Printable View
I knew it was going to happen sooner or later but it really made me sad. I know there are bigger problems out there but it's this kind of stuff that makes us as a whole community look bad. Why did they have to go and do that?!
It may sound silly but it is really a beautiful bridge. I watched all summer as the construction people were building the bridge, thinking what people can accomplish when they work together. Sigh.
So does this mean that it's now officially on the list of "bridges that were torn down before they even opened to traffic" because I-94 is soon going to be widened all the way to the point that the trench will become very similar to the ones on the northern end of the Lodge [[you know, with only perpendicular concrete walls separating service drive and freeway) as part of this "goodbye Detroit" program?Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinary
No. It was constructed for the expansion.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtburb
Was it really? You know I've been following all this stuff about widening the expressways, especially I-94 between Conner and I-96, and I kept wondering about the bridges. I guess I just can't visualize how they're going to widen it [[the expressway) without tearing a lot of those bridges down.
I musta have walked over the van dyke bridge a half a zillion times and the townsend foot bridge just west the other half a zillion times.
Same with me and the Harper Bridge, the one between Morross and Cadieux. Going to Sasser Park. The expressways are like rivers that separate neighborhoods.
Every single bridge along I-94 basically has to be torn down and rebuilt. MDOT already has done so for all the bridges east of Connor and west of I-96. They've all been rebuilt, even the larger bridges such as Moross and Vernier. Now all that remains are the bridges in the path of the future widening.Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinary
Van Dyke has been rebuilt not only wider, but with a new design. In 2014 the Gratiot bridge is next, with others to follow and be completed before the actual freeway widening starts. Even though the actual freeway widening has been pushed out, the bridges can no longer wait. And yes, some bridges will not be rebuilt, but just torn down.
Here's an article about the decrepit state of the bridges between Conner and I-96....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3331912.html
I don't know for sure, but a lot of those bridges between Conner and I-96 look relatively new. How many are "widening ready"?
Perhaps some of the freeway interchange bridges were replaced... but all of the roadway and train bridges between Conner and I-96 need to be redone, except for Van Dyke. Some of these bridges may have already had road service work done in the past [[even the Van Dyke bridge had road surface work about 6 years ago)... but they ALL need to be replaced. This has been purposefully delayed because of the delayed decision about the freeway expansion. But now that the green light has been given, they will all [[at least the ones that will be part of the new freeway) be rebuilt with a wider freeway in mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinary
Somebody's going to make a lot of money on this. I still have to wonder if it's a viable solution. Anyway, there are couple of other threads about it. I'm mostly pissed about those damn graffiti "artists". Hell they didn't even do a nice job, I give them an 'F' for creativity and technical ability.
wonder who done it
Whatever. Had to happen sooner or later. Nothing to get upset over. Nothing that can't be power washed or painted over. Cities/counties usually have budgets for this. No big deal.
As far as 94 expansion, my guess is the bridges will be replaced but the freeway not expanded. My fear is that even if the expansion is halted, half the bridges connecting Midtown to surrounding neighborhoods will still be taken out without replacement. This includes some pretty major streets such as 3rd, John R, Brush and Ferry. Insanity that it's an even remotely reasonable idea to the planners to take out these bridges. They must be only looking at a map and think "oh, it's not that far to go around, whatever" without any idea that these actions will severely hurt these areas.
I'm thinking the same thing about the bridges being replaced but the freeway not expanded. That in itself wouldn't be a bad thing. I just can't wrap my mind around the expansion. The hurdles would be unbelievable.
Are there really plans on taking out the bridges you mentioned, i.e., 3rd, John R., and Ferry? That would be insane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinary
I think the bridges lost their beauty once they totally removed all the Art Deco details. Railings, pillars and retaining walls. All swapped for utilitarian designs.
Some improvements have been made on interstate rebuilding projects to make overpasses attractive.
Well the $8 million Van Dyke overpass does look attractive on the underside sidewalls... at least it did... it has a very nice stonework texture look to it.
Sometmes these graffiti artists does not live in the city and if so they are the new hippie artsy typeQuote:
Originally Posted by ordinary
These are not artists - they are taggers. It's hideous. The group/gang/person must go out every night... the new overhead signs on M-10, I-75, and I-96 around Downtown/Ambassador Gateway/Midtown all have tags on them... that's some daring shit climbing up on the metal installations and shimmying across to them. The Van Dyke bridge was easy - all don with both feet on the ground.
That is the type of thinking that helped get the City of Detroit and the County of Wayne where they are today, financial-speaking.Quote:
Cities/counties usually have budgets for this. No big deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolverine
Agreed. But I think you know as well as I do that ornate=expensive. It's too bad though. Seeing a detailed bridge really makes it stand out among the plain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cramerro
Amen bro. There is nothing artistic about spray painting Eat Hot Cheetos on a Freeway sign. It is nonsense, dangerous, and stupid. What I am most surprised about is how these folks never seem to be caught knowing full well that nearly every inch of freeway is monitored by a central dispatch area run with the state troopers.
Yeah it was a mistake on my part calling them artists. Some bozos with black spray cans. Of course it had to be done in a hurry.
To clean that up with power wash or paint or whatever would just be like wiping the slate clean for them to do all over again. Maybe if they were caught they should be made to spray paint, "I will not spray paint public property", all day on some wall until it's solid color and they have a severe case of carpal tunnel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinary
The Van Dyke bridge is awesome, and I think can accomodate a 4th lane. The only thing MDOT did wrong was install that electronic sign in a place where it would be moved if the freeway expanded.
I am sick of whoever is tagging all the signs in the area. The problem will eventually end of they clean up the signs as fast as they are being tagged
Yes CLAUDE G, the Van Dyke bridge CAN accomodate an additional lane of traffic. All future bridge replacements [[they will all be either replaced or eliminated) betwen Conner Ave. and I-96 will be built to handle additional lanes, sometimes 4, sometimes 5.
And yes it does look very nice from the freeway... the nice part is the abutment along the sides of the freeway... probably the nicest of all freeway underpasses.
I can't believe it. The graffiti has been removed from the walls under the bridge. There's a little bit left on the center support. I think this is good progress. It shows that somebody out there cares.
The only way attention will be brought to it, is if a tragic incident happened like if someone fell and died or got seriously hurt while painting them. Not wishing anything like that would happen, but at least the alarm would sound.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Some of those signs are pretty high up, there's no way in hell I would climb up there just to paint some graffiti.