I-375 as a boulevard? It's not just us talking about it anymore.

**subsidized** · April-29-13, 07:51 AM

I know, I know. It's been talked about to death already, but it's still a good idea and it's not just us Detroit slappys doing the talking anymore.

The state is considering raising a portion of I-375 between Gratiot and Jefferson in hopes of sparking new development. Nothing is official yet as at this point they are just tossing out ideas. Money is tight and officials don't want to spend more than it would cost to repair the road as it sits now. One interesting idea included having the private sector invest in the project, and in return receiving a portion of the newly freed up land to develop.

Read more at Crains: http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...65-a-boulevard

**DetroitPlanner** · April-29-13, 08:55 AM

I would doubt there would be that much land freed-up by this to make it worthwhile to the private sector. Land is still relatively cheap. This is not even an official study in MDOT's planning department. Therefore, it is not much more than an academic exercise right now.

**iheartthed** · April-29-13, 09:08 AM

Seems like a no-brainer to me. The hypothesized economic incentive for I-375 never materialized; the exact opposite happened. Might as well return as much land as possible back to development so that it can generate actual revenue for the city.

**Detroit Stylin** · April-29-13, 09:38 AM

Any one know what this area looked like before this grand cluster fu*k took place?

**tkelly1986** · April-29-13, 09:44 AM

This bulldozed Hastings Street/Black Bottom correct? Maybe JoAnn Watson
can use her position for something good, such as pushing for a reborn Paradise Valley [[the first thing I would actually agree with her on).

**Wesley Mouch** · April-29-13, 09:45 AM

Its not so much about the land under the freeway as the land surrounding the freeway. If this were boulevarded, you'd get the same throughput -- nearly. But with much more connectivity.

**Gistok** · April-29-13, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Seems like a no-brainer to me. The hypothesized economic incentive for I-375 never materialized; the exact opposite happened. Might as well return as much land as possible back to development so that it can generate actual revenue for the city.

I don't quite understand your comments... the reason for I-375 and M-10 south of the I-75 interchanges was to move people in and out of downtown quickly [[either from the tunnel, or from downtown businesses)... and not based on any economic reasons??

To convert I-375 into a streetlevel boulevard will cost hundreds of millions of dollars... [[money that nobody has right now) and the amount of land that will be freed for other business uses is minimal [[and would likely not be cost effective). Also... I doubt that many folks would want any commercial activity on the east [[Lafayette Park) side of the "former freeway".

Also.. putting I-375 at ground level will just create another very intimidating roadway for pedestrians to cross... such as Jefferson between I-375 and M-10... and would do little to promote the integration of downtown and Lafayette Park.

**bailey** · April-29-13, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Its not so much about the land under the freeway as the land surrounding the freeway. If this were boulevarded, you'd get the same throughput -- nearly. But with much more connectivity.

Not at all against this... don't think it will ever happen...but still, not against it. However, how is bringing 6-8 lanes up to grade really doing anything to enhance the area? I mean is Jefferson really all that walkable or connected downtown where it's a 8 lane blvd?

**401don** · April-29-13, 09:58 AM

In a state where the Legislature wants to cut film incentives to zero to fund a tiny slice of needed road repairs, this isn't likely to happen any time soon.

**DetroitHabitater** · April-29-13, 10:08 AM

I feel like the lodge south of I-75 would be a better candidate for this.

**Honky Tonk** · April-29-13, 10:18 AM

Personally, using that stretch daily, and seeing the amount of traffic and traffic jams it carries, to and from work, sporting events, Geektown Casino, etc., I don't think it's a very practical or financially sound idea.

**Detroitnerd** · April-29-13, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by bailey

Not at all against this... don't think it will ever happen...but still, not against it. However, how is bringing 6-8 lanes up to grade really doing anything to enhance the area? I mean is Jefferson really all that walkable or connected downtown where it's a 8 lane blvd?

It could be a lot more walkable. Right now you can't even cross Jefferson east of the Ren Cen. Well, you can if you can run across four lanes hurtling with traffic, then another.

**antongast** · April-29-13, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by bailey

Not at all against this... don't think it will ever happen...but still, not against it. However, how is bringing 6-8 lanes up to grade really doing anything to enhance the area? I mean is Jefferson really all that walkable or connected downtown where it's a 8 lane blvd?

6-8 lanes is too many anyway. It should be four lanes, max. If there are traffic jams sometimes, there are traffic jams sometimes. God forbid it takes three extra minutes to get back to the suburbs after a baseball game.

**southen** · April-29-13, 10:44 AM

im intrigued by it and wouldnt mind seeing it happen, but i guess it depends on how its done/looks. i live in LP and would love to be just a bit more connected to downtown with potential businesses/residential.

**Gistok** · April-29-13, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by antongast

6-8 lanes is too many anyway. It should be four lanes, max. If there are traffic jams sometimes, there are traffic jams sometimes. God forbid it takes three extra minutes to get back to the suburbs after a baseball game.

You just gave a scenario that shows why it will NEVER happen... GM will be against it... and once Dan Gilbert does an impact study on Greektown Casino traffic flow... he'll be against it too. This would be a bottleneck during all daylight hours, and gridlock during rush hours... a bottleneck this stretch will mean a backup onto I-75 north of the Fisher... your 3 minute scenario is very optimistic... and your 2 lanes in each directions scenario will NEVER get past MDOT...

**iheartthed** · April-29-13, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

I don't quite understand your comments... the reason for I-375 and M-10 south of the I-75 interchanges was to move people in and out of downtown quickly [[either from the tunnel, or from downtown businesses)... and not based on any economic reasons??

To convert I-375 into a streetlevel boulevard will cost hundreds of millions of dollars... [[money that nobody has right now) and the amount of land that will be freed for other business uses is minimal [[and would likely not be cost effective). Also... I doubt that many folks would want any commercial activity on the east [[Lafayette Park) side of the "former freeway".

Also.. putting I-375 at ground level will just create another very intimidating roadway for pedestrians to cross... such as Jefferson between I-375 and M-10... and would do little to promote the integration of downtown and Lafayette Park.

Well, that makes us even then. I don't understand your reasoning either. You think the city benefits more from moving people in and out of downtown faster? Even if the city is able to collect one more dollar than they were before then it's a win from tax revenue perspective. This isn't even considering that putting this land back on the rolls restores places for people to actually work and contribute to the economy.

**bailey** · April-29-13, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

It could be a lot more walkable. Right now you can't even cross Jefferson east of the Ren Cen. Well, you can if you can run across four lanes hurtling with traffic, then another.

Exactly, and wouldn't that be similar to what is being proposed? 3-4 lanes..median...three or four lanes?

Originally Posted by antongast

6-8 lanes is too many anyway. It should be four lanes, max. If there are traffic jams sometimes, there are traffic jams sometimes. God forbid it takes three extra minutes to get back to the suburbs after a baseball game.

.
Not to get all simcity here, but why not do something similar to Gratiot in Downtown Mt. Clemens? Traffic not separated by a grass median but blocks of development? You know...kinda sorta what it looked like before it was bulldozed to make an expressway? Otherwise, all that is going to be there is another M-59.

**antongast** · April-29-13, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

You just gave a scenario that shows why it will NEVER happen... GM will be against it... and once Dan Gilbert does an impact study on Greektown Casino traffic flow... he'll be against it too. This would be a bottleneck during all daylight hours, and gridlock during rush hours... a bottleneck this stretch will mean a backup onto I-75 north of the Fisher... your 3 minute scenario is very optimistic... and your 2 lanes in each directions scenario will NEVER get past MDOT...

I'm shifting the Overton window here, brah. Shit, let's make it a bike path.

**Honky Tonk** · April-29-13, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by antongast

6-8 lanes is too many anyway. It should be four lanes, max. If there are traffic jams sometimes, there are traffic jams sometimes. God forbid it takes three extra minutes to get back to the suburbs after a baseball game.

Fair enough. By the same token "God forbid it takes three extra minutes to cross the street".

**mwilbert** · April-29-13, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

Fair enough. By the same token "God forbid it takes three extra minutes to cross the street".

I'm pretty sure most people find standing at a corner for 3 minutes waiting to cross more annoying than sitting in a car for 3 minutes. If nothing else the person on the corner is exposed to the elements.

Shollin · April-29-13, 11:36 AM

The back up is going to be longer than 3 minutes.

**DetroitPlanner** · April-29-13, 11:40 AM

I just checked my inbox! Check this out.

"Among points of discussion will be how to accommodate the public's increasing demand for multiple modes of transportation and to connect the Riverfront, Greektown and the Eastern Market and Stadium districts."

http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,...1275--,00.html

**Gistok** · April-29-13, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Well, that makes us even then. I don't understand your reasoning either. You think the city benefits more from moving people in and out of downtown faster? Even if the city is able to collect one more dollar than they were before then it's a win from tax revenue perspective. This isn't even considering that putting this land back on the rolls restores places for people to actually work and contribute to the economy.

Um no... the city's "benefit"?? You make it sound like the Detroit Freeway system was somehow designed to acutally help Detroit?? Where did you get that idea?? The freeways were part of a federal plan that actually hurt the city in the long run. But it helped the federal master plan of the time... which the state of Michigan bought into.

And with all the prime land in the city center still available [[Hudsons block, Statler block, Tuller block, Lafayette block, 2 Monroe blocks)... a thin strip of land along the I-375 corridor is not going to do much for the downtown area..... at least not in the short run... and definitely not at a price to pay for removal of I-375.

**bailey** · April-29-13, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

To convert I-375 into a streetlevel boulevard will cost hundreds of millions of dollars... [[money that nobody has right now) and the amount of land that will be freed for other business uses is minimal [[and would likely not be cost effective). Also... I doubt that many folks would want any commercial activity on the east [[Lafayette Park) side of the "former freeway".

Per the article, it would seem 80 million is the ceiling..and also per the article, that is 80 million more than is on hand to spend... so I'm thinking this project never leaves the drawing board.

however, regarding cost, what long term savings would be created by removing the bridges from the picture? it could be a net positive. I mean if we need to spend 20-30 million [[totally made up number) to keep the bridges up to snuff over that stretch every couple of decades, wouldn't it be a better investment to spend 80 to never have to do it again?

**downtownguy** · April-29-13, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

It could be a lot more walkable. Right now you can't even cross Jefferson east of the Ren Cen. Well, you can if you can run across four lanes hurtling with traffic, then another.

The reason you can't is because it's biased against the pedestrian. Having those silly pedestrian-operated signals is proof. There should be regularly operating signals and crosswalks where people want to cross [[i.e., south side of Jefferson at Randolph. And the lights should be timed in favor of the pedestrian so people are trapped on the median less often. In the rest of the metropolitan areas, let the auto rule. But downtown, pedestrians should be on, um, even footing.