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

**Gistok** · May-01-13, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by jtf1972

How's this for a plan. Suburban communities can dictate what is best for Detroit and in turn Detroit gets to tell the suburbs how to operate. [[Hey Birmingham, get ready for the largest homeless shelter in the area and a highway plowing right through the middle of whatever neighborhood you live in!)

Let's stick to the topic...

**detmsp** · May-01-13, 05:39 PM

Is it possible that there are some long term cost savings to be had here? I have to imagine that a boulevard is cheaper to maintain than a freeway and all the accompanying bridges. Detroit has the infrastructure for 2 million people... maybe it's time to dismantle some of it so we don't have to pay for it anymore.

**jtf1972** · May-01-13, 07:18 PM

Sorry.

Surface street good. Ridiculous shortest signed interstate highway unnecessary.

**Bham1982** · May-01-13, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by jtf1972

How's this for a plan. Suburban communities can dictate what is best for Detroit and in turn Detroit gets to tell the suburbs how to operate.

I'm all for democracy. Let the 600k [[and declining) Detroiters vote, and the 5 million [[and growing) suburbanites vote. Majority rules

**Patrick** · May-01-13, 08:42 PM

The folks on this thread with the strongest opinions about 375 don't even live in SE Michigan and will not be affected by it either way.

**MSUguy** · May-01-13, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

Try going to an event @ Cobo Hall, Ford Field, Comerica Park, Ren-Cen, Music Hall, Hart Plaza, Millender Hotel, Tunnel to Cananda, Geektown Casino, Joe Louis Arena, and maybe you'll have answered your own question. All you'll have to do is stop and think about it for a minute. As bad and "uncool" as an "automobile sewer" is, that IS how people get to those destinations, spend their monies, and keep the lights on, as few as they may be. We're not talking about a 100 people showing up for dinner @ a restaurant.

Ok, let's think about it for a minute. How would turning 375 into a surface street for a few blocks hinder people in those activities? A freeway that serves only 15K a day, far less than many surface streets

Better than us just thinking about it, why don't we study it as well. Did you read the Seattle study? This isn't some hippy, latte sipper, fantasy talk or about freeways being "uncool" people have studied the effects of when freeways are removed in cities. What study do you have to show this will negatively affect downtown?

**downtownguy** · May-01-13, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

I'm all for democracy. Let the 600k [[and declining) Detroiters vote, and the 5 million [[and growing) suburbanites vote. Majority rules

Or how about we put the 600,000 [[your number) up against any single suburb of Detroit? Why do the suburbs get to aggregate into one "city"?

**Bham1982** · May-01-13, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by downtownguy

Or how about we put the 600,000 [[your number) up against any single suburb of Detroit? Why do the suburbs get to aggregate into one "city"?

Because they're the ones who don't live in the city limits, and don't have a city-specific agenda.

**Novine** · May-01-13, 10:04 PM

Coming from the western suburbs, 375 could completely disappear and I wouldn't notice its absence. The only time I've driven it has been when I missed an exit and as far as I can tell, it doesn't serve any good purpose. The idea that suburbanites are going to stop coming downtown because they can't drive an extra 1/4 to 1/2 mile on the freeway seems pretty laughable.

**Gistok** · May-01-13, 11:05 PM

Originally Posted by Novine

Coming from the western suburbs, 375 could completely disappear and I wouldn't notice its absence. The only time I've driven it has been when I missed an exit and as far as I can tell, it doesn't serve any good purpose. The idea that suburbanites are going to stop coming downtown because they can't drive an extra 1/4 to 1/2 mile on the freeway seems pretty laughable.

The same can be said for the Lodge Freeway from an eastern suburb perspecive... also serves no purpose. Like I-375 cuts downtown off from Lafayette Park... so too does US-10 [[s. of I-75) cut downtown off from Corktown.

Why all the discussion only about I-375?? If anything the lower lodge area is even more bridge and ramp intensive than I-375. What's up with that??

**mwilbert** · May-02-13, 12:03 AM

I agree. When I brought this up previously, I argued for getting rid of the southern spur of the Lodge as well. I don't have traffic counts or destination surveys, so I am not making this as a substantiated claim, but the Lodge seems more useful, feeding two casinos and Cobo and Joe Louis in a fairly direct way, and in an area where it appears to me that there are fewer reasonable alternative paths. I'd still like to get rid of it, and tie Corktown and Woodbridge more closely to the central city.

**subsidized** · May-02-13, 12:45 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

The same can be said for the Lodge Freeway from an eastern suburb perspecive... also serves no purpose. Like I-375 cuts downtown off from Lafayette Park... so too does US-10 [[s. of I-75) cut downtown off from Corktown.

Why all the discussion only about I-375?? If anything the lower lodge area is even more bridge and ramp intensive than I-375. What's up with that??

Hell yeah, get rid of all of em'. Gratiot, Woodward, and Michigan were designed to bring people into the city center, let them serve their purpose.

**Bham1982** · May-02-13, 07:56 AM

Originally Posted by subsidized

Hell yeah, get rid of all of em'. Gratiot, Woodward, and Michigan were designed to bring people into the city center, let them serve their purpose.

I think we should get rid of those streets too. They're built for automobiles, not people, and mostly serve those horrible suburbanites. They were all widened to accomodate the outward sprawl.

Better to rebuild Ye Olde Detroit, building narrow, rutted, dirt roads, and requiring everyone to ride around in horse-drawn carriages, wearing period-specific attire.

**ghettopalmetto** · May-02-13, 08:01 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

I think we should get rid of those streets too. They're built for automobiles, not people, and mostly serve those horrible suburbanites. They were all widened to accomodate the outward sprawl.

Better to rebuild Ye Olde Detroit, building narrow, rutted, dirt roads, and requiring everyone to ride around in horse-drawn carriages, wearing period-specific attire.

Don't you have an office park or strip mall at which you need to be?

Let's get this straight: You don't live in the city. You don't *want* to live in the city--or ANY city, for that matter. You're perfectly happy in your suburban paradise. Why must you force Detroit to look and function EXACTLY like the place where you live? It's a bit of a self-righteous posture, don't you think? Not to mention pretty damn dull.

I've noticed that you're a big fan of the hyperbole, and not so much the evidence. Maybe you can explain why you're so fearful of a careful and deliberate study of FACTS, which just might 1) save money for the State of Michigan in the long-term and 2) make Detroit a better place.

**iheartthed** · May-02-13, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

I think we should get rid of those streets too. They're built for automobiles, not people, and mostly serve those horrible suburbanites. They were all widened to accomodate the outward sprawl.

Those streets existed before automobiles. Why are you trolling?

**Bham1982** · May-02-13, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Those streets existed before automobiles. Why are you trolling?

But they were massively expanded in the automobile era, to serve commuting suburbanites. Woodward, for example, was widened from 60 to 120 ft.

We need to go back to back to the pre-automobile era, and build for people, not cars. After all, the advent of cars was horrible for Metro Detroit's growth, and horses are environmentally sound transit.

**marshamusic** · May-02-13, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

. After all, the advent of cars was horrible for Metro Detroit's growth, and horses are environmentally sound transit.

....but you'd have even bigger puddles in Midtown.

**iheartthed** · May-02-13, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

But they were massively expanded in the automobile era, to serve commuting suburbanites. Woodward, for example, was widened from 60 to 120 ft.

Actually, they were not widened for commuting suburbanites. The streets were widened in the 1920s to accommodate automobile traffic and also for the proposed subway system that was never built.

**DTWflyer** · May-02-13, 09:13 AM

Back the the topic at hand....

The reality is that MDOT needs to do a comprehensive study to evaluate the current highway infrastructure in the dowtown/CBD/Mid-town area and develop a 5/10/20/50 year plan based on several criteria:

- Maintenance requirements & remaining lifespan of current infrastructure
- Current and realistic future traffic flow requirement [[including weekday communiting patterns, sports/concerts/special event flows, and weekend/off-peak flows
- Impact to neighborhood and future development

Hopefully everyone is aware that current infrastructure was built in a different era of population density in the city, different commuting patterns, and thinking in highway construction and placement.

The reality is that funds are scarce and when roadways come to the end of their designed life expectacy, that before rebuilding the status quo, alternatives that include reduction, alternative replacements, or out-right removal should be considered.

There are definetely going to be opportunities over the next 20-30 years to rationalize the downtown highway infrastructure.

Now in my opinion, here is what should be done:
Complete redesign and rebuilt of the I-75/I-375/M-3 interchange.
- Improve the flow of through traffic on I-75
- Significant reduce capacity on the M-3/Gratiot connector
- Remove some of the redundant or unnecessary, loop-ramps like WB M-3 Connector to SB I-375 & SB I-75 to EB M-3 Connector

Realign add/remove rationalize the exits on I-75 between I-375 and I-96

Transition I-375 from Interstate standards to Bouldvard from south of M-3/Gratiot to Jefferson

Change the termination of I-375 at Jefferson - remove the high-speed interchange to West Jefferson

Improve flow to/from the parking lots/development east of the Ren Cen, by taking the Bouldvard and punching it through to Woodbridge/Franklin

Remove a lane from Jefferson in the downtown area.

**MSUguy** · May-02-13, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

I've noticed that you're a big fan of the hyperbole, and not so much the evidence. Maybe you can explain why you're so fearful of a careful and deliberate study of FACTS, which just might 1) save money for the State of Michigan in the long-term and 2) make Detroit a better place.

Because facts get the way of portraying anyone who thinks this is a good idea as a granola munching luddite. It may be hard to fathom to some people that there are studies on what make cities work from an urban design perspective and those of us that advocate for certain policies aren't just pulling this stuff out of our ass.

While not exactly germane to this thread, another study some people should read is The High Cost of Free Parking.

http://www.uctc.net/papers/351.pdf

**Honky Tonk** · May-02-13, 12:55 PM

This part's interesting:

" The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for The facts and accuracyo f the data presented therein° The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the U.S.D epartment of Transportation.This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation."

**Detroitnerd** · May-02-13, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

This part's interesting:

" The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for The facts and accuracyo f the data presented therein° The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the U.S.D epartment of Transportation.This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation."

That would be the first time that standard legal boilerplate were interesting...

**Wesley Mouch** · May-02-13, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Actually, they were not widened for commuting suburbanites. The streets were widened in the 1920s to accommodate automobile traffic and also for the proposed subway system that was never built.

It was done in the mid-30s. Never heard that it had anything to do with subways. Can you provide insight? Woodward had [[and beyond downtown probably still has) streetcar tracks in the middle. Makes it unlikely they'd consider cut n' cover there.

**MSUguy** · May-02-13, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

This part's interesting:

" The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for The facts and accuracyo f the data presented therein° The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the U.S.D epartment of Transportation.This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation."

Therefore it's invalid? Shoup is a very highly regarded professor of urban planning.

**Detroitnerd** · May-02-13, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

It was done in the mid-30s. Never heard that it had anything to do with subways. Can you provide insight? Woodward had [[and beyond downtown probably still has) streetcar tracks in the middle. Makes it unlikely they'd consider cut n' cover there.

The great movement to widen Detroit's radial thoroughfares was done in the 1920s and 1930s, before the suburban boom of the late 1940s and 1950s. So iheart's point stands.