Freeway Removal in Detroit

[iheartthed]

Actually, like Detroit, LA was also built around the street car. GM pushed to have the streetcars in LA dismantled in the 1950s just as hard as they did here.

Bear in mind the city of Los Angeles had 1.2 million people by 1930, long before they were large scale construction of freeways.

But Los Angeles has 4 million people now. Most of the city's growth occurred during the freeway era. By 1930 Detroit was at 90% of its peak population.

[ghettopalmetto]

Parkways... I hadn't thought of that. Most of the neighborhoods that surround our expressway corridors are abandoned anyway, so why not widen the freeways and stick parks around them like in Queens?

Actually, I think the freeways can be narrowed. Expansion costs more money, both up-front and in the long-term [[Remember--MDOT doesn't even have money to maintain the existing road network.). Expansion would also result in scads of $$$ for additional earth movement and create an uglier, more disconnected environment. There's no reason [[MDOT's plug-and-chug formulas be damned) why you couldn't have a network of parkways with 2-3 lanes max. in each direction. I don't think "parks", per se, are the answer--there would be a whole hell of a lot of dead-space parks that would go unused--but rather, re-forested areas along the corridors.

[MicrosoftFan]

Actually, I think the freeways can be narrowed. Expansion costs more money, both up-front and in the long-term [[Remember--MDOT doesn't even have money to maintain the existing road network.). Expansion would also result in scads of $$$ for additional earth movement and create an uglier, more disconnected environment. There's no reason [[MDOT's plug-and-chug formulas be damned) why you couldn't have a network of parkways with 2-3 lanes max. in each direction. I don't think "parks", per se, are the answer--there would be a whole hell of a lot of dead-space parks that would go unused--but rather, re-forested areas along the corridors.

Ah, the happy medium. Narrow freeways to 2 lanes in each direction while splitting the traffic flow so that more cars go through our dead retail corridors. Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.

[GPCharles]

The Packard Plant, Connor Creek, the fruitless industrial project by St. Cyril, City Airport, Jefferson North, Poletown Plant, basically everything in Milwaukee Junction.

All of which were surrounded by dense residential neighborhoods. From the Connor Road factories east to the GP border and west to Indian Village was all residential. So how did the existence of the plants kill those neighborhoods? More like it was the closing of the plants.

[MicrosoftFan]

All of which were surrounded by dense residential neighborhoods. From the Connor Road factories east to the GP border and west to Indian Village was all residential. So how did the existence of the plants kill those neighborhoods? More like it was the closing of the plants.

That's what I meant, the closing of the plants.

[313WX]

But Los Angeles has 4 million people now. Most of the city's growth occurred during the freeway era. By 1930 Detroit was at 90% of its peak population.

The point was that while the freeways did have some negative impacts on the city [[as well as positive impacts), it was not the sole cause of the city's decline, and not even the primary cause.

Otherwise, every other city with freeways as extensive as Detroit's would have declined to the same extent Detroit did if that were the case...

[ghettopalmetto]

Ah, the happy medium. Narrow freeways to 2 lanes in each direction while splitting the traffic flow so that more cars go through our dead retail corridors. Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.

Eh, it'll never get anywhere. MDOT's overly simplistic models will predict cataclysmic traffic jams.

[iheartthed]

Otherwise, every other city with freeways as extensive as Detroit's would have declined to the same extent Detroit did if that were the case...

Who says that didn't happen? Check out St. Louis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Memphis, Birmingham, Baltimore, etc.

Detroit built its freeways through the city's most densely populated areas. This absolutely did have a detrimental effect on the city and its ability to stem its substantial population decline.

[MicrosoftFan]

Eh, it'll never get anywhere. MDOT's overly simplistic models will predict cataclysmic traffic jams.

"The closing of I-375 will causes 10 hour traffic jams! We predict that using the population prediction tool on Excel 97 that I-375 will carry 300,000 cars per day in 3 years!"

MDOT. "If we keep making the problem worse, maybe people won't notice."

[Scottathew]

I live just off of John R at Auburn Road [[21 Mile). The building I work in is in the CBD. If John R were contiguous and some modifications to optimize timings I could survive without I-75. Also, if a bus service was offered in my area, I would consider taking it [[depending on the time penalty I would incur).

[313WX]

Check out St. Louis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Memphis, Birmingham, Baltimore, etc.

Check out what?

None of those cities have freeways systems nearly as extensive as Detroit's, nor were their declines [[although perhaps significant) nearly as severe as Detroit's decline.

[iheartthed]

Check out what?

None of those cities have freeways systems nearly as extensive as Detroit's, nor were their declines [[although perhaps significant) nearly as severe as Detroit's decline.

Yes, their declines were steep, as steep as, and in some cases steeper than. St. Louis's population decline has actually been steeper than Detroit's, by percentage.

[Bham1982]

Ah, I was wondering how long it would take before one of those alcoholic father-type "Even Though We Abused the Hell Out of It, Detroit NEEDS the Suburbs to Surivive" posts would show up. As if City residents are waiting with baited breath for some upper-middle-class family from Novi to shower a few dollars on them.

Apparently you're new to Detroit.

The entire "economic development" policy for the last 50-60 years is getting "upper middle class families from Novi" to shower dollars on the city. What are the major projects in the city? Stadia, convention centers, office, destination restaurants, etc. This is almost entirely geared towards separating dollars from suburban pocketbooks.

There is almost nothing getting built/subsidized downtown that doesn't require 90%+ suburban participation. So, yeah, if you are part of the downtown/midtown cheering squad, you better want Barb from Novi to have easy accessibility downtown, or no one's going to show up at Comerica or Orchestra Hall or the Motown Hoedown or whatever the hell it's called.

It's simple math. Detroit comprises 10% of the region's population, and probably not even 5% of the region's wealth. The city is overwhelmingly poor and destitute. There is no way to have any sort of economic policy for downtown/midtown without courting those living outside Detroit.

[Bham1982]

Empirical evidence shows that many of those car trips would simply disappear, as freeways are known to induce driving.

Indeed they would disappear. The few people traveling into Detroit would become even fewer, and the remaining businesses would perish. Then the armchair urban planners of DYes could rant and rave against the evil, racist suburbanites, and their refusal to travel 2 hours on surface roads for a taco in Mexicantown.

[Bham1982]

CWhile freeways have major negative externalities for neighborhoods, they do not in themselves destroy them when the other elements of the urban lifeblood remain present. One of the most desirable urban neighborhoods on the continent, Brooklyn Heights, is basically surrounded by an interstate, and its neighboring desireable neighborhoods, Cobble Hill and the Columbia Street waterfront and DUMBO, are bisected by the same interstate.

And Williamsburg, Brooklyn, arguably the hottest neighborhood basically anywhere, has an elevated freeway gashing right through the heart of the neighborhood. While it's hideous and probably shouldn't have been built, and sits in a city where most people don't even own cars, no one would seriously advocate for its removal.

And the surrounding blocks have tons of development and vitality, with projects being built right up against the freeway.

[ghettopalmetto]

Apparently you're new to Detroit.

It's simple math. Detroit comprises 10% of the region's population, and probably not even 5% of the region's wealth. The city is overwhelmingly poor and destitute. There is no way to have any sort of economic policy for downtown/midtown without courting those living outside Detroit.

Wow, that's not pompous and arrogant at all! Maybe you should tap out of this one, Wonder Bread.

[313WX]

The difference is that Metropolitan Detroit kept geographically growing [[as did its freeway system) even though the population has remained stagnant since the early 1970s. Thus, any new "growth" in the past 40 years-or-so has been merely a reshuffling of the deck chairs.

In the meantime, one thinks of all the money spent on new roads, extension of utility lines, expansion of suburban safety services, construction of new schools, demolition of old schools and houses, etc., and there has been *massive* expenditure merely to allow this reshuffling to take place. Have these billions of dollars in investments produced any return for the taxpayers?

It depends on how you define the return on investment ane taxpayers.

For suburbanites, they receive the non-monetary benefit of being able to work/play in and travel through isolated parts of the city without having to face the major problems that plague the city. Given that we have yet to see any large scale change in regional/state policies and living/commuting patterns, this sunken cost was obviously worth it to them for that benefit.

And given that these same suburbanites now control majority of lansing and make up majority of the region's populations, I wouldn't hold my breath for things to be done differently any time soom...

[iheartthed]

And Williamsburg, Brooklyn, arguably the hottest neighborhood basically anywhere, has an elevated freeway gashing right through the heart of the neighborhood. While it's hideous and probably shouldn't have been built, and sits in a city where most people don't even own cars, no one would seriously advocate for its removal.

And the surrounding blocks have tons of development and vitality, with projects being built right up against the freeway.

The BQE does not go through the heart of Williamsburg. If anything it acts as a psychological barrier between rich Williamsburg and not-so-rich Williamsburg.

[313WX]

Unfortunately, Bham1982 is right. While what he says doesn't seem to align with how most on DYes feel, everything he says is exactly how the silent majority in "SE Michigan" feel...

[Honky Tonk]

The Packard Plant, Connor Creek, the fruitless industrial project by St. Cyril, City Airport, Jefferson North, Poletown Plant, basically everything in Milwaukee Junction.

Except none of those are "heavy industry", or specifically located on the East Side. The only "heavy industry" that lead to the demise of the East Side was Krack Sales, and possibly the loss of jobs @ some of the places you mentioned. It is because of those jobs, and the lack of crime from jobless residents not needing a fix, that the East Side grew. Freeways were needed to bring in raw materials, and take out finished product.

[Gpwrangler]

I agree. The I-94 expansion project is terrible. I think that a less radical approach to removal would be to get rid of I-375 and M-10 south of Fisher, then get rid of the I-96 "express lanes" because narrowing that would be good for the surrounding neighborhood. I could see a I-696 style rooftop park next to the new Red Wings Arena.

A lot of what freeway removal is about is helping neighborhoods. Detroit's downtown comeback may be great in all, but helping neighborhoods will actually stabilize the population of the city.

Also, I found a cool page about public transit on I-94- this would be great now. Stick a light rail system in the median of I-94 just like I-94 is in Chicago.

http://detroittransithistory.info/Ar...yBusStops.html

It might be worth studying these neighborhoods a bit before deciding that removing freeways will solve their problems.

[Detroitnerd]

It might be worth studying these neighborhoods a bit before deciding that removing freeways will solve their problems.

Ah, yes. Just a few more years of study. To confirm what everybody else already knows.

Look at a freeway. What do you see when you look at it? Look carefully and minutely. Stand there for an hour and watch it and formulate in your mind exactly what it is you're looking at and what aesthetic value it has.

You will realize you are looking at something monumentally ugly and wasteful. Ask yourself if you would want your neighborhood near anything like it. Or, if your neighborhood were near one, ask if you'd want it enlarged.

We all know the answer already.

Cities like Vancouver are experiencing growth, rising values, prosperity, and no doomsday traffic jams without any freeways at all. We don't need them.

But, whatever. Keep on "studying" the problem.

[dtowncitylover]

Ah, yes. Just a few more years of study. To confirm what everybody else already knows.

Look at a freeway. What do you see when you look at it? Look carefully and minutely. Stand there for an hour and watch it and formulate in your mind exactly what it is you're looking at and what aesthetic value it has.

You will realize you are looking at something monumentally ugly and wasteful. Ask yourself if you would want your neighborhood near anything like it. Or, if your neighborhood were near one, ask if you'd want it enlarged.

We all know the answer already.

Cities like Vancouver are experiencing growth, rising values, prosperity, and no doomsday traffic jams without any freeways at all. We don't need them.

But, whatever. Keep on "studying" the problem.

LOL Gee, I wish 696 wasn't routed on 10 Mile. It would've been better if it plowed right through Huntington Woods, Berkley, and downtown Royal Oak. My neighborhood would've been well served.

[Detroitnerd]

LOL Gee, I wish 696 wasn't routed on 10 Mile. It would've been better if it plowed right through Huntington Woods, Berkley, and downtown Royal Oak. My neighborhood would've been well served.

That's an excellent case in point. Why, when I-696 was being built, did the route get such resistance from people with money and resources? Why was I-275 never completed? Why didn't the moneyed people of the proposed corridor welcome the prosperity and development the freeway was bound to bring?

We all know the answers. You can bet that anybody who still champions the freeway as the way of the future is just engaging in some increasingly dubious sophistry. The future will look very different from the 20-lane freeways our local planners still feverishly dream of. We should start planning that transition now, instead of when we have to take a crash-course in 21st century realities.

[Hermod]

The Packard Plant, Connor Creek, the fruitless industrial project by St. Cyril, City Airport, Jefferson North, Poletown Plant, basically everything in Milwaukee Junction.

Hudson Motors, Briggs Mfg, Budd, Chrysler-Jefferson, Allied Products