I 75

**Detroitdave** · September-26-16, 01:41 PM

Just thinking out loud . While watching the news the other day , it will take 14 years to finish the rehab of I 75 in Oakland county, 14 Years !
If this was any project in Detroit suburbanites would have a fit !
They would be screening bloody murder. "Why should my tax dollars go to the people in Detroit for ... X project !" and "Why the hell are they paying
1 billion dollars for something I rarely, if ever use ?
Just a thought
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...eded/80405272/

**Scottathew** · September-26-16, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitdave

Just thinking out loud . While watching the news the other day , it will take 14 years to finish the rehab of I 75 in Oakland county, 14 Years !
If this was any project in Detroit suburbanites would have a fit !
They would be screening bloody murder. "Why should my tax dollars go to the people in Detroit for ... X project !" and "Why the hell are they paying
1 billion dollars for something I rarely, if ever use ?
Just a thought
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...eded/80405272/

The state invests large amounts of money in interstates in Detroit, including upcoming projects on I-94 that are of a similar financial scope to the I-75 project.

I've not seen of this supposed outrage. As a suburbanite, I do not feel outrage.

I think you're looking for a controversy that simply doesn't exist.

**dtowncitylover** · September-26-16, 02:01 PM

No offense, but where have you been?

**Detroitdave** · September-26-16, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by 48307

The state invests large amounts of money in interstates in Detroit, including upcoming projects on I-94 that are of a similar financial scope to the I-75 project.

I've not seen of this supposed outrage. As a suburbanite, I do not feel outrage.

I think you're looking for a controversy that simply doesn't exist.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree .
I'm not looking for controversy , but history speaks for itself .
When it comes to regionalism, the burbs ,with a few exceptions , ie Cobo and the Zoo. lets just say , aren't to eager to work together.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, but we all know this is true.

**Farwell** · September-26-16, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitdave

I respect your opinion, but I disagree .
I'm not looking for controversy , but history speaks for itself .
When it comes to regionalism, the burbs ,with a few exceptions , ie Cobo and the Zoo. lets just say , aren't to eager to work together.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, but we all know this is true.

Then exactly "what" are you trying to do?

**Scottathew** · September-26-16, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitdave

I respect your opinion, but I disagree .
I'm not looking for controversy , but history speaks for itself .
When it comes to regionalism, the burbs ,with a few exceptions , ie Cobo and the Zoo. lets just say , aren't to eager to work together.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, but we all know this is true.

Understood. Just putting in my two-cents, since I'm the demographic whose thoughts are being assumed.

**Bham1982** · September-26-16, 08:04 PM

While yeah, the burbs and city haven't agreed on many issues over the decades [[and why would they; demographics are completely different) I don't ever recall a city-suburban controversy over road improvements [[which wouldn't make much sense as one thing city dwellers and suburbanites share is extreme auto orientation).

**EastsideAl** · September-26-16, 08:10 PM

Goodness, it only took them 12 years to build the damn thing in the first place. And that was with a 3+ year gap in the middle.

**bibs** · September-26-16, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Goodness, it only took them 12 years to build the damn thing in the first place. And that was with a 3+ year gap in the middle.

It didn't take 12 years to build that section. It took about 13 year to build it through the entire state. I wonder if the replacement cost of the section in Oakland County costs as much to build it through the entire state in the first place.

**jmarie** · September-26-16, 10:41 PM

When building it, they didn't have to deal with people traveling on it.

It will take so long because there really isn't much of an alternative. There isn't a good alternate route for 75, or they would likely have just closed the whole thing like they did with 275. Could you imagine the nightmare you would have if you did all 17 or so miles at once?! As someone who drives the entire section every day, no thank you!

**archfan** · September-27-16, 12:38 AM

Originally Posted by jmarie

When building it, they didn't have to deal with people traveling on it.

It will take so long because there really isn't much of an alternative. There isn't a good alternate route for 75, or they would likely have just closed the whole thing like they did with 275. Could you imagine the nightmare you would have if you did all 17 or so miles at once?! As someone who drives the entire section every day, no thank you!

I think the first month would be a nightmare, as everyone tried to commute as they've always done. Then, people would start to think about alternatives - taking different surface streets, starting earlier or later, working from home. It would be annoying for the summer or two they shut it down, but then you'd get 12 years back.

**Gistok** · September-27-16, 03:12 AM

I've been noticing that the I-94 expansion [[between Conner and I-96) has had work done for the expansion... whether or not it ever happens. The Van Dyke, Woodward and Trumbull bridges have all been replaced with a wider span to handle a potential 4th lane in either direction. This will likely continue as more spans need to be replaced rather quickly. The rust showing on the other bridges in that corridor is getting worse.

Not sure about the west side, but all the bridges east of Conner have already been replaced... including Cadieux, Moross, Vernier [[8 Mile) thru 12 Mile. The oldest I-94 bridges are the midtown ones, and they need replacement pronto.

I don't mind the I-94 widening [[the forum is littered with discussions of it)... but if they could only do it without the service drive and the interchange rebuilds, it would be a less expensive route. But I know the Feds/MDOT don't like that Lodge Fwy. left exit interchange.

**Scottathew** · September-27-16, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by jmarie

When building it, they didn't have to deal with people traveling on it.

It will take so long because there really isn't much of an alternative. There isn't a good alternate route for 75, or they would likely have just closed the whole thing like they did with 275. Could you imagine the nightmare you would have if you did all 17 or so miles at once?! As someone who drives the entire section every day, no thank you!

The reason why they're breaking it up into all these segments is funding, not because it is optimal.

The best case scenario for I-75 would be to do it all at once [[over 1-2 years). Temporarily pave the shoulders and allow two lanes in each direction with a traffic shift.

I live in Rochester Hills and commute to Detroit for work. The I-75 road work means that my route is going to be significantly impacted every-other year for 14 years, instead of just being impacted for 1-2 years.

It is rather true that for many there aren't any freeway alternatives for I-75, and Mound Road can only handle so much. I-75 would not be a good candidate for full-closure like I-275 and I-96 was.

**EastsideAl** · September-27-16, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by bibs

It didn't take 12 years to build that section. It took about 13 year to build it through the entire state. I wonder if the replacement cost of the section in Oakland County costs as much to build it through the entire state in the first place.

Correct me if I'm off somewhere, but the sources I can find show construction on the segment from Lapeer Rd. south to 11 Mile Rd. as being started in 1959 and completed and opened in 1963. I'm old enough to remember the construction of the southerly portion, from 8 Mile to 11 Mile. It was started in 1966 and mostly completed in 1969, but the segment with the I-696 interchange wasn't done until 1971.

In any event, 14 years to rehab and add a carpool lane seems a bit extreme.

**sirrealone** · September-27-16, 09:06 AM

If interest rates remain low, then I would bet that at some point they'll float bonds so that they can finish it in a couple of years, then pay it back along the way once the additional road funding money comes in. They can't do that until the revenues actually start flowing in otherwise they'll pay a lot higher interest rates.

**3WC** · September-27-16, 09:18 AM

I have been driving I-75 5-6 days a week , and the Exit 75 [[Sq. Lake Rd), for 42 years.

This is the biggest boondoggle, unnecessary, corporate welfare, waste of federal [[mostly) and local tax dollars I've ever seen. The two mile Exit 75 re-build is a no-bid, design build project fraught with corruption.

The justification for the Exit 75 rebuild is that over the past 5-6 years there have been 600 accidents in the area. I have used that exit thousands of times over 42 years and have never seen an accident or been involved in a traffic back-up. Whatever accidents have occurred have been fender benders and normal for the volumn of traffic.

The northbound exit to Sq. Lake Rd. is a left hand exit and drivers must cross two lanes of traffic [[cars exiting to Sq. Lake from southbound 75) in a short distance to exit at Opdyke. It's a terrible design. However, the new exit northbound will be a right hand exit over a to-be constructed bridge across all lanes of 75, BUT DRIVERS WILL STILL HAVE TO CROSS TWO LANES IN A SHORT DISTANCE TO GET ON OPDYKE RD. The original design problem will not be solved, although in thousands of times I've used it I've never seen an accident there.

The whole debacle will cause drivers to waste millions of man hours in congested traffic and millions of gallons of wasted gasoline while idling in miles-long traffic back-ups during construction.

When the whole I-75 project is completed I doubt if travel times will be reduced by a minute. Other cities such as Chicago and L.A. have added more lanes and the result is that more driver use them and congestion has not been alleviated.

I understand that there is not one local municipality that has to spend tax dollars on this boondoggle supports it.

**Bham1982** · September-27-16, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by 3WC

Other cities such as Chicago and L.A. have added more lanes and the result is that more driver use them and congestion has not been alleviated.

We want people to use the freeway; that's the whole point. Expanded mobility is a good thing.

And as a regular driver on I-75, couldn't disagree more. The freeway is an overburdened mess and desperately needs renovation and expansion. The Square Lake exit is dangerous, with ridiculous merging.

**EastsideAl** · September-27-16, 10:59 AM

Do we really want more people to use freeways? In this day and age? Why? I thought that all the current trends in urban planning, almost everywhere but here in backwards stuck in the '50s & '60s Detroit, is to move away from further roadway and auto traffic expansion, for just the reasons 3WC mentions. That's one of several reasons why I've been so adamantly against the idiotically short-sighted I-94 redo and expansion.

Oakland County needs better transportation and better transportation options to be sure. But I don't see how a 14 year project that will sink billions of dollars into a 1960s auto-centric carbon-spewing transportation mode [[which, if the experience of freeway expansion elsewhere is any guide, will only bring more auto traffic and more congestion) is going to provide any significant long-term answers to those problems.

**Bham1982** · September-27-16, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Do we really want more people to use freeways?

Probably, yeah. Putting more traffic on freeways, as opposed to surface streets, means better air quality, more fuel efficiency, and greater mobility.

You probably don't want to be building brand new freeways in a generally stagnant region, but you definitely want to drive traffic, esp. existing traffic, to major freeway corridors.

**3WC** · September-27-16, 03:10 PM

Bham1982: I'll say it again, since you may have missed it in my post.

The rebuilt exit 75 DOES NOT eliminate the only bad design feature, which requires a two lane crossover [[from N-bound 75) to get to Opdyke Rd. And, it will still require exiting S-bound 75 traffic to cross over in front of exiting N-bound drivers trying to access Opdyke. [[But, in 42 years and thousands of times through that exit I have never seen an accident there.)

Your post make me think you rarely if ever use that exit.

When you do use I-75 it appears you don't have to travel through the construction area. You probably never had to use the Adams Road exit since it's closed, or Squirrel Road, also closed since the bridge over 75 has been demolished.

If you do use it, you must have a very high tolerance for the ineptitude of our leaders who have promoted such a travesty, and much time to kill stuck in traffic needlessly. And, if you think traffic will be better if the project is ever finished, be prepared to be disappointed, and conned.

**Bham1982** · September-27-16, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by 3WC

If you do use it, you must have a very high tolerance for the ineptitude of our leaders who have promoted such a travesty, and much time to kill stuck in traffic needlessly. And, if you think traffic will be better if the project is ever finished, be prepared to be disappointed, and conned.

I have yet to see a road expansion project that made travel inherently worse or less safe, so I'll take my chances with I-75, and save my outrage for Trump and his idiotic supporters. I trust traffic engineers [[really engineers in general) for the most part.

The MDOT website directly contradicts your claims about I-75, around Square Lake, BTW. Looks like they're making major improvements to those exit ramps.

http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,...2039--,00.html

**3WC** · September-27-16, 04:24 PM

Bham: They are making major changes to the exit ramp but no "improvements."

I have sat in on public forums where the plans were discussed in detail by MDOT and Bloomfield Twp. officials. The plans are indisputable. The original design flaws are not being corrected as was made clear before booing from the large audience caused many if not most to leave in frustration.

I seriously considered financing a lawsuit to stop the project because the state has failed in several respects to conduct the necessary preliminary requirements prior to starting the project.

**jmarie** · September-27-16, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by archfan

I think the first month would be a nightmare, as everyone tried to commute as they've always done. Then, people would start to think about alternatives - taking different surface streets, starting earlier or later, working from home. It would be annoying for the summer or two they shut it down, but then you'd get 12 years back.

I drive from exit 106 [[Genesee/Oakland county line) to exit 49 every day. Closing the expressway would be more than annoying.

**jmarie** · September-27-16, 09:19 PM

I was under the impression the whole point of starting at Square Lake Road was to make the entrance to NB 75 on the right instead of the left. Either I'm missing something, or I have a very different opinion on whether or not that is an improvement. I hate when people merge on and have to cut all the way across to take M59. While I'm thankful not to have to do that, it still terrifies me when people are cutting in front of you in a mad dash to get across 5 lanes in about a mile.

**RO_Resident** · September-27-16, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by 3WC

Bham: They are making major changes to the exit ramp but no "improvements."

I have sat in on public forums where the plans were discussed in detail by MDOT and Bloomfield Twp. officials. The plans are indisputable. The original design flaws are not being corrected as was made clear before booing from the large audience caused many if not most to leave in frustration.

I seriously considered financing a lawsuit to stop the project because the state has failed in several respects to conduct the necessary preliminary requirements prior to starting the project.

Curious, what do you think is deficient in the MDOT process or the EIS?