Removing Freeways

[maxx]

http://www.preservenet.com/freeways/...Proposals.html
Planned Freeway Removals

The following freeway removals are being planned by city and state governments:

• Rochester, NY, Innerloop: The Inner Loop completely circles downtown Rochester, and the city has planned to remove it since 1990, when it completed its "Vision 2000 Plan" for downtown. In addition to this official city support, there is strong citizen backing to "demote the moat." The city is now studying the impact of this plan on traffic, and then will try to get funding for it.

• Trenton, NJ, Route 29: The freeway was initially designed to remove trucks from local streets, but truck traffic was banned from it before its completion. In response to complaints from the city, the state Dept. of Transportation is now planning to remove this freeway and replace it with a boulevard and local street grid, freeing up 18 acres of land for development. This plan is one of NJDOT's “smart growth corridor studies.”

• Akron, OH, Innerbelt: Inspired by the example of Milwaukee, Akron mayor Don Plusquellic has proposed removing the Innerbelt freeway to promote economic development. The city is now conducting a $2 million study of this freeway removal.

• Washington, DC, Whitehurst Freeway: City officials are discussing plans to remove this three-quarter-mile-ling freeway, which divides Georgetown from its waterfront, and to replace it with a boulevard. There are also preliminary discussions of removing other elevated freeways, including Southeast Freeway near the Capitol and part of the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway near the Lincoln Memorial.

So what freeway could Detroit do without? And how about that ugly noisy People Mover that goes nowhere?

[Gistok]

... wouldn't it be cheaper to reduce the PM noise than to spend 10s of millions tearing it and all the stations down??

My choice of freeway removal... M-53.

[stasu1213]

Detroit could do without the davison. Detroit could probably do without the Jeffries if light rail goes up Grand River. Once Detroit's downtown get a major retail district the people mover will be good for it. Dropping riders off at different spots

[Hermod]

My choice of freeway removal... M-53.

Sine the M-53 freeway doesn't come within eight miles of the Detroit city limits, how does it cause you any gas? What wonderful neighborhoods or classic buildings died when it was built?

[RO_Resident]

I don't think anyone would miss I-375 if were to be boulevarded.

[DetroitHabitater]

The lodge south of 75

[Brian1979]

75 between 375/Gratiot and 96. Instead of going downtown 75 could multiplex with 94 and come back down 96 and on. I just think it'd be nice without 75 there to connect downtown to midtown.

[rhythmc]

Interesting thread. I've not been around the city enough to have a real opinion. I do think that freeways into the city were fine for their time [[generally, the time period where most Americans were fleeing to the 'burbs) but they've also been used as a means of ridding cities of certain types of neighborhoods [[very bad). With the exception of freeways that go directly to the Ambassador bridge I don't think any should cut through the city. They cause the city to be disjointed and hinder walkability.

[mwilbert]

I don't think anything like this is going to happen anytime soon, but I think we could lose both the Lodge and 375 south of the Fisher. 375 cuts off Lafayette Park and the east riverfront from downtown, and the Lodge cuts off Corktown. It wouldn't take that long for traffic to get downtown on the surface.

I also agree that it is lamentable that the Fisher divides downtown from Midtown, but removing that seems like it would disrupt traffic patterns more.

[iheartthed]

I'd get rid of 375 completely. I'd also get rid of the Fisher between I-96 and the 375/75/Gratiot interchange.

[eastland]

I don't think the GM execs would go for 375's removal -- would take them too long to get back to Bloomfield.

[DC48080]

I don't think the GM execs would go for 375's removal -- would take them too long to get back to Bloomfield.

And for the other rank and file employees in the Ren Cen to get to their homes in Northwest Detroit, Warren, Dearborn, and any other neighborhood or suburb.

Don't try to make this thread about putting down the evil unsustainable suburbs or those God awful evil rich executives who live there.

[boogiechillen]

I would like to see the removal of I-375 and the capping of I-75 South between John R and Grand River. Some sort of promenade park built over that portion of the freeway is an interesting pipe dream.

[NorthEndere]

In my dreams, The Fisher would be taken underground for most of its course, or done away with altogether from the Jeffries to where it ends at Gratiot. 375 never made much sense to begin with unless you were a GM employee once they took SEMTA out of commission, so it could be taken out or boulevarded. I think the Lodge has always served a pretty useful purpose, but the sheer size of the interchange with the Fisher seems like total overkill, and does the Fisher's interchange with the Chrysler/375.

Anyway, I think taking out the Fisher or reconfiguring it in some way would open up a lot of room to allow for the reconnection of downtown to its surrounding neighborhoods.

[Hermod]

In my dreams, The Fisher would be taken underground for most of its course, or done away with altogether from the Jeffries to where it ends at Gratiot. 375 never made much sense to begin with unless you were a GM employee once they took SEMTA out of commission, so it could be taken out or boulevarded. I think the Lodge has always served a pretty useful purpose, but the sheer size of the interchange with the Fisher seems like total overkill, and does the Fisher's interchange with the Chrysler/375.

Anyway, I think taking out the Fisher or reconfiguring it in some way would open up a lot of room to allow for the reconnection of downtown to its surrounding neighborhoods.

This opens up a topic which has always caused controversy in cities that lie along "through" interstates. Should the main interstate go through the city or should it go around the city?

Should the current I-275 be renumbered I-75 and the Fisher-Chrysler-aokland county portion on I-75 be redesignated as I-275?

Richmond went through this with I-95 and I-64. For a long time, they insisted that these roads went "though" Richmond and resisted completion of the beltway as "bypassing" Richmond.
Finally they agreed to completing the beltway and routing I-95 and I-64 around Richmond with the interstates running through the cities designated as alternate routes.

As long as Fisher-Chrysler remain I-75, you are not going to tear them up.

[DetroitPlanner]

375 is the only freeway to be built with europave. The cost to rip that out would be outragous.

In addition if federal aid has been used on any of these freeways in the last 30 years the state would be required to re-imburse the feds if they destroy what the feds paid for. Nearly all of the roads have had major work done to them.

There is no way that you are ever going to be rid of I-75, I-94 or I-96. These are part of the national defense system of freeways.

I would like to see us concentrate on the land use around the freeways. Right now it is a jumbled mess. Start off by tearing down some of the eysores, begin zoning the areas nearest to the freeway ramps with things that make sense to put there. I get off of I-94 at Addison frequently. This is a nighborhood street with lots of homes densely packed onto it. Imagine living in one of those homes and having all of that noise!

[ghettopalmetto]

This opens up a topic which has always caused controversy in cities that lie along "through" interstates. Should the main interstate go through the city or should it go around the city?

Should the current I-275 be renumbered I-75 and the Fisher-Chrysler-aokland county portion on I-75 be redesignated as I-275?

Richmond went through this with I-95 and I-64. For a long time, they insisted that these roads went "though" Richmond and resisted completion of the beltway as "bypassing" Richmond.
Finally they agreed to completing the beltway and routing I-95 and I-64 around Richmond with the interstates running through the cities designated as alternate routes.

As long as Fisher-Chrysler remain I-75, you are not going to tear them up.

Actually, I-95 and I-64 DO go right smack through downtown Richmond. I've driven it dozens of times.

With that said, I-375 in Detroit is a waste of space, as is the Lodge south of I-94. There are probably some exits that can be done away with on the remaining freeways, so that they serve their intended purpose instead of acting as high-speed "local" roads.

[DetroitPole]

The problem is not so much that we're not removing them, but actually widening and expanding them [[now I-94, totally unnecessarily) in a region that hasn't had population growth in 30 years - and our state was the only state to lose population in the last ten!

It's still 1965 here. Do people wonder why Michigan is in the toilet?

Removing them won't happen. And it isn't because of the suburbs, it is because of the ex-burbs. This region is so ridiculously far-flung and sprawling, people commute so far for everything, and mass transit has been so thoroughly dismantled [[or actually removed in some burbs) that not only would removing certain freeways be a non-starter, our economy [[what's left of it) would probably collapse. We are totally dependent on them. It's the other crack for Metro Detroit.

[tkelly1986]

To rid the city of these unnecessary eye sores, it may not be entirely necessary to remove the freeways; why not just build a roof and cover them up. Similar to the cut and cover strategy for subway building. The “Big Dig” in Boston was so expensive because they had to tunnel under the existing freeway. However, here is Detroit, half the work is done….I say cap the freeways that slice up downtown [[the CBD).

[DetroitPlanner]

To rid the city of these unnecessary eye sores, it may not be entirely necessary to remove the freeways; why not just build a roof and cover them up. Similar to the cut and cover strategy for subway building. The “Big Dig” in Boston was so expensive because they had to tunnel under the existing freeway. However, here is Detroit, half the work is done….I say cap the freeways that slice up downtown [[the CBD).

In Columbus they came up with a relatively cool solution. A freeway is disgused along High Street that connects downtown with the OSU student neighborhood by shops built on a freeway bridge.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...03439&t=h&z=18

[sirrealone]

To rid the city of these unnecessary eye sores, it may not be entirely necessary to remove the freeways; why not just build a roof and cover them up. Similar to the cut and cover strategy for subway building. The “Big Dig” in Boston was so expensive because they had to tunnel under the existing freeway. However, here is Detroit, half the work is done….I say cap the freeways that slice up downtown [[the CBD).

I've read that Michigan is in danger of losing up to half a billion dollars annually in federal road funds if they can't come up with state funding thresholds. It's hard enough to keep up on maintaining the existing roads, which will be all but impossible if we lose any or all of that funding. I simply don't see where the extra billions would come from that would be needed to do any sort of widespread capping.

A capped freeway, to me, seems to lend itself to much higher maintenance costs down the line. I guess the pavement would probably last longer not being exposed to the elements, but when it comes time for rebuilding, an underground road is going to cost way more and take longer, I would think.

[jcole]

In Columbus they came up with a relatively cool solution. A freeway is disgused along High Street that connects downtown with the OSU student neighborhood by shops built on a freeway bridge.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...03439&t=h&z=18

Actually, that's a very, very old way of utilizing bridges; London Bridge at one time had market stalls and shops as well as some of the bridges in Edinburgh, Scotland.

[muskie1]

To rid the city of these unnecessary eye sores, it may not be entirely necessary to remove the freeways; why not just build a roof and cover them up. Similar to the cut and cover strategy for subway building. The “Big Dig” in Boston was so expensive because they had to tunnel under the existing freeway. However, here is Detroit, half the work is done….I say cap the freeways that slice up downtown [[the CBD).

The dowtown freeways could never be covered without having bypass routes to handle all the truck traffic. Most tunnels and covered roads do not allow many hazardous and flammable cargos. Many of the more dangerous loads are confined to having to stay on certain routes so you would need a way for this stuff to move into,through or around the city.

[DetroitPlanner]

Actually, that's a very, very old way of utilizing bridges; London Bridge at one time had market stalls and shops as well as some of the bridges in Edinburgh, Scotland.

Obviously they never have had to deal with FHWA!

[jcole]

Obviously they never have had to deal with FHWA!

No, just the Stuart kings.