I-275: Since It Will Never Go To Pontiac...

[thenetwork]

Considering that NIMBYs and environmentalists have all but killed any chance of I-275 ever being built north of Novi, why not renumber I-696 as a continuation of I-275 giving Metro Detroit a true loop bypass route?

Like I-275, I-696 only meets it's parent route on one end.  At least with extending I-275 eastward, it would still have the opportunity to meet it's parent route a second time. 

[JREwing78]

I'm not a fan of change simply to follow obscure rules. It's been I-275 for 50+ years; any change would simply confuse people worse than leaving it as it is.

SM-G950U

[Max Rockatansky]

I'd be okay with truncating it to I-96, the multiplex has always been weird in terms of signage.

[dkblake]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

[The Ghostbuster]

Keep 696 as is. Eliminate the 96/275 duplex. It is an unnecessary co-designation (I feel the same way about the 84-380 duplex in Pennsylvania).

[Flint1979]

What would changing the numbers do to make it a true loop bypass if it isn't one already? Both I-275 and I-696 end at an Interstate at both ends making the even number acceptable. Even though I-196 on the western side of the state has an odd number also ending at an Interstate on both ends that is another story which involves flipping what was suppose to be I-196 to Muskegon around with I-96 which was suppose to follow I-196's routing back to I-94 so the number was just flip flopped. I-196 is not a spur route to anywhere other than to I-94, it starts in Grand Rapids so it is not a spur to Grand Rapids.

[Flint1979]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

Really if you are coming from say Monroe and going to Auburn Hills or even Royal Oak it would be better to just stay on I-75 and follow it through Detroit than to take I-275 or Telegraph or the Southfield. Any route you take it's going to take at least an hour to drive from Monroe to Royal Oak all of which is through Metro Detroit.

[I-39]

Someone educate me, where was it suppose to end up originally?

[tigerwings]

At I-75 near Clarkston.

M-5 north is in the original ROW.

[I-39]

At I-75 near Clarkston.

M-5 north is in the original ROW.

But they didn't preserve any ROW north of Pontiac Trail?

[Flint1979]

At I-75 near Clarkston.

M-5 north is in the original ROW.

But they didn't preserve any ROW north of Pontiac Trail?

There never was anything north of Pontiac Trail. Development pretty much put a stop to it. Just like M-10 can't go any further or else it would run right into a shopping plaza after Orchard Lake.

[I-39]

At I-75 near Clarkston.

M-5 north is in the original ROW.

But they didn't preserve any ROW north of Pontiac Trail?

There never was anything north of Pontiac Trail. Development pretty much put a stop to it. Just like M-10 can't go any further or else it would run right into a shopping plaza after Orchard Lake.

I see. I wasn't sure if this was another IL-53 type situation.

[Ryctor2018]

Not only that, but too many environmental issues shutdown I-275 north of its current terminus. Outside the M-5 ROW, look at central Oakland County on a map. Lakes, everywhere, swampy land, bogs, etc. I had always maintained that Michigan should have followed Wisconsin or Ohio's lead on a N-S route thru there. Make Haggerty Rd, Union Lake Rd, and other roads state highways. Then you can you make whatever is needed locally for the trunk line. Freeway, blvd, 5 lane road, 2 lane road, the state would maintain the routing.

Upthread, a few posters mentioned eliminating the I-96/I-275 overlap. This is 21st Century hindsight. I-275 was built first. I-96 changed its routing to the Jeffries freeway corridor that now exist. If you look at a map, the eastern M-5 freeway thru Farmington was supposed to be I-96. But, there was too much development in the way, so I-96 was shifted to its current alignment where it meets I-275 (and M-14) at the interchange in western Livonia. The giant interchange with I-96/I-275/I-696/M-5 was designed for I-275 to continue north (as M-5 does now). I-275 was eventually killed in central Oakland county long after everything was shifted around. Local nomenclature and the state of MI still refers to the entire route as I-275, not I-96 or a multiplexed route. 

[I-39]

Not only that, but too many environmental issues shutdown I-275 north of its current terminus. Outside the M-5 ROW, look at central Oakland County on a map. Lakes, everywhere, swampy land, bogs, etc. I had always maintained that Michigan should have followed Wisconsin or Ohio's lead on a N-S route thru there. Make Haggerty Rd, Union Lake Rd, and other roads state highways. Then you can you make whatever is needed locally for the trunk line. Freeway, blvd, 5 lane road, 2 lane road, the state would maintain the routing.

Yeah, looking at a map, it seems like a more extreme version (terrain wise) of the IL-53 extension in Lake/McHenry County, Illinois. There would be so many bridge crossings needed of lakes it probably wouldn't be practical anymore.

[dkblake]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

Really if you are coming from say Monroe and going to Auburn Hills or even Royal Oak it would be better to just stay on I-75 and follow it through Detroit than to take I-275 or Telegraph or the Southfield. Any route you take it's going to take at least an hour to drive from Monroe to Royal Oak all of which is through Metro Detroit.

Totally agree. What I was getting at is that the OP idea for renumbering I-696 to I-275 would imply that the current I-275 to I-696 drive would create a unified, sensible beltway around Detroit, and there's really no scenario in which you would actually drive that full I-275 loop from I-75 Exit 20 back to I-75 Exit 61 unless (1) I-75 through Detroit was literally closed and (2) you live in Royal Oak.

Also very much disagree that the I-275 duplex should be removed. I-275 is the "through" N-S route up to 696 and I-96 uses it to shift E-W corridors to go to Lansing.

[Flint1979]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

Really if you are coming from say Monroe and going to Auburn Hills or even Royal Oak it would be better to just stay on I-75 and follow it through Detroit than to take I-275 or Telegraph or the Southfield. Any route you take it's going to take at least an hour to drive from Monroe to Royal Oak all of which is through Metro Detroit.

Totally agree. What I was getting at is that the OP idea for renumbering I-696 to I-275 would imply that the current I-275 to I-696 drive would create a unified, sensible beltway around Detroit, and there's really no scenario in which you would actually drive that full I-275 loop from I-75 Exit 20 back to I-75 Exit 61 unless (1) I-75 through Detroit was literally closed and (2) you live in Royal Oak.

Also very much disagree that the I-275 duplex should be removed. I-275 is the "through" N-S route up to 696 and I-96 uses it to shift E-W corridors to go to Lansing.

The only way that I-275 to I-696 to get to or from Royal Oak, Madison Heights, Hazel Park, Warren and around that area would be a benefit would be if you were coming from like Ann Arbor. Then again I'm not sure how many people actually know that the best way from west of Ann Arbor to downtown Detroit is to take M-14 to I-96 rather than stay on I-94. But any of the cities along I-275 then I-275 to I-696 would be the best way. And yeah like that project that had I-75 at the Rouge River shut down for a couple of years that was a disaster along Fort Street I went through that area a few times and finally decided to start using I-94 to the Southfield to bypass the I-75 closure.

[thenetwork]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

Really if you are coming from say Monroe and going to Auburn Hills or even Royal Oak it would be better to just stay on I-75 and follow it through Detroit than to take I-275 or Telegraph or the Southfield. Any route you take it's going to take at least an hour to drive from Monroe to Royal Oak all of which is through Metro Detroit.

Totally agree. What I was getting at is that the OP idea for renumbering I-696 to I-275 would imply that the current I-275 to I-696 drive would create a unified, sensible beltway around Detroit, and there's really no scenario in which you would actually drive that full I-275 loop from I-75 Exit 20 back to I-75 Exit 61 unless (1) I-75 through Detroit was literally closed and (2) you live in Royal Oak.

Also very much disagree that the I-275 duplex should be removed. I-275 is the "through" N-S route up to 696 and I-96 uses it to shift E-W corridors to go to Lansing.

My point is, most circular belt 3dis around major cities are rarely, if ever traveled in their entirety despite having the same route number on all sides of the city.

I don't expect too many drivers to regionally bypass Detroit by driving both I-275 and I-696 to get back to I-75 ‐‐ From Toledo, I'd beeline US-23 as the true Detroit Bypass, or even I-275/I-96/US-23 if I wanted to avoid Ann Arbor as well or if I was coming from the East Side of Toledo (I-280)

I'd rather see one Interstate number ring around Detroit instead of two routes that should be odd-numbered 3dis as they are currently, in effect, spurs off their parent routes and would give more reason for the I-96/I-275 duplex.

[Flint1979]

I wasn't one that said that I-275 should be removed between the I-96/M-14 interchange and the I-696/I-96/M-5 interchange. I think it should be kept but I don't think it should be built to I-75. I think that at one time they should have built a N-S state highway between there and I-75 near Davisburg. They started with M-5 going north but that only went as far as Pontiac Trail with the road going up to Richardson roughly on the same line as 17 Mile Road. Oakland County has a ton of lakes though so routing through there would have been tough. They could have gone a bit more west giving relief to US-23 which is heavily traveled. Toledo to Flint traffic will use US-23 unless there is a stop in Metro Detroit for anyone as I-75 is 25 miles longer and takes you through the thick of Metro Detroit.

[Terry Shea]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

Really if you are coming from say Monroe and going to Auburn Hills or even Royal Oak it would be better to just stay on I-75 and follow it through Detroit than to take I-275 or Telegraph or the Southfield. Any route you take it's going to take at least an hour to drive from Monroe to Royal Oak all of which is through Metro Detroit.

Totally agree. What I was getting at is that the OP idea for renumbering I-696 to I-275 would imply that the current I-275 to I-696 drive would create a unified, sensible beltway around Detroit, and there's really no scenario in which you would actually drive that full I-275 loop from I-75 Exit 20 back to I-75 Exit 61 unless (1) I-75 through Detroit was literally closed and (2) you live in Royal Oak.

Also very much disagree that the I-275 duplex should be removed. I-275 is the "through" N-S route up to 696 and I-96 uses it to shift E-W corridors to go to Lansing.

The only way that I-275 to I-696 to get to or from Royal Oak, Madison Heights, Hazel Park, Warren and around that area would be a benefit would be if you were coming from like Ann Arbor. Then again I'm not sure how many people actually know that the best way from west of Ann Arbor to downtown Detroit is to take M-14 to I-96 rather than stay on I-94. But any of the cities along I-275 then I-275 to I-696 would be the best way. And yeah like that project that had I-75 at the Rouge River shut down for a couple of years that was a disaster along Fort Street I went through that area a few times and finally decided to start using I-94 to the Southfield to bypass the I-75 closure.

True, but who stays on any beltway for the entire length or most of it?  People who like to get dizzy going in circles?

[kenarmy]

Forget development, did they actually think they could get 275 built over the lakes all the way to Clarkston?

And you guys have it all wrong.. 275 should obviously be extended 24 miles south along I-75 so it could then subsume 280.

[Ryctor2018]

Yeah, looking at a map, it seems like a more extreme version (terrain wise) of the IL-53 extension in Lake/McHenry County, Illinois. There would be so many bridge crossings needed of lakes it probably wouldn't be practical anymore.

Right, and just like IL-53, there is no good alternative to a cancelled I-275 in the area. I never understood that; if you cannot build the full freeway ok you live with that. But, the region in western Oakland bit off their nose to spite their face. Only two lane winding roads that tax the infrastructure to the limit. The congestion is many times worse than if a route were built somehow thru the area. Lake county and Oakland county painted themselves into a corner they cannot escape from.

[Terry Shea]

I remember when M-5 was being built between I-96 and Pontiac Trail, MDOT maps showed it as being built as a freeway.  I had a bowling tournament in Clarkston a few days after M-5 was opened to traffic, so I decided to go home that way, and wow what a disappointment that it wasn't a freeway...apart from basically the long exit ramps to and from I-96.  I can't figure out how MDOT could get that wrong on their own map.

[Flint1979]

Forget development, did they actually think they could get 275 built over the lakes all the way to Clarkston?

And you guys have it all wrong.. 275 should obviously be extended 24 miles south along I-75 so it could then subsume 280.

They could have with some careful planning but it would have been pretty curvy. I don't think taking I-96 to US-23 to get back to I-75 is that bad. It's like 45 miles from the north end of I-275 back to I-75 taking that way so not awful. It's about 18 miles on a straight line from the north end of I-275 to where it was suppose to end but with some curves it would be over 25 miles most likely. So all in all at least there is a connection to I-75 without having to take I-696 back to I-75.

I made that mistake once I wasn't old enough to drive my dad was driving but I was giving him the directions. This was back in about 1993-1994 when I-75 was completely closed in downtown Detroit for construction. At the time I didn't really know how exactly to connect back to I-75 so I told him to take I-96 all the way out to I-275 and take I-275 to I-696 to get back to I-75. Wasn't even thinking of using I-96 to US-23. So that's the route we took. Honestly I just wanted him to spend more time riding around Detroit because I was only about 14 years old at the time and thought it was fun and I thought taking US-23 would be boring.

[Flint1979]

I don't think of I-275 and I-696 as a single loop route; I-696 is an E-W route in the immediate northern suburbs from I-94 to I-96, and while I-275 can get you back to I-75 via 96 and 23, it also functions as a N-S route to DTW and local highway in Livonia/Farmington etc. The other thing is that using I-75 to I-275 north to I-696 east to I-75 north as a loop route is pretty inefficient unless you're going to, say, the Royal Oak area- up to Auburn Hills you'd take Telegraph, for example.

Really if you are coming from say Monroe and going to Auburn Hills or even Royal Oak it would be better to just stay on I-75 and follow it through Detroit than to take I-275 or Telegraph or the Southfield. Any route you take it's going to take at least an hour to drive from Monroe to Royal Oak all of which is through Metro Detroit.

Totally agree. What I was getting at is that the OP idea for renumbering I-696 to I-275 would imply that the current I-275 to I-696 drive would create a unified, sensible beltway around Detroit, and there's really no scenario in which you would actually drive that full I-275 loop from I-75 Exit 20 back to I-75 Exit 61 unless (1) I-75 through Detroit was literally closed and (2) you live in Royal Oak.

Also very much disagree that the I-275 duplex should be removed. I-275 is the "through" N-S route up to 696 and I-96 uses it to shift E-W corridors to go to Lansing.

My point is, most circular belt 3dis around major cities are rarely, if ever traveled in their entirety despite having the same route number on all sides of the city.

I don't expect too many drivers to regionally bypass Detroit by driving both I-275 and I-696 to get back to I-75 ‐‐ From Toledo, I'd beeline US-23 as the true Detroit Bypass, or even I-275/I-96/US-23 if I wanted to avoid Ann Arbor as well or if I was coming from the East Side of Toledo (I-280)

I'd rather see one Interstate number ring around Detroit instead of two routes that should be odd-numbered 3dis as they are currently, in effect, spurs off their parent routes and would give more reason for the I-96/I-275 duplex.

For the amount of time it would take you to bypass Ann Arbor you could already be well past Ann Arbor by the time it took you to take I-75 to I-275 to I-96 back to US-23. You'd probably be more interested in bypassing the Ann Arbor-Brighton stretch of US-23 though since that's the busiest stretch of 23 between Flint and Toledo but with the flex lane in there it helps, still hate that the flex lane is only open during certain hours though as US-23 should be eight lanes between I-96 and I-94, three lanes in other places. South of Ann Arbor though four lanes is ok.

[GaryV]

I'd rather see one Interstate number ring around Detroit instead of two routes that should be odd-numbered 3dis as they are currently, in effect, spurs off their parent routes and would give more reason for the I-96/I-275 duplex.

Is your ring going to go across into Canada in order to meet up at the other end?

Another point is that an even numbered 3di doesn't need to meet up with its parent at both ends.  It only needs to meet up with another interstate at the end that is not its parent.  I-275 (75 to 96) and I-696 (96 to 94) both meet that definition.