I-275 and I-696 form a 1/2 loop around Detroit, with the former making up the west side, and the latter making up the north. I know that I-275 was supposed to continue north and terminate at I-75 outside Pontiac at one point, but that segment was cancelled, and all that's left is a stub freeway on which MI 5 runs. Would it have made more sense to have a backup plan in case one of those freeway segments was cancelled? Specifically, to route one or the other designation completely around the area, I-96 concurrency notwithstanding?
There's no dilemma. Nobody cares that two routes end at the same interchange.
I don't see any dilemma. If you want to go back to I-75 you use I-96 WB to US-23 NB. I-696 starts at that interchange and I-275 ends there and there isn't anything else going to be done to complete I-275 as the land north of there is way too developed to plant a freeway through there. It's almost as bad as when they wanted to extend I-475 south of Flint to connect with US-23.
I-275 could be cut back to end at the intersection with I-96 (Jeffries) and M-14.
But I-275 was completed before the Jeffries Freeway. The mentality in metro Detroit is still that there are 2 separate sections of I-96. The overlap of I-96/I-275 is pretty much called only I-275.
When the northern extension of I-275 to link back with I-75 was never built, the number stuck for the entire current stretch.
Quote from: GaryV on February 09, 2018, 02:36:34 PM
I-275 could be cut back to end at the intersection with I-96 (Jeffries) and M-14.
But I-275 was completed before the Jeffries Freeway. The mentality in metro Detroit is still that there are 2 separate sections of I-96. The overlap of I-96/I-275 is pretty much called only I-275.
When the northern extension of I-275 to link back with I-75 was never built, the number stuck for the entire current stretch.
I-275 should really be switched to I-175 since it never reconnects with I-75 but since it's always been I-275 and it was originally suppose to reconnect with I-75 I guess I-275 is fine. Same really with I-696 it should be I-396 and the reason Detroit doesn't have a full beltway of course is because it's a border city and Canada is in the way of making a full loop.
It wasn't even really apparent to me until High School that the I-96/I-275 was odd. Most locals in Michigan just refer to it as "275" as noted upthread. Really I think we're long past the need to fix the designation with it already being local route slang.
This also doesn't strike me as a dilemma. I think the numbers are fine the way they are.
I-275 and I-696 numbers are perfectly fine. And they should definitely start with even digits, as they form a beltway. I wouldn't be opposed to merging their numbers from the get-go, but there's been too long of a precedent now.
Quote from: Henry on February 09, 2018, 10:21:18 AM
I-275 and I-696 form a 1/2 loop around Detroit, with the former making up the west side, and the latter making up the north. I know that I-275 was supposed to continue north and terminate at I-75 outside Pontiac at one point, but that segment was cancelled, and all that's left is a stub freeway on which MI 5 runs. Would it have made more sense to have a backup plan in case one of those freeway segments was cancelled? Specifically, to route one or the other designation completely around the area, I-96 concurrency notwithstanding?
It's not uncommon
I-494 and I-694 on the east side of St Paul MN
I-255 and I-270 south of St Louis MO (I live 2 miles from this and nobody here has a problem with it)
I-64 and I-264 and I-664 in Chesapeake VA (I used to live in Tidewater and it wasn't an issue)
There may be others but I thought of these off the top of my head
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 09, 2018, 03:12:23 PM
I-275 should really be switched to I-175 since it never reconnects with I-75 but since it's always been I-275 and it was originally suppose to reconnect with I-75 I guess I-275 is fine. Same really with I-696 it should be I-396 and the reason Detroit doesn't have a full beltway of course is because it's a border city and Canada is in the way of making a full loop.
It connects interstates; that's all it needs to have an even 3di.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 09, 2018, 03:12:23 PM
I-275 should really be switched to I-175 since it never reconnects with I-75 but since it's always been I-275 and it was originally suppose to reconnect with I-75 I guess I-275 is fine. Same really with I-696 it should be I-396 and the reason Detroit doesn't have a full beltway of course is because it's a border city and Canada is in the way of making a full loop.
It connects interstates; that's all it needs to have an even 3di.
How does that matter? I-196 connects between I-96 and I-94 and has an odd 3-di.
I don't know of anybody in Michigan who views this a problem. I would have cut I-275 back to the M-14 interchange at one point, but nobody has any problems, so it's best left alone.
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:27:20 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 09, 2018, 03:12:23 PM
I-275 should really be switched to I-175 since it never reconnects with I-75 but since it's always been I-275 and it was originally suppose to reconnect with I-75 I guess I-275 is fine. Same really with I-696 it should be I-396 and the reason Detroit doesn't have a full beltway of course is because it's a border city and Canada is in the way of making a full loop.
It connects interstates; that's all it needs to have an even 3di.
How does that matter? I-196 connects between I-96 and I-94 and has an odd 3-di.
Not originally. I-96 and I-196 swapped designations west of Grand Rapids. Primarily because what is now I-196 was built later, and it didn't make sense to change route numbers as you traveled from Lansing through GR to Muskegon (or vice versa).
The 275-696 interchange looks problematic on a map, but from approaching it the 275-696 movements definitely feel like an exit. So in that case route continuity between the two would be counter intuitive.
The I-96 movement at the M-14/S JCT I-275 interchange is a greater Human Factors violation. Was there ever a plan to route I-96 roughly along M-5/Grand River Ave between where it curves to the west and where M-5 picks up? That would make a lot more sense conceptually than piggy backing 96 along 275.
Edit - after a little research I see the answer is yes.
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:27:20 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
It connects interstates; that's all it needs to have an even 3di.
How does that matter? I-196 connects between I-96 and I-94 and has an odd 3-di.
I'm saying they meet one of the numbering conventions for even 3di's. Either they loop back to the parent or they connect to another interstate.
Odd 3di's can connect to other interstates or 'dead end'.
It's more flexible to be able to use both evens and odds for those 'connector' 3di's. A situation like 275/696 where they function like loop freeways or as part of a system of urban freeways, evens make sense. For 196 where it's sort of an alternate mainline, an odd makes sense. Same for 135 in Kansas (although, that one could probably be a mainline interstate, but I don't want to get too off subject)
Naturally not everyone follows this sensible rule of thumb. I-355 would be perfectly acceptable as an even 3di. I-476 on the Northeast Extension would've made more sense as an odd 3di, but there was an existing even 3di that was easy to extend.
Anyway, the point is, there is no rule that an even 3di
must return to it's parent, it's just a guide. And there are dozens and dozens of even 3di's that can testify to this simple fact.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 14, 2018, 09:24:37 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:27:20 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
It connects interstates; that's all it needs to have an even 3di.
How does that matter? I-196 connects between I-96 and I-94 and has an odd 3-di.
I'm saying they meet one of the numbering conventions for even 3di's. Either they loop back to the parent or they connect to another interstate.
Odd 3di's can connect to other interstates or 'dead end'.
It's more flexible to be able to use both evens and odds for those 'connector' 3di's. A situation like 275/696 where they function like loop freeways or as part of a system of urban freeways, evens make sense. For 196 where it's sort of an alternate mainline, an odd makes sense. Same for 135 in Kansas (although, that one could probably be a mainline interstate, but I don't want to get too off subject)
Naturally not everyone follows this sensible rule of thumb. I-355 would be perfectly acceptable as an even 3di. I-476 on the Northeast Extension would've made more sense as an odd 3di, but there was an existing even 3di that was easy to extend.
Anyway, the point is, there is no rule that an even 3di must return to it's parent, it's just a guide. And there are dozens and dozens of even 3di's that can testify to this simple fact.
I've always viewed the 3di numbering rules as being more guideline than hard and fast rule. Beltways and routes that start and end at their parent should be even. Routes that only meet one interstate at one end should be odd. Other routes, similar to 196, could be even or odd (although the practice tends to favor even). So if you have a metro area with many 3dis off of a single parent, it is very difficult to make sure that all meet the rules, you can easily run out of evens (or odds). But still, as there is a great preference for beltways and routes that meet their parent twice to be even, those should be assigned first and if there are any other connectors those can be assigned the remaining even numbers until you run out of evens.
So there are many odd numbered 3dis that probably would be even if the rules were followed, but the evens were probably used up in other areas.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 14, 2018, 09:24:37 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:27:20 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2018, 12:16:49 PM
It connects interstates; that's all it needs to have an even 3di.
How does that matter? I-196 connects between I-96 and I-94 and has an odd 3-di.
I'm saying they meet one of the numbering conventions for even 3di's. Either they loop back to the parent or they connect to another interstate.
Odd 3di's can connect to other interstates or 'dead end'.
It's more flexible to be able to use both evens and odds for those 'connector' 3di's. A situation like 275/696 where they function like loop freeways or as part of a system of urban freeways, evens make sense. For 196 where it's sort of an alternate mainline, an odd makes sense. Same for 135 in Kansas (although, that one could probably be a mainline interstate, but I don't want to get too off subject)
Naturally not everyone follows this sensible rule of thumb. I-355 would be perfectly acceptable as an even 3di. I-476 on the Northeast Extension would've made more sense as an odd 3di, but there was an existing even 3di that was easy to extend.
Anyway, the point is, there is no rule that an even 3di must return to it's parent, it's just a guide. And there are dozens and dozens of even 3di's that can testify to this simple fact.
And what exactly is I-196 an alternate to? As far as even numbered 3-di some states treat them as spurs and some as bypasses, I-275 and I-696 are Michigan's only even 3-di's to not connect to it's parent route at both ends. I-475 does, I-675 does, I-496 does, even the unsigned I-296 does.
Quote from: GaryV on February 09, 2018, 02:36:34 PM
I-275 could be cut back to end at the intersection with I-96 (Jeffries) and M-14.
I believe the FHWA route log shows the northern terminus of I-275 at the I-96/M-14 interchange. MDOT extends it to the M-5/I-696 interchange.
Quote from: GaryV on February 09, 2018, 02:36:34 PM
But I-275 was completed before the Jeffries Freeway. The mentality in metro Detroit is still that there are 2 separate sections of I-96. The overlap of I-96/I-275 is pretty much called only I-275.
Part of that mentality may have come from the fact that otherwise driving directions along the Ann Arbor-Southfield corridor would be M-14 east --> I-96 west --> I-696 east (and vice versa), which would blow everyone's mind.
Even MDOT refers to the the I-96/I-275 concurrent stretch as I-275, even though I-96 is the primary route. Detour signage on I-96 often reads "follow I-275 to I-96" when really it should read "stay on I-96." And check out this signage at the southbound I-96/I-275 split: https://goo.gl/maps/4PrjfP2vHzy
Since I-96 is the primary route, this really should be signed as a three-lane right exit to I-275. But again, nobody (including MDOT) thinks of it that way.
Part of the reason is that, back in the day, I-96 was going to follow the Grand River Ave corridor between Farmington Hills and Detroit. Putting I-96 on the I-275 corridor was supposed to be a temporary arrangement while the Grand River Ave corridor was rebuilt as a freeway. Of course, nothing is more permanent than a temporary fix.
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 18, 2018, 02:13:40 PM
Part of the reason is that, back in the day, I-96 was going to follow the Grand River Ave corridor between Farmington Hills and Detroit. Putting I-96 on the I-275 corridor was supposed to be a temporary arrangement while the Grand River Ave corridor was rebuilt as a freeway. Of course, nothing is more permanent than a temporary fix.
Really? That would have cost a fortune to rip all those businesses and homes on Grand River...no wonder that didn't happen. I had no idea that was even considered.
It was supposed to be parallel to Grand River, not rebuilding Grand River. My mistake:
http://www.michiganhighways.org/listings/I-096.html