Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flint1979]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

I think an I-96 extension would be the best option. Then all Michigan interstates would touch Canada.

I think the best option is to have no route number and a sign saying Bridge to Canada. It's not like there is a long highway ending there. Ramps to and from I-75 with no number is probably what is going to happen. MDOT isn't going to be interested in putting up a highway number for no reason at all.

[SkyPesos]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

I think an I-96 extension would be the best option. Then all Michigan interstates would touch Canada.

I think the best option is to have no route number and a sign saying Bridge to Canada. It's not like there is a long highway ending there. Ramps to and from I-75 with no number is probably what is going to happen. MDOT isn't going to be interested in putting up a highway number for no reason at all.

For no route number, I would appreciate at least a mention of ON 401 with a “TO 401” on the signs approaching the bridge.

Maybe even London or Toronto as a control city, but that’s a pie in the sky dream knowing MDOT signage.

[ARMOURERERIC]

Moroun Bypass

[Ryctor2018]

MDOT will probably sign it internally. Maybe CONN-75 or something like that for maintenance purposes. For the general public, I expect it to be unsigned.

[ilpt4u]

How about making a Gordie Howe Bridge Shield, and sign it with that?

[Flint1979]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

I think an I-96 extension would be the best option. Then all Michigan interstates would touch Canada.

I think the best option is to have no route number and a sign saying Bridge to Canada. It's not like there is a long highway ending there. Ramps to and from I-75 with no number is probably what is going to happen. MDOT isn't going to be interested in putting up a highway number for no reason at all.

For no route number, I would appreciate at least a mention of ON 401 with a “TO 401” on the signs approaching the bridge.

Maybe even London or Toronto as a control city, but that’s a pie in the sky dream knowing MDOT signage.

They wouldn't use London or Toronto they'd just use Canada. Canada is used by MDOT when a route leads to one of the International bridges.

[Flint1979]

Moroun Bypass

I loved it when that moron had to spend a night in the Wayne County Jail. I just call him Manuel Moron.

[triplemultiplex]

I think I've said as much before but a LOT of drama could have been avoided and a LOT of money could have been saved if the state or federal government had simply eminent domained the Ambassador Bridge and cut out the profiteering Mourons.

Good thing Canada had the stones to start building the Howe regardless of that nonsense going on west of the river.

[catch22]

The GHB recently posted a couple of drone flyover videos showing the progress to date on both sides of the river.

US side: 

Canada side:

To chime in on whether or not the connector will have its own route number on the US side, my guess is no, since the ramps will only extend from I-75 to the north side of the bridge property (at the NS railroad tracks).  My guess is they will be less than 1/2 mile long.

[bessertc]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

I think an I-96 extension would be the best option. Then all Michigan interstates would touch Canada.

I think the best option is to have no route number and a sign saying Bridge to Canada. It's not like there is a long highway ending there. Ramps to and from I-75 with no number is probably what is going to happen. MDOT isn't going to be interested in putting up a highway number for no reason at all.

For no route number, I would appreciate at least a mention of ON 401 with a “TO 401” on the signs approaching the bridge.

Maybe even London or Toronto as a control city, but that’s a pie in the sky dream knowing MDOT signage.

While, realistically, the U.S. side will just consist of ramps leading from I-75/Fisher Frwy directly into the U.S. Toll & Customs Plaza (or whatever they call it) and, therefore, it's not really even a route—much like the existing ramps from I-75 to the Ambassador Bridge just down the way a bit—I had suggested to my best friend that works for the Federal Higwhay Administration, Michigan Division office that MDOT should just number the ramps as "M-9" anyway, regardless of the length or lack of length of the "route." She thought it was the best idea she heard in a long time and said she'd take it to the FHWA and MDOT folks coordinating the U.S. side of the construction. And for anyone who doesn't understand the significance of M-9... firstly, you cannot be my friend. (I'm a huge hockey and Red Wings fan.) Second, check these out:


So, you know how MDOT now includes the Canadian Flag on signs for routes leading to Canadian crossings (e.g. I-94/I-69 heading to the Blue Water Bridge and Ambassador Bridge exit ramps off I-75/Fisher Frwy in Detroit), why not just add an "M-9" diamond next to the Canadian Flag? I am going to create a couple sign mock-ups along those lines to give to my friend to send to her other FHWA and MDOT colleagues so... who knows? I know MDOT well enough to not expect anything to come of it, but... maybe??

[wanderer2575]

While, realistically, the U.S. side will just consist of ramps leading from I-75/Fisher Frwy directly into the U.S. Toll & Customs Plaza (or whatever they call it) and, therefore, it's not really even a route—much like the existing ramps from I-75 to the Ambassador Bridge just down the way a bit—I had suggested to my best friend that works for the Federal Higwhay Administration, Michigan Division office that MDOT should just number the ramps as "M-9" anyway, regardless of the length or lack of length of the "route." She thought it was the best idea she heard in a long time and said she'd take it to the FHWA and MDOT folks coordinating the U.S. side of the construction. And for anyone who doesn't understand the significance of M-9... firstly, you cannot be my friend. (I'm a huge hockey and Red Wings fan.) Second, check these out:


So, you know how MDOT now includes the Canadian Flag on signs for routes leading to Canadian crossings (e.g. I-94/I-69 heading to the Blue Water Bridge and Ambassador Bridge exit ramps off I-75/Fisher Frwy in Detroit), why not just add an "M-9" diamond next to the Canadian Flag? I am going to create a couple sign mock-ups along those lines to give to my friend to send to her other FHWA and MDOT colleagues so... who knows? I know MDOT well enough to not expect anything to come of it, but... maybe??

I hate to burst your bubble, but the reason the Canadian flag graphic was added is additional hand-holding for idiot motorists who cannot comprehend the words "Canada" and "Bridge to Canada" as controls, even though they are well within the 140-character limit of a tweet.  (Specifically, the debacle when the I-94/I-69 terminus at Port Huron was realigned and motorists who hadn't yet updated their GPSs ignored the new signs and found themselves on the Blue Water Bridge instead of on M-25.)  Showing both a Michigan route shield and a Canadian flag defeats the purpose of the latter and will really confuse the hell out of a lot of people.

[ilpt4u]

Showing both a Michigan route shield and a Canadian flag defeats the purpose of the latter and will really confuse the hell out of a lot of people.

Show three graphics:
1) Create & Use a new “Gordie Howe Bridge” Shield
2) ON 401 Shield. If you want to use the the “To” print above the shield, fine
3) Canadian Flag

[wanderer2575]

I can engage in Fictional as much as the next person, but signs for this bridge will be up in a couple years and therefore I look at this from a Reality angle.  And the reality is this:  I'm sure many in-the-loop MDOT staffers personally would love to send a "screw you" message to the Maroun bridge company by including a Canadian route shield and control cities.  But MarounCo has engaged MDOT in litigation previously, it clearly has no qualms about doing it again if it think it's been wronged, and certainly MDOT knows that would not be the best expenditure of limited tax dollars.  MDOT's responsible course would be to not poke that particular sore spot.

Bottom line:  I expect we'll see "Bridge to Canada" and a flag graphic, and maybe also the bridge name.  Nothing more.

[bessertc]

I hate to burst your bubble, but the reason the Canadian flag graphic was added is additional hand-holding for idiot motorists who cannot comprehend the words "Canada" and "Bridge to Canada" as controls, even though they are well within the 140-character limit of a tweet.  (Specifically, the debacle when the I-94/I-69 terminus at Port Huron was realigned and motorists who hadn't yet updated their GPSs ignored the new signs and found themselves on the Blue Water Bridge instead of on M-25.)  Showing both a Michigan route shield and a Canadian flag defeats the purpose of the latter and will really confuse the hell out of a lot of people.

Oh, I know precisely why the Canadian flag was added to the freeway signs. Remember, my best friend works at the Michigan Division of the Federal Highway Administration. She and I have had many interesting discussions over the years. She and I also know many of the same MDOT staffers, too, so while we're on the same page 90–92% of the time, those remaining 8–10% of the time, we can get into it pretty well! 

My personal opinion is that if you need a Canadian flag on the sign to help you better read the word "C a n a d a" on said same sign, that's clear grounds for immediate drivers license revocation. Period. It's the same as failing your eye test. Or driving slow in the left lane of the freeway. You have no legitimate right to be on our highways if you can't read a sign. And if you were distracted by something else in your vehicle... doesn't matter. In fact, even worse, in my book. You're piloting a lethal weapon at deadly speeds. If you can't use it properly, which includes not reading a Harry Potter novel or balancing your checkbook while driving and it also means being able to understand what "C a n a d a" means when you're heading to Canada. So, if an sign saying "M-9 [CanFlag] / Gordie Howe Int'l / Bridge to Canada" confuses you, please report to your nearest Secretariah State branch (Michigan Residents) or DMV Office (other states' residents), turn your license in and make sure the Uber and/or Lyft apps are on your smartphone, because you should NEVER be behind the wheel again. Again, this is my personal opinion, which is why I'm not a politician or a spokesperson, but I know I ain't the only one who feels this way.

And if someone can't fathom driving on an "M-9" to reach Canada via a bridge... my God, I sure hope they live on the approach roadways for the International Bridge, Bluewater Bridge, Gordie Howe International Bridge, Matty Maroun Memorial Ambassador Bridge, or Detroit-Windsor Tunnel, then!! Personally, I need to drive on several different highways to reach Canada with different numbers... and I do it all without being confused one bit!

</rant>

[wanderer2575]

I hate to burst your bubble, but the reason the Canadian flag graphic was added is additional hand-holding for idiot motorists who cannot comprehend the words "Canada" and "Bridge to Canada" as controls, even though they are well within the 140-character limit of a tweet.  (Specifically, the debacle when the I-94/I-69 terminus at Port Huron was realigned and motorists who hadn't yet updated their GPSs ignored the new signs and found themselves on the Blue Water Bridge instead of on M-25.)  Showing both a Michigan route shield and a Canadian flag defeats the purpose of the latter and will really confuse the hell out of a lot of people.

Oh, I know precisely why the Canadian flag was added to the freeway signs. Remember, my best friend works at the Michigan Division of the Federal Highway Administration. She and I have had many interesting discussions over the years. She and I also know many of the same MDOT staffers, too, so while we're on the same page 90–92% of the time, those remaining 8–10% of the time, we can get into it pretty well! 

My personal opinion is that if you need a Canadian flag on the sign to help you better read the word "C a n a d a" on said same sign, that's clear grounds for immediate drivers license revocation. Period. It's the same as failing your eye test. Or driving slow in the left lane of the freeway. You have no legitimate right to be on our highways if you can't read a sign. And if you were distracted by something else in your vehicle... doesn't matter. In fact, even worse, in my book. You're piloting a lethal weapon at deadly speeds. If you can't use it properly, which includes not reading a Harry Potter novel or balancing your checkbook while driving and it also means being able to understand what "C a n a d a" means when you're heading to Canada. So, if an sign saying "M-9 [CanFlag] / Gordie Howe Int'l / Bridge to Canada" confuses you, please report to your nearest Secretariah State branch (Michigan Residents) or DMV Office (other states' residents), turn your license in and make sure the Uber and/or Lyft apps are on your smartphone, because you should NEVER be behind the wheel again. Again, this is my personal opinion, which is why I'm not a politician or a spokesperson, but I know I ain't the only one who feels this way.

And if someone can't fathom driving on an "M-9" to reach Canada via a bridge... my God, I sure hope they live on the approach roadways for the International Bridge, Bluewater Bridge, Gordie Howe International Bridge, Matty Maroun Memorial Ambassador Bridge, or Detroit-Windsor Tunnel, then!! Personally, I need to drive on several different highways to reach Canada with different numbers... and I do it all without being confused one bit!

</rant>

My personal opinion syncs with yours, but the reality is that a large part of government bureaucracy is to protect a blameless citizenry (I borrowed that phrase from P.J. O'Rourke's excellent book Parliament of Whores).

[rte66man]

I hate to burst your bubble, but the reason the Canadian flag graphic was added is additional hand-holding for idiot motorists who cannot comprehend the words "Canada" and "Bridge to Canada" as controls, even though they are well within the 140-character limit of a tweet.  (Specifically, the debacle when the I-94/I-69 terminus at Port Huron was realigned and motorists who hadn't yet updated their GPSs ignored the new signs and found themselves on the Blue Water Bridge instead of on M-25.)  Showing both a Michigan route shield and a Canadian flag defeats the purpose of the latter and will really confuse the hell out of a lot of people.

Oh, I know precisely why the Canadian flag was added to the freeway signs. Remember, my best friend works at the Michigan Division of the Federal Highway Administration. She and I have had many interesting discussions over the years. She and I also know many of the same MDOT staffers, too, so while we're on the same page 90–92% of the time, those remaining 8–10% of the time, we can get into it pretty well! 

My personal opinion is that if you need a Canadian flag on the sign to help you better read the word "C a n a d a" on said same sign, that's clear grounds for immediate drivers license revocation. Period. It's the same as failing your eye test. Or driving slow in the left lane of the freeway. You have no legitimate right to be on our highways if you can't read a sign. And if you were distracted by something else in your vehicle... doesn't matter. In fact, even worse, in my book. You're piloting a lethal weapon at deadly speeds. If you can't use it properly, which includes not reading a Harry Potter novel or balancing your checkbook while driving and it also means being able to understand what "C a n a d a" means when you're heading to Canada. So, if an sign saying "M-9 [CanFlag] / Gordie Howe Int'l / Bridge to Canada" confuses you, please report to your nearest Secretariah State branch (Michigan Residents) or DMV Office (other states' residents), turn your license in and make sure the Uber and/or Lyft apps are on your smartphone, because you should NEVER be behind the wheel again. Again, this is my personal opinion, which is why I'm not a politician or a spokesperson, but I know I ain't the only one who feels this way.

And if someone can't fathom driving on an "M-9" to reach Canada via a bridge... my God, I sure hope they live on the approach roadways for the International Bridge, Bluewater Bridge, Gordie Howe International Bridge, Matty Maroun Memorial Ambassador Bridge, or Detroit-Windsor Tunnel, then!! Personally, I need to drive on several different highways to reach Canada with different numbers... and I do it all without being confused one bit!

</rant>

My personal opinion syncs with yours, but the reality is that a large part of government bureaucracy is to protect a blameless citizenry (I borrowed that phrase from P.J. O'Rourke's excellent book Parliament of Whores).

He will be greatly missed. I have all of his books and reread them every few years.

[RoadMaster09]

I think a hidden I-x75 (say, I-775 but unsigned in the field), signed as "TO 401" and "TO I-75". That would be the most logical to avoid confusion.

[Flint1979]

Why would a ramp leading to and from an International bridge need a highway number? The only reason that I-75 is on the International Bridge and I-69 and I-94 are on the Blue Water Bridge is because those highways end at the border, otherwise they too wouldn't have a highway number on them and it's only half the bridge anyway. This is no different than the leadup to the Ambassador Bridge or Detroit-Windsor Tunnel neither of which carry a highway number.

[bulldog1979]

If I-75 were farther inland at that location, I'd advocate for a number to connect from the freeway to the bridge. My choices would be I-175 (logically fits in the progression of 3dIs northward in the state), M-401 or M-9. As it stands, I don't see a point given the short length unless we have some sort of jurisdictional reason that we need to number it.

If a short connector were to be built from the bridge to I-94, then I'd say that should get a number and add a possible I-x94 to the list of options.

As a side note, in an alternate universe, the Ambassador Bridge would be part of I-96 much as the International Bridge is part of I-75, and it have been properly connected to the bridge long before the Gateway Project.

[jzn110]

M-9 would actually be pretty cool. And besides, it wouldn't be the shortest M-highway in Michigan if designated as such.

[bulldog1979]

If we got M-9... I'd then be itching to get M-2, M-4 and M-7 put into use some place.

[ethanhopkin14]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

What about extending Interstate 96 down Interstate 75 to the bridge and having it be an extension of Interstate 96?

[Flint1979]

If I-75 were farther inland at that location, I'd advocate for a number to connect from the freeway to the bridge. My choices would be I-175 (logically fits in the progression of 3dIs northward in the state), M-401 or M-9. As it stands, I don't see a point given the short length unless we have some sort of jurisdictional reason that we need to number it.

If a short connector were to be built from the bridge to I-94, then I'd say that should get a number and add a possible I-x94 to the list of options.

As a side note, in an alternate universe, the Ambassador Bridge would be part of I-96 much as the International Bridge is part of I-75, and it have been properly connected to the bridge long before the Gateway Project.

The difference though is that the International Bridge was built around the same time I-75 was, the Ambassador Bridge was built well before I-96.

[Terry Shea]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

What about extending Interstate 96 down Interstate 75 to the bridge and having it be an extension of Interstate 96?

How does that make any sense whatsoever?

[Alps]

Have it been decided what the US approach to the bridge be called yet? I see a few options here:
1) an x75
2) M-401 (my preference)
3) “Bridge to Canada”, without a route number.

What about extending Interstate 96 down Interstate 75 to the bridge and having it be an extension of Interstate 96?

How does that make any sense whatsoever?

How doesn't it?