I-475 extension?

[Hellfighter]

There's talk of extending I-475 to US-23 south of Baldwin Road. They're reasoning is that they want truck traffic detoured around the I-75/US-23/I-69 interchange.

[Terry Shea]

WTF?  This proposal makes no sense at all to me.  Flint once had a population of almost 200,000.  It's now 114,000 and falling fast!  30-40 years ago when there were actually people and businesses in the area such a project may have made sense, but not now.  The state obviously has no money to ever complete such a project but they're about to waste a whole lot of money on "feasibility studies".  Instead how about spending money to complete projects already started or approved, such as filling in the missing freeway gaps on US-31, US-131, US-127, etc., instead of looking to backlog even more projects that will never get funding or see the light of day.

[mgk920]

I'm curious about the routing that such a connector would use.  From checking the recent aerial images of that area, most of the land there has been covered by suburban sprawl development.

OTOH, I can then see US 23 being reflagged as 'I-475' from there to Toledo....



Mike

[leifvanderwall]

If the project goes through you might as well call the entire US 23 freeway I-475 because 23 is mulitplexed with I-475's counterpart at Toledo. In fact it is the first time that a US freeway will meet the same 3DI in two different cities. I think Michigan & Ohio need to call the entire freeway I-475. It's not like the situation with I-476 in PA. The I-475 Toledo spur 'tween US 23 & 75 should be called I-875

[Stephane Dumas]

OTOH, I can then see US 23 being reflagged as 'I-475' from there to Toledo....

I taught of another number like I-73 

[Terry Shea]

I'm curious about the routing that such a connector would use.  From checking the recent aerial images of that area, most of the land there has been covered by suburban sprawl development.

OTOH, I can then see US 23 being reflagged as 'I-475' from there to Toledo....



Mike

Won't happen.  MDOT hates giving freeways interstate numbers, especially 3-digit interstates.  They never even attempted to give M-6 a 3-digit (and that would have been a no-brainer) and removed signage from I-296 over 30 years ago.  They wouldn't spend the money to re-sign it either, but they love to waste money on feasibility studies for projects that aren't feasible and/or leave projects unfinished for decades on end.

[leifvanderwall]

I didn't know that MDOT hated giving new freeways an interstate moniker; I know they don't like I-73. I think the MDOT wants to keep US 23 intact because of the route from Standish to Mackinaw City. Does Michigan think it has enough interstates?

[Terry Shea]

I didn't know that MDOT hated giving new freeways an interstate moniker; I know they don't like I-73. I think the MDOT wants to keep US 23 intact because of the route from Standish to Mackinaw City. Does Michigan think it has enough interstates?

There are very few 3-digit Interstates in Michigan.  When was the last time a 3-Dig was given out in Michigan?

[leifvanderwall]

Very few? I-196,I-475,I-675, I-194, I-496, I-696, I-275. If the I-475 extension goes through to Baldwin Rd. then I do think the MDOT will at least think about fusing Toledo's and Flint's I-475 together for one route. Lansing may be having some budget issues right now, but I don't think it is anti-new interstates as you may think. MDOT did look long and hard into bringing in I-73 and if state revenue improves in the next few years I-73 maybe back on the bargaining table. It's going to be interesting who takes over as Governor next year; I know Granholm was against bringing any new interstates in because she felt the roads that we already had needed to be fixed first. The stretch of US 23 between Flint and Toledo should be I-475 and maybe that is real motive for the I-475 extension to Baldwin Rd.

[rawmustard]

Very few? I-196,I-475,I-675, I-194, I-496, I-696, I-275. If the I-475 extension goes through to Baldwin Rd. then I do think the MDOT will at least think about fusing Toledo's and Flint's I-475 together for one route. Lansing may be having some budget issues right now, but I don't think it is anti-new interstates as you may think. MDOT did look long and hard into bringing in I-73 and if state revenue improves in the next few years I-73 maybe back on the bargaining table. It's going to be interesting who takes over as Governor next year; I know Granholm was against bringing any new interstates in because she felt the roads that we already had needed to be fixed first. The stretch of US 23 between Flint and Toledo should be I-475 and maybe that is real motive for the I-475 extension to Baldwin Rd.

I would think that none of you are forgetting about the substandard railroad underpass at Milan, which predates most of the US-23 freeway in Michigan. MDOT would need to fix that before it could petition to bring I-475 up to Flint (AFAIK, MDOT has no want to do so). Plus, it would have to get ODOT to join in on it. So, in all likelihood, there will likely continue to be two different I-475s for most of this century, and much of the next.

As for I-73, I know that Lenawee County residents are largely opposed to a freeway running through US-223's corridor. If I-94 and US-23 could be improved, it might mitigate any need for that freeway. (Personally, I'm for the latter option.)

[leifvanderwall]

I-73 could always follow the US 127 corridor from the Turnpike also to Jackson. I do think the substandard railroad bridge can be removed and rebuilt in Milan; I mean would it hold up train traffic that much in the time it takes to build a new bridge across the freeway.

[mightyace]

I-73 could always follow the US 127 corridor from the Turnpike also to Jackson. I do think the substandard railroad bridge can be removed and rebuilt in Milan; I mean would it hold up train traffic that much in the time it takes to build a new bridge across the freeway.

Replacing the overpass would probably not delay train traffic at all.  Like many highway bridge replacements, the new overpass would be built parallel to the existing bridge.  When the new bridge is finished, the track will be shifted to the new bridge and demolition of the old one can begin.  There would just be a minor delay when the cutover occurred.

Or, if the line is lightly used, a detour might be put up while the bridge is replace in place.

[thenetwork]

Speaking of substandard railroad crossings on US-23 between Ann Arbor & Toledo...

I seem to recall back in the mid-to-late 70's on one of my first trips down US-23, that there was an at-grade railroad crossing for a time somewhere between Milan and US-223.  The crossing did have a traffic light set-up in lieu of a standard cross-buck red signal.   

Does anybody else remember that crossing, it's exact location, and the years that crossing was there?  Once I started driving and went to college in Toledo, I drove that stretch of US-23 dozens of times, and could not find a single trace of it.

[InterstateNG]

There are also substandard overpasses between Ann Arbor and Flint.

It looks like that rail crossing may have been here:  http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Milan,+MI&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.57764,79.013672&ie=UTF8&ll=41.904066,-83.661704&spn=0.022933,0.038581&z=15

[mightyace]

Useless, unsubstantiated, political comment alert! 

Then again, I think the Republicans want to keep US 23 from being an interstate anyways.

[Terry Shea]

Useless, unsubstantiated, political comment alert! 

Then again, I think the Republicans want to keep US 23 from being an interstate anyways.

Not to mention utterly wrong! 

[rawmustard]

Useless, unsubstantiated, political comment alert! 

Then again, I think the Republicans want to keep US 23 from being an interstate anyways.

Not to mention utterly wrong! 

I tend to agree on both counts. Leif, please be careful.

[Alps]

Useless, unsubstantiated, political comment alert! 

Then again, I think the Republicans want to keep US 23 from being an interstate anyways.

Talk about unsubstantiated... Republicans favor small businesses as the halcyons of individual capitalistic triumph.  So given the Interstate designation's alleged ties to commercial development, I would imagine the Republicans would be all over Interstate status like punch on pie.  I wonder what Bud Shuster's affiliation was...  Yep, Republican...

[leifvanderwall]

Okay, Okay! First of all I apologize for my "The Republicans want to keep US 23 from being an interstate"  comment, eventhough I was surprised by the uproar. It actually did bother me that people thought I was being reckless and even worse ignorant. So I decided to do some Googling and research.

First I decided to look at George W. Bush- Not only is he a Republican, but the most criticized President in modern era. In 2005, Bush did sign into law The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficent Transportation Equity Act which was to provide $286.4 billion dollars in guaranteed spending for highways , rail, and transit programs over 6 years. He signed the bill in front of a crowd of 3,000 people in  Aurora, IL  at the front of Caterpillar HQ.

Bush was quoted as saying ,"I'm here to sign the bill because this proposal will increase the demand for the machines you make here and more jobs will be created."

and... "The bill is going to help modernize the highway system and improve the quality of life for a lot of people. Highways just don't happen; people have to show up and do the work to fix a road or build a bridge and they need new equipment."

Then there's Presidential candidate John McCain. The Arizona Senator was against The Highway Trust Fund being used for bike and pedestrian paths. McCain criticized Congress for passing 78 billion dolars from the fund that went towards "purposes other than construction and maintenance of highways and bridges"- including 2 billion dollars that went to 5,547 projects for bikes and pedestrians.

I know I've been criticized for being too political, but we have to continue to put pressure on the officials we elect because they have the power to appropiate funds on highway projects they want to be fixed. Despite imperfections , our highway system is the best in the world.

If US 23 becomes an Interstate 475 or I-73 that would be great; if not it's not the end of the world. But we can still dream can't we?

[mightyace]

I know I've been criticized for being too political, but we have to continue to put pressure on the officials we elect because they have the power to appropiate funds on highway projects they want to be fixed. Despite imperfections , our highway system is the best in the world.

If US 23 becomes an Interstate 475 or I-73 that would be great; if not it's not the end of the world. But we can still dream can't we?

I don't have a problem with this.  (There maybe points I could nitpick on or disagree about, but I'll let them go.)

If you want to criticize a politician, fine, as long as you back it up with facts and the facts are relevant to the topic at hand.

Given the subject of this forum, highways, are mostly paid for by public (tax) money or administered by quasi-public agencies like the many toll authorities, we have to drag politicians into the mix.

As long as we stick to statements like the following, we should be fine:

1) Gov. Smith opposed the parkway extension.
2) I don't like it that President Jones vetoed the XYZ Transportation bill because blah blah blah.
3) The ABC bill in the state house was opposed mainly by members of the <blank> party.