News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-475/US23 projects in Toledo

Started by Ellie, January 31, 2022, 06:28:08 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Terry Shea

Quote from: skluth on February 12, 2022, 11:28:27 AM
Quote from: Terry Shea on February 12, 2022, 02:57:20 AM
Quote from: Ellie on February 10, 2022, 10:26:04 PM
Quote from: Terry Shea on February 06, 2022, 09:10:45 PM
Quote from: Ellie on February 06, 2022, 06:27:58 AM
Quote from: Terry Shea on February 06, 2022, 03:35:28 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on February 05, 2022, 10:57:04 AM
Quote from: westerninterloper on February 05, 2022, 10:08:48 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 05, 2022, 06:45:10 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 05, 2022, 04:41:31 AM
Quote from: TempoNick on February 04, 2022, 10:05:19 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 04, 2022, 07:51:07 PM
While I agree generally, I wouldn't call it I-475 - that already exists. How about I-875?

It should be a separate, unique route from the urban Flint highway.

It's practically a straight line all the way from south of Toledo all the way through Flint. It makes sense to have one Interstate number for that road. Remember, I-275 goes through three states.
The US-23 freeway doesn't even connect with I-475 to begin with.
There was a proposal several years ago to connect the south end of I-475 to US-23 but nothing ever came of it and with development in the area it's probably never going to happen. I haven't heard much about it in years.

IF a new I-475 stretched from Perrysburg to Flint, what would come of the northern e-w leg of 475 that connects Sylvania and Central Toledo? Would that be I-875?

You could make it an extention of I-280 via the brief multiplex with I-75.
Or you could make it I-238E.  That may not make any sense whatsoever, but it somehow makes more sense than what you just suggested.

On a more serious note, I've seen I-875 proposed for the route, which I think makes sense as it avoids needing to re-designate any other highways.

I disagree with others here on the lack of utility for signing this as an Interstate; signing it as I-875 would indicate it as a true bypass of the Detroit metro area for long-distance travelers (especially given that I-275 doesn't directly bypass Detroit). On the other hand, whether this is worth the cost of bringing US 23 up to Interstate standards is questionable.
Proposed by whom?  Certainly not MDOT who has been very outspoken about opposing any 3-digit Interstate routes.  They removed signage on I-296 and refused to give M-6 any I-X96 designation because they believe everyone is stupid and would become confused with so many routes ending with 96.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1715.msg38511#msg38511, though I misremembered -- it was actually a proposal for signing this as I-475 after all.

And I share your disappointment in MDOT. Likely never getting M-14 signed as I-394 either.
Again, proposed by whom?  "There's talk of..." and proposals are not the same thing.  Certainly MDOT or any governmental authority didn't propose this, or anything on that particular post.  Everything on there appears to belong n Fictional Highways, as does the bulk of the discussion here, even though it didn't start out that way.
The only way US 23 will be an interstate is if locals push for it. US 41 became I-41 in neighboring Wisconsin because boosters in Appleton, Oshkosh, and Fond du Lac wanted it. (Appleton-Oshkosh is the third-largest metro in WI.) Ann Arbor and Brighton already have interstate access via I-94 and I-96 respectively. Dundee, Milan, and Fenton are probably not large enough to have that influence alone assuming they even want it an interstate highway. You want it to be an interstate, do the legwork to convince the locals. Convincing the entire AA Roads community isn't going to matter, although that's unlikely to happen either.
I don't want it to be an interstate.  I think that would be stupid.


Flint1979

I don't want US-23 to be an Interstate either. It's perfectly fine the way it is and Michigan doesn't need to add another mile of Interstate highway. This state isn't that hard to get around in, the state highways, US highways and Interstate highways are fine the way they are for the most part in the state. Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.

sprjus4

Quote from: Flint1979 on February 15, 2022, 09:52:40 AM
Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.
Better indication of its freeway status as a bypass route of Detroit, and a glaring gap in the interstate system...

but those aren't important, of course.

skluth

Quote from: sprjus4 on February 15, 2022, 03:19:23 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 15, 2022, 09:52:40 AM
Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.
Better indication of its freeway status as a bypass route of Detroit, and a glaring gap in the interstate system...

but those aren't important, of course.
VA 164 isn't an interstate either and it's local for you. For that matter, neither is VA 288 which is a de facto southwest bypass of Richmond. And I haven't even started on VA 28, VA 37, and VA 168. Interstate freeways aren't a priority in Virginia. It only seems to be a thing in North Carolina and Texas.

sprjus4

Quote from: skluth on February 15, 2022, 06:42:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 15, 2022, 03:19:23 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 15, 2022, 09:52:40 AM
Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.
Better indication of its freeway status as a bypass route of Detroit, and a glaring gap in the interstate system...

but those aren't important, of course.
VA 164 isn't an interstate either and it's local for you. For that matter, neither is VA 288 which is a de facto southwest bypass of Richmond. And I haven't even started on VA 28, VA 37, and VA 168. Interstate freeways aren't a priority in Virginia. It only seems to be a thing in North Carolina and Texas.
All of those are local routes. And I've never said anything about not wanting numbers for those. Arguably, VA-164 should be I-164, and VA-288 should be some I-x95. I'll also add VA-895 / I-895 there. However, I see less importance for VA-28, VA-37, or VA-168.

US-23 is a major long distance highway that is carrying interstate traffic that is on the interstate highway system at either end and continuing on.

thenetwork

Quote from: sprjus4 on February 15, 2022, 03:19:23 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 15, 2022, 09:52:40 AM
Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.
Better indication of its freeway status as a bypass route of Detroit, and a glaring gap in the interstate system...

but those aren't important, of course.

Coming from Ohio, someone not familiar with the region only sees control cities of Sylvania, OH and Ann Arbor, MI. So for them, US-23 does not look to be an alternative bypass of I-75 around Detroit   

ODOT *could* install a supplemental BGS before Perrysburg to say that US-23 is the Detroit bypass and US-23 North is suggested for travel to Flint and Northern Michigan.

Coming from the north, I believe US-23 from Flint does use both Ann Arbor AND Toledo as control cities -- effectively saying that US-23 South is the Detroit bypass.

Flint1979

Quote from: thenetwork on February 15, 2022, 07:21:36 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 15, 2022, 03:19:23 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 15, 2022, 09:52:40 AM
Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.
Better indication of its freeway status as a bypass route of Detroit, and a glaring gap in the interstate system...

but those aren't important, of course.

Coming from Ohio, someone not familiar with the region only sees control cities of Sylvania, OH and Ann Arbor, MI. So for them, US-23 does not look to be an alternative bypass of I-75 around Detroit   

ODOT *could* install a supplemental BGS before Perrysburg to say that US-23 is the Detroit bypass and US-23 North is suggested for travel to Flint and Northern Michigan.

Coming from the north, I believe US-23 from Flint does use both Ann Arbor AND Toledo as control cities -- effectively saying that US-23 South is the Detroit bypass.
Just Ann Arbor is the control city on SB US-23 in Flint. Toledo isn't used as a control city at all until you get to Ann Arbor.

sprjus4

^ Admittedly, there should at least be mention of both Toledo and Flint from either end, to clearly indicate it's a through route and the best route for long distance traffic to follow.

Along with being supplemented as a I-x75 route, but at minimum the former.

Terry Shea

Quote from: sprjus4 on February 15, 2022, 03:19:23 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 15, 2022, 09:52:40 AM
Making US-23 into an Interstate accomplishes nothing.
Better indication of its freeway status as a bypass route of Detroit, and a glaring gap in the interstate system...

but those aren't important, of course.
It's not a bypass of Detroit.  It's no more a bypass of Detroit than I-69 is.  Both are direct routes to other destinations that don't really come anywhere near Detroit.  And what's this about a glaring gap in the interstate system?  That makes no sense at all.

Flint1979

I agree with Terry Shea. I have never thought of US-23 as a bypass of Detroit or a gap in the Interstate highway system. Where is the gap? US-23 is a US highway not an Interstate and I-75 doesn't have a gap in it and neither does I-275 or I-96 or I-696 other routes you could possibly take. I-69 is also a bypass of Detroit like Terry said and we aren't lodging for it to be renumbered as an I-x94. It makes no sense to make US-23 into an Interstate like I said earlier it accomplishes nothing.


westerninterloper

Quote from: Flint1979 on February 16, 2022, 07:58:57 AM
I agree with Terry Shea. I have never thought of US-23 as a bypass of Detroit or a gap in the Interstate highway system. Where is the gap? US-23 is a US highway not an Interstate and I-75 doesn't have a gap in it and neither does I-275 or I-96 or I-696 other routes you could possibly take. I-69 is also a bypass of Detroit like Terry said and we aren't lodging for it to be renumbered as an I-x94. It makes no sense to make US-23 into an Interstate like I said earlier it accomplishes nothing.

I could see it being renumbered I-475 for many of the reasons stated in the thread. I live in Toledo and do think of and use it as a bypass when I'm going up north; it keeps me from otherwise going through Detroit on I-75.

I also think there is a gap in the interstates around Detroit; US 23 serves functionally as the third-ring western bypass for metro Detroit; Southfield and I-275 being the first and second. (Maybe I-69 is the fourth to the west, second to the north?)

But neither of those allows you to "bypass" the metro area, because even though they connect with other interstates, they end having only brought you to an east-west route, and they don't allow you to continue north into the suburbs. I would never take Southfield or I-275 if I were heading to Mackinac from Toledo.

Most of the people using US 23 are Michiganders and Ohioans, and that route goes through important cities in each state - so folks from this area are very familiar that it is a major route (with a few weird detours, like Fostoria), and do use it as a far western bypass of Metro Detroit.

Reminds me that the city of Detroit is geographically quite a backwater; unless you are going to Canada, there is almost no reason one would casually pass through Detroit.
Nostalgia: Indiana's State Religion

skluth

Quote from: westerninterloper on February 16, 2022, 04:15:49 PM
Reminds me that the city of Detroit is geographically quite a backwater; unless you are going to Canada, there is almost no reason one would casually pass through Detroit.

Pulled out because it's an important point. Detroit isn't directly north of Toledo; it's northeast. It's really off the main line of traffic going north-south into the Lower Peninsula. If anything, I-75 should be routed along US 23 and I-75 going Flint-Detroit-Toledo should be something else (not necessarily interstate). Michigan's geography of two large peninsulas with many smaller peninsulas means there's a lot of the state that is isolated from mainline traffic, and the entire state essentially is cut off from east-west traffic across the country. It's geographically similar to Florida in that it's mostly cut off from the national grid on three sides.

GaryV

When the M routes were set up before there were even US Highways, what is now the US-23 corridor north from Toledo was M-65 (no freeways, of course).  M-10 went from Toledo, Telegraph Rd to Dearborn, Michigan Ave to downtown Detroit, Woodward and then further north Dixie Highway through Flint and the Saginaw/Bay City area. It then roughly followed what is now US-23 through Alpena and other cities - although the shoreline route hadn't been built yet.

When the US highways came, the major route was US-25 from Toledo through Detroit to Port Huron, and later into the Thumb.  US-23 was considered a lesser route, so even though it should have been east of US-25, it ended up being west of it and went from Toledo through Flint and Alpena to Mackinaw.

US-10 also ran northwest out of Detroit through Flint, Saginaw, Midland and then west to the ferry at Ludington.

When the Interstates came, it was recognized that I-94 coming out of Chicago and going through Detroit made sense to continue to Port Huron and the Blue Water Bridge. I-75 replaced US-25 out of Toledo to Detroit, and then north. The section from Standish north of Bay City to Grayling went along the M-76 routing that never was a US Highway.  Then it replaced old US-27 to Mackinaw and beyond to Sault Ste Marie replacing a section of US-2.

That left the other parts of US-23 where they were - Toledo to Flint and along the "Sunrise Side" Lake Huron shoreline - plus the concurrency with I-75 in between.

Just like US-23 in Ohio today is not the major route to Columbus, neither was it considered the major route in Michigan. It still isn't, despite being a very good routing from the south to Up North. That's probably why an Interstate number was never pursued for it.

Flint1979

US-23 is usually a pain to drive between Flint and Toledo. MDOT should have widened the entire thing by now.

SkyPesos

Quote from: GaryV on February 16, 2022, 06:29:32 PM
When the Interstates came, it was recognized that I-94 coming out of Chicago and going through Detroit made sense to continue to Port Huron and the Blue Water Bridge. I-75 replaced US-25 out of Toledo to Detroit, and then north. The section from Standish north of Bay City to Grayling went along the M-76 routing that never was a US Highway.  Then it replaced old US-27 to Mackinaw and beyond to Sault Ste Marie replacing a section of US-2.
I remember seeing some early interstate plans map with I-77 on the Detroit-Port Huron part of I-94, and I-94 ending in Detroit. Existing I-77 is I-79 and exist I-79 simply doesn't exist on the map. What a colossal waste of a 2di number that would've been!

Quote from: GaryV on February 16, 2022, 06:29:32 PM
Just like US-23 in Ohio today is not the major route to Columbus, neither was it considered the major route in Michigan. It still isn't, despite being a very good routing from the south to Up North. That's probably why an Interstate number was never pursued for it.
That's because the major route from Toledo to Columbus is I-75/OH 15/US 23, not US 23  :bigass:
Would be nice to get this routing (at least the OH 15/US 23 part) unified under a single number though).

Terry Shea

Quote from: westerninterloper on February 16, 2022, 04:15:49 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 16, 2022, 07:58:57 AM
I agree with Terry Shea. I have never thought of US-23 as a bypass of Detroit or a gap in the Interstate highway system. Where is the gap? US-23 is a US highway not an Interstate and I-75 doesn't have a gap in it and neither does I-275 or I-96 or I-696 other routes you could possibly take. I-69 is also a bypass of Detroit like Terry said and we aren't lodging for it to be renumbered as an I-x94. It makes no sense to make US-23 into an Interstate like I said earlier it accomplishes nothing.

I could see it being renumbered I-475 for many of the reasons stated in the thread. I live in Toledo and do think of and use it as a bypass when I'm going up north; it keeps me from otherwise going through Detroit on I-75.

I also think there is a gap in the interstates around Detroit; US 23 serves functionally as the third-ring western bypass for metro Detroit; Southfield and I-275 being the first and second. (Maybe I-69 is the fourth to the west, second to the north?)

But neither of those allows you to "bypass" the metro area, because even though they connect with other interstates, they end having only brought you to an east-west route, and they don't allow you to continue north into the suburbs. I would never take Southfield or I-275 if I were heading to Mackinac from Toledo.

Most of the people using US 23 are Michiganders and Ohioans, and that route goes through important cities in each state - so folks from this area are very familiar that it is a major route (with a few weird detours, like Fostoria), and do use it as a far western bypass of Metro Detroit.

Reminds me that the city of Detroit is geographically quite a backwater; unless you are going to Canada, there is almost no reason one would casually pass through Detroit.
Likewise, you wouldn't take US-23 to get to the Mackinac Bridge.  It will get you there, but it certainly isn't a direct route.  And I-75 is not a direct route through Florida to Miami.   Is The Florida turnpike considered to be a bypass of I-75, and should it be given an I-x75 route number?  I think not.

sprjus4

With this same logic, I-12 should not exist either.

Nor I-57.

Terry Shea

Quote from: sprjus4 on February 16, 2022, 10:26:48 PM
With this same logic, I-12 should not exist either.

Nor I-57.
I-57 makes perfect sense.  What else are you going to call it?  I-12 could possibly be an I-x10 route except it would be pretty long for a 3-digit.

Flint1979

I-57 is a long distance bypass of I-55 and I-12 could probably be an I-x10 but it isn't.

sprjus4

^ Using the logic of US-23, I-12 should be a US-190 freeway, and I-57 should be a SR-37 / US-45 freeway.

Terry Shea

Why do we have a Fictional Highways Forum when everyone posts their fictional nonsense here?

Terry Shea

Copied from Fictional Highways forum:
Title: Posting about fictional highways
Post by: Scott5114 on October 15, 2009, 09:08:31 AM
One common roadgeek pastime is to fantasize about what one would do were one to be in control of the highway system. However, it is necessary to keep fact extracted from fiction. in a discussion about real highway systems, one cannot avoid considering the political, fiscal, and environmental forces that shape them. In any such discussion, completely made-up designations and highways not seriously considered by the pertinent road agency are likely to distract.

This section of the forum, then, is intended to contain these musings upon what would be nice if anything were possible. It is provided as an oasis from the reality of the world that prevents the highways we really want from coming to fruition. We are aware here that many of the ideas posted here are financially untenable, or would be otherwise doomed to die by the hands of NIMBYs and environmentalists. But this section of the forum is just for fun, would-be-neat-to-have projects. Sure, if you can point out a way to improve an idea by avoiding a crowded neighborhood or environmental feature do that, but outright dismissing an idea here as "costing too much" or something like that just spoils the fun for others. Obviously, if all of these things were possible, many of them would be actually done.

On the other hand, many of us are interested in debate regarding those very forces which are not considered in this section. There are many other facets to I-99 than its number, for instance; maybe a thread could start off focused on the acid rock deposits and how they were dealt with or the future expansion of the highway towards New York. Threads like these don't need to be derailed by your bright idea for renumbering it. And please, nothing in the main forums about extending I-40 to Bakersfield unless you're talking about solid plans put out by Caltrans. Those sorts of things should be kept here and only here. Please help keep threads in the other boards on-topic by removing fictional highway ideas to this board. Thank you for your consideration of those who may not wish to have their examination of the system that exists interfered with by ideas which are obviously impossible.

Now can we get back on topic plase?

sprjus4

The bulk of the posts on here seem worthy to be split into its own fictional thread - I agree.

It doesn't discount the merits of such a designation, however.

Flint1979

The original post was about widening and rebuilding a part of I-475/US-23 in Ohio. With that I say that is a start but probably nothing will ever come of widening US-23 in Michigan. Toledo is a decent sized metro area so a widening project is probably needed.

US-23 is US-23 because that is what it is nothing more, nothing less. It's worked this way for this long I don't see any point in attempting to fix it unless it is to widen it between Flint and Perrysburg.

sprjus4

^ What is the issue with MDOT converting those "flex lanes" that either a) already exist or b) are proposed between Ann Arbor and Brighton to a full 6 lane configuration? As far as I'm seeing, it would result in a cross section with three full size lanes, a full paved right shoulder, and a 3-4 foot paved left shoulder, which is not entirely abnormal for an urban 6 lane highway. And if it's desired in the future, they could widen slightly to the left to provide a full shoulder section.

It seems this would be a big step forward towards a complete 6 laning of the corridor. But for some reason, they insist the shoulder lane is only needed during peak hours in the peak direction.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.