Detroit - Removal of I-375

[GaryV]

I absolutely agree. No route number is needed for what will be essentially a long ramp with no exits (except maybe for those who work in customs, duty-free shop, etc.)

I could see MDOT putting up small blue "RAMP" signs though, like they have around other big intersections in metro Detroit. For example,

RAMP
I-75 to
Gordie Howe
Bridge

[skluth]

This will likely be a completely impractical and hair-brained idea, but once existing 375 is converted into a boulevard, the 375 designation should be shifted to the freeway connecting the Gordie Howe International Bridge with ON 401.

Getting off-topic here but if any number is used for the Gordie Howe Bridge it should be '9' or something like 975.

(Picture deleted)

Really? Why is this ramp to the bridge worthy of a route number? Knowing MDOT there isn't going to be a route number. MDOT isn't giving a ramp connecting to Canada a route number.

I said IF!! I agree no number is needed. But IF there were a number, it should honor Howe.

[vdeane]

This will likely be a completely impractical and hair-brained idea, but once existing 375 is converted into a boulevard, the 375 designation should be shifted to the freeway connecting the Gordie Howe International Bridge with ON 401.

Why make it any more confusing than it needs to be?

And why would they put a Michigan-related highway number in Ontario? If that few hundred yards of highway between the bridge and 401 needs a number, just extend 401, except it isn't probably going to be all freeway.

Right. It's a ramp connecting to a bridge that's all it is.

Yup. The ramps to/from I-75 to the north edge of the bridge property will be about 1/2 mile long by my rough guess.  I think some folks have the impression that there's going to be some sort of longer connector road between the two but there's no room for one.

The US Port of Entry map at the bridge's web site shows this pretty well:

https://www.gordiehoweinternationalbridge.com/en/gallery#!nav-maps

We are talking 2 different things here. The roadway at the north end of the bridge, in Michigan, could be considered for a Michigan highway number (although unlikely).

However what was originally proposed in this sub-thread was to have the ramp on the south end of the bridge in Ontario numbered 375. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Having a route number of any kind makes no sense at all. There are four crossings between the US and Canada in Michigan, with this new  bridge it'll be five. The Blue Water and International bridges already have an Interstate highway leading up to the border so it makes sense there. Where it doesn't make any sense is in Detroit, with the Ambassador Bridge there are signs simply saying Bridge to Canada without a need for a route number, same with the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel having signs Tunnel to Canada. So I'm just wondering why we would need to put a route number on this bridge especially a number that has already been used in Detroit and will cause confusion. I don't see the point in it at all and don't think MDOT is going to waste their time making the leadup ramps to the Gordie Howe Bridge into a state highway or Interstate. I know you and others on this forum live in Michigan too and are just as up to date on most things in this state as I am. It would be out of MDOT's nature to do this.

I think a lot of people are thinking "ON 401 will end at the border and that will leave a gap in the numbering, we need to add one for connectivity" without considering that Ontario doesn't work that way.  The 400-series highways that end at bridges end AT the bridge, not ON the bridge.

[cbeach40]

I said IF!! I agree no number is needed. But IF there were a number, it should honor Howe.

This has already been covered. No route number.

The Gordie Howe Bridge isn't going to have a route number, just like the Ambassador Bridge doesn't. It'll just have ramps leading to and from the bridge.

Oh I know, I am working on that project. 

[NWI_Irish96]

I said IF!! I agree no number is needed. But IF there were a number, it should honor Howe.

This has already been covered. No route number.

The Gordie Howe Bridge isn't going to have a route number, just like the Ambassador Bridge doesn't. It'll just have ramps leading to and from the bridge.

Oh I know, I am working on that project. 

I prefer that international crossings not have route numbers. Otherwise if forces you to have a passport to clinch the route.

[Rothman]

This will likely be a completely impractical and hair-brained idea, but once existing 375 is converted into a boulevard, the 375 designation should be shifted to the freeway connecting the Gordie Howe International Bridge with ON 401.

Getting off-topic here but if any number is used for the Gordie Howe Bridge it should be '9' or something like 975.

(Picture deleted)

Really? Why is this ramp to the bridge worthy of a route number? Knowing MDOT there isn't going to be a route number. MDOT isn't giving a ramp connecting to Canada a route number.

I said IF!! I agree no number is needed. But IF there were a number, it should honor Howe.

https://youtu.be/UaFl6CkA0mA

[Molandfreak]

I said IF!! I agree no number is needed. But IF there were a number, it should honor Howe.

This has already been covered. No route number.

Nice job missing the point again...

[vdeane]

Well, if that's the point, then perhaps there are better venues for this discussion.

[Flint1979]

I absolutely agree. No route number is needed for what will be essentially a long ramp with no exits (except maybe for those who work in customs, duty-free shop, etc.)

I could see MDOT putting up small blue "RAMP" signs though, like they have around other big intersections in metro Detroit. For example,

RAMP
I-75 to
Gordie Howe
Bridge

I think too especially needed would be signs that indicate that the exit takes you into Canada with maybe a No Reentry to the USA or something like that.

[Flint1979]

This will likely be a completely impractical and hair-brained idea, but once existing 375 is converted into a boulevard, the 375 designation should be shifted to the freeway connecting the Gordie Howe International Bridge with ON 401.

Why make it any more confusing than it needs to be?

And why would they put a Michigan-related highway number in Ontario? If that few hundred yards of highway between the bridge and 401 needs a number, just extend 401, except it isn't probably going to be all freeway.

Right. It's a ramp connecting to a bridge that's all it is.

Yup. The ramps to/from I-75 to the north edge of the bridge property will be about 1/2 mile long by my rough guess.  I think some folks have the impression that there's going to be some sort of longer connector road between the two but there's no room for one.

The US Port of Entry map at the bridge's web site shows this pretty well:

https://www.gordiehoweinternationalbridge.com/en/gallery#!nav-maps

We are talking 2 different things here. The roadway at the north end of the bridge, in Michigan, could be considered for a Michigan highway number (although unlikely).

However what was originally proposed in this sub-thread was to have the ramp on the south end of the bridge in Ontario numbered 375. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Having a route number of any kind makes no sense at all. There are four crossings between the US and Canada in Michigan, with this new  bridge it'll be five. The Blue Water and International bridges already have an Interstate highway leading up to the border so it makes sense there. Where it doesn't make any sense is in Detroit, with the Ambassador Bridge there are signs simply saying Bridge to Canada without a need for a route number, same with the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel having signs Tunnel to Canada. So I'm just wondering why we would need to put a route number on this bridge especially a number that has already been used in Detroit and will cause confusion. I don't see the point in it at all and don't think MDOT is going to waste their time making the leadup ramps to the Gordie Howe Bridge into a state highway or Interstate. I know you and others on this forum live in Michigan too and are just as up to date on most things in this state as I am. It would be out of MDOT's nature to do this.

I think a lot of people are thinking "ON 401 will end at the border and that will leave a gap in the numbering, we need to add one for connectivity" without considering that Ontario doesn't work that way.  The 400-series highways that end at bridges end AT the bridge, not ON the bridge.

I think that even if it did it wouldn't require Michigan to make a ramp leading a bridge over the border into a route number.

[Henry]

This will likely be a completely impractical and hair-brained idea, but once existing 375 is converted into a boulevard, the 375 designation should be shifted to the freeway connecting the Gordie Howe International Bridge with ON 401.

Why make it any more confusing than it needs to be?

And why would they put a Michigan-related highway number in Ontario? If that few hundred yards of highway between the bridge and 401 needs a number, just extend 401, except it isn't probably going to be all freeway.

This will likely be a completely impractical and hair-brained idea, but once existing 375 is converted into a boulevard, the 375 designation should be shifted to the freeway connecting the Gordie Howe International Bridge with ON 401.

That makes no sense and makes things confusing. There isn't no freeway connecting to the Gordie Howe Bridge it's a ramp and isn't worthy of a route number of any kind.

I-375 should just be dead and buried once the boulevard gets built. And I don't see the need for any number on the Gordie Howe Bridge. Neither the Ambassador Bridge nor the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel carries one, so that argument is useless.

[mgk920]

It just needs signs saying to the effect 'BRIDGE TO CANADA' (with the appropriate flags) and 'TO [ON 401]', also an 'oops' turnaround/return lane.  That can be adjusted whenever the checkpoints are eliminated, of course.

Mike

[Stephane Dumas]

I saw that article mentioned on an other forum and some might think of unintended consequences.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/parts-of-i-375-replacement-in-detroit-would-be-9-lanes-wide-and-community-is-concerned/ar-AA1ksGn3?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=a5e2295cf93c458db34c80e176851adf&ei=71

The Michigan Department of Transportation plans to review updated traffic data and possibly reduce the size of some of the intersections envisioned in its Interstate 375 replacement project.

The efforts come as more voices raise concerns about whether the project as described to date would truly address issues that backers have given for supporting it, namely as a way to reconnect east-side neighborhoods with Detroit's downtown and to somehow address the elimination of Black Bottom and Paradise Valley to highway building and urban renewal projects decades ago.

Some intersections, when including dual turn lanes, for instance, would be nine lanes across, although much of the design envisions three lanes in each direction.
Start the day smarter. Get all the news you need in your inbox each morning.

Detroit Councilwoman Angela Whitfield-Calloway summed up the concerns of some critics in a memo posted on social media Nov. 15 when she wrote that "to present and package a nine-lane highway as 'reconnecting' is disingenuous, dangerous and unacceptable. For these reasons, I will vehemently oppose any proposed project that fails to properly reconnect and restore the community."

Project manager Jon Loree said much of the feedback that MDOT has received to date relates to concerns about the width of some intersections and, particularly from the business community, to how access would be maintained with major construction slated to happen between 2026 and 2028, but with some starting in 2025.

[Plutonic Panda]

Saying this road is a nine lane highway because of turn lanes at the intersections is disingenuous. There's this miraculous thing called a pedestrian bridge if needed.

[mgk920]

This is looking more and more to me as being a case of 'be careful of what you wish for, for you . . .'

Mike

[The Ghostbuster]

I never supported this project. I think Interstate 375 should have been reconstructed as a freeway, and large portions of it should have had covers constructed over it. That would have sufficiently reconnected the neighborhoods in my opinion. Detroit may live to regret this freeway deconstruction, although they will likely spin it as a great-success story. Even if they just tore out the freeway and tried to redevelop the land, if what happened in Milwaukee after the Park Freeway came down, it would be a long time before the land was completely redeveloped.

[silverback1065]

their concerns aren't invalid. michigan is known for extremely wide roads. as a pedestrian that will be an issue to cross, i wonder if they have evidence that this road needs so many lanes.  would this new road be a state road or city street?

[Plutonic Panda]

I'm sure they do evidence why would they just waste money building it if it wasn't needed? Didn't they release an EIS? If so there's the evidence. If not then they will release it.

[Flint1979]

I was on I-375 yesterday. I blew down it at 80 mph as the exit to stay on I-75 was backed up all the way to Warren. Only had to stop at the light at Woodward on Jefferson, got back on the Lodge and back to SB I-75 and got around all that traffic.

[Flint1979]

I never supported this project. I think Interstate 375 should have been reconstructed as a freeway, and large portions of it should have had covers constructed over it. That would have sufficiently reconnected the neighborhoods in my opinion. Detroit may live to regret this freeway deconstruction, although they will likely spin it as a great-success story. Even if they just tore out the freeway and tried to redevelop the land, if what happened in Milwaukee after the Park Freeway came down, it would be a long time before the land was completely redeveloped.

Detroit isn't going to regret getting rid of I-375. At the northern terminus it has around 50,000 VPD, go less than a mile south on it and it drops to about 15,000 VPD something a boulevard could most certainly handle.

[7/8]

I never supported this project. I think Interstate 375 should have been reconstructed as a freeway, and large portions of it should have had covers constructed over it. That would have sufficiently reconnected the neighborhoods in my opinion. Detroit may live to regret this freeway deconstruction, although they will likely spin it as a great-success story. Even if they just tore out the freeway and tried to redevelop the land, if what happened in Milwaukee after the Park Freeway came down, it would be a long time before the land was completely redeveloped.

Detroit isn't going to regret getting rid of I-375. At the northern terminus it has around 50,000 VPD, go less than a mile south on it and it drops to about 15,000 VPD something a boulevard could most certainly handle.

15,000 is crazy low, a four-lane road should easily handle that. It's a bummer they're proposing six through lanes plus multiple turn lanes, really defeats the purpose of reconnecting the community. It would be nice to see a report for their justification.

I never supported this project. I think Interstate 375 should have been reconstructed as a freeway, and large portions of it should have had covers constructed over it.

Honestly if they go with the super-wide boulevard, then I agree that this would be much better at achieving the project goal. It's also mostly depressed already (though I imagine capping is still an expensive endeavour). But if I had to choose one location for a capped freeway in Detroit, my preference would be I-75 between downtown and midtown.

[froggie]

15K doesn't need a freeway, but the way they're planning it is stupid.  A pair of 3-lane one-way roads with sidewalks and boulevards, on-street parking, and bump outs at intersections would more than suffice without the need for turn lanes.  With plenty of land in between to redevelop.

[Plutonic Panda]

Well, if Detroit ever sees a comeback and becomes a boomtown again, if built as proposed this road will be ready to handle the traffic load for future proofing.

[kernals12]

I don't see why they're removing I-375 when M-10 is the one that's really undercapacity, it only sees 22,000 vehicles a day south of I-75.

I also think they should've gone with the median u-turn concept for the new boulevard. The excuse that it would leave less developable space doesn't really hold water in a city where entire blocks have reverted to prairie land.

[Flint1979]

I don't see why they're removing I-375 when M-10 is the one that's really undercapacity, it only sees 22,000 vehicles a day south of I-75.

I also think they should've gone with the median u-turn concept for the new boulevard. The excuse that it would leave less developable space doesn't really hold water in a city where entire blocks have reverted to prairie land.

Because there is no reason to remove the Lodge. I-375 sees even less traffic than that with about 15,000 VPD at it's southern terminus. The Lodge has twice that at almost 30,000 VPD actually.