News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Are highway removal activists stats misleading?

Started by silverback1065, January 31, 2017, 11:25:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

tradephoric

If MDOT goes with this alternative for the I-75/I-375 interchange, it will make it a lot less likely for drivers on I-75 to make a wrong turn and end up on Gratiot (a nightmare scenario for any out of towners who thinks there is a 100% certainty that something bad will happen if they end up driving on Detroit's non-downtown surface streets).



I will say Gratiot/I-375 area is a little tricky for those not familiar with the area.  Currently if you are traveling Gratiot away from downtown and don't take Brush Street to cut to the I-75 on-ramp off Madison, you are stuck traveling down Gratiot for quite a while past the freeway.  Then you gotta backtrack and you may quickly find yourself lost in the pleasant side of Detroit.  Or if you are traveling NB I-75 and don't take the right-side off ramp, you will end up on Gratiot (yes, you take the exit ramp to continue on I-75 whereas the straight "main" movement will take you to Gratiot). 


sparker

Quote from: jon daly on July 20, 2018, 11:29:58 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 02, 2017, 08:30:51 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on February 01, 2017, 10:09:04 PMOn the other hand, when New Haven removed two blocks of the CT 34 freeway, they had developers lined up and on board in the planning stages, and the buildings that now stand on these parcels were already designed and ready to be built before any shovels went in the ground removing the freeway.
To be fair, the CT 34 freeway in that area was more of spur (or glorified on/off ramp) as opposed to a through-expressway (although such was originally planned way back when); so removing/downgrading it didn't translate into spilling traffic (including delivery vehicles) onto local streets.

This explains why the sign on I-95 mow says MLK. I was wondering about that.

I'd like to thank sparker for a deep post that spurs big picture thought and discussion. I'm mainly familiar with new urbanism via the crunchy-con version of it. See this link or the Frront Porch Republic.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/web-categories/new-urbanism/

I don't know much about it, but I know that I live too far from work. Is Putnam the BOWLING ALONE guy? I've been meaning to read that for years.



Thanks for the nice cite; much appreciated.  Yes, Putnam is "the Bowling Alone" guy; pretty much required reading in public policy classes for the last 30-odd years.  Always found it based on reasonably accurate observations, although I have opined (in various papers rather than this forum) that it was short on context -- the shift in this country's labor patterns, including the shuttering of quite a few manufacturing facilities as well as the receding of unionized labor (these tend, in themselves, to function as something of a Venn diagram), resulting in dispersal of previously tight-knit working-class communities, some of whom bowled together in leagues, more often than not sponsored by employers or unions.  My own dad was in one of those; the league, consisting of L.A. construction firms, contained both management and labor personnel.  I don't know what happened to the league after he retired in 1977 (the bowling alley, in Glendale, CA, is long gone and replaced by a Disney complex); construction is one of those endeavors that, if the firm is on solid ground, tends to survive sociopolitical changes.  But the fact remains that many of those leagues dissipated because the foundation for such did as well; underlying economic situations well beyond the control of the bowlers themselves -- individually or collectively -- largely caused the demise of that institution.  Now, I realize that Putnam was simply using the league bowling situation as an allegory for general social malaise -- but, again, when other similar situations are placed in context with regards to the myriad other contributing factors, both social and economic, losses such as the cited examples are largely unavoidable.   

jon daly

My dad, and (especially my mother's dad) belonged to fraternal orgainizations, but they weren't work related.

I joined one recently, but I haven't been active. I don't fraternize with co-workers outside the office.

A lot of this is because I'm in a specialized part of my industry and the opportunities within it aren't close to home. I used to live a mile from one job for almost a decade, but I got married, my wife had trouble selling her place so we moved there instead of staying at my place.

Where in not for the highways, I'd have had to suck it up and find something local. I'm not sure this would've been a bad thing, but I don't think I've figured out the answer to this question. I am getting to the point where we might be able to afford to move closer to work, so I can actually have a little more free time .



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.