Maine E-W Freeway/Canada connector
David Sturm
Moving to Central Maine as I have, I'm getting to experience a few new
highway issues. One I think is fairly interesting to m.t.r...
There is a lot of steam building to develop a cross-state highway.
(Eastern and Northern Maine are slowly losing population and jobs,
and don't give one flip about NIMBYism, thank goodness!) Original
proposals were to go straight across the state along the Canadian rail
line route, but that runs a tad to the north of most of the population
of central and eastern Maine. (This was essentially a route parallel
to ME 6).
The newest proposal actually could happen. (Realize that Maine
actually voted about 70% YES to widen the ME Turnpike in November
referenda...) The mainline route would run from the Coburn Gore
crossing from Canada, to carry traffic from Montreal and Sherbrooke
(maybe on an extended autoroute 10?) into Maine. The route would head
ESE along ME 27 and ME 16 to Anson. (Conveniently past ski areas.)
Then near Madison and north of Skowhegan, follow east near ME 43 and US
2. The route intersects I-95 north of exit 38 and Pittsfield.
The next 38 or so miles is done. The W-E route follows I-95 to I-395
and to its current end at US 1A.
The route now extends I-395 eastward following ME 9 to Calais. At
Calais, a new bridge might be built to connect with the NB freeway
being developed along NB 1.
End result, Maine builds a route which connects Montreal and Toronto
with the Maritimes along the shortest route, and at the same time
connects certain areas, such as Washington County and Skowhegan into
the state's "freeway system" (i.e. I-95).
The question is what type of route it would be. Mayors of towns along
the route and state representatives all are signing on to the project.
The oft-quoted estimate is a total of $1B for the whole route to be
built as a limited access freeway. No one seems turned off by that.
(The state is sitting on a record $184M budget surplus...)
Some propose "great savings" to build a super-2. I think it's common
m.t.r knowledge that you're lucky to have that come in at less than 70%
of the 4 lane cost. Also, in a state that gets a bit of fog now and
again, the loss of life etc., makes it unlikelier. However, the
stretch from Bangor to Calais would probably do okay initially as super
2. There isn't all that much change in elevation.
The stretch from Quebec to Pittsfield probably would need to be 4 lane
with the grade changes and turns thru hilly terrain.
In general, Mainers are so annoyed with being a "dead-end of the US",
that increasingly, partnerships with the Maritime Provinces, and eyes
to Montreal and Quebec (whether it be part of Canada or not... Mainers
are about 40% descendent from Franco-Americans...) in place of "New
England" compacts. Because of that, a 4-lane limited access route
tying into Quebec Autoroute 10 and NB freeway NB 1 will likely be seen
as cementing a future economic life as a "cooperative partner" with
Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia...
(As an aside, remember that although Maine is a US state, and NB
considered by some as an Anglo province... the truth is both have a
tremendous amount of Franco in the family trees... Secession by Quebec
won't remove the Franco from anyone's ancestry...)
No one has mentioned (interstate-type) federal funding per se for the
route, but I would imagine the state would try... I imagine though "by
the books" this freeway wouldn't fit since the borders of Maine aren't
major metros. Of course with NAFTA (or preferably, CAFTA ;] ) in mind,
this route would do a lot more for international trade than any
"Continental 1", "I-69 to the World", etc ad nauseam...
(For us m.t.r viologists, what might we number it? I-92 or I-98 would
fit the profile of what the road is designed to do better than 3dis
would. The only other 3dis left for odd spurs are 795 and 995 in
Maine.)
This road would be ideal as one of the new short-term toll roads, I'd
think. Collect tolls a few miles eastbound into Maine from Quebec, and
westbound halfway between Bangor and Calais. In other words, let
Mainers pay for the parts of the route they'd use with their taxes
mostly, and Canadians using the "Maritime Short Route" pay via tolls.
(Hmmmm, maybe Ottawa would kick in money... They do own a rail route
thru the middle of Maine....) Some would suggest a tollbooth just
beyond Skowhegan westbound to collect tolls from visiting skiiers.
As this whole project moves towards legislation, I'll provide updates
to m.t.r.... There will likely be additional political tradeoffs that
will include more roads... a 4-lane US 1 from Houlton to Presque Isle,
a limited access route to complete the "triangle" from Waterville to
Skowhegan, and a 4-lane from the new E/W freeway to Machias along ME
192.
Dave Sturm
OH native, AL graduate, NC survivor, ME resident.
William F Yurasko
>
> (For us m.t.r viologists, what might we number it? I-92 or I-98 would
> fit the profile of what the road is designed to do better than 3dis
> would. The only other 3dis left for odd spurs are 795 and 995 in
> Maine.)
Where is I-595 in Maine?
I'd go for I-98, myself.
WILLIAM
>
>
> Dave Sturm
Actionmaps
The concept of what amounts to a national highway through another country
almost happened one other time, I believe, when back in around 1939, Germany
had already annexed Austria, and the only way to connect the Vienna area with
the highly populated and industrialized section of Germany around Breslau was
through Czechoslovakia.
As far as I know, the Germans had already cleared and graded the autobahn path
across the whole country and then the war broke out and it was never finished.
Any body know more about that?
Frank Solomon
Douglas Andrew Willinger
Another such example, also German (though I don't know how far it got)
was a proposal to build a connector autobahn between contigious Germany
and its province of East Prussia, that was seperated from the rest of
Germany after WWI, through the Polish Corridor. (All of this since
changed with the post WWII Oder-Neisse line that moved the German-Polish
border westwards, along with the Polish-Bylorussian/Polish-Ukrainian
borders -- the Curzon line -- at that war's end.) This was to connect
with Danzig in the then Danzig Free State, and than Konigsberg in East
Prussia, now Kalingrad, Kalingrad Oblast, now part of the Russian
Federation.
Interestingly, some European auto-route maps show highways in modern day
western Poland (particularly Silesia where Bresau -- now Wroclaw -- is
located that may have been Third Reich era German autobahns that fell on
the Polich side of the border with the post war boundary changes.
Does anyone out there know more about this?
Douglas A. Willinger
Takoma Park Highway Design Studio
Kirby's of Fredericton
William F Yurasko wrote in article <34A93B...@email.psu.edu>...
>
>Where is I-595 in Maine?
>I'd go for I-98, myself.
>
There is none.
--
J.P. Kirby
Fredericton, N.B., Canada, Earth
Roads: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7212
(FYI David, this includes a Maine highway page)
E-mail: pki...@surfcity.nb.ca
"Need a change of air? You are right on time!" -- Local perfume sale ad,
12/97
Kirby's of Fredericton
David Sturm wrote in article <68b789$1bhs$1...@sol.caps.maine.edu>...
Original
>proposals were to go straight across the state along the Canadian rail
>line route, but that runs a tad to the north of most of the population
>of central and eastern Maine. (This was essentially a route parallel
>to ME 6).
I'm sure they'd dance naked on Main Street in Dover-Foxcroft... (see recent
thread)
The mainline route would run from the Coburn Gore
>crossing from Canada, to carry traffic from Montreal and Sherbrooke
>(maybe on an extended autoroute 10?) into Maine. The route would head
>ESE along ME 27 and ME 16 to Anson. (Conveniently past ski areas.)
>Then near Madison and north of Skowhegan, follow east near ME 43 and US
>2. The route intersects I-95 north of exit 38 and Pittsfield.
Good idea. Skowhegan desperately needs a bypass.
>The route now extends I-395 eastward following ME 9 to Calais. At
>Calais, a new bridge might be built to connect with the NB freeway
>being developed along NB 1.
>
Do they really need a freeway along ME 9?
>End result, Maine builds a route which connects Montreal and Toronto
>with the Maritimes along the shortest route, and at the same time
>connects certain areas, such as Washington County and Skowhegan into
>the state's "freeway system" (i.e. I-95).
I'd much rather build one along PQ 185 and NB 2..., and the only freeway I
could see would be bypasses at Calais and Skowhegan (while we're at it, why
not build some at Rumford and Farmington)
>
>
>Some propose "great savings" to build a super-2. I think it's common
>m.t.r knowledge that you're lucky to have that come in at less than 70%
>of the 4 lane cost. Also, in a state that gets a bit of fog now and
>again, the loss of life etc., makes it unlikelier. However, the
>stretch from Bangor to Calais would probably do okay initially as super
>2. There isn't all that much change in elevation.
>
>The stretch from Quebec to Pittsfield probably would need to be 4 lane
>with the grade changes and turns thru hilly terrain.
>
>In general, Mainers are so annoyed with being a "dead-end of the US",
>that increasingly, partnerships with the Maritime Provinces, and eyes
>to Montreal and Quebec (whether it be part of Canada or not... Mainers
>are about 40% descendent from Franco-Americans...) in place of "New
>England" compacts. Because of that, a 4-lane limited access route
>tying into Quebec Autoroute 10 and NB freeway NB 1 will likely be seen
>as cementing a future economic life as a "cooperative partner" with
>Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia...
>
>(As an aside, remember that although Maine is a US state, and NB
>considered by some as an Anglo province... the truth is both have a
>tremendous amount of Franco in the family trees... Secession by Quebec
>won't remove the Franco from anyone's ancestry...)
If you ever go to our province, take a look at the bilingual signs... NB is
one of the few places where you'll see "STOP ARRET".
>
>(For us m.t.r viologists, what might we number it? I-92 or I-98 would
>fit the profile of what the road is designed to do better than 3dis
>would. The only other 3dis left for odd spurs are 795 and 995 in
>Maine.)
How about US 1 for the Bangor -- Calais stretch? The current route between
Belfast ands Calais would be numbered something else.
>
>(Hmmmm, maybe Ottawa would kick in money... They do own a rail route
>thru the middle of Maine....)
No, that's private.
>As this whole project moves towards legislation, I'll provide updates
>to m.t.r.... There will likely be additional political tradeoffs that
>will include more roads... a 4-lane US 1 from Houlton to Presque Isle,
>a limited access route to complete the "triangle" from Waterville to
>Skowhegan, and a 4-lane from the new E/W freeway to Machias along ME
>192.
I'll keep my eyes on WLBZ-TV. (the Bangor NBC station carried by the
Fredericton cable system)
BTW David, have you seen my Maine Highways page?
--
J.P. Kirby
Fredericton, N.B., Canada, Earth
Roads: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7212
NB Radio: http://members.tripod.com/~jpkirby/nbradio.html
Steve Anderson
Another vote for I-98 here. (I've often thought about an I-98 along the
ME 9 corridor from Bangor to Calais, where it becomes a limited-access
NB 1.
As for I-92, well, save that for the US 4 corridor from the Albany, NY
area to the Portsmouth-Portland area.
-- Steve Anderson
The Roads of Metro New York http://members.tripod.com/~ande264/
Andy P. Jung
Has the Autobahn been extended into the former East Germany?
--
Andy P. Jung
to reply via e-mail, change the "com" to "net"
from my e-mail address.
**************************************************************
*Visit my Home Page and see how you could get FREE stuff like*
*Instant Lottery Tickets, Personal Ad, Pager, CDs and Tapes! *
* http://pages.prodigy.net/apjung/ *
**************************************************************
Actionmaps <actio...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19971230200...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
Kirby's of Fredericton
Steve Anderson wrote in article <34A9D8...@erols.com>...
>Another vote for I-98 here. (I've often thought about an I-98 along the
>ME 9 corridor from Bangor to Calais, where it becomes a limited-access
>NB 1.
>
A 2di for that corridor would be akin to Shuster. As well, NB 1 isn't
limited asccess until St. George, about 30 miles in from the border.
Dave 2
David Sturm wrote:
>
> (Hmmmm, maybe Ottawa would kick in money...
Ha ha ha, that's the best laugh I've had all day. Cripes, it's hard
enough to get money for the TCH, never mind a highway in a foreign
country.
> They do own a rail route
> thru the middle of Maine....)
Um, no, that's a Canadian Pacific line. (Is that still running? The
passenger service was cancelled (again) in the last few years; I recall
reading that CP was going to sell it or abandon it. "Goddamn the CPR."
Even if it was a Canadian National line, Ottawa has privatized CN.
--
"Never take no cut-offs, and hurry along as fast as you can"
- Virginia Reid
Warning: Address has been modified.
d2fr...@fre.fsu.umd.edu
In article <19971230200...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, actio...@aol.com (Actionmaps) writes:
>The concept of what amounts to a national highway through another country
>almost happened one other time, I believe, when back in around 1939, Germany
>had already annexed Austria, and the only way to connect the Vienna area with
>the highly populated and industrialized section of Germany around Breslau was
>through Czechoslovakia.
>
>As far as I know, the Germans had already cleared and graded the autobahn path
>across the whole country and then the war broke out and it was never finished.
>
>Any body know more about that?
>
>Frank Solomon
There's an E-15 motorway that appeared rather suddenly in the early 80's in
the Czech and Slovak republics running from Prauge to Bratislava. It wouldn't
be much of a stretch to link this road to Dresden and Vienna.
C.C. Slater
d2fr...@fre.fsu.umd.edu
In article <34A97F...@idt.net>, Douglas Andrew Willinger <doug...@idt.net> writes:
>Actionmaps wrote:
>>
>> The concept of what amounts to a national highway through another country
>> almost happened one other time, I believe, when back in around 1939, Germany
>> had already annexed Austria, and the only way to connect the Vienna area with
>> the highly populated and industrialized section of Germany around Breslau was
>> through Czechoslovakia.
>>
>> As far as I know, the Germans had already cleared and graded the autobahn path
>> across the whole country and then the war broke out and it was never finished.
>>
>> Any body know more about that?
>>
>> Frank Solomon
>
>was a proposal to build a connector autobahn between contigious Germany
>and its province of East Prussia, that was seperated from the rest of
>Germany after WWI, through the Polish Corridor. (All of this since
>changed with the post WWII Oder-Neisse line that moved the German-Polish
>border westwards, along with the Polish-Bylorussian/Polish-Ukrainian
>borders -- the Curzon line -- at that war's end.) This was to connect
>with Danzig in the then Danzig Free State, and than Konigsberg in East
>Prussia, now Kalingrad, Kalingrad Oblast, now part of the Russian
>Federation.
>
>Interestingly, some European auto-route maps show highways in modern day
>western Poland (particularly Silesia where Bresau -- now Wroclaw -- is
>located that may have been Third Reich era German autobahns that fell on
>the Polich side of the border with the post war boundary changes.
>
>Does anyone out there know more about this?
>
>
>Douglas A. Willinger
>Takoma Park Highway Design Studio
Part of the E22 in SW Poland is an old Autobahn; and there was a freeway from
Eblang in NE Poland to Kaliningrad; which was shown on German road maps well
into the 1960's(as were the pre-1937 national borders).
Somwhere in my stash is a German travel brochure from 1937 that has a map of
the proposed autobahn system. I'll have to scan that in...
C.C. Slater
Snowmaster
> I'd go for I-98, myself.
>
>
There isn't. 3di's are 295 Portland, 395 Bangor, and 495
Auburn/Lewiston. I'll be biting my tounge here, I know, but I don't
think there's a 595 anywhere closer than Baltimore.
As for this Canada connector, are you guys thinking about the ME-9
Corridor? I'm a newcommer to the group.
Snowmaster
Snowmaster
> that would
> link an extended Quebec Autoroute 10 to New Brunwick 1 along a
> corridor
> following ME-27 and ME-16 from Coburn Gore to the Madison / Skowhegan
> area,
> then US 2 to I 95, a multiplex with I-95 to Bangor, then ME-9 to
> Calais. This
> route would provide a much more direct link between Montreal and the
> Maritime
> Provinces.
>
> From what was posted, it appears that this is a very real possibility.
>From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
canada pretty soon. I've often wondered if either PQ or whats left of
Canada would think about joining the US. far fetched, I know, but the
economic support might make it worthwhile. A more realistic and pointed
comment is:Why should we pay for it? Don't tell me it would be on the
"goodwill of NAFTA".
Ignorant suggestion: althought this project is almost completed, the
freeway thru London, ON is (or would be) equally usefull to US travelers
as the proposed cross-Maine freeway would be to Canadians. Admittedly,
the ON highway also provides a great deal to the locals, where as the
cross-Maine would be of little use to Americans. however, that
almost-complete freeway thru Ontario provides (most of) the missing link
of I-90, from Buffalo to Detroit, where now it swings down and becomes
I-80/90. Of course, the other half of the missing link is blocked by a
sizable lake, but that's another story.
My point is, maybe this could be looked at a some kind of a trade. I'm
being idealistic, of course.
At London, the freeway forks. The south fork goes south to a grossly
inadequate bridge and tunnel into Detroit. There needs to be a limited
acess tunnel that connects to the detroit freeway system. Ypu'll notice
that I-696, MI-39, and ON-2 form the beginnings of a beltway, a beltway
that, if nothing else, looks really good on paper. The two new crossings
there as well as an upgraded D-W tunnel that has a direct connection to
the MI-10 freeway seem to fit the bill.
The north fork goes due west to Port Sarina. Another thought is to have
the I-90 route follow assorted freeways already in existance north to
the UP over the Mackinac Bridge. From there, a new freeway could
parallel US-2 at least to Duluth, but, IMHO, with expansion what it's
been in the last 30 years, we need a more northern freeway all the way
to sandpoint, ID.
Snowmaster
Michael G. Koerner
In article <19980104011...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, mary...@aol.com
(MaryKDan) wrote:
>>As for this Canada connector, are you guys
>>thinking about the ME-9 Corridor? I'm a
>> newcommer [sic] to the group.
>
>Yes the thread began with a discussion about a cross-Maine freeway that
would
>link an extended Quebec Autoroute 10 to New Brunwick 1 along a corridor
>following ME-27 and ME-16 from Coburn Gore to the Madison / Skowhegan area,
>then US 2 to I 95, a multiplex with I-95 to Bangor, then ME-9 to Calais.
This
>route would provide a much more direct link between Montreal and the
Maritime
>Provinces.
>
>From what was posted, it appears that this is a very real possibility.
Would a southward extension of PQ Autoroute 73 from its current south end at
St.-Joseph-de-Beauce, PQ to the USA/PQ border at Coburn Cove, ME/Woburn, PQ
roughly via PQ 173, PQ 204 and PQ 161 possibly be at part of these corridor
plans?
____________________________________________________________________________
Regards,
Michael G. Koerner
Appleton, WI
***NOTICE*** SPAMfilter in use, please remove ALL 'i's from the return
address to reply. ***NOTICE***
____________________________________________________________________________
Michael G. Koerner
In article <34AE6CBA...@tiac.net>, Snowmaster <ja...@tiac.net> wrote:
[snipitty snip snip...]
>>From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
>canada pretty soon. I've often wondered if either PQ or whats left of
>Canada would think about joining the US. far fetched, I know, but the
>economic support might make it worthwhile. A more realistic and pointed
>comment is:Why should we pay for it? Don't tell me it would be on the
>"goodwill of NAFTA".
NOT that far fetched, but a good thread for a different NG :-)
>
>Ignorant suggestion: althought this project is almost completed, the
>freeway thru London, ON is (or would be) equally usefull to US travelers
>as the proposed cross-Maine freeway would be to Canadians. Admittedly,
>the ON highway also provides a great deal to the locals, where as the
>cross-Maine would be of little use to Americans. however, that
>almost-complete freeway thru Ontario provides (most of) the missing link
>of I-90, from Buffalo to Detroit, where now it swings down and becomes
>I-80/90. Of course, the other half of the missing link is blocked by a
>sizable lake, but that's another story.
Wouldn't that be 'I-*94*'???
>
>My point is, maybe this could be looked at a some kind of a trade. I'm
>being idealistic, of course.
>
>At London, the freeway forks. The south fork goes south to a grossly
>inadequate bridge and tunnel into Detroit. There needs to be a limited
>acess tunnel that connects to the detroit freeway system. Ypu'll notice
>that I-696, MI-39, and ON-2 form the beginnings of a beltway, a beltway
>that, if nothing else, looks really good on paper. The two new crossings
>there as well as an upgraded D-W tunnel that has a direct connection to
>the MI-10 freeway seem to fit the bill.
I have often thought similar thoughts, but more like a southward extension
of the M-53 freeway into the City of Detroit and across the St. Claire River
in the Belle Isle area to ultimately connect to ON 2 and ON 401 in Windsor,
ON. This would have new connections to an extended/completed Davison
Expressway and Fischer Freeway on the City's near east and northeast sides.
My rough guesstimate is that such a bridge would easily require at least 8
lanes, and probably many more, although a new wider Ambassador Bridge (with
better connections) would most likely alleviate some of that need.
>
>The north fork goes due west to Port Sarina. Another thought is to have
>the I-90 route follow assorted freeways already in existance north to
>the UP over the Mackinac Bridge. From there, a new freeway could
>parallel US-2 at least to Duluth, but, IMHO, with expansion what it's
>been in the last 30 years, we need a more northern freeway all the way
>to sandpoint, ID.
Maybe after Canada shatters, we could build a new 'I-96' and 'I-98'
following the existing western 'Trans Canada' routes [and US 2]... :-)
MaryKDan
>As for this Canada connector, are you guys
>thinking about the ME-9 Corridor? I'm a
> newcommer [sic] to the group.
Yes the thread began with a discussion about a cross-Maine freeway that would
link an extended Quebec Autoroute 10 to New Brunwick 1 along a corridor
following ME-27 and ME-16 from Coburn Gore to the Madison / Skowhegan area,
then US 2 to I 95, a multiplex with I-95 to Bangor, then ME-9 to Calais. This
route would provide a much more direct link between Montreal and the Maritime
Provinces.
From what was posted, it appears that this is a very real possibility.
- Dan Stober
Salt Lake City
David Outen
Snowmaster <ja...@tiac.net> wrote in article <34AE6CBA...@tiac.net>...
> >From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
> canada pretty soon. I've often wondered if either PQ or whats left of
> Canada would think about joining the US. far fetched, I know, but the
> economic support might make it worthwhile. A more realistic and pointed
> comment is:Why should we pay for it? Don't tell me it would be on the
> "goodwill of NAFTA".
>
I think that the residents of Quebec have realized that separation isn't in
their best economic interest. This isn't the right newsgroup to discuss
this emotional issue.
> Ignorant suggestion: althought this project is almost completed, the
> freeway thru London, ON is (or would be) equally usefull to US travelers
> as the proposed cross-Maine freeway would be to Canadians. Admittedly,
> the ON highway also provides a great deal to the locals, where as the
> cross-Maine would be of little use to Americans. however, that
> almost-complete freeway thru Ontario provides (most of) the missing link
> of I-90, from Buffalo to Detroit, where now it swings down and becomes
> I-80/90. Of course, the other half of the missing link is blocked by a
> sizable lake, but that's another story.
I am assuming you are talking about the section of 403 west of Hamilton.
Did I see or hear somewhere that they weren't going to complete this
section?
>
> My point is, maybe this could be looked at a some kind of a trade. I'm
> being idealistic, of course.
>
> At London, the freeway forks. The south fork goes south to a grossly
> inadequate bridge and tunnel into Detroit. There needs to be a limited
> acess tunnel that connects to the detroit freeway system. Ypu'll notice
> that I-696, MI-39, and ON-2 form the beginnings of a beltway, a beltway
> that, if nothing else, looks really good on paper. The two new crossings
> there as well as an upgraded D-W tunnel that has a direct connection to
> the MI-10 freeway seem to fit the bill.
M-10 ends 2 blocks from the tunnel directly onto Jefferson from which the
tunnel entrance is off a side street. I-375 ends 2 blocks down Jefferson
the other way. It's adequate. There's not enough room to shoehorn
another tunnel in this area without serious demolition of viable real
estate on both sides of the river. There is talk(again) of building a new
bridge somewhere to the south of the Ambassador Bridge. They are trying
to get NAFTA funds to make a direct I-75 connection into the Ambassador
Bridge entrance plaza. The Windsor end of the bridge and tunnel are far
from the end of the 401 however. They did improve access to the bridge by
rebuilding Huron Church Rd. which has helped quite a bit.
>
> The north fork goes due west to Port Sarina. Another thought is to have
> the I-90 route follow assorted freeways already in existance north to
> the UP over the Mackinac Bridge. From there, a new freeway could
> parallel US-2 at least to Duluth, but, IMHO, with expansion what it's
> been in the last 30 years, we need a more northern freeway all the way
> to sandpoint, ID.
There isn't enough traffic to warrant a freeway across the UP. I wouldn't
use it in the winter. You are running through some very cold, lonely,
snowy areas up there.
Dave
David Outen
The long range plan was for the Davison Fwy to run up Mound Rd and then
swing over to the current end of M-53. I-96 was built with a freeway style
interchange to Davison. When I-696 was built the interchange at Mound Rd
was constructed with ramps and service drives as if Mound was already a
freeway at that point. That plan is dead. Mound Rd and Van Dyke have
both just been rebuilt as mult-lane highways.
While additional road capacity across the border is needed the real problem
is lack of space for adequate customs facilities on both sides. There
have been improvements to this on both sides and at both crossings
recently.
Dave
[message edited]
Michael G. Koerner <migk...@diataieixii.com> wrote in article
<68msf7$q2v$1...@news.athenet.net>...
Linda & Chris Bessert
> >inadequate bridge and tunnel into Detroit. There needs to be a limited
> >acess tunnel that connects to the detroit freeway system. Ypu'll notice
> >that I-696, MI-39, and ON-2 form the beginnings of a beltway, a beltway
> >that, if nothing else, looks really good on paper. The two new crossings
> >there as well as an upgraded D-W tunnel that has a direct connection to
> >the MI-10 freeway seem to fit the bill.
>
> of the M-53 freeway into the City of Detroit and across the St. Claire River
> in the Belle Isle area to ultimately connect to ON 2 and ON 401 in Windsor,
Oops! That would be the *Detroit River* it would be crossing in the
Belle Isle area.
> ON. This would have new connections to an extended/completed Davison
> Expressway and Fischer Freeway on the City's near east and northeast sides.
> My rough guesstimate is that such a bridge would easily require at least 8
> lanes, and probably many more, although a new wider Ambassador Bridge (with
> better connections) would most likely alleviate some of that need.
Recently, the Detroit media outlets announced that a long-awaited
"Third Detroit River Crossing" will be built in the downriver area,
roughly connecting the Michigan cities of Ecorse or Wyandotte with the
Ontario city of LaSalle. If we all take out a map of Metro Detroit
right now, we can see that a due west extension of Hwy 401 would meet
up with M-39/Southfield Hwy at I-75 in Lincoln Park. A little upgrade
of the current divided highway portion of M-39 between I-75/Fisher
Frwy and I-94/Edsel Ford Frwy brings a direct freeway connection from
Toronto into Detroit without going through Sarnia and Port Huron.
Accordingly, word has it that the Ambassador Bridge Approach on the
Michigan side will finally be connected directly into I-75/Fisher Frwy.
It will take some kind of federal legislation to allow an Interstate
highway to connect directly to a privately-owned international bridge
or something wierd to that affect.
> >
> >The north fork goes due west to Port Sarina.
Actually it's Sarnia on the Ontario side and Port Huron on the
Michigan side. Speaking of which, its hopeful that the "original"
Bluewater Bridge (I-69/I-94 to Hwy 402) will be rehabilitated by
2000, opening up six whole lanes between Port Huron and Sarnia,
instead of the current 1.5 lanes each way on the "new" Bluewater
Bridge, which opened in July adjacent to the "original" dating
from 1939.
> >Another thought is to have
> >the I-90 route follow assorted freeways already in existance north to
> >the UP over the Mackinac Bridge. From there, a new freeway could
> >parallel US-2 at least to Duluth, but, IMHO, with expansion what it's
> >been in the last 30 years, we need a more northern freeway all the way
> >to sandpoint, ID.
Woah! I can't see a freeway across the U.P. of Michigan, even in
the next 30 years! I have a feeling that continued construction of
"passing lanes" and divided highway bypasses of larger towns (Mani-
stique, Escanaba, Iron Mountain, Ironwood, Ashland, etc) will be
sufficient between St. Ignace and Duluth.
> Maybe after Canada shatters, we could build a new 'I-96' and 'I-98'
> following the existing western 'Trans Canada' routes [and US 2]... :-)
Oh no! Not THAT thread again! :^O
Chris
David J. P. Long - Change '_' in email to '.'
Snowmaster <ja...@tiac.net> wrote:
>>From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
>canada pretty soon. I've often wondered if either PQ or whats left of
>Canada would think about joining the US. far fetched, I know, but the
>economic support might make it worthwhile. A more realistic and pointed
>comment is:Why should we pay for it? Don't tell me it would be on the
>"goodwill of NAFTA".
PQ wants to leave because they want to 'preserve their culture' - at
least that's the stated reason of separatists. There is NO WAY that
they would ever join the US. You see the separatists with their
"Quebec passports" and it's clear what the goal is.
The premier (like a governor) of one of the Atlantic Provinces (New
Brunswick, I think) said that if all of Quebec left, he wondered if
they (the Atlantics) "would have no choice but to join the US" - but I
never hear any more of it.
+----/|-------------------------------------+-------------------+
| | | djl...@magic.mv.com \ Cute msg |
| / | djl...@msn.com \ goes here |
| ( ) http://www.mv.com/ipusers/magic \ |
+--`--' ----------------------------------------+---------------+
MaryKDan
>Would a southward extension of PQ Autoroute 73 from
>its current south end at St.-Joseph-de-Beauce, PQ to the
>USA/PQ border at Coburn Cove, ME/Woburn, PQ
>roughly via PQ 173, PQ 204 and PQ 161 possibly be a
My information on this project comes from what was posted at the beginning of
this thread. That posting mentioned an extension of PQ-10 from Sherbrooke
eastward.
- Dan Stober
Salt Lake City
http://members.aol.com/utahhwys/
virginiatech Rush Wickes
On Sat, 03 Jan 1998 08:52:11 -0800, Snowmaster <ja...@tiac.net> wrote:
>At London, the freeway forks. The south fork goes south to a grossly
>inadequate bridge and tunnel into Detroit. There needs to be a limited
>access tunnel that connects to the Detroit freeway system.
What are the conditions of the Windsor River crossings? I read about
plans to build a parallel span to the Ambassador Bridge approximately
12 years ago, but I guess nothing has happened. Is the Detroit
Windsor tunnel a one or two tube crossing?
Rush Wickes
law at vt dot edu
AUTOSPAMMERS: Send your unwanted e-mail to other people such as
postm...@fbi.gov and cust...@usps.gov, not me. Thanks!
Snowmaster
> Windsor tunnel a one or two tube crossing?
I dunno. Last time I was by there, we crossed at Sarina/Pt. Huron.
Guestimating by the RMcN atlas,it'a a one-tube two-lane tunnel.
Aparently, it doesn't connect directly to a road system it goed right
inside a large customs building and out onto surface streets from there.
Snowmaster
Philip Goldsmith
David Outen wrote:
> I am assuming you are talking about the section of 403 west of Hamilton.
> Did I see or hear somewhere that they weren't going to complete this
> section?
Having just been down the 403 on Friday, I can tell you that the portion
of 403 in question is a beautiful, fairly new looking limited-access
four lane freeway.
Phil Goldsmith
pgol...@bu.edu
David Outen
virginiatechRush Wickes <l...@vt.edu> wrote in article
<34afae60...@news.delanet.com>...
>
> What are the conditions of the Windsor River crossings? I read about
> plans to build a parallel span to the Ambassador Bridge approximately
> 12 years ago, but I guess nothing has happened. Is the Detroit
The tunnel (actually a tube) is 2 lanes. Due to the tight corkscrew down
on the Detroit side, they must stop traffic ascending to allow the longer
trucks to descend. The Ambassador Bridge is 4 lanes.
The main problem is customs and inspection facilities. Improvements have
been made on both sides of the river at both crossings. But they need
more real estate which will be hard to come. That's one of the reasons
for the new bridge discussions. The one thing they have going for them is
that a lot of the truck shipments can pass without inspection(forgot the
legal description). Most residents of Ontario and Michigan are passed
through the border with little delay. If not for the above then you would
have one heck of a traffic back-up at the border.
Dave
Texas Highway Man
Andy P. Jung wrote in message <01bd15c3$32ec60c0$213bedcc@default>...
>Has the Autobahn been extended into the former East Germany?
However, while West Germany upgraded and expanded their system immensely,
East Germany pretty much maintained what there was and made no upgrades or
expansions. Since reunification, Germany has spent copious amounts of marks
to get the eastern Autobahns up to modern standards and to expand the
system.
-Brian Purcell
"The Texas Highway Man"
Internet: brian....@internetmci.com
Web: http://www.GeoCities.com/TheTropics/Cabana/1618
<!> Remove the *KEEPYOURSPAM* when replying by e-mail.
Scott D. Rhodes
>>From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
>canada pretty soon.
Based on the number of attempts the Quebecois separatists have made in recent
years and the number of times they've succeeded (zero), I would say that while
it is likely that the separatists will keep trying until they do succeed, it
is also probably going to a very long time before it happens, if it ever
happens at all.
>I've often wondered if either PQ or whats left of
>Canada would think about joining the US. far fetched, I know, but the
>economic support might make it worthwhile.
I've seen numerous scenarios put forth for what would happen to Canada if
Quebec broke away, many of which include parts of Canada joining the United
States. One thing that all of these scenarios have had in common is that they
were the thoughts of Americans. I've never seen a Canadian suggest it was
likely to happen, and indeed most of those I've personally spoken too felt
that the condition of Quebec separating put the whole question into the purely
theoretical (i.e., they thought Quebec would never separate).
(The most fascinating scenario I've read, incidentally, had the Maritimes
immediately forming their own nation due to the geographical isolation from
the rest of Canada, Ontario quickly becoming the overwhelmingly dominant
province once Quebec was no longer around to balance things out, and the
provinces from Manitoba west leaving the confederation in protest of Ontario's
power and joining the U.S., thus leaving present-day Ontario as the entirety
of Canada. The basic gist of what he was saying was that Quebec was
ironically the main thing providing the rest of Canada with a cultural unity.
I don't think I agree with his prediction of what would happen if Quebec left,
but his idea regarding Quebec's role in uniting the rest of the nation did
seem to have some merit to it.)
>A more realistic and pointed
>comment is:Why should we pay for it? Don't tell me it would be on the
>"goodwill of NAFTA".
If there was sufficient Montreal-New Brunswick traffic on such a route, it's
possible that there could be sufficient economic incentive to build it.
Dave 2
Scott D. Rhodes wrote:
>
> >>From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
> >canada pretty soon.
>
> Based on the number of attempts the Quebecois separatists have made in recent
> years and the number of times they've succeeded (zero), I would say that while
> it is likely that the separatists will keep trying until they do succeed, it
> is also probably going to a very long time before it happens, if it ever
> happens at all.
Well, in the last installment of the "never-endum", the results were
aprox.
Yes (to separation) 49.5%
No (to separation) 50.5%
A little too close for comfort.
(However, if they did separate, the cross-Maine route to the Maritimes
would become more stategically important)
Michael G. Koerner
----------
In article <34B669...@infowave.cutoffs.no.spam.net>, Dave 2
<da...@infowave.cutoffs.no.spam.net> wrote:
>Scott D. Rhodes wrote:
>>
>> >>From a relatively ignorant guy, seems to me that Quebec will be leaving
>> >canada pretty soon.
>>
>> Based on the number of attempts the Quebecois separatists have made in
recent
>> years and the number of times they've succeeded (zero), I would say that
while
>> it is likely that the separatists will keep trying until they do succeed,
it
>> is also probably going to a very long time before it happens, if it ever
>> happens at all.
>
>Well, in the last installment of the "never-endum", the results were
>aprox.
>
>Yes (to separation) 49.5%
>No (to separation) 50.5%
IIRC, the margin of victory for the 'nons' was less than the number of
spoiled ballots.
Kirby's of Fredericton
Michael G. Koerner wrote in article <69778v$s2c$1...@news.athenet.net>...
>>Well, in the last installment of the "never-endum", the results were
>>aprox.
>>
>>Yes (to separation) 49.5%
>>No (to separation) 50.5%
>
>IIRC, the margin of victory for the 'nons' was less than the number of
>spoiled ballots.
Yes. I have heard that pro-Yes ballot counters rejected "No" ballots because
the X was too squiggly, the mark was too light or dark, etc. The margin of
victory would have been much larger.
--
J.P. Kirby
Fredericton, N.B., Canada, Earth
Roads: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7212
NB Radio: http://members.tripod.com/~jpkirby/nbradio.html
E-mail: pki...@surfcity.nb.ca
Mmm bop, ba duba bop -- Hanson. Your kids are listening to gibberish!
David J. P. Long - Change '_' in email to '.'
rho...@ipass.net (Scott D. Rhodes) wrote:
>States. One thing that all of these scenarios have had in common is that they
>were the thoughts of Americans. I've never seen a Canadian suggest it was
>likely to happen, and indeed most of those I've personally spoken too felt
>that the condition of Quebec separating put the whole question into the purely
>theoretical (i.e., they thought Quebec would never separate).
The Premier of New Breunswick (if I remember the correcct province)
said that if Qubec separated they "might have no choice but to join
the US".
That's the *only* time I ever heard it come from north of the border.
David J. P. Long - Change '_' in email to '.'
"Kirby's of Fredericton" <pki...@surfcity.nb.ca> wrote:
>
>
>Michael G. Koerner wrote in article <69778v$s2c$1...@news.athenet.net>...
>>>Well, in the last installment of the "never-endum", the results were
>>>aprox.
>>>
>>>Yes (to separation) 49.5%
>>>No (to separation) 50.5%
>>
>>IIRC, the margin of victory for the 'nons' was less than the number of
>>spoiled ballots.
>
>Yes. I have heard that pro-Yes ballot counters rejected "No" ballots because
>the X was too squiggly, the mark was too light or dark, etc. The margin of
>victory would have been much larger.
There was also the discussion of just what the referendum meant. I
saw reports on CBC that clearly showed people who were *opposed* to
separation that would vote *for* the referendum because, as I recall,
the referendum was whether or not Quebec/Canada should *discuss* the
issue of separation.
Paul Schlichtman
David J. P. Long - Change '_' in email to '.' wrote:
> The Premier of New Breunswick (if I remember the correcct province)
> said that if Quebec separated they "might have no choice but to join
> the US".
>
> That's the *only* time I ever heard it come from north of the border.
>
> +----/|-------------------------------------+-------------------+
> | | | djl...@magic.mv.com \ Cute msg |
> | / | djl...@msn.com \ goes here |
> | ( ) http://www.mv.com/ipusers/magic \ |
> +--`--' ----------------------------------------+---------------+
Interesting...
However, I heard a totally different attitude in Newfoundland. They hope Quebec
leaves Canada... something about making the drive to Toronto shorter...
-- -------------------------------------------------------------
"Because you are children and you can understand it."
-- Mr. Dolphus Raymond in To Kill a Mockingbird.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlichtman
Harvard University Graduate School of Education
mailto:schlicpa*NOSPAM*@hugse1.harvard.edu
remove the *NOSPAM* filter in the address or remove the SPAM from the net.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://gseweb.harvard.edu/TIEWeb/STUDENTS/DOCTORAL/schlicpa/schlicpa.html
...and why you will be lost if you come to Arlington:
http://gseweb.harvard.edu/TIEWeb/STUDENTS/DOCTORAL/schlicpa/signs.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------