Chrysler Freeway, which couldn’t be built until the route for the intersecting Walter P. The Macomb County segment had M-6 as an interim shield but became I-696 when the entire highway was completed through.Īnother missing link was part of I-75, the Walter P. It’s along 11 Mile in Macomb County (Warren etc.) but the missing link is along 10 Mile in Oakland County (Royal Oak etc.). For those not familiar, the shoe-fly at 11 Mile (post above) in Macomb County was also for the Reuther Freeway, the segment built earlier. Once the new bridge was completed, the disappearing act ceased.ĬHRIS Thanks for the note. When the freight went into and out of the shoe-fly at 11-Mile Road, the headlight disappeared and reappeared. Since the line was straight and flat, we could see headlights for miles from our vantage point at 8-Mile Road. In the early 70s, I also recall the construction of 696 between I-94 and I-75, which went no further than I-75, due to the lawsuits in Royal Oak, Huntington Woods and Lathrop Village.Īs an aside, we would watch the GTW freights come south on the Mt. The exits had large piles of soil on them for the longest time.
We drove past what was called the “Forgotten Freeway” – I-696. I recall riding in my parents car on the Lodge Freeway on our way to picnics in Brighton. This is the proverbial “gravy train.” Now, to quote Yoda, “High speed they are not.”īTW, I grew up on the east side of Detroit. So, Caltrans hired consultants, who hired consultants, who hired consultants, who hired even more consultants. Caltrans did not have the expertise in-house to complete the project. I read a report a couple of years back stating the reason the project was so far behind schedule and over budget rested squarely with Caltrans. It will then traverse the area between the BNSF and Union Pacific corridors, and then continue adjacent, or nearly adjacent, to the UP corridor through the community of Oildale and the City of Bakersfield. The alignment “will be located generally adjacent to the BNSF corridor through the City of Shafter. The F-B LGA is a 23.13-mile alternative alignment between the city of Shafter and the city of Bakersfield, according to the filing. Specifically, the agency seeks approval of a modified route reached as part of a settlement with the city of Bakersfield, known as the “F-B LGA” or Fresno-Bakersfield locally generated alternative. Line between Fresno and Bakersfield, Calif. The second document petitions the board to reconsider proceeding regarding the 114 miles of high-speed passenger rail
The agency now seeks to reopen its petition for the STB to consider the Selected Alternative for the Central Valley Wye. The selected option was the “SR 152 (North) to Road 11 Wye Alternative,” which begins at the intersection of Henry Miller Road and Carlucci Road in Merced County, running east along the north side of State Route 152 toward Chowchilla. Through the process, 17 options were identified, which went through additional review and saw local stakeholder input. According to the filing, the agency and Federal Railroad Administration initially considered five options for the wye in developing the preliminary analysis, but the final decision was deferred. Specifically, the agency seeks to make changes to a planned wye that would connect lines radiating to Fresno, Merced, and San Jose. This is the first segment of line approved for construction. The first document seeks to reexamine an exemption granted for 65 miles of high-speed line between Merced andįresno, Calif. WASHINGTON – The California High-Speed Rail Authority has filed two petitions with the Surface Transportation Board to reopen proceedings to make changes to two aspects of its high speed rail line under construction in the Central Valley.
0 kommentar(er)
