I-94 Expansion Project [[Roadway to Detroit's Future)

[EL Jimbo]

It's not like this is being done in 1 year... this is likely a 5+ year project... so the money will be spread out....

I do agree with the need to widen I-75 between from 8-16 Mile. Why I-75 is 4 lanes near Frankenmuth escapes me??

I disagree with the need to change the Square Lake exit off of I-75. It may be a left Exit... but due to its' enormous size... the cost would never be worth it.

I also think that I-94 should be widened from 2 to 3 lanes from US-23 [[east of Ann Arbor) to Jackson Rd. [[west of Ann Arbor).

It's going to be A LOT of money. Much more so than your typical road work. MDOT could fix a lot more miles of road for the amount they are putting into this.

[CLAUDE G]

Is this the reason all the house fires along the I94 service drive between Vandyke and Gratiot east and west bound? HMMMMMMMM.

Intresting that you said that, I noticed the same thing. There is like 2 or 3 of them in a row near Van Dyke and I-94 in the past few years.

If they burn down the abandoned homes, the state eventually gets them on a tax sale and they do not have to buy people out.

[Gsgeorge]

In case anyone else didn't notice, the plans call for the leveling of what is left of the 4th street neighborhood, that little block at I-94, the Lodge, Third and Holden. What will happen to the community that has been living there, the homes that are in good condition? Another historic Detroit neighborhood lost to our insatiable drive for the ever-expanding freeway...

[ghettopalmetto]

It's like the 1950s all over again! Wheeeeeeeee!

[313WX]

In case anyone else didn't notice, the plans call for the leveling of what is left of the 4th street neighborhood, that little block at I-94, the Lodge, Third and Holden. What will happen to the community that has been living there, the homes that are in good condition? Another historic Detroit neighborhood lost to our insatiable drive for the ever-expanding freeway...

Why should suburbanites [[the ones who control the money and want to get in/out of Detroit coming from downtown/Ford/Ann Arbor/the Airport as fast as possible before encountering "scary" things) care about what happens to a neighborhood they don't live in?

[Detroitnerd]

Every few years this plan is taken out of some drawer, tabled, and then proposed as a bold "new" plan linked to a "future" that exists perhaps only in the minds of a few octegenarian roadway planners.

Widening I-94 will not alleviate the issues of traffic jams, because as you widen it, more people will choose it over other roads.

Furthermore, this plan is from about 10 to 20 years ago, and is simply dusted off and thrown at us again. It does not acknowledge any of the changes that have taken place over the last decade.

It further divides the New Center and Midtown neighborhoods at a time when local institutions are trying to bind them together [[UCCA, CCS, etc.).

It calls for the destruction of much of the Fourth Street neighborhood in the name of a service drive.

It would have high-speed traffic going right past two newly built schools on the westbound service drive.

It won't add to the real estate value around it, and, in fact, given the environmental impact of exhaust and noise, would likely hurt it.

So it's a poorly thought-out, obsolete plan. It will hurt the area it travels through. And we can't even say it will shave a second off anybody's commute.

Thanks, MDOT.

[ghettopalmetto]

Every few years this plan is taken out of some drawer, tabled, and then proposed as a bold "new" plan linked to a "future" that exists perhaps only in the minds of a few octegenarian roadway planners.

Widening I-94 will not alleviate the issues of traffic jams, because as you widen it, more people will choose it over other roads.

But see, that's why MDOT is doing all this pre-emptive work:

I-94: Roadway to Detroit's Future
In the City of Detroit, the I-94 Rehabilitation Project will provide significant upgrades along the interstate in order to meet future traffic loads.

http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,...115---,00.html


Of course, they'll widen I-94 [[Remember--Michigan doesn't have money for expensive light rail!!!), traffic volumes will increase, and the engineers whose sole job it is to widen every road they possibly can will pat each other on the back.

[cramerro]

I agree with most of the CONS of this project, no need to re-state them. The only elements of support I can thow behind this project are:

1. The new design will include a standard shoulder on both sides of the travel lanes. This is a MAJOR safety improvement IMO. Also, more than 10 feet of wiggle room to merge at the bottom of the entrance ramps will also make using the freeway safer [[best driver's ed trip ever!).

2. The funds, however rediculous the level, are at least directed in rebuilding/improving infrastructure in a 'developed' area. It won't have spin-off for the hoods along the way, but at least it is money rebuilding something that hasn't been rebuilt in 50-60 years since it was first constructed. The project to rebuild it exactly how it is now [[without widening, etc), I think, would be a good portion of this budget either way... and they've been putting of the rebuild for years now.

In going through the final design a few years back, I think they only had to push out a half dozen businesses or so [[not bad considering how many are right along the freeway)... the biggest money portions of this project will be rebuilding the interchanges with I-75 and M-10.

If you really want to get excited about wasting money, scroll down on your TIP document to the I-96/Latson Road interchange in Genoa Township, poised to start in the next year or so. Building an interchange in farmfields to provide access to suburban lands [[not even around the interchange) that are filled with foreclosed or underwater houses. This is the ultimate example of wasteful spending pushed through by politicians that are in denail about the state of things in our area. These types of sprawl-boosting projects are what got us into this mess and we're so far behind that we're still going to build one POST-bubble-burst.

[Wesley Mouch]

I usually agree 110% with the new urbanist creed that road expansion increases congestion.

Don't agree here.

Is true for Hall Road or Telegraph.

Not true here.

I94 is not a highway, but a connector.

We can only hope that it does increase congestion in Detroit. We need more congestion -- the spinoff of success, and less vacant land -- the spinoff of failure.

[Gistok]

Cramerro, I have to agree with you on the I-94/M10 interchange... that will be a HUGE expense only because the policy of the federal government is to eliminate these kind of "left exits" to interchanges. I wonder how much that alone is going to cost?

If the money for the expansion of I-94 were diverted elsewhere in metro Detroit... such as I-75 in Oakland County... then I would prefer the I-94 work...

[Detroitnerd]

We've learned at great cost over the last 75 years that it's best to preserve the fragile urban fabric of streets and thoroughfares. The road probably should have gone around the city in the first place, not bisecting and trisecting the city. But instead of coming up with plans that alleviate traffic [[light rail, serious mass transit, commuter rail) we want to ensure the major route -- for all traffic going to Detroit, from Detroit, through Detroit, from Mount Clemens to Dearborn and beyond -- must go right through the part of the city that is experiencing the most dramatic regrowth.

We know that MDOT doesn't care about cities. We know that Lansing's level of urbanity is about that of a county-level highway planner. But for anybody with a stake in Detroit, Midtown or New Center to approve of this plan is just about the silliest thing I've ever heard of.

[cramerro]

We've learned at great cost over the last 75 years that it's best to preserve the fragile urban fabric of streets and thoroughfares. The road probably should have gone around the city in the first place, not bisecting and trisecting the city. But instead of coming up with plans that alleviate traffic [[light rail, serious mass transit, commuter rail) we want to ensure the major route -- for all traffic going to Detroit, from Detroit, through Detroit, from Mount Clemens to Dearborn and beyond -- must go right through the part of the city that is experiencing the most dramatic regrowth.

We know that MDOT doesn't care about cities. We know that Lansing's level of urbanity is about that of a county-level highway planner. But for anybody with a stake in Detroit, Midtown or New Center to approve of this plan is just about the silliest thing I've ever heard of.

Other than the expansion-leads-to-congestion argument, I'm not sure I follow. The portion of I-94 through the Woodward corridor already has plenty of right-of-way... all that area will see I'm pretty sure is construction disruption. The lodge interchange it a pretty tight fit but there are some pretty innovative designs out there for property-constrained interchanges. Safe, clean infrastructure can be a positive for business, residents and development... and this rebuild would be in place for the next 50 years. This re-build is not a neighborhood destroyer. Make the Woodward bridge a context-sensitive aestheitc centerpiece. Decorative design elements, fancy lighting, gateway signage... MDOT is under mandate to spend money on that sort of thing.

[Wesley Mouch]

Other than the expansion-leads-to-congestion argument, I'm not sure I follow. The portion of I-94 through the Woodward corridor already has plenty of right-of-way... all that area will see I'm pretty sure is construction disruption. The lodge interchange it a pretty tight fit but there are some pretty innovative designs out there for property-constrained interchanges. Safe, clean infrastructure can be a positive for business, residents and development... and this rebuild would be in place for the next 50 years. This re-build is not a neighborhood destroyer. Make the Woodward bridge a context-sensitive aestheitc centerpiece. Decorative design elements, fancy lighting, gateway signage... MDOT is under mandate to spend money on that sort of thing.

Oddly, the Lodge interchange works well with its left turns, but the I-96 interchange is always backed-up in the right-hand lane.

But on the bigger point --- I just can't see the reason to oppose this. I can respect an argument for avoiding 4th Street -- I have friends who used to live there -- and that is of course possible. But beyond that, I can't understand why its bad to have a well-functioning freeway -- once you have one.

[Detroitnerd]

Safe, clean infrastructure can be a positive for business, residents and development... and this rebuild would be in place for the next 50 years. This re-build is not a neighborhood destroyer. Make the Woodward bridge a context-sensitive aestheitc centerpiece. Decorative design elements, fancy lighting, gateway signage... MDOT is under mandate to spend money on that sort of thing.

Bar-be-bar-be-burr-burr.

This project IS a neighborhood-destroyer. The Fourth Street neighborhood, one of the last intact neighborhoods, where about a dozen of my friends live, would be bulldozed to make way for a service drive. So, I'm not sure I follow. It would also have a service drive with traffic rushing past the sidewalk of the new school they built since they designed the plan. Proof they don't know or care about the actual neighborhood.

As for safe, clean infrastructure, that a freeway is not. Exhaust, particulate matter, noise ... you build walls against this sort of stuff in the suburbs, but in the city you think it can be positive for business, residents and development?

You want context-sensitive aesthetics from MDOT, with decorative design elements, fancy lighting, gateway signage? Even though they won't draw up a new plan to acknowledge the changes in the neighborhood? Even though they fly in the face of what local institutions want? I would like to see this gumdrop land you speak of. And, after all that nice stuff, you'll still have semi trucks hurtling along at 80 mph separating neighborhood from neighborhood. All in an attempt to solve a problem that we already know will fail at great cost to the state and the neighborhood? No thanks.

[ordinary]

So let's say that I-94 is widened to 4 lanes each way between Conner and I-96. Wouldn't traffic volume and speeds increase just to find a bottleneck at both ends of this widening?

[iheartthed]

Bar-be-bar-be-burr-burr.

This project IS a neighborhood-destroyer. The Fourth Street neighborhood, one of the last intact neighborhoods, where about a dozen of my friends live, would be bulldozed to make way for a service drive. So, I'm not sure I follow. It would also have a service drive with traffic rushing past the sidewalk of the new school they built since they designed the plan. Proof they don't know or care about the actual neighborhood.

And for a city that's hurting for residents and revenue like Detroit... The leadership should be dead set against any project that would displace residents AND remove revenue generating properties from the grid.

[Gistok]

What the heck are some of you talking about in regards to 4th Street???

IT AIN'T GOIN' ANYWERE.....

If you were to look at the video AND know your sense of directions... at the 2:10 mark it shows the computer generated aerial plan of the roadway going EAST... not WEST. So 4th St. is on the NW side of the Lodge interchange in that image...

And the street and homes ARE STILL INTACT...

I verified that with this blogsite about 4th Street...
http://maugre22.wordpress.com/2010/0...-safe-for-now/

So lets stick to the facts about this project... and not ramble on incessantly about 4th Street being destroyed...

[ghettopalmetto]

I usually agree 110% with the new urbanist creed that road expansion increases congestion.

Don't agree here.

Is true for Hall Road or Telegraph.

Not true here.

I94 is not a highway, but a connector.

So the roadway is going to behave differently just because you call it a "connector"??? I don't follow.

This line about a "safer" roadway is bullshit concocted to sell the public on a $1 billion boondoggle straight out of the 1960s. When highway engineers say "safer", what they mean is that traffic will be able to move faster. No more, no less.

[Detroitnerd]

What the heck are some of you talking about in regards to 4th Street???

IT AIN'T GOIN' ANYWERE.....

If you were to look at the video AND know your sense of directions... at the 2:10 mark it shows the computer generated aerial plan of the roadway going EAST... not WEST. So 4th St. is on the NW side of the Lodge interchange in that image...

And the street and homes ARE STILL INTACT...

I verified that with this blogsite about 4th Street...
http://maugre22.wordpress.com/2010/0...-safe-for-now/

So lets stick to the facts about this project... and not ramble on incessantly about 4th Street being destroyed...

You are looking at the video. I have seen the plans themselves and compared them to the actual layout. At least two houses would be lost. And the green space would be gone. It is likely many trees would be torn down and the tenor of the neighborhood much changed. The end of the street would be taken as well, bollixing the way Fourth-Streeters use the alley to navigate back to Antoinette. And you'd lose precious on-street parking for the Valson apartment building. The nearby bridge would go too, wouldn't it, losing a quick bike trip to the university, further making the neighborhood less desirable. Add to that the incessant, nearer sound of service drive traffic.

You really use a personal blog for fact-checking?

Compare the rendering of the expansion with the neighborhood as it is. You will find a disturbing lack of acknowledgment of what has happened since it was drawn up 10-20 years ago. And, yes, they'd have to knock down the new extension of University Prep and put a service drive in front of the main campus' front door, where kids get picked up.

And, at great cost, and at considerable loss, the congestion will not be alleviated and pollution will be increased. And why? Because it was on some bonehead MDOT official's "must do" list?

[j to the jeremy]

Widen more roads...disinvest in transit...I'm now accepting suggestions for a new city to move to after school.....

[bartock]

Cramerro, I have to agree with you on the I-94/M10 interchange... that will be a HUGE expense only because the policy of the federal government is to eliminate these kind of "left exits" to interchanges. I wonder how much that alone is going to cost?

If the money for the expansion of I-94 were diverted elsewhere in metro Detroit... such as I-75 in Oakland County... then I would prefer the I-94 work...

Is there a reason why the government feels the "left exits" to interchanges are so bad so as to result in a complete re-do? The one onto SB Lodge off of 94 [[and NB, for that matter) can be dicey, but is it any more dangerous than a right merge? Is it a traffic flow concern?

[Hermod]

Yes, I agree. Also, social engineering is resented by Americans. People don't like to ride public transportation with smelly drunks and drug addicts, nor do they like to face the possibility of being robbed to and from work. People want their cars and they wont move to public transportation in large enough numbers. What would you suggest wrt I-94 if we don't spend the money on repairing it? Close it down? Because thats what you will need to do it the road is not upgraded. You can't force people to do what they don't want to do, even if you could, it would not be right.

Allof the transit proposals being casually tossed around in here are all on radial routes. None seem to be aimed at a good crosstown route [[always Detroit's weakness until the Davison and Ford Xpwys were built.

[Detroitnerd]

All of the transit proposals being casually tossed around in here are all on radial routes. None seem to be aimed at a good crosstown route [[always Detroit's weakness until the Davison and Ford Xpwys were built.

Discounting the four or five streetcar lines [[Warren/Forest, Jefferson/Fort, Buchanan/Mack, Harper/McGraw, Baker) that is. It would be good to have some crosstown routes, I agree, taking cars off I-94 and reinvigorating some of the more desolate strips the Ford left when it took people off the city streets.

[jon]

Is there a reason why the government feels the "left exits" to interchanges are so bad so as to result in a complete re-do? The one onto SB Lodge off of 94 [[and NB, for that matter) can be dicey, but is it any more dangerous than a right merge? Is it a traffic flow concern?

There's absolutely no difference in the level of safety. You can see some safety maps from SEMCOG here. The road segment between 96 and the lodge, with all it's crazy overpasses, left exits, crumbling pavement, and "insufficient" acceleration and deceleration lanes is rated low crash risk. The rest of i-94 in the city is rated as medium.

Of course, driving is incredibly dangerous--for those aged 2-35[[ish), it is the most likely cause of death. For a young fellow like myself, it seems like the best way to stay alive is to avoid the car [[which I managed to do for years living in the city).

As for congestion, what better way for a government to promote transit than traffic jams?

Clever people tend to get what they pay for. Unless they listen to traffic engineers, in which case they pay thousands of thousands of thousands of dollars and get the same thing they started with.

[Hermod]

Discounting the four or five streetcar lines [[Warren/Forest, Jefferson/Fort, Buchanan/Mack, Harper/McGraw, Baker) that is. It would be good to have some crosstown routes, I agree, taking cars off I-94 and reinvigorating some of the more desolate strips the Ford left when it took people off the city streets.

Jefferson was really more of a radial route from downtown. Fort and Kercheval were connected as a crosstown route running through downtown. The main crosstown line was the Warren line and was called "Crosstown". The other cross town line was the Charlevoix line.

The heavily-used Baker route was a bit of an odd duck making a long north-south jog on its way from Van Dyke and Nevada to the Ford Rouge plant. The track was so bad on the Baker line that they couldn't run the PCC cars because they would damage their wheel casings where the track dipped but the pavement didn't. The Baker line used the old Peter Witts up until conversion to motor bus in 1952

None of the streetcar lines served the purpose of the Davison Expressway.