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

[iheartthed]

Thanks.

But do you really think the level of maintenance, repair, and investment in roads within the city proper are equal to that in the sticks?

I don't know and also think it's a non-issue. Michigan doesn't do spectacularly well at road maintenance anywhere... It seems the state is best at building new and unnecessary roads [[or adding unnecessary road capacity) and letting the old stuff rot for as long as possible.

But for the purposes of Detroit, you can drive clear across that city at any time of the day and almost never hit any type of congestion whatsoever. I don't think that completely eliminating congestion by flooding the area with road capacity is the best use of resources within a city. Roads are not created in a vacuum. Adding lanes does take from something else.

[Gistok]

Thanks.

But do you really think the level of maintenance, repair, and investment in roads within the city proper are equal to that in the sticks?

No, nowhere near what the burbs have... When you get off the Lodge, Chrysler or I-96 onto I-94, you are usually shoehorned into 3 lanes of traffic within 200ft of the entrance ramp. Is that safe... heck no... and you won't find that in the burbs as much.

I disagree with the need to rebuild the M-10 interchange, and the need to add 3 lanes of service drives in each direction. But I applaud the idea of a 4th lane of traffic in the designated areas.

A more common sense approach would suggest that the need is the 4th lane... not cutting out more of the surrounding businesses and homes for a fancy service drive.

[antongast]

I don't know and also think it's a non-issue. Michigan doesn't do spectacularly well at road maintenance anywhere... It seems the state is best at building new and unnecessary roads [[or adding unnecessary road capacity) and letting the old stuff rot for as long as possible.

But for the purposes of Detroit, you can drive clear across that city at any time of the day and almost never hit any type of congestion whatsoever. I don't think that completely eliminating congestion by flooding the area with road capacity is the best use of resources within a city. Roads are not created in a vacuum. Adding lanes does take from something else.

I think this article, written by former Milwaukee mayor John Norquist, makes some interesting points that are somewhat relevant to this thread:

If people enjoy crowded places, it seems a bit strange that federal and state governments continue to wage a war against traffic congestion. Despite many hundreds of billions dollars spent increasing road capacity, they've not yet won; thank God. After all, when the congestion warriors have won, the results aren’t often pretty. Detroit, for example, has lots of expressways and widened streets and suffers from very little congestion. Yet no one would hold up Detroit as a model.

[Detroitnerd]

A more common sense approach would suggest that the need is the 4th lane... not cutting out more of the surrounding businesses and homes for a fancy service drive.

Gistok, if you already know in advance, as we do, that adding an additional lane will make the traffic on I-94 WORSE, how does that become a "common sense" approach?

[TKshreve]

I don't know and also think it's a non-issue. Michigan doesn't do spectacularly well at road maintenance anywhere... It seems the state is best at building new and unnecessary roads [[or adding unnecessary road capacity) and letting the old stuff rot for as long as possible.

But for the purposes of Detroit, you can drive clear across that city at any time of the day and almost never hit any type of congestion whatsoever. I don't think that completely eliminating congestion by flooding the area with road capacity is the best use of resources within a city. Roads are not created in a vacuum. Adding lanes does take from something else.

In this case, those lanes are derived at the expense of the embankment. Thus displacing the noise ramp and creating a more acoustically-sound stretch of freeway.

I think some people here are playing both sides. You can not have your modernizations and restoration, but keep traffic capacity remaining in the current prehistoric state. Cake --> Eat.

It is a fact that this stretch of I-94 is regularly jammed every weekday during both rush hours. It is a very undesirable commute that I have battled on and off for many years. What I have seen plucked out of the opinion tree and passed off as fact is the concept that the freeway [[when expanded) will mysteriously draw all these new motorists to it to fill the extra space and once again create a slow moving thoroughfare. I invite any and all raw data that supports this overused claim.

I have also seen claims regarding the funding of this project. Can anyone supply some raw data regarding and supply and alternative uses to these funds? What will this really cost Detroiters, or MI residents - or even more so federal taxpayers?

On a final note, I personally like the idea of a continuous service drive. I have been pushed off that stretch of the freeway many times due to construction only to find myself in an uncertain situation without a true sense of direction. A consistent service drive would and could supply the right environment to not only create a sense of safety for out-of-town motorists along this stretch, but also the right habitat for a small business environment.

"When you chop wood, chips fly"

[iheartthed]

It is a fact that this stretch of I-94 is regularly jammed every weekday during both rush hours. It is a very undesirable commute that I have battled on and off for many years.

Then you should have taken Warren.

[antongast]

On a final note, I personally like the idea of a continuous service drive. I have been pushed off that stretch of the freeway many times due to construction only to find myself in an uncertain situation without a true sense of direction.

Invest in a map and learn your way around town. I promise this is a cheaper option than building you a service drive so you don't have to get lost.

[Detroitnerd]

It is a fact that this stretch of I-94 is regularly jammed every weekday during both rush hours. It is a very undesirable commute that I have battled on and off for many years.

Then familiarize yourself with the other crosstown routes that are underused. I am always aware that I-94 is generally clogged 8-10 a.m. and 4-6 p.m. That is when I don't use it. I'd rather go 30 mph on Gratiot, Michigan, Warren, Forest, Fort or Jefferson than crawl through that traffic, as it draws many people who are simply passing through and don't know the surface streets. Which is better? We spend billions of dollars and sacrifice hundreds of tax-paying buildings for more capacity, or you get a map?

What I have seen plucked out of the opinion tree and passed off as fact is the concept that the freeway [[when expanded) will mysteriously draw all these new motorists to it to fill the extra space and once again create a slow moving thoroughfare. I invite any and all raw data that supports this overused claim.

Just look up "induced demand" and investigate for yourself. You will find that almost every highway planning agency in the world is aware of the effects of "induced demand." It would seem, at this point, that the onus is on the deniers to prove their point.

[TKshreve]

Then you should have taken Warren.

Thanks, but no thanks. I have taken Warren before. The car I was riding in was T-boned by a hooptie which blew a stop sign from behind a building. We rolled 2.5 times and ended up upside down, having to crawl out on broken glass. The car that hit us fled the scene, never to be found. The cops [[who showed up after the Fire Engine, but before the Ambo) were told by numerous residents that WE were the ones going the wrong way on Warren, causing the accident. They eventually learned the real story from a 6 year old girl who witnessed the accident herself.

Forgive me for not taking your advice to heart.

Invest in a map and learn your way around town. I promise this is a cheaper option than building you a service drive so you don't have to get lost.

Fortunately I grew up on the East side of the area and know my way around pretty well by now. It's the out-of-town people that you want to stop and shop in your area that this service drive would benefit most. Unless you really don't want them to stop........ or shop?

[Detroitnerd]

Thanks, but no thanks. I have taken Warren before. The car I was riding in was T-boned by a hooptie which blew a stop sign from behind a building. We rolled 2.5 times and ended up upside down, having to crawl out on broken glass. The car that hit us fled the scene, never to be found. The cops [[who showed up after the Fire Engine, but before the Ambo) were told by numerous residents that WE were the ones going the wrong way on Warren, causing the accident. They eventually learned the real story from a 6 year old girl who witnessed the accident herself.

So your argument is that you want to stay on the freeway and not drive the city streets? And that's why we must widen a freeway for you? So you can pass through without having to deal with the city?

It's the out-of-town people that you want to stop and shop in your area that this service drive would benefit most. Unless you really don't want them to stop........ or shop?

Oh, yes. High-speed freeways spur TREMENDOUS transit-oriented development. Har-de-har-har.

[antongast]

Fortunately I grew up on the East side of the area and know my way around pretty well by now. It's the out-of-town people that you want to stop and shop in your area that this service drive would benefit most. Unless you really don't want them to stop........ or shop?

The way you get people to stop and shop in a place is to have things there that are worth stopping for or shopping at, not to give them improved freeway access. At least, assuming that we're still talking about city neighborhoods and not some anonymous cluster of gas stations and fast-food joints off a random rural exit somewhere.

[Gistok]

The way you get people to stop and shop in a place is to have things there that are worth stopping for or shopping at, not to give them improved freeway access. At least, assuming that we're still talking about city neighborhoods and not some anonymous cluster of gas stations and fast-food joints off a random rural exit somewhere.

Such as I-94 and Cadieux Rd.? You don't need to go rural to find the type of cluster your talking about....

[Gistok]

Gistok, if you already know in advance, as we do, that adding an additional lane will make the traffic on I-94 WORSE, how does that become a "common sense" approach?

How do you know that in advance? Are there any folks on this forum that are true experts in the field?

All the crosstown streets mentioned so far in this discussion have been south of I-94. None north of it. And without exception there is no continuous east/west route among the ones mentioned. Warren Ave.... turns one way... and for folks taking Forest eastbound.... that is one piss poor crosstown street. You really do need a map going eastbound crosstown.

And has anyone ever taken those streets and noticed the speed of the cars traveling? 50 MPG seems to be standard for E.B. Lafayette/Vernors. I'm sure the folks living along the way love that... why not... there's not enough police to patrol the area... so speed is not a problem to drivers...

Common sense says that "flowing" traffic on I-94 is safer than stop and go.

And as has been discussed on other threads. Most folks who take the surface streets in Detroit because the freeway is too jammed up... 95%+ never make a single stop along the way. It's the nature of the beast... there's either the intimidation factor of driving thru the hood... or there's no retail worth stopping for. And gas.... only if you're empty will most crosstown drivers stop at a gas station... the panhandlers have done a good job of keeping everyone in their cars...

[antongast]

Such as I-94 and Cadieux Rd.? You don't need to go rural to find it....

Are those places catering mostly to freeway through traffic, or to people who live and/or work nearby? I don't have data or anything, but that whole stretch of Harper is a reasonably healthy neighborhood retail strip by Detroit standards, and I can't think of any gas stations or fast-food joints that are located near the exit but away from the retail strip [[the non-Harper side of that interchange is pretty much all residential). Gas stations and fast-food joints exist all over Detroit in places that are nowhere near freeway exits. What I'm talking about are clusters that clearly only exist because of the freeway, where the area around the exit isn't developed at a density that would support that kind of concentration of businesses.

But all that is nitpicky. If your strategy for revitalizing Detroit is building a McDonald's and a Marathon at every freeway exit and then attracting as much through traffic to the freeways as possible, then I think you're pretty badly misinformed about what cities are and how they work.

[Bham1982]

Gistok, if you already know in advance, as we do, that adding an additional lane will make the traffic on I-94 WORSE, how does that become a "common sense" approach?

A fourth lane won't make the traffic worse. That's completely illogical.

Folks on DYes consistently mischaracterize the principal of induced congestion.

Again, induced congestion does NOT mean that more lane automatically equals worse traffic. It simply means that added capacity will attract more usage from other routes or modes.

If we were to accept your interpretation of induced congestion, then we should reduce all the Metro Detroit roadways to winding, dirt country lanes, and then we will have no more traffic problems.

[Gistok]

Actually the I-94/Cadieux area was a really nice area until the last 10 years or so... now it's just a cluster of bars, fast food and gas stations manned by panhandlers.

I remember it in its' glory days 35 years ago, when there was Wrigley's Drug Store, the Vogue Theatre, a full new car dealership, Vergote's Poultry, lots of mom and pop stores, a coin shop, a bike shop, Embo's Grocery, restaurants, the Milk Depot, Flemings Drug Store... now all gone...

[iheartthed]

Thanks, but no thanks. I have taken Warren before. The car I was riding in was T-boned by a hooptie which blew a stop sign from behind a building. We rolled 2.5 times and ended up upside down, having to crawl out on broken glass. The car that hit us fled the scene, never to be found. The cops [[who showed up after the Fire Engine, but before the Ambo) were told by numerous residents that WE were the ones going the wrong way on Warren, causing the accident. They eventually learned the real story from a 6 year old girl who witnessed the accident herself.

Forgive me for not taking your advice to heart.

Hoopties don't use freeways?

[TKshreve]

Oh, yes. High-speed freeways spur TREMENDOUS transit-oriented development. Har-de-har-har.

Well, a renovation would be a hell of a lot better received by potential business than the pot hole infested, broken corridor, street lamp scarce, coney island rimmed, stop sign blowing, weed laden service-drive network that exists now.

BTW - I did a little light reading on "Induced Demand" and it appears you are correct that many theorists have studied, written and published material on the subject. From what I could see, the entire subject of induced demand remains just that: a theory. There are variables in play that will have unforeseen outcomes that not you nor myself can predict regarding this particular stretch of freeway. For instance, induced demand is founded on the principle that an area is in a growth pattern - ya know..... housing demand on the rise, surrounding suburbs in growth patterns and jobs being added throughout the region [[necessitating freeways). What Detroit has is a shrinking region, with job loss, which might actually have an adverse reaction to what you are suggesting here. Frankly, I'm sticking with the notion that not you, nor myself..... or even the expert urban transportation experts can predict exactly what will be the congestion outcome of an expanded eastside I-94 expansion.

Here is a piece that explains a little bit of what I am talking about [[I'm not crazy about the source, but the article does found itself on raw scientific research):

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinio...e-congestion-0

[antongast]

Actually the I-94/Cadieux area was a really nice area until the last 10 years or so... now it's just a cluster of bars, fast food and gas stations manned by panhandlers.

I remember it in its' glory days 35 years ago, when there was Wrigley's Drug Store, the Vogue Theatre, a full new car dealership, Vergote's Poultry, lots of mom and pop stores, a coin shop, a bike shop, Embo's Grocery, restaurants, the Milk Depot, Flemings Drug Store... now all gone...

I'm not sure what your point is. What I mean by "reasonably healthy" isn't "the businesses there appeal to Gistok's sensibilities" or "the businesses there now are the same ones that were there 35 years ago," I mean that most of the storefronts are occupied and people shop there.

[Islandman]

One only needs to spend a few hours on a LA freeway to see that having super highways does not work, but whatever.

Name one expansion of a current freeway system in the U.S. that has improved congestion for a protracted amount of time?

[Detroitnerd]

How do you know that in advance? Are there any folks on this forum that are true experts in the field?

You don't have to be an expert to understand induced demand. The more you expand a trunk route, the more traffic says, "Oh, that route is larger, let's use that." And people drive more and longer distances, putting more traffic on the road. Sometimes a roadway has been removed and some people predicted gridlock, but when the removal took place, traffic moved elsewhere. This is proven. So all you do by adding a lane is relieving congestion temporarily until peak use is achieved again. At tremendous cost, to the state, to the freeway's neighbors, to the city [[lost tax rolls) and to common sense...

All the crosstown streets mentioned so far in this discussion have been south of I-94. None north of it. And without exception there is no continuous east/west route among the ones mentioned. Warren Ave.... turns one way... and for folks taking Forest eastbound.... that is one piss poor crosstown street. You really do need a map going eastbound crosstown.

Let me get this straight: You would be down in the freeway going ZERO MPH, and then you can drive across town but you don't want to take the boulevard across, or because the street names change at Woodward, or can't make it up to the Davison, or because the crosstown routes are to far south for you. What's wrong with you? Can't you simply drive across town on surface streets at a reasonable speed instead of sitting in the freeway stopped? You demand the right to drive across town at 70 mph during rush hour without having to deal with the city you're traveling through?

And has anyone ever taken those streets and noticed the speed of the cars traveling? 50 MPG seems to be standard for E.B. Lafayette/Vernors. I'm sure the folks living along the way love that... why not... there's not enough police to patrol the area... so speed is not a problem to drivers...

The speed limit on Lafayette is lower than that. And I don't see a whole lot of speeding on Lafayette. City driving isn't that dangerous.

Common sense says that "flowing" traffic on I-94 is safer than stop and go.

Except when it IS stop-and-go. And, again, that's why I don't get on the Ford during certain hours. And it hasn't ruined my life. I would rather live near work and take surface streets than fight traffic every day. And, actually, there are fewer accidents in places like Eastern Market, where speeds are low and drivers are paying attention, than there are on places like the Ford Freeway, where, despite high speeds, you're lulled into a sense of security by all the signage and roadway.

And as has been discussed on other threads. Most folks who take the surface streets in Detroit because the freeway is too jammed up... 95%+ never make a single stop along the way. It's the nature of the beast... there's either the intimidation factor of driving thru the hood... or there's no retail worth stopping for. And gas.... only if you're empty will most crosstown drivers stop at a gas station... the panhandlers have done a good job of keeping everyone in their cars...

Who cares if they stop? They relieve congestion on the freeway -- and we get to keep the money it would have cost to expand the freeway in vain. As for your remarks about being intimidated in the hood, lack of retail, panhandlers, are you trippin'? We need to expand the freeway so that people aren't scared by the city they're driving through? That's gonna be a hard sell to the people whose houses would have to be knocked down to expand the freeway -- which won't solve the problem anyway.

[Gistok]

I'm not sure what your point is. What I mean by "reasonably healthy" isn't "the businesses there appeal to Gistok's sensibilities" or "the businesses there now are the same ones that were there 35 years ago," I mean that most of the storefronts are occupied and people shop there.

Ummm approximately 2/3 of the storefronts are occupied... mostly with gas stations, bars and fast food... not exactly the oasis of health it once was...

[Detroitnerd]

Well, a renovation would be a hell of a lot better received by potential business than the pot hole infested, broken corridor, street lamp scarce, coney island rimmed, stop sign blowing, weed laden service-drive network that exists now.

That is precisely the environment produced by the very expressway you hope to expand. Those who would solve a problem by enlarging upon it would seem to be ... mad?

BTW - I did a little light reading on "Induced Demand" and it appears you are correct that many theorists have studied, written and published material on the subject. From what I could see, the entire subject of induced demand remains just that: a theory.

Yes, Virginia. Just like evolution.

Here is a piece that explains a little bit of what I am talking about [[I'm not crazy about the source, but the article does found itself on raw scientific research):

Look at me! I can scan a page of Google results about an issue and pick the one I AGREE WITH! [beams, clearly wants star on forehead]

Ignorance is one thing. We all start out ignorant.

Willful ignorance is repugnant.

[TKshreve]

I'm not sure what your point is. What I mean by "reasonably healthy" isn't "the businesses there appeal to Gistok's sensibilities" or "the businesses there now are the same ones that were there 35 years ago," I mean that most of the storefronts are occupied and people shop there.

Well if what you want to hear is "yes" to the question of:

Does the freeway directly benefit business stabilization along its path?

Then I would say Harper is a great example of this. Not only near Cadieux, but if you head South [[I think it is) Harper crosses I-94 and once again fosters a strong business sector that houses [[or housed - sorry haven't been through there in the last few years) a lot of businesses.

For example, my mom used to go to a furniture upholstery shop near the CP golf course area of Harper. It was not a super clean, attractive area, but the business was well known and well respected. Upholstery is a lost art form and this place according to my mother was one of the last good places around. Coincidence it survived as long as it did? [[not sure if it's still there though)

But anyways, much of Harper along I-94 [[be it whatever side of the freeway) has long had strong business corridors. I can not testify to whether this was a strong area before the freeway came through. Nor can I testify that this area remains busy today because of the freeway being there. I am not the expert....... once again.

What I can say is that there are several businesses that have survived along this stretch.

[Detroitnerd]

A fourth lane won't make the traffic worse. That's completely illogical.

You always come in and puff your chest out, shoot your mouth off, and think that because you declare something, it is true.

Guess what?

It isn't.