PIRG: I-94 Project One of the Worst "Highway Boondoggles"

[Hermod]

Downtown Royal Oak was a streetcar suburb.

More than that, it was a way station on the old road to Pontiac-Flint. It was a station on the GTW long before the interurbans were built. Obviously the fact that it became an interurban junction [[the Flint line split off the Pontiac line in downtown Royal Oak) aided in its growth.

[professorscott]

I find the 696/94 arguments redundant and unimportant. 696 exists; it was built a long time ago [[and a long time before Mr. Townsend was in political life) and it exists. It's idiotic to whine about "why don't they shut down lanes on I-696"; it's existing infrastructure. I do agree with the poster who pointed out the dissimilarity between what happened to Royal Oak post-Reuther and what hasn't happened in Detroit post-Ford.

My take on this is as follows: justify to me how, in the situation that southeast Michigan is in today, that the most important thing we can do with this kind of money is to widen a freeway. That our major priority, spending wise - a project on which we will spend far more than any other project I can see coming down the pike - is to make an expressway wider.

In case anyone bothers to point out that the particular bucket of money from which the Federal part of this comes requires it to be spent on transportation, I can think, off the top of my head, of a few transportation projects that would be more justifiable than this.

[Scottathew]

No one claimed such a thing.

The point is that a rep. from Royal Oak, host to massive freeway largesse, is fighting freeway improvements in competing jurisdictions. That's the hypocrisy. No one claims that Dexter Davison will morph into a Royal Oak-ish drunk tank for yahoos from Plymouth and Utica.

He's also fighting the I-75 expansion that goes right through Royal Oak\Madison Heights.

[Islandman]

The Walter Reuther was built to support the growing suburban landscape. I don't think it necessarily "competes" with the Edsel Ford at all. They both have their commuters and trucks.

696 is a suburban freeway. The suburbs were built around the freeway. 94 was built around an urban landscape and that landscape should be first and foremost, not some widening that will further destroy said landscape.

Completely agree that 696 does not compete with 94 whatsoever, but you think that the suburbs were built around 696?

I'm pretty sure a large swath of homes were moved due to its construction. I worked summers at the zoo in the 80s and saw a lot of the project.

[iheartthed]

I find the 696/94 arguments redundant and unimportant. 696 exists; it was built a long time ago [[and a long time before Mr. Townsend was in political life) and it exists. It's idiotic to whine about "why don't they shut down lanes on I-696"; it's existing infrastructure. I do agree with the poster who pointed out the dissimilarity between what happened to Royal Oak post-Reuther and what hasn't happened in Detroit post-Ford.

My take on this is as follows: justify to me how, in the situation that southeast Michigan is in today, that the most important thing we can do with this kind of money is to widen a freeway. That our major priority, spending wise - a project on which we will spend far more than any other project I can see coming down the pike - is to make an expressway wider.

In case anyone bothers to point out that the particular bucket of money from which the Federal part of this comes requires it to be spent on transportation, I can think, off the top of my head, of a few transportation projects that would be more justifiable than this.

Yes, I completely agree with this, professor. Four billion dollars, wow. Detroit could build a real transit system with that type of money. New York is spending that much on the new Second Avenue subway line, so Detroit could probably cover half the city in subway service with that amount.

[swingline]

No one claimed such a thing.

The point is that a rep. from Royal Oak, host to massive freeway largesse, is fighting freeway improvements in competing jurisdictions. That's the hypocrisy. No one claims that Dexter Davison will morph into a Royal Oak-ish drunk tank for yahoos from Plymouth and Utica.

Cleaning out all of the strawmen in your garage and the red herrings from your refrigerator, eh Bham? Yes, it can be a struggle to find an argument that successfully allows you to demonize someone with whom you disagree politically. But maybe you're right. Maybe Rep. Townsend is a Brooks Patterson mole in the Dem party whose secret agenda is to make sure that Oakland County's money stays in Oakland County. After all, everybody has their hand in your wallet out there, right?

Or maybe he's smart enough to identify a massive waste of taxpayer dollars that will do nothing for Detroit and everything for the road building lobby and the facilitation of 70 mph commutes for suburbanites.

[Scottathew]

I don't think either freeway is congested enough to justify widening them though.

For example, today it only took me 5 minutes on westbound I-94 today to get from Conner to I-75, which isn't shabby at all for a major city during rush hour.

I-75 is pretty bad during rush hour. I get on at Big Beaver\Rochester and it's jammed up pretty much until 8-Mile, and then again around I-94.

In the evening rush hour I-75 is jammed up from before I-94 until about 12 Mile Road.

There is a peak volume issue on I-75.

[poobert]

The comparison is somewhat specious but completely idiotic.

I-94 already exists. It therefore bears no comparison to the construction of 696. Talk of closing lanes on 696 is incendiary nonsense.

The only time you're going to encounter serious traffic on I-94 is if there is an accident, in which case an additional lane or two won't help.

"Accessibility" does not mean being able to go 70 miles per hour during rush hour, contrary to the belief of every idiot driver in Metro Detroit and the total shit-for-brains at MDOT. These morons can't even prevent the roads they have from totally disintegrating. I wouldn't trust them to bag my groceries.

Further, I actually live off of I-94 in Detroit on the eastside and I think if you don't you should screw off because it's pretty much none of your business. It's my backyard and I think it's the stupidest fucking idea since the plastic lamppost covers.

I think those of us in area around I-94 should get a vote on the issue, whether to widen I-94 or not widen it and throw rotten vegetables at MDOT executives, and I know which side would win out.

[dtowncitylover]

Completely agree that 696 does not compete with 94 whatsoever, but you think that the suburbs were built around 696?

I'm pretty sure a large swath of homes were moved due to its construction. I worked summers at the zoo in the 80s and saw a lot of the project.

They weren't moved they were destroyed. There used be a Pleasant Ridge neighborhood where the service drive of 696 is now west of Woodward. Royal Oak/PR/Ferndale, obviously, weren't built around 696, but go north and you will find Rochester, Washington, Clarkston, Shelby all built around the freeway.

[Bham1982]

You also make it seem like Rep. Townsend built 696 and 75 himself. While I'm sure he is committed to the maintenance of those freeways, he isn't interested in expanding them.

And that's why he's a blatant hypocrite. He has one standard for Royal Oak, and then denies the same largesse for competing communities.

[Bham1982]

My take on this is as follows: justify to me how, in the situation that southeast Michigan is in today, that the most important thing we can do with this kind of money is to widen a freeway. That our major priority, spending wise - a project on which we will spend far more than any other project I can see coming down the pike - is to make an expressway wider.

If these are transportation dollars, I can't think of a better project for Southeast Michigan. Seems like a great use of federal dollars, for once. Will be huge in local mobility and getting better airport access for East Siders.

But I'm sure the transit gurus at DYes would prefer more empty parking shuttles to stadia and the like.

[Scottathew]

They weren't moved they were destroyed. There used be a Pleasant Ridge neighborhood where the service drive of 696 is now west of Woodward. Royal Oak/PR/Ferndale, obviously, weren't built around 696, but go north and you will find Rochester, Washington, Clarkston, Shelby all built around the freeway.

I heard a story [[I don't know if it's true) that Pleasant Ridge fought I-696 tooth and nails. They were given a peace offering of having a capped freeway park [[like the three in Southfield over 696) and they still fought it.

As a punishment for continuing to fight after the peace offering, they took away the capped park and never built it.

Imagine how different it would be if there was a large park bridging the gap between Please Ridge and the Zoo!

[Wesley Mouch]

I do not see that adding a lane to I94 results in 'billions' of dollars of additional project cost.

What does cost 'billions' is the changing of I94 from an anachronistic urban freeway to a modern suburban freeway with service drives, embankments, etc. that all meet some standard that was meant to apply to rural Montana, not downtown Detroit.

Widening is good. Absurd bloat is not.

[dtowncitylover]

And that's why he's a blatant hypocrite. He has one standard for Royal Oak, and then denies the same largesse for competing communities.

Oh you sweet soul. We have to accept what we have and move on. But we can't let any further freeway widening happen in the city because it will further destroy it. Suburban "standards" don't belong in the city. Freeways, strip malls, and cul-de-sacs don't belong there. But unfortunately all three are there and we have to work so that we produce better urban-friendly infrastructure and planning.

I-94 needs to be resurfaced and repaired but it doesn't need widening just for some truckers and people that need to get to work 2 minutes earlier.

[Bham1982]

Imagine how different it would be if there was a large park bridging the gap between Please Ridge and the Zoo!

Those three existing parks, BTW, are the weirdest thing. They were built for a condition [[Orthodox Jews living north of the road and worshiping south of the road) that could have easily been solved with pedestrian crossings. I don't understand how those parks came into existence. Even sillier now since most of that community has moved out, esp. south of the freeway.

[dtowncitylover]

I heard a story [[I don't know if it's true) that Pleasant Ridge fought I-696 tooth and nails. They were given a peace offering of having a capped freeway park [[like the three in Southfield over 696) and they still fought it.

As a punishment for continuing to fight after the peace offering, they took away the capped park and never built it.

Imagine how different it would be if there was a large park bridging the gap between Please Ridge and the Zoo!

Interesting, never heard that one. Though how would it have worked with the Woodward ramps?

[Bham1982]

Oh you sweet soul. We have to accept what we have and move on.

No, we don't have to "accept it". It's a good thing, and we should embrace it. I-696 has been fantastic for Royal Oak.

But we can't let any further freeway widening happen in the city because it will further destroy it.

Freeway widenings have nothing to do with the decline in Detroit. There are basically no freeways on the East Side, which is easily the most decayed part of Detroit. The most prosperous parts of Detroit are carved up with freeways.

The people who blame freeways for Detroit's demise are the same people who think football stadiums and Buffalo Wild Wings are urban renewal. Southeast Michigan doesn't know the first thing about what makes cities tick.

[dtowncitylover]

Those three existing parks, BTW, are the weirdest thing. They were built for a condition [[Orthodox Jews living north of the road and worshiping south of the road) that could have easily been solved with pedestrian crossings. I don't understand how those parks came into existence. Even sillier now since most of that community has moved out, esp. south of the freeway.

I think the Orthodox community wanted something more cohesive and welcoming than just pedestrian overpasses. The Orthodox community is still there and alive, but it doesn't seem to get any younger.

[dtowncitylover]

No, we don't have to "accept it". It's a good thing, and we should embrace it. I-696 has been fantastic for Royal Oak.


Freeway widenings have nothing to do with the decline in Detroit. There are basically no freeways on the East Side, which is easily the most decayed part of Detroit. The most prosperous parts of Detroit are carved up with freeways.

The people who blame freeways for Detroit's demise are the same people who think football stadiums and Buffalo Wild Wings are urban renewal. Southeast Michigan doesn't know the first thing about what makes cities tick.

Well the most "prosperous" part of Detroit, by which I think you mean greater downtown, was indeed decayed or dacaying. Davison tore apart Highland Park. Decayed. Jeffries tore apart the west side. Brightmoor decayed. Look at the area surrounding 75 and Nevada, 7 Mile, and 8 Mile. The Fisher through Corktown didn't help much either.

There is nothing good about freeways in an urban environment. Cities should not be built for the car, we are the shining example why that shouldn't happen.

Maybe we can make the Southfield a full freeway and run it all the way to Woodward?

[Scottathew]

Interesting, never heard that one. Though how would it have worked with the Woodward ramps?

It could have been done with little consequence to the ramps, they would just get pushed westward by like maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of a mile.

I imagine [[purely speculation) the capped park would have been near Oakdale and Ridge Road, and would have gone about 500-700 feet [[the range of the three Southfield caps).

If you went 600 feet from Ridge Road you would have no impact to the EB Woodward exit, and a 300-400 foot impact to the WB Woodward entrance.



This subject has me fascinated, I found a book and I'm getting it MelCated to my local library:

A planning and engineering analysis of the location and design alternatives considered; Interstate 696
http://ltu.worldcat.org/title/inters...d/oclc/4529489

[Dan Wesson]

Up north here they are threatening to remove the asphalt and go back to gravel.

[mikeg19]

Someone solve this for me: How is adding another lane to the freeway going to provide any relief to traffic congestion when everyone is still merging onto the same 1 or 2 lane exit????

Widening 94/75/M59/696 is absolutely pointless. There are two times a day when you can't drive 95mph on them: 7:30-8:30am and 4:30-6pm, give or a take a few minutes. Do we really need to spend $4 billion dollars to alleviate traffic for a grand total of a 4 hours a day? NO.

What I wouldn't mind seeing the money spent on is smarter and more efficient interchanges, better traffic update systems, and updated infrastructure.

[Wesley Mouch]

I think the Orthodox community wanted something more cohesive and welcoming than just pedestrian overpasses. The Orthodox community is still there and alive, but it doesn't seem to get any younger.

My understanding is that some orthodox jews are religiously prohibited from using mechanical contrivances when going from home to worship. No cars, bikes, etc. You walk. On the ground.

A bridge is a machine, a tool. Forbidden. Covering the bridge with soil makes it one with the earth -- and walking on earth is OK.

If my understanding is correct, I'm less sure how they justify walking on concrete -- but that's what I recall. That the earth, the soil, is what was important.

[dtowncitylover]

My understanding is that some orthodox jews are religiously prohibited from using mechanical contrivances when going from home to worship. No cars, bikes, etc. You walk. On the ground.

A bridge is a machine, a tool. Forbidden. Covering the bridge with soil makes it one with the earth -- and walking on earth is OK.

If my understanding is correct, I'm less sure how they justify walking on concrete -- but that's what I recall. That the earth, the soil, is what was important.

Uh oh, let's not turn this into a Torah/Talmud argument...

[dtowncitylover]

This subject has me fascinated, I found a book and I'm getting it MelCated to my local library:

A planning and engineering analysis of the location and design alternatives considered; Interstate 696
http://ltu.worldcat.org/title/inters...d/oclc/4529489

Pass it my way, when you're done!

As much I despise what freeways have done to our inner cities, I find transportation systems to be very interesting. Unfortunately my brain isn't wired to be a civil engineer.