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

[Cliffy]

Whoa, what did I miss?

Either he's a bot or mentally ill. Don't really understand why he's allowed to contaminate every thread with his Smart Bus hatred.

[Hermod]

I'm sorry. Four + four + two + two = 12 travel lanes. Is that right? 12 freaking lanes?

When did we begin to consider a "service drive" [[especially one that comes and goes) as "travel lanes"?

Service drives are a method to collect traffic to and from the expressway and serve multiple cross streets without the requirement for large land consuming cloverleafs and pinwheels.

[DetroitPlanner]

PIRG is an environmental group. They would like everyone to ride bicycles so we don't pollute. What do you expect them to say about a freeway expansion?

If you read it's critique, is is sloppily written and says the project Limits are I-76 to Conner.

It also ignores the fact that the City leaders have given this project its blessing.

[professorscott]

If you read it's critique, is is sloppily written and says the project Limits are I-76 to Conner.

It also ignores the fact that the City leaders have given this project its blessing.

I-76 to Conner?! Holy crap! The nearest I-76 comes to Detroit is Akron, and from there to Conner is over 190 miles! They clearly haven't budgeted enough for this project

[Gistok]

One thing that has always mystified me was the widening of I-75 to 4 lanes between a stretch of Flint and Saginaw [[near Frankenmuth).... didn't know there was such a rush hour that far out??

[Cliffy]

When did we begin to consider a "service drive" [[especially one that comes and goes) as "travel lanes"?

Service drives are a method to collect traffic to and from the expressway and serve multiple cross streets without the requirement for large land consuming cloverleafs and pinwheels.

There is no formula in the Highway Capacity Manual that includes service drives for calculating freeway capacity. Its one thing not to like it and feel that left lane on-ramps and inadequate shoulder width should remain the same like we are a Central American country but the exaggeration and misinformation is ridiculous. Also, when you ride the service drive east of Chene, the service drives cuts off and is not continuous.

So its really going from 3 lanes in each direction to 4 lanes in each direction. I would love to have 6 lanes in each direction. That would be awesome.

[Hermod]

There is no formula in the Highway Capacity Manual that includes service drives for calculating freeway capacity. Its one thing not to like it and feel that left lane on-ramps and inadequate shoulder width should remain the same like we are a Central American country but the exaggeration and misinformation is ridiculous. Also, when you ride the service drive east of Chene, the service drives cuts off and is not continuous.

So its really going from 3 lanes in each direction to 4 lanes in each direction. I would love to have 6 lanes in each direction. That would be awesome.

When you get more than 4 lanes in each direction, it gets ridiculous. Four lanes in each direction should be adequate for I-94 especially if trucks are restricted to the two right lanes.

[Cliffy]

Yeah I'm just being sarcastic. 4 lanes would be perfect and with the larger 12' shoulders, it will be much safer if people stall or whatever happens, cars can be pushed off the road quickly.

[erikd]

NITC is not the only crossing. As you mentioned, the Blue Water Bridge customs plaza is also being expanded. Trucks have to be coming from somewhere are Port Huron certainly is not large enough to generate that need. There are trucks from the E side that need to get to the 401 to get to places like Windsor and there are also trucks that need to get to HWY 402. You are not looking at this in its totality. Regardless of freight, that is only one piece. The road is old, it cannot be rebuilt the way it is now, it is an interstate and the feds will not allow it. The feds want the operations to be improved, it to be safer, and the bridges raised in height. It is a federal need and the feds are picking up the cost of most of it.

The planning for the widening of I-94 happened well after the twinning of the Blue Water Bridge. The Blue Water bridge opened in 1993. The EIS for I-94 was signed 15-20 year later.

I swear sometimes I read this website and think, if these folks were posting and complaining about changing Campus Martius we would still have that dangerous no man's land in the middle of downtown.

The plan for widening I-94 did not happen well after the twinning of the Blue Water Bridge. The I-94 widening plan was studied and planned in the mid-late 90s, at the same time the Blue Water Bridge twinning was happening. 20 years after 1993 was last year, and the 94 widening plan has been on the books for far longer than that.

The 94 widening project was planned to deal with two major factors:
1. Projections of a dramatic increase of traffic volume, which has not actually happened.
2. Increasing freeway capacity for the additional truck traffic coming through the [[at that time) new twin-span Blue Water Bridge.

Now that we are about spend $2 billion to put this plan into place, it is prudent to take a second look, and see if the 20 year old reasons, facts, and assumptions that this project was based on are still valid.

The projected increase of traffic volume hasn't happened, and the increased access to the Blue Water Bridge will almost certainly become a moot point once the NITC is built. If there is a reliable study that predicts an increase in truck traffic between Port Huron and Detroit after the NITC bridge is built, then the 94 widening project may still be valid, but I find it unlikely that any reliable study would come to that conclusion.

It seems clear that the construction of the NITC bridge, and the direct 401/75 freeway connections, will result in a decreased amount of truck traffic crossing the Blue Water Bridge and coming down 94 through Detroit.

I am not opposed to change, nor am I necessarily opposed to freeway expansion, as long as the investment is prudent and makes sense for the future. However, the I-94 expansion project is based on incorrect and outdated models and assumptions, which also did not plan or account for the change in truck traffic that will certainly happen when the NITC/401/75 project is completed.

I fail to see why we should just blindly carry out a plan to spend billions to build a project that no longer makes sense.

[DetroitPlanner]

One thing that has always mystified me was the widening of I-75 to 4 lanes between a stretch of Flint and Saginaw [[near Frankenmuth).... didn't know there was such a rush hour that far out??

Engler was obsessed with making I-75 at least four lanes in each direction as it is a major tourist route. It is for Fridays N and Sundays S. Very silly if you ask me, particularly when with longer drives you could detour to Dixie Highway, M-15, M-13......

[DTWflyer]

Engler was obsessed with making I-75 at least four lanes in each direction as it is a major tourist route. It is for Fridays N and Sundays S. Very silly if you ask me, particularly when with longer drives you could detour to Dixie Highway, M-15, M-13......

It is for the up north traffic on Fridays northbound, Sundays/holidays southbound which does get very congested in that stretch.
Actually the worst section has been the stretch north of Bay City from US-10 up to where US-23 splits out to Standish and up the east side of the state. I-75 is 2-lanes up there and backs-up for a good 20 mile stretch every summer weekend. It is usually better to use M-13 in the stretch. I-75 is 2 lanes and there is so much slow moving traffic - RVs, boat trailers, everyone pulling some type of recreational vechicle that can barely do 55 mph and it just backs up to no end.

They need to widen that stretch before the 4 lane Flint-Saginaw section. But, I'm not really complaining that they did.

However the stupid Zilwaukee Bridge is another matter. That thing is closed every other year it seems. They had one side closed all last summer for fixing the bridge bearings, after a botched attempt in 2008 or so. This summer they are doing the other side. They decided to only do the traffic shift for the extra lanes through Labor Day weekend and now making northbound use the 2-lane, curvy I-675 route through Saginaw. Traffic on Friday night was backed-up close to 10 miles, ending up bailing off on old Dixie Hwy at Bridgeport and bushwacking my way around Saginaw.

[Wesley Mouch]

Yeah I'm just being sarcastic. 4 lanes would be perfect and with the larger 12' shoulders, it will be much safer if people stall or whatever happens, cars can be pushed off the road quickly.

In some cities [[Atlanta for example) their growth has demanded more than 4 lanes. Its not too much where the demand has properly been induced.

[DetroitPlanner]

Actually the worst section has been the stretch north of Bay City from US-10 up to where US-23 splits out to Standish and up the east side of the state. I-75 is 2-lanes up there and backs-up for a good 20 mile stretch every summer weekend. It is usually better to use M-13 in the stretch. I-75 is 2 lanes and there is so much slow moving traffic - RVs, boat trailers, everyone pulling some type of recreational vechicle that can barely do 55 mph and it just backs up to no end.

Dude, I got a cottage in West Branch and you gave away my secret! I usually try to drive off-peak to get away from the yahoos pulling stuff.

You can usually get on M-13 @ Zilwaukee and avoid much of that stuff too. Yes you are routed on to Euclid which slows you down a bit, but it is not terrible. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sa...e3946d7baef5ac

[313WX]

In some cities [[Atlanta for example) their growth has demanded more than 4 lanes. Its not too much where the demand has properly been induced.

Atlanta is probably the perfect modern example of a city with horrible urban planning. Freeways are the only way in/out of the city, and the residents in the Atlanta metro area have decided to reside practically hundreds of miles from the actual city center where their jobs are actually based. Those freeways being widened to more than 4 lanes certainly didn't help them when the city shut down for days over 1" of snow last winter, did they?

Besides the fact that Detroit has an extensive, well-planned freeway system already in place, its system is also complimented by a heavily underutilized grid of surface streets [[Grand River is pretty much a ghost town in the middle of a work day), as suburbanites who must commute in/out/through the city seem to be too afraid to use these surface streets in fear of crime.

[swingline]

The plan for widening I-94 did not happen well after the twinning of the Blue Water Bridge. The I-94 widening plan was studied and planned in the mid-late 90s, at the same time the Blue Water Bridge twinning was happening. 20 years after 1993 was last year, and the 94 widening plan has been on the books for far longer than that.

The 94 widening project was planned to deal with two major factors:
1. Projections of a dramatic increase of traffic volume, which has not actually happened.
2. Increasing freeway capacity for the additional truck traffic coming through the [[at that time) new twin-span Blue Water Bridge.

Now that we are about spend $2 billion to put this plan into place, it is prudent to take a second look, and see if the 20 year old reasons, facts, and assumptions that this project was based on are still valid.

The projected increase of traffic volume hasn't happened, and the increased access to the Blue Water Bridge will almost certainly become a moot point once the NITC is built. If there is a reliable study that predicts an increase in truck traffic between Port Huron and Detroit after the NITC bridge is built, then the 94 widening project may still be valid, but I find it unlikely that any reliable study would come to that conclusion.

It seems clear that the construction of the NITC bridge, and the direct 401/75 freeway connections, will result in a decreased amount of truck traffic crossing the Blue Water Bridge and coming down 94 through Detroit.

I am not opposed to change, nor am I necessarily opposed to freeway expansion, as long as the investment is prudent and makes sense for the future. However, the I-94 expansion project is based on incorrect and outdated models and assumptions, which also did not plan or account for the change in truck traffic that will certainly happen when the NITC/401/75 project is completed.

I fail to see why we should just blindly carry out a plan to spend billions to build a project that no longer makes sense.

Good summary of the issues. You have identified a boondoggle.

[DetroitPlanner]

Atlanta is probably the perfect modern example of a city with horrible urban planning. Freeways are the only way in/out of the city, and the residents in the Atlanta metro area have decided to reside practically hundreds of miles from the actual city center where their jobs are actually based. Those freeways being widened to more than 4 lanes certainly didn't help them when the city shut down for days over 1" of snow last winter, did they?

There are far worse:

Gary IN
Houston TX
Las Vegas NV
Wasilla AK
Washington DC [[the good, the bad, and the ugly)

Atlanta at least has an excuse, it had a post freeway population explosion. Besides freeway issues they also have water issues. Glad Detroit is my home.

[EastsideAl]

Atlanta is probably the perfect modern example of a city with horrible urban planning. Freeways are the only way in/out of the city, and the residents in the Atlanta metro area have decided to reside practically hundreds of miles from the actual city center where their jobs are actually based. Those freeways being widened to more than 4 lanes certainly didn't help them when the city shut down for days over 1" of snow last winter, did they?

Besides the fact that Detroit has an extensive, well-planned freeway system already in place, its system is also complimented by a heavily underutilized grid of surface streets [[Grand River is pretty much a ghost town in the middle of a work day), as suburbanites who must commute in/out/through the city seem to be too afraid to use these surface streets in fear of crime.

I wish there was a way to +1 posts here. I've been unfortunate enough to have to spend significant time driving around Atlanta. Just a horrendous mess of freeways and a truly awful piece of urban planning. In large sections of that city it seems to have done every bit as good of a job of messing up their city and their urban and neighborhood fabric as building giant trenches to drive out of and through our city did to Detroit.

[Gpwrangler]

Besides the fact that Detroit has an extensive, well-planned freeway system already in place, its system is also complimented by a heavily underutilized grid of surface streets [[Grand River is pretty much a ghost town in the middle of a work day), as suburbanites who must commute in/out/through the city seem to be too afraid to use these surface streets in fear of crime.

Fear's got nothing to do with it for me and most people I know. Grand river has lights and a 45 speed limit. So does Gratiot. I'd rather do 70 with no lights. There's not a street I've been on that I'm worried about crime. Stop lights and getting stuck behind trucks, buses and slow drivers is why I skip the side roads.

[313WX]

Fear's got nothing to do with it for me and most people I know. Grand river has lights and a 45 speed limit. So does Gratiot. I'd rather do 70 with no lights. There's not a street I've been on that I'm worried about crime. Stop lights and getting stuck behind trucks, buses and slow drivers is why I skip the side roads.

1. The official speed limit on Gratiot & Grand River is 35 MPH. Even then, the flow of traffic is rarely ever that slow. That official speed limit is from a bygone era, when tons of pedestrians would be walking up/down and frequently crossing Gratiot & Grand Rivers to patronize the store front retailers.

2. You still never addressed my post from earlier...

I reverse commute as well to Dearborn, but I live on the east side. So given that I have a crosstown reverse commute, I still deal with the "congestion" into downtown/midtown on I-94 everyday.

As I stated before, it only takes me 5 minutes on a typical day to get from Conner to I-75 on I-94. Traffic is typically moving at posted speeds as well, aside from the occasional stop & go.

Even coming home, it takes maybe 5-10 minutes max on a typical day to get from I-75 to Chalmers. And yet again, aside from the occasional stop & go, traffic still moves at posted speeds.

I hardly consider it a bad thing to traverse 5-10 miles in a major city during rush hour in only 5-10 minutes. In fact, Americans in any other major city would consider that a blessing. But that's just my perspective.

I just don't think spending billions of dollars to build additional lanes [[that we'll have to spend more money we don't have to maintain) on a freeway that otherwise moves at posted speeds during rush hour [[aside from the occasional stop and go) is a wise investment...

Why do you think it's a wise decision to spend billions of dollars to widen a freeway that's already fairly efficient with 3 lanes just so some can have the illusion that they'll be getting through that hellhole "Detoilet" any faster?

Given your history of posts about fiscal conservative spending, I'm surprised at your stance on this project...

[Gpwrangler]

1. The official speed limit on Gratiot & Grand River is 35 MPH. Even then, the flow of traffic is rarely ever that slow. That official speed limit is from a bygone era, when tons of pedestrians would be walking up/down and frequently crossing Gratiot & Grand Rivers to patronize the store front retailers.

2. You still never addressed my post from earlier...



Why do you think it's a wise decision to spend billions of dollars to widen a freeway that's already fairly efficient with 3 lanes just so some can have the illusion that they'll be getting through that hellhole "Detoilet" any faster?

Given your history of posts about fiscal conservative spending, I'm surprised at your stance on this project...

As stated many, many times, the freeway needs better on and off ramps, some curves addressed, and capacity fixes [[lane per side) so it's up to modern standards. The freeway is not "fairly efficient", it's a mess.

I take Gratiot north sometimes when 94 bogs down in the morning or becomes a sheet of ice. Doubles my commute time. No thanks.

[ghettopalmetto]

As stated many, many times, the freeway needs better on and off ramps, some curves addressed, and capacity fixes [[lane per side) so it's up to modern standards. The freeway is not "fairly efficient", it's a mess.

I take Gratiot north sometimes when 94 bogs down in the morning or becomes a sheet of ice. Doubles my commute time. No thanks.

This from a guy who regularly rails against any form of government spending.

DDOT and SMART are far from "modern standards" or "fairly efficient". It's fair to characterize both as "a mess". Yet you regularly rail against transit, even though the current inadequate system doubles the commute times of tens of thousands of people on a daily basis. So *you* get the $2.7 billion project just because you don't like the speed limit on a particular stretch of road, but transit spending is socialism? Why the disconnect?

You're not the only one, GPWrangler. MDOT has oft-stated that they're not engaged in social engineering. But to me, seizing and destroying property, eliminating bridges, and widening a chasm between Midtown and Downtown is the exact definition of "social engineering". Given the amount of proposed spending, it's clear that cars on the freeway matter to MDOT.

I'm just curious why this project is so suddenly necessary when 1) the population of the region hasn't increased in 40 years and 2) vehicle-miles driven has decreased 14 percent. There doesn't seem to be any kind of justification for either the I-94 or I-75 projects, no matter how badly the proponents stretch to rationalize it. Yet somehow, these roads all-of-a-sudden don't work, and *need* billions of dollars in "fixes".

I'm sorry that your Dale Earnhardt fantasy costs so much money, because that kind of coin could really be put to good use if MDOT had any kind of knowledge beyond Adding Lanes. But hey, whatever it takes to keep the Highway Industrial Complex and Suburban Tract Home Builders happy, right?

[motz]

I'm sorry that your Dale Earnhardt fantasy costs so much money, because that kind of coin could really be put to good use if MDOT had any kind of knowledge beyond Adding Lanes. But hey, whatever it takes to keep the Highway Industrial Complex and Suburban Tract Home Builders happy, right?

This made me laugh, +1 for you. You've summed up my arguments pretty well, and as someone who lives directly by 94, I would love to see improvements but think expansion is utterly unnecessary.

[313WX]

This made me laugh, +1 for you. You've summed up my arguments pretty well, and as someone who lives directly by 94, I would love to see improvements but think expansion is utterly unnecessary.

Agreed with the bolded.

[ghettopalmetto]

This made me laugh, +1 for you. You've summed up my arguments pretty well, and as someone who lives directly by 94, I would love to see improvements but think expansion is utterly unnecessary.

Be careful there! "Improvements" are the same as Widenings, in MDOT-speak.

Resurface the roadway. Fix the bridges. But expansion of the road network is wholly unnecessary. The assumptions on which the expansion project is based are flat-out wrong, and need to be revisited.

[motz]

Be careful there! "Improvements" are the same as Widenings, in MDOT-speak.

Resurface the roadway. Fix the bridges. But expansion of the road network is wholly unnecessary. The assumptions on which the expansion project is based are flat-out wrong, and need to be revisited.

Very very true. A good example would be the Trumbull to I-94W on ramp... All they need to really do is resurface the ramp, extend the merging lane and voila, we're golden. Same goes for a lot of the supposed "boondoggles" that Dale Earnhardt up there keeps mentioning.