Michigan Notes

[hockeyjohn]

MDOT's 2019 Truck Operator Map indicates changes in Kalamazoo as the city will take control of several trunkline routes within the city limits:



•   The non-freeway portion of Business US-131 is turned back leaving it a spur from the north only
•   Unsigned M-331 is completely turned back
•   M-43 joins US-131 and M-89 and by-passes the city to the north - a new M-343 is designated along Gull Rd from the M-43/M-89 east junction to the city limit while West Main Street is unsigned trunkline from US-131 to the city limit
•   Business I-94 is truncated at M-96 leaving it as a spur - West Stadium Drive from US-131 to the city limits will be unsigned trunkline as will a small stub on the east end from M-96 to the city limits

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/2017_Truck_Operator_Map_WEB_599666_7.pdf[/list]

[tradephoric]

As part of the M-5 modernization project, MDOT is planning on rebuilding the M-5 and 12 Mile interchange.  Known as the "folded interchange" this innovative design will increase the capacity of the interchange and reduce driver delays.  The underutilized median along 12 Mile will be used to include on-ramp lanes, with the opposing on-ramp lanes criss-crossing each other much like you see at a diverging diamond.  But the "folded interchange" has many advantages over the Diverging Diamond including not having to divert through lanes of traffic along the arterial that don't plan on entering the freeway.  This is why MDOT has decided to build the folded interchange at this location.  Quite simply, it's a superior interchange design compared to the Diverging Diamond.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vimICuJlQhI


(existing underpass that will fit the additional on-ramp lanes)

[wanderer2575]

As part of the M-5 modernization project, MDOT is planning on rebuilding the M-5 and 12 Mile interchange.  Known as the "folded interchange" this innovative design will increase the capacity of the interchange and reduce driver delays.  The underutilized median along 12 Mile will be used to include on-ramp lanes, with the opposing on-ramp lanes criss-crossing each other much like you see at a diverging diamond.  But the "folded interchange" has many advantages over the Diverging Diamond including not having to divert through lanes of traffic along the arterial that don't plan on entering the freeway.  This is why MDOT has decided to build the folded interchange at this location.  Quite simply, it's a superior interchange design compared to the Diverging Diamond.

What is your source?  The M-5 project involves pavement repair and resurfacing, work on the Grand River Avenue and Drake Road bridges, and sign replacement.  None of the MDOT information releases says anything about redesign/reconstruction of this interchange.  The plans for replacement signs correspond to the existing interchange, and in fact the new BGS for the loop ramp from westbound 12 Mile Road to southbound M-5 (which would be eliminated in your folded diamond) just went up in the past week.  As for capacity improvement, this interchange is hardly in need of it.

This video you linked says "M 5 interchange," but it's a completely different M 5.

[ftballfan]

MDOT's 2019 Truck Operator Map indicates changes in Kalamazoo as the city will take control of several trunkline routes within the city limits:



•   The non-freeway portion of Business US-131 is turned back leaving it a spur from the north only
•   Unsigned M-331 is completely turned back
•   M-43 joins US-131 and M-89 and by-passes the city to the north - a new M-343 is designated along Gull Rd from the M-43/M-89 east junction to the city limit while West Main Street is unsigned trunkline from US-131 to the city limit
•   Business I-94 is truncated at M-96 leaving it as a spur - West Stadium Drive from US-131 to the city limits will be unsigned trunkline as will a small stub on the east end from M-96 to the city limits

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/2017_Truck_Operator_Map_WEB_599666_7.pdf[/list]

The west segment of M-43 between US-31 and US-131 should have a completely separate number IMHO

[bulldog1979]

MDOT's 2019 Truck Operator Map indicates changes in Kalamazoo as the city will take control of several trunkline routes within the city limits:



•   The non-freeway portion of Business US-131 is turned back leaving it a spur from the north only
•   Unsigned M-331 is completely turned back
•   M-43 joins US-131 and M-89 and by-passes the city to the north - a new M-343 is designated along Gull Rd from the M-43/M-89 east junction to the city limit while West Main Street is unsigned trunkline from US-131 to the city limit
•   Business I-94 is truncated at M-96 leaving it as a spur - West Stadium Drive from US-131 to the city limits will be unsigned trunkline as will a small stub on the east end from M-96 to the city limits

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/2017_Truck_Operator_Map_WEB_599666_7.pdf[/list]

The west segment of M-43 between US-31 and US-131 should have a completely separate number IMHO

Agreed. I'd have renumbered that section as a new M-41 from South Haven to the west side of Kalamazoo and then left the remainder of M-43 from Kalamazoo through the Lansing area alone.

[The Ghostbuster]

I doubt there will ever be an M-41 unless US 41 is decomissioned in Michigan. Also, wouldn't such suggestions be better suited for Fictional Highways?

[Flint1979]

I doubt there will ever be an M-41 unless US 41 is decomissioned in Michigan. Also, wouldn't such suggestions be better suited for Fictional Highways?

US-41 is in the Upper Peninsula, the location where they are talking about is in the Lower Peninsula several hundred miles away from Michigan's part of US-41. Michigan doesn't limit the use of one number to each set of highways. Every Interstate in Michigan has a same numbered state highway somewhere else in the state.

[ftballfan]

MDOT's 2019 Truck Operator Map indicates changes in Kalamazoo as the city will take control of several trunkline routes within the city limits:



•   The non-freeway portion of Business US-131 is turned back leaving it a spur from the north only
•   Unsigned M-331 is completely turned back
•   M-43 joins US-131 and M-89 and by-passes the city to the north - a new M-343 is designated along Gull Rd from the M-43/M-89 east junction to the city limit while West Main Street is unsigned trunkline from US-131 to the city limit
•   Business I-94 is truncated at M-96 leaving it as a spur - West Stadium Drive from US-131 to the city limits will be unsigned trunkline as will a small stub on the east end from M-96 to the city limits

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/2017_Truck_Operator_Map_WEB_599666_7.pdf[/list]

The west segment of M-43 between US-31 and US-131 should have a completely separate number IMHO

Agreed. I'd have renumbered that section as a new M-41 from South Haven to the west side of Kalamazoo and then left the remainder of M-43 from Kalamazoo through the Lansing area alone.

Kalamazoo is trying its hardest to be in Indiana based on them receiving all (non-freeway) state highway mileage within its city limits. Even before this, I still felt M-43 should be two (or even three) separate routes. Michigan has plenty of #'s below 100 available (16, 56, 70, 74, 76, 87, 92, 98) without having to duplicate existing US Highway numbers (12, 23, 31, 41).

[cwf1701]

I doubt there will ever be an M-41 unless US 41 is decomissioned in Michigan. Also, wouldn't such suggestions be better suited for Fictional Highways?

US-41 is in the Upper Peninsula, the location where they are talking about is in the Lower Peninsula several hundred miles away from Michigan's part of US-41. Michigan doesn't limit the use of one number to each set of highways. Every Interstate in Michigan has a same numbered state highway somewhere else in the state.

And in some cases, the US highways have a state number as well (Old M-2 (some AAA maps had a M-2 on what would become I-96 in the 70s), M-8, M-10, M-24, M-25 (Old US-25), M-27 (Old US-27), M-112 (Old US-112), Old M-131)

[Flint1979]

I doubt there will ever be an M-41 unless US 41 is decomissioned in Michigan. Also, wouldn't such suggestions be better suited for Fictional Highways?

US-41 is in the Upper Peninsula, the location where they are talking about is in the Lower Peninsula several hundred miles away from Michigan's part of US-41. Michigan doesn't limit the use of one number to each set of highways. Every Interstate in Michigan has a same numbered state highway somewhere else in the state.

And in some cases, the US highways have a state number as well (Old M-2 (some AAA maps had a M-2 on what would become I-96 in the 70s), M-8, M-10, M-24, M-25 (Old US-25), M-27 (Old US-27), M-112 (Old US-112), Old M-131)

That's true too. My whole point is that if they renumbered a highway to M-41 in the Kalamazoo area no one is going to confuse it with US-41 in the U.P.

[Flint1979]

The Maple Road overpass on I-75 between I-69 and the US-23 split was hit by a truck yesterday again. That bridge has been struck a few times over the past few years. The height of the bridge is 14 feet, 2 inches so I don't think the height should really be an issue here. I-75 was closed yesterday after the incident and traffic was backed up onto I-69 because of it and at the same time another accident involving two motorcycles happened on WB I-69 at I-75 causing another backup in the same area.

There was a piece of construction equipment on a truck or a trailer and they were over height. They hit the bridge and the cab of that construction equipment just actually came right off. The legal height is 13 feet, 6 inches. Anything over that you are required to have a special permit.

[Flint1979]

Btw, the Maple Road overpass will be getting replaced next year.

[wanderer2575]

MDOT's 2019 Truck Operator Map indicates changes in Kalamazoo as the city will take control of several trunkline routes within the city limits:



•   The non-freeway portion of Business US-131 is turned back leaving it a spur from the north only
•   Unsigned M-331 is completely turned back
•   M-43 joins US-131 and M-89 and by-passes the city to the north - a new M-343 is designated along Gull Rd from the M-43/M-89 east junction to the city limit while West Main Street is unsigned trunkline from US-131 to the city limit
•   Business I-94 is truncated at M-96 leaving it as a spur - West Stadium Drive from US-131 to the city limits will be unsigned trunkline as will a small stub on the east end from M-96 to the city limits

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/2017_Truck_Operator_Map_WEB_599666_7.pdf[/list]

News article at https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2019/01/agreement-would-turn-over-mdot-streets-to-city-of-kalamazoo.html.

And of course we lose the wrong-way concurrency of M-43 and M-89 on the north side of Richland, but gain a same-way concurrency northwest of there.

When the signs are taken down, we'll have three numbered spur routes to the Kalamazoo downtown area limit:  Business US-131 from the north, Business I-94 from the east, and new M-343 from the northeast.  I like that MDOT will make Main Street and Stadium Drive unnumbered trunklines instead of going Indiana-like and creating discontinuous routes on either side of the city.  But seems to me that making spurs from former through routes offers nothing but confusion for motorists (and the cynic in me wonders if the new termini will even be signposted or trailblazed, or will motorists just be dumped into downtown and left to find their own way) -- I think MDOT should have made these unnumbered routes as well, completely eliminating the posted business routes.

The west segment of M-43 between US-31 and US-131 should have a completely separate number IMHO

I agree, but it is what it is.  Changing the existing number of the west segment just to satisfy the technicalities of a corridor definition would confuse the bejeebers out of the general motoring public, and I think it's a good move that MDOT isn't doing it.  And while the new routing of M-43 is hardly direct (eastbound traffic will go north concurrent with US-131, southeast concurrent with M-89, then north again on existing M-43; vice versa for westbound), it's again MDOT doing what it can to keep the route contiguous and not pulling an Indiana-type move in having discontinuous segments.

[wanderer2575]

MDOT confirmed to me in an e-mail today that it is is no longer producing the annual Paving The Way state trunkline construction map.  Says the e-mail, "The most accessible and reliable information to help determine what construction projects you may encounter on state trunklines is on MI Drive (www.michigan.gov/drive).  If you activate the construction layer (the cone icon), you can click on any project on the map for details about individual projects."

The map has been available only as a PDF download the past few years (not printed and available at rest areas and welcome centers) for the past few years, but it's no longer being compiled at all.

[Great Lakes Roads]

I hope that this is NOT what MDOT has decided for an interchange design for the future interchange with I-94 and U.S. 31 where the current I-94 BL interchange (exit 33) is in St. Joseph.

Article:
https://www.heraldpalladium.com/news/local/open-house-on-u-s-extension-scheduled/article_9d7deb49-bb80-5836-ab20-6fde4495ccb0.html

EDIT: Fixed the image link.

[wanderer2575]

^^  If this is the design that will be constructed, it actually is an improvement    over the Selected Alternative specified in the FHWA's Record of Decision issued in August 2004.  No changes to the US-31 movements, and it's a damn shame that MDOT won't spend (or can't scrape up) the money to build a flyover ramp for southbound US-31 traffic, but the original Selected Alternative was for a full eight-ramp cloverleaf.  That would have resulted in nasty and dangerous weave/merge setups, especially in the southern half of the interchange (between the merge from southbound US-31 and exit from eastbound BL I-94 to eastbound I-94).

[The Ghostbuster]

US 31 should have been completed years ago. Also, US 31's interchange with Interstate 94 (and Business 94) should be a full freeway-to-freeway interchange.

[Flint1979]

I-94 is falling apart and MDOT has done absolutely nothing about it. The proposal for I-94 is almost 20 years old. The interchange at the Lodge Freeway is as obsolete as an eight track record. It's just ridiculous that MDOT balks on everything they do and we're forced to drive on these garbage roads paying the highest car insurance rates in the country.

[JREwing78]

I hope that this is NOT what MDOT has decided for an interchange design for the future interchange with I-94 and U.S. 31 where the current I-94 BL interchange (exit 33) is in St. Joseph.

It looks like the through movements of US-31 are free-flowing, albeit slowed considerably on the SBD side by the 270 degree curve. The signals are all for the I-94 BL movements, so that's fine. It's certainly a big improvement over the current arrangement, and there's not going to be enough traffic that this will become a safety concern.

[codeGR]

MDOT is replacing most of the signage along M-6 this year. At this moment, many of the new metal sign posts are installed, though I haven't seen any new wooden posts installed yet, at least where I looked.

[Flint1979]

MDOT just got done with M-58 in Saginaw. Which included a new turn signal at Center Road and is now completely black topped from the Saginaw city limits to M-47.

[wanderer2575]

Sign replacement along the M-5 freeway in Farmington and Farmington Hills is also being done (along with resurfacing and work on the Grand River Avenue and Drake Road bridges).  The sign plans are surprisingly sloppy:  A few fairly new signs that are indicated to be replaced again, several older signs missed that are not being replaced, questionable decisions on placement and control city changes, and at least one error (about which I emailed MDOT and we will see if it gets fixed before the sign is fabricated and installed).

[ftballfan]

MDOT is replacing most of the signage along M-6 this year. At this moment, many of the new metal sign posts are installed, though I haven't seen any new wooden posts installed yet, at least where I looked.

M-6 is one of the few stretches of freeway in MI that never had Clearview put on it (it opened just before MI switched to Clearview)

[codeGR]

I saw one of the new signs being installed today on M6 and, thankfully, it is Clearview.

[tradephoric]

I hope that this is NOT what MDOT has decided for an interchange design for the future interchange with I-94 and U.S. 31 where the current I-94 BL interchange (exit 33) is in St. Joseph.

Article:
https://www.heraldpalladium.com/news/local/open-house-on-u-s-extension-scheduled/article_9d7deb49-bb80-5836-ab20-6fde4495ccb0.html

EDIT: Fixed the image link.

BTW what is with the interchange on US-31 to the west of this planned interchange on Crystal Avenue?  From the air it looks like a standard diamond interchange, but it's not grade separated.  I guess this is really a jughandle?

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1190914,-86.4176723,390m/data=!3m1!1e3