Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Terry Shea]

30 years of re-planning and this was the best design they could come up with?  Oh, that's right, it's MDOT!

[sprjus4]

30 years of re-planning and this was the best design they could come up with?  Oh, that's right, it's MDOT!

In all honesty, I don’t really see much issues with it. The major movements are free-flowing and limited access, and the highway itself is a 70 mph controlled access freeway facility.

[Terry Shea]

30 years of re-planning and this was the best design they could come up with?  Oh, that's right, it's MDOT!

In all honesty, I don’t really see much issues with it. The major movements are free-flowing and limited access, and the highway itself is a 70 mph controlled access freeway facility.

Yeah, and one could substitute "bowel movements are free flowing" for "major movements are free flowing." and it wouldn't be any different.  Either way it's a an ugly, messy pain in the a$$.

[sprjus4]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

[NWI_Irish96]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

[Flint1979]

Well if US-31 ever does become an Interstate which I doubt it will they will have to reconstruct the ramps again. I don't see US-31 ever becoming an Interstate though.

[NWI_Irish96]

Well if US-31 ever does become an Interstate which I doubt it will they will have to reconstruct the ramps again. I don't see US-31 ever becoming an Interstate though.

It's going to be quite a while, anywhere from 20-50 years, but I think 31 will eventually be freeway from Indy all the way to St. Joseph. Why would Indiana and Michigan not want an interstate designation at that point?

I imagine that South Bend in particular would see the benefits of getting it designated as an interstate right now.

[sprjus4]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

[skluth]

The interchange is fine. If you don't like it, don't use it. I'm sure locals and US 31 travelers will be happy with the improvements and won't miss the omission of a NB US 31 to WB I-94 ramp as they will probably be exiting at Napier Avenue or an earlier exit so they don't have to backtrack on I-94 WB which goes SSW from the interchange.

[Terry Shea]

Well if US-31 ever does become an Interstate which I doubt it will they will have to reconstruct the ramps again. I don't see US-31 ever becoming an Interstate though.

I don't see where that would be a problem.  In fact, MDOT seems to delight in doing things like re-constructing the same exit ramps several times.  I know in the last 15-20 years or so, the Cascade Road ramps over I-96 have been reconstructed at least 2-3 times.

[Terry Shea]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

[zzcarp]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

[Terry Shea]

http://www.michiganhighways.org/photos/US-31_LastSegment1.jpg
Here's another big safety concern: There appears to be no acceleration lane from EB I-94 exit ramp merging with SB US-31.  What's up with that?

[Terry Shea]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

Once again, an extremely poor, stupid and dangerous design!  "Oh, we can waste a lot of money changing it after several people get killed in accidents" just doesn't cut it!

[zzcarp]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

Once again, an extremely poor, stupid and dangerous design!  "Oh, we can waste a lot of money changing it after several people get killed in accidents" just doesn't cut it!

How do you think this works? Traffic engineers analyze the movements and traffic to see what works and if a signal is warranted. If it's not warranted, there's no light. Now if, as you assert, this will be dangerous or have people killed in accidents, and enforcement and other mitigations don't work, you get a crash warrant for a traffic light.

[sprjus4]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

Once again, an extremely poor, stupid and dangerous design!  "Oh, we can waste a lot of money changing it after several people get killed in accidents" just doesn't cut it!

So, they put in a left turn lane for a minor movement that crosses a singular carriageway that is a single lane wide of traffic, and it’s “dangerous”?

[skluth]

http://www.michiganhighways.org/photos/US-31_LastSegment1.jpg
Here's another big safety concern: There appears to be no acceleration lane from EB I-94 exit ramp merging with SB US-31.  What's up with that?

It's merging with the traffic exiting WB I-94 which is coming out of a cloverleaf ramp. That traffic won't be very fast. I doubt the merge there will be difficult. I prefer longer merge distances but I see similar all over California.

[Terry Shea]

http://www.michiganhighways.org/photos/US-31_LastSegment1.jpg
Here's another big safety concern: There appears to be no acceleration lane from EB I-94 exit ramp merging with SB US-31.  What's up with that?

It's merging with the traffic exiting WB I-94 which is coming out of a cloverleaf ramp. That traffic won't be very fast. I doubt the merge there will be difficult. I prefer longer merge distances but I see similar all over California.

No offense, but who wants to be like California?

[Terry Shea]

http://www.michiganhighways.org/photos/US-31_LastSegment1.jpg
Here's another big safety concern: There appears to be no acceleration lane from EB I-94 exit ramp merging with SB US-31.  What's up with that?

It's merging with the traffic exiting WB I-94 which is coming out of a cloverleaf ramp. That traffic won't be very fast. I doubt the merge there will be difficult. I prefer longer merge distances but I see similar all over California.

It's merging with accelerating traffic trying to get up to freeway speed.  There is absolutely no excuse for this!

[Terry Shea]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

Once again, an extremely poor, stupid and dangerous design!  "Oh, we can waste a lot of money changing it after several people get killed in accidents" just doesn't cut it!

How do you think this works? Traffic engineers analyze the movements and traffic to see what works and if a signal is warranted. If it's not warranted, there's no light. Now if, as you assert, this will be dangerous or have people killed in accidents, and enforcement and other mitigations don't work, you get a crash warrant for a traffic light.

What could be stupider or more dangerous than an at grade intersection in the middle of an interchange?  Adding a traffic light at an at grade intersection in the middle of an interchange!

[skluth]

http://www.michiganhighways.org/photos/US-31_LastSegment1.jpg
Here's another big safety concern: There appears to be no acceleration lane from EB I-94 exit ramp merging with SB US-31.  What's up with that?

It's merging with the traffic exiting WB I-94 which is coming out of a cloverleaf ramp. That traffic won't be very fast. I doubt the merge there will be difficult. I prefer longer merge distances but I see similar all over California.

It's merging with accelerating traffic trying to get up to freeway speed.  There is absolutely no excuse for this!

The merging traffic there will probably be going faster than the traffic accelerating out of a cloverleaf. The camera angle isn't very helpful but I think it's longer than it looks. The stripes between the lanes in that picture are almost squares; a rough estimation with lines of 10 feet and spacing between lines of 35 feet (based on GE measurements of US 31 and I-94) means the ramp is probably has at least 450 feet for acceleration. That's not much it should be enough at those speeds barring wannabe NASCAR drivers.

[sprjus4]

^ If we wanna talk about short to non-existent acceleration lanes, look no further than Texas.

[sprjus4]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

Once again, an extremely poor, stupid and dangerous design!  "Oh, we can waste a lot of money changing it after several people get killed in accidents" just doesn't cut it!

How do you think this works? Traffic engineers analyze the movements and traffic to see what works and if a signal is warranted. If it's not warranted, there's no light. Now if, as you assert, this will be dangerous or have people killed in accidents, and enforcement and other mitigations don't work, you get a crash warrant for a traffic light.

What could be stupider or more dangerous than an at grade intersection in the middle of an interchange?  Adding a traffic light at an at grade intersection in the middle of an interchange!

So no signals or at-grades should exist at an interchange? So every single interchange in the country should be a cloverleaf or flyover? Even at a farm road?

[Terry Shea]

I don’t understand… northbound is free-flowing at 50-55 mph, and southbound is a 30-35 mph loop ramp which is common on freeways…

If you're going NB on 31 and want to go WB on 94, you cross an at-grade intersection where traffic from BL 94 turns left onto EB 94. I thought that would disqualify 31 from later being made an interstate but others have pointed out similar situations that already exist.

US-31 is not an interstate though… the current bypass constructed is adequate for traffic volumes and provides free-flow on the major movements. The amount of traffic going from US-31 north to I-94 west is likely minimal enough having the at-grade crossing is not an issue.

From a traffic standpoint, the interchange seems fine.

From a safety standpoint, it's a big issue!  Traffic will likely still be in excess of 70 MPH no matter what the posted speed limit is through the at grade intersection.  Like I said earlier, MDOT had about 30 years to design this and came up with something dangerous and stupid!

It seems like there will be pretty good sight distance for anyone on I-94B eastbound making that left turn. And as others have said, the ramp from US 31 NB to the I-94B WB movement likely won't be used much. So I disagree with your assertion that it's dangerous or stupid. However, if it does become dangerous, it could easily have a two-phase signal installed for EB left turns along with additional lower speed limit signs.

Once again, an extremely poor, stupid and dangerous design!  "Oh, we can waste a lot of money changing it after several people get killed in accidents" just doesn't cut it!

How do you think this works? Traffic engineers analyze the movements and traffic to see what works and if a signal is warranted. If it's not warranted, there's no light. Now if, as you assert, this will be dangerous or have people killed in accidents, and enforcement and other mitigations don't work, you get a crash warrant for a traffic light.

What could be stupider or more dangerous than an at grade intersection in the middle of an interchange?  Adding a traffic light at an at grade intersection in the middle of an interchange!

So no signals or at-grades should exist at an interchange? So every single interchange in the country should be a cloverleaf or flyover? Even at a farm road?

This is freeway to freeway.  Or at least it was supposed to be.

[sprjus4]

^ The freeway ends at I-94. It is an arterial surface / business route to the west.

The freeway-to-freeway portion is all free-flowing / limited-access except the US-31 north to I-94 west movement which is low volume to non-existent. They could have omitted that movement altogether and likely have little impact on traffic.

I’m still not seeing any problems with the interchange functionally.