Print

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

[Flint1979]

A self proclaimed expert just because another user said so. Woohoo.

As opposed to you, who is a self-proclaimed expert just because.

Yet I've never claimed to be an expert at anything.

[Flint1979]

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?

I don't see why anyone would take the EB I-94 to SB US-31 ramp in the first place. All they would be doing is back tracking because getting off at Napier Avenue and using that to get to SB US-31 would be quicker. The stupid thing should have been linked right into the south end of I-196, fuck them butterflies.

While I agree that linking up directly at I-196 would have been better, it would still be the same situation for EB I-94 traffic using Napier Ave to access SB US-31.  But the fact is that people are going to use the freeway-to-freeway connection even if Napier Avenue is shorter and faster.   In fact, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if 10 or so years down the road, MDOT decides to do a study for a connector route somewhere south (perhaps well south) of Napier Ave for EB I-94 traffic to cut over on.  Of course, they'll never find the funding for it and may find some rare grasshoppers in the area or something, but at least they'll have wasted money on a study.

I'm not sure where they would do that at. It might be a little out of the way but taking M-139 would probably solve that. The problem is that I-94 doesn't really go east and west in that area and both highways pretty much go the same direction except I-94 runs along the lakeshore in a NE-SW direction and US-31 goes more directly north and south.

[SEWIGuy]

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?

I don't see why anyone would take the EB I-94 to SB US-31 ramp in the first place. All they would be doing is back tracking because getting off at Napier Avenue and using that to get to SB US-31 would be quicker. The stupid thing should have been linked right into the south end of I-196, fuck them butterflies.

How many people are actually going to go EB I-94 to SB US-31?  It seems to me that any local traffic is just going to use local roads to bypass I-94 and cut over to US-31, and non-local traffic isn't going to take I-94 that far north (east) anyway. 

Playing around on Google Maps pretty much verifies that any traffic that is going toward South Bend isn't using Napier (unless it is local) or the ramp from I-94 to US-31.

[Flint1979]

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?

I don't see why anyone would take the EB I-94 to SB US-31 ramp in the first place. All they would be doing is back tracking because getting off at Napier Avenue and using that to get to SB US-31 would be quicker. The stupid thing should have been linked right into the south end of I-196, fuck them butterflies.

How many people are actually going to go EB I-94 to SB US-31?  It seems to me that any local traffic is just going to use local roads to bypass I-94 and cut over to US-31, and non-local traffic isn't going to take I-94 that far north (east) anyway. 

Playing around on Google Maps pretty much verifies that any traffic that is going toward South Bend isn't using Napier (unless it is local) or the ramp from I-94 to US-31.

Using US-12 or M-139 would accomplish that.

[SEWIGuy]

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?

I don't see why anyone would take the EB I-94 to SB US-31 ramp in the first place. All they would be doing is back tracking because getting off at Napier Avenue and using that to get to SB US-31 would be quicker. The stupid thing should have been linked right into the south end of I-196, fuck them butterflies.

How many people are actually going to go EB I-94 to SB US-31?  It seems to me that any local traffic is just going to use local roads to bypass I-94 and cut over to US-31, and non-local traffic isn't going to take I-94 that far north (east) anyway. 

Playing around on Google Maps pretty much verifies that any traffic that is going toward South Bend isn't using Napier (unless it is local) or the ramp from I-94 to US-31.

Using US-12 or M-139 would accomplish that.

Right. So your statement "because getting off at Napier Avenue and using that to get to SB US-31 would be quicker" isn't all that relevant because I doubt many people heading east on I-94 are then going south on US-31. Sure, SOME people might, and they might use Napier to do so. But it doesn't seem like a lot.

[skluth]

I'll defer to the highway engineers who designed the interchange and believe it's adequate unless the horrific accidents predicted by someone here actually happen. I think an accident on the EB I-94 to SB US 31 ramp is more likely to be caused by some idiot trying to take the ramp's curve to fast than any merge. The interchange's location in lake effect snow land means all those ramps will be experiencing a lot of slick and icy conditions. My opinion and others here means squat since (I believe) only one person here has even seen the interchange and has deemed it sufficient but flawed. Others have only seen incomplete photos, some taken at angles that don't show the interchange properly. Could it be better? Yes. Is it good enough that most drivers who drove that segment pre-construction will appreciate the improvements. Yes.

[bessertc]

How many people are actually going to go EB I-94 to SB US-31?  It seems to me that any local traffic is just going to use local roads to bypass I-94 and cut over to US-31, and non-local traffic isn't going to take I-94 that far north (east) anyway. 

Playing around on Google Maps pretty much verifies that any traffic that is going toward South Bend isn't using Napier (unless it is local) or the ramp from I-94 to US-31.

Using US-12 or M-139 would accomplish that.

Right. So your statement "because getting off at Napier Avenue and using that to get to SB US-31 would be quicker" isn't all that relevant because I doubt many people heading east on I-94 are then going south on US-31. Sure, SOME people might, and they might use Napier to do so. But it doesn't seem like a lot.

Again, I think people are missing the whole trucking, overweight (with regard to local roads), oversize, and hazardous cargo angle here. There are a lot of these types of vehicles on the highways and if no options are given for these vehicles, they'd have to go dozens or hundreds of miles out of the way to get from A to B. Yes, the Average Joe/Jane in a Buick or Toyota won't use I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd, but plenty of trucks and larger vehicles will.

Plus, using the various online map services that include the new US-31 freeway, it's 2.6 miles out-of-the-way to stay on the freeway vs. using the "Napier Cutoff" route, but only one (1) minute longer. Imagine getting any of the lights along Napier Ave and, especially if you're in a big rig or similar vehicle, that immediately negates that one minute, so the time evens out. For automobile drivers who "sometimes don't adhere to the speed limit  ",  you may be able to even that out regardless.

And using US-12 or M-139 isn't also the best if you're coming from the Twin Cities (BJ/SJ) and heading toward Niles, South Bend, Indianapolis, etc. US-12 is out of the way and a lot of miles on two-lane highway when a freeway already exists between those points and M-139 is even worse—it's the reason the US-31 freeway was built to begin with: to get through trucks and cars OFF that highway that made it so dangerous to begin with.

[sprjus4]

And using US-12 or M-139 isn't also the best if you're coming from the Twin Cities (BJ/SJ) and heading toward Niles, South Bend, Indianapolis, etc. US-12 is out of the way and a lot of miles on two-lane highway when a freeway already exists between those points and M-139 is even worse—it's the reason the US-31 freeway was built to begin with: to get through trucks and cars OFF that highway that made it so dangerous to begin with.

M-139 is the route suggested via Google Maps, and the signage on US-31 even lists “Benton Harbor” as a control city for the northbound exit.

I don’t think US-12 was suggested for Benton Harbor / St. Joseph traffic, it was for traffic on I-94 near the Illinois border.

As far as Napier Ave… did they recently install new traffic signals on that route? Because looking at satellite imagery, there doesn’t appear to be any traffic signals between I-94 and US-31.

[Flint1979]

US-12 was mentioned as a route between US-31 and I-94. Not a route to or from Benton Harbor.

[bessertc]

And using US-12 or M-139 isn't also the best if you're coming from the Twin Cities (BJ/SJ) and heading toward Niles, South Bend, Indianapolis, etc. US-12 is out of the way and a lot of miles on two-lane highway when a freeway already exists between those points and M-139 is even worse—it's the reason the US-31 freeway was built to begin with: to get through trucks and cars OFF that highway that made it so dangerous to begin with.

M-139 is the route suggested via Google Maps, and the signage on US-31 even lists “Benton Harbor” as a control city for the northbound exit.

You're confused. We're talking about the amount of traffic using the ramp from I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd.

I don’t think US-12 was suggested for Benton Harbor / St. Joseph traffic, it was for traffic on I-94 near the Illinois border.

Again, someone suggested using US-12 as a connection between I-94 and US-31 sbd heading toward Niles, South Bend, etc. (in addition to Napier Ave or M-139) instead of using the I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd ramp. Essentially, the discussion is about Greater Benton Harbor/St Joseph area traffic heading toward Niles and beyond and how they would access US-31 sbd, not heading north. The original question was: "How many people are actually going to go EB I-94 to SB US-31?"

As far as Napier Ave… did they recently install new traffic signals on that route? Because looking at satellite imagery, there doesn’t appear to be any traffic signals between I-94 and US-31.

I was primarily thinking of the traffic signals at both ramp terminals at the I-94 interchange. I also mentally misplaced the traffic signal from the nbd US-31 off-ramp over at the sbd US-31 off-ramp instead. In any event, there are traffic signals, several road intersections, businesses, copious private driveways, a well-posted 50 mph speed limit for two-thirds of the distance between the two freeways, and a mixture of local, regional and this 'would-be' long-distance traffic that would make Napier less attractive as a cut-across, if one was even able to use that route (e.g. if you're a truck, oversize load, hazardous cargo, etc.).

Another point that needs to be raised and cannot be overlooked but is hard to quantify on engineering drawings is traffic heading from ebd BL I-94 onto the sbd US-31 freeway is accelerating to 70 mph through the interchange, if not already doing 70+ (trust me—in the several times I've been through it, that's what is actually happening, even though the 70 mph sign isn't until the Benton Center Rd overpass). Similarly, while the 55 mph speed sign is posted nbd on US-31 at the same overpass, traffic heading through the interchange onto BL I-94 will often be going in the 65–75–80 mph range. This is really not the kind of speeds you want people making left turns across. You have a mixture of people wanting to maintain a fast rate of travel with those needing to slow way down. This works fine at the Napier Ave overpass, since the posted limit is 40 west of the interchange and 50 to the east, you have a set of traffic signals, and there is a high volume of turning vehicles (ramp traffic, truck stops, fast food, county office facility, etc., etc.), whereas BL I-94 is limited-access east of the Crystal Ave roundabout and US-31 is a freeway from Plymouth, Indiana to the south, so speeds through the new interchange are clearly much higher, hence the safety factor decreases considerably.

[Flint1979]

I know my way around Michigan I've crisscrossed the state my entire life. Using M-139 which is a state highway to get from Benton Harbor to points south on US-31 is a good way and besides if you are starting in Benton Harbor or somewhere around there you are going to take local roads to get to US-31 anyway. If trucks are going from eastbound I-94 to southbound US-31 what are they doing that far north in the first place? Let's keep in mind that I-94 does not run in an east and west direction in this area as it bends to avoid Lake Michigan. Anyone that is already on I-94 eastbound that far north isn't going to be switching to southbound US-31. And keep in mind that M-139 is also part of Emergency I-94 in that area as well so I believe it can handle truck traffic. It's also on the National Highway System as well.

[JoePCool14]

I'll defer to the highway engineers who designed the interchange and believe it's adequate unless the horrific accidents predicted by someone here actually happen.

You know, the specific highway engineers designing something might be wrong. They're not infallible. Especially as a budding transportation engineer himself, I think I can at least question certain decisions. And even if I wasn't, I refuse to be one of those "trust the experts" people.

[skluth]

I'll defer to the highway engineers who designed the interchange and believe it's adequate unless the horrific accidents predicted by someone here actually happen.

You know, the specific highway engineers designing something might be wrong. They're not infallible. Especially as a budding transportation engineer himself, I think I can at least question certain decisions. And even if I wasn't, I refuse to be one of those "trust the experts" people.

I don't trust the experts on everything. But when something also looks fine in my opinion, I'll trust the experts more than a couple road geeks. This interchange is fine. It's flawed because the imaginary heavy interstate truck traffic between New Buffalo and Berrien Springs needs a slightly longer merge at the end of the EB I-94 to SB US 31 ramp.

[bessertc]

I'll defer to the highway engineers who designed the interchange and believe it's adequate unless the horrific accidents predicted by someone here actually happen.

You know, the specific highway engineers designing something might be wrong. They're not infallible. Especially as a budding transportation engineer himself, I think I can at least question certain decisions. And even if I wasn't, I refuse to be one of those "trust the experts" people.

I don't trust the experts on everything. But when something also looks fine in my opinion, I'll trust the experts more than a couple road geeks. This interchange is fine. It's flawed because the imaginary heavy interstate truck traffic between New Buffalo and Berrien Springs needs a slightly longer merge at the end of the EB I-94 to SB US 31 ramp.

You do realize the Twin Cities of Benton Harbor and St. Joseph do generate a certain amount of truck traffic in and of themselves, right? Any regional retail and commercial hub would, as well as one with some level of manufacturing. Trucks and other motor carriers need to come to BH/SJ and also need to bring goods from BH/SJ. Why do you think that ramp is only for traffic driving along I-94 ebd from Indiana and heading back toward Indiana? Did you ever think we also need to have infrastructure redundancy in addition to all the points that have been brought up to this point. The I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd ramp is NOT meant for traffic originating in New Buffalo or anywhere in that area and headed for Niles or South Bend—it is nothing short of ridiculous to state anything of the sort. Who said every ramp between freeways is reserved only for "interstate truck traffic"? That is patently ludicrous.

[bessertc]

I know my way around Michigan I've crisscrossed the state my entire life. Using M-139 which is a state highway to get from Benton Harbor to points south on US-31 is a good way and besides if you are starting in Benton Harbor or somewhere around there you are going to take local roads to get to US-31 anyway. If trucks are going from eastbound I-94 to southbound US-31 what are they doing that far north in the first place? Let's keep in mind that I-94 does not run in an east and west direction in this area as it bends to avoid Lake Michigan. Anyone that is already on I-94 eastbound that far north isn't going to be switching to southbound US-31. And keep in mind that M-139 is also part of Emergency I-94 in that area as well so I believe it can handle truck traffic. It's also on the National Highway System as well.

As I noted in another response, why is everyone assuming this I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd ramp is for interstate truck traffic coming from Chicago or Milwaukee and heading for South Bend? That is a ludicrous statement out of the box. What about truck traffic generated within the Greater Twin Cities (Benton Harbor/St. Joseph) area that gets onto I-94 at Napier, Pipestone, or even at M-139 or M-63? Sure, they could use M-139, but the freeway is often a much more desirable route for trucks and is often the only route for those needing permits which constrain them to only very few, specific routes (e.g. NOT Napier or M-139, for example) for a variety of reasons, including lane widths, clearance issues, etc.

[skluth]

I know my way around Michigan I've crisscrossed the state my entire life. Using M-139 which is a state highway to get from Benton Harbor to points south on US-31 is a good way and besides if you are starting in Benton Harbor or somewhere around there you are going to take local roads to get to US-31 anyway. If trucks are going from eastbound I-94 to southbound US-31 what are they doing that far north in the first place? Let's keep in mind that I-94 does not run in an east and west direction in this area as it bends to avoid Lake Michigan. Anyone that is already on I-94 eastbound that far north isn't going to be switching to southbound US-31. And keep in mind that M-139 is also part of Emergency I-94 in that area as well so I believe it can handle truck traffic. It's also on the National Highway System as well.

As I noted in another response, why is everyone assuming this I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd ramp is for interstate truck traffic coming from Chicago or Milwaukee and heading for South Bend? That is a ludicrous statement out of the box. What about truck traffic generated within the Greater Twin Cities (Benton Harbor/St. Joseph) area that gets onto I-94 at Napier, Pipestone, or even at M-139 or M-63? Sure, they could use M-139, but the freeway is often a much more desirable route for trucks and is often the only route for those needing permits which constrain them to only very few, specific routes (e.g. NOT Napier or M-139, for example) for a variety of reasons, including lane widths, clearance issues, etc.

I'm sure there will be a few local trucks. I'm just surprised that Michigan drivers are so unskilled that this much improved layout is still inadequate.

[Flint1979]

I know my way around Michigan I've crisscrossed the state my entire life. Using M-139 which is a state highway to get from Benton Harbor to points south on US-31 is a good way and besides if you are starting in Benton Harbor or somewhere around there you are going to take local roads to get to US-31 anyway. If trucks are going from eastbound I-94 to southbound US-31 what are they doing that far north in the first place? Let's keep in mind that I-94 does not run in an east and west direction in this area as it bends to avoid Lake Michigan. Anyone that is already on I-94 eastbound that far north isn't going to be switching to southbound US-31. And keep in mind that M-139 is also part of Emergency I-94 in that area as well so I believe it can handle truck traffic. It's also on the National Highway System as well.

As I noted in another response, why is everyone assuming this I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd ramp is for interstate truck traffic coming from Chicago or Milwaukee and heading for South Bend? That is a ludicrous statement out of the box. What about truck traffic generated within the Greater Twin Cities (Benton Harbor/St. Joseph) area that gets onto I-94 at Napier, Pipestone, or even at M-139 or M-63? Sure, they could use M-139, but the freeway is often a much more desirable route for trucks and is often the only route for those needing permits which constrain them to only very few, specific routes (e.g. NOT Napier or M-139, for example) for a variety of reasons, including lane widths, clearance issues, etc.

I'm sure there will be a few local trucks. I'm just surprised that Michigan drivers are so unskilled that this much improved layout is still inadequate.

You'd be surprised but I don't see the problem at all. I think people just need something to complain about.

[bessertc]

I know my way around Michigan I've crisscrossed the state my entire life. Using M-139 which is a state highway to get from Benton Harbor to points south on US-31 is a good way and besides if you are starting in Benton Harbor or somewhere around there you are going to take local roads to get to US-31 anyway. If trucks are going from eastbound I-94 to southbound US-31 what are they doing that far north in the first place? Let's keep in mind that I-94 does not run in an east and west direction in this area as it bends to avoid Lake Michigan. Anyone that is already on I-94 eastbound that far north isn't going to be switching to southbound US-31. And keep in mind that M-139 is also part of Emergency I-94 in that area as well so I believe it can handle truck traffic. It's also on the National Highway System as well.

As I noted in another response, why is everyone assuming this I-94 ebd to US-31 sbd ramp is for interstate truck traffic coming from Chicago or Milwaukee and heading for South Bend? That is a ludicrous statement out of the box. What about truck traffic generated within the Greater Twin Cities (Benton Harbor/St. Joseph) area that gets onto I-94 at Napier, Pipestone, or even at M-139 or M-63? Sure, they could use M-139, but the freeway is often a much more desirable route for trucks and is often the only route for those needing permits which constrain them to only very few, specific routes (e.g. NOT Napier or M-139, for example) for a variety of reasons, including lane widths, clearance issues, etc.

I'm sure there will be a few local trucks. I'm just surprised that Michigan drivers are so unskilled that this much improved layout is still inadequate.

Well, the fact that you've resorted to ad hominem attacks shows you aren't willing to have a substantive discussion. No one has said the new interchange in inadequate, rather it is substandard. Those are two different things (hence the different terms). If Michiganders and non-Michiganders navigated the Napier Ave route connecting I-94 and US-31 for nearly twenty years, no one is stating they cannot navigate this new interchange. I and others have offered numerous items for consideration in this discussion, yet you have either not responded, like in this instance, or you have issued attacks or made off-color statements. It's clear you have nothing to offer to this discussion and engaging with you is definitely a waste of time.

[JREwing78]

No one has said the new interchange in inadequate, rather it is substandard. Those are two different things (hence the different terms).

The argument about whether this interchange is even "substandard" is based on whether US-31 has to meet Interstate highway standards. There's nothing inherent to a US Highway designation that requires a specific roadway design. In particular, there's nothing forcing MDOT to build a US Highway to Interstate standards (unless there's specific Federal funding tied to the road design).

The fact that 99.9% of the US-31 roadway in Berrien County meets Interstate highway standards doesn't mean that all of it has to. As "substandard" elements go, this isn't even bad enough to surpass I-70 in Breezewood or I-180 in Cheyenne. It's one funky ramp that doesn't require a full stop, and that merges directly back into a freeway. Other than not having substantive markers to delineate the merge point with EBD Bus I-94 traffic, there's nothing wrong with the ramp from a safety standpoint.

"But but but... I-67!" Pffft! Not happening before 2050, if ever. Michigan doesn't care about pushing that designation. Indiana has 80+ miles of US-31 to convert to Interstate standards before a logical I-67 routing can happen, and despite considerable public support isn't going to happen quickly. So, at a minimum, Michigan saved itself 40 years of maintenance costs on a flyover ramp in a lake effect snowbelt. That's not sexy, but it'll fill more than a few potholes.

[Terry Shea]

I know my way around Michigan I've crisscrossed the state my entire life. Using M-139 which is a state highway to get from Benton Harbor to points south on US-31 is a good way and besides if you are starting in Benton Harbor or somewhere around there you are going to take local roads to get to US-31 anyway. If trucks are going from eastbound I-94 to southbound US-31 what are they doing that far north in the first place? Let's keep in mind that I-94 does not run in an east and west direction in this area as it bends to avoid Lake Michigan. Anyone that is already on I-94 eastbound that far north isn't going to be switching to southbound US-31. And keep in mind that M-139 is also part of Emergency I-94 in that area as well so I believe it can handle truck traffic. It's also on the National Highway System as well.

Wow!  I used to travel that stretch a bunch when M-139 was signed as US-31, and it was horrific!  There were all kinds of slow trucks and absolutely nowhere to pass.  There were a lot of dump trucks, cement trucks, etc.  I believe there may be a gravel pit or 2 or maybe a dozen along or very close to that route.  That roadway was basically a 2-lane I-94 with limited sight distances, slow speed limits, slower traffic, at grade intersections, driveways, etc.  I would never again travel that stretch of road unless I absolutely had to. And there will plenty of people that far north on EB I-94 opting to use the SB US-31 exit.  Some people just stick to freeways.  Some people, no wait, probably a majority of people aren't very bright and have no idea where they're going.  Some might want to exit earlier and miss their exit(s).  I'd dare say most people under 40 have no clue how to read a map, and if they rely on GPS they may end up in the middle of Lake Michigan!  And if there's construction in the area and MDOT does their usual fine job signing detour routes, like they did north of Lansing this past year, everyone may end up on the wrong route.

[Terry Shea]

No one has said the new interchange in inadequate, rather it is substandard. Those are two different things (hence the different terms).

The argument about whether this interchange is even "substandard" is based on whether US-31 has to meet Interstate highway standards. There's nothing inherent to a US Highway designation that requires a specific roadway design. In particular, there's nothing forcing MDOT to build a US Highway to Interstate standards (unless there's specific Federal funding tied to the road design).

The fact that 99.9% of the US-31 roadway in Berrien County meets Interstate highway standards doesn't mean that all of it has to. As "substandard" elements go, this isn't even bad enough to surpass I-70 in Breezewood or I-180 in Cheyenne. It's one funky ramp that doesn't require a full stop, and that merges directly back into a freeway. Other than not having substantive markers to delineate the merge point with EBD Bus I-94 traffic, there's nothing wrong with the ramp from a safety standpoint.

"But but but... I-67!" Pffft! Not happening before 2050, if ever. Michigan doesn't care about pushing that designation. Indiana has 80+ miles of US-31 to convert to Interstate standards before a logical I-67 routing can happen, and despite considerable public support isn't going to happen quickly. So, at a minimum, Michigan saved itself 40 years of maintenance costs on a flyover ramp in a lake effect snowbelt. That's not sexy, but it'll fill more than a few potholes.

From a safety standpoint there are numerous things wrong with this design.  I believe MDOT loves to deliberately build substandard interchanges, roadways etc., so they can go back in 10-20 years and fix what they did wrong the first time.  This keeps everyone gainfully employed.

[silverback1065]

No one has said the new interchange in inadequate, rather it is substandard. Those are two different things (hence the different terms).

The argument about whether this interchange is even "substandard" is based on whether US-31 has to meet Interstate highway standards. There's nothing inherent to a US Highway designation that requires a specific roadway design. In particular, there's nothing forcing MDOT to build a US Highway to Interstate standards (unless there's specific Federal funding tied to the road design).

The fact that 99.9% of the US-31 roadway in Berrien County meets Interstate highway standards doesn't mean that all of it has to. As "substandard" elements go, this isn't even bad enough to surpass I-70 in Breezewood or I-180 in Cheyenne. It's one funky ramp that doesn't require a full stop, and that merges directly back into a freeway. Other than not having substantive markers to delineate the merge point with EBD Bus I-94 traffic, there's nothing wrong with the ramp from a safety standpoint.

"But but but... I-67!" Pffft! Not happening before 2050, if ever. Michigan doesn't care about pushing that designation. Indiana has 80+ miles of US-31 to convert to Interstate standards before a logical I-67 routing can happen, and despite considerable public support isn't going to happen quickly. So, at a minimum, Michigan saved itself 40 years of maintenance costs on a flyover ramp in a lake effect snowbelt. That's not sexy, but it'll fill more than a few potholes.

From a safety standpoint there are numerous things wrong with this design.  I believe MDOT loves to deliberately build substandard interchanges, roadways etc., so they can go back in 10-20 years and fix what they did wrong the first time.  This keeps everyone gainfully employed.

 

[triplemultiplex]

Yeah, cuz otherwise there's such a shortage of sorely needed road repairs in Michigan.