Detroit Bridge Wars

[sparker]

Although I don't see this ending the "wars," it should be noted that Matty Maroun has died aged 93.

There's one individual who I will not miss.

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

[vdeane]

Contract has been finalized
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/gordie-howe-bridge-construction-1.4842489

The new bridge will provide a six lanes of interrupted arterial connection between the Hwy 401 and I-75 freeways, as well as multi-use trails. It will cost $5.7B for the design/build/finance/operate/maintain contract, of which $3.8B is estimated to cover construction. Construction is to being next month.

Arterial connection? this won't be limited access in canada?

It has a customs booth and toll plaza, plus the curves in the area don't meet 400-series highway standards.  Ontario is picky about what they call a freeway.

[silverback1065]

Contract has been finalized
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/gordie-howe-bridge-construction-1.4842489

The new bridge will provide a six lanes of interrupted arterial connection between the Hwy 401 and I-75 freeways, as well as multi-use trails. It will cost $5.7B for the design/build/finance/operate/maintain contract, of which $3.8B is estimated to cover construction. Construction is to being next month.

Arterial connection? this won't be limited access in canada?

It has a customs booth and toll plaza, plus the curves in the area don't meet 400-series highway standards.  Ontario is picky about what they call a freeway.

Interesting, so there won't be signals or driveway cuts so it's essentially limited access?

[vdeane]

Only that which would be expected for a border crossing.
https://bizxmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/WDBA-Financial-Close-News-Release-and-Backgrounders-EN-1-3.jpg

[Flint1979]

Although I don't see this ending the "wars," it should be noted that Matty Maroun has died aged 93.

There's one individual who I will not miss.

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

I'm hoping his family puts the bridge up for sale. I was thrilled when they sold Michigan Central Station. Never thought I'd see that building open again. I'm not sure though what his heirs are like. I was happy when he had to spend time in the Wayne County Jail several years ago.

I honestly don't think the Ambassador Bridge has much of a life span left.

[ftballfan]

Although I don't see this ending the "wars," it should be noted that Matty Maroun has died aged 93.

There's one individual who I will not miss.

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

I'm hoping his family puts the bridge up for sale. I was thrilled when they sold Michigan Central Station. Never thought I'd see that building open again. I'm not sure though what his heirs are like. I was happy when he had to spend time in the Wayne County Jail several years ago.

I honestly don't think the Ambassador Bridge has much of a life span left.

I'd expect the Ambassador to close for a massive overhaul once the new bridge opens

[rawmustard]

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

His son Matthew has managed the business since the elder Maroun retired, and I know he's pretty much toed the company line when speaking on issues.

[Flint1979]

Although I don't see this ending the "wars," it should be noted that Matty Maroun has died aged 93.

There's one individual who I will not miss.

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

I'm hoping his family puts the bridge up for sale. I was thrilled when they sold Michigan Central Station. Never thought I'd see that building open again. I'm not sure though what his heirs are like. I was happy when he had to spend time in the Wayne County Jail several years ago.

I honestly don't think the Ambassador Bridge has much of a life span left.

I'd expect the Ambassador to close for a massive overhaul once the new bridge opens

I agree with that if it is kept open.

[mgk920]

Although I don't see this ending the "wars," it should be noted that Matty Maroun has died aged 93.

There's one individual who I will not miss.

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

I'm hoping his family puts the bridge up for sale. I was thrilled when they sold Michigan Central Station. Never thought I'd see that building open again. I'm not sure though what his heirs are like. I was happy when he had to spend time in the Wayne County Jail several years ago.

I honestly don't think the Ambassador Bridge has much of a life span left.

I'd expect the Ambassador to close for a massive overhaul once the new bridge opens

I agree with that if it is kept open.

Heck, as part of its reconstruction, I'd love to see the Michigan Central Station also be restored for use as the city's main train station.  It is ideally located in relation to both the city and the railroad network for that purpose.



Mike

[Flint1979]

Although I don't see this ending the "wars," it should be noted that Matty Maroun has died aged 93.

There's one individual who I will not miss.

I wonder if his heirs have the same penchant for litigation as good old Matty.  If so, they'll continue to be the proverbial thorn in the side of local cross-border issues.  But OTOH, they might be of the "take the money and run" sort, in which case MI and ON DOT's might wish to simply take the Ambassador off their hands just to avoid future conflicting interest (but wait until the Gordie Howe bridge opens to get the best price!).

I'm hoping his family puts the bridge up for sale. I was thrilled when they sold Michigan Central Station. Never thought I'd see that building open again. I'm not sure though what his heirs are like. I was happy when he had to spend time in the Wayne County Jail several years ago.

I honestly don't think the Ambassador Bridge has much of a life span left.

I'd expect the Ambassador to close for a massive overhaul once the new bridge opens

I agree with that if it is kept open.

Heck, as part of its reconstruction, I'd love to see the Michigan Central Station also be restored for use as the city's main train station.  It is ideally located in relation to both the city and the railroad network for that purpose.



Mike

Ford owns the station now. I haven't been to Detroit in about a year and only live 100 miles from it. But anyway, I never thought the setup at MCS was relevant for Amtrak because the entrance to the railroad tunnel under the Detroit River isn't far from MCS so trains would have to back track but I think it would have been cool to have it used as a train station again.

I was thrilled when the Book Cadillac Hotel was renovated. I was actually one of the people that saved that building from being demolished.

[cbeach40]

Contract has been finalized
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/gordie-howe-bridge-construction-1.4842489

The new bridge will provide a six lanes of interrupted arterial connection between the Hwy 401 and I-75 freeways, as well as multi-use trails. It will cost $5.7B for the design/build/finance/operate/maintain contract, of which $3.8B is estimated to cover construction. Construction is to being next month.

Arterial connection? this won't be limited access in canada?

It has a customs booth and toll plaza, plus the curves in the area don't meet 400-series highway standards.  Ontario is picky about what they call a freeway.

It also has pedestrian and cycling facilities and no median. So, it doesn't meet any standard of freeway regardless of jurisdiction.

The approach roads are now all freeway, but the bridge and plazas themselves are not anywhere close to that.

[vdeane]

No median?  Why would they build a bridge of that caliber with freeways on both ends with no median?

Bike/ped facilities wouldn't automatically disqualify something, depending on the circumstances.  The new Tappan Zee has a multi-use path, for example, and many states allow bikes on the interstate (especially out west).

[GaryV]

Because if you have to stop at customs at either end of a bridge, there's hardly any reason to make it 70 mph capable.

[sparker]

No median?  Why would they build a bridge of that caliber with freeways on both ends with no median?

Bike/ped facilities wouldn't automatically disqualify something, depending on the circumstances.  The new Tappan Zee has a multi-use path, for example, and many states allow bikes on the interstate (especially out west).

Because if you have to stop at customs at either end of a bridge, there's hardly any reason to make it 70 mph capable.

Question -- will there be some type of directional separation -- K-rail, beam, or at least some raised curbing -- in place of a full median on the Howe bridge?  Ancillary question -- are there visual plans for the structure and approaches available? 

[Joe The Dragon]

No median?  Why would they build a bridge of that caliber with freeways on both ends with no median?

Bike/ped facilities wouldn't automatically disqualify something, depending on the circumstances.  The new Tappan Zee has a multi-use path, for example, and many states allow bikes on the interstate (especially out west).

Because if you have to stop at customs at either end of a bridge, there's hardly any reason to make it 70 mph capable.

Question -- will there be some type of directional separation -- K-rail, beam, or at least some raised curbing -- in place of a full median on the Howe bridge?  Ancillary question -- are there visual plans for the structure and approaches available?

planing some kind of lane control?

[Mdcastle]

Any news on if EZPass will be accepted?

[vdeane]

Because if you have to stop at customs at either end of a bridge, there's hardly any reason to make it 70 mph capable.

I didn't say it had to support 70 mph (there are LOTS of sections of interstate with speed limits below 55, especially in New York state, and most especially on bridges), but it should at least be some kind of freeway.  This would allow for ON 401 to end at the border as ON 402 does.  It's worth noting that where interstates go to the border, full interstate standards are maintained all the way to the border itself - not just to US customs on the other side.  If any kind of additional access beyond what would also be used at a toll booth (such as for export control), it's done as a ramp.  Duty free stores are done as either a service area or off the last exit before the border.

And what would they do if the US ever came to its senses on national security and we adopted a schengen-like system?  They'd have to tear down the bridge and replace it!

[ilpt4u]

Any news on if EZPass will be accepted?

Would be even more interesting if both EZ-Pass and 407-ETR Transponder/Accounts are supported. That is probably Fictional territory, tho

[vdeane]

Canada doesn't do interoperability.  In Montréal alone, someone would need two different transponders just to use A-25 and A-30.  So E-ZPass, maybe (the NY international bridges use it, aside from a couple up north with no electronic toll collection), but 407 interoperability, definitely not.

[catch22]

No median?  Why would they build a bridge of that caliber with freeways on both ends with no median?

Bike/ped facilities wouldn't automatically disqualify something, depending on the circumstances.  The new Tappan Zee has a multi-use path, for example, and many states allow bikes on the interstate (especially out west).

Because if you have to stop at customs at either end of a bridge, there's hardly any reason to make it 70 mph capable.

Question -- will there be some type of directional separation -- K-rail, beam, or at least some raised curbing -- in place of a full median on the Howe bridge?  Ancillary question -- are there visual plans for the structure and approaches available? 

Start here:

https://www.gordiehoweinternationalbridge.com/en

[vdeane]

That multi-use path wouldn't disqualify it as a freeway in my book.  No different than the Tappan Zee, or the Goethals.  The lack of anything for a median is a bigger deal.  On MTR non-divided four-lane freeways were called super-4s.  Would that make this a super-6?  Ideally it would have been built another lane winder so there could be real left shoulders and a jersey barrier.  Failing that, they could narrow the right shoulders to fit in a barrier.

It's frustrating how Canada always seems to cheap out when it come to freeway connectivity, especially with respect to the border.  There seems to be a difference of philosophy at play.  In the US, the interstates were planned as a system first, to connect all the significant parts of the country to each other.  In Canada, freeway planning is based on more of a corridor approach, with upgrades targeted to specific areas based on certain conditions.  This is especially true outside of Ontario and Québec - in fact, no provinces other than those two even pay lip service to the idea of having a freeway system rather than corridors that happen to be freeways (New Brunswick and Nova Scotia both have theoretical systems, but in practice most of their centerline mileage consists of two lane roads).  As someone who has a very strong preference for the system approach over the corridor one, it's disappointing.  It basically turns the border into a giant Breezewood.

[cbeach40]

No median?  Why would they build a bridge of that caliber with freeways on both ends with no median?

Oh, wow, I wonder... 

Bike/ped facilities wouldn't automatically disqualify something, depending on the circumstances.  The new Tappan Zee has a multi-use path, for example, and many states allow bikes on the interstate (especially out west).

Adjacent facilities not necessarily (though it's not a great idea). Transverse pedestrian facilities/activities - as will occur within the bridge complex - absolutely do disqualify it. At least based on MTO, AASHTO, and FHWA/HCM's definition of a freeway.

I didn't say it had to support 70 mph (there are LOTS of sections of interstate with speed limits below 55, especially in New York state, and most especially on bridges), but it should at least be some kind of freeway.

No it doesn't. That offers no advantage to throughput and, per below, does almost nothing for safety either.

This would allow for ON 401 to end at the border as ON 402 does.

Hwy 402 ends 1.8 km from the border. And the section of road west of Front Street (some MTO, some BWBA) is not built to anywhere near freeway standard.
As an aside, Hwy 401 will end approximately 2.4 km from the border.

It's worth noting that where interstates go to the border, full interstate standards are maintained all the way to the border itself - not just to US customs on the other side. If any kind of additional access beyond what would also be used at a toll booth (such as for export control), it's done as a ramp.  Duty free stores are done as either a service area or off the last exit before the border.

That's completely false. None of the Interstates at/approaching the border maintains full Interstate design standards. Road side safety, lane configuration, curb design, cross roads, ramp design, curves - not a single one of the Interstates that end at the Canadian border actually check all of the boxes that make full Interstate standard.

And what would they do if the US ever came to its senses on national security and we adopted a schengen-like system?  They'd have to tear down the bridge and replace it!

Dealing with the engineering side of things, it would be possible to retrofit some of the bridges like the Gordie Howe or Blue Water. Not that I would expect such a thing to ever be necessary or desirable as described below, but there's no reason it can't be done.

In terms of Schengen-type crossing, at this point there's far more resistance to that one the Canadian side than the American. Notwithstanding the litany of issues that already existed prior to this year, but the COVID-19 crisis has galvanized a lot of Canadians against the notion of ever allowing unfettered access. Heck, even fettered access is widely unpopular right now.

That multi-use path wouldn't disqualify it as a freeway in my book.  No different than the Tappan Zee, or the Goethals.  The lack of anything for a median is a bigger deal.  On MTR non-divided four-lane freeways were called super-4s.  Would that make this a super-6?  Ideally it would have been built another lane winder so there could be real left shoulders and a jersey barrier.  Failing that, they could narrow the right shoulders to fit in a barrier.

A single lane would not be sufficient size if the intention is to eventually build a barrier and upgrade it to freeway standard. And if there were to be one, it's not the 1980s anymore, low performance barriers like Jersey Barriers are not sufficient for separating opposing traffic. To build to freeway standard you'd need high performance barriers between opposing traffic and between traffic and the ped/bike facility.

In any event, doing so will a) massively increase the weight load on the structure b) complicate winter maintenance c) cost a lot to build d) provide minimal benefit to safety as it's operating at low speed e) cost a lot to maintain long term f) eliminate the ability to be flexible with lane configurations to adjust for traffic flow, road work, etc.

Adding an extra lane or provisions for a barrier would add tens, if not hundreds of millions to the cost of the project. All for something that by all accounts would be demonstrably worse.

In terms of categorization, I mean it's a unique facility in and of itself. Between the various design criteria of roadways (freeway/expressway/arterial/collector/local) it doesn't meet the standards for the first two, nor the patterns for the latter two. So you could go with arterial, but as I said, it's unique, I don't think any standard provincial, state, or national design criteria were created for the project. Heck, there was even talk at one point about explosive resistance designs on the approach roads, which very, very, much do not conform to any standards.

It's frustrating how Canada always seems to cheap out when it come to freeway connectivity, especially with respect to the border. There seems to be a difference of philosophy at play.

Yes, though as stated, only somewhat.

In the US, the interstates were planned as a system first, to connect all the significant parts of the country to each other.  In Canada, freeway planning is based on more of a corridor approach, with upgrades targeted to specific areas based on certain conditions.

Why would the US develop a whole freeway system instead of just doing it where development dictates? Well, one:
US pop. 1956 - 170 million
Canada pop. 1956 - 16 million
US pop. 2020 - 331 million
Canada pop. 2020 - 38 million

And two, the full name of the system as the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways.

The US has the population base to make very few sections actually unnecessary. And the Cold War strategic impetus to build them where there isn't.

Basically, take a look at non-interstate highway in the US, particularly in areas away from Interstates. You get mixes of two and multi-lane arterials, with expressway and freeway segments mixed in. Why? Because that's all that's needed in those areas.
Canada is like that. Handful of medium and large cities with freeway networks between them, and then a whole lot of nothing where you can go ages without seeing another soul. So only the problem areas get upgrades.

This is especially true outside of Ontario and Québec - in fact, no provinces other than those two even pay lip service to the idea of having a freeway system rather than corridors that happen to be freeways (New Brunswick and Nova Scotia both have theoretical systems, but in practice most of their centerline mileage consists of two lane roads).

That's because they're incredibly empty. A freeway system is not necessary.

As someone who has a very strong preference for the system approach over the corridor one, it's disappointing.  It basically turns the border into a giant Breezewood.

Breezewood is a different situation. Breezewood is where traffic is intentionally slowed down and an unsafe environment is created in spite of what proper traffic engineering judgement would dictate there. The borders are, by and large, exactly what they need to be.

Freeways are just another type of road, nothing magical about them. Sometimes they're needed, sometimes something lower order is sufficient or even desirable. A preference for a system, doing so flying in the face of logic, or engineering and planning competence, makes no sense.

[MisterSG1]

Canada is like that. Handful of medium and large cities with freeway networks between them, and then a whole lot of nothing where you can go ages without seeing another soul. So only the problem areas get upgrades.

Ooh, so if that's the case, and you clearly used the word Canada, would you care for the reasoning on why NB-2 has a freeway section between Grand Falls and Woodstock? Check the AADT of those sections, definitely no warrants for such a road there and yet it exists. Even better is them wanting to twin NB-11 into a full freeway.

Point I'm saying is by your logic, much of NB-2 shouldn't be a freeway.

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^
OK, look at the artists' rendition of the bridge details, including the overhead variable sign with green or red arrows -- the lanes are reversible!!!!, obviously to "tailor" the capacity for the dominant commute direction at a given time.  That would certainly account for the lack of median, since unless a movable rail or series of bollards (e.g. the Golden Gate Bridge) was deployed, the full carriageway would have to be open construction, with at least the two center lanes reversible for 4+2 peak-hour commute configuration.  Off-peak, it would likely default to a 3+3 situation.  But if the bridge speed limit stays below 50 mph, a median barrier may not be necessary. 

[vdeane]

Adjacent facilities not necessarily (though it's not a great idea). Transverse pedestrian facilities/activities - as will occur within the bridge complex - absolutely do disqualify it. At least based on MTO, AASHTO, and FHWA/HCM's definition of a freeway.

I'm not sure where that would be... the multi-use path designs don't show any crosswalks.  Are you referring to within the customs booths and toll barriers?  If so, that's no different than the Thruway.  I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim that isn't a freeway.

Hwy 402 ends 1.8 km from the border. And the section of road west of Front Street (some MTO, some BWBA) is not built to anywhere near freeway standard.
As an aside, Hwy 401 will end approximately 2.4 km from the border.

How is that area not a freeway?  This looks like a typical major bridge on a freeway to me, although the speed limit is absurdly low.  How is anyone supposed to hold 30 mph on that?  Must feel very, very painful to cross!  And I thought 25 on the Mid-Hudson was bad!

That's completely false. None of the Interstates at/approaching the border maintains full Interstate design standards. Road side safety, lane configuration, curb design, cross roads, ramp design, curves - not a single one of the Interstates that end at the Canadian border actually check all of the boxes that make full Interstate standard.

I just took a look at I-29 and I-95, and I'm very familiar with I-81 and I-87.  They strike me as no worse than a typical toll barrier.  No worse than trucks cutting across the road at the tandem lot.  Significantly better, in fact!

In terms of Schengen-type crossing, at this point there's far more resistance to that one the Canadian side than the American. Notwithstanding the litany of issues that already existed prior to this year, but the COVID-19 crisis has galvanized a lot of Canadians against the notion of ever allowing unfettered access. Heck, even fettered access is widely unpopular right now.

Isn't that all due to coronavirus?  Why wouldn't things go back to normal once the pandemic is done?  Spanish flu became a historical footnote that nobody talked about before this year, for example.

A single lane would not be sufficient size if the intention is to eventually build a barrier and upgrade it to freeway standard. And if there were to be one, it's not the 1980s anymore, low performance barriers like Jersey Barriers are not sufficient for separating opposing traffic. To build to freeway standard you'd need high performance barriers between opposing traffic and between traffic and the ped/bike facility.

In any event, doing so will a) massively increase the weight load on the structure b) complicate winter maintenance c) cost a lot to build d) provide minimal benefit to safety as it's operating at low speed e) cost a lot to maintain long term f) eliminate the ability to be flexible with lane configurations to adjust for traffic flow, road work, etc.

Adding an extra lane or provisions for a barrier would add tens, if not hundreds of millions to the cost of the project. All for something that by all accounts would be demonstrably worse.

In terms of categorization, I mean it's a unique facility in and of itself. Between the various design criteria of roadways (freeway/expressway/arterial/collector/local) it doesn't meet the standards for the first two, nor the patterns for the latter two. So you could go with arterial, but as I said, it's unique, I don't think any standard provincial, state, or national design criteria were created for the project. Heck, there was even talk at one point about explosive resistance designs on the approach roads, which very, very, much do not conform to any standards.

Meanwhile, this is the Golden Gate.  This is the Pont Champlain.  I don't see anyone claiming they're not freeways.

Why would the US develop a whole freeway system instead of just doing it where development dictates? Well, one:
US pop. 1956 - 170 million
Canada pop. 1956 - 16 million
US pop. 2020 - 331 million
Canada pop. 2020 - 38 million

And two, the full name of the system as the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways.

The US has the population base to make very few sections actually unnecessary. And the Cold War strategic impetus to build them where there isn't.

Basically, take a look at non-interstate highway in the US, particularly in areas away from Interstates. You get mixes of two and multi-lane arterials, with expressway and freeway segments mixed in. Why? Because that's all that's needed in those areas.
Canada is like that. Handful of medium and large cities with freeway networks between them, and then a whole lot of nothing where you can go ages without seeing another soul. So only the problem areas get upgrades.

There's no freeway between I-15 and Calgary.  There's no freeway in Manitoba period.  If Canada were part of the US, there would be an interstate all the way from Vancouver to Winnipeg if not Thunder Bay.  I-15 would go north to Edmonton.  Winnipeg's beltway would be a 3di.  I-29 would go to Winnipeg.  Vancouver's freeway system wouldn't be fractured in two parts that don't connect.  I could go on.  Now, there probably wouldn't be more freeways in the maritimes, but they'd be signed more as a system rather than a shield that's shared with two-lane roads (in Nova Scotia most of them are limited access at least, but even that isn't the case in New Brunswick; why bother having a special shield if you're not going to make the roads that use it special?).

Freeways are just another type of road, nothing magical about them. Sometimes they're needed, sometimes something lower order is sufficient or even desirable. A preference for a system, doing so flying in the face of logic, or engineering and planning competence, makes no sense.

Tell that to Dan McNichol, the author of The Roads that Built America, one of the greatest books about roads ever written.  His introduction exudes the greatness inherent in the interstate highway system.  As a young roadgeek who was always strongly oriented towards freeways (I never cared about non-freeways prior to being involved in the roadgeek community, and even now, 95% of my caring is mapping clinched routes on Travel Mapping).  Besides, when I drive, I want to set the cruise control to 70 and not deal with slowing down or stopping.  Besides, as someone who thinks in terms of uniform systems, taking a road outside the system to get between to points on the system just feel weird.

Living near Albany, I can get to most anywhere in North America on an all-freeway route without going out of my way to most anywhere that is connected to the main freeway system.  The main exceptions are Rhode Island (and that's borderline; I-495 isn't that far off from MA/RI 146) and Vermont (which annoys me).  If/when I have to move to an area for which this is not true, I will feel sad.  I even search for apartments based on how well the freeway system connects them to the rest of the metro area.

^^^^^^^^^
OK, look at the artists' rendition of the bridge details, including the overhead variable sign with green or red arrows -- the lanes are reversible!!!!, obviously to "tailor" the capacity for the dominant commute direction at a given time.  That would certainly account for the lack of median, since unless a movable rail or series of bollards (e.g. the Golden Gate Bridge) was deployed, the full carriageway would have to be open construction, with at least the two center lanes reversible for 4+2 peak-hour commute configuration.  Off-peak, it would likely default to a 3+3 situation.  But if the bridge speed limit stays below 50 mph, a median barrier may not be necessary. 

That striping doesn't look like it's set up for a reversable lane.  For some reason a lot of new bridges have such system even if they appear to serve no discernible purpose.

Also, with a mile ore more between customs booths, anything below 50 would just feel painfully slow.