Print

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

[JoePCool14]

I would prefer 794 not to be dismantled. Milwaukee doesn't have great public transit to make-up for the difference and 94 is busy enough as it is. I'd rather have the traffic use highways than clog up surface streets. 794 is not just a short freeway stub, it's a connection to the lakeshore areas further south, even down to Racine County.

Agreed. I also think that it benefits the residents of Bay View and that area. It can be a challenge to get to that area by going south on 94 then east on surface streets. That was the whole reason for opening the Lake Parkway in the first place.

A removal of I-794 between the Marquette wouldn't mean a removal of the bridge or the Lake Parkway.  You would just need to drive on a surface street for a few blocks.

...which would be a step backwards. You'd end up with a freeway stub that's completely disconnected. I would not support that.

[SEWIGuy]

I would prefer 794 not to be dismantled. Milwaukee doesn't have great public transit to make-up for the difference and 94 is busy enough as it is. I'd rather have the traffic use highways than clog up surface streets. 794 is not just a short freeway stub, it's a connection to the lakeshore areas further south, even down to Racine County.

Agreed. I also think that it benefits the residents of Bay View and that area. It can be a challenge to get to that area by going south on 94 then east on surface streets. That was the whole reason for opening the Lake Parkway in the first place.

A removal of I-794 between the Marquette wouldn't mean a removal of the bridge or the Lake Parkway.  You would just need to drive on a surface street for a few blocks.

...which would be a step backwards. You'd end up with a freeway stub that's completely disconnected. I would not support that.

Replacing I-794 will be expensive. This is an option that will not only be less expensive but lead to greater development opportunities downtown and in the Third Ward. Having a bridge that is still freeway separated from that is hardly a reason not to move forward with that.

[triplemultiplex]

With all the attention to the 4 to 6 expansion north of I-43, this project flew under my radar:

https://projects.511wi.gov/43milw/full-project-overview/

I had assumed they were just replacing the bridges over the Milwaukee River and didn't realize the were removing the viaduct that used to span railyards between Capitol and Hampton.  I drove through last weekend and was surprised to find myself 'on the ground' going SB.

Up the road on the expansion project, it seems like all the early action is over the county line in Mequon.  Which I found interesting in terms of staging because I figured it would make more sense to work from south to north. That way, the third lane can be opened continuous with the existing six lane cross section south of Silver Spring.  And also the most inadequate portion of the corridor is from Silver Spring to Brown Deer, so it's annoying to see that lingering another construction season.  But what do I know about staging?  I'm just an armchair observer.

[peterj920]

It makes sense to remove the bridges since the railyard is gone. The embankment will be a lot cheaper to maintain.

[triplemultiplex]

This belongs in the Milwaukee Freeways discussion, not the statewide garbage bin.

1,000 Friends of Wisconsin, a land use advocacy group, released their thoughts on replacing I-794 in Milwaukee with a surface boulevard.  "Rethink 794."

https://www.rethink794.com/

Trying to shunt this line of discussion to this thread, where it fits better.

The site is worth clicking around on because they've got some interesting historic low-angle aerial photography of different freeway stuff around downtown.  I don't think I've seen an image of the r/w cleared through to the bluff above the lake for the Park East before, for example.

And they totally cite Chris Bessert's Wisconsin Highways page in their history section about 794.

I do have to chuckle at this rendering of the Lake Interchange area stuffed to the brim with new skyscrapers:

I don't think there is that much demand for downtown real estate to build 7 new skyscrapers, including a new tallest building in the city, it would seem.  Who's gonna live/work there?  More high end second condos for millionaires and empty office space because everyone works from home?  Let's be realistic. It will mostly be 4-10 story mixed use structures with one or two more generic condo towers.

[JoePCool14]

My opinion on 794 has not changed. It's a useful connector freeway that should remain. Since the anti-freeway crowd will continue advocate for demoing highways, I'm going to advocate for maintaining highways with some exceptions.

[Plutonic Panda]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

[SEWIGuy]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

Lol what? How could that possibly be viable?

[JoePCool14]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

Why? What purpose would that even serve? It's easy enough to jog over there on College or Layton. 794's main purpose is to connect the lakefront areas with downtown without using 94, so why would someone on 94 already really want to use this?

[mgk920]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

Why? What purpose would that even serve? It's easy enough to jog over there on College or Layton. 794's main purpose is to connect the lakefront areas with downtown without using 94, so why would someone on 94 already really want to use this?

Even more so, I-794 (south)'s original purpose was to be another six lane connection between metro Milwaukee and Chicagoland, operating in parallel with I-94.

Mike

[FightingIrish]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

That makes no sense. I've never seen any traffic tie-ups on any of the roads around the airport, especially after the Mitchell Interchange and I-94 widening project.

For 794 access to the airport, Layton and College Avenues work quite well.

Besides, Howell Avenue is now home to a number of privately-owned parking lots and hotels.

WIS 794 works well for access to Bayview, St. Francis, Cudahy and other south shore areas. It's the reason they finally built out the Lake Parkway.

[skluth]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

Why? What purpose would that even serve? It's easy enough to jog over there on College or Layton. 794's main purpose is to connect the lakefront areas with downtown without using 94, so why would someone on 94 already really want to use this?

Even more so, I-794 (south)'s original purpose was to be another six lane connection between metro Milwaukee and Chicagoland, operating in parallel with I-94.

Mike

I don't recall hearing I/WI-794 ever being planned as going to Chicago. Maybe to better connect Racine and Kenosha since I-94 bypasses both. But I don't remember it as anything more than to connect Cudahy, South Milwaukee, and the rest of the South Shore to downtown.

[Joe The Dragon]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

Why? What purpose would that even serve? It's easy enough to jog over there on College or Layton. 794's main purpose is to connect the lakefront areas with downtown without using 94, so why would someone on 94 already really want to use this?

Even more so, I-794 (south)'s original purpose was to be another six lane connection between metro Milwaukee and Chicagoland, operating in parallel with I-94.

Mike

I don't recall hearing I/WI-794 ever being planned as going to Chicago. Maybe to better connect Racine and Kenosha since I-94 bypasses both. But I don't remember it as anything more than to connect Cudahy, South Milwaukee, and the rest of the South Shore to downtown.

All the way down to the Amstutz Expressway and that at least to US-41 / maybe some link to I-94 (toll part)

[JoePCool14]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

Why? What purpose would that even serve? It's easy enough to jog over there on College or Layton. 794's main purpose is to connect the lakefront areas with downtown without using 94, so why would someone on 94 already really want to use this?

Even more so, I-794 (south)'s original purpose was to be another six lane connection between metro Milwaukee and Chicagoland, operating in parallel with I-94.

Mike

I don't recall hearing I/WI-794 ever being planned as going to Chicago. Maybe to better connect Racine and Kenosha since I-94 bypasses both. But I don't remember it as anything more than to connect Cudahy, South Milwaukee, and the rest of the South Shore to downtown.

All the way down to the Amstutz Expressway and that at least to US-41 / maybe some link to I-94 (toll part)

Imagine if that had been fully built out. I know 94 is busy, but I can't see a second freeway between Milwaukee and Chicago being necessary.

[triplemultiplex]

Those were heady days and planners in the 50s/60s had every reason to believe Racine and Kenosha would keep growing instead of getting caught up in the Rust Belt.  I assume they thought of this uber-vision of the Lake Freeway would serve more inter-city traffic while I-94 handled the long distance travelers.

[Plutonic Panda]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

That makes no sense. I've never seen any traffic tie-ups on any of the roads around the airport, especially after the Mitchell Interchange and I-94 widening project.

For 794 access to the airport, Layton and College Avenues work quite well.

Besides, Howell Avenue is now home to a number of privately-owned parking lots and hotels.

WIS 794 works well for access to Bayview, St. Francis, Cudahy and other south shore areas. It's the reason they finally built out the Lake Parkway.

Granted, I’ve never been to Milwaukee so this is my Google Maps City Planning lol but it seems like it could be a useful connection extending I-794 and creating an alternative route for traffic to and from downtown when I-94 gets backed up.

[SEWIGuy]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

That makes no sense. I've never seen any traffic tie-ups on any of the roads around the airport, especially after the Mitchell Interchange and I-94 widening project.

For 794 access to the airport, Layton and College Avenues work quite well.

Besides, Howell Avenue is now home to a number of privately-owned parking lots and hotels.

WIS 794 works well for access to Bayview, St. Francis, Cudahy and other south shore areas. It's the reason they finally built out the Lake Parkway.

Granted, I’ve never been to Milwaukee so this is my Google Maps City Planning lol but it seems like it could be a useful connection extending I-794 and creating an alternative route for traffic to and from downtown when I-94 gets backed up.

I-94 rarely gets THAT backed up where such an alternative is needed, but also tunneling under the airport would be a massive cost that would never been recovered.  I mean, you could just run WI-794 east along College to I-94 if you wanted to sign such an alternative.

[JoePCool14]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

That makes no sense. I've never seen any traffic tie-ups on any of the roads around the airport, especially after the Mitchell Interchange and I-94 widening project.

For 794 access to the airport, Layton and College Avenues work quite well.

Besides, Howell Avenue is now home to a number of privately-owned parking lots and hotels.

WIS 794 works well for access to Bayview, St. Francis, Cudahy and other south shore areas. It's the reason they finally built out the Lake Parkway.

Granted, I’ve never been to Milwaukee so this is my Google Maps City Planning lol but it seems like it could be a useful connection extending I-794 and creating an alternative route for traffic to and from downtown when I-94 gets backed up.

That's alright. I've used 794 a lot to go between Racine and Milwaukee. This is getting into fictional territory, but all I'd like to see 794 extended to all the way down Pennsylvania Ave south to WI-100. It would be great to see an extended freeway/expressway, but I think I'd just want WisDOT to take the road over to increase the speed limits to something more reasonable. South Milwaukee and Oak Creek are adamant about 25 for a significant portion for no good reason.

[Revive 755]

I don't recall hearing I/WI-794 ever being planned as going to Chicago. Maybe to better connect Racine and Kenosha since I-94 bypasses both. But I don't remember it as anything more than to connect Cudahy, South Milwaukee, and the rest of the South Shore to downtown.

All the way down to the Amstutz Expressway and that at least to US-41 / maybe some link to I-94 (toll part)

The Lake Freeway was to tie into an upgraded US 41 in Illinois, not the Amstutz.  The connection is specifically mentioned on Page 36 (46/86 if using the pdf page numbers) of the CATS 1971 Interim Transportation Plan - see https://datahub.cmap.illinois.gov/dataset/a870d8bc-7e12-43ab-9626-71a25107beb7/resource/188a42fc-e4f9-42a2-b218-7dcb66a29725/download/InterimPlan1971.pdf.  There are a couple maps out there (some of which will show up on IDOT plan cover sheets) that show the Lake Freeway tying into the I-94/US 41 split near the Wisconsin Boundary after the US 41 freeway in Lake County were cancelled.

[Plutonic Panda]

It’d be cool to see a project to tunnel under the airport and connect the 119 to 794. Maybe they could toll it to help fund it and expand the existing sections to 6 lanes.

That makes no sense. I've never seen any traffic tie-ups on any of the roads around the airport, especially after the Mitchell Interchange and I-94 widening project.

For 794 access to the airport, Layton and College Avenues work quite well.

Besides, Howell Avenue is now home to a number of privately-owned parking lots and hotels.

WIS 794 works well for access to Bayview, St. Francis, Cudahy and other south shore areas. It's the reason they finally built out the Lake Parkway.

Granted, I’ve never been to Milwaukee so this is my Google Maps City Planning lol but it seems like it could be a useful connection extending I-794 and creating an alternative route for traffic to and from downtown when I-94 gets backed up.

That's alright. I've used 794 a lot to go between Racine and Milwaukee. This is getting into fictional territory, but all I'd to see 794 extended to all the way down Pennsylvania Ave south to WI-100. It would be great to see an extended freeway/expressway, but I think I'd just want WisDOT to take the road over to increase the speed limits to something more reasonable. South Milwaukee and Oak Creek are adamant about 25 for a significant portion for no good reason.

I need to get up there and check it out. Milwaukee seems like a criminally underrated city for some reason.

[triplemultiplex]

Milwaukee is a fascinating place for highway history.  Stub ramps and tear-downs, but also sections of freeway rebuilt very well in this century.  Rail transit that was torn out in favor of freeways mid-20th century, an old freeway proposal that eventually came to life as a 'parkway', an odd penchant for interchanges that look like this.

And if you like beer, they got you covered.  Unlike out west, it's not mostly IPAs at all the craft breweries.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah I’m one of the oddballs who can’t stand dark beers although every now and then I’ll go for a Dunkel of some kind. Thanks for the fascinating info I plan on checking it out in 23’.

[skluth]

IPAs suck. They only exist because the British Navy needed a beer that could survive the journey from England to India without spoiling and adding more hops than necessary for a good beer was the only way for the beer to survive the months-long journey in the days of sailing. I'm not big on dark beers either. Fortunately my Wisconsin heritage means I grew up drinking pilsners and lagers as the Great Spaghetti Monster in the sky intended. I'm glad Wisconsin's new smaller breweries have mostly continued that tradition.

[FightingIrish]

Milwaukee is a fascinating place for highway history.  Stub ramps and tear-downs, but also sections of freeway rebuilt very well in this century.  Rail transit that was torn out in favor of freeways mid-20th century, an old freeway proposal that eventually came to life as a 'parkway', an odd penchant for interchanges that look like this.

And if you like beer, they got you covered.  Unlike out west, it's not mostly IPAs at all the craft breweries.

Scroll a mile west of there and there's an abandoned interchange with what was originally intended to be the Stadium Freeway. It's now a park n' ride, but completely inaccessible from the freeway. A few of the ramps are still there, but slowly being reclaimed by nature.

BTW, the freeway is a very rare occurrence of a triple interstate multiplex I-41, I-43 and I-894 (also US 41). And two of the routes are going in opposite directions.

[mgk920]

Yea, one of two interstate triplexes (both currently in Wisconsin) and one of the two 'wrong way' pairings of I-routes (the other being in Virginia).

 

Mike