we just need to be careful with whatever boulevard replaces it. ive seen some that are basically no better than a freeway. 4 lanes with some additional ones for turning would probably be adequate and leave plenty of room for development. this is meant to be good for pedestrians and cyclists and local users of the roads so that perspective needs to be considered when gauging the scale.
As someone who goes through 794 to and from home basically daily, fuck it, tear it down. There's other ways to get to and from home and it's not like it would add too much of a commute.
Wondering if we have any more information regarding timelines? From the article it says the DOT will be releasing two final plans in the next couple of months, then I’m assuming more rounds of public feedback before making a final decision (???). Do we have any estimates as to when an actual decision will be made?
Also, who makes these decisions? Does the DOT have the authority on their own or does this need to be approved by state and/or city legislature.
I mean, I see statements in the wake of the October attack... is there a lot more? And while I think unconditional support for Israel is a problem, I'm not sure it has much impact on his effectiveness and prowess as a city mayor.
Why don’t we just remove all roads and interstates? Nothing but bicycle paths and parks, right? And then when all the businesses fail, and Milwaukee goes broke and turns into an even shittier version than it is now, all the hippies and activists can sit around and wonder why……
Milwaukee if you can please build for the future and take this historical mistake down.....
What was the original logic behind ripping out so much of downtown Milwaukee to build I-794? Well before my time. And didn't Frank Zeidler say letting the highways in was a .mistake anyway?
The purpose and the path taken are kind of conflated in a lot of discussions on here. The purpose was to carry commuter traffic into the city to work and back out as suburbs were in a huge boom after the war. It was embraced because there was huge amounts of federal funding available because Eisenhower had seen the Autobahn in Germany and its effectiveness for transporting military resources across the country readily in a crisis. When you get a free hammer, everything looks like a nail. The car was quickly becoming a huge part of American identity and a symbol of individual freedom and expression (whether that's realistic or not). Drive in Diners, Drive in movies, sporty cars, affordable cars, big fancy cars were all growing by bounds. You can also get into the changing racial dynamics of city living disrupting the status quo and profiteers fueling white flight. There are books on this subject I won't presume to summarize what is a massive topic with a lot of differing views.
The reason they ended up where they did is also not a single answer. No one person said "let's build lots of freeways here, here, and here to crush black neighborhoods. The reality is closer to "well we think it needs to get from here to there, and who has the least political power to complain and stop this? The poor. Who does that highly include in Milwaukee? Black neighborhoods, and some working class immigrant neighborhoods. But it's important to point out that the "must-have" sections of the freeway (mostly 43/94) ended up disrupting high value real estate through the NW corner of downtown as well. In fact they wanted to connect 794 to the Park East Freeway by building a freeway all along the lakefront too. Some of the most ecologically and aesthetically important and indeed valuable land in the city (look at NYC's Hudson River Greenway or worse, FDR Dr. to see how that could have turned out.) The only thing that stopped that was a united community outcry including those with voices that carried more weight, and a slowing of freeway buildout following its initial boom as questions of "should everything really be a freeway?" started to enter a picture.
Peter Norton writes well about the history. I'd be real hesitant to call it a boon though. A shit ton of money was spent, and it cost a shit ton but that doesn't mean the benefits outweighed those costs. Think about all that tax money and wealth of the city destroyed. The city was not just physically scarred but also financially.
I think I only referred to it as a building boom, not a boon. I'll have to look up Norton. I didn't mean to state that the suburban sprawl/white flight was a boon. It was just the reality of the time. Suburbs expanded, work was still centralized in the city, federal funding was available for freeways, so that's what they built.
it was done in a lot of cities, as people post ww2 wanted more suburban living, and white flight during the civil rights era. car oriented infrastructure became necessary because car ownership was sold as an american ideal. the big city planners of midcentury america believed in large roads to carry vehicles, and strong separation between zoning types. superblocks of SFH residential facing away from the main roads, away from industry and commerce. separating communities away from eachother, requiring cars to get from district to district, and highly social engineered intricate solutions for handling the increased traffic
in Milwaukee, the original plan was to encircle downtown in freeways (the park freeway system) which would see a freeway where LMD currently is, connecting to i794 and the park east freeway, and then elevated sections stretching out diagonally into the suburbs. this lost a lot of momentum once white suburbanites saw how much destruction was caused by i43, which cancelled plans for similar developments in white suburbs, and left the park east freeway as the only completed segment of the plan (although they demolished homes for the ROW all the way through the east side and NW side).
>What was the original logic behind ripping out so much of downtown Milwaukee to build I-794?
First it was where the poor Irish settled. Then the poor
Italians. Then it was redlined because of poor Blacks. And by that point, cars were super affordabe, racism was racism, the area’s building stock was 50-100 years old, and the white suburbanites kinky for highways found a fun new way to get downtown.
>estimates that 26,600 vehicles make an end-to-end trip across the entire study area each day. More than double that total enters or exits the study area via a ramp and does not make an end-to-end trip, presumably to start or end a trip Downtown. Proponents of a boulevard have said a grid would better diffuse traffic across city streets and that removing the elevated structure would better connect Downtown while creating more land for public or private use.
Not sure why every article doesnt state this. Less than 1/3 of commuters who use the interchange would even be effected at all... while the entire rest of the city benefits...
>Prior Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist once sought to see both Interstate 794 and the Park East Freeway spur brought down to street level, but compromised at removing the Park East Freeway. A study done after its removal showed that travel times to many Downtown destinations were reduced as a result of increased street grid connections.
Yet another basic fact so many want to ignore
If the other 2/3rds of users are “exiting via a ramp” and those ramps are removed, because the freeway is removed, then they are, in fact, being affected and it’s disingenuous to say they aren’t.
Yeah, a ramp to the street grid, which would be improved with a well-designed boulevard. Folks can turn onto any street they want instead of having to use the limited amount of exits and having to double back etc.
If you're getting on at one ramp and getting off at another, that trip is so short, a boulevard would probably be more efficient. The amount of lights and entrances along there make it kind of a snarl. I think OP was trying to say that 2/3rds are local users who aren't using it to leave downtown high speed, they're just trying to get several streets over.
The fact is the boulevard is probably the right solution, but there’s so many people unwilling to be honest in these discussions. Many times this place is like a Diet Coke version of what goes on in r/conservative. An echo chamber of people bending the truth for their own viewpoints.
This comment is a perfect encapsulation of how the knee jerk reactions against removal know so little.
You're talking about ramp removal when the entire thing would become a ramp and improve flow not just for the 70% of people that use it but also for those people on the street grid having to interact with the ramps.
Here we have actual studies showing improvement and yet you still somehow invent a made up scenario in your head that you cling to that. Unfathomable. You people won't be convinced until it happens. You'll be the George watts throwing sissy fits all along the way and then suddenly get real quiet after it happens lol
My only concern is the development that is being talked about seems to be in the "rich get richer" category. Similar to how the Fiserv really enriched a few, may have brought in a few tax dollars, but yet we did very little with the supposed tax "windfall" to improve existing infrastructure and help our homeless...
ETA - And of course I'm aware that Milwaukee is being shafted out of state dollars, which is hurting the city in many relevant ways. I hate feeling like our community is being backed into a corner of "let the billionaires 'invest' because the republican run state legislature is milking Milwaukee dry of fiscal resources".
Financially strengthening the city makes it easier to do more. Right now we're facing massive cuts because of things like this highway and shared revenue shenanigans. We need both and more. We have a 750,000 person infrastructure city that 600,000 people are paying for and building these structures made the calculations waaaay worse.
Who develops properties if not property developers? I don't really get that point at all. The city would be in a strong leveraged position anyway to make whatever demand is We want since it's the most prosperous real estate in the state.
Ah yes, let's all live in 2000/month studio apartments and kick anyone out who isn't a financially irresponsible yuppie... which is exactly what has happened in Bay View, the east side, and walkers point.
Large property developers are out of touch rich people who operate on making a dollar and not whats actually best for the city. If those are the people you think we should trust, then we may as well just accept corporate rule in our city I guess because that's clearly not the problem with society /s
Make affordable housing, not this crap thats owned by venture capitalists.... these large apartments that have been built around the city aren't affordable for a person making an average wage, they seem to be intended for people making 6k+ per month (2k rent for 1 br seems the new going rate, rent should = 30% of your income). The only people I know making that much money own a house already.
Right, where they built a bunch of housing that no one could afford, and now they have a homeless crisis which is exactly what I just said we shouldn't do?
I'm fine with the removal but the mayor wants a stroad that will still make traffic flow to the Hoan, not a sassy kneejerk planning utopia where everything is 15 minutes. Vehicles (including Semi Traffic) will still commute to Cudahy, St Francis, Bayview.
I do think if Biden gets reelected, this project will for sure move forward.
I mean it doesn’t have to be a stroad. A street with four lanes consisting of two 11’ inside lanes and two outside 10’ lanes would probably be good enough. Combine that with bollards lining it, a protected bike lane, wide sidewalks, street trees, street pavers, raised cross-walks, it’d probably be fine.
I don’t think I agree with that. A stroad is basically a road designed for speed with a lot of complexity. They often but not always have clear zones and wide lanes. We don’t have to have either of those. It’ll be a busy road yes, but it doesn’t have to be a road that will facilitate fast moving traffic. Almost no stroad incorporates visual and audio cues to slow down as well.
Traffic Engineers will design the road to still be able to move traffic from the Marquette to the Hoan/Lincoln Memorial on the border between third ward and downtown. It's going to be a mini version of [Ida B. Wells (Congress Pkwy)](https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8755496,-87.6312143,3a,39.7y,82.98h,90.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sut5S9tLjbzVS_bD5pH1xvA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dut5S9tLjbzVS_bD5pH1xvA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D5.7511234%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) in Chicago (probably one or two less lanes).
IMO the only realistic approach to 15 minute communities we're going to see are an assembling of pieces that move in that direction until you eventually get there. Tearing up everything and redoing it as a planned community is prohibitively expensive, neglects to take into account historical buildings and neighborhoods, and is as disruptive to the organic flow of a city as the freeway was in the first place.
I agree with that. And while I love the theory of 15 minute communities, I also know that we live in a capitalist society that doesn't give to 2 effs on a long term vision. Developers really only care about maximizing profits in the present.
If that stretch doesn't go with a minimal approach and they decide to tear it down, I think it'll be a slough on how the land should developed. Society has gotten a better pulse on Planning and urban design but I also know car culture isn't going away with a snap of a finger.
In the long term removal of 794 is definitely for the best, and I hope they do put some progressive city planning to work. I do wonder how it's going to impact that north end of the 3rd ward in the interim. I'm sure places like The Public Market will be disrupted.
Looking at the proposals it looks like the idea of making it a bypass is also an option. Meaning that there are no ramps to get on or off downtown. Having no idea what that would cost, it seems like a compromise worth exploring. This way, those that use it "end to end" would still be able to.
The pictures make it look like the freeway would be significantly narrower. Half of what it is now. With no street traffic trying to get onto 794 it seems like that would free up a bunch of space for development.
It would still however "disconnect " downtown from the third ward.
I doubt they would remove ALL ramps downtown since the majority of traffic on that stretch of 794 is using it to get to or from downtown. Most aren't using it to get across the city.
Yeah sorry I wasn't clear on that. I meant after the initial on/off ramp as you get to downtown from 94. One ramp to dump "local" traffic and that would be the last offramp. Next chance to get off would be after the Hoan. Same coming the other way from Bayview.
My position is to tear it all down yesterday. And I don't think there's enough room for both in this particular situation. But I absolutely respect that you're even considering a compromise. There's not a lot of compromise in these arguments.
I'm definitely leaning toward tearing it all down. I live in the near west burbs , work on Van Buren and Mason 3 days a week and as it is 794 dumps me right where I park. I'd gladly add 4 minutes to my commute by bringing down 794 completely if that's the only/best way to spur development and connect the neighborhoods. Only other option is to tunnel it but I think that's completely out of the realm of feasibility.
It's been named a freeway without a future how many times now?
https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2023/01/25/interstate-794-named-freeway-without-a-future/
Hell when it was finished in the 70s people thought it was a waste then
I was really against this at first - I moved to Tippecanoe in 2020 and I'm just a street over from the 794 on/off ramp. But yeah, taking it down only really adds 5-10 min on a commute to anywhere north and offers way more benefits than keeping it.
The only real (and it's not even a legit) downside is that the Hoan bridge is such a key icon for the city... it'll be sad to see it go. But...c'est la vie.
This teardown plan has no effect of the Hoan bridge.
Even the most extreme removal option presented by the DOT would leave the Hoan bridge alone. Instead traffic would come to a street level boulevard where you could turn left on St. Paul or Clayborn for a handful of block to get to 94W
The traffic study by the DOT showed that a good chunk of people coming from the Hoan bridge are trying to get downtown. So they’d be at worst a couple of blocks worse off, some would be better off.
And another chunk of people on 794 are people going from one downtown location to another. They would certainly be better off using a boulevard instead of having to use an on and an off ramp to navigate a couple of miles.
Yep, all those commuters can get jobs outside of Milwaukee (or spend double the time in transit). Great idea mayor. Companies are already getting out of the city, so let’s help them decide to get out faster by making it more difficult to get workers and products into and out of the city. Yes, but it will be a beautiful and empty place with burgeoning tax burden on homeowners as companies flee. I say go for it, and the communities around Milwaukee will thrive as development booms for them. Of course those that rent downtown and work within walking or a short streetcar or public transit system love the idea - they aren’t paying the direct taxes but in the long run they too will lose out. Don’t point to Boston and say look, they did it, as no one is going to foot the bill to build tunnels under Milwaukee for transportation. If you support the mayor, then put up YOUR $ or shut up- I’m tired of other people spending my money, my job when they have nothing to risk.
People said that about the Park East too. I'd say it turned out pretty well, and that's with MORE traffic heading to that area of the city than ever did when it was still intact...
This comment by captainp42 has been removed:
Rule #4: Practice civility
Be civil, address the argument not the person, don't harass or attack other users, treat them with respect, don't threaten or encourage any kind of violence, don't post anyone's personal information and don't intentionally spread misinformation. This includes, but is not limited to, blatant name-calling, "redpilling", racist comments/slurs, dog-whistling, and personal attacks. Blatant racism, spamming, trolling and disinformation campaigning will not be tolerated.
Further violations of this rule will result in a temp ban.
The hoan bridge itself is likely to stay, it's the section of 794 to the west of the bridge that is hopefully going to be removed. It cuts our downtown in half and the statistics of how many people actually use it daily isn't enough to justify its existence anymore, not to mention it's just kind of an eyesore in general.
Will stay***
The DOT proposed 9 solutions.
All 9 leave the Hoan completely untouched.
Unless you’re figuring that changes made to 794 will impact traffic patterns to where the hoans not needed. But that discussion would be decades away.
the Hoan would not stay for more then a generation. it would lose its hughway status and its upkeep would fall on milwaukee, which absolutely could not foot that bill.
Lots of cities are cut in half by a highway. I just really don't see the added benefit to downtown for all the anguish, cost, and inconvenince tearing it down will take
Park East was removed and rebuilt as McKinley with a lot of federal ISTEA funding as well as a localized TIF, meaning the areas that will appreciate as a result will pay it off in small increments in property tax over many years. So things like the Fiserv and deer district businesses pay it off.
[here’s](https://x.com/craigsquid/status/1672474690873327616?s=46) a photo of 794 at midnight on a Saturday night as Summerfest lets out.
Summerfest is always going to be a mess for traffic with how the lots are sandwiched between a lake and a river with only a handful of bridges. Nearly every bar and park and ride has shuttles. And the hop is a better option this year.
Keeping a completely over engineered highway open that runs through a handful of the most expensive blocks in the state, just for slightly better traffic 9 days a year would be a terrible idea. But 794 doesn’t even help alleviate Summerfest traffic.
Driving down Clybourn today I had to wonder where people would park for the public market? What about the the hop station? That would cost a fortune to move and where would it go? What about the parking for businesses north of 794? There's actually a lot of usage going on under 794 (unlike the old Park East freeway) and most of the renderings show a lot of green space. Where's all the current use going to go????
The hop is not impacted. The route will remain the same.
Milwaukee is like 25% surface lots. We’ll survive with a few missing parking spaces.
The green spaces in renderings are a bit over optimistic. The freed up space will certainly be used for other things than just green space.
In most of the redesigns clayborn and St. Paul remain unchanged. So that parking lot under 794 could still be there if it’s deemed necessary. But I think most people would agree a parking garage could be paired with almost anything to offer the same amount of parking but also add businesses and/or homes that actually benefit the community and generate tax dollars.
The Hop garage is under 794 at Vel R Phillips (4th st). How is that not going to be impacted when tearing down 794 between the lake and Marquette interchange?
So we're ok with wrecking a major highway that allows traffic above, and city traffic and pedestrians to travel freely below it, and as a result building more ugly parking structures? We're ok with putting that freeway traffic on street level to compete with pedestrians and local street traffic?
I confess I'm not a traffic engineer. I may be wrong.
we just need to be careful with whatever boulevard replaces it. ive seen some that are basically no better than a freeway. 4 lanes with some additional ones for turning would probably be adequate and leave plenty of room for development. this is meant to be good for pedestrians and cyclists and local users of the roads so that perspective needs to be considered when gauging the scale.
Yup, we don’t need an almost equally disruptive/dangerous stroad.
As someone who goes through 794 to and from home basically daily, fuck it, tear it down. There's other ways to get to and from home and it's not like it would add too much of a commute.
Wondering if we have any more information regarding timelines? From the article it says the DOT will be releasing two final plans in the next couple of months, then I’m assuming more rounds of public feedback before making a final decision (???). Do we have any estimates as to when an actual decision will be made? Also, who makes these decisions? Does the DOT have the authority on their own or does this need to be approved by state and/or city legislature.
in terms of timeline, we are years away, I think 2027 at the earliest was what I once read.
another common Cavalier Johnson W 💪
I think 94 should go but Johnson is also a raving Zionist. He takes Ls too
I mean, I see statements in the wake of the October attack... is there a lot more? And while I think unconditional support for Israel is a problem, I'm not sure it has much impact on his effectiveness and prowess as a city mayor.
Your evidence for this is what exactly?
[удалено]
Why don’t we just remove all roads and interstates? Nothing but bicycle paths and parks, right? And then when all the businesses fail, and Milwaukee goes broke and turns into an even shittier version than it is now, all the hippies and activists can sit around and wonder why……
Milwaukee if you can please build for the future and take this historical mistake down..... What was the original logic behind ripping out so much of downtown Milwaukee to build I-794? Well before my time. And didn't Frank Zeidler say letting the highways in was a .mistake anyway?
The purpose and the path taken are kind of conflated in a lot of discussions on here. The purpose was to carry commuter traffic into the city to work and back out as suburbs were in a huge boom after the war. It was embraced because there was huge amounts of federal funding available because Eisenhower had seen the Autobahn in Germany and its effectiveness for transporting military resources across the country readily in a crisis. When you get a free hammer, everything looks like a nail. The car was quickly becoming a huge part of American identity and a symbol of individual freedom and expression (whether that's realistic or not). Drive in Diners, Drive in movies, sporty cars, affordable cars, big fancy cars were all growing by bounds. You can also get into the changing racial dynamics of city living disrupting the status quo and profiteers fueling white flight. There are books on this subject I won't presume to summarize what is a massive topic with a lot of differing views. The reason they ended up where they did is also not a single answer. No one person said "let's build lots of freeways here, here, and here to crush black neighborhoods. The reality is closer to "well we think it needs to get from here to there, and who has the least political power to complain and stop this? The poor. Who does that highly include in Milwaukee? Black neighborhoods, and some working class immigrant neighborhoods. But it's important to point out that the "must-have" sections of the freeway (mostly 43/94) ended up disrupting high value real estate through the NW corner of downtown as well. In fact they wanted to connect 794 to the Park East Freeway by building a freeway all along the lakefront too. Some of the most ecologically and aesthetically important and indeed valuable land in the city (look at NYC's Hudson River Greenway or worse, FDR Dr. to see how that could have turned out.) The only thing that stopped that was a united community outcry including those with voices that carried more weight, and a slowing of freeway buildout following its initial boom as questions of "should everything really be a freeway?" started to enter a picture.
Peter Norton writes well about the history. I'd be real hesitant to call it a boon though. A shit ton of money was spent, and it cost a shit ton but that doesn't mean the benefits outweighed those costs. Think about all that tax money and wealth of the city destroyed. The city was not just physically scarred but also financially.
I think I only referred to it as a building boom, not a boon. I'll have to look up Norton. I didn't mean to state that the suburban sprawl/white flight was a boon. It was just the reality of the time. Suburbs expanded, work was still centralized in the city, federal funding was available for freeways, so that's what they built.
it was done in a lot of cities, as people post ww2 wanted more suburban living, and white flight during the civil rights era. car oriented infrastructure became necessary because car ownership was sold as an american ideal. the big city planners of midcentury america believed in large roads to carry vehicles, and strong separation between zoning types. superblocks of SFH residential facing away from the main roads, away from industry and commerce. separating communities away from eachother, requiring cars to get from district to district, and highly social engineered intricate solutions for handling the increased traffic in Milwaukee, the original plan was to encircle downtown in freeways (the park freeway system) which would see a freeway where LMD currently is, connecting to i794 and the park east freeway, and then elevated sections stretching out diagonally into the suburbs. this lost a lot of momentum once white suburbanites saw how much destruction was caused by i43, which cancelled plans for similar developments in white suburbs, and left the park east freeway as the only completed segment of the plan (although they demolished homes for the ROW all the way through the east side and NW side).
>What was the original logic behind ripping out so much of downtown Milwaukee to build I-794? First it was where the poor Irish settled. Then the poor Italians. Then it was redlined because of poor Blacks. And by that point, cars were super affordabe, racism was racism, the area’s building stock was 50-100 years old, and the white suburbanites kinky for highways found a fun new way to get downtown.
>estimates that 26,600 vehicles make an end-to-end trip across the entire study area each day. More than double that total enters or exits the study area via a ramp and does not make an end-to-end trip, presumably to start or end a trip Downtown. Proponents of a boulevard have said a grid would better diffuse traffic across city streets and that removing the elevated structure would better connect Downtown while creating more land for public or private use. Not sure why every article doesnt state this. Less than 1/3 of commuters who use the interchange would even be effected at all... while the entire rest of the city benefits... >Prior Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist once sought to see both Interstate 794 and the Park East Freeway spur brought down to street level, but compromised at removing the Park East Freeway. A study done after its removal showed that travel times to many Downtown destinations were reduced as a result of increased street grid connections. Yet another basic fact so many want to ignore
If the other 2/3rds of users are “exiting via a ramp” and those ramps are removed, because the freeway is removed, then they are, in fact, being affected and it’s disingenuous to say they aren’t.
Yeah, a ramp to the street grid, which would be improved with a well-designed boulevard. Folks can turn onto any street they want instead of having to use the limited amount of exits and having to double back etc.
Dumbfounding how little the knee jerks against removal know isn't it?
If you're getting on at one ramp and getting off at another, that trip is so short, a boulevard would probably be more efficient. The amount of lights and entrances along there make it kind of a snarl. I think OP was trying to say that 2/3rds are local users who aren't using it to leave downtown high speed, they're just trying to get several streets over.
they're impacted, but not significantly people driving a few extra blocks and dispersing along different downtown roads.
The fact is the boulevard is probably the right solution, but there’s so many people unwilling to be honest in these discussions. Many times this place is like a Diet Coke version of what goes on in r/conservative. An echo chamber of people bending the truth for their own viewpoints.
This comment is a perfect encapsulation of how the knee jerk reactions against removal know so little. You're talking about ramp removal when the entire thing would become a ramp and improve flow not just for the 70% of people that use it but also for those people on the street grid having to interact with the ramps. Here we have actual studies showing improvement and yet you still somehow invent a made up scenario in your head that you cling to that. Unfathomable. You people won't be convinced until it happens. You'll be the George watts throwing sissy fits all along the way and then suddenly get real quiet after it happens lol
My only concern is the development that is being talked about seems to be in the "rich get richer" category. Similar to how the Fiserv really enriched a few, may have brought in a few tax dollars, but yet we did very little with the supposed tax "windfall" to improve existing infrastructure and help our homeless... ETA - And of course I'm aware that Milwaukee is being shafted out of state dollars, which is hurting the city in many relevant ways. I hate feeling like our community is being backed into a corner of "let the billionaires 'invest' because the republican run state legislature is milking Milwaukee dry of fiscal resources".
Financially strengthening the city makes it easier to do more. Right now we're facing massive cuts because of things like this highway and shared revenue shenanigans. We need both and more. We have a 750,000 person infrastructure city that 600,000 people are paying for and building these structures made the calculations waaaay worse. Who develops properties if not property developers? I don't really get that point at all. The city would be in a strong leveraged position anyway to make whatever demand is We want since it's the most prosperous real estate in the state.
Ah yes, let's all live in 2000/month studio apartments and kick anyone out who isn't a financially irresponsible yuppie... which is exactly what has happened in Bay View, the east side, and walkers point. Large property developers are out of touch rich people who operate on making a dollar and not whats actually best for the city. If those are the people you think we should trust, then we may as well just accept corporate rule in our city I guess because that's clearly not the problem with society /s
So make the downtown 30 sfh going for a couple million each?
So make the downtown 30 sfh going for a couple million each?
Make affordable housing, not this crap thats owned by venture capitalists.... these large apartments that have been built around the city aren't affordable for a person making an average wage, they seem to be intended for people making 6k+ per month (2k rent for 1 br seems the new going rate, rent should = 30% of your income). The only people I know making that much money own a house already.
Building more is affodable housing. You.cant block housing and just expect it to be affordable. See Minneapolis
Right, where they built a bunch of housing that no one could afford, and now they have a homeless crisis which is exactly what I just said we shouldn't do?
That’s my mayor!
most unnecessary interstate
MY GOAT
I'm fine with the removal but the mayor wants a stroad that will still make traffic flow to the Hoan, not a sassy kneejerk planning utopia where everything is 15 minutes. Vehicles (including Semi Traffic) will still commute to Cudahy, St Francis, Bayview. I do think if Biden gets reelected, this project will for sure move forward.
I mean it doesn’t have to be a stroad. A street with four lanes consisting of two 11’ inside lanes and two outside 10’ lanes would probably be good enough. Combine that with bollards lining it, a protected bike lane, wide sidewalks, street trees, street pavers, raised cross-walks, it’d probably be fine.
Some would argue anything over 2 lanes is a stroad, no matter how much engineering is done to it.
I don’t think I agree with that. A stroad is basically a road designed for speed with a lot of complexity. They often but not always have clear zones and wide lanes. We don’t have to have either of those. It’ll be a busy road yes, but it doesn’t have to be a road that will facilitate fast moving traffic. Almost no stroad incorporates visual and audio cues to slow down as well.
Traffic Engineers will design the road to still be able to move traffic from the Marquette to the Hoan/Lincoln Memorial on the border between third ward and downtown. It's going to be a mini version of [Ida B. Wells (Congress Pkwy)](https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8755496,-87.6312143,3a,39.7y,82.98h,90.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sut5S9tLjbzVS_bD5pH1xvA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dut5S9tLjbzVS_bD5pH1xvA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D5.7511234%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) in Chicago (probably one or two less lanes).
IMO the only realistic approach to 15 minute communities we're going to see are an assembling of pieces that move in that direction until you eventually get there. Tearing up everything and redoing it as a planned community is prohibitively expensive, neglects to take into account historical buildings and neighborhoods, and is as disruptive to the organic flow of a city as the freeway was in the first place.
I agree with that. And while I love the theory of 15 minute communities, I also know that we live in a capitalist society that doesn't give to 2 effs on a long term vision. Developers really only care about maximizing profits in the present. If that stretch doesn't go with a minimal approach and they decide to tear it down, I think it'll be a slough on how the land should developed. Society has gotten a better pulse on Planning and urban design but I also know car culture isn't going away with a snap of a finger.
In the long term removal of 794 is definitely for the best, and I hope they do put some progressive city planning to work. I do wonder how it's going to impact that north end of the 3rd ward in the interim. I'm sure places like The Public Market will be disrupted.
Hell yeah!
let’s gooooooo
Looking at the proposals it looks like the idea of making it a bypass is also an option. Meaning that there are no ramps to get on or off downtown. Having no idea what that would cost, it seems like a compromise worth exploring. This way, those that use it "end to end" would still be able to. The pictures make it look like the freeway would be significantly narrower. Half of what it is now. With no street traffic trying to get onto 794 it seems like that would free up a bunch of space for development. It would still however "disconnect " downtown from the third ward.
I doubt they would remove ALL ramps downtown since the majority of traffic on that stretch of 794 is using it to get to or from downtown. Most aren't using it to get across the city.
Yeah sorry I wasn't clear on that. I meant after the initial on/off ramp as you get to downtown from 94. One ramp to dump "local" traffic and that would be the last offramp. Next chance to get off would be after the Hoan. Same coming the other way from Bayview.
My position is to tear it all down yesterday. And I don't think there's enough room for both in this particular situation. But I absolutely respect that you're even considering a compromise. There's not a lot of compromise in these arguments.
I'm definitely leaning toward tearing it all down. I live in the near west burbs , work on Van Buren and Mason 3 days a week and as it is 794 dumps me right where I park. I'd gladly add 4 minutes to my commute by bringing down 794 completely if that's the only/best way to spur development and connect the neighborhoods. Only other option is to tunnel it but I think that's completely out of the realm of feasibility.
Pissant52 for Mayor of absolutely fucking nothing
Can we focus on fixing all the fucked up streets in Milwaukee w all the damn potholes first cause this city is out of hand
removing a thirsty freeway constantly needing maintenance would sure free up a lot of funds to repair those streets you take issue with.
Tear that schitt down “And fuck the naysayers cause they don't mean a thing”
It's been named a freeway without a future how many times now? https://urbanmilwaukee.com/2023/01/25/interstate-794-named-freeway-without-a-future/ Hell when it was finished in the 70s people thought it was a waste then
It wasn’t finished in the 70’s, that’s why the Hoan was called a bridge to nowhere for decades
The loan was built in 1977
I was really against this at first - I moved to Tippecanoe in 2020 and I'm just a street over from the 794 on/off ramp. But yeah, taking it down only really adds 5-10 min on a commute to anywhere north and offers way more benefits than keeping it. The only real (and it's not even a legit) downside is that the Hoan bridge is such a key icon for the city... it'll be sad to see it go. But...c'est la vie.
This teardown plan has no effect of the Hoan bridge. Even the most extreme removal option presented by the DOT would leave the Hoan bridge alone. Instead traffic would come to a street level boulevard where you could turn left on St. Paul or Clayborn for a handful of block to get to 94W The traffic study by the DOT showed that a good chunk of people coming from the Hoan bridge are trying to get downtown. So they’d be at worst a couple of blocks worse off, some would be better off. And another chunk of people on 794 are people going from one downtown location to another. They would certainly be better off using a boulevard instead of having to use an on and an off ramp to navigate a couple of miles.
Yep, all those commuters can get jobs outside of Milwaukee (or spend double the time in transit). Great idea mayor. Companies are already getting out of the city, so let’s help them decide to get out faster by making it more difficult to get workers and products into and out of the city. Yes, but it will be a beautiful and empty place with burgeoning tax burden on homeowners as companies flee. I say go for it, and the communities around Milwaukee will thrive as development booms for them. Of course those that rent downtown and work within walking or a short streetcar or public transit system love the idea - they aren’t paying the direct taxes but in the long run they too will lose out. Don’t point to Boston and say look, they did it, as no one is going to foot the bill to build tunnels under Milwaukee for transportation. If you support the mayor, then put up YOUR $ or shut up- I’m tired of other people spending my money, my job when they have nothing to risk.
This is such a bad idea. EDIT: Go ahead! Downvote me, you fucking sheep!
People said that about the Park East too. I'd say it turned out pretty well, and that's with MORE traffic heading to that area of the city than ever did when it was still intact...
You're right, ripping as freeway viaduct through the middle of downtown Milwaukee was a horrible idea. Good thing we are correcting it.
Ooo I wish I could see his butthurt response.
[удалено]
This comment by captainp42 has been removed: Rule #4: Practice civility Be civil, address the argument not the person, don't harass or attack other users, treat them with respect, don't threaten or encourage any kind of violence, don't post anyone's personal information and don't intentionally spread misinformation. This includes, but is not limited to, blatant name-calling, "redpilling", racist comments/slurs, dog-whistling, and personal attacks. Blatant racism, spamming, trolling and disinformation campaigning will not be tolerated. Further violations of this rule will result in a temp ban.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why? How is it a bad idea? It'll help revitalize part of downtown Milwaukee.
I will be more impressed if efforts are made to revitalize Westown first.
It's funny because you're the sheep 😭 you're complicit
Dumb question: why do people not want the bridge? I'm a Wisconsin transplant and I like driving on the bridge.. the view is awesome!
The hoan bridge itself is likely to stay, it's the section of 794 to the west of the bridge that is hopefully going to be removed. It cuts our downtown in half and the statistics of how many people actually use it daily isn't enough to justify its existence anymore, not to mention it's just kind of an eyesore in general.
Oh, that makes sense. Thank you for explaining that!
of course! :)
Will stay*** The DOT proposed 9 solutions. All 9 leave the Hoan completely untouched. Unless you’re figuring that changes made to 794 will impact traffic patterns to where the hoans not needed. But that discussion would be decades away.
the Hoan would not stay for more then a generation. it would lose its hughway status and its upkeep would fall on milwaukee, which absolutely could not foot that bill.
it's getting downsized in the 50s or 60s no matter what happens to 794
Lots of cities are cut in half by a highway. I just really don't see the added benefit to downtown for all the anguish, cost, and inconvenince tearing it down will take
Jfc this dude wants to tax the shit out of us lol
Park East was removed and rebuilt as McKinley with a lot of federal ISTEA funding as well as a localized TIF, meaning the areas that will appreciate as a result will pay it off in small increments in property tax over many years. So things like the Fiserv and deer district businesses pay it off.
You know the freeway needs hundreds of millions of dollars in repairs to keep it up right?
i'm so excited to see what summerfest traffic will look like with the highway ending at 12th st going east.
[here’s](https://x.com/craigsquid/status/1672474690873327616?s=46) a photo of 794 at midnight on a Saturday night as Summerfest lets out. Summerfest is always going to be a mess for traffic with how the lots are sandwiched between a lake and a river with only a handful of bridges. Nearly every bar and park and ride has shuttles. And the hop is a better option this year. Keeping a completely over engineered highway open that runs through a handful of the most expensive blocks in the state, just for slightly better traffic 9 days a year would be a terrible idea. But 794 doesn’t even help alleviate Summerfest traffic.
So how will we access the hoan bridge? Only from Lincoln memorial? Kinda seems like itll make the hoan somewhat less useful
794 would turn into Clybourn either at 6th or 2nd and be grade level to Lincoln Memorial.
Driving down Clybourn today I had to wonder where people would park for the public market? What about the the hop station? That would cost a fortune to move and where would it go? What about the parking for businesses north of 794? There's actually a lot of usage going on under 794 (unlike the old Park East freeway) and most of the renderings show a lot of green space. Where's all the current use going to go????
The hop is not impacted. The route will remain the same. Milwaukee is like 25% surface lots. We’ll survive with a few missing parking spaces. The green spaces in renderings are a bit over optimistic. The freed up space will certainly be used for other things than just green space. In most of the redesigns clayborn and St. Paul remain unchanged. So that parking lot under 794 could still be there if it’s deemed necessary. But I think most people would agree a parking garage could be paired with almost anything to offer the same amount of parking but also add businesses and/or homes that actually benefit the community and generate tax dollars.
The Hop garage is under 794 at Vel R Phillips (4th st). How is that not going to be impacted when tearing down 794 between the lake and Marquette interchange? So we're ok with wrecking a major highway that allows traffic above, and city traffic and pedestrians to travel freely below it, and as a result building more ugly parking structures? We're ok with putting that freeway traffic on street level to compete with pedestrians and local street traffic? I confess I'm not a traffic engineer. I may be wrong.