Dave Reid

Committee Not Happy With Zoo Interchange Plan

By - Jan 30th, 2009 12:36 pm
Sign-up for the Urban Milwaukee daily email

The Wisconsin DOT presented the most recent plans for the reconstruction of the Zoo Interchange.

The project team argued that because of the age of the interchange, number of accidents, and predicted congestion that the interchange needs to be rebuilt and widened.  They presented multiple options, all of which included the relocation of at least 13 residential homes, one business and would cut the parking lot at State Fair in half.  It was pointed out that the under the plans now being considered there will be no impact to the Honey Creek Business Park.  The design includes additional lanes and new frontage roads, referred to as Texas U-Turns, that essentially double the footprint of the highway.  Alderman Bob Bauman expressed that the Wisconsin DOT seems to always push for freeway expansion saying that “no one ever talks about the no build option” and that “this a stealth widening of the Milwaukee freeway system”.

In response to a series of questions and comments regarding transit options, Ms. Brown, from the Wisconsin DOT, responded that “transit is not considered as part of the construction of the interchange”.  Alderman Murphy expressed the committee’s belief that the Wisconsin DOT has ignored multi-modal options at the expense of the City of Milwaukee saying that “the way they (Wisconsin DOT) set up this planning they specifically excluded it”.  Wisconsin DOT staff repeatedly pointed to SEWRPC’s planning as their guiding direction and Ms. Brown reiterated “that (rail) is not an option given the schedule and time frame”.  Near the end of the meeting Alderman Bauman summed up the committee’s message to the Wisconsin DOT saying “carry back the message you don’t have any happy campers”.

Categories: Politics

4 thoughts on “Committee Not Happy With Zoo Interchange Plan”

  1. Shelton V says:

    ANyone mention the need for commuter rail and how easily it could be used to reduce congestion during the construction and after?

  2. Dave Reid says:

    Shelton oh yes that was the point that every member of the committee tried to get across to the DOT. i.e. a rail component should be considered, but well wasn’t. Further Alderman Bauman even pushed for some sort of improved transit service during the reconstruction to alleviate the disturbance.

  3. Aaron Dixon says:

    The ultimate solution for me would be to replace the current bridge with a bigger suspension type bridge that has a modern design. I’m thinking of the Brooklyn Bridge but not replicated. My concept would be a six – eight lane bridge with a two way mass transit mode in the middle or on each side. The idea is to connect the north with the south. (even Racine and Kenosha) I would like the 1,000 ft. suspension towers illuminated at night with special lighting effects that create “shock and awe” for visitors arriving on the 94 high rise. The trains, or whatever the mass transit mode is, would have energy efficient, safe unobstructed right of way.

  4. Jeramey Jannene says:

    @Aaron – Is this for the Zoo Interchange, Hoan Bridge, or I-94 High Rise Bridge?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *