Expanded I-94 freeway in Milwaukee
Chuck, I wonder if the City of Milwaukee has authority over the State of Wisconsin on this project? If the City does not want it but the State does, then does the State win? Seems like a zero sum game here. Thoughts?
I have relatives in Milwaukee and visit often. More transit is needed not road lane miles.
Chris Godlewski - Goshen, Indiana
Comments
4 comments
I'm not sure. In Minnesota, we have a process called Municipal Consent. This is only required when the highway is changed -- more lanes, added right-of-way, etc... -- and that creates a little game. The state needs municipal consent, but they can withhold funding if they don't get it (let things slowly rot or do minimal maintenance). There might be some other nuance, but the state -- which has the money -- has the power and cities really don't.
That being said, the only projects I've ever seen stopped or dramatically changed are those with strong local leadership pushing in a different direction. I don't know any DOT that will proceed against a unified municipal opposition; that's a tough thing to do, politically. We're in weird political times, and Wisconsin's state/local political tension might make it more of an exception, so who knows.
Thank you Charles for the comment back. Makes sense. This is more of an informal response back from City to State. Doesn’t seem fair but I agree this is the setup in place. I like Minnesota’s approach. Thanks again.
Chris, I just stumbled upon your post. I'm a resident of MKE and have been pushing on social media for public comment. For what it's worth, they do allow for public comment. There isn't much for transparency of what happens to it though, which I think is a shortcoming of the review process. While I'm not a local leader, I'd like to think every form submittal helps.
Along with the fix-at-6 lane link you sent, the DOT occasionally mentions a no-build option only as a comparison to 'why' they should build it. They don't go into any depth on the pros of not spending 1.2 billion dollars and maintaining the existing system. Instead, they give you the ultimatum to spend 1.15 billion for the 6-lane option.
The new mayor, city engineer, and Dept. Public Works Head are all very 'pro urbanism', but haven't surprised me with any stances against the expansion. If I-94 expansion falls through, it's all the more important to push hard for boulevard-ing the I-794 spur or providing comment on their additional planned expansions for 2050.
Here's the page with a link to the comment form:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/se/94stadiumint/involve.aspx
Wisconsin's VISION 2050 with additional highway expansion around MKE:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/se/94ew-study/2022/hearing/traffic.pdf
For a DOT with +4 billion in debt, they sure are hungry to spend more money.
Thank you Sam. I left a comment from the link you provided. I just hope if this gets built that other viable options to support the community are planned like bike trails, pedestrian and transit options. And other items to support the community it is dividing. My West Allis family is fighting this as well. Keep the good fight going.
Please sign in to leave a comment.