Construction Ahead

Wisconsin taxpayers were delighted to hear that the massive multi-year reconstruction of the Marquette Interchange in Milwaukee was completed early and came in under budget. Let's hope for the same outcome when we here in Madison get our own bit of I94 reconstructed.



The Wisconsin Department of Transportation is planning on widening 94 from four to six lanes between the Badger Interchange (that's where 39/90/94 all meet up) and County N. The widening of the interstate necessitates the replacement of bridges at Sprecher Road, Gaston Road, and Cty N; the ramps at the 94-Cty N interchange will be lengthened, a stretch of N at the interchange will be rebuilt, as will 1,000 feet of nearby Cty TT; and a Park & ride lot has been proposed for the northwest quadrant of the 94-Cty N interchange. Look for construction to start in 2010 and finish in 2011.

When I asked someone at the DOT why the construction was needed, I was forwarded a rather cryptic e-mail from a gentleman at Ayres Associates, a firm which does surveying, mapping, and the like. There were all these acronyms and figures that were undefined but I think I've got is sussed out.

The stretch of I94 at issue here has an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of 77,650 for "the design year 2030". So nearly 78,000 vehicles are projected to use that bit of freeway everyday by 2030. An AADT of 53,500 is the threshold for considering six lanes, although merely reaching that limit does not in and of itself warrant adding more blacktop. So traffic analysts determined the LOS – Level of Service – for our humble backbone route.

What's Level of Service? Generally speaking, it's how well traffic flows. I found some handy definitions in an environmental impact statement drawn up for the Green Bay Metro Area.

Getting back to our neck of the woods, the westbound portion of I94 hit LOS D in 2004 and the eastbound doing so a year later. LOS D is the "point where service approaches unstable flow and volume to capacity ratios [are] between 0.64 and 0.78". Projections show eastbound lanes to be at LOS E ("unstable flow and volume to capacity ratios between 0.79 and 1.00", i.e. – bad) with the westbound lanes deteriorating to LOS F, the worst there is short of a semi-truck rolling over blocking all traffic. (LOS F is "forced flow and volume to capacity ratios greater than 1.00", i.e. – really bad.)

The gentleman from Ayres notes that, when a section of highway hits LOS D, that's when alarm bells start going off and blacktop gets laid. In our case, the construction will boost I94 to LOS B, which is quite good, before it drops to LOS C by 2014.

I have to wonder if the LOS has gotten any better since gas prices shot up. I also wonder how many fewer cars would be on that stretch of I94 if Madison had Amtrak service.

I bring up Amtrak because Congress recently decided to almost double its funding and, miracle of miracles, Bush is expected to sign onto the program. This is the same president who has wanted to slash funding for the beleaguered rail system.

The legislation provides roughly $13 billion for Amtrak and passenger-rail funding over five years, nearly double current spending levels. The bill also contains a mandate for rail operators to equip trains with collision-avoidance technology that could have prevented last month's head-on crash in California that killed 25 people.

The number of riders on Amtrak, commuter rail and rapid-transit services has soared this year along with gasoline prices, leading Congress to increase federal support. The shift to rail and away from cars -- Americans have been driving less for nearly a year now -- will also affect next year's debate on a transportation-spending bill that could cost as much as $500 billion. Currently, the federal government spends more than $40 billion annually on highways, roughly $10 billion on mass transit and about $1.4 billion on Amtrak. Advocates of shifting those ratios in favor of rail and mass transit hope to seize on the opportunity presented by rising energy prices.

Unsurprisingly, McCain voted against the bill while Obama supported it.

It remains unlikely that Madison will get Amtrak service any time soon. No doubt the projected cost of a few years ago, which was about $350 million, has inched its way upwards. Still, the increased funding is good news. Could we be witnessing a fundamental shift in thinking towards Amtrak?



EDIT: There's a good article up at the Chicago Tribune which notes that the bill also contains funding to develop high speed passenger rail and has info about the initiative to bring it to the Midwest with Chicago as the hub.

Among other precedents, it authorizes $3.4 billion to create high-speed passenger rail corridors and provide rail capital-improvement grants to states.

The ambitious project proposed for the Midwest would cover 3,000 miles in nine states. All lines would radiate from a hub in downtown Chicago. The cost of a fully completed Midwest network is estimated at almost $8 billion.

Planners envision the line running from Chicago up through Milwaukee, Madison, the Twin Cities and eventually Duluth, while separate routes from Chicago would extend east to Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati.

A high-speed rail line between Chicago and the Twin Cities could be running within five years, according to U.S. Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation Committee.

So we here in Madison have as good a chance for Amtrak service as we've ever had.