794 is at a crossroads, quite literally.
Should the Lake Interchange be rebuilt essentially as is, or should it be brought to grade level, creating a downtown boulevard? Or is the answer somewhere in the middle?
Those are among the questions in front of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, as it explores concepts related to the upcoming reconstruction.
The DOT wants to know what you think.
Public involvement meetings are planned this Tuesday and Wednesday, August 1 and 2, at the Milwaukee Marriott Downtown and Saint Thomas More High School. Details are in the flyer.
And here are details on the project and concepts under consideration.
South Milwaukee’s Common Council — and those in Cudahy and St. Francis — have already weighed in. Their position: Keep it as is. The South Milwaukee council passed a resolution passed on April 18 to “oppose the replacement of I-794 with surface street ramps.” Cudahy and St. Francis passed similar measures. From the Journal Sentinel story on this …
South Milwaukee Mayor Jim Shelenske said on his Facebook page potential future plans to create a surface boulevard “could significantly increase your drive times.”
South Milwaukee’s resolution opposing the project, passed by the common council April 18, highlights some potential negative affects including the loss of Route 48, an MCTS freeway flyer route. The resolution also asserts a likely increased density of traffic on I-94 from Racine County to downtown Milwaukee as drivers change habits.
The Cudahy Common Council has passed an identical resolution, calling I-794 “an essential transportation connection.”
St. Francis expressed similar opposition to the project, which officials said that “would sever a key economic gateway to the South Shore and increase drive times between Milwaukee and the South Shore, I-43 and I-94.” The St. Francis resolution, which passed May 2, also suggested the proposal would increase congestion on surface streets within the three South Shore cities. “(The resolution is) just to let the powers that be know our citizens are against this,” said St. Francis Mayor Ken Tutaj.
“You’re going to have cars congested on a very small street,” Tutaj said, adding that the skinnier streets are proposed to include longer sidewalks and bike paths.
“The City of St. Francis opposes any transportation alternative that incorporates demolition or decommissioning of the Daniel Hoan Memorial Bridge or any other part of the existing I-794 … within the City of Milwaukee,” the St. Francis resolution reads.
My view: It’s too early to make statements like this. And it’s too easy.
As someone who uses 794 daily to get to and from work and has valued this fast and easy connection with downtown and points west, I suggest a key piece of information is missing.
How will travel times be impacted by the various concepts? The answer is, no one knows. Yet.
I asked that question of Project Manager David Pittman, and he responded via email: “At this time, that level of analysis has not been performed. As we further develop our various concepts into alternatives, we anticipate doing more detailed traffic modeling that will be able to provide travel time predictions.”
In other words, we don’t know perhaps the most important data point for those in the South Shore — the ones most likely to use 794 as their connection through downtown — to make up their minds on this.
If travel times are impacted by just a few minutes with even the most “at-grade” concept, then I’m all in on what would be a generational opportunity — a chance to unlock more than $1 billion in development potential, connect the Third Ward to downtown Milwaukee and the lakefront, and breathe new life into streets and public spaces below the bridges. A boulevard would also encourage other modes of transportation beyond the car.
And if the drive times are significantly higher? Then maybe I’ll need to rethink my position.
Either way, why shut down debate now? We may get one chance in my lifetime to do this right.
South Milwaukee Blog 
Thank you for your level-headed response to this situation. I also use 794 daily and I am familiar with positive impact to the downtown should this section of freeway be removed. Like you, I am going to reserve judgement until more info is presented. I wish others would as well.
It’s also worth noting the clear lack of research done on the actual proposal or the facts. South Milwaukee’s resolution has a whole WHEREAS devoted to the impacts on route 48 – a route that has been suspended since 2020 and officially discontinued since Nov. 2022 – a full 5 months before the resolution was passed.
ever developer that says this will unlock billions in investment will also be asking for a TIF to fund the project because without taxpayer dollars the project wont happen.
The people behind that want to take down 794 only want to make themselves rich.