Construction scheduled for West Stadium Boulevard in Ann Arbor starting in March
Parts of West Stadium Boulevard in Ann Arbor will be under construction starting in March.
The City of Ann Arbor says the work will take place between Suffolk Avenue and Hutchins Avenue - approximately between Pauline and Seventh streets - and will continue until November.
The project will include:
- Completely reconstructing the street.
- Reducing from four to three lanes between Suffolk and Franklin streets, with on-street bike lanes on both sides.
- New, large capacity storm sewer pipes to provide detention and improved water quality downstream.
- Removing and replacing existing street trees.
- A new water main to replace the existing water distribution pipes.
- New sidewalk ramps and LED energy-efficient street lights.
Detour Route
One lane of westbound traffic will be maintained through the construction zone.
Eastbound traffic will be detoured west on Pauline Boulevard, south on Maple Road, east on Scio Church Road then north on Main Street.
More Information
The city will host an informational open house from 7 to 8:30 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 3 at Trinity Lutheran Church, 1400 W. Stadium Blvd. in Ann Arbor. There will be a short presentation at 7:15 p.m. about the project, followed by a question and answer session with the project team.
View West Stadium Boulevard construction zone in a larger map
Comments
A2_Jim
Sat, Jan 30, 2010 : 4:55 p.m.
The city has an agenda which is to make using cars less desirable than taking the AATA buses and riding a bike and that WILL NOT change until there is a public outcry. Plans are drawn up in secret and inflicted upon us uniformed public rabble because THEY know better than we what is best. Contact the City Council reps for this area Marcia Higgins (lives just off this stretch of Stadium) and Margie Teal (up for re-election this fall) with your concerns. http://www.a2gov.org/government/citycouncil/Pages/Home.aspx
pegret
Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 1:30 p.m.
And whose brilliant idea was this? Probably the same genius who came up with the very expensive mistake on S. Main near the Busch's plaza. Hey Ann Arbor, let's just keep spending as much money as we can for projects that most people don't want!
aninsider
Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 11:11 a.m.
These are radical anti vehicle policies/plans implemented under the guise of "traffic calming". They do not improve traffic flow and were not intended to, they are pro bicycle, anti vehicle designs forced into all major street reconstruction designs by written policy. Bicycle routes/traffic trump vehicle traffic flow thru written policy and street design requirements and when bicycle lanes cannot be added maintaining current lanes due to R.O.W. or greenbelt issues, then a lane will be removed to accommodate bicycles. These policies in fact impede vehicle traffic flow as can be observed daily during morning and afternoon rush hours. They also have increased vehicular (cut-thru) traffic in residential areas with drivers attempting to avoid the "by design" traffic back up. Traffic backups appear to be worse in the afternoon rush hour in these redesigned routes with traffic at stand still movement starting as early as 3:00 pm and lasting until 6:00 pm, with hundreds of vehicles for hours at stand still movement pumping astronomical amounts of exhaust fumes into the air which I think is quite ironic. It use to be called rush hour, these designs have changed that to rush hours. All routes in and out of town are increasing being reduced with more coming (possibly Huron St.). With other communities working to get vehicle traffic in and out of their towns as quickly as possible, this community seems to be going in the other direction and appears the added tons of exhaust pollution due to standing traffic at most all routes in and out of town is an acceptable trade for bikes to ride in major traffic routes. I think one of the previous posters had it right regarding Ann Arbors leaders living a different reality, but I think weve all known that for awhile now.
bellababy
Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 10:38 a.m.
i am all for updating the roads but reducing the traffic lanes to add bike paths?? I think a traffic survey is in need. Not to mention laws regulating the bike paths. State street has them and most bikers are sitll on the sidewalks, in the roads?? If they are to protect the bikers then use them!
townie54
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 10:05 p.m.
Just like I've said many times,Ann Arbors rulers are in a different reality then us working folks.Bikers can ride on any other road but Stadium.Its dangerous to ride on Stadium.I sure wouldn't want to.There is no reason you can give that will convince me that this is a good idea because there isn't one.Zip Zilch Nada.Maybe the reporter made a mistake.
LB
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 8:45 p.m.
Almost 2 years ago there was an informational meeting at Pioneer High School to discuss this matter. I signed up to receive emails, but have never received anything further. The Planners knew that continuing the existing four lanes with bike lanes was going to be a problem with the small extensions on Stadium, because the Master Plan with every major street reconstruction calls for bike lanes. I believe they know this will be a problem, but obviously they don't care.
CobraII
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 12:46 p.m.
Doesn't everyone know, your not supposed to drive a car to the football games or anywhere else in A2!
Peter Eckstein
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 11:38 a.m.
It is fine that traffic will be detoured onto Pauline, but isn't this at the same time that Main Street will be partly closed down because of all the wonderful (?) things they will be doing to the Michigan Stadium? Will both projects be squeezing some of the same traffic simultaneously?
roz
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 11:32 a.m.
I vote with Lulumom. I'd like to learn about any traffic studies that have been done. It's hard to believe that vehicle-flow data would support this change. When Stadium traffic jams up (and not just during events, but even during evening rush hour), traffic will divert to residential streets, raising more safety concerns than the absence of bike lanes currently does. Other commenters noted the proximity of Pioneer High. Not to diss high school students, but it's not generally a population noted for patience and caution. Dedicated left-turn lanes make sense in areas where there are a lot of left turners to be accommodated, such as at sizable intersections, stretches with a lot of parking-lot entrances, etc. Does anyone believe that the hordes of neighbors turning onto 1-block-long Kay Parkway are a problem looking for a solution? And lest I be thought a knee-jerk change-hater, I love the traffic rotaries at Maple and M-14.
redhead74
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 10:15 a.m.
I have to agree with both lulumom9 and SamiM. Stadium Blvd is a much more major route that the stretch of Packard they are talking about. Has the city considered the student traffic that tears out of Pioneer on their short lunch time and heads to all the fast food places on Stadium? Do you actually think that these kids are NOT going to cut in to traffic at the last second where the lanes go to one to get back to school on time? Or maybe they will stop going to retaurants on that part of Stadium because it is a hassle. Was there any consideration by council as to the impact on businesses in the area? I drove every day on that stretch when the other road improvements were being done. There were always huge backups where the lanes went down to one. I know this mayor and council value bike lanes above all else but in this case the majority was not taken into account. The only reason to go to from 4 to 3 lanes is to provide bike lanes to a very small number of citizens. The rest of us evil car drivers don't matter. And why are we having a community meeting AFTER the plans have been set and a construction date is on the horizon? I think the answer to that is a nobrainer. In the mean time we get to continue to drive over a bridge that is an eyesore and a real danger.
a2roots
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 9:01 a.m.
This reworking of the traffic has been out there for awhile. You cannot compare the short strip of Packard with this section of Stadium. It goes beyond stupid to think this is a good idea. I am pretty certain our quiet, small but politically connected bike people are behind this. We certainly need bike lanes in place of traffic lanes...NOT. Does anyone really think that putting a bike lane here will increase bike ridership along this route? If you drive S. Main from Buschs to Eisenhower please tell me how many bikes use this route. And Ed, where exactly are the bottlenecks that are created by the lack of a center turn lane. The handful of times this occurs daily will certainly be overshadowed by the problems of moving traffic during events at the UM and Pioneer. Another case of misplaced priorities to satisfy a few and an attempt to drive home life style changes.
Sarah
Wed, Jan 27, 2010 : 6:47 a.m.
I'm with lulumom. Sorry, Edward! On Platt at Packard, heading southbound, the road goes from two lanes to one straight lane. The right lane becomes right turn only, but cars scoot down it to cut in and go straight. The traffic backs up almost to the Platt/Huron light (near the United Way) at the evening rush hour and for those of us who need to get to the left turn lane? ha ha ha. It's an absolute disaster.
Theda J.
Tue, Jan 26, 2010 : 9:09 p.m.
Explain to me why Stadium west of Pauline is now 5 lanes to accommodate all the traffic coming in and out of Ann Arbor and now the city is going to go down to 3 lanes the closer we get to a large high school, a football stadium, and a basketball arena? I just don't understand it.
Chris
Tue, Jan 26, 2010 : 2:40 p.m.
Lulu, I don't think anyone made plans to try and slow down/bottle up traffic. The recent changes on various roads within A2 have been well-received, IMO. Per Ed's point, changes on Packard have, I think, actually helped traffic, by having a dedicated turn lane.
lulumom9
Tue, Jan 26, 2010 : 2:37 p.m.
Thanks, for the comment, Edward, however, Packard does not house the venues that Stadium houses or the type where the traffic arrives and departs at the same time. I remember the traffic snarls after the football games on Stadium last season because of the Maple Rd. construction between Dexter and Miller which only allowed one lane in each direction. A city should not try to attract large numbers of fans (which are in reality customers) to a venue if it does not have the infrastructure to handle the resultant traffic.
lulumom9
Tue, Jan 26, 2010 : 1:53 p.m.
Let me get this straight, traffic is going to be two lanes in each direction and then all of a sudden funnel into one lane in each direction. Does anyone understand that Stadium is a main route around the city? We have huge numbers of cars trying to reach or leave a large high school, a 100,000 plus seat stadium, and a basketball arena and you are expecting two lanes of traffic to handle all of these cars. Has anyone who came up with this brilliant solution ever been out on the highway during construction season and noticed that, even in relatively light volume, how the traffic comes to a complete standstill when it has to funnel from two lanes down to one? This is probably the most hairbrained idea the city planners have come up with yet. Pity anyone heading westward after a Michigan football game; you may make it out of town before midnight!
SamiM
Tue, Jan 26, 2010 : 10:02 a.m.
How about fixing the bridge on stadium between Industrial and Main? >.