Average Weekday Cars on the Road

4A: 13,000

4B-4C: 17,500

Crash Rates 2021-2025

(Fatal or serious injury crashes per mile per year)

4A-4C: 0.33

Driving Speeds

Target: 25 MPH

Posted: 40MPH (4A-4B); 35MPH (4C)

Actual (85th Percentile): 39MPH

Bike Facility Type

Proposed: Separated bike lanes or shared use path

Existing Weekday Transit Frequency

4A-4C: Every 5-10 mintes

The Ride 2045 Proposed Transit Priority Level

4A: High frequency service

4B-4C: Priority service

For A2R2, vehicle volumes and speeds were collected using standard pneumatic-tube traffic counters over seven consecutive days, September 17–23, 2025. This provided traffic information for every hour of the day, including five weekdays and two weekend days. U-M and Ann Arbor Public Schools were in session, there was no home football game during the collection period, and the roads were not directly affected by active construction. This provides a broader picture of traffic patterns than counts limited to the morning and afternoon rush hours.

The summary charts show how traffic demand varies throughout the day, allowing us to identify periods when traffic volumes may present challenges to changing the roadway configuration.

• The corridor functions as a high-speed arterial. Existing side paths along 4A and 4B provide separation from vehicles, but driveway and intersection crossings can still be uncomfortable and difficult.
• Concerns about crosswalk compliance issues and long pedestrian delays at intersections.
• Calls for better bike facilities, safer intersections and speed reduction, with less comments about transit compared to other corridors.

Safer crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists

Safer bicycle and transit facilities

Reduced vehicle speeds

Expanding multimodal access

Support future land-use changes

Current conditions

Eisenhower has relatively controlled access and continuous sidewalks or side paths, providing more separation from traffic than many other A2R2 corridors. However, operating speeds remain well above the 25mph target, bicycle facilities are inconsistent, and major intersections involve long or complex crossings. As surrounding land uses redevelop, the wide multilane design may become more challenging as walking, bicycling, transit, and cross-street activity increase. Segment 4C has sections that lack bike facilities.

What this design achieves

Reallocating outside through lanes can reduce passing opportunities, reinforce lower speeds, simplify crossings, and create space for a more continuous bicycle facility. The existing side paths provide a basis for improvement. Transit priority can be added at major intersections or other locations where bus delay warrants it. In 4A and 4B, current traffic volumes make lane reallocation comparatively straightforward; 4C will require additional peak-hour and intersection design work.