US-41 Interstate Conversion

[rawmustard]

i could be COMPLEATLY wrong, but i think the only control cities are green bay and milwaukee...and im sure chicago in the millwaukee area....there are new electronic signs...and mabey they will have times to city X on them...but i dont think any other signs do...this is from what i have seen in renderings...and a few signs up here in Oshkosh.

I would want to think WisDOT would use whatever control city is used at the northern 41/141 split. Oconto would make the most sense. I'm not sure what MDOT uses, but probably not Marquette until US-41 heads north out of Escanaba.

[agentsteel53]

i could be COMPLEATLY wrong

yes.  yes you are.

could you please, possibly, with a cherry on top, "mabey" use correct English spelling and grammar in your posts?

[mgk920]

'Appleton' is used as a US 41 control at the WI 172 Ashwaubenon Interchange.

As for the BGSes at Mason St, just the 'NORTH US 41' control is fine, as it serves a lot of local traffic.  Now, OTOH, at I-43, 'Marinette/Iron Mountain' would be my control.

I would also use 'Appleton' instead of 'Fond du Lac' as the control for US 45/I-894 in metro Milwaukee.

Mike

[Alps]

i could be COMPLEATLY wrong

yes.  yes you are.

could you please, possibly, with a cherry on top, "mabey" use correct English spelling and grammar in your posts?

The Compleat Angler was there first. Therefore Jordana is correct.

yes i know it's jordan a h

[GeekJedi]

IIRC, Marinette is used as a control city for NB US 41 from WIS 172.

[Jordanah1]

i could be COMPLEATLY wrong

yes.  yes you are.

could you please, possibly, with a cherry on top, "mabey" use correct English spelling and grammar in your posts?

The Compleat Angler was there first. Therefore Jordana is correct.

yes i know it's jordan a h

i think i can read your white thing at the bottom...yes.. its jordan a h...(initials). and i was refering to the new signage along the corridor in oshkosh and green bay. and potential sign upgrades in the milwaukee area when the interstate designation is given, and signage changes....and..im sorry that i was wrong...at least i said that i wasn't sure...

[mgk920]

Interesting - WisDOT has just distributed brochures explaining the 2012 work plans for US 41 in both the Oshkosh-Neenah and Green Bay areas in Thursday's (2012-01-26) editions of the newspapers in NE Wisconsin.

Neat!



Mike

[mgk920]

I went to an informational meeting this evening in Oshkosh for the WI 21 interchange area and have a few interesting tidbits to report.

-WisDOT had a REALLY NICE scale model of that interchange and causeway area on display.  

-The US 41/WI 21 interchange and WI 21 across US 41 will close in the early AM of Monday, 2012-03-19 and is planned for reopening on 2012-11-15.  The contractor will receive a $50K/day bonus for each day that it opens early, up to $500K (ten days) - and that is the contractor's schedule.

-The southbound side of the Lake Butte des Morts Causeway is being worked on as I type this, crews are setting beams on one of the bridges tonight and tomorrow night. Northbound will be done next year.

-Two county highway bridges to the north of the causeway (County 'Y' and County 'G') will be replaced in either 2013 and/or 2014.  This is mainly to bring things up to modern standards plus add off-road trail facilities to each.  I was told that snowmobilers frequently cross US 41 at County 'G'.

-Forget about adding any additional interchanges between WI 76 by Oshkosh and Breezewood-Bell in Neenah.  Interstate standards will not allow a new access in that short of distance without a lot of Federal messing around and the added utility of such an interchange will not be worth the hassles.  This idea has been seriously talked about and studied as recently as the late 1990s/early 2000s.

-(*IMPORTANT ITEM!!!*) Speaking of interstate standards, even though they did not give a percentage likelihood, the WisDOT guys all sounded about 98-99% certain that the I-route number that US 41 will receive upon its pending promotion *WILL NOT* be '41'.  Far and away their favorite number is '55'.  They also said that ID(i)OT isn't thrilled with any of the numbers (but oh well - hehehehe    ).

I did discuss at length with them how things are all wired together in Chicagoland.  Yes, they are aware of the numbering situation with I-55 vs. I-57 in Chicago and that if the chosen number will indeed be '55', at least part of the Stevenson Expressway will then have to be changed to an 'odd' 3DI.  One of them also said the words "New Orleans".  Regardless, they'll be leaving it up to ID(i)OT and the ISTHA to figure out how to tie the ends together.

(An aside, I actually kind of like the idea that was discussed a while back that if the number is '55', then, with the plans that the ISTHA has to re-engineer the Tri-State Tollway (I-294)/Stevenson (I-55) interchange, I-55 could be rerouted to follow the Tri-State from there to Wisconsin, reflagging the entire Stevenson from there 'in' as an odd 3DI.  I-555 anyone? [Note, 'I-155' is already in use in Illinois.])

Wither WI 55 in that case?  The WisDOT guys told me that the current plan is to do nothing with it and that they believe that public confusion surrounding such an I-route number (US 41 meets WI 55 in Kaukauna) will not be a problem.

They are expecting preliminary word on the number assignment from the FHWA by sometime in mid to late spring.

Also, I can announce a website on the pending US 41 interstate promotion that has recently gone 'live':
http://www.dot.wi.gov/projects/neregion/41/index.htm

-The NB US 41 to NB US 45 flyover ramp at Algoma Bd in Oshkosh is expected to open by late June.

Mike

[Revive 755]

So US 41 will likely be I-243?   

I can see IDOT not wanting to change all the signs extending I-55 or I-57 would require, but I'm not seeing why IDOT "isn't thrilled with any of the numbers - there isn't exactly a good place for an I-243 to enter Illinois, and I highly doubt there is a secret plan for an I-41 in Illinois.

[JREwing78]

I-55 would be far and away the most prominent choice, not just because of "New Orleans, but also "Memphis" and "St. Louis". It also is probably the best fit for the interstate highway grid in general, though it does make I-43 north of Milwaukee look even more out of place.

We could really cheese off the IDOT guys and team this with a I-57 extension replacing I-43 north of Milwaukee.

I'm not sure now would be the best time for WisDOT to go against their "no concurrency" policy. WI-39 was different because it was sufficiently separated from I-39. But having "55" and "55" meet at an interchange would make providing directions a pain for the folks in Kaukauna. I would rather see it replaced with WI-155 or WI-255. Or, dig up WI-62 or WI-150 out of the ashes.

[hobsini2]

There are a couple major issues of rebuilding the I-55/I-294 interchange to allow I-55 to go up US 41 i can think of.

First is the room for widening the ramps from NB 55 to NB 294 and SB 294 to SB 55. You would have to close the Joliet Rd part of the interchange (which would piss off people in Indian Head Park and Countryside), widen SB 294 to SB 55 ramp to at least 2 lanes if not 3 lanes, and the proximaty (sp) of the County Line Rd interchange on 55 would need a 3 lane wide c-d roadway.

Secondly, 294 itself would have to add at least 1 more lane each direction (making 294 a 10 lane highway at minimum) to carry the flow of new traffic to go with the current traffic along with 94 in Lake, Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee Counties.

This is a construction nightmare if you ask me.

If one were to extend 55 or 57 into WI, it should be 57 since you already have to interchanges in place to accomidate the added traffic.

I could see 55 being rerouted onto a farther bypass of Chicago like 355 if the 53 Tollway is ever built into Lake County to Waukegan but frankly i would just keep 55 ending in Chicago.

[NE2]

Changing numbers doesn't change traffic flow. If the interchange is fine currently, it doesn't need reconfiguration just because the numbers change. (Even if it's not currently fine, it doesn't need to jump the queue.)

[SEWIGuy]

Wither WI 55 in that case?  The WisDOT guys told me that the current plan is to do nothing with it and that they believe that public confusion surrounding such an I-route number (US 41 meets WI 55 in Kaukauna) will not be a problem.

Why don't they just renumber the section south of WI-29?  (They can get rid of the 15 mile duplex between Shawano and Angelica.)  Only about 30 miles...and they could do some 3di.  That way they don't have to change the entire highway north of WI-29.

Regardless, I think I-55 with a WI-55 interchange would be much less confusing than an I-57 and a WI-57 both connecting Milwaukee and Green Bay.

Will they keep US-41 on its current routing from the IL border through northern Wisconsin...including a really long concurrency from Appleton Avenue through Green Bay?

[mgk920]

Wither WI 55 in that case?  The WisDOT guys told me that the current plan is to do nothing with it and that they believe that public confusion surrounding such an I-route number (US 41 meets WI 55 in Kaukauna) will not be a problem.

Why don't they just renumber the section south of WI-29?  (They can get rid of the 15 mile duplex between Shawano and Angelica.)  Only about 30 miles...and they could do some 3di.  That way they don't have to change the entire highway north of WI-29.

Regardless, I think I-55 with a WI-55 interchange would be much less confusing than an I-57 and a WI-57 both connecting Milwaukee and Green Bay.

Will they keep US-41 on its current routing from the IL border through northern Wisconsin...including a really long concurrency from Appleton Avenue through Green Bay?

From what I could gather, US 41 will stay where it is, too.

Also, a couple of more items:

-I forgot to ask about whether or not WI 441 is also in line for 'promotion'. 

-WisDOT is likely to start studying US 41 between WI 15 at Appleton and Scheuring Rd in De Pere after all of the current work is complete, but as it stands now, any upgrades on that section are years, if not decades, away.

Mike

[JREwing78]

Why don't they just renumber the section south of WI-29?  (They can get rid of the 15 mile duplex between Shawano and Angelica.)  Only about 30 miles...and they could do some 3di.  That way they don't have to change the entire highway north of WI-29.

A solid idea. That would at least avoid two routes with the same number meeting up. Call it Highway 62.

From what I could gather, US 41 will stay where it is, too.

Not surprising, given that WisDOT has no issue with the I-39/US-51 concurrency that largely there for historical purposes. It would also cause a lot more route resigning headaches north of Green Bay than removing US-51 from its route would've.

[hobsini2]

Changing numbers doesn't change traffic flow. If the interchange is fine currently, it doesn't need reconfiguration just because the numbers change. (Even if it's not currently fine, it doesn't need to jump the queue.)

I disagree with "Changing numbers won't change the traffic flow."
The 55/294 interchange has the NB 55 to NB 294, SB 294 to NB 55, SB 294 to SB 55 ramps all single lane. The only double lane part of any of these ramps is SB 294 to SB 55 until you get to the toll plaza then it becomes a single lane. If 55 was to be routed onto the interchange like some propose, the interchange will need to be widened at a minimum of 2 lanes each direction. Trust me. The interchange unless widened could not handle the traffic.

[Brandon]

Changing numbers doesn't change traffic flow. If the interchange is fine currently, it doesn't need reconfiguration just because the numbers change. (Even if it's not currently fine, it doesn't need to jump the queue.)

I disagree with "Changing numbers won't change the traffic flow."
The 55/294 interchange has the NB 55 to NB 294, SB 294 to NB 55, SB 294 to SB 55 ramps all single lane. The only double lane part of any of these ramps is SB 294 to SB 55 until you get to the toll plaza then it becomes a single lane. If 55 was to be routed onto the interchange like some propose, the interchange will need to be widened at a minimum of 2 lanes each direction. Trust me. The interchange unless widened could not handle the traffic.

Shoot.  It already can't handle the existing traffic.  Part of the problem is the County Line Rd cloverleaf next to it.  I favor getting rid of the eastern half of that interchange and making it into a folded diamond to give the I-294 ramps more room.

[SEWIGuy]

Why don't they just renumber the section south of WI-29?  (They can get rid of the 15 mile duplex between Shawano and Angelica.)  Only about 30 miles...and they could do some 3di.  That way they don't have to change the entire highway north of WI-29.

A solid idea. That would at least avoid two routes with the same number meeting up. Call it Highway 62.

Except I completely forgot that WI-55 heads south along the east side of Lake Winnebago.  Blah...

[SEWIGuy]

Changing numbers doesn't change traffic flow. If the interchange is fine currently, it doesn't need reconfiguration just because the numbers change. (Even if it's not currently fine, it doesn't need to jump the queue.)

I disagree with "Changing numbers won't change the traffic flow."
The 55/294 interchange has the NB 55 to NB 294, SB 294 to NB 55, SB 294 to SB 55 ramps all single lane. The only double lane part of any of these ramps is SB 294 to SB 55 until you get to the toll plaza then it becomes a single lane. If 55 was to be routed onto the interchange like some propose, the interchange will need to be widened at a minimum of 2 lanes each direction. Trust me. The interchange unless widened could not handle the traffic.

You seem to be saying that by simply changing the routing of I-55 that a bunch of people would take the route that didn't take it previously.  That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[mgk920]

Regardless of the numbering issue, the Tri-State/Stevenson interchange badly needs a complete re-engineering.  If/when the ISTHA ever converts to a transponder/photo only toll system (perhaps set up as a 'virtual ticket' system with the gantries being set up on all of the entrances and exits), then full-speed flyovers can be built there, they could use air-rights over that sewage treatment plant for those and there is room for then to set down for the tollway north.  (For example, I like how that full-speed ramp was done for NB I-39 at the Northwest Tollway at Rockford.)

Yes, the rest of that mess also needs redoing, including finding a new way to handle Joliet Rd (old US 66).

Mike

[Brandon]

Regardless of the numbering issue, the Tri-State/Stevenson interchange badly needs a complete re-engineering.  If/when the ISTHA ever converts to a transponder/photo only toll system (perhaps set up as a 'virtual ticket' system with the gantries being set up on all of the entrances and exits), then full-speed flyovers can be built there, they could use air-rights over that sewage treatment plant for those and there is room for then to set down for the tollway north.  (For example, I like how that full-speed ramp was done for NB I-39 at the Northwest Tollway at Rockford.)

Yes, the rest of that mess also needs redoing, including finding a new way to handle Joliet Rd (old US 66).

Mike

Joliet Rd is the easy part.  It's the County Line Rd ramps that muck up the movements here.

[GeekJedi]

Changing numbers doesn't change traffic flow. If the interchange is fine currently, it doesn't need reconfiguration just because the numbers change. (Even if it's not currently fine, it doesn't need to jump the queue.)

But what about all of those people that took I-55 -> I-294 -> I-94 -> US-41??  They're all going to take I-55 the entire way now!!  

[mgk920]

Changing numbers doesn't change traffic flow. If the interchange is fine currently, it doesn't need reconfiguration just because the numbers change. (Even if it's not currently fine, it doesn't need to jump the queue.)

But what about all of those people that took I-55 -> I-294 -> I-94 -> US-41??  They're all going to take I-55 the entire way now!!  

For us here in the Oshkosh/Appleton/Green Bay, WI area, the route number order is usually 'I-55 -> I-39 -> WI 26 -> US 41'.

:jumping:

Mike

[triplemultiplex]

So WisDOT is betting on 55?  Hmm.  My preferred option has always been 41 as I've said before.  Extending a Chicagoland interstate puts it out of sequence and that always rubs me wrong.  At least it would be rooted in the grid.
And I can understand picking 55 over 57 because of that whole x5 emphasis the grid uses.  55 is what should've been the number for the original Milwaukee-Green Bay interstate.

(Sorry to get fictional, but visual aids are great.  That's not a proposed renumbering scheme, but the numbering system I would've used from the beginning; renumbering that much highway is just unreasonable.  I'll be happy to discuss this image further in the fictional subforum.)

Mike, did you discuss with anyone the possible fate of I-894?  Regardless of the number we get, it seems logical to eliminate 894 as it would create a useless duplex with the new interstate.  But I'm just speculating; does WisDOT see that happening?

I think all the verbiage on WisDOT's site has I-43 as the northern terminus, but was there any mention of taking the new interstate to Abrams right away?  That split is major enough for an interstate terminus in my mind.

Finally, was there any display about the WI 144 interchange in Slinger?  It's up for reconstruction next year, I believe, and is the last paleo-interchange left on the interstate corridor. It seems to me like they have room to eliminate the loop ramp and turn it into a straight-up diamond.  Just curious.

[kharvey10]

I recalled in early 80s that IDiOT told WisDOT off about extending 43 into IL on that US 51 freeway that was under construction at the time.  They also told them to shove it on I-57 back in the 70s.  WisDOT should go right after IDiOT and pursue 57 or 55, I see 57 the better choice - IDiOT and ITHA is actually getting off their butts in building that interchange with 294.  Chicagoland locals don't refer any of the main expressway/tollway by number anyway - except for 57.  The trucking industry sees I-57 as basically I-55 ALT anyway, there are places on I-57 south of Chicago that at least 30% of traffic is trucks.