Yesterday, I had a chance to head to Jefferson County to catch-up on the WI-26 upgrade project. This project will eventually create a 4-lane highway from Janesville to the intersection with WI-60 north of Watertown. All cities will be bypassed along the way, with the exception of Johnson Creek, which is where WI-26 intersects with I-94.
The bypass of Jefferson is pretty much complete, except for the paving, and the final intersections on the north and south end of town. The southern end of the bypass will actually begin at the northern end of the Fort Atkinson bypass. The Fort Atkinson bypass at the north end has actually been realligned to feed better into the Jefferson bypass. This will be a full-freeway bypass.
Work on the Fort Atkinson bypass has also begun. The Fort Atkinson bypass is currently two-lane, most of which is a super-two expressway. They are adding two-lanes and a median, and constructing bridges to keep all cross-traffic off the bypass. This will also then be a full-freeway bypass. Work on the section between the Jefferson bypass and the current Johnson Creek four-lane segment has begun. This is a very short section that will not be a full-freeway.
Finally, the Watertown section began last year, most of which has occured on the south end of town. There is not much evidence of the bypass on the northern end.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/wis26corridor/map.htm
I'll have to take a peek at this project in the near future - I last checked it all out last summer.
I do find it interesting how the north end of the Fort Atkinson bypass is being redirected to follow the west side of the railroad towards Jefferson instead of crossing over to the east side of it as it does now. Too bad the two weren't built together when the Fort Atkinson section was first built in the 1980s - it could have saved a considerable amount of linear distance of ROW and concrete.
Also, I have been bugging WisDOT to extend that work beyond WI 60 for several years now, or at least start planning for it. I'd like to see it continue on to connect with US 151 at the SE 'corner' of Beaver Dam.
Anything on progress on the Milton bypass section and planning for the new US 12 Fort Atkinson-Whitewater section yet?
WI 26 is an important connection between NE Wisconsin and points south.
Mike
The only indication of any work south of Fort Atkinson is that they realligned WI-59 south of town last year. Work on that section isn't set to begin until 2012.
The Whitewater to Fort Atkinson work, which is essentially a Fort Atkinson bypass, has basically been shelved. They have selected alternative 7a.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d1/us12fort/docs/map-southbypassconcept.pdf
They are also looking at a different alternative to 7a called "Concept J" which relocates the US-12 / WI-26 interchange just south of the current southern bypass interchange.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d1/us12fort/docs/memo-conceptj.pdf
My guess is this doesn't happen for 15 years at least.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 01, 2010, 10:39:02 AM
The only indication of any work south of Fort Atkinson is that they realligned WI-59 south of town last year. Work on that section isn't set to begin until 2012.
The Whitewater to Fort Atkinson work, which is essentially a Fort Atkinson bypass, has basically been shelved. They have selected alternative 7a.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d1/us12fort/docs/map-southbypassconcept.pdf
They are also looking at a different alternative to 7a called "Concept J" which relocates the US-12 / WI-26 interchange just south of the current southern bypass interchange.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/d1/us12fort/docs/memo-conceptj.pdf
My guess is this doesn't happen for 15 years at least.
Well, WisDOT is studying alignments for heavy upgrades to the US 151/WI 23 interchange in Fond du Lac, even though construction is not expected for 20-30 years, just to preserve ROW. The idea there is to add a full-speed free flow connection in the major turn direction (US 151 to the south<->WI 23 to the east).
Anyways, I do not like that 'Concept J' at all and the discussion in that paper comes to the same conclusion. '7a' is the routing that I favored all along, too, and I like its redo of the WI 26 south interchange (free-flow ramps and favoring the US 12 through movement).
More broadly, as I have been thinking out loud for a couple of decades now, :poke: US 12 southeast of Madison strikes me as a dam that is about to fail, with it being just a couple of little upgrades here and there (ie, the Fort Atkinson bypass, the Whitewater-Elkhorn 'corner cut', a Richmond, IL bypass, the IL 53 Lake County Tollway, etc) away from suddenly needing fast-track upgrades to a fully interstate compatible six-lane freeway, including major re-engineering of the Beltline interchange in Madison - it will supplant I-90 and I-94 as the major routing between Chicagoland and points northwest.
I just also comment on your WI-26 to US-151 hookup. The locals generally take Dodge County A between WI-26 just south of Juneau, which intersects with US-151 just northeast of Beaver Dam.
One idea would be to follow that general highway up to US-151. Another would be to have WI-26 turn northwest after the WI-60 interchange, follow a current railroad ROW to where it can hook up with US-151 near the County G interchange on the south side of Beaver Dam.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 03, 2010, 09:22:00 AM
I just also comment on your WI-26 to US-151 hookup. The locals generally take Dodge County A between WI-26 just south of Juneau, which intersects with US-151 just northeast of Beaver Dam.
One idea would be to follow that general highway up to US-151. Another would be to have WI-26 turn northwest after the WI-60 interchange, follow a current railroad ROW to where it can hook up with US-151 near the County G interchange on the south side of Beaver Dam.
Today, the local rag did an update on this project and a meeting WIDOT had with County officials. One thing they mentioned was that they do know that upgrading north of WI-60 is going to be a major issue, but there is still some debate as to the best way to route a potential upgrade. The County A route I mentioned was actually discussed as a possibility.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 18, 2010, 05:52:48 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 03, 2010, 09:22:00 AM
I just also comment on your WI-26 to US-151 hookup. The locals generally take Dodge County A between WI-26 just south of Juneau, which intersects with US-151 just northeast of Beaver Dam.
One idea would be to follow that general highway up to US-151. Another would be to have WI-26 turn northwest after the WI-60 interchange, follow a current railroad ROW to where it can hook up with US-151 near the County G interchange on the south side of Beaver Dam.
Today, the local rag did an update on this project and a meeting WIDOT had with County officials. One thing they mentioned was that they do know that upgrading north of WI-60 is going to be a major issue, but there is still some debate as to the best way to route a potential upgrade. The County A route I mentioned was actually discussed as a possibility.
Do you have a link to that article?
Also, as I have mentioned in various forvms in recent years and have communicated to WisDOT on several occasions, my favorite northward extension of WI 26 from WI 16/60 would be as a 'super two' freeway on an upgradable new four-lane ROW generally along County 'A' and County 'W' to connect with US 151 using free-flow ramps at the southeast 'corner' of Beaver Dam. Also, remove the County 'G' interchange on US 151 at Beaver Dam and redirect County 'G' to feed into BR US 151 at its planned re-engineered interchange at the southwest corner of Beaver Dam. This would all would pass through wide-open countryside and IMHO be the simplest, most straightforward routing with the least new concrete and best overall public utility.
Mike
No link to the article. The one they have online omits the comments made about future expansion. But I completely agree with your suggestion about future routing.
I had the day off and took a round-trip ride on WI 26 between Oshkosh and I-39/90 at Janesville on Sunday (2010-08-22).
-YES, those four-way STOP signs between Waupun and WI 60 are beyond annoying! No relief on that using County 'A' on that point, there are a few on that road, too.
-Some preliminary ROW clearance work has been done for the four-lane upgrades on the part between WI 60 and Watertown (the WI 16/26 duplex section).
-Construction on the westside Watertown bypass freeway is well under way, including an interesting bridge on Watertown's south side. As it sits now, it is mostly hidden from view from existing WI 26, barely visible behind a small glacial esker. WI 19 is currently *closed* at its WI 26 interchange, which will include roundabouts at the ramp intersections. These are getting popular in the state, the US 41 work in both the Oshkosh-Neenah and Green Bay metro areas will include OODLES of them! This bypass looks to be on schedule to open in late 2011.
-MUCH grading has been done on the remaining two-lane sections between Watertown and Jefferson. Nope, there is no work nor any known near-term plans to eliminate the stop-and-go lights in the I-94 area at Johnson Creek. :verymad: :banghead:
-The westside Jefferson bypass freeway looks to be on schedule to open later on this year. As part of that project, the interchange at the north end of Fort Atkinson is being realigned to a much greater extent than I was at first expecting.
-Grading for upgrading the WI 26 Fort Atkinson bypass from a 'super-two' to a full four-lane freeway is under way, the part at the north end (including bridging those two BAD crossroads) looks to be on track to be done this fall, along with the Jefferson bypass. South of US 12, it'll be at least another year as this part includes a new bridge over the Rock River for the southbound side of the highway, work on which is just under way.
-The part between Fort Atkinson and Milton is showing a few signs of some ROW clearance.
-The only work on the planned Milton bypass freeway so far (to go around the city's east side) is a pair of roundabouts for the WI 26 interchange ramps on the newly relocated part of WI 59 as it heads eastward out of town. There is also a roundabout at the new WI 59/County 'M' intersection.
-Nope, just like at Johnson Creek, there are no known near-term plans to eliminate the intersections and stop-and-go lights near I-39/90 in and near Janesville. :verymad: :banghead:
-A major natural gas pipeline is being constructed across Janesville's far north side.
Mike
Yep, there will be no improvements at Johnson Creek. 20 years ago, there was nothing there. But now I don't think WIDOT can do much of anything unless it locates the highway signifcantly to the east, or buys up a bunch of commercial businesses. The ROW clearing between Fort Atkinson and Milton also includes a newly discovered archiological site.
http://gazettextra.com/news/2010/may/02/anthropologists-explore-treasures-near-lake-koshko/
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 25, 2010, 09:43:54 AM
Yep, there will be no improvements at Johnson Creek. 20 years ago, there was nothing there. But now I don't think WIDOT can do much of anything unless it locates the highway signifcantly to the east, or buys up a bunch of commercial businesses. The ROW clearing between Fort Atkinson and Milton also includes a newly discovered archiological site.
http://gazettextra.com/news/2010/may/02/anthropologists-explore-treasures-near-lake-koshko/
A few years ago I did some map scribbling in that area where I came up with an idea for routing a bypass freeway around the west side of Johnson Creek. It would have interchanges at both ends of town plus at I-94, done in such a way as to be as non-disruptive as possible to the present commercial area. An east side routing would work, too.
Yes, any such work would be well into the future, but ultimately something will have to be done with those signals (and also the ones in Janesville), they are as annoying as the ones on US 10 on Stevens Point's east side (between I-39 and the upgraded highway farther east towards Appleton). At Stevens Point, plans are in place for a US 10 east bypass freeway to begin construction (hopefully) within the next five-ten years.
Mike
The WI-26 bypass of Jefferson opened yesterday!
I drove it this morning. WIDOT did a nice job with this one. It is a four lane highway with interchanges at Bus WI-26 both on the north and south end of town...both are still closed but will open by Thanksgiving...and at US-18. The south Bus WI-26 also is marked "To WI-89." The only real issue is the 3/4 mile two lane stretch between the north end of the bypass and the four lanes at Johnson Creek. That will be gone within the next couple of years though as the WI-26 corridor improvements are completed.
Right now it is marked at 55 mph. I am not sure if that will changed after the Fort Atkinson bypass upgrades are finished next summer, resulting in a four lane freeway from just south of Fort Atkinson to just south of Johnson Creek. Also north of US-18, the highway has a typical "Alternate I-94" signage.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 04, 2010, 10:20:17 AM
The WI-26 bypass of Jefferson opened yesterday!
I drove it this morning. WIDOT did a nice job with this one. It is a four lane highway with interchanges at Bus WI-26 both on the north and south end of town...both are still closed but will open by Thanksgiving...and at US-18. The south Bus WI-26 also is marked "To WI-89." The only real issue is the 3/4 mile two lane stretch between the north end of the bypass and the four lanes at Johnson Creek. That will be gone within the next couple of years though as the WI-26 corridor improvements are completed.
Right now it is marked at 55 mph. I am not sure if that will changed after the Fort Atkinson bypass upgrades are finished next summer, resulting in a four lane freeway from just south of Fort Atkinson to just south of Johnson Creek. Also north of US-18, the highway has a typical "Alternate I-94" signage.
I can easily see WI 89 ultimately being rerouted around the north and east sides of that hill by the Fort Atkinson North interchange to feed into that interchange. I was somewhat amazed that the WI 26 mainline was realigned there, as I found out when I drove it a two months ago, with the bridge in that interchange being replaced on the new higher-speed curve alignment. That interchange was not that old, still well within its design life.
Do you think that WisDOT has actually learned its lessons regarding those 'bypasses on the cheap' that they were doing a few years ago (ie, US 151 around Fond du Lac)?
Mike
WI-89 was only redirected along the old Jefferson County Q between US-18 and Fort Atkinson about 15-20 years ago. What they should have done is route WI-89 along US-18 east to the new interchange, and run it along the new WI-26 bypass to the Bus WI-26 bypass on the north side of Fort Atkinson. As it stands now, WI-89 is simply a local road...probably worth of a simple county highway designation. The distance between the US-18/WI-89 intersection, and the new WI-26/US-18 interchange, is probably about a mile.
As for "learning their lesson" see my comments on the new Burlington bypass.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 04, 2010, 02:54:16 PM
WI-89 was only redirected along the old Jefferson County Q between US-18 and Fort Atkinson about 15-20 years ago. What they should have done is route WI-89 along US-18 east to the new interchange, and run it along the new WI-26 bypass to the Bus WI-26 bypass on the north side of Fort Atkinson. As it stands now, WI-89 is simply a local road...probably worth of a simple county highway designation. The distance between the US-18/WI-89 intersection, and the new WI-26/US-18 interchange, is probably about a mile.
What WisDOT should do with WI 89 is break it up into two separate state highways. It's completely unnecessary between Whitewater and Jefferson. But we all know how much they love their long, stupid multiplexes in this state.
The re-routing of WI-89 that they did between US-18 and Fort Atkinson made a great deal of sense when they did it. They basically put a state highway designation on a county highway that people used all the time to get from Lake Mills to Fort Atkinson. So right now, the duplex with US-12 is only about ten miles from FA to Whitewater. Is giving the section south of Whitewater, and the section north of US-18, really worth the effort and cost of signage?
The easiest thing to do would be to renumber the highway south of Whitewater to something like WI-189. You wouldn't have to change a bunch of signs and no BGSs like you would if you changed the northern section.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 05, 2010, 09:19:43 AM
The re-routing of WI-89 that they did between US-18 and Fort Atkinson made a great deal of sense when they did it. They basically put a state highway designation on a county highway that people used all the time to get from Lake Mills to Fort Atkinson. So right now, the duplex with US-12 is only about ten miles from FA to Whitewater. Is giving the section south of Whitewater, and the section north of US-18, really worth the effort and cost of signage?
The easiest thing to do would be to renumber the highway south of Whitewater to something like WI-189. You wouldn't have to change a bunch of signs and no BGSs like you would if you changed the northern section.
Well, if/when the Whitewater-Fort Atkinson section of the US 12 freeway is ever built, 'old' US 12 can certainly remain as WI 89. Ditto the 'Corner Cut' - the east-west part of existing US 12 can be remarked as WI 20 and the north-south part can remain as WI 67.
Mike
Article from the Wisconsin State Journal on the WI-26 Jefferson bypass opening:
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/article_f3ebd09c-e9b5-11df-b1bd-001cc4c03286.html?mode=story
I did a quick side-trip along WI-26 from Janesville to Johnson Creek just before the height of rush-hour tonight, and the upgrades can't come fast enough. Traffic moves well enough, but it's heavy all the way to Fort Atkinson, and there's no hope of passing slower traffic on the 2-lane stretches.
The newly-opened 4-lane stretch feel horribly slow posted at 55 mph; there's enough construction at both ends that not posting it at 65 is understandable. But it's going to be a horrible speed trap until it's raised.
Johnson Creek isn't the worst stretch to drive through, even at the height of rush hour traffic was fairly light. But it won't take long for all the commercial development to cause slowdowns here, particularly once the 4-laning of 26 is completed between 151 and Janesville.
I made a down-and-back trip on WI 26 on Monday. It is much as you said south of I-94. North of I-94, there is a lot of grading work under way all the way to where the Watertown bypass rejoins the existing ROW north of Watertown. The short westward extension of the WI 16 Watertown bypass to connect with the new WI 26 bypass (that will be a trumpet interchange favoring WI 26) is also mostly graded now. The information that I have has the Watertown bypass scheduled to open sometime during 2012.
I also noticed that an archeological dig is under way along WI 26 a short distance south of Fort Atkinson.
Mike
2012 is correct.
Here is an article on the dig. If they find any human remains, which they haven't yet, it is going to cause some issues with the highway routing.
http://gazettextra.com/news/2010/may/02/anthropologists-explore-treasures-near-lake-koshko/
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 21, 2010, 07:11:54 PM
it is going to cause some issues with the highway routing
Thank you for not describing these as "grave issues"
Update:
The concrete is mostly (if not completely) laid for the SBD lanes of the WI-26 Fort Atkinson bypass. The southern portion has a VERY narrow median - it's likely to have Jersey barriers in place once completed. The median widens coming up to the US-12 interchange.
The condition of the concrete on the soon-to-be NBD lanes suggests WisDOT will rebuild those too. Better now than when the 4-lanes come up from Milton.
Between Jefferson and Johnson Creek, WisDOT is squeezing a 4-lane through in a ROW that doesn't quite fit, so the frontage roads are a bit wonky and the alignment appear to shift around to avoid existing structures. The railroad overpass is taking form in the soon-to-be SBD lanes. I don't see this stretch being done this year, but they could easily complete it next year if sufficiently funded.
I haven't yet done the drive into Watertown from Johnson Creek. But the section north to WI-60 shows its age, and was clearly never intended to become part of a 4-lane highway. The WI-16 bypass is surprisingly narrow and quite a slow go around Watertown's east side. After the long stretch of 4-lanes most of the way Watertown, going down to two lanes really makes this stretch a slog.
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 20, 2011, 11:43:35 PM
I haven't yet done the drive into Watertown from Johnson Creek. But the section north to WI-60 shows its age, and was clearly never intended to become part of a 4-lane highway. The WI-16 bypass is surprisingly narrow and quite a slow go around Watertown's east side. After the long stretch of 4-lanes most of the way Watertown, going down to two lanes really makes this stretch a slog.
WI-26 will bypass Watertown on the *west* side of the city on a completely new section of road. It won't be using the WI-16 "bypass."
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 21, 2011, 04:53:01 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 20, 2011, 11:43:35 PM
I haven't yet done the drive into Watertown from Johnson Creek. But the section north to WI-60 shows its age, and was clearly never intended to become part of a 4-lane highway. The WI-16 bypass is surprisingly narrow and quite a slow go around Watertown's east side. After the long stretch of 4-lanes most of the way Watertown, going down to two lanes really makes this stretch a slog.
WI-26 will bypass Watertown on the *west* side of the city on a completely new section of road. It won't be using the WI-16 "bypass."
I didn't intend to imply otherwise. I switched to discussing WI-16 coming from the east to meet up with WI-26 and didn't give the proper cue.
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 21, 2011, 10:07:38 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 21, 2011, 04:53:01 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 20, 2011, 11:43:35 PM
I haven't yet done the drive into Watertown from Johnson Creek. But the section north to WI-60 shows its age, and was clearly never intended to become part of a 4-lane highway. The WI-16 bypass is surprisingly narrow and quite a slow go around Watertown's east side. After the long stretch of 4-lanes most of the way Watertown, going down to two lanes really makes this stretch a slog.
WI-26 will bypass Watertown on the *west* side of the city on a completely new section of road. It won't be using the WI-16 "bypass."
I didn't intend to imply otherwise. I switched to discussing WI-16 coming from the east to meet up with WI-26 and didn't give the proper cue.
WisDOT is extending the WI 16 bypass a bit westward to connect it to the new WI 26 bypass freeway with a trumpet interchange. Overall, I like how WisDOT is doing this one.
You can make out the ROW in the latest Google image:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.218313,-88.743353&spn=0.035903,0.087891&t=k&z=14
Panning farther south, the Jefferson bypass is shown nearly complete.
Mike
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 21, 2011, 10:07:38 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 21, 2011, 04:53:01 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on June 20, 2011, 11:43:35 PM
I haven't yet done the drive into Watertown from Johnson Creek. But the section north to WI-60 shows its age, and was clearly never intended to become part of a 4-lane highway. The WI-16 bypass is surprisingly narrow and quite a slow go around Watertown's east side. After the long stretch of 4-lanes most of the way Watertown, going down to two lanes really makes this stretch a slog.
WI-26 will bypass Watertown on the *west* side of the city on a completely new section of road. It won't be using the WI-16 "bypass."
I didn't intend to imply otherwise. I switched to discussing WI-16 coming from the east to meet up with WI-26 and didn't give the proper cue.
Ah OK....right now, I guess about a third the traffic heads down WI-16 and about 2/3 heads into Watertown. My guess is that even more will use WI-26 after it is four lanes.
Update: They will not be replacing the concrete on the older Fort Atkinson bypass lanes. They are simply patching it. (The new northbound lanes.)
WisDOT just released the construction plans for the Watertown Bypass:
ftp://ftp.dot.state.wi.us/plansandproposals/2011/09September_13/20110913001plan.pdf (ftp://ftp.dot.state.wi.us/plansandproposals/2011/09September_13/20110913001plan.pdf)
The work around Fort Atkinson appears to be wrapping up; they're completing patching in the northbound lanes. North of there, the road is completely done up to just south of the railroad tracks north of Jefferson. The road is down to one lane each way while crews build overpasses over the tracks. I wouldn't expect them to be completed before fall of next year; they might have the southbound overpass ready later on next spring, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
I also tooled up to Watertown to see the expansion; it looks like they're moving pretty quickly. Maybe next year we'll see the bypass open up?
The Watertown bypass is to open in 2012.
does anyone else want to see a wisconsin 26 extend as a 4 lane divided road all the way to Oshkosh through the new interchange in waupun from a new routing to beaver dam, and a partial freeflow (similar to the new us 41-us 45 interchange) at the current us41-wis 26 interchange? i travel that road alot, and find that it is heavily congested, expecially during big holiday travel days. rosendale in particular is bad, and even a super 2 bypass around the east side with a diamond at wis 23 would help alot. the last time i traveled wis 26, there was a 1/2 mile long line of cars trying 2 go through rosendale.
I'm sure 4-laning WIS 26 between Watertown and Oshkosh is inevitable, though surprisingly the Corridors 2030 plan doesn't really show much happening north of Waupun.
More info:
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/corridor-rockriver.pdf
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/corridor-goose.pdf
We've had a fair amount of discussion about WI 26 in here over the past couple of years. The current construction.program is to extend the four-lanes from Watertown northwards to WI 60 (east). I did hear some early rumblings earlier this year from WisDOT about them starting to look into options for extending the four lanes from WI 60 (east) to US 151.
My opinion? Reroute WI 26 from WI 60 (east) northward and northwestward as a two-lane road on a fully upgradable new four-lanes ROW closely following Dodge County 'A' and Dodge County 'W' to US 151 at its curve on the southeast 'corner' of Beaver Dam. As part of that, I would close the County 'G' interchange on US 151, rerouting County 'G' to feed into BR US 151 from the south. Both of these would cross wide-open countryside and require the taking of very few, if any, houses.
North of Waupun, a new-ROW WI 26 bypass of Rosendale is a 'no-brainer', the rest can be upgraded to four lanes as traffic warrants and funding allows.
Mike
I have a question: For those going from Waupun and points south north to Oshkosh, how many people take the 4-lane US 151 to Fond du Lac, and then US 41 from there to Oshkosh, rather than WIS 26 from Waupun to Oshkosh? I've driven that stretch of WIS 26 a few times and find it to be incredibly slow. So ever since the 4-lane US 151 opened all the way to Fond du Lac, that is the route I chose when heading to Oshkosh from the Madison area. It may be a few miles longer, but it's a higher speed limit and easier passing (not to mention less traffic on that stretch of 151). I'm just curious as to why more people don't chose the route I take instead. IMO, 4-laning WIS 26 from Waupun to Oshkosh would almost be a little redundant.
i believe it takes longer, playing highschool sports, our bus has never gone that way, although, the bus rarely takes the higher speed road, such as coming from oshkosh, and going to 23 east of fond du lac, the bus always takes the 3:30ish heavy trafic johnson street through fond du lsac, and would sertainly b faster taking 151 bypass, also going 2 oakfield we always exit at military road(county d) and take that rather than 151 to that exit, although the bus did do that once. and to answer the origional question about trafic, it is very heavily traveled, its a [major] truck route.
the us 151 project in waupun set up the future 4laning, building the partial freeflow with the ne wis 26 interchange, and if the new ROW would travel strait north from the interchange just west of the current ROW, its all farmland, and would set up the rosendale bypass on the west side with an interchange at wis 23, then cross old 26 and parralel it on the east side untill a partial freeflow with us41 like the new us 41-45 interchange, and a trumpet with what will be the new west side arterial when ever thats built, with the interchange built, and temorarily serving local trafic.
According to Google Maps, it is 31 miles via WI-26 and Rosendale, and 38.4 miles via US-151 and Fond du Lac. However, Google maps says that WI-26 only takes one minute shorter.
I really doubt that WIDOT is going to consider upgrading WI-26 between Waupun and Oshkosh.
The traffic may well force their hand eventually, but I would agree. If they wanted to 4-lane WIS 26 north of Waupun, they would've put it into Corridors 2030.
Most non-locals heading north or south wouldn't look at taking 26, because they'd see the 4-lane 151 on the map. I took 26 south of Oshkosh on a Sunday afternoon in April, and was rather shocked at the traffic it was getting (and even more shocked at seeing the passing lanes - you almost never see that outside of hills in Wisconsin).
I was definitely NOT surprised at the heavy law enforcement presence.
Well, everyone knows about the WI-26 being the short-cut between Waupun and Oshkosh....and it made sense when US-151 was a two-lane highway. But now that it is a four-lane highway, US-151 is simply easier. More passing...no Rosendale to slow you down... But some people stick with what they know, and what they know is WI-26.
how about this for an interchange design, the west side arterial segments wouldnt be added untill later, but haveing them in the plans can help preserve ROW.(note not all to scale)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1110.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fh454%2Fjordanah1%2Fhighway%2520renderings%2Fus41-wis26interchange.jpg&hash=e7745e311206922e203250848e9d8cbe0ba72359)
^^
Many years ago I mused about diverging a new-ROW WI 26 from US 41 in the area of that big curve in northern Fond du Lac County, but never pursued it any farther due to a perceived (by me) lack of justification for such a radical upgrade.
Is there any 'official' level discussion going on about a westside arterial for Oshkosh? That is a new one for me.
My read on the Oshkosh area? Besides solving the traffic quandary at US 41/WI 21, I would be working on developing a much-upgraded southside lateral arterial street, running from US 41/WI 26 to US 45 at its intersection with former WI 175 (ex US 41, exx WI 15, exxx Yellowstone Trail) along what is now County 'N' and Fisk Ave, perhaps using that as a rerouted US 45.
Mike
the west side arterial is in the 2030 plans, the best info is at http://www.co.winnebago.wi.us/highway ,and a large swath is filled in on the planning maps for possible ROW, but no ROW has been purchased yet, and no plans have been finalized. none of the towns want it within their boundaries, so it will most likely stradel town of Omro, and town of Algoma. I had been thinking about a southern arterial as well, but i dont think they have ever even mentioned it. it could cloverleaf with wis 26/west side arterial south of current wis 26 diamond, which would remain for local acces?... and they could even use it as an emergency landing strip! 2 birds with 1 stone!
while i was spacing out during calculus today, i came up with an idea for the Johnson Creek area. to eliminate the diamond with I94, a 3level stacked roundabout could be built aligned south a little, to avoid some buisineses, and would be significantly smaller than a cloverleaf. it would have a speed limit of 35-45 mph, and would be freeflow. this would go with the grade seperation of Jefferson Rd, Milwaukee St, and Hartwig Bvd south of I94, and have one diamond built between Johnson creek, and watertown, with all other roads and driveways seperated, or diverted to frontage roads. so that it would be a freeway for that entire length.
(it is not all to scale, and some lines are sharper than they would be)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1110.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fh454%2Fjordanah1%2Fhighway%2520renderings%2Fmywis26atI94-1.jpg&hash=5b70715a9b986c92efec1a831ddfb2ca1e04086a)
^^
Aw man, you're taking out my favorite pit stop in the state. That truck stop in the northwest quadrant has the best heat lamp grill I've ever seen, plus Wisconsin themed cookies amid their tempting bakery selection.
I"ll probably try and locate a cloverleaf to the east a little when I get around to this one.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 18, 2011, 06:41:14 PM
^^
Aw man, you're taking out my favorite pit stop in the state. That truck stop in the northwest quadrant has the best heat lamp grill I've ever seen, plus Wisconsin themed cookies amid their tempting bakery selection.
I"ll probably try and locate a cloverleaf to the east a little when I get around to this one.
That's my best option on that one, too. It'll have to be just east of that landfill, running roughly along Switzke Rd north of I-94.
BTW, check out the just-posted new aerial images of the Watertown area on Google Maps :thumbsup:
Mike
In looking at those maps, I wonder what needs to be done with WI-89. As you drive on the new WI-26 around Jefferson, you can literally see WI-89 less than one mile to the west. Some thoughts...
**Extend WI-89 along US-18 to the WI-26 bypass. Have it exit off at the northern Bus. WI-26 interchange, where it can catch up with its former routing just north of downtown Fort Atkinson.
**Due the same above, but keep WI-89 along WI-26 to the US-12 interchange, where it can then follow US-12 to Whitewater. The advantage of this is that once the US-12 bypass of Fort Atkinson is built, WI-89 would naturally follow it.
**Eliminate WI-89 entirely south of US-18. Between Whitewater and WI-11/US-14, you could either create a WI-189, or create some sort of duplex along WI-11. Either WI-140 from the west or WI-50 from the east.
My thought was to have WI-89 follow US-12 west out of Fort Atkinson, then north on County Road G. Nice and direct, and you eliminate the mess at US-18.
Quote from: JREwing78 on October 20, 2011, 11:10:09 PM
My thought was to have WI-89 follow US-12 west out of Fort Atkinson, then north on County Road G. Nice and direct, and you eliminate the mess at US-18.
To top it off, that is the route that locals take between Fort Atkinson and Lake Mills.
I am excited for the completion of this between Wis 60 and Milton, the new stretch around Milton makes going between Rockford and Fon Du Lac much more streamlined.
I haven't been north of Watertown since construction resumed there. They have a lot of work ahead at Hwy 60 to reconstruct the interchange and build overpasses for Hwy 60 and Hwy 26 over the railroad.
The section between Fort Atkinson and County N is progressing rapidly, and should be done by the fall.
Certain Milton business owners aren't so enamored; they've had trouble with people not being able to find them since the bypass has gone in. The Janesville Gazette recently reported on measures to fix that: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zcww-U8e_jgJ:www.gazettextra.com/article/20140409/ARTICLES/140409649+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
I'm a bit surprised they haven't re-designated the old Hwy 26 north of Milton as a County highway. It is now merely "Milton Rd".
Here is a line from the article that really sums up the problem:
"The city had first approached the DOT in 2013 about Janesville Street being cut off."
2013...when the bypass was almost complete? The entire article has a "blame WIDOT" tone, but where were Milton officials when these plans were being drawn up? The lack of an exit on the south side was pretty clear from the beginning. And yeah, I can understand why they aren't happy...there should be one on the south side of town. But I think most of the blame for that is on Milton.
Local leaders who met with the secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation last week left the Capitol with some homework and hope that a business route designation for State Highway 26 could be implemented soon.
Making Milton visible again?
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/business/article_36083b4c-d5f7-11e3-8f8d-0017a43b2370.html
Quote from: JREwing78 on May 20, 2014, 02:20:03 PM
Local leaders who met with the secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation last week left the Capitol with some homework and hope that a business route designation for State Highway 26 could be implemented soon.
Making Milton visible again?
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/business/article_36083b4c-d5f7-11e3-8f8d-0017a43b2370.html
"Among some of the more immediate changes agreed upon will be modifications to signs along the Highway 26 bypass, including revising directional signs for Exit 8 at the State Highway 59 interchange. Currently, the signs list Whitewater first before Milton, but the DOT agreed to switch the names to give Milton more prominence."
(OK that is kind of silly but whatever...)
"Frazier said the DOT also agreed to mark the interchange at County Highway N as a Milton exit, as well as place signs ahead of the interchange that indicate Milton could be accessed at the next two exits. Current exit signs at the County N interchange only offer directions to Whitewater and Edgerton."
(This makes more sense. The Edgerton designation seems strange to me anyway.)
"The town really didn't appreciate taking the old Highway 26 into the municipality anyway simply because of maintenance alone, but this is a concrete highway and it's quite wide, designed for heavier traffic in mind," [Town of Milton Chairman Bryan] Meyer said. "When you go to repair it, it's a much more expensive surface to maintain.
"We can replace all the roads in our whole town — we have about 50 miles of roads besides this (one) in the town — and we can put new blacktop over all of it for what it would cost to replace this concrete highway," he added.
I personally found it a little strange that the road wasn't designated a County Trunk Highway instead.
Bumps appear on the road to Business Highway 26
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/government/article_fbba824a-e106-11e3-8a48-0017a43b2370.html
The bypass has affected a lot of different people a lot of different ways, but the thing we hear the most is the idea that the direct and convenient access to Milton has been completely eliminated," [Milton mayor Brett] Frazier said. "People wonder, rightly, why that is when other communities that have had bypasses put in — some just down the road from us — have been able to maintain business access.
Milton pressing DOT for better access
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/government/article_797a1e6c-c56d-11e3-a145-0017a43b2370.html
Again, I simply don't understand where the leadership of Milton was when this was being designed. This goes back to when the Mobil station on the south end of town was actually bought by the current owner *after* all the plans were made public...and the new owner claimed he didn't know there wasn't going to be access on the south side.
Where was the City? Where was the Chamber of Commerce?
I understand why the Town doesn't want to take over maintenance on a Business 26 because I can't see the benefit they would get from it. I guess if the City is so intent on marking it as a Business highway, then the City can agree to take over the maintenance.
A lot of this is simply failure on the City of Milton's part. That is what makes them different from cities like Fort Atkinson and Jefferson.
Agreed. There's no reason why there couldn't be an interchange at Janesville St/Henke Rd, even if it was simply a partial interchange for traffic to and from Janesville.
There's no reason why they couldn't have constructed a direct link from Harmony Townhall Rd to Janesville St (via Parkview Dr. if necessary), or fed Harmony Townhall Rd directly into Parkview Dr. The city wasn't on the ball.
Honestly, I think with appropriate signage the existing setup is fine. The majority of the businesses are easily accessible via the Hwy 59 exit, and the locals are going to figure out their way around soon enough. If they can't figure out how to get people around the city, it's going to be their loss. Holding onto a pipe dream of reconnecting Janesville St to Hwy 26 is only going to be harmful.
Unbelievable.
The bypass has only been in the works for years. They've held public meetings and published plans. The opportunity to bring their concerns to WisDOT was there in spades. Now, after the people in government in Milton realized they screwed up, want a "do-over"? Sorry - no. You made the bed, you sleep in it. I can guaran-damn-tee you that nobody is having a hard time "finding" Milton because of this. The only reason people "found" Milton before was because traffic on a major highway had to slow down to get through it.
(Keep in mind that this intersection area is in on unincorporated (township) land in the now somewhat small rural area that is left between the City of Janesville and the City of Milton. The west half of the actual WI 26/Harmony Townhall Rd interchange is in the City of Janesville.)
As that area futher develops, I can see upgrades to the intersections in that area, perhaps redoing Townhall/Townline, Townline/Parkview and Townline/Heinke (Janesville Rd) as roundabouts to make those turns less of a traffic flow 'disconnect' in the road network.
As for traffic between the older central parts of Janesville and Milton? That's what County 'Y' is for.
:nod:
Mike
'Y' of course. :bigass:
Quote from: mgk920 on May 22, 2014, 04:44:16 PM
(Keep in mind that this intersection area is in on unincorporated (township) land in the now somewhat small rural area that is left between the City of Janesville and the City of Milton. The west half of the actual WI 26/Harmony Townhall Rd interchange is in the City of Janesville.)
As that area futher develops, I can see upgrades to the intersections in that area, perhaps redoing Townhall/Townline, Townline/Parkview and Townline/Heinke (Janesville Rd) as roundabouts to make those turns less of a traffic flow 'disconnect' in the road network.
As for traffic between the older central parts of Janesville and Milton? That's what County 'Y' is for.
:nod:
Mike
Taking County Y doesn't get you to the "business district" part of Milton, which was basically located along the old 26.
Milton is strange in that it has two "business district" sections, one on the west side of town along Merchant Row, and the other on the east end along Parkview Dr. and Janesville St.
At any rate, people will now have a harder time saying they couldn't find an east-side Janesville business.
Business 26 signs are going up
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/government/article_b6eee98a-01f9-11e4-962e-001a4bcf6878.html
Quote from: JREwing78 on July 07, 2014, 08:03:23 PM
Milton is strange in that it has two "business district" sections, one on the west side of town along Merchant Row, and the other on the east end along Parkview Dr. and Janesville St.
At any rate, people will now have a harder time saying they couldn't find an east-side Janesville business.
Business 26 signs are going up
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/government/article_b6eee98a-01f9-11e4-962e-001a4bcf6878.html
That is because the modern-day City of Milton was formed by the merger of the previous Village of Milton (east part of the city) and Village of Milton Junction (west part of the city). I want to say that this was in the 1970s.
Mike
Business Hwy 26 signs are up along the old Hwy 26 route into Milton from the north, then along Hwy 59 back to the new Hwy 26. The exits also have freshly updated listings for Milton and Business 26 at each end.
Progress on the 4-laning north of Hwy N is good. Most of the grading for the NBD lanes to the county line is done, and SBD north of the line is done to about Koshkonong Lake Rd. Having all 4 lanes open by Labor Day doesn't seem like an unrealistic goal, assuming the weather is cooperative.
Quick update:
Concrete pavement is nearing completion on the SBD lanes north of Watertown. It appears they could have it ready to shift traffic to two-way operation in the SBD lanes by Labor Day.
Progress is slower on the Hwy 16/60 interchange. SBD on and off-ramps at the new Hwy 16/60 overpass are constructed, with all Hwy 26 traffic routed on them. They meet at a T-intersection currently while the old Hwy 16/60 overpass is removed and work is completed on the new overpass.
Concrete paving is also nearing completion on the SBD lanes south of Fort Atkinson to the Rock County line. NBD between County N and the Rock County line is also done. Asphalt shoulders are next. Both carriageways between County N and Fort Atkinson still appear to be on track to be done by Labor Day, with median work remaining afterward.
For all the talk of heavy traffic enforcement this past weekend, I saw no signs of this on Hwy 26. The 55mph limit in Rock County was completely meaningless; most traffic was doing 70-75.
Quote from: JREwing78 on August 04, 2014, 11:40:32 PM
For all the talk of heavy traffic enforcement this past weekend, I saw no signs of this on Hwy 26. The 55mph limit in Rock County was completely meaningless; most traffic was doing 70-75.
IIRC, the heavy enforcement was focused on I-94. That said, when driving over to Milwaukee from the Madison area this past Saturday, I didn't see any more LE than I typically would.
Traffic on Hwy 16/26 north of Watertown got switched over to the SBD carriageway sometime in the past week, and is being heavily patrolled by Dodge County sheriff's deputies.
They appear to also be progressing on Hwy 60 east of Hwy 16/26 (which will also form the temporary bypass to allow new overpasses of the railroad on Hwy 26). From what I can tell they may not have the temporary bypass in place until late in the fall, if not next year; they have a lot of work to do yet.
Hwy 26 between Fort Atkinson and County N north of Milton is really close to completion. I fully expect both carriageways to be open for Labor Day weekend, albeit maybe with only one lane of traffic open each way.
So I was off by a week on the Fort Atkinson - County N stretch.
Crews were busy posting signs, setting cable median barriers, and re-striping pavement this afternoon in preparation for opening both carriageways to traffic. It appears they'll have the right lane open on each carriageway by the end of this weekend, with continued median work for a few more weeks.
Repair work on the newly-designated Business 26 stretch (old Hwy 26/Janesville St/Rd) north of Hwy 59 in Milton has now begun, as well as the old Hwy 59 (E. High St). They have completely blocked all vehicular access south of County N with barriers and a bucket loader. More: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:okK-kWFDx7oJ:www.gazettextra.com/20140825/old_highway_26_old_highway_59_to_getting_repairs_before_being_turned_over_to_local_governments+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Both carriageways south of Fort Atkinson are now open, one lane each way.
Pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/126899288@N04/
I drove WI 26 last week Wednesday (2014-09-24):
-The Milton-Fort Atkinson section looks to be on track to have the last of its bandages removed by the end of October. The part north of Watertown, fall of 2015.
-The interchange at WI 16/60 is mostly complete and its ramps are now being used as part of a temporary 'bypass' routing while the new WI 26 overcrossing of Union Pacific's Adams Line is being built. This one will last until at least late summer of 2015.
-Interesting overhead double-trombone-arm stop and go lights with vertical heads - one on each side of each carriageway at the first southbound intersection off of the freeway on Janesville's north edge.
Mike
Looks like WISDot has done a decent job upgrading WIS 26 for the most part until it gets anywhere near an interstate. Then that is where you encounter traffic signals :pan:
They're definitely very close to completion on the Milton-Fort Atkinson section. Traffic was one lane each way on the outside lanes back in mid-September while they completed median work. They are now on the inside lanes while they complete final signage, landscaping work, striping, and grinding rumble strips.
The two stretches with stoplights in Johnson Creek and Janesville are annoying after the long 65 mph stretches. Johnson Creek's long 55 mph transitions bug me simply because they're unnecessary; they extend two miles out from the 45 mph zone when they only need to be about a half-mile. Janesville's probably bugs me less because, well, I live there. 8-)
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on October 01, 2014, 11:26:47 PM
Looks like WISDot has done a decent job upgrading WIS 26 for the most part until it gets anywhere near an interstate. Then that is where you encounter traffic signals :pan:
I also hope that WisDOT will be starting work on similar freeway/expressway upgrades to WI 26 from WI 16/60 to US 151 and then a Rosendale bypass within my remaining lifetime....
:poke:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on October 02, 2014, 11:52:42 AM
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on October 01, 2014, 11:26:47 PM
Looks like WISDot has done a decent job upgrading WIS 26 for the most part until it gets anywhere near an interstate. Then that is where you encounter traffic signals :pan:
I also hope that WisDOT will be starting work on similar freeway/expressway upgrades to WI 26 from WI 16/60 to US 151 and then a Rosendale bypass within my remaining lifetime....
:poke:
Mike
I wish for that as well, but not going to happen ..... Those traffic signals are there for good on WIS 26
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on October 04, 2014, 04:37:41 AM
I wish for that as well, but not going to happen ..... Those traffic signals are there for good on WIS 26
How about replacing these traffic signals with roundabouts since WSDOT had embraced the roundabout?
All 4 lanes are now open to traffic south of Fort Atkinson. Orange barrels are still out there, but there appears to be little work remaining besides a little striping and posting the 65 mph speed limit signs.
And.... at least as of noon on Friday, WisDOT had not put up the 65 mph limit signs between Janesville and Fort Atkinson. No idea what's holding up the show. Then again, they left the 55 mph limit up for months on the portion bypassing Fort Atkinson and Jefferson.
The workers are hustling hard to get the NBD carriageway north of Watertown finished before the snow flies. The new overpass and south-side on/off ramps from Hwy 60 are open, and the temporary Hwy 16 26 bypass of the railroad underpass is in place and operational, as mgk920 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=1145) mentioned earlier.
I just drove the section north of Watertown yesterday before exiting eastbound on WI-60. Why is the section just east of the WI-60 interchange in blacktop? Is that only a temporary roadway?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 29, 2014, 09:37:37 AM
I just drove the section north of Watertown yesterday before exiting eastbound on WI-60. Why is the section just east of the WI-60 interchange in blacktop? Is that only a temporary roadway?
Part of that roadway is temporary. When complete, the east-west WI 60 routing with smooth curving will be the final product.
Mike
Quote from: JREwing78 on October 28, 2014, 10:12:38 PM
And.... at least as of noon on Friday, WisDOT had not put up the 65 mph limit signs between Janesville and Fort Atkinson. No idea what's holding up the show. Then again, they left the 55 mph limit up for months on the portion bypassing Fort Atkinson and Jefferson.
They had some lanes between County N and Fort Atkinson closed today. Looks like they still were doing some work in the medians.
All work is complete south of Fort Atkinson and 65 mph signs have been installed from the south side of Milton all the way to the Fort bypass. Yay!!
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 14, 2014, 02:24:59 PM
All work is complete south of Fort Atkinson and 65 mph signs have been installed from the south side of Milton all the way to the Fort bypass. Yay!!
Thanks for the update. I have to drive from Watertown to Rockford next week so that'll make things much much easier!!
Apparently the extra work that delayed the opening of all four lanes on the Fort Atkinson-Milton stretch was due to pavement damage found in the northbound lanes.
Highway 26 opens to four lanes to Fort
Some business owners feeling the effects over a year after bypass opened
http://www.hngnews.com/milton_courier/news/local/article_07123182-547b-11e4-a301-0017a43b2370.html
If anyone's curious as to what the Hwy 26 construction looked like last year, you can see it on Google Street View:
https://goo.gl/maps/HGA99
Looks like a good road trip for after the road meet on April 18 .....?
Steady progress is being made in the area around the Hwy 16/60 exit on Hwy 26 near Clyman (north of Watertown). The road bed for Hwy 26 is ready to accept new concrete pavement, and the beams for the new overpass are in place (the road previously went under a narrow railroad overpass). The dual-carriageway will end shortly north of the Hwy 16/60 overpass prior to reaching the railroad.
The concrete still needs to be laid for the SBD carriageway south to County J; traffic continues to be two-way north to the Hwy 16/60 exit, and two-way traffic shares the NBD off-ramp, ending at a 3-way Stop sign. Speed limits south of County J are still posted for 55 mph south to the County Q/County L intersection.
From my understanding, the city of Janesville didn't want that option. If it was even offered. Same reason that CTH Y was rerouted onto McCormick and a traffic signal was installed at McCormick and HWY 26 instead of an interchange.
Quote from: WarrenWallace on August 06, 2015, 10:17:42 AM
From my understanding, the city of Janesville didn't want that option. If it was even offered. Same reason that CTH Y was rerouted onto McCormick and a traffic signal was installed at McCormick and HWY 26 instead of an interchange.
I offered a 'free-flow with maintaining and improving the street connections' option for I-39/90/WI 26 in the 'Redesigning Interchanges' subforvm in the fantasy highways section in here a couple of years ago.
Mike
And really the only movements that should absolutely be free flow are SB 26 to SB 39/90 and NB 39/90 to NB 26. If you want to have the remaining movements be a signal, fine.
Again, why?
I know the "roadgeek default" is to build the biggest thing possible regardless of cost, but there are not significant traffic back ups at the two lights between I-30/90 and the freeway. (Earlier I said one...sorry).
If the intent, which I believe it is by WisDOT, is to have Wis 26 as a freeway from Janesville to at least Waupun, then that kind of movement should happen. Plain and simple. Why put it off if they are going to rebuild the interchange? Just do it at once so you won't go back in 10 years to do it.
The WIS 26 thread is over here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2760.0
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 06, 2015, 01:03:37 PM
If the intent, which I believe it is by WisDOT, is to have Wis 26 as a freeway from Janesville to at least Waupun, then that kind of movement should happen. Plain and simple. Why put it off if they are going to rebuild the interchange? Just do it at once so you won't go back in 10 years to do it.
Who says that is their intent? I certainly don't see a cost effective way to bypass Johnson Creek for instance. Furthermore, as Geek Jedi says, if you are claiming that the WI-26 freeway doesn't go to Janesville, then you are simply arguing semantics. The freeway ends just south of Milton. Close enough really.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 06, 2015, 06:08:57 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 06, 2015, 01:03:37 PM
If the intent, which I believe it is by WisDOT, is to have Wis 26 as a freeway from Janesville to at least Waupun, then that kind of movement should happen. Plain and simple. Why put it off if they are going to rebuild the interchange? Just do it at once so you won't go back in 10 years to do it.
Who says that is their intent? I certainly don't see a cost effective way to bypass Johnson Creek for instance. Furthermore, as Geek Jedi says, if you are claiming that the WI-26 freeway doesn't go to Janesville, then you are simply arguing semantics. The freeway ends just south of Milton. Close enough really.
First of all, are there lights on 26 in Janesville north of 39/90? Yes. Freeways don't have lights. That's not semantics. That's being incomplete for 3 miles. Second, I said if it is their intent which I believe it is. That doesn't mean that is 100% good as gold. That is MY opinion.
Third, You can bypass Johnson Creek to the east by about a mile or so. Not as big a deal as you think it is.
http://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/Wis_26_Johnson_Creek_Bypass/GYrufS2SZ_
I've driven the section of WIS 26 in question a few times in recent months travelling between Milwaukee and Janesville. Other than the occasional minor inconvenience of getting stopped at a light on either end of the freeway, I really don't see any extreme need to finish it at this point.
I took several pictures of the work on Hwy 26 at Hwy 16/60 tonight:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/126899288@N04/zGo18y
Google Maps has a picture from this year that shows what the final configuration will look like:
https://goo.gl/maps/Rqg9e
Quote from: JREwing78 on August 30, 2015, 10:33:05 PM
I took several pictures of the work on Hwy 26 at Hwy 16/60 tonight:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/126899288@N04/zGo18y
Google Maps has a picture from this year that shows what the final configuration will look like:
https://goo.gl/maps/Rqg9e
That's the status of construction on the day that image was shot. The current road lines north of Union Pacific's ex CNW Adams Line are temporary, built only as a construction bypass.
Mike
The section of WI-26 from just north of WI-60 through the WI-16/60 interchange has opened up. (Drove it today.) This is the last remaining section to open on the massive WI-26 expansion project from Janesville to this location. The inside lanes are still closed because they are doing some guardrail and shoulder work, but my guess is all four lanes will be open in a couple weeks.
The only issue that I see is that there are no BGS signs at the WI-26/16/60 interchange. Just black and white directional signs. I think a BGS with Columbus and Hartford as control cities would have been appropriate.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 20, 2015, 05:04:20 PM
The section of WI-26 from just north of WI-60 through the WI-16/60 interchange has opened up. (Drove it today.) This is the last remaining section to open on the massive WI-26 expansion project from Janesville to this location. The inside lanes are still closed because they are doing some guardrail and shoulder work, but my guess is all four lanes will be open in a couple weeks.
The only issue that I see is that there are no BGS signs at the WI-26/16/60 interchange. Just black and white directional signs. I think a BGS with Columbus and Hartford as control cities would have been appropriate.
I would be surprised if BGS signs don't appear eventually there. The rest of the highway to that point has them at interchanges.
I figured they were close to opening Hwy 26 north of the Hwy 16/60 interchange when I drove up at the end of August - the roadbed was prepared for paving then. I have to drive through there Thursday; it'll be neat to see the finished product.
Quote from: JREwing78 on September 27, 2015, 08:38:16 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 20, 2015, 05:04:20 PM
The section of WI-26 from just north of WI-60 through the WI-16/60 interchange has opened up. (Drove it today.) This is the last remaining section to open on the massive WI-26 expansion project from Janesville to this location. The inside lanes are still closed because they are doing some guardrail and shoulder work, but my guess is all four lanes will be open in a couple weeks.
The only issue that I see is that there are no BGS signs at the WI-26/16/60 interchange. Just black and white directional signs. I think a BGS with Columbus and Hartford as control cities would have been appropriate.
I would be surprised if BGS signs don't appear eventually there. The rest of the highway to that point has them at interchanges.
I figured they were close to opening Hwy 26 north of the Hwy 16/60 interchange when I drove up at the end of August - the roadbed was prepared for paving then. I have to drive through there Thursday; it'll be neat to see the finished product.
Just drove through there today and there is a BGS heading northbound with an exit number assigned but not southbound. The control cities were Columbus and Hustisford (covered because 60 EB is closed at the interchange). Rest of BGS signs will probably be installed next week. It also appears that they are putting in reduced speed limit signs near the overpass which would make it seem that the road will be 65 once complete.
Quote from: jwags on September 27, 2015, 09:26:06 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on September 27, 2015, 08:38:16 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 20, 2015, 05:04:20 PM
The section of WI-26 from just north of WI-60 through the WI-16/60 interchange has opened up. (Drove it today.) This is the last remaining section to open on the massive WI-26 expansion project from Janesville to this location. The inside lanes are still closed because they are doing some guardrail and shoulder work, but my guess is all four lanes will be open in a couple weeks.
The only issue that I see is that there are no BGS signs at the WI-26/16/60 interchange. Just black and white directional signs. I think a BGS with Columbus and Hartford as control cities would have been appropriate.
I would be surprised if BGS signs don't appear eventually there. The rest of the highway to that point has them at interchanges.
I figured they were close to opening Hwy 26 north of the Hwy 16/60 interchange when I drove up at the end of August - the roadbed was prepared for paving then. I have to drive through there Thursday; it'll be neat to see the finished product.
Just drove through there today and there is a BGS heading northbound with an exit number assigned but not southbound. The control cities were Columbus and Hustisford (covered because 60 EB is closed at the interchange). Rest of BGS signs will probably be installed next week. It also appears that they are putting in reduced speed limit signs near the overpass which would make it seem that the road will be 65 once complete.
Sweet! Thanks for the update guys.
Finally the section around WI-60 is done, and the cones are gone. The speed limit through the area is set at 65. If I'm not mistaken, that pretty much wraps up any type of expansion of WI-26 for the foreseeable future.
Good deal! This is much like how the Hwy 26 expansion wrapped up between Fort Atkinson and Milton - the 65 mph limits weren't set until all construction activities were completed. It was especially hard this summer to not get nailed with a speeding ticket north of Watertown with the 55 mph limits up and in force.
Even before the Hwy 16/60 exit was completed, Hwy 26 -> County A (Dodge County) -> US-151 was a much calmer (and probably quicker) route from Janesville and points south than I-39/90 -> US-151. The Hwy 16/60 exit fixes the biggest problem with Hwy 26 north of Watertown (aside from having to go through Rosendale).
Given current budgetary issues (and the recent redo of Hwy 26 between US-151 and US-41), it'll probably be at least 10-15 years before serious effort to complete 4-laning Hwy 26 is undertaken.
I still think that they should route WI-26 up CTH-A instead of it's current alignment through Juneau. It seems like most people take that way anyway.
I also don't understand why they haven't removed WI-26 from the "city" routing in Waupun. That could easily be a business routing, or removed altogether.
Quote from: GeekJedi on November 21, 2015, 10:03:07 PM
I still think that they should route WI-26 up CTH-A instead of it's current alignment through Juneau. It seems like most people take that way anyway.
I also don't understand why they haven't removed WI-26 from the "city" routing in Waupun. That could easily be a business routing, or removed altogether.
Agreed on both counts. The stretch through Juneau could be a newly-designated state highway, or even a county highway.
I would think that it would be a county road since WisDOT doesn't like to add mileage without taking it away from somewhere else.
The part of current WI 26 between County 'A' and WI 33 should be renumbered as an extension of WI 28 while the part from there north to Waupun is downgraded to a lettered county highway.
Yes, until a four lane route is developed, WI 26 should follow County 'A'. It is now one of the very best two-lane roads in the state.
Longer term, WI 26 should be rerouted onto a new four-lane ROW to connect with US 151 on the southeast corner of Beaver Dam.
Mike
What do you think about moving WI-26 out of the city of Waupun? Is there a reason why they still have it that way? Makes me scratch my head!
The current routing (that I'm aware of) for 26 takes it around Waupun on 151.
Surprisingly, it doesn't. It exits 151 south of Waupun, then re-joins it from Business 151, then exits again north of Waupun.
There's signs on US-151 directing NBD Hwy 26 users intending to go to Oshkosh to stay on US-151.
I agree, GeekJedi, there's no reason to keep Hwy 26 through Waupun. It makes much more sense as a Business US-151.
Quote from: JREwing78 on November 22, 2015, 05:29:09 PM
There's signs on US-151 directing NBD Hwy 26 users intending to go to Oshkosh to stay on US-151.
I agree, GeekJedi, there's no reason to keep Hwy 26 through Waupun. It makes much more sense as a Business US-151.
Heck, if I had my way, I'd remove that convoluted half-interchange on Waupun's NE corner and replace it with a simple straight across street bridge. The existing interchanges at WI 49 and WI 26 north are more than adequate to serve that area.
Mike
This is one of these cases where I don't think WIDOT numbering aids navigation and only serves to confuse travelers. US-151 through Madison is another one. Even if they labelled both as "Business" routes, but kept state maintenance for a period of time, that would be preferable.
I went to college in Platteville, which is on US 151. I had some classmates from the Fox Valley area who were told that to get to Platteville, just follow highway 151. Of course, they took that literally, and without even looking at a map, the first time making the trip down followed 151 through Madison instead of following the interstate and Beltline around. They would comment on how long it took going through downtown and getting lost going around the Capitol. Once I explained it to them, then they were like, yeah, that makes so much more sense.
One reason for US 151 still going through the city is nostalgia, i.e. 151 is the only US Highway to run through the isthmus. I agree with changing the routing of 26 through Waupun and 151 through/around Madison. What's one more route number on the interstate and Beltline anyway?
^^ When I was there I told a relative to follow that way around Madison. He did not believe me so he decided to take 151 through Madison and was mad it took so long. He also took 41 to 151 in Fond du Lac as he didn't believe 26 would be a shortcut (This was well before 151 was expanded to 4 lanes).
Are all the exits along the WI-26 corridor numbered?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 23, 2015, 03:55:40 PM
Are all the exits along the WI-26 corridor numbered?
Yes. The southernmost (Harmony Town Hall Rd in Janesville) is, IIRC, Interchange 6.
Mike
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 07, 2015, 01:10:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 06, 2015, 06:08:57 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 06, 2015, 01:03:37 PM
If the intent, which I believe it is by WisDOT, is to have Wis 26 as a freeway from Janesville to at least Waupun, then that kind of movement should happen. Plain and simple. Why put it off if they are going to rebuild the interchange? Just do it at once so you won't go back in 10 years to do it.
Who says that is their intent? I certainly don't see a cost effective way to bypass Johnson Creek for instance. Furthermore, as Geek Jedi says, if you are claiming that the WI-26 freeway doesn't go to Janesville, then you are simply arguing semantics. The freeway ends just south of Milton. Close enough really.
First of all, are there lights on 26 in Janesville north of 39/90? Yes. Freeways don't have lights. That's not semantics. That's being incomplete for 3 miles. Second, I said if it is their intent which I believe it is. That doesn't mean that is 100% good as gold. That is MY opinion.
Third, You can bypass Johnson Creek to the east by about a mile or so. Not as big a deal as you think it is.
http://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/Wis_26_Johnson_Creek_Bypass/GYrufS2SZ_
Your Johnson Creek bypass goes straight over the top of a landfill. It would probably actually be cheaper to build an elevated freeway straight through Johnson Creek than to bypass it because of the added mileage.
Quote from: Jordanah1 on April 18, 2016, 08:53:19 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 07, 2015, 01:10:34 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 06, 2015, 06:08:57 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 06, 2015, 01:03:37 PM
If the intent, which I believe it is by WisDOT, is to have Wis 26 as a freeway from Janesville to at least Waupun, then that kind of movement should happen. Plain and simple. Why put it off if they are going to rebuild the interchange? Just do it at once so you won't go back in 10 years to do it.
Who says that is their intent? I certainly don't see a cost effective way to bypass Johnson Creek for instance. Furthermore, as Geek Jedi says, if you are claiming that the WI-26 freeway doesn't go to Janesville, then you are simply arguing semantics. The freeway ends just south of Milton. Close enough really.
First of all, are there lights on 26 in Janesville north of 39/90? Yes. Freeways don't have lights. That's not semantics. That's being incomplete for 3 miles. Second, I said if it is their intent which I believe it is. That doesn't mean that is 100% good as gold. That is MY opinion.
Third, You can bypass Johnson Creek to the east by about a mile or so. Not as big a deal as you think it is.
http://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/Wis_26_Johnson_Creek_Bypass/GYrufS2SZ_
Your Johnson Creek bypass goes straight over the top of a landfill. It would probably actually be cheaper to build an elevated freeway straight through Johnson Creek than to bypass it because of the added mileage.
Stop making sense. :-D
Quote from: GeekJedi on April 19, 2016, 07:45:34 PM
Stop making sense. :-D
I was going to be cheeky and post this thinking the title of the song was "Stop Making Sense" but I was wrong. I'M POSTIN' IT ANYWAY
Alas, existing WI-26 is only a shell of what it once was. From 1923 to 1934, WI-26/M-26 was a continuous designated route from Beloit, WI to Copper Harbor, MI. Now WI-26 just connects Janesville with Oshkosh.