Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[OCGuy81]

Is WI-441 in Appleton up to Interstate standards?  I've never been to that part of Wisconsin, but was looking at my atlas, and saw it's a full freeway.

With the posts I've seen on US-41 becoming a possible I-41, would WI-441 be a possible bypass of Appleton and be rebranded as I-441?

[mgk920]

Is WI-441 in Appleton up to Interstate standards?  I've never been to that part of Wisconsin, but was looking at my atlas, and saw it's a full freeway.

With the posts I've seen on US-41 becoming a possible I-41, would WI-441 be a possible bypass of Appleton and be rebranded as I-441?

WI 441 is a freeway along its entire length, but only the parts in Calumet and Outagamie Counties are up to full interstate standards.  The Winnebago County section (the part that also carries US 10) includes a major bridge with no shoulders as well as other deficiencies.  WisDOT has firm plans for the needed upgrades (widen the Winnebago County part to six lanes, broaden the 'S' curves, build a parallel bridge with the existing one to become an interstate-compatible three lanes with an auxiliary lane westbound, complete the US 10/US 41/WI 441 interchange, etc), waiting on funding.

See:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=44.227119,-88.439512&spn=0.03678,0.087891&t=k&z=14&vpsrc=6

BTW, My expectation is for US 41 to become 'I-57', so this would then be 'I-457'.  

(I would not object to the 'I-457' number then being extended to I-39 at Stevens Point, WI, if and when US 10 is ever fully upgraded.)

Mike

[OCGuy81]

BTW, My expectation is for US 41 to become 'I-57', so this would then be 'I-457'.

That's pretty interesting.  I-57, huh?  Would that be similar to I-39 in Wisconsin, where you'd have the current 57 duplex with 94 into Milwaukee and then break off on its own?  55 might work too, wouldn't you say? Make an x5 even longer?

[mgk920]

BTW, My expectation is for US 41 to become 'I-57', so this would then be 'I-457'.

That's pretty interesting.  I-57, huh?  Would that be similar to I-39 in Wisconsin, where you'd have the current 57 duplex with 94 into Milwaukee and then break off on its own?  55 might work too, wouldn't you say? Make an x5 even longer?

My logical reasonings on this have been discussed at length elsewhere in here - I-55 does not end at the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-90/94) in Chicago, it continues on to Lake Shore Drive (US 41), while I-57 ends with an ideal feed into the Dan Ryan (I-94) on Chicago's south side.  To reroute I-55 at its interchange with the Dan Ryan would involve using a sharp two-lane ramp in one direction and a similarly sharp one-lane ramp in the other for the I-55 mainline routing.  Either number (55 or 57) would give I-94 between Chicago and Milwaukee a more proper and far less confusing north-south number.  Also, WI 55, one of those Wisconsin state highways that goes a loooong way through many twists and turns, intersects US 41 at Kaukauna, WI and would have to be renumbered while WI 57, although also in eastern Wisconsin, does not intersect US 41 and follows a much simpler routing.  If US 41 becomes 'I-57', I would not object to rerouting US 41 to replace WI 57 between Milwaukee (actually the I-43/WI 57 split at Port Washington) and Green Bay.  The part from Green Bay into Door County could become a 'WI x43'.

Mike

[NE2]

WIS 441 will be I-366 when the speed is raised to 85.

[agentsteel53]

WIS 441 will be I-366 when the speed is raised to 85.

nah, the speed limit is US-31EX and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

[exit322]

WIS 441 will be I-366 when the speed is raised to 85.

Quite interesting.  I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

[NE2]

WIS 441 will be I-366 when the speed is raised to 85.

Quite interesting.  I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=5625;sa=showPosts

[tchafe1978]

what's with all the snarky comments?

[Jordanah1]

BTW, My expectation is for US 41 to become 'I-57', so this would then be 'I-457'.

That's pretty interesting.  I-57, huh?  Would that be similar to I-39 in Wisconsin, where you'd have the current 57 duplex with 94 into Milwaukee and then break off on its own?  55 might work too, wouldn't you say? Make an x5 even longer?

My logical reasonings on this have been discussed at length elsewhere in here - I-55 does not end at the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-90/94) in Chicago, it continues on to Lake Shore Drive (US 41), while I-57 ends with an ideal feed into the Dan Ryan (I-94) on Chicago's south side.  To reroute I-55 at its interchange with the Dan Ryan would involve using a sharp two-lane ramp in one direction and a similarly sharp one-lane ramp in the other for the I-55 mainline routing.  Either number (55 or 57) would give I-94 between Chicago and Milwaukee a more proper and far less confusing north-south number.  Also, WI 55, one of those Wisconsin state highways that goes a loooong way through many twists and turns, intersects US 41 at Kaukauna, WI and would have to be renumbered while WI 57, although also in eastern Wisconsin, does not intersect US 41 and follows a much simpler routing.  If US 41 becomes 'I-57', I would not object to rerouting US 41 to replace WI 57 between Milwaukee (actually the I-43/WI 57 split at Port Washington) and Green Bay.  The part from Green Bay into Door County could become a 'WI x43'.

Mike

i would also rather see I-55 rather than I-57, simply because its an I-x5 number, it could be routed along I-355 north to I-88, from I-88 to I-294, and I-294 to I-94. there would be no slow ramps, as well as no tolled ramps, 

[exit322]

Quite interesting.  I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=5625;sa=showPosts

Well played.  I tip my cap to you.

[hobsini2]

BTW, My expectation is for US 41 to become 'I-57', so this would then be 'I-457'.

That's pretty interesting.  I-57, huh?  Would that be similar to I-39 in Wisconsin, where you'd have the current 57 duplex with 94 into Milwaukee and then break off on its own?  55 might work too, wouldn't you say? Make an x5 even longer?

My logical reasonings on this have been discussed at length elsewhere in here - I-55 does not end at the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-90/94) in Chicago, it continues on to Lake Shore Drive (US 41), while I-57 ends with an ideal feed into the Dan Ryan (I-94) on Chicago's south side.  To reroute I-55 at its interchange with the Dan Ryan would involve using a sharp two-lane ramp in one direction and a similarly sharp one-lane ramp in the other for the I-55 mainline routing.  Either number (55 or 57) would give I-94 between Chicago and Milwaukee a more proper and far less confusing north-south number.  Also, WI 55, one of those Wisconsin state highways that goes a loooong way through many twists and turns, intersects US 41 at Kaukauna, WI and would have to be renumbered while WI 57, although also in eastern Wisconsin, does not intersect US 41 and follows a much simpler routing.  If US 41 becomes 'I-57', I would not object to rerouting US 41 to replace WI 57 between Milwaukee (actually the I-43/WI 57 split at Port Washington) and Green Bay.  The part from Green Bay into Door County could become a 'WI x43'.

Mike

i would also rather see I-55 rather than I-57, simply because its an I-x5 number, it could be routed along I-355 north to I-88, from I-88 to I-294, and I-294 to I-94. there would be no slow ramps, as well as no tolled ramps, 

Jordanah, you must not realize how busy an interchange I-55 and I-355 is at current.   It would not be a smooth transition to make I-55 go up 355 as you propose.  I am ok with I-57 being extended but i would prefer US 41 freeway just become I-41 as currently proposed to eliminate the number confusion and WI 57 is already in the area so you would affect at least 2 roads north of Milwaukee. As i stated in the past, i see no reason why US 41 couldn't be placed on WI 175 and current US 41 become I-41.

[Revive 755]

^ I got a reason:  Because it would be better to try and keep I-41 in reserve for future developments in the Midwest than use the number on another intrastate route in Wisconsin when I-55, I-57, or even I-65 could be extended/relocated fairly easily.

[mgk920]

^ I got a reason:  Because it would be better to try and keep I-41 in reserve for future developments in the Midwest than use the number on another intrastate route in Wisconsin when I-55, I-57, or even I-65 could be extended/relocated fairly easily.

'65' would work in a pinch, but, like with I-55, its connection into the highways at its north end is far less than ideal.  OTOH, WisDOT would not gave to renumber a state highway with that number as 'WI 65' is in the outer MStP suburbs.

Mike

[Jordanah1]

BTW, My expectation is for US 41 to become 'I-57', so this would then be 'I-457'.

That's pretty interesting.  I-57, huh?  Would that be similar to I-39 in Wisconsin, where you'd have the current 57 duplex with 94 into Milwaukee and then break off on its own?  55 might work too, wouldn't you say? Make an x5 even longer?

My logical reasonings on this have been discussed at length elsewhere in here - I-55 does not end at the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-90/94) in Chicago, it continues on to Lake Shore Drive (US 41), while I-57 ends with an ideal feed into the Dan Ryan (I-94) on Chicago's south side.  To reroute I-55 at its interchange with the Dan Ryan would involve using a sharp two-lane ramp in one direction and a similarly sharp one-lane ramp in the other for the I-55 mainline routing.  Either number (55 or 57) would give I-94 between Chicago and Milwaukee a more proper and far less confusing north-south number.  Also, WI 55, one of those Wisconsin state highways that goes a loooong way through many twists and turns, intersects US 41 at Kaukauna, WI and would have to be renumbered while WI 57, although also in eastern Wisconsin, does not intersect US 41 and follows a much simpler routing.  If US 41 becomes 'I-57', I would not object to rerouting US 41 to replace WI 57 between Milwaukee (actually the I-43/WI 57 split at Port Washington) and Green Bay.  The part from Green Bay into Door County could become a 'WI x43'.

Mike

i would also rather see I-55 rather than I-57, simply because its an I-x5 number, it could be routed along I-355 north to I-88, from I-88 to I-294, and I-294 to I-94. there would be no slow ramps, as well as no tolled ramps, 

Jordanah, you must not realize how busy an interchange I-55 and I-355 is at current.   It would not be a smooth transition to make I-55 go up 355 as you propose.  I am ok with I-57 being extended but i would prefer US 41 freeway just become I-41 as currently proposed to eliminate the number confusion and WI 57 is already in the area so you would affect at least 2 roads north of Milwaukee. As i stated in the past, i see no reason why US 41 couldn't be placed on WI 175 and current US 41 become I-41.

i wasnt aware that its that busy, but it doesnt surprise me being chicago, but i dont see how resigning the route would make it busier or anything. the people who commute one way will still commute that way. all it would do is make an easier routing for I-55, that would be more direct to wisconsin should I-55 be chosen for the section on US-41 in wisconsin.

[Steve]

This is getting deep into Fictional Highways territory. Please right the ship.

[hobsini2]

i wasnt aware that its that busy, but it doesnt surprise me being chicago, but i dont see how resigning the route would make it busier or anything. the people who commute one way will still commute that way. all it would do is make an easier routing for I-55, that would be more direct to wisconsin should I-55 be chosen for the section on US-41 in wisconsin.

The issue is not the commuter traffic.  The issue comes with the long distance traffic, ie semis.  The NB 55 to NB 355 ramp is a single lane ramp.  There is room to make a 2nd lane however through Bolingbrook, I-55 needs 3 lanes at minimum.  I really want them to have it 4 lanes between 355 and IL 53 similar to the stretch from 355 to Lemont Rd.