US-41 Interstate Conversion

[on_wisconsin]

^That stuff was pretty much before the number was decided.
These hopefully will clear up some debate:

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/neregion/41/docs/map-overview.pdf

Why was I-41 recommended as the route number?

There are a number of reasons WisDOT, American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials. (AASHTO) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) conditionally approved I-41 as the route designation, including:

    I-41 follows the AASHTO guidelines of increasing route numbers west to east, with its location between I-39 and I-43.
    I-41 is the route designation number anticipated and preferred by the general public.
    I-41 allows for future Interstate loop or spur routes to be designated off of I-41.

Will Interstate 41 and US 41 follow the same route?

Yes. Because I-41 and US 41 will be concurrent the entire route, there should be no driver confusion about which "Route 41" to follow.

    US 41 joins I-94 at the Russell Road interchange, approximately 1 mile south of the WI/IL state line, making it the logical starting point for the conversion.
    The current route of US 41 in Milwaukee following I-94 from the Mitchell interchange, to the Marquette interchange, to the Miller Park interchange, and then north along Lisbon and Appleton Avenue will be relocated to be concurrent with I-41 along I-894 and US 45.
    Current US 41 from I-94 at the Miller Park interchange to the interchange with US 45 will be re-numbered to a state highway.
    The end point of I-41 will be in Green Bay at the I-43 interchange where US 41 will continue north to Michigan.

What other route numbers were considered?

A number of other route numbers were considered but, based on existing route numbering guidelines and public feedback, I-41 was deemed most appropriate.

Why extend I-41 to the Illinois border?

It is a logical starting point for the new Interstate. It will add 33 miles to the conversion, making the corridor 175 miles long. An economic assessment found Wisconsin will benefit from having the new interstate extended to Illinois.

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/neregion/41/faq.htm#recommended

Can we please get to talking about the road itself now...

[SEWIGuy]

I guess I didn't realize that WIDOT's *recommendation* ended all debate on the matter.

[amroad17]

Basically, US 41 will turn into I-41 where it joins I-94 in Illinois and become US 41 again at the I-43 interchange in Green Bay with the understanding that US 41 is the hidden concurrency with I-41.  Sounds good to me.  Maybe NC can do this with I-74/US 74 whenever that stretch of freeway is completed.

[triplemultiplex]

It is estimated that 10-20 percent of the trucks currently operating on US 41 are hauling overweight or oversize loads by permit or allowed by state statute.

Hmm, so logging trucks are a pretty big chunk of the truck traffic.  (Most of those overweight loads are logging trucks bound for paper mills in the Fox Cites.)  I had convinced myself it wasn't that much, hence my grumbling about needing to jump through hoops to include an exception via Congress.  So we'll be waiting on that part for a little while longer...

[Revive 755]

Why was I-41 recommended as the route number?

I-41 follows the AASHTO guidelines of increasing route numbers west to east, with its location between I-39 and I-43.

Except that the southern extension becomes east of I-43.  Also convenient of AAHSTO to suddenly throw out the I-/US- duplication rule in favor of numbering arguments.
 

I-41 allows for future Interstate loop or spur routes to be designated off of I-41.

1) I'd believe this argument more if Wisconsin had more 3di's than the two in the Milwaukee area - maybe if there was already an I-x43 in Green Bay, or than had been talk of an interstate designation for the unbuilt Racine Loop Freeway.

2) Could have easily had future spurs or loops with any new 2di.  Given the lack of I-x43's and I-x94's, could have easily met this requirement with the I-594 or I-643 options too.

Why extend I-41 to the Illinois border?

It is a logical starting point for the new Interstate.

And there are how many other interstates that end after just crossing the state line, excluding those that had or have plans for future extensions?


As for the road itself, is US 45 really interstate standard north of the Zoo interchange?  The hills and curves don't seem up to par.

[mgk920]

I-41 allows for future Interstate loop or spur routes to be designated off of I-41.

1) I'd believe this argument more if Wisconsin had more 3di's than the two in the Milwaukee area - maybe if there was already an I-x43 in Green Bay, or than had been talk of an interstate designation for the unbuilt Racine Loop Freeway.

2) Could have easily had future spurs or loops with any new 2di.  Given the lack of I-x43's and I-x94's, could have easily met this requirement with the I-594 or I-643 options too.

"WI 441"



(Note, this one could also potentially be extended westward to I-39.)

Mike

[gbgoose]

I-41 allows for future Interstate loop or spur routes to be designated off of I-41.

1) I'd believe this argument more if Wisconsin had more 3di's than the two in the Milwaukee area - maybe if there was already an I-x43 in Green Bay, or than had been talk of an interstate designation for the unbuilt Racine Loop Freeway.

2) Could have easily had future spurs or loops with any new 2di.  Given the lack of I-x43's and I-x94's, could have easily met this requirement with the I-594 or I-643 options too.

"WI 441"



(Note, this one could also potentially be extended westward to I-39.)

Mike

You could add Wis-172 to the list of candidates for an I-x43 or I-x41 as well.

[Molandfreak]

(Note, this one could also potentially be extended westward to I-39.)

I-441 in my mind would just go to Winchester. The 10-45 corridor from Stevens Point to Oshkosh would be I-339.

2) Could have easily had future spurs or loops with any new 2di.  Given the lack of I-x43's and I-x94's, could have easily met this requirement with the I-594 or I-643 options too.

I hate unneeded spurs of spurs. They make things confusing.

[Anthony_JK]

Personally, if I had my druthers, I'd terminate I-41 at the Hale Interchange, and also get rid of the I-894 concurrence entirely. That eliminates the "east of I-43" problem south of Milwaukee quite nicely. Why extend it just to truncate it at the IL border??

[Molandfreak]

Personally, if I had my druthers, I'd terminate I-41 at the Hale Interchange, and also get rid of the I-894 concurrence entirely. That eliminates the "east of I-43" problem south of Milwaukee quite nicely. Why extend it just to truncate it at the IL border??

Or the Zoo interchange which eliminates the wrong-way concurrency, and have I-43 by itself on the east-west portion of I-894.

[mgk920]

Personally, if I had my druthers, I'd terminate I-41 at the Hale Interchange, and also get rid of the I-894 concurrence entirely. That eliminates the "east of I-43" problem south of Milwaukee quite nicely. Why extend it just to truncate it at the IL border??

Or the Zoo interchange which eliminates the wrong-way concurrency, and have I-43 by itself on the east-west portion of I-894.

The reason for the number continuing through is that that is a major through traffic corridor (Chicagoland and beyond <-> the Fond du Lac/Oshkosh/Appleton area and beyond) and it is advisable to give such corridors single through route numbers.  The many number changes on that routing has been a major bugaboo for the Fox Valley (people traveling to or from here have actually gotten lost because of that) and I've been pestering WisDOT about that since the 1980s ("Why not reroute US 41 to follow that logical freeway corridor?" ad nauseum).



Mike

[SEWIGuy]

Personally, if I had my druthers, I'd terminate I-41 at the Hale Interchange, and also get rid of the I-894 concurrence entirely. That eliminates the "east of I-43" problem south of Milwaukee quite nicely. Why extend it just to truncate it at the IL border??

My guess is that it is because I-41 is going to be replacing US-41.  If I were to guess, you will see US-41 "disappear" at the WI border, replaced with I-41, and then "reappear" when I-41 ends by Green Bay.

[GeekJedi]

"Current US 41 from I-94 at the Miller Park interchange to the interchange with US 45 will be re-numbered to a state highway."

My vote?  Extend WI-175 and terminate it at WI-59.  It eliminates the "phantom" WI-341 and prevents another short, random highway.  It's an obvious "natural" extension.

[english si]

If I were to guess, you will see US-41 "disappear" at the WI border

A mile south of the border. IL signed off on it.

[triplemultiplex]

As for the road itself, is US 45 really interstate standard north of the Zoo interchange?  The hills and curves don't seem up to par.

It's fine north of North Ave.  South of there is about to be reconstructed so it's not going to matter in a few years.  The curve & hills associated with the railroad overpass between North Ave. and Mayfair Rd. are definitely substandard.  But the fix is in the pipeline so good enough for me.

It's actually US 41 that is technically substandard in Washington County north of the US 45 split where the distance between carriageways is too small to not have a median barrier of some sort.  Also the interchange with WI 144 in Slinger is substandard.  But that's getting rebuilt either this year or next (don't remember which).

"Current US 41 from I-94 at the Miller Park interchange to the interchange with US 45 will be re-numbered to a state highway."

My vote?  Extend WI-175 and terminate it at WI-59.  It eliminates the "phantom" WI-341 and prevents another short, random highway.  It's an obvious "natural" extension.

Seconded.

[SEWIGuy]

Extending WI-175 wouldn't be that difficult because WI-341 doesn't show up on any BGS and has no reassurance markers that I am aware of.

[mgk920]

"Current US 41 from I-94 at the Miller Park interchange to the interchange with US 45 will be re-numbered to a state highway."

My vote?  Extend WI-175 and terminate it at WI-59.  It eliminates the "phantom" WI-341 and prevents another short, random highway.  It's an obvious "natural" extension.

That's part of the US 41 reroute that I was 'pestering' WisDOT about since the 1980s.



Mike

[mgk920]

During a presentation on Friday, 2013-02-15 at WisDOT's Green Bay office in Ashwaubenon, Governor Scott Walker announced that there will be *no* delays in the planned big-shovel rebuild and 'completion' of the US(I)-41/US 10/WI 441 interchange between Appleton and Neenah (the 'Bridgeview' interchange) as well as for the planned WI 15 bypass of Hortonville and four-laning between the Greenville area and US 45 at New London.

Construction could get under was as soon as next year.

http://www.whby.com/index.php/News/WHBY_News/73329



Mike

[hobsini2]

During a presentation on Friday, 2013-02-15 at WisDOT's Green Bay office in Ashwaubenon, Governor Scott Walker announced that there will be *no* delays in the planned big-shovel rebuild and 'completion' of the US(I)-41/US 10/WI 441 interchange between Appleton and Neenah (the 'Bridgeview' interchange) as well as for the planned WI 15 bypass of Hortonville and four-laning between the Greenville area and US 45 at New London.

Construction could get under was as soon as next year.

http://www.whby.com/index.php/News/WHBY_News/73329



Mike

While I like the idea of these projects getting underway as soon as possible, quite frankly I do not trust Governor Walker's word. Without getting too much off subject, he broke promises he made to the teacher's and public service unions after he was elected. But anyway, I hope he is right now.

[DaBigE]

During a presentation on Friday, 2013-02-15 at WisDOT's Green Bay office in Ashwaubenon, Governor Scott Walker announced that there will be *no* delays in the planned big-shovel rebuild and 'completion' of the US(I)-41/US 10/WI 441 interchange between Appleton and Neenah (the 'Bridgeview' interchange) as well as for the planned WI 15 bypass of Hortonville and four-laning between the Greenville area and US 45 at New London.

Construction could get under was as soon as next year.

http://www.whby.com/index.php/News/WHBY_News/73329



Mike

While I like the idea of these projects getting underway as soon as possible, quite frankly I do not trust Governor Walker's word. Without getting too much off subject, he broke promises he made to the teacher's and public service unions after he was elected. But anyway, I hope he is right now.

Not to get too far off-topic either, but when have you ever been able to trust any politician's word?

[vtk]

While I like the idea of these projects getting underway as soon as possible, quite frankly I do not trust Governor Walker's word.

On the other hand, I think Walker can be compared in a lot of ways to Ohio's Kasich.  He proclaimed that ODOT, under previous administrations, had promised way too much in the face of declining infrastructure funding, and forced a much more pessimistic forecast for big projects.  It totally sucks, but at the same time there's much more confidence that ODOT will do all the things it now says it will.  I'm not sure if Wisconsin has gone through similar spending forecast revisions, I don't think a republican governor is going to admit to spending a lot of money on something unless the citizens can see results quickly.

[mgk920]

A few short years ago, Wisconsin's state finances were in worse shape than Illinois' and the previous governor was actively raiding the transport segregated fund to cover part of the shortfalls - causing projects to be delayed (among other things).  The state's budget is now running a very sizable surplus (the latest report being about $500M) and there is now enough padding in the finances to be able to move WisDOT projects back up.

Mike

[Alps]

A few short years ago, Wisconsin's state finances were in worse shape than Illinois' and the previous governor was actively raiding the transport segregated fund to cover part of the shortfalls - causing projects to be delayed (among other things).  The state's budget is now running a very sizable surplus (the latest report being about $500M) and there is now enough padding in the finances to be able to move WisDOT projects back up.

Mike

If there is enough money, that doesn't guarantee it will go to infrastructure. I guarantee you civil engineering firms in Wisconsin are lobbying hard for that, but there are a lot of competing interests.

[SEWIGuy]

A few short years ago, Wisconsin's state finances were in worse shape than Illinois'

That is completely false because you are ignorning Illinois' unfunded pension liabilities...which Wisconsin does not have to deal with.

[mgk920]

True, I was going on current term budget items, but yes, Wisconsin is the only USA state whose government employee pension system is fully funded.

And also, yes, I am aware that there is more to a state's government than just the DOT and they will all be competing for added attention, but things are still in far, far better shape now than they were back in the 'double-aughts'.



Mike