US-41 Interstate Conversion

[peterj920]

I did notice that the Frigo Bridge lights were replaced wth LEDs after repairs, but the new lights on I-41 installed at the same time weren't. 

[DaBigE]

LEDs are WisDOT standard for virtually all lighting now, though I cannot confirm under-deck lighting or high-mast (interchange) lighting. Some projects that were previously let had change orders to switch fixtures to LED, but not all of them. Their LED unit specs allow for virtually a one-for-one replacement of HPS lighting.

[Henry]

http://wigrants.gov/projects/neregion/41/docs/map-ex3.pdf

I-94 eastbound actually travels south, while I-94 west travels north.  By signing I-41 north and south, it clears up confusion on which way traffic is flowing.  Chicago is thought of as south of Milwaukee, not east and vice versa.  Also, a lot of truck traffic continues on US 41 to Chicago to avoid the tolls on I-94.

In that case, I wish the exits would be renumbered to increase going northward like a north-south interstate, but as we've seen with I-39, it's not going to happen.

Which is why I'm disappointed that WI IL missed a golden opportunity to extend I-57 north from Chicago many years back because they didn't want it. At least it would've been a better fit for the Interstate to Green Bay (which is now I-43).

I-57 was the proposed number for I-43 from Milwaukee to Green Bay but Illinois blocked it as they didn't want to extend their signing.

The proposal for the interstate was to follow Wis 57 north of Milwaukee to Green Bay, but opposition and protests from farmers changed the route to be extended north from the US 141 freeway that ended at Sheboygan at the time. 

I knew that one of the states didn't want to extend the north-south Interstate that ends in Chicago to Milwaukee and Green Bay, and I'm now reminded just how much of an asshole-run state IL really is.

[noelbotevera]

http://wigrants.gov/projects/neregion/41/docs/map-ex3.pdf

I-94 eastbound actually travels south, while I-94 west travels north.  By signing I-41 north and south, it clears up confusion on which way traffic is flowing.  Chicago is thought of as south of Milwaukee, not east and vice versa.  Also, a lot of truck traffic continues on US 41 to Chicago to avoid the tolls on I-94.

In that case, I wish the exits would be renumbered to increase going northward like a north-south interstate, but as we've seen with I-39, it's not going to happen.

Which is why I'm disappointed that WI IL missed a golden opportunity to extend I-57 north from Chicago many years back because they didn't want it. At least it would've been a better fit for the Interstate to Green Bay (which is now I-43).

I-57 was the proposed number for I-43 from Milwaukee to Green Bay but Illinois blocked it as they didn't want to extend their signing.

The proposal for the interstate was to follow Wis 57 north of Milwaukee to Green Bay, but opposition and protests from farmers changed the route to be extended north from the US 141 freeway that ended at Sheboygan at the time. 

I knew that one of the states didn't want to extend the north-south Interstate that ends in Chicago to Milwaukee and Green Bay, and I'm now reminded just how much of an asshole-run state IL really is.

They try their best to hide it to the normal Joe, but no credit for that.

[peterj920]

http://wigrants.gov/projects/neregion/41/docs/map-ex3.pdf

I-94 eastbound actually travels south, while I-94 west travels north.  By signing I-41 north and south, it clears up confusion on which way traffic is flowing.  Chicago is thought of as south of Milwaukee, not east and vice versa.  Also, a lot of truck traffic continues on US 41 to Chicago to avoid the tolls on I-94.

In that case, I wish the exits would be renumbered to increase going northward like a north-south interstate, but as we've seen with I-39, it's not going to happen.

Which is why I'm disappointed that WI IL missed a golden opportunity to extend I-57 north from Chicago many years back because they didn't want it. At least it would've been a better fit for the Interstate to Green Bay (which is now I-43).

I-57 was the proposed number for I-43 from Milwaukee to Green Bay but Illinois blocked it as they didn't want to extend their signing.

The proposal for the interstate was to follow Wis 57 north of Milwaukee to Green Bay, but opposition and protests from farmers changed the route to be extended north from the US 141 freeway that ended at Sheboygan at the time. 

I knew that one of the states didn't want to extend the north-south Interstate that ends in Chicago to Milwaukee and Green Bay, and I'm now reminded just how much of an asshole-run state IL really is.

They try their best to hide it to the normal Joe, but no credit for that.

The US 12 Freeway ending at the Illinois state line also shows that Illinois did not want to cooperate with Wisconsin

[Brandon]

The US 12 Freeway ending at the Illinois state line also shows that Illinois did not want to cooperate with Wisconsin

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

[GeekJedi]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

[Rothman]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's?

It's really wacky why some across-border state projects fly through (NY and VT -- Crown Point Bridge and work around Rouses Point) and others do not (NY and PA work on Upper Delaware interstate bridges).  It really comes to how invested both states are in the projects -- which leads to the best defined interstate agreements -- but that investment is highly variable. 

I know in the case of the Upper Delaware interstate bridges that NYSDOT has been waiting around for PennDOT to do its part -- for years.  I think these projects are back on the program in future years -- again -- so we'll see what happens now.  Not sure what incentive PennDOT needs; maybe NY will close the bridges down?  Maybe that won't even matter because they don't have very high traffic counts?  I dunno.

[peterj920]

I think MNDOT and WISDOT do an excellent job of coordinating projects.  In Duluth/Superior, MNDOT is in charge of the Blatnik Bridge, while WISDOT is in charge of the Bong Bridge.  The MN 36/WIS 64 bridge in Stillwater was also collaborated well.  When the speed limit on I-94 was raised to 70, MNDOT raised the speed limit to 70 across the border within a day.

[Brandon]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Oh, I don't.  When I say they don't play nice, it has nothing to do with malice, but with a sheer lack of interest on the part of IDOT.  They just don't seem very interested in working with other DOTs all the time.  They could've answered WisDOT on extending I-55 or I-57, but never seemed interested enough to actually do anything about it.

On the other hand, IowaDOT did tell IDOT to go screw over switching I-80 and I-74 in the Quad Cities.

[roadman65]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

First of all it makes no sense to even sign I-41 anyway in Illinois being it ends abruptly at no other interstate.  Yes, maybe IDOT should have renumbered I-294 as I-41, which would make sense, but Wisconsin should have just created I-41 to be between Milwaukee and Green Bay as its overlap south of Milwaukee is totally useless!

Yes, its to link the two disjointed US 41 segments now so that Route 41 can still go between Miami and Copper Harbor with two designations like some state roads in Florida have a county road with the same number connecting the two state segments, however US 41 could still be on I-94 as it was between Illinois and the I-43/ I-894 interchange as with one interstate number there is enough for interstate funding from Washington.

[Brandon]

Yes, its to link the two disjointed US 41 segments now so that Route 41 can still go between Miami and Copper Harbor with two designations like some state roads in Florida have a county road with the same number connecting the two state segments, however US 41 could still be on I-94 as it was between Illinois and the I-43/ I-894 interchange as with one interstate number there is enough for interstate funding from Washington.

Actually, they're signed concurrently as {I-41}{US-41} on the reassurance signage and at many interchanges.  Thus, there really is no gap.

[mgk920]

Yes, its to link the two disjointed US 41 segments now so that Route 41 can still go between Miami and Copper Harbor with two designations like some state roads in Florida have a county road with the same number connecting the two state segments, however US 41 could still be on I-94 as it was between Illinois and the I-43/ I-894 interchange as with one interstate number there is enough for interstate funding from Washington.

Actually, they're signed concurrently as {I-41}{US-41} on the reassurance signage and at many interchanges.  Thus, there really is no gap.

Also, there are two '[US 41] Follow [I-41]' overhead BGSes on NB I-41/94/US 41 near the state line and two of them on SB I-41/US 41/45 in the Granville interchange area in far northwest Milwaukee.

Mike

[Henry]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

First of all it makes no sense to even sign I-41 anyway in Illinois being it ends abruptly at no other interstate.  Yes, maybe IDOT should have renumbered I-294 as I-41, which would make sense, but Wisconsin should have just created I-41 to be between Milwaukee and Green Bay as its overlap south of Milwaukee is totally useless!

Given that IDOT would not extend I-55/I-57 to Milwaukee, I don't see it routing I-41 down I-294 anytime soon. But it would be nice to have that as a western bypass of Chicagoland.

[Mrt90]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

First of all it makes no sense to even sign I-41 anyway in Illinois being it ends abruptly at no other interstate.  Yes, maybe IDOT should have renumbered I-294 as I-41, which would make sense, but Wisconsin should have just created I-41 to be between Milwaukee and Green Bay as its overlap south of Milwaukee is totally useless!

Given that IDOT would not extend I-55/I-57 to Milwaukee, I don't see it routing I-41 down I-294 anytime soon. But it would be nice to have that as a western bypass of Chicagoland.

It would have to be routed down I-94 first to get to I-294, since I-294 begins/ends 25 miles from the US41/I-94 split.  Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

[mgk920]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

First of all it makes no sense to even sign I-41 anyway in Illinois being it ends abruptly at no other interstate.  Yes, maybe IDOT should have renumbered I-294 as I-41, which would make sense, but Wisconsin should have just created I-41 to be between Milwaukee and Green Bay as its overlap south of Milwaukee is totally useless!

Given that IDOT would not extend I-55/I-57 to Milwaukee, I don't see it routing I-41 down I-294 anytime soon. But it would be nice to have that as a western bypass of Chicagoland.

It would have to be routed down I-94 first to get to I-294, since I-294 begins/ends 25 miles from the US41/I-94 split.  Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

As I mentioned in previous posts, I'd almost route 'I-41' to replace I-94 through Chicago while rerouting I-94 to replace I-294 around Chicago.  Have 'I-41' (temporarily?) end at I-80/94 in Lansing, IL, with the option kept open to continue it southward via IL 394 to potentially ultimately end at I-24 just south of Hopkinsville, KY via the US 41 corridor.

Mike

[mgk920]

A couple of I-41 updates here in the Appleton, WI area.

- New overhead BGSes are being installed over SB I-41 in the construction zone between Prospect Ave (County 'BB') and US 10/WI 441 (Bridgeview interchange).  One set went up a couple of days ago and another set is scheduled to go up after midnight Friday.  Yes, this requires overnight full lane closures on I-41. 

And yes, 'I-41' shields are on them.   

- A long-term ramp closure detour on local streets in the area of the US 10/WI 441 'Bridgeview' interchange is marked by contractor-installed I-41 signs.  They are on SB County 'CB' and EB County 'II' (Winchester Rd), marking the detour for the closed EB US 10 to SB I-41 ramp.

- NB I-41 to EB US 10/WI 441 ramp traffic is being permanently shifted onto the new ramp for that move *tonight* (Thursday, 2015-09-17), EB US 10 has a full-lane closure for that work.

Mike

[Highway63]

I logged on just now to say what I'd seen in Appleton, and I got beaten to the punch by less than an hour.

I finished a 1000-mile trip to Door County yesterday and traveled "I-41" from Green Bay to Oshkosh. The speed limit is 70, which perhaps is the most notable indicator right now that it's an interstate. Lots of construction at the I-43/41 interchange. Going southbound, the first I-41 shield was between the Lineville Road exit and I-43, and there were plenty of I-41/US 41 pairs after exits. However, the only overhead (on a BGS) I-41 shield I saw is exactly the one mgk920 is talking about. I took a picture but I think it's out of focus (haven't looked yet). All BGSs north of there including in Green Bay only had US 41, but because of the construction half the SB BGSs in the Green Bay area are temporary anyway. I looked back while driving and there were some NB BGSs in Green Bay with I-41, usually on the left-most side as a pull-through.

I saw the "Detour South I-41" signs on BB and II, but I could not take pictures because it was dark and I was tired. There's a different sign issue worth noting nearby: On SB WI 76 approaching US 10, the US 10 signs are WI 10 instead.

[peterj920]

I logged on just now to say what I'd seen in Appleton, and I got beaten to the punch by less than an hour.

I finished a 1000-mile trip to Door County yesterday and traveled "I-41" from Green Bay to Oshkosh. The speed limit is 70, which perhaps is the most notable indicator right now that it's an interstate. Lots of construction at the I-43/41 interchange. Going southbound, the first I-41 shield was between the Lineville Road exit and I-43, and there were plenty of I-41/US 41 pairs after exits. However, the only overhead (on a BGS) I-41 shield I saw is exactly the one mgk920 is talking about. I took a picture but I think it's out of focus (haven't looked yet). All BGSs north of there including in Green Bay only had US 41, but because of the construction half the SB BGSs in the Green Bay area are temporary anyway. I looked back while driving and there were some NB BGSs in Green Bay with I-41, usually on the left-most side as a pull-through.

I saw the "Detour South I-41" signs on BB and II, but I could not take pictures because it was dark and I was tired. There's a different sign issue worth noting nearby: On SB WI 76 approaching US 10, the US 10 signs are WI 10 instead.

The BGSs at I-41/Wis 172 were the first I-41 signs to be installed in May.  As soon as one was installed, I sent a picture to the webmaster here, and can be seen on the I-41 interstate-guide page, along with other pictures I submitted.  There's also 2 signs on the Northbound I-41 C/D ramps between Wis 54 and Wis 29.  They were put up about 2 months ago.  The other interchange to just get I-41 signs in Green Bay is the Oneida St Interchange.  The finishing touches are being applied to Oneida St underneath I-41, and some new signs were installed.  The sign crews right now are probably somewhere in Washington or Dodge Counties right now working their way north. 

[Henry]

IDOT (and their predecessor IDPW) did not play nice with other state DOTs.  It's a miracle, actually, that I-80/94 was improved, and the new I-70 bridge was built.

I still don't quite understand the "do not play nice with other state DOT's" thing. Do people think they sit around trying to find ways to screw other DOT's? I gotta believe it's really more of a case of inertia than anything else. What possible motivation would a body like a DOT have to purposely not "play nice". I hear that a lot about the lack of I-41 signing in IL. I keep hearing "IDOT wants nothing to do with it" or "they're telling WisDOT to screw off" or whatever. Really? Does less than a mile of signing make a difference in their world, or is it really just bureaucratic inertia taking hold?

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

First of all it makes no sense to even sign I-41 anyway in Illinois being it ends abruptly at no other interstate.  Yes, maybe IDOT should have renumbered I-294 as I-41, which would make sense, but Wisconsin should have just created I-41 to be between Milwaukee and Green Bay as its overlap south of Milwaukee is totally useless!

Given that IDOT would not extend I-55/I-57 to Milwaukee, I don't see it routing I-41 down I-294 anytime soon. But it would be nice to have that as a western bypass of Chicagoland.

It would have to be routed down I-94 first to get to I-294, since I-294 begins/ends 25 miles from the US41/I-94 split.  Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

As I mentioned in previous posts, I'd almost route 'I-41' to replace I-94 through Chicago while rerouting I-94 to replace I-294 around Chicago.  Have 'I-41' (temporarily?) end at I-80/94 in Lansing, IL, with the option kept open to continue it southward via IL 394 to potentially ultimately end at I-24 just south of Hopkinsville, KY via the US 41 corridor.

Mike

I'm all for that too, but it's straying a bit far into fictional territory; and we've discussed it there anyway.

[Highway63]

However, the only overhead (on a BGS) I-41 shield I saw is exactly the one mgk920 is talking about. I took a picture but I think it's out of focus (haven't looked yet).

I was right. It's out of focus.  The I-41/US 41 pair I stopped to photograph is good though.

[peterj920]

New southbound on ramp from Velp Ave to I-41 South just opened.  The ramp is about 10 feet higher than the current roadway is, and merges with the mainline at Memorial Drive where construction is complete.  The new northbound lanes are also elevated higher, and the current mainline where the new southbound lanes will be looks like a trench right now.  In the beginning of November, traffic will be switched to the northbound lanes, and that area will be raised and worked on.  The I-41 south to I-43 south, I-41 south mainline, and Velp Ave are the only stretches where construction needs to start.  Around Lombardi Ave, noise barrier work continues and the mainline looks graded and ready for paving.  I don't think they will start the paving until the noise barriers are complete.  More BGSs were also replaced with I-41 in the Wis 29 interchange area Friday night.

[mgk920]

However, the only overhead (on a BGS) I-41 shield I saw is exactly the one mgk920 is talking about. I took a picture but I think it's out of focus (haven't looked yet).

I was right. It's out of focus.  The I-41/US 41 pair I stopped to photograph is good though.

I'll be out getting decent shots of those new BGSes within the next few days.

Mike

[Big John]

I drove south down US 45 to Oshkosh today.  The southbound BGS's on US 45 have the new interstate shield on them.  I then took the TOTSO ramp to stay on US 45 into Oshkosh, then saw the other US 41 signs had not been converted yet to the roundabouts.  The overhead northbound BGS had not been changed either at the first NB roundabout.

Another thing I noticed is that there are Alternate US 41 signs posted on the city streets in Oshkosh.  Not sure if there is any intention of changing those signs too.

[peterj920]

The alternate US 41 signs will get replaced also.  That's part of the reason why it's taking so long to replace all of the signs.  All the remaining BGSs on mainline I-41 were changed over in the Green Bay Area last week.  Green Bay is supposed to be the last place where the signs are being changed over, but I-41 signs pop up sporadically at different times.  An I-41/US 141 south sign was posted on the loop ramp from I-43 south to I-41 south in June, despite the fact that the sign will be useless after November, when the ramp permanently closes and the new ramp won't have access to US 141 south.