US-41 Interstate Conversion

[SEWIGuy]

I think the entire signing of US-41 makes no sense between the IL line and Green Bay.  If they would have simply made it "disappear" between those two spots, very few would be confused.  People would figure it out.

[peterj920]

Interesting that US 41 reassurance signs were omitted and I-41 is signed solo.

I still think that's the ultimate fate. US-41 will eventually be "unsigned" along the route, save for a few "41 Follow 41" signs. There are more than a few "uni-assemblies" in Milwaukee that have 894/45/I-41 on a single board, and US-41 on a standalone sign. The new on ramp BGS's on WI-33 and a few other exits show I-41 only, as do the BGS's near the Lake Butte Des Morts bridge in Oshkosh.

The BGS and signs at exits only had I-41 the entire time without US 41 with the exception of US 41 follow I-41 at major interchanges, but WISDOT put US 41 reassurance signs with I-41 after every entrance ramp on the mainline.  This is the first time I have seen a reassurance sign with US 41 omitted on the mainline. 

[alecscradle]

I'm not sure how Wisconsin plans on making US 41 from the IL State Line to Green Bay "unsigned", since that would be ~170 miles of an unsigned highway.  Typically in the past if they put a highway on top of a US Route they just typically decommission the US Route, which could happen to US 41 in WI and MI.  It wouldn't be much of a problem for Michigan, they'd probably just turn it into M 41, but I'm not sure what they would call it in Wisconsin past Green Bay.  Turning it into WI 41 would be very confusing.

[peterj920]

I'm not sure how Wisconsin plans on making US 41 from the IL State Line to Green Bay "unsigned", since that would be ~170 miles of an unsigned highway.  Typically in the past if they put a highway on top of a US Route they just typically decommission the US Route, which could happen to US 41 in WI and MI.  It wouldn't be much of a problem for Michigan, they'd probably just turn it into M 41, but I'm not sure what they would call it in Wisconsin past Green Bay.  Turning it into WI 41 would be very confusing.

US 52 is unsigned from Jamestown, ND to St Paul, MN which spans hundreds of miles.  There's a US 52 follow I-94 sign at the US 52/I-94 east interchange in St Paul, and that is it until North Dakota. 

There are US 41 follow I-41 BGS  at major interchanges, such as at Wis 441, US 10, US 45 in Oshkosh, I-43, and the I-94 interchanges.  The I-41/US 41 reassurance signs are only a year old so they are going to be around a long time.  The only reason why the I-41 standalone signs were posted now because it was a work zone when all of the other signs were posted.  Even if there was a hidden concurrency, US 41 could still remain north of Green Bay.

[silverback1065]

I'm not sure how Wisconsin plans on making US 41 from the IL State Line to Green Bay "unsigned", since that would be ~170 miles of an unsigned highway.  Typically in the past if they put a highway on top of a US Route they just typically decommission the US Route, which could happen to US 41 in WI and MI.  It wouldn't be much of a problem for Michigan, they'd probably just turn it into M 41, but I'm not sure what they would call it in Wisconsin past Green Bay.  Turning it into WI 41 would be very confusing.

US 52 is unsigned from Jamestown, ND to St Paul, MN which spans hundreds of miles.  There's a US 52 follow I-94 sign at the US 52/I-94 east interchange in St Paul, and that is it until North Dakota. 

There are US 41 follow I-41 BGS  at major interchanges, such as at Wis 441, US 10, US 45 in Oshkosh, I-43, and the I-94 interchanges.  The I-41/US 41 reassurance signs are only a year old so they are going to be around a long time.  The only reason why the I-41 standalone signs were posted now because it was a work zone when all of the other signs were posted.  Even if there was a hidden concurrency, US 41 could still remain north of Green Bay.

I don't get the point of not signing US 52 in this situation.

[SEWIGuy]

I'm not sure how Wisconsin plans on making US 41 from the IL State Line to Green Bay "unsigned", since that would be ~170 miles of an unsigned highway. 

Yep.  Not sure what is wrong with that.  Simply turning a US Highway into an Interstate with the same number.

Typically in the past if they put a highway on top of a US Route they just typically decommission the US Route, which could happen to US 41 in WI and MI.  It wouldn't be much of a problem for Michigan, they'd probably just turn it into M 41, but I'm not sure what they would call it in Wisconsin past Green Bay.  Turning it into WI 41 would be very confusing.

Why would that be confusing? 

[dcharlie]

Did Illinois Or (WIS) ever put up I-41 signs on the Illinois side of the border?

[Henry]

New northbound lanes opened today between Wis 172 and Wis 54.  Check out pics on Facebook.  Interesting that US 41 reassurance signs were omitted and I-41 is signed solo.

So US 41 will be decommissioned eventually where I-41 is? I don't see any problem with that.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

US 41 is a vital road in the UP. I can't see Michigan ever getting on board with decommissioning it.

[peterj920]

Did Illinois Or (WIS) ever put up I-41 signs on the Illinois side of the border?

Southbound, there are 2 END I-41 signs at the state line.  Northbound, there is a BGS at Russell Rd with I-41, along with I-41 signs for the northbound I-41/I-94 on ramp from Russell Rd. 

[peterj920]

US 41 is a vital road in the UP. I can't see Michigan ever getting on board with decommissioning it.

Michigan has no problem decommissioning US highways.  If Wisconsin wanted to decommission it, they would just designate it M-41.  US 27 was a vital highway and renumbered a large portion of it US 127 so US 27 could be end in Indiana and not follow I-69.  US 10 was a major roadway in the Detroit area, but was designated M-10 so US 10 didn't have to run concurrent with I-75 between the Detroit metro to Bay City.  Wisconsin won't decommission US 41.  Wisconsin likes to keep its US highways for the most part.  US 16 was only decommissioned because Minnesota and South Dakota pressured it to, and the entire route became Wis 16.  US 141 followed I-43 south of Green Bay so there was no point of keeping it. 

[silverback1065]

US 41 is a vital road in the UP. I can't see Michigan ever getting on board with decommissioning it.

Michigan has no problem decommissioning US highways.  If Wisconsin wanted to decommission it, they would just designate it M-41.  US 27 was a vital highway and renumbered a large portion of it US 127 so US 27 could be end in Indiana and not follow I-69.  US 10 was a major roadway in the Detroit area, but was designated M-10 so US 10 didn't have to run concurrent with I-75 between the Detroit metro to Bay City.  Wisconsin won't decommission US 41.  Wisconsin likes to keep its US highways for the most part.  US 16 was only decommissioned because Minnesota and South Dakota pressured it to, and the entire route became Wis 16.  US 141 followed I-43 south of Green Bay so there was no point of keeping it.

I didn't US used to go to detroit! What was the original routing?

[Mrt90]

Did Illinois Or (WIS) ever put up I-41 signs on the Illinois side of the border?

Southbound, there are 2 END I-41 signs at the state line.  Northbound, there is a BGS at Russell Rd with I-41, along with I-41 signs for the northbound I-41/I-94 on ramp from Russell Rd.

I think there are also signs on US41 at the US41/I-94 merge in Illinois which mention I-41.

It was probably smart to end I-41 south at the state line because it would have been confusing to have "End I-41" signs at the exit for US41, which is confusing enough because it is a left exit.

[dvferyance]

I would just renumber the part north of Green Bay to US 37 if you were to end US 41 in Zion IL just before Wisconsin. I would just have US 41 hidden with I-41. Makes perfect sense it's the same number anyways. This is not by any means unusual. Colorado unsigned most of it's US highway duplexes with interstates.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

US 41 is a vital road in the UP. I can't see Michigan ever getting on board with decommissioning it.

Michigan has no problem decommissioning US highways.  If Wisconsin wanted to decommission it, they would just designate it M-41.  US 27 was a vital highway and renumbered a large portion of it US 127 so US 27 could be end in Indiana and not follow I-69.  US 10 was a major roadway in the Detroit area, but was designated M-10 so US 10 didn't have to run concurrent with I-75 between the Detroit metro to Bay City.  Wisconsin won't decommission US 41.  Wisconsin likes to keep its US highways for the most part.  US 16 was only decommissioned because Minnesota and South Dakota pressured it to, and the entire route became Wis 16.  US 141 followed I-43 south of Green Bay so there was no point of keeping it. 

Those other decomms were due to overlapping Interstates. This one is not quite the same as those others.

[bulldog1979]

US 41 is a vital road in the UP. I can't see Michigan ever getting on board with decommissioning it.

Michigan has no problem decommissioning US highways.  If Wisconsin wanted to decommission it, they would just designate it M-41.  US 27 was a vital highway and renumbered a large portion of it US 127 so US 27 could be end in Indiana and not follow I-69.  US 10 was a major roadway in the Detroit area, but was designated M-10 so US 10 didn't have to run concurrent with I-75 between the Detroit metro to Bay City.  Wisconsin won't decommission US 41.  Wisconsin likes to keep its US highways for the most part.  US 16 was only decommissioned because Minnesota and South Dakota pressured it to, and the entire route became Wis 16.  US 141 followed I-43 south of Green Bay so there was no point of keeping it. 

Those other decomms were due to overlapping Interstates. This one is not quite the same as those others.

As I've noted elsewhere, MDOT did a study regarding overlapping designations in the Grand Rapids area in 1979. FHWA and AASHTO agreed to hide the I-296 designation to minimize diver confusion. In the wake of that study, MDOT looking at various other overlapping designations in the state in the 1980s. As a result, they petitioned to truncate US 2, removing it from I-75 between St. Ignace and Sault Ste. Marie and remove a "useless concurrency". They also petitioned to truncate US 10 off I-75 between Bay City and Clarkston. (From there, US 10 followed what is now US 24 to M-10 and then followed the Lodge Freeway into Detroit.) A similar petition trimmed back most of US 33 in the state, removing it north and northwest of Niles.

Those changes were all made in the 1983—86 timeframe. It wasn't until 1999 that MDOT got INDOT to go along with petitioning to remove US 27 from the state, and I suspect that the 3-year delay in actually changing US 27 to US 127 north of Lansing was related to a) getting the St. Johns Bypass finished, thus making US 127 flow right into US 27 instead of jogging along I-69; b) seeing where I-73 might fit into the equation by making both US 27 and US 127 redundant to a new number completely. If I-73 had a chance of moving forward, I suspect MDOT might asked to renumber US 27 north of Lansing as part of I-73, with "Future I-73" or "Temp I-73" along the Ithaca—St. Johns section.

On the other hand, I just don't see Michigan going along with dropping US 41 in the UP. The designation here isn't redundant to another one on the routing, and it serves as the main highway through the region's largest city.

[alecscradle]

I would just renumber the part north of Green Bay to US 37 if you were to end US 41 in Zion IL just before Wisconsin. I would just have US 41 hidden with I-41. Makes perfect sense it;s the same number anyways. This is not by any means unusual. Colorado unsigned most of it's US highway duplexes with interstates.

This makes the most sense to me.  Having the whole I 41/US 41 switch at Green Bay seems confusing at least to me, and I feel like some drivers would be confused as well.  Even if they're on the same route calling the same road 41 twice is confusing.

One thing I'm wondering is if they'd do anything to US 141 if US 41 were truncated.  I know auxiliary US routes don't have to connect to the main stem, but would it be worth renumbering that route?

[SEWIGuy]

Renumbering a highway that has been "41" since everyone who lives around there has been alive would be much more confusing.  If number duplication was a problem, they should have chosen a different interstate number.  But I don't think it is much of a problem.

[dvferyance]

Renumbering a highway that has been "41" since everyone who lives around there has been alive would be much more confusing.  If number duplication was a problem, they should have chosen a different interstate number.  But I don't think it is much of a problem.

Just make US 41 hidden with I-41 makes perfect sense. As I said before Colorado does not sign most of it's US highway duplexes with interstates.

[SEWIGuy]

Renumbering a highway that has been "41" since everyone who lives around there has been alive would be much more confusing.  If number duplication was a problem, they should have chosen a different interstate number.  But I don't think it is much of a problem.

Just make US 41 hidden with I-41 makes perfect sense. As I said before Colorado does not sign most of it's US highway duplexes with interstates.

I agree with you completely.  I have said from the beginning that's what they should do.  Keeping US-41 reassurance markers around is completely unnecessary.

[peterj920]

This Friday, August 26 the I-41/I-43 interchange opens to traffic

[peterj920]

The I-41/I-43 interchange is fully open today.  I-41 north mainline between County G and Wis 172 will open tomorrow.  Mainline traffic has been using C/D lanes for the last year. 

[Fox 11 News]

http://fox11online.com/news/local/green-bay/major-interchange-reopened-this-morning-in-green-bay-area

[I-39]

Does anyone know why I-41 doesn't show up along the roadway between the Zoo interchange and WIS-145 on Google Maps? It also does not appear cosigned with I-94 or I-894.

[skluth]

US 41 is a vital road in the UP. I can't see Michigan ever getting on board with decommissioning it.

WI-29 gets by just fine as a state highway and is far busier than US-41 will ever be in the UP. There is no reason US-41 couldn't be state highways from Abrams to the the tip of the Keewenaw. They could also get rid of US-141 completely and designate it a state route in both Michigan and Wisconsin.