News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-41, An AASHTO Violation?

Started by ColossalBlocks, January 07, 2017, 12:06:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SEWIGuy

Quote from: Rothman on January 10, 2017, 01:19:03 PM
I-4, fine as is, doesn't come back and hit the same interstate like I-41 does with I-43.

Why does that matter?  They service two completely different groups of cities along their routes. 


Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PMTell me if I'm wrong, but the only highway on your list that is completely multiplexed is I-22. The fact that I-41 is multiplexed along its entire route is not right to me.


Uh...OK...why?  I-39 also comes pretty close to doing the same, but I don't see the point.

Interstate highways speak to a specific standard of highway and that helps with navigation.  Furthermore, since the highway has always been "Highway 41," the number made sense.

Complaints like the two above are simply technical and arcane. 


english si

Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PMI-97 definitely should not be an interstate.
I can understand 3di rather than 2di, but it links a state capital to the state's largest city (and one of the biggest urban areas in the country).
Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 10, 2017, 01:43:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 10, 2017, 01:19:03 PM
I-4, fine as is, doesn't come back and hit the same interstate like I-41 does with I-43.
Why does that matter?  They service two completely different groups of cities along their routes.
That doesn't matter. I-94 shouldn't be an interstate west of Chicago as I-90 takes you to Madison and Montana.  :)

The Ghostbuster

The US 41 corridor could have been numbered Interstate 47, 594 or 643, which were the other numbers considered. Given that Interstate 41 is east of 39 and west of 43, it would seem the 41 designation would be the logical designation for the corridor.

billtm

Quote from: english si on January 10, 2017, 03:39:40 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PMI-97 definitely should not be an interstate.
I can understand 3di rather than 2di, but it links a state capital to the state's largest city (and one of the biggest urban areas in the country).
Stupid me! :banghead: I meant definitely shouldn't be a 2di.

In the case of I-39, eventually I would like to see US-51 north of US-8 downgraded to a 3dus highway, and then truncated in Bloomington, as it has effectively been replaced by I-39. That could be done for US-41 also, but I support that idea a whole lot less because I feel like US-41 does a lot more north of Green Bay than US-51 does north of US-8. So it would be more important to keep US-41 a continuous route. If US-41 in Wisconsin deserves to become an Interstate, why not WI-29?

Big John

Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 05:13:57 PMIf US-41 in Wisconsin deserves to become an Interstate, why not WI-29?
Much of WI 29 between I-94 and I-41 aren't up to interstate standard, having at-grade intersections ion it.  Current traffic does not justify a full freeway conversion at this time.

Avalanchez71

Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 05:13:57 PM
Quote from: english si on January 10, 2017, 03:39:40 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PMI-97 definitely should not be an interstate.
I can understand 3di rather than 2di, but it links a state capital to the state's largest city (and one of the biggest urban areas in the country).
Stupid me! :banghead: I meant definitely shouldn't be a 2di.

In the case of I-39, eventually I would like to see US-51 north of US-8 downgraded to a 3dus highway, and then truncated in Bloomington, as it has effectively been replaced by I-39. That could be done for US-41 also, but I support that idea a whole lot less because I feel like US-41 does a lot more north of Green Bay than US-51 does north of US-8. So it would be more important to keep US-41 a continuous route. If US-41 in Wisconsin deserves to become an Interstate, why not WI-29?

The only precedence I can think of for this is US 127 formerly US 27 in Michigan.

GaryV

Quote from: Avalanchez71 on January 10, 2017, 05:40:13 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 05:13:57 PM
Quote from: english si on January 10, 2017, 03:39:40 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PMI-97 definitely should not be an interstate.
I can understand 3di rather than 2di, but it links a state capital to the state's largest city (and one of the biggest urban areas in the country).
Stupid me! :banghead: I meant definitely shouldn't be a 2di.

In the case of I-39, eventually I would like to see US-51 north of US-8 downgraded to a 3dus highway, and then truncated in Bloomington, as it has effectively been replaced by I-39. That could be done for US-41 also, but I support that idea a whole lot less because I feel like US-41 does a lot more north of Green Bay than US-51 does north of US-8. So it would be more important to keep US-41 a continuous route. If US-41 in Wisconsin deserves to become an Interstate, why not WI-29?

The only precedence I can think of for this is US 127 formerly US 27 in Michigan.

And in reverse, US 12, formerly US 112 in Michigan.

cjk374

So I-41's endpoints are both on I-43? Well....then just change I-41 to I-43A so we can really have something to talk about.  :)  :-D  :cool:
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

Big John

^^ The North end is by the north end of I-43, but the south end is just south of the Illinois state line on I-94.

Revive 755

Quote from: Big John on January 10, 2017, 07:29:44 PM
^^ The North end is by the north end of I-43, but the south end is just south of the Illinois state line on I-94.

Nitpicking, but last time I drove that segment, the end I-41 assembly for southbound was actually north of the Illinois border - so NB I-41 is longer than SB I-41  :spin:

billtm

Quote from: Big John on January 10, 2017, 05:19:54 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 05:13:57 PMIf US-41 in Wisconsin deserves to become an Interstate, why not WI-29?
Much of WI 29 between I-94 and I-41 aren't up to interstate standard, having at-grade intersections ion it.  Current traffic does not justify a full freeway conversion at this time.
Sorry, my bad again :-/. I just came up with that example from a quick glance at Google Maps. I was posting from school, so I couldn't check my facts with my Rand McNally. :pan:

compdude787

Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 10:38:28 PM
I just came up with that example from a quick glance at Google Maps. I was posting from school, so I couldn't check my facts with my Rand McNally. :pan:

Google Maps sometimes shows divided highways with at-grade intersections in the same color as freeways, so I understand your confusion.

rickmastfan67

Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PM
Tell me if I'm wrong, but the only highway on your list that is completely multiplexed is I-22.

You're wrong.  US-78 leaves I-22 well before I-65 @ Exit 85.  Thus, the last ~10 miles of the route isn't multiplexed with anything.

dcharlie

#38
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on January 11, 2017, 03:26:43 AM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PM
Tell me if I'm wrong, but the only highway on your list that is completely multiplexed is I-22.

You're wrong.  US-78 leaves I-22 well before I-65 @ Exit 85.  Thus, the last ~10 miles of the route isn't multiplexed with anything.

That's interesting because this GSV shot clearly shows US 78 multiplexing with I-22 just East of Coalburg Rd.    https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5878616,-86.8452551,3a,75y,115.3h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssk_Pk0nSIC0OI-0SspDg-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Which means it does go all the way to I-65

billtm

Quote from: dcharlie on January 11, 2017, 08:41:59 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on January 11, 2017, 03:26:43 AM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PM
Tell me if I'm wrong, but the only highway on your list that is completely multiplexed is I-22.

You're wrong.  US-78 leaves I-22 well before I-65 @ Exit 85.  Thus, the last ~10 miles of the route isn't multiplexed with anything.

That's interesting because this GSV shot clearly shows US 78 multiplexing with I-22 just East of Coalburg Rd.    https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5878616,-86.8452551,3a,75y,115.3h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssk_Pk0nSIC0OI-0SspDg-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Which means it does go all the way to I-65

That's weird, because I also just found a GSV shot showing exit 85 for US-78 to Birmingham. :confused:

dcharlie

Quote from: billtm on January 11, 2017, 09:10:10 AM
Quote from: dcharlie on January 11, 2017, 08:41:59 AM
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on January 11, 2017, 03:26:43 AM
Quote from: billtm on January 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PM
Tell me if I'm wrong, but the only highway on your list that is completely multiplexed is I-22.

You're wrong.  US-78 leaves I-22 well before I-65 @ Exit 85.  Thus, the last ~10 miles of the route isn't multiplexed with anything.

That's interesting because this GSV shot clearly shows US 78 multiplexing with I-22 just East of Coalburg Rd.    https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5878616,-86.8452551,3a,75y,115.3h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssk_Pk0nSIC0OI-0SspDg-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Which means it does go all the way to I-65

That's weird, because I also just found a GSV shot showing exit 85 for US-78 to Birmingham. :confused:

The date on that shot shows July 2016.  I think that was before I-22 was completed.  So that would explain Us-78's dual personalities.


hbelkins

Quote from: dcharlie on January 11, 2017, 08:41:59 AM
That's interesting because this GSV shot clearly shows US 78 multiplexing with I-22 just East of Coalburg Rd.    https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5878616,-86.8452551,3a,75y,115.3h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssk_Pk0nSIC0OI-0SspDg-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Which means it does go all the way to I-65

Google Maps is wrong. (Which is not surprising...)

As for I-41, better routes to compare it with are I-476 and I-376 in Pennsylvania. If I-41 should be a 2di and not a 3di, then these two routes should also be 2dis.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

Mrt90

Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 09, 2017, 08:10:41 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 09, 2017, 08:04:37 PM
What I really don't get is why it had to become an Interstate. What's wrong with keeping it US-41? It never crosses state lines anyways. I-43 is the faster and shorter route anyways, so having two interstates connecting the same two points is just confusing, IMO.


It does cross a state line.  (And I-43 doesn't).  And I-41 is shorter to Green Bay if you are going from the west side of the Milwaukee suburbs.
Well, it's only for 0.9 miles (the distance from the US41 merge with I-94 in Illinois to the WI/IL border), and only in one direction (I-41 ends at the WI/IL border going south).

I think the real reason for the change was that it was thought to be more attractive for businesses to move to a location near an interstate highway.  And it sure makes giving directions from Kenosha to Fond du Lac and points north easier.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: Mrt90 on January 11, 2017, 10:41:37 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 09, 2017, 08:10:41 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 09, 2017, 08:04:37 PM
What I really don't get is why it had to become an Interstate. What's wrong with keeping it US-41? It never crosses state lines anyways. I-43 is the faster and shorter route anyways, so having two interstates connecting the same two points is just confusing, IMO.


It does cross a state line.  (And I-43 doesn't).  And I-41 is shorter to Green Bay if you are going from the west side of the Milwaukee suburbs.
Well, it's only for 0.9 miles (the distance from the US41 merge with I-94 in Illinois to the WI/IL border), and only in one direction (I-41 ends at the WI/IL border going south).


Not according to AASHTO.  Here is the entry for Illinois from the link above.

"Begins at the Wisconsin/Illinois state border
following USH 41/IH-94 to the USH 41/IH-94
interchange south of Russell Road/County
Highway 19. Travels over an existing Interstate
and US Highways Southerly covering 0.9 and
ends at the USH 41/IH-94 interchange. IH-41 is
proposed to follow USH 41/IH-94 from the
Wisconsin/Illinois state border south to the USH
41/IH-94 interchange. No letter included showing
the member department has contacted FHWA.
AASHTO to prepare information letter to FHWA
headquarters and copying Illinois. South of
Russell Road/County Highway 19."

Mrt90

Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 11, 2017, 11:09:06 AM
Quote from: Mrt90 on January 11, 2017, 10:41:37 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 09, 2017, 08:10:41 PM
Quote from: billtm on January 09, 2017, 08:04:37 PM
What I really don't get is why it had to become an Interstate. What's wrong with keeping it US-41? It never crosses state lines anyways. I-43 is the faster and shorter route anyways, so having two interstates connecting the same two points is just confusing, IMO.


It does cross a state line.  (And I-43 doesn't).  And I-41 is shorter to Green Bay if you are going from the west side of the Milwaukee suburbs.
Well, it's only for 0.9 miles (the distance from the US41 merge with I-94 in Illinois to the WI/IL border), and only in one direction (I-41 ends at the WI/IL border going south).


Not according to AASHTO.  Here is the entry for Illinois from the link above.

"Begins at the Wisconsin/Illinois state border
following USH 41/IH-94 to the USH 41/IH-94
interchange south of Russell Road/County
Highway 19. Travels over an existing Interstate
and US Highways Southerly covering 0.9 and
ends at the USH 41/IH-94 interchange. IH-41 is
proposed to follow USH 41/IH-94 from the
Wisconsin/Illinois state border south to the USH
41/IH-94 interchange. No letter included showing
the member department has contacted FHWA.
AASHTO to prepare information letter to FHWA
headquarters and copying Illinois. South of
Russell Road/County Highway 19."
I drive that way every day on the way to work, and the end I-41 signs are at the state line.  That might just be a practical matter, though, because it might be confusing to people who don't know the difference between a US highway and an Interstate highway and are just looking for 41 to have end I-41 signs right at the exit for US41.

Either way, you are technically correct that I-41 does cross a state line, whether it's in only one direction or both ways.

english si

Quote from: hbelkins on January 11, 2017, 10:36:56 AMAs for I-41, better routes to compare it with are I-476 and I-376 in Pennsylvania. If I-41 should be a 2di and not a 3di, then these two routes should also be 2dis.
The one problem with this is should. It's surely more a case of not should not.

There's no real reason why I-41, I-476, etc should not be 2dis, but by the same token, there's no real reason why they necessarily should be.

I-41 is a 2di because the numbering worked - the freeway was already referred to by that number, the number was free and fit the grid. The I-x76s were lengthy extensions of existing 3dis, and the grid is lacking 2di numbers in that part of the world (hence I-99 stealing one from elsewhere).

The Ghostbuster

Granted, the Interstate 41 designation could have ended at the Zoo Interchange. It was designated to the US 41/Interstate 94 split just south of the Wisconsin/Illinois border so that portion of the North-South Freeway could have an Interstate designation that was signed north-south (its proper directional alignment), unlike Interstate 94, which has always been signed east-west.

Revive 755

Quote from: english si on January 11, 2017, 12:00:32 PM
There's no real reason why I-41, I-476, etc should not be 2dis, but by the same token, there's no real reason why they necessarily should be.

I-41 is a 2di because the numbering worked - the freeway was already referred to by that number, the number was free and fit the grid. The I-x76s were lengthy extensions of existing 3dis, and the grid is lacking 2di numbers in that part of the world (hence I-99 stealing one from elsewhere).

Perhaps PennDOT wasn't trying that hard for a 2di for I-476 - they could have tried to duplicate I-85.  I'd bet North Carolina would have.  :biggrin:



As for the signed end for SB I-41:  Streetview - note the change in pavement and the welcome sign in the background

billtm

Quote from: english si on January 11, 2017, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 11, 2017, 10:36:56 AMAs for I-41, better routes to compare it with are I-476 and I-376 in Pennsylvania. If I-41 should be a 2di and not a 3di, then these two routes should also be 2dis.
The one problem with this is should. It's surely more a case of not should not.

There's no real reason why I-41, I-476, etc should not be 2dis, but by the same token, there's no real reason why they necessarily should be.

I-41 is a 2di because the numbering worked - the freeway was already referred to by that number, the number was free and fit the grid. The I-x76s were lengthy extensions of existing 3dis, and the grid is lacking 2di numbers in that part of the world (hence I-99 stealing one from elsewhere).

One thing I think most of us can agree upon is that I-99 should not be a 2di. An argument can even be made that it should just stay as US-220, because it isn't even connected to the Interstate highway system in a free-flowing manner.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: billtm on January 11, 2017, 08:30:42 PM
Quote from: english si on January 11, 2017, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 11, 2017, 10:36:56 AMAs for I-41, better routes to compare it with are I-476 and I-376 in Pennsylvania. If I-41 should be a 2di and not a 3di, then these two routes should also be 2dis.
The one problem with this is should. It's surely more a case of not should not.

There's no real reason why I-41, I-476, etc should not be 2dis, but by the same token, there's no real reason why they necessarily should be.

I-41 is a 2di because the numbering worked - the freeway was already referred to by that number, the number was free and fit the grid. The I-x76s were lengthy extensions of existing 3dis, and the grid is lacking 2di numbers in that part of the world (hence I-99 stealing one from elsewhere).

One thing I think most of us can agree upon is that I-99 should not be a 2di. An argument can even be made that it should just stay as US-220, because it isn't even connected to the Interstate highway system in a free-flowing manner.


It's fine as a 2di. 



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.