Print

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

[I-39]

Let's look at this logically.

Let's say they chose I-47 that ends at the Zoo Interchange.  Now what would you have done with US-41?  Would you have co-signed it the entire way between Green Bay and Milwaukee?  Would you have kept it on the former routing through Milwaukee? (exiting at Appleton Avenue then running with I-94 through downtown?)  Would you have run it along I-894, which means you are duplexing a "41" along that highway anyway, just one with black and white shield instead of red, white and blue ones.

This is why I-41 on its current routing always made sense.  You can "hide" US-41 when the highway is an interstate only to have it re-emerge on either end, causing little confusion.  You fix the bad US-41 routing on the north side of Milwaukee, which actually WAS confusing.  And you sign a north/south highway as north and south between Chicago and Milwaukee instead of the east west signage of I-94 only.

Swapping out signs was going to incur a cost regardless.  This way they would able to avoid and/or fix multiple problems anyway.

They could've done all of that by just routing US41 onto the current routing it's on. They didn't need to make it an interstate. Not every freeway has to be an interstate. We don't have many non-interstate freeways here in the Midwest because of this.

1. WIDOT didn't have a choice since the designation was part of a highway funding bill.

2. I disagree with you.  I think every interstate compatible freeway of significant length should be designated an interstate.

3. It's absolutely fine as an interstate.  Only roadgeeks care about the "problems" outlined in this topic.

With that analogy, then IL394 would be designated as I394. There should be some non interstate freeways. CA and MN kinda have the right idea with it, although parts of MN5 and MN100 go onto I494.

Well I did say "of significant length," and I don't think IL-394 falls into that category.  I was intentionally vague with that description, but I am thinking for 2dis, about 75-100 miles or more.  (Not saying those less than that figure SHOULDN'T be interstates.)

Agree, but some long corridors are fine as US Highways. US 151 is an example that is often thrown around for an Interstate designation when the corridor becomes a freeway between Fond du Lac and Madison (and even Madison to Dubuque), but I think it’s fine as US 151. Compared to turning WIS 29 into I-96, which would benefit the corridor in the same way that converting WIS 15 to I-43 in the late 80s did, I don’t think there would be a similar benefit for US 151.

[thspfc]

Let's look at this logically.

Let's say they chose I-47 that ends at the Zoo Interchange.  Now what would you have done with US-41?  Would you have co-signed it the entire way between Green Bay and Milwaukee?  Would you have kept it on the former routing through Milwaukee? (exiting at Appleton Avenue then running with I-94 through downtown?)  Would you have run it along I-894, which means you are duplexing a "41" along that highway anyway, just one with black and white shield instead of red, white and blue ones.

This is why I-41 on its current routing always made sense.  You can "hide" US-41 when the highway is an interstate only to have it re-emerge on either end, causing little confusion.  You fix the bad US-41 routing on the north side of Milwaukee, which actually WAS confusing.  And you sign a north/south highway as north and south between Chicago and Milwaukee instead of the east west signage of I-94 only.

Swapping out signs was going to incur a cost regardless.  This way they would able to avoid and/or fix multiple problems anyway.

They could've done all of that by just routing US41 onto the current routing it's on. They didn't need to make it an interstate. Not every freeway has to be an interstate. We don't have many non-interstate freeways here in the Midwest because of this.

1. WIDOT didn't have a choice since the designation was part of a highway funding bill.

2. I disagree with you.  I think every interstate compatible freeway of significant length should be designated an interstate.

3. It's absolutely fine as an interstate.  Only roadgeeks care about the "problems" outlined in this topic.

With that analogy, then IL394 would be designated as I394. There should be some non interstate freeways. CA and MN kinda have the right idea with it, although parts of MN5 and MN100 go onto I494.

Well I did say "of significant length," and I don't think IL-394 falls into that category.  I was intentionally vague with that description, but I am thinking for 2dis, about 75-100 miles or more.  (Not saying those less than that figure SHOULDN'T be interstates.)

Agree, but some long corridors are fine as US Highways. US 151 is an example that is often thrown around for an Interstate designation when the corridor becomes a freeway between Fond du Lac and Madison (and even Madison to Dubuque), but I think it’s fine as US 151. Compared to turning WIS 29 into I-96, which would benefit the corridor in the same way that converting WIS 15 to I-43 in the late 80s did, I don’t think there would be a similar benefit for US 151.

Even if US-151 between Dubuque and Madison becomes a full freeway, I still don't think it would be fit for an Interstate designation because of all the sharp curves and steep hills - there's a 7% maximum grade rule for Interstate highways, and that stretch of US-151 probably has a few 8+% grade hills.

[I-39]

Let's look at this logically.

Let's say they chose I-47 that ends at the Zoo Interchange.  Now what would you have done with US-41?  Would you have co-signed it the entire way between Green Bay and Milwaukee?  Would you have kept it on the former routing through Milwaukee? (exiting at Appleton Avenue then running with I-94 through downtown?)  Would you have run it along I-894, which means you are duplexing a "41" along that highway anyway, just one with black and white shield instead of red, white and blue ones.

This is why I-41 on its current routing always made sense.  You can "hide" US-41 when the highway is an interstate only to have it re-emerge on either end, causing little confusion.  You fix the bad US-41 routing on the north side of Milwaukee, which actually WAS confusing.  And you sign a north/south highway as north and south between Chicago and Milwaukee instead of the east west signage of I-94 only.

Swapping out signs was going to incur a cost regardless.  This way they would able to avoid and/or fix multiple problems anyway.

They could've done all of that by just routing US41 onto the current routing it's on. They didn't need to make it an interstate. Not every freeway has to be an interstate. We don't have many non-interstate freeways here in the Midwest because of this.

1. WIDOT didn't have a choice since the designation was part of a highway funding bill.

2. I disagree with you.  I think every interstate compatible freeway of significant length should be designated an interstate.

3. It's absolutely fine as an interstate.  Only roadgeeks care about the "problems" outlined in this topic.

With that analogy, then IL394 would be designated as I394. There should be some non interstate freeways. CA and MN kinda have the right idea with it, although parts of MN5 and MN100 go onto I494.

Well I did say "of significant length," and I don't think IL-394 falls into that category.  I was intentionally vague with that description, but I am thinking for 2dis, about 75-100 miles or more.  (Not saying those less than that figure SHOULDN'T be interstates.)

Agree, but some long corridors are fine as US Highways. US 151 is an example that is often thrown around for an Interstate designation when the corridor becomes a freeway between Fond du Lac and Madison (and even Madison to Dubuque), but I think it’s fine as US 151. Compared to turning WIS 29 into I-96, which would benefit the corridor in the same way that converting WIS 15 to I-43 in the late 80s did, I don’t think there would be a similar benefit for US 151.

Even if US-151 between Dubuque and Madison becomes a full freeway, I still don't think it would be fit for an Interstate designation because of all the sharp curves and steep hills - there's a 7% maximum grade rule for Interstate highways, and that stretch of US-151 probably has a few 8+% grade hills.

True, but like I said, it doesn’t need to be an Interstate. It is fine as US 151, and the Dubuque to Madison segment is probably even further away than WIS 29 in becoming full freeway.

[SSOWorld]

<quotes trimmed>

Agree, but some long corridors are fine as US Highways. US 151 is an example that is often thrown around for an Interstate designation when the corridor becomes a freeway between Fond du Lac and Madison (and even Madison to Dubuque), but I think it’s fine as US 151. Compared to turning WIS 29 into I-96, which would benefit the corridor in the same way that converting WIS 15 to I-43 in the late 80s did, I don’t think there would be a similar benefit for US 151.

WIS 15 became I-43 because to be a 65 mph road required the red-white-and-blue shield at the time - like the designations in Illinois (155 and 88). US-51 to Wausau got lucky because an amendment to the 65 rule allowed additional freeways to get it on certain conditions.

[mrsman]

Very good discussion so far.

I'm in the camp of leaving the I-894 designation.  Even though it is subsumed by I-41, it is still well known to travelers as the Milwaukee bypass highway.

What is needed along the corridor are better signage for control cities to guide people along the bypass.  This should be done on the big green signs along the highways and at the three key interchanges that I-894 passes through.  This should also be done at the cross street on-ramps, where now al you have are small roadsign signs for 41N/43S/894W ro 41S/43N/894E.  At a moment's notice, it will be hard to keep up with this, especially given the confusion of the wrong-way 41/43 multiplex.

The signs at the Zoo Interchange seem very good, as they list all apppropriate highways.  (All pointing south).  The proper signs also put in "Bypass" (although my preference would be "Milwaukee Bypass") and have an airport symbol.  Most importantly, Chicago is the control.

The stretch between Zoo and 43 should have control cities signed from cross-street on-ramps.  Southbound should be Chicago.  Northbound should be both Madison and Fond du Lac.  (Madison is the primary control where there is only room for one).  894 should be signed north/south on this section, not east/west.

The signs at the 43 interchange should have 41 south, 43 north, and 894 east for one direction and 41/894/45 north in the other direction.  The signs for 41S/43N/894E should also include an airplane logo.  The control city for 41S/43N/894E is properly Chicago if coming from the direction of Zoo, but it should list both Chicago and Milwaukee if coming from 43 NB.  The control cities for 41/894/45 north are properly listed as Fond du Lac and Madison, but the controls need to be listed on signs coming from the airport as well.  (The signs are only seen when coming from 43 N.)

The stretch between the Airport Interchange and 43 should have control cities signed from cross-street on-ramps.  Eastbound should be Milwaukee and Chicago, with Milwaukee as the primary control.  Westbound should be both Madison and Beloit.  (Madison is the primary control where there is only room for one).  The control cities are really important here as each of the three highways signed has a different compass direction.

Finally, at the Airport interchange, care must be taken that each highway have a cardinal direction posted.  The controlled cities as currently signed here seem appropriate (Beloit signed on the exit from 94 EB and Fond du Lac/Madison signed on the exit from 94 WB).  The only thing I would add are signs for "BYPASS" (or "Milwauikee Bypass") in a similar manner as signed from the Zoo Interchange.

[SEWIGuy]

Let's look at this logically.

Let's say they chose I-47 that ends at the Zoo Interchange.  Now what would you have done with US-41?  Would you have co-signed it the entire way between Green Bay and Milwaukee?  Would you have kept it on the former routing through Milwaukee? (exiting at Appleton Avenue then running with I-94 through downtown?)  Would you have run it along I-894, which means you are duplexing a "41" along that highway anyway, just one with black and white shield instead of red, white and blue ones.

This is why I-41 on its current routing always made sense.  You can "hide" US-41 when the highway is an interstate only to have it re-emerge on either end, causing little confusion.  You fix the bad US-41 routing on the north side of Milwaukee, which actually WAS confusing.  And you sign a north/south highway as north and south between Chicago and Milwaukee instead of the east west signage of I-94 only.

Swapping out signs was going to incur a cost regardless.  This way they would able to avoid and/or fix multiple problems anyway.

They could've done all of that by just routing US41 onto the current routing it's on. They didn't need to make it an interstate. Not every freeway has to be an interstate. We don't have many non-interstate freeways here in the Midwest because of this.

1. WIDOT didn't have a choice since the designation was part of a highway funding bill.

2. I disagree with you.  I think every interstate compatible freeway of significant length should be designated an interstate.

3. It's absolutely fine as an interstate.  Only roadgeeks care about the "problems" outlined in this topic.

With that analogy, then IL394 would be designated as I394. There should be some non interstate freeways. CA and MN kinda have the right idea with it, although parts of MN5 and MN100 go onto I494.

Well I did say "of significant length," and I don't think IL-394 falls into that category.  I was intentionally vague with that description, but I am thinking for 2dis, about 75-100 miles or more.  (Not saying those less than that figure SHOULDN'T be interstates.)

Agree, but some long corridors are fine as US Highways. US 151 is an example that is often thrown around for an Interstate designation when the corridor becomes a freeway between Fond du Lac and Madison (and even Madison to Dubuque), but I think it’s fine as US 151. Compared to turning WIS 29 into I-96, which would benefit the corridor in the same way that converting WIS 15 to I-43 in the late 80s did, I don’t think there would be a similar benefit for US 151.

If US-151 becomes a full freeway between Madison and Fond du Lac, I would like it to become a 3di (I-239), with US-151 truncated back to Dodgeville, WI-55 extended to I-41, and some new state highway running between WI-55 and Manitowoc.  But this will never happen.

I don't think it will ever be interstate compatible between Madison and Dubuque.

[SEWIGuy]

Very good discussion so far.

...

The stretch between Zoo and 43 should have control cities signed from cross-street on-ramps.  Southbound should be Chicago.  Northbound should be both Madison and Fond du Lac.  (Madison is the primary control where there is only room for one).  894 should be signed north/south on this section, not east/west.

...

The stretch between the Airport Interchange and 43 should have control cities signed from cross-street on-ramps.  Eastbound should be Milwaukee and Chicago, with Milwaukee as the primary control.  Westbound should be both Madison and Beloit.  (Madison is the primary control where there is only room for one).  The control cities are really important here as each of the three highways signed has a different compass direction.

So I agree with you for the most part, except for these two paragraphs.  I don't like the idea of control cities on the I-894 exits for the most part because traffic for the most part is local and not accessing the highway for a longer distance trip.

But I particularly don't like the suggestion of Milwaukee as a control city on the E/W portion of I-894 because BOTH directions lead you to different parts of Milwaukee.  (For instance, the Milwaukee County Zoo is in Milwaukee, and there is a whole office / industrial complex further north on I-41.)

You could say "Downtown Milwaukee" or even simply "Downtown" instead. 

[triplemultiplex]

True, but like I said, it doesn’t need to be an Interstate. It is fine as US 151, and the Dubuque to Madison segment is probably even further away than WIS 29 in becoming full freeway.

In terms of percentage of that total length, you'll see more freeway sooner on the 151 segment in question.
Freeway conversion east of Dodgeville will probably see significant progress this decade as Madison keeps sprawling and the at-grade intersections increasingly become a liability.

Back to 894, I don't think the locals will stress that number going away.  People are dumb, but they're also not idiots.

[I-39]

True, but like I said, it doesn’t need to be an Interstate. It is fine as US 151, and the Dubuque to Madison segment is probably even further away than WIS 29 in becoming full freeway.

In terms of percentage of that total length, you'll see more freeway sooner on the 151 segment in question.
Freeway conversion east of Dodgeville will probably see significant progress this decade as Madison keeps sprawling and the at-grade intersections increasingly become a liability.

Back to 894, I don't think the locals will stress that number going away.  People are dumb, but they're also not idiots.

Only the US 151 segment between Verona and Dodgeville would the freeway conversion happen. Dodgeville to Dubuque is probably further off than WIS 29.

I’m actually baffled they haven’t done the short segment between Verona and Mt. Horeb, all they have to do is construct some frontage roads and close off a few intersections. No new interchanges or overpasses required. With the growth of Epic and the West side of Verona in general, it seems like a low hanging fruit.

Then again, if it were up to me, in addition to the Interstate reconstruction/expansion, WisDOT should in the next decade prioritize freeway conversion on US 151 between Columbus and Waupun, Verona and Dodgeville and WIS 29 between Pittsfield and Bonduel.

[dvferyance]

True, but like I said, it doesn’t need to be an Interstate. It is fine as US 151, and the Dubuque to Madison segment is probably even further away than WIS 29 in becoming full freeway.

In terms of percentage of that total length, you'll see more freeway sooner on the 151 segment in question.
Freeway conversion east of Dodgeville will probably see significant progress this decade as Madison keeps sprawling and the at-grade intersections increasingly become a liability.

Back to 894, I don't think the locals will stress that number going away.  People are dumb, but they're also not idiots.

Only the US 151 segment between Verona and Dodgeville would the freeway conversion happen. Dodgeville to Dubuque is probably further off than WIS 29.

I’m actually baffled they haven’t done the short segment between Verona and Mt. Horeb, all they have to do is construct some frontage roads and close off a few intersections. No new interchanges or overpasses required. With the growth of Epic and the West side of Verona in general, it seems like a low hanging fruit.

Then again, if it were up to me, in addition to the Interstate reconstruction/expansion, WisDOT should in the next decade prioritize freeway conversion on US 151 between Columbus and Waupun, Verona and Dodgeville and WIS 29 between Pittsfield and Bonduel.

I am surprised they won't even close off the connector road to Hwy J. It's grade seperated but there is a connector road that creates an at grade intersection. Makes the underpass kind of pointless.

[GeekJedi]

I'm on the fence with the 894 designation. I understand that I'm a road geek so I pay more attention to this than many people, and I've lived in the Milwaukee area for most of my 51 years on this planet. I do believe that 894 is superfluous at this point, but it has been that forever and there's something to be said for consistency. On the other hand, if we were to rip off the band-aid and just fix everything, I'd remove it, and additionally move 43 to run North on 894 to 94 East instead of 894 East, fixing the now awkward stretch of a North and a Southbound interstate.

Again most people wouldn't care, and the only reason to do it is to make the road geeks happy.

[SEWIGuy]

I'm on the fence with the 894 designation. I understand that I'm a road geek so I pay more attention to this than many people, and I've lived in the Milwaukee area for most of my 51 years on this planet. I do believe that 894 is superfluous at this point, but it has been that forever and there's something to be said for consistency. On the other hand, if we were to rip off the band-aid and just fix everything, I'd remove it, and additionally move 43 to run North on 894 to 94 East instead of 894 East, fixing the now awkward stretch of a North and a Southbound interstate.

Again most people wouldn't care, and the only reason to do it is to make the road geeks happy.

I disagree with the bolded.  First, the I-894 east/west routing is the quickest through route for I-43.  Second, the Zoo Interchange is already the busiest in the state and you would be dumping more traffic onto the overloaded I-94.

[triplemultiplex]

Second, the Zoo Interchange is already the busiest in the state and you would be dumping more traffic onto the overloaded I-94.

There is an assumption in there that I-43 sees anything close to a large amount of thru traffic, which it does not.  I-43 is really two functionally different interstates stitched together.  While I agree this I-43 reroute that was just pitched isn't a great idea, it's not for this reason particular reason.  The distance is the more overriding factor.

[SEWIGuy]

Second, the Zoo Interchange is already the busiest in the state and you would be dumping more traffic onto the overloaded I-94.

There is an assumption in there that I-43 sees anything close to a large amount of thru traffic, which it does not.  I-43 is really two functionally different interstates stitched together.  While I agree this I-43 reroute that was just pitched isn't a great idea, it's not for this reason particular reason.  The distance is the more overriding factor.

I get that.

[GeekJedi]

I get all of that.

[thspfc]

I get all of that.

Understood.

[The Ghostbuster]

If the Interstate 894 designation was removed, the mile markers and exit numbers would have to be renumbered. The exits would probably be numbered 28-38 to match the existing exit sequence north of the Zoo Interchange, though an 894 removal should have the exit numbered between 33 and 43 (if using Interstate 41's mileage from the Illinois/Wisconsin border, with all numbers north of the Zoo Interchange being increased by 5 digits). If 894 was going to be removed, it would have happened in 2015 when Interstate 41 was commissioned.

[skluth]

If the Interstate 894 designation was removed, the mile markers and exit numbers would have to be renumbered. The exits would probably be numbered 28-38 to match the existing exit sequence north of the Zoo Interchange, though an 894 removal should have the exit numbered between 33 and 43 (if using Interstate 41's mileage from the Illinois/Wisconsin border, with all numbers north of the Zoo Interchange being increased by 5 digits). If 894 was going to be removed, it would have happened in 2015 when Interstate 41 was commissioned.

Yeah, it's a hassle. But ultimately not that big a deal. States do this all the time. It's less frequent and more costly with interstates compared to US and state (plus CTH in WI) routes, but it has been done. Locals will still call it 894 just like they still say Highway 40 in St Louis and I still refer to I-90 in Illinois as the Northwest Tollway.

[thspfc]

If the Interstate 894 designation was removed, the mile markers and exit numbers would have to be renumbered. The exits would probably be numbered 28-38 to match the existing exit sequence north of the Zoo Interchange, though an 894 removal should have the exit numbered between 33 and 43 (if using Interstate 41's mileage from the Illinois/Wisconsin border, with all numbers north of the Zoo Interchange being increased by 5 digits). If 894 was going to be removed, it would have happened in 2015 when Interstate 41 was commissioned.

Yeah, it's a hassle. But ultimately not that big a deal. States do this all the time. It's less frequent and more costly with interstates compared to US and state (plus CTH in WI) routes, but it has been done. Locals will still call it 894 just like they still say Highway 40 in St Louis and I still refer to I-90 in Illinois as the Northwest Tollway.

Even though removing the 894 shields wouldn't be a large project, it still needs to be justified. I wouldn’t throw a dollar bill into a river because "it's just a dollar". And at this time there is no reason to change anything about I-894.

[SEWIGuy]

If the Interstate 894 designation was removed, the mile markers and exit numbers would have to be renumbered. The exits would probably be numbered 28-38 to match the existing exit sequence north of the Zoo Interchange, though an 894 removal should have the exit numbered between 33 and 43 (if using Interstate 41's mileage from the Illinois/Wisconsin border, with all numbers north of the Zoo Interchange being increased by 5 digits). If 894 was going to be removed, it would have happened in 2015 when Interstate 41 was commissioned.

Yeah, it's a hassle. But ultimately not that big a deal. States do this all the time. It's less frequent and more costly with interstates compared to US and state (plus CTH in WI) routes, but it has been done. Locals will still call it 894 just like they still say Highway 40 in St Louis and I still refer to I-90 in Illinois as the Northwest Tollway.

Even though removing the 894 shields wouldn't be a large project, it still needs to be justified. I don't throw a dollar bill into a river because "it's just a dollar". And at this time there is no reason to change anything about I-894.

Yep. Not confusing anyone. Just multiplexed for its entire route, which has been the case for 30 years anyway.

[GeekJedi]

If the Interstate 894 designation was removed, the mile markers and exit numbers would have to be renumbered. The exits would probably be numbered 28-38 to match the existing exit sequence north of the Zoo Interchange, though an 894 removal should have the exit numbered between 33 and 43 (if using Interstate 41's mileage from the Illinois/Wisconsin border, with all numbers north of the Zoo Interchange being increased by 5 digits). If 894 was going to be removed, it would have happened in 2015 when Interstate 41 was commissioned.

Yeah, it's a hassle. But ultimately not that big a deal. States do this all the time. It's less frequent and more costly with interstates compared to US and state (plus CTH in WI) routes, but it has been done. Locals will still call it 894 just like they still say Highway 40 in St Louis and I still refer to I-90 in Illinois as the Northwest Tollway.

Even though removing the 894 shields wouldn't be a large project, it still needs to be justified. I don't throw a dollar bill into a river because "it's just a dollar". And at this time there is no reason to change anything about I-894.

Yep. Not confusing anyone. Just multiplexed for its entire route, which has been the case for 30 years anyway.

I can't believe it's been that long already! I still sometimes catch myself calling it Hwy 15. Of course I caught myself calling the Les Paul Pkwy Hwy A the other day. Funny how age does that to you!

[hobsini2]

If the Interstate 894 designation was removed, the mile markers and exit numbers would have to be renumbered. The exits would probably be numbered 28-38 to match the existing exit sequence north of the Zoo Interchange, though an 894 removal should have the exit numbered between 33 and 43 (if using Interstate 41's mileage from the Illinois/Wisconsin border, with all numbers north of the Zoo Interchange being increased by 5 digits). If 894 was going to be removed, it would have happened in 2015 when Interstate 41 was commissioned.

Yeah, it's a hassle. But ultimately not that big a deal. States do this all the time. It's less frequent and more costly with interstates compared to US and state (plus CTH in WI) routes, but it has been done. Locals will still call it 894 just like they still say Highway 40 in St Louis and I still refer to I-90 in Illinois as the Northwest Tollway.

Even though removing the 894 shields wouldn't be a large project, it still needs to be justified. I don't throw a dollar bill into a river because "it's just a dollar". And at this time there is no reason to change anything about I-894.

Yep. Not confusing anyone. Just multiplexed for its entire route, which has been the case for 30 years anyway.

I can't believe it's been that long already! I still sometimes catch myself calling it Hwy 15. Of course I caught myself calling the Les Paul Pkwy Hwy A the other day. Funny how age does that to you!

I know the feeling.  I too have occasionally called the I-43 extension Wis 15.  And I usually refer to I-39 north of Portage as Hwy 51.