1963 Wisconsin Proposed Interstate Extensions

[Mdcastle]

if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

All the money they save by refusing to buy streetlights for their rural interchanges they spend on red, white, and blue signs.

[texaskdog]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

The UP part of the country is one of the least populated areas.  I love it but no one lives up there.

[I-39]

I also would like to note that nothing was proposed along the US 10 corridor at the time. Interesting how that became a priority later. I still think the entirety of US 10 between Appleton and Marshfield was drastically overbuilt, they could've done lesser upgrades. Same with WIS 26.

[mgk920]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

The UP part of the country is one of the least populated areas.  I love it but no one lives up there.

And few people live up there because there is little economic activity up there.  LEGENDARY scenery and year-round outdoor sports (hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, skiing, etc), but little other reason to be there.  There is a reason why US 2 is not an interstate compatible four lane highway west of US 41.

Mike

[SEWIGuy]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

IMO, I-43 should have been extended into Illinois and used for the I-39/US 51 corridor between Rockford and Bloomington/Normal. The US 51 corridor in Wisconsin could have been a 3 digit interstate, if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

Agreed.  But the problem is that I-39 in Illinois was planned before I-43 was extended to Beloit right?

Anyway, US-51 could have been a 3di or a seperate 2di from the start.  A northern version of I-37 would have been fine. 

[sparker]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

IMO, I-43 should have been extended into Illinois and used for the I-39/US 51 corridor between Rockford and Bloomington/Normal. The US 51 corridor in Wisconsin could have been a 3 digit interstate, if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

The only reasons WI chose I-43 as the designation for the first Green Bay extension were (1) the original concept of an I-57 extension was shut down by IL at the bequest of the Daley crowd in Chicago, who were loath to change numbers of local freeways, and (2) WI 43 was a short Milwaukee-area state route easily dealt with; WDOT wouldn't have had to renumber a longer state highway if the available alternatives, 47 or (at the time) 49 were selected.  So the upper Midwest Interstate grid pattern was FUBAR'd for local convenience (and arrogance emanating from Chicagoland!). 

[mrose]

I've also heard somewhere that I-43 was planned for the Illinois portion of I-39, but it was killed / rejected. At this time I-43 hadn't been extended down WI 15 to Beloit yet.

Then you would have had a continuous interstate from Green Bay to Bloomington-Normal.

I always wonder if I-39 in Wisconsin wouldn't have made more sense as a 3di and then you wouldn't have had that super long multiplex.

[SEWIGuy]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

IMO, I-43 should have been extended into Illinois and used for the I-39/US 51 corridor between Rockford and Bloomington/Normal. The US 51 corridor in Wisconsin could have been a 3 digit interstate, if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

The only reasons WI chose I-43 as the designation for the first Green Bay extension were (1) the original concept of an I-57 extension was shut down by IL at the bequest of the Daley crowd in Chicago, who were loath to change numbers of local freeways, and (2) WI 43 was a short Milwaukee-area state route easily dealt with; WDOT wouldn't have had to renumber a longer state highway if the available alternatives, 47 or (at the time) 49 were selected.  So the upper Midwest Interstate grid pattern was FUBAR'd for local convenience (and arrogance emanating from Chicagoland!). 

How was the grid affected at all?  I-43 fits it perfectly. 

[I-39]

I've also heard somewhere that I-43 was planned for the Illinois portion of I-39, but it was killed / rejected. At this time I-43 hadn't been extended down WI 15 to Beloit yet.

Then you would have had a continuous interstate from Green Bay to Bloomington-Normal.

I always wonder if I-39 in Wisconsin wouldn't have made more sense as a 3di and then you wouldn't have had that super long multiplex.

Yes, it would have made much more sense to use I-43 along the present day I-39 corridor and then subsequently use a 3 digit (I-390?) along the US 51 corridor between Portage and Wausau. What they ended up doing really made no sense, and caused a lot of unnecessary multiplexing.

Additionally, I-41 should have not been multiplexed with I-94 down to the state line.

[Brandon]

if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

All the money they save by refusing to buy streetlights for their rural interchanges they spend on red, white, and blue signs.

Why do you need lights at rural interchanges?  They're just fine with proper reflectorization.

[SEWIGuy]

if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

All the money they save by refusing to buy streetlights for their rural interchanges they spend on red, white, and blue signs.

Why do you need lights at rural interchanges?  They're just fine with proper reflectorization.

Yeah no kidding.  Are there a rash of accidents at them now?

[texaskdog]

I've also heard somewhere that I-43 was planned for the Illinois portion of I-39, but it was killed / rejected. At this time I-43 hadn't been extended down WI 15 to Beloit yet.

Then you would have had a continuous interstate from Green Bay to Bloomington-Normal.

I always wonder if I-39 in Wisconsin wouldn't have made more sense as a 3di and then you wouldn't have had that super long multiplex.

39 is in more of a line but 43 would eliminate much duplexing and TRIplexing

[gr8daynegb]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

IMO, I-43 should have been extended into Illinois and used for the I-39/US 51 corridor between Rockford and Bloomington/Normal. The US 51 corridor in Wisconsin could have been a 3 digit interstate, if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

But we also gave 39 it's only alone time too, because Midwest hospitality or something    

[thspfc]

It's not necessary to extend I-39.  Possibly expanding a four lane US-51, but even that's a marginal need right now compared to others.

IMO, I-43 should have been extended into Illinois and used for the I-39/US 51 corridor between Rockford and Bloomington/Normal. The US 51 corridor in Wisconsin could have been a 3 digit interstate, if anything. WisDOT sure does love their multiplexes.....

But we also gave 39 it's only alone time too, because Midwest hospitality or something    

39 is perfectly fine as is. It's straight, connects several important cities, and the traffic is enough to justify the designation. I love US-51 and the history of that road as much as anyone, but I don't understand why people think that a 300 mile direct freeway corridor with plenty of traffic should not be one 2 digit Interstate.
People do love to hate on Wisconsin's Interstates, don't they.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

People do love to hate on Wisconsin's Interstates, don't they.

Other than I-41's useless extension to IL, I think they're fine. A lot of roadgeeks screech and scream about 894, but I think the reasons for keeping it were valid. Which coincidentally would not have been an issue without the useless 41 extension.

[I-39]

People do love to hate on Wisconsin's Interstates, don't they.

Other than I-41's useless extension to IL, I think they're fine. A lot of roadgeeks screech and scream about 894, but I think the reasons for keeping it were valid. Which coincidentally would not have been an issue without the useless 41 extension.

While I agree to some extent, at least it makes I-41 is a true Interstate, unlike I-43. Come to think of it, under the current setup, I-43 is probably the most pointless designation. Both the Milwaukee-Green Bay and Milwaukee-Beloit segments could have probably become 3 digit interstates.

Then again, if it were up to me I-43 between Beloit and Milwaukee wouldn't exist at all. One of the biggest head scratchers of all time has to be the decision by WisDOT over a period of 40 years to build what is today the US 151, WIS 26 and I-43 corridors when theoretically, they could have built one corridor along WIS 26 that could serve the purpose of all three of those corridors. Big waste of $$$.

[SEWIGuy]

The system is what's "interstate."   Not necessarily the individual highways.

[thspfc]

People do love to hate on Wisconsin's Interstates, don't they.

Other than I-41's useless extension to IL, I think they're fine. A lot of roadgeeks screech and scream about 894, but I think the reasons for keeping it were valid. Which coincidentally would not have been an issue without the useless 41 extension.

I agree on the 41 extension. At this point I'm just convinced that WISDOT has a fetish for concurrences. But the only other things I would change about WI's Interstate system is to extend 39 to the 29 West split and to extend 41 to the US-41/US-141 split.

[I-39]

People do love to hate on Wisconsin's Interstates, don't they.

Other than I-41's useless extension to IL, I think they're fine. A lot of roadgeeks screech and scream about 894, but I think the reasons for keeping it were valid. Which coincidentally would not have been an issue without the useless 41 extension.

I agree on the 41 extension. At this point I'm just convinced that WISDOT has a fetish for concurrences. But the only other things I would change about WI's Interstate system is to extend 39 to the 29 West split and to extend 41 to the US-41/US-141 split.

Why would they do either of those things? It wouldn't be worth it. Only other Interstate addition at this point would be converting WIS 29 to I-96 when it becomes a full freeway, but that is decades away.

[thspfc]

People do love to hate on Wisconsin's Interstates, don't they.

Other than I-41's useless extension to IL, I think they're fine. A lot of roadgeeks screech and scream about 894, but I think the reasons for keeping it were valid. Which coincidentally would not have been an issue without the useless 41 extension.

I agree on the 41 extension. At this point I'm just convinced that WISDOT has a fetish for concurrences. But the only other things I would change about WI's Interstate system is to extend 39 to the 29 West split and to extend 41 to the US-41/US-141 split.

Why would they do either of those things? It wouldn't be worth it. Only other Interstate addition at this point would be converting WIS 29 to I-96 when it becomes a full freeway, but that is decades away.

29 is never going to be a full freeway. There's so many intersections on it, especially from Marathon City to Boyd. The growth in the Eau Claire, Wausau, and Green Bay areas isn't fast enough to justify it.

[SEWIGuy]

I actually think US-151 between I-41 and I-39 could end up an interstate before WI-29.

[JREwing78]

I actually think US-151 between I-41 and I-39 could end up an interstate before WI-29.

I would agree, but honestly if I was running WisDOT, I'd be in no hurry to do either.

The traffic load is there on US-151, at least to the Hwy 26 north exit near Waupun. East of that, traffic is pretty light for a 4-lane. One can make a case for fully limited-access freeway between Madison and Waupun, but Hwy 26 towards Oshkosh takes a huge chunk of that traffic. Also, given the design of the Fond du Lac bypass and its connections to Hwy 23 towards Sheboygan, WisDOT clearly isn't expecting an Interstate conversion anytime soon.

I don't see the benefit of an Interstate label on US-151 unless you can extend the designation from Cedar Rapids or the Quad Cities to at least Fond du Lac. Otherwise, US-151 is just fine as a route designation.

29 is never going to be a full freeway. There's so many intersections on it, especially from Marathon City to Boyd. The growth in the Eau Claire, Wausau, and Green Bay areas isn't fast enough to justify it.

I agree. I would rather WisDOT spend its money on areas with greater need. For example, US-12 between the Dells and Middleton has the traffic load justifying a fully limited-access freeway, at least south of Sauk City. Or 4-laning Hwy 26 between Oshkosh and US-151 near Waupun, a road I use all the time and has HEAVY traffic for a 2-lane.

[SEWIGuy]

I agree that any new interstate is very unlikely but n Wisconsin. I just think that US-151 may make a better candidate than WI-29.

My priority would be six laning I-41 between Appleton and Green Bay and I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee.

[thspfc]

My priority would be six laning I-41 between Appleton and Green Bay and I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee.

90/94 from the Dells to at least Tomah needs six lanes more than 94 from Madison to Waukesha. The number of trucks on that stretch is outrageous for only two lanes in each direction.
You could probably make the argument that 39 from Portage to Stevens Point and 43 from the northern Milwaukee suburbs to Green Bay are the only mainline Interstates that will never need at least three lanes in each direction in WI. You could maybe throw 90 from Tomah to La Crosse in there too.

[I-39]

I actually think US-151 between I-41 and I-39 could end up an interstate before WI-29.

I would agree, but honestly if I was running WisDOT, I'd be in no hurry to do either.

The traffic load is there on US-151, at least to the Hwy 26 north exit near Waupun. East of that, traffic is pretty light for a 4-lane. One can make a case for fully limited-access freeway between Madison and Waupun, but Hwy 26 towards Oshkosh takes a huge chunk of that traffic. Also, given the design of the Fond du Lac bypass and its connections to Hwy 23 towards Sheboygan, WisDOT clearly isn't expecting an Interstate conversion anytime soon.

I don't see the benefit of an Interstate label on US-151 unless you can extend the designation from Cedar Rapids or the Quad Cities to at least Fond du Lac. Otherwise, US-151 is just fine as a route designation.

29 is never going to be a full freeway. There's so many intersections on it, especially from Marathon City to Boyd. The growth in the Eau Claire, Wausau, and Green Bay areas isn't fast enough to justify it.

I agree. I would rather WisDOT spend its money on areas with greater need. For example, US-12 between the Dells and Middleton has the traffic load justifying a fully limited-access freeway, at least south of Sauk City. Or 4-laning Hwy 26 between Oshkosh and US-151 near Waupun, a road I use all the time and has HEAVY traffic for a 2-lane.

1. Yes, it will be a while before WIS 29 is full freeway across the state, but I wouldn't say never. I do agree there are bigger priorities.

2. Until a Sauk City bypass is constructed, it wouldn't be a good idea to make 12 a full freeway south of there so as

3. I don't think US 151 needs to be an Interstate or even a full freeway, the corridor is overbuilt as it is.

My priority would be six laning I-41 between Appleton and Green Bay and I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee.

90/94 from the Dells to at least Tomah needs six lanes more than 94 from Madison to Waukesha. The number of trucks on that stretch is outrageous for only two lanes in each direction.
You could probably make the argument that 39 from Portage to Stevens Point and 43 from the northern Milwaukee suburbs to Green Bay are the only mainline Interstates that will never need at least three lanes in each direction in WI. You could maybe throw 90 from Tomah to La Crosse in there too.

Yep. WisDOT is far behind on existing Interstate reconstruction/expansion IMO. Spent too much time building unneeded four lane highways rather than fixing existing ones.