News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

1963 Wisconsin Proposed Interstate Extensions

Started by froggie, August 14, 2019, 02:17:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

hobsini2

Quote from: I-39 on June 19, 2020, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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 $$$.
No they couldn't. If WIS 26 was the only interstate corridor of the 3 you pointed out, Milwaukee and Madison traffic wouldn't have a direct connection to the Fond du Lac/Oshkosh/Fox Cities/Green Bay and Beloit without going at least 25 miles on I-94 to get to that corridor. Just because you may not think that all 3 are worthy of being 4 lane divided highways doesn't make it so.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)


hobsini2

Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 10:50:09 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 20, 2020, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 08:16:06 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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.
I bet 29 is a full freeway between Eau Claire and Green Bay by 2030.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

thspfc

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 21, 2020, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 10:50:09 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 20, 2020, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 08:16:06 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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.
I bet 29 is a full freeway between Eau Claire and Green Bay by 2030.
Lol, I would easily take that bet. How much?  :-D

SEWIGuy

Quote from: I-39 on June 19, 2020, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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 $$$.


Are you serious about this?  Who is going to drive from Madison to Johnson Creek just to take a WI-26 freeway to Fond du Lac? 

I-39

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 21, 2020, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 10:50:09 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 20, 2020, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 08:16:06 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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.
I bet 29 is a full freeway between Eau Claire and Green Bay by 2030.

Yeah right. Other than the County VV Interchange Project, I don't think there are any freeway conversion projects along WIS 29 on tap for the next 5 years. Unless they decide to do what they did with US 41 in the 1990's and conduct a large scale freeway conversion effort, it ain't happening by 2030.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 22, 2020, 08:50:37 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 19, 2020, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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 $$$.


Are you serious about this?  Who is going to drive from Madison to Johnson Creek just to take a WI-26 freeway to Fond du Lac?

The people who need to get to Fond du Lac? Sure, it may add a few miles more, but is it really that bad?

In all seriousness, with budget dollars stretched, maintaining all of these four lane highways built in the last 30-40 years is going to get expensive. The case for building some of them was overstated, and dollars are needed to rebuild the Interstates.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 11:55:37 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 21, 2020, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 10:50:09 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 20, 2020, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 08:16:06 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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.
I bet 29 is a full freeway between Eau Claire and Green Bay by 2030.

Yeah right. Other than the County VV Interchange Project, I don't think there are any freeway conversion projects along WIS 29 on tap for the next 5 years. Unless they decide to do what they did with US 41 in the 1990's and conduct a large scale freeway conversion effort, it ain't happening by 2030.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 22, 2020, 08:50:37 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 19, 2020, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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 $$$.


Are you serious about this?  Who is going to drive from Madison to Johnson Creek just to take a WI-26 freeway to Fond du Lac?

The people who need to get to Fond du Lac? Sure, it may add a few miles more, but is it really that bad?

In all seriousness, with budget dollars stretched, maintaining all of these four lane highways built in the last 30-40 years is going to get expensive. The case for building some of them was overstated, and dollars are needed to rebuild the Interstates.


It's not just to Fond du Lac, its the Fox Valley and Green Bay as well.  And yes, 20 miles out of the way is bad.

If anything, upgrading WI-26 was the waste of money.  US-151 and I-43 have been perfectly acceptable.

thspfc

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 22, 2020, 12:06:02 PM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 11:55:37 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 21, 2020, 07:45:01 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 10:50:09 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 20, 2020, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 20, 2020, 08:16:06 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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.
I bet 29 is a full freeway between Eau Claire and Green Bay by 2030.

Yeah right. Other than the County VV Interchange Project, I don't think there are any freeway conversion projects along WIS 29 on tap for the next 5 years. Unless they decide to do what they did with US 41 in the 1990's and conduct a large scale freeway conversion effort, it ain't happening by 2030.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 22, 2020, 08:50:37 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 19, 2020, 02:58:03 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 19, 2020, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 19, 2020, 02:04:51 PM
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 $$$.


Are you serious about this?  Who is going to drive from Madison to Johnson Creek just to take a WI-26 freeway to Fond du Lac?

The people who need to get to Fond du Lac? Sure, it may add a few miles more, but is it really that bad?

In all seriousness, with budget dollars stretched, maintaining all of these four lane highways built in the last 30-40 years is going to get expensive. The case for building some of them was overstated, and dollars are needed to rebuild the Interstates.


It's not just to Fond du Lac, its the Fox Valley and Green Bay as well.  And yes, 20 miles out of the way is bad.

If anything, upgrading WI-26 was the waste of money.  US-151 and I-43 have been perfectly acceptable.
The work on 26 was not a waste.
And it's utterly ridiculous how I-41 and I-43 are being beat to near death on this forum, while highways like I-4, I-12, and I-19 don't get the same treatment. I-41 AND I-43 ARE FINE AS THEY ARE. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOTHING.

I-39

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 22, 2020, 12:06:02 PMIt's not just to Fond du Lac, its the Fox Valley and Green Bay as well.  And yes, 20 miles out of the way is bad.

If anything, upgrading WI-26 was the waste of money.  US-151 and I-43 have been perfectly acceptable.

My point there was that WisDOT has built a lot of unneeded/redundant four lane expansions over the last 30-40 years. I was just stating WIS 26 is one example where it could in theory serve the functions of itself, I-43 and US 151 all in one corridor, even if it is not the most convenient. This would have saved money on highway maintenance and focused more resources on badly needed rebuilds of the actual Interstates in Wisconsin.

But I agree in hindsight, the improvements to WIS 26 shouldn't have been done.

I-39

Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.

mgk920

The problem WRT US 151 at Fond du Lac is its I-41 interchange, it (a conventional diamond with RIRO roadways connecting it to adjacent Main St/WI 175) would have to be completely redone.

Ditto WRT the existing I-90/94/US 12 interchange in Lake Delton - it also would have to be completely redone to remove the freeway-to-freeway connection from it.

Both would be good 'challenges' for the 'Redesigning Interchanges' thread in the Fictional Highways forvm in here.

:nod:

Mike

thspfc

Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

jwags

Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

skluth

Quote from: jwags on June 25, 2020, 01:28:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

The issue isn't that WI 26 didn't need improvements. It obviously did. The issue is more the overkill of improvements to WI 26. Bypasses of Watertown, Jefferson, and Ft Atkinson are much appreciated. The bypasses didn't need to be four-lane freeways though. Also, one of the worst stretches - WI 26 near the I-94 interchange - is still a mess. I also don't understand the point of the adjacent bike path; I don't object to bike paths but the money spent on that bike path could have built several smaller, more useful bike paths in other places (both locally and around Wisconsin). The overall impression is that a lot of money was wasted on extras for this project when the money could have been better spent elsewhere.

thspfc

Quote from: skluth on June 26, 2020, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: jwags on June 25, 2020, 01:28:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

The issue isn't that WI 26 didn't need improvements. It obviously did. The issue is more the overkill of improvements to WI 26. Bypasses of Watertown, Jefferson, and Ft Atkinson are much appreciated. The bypasses didn't need to be four-lane freeways though. Also, one of the worst stretches - WI 26 near the I-94 interchange - is still a mess. I also don't understand the point of the adjacent bike path; I don't object to bike paths but the money spent on that bike path could have built several smaller, more useful bike paths in other places (both locally and around Wisconsin). The overall impression is that a lot of money was wasted on extras for this project when the money could have been better spent elsewhere.
So basically you want to see clones of the US-12 bypass of Whitewater. I think you're pretty much alone in that category.
As for the stretch through Johnson Creek, I agree that they could have done a lot better there.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:11:43 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 26, 2020, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: jwags on June 25, 2020, 01:28:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

The issue isn't that WI 26 didn't need improvements. It obviously did. The issue is more the overkill of improvements to WI 26. Bypasses of Watertown, Jefferson, and Ft Atkinson are much appreciated. The bypasses didn't need to be four-lane freeways though. Also, one of the worst stretches - WI 26 near the I-94 interchange - is still a mess. I also don't understand the point of the adjacent bike path; I don't object to bike paths but the money spent on that bike path could have built several smaller, more useful bike paths in other places (both locally and around Wisconsin). The overall impression is that a lot of money was wasted on extras for this project when the money could have been better spent elsewhere.
So basically you want to see clones of the US-12 bypass of Whitewater. I think you're pretty much alone in that category.
As for the stretch through Johnson Creek, I agree that they could have done a lot better there.


The Whitewater bypass is a disaster.

I think a clone of the Fort Atkinson bypass prior to the expansion would have been sufficient.  Two lanes with ramps at the major intersections and a few cross streets.  The only place where four lanes were truly needed were between Milton and Janesville.

Ketchup99

Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PM
The work on 26 was not a waste.
And it's utterly ridiculous how I-41 and I-43 are being beat to near death on this forum, while highways like I-4, I-12, and I-19 don't get the same treatment. I-41 AND I-43 ARE FINE AS THEY ARE. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOTHING.
I don't see a reason to harp on 41, 43, or really 4, 12, or 19 either. Last I checked, there's no length requirement for a 2di. Honestly, something like I-4 probably has more claim to be a 2di than something like I-27, even though the latter is longer. I-4 serves a major corridor between urban areas, length be damned.

thspfc

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 26, 2020, 09:15:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:11:43 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 26, 2020, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: jwags on June 25, 2020, 01:28:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

The issue isn't that WI 26 didn't need improvements. It obviously did. The issue is more the overkill of improvements to WI 26. Bypasses of Watertown, Jefferson, and Ft Atkinson are much appreciated. The bypasses didn't need to be four-lane freeways though. Also, one of the worst stretches - WI 26 near the I-94 interchange - is still a mess. I also don't understand the point of the adjacent bike path; I don't object to bike paths but the money spent on that bike path could have built several smaller, more useful bike paths in other places (both locally and around Wisconsin). The overall impression is that a lot of money was wasted on extras for this project when the money could have been better spent elsewhere.
So basically you want to see clones of the US-12 bypass of Whitewater. I think you're pretty much alone in that category.
As for the stretch through Johnson Creek, I agree that they could have done a lot better there.


The Whitewater bypass is a disaster.

I think a clone of the Fort Atkinson bypass prior to the expansion would have been sufficient.  Two lanes with ramps at the major intersections and a few cross streets.  The only place where four lanes were truly needed were between Milton and Janesville.
Four lanes to Watertown and the Watertown bypass were needed as well. You could argue about Fort and Jefferson, but those communities are both growing and will only continue to grow as more jobs pop up in Madison and Waukesha County.

thspfc

Quote from: Ketchup99 on June 26, 2020, 09:27:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PM
The work on 26 was not a waste.
And it's utterly ridiculous how I-41 and I-43 are being beat to near death on this forum, while highways like I-4, I-12, and I-19 don't get the same treatment. I-41 AND I-43 ARE FINE AS THEY ARE. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOTHING.
I don't see a reason to harp on 41, 43, or really 4, 12, or 19 either. Last I checked, there's no length requirement for a 2di. Honestly, something like I-4 probably has more claim to be a 2di than something like I-27, even though the latter is longer. I-4 serves a major corridor between urban areas, length be damned.
19 is right on the fence between being 2di worthy and a 3di IMO. 4 is definitely 2di worthy, but 41 and 43 are both much longer. And 12 is just a joke. I-10 should take over all of I-12, then existing I-10 becomes an x10.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:30:08 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 26, 2020, 09:15:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:11:43 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 26, 2020, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: jwags on June 25, 2020, 01:28:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

The issue isn't that WI 26 didn't need improvements. It obviously did. The issue is more the overkill of improvements to WI 26. Bypasses of Watertown, Jefferson, and Ft Atkinson are much appreciated. The bypasses didn't need to be four-lane freeways though. Also, one of the worst stretches - WI 26 near the I-94 interchange - is still a mess. I also don't understand the point of the adjacent bike path; I don't object to bike paths but the money spent on that bike path could have built several smaller, more useful bike paths in other places (both locally and around Wisconsin). The overall impression is that a lot of money was wasted on extras for this project when the money could have been better spent elsewhere.
So basically you want to see clones of the US-12 bypass of Whitewater. I think you're pretty much alone in that category.
As for the stretch through Johnson Creek, I agree that they could have done a lot better there.


The Whitewater bypass is a disaster.

I think a clone of the Fort Atkinson bypass prior to the expansion would have been sufficient.  Two lanes with ramps at the major intersections and a few cross streets.  The only place where four lanes were truly needed were between Milton and Janesville.
Four lanes to Watertown and the Watertown bypass were needed as well. You could argue about Fort and Jefferson, but those communities are both growing and will only continue to grow as more jobs pop up in Madison and Waukesha County.

I lived there for 22 years up until two years ago and their growth was completely manageable with little reason to think that would change significantly. And if you're driving to Madison you aren't taking WI-26 anyway. Likely not Waukesha either.

Four lanes was overkill and the road hasn't met its traffic projections yet.

thspfc

Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 26, 2020, 09:36:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:30:08 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 26, 2020, 09:15:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:11:43 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 26, 2020, 07:01:17 PM
Quote from: jwags on June 25, 2020, 01:28:30 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 25, 2020, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: I-39 on June 22, 2020, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PMThe work on 26 was not a waste.

Yes it was.

Not everything needs to be elaborate Interstate-grade freeway. And since most of the traffic is still local on that corridor, they could have done lessor upgrades like an expressway or a 5 lane undivided highway.
Safety is the #1 factor by far in determining what WISDOT does and what they don't do. Expanding undivided 2-3 lane highways with high traffic counts, like WI-26, has been proven to make them safer by a significant margin. And it's not like WISDOT is throwing cash at every two lane road. WI-26 and US-10 from Stevens Point to Marshfield are the only two that are controversial.

I grew up right off of WI-16/26 and I can say that the improvements have greatly helped traffic in the corridor. I can recall many bad accidents on the stretch between WI-60 and Watertown along with many dangerous hills where people would attempt to pass. Also, traffic in the city of Watertown has been reduced to more reasonable levels due to the bypass. The road handles a good portion of thru truck traffic coming from the fox cities heading toward I-39 in IL.

The issue isn't that WI 26 didn't need improvements. It obviously did. The issue is more the overkill of improvements to WI 26. Bypasses of Watertown, Jefferson, and Ft Atkinson are much appreciated. The bypasses didn't need to be four-lane freeways though. Also, one of the worst stretches - WI 26 near the I-94 interchange - is still a mess. I also don't understand the point of the adjacent bike path; I don't object to bike paths but the money spent on that bike path could have built several smaller, more useful bike paths in other places (both locally and around Wisconsin). The overall impression is that a lot of money was wasted on extras for this project when the money could have been better spent elsewhere.
So basically you want to see clones of the US-12 bypass of Whitewater. I think you're pretty much alone in that category.
As for the stretch through Johnson Creek, I agree that they could have done a lot better there.


The Whitewater bypass is a disaster.

I think a clone of the Fort Atkinson bypass prior to the expansion would have been sufficient.  Two lanes with ramps at the major intersections and a few cross streets.  The only place where four lanes were truly needed were between Milton and Janesville.
Four lanes to Watertown and the Watertown bypass were needed as well. You could argue about Fort and Jefferson, but those communities are both growing and will only continue to grow as more jobs pop up in Madison and Waukesha County.

I lived there for 22 years up until two years ago and their growth was completely manageable with little reason to think that would change significantly. And if you're driving to Madison you aren't taking WI-26 anyway. Likely not Waukesha either.

Four lanes was overkill and the road hasn't met its traffic projections yet.
*yet. It's been done for what, six years? When WISDOT builds roads, they don't build them for six years in the future, they build them so that they don't have to work on it again for a long time. And I wasn't specifically talking about commuting to Madison or Waukesha. Those commuters are going to go other places too, and 26 is the main road in and out of those places.

froggie

Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:35:38 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on June 26, 2020, 09:27:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PM
The work on 26 was not a waste.
And it's utterly ridiculous how I-41 and I-43 are being beat to near death on this forum, while highways like I-4, I-12, and I-19 don't get the same treatment. I-41 AND I-43 ARE FINE AS THEY ARE. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOTHING.
I don't see a reason to harp on 41, 43, or really 4, 12, or 19 either. Last I checked, there's no length requirement for a 2di. Honestly, something like I-4 probably has more claim to be a 2di than something like I-27, even though the latter is longer. I-4 serves a major corridor between urban areas, length be damned.
19 is right on the fence between being 2di worthy and a 3di IMO. 4 is definitely 2di worthy, but 41 and 43 are both much longer. And 12 is just a joke. I-10 should take over all of I-12, then existing I-10 becomes an x10.

Despite your claim, I-12 HAS been beaten to death on this forum in other threads.  I can also tell with how you're beating that horse that you haven't actually been to southeastern Louisiana.

Reasons to keep 10 and 12 as they are:

- New Orleans is a major city and worthy of a 2di.  Your plan would demote it to 3di status.
- Historical context:  when route numbering was approved, I-12 was not going to re-intersect with I-10 in Slidell.  It was intended as a long-distance connection between I-10 and I-59, meeting I-59 in southern Mississippi while I-10 was originally slated to bypass Slidell entirely.  During the 1960s is when things changed, with both I-10 and I-12 rerouted to Slidell.

hobsini2

Quote from: froggie on June 27, 2020, 10:25:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:35:38 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on June 26, 2020, 09:27:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PM
The work on 26 was not a waste.
And it's utterly ridiculous how I-41 and I-43 are being beat to near death on this forum, while highways like I-4, I-12, and I-19 don't get the same treatment. I-41 AND I-43 ARE FINE AS THEY ARE. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOTHING.
I don't see a reason to harp on 41, 43, or really 4, 12, or 19 either. Last I checked, there's no length requirement for a 2di. Honestly, something like I-4 probably has more claim to be a 2di than something like I-27, even though the latter is longer. I-4 serves a major corridor between urban areas, length be damned.
19 is right on the fence between being 2di worthy and a 3di IMO. 4 is definitely 2di worthy, but 41 and 43 are both much longer. And 12 is just a joke. I-10 should take over all of I-12, then existing I-10 becomes an x10.

Despite your claim, I-12 HAS been beaten to death on this forum in other threads.  I can also tell with how you're beating that horse that you haven't actually been to southeastern Louisiana.

Reasons to keep 10 and 12 as they are:

- New Orleans is a major city and worthy of a 2di.  Your plan would demote it to 3di status.
- Historical context:  when route numbering was approved, I-12 was not going to re-intersect with I-10 in Slidell.  It was intended as a long-distance connection between I-10 and I-59, meeting I-59 in southern Mississippi while I-10 was originally slated to bypass Slidell entirely.  During the 1960s is when things changed, with both I-10 and I-12 rerouted to Slidell.

While I agree that New Orleans needs to have a 2di interstate instead of a 3di, there are plenty of ways that could happen and still free up I-12. Here's what I would do.
I-12 becomes I-10.
I-59 gets extended into New Orleans to the Pontchartrain Expy.
We know that I-49 is going to be coming in on US 90. Great. Still do that.
I-55 continues southeast along I-10 to the new extension of I-59 and I-49.
That leaves I-55 to Baton Rouge without a number. I-155. Done.
I-310 becomes I-355 or I-349.
I-610 becomes I-655 or I-659.
I-510 becomes I-559.

And now I-12 is free.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

thspfc

Quote from: froggie on June 27, 2020, 10:25:18 AM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2020, 09:35:38 PM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on June 26, 2020, 09:27:36 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 22, 2020, 12:15:37 PM
The work on 26 was not a waste.
And it's utterly ridiculous how I-41 and I-43 are being beat to near death on this forum, while highways like I-4, I-12, and I-19 don't get the same treatment. I-41 AND I-43 ARE FINE AS THEY ARE. STOP WHINING ABOUT NOTHING.
I don't see a reason to harp on 41, 43, or really 4, 12, or 19 either. Last I checked, there's no length requirement for a 2di. Honestly, something like I-4 probably has more claim to be a 2di than something like I-27, even though the latter is longer. I-4 serves a major corridor between urban areas, length be damned.
19 is right on the fence between being 2di worthy and a 3di IMO. 4 is definitely 2di worthy, but 41 and 43 are both much longer. And 12 is just a joke. I-10 should take over all of I-12, then existing I-10 becomes an x10.

Despite your claim, I-12 HAS been beaten to death on this forum in other threads.  I can also tell with how you're beating that horse that you haven't actually been to southeastern Louisiana.

Reasons to keep 10 and 12 as they are:

- New Orleans is a major city and worthy of a 2di.  Your plan would demote it to 3di status.
- Historical context:  when route numbering was approved, I-12 was not going to re-intersect with I-10 in Slidell.  It was intended as a long-distance connection between I-10 and I-59, meeting I-59 in southern Mississippi while I-10 was originally slated to bypass Slidell entirely.  During the 1960s is when things changed, with both I-10 and I-12 rerouted to Slidell.
The New Orleans area would still be served by I-10, just like how the Pittsburgh area is served by I-76 and I-79 but only the 3dis go into the city.

froggie

^ The North Shore (of Lake Pontchartrain) is generally considered a separate area from New Orleans, so in that effect your plan would NOT have NOLA served by I-10.  What you're proposing is no different than saying "you don't need both I-41 and I-43 between Milwaukee and Green Bay...one of those could be a 3di."

thspfc

Quote from: froggie on June 28, 2020, 09:43:17 AM
^ The North Shore (of Lake Pontchartrain) is generally considered a separate area from New Orleans, so in that effect your plan would NOT have NOLA served by I-10.  What you're proposing is no different than saying "you don't need both I-41 and I-43 between Milwaukee and Green Bay...one of those could be a 3di."
It is different. I-41 is longer than I-10 from Baton Rouge to Slidell, and I-41 actually connects to other major highways (WI-29, US-10, US-45, US-151), while I-10 doesn't - it's basically just two spurs segmented together.



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.