Wisconsin notes

[jwags]

It looks like 70 MPH may be coming to the WI-16 freeway between I-94 and Oconomowoc. Driving in the area today, I noticed that there are now freshly planted second posts placed next to the current posts holding the 65 MPH signs. They could be just installing new 65 MPH signs using what appears to be the new "2-post" standard, but I don't see WisDOT doing that out of the blue.

I noticed that too last week when I was in that area. I saw the same thing yesterday on the US 12 freeway from Elkhorn to IL. US 12 is still 65 as well.

[JREwing78]

In other news: Madison residents can't merge.

DOT closes what neighbors call the 'Stoughton Road death ramp'
http://www.channel3000.com/news/DOT-closes-what-neighbors-call-the-Stoughton-Road-death-ramp/36079912

[Roadguy]

In other news: Madison residents can't merge.

DOT closes what neighbors call the 'Stoughton Road death ramp'
http://www.channel3000.com/news/DOT-closes-what-neighbors-call-the-Stoughton-Road-death-ramp/36079912

I have not been on Stoughton for awhile so when I first saw this I went to google streetview to remind myself what it looked like and though, there is an auxiliary lane... what's the big deal?

Then I watched the video... I can see the concerns.   That is a very sub-standard merge point (construction zones typically don't meet standards) but that is pretty bad.  I agree people don't know how to merge but that is tough merge to begin with.  If traffic is dense on Stoughton and you wanted to make it on at full speed you are at the mercy of drivers on Stoughton to let you in (as you force your way in) as there is no "escape zone aka shoulder" if things go wrong.  The other option is to stop, but most people won't because they feel like once they stop they are stuck.

Smart move to close it as that is just an crash waiting to happen.

[Roadguy]

Right now the biggest concern in the Superior area has to be I-535.  Last I checked there was a weight limit posted on the Blatnik Bridge, and it's because the bridge is an aging steel truss bridge.  In the next 25 years or even sooner, the bridge is going to have to be replaced, and I'm guessing that it isn't going to be cheap.  By looking at the WIS and MN DOT websites and the bridge parapets, I notice that MNDOT is primarily responsible for the Blatnik Bridge while WISDOT is responsible for the Bong Bridge.  THE Blatnik Bridge rehab project was on the MNDOT website, while the Bong Bridge rehab project was listed on the WISDOT website.  The bridge parapets on the Bong Bridge are unique to Wisconsin, and I notice that they're also used on the interchange ramps with I-35.   Are the costs for maintaining the bridges split, or do the DOTs take care of the bridges they take a lead on?  If the Blatnik Bridge gets to the point where it's unusable, will it be rebuilt or will the Bong Bridge become the only crossing between Duluth and Superior?

For crossings between WI and MN, each state pays half of the cost for the bridge structure.  They pay their own costs for any approach work up to the bridge.  WI and MN tend to alternate who oversees and constructs crossings (14/61 is WisDOT although the border is a side channel, 90 is MnDOT, Winona is MnDOT although the border is a side channel, Wabasha is WisDOT, Red Wing is MnDOT, Prescott is WisDOT, 94 is WisDOT, 36 is MnDOT, 2 is WiSDOT, 535 is MnDOT). 

Especially with the recent replacements for many of the crossings you can see what styles of bridges each DOT prefers as well.  MnDOT prefers more of the prestressed concrete box segment bridges like the 35W bridge while WisDOT prefers more steel arch bridges like the Hoan Bridge.  You can even tell the differences in who built it typically by the light poles as well, note the different styles between the Blatnik and Bong bridges.

When the Blatnik eventually needs to get replaced (I expect due to high costs they may look at additional rehab and leave replacement as a last resort), they will find the money to do it.  Just for emergency purposes alone, there needs to be the two crossings.  But today it would probably be well over $750 million to replace it.  So it will probably require special allocations by both states through the legislature and governor to fund it as neither DOT has that money sitting around.

Find it interesting that the bridges that WISDOT oversees are newer and in a lot better shape than the bridges that MNDOT oversees.  Aside from the new MN 36/WIS 64 Bridge that is set to open, all of the other bridges mentioned that MNDOT oversees are probably going to need to be replaced or undergo a major rehab.  All of the structures that WISDOT takes the lead in that are mentioned are in great shape and will last a long time.

A lot of MnDOT's bridges are currently seeing work.  I-90 (Dresbach) is being replaced, MN 43 in Winona is seeing the existing span rehabbed and a 2nd span added, Red Wing is getting replaced in 2018, Stillwater has the new bridge built in the new location while the old will become a trail bridge, Blatnik saw work on it a few years ago although that was a very minor preservation project.  WisDOT definitely has the advantage as many of the bridges they own are newer to begin with, give it another 10-20 years and a lot of work will need to be done on those bridges as well.  It is all cyclical and dependent on the original age of the bridge.

[colinstu]

In other news: Madison residents can't merge.

DOT closes what neighbors call the 'Stoughton Road death ramp'
http://www.channel3000.com/news/DOT-closes-what-neighbors-call-the-Stoughton-Road-death-ramp/36079912

I have not been on Stoughton for awhile so when I first saw this I went to google streetview to remind myself what it looked like and though, there is an auxiliary lane... what's the big deal?

Then I watched the video... I can see the concerns.   That is a very sub-standard merge point (construction zones typically don't meet standards) but that is pretty bad.  I agree people don't know how to merge but that is tough merge to begin with.  If traffic is dense on Stoughton and you wanted to make it on at full speed you are at the mercy of drivers on Stoughton to let you in (as you force your way in) as there is no "escape zone aka shoulder" if things go wrong.  The other option is to stop, but most people won't because they feel like once they stop they are stuck.

Smart move to close it as that is just an crash waiting to happen.

This is for entering Stoughton Rd going North... I'm not seeing any auxiliary lane before, and there certainly isn't one now either.
It's a pretty sketchy looking setup, but nothing special compared to some of the ramps I've seen in Chicago (that aren't under construction). Couple that with Madison drivers (which I've found to be some of the worst) I could see why they might want to re-think it/close it.

[Roadguy]

In other news: Madison residents can't merge.

DOT closes what neighbors call the 'Stoughton Road death ramp'
http://www.channel3000.com/news/DOT-closes-what-neighbors-call-the-Stoughton-Road-death-ramp/36079912

I have not been on Stoughton for awhile so when I first saw this I went to google streetview to remind myself what it looked like and though, there is an auxiliary lane... what's the big deal?

Then I watched the video... I can see the concerns.   That is a very sub-standard merge point (construction zones typically don't meet standards) but that is pretty bad.  I agree people don't know how to merge but that is tough merge to begin with.  If traffic is dense on Stoughton and you wanted to make it on at full speed you are at the mercy of drivers on Stoughton to let you in (as you force your way in) as there is no "escape zone aka shoulder" if things go wrong.  The other option is to stop, but most people won't because they feel like once they stop they are stuck.

Smart move to close it as that is just an crash waiting to happen.

This is for entering Stoughton Rd going North... I'm not seeing any auxiliary lane before, and there certainly isn't one now either.
It's a pretty sketchy looking setup, but nothing special compared to some of the ramps I've seen in Chicago (that aren't under construction). Couple that with Madison drivers (which I've found to be some of the worst) I could see why they might want to re-think it/close it.

Read the article and look at it closer, the issue is the Southbound ramp on to Stoughton.  Chicago is also a tough comparison because many of the freeways where there are sub-standard ramps are crawling for many of hours of the day as well.  Makes it easier to merge when traffic when its moving slow.  The two situations are not really comparable.

If someone from the area can confirm I'm wrong, go for it, but looking at the article and watching the video they clearly are discussing southbound.

[Mrt90]

In other news: Madison residents can't merge.

DOT closes what neighbors call the 'Stoughton Road death ramp'
http://www.channel3000.com/news/DOT-closes-what-neighbors-call-the-Stoughton-Road-death-ramp/36079912

I have not been on Stoughton for awhile so when I first saw this I went to google streetview to remind myself what it looked like and though, there is an auxiliary lane... what's the big deal?

Then I watched the video... I can see the concerns.   That is a very sub-standard merge point (construction zones typically don't meet standards) but that is pretty bad.  I agree people don't know how to merge but that is tough merge to begin with.  If traffic is dense on Stoughton and you wanted to make it on at full speed you are at the mercy of drivers on Stoughton to let you in (as you force your way in) as there is no "escape zone aka shoulder" if things go wrong.  The other option is to stop, but most people won't because they feel like once they stop they are stuck.

Smart move to close it as that is just an crash waiting to happen.

This is for entering Stoughton Rd going North... I'm not seeing any auxiliary lane before, and there certainly isn't one now either.
It's a pretty sketchy looking setup, but nothing special compared to some of the ramps I've seen in Chicago (that aren't under construction). Couple that with Madison drivers (which I've found to be some of the worst) I could see why they might want to re-think it/close it.

Read the article and look at it closer, the issue is the Southbound ramp on to Stoughton.  Chicago is also a tough comparison because many of the freeways where there are sub-standard ramps are crawling for many of hours of the day as well.  Makes it easier to merge when traffic when its moving slow.  The two situations are not really comparable.

If someone from the area can confirm I'm wrong, go for it, but looking at the article and watching the video they clearly are discussing southbound.

Plus there is a solid white line in the merge area on Stoughton Road, so technically drivers on Stoughton Road cannot change lanes to help let someone merge, they can only slow down.  I wonder if there is enough room to have the entrance ramp meet Stoughton Road at close to a 90 degree angle and put up a stop sign there?  I think that would be safer and better than just closing the whole thing.

There are a couple of entrance ramps to Highway 50 near Kenosha just west of Highway 31 that are just like this but those ramps are not utilized very much so it's not really a problem right now.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5665728,-87.8993454,3a,75y,37.69h,76.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbo09vyCak8BPxvVLcO6oOA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5670094,-87.9035136,3a,75y,268.55h,68.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCy6IJN0Tc6gF4EQ543JzXQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[peterj920]

http://www.wjfw.com/email_story.html?SKU=20151028191610

Interesting story in the Town of Lincoln, which is just north of Eagle River where the DOT is removing street lights along US 45 because they don't want to turn the lights on.  WISDOT is removing the lights and billing the town.  The town is accusing WISDOT of bullying them, and WISDOT says that the town agreed to maintain the lights when they were installed and they have to be taken down due to safety.  LED retrofitting was discussed also in the article.  Who's side are you on, the town or WISDOT?

[mgk920]

http://www.wjfw.com/email_story.html?SKU=20151028191610

Interesting story in the Town of Lincoln, which is just north of Eagle River where the DOT is removing street lights along US 45 because they don't want to turn the lights on.  WISDOT is removing the lights and billing the town.  The town is accusing WISDOT of bullying them, and WISDOT says that the town agreed to maintain the lights when they were installed and they have to be taken down due to safety.  LED retrofitting was discussed also in the article.  Who's side are you on, the town or WISDOT?

'They' in the first sentence refers to the township.

If the township is crying poor like they are, then it's their fault for having them installed in the first place.  This makes me question their very existence.  If the township can't afford to govern themselves, then maybe they should be merged into the City of Eagle River.  Then the city can maintain them to their hearts' content.



Mike

[DaBigE]

http://www.wjfw.com/email_story.html?SKU=20151028191610

Interesting story in the Town of Lincoln, which is just north of Eagle River where the DOT is removing street lights along US 45 because they don't want to turn the lights on.  WISDOT is removing the lights and billing the town.  The town is accusing WISDOT of bullying them, and WISDOT says that the town agreed to maintain the lights when they were installed and they have to be taken down due to safety.  LED retrofitting was discussed also in the article.  Who's side are you on, the town or WISDOT?

I don't totally agree with removing the poles, but I can see both sides of the removal/leave them installed argument. For many years (still?) WisDOT has admitted to not having the resources to ensure all of their own lighting was in proper working order (read: WisDOT has their own non-functioning/dark street lights, albeit for a different reason), so I can see a bit of hypocrisy here.

That's where the blame on WisDOT ends in my book. The town agreed to maintain them; WisDOT has it in writing. Stop paying your mortgage or credit card and see what happens. I guess this is just repossession on a governmental scale. As stated in this and other WisDOT has tried to work with the town...but the town has stonewalled. Other articles I've read on the situation mentioned the town diverting the lighting money towards road patching. One article also mentioned the town even threatened to have law enforcement officials prevent the workers from removing the lights (turning the whole thing into one big pissing match). I wonder if Vilas County could have absorbed the lights into their system (unless the county does not currently maintain any)?

[peterj920]

The town also received about $135,000 from WISDOT for roads, according to jsonline.  They probably figured that they needed all of the money for road projects within the town.  Some of that money could have been used to keep the lights on.  Once I found out they received that much aid, I'd have to side with the state because the cost of lights is a fraction of that amount.  If they're receiving that much money in aid, the town must have a lot of roads that are in rough shape.   

[merrycilantro]

Superior was the second largest city in Wisconsin? I never would have guessed that!!

"If the township can't afford to govern themselves, then maybe they should be merged into the City of Eagle River."

Agree. Makes me wonder if there are any Merger talks going on up north as there are/were going on down south. And then my A.D.D. brain thinks about the Town of Sheboygan, how they have tried and failed in the past to incorporate as a village. Doesn't make too much sense to me, they've got the population base for it, it really reminds me of the Milwaukee and West Suburbs area, how you can tell it's in the country yet it's built up at the same time. If that makes any sense.

[SEWIGuy]

http://www.wjfw.com/email_story.html?SKU=20151028191610

Interesting story in the Town of Lincoln, which is just north of Eagle River where the DOT is removing street lights along US 45 because they don't want to turn the lights on.  WISDOT is removing the lights and billing the town.  The town is accusing WISDOT of bullying them, and WISDOT says that the town agreed to maintain the lights when they were installed and they have to be taken down due to safety.  LED retrofitting was discussed also in the article.  Who's side are you on, the town or WISDOT?

Another article. 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/lights-out-in-lincoln-dot-to-remove-streetlights-in-dispute-b99603804z1-337505001.html

The town's actions were even worse.

The town chairman threatened to call law enforcement for theft if WIDOT took the poles down, even though the town willingly relinquished the ownership of the lights.  Another town supervisor, when asked about the threat to call law enforcement, said to the paper:  "We were talking about rounding up a couple guys with muzzle loaders and meeting them."

WIDOT paid for the lights for a few months and even offered to have them turn every other light on or keep them on for a limited time at night.  The town refused.

Town governments are the worst.  I think Wisconsin should seriously consider unincorporated areas to be overseen by the County Boards and eliminate this kind of stuff.

[colinstu]

Wow, that's ridiculous. I agree.

[triplemultiplex]

What a bunch of bullcrap.  The Town of Lincoln includes most of Vilas County's portion of the Eagle Chain of Lakes; the shores of which are packed with expensive vacation properties.  The idea that they don't have enough money to keep a few streetlights on is laughable on its face. Either they are absolutely terrible at managing their money over there (or worse, committing some sort of fraud) or they are trying to pull some ideological bullshit that benefits no one.  (*cough* teabaggers *cough*cough*)

These town officials sound like idiots threatening to call the cops on the DOT or show up with "muzzle loaders" (which by the way is especially odd they are that specific about the type of old-timey gun that almost no one owns, even Up North.)

And then the DOT; they don't look so hot either.  Clearly they are removing the streetlights just to spite these idiots on the town board.  Traffic hazard my ass.

It should have never come to this.

[SEWIGuy]

To tie the last two subject together, I was driving on Stoughton Road in Madison in the rain the other night, and was amazed to see that it still doesn't have streetlights between the Broadway intersection and Buckeye Road.  (I didn't go further north than that.)

Maybe Madison can buy from from the cheap from WIDOT?

[midwesternroadguy]

No one looks very good here.

Clearly the Town reneged on an agreement.

WisDOT got petty, and decided for some capricious reason that street lights were a traffic hazard in Lincoln Twp. and nowhere else in the state.  It all starts to sound rather hillbillyish to me, and I find it really embarrassing. 

Wisconsin politics are definitely taking a turn for the worse these days.

[DaBigE]

To tie the last two subject together, I was driving on Stoughton Road in Madison in the rain the other night, and was amazed to see that it still doesn't have streetlights between the Broadway intersection and Buckeye Road.  (I didn't go further north than that.)

Maybe Madison can buy from from the cheap from WIDOT?

Other than the recent signal and lighting upgrades at the Buckeye and Pflaum intersections, I doubt that stretch will get lighting until Stoughton Rd gets completely rebuilt. Plus, it's not all the city of Madison...you have the town of Blooming Grove (which Madison will eventually own) and the city of Monona to deal with. Madison likes throwing their weight around at times, but I doubt it would happen in this instance. Not to forget, there are many stretches of the Beltline that are still unlit.

No one looks very good here.

Clearly the Town reneged on an agreement.

WisDOT got petty, and decided for some capricious reason that street lights were a traffic hazard in Lincoln Twp. and nowhere else in the state.  It all starts to sound rather hillbillyish to me, and I find it really embarrassing. 

Wisconsin politics are definitely taking a turn for the worse these days.

I agree completely.

[jreuschl]

At the I-94 and CTH F exit in Waukesha Co, WisDOT has covered the former F and TO WI-74 sign to just indicate hwy F. Why would they do this?

They should have extended 74 south anyway to I-94.

[Sephyroth]

At the I-94 and CTH F exit in Waukesha Co, WisDOT has covered the former F and TO WI-74 sign to just indicate hwy F. Why would they do this?

They should have extended 74 south anyway to I-94.

That helps answer my question then...I noticed yesterday that the signs for Hwy 74 were covered on the BGSs on I-41, and the End 74 sign (that was just there last Sunday) was completely removed, along with any trace of the road existing (e.g. JCT signs at Hwy 175)

[jreuschl]

So is WisDOT decommissioning Wi-74 then!?

[Sephyroth]

So is WisDOT decommissioning Wi-74 then!?

Yes, it looks that way. I did some googling and found this item from the Menomonee Falls village board talking about the transfer from state control to local control.

This looks to be part of the western Waukesha bypass, where the state can't add any new highway miles to the existing plan, so they're transferring what (now used to be!) Hwy 74 to the county & towns, effective as of yesterday.

[GeekJedi]

So it looks like they are eventually planning to route US-18 over the Les Paul Pkwy as part of the planned Waukesha Bypass. That would likely explain the reconstruction of Summit Ave. in Waukesha, since it's typically SOP for WisDOT to make road repairs before handing jurisdiction over to other bodies.

[SEWIGuy]

Wow.  Good find.

If the planned Waukesha bypass goes heads north to I-94 as that map indicates, I think it would be better to have US-18 routed along the I-94 to Bluemound Road.  At first glance, the Les Paul Parkway is longer.

Or even better, route US-18 north to I-94 and end it there.  Then come up with another number for Bluemound Road and  WI-164 south of I-94.  That gets rid of that dumb duplex with I-94.

[merrycilantro]

I am unable to open the link, but am I correct in assuming then that the new Waukesha Bypass will bear Highway 18 then?