Wisconsin notes

[GeekJedi]

I suppose the numbering is based on a "they have to number it *something*" mentality. It isn't really about making the US-18 route more direct, it's about turning over the streets US-18 runs over back to the City of Waukesha, and then finding a number for the bypass. US-18 fits the bill. So I guess it makes sense in a "big picture" way.

[FightingIrish]

I really don't like the idea of taking away some mileage of a state highway in order to extend another state highway. What is the reasoning behind this?

Some vague law about WISDOT not adding any additional miles of funded road to their allotment. If they add additional miles, they need to take it from somewhere else. WIS 74 seems to fit the bill, and it was truncated and relocated heavily when 164 was shifted over to the CTY J route and extended north. I get the feeling 74 was kept on the books for when an opportunity like this happened, and they needed to take mileage away from elsewhere.

[peterj920]

Exited from I-43 onto Wis 57 and saw a Speed Limit 65 Ahead sign.  After passing that sign I saw new Speed Limit 70 signs posted.  The new 70 zone on Wis 57 goes up to just before Church Rd past the Wis 54 interchange, where there were new Speed Likit 65 ahead signs.  I thought the signs from the I-43 ramps would be moved and placed there instead.  I guess the sign crews forgot about those signs because they're still posted despite changing all of the speed limit signs to 70.

[DaBigE]

Despite what the news release said, the 70 mph speed limit for US 151 will not begin at I-39. Instead, it begins between Exit 98 (American Pkwy) & 100 (Reiner Rd). The SB drop to 55 heading into Madison actually got pushed further upstream than it used to be, likely to match the point where the 70 signs now begin for northbound.

[SEWIGuy]

I really don't like the idea of taking away some mileage of a state highway in order to extend another state highway. What is the reasoning behind this?

Some vague law about WISDOT not adding any additional miles of funded road to their allotment. If they add additional miles, they need to take it from somewhere else. WIS 74 seems to fit the bill, and it was truncated and relocated heavily when 164 was shifted over to the CTY J route and extended north. I get the feeling 74 was kept on the books for when an opportunity like this happened, and they needed to take mileage away from elsewhere.

I don't think it is a law.  In fact the .pdf presentation to Menomonee Falls, it specifically says "As part of this project WDOT per their rules they cannot add any new STH miles."

WIDOT has been maintaining about 11,750 miles in highways since 1998.  My guess is that they have simply decided that this is the limit and any additions must come with a deletion.

http://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/data-plan/veh-miles/vmt-hist.pdf

[peterj920]

In the past they sure didn't care about adding mileage.  Wis 127 is an old alignment of Hwy 16 and Wis 175 was designated right after US 41 was rerouted between Fond Du Lac and Milwaukee in the 50s. Both of those routes would moat likely be turned back to local control if a similar reroute would happen today.  Those are 2 routes that could probably be easily turned back to county/local control.

[mgk920]

In the past they sure didn't care about adding mileage.  Wis 127 is an old alignment of Hwy 16 and Wis 175 was designated right after US 41 was rerouted between Fond Du Lac and Milwaukee in the 50s. Both of those routes would moat likely be turned back to local control if a similar reroute would happen today.  Those are 2 routes that could probably be easily turned back to county/local control.

Also, when the US 10/45 freeway complex (Appleton/Fremont/New London/Oshkosh) was built (opened in late 2003), the original plan was to turn the north-south part of former US 45 over to the two counties (Outagamie and Winnebago), but traffic projections found that it would still be a worthy state highway.  Thus, except for former WI 110 (Oshkosh-Fremont), ALL of the 'old' roads that the new-ROW US 10 and US 45 freeways plus the former County 'D' part of rerouted US 45 in that area replaced are still state highways (WI 15, WI 76 and WI 96).  In fact, the supplanted part of WI 15 is one of WisDOT's six 'delayed' major upgrade projects.

Mike

[peterj920]

In the past they sure didn't care about adding mileage.  Wis 127 is an old alignment of Hwy 16 and Wis 175 was designated right after US 41 was rerouted between Fond Du Lac and Milwaukee in the 50s. Both of those routes would moat likely be turned back to local control if a similar reroute would happen today.  Those are 2 routes that could probably be easily turned back to county/local control.

Also, when the US 10/45 freeway complex (Appleton/Fremont/New London/Oshkosh) was built (opened in late 2003), the original plan was to turn the north-south part of former US 45 over to the two counties (Outagamie and Winnebago), but traffic projections found that it would still be a worthy state highway.  Thus, except for former WI 110 (Oshkosh-Fremont), ALL of the 'old' roads that the new-ROW US 10 and US 45 freeways plus the former County 'D' part of rerouted US 45 in that area replaced are still state highways (WI 15, WI 76 and WI 96).  In fact, the supplanted part of WI 15 is one of WisDOT's six 'delayed' major upgrade projects.

Mike

Wis 150 was also decommissioned since it ran within 2 miles of US 10.  When US 10 was open to end at US 45 (now Wis 76), the stretch of Wis 150 between US 45 and US 41 became II.  In 2003 when the rest of US 10 opened, the rest of Wis 150 was turned back to local control. 

[SEWIGuy]

In the past they sure didn't care about adding mileage.  Wis 127 is an old alignment of Hwy 16 and Wis 175 was designated right after US 41 was rerouted between Fond Du Lac and Milwaukee in the 50s. Both of those routes would moat likely be turned back to local control if a similar reroute would happen today.  Those are 2 routes that could probably be easily turned back to county/local control.

Also, when the US 10/45 freeway complex (Appleton/Fremont/New London/Oshkosh) was built (opened in late 2003), the original plan was to turn the north-south part of former US 45 over to the two counties (Outagamie and Winnebago), but traffic projections found that it would still be a worthy state highway.  Thus, except for former WI 110 (Oshkosh-Fremont), ALL of the 'old' roads that the new-ROW US 10 and US 45 freeways plus the former County 'D' part of rerouted US 45 in that area replaced are still state highways (WI 15, WI 76 and WI 96).  In fact, the supplanted part of WI 15 is one of WisDOT's six 'delayed' major upgrade projects.

Mike

If you look at the link I posted above, that is probably why mileage went from 11,755 to 11,812 over two year to 2004.  But then it went back down over the next couple of years.  Something somewhere was either decommissioned or turned back over to a municipality to maintain.

[peterj920]

Wis 149, 175 north of US 151, Wis 115, and Wis 194 were decommissioned in the years after that project

[SEWIGuy]

Wis 149, 175 north of US 151, Wis 115, and Wis 194 were decommissioned in the years after that project

Very likely not a coincidence. 

So to go back to your earlier topic, the reason you don't see more decommissionings is because you haven't seen many additions recently. 

[peterj920]

In the 80s there were 5 state highways roads nearby where I grew up where the state transferred about 70 miles to local control and I don't think there were any additions that added up to that amount(Wis 32, Wis 96, Wis 114, Wis 148, and Wis 149 were the affected routes near me) In the 90s, many of the state maintained business routes were transferred to local control.  When a road is decommissioned and a new state highway is created, I do notice that WISDOT sure likes to "recycle" numbers, even 3 digit numbers.

[GeekJedi]

In the 80s there were 5 state highways roads nearby where I grew up where the state transferred about 70 miles to local control and I don't think there were any additions that added up to that amount(Wis 32, Wis 96, Wis 114, Wis 148, and Wis 149 were the affected routes near me) In the 90s, many of the state maintained business routes were transferred to local control.  When a road is decommissioned and a new state highway is created, I do notice that WISDOT sure likes to "recycle" numbers, even 3 digit numbers.

Actually, often local governments get to pick numbers (like in the case of WI-15). As for no additions during that time frame in the 80's - are you sure? WisDOT could have certainly made additions elsewhere in the state - or at least planned some.

Additionally, I don't think Business routes were ever state maintained, were they?

While I don't think there is a "hard" rule about STH mileage, there are per-mile maintenance costs involved. I imagine that WisDOT would prefer to control those costs by keeping the size of the STH system relatively static.

[peterj920]

There are still 2 business routes that are state maintained and they're still listed on the WISDOT state trunk system map.  Business 51 in the Wausau area, and Business 51 from the south Stevens Point city limits to the southern interchange of I-39/US 51.  When the US 10 expressway opened to Marshfield, Business 51 was turned back to local control in the city of Stevens Point, but is still part of the state highway system outside the city for some reason.  Business 51 in Merrill also used to be state maintained, but that was turned back.  Business 41 in Green Bay also appeared on state maps for a while.  If you go to wisconsinhighways.org, there is some more information on business routes and you can check out the WISDOT maps to see that Business 51 is state maintained in Stevens Point and Wausau.

There were some additions approved in the 80s, but they didn't match the amount of miles that WISDOT turned back on those routes.  The WIS 441 bridge and Wis 172 to the airport were previous county highways that became state highways, and Wis 156 was extended while Wis 187 in the same area was shortened.  The highways that the state turned back to local control were pretty minor.  Wis 114 actually created a loop with US 10, but the stretch from Hilbert to Brillion was turned back so there isn't a loop anymore.  Wis 148 was a short state highway that ran from Cato (US 10) to Valders (US 151).  Wis 32 north of Reedsville is very curvy, and Wis 57 is a lot better route between Kiel and De Pere, which is probably why it now runs concurrent with Wis 57. 

[SEWIGuy]

In the 80s there were 5 state highways roads nearby where I grew up where the state transferred about 70 miles to local control and I don't think there were any additions that added up to that amount(Wis 32, Wis 96, Wis 114, Wis 148, and Wis 149 were the affected routes near me) In the 90s, many of the state maintained business routes were transferred to local control.  When a road is decommissioned and a new state highway is created, I do notice that WISDOT sure likes to "recycle" numbers, even 3 digit numbers.

In 1980, WIDOT maintained 11,936 miles of highway.  In 1989 that figure 11,882.  So during the decade they dropped a rather insignificant 52 total miles.

[merrycilantro]

a little off topic but still on point with the entry, does anybody know what's up with I-94 in Milwaukee, since they voted down the Double Deck option? Is it back to the drawing board?

[Milwaukee, WY]

a little off topic but still on point with the entry, does anybody know what's up with I-94 in Milwaukee, since they voted down the Double Deck option? Is it back to the drawing board?

They always had an eight lane at-grade option with the side effect of eliminating some ramps at Hawley. I think that's what they're going with.

[merrycilantro]

This might sound a little fiction-ish and I assure you it's not intended...but...way back when John Norquist suggested to re-route I-94 onto current day I-894, drop 894 and extend I-794 along current day I-94 (or turn it into an urban boulevard or whatever it was)...It almost sort of makes sense to me...It would seem that if, at the Zoo, I-94 goes along the bypass and completely just obliterates I-894, it would make a little sense and...okay hear me out:

If your main goal is to go I-94 from Madison to Chicago...aside from alternate routes, if you were set on traveling I-94 thru Milwaukee, You'd want to take the bypass anyways to stay tf away from Downtown anyway. Unless you have a reason to go Downtown, having I-94 route through (or corner-nip as it were) Downtown, an extension of I-794 would be just fine for that purpose, and still fall within guidelines. Looking at Google Maps, my (very uneducated mind you) brain sees potential to expand perhaps a little more than say the congested corridor in question. I-894 has become a bit of an excess number anyways, people on here have been talking about ditching it, or why don't they ditch it, the "Will-They-Won't-They" of the I-41 Thread, you know after the "Will-They-Won't-They" extend I-55...we all needed something else to surmise...

It's just, the more I thought about it, the more it (seemingly) makes sense to do it that way. Everyone will end up in the same place anyway...now I know what some might be thinking, okay so they have *and i'm paraphrasing here* "To Chicago Follow Bypass"...the BGS's could be cleaned up a bit more (yeah i know i'm a little late for that considering they are updated now from the I-41 promotion)...I do realize there are incomplete interchanges on I-894 in the West Allis/Greenfield Areas, and it seems like they could even be remedied or even removed/replaced with another cross street.

Thoughts? And then also, My sincere apologies if this is fictional. It seems realistic in my head...

[SEWIGuy]

You lost me at "If your main goal is to go I-94 from Madison to Chicago..."  No one would do that.

I-94 should go through the center of Milwaukee.  That is what most urban interstates do.  Bypasses "bypass" the city center.

[peterj920]

a little off topic but still on point with the entry, does anybody know what's up with I-94 in Milwaukee, since they voted down the Double Deck option? Is it back to the drawing board?

They always had an eight lane at-grade option with the side effect of eliminating some ramps at Hawley. I think that's what they're going with.

The preferred alternative is for 8 lanes through the cemetery with 11 foot lanes through the area.  The Stadium Interchange will have low speed free flow ramps from I-94 to Wis 175, but there will be protected left turn signals from Wis 175 to I-94, so Wis 175 will be downgraded in the interchange area. 

Here is a link of the announcement on the cemetery option

http://www.wisn.com/news/dot-officials-kill-doubledecker-option-for-i94/31318692

[colinstu]

There were two options, the at-grade on-alignment option, that had 8 lanes, but either no or half-access to Hawley Rd, as well as no shoulders, reduced lane widths, etc... and the double deck "all-up" config that featured full access with Hawley.

The double deck lost out, and the FEIS or whatever that was submitted shows the non-double deck option as the preferred alternative selected.

[peterj920]

Drove on Hwys 41/141 north of Green Bay and the Speed Limit remains 65.  No idea why short stretches of Wis 29/57 get changed to 70, while the freeway stretch of 41/141 is longer than both of those sections combined.  I'm assuming that all of the other freeway sections not listed in the press release didn't get raised speed limit.  There are several sections that could still be raised to 70, including US 45 north of Oshkosh, US 10 west of Appleton and from I-39 to Wis 13, US 51 north of Wausau, and Wis 29 east of I-39 to Ringle.  Hopefully in the future those stretches of freeway will get the faster speed limit.

At the same time I give credit to WISDOT for raising the speed limit to 70 on non-interstate freeways.  A large stretch of US 20 is freeway in Iowa, but the speed limit remains 65.  Some states to the south or to the east only give higher speed limits to interstates only like Iowa. 

[mgk920]

a little off topic but still on point with the entry, does anybody know what's up with I-94 in Milwaukee, since they voted down the Double Deck option? Is it back to the drawing board?

From what I understand, the current thought by WisDOT is for four very narrow lanes to be scrunched in in each direction.



Mike

[merrycilantro]

You lost me at "If your main goal is to go I-94 from Madison to Chicago..."  No one would do that.

I-94 should go through the center of Milwaukee.  That is what most urban interstates do.  Bypasses "bypass" the city center.

SEWI, you're right, i didn't really think about that...from Madison and points west you're undoubtedly going to take at the very least I-39...my thought process at the time was "instead of narrowing the lanes like that why not use road with more room for expansion"...I'd had the thought that there was one city that did that but a quick glance around Google Maps told me that either I was seeing things or it's a small city. If only a couple of those never-built freeways of Milwaukee's checkered freeway past would have been built, perhaps some of the East-West's congestion could have been alleviated...

[colinstu]

I happy those freeways were never built. They would've been ugly & take up a lot of nice real estate.

4 Lanes thru this area of 94 makes sense because the Marquette is 4 lanes and the upcoming Zoo interchange will be 4 lanes too. To maintain this 3-lane bottle neck & make no changes would suck. Plus, the left-hand exits/entrances at the Stadium interchange need to go + remove the weaves at 35th & 25-27th Sts... the project needs to happen.