Wisconsin notes

[peterj920]

Good thing they got rid of those protected left turns.  Clairemont Ave was a lot slower than before they were put in.  It looks like they were only put in where the road was 3 lanes in each direction.  I hope that the lights on Wis 312 are also switched because there's no reason why those lights should be protected.

They really should. 312 East of US 12 Is 5 Stack Permissive except at present US 53, those may be protected I do not remember. I'm still trying to figure out exactly how the fya is programmed on these new setups on clairemont, one side may be flashing, while the other side may stay solid red. I think certain lanes are protected only during certain times.

When US 53 was only open to Wis 312 and that stretch was designated as Bypass 53, there was a protected left turn, but the left turn had the priority green over oncoming traffic from County Q.  Jeffers Rd east of US 12 still has protected left turn arrows.  The newest signal is at Old Wells Rd, and I was concerned about a protected left being installed there, as that was the only road I turned left onto from Wis 312 heading west.  A 5 stack was placed there and more people probably turn left at that intersection than any of the protected left turn signals along Wis 312. 

[dvferyance]

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.

I agree it is a dumb duplex when WI-164 was extended in the late 90's there was no need for a reroute between Waukesha and Sussex. It just simply could have been routed west where it used to end in Sussex and take over CR-J's routing north of there. That would have been far more logical than all these other routing changes.

[peterj920]

WISDOT is holding a public meeting for a corridor mapping of US 10 between Amherst Junction and Stevens Point.  Looks like they're planning ahead for a future freeway bypass of eastern Stevens Point.   

http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/about-wisdot/newsroom/news-rel/074a-nc.aspx

[mgk920]

WISDOT is holding a public meeting for a corridor mapping of US 10 between Amherst Junction and Stevens Point.  Looks like they're planning ahead for a future freeway bypass of eastern Stevens Point.   

http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/about-wisdot/newsroom/news-rel/074a-nc.aspx

Good find, I'll try to make it.

Mike

[merrycilantro]

Nice. That's one major choke point in the busy tourist season, people traveling from US 10 onto Northbound I-39. Could even toll it (in reference to another thread of mine...)...*not trying to ignite a flame war LOL*

[The Ghostbuster]

Originally, the US 10 Corridor Preservation Study only went from Amherst Junction to Fremont. http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/nc/us10corridor/default.aspx

[mgk920]

Nice. That's one major choke point in the busy tourist season, people traveling from US 10 onto Northbound I-39. Could even toll it (in reference to another thread of mine...)...*not trying to ignite a flame war LOL*

I'm going on the assumption that they'll be officially protecting the yet to be acquired ROW for the freeway routing that was decided upon back during the mid-00s.

Mike

[merrycilantro]

Was that the one that curved north of current US 10 or the one that curved south? I mean for me personally, either way I'd still stop in Stevens Point on the way up north, it's a great halfway point with some decent places to stop for fuel/food and what not. Just that intersection of US10 and I-39...gawdawful at times.

[peterj920]

Was that the one that curved north of current US 10 or the one that curved south? I mean for me personally, either way I'd still stop in Stevens Point on the way up north, it's a great halfway point with some decent places to stop for fuel/food and what not. Just that intersection of US10 and I-39...gawdawful at times.

I'm pretty sure it's the alternative curved south from Amherst Jct.  If that were built I think Wis 54 should be routed concurrently with US 10 then along County B to the existing expressway segment.  Right now I think US 10/County B is better than using Wis 54 between Plover and Waupaca due to being able to use the US 10 expressway.  The County B interchange is also a lot busier since WISDOT is proposing to build a diverging diamond interchange at I-39.

[dvferyance]

Due to the lack of money and other higher priories like finishing I-94 to Illinois and between the zoo and the Marquette I am sure this is a long ways from becoming a reality. I would bet not until at least 2030.

[SEWIGuy]

Was that the one that curved north of current US 10 or the one that curved south? I mean for me personally, either way I'd still stop in Stevens Point on the way up north, it's a great halfway point with some decent places to stop for fuel/food and what not. Just that intersection of US10 and I-39...gawdawful at times.

I'm pretty sure it's the alternative curved south from Amherst Jct.  If that were built I think Wis 54 should be routed concurrently with US 10 then along County B to the existing expressway segment.  Right now I think US 10/County B is better than using Wis 54 between Plover and Waupaca due to being able to use the US 10 expressway.  The County B interchange is also a lot busier since WISDOT is proposing to build a diverging diamond interchange at I-39.

The preferred option is the "HH-Porter Split Option 1" on this map:

http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/Map32_021.pdf

It is the southernmost option and IMO the most logical.  The problem is that this was originally chosen back in 2008, and even then had a construction schedule of somewhere between 2025-2035.

Unless something has changed that I am unaware of.

[mgk920]

The preferred option is the "HH-Porter Split Option 1" on this map:

http://www.co.portage.wi.us/Comprehensive%20Plan/Planning%20Program/Stevens%20Point/Map32_021.pdf

It is the southernmost option and IMO the most logical.  The problem is that this was originally chosen back in 2008, and even then had a construction schedule of somewhere between 2025-2035.

Unless something has changed that I am unaware of.

Yea.  I submitted some ideas for a variation on the theme for the middle option that got deep into the selection process and from what a WisDOT guy told me at the time, set back the timeline on the final decision by several weeks.

Mike

[triplemultiplex]

Is it just me or do I post this image every few months?


Ignore the interchange configuration where it splits from the existing US 10 on the east end of the map because they are going to do something different apparently.
The alignment is what is relevant.

[Alps]

New question: County Highway VK - why is it VK? Lombardi would be VL, and his middle name wasn't K.

[dvferyance]

New question: County Highway VK - why is it VK? Lombardi would be VL, and his middle name wasn't K.

No idea if it was KV I would say that stands for King Vince.

[Big John]

VK is the best 2-letter abbreviation of Vikings, which is bothersome for the road Lambeau Field is on.  I think it is someone else's initials.

[peterj920]

The frontage road along Wis 29 between County J and County EB is County RK, so there must be some significance to the K at the end.  All 3 dead end county roads in Brown County start with an I.  Old 96 in Wrightstown on the east side is now County MW and I have no idea how the Brown County Highway Department came up with that. 

[dvferyance]

The frontage road along Wis 29 between County J and County EB is County RK, so there must be some significance to the K at the end.  All 3 dead end county roads in Brown County start with an I.  Old 96 in Wrightstown on the east side is now County MW and I have no idea how the Brown County Highway Department came up with that.

Was WI-96 recently rerouted? I don't see any change in google maps.

[Big John]

The frontage road along Wis 29 between County J and County EB is County RK, so there must be some significance to the K at the end.  All 3 dead end county roads in Brown County start with an I.  Old 96 in Wrightstown on the east side is now County MW and I have no idea how the Brown County Highway Department came up with that.

Was WI-96 recently rerouted? I don't see any change in google maps.

there is a new bridge on WI 96 in Wrightstown.  The road east of the old bridge was redeginated as county MW, though not marked on Google maps but labeled High St. https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3254174,-88.1598582,18z

[SSOWorld]

The frontage road along Wis 29 between County J and County EB is County RK, so there must be some significance to the K at the end.  All 3 dead end county roads in Brown County start with an I.  Old 96 in Wrightstown on the east side is now County MW and I have no idea how the Brown County Highway Department came up with that.

Was WI-96 recently rerouted? I don't see any change in google maps.

there is a new bridge on WI 96 in Wrightstown.  The road east of the old bridge was redeginated as county MW, though not marked on Google maps but labeled High St. https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3254174,-88.1598582,18z

I see it marked Wis-96.

[peterj920]

The frontage road along Wis 29 between County J and County EB is County RK, so there must be some significance to the K at the end.  All 3 dead end county roads in Brown County start with an I.  Old 96 in Wrightstown on the east side is now County MW and I have no idea how the Brown County Highway Department came up with that.

Was WI-96 recently rerouted? I don't see any change in google maps.

there is a new bridge on WI 96 in Wrightstown.  The road east of the old bridge was redeginated as county MW, though not marked on Google maps but labeled High St. https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3254174,-88.1598582,18z

I see it marked Wis-96.

County MW goes from County ZZ up High St to Turner St, then it turns south briefly to the roundabout with Wis 96.  The road is very short.  The diagonal road northeast of the roundabout on google maps shouldn't be there and doesn't exist.  The new Wis 96 bridge is south of the old bridge and rises above the valley on both sides.

[JMAN_WiS&S]

Good thing they got rid of those protected left turns.  Clairemont Ave was a lot slower than before they were put in.  It looks like they were only put in where the road was 3 lanes in each direction.  I hope that the lights on Wis 312 are also switched because there's no reason why those lights should be protected.

They really should. 312 East of US 12 Is 5 Stack Permissive except at present US 53, those may be protected I do not remember. I'm still trying to figure out exactly how the fya is programmed on these new setups on clairemont, one side may be flashing, while the other side may stay solid red. I think certain lanes are protected only during certain times.

When US 53 was only open to Wis 312 and that stretch was designated as Bypass 53, there was a protected left turn, but the left turn had the priority green over oncoming traffic from County Q.  Jeffers Rd east of US 12 still has protected left turn arrows.  The newest signal is at Old Wells Rd, and I was concerned about a protected left being installed there, as that was the only road I turned left onto from Wis 312 heading west.  A 5 stack was placed there and more people probably turn left at that intersection than any of the protected left turn signals along Wis 312.

UPDATE: Cameron St, Menomonie St, and university dr by CVTC now has 4 stacks, not sure about stein. Interesting fact, I thought Dual Permissive FYA left turns werent allowed for crossing more than 2 lanes at 45mph. These two intersections are Dual Turns crossing 3 lanes of traffic going 45mph, and to most locals, they go more like 51-53 mph.

[JMAN_WiS&S]

I visited Eau Claire's only HAWK Signal today. Watched 3 activations and recorded one. Drivers for the most part knew how to use it without confusing signage.
https://youtu.be/HNC76jcZ0Is

I also visited both of Eau Claires FYA doghouse intersections but didn't get any footage. I sat at the Lake St/First Ave setup for 15 minutes and the protected green arrow never came up. I took this video of the Farwell St/Galloway st setup about a month ago:
https://youtu.be/7FaFAoH4xZ0

[SSOWorld]

Not only does it go "against" Wisconsin norms, it's also a MUTCD violation in that the green arrow and FYA are the same head...

[Revive 755]

Not only does it go "against" Wisconsin norms, it's also a MUTCD violation in that the green arrow and FYA are the same head...

Maybe I'm not quite understanding your post but anyway:

The display shall be a four-section signal face except that a three-section signal face containing a dual-arrow signal section shall be permitted where signal head height limitations (or lateral positioning limitations for a horizontally-mounted signal face) will not permit the use of a four-section signal face. The dual-arrow signal section, where used, shall display a GREEN ARROW for the protected left-turn movement and a flashing YELLOW ARROW for the permissive left-turn movement.

For additional consideration, there is also the following interpretation/ruling by FHWA for a display with a dual-arrow display (steady green/flashing yellow) in Minnesota:  Link.