Wisconsin notes

[The Ghostbuster]

How about County FC for Foxconn?

[Big John]

How about County FC for Foxconn?

Or FU for how it ended up?

[The Ghostbuster]

County FU is one better, since Foxconn and former Gov. Walker screwed over southeast Wisconsin.

[FightingIrish]

I didn't mean to start a debate about what happens in other states - this is the "Wisconsin" topic after all.

My point is that in a state with a capped mileage, Wisconsin has a lot of highways that parallel freeways (US-12, WI-16, WI-175)  In some cases that might be absolutely legit. In others, I question their importance.  For instance, you can actually see US-12 from I-94 as you drive from the Dells north to Black River Falls.  I think you can legit put US-12 on the interstate between that stretch and free up about 75 miles that could better be used elsewhere.

WISDOT tends to keep highways on their books in case local jurisdictions (such as city or county) want to make a trade (I used the Waukesha and Menomonee Falls examples previously). Or, if the state initiates the trade (like when they relocated and extended WIS 164 a few years back.

WIS 175 appears to be trade-bait for potential swaps, or so go the rumors.

And some rather unusual assignments stay on the books for other reasons, like WIS 57 on the horribly decrepit N. 20th St. in Milwaukee, which I assume exists because it eventually leads to the 27th St. Bridge, overseen by WISDOT, that carries WIS 57 to its almost immediate southern terminus on the other end.

[FightingIrish]

I still say that they should have made 311 a county highway because it still makes no sense.

The road is owned by WISDOT, and may play a bigger role in the future, so it gets a number. There are many instances (in many states) of short spur routes leading to state-owned properties, such as state parks, prisons, etc. that carry route numbers. Minnesota is full of them.

[SEWIGuy]

I still say that they should have made 311 a county highway because it still makes no sense.

The road is owned by WISDOT, and may play a bigger role in the future, so it gets a number. There are many instances (in many states) of short spur routes leading to state-owned properties, such as state parks, prisons, etc. that carry route numbers. Minnesota is full of them.

Right. It's just a jurisdictional issue. Not some statement of the relative value of the highway.

[dvferyance]

STH 142 used to extend to STH 32 in Kenosha, but it was retracted to the Interstate 94 interchange (now Interstates 41/94) in the early 1990s. Old 142 is now CTH S.

Right I knew that and that did make sense at the time. But that was 30 years ago times have changed. Now there is an Amazon warehouse and other warehouses by I-94. Making it a much more important route. Since the road has been expanded it sure has a state highway feel to it. I would keep the part east of 31 a local street but west of 31 it should be part of 142 again. Even the signage for Burlington is still there at that intersection. And I am sure the road gets a lot of trucks.

[hobsini2]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

[SEWIGuy]

What does "makes sense to be a state highway" even mean? There are plenty of important roads that have a lot of trucks, especially in urban areas, that aren't state highways.

I agree that WI-311 is silly. However if it is something that Wisconsin agreed to, and is therefore state-maintained, it should be numbered as such. Does that mean it is more important than the county highways you listed?  Likely not, but I don't think that's the intent of state highways outside of rural areas anyway.

[hobsini2]

What does "makes sense to be a state highway" even mean? There are plenty of important roads that have a lot of trucks, especially in urban areas, that aren't state highways.

I agree that WI-311 is silly. However if it is something that Wisconsin agreed to, and is therefore state-maintained, it should be numbered as such. Does that mean it is more important than the county highways you listed?  Likely not, but I don't think that's the intent of state highways outside of rural areas.

Making sense would be a connection between population centers on a heavily traveled road. If the traffic volume is high enough to be on the level with other local state highways, make it one. For example, Hwy N in Dane County had a daily count between Stoughton and Sun Prairie that was consistently over 4200 and at a couple points over 9000. Compare that to Wis 73 just a few miles east from I-90 to Marshall. The low point was 2200 with a high point of 5800. To me, it makes sense to have N be a state highway.

To me, signing a highway as a state route should be more about the importance of the road than if it is "state maintained". I know that's counter to reality but that's my opinion.  Wis 311 is not an important highway. Hell, it could be argued that it is the most useless state highway despite Wis 127 and Wis 134's existence. And it's not like a river bridge crossing that should be state maintained. Decommission it to a county highway.

[SEWIGuy]

I agree with you that highways like Dodge County A should be a state highway instead of WI-26 (although I would keep it a state highway through Juneau to WI-33).  My opinion is based on that it is a better route for long-term navigation, which is why it is currently utilized by most people accessing US-151.

But IMO in urban areas its not simply a traffic count issue.  East Mason Street (County V) in Green Bay gets about 50-75% more traffic than Riverside Drive (WI-57).  I don't think the former needs to be a state highway because of that.

[hobsini2]

I agree with you that highways like Dodge County A should be a state highway instead of WI-26 (although I would keep it a state highway through Juneau to WI-33).  My opinion is based on that it is a better route for long-term navigation, which is why it is currently utilized by most people accessing US-151.

But IMO in urban areas its not simply a traffic count issue.  East Mason Street (County V) in Green Bay gets about 50-75% more traffic than Riverside Drive (WI-57).  I don't think the former needs to be a state highway because of that.

Urban areas are a different case. Obviously, there will be some city streets that would have more traffic than others. But in the cases where you have one town of say 10k and another town of 10k that has no state highway between them but a county highway, that county highway should be a state highway because of the vitality of the link. So in the case of Hwy N, you are linking 13k (Stoughton) with 7300 (Cottage Grove) and 35k (Sun Prairie) over 19 miles. I would not say this is an urban case.

[SEWIGuy]

I don't know enough about Dane County N to know, but that's more of a persuasive argument than Kenosha County S.

[dvferyance]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

I am ok with a few every here and there. But in the SE part of the state they just happened way too much.

[GeekJedi]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

I am ok with a few every here and there. But in the SE part of the state they just happened way too much.

Having a lot in SE Wisconsin makes sense though. It is the most populated part of the state with the largest road network, so there's bound to be more trading going on here.

[SEWIGuy]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

I am ok with a few every here and there. But in the SE part of the state they just happened way too much.

Having a lot in SE Wisconsin makes sense though. It is the most populated part of the state with the largest road network, so there's bound to be more trading going on here.

Right. I am all for getting rid of state designations on highways like WI-83 between WI-33 and WI-175, if it means creating new ones on routes that are considered more important.

[mgk920]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

I am ok with a few every here and there. But in the SE part of the state they just happened way too much.

Having a lot in SE Wisconsin makes sense though. It is the most populated part of the state with the largest road network, so there's bound to be more trading going on here.

Right. I am all for getting rid of state designations on highways like WI-83 between WI-33 and WI-175, if it means creating new ones on routes that are considered more important.

A few years ago I pondered thoughts on what lettered county highways in Wisconsin would be likely 3 digit state highways if they were in other states like Ohio or Pennsylvania.

Mike

[dvferyance]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

I am ok with a few every here and there. But in the SE part of the state they just happened way too much.

Having a lot in SE Wisconsin makes sense though. It is the most populated part of the state with the largest road network, so there's bound to be more trading going on here.

There has been very little if any trading in the last several decades in NE Illinois where the Chicago area is. Also other midwest metros like Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinanti St Louis ect same thing. Very little change.

[peterj920]

At the county level there seems to be a movement in giving back more urban routes back to the cities/municipalities. In the Appleton Area, parts of County E and KK were turned back to Appleton after reconstruction. Calumet County gave County LP to the cities and County F to Chilton. The counties in those cases helped fund the reconstruction and got rid of the roads at the end.

In Dane County County PD/McKee Rd appears to be given to Fitchburg between US 151 and County D/Fish Hatchery Rd as another example. It says "To PD"  at County D and at the US 151 off ramp the arrows only point west for PD. As more areas develop I wouldn't be surprised to see more turn backs of County roads.

[SEWIGuy]

This is why I hate the "trade offs". If a road makes sense to be a state highway, so be it. Dane N, Dodge A and Kenosha S come to mind.

I am ok with a few every here and there. But in the SE part of the state they just happened way too much.

Having a lot in SE Wisconsin makes sense though. It is the most populated part of the state with the largest road network, so there's bound to be more trading going on here.

There has been very little if any trading in the last several decades in NE Illinois where the Chicago area is. Also other midwest metros like Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinanti St Louis ect same thing. Very little change.

Are the funding mechanisms similar?

[The Ghostbuster]

It is my experience that county highways are the most sparsely signed routes in the state of Wisconsin. Here in the Madison area, along the beltline, several county highways are not signposted on the overhead signs. These include CTH MS (Exit 251A), CTH MM (Exit 262), CTH MC (Exit 263), CTH BW (Exit 264), and formerly there was no CTH BB sign at Exit 265. I'm sure there are other intersections and interchanges elsewhere in the state that omit county highway designations.

[hobsini2]

It is my experience that county highways are the most sparsely signed routes in the state of Wisconsin. Here in the Madison area, along the beltline, several county highways are not signposted on the overhead signs. These include CTH MS (Exit 251A), CTH MM (Exit 262), CTH MC (Exit 263), CTH BW (Exit 264), and formerly there was no CTH BB sign at Exit 265. I'm sure there are other intersections and interchanges elsewhere in the state that omit county highway designations.

I think this is mostly an urban thing with the BGS in Milwaukee and Madison. A lot of the Milwaukee County county highways are unsigned on the BGS but are signed on the ramps. College Ave Hwy ZZ comes to mind.

[Big John]

^^ They used to be signed on BGS's in Milwaukee County but the policy changed in the late 1990s.

[SEWIGuy]

^^ They used to be signed on BGS's in Milwaukee County but the policy changed in the late 1990s.

Which is fine since they aren't used for navigational purposes anyway.

[Big John]

College Ave in Downtown Appleton to get a road diet: https://www.wbay.com/video/2023/07/10/appleton-reconfigures-stretch-college-ave/