Wisconsin notes

[mgk920]

Reconstructing the 94/12/29 Elk Mound interchange to be free flow seems like it could enter design within the decade as the overpasses are reaching the end of their lifespan and I sure hope they wouldn't fork the money to replace them with them eventually getting ripped out anyways.

Thanks for the updates! Any word if they're still planing on that clunky, (wet)land consuming cloverleaf design that was initially proposed circa 2009'ish?   

C/D lanes are already badly needed on 53 between 12 and River Prairie Dr, and RP Dr and 312 in both directions the whole length.

US 53 from Clairemont to at least the North Xing, if not Melby should be widened to 6 thru lanes given all the rapid growth the area is seeing. Especially, given how many "You ask, We answer" type segments on the local news have been dedicated to expanding the Bypass in the last 5–10 years. It's a bit surprising there hasn't been much, if any, urgency from WisDOT on the matter...

I don't like the coverleaf at I-94/US 12/WI 29 either (I sent WisDOT a scribbling of my thoughts on it based on the I-24/57 interchange in Illinois several years ago, too) and also very much disliked (and still don't at all like) how the Clairemont/Hastings area in Eau Claire was redone - it seriously violates my 'KISS" rule and is way too needlessly and expensively complicated.

Mike

[JMAN_WiS&S]

Reconstructing the 94/12/29 Elk Mound interchange to be free flow seems like it could enter design within the decade as the overpasses are reaching the end of their lifespan and I sure hope they wouldn't fork the money to replace them with them eventually getting ripped out anyways.

Thanks for the updates! Any word if they're still planing on that clunky, (wet)land consuming cloverleaf design that was initially proposed circa 2009'ish?   

C/D lanes are already badly needed on 53 between 12 and River Prairie Dr, and RP Dr and 312 in both directions the whole length.

US 53 from Clairemont to at least the North Xing, if not Melby should be widened to 6 thru lanes given all the rapid growth the area is seeing. Especially, given how many "You ask, We answer" type segments on the local news have been dedicated to expanding the Bypass in the last 5–10 years. It's a bit surprising there hasn't been much, if any, urgency from WisDOT on the matter...

As far as I'm aware nothing has really moved forward with regards to the Elk Mound Interchange study.

I've asked people internally about 3 laning 53, and usually just get runaround. As far as I'm aware, all of the bridges between Clairemont and the North Crossing were built with wide piers to allow more girders and deck to be fairly easily added when the time comes.

[JMAN_WiS&S]

Reconstructing the 94/12/29 Elk Mound interchange to be free flow seems like it could enter design within the decade as the overpasses are reaching the end of their lifespan and I sure hope they wouldn't fork the money to replace them with them eventually getting ripped out anyways.

Thanks for the updates! Any word if they're still planing on that clunky, (wet)land consuming cloverleaf design that was initially proposed circa 2009'ish?   

C/D lanes are already badly needed on 53 between 12 and River Prairie Dr, and RP Dr and 312 in both directions the whole length.

US 53 from Clairemont to at least the North Xing, if not Melby should be widened to 6 thru lanes given all the rapid growth the area is seeing. Especially, given how many "You ask, We answer" type segments on the local news have been dedicated to expanding the Bypass in the last 5–10 years. It's a bit surprising there hasn't been much, if any, urgency from WisDOT on the matter...

I don't like the coverleaf at I-94/US 12/WI 29 either (I sent WisDOT a scribbling of my thoughts on it based on the I-24/57 interchange in Illinois several years ago, too) and also very much disliked (and still don't at all like) how the Clairemont/Hastings area in Eau Claire was redone - it seriously violates my 'KISS" rule and is way too needlessly and expensively complicated.

Mike

Yeah there are things about that project that I'd liked to have seen done differently. The Clairemont & 53 interchange really should've been free flow but I understand space was a constraint.The way the lights are timed now eastbound traffic is basically free flow if you're within the platoon of cars. Hastings way between 53 and Clairemont just feels underutilized now. Same with Hastings way north of Birch St.

[mgk920]

For one, I wold have fed WI 93 to the south into Hastings Way to the north as a major surface street, eliminating all of the related rampage'. That in itself would have gone a long way towards simplifying it.

Mike

[JMAN_WiS&S]

For one, I wold have fed WI 93 to the south into Hastings Way to the north as a major surface street, eliminating all of the related rampage'. That in itself would have gone a long way towards simplifying it.

Mike

I agree that would work, but then you'd need to deal with reconfiguring the interchange at Clairemont & Hastings & London to eliminate the missing movement. Part of me things Mall Dr was the original alignment for 93 and it met 53 and 12 where that diamond is now. If 93 used that London wouldn't need to connect to Clairemont

[mgk920]

Also, at the Elk Mound interchange, it might be a cheaper alternative to simply buy out those businesses along US 12 than doing any needed access road work to maintain their presence.

Mke

[mgk920]

For one, I wold have fed WI 93 to the south into Hastings Way to the north as a major surface street, eliminating all of the related rampage'. That in itself would have gone a long way towards simplifying it.

Mike

I agree that would work, but then you'd need to deal with reconfiguring the interchange at Clairemont & Hastings & London to eliminate the missing movement. Part of me things Mall Dr was the original alignment for 93 and it met 53 and 12 where that diamond is now. If 93 used that London wouldn't need to connect to Clairemont

My sense is that Mall Dr was the original WI 93.  I would have restored that as WI 93, feeding it into Hastings Way (reflagging  it too from the old US 53 number as a northward extension of WI 93?) with a big surface intersection where the diamond interchange with old US 53 is now.  As for London Rd, an eastward cross connection to WI 93 (now Mall Dr) at Henry Ave or thereabouts should have sufficed.  Also, for city street addressing purposes, I would have added the name of 'Hastings Way' to this 'new'  WI 93 in the City of Eau Claire.

Mike

[The Ghostbuster]

Maybe when they finally do reconstruct the Interstate 94/US 12/STH 29 interchange, it could be in a similar configuration as the Interstate 39/Interstate 43/Interstate 90/STH 81 interchange in Beloit; or the Interstate 41/US 41/STH 29 interchange in Green Bay. Of course, the existing businesses around the 94/12/29 interchange would have to be torn down to make way for such an interchange configuration, but that probably would have happened anyway. Another possibility is to realign 12 and 29 and build the new interchange like the Interstate 94/US 53 interchange.

[on_wisconsin]

Also, at the Elk Mound interchange, it might be a cheaper alternative to simply buy out those businesses along US 12 than doing any needed access road work to maintain their presence.

^ This, given all the enviro work/ wetland mitigation and railroad stuff that would have to be done if something close to the 2009 design is chosen. An entirely new EIS/ FONSI would likely have to be done anyway, given the amount of time that has passed. 

[triplemultiplex]

This is probably buried deep in the Redesigning Interchanges thread, but I took a few stabs at that Elk Mound junction and settled on this design:

[peterj920]

There's really only two ramps that need high speed movements which are from I-94 E to Wis 29 E and Wis 29 W to I-94 W. A large reconstruction isn't needed like at I-43/I-90 in Beloit. Reconstruct those two ramps with a high speed design with slight modifications to the local ramps.

A flyover ramp from US 53 South to I-94 East should be the highest priority when it comes to interchange reconstruction in the Eau Claire Area. That's probably the busiest loop ramp.

[mgk920]

Yea, much better at Elk Mound.  I would just add a roundabout at US 12/WI 40.

Now, the next challenge (if you wish to accept it) is the I-94/US 53 interchange in Eau Claire.



Mike

[JMAN_WiS&S]

Yea, much better at Elk Mound.  I would just add a roundabout at US 12/WI 40.

Now, the next challenge (if you wish to accept it) is the I-94/US 53 interchange in Eau Claire.



Mike

The concept I have in my head would be a flyover ramp for 53 SB-94 EB traffic, and then turn the rest of the cloverleaf into a regular diamond with roundabouts for all other movements. Keep the existing 94 WB to 53 NB high speed ramp. Might try to create a rendering of that later if someone else doesn't first. Need to figure out what the approach from 53 SB for this would look like tho.

[mgk920]

Yea, much better at Elk Mound.  I would just add a roundabout at US 12/WI 40.

Now, the next challenge (if you wish to accept it) is the I-94/US 53 interchange in Eau Claire.



Mike

The concept I have in my head would be a flyover ramp for 53 SB-94 EB traffic, and then turn the rest of the cloverleaf into a regular diamond with roundabouts for all other movements. Keep the existing 94 WB to 53 NB high speed ramp. Might try to create a rendering of that later if someone else doesn't first. Need to figure out what the approach from 53 SB for this would look like tho.

I would find a way to separate the US 53 freeway to the north and a free-flowing interchange between it and I-94 from US 53 to the south and feed that one into a Major surface street to the north, then 'piggyback' the two I-94 interchanges on top of each other (sort of like at the I-39/90/I-43 Beloit interchange or the I-41/WI 29/32 Shawano Interchange in the Green Bay area).  I'll have to get the maps and air photos out for that one.  IMHO, the easiest ramps there would be high-speed ones between I-94 to the southeast and US 53 to the north.  I would also move US 53 to follow I-94 between that Eau Claire Interchange and US 10 in Osseo, transferring the existing US 53 to Eau Claire and Trempealeau Counties for 'lettering'.  I do not consider Oakwood Mall to be a major long term traffic generator, it is dying and the City's planning department is already pondering that area's future.

Mike

[The Ghostbuster]

I highly doubt US 53 will be transferred to Interstate 94 between Eau Clarie and Osseo. It would have happened long ago if it was going to happen. US 12 largely parallels Interstate 94 between Hudson and Wisconsin Dells, and its only duplex with 94 is the first four miles of 94 within the state.

[triplemultiplex]

Now, the next challenge (if you wish to accept it) is the I-94/US 53 interchange in Eau Claire.

Oh I did that years ago.  I'll have to dig it up and repost it.
Though I should probably do that in the Rebuilding Interchanges thread, lest I drop more fiction in this thread.

<several minutes later...>

And here we go.

[Big John]

Now, the next challenge (if you wish to accept it) is the I-94/US 53 interchange in Eau Claire.

Oh I did that years ago.  I'll have to dig it up and repost it.
Though I should probably do that in the Rebuilding Interchanges thread, lest I drop more fiction in this thread.

<several minutes later...>

And here we go.

I-98?

[JMAN_WiS&S]

Now, the next challenge (if you wish to accept it) is the I-94/US 53 interchange in Eau Claire.

Oh I did that years ago.  I'll have to dig it up and repost it.
Though I should probably do that in the Rebuilding Interchanges thread, lest I drop more fiction in this thread.

<several minutes later...>

And here we go.

These look just as good as I remember them being. My comments:

53 Interchange:
-Commonwealth Av & Keystone Crs badly needs a roundabout as is today. Good foreshadowing.
-Keystone & Gateway should also be a roundabout in my opinion.
-This option would be nice, as it would miss the current critical pedestrian wall that exists in this area. The only legal way to cross I-94 on foot or bike right now is via STH 93 or Hobbs Road.
-I feel like this configuration would give enough relief to the existing Golf/AA/53 diamond without having to build the planned DDI there potentially. Much of the current bottlenecking comes from traffic trying to head towards 94.
-Would the 53N to 94E movements both ways be one or two lanes?

29 Interchange:
-As a cost saving measure, since the parclo already exists at 40, I would not have any ramps from 29/12 going directly to 94 and continue to make traffic on 12 and 40 access 29 and 94 at the existing parclo.
-The routing of 12 through the new interchange does work however, my only concern is the grade crossing for 40. Turn lane storage for cars waiting for trains may be needed if there is no grade separation.
-Roundabouts would be helpful at 12&40, and at both of the intersections at the top of 40/29. Locals may also argue for one at the county road intersection to the north, but I've never seen traffic too crazy north of the ramps.
-Your interchange would work as designed just fine, but I'd at the very least try to put roundabouts at the tops of the 12 ramps. WisDOT doesn't really like to put stop controls at freeway diamonds that are unsignalized anymore.

[Rothman]

Fictional.

[mgk920]

I highly doubt US 53 will be transferred to Interstate 94 between Eau Clarie and Osseo. It would have happened long ago if it was going to happen. US 12 largely parallels Interstate 94 between Hudson and Wisconsin Dells, and its only duplex with 94 is the first four miles of 94 within the state.

US 141 between Milwaukee and Green Bay?

Mike

[JREwing78]

I highly doubt US 53 will be transferred to Interstate 94 between Eau Clarie and Osseo. It would have happened long ago if it was going to happen. US 12 largely parallels Interstate 94 between Hudson and Wisconsin Dells, and its only duplex with 94 is the first four miles of 94 within the state.

US 141 between Milwaukee and Green Bay?

Mike

US-141 was built out as a relocated US-141, and then later redesignated as I-43. AASHTO wouldn't let WisDOT move US-141 back to the original roadway even if they wanted to (one reason why US-51 in Illinois is duplexed with I-39 instead of on what's now IL-251). The designation for US-141 went away because I-43 made it redundant. (Honestly, it should've been removed all the way back to Abrams).

I-94 was always designated as an Interstate highway, so WisDOT didn't need to move an existing designation. US-53 probably remains on its alignment more out of inertia than anything else; it could easily be downgraded to a County route. But it's also the best way to route traffic around I-94 closures, and the counties involved are likely less than enthusiastic about taking on more road maintenance.

[SEWIGuy]

I highly doubt US 53 will be transferred to Interstate 94 between Eau Clarie and Osseo. It would have happened long ago if it was going to happen. US 12 largely parallels Interstate 94 between Hudson and Wisconsin Dells, and its only duplex with 94 is the first four miles of 94 within the state.

US 141 between Milwaukee and Green Bay?

Probably because most of what is now I-43 was part of a relocated, then upgraded, US-141. Some of US-141's original routing sits on REALLY rural roads before it was relocated to roughly its current route.

[Molandfreak]

I highly doubt US 53 will be transferred to Interstate 94 between Eau Clarie and Osseo. It would have happened long ago if it was going to happen. US 12 largely parallels Interstate 94 between Hudson and Wisconsin Dells, and its only duplex with 94 is the first four miles of 94 within the state.

US 141 between Milwaukee and Green Bay?

Mike

US-141 was built out as a relocated US-141, and then later redesignated as I-43. AASHTO wouldn't let WisDOT move US-141 back to the original roadway even if they wanted to (one reason why US-51 in Illinois is duplexed with I-39 instead of on what's now IL-251). The designation for US-141 went away because I-43 made it redundant. (Honestly, it should've been removed all the way back to Abrams).

I-94 was always designated as an Interstate highway, so WisDOT didn't need to move an existing designation. US-53 probably remains on its alignment more out of inertia than anything else; it could easily be downgraded to a County route. But it's also the best way to route traffic around I-94 closures, and the counties involved are likely less than enthusiastic about taking on more road maintenance.

I'm sure AASHTO would approve moving US 51 back to IL 251 since it's a toll-free alternate.

[SEWIGuy]

I highly doubt US 53 will be transferred to Interstate 94 between Eau Clarie and Osseo. It would have happened long ago if it was going to happen. US 12 largely parallels Interstate 94 between Hudson and Wisconsin Dells, and its only duplex with 94 is the first four miles of 94 within the state.

US 141 between Milwaukee and Green Bay?

Mike

US-141 was built out as a relocated US-141, and then later redesignated as I-43. AASHTO wouldn't let WisDOT move US-141 back to the original roadway even if they wanted to (one reason why US-51 in Illinois is duplexed with I-39 instead of on what's now IL-251). The designation for US-141 went away because I-43 made it redundant. (Honestly, it should've been removed all the way back to Abrams).

I-94 was always designated as an Interstate highway, so WisDOT didn't need to move an existing designation. US-53 probably remains on its alignment more out of inertia than anything else; it could easily be downgraded to a County route. But it's also the best way to route traffic around I-94 closures, and the counties involved are likely less than enthusiastic about taking on more road maintenance.

Actually I-94, or at least one lane of it, was WI-30 for a good portion of the way between Waukesha County and Madison.  The original WI-30 runs along what is now Jefferson County B and Dane County BB.

[JREwing78]

Between Hudson and the Dells?

SM-G991U