News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Why Wyoming?

Started by MNHighwayMan, February 10, 2017, 05:41:38 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

texaskdog

Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


SEWIGuy

Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 05:35:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


No reason to do that.  Gotta put some number on the bridge over the river. 

texaskdog

Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 06:22:54 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 05:35:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


No reason to do that.  Gotta put some number on the bridge over the river. 

Why?????

SEWIGuy

Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 09:54:00 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 06:22:54 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 05:35:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


No reason to do that.  Gotta put some number on the bridge over the river. 

Why?????

Because.

texaskdog

Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 10:06:38 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 09:54:00 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 06:22:54 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 05:35:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


No reason to do that.  Gotta put some number on the bridge over the river. 

Why?????

Because.

It's less significant than Stillwater which is MN 36 or WI 64

SEWIGuy

Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 10:40:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 10:06:38 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 09:54:00 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 06:22:54 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 05:35:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


No reason to do that.  Gotta put some number on the bridge over the river. 

Why?????

Because.

It's less significant than Stillwater which is MN 36 or WI 64


According to WIDOT traffic counts, US-10 carries 14,600 vpd across the St. Croix.  WI-64 carries 15,000.  Not a significant difference.

DandyDan

They could truncate US 61 to I-94 and then call the segment north of I-94 something like MN 561, couldn't they?  If MNDOT knows they are getting rid of it in the future, what difference does it make what number it has?
MORE FUN THAN HUMANLY THOUGHT POSSIBLE

midwesternroadguy

Getting back to US 61, why did MNDOT waste all that money creating TH 61 signs for the stretch northeast of Duluth when it could have just ghosted it "US 61, follow I-35" between Wyoming and Duluth as it did with US 10, US 12, and US 52? It seemed like that was a lot of unnecessary money to waste developing a new sign number when it could have addressed a concurrency much more efficiently. 

Why are concurrencies so bad?  What's wrong with route continuity anyway?  With the discussion of extending US 212, why would the short concurrencies with TH 55 or US 61 be so bad?

MNHighwayMan

#33
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on February 12, 2017, 09:02:21 AM
Getting back to US 61, why did MNDOT waste all that money creating TH 61 signs for the stretch northeast of Duluth when it could have just ghosted it "US 61, follow I-35" between Wyoming and Duluth as it did with US 10, US 12, and US 52? It seemed like that was a lot of unnecessary money to waste developing a new sign number when it could have addressed a concurrency much more efficiently. 

Why are concurrencies so bad?  What's wrong with route continuity anyway?  With the discussion of extending US 212, why would the short concurrencies with TH 55 or US 61 be so bad?

That's a good question, despite the fact that for approximately 10-15 years US-61 was signed normally along I-35.
Also, US-10 is fully marked in Minnesota - its consecutive concurrencies with 694, 35E, 94, and 61 are all marked with US-10 shields. It's only 12 and 52 that have invisible concurrencies.

Mdcastle

Ghosting US 12 and US 52 didn't start until around 1980. (There were still a few stray markers for US 52 west of St Cloud into the 1990s.)

MNHighwayMan

Quote from: Mdcastle on February 12, 2017, 09:42:26 AM
Ghosting US 12 and US 52 didn't start until around 1980. (There were still a few stray markers for US 52 west of St Cloud into the 1990s.)

Hmm, I didn't know that. It must be a cost-saving measure by MnDOT then, and/or they feel it simplifies things for drivers. Still raises the valid question of why they didn't do the same to US-61, though.

texaskdog

Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 10:52:57 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 10:40:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 10:06:38 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 09:54:00 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 06:22:54 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 05:35:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 11, 2017, 03:24:06 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 11, 2017, 11:20:41 AM
Us 10 in far west Wisconsin is fairly minor


Yeah but east of there is a four-lane expressway.  No reason to decommission it. 

It should still be moved from Ellsworth up past River Falls to 94


No reason to do that.  Gotta put some number on the bridge over the river. 

Why?????

Because.

It's less significant than Stillwater which is MN 36 or WI 64


According to WIDOT traffic counts, US-10 carries 14,600 vpd across the St. Croix.  WI-64 carries 15,000.  Not a significant difference.

I don't buy it.  They are building a huge new bridge in Stillwater and Prescott has a relatively small one

texaskdog

US 52 is completely unnecessary west of Saint Paul.  If ND wants to keep it so bad they should just extend 10, giving a more important number a longer route.

DandyDan

Quote from: Mdcastle on February 12, 2017, 09:42:26 AM
Ghosting US 12 and US 52 didn't start until around 1980. (There were still a few stray markers for US 52 west of St Cloud into the 1990s.)
I seem to think it would it began a bit later than 1980, because when I was a kid in the 80's, we would go to the old Montgomery Ward store off of University Ave and the old Sears store by the capitol, all on the same trip, and I do remember University Ave being US 12 and US 52 back then.
MORE FUN THAN HUMANLY THOUGHT POSSIBLE

froggie

Monte's right in that the process generally began in 1980 when US 52 was moved to I-94 between St. Cloud and Brooklyn Park, though I believe there was some co-signage involved at the time.  Below is a general timeline of how the route changes which led to the ghosting went down:

1980:  US 52 moved to I-94 between St. Cloud and Brooklyn Park (today's CSAH 81 interchange).
Ca. 1983-84:  US 52 moved to I-94 between CSAH 81 and the downtown 4th St ramps.
1985:  I-94 completed east of I-494/694 to the St. Croix River, a direct upgrade of the pre-existing US 12 alignment.
1988:  As part of the "great Hennepin County Highway Swap", US 12 was moved off Washington and University Avenues and onto I-94 between the downtowns.  Also as part of this, a gap was created in US 52 (which was NOT moved at the time) between I-35W and the Minneapolis/St. Paul line.
Ca. 1995:  US 52 moved onto I-94 between the downtowns.  This reroute was approved by AASHTO on April 9, 1994.  Turnback of University Ave in St. Paul to Ramsey County was completed June 1, 1996.

TheHighwayMan3561

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on February 12, 2017, 09:44:45 AM
Quote from: Mdcastle on February 12, 2017, 09:42:26 AM
Ghosting US 12 and US 52 didn't start until around 1980. (There were still a few stray markers for US 52 west of St Cloud into the 1990s.)

Hmm, I didn't know that. It must be a cost-saving measure by MnDOT then, and/or they feel it simplifies things for drivers. Still raises the valid question of why they didn't do the same to US-61, though.

(sorry for the five-month belated reply) In my own research I've come to the conclusion that MnDOT did indeed begin ghosting US 61 during the 80s before they axed the route entirely in 1990. I found a video of the old US 2 Arrowhead Bridge from 1983 on YouTube which shows them passing by what was then the I-35/US 2 eastern interchange at Central Avenue with no mention of US 61 at the interchange. I've also noted no greenout on any of the few remaining signs from the era. It should be noted that MnDOT originally petitioned for US 61's removal in 1971 but was denied at the time, likely because there were still sections of I-35 that were incomplete between Duluth and the Twin Cities. It was like them quietly scaling back the route's existence so they could drop it altogether later.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

peterj920

US 10 is also pretty busy in Michigan.  It's a freeway between Claire and Bay City.

dvferyance

Quote from: texaskdog on February 12, 2017, 05:26:24 PM
US 52 is completely unnecessary west of Saint Paul.  If ND wants to keep it so bad they should just extend 10, giving a more important number a longer route.
That is a great idea. US 52 is such an odd route it's starts in South Carolina but makes it's way up to North Dakota and ends at the Canadian border. I would just extend US 10 to Minot to avoid a grid violation. The rest could be downgraded to a state highway.

texaskdog

I don't understand why 61 north of Duluth wasn't significant enough to say a US route, even if there was a gap.  I guess it could have been US 153 as well.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.