Two lane freeways

[jwolfer]

Makes me wonder if WisDOT has some "secret" future plans for another loop ramp at this interchange.

I don't think there are any "secret" plans, just some hedging of bets. With a bridge project like this, you best plan for all eventual possibilities, even if you don't think you'll ever need them.

As for bridge widening, they did the same thing along I-43 in Waukesha County a few years ago. All of the bridges there are ready for an extra lane.

Florida widened interstate bridges to accommodate additional median lane on i95 from Jacksonville to i4 around 1990. The rest of the road was widened in the early 2000s.  Other interstate had similar projects

[SEWIGuy]

I do find it interesting that nearly all of the bridges (all of them after this summer) on I-94 in western Waukesha County are wide enough to handle three lanes and have been for decades.
The hard part is already done.

And speaking of that section; the new bridges over the interstate at WI 67 have a ton of space beneath them; way more than is needed for a six lane freeway.  Sure the EB side as an acceleration lane for the loop ramp, but not the WB side.  Makes me wonder if WisDOT has some "secret" future plans for another loop ramp at this interchange.

This is pure speculation on my part, but I'm curious if the Madison-Milwaukee-Chicago high speed rail was going to parallel I-94 through there. I'm probably wrong, but it's possible.

No it was going to be further north.  Roughly running along the WI-16/WI-19 corridor.

[mgk920]

I do find it interesting that nearly all of the bridges (all of them after this summer) on I-94 in western Waukesha County are wide enough to handle three lanes and have been for decades.
The hard part is already done.

And speaking of that section; the new bridges over the interstate at WI 67 have a ton of space beneath them; way more than is needed for a six lane freeway.  Sure the EB side as an acceleration lane for the loop ramp, but not the WB side.  Makes me wonder if WisDOT has some "secret" future plans for another loop ramp at this interchange.

This is pure speculation on my part, but I'm curious if the Madison-Milwaukee-Chicago high speed rail was going to parallel I-94 through there. I'm probably wrong, but it's possible.

The proposal was to upgrade an existing branch line, the former MILW route between Watertown and Madison, and use the existing CP (ex MILW) mainline from there to downtown Milwaukee.  The project's astronomical cost (+/- $800M) was due to having to dig the roadbeds of several lengthy sections on either side of Waterloo, WI out of the swamps/marshes and replace them with bridging.

It was *NOT* to be a European/Asian style 'true' high speed service, rather only an 'enhanced-speed' restored conventional service.  The full Chicago-MStP route would have been uncompetitive with airlines between the cities.

Mike

[captkirk_4]

It was *NOT* to be a European/Asian style 'true' high speed service, rather only an 'enhanced-speed' restored conventional service.  The full Chicago-MStP route would have been uncompetitive with airlines between the cities.

Mike

I've never understood these High Speed Rail people thinking the US is Japan or France. They take the seating stats of Chicago to Minneapolis flights to try to justify it not realizing most of these passengers are connecting on to other flights to places far, far away like California, Orlando, or Tokyo and are not final destination traffic between the two cities. No one would want to replace an hour connecting flight straight between two airport terminals with a half day train journey involving taxis between downtown train stations and airports, then check in and go through security.

[froggie]

I think you're underestimating the number of people that would simply travel between MSP and Chicago or points in between.

[Brandon]

It was *NOT* to be a European/Asian style 'true' high speed service, rather only an 'enhanced-speed' restored conventional service.  The full Chicago-MStP route would have been uncompetitive with airlines between the cities.

Mike

I've never understood these High Speed Rail people thinking the US is Japan or France. They take the seating stats of Chicago to Minneapolis flights to try to justify it not realizing most of these passengers are connecting on to other flights to places far, far away like California, Orlando, or Tokyo and are not final destination traffic between the two cities. No one would want to replace an hour connecting flight straight between two airport terminals with a half day train journey involving taxis between downtown train stations and airports, then check in and go through security.

That, and the fact that many of these folks would still need to drive anyway to get to their final destinations after being dropped off at the train station.  They don't magically get from the train station to their town somewhere well off the rails or between stations.

I think you're underestimating the number of people that would simply travel between MSP and Chicago or points in between.

I don't think he is.

[froggie]

That, and the fact that many of these folks would still need to drive anyway to get to their final destinations after being dropped off at the train station.

Unless their final destination is in town.  The problem with suburban-style development is that it's spread destinations around...almost too much.  End result is a much higher VMT level (and, conversely, traffic) than had development been more dense closer in.

I think you're underestimating the number of people that would simply travel between MSP and Chicago or points in between.

I don't think he is.

Have you ridden it or looked at the ridership numbers?  Most travel on the Empire Builder is only a few to a half-dozen stops.  Not a lot of people are riding much longer distances unless they're doing it deliberately for the leisure.

Even looking at a slightly longer distance...plenty of people who travel between MSP and Chicago without going further.