News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

The Future of US 12 in Wisconsin

Started by US 12 fan, August 20, 2017, 09:46:11 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

triplemultiplex

My case for continued improvements to US 12 between Madison and Elkhorn is once there is a bypass of Ft. Atkinson and the 'corner cut' is complete, US 12 to I-43 becomes an attractive alternate route between Madison and Milwaukee.  2 lanes would be just fine for this purpose.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 21, 2017, 12:40:15 PM
I also think looking at some improvements between Madison and Fort Atkinson make sense.  I don't know if this would be addressed when they look at the I-39/90 interchange, but the Millpond Road and County AB intersections just east of the interchange are terrible. 

AB has an interchange in its future.  The City of Madison sees a four-lane divided arterial road running north on AB from there transitioning into Sprecher Rd and on north toward Sun Prairie.
Millpond would get an overpass and some dumb little jughandle ramps in the last preferred alternative for the Beltline interchange before it was put on hold for lack of funding.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 20, 2017, 09:56:57 PM
And the expense and controversy of cutting through the Kettle Moraine likely means it will politically never fly.

A two-lane option would not need any more r/w through the Kettle Moraine.

I wouldn't mind seeing some of those signals on the Whitewater bypass replaced with super-2 interchanges, now that I think about it.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."


GeekJedi

Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 28, 2017, 09:59:14 PM
My case for continued improvements to US 12 between Madison and Elkhorn is once there is a bypass of Ft. Atkinson and the 'corner cut' is complete, US 12 to I-43 becomes an attractive alternate route between Madison and Milwaukee.  2 lanes would be just fine for this purpose.

Except that proposal will likely never actually happen. Well, perhaps the Ft. Atkinson bypass, but I don't see much else happening there for political and financial reasons. I see the upgraded I-90 and the shiny new 70MPH speed limits being the solution for now, with any preferred route being US-12 to I-43 to I-90.

"Wisconsin - The Concurrency State!"

SEWIGuy

#27
Quote from: GeekJedi on August 29, 2017, 07:01:02 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 28, 2017, 09:59:14 PM
My case for continued improvements to US 12 between Madison and Elkhorn is once there is a bypass of Ft. Atkinson and the 'corner cut' is complete, US 12 to I-43 becomes an attractive alternate route between Madison and Milwaukee.  2 lanes would be just fine for this purpose.

Except that proposal will likely never actually happen. Well, perhaps the Ft. Atkinson bypass, but I don't see much else happening there for political and financial reasons. I see the upgraded I-90 and the shiny new 70MPH speed limits being the solution for now, with any preferred route being US-12 to I-43 to I-90.


Yeah I live in Fort Atkinson, I can't see US-12 being a legitimate alternative to I-94 from Madison to Milwaukee.  I don't even take it now when I want an alternative. 

EDIT:  In looking this up, the better alternative to I-94 from say Monona to MKE airport is I-39/90 south, WI-59 east, County N to Whitewater, US-12 east, and WI-20 east to East Troy.

I-39/90 swings eastward south of Madison, and with the increased speed limit, makes it a better alternative than US-12.

dvferyance

Probably the best alternative is to take 19 to Watertown then 16 to Waukesha. Much of 16 is already a freeway or at least 4 lane.

I-39

Quote from: GeekJedi on August 29, 2017, 07:01:02 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 28, 2017, 09:59:14 PM
My case for continued improvements to US 12 between Madison and Elkhorn is once there is a bypass of Ft. Atkinson and the 'corner cut' is complete, US 12 to I-43 becomes an attractive alternate route between Madison and Milwaukee.  2 lanes would be just fine for this purpose.

Except that proposal will likely never actually happen. Well, perhaps the Ft. Atkinson bypass, but I don't see much else happening there for political and financial reasons. I see the upgraded I-90 and the shiny new 70MPH speed limits being the solution for now, with any preferred route being US-12 to I-43 to I-90.

The Ft. Atkinson bypass will never happen as there is too much opposition. And at this point, it is not really needed.

It's time to get real about further freeway upgrades to US 12 between Elkhorn and Madison. It will never connect to anything in Illinois (and won't draw a ton of traffic as a result) and with the recent/ongoing rebuilding & widening of I-39/90 between Madison and I-294, that should be more than enough to handle traffic for a while. Plus, building more freeway leads to more maintenance costs in the future, and WisDOT already overbuilt elsewhere in the state, so dollars will be stretched very thin in the future. 

US 12 fan

It's been three years since I first brought this up. I know the Fort Atkinson bypass is dead and will not happen. I am curious about the Sauk City bypass now that it is 2020. Any updates on this?

The Ghostbuster

I doubt a Sauk City bypass will be built anytime soon. Maybe in 20 to 30 years, but probably not sooner.

JREwing78

What 4-laning US-12 between Madison and Elkhorn does is make an attractive alternative for traffic destined for Lake Geneva, Kenosha and the northern Chicago suburbs. It also would relieve a lot of traffic pressure on the existing US-12/Hwy 67 north of Elkhorn, as Whitewater-bound traffic has a more direct path.

Honestly, I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee would likely be 6-laned before a 4-lane US-12 east of Madison happens.

SEWIGuy

Right. The four lanes may one day extend to Cambridge but I really doubt it will ever go further than that. Most of the traffic is local and 99% of the time is completely manageable with two lanes.

I-39

There is no need for any further four lane upgrades on US 12 between Madison and the Illinois border, considering nothing will be done on the Illinois side.

The next area of focus needs to be the Sauk City bypass and removing the stoplights between the Beltline and Sauk City.

Also, the pavement from just south of Ski Hi Road down to Business 12/Prairie Road needs to be rebuilt to modern specifications.

paulthemapguy

A Sauk City bypass would require a new and very expensive bridge over the Wisconsin River, so it would probably never be worth the price.
Avatar is the last interesting highway I clinched.
My website! http://www.paulacrossamerica.com Now featuring all of Ohio!
My USA Shield Gallery https://flic.kr/s/aHsmHwJRZk
TM Clinches https://bit.ly/2UwRs4O

National collection status: 361/425. Only 64 route markers remain

Joe The Dragon

Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 25, 2020, 11:26:01 PM
A Sauk City bypass would require a new and very expensive bridge over the Wisconsin River, so it would probably never be worth the price.
they can fill in the 4 lane gap easy with no bridge work.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: I-39 on February 25, 2020, 09:14:37 PM
There is no need for any further four lane upgrades on US 12 between Madison and the Illinois border, considering nothing will be done on the Illinois side.

The next area of focus needs to be the Sauk City bypass and removing the stoplights between the Beltline and Sauk City.

Also, the pavement from just south of Ski Hi Road down to Business 12/Prairie Road needs to be rebuilt to modern specifications.


I would suggest that extending the four laning incrementally to Cambridge over the course of the next 20 years will be necessary as more and more people commute to Madison along that route.

The Ghostbuster

I doubt US 12/18 will be four-laned east of CTH-N anytime soon. The DOT did a corridor study of the US 12 corridor between CTH-N and STH-26 from 2011-2014): https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12nto26/default.aspx. It looked at intersection improvements, and a couple realignments, but did not investigate the possibility of four-laning the corridor. US 12 will probably remain a two lane highway indefinitely.

dvferyance

Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2020, 11:36:11 AM
Quote from: I-39 on February 25, 2020, 09:14:37 PM
There is no need for any further four lane upgrades on US 12 between Madison and the Illinois border, considering nothing will be done on the Illinois side.

The next area of focus needs to be the Sauk City bypass and removing the stoplights between the Beltline and Sauk City.

Also, the pavement from just south of Ski Hi Road down to Business 12/Prairie Road needs to be rebuilt to modern specifications.


I would suggest that extending the four laning incrementally to Cambridge over the course of the next 20 years will be necessary as more and more people commute to Madison along that route.
I agree there is already an interchange at WI-73 would make perfect sense.

hobsini2

Quote from: dvferyance on March 20, 2020, 06:26:20 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2020, 11:36:11 AM
Quote from: I-39 on February 25, 2020, 09:14:37 PM
There is no need for any further four lane upgrades on US 12 between Madison and the Illinois border, considering nothing will be done on the Illinois side.

The next area of focus needs to be the Sauk City bypass and removing the stoplights between the Beltline and Sauk City.

Also, the pavement from just south of Ski Hi Road down to Business 12/Prairie Road needs to be rebuilt to modern specifications.


I would suggest that extending the four laning incrementally to Cambridge over the course of the next 20 years will be necessary as more and more people commute to Madison along that route.
I agree there is already an interchange at WI-73 would make perfect sense.
And that interchange with 73 was desperately needed ages ago.  Having 73 thru traffic come to a T at 2 different points with 12-18 was not a good idea and did result in many accidents.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

triplemultiplex

A Sauk City bypass would be nice, but what's urgently needed in that corridor is an interchange at CTH K just north of Middleton.  That traffic light suuuuuuxxxxx.
Why this isn't a higher priority is stupefying.  It's not just a matter of inconvenience; that intersection is glazed with skid marks of countless vehicles traveling at freeway speeds suddenly having to slam on the brakes for a damn light that's changing.  It should have been part of the four lane conversion/Middleton bypass ~16 years ago.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

JREwing78

Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 20, 2020, 08:24:12 PM
A Sauk City bypass would be nice, but what's urgently needed in that corridor is an interchange at CTH K just north of Middleton.  That traffic light suuuuuuxxxxx.
Why this isn't a higher priority is stupefying.  It's not just a matter of inconvenience; that intersection is glazed with skid marks of countless vehicles traveling at freeway speeds suddenly having to slam on the brakes for a damn light that's changing.  It should have been part of the four lane conversion/Middleton bypass ~16 years ago.

This. The stoplights at Hwy 19 and County P should be eliminated as well. It looks like a freeway. It drives like a freeway. It has no business having stoplights on it.

SEWIGuy

I agree all of those should be removed.  But wasn't the Middleton bypassed designed almost 25 years ago?  When it opened those intersections weren't problems.  To say they should have always been designed that way is Monday morning quarterbacking. 

JREwing78

Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 21, 2020, 08:27:46 AM
I agree all of those should be removed.  But wasn't the Middleton bypassed designed almost 25 years ago?  When it opened those intersections weren't problems.  To say they should have always been designed that way is Monday morning quarterbacking. 

Perhaps, but it also signals to me a significant lack of foresight on the part of WisDOT. It's the most direct route from Waunakee to the west side of the Madison metro. To not expect that would quickly become a traffic hazard is silly. There should have been at least ROW acquired in anticipation of having to put an interchange in at County K.

midwesternroadguy

Not only is there a safety issue on US 12, but there is a serious capacity issue for County Trunk K, particularly at peak hour at that intersection.  This will only worsen, bringing up the need for a North Beltline/Mendota Parkway.  Unfortunately, the most recent proposal was to upgrade STH 19, 113, County Trunks M and K.  With the new roundabout at the 19,113, County I intersection, that routing seems even more convoluted for a bypass.  Throw in the fact that Waunakee is aggressively developing land north of M, there isn't much hope for a new corridor, regardless of the level of political resistance.  Sigh. 

DaBigE

Quote from: JREwing78 on March 21, 2020, 10:24:11 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 21, 2020, 08:27:46 AM
I agree all of those should be removed.  But wasn't the Middleton bypassed designed almost 25 years ago?  When it opened those intersections weren't problems.  To say they should have always been designed that way is Monday morning quarterbacking. 

Perhaps, but it also signals to me a significant lack of foresight on the part of WisDOT. It's the most direct route from Waunakee to the west side of the Madison metro. To not expect that would quickly become a traffic hazard is silly. There should have been at least ROW acquired in anticipation of having to put an interchange in at County K.

Wait, are we talking about the same WisDOT that so many accuse of overbuilding?

As SEWIGuy mentioned, this portion of 12 was designed almost a quarter century ago. I doubt WisDOT was planning on how much traffic Middleton ended up creating west of the beltline, nor a little place called Epic.
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

mgk920

Had the Interstate Highway Act not been passed in the mid-1950s, IMHO, a major cross-country 'ticket' tollway would likely have been built in the US 12 corridor via Elkhorn and roughly following the modern-day Beltline around Madison, by the late 1950s.

Mike

I-39

Quote from: DaBigE on March 23, 2020, 02:25:35 AM
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 21, 2020, 10:24:11 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 21, 2020, 08:27:46 AM
I agree all of those should be removed.  But wasn't the Middleton bypassed designed almost 25 years ago?  When it opened those intersections weren't problems.  To say they should have always been designed that way is Monday morning quarterbacking. 

Perhaps, but it also signals to me a significant lack of foresight on the part of WisDOT. It's the most direct route from Waunakee to the west side of the Madison metro. To not expect that would quickly become a traffic hazard is silly. There should have been at least ROW acquired in anticipation of having to put an interchange in at County K.

Wait, are we talking about the same WisDOT that so many accuse of overbuilding?

As SEWIGuy mentioned, this portion of 12 was designed almost a quarter century ago. I doubt WisDOT was planning on how much traffic Middleton ended up creating west of the beltline, nor a little place called Epic.

The volumes were already there to support an interchange when the four lane opened, it's only been getting worse since. Putting stop lights on any high volume expressway is a disaster.

A US 12/County K interchange definitely needs to be a priority within the next decade.

thspfc

Quote from: I-39 on March 23, 2020, 01:23:59 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on March 23, 2020, 02:25:35 AM
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 21, 2020, 10:24:11 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 21, 2020, 08:27:46 AM
I agree all of those should be removed.  But wasn't the Middleton bypassed designed almost 25 years ago?  When it opened those intersections weren't problems.  To say they should have always been designed that way is Monday morning quarterbacking. 

Perhaps, but it also signals to me a significant lack of foresight on the part of WisDOT. It's the most direct route from Waunakee to the west side of the Madison metro. To not expect that would quickly become a traffic hazard is silly. There should have been at least ROW acquired in anticipation of having to put an interchange in at County K.

Wait, are we talking about the same WisDOT that so many accuse of overbuilding?

As SEWIGuy mentioned, this portion of 12 was designed almost a quarter century ago. I doubt WisDOT was planning on how much traffic Middleton ended up creating west of the beltline, nor a little place called Epic.

The volumes were already there to support an interchange when the four lane opened, it's only been getting worse since. Putting stop lights on any high volume expressway is a disaster.

A US 12/County K interchange definitely needs to be a priority within the next decade.
I stand by my theory that that is the longest light in Wisconsin.



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.