News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Wisconsin notes

Started by mgk920, May 30, 2012, 02:33:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Roadguy

Quote from: DaBigE on June 27, 2015, 11:17:33 PM
Not entirely true. WisDOT installations rarely had a signal mounted on the vertical pole of a trombone arm installation (at least facing in the same direction as the trombone arm signal. However, mounting a vertical signal on the trombone arm support has been a standard installation in many municipalities, Appleton  being one of them, IIRC. An older WisDOT installation would have included a stop-bar signal, one mounted on the far right on a trombone arm, and one mounted on the far left (mounted behind the stop-bar signal for the opposing direction), or in the median, if one was present.

I don't see the stop-bar signal going the way of the do-do anytime soon, as that pole is a convenient place to mount at least one of the pedestrian signals. As long as you got a pole there, you might as well include a vehicular signal as well.

Dang, I forgot the Far Right is not exercised everywhere.  When I use to reside in Wisconsin the couple intersections I remembered had them and just assumed they were everywhere.  Then I looked on google and realized the far right on most signals is not there.

Still think with the new monotubes there is no need for a near right (stop bar signal head) but WisDOT has always done things their own unique way.  A pedestrian push button pole would suffice just fine.  By not requiring the stop bar signal head, on the thousands of signals statewide would could save on installation and maintenance costs.  Sure on per signal cost it's minimal much but you add together all of the new/replacements done each year and the costs add up.


SSOWorld

A unique situation exists in Prairie du Chien with no stop bar signal - but this - I believe - is a locally maintained setup. It has the monotube with 2 signals and a left side.
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

DaBigE

Quote from: Roadguy on June 28, 2015, 12:35:13 AM
Quote from: DaBigE on June 27, 2015, 11:17:33 PM
Not entirely true. WisDOT installations rarely had a signal mounted on the vertical pole of a trombone arm installation (at least facing in the same direction as the trombone arm signal. However, mounting a vertical signal on the trombone arm support has been a standard installation in many municipalities, Appleton  being one of them, IIRC. An older WisDOT installation would have included a stop-bar signal, one mounted on the far right on a trombone arm, and one mounted on the far left (mounted behind the stop-bar signal for the opposing direction), or in the median, if one was present.

I don't see the stop-bar signal going the way of the do-do anytime soon, as that pole is a convenient place to mount at least one of the pedestrian signals. As long as you got a pole there, you might as well include a vehicular signal as well.
Dang, I forgot the Far Right is not exercised everywhere.  When I use to reside in Wisconsin the couple intersections I remembered had them and just assumed they were everywhere.  Then I looked on google and realized the far right on most signals is not there.

Still think with the new monotubes there is no need for a near right (stop bar signal head) but WisDOT has always done things their own unique way.  A pedestrian push button pole would suffice just fine.  By not requiring the stop bar signal head, on the thousands of signals statewide would could save on installation and maintenance costs.  Sure on per signal cost it's minimal much but you add together all of the new/replacements done each year and the costs add up.

As of right now, the near-right is still a shall condition in the WisDOT Signal Design Manual, however, that page/section has not officially been updated since July 2006. Of course, locals don't have to follow the WisDOT manual word-for-word.

As for knock-downs, the near-right isn't knocked nearly as often as median-mounted signals. That said, I'm not sure how I feel about the near-side signals. They've been around longer than I've been alive. I agree, they are redundant given WisDOT's monotube installations, however, WisDOT seems to be a fan of redundancies when signals are concerned. If/when they start disappearing, I'll just get used to them like I have the monotubes. With monotubes spreading across the state at a rapid pace, the once ubiquitous trombone arm installations are starting to look a little strange to me now. :eyebrow:
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister

peterj920

The trombone arm is still being installed periodically.  At the U.S. 41/141 and County B interchange in Suamico, the DOT installed a new horizontal signal with a trombone arm, might have been because there's only one lane in each direction.  There were vertical flashing yellow left turn signals mounted on the ground.

In Ashwaubenon, there was also a new signal with a trombone arm installed at County G/Ridge Rd.  County G is 4 lanes, but no left turn signals were installed, which may be why the "traditional" setup was chosen.  But at County EB/Cormier Rd, they opted for a monotube with vertical signal heads.  The cost for both signals may have been split between Brown Co. and Ashwaubenon, but interesting how the same municipalities chose 2 different styles at 2 different intersections.

hobsini2

I wish that Wisconsin would have kept the trombone. Also wish Illinois did as well. The monotube is just dull.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

peterj920

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 28, 2015, 01:22:02 PM
I wish that Wisconsin would have kept the trombone. Also wish Illinois did as well. The monotube is just dull.

The trombone is still being used.  In a previous post I stated that 2 new intersections had signals installed with trombone arms, and one of them was by the DOT at the US 41-141/ County B interchange in Suamico.  If there's only one lane in each direction, I think they will probably use it since only one overhead signal is needed.  Roundabouts are more of a threat to trombone arms disappearing, in northeast Wisconsin there have been a lot of signals replaced with roundabouts. 

SSOWorld

The exact policy for the state maintained roads is replace with monotubes on multi-lane road construction projects, trombones otherwise, locally maintained roads can do what they choose.
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

hobsini2

Quote from: SSOWorld on June 28, 2015, 09:57:46 PM
The exact policy for the state maintained roads is replace with monotubes on multi-lane road construction projects, trombones otherwise, locally maintained roads can do what they choose.
Well Green Lake replaced their trombone signal at 23/49/A with monotubes despite all directions having 1 thru lane and a left turn lane and left turn signals in the islands.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

on_wisconsin

#658
Quote from: mgk920 on June 27, 2015, 10:34:49 PM
Appleton has been using Clearview blades since late 2012.

The City of Eau Claire has been using Clearview as it's default sign typeface since around 2009.

EDIT. Actually, the city uses it for pretty much everything sign related:



"Speed does not kill, suddenly becoming stationary... that's what gets you" - Jeremy Clarkson

SSOWorld

Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

Brandon

Quote from: SSOWorld on June 29, 2015, 03:38:20 PM
That's clearview???

:eyebrow:

Yes, it appears to be so.  Of course, I'm used to seeing all-caps Clearview on freeways and tollways here in Illinois.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

SSOWorld

* SSOWorld thinks he should study up.... ;)
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

on_wisconsin

#662
I took a little trip down Lake Street in Eau Claire: (click to enlarge)














(Yes, they where taken with a phone, sorry there not the best.)

As long as there is a full backplate used, as seen above, doghouse stop lights could grow on me.
"Speed does not kill, suddenly becoming stationary... that's what gets you" - Jeremy Clarkson

Milwaukee, WY

Quote from: on_wisconsin on July 02, 2015, 09:42:38 AMAs long as there is a full backplate used, as seen above, doghouse stop lights could grow on me.

I agree with you. I think they look cleaner than a five section tower. Especially when the tower is mounted so the bottom of the assembly aligns with the others (which the city of Milwaukee has done on a few monotubes on the west side).

I also wouldn't hate if if they tried the way Colorado and Wyoming used to do five section PPLTs which was a regular 3 section with the left arrows mounted next to the yellow and green. These could look a bit lopsided, but they worked well in terms of clarity. 

tchafe1978

The two segments of US 10 in Michigan and Wisconsin are now "connected":

http://www.channel3000.com/money/route-taken-by-lake-michigan-ferry-getting-new-designation/34050764

Now I know it wasn't official before this, but wasn't the ferry always thought of as connecting the two segments? Now maybe the ferry can carry US 10 shields.

Big John

Quote from: tchafe1978 on July 08, 2015, 10:14:29 AM
Now maybe the ferry can carry US 10 shields.
Already has their homemade shield

SEWIGuy

Quote from: tchafe1978 on July 08, 2015, 10:14:29 AM
The two segments of US 10 in Michigan and Wisconsin are now "connected":

http://www.channel3000.com/money/route-taken-by-lake-michigan-ferry-getting-new-designation/34050764

Now I know it wasn't official before this, but wasn't the ferry always thought of as connecting the two segments? Now maybe the ferry can carry US 10 shields.


Previously, they were two segments.  The first one in Michigan, the second Wisconsin and westward.  Similar to US-2.

Now they are considered one segment with the ferry line being part of the route.  Similar to US-101 prior to the Golden Gate.

It is a distinction without a meaningful difference.  Basically a PR thing.

The Ghostbuster

Personally, I've always considered US 10 in Michigan, and US 10 from Wisconsin westward to be one route. As for the two US 2's, they can be considered two routes. That also includes the two US 422s.

texaskdog

How long does the ferry take?  And how much time does it save?

Mrt90

#669
Quote from: texaskdog on July 08, 2015, 04:30:59 PM
How long does the ferry take?  And how much time does it save?
The Manitowoc-Ludington ferry takes 4 hours to cross Lake Michigan.  If you were literally travelling between those two cities it would probably save you a few hours, but few people actually do that.  If you were driving between Wausau, Wi and Grand Rapids, MI, or between Madison, Wi and Traverse City, MI for a couple of examples, it would probably be a little faster to drive south toward Chicago and then back north.  Unless your departure and destination is pretty close (within 50 miles or so) to Manitowoc and Ludington the ferry is probably not faster.

Rothman

At $66 a person plus $66 for your car, the cost has to be factor that comes into play as well.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

peterj920

There was actually a period in the 90s where the ferry didn't run between the 2 cities and the ferry was actually used more for railways in the past, which is probably why the ferry didn't have the US 10 designation.  The Manitowoc Ferry has to compete with the Lake Express, which is a newer ferry service that revived the route that connected the sections of US 16 between Milwaukee and Muskegon.  The SS Badger probably sees the US 10 designation as a leg up on the competition. 

JREwing78

Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2015, 05:03:15 PM
At $66 a person plus $66 for your car, the cost has to be factor that comes into play as well.

F***, it's that cheap? That's not a terrible price at all! I remember it being more expensive before.

The competition is $86.50 or $99 per adult, plus $99 for your car.


Roadguy

Quote from: Mrt90 on July 08, 2015, 04:58:39 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on July 08, 2015, 04:30:59 PM
How long does the ferry take?  And how much time does it save?
The Manitowoc-Ludington ferry takes 4 hours to cross Lake Michigan.  If you were literally travelling between those two cities it would probably save you a few hours, but few people actually do that.  If you were driving between Wausau, Wi and Grand Rapids, MI, or between Madison, Wi and Traverse City, MI for a couple of examples, it would probably be a little faster to drive south toward Chicago and then back north.  Unless your departure and destination is pretty close (within 50 miles or so) to Manitowoc and Ludington the ferry is probably not faster.

Does this include the time you sit in traffic through Chicago or assume you make it through there with only minor delays?

DaBigE

Quote from: Roadguy on July 08, 2015, 10:45:07 PM
Quote from: Mrt90 on July 08, 2015, 04:58:39 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on July 08, 2015, 04:30:59 PM
How long does the ferry take?  And how much time does it save?
The Manitowoc-Ludington ferry takes 4 hours to cross Lake Michigan.  If you were literally travelling between those two cities it would probably save you a few hours, but few people actually do that.  If you were driving between Wausau, Wi and Grand Rapids, MI, or between Madison, Wi and Traverse City, MI for a couple of examples, it would probably be a little faster to drive south toward Chicago and then back north.  Unless your departure and destination is pretty close (within 50 miles or so) to Manitowoc and Ludington the ferry is probably not faster.

Does this include the time you sit in traffic through Chicago or assume you make it through there with only minor delays?

What about tolls? It's been years since I made the trip from WI to MI via IL and IN. How much does that trip cost these days? The value of being able to avoid Chicagoland traffic alone has got to be worth a decent amount of money.
"We gotta find this road, it's like Bob's road!" - Rabbit, Twister



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.