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

Milwaukee's Stadium Freeway Future

Started by chrismarion100, April 21, 2023, 12:08:02 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

chrismarion100

There is currently a study called "Reimagining WIS 175 Study" which will find alternatives for the future of the WIS 175 corridor. A Public Involvement Meeting is planned for Thursday, May 11 ​from 4 pm-7 pm at Washington Park Senior Center 4420 West Vliet Street, Milwaukee.
Relevant Links
WisDOT study website: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/se/175study/default.aspx
Online comments site where you can input what you would want to see https://graef.mysocialpinpoint.com/wisdot175/map#/


mgk920

The anti-freeway people in metro Milwaukeeland have been salivating over this one for many years now, too.


Mike

SEWIGuy

As they should. It's useless north of the interstate.

StogieGuy7

Quote from: chrismarion100 on April 21, 2023, 12:08:02 AM
There is currently a study called "Reimagining WIS 175 Study" which will find alternatives for the future of the WIS 175 corridor. A Public Involvement Meeting is planned for Thursday, May 11 ​from 4 pm-7 pm at Washington Park Senior Center 4420 West Vliet Street, Milwaukee.
Relevant Links
WisDOT study website: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/se/175study/default.aspx
Online comments site where you can input what you would want to see https://graef.mysocialpinpoint.com/wisdot175/map#/

The word "reimagining" is always a red flag. It means that the people positing a given plan are marketing it as one thing, when the true plan is something that's not quite what you're led to believe - and a whole lot less desirable.

silverback1065

Wasn't this supposed to be a much longer freeway? I support removing stubs and unfinished freeways, not the ones that actually were completed fully. the stubs tend to not be very useful but it depends on the city.

Henry

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2023, 09:41:03 AM
Wasn't this supposed to be a much longer freeway? I support removing stubs and unfinished freeways, not the ones that actually were completed fully. the stubs tend to not be very useful but it depends on the city.
In fact, it was proposed to end at Port Washington to the north, and I-43/I-894 to the south. The northern extension included interchanges with two unbuilt freeways (Park West and Bay, plus Fond du Lac). A parking lot has been built on top of what would've been the southern terminus.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

SEWIGuy

Quote from: StogieGuy7 on April 21, 2023, 08:53:23 AM
Quote from: chrismarion100 on April 21, 2023, 12:08:02 AM
There is currently a study called "Reimagining WIS 175 Study" which will find alternatives for the future of the WIS 175 corridor. A Public Involvement Meeting is planned for Thursday, May 11 ​from 4 pm-7 pm at Washington Park Senior Center 4420 West Vliet Street, Milwaukee.
Relevant Links
WisDOT study website: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/se/175study/default.aspx
Online comments site where you can input what you would want to see https://graef.mysocialpinpoint.com/wisdot175/map#/

The word "reimagining" is always a red flag. It means that the people positing a given plan are marketing it as one thing, when the true plan is something that's not quite what you're led to believe - and a whole lot less desirable.



In this case, there is nothing less desirable than what already exists.  It's useless.

Keeping the freeway south of I-94 to National Avenue is fine.  It helps with parking around American Family Field and gets people through the Valley otherwise.  There is nothing that the north stub does that can't be done better with a nice, surface boulevard.

The Ghostbuster

I would leave the freeway mostly intact, only making the portion north of the W. Lloyd St. overpass a boulevard (although I could live with making it a four-lane 45 MPH parkway). I would remove the ramps at the Stadium North Freeway's northern terminus and have the mainline end at a signaled intersection at Lisbon Ave., where the Associated Bank building once stood. I would also add exit numbers to Brewers Boulevard and the Stadium North Freeway: with the interchange at the American Family Field being Exit 1A; Interstate 94 East would be 1B and 94 West 1C (they would keep these numbers even after the Stadium Interchange is reconstructed as a diverging-diamond interchange); Wisconsin Ave./Bluemound Rd./US 18 would be 1D; State Street/Vliet Street would be 1E; Washington Blvd. would be 2A, and Lloyd St. would be 2B.

triplemultiplex

As it exists, the Stadium North Freeway is a barrier between Washington Park and the Washington Heights neighborhood. 
I would retain the split diamond at Wisconsin & Wells and the bridge over the Menomonee Valley, but north of where the bridge lands, the downgrade should happen.

The old freeway should either direct feed 47th St or become a small boulevard built along the eastern edge of the existing r/w.  The former allows one to expand Washington Park west.  The latter opens a path between the boulevard and 47th St for new homes.

I see the first at-grade intersection to be at Martin Drive where NB on/off ramps currently exist.

The boulevard would be constructed similar to the ones that already exist in the neighborhood.  It would be a good fit.

The time is coming to do something as the existing overpasses over the freeway trench will be aging out soon.  Certainly makes more sense to me to remove the future maintenance burden given the low utility of the Stadium North.

I do think it makes sense to retain the split diamond at Wisconsin & Wells, like I said, because of the topography.  It would make for an awkward hill to try and bring WI 175 up to the 'surface' grade only to have it plunge back down over the Menomonee River.  Then one is also looking at an extremely complicated 5-way intersection with Wisconsin Ave, Bluemound Rd & WI 175 if one tries to bring it all up to the same grade.  It'll be simpler to retain the existing grade separations at this location.

North of the Valley, though, fill it all in.  There are a lot of better uses for that giant r/w than saving cars one minute.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

mgk920

Quote from: Henry on April 21, 2023, 10:03:13 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2023, 09:41:03 AM
Wasn't this supposed to be a much longer freeway? I support removing stubs and unfinished freeways, not the ones that actually were completed fully. the stubs tend to not be very useful but it depends on the city.
In fact, it was proposed to end at Port Washington to the north, and I-43/I-894 to the south. The northern extension included interchanges with two unbuilt freeways (Park West and Bay, plus Fond du Lac). A parking lot has been built on top of what would've been the southern terminus.

In fact, one can easily see where the ramps, bridges and roadways of the north end of that freeway were originally planned to be at the I-43/WI 57 split by Port Washington.

Mike

triplemultiplex

#10
The "Saukville Interchange" is an interesting place.
Clearly a wide r/w for a much larger interchange is seen in the parcels:



Throw on the 1 foot elevation contours and one can see the grading of a ghost ramp in the median of I-43:



I long assumed the grading you can see from the highway as you're passing through this interchange was for a SB WI 57 -> NB I-43 ramp that was never built, thus making it a directional Y interchange.  But looking at the curve and angle of that grading now, it seems more like it was intended for a ramp coming in from the east:



The lack of any grading in the median of WI 57 for my assumed ramp suggests they were thinking about the Stadium North Freeway coming in from the west some day at the time this interchange was constructed.  The parcel boundary in the northeast quadrant does suggest it would have been a full access interchange since there'd be no need to have the r/w shaped like that if the intent wasn't to have a ramp from SB I-43 to NB WI 57.

This contrasts with the r/w west of the freeway where no extra was acquired (or if it was, it was sold back). Except for the one parcel on the north slope of the hill SB WI 57 cuts through. That parcel line mirrors pretty well the curve of a ramp from SB WI 57 to WB on the Stadium Freeway.

Based on this, I think I can sketch out the interchange WisDOT had in mind 50 years ago.  I might do that this weekend.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

mgk920

Also the space between the NB WI 57 roadway and the SB I-43 bridge above it.  There is enough room for another bridge between them.

The view from NB WI 57:

https://goo.gl/maps/htHtjj8zb9Xbwo2y7

Mike

Big John

^^ And the bridge plans for that overpass specifically show a "future" Stadium North freeway bridge.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2023, 09:41:03 AM
Wasn't this supposed to be a much longer freeway? I support removing stubs and unfinished freeways, not the ones that actually were completed fully. the stubs tend to not be very useful but it depends on the city.
I don't, one day in the future if we can ever get our costs down we can build freeway tunnels in cities and these stubs will prove useful.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: mgk920 on April 21, 2023, 12:28:35 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 21, 2023, 10:03:13 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2023, 09:41:03 AM
Wasn't this supposed to be a much longer freeway? I support removing stubs and unfinished freeways, not the ones that actually were completed fully. the stubs tend to not be very useful but it depends on the city.
In fact, it was proposed to end at Port Washington to the north, and I-43/I-894 to the south. The northern extension included interchanges with two unbuilt freeways (Park West and Bay, plus Fond du Lac). A parking lot has been built on top of what would've been the southern terminus.

In fact, one can easily see where the ramps, bridges and roadways of the north end of that freeway were originally planned to be at the I-43/WI 57 split by Port Washington.

Mike


Jeez, what a disaster that would have been.  The anti-freeway sentiment in some cities is justified based on history like this.

thspfc

I agree with most in this thread. Definitely downgrade the Stadium Fwy north of 94. Keep the interchange with Miller Way. As for the interchange with 94 itself, I would vote for a directional T/diamond hybrid, like I-41/WI-29/Shawano Ave in Green Bay, with the free-flow ramps facing south for Brewers traffic.

mgk920

I'm pretty much expecting WisDOT to go with replacing the Stadium interchange with a DDI and downgrading the freeway north of the 'valley' to a surface boulevard.  The DDI could be engineered to handle the gameday traffic.

Mike

triplemultiplex

The odd diamond/stack hybrid that came out of the draft EIS as the "preferred" alternative is probably DOA now that the study has been resumed for the Stadium Interchange.  The DDI is looking much more reasonable.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

silverback1065

anyone have a link to a map that shows all the proposed freeways in Milwaukee?  :hmmm:

chrismarion100

If you click on the highways, it will tell you some information about the highway.
http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/milwaukee/system_map.html

skluth

I'd prefer that the boulevard start at Vliet. This would result in no freeway along the entire west side of Washington Park with the current freeway being downgraded to a parkway along the west boundary of the park. The Stadium Freeway really doesn't interfere with any populated neighborhoods south of Wisconsin. I'd keep the interchanges at Wisconsin and west of the Miller Brewery. As pointed out by others, it might be more costly to put the road at grade due to all the topographic variation than keeping the current alignment.

FWIW, here's some past Milwaukee freeway proposal history.

hobsini2

I would be in favor of having the stub north of the State St interchange become a city boulevard.
However, I would also extend the boulevard to meet with Fond du Lac Ave via Sherman Blvd to the east instead of just ending at Lisbon Ave. I know this is getting in the realm of fictional ideas but Sherman Blvd is already a 4 lane divided boulevard and it would ease traffic on Lisbon Ave if the Stadium Frwy/Blvd could get north to FDL Ave. And the bonus is you really would not have to redo Sherman Blvd north of Meinecke Ave.
Bicycles would be able to use the new boulevard from north of Olmstead Way.
This would also allow it to be a good candidate for future streetcars connecting Fond du Lac Ave and Downtown via Miller Park and National Ave.

Here is the map with my idea.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1GB6nT_bvfMIl57TEExnEyuBmFBy0i2k&usp=sharing
Here is what it could look like.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

SEWIGuy

Quote from: hobsini2 on April 23, 2023, 03:00:39 PM
I would be in favor of having the stub north of the State St interchange become a city boulevard.
However, I would also extend the boulevard to meet with Fond du Lac Ave via Sherman Blvd to the east instead of just ending at Lisbon Ave. I know this is getting in the realm of fictional ideas but Sherman Blvd is already a 4 lane divided boulevard and it would ease traffic on Lisbon Ave if the Stadium Frwy/Blvd could get north to FDL Ave. And the bonus is you really would not have to redo Sherman Blvd north of Meinecke Ave.
Bicycles would be able to use the new boulevard from north of Olmstead Way.
This would also allow it to be a good candidate for future streetcars connecting Fond du Lac Ave and Downtown via Miller Park and National Ave.

Here is the map with my idea.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1GB6nT_bvfMIl57TEExnEyuBmFBy0i2k&usp=sharing
Here is what it could look like.

I like that. Very well thought out.

peterj920

Wis 175/Stadium Freeway and Wis 145/Fond Du Lac Freeways are at the bottom of priorities for rebuilds. The Park East was easy to tear down because it was elevated and the real estate had potential value. Turning the Stadium Freeway into a boulevard would be way more costly since it is below grade. With highway dollars limited, there are a lot higher priorities to use resources towards.

Trademark

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 22, 2023, 12:53:13 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 21, 2023, 09:41:03 AM
Wasn't this supposed to be a much longer freeway? I support removing stubs and unfinished freeways, not the ones that actually were completed fully. the stubs tend to not be very useful but it depends on the city.
I don't, one day in the future if we can ever get our costs down we can build freeway tunnels in cities and these stubs will prove useful.

Putting a freeway in a tunnel under North Milwaukee would be one of the worst decisions imaginable, and there is no way that it will be pursued even if we bring the cost down.



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.