Wisconsin notes

[thspfc]

As is, 39/90/94 isn't really for local traffic. Too far out, and basically only interchanges with other limited-access roads. As a result, that local traffic is pushed onto Stoughton Rd.

I'm sure if WISDOT could redo things from scratch, they would build 39/90/94 closer to Stoughton Rd's current alignment than the Interstates' current alignment. That would eliminate the need for 1) a limited-access Stoughton Rd, and 2) the WI-30 connector freeway. I imagine it being a slightly longer version of I-41 in Green Bay. Separated C/D lanes between close exits, allowing for more interchanges with access to city streets.

[peterj920]

As is, 39/90/94 isn't really for local traffic. Too far out, and basically only interchanges with other limited-access roads. As a result, that local traffic is pushed onto Stoughton Rd.

I'm sure if WISDOT could redo things from scratch, they would build 39/90/94 closer to Stoughton Rd's current alignment than the Interstates' current alignment. That would eliminate the need for 1) a limited-access Stoughton Rd, and 2) the WI-30 connector freeway. I imagine it being a slightly longer version of I-41 in Green Bay. Separated C/D lanes between close exits, allowing for more interchanges with access to city streets.

I don't think WISDOT would re-do the interstate alignment. I think they're happy that I-39/I-90/I-94 doesn't carry local traffic because the interstate carries so much traffic and local traffic would cause serious congestion. US 51/Stoughton Rd keeps the interstate less congested.

However, the lack of interchanges on the far east side does make driving frustrating.

[SEWIGuy]

Why would anyone expect movements from Stoughton Road to the Beltline to be free-flowing? There's a reason why they're partially in the works for Verona Road: because they would complete US 151 so that it is consistently free-flowing from Dubuque to Madison. Traffic lights are consistent with the type of roadway US 51 is in that area.

Also, providing a US-151 free flowing through route to go to Dubuque is at best a secondary reason for the idea of a free flowing interchange at the Beltline and Verona Road.  The vast majority of traffic that goes through that interchange is local - people commuting to and from Verona and points west.

[thspfc]

Why would anyone expect movements from Stoughton Road to the Beltline to be free-flowing? There's a reason why they're partially in the works for Verona Road: because they would complete US 151 so that it is consistently free-flowing from Dubuque to Madison. Traffic lights are consistent with the type of roadway US 51 is in that area.

Also, providing a US-151 free flowing through route to go to Dubuque is at best a secondary reason for the idea of a free flowing interchange at the Beltline and Verona Road.  The vast majority of traffic that goes through that interchange is local - people commuting to and from Verona and points west.

Yeah, WISDOT isn't making decisions based on arbitrary stuff like a no-stop drive between Madison and Dubuque. On a large scale, that doesn't matter. What matters are the actual traffic conditions on US-151.

[The Ghostbuster]

I have a feeling that the previously-proposed Stage 3 upgrade of Verona Rd. (https://projects.511wi.gov/veronard/wp-content/uploads/sites/143/ss-2012nov13.pdf) will likely never happen. Verona Rd. is likely as upgraded as it is going to get. Also, I don't think Stoughton Rd. needs to be upgraded to be free-flow throughout the entire corridor (which seems like overkill to me, considering Interstates 39/90/94 are just a couple of miles to the east). The previously-proposed Alternative B (https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/51/map-propalts.pdf) with additional lanes in each direction will probably be enough of an upgrade to the US 51 corridor.

[mgk920]

As is, 39/90/94 isn't really for local traffic. Too far out, and basically only interchanges with other limited-access roads. As a result, that local traffic is pushed onto Stoughton Rd.

I'm sure if WISDOT could redo things from scratch, they would build 39/90/94 closer to Stoughton Rd's current alignment than the Interstates' current alignment. That would eliminate the need for 1) a limited-access Stoughton Rd, and 2) the WI-30 connector freeway. I imagine it being a slightly longer version of I-41 in Green Bay. Separated C/D lanes between close exits, allowing for more interchanges with access to city streets.

I don't think WISDOT would re-do the interstate alignment. I think they're happy that I-39/I-90/I-94 doesn't carry local traffic because the interstate carries so much traffic and local traffic would cause serious congestion. US 51/Stoughton Rd keeps the interstate less congested.

However, the lack of interchanges on the far east side does make driving frustrating.

Yea, but that ship sailed at least 60 years ago and before then (before the Interstate Highway Act), there were proposals (plans?) to extend the cross-country ticket-turnpike (Indiana Toll Road) through Chicago and onward at least to the MSP area, which would have served and bypassed Madison.  Stoughton Rd WOULD have been the east Beltline under that scenario.  The original stated purpose of the Interstates as to bypass major population centers to mainly serve cross-country through traffic and not local traffic, so I do agree with the light access to the existing I-39/90/94 corridor in Madison.  Yes, I can also see the existing Beltline becoming and 'odd' 3DI.

Mike

[dvferyance]

As is, 39/90/94 isn't really for local traffic. Too far out, and basically only interchanges with other limited-access roads. As a result, that local traffic is pushed onto Stoughton Rd.

I'm sure if WISDOT could redo things from scratch, they would build 39/90/94 closer to Stoughton Rd's current alignment than the Interstates' current alignment. That would eliminate the need for 1) a limited-access Stoughton Rd, and 2) the WI-30 connector freeway. I imagine it being a slightly longer version of I-41 in Green Bay. Separated C/D lanes between close exits, allowing for more interchanges with access to city streets.

I don't think WISDOT would re-do the interstate alignment. I think they're happy that I-39/I-90/I-94 doesn't carry local traffic because the interstate carries so much traffic and local traffic would cause serious congestion. US 51/Stoughton Rd keeps the interstate less congested.

However, the lack of interchanges on the far east side does make driving frustrating.

Yea, but that ship sailed at least 60 years ago and before then (before the Interstate Highway Act), there were proposals (plans?) to extend the cross-country ticket-turnpike (Indiana Toll Road) through Chicago and onward at least to the MSP area, which would have served and bypassed Madison.  Stoughton Rd WOULD have been the east Beltline under that scenario.  The original stated purpose of the Interstates as to bypass major population centers to mainly serve cross-country through traffic and not local traffic, so I do agree with the light access to the existing I-39/90/94 corridor in Madison.  Yes, I can also see the existing Beltline becoming and 'odd' 3DI.

Mike

Yeah just what we need a fifth route sharing the same pavement.

[SEWIGuy]

I just don't see WIDOT being all that interested in 3dis at all so I think we are safe from a fifth highway on the corridor. (Although the corridor DID have five highways in the past before WI-13 was truncated.)

Anyway, I think if WIDOT knew then what it knows now, it would have kept the interstate right where it is but would have developed an exit at Buckeye Road (County AB) in between I-94 and the Beltline.  I think it would have helped reduce congestion on the US-51 / Beltline interchange because a significant amount of traffic from Monona and the east side of Madison has to use the US-51 corridor to get to the interstate.

[The Ghostbuster]

There won't be any new 3dis in Wisconsin (or new 2dis for that matter). Interstates 535, 794 and 894 are all the 3dis that will likely ever exist. I certainly would not want one on the Beltline or STH-30.

[hobsini2]

There won't be any new 3dis in Wisconsin (or new 2dis for that matter). Interstates 535, 794 and 894 are all the 3dis that will likely ever exist. I certainly would not want one on the Beltline or STH-30.

I could see Wis 30 being a 3di because of its access between I-39/90/94 and Downtown. Not likely but I could see it.

[Molandfreak]

Yawn. Another "WisDOT has a vendetta against 3DIs"  hyperbolic conversation. How quickly can we forget that two numbering considerations for the I-41 corridor were 3DI numbers less than a decade ago?

It's about a lack of demand, not an imaginary hatred the DOT has for them.

[SEWIGuy]

Yawn. Another "WisDOT has a vendetta against 3DIs"  hyperbolic conversation. How quickly can we forget that two numbering considerations for the I-41 corridor were 3DI numbers less than a decade ago?

It's about a lack of demand, not an imaginary hatred the DOT has for them.

No one said WIDOT "hated" 3dis. I said that they don't seem to have interest in them - given that there are multiple interstate compatible freeways in Wisconsin that could be signed as such.  Your "lack of demand" statement isn't really accurate - WI-30, Beltline, US-12 between I-43 and the IL line, US-45 to West Bend, etc.

[Molandfreak]

Yawn. Another "WisDOT has a vendetta against 3DIs"  hyperbolic conversation. How quickly can we forget that two numbering considerations for the I-41 corridor were 3DI numbers less than a decade ago?

It's about a lack of demand, not an imaginary hatred the DOT has for them.

No one said WIDOT "hated" 3dis. I said that they don't seem to have interest in them - given that there are multiple interstate compatible freeways in Wisconsin that could be signed as such.  Your "lack of demand" statement isn't really accurate - WI-30, Beltline, US-12 between I-43 and the IL line, US-45 to West Bend, etc.

This is a rabbit hole we've been down dozens of times before. The lack of demand is from local authorities and focus groups who, to the best of my knowledge, haven't asked WisDOT to give those corridors interstate designations. I-41 happened because there was enough fanfare from local authorities to make it happen.

The fact that non-interstate freeways exist in Wisconsin proves nothing. I'm talking about the designations, not the freeways.

[mgk920]

In reality, I too see little interest ( NOT hatred nor ambivalence!) in WisDOT for the idea of designating any new I-routes in the state. It does not serve a useful purpose for them.  That said, IMHO, the most likely next future new I-route in Wisconsin is 441, but certainly not until after the currently planned six lane upgrades to I-41 are completed at the very earliest (7-8 years minimum) and any few blocks long extension of 535 when the Blatnik bridge is replaced notwithstanding.

Mike

[SEWIGuy]

Yawn. Another "WisDOT has a vendetta against 3DIs"  hyperbolic conversation. How quickly can we forget that two numbering considerations for the I-41 corridor were 3DI numbers less than a decade ago?

It's about a lack of demand, not an imaginary hatred the DOT has for them.

No one said WIDOT "hated" 3dis. I said that they don't seem to have interest in them - given that there are multiple interstate compatible freeways in Wisconsin that could be signed as such.  Your "lack of demand" statement isn't really accurate - WI-30, Beltline, US-12 between I-43 and the IL line, US-45 to West Bend, etc.

This is a rabbit hole we've been down dozens of times before. The lack of demand is from local authorities and focus groups who, to the best of my knowledge, haven't asked WisDOT to give those corridors interstate designations. I-41 happened because there was enough fanfare from local authorities to make it happen.

The fact that non-interstate freeways exist in Wisconsin proves nothing. I'm talking about the designations, not the freeways.

I think you are correct that if West Bend were insistent on US-45 being a 3di, and applied pressure on WIDOT to do so, a 3di would happen.  But WIDOT isn't going out of its way to designate interstate compatible freeways as 3dis. 

Both statements can be true.

[thspfc]

WI-441 is a classic beltway 3di. Unless there's Interstate requirements it doesn't meet (which seems unlikely), the only reason it's not is that WISDOT doesn't feel like making it official.

[skluth]

You can make the same arguments for WI 172 (between I-41 and I-43) as you can for WI 441, and that part of WI 172 has been interstate compliant for its entire existence. There's been no outcry from anyone I know in Green Bay to make it an interstate.

[GeekJedi]

WI-441 is a classic beltway 3di. Unless there's Interstate requirements it doesn't meet (which seems unlikely), the only reason it's not is that WISDOT doesn't feel like making it official.

I totally agree. WisDOT is generally not in the habit of playing with highway numbering for the sake of following convention. I don't ever see WI-441 become I-441 unless a local jurisdiction specifically asks for it. There's just no reason to do so.

[SSOWorld]

it's HWY 441 to you.

[JoePCool14]

I will personally pledge $1 million of Jeff Bezos' money for WisDOT to change all WI-441 shields to I-441 shields.

[SEWIGuy]

I will personally pledge $1 million of Jeff Bezos' money for WisDOT to change all WI-441 shields to I-441 shields.

Why?

[zzcarp]

I will personally pledge $1 million of Jeff Bezos' money for WisDOT to change all WI-441 shields to I-441 shields.

Why?

As Milton Friedman said, "Nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as he spends his own."

[JoePCool14]

I will personally pledge $1 million of Jeff Bezos' money for WisDOT to change all WI-441 shields to I-441 shields.

Why?

Red, white, and blue shields are cool. 

Jokes aside, I do think it would be nice if it was recategorized as an Interstate, but I'm not going to fight for the death for it. It's more of a "would be nice" sort of thing.

[mgk920]

I will personally pledge $1 million of Jeff Bezos' money for WisDOT to change all WI-441 shields to I-441 shields.

Why?

Red, white, and blue shields are cool. 

Jokes aside, I do think it would be nice if it was recategorized as an Interstate, but I'm not going to fight for the death for it. It's more of a "would be nice" sort of thing.

Sort of mirroring the British style, 'WI 441 I'.



Mike

[dvferyance]

There won't be any new 3dis in Wisconsin (or new 2dis for that matter). Interstates 535, 794 and 894 are all the 3dis that will likely ever exist. I certainly would not want one on the Beltline or STH-30.

With the exception of 441 I would agree. I think 172 would be eligible to be a 3di but I doubt it will ever happen. WI-30 is nowhere near interstate compatible and I would not even want a 3di on the beltline too many routes already exist there.