The Future of US 12 in Wisconsin

[thspfc]

Yeah I don't know what the plans are for a Sauk bypass, but it's going to be difficult for them to accquire the ROW, especially between CTH-Y and WI-60.

[mgk920]

Yeah I don't know what the plans are for a Sauk bypass, but it's going to be difficult for them to accquire the ROW, especially between CTH-Y and WI-60.

I saw some several decades old maps a few years ago that showed a bypass freeway being routed around the citys' south and west side.  I wonder if that routing is still valid.

Mike

[I-39]

The divided highway was constructed for the Ordnance Plant during WWII with concrete pavement.  In the "˜80s the original concrete and blacktop overlays were "rubble-ized"  (and removed) and replaced with a bituminous pavement.  We will see how long the overlay from 2019 lasts north and south of the S Curve project.  It certainly was a relief to have that done at least.  While the wheel tracks were extremely pothole-ridden, they could be avoided by shifting your vehicle slightly, if you weren't driving a large vehicle.  Funny how many people didn't notice that and chose to drive through the potholes. 

Maybe they're awaiting a full reconstruction until a decision is made about the Sauk City bypass.  However, I don't see that happening for at least 20 years.

South of the project area, I could definitely see the case for waiting, but north of the project area to Ski Hi Road they should've just rebuilt the pavement entirely to match the new Baraboo bypass.

[triplemultiplex]

Speed limits remain 55 mph. Considering the relatively few intersections and driveways south of Ski-hi Road, I would think it would be considered for a 65 mph upgrade–unless the narrow median over Stevens Pass drove that decision. 

In my amateur assessment, the curves through the South Range of the Baraboo Hills don't support a 65 SL.  The curves are just sharp enough and with no physical barrier between the carriageways in that narrow median, it's probably the right move to end the 65 where it does.

As to why the project wasn't more extensive to upgrade the rest of the old four lane, I think you all know the answer to that:
$$$

They got the crummiest part fixed up, so that'll have to do for the intermediate future. 

[The Ghostbuster]

For those inquiring on a possible Sauk City Bypass, here is a PDF on possible alignments from 2005 (the Near South Bypass Alternative being the preferred one): http://www.vandewalle.com/work/sauk/final/Map%2012.pdf.

Also, here is a story from 2014 about a potential Sauk City Bypass: https://www.wiscnews.com/saukprairieeagle/news/local/sauk-city-hwy-12-bypass-on-backburner/article_40e5d568-5e2f-5c96-8799-be62e0823d1c.html. I doubt anything has changed since then, or will change anytime soon.

[Joe The Dragon]

For those inquiring on a possible Sauk City Bypass, here is a PDF on possible alignments from 2005 (the Near South Bypass Alternative being the preferred one): http://www.vandewalle.com/work/sauk/final/Map%2012.pdf.

Also, here is a story from 2014 about a potential Sauk City Bypass: https://www.wiscnews.com/saukprairieeagle/news/local/sauk-city-hwy-12-bypass-on-backburner/article_40e5d568-5e2f-5c96-8799-be62e0823d1c.html. I doubt anything has changed since then, or will change anytime soon.

Can't they just do an quick 4 laneing of the rest of the 2 lane parts?

[The Ghostbuster]

Maybe, but it would require undertaking a study, approving the project, funding it, and then constructing the project. That takes many years, and much political wrangling to accomplish. Not to mention potential opposition from special interest groups and NIMBYs.

[US 12 fan]

Here is an article from May that may give some hints to what may happen in the near future for Highway 12.

https://www.hngnews.com/cambridge_deerfield/article_3866c325-34aa-561a-8878-bbf21a088a24.html

More details should be mentioned in the Connect 2050 website in the fall.

https://connect2050.wisconsindot.gov/

[SEWIGuy]

Here is an article from May that may give some hints to what may happen in the near future for Highway 12.

https://www.hngnews.com/cambridge_deerfield/article_3866c325-34aa-561a-8878-bbf21a088a24.html

More details should be mentioned in the Connect 2050 website in the fall.

https://connect2050.wisconsindot.gov/

What a terrible article:

"The DOT has long eyed making all of Highway 12 four lanes between Madison and Lake Geneva, and potentially bypassing Cambridge and Fort Atkinson."

This isn't really accurate.  They may have once wanted to do that, but expanding US-12 to four lanes hasn't been a major priority for decades now.

"Today, portions of Highway 12 are four lanes in the Whitewater and Lake Geneva areas. But it remains two lanes from Cottage Grove past Fort Atkinson."

Not only does US-12 not go to Cottage Grove, but there are no four lane portions between Dane County N and Elkhorn.  Where are the four lane portions near Whitewater???

"There have been signs, over years, that the DOT's four-lane vision persists.

The seemingly oversized U.S. Highway 12-18 and State Highway 73 interchange at Deerfield, completed in 2015, was a significant reminder."

That interchange is not in anyway "oversized."  The bridge carrying US-12/18 would have to be replaced with any expansion, and the exit ramps are simple and short.  It was put in place to get rid of the left turn movements from WI-73, which were not only dangerous, but causing big back ups.


The author is looking for something that isn't there.  Even WIDOT's look at US-12 between County N and Cambridge doesn't include expansion to four lanes.

[I-39]

There is no longer any need for further four lane US 12 upgrades between Illinois and Madison. That shipped sailed when Illinois dropped plans for FAP 420.

The only remaking thing needed is a Sauk City bypass and making the entire US 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells a freeway. Neither is going to happen anytime soon though.

[thspfc]

There is no longer any need for further four lane US 12 upgrades between Illinois and Madison. That shipped sailed when Illinois dropped plans for FAP 420.

The only remaking thing needed is a Sauk City bypass and making the entire US 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells a freeway. Neither is going to happen anytime soon though.

Well the Beltline still sucks, so there's that.

An interchange at CTH-K in Middleton is needed. An interchange at Springfield Corners would be nice but I can't imagine that ever happening, not within the next 30-40 years anyways.

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

[triplemultiplex]

By the end of the decade, the signals at CTH K and Springfield will be replaced by interchanges.  I'm calling it.
Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

[JREwing78]

The only remaking thing needed is a Sauk City bypass and making the entire US 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells a freeway. Neither is going to happen anytime soon though.

An interchange at CTH-K in Middleton is needed. An interchange at Springfield Corners would be nice but I can't imagine that ever happening, not within the next 30-40 years anyways.

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

First priority should be to eliminate all the stoplights between Middleton and Hwy 78 near Prairie du Sac, replacing all stoplights with interchanges (starting with CTH-K). Completing the 4-laning between the Dells and Middleton, removing the remaining stoplights in the process, should be the next priority. Down the road, the section climbing the bluffs south of Baraboo should be widened and rebuilt to interstate standards. Then, as traffic demands, replace all intersections with overpasses or interchanges as traffic dictates.

Completion of 4-laning should be completed before WisDOT starts the planned rebuild/widening of I-39/90/94 between Madison and Portage. That would allow US-12 to take the edge off traffic issues caused by the I-39/90/94 widening work.

[I-39]

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

If the rest of the corridor is, then yes it will. And that would probably be the easiest segment to upgrade.

Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

Yeah right. Considering there isn't even a study opened right now, it'll be 15-20 years minimum before any construction materializes there.

[SEWIGuy]

Four-laning US-12/18 from County N to Cambridge may make sense eventually too.  But the thing is this is not because US-12 is some type of "through corridor," but because of Madison commuter traffic.  This is why, despite the fact that it is mapped, we aren't going to see a bypass of Fort Atkinson anytime soon, nor will we see a "cut the corner" from Whitewater to Elkhorn.

[Joe The Dragon]

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

If the rest of the corridor is, then yes it will. And that would probably be the easiest segment to upgrade.

Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

Yeah right. Considering there isn't even a study opened right now, it'll be 15-20 years minimum before any construction materializes there.

sauk city can have an quick thing done to fill in the 4 lane gap.

[I-39]

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

If the rest of the corridor is, then yes it will. And that would probably be the easiest segment to upgrade.

Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

Yeah right. Considering there isn't even a study opened right now, it'll be 15-20 years minimum before any construction materializes there.

sauk city can have an quick thing done to fill in the 4 lane gap.

No, it will require an expensive crossing over the Wisconsin River.

[Revive 755]

There is no longer any need for further four lane US 12 upgrades between Illinois and Madison. That shipped sailed when Illinois dropped plans for FAP 420.

The only remaking thing needed is a Sauk City bypass and making the entire US 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells a freeway. Neither is going to happen anytime soon though.

Disagree:

1) There is the higher quality WI 50 connection to the Kenosha area.

2) There's still a lot of traffic using the subpar parts of US 12 in Illinois to Wisconsin.

[SEWIGuy]

There is no longer any need for further four lane US 12 upgrades between Illinois and Madison. That shipped sailed when Illinois dropped plans for FAP 420.

The only remaking thing needed is a Sauk City bypass and making the entire US 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells a freeway. Neither is going to happen anytime soon though.

Disagree:

1) There is the higher quality WI 50 connection to the Kenosha area.

2) There's still a lot of traffic using the subpar parts of US 12 in Illinois to Wisconsin.

I don't really agree with #2.  Having lived just off one of the "subpar parts of US-12 in Wisconsin" for many years, you would see *some* Illinois plates and increase in traffic on summer weekends, but it hardly enough to cause significant issues.  For instance, the traffic in downtown Fort Atkinson would still be less than what a normal weekday commute would see.

I guess it depends on your definition of "a lot."

[Joe The Dragon]

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

If the rest of the corridor is, then yes it will. And that would probably be the easiest segment to upgrade.

Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

Yeah right. Considering there isn't even a study opened right now, it'll be 15-20 years minimum before any construction materializes there.

sauk city can have an quick thing done to fill in the 4 lane gap.

No, it will require an expensive crossing over the Wisconsin River.

looks to be 4 lanes now

[I-39]

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

If the rest of the corridor is, then yes it will. And that would probably be the easiest segment to upgrade.

Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

Yeah right. Considering there isn't even a study opened right now, it'll be 15-20 years minimum before any construction materializes there.

sauk city can have an quick thing done to fill in the 4 lane gap.

No, it will require an expensive crossing over the Wisconsin River.

looks to be 4 lanes now

But it is not freeway/expressway grade. That will require a bypass, which there are no plans for at the moment.

[JREwing78]

I don't think it has to be a freeway between Prairie du Sac and Baraboo though.

If the rest of the corridor is, then yes it will. And that would probably be the easiest segment to upgrade.

Also, Sauk City bypass will be at least under construction, if not, done.

Yeah right. Considering there isn't even a study opened right now, it'll be 15-20 years minimum before any construction materializes there.

sauk city can have an quick thing done to fill in the 4 lane gap.

No, it will require an expensive crossing over the Wisconsin River.

looks to be 4 lanes now

But it is not freeway/expressway grade. That will require a bypass, which there are no plans for at the moment.

And, without that freeway grade bridge over the Wisconsin River, there is no point in upgrading anything else. All further 4-laning would do is pull traffic that would've taken I-39/90/94 instead and cause more accidents in Prairie du Sac. Once that bridge is built, then it's a no-brainer to bring the existing 2/4 lane up to modern WisDOT expressway standards (with provision to convert to freeway later).

[JREwing78]

There's a general lack of expressway/freeway connectivity between the communities south of Milwaukee along I-94 and communities along I-39/90. Obviously, Madison is directly connected to Milwaukee, but any freeway connection to Racine or Kenosha requires driving through Milwaukee. Janesville has no direct freeway/expressway connection eastward. Beloit technically has an all freeway/expressway route, but it requires a couple of turns along the way.

Is such a connection warranted? I think so. Judging by the high level of traffic on County N, County A, and US-14 in Rock County, I could see a future need for one or two expressway segments. Frankly, US-14 is ready for it now, but there's not a sufficiently loud, vocal demand to make it happen. County N is very busy for a county road and frankly should be adopted by WisDOT as an extension of Hwy 20, but passing lanes and other modernization will keep it safe as a 2-lane for another 20-30 years.

I could see WisDOT making expressway-grade connections between Newville and Whitewater, and between Janesville and Darien, but leaving US-12 as 2-lane through Cambridge and Fort Atkinson, based on traffic demands.

[SEWIGuy]

I could see WisDOT making expressway-grade connections between Newville and Whitewater, and between Janesville and Darien, but leaving US-12 as 2-lane through Cambridge and Fort Atkinson, based on traffic demands.

I can see your point about County N and WI-59 between Whitewater and Newville.  I do think that when they did the Fort Atkinson south bypass study, a relocated US-12 (or at least an improvement along that corridor) was one of the options.

But I think a four lane expressway is a long ways off.

[I-39]

There's a general lack of expressway/freeway connectivity between the communities south of Milwaukee along I-94 and communities along I-39/90.

And that's ok. Existing highways are sufficient. Not every corner of every area needs freeway/expressway grade highways. Lake County IL is heavily populated and survives without an E/W freeway.

WisDOT is going to have a lot of expense maintaining all the new freeway/expressway grade highways built in the last three decades. They need to focus on rebuilding and improving their interstates before anything.