Started this thread to talk about projects and traffic in Madison.
With The Beltline frequently backing up westbound due to congestion at the US 151/US 18 Verona Rd Interchage, should the DOT expedite phase 3 of the Verona Rd Project to provide free flow ramps?
We've been advocating that for years.
Mike
Why didn't they do that to begin with? Why waste all that money on that stupid SPUI with the three left turn lanes (that still backs up onto the westbound Beltline) if they were going to make it a free flow eventually?
IIRC, it was a combination of cost and ROW issues in the southeast corner. And unless WisDOT has finished up the construction on Verona Rd (US 18/151), that may be contributing to the above-mentioned backups onto the Beltline.
Quote from: froggie on February 25, 2019, 09:30:24 AM
IIRC, it was a combination of cost and ROW issues in the southeast corner. And unless WisDOT has finished up the construction on Verona Rd (US 18/151), that may be contributing to the above-mentioned backups onto the Beltline.
Also, remember that this is in Madison, WI.
'nuff said.
:rolleyes:
Mike
I feel like stage 3 is something WISDOT should've done in the first place. Now that they've done stage 1 and stage 2, they're going to have to redo everything they've done before on Verona Rd southwest of the interchange.
Here's the map for stage 3 if anyone wants to look at it:
https://projects.511wi.gov/veronard/wp-content/uploads/sites/143/map-altstage3.pdf
I'll be dead before this happens.
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 25, 2019, 05:34:22 PM
I feel like stage 3 is something WISDOT should've done in the first place. Now that they've done stage 1 and stage 2, they're going to have to redo everything they've done before on Verona Rd southwest of the interchange.
Here's the map for stage 3 if anyone wants to look at it:
https://projects.511wi.gov/veronard/wp-content/uploads/sites/143/map-altstage3.pdf
Including that super-massive overcrossing that is in front of the Home Depot. I chalk this up to the NIMBYs and enviro-whackos who are endemic in that general area. I fully agree, this should have been done in the first place.
:banghead:
Mike
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 25, 2019, 09:28:50 PM
I'll be dead before this happens.
Second that statement. When they proceeded with phase 1 & 2 it basically eliminated a chance in the future to proceed with phase 3.
Another issue is the way the cities of Madison and Fitchburg allowed for the areas around Verona Road to develop. Intersections right next to other intersections, no attempts to control nearby access... they call them planners but it amazing how little foresight so many of them have. It should be logical to not place two heavily used intersections within 200' of one another (frontage road and heavily used state highway) but they clearly missed the memo on that one.
Quote from: Roadguy on February 26, 2019, 03:59:40 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 25, 2019, 09:28:50 PM
I'll be dead before this happens.
Second that statement. When they proceeded with phase 1 & 2 it basically eliminated a chance in the future to proceed with phase 3.
Another issue is the way the cities of Madison and Fitchburg allowed for the areas around Verona Road to develop. Intersections right next to other intersections, no attempts to control nearby access... they call them planners but it amazing how little foresight so many of them have. It should be logical to not place two heavily used intersections within 200' of one another (frontage road and heavily used state highway) but they clearly missed the memo on that one.
It wasn't the local development and the intersections around them that caused the problem. That area has been built up that way since the 70s and 80s and by and large wasn't difficult to get around.
The back-ups started occurring when Verona and areas around there became more commuter-type communities. In the 1970s and 80s, Verona was a dinky farm town and Mount Horeb may as well have been the end of the earth. Now both have a significant portion of people who commute up to Madison every day - and there is only a couple ways for them to get there. So I can understand why Madison and Fitchburg aren't happy about cutting off access to those businesses.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 26, 2019, 09:27:06 AM
Quote from: Roadguy on February 26, 2019, 03:59:40 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 25, 2019, 09:28:50 PM
I'll be dead before this happens.
Second that statement. When they proceeded with phase 1 & 2 it basically eliminated a chance in the future to proceed with phase 3.
Another issue is the way the cities of Madison and Fitchburg allowed for the areas around Verona Road to develop. Intersections right next to other intersections, no attempts to control nearby access... they call them planners but it amazing how little foresight so many of them have. It should be logical to not place two heavily used intersections within 200' of one another (frontage road and heavily used state highway) but they clearly missed the memo on that one.
It wasn't the local development and the intersections around them that caused the problem. That area has been built up that way since the 70s and 80s and by and large wasn't difficult to get around.
The back-ups started occurring when Verona and areas around there became more commuter-type communities. In the 1970s and 80s, Verona was a dinky farm town and Mount Horeb may as well have been the end of the earth. Now both have a significant portion of people who commute up to Madison every day - and there is only a couple ways for them to get there. So I can understand why Madison and Fitchburg aren't happy about cutting off access to those businesses.
The location of Epic doesn't help either.
As a 32-year resident of Madison, I kow this city like the back of my hand. As far as transportaion is concerned in my city, I would really like the DOT to get a move on deciding on what they are going to do with the US 51 (Stoughton Road) corridor study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/51/default.aspx. The last public information meeting was six years ago. I'd also like them to decide what they will do with the Beltine corridor study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx. Personally, I'd add a congestion-priced toll lane in each direction, and all on-ramps along the corridor would have ramp meters as well. I also would mind a Beltilne bypass along the north side of the Madison area (although I know that is a pipe dream). As for public transit through the city, the proposed Bus Rapid Transit plan greatly interests me: http://www.madisonareampo.org/BRT.cfm. BRT makes much more sense to me than the previous rail proposals (commuter, light, streetcar).
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 26, 2019, 04:52:43 PM
As a 32-year resident of Madison, I kow this city like the back of my hand. As far as transportaion is concerned in my city, I would really like the DOT to get a move on deciding on what they are going to do with the US 51 (Stoughton Road) corridor study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/51/default.aspx. The last public information meeting was six years ago. I'd also like them to decide what they will do with the Beltine corridor study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx. Personally, I'd add a congestion-priced toll lane in each direction, and all on-ramps along the corridor would have ramp meters as well. I also would mind a Beltilne bypass along the north side of the Madison area (although I know that is a pipe dream). As for public transit through the city, the proposed Bus Rapid Transit plan greatly interests me: http://www.madisonareampo.org/BRT.cfm. BRT makes much more sense to me than the previous rail proposals (commuter, light, streetcar).
I've been open to WISDOT looking into tolling as a long-term solution to provide road funding. Adding a toll lane to the Beltline sounds like a great idea. Congestion pricing would basically mitigate the extra traffic adding the extra lane would provide. If we're going to do tolling, I would suggest using a system compatible with I-Pass so we can toll drivers coming in and out of Illinois as well.
When I first moved to Madison I wanted rail as well, but now it looks like it's not going to happen here because they'll probably move forward with BRT. I hope we can make it work so we can provide effective transit for people all over Madison and Dane County.
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 26, 2019, 05:39:06 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 26, 2019, 04:52:43 PM
As a 32-year resident of Madison, I kow this city like the back of my hand. As far as transportaion is concerned in my city, I would really like the DOT to get a move on deciding on what they are going to do with the US 51 (Stoughton Road) corridor study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/51/default.aspx. The last public information meeting was six years ago. I'd also like them to decide what they will do with the Beltine corridor study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx. Personally, I'd add a congestion-priced toll lane in each direction, and all on-ramps along the corridor would have ramp meters as well. I also would mind a Beltilne bypass along the north side of the Madison area (although I know that is a pipe dream). As for public transit through the city, the proposed Bus Rapid Transit plan greatly interests me: http://www.madisonareampo.org/BRT.cfm. BRT makes much more sense to me than the previous rail proposals (commuter, light, streetcar).
I've been open to WISDOT looking into tolling as a long-term solution to provide road funding. Adding a toll lane to the Beltline sounds like a great idea. Congestion pricing would basically mitigate the extra traffic adding the extra lane would provide. If we're going to do tolling, I would suggest using a system compatible with I-Pass so we can toll drivers coming in and out of Illinois as well.
Yes, look how well tolling works in Illinois. Perpetual construction on the toll roads while everything else falls apart. It'll take forever to get off the ground, require a significant investment just for the infrastructure, and still won't solve anything long-term. Where do you plan on squeezing in a toll lane on the Beltline? There's no room where it needs it most; not to mention the environmental uproar that would keep the idea in the court system forever.
Really want to fund transportation in WI? Tack on a road tax to alcohol sales. Who knows, we might even cut down the drunk driving problem at the same time.
Beltline / 18-151 interchange - I don't know what it is like these days, but I don't recall that area ever being anything more than a tight squeeze, even 25 years ago.
Seems like one of those things that was always underbuilt and then development filled in all the space to the point where there's kinda no easy answer.
Yeah it pretty much sucks how there's no room to build on the Beltline. I don't think transportation officials predicted the Beltline would see this much traffic when they first built it as a freeway.
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 27, 2019, 01:48:04 AM
Yeah it pretty much sucks how there's no room to build on the Beltline. I don't think transportation officials predicted the Beltline would see this much traffic when they first built it as a freeway.
I would agree that I don't think they anticipated this much traffic, but they also have done a good job preserving it as a freeway. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, it still had at-grade entrances and exits, and the portion between Mineral Point Road and Middleton still had driveways. It could have easily become worse had WIDOT not made the choices it did.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2019, 09:27:42 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 27, 2019, 01:48:04 AM
Yeah it pretty much sucks how there's no room to build on the Beltline. I don't think transportation officials predicted the Beltline would see this much traffic when they first built it as a freeway.
I would agree that I don't think they anticipated this much traffic, but they also have done a good job preserving it as a freeway. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, it still had at-grade entrances and exits, and the portion between Mineral Point Road and Middleton still had driveways. It could have easily become worse had WIDOT not made the choices it did.
I do remember when the north-south part was a rural two-lane highway and the intersection at Old Sauk Rd was an at-grade intersection. This was in about 1983.
:-o
Another issue with the Beltline is that due to the lakes, there are no other good ways to get from one side of the city to the other.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 27, 2019, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2019, 09:27:42 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 27, 2019, 01:48:04 AM
Yeah it pretty much sucks how there's no room to build on the Beltline. I don't think transportation officials predicted the Beltline would see this much traffic when they first built it as a freeway.
I would agree that I don't think they anticipated this much traffic, but they also have done a good job preserving it as a freeway. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, it still had at-grade entrances and exits, and the portion between Mineral Point Road and Middleton still had driveways. It could have easily become worse had WIDOT not made the choices it did.
I do remember when the north-south part was a rural two-lane highway and the intersection at Old Sauk Rd was an at-grade intersection. This was in about 1983.
:-o
Another issue with the Beltline is that due to the lakes, there are no other good ways to get from one side of the city to the other.
Mike
I lived in Madison from 1975-1980. The Beltline was not built east of the Broadway exit back then also. The multiplex ran on Broadway through the south end of Monona which was, like today, a four lane boulevard with stoplights. The Beltline was busy in the late 70s, but the feeder routes had much less capacity than today.
Quote from: skluth on February 27, 2019, 02:42:27 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 27, 2019, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2019, 09:27:42 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 27, 2019, 01:48:04 AM
Yeah it pretty much sucks how there's no room to build on the Beltline. I don't think transportation officials predicted the Beltline would see this much traffic when they first built it as a freeway.
I would agree that I don't think they anticipated this much traffic, but they also have done a good job preserving it as a freeway. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, it still had at-grade entrances and exits, and the portion between Mineral Point Road and Middleton still had driveways. It could have easily become worse had WIDOT not made the choices it did.
I do remember when the north-south part was a rural two-lane highway and the intersection at Old Sauk Rd was an at-grade intersection. This was in about 1983.
:-o
Another issue with the Beltline is that due to the lakes, there are no other good ways to get from one side of the city to the other.
Mike
I lived in Madison from 1975-1980. The Beltline was not built east of the Broadway exit back then also. The multiplex ran on Broadway through the south end of Monona which was, like today, a four lane boulevard with stoplights. The Beltline was busy in the late 70s, but the feeder routes had much less capacity than today.
Colloquially Broadway was called "the Beltline" at the time. (That's why they referred to the highway between I-90 and South Towne as the "new Beltline" when it first opened.) But yeah you are correct. And Broadway backed up considerably during rush hours. Can't imagine what it would be like now had they not built the new highway.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2019, 03:31:19 PM
Quote from: skluth on February 27, 2019, 02:42:27 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 27, 2019, 10:27:10 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 27, 2019, 09:27:42 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on February 27, 2019, 01:48:04 AM
Yeah it pretty much sucks how there's no room to build on the Beltline. I don't think transportation officials predicted the Beltline would see this much traffic when they first built it as a freeway.
I would agree that I don't think they anticipated this much traffic, but they also have done a good job preserving it as a freeway. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, it still had at-grade entrances and exits, and the portion between Mineral Point Road and Middleton still had driveways. It could have easily become worse had WIDOT not made the choices it did.
I do remember when the north-south part was a rural two-lane highway and the intersection at Old Sauk Rd was an at-grade intersection. This was in about 1983.
:-o
Another issue with the Beltline is that due to the lakes, there are no other good ways to get from one side of the city to the other.
Mike
I lived in Madison from 1975-1980. The Beltline was not built east of the Broadway exit back then also. The multiplex ran on Broadway through the south end of Monona which was, like today, a four lane boulevard with stoplights. The Beltline was busy in the late 70s, but the feeder routes had much less capacity than today.
Colloquially Broadway was called "the Beltline" at the time. (That's why they referred to the highway between I-90 and South Towne as the "new Beltline" when it first opened.) But yeah you are correct. And Broadway backed up considerably during rush hours. Can't imagine what it would be like now had they not built the new highway.
One of the alternatives that was studied before the Yahara Marsh bridge was built was to upgrade the existing Broadway. Yep, the conclusion on that one was about what you might think that it would be.
:meh:
Mike
Maybe instead of just turning the shoulder into a 4th lane at peak times like the DOT has proposed, maybe they could make that into a toll lane.
I've found the beltline/Verona Rd interchange flow has improved quite a bit based on my experience. I don't go through there every day, but when I do I don't have to wait through 2 or 3 light cycles to make a turn from westbound to southbound. I think removing the light at Summit Rd to turn on to the frontage roads has helped greatly, with not having to stop and no cross traffic. Now if they'd only get rid of the light at Raymond Rd, which will be the last remaining light heading south.
You may have to wait until/if they do the proposed Stage 3 freeway conversion of Verona Road before the Raymond Road traffic light is removed.
The Beltline is what happens when you don't plan ahead and just sort of cobble things together well after they are already needed.
Ironically, it was forward thinking that has lead to Madison's tremendous growth in the last quarter century. Public investment in education. Madison wouldn't have a quarter million people if UW was somewhere else. It'd be another middling 50k rust belt city.
The ball needs to get moving rapidly on replacing that signal at US 12 & CTH K with an interchange. Hard to believe that light is going to make it into the 2020's. The amount of skid marks at that intersection say more than I could in a long paragraph.
It's also time to start planning for a 2 lane semi-directional ramp from US 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB.
US 14 has to be over the threshold for four lanes out to Cross Plains by now. Do it right and avoid creating the next Verona Rd.
And speaking of US 14, that tantalizing r/w WisDOT already owns to extend the freeway down to the county line; its time has come.
re: Verona Rd
A good compromise leaves everyone disappointed.
Quote from: triplemultiplexUS 14 has to be over the threshold for four lanes out to Cross Plains by now. Do it right and avoid creating the next Verona Rd.
You could probably make an argument/case for it out to Black Earth at this point. As for "doing it right", that would involve buying up private access points and making it limited-access at a minimum. That won't be cheap. Nor will redoing the 12/14 interchange given the railroad.
Throwback article mentioned in the Madison paper (an editorial from 1944): Madison badly needs a beltline (https://madison.com/wsj/opinion/column/madison-badly-needs-a-beltline----state-journal/article_bbadfe9c-cd5f-5564-b11d-7f92dd58ceb9.html)
Well, Madison did get a beltline (though when it first opened in 1951, it was just a two-lane highway). Now if they could find a way to improve the roadway without plowing down everything around it (maybe building elevated lanes in the median, to minimize right-of-way expansion).
Finally seeing some resurfacing on the west end of the US 12/Beltline resurfacing project. Will the clearview signs be replaced as a part of the project?
Quote from: peterj920 on July 01, 2019, 12:18:25 AM
Finally seeing some resurfacing on the west end of the US 12/Beltline resurfacing project. Will the clearview signs be replaced as a part of the project?
No. It's purely a repair and resurfacing project. The only signs included in the plan are for traffic control.
In general, you're going to be seeing less sign replacements as part of most construction projects (which should make one member happy), as they've switched to corridor signing replacements on a 12-year cycle.
I hate the clearview signs. They remind me of Illinois. :spin:
Quote from: DaBigE on July 01, 2019, 09:09:08 AM
Quote from: peterj920 on July 01, 2019, 12:18:25 AM
Finally seeing some resurfacing on the west end of the US 12/Beltline resurfacing project. Will the clearview signs be replaced as a part of the project?
No. It's purely a repair and resurfacing project. The only signs included in the plan are for traffic control.
In general, you're going to be seeing less sign replacements as part of most construction projects (which should make one member happy), as they've switched to corridor signing replacements on a 12-year cycle.
yeah - except the occasional slipping in of control cities with political influence (*cough* Mount Pleasant *cough*)
Quote from: thspfc on July 01, 2019, 11:12:42 AM
I hate the clearview signs. They remind me of Illinois. :spin:
Could we get away from the emotional aspect of Clearview font, and recognize the fact that Clearview serves its purpose in providing an easier-to-read font at highway speeds? Being one that doesn’t always embrace change (i. e. the loss of Wisconsin’s classic horizontal overhead stoplights), this is one change that is better. Particularly for those with changing vision with age.
Quote from: froggie on March 03, 2019, 09:57:05 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplexUS 14 has to be over the threshold for four lanes out to Cross Plains by now. Do it right and avoid creating the next Verona Rd.
You could probably make an argument/case for it out to Black Earth at this point. As for "doing it right", that would involve buying up private access points and making it limited-access at a minimum. That won't be cheap. Nor will redoing the 12/14 interchange given the railroad.
This is one of the most unrecognized exurban highway needs in southern Wisconsin. I would add that corridor could use expansion to Spring Green and other improvements all the way to Gotham. It’s been congested for over a generation.
Quote from: mrose on February 26, 2019, 11:51:40 PM
Beltline / 18-151 interchange - I don't know what it is like these days, but I don't recall that area ever being anything more than a tight squeeze, even 25 years ago.
Seems like one of those things that was always underbuilt and then development filled in all the space to the point where there's kinda no easy answer.
The Verona Road/Beltline interchange has been a problem area ever since it’s construction in 1947-51. Its renovations have provided fleeting relief at best. The original at-grade intersection lasted roughly 8 years before the interchange was built. The Beltline was expanded to 6 lanes east of there in 1970, requiring another interchange rebuilding. Another in 1973 with the Midvale/Verona Road realignment. More improvements in the ‘80s, and now the latest reincarnation—with its limited lifetime. Too bad it’s never gotten built, a la Phase 3, the right way. Reminds me of MnDOT’s approach to band-aid fixes that only last a few years.
Quote from: SSOWorld on July 01, 2019, 09:16:19 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 01, 2019, 09:09:08 AM
Quote from: peterj920 on July 01, 2019, 12:18:25 AM
Finally seeing some resurfacing on the west end of the US 12/Beltline resurfacing project. Will the clearview signs be replaced as a part of the project?
No. It's purely a repair and resurfacing project. The only signs included in the plan are for traffic control.
In general, you're going to be seeing less sign replacements as part of most construction projects (which should make one member happy), as they've switched to corridor signing replacements on a 12-year cycle.
yeah - except the occasional slipping in of control cities with political influence (*cough* Mount Pleasant *cough*)
Seriously? Mt. Pleasant is a control city? Good Lord.
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on July 02, 2019, 04:26:05 AM
Quote from: thspfc on July 01, 2019, 11:12:42 AM
I hate the clearview signs. They remind me of Illinois. :spin:
Could we get away from the emotional aspect of Clearview font, and recognize the fact that Clearview serves its purpose in providing an easier-to-read font at highway speeds? Being one that doesn't always embrace change (i. e. the loss of Wisconsin's classic horizontal overhead stoplights), this is one change that is better. Particularly for those with changing vision with age.
Can we keep the Clearview debate in its own thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1411.msg2398826#msg2398826)? FHWA has spoken; it's time to move on. The statistics are mixed at best; flawed and purchased at worst.
Some initial work is apparent in the 39/90 median of the Beltline Interchange. The real fun starts in spring, but they seem to be prepping a staging area immediately south of EB 12/18 in the interstate median.
As a reminder of the preferred alternative being constructed:
https://projects.511wi.gov/i-39-90/wp-content/uploads/sites/145/I39-90US12-18intchgprefalt-Dec2018.pdf
Basically it moves the NB lanes of 39/90 up against the SB lanes to eliminate the left exit NB. Not the scope some may have wanted, however, I see it as an 'interim' stage for this interchange. As evidence, check out the length of the new NB bridge over the NB-WB ramp; it has lots of space to accommodate many of the better designs that were on the table.
US 12/ Madison Beltline resurfacing complete. Unfortunately the ramps at Todd Dr and the original Fish Hatchery Rd Rd ramps that were in worse shape than the mainline itself were not fixed.
3-lane Verona Rd opening on Monday - should help to alleviate lots of traffic problems although one year left with highway PD.
Still the Raymond Rd intersection, but I guess they've improved the signal timing. :-/
https://projects.511wi.gov/veronard/openlanes/?fbclid=IwAR2u1bYx4WvC7X8S14k2R7XsL7uCHRuau-7ZLVWxPnrACk88wzX8Sqvi3Yo
Verona Rd complete. Hwy M/Pleasant View Rd complete. North Section if I-39/I-90 complete. Quite a few large projects finishing in the Madison Area in the last week!
This article was posted today in the online version of the Wisconsin State Journal (I don't read the print version): Extra lanes on Madison's Beltline a fine idea: https://madison.com/wsj/opinion/editorial/extra-lanes-on-madison-s-beltline-a-fine-idea/article_a0bfb1de-002f-5f1e-a062-a4863ff11b73.html#1.
The story details about the proposal to turn the inner shoulder in both directions into a traffic lane during rush hour. I would support such a proposal only on 2 conditions. 1: The lane be open at all times, day or night. 2: The lane was congestion-priced, so traffic could move at the speed limit regardless of how much traffic is in the existing three general purpose lanes.
There wont be congestion pricing on the Beltline.
That inner shoulder would be awfully tight for a travel lane.
The problem with the beltline is less about capacity and more about interchange spacing. There's too much merging going on over short distances and that ties everything up.
Additionally, there is no alternative for traffic that only uses it for two exits.
Braid a few ramps and get a decent surface alternative between South Towne and Fish Hatchery and that would help tremendously.
A shoulder lane turns 6 lanes of gridlock into 8 lanes of gridlock; that's my prediction.
Quote from: peterj920 on November 17, 2019, 12:56:24 PM
Verona Rd complete. Hwy M/Pleasant View Rd complete. North Section if I-39/I-90 complete. Quite a few large projects finishing in the Madison Area in the last week!
Did they actually open all 6 lanes to traffic from County Trunk MN to Newville?
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on December 14, 2019, 06:50:27 AM
Quote from: peterj920 on November 17, 2019, 12:56:24 PM
Verona Rd complete. Hwy M/Pleasant View Rd complete. North Section if I-39/I-90 complete. Quite a few large projects finishing in the Madison Area in the last week!
Did they actually open all 6 lanes to traffic from County Trunk MN to Newville?
Yes. 6 lanes from the Beltline interchange to Newville. SBD goes down to 2 lanes about a mile north of the Hwy 59 exit, despite being built out for 3 lanes past the SBD rest area just north of Janesville. SBD opens up to 3 lanes again about a mile from the Illinois line, just past the I-43 interchange construction area.
The lanes are built out for 4 lanes in each direction between US-14 and Avalon Rd, and 3 lanes each way from there to Hart Rd. in Beloit. They're currently only striped for 2 lanes each way because of the construction at I-43, US-14, and Hwy 26. The thinking is that having traffic merge back down from 3/4 lanes back down to 2 lanes multiple times causes a safety risk.
Hwy D/Fish Hatchery Rd reconstruction will now be split between 2 year in 2020-2012 and Hwy PD/McKee Rd between Verona Rd and Seminole Highway will be reconstructed in 2020. It will be pretty miserable getting around Fitchburg this year.
Quote from: peterj920 on January 07, 2020, 02:50:42 PM
Hwy D/Fish Hatchery Rd reconstruction will now be split between 2 year in 2020-2012 and Hwy PD/McKee Rd between Verona Rd and Seminole Highway will be reconstructed in 2020. It will be pretty miserable getting around Fitchburg this year.
Toss in some bridge rehab work along US 14 south of the beltline, and you'll want to avoid Fitchburg/Oregon altogether.
Quote from: DaBigE on January 07, 2020, 04:32:50 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on January 07, 2020, 02:50:42 PM
Hwy D/Fish Hatchery Rd reconstruction will now be split between 2 year in 2020-2012 and Hwy PD/McKee Rd between Verona Rd and Seminole Highway will be reconstructed in 2020. It will be pretty miserable getting around Fitchburg this year.
Toss in some bridge rehab work along US 14 south of the beltline, and you'll want to avoid Fitchburg/Oregon altogether.
Isn't it always a bitch to get around Fitchburg?
Fish Hatchery is in the throes of the reconstruction project. One lane in each direction for about 3/4 mi from the Beltline south.
Simultaneously, WisDOT has a project this year to fix up all the bridges on US 14 between the Beltline and Oregon, so that is also down to one lane in each direction.
Really great job of coordinating those two projects!
:pan:
Meanwhile over by "The Interstate", the new NB bridges are starting to go in through the Beltline interchange. Should be seeing cranes around there all summer long. It should become clear fairly soon how the new bridges are being constructed with the future in mind. The width for a third lane will be obvious. Less so will be the extra distance spanned over the NB->WB turbine ramp to accommodate future c/d action for the Beltline between I-39/90 and Stoughton Rd.
Is US-14 really the alternative for that portion of Fish Hatchery? I grew up just off of Fish Hatch but south of there - off Irish Lane. The alternatives I would have used would have been either Seminole Highway if I were headed west, or Syene and McCoy Roads if I were headed east. If I were headed downtown, I would have caught US-14 at the McCoy Road exit, well north of where most of the bridge construction project is, and taken Park Street. Or maybe I would have gotten onto Rimrock Road over to John Nolen Drive. But I don't think I would have taken US-14.
I should also say its funny in retrospect to see what has happened to Fish Hatchery. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, once you got south of the apartments just off the Beltline, it was a completely rural road. And until the early 90s, was routed along what is now "Glacier Valley Road." Where the road runs now south of McKee Road (CTH PD) was a field where the dairy cows on a friend's farm used to graze.
There were no restaurants south of the Beltline either, except for a Bridgeman's, which was located in the current Park Bank building.
Now that fringe is just past TriNorth at the top of the hill after Lacy Rd (another corridor that's seen considerable change in the last decade.)
It's interesting though that despite being such a large area, Fitchburg has managed to not let development 'leap-frog' the urban fringe very much as it's grown. Compared to the west side which has become a hodge-podge of subdivisions and farm fields, the edge of the 'city' in Fitchburg is nice and 'clean'.
14 is very much a Fish Hatch alternate ever since Lacy Rd was rerouted to a new interchange c. 2012. It's even signed as much right now.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 05, 2020, 12:09:37 PM
Now that fringe is just past TriNorth at the top of the hill after Lacy Rd (another corridor that's seen considerable change in the last decade.)
It's interesting though that despite being such a large area, Fitchburg has managed to not let development 'leap-frog' the urban fringe very much as it's grown. Compared to the west side which has become a hodge-podge of subdivisions and farm fields, the edge of the 'city' in Fitchburg is nice and 'clean'.
14 is very much a Fish Hatch alternate ever since Lacy Rd was rerouted to a new interchange c. 2012. It's even signed as much right now.
Thanks for the info on the alternatives. Haven't been to the area for about five years and haven't lived there for 30, so I wouldn't know.
Another classmate of mine grew up on a farm at the southeast corner of Lacy and Fish Hatchery. Right where the big tech park is right now.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 05, 2020, 01:08:43 PM
Another classmate of mine grew up on a farm at the southeast corner of Lacy and Fish Hatchery. Right where the big tech park is right now.
And literally where I am sitting at this moment. ;)
I'm surrounded by construction. Fish Hatchery under construction, McKee under construction from Seminole Hwy to Fitchrona, and US 14 down to 1 lane for bridge work.
I-39/90 traffic is now using the new NB carriageway through the Beltline Interchange. The NB exit toward Madison is finally on the right.
The ramp from the Beltline EB to NB 39/90 is a bit sticky right now in its temporary configuration which shunts it down to one lane before it joins the interstate. Consistently backed up. But that will go away once the lanes are in final configuration.
Meanwhile, they are closing in on completion of the Beltline's flex lane project. The median barrier is mostly complete and just a few more sections of lane need a final course of asphalt. None of the signage is up yet, though. The flex lane is supposed to be up and running in November.
And in future news, looks like WisDOT is moving forward with construction of an interchange at US 12/18 and CTH AB out past the casino and landfill:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us1218-countyab/overview-feb2021.pdf (https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us1218-countyab/overview-feb2021.pdf)
The alignment of the new interchange might seem weird, but it's meant to accommodate a future relocation of CTH AB as a major divided artery from here to north of Femrite Rd.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 24, 2021, 10:28:46 AM
I-39/90 traffic is now using the new NB carriageway through the Beltline Interchange. The NB exit toward Madison is finally on the right.
The ramp from the Beltline EB to NB 39/90 is a bit sticky right now in its temporary configuration which shunts it down to one lane before it joins the interstate. Consistently backed up. But that will go away once the lanes are in final configuration.
Meanwhile, they are closing in on completion of the Beltline's flex lane project. The median barrier is mostly complete and just a few more sections of lane need a final course of asphalt. None of the signage is up yet, though. The flex lane is supposed to be up and running in November.
And in future news, looks like WisDOT is moving forward with construction of an interchange at US 12/18 and CTH AB out past the casino and landfill:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us1218-countyab/overview-feb2021.pdf (https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us1218-countyab/overview-feb2021.pdf)
The alignment of the new interchange might seem weird, but it's meant to accommodate a future relocation of CTH AB as a major divided artery from here to north of Femrite Rd.
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 24, 2021, 10:28:46 AM
I-39/90 traffic is now using the new NB carriageway through the Beltline Interchange. The NB exit toward Madison is finally on the right.
The ramp from the Beltline EB to NB 39/90 is a bit sticky right now in its temporary configuration which shunts it down to one lane before it joins the interstate. Consistently backed up. But that will go away once the lanes are in final configuration.
Meanwhile, they are closing in on completion of the Beltline's flex lane project. The median barrier is mostly complete and just a few more sections of lane need a final course of asphalt. None of the signage is up yet, though. The flex lane is supposed to be up and running in November.
And in future news, looks like WisDOT is moving forward with construction of an interchange at US 12/18 and CTH AB out past the casino and landfill:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us1218-countyab/overview-feb2021.pdf (https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us1218-countyab/overview-feb2021.pdf)
The alignment of the new interchange might seem weird, but it's meant to accommodate a future relocation of CTH AB as a major divided artery from here to north of Femrite Rd.
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Yeah I think it would make sense to put an interchange at AB and I-39/90 to serve the traffic needs of McFarland more than anything.
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
You're talking AB south of the Beltline Interchange and not Buckeye Rd, I glean from context?
Given the way the local roads currently exist, such an interchange might work better at Siggelkow Rd. (Or as I like to call it "Single Cow Rd" :-D )
Although the spacing is less forgiving between there and the Beltline, I dislike how the local streets don't go straight thru downtown McFarland to US 51 in that area, unlike Siggelkow. By connecting straight to 51, that provides more options to get to/from the industrial and commercial part of McFarland from the interstate as well as the residential neighborhoods that keep growing on the village's east side. Siggelkow is a four lane, mostly divided corridor to the edge of town where it's expandable all the way to the interstate.
Downside is, more homes would have to go down to build an interchange at Siggelkow versus CTH AB.
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
I think it would be a useful addition, assuming it was built out correctly and didn't have stoplights at EVERY. SINGLE. CROSSROAD. It probably wouldn't make a dramatic difference in Beltline traffic, but it would give through-traffic an option to avoid the Beltline.
Quote from: JREwing78 on October 02, 2021, 06:30:59 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
I think it would be a useful addition, assuming it was built out correctly and didn't have stoplights at EVERY. SINGLE. CROSSROAD. It probably wouldn't make a dramatic difference in Beltline traffic, but it would give through-traffic an option to avoid the Beltline.
I updated how I would do the Realigned Hwy AB with the places I would signal and a few exit ramps.
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 07:28:36 AM
Quote from: JREwing78 on October 02, 2021, 06:30:59 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
I think it would be a useful addition, assuming it was built out correctly and didn't have stoplights at EVERY. SINGLE. CROSSROAD. It probably wouldn't make a dramatic difference in Beltline traffic, but it would give through-traffic an option to avoid the Beltline.
I updated how I would do the Realigned Hwy AB with the places I would signal and a few exit ramps.
If you knew the area at all, you would know this is a complete non-starter.
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
Right. M already serves that purpose. And people aren't going to get off at AB to head to Verona anyway. What would be better is a corridor following US-51, WI-138 and County M...all of which already exist.
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
It's still not going to work. First off, the amount of real estate purchasing you are going to have to do makes this extremely expensive. I mean, you are plowing right through an existing subdivision.
Second, I think you are mixing up purposes here. A County AB exit makes sense to provide access to McFarland right off of I-39/90. But creating a new corridor to provide access across Fitchburg to Verona I don't think makes a lot of sense there.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 02, 2021, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
It's still not going to work. First off, the amount of real estate purchasing you are going to have to do makes this extremely expensive. I mean, you are plowing right through an existing subdivision.
Second, I think you are mixing up purposes here. A County AB exit makes sense to provide access to McFarland right off of I-39/90. But creating a new corridor to provide access across Fitchburg to Verona I don't think makes a lot of sense there.
The idea is that it's a southern reliever for the Beltline. It's obviously not going to be built. I don't like the concept of a high-speed multi-lane divided highway with frequent traffic lights (ahem, US-12 northwest of Madison); either build an expressway or don't IMO. But the discussion, if you hadn't noticed, has shifted to be about more than just CTH-AB and McFarland.
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 04:45:16 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 02, 2021, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
It's still not going to work. First off, the amount of real estate purchasing you are going to have to do makes this extremely expensive. I mean, you are plowing right through an existing subdivision.
Second, I think you are mixing up purposes here. A County AB exit makes sense to provide access to McFarland right off of I-39/90. But creating a new corridor to provide access across Fitchburg to Verona I don't think makes a lot of sense there.
The idea is that it's a southern reliever for the Beltline. It's obviously not going to be built. I don't like the concept of a high-speed multi-lane divided highway with frequent traffic lights (ahem, US-12 northwest of Madison); either build an expressway or don't IMO. But the discussion, if you hadn't noticed, has shifted to be about more than just CTH-AB and McFarland.
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 04:45:16 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 02, 2021, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
It's still not going to work. First off, the amount of real estate purchasing you are going to have to do makes this extremely expensive. I mean, you are plowing right through an existing subdivision.
Second, I think you are mixing up purposes here. A County AB exit makes sense to provide access to McFarland right off of I-39/90. But creating a new corridor to provide access across Fitchburg to Verona I don't think makes a lot of sense there.
The idea is that it's a southern reliever for the Beltline. It's obviously not going to be built. I don't like the concept of a high-speed multi-lane divided highway with frequent traffic lights (ahem, US-12 northwest of Madison); either build an expressway or don't IMO. But the discussion, if you hadn't noticed, has shifted to be about more than just CTH-AB and McFarland.
Of course I noticed. It's a bad idea that probably should be discussed on the Fictional board.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 03, 2021, 07:51:53 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 04:45:16 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 02, 2021, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
It's still not going to work. First off, the amount of real estate purchasing you are going to have to do makes this extremely expensive. I mean, you are plowing right through an existing subdivision.
Second, I think you are mixing up purposes here. A County AB exit makes sense to provide access to McFarland right off of I-39/90. But creating a new corridor to provide access across Fitchburg to Verona I don't think makes a lot of sense there.
The idea is that it's a southern reliever for the Beltline. It's obviously not going to be built. I don't like the concept of a high-speed multi-lane divided highway with frequent traffic lights (ahem, US-12 northwest of Madison); either build an expressway or don't IMO. But the discussion, if you hadn't noticed, has shifted to be about more than just CTH-AB and McFarland.
Quote from: thspfc on October 03, 2021, 04:45:16 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 02, 2021, 10:18:28 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 02, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 02, 2021, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 01, 2021, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on September 25, 2021, 08:38:11 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on September 25, 2021, 07:25:16 AM
With the new Hwy AB interchange at 12/18 and your bringing up of AB becoming a divided arterial, it makes me wonder if there may be in the future an interchange with 39/90 at AB and a turn to the west towards Fitchburg. That would make sense to me.
Traffic going to Fitchburg would still take the Beltline. Getting from CTH-AB to Fitchburg without using the Beltline involves a lot of 45 MPH roads with tight 90 degree curves.
I was thinking more of a future divided arterial that Triple brought up be continued west to somewhere near US 14 and Byrne Rd and then eventually to US 18/151 near Hwy M. Something like this...
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1jwS6C5cas4hnbELyG1u1UeDMMmvIXu-G&usp=sharing
At the west end, it would make more sense for it to take over CTH-M's routing from just east of CTH-PB to US-18/151.
That make sense on the west end to tie it into Hwy M. I have realigned it accordingly.
It's still not going to work. First off, the amount of real estate purchasing you are going to have to do makes this extremely expensive. I mean, you are plowing right through an existing subdivision.
Second, I think you are mixing up purposes here. A County AB exit makes sense to provide access to McFarland right off of I-39/90. But creating a new corridor to provide access across Fitchburg to Verona I don't think makes a lot of sense there.
The idea is that it's a southern reliever for the Beltline. It's obviously not going to be built. I don't like the concept of a high-speed multi-lane divided highway with frequent traffic lights (ahem, US-12 northwest of Madison); either build an expressway or don't IMO. But the discussion, if you hadn't noticed, has shifted to be about more than just CTH-AB and McFarland.
Of course I noticed. It's a bad idea that probably should be discussed on the Fictional board.
The Town of Dunn would never let it happen. It has blocked internal developments since the 1970s, and would be very much opposed to any corridor putting development pressure on lands within it.
The next few weeks will have several Madison construction projects wrap up. County D/Fish Hatchery Rd will be completed by next week, the Beltline Interchange will be completely open, and The Beltline Flex Lane project is nearly complete. Sadly, it may be the end of the remaining button copy signs on I-39/I-90.
Quote from: peterj920 on October 25, 2021, 02:52:33 AM
The next few weeks will have several Madison construction projects wrap up. County D/Fish Hatchery Rd will be completed by next week, the Beltline Interchange will be completely open, and The Beltline Flex Lane project is nearly complete. Sadly, it may be the end of the remaining button copy signs on I-39/I-90.
Happily it will be the end of Clearview in Wisconsin. (though in favor of APLs)
Madison survived the closure of the busiest freeway to freeway ramp in the area between I-90/I-39 south and US 12/Beltline Westbound. The Beltline Interchange should be fully open in 2 weeks!
With the signage I wish the signs would say "Beltline Hwy" when approaching US 12/US 18 since that's what most people refer the Highway as.
Quote from: peterj920 on November 03, 2021, 04:49:14 PM
With the signage I wish the signs would say "Beltline Hwy" when approaching US 12/US 18 since that's what most people refer the Highway as.
It would certainly make navigation easier for non-locals. There's a smattering of signs in Madison that do refer to it as that.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 05, 2020, 09:15:18 AM
I should also say its funny in retrospect to see what has happened to Fish Hatchery. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, once you got south of the apartments just off the Beltline, it was a completely rural road. And until the early 90s, was routed along what is now "Glacier Valley Road." Where the road runs now south of McKee Road (CTH PD) was a field where the dairy cows on a friend's farm used to graze.
There were no restaurants south of the Beltline either, except for a Bridgeman's, which was located in the current Park Bank building.
If the recently reconstructed Fish Hatchery Rd replaced pavement from the 1990s, it was constructed extremely bad. Concrete shouldn't fail that terribly over that amount of time.
Quote from: peterj920 on November 04, 2021, 07:49:43 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 05, 2020, 09:15:18 AM
I should also say its funny in retrospect to see what has happened to Fish Hatchery. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, once you got south of the apartments just off the Beltline, it was a completely rural road. And until the early 90s, was routed along what is now "Glacier Valley Road." Where the road runs now south of McKee Road (CTH PD) was a field where the dairy cows on a friend's farm used to graze.
There were no restaurants south of the Beltline either, except for a Bridgeman's, which was located in the current Park Bank building.
If the recently reconstructed Fish Hatchery Rd replaced pavement from the 1990s, it was constructed extremely bad. Concrete shouldn't fail that terribly over that amount of time.
IIRC, the pavement north of the golf course area dated back to at least circa mid-80's.
US 151/Blair Street getting a much needed reconstruction. Traffic will be a mess with a closure but construction is way overdue since all the joints failed and there's asphalt patching between each slab.
Does anyone know when the Beltline flex-lane will actually be functional? I drove through Madison yesterday and the signs were still covered up.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 21, 2022, 10:28:13 AM
Does anyone know when the Beltline flex-lane will actually be functional? I drove through Madison yesterday and the signs were still covered up.
It's supposed to go live sometime this summer.
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 21, 2022, 08:34:49 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 21, 2022, 10:28:13 AM
Does anyone know when the Beltline flex-lane will actually be functional? I drove through Madison yesterday and the signs were still covered up.
It's supposed to go live sometime this summer.
So that means I would have to make a special trip out just to see it in action. Unfortunate. :-(
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 22, 2022, 08:13:55 AM
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 21, 2022, 08:34:49 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 21, 2022, 10:28:13 AM
Does anyone know when the Beltline flex-lane will actually be functional? I drove through Madison yesterday and the signs were still covered up.
It's supposed to go live sometime this summer.
So that means I would have to make a special trip out just to see it in action. Unfortunate. :-(
A chip shortage along with the decision to add an auxiliary lane at Todd Drive is delaying the lanes from becoming active.
Quote from: peterj920 on March 23, 2022, 01:56:45 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 22, 2022, 08:13:55 AM
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 21, 2022, 08:34:49 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 21, 2022, 10:28:13 AM
Does anyone know when the Beltline flex-lane will actually be functional? I drove through Madison yesterday and the signs were still covered up.
It's supposed to go live sometime this summer.
So that means I would have to make a special trip out just to see it in action. Unfortunate. :-(
A chip shortage along with the decision to add an auxiliary lane at Todd Drive is delaying the lanes from becoming active.
They have an auxiliary lane at Todd Drive.
Quote from: SSOWorld on March 23, 2022, 06:53:47 AM
They have an auxiliary lane at Todd Drive.
They are extending the aux lane that comes on at Verona Road to just past Todd. It will require expansion of the existing EB bridge over Todd. Seminole onramp and EB Todd exit are closed all spring.
The EB Beltline aux lane extension is complete and open. So we must be mere days away from activating the flex lane.
Even without the flex lane running, that aux lane is very useful. It gets added at Verona Rd and becomes the exit only lane for Fish Hatchery Road. That makes it the most substantial capacity improvement for the middle part of The Beltline in decades. (At least until that flex lane starts operation.)
Welcome news, indeed. It'll be interesting to see what the effects on traffic are when fully opened up.
I can see a future pain point for the flex lane EB approaching 39/90 because it ends at the same place where the onramp from Stoughton Road is coming in. So there will be a spot here where essentially 6 lanes of traffic are pinching down to 3 with the 3 GP lanes and the flex lane on the Beltline plus a two-lane onramp. That's going to be a source of daily backups until WisDOT endeavors to add an aux lane between Stoughton Road and 39/90.
I must say, the new overhead BGS signage is much more helpful in being true to reality with the "arrow per lane" standard. EB approaching 39/90, the signage used to make it seem like only the left lane was the exit to go NB on 39/90 an only once one gets to the old SB bridge over 12/18 does one see that the middle lane is either/or. The new signs make this arrangement abundantly clear well before the gore, which I like.
Last night, on the way back from happy hour, crews were installing new BGS's around Todd Dr and VMS overheads were saying something to the effect of "Flex Lane Testing in Progress". Makes me think it'll be up and running right after the holiday.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 28, 2022, 11:57:05 AM
I can see a future pain point for the flex lane EB approaching 39/90 because it ends at the same place where the onramp from Stoughton Road is coming in. So there will be a spot here where essentially 6 lanes of traffic are pinching down to 3 with the 3 GP lanes and the flex lane on the Beltline plus a two-lane onramp. That's going to be a source of daily backups until WisDOT endeavors to add an aux lane between Stoughton Road and 39/90.
I must say, the new overhead BGS signage is much more helpful in being true to reality with the "arrow per lane" standard. EB approaching 39/90, the signage used to make it seem like only the left lane was the exit to go NB on 39/90 an only once one gets to the old SB bridge over 12/18 does one see that the middle lane is either/or. The new signs make this arrangement abundantly clear well before the gore, which I like.
Last night, on the way back from happy hour, crews were installing new BGS's around Todd Dr and VMS overheads were saying something to the effect of "Flex Lane Testing in Progress". Makes me think it'll be up and running right after the holiday.
There should be aux lanes between each interchange of the Beltline from University to I-39/90.
It's one of the thing that always gets me about places that have bottleneck spots. I have to deal with one almost daily by me on I-55. Never understood why they didn't make an aux lane between Route 53 and I-355, both directions, when they built the 355 extension.
The beltline doesn't experience the amount of traffic outside W. Broadway to Verona Road as within.
I would settle for more ramp meters on on-ramps. For example, when the Verona Road interchange was reconstructed, I am surprised ramp meters weren't placed on its on-ramps.
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 28, 2022, 03:12:52 PM
There should be aux lanes between each interchange of the Beltline from University to I-39/90.
It's one of the thing that always gets me about places that have bottleneck spots. I have to deal with one almost daily by me on I-55. Never understood why they didn't make an aux lane between Route 53 and I-355, both directions, when they built the 355 extension.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. The stupid thing is WisDOT *almost* accomplishes this between Mineral Point Rd and Gammon Rd with their long on and off-ramps between the two exits. There is *maybe* 1/4 mile of separation between the end of one and the beginning of the other. Absurd.
There is basically one between Whitney Way and Gammon Rd westbound, as the far-right lane turns into the exit ramp for Gammon Rd and the road narrows to 2 lanes westbound.
For all the other interchanges to University Ave, the traffic levels and amount of weaving/merging traffic definitely merit aux lanes. This will become a major pain point until WisDOT finally creates them. The 4 mainline travel lanes are fine for right now west of Gammon Rd, particularly if the aux lanes are built out.
EBD east of Gammon Rd really needs to be the mirror of WBD, with the on-ramp from Gammon Rd forming the 3rd mainline travel lane. Or, start the 3rd eastbound travel lane at the Gammon Rd overpass so that Gammon Rd traffic can more safely merge. It's better once you get to Whitney Way as traffic can spread out before Verona Rd. But the point that Gammon Rd EBD on-ramp traffic meets the EBD mainline traffic is a bit dicey simply due to traffic volume.
The new flex lanes are scheduled to open on Wednesday morning. It will be interesting to see how quickly people adapt to them and how much effect they have on traffic.
Quote from: SSOWorld on October 25, 2021, 08:12:59 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on October 25, 2021, 02:52:33 AM
The next few weeks will have several Madison construction projects wrap up. County D/Fish Hatchery Rd will be completed by next week, the Beltline Interchange will be completely open, and The Beltline Flex Lane project is nearly complete. Sadly, it may be the end of the remaining button copy signs on I-39/I-90.
Happily it will be the end of Clearview in Wisconsin. (though in favor of APLs)
It was there last month it appears they missed replacing one clearview sign.
My mother has seemed unimpressed with the new flex lanes along the Beltine. I doubt she will personally ever use them.
Quote from: dvferyance on July 11, 2022, 12:01:42 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on October 25, 2021, 08:12:59 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on October 25, 2021, 02:52:33 AM
The next few weeks will have several Madison construction projects wrap up. County D/Fish Hatchery Rd will be completed by next week, the Beltline Interchange will be completely open, and The Beltline Flex Lane project is nearly complete. Sadly, it may be the end of the remaining button copy signs on I-39/I-90.
Happily it will be the end of Clearview in Wisconsin. (though in favor of APLs)
It was there last month it appears they missed replacing one clearview sign.
At least one WB Beltline sign for Rimrock is still clearview.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 11, 2022, 12:20:22 PM
My mother has seemed unimpressed with the new flex lanes along the Beltine. I doubt she will personally ever use them.
They look narrow to me.
I'm sure the flex lanes will provide some relief, but if the Madison area continues to grow quickly, it won't be long before the Beltline is swarmed by traffic just as badly as it was before the project.
I've set myself up in Madison so I don't need the Beltline during peak hours, so it might be a while before I get to try out the flex lane.
It has been my contention from the start that it will basically turn 6 lanes of congestion into 8 lanes of congestion. It's all the merging that creates the problems; everyone queuing up to get off EB at Verona Rd, the weave between South Towne and Nolen, the weave between Park and Fish Hatch. The big test of that hypothesis starts soon. But I guess it will be great for those poor bastards who have to traverse the length of the beltline on their commutes. But since most traffic gets off 2 or 3 exits from where they got on, that flex lane won't directly help them; at least the way most people in this city drive: move over way early and stay there until your exit.
Quote from: thspfc on July 11, 2022, 04:08:26 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on July 11, 2022, 12:01:42 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on October 25, 2021, 08:12:59 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on October 25, 2021, 02:52:33 AM
The next few weeks will have several Madison construction projects wrap up. County D/Fish Hatchery Rd will be completed by next week, the Beltline Interchange will be completely open, and The Beltline Flex Lane project is nearly complete. Sadly, it may be the end of the remaining button copy signs on I-39/I-90.
Happily it will be the end of Clearview in Wisconsin. (though in favor of APLs)
It was there last month it appears they missed replacing one clearview sign.
At least one WB Beltline sign for Rimrock is still clearview.
I think that is the one I saw. I like it now that Rimrock is now signed as Hwy MM as it is south of the Beltline. Kind of like for many years Moorland Rd was not signed Hwy O.
The FlexLane project offically open to traffic yesterday around mid afternoon:
(https://i.imgur.com/CzDRbQL.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/pLmtpFv.jpg)
I'm wondering how long it will be before the first disabled car gets rear-ended hard in that lane.
Mike
My mother called me last night on her way home from work, and said she did try the flex lane just for me. I'm not sure if she will use them again.
the lack of a shoulder makes me disinterested - reminding me of I-70 in PA (or the turnpike)
Quote from: mgk920 on July 14, 2022, 10:55:01 AM
I'm wondering how long it will be before the first disabled car gets rear-ended hard in that lane.
Mike
I don't see that happening often - they have that service truck that patrols the area.
This past weekend, I observed the flex lane in operation outside of normal peak hours. They had it open westbound on Saturday around noon, probably because the Badgers were playing at home. Seems like a good use of the facility, though by the time I was seeing it, the extra lane wasn't needed. WB was open, EB was closed at that point. I'll bet they flipped it around after halftime; though I didn't see for myself.
It did flip toward the end of the game. It's a great use for Badger games.
It probably flipped because Badger fans were stampeding to get the hell out of there. After all, after kicking a field goal and taking a 10-7 lead over the University of Illinois early in the second quarter, the Fighting Illini put up 27 unanswered points to win 34-10, and the Badgers' coach was subsequently cut loose.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 06, 2022, 04:55:39 PM
It probably flipped because Badger fans were stampeding to get the hell out of there. After all, after kicking a field goal and taking a 10-7 lead over the University of Illinois early in the second quarter, the Fighting Illini put up 27 unanswered points to win 34-10, and the Badgers' coach was subsequently cut loose.
Wonder if Chryst used the flex lane on his way out of Madison after being fired . . .
Quote from: thspfc on October 07, 2022, 04:08:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 06, 2022, 04:55:39 PM
It probably flipped because Badger fans were stampeding to get the hell out of there. After all, after kicking a field goal and taking a 10-7 lead over the University of Illinois early in the second quarter, the Fighting Illini put up 27 unanswered points to win 34-10, and the Badgers' coach was subsequently cut loose.
Wonder if Chryst used the flex lane on his way out of Madison after being fired . . .
LOL :-D I was really shocked he was fired. Saw a list of college hot seats before the season and his was considered about as safe as it gets. But I guess it means they'll keep Leonhard as head coach before he left for someplace else.
WisDOT is saying the Flex Lanes are a success (https://www.channel3000.com/flex-lane-travel-times/#/questions/)
Quote from: skluth on October 08, 2022, 07:03:13 PM
WisDOT is saying the Flex Lanes are a success (https://www.channel3000.com/flex-lane-travel-times/#/questions/)
What will make them a success or failure is how long it takes before WISDOT has to make more upgrades on the Beltline.
Quote from: thspfc on October 07, 2022, 04:08:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 06, 2022, 04:55:39 PM
It probably flipped because Badger fans were stampeding to get the hell out of there. After all, after kicking a field goal and taking a 10-7 lead over the University of Illinois early in the second quarter, the Fighting Illini put up 27 unanswered points to win 34-10, and the Badgers' coach was subsequently cut loose.
Wonder if Chryst used the flex lane on his way out of Madison after being fired . . .
But still getting paid 11 million bucks.
Don't you wish you could get fired and still make more than 99.5% of the population?
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 10, 2022, 03:45:06 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 07, 2022, 04:08:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 06, 2022, 04:55:39 PM
It probably flipped because Badger fans were stampeding to get the hell out of there. After all, after kicking a field goal and taking a 10-7 lead over the University of Illinois early in the second quarter, the Fighting Illini put up 27 unanswered points to win 34-10, and the Badgers' coach was subsequently cut loose.
Wonder if Chryst used the flex lane on his way out of Madison after being fired . . .
But still getting paid 11 million bucks.
Don't you wish you could get fired and still make more than 99.5% of the population?
Daniel Ricciardo sure knows what that's like.
Quote from: thspfc on October 08, 2022, 10:38:39 PM
Quote from: skluth on October 08, 2022, 07:03:13 PM
WisDOT is saying the Flex Lanes are a success (https://www.channel3000.com/flex-lane-travel-times/#/questions/)
What will make them a success or failure is how long it takes before WISDOT has to make more upgrades on the Beltline.
An aux lane from Todd Drive to US 18/151 Verona Rd Westbound would be a huge help. The green for Verona Rd traffic needs to be longer and made a priority. There's way more traffic on that ramp than traffic from Midvale Blvd. Ramp meters on the Broadway ramps would help. There seems to be a big bottleneck at that interchange during rush hour.
Quote from: peterj920 on October 10, 2022, 10:39:21 PM
Ramp meters on the Broadway ramps would help. There seems to be a big bottleneck at that interchange during rush hour.
Too much traffic trying to get off at Nolen with traffic coming on at Broadway; the streams cross and it all binds. Ideally, they'd braid those two movements so they don't cross like they do. Both directions, in fact. That would do wonders.
Maybe these suggestions will be implemented when the DOT's Madison Beltline Corridor Study (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx) reaches final design and construction, although you might be in for quite a wait.
I used the flex lanes yesterday - it did seem to help traffic, even with the typical Madison LLB's doing exactly 55 in the flex lane when there was room to move over...
Construction starting soon on several projects in the Madison Area. Some key projects:
Broom Street between John Nolen and W Washington St along with Wilson St.
The E Washington St/Blair St Intersection
Atwood Avenue
Continued work on University Avenue
Pleasant View Rd 4 lane expansion between Old Sauk Rd and US 14
Wis 113 between Madison City Limits and Wis 19
Would've been kind of nice if you could've at least gave a quick description of what these projects are...
The first one isn't on the City of Madison website: https://www.cityofmadison.com/. The second one is a pavement replacement project that addresses the portion of East Washington Avenue (between Blair St. and Blount St.) that was left untouched when the Blair St.-to-Thornton Ave. segment of East Washington Av. was reconstructed in 2004. Here is a good look at the East Washington/Blair intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.078495,-89.3785459,3a,75y,316.65h,67.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJh2oubVabOIsQWASVSTD1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192. The third one is addressed here: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/atwood-avenue. I hate the fact that while inbound Atwood will remain two lanes westbound, outbound Atwood Ave. will be reduced to one lane eastbound (although that does match the segment of Atwood between S. Fair Oaks Ave. and Oakridge St.). The fourth one was started last year: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/university-avenue. The fifth one is here: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/pleasant-view-road. The last one also isn't on the City of Madison website.
^^^ thanks. Madison seems to be a unique city. I need to get up there and check out that part of the country.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 14, 2023, 04:42:02 PM
The first one isn't on the City of Madison website: https://www.cityofmadison.com/. The second one is a pavement replacement project that addresses the portion of East Washington Avenue (between Blair St. and Blount St.) that was left untouched when the Blair St.-to-Thornton Ave. segment of East Washington Av. was reconstructed in 2004. Here is a good look at the East Washington/Blair intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.078495,-89.3785459,3a,75y,316.65h,67.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJh2oubVabOIsQWASVSTD1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192. The third one is addressed here: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/atwood-avenue. I hate the fact that while inbound Atwood will remain two lanes westbound, outbound Atwood Ave. will be reduced to one lane eastbound (although that does match the segment of Atwood between S. Fair Oaks Ave. and Oakridge St.). The fourth one was started last year: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/university-avenue. The fifth one is here: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/pleasant-view-road. The last one also isn't on the City of Madison website.
The Broom St project is listed under W Wilson Street. The project works on the streets in that area but will reduce lanes on Broom.
https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/300-block-w-wilson
Here's the Wis 113 project from the WISDOT site:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/wis113-westport/default.aspx
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 14, 2023, 04:42:02 PM
I hate the fact that while inbound Atwood will remain two lanes westbound, outbound Atwood Ave. will be reduced to one lane eastbound (although that does match the segment of Atwood between S. Fair Oaks Ave. and Oakridge St.).
I think this is one of those situations where accommodating left turns by losing a travel lane in one direction will actually be better than the four lane undivided.
Quote from: peterj920 on March 15, 2023, 01:25:13 AM
Here's the Wis 113 project from the WISDOT site:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/wis113-westport/default.aspx
Kind of surprised they're not going to fill the four lane gap in that stretch as part of this. One can see the r/w already is in place and it's not like Waunakee isn't growing.
This is going to be a big year for construction related to Bus Rapid Transit in Madison. So expect lane closures at some point over the next two summers at the BRT stops:
(https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/images/brt/Madison_BRT.png)
For more information on the bus rapid transit project in Madison, see this website: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/bus-rapid-transit.
Definitely a positive step forward. Hopefully they see fit to expand and extend BRT service beyond the existing layout. The current bus system has decent coverage but is bog slow. BRT could make it much easier to live on the Isthmus without a car.
I just hope that any new line heading north out of downtown would hit up the airport.
A DDI is being proposed as part of the planned improvements for the new Buc-ee's in DeForest (CTH I/V and I-Triplex):
https://meetings.vi.deforest.wi.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Documents/ViewDocument/DOT%20MAP%20-%20for%20-%20DISCUSSION%20AND%20ACTION%20ON%20A%20REQUEST%20FOR%20A%20CONDITIONAL%20USE.pdf?meetingId=3543&documentType=Agenda&itemId=29196&publishId=21735&isSection=false
https://meetings.vi.deforest.wi.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Documents/ViewDocument/EX%20B%20CONCEPTUAL%20SITE%20AND%20LANDSCAPE%20-%20for%20-%20DISCUSSION%20AND%20ACTION%20ON%20A%20RE.pdf?meetingId=3543&documentType=Agenda&itemId=29196&publishId=21727&isSection=false
Quote from: on_wisconsin on March 25, 2023, 11:25:31 PM
A DDI is being proposed as part of the planned improvements for the new Buc-ee's in DeForest (CTH I/V and I-Triplex):
https://meetings.vi.deforest.wi.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Documents/ViewDocument/DOT%20MAP%20-%20for%20-%20DISCUSSION%20AND%20ACTION%20ON%20A%20REQUEST%20FOR%20A%20CONDITIONAL%20USE.pdf?meetingId=3543&documentType=Agenda&itemId=29196&publishId=21735&isSection=false
https://meetings.vi.deforest.wi.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Documents/ViewDocument/EX%20B%20CONCEPTUAL%20SITE%20AND%20LANDSCAPE%20-%20for%20-%20DISCUSSION%20AND%20ACTION%20ON%20A%20RE.pdf?meetingId=3543&documentType=Agenda&itemId=29196&publishId=21727&isSection=false
45 mph speed limits on the
ramps???
Quote from: SSOWorld on March 26, 2023, 05:47:17 AM
45 mph speed limits on the ramps???
Yet the access road (Hwy I) in front of the store is shown as 55 mph between the proposed stop lights to be added... :rolleyes:
Any idea when this conversion to Exit 126 might be constructed? Or is this just a preliminary proposal?
Wow I hope Bucees is chipping in for that interchange revamp.
It's already a good location for a DDI in terms of traffic movement. Most vehicles are getting on or off the interstate with very little "thru" traffic on CTH V.
It's been interesting to see how much Madison has sprawled north in the last decade. Between this exit and WI 19, there's a ton of new stuff. WisDOT built that freeway on the east side of DeForest for US 51 and it seems like ever since then, that place is blowing up. The Town of Windsor incorporated to stave off more annexation. One of those new giant Fleet Farms went in at WI 19. They're building one of those ugly golf net places as one approaches the DeForest exit (totally distracts from the usually humorous ABS sign). Big new baseball field complex in that area.
Kinda seems like DeForest is poised to be the next Sun Prairie.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 26, 2023, 12:47:32 PM
Wow I hope Bucees is chipping in for that interchange revamp.
It's already a good location for a DDI in terms of traffic movement. Most vehicles are getting on or off the interstate with very little "thru" traffic on CTH V.
It's been interesting to see how much Madison has sprawled north in the last decade. Between this exit and WI 19, there's a ton of new stuff. WisDOT built that freeway on the east side of DeForest for US 51 and it seems like ever since then, that place is blowing up. The Town of Windsor incorporated to stave off more annexation. One of those new giant Fleet Farms went in at WI 19. They're building one of those ugly golf net places as one approaches the DeForest exit (totally distracts from the usually humorous ABS sign). Big new baseball field complex in that area.
Kinda seems like DeForest is poised to be the next Sun Prairie.
DeForest already has become the next Sun Prairie. Pretty soon, there will not be any gap between Hwy V and Wis 19 along US 51 and the Interstate. Windsor is growing too. I would not be surprised if Windsor Rd gets an interchange with I-39/90/94 in the next few years.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 26, 2023, 12:47:32 PM
Wow I hope Bucees is chipping in for that interchange revamp.
It's already a good location for a DDI in terms of traffic movement. Most vehicles are getting on or off the interstate with very little "thru" traffic on CTH V.
It's been interesting to see how much Madison has sprawled north in the last decade. Between this exit and WI 19, there's a ton of new stuff. WisDOT built that freeway on the east side of DeForest for US 51 and it seems like ever since then, that place is blowing up. The Town of Windsor incorporated to stave off more annexation. One of those new giant Fleet Farms went in at WI 19. They're building one of those ugly golf net places as one approaches the DeForest exit (totally distracts from the usually humorous ABS sign). Big new baseball field complex in that area.
Kinda seems like DeForest is poised to be the next Sun Prairie.
As part of the proposal Bucees agreed to pay for improvements. The bridge is new enough where it can be retrofitted for a DDI. Missouri has retrofitted many existing bridges for DDI's.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 26, 2023, 12:47:32 PM
Wow I hope Bucees is chipping in for that interchange revamp.
It's already a good location for a DDI in terms of traffic movement. Most vehicles are getting on or off the interstate with very little "thru" traffic on CTH V.
It's been interesting to see how much Madison has sprawled north in the last decade. Between this exit and WI 19, there's a ton of new stuff. WisDOT built that freeway on the east side of DeForest for US 51 and it seems like ever since then, that place is blowing up. The Town of Windsor incorporated to stave off more annexation. One of those new giant Fleet Farms went in at WI 19. They're building one of those ugly golf net places as one approaches the DeForest exit (totally distracts from the usually humorous ABS sign). Big new baseball field complex in that area.
Kinda seems like DeForest is poised to be the next Sun Prairie.
Verona is the new Sun Prairie. DeForest is the
next new Sun Prairie.
Indeed, DeForest and Windsor are planning for a lot of growth over the next couple decades. I would expect the area enclosed by Lake Rd, Vinburn Rd, WI-19, and US-51 to be completely developed by 2035. The area south of Windsor Rd and west of Portage Rd is already getting there, with the exception of the Token Creek conservancy.
The conservancy will prevent Windsor and Sun Prairie from completely connecting, but it will also make it difficult to expand WI-19 along the two-lane section through Token Creek. The Portage Rd intersection is usually a long wait during afternoon rush hour. A roundabout might work if they can get the space for it.
"Madison could get 2 new interstate interchanges in I-39/90/94 Madison-Dells project
John Gettings, Wisconsin State Journal
The Interstate 39/90/94 67-mile corridor from near Madison to the Wisconsin Dells area is under review for a potential major project in a few years, and alternatives for each interchange are now available for feedback.
...
"We're really trying to develop long-term solutions to the needs of the existing interstate," said Daniel Schave, the department's Major Studies supervisor leading the study.
...
The two potential future highway exits will be on Interstate 94 at Milwaukee Street and at Hoepker Road off of I-39/90/94 just north of the major interchange with Highway 151. Increased population and employees in the area of those two intersections creates the potential for the additional interchanges.
Schave said that the department is looking at three alternatives for the mainline interstate itself. A potential managed lane (an additional left lane open and closed to traffic based on time intervals and traffic flow which is used as extra shoulder space when closed) from Madison to near Portage where I-90/94 splits from I-39 is a possibility. Another option includes adding a regular traffic lane along the entire corridor. Pavement and bridge replacement is being explored as well.
...
DDIs are being explored at I-39/90/94's interchanges with Highway 51 and Highway V in Dane County, as well as I-90/94's interchanges with Highway 12 and Highway 23 in Lake Delton..."
...
https://madison.com/news/local/madison-could-get-2-new-interstate-interchanges-in-i-39-90-94-madison-dells-project/article_9299c73e-a722-5811-80ea-4a2df5c36ab7.html
...
WisDOT study site:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/399094/public.aspx
Preliminary Alternatives:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/399094/interchangealternatives-april23.pdf
I have pretty much liked what I saw with the Interstate 39/90/94 study, although I wish they had kept it ongoing and not temporarily cancelled it in 2017.
Ooh we have alternatives now. This will be fun.
Gonna start with the East Town Interchange because I see two alternatives here that are non-starters. There is way too much commuter traffic continuing on East Wash between the Isthmus and Sun Prairie to force that traffic to exit at a diamond and weave its way under a system interchange between US 151 and the interstate. I know WisDOT has been a fan of trying to separate system and surface traffic like that at places like Beloit, Green Bay and Wausau, but that is NOT going to work in this location. Therefore only their alternatives 1 and 2 are viable.
Next I'll note my surprise that WisDOT sees the need for collector/distributor roadways between the Badger Interchange and the East Town Interchange since that's a fairly long distance, but I guess. Alternative 1 for the Badger interchange is better because it uses less land. Big fan of moving all the left exits to the right. The existing left-hand ramps are a big disruption to the flow of things, in my experience.
I do not support the addition of interchanges to the Triplex at Hoepker Rd or at I-94 and the east end of Milwaukee St. Those will only encourage more sprawl and create more future issues with traffic merging on the freeway. These freeways are to move vehicles thru Madison, not to subsidize real estate development. I don't want to see this corridor clogged with more interchanges. There are plenty as is. The Hoepker Rd one is particularly egregious since it's so close to US 51. Nuts to that. I like that it's a few miles between exits as one drives by Madison.
Some of those alternatives for WI 19 are overkill. A flyover NB->WB? I don't see that happening. Same deal for that U-ramp bullcrap. I think I'm on board with the idea of switching the grading so WI 19 can bridge the railroad.
The DDI's at US 51 and County V are inevitable, I feel. Good on them
I'd really like to see County CS turned into a diamond, just like they're doing to WI 60 right now. The Pilot at that exit is the reason. It'll make it easier for trucks to enter and exit the freeway to not deal with a loop.
Cascade Interchange, alternative 2 is better. No need for such a high speed, expensive ramp from EB to NB in Alt 1.
WI 33's two interchanges with the freeways, go with the diamonds again. Though I might tighten up the I-39 diamond so it impacts fewer wetlands.
At the Dells Parkway, I'd favor retaining the existing parclo but with the addition of a distributor ramp NB->WB that bypasses the ramp terminal signal at the south end of the interchange. Just like how US 14 hits the Beltline in Madison.
Finally, I think the split diamond is the way to go at WI 13/County H. The other option impacts protected DNR land along Hulbert Creek, a class 1 trout stream. I've actually fished that creek just upstream from the interstate and the existing culvert under the ramps is somewhat of a barrier to fish passage from what I could see.
I will also say that I like the Milwaukee Avenue extension and interchange with I-94 now that I have seen it. Makes a ton of sense.
I don't like the MKE Street interchange. That will only be a catalyst for more inefficient land uses and make the city sprawl east faster. Plus look at a how much it complicates and expensifies the Badger Interchange concepts. That's tens of millions of dollars worth of more ramps which will function as a subsidy to all the real estate speculators trying to turn more of our farmland into ugly McMansions.
Sadly, it's a foregone conclusion that it's going in, I fear. They went ahead and built the overpasses for this interchange 10+ years ago when they expanded I-94 to 3x3.
The only way I'd support this new interchange is if the developers and speculators pay for it.
Bucee's is willing to pay to upgrade the CTH V interchange, so that only seems fair. And that includes all the extra braiding ramps that will be needed.
Worse is the option here that tries to handle this new interchange with only aux lanes between it and the Badger. That's going to result in some wild weaving as commuters enter from the new interchange and try and dart across multiple lanes to get to where they're going at the Badger.
Between the cost of building it without generating weaving problems, the weaving problems that will result if it isn't built to negate them, and the negative land use impacts, the best alternative at Milwaukee Street is No Build. This is an unneeded interchange and is literally using induced demand to justify its construction.
Even though many of us will be gone and forgotten by then, The US 12 interchange at the Dells/Lake Delton will have to be revisited a decade or two after this latest round of work is complete, for upgrading to a full free-flow freeway to freeway connection for the through traffic with provisions for upgraded surface road/street connections for the local crowd.
I also see a glaring need for local surface connections between WI 78 to the southwest and county and local roads to the north and east at the Cascade interchange. My sense is that the current interchange there was done 'on the cheap' just to get the high traffic interstate standard connections done and open when it was built. Yes, I have done numerous mindless scribblings on this one over the years.
The East Town interchange ideas are intriguing, too.
I am very much looking forward to further ongoing discussions on this project. :nod:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on April 19, 2023, 12:39:09 PM
I also see a glaring need for local surface connections between WI 78 to the southwest and county and local roads to the north and east at the Cascade interchange.
The two alternatives WisDOT has seem to address this by creating a continuous Cascade Mountain Rd under I-39 and turning north toward CTH U. In effect reusing the pre-interstate alignment of WI 78. The new Cascade Mountain Rd would intersect WI 78 between its diamond interchange with I-90/94 and its half interchange with I-39.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 12:36:25 PM
I don't like the MKE Street interchange. That will only be a catalyst for more inefficient land uses and make the city sprawl east faster. Plus look at a how much it complicates and expensifies the Badger Interchange concepts. That's tens of millions of dollars worth of more ramps which will function as a subsidy to all the real estate speculators trying to turn more of our farmland into ugly McMansions.
Good. Dane County needs housing more than it needs farmland.
Affordable housing, not overpriced, oversized, cheaply built sprawl on the periphery.
People need housing, not debt slavery.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 02:38:02 PM
Affordable housing, not overpriced, oversized, cheaply built sprawl on the periphery.
People need housing, not debt slavery.
People have the free will to enter into the transactions that they wish.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 19, 2023, 02:43:24 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 02:38:02 PM
Affordable housing, not overpriced, oversized, cheaply built sprawl on the periphery.
People need housing, not debt slavery.
People have the free will to enter into the transactions that they wish.
AKA, "Both the destitute and the filthy rich have the right to live under a bridge."
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 12:36:25 PM
I don't like the MKE Street interchange. That will only be a catalyst for more inefficient land uses and make the city sprawl east faster. Plus look at a how much it complicates and expensifies the Badger Interchange concepts. That's tens of millions of dollars worth of more ramps which will function as a subsidy to all the real estate speculators trying to turn more of our farmland into ugly McMansions.
There's plenty of higher-density, lower COL development happening along the far east edge of the city.
If there's one thing Wisconsin has no shortage of, it's farmland. Losing some farmland near Madison is not a concern when literally 40% of the state is farmland.
QuoteSadly, it's a foregone conclusion that it's going in, I fear. They went ahead and built the overpasses for this interchange 10+ years ago when they expanded I-94 to 3x3.
The only way I'd support this new interchange is if the developers and speculators pay for it.
We all pay taxes for stuff we don't use. Why did my tax dollars help fund the I-94 Racine/Kenosha County upgrade, even though I never use it? This interchange would be helpful for a lot of people.
Quote
Between the cost of building it without generating weaving problems, the weaving problems that will result if it isn't built to negate them, and the negative land use impacts, the best alternative at Milwaukee Street is No Build. This is an unneeded interchange and is literally using induced demand to justify its construction.
It would be about a mile between the eastern merge point of the Badger and the off ramp to Milwaukee St. Is that not long enough?
Quote from: westerninterloper on April 19, 2023, 03:40:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 19, 2023, 02:43:24 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 02:38:02 PM
Affordable housing, not overpriced, oversized, cheaply built sprawl on the periphery.
People need housing, not debt slavery.
People have the free will to enter into the transactions that they wish.
AKA, "Both the destitute and the filthy rich have the right to live under a bridge."
Even if the only housing that is build is "overpriced, oversized, cheaply built sprawl," that's better for Dane County's housing issues than nothing. Some people like that style of house - and it's not WIDOT's responsibility to also determine local land use anyway.
I'm sure that CTH V will be upgraded as soon as Buc-ee's starts building.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 02:38:02 PM
Affordable housing, not overpriced, oversized, cheaply built sprawl on the periphery.
People need housing, not debt slavery.
Many to most of the crystal ball gazing development related discussions that I have read and seen in recent years seem to agree that as the Baby Boomers and more recent demographic groups move on and die off that the younger crowd that will be replacing them will be progressively far less interested as a whole in that type of residential, the the point that by the later part of the century (we will pretty much all be long gong and forgotten by then, though), many of these suburban style single family tract neighborhoods will have become very slummy and run down. Yes, the poor build quality of many of these newer houses will be a factor in this. Thus, I'm not too terribly worried about this for the long term. I would design the streets to make the needed connections, but not specifically set them to encourage the development.
Mike
How can anyone project what housing preferences will be in 50 years?
Be careful when making future predictions, no matter how educated you are. One is far more likely to be wrong than to be right. And the farther out your prediction is, the more likely it will be inaccurate. I always take future predictions with a grain of salt, and usually don't make them myself.
Here is another article on the flex lanes in Madison: https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/madison-flex-lane-tweaks-see-morning-commutes-move-later/ar-AA1a6IlU?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=51214293fb7c48949c5154ee6942b201&ei=108
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 11:00:10 AM
Ooh we have alternatives now. This will be fun.
Gonna start with the East Town Interchange because I see two alternatives here that are non-starters. There is way too much commuter traffic continuing on East Wash between the Isthmus and Sun Prairie to force that traffic to exit at a diamond and weave its way under a system interchange between US 151 and the interstate. I know WisDOT has been a fan of trying to separate system and surface traffic like that at places like Beloit, Green Bay and Wausau, but that is NOT going to work in this location. Therefore only their alternatives 1 and 2 are viable.
Next I'll note my surprise that WisDOT sees the need for collector/distributor roadways between the Badger Interchange and the East Town Interchange since that's a fairly long distance, but I guess. Alternative 1 for the Badger interchange is better because it uses less land. Big fan of moving all the left exits to the right. The existing left-hand ramps are a big disruption to the flow of things, in my experience.
I do not support the addition of interchanges to the Triplex at Hoepker Rd or at I-94 and the east end of Milwaukee St. Those will only encourage more sprawl and create more future issues with traffic merging on the freeway. These freeways are to move vehicles thru Madison, not to subsidize real estate development. I don't want to see this corridor clogged with more interchanges. There are plenty as is. The Hoepker Rd one is particularly egregious since it's so close to US 51. Nuts to that. I like that it's a few miles between exits as one drives by Madison.
Some of those alternatives for WI 19 are overkill. A flyover NB->WB? I don't see that happening. Same deal for that U-ramp bullcrap. I think I'm on board with the idea of switching the grading so WI 19 can bridge the railroad.
The DDI's at US 51 and County V are inevitable, I feel. Good on them
I'd really like to see County CS turned into a diamond, just like they're doing to WI 60 right now. The Pilot at that exit is the reason. It'll make it easier for trucks to enter and exit the freeway to not deal with a loop.
Cascade Interchange, alternative 2 is better. No need for such a high speed, expensive ramp from EB to NB in Alt 1.
WI 33's two interchanges with the freeways, go with the diamonds again. Though I might tighten up the I-39 diamond so it impacts fewer wetlands.
At the Dells Parkway, I'd favor retaining the existing parclo but with the addition of a distributor ramp NB->WB that bypasses the ramp terminal signal at the south end of the interchange. Just like how US 14 hits the Beltline in Madison.
Finally, I think the split diamond is the way to go at WI 13/County H. The other option impacts protected DNR land along Hulbert Creek, a class 1 trout stream. I've actually fished that creek just upstream from the interstate and the existing culvert under the ramps is somewhat of a barrier to fish passage from what I could see.
A few notes after a quick look-see of he proposal
- Like with the engineers at WisDOT, I also see the need for CD lanes between the Badger and East Town interchanges - that highway carries a _lot_ of traffic and CD lanes will keep things simpler and more manageable for the drivers (like with ON 401), especially those who are not from the Madison area.
- I also much prefer the alternatives for the east Town interchange that do no feed Washington (Boulevard?) directly into US 151 to and from the northeast, IMHO that is now a nasty left exit/entrance situation. I would definitely keep the freeway through traffic separate from the surface street traffic. As for the access between Washington Bd and US 151 toward Sun Prairie, The ramps in alt. 4 (my current preferred option) should be adequate (make the intersection a roundabout?). I find it interesting that both of those options include a 'split diamond' connection between the interstates and Washington and High Crossing.
I also prefer the second option for the Badger interchange, it has a much more logical through traffic feed for I-94 than the first one.
I have always been a firm adherent of the 'KISS' principal.
Mike
I would contend there is more traffic continuing on US 151 than there is traffic going to/from the interstate in any given direction, so it would be more appropriate to treat it like the thru route it is.
The SB off ramp to continue on East Wash from 151 in the alternatives that force that traffic to exit will be hopelessly clogged every single morning.
Using WisDOT traffic count information, if I haven't screwed this up, I've got about an AADT of 20,000 continuing on US 151 thru this interchange.
That should be both directions, so 10k each direction.
That is less than the traffic going between the Badger and Sun Prairie, so I can understand wanting that to be the 'thru' route, however those proposed exits in alts 3 & 4 are going to be clogged.
For comparison, an AADT of 10k is about what exits the Beltline WB at Nolen Dr. Forcing that volume of traffic to exit and turn left in order to keep going 'straight' seems very sub-optimal to me.
Sort of a side complaint, but alts 3 and 4 would throw into question the routing of US 151 thru the isthmus in the future. :think
Quote from: mgk920 on April 20, 2023, 02:15:49 PM
I have always been a firm adherent of the 'KISS' principal.
Mike
Gene Simmons?
Should one of the options of not feeding US 151 to the northeast into Washington BD is what WisDOT goes with, how much of that commuter traffic between the interstates and the central Isthmus or beyond will be diverting to I-39/90/94 and WI 30 or the Beltline (origin - destination studies)? IMHO, if what you are saying is correct,that will take noticeable amounts of overhead traffic off of the major surface streets that pass through that the University area.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on April 20, 2023, 07:53:38 PM
Should one of the options of not feeding US 151 to the northeast into Washington BD is what WisDOT goes with, how much of that commuter traffic between the interstates and the central Isthmus or beyond will be diverting to I-39/90/94 and WI 30 or the Beltline (origin - destination studies)? IMHO, if what you are saying is correct,that will take noticeable amounts of overhead traffic off of the major surface streets that pass through that the University area.
Mike
What think the vast majority of traffic is local coming to and from Madison.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 20, 2023, 09:08:36 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on April 20, 2023, 07:53:38 PM
Should one of the options of not feeding US 151 to the northeast into Washington BD is what WisDOT goes with, how much of that commuter traffic between the interstates and the central Isthmus or beyond will be diverting to I-39/90/94 and WI 30 or the Beltline (origin - destination studies)? IMHO, if what you are saying is correct,that will take noticeable amounts of overhead traffic off of the major surface streets that pass through that the University area.
Mike
What think the vast majority of traffic is local coming to and from Madison.
You are correct in that one of my friends commutes daily from Columbus, WI into the City of Madison via US 151. He gets off at American Parkway to go to his job at American family Insurance.
Also, whatever is decided here will almost certainly not begin construction until after the I-41 project between Appleton and De Pere is completed in or after 2029.
Mike
I would agree that any improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor will not be constructed until the 2030s at the earliest, same for any improvements to the adjacent US 51/Stoughton Rd. corridor. It will be built in phases, and that all improvements will likely not be complete until the 2040s. I also expect US 151 through Madison will likely remain on its existing alignment, and not be transferred to the Beltline and the Interstates.
We'll probably have Bus Rapid Transit extended out to Sun Prairie long before anything breaks ground to rebuild the East Town interchange.
Don't know how much that'll help, but it won't be zero.
Forcing US-151 thru traffic to stop at the interchange with 39/90/94 cannot be an option. There's way too much traffic. To me, the obvious choice is building a flyover from 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB.
Quote from: thspfc on April 22, 2023, 01:15:45 PM
Forcing US-151 thru traffic to stop at the interchange with 39/90/94 cannot be an option. There's way too much traffic. To me, the obvious choice is building a flyover from 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB.
All the alternatives for an interchange rebuild have free flowing movements between US 151 to Sun Prairie and I-39/90/94 south of the interchange. The diamond interchange would be mixed in with free flow ramps for local traffic. I'm on with the design. It gives high speed ramps to the ramps that are needed, replaces the loop ramp from south US 151, and E. Washington has signals any ways so it's ok for traditional ramps for local traffic.
Quote from: thspfc on April 22, 2023, 01:15:45 PM
Forcing US-151 thru traffic to stop at the interchange with 39/90/94 cannot be an option. There's way too much traffic. To me, the obvious choice is building a flyover from 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB.
Absolutely agree. US 151 on both the northeast end and southwest end of Madison are practically regionally freeways and should be treated as such with free flow ramps to divert traffic off of the local roads inside of the Interstate and Beltline. I actually could see 151 being converted to interstate standards between Dubuque and Fond du Lac sometime in the next 20 years.
I think US-151 between Madison and FdL is the most logical next interstate in Wisconsin.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 22, 2023, 10:52:53 PM
I think US-151 between Madison and FdL is the most logical next interstate in Wisconsin.
Nothing else in Wisconsin needs to be interstate though upgrading US 151 to freeway to Beaver Dam would be useful (though it would destroy access to Schultz's Cheese Shop, my favorite little cheese stop along the highway between Green Bay and Madison). I'd rather have a better connection between WI 26 and US 151 rather than two lane CTH A.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on April 22, 2023, 10:52:53 PM
I think US-151 between Madison and FdL is the most logical next interstate in Wisconsin.
Traffic counts don't support it past Beaver Dam. And certainly not past WI-26.
A couple of clarifications regarding the discussion of the I 39/90/94 study alternatives.: First, it is the East Towne (not East Town) area. Secondly, it's East Washington Avenue (not street or boulevard), no one in Madison says just Washington. E. Washington Ave. and W. Washington Ave. are almost considered to be separate streets divided by the Capitol Square.
Regarding the alternatives, I like the suggestion of the northbound bypass for US 12 to WB I-90 at the ramp terminal stoplights at exit 92 at Lake Delton a la S. Park St. at the Beltline. However, this may be short-lived. Once the Sauk City bypass is ever constructed, I imagine the additional traffic will warrant a free flow system interchange at I-90.
I also like the alignment of the northbound offramp at STH 19 aligning with County Trunk CV.
I don't care for removing the trumpet at STH 13 at the Dells.
Is the redo of the I-39 split at Cascade Mountain really warranted? Seems like a lot of effort for little benefit.
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on April 23, 2023, 03:01:32 PM
A couple of clarifications regarding the discussion of the I 39/90/94 study alternatives.: First, it is the East Towne (not East Town) area.
This might be the most obnoxious nitpick I've ever seen here.
Quote from: thspfc on April 23, 2023, 04:27:27 PM
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on April 23, 2023, 03:01:32 PM
A couple of clarifications regarding the discussion of the I 39/90/94 study alternatives.: First, it is the East Towne (not East Town) area.
This might be the most obnoxious nitpick I've ever seen here.
Especially since WisDOT's own maps in the study website say 'Washington Boulevard'. That had me confused, too.
Mike
More information on the proposed j-turn on US 18/151 at CTH F is located here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us18-bluemounds/default.aspx
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 24, 2023, 10:42:37 AM
More information on the proposed j-turn on US 18/151 at CTH F is located here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us18-bluemounds/default.aspx
There's also a proposed J Turn on County C on US 151 south of Waupun. It's used more than nearby Wis 68 because County C directly connects US 151 with Fox Lake and Wis 68 requires traffic to travel through Waupun.
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us151-cintersection/default.aspx
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 24, 2023, 10:42:37 AM
More information on the proposed j-turn on US 18/151 at CTH F is located here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us18-bluemounds/default.aspx
Total waste of money. An interchange would be far far better. And is long overdue.
Penny wise, pound foolish. How long did those "J-turns" last on WI 29 in western Brown County? Like 3 years? Then they got the money to do it correctly. So yeah the early effort is effectively wasted.
Construction of the J-turn at CTH-F is the short-term plan, and an interchange at that location is the long-term plan. I'm sure the US 18/151 corridor will eventually be converted to freeway standards, but it will be a long and slow process, just like the other freeway-conversion studies around the state.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 24, 2023, 04:48:06 PM
Construction of the J-turn at CTH-F is the short-term plan, and an interchange at that location is the long-term plan. I'm sure the US 18/151 corridor will eventually be converted to freeway standards, but it will be a long and slow process, just like the other freeway-conversion studies around the state.
Yeah I don't understand the criticism here. Sure it will eventually be a full interchange. But they don't have the money for that now, so they may as well improve safety in the short term and do the full thing later.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 24, 2023, 04:38:05 PM
Penny wise, pound foolish. How long did those "J-turns" last on WI 29 in western Brown County? Like 3 years? Then they got the money to do it correctly. So yeah the early effort is effectively wasted.
Those J-turns on Hwy 29 were poorly planned - I'll grant you that much. This stretch of US-151 is a much better candidate. I highly doubt this section of US-151 is going to grow so much in traffic so quickly that this J-turn will become a waste.
Quote from: midwesternroadguy on April 23, 2023, 03:01:32 PM
A couple of clarifications regarding the discussion of the I 39/90/94 study alternatives.: First, it is the East Towne (not East Town) area. Secondly, it's East Washington Avenue (not street or boulevard), no one in Madison says just Washington. E. Washington Ave. and W. Washington Ave. are almost considered to be separate streets divided by the Capitol Square.
Regarding the alternatives, I like the suggestion of the northbound bypass for US 12 to WB I-90 at the ramp terminal stoplights at exit 92 at Lake Delton a la S. Park St. at the Beltline. However, this may be short-lived. Once the Sauk City bypass is ever constructed, I imagine the additional traffic will warrant a free flow system interchange at I-90.
I also like the alignment of the northbound offramp at STH 19 aligning with County Trunk CV.
I don't care for removing the trumpet at STH 13 at the Dells.
Is the redo of the I-39 split at Cascade Mountain really warranted? Seems like a lot of effort for little benefit.
Actually, not a lot of people say "E. Washington" either. They say "East Wash".
They have been installing temporary signals on wires along East Washington Ave. in Madison. I believe it is part of the construction of the proposed bus rapid transit line.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 26, 2023, 04:11:07 PM
They have been installing temporary signals on wires along East Washington Ave. in Madison. I believe it is part of the construction of the proposed bus rapid transit line.
Noticed several along Mineral Point Rd as well. Nice to see shovels finally turning on BRT after being stuck in Madtown "analysis paralysis" for the last 5+ years.
EDIT. Map of the under construction BRT lines:
(https://i.imgur.com/DJUOGRP.png)
City of Madison
The local bus system, Madison Metro is undergoing a route overhaul beginning on Sunday, June 11: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign. Most of the new routes will be lettered routes (as were all routes prior to 1998). The four transfer points that were constructed in 1998 will be eliminated as well. I have mixed feelings about the redesign. I like the current numbered routes, and after the redesign, a few of the routes I could take will be less direct than before. Nevertheless, the city obviously felt that 25 years under the current system was enough, and it was time for an update, so I (and everyone else) will have to make do.
Quote from: on_wisconsin on April 29, 2023, 01:38:23 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 26, 2023, 04:11:07 PM
They have been installing temporary signals on wires along East Washington Ave. in Madison. I believe it is part of the construction of the proposed bus rapid transit line.
Noticed several along Mineral Point Rd as well. Nice to see shovels finally turning on BRT after being stuck in Madtown "analysis paralysis" for the last 5+ years.
EDIT. Map of the under construction BRT lines:
(https://i.imgur.com/DJUOGRP.png)
City of Madison
What is the point of the green and blue lines? Will that be more frequent service or will they extend those lines in the future?
Perhaps the Frequently Asked Questions page will provide you with more information: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/bus-rapid-transit/frequently-asked-questions.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 12:12:11 PM
Perhaps the Frequently Asked Questions page will provide you with more information: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/bus-rapid-transit/frequently-asked-questions.
Maybe I'm blind but I didn't see the answer there though it did mention this is merely phase 1 so I'm guessing that means they will use the other colored lines as expansions apart from the red line. Makes sense.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 29, 2023, 12:22:49 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 12:12:11 PM
Perhaps the Frequently Asked Questions page will provide you with more information: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/bus-rapid-transit/frequently-asked-questions.
Maybe I'm blind but I didn't see the answer there though it did mention this is merely phase 1 so I'm guessing that means they will use the other colored lines as expansions apart from the red line. Makes sense.
More or less. The dashed lines are local service (non-BRT) continuations of the green and blue lines that are tentatively planned to be upgraded in phase 2, depending on demand/ funding.
The green line will essentially replace Metro's current route 4, while the blue line replaces route 70. Red Line (core) service will basically replace the high ridership portions of current route 2 along with parts of 15 & 67 on the west side and route 6 east of the square.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 11:41:07 AM
The local bus system, Madison Metro is undergoing a route overhaul beginning on Sunday, June 11: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign.
Looking at the routes that are relevant to me; I can still get where I'd need to go but I find it curious that the city hall area of Fitchburg will now be detached from the Fish Hatchery corridor which seems odd to me. Maybe as the Lacy Rd area west of US 14 starts filling in it will make better sense.
In other arenas, construction of the new interchange at US 12/18 and CTH AB east of the dump is well underway. Genuinely shocked this is being done before US 12 at CTH K. Both are needed, don't get me wrong, but clearly the priority should be to eliminate that signal at K.
WI 26 discussion moved to Fictional Highways (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33246.0).
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 01, 2023, 01:11:51 AM
WI 26 discussion moved to Fictional Highways (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33246.0).
Why would you do that? Outside of a couple posts talking about a bypass, most of the discussion was about actual highways. Move it to the "Wisconsin" topic? Sure. Fictional? Silly decision.
Unless there is an actual proposal for STH 26 to bypass Rosendale (and I don't think there is), I agree with Administrator Scott5114's decision to move STH 26 discussion to Fictional Highways.
Discussion about whether a bypass is needed is not fictional and should not have been moved. Discussion about hypothetical plans for said bypass would be fictional. But aside from one or two posts, the main point of contention was whether a bypass or new ramps were needed.
Why would a WIS 26 discussion be in a Madison thread? It doesn't go through or anywhere near Madison.
My thoughts exactly. Discussion about STH 26 should be in Wisconsin Notes, real projects along STH 26 that is.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 01, 2023, 07:54:26 PM
My thoughts exactly. Discussion about STH 26 should be in Wisconsin Notes, real projects along STH 26 that is.
Right. That's where it should have been moved. Not to Fictional Highways.
Even the mapped bypass was more answering a question about how viable it would be.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 29, 2023, 05:21:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 11:41:07 AM
The local bus system, Madison Metro is undergoing a route overhaul beginning on Sunday, June 11: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign.
Looking at the routes that are relevant to me; I can still get where I'd need to go but I find it curious that the city hall area of Fitchburg will now be detached from the Fish Hatchery corridor which seems odd to me. Maybe as the Lacy Rd area west of US 14 starts filling in it will make better sense.
Looking at the new route and being numbered vs lettered, guessing a few biotech firms along the busline are helping fund it. Similar to the EpicLand routes to Verona or the UW circulators.
https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign/route-65
QuoteIn other arenas, construction of the new interchange at US 12/18 and CTH AB east of the dump is well underway. Genuinely shocked this is being done before US 12 at CTH K. Both are needed, don't get me wrong, but clearly the priority should be to eliminate that signal at K.
^This... It's somewhat hard to imagine US 12/ CTH AB intersection is a larger accident blackspot than CTH K, especially with the topography there. But then the latter doesn't have a casino and a large country club next to it so you know...
Quote from: on_wisconsin on May 02, 2023, 02:17:10 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 29, 2023, 05:21:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 11:41:07 AM
The local bus system, Madison Metro is undergoing a route overhaul beginning on Sunday, June 11: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign.
Looking at the routes that are relevant to me; I can still get where I'd need to go but I find it curious that the city hall area of Fitchburg will now be detached from the Fish Hatchery corridor which seems odd to me. Maybe as the Lacy Rd area west of US 14 starts filling in it will make better sense.
Looking at the new route and being numbered vs lettered, guessing a few biotech firms along the busline are helping fund it. Similar to the EpicLand routes to Verona or the UW circulators.
https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign/route-65
That route along Fish Hatchery ends just north of the biotech firms. I think it is more collecting the people who live in the hundreds of apartments around that shopping center just north of McKee Farms.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 02, 2023, 08:33:32 AM
Quote from: on_wisconsin on May 02, 2023, 02:17:10 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 29, 2023, 05:21:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 29, 2023, 11:41:07 AM
The local bus system, Madison Metro is undergoing a route overhaul beginning on Sunday, June 11: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign.
Looking at the routes that are relevant to me; I can still get where I'd need to go but I find it curious that the city hall area of Fitchburg will now be detached from the Fish Hatchery corridor which seems odd to me. Maybe as the Lacy Rd area west of US 14 starts filling in it will make better sense.
Looking at the new route and being numbered vs lettered, guessing a few biotech firms along the busline are helping fund it. Similar to the EpicLand routes to Verona or the UW circulators.
https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/routes-schedules/transit-network-redesign/route-65
That route along Fish Hatchery ends just north of the biotech firms. I think it is more collecting the people who live in the hundreds of apartments around that shopping center just north of McKee Farms.
Was thinking more along the lines of Promega which has large campus on Cheryl Pkwy. Exact Sciences also has a large facility just off Rimrock.
My apologies. I was looking at the wrong link. I think your thoughts are accurate.
BTW, having grown up in the 70s and 80s in the area of Fish Hatchery and Irish Lane, the growth around there still boggles my mind. I was just around there last weekend and parts of it are becoming completely unrecognizable to me.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 26, 2023, 04:11:07 PM
They have been installing temporary signals on wires along East Washington Ave. in Madison. I believe it is part of the construction of the proposed bus rapid transit line.
Really Washington Ave was redone not that long ago and I never thought the road was in any kind of disrepair.
The portion between Blair St. and Thierer Rd./Portage Rd. was reconstructed between 2004 and 2010 (with a construction break in 2008. The portion from Thierer Rd./Portage Rd. to East Springs Dr. was reconstructed in 2012 (only the pavement was replaced, and bike lanes were added). This PDF from April 6th includes more information: https://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/documents/brt/ConstructionEastSide_20230406.pdf.
The reconstruction project didn't include the US 51/Stoughton Rd Intersection and the Blair St Intersection which is being reconstructed right now.
There are temporary signals being installed on Mineral Point Rd, Whitney Way, University Ave, and now E. Washington St.
When "BRT" utilizes existing streets - even if it has dedicated lanes, it's still not Bus Rapid Transit.
Quote from: SSOWorld on May 08, 2023, 07:53:21 PM
When "BRT" utilizes existing streets - even if it has dedicated lanes, it's still not Bus Rapid Transit.
What about signal priority?
Quote from: Rothman on May 08, 2023, 09:01:43 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on May 08, 2023, 07:53:21 PM
When "BRT" utilizes existing streets - even if it has dedicated lanes, it's still not Bus Rapid Transit.
What about signal priority?
Works, but still cross streets.
True BRT has it's own right-of-way and is set up like a dedicated rail.
Quote from: SSOWorld on May 08, 2023, 10:08:11 PM
Ideally, BRT has it's own right-of-way and is set up like a dedicated rail.
Wouldn't that be more accurate? ;)
Channel3000.com (the local CBS affiliate) has a feature article discussing the Flex Lanes on the Madison Beltline:
Behind the scenes: A look at the nerve center that monitors the Flex Lanes and other Wisconsin highways
https://www.channel3000.com/news/behind-the-scenes-a-look-at-the-nerve-center-that-monitors-the-flex-lanes-and/article_68832048-e07c-11ed-9764-1b6521fe2bdd.html (https://www.channel3000.com/news/behind-the-scenes-a-look-at-the-nerve-center-that-monitors-the-flex-lanes-and/article_68832048-e07c-11ed-9764-1b6521fe2bdd.html)
Has anyone used the Beltline flex lanes?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 09, 2023, 02:02:52 PM
Has anyone used the Beltline flex lanes?
Yep. Not really all that remarkable.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 09, 2023, 02:02:52 PM
Has anyone used the Beltline flex lanes?
Yes and it's really helped my afternoon commute! It's helped a lot during rush hour and they work great as long as there isn't a crash! There have been a lot of speed limit 55 signs posted in the median recently since so many people drive between 70-80 mph in that lane when it's open.
I was actually on the Beltline last Friday when they turned the flex lanes on for the afternoon rush. Though I was already east of the more typically congested part of the Beltline, obviously there was a noticeable improvement to the flow of things. Even used it myself as other cars were jostling for position at the Stoughton Rd exit.
I have also seen cheaters using it when its supposed to be closed just so they can keep doing 70 or whatever. One was one of those crotch rocket donorcycles, but those people are maniacs anyway.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 10, 2023, 09:51:37 AM
I was actually on the Beltline last Friday when they turned the flex lanes on for the afternoon rush. Though I was already east of the more typically congested part of the Beltline, obviously there was a noticeable improvement to the flow of things. Even used it myself as other cars were jostling for position at the Stoughton Rd exit.
I have also seen cheaters using it when its supposed to be closed just so they can keep doing 70 or whatever. One was one of those crotch rocket donorcycles, but those people are maniacs anyway.
I thought you didn't believe in the concept of speeding? What changed?
Quote from: SSOWorld on May 08, 2023, 10:08:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on May 08, 2023, 09:01:43 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on May 08, 2023, 07:53:21 PM
When "BRT" utilizes existing streets - even if it has dedicated lanes, it's still not Bus Rapid Transit.
What about signal priority?
Works, but still cross streets.
True BRT has it's own right-of-way and is set up like a dedicated rail.
Hopefully, the City is using BRT as a proof of concept/ stepping stone for a potential streetcar system.
A streetcar line was proposed in the mid-2000s (a pet project of former mayor Dave Cieslewicz) and was not constructed. On the question of "what would induce you to ride the streetcar?", I posted the following: "I would only ride the streetcar if it picked me up at my doorstep and dropped me off right at my destination 24/7 without waiting or transfers." A commuter rail line from the Transport 2020 proposal was also turned down. I support the present Bus Rapid Transit proposal and prefer buses to trains.
Quote from: thspfc on May 10, 2023, 10:50:48 AM
I thought you didn't believe in the concept of speeding? What changed?
Nuance! Ever heard of it? Doing 70 on a crowded urban freeway posted at 55 is NOT the same thing as being in the middle of decelerating and technically still like 5 over the posted limit being strictly enforced by corrupt, fascist cops.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 11, 2023, 02:36:49 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 10, 2023, 10:50:48 AM
I thought you didn't believe in the concept of speeding? What changed?
Nuance! Ever heard of it? Doing 70 on a crowded urban freeway posted at 55 is NOT the same thing as being in the middle of decelerating and technically still like 5 over the posted limit being strictly enforced by corrupt, fascist cops.
Both are breaking the law and potentially dangerous. And whether the cops are "corrupt" or "fascist" (they're not) is irrelevant to whether or not you're breaking the law.
Quote from: thspfc on May 11, 2023, 03:36:31 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 11, 2023, 02:36:49 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 10, 2023, 10:50:48 AM
I thought you didn't believe in the concept of speeding? What changed?
Nuance! Ever heard of it? Doing 70 on a crowded urban freeway posted at 55 is NOT the same thing as being in the middle of decelerating and technically still like 5 over the posted limit being strictly enforced by corrupt, fascist cops.
Both are breaking the law and potentially dangerous. And whether the cops are "corrupt" or "fascist" (they're not) is irrelevant to whether or not you're breaking the law.
Somebody must've gotten pulled over once in Rosendale.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 09, 2023, 09:37:59 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on May 08, 2023, 10:08:11 PM
Ideally, BRT has it's own right-of-way and is set up like a dedicated rail.
Wouldn't that be more accurate? ;)
If it doesn't have its own right of way, then what makes it different from a normal bus?
Signal prioritization lets the BRT through the intersection before regular traffic.
Stations are designed like light rail stations with elevated platforms, awnings, and digital signage indicating when the next bus arrives.
There are also fewer stops than a typical bus route.
The only one of those that makes the buses run much faster is the signal prioritization, and that only matters if the bus isn't stuck behind cars, which it likely will be if it doesn't have its own right of way.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 10, 2023, 09:51:37 AM
I have also seen cheaters using it when its supposed to be closed just so they can keep doing 70 or whatever. One was one of those crotch rocket donorcycles, but those people are maniacs anyway.
Sounds like they needed some of these. Probably not feasible, given the sheer distance of the flex lanes, but these might've helped. No, they wouldn't need to be spaced this closely.
https://goo.gl/maps/rbroDrK8boQdRJ2a8
Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 12, 2023, 09:48:16 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 10, 2023, 09:51:37 AM
I have also seen cheaters using it when its supposed to be closed just so they can keep doing 70 or whatever. One was one of those crotch rocket donorcycles, but those people are maniacs anyway.
Sounds like they needed some of these. Probably not feasible, given the sheer distance of the flex lanes, but these might've helped. No, they wouldn't need to be spaced this closely.
https://goo.gl/maps/rbroDrK8boQdRJ2a8
I feel like those could cause collisions when speeding clowns have to merge right into thick, slower traffic to avoid them.
Broom Street is closed at John Nolen for much of the summer. North Shore or Blair are the options, although you couldn't make a left turn from Blair to East Wash :-/
Speaking of John Nolen Dr., there is a proposed reconstruction project planned in the near future: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/john-nolen-drive.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 22, 2023, 10:53:37 AM
Speaking of John Nolen Dr., there is a proposed reconstruction project planned in the near future: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/john-nolen-drive.
It sure needs it more than Washington Ave does.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 19, 2023, 11:00:10 AM
Ooh we have alternatives now. This will be fun.
Gonna start with the East Town Interchange because I see two alternatives here that are non-starters. There is way too much commuter traffic continuing on East Wash between the Isthmus and Sun Prairie to force that traffic to exit at a diamond and weave its way under a system interchange between US 151 and the interstate. I know WisDOT has been a fan of trying to separate system and surface traffic like that at places like Beloit, Green Bay and Wausau, but that is NOT going to work in this location. Therefore only their alternatives 1 and 2 are viable.
Next I'll note my surprise that WisDOT sees the need for collector/distributor roadways between the Badger Interchange and the East Town Interchange since that's a fairly long distance, but I guess. Alternative 1 for the Badger interchange is better because it uses less land. Big fan of moving all the left exits to the right. The existing left-hand ramps are a big disruption to the flow of things, in my experience.
I do not support the addition of interchanges to the Triplex at Hoepker Rd or at I-94 and the east end of Milwaukee St. Those will only encourage more sprawl and create more future issues with traffic merging on the freeway. These freeways are to move vehicles thru Madison, not to subsidize real estate development. I don't want to see this corridor clogged with more interchanges. There are plenty as is. The Hoepker Rd one is particularly egregious since it's so close to US 51. Nuts to that. I like that it's a few miles between exits as one drives by Madison.
Some of those alternatives for WI 19 are overkill. A flyover NB->WB? I don't see that happening. Same deal for that U-ramp bullcrap. I think I'm on board with the idea of switching the grading so WI 19 can bridge the railroad.
The DDI's at US 51 and County V are inevitable, I feel. Good on them
I'd really like to see County CS turned into a diamond, just like they're doing to WI 60 right now. The Pilot at that exit is the reason. It'll make it easier for trucks to enter and exit the freeway to not deal with a loop.
Cascade Interchange, alternative 2 is better. No need for such a high speed, expensive ramp from EB to NB in Alt 1.
WI 33's two interchanges with the freeways, go with the diamonds again. Though I might tighten up the I-39 diamond so it impacts fewer wetlands.
At the Dells Parkway, I'd favor retaining the existing parclo but with the addition of a distributor ramp NB->WB that bypasses the ramp terminal signal at the south end of the interchange. Just like how US 14 hits the Beltline in Madison.
Finally, I think the split diamond is the way to go at WI 13/County H. The other option impacts protected DNR land along Hulbert Creek, a class 1 trout stream. I've actually fished that creek just upstream from the interstate and the existing culvert under the ramps is somewhat of a barrier to fish passage from what I could see.
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
It makes complete sense. This is the only section of US-151 on a city street in-between the Mississippi and Fond du Lac. While it's understandable to want to have a signed navigable route to and through downtown Madison, there is no reason for through traffic on US-151 to follow the signed route.
I would not be opposed to a special "Capitol Loop" designation, but instead of following the existing designated US-151 routing, I'd route it on E. Washington, Blair
Ave St, and John Nolen Dr back to the Beltline. I don't see a purpose for Park St. or
Regent Proudfit St to have a state highway designation, though if the City of Madison so desired, it could designate a University Loop to connect the Beltline to the UW campus.
After the Beltline opened ca. 1951, there was a City US 12 and 14, and possibly a City US 18. City 12/14 followed University Avenue (to campus) to Park Street where it turned south until the two highways split at Olin Avenue. I remember the yellow shields for these business routes until their removal about 1970. I don't remember yellow shields for City 18 (would have been Nakoma Road to Monroe Street to Regent Street to Park Street. I wish they had remained for wayfinding purposes, even though they didn't go all the way to the Capitol Square.
Quote from: JREwing78 on May 27, 2023, 03:35:17 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
It makes complete sense. This is the only section of US-151 on a city street in-between the Mississippi and Fond du Lac. While it's understandable to want to have a signed navigable route to and through downtown Madison, there is no reason for through traffic on US-151 to follow the signed route.
I would not be opposed to a special "Capitol Loop" designation, but instead of following the existing designated US-151 routing, I'd route it on E. Washington, Blair Ave, and John Nolen Dr back to the Beltline. I don't see a purpose for Park St. or Regent St to have a state highway designation, though if the City of Madison so desired, it could designate a University Loop to connect the Beltline to the UW campus.
Completely agree on the routing. BTW, I believe technically US-151 doesn't go onto Regent Street - it is on Proudfit St. just to the east of Washington Avenue. Those two streets only started meeting at a common intersection with West Washington sometime in the late 80s I believe.
WisDOT removed the Business 41 designation from several cities in the late 1990s, saying they did not belong in larger cities. With that, I doubt Business 151 would be used there.
Quote from: mgk920 on May 27, 2023, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
I've always thought that the route from the freeway to the capital should be "WI-1". Yes, I know it breaks the rules, and it doesn't really matter - I just think it would be cool!
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
IMHO, rerouting US 151 to follow the interstates (which I fully support) would also make it much more likely that the forthcoming re-engineering of the highways after 2030 (currently under study) will include free-flowing ramps and other through surface street connections at the E Washington Ave 'East Towne Interchange'.
Mike
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 28, 2023, 09:24:11 AM
Completely agree on the routing. BTW, I believe technically US-151 doesn't go onto Regent Street - it is on Proudfit St. just to the east of Washington Avenue. Those two streets only started meeting at a common intersection with West Washington sometime in the late 80s I believe.
Correct. And it's Blair St. not Ave.
Quote from: JREwing78 on May 28, 2023, 02:24:54 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 28, 2023, 09:24:11 AM
Completely agree on the routing. BTW, I believe technically US-151 doesn't go onto Regent Street - it is on Proudfit St. just to the east of Washington Avenue. Those two streets only started meeting at a common intersection with West Washington sometime in the late 80s I believe.
Correct. And it's Blair St. not Ave.
Correct on the US 151 was never on Regent St, heading west down West Washington before going south on Park to the Beltline. Gotta love how having a triplex wasn't enough so the Beltline was a quadraplex of US 12-14-18-151 between Verona Rd and Park. However, Regent and Proudfit did meet at West Washington when I was living there in the late 70s. This city map from 1966 (https://collections.lib.uwm.edu/digital/collection/agdm/id/24708/rec/10) shows it's been that way since at least then. It is interesting to see on the map how much of the street pattern near the intersection has been reconfigured with the new Kohl Center since then, so I can understand thinking Regent/Proudfit at Washington being different back then.
If it is true that they are discussing rerouting US 151 because of the potential Madison-to-Wisconsin Dells project, it makes complete sense. It wouldn't surprise me if they replace the Madison route with either 251, 351, 451 or Business 151. But is it possible that might make it a single digit? I don't understand the issue of not having a single digit highway in this state, with the exception of US 2 and US 8. Is it also possible that they expand Highway 30 or 113? Not necessarily as the entire Madison route but as a partial route. Say for instance, instead of 113 ending at 151, they just expand it and have it end at US 12-14-18-151.
I highly doubt US 151 will be rerouted within the Madison area. There really is no need to. Utilizing US 12/18 and Interstates 39/90/94 is sufficient to make an all-freeway journey around the Madison area without rerouting the US 151 designation.
I would liken it to how WisDOT slowly pulled US 41 off the city streets in the Milwaukee area. The thru traffic already knows which way to go to keep following US 151, moving the shields would just make it official.
So would this give Madison a
second quadplex, or do y'all think if they've got all the separate carriageways and stuff like in those alternatives, that means it won't count? :poke:
As far as the current routing thru the core of Madison, I actually think the most likely scenario is WisDOT hands it all over to the city. That way the city doesn't have to jump through as many hoops about what it does with the affected streets as the city keeps growing and infilling. Like if they want to narrow up the lanes on North Shore or build BRT on Park St, they won't have to run that by WisDOT since it won't be a "state highway" any more. It would be kind of like how the Layton Blvd reconstruction around the Millennium was the impetus for the first movement of US 41 onto the freeways over in MKE.
Though that does sort of leave WI 113 and WI 30 hanging. But so what? There's no rule about state highways having to end at other state highways. ;)
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 22, 2023, 10:53:37 AM
Speaking of John Nolen Dr., there is a proposed reconstruction project planned in the near future: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/john-nolen-drive.
Yes and boy is it needed. The pavement condition keeps getting worse with large chunks of concrete coming loose every winter by the Colosseum. The transition to the bridges is getting more and more harsh and one of those expansion joint plates is clearly loose from how much noise it makes when vehicles drive over it. I might also add the parallel bike path also suffers from poor pavement quality; you'll feel those bumps for sure.
I know I would also appreciate some more vertical clearance between the average water surface and the underside of the bridges. Yeah they're about the same as the railroad bridges, but Nolen is way wider and it would be nice to have a little more head room under there as you're paddling through, especially when the water is high. Give the cliff swallows more space. ;)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 30, 2023, 03:48:24 PM
I would liken it to how WisDOT slowly pulled US 41 off the city streets in the Milwaukee area. The thru traffic already knows which way to go to keep following US 151, moving the shields would just make it official.
So would this give Madison a second quadplex, or do y'all think if they've got all the separate carriageways and stuff like in those alternatives, that means it won't count? :poke:
As far as the current routing thru the core of Madison, I actually think the most likely scenario is WisDOT hands it all over to the city. That way the city doesn't have to jump through as many hoops about what it does with the affected streets as the city keeps growing and infilling. Like if they want to narrow up the lanes on North Shore or build BRT on Park St, they won't have to run that by WisDOT since it won't be a "state highway" any more. It would be kind of like how the Layton Blvd reconstruction around the Millennium was the impetus for the first movement of US 41 onto the freeways over in MKE.
Though that does sort of leave WI 113 and WI 30 hanging. But so what? There's no rule about state highways having to end at other state highways. ;)
Or you could extend WI-30 along Aberg and both could end at the Packers / Aberg intersection.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 31, 2023, 09:13:20 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 30, 2023, 03:48:24 PM
I would liken it to how WisDOT slowly pulled US 41 off the city streets in the Milwaukee area. The thru traffic already knows which way to go to keep following US 151, moving the shields would just make it official.
So would this give Madison a second quadplex, or do y'all think if they've got all the separate carriageways and stuff like in those alternatives, that means it won't count? :poke:
As far as the current routing thru the core of Madison, I actually think the most likely scenario is WisDOT hands it all over to the city. That way the city doesn't have to jump through as many hoops about what it does with the affected streets as the city keeps growing and infilling. Like if they want to narrow up the lanes on North Shore or build BRT on Park St, they won't have to run that by WisDOT since it won't be a "state highway" any more. It would be kind of like how the Layton Blvd reconstruction around the Millennium was the impetus for the first movement of US 41 onto the freeways over in MKE.
Though that does sort of leave WI 113 and WI 30 hanging. But so what? There's no rule about state highways having to end at other state highways. ;)
Or you could extend WI-30 along Aberg and both could end at the Packers / Aberg intersection.
Well, the part of US 41 on Milwaukee streets north of national Ave is still a state highway (WI 175).
How many 3DIs end at regular non-state highway city streets? Decommission the rest of WI 30 and replace it with an 'odd' 3DI number.
Mike
It's hard to believe that STH 30 once spanned from Madison to Milwaukee (although it was co-designated with other routes east of Goerke's Corners). I disagree that it should be an Interstate Highway, since the 30 designation has been around since 1923 (more information on STH 30 I and II are available here: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys30-39.html#STH-030), and I believe it should keep that designation.
I always thought that Wis 13 should be extended down Wis 113 and Wis 213 to Beloit. Have 30 end along Aberg at Packers or Have 30 follow the current 151 Washington corridor before heading out on University to end at 14 & 12. But that's pie in the sky.
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
Quote from: Big John on May 28, 2023, 09:50:16 AM
WisDOT removed the Business 41 designation from several cities in the late 1990s, saying they did not belong in larger cities. With that, I doubt Business 151 would be used there.
WISDOT requested for the business routes to be removed. It's ultimately up to the municipalities if they wanted to remove the business routes of not with the exception of Business 51 in Wausau, the only full WISDOT business route. Bus 51 is a WISDOT highway in Plover and Whiting, but was turned back to city of Stevens Point as a part of the US 10 project.
If US 151 was rerouted, the City of Madison could request a business route and locally sign it.
Otherwise, why not make a Bypass US 151 designation on I-90 and The Beltline? The only one in the state was short lived when Bypass US 53 existed along the partially complete Eau Claire Bypass and North Crossing until the bypass was fully opened.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 31, 2023, 07:45:18 PM
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
WI-13 was one of the original state highways. My guess is that they duplexed it with WI-12 (current US-12) because that was the best route to take at the time between Madison and Kilbourn. Even now, WI-113 might as well be a county highway north of Madison. It's narrow and curvy - hardly a major route.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 31, 2023, 08:58:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 31, 2023, 07:45:18 PM
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
WI-13 was one of the original state highways. My guess is that they duplexed it with WI-12 (current US-12) because that was the best route to take at the time between Madison and Kilbourn. Even now, WI-113 might as well be a county highway north of Madison. It's narrow and curvy - hardly a major route.
Wis 113 is very worthy of a state highway north of Madison. It is very busy between Madison and Waunakee. It's also becoming increasingly busy to Lodi. The intersection with County Hwys P/V is currently being reconstructed as a roundabout due to traffic at that intersection.
Wis 134 would be the state highway that should be a county highway. A 3 mile spur to the unincorporated community of London. Supposedly it was needed back in the day because London had a train station and nearby Cambridge did not.
Quote from: peterj920 on June 01, 2023, 04:42:55 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 31, 2023, 08:58:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 31, 2023, 07:45:18 PM
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
WI-13 was one of the original state highways. My guess is that they duplexed it with WI-12 (current US-12) because that was the best route to take at the time between Madison and Kilbourn. Even now, WI-113 might as well be a county highway north of Madison. It's narrow and curvy - hardly a major route.
Wis 113 is very worthy of a state highway north of Madison. It is very busy between Madison and Waunakee. It's also becoming increasingly busy to Lodi. The intersection with County Hwys P/V is currently being reconstructed as a roundabout due to traffic at that intersection.
Wis 134 would be the state highway that should be a county highway. A 3 mile spur to the unincorporated community of London. Supposedly it was needed back in the day because London had a train station and nearby Cambridge did not.
I agree on WI-134. But I could name a bunch of Dane County highways that are more worthy of being a state highway than WI-113.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 01, 2023, 04:47:41 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on June 01, 2023, 04:42:55 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 31, 2023, 08:58:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 31, 2023, 07:45:18 PM
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
WI-13 was one of the original state highways. My guess is that they duplexed it with WI-12 (current US-12) because that was the best route to take at the time between Madison and Kilbourn. Even now, WI-113 might as well be a county highway north of Madison. It's narrow and curvy - hardly a major route.
Wis 113 is very worthy of a state highway north of Madison. It is very busy between Madison and Waunakee. It's also becoming increasingly busy to Lodi. The intersection with County Hwys P/V is currently being reconstructed as a roundabout due to traffic at that intersection.
Wis 134 would be the state highway that should be a county highway. A 3 mile spur to the unincorporated community of London. Supposedly it was needed back in the day because London had a train station and nearby Cambridge did not.
I agree on WI-134. But I could name a bunch of Dane County highways that are more worthy of being a state highway than WI-113.
Travel Wis 113 during rush hour, there's way more traffic than you think.
County PB and Wis 69 could be swapped. The National Highway System has County PB and not Wis 69.
Wis 113 is a NHS route from Wis 19 west to the end at US 151.
Quote from: peterj920 on June 01, 2023, 04:54:55 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 01, 2023, 04:47:41 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on June 01, 2023, 04:42:55 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 31, 2023, 08:58:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 31, 2023, 07:45:18 PM
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
WI-13 was one of the original state highways. My guess is that they duplexed it with WI-12 (current US-12) because that was the best route to take at the time between Madison and Kilbourn. Even now, WI-113 might as well be a county highway north of Madison. It's narrow and curvy - hardly a major route.
Wis 113 is very worthy of a state highway north of Madison. It is very busy between Madison and Waunakee. It's also becoming increasingly busy to Lodi. The intersection with County Hwys P/V is currently being reconstructed as a roundabout due to traffic at that intersection.
Wis 134 would be the state highway that should be a county highway. A 3 mile spur to the unincorporated community of London. Supposedly it was needed back in the day because London had a train station and nearby Cambridge did not.
I agree on WI-134. But I could name a bunch of Dane County highways that are more worthy of being a state highway than WI-113.
Travel Wis 113 during rush hour, there's way more traffic than you think.
County PB and Wis 69 could be swapped. The National Highway System has County PB and not Wis 69.
Wis 113 is a NHS route from Wis 19 west to the end at US 151.
WI 113 was four lanes to CTH M back when I lived in Madtown in the late 70s. I remember it being pretty busy to the airport but never went past that. Added bonus: It's one of the few state highways that must be clinched with a free car ferry trip.
Quote from: peterj920 on June 01, 2023, 04:54:55 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 01, 2023, 04:47:41 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on June 01, 2023, 04:42:55 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 31, 2023, 08:58:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 31, 2023, 07:45:18 PM
STH 213 was part of STH 13 until 1961, when it was retracted to its present terminus west of Wisconsin Dells: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys200-399.html#STH-213. STH 113 was commissioned as an alternative to STH 13 and STH (soon-to-be US) 12 when the former was extended from Kilbourn (present-day Wisconsin Dells) to Beloit in 1923. I think STH 113 should have been part of STH 13 to begin with. I think the duplex with STH/US 12 to Madison, and the duplex with US 14 (after 1933) from Madison to Evansville was unnecessary. Alas, all that is ancient history, as STH 13 was retracted due to the construction of Interstates 90 and 94 (as well as the unnecessary co-currency with US 12 and US 14, which lasted 77 miles).
WI-13 was one of the original state highways. My guess is that they duplexed it with WI-12 (current US-12) because that was the best route to take at the time between Madison and Kilbourn. Even now, WI-113 might as well be a county highway north of Madison. It's narrow and curvy - hardly a major route.
Wis 113 is very worthy of a state highway north of Madison. It is very busy between Madison and Waunakee. It's also becoming increasingly busy to Lodi. The intersection with County Hwys P/V is currently being reconstructed as a roundabout due to traffic at that intersection.
Wis 134 would be the state highway that should be a county highway. A 3 mile spur to the unincorporated community of London. Supposedly it was needed back in the day because London had a train station and nearby Cambridge did not.
I agree on WI-134. But I could name a bunch of Dane County highways that are more worthy of being a state highway than WI-113.
Travel Wis 113 during rush hour, there's way more traffic than you think.
County PB and Wis 69 could be swapped. The National Highway System has County PB and not Wis 69.
Wis 113 is a NHS route from Wis 19 west to the end at US 151.
Driven it plenty of times and I stand by my assertion.
WI-113 has plenty of traffic (>4k AADT) south of Lodi. North of Lodi it falls off quite a bit to just over 1k AADT. Even so, there are a LOT of WI state highways I would decomission before WI-113, including the nearby WI-188.
Quote from: thspfc on June 02, 2023, 03:36:16 PM
WI-113 has plenty of traffic (>4k AADT) south of Lodi. North of Lodi it falls off quite a bit to just over 1k AADT. Even so, there are a LOT of WI state highways I would decomission before WI-113, including the nearby WI-188.
The portion of Wis 188 between US 12 and Wis 60 is very busy. It's the "Sauk City Bypass" for traffic not wanting to drive through town and wanting to travel through Sauk City to get to Prairie Du Sac or north on Wis 78.
Quote from: peterj920 on June 02, 2023, 10:30:20 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 02, 2023, 03:36:16 PM
WI-113 has plenty of traffic (>4k AADT) south of Lodi. North of Lodi it falls off quite a bit to just over 1k AADT. Even so, there are a LOT of WI state highways I would decomission before WI-113, including the nearby WI-188.
The portion of Wis 188 between US 12 and Wis 60 is very busy. It's the "Sauk City Bypass" for traffic not wanting to drive through town and wanting to travel through Sauk City to get to Prairie Du Sac or north on Wis 78.
It peaks at about 2k. It would be just fine as a busier segment of a county road.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 30, 2023, 02:32:48 PM
I highly doubt US 151 will be rerouted within the Madison area. There really is no need to. Utilizing US 12/18 and Interstates 39/90/94 is sufficient to make an all-freeway journey around the Madison area without rerouting the US 151 designation.
If US 151 remained within the City of Madison, it would make more sense to route it along John Nolen Dr to The Beltline. Once it travels on Proudfit, W Washington, and Park St, the route isn't the most direct route to anywhere. Even on Park St. Fish Hatchery Rd is the quicker route to rejoin The Beltline heading southwest or Northeast.
Quote from: GeekJedi on May 28, 2023, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 27, 2023, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
I've always thought that the route from the freeway to the capital should be "WI-1". Yes, I know it breaks the rules, and it doesn't really matter - I just think it would be cool!
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
Boy, did I mess up my formatting!
What my post originally said was that I wouldn't be against revising the legislation and allowing the highway to the Capitol be renamed "WI-1" if 151 was moved. Just my $.02 (and bordering on fictional).
Quote from: GeekJedi on June 03, 2023, 08:39:26 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on May 28, 2023, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 27, 2023, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
I've always thought that the route from the freeway to the capital should be "WI-1". Yes, I know it breaks the rules, and it doesn't really matter - I just think it would be cool!
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
Boy, did I mess up my formatting!
What my post originally said was that I wouldn't be against revising the legislation and allowing the highway to the Capitol be renamed "WI-1" if 151 was moved. Just my $.02 (and bordering on fictional).
But WI does not go below 10.
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 03, 2023, 10:24:03 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on June 03, 2023, 08:39:26 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on May 28, 2023, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 27, 2023, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
I've always thought that the route from the freeway to the capital should be "WI-1". Yes, I know it breaks the rules, and it doesn't really matter - I just think it would be cool!
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
Boy, did I mess up my formatting!
What my post originally said was that I wouldn't be against revising the legislation and allowing the highway to the Capitol be renamed "WI-1" if 151 was moved. Just my $.02 (and bordering on fictional).
But WI does not go below 10.
US 2 and US 8? I can see the legislature trying 'WI 1' (no federal rules against that).
Mike
Never understood why there are no single-digit state highways in WI. If they wanted every community to be equal, they really should've started numbering at 100 and tried their best to opt out of the US highway system.
If any community is worthy of "highway 1," Madison is it.
Quote from: mgk920 on June 03, 2023, 11:24:48 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 03, 2023, 10:24:03 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on June 03, 2023, 08:39:26 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on May 28, 2023, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 27, 2023, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
I've always thought that the route from the freeway to the capital should be "WI-1". Yes, I know it breaks the rules, and it doesn't really matter - I just think it would be cool!
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
Boy, did I mess up my formatting!
What my post originally said was that I wouldn't be against revising the legislation and allowing the highway to the Capitol be renamed "WI-1" if 151 was moved. Just my $.02 (and bordering on fictional).
But WI does not go below 10.
US 2 and US 8? I can see the legislature trying 'WI 1' (no federal rules against that).
Mike
WI couldn't deny the use of those, not in the state system per se. (one level above it)
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 04, 2023, 05:26:15 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on June 03, 2023, 11:24:48 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 03, 2023, 10:24:03 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on June 03, 2023, 08:39:26 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on May 28, 2023, 02:12:12 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 27, 2023, 01:28:42 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on May 27, 2023, 07:09:01 AM
Received an email today saying that WIDOT is considering moving US-151 onto the interstate and the Beltline as part of this project.
I've always thought that the route from the freeway to the capital should be "WI-1". Yes, I know it breaks the rules, and it doesn't really matter - I just think it would be cool!
No words on any potential number for the 'old' road, I assume (ie, 'WI 251', 'WI 451','BR US 151', etc). I would support this proposal, too, BTW.
Mike
Boy, did I mess up my formatting!
What my post originally said was that I wouldn't be against revising the legislation and allowing the highway to the Capitol be renamed "WI-1" if 151 was moved. Just my $.02 (and bordering on fictional).
But WI does not go below 10.
US 2 and US 8? I can see the legislature trying 'WI 1' (no federal rules against that).
Mike
WI couldn't deny the use of those, not in the state system per se. (one level above it)
But the fact that they do exist means that there is no longer any reason to continue the practice of avoiding single-digit highways. "Community equality" was impossible after 1926.
This page should give some insight on why no State Highway is lower than 10 (excluding US 2 and US 8): http://wisconsinhighways.org/indepth/first_memo.html.
Nearby, IL 1 does not enter Springfield. It starts on the far south side of Chicago and runs southward for nearly the rest of the length of the state through mostly rural land not far from the Indiana state line.
Mike
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 04, 2023, 12:27:01 PM
This page should give some insight on why no State Highway is lower than 10 (excluding US 2 and US 8): http://wisconsinhighways.org/indepth/first_memo.html.
Exactly, it's an outdated practice that was made hilarious as soon as the US Highway system was established. Why, again, can the status quo never change?
Who in 2023 would be upset if WIS 1 was established in Madison?
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 04, 2023, 07:20:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 04, 2023, 12:27:01 PM
This page should give some insight on why no State Highway is lower than 10 (excluding US 2 and US 8): http://wisconsinhighways.org/indepth/first_memo.html.
Exactly, it's an outdated practice that was made hilarious as soon as the US Highway system was established. Why, again, can the status quo never change?
Who in 2023 would be upset if WIS 1 was established in Madison?
In today's political climate, some idiot would make a major issue out of it. I have no idea how or why, but considering the crazy crap that counts for being offended these days (like showing Michelangelo's statue of David to a high school class) I just don't think it's worth the effort.
Well I think it's a bit of a moot point to invoke a single digit number since Wisconsin has a few 2 digits laying around unused currently like 62 or 99.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 05, 2023, 11:16:11 AM
Well I think it's a bit of a moot point to invoke a single digit number since Wisconsin has a few 2 digits laying around unused currently like 62 or 99.
plus 74 and 84.
Plus, there are plenty of three-digit numbers that could be used again, at least for shorter routes.
I also think the "honor" of having a single digit route meant a lot more when the system was introduced over 100 years ago. I doubt many would care now.
If it was up to me, the single digit numbers would have been placed on the state highways that are considered the backbone to the system at least in some parts of the current highway. Wis 29 from Prescott to Kewaunee with Elk Mound to Green Bay being a major player. Wis 35 from Dubuque to Superior with Dubuque to Hudson being important. Wis 21 from Sparta to Oshkosh with Tomah to Oshkosh being important. And so on. This would not replace any of the US Highways or Interstates.
I've wondered also if the state highways that are at least 4-lane could be given a different color shield, just to denote their expressway status. Same shape, but something other than white.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 05, 2023, 12:23:44 PM
I also think the "honor" of having a single digit route meant a lot more when the system was introduced over 100 years ago. I doubt many would care now.
Has anyone found evidence that a single digit state highway
anywhere in the country caused a public outcry? It seems like they were trying to prevent a completely imaginary scenario.
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 05, 2023, 05:47:38 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 05, 2023, 12:23:44 PM
I also think the "honor" of having a single digit route meant a lot more when the system was introduced over 100 years ago. I doubt many would care now.
Has anyone found evidence that a single digit state highway anywhere in the country caused a public outcry? It seems like they were trying to prevent a completely imaginary scenario.
It was imaginary, or a better word would be hypothetical, since Wisconsin was the first to number highways.
Quote from: invincor on June 05, 2023, 02:50:34 PM
I've wondered also if the state highways that are at least 4-lane could be given a different color shield, just to denote their expressway status. Same shape, but something other than white.
I have thought the same...especially with WI-29.
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 06, 2023, 07:05:39 AM
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
In the hypothetical we are talking about, if US-151 is routed over the interstate and the Beltline, and WI-1 (or whatever) replaces it on the city streets, there is a net gain of zero miles.
If they use John Nolen Drive for WI-1 to get to the Beltline instead of US-151's current routing west of downtown, there would actually be a net reduction in miles.
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 06, 2023, 07:05:39 AM
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
I always thought that was a dumb rule.
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 06, 2023, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 06, 2023, 07:05:39 AM
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
I always thought that was a dumb rule.
I agree it's a dumb rule. Unfortunately, it's probably needed because otherwise the state's supported highway mileage would have ballooned out of control because legislators like nothing better than getting the state to pay for their districts' road projects.
Quote from: skluth on June 06, 2023, 01:19:37 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 06, 2023, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 06, 2023, 07:05:39 AM
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
I always thought that was a dumb rule.
I agree it's a dumb rule. Unfortunately, it's probably needed because otherwise the state's supported highway mileage would have ballooned out of control because legislators like nothing better than getting the state to pay for their districts' road projects.
The highways are run through legislation and voted on before they become reality. Correct?
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 06, 2023, 02:00:29 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 06, 2023, 01:19:37 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 06, 2023, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 06, 2023, 07:05:39 AM
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
I always thought that was a dumb rule.
I agree it's a dumb rule. Unfortunately, it's probably needed because otherwise the state's supported highway mileage would have ballooned out of control because legislators like nothing better than getting the state to pay for their districts' road projects.
The highways are run through legislation and voted on before they become reality. Correct?
You mean the highway construction? Unless it's major, I doubt the specific projects are outlined in the budget. My guess is they allocate money to various programs than WIDOT determines how to allocate the money.
There is, somewhere in the law, a "salary cap" of state-owned highway mileage that WIDOT can't exceed without the law being changed by the legislature. They're up against that cap and have been for a very long time, thus if there is ever need to "promote" a county or other local highway to state-owned status, there has to be a nearly-equal trade back where the counties/locals assume ownership of a "demoted" state highway. And that trade can only happen if both sides of it agree to it. Neither side can force a trade on the other.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on June 06, 2023, 02:30:16 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 06, 2023, 02:00:29 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 06, 2023, 01:19:37 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 06, 2023, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 06, 2023, 07:05:39 AM
Keep in mind, that when a highway designation is made, there must be compensation by either removing or reducing another one.
I always thought that was a dumb rule.
I agree it's a dumb rule. Unfortunately, it's probably needed because otherwise the state's supported highway mileage would have ballooned out of control because legislators like nothing better than getting the state to pay for their districts' road projects.
The highways are run through legislation and voted on before they become reality. Correct?
You mean the highway construction? Unless it's major, I doubt the specific projects are outlined in the budget. My guess is they allocate money to various programs than WIDOT determines how to allocate the money.
No. I mean the actual routing of the highways before they are marked in the field.
The Wisconsin legislature plays no part in route numbering. That's entirely within the purview of WisDOT. Minnesota this is not. :P
The mileage limit thing; they used to do that based on DOT district, not county. A much more reasonable way to stay under their mileage cap. Doing it by county is stupid. Especially when the populations, and therefore traffic volumes in some counties are far larger than they were when this dumb system ossified a couple decades ago.
Meanwhile, depopulating rural counties get to hang on to every single mile of state highway now? Because it's not like they'll ever add mileage and need to free some up in the same county. It's ridiculous. Dane County has like three times the population it had 50 years ago, but they're stuck with the same mileage of state highways under the current system. Meanwhile, some glorified county road to basically nowhere gets to stick around basically forever now. Time to shake the system up.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 06, 2023, 03:20:21 PM
The Wisconsin legislature plays no part in route numbering. That's entirely within the purview of WisDOT. Minnesota this is not. :P
The mileage limit thing; they used to do that based on DOT district, not county. A much more reasonable way to stay under their mileage cap. Doing it by county is stupid. Especially when the populations, and therefore traffic volumes in some counties are far larger than they were when this dumb system ossified a couple decades ago.
Meanwhile, depopulating rural counties get to hang on to every single mile of state highway now? Because it's not like they'll ever add mileage and need to free some up in the same county. It's ridiculous. Dane County has like three times the population it had 50 years ago, but they're stuck with the same mileage of state highways under the current system. Meanwhile, some glorified county road to basically nowhere gets to stick around basically forever now. Time to shake the system up.
Absolutely agree. There are some county highways that should be upgraded to state highways like Dane County N and Dodge County A. Then there's Wis 68, Wis 118, Wis 129 (Should be Bypass US 61).
STH 68 once connected Fox Lake with Port Washington. The present-day Fox Lake-to-Waupun alignment was part of STH 33 until 33 and 68 swapped routes in 1930 (STH 49 east of Waupun should be part of STH 68, and I'm not the only one who thinks so). I have no opinion on STH 118. As for STH 129 around Lancaster, instead of making it Bypass US 61, I would make it part of mainline US 61 (STH 129 was CTH I until 1959).
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 07, 2023, 11:34:54 AM
STH 68 once connected Fox Lake with Port Washington. The present-day Fox Lake-to-Waupun alignment was part of STH 33 until 33 and 68 swapped routes in 1930 (STH 49 east of Waupun should be part of STH 68, and I'm not the only one who thinks so). I have no opinion on STH 118. As for STH 129 around Lancaster, instead of making it Bypass US 61, I would make it part of mainline US 61 (STH 129 was CTH I until 1959).
Why? WI-49 runs along Main Street all the way through Waupun and is the through street at the intersection when WI-68 ends.
STH 68 is an east-west route, while STH 49 is mostly a north-south route. STH 49 ended at US 151 (now Business 151) in Waupun until 1947 when it was extended eastward to US 41 (present-day STH 175), and later extended to the new US 41 alignment in 1954 (Now the US 41/Interstate 41 freeway at present-day Exit 87). I would have preferred that the STH 68 should have been extended east of Waupun since it was already an east-west route to begin with (although I am well aware how convoluted the state highway system is, and STH 49 is no exception).
I'll defend WIS 118 since there isn't really another good alternative route to US 63 in that area. It was improved significantly when the fish creek bridge was closed a couple years ago.
Or WI 127 west of Portage being redundant of WI 16.
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 07, 2023, 04:20:51 PM
I'll defend WIS 118 since there isn't really another good alternative route to US 63 in that area. It was improved significantly when the fish creek bridge was closed a couple years ago.
US-63 is traveled by about 2k vehicles/day in that area. If we want a state-designated alternate route for every highway with over 2k vehicles, we're going to have to just about double the number of state-designated highways. WI-118 should be decomissioned.
Quote from: Big John on June 07, 2023, 04:43:00 PM
Or WI 127 west of Portage being redundant of WI 16.
100%. And WI-16 is essentially the alternate to I-90/94. The only thru traffic that uses it consistently is Portage to and from the portion of Wisconsin Dells that is east of the river.
Here are all the state highways I would decommission:
24 - no different from countless Milwaukee area major streets that are not state highways
79 - not enough traffic
86 - not enough traffic
101 - not enough traffic
102 - not enough traffic
105 - has some traffic, but not enough to justify its short length
108 - not enough traffic
111 - not enough traffic
112 - see 105
118 - not enough traffic
122 - not enough traffic
125 - typical city street, doesn't leave Appleton
126 - not enough traffic
127 - completely useless. Its AADT east of CTH-XX
might justify state highway status if it was long enough, but west of there it drops way off
134 - spur to nowhere, not sure if it still exists?
137 - not enough traffic
139 - not enough traffic
146 - not enough traffic
152 - spur to nowhere
155 - spur to nowhere
158 - typical city street, doesn't leave Kenosha
165 - see 158
169 - not enough traffic
179 - not enough traffic
186 - not enough traffic
188 - not enough traffic
191 - not enough traffic
193 - ???
253 - not enough traffic
311 - corporate stunt
68 misses the chopping block for me because I think it should take over WI-49 between Waupun and Lomira. Similarily, WI-75 should absorb WI-83 south of WI-50.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 07, 2023, 01:06:05 PM
STH 68 is an east-west route, while STH 49 is mostly a north-south route. STH 49 ended at US 151 (now Business 151) in Waupun until 1947 when it was extended eastward to US 41 (present-day STH 175), and later extended to the new US 41 alignment in 1954 (Now the US 41/Interstate 41 freeway at present-day Exit 87). I would have preferred that the STH 68 should have been extended east of Waupun since it was already an east-west route to begin with (although I am well aware how convoluted the state highway system is, and STH 49 is no exception).
They should just change the directional signage. WI-49 turns to run directly east before it enters the city of Waupun and remains so through Brownsville to I-41. Ending it at an interchange where it is by far the primary route makes zero sense to me.
Quote from: Big John on June 07, 2023, 04:43:00 PM
Or WI 127 west of Portage being redundant of WI 16.
Absolutely. No reason for that to not be a county highway.
STH 127 was part of US 16 (now STH 16) until 1948: http://wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys120-129.html#STH-127. I imagine if 127 is ever decommissioned, it would have one county highway designation instead of two like when 16 was rerouted.
Quote from: thspfc on June 07, 2023, 06:39:47 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on June 07, 2023, 04:20:51 PM
I'll defend WIS 118 since there isn't really another good alternative route to US 63 in that area. It was improved significantly when the fish creek bridge was closed a couple years ago.
US-63 is traveled by about 2k vehicles/day in that area. If we want a state-designated alternate route for every highway with over 2k vehicles, we're going to have to just about double the number of state-designated highways. WI-118 should be decomissioned.
Quote from: Big John on June 07, 2023, 04:43:00 PM
Or WI 127 west of Portage being redundant of WI 16.
100%. And WI-16 is essentially the alternate to I-90/94. The only thru traffic that uses it consistently is Portage to and from the portion of Wisconsin Dells that is east of the river.
Here are all the state highways I would decommission:
24 - no different from countless Milwaukee area major streets that are not state highways
79 - not enough traffic
86 - not enough traffic
101 - not enough traffic
102 - not enough traffic
105 - has some traffic, but not enough to justify its short length
108 - not enough traffic
111 - not enough traffic
112 - see 105
118 - not enough traffic
122 - not enough traffic
125 - typical city street, doesn't leave Appleton
126 - not enough traffic
127 - completely useless. Its AADT east of CTH-XX might justify state highway status if it was long enough, but west of there it drops way off
134 - spur to nowhere, not sure if it still exists?
137 - not enough traffic
139 - not enough traffic
146 - not enough traffic
152 - spur to nowhere
155 - spur to nowhere
158 - typical city street, doesn't leave Kenosha
165 - see 158
169 - not enough traffic
179 - not enough traffic
186 - not enough traffic
188 - not enough traffic
191 - not enough traffic
193 - ???
253 - not enough traffic
311 - corporate stunt
68 misses the chopping block for me because I think it should take over WI-49 between Waupun and Lomira. Similarily, WI-75 should absorb WI-83 south of WI-50.
I'm not so worried about traffic counts. If a corridor makes sense, it's fine.
My thoughts:
Wis 24 should be extended to Janesville along ES and A. West of US 12, it is the more direct route to Janesville.
Wis 79 should be a county highway.
Wis 86 is fine to stay since it is one of the bridges over the Wisconsin River. Ending at Wis 13 makes sense.
Wis 101 can stay since it connects the orphaned part of US 2. I know 70 does as well but that's an e-w road.
Wis 102 should be a county highway.
Wis 105 I would extend east along the E-W section of Wis 13 to end at Ashland. I don't like the "wrap around" 13 does north of Ashland.
Wis 108 I could see the merit if it ended in Black River Falls. But it does not so it could go.
Wis 111 should be a county highway.
Wis 112 should be a county highway.
Wis 118 should be a county highway.
Wis 122 has merit because of the bridge into Michigan.
Wis 125 should be along all of College Ave and extended east to Holland and then south on Hwy D to US 10. And since College Ave is the direct access to Outagamie Co Airport (3rd busiest airport in the state), I would even extend it west to end at the airport.
Wis 126 should be a county highway.
Wis 127 should be a county highway.
Wis 134 should be a county highway if it is not extended north to Waterloo and possibly Columbus.
Wis 137 should be a county highway.
Wis 139 has merit because of the bridge to Michigan.
Wis 146 should be a county highway.
Wis 152 could be extended northeast to Wis 49 to make a Wautoma to Fremont corridor.
Wis 155 should be a county highway.
Wis 158 can stay because of it serving the Kenosha Airport and is the direct connection to Downtown.
Wis 165 could be extended west because of the Bristol Fair to US 45.
Wis 169 is fine.
Wis 179 could be extended east and west to connect Wis 35 and Wis 60 near Boscobel. I would be ok if this was just a county highway.
Wis 186 I would realign the south end from Vesper to follow Hwy HH and Hwy F into Wisconsin Rapids. The Vesper to Wis 73 segment could be Hwy D.
Wis 188 is fine.
Wis 191 should be a county highway.
Wis 193 should be a county highway.
Wis 253 should be a county highway.
Wis 311 should be a county highway. Damn corporation stunts.
Highway 24 used to end at Highway 20 outside East Troy, close to I-43. I would recommend bringing that back because I do not understand why they truncated it.
Quote from: US 12 fan on June 08, 2023, 01:18:34 PM
Highway 24 used to end at Highway 20 outside East Troy, close to I-43. I would recommend bringing that back because I do not understand why they truncated it.
Easy. Around 1988-89, WIDOT replaced a route that paralleled I-43 (WI-24 is now CTH-L) with two that intersected the interstate (WI-164 used to be CTH-F. WI-120 between East Troy and WI-36 used to be CTH-G)
It makes sense....you can actually see I-43 from WI-24's former routing. No reason to have both.
I'll defend WI 111 because it's a sort of "watershed" route. By that I mean it exists at a point where the north-south corridors in the state shift from generally pointing toward Chicago to generally pointing toward the Twin Cities. 111 is a path for vehicles to cut from one of those trends to the other in an efficient manner. In that context, it's a worthy state highway.
The trio of seemingly useless state highways up around Ashland seem to be an artifact of a bygone era when that area was more of a big deal in the state in terms of like mines and stuff. I have often thought that if a bypass of Ashland was ever constructed for US 2 (yeah I know, totally not needed) then one could decommission 112, 118 and 137.
In terms of adding state highways to the Madison area, top of my list would be extending WI 138 from Oregon west to Verona via CTH M.
There's also a good case to be made for CTH K & CTH M between US 12 and WI 113. Especially if they ever get around to doing that whole "parkway" thing up there on that corridor.
I'd also like to move WI 35 onto CTH F in St. Croix & Pierce counties. Thus paving the way for the expressway between Hudson and River Falls to get a gratuitous upgrade to I-194. :poke: (Not serious about then, just poking the bear.)
Quote from: US 12 fan on June 08, 2023, 01:18:34 PM
Highway 24 used to end at Highway 20 outside East Troy, close to I-43. I would recommend bringing that back because I do not understand why they truncated it.
I would at least have it end at 164 in Big Bend. West of there traffic counts drop at least that would be a far more logical ending then it's current ending at the county line. But it's not alone in that regard. MI-152 and VA-108 also end at a county line. The later like WI-24 once did have a logical ending but got truncated.
Back here in Madison, there recently was a PIM on the Madison Beltline Study's PEL study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx. Personally, I hope they go for the Add One Lane proposal: https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/623addone.pdf. I would also like to see more ramp meters on the on-ramps, as well as additional grade separations so traffic doesn't always have to go through the interchanges to cross the Beltline.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 11, 2023, 12:04:21 PM
Back here in Madison, there recently was a PIM on the Madison Beltline Study's PEL study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx. Personally, I hope they go for the Add One Lane proposal: https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/623addone.pdf. I would also like to see more ramp meters on the on-ramps, as well as additional grade separations so traffic doesn't always have to go through the interchanges to cross the Beltline.
How does that study not go up to County K? That intersection causes so many backups during rush hour which go past Parmenter St. There's way more traffic on US 12 towards Sauk City than there is east of I-39/90 to County N.
That is a separate study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/default.aspx. There is also this study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12skihi19/default.aspx.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 11, 2023, 07:49:09 PM
That is a separate study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/default.aspx. There is also this study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12skihi19/default.aspx.
No action since 2015 which means not happening.
Also, today was the day of the new bus routes being implemented: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/the-best-we-could-ask-for-on-a-slow-rollout-metro-transit-launches-updated-routes/ar-AA1cq2aL?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=358359ce6b904ce0911fac2724bf1a18&ei=57.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 08, 2023, 02:34:45 PM
I'd also like to move WI 35 onto CTH F in St. Croix & Pierce counties. Thus paving the way for the expressway between Hudson and River Falls to get a gratuitous upgrade to I-194. :poke: (Not serious about then, just poking the bear.)
I actually asked someone at WisDOT about this very thing about 20 years ago, soon after the expressway was completed. He said the counties had enquired about this, but they had to turn them down because a) the mileage "salary cap"... there was no good corresponding turnback candidates where the counties would take over something from the state in return and b) CTH F has too many private driveways that have access to the road to meet their safety criteria. Before the state could take it over, some of those would have to be closed off or consolidated until it was under some threshold concentration number. I had suggested calling the expressway WI-594 afterwards, and he agreed that was a great number for it if it ever happens.
Quote from: invincor on June 12, 2023, 08:48:44 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 08, 2023, 02:34:45 PM
I'd also like to move WI 35 onto CTH F in St. Croix & Pierce counties. Thus paving the way for the expressway between Hudson and River Falls to get a gratuitous upgrade to I-194. :poke: (Not serious about then, just poking the bear.)
I actually asked someone at WisDOT about this very thing about 20 years ago, soon after the expressway was completed. He said the counties had enquired about this, but they had to turn them down because a) the mileage "salary cap"... there was no good corresponding turnback candidates where the counties would take over something from the state in return and b) CTH F has too many private driveways that have access to the road to meet their safety criteria. Before the state could take it over, some of those would have to be closed off or consolidated until it was under some threshold concentration number. I had suggested calling the expressway WI-594 afterwards, and he agreed that was a great number for it if it ever happens.
Couldn't you create enough mileage by moving US-12 onto the interstate at Menomonie and turning the current US-12 into a county highway? Real quick check shows that County F has more traffic than US-12.
[/quote]
Couldn't you create enough mileage by moving US-12 onto the interstate at Menomonie and turning the current US-12 into a county highway? Real quick check shows that County F has more traffic than US-12.
[/quote]
I suppose you could, and if they manage the cap these days by district rather than county, then that could work. They were still doing it county-by-county back when I asked the question, and a US-12 swap wouldn't have worked then as none of it is in Pierce while the majority of CTH-F is. Then again, they might still be loathe to downgrade that much of 12 as it's really useful as an Alternate-I-94 whenever there's construction or a major accident affecting I-94 traffic. (and it's signed as such)
Sorry that we're off-topic as this isn't "Madison Area". Mods, please feel free to shunt this tangent over into Wisconsin Notes or elsewhere.
Dane County is growing but there isn't any need for new state highways. Upgrades to existing highways are badly needed. Wis 19 needs to be 4 lanes between Waunakee and Sun Prairie, US 14 needs to be made 4 lanes to Cross Plains and needs to be upgraded to 4 lanes between Oregon and Evansville. Wis 113 could also use a 4 lane upgrade between River Rd and Wis 19. It would also help to place interchanges on US 12 where there are currently traffic signals.
US 12 may get additional interchanges in the long-term to replace signaled intersections. As for expanding US 14, STH 19, and STH 113 to four lanes, don't hold your breath.
#1 priority should be US-12 at CTH-K but that's clearly not the case.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 12, 2023, 07:48:13 PM
US 12 may get additional interchanges in the long-term to replace signaled intersections. As for expanding US 14, STH 19, and STH 113 to four lanes, don't hold your breath.
I'm trying to understand the logic of a flyover ramp from I-39/90/94 to Wis 19 west in the latest proposal only for it to be reduced to 2 lanes a mile later. I know they're not in current plans but the expansions are needed.
The traffic counts support expansion. On those segments of Wis 19 traffic counts vary from 11,600 to 16,200. The other segments are 9500-13,000 VPD.
I suppose if you're headed to Waunakee, the flyover would bypass the RR and traffic signals. I would hope those 2 mile gap segments of 19 and 113 would be 4 lanes by the time this is built.
I'm not sure about those alternatives of putting 19 up and over the interstate and the RR. The limits of Alt 1 definitely don't work in their drawing.
I'd agree that flyover is overkill, but it would make it easier to stage swapping the grade between the interstate and WI 19.
When an overpass gets replaced by an underpass, you have to totally close one of the intersecting roads during construction, so WI 19 will have to be closed for at least one entire construction season to do that. The flyover makes it so they can build that first and have it available to access Waunakee from the south during the over/under switch.
It's going to be a significant headache to grade switch that interchange because you're losing a lot of east-west connectivity for most of one year.
A more radical, but cheaper, idea: cut off access to CTH-CV and make it a DDI. The CV intersection is what causes, or heavily contributes to, the backups in that area. Traffic going from Windsor to 39/90/94 and vice versa can use Windsor Rd to US-51 southbound, and River Rd to CTH-V northbound.
A previous proposal for that segment of US 51 was to convert the CTH-CV/Anderson Rd. intersection into an overpass, and construct an interchange between US 51 and Hoepker Rd., with the CTH-CV designation being moved to Hoepker Rd. (I assume existing CV between Hoepker and US 51 would have been renamed as an extension of Anderson Rd.). In any event, the Stoughton Rd. Corridor Study has been spilt into two separate studies: The South Study (Voges Rd./Terminal Dr.-to-STH 30) is here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us51-corridor/southstudy.aspx. The North Study (STH 30-to-STH 19) is here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us51-corridor/northstudy.aspx.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 15, 2023, 02:55:59 PM
A previous proposal for that segment of US 51 was to convert the CTH-CV/Anderson Rd. intersection into an overpass, and construct an interchange between US 51 and Hoepker Rd., with the CTH-CV designation being moved to Hoepker Rd. (I assume existing CV between Hoepker and US 51 would have been renamed as an extension of Anderson Rd.). In any event, the Stoughton Rd. Corridor Study has been spilt into two separate studies: The South Study (Voges Rd./Terminal Dr.-to-STH 30) is here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us51-corridor/southstudy.aspx. The North Study (STH 30-to-STH 19) is here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us51-corridor/northstudy.aspx.
US 51/Stoughton Rd needs to be upgraded at least close to
a freeway between US 151/E Washington and US 12/Beltline. There are major backups at the Pfaum Rd and Buckeye Rd intersections and interchanges are needed badly. The US 51/US 151 proposal for an SPUI seems to be the perfect fix for that intersection. Traffic between US 51 and I-90 isn't terribly bad and is good mostly as is. However it's great to see the awful pavement being replaced on the northbound lanes north of US 151.
At the meeting for the Madison to Dells project, was there any talk about US 151 getting rerouted or was that not mentioned at all? There was speculation on this top that this may happen.
Never mind. I went on the project site and it said they are not considering off alignment options at this time.
Those off-alignment proposals probably wouldn't have been constructed anyway.
Here is a picture of the US 12/18 and County AB interchange project.
https://projects.511wi.gov/us1218-countyab/wp-content/uploads/sites/986/3080-01-40-Looking-South-at-Interchange-676x380.jpg
Noticed there's now a small billboard SB on the triplex just north of the Dane County line: "Bucees 559 miles"
Seems like they're teasing their new location since that's just north of the exit they're going it at. Thought it was funny; like I expect to see that same billboard in the future with the 559 crossed off and the words "next exit" added.
Obviously, the photographer taking the picture of the new interchange at CTH AB was facing southwest. Here is a perspective of what the interchange and corridor will look like when construction of Exit 269 is completed: https://projects.511wi.gov/us1218-countyab/wp-content/uploads/sites/986/PIM2_CTH-AB-Project-Overview-FINAL-2022-06-21.pdf.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 05, 2023, 11:06:27 AM
Noticed there's now a small billboard SB on the triplex just north of the Dane County line: "Bucees 559 miles"
Seems like they're teasing their new location since that's just north of the exit they're going it at. Thought it was funny; like I expect to see that same billboard in the future with the 559 crossed off and the words "next exit" added.
Ha! Funny enough - I saw that and thought the same thing!
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
I think in the long-term, the beltline should get an additional lane in each direction. In the short-term, the flex lane should be extended to at least the University Ave. interchange.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Madison politics will never allow that. Full of BANANAs
Also, there are right-of-way constraints that would make widening difficult (although I think it needs to be done, as the beltline is the most heavily traveled corridor in the city of Madison). That is why I think they should extend the flex lanes first. The Interstates also need an additional lane in each direction north of the beltline interchange.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 15, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
Certainly unlikely at any time in the foreseeable future, but a North Beltline would definitely be useful, too.
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 15, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
No.
A South Reliever connecting US 18/151 and Interstate 39/90 was looked at during the Verona Rd. Study. It would have been located about five miles south of the Beltline. It was rejected since it would neither relieve congestion from Verona Rd. nor the Beltline. The closest to a North Beltline is the long-proposed North Mendota Parkway, which probably won't ever be constructed.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 15, 2023, 09:02:30 PM
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 15, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
No.
Then what
is the Beltline for?
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 16, 2023, 01:11:48 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 15, 2023, 09:02:30 PM
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 15, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
No.
Then what is the Beltline for?
East to West bypass of the ithsmus
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 16, 2023, 07:29:52 AM
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 16, 2023, 01:11:48 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 15, 2023, 09:02:30 PM
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 15, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
No.
Then what is the Beltline for?
East to West bypass of the ithsmus
Just imagine for a few minutes the traffic situation in the Madison area if those stupid lakes weren't in the way.
:banghead:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on July 16, 2023, 12:46:41 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 16, 2023, 07:29:52 AM
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 16, 2023, 01:11:48 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 15, 2023, 09:02:30 PM
Quote from: algorerhythms on July 15, 2023, 03:52:00 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 15, 2023, 08:43:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 14, 2023, 04:19:37 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 14, 2023, 10:22:34 AM
Local media is reporting this week that the flex lane on the Beltline has reduced travel times by 45% after one year of data.
Sounds great, but that will disappear in the next 2-3 years, just you watch.
Then if that happens it'll need to be expanded. If possible expand it by 2 additional lanes each way instead of one.
Never, ever going to happen. What Madison needs is a south to west bypass, which also probably won't happen.
Isn't that what the Beltline is supposed to be?
No.
Then what is the Beltline for?
East to West bypass of the ithsmus
Just imagine for a few minutes the traffic situation in the Madison area if those stupid lakes weren't in the way.
:banghead:
Mike
Ironically no one would want to live there.
Or they wouldn't have picked this as the spot for the capital back in the day. ;)
Not that it's just political unfeasible to widen the Beltine east of Verona Rd, it would also have an enormous price tag and there'd be so much r/w impact it would stir up all kinds of bad times. We're talking major wetlands impacts across the Yahara River and possibly eating into the Arboretum; it's just impractical.
I've stated this before, but the one 'widening' thing they could possibly do is turn all the interchanges from Todd to Rimrock into "Texas-style" one-way frontage roads with slip ramps between the Beltine lanes and the frontage roads. So you're not adding lanes to the freeway itself, but using the frontage roads to try and eliminate some of the traffic that's only using the Beltine for 2 exits. It would let one space out entrances and exits a little better.
It all would be so much more manageable if they hadn't added interchanges to Todd Dr and Rimrock back in the day. Now those are establish and we're stuck with all these closely-spaced interchanges. Much easier to disentangle Park and Fish Hatch without those two interchanges to worry about. I've gamed it out.
Quote from: mgk920 on July 16, 2023, 12:46:41 PM
Just imagine for a few minutes the traffic situation in the Madison area if those stupid lakes weren't in the way.
Wikipedia isn't showing those lakes being excessively deep, just put a bridge or two across them :spin:
:-D
We laugh but that's kinda what they did in the 60's to build John Nolen Drive. Straight-up filled in alongside the railroad tracks, which themselves were punched right thru open water back in the day. The bay they cross would've been anywhere between 5 and 8 feet deep, depending on lake level.
Interesting tidbit I picked up as I read material about the city's plans to revamp the waterfront between Olin Park and the Isthmus, apparently the fill they used to create the earthen causeway for Nolen Drive was dredged right from Lake Monona nearby. If you check out a bathymetric map of Lake Monona, this 25 foot hole (http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=43.06005,-89.38047&z=15&t=U&marker0=-60.10001%2C-155.40001%2C60.10S%20155.4W) is the 'borrow pit' from that construction. Amazing to think about in modern context as the environmental rules and the general public would never let you do either thing; dredging or filling. Especially there. For highway construction. :spin:
And now that segment of John Nolen Drive is slated for reconstruction: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/john-nolen-drive.
I'm dreading city reconstruction projects with how long University Ave is taking. The project was supposed to take 2 years and it's probably going to take 3. Almost 2 years in the reconstruction is coming along at a snails pace. The road is also getting very beat up.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 18, 2023, 03:46:41 PM
And now that segment of John Nolen Drive is slated for reconstruction: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/john-nolen-drive.
So needed. Chunks of concrete keep coming loose in numerous spots. Damn thing will be gravel by the time they dig out the old pavement by the Alliant Energy Center.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 19, 2023, 05:44:12 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 18, 2023, 03:46:41 PM
And now that segment of John Nolen Drive is slated for reconstruction: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/projects/john-nolen-drive.
So needed. Chunks of concrete keep coming loose in numerous spots. Damn thing will be gravel by the time they dig out the old pavement by the Alliant Energy Center.
At least that is all in the City of Madison now.
Mike
Yeah people have begun to adjust finally to no longer having "Town of Madison" police cars visible from Fish Hatchery Rd. In other words, less unwarranted braking in front of the old town hall.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 20, 2023, 04:51:33 PM
Yeah people have begun to adjust finally to no longer having "Town of Madison" police cars visible from Fish Hatchery Rd. In other words, less unwarranted braking in front of the old town hall.
The City of Fitchburg actually revived the old town hall although it is in the City of Madison. Fitchburg received the Zimbrick dealership and the area southwest of the Rimrock Rd Interchange. Right after the switch, Fitchburg wasted no time posting a new Fitchburg sign on Rimrock Rd immediately after The Beltline.
Crews are putting stakes in the ground preparing for Hwy M four lane expansion to Hwy K. What's needed is for Hwy K to be made four lanes but at least it improves a busy stretch of road north of the lake.
I also see a project to expand Hwy PD to four lanes for a couple miles west with a new entrance to Epic. I'm guessing Epic is paying for that project.
I just finished the PIM survey for the US 51 Stoughton Rd. South Study: https://www.surveymonkey.com/survey-thanks/?sm=DyLNhk6QRx1GbCrb9eNjF2X2iKICsNwMG_2B1BoXHkW5Bzr4bQPwRHRLVBmzf9kc3NDnEVZ_2FipzupkaGjx_2B4PF3JSaCHkI9vnrIC3w3JiND_2FE_3D. They are taking comments through August 20th. I have also looked at the presentation that was at the first PIM 8 days ago: https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/by-region/sw/us51-corridor/presentationjuly23.pdf. I have a huge interest in the North and South Stoughton Rd. Corridor studies because I have been up and down that road a billion times, and the South Corridor goes by my mother's house.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 28, 2023, 10:04:23 PM
I just finished the PIM survey for the US 51 Stoughton Rd. South Study: https://www.surveymonkey.com/survey-thanks/?sm=DyLNhk6QRx1GbCrb9eNjF2X2iKICsNwMG_2B1BoXHkW5Bzr4bQPwRHRLVBmzf9kc3NDnEVZ_2FipzupkaGjx_2B4PF3JSaCHkI9vnrIC3w3JiND_2FE_3D.
That took me to a beer survey. Try this link for the PIM survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/US51SJuly23
Quote from: JREwing78 on July 29, 2023, 02:19:15 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 28, 2023, 10:04:23 PM
I just finished the PIM survey for the US 51 Stoughton Rd. South Study: https://www.surveymonkey.com/survey-thanks/?sm=DyLNhk6QRx1GbCrb9eNjF2X2iKICsNwMG_2B1BoXHkW5Bzr4bQPwRHRLVBmzf9kc3NDnEVZ_2FipzupkaGjx_2B4PF3JSaCHkI9vnrIC3w3JiND_2FE_3D.
That took me to a beer survey. Try this link for the PIM survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/US51SJuly23
Survey Monkey, the official survey provider of beer and state/local DOTs alike. :)
Sorry about that. When I reclick on the the link, it takes me to a site called Survey Monkey; which says: "Help those who are helping others" , and "Take a survey to raise $0.50 for organizations like the American Red Cross, International Rescue Committee, Doctors Without Borders, and more." Nothing about beer appeared for me.
The honeymoon period of the Flex Lanes on the Beltline continues. Apparently a 45% decrease in travel times and 20% reduction in crashes.
https://madison.com/news/traffic/beltline-flex-lane-crashes-travel-times-dot/article_010aa734-24a5-11ee-87c3-5bc9b78873d2.html
Oh, wait a minute I thought that wasn't possible because of induced demand.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 30, 2023, 03:06:32 PM
Oh, wait a minute I thought that wasn't possible because of induced demand.
After one year? :-/
Is one year too short of a time for "induced demand" to overwhelm a roadway? The way I've heard induced demand proponents talk about it, as soon as one new road is built, or one existing road is widened: BOOM! It becomes overwhelmed with traffic, allegedly confirming its futility.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 31, 2023, 12:50:31 PM
Is one year too short of a time for "induced demand" to overwhelm a roadway? The way I've heard induced demand proponents talk about it, as soon as one new road is built, or one existing road is widened: BOOM! It becomes overwhelmed with traffic, allegedly confirming its futility.
You're exaggerating.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 31, 2023, 03:52:39 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 31, 2023, 12:50:31 PM
Is one year too short of a time for "induced demand" to overwhelm a roadway? The way I've heard induced demand proponents talk about it, as soon as one new road is built, or one existing road is widened: BOOM! It becomes overwhelmed with traffic, allegedly confirming its futility.
You're exaggerating.
They always do. When induced demand doesn't result in the freeway being gridlocked there's always some excuse.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 31, 2023, 04:50:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 31, 2023, 03:52:39 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 31, 2023, 12:50:31 PM
Is one year too short of a time for "induced demand" to overwhelm a roadway? The way I've heard induced demand proponents talk about it, as soon as one new road is built, or one existing road is widened: BOOM! It becomes overwhelmed with traffic, allegedly confirming its futility.
You're exaggerating.
They always do. When induced demand doesn't result in the freeway being gridlocked there's always some excuse.
Anyone who thinks induced demand is instantaneous is wrong. Anyone who thinks induced demand isn't a thing is also wrong.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 31, 2023, 07:25:33 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 31, 2023, 04:50:35 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 31, 2023, 03:52:39 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 31, 2023, 12:50:31 PM
Is one year too short of a time for "induced demand" to overwhelm a roadway? The way I've heard induced demand proponents talk about it, as soon as one new road is built, or one existing road is widened: BOOM! It becomes overwhelmed with traffic, allegedly confirming its futility.
You're exaggerating.
They always do. When induced demand doesn't result in the freeway being gridlocked there's always some excuse.
Anyone who thinks induced demand is instantaneous is wrong. Anyone who thinks induced demand isn't a thing is also wrong.
Correct. And anyone who thinks that it is always a bad thing is wrong.
Ugh not this boring stupid debate again. Quit derailing threads with this circular argument.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 02, 2023, 11:13:21 AM
Ugh not this boring stupid debate again. Quit derailing threads with this circular argument.
Yeah and if the facts were in the opposite direction you wouldn't care about it.
Let's get back to discussing Madison Area Projects, and leave arguments about induced demand to another thread.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 03, 2023, 11:58:25 AM
Let's get back to discussing Madison Area Projects, and leave arguments about induced demand to another thread.
Why not just do something about those stupid lakes.
:hmmm:
Mike
The Flex Lane has worked very well and it's well designed for rush hour traffic. On my morning commute it's actually turned off eastbound because 70 was the minimum anyone was traveling in that lane. Even without it at 7:15am traffic moves smoothly without the flex lane. The flex lane is open the other direction and there is way more traffic traveling west than east in the morning. The opposite happens in the afternoon.
On my afternoon commute I use the Flex Lane going west and it helps me avoid the Verona Rd off ramp backups that is the root problem for congestion. The ramp is so clogged that traffic backs up onto the mainline.
I have noticed post-COVID there is less traffic during rush hour than before. It can be attributed to more people working from home. I'm personally commuting 2 days a week less and the parking lot went from being full to half full.
Quote from: peterj920 on August 03, 2023, 01:56:31 PM
I have noticed post-COVID there is less traffic during rush hour than before. It can be attributed to more people working from home. I'm personally commuting 2 days a week less and the parking lot went from being full to half full.
Same. In fact, way less than half the cars parked there now compared to 2019. Gotta a lot of telecommuting at our office. It's a permanent change, too, based on how they rearranged the office space. I go in about once a week on average.
Though I didn't need to use the beltline on my commute, I can see what traffic is doing as I go over or under it en route to the office.
Drove on PD by Epic and there's new APL BGS signs approaching Northern Lights Drive and the construction is continuing west on 4 lane expansion. A TIF district or Epic must be paying for the expansion. That project is moving way faster than any inside the City of Madison or Dane County!
How far might CTH PD be expanded to four lanes? All the way to US 18/151 (Exit 70, not Exit 83A)?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 23, 2023, 11:01:12 PM
How far might CTH PD be expanded to four lanes? All the way to US 18/151 (Exit 70, not Exit 83A)?
It's being expanded to a new road that's going to be another entrance to Epic at a signalized intersection about 2 miles west. After the recent expansion more work was done in the last year to make extremely long dual left turn lanes between Woods Rd and Northern Lights Rd.
Epic just had their annual conference and construction was suspended and 2 lanes were opened up on US 18/US 151 just for that conference. That shows the power of Epic along with the new expanded ramps at Epic Lane and the further expansion of County PD.
My younger brother lives in Madison, and I'm currently visiting him for the weekend. While we were downtown, he remarked that the Johnson Street/Gorham Street one-way couplet (which University Avenue feeds into coming in from the west) is the unofficial "through-route" traversing the length of the Isthmus (as Washington Avenue, which US 151 follows in the northeast part of the city, is interrupted by Capitol Square), and I remarked that "Why doesn't US 151 come up Park Street to the Johnson/Gorham couplet, and follow that until it meets East Washington?"
Or, even better yet, as it comes into Madison from the south along Verona Road and meets the Beltline, why not just continue up Midvale Boulevard and then turn right on University, continuing into Johnson/Gorham? (Well, either that or just skirt the city on the Beltline and I-90/94 - the point is, just pick either the city streets or the bypass for the routing of US 151, rather than the strange mishmash of both that it follows today.)
Anyway, what do you think?
It should be placed on the Beltline and interstate. No need to re-route within the city.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 26, 2023, 08:32:13 AM
It should be placed on the Beltline and interstate. No need to re-route within the city.
That is my read on the option that WisDOT is studying for redoing the East Towne interchange (I-39/90/94 / Washington Ave US 151) with free flowing ramps pointing northeast on US 151 towards the northeastern part of the state.
Mike
I support Alternative 2 of the US 151 interchange alternatives since I think traffic on US 151 should remain free-flow through the interchange. I would oppose adding a signalized interchange to US 151, and would strongly oppose shifting US 151 traffic to parallel roadways with at-grade intersections.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 26, 2023, 08:32:13 AM
It should be placed on the Beltline and interstate. No need to re-route within the city.
Just what Wisconsin needs even more duplexing.
Quote from: dvferyance on August 26, 2023, 05:52:03 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 26, 2023, 08:32:13 AM
It should be placed on the Beltline and interstate. No need to re-route within the city.
Just what Wisconsin needs even more duplexing.
Or 4-plexing
Quote from: Big John on August 26, 2023, 07:02:17 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on August 26, 2023, 05:52:03 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 26, 2023, 08:32:13 AM
It should be placed on the Beltline and interstate. No need to re-route within the city.
Just what Wisconsin needs even more duplexing.
Or 4-plexing
There already is a US highway quad-plex on the Beltline (US 12-14-18-151).
Mike
I think US 151 should stay on its existing alignment through Madison. The time to reroute 151 to completely bypass Madison would have in 1955 (when 151 was removed from Nakoma Rd., Monroe St. and Regent St. and shifted to the Beltline between present-day Exits 258 and 261), or in 1961 when Interstates 90 and 94 were completed around Madison.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 26, 2023, 07:30:26 PM
I think US 151 should stay on its existing alignment through Madison. The time to reroute 151 to completely bypass Madison would have in 1955 (when 151 was removed from Nakoma Rd., Monroe St. and Regent St. and shifted to the Beltline between present-day Exits 258 and 261), or in 1961 when Interstates 90 and 94 were completed around Madison.
US-151 is a much different route on either side of Madison now. Also I don't think there was "a time" to relocate. It can be done at anytime.
The most logical urban route for US 151 would be John Nolen Dr from The Beltline and retain the current alignment on Blair and E. Washington. That would cover Madison's two biggest Downtown gateways. Way more traffic uses John Nolen than Park St to get to Downtown and way easier than following the convoluted route of Park, W. Washington and Proudfit. Fish Hatchery Rd is even shorter than Park and traffic going to W Beltline uses that to get there instead of Park St.
Quote from: peterj920 on August 28, 2023, 12:06:40 PM
The most logical urban route for US 151 would be John Nolen Dr from The Beltline and retain the current alignment on Blair and E. Washington. That would cover Madison's two biggest Downtown gateways. Way more traffic uses John Nolen than Park St to get to Downtown and way easier than following the convoluted route of Park, W. Washington and Proudfit. Fish Hatchery Rd is even shorter than Park and traffic going to W Beltline uses that to get there instead of Park St.
Renumber the present routing of US 151 'in' from the freeways to be 'WI 251'?
Mike
But then US 151 is using an extremely tight, old, crappy loop ramp to continue northbound from the Beltline to Nolen.
Best just move it to the all freeway routing.
There's not that much value in having a route designated through the Isthmus when all the streets are referred to by their proper names instead of route numbers. If WisDOT insists on having one though, just slap a new state highway number on it.
Prior to 1951 (when the Beltline opened), US 12/18 followed existing John Nolen Dr. to Olin Ave., then followed Olin to Park St., followed Park to University Ave., then followed University Ave. out of town (18 departed Park at Regent St., 151 likewise after 1937). Thus, I agree rerouting 151 down the rest of John Nolen wouldn't be a good idea (although I wouldn't mind CTH MC being rerouted off of its short segment of Olin Ave. and redirected to terminate at US 151 at the John Nolen Dr./North Shore Dr. intersection). As I said before, leave 151 on its existing alignment.
There's no signage for CTH MC so the point is moot.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 29, 2023, 10:39:10 AM
There's no signage for CTH MC so the point is moot.
Did they finally remove that lone reassurance marker? It may actually have been removed awhile ago, but for years they had an old MC marker about halfway between Park and John Nolen that looked like it was installed in the 40s.
I remember a lone CTH MC marker eastbound on Olin Ave. a short distance from the Olin Ave./John Nolen Dr. intersection (there was also an End CTH MC marker at about the same location westbound on Olin Ave.). Those markers have probably been gone about 30 years. I personally thought the MC designation should have continued to Park St., although when it was designated, the point where it began/ended was probably the location of the Madison city limits. There are other county highways that begin/end at a city's boundary (both ends of CTH F in Waukesha County comes to mind).
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 29, 2023, 02:55:29 PM
I remember a lone CTH MC marker eastbound on Olin Ave. a short distance from the Olin Ave./John Nolen Dr. intersection (there was also an End CTH MC marker at about the same location westbound on Olin Ave.). Those markers have probably been gone about 30 years. I personally thought the MC designation should have continued to Park St., although when it was designated, the point where it began/ended was probably the location of the Madison city limits. There are other county highways that begin/end at a city's boundary (both ends of CTH F in Waukesha County comes to mind).
30 years? Wow. I could have sworn it was more recent but you are probably correct.
I was just a kid when CTH MC was signed, but I still remember it vividly.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 29, 2023, 10:39:10 AM
There's no signage for CTH MC so the point is moot.
I assumed the route was decommissioned many years ago. A few maps still mark it other than that I would never have known it ever existed.
CTH MC does still exist: https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/travel/road/hwy-maps/county-maps/dane.pdf. It just is unsigned like a lot of county highways are.
It's easy to tell in the winter time who maintains John Nolen. When heading south John Nolen gets a lot better after Olin Ave. I'm assuming Dane County takes care of it between Olin and The Beltline. That must be the hidden County MC at work.
Quote from: peterj920 on September 02, 2023, 04:37:41 AM
It's easy to tell in the winter time who maintains John Nolen. When heading south John Nolen gets a lot better after Olin Ave. I'm assuming Dane County takes care of it between Olin and The Beltline. That must be the hidden County MC at work.
I believe this was the old Town of Madison - which is now annexed by the City and the City of Fitchburg (split between)
Quote from: SSOWorld on September 02, 2023, 10:49:59 AM
Quote from: peterj920 on September 02, 2023, 04:37:41 AM
It's easy to tell in the winter time who maintains John Nolen. When heading south John Nolen gets a lot better after Olin Ave. I'm assuming Dane County takes care of it between Olin and The Beltline. That must be the hidden County MC at work.
I believe this was the old Town of Madison - which is now annexed by the City and the City of Fitchburg (split between)
Once the Cities of Madison and Fitchburg took over, the Town of Madison street blades at Rusk Ave and Rimrock were changed (blade said County MM). Fitchburg put a sign up on Rimrock in the median right after the interchange with The Beltline.
I do notice that the John Nolen Madison project ends at Olin Ave. Couldn't they figure something out with Dane County to complete the work to The Beltline?
Definitely not signed. That's my 'hood these days so I got eyes on Nolen every couple of days.
That old-ass concrete is giving up the ghost. About twice a year, they try filling in the giant holes with cold mix, but soon enough, more chunks of concrete pop out. The curb is littered with fist-sized rocks of concrete. Makes one wonder how much worse they're going to let it get.
If you're planning on accessing US 12/18 eastbound from Interstates 39/90 in the near future, you'll need to take an alternative route: https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/exit-ramps-from-i-39-90-to-u-s-12-18-to-close-for-more-than-month/ar-AA1gi9Lk?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=6a98cd3b901349c791a2c2a65bd634f7&ei=38. I'm sure everything will open back up once the new interchange at CTH AB is completed.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 05, 2023, 07:11:42 PM
If you're planning on accessing US 12/18 eastbound from Interstates 39/90 in the near future, you'll need to take an alternative route: https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/exit-ramps-from-i-39-90-to-u-s-12-18-to-close-for-more-than-month/ar-AA1gi9Lk?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=6a98cd3b901349c791a2c2a65bd634f7&ei=38. I'm sure everything will open back up once the new interchange at CTH AB is completed.
That detour is going to be absolutely brutal during rush hour.
That's a silly detour. If one wants to get east on 12/18 from the south, just take the CTH N exit. Hopefully people's navigation apps will guide them that way instead of forcing them to slog through the Stoughton Road exit.
I assume the recommended detour from 39/90 SB is 94 east to CTH-N?
That's the problem with having the Interstate interchanges being so widely spaced in the Madison area. If one of them is closed, unless you divert to surface streets, it's one hell of a long detour. I'd say detouring to CTH N is probably the best bet for Interstate traffic. Then again, this closing is only for three months, so patience is probably warranted.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 06, 2023, 10:22:31 PM
That's the problem with having the Interstate interchanges being so widely spaced in the Madison area. If one of them is closed, unless you divert to surface streets, it's one hell of a long detour. I'd say detouring to CTH N is probably the best bet for Interstate traffic. Then again, this closing is only for three months, so patience is probably warranted.
Right. If you are going SB on I-39/90 and want to go EB on US-12/18, getting off at the Beltline and turning around at Stoughton Road is the shortest option both distance and time-wise.
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
I assume the recommended detour from 39/90 SB is 94 east to CTH-N?
I doubt it. That would take forever going through Cottage Grove. It's the exact issue that Ghostbuster is talking about. The posted detour isn't great, but its the best option available.
If you want to go NB I-39/90 to EB-US-12/18 a County N detour makes more sense since the interstate swings to the east. My guess is that most people would already use that route even without construction though.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 06, 2023, 10:22:31 PM
That's the problem with having the Interstate interchanges being so widely spaced in the Madison area. If one of them is closed, unless you divert to surface streets, it's one hell of a long detour. I'd say detouring to CTH N is probably the best bet for Interstate traffic. Then again, this closing is only for three months, so patience is probably warranted.
But the trade off is less congestion from merging traffic during peak periods because there are fewer interchanges.
One can see this all the time on the triplex during heavy weekends. It clogs up at every interchange as traffic merging on tries to squeeze in causing a ripple of brake lights.
I like that 39/90 has few interchanges thru the Madison area. It keeps a lot of local traffic off of a freeway that should primarily be for thru traffic. Like the exact opposite of the beltline which is so interchange dense that it clogs at peak times with people only using it for a short distances. Out east by "the interstate", that traffic uses local roads like it should, instead of mingling with heavy interstate traffic.
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
I assume the recommended detour from 39/90 SB is 94 east to CTH-N?
The posted detour will be to go west on the Beltline and U-turn at Stoughton Road, which depending on the time of day, it might be better to take N through Cottage Grove.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 07, 2023, 10:38:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
I assume the recommended detour from 39/90 SB is 94 east to CTH-N?
The posted detour will be to go west on the Beltline and U-turn at Stoughton Road, which depending on the time of day, it might be better to take N through Cottage Grove.
If I recall someone saying (so don't shoot me), Wisconsin is not allowed to post state highway detours on non-state highways so that's why you get some of these more oddball/nonsensical detours.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 07, 2023, 02:43:14 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 07, 2023, 10:38:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
I assume the recommended detour from 39/90 SB is 94 east to CTH-N?
The posted detour will be to go west on the Beltline and U-turn at Stoughton Road, which depending on the time of day, it might be better to take N through Cottage Grove.
If I recall someone saying (so don't shoot me), Wisconsin is not allowed to post state highway detours on non-state highways so that's why you get some of these more oddball/nonsensical detours.
I don't know about being "not allowed." I can say that I have definitely seen county highways as detours before. But it most certainly is rare.
But also this isn't non-sensical. Using Google Maps, the posted detour will be two minutes faster than using I-94 to County N.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 07, 2023, 04:29:38 PM
But also this isn't non-sensical. Using Google Maps, the posted detour will be two minutes faster than using I-94 to County N.
I never said this one was.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 07, 2023, 04:38:54 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 07, 2023, 04:29:38 PM
But also this isn't non-sensical. Using Google Maps, the posted detour will be two minutes faster than using I-94 to County N.
I never said this one was.
I mean...you said "some of these..." so it most certainly seemed to imply you were including this one.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on September 07, 2023, 02:43:14 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 07, 2023, 10:38:28 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2023, 09:47:50 PM
I assume the recommended detour from 39/90 SB is 94 east to CTH-N?
The posted detour will be to go west on the Beltline and U-turn at Stoughton Road, which depending on the time of day, it might be better to take N through Cottage Grove.
If I recall someone saying (so don't shoot me), Wisconsin is not allowed to post state highway detours on non-state highways so that's why you get some of these more oddball/nonsensical detours.
There was a US 10 detour in Calumet/Manitowoc counties using County PP, County K, and Co
County W. In that part of the state the county roads are built just as well as state highways especially Calumet County.
When US 10 and Wis 32/57 are detoured in that area, county roads are used almost exclusively.
If anyone is coming to Madison this weekend, there are roads to avoid due to the Ironman Triathlon: https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/dane-co-cities-list-road-closures-during-ironman-triathlon/ar-AA1gp8NY?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=33c386a64ddb4a09b3c0cad183eeffed&ei=22.
I've also seen many state highway detours on county highways or even local city streets, but this year they seem more nonsensical here with some work on local roads that are also state highways, near I-41 in the Appleton area, too. The locals know the best ways to avoid those work zones, anyways.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on September 08, 2023, 01:22:13 PM
I've also seen many state highway detours on county highways or even local city streets, but this year they seem more nonsensical here with some work on local roads that are also state highways, near I-41 in the Appleton area, too. The locals know the best ways to avoid those work zones, anyways.
Mike
Waukesha County never likes to post detours on any road that is not either a state or county highway. It many times creates much longer detours than otherwise would be.
A Madison man died participating in the Ironman triathlon: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ironman-wisconsin-athlete-who-died-was-a-51-year-old-madison-man-sheriff-s-office-says/ar-AA1gCjPI?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=a5915b2bb7f8447191c2b74ec1f3b943&ei=71. Maybe the triathlon is too rigorous for some competitors.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 12, 2023, 02:46:44 PM
A Madison man died participating in the Ironman triathlon: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ironman-wisconsin-athlete-who-died-was-a-51-year-old-madison-man-sheriff-s-office-says/ar-AA1gCjPI?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=a5915b2bb7f8447191c2b74ec1f3b943&ei=71. Maybe the triathlon is too rigorous for some competitors.
hat is the responsibility of the individual participants. They all sign such a legal release when entering anyways.
Mike
When they did major work on WI 70 between Winter and Fifield ~20 years ago, the posted detour took one all the way down to Ladysmith.
And this summer's detour of WI 21 between Coloma and Wautoma is quite circuitous.
Both to stay on state highways or above.
WI 113 between Madison and Waunakee this year is another one where the posted detour takes one much further than if they had used some county roads.
So yeah, sometimes they seem to default to not using county roads for official detours despite there being viable options. I think it's all situational with the condition/functional classification of the potential county road detour being a factor as well as maybe experience with locals complaining about extra traffic.
The County M construction project starts next week. :clap:
Quote from: peterj920 on September 13, 2023, 02:57:05 PM
The County M construction project starts next week. :clap:
Is there any discussion of widening County Trunk M from Oncken Road to the Middleton city limits? Or is that tied into planning for the Mendota Parkway?
Construction on CTH M will begin on Tuesday, and last until Fall 2024: https://highway-projects-countyofdane.hub.arcgis.com/pages/cth-m. As for the North Mendota Parkway, it is probably dead permanently. A pity.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 13, 2023, 10:44:56 AM
When they did major work on WI 70 between Winter and Fifield ~20 years ago, the posted detour took one all the way down to Ladysmith.
And this summer's detour of WI 21 between Coloma and Wautoma is quite circuitous.
Both to stay on state highways or above.
WI 113 between Madison and Waunakee this year is another one where the posted detour takes one much further than if they had used some county roads.
So yeah, sometimes they seem to default to not using county roads for official detours despite there being viable options. I think it's all situational with the condition/functional classification of the potential county road detour being a factor as well as maybe experience with locals complaining about extra traffic.
I definitely remember the last time 23 had a detour between Princeton and Green Lake. The detour had you taking 73-21-49. That was several years ago.
With the US 18/US 151 Verona Rd exit constantly backing up onto the Beltline Mainline it may be time to accelerate Phase 3 of the project. It's becoming the biggest choke point on The Beltline.
Quote from: peterj920 on September 18, 2023, 02:55:37 PM
With the US 18/US 151 Verona Rd exit constantly backing up onto the Beltline Mainline it may be time to accelerate Phase 3 of the project. It's becoming the biggest choke point on The Beltline.
WisDOT and Madison area locals have been arguing about adding a set of 'fly under' ramps there since the 1990s. Typical Madison anti-car BANANAs.
< sigh . . . >
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on September 18, 2023, 09:03:29 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on September 18, 2023, 02:55:37 PM
With the US 18/US 151 Verona Rd exit constantly backing up onto the Beltline Mainline it may be time to accelerate Phase 3 of the project. It's becoming the biggest choke point on The Beltline.
WisDOT and Madison area locals have been arguing about adding a set of 'fly under' ramps there since the 1990s. Typical Madison anti-car BANANAs.
< sigh . . . >
Mike
I moved from the Fox Valley to Madison about 5 years ago and I'd say that Madison has had a lot of car friendly projects since I moved here.
County M/Pleasant View Rd has been expanded to 4 lanes and there's a continuing project to expand Pleasant View between Old Sauk and US 14.
The Beltline has the flex lane and is very popular.
The Verona Rd phase 2 project was completed.
County M is new undergoing reconstruction to 4 lanes to County K from Wis 113.
County PD is being expanded to 4 lanes to the west (Epic probably paying the tab).
US 51 freeway opened in DeForest.
I'd say there's a lot of big projects that have been completed in the last 5 years.
Yeah, my recollection was that the free-flowing alternative was discarded mostly due to cost, not Madison being anti-car.
There were a lot of anti-car objections that were raised by locals at the PIMs that I checked out in the 1990s regarding the then active 'fly under' proposals at Beltline/Verona Rd, too. Yes, I do know that WisDOT has been otherwise mostly successful WRT highway upgrade proposals in the Madison area in that they were needed due to overwhelming traffic.
Mike
Oh come on. Comments at PIMs? As far as I recall, the city's major concern was access to the neighborhood right to the east of Verona Road more than anything.
While I would like Phase 3 on Verona Rd. to be implemented, it likely never will be, just like that one-discussed south reliever will never be constructed.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 19, 2023, 07:35:15 PM
While I would like Phase 3 on Verona Rd. to be implemented, it likely never will be, just like that one-discussed south reliever will never be constructed.
I thought the problem with the south reliever is that it wouldn't do much relieving.
True. It was a pie-in-the-sky proposal that would've never been constructed. While it might have facilitated local traffic, as well as traffic between US 18/151 and Interstate 39/90, it likely would have been more of a boondoggle than a boon.
Why did they even need to do it in "phases" rather than doing it right the first time? They shouldn't have done any work in that area until the flyovers were funded to begin with.
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 19, 2023, 08:05:29 PM
Why did they even need to do it in "phases" rather than doing it right the first time? They shouldn't have done any work in that area until the flyovers were funded to begin with.
Lack of money.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 19, 2023, 09:18:12 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 19, 2023, 08:05:29 PM
Why did they even need to do it in "phases" rather than doing it right the first time? They shouldn't have done any work in that area until the flyovers were funded to begin with.
Lack of money.
Well yes, that's why I said they shouldn't have done anything until they could afford to do it right.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 19, 2023, 09:18:12 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 19, 2023, 08:05:29 PM
Why did they even need to do it in "phases" rather than doing it right the first time? They shouldn't have done any work in that area until the flyovers were funded to begin with.
Lack of money.
Mayor Dave was against the flyover, and that alternative was shelved due to local concerns and costs. I thought it was to be revisited in 30+ years. The current layout was designed so that the flyover could be added later.
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 19, 2023, 09:24:01 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 19, 2023, 09:18:12 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 19, 2023, 08:05:29 PM
Why did they even need to do it in "phases" rather than doing it right the first time? They shouldn't have done any work in that area until the flyovers were funded to begin with.
Lack of money.
Well yes, that's why I said they shouldn't have done anything until they could afford to do it right.
I just don't think you can take that approach because "do it right" is a subjective opinion. Furthermore doing something smaller to see if that's sufficient for a couple decades may prove more cost effective in the long run.
It's a tough case to make when outside of peak hours, the single point functions just fine. At this point, it'll probably cost $300 million to construct 'Phase 3' just to shave a couple minutes off a rush hour commute. Which in some cases might be worth it if it also creates a safer piece of infrastructure for everyone (not just those in vehicles.)
Pretty safe bet the status quo at Verona Road is what we are going to have for at least another decade. Probably even two.
I mean, press releases from the time specifically said that people weren't going to be aware of just how bad traffic would get with ongoing construction in a known boondoggle. Multiple sessions of construction don't eliminate that problem, they just make a bottleneck happen twice when it could have happened in one go.
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 20, 2023, 11:48:30 AM
I mean, press releases from the time specifically said that people weren't going to be aware of just how bad traffic would get with ongoing construction in a known boondoggle. Multiple sessions of construction don't eliminate that problem, they just make a bottleneck happen twice when it could have happened in one go.
I'm not sure what you mean by boondoggle. Anyway, no one ever said that this solution would eliminate all bottlenecks - nor do I think that should always be the goal however. The solution provided much improvement between the Beltline and County PD. It also replaced aging infrastructure.
Believe me I have been through there during rush hour. It's not ideal but it's largely fine. The idea that unless something is completely 100% perfect and free-flowing that they should wait until they have the money to make it so, is just not how the world works. Compromises to get 95% of something done is routine.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 20, 2023, 10:52:14 AM
It's a tough case to make when outside of peak hours, the single point functions just fine. At this point, it'll probably cost $300 million to construct 'Phase 3' just to shave a couple minutes off a rush hour commute. Which in some cases might be worth it if it also creates a safer piece of infrastructure for everyone (not just those in vehicles.)
Pretty safe bet the status quo at Verona Road is what we are going to have for at least another decade. Probably even two.
Exactly.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 20, 2023, 01:20:48 PM
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 20, 2023, 11:48:30 AM
I mean, press releases from the time specifically said that people weren't going to be aware of just how bad traffic would get with ongoing construction in a known boondoggle. Multiple sessions of construction don't eliminate that problem, they just make a bottleneck happen twice when it could have happened in one go.
I'm not sure what you mean by boondoggle. Anyway, no one ever said that this solution would eliminate all bottlenecks - nor do I think that should always be the goal however. The solution provided much improvement between the Beltline and County PD. It also replaced aging infrastructure.
Believe me I have been through there during rush hour. It's not ideal but it's largely fine. The idea that unless something is completely 100% perfect and free-flowing that they should wait until they have the money to make it so, is just not how the world works. Compromises to get 95% of something done is routine.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 20, 2023, 10:52:14 AM
It's a tough case to make when outside of peak hours, the single point functions just fine. At this point, it'll probably cost $300 million to construct 'Phase 3' just to shave a couple minutes off a rush hour commute. Which in some cases might be worth it if it also creates a safer piece of infrastructure for everyone (not just those in vehicles.)
Pretty safe bet the status quo at Verona Road is what we are going to have for at least another decade. Probably even two.
Exactly.
Drive through there between 7-9 am and 3-6 pm now and traffic is backing up onto the Beltline Mainline. The least they could do is at least give the Beltline to US 151/18 off ramps priority green. Way more traffic comes off of there than Midvale Blvd. Why does Midvale get priority green?
Apparently the US 12/18 County AB intersection is completed and will fully open today.
My mother and I drove through the future interchange after going apple-picking at Door Creek Orchard. I thought the new interchange looked pretty good. Now if they could find a way to complete the proposed freeway conversion between Interstate 39/90 and CTH N, that would be great.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2023, 10:49:13 AM
My mother and I drove through the future interchange after going apple-picking at Door Creek Orchard. I thought the new interchange looked pretty good. Now if they could find a way to complete the proposed freeway conversion between Interstate 39/90 and CTH N, that would be great.
Top priority should be to build an interchange at US 12/County K. There are major backups there and major backups. Between County AB and N traffic moved just fine and there aren't any backups. Otherwise work on US 51 between the Beltline and Wis 30. Traffic backs up at those 3 lights.
One need only look at all the skid marks left by trucks at that damned CTH K intersection to set an idea of how overdue that interchange is.
There would have to be a few relocations to build an interchange at CTH K, but I agree it should be done. Also, the driveway to the farmhouse just south of CTH K should be closed and relocated, perhaps via an extension of Barbender Rd.
Not that US-12 is apparently that high on WisDOT's priority list, but there's no reason to have any stoplights between Sauk City and Middleton.
Springfield Corners will require installation of frontage roads and having US-12 overpass County P and Hwy 19/Balles Rd; it's too tight to put in appropriate ramps if the side roads overpass US-12. It's probably the path of least resistance for the western Hwy 19 interchange as well.
That would relocate the first stoplight to Hwy 78 just south of Sauk City, where it would likely remain as existing WisDOT plans call for a southern bypass of Sauk City, which would have to initiate somewhere south of County Y to avoid having to displace residences.
WisDOT's current preferred alternatives for converting US 12 into a freeway up to Springfield Corners:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx)
They're suddenly a big fan of split diamonds, it would seem.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2023, 10:42:55 AM
WisDOT's current preferred alternatives for converting US 12 into a freeway up to Springfield Corners:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx)
They're suddenly a big fan of split diamonds, it would seem.
There's been no movement on this project for eight years.
And I doubt any movement will be done anytime soon, if ever. I would still like a Sauk City Bypass to be constructed, since the deferred construction date for the potential bypass expired in 2020 (as part of the deal to expand US 12 between Middleton and Sauk City to four lanes).
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 29, 2023, 11:52:42 AM
And I doubt any movement will be done anytime soon, if ever. I would still like a Sauk City Bypass to be constructed, since the deferred construction date for the potential bypass expired in 2020 (as part of the deal to expand US 12 between Middleton and Sauk City to four lanes).
At this point why not at least construct a 4 lane undivided roadway from Sauk City to County Z and close the 4 lane gap? Doing that wouldn't cost that much to build and wouldn't require that much ROW.
The cost difference relative to the safety improvement is insufficient, in my opinion. Better to line up the funds for a proper four lane divided facility than have to spend money twice to fix some janky, interim 'solution'.
Yeah, I don't think we will see many four-lane undivided rural highways in the future.
The Atwood Ave. project should be wrapping up in about a month. I went by there and saw that the pavement, curbs, and gutters were down, and construction seemed to be nearing completion. It is still just one-way between Cottage Grove Rd. and Walter St., and two-way from there to Fair Oaks Ave: https://www.cityofmadison.com/engineering/documents/projects/Atwood%20Avenue%20-%20Sept_%201%20traffic%20switch.pdf. The detour signs are still in place along Milwaukee St., Stoughton Rd., and Cottage Grove Rd. I still dislike the fact that they narrowed the street from two lanes in each direction to one lane in the outbound direction (matching the segment between Fair Oaks Ave. and Oakridge Ave.).
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 03, 2023, 11:55:03 AM
Yeah, I don't think we will see many four-lane undivided rural highways in the future.
There seems to be more and more passing lanes constructed with 3 lane stretches. The longest 4 lane rural undivided is US 51 between Janesville and Beloit.
I was just thinking of a cheap alternative to stop the bottlenecks where US 12 narrows to 2 lanes. The 2 lane stretch can get slow and backed up especially on weekends. If new passing lanes can be constructed why not add a lane each direction to the existing highway and keep it undivided to minimize ROW impacts?
Quote from: peterj920 on October 04, 2023, 02:10:58 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 03, 2023, 11:55:03 AM
Yeah, I don't think we will see many four-lane undivided rural highways in the future.
There seems to be more and more passing lanes constructed with 3 lane stretches. The longest 4 lane rural undivided is US 51 between Janesville and Beloit.
I was just thinking of a cheap alternative to stop the bottlenecks where US 12 narrows to 2 lanes. The 2 lane stretch can get slow and backed up especially on weekends. If new passing lanes can be constructed why not add a lane each direction to the existing highway and keep it undivided to minimize ROW impacts?
I believe that four lane undivided is now frowned upon for surface roadways due to the unsafe situations created by vehicles that are stopped in a left lane while waiting to turn left. usually two lanes with a turn lane on the right or a shared center left turn lane is called for now.
Mike
Michigan seems to prefer the 4-lane undivided sections of passing lane, at least on its newer builds. I suspect it's more about how its able to acquire ROW; in more populated areas it's probably easier to build as 2 3-lane sections rather than 1 4-lane section. Generally these sections of passing lane are not in areas with heavy left-turning traffic, so they get away with it.
The main reason US-51 is 4-lane undivided between Janesville and Beloit is historical; it was built out before I-90 was built, and it was cheaper/easier to leave it v.s. shrinking back down to 2 lanes. It has relatively light traffic for 4 lanes, so they kinda get away with it. The spots with heaver left turn traffic have a center turn lane, and through the Town of Beloit it's road-dieted to 2 lanes with a TWLTL.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 04, 2023, 03:27:09 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on October 04, 2023, 02:10:58 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 03, 2023, 11:55:03 AM
Yeah, I don't think we will see many four-lane undivided rural highways in the future.
There seems to be more and more passing lanes constructed with 3 lane stretches. The longest 4 lane rural undivided is US 51 between Janesville and Beloit.
I was just thinking of a cheap alternative to stop the bottlenecks where US 12 narrows to 2 lanes. The 2 lane stretch can get slow and backed up especially on weekends. If new passing lanes can be constructed why not add a lane each direction to the existing highway and keep it undivided to minimize ROW impacts?
I believe that four lane undivided is now frowned upon for surface roadways due to the unsafe situations created by vehicles that are stopped in a left lane while waiting to turn left. usually two lanes with a turn lane on the right or a shared center left turn lane is called for now.
Mike
In that area there isn't much to worry about for left turning traffic except for Sauk Prairie Rd and there's already turn lanes at Wis 60. There is a trend going away from new construction of 4 lane undivided but is still used where there is narrow ROW in urban areas.
I'd prefer a full 4 lane Sauk City Bypass but if the funds and planning aren't there to build it anytime soon why not look at economic options to at least improve the existing 2 lane section of US 12 and provide some relief?
Quote from: peterj920 on October 06, 2023, 12:58:20 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on October 04, 2023, 03:27:09 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on October 04, 2023, 02:10:58 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 03, 2023, 11:55:03 AM
Yeah, I don't think we will see many four-lane undivided rural highways in the future.
There seems to be more and more passing lanes constructed with 3 lane stretches. The longest 4 lane rural undivided is US 51 between Janesville and Beloit.
I was just thinking of a cheap alternative to stop the bottlenecks where US 12 narrows to 2 lanes. The 2 lane stretch can get slow and backed up especially on weekends. If new passing lanes can be constructed why not add a lane each direction to the existing highway and keep it undivided to minimize ROW impacts?
I believe that four lane undivided is now frowned upon for surface roadways due to the unsafe situations created by vehicles that are stopped in a left lane while waiting to turn left. usually two lanes with a turn lane on the right or a shared center left turn lane is called for now.
Mike
In that area there isn't much to worry about for left turning traffic except for Sauk Prairie Rd and there's already turn lanes at Wis 60. There is a trend going away from new construction of 4 lane undivided but is still used where there is narrow ROW in urban areas.
I'd prefer a full 4 lane Sauk City Bypass but if the funds and planning aren't there to build it anytime soon why not look at economic options to at least improve the existing 2 lane section of US 12 and provide some relief?
Right now, I'd also be happy with building the long-proposed US 12 Sauk (Prairie) bypass as a 'super two' on an upgradable four lane ROW.
Mike
I have a feeling a US 12 Sauk City Bypass will not be built anytime soon, if ever. If that is the case, maybe existing 12 between STH 60 and Business 12/CTH Z/Prairie Rd. Could be expanded to four lanes.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 29, 2023, 08:33:48 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2023, 10:42:55 AM
WisDOT's current preferred alternatives for converting US 12 into a freeway up to Springfield Corners:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx)
They're suddenly a big fan of split diamonds, it would seem.
There's been no movement on this project for eight years.
Other than an interchange at Hwy K no further upgrades are needed.
As of Friday, Atwood Ave. from Fair Oaks Ave. to Cottage Grove Rd. has reopened to traffic in both directions: https://www.cityofmadison.com/news/atwood-avenue-now-open-to-bidirectional-traffic.
Quote from: dvferyance on October 13, 2023, 10:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 29, 2023, 08:33:48 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2023, 10:42:55 AM
WisDOT's current preferred alternatives for converting US 12 into a freeway up to Springfield Corners:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx)
They're suddenly a big fan of split diamonds, it would seem.
There's been no movement on this project for eight years.
Other than an interchange at Hwy K no further upgrades are needed.
Obviously you don't drive that stretch. There's traffic signals at Wis 19 and County P. There is heavy traffic to Sauk City and interchanges are needed at those intersections. Anyone who lives on the West Side uses US 12 to get to The Dells and I-90/I-94 to the northwest since it runs along the far east side of Madison and is out of the way.
Quote from: peterj920 on October 18, 2023, 01:52:27 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on October 13, 2023, 10:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 29, 2023, 08:33:48 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2023, 10:42:55 AM
WisDOT's current preferred alternatives for converting US 12 into a freeway up to Springfield Corners:
https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/12freeway/maps.aspx)
They're suddenly a big fan of split diamonds, it would seem.
There's been no movement on this project for eight years.
Other than an interchange at Hwy K no further upgrades are needed.
Obviously you don't drive that stretch. There's traffic signals at Wis 19 and County P. There is heavy traffic to Sauk City and interchanges are needed at those intersections. Anyone who lives on the West Side uses US 12 to get to The Dells and I-90/I-94 to the northwest since it runs along the far east side of Madison and is out of the way.
Agreed. Both of those signals cause issues for traffic in the area. There is plenty of traffic going up to Sauk City to warrant something different. Much like the stoplights along the 16/67 bypass in Oconomowoc. The cost-cutting they did in these areas is starting to haunt us.
This is somewhat east of the Madison area, but the Interstate 94 interchange at STH 73 (Exit 250) is planned to be reconstructed next year: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i94wis73/default.aspx. The DOT website has given little information about what configuration the reconstructed STH 73 interchange will be, but if I had to hazard a guess it would likely be similar to the CTH N interchange (Exit 244); a diamond interchange with roundabouts at the ramp terminals. When the interchange is reconstructed, I hope the underpasses become wide enough to accommodate a third lane in each direction.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 19, 2023, 06:49:31 PM
This is somewhat east of the Madison area, but the Interstate 94 interchange at STH 73 (Exit 250) is planned to be reconstructed next year: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i94wis73/default.aspx. The DOT website has given little information about what configuration the reconstructed STH 73 interchange will be, but if I had to hazard a guess it would likely be similar to the CTH N interchange (Exit 244); a diamond interchange with roundabouts at the ramp terminals. When the interchange is reconstructed, I hope the underpasses become wide enough to accommodate a third lane in each direction.
The bridges will be wide enough for a 3rd lane and that's been common along I-94 all the way to the Minnesota border. They're built that way mainly to accommodate bi-directional traffic if there's construction it seems as work zones along I-94 have 2 lanes in each direction.
I-94 between Madison and Pewaukee needs a rebuild badly as the road bed is shot. New resurfacing projects don't last very long because of it.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 19, 2023, 06:49:31 PM
The DOT website has given little information about what configuration the reconstructed STH 73 interchange will be, but if I had to hazard a guess it would likely be similar to the CTH N interchange (Exit 244); a diamond interchange with roundabouts at the ramp terminals.
As a rural interchange with no services in the immediate interchange area, I think it's more likely they won't use roundabouts at the ramp terminals. I'm noticing a rough pattern in where WisDOT is using ramp terminal roundabouts in recent years. And I think this junction falls below whatever threshold I'm imagining they have for roundabouts over conventional intersections for the ramp terminals.
I think that threshold involves some calculation on whether or not signals would be needed, either right now or in the near future. Provided the location is suburban or exurban or is rural, but has an abundance of businesses serving freeway travelers. And naturally, assuming no site-specific constraints that would make some other configuration more suited.
Quote from: peterj920 on October 19, 2023, 11:41:59 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 19, 2023, 06:49:31 PM
This is somewhat east of the Madison area, but the Interstate 94 interchange at STH 73 (Exit 250) is planned to be reconstructed next year: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i94wis73/default.aspx. The DOT website has given little information about what configuration the reconstructed STH 73 interchange will be, but if I had to hazard a guess it would likely be similar to the CTH N interchange (Exit 244); a diamond interchange with roundabouts at the ramp terminals. When the interchange is reconstructed, I hope the underpasses become wide enough to accommodate a third lane in each direction.
The bridges will be wide enough for a 3rd lane and that's been common along I-94 all the way to the Minnesota border. They're built that way mainly to accommodate bi-directional traffic if there's construction it seems as work zones along I-94 have 2 lanes in each direction.
I-94 between Madison and Pewaukee needs a rebuild badly as the road bed is shot. New resurfacing projects don't last very long because of it.
How much of that current I-94 roadbed is still the pre-I-94 WI 30 roadbed?
That sounds a LOT like how much of the I-41 project between Appleton and De Pere starting next year will be digging out and replacing old US 41 roadbed that dates back to and before 1960.
Mike
^^ Though the portion from just north of CTH J to De Pere was done in 2000.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 20, 2023, 12:09:34 PM
How much of that current I-94 roadbed is still the pre-I-94 WI 30 roadbed?
Except for the little bit thru Johnson Creek that was redone ~20 years ago, it should be the whole thing from just east of Cottage Grove to CTH SS in Pewaukee.
Quote from: Big John on October 20, 2023, 12:45:49 PM
^^ Though the portion from just north of CTH J to De Pere was done in 2000.
Parts were partially realigned and so forth as part of its upgrade from the previous surface four lanes to a full interstate compatible freeway in about 2000, but it was not fully rebuilt. The pending 'big shovel' project will dig out the highway's entire roadbed and replace it with an urban profile six lane freeway to match what was done a decade and two ago further south to WI 26 in Oshkosh and a few years ago further north around the Green Bay area. It will be an entirely new highway.
Mike
Just curious, I don't know much about the Madison area. I have visited there this summer and was wondering if they were or are planning to connect the beltline freeway to 90/94 somewhere north of town. :hmmm:
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 24, 2023, 10:15:09 AM
Just curious, I don't know much about the Madison area. I have visited there this summer and was wondering if they were or are planning to connect the beltline freeway to 90/94 somewhere north of town. :hmmm:
Not a chance. Too many BANANAs there.
Quote from: Big John on October 24, 2023, 10:38:04 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 24, 2023, 10:15:09 AM
Just curious, I don't know much about the Madison area. I have visited there this summer and was wondering if they were or are planning to connect the beltline freeway to 90/94 somewhere north of town. :hmmm:
Not a chance. Too many BANANAs there.
Unless you count US-12's interchange with I-90/94 as "somewhere north of town."
Quote from: SEWIGuy on October 24, 2023, 01:58:15 PM
Quote from: Big John on October 24, 2023, 10:38:04 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 24, 2023, 10:15:09 AM
Just curious, I don't know much about the Madison area. I have visited there this summer and was wondering if they were or are planning to connect the beltline freeway to 90/94 somewhere north of town. :hmmm:
Not a chance. Too many BANANAs there.
Unless you count US-12's interchange with I-90/94 as "somewhere north of town."
And the I-90/94/US 12 connection at Lake Delton (Wisconsin Dells) would require a complete redo to accomplish that, like it *should* have been done a couple of decades or more ago. The actual 'North Beltline' ship in the Madison area itself sailed by the 1960s and is not likely to be revived at any time within the foreseeable future. The traffic demand is still and will always be there, but only look for more minor 'here and there' type upgrades to address that. Anything beyond that will have to wait for future generations to get fed up and demand that something more substantial be done.
Mike
There has long been a North Mendota Parkway proposed for the north side of Madison. It is unlikely that it will ever be constructed. I wouldn't mind expanding STH 19 to four lanes (except for the portion east of Dorn Dr. and west of Division St., where it would be impossible) from US 12 to US 51, maybe even a northern bypass of Waunakee.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 24, 2023, 02:31:24 PM
There has long been a North Mendota Parkway proposed for the north side of Madison. It is unlikely that it will ever be constructed. I wouldn't mind expanding STH 19 to four lanes (except for the portion east of Dorn Dr. and west of Division St., where it would be impossible) from US 12 to US 51, maybe even a northern bypass of Waunakee.
While I agree with the idea, any new construction around Waunakee will be DOA.
They are going to make CTH M four lanes around the north end of Lake Mendota. That's about as close to a "Northern Beltline" or "North Mendota Parkway" we're going to get.
That's better than nothing, I suppose.
:pan:
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 25, 2023, 09:59:43 AM
They are going to make CTH M four lanes around the north end of Lake Mendota. That's about as close to a "Northern Beltline" or "North Mendota Parkway" we're going to get.
I think eventually CTH K may become 4 lanes. The issue right now is that there's so many areas of growth where expansion is needed. County M/Pleasant View Rd is probably the largest expansion project in the last 10 years. County BB/Cottage Grove Rd was just expanded as well. County PD is also being expanded mainly thanks to Epic. However, Dane County is splitting the costs with the municipalities making the projects more economical. Anything in the rural areas have to be taken on 100% by Dane County which would strain its budget.
Steer clear of John Nolen Drive for the next several weeks: https://www.nbc15.com/2023/11/08/big-delays-expected-john-nolen-drive-until-christmastime/.
I really need the intersection of WI-60 and US 12 near Sauk City to be signaled. I've frequently upwards of 5 minutes to be able turn left onto 12.
I'm surprised it's not signaled already, like the CTH PF intersection. Maybe the DOT will build a roundabout there if they don't add traffic signals to the intersection.
Looked at the DOT website and there's going to be a signal at US 18/151 and County G/Dairyland Dr? There's also going to be added auxiliary lanes. EPIC has a big influence!
The project is listed here: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us18151-danecounty/default.aspx. The stop-sign controlled intersection at the ramp terminal at the CTH-G interchange has evidently become inadequate, which is why they will be signalized in 2025. Personally, I think both ramp terminals should be signalized instead of just the westbound one.
^^ The link provided the results of traffic signal warrants and only 1 of the ramps met a warrant. Though I agree that WisDOT is rather conservative in putting in signals at ramp termini.
Whenever I go by there's hardly any traffic and it's a rural interchange. But I'm guessing they're anticipating more EPIC traffic.
I traveled along the reconstucted portion of Atwood Ave. today, and I think it looks pretty good, even though I still think they should have left the street (Oakridge Ave. to Cottage Grove Rd.) with two lanes in each direction.
Quote from: peterj920 on November 24, 2023, 09:27:35 PM
Looked at the DOT website and there's going to be a signal at US 18/151 and County G/Dairyland Dr? There's also going to be added auxiliary lanes. EPIC has a big influence!
Despite how close it is, that exit isn't very useful for getting to and from Epic unless you're coming from Mount Vernon. Though with how much Verona has expanded, the DOT might be anticipating more housing development in the vicinity of the exit.
A 2nd entrance to Epic is currently being constructed. County PD is being expanded to Country View Rd where there will be a new signal and entrance. I'm guessing a new road is going to be constructed from the interchange into the new west entrance.
The future second entrance already appears on Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0111717,-89.5760368,703m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu
Quote from: peterj920 on November 28, 2023, 02:38:42 PM
A 2nd entrance to Epic is currently being constructed. County PD is being expanded to Country View Rd where there will be a new signal and entrance. I'm guessing a new road is going to be constructed from the interchange into the new west entrance.
I presume you work there.
Quote from: SSOWorld on November 28, 2023, 08:57:44 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on November 28, 2023, 02:38:42 PM
A 2nd entrance to Epic is currently being constructed. County PD is being expanded to Country View Rd where there will be a new signal and entrance. I'm guessing a new road is going to be constructed from the interchange into the new west entrance.
I presume you work there.
No, just live nearby and use PD to get to US 18/US 151 on my Driftless Adventures.
The CTH PD has had some massive upgrades over the years. Previously, the four-lane roadway narrowed back to two lanes just west of Maple Grove Dr. Since then, there has been a lot of development, thus more of CTH PD has had to be expanded to four lanes. This includes the construction of a single-point intersection at the CTH-PD/CTH-M intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0164118,-89.5325887,497m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu. I wouldn't be surprised if CTH-PD is eventually expanded to four lanes all the way to US 18/151.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 30, 2023, 01:23:25 PM
The CTH PD has had some massive upgrades over the years. Previously, the four-lane roadway narrowed back to two lanes just west of Maple Grove Dr. Since then, there has been a lot of development, thus more of CTH PD has had to be expanded to four lanes. This includes the construction of a single-point intersection at the CTH-PD/CTH-M intersection: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0164118,-89.5325887,497m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu. I wouldn't be surprised if CTH-PD is eventually expanded to four lanes all the way to US 18/151.
That intersection is weird. PD westbound gets to free flow under County M but PD east has to stop at a light. I doubt PD is going to be made 4 lanes to US 18/US 151. The County G/Dairyridge Rd interchange is being upgraded and will serve traffic heading to Epic from Mt. Horeb.
I'm sure there would have been a free-flow lane constructed in the eastbound direction as well, had it not been for the substation located at the southeast corner of the CTH-PD/CTH-M intersection. The substation probably could have been relocated, and the power lines moved, but neither were.
They are presently installing a traffic signal at the intersection of East Washington Ave. and Melvin Ct./Rethke Ave. Installation isn't complete yet, but when it is completed and fully operational, the flashing crossing signals at the intersection will undoubtedly be removed: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1094381,-89.3357211,3a,75y,224.86h,83.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNH8vSP9yYrTtyjMtfafEVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 12, 2023, 10:42:37 PM
They are presently installing a traffic signal at the intersection of East Washington Ave. and Melvin Ct./Rethke Ave. Installation isn't complete yet, but when it is completed and fully operational, the flashing crossing signals at the intersection will undoubtedly be removed: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1094381,-89.3357211,3a,75y,224.86h,83.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNH8vSP9yYrTtyjMtfafEVA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu.
Because E. Washington can always use more traffic lights. More people going to the Geisha House? :-D
The traffic signal is being installed as part of the BRT project that will open in late 2024. Other non-signalized intersections along the route's corridor are getting signals as well.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 19, 2023, 02:16:15 PM
The traffic signal is being installed as part of the BRT project that will open in late 2024. Other non-signalized intersections along the route's corridor are getting signals as well.
.
How many stoplights are being installed as part of the BRT? Looks like they'll be at Sheboygan Ave and Whitney Way, Sheboygan and Segoe Road, E. Wash at Melvin/Rethke. Any others?
I'd suggest going to the City of Madison website and clicking on the Bus Rapid Transit page to learn more about where new traffic signals are being erected within the BRT corridor (and the entire project in general).
Isn't that 'BRT' thing a sort of 'poor man's' rubber tire version of a steel rail tram system that would be commonly found in many European cities? IIRC, the same thing is being done in the Milwaukee area.
Mike
Comparing US cities with European cities is really comparing apples to oranges. The land mass of Europe is similar to the entire land mass of the United States, and their cities are closer together. That's probably why rail seems to work better there as opposed to here. The northeastern portion of the United States is probably the only part of the country where rail transport between cities would work as well as in Europe. I think buses get a very bad rap. Personally, I strongly prefer buses to trains.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 14, 2024, 11:21:49 PM
Comparing US cities with European cities is really comparing apples to oranges. The land mass of Europe is similar to the entire land mass of the United States, and their cities are closer together. That's probably why rail seems to work better there as opposed to here. The northeastern portion of the United States is probably the only part of the country where rail transport between cities would work as well as in Europe. I think buses get a very bad rap. Personally, I strongly prefer buses to trains.
I was typing about local tram/transit systems, not intercity systems.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 14, 2024, 11:14:56 PM
Isn't that 'BRT' thing a sort of 'poor man's' rubber tire version of a steel rail tram system that would be commonly found in many European cities? IIRC, the same thing is being done in the Milwaukee area.
I liken BRT to street-running light rail. Same methodology with the stops using elevated platforms and displays telling you when the next vehicle arrives. Same type of spacing between stops. Same use of signal prioritization.
State St.'s two bus rapid transit stations begin construction on Monday: https://www.wmtv15news.com/2024/02/16/state-street-bus-rapid-transit-stations-begin-construction/.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 16, 2024, 01:15:41 PM
State St.'s two bus rapid transit stations begin construction on Monday: https://www.wmtv15news.com/2024/02/16/state-street-bus-rapid-transit-stations-begin-construction/.
"State Street" and "rapid transit" sounds like an oxymoron, especially when it's Badger game day. :)
There's going to be a new Perry St overpass across The Beltline that was announced today. The new bridge will be built just to the west of the US 14/US 151 Interchange.
The madison.com story (https://madison.com/news/local/government-politics/madison-beltline-overpass-grant/article_72d00040-e150-11ee-b071-2f49a7537639.html) is paywalled, so it can't be accessed. While I welcome new grade-separations across the Beltline, there doesn't seem to be enough space to build an overpass at Perry St. The frontage roads are too close to the mainline lanes, and the eastbound off-ramp to US 14 East/US 151 North. How would they manage to construct an overpass without lowering the road (Beltline), or taking out the church and motels surrounding Perry St.?
I guess that's what the planning grant is studying.
As long as they leave enough room under it so the beltline ramps to Park and Fish Hatch can be braided in the future. Those two interchanges are too close together to just rely on aux lanes.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 15, 2024, 11:31:31 AM
As long as they leave enough room under it so the beltline ramps to Park and Fish Hatch can be braided in the future. Those two interchanges are too close together to just rely on aux lanes.
The Fish Hatchery/Todd Dr/Seminole Hwy/Verona Rd is the worst sequence on The Beltline. Traveling westbound that's where all the backups are.
Quote from: peterj920 on March 16, 2024, 09:41:51 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 15, 2024, 11:31:31 AM
As long as they leave enough room under it so the beltline ramps to Park and Fish Hatch can be braided in the future. Those two interchanges are too close together to just rely on aux lanes.
The Fish Hatchery/Todd Dr/Seminole Hwy/Verona Rd is the worst sequence on The Beltline. Traveling westbound that's where all the backups are.
That's less because of the exits being close together and more because that's a choke point so it gets the most traffic.
Quote from: peterj920 on March 14, 2024, 02:18:00 AM
There's going to be a new Perry St overpass across The Beltline that was announced today. The new bridge will be built just to the west of the US 14/US 151 Interchange.
From the DOT press release: "The funding is aimed at reconnecting communities that were cut off by transportation infrastructure decades ago, leaving entire neighborhoods without direct access to opportunity, like schools, jobs, medical offices and places of worship."
Yeah, this is NOT a "cut off" community. This is a light commercial/industrial district that is separated from a mixed commercial/residential area by a highway. It's a stupid location to try to cram in another vehicle overpass, and it won't do a damn thing for the folks who live there. What it *might* do is make the area south of the Beltline more viable for redevelopment - and I suspect that's ultimately the City's goal, press releases be damned.
It's easily a $10-15 million project for a vehicle bridge to connect the two sides, only one of which has an appreciable residential population - nobody lives in the City of Madison section south of the Beltline. Both areas already have ample ways to get in and out by car. Not to mention, they'll need to grab a bunch of property on both sides of the Beltline to put this bridge in there.
Take out the slum motels on each side of the highway the most expensive way possible! Do eeet!!!
If we're merely talking about a pedestrian and bike overpass, that makes a lot more sense. There is a dearth of options to safely cross the Beltline as a pedestrian or cyclist, and this would provide a viable way into the City from the Capital City bike trail or neighborhood farther south in Fitchburg. It can be done without nearly the amount of disruption or property acquisition as a vehicle overpass.
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 17, 2024, 09:31:33 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on March 14, 2024, 02:18:00 AM
There's going to be a new Perry St overpass across The Beltline that was announced today. The new bridge will be built just to the west of the US 14/US 151 Interchange.
From the DOT press release: "The funding is aimed at reconnecting communities that were cut off by transportation infrastructure decades ago, leaving entire neighborhoods without direct access to opportunity, like schools, jobs, medical offices and places of worship."
Yeah, this is NOT a "cut off" community. This is a light commercial/industrial district that is separated from a mixed commercial/residential area by a highway. It's a stupid location to try to cram in another vehicle overpass, and it won't do a damn thing for the folks who live there. What it *might* do is make the area south of the Beltline more viable for redevelopment - and I suspect that's ultimately the City's goal, press releases be damned.
It's easily a $10-15 million project for a vehicle bridge to connect the two sides, only one of which has an appreciable residential population - nobody lives in the City of Madison section south of the Beltline. Both areas already have ample ways to get in and out by car. Not to mention, they'll need to grab a bunch of property on both sides of the Beltline to put this bridge in there.
Take out the slum motels on each side of the highway the most expensive way possible! Do eeet!!!
If we're merely talking about a pedestrian and bike overpass, that makes a lot more sense. There is a dearth of options to safely cross the Beltline as a pedestrian or cyclist, and this would provide a viable way into the City from the Capital City bike trail or neighborhood farther south in Fitchburg. It can be done without nearly the amount of disruption or property acquisition as a vehicle overpass.
it's simply political speak :-D
While the beltline didn't cut off access to something that previously was there, it does offer an inconvenience to accessing the light industrial area that has developed south of the beltline since its construction.
My reading between the lines is someone likes the idea of people living in south Madison neighborhoods to be able to walk/bike to jobs in that industrial park. Or at least drive there without using Fish Hatch. That area south of the beltline is kind of on an island presently with only Fish Hatch connecting it to the rest of the city.
Like I said earlier, it would be great if such an overpass could be folded into a project to braid the ramps between Park and Fish Hatch. Those are sucky merges most times of day.
Quote from: JREwing78 on March 17, 2024, 09:31:33 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on March 14, 2024, 02:18:00 AM
There's going to be a new Perry St overpass across The Beltline that was announced today. The new bridge will be built just to the west of the US 14/US 151 Interchange.
From the DOT press release: "The funding is aimed at reconnecting communities that were cut off by transportation infrastructure decades ago, leaving entire neighborhoods without direct access to opportunity, like schools, jobs, medical offices and places of worship."
Yeah, this is NOT a "cut off" community. This is a light commercial/industrial district that is separated from a mixed commercial/residential area by a highway. It's a stupid location to try to cram in another vehicle overpass, and it won't do a damn thing for the folks who live there. What it *might* do is make the area south of the Beltline more viable for redevelopment - and I suspect that's ultimately the City's goal, press releases be damned.
It's easily a $10-15 million project for a vehicle bridge to connect the two sides, only one of which has an appreciable residential population - nobody lives in the City of Madison section south of the Beltline. Both areas already have ample ways to get in and out by car. Not to mention, they'll need to grab a bunch of property on both sides of the Beltline to put this bridge in there.
Take out the slum motels on each side of the highway the most expensive way possible! Do eeet!!!
If we're merely talking about a pedestrian and bike overpass, that makes a lot more sense. There is a dearth of options to safely cross the Beltline as a pedestrian or cyclist, and this would provide a viable way into the City from the Capital City bike trail or neighborhood farther south in Fitchburg. It can be done without nearly the amount of disruption or property acquisition as a vehicle overpass.
I think the City using this for additional development south of the Beltline is exactly what they are thinking about here. The portion south of the Beltline really hasn't changed much in the last few decades. Remember this was part of the old Town of Madison so the City hasn't had its hands on it for awhile.
Originally, the underpass at Terrence Ave. (just south of Exit 251AB), and the overpass at S. High Point Rd. were the only grade-separations that had no access to the Beltline. Then in 2005, the overpass for Agriculture Dr. (between Exit 266 and Exit 267AB) was constructed, and the Middleton Bypass was completed. More grade-separations should have been constructed along the Beltline. However, there are plenty of space constraints, especially between Exits 257 and 264. Maybe the ongoing Madison Beltline Study (https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx) will ultimately provide additional grade-separations to the corridor.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 18, 2024, 05:44:20 PM
Originally, the underpass at Terrence Ave. (just south of Exit 251AB),
Terrace Avenue