Unbuilt Freeway in Superior?

[dvferyance]

Given that most of US 53 between Superior and La Crosse is a freeway, WI's had plenty of chances to designate it as an Interstate. A northern I-37 would've been the most logical choice, since it's between I-35 and I-39. But that ship seems to have sailed now.

Not every major corridor needs to be an interstate.

[The Ghostbuster]

Had the powers-that-be decided to convert the US 53 corridor from Eau Claire to Superior into an Interstate Standard freeway, the only logical number that could have been used would have been Interstate 37. There may be further upgrades to the existing corridor in the distant future, as sited by this DOT study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/nw/us53corridor/default.aspx. However, I highly doubt a full freeway upgrade will ever happen.

[Rothman]

Fun fact:  In order to beat Duluth in the race to attract the railroad, Superior gave up 1/3 of its property (at the time) to it.  One of the reasons why the entire waterfront has a rail line on it.

Superior did/does have the advantage of a more gradual slope down from regional highlands on their side of the harbor.

They also have the natural harbor.  Duluth's has to be constantly dredged.

[GaryV]

Fun fact:  In order to beat Duluth in the race to attract the railroad, Superior gave up 1/3 of its property (at the time) to it.  One of the reasons why the entire waterfront has a rail line on it.

Superior did/does have the advantage of a more gradual slope down from regional highlands on their side of the harbor.

They also have the natural harbor.  Duluth's has to be constantly dredged.

It's the same harbor. They only created a more direct harbor channel on the Duluth side (where the lift bridge is). Even if that artificial channel wasn't there, the same amount of silt would be coming down the St. Louis River and it would have to be dredged out from somewhere in the harbor.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Local legend about the Duluth canal is that Superior sued to block the construction of it, but since in the old days it would obviously take significant time for the authorities to travel to Duluth and ascertain the situation, the townsfolk hurriedly dug the canal out before anyone could arrive and potentially stop it.

[Rothman]

Fun fact:  In order to beat Duluth in the race to attract the railroad, Superior gave up 1/3 of its property (at the time) to it.  One of the reasons why the entire waterfront has a rail line on it.

Superior did/does have the advantage of a more gradual slope down from regional highlands on their side of the harbor.

They also have the natural harbor.  Duluth's has to be constantly dredged.

It's the same harbor. They only created a more direct harbor channel on the Duluth side (where the lift bridge is). Even if that artificial channel wasn't there, the same amount of silt would be coming down the St. Louis River and it would have to be dredged out from somewhere in the harbor.

No, it is not the same harbor.  Take the harbor cruise sometime and they'll explain the difference.

[triplemultiplex]

Well, speaking in hydrological terms it's the same "harbor" in that it's the same embayment of water separated from the main body of water by some sort of narrows or inlet.  When your talking shipping, that's where the difference matters.

My earlier note about the gentler slope on the Wisconsin side; one need only look at an old railroad map to see how that was an advantage for Superior.  8 different railroad lines used to descend to the port on the Superior side.  Despite being closer to the mines up north, only 2 railroads found their way down to the port on the Duluth side.

[froggie]

My earlier note about the gentler slope on the Wisconsin side; one need only look at an old railroad map to see how that was an advantage for Superior.  8 different railroad lines used to descend to the port on the Superior side.  Despite being closer to the mines up north, only 2 railroads found their way down to the port on the Duluth side.

Also why the main line north from the Twin Cities (BNSF's Hinckley Subdivision) dips into Wisconsin.

Though it doesn't change the gist of your point, there were 3 railroads back in the day on the Duluth side.  There are the two Canadian National descents down the bluff but historically there was also a former Northern Pacific line along what is now the Willard Munger State Trail.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Despite its geographical and topographical disadvantages, Duluth was able to come up with more money than Superior to attract rail business, which is largely why Duluth's growth outpaced Superior's.

[Rothman]

Despite its geographical and topographical disadvantages, Duluth was able to come up with more money than Superior to attract rail business, which is largely why Duluth's growth outpaced Superior's.

I don't think it's that simple, given that Superior gave away 1/3 of its land to the railroad, which is still evident today with the rail line running right along the shore.  It's not like the railroad chose exclusively between Duluth and Superior.

[Rothman]

Well, speaking in hydrological terms it's the same "harbor" in that it's the same embayment of water separated from the main body of water by some sort of narrows or inlet.  When your talking shipping, that's where the difference matters.

My earlier note about the gentler slope on the Wisconsin side; one need only look at an old railroad map to see how that was an advantage for Superior.  8 different railroad lines used to descend to the port on the Superior side.  Despite being closer to the mines up north, only 2 railroads found their way down to the port on the Duluth side.

In terms of silt from the river, Superior's harbor does not require the dredging that the artificial channel on the Duluth side requires.  Hence why local authorities call Superior's harbor the natural one.

The dredger is a common sight in Duluth.

[peterj920]

Drove through Superior last weekend and the unbuilt freeway was a huge missed opportunity for the city. It would have made Superior's west side and Downtown more accessible by providing nearby freeway access and would have most likely spurred economic development along it to a city that's in desperate need of economic development.

US 53 is built about as well as it can be through Superior with limited traffic signals but it's still though to have a smooth drive from Eau Claire to Superior and have to suddenly slow to 35 mph. Look at how successful  US 53 freeway Eau Claire Bypass has been! Superior could have had similar success if built.

On the other side of the St. Louis River, Duluth has easier access with I-35 which gives the city a bigger advantage over Superior in attracting economic development. Not saying that Superior would have topped Duluth but would have at least made the city competitive.

[Rothman]

Drove through Superior last weekend and the unbuilt freeway was a huge missed opportunity for the city. It would have made Superior's west side and Downtown more accessible by providing nearby freeway access and would have most likely spurred economic development along it to a city that's in desperate need of economic development.

US 53 is built about as well as it can be through Superior with limited traffic signals but it's still though to have a smooth drive from Eau Claire to Superior and have to suddenly slow to 35 mph. Look at how successful  US 53 freeway Eau Claire Bypass has been! Superior could have had similar success if built.

On the other side of the St. Louis River, Duluth has easier access with I-35 which gives the city a bigger advantage over Superior in attracting economic development. Not saying that Superior would have topped Duluth but would have at least made the city competitive.

Not this malarkey again...

There has been good discussion about why the west side freeway would never pass local muster, nor have the benefits you say it would.  Also, the idea that a freeway on the west side of Superior would have been its economic savior ignores a plethora of historical variables that caused Superior to end up where it is today.

[peterj920]

Drove through Superior last weekend and the unbuilt freeway was a huge missed opportunity for the city. It would have made Superior's west side and Downtown more accessible by providing nearby freeway access and would have most likely spurred economic development along it to a city that's in desperate need of economic development.

US 53 is built about as well as it can be through Superior with limited traffic signals but it's still though to have a smooth drive from Eau Claire to Superior and have to suddenly slow to 35 mph. Look at how successful  US 53 freeway Eau Claire Bypass has been! Superior could have had similar success if built.

On the other side of the St. Louis River, Duluth has easier access with I-35 which gives the city a bigger advantage over Superior in attracting economic development. Not saying that Superior would have topped Duluth but would have at least made the city competitive.

Not this malarkey again...

There has been good discussion about why the west side freeway would never pass local muster, nor have the benefits you say it would.  Also, the idea that a freeway on the west side of Superior would have been its economic savior ignores a plethora of historical variables that caused Superior to end up where it is today.

It probably wouldn't save the city but it would definitely help and make things way more convenient for motorists/truckers. Existing US 53 is not a convenient way to travel to Duluth and even more inconvenient for trucks. They need to stay in the left lane until I-535.

[sprjus4]

Drove through Superior last weekend and the unbuilt freeway was a huge missed opportunity for the city. It would have made Superior's west side and Downtown more accessible by providing nearby freeway access and would have most likely spurred economic development along it to a city that's in desperate need of economic development.

US 53 is built about as well as it can be through Superior with limited traffic signals but it's still though to have a smooth drive from Eau Claire to Superior and have to suddenly slow to 35 mph. Look at how successful  US 53 freeway Eau Claire Bypass has been! Superior could have had similar success if built.

On the other side of the St. Louis River, Duluth has easier access with I-35 which gives the city a bigger advantage over Superior in attracting economic development. Not saying that Superior would have topped Duluth but would have at least made the city competitive.

Not this malarkey again...

There has been good discussion about why the west side freeway would never pass local muster, nor have the benefits you say it would.  Also, the idea that a freeway on the west side of Superior would have been its economic savior ignores a plethora of historical variables that caused Superior to end up where it is today.

Perhaps not economic growth, but it is important to realize that Superior's 35 mph slog is a gap in an otherwise 65 mph divided highway to the south and I-35 to the north.

A lot of small towns on divided highway routes have bypasses, not for economic growth but to provide a free-flowing divided highway route around them.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

After sketching it out I could almost see something like this making some sense in 1985 if you really wanted US 53 off that East End route. But that ship sailed long ago.



It mostly sticks to the planned rail yard freeway and avoids all the misfit jumbled neighborhoods that make Superior what it is.

[Rothman]

All you guys are doing is showing ignorance of local socioeconomics.  West side of Superior north of the forest is one of the most, if not most, affluent parts of Superior.  They'd oppose the freeway.

As to "other towns have bypasses, so Superior should, too," all that does is bring to mind Mr. Prosser.

Anyway, no serious proposal has been brought forward to do this in decades, which means the need for such is being exaggerated.  That's even taking into account Madison's tendency to ignore everything north of WI 29.  We hear the frustration about Breezewood all the time.  Driving through Superior to get to Duluth?  Not so much, even though I do think that the 35 mph section on Wi 35 by the airport and Menard's should be raised.

Like I said, this conversation has been had on the forum before and the fact of the matter is this idea of a western bypass borders on FritzOwl territory given the realities in the area.

[invincor]

As to "other towns have bypasses, so Superior should, too," all that does is bring to mind Mr. Prosser.

I get this reference, but I do have to wonder how many other people here know what this is from. 

And beware of the leopard!

[Rothman]

As to "other towns have bypasses, so Superior should, too," all that does is bring to mind Mr. Prosser.

I get this reference, but I do have to wonder how many other people here know what this is from. 

And beware of the leopard!

Well, we are all geeks...

[SEWIGuy]

Drove through Superior last weekend and the unbuilt freeway was a huge missed opportunity for the city. It would have made Superior's west side and Downtown more accessible by providing nearby freeway access and would have most likely spurred economic development along it to a city that's in desperate need of economic development.

US 53 is built about as well as it can be through Superior with limited traffic signals but it's still though to have a smooth drive from Eau Claire to Superior and have to suddenly slow to 35 mph. Look at how successful  US 53 freeway Eau Claire Bypass has been! Superior could have had similar success if built.

On the other side of the St. Louis River, Duluth has easier access with I-35 which gives the city a bigger advantage over Superior in attracting economic development. Not saying that Superior would have topped Duluth but would have at least made the city competitive.

Not this malarkey again...

There has been good discussion about why the west side freeway would never pass local muster, nor have the benefits you say it would.  Also, the idea that a freeway on the west side of Superior would have been its economic savior ignores a plethora of historical variables that caused Superior to end up where it is today.

Perhaps not economic growth, but it is important to realize that Superior's 35 mph slog is a gap in an otherwise 65 mph divided highway to the south and I-35 to the north.

A lot of small towns on divided highway routes have bypasses, not for economic growth but to provide a free-flowing divided highway route around them.

A slog? It's about a six mile stretch that generally moves just fine.

Just like US-10 east of Stevens Point, while sure it would be *nice* to have a freeway to freeway connection, it certainly isn't a necessity given the costs involved, short distances and the other priorities within the state.

[sprjus4]

A slog? It's about a six mile stretch that generally moves just fine.

Slowing down from 65 mph to 35 mph for six miles... you can still be free-flowing, it's still a slog.

Just like US-10 east of Stevens Point, while sure it would be *nice* to have a freeway to freeway connection, it certainly isn't a necessity given the costs involved, short distances and the other priorities within the state.

I can see this.

[peterj920]

A slog? It's about a six mile stretch that generally moves just fine.

Slowing down from 65 mph to 35 mph for six miles... you can still be free-flowing, it's still a slog.

Just like US-10 east of Stevens Point, while sure it would be *nice* to have a freeway to freeway connection, it certainly isn't a necessity given the costs involved, short distances and the other priorities within the state.

I can see this.

It was a huge mistake to cancel the US 10 Stevens Point East bypass. A lot of money was spent on the I-41 interchanges with US 10 and US 45 to make them free flowing, upgrading US 45 to freeway between I-41 and US 10, then have traffic slow down and travel through an interchange with 30 mph ramps. A lot more traffic uses US 10 east of Stevens Point than west to Marshfield, yet the money was spent on the US 10 bypass that only has 1/3 of the traffic that US 10 has traveling time east of Stevens Point. If large projects are going to be done, complete at 100% not 95%.

[SEWIGuy]

A slog? It's about a six mile stretch that generally moves just fine.

Slowing down from 65 mph to 35 mph for six miles... you can still be free-flowing, it's still a slog.

Just like US-10 east of Stevens Point, while sure it would be *nice* to have a freeway to freeway connection, it certainly isn't a necessity given the costs involved, short distances and the other priorities within the state.

I can see this.

It was a huge mistake to cancel the US 10 Stevens Point East bypass. A lot of money was spent on the I-41 interchanges with US 10 and US 45 to make them free flowing, upgrading US 45 to freeway between I-41 and US 10, then have traffic slow down and travel through an interchange with 30 mph ramps. A lot more traffic uses US 10 east of Stevens Point than west to Marshfield, yet the money was spent on the US 10 bypass that only has 1/3 of the traffic that US 10 has traveling time east of Stevens Point. If large projects are going to be done, complete at 100% not 95%.

I don't agree with that at all. Sometimes the last 5% isn't worth the cost. And in this case it is more like 2% because it is about a two mile stretch of the 100 miles between Marshfield and Oshkosh.

Again, not everything has to be free flowing. Is traffic slowing down for two miles incovenient? Sure. Is it worth $200 million to fix? I have my doubts.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Besides, I'm not sure why people are complaining about the US 53 Superior side issues so much when there's a more annoying slog on the Minnesota side up through the mall area and Hermantown with a 65 MPH rural expressway on the other end.

[Rothman]

Besides, I'm not sure why people are complaining about the US 53 Superior side issues so much when there's a more annoying slog on the Minnesota side up through the mall area and Hermantown with a 65 MPH rural expressway on the other end.

Ha!  Good point.