Wisconsin notes

[MantyMadTown]

Through Janesville, WisDOT is building out I-39/90 to 8 lanes (and 12 between the US-14 and Hwy 26 exits with the weave/merge lanes). It seems highly unlikely that they would cheap out at the Beltline and not have at least 6 through lanes.

If 4 through lanes was going to be adequate there, all they would have to do to "finish" the Beltline interchange is run the NBD I-39/90 left lane into the WBD Beltline exit, and have the EBD Beltline to SBD I-39/90 ramp turn into the right lane. No need to bother with new bridges.  Just a series of signs on NBD I-39/90 indicating the left lane is for the Beltline.

One of the major goals is for I-39/90 to not be a parking lot for weekend tourist traffic. You bet your ass the first 4-lane section of I-39/90 north of Rockford would be a crash hotspot every Friday, and the last thing any Wisconsinite would want is to have over $1 Billion dumped into I-39/90 south of the Beltline and end up with the same backup hell immediately afterwards.

If it's only going to be 8 lanes until Janesville and 6 after that, Janesville is going to become the site of a daily traffic jam in the summer.  Why would they create a bottleneck like that...they'd probably be better off keeping it all 6 lanes.

So I agree with you--if there was a place to change the width from 8 lanes to 6, it would be the Beltline Interchange.  Enough traffic will divert to Madison that it wouldn't be as bad of a bottleneck as the one they're establishing in Janesville.

The only section of I-39/90/94 to have 8 through lanes is the stretch between US-151 and Hwy 30, where traffic counts climb north of 100,000 vpd. The Beltline is moving 140,000 vpd (with some issues) with only 6 through lanes.

If it's 8 lanes between 151 and Hwy 30, then 4 lanes through the Beltline interchange is quite the bottleneck.
Yep, we should definitely build it to 6 lanes all the way through.

[froggie]

The only way to have 39/90 be 6 lanes through the Beltline interchange and not create a bottleneck on the Beltline ramps is to convince them to add auxiliary lanes between the Beltline and 94.  Yes, there's that much traffic going to/from the Beltline.  If you're only going to have 6 lanes between the Beltline and 94, then keeping 4 lanes on 39/90 through the Beltline interchange is the only way you'll avoid having a worse bottleneck on the Beltline ramps...specifically the ramps between the Beltline and 39/90 North(West).  Those ramps actually carry more traffic than 39/90 through traffic through the interchange.

If I am reading the traffic count maps correctly, 60,900 vehicles approach the interchange from the north.

I ran the number crunching and got a figure in the vicinity of 46,000.  There's also a continuous traffic recorder on 39/90 between the Beltline and 94 which for 2014 (most recent year available) had an average daily traffic volume of 86,000 in both directions with an almost even 50/50 directional split (so roughly 43,000 southbound approaching the Beltline).  An average daily volume of 86K correlates well with summer weekend (Saturday/Sunday) traffic.  Friday summer traffic is the busiest and is approximately 30% heavier.

Based on this (and as I mentioned above), you actually have over half of your southbound traffic exiting to the Beltline (and, conversely, half of your northbound traffic coming from the Beltline).

[I-39]

Why couldn't WisDOT just go through with the original plans for the Beltline interchange?

What they are proposing is simply kicking the can down the road for 15-20 years.

[DaBigE]

What they are proposing is simply kicking the can down the road for 15-20 years.

That appears to be their motto lately...whatever they can do to save money in the short-term.

[froggie]

Why couldn't WisDOT just go through with the original plans for the Beltline interchange?

Funding.  The governor and state legislature opted some years ago to no longer index the state gas tax to inflation, and the result is that WisDOT's buying power has been eroding since then.

[SSOWorld]

Why couldn't WisDOT just go through with the original plans for the Beltline interchange?

Funding.  The governor and state legislature opted some years ago to no longer index the state gas tax to inflation, and the result is that WisDOT's buying power has been eroding since then.

Cascade effect - and the politicians in the seats do not want to lose their jobs due to "mistakes" like raising taxes.  Nobody likes higher taxes. (even if they do help the funds) #NIMBY

[SEWIGuy]

Why couldn't WisDOT just go through with the original plans for the Beltline interchange?

Funding.  The governor and state legislature opted some years ago to no longer index the state gas tax to inflation, and the result is that WisDOT's buying power has been eroding since then.

Cascade effect - and the politicians in the seats do not want to lose their jobs due to "mistakes" like raising taxes.  Nobody likes higher taxes. (even if they do help the funds) #NIMBY

Actually many of the Republicans are also wanting to restore the indexing.  Really its the governor who doesn't want it, and given the powerful veto that he wields, it will be nearly impossible to restore it.

[triplemultiplex]

Actually many of the Republicans are also wanting to restore the indexing.  Really its the governor who doesn't want it, and given the powerful veto that he wields, it will be nearly impossible to restore it.

There's a solution to that this November...

[dvferyance]

Actually many of the Republicans are also wanting to restore the indexing.  Really its the governor who doesn't want it, and given the powerful veto that he wields, it will be nearly impossible to restore it.

There's a solution to that this November...

I have never heard Evers say he wants to invest in roads.

[MantyMadTown]

Actually many of the Republicans are also wanting to restore the indexing.  Really its the governor who doesn't want it, and given the powerful veto that he wields, it will be nearly impossible to restore it.

There's a solution to that this November...

I have never heard Evers say he wants to invest in roads.

I'm pretty sure he said that's one of his top priorities. If you look at his campaign platform he definitely says he wants to invest in roads and other types of transportation infrastructure.

[invincor]

And certainly it's got to be allies of his behind the "Scottholes" campaign.  And didn't I hear they even flew a banner over Lambeau Field before or during the game last Sunday?

[mgk920]

Please keep the partisan politics under control, OK?

Mike

[GeekJedi]

While this is veering a bit into partisan politics, these are excellent road-related points. No matter what side you're on, the (published) facts are that the quality of Wisconsin roads have declined greatly in recent years. The (published) facts are that it's because the transportation fund is running at a deficit. Yes, some of that can be controlled with spending, but the reality is that expenses grow over time, while the funding has stopped. That was also political. So, the two are intertwined, whether you want them to be or not. It's already a plank in the platform of the campaigns.

[SSOWorld]

The current governor is more interested in keeping his image squeaky clean for a presidential run than he is in funding the roads (Which would mean increasing the gas tax).

[MantyMadTown]

The current governor is more interested in keeping his image squeaky clean for a presidential run than he is in funding the roads (Which would mean increasing the gas tax).

I don't know if he's interested in another presidential run at this point but he's certainly trying to reshape his image for the governor's race. I don't think many of us are fooled by his campaign.

[SSOWorld]

The current governor is more interested in keeping his image squeaky clean for a presidential run than he is in funding the roads (Which would mean increasing the gas tax).

I don't know if he's interested in another presidential run at this point but he's certainly trying to reshape his image for the governor's race. I don't think many of us are fooled by his campaign.

Regardless, he is only interested in self-interest.

[JREwing78]

Apparently it's not just roadgeeks that are seeing WisDOT's plans for the Beltline interchange as cheaping out:


Critics call WisDOT's preferred plan for I-39/90 at Beltline 'brand-new bottleneck'
https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/critics-call-wisdot-s-preferred-plan-for-i--at/article_179d47a1-8812-5dbd-89dc-73c55aaf9f1e.html

[The Ghostbuster]

Rebuild the interchange right the first time (6 lanes, right-hand-only exit and entrance ramps), or don't rebuild the interchange at all.

[Brandon]

Rebuild the interchange right the first time (6 lanes, right-hand-only exit and entrance ramps), or don't rebuild the interchange at all.

The only ramp at that interchange that should even be a left exit is north I-39/90 to the westbound Beltline due to traffic volume.  Everything else should be on the right and only the right.

[Brandon]

What they are proposing is simply kicking the can down the road for 15-20 years.

That appears to be their motto lately...whatever they can do to save money in the short-term.

Could be worse.  You could have FIB-DOT in charge of your roads.

[paulthemapguy]

The only ramp at that interchange that should even be a left exit is north I-39/90 to the westbound Beltline due to traffic volume.  Everything else should be on the right and only the right.

I 100% agree with this.  The west and south approaches should be connected as fluidly as possible.

[froggie]

Rebuild the interchange right the first time (6 lanes, right-hand-only exit and entrance ramps), or don't rebuild the interchange at all.

The only ramp at that interchange that should even be a left exit is north I-39/90 to the westbound Beltline due to traffic volume.  Everything else should be on the right and only the right.

If it were more of an even split, I could see that.  But almost 70% of northbound 39/90 traffic is remaining on 39/90 at the Beltline interchange.

[MantyMadTown]

Rebuild the interchange right the first time (6 lanes, right-hand-only exit and entrance ramps), or don't rebuild the interchange at all.

The only ramp at that interchange that should even be a left exit is north I-39/90 to the westbound Beltline due to traffic volume.  Everything else should be on the right and only the right.

If it were more of an even split, I could see that.  But almost 70% of northbound 39/90 traffic is remaining on 39/90 at the Beltline interchange.

This is why it should be 6 lanes throughout the whole interchange.

[froggie]

^ However, there's even more traffic going from the Beltline to northbound 39/90 than there is through traffic on 39/90.  Making 6 lanes through the interchange without adding lanes between the Beltline and 94 will just make the bottleneck worse.  Traffic coming from the Beltline needs its own dedicated lane once it reaches northbound 39/90.

[triplemultiplex]

Yes, any rebuild of the Beltline Interchange should also add a fourth lane to 39/90 up to the Badger Interchange.
That would mean replacing the Cottage Grove Rd overpass, but that needs it anyway.  Gotta make that bridge four lanes with all the sprawl east of the interstate now.