Milwaukee's Stadium Freeway Future

[The Ghostbuster]

There is another artifact of the Stadium Freeway's future that eventually will need to be dealt with; what exists of the originally-proposed and built southern terminus of the Stadium South Freeway at its junction with Interstates 41/43/894: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9634203,-87.9647316,647m/data=!3m1!1e3. The park-and-ride lot can remain, but the remnants of what was to have been called the Greenfield Interchange needs to be completely removed, and the main lanes of the Airport Freeway needs to be condensed together to eliminate the space in the median. I'm sure that will be addressed whenever that segment of 41/43/894 is reconstructed in the future.

[GeekJedi]

The park-and-ride lot can remain, but the remnants of what was to have been called the Greenfield Interchange needs to be completely removed, and the main lanes of the Airport Freeway needs to be condensed together to eliminate the space in the median. I'm sure that will be addressed whenever that segment of 41/43/894 is reconstructed in the future.

Why?

[The Ghostbuster]

What I said is what I would do to that segment of 41/43/894. Ultimately, the DOT will decide what will truly be done to the corridor. I just hope the DOT expands 41/43/894 to eight lanes whenever it is reconstructed.

[GeekJedi]

What I said is what I would do to that segment of 41/43/894. Ultimately, the DOT will decide what will truly be done to the corridor. I just hope the DOT expands 41/43/894 to eight lanes whenever it is reconstructed.

I'm just wondering why you believe that the space in the median needs to be eliminated. That's kind of an arbitrary thing.

[The Ghostbuster]

When Interstate 39/90 was reconstructed, the northbound lanes were placed next to the southbound lanes when the left-hand exit to US 12/18 west was eliminated. I just thought the same thing might be done with that stretch of 41/43/894. Of course, I may be comparing apples to oranges, since the 12/18 interchange was completed, while the "Greenfield Interchange" was built, but never utilized (except for buses formerly: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9618421,-87.9612473,3a,75y,270.59h,89.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stcdbwtG1KMTkswefGMVK7A!2e0!5s20070801T000000!7i3328!8i1664).

[triplemultiplex]

Pretty much a given they'll slap the lanes back together whenever that stretch of freeway comes up for reconstruction. It will make it easier to remove the last, unused bridge in the ghost interchange.

[GeekJedi]

When Interstate 39/90 was reconstructed, the northbound lanes were placed next to the southbound lanes when the left-hand exit to US 12/18 west was eliminated. I just thought the same thing might be done with that stretch of 41/43/894. Of course, I may be comparing apples to oranges, since the 12/18 interchange was completed, while the "Greenfield Interchange" was built, but never utilized (except for buses formerly: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9618421,-87.9612473,3a,75y,270.59h,89.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stcdbwtG1KMTkswefGMVK7A!2e0!5s20070801T000000!7i3328!8i1664).

Ahh, OK. That makes sense. I just thought that it was one of those "it's not standard, so it should be removed" things. If they upgrade the area, I'm totally with you on that!

[peterj920]

The reimagining Wis 175 study site is now live. WISDOT is studying to see if it should be replaced with an at grade boulevard.

https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/se/175study/default.aspx

[Plutonic Panda]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

What they really should do if they want to rid the area of the freeway due to noise and pollution is turn the corridor into a linear park and let the existing street grid handle the additional traffic load.

[OCGuy81]

I don't think it's a terrible idea.  The demolition of another stub, the Park Freeway, really led to a rennissance of Milwaukee's east side. 

[SEWIGuy]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

First, the traffic drops off pretty significantly the further north you go.

Second, it really is a barrier in that neighborhood that restricts access to Wick Park and Washington Park.  (I used to live in that area in the early 90s.)

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

[triplemultiplex]

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

Seems as though the stated scope of the future project would line up with my earlier speculation about the area around Wisconsin, Wells and Bluemound:

a study​​ for WIS 175 between Wisconsin Avenue and Lisbon Avenue.

So to me, that sounds like they won't be altering that area and concern themselves only with the portion north of the Menomonee Valley; bridge included.
Which makes sense, the existing spans have four lanes in each direction (3 GP lanes and 1 aux lane between ramps) and they barely need two.

[Plutonic Panda]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

First, the traffic drops off pretty significantly the further north you go.

Second, it really is a barrier in that neighborhood that restricts access to Wick Park and Washington Park.  (I used to live in that area in the early 90s.)

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

But what I'm not understanding is why the need to replace it with a boulevard? Why not just continue it Vliet St. with it becoming at grade right after the RR tracks to allow for an intersection at Martin Dr.? Expand Washington Park to the west and build a new gathering spot or plaza at the northern end of the stub where it splits.

It sounds like they're just going to convert the entire thing to a boulevard London AVE. Which in that case then why not just keep it a freeway?

Granted, I haven't been to Milwaukee so I'm playing the Google Maps armchair expert here.

[SEWIGuy]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

First, the traffic drops off pretty significantly the further north you go.

Second, it really is a barrier in that neighborhood that restricts access to Wick Park and Washington Park.  (I used to live in that area in the early 90s.)

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

But what I'm not understanding is why the need to replace it with a boulevard? Why not just continue it Vliet St. with it becoming at grade right after the RR tracks to allow for an intersection at Martin Dr.? Expand Washington Park to the west and build a new gathering spot or plaza at the northern end of the stub where it splits.

It sounds like they're just going to convert the entire thing to a boulevard London AVE. Which in that case then why not just keep it a freeway?

Granted, I haven't been to Milwaukee so I'm playing the Google Maps armchair expert here.

The simple reason is that a boulevard can be developed and is easier to cross by foot than a freeway.

[Plutonic Panda]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

First, the traffic drops off pretty significantly the further north you go.

Second, it really is a barrier in that neighborhood that restricts access to Wick Park and Washington Park.  (I used to live in that area in the early 90s.)

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

But what I'm not understanding is why the need to replace it with a boulevard? Why not just continue it Vliet St. with it becoming at grade right after the RR tracks to allow for an intersection at Martin Dr.? Expand Washington Park to the west and build a new gathering spot or plaza at the northern end of the stub where it splits.

It sounds like they're just going to convert the entire thing to a boulevard London AVE. Which in that case then why not just keep it a freeway?

Granted, I haven't been to Milwaukee so I'm playing the Google Maps armchair expert here.

The simple reason is that a boulevard can be developed and is easier to cross by foot than a freeway.

I'm not seeing a lot of room for development even if it were downgraded to a four lane boulevard without some sort of urban renewal plan where nearby buildings are torn down.

I'll wait to see proposals but I am all in favor of removing the freeway just not replacing it with a boulevard all the way to Libson. It just doesn't make sense to me.

[on_wisconsin]

The freeway is an eyesore and probably should go, but replacing it with what will more or less be a Stroad is almost certainly not the right alternative...

[SEWIGuy]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

First, the traffic drops off pretty significantly the further north you go.

Second, it really is a barrier in that neighborhood that restricts access to Wick Park and Washington Park.  (I used to live in that area in the early 90s.)

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

But what I'm not understanding is why the need to replace it with a boulevard? Why not just continue it Vliet St. with it becoming at grade right after the RR tracks to allow for an intersection at Martin Dr.? Expand Washington Park to the west and build a new gathering spot or plaza at the northern end of the stub where it splits.

It sounds like they're just going to convert the entire thing to a boulevard London AVE. Which in that case then why not just keep it a freeway?

Granted, I haven't been to Milwaukee so I'm playing the Google Maps armchair expert here.

The simple reason is that a boulevard can be developed and is easier to cross by foot than a freeway.

I'm not seeing a lot of room for development even if it were downgraded to a four lane boulevard without some sort of urban renewal plan where nearby buildings are torn down.

I'll wait to see proposals but I am all in favor of removing the freeway just not replacing it with a boulevard all the way to Libson. It just doesn't make sense to me.

There's plenty of room for development if it is turned into a boulevard. 

The freeway is an eyesore and probably should go, but replacing it with what will more or less be a Stroad is almost certainly not the right alternative...

Agreed.

[Plutonic Panda]

The freeway is an eyesore and probably should go, but replacing it with what will more or less be a Stroad is almost certainly not the right alternative...

Right! Because if that's the alternative it would be better to keep the freeway as any reductions of noise and unsightly aspects would be minimal and not worth the reduction in travel times and safety risks for pedestrians crossing at grade intersections.

Do it right and convert most of it to a greenway not a boulevard. Let the other streets handle the increased load since it's so minimal.

[Plutonic Panda]

There's plenty of room for development if it is turned into a boulevard.   

Where? Maybe at Martin Dr but that's one single intersection and a pretty small area.

[SEWIGuy]

There's plenty of room for development if it is turned into a boulevard.   

Where? Maybe at Martin Dr but that's one single intersection and a pretty small area.

Pretty much the whole corridor. I used to live near there. You're looking at Google. If you don't believe me, I no longer care.

[Plutonic Panda]

There's plenty of room for development if it is turned into a boulevard.   

Where? Maybe at Martin Dr but that's one single intersection and a pretty small area.

Pretty much the whole corridor. I used to live near there. You're looking at Google. If you don't believe me, I no longer care.

I mean, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I am looking at google. In street view and aerial. I'm just not seeing how it would add a ton of development but maybe I'm wrong. I'm not going to die on this hill so I guess we'll see. I just think it would be smarter to add more park and green space in lieu of road space if this freeway is removed.

[SEWIGuy]

There's plenty of room for development if it is turned into a boulevard.   

Where? Maybe at Martin Dr but that's one single intersection and a pretty small area.

Pretty much the whole corridor. I used to live near there. You're looking at Google. If you don't believe me, I no longer care.

I mean, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I am looking at google. In street view and aerial. I'm just not seeing how it would add a ton of development but maybe I'm wrong. I'm not going to die on this hill so I guess we'll see. I just think it would be smarter to add more park and green space in lieu of road space if this freeway is removed.

You don't have to convince me of anything cause I know I have a better understanding of the area than you do.

[Plutonic Panda]

There's plenty of room for development if it is turned into a boulevard.   

Where? Maybe at Martin Dr but that's one single intersection and a pretty small area.

Pretty much the whole corridor. I used to live near there. You're looking at Google. If you don't believe me, I no longer care.

I mean, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I am looking at google. In street view and aerial. I'm just not seeing how it would add a ton of development but maybe I'm wrong. I'm not going to die on this hill so I guess we'll see. I just think it would be smarter to add more park and green space in lieu of road space if this freeway is removed.

You don't have to convince me of anything cause I know I have a better understanding of the area than you do.

Jesus fucking Christ you're being defensive. Tone it down a bit. I never said you didn't have a better understanding and I've admittedly posted I don't know the area and I'm looking at it through google maps.

I'm not going to bother stating anything further. I'll wait until the study is released which should give a better idea of just how much extra land will be available for development if a boulevard replacement is selected.

[mgk920]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding why this freeway should be removed. It's in an area dominated by cars. What difference would an at grade boulevard do other than just move traffic but much more inefficiently.

First, the traffic drops off pretty significantly the further north you go.

Second, it really is a barrier in that neighborhood that restricts access to Wick Park and Washington Park.  (I used to live in that area in the early 90s.)

But I don't think the entire freeway should be removed.  This was expressed by someone else in this topic, but I think they should maintain the freeway northward until it crosses the Menomonee Valley, the railroad tracks and State Street.  After that it has plenty of room to become a boulevard starting at Juneau, which can now cut through again. A nice boulevard between that point and Lisbon would function nicely.

A couple of weeks ago I was intrigued by a map that someone made and put up in another forvm that showed a 45 or so degree crossover at Lisbon to directly feed Sherman Boulevard into (stadium boulevard/parkway).  I hope that WisDOT gives that one a fair hearing.

Mike

[triplemultiplex]

Looking at some AADT numbers, it's almost a 50-50 split in the amount of traffic using the Lloyd St exit and the amount of traffic continuing all the way to the end of the stub. It's actually 55% continuing, 45% using Lloyd St.
Clearly a good chunk of that is folks sliding over to Sherman Blvd.  But not quite enough to justify direct feeding a future boulevard into Sherman from the old freeway.  So I think the junction of Lloyd and the new surface facility will be nothing special.

The more I look at this area north of Vliet St, the more I'd want the boulevard to be built along the eastern edge of the r/w so there could be residential infill between the new road and 47th St.  Washington Heights is a decent middle class neighborhood and I feel like the freed space would fill in just fine, as long as one tries to steer redevelopment to match the neighborhood with reasonable sized detached housing and maybe an apartment building or two thrown in.

Placing the boulevard along 47th St would free up more land for Washington Park, but I feel like new housing would be more beneficial to the area.  Washington Park is pretty big to begin with. It was where the zoo was before the 60's, after all. Then I also assume the folks already living on 47th St, which is currently a relatively peaceful side road, won't want to be suddenly living on the "main drag" through their neighborhood.

Too bad they're not doing any more tunneling in the area for like the deep storage system for stormwater.  The rock they dug through to make those would've made great fill for the freeway trench.  Smashed up limestone is perfect for something like that.