Regional Boards > Great Lakes and Ohio Valley
Milwaukee area freeways
Stephane Dumas:
Alternative 1 for US-45 got a interesting use of service roads system
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/seregion/zoointrchng/docs/sdeis-ex216.pdf
Alternative 3 include even a roundabout for one of the ramp and connectors streets
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/seregion/zoointrchng/docs/sdeis-ex218.pdf
triplemultiplex:
Visited WisDOT's PIM this week about the Zoo Interchange. It sounds like the "reduced impacts" alternative is receiving the most positive feedback. (see link in thread's first post)
And by and large I'd have to agree that it's the best one. The complicated series of ramps and frontage roads along US 45 north of the Zoo in the other alternatives seem like overkill. Plus, I'm starting to dig the wild parclo at Watertown Plank. My only concern with the R.I. Alt is the spacing between service ramps in a couple spots. Graphics on display indicated interchange would operate at LOS D or better during normal peak conditions with the R.I. Alt. At this point, I'd expect the final design to closely resemble the R.I. Alt.
In talking with one of the engineers, one of the bigger complicating factors in working with this interchange is rail-related. The rail-trail corridor that parallels I-94 in this area requires that they make bridges high enough to accommodate a hypothetical conversion back to rail, regardless of how unlikely it may be. That restricts what they can do in the Z-axis, so to speak. It also ads cost. This is despite a total lack of precedent for a rail trail going back to rail. In my opinion, if trains ever run on these tracks again, it'll probably be some commuter rail that at least doesn't have the same vertical clearance requirements as freight tracks.
The engineer also commented on how "fun" it is to come up with a way to replace the UP railroad bridge over I-94 in the project area.
Speaking to Mike's point about a left lane drop; I did not notice any instance of that in any of the displays.
Lastly, I should mention that the engineer I talked to was actual a UW basketball player back when they made the Final Four like 10 years ago. I only found this out after I had left, which is probably for the better. I'd hate to keep a guy from his job. (Go Badgers tonight!)
froggie:
--- Quote ---This is despite a total lack of precedent for a rail trail going back to rail. In my opinion, if trains ever run on these tracks again, it'll probably be some commuter rail that at least doesn't have the same vertical clearance requirements as freight tracks.
--- End quote ---
Can't think of any post-construction cases offhand, but there's at least 2 planning cases I know of, one in Minneapolis, another in the DC suburbs.
ToledoRoadgeek:
--- Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 24, 2011, 04:59:02 PM ---Visited WisDOT's PIM this week about the Zoo Interchange. It sounds like the "reduced impacts" alternative is receiving the most positive feedback. (see link in thread's first post)
And by and large I'd have to agree that it's the best one. The complicated series of ramps and frontage roads along US 45 north of the Zoo in the other alternatives seem like overkill. Plus, I'm starting to dig the wild parclo at Watertown Plank. My only concern with the R.I. Alt is the spacing between service ramps in a couple spots. Graphics on display indicated interchange would operate at LOS D or better during normal peak conditions with the R.I. Alt. At this point, I'd expect the final design to closely resemble the R.I. Alt.
In talking with one of the engineers, one of the bigger complicating factors in working with this interchange is rail-related. The rail-trail corridor that parallels I-94 in this area requires that they make bridges high enough to accommodate a hypothetical conversion back to rail, regardless of how unlikely it may be. That restricts what they can do in the Z-axis, so to speak. It also ads cost. This is despite a total lack of precedent for a rail trail going back to rail. In my opinion, if trains ever run on these tracks again, it'll probably be some commuter rail that at least doesn't have the same vertical clearance requirements as freight tracks.
The engineer also commented on how "fun" it is to come up with a way to replace the UP railroad bridge over I-94 in the project area.
Speaking to Mike's point about a left lane drop; I did not notice any instance of that in any of the displays.
Lastly, I should mention that the engineer I talked to was actual a UW basketball player back when they made the Final Four like 10 years ago. I only found this out after I had left, which is probably for the better. I'd hate to keep a guy from his job. (Go Badgers tonight!)
--- End quote ---
Driven through this interchange quite a few times on the way to MN. In looking at the aerials for the "reduced impacts" plan, it looks like I-94 narrows to 2 lanes in each direction through the interchange. I was just curious if they were planning on leaving room for a future third lane or HOV/HOT lane in each direction? Seems to me like that would leave a pretty nasty bottleneck, but you live there so you would know better than I.
Quote
Revive 755:
Couple comments from a trip to the Milwaukee area today:
* The WI 794 freeway/Lake Parkway has got to be one of the worst speed traps in the country; seriously, that route can easily be posted at 55, not 40.
* There's about as much redevelopment along I-794 as there is in the old Park Freeway East corridor. It might have helped if I took an old map with me to be sure, but I think a lot of the corridor was still open. In any case, the traffic signal timing for the replacement street is appalling, as is the font on one of the street signs.
* Whoever is in charge of construction that blocked access to the ramp near Marquette Interchange to WB I-94 did not bother to cover up all the signs directing traffic to this ramp.
* WB I-94 west of the US 41 interchange was awfully congested for a Saturday (most likely from the construction).
* The ramp meters around Milwaukee are a bit irritating, especially on I-94 west of I-894.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version