Does anyone else think that maybe WIS 172 should be considered for a renumbering for WIS 29 between I-41/US 41 and I-43 .....? This would continue the freeway of WIS 29 to connect to I-43 if that happened and also take 29 off the city streets. Any thoughts .....?
If they did, that would be a massive waste of money spent to build the flyover interchange they just completed at the current junction with US(I)-41. Think about that.
Perhaps if WI 29 becomes an interstate as either a three digit auxiliary route to I 41 or 43 or in even more fictional highway territory a high 90s east west interstate it would be logical to follow the limited access WI 172 road.
Quote from: SSOWorld on August 31, 2014, 05:06:18 PM
If they did, that would be a massive waste of money spent to build the flyover interchange they just completed at the current junction with US(I)-41. Think about that.
Not necessarily. WI 29 would use the new interchange and then jump onto I-41 south and then exit onto what is now eastbound WI 172 .....
Oh - duh! :banghead: :pan:
That would probably not happen. Given that it's a study right now It's unknown what the dream would be. Good theory though. Truthfully, the only purpose for that would be to encourage use of I-43 - which unless you were going to Manitowoc or Sheboygan, would be highly unlikely.
Besides - east of US-41, the highway becomes local. (at the split between 32-29 as 32 carries the traffic over - technically :bigass: )
If anything, I would decommission WI 29 east of US(I)-41, giving the part east of I-43 a new number.
WI 172 should become a rerouted WI 54.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on September 01, 2014, 10:23:51 AM
If anything, I would decommission WI 29 east of US(I)-41, giving the part east of I-43 a new number.
I would give it a new number west of Menomonie as well. (My original idea was to give WI-29 a new number between I-94 and Green Bay...WI-1...but that isn't happening.)
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 01, 2014, 11:52:39 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on September 01, 2014, 10:23:51 AM
If anything, I would decommission WI 29 east of US(I)-41, giving the part east of I-43 a new number.
I would give it a new number west of Menomonie as well. (My original idea was to give WI-29 a new number between I-94 and Green Bay...WI-1...but that isn't happening.)
I personally like the idea of extending US 212 along MN 62, MN 55, then take over all of WI 29 & WI 172 to I-43. Based on the plans for the new I-94/WI-29 interchange in Elk Mound, WISDot is trying to upgrade WI 29 to an interstate standard highway in the future .....
Do US Routes get extensions? I am under the impression they don't.
Why wouldn't they?
Quote from: SSOWorld on September 01, 2014, 03:35:37 PM
Do US Routes get extensions? I am under the impression they don't.
Sure they can. US-63 was extended south into Louisiana about 15 years ago.
But why mess with AASHTO when you don't have to, and its not as though extending US-212 would aid in navigation in any way.
Quote from: mgk920 on September 01, 2014, 10:23:51 AM
If anything, I would decommission WI 29 east of US(I)-41, giving the part east of I-43 a new number.
WI 172 should become a rerouted WI 54.
Mike
Good point. WI 54 and 29 multiplexed maybe would make sense .....?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 01, 2014, 05:34:27 PM
Quote from: SSOWorld on September 01, 2014, 03:35:37 PM
Do US Routes get extensions? I am under the impression they don't.
Sure they can. US-63 was extended south into Louisiana about 15 years ago.
But why mess with AASHTO when you don't have to
Hey, the tale of the extended US 377 shows the practical power of any DOT vs. AASHTO's limited ability to stop individual states from signing extensions at will...
Hoping not to be teetering on the edge of Fictional Highways here I'd like to see a I-541 or even a I-543...hard to tell which they'd go with because 43 sort of wraps around Green Bay, whereas 41, which clearly is the more dominant freeway, should definitely have a Child Route.
Be That as it may, I do agree with SSOWorld that unless you're going to Sheboygan or Manitowoc, I couldn't see much of a use for extending any potential Wis 29 Interstate of the Future along Wis 172 when one can just as easily hop onto 41 and get to Milwaukee just the same as I-43. Good thought though.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 01, 2014, 05:34:27 PM
But why mess with AASHTO when you don't have to, and its not as though extending US-212 would aid in navigation in any way.
Yes it would. An extension to Hastings would give a single number to a south metro corridor that currently has three numbers. An extension to Green Bay would put a major cross-state corridor on a national network, which should have been done in the first place.
Quote from: Molandfreak on September 02, 2014, 06:15:37 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 01, 2014, 05:34:27 PM
But why mess with AASHTO when you don't have to, and its not as though extending US-212 would aid in navigation in any way.
Yes it would. An extension to Hastings would give a single number to a south metro corridor that currently has three numbers. An extension to Green Bay would put a major cross-state corridor on a national network, which should have been done in the first place.
I will agree with you on the first point, but not the second. For the vast majority of people, changing WI-29 to US-212 is simply a change in numbers. It isn't going to help them that it is connected with what is basically a rural highway west of the cities.
WIS 29 is a very lightly traveled road west of Menomonie due to the Interstate. 29 carries direct EC to Men traffic but not as much as that which goes the other way from I-94. Same holds true for the road east of Green Bay.
That is all true about WI 29 being lightly travelled, however if US 212 WERE to be numbered onto WI 29, I would rather see it on the routing I proposed than to multiplex I-94 .....
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on September 03, 2014, 10:06:54 PM
That is all true about WI 29 being lightly travelled, however if US 212 WERE to be numbered onto WI 29, I would rather see it on the routing I proposed than to multiplex I-94 .....
Or have it multiplex over the St. Croix River on I-94, head south on WI-35 to River Falls, then take over WI-29 from there.
Quote from: merrycilantro on September 02, 2014, 10:56:37 AM
Hoping not to be teetering on the edge of Fictional Highways here I'd like to see a I-541 or even a I-543...hard to tell which they'd go with because 43 sort of wraps around Green Bay, whereas 41, which clearly is the more dominant freeway, should definitely have a Child Route.
In the event of an interstate promotion, it should be an even first digit. If it connects two interstates, it probably should be even. Plus it functions as a bypass/beltline/whatever making that the more logical choice. Personally, I've always upgraded WI 172 to I-243 on all of my fictional musings. It makes for a more "natural" x43 in my opinion.
Quote from: mgk920WI 172 should become a rerouted WI 54.
This seems reasonable.
But I do like that the psuedo-freeway on Mason Street over the Fox River is a state highway.
^^I agree. That makes sense to me. Looking at a map it almost looks like Wis 172 was a sort of "original routing of I-43" which i know is not the case...but definitely makes it more suitable to an I-x43. I never would have thought of an even numbered route because I was under the assumption that an even numbered route had to connect to its parent twice, not just 2 interstates, thus only the Spur option seemed viable. Makes sense though and I totally agree with you.
Just had a passing thought, probably too fictional...but to quickly mention...what if it would in fact be a Spur, odd numbered route, follow 172, be concurrent with I-43 from 172 to the new 54 on the northeast side, and continued to Sturgeon Bay...and that's where I'll leave it. Although in that case it'd almost have to be an Odd x41...
True. It would make sense if WIS 172 was part of the interstate system however be careful - this IS Wisconsin we are talking about. What in reality would happen most likely would be a 3di interstate designation multiplexed with WIS 172! Bad WISDOT!! :pan:
This is very true...Case in Point: Milwaukee.
Quote from: merrycilantro on September 02, 2014, 10:56:37 AM
Hoping not to be teetering on the edge of Fictional Highways here I'd like to see a I-541 or even a I-543...hard to tell which they'd go with because 43 sort of wraps around Green Bay, whereas 41, which clearly is the more dominant freeway, should definitely have a Child Route.
Be That as it may, I do agree with SSOWorld that unless you're going to Sheboygan or Manitowoc, I couldn't see much of a use for extending any potential Wis 29 Interstate of the Future along Wis 172 when one can just as easily hop onto 41 and get to Milwaukee just the same as I-43. Good thought though.
I think an even more logical numbering would be I-194. On the west end, it would branch off I-94 near Eau Claire and end in Green Bay. At roughly 200 miles, it would be by far the longest 3di. The rationale for the odd x94 designation is that it would connect interstate traffic between Northern Wisconsin and Minnesota, while signifying that it would be going off in a different direction than I-94. Besides, an x41 or x43 just doesn't make much sense.
An alternate designation could be a "western" I-96. Or maybe even I-98.
^^I LIKE THAT TRAIN OF THOUGHT!!!
though, knowing WisDOT they'll multiplex I-194 and I-43...i guess that'd mean effectively turning it into a Super Long Badgerland Beltway of sorts....say I-294 and south of GB it'd be I-43/294.
I jest...
Quote from: merrycilantro on September 02, 2014, 10:56:37 AM
Hoping not to be teetering on the edge of Fictional Highways here I'd like to see a I-541 or even a I-543...hard to tell which they'd go with because 43 sort of wraps around Green Bay, whereas 41, which clearly is the more dominant freeway, should definitely have a Child Route.
I-543 would be cool since all Green Bay zip codes start with 543.
Quote from: merrycilantro on September 30, 2014, 03:22:23 PM
^^I LIKE THAT TRAIN OF THOUGHT!!!
though, knowing WisDOT they'll multiplex I-194 and I-43...i guess that'd mean effectively turning it into a Super Long Badgerland Beltway of sorts....say I-294 and south of GB it'd be I-43/294.
I jest...
I had thought of I-92 for the WIS 29 corridor - just reversing the numbers and put them into an interstate shield! I guess it would be technically out of the grid north of I-94, but I-82 is another good example .....
That and I also am partial to the thought of I-294 (or I-435) is a good choice for the finished MN 610 corridor in the northern Twin Cities IMO.
I'm told that MnDot is the killjoy of interstate conversion...as I am not a resident I don't know if that is true...
There really is no reason to go through the expense of upgrading WI-29 to an interstate compatible freeway anytime soon. The rural areas between Eau Claire and Wausau, and Wausau and Green Bay, are in the low 10,000s per day. (Underneath 10,000 in some parts between Wausau and Green Bay.)
Contrast that to US-41 between Milwaukee and Fond du Lac that sees daily counts about three times that size.
What would be nice is for those few State Highways (such as Wis 29 and Wis 23, once it gets finished, and Wis 57) that are built to Expressway Standards but not quite Interstate Standards, to get some sort of designation that travelers who might not necessarily know, would be like "Oh OK this is a 'might-as-well-be freeway, I can travel that like I would an Interstate"...such a designation for US 41 would have been nice too...but well what would you call it. People so tend to travel Interstates over State Hwys and even US Hwys thinking they're going to all be just 2-lane rural routes outside the big cities. Perhaps a different State Highway Sign along with maybe a name (a'la the Chicago Freeway System)...or turnpike, if that wouldn't reference a toll (at least it does in my mind, correct me if I'm wrong)...just let drivers know hey this is a special state highway, this is an expressway...even if it's so dumb as to call it the Green Bay-Eau Claire Expressway...Milwaukee's got the East-West and the North-South Freeways, so nothing could be more obvious than that.
Call Wis 29 from Eau Claire to Green Bay the Cranberry Expressway, Wis 57 the Kettle Moraine Expressway, maybe just have the same Wisconsin State Highway Shield we do now, only blue...just to indicate some form of elevation. Wis 50 - Lake Geneva Turnpike...Wis 23 - Plank Road Expressway (in reference to its old name). Wis 172 - Lombardi Expressway (or anything in reference to the beloved Packers)...Wis 54 - Door County Turnpike...ya know? Maybe I'll make a map and figure out how to post, but I will post in the Fictional Highways forum just in case.
Thanks for Listening. Sorry for Rambling.
**I take back all the Turnpike uses...By Definition Turnpike is an expressway on which a toll is charged. My bad. But y'all get the point.
Quote from: merrycilantro on October 01, 2014, 09:09:17 AM
I'm told that MnDot is the killjoy of interstate conversion...as I am not a resident I don't know if that is true...
I am relatively new to MN myself - about 5 and a half years now, so no idea if that is the truth. Froggie is really the one to ask that question .....
In my opinion, WisDOT should be moving faster on freeway conversion between Shawano and Green Bay. The Michigan Lefts in Brown County are a little safer, but there is plenty of traffic to justify the full upgrade. That's been my observation every time I drive that stretch.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on October 02, 2014, 12:59:04 AM
In my opinion, WisDOT should be moving faster on freeway conversion between Shawano and Green Bay. The Michigan Lefts in Brown County are a little safer, but there is plenty of traffic to justify the full upgrade. That's been my observation every time I drive that stretch.
Actually 'Bonduel' - WI 29 is already a fully interstate-compatible freeway from a short distance east of WI 47/55 to the west edge of the Shawano area. The several remaining non-freeway sections east of Shawano are not that long and should not be difficult at all to upgrade.
IMHO, WI 29 is 'evolving' in the same manner that US(I)-41 has been since the early post-WWII years, only a few decades behind it in the timeline.
Mike
Right. I should've referred to the Shawano freeway segment and not just Shawano.