U.S 10
U.S 12
U.S 41
U.S 51
U.S 53
U.S 151
WIS 29
All of these highways have significant portions that are interstate-quality freeway or are planned to be upgraded to interstate quality freeway. Why does Wisconsin build all these freeway corridors as opposed to scaled-back expressways like neighboring states?
look again.
53 is scaled back from Rice Lake northward.
29 is a mix of both.
12 is mostly 2-lane except Madison and Elkhorn
also - because WisDOT.
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 08, 2015, 10:00:42 PM
U.S 10, U.S 12, U.S 41, U.S 51, U.S 53, U.S 151, WIS 29
All of these highways have significant portions that are interstate-quality freeway or are planned to be upgraded to interstate quality freeway. Why does Wisconsin build all these freeway corridors as opposed to scaled-back expressways like neighboring states?
The snarky answer would be to catch all the FIBs wanting to travel 75mph in a 65mph zone.
More seriously, Wisconsin does a really good job at identifying its road future needs. Check out the Corridors 2030 plan (there was previously a Corridors 2020 plan) at http://www.dot.state.wi.us/business/econdev/corridors.htm. The WIDOT site is also one of the best state DOT sites IMO, especially when it comes to showing current and future projects. They have a weird obsession with roundabouts, but I like roundabouts so I'm ok with it.
The state also depends heavily on tourism. So it's important that all those FIBs be able to get to their vacations in Door County, Vilas County, and other spots Up North without much hassle. To facilitate travel to the Dells, Wisconsin is currently upgrading the 39/90/94 corridor between Beloit and Wisconsin Dells to six lanes. It's now much easier for me to visit my family in Green Bay when I drive up from St Louis than it was when I moved in the late 1980's.
They've had a strong desire to expand US 2 to four lanes from US 53 near Superior on east, but have had trouble justifying a real need for it.
US 41 is a major route for commercial truck traffic between Green Bay, the Fox Valley and Milwaukee and Southeast Wisconsin. This is a major reason that it will be re-signed as I-41 this year. The traffic needs outgrew the original two lane road decades ago.
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 08, 2015, 10:00:42 PM
U.S 10
U.S 12
U.S 41
U.S 51
U.S 53
U.S 151
WIS 29
All of these highways have significant portions that are interstate-quality freeway or are planned to be upgraded to interstate quality freeway. Why does Wisconsin build all these freeway corridors as opposed to scaled-back expressways like neighboring states?
Some of these expansions had strong political tones towards them, some were definitely safety related (although obviously all have safety improvements going from 2 lanes to 4 lane expressways), and some actually did merit expansion.
One thing to note is one can assume by Freeway you mean interchange access only. Most of these highways in the list above are expressways that still have many minor access points (driveways and town roads) with major roadways (state highways or county Roads) having interchanges.
If there is another state that is even more extreme in 2 lane to 4 lane freeway expansions it is Michigan. When they converted their 2 lane highways they not only added interchanges at major access points but also turned them into full limited controlled access freeways (It is very costly to remove the minor access points like driveways and there really is a diminishing return in terms of safety with low AADT).
Some specific project details:
WIS 23, does not warrant 4 lanes between Fond du Lac & Plymouth but it's expansion was written into state law. There are safety issues and not many passing opportunities on the existing 2 lane roadway.
WIS 29, outside of Chippewa Falls, Wausau, and Green Bay the AADT is low enough not to warrant 4 lanes even today. I use to travel this roadway frequently between Green Bay-St. Paul and about the most traffic it sees are on Packer game weekends. The bonus of the 4 lane expansion is that it cut off at least an hour out of the original drive because you now bypass Shawano, Chippewa Falls, Abbotsford, the west end of Wausau, and the small towns. The old highway was called bloody 29 by locals and its expansion was pushed because of safety and there was no easy way to get across the northern part of the state.
US 41 is obviously being converted to I-41. It serves the major cities in the Fox Valley and before the interchanges were put in corridor wide, there were some bad fatal/injury crashes. The AADT is well justified for construction as an interstate. I had heard it was actually suppose to be a part of the original interstate system but the application was never submitted.
US 51 was originally built for tourists heading north. There was also a strong push for a 4 lane connection to the south from the Wausau/Point/Rapids areas. If it would not had been expanded, there definitely would be safety issues today especially in the summer months.
US 10 between Point and Marshfield was written into state law. That portion does not warrant 4 lanes. The portion between Point and Appleton/Oshkosh is a similar situation to US 51.
US 53 the best project was the Eau Claire bypass. North of Eau Claire to Superior there definitely is not the AADT to justify 4 lanes. Even today a good portion of it could probably operate fine as a 2 lane roadway. I'm not too familiar with this but would guess it was written into state law.
One last note, Corridors 2020 as proposed by then Governor Thompson was not suppose to be completed until 2020 but was accelerated and took about half the time to complete because of the growing traffic volumes in that time (it was the 1990s) and the political push to get these highways built. It is interesting the original 2020 study they projected from 2000-2020 WISDOT would need $20 billion. In the next 2 year state budget, WISDOT's budget is approx $6 billion. Although the big projects in the 2020 program focused outside of Milwaukee/Madison while the next 10 year the big projects will be in these areas.
Quote from: Roadguy on February 08, 2015, 11:44:06 PM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 08, 2015, 10:00:42 PM
U.S 10
U.S 12
U.S 41
U.S 51
U.S 53
U.S 151
WIS 29
All of these highways have significant portions that are interstate-quality freeway or are planned to be upgraded to interstate quality freeway. Why does Wisconsin build all these freeway corridors as opposed to scaled-back expressways like neighboring states?
Some of these expansions had strong political tones towards them, some were definitely safety related (although obviously all have safety improvements going from 2 lanes to 4 lane expressways), and some actually did merit expansion.
One thing to note is one can assume by Freeway you mean interchange access only. Most of these highways in the list above are expressways that still have many minor access points (driveways and town roads) with major roadways (state highways or county Roads) having interchanges.
Notice I said most of these corridors are either freeway or high-quality expressway that are planned to be upgraded to freeway in the future. I agree some of these weren't necessary, particularly WIS 29 and U.S 53.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 08, 2015, 10:35:42 PM
They've had a strong desire to expand US 2 to four lanes from US 53 near Superior on east, but have had trouble justifying a real need for it.
And yet, we keep envisioning a freeway link from Duluth to Sault Ste. Marie. Seriously, though, the need is just not there yet.
Maybe the best way to determine why these roads were expanded to 4 lanes, is to find out what traffic was like before the expansion. I have heard that the Highway 29 corridor was known as Bloody 29 due to a bunch of nasty accidents. Source: http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys20-29.html#STH-029. Similar situations, as well as over-capacity traffic counts may have been factors with the other roads. If anyone has more information into this, let me know.
It's just funny how most surrounding states build their major highways as freeways or high-quality expressways while Illinois always builds them as watered down expressways, smh
You might say the same about Michigan: US 31, 131, 127, 10, 23, M 6, 14, 10*, 8* all have Interstate quality freeways. The traffic justified the upgrade. And there was no need to apply for Interstate numbers when the existing numbers served just fine.
* - although these two were freeways before being numbered.
I've driven US 53 it's entirety through Wisconsin many times over many years. First time I was a passenger in 1973. It's been a real interesting progression. I agree a Super 2 lane highway would probably suffice. That's what it is in MN and it kind of was that way before the 4 lane fever kicked in. The Eau Claire segment was much needed. It's justified on the Superior area too. But I have to admit it's a super nice drive through the state as it is. If I was spending more money on the corridor, it'd be on the Superior end.
Quote from: monty on February 09, 2015, 09:25:35 PM
I've driven US 53 it's entirety through Wisconsin many times over many years. First time I was a passenger in 1973. It's been a real interesting progression. I agree a Super 2 lane highway would probably suffice. That's what it is in MN and it kind of was that way before the 4 lane fever kicked in. The Eau Claire segment was much needed. It's justified on the Superior area too. But I have to admit it's a super nice drive through the state as it is. If I was spending more money on the corridor, it'd be on the Superior end.
I haven't been on it in a while, the last time was shortly before the U.S 53 bypass in Eau Claire opened. I believe the plan is to extend the freeway slightly north of Rice Lake to Haugan (they already have the interchange at County V and I believe they will put overpasses at 26th and 30th ave eventually, plus close off 27th completely and construct some frontage roads for 27th and 30th Ave traffic) and then the rest of the corridor gets expressway improvements.
To add to GaryV's post, Michigan also rarely believes in building rural expressways or divided highways - in most cases, it's either a 2 lane road or a full-blown freeway.
Quote from: Henry on February 09, 2015, 11:18:55 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 08, 2015, 10:35:42 PM
They've had a strong desire to expand US 2 to four lanes from US 53 near Superior on east, but have had trouble justifying a real need for it.
And yet, we keep envisioning a freeway link from Duluth to Sault Ste. Marie. Seriously, though, the need is just not there yet.
The need will
never be there in Michigan unless the population triples or something. In most places, US 2 has an AADT of less than 5000, and M-28 has an AADT of less than 3000. They both flirt with 1000 east of Bessemer.
Plus, MDOT still doesn't care about building their half of a Menominee/Marinette bypass. Sorry, Wisconsin.
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 09, 2015, 07:09:55 PM
It's just funny how most surrounding states build their major highways as freeways or high-quality expressways while Illinois always builds them as watered down expressways, smh
Illinois, for lack of a better term, is broke.
Quote from: Brandon on February 10, 2015, 10:12:25 AM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 09, 2015, 07:09:55 PM
It's just funny how most surrounding states build their major highways as freeways or high-quality expressways while Illinois always builds them as watered down expressways, smh
Illinois, for lack of a better term, is broke.
Is this why Chicago only has one non-Interstate freeway?
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 10, 2015, 04:53:29 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 10, 2015, 10:12:25 AM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 09, 2015, 07:09:55 PM
It's just funny how most surrounding states build their major highways as freeways or high-quality expressways while Illinois always builds them as watered down expressways, smh
Illinois, for lack of a better term, is broke.
Is this why Chicago only has one non-Interstate freeway?
Yes, because IDOT has no money to do ANYTHING but barely maintain the roads as they are. Most capital projects are done in the Chicagoland area, and even then, most lack funding. Go on IDOT and see how many projects are stuck in Phase I because they have no construction funding. It's all because of the corrupt politicians (most of them from the Cook County Democratic Party) that have been running the state into the ground for the last 4+ decades
I love how Wisconsin managed to upgrade U.S 41, 51, 53 and 151 to full freeways or high-quality upgradable expressway while Illinois couldn't even build a fourth of the supplemental freeway system proposed in the 60s/70s. Of course, we could debate how many of those freeways were necessary, but that is for another topic. The point is, Wisconsin (and other surrounding states) have kicked Illinois butt badly when it comes to high-quality corridors.
Just looking at a map of Wisconsin, why isn't US 53 signed as an interstate north of I-94?
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:46:30 AM
Just looking at a map of Wisconsin, why isn't US 53 signed as an interstate north of I-94?
Why does it need an interstate number?
Quote from: Brandon on February 11, 2015, 09:49:14 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:46:30 AM
Just looking at a map of Wisconsin, why isn't US 53 signed as an interstate north of I-94?
Why does it need an interstate number?
It doesn't. Unless the freeway went all the way to at least Duluth, it does not need an Interstate number. It is fine the way it is.
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 11, 2015, 09:56:26 AM
Quote from: Brandon on February 11, 2015, 09:49:14 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:46:30 AM
Just looking at a map of Wisconsin, why isn't US 53 signed as an interstate north of I-94?
Why does it need an interstate number?
It doesn't. Unless the freeway went all the way to at least Duluth, it does not need an Interstate number. It is fine the way it is.
Are there plans to fill in the gap?
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:59:46 AM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 11, 2015, 09:56:26 AM
Quote from: Brandon on February 11, 2015, 09:49:14 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:46:30 AM
Just looking at a map of Wisconsin, why isn't US 53 signed as an interstate north of I-94?
Why does it need an interstate number?
It doesn't. Unless the freeway went all the way to at least Duluth, it does not need an Interstate number. It is fine the way it is.
Are there plans to fill in the gap?
Don't expect anything concrete for the next 20-30 years or so. The current expressway handles the traffic load fine and WisDOT already has a plan in place to upgrade black spots as they pop up.
Quote from: on_wisconsin on February 11, 2015, 12:24:20 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:59:46 AM
Quote from: adamlanfort on February 11, 2015, 09:56:26 AM
Quote from: Brandon on February 11, 2015, 09:49:14 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2015, 09:46:30 AM
Just looking at a map of Wisconsin, why isn't US 53 signed as an interstate north of I-94?
Why does it need an interstate number?
It doesn't. Unless the freeway went all the way to at least Duluth, it does not need an Interstate number. It is fine the way it is.
Are there plans to fill in the gap?
Don't expect anything concrete for the next 20-30 years or so. The current expressway handles the traffic load fine and WisDOT already has a plan in place to upgrade black spots as they pop up.
As part of the corridor preservation study on U.S 53 between Rice Lake and Superior, they have plans to extend the freeway to just north of Haugan. They just installed an interchange at County V in Haugan and they will eventually close off all remaining access points between 26th and 30th (including building overpasses at both locations). The same goes for the area between the two interchanges in Spooner, they plan to convert that section to full freeway. Not sure about the section between Spooner and Haugan.
My guess is they'll convert the section between Haugan and Spooner to freeway and leave the rest an as expressway (with some modifications), although the corridor is fine the way it is now.
Some WisDOT links relevant to this subject:
US 53 Corridor Preservation Study
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/nwregion/53corridor/index.htm
US 18/151 Freeway Conversion Study (Dodgeville to Verona)
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/swregion/18151study/index.htm
WI 29 Freeway Conversion Study (Brown County)
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/neregion/29/index.htm
I see WisDOT no longer has links for the rest of the corridor.
US 151 Freeway Conversion Study (Columbus to Waupun)
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/swregion/151/index.htm
WI 64 Freeway Conversion Study
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/nwregion/wis64freeway/index.htm
US 53 is going to get a few interchanges/jughandles. An interchange at Trego would be a good idea right now. Get the Hayward-bound crowd on and off safer.
WI 29; I'd like to see conversion sooner rather than later between Shawano and GB.