I'll get this thread started. The study is underway right now to expand I-39/90/94 between the Beltline and the I-39 split off in Portage. They are currently debating whether or not to simply reconstruct and expand the existing highway or build a new "eastern reliever" freeway, which seems insane if you ask me.
What should be done here?
And if they really want an alternative route, instead of building the eastern corridor, wouldn't it simply be a better idea to expedite the US 12 freeway upgrades between the end of the Beltline and the Baraboo bypass?
This has been discussed in the Wisconsin Notes topic. Yes I think the eastern reliever ideas are well thought out. I also think they are going to go nowhere, and perhaps WIDOT intentionally did that in order to make the expansion idea seem like the best alternative.
I agree the eastern relievers will never be built. They will probably expand the existing highway.
This part that has been mentioned is already 6 lanes it's fine as is. I thought they were studying to expand the Portage to Tomah section which would need to be expanded. Unless this was a misprint.
Quote from: dvferyance on December 23, 2016, 05:55:23 PM
This part that has been mentioned is already 6 lanes it's fine as is. I thought they were studying to expand the Portage to Tomah section which would need to be expanded. Unless this was a misprint.
It needs to be rebuilt/expanded to at least eight lanes through the Madison area and the interchanges need reconfiguration, particularly the I-94/WIS 30 interchange.
Plus, I believe there is a separate study for the section between I-39 and Wisconsin Dells.
A "reliever" would make more sense as a direct connection between the western Milwaukee suburbs and I-90 just south of Portage. In other words, don't force traffic from the Milwaukee area bound for points beyond Madison to drive through Madison.
Quote from: JREwing78 on December 23, 2016, 11:04:52 PM
A "reliever" would make more sense as a direct connection between the western Milwaukee suburbs and I-90 just south of Portage. In other words, don't force traffic from the Milwaukee area bound for points beyond Madison to drive through Madison.
Through Madison? Not really. For the most part, the current interstate goes through the fringes of Madison. US 151, that goes through Madison.
Quote from: JREwing78 on December 23, 2016, 11:04:52 PM
A "reliever" would make more sense as a direct connection between the western Milwaukee suburbs and I-90 just south of Portage. In other words, don't force traffic from the Milwaukee area bound for points beyond Madison to drive through Madison.
In other words, highway 16.
XT1028
Quote from: tchafe1978 on December 25, 2016, 04:18:40 PM
Quote from: JREwing78 on December 23, 2016, 11:04:52 PM
A "reliever" would make more sense as a direct connection between the western Milwaukee suburbs and I-90 just south of Portage. In other words, don't force traffic from the Milwaukee area bound for points beyond Madison to drive through Madison.
In other words, highway 16.
XT1028
Exactly, but as a freeway. The current Hwy 16, mostly 2-lane, is not a way to get to the Dells quickly.
When WIDOT declared that they weren't cutting the corner from Watertown to Columbus, the WI-16 dream died.
Although this is a bit far out from Interstate 39/90/94, maybe widening the remaining two-lane segments of US 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells could make that roadway an alternative between the two cities. In the end, existing 39/90/94 will be expanded to 8 lanes, and none of the relievers will be constructed.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 27, 2016, 03:28:45 PM
Although this is a bit far out from Interstate 39/90/94, maybe widening the remaining two-lane segments of US 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells could make that roadway an alternative between the two cities. In the end, existing 39/90/94 will be expanded to 8 lanes, and none of the relievers will be constructed.
I'm fully expecting to see US 12 continuing to 'evolve' in that direction and once the Sauk-Prairie embargo runs its course, a major four-lane bypass there will be on the schedule. It's what would have happened decades ago had the interstates (and failing them, a major cross-country ticket tollway) never been built on their present corridors.
'I-x90', anyone?
Mike
Forget any potential 3-digit Interstate designations. The US 12 corridor doesn't need one. I can't think of any corridor in the state of Wisconsin that will get a new Interstate designation anytime soon.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2016, 04:19:06 PM
Forget any potential 3-digit Interstate designations. The US 12 corridor doesn't need one. I can't think of any corridor in the state of Wisconsin that will get a new Interstate designation anytime soon.
The only one that I can think of for, let's say, within the next 10-20 years, is WI 441.
Mike
The potential WI-441 to Interstate 441 conversion, in my opinion, is a pipe dream. I believe it is very unlikely that such a conversion will ever happen. It's not that I oppose such a conversion per se, I just don't see it taking place.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2016, 04:19:06 PM
Forget any potential 3-digit Interstate designations. The US 12 corridor doesn't need one. I can't think of any corridor in the state of Wisconsin that will get a new Interstate designation anytime soon.
How did you determine the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation? Is this your opinion or a statement based in fact? Please elaborate on your reasoning, since your statements in this post appear to be mere opinion and offer little factual information about why Wisconsin will not create any more Interstate highways. Links and citations would be helpful. Have you talked to someone involved in planning at WIDOT who has given you this impression? Have you read something to give this impression? Or are you articulating your personal opinion without any factual analysis to back up your opinions?
Quote from: andy3175 on December 31, 2016, 12:19:49 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2016, 04:19:06 PM
Forget any potential 3-digit Interstate designations. The US 12 corridor doesn't need one. I can't think of any corridor in the state of Wisconsin that will get a new Interstate designation anytime soon.
How did you determine the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation? Is this your opinion or a statement based in fact? Please elaborate on your reasoning, since your statements in this post appear to be mere opinion and offer little factual information about why Wisconsin will not create any more Interstate highways. Links and citations would be helpful. Have you talked to someone involved in planning at WIDOT who has given you this impression? Have you read something to give this impression? Or are you articulating your personal opinion without any factual analysis to back up your opinions?
LOL. You want him to write a dissertation on a message board?
How about this... Wisconsin has historically shown no interest in 3di designations. There hasn't been a new one since the 1960s, despite the fact that there are opportunities to do so.
**US-12 from Elkhorn to the IL line
**WI-30 in Madison
**WI-172 outside of Green Bay
**US-45 south of West Bend
**WI-441 around Appleton
The top three could have been designated at anytime in the last few decades. Nothing. The last two are now (or will soon be) eligible with the I-41 designation. No plans to do so on the WISDOT site. There are probably others I am forgetting.
As for the route in question, US-12 west of Madison isn't going to be upgraded to interstate freeway in decades. They may extend the expressway from Sauk Prairie to I-90/94 at the Dells, and they may upgrade some at-grade intersections to interchanges, but there simply isn't the resources to do a major overhaul. And it seems like they will rightfully focus their efforts on the interstate corridor.
As for other major corridors...where? WI-29 simply doesn't have the traffic volume to justify upgrades along that corridor. They may extend corridors further north (I-39 and I-41), but there simply isn't any obvious candidates.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 31, 2016, 10:33:15 AM
Quote from: andy3175 on December 31, 2016, 12:19:49 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2016, 04:19:06 PM
Forget any potential 3-digit Interstate designations. The US 12 corridor doesn't need one. I can't think of any corridor in the state of Wisconsin that will get a new Interstate designation anytime soon.
How did you determine the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation? Is this your opinion or a statement based in fact? Please elaborate on your reasoning, since your statements in this post appear to be mere opinion and offer little factual information about why Wisconsin will not create any more Interstate highways. Links and citations would be helpful. Have you talked to someone involved in planning at WIDOT who has given you this impression? Have you read something to give this impression? Or are you articulating your personal opinion without any factual analysis to back up your opinions?
LOL. You want him to write a dissertation on a message board?
How about this... Wisconsin has historically shown no interest in 3di designations. There hasn't been a new one since the 1960s, despite the fact that there are opportunities to do so.
**US-12 from Elkhorn to the IL line
**WI-30 in Madison
**WI-172 outside of Green Bay
**US-45 south of West Bend
**WI-441 around Appleton
The top three could have been designated at anytime in the last few decades. Nothing. The last two are now (or will soon be) eligible with the I-41 designation. No plans to do so on the WISDOT site. There are probably others I am forgetting.
As for the route in question, US-12 west of Madison isn't going to be upgraded to interstate freeway in decades. They may extend the expressway from Sauk Prairie to I-90/94 at the Dells, and they may upgrade some at-grade intersections to interchanges, but there simply isn't the resources to do a major overhaul. And it seems like they will rightfully focus their efforts on the interstate corridor.
As for other major corridors...where? WI-29 simply doesn't have the traffic volume to justify upgrades along that corridor. They may extend corridors further north (I-39 and I-41), but there simply isn't any obvious candidates.
For what it's worth, I'm not advocating for any Interstate designations in Wisconsin, and I agree with your logic on why there have been no new designations other than Interstate 41 in the past several decades. What I am advocating is for the Ghostbuster to stop making the same post in multiple locations in this forum about the unlikelihood of a given project or potential designation for a future upgrade based on his own opinion without any research or factual analysis.
Quote from: mgk920 on December 28, 2016, 10:00:28 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 27, 2016, 03:28:45 PM
Although this is a bit far out from Interstate 39/90/94, maybe widening the remaining two-lane segments of US 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells could make that roadway an alternative between the two cities. In the end, existing 39/90/94 will be expanded to 8 lanes, and none of the relievers will be constructed.
I'm fully expecting to see US 12 continuing to 'evolve' in that direction and once the Sauk-Prairie embargo runs its course, a major four-lane bypass there will be on the schedule. It's what would have happened decades ago had the interstates (and failing them, a major cross-country ticket tollway) never been built on their present corridors.
'I-x90', anyone?
Mike
I-290 as an extension of the current on in Chicagoland along the US 12 corridor. Wishful thinking? Perhaps. But you never know.
Quote from: hobsini2 on December 31, 2016, 02:35:50 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on December 28, 2016, 10:00:28 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 27, 2016, 03:28:45 PM
Although this is a bit far out from Interstate 39/90/94, maybe widening the remaining two-lane segments of US 12 between Madison and Wisconsin Dells could make that roadway an alternative between the two cities. In the end, existing 39/90/94 will be expanded to 8 lanes, and none of the relievers will be constructed.
I'm fully expecting to see US 12 continuing to 'evolve' in that direction and once the Sauk-Prairie embargo runs its course, a major four-lane bypass there will be on the schedule. It's what would have happened decades ago had the interstates (and failing them, a major cross-country ticket tollway) never been built on their present corridors.
'I-x90', anyone?
Mike
I-290 as an extension of the current on in Chicagoland along the US 12 corridor. Wishful thinking? Perhaps. But you never know.
I-290 over the EOE.
Closer to the topic at hand, I think there could be some interesting upgrades to the East Town Interchange (US 151 & the interstates) associated with the outcome of this study. In particular, a flyover or turbine ramp from 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB seems likely.
Even if they keep the Badger Interchange in its current configuration, I would like to at least get two lane ramps for WB -> SB and NB -> EB. But ideally, it would be nice to get a design that moves some left hand ramps to the right.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 03, 2017, 08:57:24 PM
Closer to the topic at hand, I think there could be some interesting upgrades to the East Town Interchange (US 151 & the interstates) associated with the outcome of this study. In particular, a flyover or turbine ramp from 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB seems likely.
Even with High Crossing Blvd in the way?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 03, 2017, 09:08:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 03, 2017, 08:57:24 PM
Closer to the topic at hand, I think there could be some interesting upgrades to the East Town Interchange (US 151 & the interstates) associated with the outcome of this study. In particular, a flyover or turbine ramp from 151 SB to 39/90/94 SB seems likely.
Even with High Crossing Blvd in the way?
Worst case they build a new bridge for High Crossing Boulevard or carry the flyover for the SB US 151 to SB/EB I-39/I-90/I-94 over the High Crossing overpass.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 03, 2017, 08:57:24 PM
Even if they keep the Badger Interchange in its current configuration, I would like to at least get two lane ramps for WB -> SB and NB -> EB. But ideally, it would be nice to get a design that moves some left hand ramps to the right.
My biggest wish is to reconstruct the WIS 30 onramp to the interstate...there's something about the design of the current left-side merge that makes me nervous anytime I have to use it.
I also recall that a couple of years ago, there were postings in the Fictional/Fantasy Highways forvm where ideas were floated for redoing the I-39/90/94/WI 78 Cascade Interchange (I-39 split) near Portage. Now is the time to submit them to WisDOT.
:nod:
Mike
How exactly should that interchange be reconstructed? I have no recommendations beyond the interchanges around Madison. Right-hand-only stack ramps at Interstate 94/WIS 30. No cloverleaves at US 12/18. I don't have any issues with the US 151 interchange, as I think it is as improved as its going to get. I would like collector-distributor lanes between US 51 and WIS 19, though.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 04, 2017, 06:53:03 PM
How exactly should that interchange be reconstructed? I have no recommendations beyond the interchanges around Madison. Right-hand-only stack ramps at Interstate 94/WIS 30. No cloverleaves at US 12/18. I don't have any issues with the US 151 interchange, as I think it is as improved as its going to get. I would like collector-distributor lanes between US 51 and WIS 19, though.
Drive through the US 151 interchange during the peaks, especially the PM. The weaving associated with the SB US 151 traffic is bad with everyone from AmFam and the rest of the office park mixed with the traffic coming from Sun Prairie and points north.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 31, 2016, 10:33:15 AM
Quote from: andy3175 on December 31, 2016, 12:19:49 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 29, 2016, 04:19:06 PM
Forget any potential 3-digit Interstate designations. The US 12 corridor doesn't need one. I can't think of any corridor in the state of Wisconsin that will get a new Interstate designation anytime soon.
How did you determine the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation? Is this your opinion or a statement based in fact? Please elaborate on your reasoning, since your statements in this post appear to be mere opinion and offer little factual information about why Wisconsin will not create any more Interstate highways. Links and citations would be helpful. Have you talked to someone involved in planning at WIDOT who has given you this impression? Have you read something to give this impression? Or are you articulating your personal opinion without any factual analysis to back up your opinions?
LOL. You want him to write a dissertation on a message board?
How about this... Wisconsin has historically shown no interest in 3di designations. There hasn't been a new one since the 1960s, despite the fact that there are opportunities to do so.
**US-12 from Elkhorn to the IL line
**WI-30 in Madison
**WI-172 outside of Green Bay
**US-45 south of West Bend
**WI-441 around Appleton
The top three could have been designated at anytime in the last few decades. Nothing. The last two are now (or will soon be) eligible with the I-41 designation. No plans to do so on the WISDOT site. There are probably others I am forgetting.
As for the route in question, US-12 west of Madison isn't going to be upgraded to interstate freeway in decades. They may extend the expressway from Sauk Prairie to I-90/94 at the Dells, and they may upgrade some at-grade intersections to interchanges, but there simply isn't the resources to do a major overhaul. And it seems like they will rightfully focus their efforts on the interstate corridor.
As for other major corridors...where? WI-29 simply doesn't have the traffic volume to justify upgrades along that corridor. They may extend corridors further north (I-39 and I-41), but there simply isn't any obvious candidates.
WisDOT hinted that WIS-29 may become an Interstate once it is fully converted to freeway from Elk Mound to Green Bay, but like you said, that's not going to happen anytime soon since the traffic volumes are not there yet.
As for US 12, I'm not sure why they haven't expedited the freeway upgrades between Baraboo and the Beltline (for the sections outside of the Sauk City bypass). If they really want to talk about a reliever route, look no further than US 12. I agree the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor between Madison and the Dells should get the priority first, but US 12 should be not far behind.
Quote from: I-39 on January 05, 2017, 11:25:15 AM
As for US 12, I'm not sure why they haven't expedited the freeway upgrades between Baraboo and the Beltline (for the sections outside of the Sauk City bypass). If they really want to talk about a reliever route, look no further than US 12. I agree the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor between Madison and the Dells should get the priority first, but US 12 should be not far behind.
I am not sure it would be a good reliever route though.
The only people that would use that would be people from the west side of Madison who are going to the Dells and further points northwest. If you are heading up I-39, you aren't taking US-12 even if you are on the west side of Madison.
Traffic from points south of Madison headed to the Dells and beyond on I-90/94 aren't going to get off to take US-12. It wouldn't effect traffic from east of Madison that comes into the area on I-94 either.
To the person who asked how I determined that the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T! Period. I live in Madison, and while I haven't been out that way a lot, it is obvious because WISDOT doesn't plan on making the whole corridor a freeway. Now or in the future. On the west end of the Beltline at CTH-K, the portion from there to STH-19 is the only one planned for freeway conversion at some point in the future. I don't know how likely a Sauk City bypass is (it can't be built before 2020, as part of the deal to four-lane US 12 between Middleton and Sauk City), but beyond there, the currently under construction West Baraboo Bypass, and the previously constructed freeway north of Baraboo are the only other freeway portions of US 12 that will exist in the corridor anytime soon, if ever.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 05, 2017, 04:40:27 PM
To the person who asked how I determined that the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T! Period. I live in Madison, and while I haven't been out that way a lot, it is obvious because WISDOT doesn't plan on making the whole corridor a freeway. Now or in the future. On the west end of the Beltline at CTH-K, the portion from there to STH-19 is the only one planned for freeway conversion at some point in the future. I don't know how likely a Sauk City bypass is (it can't be built before 2020, as part of the deal to four-lane US 12 between Middleton and Sauk City), but beyond there, the currently under construction West Baraboo Bypass, and the previously constructed freeway north of Baraboo are the only other freeway portions of US 12 that will exist in the corridor anytime soon, if ever.
So...I work in Madison, so if I say "BECAUSE IT DOES! Period." does that mean it does? Because, you know, that's kinda not a reason.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 05, 2017, 04:40:27 PM
To the person who asked how I determined that the US 12 corridor doesn't need an Interstate designation. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T! Period. I live in Madison, and while I haven't been out that way a lot, it is obvious because WISDOT doesn't plan on making the whole corridor a freeway.
I FOR ONE DISAGREE. Period.
And you have been to the future and can say for sure that a full freeway conversion for the US 12 corridor will not appear some year?
I personally don't see the US 12 corridor becoming an Interstate, which would be overkill. As for US 12 being 4 lanes from Wisconsin Dells to Madison, I'd be all for that. Most of my previous comment was based on plans and proposals on the WISDOT website. No, I haven't been to the future, but I believe the WISDOT website is the best reference guide to what might happen to said corridors in the future.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 06, 2017, 03:53:25 PM
I personally don't see the US 12 corridor becoming an Interstate, which would be overkill.
I just have to ask: Why would any portion of US 12 in Wisconsin becoming an Interstate be "overkill"? Is this because you don't feel the traffic counts don't warrant an Interstate, because the numbering change would be difficult for travelers to understand, because you prefer the US 12 designation and want that to remain in place, because you believe the Interstate highway system has reached its maximum length and there should not be additions to the system, etc. ....? My difficulty here is that you habitually make relatively short posts based on some understanding of the future that the rest of us don't have. While I am fine with you making opinions, I am troubled by your generalized statements that do not explain how you arrived at your opinion. And I see you've made these kinds of posts all over this forum that state, more or less, that this corridor or that corridor will never be built and certainly would never get an Interstate shield. That's fine if you believe it, but it adds nothing to this forum unless you have something informative to add to the thread that helps others understand the facts behind your opinion. Otherwise it's only your opinion, which does not add much to the overall conversation about the proposal, whatever roadway proposal we're discussing. Finally, I have no particular opinion either way about whether some corridor gets widened or gets an Interstate designation, but as someone who follows highway politics, it is worthwhile to watch the official proposals, see where they go, and offer my opinion if there is something factual to back it up.
I also don't see US 12 becoming an interstate for a long time, if ever. Spot improvements, yes. Further expansion of the expressway (other than what's already programmed), maybe, but even that is decades off.
Looking at the most recent interstate conversion in Wisconsin, US 12 doesn't have the population density that US/I-41 has (surrounding the route or as destination cities). Once you get outside of the Madison metro area, look at the destination cities it would serve...Baraboo (~12K), Wisconsin Dells (~2.7K - permanent). Even then, most out-of-state travelers going to the Dells stick to the existing I-39/90/94 route. Not to mention the political nightmare WisDOT would be facing trying to justify funding interstate-level improvements to the corridor with so many other programmed and rehab projects needing funding. While I believe using interstate highway status as a marketing tool is weak reasoning to justify a highway project (as was part of the reasoning for I-41), I see even less of a case for marketing a US 12 conversion than what US 41 had in the Fox Valley.
Then once you get past the Dells, its basically paralleling I-90 or I-94, so what would be the point of another interstate? South of Madison, upgrading would require constructing bypasses around Cambridge and Fort Atkinson (again, think about the political fight WisDOT would be in for).
I believe 6-lanes between Pewaukee and Madison, and Portage to the Dells will happen well before any more grandiose upgrades to US 12. The benefit-cost ratio just doesn't seem to be present for US 12. IMO, US 12 will remain a scenic alternate route for my lifetime.
All of the alternatives for the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are being refined for the Draft Tier 1 EIS. There are no dates scheduled for the public hearing for the Draft EIS, but since the last PIM was only two months ago, it will likely be a while before it's held.
The US 12 corridor between Madison and the Dells does not need an Interstate designation. I was simply suggesting perhaps it could be fully upgraded to a four-lane freeway to serve as a reliever route for I-39/90/94, which despite what has been said, I think it would be used more than people think. However, I do agree with the consensus that it won't happen for a long time, if ever.
That being said, they should in the meantime get going on some interim improvements to US 12 in that corridor, including freeway conversion between the Beltline and WIS 19 (which is under study right now) and rebuilding the pavement on the existing four lane segment between the end of the Baraboo bypass and County Z. Additionally, consider rebuilding and widening the Beltline between Middleton (US 14) and Verona Road to six lanes.
Back to I-39/90/94, the biggest things that needs to be addressed are rebuilding and widening to eight lanes in the Madison area and reconstructing both the I-39/90/I-94/WIS 30 interchange and the US 151 interchange. The former needs to be modified to eliminate the left turns and the latter needs to become a free flow freeway-to-freeway interchange.
By the way, does anyone know if the I-39/90 interchange with the Beltline has become part of this study? I no longer see it in the construction timeline for the I-39/90 widening project.
Since the Beltline Interchange will not be reconstructed with the current 39/90 reconstruction project (which I totally disagree with), it is very likely that it will be reconstructed as part of the 39/90/94 project.
I believe the 39/90 interchange with the Beltline is now part of the larger study focused on the Beltline from CTH N to Middleton.
http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/default.aspx
US 16 should be brought back from the dead east of Rapid City just so it can get (re)routed onto the Beltline. US 12, 14, 16, 18... and 151 :bigass:
Take it to Fictional Highways, Bickendan. I'd put US 16 back on its original alignment east of Rapid City. It does not need to go through Madison, even fictionally.
It sounds like the Beltline interchange, if it is included in the I-39/90 work, will be the last thing done. I saw somewhere that it may not be constructed until after 2022.
Maybe just a train (light rail or commuter or BOTH) from Janesville, Madison to MSN, Portage, Dells, BRF, Eau Claire, MSP? If any place could pull it off, it would be Daneco etal.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 13, 2017, 05:55:39 PM
Take it to Fictional Highways, Bickendan. I'd put US 16 back on its original alignment east of Rapid City. It does not need to go through Madison, even fictionally.
I do hope you can tell when someone's being a smartass for the sake of being a smartass.
Sorry, Bickendan. I didn't realize you were being a smartass. My mistake.
Quote from: Bickendan on January 13, 2017, 03:39:43 AM
US 16 should be brought back from the dead east of Rapid City just so it can get (re)routed onto the Beltline. US 12, 14, 16, 18... and 151 :bigass:
Then re-route US 20 up I-90, across the beltline, then back down 151. Then we can have US 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 151! :bigass:
I mean - go big or go home, right?
Quote from: GeekJedi on January 14, 2017, 02:08:20 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on January 13, 2017, 03:39:43 AM
US 16 should be brought back from the dead east of Rapid City just so it can get (re)routed onto the Beltline. US 12, 14, 16, 18... and 151 :bigass:
Then re-route US 20 up I-90, across the beltline, then back down 151. Then we can have US 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 151! :bigass:
I mean - go big or go home, right?
Ooooh, a sextuplet! It's almost a waltz of US highways! :bigass:
Quote from: GeekJedi on January 14, 2017, 02:08:20 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on January 13, 2017, 03:39:43 AM
US 16 should be brought back from the dead east of Rapid City just so it can get (re)routed onto the Beltline. US 12, 14, 16, 18... and 151 :bigass:
Then re-route US 20 up I-90, across the beltline, then back down 151. Then we can have US 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 151! :bigass:
I mean - go big or go home, right?
You can go even farther and reroute US 51 west on the beltline then it can head back east over on WI 19. Now we have US 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 51, 151 all on the same road!
Quote from: dvferyance on January 15, 2017, 09:25:17 PM
Quote from: GeekJedi on January 14, 2017, 02:08:20 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on January 13, 2017, 03:39:43 AM
US 16 should be brought back from the dead east of Rapid City just so it can get (re)routed onto the Beltline. US 12, 14, 16, 18... and 151 :bigass:
Then re-route US 20 up I-90, across the beltline, then back down 151. Then we can have US 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 151! :bigass:
I mean - go big or go home, right?
You can go even farther and reroute US 51 west on the beltline then it can head back east over on WI 19. Now we have US 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 51, 151 all on the same road!
Imagine how long the unisigns would have to be for that! :D
Let's get back to discussing the thread's subject and save the fictitious stuff for Fictional Highways.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 18, 2017, 04:20:31 PM
Let's get back to discussing the thread's subject and save the fictitious stuff for Fictional Highways.
Uh oh. The thread police. :rolleyes:
I'm not being the thread police. I think the entire discussion of rerouting US Highways is getting off track, and I think we should get back to discussing the thread's subject: The Interstate 39/90/94 expansion from Madison to Portage. If you disagree with what I have posted, please state your case.
I don't need to make a case on my behalf for you. If you wish to "get back to discussing the thread's topic" then post something does so. Otherwise keep scrolling. The "discussion" involving rerouting US Highways was lighthearted humor. If you believe that there's a problem with the subject matter, alert the moderators who will take care of the issue if it's a problem.
Since major improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are many years down the road, here is a project that is currently scheduled for the corridor between STH-33 and CTH-CS: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i399094/default.aspx
Looks like I'll be taking the ferry a lot more this summer to avoid the traffic there!
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:42:27 PM
Since major improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are many years down the road, here is a project that is currently scheduled for the corridor between STH-33 and CTH-CS: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i399094/default.aspx
"Roadway improvements include repairs to the existing driving surface and shoulders, installation of new guard rails, and new permanent signing and markings. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) such as microwave detectors,..."
What are microwave detectors?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 24, 2017, 09:24:08 PM
What are microwave detectors?
Those are the little "pizza boxes on poles" that measure traffic speed.
http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/96100/ch05/ch05_02.html
Quote from: GeekJedi on January 24, 2017, 09:28:15 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on January 24, 2017, 09:24:08 PM
What are microwave detectors?
Those are the little "pizza boxes on poles" that measure traffic speed.
http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/96100/ch05/ch05_02.html
Thank you.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:42:27 PM
Since major improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are many years down the road, here is a project that is currently scheduled for the corridor between STH-33 and CTH-CS: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i399094/default.aspx
Why not just 4 lane the rest of US 12 from Sauk City to Baraboo?
Quote from: dvferyance on February 10, 2017, 01:14:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:42:27 PM
Since major improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are many years down the road, here is a project that is currently scheduled for the corridor between STH-33 and CTH-CS: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i399094/default.aspx
Why not just 4 lane the rest of US 12 from Sauk City to Baraboo?
Four laning US-12 from Sauk City to Baraboo has nothing to do with the link you are responding to. Those improvements must happen regardless.
But four laning that section of US-12 would do little to ease congestion on the portion of I-30/90/94 that needs long term improvement.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 10, 2017, 01:29:58 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 10, 2017, 01:14:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:42:27 PM
Since major improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are many years down the road, here is a project that is currently scheduled for the corridor between STH-33 and CTH-CS: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i399094/default.aspx
Why not just 4 lane the rest of US 12 from Sauk City to Baraboo?
Four laning US-12 from Sauk City to Baraboo has nothing to do with the link you are responding to. Those improvements must happen regardless.
But four laning that section of US-12 would do little to ease congestion on the portion of I-30/90/94 that needs long term improvement.
I was just suggesting it as a short term alternative. I have never seen any major congestion on this highway anyways.
Quote from: dvferyance on March 10, 2017, 10:14:23 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on February 10, 2017, 01:29:58 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 10, 2017, 01:14:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:42:27 PM
Since major improvements to the Interstate 39/90/94 corridor are many years down the road, here is a project that is currently scheduled for the corridor between STH-33 and CTH-CS: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/i399094/default.aspx
Why not just 4 lane the rest of US 12 from Sauk City to Baraboo?
Four laning US-12 from Sauk City to Baraboo has nothing to do with the link you are responding to. Those improvements must happen regardless.
But four laning that section of US-12 would do little to ease congestion on the portion of I-30/90/94 that needs long term improvement.
I was just suggesting it as a short term alternative. I have never seen any major congestion on this highway anyways.
On what highway? US-12? I would agree. Therefore there is no reason to upgrade.