WisDOT begins design work for WI 15 Hortonville, WI bypass

[mgk920]

http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20120321/APC0101/120321043

This will extend the four lanes on WI 15 from just west of WI 76 in the unincorporated Greenville area to US 45 at New London, WI, making the entire highway four lanes.  The last that I heard, the bypass section will run around Hortonville's north side as a freeway (grade separation at County 'M'), but with no interchanges, only an upgradable roundabout at each end where it meets the 'old' road, with the rest of the upgrades being on the existing ROW.

This is one of the state's recently-enumerated projects and is likely to be built within the next five to ten years.

WI 15 carries very heavy local/regional commuter traffic, but little overhead through traffic since US 45 was rerouted off of it in late 2003, on its entire route and the traffic is overwhelming the two-lane WI 15 street though downtown Hortonville.

Mike

[triplemultiplex]

WI 15 doesn't exactly jump out at you on a map when considering 4 lane conversions in Wisconsin.  Especially if you don't appreciate the 'reach' of the metro area around Appleton.  I for example, imagine WisDOT will be slapping some extra lanes or something on WI 47 north of US 41 in a decade or so since a LOT of Fox Valley residents use that en route to "Up North".

On a map, the west end of the Hortonville bypass doesn't look so hot, but the fact that the intersection will be a roundabout regardless of what is designed as the 'thru-route' takes some of the sting out of my concerns for that kind of reunion of bypass and old road.

Speaking of Greenville, that always strikes me as one of those places in Wisconsin where I can't believe it's not incorporated.  They could probably carve out a city of about 10K from Greenville.  The neighboring Town of Grand Chute is another place like that (if memory serves, it's the largest municipal township in the state).  Of course if it were up to me (and thankfully it's not) that whole area would be part of Appleton proper. But that's another story.

[mgk920]

WI 15 doesn't exactly jump out at you on a map when considering 4 lane conversions in Wisconsin.  Especially if you don't appreciate the 'reach' of the metro area around Appleton.  I for example, imagine WisDOT will be slapping some extra lanes or something on WI 47 north of US 41 in a decade or so since a LOT of Fox Valley residents use that en route to "Up North".

On a map, the west end of the Hortonville bypass doesn't look so hot, but the fact that the intersection will be a roundabout regardless of what is designed as the 'thru-route' takes some of the sting out of my concerns for that kind of reunion of bypass and old road.

Speaking of Greenville, that always strikes me as one of those places in Wisconsin where I can't believe it's not incorporated.  They could probably carve out a city of about 10K from Greenville.  The neighboring Town of Grand Chute is another place like that (if memory serves, it's the largest municipal township in the state).  Of course if it were up to me (and thankfully it's not) that whole area would be part of Appleton proper. But that's another story.

That whole area SHOULD be part of Appleton.  In fact, if I were the benevolent dictator, the entire Fox Cities metro area (Neenah though Kaukauna and the Sherwood area though Greenville Twp.) would be one city.



Also, about ten years or so ago, WisDOT did hold some PIMs and hearings about future WI 47 upgrades between Appleton and Black Creek, including a potential interchange between WI 47 and County 'A' where they split south of Black Creek.  That split is very busy and is NASTY for traffic from NB County 'A' to NB WI 47.  This was in conjunction with a study on a potential new interchange at US 41 and County 'A' (Lynndale Dr) in the northwest Appleton area (yep, it's in Grand Chute Twp.).  WisDOT will not put an interchange in there until that intersection near Black Creek is addressed as the traffic that would then use County 'A' would overwhelm it.

The pending 'promotion' of US 41 to a full interstate would complicate that in that County 'A' is closer to both WI 15 and WI 47 than interstate standards would allow and an exception would be needed to add it.

Mike

[SSOWorld]

What is it with Wisconsin and their love of roundabouts?

[mgk920]

What is it with Wisconsin and their love of roundabouts?

Well, once the locals get accustomed to how they work, they prove to be very efficient at keeping traffic moving, avoiding unnecessary stops (ie, one of my biggest driving frustrations is sitting stopped at a red light with no conflicting traffic) and allow for much greater flexibility in intersection and roadway layouts and alignments than do conventional intersections.  They often cost less to build and operate than signalized intersections, too.

Mike
Post Merge: March 29, 2012, 03:11:43 PM
Also, the crash safety numbers of roundabouts are night v. day better than for conventional intersections involving the same classes of roads due to far fewer points of conflict, fewer decision points, the shallow angles of all of their points of conflict (especially *no* 'broadside' crashes and 3/4 head-on crashes involving left-turning vehicles) and their slower-speed nature.  When crashes do occur at roundabouts, they tend to be minor.

Mike

[GeekJedi]

I think it's great that WisDOT has "standardized" on roundabouts for the exact reasons you described.  Once you get used to them, they're fantastic - especially when you've got a minor road crossing a major one.

[hobsini2]

I had not been in favor of roundabouts for the 41 construction BUT they did a nice job so far and now i never get stopped at 9th and Koeller in Oshkosh coming off the freeway. So i am ok with them in small doses at important at grade intersections.

[DaBigE]

I think it's great that WisDOT has "standardized" on roundabouts for the exact reasons you described.  Once you get used to them, they're fantastic - especially when you've got a minor road crossing a major one.

WisDOT hasn't really "standardized" their use, per se, rather it is part of their policy the roundabouts must be investigated with any intersection reconstruction/reconfiguration, as part of their ICE reports (Intersection Control Evaluation).

Well, once the locals get accustomed to how they work, they prove to be very efficient at keeping traffic moving, avoiding unnecessary stops (ie, one of my biggest driving frustrations is sitting stopped at a red light with no conflicting traffic) and allow for much greater flexibility in intersection and roadway layouts and alignments than do conventional intersections.  They often cost less to build and operate than signalized intersections, too.
...
Also, the crash safety numbers of roundabouts are night v. day better than for conventional intersections involving the same classes of roads due to far fewer points of conflict, fewer decision points, the shallow angles of all of their points of conflict (especially *no* 'broadside' crashes and 3/4 head-on crashes involving left-turning vehicles) and their slower-speed nature.  When crashes do occur at roundabouts, they tend to be minor.

Mike

I think it's great that WisDOT has "standardized" on roundabouts for the exact reasons you described.  Once you get used to them, they're fantastic - especially when you've got a minor road crossing a major one.

I had not been in favor of roundabouts for the 41 construction BUT they did a nice job so far and now i never get stopped at 9th and Koeller in Oshkosh coming off the freeway. So i am ok with them in small doses at important at grade intersections.

I'll be one of the first to admit that they don't work everywhere, but as an engineer that works with roundabout designs on a fairly regular basis, a BIG  THANK YOU to those of you who understand and appreciate them.  I wish more of you could be at our public meetings.

[twinsfan87]

^^ Ditto to the above. They certainly don't work everywhere, but they should be used more where they DO work. I'm glad Wisconsin has embraced them! Now if only Mn/DOT shared the same sentiment...

[Alps]

They certainly don't work everywhere

Something more people need to realize.

[GeekJedi]

WisDOT hasn't really "standardized" their use, per se, rather it is part of their policy the roundabouts must be investigated with any intersection reconstruction/reconfiguration, as part of their ICE reports (Intersection Control Evaluation).

My mistake!  I thought that I had heard that they had to not only be considered, but preferred when the evaluation warrants it.  Of course, what I hear and what reality really is are often two different things!

[DaBigE]

My mistake!  I thought that I had heard that they had to not only be considered, but preferred when the evaluation warrants it.  Of course, what I hear and what reality really is are often two different things!

It depends on the supervising engineer and the WisDOT region.  Generally, when the ICE report shows a roundabout performing at least equal to a signal, the nod will usually go to the roundabout due to the long-term maintenance/cost differences.  However, there still are some older, "well-established" DOT engineers are still not quite convinced (but their numbers do seem to be on the decline).  That said, the project still has to be "tolerated" by the public.  When Wis 26 was being reconstructed within the city of Watertown, at least two roundabouts were proposed (one at the driveway to ShopKo and the [former] Pick 'n Save).  The citizens of Watertown were adamantly against them, and the DOT did an about-face.  Ironically, as part of the recent Watertown bypass project, you practically cannot enter/leave Watertown without going through at least one roundabout.

[mgk920]

Public acceptance of roundabouts is one of those things that fall under my 'give it time' line of thinking.



Mike

[DaBigE]

Public acceptance of roundabouts is one of those things that fall under my 'give it time' line of thinking.



Mike

Exactly.  And the growing number of before/after opinion studies are proving it.

[SSOWorld]

I know of at least one friend who refuses to accept roundabouts because "they are un-American". (but that's for another topic.)

[Scott5114]

I know of at least one friend who refuses to accept roundabouts because "they are un-American". (but that's for another topic.)

Yes, because we must strive to keep our country, and our society, nay, our very way of life, free from undue British influences...

What year does your friend live in, 1775?

[J N Winkler]

I wonder where Master son's friend thinks the British got the roundabout from . . .