Illogical Moves by WISDOT

[peterj920]

I drove on US 41 today between Green Bay and Peshtigo today.  Driving north on US 41 between the US 141 interchange and Oconto, most of the green guide signs for cross roads and mileage were faded and in real bad shape.  The more recent stretch of constructed expressway between Oconto and Peshtigo has almost all new signs.  The one way signs were replaced with horizontal signs, the intersecting county road signs and US 41/L.M. Circle Tour signs are large, and are just as large as the ones that they replaced.

Meanwhile, the county road intersecting signs and US 41 reassurance signs are smaller and older than the signs that WISDOT replaced.  The vertical one way signs remain on that stretch of road also.

I don't understand why WISDOT would replace the newer signs on the newly reconstructed roadway and not replace signs that actually need to be replaced on an older stretch of roadway.  The signs that were replaced were only about 5-6 years old while the signs that remain are anywhere from 10-20 years old.  The green crossroad signs that are extremely faded were probably posted when US 41 was first reconstructed as an expressway in the early 90s.

[GeekJedi]

Probably because part of the budget for the road upgrade included new signage.

[peterj920]

Probably because part of the budget for the road upgrade included new signage.

I would hope that when signs are installed they would last longer than 5 years, and that's how old the signs that got replaced were.  They were all new when US 41 was upgraded to an expressway.  On the US 41 large reassurance signs, the large Lake Michigan Circle Tour signs are being added alongside.  Horizontal one ways are replacing the vertical one way signs, but wouldn't it be more logical to replace older signs before replacing newer signs?

[DaBigE]

Probably because part of the budget for the road upgrade included new signage.

I would hope that when signs are installed they would last longer than 5 years, and that's how old the signs that got replaced were.  They were all new when US 41 was upgraded to an expressway.  On the US 41 large reassurance signs, the large Lake Michigan Circle Tour signs are being added alongside.

In the case of the signs in bad shape, they may not have been reported yet or other unknown red-tape issues. Case-in-point, there were a pair of route marker assemblies on one of the ramps on my commute route that were faded almost beyond recognition. The state signing engineer even knew about them and joked about them, however, it still took several years to finally get replaced.

Unless it's a traffic control or safety item (Stop/Yield sign, traffic signal, beam guard, etc.), rarely is there much of a sense of urgency to repair or replace.

Horizontal one ways are replacing the vertical one way signs, but wouldn't it be more logical to replace older signs before replacing newer signs?

Depends on where the money is coming from. Logic rarely has a place in governmental operations.

[vdeane]

Major reconstructions ALWAYS include new signage.  The previously existing signage was probably sold for scrap by the contractor when they had to remove it to get their paving equipment in.

At the risk of sounding like a Geico commercial... when you do major work on a highway, you replace the signage.  It's what you do.

[peterj920]

Major reconstructions ALWAYS include new signage.  The previously existing signage was probably sold for scrap by the contractor when they had to remove it to get their paving equipment in.

At the risk of sounding like a Geico commercial... when you do major work on a highway, you replace the signage.  It's what you do.

The major work on the highway was done 6 years ago and all of the signs were brand new when the road was open.  The roadway wasn't touched and the signs were replaced.   The one way signs were replaced with horizontals, but the vertical signs that were older south of Oconto remained.  Both sections of roadway were expressway, but doesn't it make more sense to replace the older signs than the newer signs?  Google streetview just went through this area so I have pictures and you can see for yourself. 

Here is an intersection with County W in 2013. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9902165,-87.8580213,3a,75y,26.85h,87.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqru5iiFsMJq9mVA7yCmp7w!2e0!5s20130801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Here is the picture from 2015 with the County W sign recently replaced
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.990217,-87.858021,3a,75y,26.85h,87.94t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1cvVBJaArjtSQOjl2jJtAw!2e0!5s20150901T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Here is a picture of one of the signs on US 41 just north of 141 from September 2014.  There are several signs like this at intersections that are in as bad of shape as this one that need replacement, while that perfectly fine County W sign above got replaced.  I was just using the County W sign as an example, all of the signs along that stretch got replaced. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7929893,-88.0364699,3a,75y,74.18h,82.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skHQ6BYbmx_g8IB26QpSzrA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

And here's a picture of a County J sign south of Oconto that is smaller and doesn't get replaced with a bigger sign, and is most likely older than the County W sign that was replaced north of Oconto.  That sign was in ok shape, but it's smaller than the signs north of Oconto that were newer and were replaced.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.8005841,-87.9989829,3a,75y,100.64h,78.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sokXTz_724KYOZjW69Lbk0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I hope these visuals illustrate my point of why these sign changes look pretty illogical. 

[GeekJedi]

Of course, there's the whole "trying to apply logic to government projects" thing! 

[Roadguy]

I'm not familiar with the reflectivity standards in the MUTCD but aren't signs required now to maintain a certain level of reflectivity?  Is it just regulatory signs or others as well?  With these newer standards, it would most likely put signs on a replacement cycle so eventually these will have to be replaced.

Are we just talking this specific situation or are we opening the floor to more instances of illogical WisDOT moves?  This could be dangerous, I could list quite a few things if we open the floor.

[peterj920]

I posted this for anyone else to post illogical moves by WISDOT.  I'm sure there's lots of them.  If you're going by MUTCD reflective standards, the signs replaced north of Oconto met those standards, while the signs south of Oconto are older and didn't.

[I-39]

I'll answer your original post.

They are going to have to eventually reconstruct the US 41/141 interchange in Abrams to realign the ramps to the right side of the road per current design standards, as well as replace the structures. Also, they will eventually need to convert the remaining expressway sections between Abrams and Peshtigo to freeway, as US 41 is south of Abrams.

Now, those things are certainly not high priorities, and they shouldn't be. They are not needed at this time. But when they will be needed (perhaps 15-20 years down the road), they can replace the signage with more modern ones. Until then, just fix the existing ones.

[peterj920]

That doesn't explain anything.  Perfectly good signs were replaced north of Oconto that weren't very old and older signs south of Oconto that had a lot more wear on them weren't replaced.  Logic says replace the older signs that are worn out and replace the newer signs when they start to wear.  I don't think US 41 is going to be converted to freeway anytime soon and I doubt the entire interchange needs to be rebuilt.  The lane drop on US 41 south needs to be worked on, but the bridges are fine.  I-41 to I-43 south will have a left exit, and US 10 east to US 45 south are recent examples of modern left exits.  In rural areas or where there is a lot of spacing between interchanges, they can still be used in those situations.

[SEWIGuy]

10 posts on the quality of signage on a stretch of highway in northeast Wisconsin.

On the one hand, this surprises me.  On the other hand, it doesn't.

[DaBigE]

That doesn't explain anything.  Perfectly good signs were replaced north of Oconto that weren't very old and older signs south of Oconto that had a lot more wear on them weren't replaced.  Logic says replace the older signs that are worn out and replace the newer signs when they start to wear.  I don't think US 41 is going to be converted to freeway anytime soon and I doubt the entire interchange needs to be rebuilt.  The lane drop on US 41 south needs to be worked on, but the bridges are fine.  I-41 to I-43 south will have a left exit, and US 10 east to US 45 south are recent examples of modern left exits.  In rural areas or where there is a lot of spacing between interchanges, they can still be used in those situations.

Other than complaining on an internet forum, have you contacted WisDOT about the issue?

[vdeane]

The major work on the highway was done 6 years ago and all of the signs were brand new when the road was open.  The roadway wasn't touched and the signs were replaced.   The one way signs were replaced with horizontals, but the vertical signs that were older south of Oconto remained.  Both sections of roadway were expressway, but doesn't it make more sense to replace the older signs than the newer signs?  Google streetview just went through this area so I have pictures and you can see for yourself.

OK, I misunderstood.  I thought the signs were replaced a few years ago and then it was recently reconstructed with the signs replaced again as part of the reconstruction.

That is odd.  Looks like a case of the left hand not knowing what the right is doing and programming the signs for replacement while forgetting about the reconstruction contract.  Or maybe they had some hidden defect that needed fixing.

I saw the former on I-93 in NH.  In back to back work zones, there were signs saying "left lane closed ahead" while the left lane was already closed.  One of those signs was in Franconia Notch where there was no left lane to speak of.

[mgk920]

I'll answer your original post.

They are going to have to eventually reconstruct the US 41/141 interchange in Abrams to realign the ramps to the right side of the road per current design standards, as well as replace the structures. Also, they will eventually need to convert the remaining expressway sections between Abrams and Peshtigo to freeway, as US 41 is south of Abrams.

Yea, those lane drops have been a bugaboo for me ever since that interchange was completed, they've never made any sense to me.  OTOH, it would not surprise me to see at least a serious study on upgrading the combined US 41/141 to six lanes when that major work is done, it is amazingly busy.  Perhaps we should have the highway be eight lanes between the Abrams interchange and the next interchange to the south (County 'D'/Abrams, a very short distance) with the southbound exit/drop be the feed from US 141's right lane (US 141's left lane and the two US 41 lanes become the three southbound mainline lanes), and the mirror image northbound.

Also, from there to Oconto will be the ultimate in simplicity for upgrading US 41 to a full freeway, most of the crossroads can be easily cut off or bridged, a couple of them would become interchanges and most of the private accesses can simply be bought out at minimal cost.  The only semi-complex frontage road work would be close to US 141.  Oconto to Peshtigo would be more complex with needed frontage/access work.  In addition, I have never liked the half-interchanges at either end of Oconto, they should have been full ones done like the two on either end of Peshtigo and ways should be found to 'complete' them.

Mike

[GeekJedi]

Totally agree, however I don't see any of that being done in the next 20+ years.