US 51 DeForest Project (WI)
Craig Holl
Apparently WisDOT will be converting two miles of US 51 north of WI 19 into
an expressway and possibly a freeway, at the suggestion of the public.
Please read this news release and give me your take on this.
--
Craig Holl
Mechanical Engineer
New Berlin, WI
*remove all numbers and caps to reply*
Michael G. Koerner
>
> http://www.dot.state.wi.us/dtd/hdist1/pdf/d1-us51news.pdf
>
> Apparently WisDOT will be converting two miles of US 51 north of WI 19 into
> an expressway and possibly a freeway, at the suggestion of the public.
> Please read this news release and give me your take on this.
It looks to me like something that would have been done about 30-40
years ago had the I-system never been built. Also, US 51/WI 19 is
already a diamond interchange 'favoring' US 51, this would extend the
upgrades to about the Dane-Columbia county line. It is an interesting
setup there as both WI 19 and US 51 also have multi-ramp 'par-clo'
interchanges with very nearby I-39/90/94, making for an impressive
complex of interchanges and highway-commercial businesses (motels, fast
food, truck stops, etc). Metro Madison is a FAST growing area, too, and
a lot of that traffic is being driven by suburban sprawl and not
long-distance commerce. US 51 (Stoughton Rd) is a commuter route,
adjacent I-39/90/94 is a long-distance route.
I am finding it quite interesting indeed that the needs for many of
these upgrades (US 51, US 12, etc) have simply been pushed back a few
decades by the interstates.
--
___________________________________________ ____ _______________
Regards, | |\ ____
| | | | |\
Michael G. Koerner May they | | | | | | rise again!
Appleton, Wisconsin USA | | | | | |
___________________________________________ | | | | | | _______________
Craig Holl
> >
> > Apparently WisDOT will be converting two miles of US 51 north of WI 19
into
> > an expressway and possibly a freeway, at the suggestion of the public.
> > Please read this news release and give me your take on this.
>
> It looks to me like something that would have been done about 30-40
> years ago had the I-system never been built. Also, US 51/WI 19 is
> already a diamond interchange 'favoring' US 51, this would extend the
> upgrades to about the Dane-Columbia county line. It is an interesting
> setup there as both WI 19 and US 51 also have multi-ramp 'par-clo'
> interchanges with very nearby I-39/90/94, making for an impressive
> complex of interchanges and highway-commercial businesses (motels, fast
> food, truck stops, etc). Metro Madison is a FAST growing area, too, and
> a lot of that traffic is being driven by suburban sprawl and not
> long-distance commerce. US 51 (Stoughton Rd) is a commuter route,
> adjacent I-39/90/94 is a long-distance route.
I know that US 51 has six ramps, but I didn't think WI 19 has more than the
standard 4-ramp diamond. The diamond is widely split on the east side of
the interstate, though.
Making a U-turn at the US 51 / I-90 interchange (I-90 WB to EB) is a real
pain in the evening rush, since you have to make a left onto US 51. I had
to do this once when I was scoping the US 151 interchange work.
> I am finding it quite interesting indeed that the needs for many of
> these upgrades (US 51, US 12, etc) have simply been pushed back a few
> decades by the interstates.
Let's hope that WI 16 (formerly US 16) is the next of these pre-interstate
routes to be upgraded. This would definitely ease a lot of traffic volume
on I-94 between Milwaukee and Portage. It would 'cut the corner' in much
the same way that US 12 does on the Chicago-Madison I-90 trip. I'll take
the long leg of the triangle over the two short sides any day, given
equivalent facilities.
Michael G. Koerner
>
> > > http://www.dot.state.wi.us/dtd/hdist1/pdf/d1-us51news.pdf
> > >
> > > Apparently WisDOT will be converting two miles of US 51 north of WI 19
> into
> > > an expressway and possibly a freeway, at the suggestion of the public.
> > > Please read this news release and give me your take on this.
> >
> > It looks to me like something that would have been done about 30-40
> > years ago had the I-system never been built. Also, US 51/WI 19 is
> > already a diamond interchange 'favoring' US 51, this would extend the
> > upgrades to about the Dane-Columbia county line. It is an interesting
> > setup there as both WI 19 and US 51 also have multi-ramp 'par-clo'
> > interchanges with very nearby I-39/90/94, making for an impressive
> > complex of interchanges and highway-commercial businesses (motels, fast
> > food, truck stops, etc). Metro Madison is a FAST growing area, too, and
> > a lot of that traffic is being driven by suburban sprawl and not
> > long-distance commerce. US 51 (Stoughton Rd) is a commuter route,
> > adjacent I-39/90/94 is a long-distance route.
>
> I know that US 51 has six ramps, but I didn't think WI 19 has more than the
> standard 4-ramp diamond. The diamond is widely split on the east side of
> the interstate, though.
Checking:
http://terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com/image.aspx?t=1&s=13&x=194&y=2990&z=16&w=2
Shows that I-39/90/90/WI 19 is indeed a wierdly stretched out diamond,
looking almost at first blush like WisDOT was anticipating a future need
for additional ramps when it was built decades ago. In fact, though,
that wierd ramp routing is to avoid a railroad that cuts north-south
through that interchange.
A broader overview of the area is at:
http://terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com/image.aspx?t=1&s=14&x=97&y=1495&z=16&w=2
> Making a U-turn at the US 51 / I-90 interchange (I-90 WB to EB) is a real
> pain in the evening rush, since you have to make a left onto US 51. I had
> to do this once when I was scoping the US 151 interchange work.
>
> > I am finding it quite interesting indeed that the needs for many of
> > these upgrades (US 51, US 12, etc) have simply been pushed back a few
> > decades by the interstates.
>
> Let's hope that WI 16 (formerly US 16) is the next of these pre-interstate
> routes to be upgraded. This would definitely ease a lot of traffic volume
> on I-94 between Milwaukee and Portage. It would 'cut the corner' in much
> the same way that US 12 does on the Chicago-Madison I-90 trip. I'll take
> the long leg of the triangle over the two short sides any day, given
> equivalent facilities.
--
Jon Enslin
>>>http://www.dot.state.wi.us/dtd/hdist1/pdf/d1-us51news.pdf
>>>
>>>Apparently WisDOT will be converting two miles of US 51 north of WI 19
>>>
> into
>
>>>an expressway and possibly a freeway, at the suggestion of the public.
>>>Please read this news release and give me your take on this.
It is going to be a WI-54 / WI-50 type expressway. I do not believe it
will have any exits, but will be a limited access, limited driveway four
lane road.
>>I am finding it quite interesting indeed that the needs for many of
>>these upgrades (US 51, US 12, etc) have simply been pushed back a few
>>decades by the interstates.
>>
>
> Let's hope that WI 16 (formerly US 16) is the next of these pre-interstate
> routes to be upgraded. This would definitely ease a lot of traffic volume
> on I-94 between Milwaukee and Portage. It would 'cut the corner' in much
> the same way that US 12 does on the Chicago-Madison I-90 trip.
I have been saying this for awhile.
Frankly, you could even start the upgrades a two lane highway if you do
three things. First, bypass Oconomowoc. Second, cut the corner from
Watertown to Columbus hooking into the US-151 bypass. Third, find a way
to connect to either I-39/90/94 south of Portage or I-39/US-51 north of
Portage. The latter is probably the better option because you wouldn't
have to build another Wisconsin River crossing.
Right now, there is not a lot of traffic utilizing this route unlike
US-51 or US-12. However, I could see this being a much more viable
alternative to I-94 for Milwaukee traffic. The interstate tripleplex is
becoming undriveable on summer weekends, and this would take a lot of
traffic off.
Start it as a two-lane project and see how traffic patterns change.
Jon
Craig Holl
> >>these upgrades (US 51, US 12, etc) have simply been pushed back a few
> >>decades by the interstates.
> >>
> >
> > Let's hope that WI 16 (formerly US 16) is the next of these
pre-interstate
> > routes to be upgraded. This would definitely ease a lot of traffic
volume
> > on I-94 between Milwaukee and Portage. It would 'cut the corner' in
much
> > the same way that US 12 does on the Chicago-Madison I-90 trip.
>
>
> I have been saying this for awhile.
>
> Frankly, you could even start the upgrades a two lane highway if you do
> three things. First, bypass Oconomowoc. Second, cut the corner from
> Watertown to Columbus hooking into the US-151 bypass. Third, find a way
> to connect to either I-39/90/94 south of Portage or I-39/US-51 north of
> Portage. The latter is probably the better option because you wouldn't
> have to build another Wisconsin River crossing.
>
> Right now, there is not a lot of traffic utilizing this route unlike
> US-51 or US-12. However, I could see this being a much more viable
> alternative to I-94 for Milwaukee traffic. The interstate tripleplex is
> becoming undriveable on summer weekends, and this would take a lot of
> traffic off.
>
> Start it as a two-lane project and see how traffic patterns change.
I agree. I don't even think you'd need to cut the Watertown-Columbus corner
at first, though. Just a Columbus bypass and Portage bypass would do it.
The Oconomowoc bypass will be done in the next four years; they even started
some of the swampland work on it this fall. I would start using WI 16 on
busy weekends once the bypasses were built. Then it would just be a matter
of time before traffic counts warranted 4 lanes on more sections, and that
will just lead to more people using the route. Before we know it, WisDOT
would need to convert the whole thing to a freeway.
Ah, the fantasyland we live in...
Jon Enslin
That's a good point, especially when you consider that WI-26 will be
upgraded in the area to four lanes within the next 10 years or so.
Jon
Michael G. Koerner
Interestingly, too, are the potential plans for the north WI 16/26
split. The crude downloads from WisDOT (WI 26 study) seem to tell me
that it will be re-engineered to favor a 'WI 60' east-west through
movement. From WI 26 to Hartford, WI 60 is an amazingly well engineered
road, including a short 'super two' freeway segment around Hustisford,
with the rural part between WI 26 and Columbus not far behind in
engineering. It is one of the more interesting 'obscure' drives in
Wisconsin, too, IMHO.
A WI 16 'cut corner' routing should then (with a realigned WI 60) run
from the northwest corner of the planned WI 26 Watertown bypass directly
to Columbus, perhaps alongside of the CP mainline at least part of the way.
One idea I just had would be to run a new-ROW WI 16 along the CP
mainline northwest of Watertown to connect with WI 60 around Astico, the
continue northwestward from there to the northeast end of the US 151
Columbus bypass (it could also connect to the southwest end). It would
then not be too difficult to continue WI 16 towards Portage from the
northwest corner of the US 151 Columbus bypass and WI 60 to the east
would be more integrated into the major highway system.
Kevin Robokoff
At one time they envisioned WI-16 into a 4 lane expressway/freeway
from Oconomowoc to Portage.
They have ROW for 4 lanes at the interchangne at WI-22 and appears
someday that will be expanded. It also appears some ROW was cleared in
some parts along that route for future addition of 4 lanes(shows
easily on terraserver). Note the ramp to nowhere in Oconomowoc. I am
assuming the bypass will be built on that route. I would suggest they
smooth that out as well so its free flowing for WI-16 around
Oconomowoc. I am also assuming that is why there was a new terrain
route for WI-16 from Watertown to Columbus as well.
Kevin.
Craig Holl
pre-interstate
> > routes to be upgraded. This would definitely ease a lot of traffic
volume
> > on I-94 between Milwaukee and Portage. It would 'cut the corner' in
much
> > the same way that US 12 does on the Chicago-Madison I-90 trip. I'll
take
> > the long leg of the triangle over the two short sides any day, given
> > equivalent facilities.
>
>
> At one time they envisioned WI-16 into a 4 lane expressway/freeway
> from Oconomowoc to Portage.
>
> They have ROW for 4 lanes at the interchangne at WI-22 and appears
> someday that will be expanded. It also appears some ROW was cleared in
> some parts along that route for future addition of 4 lanes(shows
> easily on terraserver). Note the ramp to nowhere in Oconomowoc. I am
> assuming the bypass will be built on that route. I would suggest they
> smooth that out as well so its free flowing for WI-16 around
> Oconomowoc. I am also assuming that is why there was a new terrain
> route for WI-16 from Watertown to Columbus as well.
Yes, the Ocomowoc bypass will go north from that interchange. But no, free
flow ramps for WI 16 will NOT be added. You'll have to turn right to
continue WB, and you'll have to turn left at a light to continue EB.
Original plans in the 60's called for flyovers, but it proved too costly for
the swamp environment.
Jon Enslin
> Interestingly, too, are the potential plans for the north WI 16/26
> split. The crude downloads from WisDOT (WI 26 study) seem to tell me
> that it will be re-engineered to favor a 'WI 60' east-west through
> movement. From WI 26 to Hartford, WI 60 is an amazingly well engineered
> road, including a short 'super two' freeway segment around Hustisford,
> with the rural part between WI 26 and Columbus not far behind in
> engineering. It is one of the more interesting 'obscure' drives in
> Wisconsin, too, IMHO.
An interesting part on WI-16/60 between WI-26 and Columbus is the County
G crossing near Lowell. County G crosses WI-16/60 on a very high
bridge and the only connection between the two is a local road which has
a very old "US-16" shield.
The whole stretch is amazing because WI-33 to the north has much more
traffic IMO.
Don't forget the portion of WI-60 between Hartford and Slinger being
four lanes either.
>
> A WI 16 'cut corner' routing should then (with a realigned WI 60) run
> from the northwest corner of the planned WI 26 Watertown bypass directly
> to Columbus, perhaps alongside of the CP mainline at least part of the way.
>
> One idea I just had would be to run a new-ROW WI 16 along the CP
> mainline northwest of Watertown to connect with WI 60 around Astico, the
> continue northwestward from there to the northeast end of the US 151
> Columbus bypass (it could also connect to the southwest end). It would
> then not be too difficult to continue WI 16 towards Portage from the
> northwest corner of the US 151 Columbus bypass and WI 60 to the east
> would be more integrated into the major highway system.
Or you could hook it into the south end of the bypass as well. WIDOT
does have a ROW marked out according to Chris Bessert.
WI-16 between Columbus and Portage is also a very nice drive...bypassing
many of the small towns along the way including Fall River, Rio and
Wyocena. The connection between WI-22 and WI-16 at Wyocena is a full
*diamond interchange*....a remnant when both roads were "more than they
are now." WI-16 was a USH and WI-22 was a major route up north from
Madison before US-51 became a freeway. (I still think WI-22 is a faster
route to Waupaca than US-51.)
I think WI-16 is a completely underutilized route that once received a
great deal of investment and should be used more.
Jon
Michael G. Koerner
I'll have to go poking around there someday.
> WI-16 between Columbus and Portage is also a very nice drive...bypassing
> many of the small towns along the way including Fall River, Rio and
> Wyocena. The connection between WI-22 and WI-16 at Wyocena is a full
> *diamond interchange*....a remnant when both roads were "more than they
> are now." WI-16 was a USH and WI-22 was a major route up north from
> Madison before US-51 became a freeway. (I still think WI-22 is a faster
> route to Waupaca than US-51.)
>
> I think WI-16 is a completely underutilized route that once received a
> great deal of investment and should be used more.
>
> Jon
Kevin Robokoff
> Michael G. Koerner wrote:
>
>
> > Interestingly, too, are the potential plans for the north WI 16/26
> > split. The crude downloads from WisDOT (WI 26 study) seem to tell me
> > that it will be re-engineered to favor a 'WI 60' east-west through
> > movement. From WI 26 to Hartford, WI 60 is an amazingly well engineered
> > road, including a short 'super two' freeway segment around Hustisford,
> > with the rural part between WI 26 and Columbus not far behind in
> > engineering. It is one of the more interesting 'obscure' drives in
> > Wisconsin, too, IMHO.
>
>
> An interesting part on WI-16/60 between WI-26 and Columbus is the County
> G crossing near Lowell. County G crosses WI-16/60 on a very high
> bridge and the only connection between the two is a local road which has
> a very old "US-16" shield.
>
> The whole stretch is amazing because WI-33 to the north has much more
> traffic IMO.
>
> Don't forget the portion of WI-60 between Hartford and Slinger being
> four lanes either.
>
only a boulvevard style 4 lane IIRC, not what I would call an
expressway.
>
> >
> > A WI 16 'cut corner' routing should then (with a realigned WI 60) run
> > from the northwest corner of the planned WI 26 Watertown bypass directly
> > to Columbus, perhaps alongside of the CP mainline at least part of the way.
> >
that idea was planned years ago, but from what I heard has been
disgarded now once the Interstates were built.
> > One idea I just had would be to run a new-ROW WI 16 along the CP
> > mainline northwest of Watertown to connect with WI 60 around Astico, the
> > continue northwestward from there to the northeast end of the US 151
> > Columbus bypass (it could also connect to the southwest end). It would
> > then not be too difficult to continue WI 16 towards Portage from the
> > northwest corner of the US 151 Columbus bypass and WI 60 to the east
> > would be more integrated into the major highway system.
>
>
> Or you could hook it into the south end of the bypass as well. WIDOT
> does have a ROW marked out according to Chris Bessert.
>
> WI-16 between Columbus and Portage is also a very nice drive...bypassing
> many of the small towns along the way including Fall River, Rio and
> Wyocena. The connection between WI-22 and WI-16 at Wyocena is a full
> *diamond interchange*....a remnant when both roads were "more than they
> are now." WI-16 was a USH and WI-22 was a major route up north from
> Madison before US-51 became a freeway. (I still think WI-22 is a faster
> route to Waupaca than US-51.)
>
WI-22 is a scenic drive and is rather quick to Waupaca as most of it
has been reconstructed over the years.
also that interchange at Wyocena shows ROW for 4 lanes through that
interchange. Eventually if traffic warrants it, I am sure it will be
converted to 4 lanes.
> I think WI-16 is a completely underutilized route that once received a
> great deal of investment and should be used more.
>
they could also mark it as alternative I-94 along the entire stretch.
Kevin
> Jon
Jon Enslin
> > WI-16 between Columbus and Portage is also a very nice drive...bypassing
> > many of the small towns along the way including Fall River, Rio and
> > Wyocena. The connection between WI-22 and WI-16 at Wyocena is a full
> > *diamond interchange*....a remnant when both roads were "more than they
> > are now." WI-16 was a USH and WI-22 was a major route up north from
> > Madison before US-51 became a freeway. (I still think WI-22 is a faster
> > route to Waupaca than US-51.)
> >
> WI-22 is a scenic drive and is rather quick to Waupaca as most of it
> has been reconstructed over the years.
>
> also that interchange at Wyocena shows ROW for 4 lanes through that
> interchange. Eventually if traffic warrants it, I am sure it will be
> converted to 4 lanes.
Traffic IMO will never warrant it.
Especially on WI-22. When I was a kid, I used to take WI-22 from
Madison to Waupaca a few times a summer. It was relatively busy. Ever
since they upgraded US-51 to interstate freeway, the traffic on WI-22 is
nowhere near what it used to be...even on summer weekends.
Jon
--
"I would not buy you a beer if you promised to pour it on my burning
house." - M1EK
Steve
>
> Jon Enslin <ens...@REMOVEATYOUROWNRISKuww.edu> wrote in message news:<3DB6F108...@REMOVEATYOUROWNRISKuww.edu>...
> > Michael G. Koerner wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Interestingly, too, are the potential plans for the north WI 16/26
> > > split. The crude downloads from WisDOT (WI 26 study) seem to tell me
> > > that it will be re-engineered to favor a 'WI 60' east-west through
> > > movement. From WI 26 to Hartford, WI 60 is an amazingly well engineered
> > > road, including a short 'super two' freeway segment around Hustisford,
> > > with the rural part between WI 26 and Columbus not far behind in
> > > engineering. It is one of the more interesting 'obscure' drives in
> > > Wisconsin, too, IMHO.
> >
> >
> > An interesting part on WI-16/60 between WI-26 and Columbus is the County
> > G crossing near Lowell. County G crosses WI-16/60 on a very high
> > bridge and the only connection between the two is a local road which has
> > a very old "US-16" shield.
> >
> interesting, I will need to check it out on terraserver.
where 16 would have gone from its intersection with current G? Also,
from aerial photos, it appears 16/60 is in a bit of a depression
relative to the surrounding land.
--
Steve from New Jersey
Civil Engineering (Course 1) at MIT
Jon Enslin
> Jon Enslin <ens...@REMOVEATYOUROWNRISKuww.edu> wrote in message
> > G crossing near Lowell. County G crosses WI-16/60 on a very high
> > bridge and the only connection between the two is a local road which has
> > a very old "US-16" shield.
> >
> interesting, I will need to check it out on terraserver.
Here is Mapquest:
If you zoom in you will see that US-16 used to enter and exit Lowell
on what is now "Old 16 Road."
Lowell sits on a little bit of a rise. WI-16 now runs through a cut
south of town. The only way to access County G is via Old 16 Road.
Jon