NEWS
Council debates transportation
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Michelle Orris:
- UW band to play pre- and post-game Music City Bowl (December 11, 2003)
- UW advertising project receives national attention for study (December 4, 2003)
- UW advertising project receives national attention for study (December 4, 2003)
- Judge chooses not to hear appeal propelled by Wisconsin Law School (November 14, 2003)
Related Stories:
- Cross-town traffic choking the city (January 23, 2003)
- Public transit overhaul discussed (February 14, 2002)
- City ponders future of transportation (April 27, 2006)
- City considers future travel (September 27, 2006)
- Light-rail gains steam from public (May 4, 2007)
Share This:
by Michelle Orris
Thursday, January 23, 2003
The City Council adopted a plan Tuesday to study alternatives for high-capacity regional transportation in Madison, including light-rail transit and electric streetcars.
The study’s cost will total $2.5 million. Project manager David Trowbridge said the state transportation department has committed to cover half of the funds, and the other half will come from yet-to-be-determined university, Dane County and city sources.
The plan will analyze the different transportation options in more detail to determine how much they would cost, how they would operate and how they would affect traffic and neighborhoods.
Ald. Steve Holtzman, District 19, said the plan does not bind the council to any particular transportation scenario.
“It’s a very forward-looking plan,” Holtzman said. “We’re trying to reduce congestion on city streets and implement something that augments the Metro.”
Transport2020, a committee studying future transportation options, recommends the implementation of alternative transportation to alleviate the downtown traffic crunch within the next five to 20 years.
Trowbridge said traffic congestion has increased in downtown Madison, particularly in central areas including East Washington and University Avenue. City officials expect traffic to more than double on Madison’s isthmus by the year 2020.
He said Madison has no more road capacity, creating the need for alternative transportation. “We want to keep downtown Madison healthy and growing, without all the freeways that choke some cities,” Trowbridge said.
Three council members voted against the proposal due to reservations about the plan’s cost, impact on traffic and potential aggravation of suburban sprawl.
Ald. Dorothy Borchardt, District 12, said she voted against the proposal because of the plan to set up a 10-mile rail route between Middleton and East Town, as well as its high cost.
“I don’t think people would ride it, plus taxpayers would subsidize its cost up to at least $40 per ride,” Borchardt said, concerned that Madison residents would not be able to afford the taxes.
Ald. Warren Onken, District 3, told the alders the Transport2020 committee has spent almost every other meeting deliberating how to pay for the system, which could include improved busing, commuter rail and streetcars. The committee estimates that start-up capital costs of the project would total $242 million, with annual operating costs of $40 million.
In other business over winter break, the council passed two housing ordinances sponsored by Ald. Mike Verveer, District 4.
One ordinance passed Jan. 7 allows tenants to change a lock on their apartment for their health or safety without first notifying their landlord.
“It’s an issue more than people realize,” Verveer said, citing emergency situations such as domestic abusers who have keys to their girlfriend or boyfriend’s apartment.
The second ordinance requires landlords to provide tenants with a telephone number to contact them, whereas previously they only had to provide their address.
The ordinance would allow tenants to contact their landlord to report an emergency or efficiently request repairs, Verveer said.
A Verveer-sponsored ordinance failed during the same meeting. The ordinance would have prohibited landlords from collecting earnest money, similar to a security deposit, from tenants in the middle of their leases.
