Trouble is, Twin Cities (MSP) with the rehab for Madison-Portage is indefinite. I’m sure Madison was a tough choice for the Milwaukee Road or they would have routed the Hiawatha that way instead of through Columbus. Both the CNW and MR had their problems going from Milwaukee to Madison. Furthermore, there is no fast alignment.
One interesting alternative now would be the CP out of Milwaukee to Duplaineville and a new connection to the CN, south to Waukesha, west on the WSOR (former MR) through through Whitewater to Milton Jct, north to the former CNW roadbed on the Lake Monona causeway, and east to Monona Landing two blocks from the Capitol and in the “right” direction to continue north, a distance of 98 miles compared to the 84 mile route by way of Watertown.
I caught a comment on the study of extending Metra North Central service from Antioch, IL to Burlington, WI. The connection at Duplaineville would facilitate a third route to Chicago on the CN through Waukesha and Burlington.
Maybe putting Madison on the CHI-MKE-MSP Corridor is politically driven; but I wonder if a comparison had been made taking into account the greater ridership to Madison compared to the reduced ridership for the longer trip between other station pairs?
I agree that there will be no direct high speed rail service between Madison and the Twin Cities anytime soon. I recently talked to my Minnesota state representative Melissa Hortman who serves on the transportation committee in the Minnesota legislature. I asked her why the Twin Cities - Chicago was not funded this time. She was blunt, Minnesota was not ready. She used the analogy of buying a house. Minnesota only recently figured out it wanted to buy a house,Wisconsin on the other hand was ready to close on the house.
I feel that the focus of high speed rail in Wisconsin should be on Madison to Milwaukee and Chicago and serve the business community and the UW. It seems to me that Madison has become much more than the state capital and home of the Badgers. I have noticed that the Northwestern part of Madison has really developed since the late 1980’s. I think that putting a station at Dane County airport makes sense. People from Janesville, Beloit,and even Rockford may find Madison a better choice than O’Hare. It could mean better air service to Madison.
What I was thinking was that past practice found “optimal” in terms of construction cost and ridership, sometimes picking a less desirable location for the station to keep construction costs practical. 30th St in Phila is a great example.
I would also submit that every airport is in a less than desirable location w.r.t. to their urban area, yet there are no shortage of passengers…
One advantage of the airport site is no land acquisition cost. The county already owns the land. The rail station site is in the economy/overflow parking lot. Plenty of surface parking. It is, however, a long hike to the air terminal and its amenities.
The parking situation at the Yahara Station site depends on how it is developed. Presently, there’s the underutilized Fiore Shopping Center on the Washington Avenue end, a city fleet garage at the Johnson Street end, and a couple of other properties in between. If it gets developed as a multi-use facility, a parking garage would likely be needed. If its just a station, there’s probably enough space for surface parking.
As I recall, the Empire Builder would likely stay on the present route on the CP main through Columbus.
The Yahara Station is also in an area where trains will have slowed down already, having passed through a residential neighborhood and in the midst of a tight curve. On the way to the airport, the train would pass through the WSOR yards and another residential neighborhood. It would not have a chance
One advantage of the airport site is no land acquisition cost. The county already owns the land. The rail station site is in the economy/overflow parking lot. Plenty of surface parking. It is, however, a long hike to the air terminal and its amenities.
Aerial photos show the current Dade Co Airport lots being used near capacity. If the unused and undeveloped area south of the airport’s remote lot are used for Amtrak, I estimate that would provide for 600-800 spaces and projects to a capacity for as many as 1,200 passengers a day before ridership would begin to be constrained.
Sadly, the track comes within 100 ft of the terminal across a ditch and service roads; but then parking would be inconvenient or dependent on a shuttle that may need more than one trip and adding time to the trip for some.
The problem remains that the airport entails a 6-mile, 10-minute (20 minutes overall) back-haul for most travelers from Madison headed east. This is a pre
Who, representing “the university” thinks that the Memorial Union curb is a bad place as an intercity bus hub? What does that person want?
Yes, Langdon in front of the Union is congested as all get-go. But it is right in the heart of the U and tremendously convenient to the students and to faculty and staff members who take that bus to O’Hare or Downtown Chicago on business for the University. If you can tell me who at the U thinks that way, I can organize a posse to have that person thrashed with a “clue bat.” Besides, if one wants parking or more convenient drop-off, there is the Dutch Mill park-n-ride on the way out of town. What more do you want? A convenient although necessarily congested location (where they sell bus tickets at a Memorial Union counter, at that), and an “outlying” location with parking and pickup-standing spots.
I am conflicted in two directions by this thing. On one hand, everyone and his brother now has an expert opinion about the airport station, and after all is said and done, the advocacy community may yet make a hash of this thing we worked for over 20 years to get.
On the other hand, I looked out of my office window, and I saw a chartered motorcoach bus back up the McClain Practice Facility – most likely a sports team has a bus ride to particpate in a game in Big Ten compet
If they do this thing, they would be smart if they stay outside the city limits of Madison.
Else, if they do this thing, they should just make the western endpoint a platform at HWY 51 /(Stoughton Rd./CommercialAve.), or if not there, then Lien/Thomson Rds. Think park and ride.
I think it would be a better use of the money to acquire locomotives that are well suited to the Talgos. Second, buy additional trainsets. Third, restore CP second track out of Milwaukee to Watertown, and extend Hiawatha service through western Milwaukee suburbs to Watertown.
(Many Madison people traveling to central Chicago now drive to Mitchell Field Amtrak station in Milwaukee, and take the Hiawatha’s into Chicago and back. These people spend to save time and hassle).
Given a large number of UW students are from or going to the Chicago area, I wonder if any thought has been given to reviving one of the old, non-Milwaukee routes?
In looking for the article, I see I have to back off from that posting. There’s no mention of the UW’s or the Union’s attitude toward the present situation on Landon Street, but the Union’s position on Badger Bus using Union South was articulated through a spokesperson:
Again not knowing the physical layout of Madison but recognizing the lake
Maybe a station outside the city limits (airport or otherwise)
Then only a platform at the UW for students and for home football games. Its time to start the football specials again. Physical layout make that possible? When service MAD - MSP is initiated then these 2 stations could be used for that service as well as long as the design of the outside city limits station anticipates that future use.
If the airport location is inconvenient for Capitol/UW travelers and an Isthmus/UW station won’t work for HSR through to the Twin Cities, how about a two stage solution? Even after trains are extended past Madison to point northwest, there will almost certainly be CHI-MIL-MAD only trains. Since that’s all we will have to work with to start, how about a downtown station for the limited service that will be all we have to work with for now. Once the HSR route extends past Madison, develop the airport site for through trains and keep downtown for trains that originate/terminate in Madison. Within that general idea, some options for future detail work:
A Yahara stop to serve NW Madison.
Possibly extend the downtown extension across to the west wide of Madison/Middleton area to serve people living on that side of town or allowing easier access to/from the belt line.
These would necessarily prevent any rapid transit times from any station west of Yahara to points east but the added convenience of acces might be more than enough to offset that. Once HSR gets developed through to MSP, the Yahara, downtown and (maybe) stations would serve CHI-MIL-MAD trains and possibly a shuttle connecting with the airport.
The idea would be similar to the (larger scale) suburban stops Amtrak has in, say Glenview and Naperville, IL. The serve passengers that live/drive in that area and rovide connections to local (Metra) trains for those that find that convenience more important than the slower travel time.
How about the Amtrak California approach? Just have buses meet the train at the airport station and shuttle passengers where they need to go. Amtrak does this for SF at Emeryville. Works very well. Walk off the train, thru the station, onto the bus and away you go.
With all the money that is going to be spent on this project, why take an “almost there” approach when it comes to the final destination in Madison? The airport is on the edge of the city for the obvious reason that it needs to be. The train depot needs to be where the maximum number of people can and will use it, i.e. near the University and the State Capitol. I would hazard a guess that the C&NW and Milwaukee Road took this into account a century ago or so when they located their depots where they did. It is just plain common sense.
As to the number of grade crossings that need to be protected and concerns for train speed within the city, places like Chicago and its suburbs have dealt with this for decades and done so largely with success.
You gotta read this whole thread. The “original RRs did it this way” theory - busted!. The “successful RR stations in the US are this way” theory - busted! The “Has to be downtown” theory - busted! When you add in all the complexity of how and where in Madison plus the “how do you extend to Minneapolis” problem, plus the notion that most in Madison -even the students - have cars and that most trips will have a Madison rather than Chicago origin, It makes most sense to put the station somewhere that’s easy to drive to and has good parking.
The best compromise I’ve heard is Harvey’s, where the Madison turns would terminate in a city station and the (eventual) through trains would skip it. Sort of like how Amtrak’s Keystones used to terminate in Suburban Station after making 30th St.
You appear not to be that familiar with Madison or else you would have understood my statement. We are not just talking about generic downtowns somewhere out of context. Look up where these depots were in relation to (1) the University and (2) downtown and the capitol and you will understand.
John Timm
[quote user=“oltmannd”]
You gotta read this whole thread. The “original RRs did it this way” theory - busted!. The “successful RR stations in the US are this way” theory - busted! The “Has to be downtown” theory - busted! When you add in all the complexity of how and where in Madison plus the “how do you extend to Minneapolis” problem, plus the notion that most in Madison -even the students - have cars and that most trips will have a Madison rather than Chicago origin, It makes most sense to put the station somewhere that’s easy to drive to and has good parking.
The best compromise I’ve heard is Harvey’s, where the Madison turns would terminate in a city station and the (eventual) through trains would skip it. Sort of like how Amtrak’s Keystones used to terminate in Sub
I have lived in Madison for nearly 30 years, and my esteemed Atlanta, Georgia-residing rail advocacy friend has it just about right. ProRail, the Madison-based advocacy group supports the Airport Station, pretty much along the same line of reasoning.
If HSR is routed through Columbus, it will shorten trip time between Milwaukee and the Twin Cities while serving the multicounty Madison area. Just increase the speed limit on 151 into Madison to 80mph. It’s grade-separated. [swg]
And the residents of Beaver Dam won’t have to travel all the way to Dane County Regional to catch the train. They don’t have the 400 at S. Beaver Dam anymore, y’know.
Why was the Canadian Pacific required to relocate its HSR-to-be line from ADJACENT TO the airport terminal for the AIRPORT parking structure et.al. improvement project a couplle years ago?
Then again, the airport could be moved to Columbus.
The Captitols may work “well,” but how many more might ride if the train went all the way to Market & Montgomery, AT&T Park, and 3rd & Townsend? How much more costly would be another pair of tubes across the Bay compared to fixing up existing tracks through Madison, even if a short stretch of abandoned row needs to be restored?
I agree. I was born and raised in Wisconsin. If we are spending $800 million on a project. When I say “we” I mean Federal Taxpayer portion. Do the project right and put a downtown station in. You have downtown stations in almost every major city on this Chicago-Madison line. It would really be stupid to have what amounts to only a suburban station for Madison (second largest city in Wisconsin after Milwaukee). Dynamite buildings in Madison if you need to make room, clear the path for the ROW. Lets not have half measures with this project. I’m willing to pay more taxes for a project done right then one done half right to save a little money here and there. Also, lets not have the Madison station be a Mobile Home trailer next to a parking lot either. Build a train station worthy of a city that size. Hopefully the bureaucrats get this project right. I already have my doubts with