Madison Area

[mgk920]

Again, if those stupid lakes weren't in the way . . .

Basically, how much WisDOT money do you want to spend on it?  With enough money, one could build a very useful 'local/express' lane setup on the Beltline.  But will the rest of the state go for it?

Do they get veto power or something? Does the rest of the state get to "go for" I-41 expansion between Appleton and De Pere? I-94 expansion in Milwaukee?

The dollars should go where they are needed the most.

Those places where they are 'needed the most' also tend to be the places where the locals want them the least.  Look at all of the 'unbuilts' in metro Milwaukee, how long it took to add the badly needed lanes to the I-94 east-west freeway in Milwaukee and the direct free-flow ramps at the Beltline-Verona Rd interchange in Madison.  The ongoing I-41 six and eight lane upgrades (among many other projects throughout the NE part of the state) were all WANTED by the locals.

Mike

[SEWIGuy]

Again, if those stupid lakes weren't in the way . . .

Basically, how much WisDOT money do you want to spend on it?  With enough money, one could build a very useful 'local/express' lane setup on the Beltline.  But will the rest of the state go for it?

Do they get veto power or something? Does the rest of the state get to "go for" I-41 expansion between Appleton and De Pere? I-94 expansion in Milwaukee?

The dollars should go where they are needed the most.

Those places where they are 'needed the most' also tend to be the places where the locals want them the least.  Look at all of the 'unbuilts' in metro Milwaukee, how long it took to add the badly needed lanes to the I-94 east-west freeway in Milwaukee and the direct free-flow ramps at the Beltline-Verona Rd interchange in Madison.  The ongoing I-41 six and eight lane upgrades (among many other projects throughout the NE part of the state) were all WANTED by the locals.

So your question should have been, will the locals go for it?

[The Ghostbuster]

As a nearly lifelong resident of Madison, I strongly support all of the projects mentioned above.

[SSOWorld]

As a nearly lifelong resident of Madison, I strongly support all of the projects mentioned above.

As a lifelong resident not of Madison, I strongly support all of the projects mentioned above.

Particularly if they finally put free-flow from the beltline to Verona road

There is just WAAAAYYYYY too much business development along the beltline to permit expansions without shrinking lanes and shoulders.

[The Ghostbuster]

There is a virtual PIM for the Beltline PEL Study tomorrow at 5:30pm: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/madisonbeltline/public.aspx.

[The Ghostbuster]

There is a potential construction start date for the Stoughton Road North Study: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/by-region/sw/us51-corridor/northstudy.aspx. I still wish they had gone with the jug-handle alternative at East Washington Ave.

[The Ghostbuster]

US 51 could be moved near the airport due to runway expansion: https://madison.com/news/traffic/article_c6b53ca0-eaef-426e-8342-a6bad38218d7.html.

[on_wisconsin]

US 51 could be moved near the airport due to runway expansion: https://madison.com/news/traffic/article_c6b53ca0-eaef-426e-8342-a6bad38218d7.html.

From the Airport Draft NCP from last October... Layouts start at pg 113 (already linked): https://www.msnairport.com/documents/pdf/MSN-P150-Draft-NCP-Amendment-10242025-final.pdf#page=113

Alt 2 is likely the most questionable safety wise due to extending the Rwy 3 end closer to taxiway A which would likely introduce new restrictions on use of the taxiway when in mixed flow ops. Never mind the probable removal of various buildings on the extended Rwy 3 approach after the FAA and USAF have their final say.
TLDR: Simply extending the NE (21) end of the runway and building a tunnel for US 51 will almost certainly be a lot more straightforward to get shovels moving. IMHO

[mgk920]

US 51 could be moved near the airport due to runway expansion: https://madison.com/news/traffic/article_c6b53ca0-eaef-426e-8342-a6bad38218d7.html.

From the Airport Draft NCP from last October... Layouts start at pg 113 (already linked): https://www.msnairport.com/documents/pdf/MSN-P150-Draft-NCP-Amendment-10242025-final.pdf#page=113

Alt 2 is likely the most questionable safety wise due to extending the Rwy 3 end closer to taxiway A which would likely introduce new restrictions on use of the taxiway when in mixed flow ops. Never mind the probable removal of various buildings on the extended Rwy 3 approach after the FAA and USAF have their final say.
TLDR: Simply extending the NE (21) end of the runway and building a tunnel for US 51 will almost certainly be a lot more straightforward to get shovels moving. IMHO

Like with Howell Ave (WI 38) under the east-west runway at MKE.

Mike