Flam Road resurfacing: commission approves geometrics, asks staff for parking-removal and bike-lane options

The City of Madison Transportation Commission approved the overall geometrics for the Flam Road resurfacing project and directed staff to return with pavement-marking alternatives that consider removing on-street parking on sections of the corridor to improve bicycling facilities.

Why it matters: Flam Road passes La Follette High School and a middle school and serves as a key east—west connector. Commissioners and public commenters said the corridor should better reflect the city's Complete Green Streets goals for all-ages-and-abilities bike facilities; staff said the current contract is a resurfacing (not a reconstruction), underground utilities and overhead power poles constrain curb relocation, and project timing is tight.

What staff said: Steve Sontag, project engineer for the Flam Road resurfacing project, told the commission the scope would replace asphalt pavement and base, update water and sanitary mains, and repair curb and sidewalk where needed. He summarized the team's preferred construction approach: "The project aims to enhance the roadway infrastructure while also addressing the aging underground utilities to ensure long-term reliability and safety of the community." Staff proposed phasing the work because of proximity to schools and anticipated start dates in late July; staff said an east-phase could finish by mid—late November, with the remaining work after the school year ends in 2025.

Public comment and commission concerns: Nick Davies, a resident and public commenter, objected to the proposed striping as inconsistent with the Complete Green Streets Guide. "Flam Road is on the all ages and abilities bike network map," Davies said. "The proposed design ... shows a non-buffered bike lane without even a stripe separating it from the moving vehicle lane. This is not an all ages and abilities facility." Commissioners repeatedly raised the same concern: whether the resurfacing could do more than restore existing striping and whether parking could be removed on at least one side of certain blocks to create buffered or protected bike lanes.

Staff constraints and technical points: Staff emphasized that the project is resurfacing, not full reconstruction. Key constraints they cited: - Terrace widths and overhead power poles (MG&E) limit curb relocation; MG&E indicated pole relocation would be a multi-year process. - The corridor's right-of-way and existing 44-foot travel face limit space available for protected lanes without removing parking or securing easements. - School bus operations currently use a curbside area; engineering said an easement from the school could allow extra space for bus pullouts and wider sidewalks, and staff are coordinating with the school district on potential adjustments.

Next steps directed by the commission: Commissioners voted to approve the overall curb/geometrics to keep the project on schedule for the utilities work, while directing staff to develop and present pavement-marking alternatives that include at least one scenario removing parking on one side of the roadway in the segments where constrained widths prevent buffered bike lanes. Staff also agreed to return with measurement-driven alternatives showing the impacts to bus operations, parking supply and winter maintenance obligations.

Quotes - "The project aims to enhance the roadway infrastructure while also addressing the aging underground utilities to ensure long-term reliability and safety of the community," said Steve Sontag, project engineer for the Flam Road resurfacing project. - "Flam Road is on the all ages and abilities bike network map ... This is not an all ages and abilities facility," said Nick Davies, a resident offering public comment.

Practical consequences and timing: Staff warned that if the commission asked for a full public re-engagement including parking surveys and a new public information meeting for major striping changes, the resurfacing contract would likely slip into 2026. To avoid that delay while still responding to safety concerns, the commission approved geometric plans now and required staff return quickly with striping alternatives for the commission to review before final striping and construction staging decisions.

What staff will return with: pavement-marking plans showing alternatives (including parking-removal scenarios), analysis of bus operations and winter maintenance implications, and any easement language needed for sidewalk widening in front of school property.

Meeting context: The motion to approve geometrics with staff-directed marking alternatives passed by unanimous consent; commissioners asked staff to balance construction timing, utility work and pedestrian/bicycle safety when preparing the alternatives.