Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Corridor Us51 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
WisDOT outlines five corridor concepts for US‑51/South Stoughton Road; next public meeting late 2025
Summary
MADISON, Wis. — The Wisconsin Department of Transportation on July 23 presented conceptual alternatives for a 4.4‑mile study of US‑51 (South Stoughton Road), telling the Madison Transportation Commission the project’s purpose is “to improve safety and mobility for all modes of travel and to improve community connectivity guided by local plans and goals.”
Get email alerts on the Transportation Corridor Us51 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
MADISON, Wis. — The Wisconsin Department of Transportation on July 23 presented conceptual alternatives for a 4.4‑mile study of US‑51 (South Stoughton Road), telling the Madison Transportation Commission the project’s purpose is “to improve safety and mobility for all modes of travel and to improve community connectivity guided by local plans and goals.”
The project stretches from Bogus Road/Terminal Drive in McFarland north to just south of Highway 30 in Madison, and is adjacent to Monona and Blooming Grove. WisDOT staff said current weekday traffic varies from about 34,000 vehicles per day at the south end to nearly 48,000 vehicles per day between Broadway and Cottage Grove Road.
Why it matters: US‑51 is a major north–south arterial on Madison’s east side that serves commercial areas, neighborhoods and industrial truck traffic. WisDOT said the corridor’s principal needs are safety, mobility and connectivity; the agency and city staff framed the decisions around how to reduce speeds and add safe bike/pedestrian facilities while maintaining needed freight access.
What WisDOT presented: The study has advanced five corridor concepts (plus a no‑build) and three intersection approaches (traditional at‑grade, interchange upgrades, and “hybrid” intersections that separate mainline US‑51 traffic from cross‑traffic with connector roads and grades). Every corridor alternative includes a north–south shared‑use path; the exact alignment will be refined with city and stakeholder input.
Notable intersection options discussed: - Milwaukee Street and Cottage Grove Road: either upgrade existing interchanges (longer acceleration/deceleration lanes) or convert ramps to low‑speed connector roads with new signals. - Buckeye Road and Flam Road: options include expanded at‑grade intersections or “hybrid” designs that lower US‑51 under the crossroad and add connector roads and new bridges to remove signal conflicts. - Central section (Buckeye to Tompkins): a “wide boulevard” concept would remove frontage roads and move northbound lanes to the east frontage alignment and southbound lanes to the west frontage alignment, creating a landscaped median and direct access for businesses onto US‑51. - Broadway and the BeltLine: concepts include offset T intersections and a hybrid alternative that would raise Broadway over US‑51; the BeltLine interchange could stay as a diamond with added lanes or convert to a diverging diamond interchange (DDI).
City staff and public reaction: City staff said they prefer alternatives that reduce the “interstate‑like” feel of the road and noted a particular staff preference for the wide boulevard in the corridor’s central segment. City staff urged designs that make bicycling and walking feel comfortable and that slow traffic.
Public registrants urged similar changes. Resident Nicholas Davies said he “opposes capacity expansion” and favored options that make future conversion to a city street feasible; he told commissioners the corridor should preserve land for active uses and not create larger “dead zones” along what he called “one of the area’s few activatable corridors.” Resident Gabriel Hill urged redirecting through traffic to I‑90 to “reknit neighborhoods,” saying the redesign would add about “five minutes to a trip” but would make the corridor safer and more walkable.
Safety and data: WisDOT said it used MPO travel‑demand modeling to develop forecasts and that the study’s safety analysis (a five‑year crash review) identified four fatalities over that analysis window; staff said detailed safety exhibits were posted on the project website. WisDOT staff acknowledged public concern about projected traffic growth, saying forecasts follow MPO and state demographic projections and will be evaluated further during the detailed alternatives phase.
Process and timeline: WisDOT said concepts from November 2024 and the July 15 public meeting will be combined to produce detailed alternatives. A fourth public meeting to present detailed alternatives is anticipated in late 2025 or early 2026; the environmental document is expected in late 2026, with a formal public hearing after FHWA signs the document. The study is planned to complete in 2027; WisDOT told commissioners the earliest construction of a preferred alternative would likely be in the early 2030s and would be contingent on funding.
How to comment: WisDOT said the online survey and project materials are available through August 15 and provided project contacts (project manager Jeff Barrons and Michelle Howe, Major Studies Supervisor, Southwest Region WisDOT office).
Discussion vs. decision: The Transportation Commission received the presentation and public comments; no formal commission action or endorsement of an alternative was taken during the meeting. City staff said they will provide formal written comments to WisDOT in coming weeks and continue technical coordination.
Ending: WisDOT asked residents to review exhibits and the survey online before the August 15 comment deadline; commissioners and city staff said they intend to keep engaging as the project moves into detailed alternatives and design.

