Madison Transportation Commission asks staff to draft test of Williamson Street peak‑hour lane removal

The Madison Transportation Commission voted Aug. 13 to ask city staff to return to the commission on Aug. 27 with a detailed proposal for a time‑limited test of removing peak‑hour travel lanes on Williamson Street.

The commission’s request follows months of public concern after several crashes in recent years in which motor vehicles left the roadway and struck buildings along the commercial corridor between Brearly Street and Thornton Avenue. The test would be a temporary, reversible measure to evaluate effects on traffic flow, left‑turn movements, pedestrian safety and diversion to parallel streets.

Tom Moore, traffic engineering, told the commission the crash record includes a range of causes — drunk driving, medical events and speeding — and that only the most recent crash into Motherfools coffeehouse occurred during a weekday afternoon peak. He outlined technical limits in current modeling, particularly uncertainty about left‑turn volumes and how much traffic would divert from Williamson during a test. "All it takes is, you know, 1 cycle or 2 for it to back up and just blow up the whole street," Moore said, describing why the models assume long left‑turn storage lanes at intersections.

Residents and neighborhood representatives argued for a quicker, lower‑cost trial. "The trial closure can be the study," said Mike Tarby, incoming co‑chair of the Marquette Neighborhood Association Transportation and Safety Committee and a member of Strong Towns Madison. Tarby told commissioners a temporary change could be made with signs and reversible enforcement steps: "We're not committing to a multimillion dollar street reconstruction. We're asking for signs to be covered, towing to be stopped, and maybe a warning sign or 2." Jim Kreft, a Fitch Hatchery Road resident, and Theresa Emerling, a Jennifer Street resident and Marquette traffic committee member, also spoke in favor of a pilot.

Moore described mitigation options the city could study, including targeted curb changes, improved signal timing, police enforcement and protective street bollards at vulnerable intersections. He provided preliminary cost figures: roughly $15,000 to install three protective bollards to shield one quadrant of an intersection, and about $600,000 to install bollards at all 10 intersections on Williamson if that full approach were chosen. He estimated a full corridor study with updated counts, modeling and public outreach at roughly $100,000; by contrast, a larger corridor reconstruction (Regent Street) is running about $245,000.

Commissioners discussed tradeoffs: some said a limited internal test would be preferable to spending months and money on a consultant study, while others emphasized the staff time required to design a defensible pilot and to collect before/during data. Commissioners also raised concerns about impacts on businesses if permanent parking had to be removed at intersections and about congestion near Fire Station No. 3.

Alder Martinez Rutherford moved and Denise Jess seconded a motion asking staff to return at the commission’s next meeting with a proposal for a test, including alternatives and timelines. The commission carried the motion by unanimous consent.

The commission asked staff to clarify scope for a test that could include: temporary signage and enforcement, a schedule for data collection (including travel times and queue links), camera monitoring if feasible, options for temporary left‑turn management, and an estimate of staffing and equipment needs. Moore told commissioners staff could prepare materials for the Aug. 27 meeting but warned doing the work internally would require reallocating existing staff time.

Commissioners also discussed potential funding sources for bollards and related capital work, including the city’s Safe Streets for All federal grant program. Moore said small, targeted bollard installations or localized protective measures could likely be pursued under Safe Streets funding, but a corridor‑wide bollard program would probably require larger capital funding or a grant application.

The commission’s direction does not authorize physical changes; it asks staff to return with a proposal that lays out options, likely costs, data collection plans and a recommended timeline.

The commission’s next meeting is Aug. 27, when staff are expected to present the test proposal and alternatives.