Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation Study topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

AECOM outlines phased study and six‑figure cost ranges for Main Street–Verona Avenue corridor

Verona Common Council · July 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Consultants recommended a phased alternatives evaluation for the Main Street/Verona Avenue corridor, with initial phases (existing conditions through preliminary alternatives) estimated at $125,000–$400,000 and later environmental and 30% design work increasing the potential cost depending on NEPA requirements.

AECOM presented a proposed, phased study to evaluate alternatives and produce environmental documentation and 30% plans for the Main Street–Verona Avenue intersection and approximately 0.5 mile in each direction. The consultant recommended proceeding immediately with phases 1–3 (existing conditions/purpose and need, conceptual strategies, preliminary alternatives) and then, depending on findings and funding, advancing to detailed alternatives, environmental documentation and 30% design work.

An AECOM presenter outlined cost ranges tied to study limits and required environmental review: "The approximate cost is 125,000 to 200,000 depending on the limits of the study and the level of analysis in the existing conditions," the consultant said. Preliminary alternatives were estimated at $200,000–$400,000, and the environmental/documentation phase could range $200,000–$500,000 depending on whether federal NEPA review is required.

Context: council members asked about using Madison MPO travel‑demand modeling and how the study could strengthen grant applications; AECOM said its grants group could help tailor alternatives to funding opportunities. The council discussed phasing, reusing comp‑plan public input, and whether to front‑load design work or wait until funding is identified.

Next steps: staff will review the proposed scope, consider budget options (amend 2026 budget vs. include in 2027), and return with recommendations about whether to issue an RFP or proceed with AECOM work.