If the airport location is inconvenient for Capitol/UW travelers and an Isthmus/UW station won't work for HSR through to the Twin Cities, how about a two stage solution? Even after trains are extended past Madison to point northwest, there will almost certainly be CHI-MIL-MAD only trains. Since that's all we will have to work with to start, how about a downtown station for the limited service that will be all we have to work with for now. Once the HSR route extends past Madison, develop the airport site for through trains and keep downtown for trains that originate/terminate in Madison. Within that general idea, some options for future detail work:
These would necessarily prevent any rapid transit times from any station west of Yahara to points east but the added convenience of acces might be more than enough to offset that. Once HSR gets developed through to MSP, the Yahara, downtown and (maybe) stations would serve CHI-MIL-MAD trains and possibly a shuttle connecting with the airport.
The idea would be similar to the (larger scale) suburban stops Amtrak has in, say Glenview and Naperville, IL. The serve passengers that live/drive in that area and rovide connections to local (Metra) trains for those that find that convenience more important than the slower travel time.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
With all the money that is going to be spent on this project, why take an "almost there" approach when it comes to the final destination in Madison? The airport is on the edge of the city for the obvious reason that it needs to be. The train depot needs to be where the maximum number of people can and will use it, i.e. near the University and the State Capitol. I would hazard a guess that the C&NW and Milwaukee Road took this into account a century ago or so when they located their depots where they did. It is just plain common sense.
As to the number of grade crossings that need to be protected and concerns for train speed within the city, places like Chicago and its suburbs have dealt with this for decades and done so largely with success.
John Timm
desertdogWith all the money that is going to be spent on this project, why take an "almost there" approach when it comes to the final destination in Madison? The airport is on the edge of the city for the obvious reason that it needs to be. The train depot needs to be where the maximum number of people can and will use it, i.e. near the University and the State Capitol. I would hazard a guess that the C&NW and Milwaukee Road took this into account a century ago or so when they located their depots where they did. It is just plain common sense. As to the number of grade crossings that need to be protected and concerns for train speed within the city, places like Chicago and its suburbs have dealt with this for decades and done so largely with success. John Timm
The best compromise I've heard is Harvey's, where the Madison turns would terminate in a city station and the (eventual) through trains would skip it. Sort of like how Amtrak's Keystones used to terminate in Suburban Station after making 30th St.
You appear not to be that familiar with Madison or else you would have understood my statement. We are not just talking about generic downtowns somewhere out of context. Look up where these depots were in relation to (1) the University and (2) downtown and the capitol and you will understand.
oltmannddesertdogWith all the money that is going to be spent on this project, why take an "almost there" approach when it comes to the final destination in Madison? The airport is on the edge of the city for the obvious reason that it needs to be. The train depot needs to be where the maximum number of people can and will use it, i.e. near the University and the State Capitol. I would hazard a guess that the C&NW and Milwaukee Road took this into account a century ago or so when they located their depots where they did. It is just plain common sense. As to the number of grade crossings that need to be protected and concerns for train speed within the city, places like Chicago and its suburbs have dealt with this for decades and done so largely with success. John Timm You gotta read this whole thread. The "original RRs did it this way" theory - busted!. The "successful RR stations in the US are this way" theory - busted! The "Has to be downtown" theory - busted! When you add in all the complexity of how and where in Madison plus the "how do you extend to Minneapolis" problem, plus the notion that most in Madison -even the students - have cars and that most trips will have a Madison rather than Chicago origin, It makes most sense to put the station somewhere that's easy to drive to and has good parking. The best compromise I've heard is Harvey's, where the Madison turns would terminate in a city station and the (eventual) through trains would skip it. Sort of like how Amtrak's Keystones used to terminate in Suburban Station after making 30th St.
desertdog You appear not to be that familiar with Madison or else you would have understood my statement. We are not just talking about generic downtowns somewhere out of context. Look up where these depots were in relation to (1) the University and (2) downtown and the capitol and you will understand. John Timm
I have lived in Madison for nearly 30 years, and my esteemed Atlanta, Georgia-residing rail advocacy friend has it just about right. ProRail, the Madison-based advocacy group supports the Airport Station, pretty much along the same line of reasoning.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Kevin C. Smith If the airport location is inconvenient for Capitol/UW travelers and an Isthmus/UW station won't work for HSR through to the Twin Cities, how about a two stage solution? Even after trains are extended past Madison to point northwest, there will almost certainly be CHI-MIL-MAD only trains. Since that's all we will have to work with to start, how about a downtown station for the limited service that will be all we have to work with for now. Once the HSR route extends past Madison, develop the airport site for through trains and keep downtown for trains that originate/terminate in Madison. Within that general idea, some options for future detail work:A Yahara stop to serve NW Madison.Possibly extend the downtown extension across to the west wide of Madison/Middleton area to serve people living on that side of town or allowing easier access to/from the belt line. These would necessarily prevent any rapid transit times from any station west of Yahara to points east but the added convenience of acces might be more than enough to offset that. Once HSR gets developed through to MSP, the Yahara, downtown and (maybe) stations would serve CHI-MIL-MAD trains and possibly a shuttle connecting with the airport. The idea would be similar to the (larger scale) suburban stops Amtrak has in, say Glenview and Naperville, IL. The serve passengers that live/drive in that area and rovide connections to local (Metra) trains for those that find that convenience more important than the slower travel time.
This is essentially the same as my suggestion. What's the difference if a number of Madison trips make local stops to a terminus at the west end of the campus? It's not like stations to the west of Madison would be affected by longer travel times. Conversely, passengers to government, university, and medical destinations could be dropped off or picked up within walking distances.
One Wisconsin person just couldn't wrap his head around the concept of multiple stations, insisting that the airport, 8 miles out and 8 miles back, would be convenient and competitive because it had parking and is promised a dedicated shuttle bus. Platforms seem to be coming in at around $800k, so this wouldn't represent a significant cost for an $800m project.
http://www.prorail.com/airport.html
If HSR is routed through Columbus, it will shorten trip time between Milwaukee and the Twin Cities while serving the multicounty Madison area. Just increase the speed limit on 151 into Madison to 80mph. It's grade-separated.
And the residents of Beaver Dam won't have to travel all the way to Dane County Regional to catch the train. They don't have the 400 at S. Beaver Dam anymore, y'know.
Why was the Canadian Pacific required to relocate its HSR-to-be line from ADJACENT TO the airport terminal for the AIRPORT parking structure et.al. improvement project a couplle years ago?
Then again, the airport could be moved to Columbus.
http://nomadisonairport.org/
If you want to engage Madison politics, have at it. Will there be a front porch on the depot?
oltmanndHow about the Amtrak California approach? Just have buses meet the train at the airport station and shuttle passengers where they need to go. Amtrak does this for SF at Emeryville. Works very well. Walk off the train, thru the station, onto the bus and away you go.
The Captitols may work "well," but how many more might ride if the train went all the way to Market & Montgomery, AT&T Park, and 3rd & Townsend? How much more costly would be another pair of tubes across the Bay compared to fixing up existing tracks through Madison, even if a short stretch of abandoned row needs to be restored?
I agree. I was born and raised in Wisconsin. If we are spending $800 million on a project. When I say "we" I mean Federal Taxpayer portion. Do the project right and put a downtown station in. You have downtown stations in almost every major city on this Chicago-Madison line. It would really be stupid to have what amounts to only a suburban station for Madison (second largest city in Wisconsin after Milwaukee). Dynamite buildings in Madison if you need to make room, clear the path for the ROW. Lets not have half measures with this project. I'm willing to pay more taxes for a project done right then one done half right to save a little money here and there. Also, lets not have the Madison station be a Mobile Home trailer next to a parking lot either. Build a train station worthy of a city that size. Hopefully the bureaucrats get this project right. I already have my doubts with selecting TALGO but I am still hopeful they can get the rest right.
jclass(Just the points I want to respond to)http://www.prorail.com/airport.html And the residents of Beaver Dam won't have to travel all the way to Dane County Regional to catch the train. They don't have the 400 at S. Beaver Dam anymore, y'know. Why was the Canadian Pacific required to relocate its HSR-to-be line from ADJACENT TO the airport terminal for the AIRPORT parking structure et.al. improvement project a couplle years ago?
Thanks for calling attention to Prorail's talking points on the airport location, which have recently been updated. Their argument for the airport location sets up a straw man of a downtown/campus location, which ain't gonna happen, regardless of posts on this thread. There's no addressing the two near-east sites, Yahara and Union Corners, that are presently being discussed. There's no addressing recent developments in intercity bus service. The pretty pictures imply an integrated air-rail terminal--a far cry from an Am-shack in the far corner of the overflow lot that I predict.
The logical place for Beaver Dam residents to pick up a Chicago-Madison train is Watertown. That city is looking into the site of a recently vacated supermarket.
The CP Madson-Portage line relocation had nothing to do with the airport terminal or parking structures. In that area, the line is still where it has been--to the west of the parking structure and on the other side of a creek. The relocation was north of the airport, at the request of the FAA, to provide increased clearance north of the main runway.
Thanks for the info, Rwulfsberg.
I was kidding about Beaver Dam residents because they have to drive past Columbus to get to Madison, and highlights (like your Am-shack) the mediocrity of it all.
oltmannd The best compromise I've heard is Harvey's, where the Madison turns would terminate in a city station and the (eventual) through trains would skip it. Sort of like how Amtrak's Keystones used to terminate in Suburban Station after making 30th St.
That was what I was getting at earlier. Maybe MSP trains would stop at the airprt or another point "suburban station" and the Madison terminators which will happen much sooner will terminate downtown and also at the "suburban" station.
101 E Wilson just announced as the site for the Madison station.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_d12dc626-8521-11df-964e-001cc4c002e0.html
This is the Department of Administration Building. The vision is to use the ground floor (Wilson Street) as the entrance to the station. Upper floors still get used as an office building. The building sits on a bluff overlooking the tracks and lake Monona, so the platform would be accessed from above.
The building does not have a whole lot of street frontage on E. Wilson. It will be interesting to see how they design dropoff and taxi areas.
My guess is that what tipped the decision toward E. Wilson, as opposed to the State Office Building on W. Wilson, is that parking will be across the street. A parking ramp already there is going to be replaced with an expanded underground facility. Details yet to be worked out.
Rolf Wulfsberg
Better than nothing, or the airport; but without a first-hand familiarity, I'd say the 1 W Wilson could utilize the weather protection offered by the terrace overhead.
Right on!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.