Phase 1 Report

APPENDIX C

Comments

Abbreviated Synopsis of the Written Comments received from July 29, 1998 Public Informational Meeting at Dane County Expo Center, Mendota Room 1, 1919 Expo Way, Madison, WI 53713

1. Strongly support establishing commuter rail in Madison. Hope it serves Madison as well as the outlying communities. Support newer technology equipment. Concerned that commuter rail service to distant communities may increase sprawl.
   
   
2. Taxes are high enough. Concerned with noise and how it will affect the value of his home. Existing air horns are very loud and need correction. Why not tear up track and create bus lanes and bike trails.
   
   
3. Increase in rail traffic will exacerbate auto congestion. Higher property taxes in Madison that will benefit people who work in Madison but don't live here. Forcing noise of freight traffic into night with more whistle blowing at night. Concerns that environmental impact of rehabing the track and crossing at Milwaukee Street and the Starkweather Creek Branch may be underestimated.
   
   
4. Good job on presentation and materials. Estimated cost of the starter system is well within capability of the tax base. Appreciate work of the committee and urge effort to continue.
   
   
5. Many students can't afford a to own a car nor want to, and this system would be beneficial. Gives more mobility to people who can't afford cars.

Abbreviated Synopsis of the Written Comments received from August 12 and 13, 1998 Public Informational Meetings at: Dane County Expo Center, Mendota Room 1, 1919 Expo Way, Madison, WI 53713 City of Sun Prairie, City Hall, Community Room, 300 E Main St., Sun Prairie, WI 53590 Village of Black Earth Fire Station, 1131 Blue Mound St., Black Earth, WI 53515

1. Needs further study. Town of Burke is planning a community park around the rail system for future "park and ride". We need mass transit because the area is growing so fast.
   
   
2. Would like further study. Rail has means to remove some road traffic.
   
   
3. Important to continue the study of commuter rail in the transportation system, and implement if feasible. As county grows this alternative will become more feasible and economical. Support and would use service.
   
   
4. Keep up the good work.
   
   
5. Need clarification of some issues: Property values of homes along railways, and setback of rails in residential areas.
   
   
6. Previously lived in L.A. Would like to see this system developed while the costs are relatively low. Would like to see this done before the transportation problems become unmanageable.
   
   
7. Concerned that the livability of adjacent residential neighborhoods is not being addressed fully. East Isthmus are in danger of owner-occupied flight if needs not addressed. Need to have feedback, and concern with Wisconsin Southern operations and use of track.
   
   
8. The environmental discussion in the report is weak. Unclear about farebox recovery, and feel that development policies are needed. Need to have other modes of travel to keep Madison as a good place to live.
   
   
9. The traffic congestion is getting worse due to the rate of growth in the area. Commuter rail will cut down on pollution, and will allow people to quickly travel between communities. Will provide effective transportation for non-drivers.
   
   
10. Noticed increase in downtown Isthmus traffic the past two years. Use rail whenever on vacation, and look forward to future here when they can ride on the rails.
    
    
11. This is doable provided we get enough Federal and State money. Concern of whether or not we have enough density to make the system workable. If built, we could see extension to other communities.
    
    
12. Would use from Mazomanie if system is built to there, or would use western terminus on a starter system. Need intermodal linkages to be successful. Support compact development, and commuter rail is a way to effect this goal.
    
    
13. Commuter rail seems like a no-brainer. Congestion in Isthmus will be hellish in 15 years. Rail with bikes would provide easier access to people. Need system to support those who don't have cars and can't drive.
    
    
14. Would not need any more parking facilities.
    
    
15. In favor of rail service. Used other systems in U.S. Concerned with grade crossing safety. Would relieve neighborhood during football weekends (traffic parking). Interested in expanding system to Sauk City for commuters.
    
    
16. Be certain of the economics before proceeding further. The true cost of a commuter rail system is much greater than the identified operating costs. On a competitive basis, commuter rail is not economical. The commuter rail system will likely cause great damage to the Madison Metro Bus System. Expanding Madison Metro is simpler and cheaper. Although these comments are critical, the study has been done in a consistent, professional and honest manner. Appreciate the work that has been done.
    
    
17. Many property owners live just 46 feet away from the rail line and having freight trains going through our back yards at night is totally unacceptable.
    
    
18. Agree with the study findings that something needs to be done. Two issues: getting people back and forth to Madison and problem of freight service at night when they are trying to sleep. Need to guard quality of life in Sun Prairie.
    
    
19. Firm supporter of mass transit. Would like to see light rail, but do not know if its feasible in Dane County. Need to get people out of cars. No feasible public transportation to get to job in Greenway Cross area of Madison from Sun Prairie.
    
    
20. Concern that the rail transit would open up opportunities for drug dealing in train stations. Freight rail operations in the evenings would contribute to noise in the night and falling property values.
    
    
21. How will future industrial development be used to enhance mass transit? Are all communities willing to restrict commercial zoning to within walking distance to rail?
    
    
22. There is a need for public transportation, bus and/or rail, in Dane County. It needs to be developed soon. With the rapid growth of communities surrounding Madison, traffic congestion is not going to get any better.
    
    
23. Let the new transportation exercise begin.
    
    
24. Strongly support commuter rail, even though the tracks are just behind my house. Public subsidy is a necessity and is no different from the vast amount of money which pays for highways, roads and streets.

Abbreviated Synopsis of Speakers Comments from August 12, 1998 Public Informational Meeting at Dane County Expo Center, Mendota Room 1, 1919 Expo Way, Madison, WI 53713

1. Questions whether bicycles were integrated in plans with commuter rail, and sharing of right-of-ways with bicycles.
   
   
2. Concerns with livability of neighborhoods adjacent to commuter rail operations. Also unhappy with cooperation of existing freight rail operator.
   
   
3. Need more discussion on long-range opportunities for commuter rail beyond corridors presently under discussion.
   
   
4. Expressed that there would be less problems on commuter rail operations in winter than streets and highways when we have storms.
   
   
5. Concerns that the costs as noted are estimates of the costs of commuter rail, and whether these might end up significantly higher when actually under construction.
   
   
6. Concerns on what the actual annual costs would be significantly higher if the costs of construction were included.
   
   
7. The opinion was stated that there would be a savings in cost of highway maintenance if commuter rail was established.
   
   
8. Was welded rail included in the cost estimates?
   
   
9. A statement was made that we should consider light rail again.
   
   
10. What would be the fare structure for the commuter rail system?
    
    
11. The commuter rail system must be cost effective to relieve congestion.
    
    
12. What are the anticipated municipal cost shares for the commuter rail?
    
    
13. Statement was made that we need the support of the state legislature to make commuter rail happen.

Abbreviated Synopsis of Speakers Comments from August 12, 1998 Public Informational Meeting at City of Sun Prairie, City Hall, Community Room, 300 E Main St., Sun Prairie, WI 53590

1. Have we compared costs of commuter rail with other forms of transportation?
   
   
2. Costs too much with only 15,000 additional riders.
   
   
3. Can we stop this crime?
   
   
4. Has the State, Department of Transportation, been involved, and what is the cost breakdown of this study?
   
   
5. Consideration should be given to the people who live in the community, and the effect of the rail operations on adjacent property owners.
   
   
6. Worried about the existing and future whistle noise.
   
   
7. Need to look at impacts. Keep door open to future, keep corridors and don't turn them into bike/hiking trails. This is an option to consider.
   
   
8. Question if all people will reap benefits of commuter rail, and what type of density do you need to support commuter rail.
   
   
9. When do the actual residents living along the lines have a chance to voice their opinions?
   
   
10. How can freight rail and light rail be compatible?
    
    
11. Freight rail service will increase.
    
    
12. No way is commuter rail feasible. The costs of capital are not included and the costs are grossly underestimated. How will Madison Metro deal with financial impact of a reduction in riders caused by commuter rail? Bus system expansion a more logical way to expand one bus at a time.
    
    
13. Stated the actual costs of auto travel is a total of $.45/mile, the bus system $.21-.22/mile. Only a small group of individuals supporting a dream. Isn't going to get people out of their cars.
    
    
14. Costs are taxpayer costs no matter if they are local, state, or federal. Not terrible to continue the study.
    
    
15. Start to build the system now, and not in the future when the costs will be higher.
    
    
16. Supportive of rail, was involved in previous study. Important to use existing corridors, and it will be needed in the future.
    
    
17. Create bus system to compliment the rail system.
    
    
18. Discussed organization to support commuter rail in the community in the future.
    
    
19. Three previous bus systems in Sun Prairie have failed, so how can commuter rail be expected to succeed?
    
    
20. Road trolley system in Vancouver. That type of system could be used in Dane County.
    
    
21. Person indicated they had commute between Madison and Sun Prairie for over 21 years. Stop lights have been added each year along the route. Rail is an alternative as the traffic on the roads increase.
    
    
22. Need to educate people to get out of cars. Asked those in the audience from Sun Prairie to note if they were interested in a bus system. Explained previous bus ventures in Sun Prairie were not supported.
    
    
23. Is the installation of fiber optics on the rail corridor the reason that commuter rail is being considered?
    
    
24. Recently undertaken service between Watertown and Milwaukee was discussed.

Abbreviated Synopsis of Speakers Comments from August 13, 1998 Public Informational Meeting at Village of Black Earth Fire Station, 1131 Blue Mound St., Black Earth, WI 53515

1. Comments that report did not discuss parking at rail stations.
   
   
2. Did the study look at the reverse commute to the jobs in the rural communities? Critical of O&D surveys as a way to project ridership.
   
   
3. Will this system create more sprawl?
   
   
4. Will a double track be needed to Mazomanie?
   
   
5. Was anything being done, such as rubber wheels or other technology, to reduce the vibration in the cars to make them ride better?
   
   
6. Would there be express service rather than having to make all the stops?
   
   
7. Around Chicago the line has warped development and have caused some of the rural cities and villages to lose their character and identity.
   
   
8. Thought this was to be an official hearing with court reporters to take testimony. We have to hear from those on the other side of this issue. Critical of local environmental groups influence on this study. Felt the ridership numbers were not correct when compared with the estimated ridership on lines projected in the Milwaukee area. This is not a commuter rail proposal, but a light rail proposal. The stations are too close together for commuter rail. With the money spent on this system, huge numbers of free transit rides could be offered instead of investing in this service. Would the County support a non-binding referendum on this issue?
   
   
9. Were the costs of other transportation projects in the area compared in cost to the commuter rail construction costs?
   
   
10. Will freight rail service be continued?
    
    
11. How many vehicles will be provided in the starter system, and how many people will be carried on each vehicle?
    
    
12. Ridership from rural areas will never be enough to get service out to the Black Earth area. City residents want rural areas to pay for city needs. Why don't Madison Metro buses go to rural areas.
    
    
13. How were the ridership forecasts calculated? Did they include other than home to work trips?
    
    
14. We would be inconvenienced to consider commuter rail operations.
    
    
15. Need commuter rail in the future. Need to consider commuter rail (that has existing right-of-ways) instead of additional highways that use up farmland.
    
    
16. We will have a 4-lane highway out here in the next 20-years.
    
    
17. Need to limit zonings to areas around existing development. Need to look at simulation models so people can see what system would look like.
    
    
18. More walking and bicycle traffic occurs in cities with rail systems. This is more healthy.

The text that follows briefly addresses some key concerns and comments raised at the July and August public meetings

Madison Metro Viability

Concerns were expressed about the potential impact of commuter rail on Madison Metro's viability. For this initial commuter rail feasibility study, it was assumed that all current Madison Metro operations would be continued. In future studies, more detailed analysis of ridership and routing can be performed to better tailor service to future demand. St. Louis and Denver experience has shown that introducing a new rail service can permit a restructuring of bus lines to produce operating cost savings. Since a two car commuter rail train can carry the same number of passengers as four buses, there may be opportunities to eliminate or reduce duplicative services in the same corridors. In St. Louis, adding rail has resulted in an overall increase in bus riders, through converting many bus routes to feeder routes and providing supplemental bus service.

Sprawl

Concerns were expressed that commuter rail may increase sprawl. Just the opposite has been the experience of most metropolitan areas served by rail transit. In most cases, the areas around stations have developed with higher density to encourage walking access or feeder bus access. The four rail lines examined in the Dane county study predominantly focus on older, established communities such as Stoughton, Sun Prairie and Mazomanie. Commuter rail can make these older centers more accessible and more attractive for investment in rebuilding and remodeling existing housing and adding infill housing. Conversely, reliance on only autos for transportation and the building of freeways has led to the sprawl around most urban areas and the resulting loss of open space and productive farmland.

The commuter rail lines could also provide opportunities for new developments to be clustered around stations in areas with vacant land such as in the Burke and Windsor areas. Transit - oriented development could be more pedestrian - friendly in those areas with smaller lot sizes while preserving open space in areas more distant from the stations. Commuter rail could also provide transit access to outlying major activity centers such as Greenway Center, East Towne and the proposed ABS development to serve expanding employment concentrations as an alternative to only auto access.

Noise

A number of speakers at the four public informational meetings in July and August expressed concern about the potential noise impact of whistle blowing at the at-grade street crossings. The capital cost estimates include the installation of four-quadrant gates at all crossings to prevent people from driving their private vehicles around the gates. Such gates have been approved by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) as being an acceptable alternative to the blowing of train whistles. Pole mounted horns which are aimed at the approaching auto traffic and reduce the area of noise impacts have also been approved by FRA.

Property Values

The question of property value impacts was raised by one speaker. Around the country, the general experience has been the residential areas within walking distance of commuter rail stations have a higher value that those which are more distant. As stated in the Transportation Research Board report "Transit and Urban Form", dated 1996 , "Rail transit frequently confers a value premium on residential properties near stations." In areas more distant from stations, the railroad right-of-way can be landscaped to screen the adjacent development.

Railroad Freight Operations

The impact of railroad freight operations was noted as a concern. The capital program for improving the existing rail lines for commuter trains includes the installation of welded rail which greatly reduces both noise and vibration. The issue of whistle blowing was previously addressed.

Upgrading of the railroad facilities for commuter rail will also benefit rail freight operations in other ways. The new tracks will reduce track maintenance costs and the upgrading of the grade crossing warning devices will also improve freight train safety. Offsetting these benefits to some extent is the value of the railroad rights-of-way. No costs were included in the evaluation of any lease costs for the railroad property, some of which is already State-owned.