Officials plan talks on Milton interchange idea

By NEIL JOHNSON ( Contact )   Friday, Sept. 3, 2010
ADVERTISEMENT
 

Reader pollAudio

Should an I-90 interchange be constructed at County M, west of Milton?

  

See the results and comments

Photo

Brett Frazier

Photo

Kim Hixson

Podcast Episode


Outgoing Milton City Administrator Todd Schmidt reflects on his years at the helm.

RSS   

— As lobbying efforts continue for a plan that would expand Interstate 90/39 between the Madison and the Illinois/Wisconsin state line, some area officials are working to add a detail: an interchange west of Milton.

This week, Milton Alderman Brett Frazier said he’s been in talks with state Rep. Kim Hixson, D-Whitewater, and the lawmaker is trying to spark a conversation with the state Department of Transportation over whether an interchange at County M would be viable.

Frazier said Hixson has invited Milton city officials to meet with DOT officials in Madison, perhaps within the next month.

“My hope is that we can move quickly enough that our project can be a part of the initial enumeration of the (proposed I-90/39 expansion) project,” Frazier said in an email.

The city of Milton has not formally discussed the interchange idea, and it would have to be written into the larger, Interstate expansion plan—a $1 billion project that has not yet been approved.

The Gazette couldn’t reach Rep. Hixson for comment about his current role in lobbying for a Milton interchange.

But Hixson has been a supporter of the I-90/39 expansion, and earlier this year trumpeted the idea of an interchange at Milton. He said it would improve commute times and emergency access at the Interstate and could boost local economic development.

Milton sits two miles east of an eight-mile stretch of I-39/90 between Janesville and Newville that has no exits.

The crossroad that would accommodate the interchange, County M, is the western extension of West Madison Avenue and functions as one of the city’s main streets.

The city’s comprehensive land use plan categorizes several large properties near County M and adjacent to the Interstate as “urban reserve” and lists the properties’ possible future use as “industrial.”

The properties are mostly large farm parcels and are located in the town of Milton.

Top officials with the city of Milton and the town of Milton are taking a tempered approach to the idea of an interchange at Milton.

In an interview this week on WCLO Radio, City Administrator Todd Schmidt said the city would be interested in a County M interchange because it would fit into the city’s long term goals for industrial development on Milton’s west end.

But in the same interview, Schmidt noted that trends in Interstate development would seem to work against an interchange being built west of Milton.

“I’ve heard it said before that federal and state officials are more interested in removing Interstate interchanges rather than adding them, simply because of the safety factor,” Schmidt said.

Schmidt said Rep. Hixson has told city staff he plans to discuss a Milton interchange with state transportation officials “sometime within the next three weeks” and has invited city staff to join the discussion.

Schmidt said outside of contact with Hixson’s office, “there has been no serious formal discussion by city staff or by city officials” on a possible interchange at Milton.

“The city of Milton hasn’t been pushing the subject,” he said.

Schmidt said ultimately there would have to be developer interest to drive any future efforts by the city to change land use near the Interstate.

“The city’s not gong to annex its way out to the Interstate just because there’s an interchange coming,” he said.

Milton Town Board Chairman Bryan Meyer said Hixson’s office has contacted town officials about the possible interchange. Meyer said he’s aware an interchange would suit the city’s development plans, but he indicated that town officials are indifferent to the idea.

“For the town’s perspective, I don’t see any immediate benefits. I don’t know that there’s any negatives either,” Meyer said. “With our own comprehensive land use (plan), the town looked at transportation needs over the last three years, and we didn’t identify a need for it (an interchange).”

Any new interchange at I-90/39 would require an Interstate justification report, which would have to be approved by the state Department of Transportation and the federal Highway Administration. The cost of such a study is unclear, and it’s also unclear who would be willing to pay for it.

“We’d need to nail down what the cost would be,” Frazier said. “But the first step would be to have a sit-down with the city council and the DOT. We have to start with a conversation.”

reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(20)
usaret
Nov 11, 2010 at 1:18 p.m.
Suggest removal

Would be nice to have but not needed. Maybe 15 or 20 yrs down the road, if development in the area warrants it then take a look. For now, put on the back burner.

janesvillecrtitc
Sep 7, 2010 at 9:21 a.m.
Suggest removal

I think this is a good idea. The interchange will cost the lowest amount if done in conjunction with the road improvements. If done before or after it will easily cost 2X or 3X the amount. The distance from the other interchanges is just about right and it will alleviate the hwy 26 and 59 traffic issues, and it would definitely be a good development for economic reasons. This is truly a win for everyone in Milton and Rock County. I am not sure what is wrong with Woody, he sounds more like a jealous neighbor than anything else.

facts101
Sep 6, 2010 at 7:22 a.m.
Suggest removal

Woody I take it you must be one of the other land owners. And Milton does not have empty buildings in its business park they are all full. Also Milton is adding a business here very soon called Penn Color. They are building as we speak. Also some of the businesses in the park are expanding or have plans to do so. So Milton is on the right track. Milton's business park on the east side is almost full. So the city can either buy more land of try and expand on the west side. In order to expand the west side they need better transportation alternatives to attract businesses to locate there. The city already has the railroad which serves both sides of the city. But something closer to I-90 system would be ideal for the west side.

carlp
Sep 4, 2010 at 1:10 p.m.
Suggest removal

Well there ya go! No Milton interchange because Alderman Frazier looks like a young Jesse Ventura. And thanks for the insight into the election. It will save me from going to the polls and casting my vote. Thanks for bringing such powerful reasoning to the discussion.

janesvillean
Sep 4, 2010 at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal

I would rather see investment in commuter rail between Madison down the Rock River valley to Rockford, but if I-90 is expanded an interchange study is logical. One thing people need to put out of their minds is that this will do anything about the current employment situation. The timeline even on just a standalone interchange is years -- five would be fast. I doubt this could be fast-tracked to where it would merit being done before the six-lane conversion. Lost jobs and empty buildings now are a result of the recession, and there isn't much that the Milton leaders can do about the global economy. They can and should plan for the very long term, though, and that's where this comes in.
.
Milton is likely to be helped by the WI-26 expressway conversion. With Milton growing and Janesville returning to growth in the long run, as is more than likely, I believe an interchange can make sense here. My personal preference would be closer to Janesville on Townline Rd., which would be a good place for traffic to cut over to 26 and access the east side (of Milton) industrial area, but that's probably too close to the existing exit. An interchange at M would serve the west side of Milton, the south side of Edgerton, and the north (and west) side of Janesville, which is particularly difficult to reach without going through either Edgerton, Newville, or Janesville's commercial/strip district, all of which are at least a mile or two of slow streets. The DOT would definitely look at the regional effects. I don't know that the COJ wants a northern entrance, but I can definitely say as a west side resident it would be an asset to more than Milton.

carlp
Sep 4, 2010 at 9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal

In my opinion, I would have to ask myself what the actual time saving would be by putting an interchange at M and I-39/90. Driving (east)south on 90, you get off on 163 and take 59 in to Milton. Driving (west) north, you get off at 171 and take 26 in to Milton. Heading south you might save 5 minutes at best. Heading north you would probably lose time by driving past Milton and back tracking. The only one it would benefit is the Milton cops that go out to the Interstate when things are slow in town. Again, just my opinion

newempire
Sep 4, 2010 at 8:55 a.m.
Suggest removal

I guess the larger question is this: what needs to be done to create jobs in our area? There are regular bloggers on this site who were out of work for months recently. We all know someone who's in or has been in that situation.

What needs to be done to create jobs in our area?

zythia13
Sep 4, 2010 at 8:55 a.m.
Suggest removal

"...fondness of some foreign traffic control system." There are very real reasons for using a roundabout that have nothing to do with "fondness."

woody
Sep 4, 2010 at 8:29 a.m.
Suggest removal

Don't put a interchange in just so someone can get rich from development. Only put one in because there is a great need to connect to I90. The Janesville and Newville exits are not that far away so we don't NEED one.

nemesis
Sep 4, 2010 at 8:24 a.m.
Suggest removal

If there is an interchange put in there and any bureaucrat reading this who has the clout. Don't put in a round-a-bout just to satisfy your fondness of some foreign traffic control system.

woody
Sep 4, 2010 at 8:18 a.m.
Suggest removal

Hey Brett, what we don't need is another business park with a bunch of empty buildings. Take some time to look around YOUR city and count the empty ones. Call around to the hotels and ask what percent they are filled. Go out and talk to the OTHER land owners. By the way...Dick Tracy was being sarcastic.

newempire
Sep 4, 2010 at 7:10 a.m.
Suggest removal

This is Milton Alderman Brett Frazier.

My hope with all of this is that a conversation can begin about how Milton will grow in the next decade. An interchange on the west side of the city would provide an opportunity for employment based development. There are a lot of good, hard-working people out of work in Rock County. They don't need political promises- they've had enough of them to last a lifetime. They need jobs. There are a lot of different ways to encourage job growth, but let's face it- some of the decisions made at the State and Federal levels haven't exactly helped the jobs situation.

I commute to work an hour each way every day. I've done that for four years. I do it because that's where a lot of us have had to go in order to find jobs to support our families and I've got a wife and three little ones counting on me. My hope is that the action that we take now will create a different Rock County for my kids when they grow up. We can argue the merits of the interchange and we can even argue if more development is what Milton needs, but I'm happy to step out and be bold when I advocate on behalf of the City of Milton and the greater Rock County area.

And hey- Dick Tracy...glad you like 'em. :)

Brett Frazier
Milton City Council

facts101
Sep 4, 2010 at 6:56 a.m.
Suggest removal

This is all smoke and mirrors at election time. When November is over this will only be a memory. I love how politicians love spending the tax payers money at election time. Using our money to buy our votes you gotta love it.

DickTracy
Sep 4, 2010 at 6:46 a.m.
Suggest removal

The earrings are a great touch in that photo! Really screams "professionalism!"

jv92
Sep 4, 2010 at 12:03 a.m.
Suggest removal

Ranjan I did not see that as a mistake. I thought that wording fairly reflected the truth.

woody
Sep 3, 2010 at 6:59 p.m.
Suggest removal

I believe this is about a couple people trying to get rich from unwanted and not needed development. It's not like Milton people can't get on the interstate and more interchanges mean more accidents.

cynicaleye
Sep 3, 2010 at 6:19 p.m.
Suggest removal

This is a stupid idea. Let's spend even more money for an interchange going no where.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT