USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
Secondary EffectsUSH 12 ExperienceSecondary Effects
USH 12 Experience
Dane and Sauk Counties
Wisconsin
Dane and Sauk Counties
Wisconsin
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• Went through an extensive public/agency involvement process 1991 to 1995– Study committees with governments and
agencies (before they were popular)– Project scoping meetings– Township coordination meetings– Public Involvement Meetings– Interaction with ALL agencies
94
90 39
12
12
151
18
1451
14
60
Madison
Fitchburg
Middleton
Sauk City
151
18
18 Mile Project Corridor
• DOT wanted to improve a 2-lane rural roadway radiating from the Madison Metropolitan Area to a 4-lane expressway (Dane County)
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• Focus of concern was agricultural impacts to this corridor lined with dairy farms.
• Because of this, on-alignment alternatives were favored to reduce farm severances
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• 1993 Ho-Chunk Bingo Hall lies on USH 12 – 2 miles south of Interstate
90/94
– 20 miles north of Sauk City
– 40 miles north of Madison
• 1993 Changes in legislation allow Bingo Hall to convert to Casino– Traffic Volumes
Dramatically Increase
94
90 39
12
12
151
18
14
51
51
14
60
33
BarabooWest
Madison
Fitchburg
Middleton
Lake Delton
Sauk City
151
NORTH
18
Baraboo
Ho Chunk Casino
I 90/94
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• 1994 DOT initiates EIS for 11 mile portion of USH 12 south of interstate (Sauk County)– Leaves an 11 mile segment of
unimproved roadway between two projects
• 1995 DOI letter cites segmentation
• DOT answers by including impacts of whole corridor in the EIS for both projects– Even for roadway portion not
going to be improved for 20 years
94
90 39
12
12
151
18
51
51
14
60
33
BarabooWest
Madison
Fitchburg
Middleton
Lake Delton
Sauk City
151
NORTH
18
Baraboo
Ho Chunk Casino
I 90/94
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
Background
• Dane County DEIS released in 1995– Almost all supported a four-lane
improvement on existing alignment
• Sauk County DEIS released in 1996– 5 different alignments investigated,
both on and off-alignment
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
Baraboo Range National Natural Landmark!!!!
• Quartzite Range• 27 miles long• 14 miles wide• South Range• Largest block of
unfragmented forest in the Mid-west
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Illinois
Indiana
Driftless Plains District
Sand Plains District
Moraines District
Southern Minnesota andWisconsin SavannaEcoregion
Baraboo HillsBioreserve
NORTH
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
Sea Bottom Sand Deposits Compress to Form QuartziteSea Bottom Sand Deposits Compress to Form Quartzite
Quartzite Then Buckles UpwardQuartzite Then Buckles Upward
Submerged Again by Sea Waters, Sediments are Again Deposited and Eventually Form Sandstone and Limestone
Submerged Again by Sea Waters, Sediments are Again Deposited and Eventually Form Sandstone and Limestone
Erosion Exposes Quartzite HillsErosion Exposes Quartzite Hills
Glacier Furthur Erodes Quartzite Bluffs and Leaves Gravel, Sand, Silt and Clay Deposits as it Melts
North Range
South Range
BarabooValley
Glacier Furthur Erodes Quartzite Bluffs and Leaves Gravel, Sand, Silt and Clay Deposits as it Melts
North Range
South Range
BarabooValley
1
2
3
4
5
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
Reedsburg
Baraboo Hills
Wisconsin Rive
r
Wisconsin River
Sauk City
Lake Delton
Baraboo
Begin Project
End Project
N O R T H
• Clear-cut in early 1900’s• Steep slopes and rocky soils
limited agricultural use• Steep slopes and rocky soils
limited septic systems• Lack of development allowed
reforestation• Home to many T&E species
(particularly neo-tropical birds• “Last Great Place” by Nature
Conservancy• National Natural Landmark• Most of land still privately
owned
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• New secondary effects concerns• With a four-lane roadway – BRNNL more
attractive to live in for Madison commuters• A regulatory agency asked for quantitative
analysis of how improvement would affect BRNNL– How many new commuters (2nd Effect)– How many locate in BRNNL (2nd Effect)– How the new households would affect T&E
species (3rd Effect)
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• DOT promptly started a review– (Project on Fast Track)
• Three quantitative analysis started:– Gravity-type– Commuter Shed Review– Highway Type vs. Community Growth
Resulted in Increasing DOA projections
• Qualitative review of effects to T&E species also initiated
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Travel Time
Travel Time vs. Percent CommutingUSH 12 Corridor
Gravity-type Model
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
Henrietta
Woodland LaValle Winfield Dellona
Westford IrontonReedsburg
ExcelsiorDelton
Baraboo
Fairfield
Greenfield
Lewiston
Rockbridge
Willow Washington
Westfie ld
Rich land Ithaca
BearCreek
Franklin Honey
Creek
Sumpter
Merrimac
Caledonia
FortWinnebago
Marcellon
Dekorra
Westpoint LodiArlington
Troy
Spring Green
BuenaVistaOrion
Pulaski ClydeWyoming Arena
BlackEarth
Prai rie
Du Sac
Mazomanie
RoxburyDane
Berry Springfield
Vermont CrossPlains
Highland Dodgeville
Ridgeway
Pacific
ScottRandolf
Fox Lake
Trenton
WestfordCourtlandSpringvaleWyocena
Lowville Otsego
FountainPrai rie
SalamusBeaverDam
LowellElba
Columbus
HamdenLeeds
Vienna
DeForest
Bristol York
Fortland
Shie lds
WaterlooMedinaSunPrai rie
BurkeWestport
Milford
LakeMills Azta lanDeerfield
CottageGrove
Dunn
PleasantSprings Christian
Parkland Jefferson
Koshkanong
MiltonFultonPorter
DunkirkRutland
Janesville
Rock
Harmont
LaPrairie
Lima
Johnstown
Clinton
Plymounth
SpringValley
Magnolia
Union
Center
Oregon
Brooklyn
MountPleasant
DecaturSylvester
Exeter
Montrose
Verona
Springdale
Primrose
NewGlarus
Washington
Monroe
Eden
Linden
Mifflin
MineralPoint
WillowSpringsKendall
Belmont
ElkGrove Seymour
Darlington
Fayette
Lamont
Wiota Jordan
Adams
Argyle
Blanchard
Waldwick
Moscow
Berry
BlueMoundBrigham
York
Reedsburg
SaukCity
RichlandCenter
YubaCazenova
LimeRidge
RockSprings
LakeDelton
Baraboo
Freedom
Plain
Lone Rock
Avoca
Highland
Portage
Poynette
Pardeeville
Dane
LaValle
Dodgeville
SunPrairie
Loganville
Linden
Fitchburg
Madison
NewGlarus
MineralPoint
Darlinton
Monroe BrodheadOrfordville
Janesville
FortAtkinson
Jefferson
LakeMills
Edgerton
Stoughton
CottageGrove
MarshallWaterloo
Columbus
Watertown
Doyleston
WaunakeeCross Plains
MountHoreb
Verona
BlueMound
Argyle
Hollandale
Barneveld
Ridgeway
Belmont
DeForest
Rio
Lowell
Albany
Albany
Footville
Milton
Evansville
Mazomanie
ArenaSpringGreen
Middleton
20%
10%30%
40%
5%
50%
Madison
Commuter Shed Analysis
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
Population Change1990-2020
Year1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
60,000 } 4% InfluenceRange
WDOAProjections
100% ofWDOA
104% ofWDOA
BasePopulation
4 % More Populationwith 4-lane HighwayImprovements
WDOA 1990-2005
WDOA 2005- 2020
Change in DOA Projections
54% more population growth than projected
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• 167 acres of more residential development in BRNNL
• 28 caused by highway improvement
• 120 page analysis listed in SDEIS
• Allocated development to areas most susceptible to development to determine effect to T&E species
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
Impacted Forest InteriorsAssuming Development ofSusceptible Areas
Forest Interior Areas (300m from Edge)
Impacted Forest Interiors if SusceptibleAreas were Fully Developed
N O R T H
DEVIL’SLAKE
Forest InteriorConverted to Edge
CTH W
Ski Hi Rd.CTH PF
Tower
Pointof
Rocks
Valley View
SeelyLake
Not to Scale
Denzer
ApproximateBRNNLBoundary
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History• Agencies were skeptical
– Believed effects would be much greater– EPA threatened an EU rating
• EPA commissioned their own study from Argonne Labs
• Argonne Report extremely critical of quantitative methods used– Report seemed to advocate more rigorous use of
Gravity Model (emphasis on commuters)
• Criticisms of qualitative analysis to T&E species were modest
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• DOT responded:– Review of historical changes in land
use in the BRNNL– Supplemental quantitative analysis
focusing on Gravity model.– Released a Supplemental DEIS for
Sauk county USH 12
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
HistoryHistorical Land Use change in BRNNL(From Satellite photographs)
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1962 1992 2020
YEAR
AC
RE
S
Residential
(Projected withcurrent trends and
preservation efforts)
Shrub / Other
Forest Edge
Forest Interior
Agricultural
Residential area (at 2.24 acres perdwelling) includes 1,180 acres dueto DOA growth projections and 85acres attributed to USH 12
Fragmentation (at 8 acres perdwelling) includes 1,170 acresdue to DOA growth projectionsand 310 acres attributed to USH 12
Forest Interior Actually Increased from 1962 to 1992!
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
History
• Supplemental Gravity Analysis– 12 different models performed– All indicated a change in commuters of 13
to 28 more commuters from BRNNL due to improved highway times
• Agencies (DATCP) critical of analysis– Said it only considered effect of commuter,
and not local growth
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 MOA
• Phased Construction in Dane County– 1999 Preliminary work only– 200-2001 Construct northern portion– 2002-2003 Grading, no pavement in southern
portion– 2004 Construction of Middleton Bypass
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 MOA
• Access Control and Adjoining Land Divisions– 30% fewer access points as compared to
current roadway– 500 foot control of access along local roads– 1000 foot control of access along State and
County roads
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 MOA
• Commuter Rail/Transit Alternatives Study to be completed
• Fund 50% of PE for locally preferred alternative for commuter rail/transit study.
• Secondary Land Use Impact Methodology– Survey state of art modeling techniques– Provide guidelines for use of models– Identify improvement needed in models
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 MOA
• BRNNL Protection Fund– $5 million for purchase of land or
development rights in Baraboo Range– Legislature not amused, passed bill that
development rights can only be purchased within ½ mile of highway Right-of-Way
• Preservation outside BRNNL– $5 million for development rights in Dane and
Sauk Counties– Local Planning Assistance
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 MOA
• Ice Age National Scenic Trail– Grade Separated Crossings– Transportation Enhancement aid
• Play nice together provisions
• Meet biannually to discuss status of MOA
• One original signer left, considers himself to be the conscious of the MOA
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
Availability and Cost of
Land
EconomicClimate
TransportationNetwork
PerceivedQuality of
Life
Other
PopulationIncrease
DevelopmentNeed
ComprehensiveZoning andLand Use
Planning AsAdministered
By LocalGovernmental
Jurisdiction
StateAdministeredRegulations
Such As SewerRestrictions,Water Way
Restrictions,and AccessRestrictions
Development
Factors CreatingDevelopment Need
FactorsControllingDevelopment
Land Use Development in Wisconsin
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects
USH 12 – Secondary EffectsUSH 12 – Secondary Effects