Milwaukee is notoriously car dependent and underserved by mass transit—a situation that will only become more critical as the state Department of Transportation begins construction on I-94’s Stadium Interchange, potentially in 2019, and congestion increases on the freeway and local roads.
To solve those issues, Milwaukee County is developing a 7-mile Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) plan to move riders from Downtown Milwaukee to Wauwatosa’s Milwaukee Regional Medical Center and the Milwaukee County Research Park.
BRTs are promoted as an efficient way to move through congested urban areas. At peak periods, it can save riders about 10% to 20% of travel time in the cities where it’s in place. BRTs in other cities typically travel along a dedicated lane in high-traffic corridors, use traffic signal controls to breeze through green lights, include fewer stops than traditional bus routes, and stop along street-side stations, where passengers purchase tickets before boarding the bus.
Launching a BRT in Milwaukee isn’t a terribly new concept. When he was Milwaukee County executive, Scott Walker had pitched it as an alternative to light rail out to the suburbs, but despite having a pool of federal money to expand the transit system, he never acted on this particular project.
Now, however, the Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS) is developing a BRT proposal to send to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in August to compete for grants for capital costs. Until then, the county has formed a stakeholders advisory group, held two public forums last week and will select a route in May, which will be offered up for public comment. In June, it needs the Milwaukee and Wauwatosa governments to sign off on the project. MCTS also needs Milwaukee County Board approval of funding and routing.
It’s an aggressive timeline, but MCTS is hoping to capture federal dollars via the competitive Small Starts Program, which could fund up to 80% of the project’s capital costs, and get the system running to alleviate congestion caused by the Stadium Interchange reconstruction. There are other sources of federal funds available, according to MCTS, as well as potential money from the state, Milwaukee County, Wauwatosa, the City of Milwaukee, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) and the private sector.
|
|
The capital cost of BRTs in other cities run from $2.8 million per mile in Minneapolis to $25.5 million per mile in Lansing, Mich., according to data provided by MCTS. Based on those figures, the 7-mile Milwaukee BRT could cost anywhere from $19.6 million to $178.5 million to construct, but MCTS hasn’t provided any estimates.
There’s no word yet on how the BRT’s operating costs will be funded, but MCTS spokesman Brendan Conway said, “At this point this is no reason to believe it would be different than current bus fare.”
Will BRT Deliver on Its Promises?
Adding the BRT could benefit Milwaukee County in a number of ways. It’ll help reduce residents’ dependence on cars, increase ridership throughout the MCTS system and alleviate congestion throughout the east-west corridor, to start with, and it’ll spur local development and capture tax dollars Wisconsinites send to the federal government that would be used on projects elsewhere. And since light rail seems to be off the table, a BRT seems like a sensible, fast and flexible way to cross the county via public transit.
“BRT is one of the most cost-effective ways to address pressing transportation needs, enhance economic development and improve quality of life in our communities,” said Ashwat Anandanarayanan, 1000 Friends of Wisconsin director of transportation policy, in a statement supporting the BRT. “BRT has been found to improve traffic safety, reduce congestion and create new development along its routes. Investing in this system will help Milwaukee and its surrounding regions attract and retain the best talent and remain economically competitive in the future.”
But more skeptical is Milwaukee Alderman Robert Bauman, who’s concerned about the yet-to-be-determined details of the plan.
“I don’t think folks understand that this is not some no pain, big gain kind of investment,” Bauman told the Shepherd at the April 12 forum.
A primary concern for Bauman is whether the BRT would have a dedicated lane—either a traffic lane or a parking lane—or travel in the same lanes as other vehicles.
That hasn’t been finalized, said Dan Meyers, the project manager from AECOM who spoke at the April 12 forum. He called the BRT a “scalable transit mode” that could have a dedicated lane in some parts of the route and share mixed-use lanes in other sections. Meyers predicted that passengers would save 20% to 30% of travel time, thanks to the use of dedicated lanes, ticketing efficiencies and traffic signal control technology.
But Bauman was less optimistic.
“One of two things has to be true,” Bauman said. “Either the travel time savings is being unrealistically represented to the public or the public isn’t being told the real inconveniences of achieving those travel time savings.”
Bauman also cautioned about the BRT’s dedicated lane’s impact on drivers, who might be prevented from making left-hand turns at side streets along the route—for example, on Wisconsin Avenue through Downtown—except at main intersections.
“I think to do it right you have to shut off those cross streets,” Bauman said. “I don’t think they’re planning on cutting them off, which means that they’ll never achieve the travel time savings.”
MCTS’ Conway responded, “Routing and lanes are all part of the planning and public engagement process that is now happening.
Another wrinkle is how frequently the BRT would run. MCTS’ current proposed BRT service would run every 10 minutes at peak times, every 15 minutes in midday and every 20-30 minutes in the evening.
Bauman said the BRT has to run very frequently for it to be successful.
“If it’s still 15-minute headways despite all this capital investment I don’t think you’re going to get the benefit and you’re not going to get the ridership, no matter how fast it is,” Bauman said. “People will not do that waiting if they have a car sitting in their garage. They’ll scratch their heads and say, ‘I could literally be where I’m going in the time it’s taking me to stand here.’”
Bauman also wondered if MCTS could achieve close to the same benefits by merely increasing MCTS services along the east-west corridor.
“You can make a very strong argument that they can invest in significantly improving the frequency of the Gold Line and you’ll achieve almost the same benefits in terms of ridership increases and travel time savings,” Bauman said.
Finally, there’s politics. Milwaukee County needs the City of Milwaukee and Wauwatosa to sign off on the project in June. Bauman said that’s a quick timeframe for hammering out an intergovernmental agreement that could pass the Common Council. The city owns the streets, so a dedicated BRT lane would raise a host of issues among Common Council members.
“County, you want a dedicated lane that only you can use? Consider it your road. You maintain it, you plow it, you deal with the street lights and all of the infrastructure,” Bauman said. “That will all be elements in the negotiations.”
