US 51 Corridor Study (Stoughton-McFarland) - Alternatives analysis

​Alternatives have been developed and identified using public and agency input. Coordination with local officials, businesses, and other focus groups has been and will continue to be essential throughout the project.

Evaluation of the alternatives includes:

  • Modeling and assessment of travel demands.
  • Traffic operations analysis.
  • Investigation of potential land use development and redevelopment impacts.
  • Coordination with the public during the alternative development and selection process.
  • Coordination with environmental agencies regarding the impacts of the selected alternatives.

The alternatives being investigated consist of low-build and 4-lane expansion options for certain sections and will include intersection improvements. The EA will evaluate impacts, compare alternatives, and provide opportunities for public input.

Alternatives Considered

  • No-Build - No action taken beyond normal roadway maintenance.

The No Build alternative does not address the purpose and need elements for the study.

  • Alternative A (Low Build)
    • Safety improvements at various intersections along the corridor.
    • Reconstruction of the 2-lane section east of Stoughton, including the addition of a passing lane.

WisDOT dismissed Alternative A from further consideration as an improvement solution because it does not meet the purpose and need elements of the study.

  • Alternative B - 4-lane expansion of US 51 with Stoughton Bypass
    • 4-Lane reconstruction through McFarland.
    • 4-Lane from County B to McFarland.
    • 4-Lane Stoughton Bypass, comprised of 3 links:
      • West link: On existing US 51 between WIS 138 and County B.
      • North link: On County B between US 51 and County N with a sub-alternative called County B South Alignment east of Williams Drive.
      • East Link: One of several alignments that connect the County B/County N intersection with US 51 east of Stoughton.
    • Safety improvements at intersections in Stoughton and McFarland.
    • Reconstruction of the 2-lane roadway east of Stoughton, including the addition of a passing lane.

WisDOT dismissed Alternative B from further consideration as an improvement alternative solution because it has higher real estate and relocation impacts, and significant environmental impacts. Alternative B also has a higher financial cost and would likely not meet the federal fiscal constraint requirement. In addition, the majority of public comments received were opposed to the Stoughton Bypass aspect of Alternative B.

  • Alternative H (Hybrid)
    • 4-Lane reconstruction through McFarland.
    • 2-Lane reconstruction from County B to McFarland.
    • 2-Lane reconstruction through Stoughton.
    • Reconstruction of the 2-lane roadway east of Stoughton, including the addition of a passing lane.

Alternative H has been identified by WisDOT as the preferred alternative (official long-term plan) for the corridor. Alternative H best satisfies the purpose and need elements compared to the No Build and Alternative A. Alternative H also has lower impacts and costs when compared to Alternative B, and is anticipated to meet the federal fiscal constraint requirement, while Alternative B is not. ​In addition, the majority of public comments received support Alternative H over the other alternatives.