For the last three years I’ve traveled to Madison over the Thanksgiving weekend to accompany my girlfriend on a visit to her grandmother. Grandma Dee was born and raised in Madison, and has proven to be an excellent source for the history and culture of the city (beer and football, mostly). In the course of these travels, I’ve accumulated some observations about Madison that I’d like to share.
This may be the inaugural post of an occasional series documenting my various Upper Midwestern excursions. I travel fairly often but thanks to a combination of full-time employment and neurotic antipathy toward air transportation, my travel is mostly limited to Minnesota and neighboring states. Madison is a particularly suitable city to kick off this series since it has implemented a number of experimental streetscaping techniques. I’m going to start off with something more basic, though:
Why does UW feel so much more urban than the U of M?
The Twin Cities metro is around six times larger than the Madison metro, but somehow the UW campus feels urban in a way that the U of M doesn’t. Madison’s main shopping street is State Street, which gradually accumulates more and more academic function until it terminates at the University’s Bascom Mall. This side-by-side, close-knit nature is in contrast to the U of M, which literally fences itself off from Dinkytown. Only a handful of University uses penetrate the half-mile perimeter trench that is University Ave between 11th and 17th Aves, and while everyone thinks of Dinkytown as the University Neighborhood, it doesn’t look terribly different from any other Minneapolis neighborhood if the streets happen to be deserted of the maroon-clad denizens. The West Bank and St Paul campuses are a bit more integrated with their surrounding neighborhoods, in that they’re only separated by a broad lawn or parking lot rather than an actual fence. Probably the area that is most integrated with its surroundings is Stadium Village, which is gradually being annexed by the University. There you’ll find a few commercial buildings sharing a block with the University’s IT department, for example, in a coziness that wouldn’t be out of place in Madison but which the U of M apparently finds uncomfortable, as evidenced by their decades-long effort to demolish the neighborhood.
But it’s not just proximity to the city that makes UW feel urban – even when you can’t see any building without a UW logo on it, you often still feel like you’re in a city. The reason is right above you – buildings on the UW campus are tall. UW has a cool interactive campus map tool where you can click on any University building and there will be a tiny little sketch of it, which gives you a sense of the heights of campus buildings (bing works too). I encourage you to look around on those mapping sites, because the best confirmation I could find for my perception was Emporis, which lists 71% of UW buildings as being more than 6 stories as opposed to only 16% of U of M buildings (including St Paul). The caveat? Emporis only lists 34 UW buildings, but they list 102 U of M buildings. So it may give a truer picture of the U of M campus than the UW campus.
Besides height, it seems like UW’s buildings have narrower setbacks, which reinforces the street wall and gives a more urban feel. This first came to my attention with the Pres House apartments, only 10 feet from their namesake church, but neither of those are official campus buildings. Still, there are plenty of buildings on the UW campus that are 30′ apart – too many to list here. They would likely no longer be standing if they were on their western counterpart campus; the U of M tore down Wesbrook this summer for the crime of standing 35′ from Northrup. And many of the close-standing UW buildings aren’t as ancient as Wesbrook, suggesting the UW administration doesn’t think an urban campus is a bad thing.
Or were they just drunk when they signed off on the site plan? What accounts for the differences between the campuses? Why does the U of M seek out a simple, park-like atmosphere while UW is content with the complex geometry of an urban campus? I have no idea, but wild guess is that geography was a prime contributor – UW’s location very near to Madison’s downtown and smack in the line of a primary growth axis for that city both restrained campus expansion (UW is now about a third of the area of the U of M, though they were likely originally about the same size) and allowed denser buildings to fit in with the surroundings. The U of M’s more suburban location allowed for easier campus expansion and required more suburban building styles to match its streetcar suburb neighbors.
But I’d like to throw out a wilder guess: I’ve noticed development throughout SE Wisconsin that seems denser that comparable developments around the Twin Cities. Buildings seem taller, closer together and more fancifully adorned – while most of this is within a suburban context; by which I mean what in the Twin Cities would be a football field-sized parking lot is a soccer field-sized parking lot in SE Wisconsin. (A small distinction, maybe, but I’ll take what I can get.) Could this be the influence of that nearby modern megalith, Chicago?
On the other hand, maybe I’m just reading too much into the sheen that often accompanies new sights. Maybe a Madisonian visiting the U of M would make similar observations. Maybe I was just thrown off-balance by the presence of hills. In that case, expect a couple more posts of unreliable observations, including one touching on a bike facility that makes a cameo in one of the above pictures.