KTaustin-Your comments included the facts that you did not know there was a trail here and you do not pay taxes here. I live here, pay taxes here, and use the trail. While I have personally witnessed the flags used successfully on Monroe Street in Madison, traffic on that street does not travel in the 30-50 mph range as it does at this crossing with limits not enforced. My intention was not to be insulting but I believe the comments to be necessary given the support I was reading in the string. My apologies.

ChsMkr, when I suggested the flags I admitted that they would be the least effective... but they would also be the cheapest by far. Yes, pranksters might steal the flags, just like they might paint the flashing lights black or steal stop-signs. Does that mean we shouldn't bother putting in stop-signs? As for night-time, I was under the impression that most people riding/walking the bike trails like to actually see the sights and therefore there isn't a lot of night traffic... perhaps I'm mistaken. I'll re-iterate that I don't have any experience with these flags, just that some people I know in Madison have commented that they work okay. Maybe somebody who lives in Madison can answer whether they actually have a theft problem. Personally, considering that the council already voted on the measure, and that I don't even pay Janesville city taxes, I don't really care what happens to the intersection. Sorry that I'm getting a little defensive, but what you said was insulting and unnecessary.

Can we at least use the iron we get from the 10,560 manhole covers for theiron involved before we have to buy it back at 13.7% upcharge or the 0 charge we just shipped it to china the amount we just sold it for again? We have been doing this for about 8 years and no-one has had the foresight to charge more for this!The Asians community come to us for STEEL SUPPLY!!!!! SO SELL HIGH TO KEEP OURS DOWN!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0TRtY6Kp...

I like the idea of SCREEMIN' MEEMEE girls dancing on the sidewalk to slow traffic. It is a genius suggestion. It could solve two civic problems. (1) It would help reestablish the integrity of SCREEMIN' MEEMEES by performing a community service. (2) The only thing being blown over would be the crosswalk.

Is there any doubt that the popularity of this feature of the Gazette is tied to the amazement of the stupid things people contribute? That being said, I think the little flag idea is the most stupid that I've seen yet! I'm sure no pranksters would ever even think of stealing the little bucket of flags. How about night hours? Would our flags glow in the dark? People-a fatality occurred 3 blocks from this crossing when a speeder didn't brake for an object as large as a car. What makes anyone think they are going to respond to a child waving a little flag?

I would suggest installing the roundabout first, then seeing if traffic slows to a more reasonable level. As a result, the city may find that traffic may slow enough to make the bike crossing safer without the additional expense of a tunnel.

I think tnimmo89 is off his meds today

the problem with this intersection is its a yellow light. most people will stop, but some people WILL NOT. it says that on a sign at the crossing 'traffic may not stop'. watch the cars fly by the fire station yellow light just down the road. if there is not a siren you will not see ONE car stop. someone WILL get hit at that crossing as it is now. plus this debate is for nothing...this story is about the council ok'ing the tunnel by a 4-3 vote. thats not stupid and i wont tell you to go lay down, not because you shouldnt, but more because i dont want to make myself sound like a complete chimp.....

tnimmo89: Can you post anything positive today? Compaining about the JPD on another post and now this ignorant comment. Do you even have a valid reason for not constructing a tunnel?

Here is an idea for anyone that want to bash something. Come up with a constructive way to help rather than just negative commentary.

We dont need a stupid tunnel! End of story. Go lay down.

I understand that taxes for schools and taxes for recreational facilities are different, but the fact is that I chose to live where I do partially because of access to the bike path and partially because of the school district my home is in. As I said, I am a regular user of the trail, and if I had to pay $10 a year to get a trail pass, I would. Most state park run trails are like that.

Just as an aside....while crossing at Milwaukee today, there were 4 cars/trucks that went through the flashing lights as I stood at the edge of the road waiting to cross on my bike.

Like Zoom stated earlier in the post. Reduce it to one lane and the tunnel is no longer needed.

The suggestion of flags should be looked at. At first I was pro-tunnel but after hearing these suggestions I think city council needs to revisit this.

On a side note about the flooding, the residents in this area chose to live in a flood plain. If you put your home or property in a "known" flood plain you need to be ready for what may happen. Don't get me wrong, I feel badly for these people but it is not the cities job to fix or throw money at all of that. There is ALWAYS a risk when living next to a river. Lake Delton is a different story, no one would expect a lake to just washout and take a bunch of homes/land with it.

Funding public schools and funding parks are different. There is a payback when a child is educated. That child will in turn pay taxes, and pay into social security for people with or without children.

User fees and taxes are not the same. That being said, we couldn't collect user fees anyway.

I'm all for progress. I like the bike paths. But spending $750K for a tunnel (remember the $80K already approved to move the water line), when we don't really know what the tax base will be in a year or two is not responsible. The city will also have a huge bill to clean up after the flood. Repaving streets are a necessity. This is not.

There is a user's fee. It's called taxes. Taxes are used for services, including recreational services and facilities. Parks, pools, public golf courses where you don't have to pay $50+ for a round are all the result of your tax dollars. You may choose to not use them. No different than someone without children paying taxes to fund public schools. Here's an idea.....why not let this be an opportunity for those who don't use the trails to get our on their bikes, rollerblades, or feet and see how nice of a trail system we have here in Janesville. Maybe even ride your bike to work if it's a possibility. It'll save you money on gas, help the environment, and you'll be taking advantage of your tax dollars that were spent to build the trail. Hopefully I'll see you out there!

Waste of money. How about a user fee for the trail?

I agree with what is being said about businesses and residents need to be responsible for their own reconstruction, with the help of FEMA and hopefully flood insurance. I guess I am just disappointed that the board would even think about just adding more debt to our comminity when it is in such ruins. I understand a city needs to adapt to times and supply and demand, it just seems like a kick in the gut to these people that are dealing with life altering issues right now, and that makes me sad for them. I guess it was a wishful thought that a substantual amount of money would be gifted to help people in their own comminity. But I understand that there are always going to be the "that wasn't fair" whiners, and feel they are entitled to the same amount of "help" even though they don'e have a disaster at their hands.

optimism - I am not effected by the flood. I do feel for the people who are. I do think the city can help with basic needs; food, water, emergency shelter. I do not think it is the City's, County's, state's responsibility to foot the bill to put people's personal residences or profit making businesses back in pre-flood condition at the taxpayer's account.Rock county was declared a disaster area relief will come from FEMA not the City of Janesville. I also think that even though this flood was unfortunate people who decide to rebuild or repair in the same location should be required to get flood insurance and if they can't afford the insurance they should move out of an area known to flood.

On topic of the pedestrian underpass, People are walking more. Bike paths and pedestrian right of ways are the new thing. Janesville would benefit greatly from having one. All the improvements the city is trying to implement will be a draw for businesses and commerce to grow in Janesville. I've seen it happen in other areas. One town near me did a pedestrian under pass and cleaned up the look of the town. It has attracted businesses, increased home values, and believe it or not lowered the crime rate. These improvements attract not subtract from the over all image of a City.

Yes OPTIMISM, our ancestors did manage to walk from place to place and obviously lived at least long enough to reproduce. They also lived in a time when common courtesy was still common, when a much higher percentage of motorists obeyed traffic laws and when people were so much less self-involved that they wouldn't jeopardize someone Else's life just to arrive at their destination one traffic light sooner. That said, I believe our society has gone a completely overboard in its attempt to protect everyone from everything. For example, a few weeks ago I watched a well-armored neighborhood kid try to ride his 10-speed bicycle down several stairs, each attempt ended with him crashing unhurt into the ground. Since he was wearing a helmet, elbow pads, knee pads, etc., he was not injured and therefore did not learn. He did not learn that his bike was to designed to do "stunts", he did not learn that eventually he would be seriously injured. As opposed to when I was young I crashed, bled, learned and adjusted my approach on subsequent attempts.

Enough babbling:

Pro roundabout and in need of more information about the tunnel.

Looks like the city should step up enforcement in the area until construction begins. THey can take a portion of the fines collected and help pay for the tunnel.

But wait, If they step up enforcement folks will slow down and stop for folks in the crosswak. Maybe then this whole thing would not be necessary.

Just thinking out loud.

I never said I didn't care. I do. I just don't think its the Cities responsiblity to clean up private homes and businesses. Should they help clean the street ways, repair city infastructure, and non-profits along with providing essential supplies like food and water ? Yes. Should that have priority over the tunnel? Yes. But the city should not spend tax payers money on private property unless they have enought to give every tax paper in town regardless of location the same amount of taxpayer money.

I seriously wonder how my ancestors made it walking to their destinations without a tunnel? THe things we think we need and what we need are completely different!!

ANONOMOUSE ~ obviously you are in no way effected by the destruction of the floods. Let me put it other terms....how about this money go to non-profit organizations that are in so much need of financial support to help displaced RESIDENTS. If you don't care about the business district that is being destroyed, maybe you could support the help needed by people who have LOST THEIR HOMES. I am thinking this stinkin tunnel will help them in no way. But those of you who live up on the hill and have no water in your homes, walk on!

It's going to cost more than what they said it was.Be careful what you wish for. And if that section is so bad than why didn't they dig the hole when they put the bike path in? Seems like it would have made more sense doing it while it was built and would have cost a lot less. With all these people saying how dangerous this is it's amazing to me that no one has been hurt. Kind of like the school referendum that they were whinnying about that the kids couldn't learn. It's all part of the game and the squeaking wheel gets the grease while the taxpayers get screwed.

Let the "small dig" begin. Thanks, city council, for making a ,hard, but the correct decision.

One other thing, we have no ties to Janesville and could live about anywhere, but we CHOSE Janesville in part because of the great parks and the nice bike trail! When people have to start finding jobs elsewhere, they will have to decide whether to move or commute and having a great town to live in (including a safe bike trail) could sway people to live here. So just because the economic times are looking bleak, we shouldn't stop trying to improve the things the make this city an enjoyable place to LIVE.

Just this morning, I pushed the button, the lights were flashing, three cars stopped and one IDIOT decides to go around the car in front of him as it slows, speeds up and goes flying right past me. He also had a small child in the FRONT seat so I know he doesn't care about safety! If there weren't people like that around here, the flashing light would be fine.

As for Palmer and E. Racine, the trail crosses at a four way intersection with a stoplight. Not at ALL the same as E. Milwaukee. And as for routing the trail to the stoplight at Wright/Milwaukee/Mt Zion, I already avoid that intersection when I'm driving. With 5 roads, a busy gas station and all the businesses in that area, it is already congested. Adding bikes and pedestrians would be a terrible idea!

3 people I voted for City Council: Amy Loasching, Bill Truman and Yuri Rashkin voted against the pedestrian tunnel under East Milwaukee Street. I am very disappointed in their action as representatives of the total Janesville community. While stopped for the flashing lights, I have witnessed vehicles speed past me on the left and right.

City money should NOT be used to reconstruct businesses. They should reconstruct them themselves unless they are going to give their private profits to the city. The last post sounds like a call for income redistribution. If one business gets the city to pay its bills the other businesses in Janesville can rightfully cry foul.

Absurd. Why on earth would this even be an issue for debate while this flooding is taking place? This money that was ok'd for this tunnel should be ok'd to put forth to the efforts being made to reconstruct the businesses of Janesville that have been effected by the flood. Not to mention that the city of Janesville in a short time, will not have the tax payers money in the amounts they do now to ok such frivelous things....There are many employees of General Motors and their subsideries that ARE going to relocate. Those dollars will be lost....and I am certain that those vacant homes will not be filled as fast as they are left.

They could reduce the speed to 25. And have those bumps that they use sometimes before stop signs that remind you to slow down. I also like the idea of the flags. I have also noticed that a majority of the people using the path don't even press the button to activate the lights.

It's great we have safety in mind when proposing putting in a tunnel. As others have said this is not the time because of the flooding, and losing five major employers and their" tax dollars " within two years. Pedestrian controlled stoplights like the ones at Palmer Dr. and Racine St., clear vision for all at the crossing, speed bumps or even that speed hump make more sense. The trail crosses four lane road at Beloit Ave near Delavan Dr. a very busy road. Need tunnels at these spots to name a few. Nah flood plain not a good place for a tunnel, cost too much. Same two reasons the Milwaukee St tunnel shouldn't be put in, not to mention removing responsibility for ones actions from the Pedestrian and the Motorist. Let's take care of what we already have before adding more problems.

ktaustin: I have never seen them up here. Although it doesn't fix the situation 100% of the time it would help the majority. Is it too late to propose this idea to the city council? The round about is still needed but that is a great solution to the bike path.

There is another option that I haven't heard mentioned that recently occured to me, which would be FAR cheaper than a tunnel, roundabout, reducing lanes, staffing police, speed hill, stop-light, re-routing the bike trail, spike strip, death ray, etc. I work in Madison where many street crossings have a simple bucket with red flags on either side. They are intended to prevent the situation brought up many times in this thread, that one car stops and the pedestrian starts to cross, but another car blows past in another lane because they don't see the pedestrian. When you cross, you just grab a flag and wave it in the air.

Of course someone will argue that it would not be AS effective as the other options, because sometimes a driver sees the pedestrian (like the one in the wheelchair) and decides to blow past anyway, but it's still a far cheaper option that could be considered; not just for this intersection, but for all multilane intersections. I don't walk around in Madison but I hear from coworkers that the system works remarkably well; drivers have become accustomed to seeing the flags, and both sides of the street generally have some flags available since on average people will cross one direction as much as the other.

tjncj: My bad I thought you opposed the tunnel and only wanted police presense(sp?).
You are right, I hardly ever see them running radar past Suffolk Dr, which is just West of Wright Rd. It is very common for them to sit on Somerset Dr.

Just this morning I saw the police department setting up a speed sign at the intersection of Blackbridge and Sumac. I still can't figure that out as there can't be that much traffic there. It seems there could be better placement of those signs. Maybe a particular person kept compaining in that area??

"Eventually, the area becomes known as a target zone, people slow down, and fewer tickets get written."-Zoom

Exactly my point. Enforce the rules and people will follow them. Let it be a speedway every single day of the year as it is now and they won't have any reason to slow down. I am all for the tunnel, that is not my argument.

I agree that enforcing the speed limit may not solve all the problems at that intersection. However, it still amazes me how few peolple I have seen pulled over for speeding in that area. My point is that even the threat of getting pulled over in that area may slow things down. The 15 years that I have lived in that area, there has been no threat. Even after a fatality.

teacher2B: I'm 34 years old, what is your point? I like Darwin, so what. This is a clear cut case that needs to be looked at and addressed. Being 33 you should also know that the world is full of idiots that could eventually take out someone that prides themselves in being able to look both ways. The point is that using simple geometry a person may not see someone depending on a certain angle and decide to go around in another lane. Read down the posts and you'll see where I sited this example 2 times.

In the long run, a one time expense for traffic lights, a tunnel, or narrowing the road are still cheaper than constant police presence. Writing tickets doesn't completely pay for police. Eventually, the area becomes known as a target zone, people slow down, and fewer tickets get written. You have to maintain the constant police presence to get the ultimate result you want, which is slower vehicles. Don't forget to factor in salary, benefits, vehicle costs, etc.

I'm 33 years old and I have managed to make it that many years without getting hit by a car. It's not because I always go under roads instead of across them. It's because I make sure it is safe to cross before I cross.

Moco, your point is well taken. What made this particular incident more maddening was that the motorist clearly saw the lady in the wheelchair and he accelerated without any concern for her safety simply because he didn't want to stop for 10 seconds. He didn't give two hoots in hell about her. It was one of the rare instances in which I wished I was a police officer.
Whatever the city decides to do to make that area safer is fine with me.

MOCO428 - Two or four tickets a day won't bring the entire administration to a standstill. Just put up a "Welcome to Rosendale" sign at each end, that might do it as well. I stopped at the gas station there a couple of weeks ago. They sell shirts with a picture of a police car that say "Rosendale, its just the ticket!"

whoops. spelling I meant idiot not idion

This is exactly what I was trying to explain. What if he/she did not see her because she was in front of your vehicle and crossed out from in front of it just as that idion went through! How stupid are people. Maybe instead of flashing lights a spikg strip could come up through the road:) I know, not realistic but it would teach a lesson!

I drove through the area yesterday. A young woman in a wheelchair was attempting to cross. Yield signs are everywhere. I stopped as did another vehicle coming in the opposite direction. So the woman started crossing the street. However one motorist was bound and determined to get through ahead of her. So despite seeing two stopped vehicles he accelerated. No accident occurred but he passed about 6 feet in front of her and definitely in excess of the posted speed. It convinced me that signs and flashing lights aren't going to do the job.

whybesad: Aren't laws meant to be broken:)? You are right but that won't solve the issue. People will still speed on this road. As stated by many others, 4 lane roads seem to invite people to speed. What you are failing to consider is the cost of writing a ticket. At first glance it would appear more than adequate just to write a ticket. I'm sure that more city personnel handle that paperwork after the police officer has written it. Every time it crosses someone else's desk it costs money. Then it cost us time in court, people will go and fight it costing us money. Even if they don't go to court the judge still deals with it. If it were as simple as the officer writing it and that was the end of it I would agree but I don't think that is the case. Over time all of this will far exceed the one time cost and minimal upkeep costs.

whatever you do to let oncoming traffic know its a trail crossing, there is still a CHANCE of someone getting hit crossing. with a tunnel there is ZERO chance of it happening. an ounce of prevention....;)

Enforce the law.

Zoom, is this what you were looking for?

http://gazettextra.com/news/2008/jun/09/...

If they cut it to one lane like Zoom suggested then a tunnel may not be as necessary. That would be really cheap to do and solve the problem that exists as it right now.

Oh goody, Testerrific is back! You are truly a genius! Why is it so difficult for people to understand this situation: 1 car stops in the left lane of the eastbound lane for a pedestrian, idiot driver going way too fast doesn't see the pedestrian in front of the stopped car a proceeds to fly by him in the right hand lane of the eastbound side. At that moment when the idiot driver decides to fly by in the right hand lane the pedestrian steps out in front of the said idiot. The pedestrian would think that if one car stops the rest would use some common sense and do so as well. Now the city will end up paying out more because someone gets injured or killed.

*****Testerrific, it is a proven fact that stoplights are not as effective what is the problem with a roundabout which is less expensive and more visually appealing? Just last night I saw two vehicles at the intersection of Milwaukee and Wright blow through the red light heading West on Milwaukee. The light was red a good 30 feet before they came up to it, so it wasn't like they were hurrying to beat the yellow.

Traffic lights would cost no where near $670K. There is another story that talked about all the options, but I can't find it.

On another note, I wonder if the $670K price tag includes the $80K already authorized to move a water line.
http://www.gazettextra.com/news/2008/jan...

Mr. Doe-Traffic lights cost more than the tunnel.

>>>He noted how Jack Messer, public works director, says a good truck driver will be able to navigate around a roundabout<<<<

OK. How about the "not-so-good" truck driver?

Another option is to put in a speed hump (hump not bump). When I lived in Colorado they were placed in areas that had a lot of pedestrian/auto traffic. The hump goes up about a foot then flattens for about 3-5 feet then back down, the top of the hump could actually be the bike path. This would slow traffic and cost much less.

The solution to these East Milwaukee Street problems is quite simple. Establish a traffic tunnel that begins at Wright Road and the Mt.Zion/Milwaukee intersection, that extends all the way to HWY 14. Every 100 feet, create an underground roundabout. That way, the pedestrians on the bike path can cross the street without having to worry about dangerous traffic. And they won't even have to look right, then left, and then...wait for it..then right again. And whenever there is a fire on the East side of town, the fire trucks can maneuver their way through the cavernous roundabouts as the "Benny Hill Theme" is played in lieu of sirens. It will be hilarious. And a beautiful tribute to the great Benny Hill.

Good Lord, man. Put in a Stoplight.

Ya got me on the spelling, but seriously, if we go by the logic justifying this expenditure, then why wouldn't all East/West four lane roads be considered for a tunnel?
Is it as Councilman Steeber so eloquently stated they "would continue to cross midblock under even less safe conditions."?
Or is safetey only limited to the designated trail?
I would point out that East Racine St. at Palmer Dr. is "four lanes of speeding traffic with the sun in their eyes", but, there is traffic control signals there that seem to work just fine by my observation.
But, based on the justification given by many, we should have a tunnel.
.
Or, please explain why it works perfectly well that the trail users can cross with signals at that particular area, but they are apparently incapable of doing the same if the trail were to be re-aligned slightly to cross at an established intersection on Milwaukee St.
.
I tend to believe that the average trail user could, without (too much) confusion, cross at the intersection as we teach our children to do.

P.S. I live in an Eastside cocoon, not cacoon. But I wish I lived in Cancun!;)

JohnDoe, you didn't answer my question...WHERE is there another crossing that is as dangerous as E. Milwaukee? If there is one (or more) then why haven't they been brought up? I'm curious.

"But Russ Steeber said trail users would continue to cross midblock under even less safe conditions."
Great logic.
But that always has been Russ' strong point...lol

You must live in an Eastside cacoon janesvillemom.

Where else would a tunnel be needed? Where else are there four lanes of speeding traffic with the sun in their eyes? This is the only crossing, that I have seen, that needs a tunnel. The other streets are much safer to cross.

It's pretty presumptuous of you to think we're not already in the game.

I posted this in the great manhole cover debate of 2008, but it applies here too. Most everyone here is seemingly looking for a reason to complain. My suggestion, to those who feel this is waste of money, is to stop shouting from the sidelines and get in the game. If this pisses you off so much, get informed, get involved and really make a difference. Read up on the issues, attend city council meetings, contact our representatives politely or run for office yourself. If you feel your budget hawk approach to civic government is lacking in the council as it sits today, go make a change. All the griping here is going to do very little to fix what you see as broken. We live in a democracy and a democracy is served best by an educated and involved citizen. To borrow a quote Stephen King:
.
"We've switched from a culture that was interested in manufacturing, economics, politics — trying to play a serious part in the world — to a culture that's really entertainment-based. I mean, I know people who can tell you who won the last four seasons on American Idol and they don't know who their Representatives are."
.
Really folks, it takes work but it is work worth doing.

That's not the only place a tunnel is needed.
Open up your wallet's. Safety has no price.

The tunnel is needed. I use that trail and the crossing is very dangerous. The sun is in the driver's eyes in the morning and in the evening so they often don't see the flashing light or the pedestrians/bikes. Many times I have tried to cross with one or two stopped cars and a third will zip through without even slowing down. It is very dangerous and someone will get killed eventually if they don't fix it.

That sounds like a "roundabout" way of saying something else. And I agree.

With a guaranteed loss of jobs/revenue and a good sized cleanup bill from the flood what are they thinking? This is the time to take care of the basic’s not spend money on pet projects that only a very small minority of the city will use. We can’t even afford to plow the streets in the winter. This city needs to pull its head out of its fourth point of contact.

I've been on that trail. We need a roundabout on the trail...not just on Milwaukee St.
Get to it council.

Janesvillean, I hope you are right about your guess that the tunnel will be well lit, because the tunnel under Hwy 14 is pitch black. It's pretty unnerving going through there at night.

holy smokes... can we get off the manhole debate? Seriously... the costs are the same as old ones, they're replacing them at the same rate as they always have, they're marked clearly to help identify the service, and they seal better than the old ones.... stop with the knee-jerk reactions! Take a breath, look at the facts, then state your opinion.

With the current pending loss of 10k jobs (and taxable incomes) in this city, today is the day to tighten the belt and look for better alternatives than $600,000 public works projects like this. Even with the grant - lets put the out-of-pocket money to better use.

Enforce the current laws that state cars must stop for pedestrians in cross walks. They do it in Madison, they can do it here. Maybe lights with photo radar can generate some funding to pay for pork projects like this, but I'd like my taxes used for something more important.

City of parks? More like city with roundabouts, tunnels, and fancy manhole covers, the parks will look like fields because we can't afford to mow them! With spending like this going on its no wonder we ran short of money last winter for plowing, oh how soon we forget. Well guess what in about 5 and A half months from now snow will be flying and we will have to come up with the money again afterall you can't have those pretty new manhole covers being covered with snow, then we may as well have just kept the plain ones!!!!!

mom2marlal, the article has been corrected to use Jack Messer's full name. I'm sure it was just an inadvertent editing error.
.
mbird425, I don't know where this fear of lurkers comes from. It is ironic that the few incidents we have had related to the trail have been on the east side. Certainly there haven't been many in Monterey Park or along Afton Rd. where it's even more remote or darker. I'm certain the tunnel will be well lit.
.
chefd, you may remember that the city approved of the skate park, but required that supporters raise seed money. It's been a couple of years and they haven't accumulated much (less than 10%, maybe less than 5% of what's needed to get started). I think it's a decent idea but if the interested parties don't have more than a few pennies, that's their problem.
.
As for this tunnel, it's an investment in the long term. I applaud the city's consideration for the overall safety of the bike path. It fits well with our identity as the city of parks.

mbird,
The city looked into that, and it would be even more expensive than the tunnel. Have you seen the terrain around that crossing? The land is lower on both sides of Milwaukee Street. A bridge would have to be both handicap accessible, and high enough for semi-trucks to travel under. It would have to be very large to accomodate both requirements.

Instead of building a tunnel which is just another place for predators to hang out for the unsuspecting...why not build one of the walkway bridges over Milwaukee Street like they have in Madison and Milwaukee and such. Probably a lot cheaper too.

that kid would not have slowed down, i believe he sorta had a negative driving history, so it obviously didnt help to ticket HIM, let alone him just seeing it be done. im on that trail quite frequently with my monkeys. wait til some dill rod who doesnt stop cuz its a yellow light runs over someones kid. it will cost way the city way more and they will STILL have to pay for the tunnel.

Number one.....Everyone needs to understand I am for the safety of everyone in the city etc. But why is the city always ready to waste money on new projects when they cannot keep up on the old ones.

Maybe this year they will give some money for the well deserved skate park and stop trying to take the spot away for another dumb thing....A water park.

I have been on that trail. I ride or walk it two or three times a week. I agree that the cars do go rather fast and don't really pay much attention to the light. There is a speed limit that should be enforced. I think if people realize there is a chance to get a ticket they will slow down. They could use the grant money for the police wages to enforce the law and maybe put up more signs. Spending $670,000 is a lot of money to dig a tunnel and most likely that price will go up they always do. As what I do when I'm going across Milwaukee street I press the button and wait for the traffic to slow down for me. If they don't I wait for a break in the traffic and then cross the street. Just like any other intersection that I need to cross.

Deputize me, I'll buy my own car and radar and do it myself. If I write 3 tickets a day I can quit my other job and cut my commute down to a couple of blocks and retire at 55.

Want and need. The city has to make choices in rough times. Do we really need a tunnel under Milwaukee St. at this time? If we ran our household budgets like the city does we would be in deep trouble. The city just keeps spending and spending when will it stop?!

The point is MOCO. If you wrote enough tickets you would be able to fund the police time. You wouldn't need to sit there all day. Even a hint of worry that you may get stopped would slow things down. My guess is that the young man going 60mph that hit the family wasn't too concerned about being pulled over. If he had seen other cars pulled over in the mornings preceding the day of the accident, the threat of a $175 fine may have slowed him down. The manner in which that area has been policed, he had no fear of getting pulled over. I'm just confused why the city hasn't at least tried that approach.

My point is they could fund this position with two additional tickets a day. That is all the officer would do. If people realize they have a good chance at getting a ticket they will slow down. Have you ever driven through Rosendale on highway 26? Everyone who does goes a mile an hour under the limit because of the reputation the town has as a speed trap. They probably hardly need a cop to enforce it anymore. The position in question can be funded and patrol Milwaukee st. and others areas and the rest of the force can do their jobs.

Several people have made the comment that you can't put a price on safety or lives saved. While I understand where they're coming from, the fact is you CAN and MUST put a price on a human life when making these kind of decisions. For example, we have the technology for a nearly 100% survival rate on just about any auto accident; if you don't believe me, watch a NASCAR race. But we all accept a certain amount of risk so that we can all afford to buy a car. Having said that, I'm not sure what a human life is typically valued at; I seem to recall over $1 million but this was many years ago and was just a figure quoted in a college lecture so I wouldn't quote me on that.

As for whether I'm in favor of the tunnel, I didn't even realize there was a bike trail there so obviously I'm not one to make a call.

tjncj: The problem is that our police force does not have time to sit and run radar all the time. I've watched the local cable channel when the public gets to ask questions to our police chief. Time and time again it comes down to manpower and not being able to sit at every dangerous intersection throughout the day.

You could fund an additional position on the police force by just enforcing the law there. What is the fine for running a flashing yellow when pedestrians are in the crosswalk or Speeding 10 or more over the limit? If the average ticket was $175 and you wrote ONLY TWO per day that would be $127,750 per year.

Does anybody else wonder why you never see anyone pulled over in this area since this is such a dangerous section of the city? I have driven that section of Janesville 3 to 4 times a day over the past 15 years and can count on one hand the number of people that I have seen pulled over. I'm not saying that's the answer. It's just a little odd to me that the city is going to spend over $600,000 to a resolve a problem that could have been partially funded by enforcing the law.

ericbakkum~ if you would take the time to read the entire article it states,
"He noted how Jack Messer, public works director, says a good truck driver will be able to navigate around a roundabout."

I for one think the tunnel is a great idea. I walk this section of the trail 4-5 days a week and people don't always stop when the light is flashing. I don't think putting up a different traffic light would change that. I have said it before, but I will say it again, if this tunnel saves one person from injury or death, it is well worth the money!

MOC0428
There seems to be several fire calls that take the Fire Dept. down Wuthering Hills....just sayin'

we had the same question at the same time MOC.

Yes, fire trucks will be delayed a few seconds going through the roundabout. Since the fire station is west of the intersection, it would be interesting to know what percentage of runs go east. I would think not as many.

Good point Zoom. If you cut it to one lane then traffic might slow down so a tunnel would not be needed.

Wouldnt the round about be located East of the fire station? If so it probably wouldn't impact their response time that much since most calls go the other direction. Just asking.

Close vote. What's the point of looking into the three-lane option later, if you've already approved the tunnel and roundabout?

The real problem is four lanes of traffic on a road that doesn't need it east of Wright Road. I agree with the roundabout, but not the tunnel, which will only get use half the year. Changing from four lanes to two, with a center turn lane, would have been a good compromise for both problems.

LOL @ craigholmes. I couldn't have said it better. I live on E. Milwaukee and I am very glad this is being done. You can't put a price on safety. I would imagine that most who oppose this have never used that part of the trail. E. Milwaukee St is a very dangerous street and something needs to change. I see people doing 50+ mph on it every day. People seem to think that after they pass by Randall it is pedal to the metal. I saw to sport bikes racing a week ago, and my best guess is that they were going 80+ mph. They were doing at least double what people normally drive, ~40 mph or so.

----whybesad: Have you ever used that section of the trail? I drive through it all the time and have used it numerous times. I always stop for pedestrians but not everyone else understands that concept. I will try to explain this simply. Say I stop for a pedestrian and I'm in the left lane. The pedestrian happens to be out in front of my vehicle when someone who may not know why I am stopped blows by me in the right lane. It happens all the time. I was guilty of this when someone stopped for a family of geese by Charter Communications. It was dark I didn't know why the truck in front of me had stopped so I started to go around him on the right only to notice a family of geese walking by. I know people and geese are different but the point is the same. People are always in a hurry. I did stop for the geese by the way.

-- Just the other day my wife and another car were both almost side swiped by an idiot that didn's see the stop sign going south on Randall where it crossed Blackbridge. That has been a 4-way stop forever, yet they blew through it and honked and yelled (you #@$%^& are supposed to stop) at the other 2 who actually stopped like they were supposed.

The point is that there can never be a price put on safety.

I wonder along with luvdasea2. How will a roundabout affect the fire department emergency vehicles and their response time?

I stopped Sunday morning at the flashing lights for a family to cross. Eight or nine cars heading east went through the flashing lights before two stopped. The biggest problem/danger is when three lanes stop but cars in the fourth keep going. If the cops sat there they could ticket people all day, not to mention those driving 50 mph plus down Milwaukee every morning between 5:30 and 6:00.

I live in this area, and I can't see how this roundabout will work on a street like Milwaukee St. If it does great....but what about the Fire Station? How will they be affected? Will this it slow their contact time down? The Fire Dept. can control stop lights but not the roundabouts.

I encourage any of you to stop by the current crossing right now. Stand by the pole, and press the button, count (on one hand) how many cars stop for you.

Also, then, if you still feel like we don't need a tunnel, walk out in traffic and see how safe it is.

If you manage to get accross without any close calls, repeat, I will call this "natural selection" for thinking that the tunnel is not needed.

The council is typical government it's real easy to spend money that isn't your own. I think that money could be spent somewhere else thats needed more like the Tallman house.

How long has that bike trail been there? Is it that big of a deal to now all of a sudden spend that kind of money on it? The roundabout is a good idea and should slow traffic down enough to allow motorists to slow down for the pedestrians. It's just to much money for a tunnel.

There may be laws that state that vehicles are required to stop for pedestrians, but that doesn't mean people are going to do so. The current setup is an accident waiting to happen, either a walker or biker being struck by a car or a vehicle rear ending a stopped or slowing vehicle by a driver not paying attention to traffic. The option of re-routing the trail to the intersection of Wright Road would cross at least 2 drive ways into busy car dealerships on each side of Milwaukee Avenue. Plus improvements would have to be made to the sidewalks on each side of the road to accomodate bike traffic in both directions. The tunnel is clearly the best solution. No one is calling for tunnels in other locations. Most other road crossings on the path are side streets or streets with only one lane of traffic in either direction. And how is the cost of maintaining a tunnel a huge expense? I've never seen any maintenence being done on the tunnel under Hwy 14 because it really doesn't need any. Thank you to those who voted Yes on this.

Thanks, janesvillean. But perhaps the Gazette could do a better job of including a person's full name on the first reference in a story.

ericbakkum, it's Jack Messer, director of public works, as in the previous article.
http://gazettextra.com/news/2008/jun/21/...
.
whydoyouask, first, the roundabout is proposed for the traffic intersection to the east. Second, roundabouts are not for mixed traffic and would not solve the issue for pedestrians. Even bicyclists are recommended to use the pedestrian routes to bypass a roundabout.
.
BalancePoint, that's all well and good, but as a bicyclist I know all too well that just having the legal right of way in a situation is not the same thing as being safe. It would be small consolation to have a cop show up in your hospital room and tell you the car's driver was cited.

Does this "Messer" have a first name?

Could a roundabout be used as an option to the tunnel? That way, traffic would slow, and bikers could yield to any traffic coming from the left before proceeding into the roundabout and continuing down the trail.

This is fiscal irresponsibility. Wisconsin law give pedestrians the right of way when in a crosswalk, so the tunnel is a waste of taxpayer money. There are too many other options to look at, besides the most expensive. Tunnels have their share of drawbacks also - and maintenance will be a huge one. Where does the council think all this money is coming from??

Two points: 1. I am all for the roundabout. They are effective at slowing traffic but much better than a stoplight. They also look very nice. If anyone has a chance to go to Mt. Horeb, they have several roundabouts on the main drag off of 151 and though it may seem uncomfortable at first, you catch on quickly and realize you get from pt. A to pt. B much quicker than if you had sat through several sets of stoplights.
2. That being said, I am surprised the council went ahead with the underpass at this time. Yes, I am all for safety, but if we can slow down traffic on Milwaukee St. and keep the yellow flashing signals, I have to believe that will help improve the safety of that crossing. Its just a huge cost in these uncertain times.