Janesville roundabout plan takes next step
Photo 
Janesville - Proposed roundabout
JANESVILLE — A new roundabout will control traffic at a dangerous intersection on Janesville’s east side by this time next year, if the project gains final approval.
The city council approved a roundabout at Milwaukee Street and Wuthering Hills Drive in 2008. Monday, the city plan commission agreed to the acquisition of easements and land and forwarded the plan to the council.
The commission voted 5-2, with Doug Marklein and David Siker voting “no.”
Marklein, who lives in the area, said the one-lane circle appears to be crammed into limited space.
Marklein, who said he generally likes roundabouts, said traffic lights would have been a better option in this case.
The circle itself would be only 2 feet from the sidewalks, so snowplows could make clearing the walks a problem, Marklein said.
Marklein said after the meeting that the morning commute at that intersection can be bumper-to-bumper, and the slowdown caused by a roundabout would make it difficult for motorists to merge from nearby side streets.
“I hope it can handle the traffic. I hope it can handle the winters. Otherwise, it’s going to be a huge bottleneck,” he said.
The project would create the city’s third traffic circle but the first one in an area of heavy traffic, said Brad Schmidt, associate city planner.
The plan commission and city council approvals are needed so the city can get state and federal funding, Schmidt said.
The intersection now has stop signs for traffic on Wuthering Hills Drive. It has been the scene of numerous accidents in past years, Schmidt said. One of those accidents was a two-vehicle crash in September 2007 that killed a Janesville woman.
The city already has taken interim measures at the intersection, changing the four-lane Milwaukee Street to two lanes and adding turn and bicycle lanes. Speed-feedback signs also have been installed in both directions.
The plan commission’s action was only to decide whether the easements and land acquisition complied with city plans. The commission did not review the financial aspects.
The city is expected to pay $210,000 for the project, while the state/federal funding will be $395,000, Schmidt said.
Part of that money will pay for temporary construction easements and 790 square feet of property from the property owners at the four corners of the intersection, to accommodate the roundabout, according to a city memo.
Construction is expected to begin late next summer and be completed in fall 2012.
What’s next?
The Janesville City Council is expected to take up the acquisition of easements and property for the roundabout project when it meets at 7 p.m. Monday in Council Chambers at City Hall, 18 N. Jackson St.
If the council approves the plan, the next step would be land acquisition.
Nov 15, 2011 at 5:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Much of the data and the publications touting roundabouts is put out by the big insurance companies. While they may not actually reduce the number of accidents, the amount they pay out in claims goes down because the damage is lower since you are generally going slower.
Nov 10, 2011 at 6:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lights make more sense to me. It takes some people an eternity to figure out the round-a-bouts... Seriously? Not...
Nov 9, 2011 at 2:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Frusion, the only problem with that is that the city will want to build a multimillion dollar parking structure instead of a lot.
I wonder if they've considered putting in a pedestrian and bicycle tunnel when they build the roundabout, as long as they're tearing up the street anyway? Or will they wait until it's finished so they can tear up the roundabout for the upgrades later on, since, apparently, cost is no consideration here in the super rich community of Janesville, the billionaires' paradise.
Nov 9, 2011 at 12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Let's close Milwaukee St. altogether between Wright Rd. and Hwy 14. Put in a big parking lot near Wright Rd and people can walk to their homes from there. No roundabout needed and no bells, whistles, sirens, bridges or tunnels needed for the bike crossing. Problem solved...
Nov 9, 2011 at 11:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Modern roundabouts are the safest form of intersection in the world. Visit www.iihs.org for safety facts. The safety comes from the ‘slow and go’ operation instead of the ‘stop or go fast’ way a stop light works (or the ‘keep going fast’ large traffic circle fantasy).
The first cost of any two choices is a poor way to compare. Life-cycle cost is the best (present value of future costs, a.k.a. net present value). When comparing modern roundabouts to signals for a 20-year life cycle (the standard period), modern roundabouts usually cost us much less. Costs to compare include: first cost (design/land/construction), operation and maintenance (electricity, re-striping, etc.), crash reduction, daily delay (what’s your time worth?), daily fuel consumption, pollution (generated), area insurance rates (this costs more where it is less safe to drive). Each of these things, and others, can be estimated for any two choices and everyone near or using the project area will pay some portion of all of these costs.
Nov 9, 2011 at 11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
futurerichguy: It's the cost of the auto-centric culture you live in. If you'd get out of your car and walk, bicycle, or take public transportation then you could complain about the cost.
Nov 9, 2011 at 10:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Well, there goes all the new "wheel tax" money. What new fee are they going to impose next, I wonder?
Nov 9, 2011 at 10:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Way to go city council keep wasting the taxpayers money!!!!!!
Nov 9, 2011 at 9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
If they keep improving that stretch of East Milwaukee Street it will be rendered unusable.
For me it already is. Two 'words'; County M.
Nov 9, 2011 at 9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
gbwbill-Please explain how it will be a "vast improvement"?
Nov 9, 2011 at 9:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wow, $600,000 for one intersection. Not to mention the bottlenecks it will cause. Time to replace our city council. At least Marklein and Siker used their common sense on this vote.
Nov 9, 2011 at 9:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
I live and drive in that area. The roundabout will be a vast improvement.
Nov 9, 2011 at 9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
More money than sense - wait till someone on the adjacent sidewalk gets hit by a car! Just trading one (minor) problem for another, and expending considerable time and money in doing so.
Nov 9, 2011 at 8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
As I said, I drive that street every day and haven't seen an accident since the fatality in 2007. The bike lane/one lane change is adequate.
Show me the stats on other serious accidents there not just the one with someone speeding and dodging back in forth between the two lanes. The Gazette should be able to pull those statistics.
Nov 9, 2011 at 8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
As I said, I drive that street every day and haven't seen an accident since the fatality in 2007. The bike lane/one lane change is adequate.
Show me the stats on other serious accidents there not just the one with someone speeding and dodging back in forth between the two lanes. The Gazette should be able to pull those statistics.
Nov 9, 2011 at 8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
this is a safety issue and a traffic flow issue. so if a good analysis has been done, even if budgets are tight, we do need to make sure the expense is justified, but you dont cancel everything.
Nov 9, 2011 at 8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Look Kids, Big Ben, Parliament.
Nov 9, 2011 at 7:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
I have seen people using the *turn only* lanes for their personal passing lanes....
Nov 9, 2011 at 6:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
In that accident, wasn't the other driver doing 90 mph or something like that? I don't care if there was stop lights, stop signs or a roundabout. Someone speeding at that rate is bound to cause an accident, please don't put that thing there.
Nov 9, 2011 at 6:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
I'm getting dizzy just thinking about another round a bout
Nov 9, 2011 at 6:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Thank you.
Nov 9, 2011 at 4:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
I thought we had a budget issue in jville? Forgive me but this is just more foolish spending by people who dont care about us taxpayers. Besides roundabouts belong in europe not the U.S.
Nov 8, 2011 at 9:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Thewoman who was killed there happened in 2007 as the story stated. Since it was changed the major thing I see is drivers speeding up to beat the other guy at the merge spot. Other than that it's been fairly safe.
Nov 8, 2011 at 8:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
How about drivers PAYING ATTENTION when they drive anď put down the dam phones and other things. Pull out in front of traffic and what do you expect? Same thing with N and 26, people getting impatient and taking chances they shouldnt be.
Nov 8, 2011 at 7:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
After re-configuring Milwaukee St. in that area to two lanes, there is no need to change the Wuthering Hills intersection. The expense would be unnecessary, and traffic on Milwaukee St. would be impeded for no real purpose. Roundabouts are very nice, but this one would be a waste of taxpayer money. Put it to rest.
Nov 8, 2011 at 7 p.m.
Suggest removal
flowing for this and for sidewalks no one wants. At least this location makes sense! A woman was killed at that intersection not long ago. What kills me is the STUPID places they decide to put these things! I drive school bus on Sandhill Dr. on the city's far North east side there is a round a bout at Sandhill and Sandstone dr. where there is currently very few homes and very low traffic.
Nov 8, 2011 at 4:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
huh...i thought that money was tight and budgets needed to be trimmed lately. I guess the money is just flowing right now for traffic projects that are completely unnecessary.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.