Janesville roundabout plan detoured
Reader poll
Photo 
JANESVILLE A roundabout at the corner of Wuthering Hills Drive and Milwaukee Street is not the done deal it once was.
The Janesville City Council voted 4 to 1 on Monday to take a second look at the safety issues and the cost of installing a traffic light there instead of a roundabout. Only Councilwoman Kathy Voskuil voted to begin negotiations with landowners so the city could build the roundabout.
Councilman Russ Steeber was absent. Council President George Brunner recently resigned.
The Wuthering Hills intersection was the site of a traffic fatality in 2007.
But that area of Milwaukee Street also includes a bike crossing just to the west of Wuthering Hills that some have also deemed unsafe. The council in 2006 voted to build a tunnel, but the cost eventually ballooned to about $720,000.
The city's new public works director, Carl Weber, suggested narrowing the traffic lanes from four to two and building a pedestrian island in the middle to improve safety at the bike crossing. The council agreed to those changes in 2010.
The council also received state and federal grants of $395,000 to build a roundabout at Wuthering Hills to improve safety. The city's cost is $290,000.
Three residents Monday urged the council to reconsider the roundabout, saying the bike crossing improvements already fixed the problem.
Several council members said they have received many negative comments from residents about the roundabout.
Paul Williams, 2426 N. Lexington Drive, said a roundabout is no longer needed.
"I just can't see spending the money and trying to fit it in and trying to solve a problem that I don't think is there," he said.
Serious accidents happen all over, but the city can't build roundabouts at them all, he said.
Roundabouts make more sense in new areas, Williams added.
Mike McCarthy, 4121 Bordeaux Drive, likened building the roundabout to building a fence after the horse runs away.
Chris Ranum said it would be unfortunate that one accident caused by a reckless driver would so affect a community. He called the roundabout an "obstacle."
"I can't see spending that kind of money," he said, adding that neither the city or the state and federal governments have it.
Eric Levitt, city manager, suggested the council delay a vote until Monday, Dec. 12, when staff can study whether the city would face any liability if a future accident occurs when a safety problem was documented.
Weber said the bike crossing improvements haven't been there long enough to prove a safety effect down the road. He predicted that those people protesting the roundabout would be like the same people who on Monday admitted they had doubted the bike crossing improvements but were wrong.
Deb Dongarra-Adams, who joined the council in April, wondered whether the city could put in a stoplight rather than a roundabout.
Councilman Tom McDonald, who voted for the roundabout, said he has changed his opinion.
"Now that I've seen the engineering, I see the roundabout doesn't fit," he said.
"The changes have taken care of the majority of the problems out there," McDonald said. "Nothing that happens out there can't be corrected by a much less expensive traffic signal. I would like to see us pull the plug on the roundabout and move to a traffic signal.
"Hopefully, there are plenty of other places where we can put a roundabout where it actually fits."
Councilman Yuri Rashkin agreed that a roundabout does not belong at this location.
"I don't understand how they can help this stretch," he said. "I frankly don't even support the idea of having additional street controlling devices right now.
"Narrowing the road to one lane each way has slowed traffic down sufficiently to where I feel it is comfortable."

Nov 17, 2011 at 3:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
abc12345
Nov 15, 2011 at 7:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Want to see roundabouts in dumb places check out the Cty X exit off of Hwy. 43 ( 3 of them in sucession ) and the Parking Lot by Beloit City Hall.
OMG- just did it last Sat.
Nav took me off i-90 then made me do a uturn to get going the correct way.
The you get there and not sure what to do because a DETURN sign is there where you are supossed to enter.
Nov 17, 2011 at 6:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
fear.. a little dramatic aren't you? To go from talking about roundabouts to letting poor people die of starvation?
Nov 16, 2011 at 11:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
"Sometimes I wonder at the stupidity!" You said it dkush, but I wonder if not on traffic safety then what is not wasteful spending? I thought money spent on traffic safety would be a wise investment of tax dollars? you people hate public schools, hate safe roads, what is it that you like?
When presented with links FULL of statistics, you rhetort with that comment? My guess is that you just refuse to review factual evidence, and make every judgement based on ZERO taxes, ZERO spending on ANYTHING, YES? Let the poor die, because its their fault they are poor, right? Let the hungry starve, let the elderly die, social darwinism at its best? Is that the country you want? Honest question, please answer.
Nov 16, 2011 at 11:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
ScottRAB- trying to explain how these investments will actually be cost effective to these folks is pointless. You make MANY excellent points that should be considered, BUT, the folks that want no city councils, no taxes, no roads, nothing. every dollar spent no matter on what is wasteful. Trying to make any intelligent arguments on any point is met with the Parrot brigade repeating rhetoric of all spending being wasteful spending. Learn to drive people , installing roundabouts doesn't make us socialist europeans, okay?
Nov 16, 2011 at 10:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Just another way to waste taxpayer's money. Sometimes I wonder at the stupidity!
Nov 16, 2011 at 8:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Maxcap75, if elderly people can't figure out how a roundabout works, maybe they shouldn't be driving. Besides, would you rather have an elderly person drive slow through a roundabout, or blow a stop sign or red light because they didn't see it? It's almost impossible to drive fast through a roundabout.
How would you suggest the city inform the public? Once you see someone drive through one correctly, roundabouts are ridiculously easy to navigate.
Nov 16, 2011 at 4:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
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 16, 2011 at 3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
I think the roundabouts on 59 in Milton are in preparation for the hwy 26 bypass exits.
Nov 16, 2011 at 2:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
The 3 roundabouts by Milton have proven to be useless and expensive - each one has 14 streetlights to buy, install, operate and maintain.
Nov 16, 2011 at 1:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
"By 2025, a quarter of all drivers in the United States will be over the age of 65. Intersections are the single most dangerous traffic environment for drivers of any age with left-hand turns being the single most dangerous traffic maneuver that any of us can make. Forty percent of all crashes that involve drivers over the age of 65 occur at intersections. This is nearly twice the rate of experienced younger drivers. AARP would like to see more roundabouts constructed because of the many safety benefits that they present for drivers of all ages." - Jana Lynott, AARP Public Policy Institute
Nov 16, 2011 at 1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Many people confuse older styles of circular intersections with modern roundabouts. Rotaries are not modern roundabouts. Traffic circles (Arc D’Triumph) are not modern roundabouts. European Vacation was not a modern roundabout. New Jersey/Europe are not removing modern roundabouts. Visit www.ksu.edu to see the differences. www.fhwa.dot.gov has a video about modern roundabouts that is mostly accurate (http://tinyurl.com/3hjrqus ).
If it has a stop sign, it’s not a modern roundabout.
Vague stories without facts and locations of modern roundabout removal and high crashes should be ignored by itelligent readers.
Nov 16, 2011 at 1 p.m.
Suggest removal
round a bouts don't work because the city doesn't make any effort to inform the public how they are to be used safely!!!! Elderly people who have never encountered them before DO NOT KNOW that you yield ONLY to traffic coming from the left!!! otherwise you do NOT stop, there is no stop sign at these things! and once you are in one you do not stop for others entering, unless they blow the yield sign.
Nov 16, 2011 at 12:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
when it is their money they table it, when it is me paying the bill for a sidewalk, suddenly the economy doesn't matter one bit!!!!!
Nov 16, 2011 at 12:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
@ abc12345; Want to see roundabouts in dumb places check out the Cty X exit off of Hwy. 43 ( 3 of them in sucession )
Those aren't roundabouts, those are on and off ramps. Just because an entry or exit ramp does a 180° turn to get on or off the highway doesn't make it a roundabout.
Nov 16, 2011 at 12:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
I work a couple of blocks away also and most of those fire trucks are heading out of town to the 12 and P intersection ( a 4-way with lights). Never heard of an accident at the roundabout.
Nov 16, 2011 at 11:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
udubdub10 I work a couple blocks away & watch fire trucks and ambulance go by all the time. Spend a couple days at home and youll see what I mean!
Nov 16, 2011 at 11:24 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 smaller size of the modern roundabout is what makes them safer and keeps speeds in the 20 mph range. This makes it much easier to avoid a crash or stop for pedestrians. It also means that if a crash happens the likelihood of injury is very low. Safety is the #1 reason there are over 2,300 modern roundabouts in the US today and many more on the way.
Slow and go also means less delay than a stop light, especially the other 20 hours a day people aren’t driving to or from work. Average daily delay at a signal is around 12 seconds per car. At a modern roundabout average delay is less than five seconds. Signals take an hour of demand and restrict it to a half hour, at best only half the traffic gets to go at any one time. At a modern roundabout four drivers entering from four directions can all enter at the same time. Don’t try that with a signalized intersection.
Nov 16, 2011 at 10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
When I lived in a different city, there were several roundabouts in one area of the city and they were constant frustration. When I'd get a call at work from a driver about one of our work trucks supposedly cutting off a driver, it was ALWAYS on a roundabout. Forget the roundabouts Janesville! I don't know anyone who thinks the ones in Milton were a good idea either.
$50 says that as the area around Menards develops further and gets busier, there will plenty of road rage because of the roundabout.
Nov 16, 2011 at 8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Roundabouts?? People in this city do not even know what to do at 4-way stop! Don't confuse them anymore!
Nov 16, 2011 at 7:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
While roundabouts are excellent for traffic flow at certain types of intersections, it is now unnecessary at the Milwaukee St./Wuthering Hills intersection, given the recent changes to Milwaukee St. in that area. It's great to see that the City Council can make a good decision after all.
Nov 16, 2011 at 6:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
theflick - where do you get your info? I'm on Clay Street in Whitewater almost daily near the roundabout and have never seen an accident.
.
donnaw - the curb in the middle of the roundabout is intended for truckers to ride over, it's there for a purpose. There's a reason the middle curb is cut lower than the outside. Most roundabouts are designed knowing trucks can't fit through them, thus open middle area.
Nov 16, 2011 at 6:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Speeding happens everywhere. Do we need roundabouts everywhere. No. I drive on Wright Rd to go to work. I have people riding my tail lights because I won't go more than 5 miles over the speed limit. Maybe people should go the speed limit.
Nov 16, 2011 at 5:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
The roundabout in Whitewater is the dumbest idea ever! Also the 3 roundabouts between Whitewater and Milton. What a waste of money. The semi trucks can't completely navigate them so they go around them up on the curbing, chipping it.
Nov 16, 2011 at 4:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Come on, you mean to tell me the city cant come up with something better to waste money on. Round abouts dont work here thats why they
have previously only been used in europe where
there are apparently alot less stupid people.
There are accidents on the round about in Whitewater almost daily. Whoever started this round about craze at the state level should be fired.
Nov 16, 2011 at midnight
Suggest removal
I have a GREAT IDEA, if we as a city need some more revenue, the police department could park anywhere on Milwaukee street, or Wright road and write speeding tickets all day long 7 days a week.
The law breakers abusing their driving priviledges are the ones to blame here, not the pedestrians.
Nov 15, 2011 at 11:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Whatever happens this intersection needs some sort of traffic calming device. A roundabout would prevent people running redlights and T-boning people at 45 MPH because that is the speed that many travel along that stretch of road. Hard to drive in a roundabout at 45. I used to dislike them, but , I do understand why they are safer. If you have the patience of a 10 yr old and can drive according to law these work very well.
To those pissing and moaning about pressing the button for the yellow light on the bike trail. I ride this trail all summer long with my 2 year old twins in my trailer, press the light EVERY time, and almost NEVER get people to stop. Point being, traffic solutions would not be needed if people didn't drive all the time like their hair was on fire. I actually have been flipped off several times by drivers with the light flashing!! Charges for road rage should be severe, and many who have licenses should not because they have serious anger issues.
I have a suggestion for the speeders, and the bird flippers, LEAVE YOUR HOUSE EARLIER, dont give yourself minimum time to get to your destination, hows about driving the f****ing speedlimit? I swear some of the rants about cyclists and traffic devices are so stupid. While driving in a 25 mph zone you should drive NO FASTER than 30 and if you did and were actually paying attention while driving you would be able to stop for the occasional pedestrian or cyclist ,instead of almost hitting them.
Nov 15, 2011 at 11:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Monkey see monkey do. Other Wisconsin cities have them Janesville wants them too.............You want to drive on REAL roundabouts go to England and Scotland.
Nov 15, 2011 at 9:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
If drivers could obey the law, exercise some common sense and control themselves, there would be no problem. Yeah, I know. I’m dreaming.
Nov 15, 2011 at 9:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Che, the section of Milwauke Street east of Wright road does not get enough traffic to warrent 4 lanes.
The city has already proven that reducing lanes, or even lane width, reduces speeds. It has worked on east Milwuakee Street, west Milwaukee Street (near downtown), and north Wright Road.
I'm a big fan of roundabouts. They work much better than stop lights. I really don't understand the ignorance towards them. However, the lane reduction on Milwaukee Street has reduced speeds, and the roundabout plan does look big for that location. Why not actually study the traffic patterns at the intersection, now that traffic speeds seem to be lower?
Nov 15, 2011 at 9:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Good. I'm glad. This was a wasteful idea anyhow. Hopefully, our city council will start spending our money wisely since there isn't much to go around anymore.
Nov 15, 2011 at 9:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Someone needs to report the real story here - Yuri Rashkin actually said something sensible. I can't imagine that ever happening again.
Nov 15, 2011 at 7:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Want to see roundabouts in dumb places check out the Cty X exit off of Hwy. 43 ( 3 of them in sucession ) and the Parking Lot by Beloit City Hall.
Nov 15, 2011 at 6:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
OOOH! I know. I think Janesville and the city council should take a roadtrip to Oregon and check out their new double roundabout(so dumb). I think there are plenty of places in Janesville that could use a figure 8. How bout right smack dab in the middle of Milton Ave?!
Nov 15, 2011 at 5:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
I too have read that there are more accidents due to them than they solve.
Nov 15, 2011 at 5:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
The issue is the drag racing that takes place to get from two into one lane. Also, bicyclists/walkers/joggers not pushing the button to get the yellow light to flash. As for the intersection at Wuthering Hills and Milwaukee...the intersection doesn't need a roundabout. A traffic light will suffice. However, if a traffic light is used, does it coincide with the university study (I think it's a Florida study and not a Wisconsin study) that says a stop light is/is not needed? If not, and we (the city) have based stop light decisions off of the study, will that require us (the city) to re-evaluate all other locations where stop lights have been used? Again, in this situation, a stop light will work just as good as a roundabout.
Nov 15, 2011 at 5:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Glad to hear this...it was a dumb idea.
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
Just keep drinking that Roundabout KoolAid. That's what road builders are feeding us. I've read where numerous locations around the country are actually tearing them back out!
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
except there ISN'T ENOUGH ROOM TO DO IT.
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
The roundabout has higher capacity and greater safety margins, which is why they are being built in greater and greater numbers. Placing a traffic light here might cost less to install, but will have its own ongoing maintenance costs (remember the city proposed eliminating some traffic lights as a cost saving measure). The city will undoubtedly be building more in new subdivisions, although this isn't going to happen much soon thanks to economic conditions. If the goal for this intersection is safety, the roundabout is the clear choice.
.
People mainly seem to hate them because they're new and different. When they become more common in an area, support improves.
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Did Tom change his mond because April is coming??
Good choice.
Cannot put them everywhere.
As I said in another blog the biggest issue is before this intersection.
People RACING to get to the one lane merging.
Bikers not even stopping to hit the button before crossing.
Stop look and go when it is clear.
at both locations.
What is with with spending a boat loan in this area.
First you want a stupid tunnel because people wont STOP look and cross when safe now you thing you need a round-about.
WOW just think if we lived in a city with A LOT of traffic. What would you all do?
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
svrwthr: Hey it's a start at least.
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
@ johnnyreb6977 yah but take into the account that they are still looking for a place to put one in this statement by McDonald, "Hopefully, there are plenty of other places where we can put a roundabout where it actually fits."
Sounds like they want to put one in just because. The city must have money falling out of its pockets (sarcasm).
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
If they must have a light at the intersection, maybe it should be weighted instead of timed, so it truly reflects the traffic patterns in the N/S directions.
Nov 15, 2011 at 4:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Glad to see some of the city council starting to wake up on some topics.
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.