yada, the memo from the Director of Public Works is here:
http://www.ci.janesville.wi.us/weblink7/...
.
On p. 6, it states, "An overpass has been suggested. However, the contours, in combination with ADA regulations, make this unfeasible." In other words, they would have to build ramps from BELOW the level of the street, up to high ABOVE the street, that would accommodate wheelchair use. (This is the same standard the new ped/bike bridges in Madison are built to.) The extra elevation change of coming from below street level would increase the expense to more than a tunnel. Suggesting that a bridge is "a fraction of the cost" shows you're not really paying attention. Indeed, the most recent bridge built by Madison over Aberg Ave. (four lanes and a median) for the Starkweather bike path cost $2.7 million.
http://www.cityofmadison.com/news/view.c...

Why is it than when anyone criticizes the way this city operates someone always feels a need to invite that person to just leave?

I was born here and have lived half of my life here. I have as much right to this city and my opinions as anyone else. Not only that, I have the right, and even the responsibility to call for change when and where I see the need. This entire country is rife with the same attitude. How many times have we heard, "If you don't like this country then get out?"

No thank you, I prefer to fix what is broken rather than be chased away by a few who are afraid of change.

If indeed 5 out 6 drivers are speeders than that is tacit proof that the speed limits are too low. Traffic engineers use the 85 percentile speed to determine a reasonable speed limit on a roadway. That means the speed limit should be set at a speed that 85% of drivers would not feel comfortable exceeding. By that logic then only 15% of drivers should feel compelled to speed. That's a number much more easily dealt with via law enforcement. If speed limits are set unreasonably low, most drivers will ignore the posted limit and travel at a speed they feel is safe. This creates a conflict between those following the posted limit and faster traffic. It will lead to longer lines of traffic with fewer gaps for pedestrian crossing. Setting the speed limit too low creates a false sense of security for pedestrians, increased traffic accidents, and traffic congestion.

I am an avid user of our trail system. Even when I lived elsewhere, I would make a point to use the Janesville trails when I was in town visiting. We have a huge asset in our trail system. One can transverse the entire city with only a couple of dangerous road crossings. That's pretty good, and a lot more than most cities this size or larger can boast.

That said, we shouldn't disrupt the business of this city in order to make minor improvments to our leisure facilities. According to the City's webpage over 11,000 vehicles travel Milwaukee St. each day. They deserve some consideration also.

I like the spin they put on this. Saving $385K? They must be using Obumma's logic for the stimulus plan. I feel richer already. Now I can afford the $40 illegal tax increase for having my garbage picked up. Whoops - I meant perfectly legal FEE.

Could someone tell me why they could not build a footbridge over the road like the many all over Madison? There are many different types of these bridges for pedestrians and bikes, etc that I've seen and they could be built for a fraction of the cost of a tunnel.

Another purpose of the bike lanes installed on north Wright Road and the downtown end of East Milwaukee Street is to slow vehicle traffic. It works. Wide open roads give drivers a false sense of safety, and they speed. That's what happens now on East Milwaukee Street, but the amount of traffic on Milwaukee, east of Wright Road, doesn't justify four lanes.

All this info came from the city, in an article a year or more ago in the Gazette. It would be nice for the Gazette to report why the changes work, with info from the city planning experts. People actually go to college for this stuff. Instead, we have articles about silly suggestions from the city council.

"As far as putting more bike lanes in.... the ones they allready have on other streets are hardly used."
I hardly see the city's fire trucks being used, either. Bike lanes are apart of public safety, like the FD. The reason few use them now is because they are not well connected. Residential areas need to be connected with businesses and schools. Make more and connect them and they will be used.

It is hard for sheeples to understand. Go around.

'In regards to the round about, will the speed limit be reduced when leading up to it? I remember my first encounter with one on a Madison side street...it didn't go very well for my car at all'

yield, look left an go a bit tricky for ya??;)

Simple solution........ Put stop lights at wuthering hills and milwaukee street. Also the lights at the crosswalk should be constantly flashing. ( I think it means caution??). Also motorists and pedestrians should wake up and follow some rules that have been around a long time. As far as putting more bike lanes in.... the ones they allready have on other streets are hardly used. We need a better solution on how things are decided in this city!!!!!!

gravitylens...Move to Chicago or go to a race track to do your "moving around" this is a City not an interstate ...... slower is ALWAYS better than faster when it comes to in town driving...ask the parents of children or children of elderly parents or walkers or bike riders....if you feel the need for speed do it where it is appropriate, not in the city....And for as few "hay wagoners" I see in town there are 5 speeders.

I can't believe how many people think it necessary to slow traffic down. This city crawls! There are a lot of cities where the speed limit on Milwaukee would be 45--driveways or not. Plenty of people obey our speed limits with zeal, I routinely get stuck behind people going five or ten under. People also seem to like slowing down for a turn two or three blocks in advance, and thanks to the slow sweeping hay wagon turns everyone likes to make your chance to get around them evaporates along with your will to live.

Let's just enforce the laws we have and get moving out there. Travel through this city doesn't need to be any more convoluted than it is. Give me a Chicago commute any day.

And yes, round abouts are not a GOOD thing. Maybe a usage controlled light on Wuthering Hills & Milwaukee would help with that problem and SLOWWWWWWWWWW some people down too.

And while they are at it, why not lower the speed limit to 25mph on Milwaukee all the way to HWY 14? It's a residential area with bike path, schools and a fire station entrance/exit.
I walk and/or bike ride & drive that stretch everyday...VERY FEW follow the speed limit now.
..the fact that the speed INCREASES to 35 mph before the fire dept exit is just plain stupid.

Janesvillian: Do you remember when East Milwaukee was originally converted to four lanes? I can't remember. Bill Truman certainly seems to think that it's a mistake going back to two...but I'm with you on this. There are times when E. Milwaukee Street is busy...but I don't believe the traffic flow warrants four lanes.
+
In regards to the round about, will the speed limit be reduced when leading up to it? I remember my first encounter with one on a Madison side street...it didn't go very well for my car at all.
+
I am glad that the council finally put this issue to rest. Although I think they made the right choice by deciding against the tunnel, I also think they made it for the wrong reasons. It seems to me that the only reason those who originally voted for the tunnel ended up changing their minds is because of financial concerns. While economic hardship should be taken into consideration, there are many other important factors that I think are just as important. There is absolutely no evidence that this intersection is any more dangerous than any other crossing in the city. None. There may be "potential," but I think it can be argued that that same potential exists anywhere. Both trail users and drivers need to be more careful. Furthermore, building a tunnel sends a loud message to both inattentive drivers and irresponsible cyclists that their behavior is acceptable, that instead of having to take responsibility the city will find a way to avoid the negative consequences of your actions.

Let me put this in big letters for those who need it: A BRIDGE WOULD COST EVEN MORE THAN A TUNNEL. Sheesh.
.
Also, "just enforcing" costs more than building something that improves safety passively. Traffic engineers DO think a lot about how these things work and it's always better to have something that in its very design encourages mutually respectful behavior between two modes of travel. This is thinking SMARTER, as opposed to glib "why don't they just X" answers that are quite popular on these comment threads.

Before anyone decides to jump on the round-about bandwagon, they should take a trip up to the Ho-Chunk casino and see what a debacle round-abouts are, especially in a medium/high traffic, medium speed area of road. What a waste of time and money. While we are out to screw up our thoroughfares, maybe we could implement the big red bike boxes like Madison, or if we're lucky enough we can have another set of bike lanes like lower E. Milwaukee. You know the kind that just suddenly begin and suddenly end, with absolutely no thought process put into them. Why is it, we always try to over-analyze the situation? How about we put in red-flashing lights, that constitute a stop sign, and then have our police enforce the laws and give out some tickets to those who don't want to follow the laws. But then again, that would be too easy.

Making bikers or walkers/runners travel down to the controlled intersection is a horrible suggestion for those who have said to just do that. There are driveways into businesses and that is by far one of the most dangerous situations-inattentive drivers turning into a drive way hitting a biker or walker on the right of them.
I was in favor of the tunnel, mostly for selfish reasons (my family are very regular users of the trail). I have had several near misses at this crossing and am always very careful and always stop to press the button. The main safety concern is the 4 lanes of traffic. At least now I won't have to worry about the a** who cut over to the far outside lane to pass a stopped vehicle while I was crossing a few weeks ago.

With all the people unemployed in Janesville why don't they just hire a couple of crossing guards for the stupid people that don't know how to cross the road. This is got to cost a lot less that the island option. Lets do the math two people a day, eight hours at minimum wage......

EMMO46 - there are certain days that I'd rather take my chances at the trail crossing than at the intersection of Wright and Milwaukee. The bike lanes end end going into the intersection and you're left in "no mans land" for a bit until traffic allows you to get to the side of the road (if they see you or bother to let you that is).

I'm glad the council finally decided something and will have the city move forward with improvements. I'm still waiting for the roundabout where my friends wife lost her life. A vote of yes is one thing. Implementing the "yes" has been the difficult part on E. Milwaukee Street.

Make the decisions, have the city make the improvements and move on. Thank you for the vote of yes...

chrystol beat me to it,
Madison has bike and pedestrian bridges that cross over the beltline in Madison, why can't that be instituted here, we would probably then still receive the grant $$$$.

mastadon, bikes have exactly the same rights as other vehicles everywhere on the road. They are not required to use the bike lanes, but if they enter the vehicular traffic lanes they must obey all traffic laws. When I "take the lane" I center myself for visibility and signal robustly. It is actually safer for me to be there than out of sight near the curb, where people can make right turns in front of me or pull out of driveways without warning. Sidewalks are unsafe because of driveways and because drivers do not expect a bike to appear at a crosswalk.
.
Bikes are not second-class road users, despite what some think.
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/vehi...

Why don't they make a crossing like a rail road - the biker pushes a button and giant arms with flashing lights come down blocking the street allowing the biker to cross?

mastadon, yes, bikes can be on the road if there are no bike lanes, and are supposed to obey all traffic laws that motor vehicles do. In most cities, bicycles also have the right of way.

Adult bicyclists are NOT supposed to ride on the sidewalks. Sidewalks are meant for pedestrians, but of course, walkers have all kinds of silly reasons they don't use them, and walk in the street instead. Go figure.

A pedestrian bridge over Milwaukee Street would have been more expensive than the tunnel. Next time you drive by, look how much the trail drops below the street level. The approach to the bridge would have been very long.

Chrystol- Janesvillean's first paragraph explains why that wouldn't work. I am just thankfull the tunnel is not going to happen. Those posting are right, I drive that area twice daily at different times and I've never seen traffic that warranted 4 lanes. The Council made the right decision.

I have a semi related question, do bikes have a right to be on the road if there IS NOT a bike path for them??? or do they have to ride on the sidewalk at that point??

As many note here this as Stupid. I have to agree. This City is a hoot to adjust to, isn't it? All the dumb (expletive here) moves this counsel does; you would think Our Old City Manager has a hand in it.
Watch the public record reports on acciendents. FYI Everyone knows this to be a completely Azz-in-nine choice. All except the counsel.

How about a ramp that goes over the traffic instead? They have them in Madison, can't we look into something like that here? Or is it too late? A gradual ramp, building up the incline off to the side, then crossing at a safe height to allow vehicles to go underneath, and again tapering down to street level?

What did they plug it with?

Sandman- I don't agree. Anytime I travel that way traffic is minimal. It works fine for the other end of Milwaukee St. I see traffic moving slower as well as predicted.
Thanks for NO TUNNEL!!!

It is NOT the cities fault a kid swan past the "do not go past" sign.

I do agree a lifeguard would be a good idea.

Minan, the bike path rises up to the level of the street as it is. According to the memo presented at the study session, an overpass is unfeasible due to the long approaches necessary to meet current ADA standards.
.
The lane removal should not be an issue. This segment has NEVER had sufficient traffic to warrant four lanes -- it was just built that way in anticipation of future development. Wright Rd. handles a similar volume of traffic with a similar two-lane configuration just fine. Only a few streets in Janesville -- like Milton Ave. and Center Ave. -- actually have traffic that meets the standard levels where four lanes are recommended. This is a primarily residential street with driveway usage that is made more dangerous by a four-lane width. The wide-open street encourages people to speed, contributing to the concern about the trail crossing, and may have played a role in the fatal accident at Wuthering Hills.
.
While grade separation would be ideal, the unanticipated expense of utility relocation is a good reason to look at alternatives. I feel this will be a significant improvement over existing crossing and safer for all users in all traffic modes. The only people inconvenienced will be those vehicle drivers with a sense of entitlement that they should never be bothered by any other type of traffic.

Stupid!
Let's make life miserable and cause accidents for thousands of motorists so that a very few bikers and walkers don't have to go down to the controlled intersection at Wright Road.
Or, maybe those few could learn to "look both ways before you cross" like most of us were taught to do in first grade.
Again I say...STUPID!

Either E. Milwaukee East of Wright Rd. has become a quiet, unused road or this is a huge mistake! I get the other safety features, but a short stretch narrowing to one lane??

The action of these buffoons will CAUSE more traffic accidents than it will prevent by unnecessarily forcing traffic volume from four lanes into two.
There already is a traffic light a half block to the west, so close the trail access and reroute the users to that crossing if you are so worried about this nonsense (and why aren't you worried about drownings at Lion's Beach in the same way you are this silly crossing issue?).
All the talk about violations out there and I have yet to see an accident or a police car in parked in the area to enforce the pedestrian crossing laws or any enforcement whatsoever, which does generate revenue.
Perhaps this council of fools should go back to sidewalks, trash pick-up and the double-sheeter (again and again and again).
STOP WASTING OUR TIME AND MONEY!

New in town, aren't you Minan?