ggx3"Stop throwing your spoiled child temper tantrums and give the citizens who elected you what they want. Put it to a referendum and let the community vote on it before you decide to throw away money that we simply can't afford on this project"

well said.
They voted it down. Now until the next round when the cry babies start asking again.

I would like to point out that since 2007, that intersection is now only 1 lane in each direction with a suicide lane compared to the 2 lanes in each direction. However you can't fix stupid. There are always plenty of people turning left on to Milwaukee from Wright Road that push their limits and make a fast turn when if they just waited the extra 2-3 seconds they could turn and not have a car in sight.

Just another example of wastefull spending. We dont need this. Stop signs are cheaper!! What a joke this town is becoming.

City Council Members, please read the reports that the MOST traffic accidents in Madison were at the intersection of a round-about. Why is it that every time the city council wants something and doesn't get it, it keeps coming up again and again until they get what they want. Stop throwing your spoiled child temper tantrums and give the citizens who elected you what they want. Put it to a referendum and let the community vote on it before you decide to throw away money that we simply can't afford on this project. Want to decrease accidents? Give the police more resources for enforcing the laws. Crack down on speeders and drunk drivers. Stop giving them a slap on wrist and letting them continue on their way, if they have to pay a hefty fine or sit in jail for violating a time or two, they might change their driving habits. Look at your speed limit signs around town--most of them appear to only be "suggested speeds". Enforce them! There appears to be heavier traffic on Center Avenue than on Milwaukee Avenue (personal observation, not based on any studies), but I don't see any talk of a round-about there and, there have been fatal accidents on Center Avenue as well. Council members, please start listening to the people you represent, you were elected to represent the needs, concerns and interests of the whole community. If you don't feel that you can do that, please step aside and let someone else fill your chair.

Maybe we should lower the speed limit to 10 mph! That would only be (2) sign changes (saves $$$$)!

DwightKSchrute:
What do all of those studies show for streets that have a 35 mph speed limit?

DwightKSchrute:
Sooooo we have had one accident in four years. If we install a roundabout we will have only 0.2 accidents in four years!! Hmmmmmmm, that does not seem worth the cost!! Give us a break!

Are you frick'n kidding me? This is going to be voted on again? The street is fine!! Stop spending money that JANESVILLE DOES NOT HAVE!!!!! Take the lights from Lexington and East Milwaukee and put them out there!!
*
O M G

Farrell was for it and helped press it forward. Now he's against it and is wasting council time. I wish there was a roundabout but the council made the decision a few years ago. Move forward Jim.

Anyone which says roundabouts increase accidents is blowing smoke. Numerous studies have shown they not on decrease injury accidents significantly, they also decrease ALL accidents. From the IIHS:

A 2001 Institute study of 23 intersections in the United States reported that converting intersections from traffic signals or stop signs to roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 80 percent and all crashes by 40 percent. 1 Similar results were reported by Eisenman et al.: a 72 percent decrease in injury crashes and a 47 percent decrease in total crashes at 33 intersections that were converted from traffic signals or stop signs to roundabouts. 2 A study of 17 higher-speed rural intersections (speed limits of 40 mph or higher) found that the average injury crash rate per million entering vehicles was reduced by 84 percent and fatal crashes were eliminated when the intersections were converted to roundabouts. 3 Studies of intersections in Europe and Australia that were converted to roundabouts have reported 25-87 percent reductions in injury crashes and 36-61 percent reductions in severe injury crashes. 4

It might be that Lights are cheeper now, but would they be in the long run? You know; electricity, Repairs, Electric Bills going up?
I know that road work is always an on going situation but wouldn't it still be with a roundabout? Unless there is some differences with going around on a roundabout that tears up the road more than at a square intersection, I don't think that it would be any cheeper for lights than a roundabout.
Then I suppose to that it could be a question on who knows who, and wants to make business for one or the other.

This is a solution looking for a problem.
Why was the roundabout designed before approval to the tune of $78,000?
.
So roundabouts may lead to more accidents, according to JREwing78, but they are "smaller' accidents. How nice for body shops.

The intersection is fine now. I drive it nearly every day. I was against going to one lane, but it worked. You did your job so drop this waste of time and money.

Seems a four way stop sign would be cheaper.
Maybe you need one at Holiday and Milton Ave as well. WAY more accirdents there.
It is like "if mom doesn't let you then ask dad."
Somebody was hit on a bike at the crossing about a month ago. No word about this in the Gazette!! I don't think a tunnel is needed but something should be done in this area as well. People leave the intersection at Wright Rd and Milw and RACE to be the first when it goes to one lane and then hong at each other because one is cutting off the other and then boom you should stop now for the bikes. Maybe some police should sit here once in a while to watch!!


"If the council rejects the roundabout Monday, the city would remain on the hook for $105,000. That’s because the city would owe the state $78,000 for designing the roundabout, even if it’s not built, and the city must resurface the street at a cost of $27,000."

tired of them wasting so much money on "studies" and etc!!!!!!!

Before making a huge mistake, perhaps our city government could do some research on cities that have roundabouts. They might find that they aren't as safe as they are hyped up to be.

http://madisonwest.channel3000.com/news/...

There's no money for this...spending must stop for unnecessary or nonessential items until the economy recovers~

The "Circuit drivers" on Milton Ave. sure do like the roundaout by Menards. They use it often so they can make their return to driving the other way on Milton Ave.

JREwing78 is correct. The size of the roundabout is irrelevant; it's the rules of design and usage that differentiate them from the traffic circles. In the UK they call the new type the "modern roundabout" for this reason.
.
The difference they offer to regular intersections is eliminating the conflicts, places where paths cross -- a full four-way intersection drops from 32 conflicts to just 8. The other major safety boon is that they virtually eliminate the deadly T-bone crash. Yes, there may be many crashes at a busy roundabout, but they will be glancing blows between vehicles already headed in the same direction. The cars get damaged, but the occupants tend to survive.
.
The study showing that some intersections with high accident rates are roundabouts just means that Madison or Milwaukee are putting them in places where there's a lot of traffic. If you look at the nature of the accidents, though, you'll almost certainly see a dramatic drop in fatalities.
.
The arithmetic here may be confusing, but the cost to Janesville is a choice between the $100K we owe the state for an unbuilt intersection and the $180K it would cost us locally to build it. The rest comes from monies that are already allocated for transportation uses, and if we don't use those grants believe me somebody else will.
.
That said, with traffic calmer, it may be that the safety argument no longer holds at this location.

Typically, "modern" roundabouts are designed so you HAVE to slow down, and cautiously navigate through the intersection. Bond and JoeFlint have their definitions backwards. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout...

I'm usually quite enthusiastic about roundabouts, since the accidents that do occur happen at low speeds (meaning people tend not to die in crashes in roundabouts). It also forces people to drive more carefully through the intersection, and smooths traffic flow (since you don't have to wait for a light to change).

But, I don't think one is needed here, and neither is a stoplight or any other modification. The switch of E. Milwaukee to 2 lanes with center turn lane has calmed down traffic quite effectively, and Wuthering Hills Dr. simply isn't that busy.

But, if something HAS to be done, and the other alternative is a stoplight at this intersection, the city council would be dumb to not do a roundabout. It's simply a safer way to manage traffic, and they've already committed themselves to most of the costs of one whether or not it's built.

Bond has it right.

Said it before and I'll say it again, our traffic circles are way too small; a proper roundabout is quite a large thing and allows one to navigate without slowing down much from regular street or highway speed.

Are we gonna put one at every fatal crash site??

I thought this was a dead issue. Another way for us to spend money on something not really needed.

Are Roundabouts good or bad? What difference does that make?

Considering that the city faces the impending removal of the parking ramp over the river, that it wants a new fire house, it's buying all those garbage cans, it wants a new water tower we've been told for years now that we really need, and a bunch of other stuff the city wants to get, do we really have a spare $650,000 stacked up in a basement storage room at city hall just waiting to be spent on a bring-your-own-car merry-go-round? Why don't we just build a large bicycle tunnel wide enough for 2 cars? It'll cost more but there's more room for the beautiful commemorative bronze plaque big enough to hold all the council members' names and bio's. Sounds like a winner to me.

These are not roundabouts, they are circles. UK has roundabouts

Round and round and round they go...and where they exit, nobody knows.

Apparently the Janesville fire department isn't making enough money responding to traffic accidents. So the city council wants to help out by taking a relatively safe intersection and making it dangerous to boost some revenue from the car accidents that will result from a roundabout at this location.

People have been in accidents and have been killed at several other locations in Janesville. One person is killed, mainly due to the simple fact of inattention and someone driving recklessly. No one has been killed at this intersection since. Roundabouts are not the answer here.

Since I moved to Green Bay from Janesville a couple of years ago, Green Bay and its suburbs have built more roundabouts than I can count. There's even a triple roundabout, each multilane, at one hwy 41 overpass. And they are still building more. The construction of so many all at once has been a huge pain. But, I'll say one thing, they really do slow down the traffic. And yet, they also keep the traffic flowing more smoothly than all those stoplights. Now that I'm used to them, I actually like them better than the stoplights.

Quit beating this dead horse...it's time to bury it.

Don't do it, no good thing comes from roundabouts,
except to the construction crews. And how are the
handicapped supposed to cross?

The state DOT likes roundabouts, but hardly any one else does. Milwaukee, as well as Madison has seen increased accidents and increased congestion on roads where roundabouts have been put in.