Is bike tunnel the best option?

lots of assumptions. i actaullly have some banana flavored rolling papers if yer interested....

Hey kid ya gotta a banana for me?

kid thanks for the digs:) Just saying if you were SO concerned about this incident why on earth would you feel the NEED to run to the computer and express your angry and disbelief of the actions you just witnessed and place it on a blog? Seems a little counter productive if you ask me. Anyway you never stated in your rant that you took down the license plate and took responsible measures in calling the police to report the incident. So, that being said I just thought that you didn't do that. I'm sure if you would have you would have stated that in your rant. If I'm wrong I do apologize. I just thought that you would have stated that in your rant to show people that you did the right thing.

Best option:
Do nothing

Description: Leaves the crossing as is.
Cost: None.
Pros: Taxpayers do not have to foot the bill for a crossing at the intersection.
Cons: None of the safety concerns are addressed. Pedestrians cross at their own risk.

If vehicle doesn't follow traffic rules and hits pedestrians, then file lawsuit.

whybesad yer a chimp. a)how does this have ANYTHING to do with me and my love for marijuana?? you peeps keep bringin it into discussions as much/more than i do. b)how do you know i didnt write the tag/call the cops and c)you know where you can go;)

+1 for B.A.S.T.E.

Spanky: Do you mean a "need" like the City Council says the Children's Museum is? Or, do you mean like a real need--like paying for housing, gas, and food? The two have gotten mixed up lately.

Is the tunnel a want or need? Is it going to better the community as a whole? Home foreclosures are up. People are having a hard time making ends meet thanks to the higher costs of food and energy and taxes. It's not a good idea to keep raising taxes on people. People are saying it's only eleven dollars well eleven dollars for this and twenty dollars for the aquatic center and ten dollars for the childrens museum it starts to add up. It's only benefiting a small number of people.

Most frequent bicyclist know that in regard to motor vehicles, there is no intelligent life onboard. You see people inside, but they are not aware of where they are or what they are doing. I saw one sitting at a green light putting on makeup last week.

You see them in lively conversations on the phone, texting, or looking intently at other occupants to more effectively converse I guess.

The sweet little old lady who can't see over the steering wheel and doesn't use turn signals because they did not exist when she took her driving test, and her family doesn't have the heart to take her keys away.

The 20 sec stare down at a 4-way stop with the BMW boom car operator which could have been avoided with the utilization of a turn signal.

No, the occupants of these sensory deprivation capsules cannot hear, smell, or feel the ride, so they are not fully aware of what is going on outside their 4,000lb shells.

All bicyclist especially the infrequent riders need to know that these large, clumsy, motor vehicle livestock that race from one light to the next are not aware of where they are and what they are doing.

Bicyclist that assume that the cattle are paying attention, when in fact they may stampede at any moment, will not survive long.

The flashing lights at this intersection cause more harm than good because the trail users are given a false sense of security and assume that there is intelligent life onboard the cattle to perceive that the lights are on, and people are crossing.

My recommendation, take out the lights, cancel the tunnel, trail users wait at the crossing for an opening just like any other un-controlled intersection.

Join B.A.S.T.E.
Bicyclist Against Silly Tunnel Expense.

I agree with you, whybesad. Kid, I don't doubt what you're saying, but I still do not support that tunnel. Pedestrians need to wait until it is absolutely safe to cross any street. This means not even attempting to cross until there are NO cars coming. Especially if you have children. I'm sure this may seem inconvenient to a lot of the trail users, but too bad. I think that's a huge motivator behind the support for this tunnel. I spoke to someone in favor of the tunnel last week. He said that having to stop and wait interrupts the "flow" of the trail. Too Bad.
+
Personal responsibility on both the drivers and the pedestrians part is what is needed. I hope to see people take a more proactive approach and start writing down these license plates at every intersection--not just the E. Milwaukee Street crossing.
+
The Gazette has been saturated with articles relating to economic issues lately. Poverty affecting all of Janesville. While some of you maintain that this bike tunnel will only cost $11.00, it is still dangerous to assume that everyone can afford it. It is also dangerous to assume that this is the only area in town that is worthy of a tunnel. There are potential dangers lurking at every corner. There is very little that can be done about that, as dangers have always existed. The real issue is the lack of responsibility on both the pedestrians and the drivers. Don't build this tunnel. It will be a shrine endorsing irresponsible behavior.

Maybe instead of rushing to get on the computer and complain you should have taken down the license plate of the car and called the cops.

Ya sure ya weren't seeing things kid? Maybe smoking a funny cigarette? Not sure how a mother wouldn't wait for traffic to stop in both directions while she has her child with her.

isn't it grand how the north or northeast side of janesville always gets what it wants. I tried to get better traffic control at rockport road and afton road 2 years ago, andf the city council shot the idea down. this is just another prime example of the council doing exactly what it pleases regardless of the thoughts or needs of the people living inthis community. business and money first and people last

LUCKILY I DONT HAVE YOUR EVIDENCE!! THIS IS TRUE. MY HEART IS STILL RACING. I JUST WITNESSED EXACTLY WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT. IT WAS A MOM ON A BIKE PULLING HER CHILD IN A CARRIER. THE LIGHT WAS FLASHING YELLOW, 2 CARS STOPPED AND A THIRD ONE COMING UP. BOTH PEEPS AT FAULT. BIKER DID NOT WAIT FOR ALL TO STOP AND DRIVER DID NOT STOP AT YELLOW UNTIL IT WAS ALMOST TOO LATE FOR WHATEVER REASON. I SWEAR THE CAR ACTUALLY BUMPED THE CARRIER. I REALLY TRULY CANT BELIEVE HOW CLOSE IT WAS...STILL. LISTEN TO ME COUNCIL. ITS INEVITABLE. AND YES, EVERY INTERSECTION NEEDS ONE. NOT NOW, BUT EVENTUALLY WHEN FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE. ASK THAT MOM RIGHT NOW HOW MUCH SHE WOULD PAY FOR A TUNNEL. IM NOT RELIGOUS BUT ILL THANK WHOEVER THAT THIS TRAGEDY WAS AVERTED. BUT HOLY S**T WAS IT TOOOOOOO CLOSE.

ok my comment was a bit over done In reality i could careless. Have a good weekend.

Nanny Nation No Thanks
Whomever posted the idea of speedbumps.
Ask the snow plow drivers in winter how brillant of an idea that would be.

Get back to the basics. Use common sense be curtious. Urban planning is a joke. janesville is a nice small town.

There are a lot of "free money" grants out there. Tax and spend liberal Baldwin
projects for cities to fall sucker to.

the council needs to take care of the real issues. And will take care of biking and driving.
there have been no deaths.
How would these people survive if they lived in a big city.
This issue is a joke. I'm embarresed to learn that our council is dumb enough to take heed of what Baldwin would be pushing.Truly dissapionting.

Instead on taking care of real issues

BBB - the trail follows the greenbelt, so the design obviously followed that instead of roads.

---

Ride today took me through that intersection once again. I stopped and waited about 10 seconds. Cars stopped and waited (thanks!) and I went with no problem whatsoever.

If Milwaukee St. isnt that busy to need 4 lanes, why is there a problem crossing it?? Im confused here...??

ok this is going to sound silly, but with the roundabout already approved- won't that slow the traffic down enough and the tunnel not needed? I use the bike trail all the time and yes the intersection can be dangerous, but no dangerous than any other busy streets (like Wright Rd or Ruger?)
I do like the idea of speed bumps for the motorists to help control their speeds a little, I know I hate driving over them. And to the person who didn't understand the speed bumps- it isn't on the section of the bike trail that cyclists and pedestrians/rollerblades would use- it be for the cars approaching the trail crossing.
+
re: cyclists on sidewalks. and the link provided in one of the posts stated- bikes belong on roads not sidewalks. I bike alot. While riding on the road does not always make me feel safe (drivers too close to me), the sidewalk does not have enough room if someone is walking. and as also mentioned if the sidewalk is used along the bikepath it has been made wider for that purpose.
There are certain small sections on my commute to work that I hop on the sidewalk (and yes it happens to be at Wright Rd and Milwaukee as I head back towards the bike trail.
I don't know the best solution for this, but maybe between the roundabout and speedbumps, that would make it safer.

MOC0428 said: "I believe only 600 or so of the GMer's actually live in Janesville, the rest are scattered througout, Walworth County, Dane County and Green County."

You may be correct, but I haven't seen a hard count of the Janesville's GM residents. Don't forget LSI, Lear, Gilman (thoug not related to the GM closing), and the few folks who work for the rail line. While I agree that the closing will not effect Janesville as much as some people think, there is still a lot we don't know. Even if workers don't live in Janesville, they probably spend some of their wages here, so even non-residents will effect Janesville when they stop coming to Janesville for work. Coupled with the current recession (yes, we are in one), I think fiscal restraint is reasonable.

The closing of GM wasn't even in the equation when this project was announced. Now it is, for me at least. From the beginning, I haven't been convinced that the expenditure is justified, when there is another, less costly, alternative. Even the available grant money is somebodies tax dollars.

Reducing lanes is the best alternative to the tunnel. Reducing the lanes from Wright Road to Hwy 14 would also reduce speeds at the Wuthering Hills intersection, which the city has said is the second most dangerous of it's type in Janesville (two lanes crossing four lanes uncontrolled).

As I said below, Milwaukee Street doesn't have enough traffic to justify four lanes from Wright Road to Hwy 14. The city planning dept. published that information when a study was done after the traffic death at the Wuthering Hills intersection. Four lanes actually gives drivers a false sense of safety, so more drivers speed. The lane reduction concept was applied by adding dedicated bike lanes to the south end of Milwauke Street going into downtown, and the north end of Wright road. I certainly notice that I am more aware of my driving speeds on those sections, because the road is effectively narrower. The same thing could be accomplished on Milwaukee Street by adding a middle turn lane and reducing the driving lanes from four to two.

pwrtrp: Maybe for somone like yourself! I would guess you're the type that is making us PRO tunnelers speak up!

+

A traffic study was completed after the accident last year. The study showed the the amount of traffic East of Wright Road does not warrent the use of 4 lanes.

+

There are also a lot more than just a handful or two of bikers that go through there. If you are going to comment at least do so with some thought behind your words, or was there??

Cars would have to watch other cars merging into their lanes AND watch for people crossing the street.....and you think that wont lead to problems? To many things for a driver to think about.

Narrowing Milwaukee St to one lane? You joking? Diverting traffic (what a couple thousand cars a day?) all for a handfull or two of bikers?? People will have to merge from the other lane (while sending text messages) and there would be more accidents there. It would be a nightmare during heavier traffic times.

Is bike tunnel best option? No, what engineer design this trail to come in the middle of the block of such a busy road.

billnewbie, your point is right on!

Hannah was responding to my comment that if we are going to have a campaign against inattentive driving, we need to include car seat safety as well.

i have!!

Do you really think all this blogging makes a difference? The people you should be talking to is the city council. Raise your concerns there...where the people might actually take your comments seriously.

moco428- janesvillmom brought it up/

i am for the tunnel but id just like to say that those posting against it make some valid points. so id just like to thank you for sliding me from pro to neutral. now i can spend more time thinking about ways to educate people and end prohibition. thank you;)

Hannah: Are you on the right blog??? Did I miss something? How or where does the child seat inspection fit in with this article??

Zoom: Thanks for the reply. What do you think the city should do about the GM situation? Where will the ~$400K go to help this situation? No sarcasm intended in those questions. I just don't see the city coming to a screeching halt because of this. I believe only 600 or so of the GMer's actually live in Janesville, the rest are scattered througout, Walworth County, Dane County and Green County. I do understand that it will have an impact but I don't believe it will be as bad as some seem to think. If it were ~7000 jobs it would be different but GM has slowly been closing this plant for years thus reducing the impact of it closing entirely.

My point being that if we wait until the GM crisis is over there will be something new to worry about and it will be another reason not to solve the issue. When is the right time?

janesvillemom- i was a trained child seat inspector for "fit for a kid" makes you notice what people do with their kids. makes me ill. front seat NOT FOR UNDER 12 years old. i saw a vw jetta with SSSEEEEVVVVEEENNN poeple climb out of it and 2 were kids . WHAT IS WROnG WITH PEOPLE. the car only seats 5 and not even comfortably. see toddlers bounceing around the cab OBVIOUSLY not buckled in!! but that is a whole other issue!!!

http://www.gazettextra.com/weblogs/lates...

yes lets get our priorties straight!!!! tunnel, and museum first then ambulance! what ever city council!!

We obviously need many more tunnels in this community since we don't have enough ambulances. We can't have the wounded just laying about bleeding all over our shiny new sewer caps while waiting for the next free paramedic team.

"I would consider a "no tunnel option" if the lanes were reduced to 1 as the traffic analysis has indicated could happen. That in itself makes it much easier to negotiate. I have seen or heard of too many close calls not to do something about it.
I am a believer in Darwin but when motorists can't obey the law it is harder to swallow that theory. If everyone only travelled 35mph through this area and they stopped for flashing lights I wouldn't want the tunnel either. If you are a runner/biker that doesn't push the light or watch for traffic you deserve what you get. If you push the light, and look for traffic and someone decides they can't wait then hits you, that becomes an issue.
Unfortunately a police presence won't solve the problem, it would help but will never solve it. Something physically needs to be done in that area."

I completely agree with that.

"We never know what life has in store and if we constatnly wait for the "right" time, it will never happen."

In this case, WE DO KNOW what life has in store! The unknown economic issue of a few thousand people losing their jobs is EXACTLY why this should be put on hold. The city knows months in advance that GM (and their suppliers) will be closing. And the Council takes absolutley no steps to curtail any spending? I don't predict doom and gloom for Janesville, but to have seemingly no economic response to the closing, other than business as usual, just doesn't make sense.

By the way Wahoo, life isn't fair, never has been and it never will be.

I would consider a "no tunnel option" if the lanes were reduced to 1 as the traffic analysis has indicated could happen. That in itself makes it much easier to negotiate. I have seen or heard of too many close calls not to do something about it.

I am a believer in Darwin but when motorists can't obey the law it is harder to swallow that theory. If everyone only travelled 35mph through this area and they stopped for flashing lights I wouldn't want the tunnel either. If you are a runner/biker that doesn't push the light or watch for traffic you deserve what you get. If you push the light, and look for traffic and someone decides they can't wait then hits you, that becomes an issue.

Unfortunately a police presence won't solve the problem, it would help but will never solve it. Something physically needs to be done in that area.

wahoo: Your argument is weak at best. I don't use the city playgrounds so why should I support it? I don't use the pools so why should I support them? I don't use the cities transit service why should I support that? I don't believe in the Social Security System so why do I have to keep paying thousands of dollars into it?

+

My point is that not everyone uses every service and if we only built things that everyone used then nothing would ever get built because there will never ever be 100% agreement on all discussions.

+

Our community can't just put things on hold because of an unknown local economy issue. We never know what life has in store and if we constatnly wait for the "right" time, it will never happen.

If this is important to the group of people who use the bike trail, then they should have to raise the money! If the city tells one group that if they want something, then they need to raise the money. Giving this much money to one group and not the other is unfair. There has been to much money spent on the bike trail considering how few use it. I rarely see people using it.

Unfortunately with society being so carefree, a death IS what it takes to raise eyebrows. And someone mentioned the crash at Wuthering Hills and Milwaukee now needing a stoplight because of that? So now we need a stoplight at every place an accident happened? Janesville is pretty much the city of stoplights. Dont need a stoplight, and we dont need a tunnel.. neither are going to address the issue that people need to be accountable for themselves and their safety. So its ok for people to be sending texts and not paying attention if we have a tunnel? It would just make people concentrate less on driving. Same with the stoplight. Patience and caution when crossing a street. One thing I would recomend...maybe a speedlimit sign before the hwy 14 stoplight. Technically its 55mph (as on cty A) through the intersection until 1 block down where it is then reduced to 35. Wuthering hills isnt too far down. Proper management of what exist is in order, a tunnel is a band-aid...or more of a blindfold.

As an opponent of the tunnel I have to say motorists are becoming aware and curtious. An incident last week, still makes me belive we need the tunnel, though. Three of the four lanes were stopped for the flashing light, a family of four was crossing(in front of me), Mom, Dad, stroller and training wheel bike began to cross when something fell. They all stopped so mom could pick it up, at that time, a truck flew through the open lane. Had an item not fallen out of the stroller at least two would be dead. BUILD THE TUNNEL BEFORE SOMEONE DIES!

I think everyone realizes that the bikers need to be more careful. I can see how cruising down the trail on a bike, and then having to stop and wait for traffic can be annoying. But common sense prevails here in what action to do...race across the street and expect everyone to cater to you, or wait till its clear and safe. Everyones repeating themselves now so i figure I would too.
Another alternative no one mentioned...why not build a bridge up and over the crossing so cars can go over? Then you wont have a tunnel that people will fear at night, muggers, rapists, creatures of the night, and the tunnel could serve a haven for gangs and be riddled with spray painted gang signs. Also, what effect will this tunnel have on the wildlife? It will create a underground railroad for the northside/southside critters in the area...There could be a large territorial battle? You just really dont know?

The OBVIOUS solution is to take the $670,000.00 and HIRE more officers to CRACK down on these INATTENTIVE drivers. The amount of revenue that these new officers would generate would guarantee that they would have jobs in the future!!

Testerrific: If only life was so simple! Common sense goes along way, you're right but that doesn't solve the issue of somone traveling way to fast or being impatient with the other people that have already stopped.

I won't waste anymore of your valuable time.

By the way it isn't just the liberals that want this tunnel put in.

LaKennedy: The tunnel solution is a one time fee, and a very small amount per person at that. Let's look at your idea of enforcement alone. It is apparent we would need to add more enforcement because I'm sure they would spend more time at that location if they had the manpower. As I have seen posted here by others, lets add two officers for that area alone(not even close to reality). Those officers over time will cost more than the tunnel which in turn will cost you more in taxes. There will be new drivers emerging every year that won't have felt that sting of being pulled over on East Milwaukee. The city can police the area and slow people down but it's the drivers that haven't been pulled over that will still speed through there.

+

I see sport bikes doing 65+ mph on this road all the time. Do you understand how quickly something like that can come up on someone walking across the street?

Like thekid said "an ounce of prevention...."

And before anyone corrects me here in a futile attempt to detract from my cogent points, I absolutely meant to say that when crossing the street you should look "right...then left..then right again." But then again, Bill O'Reilly taught me how to cross the street. Fair and Balanced also lends itself to crossing a street. And I have only been hit by 34 cars in my life. But it was always their fault. And they were all dirty liberals.

I discussed this "tunnel" topic with a consultant friend of mine, who consulted with other consultants, and they came up with a great solution. If a car hits a pedestrian/jogger/biker who cannot grasp the concept of "look right, then left, then right", the driver of the vehicle is awarded $100 in credit toward reinvigorating downtown Janesville. This will solve two problems...(1) it will help reinvigorate downtown Janesville and (2) it will cut down on the number of selfish, self-absorbed jogging/bicycling knuckleheads out there that are more concerned with their "undeterred biorhythms by pausing to check for oncoming traffic" than learning how to "look right, then left...and then right again" before crossing a busy street. Maybe the city could offer the drivers who actually run over any of these people $200 dollars if they promise to make reservations at the "soon to be glamorous" Monterey Hotel in downtown Janesville. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL..cough..LOLO...L...cough...LOLOL...no seriously though. The renovated Monterey Hotel in downtown Janesville will surely...cough..save the city. LOLOLOL..COUGH...ouch...coughed too hard there.

We used to have no problems crossing busy streets when we were kids. But then again, back then we didnt have people in 5,000lb vehicles chatting or texting on their phones, fiddling with GPS systems, using a laptop, etc, while driving. Even as kids we knew that a car ISNT gonna be able to stop on a dime and they may not even see us so we STOPPED and LOOKED before crossing teh street by foot or bike. Also we didnt listen to walkmans or mp3 players while riding a bike either like so many I see now.
Thing is now people are just off in their own little world while driving, walking or biking. I see quite a number of "bicyclists" just blowing stop signs, red lights, riding against traffic, darting in and out of driveways. My parents had a guy hit our car when we were going to the pool when he blew a stop sign coming down a hill.

Speed bumps on the trail? Could you imagine the roller bladers hitting them. Can you say lawsuit? Also I don't think speed bumps can be placed on a main roadway like that, without more special consideraton.
*
Hope they mark the construction area well if and when it begins, 'cause someone's going to hit it. Especially people from out of town who use that road.

This project should be approved by the voter-system not council. Can anyone say bring on the Mayor.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to install video cameras at the intersection where a pedestrian or bicyclist has a close encounter with rude drivers can just push a button of some sort that will submit the last 30 seconds or 1 minute footage to the police to report the incident and ticket the offending driver?

This tunnel isn't about building for the pedestrians and bicyclist. It's about the drivers not respecting the pedestrian laws. I think this city is taking the tunnel approach the wrong way. It's too bad we can't close off the intersection to pedestrians and bicyclist and route the path elsewhere. Or can we?!?!?

Wahoo_35 had the same idea I did - speed bumps. A few hundred dollars to have a city crew slap some asphalt on the street, paint it bright yellow and put up 2 warning signs. Put them on the trail as well to slow down bicyclists and skaters approaching the street.
.
Speed bumps will get the attention of the drivers, slow down traffic, and perhaps clean out some earwax of cellphone users. Put one far enough out to give inattentive drivers time to react to hitting them. Monitor the traffic with cameras and if one speed bump isn't enough to slow them down, put in a second set.

Just curious, but why is Tammy Baldwin "steering" money towards Janesville when this isn't even her district?

I hope everyone realizes this never would have been an issue at all unless money was steered towards our city by Tammy Baldwin (who I usually support). This grant is what made this whole ordeal possible. What I find frustrating is that this was never an issue to anyone before this money was an option. The bike trail is great, but bear in mind it is a recreational facility. Right now, it is irresponsible to fund this (especially since there is no evidence that it is anymore dangerous than crossing anywhere else in the city) not knowing what ramifications GM's leaving will have. Have you driven around the city lately? How many "For Sale" signs have you seen? The tax base will shrink. $11.00 doesn't seem like much to some of you now, but when was the last time a project came in on budget? Also, for those of you who haven't been paying attention, our city is in pretty bad shape. Tell a senior citizen that they won't be able to pay $11.00 towards their medication because you don't want to go down the street and cross at a stop light intersection. It may seem extreme to some of you, but make no mistake: it is reality for some of us. This isn't right. It doesn't even begin to address the real issue. Just because the majority of you use the bike trail in that area, what makes that intersection any more of a priority than the others? Certainly not evidence, as there hasn't been any accidents there. Am I saying we should wait for one? NO. I'm saying we should hit this issue head on with a crack down on inattentive drivers all over this city. I'm not against safety, just this tunnel that only addresses one very specific area.
+
Also, please bear in mind that this grant will still be available after we find out what the ramifications are of GM's leaving. Don't continue to have this "spend it now or lose it mentality".

I don't think most people would be so sensitive to the issue if whatitdo is correct. Some bike riders (not all) are very rude, they surly don't follow the rules of the road. I had witnessed a bike go through a very busy interection on sunday in Beloit, right through the red stoplight at 51 and Shopiere. The decision made (be it by bikers or walkers), to cross without checking both directions a couple of times before stepping out into the point of no return, are just that, their decision. Drivers need to be more alert but most of all, I'm going to agree with lakennedy, the cops should be on that crossing like flys on you know what. It shouldn't be up to the taxpayer when the city already has police the taxpayers are paying for.

Besides..... when I was a kid, crossing the street safely was one of the first things I was taught. It wasn't that hard to learn either. 35 yrs later I can still do it. If these people who are complaining about it can't grasp the concept ........ all I can say is Darwin.
Some of these issues are real life reasons that the kid who ate all the paste in Kindergarten never should have made it.

Speeds (not speads)-oops. Also consider the general safety of the trails. Remember the few instances where we had lewd behavior occurring on the trails. Should be considered when talking about the tunnel.

Too bad no one is commenting on this topic...Oh wait a minute, I was wrong!

I lived near the crossing on E. Milwaukee St. for several years. I also used the entire trail in Janesville. Maybe I should get my but back out there (excercise)!
*
The bikers pedestrians and the drivers, were and are all to blame for the attitudes, trust me on that one.
*
I feel the over pass would be safer and more scenic. The potential bad behavior of those using it might become an issue. The tunnel would be great, but there are security and safety issues still to come with that. But something has to happen. I hate the spending issue but it makes more sense than a children's museum does to me.
*
I watched literally hundreds of people almost get hit by cars. Some cars go near highway speads through there, and police can't always deter it. Many times vehicles came to long screaching stops!
*
Maybe more ideas are needed. I know I will brain strom if it can save money. But there are smarter people out there than me!

The tunnel idea is a waste of time and tax money. The whole argument for the tunnel claims that there is a safety issue, yes? When was the last time someone was injured at this intersection? Is the argument of convenience for the joggers and cyclists not having to interrupt their workouts valid? One would think that if these individuals were that concerned about their health they would take the time to ensure their safety as well when they crossed the street.
Someone earlier mentioned that Janesville was not cyclist friendly. I beg to differ. Two major streets (milwaukee and wright) have had the most insanely ridiculous set of bicycle lanes painted in. Both streets also have sidewalks no less. But I digress. Point is: The squeaky wheel is gonna get the grease folks and all the tax payers are going to have to dig. Thank you city council.

Don't waste the money. The rightous biker attitude is annoying. stay out of the way of cars AND OUT OF THE POCKETS OF TAX PAYERS.
I've seen some rude bikers scolding cars as they make everyone slam on the brakes. having a nice in your face road rage moment.
The more you spoil them the bigger deal they think they are.
Not that biking is a bad thing it's the bikers who are like "look at me I'm a big deal nanny nanny boo boo you can't hit me".

i realize we dont need a tangent but id have NEVER guessed someone would be against a childrens museum. if you both are against wasting tax money that much then you should BOTH be on my team:)

Another thing for those who are concerned about the financial aspect ask yourself one question. Would you spend $11 of your hard earned money to save 1 life, even if it was someone you have never heard of, will never meet and will have no interaction with in your life but by donating your $11 you will save their life? If the answer is what i think it is, it should be a non-issue to build this tunnel even if it saves 1 life 30 years from now its well worth it. At least in my point of view....

Children's Museum= long term money pit for tax payers.
I do agree with lakennedy on that issue, but...
Fixing E.Milwaukee Street bike crossing=SAVING lives and saving money from a lawsuit if someone does die there...the city can't claim they didn't know the crossing was dangerous!

While we're educating people about inattentive driving, I also want to add CAR SEAT laws to that campaign! The last person who nearly hit me at E. Milwaukee had a toddler in the front seat!

lakennedy - Not sure why you think the bike tunnel would only benefit a small amount of people. Which small amount of people are you referring to? It is public property and therefore everyone benefits from it. If people choose not to use it to their benefit, that is their loss. I have ridden the entire trail and can not wait for it to be expanded.

wait...lakennedy....the childrens museum NAUSEATES you?? wow.

we do need to do educate all drivers. la you keep asking for proof that this is a dangerous intersection. you are aware what youre asking for?? im with miltonalum. build em where ever feasible over time.

lakekennedy: "I refuse to accept the notion that this tunnel is a necessity based on no evidence of an accident, or of any indication an accident will occur here over anywhere else. It is ridiculous."
+
Would it take a death or near fatal accident then to accept the notion that its a necessity. Based on traffic studies you cannot dispute that a tunnel would be safer for pedestrians and motorists invlolved? Absolutely there are more than 1 location that could use such attention but the issue is this 1 intersection at this point. Just because there has not been a fatality at this location does not mean that we should turn our heads until one does, it needs to be prevented before it happens.

Sorry, I have this messed up with the Children's Museum. Both equally nauseate me.

Who is it directed at, justsome1here?

Unidentified: We already have that underground network of tunnels ... it's called the sewer!

This tunnel will benefit a small amount of people, addressing the real issue would benefit the city. Do you have any proof, miltonalum, why this area is so much more at risk than any other? There hasn't been an accident here. Look at Beloit Avenue: four lanes, no accidents. By your logic, that equals a tunnel. There's no end to it, all in the name of safety, of course.
+
I wonder, how did anybody live past the age of ten with all of the possible accident areas out there? I suppose a little thing called personal responsibility played a role. I understand the value of human life, but I refuse to accept the notion that this tunnel is a necessity based on no evidence of an accident, or of any indication an accident will occur here over anywhere else. It is ridiculous.
+
Furthermore, miltonalum, in every blog you've indicated that finances are not an issue. You couldn't be more wrong. You definitley don't speak for me. The vast majority of people I've spoken too off this blog page DO NOT want a tunnel. Right now, we can't afford it. Obviously that's not an issue with you, but I'd appreciate a little compassion. If you're interested in gauging public support, check out Yuri Rashkins blog page. Last I checked, the nay-sayers had it with 75%.

lakennedy - If you didn't say it then why do you think it was directed at you.

As posted on the Wisconsin DOT website:
Motorist reminders
*Bicycles are vehicles. They belong on the road.
*Cyclists need room to get around potholes, sewer grates and other obstructions.
*Leave at least three feet when passing bicycles, more room at higher speeds.
*Change lanes to pass any bicycle traveling in a narrow lane.
*Train yourself to scan for fast moving (it's hard to tell speed) bicycles and motorcycles in the opposing lane to you when turning left, and scan sidewalks and crosswalks for pedestrians and bicyclists using the sidewalk and crosswalk as a pedestrian. Always scan to your right side sidewalk before you leave a stop light or stop sign. And to the left and right side sidewalks when on a one-way street.
*Right turning motorists can be a problem, but taking the lane or more of the right portion of the wide curb lane can prevent this.
*Left turning motorists are the cause of most adult bicyclists’ crashes. Motorists claim not to see the cyclist who is traveling in a straight path in the opposite direction.

so in other words yes i agree its a problem but its another issue worthy of its own $11 if that makes sense....

In a perfect world, people would all stop for pedestrians and bikes, like they are supposed to and if they didn't the police would get them. We don't live in a perfect world, so we need some kind of solution to the crossing at E. Milwaukee...it doesn't have to be a tunnel, but something needs done BEFORE someone dies.
*
I would ALSO love to see the police enforce the laws and see a huge campaign for educating drivers about the laws and about the consequences of inattentive driving. I agree that drivers are rude ALL OVER this city and most other cities too!

inattentive poor drivers need to be remedied no matter what happens with this tunnel its not a "this or that issue" its something that needs to be addressed regardless.

Also traffic laws need to be enforced all over this city, it is Terrible and needs to be remedied with or without this tunnel so dont look at increased enforcement as a solution to this tunnel that needs to be done with or without this tunnel....

Or, miltonalum, we could use that $11 per person and put it towards the real issue: inattentive/poor drivers. This would help save lives all over the city, not just at this particular intersection. Do you not agree?

justsomeonehere: I hope that post wasn't directed at me. NO WHERE have I said that bikers don't have rights to the road. Clarify in your posts, please. "Educate YOURSELF" on my posts before you try to attack them.

lake kennedy: "miltonalum: that's an interesting point. what about the life that potentially could be lost while crossing Beloit Avenue? Is that not a human life that cuts it in your book? What about the one lost while trying to cross Ruger?"

Thats not the issue at hand, the issue is this specific location, but yes since you ask, If its deamed feasable i would be for building one at every major intersection where it could potentially save lives. Obviously one cant expect a tunnel crossing every back road in the city but a handful would be logical and definately worth the $11 per person per tunnel if it could save a life.

If you think that bike riders do not have any rights on the road I suggest you look up bicycle safety on this website and educate yourself. http://www.nhtsa.gov/

I'd say "donate your money to a real cause: fighting inattentive drivers". Donate your money to something that will help the entire city, not just E. Milwaukee Street.

They are breaking the law because pedestrians have the right of way. Always. This is a problem all over the city. It doesn't just affect the people who use the E. Milwaukee Street crossing. If you are interested in being a part of the solution, I suggest you pro-tunnelers out there spend some time contacting your local law enforcement agency (who's contact information I've listed in an earlier post) and let them know it. The only thing you're solving by putting in a tunnel is putting an extra burden on tax payers and making one intersection safe, leaving all others at "risk". Why not deal with the real issue here? Why is it so important that this one intersection, that has been the scene of NO accidents, has a tunnel?