As I said in my previous post, more to follow... Here is the follow up.
Everyone is up in arms saying that putting a roundabout at the intersection of Jackson and Murdock is a matter of public safety. I have numbers that disprove that theory, at least takes the priority off of THAT intersection.
Would it surprise you to know that Jackson and Murdock is not even in the top 10 of the "dangerous" intersections in Oshkosh? Actually, it isn't even ranked in the top 20! It is ranked 21st and it's neighbor, Wisconsin and Murdock is ranked 17th!
There were only 6 accidents that occurred at this intersection in all of 2006 while the traffic numbers over 29,000 vehicles PER DAY that travel through it. Given that ratio, perhaps it is not such a high priority to do this one first.
The highest accident intersection is 9th and Knapp Streets. It had 16 accidents in 2006 followed by High Avenue and Wisconsin with 14. Then Washburn/Witzel-13, Bowen/Murdock-10 and Koeller/9th-10 round out the top 5. Koeller/9th has posted double digit accidents in ALL of the last 3 years. Wait... low and behold there are 3 within a mile of each other in the top 5. Seems to me, that our focus is a little off with safety of intersections.
This is NOT the first intersection that has been proposed to get a roundabout. The DOT would like to put the same type of intersection at 41/Witzel (one on each side of the highway for each frontage road). My opinion is that to build a roundabout at an expense of more than $600,000 to the city is ludicrous if they do not do anything to address the neighboring intersection of Wisconsin/Murdock that has posted more accidents in each of the last 2 years. This would NOT be productive and MAY actually cause more problems than they set out to fix.
If I understand the new design correctly, KFC would be purchased and the intersection widened to allow for additional turn lanes regardless of whether the roundabout is built or not. I am not sure about that aspect but either way, improvements can be made WITHOUT building an intersection at a significantly higher expense to the city with no real proof that it will improve anything. Accidents will happen at ANY intersection regardless of design. Will the 6 improve enough to justify the expense?
Guess we will find out if the council approves this design tonight...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Is 29,000 cars per day the correct figure? Who published the number/where did you find it? Link?
Kent, do you have a hotline to Esslinger? Look at the 6 year history, not just one year, geez, I thought you were in Quality Control. You know you look at TRENDS, not one anomaly. Come on, you know better than that!
Would it surprise you to know that Jackson and Murdock is not even in the top 10 of the "dangerous" intersections in Oshkosh? Actually, it isn't even ranked in the top 20! It is ranked 21st and it's [sic] neighbor, Wisconsin and Murdock is ranked 17th!
Do you have a source for this?
Yes, but it is hard copy data and I didn't get it online. I will be happy to provide it to anyone if they contact me directly. Otherwise, it is available at City Hall.
By the way, the 3 year trend shows a spike in 2005 but only 9 in 2004. This is not consistant enough to establish a trend that would support significant change.
There are OTHER intersections that NEED attention before this one does. THOSE should get the priority, not this one.
Ya, let's wait for a fatality at this one, then let's change it.
This is a ridiculous argument. Semi trailers can not make the right hand turn from Jackson to Murdock. The 7 year track record of accidents shows it IS a top 10 accident intersection. The alternative is a Murdock with a median that will prohibit left turns into Mobil, the Chinese restaurant, Pizza Hut, and the car wash. Is that acceptable? I don't think so. Esslinger was out of line and way off base. When an unemployed salesman tries to tell the DOT their business we have a problem.
I am new to Oshkosh and have been observing the politics and political alliances for the past year.
I read your blog post commenting on Cheryl Hentz's statement about Paul Elssinger.
"Cheryl states that Esslinger is "silly and hypocritical", but has nothing to support her statement. Of course, Paul is one with a bulls eye painted on his back because I noted that she didn't mention any other opposition to the intersection."
I do not know if their is "bad blood" between them but find it unsettling that you defend his position, rather than him defending himself. Also, that you do not see the irony of his position on the project.
Several weeks ago, PE was the poster boy for road safety and pushed through the inplementation of sidewalks in the Mill Road area.
Now, I don't give a rats a$$ about sidewalks in the Mill Road neighborhood.
I do mind when one of my representatives contradicts himself, being a promoter of safety one low traffic area and then a naysayer on another high traffic intersection. I think, unfortunately that it does support her statement.
I know he is not toally responsible for the Mill Road sidewalks. Other council members also supported them with their vote.
Yet I must ask: What is the ranking of the Mill Road intersection in the data you've collected? I would be interested to know.
Thank you.
Kent, I drive this intersection 4 times a day. This is one of the two worst intersection in the city, the other being Koeller/9th. I speak with truck drivers daily. They can not make the corner. ANd before you cite the testimony from the truck driver who spoke last night I will remind you that driver has not driven on the revised roundabouts with the extra wide pad on the left designed for semis. SInce leaving this intersection alone is not an option as trucks can not make the corner. What do you suggest? Certainly not the alternative of eliminating access to 5 businesses on Murdock.
7:31, the same could be said about River Mill Road. Why wait for a fatality on a road that is connected to a Recreation Trail?
Shouldn't we be working on every street, particularly where the DOT has shown safety is a factor and not number 21 on a list? What sense did that idiot from the state make diverting bike traffic to an even more dangerous intersection? And how much is the education going to cost so our children do not get killed crossing a roundabout and who will be responsible, the city or school district?
Nothing like consulting someone who does not even know what his own employer is providing council members in the way of accident information. Sad to see some council members trust the uninformed, from "experts" to "journalists."
11:03 I cannot follow your posting. I think you will find the 7:31 post to be rhetorical and sarcasm.
"Shouldn't we be working on every street"? No, we do not have enough money to work on every street but if you would like to make a donation it would be appreciated.
"And how much is the education going to cost so our children do not get killed crossing a roundabout and who will be responsible, the city or school district?" How about this idea: Let's make PARENTS responsible for their children crossing the road. The State has already indicated they would be happy to work with the schools and provide a video for use on Public Access, geeeeeeez, accept some responsibility for yourself and you children already!
As for the remainder of your post I have no idea what you are talking about - The State DOT representative works directly for the State of Wisconsin, not the City of Oshkosh where Mr. Unsafe Esslinger went for HIS information. Get a grip.
Did Esslinger give it to the uninformed DOT guy or what!!
He used DOT numbers to expertly disembowl the DOT representative.
He had that guys head spinning sooooo much, he could have starred in The Exorcist! Esslinger pointed out that over 10,000,000 cars go through the intersection a year and only 6 accidents. Our fine state official had no comeback. Then Paul points out that the fine state official wants to direct bicycle traffic to Murdock/Wisconsin. The guy had no response when Paul pointed out that the Murdock/Wisconsin intersection is even more dangerous than Murdock/Jackson.
Esslinger was a ginsu knife last night. He sliced and diced that stooge like a hot knife through butter.
My favorite part was when Paul was asking how the project two weeks ago was going to cost the City $600,000 more for the roundabout than a regular intersection, and now the state guy said it won't cost us anything more. Again, no response from our state fellow.
I bet that state guy went back to where he came from and said "please don't make me go back there again!"
Way to go Paul, keep up the GREAT work!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh ya, I'm sure the person from the DOT was just shaking in his boots after putting up with Paul Esslinger. He probably went to his office today and said, there are some real jerks in Oshkosh! But then, the DOT is just another Public Employee for the folks on this Blog to rip on, so have at it.
BTW, does anyone else have an issue with Kent Monte promoting a blog that consistently bad mouths public employees, when he is essentially living off of the public? I find that pretty hypocritical!
1:39 Were you listening? Esslinger used "City of Oshkosh" numbers not "State of Wisconsin DOT" numbers. Put your ginsu away, your wit is not sharp enough to play with the big boys.
Another poor showing by our Not-Ready-For-Prime-Time-Wannabe-Mayor.
Esslinger sited ONE YEAR as his sample size. Hardly scientific. Esslinger made an ass out of himself. The DOT has all the safety data on roundabouts. You heard they have them in DePere and Howard with no problems. The fact is that 6 of the 7 past years the intersection in question has had problems with accidents. That aside, trucks can NOT make the turn. What is it that you don't understand about trucks not being able to turn there?
I went to Cheryl Hentz's website and found ANOTHER River Mill expose. Will someone please tell Cheryl that the vote on River Mill is over, and that her side lost. Cheryl: we know you don't like Esslinger, get over it and move on!
Cheryl is so hypocritical it's amazing.
Remember when she and Melanie Bloechl were pals; Melanie couldn't do anything wrong; now she's scorned by Cheryl. She used to think Esslinger was a God, now she hates him. She used to think Jane VanDehey was great, now she hates her. She used to have Tony Palmeri as a host on the show, no he no longer wants any part of her.
I think the pattern is that Cheryl can't seem to keep friends.
No wonder she's lost miserably every time she runs for office. At least she's smart enough not to run anymore.
It's not a River Mill expose. It's a Paul Esslinger expose, as well it should be. I know for a fact Cheryl made the decision to take Tony off the show after he was eleted to the council. I see he still appears on it though. Clearly you are filled with anger and scorn of your own and just can't say things that make sense.
Alright folks. I have had enough of River Mill. They are getting sidewalks whether you like it or not. Get over it.
Is it because you want ME to compare these that it keeps getting brought up? If so, here is your wish.
There is not a comparison between the safety mentioned on River Mill and the intersection of Jackson/Murdock. You are talking about two different types of environments. One is the safety of motorists, and the other is safety of pedestrians. How can the two even compare?
My point in my post was that the intersection in question is NOT as dangerous as people are claiming and that IF we are going to spend the money on a roundabout, perhaps we should focus on the intersections that need the attention MORE.
River Mill having sidewalks is about keeping pedestrians out of the street in the safest environment possible. Jackson and Murdock doesn't even come close to being dangerous enough for this attention. 9th and 41 should get a look for this long before the Jackson/Murdock intersection.
Allowing trucks to turn there is being accounted for with the redesign WITHOUT putting in the roundy-round.
Doing the math, there are more than 31 million cars that have passed through that intersection with only 28 accidents. That is NOT significant. Paying attention and driving within speed limits prevents accidents. Putting a new type of intersection just creates a bigger pain than what is currently there.
As for the "public worker" nonsense that was mentioned earlier... I think that Paul asked fair questions and the DOT worker was making assumptions that are not based on fact when he was talking about the numbers. If he did in fact have the numbers in front of him, he would have been able to address the questions that he was being asked. Since he didn't, I think that he was not educated enough on the issue to even be able to inform the council. Second, he was making assumptions on values when he referred to the purchase and sale of KFC. He assumed that Oshkosh would get fair market value for that property. However, that is nearly NEVER the case. It will be given away in a year or two after significant tax dollars are lost while the city still owns it.
Reality is, the roundabout WILL cost more. How much more may never be known.
Isn't dead . . . dead, whether a pedestrian or a motorist? The Jackson/Murdock intersection needs to be redone and I think a round-about is the best alternative. I wish they would have put one in at Washburn and Westowne. (By the way, it's OK for our Council members to be civil when speaking with others . . . even if they are government employees).
I don't know, he seemed pretty civil to me.
As for me, there are a few intersections on the West side that need something done before someone gets killed.
Maybe if there was a roundabout at the corner of Washburn and Ninth, that old man wouldn't have driven his car into Cinders?
Once again you do not have the facts Kent. The 9th and 41 intersection is scheduled to be done when the overpass and 41 project is done as will the Witzel/41 intersection. They too will have roundabouts. You see, they are proven to be safer and MORE EFFICIENT than conventional intersections You speak of saving money on the Murdock project by going with alternative 2. That is not true. Plus we will have no left turns into 5 business' in alternative 2. Safer, cheaper to maintain, longer life, more efficient. What is it you don't understand what the experts are telling us. Did you see the workshop a few months back? have you been to DePere and Howard? Remember, the Neenah one is not what we are getting. They have made improvements for truck traffic.
The intersection by Cinders will get a roundabout. It is in the plans.
more than 31 million cars that have passed through that intersection with only 28 accidents. That is NOT significant. Paying attention and driving within speed limits prevents accidents. Putting a new type of intersection just creates a bigger pain than what is currently there.
Let us not forget it is our state dollars that pay the salary an benefits for that DOT rep. and it was the DOT that designed the present intersection and it was finished just an few years ago.
How many STATE dollars does it take to get it right?
Wisconsin/Murdock is related to Jackson/Murdock. You have high density traffic entering town from the North on Jackson and the West on Murdock. Everyone is in a huge flippin hurry, you have cars trying to turn left across traffic to get to Pizza Hut, or Dairy Queen, or the gas station that blocks up the traffic behind them. Everyone stopped in traffic, or who misses a left turn light, or just has to stop has a freak out. Road rage is up. When people get through that intersection they floor it to make up for lost time, thus the accidents at Wisconsin and a block up and down Jackson, like just last week.
The roundabout design slows traffic down, but keeps it moving. Pedestrians and bikes should avoid it.
As for all those other dangerous intersections, Dick Wollangk at the State of the City address last month informed the 12 people present that the DOT has other plans for Oshkosh: Dick mentioned that the Wisconsin DOT was planning 12 more roundabouts in Oshkosh between 2010 and 2014 - where 9th Ave, Witzel, and Hwy 21 intersect Washburn and Koeller, on the ramps on 9th and Hwy 21, and Hwy 45 at Snell. This is off the June 25 post at babblemur on the roundabout topic.
Welcome back to blogging, Kent!
Kent, your comment were spot on!!
There continues to be people that don't like Paul Esslinger, and no matter what he does, they will take the other side, no matter what!
I watched the roundabout discussion too. I think the DOT guy was ill informed and not ready for the tough questions that Esslinger asked. To be blunt, the DOT guy was an embarrassment!
By the way, I believe Esslinger said that he had DOT numbers and that he had 3 years of numbers.
Esslinger 1
DOT guy 0
I have no problem with Esslinger, but, in this case he was not well informed, he was rude, and argumentative. He just refuses to understand what ALL the professionals understand. This is a terrible intersection. While Paul spins the numbers to look at certain years, the 7 year averages tell the story, along with all the knocked over lights and crushed curbs. Thsi intersection needs an update to take throught the next 20 years. the roundabout will do that, and safely based on all the statistics.
You say you have "no problem" with Esslinger, then you go on to slam him.
Nice spin!
Paul, Tony and Dennis are looking out for the average Oshkosh taxpayer. Frank and Bryan are also stand-up guys. The whole Chamber Crowd that was on the council is really down to 2. They just don't like the fact that they are now on the short end of the votes.
There were a couple of comments made on Thursday morning regarding the proposed changes in the 9th Ave. interchange and HWY 41.
This intersection is NOT proposed for a roundabout. The DOT proposed roundabouts at the HWY 21 interchange and the Witzel overpass. There is nothing currently in the works for the 9th Avenue intersection except a larger version of what is there.
For more information on this or what is proposed for the HWY 41 corridor... Please visit the DOT website and you can see what they have in mind for the intersections.
Witzel is a wild card yet. There are 2 photos that cover that intersection, each show a different picture. You can pretty well be sure that the roundabout option will be used and the safety reasoning will be justified on this one. That one IS in the top 5 for accidents.
July 27 3:35
I did not slam Paul. I just strongly disagree with him on htis issue. Is that ok?
No, it's not ok, you're a spin meister! OK?
Post a Comment