359 Degrees

Scott, thank you for a very thorough and informative post on this topic.  I'll include the email I sent to Jim Heinrich at the bottom.  I must say that I think the pdf proposals for both plans are overkill of the worst kind!  This is a rural intersection and will likely never experience the kind of traffic volumes that such proposals would indicate.  An immediate solution that would suffice for many, many years would simply be the addition of signals.  It's too bad that politicians spend other people's money with such recklessness.  I think that the addition of dedicated left turn lanes signals operating during rush hours based on sensible timing would be all that's needed.  Of course, it wouldn't allow politicians to point to some new-fangled device and say "We've got one of those!"

It seems like traffic control is done by people without any common sense.  For example, why do the signals operate all night long on Bluemound?  Common sense would dictate flashing amber lights on Bluemound and flashing red lights on all the cross traffic.  That would certainly save fuel for needless stops by the traffic on Bluemound which probably exceeds cross traffic by 10 to 1.  I know...it's too practical.  We can put a man on the moon but can't figure out how to control traffic.  

Thanks again for furnishing a wealth of info!

Mr. Heinrich:

Please vote for lights at the intersection of North Ave. and Barker.  A roundabout is a completely unnecessary expense and use of excessive land for this rural intersection.  A practical solution is lights that are timer controlled to function during the rush hours with times determined by traffic counts comparing east-west and north-south volumes, and the construction of left turn lanes.  Right turn lanes are NOT needed and are a silly waste of space and money!

During non-rush hours, the lights can be flashing stop signs.  

Please pretend that this expense is coming out of your own pockets instead of the pockets of the over-taxed citizens.

There is no need to continue with the insanity of turning Brookfield into an urban environment with such needless projects.

Grant

Brookfield

Scott's reply:

Thank you for your comments.  I'll keep you posted.

"Alderman Berg believes Brookfield residents are already giving enough of their tax money away."

What's more, he believes the Packers will finish the 2008 season 16-0!

As to the subject at hand, I wholeheartedly agree with the Tweetster, as usual!

Wow thanks. Based upon a comment (maybe a reread is in order?), where I pretty much question the immmency of the widening (and btw didn't get an answer), you label me as being played for a fool,  and worry I am spreading misinformation.  Well, I guess I can only say that the farthest things from the truth are your assertions.  

Scott's reply:

Over the last year, I have offered twice by blog reply and once by email (via the anonymous MJS link) to meet with you in person to discuss your views of the city and my performance.  You never gave me the courtesy of a reply, yet continue to publicly echo and reinforce (hidden behind your pseudonym) the bizarre accusations of Mrs. Kilkenny. I don't get that luxury when defending myself and the city against lies and manipulations.  I think that says volumes about your character.  See you at the picnic.  Again!

Guess I am a bit miffed.  If I missed blog replies to meet, I apologize as I never saw any directed to me.  As far the MJS link, I have received only one e-mail since my id was created, from SouthOfTheBorder back in '07.  And am still attempting to see how questioning the accuracy of the imminency of North being closed, and looking for concrete answers is either echoing or reinforcing any accusation of Mrs. Kilkenny.  In fact, you have answered my North Ave questions with this blog.  Thank you.

Scott's reply:

Now, would that be "miffed" like when you described me in Kilkenny's blog as "off his rocker"?  Is that like bipolar, only left and right instead of up and down?  You know what happened the last time those terms were bandied about!  I think you wrote "lynching".

Or miffed as in when you talked about how Kate Bloomberg asked you to help Rocky Soper with his election bid against me in 2002? 

Or miffed as in when you wrote you had talked to me "twice in recent months" (one was the subdivision picnic) and wanted to state how disappointed you were with me but instead didn't say anything? 

Or miffed as in when you wrote that you planned to run against me last spring but your travel schedule wouldn't permit it?  Remember, when you are elected your invisibility cloak drops.  It sounds like you talk tough when you can hide your identity but clam up when you are public and accountable.

I replied to those offering to meet with you.  And you don't remember any of that? Oh well, the offer still stands.  Give me a call.  797-8772 or scott@scottberg.com

p.s.  How did you manage to send Kilkenny email explaining how to fix her exterior cable connection without tipping off your secret identity?  Not passing the smell test...

Scott, in the interests of both avoiding a duel and continuing suburban bliss, might I offer a resolution to your standoff with BrkfldDad? How about the two of you meeting in the confessional of a local Catholic church? That would provide you with your confrontation while providing BrkfldDad his anonymity.

Sounds win-win to this lil elf!

Scott's reply:

I'm looking forward to reading your blog. 

Actually I meant miffed in attempting to see how questioning the accuracy of her assertion that the imminency of North being closed, and looking for concrete answers is either echoing or reinforcing any accusation of Mrs. Kilkenny. Believe it or not, I am on your side on this one, but looks like I've got your 'irish' up!

But am actually quite intrigued by the other items noted, as I have never spoken to Kate Bloomberg, nor posted about her in my life; have absolutely zero aspirations for political office nor ever though of running; and have not spoken to you that I can recall.  And honestly Mr. Berg, have not seen a reply to a post that I made, nor gotten any MJS e-mail.  Makes me worry a bit, about the integrity of the postings.  And, never did send an e-mail to Mrs. Kilkenny, just gave her the tip in a comment.

Scott's reply:

To refresh your memory, please check your comment of May 6, 2008 (bottom of page) where my reply included one of my offers to meet with you.  I'll be glad to run through the rest of them with you when we meet. 

I can't always link to past comments on Kilkenny's blog / web site since she deletes it at least once a year under the pretense of improving things, gaining control, etc.  Now you can start to understand the real reason.  I wonder if she still makes 911 calls about people engaged in legal activities? 

http://scottberg.com/pdf/KilkennyPoliceReport.pdf 

In response to the question you posed in comments attached to the 911 reports, the store in question has been in operation almost continuously as early as 1977 when it operated as a Jewel Tea Store.

A quick check of tax records should reveal when the Kilkenny home was built. (Santa does not maintain records that far back!)

Scott's reply:

Thank you for the additional information.

Hi Scott, as you may recall several month's ago I sent an email to the aldermen about a situation with the Brookfield Police Dept. that was in the Brookfield New's. I received a call from you and you took the time to explain what really was going on and that the article in the Brookfield News was really inaccurate. It was your conversation and the facts that you presented to me that really helped me look at what you do for the City of Brookfield as an aldermen.  

The personal attacks that other people just want to keep festering ancient difference of opinion shows a lot of ignorance of what it takes to be a representative of the people in your district. While I do not live in your district I really look to you for sincere statements of your views on a particular subject. Doing things right is always not the easiest road to take. You deserve some smoozing here because of your continual efforts to do things right. Its appreciated. The courtesy that you show to those that hide behind a stage name is far above what they seem to be able to show you. Thanks again.

Scott's reply:

Thank you for your perspective.  And I thought it was only my teenagers who knew how to "push my buttons". 

I think the real lesson here is that there is always more to the story, which is the whole reason for my blog title of "359 Degrees".  I try to provide the part of the circle of information and analysis that others chose to ignore.  And, I do it openly and take responsibility for it.

Hi Scott,

Though i know you are personally opposed, I am strongly in favor of a roundabout at that location.

There is adequate open space and long sight lines to make a very safe and efficient roundabout. As you know, roundabouts have proven to decrease deadly accidents and that should take priority. In this case (and most properly constructed locations) the roundabout would also increase traffic flow and decrease congestion, pollution, and wasted energy. Also, it appears to me that the roundabout is not appreciably more expensive than the lighted intersection, so the 'taxpayer being roasted' note is not really a debate point here. This is definitely not a 'rural intersection' as stated by one reply, but a very heavily utilized crossing.

Also, as you mention, North Avenue is not scheduled to be widened anytime soon, but it is noted that traffic flow has exceeded the capacity for the size roadway that exists, so it really is only a matter of time (or continual gas price hikes) before it is necessary. I am in favor of the widening if 5 or 10 years from now, the traffic pattern still indicates the need. The intersections have already been upgraded to allow for a widened North Avenue. The already widened intersections can be a danger without the road completely widened. This is best demonstrated in the dangerous 'passing' lane at the Pilgrim road/railroad track intersection. Those right lanes should definitely be right turn/emergency vehicle only just to decrease those dangerous high speed pass/merge manuevers that occur constantly in that location in both directions on North Avenue.

And thanks again Scott, I believe as Larry that you do a great job of working on constituent concerns and presenting alot of information.  Also thanks for putting your opinion on issues and reasoning out there, that is increasingly rare in any political realm nowadays.  These personal issues that a few people obviously have are unfortunate and tiring after reading blogs here for a while, because it is clear there are a few that just can't get over something after years, and can't even admit when they support your opinion on this topic.

Scott's reply:

Thank you for the roundabout comments.  Everyone wants this project to turn out well, and that's a great starting point for both the county and the city.

Recently a good friend commented on roundabouts on another blog. I can do no better than reiterate his comments here:

"Oh, I think they [roundabouts] will be jolly!

Currently less than 25 percent of Brookfield drivers give a hoot about stop signs - most preferring the interpretation of 'Me first: briefly hesitate, then put petal to the metal'. This is specially true of dippy broads driving gas sucking suvs.

I just can't wait to see how this attitude works in a roundabout! Do remember to dial 911 on your cell before entering!"

'A Roundabout' - A place where anarchy, attitude and mass collide.

Scott's reply:

So, assuming we get one, should we call it "The Swirling Vortex of Death" or just "The Cyclotron"?

Kudos Scott. You are not only a statesman, but also an accomplished man of both letters and science!

As I picture the final product in use, I envision three to four older ladies forever trapped in the inner circle - unwilling to risk an exit, continually merging with four ton SUVs traveling near the sped of light as their operators text message the universe.

And drawing on your creative description, I'd like to suggest the name:

    Brookfield's Black Hole - The Swirling Vortex of Death!

Scott's reply:

I was talking to a physicist friend about this.  He suggested applying for a federal NSF grant.  He wasn't sure if the "masses" would be fast enough, but I assured them that was no problem on Barker Road.

Hi Scott, I had the grand experience of traveling through the newly opened roundabout in Oconomowoc yesterday, just really not user friendly. I have the same opinion of this one as I do about the one at the Ridge Theater on South Mooreland Rd. Just not the way to move traffic efficiently. An elderly lady was in front of me and just stopped dead in between both lanes and tried to figure out where to go, she went around at least once from what I could tell and I ended up in the wrong lane and cut some one off and was blessed with a horn blowing at me all the while I was exercising confusion my self. Poor traffic signs also contribute to the problem but even then you can end up in the wrong lane . The only one I get along with is the one in downtown Ocauchee. Not a lot of traffic there so you can look and figure out what to do. Just one persons opinion. I did send Jim Heinrich and email. Thank you.

 Scott's reply:

Thanks for the comment.  No decisions have been made yet, so contact the project office or supervisor's to state your preference.

Round-abouts have been part of the fabric of traffic "life" in Europe for ages -- not in the United States.  This to me is nothing more than an expensive experiment, and a wasteful one at that.  I'm not an engineer, but to me traffic lights with left-turn lanes are all that's needed.  I can't wait to see the city's aged population (I mean no dis-respect) trying to maneuver through a round-about, when some of these same drivers have difficulty navigating through a four-way stop.  (I know, I'll be there one day myself).  Let's just post a cop car at the round-about full-time, it'll save on gas.

Scott's reply:

My main cause for concern is the lack of familiarity by many residents.  As the community's collective experience with roundabouts grows and they become accepted, that reason will go away, but we're not there yet.  There is a "chicken or the egg" issue with that reasoning, but then we have a reasonable and accepted alternative - traffic lights - so why rush things?

By the way, traffic rotaries like those in older parts of Europe or in Boston, Washington, D.C., etc. are different from this "modern roundabout".  It has to do with the size of the circle and the layout of the entrances.  I have used these modern roundabouts many times and have become comfortable driving them, but this isn't my personal intersection so I consider other's opinions.

Scott,

On a related topic, I see that Brookfield is considering providing water to Elm Grove.

Will their water bill include sewer charges based upon their water usage? Also, Will we be issuing their residents food stamps and providing cardboard shelters against foul weather?

"Brookfield: Altruism our name; Roundabouts our game!" --- from a future Jeff Speaker Message.

Scott's reply:

I am working on an entry regarding the Elm Grove water proposal.

The Elm Grove sewer system is independent of Brookfield's.  I believe all of their sewage flows to MMSD's Jones Island plant, just like the east side of Brookfield.  I don't know their fee structure, other than to say there is no connection to the city.

The goal of the negotiations is joint service and fairness, which includes no expense to city residents.  On the other hand, don't expect Elm Grove to foot the entire bill for all the city's water, sewer, police, road repair, and everything else.

www.jsonline.com/.../index.aspx

This article supports my contentions.  The fact that the State wishes they had a separate fund to teach new drivers how to navigate these dopey constructions only proves that the plain old four-way intersection with signals is more appropriate.  It's a typical government situation...they decide they want to do something and the consequences be damned.  Pissing our tax dollars down a rat's hole!

Scott's reply:

@##!  And you complain about spelling?

Hi Scott, I wonder how many round abouts are in Florida. With the percentage of elderly drivers there it certainly would be a great research area to see if they were easily adapted to by older drivers. I did a little digging around on the internet for that information but did not get anything that was useful. FYI, thank you.  

Scott's reply:

First of all, confusion when driving is not limited to older drivers or even teenage drivers. 

I have seen comments that the U.S. now has over 1,000 modern roundabouts in addition to an unspecified number of the older traffic rotaries.  The traffic engineering literature is full of studies about their virtues and many states are considering them.

Uh, Einstein, I believe that every word is spelled correctly.  What's your beef your friggin' moron?  Need someone new to fight with?  You've picked the wrong one if you do because I am someone who is willing to meet you face-to-face.

Scott's reply:

Actually, I was referring to Kyle Prasts' blog where there was a debate on spelling and her censorship of historically correct quotes.  As for the "beef", I believe your comments speak for themselves.