Tim Doulin has brought up an issue on his blog that’s been talked about off and on for the last few years… the conversion of Summit and Fourth Streets from one-way into two-way streets. The pros and cons of one-way and two-way traffic are pretty widespread, so to save myself some typing, I’ll just point you to this link if you want to read more about the basics of this topic.
So, with that said, what do you all think of this type of traffic conversion? It is something that the City of Columbus might want to at least re-evaluate as traffic patterns and urban regrowth have changed the landscape of these roadways since they were converted into one-ways?
One-way or another
Posted by Tim Doulin on October 4, 2007Pedestrians vs. cars? Cars almost always win.
Converting Summit and 4th streets north of Downtown to two-way streets is evidently open to discussion as the city prepares a “mobility plan” for that area. The streets were originally two-way but have been one-way since the 1950s.
For commuters who wish to avoid the freeways, Summit is a popular route into Downtown because the one-way traffic usually flows quickly. Ditto for commuters who use 4th Street to flee Downtown.
I occasionally use the routes on my treks between home and work. But residents in the area have safety concerns, especially for the kids who play and attend schools along that stretch and sometimes have to cross those busy streets. They say vehicles travel way too fast on the one-way streets and believe two-way streets would slow traffic and make it safer.
What do you think?
I vote for traffic calming mechanisms instead of two-way traffic. Traffic on both streets can be dramatically slowed by introducing raised pedestrian crosswalks, chicanes, textured pavement, speed humps, etc. These mechanisms work and they can also improve the aesthetics of the streets.
I think as more tenants move into the Jeffrey and the other new projects along that stretch off of 4th we will hear a greater cry for slowing down traffic.
What about cyclists? They’re supposed to follow the traffic rules of the road, and to force them to circle the block because of a grid of one-way streets is a bit unfriendly to those two-wheeled commuters.
Accommodating bicycle lanes is a valid point. I can see how bicyclists would be inconvenienced by having to go around the block but those in cars can say the same thing. However, drivers are clearly more protected in their cars when navigating the one-ways. I would definitely encourage planners to include bike lanes whether they are raised bike lines level with sidewalk, blue lanes, etc but to still keep those streets one way. I think reconfiguring those streets with the existing 3rd and 4th street bridges would also not be that popular with tax payers or elected officials.
Two way streets all the way. Turn them into boulevards by planting flowers/trees down the middle. Take a lesson from Chicago.
Two-way gets my vote. And yes also to creating boulevards which in turn will create bike boulevards. As the bicycle becomes one of the standard forms of transportation, the roads must change to accommodate cyclists’ way of being.