RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
From The Dispatch:
City shelves plan for two-ways
By Mark FerenchikIt was supposed to be a key part of Weinland Park’s traffic plan: converting 4th and Summit streets, two busy commuter routes between Clintonville and Downtown, from one-way to two-way streets. But now Columbus officials say they aren’t going to address the issue when they release the plan next month. They say that’s because officials are still pushing for a 13-mile light-rail line that could travel down parts of 4th and Summit as it connects Downtown to the Polaris area.
From the article”
“We’d be able to make (the light-rail) project work, if chosen, whether it’s one-way or two-way,” COTA spokesman Marty Stutz said.
Well then. Two Way + Light Rail it is! :D
Said it before, I’ll say it again. If we are going to keep it one way, let’s at least take advantage of the coming freeway changes and convert a lane on each for bus and bike only. BRT service that could serve as Short North bypass of sorts for folks commuting from Clintonville and German Village.
I’d be interested to see proposed roadway cross-sections, especially the two-way plus light rail, if anyone has them.
“Even if the study recommends converting 4th and Summit to two-way streets, there’s no money to do it now anyway, Webster said.
Of course, there’s no money ticketed to build a light-rail line, either.”
…So what is the point of this story then?
LO2W: How thick is bus traffic along those routes at the moment? I don’t remember it being heavy enough to justify a bus-only lane, at least not up near campus (my only real firsthand memories of those streets).
I’m looking at more of a way to improve service overall within the general area. With COTA looking at “bendy buses” in the near future, creating Bus Rapid Transit lines down streets like 3rd and 4th seems like a logical step. Use it as an alternative to taking the #2 down High, which can get quite interesting during morning and evening rush and the amount of on street parking.
I think that the point of the story is that the city has unilaterally decided, after some token community involvement, that those streets aren’t going to be two way. From attending the Weinland Park meetings I thought it was still open for discussion. Apparently, it’s not.
KyleEzell Says: …So what is the point of this story then?
To put a plan in place for quicker implementation when the money is available. Can’t wait until the last minute for these types of things. ;)
I live on Summit between 1st and Warren, and Summit being one way has never been a deterrent to me walking anywhere. I’m on the east side so I have to cross Summit every time I walk to the Short North (pretty much daily) and the traffic does move fast, but it’s in short contained bursts with huge breaks in between to cross at will – I genuinely don’t see the barrier here. Plus, they are SUPER convenient for driving as one way alternatives to a busy and super slow High Street. I would be totally in support of enforcing the speed limit, or even a 5mph reduction, and adding bike lanes (literally everywhere, I can’t believe we haven’t done this yet). And in my perfect world I would love to hop on a train at my front door and end up at work in Clintonville. But two-way Summit and 4th would be no more ped-friendly than slower one way w/ bikes and trains, right?
We all want this study to be done right for these streets, but you also shouldn’t invest in a year of research and planning knowing the count could be completely unreal by the time changes are enacted.
This was a big traffic calming study of the entire area, not just 2 streets, and most of the neighborhood changes are being done.
Yes COTA can run it either way, that isn’t the point, the question is how it impacts the flow of traffic if they build it… which requires more info that we can get right now.
I totally agree that we should be fighting for bike lanes and slower traffic along these stretches, whether it is 1 way or 2 way… it is moving too fast.
I found some speed data on the project web site. It wouldn’t be hard to change the speed limit and re-time the signals for 30 MPH. Then people would go a little over 30 instead of a little over 35. Adding bike lanes to narrow the other traffic lanes could also help, which appears to be part of the plan.
If people only went “a little over 35″! I’d love to see the speed limit enforced seriously for a month or so.
I don’t know why everyone wants slower traffic. I avoid high St whenever I can because of the slower traffic, unsynched lights, and parking issues. There’s another thread in CU somewhere where all this was already discussed.
lifeliberty Says: There’s another thread in CU somewhere where all this was already discussed.
I believe you’re referring to this one.
I’d just like to see the law enforced.
Again, no bike lanes. If you know how to ride in traffic you know that these are objectively less safe. Mr. Brown and Columbus traffic engineers don’t know what they’re talking about when it comes to bike infrastructure as opposed to someone who does urban cycling by the book everyday. That’s not meant as an insult, it’s just that they can”t since they don’t have loads of (if any) first hand experience. If the city is going to give us a lane, just give us a whole right lane instead of pushing us off to the side of the road where we are exposed to several more dangers. There is plenty of room on Summit and 4th for cyclists to have an entire lane dedicated to us.
As for slower traffic if timed correctly these streets would still be much faster than High with a 30MPH limit and would also minimize severity of accidents along with more reaction time for both parties. High St lights are not “unsycnhed” and are well-timed for cyclists as they should be since we have as much right to the road as cars. They’re already doing it there, so why not in Weinland Park, etc? Most roads should receive the same treatment by the city since cyclists physically cannot whiz through multiple green lights unless the road is descending.
If you must speed there is 71 and 315 going north-south.
I think people want lower speeds because the probability of death increases with speed.
I agree, if the streets aren’t going to be two-way at least enforce the speed limit. It’s a residential neighborhood. Imagine if people went 45 mph up Neil Ave. all day
And a bike lane would be great.
But , just to get everyone used to the streetcar concept, and to facilitate some traffic studies before it’s built why don’t we put some streetcars in the middle lanes of Fourth and Summit. Then, when there’s enough money we can put some track down. In the meantime people can get used to being around them. They’d be like a hip, urban traffic island. And it might slow down traffic too.
Ah, the ‘ol “For the safety of the children” arguement. Yes, let’s ban guns and alcohol and driving faster than people can walk, …just think of the children… :(
I am all for safety and more enforcement. the lights on summit and 4th are timed perfectly if you drive 35mph constantly.
I am not for newer laws or making changes when the existing laws on the books could fix a lot of problems if they only were enforced.
Huh? Who said anything about kids? Speeding cars can kill adults too.