RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
NBC4i.com wrote
Study May Change Downtown Driving
Monday, Nov 17, 2008
By Donna Willis
The city wants to increase safety for pedestrians, bicyclists and residents along 4th and Summit streets. The study focuses on changing 4th and Summit streets from one-way to two-way streets.
The reason for the safety plan is too many motorists are speeding on the two streets, according to Mary Carran Webster with the city’s public service department,. The city will have a mobility study at 5 p.m. tonight at the Grace Baptist Church, 1142 N. 6th St.
Related Stories:
- South Front Street Revamp News & Updates
- Columbus City Council Adopts Complete Streets Resolution
I would hope that part of this plan would get rid of that last half-block of one way on Warren.
The bridge looks like it needs to be rebuilt anyway (I drive fast over it in case it starts to collapse behind me) so maybe it could be retooled for two way. It would be nice to have Fourth be two way all the way down to Long, at least.
I think that portion is 1-way due to the Wonder Bread trucks. The enter and exit on that side. Then Warren also collapses to one-way down between Kerr and High. As a former resident on Warren, I liked the 1/2 near Wonder Bread, as it controlled traffic (I do dare say that if they happen to actually ever finish JP and create an intersection there, it should be made two-way to cross over into JP. They should also ditch the dumb philosopher’s names in JP and call it Warren the whole way through).
There was an article talking about the 4th Street bridge being replaced. It was posted on CU, but I cannot find it and all of my quick google searches just yield info on the Main Street bridge. But it is not slated to be replaced until some year in the future when I question if it will even be standing given its current crumbling nature. But maybe with an infrastructure stimulus package?
thinking about the bridge reminds me to ask if the bridges will remain one-way in-and-out of town? if so, this could put a lot of traffic on Warren Street and 1st Avenue for people connecting in-and-out. Warren is actually one-way east for the strip between Hamlet and 4th, so that would protect it somewhat, but 1st would probably get a lot of cross-over traffic.
The plan is only for north of 670, so there will have to be a re-routin somewhere.
At the meeting I had with MORPC, I was asked what cross street should be the “scaraficial lamb”?, to which I gulped that my words would somehow influence where all the traffic goes and I was imagined all the neighbors pissed at my decision to run the switchover on their street. But then I realized that they probably asked 100′s of people this and I am not deciding anything.
I proposed a chocking system where a certain % of traffic is switched at 2nd Ave, a certain % at 1st and a % at Warren. So instead of a “sacraficial lamb” there would be great distribution on a couple crossovers.
Yes that bridge is a piece of shit. I have walked and biked on it. Totally falling apart.
+1 on the bridge being a piece of shit. :?
This is such great news.
I remember three years ago when the city was planning on converting Gay Street to two ways and there was an uproar. But wow look what it did for ‘neighborhoodizing’ Gay Street– it’s such a positive change.
Thank you thank you thank you very much for doing this.
It’d be tough to have Summit go two-way South of I-670, given that the entrance ramp to 670 Eastbound exits on the left side of the Summit St. overpass.
First Ave is already used as a major cross street. I don’t see how this would greatly impact that? Make everything two ways with traffic calming and I think we will actually see a reduction in traffic. Just make sure that they enforce a 25 MPH speed limit and don’t widen it, then I’m happy. It is narrow enough to keep people going slow. I do get annoyed with the 45 people who turn around in my driveway everyday, meh.
I think this will be enough of an inconvenience to deter people from using Summit and Fourth as thoroughfares, thus reducing the traffic on everything except US 71, where it should be.
I think this will be enough of an inconvenience to deter people from using Summit and Fourth as thoroughfares, thus reducing the traffic on everything except US 71, where it should be.
+1 But I would say 2nd is already the natural connector linking Milo Grogan via Starr/3rd Ave to points west.
Two-way traffic was discussed several years ago when COTA was looking at 4th & Summit as a possible route for street-running light rail. It’s good to see this idea revived.
This is GREAT! I refuse to bike down Summit, I’m nearly run over every time. Especially when it approaches downtown and the exits for the highways begin…that entire area is horrible for bikers. Hopefully if this proposition goes through they’ll consider us! :-)
I highly disagree. Take your lane. Ride in a straight line. Use hand signals. This is an awesome road to ride on at like 4am in the summer with the wind on your back. Purely awesome way to go downtown. You can get from Warren to Tip Top in like 3 minutes.
The viaduct from IV to downtown is not very good during rush hours… but an awesome way to get into downtown after 8pm. Skip the Sort North and a great view of the skyline. It really opens up. Take your lane, ride straight, concentrate and go.
I’ve just recently discovered 4th as a means of biking further north. I should use it more often; it is a lot easier than plowing through OSU…
Also, please see the new guidelines the city is using for new roadway projects:
http://www.columbusunderground.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10900
:D
Also, please see the new guidelines the city is using for new roadway projects:
http://www.columbusunderground.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10900
:D
Having seen the first of many drafts to come for the revised city code regarding bikes, I am very pleased with the direction they are going. Until that passes, it seems to still be left to the whim of the transportation department.
+1
as a shop who has seen what conversions from two way to one way can do to business, two way is definitely superior for business.
I do have to wonder if ODOT will be down with this though. I know at least in downtown FEMA has supposedly designated third and fourth as escape routes in the event of an emergency. And then there’s the fact third & fourth represent US 23 I believe as well….There may be more political opposition to this from various groups as a result…
Well hopefully it does happen north of 670, maybe it will serve as successful proof of concept. :)
I think 4 cars going one way is probably about the same volume level as two cars going each way. ;)
But yeah, I’m not a traffic engineer either. Honestly, I hope this study is being conducted by more than just them. Because a traffic engineer’s job is to move as many cars and quickly as possible to where they’re trying to go, which is why Summit & Fourth were converted to two way in the first place. Instead it seems like we’re refocusing our priorities and are willing to sacrifice a few extra seconds of fine-tuned engineered driving time for things like pedestrian safety, neighborhood ambiance, and bikeability.
I am a traffic engineer. I do not think that pedestrian safety would be improved, and even walkinginfo.org agrees with me:
http://www.walkinginfo.org/engineering/roadway-streets.cfm
Two-way streets increase the number of conflict points at each intersection. So pedestrians and bikes would have to worry about right hooks and left hooks instead of just right hooks. Bike safety would probably be better served by creating a bike lane on the existing one-way pair.
Noise levels would probably decrease due to less traffic on the street, but be more consistent instead of rising and falling with traffic platoons.
Despite all of that, I do agree that the two-way conversion would make the street more comfortable for pedestrians and bikes and improve economic development. It’s a matter of perceived safety versus actual safety and what kind of a street people would rather live on. I think most people would prefer a three-lane, two-way street to a three-lane one-way street. Two-way streets also help reduce vehicle-miles traveled by providing more direct routes to destinations.
I think the big obstacles to the conversion will be accommodating traffic on OSU football Saturdays and the cost of signal modification.
Yeah it’s really funny, I’ve always found one way streets to be easier to use (biking, walking, driving etc) than two way streets but people in general seem to just absolutely hate them. I get so many complaints from customers about them like it’s my fault .
What’s even crazier is in the past month I’ve about 15 cars go the wrong way on third street and 4-5 go the wrong way on Main (we’ve been counting) ,in some cases nearly causing very severe accidents. I have never seen so many people ever do that downtown. We had a couple buffoons do that in the snowstorm but this regular weather driving now. It almost seems like in a recession people suddenly forget how to drive.
make no mistake, this is a damn good thing. slowing traffic down is always a good thing for people and for neighborhoods. Gay Street is an excellent example.
I highly disagree. Take your lane. Ride in a straight line. Use hand signals. This is an awesome road to ride on at like 4am in the summer with the wind on your back. Purely awesome way to go downtown. You can get from Warren to Tip Top in like 3 minutes.
The viaduct from IV to downtown is not very good during rush hours… but an awesome way to get into downtown after 8pm. Skip the Sort North and a great view of the skyline. It really opens up. Take your lane, ride straight, concentrate and go.
I’m not nearly being run over because I’m riding erratically and not using hand signals (something you insinuate), it’s because the cars on the road are going about 45 MPH and I’m going maybe 20. I don’t like riding on streets with cars going over twice my speed; it’s almost like riding on Kenny, which also sucks because I think most cars are going 50-55 on that road.
I won’t disagree with you that it has a gorgeous view of downtown and riding down it is a lot of fun. You’re right on that regard. I just don’t like having to battle with cars exiting and entering a highway.
It sounds like that only half supports your claim. I’m curious as to what sorts of differences we’d see in the statistics for pedestrian crashes, and how speed would factor in. Because anecdotally, it’s VERY easy for people to fly up and down Fourth & Summit at 35-45 mph with all of the synchronized lights and wide open-road configurations. Wouldn’t unsynching the lights and visually narrowing the streets with the two-way conversion slow the average speed down to a level we see on High Street (closer to 15-20 mph including all of the stopping)? I’m sure that has to weigh pretty heavily as far as pedestrian safety goes, both perceived and actual.
Does anyone know when 4th street and 3rd/summit were switched originally to one-way streets? And why/what was the reasoning behind the switch back then?