RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
The completion of the two-way conversion of South Front Street.
One more step in the redevelopment of the Riversouth neighborhood is completed as three sections of roadway are opened today to two-way traffic. They include South Front Street, between West Town and West Mound streets, West Main Street, between South High and South 2nd streets and West Rich Street, between South High and South 2nd streets.
“The conversion to two-way traffic makes these streets safer for pedestrians, bicyclists and everyone who lives, works or visits downtown,” said Mayor Michael B. Coleman. “These infrastructure improvements and the housing that our private sector partners have invested in are catalysts for a stronger core of Columbus.”
In addition to the two-way conversion, this project also included the resurfacing of streets, new underground sewer utilities, lanscaping, improved sidewalks and crosswalks, new curbs, traffic calming elements, bike racks, bike route signage, public benches, new streetlights, and rain gardens for stormwater collection.
“These improvements will ensure a healthy and vibrant downtown for residents, visitors, and businesses to enjoy for decades to come,” said Eileen Y. Paley, chair of the Public Service and Transportation committee.
I think this is great and would love if they did this to 4th and Summit which are probably the best examples of how one way streets can become highways through a nieghborhood.
Great News. I’ve long been looking forward to the end of construction around the entire River South area and I’m looking forward to the day you can drive down Front or Main Streets and not see a single orange barrel.
I just got back from New Orleans and I was shocked to see how much emptier the CBD looked from the French Quarters. In the French Quarter everywhere you looked their where clubs, bars, restaurants, and small business. I think River South should have more 4-5 story buildings with the first 1st-2nd floors of retail/business/restaurants/and clubs and have the top 2-3 floors residential. I think Rich Street could be a great stem from The Rich Street Bridge/Scioto Mile to the Columbus Commons with this idea. Just not all the hookers.
Kyle — I agree that there is a lost opportunity where we’re not building retail space at ground level.
That being said, these complete street renovations are a great step in the right direction. They make our Downtown more walkable, bikable and neighborhood-friendly, rather than being configured as a place where cars can enter and exit highways ramps at 40 miles per hour.
I’m happy to ride in either direction on these streets – its about time. Now… my nemesis streets 3rd and 4th.
Could it still be in place though? I mean there is a lot of parking spots in, and around the Riversouth district.
I’ve been converted to believing that conversion from one-way to two-way is a good thing.
But it’s only half the solution. The other half is use of judicious use of roundabouts where appropriate to make intersections safer for drivers and pedestrians and avoid congestion that wastes time and gas.
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/topics/PowerPoint/RoundAbouts_August_2010.pptx
roundabouts? that makes the solution: don’t ever stop traffic.
Yeah, not too sure that roundabouts have any place in the core of Downtown Columbus. They work ok in some neighborhoods like where they exist in Dennison Place, but traffic there is pretty calm to begin with.
Theirs a roundabout in the center of Indianapolis.
And it’s huge. To install something like that it would require the demolition of buildings to put it in a site like Broad & High. I’m not sure that an urban roundabout is necessary. Let Indy keep theirs as something unique. ;)
Yeah, not too sure that roundabouts have any place in the core of Downtown Columbus.
why I said “judicious.” but why not *any* place downtown? Not everywhere since space is an issue. but since traffic moves through them better, you can often eliminate an extra lane of traffic in each direction, leaving more intersection space to put them in. You also have more space outside the intersections of what was an extra lane for medians or expanded sidewalks or greenspace. Check out the stats in the presentation I posted. Not appropriate everywhere, but more often that you’d think. Especially when we’re getting to the issue of Third/Summit and Fourth, which a bunch of people noted.
roundabouts? that makes the solution: don’t ever stop traffic.
Yes, exactly. traffic slows down significantly, but doesn’t stop. much, much safer for everyone and a lot greener since there’s no idling. is that a bad thing?
By the way, even though roundabouts are much more efficient, effective, and safer, it’s a given that most people will object until we start getting them: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/presentations/safety_aspects/images/s27.jpg
Roundabouts can have different scales….I think Jefe might be thinking something more like this:
http://pedshed.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/plessis-robinson-roundabout.jpg
Instead of this:
http://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2010/11/uptown_normal1-537×358.jpg
I guess I should rephrase… I’m not completely against roundabout, and I am familiar with the role they serve.
That being said, I’ve not seen convincing evidence that indicates that we need one in any specific intersection in Downtown Columbus. I’m open to new ideas though… so what intersection needs one?
Also: as a frequent pedestrian Downtown, the thought of trying to cross at an intersection where cars don’t ever stop really sounds frightening. ;)
I think complete street makeovers, such as Gay Street, are much more valuable than any number of roundabouts in creating a more walkable, enjoyable downtown. These street makeovers have certainly improved the downtown landscape significantly….and I’m hopeful that new developments will take place soon.
They’re safer for pedestrians (see slides 24-30). Slower cars; separated from the intersection, which means cars are looking at you instead of looking left to turn right; you only have to cross half the street at a time.
In terms of which intersection, that’s a longer conversation. There’s a metric in the presentation of where it’s not appropriate. South Front in the picture would work well (depending on the cross street) because you could actually make the lane closest to the street permanent parking and use the space that saves in the intersection for a roundabout. Granted, they just redid the roads in there, so I’m not saying that it should be converted to a roundabout right now. But the layout would work quite well if the cross street is similar. The second lane is there for extra traffic flow, but since roundabouts work better for flow, it might be unnecessary.
I’m not a traffic engineer, so I couldn’t give an audit of every intersection. In general, though, they’d work in lots of places.
Check out the PowerPoint if you’re interested. It includes a part on the extra value creation to the area (slide 40)–I’m guessing because it’s both more efficient and safer. Also, here’s more from the feds on the safety aspects.
I would agree about Gay Street. My concern is that because those streetscape revisions are so great, more and more people will be walking and biking downtown–as well as driving at all hours instead of just rush hour–so there will be significant benefit in having more effective, efficient, and safer intersections in the future. Gay Street is also perfectly set up for its intersections to be converted. It already has a median and everything.
not that anyone is following this anymore, but: http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2011/12/15/best-of-blog-co-opting-complete-streets.html