Cities with one-way streets (planner, freeways, houses, concrete)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. One is supposed to be able to read to drive a car. A "one way" sign isn't that difficult to comprehend.
2. City streets generally have speed limits of 25-30 mph whether they are one way or two way.
3. You've read, eh? Maybe you have a link?
4. Often? Where? In Denver one way streets are usually two lanes and they seem to make traffic flow better downtown. They've usually paired, e.g. 6th Ave is one way east, 8th is one way west.
Why must you be so negative!? You asked a question and I answered it. I'm not going to post links because you will attack the sources anyway. If you really love one-way streets, that's fine.
Back in 1986, Denver converted seven one-way streets to two-way streets. A 1990 report by the City of Denver found that the average intersection accident rates increased 37.6% while average mid-block accident rates increased 80.5%.
7) City of Denver, "One-Way Street Monitoring Study, Phase 1 Conversion Report", January 1990. (The seven streets were Grant, Logan, Washington, Emerson, Downing, Marion, & Ogden Streets. Data on accident rates is from pages 15, 23, and 29).
It's really noticeable how the aggressive 3rd Avenue driver is forced to slow down around the 3:30 mark in the video. The driver has caught up to the beginning of the "green wave" and they basically can't outrun the traffic signals. This is a good example of how traffic signal timings along one-way streets can actually regulate speeds.
What's really telling is comparing the average speed of both drivers when they are not stopped at a red light. The aggressive driver on Park Avenue (two-way) averaged 41 mph. The aggressive driver on 3rd Avenue (one-way) averaged 30 mph. The driver on 3rd Avenue would have driven faster if they could, but again they were throttled back by the traffic signal timing. On the other hand, the simultaneous greens along Park Avenue always encouraged aggressive driving behavior (IE. the faster the driver goes, the more signals they can make it through before all the lights simultaneously change back to red).
Interesting video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by impala096
In what ways have these conversions been an amazing success? From a safety perspective, before/after crash data would seem crucial to determine if converting one-way to two-way streets are truly successful. Do you have any studies that compare the before/after crash data?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Would someone please tell me what is bad about one way streets now? And what's next on the "bad" list? I like to keep up with these things, not be politically incorrect.
I have seen stats on two way streets as a road calming process. But the street design is more complicated. If you have wide streets, it doesn't matter if they are one or two way, people will speed because it feels more like a freeway. Obviously traffic light timing makes a huge difference too. If there is a green wave at the sped limit, people will slow down (or speed up) to catch it.
Downtown Oakland is "over one-way streeted." The streets could easily be converted into 2 ways again, with the exceptions of the ones leading to the freeway, and they could add more bike lanes pretty easily. Most of the streets aren't so busy that it is needed, and it is almost a perfect grid, so finding an alternate route is no big deal. Right now, the bike lane situation is pretty silly, about 5-6 blocks in the middle of downtown do not have bike lanes on any side. And if you want to go to the waterfront, you need to go like 4 blocks out of the way, if you are starting on the west side, and want the easiest bike path (otherwise you have Chinatown, parks, and then the freeway cutting you off). Lots of people bike in Chinatown, but they go on the sidewalks which are really really crowded. Combine that with double parked cars, congestion, freeway ramps and other annoyances, you'll just as soon go out of your way to avoid it.
What I would say is this: When it comes to designing or retrofitting streets, the burden of proof shouldn't fall on those who want to use them the old-fashioned way. It should be on those who think the speedway ideology of the 1950s serves much of a purpose half a century later.
If the city is in a grid pattern, one ways work best, especially for downtown areas. Cities that don't have a grid but do one way streets tend to do so only for the high traffic routes. Though for streets that are more neighborhood main streets, two way streets work better because it slows people down and keeps the traffic on the main commercial street rather than use a neighborhood street.
The article never cites any before/after safety data that would indicate if the conversion from a one-way street to a two-way street has led to safer operations for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. To its credit, the article does touch on previous research that found two-way streets have a higher accident rate than one-way streets (of course it tries to discredit it).
Quote:
It's sometimes said that more accidents occur on two-way streets than one-way streets. The research that supports this claim is decades old, and to my knowledge, has not been replicated. Even if you accept this argument, though, you might want to consider that, at slower speeds, the accidents on two-way streets are much more likely to be fender-benders at left-turn intersections, not harrowing high-speed crashes involving cars and pedestrians.
Again, instead of citing actual before/after safety data, the author attempts to scare its readers to believing that one way roads lead to "harrowing high-speed crashes involving cars and pedestrians". Of course, the author describes accidents that may occur on two-way roads as "fender-benders". This article lacks factual data and is nothing more than propaganda for two-way street proponents.
Two-way conversions - the fastest, easiest, lowest cost way to reintroduce urbanism to cities
Seen it happen twice to amazing effects. Moribund auto-sewers - dead to everything but high-speed traffic because vibrant walkable complex streets with tons of pedestrians and little businesses along them. In both cases the transformation began almost immediately. 5 years out both streets went from being dead to being among the most vibrant streets in town.
And the cost is minimal - this can be done with nothing more than paint and changing streetlights. More expensive great streets programs can be implemented as well, but it's not necessary to get started.
Slow down the traffic, make the street friendlier to pedestrians - magic happens.
If the city is in a grid pattern, one ways work best, especially for downtown areas. Cities that don't have a grid but do one way streets tend to do so only for the high traffic routes. Though for streets that are more neighborhood main streets, two way streets work better because it slows people down and keeps the traffic on the main commercial street rather than use a neighborhood street.
We have one way streets in much of downtown Oakland, and in some residential streets.
In the downtown, many could be converted to 2-ways with no big impact. Today I had jury duty and inroad my bike down, I couldn't remember which streets were which direction, and I was tempted to ride against traffic. Many of the streets are pretty quiet, but people speed to hit the traffic lights.
My street (which originates downtown) converts 2 one way, but I think in some ways it is safer and some ways it isn't but it isn't really wide enough to go 2 way for either of the pair, unless you take away parking. And I know that will not happen. People would have a conniption.
Two-way streets are better for local businesses that depend heavily on their visibility to passersby.
Two-way streets have been found to be safer than one-way streets. One-way streets correlate with higher speeds and decreased levels of driver attention. Pedestrians prefer crossing two-way streets since drivers tend to travel more slowly on them, and vehicular conflicts are more predictable.
Two-way streets are much less confusing for downtown visitors than one-way streets. Visitors driving in a two-way grid network can easily approach their destination from any direction.
I'd rather have narrower streets! That slows the traffic down.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two-way conversions - the fastest, easiest, lowest cost way to reintroduce urbanism to cities
