295 replies to this topic

[krazeeboi]

You're right, and I don't advocate them being placed everywhere, just the one or two main thoroughfare(s) through a town.

[waccamatt]

krazeeboi, on Jul 20 2005, 07:34 PM, said:

So waccamatt, have you informed Columbia city council of your vision?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wanted to wait on the input here before presenting the plan to City Council.

[waccamatt]

Spartan, on Jul 21 2005, 04:24 PM, said:

Palm trees aren't built to be frozen, which is why thay are tropical, and that happens a few times a year in Cola, which is why they die, and another reason why I am not the biggest fan of them being used everywhere. It woudl be really bad if we had these thigns everywhere, looking sick   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Once established, Palmetto Trees winter quite well in Columbia. I have a Palmetto, 3 Windmill Palms, 3 Mexican Palms and 2 Pindo Palms in my backyard and they all do quite well. Only the Mexicans turn somewhat brown during the winter.

[GamecockEngineer]

I like your ideas.  As an engineer thought, the angled parking would never work.  Traffic flows on Assembly are too heavy, and the vehicle movement required with angled parking would prove too dangerous.

Other than that, I think it's something that should be done.  Removing the overhead powerlines and sidewalk beautification would be great.

Also, putting the stoplights on mastarms instead of overhead lines would greatly improve the look of the facility.

[Captain Worley]

I'd like to see pedestrian brides across some of the wider/busier streets in the area.  Huger and Assemby immediately spring to mind.

[GvilleSC]

Greenville is aiming to "sink" one of its widest streets, College Street, and connect the two sides with pedestrian bridges. I love the idea and I think this could easily work for Columbia, too. Imagine the experience walking around the area, or even driving through... I think a lot of character could be acheived this way through the ending results.  

[krazeeboi]

I think pedestrian bridges could work for Huger, but I'd rather see Assembly narrowed and streetscaped. It has the potential for some great sidewalk pedestrian activity.

[TheSuperPope]

GvilleSC, on Nov 9 2006, 02:45 PM, said:

^^^ Greenville is aiming to "sink" one of its widest streets, College Street, and connect the two sides with pedestrian bridges. I love the idea and I think this could easily work for Columbia, too. Imagine the experience walking around the area, or even driving through... I think a lot of character could be acheived this way through the ending results.  

I love the idea of sunken highways/roads, they're just so damn cool looking. But, I don't really know if its feasible to sink assembly or huger due to the intersections along both of them and the stores/shops/offices fronting them (especially Assembly). But Ped bridges would be really cool.

[Spartan]

Where is College St in Greenville?

That wouldn't make sense for Assemby or Huger I think. That would really mess up the grid system that Columbia has. Now maybe Two Notch....

[GvilleSC]

Spartan, on Nov 9 2006, 11:02 PM, said:

Where is College St in Greenville?

That wouldn't make sense for Assemby or Huger I think. That would really mess up the grid system that Columbia has. Now maybe Two Notch....

Beattie Street becomes College Street somewhere past Main. College runs infront of Heritage Green.

[waccamatt]

TheSuperPope, on Nov 9 2006, 03:29 PM, said:

I love the idea of sunken highways/roads, they're just so damn cool looking. But, I don't really know if its feasible to sink assembly or huger due to the intersections along both of them and the stores/shops/offices fronting them (especially Assembly). But Ped bridges would be really cool.

If there are adequate traffic lights I really don't see the necessity of pedestrian bridges. The money each ped bridge would cost, could bury about 4-5 blocks of power lines.

[TheSuperPope]

Why not build the ped bridges and bury the power lines while at it? (I know city council isn't just flooded with money, but its still a good question)

[krazeeboi]

I don't really see the need for pedestrian bridges on Assembly myself. Streetscaping and narrowing the street (also burying power lines) would be more desirable IMO.

How exactly do sunken roads look anyway? I'm sure I've seen some, but they're not coming readily to mind.

[Captain Worley]

It isn't practical to narrow Assembly because of the traffic flow numbers.  The vehicle count is really high on that street.  It would be niceto see more buried power/telephone lines.  They really mess up the view of the Capitol coming in from North Main.

I was just blue skying with the ped bridges.  Columbia has far too many of the things anyway.  I like the looks of them, but an engineer never sees a bridge he doesn't like.

[TheSuperPope]

KB, imagine the connector in ATL... or pretty much all of 85/75 through downtown. It's basically a highway that is sunken a few yards into the ground with vertical walls on both side and the normal roads go over top of it.

[803metlife]

krazeeboi, on Nov 10 2006, 04:14 AM, said:

I don't really see the need for pedestrian bridges on Assembly myself. Streetscaping and narrowing the street (also burying power lines) would be more desirable IMO.

How exactly do sunken roads look anyway? I'm sure I've seen some, but they're not coming readily to mind.

I don't know maybe it's just me I don't care for pedestrian bridges.

[GamecockEngineer]

SCDOT and the city are not in favor of pedestrian bridges because it "removes people from the streets".  The University's Innovista plan will/has been designed to be pedestrian friendly, which will require either narrowing the streets or providing pedestrian bridges, both of which the city/DOT are opposed to.  Narrower streets means less capacity, making the city harder to navigate.  I dont entirely agree with the argument that ped. bridges remove activity from the streets, but I can see where they are coming from.  Anyway, I think the result in the Innovista design are narrower streets but still with 4 lanes and no pedestrian bridges.

[krazeeboi]

The only one street that I really advocate narrowing is Assembly, which I think is entirely TOO wide. It can be narrowed without significantly reducing vehicle capacity quite easily. Hampton would be another one, and I would like to see it converted to a two-way street myself.

[Spartan]

I am not in favor of sinking normal roads. Interstates are one thing, but making local streets into limited access roads is a bad idea.

[waccamatt]

OK people, think about the most pedestrian city in the United States - New York City. I know of few pedestrian bridges in NYC and people get along just fine, even when crossing wide avenues.