Jump to content

New Wealthy Streetscape


uncus

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think Division would really prosper if it had a more Main St. feel, If they cut the street down to, one lane each way with a center turn lane, that could be amazing, I don't think Division is that much of a thoroughfare to keep it the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Division would really prosper if it had a more Main St. feel, If they cut the street down to, one lane each way with a center turn lane, that could be amazing, I don't think Division is that much of a thoroughfare to keep it the way it is.

I agree. Keep the street the same width for the most part, but make it a 3 lane road with 2 traffic lanes. The reason I say keep the same width, is I've gone to some of the new shops opening up down there and parked in the metered lanes there. Everytime I've done so, however, there was always some crazy person running faster than traffic in the right lane trying to pass every one. Everytime I got out my vehicle I feared for my life (or my driver's side door) as the space between the parking lanes and the traffic lane seemed very tight.

One lane in each direction with wider parking lanes swallowing up the extra asphalt would accomplish two nice things along Division.

1) The wider parking lanes would be more "visitor friendly", making it feel like you are parking on the street and not in the street.

2) Narrowing from 4 traffic lanes to 2 would keep the NASCAR mindset a little more under control and inline with acceptable speed limitations in the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have round abouts here at MSU and they are nice until you get to levels of very high traffic. It makes it difficult for pedestrians as it can be a constant flow of traffic and then if somebody gets sick of waiting and crosses drivers have to stop in the circle causing problems. They are actually getting rid of our busiest ones here on campus because of this.

Take pedestrians out and they are a great idea though, if it was combined with sky walks over the street they would work out nicely but be expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I've driven them in Europe and I think they are WAY better than traffic signals. You get used to them pretty quickly. We had a whole discussion about them here a while back:

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...&hl=roundabouts

And they have been around a lot longer than traffic signals to call them trendy.

There are some very small roundabouts on Giddings Ave. between Burton and Franklin. However, from what I've seen, lots of people just don't seem to have a clue as to how to handle them. The city put up "keep right" signs on each side, but people still go around to the left to complete a left-hand turn. Also, no one yields (in spite of "yield" signs posted on each corner of the intersection) as they approach one...I've nearly been hit a few times while I've been out running because of this. If we went with more roundabouts in town, we'd have to have some kind of ad campaign to tell people how to drive (or not drive) through these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think roundabouts are best when you have low to moderate traffic in which you can use them to control the traffic without the need to stop a stop sign or stop a red light when there is no traffic coming on the cross street. This was, traffic can keep flowing smoothly (assuming everyone knows how to use it properly). I have seen them in use in Europe and they work great in the country so you don't have to stop. As was previously mentioned, in very heavy traffic they tend to get clogged and don't do quite as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im all for pedestrian friendly neighborhoods but.............. Division needs to be 2 lanes look at what they did to plainfield from sweet to 3 mile. Traffic is worse now at rush hour due to the city making it one lane. Also with all the new shops opening up on division and other developments to come to that area traffic will get worse so i think its better to have two lanes to accomodate all the traffic these establishments will bring in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im all for pedestrian friendly neighborhoods but.............. Division needs to be 2 lanes look at what they did to plainfield from sweet to 3 mile. Traffic is worse now at rush hour due to the city making it one lane. Also with all the new shops opening up on division and other developments to come to that area traffic will get worse so i think its better to have two lanes to accomodate all the traffic these establishments will bring in the future.

traffic on division can be really insane... i dont think it would be a great idea to lower the amount of traffic lanes... though kramer-style deluxe lanes would be really posh...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im all for pedestrian friendly neighborhoods but.............. Division needs to be 2 lanes look at what they did to plainfield from sweet to 3 mile. Traffic is worse now at rush hour due to the city making it one lane. Also with all the new shops opening up on division and other developments to come to that area traffic will get worse so i think its better to have two lanes to accomodate all the traffic these establishments will bring in the future.

Plainfield went from a 4-lane street (2 lanes in each direction and no center turn lane) to a 3-lane street (1 lane in each direction with a center turn lane). The capacity of the two designs is very similar. The street may appear busier at the peak hours, but that is mostly an illusion because the lines at the lights are longer with 1 lane instead of 2. There is very little, if any, change in actual travel times from Ann Street to 3-Mile even during the peak hours.

Except for the possibility of minor delays during 2 peak-hours a day, the documented accident rate (2003/2004) is 1/3 of what it was before the change, there is more on-street parking which helps the neighborhood retailers in the area and there is a new mixed-use building in the Cheshire area that would not have been built without the road change. It is safer for bikes, it feels safer for pedestrians (on-street parking creates a barrier) and, given the amount of cars that use the road, there has been much more praise for the change than complaints.

That was exactly my previous point about Wealthy. The design of streets to accomodate the traffic demands of 2 out of 23 hours of any day is not helpful to the urban quality of life. In balance the 3-lane change on Plainfield has improved the quality of that street, as it has on West Leonard where the same change was made. Division could have been a nicer street and Wealthy should be a nicer street. Maybe Wealthy can't work with 3-lanes, but I would suggest that without on-street parking there will be no traditional storefronts from Division to Jefferson and that would be unfortunate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plainfield went from a 4-lane street (2 lanes in each direction and no center turn lane) to a 3-lane street (1 lane in each direction with a center turn lane). The capacity of the two designs is very similar. The street may appear busier at the peak hours, but that is mostly an illusion because the lines at the lights are longer with 1 lane instead of 2. There is very little, if any, change in actual travel times from Ann Street to 3-Mile even during the peak hours.

My understanding of the Plainfield change was a happy accident rather then something that was planned. When they were doing road construction at one point they realigned the lanes temporarily. Overall they realized that the traffic just flowed better that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding of the Plainfield change was a happy accident rather then something that was planned. When they were doing road construction at one point they realigned the lanes temporarily. Overall they realized that the traffic just flowed better that way.

It was an intentional change that was supported by the business and neighborhood associations. I attended 2 or 3 meetings with neighborhood representatives and the city traffic engineers prior to the change happening.

The change was implemented at the end of a construction project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way, I like the way Plainfield feels in that area now. :thumbsup: That would definitely be an improvement to make Division and Wealthy Streets the same way. There is a disconnect between what the public feels is needed for "convenience" sake, and the consequences it has on the urban environment. More topics like this may help educate people (including myself) about these issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Not to usurp TripleG's response but the City has postponed the project until the 2007 construction season. In total the project will eventually reconstruct Wealty Street all the way to Division. It is a mojor water main re-routing project so the work is fairly extensive below and above ground. The overall look of the Eastern to Union section will mimic the look of the recently reconstructed section of Wealthy between Fuller and Diamond.

So if this project is posponed . . . what is happening now? I see big holes in concrete and pipe lying around. I'm hoping that this project will result it better water pressure for me and others who live around wealthy? Am i in luck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.