haltcatchfire
Senior Member
Ever been to Manhattan? One way streets aren’t the problem.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
YYCALGARY
New Member
Manhattan and Calgary are not comparable, at all. One way streets in that city serve the purpose of moving as many people through a space as possible. This is becoming less desirable as a means to neighborhood building as we learn more about the disadvantages, and as we move toward constructing spaces where people live, work and play. It wouldn’t surprise me if there were a plan in the works for Manhattan to attempt two-way conversion in the near future.
One such example includes Regina’s downtown couplet being converted back to two-way streets. This attempt has seen moderate success, and would IMO have been more successful with a re-located plaza. I digress.
However, there is a safety aspect to the conversions as well. People generally drive slower, and notice more on two way streets opposed to one way.
“Two-way streets have also been found to be safer than one-way streets, for several reasons. Although intersections of two-way streets have more conflicting maneuvers, one-way streets correlate with decreased levels of driver attention. One-way streets also allow higher travel speeds since signal timing results in less frequent stops for vehicles. Pedestrians also prefer crossing two-way streets since drivers tend to travel more slowly on them and vehicular conflicts are more predictable.” - https://www.accessmagazine.org
The article quoted is one of many that can be found with a quick search.
1875
Senior Member
manhattan...
The daytime population consists of approximately 1.61 million commuting workers, 1.46 million local residents, 404,000 out-of-town visitors, 374,000 local day-trip visitors, 17,000 hospital patients, and 70,000 commuting students.
haltcatchfire
Senior Member
With population comes density, and street level active uses tailoring to those residents. Those uses will exist whether the street is one way or two way and local residents will support those uses whether the street is one way or two way. We’re not going to be turning any more of the avenues downtown into a high street where you’re looking for congruent blocks of retail and food service and a high quality pedestrian experience to attract visitors to the area. Stephen Avenue is already that and will remain #1.
One of the N-S streets should also develop as a pedestrian/retail heavy street to connect Stephen and Eau Claire. 3rd was supposed to be this, but with new green line stations I’d bet 2nd becomes the heavy traffic N-S route.
I lived on 12th Avenue and never once felt a need for 11th and 12th to be two-way. In fact it’s easier to cross one ways. Light timing is shorter, there’s less traffic turning across crosswalks, and jaywalking mid block is way easier.
Focus on reducing lanes, widening sidewalks and actually creating clear walk width unencumbered by signs, lamps, power boxes, planters, parking pay stations etc.
I’ve been to countless cities with decent pedestrian experiences next to one way downtowns. I’ve also been in hellish gridlock in two-way downtowns.
If we end up having the population that can support significant residential development in the current CBD we shouldn’t be brushing off comparisons to other large cities.
One of the N-S streets should also develop as a pedestrian/retail heavy street to connect Stephen and Eau Claire. 3rd was supposed to be this, but with new green line stations I’d bet 2nd becomes the heavy traffic N-S route.
I lived on 12th Avenue and never once felt a need for 11th and 12th to be two-way. In fact it’s easier to cross one ways. Light timing is shorter, there’s less traffic turning across crosswalks, and jaywalking mid block is way easier.
Focus on reducing lanes, widening sidewalks and actually creating clear walk width unencumbered by signs, lamps, power boxes, planters, parking pay stations etc.
I’ve been to countless cities with decent pedestrian experiences next to one way downtowns. I’ve also been in hellish gridlock in two-way downtowns.
If we end up having the population that can support significant residential development in the current CBD we shouldn’t be brushing off comparisons to other large cities.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Agree 100% Plus the 1 ways are lined with parked cars on both sides with the exception of a few hours for rush hour, similar to the 2 ways in the area. The problem with downtown Calgary is it's a vertical 9-5 office park. Add many more residents and the area will change to suit.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
Manhattan would arguably be a much nicer place if it got rid of the one ways and implemented a wide variety of traffic calming measures (which it has been doing).
I think one way streets being changed to two way would help. It's not the be all end all, but it would make the street presence of downtown feel nicer, as it would make for a slower more consistent flow of traffic and street noise. One thing that takes away from the street ambiance on downtown one way streets is the inconsistency of the traffic flow and noise. One minute it's dead silent with no traffic at all...a minute later a pack of 30 cars are roaring past at high speed trying to make all the timed lights....then back to dead silence and emptiness.
I like the feel of a two way street, where there is a constant flow at a slower rate with less vehicle noise. Where you can here the music from people's cars rather than the sound of the car rushing past.
I like the feel of a two way street, where there is a constant flow at a slower rate with less vehicle noise. Where you can here the music from people's cars rather than the sound of the car rushing past.
GoVertical
Senior Member
Eau Claire plaza definitely under way:
1875
Senior Member
bummer they didnt work through the winter on this
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Winter is the wrong time of year to do landscape work.
adamyyc
Active Member
Does the City of Calgary have a “percent for public art” program?
O-tac
Active Member
What happened to the last mall redevelopment and plaza design?
Calgcouver
Active Member
As I am aware the City of Calgary has a density bonusing program only for the Centre City. The application of density bonusing exists outside of the Beltline and Downtown on an ad hoc basis (i recall this being a part of the conversation related to the DC district created for RNDSQR Block).
Here is the density bonusing framework in the LUB, public art is in there: http://lub.calgary.ca/Part11/Division_7_Rules_Governing_Centre_City_Bonus_Overlays.htm
Calgcouver
Active Member
I live in Mission and really wish we could get more ground-oriented housing forms (townhouses, stacked towns). But you're not wrong it could use the land more efficiently. One of the building types i'd like to see is low-rise hybrid buildings:
Calgcouver
Active Member
I don't mind this although i find that townhouse product in mission always shoots for larger "luxury/executive" unit sizes above 2,000sf and I really wish they would focus on skinnier units, with tandem garages at the 1,200-1,600 sf range. Maybe use interlocked top floors to allow for alternating 3-bedroom units mid-building.
In terms of design i think that the window design on the 3rd floor could be nicer (especially don't like the small windows). Windows would look better if they used the tall and skinny ones consistently for each unit, create a rhythm. The Hardie lap siding would look better if they used the shingle product and if they used alternating or different colours for the different units. The end unit on the corner should have glazing and should address the other street so the building turns the corner.
Also on the main floors it would be smart to run picket fence with quality plantings in the front to create outdoor front amenity space that is private for each unit. If it is just shared lawns, the space becomes a useless front setback area that the occupants don't use. Give them a picket fenced area so that they can let a dog out, have a small garden, chairs maybe even a chiminea if they have enough room. Like this, but the front fenced area would be larger: