  Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 571 Registered: 11-2004 |
Does anyone else think that the major one streets in this city are completely unnecessary? I find them inconvenient, god forbid you miss your turn, and more important traffic doesn't seem to justify them. Second and Third especially come to mind, in particular, I detest that stretch of 2nd north of 94 with the median. It seems so pointless to have a 6 lane one way boulevard | ||
Quinn Member Username: Quinn Post Number: 1016 Registered: 01-2005 |
There are tons of one-way streets that I think suck. How about Forrest East-Bound over here on the east side...it's literally a freeway. 3 or 4 lanes (lanes appear and disappear as you travel) at 60-70 MPH sometimes faster. I would hate to live in any neighborhood along there. It's almost like people just wanted to have fun with planning or something... | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 565 Registered: 02-2006 |
I think they have it backwards. Smaller neighborhood streets should be one way. Arterial streets should be two way. | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 4032 Registered: 10-2003 |
Like the "No parking" between "Rush Hours" on downtown streets, they are leftovers from when traffic was much heavier. | ||
Haydenth Member Username: Haydenth Post Number: 195 Registered: 05-2005 |
Drive north on Second between Midtown and New Center sometime (north of WSU) It's the only divided one way street I've ever seen. | ||
Crew Member Username: Crew Post Number: 1057 Registered: 02-2004 |
Some of those one-way streets in midtown might have made sense in the 1950's when cars shared the roads with street-cars but at this point in time they should all be converted back to two-way traffic. | ||
Unclefrank Member Username: Unclefrank Post Number: 51 Registered: 03-2006 |
It goes back to Detroit still trying to act like a mega city. | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 292 Registered: 12-2003 |
I like them. I used to live in between Third and Second off of Selden and it was really convenient. No Left hand turn hassels and traffic moves much faster. Instead of making these streets two way I would rather see the freeways surrounding this area closed and covered up. Imagine having the lodge , 94, 375, and 75 in this area covered up....especially the stretch of 75 north of old Tiger Stadium. Albert Cobo, worst Mayor ever. Detroit's version of Robert Moses. (Message edited by bussey on October 28, 2006) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3004 Registered: 08-2004 |
The one way street that I don't like is Grand River from Cass to Bagley (1 block, next to the former Michigan Theatre). West of Cass, Grand River is 2 way, east of it, it is one way (eastbound). I don't know how many times I wish I could have made a left turn from eastbound Bagley to westbound Grand River. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4590 Registered: 10-2003 |
Yeah, most all of the one way streets just outside of downtown don't make much sense, anymore. | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3181 Registered: 10-2003 |
Wait until we get a big snow storm; then you will appreciate them. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 342 Registered: 08-2006 |
I actually like one way streets, just not down residential streets, as its a mess. Have to go up and come back and then turn here to get there, gos!, but one way streets are much faster in terms of traffic flow and turning. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4593 Registered: 10-2003 |
That's why many people who appreciate walkable communities see one-way's a turnoff. They are meant solely to move automobiles at higher speeds and capacities around/through a particular area, and in many cases to get commuters to freeways quicker (that is, those constructed after the invention of the freeway). (Message edited by lmichigan on October 28, 2006) | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 301 Registered: 04-2006 |
One way streets are no hassle. Most are paired with a road going the opposite direction. What are you folks complaining about? Just because the streets are different than what you would find in the suburbs they need to be changed? Detroit has a very different street network than is found in most of the suburban areas. It should not operate the same way. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 572 Registered: 11-2004 |
To think that this trying to make Detroit like the suburbs is beyond idiotic. They need to be change because they're obsolete, streets like 2nd were coveted to one ways in order to facilitate traffic movement before freeways. Especially given todays traffic conditions they encourage higher speeds making the street less pedestrian friendly. With a name like Detroitplanner I'd think you'd recognize the importance of something like traffic calming. | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 295 Registered: 12-2003 |
Why calm when you have no need to do so.......calming is usually implemented due to a large pedestrian count. Detroit is far from having this. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 345 Registered: 08-2006 |
Basically, One way streets are much better when it comes to getting into and out of the new center area and Midtown. I like Warren better than Mack when going to Children's Hospital for my Nephew, much faster and less congested that both Gratiot and Mack. However, in one case, I do like Milwaukee to get to the New Center area than the Boulevard because Milwaukee isnt as congested and doesnt have any lights until you get to the NCA. Also, think about the comparison between east Seven Mile and 8 Mile, 8 Mile is much faster than E. Seven Mile to get form one side of town to another, except for the railroads on the eastside along 8 Mile, its even faster than I-696 or I-94. | ||
Jasoncw Member Username: Jasoncw Post Number: 260 Registered: 07-2005 |
I don't like one ways. Untill you get used to an area, you get lost and turned around. If the building you want to go to is on the end of a block, you still have to drive around in a big circle to get there. I also think the confusion caused by one way streets discourages people from visiting downtowns. In Toronto they have these roads that are two way streets, but the number of lanes going in each way is dynamic. Over each lane is a light that indicates which direction the lane is going in, and depending on traffic trends, the number of lanes will change. I honestly can't see how something like this would be very expensive either, since it's only slightly more complex than normal light timing. Of course, I don't think that downtown is having major traffic problems either. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1869 Registered: 07-2004 |
One way streets as major streets exist in most major cities. I don't believe they make a city less pedestrian friendly. First, you only have to look in one direction when crossing the street. Secondly, with no left turn lane most major one way streets are at most only five lanes wide, which is not a difficult cross for most people, especially when all you have to do is look one way. I grew up between Warren and Forest where they are both one way streets. I never had a problem crossing these streets as a kid, despite the speed of the cars. The way that the lights were timed, you would get a mad dash of traffic and then nothing for a good 30 seconds, so you just waited for the mad dash to pass before crossing. Before the Lodge and the Chrysler freeways were built, streets like Second and Third, as well as John R and Brush probably served as overflow routes that relieved traffic from Woodward up to where they ended. Also, I agree with Lowell that one way streets are a Godsend during heavy snows. No plowing is needed because the cars going down the one way street help form grooves for subsequent cars to follow. The bottom of the previous cars help flatten the snow for the subsequent cars as well. Remember, Detroit has to spend additional money to plow residential streets when six or more inches of snow come down. If all residential streets were one way, then this expense wouldn't be necessary. I was just in Chicago this past weekend. Because of the density in most Chicago neighborhoods, one way residential streets are a must. Detroit would be happy to have that kind of density. Despite all of the one ways, Chicago is a very walkable city. (Message edited by royce on October 29, 2006) | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4598 Registered: 10-2003 |
Bussey, you calm to invite pedestrian use. That's like that we don't need mass transit because everyone drives. lol | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 4 Registered: 10-2006 |
Rosa Parks (12th) has to rank up there as being one of the oddest one way streets in Detroit. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 356 Registered: 08-2006 |
Lmichigan, thats what I've been trying to say the whole time I've been on the site. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 357 Registered: 08-2006 |
And yes, with our fattest city name, pedestrianship would encourage more people to walk from one place to another instead of getting in a car of a indoor shopping mall and driving to the destination, which is why we have that why were one of the fattest cities in america, fast food and over eatage everywhere, but not enough exercise now, because of laziness. Pedestrianship will give us a lot more exercise and maybe some of us wouldnt be as fat and in terms of science, it would help ease pollution and electricity usage around the nation already, as trains and subways is just more and more electricity being wasted when a lot of people around the city isnt going to ride them when its faster, cheaper, and safer to ride and drive your car daily. Also, its always faster to walk somewhere instead of waiting on mass transit and giving up your money putting your lives in the hands of some driver, losing a good exercise opportunity and giving more of it back to people who eventualy will just rip us off in the end. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 307 Registered: 04-2006 |
Eric, you're not reading the full argument. I noted that we have a very different structure of how the roads are spaced in the areas where there are one-way roads. I am not one to advocate change for changes sake. I simply tried to put the idea into context. There must have been a sound rationale for changing the roads to one-way pairs several years ago. Should this be looked at? Maybe. I'd rather have the City spend its tight dollars on improving transit, road surfaces, and police/fire than on studies, re-signing, re-signaling, and re-striping roads that already work fine, but may not be your idea of how the roads should operate. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 358 Registered: 08-2006 |
Actually, its much easier to cross a one-way street that a street like Gratiot, as they is a lack of traffic on the one-way streets. | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3185 Registered: 10-2003 |
On the lighter side, how many of you have inadvertently turned the wrong way on an empty one-way street then suddenly see cars flying at you in your lane while you saying, 'Oh, S***!', as you look desperately for a driveway or space to rip a U-ie. LOL, that happened to me just the other day on 12th Street while looking for a better angle on a building. | ||
Detroitstar Member Username: Detroitstar Post Number: 277 Registered: 01-2006 |
I'm guessing I was not the only person totally confused when driving up 2nd Street in Midtown the first few times. I thought I was driving on the wrong side of the road, until I saw the only other car on that stretch of road at the time. Seems like a giant waste of space to have a divided one way road there. | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 156 Registered: 05-2006 |
I don't mind one way streets if they are clearly marked. A couple of months ago, I was showing some friends of mine Indian Village. We turned off Jefferson on to Seminole. I knew we were getting to the end of the neighborhood, so I turned right on the next major street and was going to head back toward Jefferson on Iroquois. I think the street was Charlevoix. There weren't any cars on the street when I turned. All of a sudden cars were coming at me blowing the horn. I was almost to Iroquois so I just kept going, thinking it was probably safer and no one was in my (?) lane. Anyway, I couldn't believe I did that and it scared the crap out of my friends. We went back to Seminole and sure enough, there weren't any signs saying "No right turn" or "One way". My first clue was right after I turned and I noticed all the lines were white, no yellow lines. But since there weren't any signs, I figured I was going the right way. Until the cars showed up honking at me and pointing in the other direction. It was kind of funny in retrospect, but it could have been disastrous, especially if it had been dark. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 360 Registered: 08-2006 |
Thats "OUR FAIR CITY" 's fault, at least the lack of street signs. If you thought that was bad, travel up or down Van Dyke between McNichols and Harper. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 361 Registered: 08-2006 |
Then again, although you were in partial fault for not examining the street in a less traffic dense part of the area, you probably could of sued the city, although not helping everyone as a whole as there already in debt 1,000,000 ft above their heads. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 616 Registered: 01-2005 |
All the one way streets in SW Detroit have created a forest of signage. Not only the one way signs themselves but the signs warning not to turn right of left. Add those to the handicapped parking signs and you have some pretty marred streets. Then, of course, all those signs are vandalism targets and constantly have to be replaced. I often wonder what life was like in earlier decades in SW Detroit. The streets were two-way and the cars were just as big overall, so passing an automobile going the other way would have posed just as big a hassle as that faced by the modern drivers who pushed for SW Detroit's current one-way grid. Why was this necessary? | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1161 Registered: 11-2003 |
Strange to drive down Vernor or Charlevoix on the eastside. The neighborhoods are so dead out there you are the only car on the 4 lane road. Would loved to have seen the way the city worked back in the day. These were obviously leftovers from the days when the neighborhoods were full and the freeways didn't exist. Can you still fathom that 1 million people have LEFT the city? Thats an enormous city in itself. What is that? San Antonio leaving the city? Jeez. I will say that I took a little detour instead of taking jefferson. Some of the saddest things to see where those roads where nearly all the houses were gone, but those driveway slabs from the road up to the sidewalk (don't know if that is still there) are still there, showing you where all the homes used to stand. Now just a field. And the even stranger one is when you come across something like that, the few houses that are left are crumbling or burned out, and then there is the 1 random house with the spotless property, wonderful paintjob, beautiful patio or deck; a place where the owner obviously takes immense pride in their property. What I don't understand is why someone would do that in what is otherwise about the most grim and bleak location you could possibly imagine. I applaud anyone who does. Maybe there is history or something. Or they refuse to leave. Anyway, I can't say I'd be that strong. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 74 Registered: 07-2006 |
Being from the Flint area, and not being a regular visitor of downtown Detroit, It is incredibly confusing. It's different enough having the radial+grid layout verses the straight grid layout of most of the rest of SE michigan, throw a bunch of one ways and it's hopeless. To someone who is down there every day, i'm sure it makes complete sense, but the occasional visitor is scared off. If you're trying to attract more people downtown, and to Detroit in general, why make it more difficult for them? Especially when they are usually in town for an event, when there is even more traffic than usual. Of course, it has the side benefit of frustrating these drivers into parking their cars and walking. But parking downtown, although plentiful, has it's own issues that i won't get into here. In related but technically non-Detroit news, Flint is considering losing their one-way streets. It will cost them 2.3 million, 2 mil of which is for traffic signals alone. just a rough idea of what exactly you're looking at to convert to 2-way. (keep in mind, flint has nowhere near the 1-ways of detroit) http://www.mlive.com/news/fljo urnal/index.ssf?/base/news-40/ 1162308067281620.xml&coll=5 | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 577 Registered: 02-2006 |
New York, Chicago, Washington DC and other cities have one-way streets downtown, and they don't seem to be deterring people from visiting. Besides, this post wasn't even about downtown streets anyway...those should definitely stay how they are. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 75 Registered: 07-2006 |
okay, focusonthed, you have a point, it was mostly about the rest of detroit, and i missed that. my experience outside of downtown is even more limited, so really i should stay out of this, and leave it to those who know the areas better, and certainly would be enjoying the benefits, or downfalls, of the situation more than i. i was trying not to argue either way, in any case - i can see the benefit of both, although i do have a personal preference, i try to consider all views. in any case, New york and chicago, at the very least (i don't know about dc), have a better mass transit system than detroit however, so there's no real comparison there. but i digress... | ||
Sticks Member Username: Sticks Post Number: 125 Registered: 08-2005 |
Jasoncw, I remember Westborn used to have something like that on Michigan going through their downtown. Have two lanes going west and east and the middle lane would have signals over it, either a red X or a green check (I think). But just imagine what a bitch that would be, trying to get somewhere quick but you have people turning left from that extra lane when they have it. Or, even worse, no left turns at all! (And no NJ jughandles or MI turnarounds to fix it). | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1873 Registered: 07-2004 |
At one time, I think in the 1980s, Grand River had these green and red arrows for the center lane to add an additional lane for rush hour. Interesting concept, but too dangerous. People probably forgot that they couldn't turn left during rush hour causing accidents or potential accidents with on-coming traffic that had the green arrow. Safety concerns probably stopped this practice. | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 299 Registered: 12-2003 |
LMichigan....calming wont induce pedestrians that arent there to begin with...unlesss you count the sea of mendicants roaming the one ways now. That kind of logic is dependent upon normal market conditions, i.e. the theory that adding traffic lanes to a freeway only hurts traffic flow because it makes more inclined to drive on and develop near the roadway. A great example would be m-59 in Macomb Twp. You could make Park Ave., Second, Third, and Brush each one lane and even two way yet if no one lives there to act as pedestrians you arent going to have any benefit from "calming" traffic. When I was in Berlin there were streets wide enough for cars to travel four wide with perpendicular parking on both sides as well as wide sidewalks. Even these streets seemed quaint and on the :human scale" It is due to not the calm streets or one way or two way traffic flows, it was due to the density. I read in Suburban Nation that ideal streetscapes are based on the height of the bordering buildings. Their is a formula they developed based on the width of the street and the height of the opposing buildings. Considering that most of Detroit structures, outside of downtown, are two stories or less and in alot of areas opposed by vacant lots, the city is not exactly geared to do well in this category.   | ||
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 288 Registered: 09-2004 |
Only in Detroit...  ...in case you missed it....  ....sigh | ||
Vas Member Username: Vas Post Number: 642 Registered: 01-2004 |
How about the traffic signal on the Campus martius circle? I thought the whole point of a traffic circle was to not have signals. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 391 Registered: 08-2006 |
Why dont you people stick to the traffic of the main streets and freeways if you dont like the one ways. Mack is a lot of fun when your coming to and from Midtown going around all the non-signal turners, and the last minute signal turners. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1875 Registered: 07-2004 |
I agree with you, Bussey, Detroit's streetscapes in most areas are not ideal. I was just in Chicago and the streets that seem to be the most liveliest are the commercial streets that have multi-level buildings and only four lanes(one parking lane and one traffic lane on each side of the street). Very few streets in Detroit fit that description. The few that exist that come to mind are: Mack from St. Aubin to St. Jean; all of Cass Ave.; most of Fenkell; Harper east of Connor; Chene from 1-94 to Gratiot; and Vernor in Mexicantown. These streets to me have the most ideal urban feel to them. The one problem that I do have with many of these streets is that the sidewalks are too narrow(Cass Ave. might be the exception). Jos. Campau from the border of Detroit to Carpenter in Hamtramck has that ideal urban feel for a commercial street. Charlevoix and Kercheval in Grosse Pointe Park also have that feel. Would these streets get the nod from Suburban Nation? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3023 Registered: 08-2004 |
Well I think (per my previous post)... that they ought to make Grand River Ave. 2-way for an additional block.... to Bagley. That way, when the permanent casinos open, if you get off the Lodge at Bagley, and missed the turn of at 2nd or 3rd (can't remember which) to go north, then you could still make a left at Grand River Ave. to head towards MGM or MotorCity. Currently Grand River is 2 way only until Cass/Adams. And to get to outbound Grand River can be very frustrating for folks not familiar with the one way streets. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 392 Registered: 08-2006 |
They can also use streets like the Fischer service drive, trumbell, Third, Michigan, should I go on? truly, I think Grand River is fine the way it is now. Having two way streets I belive creates a lot more congestion. I noticed the difference in the traffic flow when people are merging off of Gratiot onto Warren, like they are so relieved. Plus, MAck was a mess this morning because it is so narrow and those industrial trucks like to drive up that street like they own it. | ||
Aiw Member Username: Aiw Post Number: 5981 Registered: 10-2003 |
I just purchased a copy of a WPA publication called "Street Traffic, City of Detroit, 1936-37" The first section is a Summary of Recommendations that this study presented to the city of Detroit. (Note - Lack of punctuation and commas are from the original text)
|
