It is sometimes difficult for out-of-towners to navigate downtown because of one-way streets, but couldn't that problem be eliminated with signs pointing to major attractions. The signs would be placed well in advance to compensate for traffic.

Your thoughts?

http://newsok.com/article/1837789/?template=news/main

Getting rid of the misplaced one-way streets is the first, most essential step to making downtown inviting and navigable. Signs don't mitigate the frustration realizing you have to go two or more blocks out of your way to get to a street going the direction you need.

-SoonerDave

I don't think it's the one way streets that are bad as much as the arbitary way in which the seemed to be set up. A planned system where one street goes one way, and the next street goes the other, is pretty simple and very common in urban areas. They help eliminate traffic backs up caused by unprotected left turns and you can time the lights to make traffic flow constant.

I agree that our downtown is confusing to an oustider, but changing them all to two way streets is just trading one cluster %$&* for another, imo.

I like the downtown 1 way streets. They seem to be set up ideally so that we can later implement bus lanes, a trolley, etc. Go 2 way, and there's no room.

BDP is right. One way streets work fine in a couplet. They also work very well for narrow streets. In addition, they are cheaper since there are less signals and no dedicated left turn lanes. The only problem with OKC's system is that the grid has been butchered up over the years for a variety of reasons (both good and bad). A case in point are 5th and 6th streets. They were designed to work as a pair, but once the memorial was extended across 5th, it lessoned the functionability of 6th. In another case, because north bound Harvey is blocked by the parking garage, it makes it much harder to go north through downtown. They really should make Hudson two-way south of Park, where it is currently excsevily wide.

I'm with BDP. I don't necessarily think this is a good idea.

Not a good idea.

At all.

I agree with those favoring 1-ways, above. Traffic flow would be really really bad with 2-ways, given the left-turn problem. It works pretty well right now, even if it's not perfect.

I don't know of a downtown in any large city that doesn't have one way streets.

I agree with those favoring 1-ways, above. Traffic flow would be really really bad with 2-ways, given the left-turn problem. It works pretty well right now, even if it's not perfect.

Can't say that I agree with you on this one Doug. For years, I have attended meetings with knowledgeable urban planners who suggest one way streets are a looser in most instances and I totally agree with them. They also suggest that we need to get rid of walk/don't walk signals and put signs on our traffic signal poles for autos to yield to pedestrians in the cross walks. Pedestrians have the right of way and should be able to cross in the crosswalk on any green light without messing with some damn button. Streets and sidewalks are part of the same system to move people from one location to another and should work together. You shouldn't need to be a track star to be able to safely cross a street. In all past OKC traffic planning, the automobile is afforded the top priority. Hopefully that will be changing.

I drive in and around downtown nearly every day, and IMO, traffic would move just as easily or more likely better, with mostly two way streets. How does it improve traffic flow for Robinson to be one way south and Harvey to be one way north? Same for Hudson and Walker. Shartel (4 to 6 lanes) is two way down to Park and then suddenly one way. There are some little short and/or narrow streets near the Civic Center and a few like Couch Drive between Robinson and Broadway that is only two lanes wide, one for parking, one for traffic, that need to be one way, but other than that, I just don't see the value. Why make traffic go around the block to get to a curbside parking space, parking garage or drop someone off? Not to mention all of the people driving the wrong way.

For instance, if you are traveling west on 6th Street at Harvey, which is four or five lanes wide and one way west, and you want to pick up your grand mother at the transit stop in front of the National Memorial, you have to go another block west, turn left on Hudson, then two blocks south, make another left on 4th Street (four lanes wide and two way) and go back east a block before you can make yet another left turn and head back north rather than just making a left turn and go south on Harvey. Is it more convenient and faster to make three left turns and travel an extra four blocks rather than that one left turn from 6th onto Harvey? The worst spots are where the one way north streets intersect with 13th. If you are headed south on one of those toward 13th, you not only encounter a one way street that you can't enter, but between 4 & 6 PM, left turns are not permitted so you have to go several blocks out of the way.

The present system of one way pairs, one way streets and combination one way/two way streets makes absolutely no sense to me and they can't get them changed back to all two way fast enough. Unfortunately, we are going to be stuck with some partial one way streets, such as walker up to NW 6th until the elevated I-40 comes down and is replaced by an at grade boulevard.

They also suggest that we need to get rid of walk/don't walk signals and put signs on our traffic signal poles for autos to yield to pedestrians in the cross walks. Pedestrians have the right of way and should be able to cross in the crosswalk on any green light without messing with some damn button.

We may disagree a bit on one-way streets, but I think you hit the nail on the head on this one. This, to me, is a MUCH more important and pressing issue in terms of both fostering a pedestrian environment and for basic safety. There is never a time I go downtown where I don't see pedestrians running for their life because they miscalculated lights and/or got caught when the lights changed. Maybe they don't need to take the pedestrian signals down, but they should time every light for pedestrian traffic every cycle. They shouldn't have to push a button to cross the street or guess whether a green light will give them enough time to cross or not. Most downtowns feature pedestrian countdowns as well (though some feel this results in drivers trying to beat the timers).

Can't say that I agree with you on this one Doug. For years, I have attended meetings with knowledgeable urban planners who suggest one way streets are a looser in most instances and I totally agree with them.
Maybe I'm missing something, but how would our existing width N/S streets that are 1-way deal with the left turn (and backed up traffic) problem? Am I only imagining such a problem?


They also suggest that we need to get rid of walk/don't walk signals and put signs on our traffic signal poles for autos to yield to pedestrians in the cross walks. Pedestrians have the right of way and should be able to cross in the crosswalk on any green light without messing with some damn button. Streets and sidewalks are part of the same system to move people from one location to another and should work together. You shouldn't need to be a track star to be able to safely cross a street. In all past OKC traffic planning, the automobile is afforded the top priority. Hopefully that will be changing.
Agreed. That said, I don't see many pedestrians who either use and/or wait for a "Walk" sign before walking! I don't think that I have EVER pushed the "walk" button.


I drive in and around downtown nearly every day, and IMO, traffic would move just as easily or more likely better, with mostly two way streets. How does it improve traffic flow for Robinson to be one way south and Harvey to be one way north? Same for Hudson and Walker. Shartel (4 to 6 lanes) is two way down to Park and then suddenly one way. There are some little short and/or narrow streets near the Civic Center and a few like Couch Drive between Robinson and Broadway that is only two lanes wide, one for parking, one for traffic, that need to be one way, but other than that, I just don't see the value. Why make traffic go around the block to get to a curbside parking space, parking garage or drop someone off? Not to mention all of the people driving the wrong way.

For instance, if you are traveling west on 6th Street at Harvey, which is four or five lanes wide and one way west, and you want to pick up your grand mother at the transit stop in front of the National Memorial, you have to go another block west, turn left on Hudson, then two blocks south, make another left on 4th Street (four lanes wide and two way) and go back east a block before you can make yet another left turn and head back north rather than just making a left turn and go south on Harvey. Is it more convenient and faster to make three left turns and travel an extra four blocks rather than that one left turn from 6th onto Harvey? The worst spots are where the one way north streets intersect with 13th. If you are headed south on one of those toward 13th, you not only encounter a one way street that you can't enter, but between 4 & 6 PM, left turns are not permitted so you have to go several blocks out of the way.

The present system of one way pairs, one way streets and combination one way/two way streets makes absolutely no sense to me and they can't get them changed back to all two way fast enough. Unfortunately, we are going to be stuck with some partial one way streets, such as walker up to NW 6th until the elevated I-40 comes down and is replaced by an at grade boulevard.
WOW! You're really into this topic, Old Downtown Guy! :bow: Maybe you're right, but I'm personally content. I'm sure that I'd be content (after a period of adjustment) if your suggestions are adopted. I mean, this isn't as important as keeping the Hornets in Okc, is it? :boff:

Though I certainly have no credentials as a traffic expert (other than those which we all have), I've made a not-too-well-done example showing what I'd think would be the "left-turn" problem I (and others) mentioned above.

Have a look at the 2 following images ... the 1st is "as is" (from memory, so I might have left out some off-street parking), and the 2nd is the same area but with Hudson and Harvey becoming 2 way streets, and assuming the same existing off-street parking.

Exemplar Area As Is
http://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/1way1.gif

In the above "as is" pic, no "left-turn" problems exist since enough same-direction lanes are available so that straight-through traffic is not impeded.

Exemplar Area w/Hudson & Harvey 2 Way
http://www.dougloudenback.com/downtown/1way2.gif

In the above, with the same off-street parking, it's pretty evident that some pretty serious left-turn problems would exist since there are too few (sometimes only 1) lanes available for straight-through traffic. It would be something like traffic on NW 23rd between Broadway and Walker where the "left" lane can turn left (north or south) but no "left turn" lane exists" and the same lane also is intended to handle "through" traffic, but can't when someone wants to turn left. Put that downtown where MUCH more traffic exists, and what have you got.

Downtown, the left-turn problem would be partially assauged if some of the existing off-street parking was eliminated so that there were at least 2 "through" lanes and a left-turn lane as well ... but what kind of a trade-off is that? I don't see that as a "good" solution to making 1-ways 2-ways.

Just my thoughts.

I agree with Doug. The one-ways work fine and the two-ways would backup traffic for left turns. I don't see any way around that.

Doug has illustrated the left turn problem very well. In addition, if a dedicated left turn bay is added to prevent backups, an extra signal phase will need to be added. Which will increase the wait times for all other traffic in the intersection. With one way streets, left turn movements are treated the same as right turns; no special signal phase is required. This also makes consecutive signal timing much easier. There also have lower capitol costs due to the need for less signal masts and vehicle detectors (if the signal is actuated).
Theres also the problem with the narrow streets. One lane per direction streets can easily be blocked by emergency vehicles or delivery trucks. In Doug's drawing (very nice by the way), this would happen with Harvey, and I believe Robinson would be the same as well.
I do agree that some downtown streets should be two way where there is no alternate going the opposite direction or where they are wide enough for five lanes of traffic (Hudson south of Park is excesively wide). Ultimately, to determine which streets need to be converted one way or the other. the traffic patterns need to be studied as a whole along with the physical capabilities of each individual street.

*** In Doug's drawing (very nice by the way)
Thanks, Travis!

No problem, Doug!

Doug Louderback: Artist-In-Residence

:)

That is a pretty slick drawing!

-----------------

OKC's traffic planner should fear mighty Doug! :)

Doug illustrated the problems with two way traffic very nicely.

I know this is an older post but I haven't been here in a while. As a former City Planner in Florida I can tell you that 2 way street are better. Other cities with many 2 way streets are Atlanta and chattanooga.

You guys make a big issue out of left turns but with 2 way streets most turns are right turns. There simply isn't any reason to turn left. The reason many people turn left now is because of the one way streets. Remember - 3 rights make a left and there is no waiting (even at red lights). Plus, a left turn doesn't have to be allowed at every intersection 24 hours a day.

Thanks for your input Kerry. I think the traffic congestion and left turn issues are just over-blown, over engineered and the same thinking that has us in the mess where we are now. Good to have an expert opinion on this important design issue.

I know this is an older post but I haven't been here in a while. As a former City Planner in Florida I can tell you that 2 way street are better. Other cities with many 2 way streets are Atlanta and chattanooga.

You guys make a big issue out of left turns but with 2 way streets most turns are right turns. There simply isn't any reason to turn left. The reason many people turn left now is because of the one way streets. Remember - 3 rights make a left and there is no waiting (even at red lights). Plus, a left turn doesn't have to be allowed at every intersection 24 hours a day.
Ok. You have a Harvey become a 2-way street. You prevent left turns durings during normal business hours at, say, every other intersection. What have you got ... people having to go out of their way to get the place that the "left turn" would have gotten them immediately to ... the same problem The Old Downtown guy was so irked about in his much earlier post ... and at the NEXT intersection where you CAN make a left turn, you have traffic backup just because The Old Downtown Guy up there at the head of the lane wants to make a damned left turn! :beaten_fi

Ok. You have a Harvey become a 2-way street. You prevent left turns durings during normal business hours at, say, every other intersection. What have you got ... people having to go out of their way to get the place that the "left turn" would have gotten them immediately to ... the same problem The Old Downtown guy was so irked about in his much earlier post ... and at the NEXT intersection where you CAN make a left turn, you have traffic backup just because The Old Downtown Guy up there at the head of the lane wants to make a damned left turn! :beaten_fi

I'm most likely on foot or riding my bike Doug, so it will be someone in a Hummer that is taking up the whole street trying to make that turn.

And all this discussion is mute anyhow. The City already has a plan in place to change several downtown one way streets back to two way, which will be implemented in the next couple of years. I don't know if they have a map on the OKC.gov site, but perhaps they do. In any case, sanity will be returning to downtown streets in the near future.