Comments on: Narrowing Church Street Permanently

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:00:52 +0000

“And I ask you – which is the more functional community street – Church St. north of Ponce or south?”

Thank you, Fred. Could not be clearer. When automotive throughput is your only criteria for building streets, you get what you deserve. Your support of urban context, and all the recreational joys it fosters, is much appreciated.

We can’t expect the private sector to buy into building pedestrian-friendly projects if the city doesn’t pony up with pedestrian-friendly streets. It’s a collaborative effort and, personally, I think the city has done a helluva job.

By: Fred Boykin

Fred Boykin — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 22:45:27 +0000

I remember Church Street when it was two lanes and what a nice street it was. Lots of trees. I don’t remember the exact details, but the City was not in favor of widening Church St. the way it turned out – but they got out voted by GDOT. Hugh Saxon went downtown and pleaded with them not to design it the way it turned out, but they wouldn’t listen. So we got a high speed, four lane arterial design that completely ignores the context of the area in which it’s built. Same with the Church/Commerce and Clairemont/Commerce intersections – those are surburban designs that don’t belong in in an urban area like downtown Decatur where efforts are now being made to encourage residents to walk downtown. They”ve become barriers to anyone except drivers.

The Decatur Community Transportation Plan spells out the City’s vision for transportation changes to enhance the ability for people to walk and bicycle around town and recognizes that the automobile is not king of the road. It also looks at transportation options from a health perspective and makes a number of far reaching recommendations. I was closely involved in the plan, fully support it, and proud to have voted for it as a City Commissioner. I encourage residents to read it – the plan is the basis for future connectivity considerations. It will help determine how we get around and how we rank our options and our choices.

Adding parking and bike lanes on Church is one recommendation, so is reconfiguring Commerce Dr. and major intersections to be more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. There is a wealth of information and guidance in the plan. Please read it sometime and you’ll better understand the city’s transportation goals. It’s posted on the City website:
http://www.decaturga.com/cgs_citysvcs_dev_transportationplan.aspx

Unfortunately, Clairemont’s 4 travel lanes are too narrow to be narrowed any further and since it is a state road, GDOT standards apply. The traffic volume is too high for the street to be considered for a “road diet” (four travel lanes to two with a center turn lane). And for the life of me, I can’t figure out much of an option to make the street “friendlier” except speed enforcement. I’d almost settle for getting GDOT to mill the asphalt and repave it so we at least have a curb again!

Roundabouts. I’m for giving them a try. Took a training course on them a few years back – they’re more common in America than people think and GDOT did okay them awhile back. Designed properly, they can accomodate multiple travel modes and are very effective at moving traffic. There is a definite learning curve, but think back on what complaints we got when the City narrowed Church St. from Ponce south to Trinity. People were shocked at how narrow it looked in front of Leon’s – now it’s the new normal. And I ask you – which is the more functional community street – Church St. north of Ponce or south?

What is refreshing is that we’re hearing both sides of the argument now and people are tending to speak in favor of multiple options – much different discussion than even ten years ago.

By: Degreatur

Degreatur — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 01:43:03 +0000

I shouldn’t speak for Lynn at the city of Decatur, but I recall hearing her address why the city changed Church from 2 lanes to 4 lanes and back to 2 again. She said the road was originally changed from 2 lanes to 4 lanes because that was the thinking during America’s highway building phase. The theory at that time was that no city could survive without 4-lane access to a major highway. Church was our 4-lane access to 285. Now, however, city planning is the opposite, and general thinking is that highways don’t bring shoppers into a city but quality of life and walkability and a vibrant streetscape. She summed up by saying anything worth doing, is worth doing twice.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 00:21:34 +0000

What’s puzzling me is this – have the reasons that originally drove the expansion of Church Street from two to four lanes changed? Has the volume dropped? Is there now an alternative route that’s reduced the amount of traffic on Church since the original expansion to four lanes?? From personal observation, it seems to me that at peak times – rush hour, lunch time etc. – the road is fully utilized.

I’d like to see a real survey of the volume done and compared to the one that drove the original expansion. If the volume’s dropped then it would seen to indicate making some of the temporary changes permanent. If it hasn’t then it should be back to the 4 lanes. Either way, let the numbers do the talking …

By: Church Street Resident

Church Street Resident — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:50:15 +0000

What a great number of people don’t realize is the danger posed by the traffic on Church Street. Speaking to the crossing guard for school children at Lucerene I was told there were over 400 tickets given in one day. With the pool, with children and adults walking to and from the schools, the city, the park, etc. there is an inherent need to address the situation on Church Street. There is also the benefit that the reduction to two lanes has cut down the through traffic and the speeders on cross streets such as Willow Lane allowing people to enter and exit their drives, their cars, etc without being mowed down by people crossing from Ponce to Church.

Living on Church Street I suffer the 10 minutes it takes to get in and out of my drive some mornings but for me it is worth the sacrifice. After all, isn’t Decatur billed as a pedestrian city?