The Sooner the Better

Last Saturday, February 21, I attended a presentation on the Jeff Speck study the City commissioned early last year. This study will ultimately lead to, among other things, two-way streets where now we have one-ways. The long process tries the patience of those anxious to get on with the conversion.

While I believe we should proceed with the conversion, I don't believe two-way streets are a panacea for New Albany. Indeed, some of the more significant recommendations from the Speck analysis directly address other aspects of walkability. But the primary identifier of the Speck study is as the two-way street study.

To address that aspect of the study then, I want to come down four square on the side of converting our one-way streets to two-way traffic.

I can't pinpoint a specific year or event to mark the beginning of New Albany's decline. (That slide, by the way, is a fate we share with countless cities across America.) Perhaps it was Henry Ford's birthday, or the housing shortage after WW II heralding the first push toward the suburbs. It could have been the day the misbegotten decision was made to abandon street cars as a component of our transportation system, the rise of the interstate highway system, or malls.

In short, cities have taken a lot of hits from any number of larger causes than the direction of traffic flow. So the reversion to two-way traffic may not bring back much of New Albany's thriving past.

The Speck study, however, represents a rare opportunity to make a calculated, comprehensive move toward reversing the decline we've faced for years. Speck notes cities  that have converted one-ways to two-ways. The positive changes in those cities may elude us here in New Albany, but in light of the significant changes we face from increased traffic funneled through New Albany as a result of the Bridges Project, it seems a sensible prescription. And, again two-way traffic is not the only remedy he suggests. In his study, Speck quotes economist Chris Leinberger, "all the fancy economic development strategies, such as developing a biomedical cluster, an aerospace cluster, or whatever the economic development 'flavor of the month' might be, do not hold a candle to the power of a great walkable urban place." New Albany has neither of the economic engines the economist cites, but we do have within our reach the power to control one element, the most potent element, of a successful city--walkability.  

One speaker at Saturday's presentation challenged New Albany's manners and neighborliness as he said that, in paraphrase, it's not nice to raise barriers to pass-through traffic resulting from the Sherman Minton's toll-free status. Aside from disagreeing with the gentleman's contention, I would ask, did the Bridge's Project show good manners to New Albany when it placed the "free-flow zone" sign on our doorstep?

The feckless action of the Bridge's Project has placed concern with our street grid, pedestrian safety, and likely disadvantageous economic ripples on the front burner.
But, New Albany's backdrop of malaise, decline, and deterioration, with renewal always just over the horizon, is a long-standing impetus to answer Speck's challenge with action. The sooner the better.