Click this link to optimize E-CityHall for screen readers Skip to Content
E-CityHall
Opengov

Input Topic: Ashman & Rodd Two-Way Conversion

← Previous   Next →

Non-Motorized Transportation

City Hall said about 1 year ago:

Non-Motorized Transportation

An important component of modern street design is including safety and access considerations for pedestrians and non-motorized transportation. (Non-motorized transportation can include walking, biking, rollerblading, scooting, or other human-powered transportation methods.) The right lanes of Ashman and Rodd streets currently contain a "sharrow" and signage to indicate that the roadway should be shared with cyclists. In a two-way configuration, Ashman and Rodd could have extra road capacity that could potentially be utilized for other purposes. 

While one-way streets can have fewer potential conflict points for pedestrians and non-motorized users than two-way streets, two-way streets typically promote slower traffic speeds and more cautious driver behavior and lead to fewer pedestrian-vehicle collisions.Click here for more information on designing for non-motorized transportation.

Based on the information provided to you above, please provide any comments or concerns you have regarding non-motorized transportation only. Please note: Regardless of a conversion of Ashman and Rodd to two-way traffic, there is an opportunity to examine non-motorized transportation access and usage in this area. Feedback on this topic can include suggestions for non-motorized use should Ashman and Rodd remain one-way. 

105 comments

Barbara Ellis about 1 year ago

Definitely agree to eliminate one-way on Ashman and
Rodd streets.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Ashman and Rodd are currently fairly busy, three lane, one way streets. If they become two way streets will there be a center left turn lane? If so, how will there be extra road capacity for other purposes. If no left turn lane, will traffic get backed up while people are waiting to make left hand turns?

 

Jake Randall about 1 year ago

I am also wondering about the left turn lane situation. If there is a turn lane, will there still be enough space overall for large enough bike lanes on both sides?

One thing that I really like about the current situation is that it feels very easy and safe to bike downtown along ashman since the whole right lane can be used for bikes.

I do think that two way streets would be more intuitive, but wouldn't want to lose an easy way to bike to things like the tridge and local restaurants and coffee shops.

 

Kayla McClendon about 1 year ago

I was at the open house and asked the same questions. The bike lane will be removed, both sides of the road will be come parallel parking, and only when needed will a left turn lane be added. Other places will be treated like 4 way stops, like Airport Rd & Sturgeon Ave, some being lights, others being stop signs. They said it'll feel more like Jefferson Rd, but without the turn lane. Which I feel like already has traffic issues.

 

Jeffrey Smith about 1 year ago

I do not like this idea at all. I walk a lot and feel that it is much safer crossing a one way street. If parking will be on both sides of the street that is even more dangerous for bikers and pedestrians trying to see traffic around parked vehicles. I suggest leaving things alone since I see no logical reason to change the way these streets presently are and have been for the last 60 or so years. Changing something that has been around for such a long time is just asking for more accidents.

 

Anna MacDougall about 1 year ago

I agree about losing a safe cycling route. If you switch to two way make the third lane a bike lane please.

 

Anna MacDougall about 1 year ago

I agree about losing a safe cycling route. If you switch to two way make the third lane a bike lane please.

 

Todd Todd about 1 year ago

I agree with this. If modeled after Jefferson, it then should have a turn lane which it isn't being designed for.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I am okay with the current configuration.

 

Shelley Hobbs about 1 year ago

Would love two-way traffic on Ashman & Rodd Streets!

 

John Bunch about 1 year ago

I would like both streets to be 2-way. I would also like to see the center city round about be restored so that the business store fronts facing it are more attractive as business locations. People drive WAY above the speed limits on both streets.
Having Ashman and Rodd 2 way would slow down traffic and reduce traffic congestion on both streets.

 

Kim Donaghy about 1 year ago

I agree 100%. Having 2-way traffic calms drivers down to more reasonable speeds, making everything safer. We don't need a 3-lane freeway going thru the middle of town. When drivers are given limited space, they naturally slow down. Just like on Main St when that was changed 20 years ago. When the intersections were narrowed, drivers slowed way down. I would also love to see the circle restored to a roundabout.

 

Sally Youn about 1 year ago

I prefer the current configuration of two one-way streets.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Keep both streets one way and make a dedicated and barrier-protected bike lane.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

A dedicated bike lane is needed. The current one way configuration allows more space for a bike lane. There are other ways to slow the traffic.

 

Jason Andrus about 1 year ago

I would love to see better bike access and even wider sidewalks in this part of town. I own a business on ashman and there are lots of people that walk/ride this corridor. Frequently people on bikes will just ride the wrong way on Ashman. I know a goal of center city is to increase walkability, however there seems to be significantly more pedestrians and cyclist on Ashman (probably because of Kroger) than on Saginaw. I don't have a preference of one way or two way, but would love to see more accessibility.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Here is a novel idea, stop wasting money on studies on how to change things that do not need to be changed and fix the existing problems. Such as terrible roads failing sewer and storm drains . This is what the focus should be on and not changing roads that work just fine and installing new wider sidewalks that will not be used any more than they were before millions were spent .

 

Russell Anton about 1 year ago

I'm a cyclist who uses these two streets as an integral part of my regular route to and from the Pierre Marquette. These, in fact are the only road surfaces I ride In Midland, and I chose them because they are one way, and have bike priority lanes, using them to get to and from the Pierre Marquette. The bike lane on both the one way roads provides me safe passage. I'm concerned turning them into 2-way roads would, in effect, create 2 more Jefferson's, more congestion, and less safety to cyclists. I am proud my home town gives some priority to bike safety. Please do not take this away.

 

David Sovereen about 1 year ago

I agree. I also bike Ashman and Rodd going to and from work as well as downtown and appreciate the well-marked bike lanes. If going to two-way traffic means less safety for bikers, I'm definitely against it. If anything, I'd like to see a bike line added between where it ends on East Ashman to where it begins again on Ashman.

Biking aside, saying the future will be like Jefferson Ave is NOT a selling point! Jefferson suffers from traffic backups during morning and evening rush hours. The three lanes of Rodd and Ashman handle those times very well and the lights are reasonably synchronized to keep traffic moving. Adding stop signs will force stops making traffic flow less efficiently and increase gas consumption. Any design that adds stop signs should be thrown out the window!

 

Kayla McClendon about 1 year ago

I absolutely agree!

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Midland claims to be a modern city, but does little to prioritize bikers and pedestrians, as other modern cities do. I would like to see both streets remain one-way and have the right lane of both streets turned into a dedicated and protected bike lane. This would still allow for 2 full lanes for car traffic. The sidewalks on the right side of the road would be better protected for pedestrians and it would remain safer for them to cross one-way traffic. This would provide safe bike and pedestrian access to and from Center City to Downtown. If Midland wants to modernize they need to start investing in public transportation and non-motorized transportation.

 

Kim Donaghy about 1 year ago

What if there was 2-way traffic with a dedicated bike lane on both sides? Kind of like E Ashman is. To me, that is the best of both worlds.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I would love to see a barrier, (for safety) for non-motorized transportation and/or e bikes and scooters. Bike lanes are nice but vehicles are often parked in them and people on their phones often drive in bike lanes. Two way or one way doesn't matter to me, but I think more vehicles would use these streets if they were two way. So if you are looking to increase vehicle traffic make it two way. If you are looking for more pedestrian traffic with less vehicle traffic keep it one way and add in some nice trails like you just did on Saginaw.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Traffic calming is a great idea for this roadway. People fly down these streets where people are living. Its a highway through a neighborhood. With this much road there is definitely enough space for a protected bike lane. Just shrink the car lanes to fit it. With the center city path, downtown, and the indian buttles median path you would create a loop. This would connect people to businesses, schools, and churches. Protect the bikes so children can ride safely to school.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

This is the way forward for sure. We need to lead the way forward in the tri-cities and re-invest in our town and make it appealing for people to want to move to. Other cities in Michigan have demonstrated that having protected bike lanes lead to increased bike traffic and a healthier, happier populace (Ann Arbor, Ferndale, Traverse City come to mind). We need to acknowledge that we are competing with Bay City, Saginaw, and Freeland for young taxpayers and need to make our city appealing to those who want to commute without hopping in a car. There currently is no way to get from the north-eastern part of the city to downtown without riding on incredibly busy roads.

While we're at it, can we make it so that the bike lanes on other roads (Ashman before the one way, Swede, etc.) are truly for bikers and aren't just parking lanes that we let bikers use?

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Please change them both to two way traffic.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Spend OUR money on a new Farmer’s Market instead of converting one way streets to two way streets and forcing people to get sump pumps

 

Nancy Devereaux about 1 year ago

The one way streets have served Midland for many years quite well. I remember the traffic flow interruptions and interactions when these roads were two ways. I believe by leaving these roads as one way streets this allows for safer and more efficient traffic flows.

 

Julia Robinette about 1 year ago

As someone who lives in the area being discussed, I have never had an issue with traffic flow or speed and actually, I find it easier to navigate as a pedestrian than streets with two-way traffic. I do not think this change is needed. If you want to fix/slow down traffic for pedestrians, please look at the Eastman/Indian area near Hines Street as this is a major safety issue for pedestrians (narrow sidewalk, heavy flow of traffic, poor visibility near corner, cars speeding). I agree with other poster that there are other ways to slow traffic.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I live between the One Ways, on E Collins St. I am against making the One Ways, Two Way traffic. For one you will now have traffic making left turns in front of on coming traffic, creating an accident potential. As for people speeding on the One Ways now, that will not stop just because it could become a Two Way road. The traffic flow on the One Ways works well because if you want to make a left turn, you are not wasting a center traffic lane, for turning. Another issue would be making Rodd St a Two Way from South Saginaw Rd, the potential for traffic backups for those wanting to make a left turn on to Bayliss St, to get to the US Post Office, etc. The One Ways I feel are the safest option available. If the City is concerned about the One Way road system being over built, then remove 1 lane. I don't think the public would go for that though. David Adams

 

Kayla McClendon about 1 year ago

I was extremely surprised to learn at the open house that in all of this estimated costs, none of this will include actually fixing any roads.

 

Kayla McClendon about 1 year ago

If this was a vote, I'd vote to keep the roads as they currently are.

 

Ann Beck about 1 year ago

I'd like to see Ashman and Rodd made into two-way streets. This would allow for a dedicated bike lane. I currently never ride down Ashman or back up Rodd due to the speed of traffic and the shared bike lanes.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Keep Ashman and Rodd as one-ways! Traffic flow would be much worse if they were two-ways.

 

David Waite about 1 year ago

The non-motorized design for Midland has always included the need for non-motorized connectivity between downtown and mid-town. The sharrowed bike lanes are one solution to that connectivity. With the addition of the wider multi-use path on South Saginaw we have that connectivity. I have no opinion on whether Ashman and Rodd should changed but it is essential that non-motorized connectivity is main. That could be a multi use bi-directional path on one or both of these streets to connect Main Street with South Saginaw. Bike lanes with parking is not an option.
Dave Waite

 

Joyce Halstead about 1 year ago

I like the sharrowed bike lanes on both Ashman and Rodd and feel very comfortable riding on both streets and prefer they be left as one ways. However, if changed to two-way, I want a bike lane on each side of both roads. Having bi-directional bike lanes on one side, means one direction is riding against traffic, which is a big no-no. I understand why most of the actual bike “lanes” in Midland allow parking but it defeats the purpose of a bike lane. Anyone riding in the lane, encountering a parked car, must “pop out” into the traffic lane, which makes the cyclist unpredictable to motorists and creates an unsafe condition. I for one, will not be riding the “bike lanes” on Saginaw Road. These are wide sidewalks with a multitude of driveways and street crossings, each of which creates an intersection for cars and bikes. Motorists are looking for slow moving pedestrians on sidewalks when pulling into a driveway or turning into a street; they are NOT looking for fast moving cyclists who seem to appear out of nowhere due to moving so much faster than pedestrians.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Single lanes in opposite directions would be fine, as traffic on Rodd would decrease a lot.
But traffic would still be very high on Ashman going to and from downtown and M20 to the traffic circle and neighborhoods. Ashman would work better as 2 lanes in both directions with turn lanes and mor lights at intersections.
As for bicycle access.. I would think since Rodd traffic would decrease It would be nice to get a dedicated bike lane on Rodd also continuing from East Ashman, down Cambridge, and down Rodd to downtown.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I support converting Ashman and Rodd to two-way.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Please do not fix a problem that does not exist. We do need bike lanes although frankly I see a handful of bicyclists. If we had them some people would probably use them. They can be accommodated with a three lane road. If you make it two way, plus a turn lane it will be too small and unsafe. All of the downtown and center city work done to increase cycling has resulted in an, at best, minimum increase while inconveniencing drivers. This is particularly when Dow lets out and traffic gets backed up. If there is a problem with speeding, enforce the speed limit, don't penalize drivers by making their commutes longer and more likely to create accidents.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Please change the roads to two-way streets. Ashman already functions this way with no issues from Waldo to Saginaw. I live near this part of Ashman and don't mind riding my bike down this segment. However, I loathe riding it from Saginaw to downtown because of the one way configuration. So much so, I usually ride on the sidewalk during that part of Ashman because people treat that part of Ashman like a racetrack. With so many people driving distractedly, I won't ride on the road because I have seen people stuck behind other bikers and when they cut out from behind them, the people driving way too fast coming up behind them have to brake suddenly when they see someone is in the road. I used to drive that way every day on my way to work and it was nerve wracking to watch that happen. Never have I seen a traffic situation on Rodd/Ashman that warrants a three-way one-way street.

 

Carol Sarnacke about 1 year ago

I'm concerned about the width of Ashman & Rod streets being 2-way . They are 3 lanes currently. Will they just be one lane each way with a bike lane? If not, does this mean major widenting of both streets? Does this mean months of construction? I know the committee is trying to update Midland, but not everything has to be changed. I still can't believe the street work to modernize "Center City". Who walks there, or rides a bike in that area? You do know the age of Midland's population.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

You said: "In a two-way configuration, Ashman and Rodd could have extra road capacity that could potentially be utilized for other purposes."

However, under the topic "Traffic Flow" the diagram shows that going from one-way to two-way roads means going from "Excess Reserve" to "Somewhat Less Reserve".

I don't have a strong personal preference either way, but please get all of your information straight before you make any decisions.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Leave Ashman and Rodd as they are.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

As someone who lived on Rodd Street, I would prefer two-way traffic with the speed limit enforced (people do fly down those streets) and a protected bike lane or wider sidewalks like the Center City development.

 

Aurelian Balan about 1 year ago

While both configurations can work (2 way vs 1 way), the question should focus MORE on how can we design our roads so that people feel safe when they bike. When we visit Mackinaw Island we all get excited to bike everywhere. We're relieved to not worry about getting crushed by that F150. Design our streets so we can have that same comfort here - with physical barrier protected bike lanes that go all the way through the circle and to the tridge. Then make a North/South version, too. Take tips from the Netherlands and the notjustbikes channel. Slower cars, thinner streets, wider sidewalks, and protected bike lanes. This is the way. Any place that puts cars before people will not be a beautiful place.

 

Marlene Meyer about 1 year ago

I would definitely be concerned if the roads were changed to 2 way with parallel parking along both sides of the road. At certain times of the day there is a lot of traffic going down each road. To have 1 lane in each direction would really back up traffic. It would be very dangerous for anyone trying to cross the streets especially since there is only 2 crosswalks currently and they are 7 blocks apart. In addition, for drivers of small sedans, it is very difficult to see past parked vehicles especially since approximately half of the vehicles now days are high profile vehicles. Where would the bicyclists ride? There isn't enough room for 2 lanes of traffic and parallel parking along the sides. It says that it would be set up like Jefferson without the turn lane. Jefferson is wider than either Rodd or Ashman. And you are saying you're going to add parking along the sides. That does not make sense. If it is going to be changed to 2 way, there definitely should not be parking on the sides. There will be too much traffic! And you will definitely need to have a crossing guard at every corner instead of just at the 2 traffic lights that are there.

 

Anna MacDougall about 1 year ago

As a cyclist I agree. I think parking will force cyclists into the lane and cars won’t have a safe way to get around them.
Please add a bike lane instead of parking.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

You certainly have to jump through hoops to make a comment. I read your introduction and reasoning and I can’t believe that you are presenting such a weak case for making this change.
To me the proposed conversion makes no sense from a public safety or traffic flow perspective. I can’t imagine that the fire department or snow removal departments are in favor, and I can’t believe that the money wouldn’t be better spent somewhere else.

There must something I’m missing. Why don’t you try a little harder to sell me on this?
Thank you

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

If it’s going to turn into something like Jefferson your asking for more accidents, add protected bike lanes, I do not even like current bike lanes that we do have on some streets, expand the side walks, the one ways keep traffic flowing, no turn lane, four way stops, bike lanes, walking on streets, you will slow traffic down but call volumes for emergencies will go up, there’s got to be better pedestrian planes for how it is now.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I am not convinced that there is a compelling reason to make this change. There does not appear to be a clear problem that is being solved by the proposed change to the one-way streets. The proposed changes will undoubtedly cost city funds to implement. I have not seen a summary of those costs and the economic benefits (if any) that would result from the changes. Other than "non-motorized traffic" (whose benefits from this seem a bit nebulous), who benefits and who loses? As with most things the city puts out for public comment, I fully believe that this is already a 'done deal' and the collection of these comments will have absolutely no effect on the course of this project.

 

Anna MacDougall about 1 year ago

Please add a protected bike lane!

I ride on these roads regularly to access the coffee shop and the grocery store. Most cars are very considerate but I have had a couple of close calls with cars cutting around me or driving right next to me instead of in a different lane. I think it is very hazardous to not have a protected lane.
As an adult, I take my chances with riding in the road but without a true bike lane it is not safe for children.
It would make me very proud to have midland be a bike friendly town for me and for children who want to explore and get exercise safely.
I think pedestrian infrastructure will continue to build strong community ties between the residents and businesses. I think more protected bike lanes will make midland a happier and healthier town.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

Keep the streets as one way but reduce the number of lanes for cars to two and use the third lane for non-vehicular use. This would provide a safer way to commute between downtown and the circle.
Converting these streets to 2-way traffic will increase the potential for accidents as people make left turns (assuming the road width stays the same and a turn lane is created in the middle of the road).

 

J.R. Nosal about 1 year ago

As a young driver, I have always found these streets to be extremely confusing to navigate. I always have to use my GPS to figure out what way is what. In fact, there have been instances of other drivers going the wrong way on these roads which poses a hazard to both pedestrians and traffic. Additionally, you need to consider including bike lanes in all newly renovated streets, so there are more options than just driving to get around the city. In conclusion, I agree eliminating one-way traffic at the identified locations (and all others) as long as a protected bike lane is included, too, like those found in Madison, Wisconsin.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I would like these roads to be two-way. I don't find them busy at all, often being the only person on the road during what should be busy times. Other times there is plenty of room still, and it's super cumbersome to navigate around Midland with these two roads being one-way. Doesn't seem necessary at all.

Let's upgrade this space and make Midland better!

 

Nancy Humphrey about 1 year ago

I see no valid reason(s) to change these streets to 2 way. Does our City of Midland really copy what other cities are doing just because other cities are making this change? I would hope not. The city of Midland could surely use the funds for this proposed change to better maintain our present streets! I think it's a bad idea to reduce lanes of traffic ... this city is growing and prompting downtown usage/events ... seems like traffic in/out of downtown would be safer to navigate with the two one way streets.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I agree. $3.7 million would fix a lot of streets.

 

Nancy Humphrey about 1 year ago

I see no valid reason(s) to change these streets to 2 way. Does our City of Midland really copy what other cities are doing just because other cities are making this change? I would hope not. The city of Midland could surely use the funds for this proposed change to better maintain our present streets! I think it's a bad idea to reduce lanes of traffic ... this city is growing and prompting downtown usage/events ... seems like traffic in/out of downtown would be safer to navigate with the two one way streets.

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

I prefer the roads as they are now..

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

1) The proposed change will eliminate the current Bike Lane.
2) If you have parking and two way lane, where will the bike lane go? You can't have everything that was said in the sessions.
3) Two Way traffic DOUBLES the number of dangerous Conflict Points at the intersections (regardless of the 'reduced speed' per your narrative.)
4) Crossing Guards have expressed concerns about the areas in front of Central Park school - more danger for kids.
5) per you: "In a two-way configuration, Ashman and Rodd could have extra road capacity that could potentially be utilized for other purposes." Lots of caveats in this statement - used for what? Your maps showed parking, and maybe a bike lane? How would all of this fit, to also include a substantial safety barrier between cars & bikes?
6) Pedestrian/walker traffic at the circle - how will you handle that? A much different layout than the rest of Asman & Rodd.
7) As a bicyclist, I would much rather pedal down a one-way street than a two-way street. Do you have any data on bicycle accidents on one-way vs two-way streets?

 

Name not shown about 1 year ago

City Staff: The community asks you to please review every statement in every 'category', even if they do not exactly pertain to the specific category. If necessary, you can move the 'generic' comments to a separate area and review them as a whole. PLEASE do not ignore any comments!

 

Deb Taylor about 1 year ago

I worry about cyclists as do many others above. Taking away the "share" lane and adding the ability for people to park on the side of the road greatly increases danger for cyclists who will need to ride around the cars. I feel like there could be other ways to slow down traffic. I like the idea of a true dedicated bike lane. I drive down these streets daily and while I can agree that people drive too fast, I see so many cyclists. I worry that the 2-way configuration would not take them into account

 

Glen Glawe about 1 year ago

As a kid growing up on East Pine Street, in the late 40s and 50s (I am now 84) I experienced two-way traffic on both Rodd and Ashman Streets. I had to cross these streets on my way to St. John's Lutheran School which was at the corner of Gordon and Grove streets at the time. It was extremely dangerous trying to cross these two streets with traffic coming from two directions. In fact, two of my friends were hit trying to cross one of these streets. Today with increased traffic and kids trying to cross two-way streets to get to Grove Park, this would create a very dangerous situation. So my questions are:
1) Why are we going back to the 1950s?
2) Who is pushing for this change? A few people that will have a negative impact on the whole city?
3) Why are we fixing something that isn't broken (same as the Buttels/Indian streets proposal)?
4) Isn't there something the city can do with the tax payers money that will benefit the entire city? Like fixing some of
our crumbling streets?
Thank You.

 

Todd Beebe about 1 year ago

I am not in favor of changing to 2-way streets. As a biker, I ride Ashman to downtown and appreciate the bike lane. I am definitely not in favor of changing the bike route through neighborhoods as there will not be a straight path, enough space, or good enough roads to ride on. I also feel that 2-way traffic will cause a lot of congestion going downtown and cause a huge safety concern exiting your vehicle after parallel parking. Where could you safely cross a 2-way street, lined with parked cars, with cross walks being 5+ blocks apart? Backing out of your driveway onto busy 2-way streets will be another huge safety issue, especially if cars are parked in the street causing limited visibility. Currently, the spacing between lights provide adequate time to back out of driveways between "waves" of traffic coming from only one direction.

 

Ellen Rabe about 1 year ago

I am not in favor of the change. I bike on the one ways and feel very safe doing so. I will not if it changes to two and includes parallel parking. Too dangerous! The sidewalks cannot accommodate bikers and walkers as they are old and too narrow. I also walk those sidewalks to town and if bikers are forced to use the sidewalks also it would not be pleasant to walk. Please do not change. I'm happy with status quo.

 

David Ramaker about 1 year ago

Strongly support two way traffic on Ashman and Rodd

 

This post is now closed to comments

To write a comment, your browser needs to accept cookies from communityfeedback.opengov.com.

Read more >