Council opts to keep traffic two-way

Local News

Discussion

PLEASE NOTE: There is a 150 word maximum for comments. All comments greater than 150 words in length will be deleted in their entirety.

ALSO NOTE: Derisive name-calling of an individual or group will result in the entire comment being deleted. This includes the terms "stupid" and "idiot" and similar references.

Welcome to our new online comments feature. Before you can join the discussion, you must first register with Disqus and verify your email address.

Once you do, your comments will post after they have been reviewed by a moderator.

We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including unpopular ones. We ask only that you keep the conversation civil and clean.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified, at the newspaper’s discretion, for a number of reasons. Here are some typical practices to avoid in trying to get your comment printed:

There is a 150 word maximum for comments. All comments greater than 150 words in length will be deleted in their entirety.

Don’t state as a fact something that is unsubstantiated or that our editors wouldn't know to be true.

Don’t presume someone’s guilt in a case when it hasn't been established by a court.

Don’t assail or impugn an identifiable individual or group. If you have that kind of criticism, sign your name and submit it as a Letter to the Editor. (There is some leeway on this in connection with public officials, but it is not unconditional.)

Don’t use profanity. This includes the term “tea bagger.”

Don’t be incendiary or tasteless. Those qualities are subjective, of course, and our editors will be the arbiters.

Do not identify yourself in the main content area of the article content form. Only by enforcing this rule can the moderators prevent unscrupulous commenters from falsely identifying themselves as someone they are not.

Don't type in all caps. It is considered the Internet equivalent of shouting.

In sports articles, do not criticize officiating.

Remember, moderators are not allowed to edit any article comments. If an article comment fails any of the above criteria, the entire comment will be deleted.

We monitor comments Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. Approval of comments outside these times may be delayed.

comments powered by Disqus

June 6, 2008

By JOE LoTEMPLIO The Press Republican Fri Jun 06, 2008, 12:00 AM EDT

PLATTSBURGH -- City councilors strongly rejected a plan to make traffic on the U.S. Oval one way instead of two-way.

Councilors voted 5 to 1 against the change, citing the impact it would have on the surrounding area and the potential to increase hazards rather than decrease them.

"I don't think we've thought through the risks clearly enough to warrant a change," Councilor Amy Valentine (D-Ward 5) said.

The proposed change was to make one lane on the Oval for motor vehicles, with the inside lane for non-motorized travel.

The one-way traffic most likely would have traveled in a counter-clockwise direction.

Residents on both sides of the issue spoke to councilors for about 30 minutes before the vote was taken Thursday night.

Oval resident Luke Cyphers, a supporter of the change, noted that the area is zoned specifically for recreational uses.

"It is in the spirit of the zoning to make this available and easy for recreation," Cyphers said.

"That's what it is supposed to be."

Cyphers' wife, Lisa Cyphers, said making the oval one-way with a recreation lane would enhance the area for the entire region.

"People are drawn to the Oval because it's a great place for recreation," she said.

"I would like to see it as a special place not just for us, but for the whole region."

Mrs. Cyphers noted that residents of the Oval would actually be the most inconvenienced by the change, but would put up with it in exchange for the benefits.

Other supporters said the nearby bicycle path along the lake is too remote and not safe for children to travel alone, and the oval would be more appropriate for biking, walking and in-line skating.

But not everyone was convinced the change would be a good idea.

Hazel Dwyer, a resident of North Catherine Street, a one-way street in the Center City, said that if the city changes the Oval traffic pattern then they should change other one-way streets.

"I've lived on that one-way street for 20 years and you should see the people who speed there," Dwyer said.

"The Oval is a wonderful asset to the city, don't ruin it."

James Bailey, the city historian, said changing the Oval would make it confusing to visitors who already have a hard time finding places.

"And I don't see how it would work in the winter with snow removal," Bailey said.

Councilor Timothy Carpenter (D-Ward 1) said changing the traffic would actually force more cars to travel in front of the Oval residences.

"That's where the kids are trying to cross the street," Carpenter said.

"To me that would decrease safety."

Councilor Chris Jackson (D-Ward 6), who lives on Oak Street, a one-way street, said people tend to speed more on one-way streets.

"I just don't think it will make it safer," he said.

Councilor Michael Kelly (D-Ward 2), who represents the Oval area, said the city needs more avenues to bike and walk.

"We need these areas right outside our front door, not on the edge of town," he said before casting the lone vote supporting the change.

"Also, this is a grassroots effort and if the people want it and feel strongly about it, then so do I."

Kelly said that despite losing the vote, he still wants to pursue further studies of traffic on the Oval.

"This is a good idea and it will come back," he said.

"I'm just glad the dialogue started."

jlotemplio@pressrepublican.com