Based on the graphical analysis posted yesterday on intersection density and vitality potential, I began to question my own assumption that Elm and Commerce should be the priority of expanding upon the success of Main Street in downtown Dallas. The results suggested that the most potential was along Harwood and Griffin. However, this was based strictly on how the roads exist now. So I decided to show what could happen if Elm and Commerce were to be changed to two-way between Harwood and Griffin:
Two-way Elm and Commerce:
I think this shows that my gut reaction to improve Elm and Commerce is proven wrong. While it changes somewhat for the segments that become two-way, converting these streets to two-way actually helps the potential of Harwood and Griffin more than the streets themselves (which could tell you that as part of the strategy to improve Harwood and Griffin, that the conversion of Elm/Commerce to two-way is necessary as well).
Point being, I think this further proves that Harwood and Griffin need major redesign as more place-based streets, as magnetic, centripetal streets rather than their current centrifugal function and strategies should be pursued for leveraging and catalyzing private investment along these corridors as well.
Don't believe me? Let's take a quick look at Underutilized or Underdeveloped parcels along those two corridors:
Blammo. That's a lot of potential for value capture there.
Of course, we killed Harwood by not extending it through Woodall Rogers Park, so its potential is limited. This will be revealed when I put this same study through the "Meta-Convergence" study proposed.