mindstalk | The power of one-lane streets

I want to talk about one-lane city streets: streets with only one travel lane (and are thus also one-way, at least for cars.)

Advantages:

They're great for pedestrians, with only 3 meters to cross to get out of the active car zone. (A pedestrian refuge between each lane would give similar benefit; in reality you'd likely only get that in a one-lane-each-way street.)

They tend to slow cars, from the visual cues of a narrow street and trees or buildings or parked cars going by, and maybe from getting stuck behind a slowpoke ahead.
Passing and lane changes are impossible, eliminating a major cause of accidents, including "aggressive driver passing and slamming into a pedestrian or bike they didn't see." Relatedly, driving takes less thought, as there aren't many decisions to make.
Intersections can be simpler, especially the intersection of two one-lane streets. You go forward or you turn in one direction, there isn't a hazardous kind of turn, and you can use squared off corners to clearly signal that one turn direction is forbidden.
Narrow street probably means less to maintain, and a higher taxpayer to infrastructure ratio.
Narrow streets can mean more enclosed streets, especially if buildings are close to the sidewalk (or street), with a width-to-height ratio closer to what most humans enjoy.
Regardless of any intellectual analysis, I've simply enjoyed the places I've lived in with such streets; they contribute somehow to a pleasant human experience.

Examples:

Some European implementations of woonerfs probably qualify, though I'm not sure being one lane is required.
Japanese narrow streets definitely qualify. One example, second example. I believe that variants of such streets make up the supermajority of streets in Japan, with a sample width of 16 feet (5 meters). (They're also explicitly two-way for bicycles.)
Also qualifying is the S.L.O.W., one blogger's name for Japanese streets with one car lane, between wide curbless sidewalks protected by bollards.
Streets in Boston's North End and Beacon Hill
Philadelphia has lots of alleyways (this is still a street, with front doors), and the wider two lanes parking, one travel, or this example (which full-size city buses go down, a fact I still find hilarious.)

Disadvantages:

I'm tempted to say there are none, and thus fuel a vigorous comment section. But the obvious one:

No ability to pass means risking getting stuck behind a slow or stopped vehicle, which can range from annoying to aggravating to "ambulance can't get through". I think I can imagine a fix for that: one continuous travel lane, but various parking/passing bays (bounced by chicanes or bulbs, so not being an extended lane). Of course, that compromises some of the advantages (you need a wider street, or narrower sidewalks, and at least some segments become less crossable, though you can still have segments that are exactly one lane wide.) In Japan or the Netherlands, such streets aren't supposed to have much traffic on them in the first place; Philadelphia is another matter.

I would note that while some drivers like to wield emergency access as a club against traffic calming measures, in reality the USA does not make fast emergency vehicles a top priority. If we did, we would reserve a lane of our wide roads for them, maybe letting buses use the lanes as well. Instead we accept ambulances and firetrucks being stuck in traffic as a price of letting cars use the full width of our roads.

The power of one-lane streets

no subject