# Civic Matters > Suburban & Other OK Communities > Norman >  Lindsey Street

## Geographer

I thought I would go ahead and start a thread since the city will be re-doing Lindsey street from the interstate to (at least) Berry.  What would you like to see?

5 lanes with middle turn lane?
4 lanes?
2 lanes with bike lanes/street parking?
2 lanes with bike lanes/street parking and a median?
2 lanes with bike lanes and non-interrupted sidewalks all the way down Lindsey?
Dedicated space for bus pull-offs?
Replace intersection lights with roundabouts?


Personal preference: 2 10' car lanes with a bike lane on each side.  Roundabouts replace the street lights at 24th/Lindsey, McGee/Lindsey, and Berry/Lindsey.  The Roundabouts would help congestion along Lindsey as cars would not have to wait for lights, but simply merging into a roundabout.  This Lindsey street project has an opportunity to be a model street for Norman and the surrounding areas...since it is a gateway into the city/university...this is all personal preference though.  Revamping Lindsey Street is a MUST though.  Retail Space per square foot has fallen recently in the shopping centers along Lindsey.  A new, complete, streetscape could revamp the corridor and put reinvestment/renovation into the strip centers along the corridor.

EDIT: Last week, President Boren voiced his support for re-doing Lindsey from Berry into campus as long as it can be done "tastefully"....meaning two lanes/sidewalks, etc...as long as it does not destroy the current tree canopy, etc.

----------


## jedicurt

my preference would be 3 lanes, one each way with a dedicated turn lane, bike lanes on each side, and dedicated spaces for bus pull-off

----------


## Geographer

I'm not sold on the dedicated middle turn lane.  I think a median that's well landscaped would do wonders for the street scape as a whole.  Left turns into businesses aren't absolutely essential, especially if you have roundabouts at intersections where you can easily enter the roundabout and make a U-turn.

But I am totally with you on the bike lanes and dedicated space for bus pull offs, if there's enough space and the city doesn't have to purchase a ton of right-of-way...which is where it could get costly.

----------


## Geographer

> I prefer 2 lanes, no median, bike lanes, and angled parking (if possible).  Back in parking is even better.



Reverse Angle parking is fantastic. It's much safer....having the street parking would also set the stage to move buildings along lindsey closer to the street.  I am not sure that would be able to get approved though, given the vast amount of parking lots along Lindsey.

----------


## Geographer

Something like this would be really cool too for Lindsey at I-35.  Where you have the on/off ramps that come into two roundabouts on either side of the interstate.

roundabout.jpg

----------


## jedicurt

As long as U-turns at intersections (either by roundabout or traffic light) are allowed and encouraged, then i would be okay with a median or a no left turn policy if there is no median.  I just know that if you allow left turns, there will be big issues for traffic backups.  that is why i support a middle turn lane.

----------


## Roger S

From an engineering viewpoint I love the concept of RAP but at the same time my wife can barely back her car out of our garage without taking the house down and I know she's not alone in her inability to back a vehicle. 

So how often would I be coming back out to my vehicle to find out that a well seasoned citizen or someone like my wife has backed into my vehicle?

----------


## BoulderSooner

isn't it already decided that it will be 2 lanes each direction with a turn lane .. and new sidewalks ..

----------


## Geographer

> From an engineering viewpoint I love the concept of RAP but at the same time my wife can barely back her car out of our garage without taking the house down and I know she's not alone in her inability to back a vehicle. 
> 
> So how often would I be coming back out to my vehicle to find out that a well seasoned citizen or someone like my wife has backed into my vehicle?


I suppose so, but from a safety standpoint, I would rather "pull into traffic" than "back out into traffic", as what happens with standard angle parking.  I don't think people be able to back into a parking spot would be a giant issue though.


EDIT: Added a photo of reverse angle parking, just so everyone knows exactly what it looks like....where you back in and have some extra space between the parking space and where the driving lane actually starts. parking.jpg

----------


## Geographer

> isn't it already decided that it will be 2 lanes each direction with a turn lane .. and new sidewalks ..


It is not totally decided.  There was a meeting last week with Dan Burden (walkable and livable communities expert) which was attended by a few council members, engineering firm hired for the lindsey project, mayor of Norman, President Boren, etc.  The workshop was specifically about a "Livable Lindsey Street" and what the design should be.

----------


## HangryHippo

Here's my preference:  

1) A beautifully landscaped center median
2) Lindsey St. is 2 lanes each way with U-turns allowed at the signaled intersections with 24th Ave, McGee, Berry, Flood, and Chautauqua
3) Dedicated areas for buses to pull off
4) Uninterrupted wide sidewalks the entire length of Lindsey

----------


## Roger S

> I suppose so, but from a safety standpoint, I would rather "pull into traffic" than "back out into traffic", as what happens with standard angle parking.  I don't think people be able to back into a parking spot would be a giant issue though.


You have more faith in the skills of Oklahoma drivers than I do.  :Wink:

----------


## Geographer

> You have more faith in the skills of Oklahoma drivers than I do.


haha...I can be optimistic sometimes  :Wink: 

I just know that people don't like backing out directly into traffic on main street...you're literally back into a driving lane on Main...and if there's a parked car next to you that's blocking your view then it's a crapshoot backing out.

----------


## Just the facts

let me say that I am presently surprised by this change of design criteria.  When the bond issue was being discussed and voted on the desire was for Lindsey to move as many cars as possible as fast as possible between Berry and I-35.

http://www.okctalk.com/norman/31544-...age-today.html

http://www.okctalk.com/norman/27534-...g-forward.html

----------


## Geographer

> let me say that I am presently surprised by this change of design criteria.  When the bond issue was being discussed and voted on the desire was for Lindsey to move as many cars as possible as fast as possible between Berry and I-35.
> 
> http://www.okctalk.com/norman/31544-...age-today.html
> 
> http://www.okctalk.com/norman/27534-...g-forward.html



Yeah,  I am surprised as well, but I think that people and city leaders are beginning to understand that we don't want to "robinson our lindsey street" (I'm coining that phrase hah).  It was encouraging to see local leaders involved in last week's workshop.

Here is the video from the workshop, towards the end of the video are some examples of what Lindsey could look like.






Malta, New York
malta.JPG

----------


## Roger S

> I just know that people don't like backing out directly into traffic on main street...you're literally back into a driving lane on Main...and if there's a parked car next to you that's blocking your view then it's a crapshoot backing out.


That's exactly why I like the concept of RAP. And I suppose in the long run the damage from someone backing into me compared to the damage of someone clipping me doing 30-40 MPH is going to be a lot less extensive....... Unless they run into me doing 30-40 MPH while I'm backing into my parking space.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Does this street run though downtown?

On edit: just noticed that it doesn't, or so I think. Anyhow, a six lane divided BLVD. with dual left turns, and right turn lanes as well as 11ft. Trails would be good.

When it runs through OU it should narrow down to 4 lanes and bike lanes on both sides

----------


## Geographer

> Does this street run though downtown?


No, Lindsey is the street that leads into the heart of the university

----------


## venture

> Does this street run though downtown?


Google Maps! /whip

But no it does not. 

Personally I like the refocus on not doing another boring 4/5 lane road to Berry. However, we have to understand that traffic is going to be pretty heavy so I think that eliminates any on street parking for safety reasons.  

A new corridor with wide sidewalks, beautiful landscaping including a median, and a setup that promotes the easy flow of traffic is what is needed. Of course we'll hear from those that want a 5 lane road all the way to campus and houses and trees be damned, but thankfully those people are few and far between. Even less now that half of the old city council is out the door as of yesterday.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Google Maps! /whip
> 
> But no it does not. 
> 
> Personally I like the refocus on not doing another boring 4/5 lane road to Berry. However, we have to understand that traffic is going to be pretty heavy so I think that eliminates any on street parking for safety reasons.  
> 
> A new corridor with wide sidewalks, beautiful landscaping including a median, and a setup that promotes the easy flow of traffic is what is needed. Of course we'll hear from those that want a 5 lane road all the way to campus and houses and trees be damned, but thankfully those people are few and far between. Even less now that half of the old city council is out the door as of yesterday.


yeah i went to gmaps right after I posted lol But you can look at my post above. It has my thoughts on it

----------


## Geographer

> Does this street run though downtown?
> 
> On edit: just noticed that it doesn't, or so I think. Anyhow, a six lane divided BLVD. with dual left turns, and right turn lanes as well as 11ft. Trails would be good.
> 
> When it runs through OU it should narrow down to 4 lanes and bike lanes on both sides



Please tell me you're joking about the six lane boulevard. That would make it the largest street in Norman. For a street that has been LOSING traffic over the past 12 years. Lindsey works fine now as two lanes, it just needs to have the street lights removed with roundabout replacing. 

A six lane road on Lindsey would not only cost a fortune to construct (right of way purchases as well) but an absolute disaster for the area. I hope you were kidding.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Please tell me you're joking about the six lane boulevard. That would make it the largest street in Norman. For a street that has been LOSING traffic over the past 12 years. Lindsey works fine now as two lanes, it just needs to have the street lights removed with roundabout replacing. 
> 
> A six lane road on Lindsey would not only cost a fortune to construct (right of way purchases as well) but an absolute disaster for the area. I hope you were kidding.


if it really has been loosing traffic, then it shouldn't be six lanes. Everything else on my list remains same though. I'm going by your word.

Btw, on gmaps it has Lindsey at five lanes one way, what am I missing here????  Where is the two lanes at?

----------


## Geographer

> if it really has been loosing traffic, then it shouldn't be six lanes. Everything else on my list remains same though. I'm going by your word.
> 
> Btw, on gmaps it has Lindsey at five lanes one way, what am I missing here????  Where is the two lanes at?


I have no clue where you're looking. Lindsey Street between I-35 on the west and Berry Road on the east. Lindsey is a mile south of Main Street and a mile north of Highway 9.

----------


## venture

> if it really has been loosing traffic, then it shouldn't be six lanes. Everything else on my list remains same though. I'm going by your word.
> 
> Btw, on gmaps it has Lindsey at five lanes one way, what am I missing here????  Where is the two lanes at?


Lindsey is only 4 lanes until just east of 24th SW then it goes to 2 lanes with a center turn lane all the way to Berry. I think you are looking at Hwy 9.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I have no clue where you're looking. Lindsey Street between I-35 on the west and Berry Road on the east. Lindsey is a mile south of Main Street and a mile north of Highway 9.





> Lindsey is only 4 lanes until just east of 24th SW then it goes to 2 lanes with a center turn lane all the way to Berry. I think you are looking at Hwy 9.


ah, I think I see it now. So if it is that kind of street they should add bike lanes, center median w/ landscaping, 12' sidewalks and that would be swell. Also, dedicated turn lanes to.

----------


## Geographer

Lindsey Stakeholder's meeting today about the new lindsey street scape project...I believe a public meeting will be held on Thursday with different workshops.

----------


## BG918

> Lindsey Stakeholder's meeting today about the new lindsey street scape project...I believe a public meeting will be held on Thursday with different workshops.


Are you going?  I really like your ideas for Lindsey, especially the roundabouts.  Put some fountains in the middle and you have a really nice entrance into the city and university.

----------


## Geographer

> Are you going?  I really like your ideas for Lindsey, especially the roundabouts.  Put some fountains in the middle and you have a really nice entrance into the city and university.


Yes I will be at the meeting today.

The last public meeting will be held today at 4:00 at Legends Times Two (1313 W Lindsey Street).  Boren, OU Institute invite ideas about Lindsey Street makeover  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

----------


## ou48A

I'm all for making Lindsey street look nice, but they have got to find a way to significantly increase that  streets capacity. After all that's the bottom line on what the city of Norman voters voted for.

Hopefully the city will do better than they did on Flood Street just north of Robinson where they had to tear out several hundred feet of vegetation due to poor decision making.

There are a lot of times when something looks real good on a blue print but the practicality is virtually nil and in the mean time a great deal of money is wasted by people with good intentions but use far too little common sense. 

Our city leaders far to often resort to expensive studies and outsiders rather than using good local judgment.

----------


## Geographer

> I'm all for making Lindsey street look nice, but they have got to find a way to significantly increase that  streets capacity. After all that's the bottom line on what the city of Norman voters voted for.
> 
> Hopefully the city will do better than they did on Flood Street just north of Robinson where they had to tear out several hundred feet of vegetation due to poor decision making.
> 
> There are a lot of times when something looks real good on a blue print but the practicality is virtually nil and in the mean time a great deal of money is wasted by people with good intentions but use far too little common sense. 
> 
> Our city leaders far to often resort to expensive studies and outsiders rather than using good local judgment.


Then come to the LOCAL meeting and voice your opinion, it'll be a great forum for discussion.

----------


## ou48A

> Then come to the LOCAL meeting and voice your opinion, it'll be a great forum for discussion.


I was actually thinking about attending, but I have had a situation that just came up that I can't get out of this afternoon. Hopefully somebody will say something close to what I posted and make it clear about what the voters thought they were voting for.

My air-conditioner broke down late night but  I managed to seclude a repair person late this afternoon. You know what they say this  time of year when it comes to air conditioning, beggars cant be to choosy.

----------


## Geographer

> I was actually thinking about attending, but I have had a situation that just came up that I can't get out of this afternoon. Hopefully somebody will say something close to what I posted and make it clear about what the voters thought they were voting for.
> 
> My air-conditioner broke down late night but  I managed to seclude a repair person late this afternoon. You know what they say this  time of year when it comes to air conditioning, beggars cant be to choosy.


I feel your pain, I had to have my AC repaired in June.

I do hope that you can find time to come though.  There will be renderings, drawings, workshops, presentations and general good discussion.  It will be good.

----------


## venture

> I was actually thinking about attending, but I have had a situation that just came up that I can't get out of this afternoon. Hopefully somebody will say something close to what I posted and make it clear about what the voters thought they were voting for.


There are ways to increase capacity without slapping down ton more pavement. I like the idea of 4 lanes, divided if possible, with bike and walking lanes - well landscaped at that, with roundabouts instead of traffic lights. It would increase capacity of the road without the need to making it any wider.

----------


## ou48A

> I feel your pain, I had to have my AC repaired in June.
> 
> I do hope that you can find time to come though.  There will be renderings, drawings, workshops, presentations and general good discussion.  It will be good.


AC is back on and fixed 100% free of charge.... Its already down to 72 degrees.

Please give us a report on the presentation.

----------


## ou48A

In principle I can support most of this.

I understand this is just a start but without redoing Lindsey street from Berry to campus its almost a project to nowhere. 
When Boren said that OU would start with a roundabout at Jenkins its pretty irritating because a large amount of money was just spent rebuilding this intersection.
 It shows how little planing goes into their thinking process and the low levels of basic economic common sense that too many of our decision makers have.
I hope they are smart with the landscaping plants.




Lindsey Street set for a makeover  Headlines  The Norman Transcript



July 26, 2013
Lindsey Street set for a makeover 

By Joy Hampton The Norman Transcript The Norman Transcript Fri Jul 26, 2013, 01:05 AM CDT 

NORMAN — Imagine if west Lindsey Street looked more like Campus Corner or downtown, with gently flowing traffic, bicyclists and people walking and laughing. Imagine trees and sidewalk cafes. Imagine Lindsey Street as more of a village and less of a strip mall. 
Imagine Lindsey Street as a destination to meander through and enjoy on the way to the university.

“You get one good chance to reinvent Lindsey, and it’s now,” community planner Dan Burden told a full house at Legends Times Two on Thursday evening. “A great street is something that harvests the best of the community and sets a template for the community.”
Burden is the co-founder and director of innovation and inspiration at the Walkable and Livable Communities Institute, a nonprofit that helps communities build healthier, more livable environments. He spoke to Norman residents and stakeholders about the possibilities for Lindsey Street to become a model of what a great street can be.

Currently, Lindsey is ranked as the No. 1 traffic congestion corridor in the Oklahoma City metropolitan area, with a crash rate nearly three times the national average for similar roadways. In August, Norman voters approved a $42 million transportation bond package with 62 percent support. Federal matching funds will pay for a strong portion of the eight proposed projects in the bond package. 

The Lindsey Street widening and storm drainage portion of that bond package accounts for more than $21 million — half the total approved package. Federal funds will pay an additional $11.5 million of the Lindsey project costs.
The vision for Lindsey presented to voters included landscaping, continuos sidewalks, bike lanes, two lanes of traffic each way and a center turn lane. 

That cement river of road between cement seas of parking lots and strip malls is exactly what Norman should avoid, said Burden and his team, Lynn Richards, Loeb Fellow at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and Michael Wallwork, an engineer with 40 years of experience in traffic engineering, road construction and transportation design.
Officials from the University of Oklahoma agree.

“We have an opportunity to make (Lindsey Street) beautiful and make traffic flow,” University of Oklahoma President David Boren said.
To make the streetscape beautiful — to take the plan for a good street and turn it into a great street — Burden proposes a triple canopy of landscaping. Instead of a center turn lane, a center median with trees would form a third area of landscaping to compliment the streetside landscaping. 

Bike lanes and landscaping provide a buffer to make pedestrians on sidewalks feel safe and secure, Burden said. 
Burden also proposed roundabouts instead of traffic lights at intersections. To start with, 24th Avenue and McGee Drive would retain their signal lights, but roundabouts at other intersections would slow vehicles down and provide a smoother flow of traffic at Murphy, Wiley Street and Berry Road. 

Roundabouts are a different way of doing an intersection. They calm traffic, but vehicles get to destinations more quickly because there is continuous flow instead of a backlog from stopping at lights. Roundabouts create a more pedestrian-friendly environment, Burden said, and reduce crashes and fatalities. 

Pedestrian crossings could be incorporated at halfway points and would increase accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists because people cross one lane of traffic safely to the median, then cross a single lane of traffic from the median to the other side. This means a pedestrian only has to watch for traffic coming from one direction.
Additionally, U-turns incorporated into the medians would allow vehicles easy access to both sides of the street versus trying to cross over several lanes of traffic during peak hours. Bus stops are another portion of the multimodal transportation portfolio envisioned for Lindsey.

Burden said accidents and injuries are dramatically lowered with these types of street improvements.
“It was not a popular idea when I started,” Burden said. “Now 80 percent of Americans want to live in a walkable community.”
The Lindsey project can’t be delayed and must meet bond goals and specifications as presented to the community, but many of the improvements suggested could be incorporated, he said. Colored bike lanes, for example, would increase visibility and safety along with aesthetic appeal.
Too often the real world we live in means sitting in traffic, Burden said, but a well-designed street can improve the economy along with improving quality of life. 
“People now want beauty,” Burden said. 

Boren said the university is on board with making Lindsey really beautiful and slowing traffic down to a pedestrian-friendly, continuous flow. 
“We don’t want to see five lanes or six lanes of concrete divide our campus,” Boren said. *“This could have the potential for doing something even beyond Berry Road.”*

Boren praised the triple canopy streetscaping idea. He said he believes the proposed changes by Burden also would give better access to Lindsey Street businesses. 
“You’re a lot better off if you never stop, you’re always moving,” Boren said. 

*Boren said OU would start with a roundabout at Jenkins and make it beautiful.*

“I think it’s something we, from the university’s point of view, would be willing to look at,” he said. “I think we’ll kick ourselves 25 years from now if we don’t do everything imaginable to make (Lindsey Street) better. It could be so much more beautiful, so much more interesting. We could be a model in Oklahoma.”

----------


## venture

Great news out of meeting yesterday on the Lindsey redesign. A lot of elements many want appear to be the main focus. First and foremost, the 5 lane Lindsey Street plan is dead it would seem.

Story in the Transcript: Lindsey Street set for a makeover  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

Main elements...


Traffic lights will be removed and roundabouts put in the intersections. Murphy, Wiley, and Berry would be the first converted. 24th and McGee would retain their lights for now.A center landscaped median will be added.U-Turns would be permitted in various cuts along the median.Bike lane added, possible painted to a different color, and additional landscaping to provide a buffer with sidewalks.Continuous sidewalks making Lindsey a more walkable street.Lindsey would be 2 lanes in each direction with new crosswalks over the median.Additional bus stops added along Lindsey.

All in all very pleased with this. The plan has the full support of President Boren, which is huge. He also stated he can see doing the same through Campus and also stated Jenkins would be the first intersection to go to a roundabout.

----------


## Geographer

It was a fantastic meeting.  I loved the revealed designs.

It's funny...the city traffic engineer's presentation took about 3 minutes.  There was no narrative, no excitement.   Dan's presentation was full of excitement, passion, reasons why we should do this, why it matters (economically, traffic-wise, etc), etc.

Venture I must correct you though, Lindsey will be two lanes each direction but with a much better overall design than what was originally planned.

All in All, the meeting went great....there were concern questions but it was mostly positive concern...not immediate "turn-offs" on the project.  We shall see what happens.  I'm thrilled though.


The funniest part of the meeting? A former councilman stated "Norman is not a city".

Sigh.

----------


## venture

Thanks Trey...it was hard to tell from the text when they said pedestrians only had to cross one lane of traffic at a time. So that through me off.

----------


## Geographer

> Thanks Trey...it was hard to tell from the text when they said pedestrians only had to cross one lane of traffic at a time. So that through me off.


I think the author meant one "direction" of traffic at a time.  There's a median in the middle with a spot dedicated to pedestrians where they can wait and cross.

----------


## venture

Another good part is that Boren definitely sounds like he doesn't want Lindsey any wider into campus. I could see Lindsey remaining 1 lane each way, but adding in a center landscaped median. This should be pretty easy to do since the turn lanes aren't needed anymore. Asp would probably go to a roundabout at some point, but its going to be a tight fit.

----------


## venture

> I think the author meant one "direction" of traffic at a time.  There's a median in the middle with a spot dedicated to pedestrians where they can wait and cross.


Yeah I was able to get that out of it...but I think you are right, he just got the phrasing wrong.

All in all still glad with this design. We avoid the 5 lane concrete monster and get a better traffic management system in place. I would imagine speed limits will stay around 30 mph through this.

----------


## Just the facts

Well, let me say that I am blown away by this turn of developments.  Maybe they learned their lesson from UNP.  I am glad they are on the right track now.

----------


## Geographer

> Well, let me say that I am blown away by this turn of developments.  Maybe they learned their lesson from UNP.  I am glad they are on the right track now.


Thanks to intervening by a couple of groups of people....haha...came in at the nick of time too.


HOWEVER...none of this is final though! It still has to be approved and whatnot....we shall see how much of this (if any of it) gets approved...

----------


## HangryHippo

> Thanks to intervening by a couple of groups of people....haha...came in at the nick of time too.
> 
> 
> HOWEVER...none of this is final though! It still has to be approved and whatnot....we shall see how much of this (if any of it) gets approved...


Were there any council members present?  Any idea how it sits with them?

----------


## venture

> Thanks to intervening by a couple of groups of people....haha...came in at the nick of time too.
> 
> HOWEVER...none of this is final though! It still has to be approved and whatnot....we shall see how much of this (if any of it) gets approved...


Hopefully we can keep out the people that want their 5 lane concrete abomination going through the middle of Norman and this proposal sales through.

----------


## Geographer

> Were there any council members present?  Any idea how it sits with them?


Yes there were 3-4 council members there...and at least 1 previous council member.  As far as I could tell, it went okay with them, but you know I don't really know what they're thinking.  We'll see.

----------


## traxx

Are there any renderings or videos of what was discussed/presented etc.?

----------


## Geographer

> Are there any renderings or videos of what was discussed/presented etc.?


I will see if I can get ahold of the presentation that Dan gave.

----------


## HangryHippo

Trey, was Dan's presentation just a slideshow of what might be possible with Lindsey St?  Or was it more detailed in offering precise solutions for what could (should) be done with Lindsey St?  Does that make sense?

----------


## ljbab728

Was anything mentioned about continuing to make Lindsey one way in places on football days?

----------


## ou48A

The city, OU & state should consider making Flood street one way north to Robinson after football games.

They need to better coordinate the traffic lights on Flood street and cover some stop signs.
They should look at doing this to others major Norman streets?

----------


## BG918

> [*]Bike lane added, possible painted to a different color, and additional landscaping to provide a buffer with sidewalks.


Maybe a crimson-colored bike lane?   :Smile: 

Sounds like they have a solid plan in place, hopefully it gets constructed that way.  The sidewalks will be a huge improvement, especially between Berry and campus.

----------


## ou48A

> Maybe a crimson-colored bike lane?  
> 
> Sounds like they have a solid plan in place, hopefully it gets constructed that way.  The sidewalks will be a huge improvement, especially between Berry and campus.


Maybe I missed it but I haven't seen any plans to offer even basic sidewalks from Berry to campus.
Clearly they are needed.

----------


## venture

> Was anything mentioned about continuing to make Lindsey one way in places on football days?


I would imagine it would be one way from campus to Berry and then go two way with the divided median. Of course one way traffic on the roundabout at Berry probably would be pretty complex - depending on how many forward westbound lanes there are. 

I think the biggest issue would be if they decide to put in additional roundabouts at Pickard, Flood, Chautauqua, and Elm. It would make sense that they add them in. We do run into space issues at most of those intersections though where the city would have to acquire some additional right of way to make it work. 




> The city, OU & state should consider making Flood street one way north to Robinson after football games.
> 
> They need to better coordinate the traffic lights on Flood street and cover some stop signs.
> They should look at doing this to others major Norman streets?


I can't see it being feasible in that area. If it wasn't cutting completely through neighborhoods it would probably be feasible, but we aren't talking just a mile of road. 

Chautauqua or Jenkins one way would probably be better, to the south, pushing more traffic on to Hwy 9. 




> Maybe a crimson-colored bike lane? 
> 
> Sounds like they have a solid plan in place, hopefully it gets constructed that way. The sidewalks will be a huge improvement, especially between Berry and campus.


Keep in mind that this is just for the I-35 to Berry portion. I would imagine we'll see something in a couple years for the next segment. OU is going to handle  the portion on campus. I think crimson colored lanes sound good though.  :Smile:

----------


## Just the facts

> Maybe a crimson-colored bike lane?


How about a checkerboard crimson and cream bike lane (and maybe crosswalks)?

----------


## kevinpate

> The city, OU & state should consider making Flood street one way north to Robinson after football games.
> 
> They need to better coordinate the traffic lights on Flood street and cover some stop signs.
> They should look at doing this to others major Norman streets?


Or, stadium event participants could simply accept that 80,000+ spectators are not going to go from seat to gate to car to NW Norman residential or hit interstate at speed without a wee bit of inconvenience.  Besides, I would think one could funnel more cars faster out E Lindsey, up and down 12th than adding to the mix of folks using Lindsey West through its narrowest path. If I wanted 35 or NW Norman after a game, E Lindsey to 12th to Tecumseh and then west would be my magic carpet.

----------


## Just the facts

Considering most fans start leaving half way through the 4th quarter, if you just wait until the clock reads 0:00 most traffic will be gone by the time you get to the car.

----------


## ou48A

> Considering most fans start leaving half way through the 4th quarter, if you just wait until the clock reads 0:00 most traffic will be gone by the time you get to the car.


That's not at all true.......... In FACT its just exactly the opposite!


The traffic becomes very backed up for the people who wait until the end of the game because so many leave early to beat traffic.
 One little problem on a street such as Lindsey causes hours worth of problems for some.

----------


## ou48A

> Or, stadium event participants could simply accept that 80,000+ spectators are not going to go from seat to gate to car to NW Norman residential or hit interstate at speed without a wee bit of inconvenience.  Besides, I would think one could funnel more cars faster out E Lindsey, up and down 12th than adding to the mix of folks using Lindsey West through its narrowest path. If I wanted 35 or NW Norman after a game, E Lindsey to 12th to Tecumseh and then west would be my magic carpet.


The problem with that line of thinking is that the OU football traffic congestion is a safety hazard that has been noted by officials.

 Due to new city parking and street restrictions along with stadium expansion and the thousands who now come to tail-gate only and never attend the games the congestion problem has grown much worse in recent years.

Better organization is needed.

PS: Via many years of experience I have discovered there are far better way that save a lot more time than your magic carpet solution

----------


## ou48A

> I can't see it being feasible in that area. If it wasn't cutting completely through neighborhoods it would probably be feasible, but we aren't talking just a mile of road. 
> 
> Chautauqua or Jenkins one way would probably be better, to the south, pushing more traffic on to Hwy 9. 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that this is just for the I-35 to Berry portion. I would imagine we'll see something in a couple years for the next segment. OU is going to handle  the portion on campus. I think crimson colored lanes sound good though.


It may or may not be feasible to make Flood one way, but they will need to do something when Lindsey street is rebuilt.
As it is now Highway 9 is very clogged for at least 2 hr after close games. Most experienced people avoid it because of its congestion.

----------


## ou48A

> How about a checkerboard crimson and cream bike lane (and maybe crosswalks)?


It probably won't fly with the anti OU crowd in Norman but I actually like that idea.

----------


## BG918

> Keep in mind that this is just for the I-35 to Berry portion. I would imagine we'll see something in a couple years for the next segment. OU is going to handle  the portion on campus. I think crimson colored lanes sound good though.


Any idea what the timeline would be to improve Lindsey from Berry to Jenkins?  Is that considered Phase III?  Phase I being Classen to Jenkins and Phase II being 35 to Berry.  That area really needs sidewalks.

----------


## ou48A

The time line will depend  a lot on over coming the opposition.
The opposition is in love with the trees and the setting.

The additional right-of-way could be taken 100%  from the north side of the street. This would leave  the nice homes on the south side street intact. But it would alow enough room for 2 lanes in each  direction, wide side walks and a bike path.

But some of the big old trees could be transplanted. I have seen this done.

New and better tree species that would  better suited for our area could be planted.
I would love to see a verity of trees that have showy fall and spring colors.

----------


## Questor

Please tell me they aren't going to start this Lindsey work until after the I-35 nightmare has wrapped up....

I like many aspects of the plan, but I really dislike the traffic circle idea. I've driven through many in other states, and despise the small ones which I assume these will be. I'm having a lot of trouble picturing in my mind how that doesn't cause problems on game days.

----------


## venture

> The time line will depend  a lot on over coming the opposition.
> The opposition is in love with the trees and the setting.


In case you didn't notice, your "opposition" is getting pretty much what they want with the current Lindsey project. 

[QUOTE=ou48A;670782]The additional right-of-way could be taken 100%  from the north side of the street. This would leave  the nice homes on the south side street intact. But it would alow enough room for 2 lanes in each  direction, wide side walks and a bike path.

Wow. So there are no nice homes on the north side? Really. We've been over this before, but I guess you need pictures to learn...

First off...Berry to Pickard....
Plenty of room until you get down the hill. South side there is little to no room with structures built very close to the street. North side roughly the same. There are a couple low priced properties here, but apparently those $190-300K homes on the north side don't count as "nice" in OU48's world.



Pickard to Chautauqua...

Space gets to be even more of a problem with many structures near the road. Variety of property values on both sides of the street, so there isn't a case of "ewww ghetto North side" versus "my gas doesn't smell South side". 



Finally Chautauqua to Campus...

Same as the previous, but a little more room and low value properties on the SOUTH side of the street. However, you get into commercial property too which is lower in value.








> But some of the big old trees could be transplanted. I have seen this done.
> 
> New and better tree species that would  better suited for our area could be planted.
> I would love to see a verity of trees that have showy fall and spring colors.


Sure you could transplant, at a very high cost, and at the risk of killing the tree. I don't see how you could say these trees aren't good for the area since those in Central Norman are pretty strong trees compared to the pathetic things you get in Suburbiaville.

----------


## venture

> Please tell me they aren't going to start this Lindsey work until after the I-35 nightmare has wrapped up....
> 
> I like many aspects of the plan, but I really dislike the traffic circle idea. I've driven through many in other states, and despise the small ones which I assume these will be. I'm having a lot of trouble picturing in my mind how that doesn't cause problems on game days.


Well they are on a fixed timeline due to the bond backing this has. I also think when the Lindsey bridge is getting torn up, it would be a great time to get it done since traffic will be lower.

Traffic circles are going to be a huge help to keep traffic moving, which in of itself will increase the capacity of the road. Game day setup would be interesting, but I think this becomes the situation of 350 days outweighs just 6 (give or take) days a year. If I understand things correctly, the traffic circles will be larger than what we see on Main Street since it'll be 2 lanes each direction. That right there would equal the capacity we have now on game days.

----------


## ou48A

> Wow. So *there are no nice homes on the north side*? Really. We've been over this before, but I guess you need pictures to learn...




I never said there are no nice homes on the north side of Lindsey. There are a few decent homes on the north side but regardless of this issue there is nothing on the north side that should prevent eliminating the inconvenience for many thousand of people each day.... clearly the homes on the south side are generally nicer and that's why taking the right-of-way from  the north side  makes the most sense. 



What I'm talking about is helping the maximum number of people while providing the least disruption to the fewest numbers of people. Buying out a handful of property on the north side of Lindsey accomplish this goal and it can be done in a very nice tasteful way.

----------


## ou48A

> .
> 
>  I think this becomes the situation of 350 days outweighs just 6 (give or take) days a year.


There's where you are wrong. 

The home OU football games are absolutely vital for donations to OU academics and athletics and because of this Football traffic on Lindsey absolutely out weighs whatever happens doing the rest of year, this is without doubt.

Whoever doesn’t accommodate game day traffic on Lindsey is an absolute fool because as it is there are already very wealthy donors who are skipping  a few home games because of  Norman's congestion. To Make it any worse is extremely short sighted and stupid unless you want unhappy or disengaged donors over an improperly built street.... And there are people in Norman who would love nothing more.

----------


## venture

> I never said there are no nice homes on the north side of Lindsey. There are a few decent homes on the north side but regardless of this issue there is nothing on the north side that should prevent eliminating the inconvenience for many thousand of people each day.... clearly the homes on the south side are generally nicer and that's why taking the right-of-way from the north side makes the most sense. 
> 
> What I'm talking about is helping the maximum number of people while providing the least disruption to the fewest numbers of people. Buying out a handful of property on the north side of Lindsey accomplish this goal and it can be done in a very nice tasteful way.


Ahhh...so 200-250K qualifies as "decent" these days? I guess my way of thinking has just been so clouded being down here mixing with the common people. I guess providing pictures and proof of properties in that stretch being very mixed, along with very little room to navigate the concrete monstrosity you want, just isn't going to open your eyes to reality of the situation.




> There's where you are wrong. 
> 
> The home OU football games are absolutely vital for donations to OU academics and athletics and because of this Football traffic on Lindsey absolutely out weighs whatever happens doing the rest of year, this is without doubt.
> 
> Whoever doesn’t accommodate game day traffic on Lindsey is an absolute fool because as it is there are already very wealthy donors who are skipping  a few home games because of  Norman's congestion. To Make it any worse is extremely short sighted and stupid unless you want unhappy or disengaged donors over an improperly built street.... And there are people in Norman who would love nothing more.


Lindsey will be 2 lanes each way ones you get to Berry coming from campus. That equals what we have right now on game days. So that's solved. We don't know yet if they would be able to do both sides of Lindsey as one way, but in reality it shouldn't be needed. 

While we are on the subject of stupid and short sighted...

Exactly how much room do you think it is going to take to do what you want, 4 lanes from Berry to campus, with large sidewalks and bike lanes? It just isn't going to happen. We are more likely to see a 2-lane Lindsey remain, with roundabouts replacing lights, and new sidewalks put in with bike lanes on the shoulders. This would provide a much better approach to campus and would also keep traffic flowing. The back ups will then hit at the crosswalk lights on campus which is an OU problem. David Boren has already said he is completely against widening Lindsey any further through campus, and I feel most are going to go with his opinion. 

Let's be honest. You are apparently upset that you may not be getting what you wanted. You wanted a typical 4 lane road with a center turn lane all down Lindsey. That's not likely to happen. Instead the momentum appears to be behind a very well designed, thought out gateway into Norman that will provide a safer and logistically better roadway. 

Lastly, for any city it is going to be tough to accommodate 80,000 people flocking into watch a game in a city of 110,000. There are going to be congestion issues. People that are hoping for no traffic are just...well short sighted and stupid. They could do all the improvements in the world, but there is still going to be massive congestions before and after games.

----------


## Just the facts

OU48A - are you seriously suggesting that Norman should build a road network capable of carrying game day traffic 6 times a year instead of building one using the other 359 days as the design standard?  Maybe OU should double the price of the tickets and cut the seating capacity in half.

----------


## ou48A

> Ahhh...so 200-250K qualifies as "decent" these days? I guess my way of thinking has just been so clouded being down here mixing with the common people. I guess providing pictures and proof of properties in that stretch being very mixed, along with very little room to navigate the concrete monstrosity you want, just isn't going to open your eyes to reality of the situation.
> 
> 
> 
> Lindsey will be 2 lanes each way ones you get to Berry coming from campus. That equals what we have right now on game days. So that's solved. We don't know yet if they would be able to do both sides of Lindsey as one way, but in reality it shouldn't be needed. 
> 
> While we are on the subject of stupid and short sighted...
> 
> Exactly how much room do you think it is going to take to do what you want, 4 lanes from Berry to campus, with large sidewalks and bike lanes? It just isn't going to happen. We are more likely to see a 2-lane Lindsey remain, with roundabouts replacing lights, and new sidewalks put in with bike lanes on the shoulders. This would provide a much better approach to campus and would also keep traffic flowing. The back ups will then hit at the crosswalk lights on campus which is an OU problem. David Boren has already said he is completely against widening Lindsey any further through campus, and I feel most are going to go with his opinion. 
> ...


I guess that your idea of protecting a hand full of people and a few trees is more importance to you than the negative impact the congestion has on thousand of people each day.

 Less congestion would drive up land prices and make the redevelopment of the core of Norman more likely, not less.... 

You say that you want the core of Norman redeveloped  but I guess you just don't understand  that the core of Norman and OU will not grow to its potential like you want with roads that are congested.  Less congestion would drive up land prices to levels that are needed to make redevelopment in the core of Norman more likely, not less....
You can look at Highland Park in Dallas and see what the Dallas toll way did to that area. And a good number of very expensive homes were torn down to make way for the toll road. Its seen very nice redevelopment and a rise in land because the new road made it a pretty essay commute to down town.

To reduce Normans congestion  and to provide just basic sidewalks and a bike path a very few people are going to be relocated. Quite frankly your view on this comes across as juvenile, overly idealistic and not very well thought out.

The area in question is not really on campus, its on the west side of campus to Berry and Boren  knows this.
Boren said that something could eventually be done in this area of Lindsey Street and you have no idea what he or the real decision makers have in mind.

----------


## ou48A

> OU48A - are you seriously suggesting that Norman should build a road network capable of carrying game day traffic 6 times a year instead of building one using the other 359 days as the design standard?  Maybe OU should double the price of the tickets and cut the seating capacity in half.


You probably have no idea how much money that has been donated to various OU causes as a direct result of the OU football program... There have been many students attending OU because of the football team who have later donated back to the University. 

These donation have made OU a better university and have helped make Norman a better place to live. It would be very smart to do what it takes to see that these donations continue.
The donated amount, and by many times, far exceeds any cost that would be incurred for any type of new road construction in the area in question.
The congestion is increasingly having an negative impact on OU football. It shouldnt be made worse !

The money spent in Norman during one home football game would exceed the cost of construction from Berry to Campus. Improving this stretch of Lindsey has been ignored for far to long even for every day needs.

----------


## venture

> I guess that your idea of protecting a hand full of people and a few trees is more importance to you than the negative impact the congestion has on thousand of people each day.
> 
>  Less congestion would drive up land prices and make the redevelopment of the core of Norman more likely, not less....


Yet you still fail to accept proof that properties in that area are already capable of going over $400-500K, even with the traffic issues there. It is pretty likely that putting in roundabouts and removing the lights, thereby having a consistent flow of traffic which in turn would reduce congestion and also increase capacity of the road. I see it more of respecting that neighborhood, the people that choose to live there, and it being one of the more scenic areas of Norman. 




> You say that you want the core of Norman redeveloped  but I guess you just don't understand  that the core of Norman and OU will not grow to its potential like you want with roads that are congested.  Less congestion would drive up land prices to levels that are needed to make redevelopment in the core of Norman more likely, not less....
> You can look at Highland Park in Dallas and see what the Dallas toll way did to that area. And a good number of very expensive homes were torn down to make way for the toll road. Its seen very nice redevelopment and a rise in land because the new road made it a pretty essay commute to down town.


The plans put forth will reduce congestion by providing a higher quality roadway and still maintain a quality of life. Also higher density development requires more walkability and less roadways to force people to use their cars to get around. However let's be honest, it isn't hard to get to that part of town as it is now. Main, Porter, Classen, and Jenkins all provide a good amount of flow into there. Not to mention Lindsey on the east side of Campus that was able to be put in without impacting many high value residences.




> To reduce Normans congestion  and to provide just basic sidewalks and a bike path a very few people are going to be relocated. Quite frankly your view on this comes across as juvenile, overly idealistic and not very well thought out.


Interesting that I'm being the juvenile when I've been able to back up and present ideas in pretty much every facet of my argument, but you continue to ignore facts when they stare are you straight in the face. To me that comes across as someone who is so arrogant in their own way of thinking that they will refuse to let facts get in their way to satisfy their wants regardless of who is impacts. I come to this discussion as someone who is actually is going to be impacted by these changes on a daily basis, so that means I'm invested in what happens to this area. More so than someone who feels they are among the "elite" citizenry of Norman camped out in the far Northwest boondocks of Norman who are more prone to favor turning Norman into a 100% bedroom/commuter community and be damned with the rest. Which I find unfortunate and feel true pity for someone suffering from that delusion. 




> The area in question is not really on campus, its on the west side of campus to Berry and Boren  knows this.
> Boren said that something could eventually be done in this area of Lindsey Street and you have no idea what he or the real decision makers have in mind.


He's been quite public about it, unless you are ignore his public statements as well like everything else. He doesn't want a 4 lane Lindsey running through campus. I'm quite aware of the area are are discussing being west of campus, since I provide maps and that whole thing. LOL  Sigh 

There definitely will be something done in this area and that is where all invested parties will be able to contribute and come up with the BEST solution, not one of just bulldoze and lay pavement and call it good. I could definitely see the ability to introduce a repaved two-lane Lindsey with bike lanes on both sides running through that area. Sidewalks are going to be tough without the removal of fixed wall structures people have in that area. Keep it down to that and you are looking at impacting maybe 3 houses at the most that are very close to the street. There might even be enough room to do a center median and divide the lanes provide additional landscaping abilities to bring it all together.

----------


## CaptDave

> I guess that your idea of protecting a hand full of people and a few trees is more importance to you than the negative impact the congestion has on thousand of people each day.


What a socialist. The needs of many outweigh the wants of a few. Wonder if views are the same on taxation? Would it be possible to get agreement from ou48A with this statement - "I guess that your idea of protecting a hand full of people and a few incomes is more importance to you than the negative impact the reduction of support services has on thousands of people each day."  :Wink:

----------


## ou48A

> Yet you still fail to accept proof that properties in that area are already capable of going over $400-500K, even with the traffic issues there. It is pretty likely that putting in roundabouts and removing the lights, thereby having a consistent flow of traffic which in turn would reduce congestion and also increase capacity of the road. I see it more of respecting that neighborhood, the people that choose to live there, and it being one of the more scenic areas of Norman. 
> 
> 
> 
> The plans put forth will reduce congestion by providing a higher quality roadway and still maintain a quality of life. Also higher density development requires more walkability and less roadways to force people to use their cars to get around. However let's be honest, it isn't hard to get to that part of town as it is now. Main, Porter, Classen, and Jenkins all provide a good amount of flow into there. Not to mention Lindsey on the east side of Campus that was able to be put in without impacting many high value residences.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that I'm being the juvenile when I've been able to back up and present ideas in pretty much every facet of my argument, but you continue to ignore facts when they stare are you straight in the face. To me that comes across as someone who is so arrogant in their own way of thinking that they will refuse to let facts get in their way to satisfy their wants regardless of who is impacts. I come to this discussion as someone who is actually is going to be impacted by these changes on a daily basis, so that means I'm invested in what happens to this area. More so than someone who feels they are among the "elite" citizenry of Norman camped out in the far Northwest boondocks of Norman who are more prone to favor turning Norman into a 100% bedroom/commuter community and be damned with the rest. Which I find unfortunate and feel true pity for someone suffering from that delusion. 
> ...



In spite of the things that you think are important facts you still fail to grasp that if this is done right it can be so much more than you even think! 
But leaving the biggest unsafe bottle neck in the entire state basically intact is not going to stand. 

The solution requires more land and even if certain officials aren't saying it yet, nearly everybody knows that a solution will require more land. When you don't even have room for basic sidewalks you can not finesse your way around this problem by putting a band aid on it and have a successful outcome in the long run. Serious people know this.




You also  fail to understand that its just not the thousands of  folks who have their daily travels delayed who are adversely impacted by the congestion Its also anyone living in Norman or the state that  could be directly or indirectly impacted.


Research and their jobs, including high wage spin off jobs are important to our entire states future economy. In increasing amounts building up the intellectual capital at OU will be a key ingredient to our states prosperity. Everyone in our state benefits in a more prosperous society....
The last thing busy researches want is to be wasting time. Congestion makes  OU a less attractive place to do research  and this would negatively impact the entire states economy.
So in this way the entire state has a stake in this and rightfully should have a say in what is done to enhance perhaps the states most important engines of future economic growth / wealth. For the state this is like an investment..... but all you want is tantamount to a band-aid approach that would only buy a limited amount of time and need to be redone in time.


I first met David Boren while he was Governor and have known a good number of people who have dealt with him at many levels...Your going to need to trust me on this. Boren isn't always as straight forward as you might believe and he has a history of this. There are some  people in our state who have a great deal of  influence who will likely help Mr. Boren out with his decision on this and on what gets built....They will certainly have more influence than you and more influence than any of the activist like you. I do know for a fact from personal contacts that several very big OU donors have grown increasingly tired of siting in Norman traffic because of antiquated congested streets. They will help Spanky decided.

----------


## venture

Considering a lot of the research facilities on campus are on the south end, would it not be more beneficial then to upgrade Highway 9 to a limited access highway? Remove all the intersections, put in on/off ramps, all the way to US 77 thereby increasing the capacity of traffic that can roll down it? This is where the bulk of the available land is around the OU campus and where additional companies will build, so it seems this is the section that would have the most benefit if we really want to have a higher speed option to campus.

----------


## kevinpate

How would that benefit SW Moore, er, um, I mean NW Norman?

----------


## venture

> How would that benefit SW Moore, er, um, I mean NW Norman?


Well the concern was raised about getting to the research campus of OU, which is on the south side.  :Smile: 

I guess we could always do a new outer loop up to NW Norman and just elevate it above the entire city of Norman...you know like Futurama or something.  :Wink:

----------


## ou48A

> Considering a lot of the research facilities on campus are on the south end, would it not be more beneficial then to upgrade Highway 9 to a limited access highway? Remove all the intersections, put in on/off ramps, all the way to US 77 thereby increasing the capacity of traffic that can roll down it? This is where the bulk of the available land is around the OU campus and where additional companies will build, so it seems this is the section that would have the most benefit if we really want to have a higher speed option to campus.


I would also be for making HY 9 a limited access highway. But it would not eliminate the need to improve all of Lindsey street in some way. Bring HY 9 up to interstate standards is yet another area state project that has been needed for a very long time.

Considering Norman is the 3 largest city in the state and considering what's in Norman and how its a major destination for many of the states largest events the state has done a preety poor job of modernizing Norman's area state highways in a timely way. I honistly don't think the Norman area has been a very high priority for our states DOT.....  in part because we haven't had local leadership pushing the highway issue as hard as they should.

If the state wants OU to be a major state economic engine for more things like the new GE energy then the states leadership needs to understand that they will need to invest in modernizing the Norman area infrastructure. This among other things includes modern streets, highways and fast commuter rail.

If Highway 9 was made into a limited access highway it would be nice to see an extension over I-35 to the west and then to the NW to a point where it meets up with the new 4 lanes of Western street. This would help the trafic during some of the large events in Norman. It would become much like Sooner road is during events,but on the west side.

The Western street project was yet another badly needed long over due project. But they did a nice job on it.

----------


## ou48A

> I guess we could always do a new outer loop up to NW Norman and just elevate it above the entire city of Norman...you know like Futurama or something.



At one time (a long time ago) there was talk of an elevated Front street that would roughly follow the rail road tracks from north of Robinson  though Norman down to about Brooks Street. 

Personally I wish they would have dug a Chanel for the train and for storm water run off with a highway over the top.

----------


## ou48A

:Tongue:

----------


## HangryHippo

> Trey, was Dan's presentation just a slideshow of what might be possible with Lindsey St?  Or was it more detailed in offering precise solutions for what could (should) be done with Lindsey St?  Does that make sense?


Trey?

----------


## Geographer

> Trey?


My apologies, I have not checked the forum in a few days. I have been quite busy this past week and weekend!

There were definitely more detailed and precise solutions.  He had his engineer (and a couple students) create exact measurement renderings that added in the proposed roundabouts, etc.  A lot of this was conceptual but they did show precise solutions as well.

----------


## HangryHippo

> My apologies, I have not checked the forum in a few days. I have been quite busy this past week and weekend!
> 
> There were definitely more detailed and precise solutions.  He had his engineer (and a couple students) create exact measurement renderings that added in the proposed roundabouts, etc.  A lot of this was conceptual but they did show precise solutions as well.


That's good to hear.  Thanks for the reply.

----------


## venture

Trey did they give an idea on how much capacity is going to be increased on Lindsey with these changes? I would imagine roundabouts help a ton.

----------


## Geographer

> Trey did they give an idea on how much capacity is going to be increased on Lindsey with these changes? I would imagine roundabouts help a ton.


Well, roundabouts aren't necessarily increasing capacity, but rather flow...which does help of course too.

----------


## venture

> Well, roundabouts aren't necessarily increasing capacity, but rather flow...which does help of course too.


Right...increasing the flow of traffic would essentially improve the capacity of traffic it can handle. I may not be phrasing it right, but I think you see where I'm coming from.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Ah, they need to be stop being a bunch of squares and fork out 10 billion to build a 10 lane tunnel under OU.

Seriously though, I wonder if people would take a light-rail to the stadium? If Norman built a light-rail through-out the city and people could drive, walk, take a bus or ride their bikes to a park and ride station, I imagine that would help.

I really don't think adding two more lanes would help with 80,000 people, but who knows. Even if it did, wouldn't that make the property values drop by making it easier to drive to and from the game, thus making sprawl easier? Instead of wanting to buy a house right next to the campus or stadium to avoid the traffic, you wouldn't have to worry about the traffic since it's no longer a problem and you can just buy a house further out. . . don't know if that would be the case, but just a possibility. 

If it were me, I'd just do the two lane with center turn, right turn, bike lanes, 10-15' sidewalks, round-a-bouts, and a light-rail would help(I think). Also, widening that highway to 6 lanes and making it limited access would be a game changer for that area as well.

Again, I think with the right combination of light-rail, bus expansion, road improvements, and 9 an official highway with interstate standards would do wonders. With a balanced and reasonable approach, anything can be an improvement, but like some stated, you are not going to move 80,000 people out of that area quickly and you should expect to experience traffic when you go to events like that.

----------


## ou48A

> Ah, they need to be stop being a bunch of squares and fork out 10 billion to build a 10 lane tunnel under OU.
> 
> Seriously though, I wonder if people would take a light-rail to the stadium? If Norman built a light-rail through-out the city and people could drive, walk, take a bus or ride their bikes to a park and ride station, I imagine that would help.
> 
> I really don't think adding two more lanes would help with 80,000 people, but who knows. Even if it did, wouldn't that make the property values drop by making it easier to drive to and from the game, thus making sprawl easier? Instead of wanting to buy a house right next to the campus or stadium to avoid the traffic, you wouldn't have to worry about the traffic since it's no longer a problem and you can just buy a house further out. . . don't know if that would be the case, but just a possibility. 
> 
> If it were me, I'd just do the two lane with center turn, right turn, bike lanes, 10-15' sidewalks, round-a-bouts, and a light-rail would help(I think). Also, widening that highway to 6 lanes and making it limited access would be a game changer for that area as well.
> 
> Again, I think with the right combination of light-rail, bus expansion, road improvements, and 9 an official highway with interstate standards would do wonders. With a balanced and reasonable approach, anything can be an improvement, but like some stated, you are not going to move 80,000 people out of that area quickly and you should expect to experience traffic when you go to events like that.



If you want adequate sidewalks and a center turn lane there is not currently enough room without buying property and tearing out large trees.


If large numbers of people can and arrive / leave quicker its less disruptive to the people who live in the area.....It makes the area a more desirable place to live which would help prices go up rather than hinder them.

Very few people would ever go to the trouble and expense of buying a home near campus to avoid football traffic. But wealthy boosters might buy a nice condo or stay in a nice hotel.... But for the campus area to be developed on any significant scale the property values will need to increases much higher than current levels. At least that been the pattern in other major city’s. The major developers simply won't be interested in developing in a area that doesn’t have modern vehicular access.... That's usually how density in an area that is already well developed is gained.... and there are going to be a lot of people who won't like any of it.

----------


## Geographer

> If you want adequate sidewalks and a center turn lane there is not currently enough room without buying property and tearing out large trees.
> 
> 
> If large numbers of people can and arrive / leave quicker its less disruptive to the people who live in the area.....It makes the area a more desirable place to live which would help prices go up rather than hinder them.
> 
> Very few people would ever go to the trouble and expense of buying a home near campus to avoid football traffic. But wealthy boosters might buy a nice condo or stay in a nice hotel.... But for the campus area to be developed on any significant scale the property values will need to increases much higher than current levels. At least that been the pattern in other major city’s.* The major developers simply won't be interested in developing in a area that doesn’t have modern vehicular access.... That's usually how density in an area that is already well developed is gained.... and there are going to be a lot of people who won't like any of it.*


You can't be serious. A developer just tried to do a rather impressive mixed-use development just north of campus corner...not anywhere near a 4-lane or larger arterial street.

And what are you talking about modern vehicular access? I drive my modern vehicle around norman and the campus area all of time. I think others do as well.

----------


## ou48A

> You can't be serious. A developer just tried to do a rather impressive mixed-use development just north of campus corner...not anywhere near a 4-lane or larger arterial street.
> 
> And what are you talking about modern vehicular access? I drive my modern vehicle around norman and the campus area all of time. I think others do as well.


As far as I'm concerned the development north of campus corner is not very large scale.....What would it really change?
Unless OU sells land there is virtually no land of scale in this area that doesn’t already have something on it.

You can drive a new car around all day but very few streets not on campus but around campus are modern. Most were built well before WWII.
Many are narrow, frequently congested, they are crumbling in some cases. They also offer developers a range of flooding issues in some cases. There are many far better risk else where for the developers of large projects..... their due diligence would tell them this.

----------


## Geographer

I have never been on a congested neighborhood road that surrounds campus, like ever..gamedays, but that's it...besides that, the only street I've experienced congestion on (that's near campus) is Lindsey.

Did you not see the 3-4 story development that was proposed literally just north of campus corner? (where asp bends back to the northwest). A 3-4 story mixed use building is a pretty good size scale for everything else that's in that area, where it's mostly single story residential and commercial (until you hit main street).

We disagree again  :Cool:

----------


## venture

> If you want adequate sidewalks and a center turn lane there is not currently enough room without buying property and tearing out large trees.
> 
> 
> If large numbers of people can and arrive / leave quicker its less disruptive to the people who live in the area.....It makes the area a more desirable place to live which would help prices go up rather than hinder them.
> 
> Very few people would ever go to the trouble and expense of buying a home near campus to avoid football traffic. But wealthy boosters might buy a nice condo or stay in a nice hotel.... But for the campus area to be developed on any significant scale the property values will need to increases much higher than current levels. At least that been the pattern in other major citys. The major developers simply won't be interested in developing in a area that doesnt have modern vehicular access.... That's usually how density in an area that is already well developed is gained.... and there are going to be a lot of people who won't like any of it.


You are back to ignoring facts again. Property values in that area have been increasing, in many cases well in excess of 30% over the last 10 years which has been outpacing a lot of pre-existing developed areas in Norman. Wheat field to McMansion doesn't count. 

It is almost like we are in this whole "no high density will come to Norman without a wider Lindsey." That is pretty effed up if one street has such an impact to bring down a city that is 100 square miles. LOL What's next? Demanding Boyd be 4/5 laned?

I lived two blocks from campus. Yes my street filled up with on street parking, but it is one of those things you deal with 6-7 times a year and then it is over. My old house over there doubled in value from when I first purchased it about 15 years ago. All that without a new Lindsey or other major changes to that area. So why aren't property values stagnant or massive amounts of houses for sale in that area? 

I get what you are saying, but you continue to be disconnected from reality.

----------


## ou48A

> I have never been on a congested neighborhood road that surrounds campus, like ever..gamedays, but that's it...besides that, the only street I've experienced congestion on (that's near campus) is Lindsey.
> 
> Did you not see the 3-4 story development that was proposed literally just north of campus corner? (where asp bends back to the northwest). A 3-4 story mixed use building is a pretty good size scale for everything else that's in that area, where it's mostly single story residential and commercial (until you hit main street).
> 
> We disagree again


If you have ever been to Lubbock and Texas Tech university in recent years you may have seen a large area of development that sits just across the street to the east of the TECH campus. What they have done is nothing short of miraculous compared to what that area was like just 12 years ago. . They have and are building the density and walkable areas that so many on here demand. OU / Norman should look at this and other similar developments near other campus to see how they did it, including the financing.

But we have to be willing to invest in our self’s. We have to make our self's more attractive to out side investors and developers. Other wise why would any large developer want to put his money on the line when its not at all hard to find better prospect and places that are far more cooperative than Norman. The city of Norman still has a very well known reputation for being very difficult to work with.... Don't believe me, just ask any significant size contractor who has done business in Norman for any length of time.

Bad out of date infrastructure such as what exist in any older areas near campus is enough to sour major redevelopment with density in those areas. It will take much higher property values than curent values and many high qulity jobs near by to see any new significant off campus density.

----------


## ou48A

Overton Park - Multiple Planning & Design Projects

Overton Park - Multiple Planning & Design Projects
 Lubbock, Texas

PSC, in an on-going effort, has assisted both the City of Lubbock and McDougal Companies, the private developer in the urban redevelopment of 325 acres in downtown Lubbock adjacent to Texas Tech University. This ambitious project is the largest private downtown redevelopment in the United States.

The project has become the first public-private collaborative partnership of its kind in Lubbock. As part of this collaboration the City implemented a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District. The project incorporates "new urbanism" planning concepts in this mixed use development. A mixture of retail, office, apartment/lofts and garage functions are underway, along with single family development with both townhomes and detached residences.

PSC in association with others was retained by the City of Lubbock to develop Overton Park Public Improvements Site Design Guidelines for the area, specifically uniform development of the TIF-funded, public improvements. Pedestrian-oriented spaces and an inviting, safe and walkable community were the major desires of both the private developer and the City of Lubbock. The guidelines include typical street hierarchy diagrams, pedestrian-friendly street cross-sections, parking diagrams, common material selections, landscape standards for Lubbock's semi-arid climate as well as appropriate site furnishing selections. Ultimately, the guidelines will be used to develop the entire district resulting in a cohesive image and a new model of urban development for the City of Lubbock. Related to this effort PSC developed a presentation style updated master plan of the proposed development features



http://www.team-psc.com/s2la_gateway.html


North University Gateway
 Lubbock, Texas

This project was initially conceived by a local civic organization, Fiestas del Llano, as an arch of Spanish Renaissance style spanning over University Avenue at 3rd Street. The goal was to evoke a sense of entry to North Lubbock, a Hispanic residential and business district experiencing a resurgence of commercial development after decades of decline. For the project to reach fruition, the City of Lubbock acquired the project, and secured its necessary funding.

The design team explored a wide range of ideas that would best reflect the symbolism and the theme of community entry, history, and sense of place. The design evolved from a span over University Avenue-- which could have been perceived as a barrier, to a series of towers framing the street, creating an entrance or passage. The final selection best conveyed the themes desired, using light, water, street banners, and open framed towers to create a sense of place and entry.

In keeping with the originally desired architectural theme, and to acknowledge the architectural heritage of Texas Tech University's campus 3 blocks to the south, the tower's shape was formed out of elements of the Spanish Renaissance style. In order to break up the linear site, colored curvilinear accents were formed into the concrete plaza. Site furniture, formed with radii matching the concrete accents, was placed at intervals that preserve the open feel of the small site, while at the same time creating a small sense of "place" focusing inward and away from the adjacent traffic thoroughfare. A water feature consisting of a fountain origin pool at the north end of the site, a waist-high water trough wall and a fountain termination pool serves to define the background of the small seating areas. Because of periodic high winds, the fountain's vertical sprays are minimized. The use of granite splash stones in the fountain origin and termination pools, as well as the linear water trough spanning the site provide an interactive water feature with the soothing splashing sounds of water.

Patterned ceramic mosaic wall tile have been placed in the tower's and banner structure's concrete bases. The 70' length of the concrete water trough wall also has ceramic tile patterns running along its length. The tile colors and patterns are a reference to historic Mexican blankets.

During daylight hours, steel tower detailing makes use of sunlight to create interesting shadow patterns which move across the plaza, evoking a sense of time. In-grade light fixtures help accent the colors of concrete, steel and tile as well as the members of the structural steel framework during the evening darkness, encouraging human interaction beyond the 8 to 5 constraints of the workday.

Landscaping elements were selected to require minimal maintenance. Drought tolerant trees and hedges provide shade and definition to the plaza's spaces. Ornamental grasses will provide color during the spring and summer. In the fall and winter, the grasses become dormant, bringing different colors to the plaza's landscape. The movement of the grasses during periods of breezy weather evoke a sense of movement and interest, making one aware of one of this region's most notable characteristics--wind.

----------


## Geographer

This isn't lindsey street, but it's close!  Re-striping of Asp to include bike lanes.

photo (3).jpgphoto (4).jpg

----------


## HangryHippo

> This isn't lindsey street, but it's close!  Re-striping of Asp to include bike lanes.
> 
> photo (3).jpgphoto (4).jpg


That's great to see!  Thanks for the pictures.

----------


## ou48A

So Boren want's to construct a traffic circle at the intersection of Jenkins and Lindsey streets.

In such a prominent location an iconic high set sculpture is needed at the center of this circle. 

Given the nature of the surrounding setting OU48A  believes that the most appropriate sculpture at this location would be a 2 X life size bronze sculpture of the Sooner Schooner that would include the ponys Boomer and Sooner. It would be a grand addition to the area.

Since Lindsey is probably going to be the main gate way to OU for many, many years the centers of all traffic circles along Lindsey Street should include art with an OU theme.

----------


## kevinpate

I feel uncertain how a traffic circle containing any meaningful center space would be possible in light of what presently exists, in particular the newest housing at the se corner of that intersection.

----------


## Geographer

> I feel uncertain how a traffic circle containing any meaningful center space would be possible in light of what presently exists, in particular the newest housing at the se corner of that intersection.


I like the idea of having meaningful centerpieces in each of the roundabouts...to sort of tell a story or something.

Side note:

We need to start using the correct terminology.  There is a big difference between a roundabout and a traffic circle.  What we are talking about in Norman is a ROUNDABOUT...not a traffic circle.

"Roundabouts are not the same as traffic circles or rotaries. Traffic circles or rotaries have high-speed entries, weaving in the circle, low capacity, and many high-speed crashes. Sometimes motorists in the circle must yield to those entering. They are large and scary to drive – a “free for all” – and everyone hates them.
Roundabouts are the opposite. They require motorists to yield on entry. There is no weaving. Speeds are low, capacity is high, and crashes are few and minor. They are comfortable to drive, and if designed well, almost everyone likes them."

Ourston Roundabout Engineering | Roundabout vs. Traffic Circle

----------


## ou48A

Thanks for the clarification about roundabouts

----------


## kevinpate

I feel uncertain how a roundabout containing any meaningful center  space would be possible in light of what presently exists, in particular  the newest housing at the se corner of that intersection.

#trainable; #notopposedmerelyconcerned

----------


## venture

> I feel uncertain how a roundabout containing any meaningful center  space would be possible in light of what presently exists, in particular  the newest housing at the se corner of that intersection.
> 
> #trainable; #notopposedmerelyconcerned


Kevin I agree with you on the space available for the centerpiece of the roundabout. I think a lot is going to come down to number of lanes going around it. They could probably put some art piece that goes over traffic, but then you have to worry about truck clearance. Though I would not be opposed to restricting height of vehicles coming down Lindsey. It would also permit tasteful pedestrian bridges that aren't going to need to be 20' high. However, I also worry about it destroying the look of campus in that part too. Something will have to be done at some point with the all the lights through campus since that can be a big bottleneck.

----------


## ou48A

> I feel uncertain how a roundabout containing any meaningful center  space would be possible in light of what presently exists, in particular  the newest housing at the se corner of that intersection.
> 
> #trainable; #notopposedmerelyconcerned




Since there won't be any center turn lanes at Lindsey and Jenkins this would offer much of the necessary room. 

They could also take some space from the corners of the intersection. OU will be tearing down the building on the NE corner.
A small reconfiguration of the intersections approaches could add additional room.

There are many examples of sculptors / art work have been added to enhanced the OU campus over the past 15 to 20 years. 


Because of the very close proximity to the coaches statues and Heisman statues this would be an extremely great location fit for a Sooner Schooner sculptor.

The city of Norman has added  art work along its trails and some streets. The bridges over I-35 are also examples of city supported art work. As with the above examples this would with out any question add value to the location and along Lindsey street.

The bottom line is if its worth tearing out the existing street to construct a roundabout, its worth doing right by putting up OU themed art work or the roundabouts on Lindsey are  just basically another intersection.

----------


## kevinpate

venture79:  Difficult if not impossible to limit big rigs on Jenkins and/or Lindsey. If nothing else, many Division I bands, and I assume teams, transport gear via 18 wheel tractor/trailer rigs.

ou48A: Again, not opposed, merely concerned.  It's one thing to mount a statute of an OU president, athlete or one of the many excellent coaches, and quite another to erect a 2X life size Sooner Schooner (or some other significant symbol) that is as large or larger in girth than height.

----------


## ou48A

> venture79:  Difficult if not impossible to limit big rigs on Jenkins and/or Lindsey. If nothing else, many Division I bands, and I assume teams, transport gear via 18 wheel tractor/trailer rigs.
> 
> ou48A: Again, not opposed, merely concerned.  It's one thing to mount a statute of an OU president, athlete or one of the many excellent coaches, and quite another to erect a 2X life size Sooner Schooner (or some other significant symbol) that is as large or larger in girth than height.


I think there may be more  land on the Hedington Hall side that would be available for a roundabout than you may believe.
As far as  big rig trucks there are not a lot that travel in this area but the police could block off traffic just as they already do on some occasions...but there are other streets available.
Most of the visiting marching bands had been parking their buses on the South Oval. But I'm not sure how that will be handled since part of Asp has been turned into a walk way now?

----------


## mdeand

I just read this entire thread from beginning to end.  I have not been up to speed on the Lindsey Street improvement plans.  However, I do live in the neighborhood and turn onto and from Lindsey Street every day.

Some observations:  Do any of you live here?  It doesn't seem like it, based upon some statements made, such as the concern for property values in the area west of campus. The value of property there is extremely high already. Widening a road there just to inflate property prices even more doesn't make sense.  Some persons posting here seem to forget the fact that Lindsey Street serves the people who live in the neighborhood more than visitors to OU.  It's access from the nearby homes to the stores on Lindsey Street and access to I-35 for the work commute to OKC.

Who is the improvement to Lindsay supposed to be serving?  The assumption seems to be the university and folks who go to football games.  That's a fallacy in both respects.  Most commuter traffic to OU comes via state highway 9 -- not Lindsey Street.  Lindsey Street serves the people who live along it between campus and I-35.  It's a real neighborhood. Those trees people want to rip up for the sake of a four-lane road between Berry and Jenkins are some of the reasons people like living there.  Very little traffic continues to the east side of Norman via Lindsey.  Those pedestrian crossings at Cate Center deter that.  There are better avenues to the east side, anyway.

As for football traffic -- big deal. So, it takes 45 minutes to get out of Norman. So what. As a citizen of Norman, I don't care one damn bit.  I put up with you clogging my streets, so you put up with sitting in your car for a little time while you listen to the post-game interviews on the radio.

Am I the only one who is stuck on Lindsey Street every morning waiting on traffic to pass so I can turn left?  (I laughed out loud at the person who posted that traffic on Lindsey is declining).  Without a center turn lane, how is that supposed to happen without backing up traffic behind me?  And the idea driving 1/2 mile to the next "roundabout" and come back just to turn left turn is ridiculous.  The roundabout idea is ridiculous for any area of Lindsey west of campus.  If David Boren wants one on campus, that's fine.  

I have lived in this area of Norman for 31 years.  My plan is to live here until I die.  I like the idea of making the west-of-Berry portion of Lindsey Street more attractive (and bike lanes are needed there and throughout Norman), but let's keep sight of the constituency the street serves.

----------


## venture

Welcome to the conversation mdeand. 




> Some observations:  Do any of you live here?  It doesn't seem like it, based upon some statements made, such as the concern for property values in the area west of campus. The value of property there is extremely high already. Widening a road there just to inflate property prices even more doesn't make sense.  Some persons posting here seem to forget the fact that Lindsey Street serves the people who live in the neighborhood more than visitors to OU.  It's access from the nearby homes to the stores on Lindsey Street and access to I-35 for the work commute to OKC.


I use to live, for about 10 years, off Pickard and Lindsey - so I'm definitely familiar with the area.  :Smile:  The property value information definitely has been posted here and in the OU Projects thread, and probably another 2 or 3 (LOL!) to give a clear idea of how high they actual are in that area now. I think some can lose focus on the fact that there is a fairly large neighborhood that is served by Lindsey itself and not just the university, but it is still one of the main gateways for it.




> Who is the improvement to Lindsay supposed to be serving?  The assumption seems to be the university and folks who go to football games.  That's a fallacy in both respects.  Most commuter traffic to OU comes via state highway 9 -- not Lindsey Street.  Lindsey Street serves the people who live along it between campus and I-35.


I think it needs to be a balance but a lot of the respect needs to go to those living in the area and how it will impact them. They've chosen to invest in that area already and should definitely have a voice in the project. I think that is why you've seen the initially planned 5 lane solution (2 each way + center turn lane) scrapped for a 4 lane road with a landscaped median. 




> It's a real neighborhood. Those trees people want to rip up for the sake of a four-lane road between Berry and Jenkins are some of the reasons people like living there.  Very little traffic continues to the east side of Norman via Lindsey.  Those pedestrian crossings at Cate Center deter that.  There are better avenues to the east side, anyway.


I agree that the large number of trees, and how dense the canopy is, is one of the main attractions to that area. We don't have many areas like that in Central OK. I would agree not much traffic continues down Lindsey to the east side, even though I'm one of those since I'm just down Lindsey a little bit further now. I do agree there are better ways to the east side now. The Robinson underpass helps a lot and I take 77/Flood from I-35 to Robinson now instead of going down to Lindsey or Hwy 9. 




> Am I the only one who is stuck on Lindsey Street every morning waiting on traffic to pass so I can turn left?  (I laughed out loud at the person who posted that traffic on Lindsey is declining).


I wouldn't understand why you would laugh when those are hard/measured figures showing traffic in a 10 year decline. Of course that doesn't mean that peak times aren't actually higher as people adjusted their schedules. 




> Without a center turn lane, how is that supposed to happen without backing up traffic behind me?  And the idea driving 1/2 mile to the next "roundabout" and come back just to turn left turn is ridiculous.  The roundabout idea is ridiculous for any area of Lindsey west of campus.  If David Boren wants one on campus, that's fine.


I would imagine we would see roundabouts at all the existing lights right now between Berry and Campus, which would keep traffic from backing up. Of course that project will entail some property acquisition but not nearly as much as would be needed in 4-lanning the segment. Roundabouts are pretty good solutions. I'm not sure if you are just confused on what we are actually talking about (see the one up on East Main) because they should actually greatly help with the flow of traffic.

----------


## Questor

I really wish all of you guys could have a conversation about Norman without insulting the other guys' part of town. That goes for both sides of town. I get sick of reading it.

----------


## ou48A

> I just read this entire thread from beginning to end.  I have not been up to speed on the Lindsey Street improvement plans.  However, I do live in the neighborhood and turn onto and from Lindsey Street every day.
> 
> Some observations:  Do any of you live here?  It doesn't seem like it, based upon some statements made, such as the concern for property values in the area west of campus. The value of property there is extremely high already. Widening a road there just to inflate property prices even more doesn't make sense.  Some persons posting here seem to forget the fact that Lindsey Street serves the people who live in the neighborhood more than visitors to OU.  It's access from the nearby homes to the stores on Lindsey Street and access to I-35 for the work commute to OKC.
> 
> Who is the improvement to Lindsay supposed to be serving?  The assumption seems to be the university and folks who go to football games.  That's a fallacy in both respects.  Most commuter traffic to OU comes via state highway 9 -- not Lindsey Street.  Lindsey Street serves the people who live along it between campus and I-35.  It's a real neighborhood. Those trees people want to rip up for the sake of a four-lane road between Berry and Jenkins are some of the reasons people like living there.  Very little traffic continues to the east side of Norman via Lindsey.  Those pedestrian crossings at Cate Center deter that.  There are better avenues to the east side, anyway.
> 
> As for football traffic -- big deal. So, it takes 45 minutes to get out of Norman. So what. As a citizen of Norman, I don't care one damn bit.  I put up with you clogging my streets, so you put up with sitting in your car for a little time while you listen to the post-game interviews on the radio.
> 
> Am I the only one who is stuck on Lindsey Street every morning waiting on traffic to pass so I can turn left?  (I laughed out loud at the person who posted that traffic on Lindsey is declining).  Without a center turn lane, how is that supposed to happen without backing up traffic behind me?  And the idea driving 1/2 mile to the next "roundabout" and come back just to turn left turn is ridiculous.  The roundabout idea is ridiculous for any area of Lindsey west of campus.  If David Boren wants one on campus, that's fine.  
> ...


I'm not going to say that your concerns shouldn’t be heard and considered but people are going to need to understand that with billions of dollars at stake the university’s economic impact to the entire state is paramount here.

OU would not be the university it is today with out the donations that have flowed into the entire university because of having the winningest college football program in modern times. Each home football game pumps many millions into the local economy, much of it from out of town and out of state. It's smart to make the trip easy for those folks so they will keep coming back and be engaged in the community and university.

But there are already big donor types who don't come to as many OU games now as they once did because of the increased time it takes to attend games. Insuring this type of  future support for something that is so vital to the universitys over all mission trumps those old weed like elm trees along Lindsey and any emotional bond that the tree hungers may have with them. The trees can be essentially replanted and with better choices that would eventually look far better than they do now. 

I don't know when it will happen, it may be 20 or 30 years, but eventually, you can bet your bottom dollar that Lindsey St will eventually have 2 lanes running in each diction from 1-35 to campus. Lets not waste our time and money. Lets finally get it right this time.

----------


## ljbab728

> But there are already big donor types who don't come to as many OU games now as they once did because of the increased time it takes to attend games.


Do you have evidence about that?  I'm a donor although not a big donor.  I've been attending OU games since the early 60's and have never based a decision about going to a game based on the time it takes to get there or the amount of traffic.  As you should know, any long time OU fan understands all about that and makes arrangements to adjust any plans for attending the game accordingly.

For many years when I parked on the practice field south of the stadium, I knew that it could take an hour or two after the game before I could leave easily.  I never minded that.  It was just part of the game day experience.

----------


## ou48A

> Do you have evidence about that?  I'm a donor although not a big donor.  I've been attending OU games since the early 60's and have never based a decision about going to a game based on the time it takes to get there or the amount of traffic.  As you should know, any long time OU fan understands all about that and makes arrangements to adjust any plans for attending the game accordingly.
> 
> For many years when I parked on the practice field south of the stadium, I knew that it could take an hour or two after the game before I could leave easily.  I never minded that.  It was just part of the game day experience.


My evidence comes from more than a few conversions over several years at the OKC golf and country club and in Nichols Hills homes... This is not the type of news that's going to be published.


But I wouldn’t miss a home game if I had to crawl home.

----------


## ljbab728

> My evidence comes from more than a few conversions over several years at the OKC golf and country club and in Nichols Hills homes... This is not the type of news that's going to be published.


Perhaps, but I just don't see that as a major issue.

----------


## venture

Transcript article Sunday on the Lindsey project...

City planners weigh in on Lindsey Street vision for the future  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

City's legal team essentially saying their change to the plans from what was originally in the bond issue is perfectly acceptable based on how they worded it. So it would seem we are well on our way to a new 4-lane divided street with bike lanes, sidewalks, and roundabouts.

----------


## ou48A

> Perhaps, but I just don't see that as a major issue.


Right now I don't see it a  major issue either, but it does happen now.....but if it became more significant its going start being a problem that we don't want. A great deal of the money that flows into OU athletics and to the University comes down Lindsey on a game day. Keep this sector of the fan base happy and engaged with OU is important to the university’s future. Reducing the amount of time required to attend OU events helps with some fans. Maybe OU could start letting helicopters land again someplace on campus?

Something else I would like to see is 2 turning lanes and a 2 lane entrance ramp to 1-35 off of Lindsey.
The State of Oklahoma has built this type of entrance to south bound I-35 on HY 51 coming from
 Stillwater for OSU events.
With far larger crowds at OU and with far higher presentage of the fan base using I-35, a 2 lane entrance would seem even more justified.

----------


## Geographer

Something like this would be grand at I-35 and Lindsey.....

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=malta...gl=us&t=h&z=18

----------


## venture

> Something like this would be grand at I-35 and Lindsey.....
> 
> https://maps.google.com/maps?q=malta...gl=us&t=h&z=18


That is probably the best example I've seen of what Lindsey will probably look like eventually.

----------


## ou48A

If the voters knew what some wanted to do with Lindsey the bond issue would have been  a much closer vote and may not have passed......The language may allow it but I don't think most Norman voters thought they were voting for anything like what the Walkable and Livable Communities Institute is now talking about.

----------


## Geographer

> If the voters knew what some wanted to do with Lindsey the bond issue would have been  a much closer vote and may not have passed......The language may allow it but I don't think most Norman voters thought they were voting for anything like what the Walkable and Livable Communities Institute is now talking about.


IMO, I am glad that we have not officially gone forth with what the engineering firm originally put together.

----------


## HangryHippo

> If the voters knew what some wanted to do with Lindsey the bond issue would have been  a much closer vote and may not have passed......The language may allow it but I don't think most Norman voters thought they were voting for anything like what the Walkable and Livable Communities Institute is now talking about.


But it passed and the language allows for it.  So time to move forward!

----------


## venture

> But it passed and the language allows for it.  So time to move forward!


Indeed. I'm glad they are thinking outside the box and brought in an expert in building streets/gateways for cities. If Lindsey truly is as important as claimed, we need to make sure that it is an attractive gateway into Central Norman. That also means utilizing the latest design methods to reduce congestion, increase safety, and provide for a more walkable community.

----------


## ou48A

> IMO, I am glad that we have not officially gone forth with what the engineering firm originally put together.



Actually I am too, but I think we should expect our city leaders to shoot straight with us. 
In this case I'm not sure they knew any better, which is not good either,,,, when your shooting from the hip.

----------


## Geographer

> Actually I am too, but I think we should expect our city leaders to shoot straight with us. 
> In this case I'm not sure they knew any better, which is not good either,,,, when your shooting from the hip.


I would agree with that statement.  I think we place too much faith in numbers based engineering design and not enough on common sense.  I will say though that these are voted on by ordinary council members who, generally, have little to no knowledge of street design so they rely on engineering firms.  The planning department should know better though and try to make their voice heard more.

----------


## vaflyer

> But it passed and the language allows for it.  So time to move forward!


 You are correct, the city of Norman can do it. The problem is how such a radical change in design impacts people who voted for and desired a wider Lindsey St. but instead will get something significantly different. Those people feel like their trust in city government has been violated. So the next time the city wants money for something and promotes a certain design, some people will not believe them and vote against it for that reason alone. As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

----------


## Geographer

> You are correct, the city of Norman can do it. The problem is how such a radical change in design impacts people who voted for and desired a wider Lindsey St. but instead will get something significantly different. Those people feel like their trust in city government has been violated. So the next time the city wants money for something and promotes a certain design, some people will not believe them and vote against it for that reason alone. As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."


From the opposite spectrum, maybe people will have MORE faith now since they can see the government opted for a better design once they see the new design physically built..maybe I'm too optimistic in the citizens of Norman haha.

----------


## HangryHippo

> You are correct, the city of Norman can do it. The problem is how such a radical change in design impacts people who voted for and desired a wider Lindsey St. but instead will get something significantly different. Those people feel like their trust in city government has been violated. So the next time the city wants money for something and promotes a certain design, some people will not believe them and vote against it for that reason alone. As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."


Let's see what's built before we cast it in such negative light.  I think this could wind up being great for Norman.

----------


## venture

> You are correct, the city of Norman can do it. The problem is how such a radical change in design impacts people who voted for and desired a wider Lindsey St. but instead will get something significantly different. Those people feel like their trust in city government has been violated. So the next time the city wants money for something and promotes a certain design, some people will not believe them and vote against it for that reason alone. As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."


I think we are in the process of getting changes pushed through Norman in a good way. The last city election eliminated half of the city council as people wanted a change. There is much hope to the new voices on council are more in tune with Norman and what is important to guide the city forward. It should be a wake up call for the remaining incumbents when the next city election is held that they may we eliminated as well. 

However, I think it is important to show that we really need to start seeking experts in these fields in advance to get better plans in place. There is no doubt that the new consensus for the Lindsey design is exactly what we need as a community and not another 5 lanes of asphalt running through the city. At the end of the day the electorate probably won't care much, in general, with the end result and will be happy. There will still be those with bruised egos who are set in their ways and would rather pave our way to a solution - which is only going to lead to more congestion down the line. 

While I feel we definitely need to ensure our elected officials present options to the electorate correct and deliver what is voted on, I am not going to be upset when a better solution is discovered before all the money is spent. Otherwise in 10-15 years we are going to be back trying to come up with a solution to fix more issues or kicking ourselves for contributing to another cookie cutter street. If people are going to be upset with the outcome of this, they can vote the way they feel they need to, but I feel they'll find themselves in the minority.

----------


## vaflyer

I know the official traffic numbers for Lindsey are down but Lindsey is a traffic nightmare from 3-6pm when OU is in session.  I avoid Lindsey at all costs during that time and instead drive on residential streets in the immediate area. I am very skeptical keeping Lindsey at one lane in each direction and installing center medians and roundabouts will solve the traffic problems. Since the city is spending approximately $20 million on this project, I want the Lindsey traffic problem fixed. 

Now some people say that increasing the Lindsey capacity to five lanes (as the city suggested at the time of the bond election) will just increase traffic. In my case, that is true. If traffic flows better on Lindsey, I will drive on it instead of traveling on residential streets but then that is the purpose of a main arterial street like Lindsey.

----------


## Geographer

> I know the official traffic numbers for Lindsey are down but Lindsey is a traffic nightmare from 3-6pm when OU is in session.  I avoid Lindsey at all costs during that time and instead drive on residential streets in the immediate area. I am very skeptical keeping Lindsey at one lane in each direction and installing center medians and roundabouts will solve the traffic problems. Since the city is spending approximately $20 million on this project, I want the Lindsey traffic problem fixed. 
> 
> Now some people say that increasing the Lindsey capacity to five lanes (as the city suggested at the time of the bond election) will just increase traffic. In my case, that is true. If traffic flows better on Lindsey, I will drive on it instead of traveling on residential streets but then that is the purpose of a main arterial street like Lindsey.


***The new drawings do NOT keep Lindsey at 1 lane.  It is two lanes each direction with a center median and roundabouts every 1/4 to 1/2 mile for turn around to go into a business on the other side of the street.

----------


## vaflyer

> ***The new drawings do NOT keep Lindsey at 1 lane.  It is two lanes each direction with a center median and roundabouts every 1/4 to 1/2 mile for turn around to go into a business on the other side of the street.


As long as the city builds Lindsey St. with 2 lanes in each direction between NW 24th and Berry, I would be fine with it.

----------


## venture

> ***The new drawings do NOT keep Lindsey at 1 lane.  It is two lanes each direction with a center median and roundabouts every 1/4 to 1/2 mile for turn around to go into a business on the other side of the street.


I really don't see how this keeps getting missed. I know my initial post after the meeting said one but quickly corrected it with in an hour. It just seems people still aren't taking the time to inform themselves on exactly what is going in there.

----------


## soonerliberal

> ***The new drawings do NOT keep Lindsey at 1 lane.  It is two lanes each direction with a center median and roundabouts every 1/4 to 1/2 mile for turn around to go into a business on the other side of the street.


Are those posted somewhere online?  I'd love to see what the plan looks like!

----------


## ou48A

> Are those posted somewhere online?  I'd love to see what the plan looks like!


The video on this link shows what Norman voters thought they were voting on.
It didn't have any roundabouts.

Conceptual Plan to Widen Lindsey Street (Berry Road to I-35) | City of Norman, Oklahoma

----------


## Geographer

> Are those posted somewhere online?  I'd love to see what the plan looks like!


I don't believe they are online anywhere, but I am sure if you email the city of Norman they have the drawings and presentation that Dan gave.

----------


## Geographer

> The video on this link shows what Norman voters thought they were voting on.
> It didn't have any roundabouts.
> 
> Conceptual Plan to Widen Lindsey Street (Berry Road to I-35) | City of Norman, Oklahoma


that design still makes me laugh.

----------


## venture

> The video on this link shows what Norman voters thought they were voting on.
> It didn't have any roundabouts.
> 
> Conceptual Plan to Widen Lindsey Street (Berry Road to I-35) | City of Norman, Oklahoma


Thankfully better reasoning took over and that design was thrown in the trash.

----------


## ou48A

> that design still makes me laugh.


But still, it would be a major improvement over what we have now.

My problem isn't so much about what's being planed now as it is with the poor planing up front that didn't have the voters voting on what's actually going to be built.
Rather its better or not is not important to this part of the discussion. We need smarter decision makers that don't waste so much time and  money.

----------


## Geographer

> But still, it would be a major improvement over what we have now.
> 
> My problem isn't so much about what's being planed now as it is with the poor planing up front that didn't have the voters voting on what's actually going to be built.
> Rather its better or not is not important to this part of the discussion. We need smarter decision makers that don't waste so much time and  money.


I agree...too many civil engineers. haha

----------


## David

I'm rather mixed on this development. On one hand, I'm not going to claim that I prefer the original plan over the new roundabout plan (assuming it ends up looking something like this, that is). But on the other hand, such a huge change to a voter approved bond issue makes me very concerned.

Does what we voted for actually matter, or are we just writing blanks checks for the city council to cash however they want?

----------


## jedicurt

> Does what we voted for actually matter, or are we just writing blanks checks for the city council to cash however they want?


no, it doesn't really matter.   once a bond is approved for a project, i'm pretty certain the city can change the designs however they want, just so long as the bond still gets used on that project and the final requirements are met.

----------


## Geographer

> I'm rather mixed on this development. On one hand, I'm not going to claim that I prefer the original plan over the new roundabout plan (assuming it ends up looking something like this, that is). But on the other hand, such a huge change to a voter approved bond issue makes me very concerned.
> 
> Does what we voted for actually matter, or are we just writing blanks checks for the city council to cash however they want?


Let's be real though, the average citizen vote on issues (such as a road design) without knowing really anything about proper street design (and yes this includes me as well on lots of things).  I, for one, am actually GLAD that the city leaders decided to look at an alternative approach to road design other than blindly following the civil engineers design who are just numbers, numbers, numbers based.  It's actually refreshing in my mind.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Let's be real though, the average citizen vote on issues (such as a road design) without knowing really anything about proper street design (and yes this includes me as well on lots of things).  I, for one, am actually GLAD that the city leaders decided to look at an alternative approach to road design other than blindly following the civil engineers design who are just numbers, numbers, numbers based.  It's actually refreshing in my mind.


I agree with this, but I do see where it *could* become a slippery slope on some things.

----------


## David

> I agree with this, but I do see where it *could* become a slippery slope on some things.


That's basically where I'm standing on this. It's easy to be happy with the city council doing their own thing if we agree with it, but what if the reverse was happening? What if the roundabout design was the original design that was overruled?

----------


## venture

> That's basically where I'm standing on this. It's easy to be happy with the city council doing their own thing if we agree with it, but what if the reverse was happening? What if the roundabout design was the original design that was overruled?


Perhaps we need to have council look at the language on how the bond money can be spent. At some point we also need to hold city council accountable as well, which I think we did when half of them were given pink slips this past year. The problem is, and Geo alluded to this a bit, is that the electorate really doesn't take the time to research anything they vote on. If they did half the stuff would come out with a different result.

----------


## HangryHippo

> That's basically where I'm standing on this. It's easy to be happy with the city council doing their own thing if we agree with it, but what if the reverse was happening? What if the roundabout design was the original design that was overruled?


That's a very valid point.  My hope is that the council will look to better sources for information and education (like Dan Burden or Blair Humphreys for example on planning and such) and other relevant experts before they just go blindly voting for something.  They need to educate themselves so that livable and likable elements become the original suggestions.  Make sense?

----------


## Geographer

> That's basically where I'm standing on this. It's easy to be happy with the city council doing their own thing if we agree with it, but what if the reverse was happening? What if the roundabout design was the original design that was overruled?


I definitely see your point

----------


## ou48A

> Let's be real though, the average citizen vote on issues (such as a road design) without knowing really anything about proper street design (and yes this includes me as well on lots of things).  I, for one, am actually GLAD that the city leaders decided to look at an alternative approach to road design other than blindly following the civil engineers design who are just numbers, numbers, numbers based.  It's actually refreshing in my mind.


Can we be glad and sad about this at the same time?

The accountability to the voters falls on those who are yet to decide on how this project will be built.

This is not the first time Norman voters have voted for something only to have it significantly changed.
This has happened with a north side sewer plant I think maybe 2 or 3 times. But when the bait and switch keeps recurring the voters are increasing going to lose trust in the city causing more and  more people to vote no on everything. 

So if we are really being honest even if this is a short term gain we have got to know that actions that break the community trust won't improve the community over the long run.

----------


## venture

> Can we be glad and sad about this at the same time?
> 
> The accountability to the voters falls on those who are yet to decide on how this project will be built.
> 
> This is not the first time Norman voters have voted for something only to have it significantly changed.
> This has happened with a north side sewer plant I think maybe 2 or 3 times. But when the bait and switch keeps recurring the voters are increasing going to lose trust in the city causing more and  more people to vote no on everything. 
> 
> So if we are really being honest even if this is a short term gain we have got to know that actions that break the community trust won't improve the community over the long run.


Then it is up to Wards 2, 4, 6, and 8 to vote out their folks the next go around. Hold them accountable and show them the door. If they all get re-elected it just reinforces the community's support in allowing them to do this.

----------


## venture

Stakeholders support vision for Lindsey  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

Property and business owners are on board with the revised plan for Lindsey Street. The city of course has final decision in the matter, but all momentum is on the better and more neighborhood friendly plan.

----------


## David

Has anyone been able to find renderings of the new plans? I've been hunting around on the city website and the only thing I have found so far is this page with the outdated plan.

There was mention back on page two of this thread of a presentation, has that been posted anywhere?

----------


## Geographer

> Has anyone been able to find renderings of the new plans? I've been hunting around on the city website and the only thing I have found so far is this page with the outdated plan.
> 
> There was mention back on page two of this thread of a presentation, has that been posted anywhere?


I have not been able to get ahold of plans either. I do not think they are posted anywhere.  You could email the city planners/engineers to see if they have digital copies.

----------


## David

I sent a few emails, to the City and to the Walkable and Livable Communities Institute. If I get anything I can share I will be sure to post.

----------


## venture

Center median gets thumbs up from city engineers  New and Developing  The Norman Transcript

City Engineers gave approval for the raised center median. However, they are against using any roundabouts due to...




> Cty staff does not support roundabouts “due to traffic capacity concerns, scheduling delays, right-of-way requirements, possible loss of federal funding and additional project costs,” according to a report issued by city staff and SAIC this week.


Seems like a bunch of short sighted people in the engineer's office.

----------


## ou48A

So putting the Federal funding for the project at risk is “short sighted”. Whew, who knew!

----------


## venture

> So putting the Federal funding for the project at risk is “short sighted”. Whew, who knew!


I'm sure they are more than capable of making the needed changes to ensure the federal funding isn't impacted. I would figure people would be more interested in getting it right instead of only going half way. I would like the know the specifics on what would threaten federal funding. I have a feeling it is more to do with a timeline issue and not with the feature issue of the project.

----------


## Geographer

This is exactly what I feared. The city is going to half ass the project and it won't turn out like it should. Trust me, federal funding isn't the issue. City engineers hate that their design has been undermined. The center median won't work without the proper roundabouts and vice versa. This is unfortunate. I hope City Council doesn't listen to the engineers.

I'm quite disappointed.

----------


## HangryHippo

> This is exactly what I feared. The city is going to half ass the project and it won't turn out like it should. Trust me, federal funding isn't the issue. City engineers hate that their design has been undermined. The center median won't work without the proper roundabouts and vice versa. This is unfortunate. I hope City Council doesn't listen to the engineers.
> 
> I'm quite disappointed.


I have no doubt the city engineers in Norman hate that their work was questioned.  Why do you feel the center median won't work without the proper roundabouts?  Why do you feel this project is being half-assed just because roundabouts aren't included?

I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm just curious what your reasoning is.

----------


## Just the facts

Actually, the federal government has a mandate to support roundabouts - so whomever wrote that part as a concern is full of crap - and I suspect, totally made it up.

Roundabouts - FHWA Safety Program

Proven Safety Countermeasures | Federal Highway Administration





> Guidance
> 
> Roundabouts should be considered as an alternative for intersections on federally funded highway projects that involve new construction or reconstruction. Roundabouts should also be considered when rehabilitating existing intersections that have been identified as needing major safety or operational improvements. Roundabouts have also proven to be effective at freeway interchange ramp terminals and at rural high-speed intersections.

----------


## venture

Thanks for the info Kerry. So I think what we are finding out is what Geo hinted at. The Norman engineers are hurt so they are going to half ass it all. I've already emailed my council person and invite everyone to do the same. We need to make sure Council goes with the right option not the half assed option.

----------


## venture

I got some clarification on the scheduling concerns and they are nothing new. They need to get the plan finalized and things in motion to align with the I-35 reconstruction. We already knew that though.

----------


## Just the facts

For far too long the engineers were allowed to operate unopposed.  Now with community activist involved they can't keep up the B.S., and that is going to be a hard adjustment for some of them.

----------


## Geographer

> I have no doubt the city engineers in Norman hate that their work was questioned.  Why do you feel the center median won't work without the proper roundabouts?  Why do you feel this project is being half-assed just because roundabouts aren't included?
> 
> I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm just curious what your reasoning is.


Here is what I mean:

If they go ahead use the central median that Dan's team proposed, it has no left turn lanes.  In this scenario, you NEED roundabouts at intersections so that people can easily turn around.  If there are no left turn lanes inbetween intersections and the only option is to make a U-turn at the nearest stoplight, then that's a problem.  If they go what they've originally  proposed in terms of a central median, then you will see something similar to what exists on Main Street today between the Interstate and east for a mile or so, where you have a useless central median that still has left turn lanes.  I don't want them to take just part of Dan's proposal because if only part of it is taken then it won't work at all.  I don't like to be the "all or nothing" kind of guy, but in this case we really have to go for it or completely abandon the new design.  I hope that makes sense.

----------


## Just the facts

I am the all or nothing type.  If I thought that 1/2 an idea would work I would just make that the whole idea.

----------


## CaptDave

> Thanks for the info Kerry. So I think what we are finding out is what Geo hinted at. The Norman engineers are hurt so they are going to half ass it all. I've already emailed my council person and invite everyone to do the same. We need to make sure Council goes with the right option not the half assed option.


That is very similar to the OKC Boulevard situation. It has taken going over the city and ODOT directly to the Federal Highway Administration to force them to evaluate anything other than their pet design. One of the best tools citizens have available is NEPA which requires ALL alternaitves to be evaluated when federal funds are used. NEPA requires economic and *social* effects of the project be considered in the alternative analysis. The social effects can be used to great effect in certain situations and it sounds like the Lindsey project might be one.

----------


## BoulderSooner

Roundabouts on this round are a bad idea

----------


## venture

> Roundabouts on this round are a bad idea


Why would you say that? And please...utilize more than just a single line in your response as to why. I know you can do it!  :Smile:

----------


## venture

Another story today: City engineers give median thumbs up  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

Pretty much hitting on that everything but the roundabouts is going through. The City Engineers and SAIC are against the roundabouts. Councilman Kovach seems to be as well. I just have to sit back and wonder how much better traffic will be with an additional lane each way but still traffic lights. Roundabouts help to manage the flow of traffic, which would be important going passed Berry. I would think at the very least that would be the intersection to focus on getting the roundabout put in. 

If they are worried about land acquisition there you have the now closed Texadelphia, a doctors office I think, the Circle K, and then a grass lot next to the other service station. Wylie you are looking at mostly parking lots to replace. Murphy you have the same.

At the end of the day what is going to be more of an obstruction to traffic - people making a U-Turn/left turn - at a cut in the median with no left turning lane or a roundabout. Also how many cuts are they going to do in the median to where it is almost pointless? Maybe that is the end goal.

----------


## Just the facts

Seems like it works with high volume to me...

----------


## CaptDave

I learned a bit about roundabouts during the OKC Blvd discussions. I changed my mind about having the huge roundabout on the boulevard because that wasn't the best design. Llindsey seems to be an excellent candidate for roundabouts though. It is unfortunate OK traffic engineers have to be dragged into this century kicking and screaming. The USFHWA has endorsed incorporating roundabouts when appropriate and might even be a potential source of additional funding. The safety benefits of roundabouts are pretty intuitive as well. I hope you guys in Norman can at least force the city traffic department to objectively evaluate incorporating them. You will probably have to leverage the feds vs. local to do so however.

----------


## Geographer

I just sent an email to my councilmember, Greg Heipel, and he agrees with me "100%" on using the Dan Burden design....so there's at least 2 councilmembers that I know of that are in favor.  I am sure a couple others are as well.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> This is exactly what I feared. *The city is going to half ass the project and it won't turn out like it should.* Trust me, federal funding isn't the issue. City engineers hate that their design has been undermined. The center median won't work without the proper roundabouts and vice versa. This is unfortunate. I hope City Council doesn't listen to the engineers.
> 
> I'm quite disappointed.


I don't think half ass is the correct term. They just didn't build it as pedestrian and bike friendly as you and others had hoped for and that's that. 

I don't live there and it really isn't my place to say what should go there, so I won't say anything on that matter. Is this the final plan?

----------


## catch22

And engineers and the automobile win again. This state can be so backwards all the time.

----------


## BoulderSooner

i wonder if any of you have driven down a road with traffic circles only ..   with 10x+ normal traffic   does parking lot mean anything to you ..

----------


## venture

> I just sent an email to my councilmember, Greg Heipel, and he agrees with me "100%" on using the Dan Burden design....so there's at least 2 councilmembers that I know of that are in favor.  I am sure a couple others are as well.


Kovach is probably going to be the big one to convince. He has to be careful. He is up for elimination in the next round of elections. The work is taking place in Kovach's ward as well, since his ends right at Berry. Holman I think would have a vested interest in this because it will impact his ward directly (his starts at Berry and goes through campus). He is also on the transportation committee.

----------


## venture

> i wonder if any of you have driven down a road with traffic circles only ..   with 10x+ normal traffic   does parking lot mean anything to you ..


I have and haven't had that experience. What evidence do you have to show it would be nothing but a parking lot?  You also still haven't replied to my last post. Please enlighten us on why you are so against roundabouts?

----------


## CaptDave

> I have and haven't had that experience. What evidence do you have to show it would be nothing but a parking lot?  You also still haven't replied to my last post. Please enlighten us on why you are so against roundabouts?


I think maybe bouldersooner was talking about OU game days? For 5 or 6 days a year I think it would be relatively easy to make the streets one way - incoming before the game, outgoing after. Ought to be enough time during the game to make the changeover.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> I think maybe bouldersooner was talking about OU game days? For 5 or 6 days a year I think it would be relatively easy to make the streets one way - incoming before the game, outgoing after. Ought to be enough time during the game to make the changeover.


they do that with Lindsey after games now

----------


## venture

> I think maybe bouldersooner was talking about OU game days? For 5 or 6 days a year I think it would be relatively easy to make the streets one way - incoming before the game, outgoing after. Ought to be enough time during the game to make the changeover.


Yeah Lindsey goes one way right now, well not the part we are talking about getting redesigned. Unless they've changed it, they sit there and utilize the center turn lane as an extra lane based on which way traffic needs to flow. Past Berry to Campus does go one way. 

We are still waiting though to get any response of length and worth from him though. He apparently has something driving his position, I think it is fair to ask for him to share it.

----------


## Just the facts

So we are back to using 6 Saturdays a year as the design standard for the other 359 days?

Carmel, IN - population 85,000 has over 60 roundabouts.  They have replaced 80% of their stoplights.

Important quote: "A roundabout can handle 4 to 5 times the amount of traffic as a traffic signal can in the same amount of time".  That is 400% to 500% more efficient.

http://www.structurepoint.com/docume...e_Corridor.pdf



On a related note - the City of Clearwater Beach replaced their main traffic light with a roundabout because traffic was backing up for miles (yes miles) at the traffic light.  After some initial issue with the traffic circle design cars are now free flowing through the intersection.  Upto 58,000 cars a day go through this roundabout everyday.

http://www.beachnewsletters.com/issues/clwt_dec11.pdf

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> And engineers and the automobile win again. This state can be so backwards all the time.


The automobile is a newer concept than walking and biking lol. . . I understand what you mean by that, but I don't think this is a total loss

----------


## venture

> The automobile is a newer concept than walking and biking lol. . . I understand what you mean by that, but I don't think this is a total loss


It is a compromise but the problem is, and I personally feel, with the center median without roundabouts will mean traffic issues with people trying to make a u-turn or block the left lane with no turn lanes. The minute we add turn lanes we then get into the realm of making the raised median pointless.

----------


## Just the facts

Can someone post a video of a traffic jam at a roundabout?

----------


## ljbab728

> Can someone post a video of a traffic jam at a roundabout?


I haven't seen a video posted yet of a roundabout with heavy traffic in spite of what was claimed.




There are several "jammed" traffic circles here.

----------


## ljbab728



----------


## venture

Neither of the "roundabouts" in those videos even look remotely close to the setup they would have for Lindsey street. Also everyone intersection appears to have traffic lights in those videos and some just look like left turning lanes where people just don't yield. I'm not seeing anything where the roundabout is the cause of the backup.

----------


## Just the facts

> I haven't seen a video posted yet of a roundabout with heavy traffic in spite of what was claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are several "jammed" traffic circles here.


I knew it - at the 5:56 mark you finally get to the stop light that is backing up all the traffic..... but now I am motion sick.  :Smiley103:

----------


## ljbab728

> Neither of the "roundabouts" in those videos even look remotely close to the setup they would have for Lindsey street. Also everyone intersection appears to have traffic lights in those videos and some just look like left turning lanes where people just don't yield. I'm not seeing anything where the roundabout is the cause of the backup.


Venture, people are the main cause of all traffic jams whether it's a roundabout or a traditional intersection.  Anyone who thinks traffic jams won't happen at traffic circles are totally fooling themselves.  I only saw one traffic light in the second video and it was to stop traffic from one direction that was entering the roundabout.

----------


## venture

> Venture, people are the main cause of all traffic jams whether it's a roundabout or a traditional intersection.  Anyone who thinks traffic jams won't happen at traffic circles are totally fooling themselves.  I only saw one traffic light in the second video and it was to stop traffic from one direction that was entering the roundabout.


There were several in there, but I won't make you watch it again. That was rough. LOL

I don't think anyone is saying that there won't be traffic delays on any busy road way - with or without a roundabout. We also need to make sure that we compare like solutions. Modern roundabouts can't be compared to the traffic circles of old that don't have yield entry restrictions, traffic deflections, and increased flare of the entries.

----------


## ljbab728

> There were several in there, but I won't make you watch it again. That was rough. LOL


I have watched the second video several times and the only light I saw that could possibly affect people in the roundabout was flashing yellow.  I think my videos provided a good contrast to the light traffic videos that were posted previously that obviously are intended to show them in the best light.  I'm not a fan as I have stated in numerous times here in various threads.

----------


## venture

> I have watched the second video several times and the only light I saw that could possibly affect people in the roundabout was flashing yellow.  I think my videos provided a good contrast to the light traffic videos that were posted previously that obviously are intended to show them in the best light.  I'm not a fan as I have stated in numerous times here in various threads.


There was a light just 40 seconds in that was red. 

Here is a video of the same roundabout (the Oldchurch Roundabout in Romford, Essex) which doesn't really show much in the way of traffic issues.

----------


## ljbab728

> There was a light just 40 seconds in that was red. 
> 
> Here is a video of the same roundabout (the Oldchurch Roundabout in Romford, Essex) which doesn't really show much in the way of traffic issues.


I saw the light when it was red and it was just for a very short time.  It just was not an issue in the traffic jam at all.  It's always possible to find videos of any intersection when there is not a traffic jam and I'm not contending that roundabouts have constant traffic jams.  I just don't see them as the panacea that many people envision.

Remember that I was posting in response to Kerry's comment that nobody had posted any videos of traffic jams in a roundabout, as if that didn't occur.

I never drive down Lindsey when going to OU games and that won't change with roundabouts installed.

----------


## venture

> I saw the light when it was red and it was just for a very short time.  It just was not an issue in the traffic jam at all.  It's always possible to find videos of any intersection when there is not a traffic jam and I'm not contending that roundabouts have constant traffic jams.  I just don't see them as the panacea that many people envision.


So what do you say then to JTF who is indicating that the traffic jam was caused by a light well away from the roundabout? Of course anyone could find a video of a road being congested or not congested. I don't think anyone is saying they will solve all traffic problems. Heavens knows just increasing the amount of lanes on Lindsey will increase cars which will increase traffic. I think it is important to note that Lindsey will still have lights at 24th and McGee. So traffic will likely still be bad up until that point.  Of course the big issue, in my mind, are the multiple pedestrian oriented traffic lights on campus that probably cause worse back ups - if not the myriad of lights from Pickard to campus. 




> I never drive down Lindsey when going to OU games and that won't change with roundabouts installed.


I don't think anyone is seriously considering this a solution for game day traffic. That will never be solved as it is just a massive influx of too many people into a small area. To think otherwise is just foolish. This solution needs to be focused on those days when there aren't 80,000 invading our city.

----------


## ljbab728

> So what do you say then to JTF who is indicating that the traffic jam was caused by a light well away from the roundabout?


I say that could happen to any roundabout or traditional intersection.

----------


## venture

> I say that could happen to any roundabout or traditional intersection.


Of course. I'm just trying to understand the dislike for roundabouts when they can provide for a better flow of traffic and increase the capacity on a street. Not to mention be used to create a very visually stunning gateway into the city.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> It is a compromise but the problem is, and I personally feel, with the center median without roundabouts will mean traffic issues with people trying to make a u-turn or block the left lane with no turn lanes. The minute we add turn lanes we then get into the realm of making the raised median pointless.


Hey, for what it's worth and what I know(which isn't much), a round-a-bout would be great here. Since enrolling at OU, I've been on Lindsey twice now and from what I've seen, there is generally minimal to no traffic, so a round-a-bout with bike lanes and wide sidewalks would do this road great.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Can someone post a video of a traffic jam at a roundabout?


As I don't have any proof, all I can say is, you can't sit there and tell me, that there has been no traffic incidents and jams at round-a-bouts. Again, I think a round-a-bout would be great here, but for something like a 6 lane road, round-a-bouts are not a good option, imo.

----------


## Geographer

Shifting gears a little bit....

Someone earlier mentioned Carmel, Indiana and their roundabouts...well check out this interstate on/off ramp system.  This is pretty cool

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=carme...gl=us&t=h&z=19


Here is also a shopping center with great street design as well in Carmel, IN.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=carme...gl=us&t=h&z=17

----------


## venture

The Clay Terrace design is pretty popular back north. Pretty much a hybrid lifestyle center layout. What UNP should have looked like instead of acres of parking in front of stores versus along the interstate.

----------


## Just the facts

> As I don't have any proof, all I can say is, you can't sit there and tell me, that there has been no traffic incidents and jams at round-a-bouts. Again, I think a round-a-bout would be great here, but for something like a 6 lane road, round-a-bouts are not a good option, imo.


That is the thing though - if we used the more efficient traffic circle we wouldn't need 6 lane roads.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Shifting gears a little bit....
> 
> Someone earlier mentioned Carmel, Indiana and their roundabouts...well check out this interstate on/off ramp system.  This is pretty cool
> 
> https://maps.google.com/maps?q=carme...gl=us&t=h&z=19
> 
> 
> Here is also a shopping center with great street design as well in Carmel, IN.
> 
> https://maps.google.com/maps?q=carme...gl=us&t=h&z=17


Carmel, IN is doing some really awesome things.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> That is the thing though - if we used the more efficient traffic circle we wouldn't need 6 lane roads.


So you're telling me, that if Preston Rd. in Dallas were reduced to 4 lanes and replaced the intersections with round-a-bouts it would solve traffic there? I wouldn't believe it unless I saw it. 

I think what you're getting at would work in a lot of different scenarios, Lindsey being one of them, but there are cases where I just don't think it would work out that well.

----------


## ou48A

> So you're telling me, that if Preston Rd. in Dallas were reduced to 4 lanes and replaced the intersections with round-a-bouts it would solve traffic there? I wouldn't believe it unless I saw it. 
> 
> I think what you're getting at would work in a lot of different scenarios, Lindsey being one of them, but there are cases where I just don't think it would work out that well.


A very good observation^

Much of the new development along Preston Road wouldn’t even be there without it having the traffic capacity that it does.

If we want nice things we have got to have the will to provide the circumstances and environment for them to be built. 
Preston Road does that by providing 6 lanes of traffic with good intersections and turning lanes. Traffic moves along at a good pace for a major city street. But most major Dallas streets have been  built similarly for many decades. Many citys in Texas now build this way.
Designing streets like they have has helped the quality of growth as can be seen by the higher incomes in many areas of north Dallas and other locations. It a classic example of how nice things are often attracted to other nice things.

In some places where they have gone back and rebuilt old out of date streets it has helped spur the redevelopment of very old neighborhoods closer to down town.

 You can't replace what good modern streets built to modern day standards can do to a community, even in old areas, by any other means.

----------


## Just the facts

I'm not familiar with Preston Rd in Dallas.  I assume there are traffic lights there now.  How is traffic?  How do you think it would flow with an intersection design the can move 4X to 5X as many cars in the same time period?  Of course, as with the videos posted above, some stop light down the street would eventually back traffic up through the roundabout - and why you might ask - because traffic can flow faster through the roundabout than it can through the street light.

----------


## venture

> I'm not familiar with Preston Rd in Dallas.  I assume there are traffic lights there now.  How is traffic?  How do you think it would flow with an intersection design the can move 4X to 5X as many cars in the same time period?  Of course, as with the videos posted above, some stop light down the street would eventually back traffic up through the roundabout - and why you might ask - because traffic can flow faster through the roundabout than it can through the street light.


Ding ding ding. I think we'll find that if/when the Lindsey plan is fully in place and built, with the roundabout options at the selected intersections, we'll see the back ups occur at 24th, McGee, and Pickard where the lights are. Of course if we see OU follow through and do a roundabout at Jenkins, and better timed lights at the crosswalks we would probably find eastbound Lindsey will flow very smoothly and westbound will be good until you hit McGee and start backing up.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> A very good observation^
> 
> Much of the new development along Preston Road wouldn’t even be there without it having the traffic capacity that it does.
> 
> If we want nice things we have got to have the will to provide the circumstances and environment for them to be built. 
> Preston Road does that by providing 6 lanes of traffic with good intersections and turning lanes. Traffic moves along at a good pace for a major city street. But most major Dallas streets have been  built similarly for many decades. Many citys in Texas now build this way.
> Designing streets like they have has helped the quality of growth as can be seen by the higher incomes in many areas of north Dallas and other locations. It a classic example of how nice things are often attracted to other nice things.
> 
> In some places where they have gone back and rebuilt old out of date streets it has helped spur the redevelopment of very old neighborhoods closer to down town.
> ...


I agree completely. OKC really needs to beautify itself(esp. along its highways) and tackle a bunch of its streets. There are tons of streets I would like to see widened to six lanes and follow the model that Dallas builds from. Everything I've seen, Dallas is extremely successful and has a ton of badass developments along Preston and along the North Dallas Tollway(which is one of the coolest highways I've ever seen). That area is so freakin nice is not even funny, and some of these amazing office parks they have I would kill for to have here.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I'm not familiar with Preston Rd in Dallas.  I assume there are traffic lights there now.  How is traffic?  How do you think it would flow with an intersection design the can move 4X to 5X as many cars in the same time period?  Of course, as with the videos posted above, some stop light down the street would eventually back traffic up through the roundabout - and why you might ask - because traffic can flow faster through the roundabout than it can through the street light.


There is a ton of traffic, and it moves very smoothly for the amount of traffic it has. That road you posted a picture of in Jacksonville, think that kind of traffic, flowing almost flawlessly. Preston is a great model, it is 6 lanes, has two dedicated left turn lanes on EVERY major intersection and dedicated right turn lanes, even into commercial developments. I'm telling you right now, there is no way a round-a-bout would work in that area. It would be a freakin mess to have round-a-bouts there. 

One thing I love about Dallas is its road and highway network. It is amazing, almost the entire city is served by 6 lane roads and it has worked very VERY well for them. Obviously, OKC can't and doesn't have a need to widen all of its roads to six lanes, but like I said, there about 5-10 of them I would think should be widened, and I'm sure they will in time. I have nothing against round-a-bouts and I even would like to see one at the new Boulevard that is to built downtown, but I just don't think they are the god of transferring traffic.

BTW, next time I'm there, I'll take a video when I'm driving through Preston so you can see what exactly it is and all the awesome stores people here are saying they want, like Tom Thumb, Kroger, Stonebriar ect.

----------


## ou48A

> I agree completely. OKC really needs to beautify itself(esp. along its highways) and tackle a bunch of its streets. There are tons of streets I would like to see widened to six lanes and follow the model that Dallas builds from. Everything I've seen, Dallas is extremely successful and has a ton of badass developments along Preston and along the North Dallas Tollway(which is one of the coolest highways I've ever seen). That area is so freakin nice is not even funny, and some of these amazing office parks they have I would kill for to have here.


I have spent a lot of time in the Dallas area over the years and known several people who were great sources of  information on the growth of the Dallas metro. As a result I have tried looking at what they have done to create a higher standard of living for them self’s.

They have done a great job of creating the environment need to create success for the individual and for corporations. Its their creation of wealth that lets them do what they have done. It a matrix of issues but no state income tax has a huge philological impact well beyond its direct impact. Their huge streets save time and make their area more productive and a more desirable place to live and do business. Until recent years they had great leaders who were bold enough to not be afraid of criticism from activist.

When we take 35 years to rebuild I-35 from I-40 to Norman and they take about 6 years to rebuild a far more extensive stretch of LBJ it's an example of stark differences in attitudes about how things should be done.
Prosperity = nice.

Sometimes we just are not nearly bold enough in our thinking.

----------


## ou48A

> There is a ton of traffic, and it moves very smoothly for the amount of traffic it has. That road you posted a picture of in Jacksonville, think that kind of traffic, flowing almost flawlessly. Preston is a great model, it is 6 lanes, has two dedicated left turn lanes on EVERY major intersection and dedicated right turn lanes, even into commercial developments. I'm telling you right now, there is no way a round-a-bout would work in that area. It would be a freakin mess to have round-a-bouts there. 
> 
> One thing I love about Dallas is its road and highway network. It is amazing, almost the entire city is served by 6 lane roads and it has worked very VERY well for them. Obviously, OKC can't and doesn't have a need to widen all of its roads to six lanes, but like I said, there about 5-10 of them I would think should be widened, and I'm sure they will in time. I have nothing against round-a-bouts and I even would like to see one at the new Boulevard that is to built downtown, but I just don't think they are the god of transferring traffic.
> 
> BTW, next time I'm there, I'll take a video when I'm driving through Preston so you can see what exactly it is and all the awesome stores people here are saying they want, like Tom Thumb, Kroger, Stonebriar ect.


Very good post^

When people say they want all these great stores there are very good reasons why some of them either are not here or are slow to come to our area. In many cases it's because other places have created better places for them to go.
Most of the time is about how much disposable income the population has. Doing the things that create higher income jobs will be necessary. Time saving transportation is critical to prosperity.

----------


## venture

> I agree completely. OKC really needs to beautify itself(esp. along its highways) and tackle a bunch of its streets. There are tons of streets I would like to see widened to six lanes and follow the model that Dallas builds from. Everything I've seen, Dallas is extremely successful and has a ton of badass developments along Preston and along the North Dallas Tollway(which is one of the coolest highways I've ever seen). That area is so freakin nice is not even funny, and some of these amazing office parks they have I would kill for to have here.


Wouldn't it be a better idea to use the money and invest in mass transit before we could expanding every road to 6 lanes? We really need to stay realistic here. OKC and also Norman (since this is the Norman section of the forum) are not Dallas and never will be Dallas. Adding more lanes typically just means more traffic to get more congested overtime...it doesn't solve the problem. We need to have a balanced approach. 

No one is saying a roundabout is the solution to every issue, but in quite a few cases it makes much more sense. It also allows the roadway to have a better look to it. You are talking about beautifying roads and highways. Adding more lanes of pavement isn't going to do it. 




> One thing I love about Dallas is its road and highway network. It is amazing, almost the entire city is served by 6 lane roads and it has worked very VERY well for them. Obviously, OKC can't and doesn't have a need to widen all of its roads to six lanes, but like I said, there about 5-10 of them I would think should be widened, and I'm sure they will in time. I have nothing against round-a-bouts and I even would like to see one at the new Boulevard that is to built downtown, but I just don't think they are the god of transferring traffic.
> 
> BTW, next time I'm there, I'll take a video when I'm driving through Preston so you can see what exactly it is and all the awesome stores people here are saying they want, like Tom Thumb, Kroger, Stonebriar ect.


Honestly I think the OKC area's road network is pretty well setup as well. Perfect grid in most locations and easy highway access. Can't really complain. Of course, no need to discuss OKC's specific road widening objects because this the Norman section and should be focused as such. 

A lot of this anti-roundabout discussion just seems to continue to stem from people that are use to the way it always has been done and have little experience with them in a full scale deployment. Nothing wrong with that. I just think for Lindsey specifically ( getting back on topic) we have the opportunity to build a new gateway into the heart of the city. The visual impact of a tree lined street, with trees in the median, and 3 roundabouts with unique, locally influenced sculptures with various lighting elements would be amazing. A typical wide slab of pavement with your typical layout will do nothing to setup Norman about from the OKC suburbs to our North.

----------


## venture

> Sometimes we just are not nearly bold enough in our thinking.


Indeed...which is why people so set in their ways wanting 5-7 lanes of pavement to create an evening bigger concrete divide through parts of town need to pushed out - much like what happened in the last council election. 

[QUOTE=ou48A;677873 Time saving transportation is critical to prosperity.[/QUOTE]

I'm glad you agree that we definitely need to try everything we can to remove traffic lights to ensure constant flows of traffic and reduce traffic delays.

----------


## Just the facts

Didn't we just learn about 2 months ago that Texas transportation funding is about to collapse under its debt?  Not only will they not be able to build new roads, they won't be able to maintain what they just built.  Anyone can appear to live high on the hog when they are borrowing money to pay for it, but when the credit runs out.... then what?  They had to transfer $1.2 billion from the states rainy day fund just to make ends meet this year.  I prefer to build smarter - not harder.

I don't want to derail this thread so this will be my last Texas post on the subject.

http://www.kxan.com/news/community-e...ding-necessity




> Experts say Texas needs to spend $4 billion more per year just to maintain the current road network, but the Republican majority has refused to raise taxes or fees to pay for them. Diverting money from the state's savings account was considered the more politically acceptable option.
> 
> Business groups warned earlier Monday that the Texas economy would suffer if the Legislature didn't do something to improve the state's deteriorating infrastructure.

----------


## ou48A

> Didn't we just learn about 2 months ago that Texas transportation funding is about to collapse under its debt?  Not only will they not be able to build new roads, they won't be able to maintain what they just built.  Anyone can appear to live high on the hog when they are borrowing money to pay for it, but when the credit runs out.... then what?  They had to transfer $1.2 billion from the states rainy day fund just to make ends meet this year.  I prefer to build smarter - not harder.
> 
> I don't want to derail this thread so this will be my last Texas post on the subject.
> 
> KXAN - Texas Legislature debates road funding | KXAN.com


Those concerns are way over blown and are being used for political posturing... the reality is.....



*

“Texas is the best credit in the U.S.,”*
*
Texas has a top credit rating from Moody’s Investors Service.*
Texas also has  about $11.8 billion in its reserves and its growing.

Texas Energy Boom Fuels Best Performance Since ?09: Muni Credit - Bloomberg

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I'm confused by this statement. Every single time, without fail, that I go into Dallas, I regret it so much.  The traffic there is horrendous. Perhaps I should get off the highways more to see what you mean?


The traffic is really bad during rush hour, other than that, it is generally pretty mild, esp. for a metro of 7 million people. On average, Austin has much worse traffic than Dallas, imo. There are a few places where they are doing construction and it backs up, but the same thing happens here.

Just FYI, Dallas does have some pretty good urban neighborhoods, Sid. If you want, I can P.M. you some great urban projects and some urban neighborhoods that are pretty cool, Dallas isn't all about it suburbs.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I have spent a lot of time in the Dallas area over the years and known several people who were great sources of  information on the growth of the Dallas metro. As a result I have tried looking at what they have done to create a higher standard of living for them self’s.
> 
> They have done a great job of creating the environment need to create success for the individual and for corporations. Its their creation of wealth that lets them do what they have done. It a matrix of issues but no state income tax has a huge philological impact well beyond its direct impact. Their huge streets save time and make their area more productive and a more desirable place to live and do business. Until recent years they had great leaders who were bold enough to not be afraid of criticism from activist.
> 
> When we take 35 years to rebuild I-35 from I-40 to Norman and they take about 6 years to rebuild a far more extensive stretch of LBJ it's an example of stark differences in attitudes about how things should be done.
> Prosperity = nice.
> 
> *Sometimes we just are not nearly bold enough in our thinking*.


Nailed it! I think we can setup a system where we can borrow money to build new highways and expansions like Texas and pay it back being responsible about it.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Wouldn't it be a better idea to use the money and invest in mass transit before we could expanding every road to 6 lanes? We really need to stay realistic here. OKC and also Norman (since this is the Norman section of the forum) are not Dallas and never will be Dallas. Adding more lanes typically just means more traffic to get more congested overtime...it doesn't solve the problem. We need to have a balanced approach


Yes, I do think a balanced approach is needed, and I'm not trying to say its and urgent matter widening the roads here six lanes. I would love to see a functioning bus system and a light-rail at that. I'm sure OKC and Norman(as well as Edmond) can manage to approach this with reason and balance.




> No one is saying a roundabout is the solution to every issue, but in quite a few cases it makes much more sense. It also allows the roadway to have a better look to it. You are talking about beautifying roads and highways. Adding more lanes of pavement isn't going to do it.


Well, I really can't say much more and shouldn't have really said much to begin with, as I don't know this area and its traffic that well, other than what I've read on here.






> Honestly I think the OKC area's road network is pretty well setup as well. Perfect grid in most locations and easy highway access. Can't really complain. Of course, no need to discuss OKC's specific road widening objects because this the Norman section and should be focused as such. 
> 
> A lot of this anti-roundabout discussion just seems to continue to stem from people that are use to the way it always has been done and have little experience with them in a full scale deployment. Nothing wrong with that. I just think for Lindsey specifically ( getting back on topic) we have the opportunity to build a new gateway into the heart of the city. The visual impact of a tree lined street, with trees in the median, and 3 roundabouts with unique, locally influenced sculptures with various lighting elements would be amazing. A typical wide slab of pavement with your typical layout will do nothing to setup Norman about from the OKC suburbs to our North.


I understand the grid system works the best, however, I like the curved roads similar to Dallas and L.A.. I think they are more "scenic". OKC's roads would be much better if they added center turn medians, landscaping, dedicated turn lanes and sidewalks.

----------


## Mr T

Councilperson Holman posted on Facebook that there is a video.  I don't remember how to link stuff (old lady here) but it is on Youtube and is called "Dan Burden: Livable Lindsey Street."  If it has already been posted, sorry!  I didn't want to go back through all the Dallas (?) stuff.

----------


## venture

Here you go:

----------


## venture

One thing I find very interesting in the video is just how well the roundabouts will fit in the existing right of ways. The problem arrives when certain city planners are pushing to have 4 lanes through every intersection when based on the details in the article - they aren't needed. A single land roundabout can handle over 20,000 cars per day with little in the way of back ups as long as there is a string of roundabouts throughout the road. As soon as a traffic light gets in there then it can all be screwed up.

----------


## ou48A

> One thing I find very interesting in the video is just how well the roundabouts will fit in the existing right of ways. The problem arrives when certain city planners are pushing to have 4 lanes through every intersection when based on the details in the article - they aren't needed. A single land roundabout can handle over 20,000 cars per day with little in the way of back ups as long as there is a string of roundabouts throughout the road. As soon as a traffic light gets in there then it can all be screwed up.


City engineers and others know that a single lane does not fit the needs on Lindsey Street on game day making single roundabouts unpractical given all the necessary consideration involved. If there were no game days or other large events a single lane with roundabouts would be manageable, but that’s not the case.

----------


## Just the facts

How is I-35 on game day?

----------


## HangryHippo

> City engineers and others know that a single lane does not fit the needs on Lindsey Street on game day making single roundabouts unpractical given all the necessary consideration involved. If there were no game days or other large events a single lane with roundabouts would be manageable, but that’s not the case.


I don't understand why an event that takes place roughly 6-7 times per year should be the overriding concern...

----------


## soonerguru

Why are people so fixated on game day? It's ridiculous. Traffic is going to be congested -- six days a year. It makes little sense to plan based on events that happen six days a year. I'm guessing OU48a must live on the West side of town? 

There are other ways to get into Norman on Game Day, up to and including spending the night and staying an extra day, patronizing Norman businesses and hotels. Also, not everyone arrives at the same time on Game Day, so it's really not that big a deal. 

It should have zero influence on the Lindsey Street discussion.

----------


## Geographer

> Why are people so fixated on game day? It's ridiculous. Traffic is going to be congested -- six days a year. It makes little sense to plan based on events that happen six days a year. I'm guessing OU48a must live on the West side of town? 
> 
> There are other ways to get into Norman on Game Day, up to and including spending the night and staying an extra day, patronizing Norman businesses and hotels. Also, not everyone arrives at the same time on Game Day, so it's really not that big a deal. 
> 
> It should have zero influence on the Lindsey Street discussion.


Wholeheartedly agree.

----------


## Just the facts

> Why are people so fixated on game day? It's ridiculous.


Because when you are trying to defend the status quo you have to go to the data extremes to do it.  I-35 backs up on game day; you don't seriously think ou48A is suggesting that Lindsey Street should be able to handle more traffic than I-35 do you?

----------


## ou48A

> Why are people so fixated on game day? It's ridiculous. Traffic is going to be congested -- six days a year. It makes little sense to plan based on events that happen six days a year. I'm guessing OU48a must live on the West side of town? 
> 
> There are other ways to get into Norman on Game Day, up to and including spending the night and staying an extra day, patronizing Norman businesses and hotels. Also, not everyone arrives at the same time on Game Day, so it's really not that big a deal. 
> 
> It should have zero influence on the Lindsey Street discussion.


*Football traffic and its congestion absolutely does have a place in the discussions as can be seen when the topic has been discussed by various OU, City, state and federal officials many times in various official settings over the years*.... 

*These people know there are very real and very valid reasons why its an important topic.*

 From strictly a safety and security stand point game day congestion is something that is taken extremely seriously, just as it should be by appropriate officials. In the event of a large emergency Lindsey street is one of the most important streets for emergency traffic and for possible evacuations.

 A one lane Lindsey street that I was responding to doesn’t even come close to adequately meeting the desired outcome....In fact its ridiculous to think that a one lane road fits our future needs..A one lane road with roundabouts would significantly slow emergency services and slow normal traffic.
When it comes to emergency services, peoples lives and property will have a much higher priority than anything else, just as they should. But if for no other reason than Norman’s future growth, on this, the city got this one right! It's now time to start plans on building to Elm street  for many of the same reasons as above.

PS: in the 42 years that I have been attending OU football games mostly from 100+ miles out of town just getting in and out of town has become far more time consuming... But I have rarely used Lindsey on game-day. I snake around on mostly residential streets. For the many hundreds of millions that have been brought into Norman because of football over the years its well worth not taking this for granted.	 

When its going to make every day life in Norman better a few additional million to make the trip a little  better for our visitors is a nice friendly investment that leaves a better lasting impression on the day when the most people from out of town are in our community.

----------


## Geographer

> *Football traffic and its congestion absolutely does have a place in the discussions as can be seen when the topic has been discussed by various OU, City, state and federal officials many times in various official settings over the years*.... 
> 
> *These people know there are very real and very valid reasons why its an important topic.*
> 
>  From strictly a safety and security stand point game day congestion is something that is taken extremely seriously, just as it should be by appropriate officials. In the event of a large emergency Lindsey street is one of the most important streets for emergency traffic and for possible evacuations.
> 
>  A one lane Lindsey street that I was responding to doesn’t even come close to adequately meeting the desired outcome....In fact its ridiculous to think that a one lane road fits our future needs..A one lane road with roundabouts would significantly slow emergency services and slow normal traffic.
> When it comes to emergency services, peoples lives and property will have a much higher priority than anything else, just as they should. But if for no other reason than Norman’s future growth, on this, the city got this one right! It's now time to start plans on building to Elm street  for many of the same reasons as above.
> 
> ...



I'm just saying...game day traffic has NOT been brought up at any of the meetings that I have been do.

David Boren didn't mention it once during his mini-speeches at the livable lindsay workshops.

I am not saying that I favor a 2 lane road instead of 4 lanes, but what I am saying is that it's ludicrous to plan for an event that happens 1.6% of the year.

----------


## soonerguru

Safety is important, obviously, but the concern about Game Day traffic should be viewed within the context of only being an issue six times a year. Issues about the other 359 days a year should be weighted accordingly.

----------


## ou48A

> I'm just saying...game day traffic has NOT been brought up at any of the meetings that I have been do.
> 
> David Boren didn't mention it once during his mini-speeches at the livable lindsay workshops.
> 
> I am not saying that I favor a 2 lane road instead of 4 lanes, but what I am saying is that it's ludicrous to plan for an event that happens 1.6% of the year.






> Safety is important, obviously, but the concern about Game Day traffic should be viewed within the context of only being an issue six times a year. Issues about the other 359 days a year should be weighted accordingly.



But that 1.6% of the year has a real big impact on what goes on at OU for 365 days a year.

I don't think very many here grasp the full extent that OU football drives donations to the entire university and also to student enrollment. 
I guarantee you that top OU officials are very aware of this factor.
A healthy OU is vital to the city of Norman. Keeping these donors happy and coming back helps.... 
It's actually a very cheap additional  investment when all things considered.

----------


## soonerguru

> When its going to make every day life in Norman better a few additional million to make the trip a little  better for our visitors is a nice friendly investment that leaves a better lasting impression on the day when the most people from out of town are in our community.


Wouldn't it make more of an impression on visitors to pass through an attractive, vibrant city street -- perhaps making them want to get out of their cars and explore -- than simply getting them in and out of Norman as fast as possible?

----------


## soonerguru

> But that 1.6% of the year has a real big impact on what goes on at OU for 365 days a year.
> 
> *I don't think very many here grasp the full extent that OU football drives donations to the entire university and also to student enrollment.*


What a ridiculous statement. As a Norman native, I'm personally quite aware of the economic impact of Game Day. I'm sure the people who make residence in Norman who are commenting on this issue are also quite aware. 

Have you considered that a healthier, more vibrant and attractive Lindsey Street corridor would add to Norman's economic development as well? Let's face it: Lindsey is flat out ugly and is a poor representation of what is otherwise a very attractive city. I know many merchants in Norman and for some of them, Game Day is no boon; sometimes it's actually a hindrance. There should be a broader focus than traffic on one single artery six times a year.

----------


## ou48A

> Wouldn't it make more of an impression on visitors to pass through an attractive, vibrant city street -- perhaps making them want to get out of their cars and explore -- than simply getting them in and out of Norman as fast as possible?


I think we are getting a lot of that^ with the planed improvements. (eventually)
I’m pretty happy with this phase of Lindsey street.
It's close to the best solution possible when everything is considered.
It certainly is a lot better than it was and its a lot better than the original planed improvement.

----------


## Just the facts

So let me ask you ou48A, how wide do you think Lindsey needs to be for free-flowing traffic on game day?  I know you said 4 lanes earlier, but do you think that is enough?

----------


## venture

Update in the Transcript today: Roundabout discussion going in circles  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

Boren and Lindsey Street Businesses WANT the roundabout solution. It seems that City Council is evenly divided right now. The many opponent appears to be the city engineers and Tom Kovach. Tom Kovach is setting himself up to get booted out of office in a year and a half and there are definitely going to be calls for the mayor to evaluate who she has in the engineers office and maybe it is a time for change.

President Boren is being pretty stern that he wants a walkable boulevard for Lindsey and not the city engineer's plan at all. If ANYONE is going to be concerned about the interests of OU, I would think it would be him. Why is it he wants the roundabout solution but other people not directly involved with the interests of the university are against it?

Some clips from the story...




> *University of Oklahoma President David Boren urged council members to make Lindsey Street a boulevard instead* of an arterial highway. The discussion came on the heels of an analysis and report by the city design team steering the city away from a proposal for roundabouts at three intersections along west Lindsey Street.





> *Several stakeholders who own or operate businesses on Lindsey Street said they support the vision proposed by Burden*, but the city design team said roundabouts are not feasible.






> *Attorney Harold Heiple who represents the Norman Developers Council, wrote council members saying he supports roundabouts for Lindsey Street.*





> “As I understand the city staff analysis, it appears to me that the Burden proposal cannot be accomplished using a two-lane roundabout design because of the amount of land required for the two-lane design,” Heiple wrote. “However, instead of walking away from roundabouts, consider the original Burden proposal for one-lane roundabouts at Murphy, McGee, Wylie and Berry and a U-turn signal for westbound Lindsey traffic at 24th.”





> *Several council members appear to be on board for including, or at least seriously considering, the use of roundabouts on Lindsey.
> *
> Boren said the built environment will affect how that environment is used.
> 
> 
> *“I would urge you to think long-term,” Boren said.*


And so far the one opponent on Council...





> Council member Tom Kovach said project plans are well under way. A public vote supported a widened version of Lindsey, and the city analysis does not support roundabouts as a feasible option in this instance.
> 
> 
> “There’s only so much you can do to a train moving down the track,” Kovach said.

----------


## venture

> But that 1.6% of the year has a real big impact on what goes on at OU for 365 days a year.
> 
> I don't think very many here grasp the full extent that OU football drives donations to the entire university and also to student enrollment. 
> *I guarantee you that top OU officials are very aware of this factor.*
> A healthy OU is vital to the city of Norman. Keeping these donors happy and coming back helps.... 
> It's actually a very cheap additional  investment when all things considered.


Is David Boren not a top OU official?

----------


## ou48A

> What a ridiculous statement. As a Norman native, I'm personally quite aware of the economic impact of Game Day. I'm sure the people who make residence in Norman who are commenting on this issue are also quite aware. 
> 
> Have you considered that a healthier, more vibrant and attractive Lindsey Street corridor would add to Norman's economic development as well? Let's face it: Lindsey is flat out ugly and is a poor representation of what is otherwise a very attractive city. I know many merchants in Norman and for some of them, Game Day is no boon; sometimes it's actually a hindrance. There should be a broader focus than traffic on one single artery six times a year.


Game-day in Norman is not just one day event, one year event, or even a decade event. 

It's has a life time impact. Pride in football stokes donations and spending that has amounted  to billions over the years coming from many places around the nation.

This money has circulated  though out the entire community making Norman a much better place for everybody to live even if you don't like OU or its football team. But very clearly football drive's many donations and helps with enrollment.

 But adding to Norman's economic development is the goal. Someday OU will expand its stadium further adding more money into our local economy. Lets plan for it now where we reasonably can.... I believe the new Lindsey plan does that + more.

Keeping Norman a nice place with good streets for our game day visitors attracts new residents. It may be their best look at Norman for many years and the impressions they leave with are important. 

 I personalty know of at least a dozen couples who moved to Norman to retire because they thought it was a nice place. They all enjoy OU sports. Many of these people have a life time of savings to invest in our community. These people were frequent visors to Norman We need to keep their experience as happy as we can if we want people like them to continue moving to Norman. As I said Lindsey Street is actually a very cheap additional investment and it will improve Norman 365

----------


## Just the facts

> Mayor Cindy Rosenthal said if traffic is to be encouraged away from Lindsey, the city needs to ask where that traffic will be absorbed.


I know this is hard for some people to understand - but it simply goes away and doesn't materialize else ware, in part, because people who once drove start walking or riding a bike to near-by destinations.

----------


## ou48A

> So let me ask you ou48A, how wide do you think Lindsey needs to be for free-flowing traffic on game day?  I know you said 4 lanes earlier, but do you think that is enough?


The experts have determined that 4 lanes are appropriate for this area.... I don't know why that wouldn’t be unreasonable....

----------


## soonerguru

> Game-day in Norman is not just one day event, one year event, or even a decade event. 
> 
> It's has a life time impact. Pride in football stokes donations and spending that has amounted  to billions over the years coming from many places around the nation.
> 
> This money has circulated  though out the entire community making Norman a much better place for everybody to live even if you don't like OU or its football team. But very clearly football drive's many donations and helps with enrollment.
> 
>  But adding to Norman's economic development is the goal. Someday OU will expand its stadium further adding more money into our local economy. Lets plan for it now where we reasonably can.... I believe the new Lindsey plan does that + more.
> 
> Keeping Norman a nice place with good streets for our game day visitors attracts new residents. It may be their best look at Norman for many years and the impressions they leave with are important. 
> ...


So it seems we agree, I guess. Hard to say. But to your point, as Venture79 points out, David Boren wants the roundabout design, and David Boren is the greatest fundraiser in the history of OU or the state, so I'll go with him on this matter as it relates to OU and OU's future.

----------


## ou48A

> Is David Boren not a top OU official?


Yes and Boren is very aware of how  OU football drives donations to the entire university and also how it impacts the student enrollment.
*That's what I was indicating*

----------


## soonerguru

> Yes and Boren is very aware of how  OU football drives donations to the entire university and also how it impacts the student enrollment.
> *That's what I was indicating*


So how do you square that knowing that Boren's preference is for the idea you seem to oppose? I'm thoroughly confused.

----------


## venture

> Yes and Boren is very aware of how  OU football drives donations to the entire university and also how it impacts the student enrollment.
> *That's what I was indicating*


Oh...so you agree with the roundabout design that *BOREN SUPPORTS*, is that correct?

----------


## ou48A

> So how do you square that knowing that Boren's preference is for the idea you seem to oppose? I'm thoroughly confused.


I am not necessary anti roundabout.
I need to see more about how it would specifically impact Lindsey Street.
But they would likely require 2 lanes in each direction to really be effective as the real long term solution that Boren speaks of. This will be particularly true if we see the redevelopment along Lindsey that everybody is hoping for.

----------


## ou48A

> Oh...so you agree with the roundabout design that *BOREN SUPPORTS*, is that correct?



That's not what I said at all on that post.
You are back to you old ways of inventing things and putting words in other people mouth,which is pretty discussing behavior.

----------


## soonerguru

So who can tell me about this Tom Kovach guy? Is he one of the progressives or one of the tea partiers? I'm not really up on Norman politics.

----------


## ou48A

> Oh...so you agree with the roundabout design that *BOREN SUPPORTS*, is that correct?


 Boren also said that he  wants something done on Lindsey from Barry to Elm.... !
That would  disturb the area that you cherish so much.

----------


## Just the facts

Does this thread remind anyone of the scene in 'City Slickers' - no, not the Yeehaw scene... the one where Mitch is trying to explain to Phil how to program the VCR but Phil just doesn't get it and on the last attempt to explain it Ed flips out and starts yelling that he (Phil) is never going to get it and even the cows understand it by now?



This thread has become like that.

----------


## venture

> That's not what I said at all on that post.
> You are back to you old ways of inventing things and putting words in other people mouth,which is pretty discussing behavior.


Yet you just pointed out that you support the direction that OU leadership if given on this and trust in their judgement - yet they support the roundabouts. Not reinventing anything, just pointing out the confusion your position is creating because we are being served conflicting statements.

----------


## venture

> Does this thread remind anyone of the scene in 'City Slickers' - no, not the Yeehaw scene... the one where Mitch is trying to explain to Phil how to program the VCR but Phil just doesn't get it and on the last attempt to explain it Ed flips out and starts yelling that he (Phil) is never going to get it and even the cows understand it by now?
> 
> This thread has become like that.


LOL so true. Sigh. I was thinking more...

----------


## ou48A

> So who can tell me about this Tom Kovach guy? Is he one of the progressives or one of the tea partiers? I'm not really up on Norman politics.


He has some decent ideas and is pretty smart but he would be considered as some one who is extremely left by any reasonable standard.

----------


## ou48A

> Yet you just pointed out that you support the direction that OU leadership if given on this and trust in their judgement - yet they support the roundabouts. Not reinventing anything, just pointing out the confusion your position is creating because we are being served conflicting statements.


He may have good advisers but Boren is not an expert on road designs.

----------


## soonerguru

> He has some decent ideas and is pretty smart but he would be considered as some one who is extremely left by any reasonable standard.


It's so weird how often the far left and the far right actually seem to have in common.

----------


## ou48A

> Does this thread remind anyone of the scene in 'City Slickers' - no, not the Yeehaw scene... the one where Mitch is trying to explain to Phil how to program the VCR but Phil just doesn't get it and on the last attempt to explain it Ed flips out and starts yelling that he (Phil) is never going to get it and even the cows understand it by now?
> 
> 
> 
> This thread has become like that.



It's more like explaining the very simple elementary economics of a very unique situation

----------


## venture

> It's more like explaining the very simple elementary economics of a very unique situation


Let's go this route. Did you watch the video of Dan Buden's presentation?

----------


## soonerguru

> He may have good advisers but Boren is not an expert on road designs.


Wait, what? So now you're saying you do not trust OU's top official to determine what is best for OU? Maybe you should take a break from posting for a while!

 :Smile:

----------


## ou48A

> It's so weird how often the far left and the far right actually seem to have in common.


You ask

Regardless of far right or left  I don't know of anyone who doesn’t want a better Lindsey street..... 
Perhaps it could be made better but I believe we have that at a minimum

----------


## ou48A

> Wait, what? So now you're saying you do not trust OU's top official to determine what is best for OU? Maybe you should take a break from posting for a while!


I am not say any such thing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But one would be a very big fool to think Boren batts 1000%

B

----------


## soonerguru

I needed some comic relief today. And...

*...this*

*thread* 

*DELIVERS!*

----------


## ou48A

> Yet you just pointed out that you support the direction that OU leadership if given on this and trust in their judgement - yet they support the roundabouts. Not reinventing anything, just pointing out the confusion your position is creating because we are being served conflicting statements.


Show me where I said that I did not trust what OU wanted to do.

----------


## soonerguru

> Show me where I said that I did not trust what OU wanted to do.


WTF? Look up two posts when you say that Boren is not necessarily the right person to make the decision. Are you high?

----------


## ou48A

> I needed some comic relief today. And...
> 
> *...this*
> 
> *thread* 
> 
> *DELIVERS!*


Yep, different day different thread but its the the fantasy world coming to life again!

----------


## ou48A

> WTF? Look up two posts when you say that Boren is not necessarily the right person to make the decision. Are you high?


Thats hardly saying that he can't make a good judgment call if he is well advised on the issue
Great Big Huge Difference, you really are grasping now!

----------


## soonerguru

I'll let you have the last word here. Ahem.

----------


## ou48A

Roundabouts or not …. now that we have a reasonably decent idea about what they will be building on Lindsey and its improvement .... It's really probably time to move on and decide on how Lindsey should be rebuilt from Elm to Barry..... since Boren say they should do something with that stretch of Lindsey too?

----------


## venture

> Roundabouts or not …. now that we have a reasonably decent idea about what they will be building on Lindsey and its improvement .... It's really probably time to move on and decide on how Lindsey should be rebuilt from Elm to Barry..... since Boren say they should do something with that stretch of Lindsey too?


Logical solution would be maintain 2 lanes through there but string smaller roundabouts to eliminate all traffic lights. Speed limit right now is 25 mph (when traffic is moving)...roundabouts would normally take it down to about 20 mph but keep traffic moving until the next hang up. That hung up is going to be on campus and OU needs to address that. Smaller roundabouts would also allow minimal right of way purchasing and keep capacity inline to handle 20,000+ vehicles a day.

----------


## CaptDave

> Yet you just pointed out that you support the direction that OU leadership if given on this and trust in their judgement - yet they support the roundabouts. Not reinventing anything, just pointing out the confusion your position is creating because we are being served conflicting statements.


Better be careful Venture - you are on thin ice with that "discussing behavior". You will be blocked soon!  :Wink:

----------


## Just the facts

> Roundabouts or not …. now that we have a reasonably decent idea about what they will be building on Lindsey and its improvement .... It's really probably time to move on and decide on how Lindsey should be rebuilt from Elm to Barry..... since Boren say they should do something with that stretch of Lindsey too?


Curbs, bike lanes, wide sidewalks on both sides of the street, decorative crosswalks, and replace the stop lights with roundabouts.  If they do something between Elm and Jenkins I recommend bike lanes, decorative raised crosswalks, and a couple of HAWK systems.

Here in Jax they took all the stop lights off of San Marco Blvd just south of downtown and put in roundabouts and all I can say is wow - it is 1000X better.  I'll take some pictures next time I am down there (which is every few days).  In Google Street view you can still see how it used to be.

----------


## David

Okay, that was weird.

Anyway, I've been watching the presentation a few pages back and I finally got to the Lindsey roundabout examples at around 52 minutes in. Here's a link that should get you to about where it starts: Dan Burden: Livable Lindsey Street Workshop - YouTube.

----------


## kevinpate

Maybe what Kovach needs is to meet up a group like the Friends for a Better Blvd group out of OKC.  Some trains can danged well be slowed if the brakes get applied instead of just having someone shoveling more manure, er, um, fuel in the firebox.

Anyone have the time to meet with some FBB folk and kick up an LRR (Lindsey Roundabouts Rule) group?

----------


## venture

> Okay, that was weird.
> 
> Anyway, I've been watching the presentation a few pages back and I finally got to the Lindsey roundabout examples at around 52 minutes in. Here's a link that should get you to about where it starts: Dan Burden: Livable Lindsey Street Workshop - YouTube.


Thanks for posting the shortcut! I would hope those that are sharing their two cents on this topic took the time to view the video so they are educated on what is being proposed.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Curbs, bike lanes, wide sidewalks on both sides of the street, decorative crosswalks, and replace the stop lights with roundabouts.  If they do something between Elm and Jenkins I recommend bike lanes, decorative raised crosswalks, *and a couple of HAWK systems.*
> 
> Here in Jax they took all the stop lights off of San Marco Blvd just south of downtown and put in roundabouts and all I can say is wow - it is 1000X better.  I'll take some pictures next time I am down there (which is every few days).  In Google Street view you can still see how it used to be.


What is that?

----------


## Just the facts

High Intensity Activated Crosswalk

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Now that's pretty cool. Why aren't they building these everywhere? Seeing as how Edmond likely spent a fortune on their lights on the new Covell and Kelly, it wouldn't be much more to have included these. I would only assume bikes on bike lanes would stop at these as well. . .

----------


## Just the facts

Lots of places are putting them in.  Tucson, AZ has more than 60 installed.  I use one in Atlanta when I walk to lunch.  They are very similar to the crosswalks in England except our cars are going much faster so we need an over kill on the visual warning.  They just have a striped pole with a yellow light on top.  They are called zebra poles.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

I noticed they have them in Tucson. A surprisingly number of people completely ignored the red light though.

----------


## Dubya61

There's a crosswalk and school zone by the Del City High School that has lots of flashing lights, but it's not a Hawk crosswalk.  There's a crosswalk in Norman on Porter / Classen (I never know which name the street is using) near the Greyhound stop that is surprisingly well lit, as well.  Short of building a Hawk crosswalk, lighting it up like in Del City and Norman did in those two instances seems smart.

----------


## ou48A

> *Curbs, bike lanes, wide sidewalks on both sides of the street*, decorative crosswalks, and replace the stop lights with *roundabouts*.  If they do something between Elm and Jenkins I recommend bike lanes, decorative raised crosswalks, and a couple of HAWK systems.



The problem with sidewalks and bike paths in the right-of-way in question is that there isn't enough room without removing of many of the old trees that grow in or very near the right-of-way. 

 New bike paths and new side walks on both sides of the street would seriously encroach on several  existing homes. It would drastically change how things look by very seriously damaging the tree canopy that some want the preserve. 

Since this is a very important part of the gateway into OU doing this right is very important.
Purchasing more right-of-way on the north side lets you do this the right way and in a way that will look far better than it does now. More right-of-way also lets you better sever the public.

By buying only on the north it lets you preserve both the canopy and charm of the homes on the south side street and it would not encroach those homes. The trees can be replanted on the north side, new wide side walks can be built on both sides  of the street along with room for a bike path. But all this requires more right-of-way and if you are going to buy more right-of-way your easily going to have enough room to build 4 lanes of traffic to better serve the community. 

I would love to see a boulevard like street lined with crape myrtles, trees that have colorful fall and spring foliage and other appropriate  vegetation...Heck, an extension of Legacy trail might even be possible  But no real improvement that amounts to anything more than a band aid is really feasible without additional right-of-way. Even the roundabouts would need more room.

----------


## Just the facts

Sometimes trees have to come down for the greater good.

----------


## ou48A

> Sometimes trees have to come down for the greater good.


I agree and I believe this is one such case. 
In time it could be made to look like a walk / bike / drive by botanical garden & arboretum. 
That's doing this right IMHO but it takes room. This is an investment in our long term futuer.

----------


## venture

> The problem with sidewalks and bike paths in the right-of-way in question is that there isn't enough room without removing of many of the old trees that grow in or very near the right-of-way.


Depending on where the trees are, chances are you'll be able to save most of them. It isn't like we need to go through with right-of-way area and just chop everything down and start over. That would be fiscally irresponsible if we don't use what is available. 




> New bike paths and new side walks on both sides of the street would seriously encroach on several  existing homes. It would drastically change how things look by very seriously damaging the tree canopy that some want the preserve.


Which is going to make any right of way acquisition very difficult to get through.




> Since this is a very important part of the gateway into OU doing this right is very important.
> Purchasing more right-of-way on the north side lets you do this the right way and in a way that will look far better than it does now. More right-of-way also lets you better sever the public.


And we are back to picking on the north side of the street. There might be a way to balance acquisition on both sides of the street by realigning Lindsey a bit.




> By buying only on the north it lets you preserve both the canopy and charm of the homes on the south side street and it would not encroach those homes. The trees can be replanted on the north side, new wide side walks can be built on both sides  of the street along with room for a bike path. But all this requires more right-of-way and if you are going to buy more right-of-way your easily going to have enough room to build 4 lanes of traffic to better serve the community.


Exactly how much does it cost to replant a 30' or taller tree? Those are OLD trees and not something that can be replaced with a little twig that will take decades to even get close to the same size. Also it is time to back off the 4-lane road idea. It is very unlikely it'll happen and would be pointless since OU won't add another lane trough their portion. There is no need for 4-lanes and it is an assinine idea to even suggest it for there. With roundabouts replacing traffic lights you'll be able to serve a much higher volume of traffic...up until you reach campus and cross walk lights start backing it up.




> I would love to see a boulevard like street lined with crape myrtles, trees that have colorful fall and spring foliage and other appropriate  vegetation...Heck, an extension of Legacy trail might even be possible  But no real improvement that amounts to anything more than a band aid is really feasible without additional right-of-way. Even the roundabouts would need more room.


Additional right-of-way is a given...it just comes down to how much. With your "tear down the north" plan you are looking at roughly $3.5 million in property acquisition costs to buy up all the properties (except for the one at Lindsey & Elm on the NW corner). The same amount it would cost, roughly, to make Lindsey traffic light free with roundabouts...in an area that would be much better served by them. 

If we utilized as much existing footprint as possible, as well as added bike lanes and average sidewalks (there really just isn't the room for 10' sidewalks in places of that stretch)...that will reduce the impacted properties significantly.

----------


## kevinpate

There is space along part of the north side, notably between Berry and Pickard.  But it starts getting tight after that, on both sides.  I'm inclined to think that the buy up the north side of the street folks would be less thrilled with the mantra if they owned, as one example, the lovely two story home at Flood/Lindsey (though that sad fence hides quite a bit of it.)

----------


## venture

> Ther eis space along part of the north side, noteably between Berry and Pickard.  But it starts getting tight after that, on both sides.  I'm inclined to think that the buy up the north side of the street folks would be less thrilled with the mantra if they owned, as one example, the lovely two story home at Flood/Lindsey (though that sad fence hides quite a bit of it.)


I could imagine the roar from people asking why properties on the southside aren't subject to the same acquisition possibilities. I'm looking at 1012 W Lindsey, the house with the brick/concrete walls all the way to the street. They have roughly 60 feet from the edge of the street to the house. I see no reason why the city can't take 20' of it for a sidewalk and bike lane.

----------


## LocoAko

> I posted this in the Going Dutch thread but I think this is exactly what Lindsey street should go with. 
> 
> I was floored with the number of bikes around OU.  Every single bike rack was full! (That means you need a lot more bike racks as well).  
> 
> If there was a lane separated bike route all along Lindsey, you'd see significant ridership on Lindsey.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Something like that Dutch street would be AWESOME on Lindsey. Oh man. (Or anywhere in Norman, really).

----------


## Geographer

> I was just down on Lindsey today and on the campus.  Man, those streetlights need to go.  The primary cause of the congestion was the existence of the streetlights, it was really clear.


THANK YOU SID. Now you know what I've been preaching on this whole time haha.

You know I was on campus all day..thanks for letting me know you were on campus..........

----------


## kevinpate

Lot more bikes these days between campus and all about downtown. 
I tend to not drive W or E Lindsey much anymore so can't say if the bike folks travel it much. But I'm through DT quite a bit and it is very noticeable compared to even a year back, and mega noticeable when I think back 5 years or more.

----------


## venture

> Lot more bikes these days between campus and all about downtown. 
> I tend to not drive W or E Lindsey much anymore so can't say if the bike folks travel it much. But I'm through DT quite a bit and it is very noticeable compared to even a year back, and mega noticeable when I think back 5 years or more.


Yeah I was downtown today as well and noticed quite a bit. Normally don't see much on E Lindsey, but with the apartments/condos going up down on 12th...I could see where bike traffic might pick up. Should be plenty of right-of-way to put in bike lanes from campus down to 12th SE.  I would also think that Lindsey & Classen would be a good target for a large roundabout. Another area that needs it bad is Classen and 12th, but I'm not sure if that would work with it being a US route. 

Working back to the west...Lindsey/George could easily be done with a roundabout before development fills in there. It sucks since it is all new construction, but it would get rid of another light and be relatively easy. Lindsey/Jenkins is going to be a tight fit but should be doable as a single lane roundabout. 

Lindsey/Asp has enough room for a single lane roundabout with all the extra space to the south. Then Van Vleet Oval, if it is every going to be reopened or not (I want to say its gone for good) would be another candidate for a roundabout but room gets tight.

----------


## venture

A couple stories in the Transcript today...

Late proposals to change Lindsey Street plans complicate issue  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

Main points from the first one...

Norman Developers Council and slow growth advocates are in agreement on a single lane (each way) boulevard with roundabouts, bike lakes, walkability, and an overall layout favorable for mixed-use/high density developments.

As we know, Boren favors this solution as well. He recommends that traffic to OU needs to be encouraged onto Highway 9 instead. It is noted that Highway 9 already hits capacity at peak hours (my personal comment in a bit).

City contractor, Freese and Nichol, will have a report to the city Monday on traffic capacity for Lindsey.

City Public Works Director Shawn O'Leary has concerns about the design. He also mentioned that they are looking at ADDING an additional traffic light at Murphy, but said a roundabout could work there too.

Another story gave some inside to the politics of it: Surviving Lindsey Street alliances  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

Open Records request had an email from Councilman Castleberry to Jungman on the issue. It sounds like Jungman, Holman, Heiple, and Williams are on board with the roundabout design. Castleberry may abstain from voting because he owns the property at the NE corner of Lindsey and Berry. There is also an additional council member that I know of that isn't listed there, so it would seem they have the votes to do Burden's design.

Some other thoughts...

- Highway 9 needs to get upgraded. It is the perfect solution to offer faster access to East Norman and Campus. How do you do this? Well the first part is to have 24th SW go under Highway 9 with a new interchange there, removing a traffic light. That whole ramp with 35 is being redone eventually anyway, so it makes sense to modify Highway 9 as well. Build an underpass for Chautauqua,  Jenkins, and 12th SE. That wouldn't get rid of all of the lights, but it would reduce them at the major intersections. It also removes the main one that causes delays - 24th SW.

- It appears many on council want the Burden's solution.

- Businesses along Lindsey, and developers as well, support Burden's solution as it will raise the prospects of more growth along Lindsey and higher property values.

----------


## BoulderSooner

Single lane each way is a terrible idea

----------


## BG918

> Then Van Vleet Oval, if it is every going to be reopened or not (I want to say its gone for good) would be another candidate for a roundabout but room gets tight.


Van Vleet will be entirely pedestrian so no need for a roundabout there.  However you do have a TON of pedestrian traffic (students) that will cross at this location, as well as the other side of the oval.  I assume they will keep the lights here for that purpose?

----------


## venture

> Single lane each way is a terrible idea


Please expand on why.

----------


## venture

> Van Vleet will be entirely pedestrian so no need for a roundabout there.  However you do have a TON of pedestrian traffic (students) that will cross at this location, as well as the other side of the oval.  I assume they will keep the lights here for that purpose?


Okay that is what I was thinking would happen. The lights would likely stay for that reason, so we probably should look at a new system to allow pedestrians to move across safely and still help traffic move through with less delays.

----------


## BG918

> - Highway 9 needs to get upgraded. It is the perfect solution to offer faster access to East Norman and Campus. How do you do this? Well the first part is to have 24th SW go under Highway 9 with a new interchange there, removing a traffic light. That whole ramp with 35 is being redone eventually anyway, so it makes sense to modify Highway 9 as well. Build an underpass for Chautauqua,  Jenkins, and 12th SE. That wouldn't get rid of all of the lights, but it would reduce them at the major intersections. It also removes the main one that causes delays - 24th SW.


Hwy 9 definitely needs to be upgraded, even more so with this alternate Lindsey plan.  I think you would have to have underpasses and limited access entrances/exits at 24th, Imhoff, Chautauqua and Jenkins.  McGee would be an underpass with no entrances/exits.  As part of this project widen the highway to 6 lanes.  This would be the easiest way for most to access the university, as well as people commuting from the south and east sides of Norman to I-35.  As the research campus grows into a larger employment center it will be even more critical.  

Lindsey would still be used to access the campus but would be a slower route.  Main to University is another option.

----------


## ou48A

> Single lane each way is a terrible idea


Yes it is! .....And there are good reasons why a single lane in each direct  is a terrible idea.

The HY-9 problem forces more traffic onto Lindsey. MR. O'Leary correctly said that “if we don't build capacity into the current Lindsey Street, traffic will go someplace else and those places may not be ready for it.” 

O' Leary is completely right but increasingly as Norman and OU grow the traffic will choose old narrow residential streets. This creates a maintenance, safety and noise issues on those street. This really isn't fair to the thousand of people who live in these neighborhoods when there is a perfectly good solution for Lindsey with 2 lanes running in each direction which would impact far fewer people.

Clearly, its pretty easy to see that responsible officials who deal with these types of issues with regularity also think one lane in each direction is a terrible idea

----------


## ou48A

> Hwy 9 definitely needs to be upgraded, even more so with this alternate Lindsey plan.  I think you would have to have underpasses and limited access entrances/exits at 24th, Imhoff, Chautauqua and Jenkins.  McGee would be an underpass with no entrances/exits.  As part of this project widen the highway to 6 lanes.  This would be the easiest way for most to access the university, as well as people commuting from the south and east sides of Norman to I-35.  As the research campus grows into a larger employment center it will be even more critical.  
> 
> Lindsey would still be used to access the campus but would be a slower route.  Main to University is another option.


This^ sounds good and all but there are no reasonable plans for HY- 9 on the horizon anytime soon.

 The article says that HY-9 is already reaching capacity at peak hours... but we also know that Lindsey is said to be the most contested street in the state. Clearly both projects are needed.. 

But seriously, do reasonable people really expect the public to wait another decade to 2  before the HY-9 problem is addressed. We can make our traffic problem better quicker and in a far more responsibly way by adding 2 lanes in each direction on Lindsey.

But on HY-9, whenever it's approved I would propose that the state build an extension of HY-9  from I-35 to the SW part of Norman and have it hook up with SW 60th / Western street. This would be a very short section of new state highway and in an area that is basically uninhabited. It would let Western Street act very much like Sooner Road but on the west side of Norman. It would help folks drive around I-35 accidents and provide a good amount of relive for large event traffic.

----------


## venture

> Yes it is! .....And there are good reasons why a single lane in each direct  is a terrible idea.
> 
> The HY-9 problem forces more traffic onto Lindsey. MR. O'Leary correctly said that “if we don't build capacity into the current Lindsey Street, traffic will go someplace else and those places may not be ready for it.” 
> 
> O' Leary is completely right but increasingly as Norman and OU grow the traffic will choose old narrow residential streets. This creates a maintenance, safety and noise issues on those street. This really isn't fair to the thousand of people who live in these neighborhoods when there is a perfectly good solution for Lindsey with 2 lanes running in each direction which would impact far fewer people.
> 
> Clearly, its pretty easy to see that responsible officials who deal with these types of issues with regularity also think one lane in each direction is a terrible idea


Pretty simple question for you. Have you watched the video linked, in its entirety, showing Burden's presentation?

----------


## venture

> But seriously, do reasonable people really expect the public to wait another decade to 2  before the HY-9 problem is addressed. We can make our traffic problem better quicker and in a far more responsibly way by adding 2 lanes in each direction on Lindsey.


I'm not completely on board with a 1 lane each way solution for Lindsey at this moment, but 2-lanes each way need to be coupled with roundabouts otherwise we are just going to have 4 lanes of backed up traffic waiting for lights to change. End result - more congestion and no solution. Especially if they are thinking about actually ADDING ANOTHER light at Murphy.

----------


## ou48A

> Pretty simple question for you. Have you watched the video linked, in its entirety, showing Burden's presentation?


Yes...... and I don't think that guy understood the dynamics of the entire Norman traffic problems well enough.

Much of what was said sounded good and we can do a lot of that. But 2 lanes in each direction already needed, but our futuer growth will make that fact even more true. It becomes even more true with the higher density living that's desired near OU.

Even if we don't do roundabout now, we can still go back and add them later and that’s OK with me as long as they are 2 lanes in each direction.

----------


## Just the facts

Here is a video I shot of one of the new roundabouts here in Jax on San Marco Boulevard at Landon Ave.  This street used to be 4 lanes with traffic lights.  It was reduced to 2 lanes and the lights taken and replaced with 2 roundabouts.  It is now one of prettiest streets in Jax and property values along the street have skyrocketed - even as the rest of the real-estate market in Florida went in the crapper.  As you can see in the video, we still have some driving challenged people here but thanks to the slow speeds through the roundabout they can't do too much harm.

----------


## venture

> Yes...... and I don't think that guy understood the dynamics of the entire Norman traffic problems well enough.


Norman's problems aren't really that unique, outside of the 6 days a year thing.




> Much of what was said sounded good and we can do a lot of that. But 2 lanes in each direction already needed, but our futuer growth will make that fact even more true. It becomes even more true with the higher density living that's desired near OU.
> 
> Even if we don't do roundabout now, we can still go back and add them later and that’s OK with me as long as they are 2 lanes in each direction.


So you would want to spend the money now on an inferior solution instead of spending a little more now and getting it done, only to go back in a few years and probably spend more to put the roundabouts in?

I think you missed that part where they took streets with over 20,000 cars a day that were congested, put roundabouts in, and resolved many congestion issues while raising property values and walkability. Two lanes in each direction are needed with a standard, congestion prone solution that the city engineers are hung up on. We really need to just do it right the first time and just get the roundabouts in with two lanes each way through at least McGee. Of course it'll go down to 2 lanes at Berry, but the bulk of traffic will be spun off by then.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Here is a video I shot of one of the new roundabouts here in Jax on San Marco Boulevard at Landon Ave.  This street used to be 4 lanes with traffic lights.  It was reduced to 2 lanes and the lights taken and replaced with 2 roundabouts.  It is now one of prettiest streets in Jax and property values along the street have skyrocketed - even as the rest of the real-estate market in Florida went in the crapper.  As you can see in the video, we still have some driving challenged people here but thanks to the slow speeds through the roundabout they can't do too much harm.


Can buses fit in that? I didn't watch the entire video. . . just the first 2 minutes. Now, I can see that working daily, but please explain to me who has the right of way and how on earth would that move heavy traffic that comes during rush hour and game nights???? It seems that would be nightmare and even worse if it was narrowed to one lane each way.

BTW, thats your account, I subscribed to ya, just so you know. Liked your videos on the Black and Red lines for OKC rail. That would be awesome to see that.

----------


## venture

> Can buses fit in that? I didn't watch the entire video. . . just the first 2 minutes. Now, I can see that working daily, but please explain to me who has the right of way and how on earth would that move heavy traffic that comes during rush hour and game nights???? It seems that would be nightmare and even worse if it was narrowed to one lane each way.
> 
> BTW, thats your account, I subscribed to ya, just so you know. Liked your videos on the Black and Red lines for OKC rail. That would be awesome to see that.


Every roundabout I've seen has been navigable by buses with no issue. Right of away is like any other roundabout...if you are in the circle already you have right of way. Entering traffic must yield. I'm not sure if there is a roundabout in Edmond for you to see, but we already have one on East Main before you get to 12th East. 

The big question now is do we stay with 1 lane or do we pay a little extra now and go with 2 lane roundabouts. There is NOTHING we can do right now to not have major backups on game night. Planning to prevent that is just going to be a waste of money and not possible. The trick with roundabouts is that traffic keeps moving. Yes you yield to traffic in the circle already but you aren't having to wait for the the light to turn green before you go. Traffic does get slowed down some, which helps with accident reduction, but your wait time typically isn't going to be anywhere near what it would be at a light.

Here is a good video of a roundabout during rush hour. This is at 18 1/2 Mile and Van Dyke Ave & Highway in Sterling Heights in Metro Detroit. This is in the northern burbs which are your more populated areas and sections that are doing much better than the City of Detroit to the South. There is a major shipping company at this interchange and also a lot of neighborhoods. This is a bit interchange. It is a bit of a unique design because it also incorporates on/off ramps for the Van Dyke Highway as well. The roundabout is a bit larger since this is actually a 3-lane roundabout. 

Overview: https://www.google.com/maps/preview#...3.1!17b1&fid=7

----------


## venture

> I still submit that bicycle infrastructure should really dominate Lindsey street. Just looking at traffic counts, there is a ton of traffic coming to and from the university.  The kind of traffic that can be easily converted to bycicle trips if the right infrastructure is built. 
> 
> Where the pedestrian/cycle crossings are on Lindsey, I suggest a cycle roundabout be considered to help keep traffic moving but enhance N/S cycle flow as well.


That is pretty interesting. I think the level you are thinking, as well as some of us also posting here, is a long term vision of what Lindsey should be. We are paying millions right now to get this done, but what point is there to tear it all up now just to do it over again in 5-10 years when those against a more multimodal solution are completely out of power. We have the chance to do it right and create a corridor to where we could see a lot of high density and high value development take place. Making it pedestrian and bicycle friendly is only going to make things better when it comes to tapping into the campus population.

----------


## Just the facts

> Can buses fit in that? I didn't watch the entire video. . . just the first 2 minutes. Now, I can see that working daily, but please explain to me who has the right of way and how on earth would that move heavy traffic that comes during rush hour and game nights???? It seems that would be nightmare and even worse if it was narrowed to one lane each way.
> 
> BTW, thats your account, I subscribed to ya, just so you know. Liked your videos on the Black and Red lines for OKC rail. That would be awesome to see that.


At the 1:00 mark a pretty good sized truck goes through the roundabout, but to answer your question directly, this is a primary bus route from downtown Jax to the southern suburbs and dozens of buses go through that roundabout (and the other one down the street) many times per day.  I am in this area a lot (my dog's favorite place to go for a walk) so I can get a video of a bus going through it.

Traffic in the roundabout has the right of way.  As you approach the roundabout you look to your left.  If there is a car in the roundabout they have the right-of-way.  If no car is there you just keep going (slowing down to make the curve).  You can see in the video that this is a challenge for some drivers (who stop in the roundabout or come to complete stop approaching the roundabout when no car is in it) - but they will learn (and besides - it is usually old people and they won't be driving much longer anyhow).

----------


## catch22

Was in Norman yesterday. I think Lindsey will be a great corridor with the roundabouts. 

Also drove Main Street. Main Street is just asking to be a streetcar corridor double tracked flank on the west, with a couplet downtown.

----------


## Just the facts

> Was in Norman yesterday. I think Lindsey will be a great corridor with the roundabouts. 
> 
> Also drove Main Street. Main Street is just asking to be a streetcar corridor double tracked flank on the west, with a couplet downtown.


Main and Gray should be returned to two-way streets.

----------


## kevinpate

I disagree JTF. The one way sections of Main and Gray are fine just like they are.

----------


## catch22

> I disagree JTF. The one way sections of Main and Gray are fine just like they are.


Yes they are fine how they are.

----------


## Just the facts

It's your town so you guys can decide.  Just Google 'two way streets vs. one way streets' before you write off the idea.

----------


## Geographer

I agree with JTF.  I HATE that main street is one way. It should be two way...I loathe one way streets.  Why do you think most major city downtowns have returned to two way streets?  :Smile:

----------


## venture

Story today in the Transcript on the safety impact that roundabouts have: Roundabout revolution could be safer for bikes  Headlines  The Norman Transcript

It takes readers to a familiar city for those of us on this thread - Carmel, IN. Similar in population to Norman, they have the most roundabouts compared to any city in the country.

Main points:

Injury accident rate down 80%Overall accident rate down 40%Difference in cost to build roundabouts recouped in savings of not needing traffic lights with related electricity and maintenance costs.Much safer for cyclists.

----------


## venture

> I agree with JTF.  I HATE that main street is one way. It should be two way...I loathe one way streets.  Why do you think most major city downtowns have returned to two way streets?


Yeah many are dumping one ways, but for Main/Gray I don't know if we reached the point yet to have to revert to 2-way. After we get done with Lindsey, and people are more familiar with the roundabout solution, I think we could see how to implement it for the Main/Gray loop - and actually create a flowing loop.

Main/Porter would be the first intersection to get a roundabout. There the city would be looking at right of way acquisition requirements, which would be a good thing. That area needs some revitalization and clearing out of the older structures. The food mart/gas station next to the fire station would go and perhaps the gyros and window tinting businesses on the SE corner. You could then take Main Street down to 2 lanes after Crawford and introduce the buffer areas for people backing out of the parking spaces.

Then on Gray and Porter another roundabout which would require the relocation of the muffler shop at least. Now with Gray I've never seen traffic get extremely bad. So there we could go down to 2 lanes with buffer zones or bike lanes for the whole stretch. 

Gray and University has much more room to play with thanks to parking lots making up most of that corner. So another roundabout there would be the next major piece to complete the continuous flowing loop for downtown.

Main and University...the most difficult one. The north side of main isn't going to be touchable by this solution. No one is going to allow tearing down some of the larger structures that make up downtown. So we have to look south again. The building with the bookstore, stamp shop, and cake store and then the Metro Glass location across the street would be targets. Clearing these out and finishing off with a roundabout would complete the circle. 

Now of course there would be individual traffic lights are other intersections in the loop, but we just simply run out of room to remove them. Removing the big choke points along Porter though should be the target and would really help with traffic flow.

----------


## Just the facts

Think about this:  Downtown Norman went from prairie to center of commerce with two way streets, then they were converted to one way and zero growth for 2 generations while the rest of Norman grew like a weed.  Maybe Norman got it right the first time.  "Urban sprawl" doesn't get much right from a mobility standpoint but I'll give it this, they don't build any one-way streets.

----------


## kevinpate

venture79, wouldn't a roundabout at both Main/Porter and Gray/Porter be a really tight fit?

----------


## venture

> venture79, wouldn't a roundabout at both Main/Porter and Gray/Porter be a really tight fit?


Indeed, which is why I said right-of-way purchasing would definitely complicate things. I was more or less just throwing out an idea to find a way to make that area move a bit better. Single-lane roundabouts you normally need like 120-150' of clearance...2 lane roundabouts you need 180-200' depending on how to set it up.

----------


## BG918

I'd be happy with just a 2-way (one lane each direction) Main and Gray with a landscaped center median down Main from Flood to Porter.  Eufaula would make the most sense for dual bike lanes since Main/Gray would be hostile to bikes due to the angled parking.  The Eufaula bike lanes would connect to potentual future bike lanes on James Garner/Jenkins (extending south to connect to bike lanes on Lindsey and eventually down to the south research campus) and also on University tying into OU's bike paths on campus.

----------


## catch22

> Think about this:  Downtown Norman went from prairie to center of commerce with two way streets, then they were converted to one way and zero growth for 2 generations while the rest of Norman grew like a weed.  Maybe Norman got it right the first time.  "Urban sprawl" doesn't get much right from a mobility standpoint but I'll give it this, they don't build any one-way streets.


How is downtown Denver growing at such a phenomenal pace? It is pretty much all one way streets. 

They aren't the destroyer of downtowns. For OKC they sucked because of all of our deadend streets and super blocks. But small blocks and an effective grid they are hardly an evil thing.

----------


## Just the facts

> How is downtown Denver growing at such a phenomenal pace? It is pretty much all one way streets. 
> 
> They aren't the destroyer of downtowns. For OKC they sucked because of all of our deadend streets and super blocks. But small blocks and an effective grid they are hardly an evil thing.


Actually, Denver is in the process of converting their one way streets to two way streets.

Several are already done...

http://yourhub.denverpost.com/denver...fziVjUSN-story




> Public Works officials planned to convert sections of Cherokee and Delaware streets as soon as this week. The sections are on Cherokee between 13th Avenue and Speer Boulevard and on Delaware between 13th and 11th avenues.
> 
> In October, crews turned Larimer Street into a two-lane road between Broadway and Downing Street. Crews also have converted sections of California and Lawrence streets northeast of Broadway into two-lane roadways in the Curtis Park/Five Points area.
> 
> “In a sense, it was a trend to make these neighborhoods more liveable,” Robb said.


and more are planned...

Denver looks into converting 1-way streets to 2-way - Denver Business Journal




> Denver Public Works is studying the possibility of converting one-way streets into two-way streets in three areas in and around downtown.
> 
> The studies were launched in response to development at Denver Union Station, in the Uptown neighborhood and anticipated development along Welton Street in the central business district, said Crissy Fanganello, public works director of planning and sustainability.
> 
> ...
> 
> The three areas under discussion for converting to two-way traffic are:
> 
> • Welton Street between 15th and 17th streets, or one block on either side of the 16th Street Mall in the central business district.
> ...

----------


## Geographer

"Two-way streets appeal to businesses because traffic moves slower on two-way streets compared to one-way streets, making it easier for motorists to stop and patronize a business, Fanganello said."

"One-way streets help people funnel in and out of downtown during commuter rush hours. Two-way streets are more pedestrian friendly because traffic is moving more slowly, she said."

----------


## catch22

While I agree, my point was they do not destroy downtowns like Jtf was saying.

----------


## Just the facts

> While I agree, my point was they do not destroy downtowns like Jtf was saying.


There is plenty of documentation to support that they did harm cities.  I can dig it up if you want me to.  In fact, one of the stated goals of converting OKC streets to one way back in the day was to get cars (and the people in them) out of downtown as fast as possible.  It worked like a charm.  So much so that people no longer needed to walk on the sidewalk and they raced by retail stores at 45 mph.  ODOT still believes in this philosophy today.

----------


## catch22

> There is plenty of documentation to support that they did harm cities.  I can dig it up if you want me to.  In fact, one of the stated goals of converting OKC streets to one way back in the day was to get cars (and the people in them) out of downtown as fast as possible.  It worked like a charm.  So much so that people no longer needed to walk on the sidewalk and they raced by retail stores at 45 mph.  ODOT still believes in this philosophy today.


Downtown Denver, Downtown Chicago have been doing okay with their one way streets. I believe San Francisco has a lot of one way streets also. 

They might be a contributing factor in certain cities but they are not the sole reason. In some cities they don't even do much harm.

----------


## Just the facts

Throw 25,000 residents in downtown Norman and you're right - one way streets might not make a difference.

Ironically enough - San Francisco is also in the process of converting some one way streets to two way.

http://sf.streetsblog.org/2013/06/20...hermans-wharf/

On edit - it seems we have detoured from Lindsey St quite a bit so maybe we should have a new thread.

http://www.okctalk.com/norman/34867-...tml#post681630

----------


## venture

Another article today...

Norman residents invited to provide their opinions about West Lindsey Street project  Headlines  The Norman Transcript




> The university has proposed that Lindsey be widened to four lanes west of McGee Drive but use two lanes east of McGee Drive. The road would maintain the same width as the four-lane footprint, but with buffered bike lanes and an auxiliary lane replacing one lane of traffic. The auxiliary lane would allow CART bus stops and for vehicles to transition out of the flow of traffic as they turn into business driveways.





> Peters said the focus for roundabouts is on the eastern leg of the Lindsey project. He said a single-lane roundabout would not be as functional at McGee Drive as at other locations. In particular, a single-lane roundabout is recommended for the Berry Road intersection.


Then we also heard from the city contractor finally...




> Eddie Haas of Freese and Nichols, reporting for the city, showed that roundabouts could work at Berry Road and east of Berry along Lindsey.





> Haas showed that both plans — the city’s proposal for four lanes and the IQC proposal for roundabouts and two lanes east of McGee — could work and should increase safety. The roundabouts would result in much slower traffic and delays during peak-use hours.


Of course the choke point for the delays in the roundabout solution will be the traffic lights at McGee and 24th SW. Slower traffic is a given since roundabouts command about 15-20 mph to go through them so the overall speed limit on Lindsey, east of McGree, would drop from the current 30 mph to 25 mph. 




> City staff reported a concern about delayed emergency response times if roundabouts are used, and the city council is taking that concern and others under advisement.


I'm not really sure how this is even accurate. Traffic will keep moving. There will be auxiliary lanes on the side of the road so traffic will be able to easily get out of the way - more so than it does now.

----------


## BoulderSooner

roundabouts on 2 lane roads have a max traffic threshold ... after which they become clogged

----------


## Geographer

LOL at the slower response times...that's totally not accurate at all.  It's just a bunch of baloney because it's something different than people are used it...that's all it is.

I also laughed at the part where it said roundabouts would cause MORE delays during rush hour.  TOTALLY FALSE.

----------


## Just the facts

> roundabouts on 2 lane roads have a max traffic threshold ... after which they become clogged


Yes - but it is a higher threshold than a 4 lane road with traffic lights.  Said another way - a 2 lane road with roundabouts can handle more traffic than a 4 lane road with stop lights.

----------


## Just the facts

> City staff reported a concern about delayed emergency response times if roundabouts are used, and the city council is taking that concern and others under advisement.


People have to stop making stuff up in their opposition because it is soooo easy to disprove.  How fast does a fire truck go through a red light?  Answer, slower than through a roundabout.

In the San Marco roundabout I posted earlier there is a fire station just down the street.  Fire trucks go through it every day.  On the north side is one of our major hospitals and ambulances also go through it everyday.  Finally, the improved safety of the street created by the roundabout reduces the number of times an emergency vehicle has to respond in the first place.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> People have to stop making stuff up in their opposition because it is soooo easy to disprove.  How fast does a fire truck go through a red light?  Answer, slower than through a roundabout.
> 
> In the San Marco roundabout I posted earlier there is a fire station just down the street.  Fire trucks go through it every day.  On the north side is one of our major hospitals and ambulances also go through it everyday.  Finally, the improved safety of the street created by the roundabout reduces the number of times an emergency vehicle has to respond in the first place.


empty red light intersection on a 4 lane road .. pretty easy for traffic to pull out of the way ...      full round about on a 2 lane road .. not much room to pull out of the way

----------


## Just the facts

Well, I don't know how we manage here in Jax then.  I guess our firefighters and drivers are just better or maybe we have magic roundabouts or something.

----------


## venture

> empty red light intersection on a 4 lane road .. pretty easy for traffic to pull out of the way ...      full round about on a 2 lane road .. not much room to pull out of the way


So an auxiliary lane, that traffic can move over into without worrying about running into any traffic, would hamper emergency response times and is worse than 4 lanes of bumper to bumper traffic? 

If you see an emergency vehicle coming up to A) don't enter the round about and B) if you are in the roundabout pull forward so the vehicle can get through. If that means going around one more time than so be it. 

I'm not really sure how this concept is so hard to understand. Unless people have other motivations for their comments.

----------


## ou48A

> LOL at the slower response times...that's totally not accurate at all.  It's just a bunch of baloney because it's something different than people are used it...that's all it is.
> 
> I also laughed at the part where it said roundabouts would cause MORE delays during rush hour.  TOTALLY FALSE.


There are many hours of  a 24 hour day when Lindsey would not have very much traffic. During these periods of times emergency response times would be delayed by being forced to slow down for roundabouts. So yes, it is accurate to say resopons times would be delayed... This small amount of time can make a very huge difference in an emergency.

There have been studies that have show that traffic calming devices slow response times.
We need to be careful that we don't out smart our self's, stop using even basic common sense and create something that is actually worse for our residents.
We need 4 lanes on Lindsey for safety reasons.


SIX MINUTES TO LIVE OR DIE

USA TODAY

----------


## Geographer

> There are many hours of  a 24 hour day when Lindsey would not have very much traffic. During these periods of times emergency response times would be delayed by being forced to slow down for roundabouts. So yes, it is accurate to say resopons times would be delayed... This small amount of time can make a very huge difference in an emergency.
> 
> There have been studies that have show that traffic calming devices slow response times.
> We need to be careful that we don't out smart our self's, stop using even basic common sense and create something that is actually worse for our residents.
> We need 4 lanes on Lindsey for safety reasons.
> 
> 
> SIX MINUTES TO LIVE OR DIE
> 
> USA TODAY


lolz

----------


## ou48A

> empty red light intersection on a 4 lane road .. pretty easy for traffic to pull out of the way ...      full round about on a 2 lane road .. not much room to pull out of the way


In addition  to it being “pretty easy for traffic to pull out of the way” traffic lights can be equipped with safety deceives that know when emergency vehicles are approaching. This helps clear traffic for emergency vehicles... 
 An emergency lane creates a huge blind spot for many drivers wanting to make a right turn. It’s a recipe for accidents.
 We need 4 lanes on Lindsey for safety.

----------


## ou48A

> lolz


How many lives are lost across USA because emergency services fail... 
some of this is due to delays caused by bad roads or do you not care about these people?

----------


## Just the facts

How many people are killed by accidents at right-angle intersection vs. how many die from emergency vehicles that pass through a roundabout where the roundabout is the difference between life or death?

Why can't some of you just accept that the world found a better way to do things and go with it?

----------


## venture

> How many lives are lost across USA because emergency services fail... 
> some of this is due to delays caused by bad roads or do you not care about these people?


So is Carmel, IN just having people drop over left and right? 

Again like JTF pointed out...people just making crap up to justify their position because they have nothing else to fall back on. The desperation is really pathetic.

----------


## venture

> In addition  to it being “pretty easy for traffic to pull out of the way” traffic lights can be equipped with safety deceives that know when emergency vehicles are approaching. This helps clear traffic for emergency vehicles... 
>  An emergency lane creates a huge blind spot for many drivers wanting to make a right turn. It’s a recipe for accidents.
>  We need 4 lanes on Lindsey for safety.


Emergency lane? What?

----------


## ou48A

> How many people are killed by accidents at right-angle intersection vs. how many die from emergency vehicles that pass through a roundabout where the roundabout is the difference between life or death?
> 
> Why can't some of you just accept that the world found a better way to do things and go with it?




2005 study conducted at the University of Texas concluded for every pedestrian killed by a speeding motorist, 37 people "may die as a result of delayed response times caused to police, fire and ambulance services" caused by speed humps.)
City fails to understand tenets of 'sustainabil... | The Kingston Whig-Standard

Some people are so dead set on what they think should be that they would never even consider something that  is only basic common sense to most. But in this case the common sense is confirmed by a very respected major university study.. 
Roundabout are going slow emergency  response times in much the same way and could cost lives. 
We need 4 lanes on Lindsey with out roundabouts for community safety

----------


## ou48A

True environmentalist can't like traffic calming

Master's Professional Reports Abstract

Traffic Calming Programs & Emergency Response: A Competition of Two Public Goods
Leslie W. Bunte, Jr.
REPORT 2000 B8858 Public Affairs Library

A natural dilemma for public policy makers occurred when two public policies conflicted with each other causing immense political and *emotional stress* upon both the policy maker and the public.

 This research paper examined the disagreement that had occurred in communities throughout the United States where traffic-calming programs were found to be in direct conflict with providing prompt emergency services. 

Thus, a conflict of two public goods was created. *This professional report examined the history and the positive and negative aspects of traffic calming programs*. *Negative impacts upon emergency services were substantiated by various emergency response time tests* conducted by leading U.S. Fire Departments. Information was also obtained on injuries that have occurred to firefighters from traffic calming devices as well as documented mechanical damages to emergency vehicles. Traffic calming programs were found to contribute to air pollution as verified by several previous environmental studies conducted specifically for traffic calming devices. This report also revealed the enormous potential for civil liabilities for local governments, particularly with the violation of the American with Disabilities Act. In general, most U.S. local governments placed their traffic calming programs in moratorium due to all of the conflicts that were generated. 

A policy analysis was conducted specifically for the conflict that had arisen in Austin, Texas. Based on quantitative processes, this analysis showed that Austin would lose an additional 37 lives per year with patients of sudden cardiac arrest if the Fire and EMS Departments experienced a 30 second delay in response times due to traffic calming. The analyses also concluded that at best, only one pedestrian life could be saved each year from traffic calming as pedestrian fatalities rarely occurred within residential neighborhoods. A risk/benefit analyses also demonstrated that *traffic-calming devices have more of a negative impact than a positive impact* to the community. To reduce the conflict, and ensure at least a balance of these two public goods, a set of recommendations was formulated for the City of Austin policy makers and for those of other communities who had similar circumstances.

----------


## venture

> 2005 study conducted at the University of Texas concluded for every pedestrian killed by a speeding motorist, 37 people "may die as a result of delayed response times caused to police, fire and ambulance services" caused by speed humps.)
> City fails to understand tenets of 'sustainabil... | The Kingston Whig-Standard
> 
> Some people are so dead set on what they think should be that they would never even consider something that  is only basic common sense to most. But in this case the common sense is confirmed by a very respected major university study.. 
> Roundabout are going slow emergency  response times in much the same way and could cost lives. 
> We need 4 lanes on Lindsey with out roundabouts for community safety


Speed over speed humps is going to be well under the 20 mph average speed through roundabouts, so why are you even trying to connect to two?

This is getting pretty comical. Nothing for months and now all of a sudden we are hearing "4 lanes on Lindsey without roundabouts for safety" when the concern hasn't been raised before. This children is what you call grasping at straws when you are running out of objections. Next we'll hear about how the Summer solstice and solar flares make them horrible.

----------


## Buffalo Bill

Nice, OU48A in all his burnt orange glory.

----------


## ou48A

> Speed over speed humps is going to be well under the 20 mph average speed through roundabouts, so why are you even trying to connect to two?
> 
> This is getting pretty comical. Nothing for months and now all of a sudden we are hearing "4 lanes on Lindsey without roundabouts for safety" when the concern hasn't been raised before. This children is what you call grasping at straws when you are running out of objections. Next we'll hear about how the Summer solstice and solar flares make them horrible.


Your argument, as so typical, lacks even basic common sense.
Roundabouts and one lane in each direction will slow emergency response times. This is particularly true during non peak hours.

Eddie Haas of Freese and Nichols “The roundabouts would result in much slower traffic and delays during peak-use hours.”
“City staff reported a concern about delayed emergency response times if roundabouts are used”

Norman Fire Chief James Fulfilling said “What works in Camel, Ind., may result in slower response times in Norman”
Then we have the university of Texas study.

Pardon me but before I believe anything that you say or post about traffic issues I am going to believe what these^ folks have to say along with my own common scene that tells me that smarter and more informed  folks than you have studied and understand far better about what needs to be done with Lindsey street as far as it being 4 lanes and no roundabouts. 

I do believe we can have a medium with trees and vegetation and some other nice stuff along the way.

----------


## ou48A

> Nice, OU48A in all his burnt orange glory.


As I have matured and learned more I actually have a great respect for the university of Texas and many of their older attending fans.
But that doesn’t mean that I like 100% of their fans or that ugly burnt orange.
I hope they keep Mack Brown around forever.

----------


## Just the facts

> 2005 study conducted at the University of Texas concluded for every pedestrian killed by a speeding motorist, 37 people "may die as a result of delayed response times caused to police, fire and ambulance services" caused by speed humps.)
> City fails to understand tenets of 'sustainabil... | The Kingston Whig-Standard
> 
> Some people are so dead set on what they think should be that they would never even consider something that  is only basic common sense to most. But in this case the common sense is confirmed by a very respected major university study.. 
> Roundabout are going slow emergency  response times in much the same way and could cost lives. 
> We need 4 lanes on Lindsey with out roundabouts for community safety


You fell for one the classic misdirection's in all of the 'study' industry - saying one thing but providing data for something else.  These two bolded words are key to the understanding that whole study.




> 2005 study conducted at the University of Texas concluded for every *pedestrian* killed by a speeding motorist, 37 people "*may* die as a result of delayed response times caused to police, fire and ambulance services" caused by speed humps.)


The vast majority of people killed at intersections are NOT pedestrians - they are people in cars.  And don't get me started on "may".

The second part is the total abandonment of "does this even pass the smell test".




> (Suffice to say, however, that studies have shown ambulances face delays of 2.3 to 9.7 seconds, and fire trucks delays of up to 15 seconds, depending on how many speed humps they need to cross over; and a 2005 study conducted at the University of Texas concluded for every pedestrian killed by a speeding motorist, 37 people "may die as a result of delayed response times caused to police, fire and ambulance services" caused by speed humps.)


Really?  37 more people are going to dies because of a 2.3 second to 9.7 second delay.  Here is the deal, if you are within 2.3 seconds of death before the ambulance arrives, you probably aren't going to make it anyhow.

----------


## ou48A

> You fell for one the classic misdirection's in all of the 'study' industry - saying one thing but providing data for something else.  These two bolded words are key to the understanding that whole study.
> 
> 
> 
> The vast majority of people killed at intersections are NOT pedestrians - they are people in cars.  And don't get me started on "may".


Master's Professional Reports Abstract

----------


## Just the facts

> Master's Professional Reports Abstract


I'll tell you what.  Show me in the Lindsey Street plan where speed bumps are included and I'll read every word of your speed bump study.  And once again, your study is only talking about saving the lives of pedestrians, we are talking about saving the lives (and injuries) of drivers and bicyclist as well.

This whole discussion has become a cartoon.

----------


## venture

> Your argument, as so typical, lacks even basic common sense.
> Roundabouts and one lane in each direction will slow emergency response times. This is particularly true during non peak hours.
> 
> Eddie Haas of Freese and Nichols “The roundabouts would result in much slower traffic and delays during peak-use hours.”
> “City staff reported a concern about delayed emergency response times if roundabouts are used”
> 
> Norman Fire Chief James Fulfilling said “What works in Camel, Ind., may result in slower response times in Norman”
> Then we have the university of Texas study.
> 
> ...


LOL. You seem to be CONVENIENTLY ignoring the fact that there will be an auxiliary lane on both sides of the road, where it is down to 1 lane each way of traffic, that traffic can easily move over out of the way into. To me, that comes across as a better solution than trying to shove 2 busy lanes (each way) to the right and try to navigate through. 

Of course roundabouts would result in slower traffic. That's the point. What are you expecting Lindsey to go to 40 mph all the way down? LOL

No...you would see a 2-lane Lindsey to McGree probably at the 30-35 mph that it is now and then a 25 mph Lindsey (down from 30) through campus. Roundabouts will maintain speeds around 20 mph on average and you remove any delays that traffic lights will cause so traffic essentially will never stop except during peak conditions. 

Let's not forget that Eddie Haas is also saying that a roundabout at Berry would work, you seemed to leave that off. 

The median with landscaping is pretty much a done deal at this point. Now it just comes down to deciding which intersections will be with lights and which will be with roundabouts. I'm sure those folks are more studied up than I on this issue. For Haas it is his job as contractor...which is why he IS NOT against roundabouts in the solution. Fulfilling is always going to have a concern if there are going to be traffic issues when it comes to response time. I wouldn't go out of my way to call him an expert though on traffic patterns and the ability to manage them.

----------


## venture

> I'll tell you what.  Show me in the Lindsey Street plan where speed bumps are included and I'll read every word of your speed bump study.  And once again, your study is only talking about saving the lives of pedestrians, we are talking about saving the lives (and injuries) of drivers and bicyclist as well.
> 
> This whole discussion has become a cartoon.


I agree Kerry. Classic misdirection from people that don't have a leg to stand on in the opposition anymore. They are at the point where they are opposing the project just to oppose it.

----------


## ou48A

> I'll tell you what.  Show me in the Lindsey Street plan where speed bumps are included and I'll read every word of your speed bump study.  And once again, your study is only talking about saving the lives of pedestrians, we are talking about saving the lives (and injuries) of drivers and bicyclist as well.
> 
> This whole discussion has become a cartoon.


It's a cartoon because there is to  little commonsense or listing to contrary opinions on your side. 
It's been pretty much its my way or the highway with your side

People with far more expertise than you or others here along with a major university study understand the impact of  what  slowing traffic does to slow emergency response times and  also how it can cost life.
Those opinions have far more credibility than yours or others posting here!

----------


## Just the facts

> It's been pretty much its my way or the highway with your side


That should be "It's been pretty much its my way or the sidewalk/bike lane/muse/passage way/rail/bus/rickshaw/skinny street/avenue/boulevard/parkway/highway with your side.  You see, this is the primary difference - my side wants equal consideration for all modes of transportation so that people can be free to choose how they want to live.  Your side wants the automobile to be the only viable mode of transportation which forces everyone over the age 18 to own a car if they want to participate fully in society.  We tried your way for 60 years - it isn't working.

----------


## CaptDave

> That should be "It's been pretty much its my way or the sidewalk/bike lane/muse/passage way/rail/bus/rickshaw/skinny street/avenue/boulevard/parkway/highway with your side.  You see, this is the primary difference - my side wants equal consideration for all modes of transportation so that people can be free to choose how they want to live.  Your side wants the automobile to be the only viable mode of transportation which forces everyone over the age 18 to own a car if they want to participate fully in society.  _We tried your way for 60 years - it isn't working._


You forgot the part about basing it on the traffic on 6 days a year too.... there is a definite generational divide in transportation and development policy. Some people really equate a car with freedom even though they are forced to sit in a metal box for a fairly large percentage of their waking hours. That is the old paradigm and the number of people that accept it as absolute are decreasing. Freedom is choice - doesn't sound like freedom if there is no viable alternative. Hopefully the lunacy of basing nearly every aspect of our society on a machine is over and we will be more thoughtful in the future.

----------


## ou48A

> That should be "It's been pretty much its my way or the sidewalk/bike lane/muse/passage way/rail/bus/rickshaw/skinny street/avenue/boulevard/parkway/highway with your side.  You see, this is the primary difference - my side wants equal consideration for all modes of transportation so that people can be free to choose how they want to live.  Your side wants the automobile to be the only viable mode of transportation which forces everyone over the age 18 to own a car if they want to participate fully in society.  We tried your way for 60 years - it isn't working.


You forget or refuse to recognize that the vast majority of people still preferred  the freedom of the automobile and that this fact isn't going to significantly change no matter what happens. This is particularly true in places like Norman.

As far as it not working, That's pure crazy! The JUST THE FACTS are that  in the past 60 years the USA has enjoyed the very highest standards of living in the history of the world.. This is in large part due to the automobile that has made people more productive and prosperous. Your thoughts that its isn't working just flat out fly in the face of actual real world facts.

We can be smarter in some areas but except for where there are areas of congestion there are no financially sound reasons to fundamentally change our basic transportation system and usage of the automobile. 
Roundabouts and one lane in each direct on Lindsey isn't being smarter for the people.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

While I've never been, it is to my knowledge that NYC has a ton of one way streets. They are not converting and NYC is a very big and nice city. Please explain that!

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Here is piece from News9. Not very good, but I'll post it anyways.

''NORMAN, Oklahoma - Rumors are swirling over planned improvements for one of Norman's busiest roadways.
The plan is to accommodate Lindsey Street's traffic but now some people are worried about talk of roundabouts and even shrinking the road.

The intersection at Lindsey and Berry is one of the proposed changes in the project; putting in a roundabout down there to slow traffic down as drivers transition from the commercial into the residential areas here in Norman. The mayor here says that there's a lot of misunderstanding about the project.

Anyone with any questions or concerns over the Lindsey St. improvements can head to a public meeting this coming Tuesday night over at the Norman City Hall.''

Rumors Swirl About Changes To Busy Norman Thoroughfare - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

----------


## Jersey Boss

> Here is piece from News9. Not very good, but I'll post it anyways.
> 
> ''NORMAN, Oklahoma - Rumors are swirling over planned improvements for one of Norman's busiest roadways.
> The plan is to accommodate Lindsey Street's traffic but now some people are worried about talk of roundabouts and even shrinking the road.
> 
> The intersection at Lindsey and Berry is one of the proposed changes in the project; *putting in a roundabout down there to slow traffic down* as drivers transition from the commercial into the residential areas here in Norman. The mayor here says that there's a lot of misunderstanding about the project.
> 
> Anyone with any questions or concerns over the Lindsey St. improvements can head to a public meeting this coming Tuesday night over at the Norman City Hall.''
> 
> Rumors Swirl About Changes To Busy Norman Thoroughfare - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |


Must be putting in his own two cents. Seems as if the roundabouts are being discussed as a more efficient way of moving traffic at speed, rather than stop and lurch from a traffic light.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> You forget or refuse to recognize that the vast majority of people still preferred  the freedom of the automobile and that this fact isn't going to significantly change no matter what happens. This is particularly true in places like Norman.
> 
> As far as it not working, That's pure crazy! The JUST THE FACTS are that  in the past 60 years* the USA has enjoyed the very highest standards of living in the history of the world..* This is in large part due to the automobile that has made people more productive and prosperous. Your thoughts that its isn't working just flat out fly in the face of actual real world facts.
> 
> We can be smarter in some areas but except for where there are areas of congestion there are no financially sound reasons to fundamentally change our basic transportation system and usage of the automobile. 
> Roundabouts and one lane in each direct on Lindsey isn't being smarter for the people.


Norway has the highest standard of living followed by Australia then the USA. Just sayin'

----------


## soonerguru

> It's a cartoon because there is to  little commonsense or listing to contrary opinions on your side. 
> It's been pretty much its my way or the highway with your side
> 
> People with far more expertise than you or others here along with a major university study understand the impact of  what  slowing traffic does to slow emergency response times and  also how it can cost life.
> Those opinions have far more credibility than yours or others posting here!


My sense is that you just like to argue, even when you're losing embarrassingly. Some people call this sophistry. You and Prunepicker should hang out.

----------


## Just the facts

> While I've never been, it is to my knowledge that NYC has a ton of one way streets. They are not converting and NYC is a very big and nice city. Please explain that!


NYC was populated 150 years before the car existed and a large percentage of Manhattan residents have never owned a car.  For most of NYC's history the automobile has never been the dominant form of transportation so one way streets never really mattered - however...

NYC is the midst of a pedestrian revolution (not to mention the all-powerful bike lobby).

Project for Public Spaces | Broadway Boulevard: Transforming Manhattan?s Most Famous Street

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Norway has the highest standard of living followed by Australia then the USA. Just sayin'


I believe Canada very recently exceeded the US living Standards. Also, I didn't know Australia was above the US, how is that? I didn't know Australia was that nice. It is one of the few places outside of the US I would willingly live though.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> NYC was populated 150 years before the car existed and a large percentage of Manhattan residents have never owned a car.  For most of NYC's history the automobile has never been the dominant form of transportation so one way streets never really mattered - however...
> 
> NYC is the midst of a pedestrian revolution (not to mention the all-powerful bike lobby).
> 
> Project for Public Spaces | Broadway Boulevard: Transforming Manhattan?s Most Famous Street


I think NYC has always been very pedestrian friendly and every picture, live feed, or video I see, the streets are jam packed with cars(you know, I typed the cars are jam packed with streets and almost posted that lol ;P)

----------


## Jersey Boss

> I believe Canada very recently exceeded the US living Standards. Also, I didn't know Australia was above the US, how is that? I didn't know Australia was that nice. It is one of the few places outside of the US I would willingly live though.


I used the 2010 Human Development Index. Info and particulars here:List of countries by Human Development Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

----------


## ou48A

> Norway has the highest standard of living followed by Australia then the USA. Just sayin'


I was unaware that their standards of living had moved ahead of ours but what I said is still basic true for the great bulk of those 60 years. But gee, maybe our leadership is bunk and wrong.

----------


## ou48A

> My sense is that you just like to argue, even when you're losing embarrassingly. Some people call this sophistry. You and Prunepicker should hang out.


You are very sadly mistaken if you honestly think I'm losing anything. There are opinions that have far more knowable than anyone posting here and a major university study that backs my side of the discussion....Clearly the facts are that delaying emergency services cost lives. But I suppose you would rather build something that cost more live than it saves and that what the other side wants. Virtually  every advanced major national society that has prosperity uses the automobile as its dominant transportation... It would be VERY foolish to believe that it won't remain true..

I can VERY safely assure you that several City of Norman officials also share many of my same traffic concerns!

----------


## venture

> Here is piece from News9. Not very good, but I'll post it anyways.
> 
> ''NORMAN, Oklahoma - Rumors are swirling over planned improvements for one of Norman's busiest roadways.
> The plan is to accommodate Lindsey Street's traffic but now some people are worried about talk of roundabouts and even shrinking the road.
> 
> The intersection at Lindsey and Berry is one of the proposed changes in the project; putting in a roundabout down there to slow traffic down as drivers transition from the commercial into the residential areas here in Norman. The mayor here says that there's a lot of misunderstanding about the project.
> 
> Anyone with any questions or concerns over the Lindsey St. improvements can head to a public meeting this coming Tuesday night over at the Norman City Hall.''
> 
> Rumors Swirl About Changes To Busy Norman Thoroughfare - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |


Not seeing anything new and was probably tipped off by someone who is trying to stop all the roundabout discussion. It also seems people don't realize the speed Lindsey is at today. You have 35 mph until 24th, then it drops to 30 mph until Berry, and then it is 25 mph until you get through campus. A roundabout at Berry will have traffic speeds drop to around 20 mph through the roundabout, but never zero that you would have with a traffic light. Let's also remember that Lindsey is 2 lane east of there and Berry is 2 lane in both directions. During the peak time of day you are going to get cars backing up a good distance waiting on the lights to change. This is a situation where a roundabout would keep that from happening and keep traffic moving. However, it also has to be coupled with additional traffic flow assistance down stream (roundabouts east down Lindsey and better planning to the west). Without that you are going to just create another choke point at the next light.




> You are very sadly mistaken if you honestly think I'm losing anything. *There are opinions that have far more knowable than anyone posting here and a major university study that backs my side of the discussion....Clearly the facts are that delaying emergency services cost lives*. But I suppose you would rather build something that cost more live than it saves and that what the other side wants. Virtually  every advanced major national society that has prosperity uses the automobile as its dominant transportation... It would be VERY foolish to believe that it won't remain true..
> 
> I can VERY safely assure you that several City of Norman officials also share many of my same traffic concerns!


So far it is pretty clear who is against this and it isn't very many people. The key one is the city engineer's office, but they can easily be fired and replaced if they continue to do what the elected representatives want. Remember it comes down to council and at last count most are in favor of at least some roundabouts on Lindsey.

Now I want to touch on an evolution we've seen based on the bolded text above. So now the major issue is delaying emergency vehicles?

We've gone from OU football traffic on July 27th... 


> "The home OU football games are absolutely vital for donations to OU academics and athletics and because of this Football traffic on Lindsey absolutely out weighs whatever happens doing the rest of year, this is without doubt."


Now to emergency response, when the first time it has even been mentioned as an issue is after the recent article in the Transcript.

Why was this not a concern voiced before now? It almost seems like the argument was lost on the previous point(s) and a "sexier" one has arrived and it is time to latch on to that. 

Perhaps we should evaluate watch the roundabout on East Main street...a QUARTER MILE from the a fire station has impacted them. Did they voice a ton of concern about it then? The nearest fire station to this area is Station #2 that is more than likely going to go down Boyd to avoid all traffic on Lindsey.

----------


## ou48A

> Now to emergency response, when *the first time it has even been mentioned as an issue is after the recent article in the Transcript.*


That's just simply not true>

The issue of congestion causing safety concerns has been brought up before in city council meetings several times going back several years... OU football traffic congestion and it's problems has also been discussed several times in city council meetings going back several years that I know of.
I have also had personal conversations with City of Norman officials who were very much in agreement with me about these same safety and congestion issues and OU football traffic.

----------


## ou48A

There is an ethical question of doing something that represents very much of a change from what the voters voted for. 
Its an issue sure to cause consternation among those who really do care about keeping the trust of the public, and there are a few.

----------


## Just the facts

Just curious, before the vote did the City of Norman specifically say how they were going to redo Lindsey St or was there anything in the ballot language addressing the design?

----------


## Just the facts

> There is an ethical question of doing something that represents very much of a change from what the voters voted for. 
> Its an issue sure to cause consternation among those who really do care about keeping the trust of the public, and there are a few.


If they announced before the vote that Lindsey would include roundabouts would you have voted No?

----------


## ou48A

> Just curious, before the vote did the City of Norman specifically say how they were going to redo Lindsey St or was there anything in the ballot language addressing the design?


Without any question Norman voters thought they were voting for a 4 lane street and probably very similar to what has been built in Norman in other locations in recent years....such as NW 36th....  That's what was sold to the public.

There was no mentioning of roundabouts that I recall and had there been the issue would have been soundly defeated and the people who now so loudly support roundabouts know it. That's why this looks like the old bate and switch which anyone with an ounce of ethical standards should take great  issue with.

----------


## ou48A

> If they announced before the vote that Lindsey would include roundabouts would you have voted No?


At the time, I'm  not sure... but I do know that in this specific instance and based on the opinions of professional's, hell no I wouldn’t vote for roundabouts on Lindsey Street now! 

But there are other streets in Norman where they do make far more sense.

----------


## Just the facts

Just for fun... Gotta love the internet.

http://www.okctalk.com/norman/31544-...age-today.html

http://www.okctalk.com/norman/27534-...forward-9.html

----------


## venture

> That's just simply not true>
> 
> The issue of congestion causing safety concerns has been brought up before in city council meetings several times going back several years... OU football traffic congestion and it's problems has also been discussed several times in city council meetings going back several years that I know of.
> I have also had personal conversations with City of Norman officials who were very much in agreement with me about these same safety and congestion issues and OU football traffic.


You miss what I'm saying. Why haven't YOU brought it up as your main point of opposition until it started to appear in the transcript? I know it has been discussed at length within the city. That is why Lindsey is currently avoided.

----------


## venture

Another story from the Transcript a couple days ago that I don't think got linked: Roundabouts could delay fire response times, report says  Previously reported  The Norman Transcript

So Chief Fullingim has two main issues - clearance room for the ladder trucks and navigating traffic. He is also against the median because it means they can't swerve around traffic in opposing lanes if needed. Then you go to model city Carmel, IN...




> So how does a city with 78 roundabouts navigate them? Mayor James Brainard said roundabouts have not been an issue for Carmel, Ind.
> 
> “*Our firefighters have been huge proponents for the roundabouts because they are not pulling people out of injury accidents*,” Brainard said.
> 
> When the idea for roundabouts in Carmel first came up, *firefighters voiced strong concerns*, Brainard said. They built a makeshift roundabout out of orange cones and drove the apparatus around it.
> 
> Brainard said roundabouts have never been an issue, and *the city’s ISO has improved since roundabouts were installed*. The inside curb of the roundabout must be a rolled curb, and there must be six feet of concrete or bricks for the trucks to roll over. *The roundabout on Main Street in Norman was constructed to this specification and local firefighters have experience navigating it*. That experience has not deterred the city’s concerns.


So they had similar resistance at the beginning but then later found it was better overall for them. 

The next part, which I think is the more concerning one instead of the roundabouts is the yielding traffic crossing the bike lanes. From the sounds of this it'll be median > car lane > bike lane > auxiliary lane > parking > grass > sidewalk > grass. That definitely raises issues then as some cars won't pay attention and just swerve over. 




> “The two-lane divided roadway concept will likely produce a situation that increases response times to this section of Lindsey Street as well any other location that requires utilizing this roadway,” Fullingim reported. “*From an emergency responder standpoint, the four-lane concept will provide an opportunity to improve response times and open a reliable emergency response route through the corridor*.”


So if we want to compromise what we are looking at then is acquiring more right-of-way and 4-lane all of this segment with the features of roundabouts, bike lanes, and sidewalks. However, the end goal really needs to be to shift traffic to Highway 9 or perhaps Main Street that already has the excess capacity and build in a new gateway from the north into Campus.

----------


## Just the facts

The book Suburban Nation does a good job of documenting local 'fire chief' opposition to any attempt to make streets more walkable.  Very little has to do with actual safety but more to do with union rules.

I wonder how fire trucks get to places in the rest of the world.

----------


## ou48A

Roundabouts could lead to delayed fire response times, according to a report issued this week by Norman city staff.

Lindsey Street between I-35 and Berry Road is currently unreliable as an emergency response route at most times due to congestion, Fullingim said in the report. I believe we have an opportunity to change this, and it would be in the best interest of public safety for this section of Lindsey Street to be a principal arterial road that would function as an effective emergency response route.


*This ^ totally ends the debate in a firm no to roundabouts on Lindsey street in Norman*.
Only the crazzys would want a street that creates more problems than it sovles and roundabouts on Lindsey Street do that.

----------


## Geographer

> Roundabouts could lead to delayed fire response times, according to a report issued this week by Norman city staff.
> 
> Lindsey Street between I-35 and Berry Road is currently unreliable as an emergency response route at most times due to congestion, Fullingim said in the report. I believe we have an opportunity to change this, and it would be in the best interest of public safety for this section of Lindsey Street to be a principal arterial road that would function as an effective emergency response route.
> 
> 
> *This ^ totally ends the debate in a firm no to roundabouts on Lindsey street in Norman*.
> Only the crazzys would want a street that creates more problems than it sovles and roundabouts on Lindsey Street do that.



People are trying to connect apples and oranges here.

Facts:
-Roundabouts decrease injury crashes.
-Roundabouts and medians don't necessarily cause "slower" response times.  (See Carmel, IN)...I suspect they're just saying this because they aren't familiar with it. It happens
-Yes, Lindsey is currently unreliable BUT ITS BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND THIS CAUSES BACK UPS.
-The newly proposed design solves all of those problems.
-If we go with the original design, the street will still not be as safe as it could be with roundabouts.  That's just the facts.  Like you have said, it's a public safety issue.  If you want to decrease overall crashes (and especially injury crashes) then put in roundabouts.  Simple.

Also, you will NOT convince me that the current fire response time on Lindsey is better than what the roundabout time would be.  I don't see why they're arguing that a roundabout would cause slower response times when, I am sure, it's already RIDICULOUSLY slow on Lindsey.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> You are dead wrong and guess what, we have thousands of miles of road in this world to make our point.  If you've just not seen it, that's okay. But apparently most of us have. 
> 
> I've responded to hundreds of MVA/medical calls using two lane roads. They work just fine.


he is or the norman city staff is?

----------


## Geographer

> he is or the norman city staff is?


Both.

The good news? At least 3-4 city councilmen have their heads in the right place.

----------


## ou48A

> Just curious, before the vote did the City of Norman specifically say how they were going to redo Lindsey St or was there anything in the ballot language addressing the design?






Lindsey Street Widening Final Render - YouTube


I'm pretty sure that this youtube shows what most folks thought they were voting on.
There are no roundabouts in this video

----------


## ou48A

> You are dead wrong and guess what, we have thousands of miles of road in this world to make our point.  If you've just not seen it, that's okay. But apparently most of us have. 
> 
> I've responded to hundreds of MVA/medical calls using two lane roads. They work just fine.


No,,, expert fire officials from Norman say you are wrong and that roundabout are not a solution for Lindsey Street. *They would know more about there needs than you!*

----------


## Geographer

> No,,, expert fire officials from Norman say you are wrong and that roundabout are not a solution for Lindsey Street. *They would know more about there needs than you!*



I literally could not stop laughing and quite reading this comment after you said *expert fire officials*. Now that's funny.

----------


## ou48A

> People are trying to connect apples and oranges here.
> 
> Facts:
> -Roundabouts decrease injury crashes.
> -Roundabouts and medians don't necessarily cause "slower" response times.  (See Carmel, IN)...I suspect they're just saying this because they aren't familiar with it. It happens
> -Yes, Lindsey is currently unreliable BUT ITS BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND THIS CAUSES BACK UPS.
> -The newly proposed design solves all of those problems.
> -If we go with the original design, the street will still not be as safe as it could be with roundabouts.  That's just the facts.  Like you have said, it's a public safety issue.  If you want to decrease overall crashes (and especially injury crashes) then put in roundabouts.  Simple.
> 
> Also, you will NOT convince me that the current fire response time on Lindsey is better than what the roundabout time would be.  I don't see why they're arguing that a roundabout would cause slower response times


Actually the city of Norman fire people disagrees with you too. 
There is know-way that you or anyone else posting here knows their needs better than they do!

----------


## Geographer

> Actually the city of Norman fire people disagrees with you too. 
> There is know-way that you or anyone else posting here knows their needs better than they do!


So basically, you're just blindly trusting people who follow old, outdated code books? Okay cool bro.

I guess it's okay to just blindly follow people without being informed about anything yourself.

----------


## ou48A

> I literally could not stop laughing and quite reading this comment after you said *expert fire officials*. Now that's funny.


But never the less its still very true. They know their needs best.
I could be wrong but I doubt that the city council throws them and what they think under the bus.

----------


## ou48A

> So basically, you're just blindly* trusting people who follow old, outdated code books*? Okay cool bro.
> 
> I guess it's okay to just blindly follow people without being informed about anything yourself.


Its more than the city of Norman officials that know that roundabouts and 1 lane in each direct are not the solution in all cases. 
Now, to not know that, is what is blind.


PS:Oh, and please tell us more about your accusation of the Norman fire department following outdated code books?

----------


## Geographer

> But never the less its still very true. They know their needs best.
> I could be wrong but I doubt that the city council throws them and what they think under the bus.


Do you not trust the *expert street designers* (Burden's team) that came in and designed a street that's similar to the work that they're been doing their whole lives?

----------


## venture

> Actually the city of Norman fire people disagrees with you too. 
> There is know-way that you or anyone else posting here knows their needs better than they do!


You still haven't answered my question. Why are you just now trumpeting the safety concerns if they are so major? Why wait until the last minute before it appears council is ready to approve the roundabout design to start launching mass protests? You've gone from saying OU football traffic is the major concern and now this. 

You've also COMPLETELY discounted the rest of the story for only 2 lines. How do you respond to the Carmel, IN situation where their fire chief was against roundabouts but now supports them since heir response times are better and there are fewer accidents.

----------


## venture

> But never the less its still very true. They know their needs best.
> I could be wrong but I doubt that the city council throws them and what they think under the bus.


If they had their way, every road would be 4 lanes so their trucks could fit down, but that is just not feasible. Though I'm sure you would be the first to volunteer your street to be widened. Correct?

----------


## venture

> Its more than the city of Norman officials that know that roundabouts and 1 lane in each direct are not the solution in all cases. 
> Now, to not know that, is what is blind.
> 
> 
> PS:Oh, and please tell us more about your accusation of the Norman fire department following outdated code books?


City of Norman officials have experience building...one...roundabout. I'm not really sure they have the knowledge and experience to make the call. That is why outside experts...experts were brought in to assist. It is also why the contractor on the project still supports a roundabout on at least the Berry/Lindsey intersection - as well as the various intersections from Berry to campus - or did you block that part out?

----------


## warreng88

I have been reading this thread for several days and the immaturity and sarcasm make me laugh. This whole conversation reminds me of when LowRyter was complaining about how unsafe the exit off the new I-40 to NB Penn was. Here is where the funny part of the conversation starts (post 1310) for anyone who wants to go back and laugh at it: http://www.okctalk.com/transportatio...pdates-53.html

----------


## ou48A

> Do you not trust the *expert street designers* (Burden's team) that came in and designed a street that's similar to the work that they're been doing their whole lives?


To a degree but I trust the people who would be dealing with the situation every day more and who have taken the time to study the issue from their point of veiw. Their recommendations trump the guy they brought in to talk and most everybody except the roundabouters understand this. 
Are you really willing to risk lives?

----------


## Geographer

> To a degree but I trust the people who would be dealing with the situation every day more and who have taken the time to study the issue from their point of veiw. Their recommendations trump the guy they brought in to talk and most everybody except the roundabouters understand this. 
> Are you really willing to risk lives?


LOL. I've had enough of this thread. You're seriously asking me if I am really willing to risk lives? C'mon man.  I've presented you with facts about how much safer roundabouts are how much they decrease injury crashes and crashes in general.  I don't know what else to say. I'm done.  :Big Grin:

----------


## ou48A

> You still haven't answered my question. Why are you just now trumpeting the safety concerns if they are so major? Why wait until the last minute before it appears council is ready to approve the roundabout design to start launching mass protests? You've gone from saying OU football traffic is the major concern and now this. 
> 
> You've also COMPLETELY discounted the rest of the story for only 2 lines. How do you respond to the Carmel, IN situation where their fire chief was against roundabouts but now supports them since heir response times are better and there are fewer accidents.


I have been talking about for a very long time and at times with city of Norman officials. 
I thought  I told you that already.


The Carmel In fire department doesn't live in Norman and know what we need.. What they say should have no Bering about what happens in Norman OK

----------


## BoulderSooner

serious ?    west Lindsey street currently carries over 20k cars a day average    2 lane roads with roundabouts can handle 20-25k cars ...     

why would Norman rebuild a road to barely handle current traffic ....   not even including event traffic?

----------


## venture

> To a degree but I trust the people who would be dealing with the situation every day more and who have taken the time to study the issue from their point of veiw. Their recommendations trump the guy they brought in to talk and most everybody except the roundabouters understand this. 
> Are you really willing to risk lives?


Oh so you have first hand knowledge of what they studied, awesome. Please share with us what they have looked at.

Also...willing to risk lives. Last I checked roundabouts reduce accidents significantly, so did you block out those statistics too?

----------


## venture

> serious ?    west Lindsey street currently carries over 20k cars a day average    2 lane roads with roundabouts can handle 20-25k cars ...     
> 
> why would Norman rebuild a road to barely handle current traffic ....   not even including event traffic?


Well which traffic forecasts do you go with to prepare for the future? Traffic has been in a steady decline for 10 years on Lindsey. Also event traffic 6 times out of the year shouldn't justify the remaining 359...we've been down this path already and put that silly notion to bed.

----------


## ou48A

> LOL. I've had enough of this thread. You're seriously asking me if I am really willing to risk lives? C'mon man.  I've presented you with facts about how much safer roundabouts are how much they decrease injury crashes and crashes in general.  I don't know what else to say. I'm done.


And I have present you and others with linked facts and informed opinions that say you are wrong and that your ideas about Lindsey street would slow emergency  response times, thus costing lives and property.

 I started out rather neutral on the idea of roundabouts but now that serious concerns have been raised there is no way they should be built. They were not even part of the plan that was voted on..There is another side to this that you and  several others just refuse to look at.



And please, what about those code books

----------


## venture

> I have been talking about for a very long time and at times with city of Norman officials. 
> I thought  I told you that already.
> 
> The Carmel In fire department doesn't live in Norman and know what we need.. What they say should have no Bering about what happens in Norman OK


So you've been talking about it a long time, with some Norman official, yet you never bring it up until just now. If it was such a concern for you I would think you would have brought it up on your own and not wait for the Transcript to run a story. 

While Carmel and Norman are different cities, they provide a model that we can work off of and adapt to our own needs. You know...like how most project concepts are done. So we should completely ignore ANY outside examples and just go with the force for our own solutions? I fail to see the logic in that.

----------


## venture

> *And I have present you and others with linked facts and informed opinions that say you are wrong and that your ideas about Lindsey street would slow emergency  response times, thus costing lives and property.*
> 
>  I started out rather neutral on the idea of roundabouts but now that serious concerns have been raised there is no way they should be built. They were not even part of the plan that was voted on..There is another side to this that you and  several others just refuse to look at.
> 
> And please, what about those coed books


But that report wasn't done in Norman, OK so why should that have any bearing on what happens here? Sound familiar?

----------


## ou48A

> But that report wasn't done in Norman, OK so why should that have any bearing on what happens here? Sound familiar?


Informed city of Norman people know what will work best for Norman needs. 
And they disagree with you too!

----------


## venture

> Informed city of Norman people know what will work best for Norman needs. 
> And they disagree with you too!


You are avoiding the questions. Please justify your response on why a study of one area cannot be used for Norman, yet another can be.

----------


## ou48A

> serious ?    west Lindsey street currently carries over 20k cars a day average    2 lane roads with roundabouts can handle 20-25k cars ...     
> 
> why would Norman rebuild a road to barely handle current traffic ....   not even including event traffic?


Informed city of Norman people know this to be true. They know what works best for Norman's unique needs.

They also understand that as Norman and OU grows that all of Lindsey Street needs to be rebuild and that to rebuild it the right way that it pretty much need to be built to handle the maximum amount of traffic that room allows for. They know that not doing  correctly now only creates huge problems for future growth of central Norman.
The problem is that not everybody is yet on board, but perhaps they can be persuaded to take the advice of their own city staff.

----------


## ou48A

> You are avoiding the questions. Please justify your response on why a study of one area cannot be used for Norman, yet another can be.


With you I'm not avoiding crap.. I'm just ignoring about half of your mindless rants.

----------


## venture

> With you I'm not avoiding crap.. I'm just ignoring about half of your mindless rants.


Well I think we have our answer then. Thanks!  Moving on...

----------


## ou48A

> Wow.


Yep... Longer response times means lost lives, a major university study show this to be true.
There is no reason to believe that longer response times wouldn’t be caused in Norman if Lindsey Street is rebuilt like some have suggested. The City Of Norman Fire department study also says that response times would be delayed by rebuilding Lindsey with roundabouts.

----------


## venture

> Yep... Longer response times means lost lives, a major university study show this to be true.
> There is no reason to believe that longer response times wouldn’t be caused in Norman if Lindsey Street is rebuilt like some have suggested. The C*ity Of Norman Fire department study* also says that response times would be delayed by rebuilding Lindsey with roundabouts.


Please share since you have access to it.

----------


## warreng88

OU48A, what emerency vehicles do you think are going to come through the Lindsey and Berry interesection? 

There are fire stations just east of 24 and Boyd, Main and Classen, Main and 36th, Robinson between 36 and 48 and near the airport on Flood Ave. 

There are police stations on either side of the railroad tracks near Main Street, Franklin and Eastern and OUPD at Chk St and Monitor Ave. 

Norman Regional Hospital is on Porter and Robinson. 

The intersection of Berry and Lindsey could very easily be avoided if there is such a problem with response time.

----------


## ou48A

> Do you know what kills tens of thousands and injures millions of people every year? Speed, right angles, and alcohol. Passive traffic management is why fire departments that serve areas where they are actively employed are always in favor of it. They see it with their own eyes. 
> 
> Again, I'm not sure why you believe that Norman fire officials are the only experts who can understand road safety on Lindsey. That's an amazing statement. 
> 
> Thankfully, thousands of lives are being saved every year due to _other_ *experts* who are working hard to remove major conflict points that have been engineered into our roadways.  
> 
> I'm not going to argue with you about this anymore. I hope for the sake of those involved in accidents along Lindsey in the past, we move past what Lindsey is today and build a road that is respectful for all those who use it.


The Norman officials say 


“[*Roundabouts could lead to delayed fire response times*, according to a report issued this week by Norman city staff.”

“*Lindsey Street between I-35 and Berry Road is currently unreliable as an emergency response route* *at most times due to congestion*,” Fullingim said in the report. “I believe we have an opportunity to change this, and

 *it would be in the best interest of public safety for this section of Lindsey Street to be a principal arterial road that would function as an effective emergency response route*.”

There have got to be some pretty good reason why the people who know our area best would say this.

----------


## venture

Where is the Fire Department study?

----------


## ou48A

> OU48A, what emerency vehicles do you think are going to come through the Lindsey and Berry interesection? 
> 
> There are fire stations just east of 24 and Boyd, Main and Classen, Main and 36th, Robinson between 36 and 48 and near the airport on Flood Ave. 
> 
> There are police stations on either side of the railroad tracks near Main Street, Franklin and Eastern and OUPD at Chk St and Monitor Ave. 
> 
> Norman Regional Hospital is on Porter and Robinson. 
> 
> The intersection of Berry and Lindsey could very easily be avoided if there is such a problem with response time.


Well, I don't know how many times emergency vehicles use Lindsey but I have seen them responding several times and slowed due traffic congestion.It's described as “currently unreliable as an emergency response route” 

On edit ...Which would also make the stretch of Lindsey from Berry to the east an unreliable emergency response route

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> The book Suburban Nation does a good job of documenting local 'fire chief' opposition to any attempt to make streets more walkable.  Very little has to do with actual safety but more to do with union rules.
> 
> *I wonder how fire trucks get to places in the rest of the world.*


Why should we try and be like the rest of the world? I think we need to go our own route and decide what is best for ourselves in the long run...

----------


## warreng88

> Well, I don't know how many times emergency vehicles use Lindsey but I have seen them responding several times and *slowed due traffic congestion*.It's described as “currently unreliable as an emergency response route” 
> 
> On edit ...Which would also make the stretch of Lindsey from Berry to the east an unreliable emergency response route


If we are talking about "slowed due to traffic congestion" and roundabouts help reduce traffic congestion since traffic is always moving, wouldn't that help increase response times?

----------


## ou48A

> If we are talking about "slowed due to traffic congestion" and roundabouts help reduce traffic congestion since traffic is always moving, *wouldn't that help increase response times*?


But that’s not always correct according to city of Norman officials.
Clearly late at night when there was little to no traffic response times would be slowed. 

But this is why we need 2 lanes in each direction.

----------


## catch22

I have never seen a fire truck or ambulance go through an intersection at more than 20mph. When it is green they still slow down.

Even early in the morning when I am on my way to work (4am) and I am the only car on the road, emergency response vehicles slow down to about 20mph before entering the intersection to make sure it is clear and perpendicular/oncoming traffic will stop. 

If you have seen a fire truck going through a red intersection at 60mph...you've seen something I have never seen.

----------


## venture

> Why should we try and be like the rest of the world? I think we need to go our own route and decide what is best for ourselves in the long run...


I think the point is that the rest of the world is much older than us here in Indian Territory and they've been faced with many of the challenges we are now coming into. We shouldn't close our minds to solutions applied elsewhere and ADAPT them to work here. 




> But that’s not always correct according to city of Norman officials.
> Clearly late at night when there was little to no traffic response times would be slowed. 
> 
> But this is why we need 2 lanes in each direction.


I'm with you that the busiest part of Lindsey should be 4 lanes...I'm not fully against leaving it at 2 lanes. However, as Catch mentioned...roundabout speeds are about 20 mph and how many emergency vehicles do you see flying through at speeds higher than that? Traffic DOESN'T STOP in a roundabout unless there is a choke point upstream...otherwise known as a traffic light. A roundabout at Lindsey/Berry is also going to help smoothly transition traffic to a single lane Lindsey east of there.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> Why should we try and be like the rest of the world? I think we need to go our own route and decide what is best for ourselves in the long run...


On the other hand why reject the ideas of others that have been shown to work? One of the problems with our leaders is the rejection of any idea that originates somewhere outside of our borders.

----------


## ou48A

Roundabouts would very likely be a lot more palatable for many people if their were 2 lanes running in each direction.

----------


## venture

This was in yesterday's Transcript...

Lindsey Street community members speak for and against roundabout  Local news  The Norman Transcript

Nothing really new. Norman Businesses want a roundabout at Berry and 4 lanes the rest of the stretch to 35 now. 

OU wants Lindsey to a minor arterial road stating Lindsey should be a destination.

Some random business guy, Randy Woods, wants it to be a major arterial road.

City engineer Jim Hunt doesn't want a roundabout.

So pretty much nothing new.  :Smile:  

The ideal solution to all of this would be 4 lanes from Berry to 35 with large roundabouts at each major intersection and be done with it. It also ensures capacity is there for future high density growth. Single lane roundabouts support up to 26,000 movements a day, more than enough to cover current traffic levels. Two-lane takes it up to 50,000 vehicles a day...which would be overkill for current traffic but it would also eliminate most of the congestions on the street.

----------


## BG918

I haven't heard anything recently, does anyone know the timeline for this project?  Which plan is the city going to proceed with?

----------


## venture

As far as I know, they haven't settled on a plan yet...but it should be coming pretty soon.

----------


## Geographer

> As far as I know, they haven't settled on a plan yet...but it should be coming pretty soon.



from what I've heard, they're pretty much going with their original terrible design.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> from what I've heard, they're pretty much going with their original terrible design.


So quick to judge. Their is nothing wrong with having a four lane street with traffic lights. I have driven on round-a-bouts and I don't like them very much. As much as people claim traffic flows smoother, I see when traffic lights are synchronized, that works better and more efficiently than having round-a-bouts. I think if they go with the original design, it will work just fine.

----------


## HangryHippo

What's the latest on the drainage projects, specifically the one just east of Berry?  Will they wait to start that until the Lindsey St. construction is done?

----------


## Geographer

> So quick to judge. Their is nothing wrong with having a four lane street with traffic lights. I have driven on round-a-bouts and I don't like them very much. As much as people claim traffic flows smoother, I see when traffic lights are synchronized, that works better and more efficiently than having round-a-bouts. I think if they go with the original design, it will work just fine.


It's pretty easy to judge a traffic light system vs roundabouts when you experience traffic light systems every single day. (see Sooner Road northbound to near I-240)

----------


## venture

> So quick to judge. Their is nothing wrong with having a four lane street with traffic lights. I have driven on round-a-bouts and I don't like them very much. As much as people claim traffic flows smoother, I see when traffic lights are synchronized, that works better and more efficiently than having round-a-bouts. I think if they go with the original design, it will work just fine.


I don't really think he is all that quick to judge given his time spent with development projects like this. That's more than you or I have when designing road systems like this. Not to mention...you are in Edmond. Those of us that have lived in Norman for decades and travel Lindsey every day understand the issues more than someone that just comes down for a football game or the rare weekend every now and then. 

What don't you like about roundabouts? I am talking REAL roundabouts, not neighborhood traffic circles (know the difference). They keep traffic flowing. The best light synchronization can't accomplish that. Exactly where have you used roundabouts extensively enough to draw a conclusion on them being inferior to typical traffic lights?

Regardless. If they do go with the original design, we'll see Lindsey continue to be a parking lot with no real walkability created with any new developments. Then in 15 years we'll be back having this same discussion on how to solve the traffic problems and end up dumping millions more in trying to find a solution.

----------


## Questor

Norman Transcript : Roundabout discussions hit dead end

----------


## Just the facts

So many things to say but for some reason I just can't put the words together so let me just say - too bad and opportunity missed.  Someday soon the people of Norman will look at the completed Lindsey street and wonder why traffic didn't improve and all we can do is point to Post #438.

----------


## ou48A

> Norman Transcript : Roundabout discussions hit dead end


Thanks for posting.
If they would not construct a double-lane roundabout its wise to move on to more pragmatic solutions.....

But Norman really does need 2 west bound lanes starting at the Imhoff bridge.
In this way roughly twice as much traffic could be sent though the light at Berry and Lindsey... 
This is the biggest bottle neck on west bound Lindsey.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I don't really think he is all that quick to judge given his time spent with development projects like this. That's more than you or I have when designing road systems like this. Not to mention...you are in Edmond. Those of us that have lived in Norman for decades and travel Lindsey every day understand the issues more than someone that just comes down for a football game or the rare weekend every now and then. 
> 
> What don't you like about roundabouts? I am talking REAL roundabouts, not neighborhood traffic circles (know the difference). They keep traffic flowing. The best light synchronization can't accomplish that. Exactly where have you used roundabouts extensively enough to draw a conclusion on them being inferior to typical traffic lights?
> 
> Regardless. If they do go with the original design, we'll see Lindsey continue to be a parking lot with no real walkability created with any new developments. Then in 15 years we'll be back having this same discussion on how to solve the traffic problems and end up dumping millions more in trying to find a solution.


Venture, I'm not ignoring your post, just haven't had time to respond to it in full, I promise I will answer the questions tomorrow.

----------


## venture

> So many things to say but for some reason I just can't put the words together so let me just say - too bad and opportunity missed.  Someday soon the people of Norman will look at the completed Lindsey street and wonder why traffic didn't improve and all we can do is point to Post #438.


It's just kicking the can down the road for 10 years until things are a complete mess again. Heck it might not even take that long. Let's be honest though, the old guard in charge of various development groups for the City of Norman are pretty incompetent. The high density zoning issues are still undecided. UNP has been a mess. Then of course the mess with this bond proposal. Oh...the sewage rate increase is another mess. Let's see what else...

I can only imagine the mess we are going to have when it comes time to making a decision with commuter rail.

I'm not shocked this is what happened. I doubt there will be much change until we have the 60+ crowd firmly planted 6 feet under so more forward thinking can progress. Well unless they screwed their children up, then we are just screwed. :-P LOL

----------


## dankrutka

The leadership in Norman is consistently disappointing. OU is the only reason Norman is a good town, but the city council and mayor continually miss opportunities to contribute to anything beyond the status quo. There's really no reason for this to happen with the brainpower, in particular the Institute for Quality Communities. Norman could be a great city with smart decision-making. Another disappointment in a long line of them.

----------


## soonerguru

> The leadership in Norman is consistently disappointing. OU is the only reason Norman is a good town, but the city council and mayor continually miss opportunities to contribute to anything beyond the status quo. There's really no reason for this to happen with the brainpower, in particular the Institute for Quality Communities. Norman could be a great city with smart decision-making. Another disappointment in a long line of them.


I still heart Norman, but most of my good feelings are nostalgic from times past. Remove OU and some improvements to Campus Corner and a little action Downtown and it has been a remarkably stagnant place. I guess it only aspires to being a bedroom community. And I agree with Venture: it's hard to imagine this inertia changing enough to put Norman into serious discussions for inner-city rail. Norman is a city in name only; it functions like a "town," and a very insular, self-satisfied one at that.

----------


## ou48A

For Norman to be the type of community that many would like it to become it needs to get far more serious about making its self more attractive to intellectually based high end private industry.

The new GE energy center is a perfect example.... But what has the City of Norman done to proactively compete for the GE project over and above others ????????

We will only become what we want if we make the necessary investments in our own community.

----------


## Just the facts

> For Norman to be the type of community that many would like it to become it needs to get far more serious about making its self more attractive to intellectually based high end private industry.
> 
> The new GE energy center is a perfect example.... But what has the City of Norman done to proactively compete for the GE project over and above others ????????
> 
> We will only become what we want if we make the necessary investments in our own community.


You have to decide what kind of city you want , because in the end, the city is only a means to a way of life ~ Enrique Penalosa

----------


## ou48A

> You have to decide what kind of city you want , because in the end, the city is only a means to a way of life ~ Enrique Penalosa


I want more prosperity in Norman. 
GE in Norman helps that goal, even if Norman must develop incentive packages well beyond what the state has done.

----------


## soonerguru

> I want more prosperity in Norman. 
> GE in Norman helps that goal, even if Norman must develop incentive packages well beyond what the state has done.


I agree Norman needs more high-end employment, but it's already very prosperous. Prosperity is not the problem. Perspective is the problem.

----------


## Just the facts

> I want more prosperity in Norman. 
> GE in Norman helps that goal, even if Norman must develop incentive packages well beyond what the state has done.


Define prosperity.  I tend to lean heavy on the quality of life side. I prefer a high quality public realm above all other options.

----------


## ou48A

> I agree Norman needs more high-end employment, but it's already very prosperous. Prosperity is not the problem. Perspective is the problem.


It's both...
In order to get things done Norman needs a more affluent tax base...

One of the things I usually do when I visit the Dallas area is visit friends and relatives in such places as Highland Park and South Lake... By comparison most of Norman is and looks very poor. But there are more than a few places like these in the Dallas Metro.

If we want high end jobs like they have we have to become truly competitive as a state, metro and City. Norman has a very long way to go in making its self attractive to very much of this type of job development and in part it's because it been self imposed.... 

The debate we have seen about Lindsey Street in Norman would not even been a debate in most of Texas... It would have been 6 laned with a grass and tree medium more than 50 years ago and the state would have been 100% behind the project.

So you are right “Perspective is the problem”

----------


## soonerguru

> It's both...
> In order to get things done Norman needs a more affluent tax base...
> 
> One of the things I usually do when I visit the Dallas area is visit friends and relatives in such places as Highland Park and South Lake... By comparison most of Norman is and looks very poor. But there are more than a few places like these in the Dallas Metro.
> 
> If we want high end jobs like they have we have to become truly competitive as a state, metro and City. Norman has a very long way to go in making its self attractive to very much of this type of job development and in part it's because it been self imposed.... 
> 
> The debate we have seen about Lindsey Street in Norman would not even been a debate in most of Texas... It would have been 6 laned with a grass and tree medium more than 50 years ago and the state would have been 100% behind the project.
> 
> So you are right “Perspective is the problem”


Well I would hate to see Norman just turn into Plano, Texas. It's not that. And it's not just for rich folks. It's actually mostly middle class but by and large it is fairly affluent. 

The reason it looks poor is because of the lack of planning.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Well I would hate to see Norman just turn into Plano, Texas. It's not that. And it's not just for rich folks. It's actually mostly middle class but by and large it is fairly affluent. 
> 
> The reason it looks poor is because of the lack of planning.


Are you serious???? Have you ever seen how much tax revenue Plano and Frisco take in???? Those are both great suburbs and amazing models to be a great suburb.

----------


## ou48A

> Well I would hate to see Norman just turn into Plano, Texas. It's not that. And it's not just for rich folks. It's actually mostly middle class but by and large it is fairly affluent. 
> 
> The reason it looks poor is because of the lack of planning.


There are elements of Plano like places that I don't particularly care for but on balance our standards of living and over all quality of life would be dramatically improved if we had done what they have done.

Lack of planing comes in large part due because of a lack of money... There needs to be enough vision to solve our money problems first.... That starts with great state and city management who sees the value in high wage jobs in our area and does what it takes to get them here even if it ruffles a few feathers.

If we could keep most of the students who graduate in difficult degree programs from OU in our area we would slow the brain drain and let their life’s worth of wealth be accumulated in our area, eventually benefiting everyone’s quality of life. Only we can do this! 

In the grand- scheme of things debates about Lindsey street are really fairly petty. When we won't take care of our own problems it  looks  bad to the decision makers who make choices about where great jobs go.

----------


## Jersey Boss

"Don't Plano My Norman"

----------


## soonerguru

> Are you serious???? Have you ever seen how much tax revenue Plano and Frisco take in???? *Those are both great suburbs* and amazing models to be a great suburb.


Exactly. Is Norman a suburb or a city with its own identity. It's acting like a suburb, not like a city.

----------


## soonerguru

> There are elements of Plano like places that I don't particularly care for but on balance our standards of living and over all quality of life would be dramatically improved if we had done what they have done.
> 
> Lack of planing comes in large part due because of a lack of money... There needs to be enough vision to solve our money problems first.... That starts with great state and city management who sees the value in high wage jobs in our area and does what it takes to get them here even if it ruffles a few feathers.
> 
> *If we could keep most of the students who graduate in difficult degree programs from OU in our area we would slow the brain drain and let their life’s worth of wealth be accumulated in our area, eventually benefiting everyone’s quality of life. Only we can do this!* 
> 
> In the grand- scheme of things debates about Lindsey street are really fairly petty. When we won't take care of our own problems it  looks  bad to the decision makers who make choices about where great jobs go.


I agree, but making Norman even more suburban is not going to achieve this goal.

----------


## ou48A

> I agree, but making Norman even more suburban is not going to achieve this goal.


Parts of Norman will need to become more suburban. The higher quality that it is, the better.
Norman has distinctly different parts of town that need different solutions to problems. 
We will need to make all of Norman better if we want improved prosperity.

----------


## ljbab728

> Parts of Norman will need to become more suburban.


I'm sure that parts of Norman will become more suburban, but saying that is needed???????

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Exactly. Is Norman a suburb or a city with its own identity. It's acting like a suburb, not like a city.


When I say suburb, I mean it is a city with strong ties to OKC. I don't mean for it to be a bedroom community. Norman is its own city and thats great, but Plano has plenty to offer as far as being a model in some areas for other cities to look after. OKC is the parent city and it will always be that way.

----------


## Geographer

> The debate we have seen about Lindsey Street in Norman would not even been a debate in most of Texas... *It would have been 6 laned with a grass and tree* medium more than 50 years ago and the state would have been 100% behind the project.
> 
> So you are right Perspective is the problem


Thank the LORD this isn't Texas...because that would be awful.  There are so many 6 lane mega-roads throughout the DFW area that are so under-used and a waste of space.

----------


## Geographer

> *Lack of planing comes in large part due because of a lack of money*... There needs to be enough vision to solve our money problems first.... That starts with great state and city management who sees the value in high wage jobs in our area and does what it takes to get them here even if it ruffles a few feathers.



I can tell you that is definitely NOT a money problem...good planning does NOT require tons of money! It requires flat out common sense!!!!

----------


## Geographer

All of this talk about whether Norman should build more suburb areas blah blah blah.

let's have a real chat for a second and use some new terms.

Urbanity = the way, and degree to which, the built environment fosters human scale interaction

if something is SUBurban that, by definition, means that it is SUB-par in providing an environment that fosters human scale interaction.  Instead of suburban, I think I will start to use the phrase "poor human scale interaction" on this forum.

Is this what we want for Norman? Is this how you attract higher paying jobs and retaining those new college graduates?  I don't think so....if you want a stagnant city of no-place with the best poor human scale interaction and no retention rate, go for it.

----------


## Just the facts

How to prosper AND do it for less cost...

The Walkable City. Jeff Speck's Amazing Ted Talk | Metro Jacksonville

----------


## mkjeeves

> if something is SUBurban that, by definition, means that it is SUB-par in providing an environment that fosters human scale interaction.  Instead of suburban, I think I will start to use the phrase "poor human scale interaction" on this forum.


The word is derived from the Old French subburbe, which is in turn derived from the Latin suburbium, formed from sub (meaning "under") and urbs ("city"). In Ancient Rome, wealthy and important people tended to live on the hills of the city, while poorer citizens lived at lower elevations – hence "under the city". The first recorded usage of the term in English, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, was made by John Wycliffe in 1380, where the form subarbis was used.

wikipedia

Some things never change. Now we have the same class issue with (some of) the wealthy and elite moving downtown and looking down their noses at the rest of the population.

----------


## Just the facts

Mkjeeves - why you are not a New Urbanist is a mystery to me.  You seem to align perfectly to nearly every aspect of the New Urbanism charter.

----------


## ou48A

> I can tell you that is definitely NOT a money problem...good planning does NOT require tons of money! It requires flat out common sense!!!!


Vision and planing are not hard to come by.
 It is mostly about a lack of money....
 If it wasn't we wouldn't have the problems to the extent that we do.

----------


## ou48A

> Some things never change. Now we have the same class issue with (some of) the wealthy and elite moving downtown and looking down their noses at the rest of the population.


Yep, that's with out doubt very true... 
We have a case where a very, very small number of people think they know what's best for everybody else. Its a classic  case of extreme liberalism telling you how to live your life. 

Lots of people are not going to want to live in a urban environment and there is nothing wrong with that.... Norman should make the suburban way of life as pleasant as possible while at the same time be making the urban way of life a pleasant as we can too.... In a place like Norman there are no good reasons why both can't be done. Its going to require doing both to become a much more prosperous city.

----------


## Geographer

> Vision and planing are not hard to come by.
>  It is mostly about a lack of money....
>  If it wasn't we wouldn't have the problems to the extent that we do.


You realize most of the problems we have are because we spend *TOO* much money on things that don't solve the root of the problem....so it's not a money problem, its a lack of vision and proper planning.

----------


## venture

> Yep, that's with out doubt very true... 
> *We have a case where a very, very small number of people think they know what's best for everybody else. Its a classic  case of extreme liberalism telling you how to live your life.*


So you are an extreme liberal now? Interesting.

----------


## Just the facts

I've been called a lot stuff but liberal has never been one of them.  My lifetime voting record is redder than a tomato.

----------


## ou48A

> Cry me a river. You want to tell people how to live their life too. Remember? 4 lanes, no roundabouts, etc, etc, etc.


What I wanted on Lindsey is a far different thing than restricting the basic growth of suburban development for tens of thousands of people. Relieving the congestion on our streets means more time spent in far more  productivity ways for tens of thousands. The city got Lindsey Street more right than most of those pie in the sky plans, as did I.

----------


## ou48A

> You realize most of the problems we have are because we spend *TOO* much money on things that don't solve the root of the problem....so it's not a money problem, its a lack of vision and proper planning.


If Norman had enough money many of our problems would have been taken care of a long time ago.

----------


## ou48A

> So you are an extreme liberal now? Interesting.


It's a narrative of modern liberalism to seek urbanization. I seek the individuals freedom to choose their own life style and to be able to do it in the most prosperous way possible...* For Norman we can and should do both urban and suburban*

----------


## venture

Hmmm. I was going to respond, but changed my mind. You can't fix stupid unfortunately.

----------


## ou48A

> I've been called a lot stuff but liberal has never been one of them.  My lifetime voting record is redder than a tomato.


Urbanization and trains are issue that are primary championed by the far left. But that’s OK. There are a few things that I have agreed with that come from the far left in spite of my voting record.

----------


## ou48A

> Hmmm. I was going to respond, but changed my mind. You can't fix stupid unfortunately.


Yes, the stupidity that keeps us a poor.

----------


## Geographer

> If Norman had enough money many of our problems would have been taken care of a long time ago.


Norman has enough money but not the correct priorities and frankly never will.

----------


## Geographer

> Relieving the congestion on our streets means more time spent in far more  productivity ways for tens of thousands. *The city got Lindsey Street more right than most of those pie in the sky plans, as did I.*


This literally made me laugh out loud. Thank you for that.

----------


## ou48A

> Norman has enough money but not the correct priorities and *frankly never will*.


That type of attitude is part of Norman's problem.

Of the  places I have seen that have fixed many of the types of problems that Norman has are in every case  more affluent. We should aspire to become more like some of the Dallas suburbans... some of them even have light rail or comuter rail.... That's a preety urban deal right there. So many say they want high end retial but it takes an afluant base to suppoert it. It's about the money!

----------


## Geographer

> That type of attitude is part of Norman's problem.
> 
> Of the  places I have seen that have fixed many of the types of problems that Norman has are in every case  more affluent. We should aspire to become more like some of the Dallas suburbans... some of them even have light rail or comuter rail.... That's a preety urban deal right there. So many say they want high end retial but it takes an afluant base to suppoert it. It's about the money!


Lots of poor small towns have great urbanity. It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with being smart and having the right priorities.

----------


## ou48A

> Lots of poor small towns have great urbanity. It has nothing to do with money and everything to do with being smart and having the right priorities.


Which only shows that uurbanism doesn’t = prosperity.


We need to make Norman more attractive for money making operations because investment money and their high wage jobs looks for the best opportunity... We have the intellectual base to kick start a more affluent Norman... but as a community do far too little to provide competitive incentives like others do.... 

Which again makes it's all about the money.

----------


## Dubya61

> Which only shows that uurbanism doesn’t = prosperity.
> 
> 
> We need to make Norman more attractive for money making operations because investment money and their high wage jobs looks for the best opportunity... We have the intellectual base to kick start a more affluent Norman... but as a community do far too little to provide competitive incentives like others do.... 
> 
> Which again makes it's all about the money.


This is almost an apples and oranges argument.  OU48A, you're right money and prosperity go hand in hand, but the argument up against you is New Urbanism (which is compatible with the suburbs -- but in a balanced approach) is all about livability.  You can have prosperity and livability, but they don't equate and both have their positives.

----------


## ou48A

> This is almost an apples and oranges argument.  OU48A, you're right money and prosperity go hand in hand, but the argument up against you is New Urbanism (which is compatible with the suburbs -- but in a balanced approach) is all about livability.  You can have prosperity and livability, but they don't equate and both have their positives.


That's fair enough.
We can  have very high standards of livability in the suburbs for those who want that style of living... Which is something that I feel a very strong majority of Oklahoma's and many others still want.

I bring some of the Dallas suburban into the discussion because some have done a very good  job of creating great world class livability, due to their prosperity, for large numbers of people, with many of the modern near by amenity’s that many of us want.. Its something that a few of us have actually experienced. But its been done in a suburban environment.

Urbanism, I have nothing aginst it for those who want that life style.

----------


## Spartan

Ou48a is generally a source of moronic comments so this thread is no different. If a more livable and walkable Lindsey Street included monuments to GOP leaders of the last half century and appropriate places to kneel and worship in the median, he'd be more supportive of that. An avenue for republican worship would be infinitely more useful to him than an avenue for humans..,

----------


## Just the facts

> Hmmm. I was going to respond, but changed my mind. You can't fix stupid unfortunately.


Now you know what I have to go through when I get together with my fellow teapartiers. It is like I start speaking a foreign language as they give me the dumbfounded deer in headlights stare.

----------


## ou48A

> Ou48a is generally a source of moronic comments so this thread is no different. If a more livable and walkable Lindsey Street included monuments to GOP leaders of the last half century and appropriate places to kneel and worship in the median, he'd be more supportive of that. An avenue for republican worship would be infinitely more useful to him than an avenue for humans..,


You once told me that you didn't root for OU or OSU and didn't care but only after giving me much grief.... But a few days ago you finally admitted that your a poke. There isn't a bigger hypocrite on this  entire board than you Spartan...Spending millions extra on Lindsey street when it would do little extra good is moronic. We can easily put those millions in resources to better use someplace else.

----------


## ou48A

> Now you know what I have to go through when I get together with my fellow teapartiers. It is like I start speaking a foreign language as they give me the dumbfounded deer in headlights stare.


You can't fix stupid by staying poor and spending trillions on trains that go to places that only a trickle of people would use and are located  in places that still need highways that operate at far below capacity. 

The Tea party is largely about fiscal responsibility. Clearly you are not fiscally responsible when you push for very expensive slow trains that go to nowhere and on borrowed money. It would be very reasonable for many Tea party members to find your thoughts rather goofy.

----------


## venture

> You once told me that you didn't root for OU or OSU and didn't care but only after giving me much grief.... But a few days ago you finally admitted that your a poke. There isn't a bigger hypocrite on this  entire board than you Spartan...Spending millions extra on Lindsey street when it would do little extra good is moronic. We can easily put those millions in resources to better use someplace else.


Little extra good? Reducing accidents by what...60-90%? Keeping speed maintained throughout the entire stretch to avoid continuous stop and go backups during rush hour. Assist a section of town to get revilatilized by being more walkable and contribute to better population density?

If anything the biggest snag to provide a better Lindsey Street was the possible legalities of changing the design. A small minority started to make some noise about it and I'm sure if their mega-wide asphalt dreamland wasn't realized, they would have sued the city and wasted more money.

----------


## venture

> You can't fix stupid by staying poor and spending trillions on trains that go to places that only a trickle of people would use and are located  in places that still need highways that operate at far below capacity. 
> 
> The Tea party is largely about fiscal responsibility. Clearly you are not fiscally responsible when you push for very expensive slow trains that go to nowhere and on borrowed money. It would be very reasonable for many Tea party members to find your thoughts rather goofy.


SMH. You realize "stupid" is in reference to thinking that it is foolish to evolve and update to the better way of doing things and instead rely on old tried and predictable methods? The thinking Lindsey should be just another cookie cutter concrete boulevard falls into that line of foolish thinking.

Now as far as your comments specifically. Not calling Kerry fiscally responsible is just laughable. Those comments don't earn any credibility by making such negative and incorrect accusations. If highways are at such low capacity, why do we continue to build them? Shouldn't we just stop expanding them so other transit solutions can be introduced instead of continuing to pour money into a system that can't be sustained? 

We've been down this road before where it becomes very abrasive towards those with more forward thinking ideas and are contributing high quality to the discussion. I understand it can make someone very overwhelmed with the rate of change many areas are seeing and the level of new ideas coming about, but there is no reason to take it out on others for feeling that way. Many people here will be willing to educate anyone who WANTS to understand what is being proposed (not just with Lindsey but everywhere) - all without judging.

----------


## ou48A

> Little extra good? Reducing accidents by what...60-90%? Keeping speed maintained throughout the entire stretch to avoid continuous stop and go backups during rush hour. Assist a section of town to get revilatilized by being more walkable and contribute to better population density?
> 
> If anything the biggest snag to provide a better Lindsey Street was the possible legalities of changing the design. A small minority started to make some noise about it and I'm sure if their mega-wide asphalt dreamland wasn't realized, they would have sued the city and wasted more money.


What's going to be built on Lindsey will be far safer and adds far more capacity than what currently exist. 
The additional resources it would have taken to build what a small number of people wanted along Lindsey can be used to relive other congested areas of Norman..

So that it would limmit the impact to resdents the city would be wise to start buying up property as it naturally becomes available along the north side of Lindsey between Berry and Elm. The City should zone this same area so that no new major construction could take place.

----------


## ou48A

> SMH. You realize "stupid" is in reference to thinking that it is foolish to evolve and update to the better way of doing things and instead rely on old tried and predictable methods? The thinking Lindsey should be just another cookie cutter concrete boulevard falls into that line of foolish thinking.
> 
> Now as far as your comments specifically. Not calling Kerry fiscally responsible is just laughable. Those comments don't earn any credibility by making such negative and incorrect accusations. If highways are at such low capacity, why do we continue to build them? Shouldn't we just stop expanding them so other transit solutions can be introduced instead of continuing to pour money into a system that can't be sustained? 
> 
> We've been down this road before where it becomes very abrasive towards those with more forward thinking ideas and are contributing high quality to the discussion. I understand it can make someone very overwhelmed with the rate of change many areas are seeing and the level of new ideas coming about, but there is no reason to take it out on others for feeling that way. Many people here will be willing to educate anyone who WANTS to understand what is being proposed (not just with Lindsey but everywhere) - all without judging.


We build highways in many places that operate under capacity because of the economic net gain they create and trains are no substitute.
Do you have any idea of the billions of dollars worth of agriculture and energy products that travel on remote 2 lane roads in low populated areas... Those roads easily pay of them self’s though increased economic gain. Energy and agriculture are the back bone of our states economy. Without doubt and they would be crippled with out good roads.

I get the feeling that few if any  on here have spent any real time living in economic prosperous rural areas well away from  major city’s and have little to no perspective.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Thank the LORD this isn't Texas...because that would be awful.  There are so many 6 lane mega-roads throughout the DFW area that are so under-used and a waste of space.


I love the roads in Dallas. I really wish the majority of roads here were six lanes, it would make traffic so much better flowing. They understand the need and desire that people have for those roads.

----------


## ou48A

> I love the roads in Dallas. I really wish the majority of roads here were six lanes, it would make traffic so much better flowing. They understand the need and desire that people have for those roads.


It's not just the Dallas area in Texas where the streets and highways are built to better standards and for higher capacity.... 
Texas spends more money up front and as a result their highways usually last longer and do not require as much rehabilitation.
Except in high growth areas most places are not very congested.

Plutomic Panda have you ever spent much time driving in far west Texas where its 30 miles between houses? They have some of the nicest roads you will ever drive on. 

When it comes to streets and highways city’s like Lubbock, Midland / Odessa  really do make many of our area OKC streets and highways look like the third world. 
Its this way because Texas has done the things necessary to bring prosperity and besides Texans expect it... We should demand it also!

----------


## BG918

This new plan still includes new sidewalks, landscaping and street lights.  That is important since this is a gateway into Norman.  Will the sidewalks be extended east of Berry to connect to the existing ones at Chautauqua?

----------


## Spartan

> You once told me that you didn't root for OU or OSU and didn't care but only after giving me much grief.... But a few days ago you finally admitted that your a poke. There isn't a bigger hypocrite on this  entire board than you Spartan...Spending millions extra on Lindsey street when it would do little extra good is moronic. We can easily put those millions in resources to better use someplace else.


I was rooting pretty hard for OU last weekend, although I really don't follow football religiously. I have lived in Norman and went to OU for one semester, if it matters, although the hypocrite insult was random.

Norman is a great city, but the lack of a large-scale walkable core beyond campus is holding it back. You should see the development strides that Stillwater is making lately, if you're obsessed with college football.

----------


## ou48A

> This new plan still includes new sidewalks, landscaping and street lights.  That is important since this is a gateway into Norman.  Will the sidewalks be extended east of Berry to connect to the existing ones at Chautauqua?


No... Not anytime soon... Sidewalks are needed in the area... but they shouldn’t be built until new right- of- way is secured... because for every walker there will be hundreds of people in vehicles moving along on a slow moving conjested road too much of the time.

----------


## ou48A

Norman won't even rebuild its old sidewalks that have been broken down for decades near campus.

I would like to hear a plan for that..? The sidewalk on the north side of Boyd east of Campus Corner to the tracks are in very bad shape.
 If we want “walk-ability” ( I'm all for that in places where large numbers of people actually walk) we should fix the sidewalks we already have first before we start adding news ones.

----------


## venture

> What's going to be built on Lindsey will be far safer and adds far more capacity than what currently exist. 
> The additional resources it would have taken to build what a small number of people wanted along Lindsey can be used to relive other congested areas of Norman..
> 
> So that it would limmit the impact to resdents the city would be wise to start buying up property as it naturally becomes available along the north side of Lindsey between Berry and Elm. The City should zone this same area so that no new major construction could take place.


Wow so now we are back to the "north of Lindsey" thing again? Sigh. At this point I don't know if I should feel sad none of the evidence provided has sunk in or just fluff this off as a troll post.

----------


## venture

> We build highways in many places that operate under capacity because of the economic net gain they create and trains are no substitute.
> Do you have any idea of the billions of dollars worth of agriculture and energy products that travel on remote 2 lane roads in low populated areas... Those roads easily pay of them self’s though increased economic gain. Energy and agriculture are the back bone of our states economy. Without doubt and they would be crippled with out good roads.
> 
> I get the feeling that few if any  on here have spent any real time living in economic prosperous rural areas well away from  major city’s and have little to no perspective.


Perhaps you can move back out there and report back to us. While you are there, we can finally move this city forward.  :Smile:   Oh, don't forget your shadow (PluPan) who apparently has a thing for you now. LOL

----------


## venture

> This new plan still includes new sidewalks, landscaping and street lights.  That is important since this is a gateway into Norman.  Will the sidewalks be extended east of Berry to connect to the existing ones at Chautauqua?


East of Berry isn't in the works yet. Some discussion on what should be done, but obviously the neighborhood is going to fight any widening that some random suburbanites want. OU of course is not going to approve of any widening through campus.

----------


## Spartan

> Norman won't even rebuild its old sidewalks that have been broken down for decades near campus.
> 
> I would like to hear a plan for that..? The sidewalk on the north side of Boyd east of Campus Corner to the tracks are in very bad shape.
>  If we want walk-ability ( I'm all for that in places where large numbers of people actually walk) we should fix the sidewalks we already have first before we start adding news ones.


Good point

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> It's not just the Dallas area in Texas where the streets and highways are built to better standards and for higher capacity.... 
> Texas spends more money up front and as a result their highways usually last longer and do not require as much rehabilitation.
> Except in high growth areas most places are not very congested.
> 
> Plutomic Panda have you ever spent much time driving in far west Texas where its 30 miles between houses? They have some of the nicest roads you will ever drive on. 
> 
> When it comes to streets and highways citys like Lubbock, Midland / Odessa  really do make many of our area OKC streets and highways look like the third world. 
> Its this way because Texas has done the things necessary to bring prosperity and besides Texans expect it... We should demand it also!


Great post and no, I have not driven in west Texas at all. I bet it is great, the majority of Texas is! I'm sure as OKC takes in more tax revenue and a change of leadership in ODOT, we will see better roads and plans for roads designed with future capacity needs in mind(6 lane roads).

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Perhaps you can move back out there and report back to us. While you are there, we can finally move this city forward.   Oh, don't forget your shadow (PluPan) who apparently has a thing for you now. LOL


I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Texas is extremely prosperous and racking in huge number as far as economic growth. For the life of me, why wouldn't Norman and all of Oklahoma for that matter, want to follow in the footsteps to take the necessary measures in order to keep ahead of growth and create great roads for years to come. There is no reason to build roads larger than 6 lanes, but you make every artery 6 lanes and that will solve the majority of traffic issues. Traffic in Dallas is amazing for a city of it's size. Traffic gets bad during rush hour, but nearly every time I visit now, traffic flows like it does here almost, again, with the exception of rush hour and other special events and construction zones.

Driving through Dallas is a breeze and with all the lane roads, you can get to where you want and in a hurry. There are tons of quality developments that OKC would kill for along these roads. The fact that 6 lane roads are a detriment to ped activity and waste of space is BS. 

Now, if we were taking about the core of Norman, than yes, I understand the opposition against 6 lane roads. Hell, I think Edmond should narrow Broadway to 1 lane in each direction and have a streetcar with bike lanes and super sidewalks. I also think a good majority of the roads in Edmond should be 6 lanes, 2nd, Danforth, Bryant, Memorial, Kelly would be a good start. Covell will need it 10-20 years down the road, but that ok. In suburbia, it is the best way to go, and it can bring great prosperity, just look at Austin, Dallas, even Los Angeles has plenty of 6 lane roads. I don't know why you seem to be so against 6 lane roads.

I don't know Norman that well, so I am trying to withhold most of my "opinions", but I really don't see the big deal on how this will be a failure for the city. As far as "shadowing" ou48a, I don't know your logic behind that, I just agree with most of what he says, is that a crime?

----------


## Geographer

I literally can't handle this forum anymore...too much misinformation for me.

----------


## Geographer

> Driving through Dallas is a breeze and with all the lane roads, you can get to where you want and in a hurry. There are tons of quality developments that OKC would kill for along these roads. *The fact that 6 lane roads are a detriment to ped activity and waste of space is BS.*


LOL. I am laughing so hard that I am crying right now.  It's so sad that people actually think these kinds of things...misinformation has run amok!

----------


## venture

> I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Texas is extremely prosperous and racking in huge number as far as economic growth. For the life of me, why wouldn't Norman and all of Oklahoma for that matter, want to follow in the footsteps to take the necessary measures in order to keep ahead of growth and create great roads for years to come.


No one is saying they don't want Norman, or Oklahoma overall, to grow and prosper. However there are proper ways to help facilitate that growth and there are also important planning steps to that need to be covered to ensure it isn't growing into the wrong model. Norman already covers 177 sq miles. That is insanely large for a city its size. A lot of that is thanks to having Lake Thunderbird in the city's limits. However, we need to have proper growth planned and designate what areas are going to follow what model. 




> There is no reason to build roads larger than 6 lanes, but you make every artery 6 lanes and that will solve the majority of traffic issues. Traffic in Dallas is amazing for a city of it's size. Traffic gets bad during rush hour, but nearly every time I visit now, traffic flows like it does here almost, again, with the exception of rush hour and other special events and construction zones.


It depends on where the artery is and how the city is setup. I personally can't see Norman's main East/West arteries going to a street that wide simply based on the large number of residential houses that are on most of those streets. Main Street west of Downtown is a bit of an exception since there aren't nearly as many curb cuts are there are on Robinson, Lindsey, etc. 




> Driving through Dallas is a breeze and with all the lane roads, you can get to where you want and in a hurry. There are tons of quality developments that OKC would kill for along these roads. The fact that 6 lane roads are a detriment to ped activity and waste of space is BS.


Actually it is not and that has been referenced many many times in this thread and others. Let's also remember, OKC is not Dallas...and Norman is not OKC. So your continued comparisons need to start being tempered because you aren't using apples to apples here. This comment also shows the lack of understanding of high density and ped activity development. The point is to keep things walkable and close by. Trying to cross a 6+ lane road is not conducive to such development. Look at major downtown areas that have great walkability. There are very free 6 lane roads for people to fight across. Downtown Chicago has a couple, but we are also talking about Michigan Avenue, Lakeshore, etc which are more exceptions than the rule. 

However we need to start looking at realistic comparisons. Ann Arbor is a strong academic community of 116,000 people - almost exactly the same of Norman's 115k. The two cities are pretty similar in most aspects...

Ann Arbor, Michigan (MI) profile: population, maps, real estate, averages, homes, statistics, relocation, travel, jobs, hospitals, schools, crime, moving, houses, news

Norman, Oklahoma (OK) profile: population, maps, real estate, averages, homes, statistics, relocation, travel, jobs, hospitals, schools, crime, moving, houses, news


The most notable one? Ann Arbor has almost 4300 per sq mile. Norman is just over 650 people. Ann Arbor is able to move many more people through their city without resorting to mega concrete barriers cutting through their city. 




> Now, if we were taking about the core of Norman, than yes, I understand the opposition against 6 lane roads. Hell, I think Edmond should narrow Broadway to 1 lane in each direction and have a streetcar with bike lanes and super sidewalks. I also think a good majority of the roads in Edmond should be 6 lanes, 2nd, Danforth, Bryant, Memorial, Kelly would be a good start. Covell will need it 10-20 years down the road, but that ok. In suburbia, it is the best way to go, and it can bring great prosperity, just look at Austin, Dallas, even Los Angeles has plenty of 6 lane roads. I don't know why you seem to be so against 6 lane roads.


We are talking about the core of Norman. How have you not got that by now? Do you even know where Lindsey is? The main urban core of Norman is going to be bordered by I-35 on the west, 12th on the East, Robinson on the North, and Imhoff on the south. Lindsey cuts right through it. This was a chance to redevelop a primary gateway into the core of Norman that is currently lined with apartments and strip malls. If they would have done the smart thing, they could have created a district of improved store fronts, high density living developments, and an area that would see an overall increase in property values. No the city can't force development, but there is a reason why the business association representing businesses along Lindsey wanting a better solution than the 4-lane cookie cutter they are apparently going to get.




> I don't know Norman that well, so I am trying to withhold most of my "opinions", but I really don't see the big deal on how this will be a failure for the city. As far as "shadowing" ou48a, I don't know your logic behind that, I just agree with most of what he says, is that a crime?


I really really wish you would take some time and visit Norman and get to know the area. Then you will see where many people are coming from. My logic behind the shadowing comment. Every comment he makes, it is almost a guaranteed like from you. So appearances and actions speak volumes. As many people have said here, plenty are much more educated in this realm of discussion than myself or OU48, Norman had a great opportunity to make this an amazing gateway to the city and change the path from being just another suburb. They'e also provided studies and facts on top of facts proving their point, where the opposition hasn't done a single thing except relay hearsay and their own personal bias. Going through the thread when the discussion of the roundabout/walkable solution came about we saw the reasons to oppose it change week to week. As soon as one thing got shot down with facts, another came up. 

I'm not here to say "NO Don't like this person"...I'm saying pay more attention to what you are liking. The "facts" the opposition provided were never substantiated with proof and always had cracks that were exposed.

----------


## dankrutka

Uh, driving in Dallas is an absolute nightmare. This must be a joke.

----------


## ou48A

> Uh, driving in Dallas is an absolute nightmare. This must be a joke.


It depends on where you are? Part's are bad but the streets not near downtown out in the suburbs are normally better and often much better.

The DFW area has or will spend billions updating their interstate express system in a fairly short amount of time..... They are fixing many of  their problems in timely ways.
In the mean time we feel lucky to have a nice new I-40 and a 35 year+ I-35 3 lane in each direction rebuild project.
 We need to figure out a way to speed up our projects.

----------


## ou48A

Texas is in the process of adding 3 lanes to hundreds of miles of  their rural interstates between major city.
Their rural interstate speed limit has been raised to 75 MPH but there are 85 MPH speed limits in Texas. 
All this saves time.... Time is money. 
It helps make them more prosperous and a more desirable place  for corporate relocations and even more prosperity.

----------


## heyerdahl

Just FYI Texas road lovers, Texas DOT is collapsing under the weight of their oversized road network. Highways and wide roads generate low-density development that doesn't have enough taxable value per acre to support the infrastructure.


*Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding
*Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding | The Raw Story

*Texas may shift costly upkeep of urban state highways to Dallas, other cities*
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/polit...nclick_check=1

*TxDOT: Falling Chunks of Concrete, Gaping Hole in I-20 Overpass Are Perfectly Normal
*TxDOT: Falling Chunks of Concrete, Gaping Hole in I-20 Overpass Are Perfectly Normal

----------


## Just the facts

> Just FYI Texas road lovers, Texas DOT is collapsing under the weight of their oversized road network. Highways and wide roads generate low-density development that doesn't have enough taxable value per acre to support the infrastructure.
> 
> 
> *Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding
> *Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding | The Raw Story
> 
> *Texas may shift costly upkeep of urban state highways to Dallas, other cities*
> http://www.dallasnews.com/news/polit...nclick_check=1
> 
> ...


You are wasting your time with this kind of argument.  Every time this reality is brought up you might as well post it in a foreign language.  Reality is so counter-institutive to them that they simply can't comprehend it, so they just ignore it.  This is the exact same thing I said earlier about my tea-party friends.  Debt for social programs they totally understand - but building roads we can't afford?  I might as well be talking to rocks and hammers.

It is exactly like watching your neighbor buy every toy under the sun with debt - and then say to yourself - I should do that too.  Why do what is driving your neighbor into unmanageable debt?  And yet, I am the one called financially irresponsible.  It's like I got sucked into a vortex and landed in Bizzaro World.

----------


## ou48A

> Just FYI Texas road lovers, Texas DOT is collapsing under the weight of their oversized road network. Highways and wide roads generate low-density development that doesn't have enough taxable value per acre to support the infrastructure.
> 
> 
> *Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding
> *Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding | The Raw Story
> 
> *Texas may shift costly upkeep of urban state highways to Dallas, other cities*
> http://www.dallasnews.com/news/polit...nclick_check=1
> 
> ...


Adding 80 miles of gravel roads in a state 5 time the size of Oklahoma is hardly significant funding problem when they are going to be damaged by very heavy truck traffic anyway...

Do you have any idea on how much new money will be flowing to the state of Texas over the next decade or so?

These problems you site are going to be a drop in the ocean for them.

----------


## ou48A

> You are wasting your time with this kind of argument.  Every time this reality is brought up you might as well post it in a foreign language.  Reality is so counter-institutive to them that they simply can't comprehend it, so they just ignore it.  This is the exact same thing I said earlier about my tea-party friends.  Debt for social programs they totally understand - but building roads we can't afford?  I might as well be talking to rocks and hammers.
> 
> It is exactly like watching your neighbor buy every toy under the sun with debt - and then say to yourself - I should do that too.  Why do what is driving your neighbor into unmanageable debt?  And yet, I am the one called financially irresponsible.  It's like I got sucked into a vortex and landed in Bizzaro World.


Do you have any idea on how much new money will be flowing to the state of Texas over the next 2 or 3 decades or so? 
I don't think you do.

----------


## Just the facts

> Do you have any idea on how much new money will be flowing to the state of Texas over the next 2 or 3 decades or so? 
> I don't think you do.


Apparently not enough to pay the debt on the roads they built to lure that 'money'.  This is the problem with the growth model.  Anyhow - like I said 'rocks and hammers'.  Justify and move on, regardless of reality.

If only people would watch this.

----------


## adaniel

At this point, I am just going to say it. If you like the roads in Texas so much, then move there. 

TX has different needs, funding mechanisms, maintenance issues, etc. than OK and comparing the two is just nuts. I don't see NM, LA, AR trying to measure themselves up to TX to the extent I see people here doing it with OK, because they have wildly different needs (the biggest of which there is nowhere close to the amount of people, traffic, or population density). 

And to see this argument coming from admitted conservatives is mind boggling. Are you okay paying vastly more in taxes or fees? Remember, that a gas tax increase went up for a vote a few years ago and was resoundingly rejected. How did you vote in that election? 




> Uh, driving in Dallas is an absolute nightmare. This must be a joke.


I grew up in the same area PP is from (Plano) and he should know better. He has obviously never been on 75 or the DNT going southbound into Dallas at 730 am.

----------


## ou48A

> Apparently not enough to pay the debt on the roads they built to lure that 'money'.  This is the problem with the growth model.  Anyhow - like I said 'rocks and hammers'.  Justify and move on, regardless of reality.


The reality is that you and too many others very clearly have no concept of what is in the process of taking place over the next few decades in Texas.

The road problems you are talking about are mere child’s play in the grand scheme of things that will be taken care of in due time..... Their politicians like to fight over the cookie jar just like everyone's do . That's what's going on now, and you will see more of it from time to time. 

But its the big picture that needs to be intensely looked at and not the petty problems that you dwell in.

Texas will be putting giant chucks of money into a state endowment to help their future funding needs that will help them sustain what they are doing for many, many decades and likely beyond!

Oklahoma should establish a similar fund.

----------


## Just the facts

> And to see this argument coming from admitted conservatives is mind boggling. Are you okay paying vastly more in taxes or fees? Remember, that a gas tax increase went up for a vote a few years ago and was resoundingly rejected. How did you vote in that election?


This is exactly what I am talking about.  Sometime I think I am the only person in the Tea Party that understand this.  It's depressing when I have to argue this simple reality to people who claim to already think this way.  It makes me think they don't know what they believe, and maybe they don't.

----------


## ou48A

> At this point, I am just going to say it. If you like the roads in Texas so much, then move there. 
> 
> TX has different needs, funding mechanisms, maintenance issues, etc. than OK and comparing the two is just nuts. I don't see NM, LA, AR trying to measure themselves up to TX to the extent I see people here doing it with OK, because they have wildly different needs (the biggest of which there is nowhere close to the amount of people, traffic, or population density). 
> 
> And to see this argument coming from admitted conservatives is mind boggling. Are you okay paying vastly more in taxes or fees? Remember, that a gas tax increase went up for a vote a few years ago and was resoundingly rejected. How did you vote in that election? 
> 
> 
> 
> I grew up in the same area PP is from (Plano) and he should know better. He has obviously never been on 75 or the DNT going southbound into Dallas at 730 am.


The roads in Texas have for decades without question helped Texas be more prosperous. I have been personally  told this by people who specialize in major world class corporate relocation to Texas. Exxon is one such example.

Telling people to move to Texas they like the roads so much is juvenile at best.
Clearly we do not need the same things but we can learn from what they have done and build with better standards and in smarter ways that create better economic conditions for our own needs.

----------


## ou48A

> And to see this argument coming from admitted conservatives is mind boggling. Are you okay paying vastly more in taxes or fees? Remember, that a gas tax increase went up for a vote a few years ago and was resoundingly rejected. How did you vote in that election?


Texas will be putting giant chucks of money into a state endowment to help their future funding needs....


Tell me why Oklahoma can't do the same and on our own scale?

----------


## soonerguru

> The roads in Texas have for decades without question helped Texas be more prosperous. I have been personally  told this by people who specialize in major world class corporate relocation to Texas. Exxon is one such example.
> 
> Telling people to move to Texas they like the roads so much is juvenile at best.
> Clearly we do not need the same things but we can learn from what they have done and build with better standards and in smarter ways that create better economic conditions for our own needs.


It's the airports and the port, not the roads.

----------


## ou48A

> It's the airports and the port, not the roads.


No.... that's not totally correct,,,, its all of it and more. 
The bottom line is that they have invested more in the things that let them be more prosperous....
 This includes higher education.

PS: Texas has more than one port

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> LOL. I am laughing so hard that I am crying right now.  It's so sad that people actually think these kinds of things...misinformation has run amok!


Well... at very least, your laughing. I did something positive; making someone laugh.  :Smile:

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> No one is saying they don't want Norman, or Oklahoma overall, to grow and prosper. However there are proper ways to help facilitate that growth and there are also important planning steps to that need to be covered to ensure it isn't growing into the wrong model. Norman already covers 177 sq miles. That is insanely large for a city its size. A lot of that is thanks to having Lake Thunderbird in the city's limits. However, we need to have proper growth planned and designate what areas are going to follow what model. 
> 
> 
> 
> It depends on where the artery is and how the city is setup. I personally can't see Norman's main East/West arteries going to a street that wide simply based on the large number of residential houses that are on most of those streets. Main Street west of Downtown is a bit of an exception since there aren't nearly as many curb cuts are there are on Robinson, Lindsey, etc. 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually it is not and that has been referenced many many times in this thread and others. Let's also remember, OKC is not Dallas...and Norman is not OKC. So your continued comparisons need to start being tempered because you aren't using apples to apples here. This comment also shows the lack of understanding of high density and ped activity development. The point is to keep things walkable and close by. Trying to cross a 6+ lane road is not conducive to such development. Look at major downtown areas that have great walkability. There are very free 6 lane roads for people to fight across. Downtown Chicago has a couple, but we are also talking about Michigan Avenue, Lakeshore, etc which are more exceptions than the rule. 
> ...


I completely understand where you are coming. I will stop posting in this thread until I get to know the city better. I transfer to OU this spring, so I will be spending much more time in Norman, so maybe I'll understand the specifics better.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Uh, driving in Dallas is an absolute nightmare. This must be a joke.


I don't think it is a nightmare.




> Just FYI Texas road lovers, Texas DOT is collapsing under the weight of their oversized road network. Highways and wide roads generate low-density development that doesn't have enough taxable value per acre to support the infrastructure.
> 
> 
> *Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding
> *Texas begins replacing paved roads with gravel due to lack of funding | The Raw Story
> 
> *Texas may shift costly upkeep of urban state highways to Dallas, other cities*
> http://www.dallasnews.com/news/polit...nclick_check=1
> 
> ...


Those stories have very inaccurate information and plenty of states are reevaluating roads that aren't being used as often as they once were and reverting back to gravel. They will fix all of those problems in the future, even Texas can't do everything at once. Very poor arguments on your part.




> I grew up in the same area PP is from (Plano) and he should know better. He has obviously never been on 75 or the DNT going southbound into Dallas at 730 am.


If you're referring to me, I actually grew up in north Edmond, but I moved to Dallas with my dad in 2004 and stayed their until 2009. Yes. those roads got bad during rush hour, but so does I-35 from downtown OKC to Norman, roads here in Edmond are hell a majority of the time and are getting worse, where is the action???

----------


## ou48A

> PS: Texas has more than one port


Just to add to this
List of ports in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to this 4 of the top 8 USA ports are in Texas
9 total Texas ports are listed


This^ is another example of how Texas has invested in their economic well being.
There is not much we can do about our ports but by comparison Oklahoma’s Port of Catoosa is ranked at 118.

----------


## Just the facts

> Yes. those roads got bad during rush hour, but so does I-35 from downtown OKC to Norman, roads here in Edmond are hell a majority of the time and are getting worse, where is the action???


The 'action' is being fought at every turn (literally) by those who think more of the same is the solution.  If your head hurts from banging it against the wall, the solution is not to bang it harder and faster.  It is to stop banging it.

----------


## CuatrodeMayo

> I have been personally  told this by people who specialize in major world class corporate relocation to Texas.


Statements like these are what keeps me coming back to this thread over and over and over...hilarious.

----------


## ou48A

> Statements like these are what keeps me coming back to this thread over and over and over...hilarious.


As opposed to your misinformed opinion.
The information that I gain from being related to 2 people that were involved at the top levels of corporate relocation to the DFW area was very educational.... They had a lot to sale. Just like us they don't have beaches or mountains but somehow they have managed to become a much more prosprous place... Why can't we?

----------


## ou48A

> You my friend, have been bluffed. If you think Exxon is in Texas because of the road system, you are being naive. 
> 
> .


I said it helped. I did not say Texas roads were they only thing that has helped them.
I address  some of those issues in various post.

But from personal conversations from those who spoke with Exxon executives many times, they were very impressed with the lack of CONJESTION compared to NYC on the area Dallas streets and highways.
Just as many other high ranking corporate official are they were tired of wasting their time in CONJESTION.
There were other obvious advantages such as much lower taxes.

----------


## ou48A

> Your friends from New York are also making stuff up. Really, you should pick friends who will tell you the truth more often. 
> 
> New York City - Delay per hour driven in peak period 26 min 
> Dallas - Delay per hour driven in peak period 22 min
> Houston - Delay per hour driven in peak period 32 min
> 
> http://www.tomtom.com/lib/doc/conges...ual-NAM-mi.pdf



First, they are relatives from Dallas.
#2 Since this occurred in the late 80's your information is way off.

Exxon Will Move Its Headquarters To Texas - NYTimes.com

Exxon's chairman, Lawrence G. Rawl, said the company had concluded that *''the Dallas area offered the best combination of factors from the standpoint of our employees' personal and professional lives and from an overall business standpoint.''*

My big point remains... We need to make our self’s more attractive by investing in the things that make us more attractive. Low congested streets highways and other forms of transportation are just one leg of the big table.

If we are in a world economy its time to be competitive on a world stage and that includes what goes on in Norman by making our lives less congested.

PS Have you ever meet Mr. Rawl.... I once did many years ago while I was attending OU.

----------


## soonerguru

> So then, it sounds like they'd be ready to leave if congestion in Dallas is just as bad as in NYC.  Except they won't.
> 
> No one, not a single person, is saying that businesses won't move to places where there is a fantastic "combination of factors". You cited and stood behind traffic congestion being a very significant reason. I'm just letting you know, if Lindsey gets roundabouts, it won't change a darn thing for our business climate. In fact, it will likely improve it. I know this because businesses are choosing to be located to places all the time with as much or even *significantly more* congestion.  Seattle is attracting businesses like crazy and it is one of the worst cities in the world for congestion. It doesn't matter much though because it has fantastic quality of life and amazing transit. Which businesses know can be both sufficient and even better than having unclogged roads. 
> 
> I'm sticking with this discussion because I truly believe that cities must look beyond the actuaries that businesses used *back in the 80s*. 
> 
> I'm not saying however, that roads don't need investment and that gridlock is okay. Don't misconstrue my words. But there is a happier medium and that exists in the form of a complete streets approach that focuses on quality of life improvements. We need a holistic and even defensive view of our streets and corridors. Businesses will see the value of that and want to be a part of it. 
> 
> There is then at least two ways to do this. I hope you'll respect the opinion of others in that and realize that neither side is taking an anti-business position. I personally believe that the shift has already started and that Texas cities will not always be at the top of these lists as so many other cities in the US are doing great things to attract businesses here for other reasons (quality of life amenities is what we tend to see primarily). But to coax your pride a little here you go: Texas Dominates The Best Cities For Good Jobs - Forbes


ou48a will never, ever, admit he is wrong. It is not an attractive trait. As far as he is concerned, he has never been wrong in any argument he's made.

Back to topic, ou48a rightly says that Norman needs to make itself a more attractive destination for recent college grads, and then he proceeds to argue in favor of solutions to problems that recent college grads couldn't care two $hits about, and seemingly argues against things that might make Norman a more appealing place for them to live post graduation. It's opposite land.

----------


## venture

> ou48a will never, ever, admit he is wrong. It is not an attractive trait. As far as he is concerned, he has never been wrong in any argument he's made.
> 
> Back to topic, ou48a rightly says that Norman needs to make itself a more attractive destination for recent college grads, and then he proceeds to argue in favor of solutions to problems that recent college grads couldn't care two $hits about, and seemingly argues against things that might make Norman a more appealing place for them to live post graduation. It's opposite land.


Great point. Look I think we all understand there multiple things the new city needs to do to be attractive to both businesses and retaining brain power. Your typical college grad, sub-40, isn't going to want to live in suburbiaville that is outside of the core of Norman (that I defined earlier). You are also going to need those suburban neighborhoods to an extent for those families that would come with any company that relocates here. However, you can't sacrifice the core for suburbia. 

The Lindsey Street project is pretty much a done deal and is just more of the same. There was an opinion article in the paper today by Robert Gallagher - Let?s build a more efficient traffic pattern for Lindsey Street  Opinion  The Norman Transcript. He is part of the "Citizens for Financially Responsible Government Norman" group. It should also be noted he was a former councilman that was tossed out on his rear in the last election as part of the house cleaning that took place. 

Now, the part where changing the project after the specifics were voted on is definitely an issue we have to be careful of. So that I don't really disagree with him on. However, then you get to one of his main closing points...




> Our city staff has advised us that the plan of four lanes and stoplights at intersections is the best one.  We are likewise facing a time frame to tie in with ODOT’s construction on I-35.
> 
> Let’s improve the flow from Imhoff Creek, build a more efficient traffic pattern for Lindsey, and show the voters that their money is well spent.


As far as the "best one" when it comes to solutions, we have mountains of evidence that has proven that Norman's city planning department is filled with people who are stuck in the 1980s. They are use to things being done their way and they are going to be slow to change. About the only thing that will fix that is an immediate firing of every moron in that department. Their time has past it is time to move on. 

Anyone who claims a roadway with traffic lights is a great solution for the most efficient traffic pattern is an idiot. Yes I'm being blunt because if they honestly believe that, their IQ is around 39. Even if you time lights properly, it still isn't going to flow perfectly. One side is going to get backed up severely because that traffic is going to hit every single light. When you look at Lindsey, traffic is going to be pretty consistent both directions all day. In the morning you have commuters heading to 35 with the students coming in. In the evening you have students heading out and commuters coming back in. There isn't a set pattern where you can effectively time the lights to push traffic in and out without screwing the other side.

So what we are doing is...oh, kicking the can...that sounds familiar. I would imagine we'll see a speed limit increase on Lindsey now to at least 35 all the way to Berry. Granted that means the average driving is going to be closer to 40-45 which will make those that front end/t-bone accidents all the more "wonderful" to experience. Obviously Norman PD will have to step up enforcement otherwise the safety factor of Lindsey isn't going to go anywhere. Sure it may not turn into a lake anymore after a drizzle, but there will probably still be the fair share of blood spilled. Perhaps supports of this design will volunteer to go clean up the accident scenes themselves? 

Also completely lost in this, from supposedly "business friendly" supporters, is that they are completely ignoring the businesses on Lindsey Street. The Norman Developers Council came out in full support of the roundabout solutions, but agreed to a compromise of a roundabout at Berry. Then you have the push to make Lindsey a high density mixed use destination street. Of course the definition of such development isn't a street lined with wide-sidewalks, bike lanes, and side-walk seating for restaurants and stores...in Oklahoma it tends to be big single box units or strip malls with a field of asphalt between them on the street. 

It is what it is though. We are only half way there and can fire the other half of council at the next city election. We also need to make sure that the proposals being put before the city need to be well vetted and thought out before even going to the polls. This project saw a good amount of opposition though, but I can only imagine what it is going to be like for the Berry to Campus portion. That is going to get downright ugly if people want to start taking bulldozers through a strong residential neighborhood for the enhancement of game day traffic.

----------


## ou48A

> ou48a will never, ever, admit he is wrong. It is not an attractive trait. As far as he is concerned, he has never been wrong in any argument he's made.
> 
> Back to topic, ou48a rightly says that Norman needs to make itself a more attractive destination for recent college grads, and then he proceeds to argue in favor of solutions to problems that recent college grads couldn't care two $hits about, and seemingly argues against things that might make Norman a more appealing place for them to live post graduation. It's opposite land.



You are wrong on both counts...
If proven wrong I would say that I stand corrected...i have actually done that on occasion
You are also wrong, but to a much lesser degree about college graduates.
This is much more about making Oklahoma and Norman more at active to people who make important decisions.... Like where business will be located and where they will be hiring college graduates will We must get that right first before we end the brain drain. This is not to say that making things better for college graduates isn't a worthy goal but even they need good jobs first. Your limited ability to see what's really required first s revealing.

----------


## ou48A

> Your typical college grad, sub-40, isn't going to want to live in suburbiaville that is outside of the core of Norman .



From  what I see broad generalizations such this^  just would not hold up to scrutiny in Norman or in very many places in Oklahoma.... Almost everyone in the past 4 years that has moved in to my sub- division is well under 40 a college graduate and originally from Oklahoma. What you think young people  want is without question not in fact occurring with a very large segment of young well educated Oklahoman's. But the bottom line is this.... If their was a great demand for the core Norman /urban life style that you other want so bad  we would already see far more of it and A LOT more on the way.

----------


## ou48A

> So then, it sounds like they'd be ready to leave if congestion in Dallas is just as bad as in NYC.  Except they won't.
> 
> No one, not a single person, is saying that businesses won't move to places where there is a fantastic "combination of factors". You cited and stood behind traffic congestion being a very significant reason. I'm just letting you know, if Lindsey gets roundabouts, it won't change a darn thing for our business climate. In fact, it will likely improve it. I know this because businesses are choosing to be located to places all the time with as much or even *significantly more* congestion.  Seattle is attracting businesses like crazy and it is one of the worst cities in the world for congestion. It doesn't matter much though because it has fantastic quality of life and amazing transit. Which businesses know can be both sufficient and even better than having unclogged roads. 
> 
> I'm sticking with this discussion because I truly believe that cities must look beyond the actuaries that businesses used *back in the 80s*. 
> 
> I'm not saying however, that roads don't need investment and that gridlock is okay. Don't misconstrue my words. But there is a happier medium and that exists in the form of a complete streets approach that focuses on quality of life improvements. We need a holistic and even defensive view of our streets and corridors. Businesses will see the value of that and want to be a part of it. 
> 
> There is then at least two ways to do this. I hope you'll respect the opinion of others in that and realize that neither side is taking an anti-business position. I personally believe that the shift has already started and that Texas cities will not always be at the top of these lists as so many other cities in the US are doing great things to attract businesses here for other reasons (quality of life amenities is what we tend to see primarily). But to coax your pride a little here you go: Texas Dominates The Best Cities For Good Jobs - Forbes


That's a fair and reasonable post and I agree with a lot of it..... but please know that Norman OK has had very well dissevered reputation of being the most difficult city in Oklahoma and one of the most difficult places in the center of the USA to build a new or expanded business.. Many business do not what to build in locations that do not have good traffic flow... and that's most Norman near OU and including Lindsey west of campus. If we want redevelopment it takes our investment in a wide range of incentives.

They have tried to address this issue but with not much success according to some I have talked with. This issue has been a very hot topic in the business community over the years. Its probably a big part of why Norman hasn't been much more that a bed room / university/ government / community.

----------


## MsProudSooner

DFW area roads are good if your commute is reasonable.  If you live in Allen and work in Frisco or Plano - no problem.  But if you live in Allen and work near the little airport in Carrollton, like my daughter does, it's not quite so convenient.  She used to work near the 635/75 interchange and live in Rockwall.  That's another nightmare commute.  635 is a perpetual mess and the exits from 635 to 75 are death traps in rush hour traffic. 

The best thing for DFW area traffic would be a good mass transit system, light rail or something similar.

----------


## ou48A

> DFW area roads are good if your commute is reasonable.  If you live in Allen and work in Frisco or Plano - no problem.  But if you live in Allen and work near the little airport in Carrollton, like my daughter does, it's not quite so convenient.  She used to work near the 635/75 interchange and live in Rockwall.  That's another nightmare commute.  635 is a perpetual mess and the exits from 635 to 75 are death traps in rush hour traffic. 
> 
> The best thing for DFW area traffic would be a good mass transit system, light rail or something similar.


They  have a light rail system (DART) along with some commuter rail. 
I took DART's light rail Green line the for the OU Texas week end. It included about 19 stops on the way back to the park and ride. The OU football team was on slow buses and they almost beat me back to Norman.
 Following the 2012 OU-Texas game I was sneezed on and caught a cold that last a few days... While mass transit works well for some if I have any other options I'm going to use them first from now on even if it cost me a little more.

----------


## venture

> From  what I see broad generalizations such this^  just would not hold up to scrutiny in Norman or in very many places in Oklahoma.... Almost everyone in the past 4 years that has moved in to my sub- division is well under 40 a college graduate and originally from Oklahoma. What you think young people  want is without question not in fact occurring with a very large segment of young well educated Oklahoman's. But the bottom line is this.... If their was a great demand for the core Norman /urban life style that you other want so bad  we would already see far more of it and A LOT more on the way.


So you are taking what is happening in your little subdivision to mean that it is happening in a large way? If you are going to apply one critique to what I say, at least apply it to yourself as well. This is why most have disregarded yours posts as trash.

As far as demand for the urban lifestyle. There have been several developments attempted, and thanks to the city being slow...they continue to fester and not get approved. How long have we been waiting for the city to formalize its zoning requirements for high density? The city is holding it up right now...not developers. The more urban development at 12th and Lindsey is proof their is demand. They are on their 3rd building now and that development is much more urban than anything up in your neck of the woods.

----------


## venture

> They  have a light rail system (DART) along with some commuter rail. 
> I took DART's light rail Green line the for the OU Texas week end. It included about 19 stops on the way back to the park and ride. The OU football team was on slow buses and they almost beat me back to Norman.
>  Following the 2012 OU-Texas game I was sneezed on and caught a cold that last a few days... While mass transit works well for some if I have any other options I'm going to use them first from now on even if it cost me a little more.


Welcome to mass transit. Sneezed on and got a cold? Damn karma. :-P

----------


## ou48A

> So you are taking what is happening in your little subdivision to mean that it is happening in a large way? If you are going to apply one critique to what I say, at least apply it to yourself as well. This is why most have disregarded yours posts as trash.
> 
> As far as demand for the urban lifestyle. There have been several developments attempted, and thanks to the city being slow...they continue to fester and not get approved. How long have we been waiting for the city to formalize its zoning requirements for high density? The city is holding it up right now...not developers. The more urban development at 12th and Lindsey is proof their is demand. They are on their 3rd building now and that development is much more urban than anything up in your neck of the woods.




In the end the bottom line is what I'm talking about. The redevelopment  of the core that you want that would let large numbers of people live there is not occurring because the demand just isn't there to any great extent.... and the evidence is highly suggestive that its not going to occur to any great extent without major change in how we conduct business in Norman and in Oklahoma. 

Few developers would take a chance on the core of Norman in a high end way and in any great way that mattered. Why....  because there is very little vacant land that isn't control by government entities, the streets and drainage are bad in many cases, Normans water could be more secure, Norman is a certified difficult place to do business and there are much better prospect for the return on invested capital. 

You want it to change it (and I do too)but it take high end jobs  to relocate in or near the core of Norman to fundamentally change the equation. But not to many high end jobs will occur without well designed rebuilt streets, good drainage and a big package of economic incentives along with other issues. 

This is partly how we have held our self’s back from become better and more prosperous.

----------


## heyerdahl

As venture pointed out, there is demand (active proposals) for high-density development north of campus that the city hasn't figured out how to regulate. There has been lots of increased density between the train tracks and Jenkins north of Boyd, working around the existing regulations. While Norman turns down developers, OU grads are filling waiting lists for urban apartments in Deep Deuce.

You are correct about one thing- businesses today are looking for neighborhoods with redesigned streets for their office locations. But they are not looking for 5-lane sprawl roads. They're looking for Project 180. Devon bankrolled removing car lanes, adding parking and bike lanes, and expanding sidewalks for the entire business district. They have to convince college grads to move to OKC.

----------


## Geographer

This is easily the most entertaining thread on OKC Talk.

----------


## ou48A

> As venture pointed out, there is demand (active proposals) for high-density development north of campus that the city hasn't figured out how to regulate. There has been lots of increased density between the train tracks and Jenkins north of Boyd, working around the existing regulations. While Norman turns down developers, OU grads are filling waiting lists for urban apartments in Deep Deuce.
> 
> You are correct about one thing- businesses today are looking for neighborhoods with redesigned streets for their office locations. But they are not looking for 5-lane sprawl roads. They're looking for Project 180. Devon bankrolled removing car lanes, adding parking and bike lanes, and expanding sidewalks for the entire business district. They have to convince college grads to move to OKC.


Core Norman is not downtown OKC

What little new housing there is in core Norman is on a very small scale and mostly aimed at students. Venture know this is true.

 If the age long pattern holds true most of these new developments in Norman  will look like crap in another 20 to 25 years and have had several owners. Virtually none of these will move the needle to any significant degree on increasing the areas wealth / income which is needed to create large scale redevelopment in core Norman, on any meaningful scale.. But I would bet there is a market for at least one high end condo units of $500,000 to $750000 and on up somewhere very near campus which might  increase the wealth by enough to help interest others in redevelopment....

.... but you still have a very serious shortage of land for development of scale.

----------


## ou48A

> This is easily the most entertaining thread on OKC Talk.


And you have been a big part of it.

Its entertaining only because several people like you keep wanting to put a square peg in a round hole that just won't work in Norman....

 Norman needs high end jobs and their wealth creation for its core redevelopment. 
To get enough high end jobs serious changes need to be made on several fronts.
These things just don't happen out of thin air because we want them to happen.


There is a bunch of youthful idealistic thinking being done by people like you about the core of Norman.

----------


## CuatrodeMayo

> But not to many high end jobs will occur without well designed rebuilt streets, _good drainage_...


Another gem.

----------


## catch22

> And you have been a big part of it.
> 
> Its entertaining only because several people like you keep wanting to put a square peg in a round hole that just won't work in Norman....
> 
>  Norman needs high end jobs and their wealth creation for its core redevelopment. 
> To get enough high end jobs serious changes need to be made on several fronts.
> These things just don't happen out of thin air because we want them to happen.
> 
> 
> There is a bunch of youthful idealistic thinking being done by people like you about the core of Norman.


That's kind of ironic since he wants a roundabout and you want a square intersection. So I think you're trying to put the square peg in  :Smile:

----------


## ou48A

> Another gem.


More like another worthless post from you.

----------


## ou48A

> That's kind of ironic since he wants a roundabout and you want a square intersection. So I think you're trying to put the square peg in


Ironic perhaps, but if he wants a redeveloped core of Norman its not going to happen just because he says it should happen!

----------


## venture

> Core Norman is not downtown OKC
> 
> What little new housing there is in core Norman is on a very small scale and mostly aimed at students. Venture know this is true.
> 
>  If the age long pattern holds true most of these new developments in Norman  will look like crap in another 20 to 25 years and have had several owners. Virtually none of these will move the needle to any significant degree on increasing the areas wealth / income which is needed to create large scale redevelopment in core Norman, on any meaningful scale.. But I would bet there is a market for at least one high end condo units of $500,000 to $750000 and on up somewhere very near campus which might  increase the wealth by enough to help interest others in redevelopment....
> 
> .... but you still have a very serious shortage of land for development of scale.


What I do know is that any high density housing complex proposed has pretty much been put on hold as the city is slow to figuring out how to zone it. So yes, everything is on a small scale now because these large scale projects are on hold. That is pretty well advertised, so thank you for proving my point there.

This fight has been on going for years. The Campus Corner development that would be 6-stories and house over 500 residents is in limbo still. Why? City Council. One of the prime reasons is Councilman Jungman who has been slow to get things going. He's up for re-election soon, as are all the even numbered wards, and they will likely all get bounced out if the last election is any indicator. As far as any shortage of land...obviously all these projects will be mostly redevelopment projects. Replacing single family units and such with high density housing. You know...how development is suppose to happen - not sprawl sprawl spawl. There is demand...the city just needs to get off their ass and get the language passed.

----------


## venture

> And you have been a big part of it.
> 
> Its entertaining only because several people like you keep wanting to put a square peg in a round hole that just won't work in Norman....
> 
>  Norman needs high end jobs and their wealth creation for its core redevelopment. 
> To get enough high end jobs serious changes need to be made on several fronts.
> These things just don't happen out of thin air because we want them to happen.
> 
> 
> There is a bunch of youthful idealistic thinking being done by people like you about the core of Norman.


There is some limited old tired ideas being floated around as well that are now well passed their time. Luckily the influence will continue to fade as people behind those old ways die off and the "youthful idealistic" people are the ones that take over.

----------


## soonerguru

> There is some limited old tired ideas being floated around as well that are now well passed their time. Luckily the influence will continue to fade as people behind those old ways die off and the "youthful idealistic" people are the ones that take over.


So ou48a is saying we need to improve Norman to make it more palatable for young, recent college grads, but he decries youthful idealistic ideas? WTF?

This isn't a discussion. This is like talking to a wall.

----------


## venture

> So ou48a is saying we need to improve Norman to make it more palatable for young, recent college grads, but he decries youthful idealistic ideas? WTF?
> 
> This isn't a discussion. This is like talking to a wall.


Exactly. We've have people contribute to this thread that either have experience when it comes to projects like this or have researched it extensively. Yet they are laughed at by one or two individuals stuck in a time warp. We need to get this discussion back on a serious track. Away from these continuous derailments by someone who is will past their prime...and well past their time.

----------


## Just the facts

> There is some limited old tired ideas being floated around as well that are now well passed their time. Luckily the influence will continue to fade as people behind those old ways die off and the "youthful idealistic" people are the ones that take over.


This is why I try and not get to worked over this issue.  Norman will either adopt a development style that is sustainable now, or it will do it the near future as natural attrition takes over.  The only real question is how big a financially liability are the current residents going to leave future residents, and will those future residents being interested in paying the bill.

----------


## LocoAko

This is as anecdotal as any of ou48a's stuff, but I'm a young person getting my MS at OU and the Norman of subdevelopments and more 4-lane arterial roads is extremely unattractive and doesn't make me feel good about staying in Norman. I'd love some density, walkability, bike lanes, and roundabouts (gasp). But what do I know.

----------


## MsProudSooner

> They  have a light rail system (DART) along with some commuter rail. 
> I took DART's light rail Green line the for the OU Texas week end. It included about 19 stops on the way back to the park and ride. The OU football team was on slow buses and they almost beat me back to Norman.
>  Following the 2012 OU-Texas game I was sneezed on and caught a cold that last a few days... While mass transit works well for some if I have any other options I'm going to use them first from now on even if it cost me a little more.


DART is great if you live and work along it's limited routes.  If you work downtown and live close to 75 or I-35 it makes life easier.  But it's not of much use otherwise.

----------


## Dubya61

> From  what I see broad generalizations such this^  just would not hold up to scrutiny in Norman or in very many places in Oklahoma.... Almost everyone in the past 4 years that has moved in to my sub- division is well under 40 a college graduate and originally from Oklahoma.


I wonder if they have done that because of the dearth of other options in Norman.

----------


## Just the facts

> DART is great if you live and work along it's limited routes.  If you work downtown and live close to 75 or I-35 it makes life easier.  But it's not of much use otherwise.


Aspirin is great for a headache if you take it.  But if you don't take it aspirin is pretty much worthless otherwise.  It is pretty much the same story with everything.

----------


## kevinpate

If nothing else, this thread has help convince me of what I will do for Halloween.

I'm gonna find me a large ou48A nametag, a Clint Eastwood mask and spend the night at Lindsey/Berry hollarin' 'Hey you kids, get off my intersection'

----------


## ou48A

> If nothing else, this thread has help convince me of what I will do for Halloween.
> 
> I'm gonna find me a large ou48A nametag, a Clint Eastwood mask and spend the night at Lindsey/Berry hollarin' 'Hey you kids, get off my intersection'


You know your side has a very weak argument when it resorts to personal attacks like this one^

----------


## adaniel

> This is as anecdotal as any of ou48a's stuff, but I'm a young person getting my MS at OU and the Norman of subdevelopments and more 4-lane arterial roads is extremely unattractive and doesn't make me feel good about staying in Norman. I'd love some density, walkability, bike lanes, and roundabouts (gasp). But what do I know.


I can tell you I know a ton of former Normanites around me in Midtown, and I know a lot have bought houses in an around the Plaza District and Western. At least one I talked to had the same complaint as this. 

I thought I would never see the day when OKC was more progressive than Norman. Really sad.

----------


## ou48A

> DART is great if you live and work along it's limited routes.  If you work downtown and live close to 75 or I-35 it makes life easier.  But *it's not of much use otherwise*.


 Agree....
Mass transit  helps but it's hardly a solution in all cases.
 It's good that the Dallas area is undergoing several  massive road building projects with more apparently on the books

----------


## ou48A

> I wonder if they have done that because of the dearth of other options in Norman.


The options for core Norman as a major development  area for living are seriously limited by a lack of available land.

To change that you have to change the equation by making the area as wealthy as you can so that redevelopment can occur.... But making the area wealthy involves making changes and investments in our community and state of a nature that most here don't seem to grasp. But to some here wealth and its creation is are like dirty words.

----------


## venture

> The options for core Norman as a *major development  area for living are seriously limited by a lack of available land.*
> 
> To change that you have to change the equation by making the area as wealthy as you can so that redevelopment can occur.... But making the area wealthy involves making changes and investments in our community and state of a nature that most here don't seem to grasp. But to some here wealth and its creation is are like dirty words.


Yes...because existing properties are never purchased, cleared, and have new structures built on. How is that working out for Stage Center?

----------


## kevinpate

> You know your side has a very weak argument when it resorts to personal attacks like this one^


from one old bean to another, you're being a tad thin skinned to raise a whimper of personal attack. you've dropped multiple posts deriding posters of being limited or having only youthful idealism or considering a thought you disagree with worthless etc.

Some of the youngsters amongst us aren't wrong. You might consider being a bit less dismissive of their thoughts than you've been here and elsewhere. 

I doubt I'm the only post mid-century person in Norman who wouldn't mind seeing some growth in the core, or to recognize it would be happening already if our local council would get off their collective arses and either lead or get out of the way of those who already have proposals.  I'm amazed it's tougher to get approval to build a nice complex near campus corner than it was for the developers to build what' going to go in off Tecumseh and 36th. 

If we should happen to run into each other on Halloween, I promise to have a spare nametag for you that says The Real ou48A. Somehow, I don't think folks will get confused too easily even without it, but hey, fair be fair.

----------


## ou48A

> Yes...because existing properties are never purchased, cleared, and have new structures built on. How is that working out for Stage Center?


Please tell us where the hundreds of millions are going to come from to help redevelop the core of Norman?  
Then please tell us what it would take to get developers to redevelop the core of Norman in ways that actually matter more than a token small scale apartment complex or 2.

This is not OKC or anywhere else. It's Norman with its own set of obstacles.

----------


## Just the facts

> Please tell us where the hundreds of millions are going to come from to help redevelop the core of Norman?


All of a sudden you don't believe in the growth model (borrow and spend now and wait for the resulting growth to pay back the debt)?  How about the same place all the money comes from to keep spreading Norman out all over the prairie?




> This is not OKC or anywhere else. It's Norman with its own set of obstacles.


No kidding.

----------


## venture

> Please tell us where the hundreds of millions are going to come from to help redevelop the core of Norman?  
> Then please tell us what it would take to get developers to redevelop the core of Norman in ways that actually matter more than a token small scale apartment complex or 2.
> 
> This is not OKC or anywhere else. It's Norman with its own set of obstacles.


You already have developers wanting to spend millions in putting in new high density developments, but nothing can move forward until the city finalizes the language and zoning areas. I find it interesting that you are now down playing these are small scale apartments when...complexes that are 6 stories high and house 500 people, I wouldn't really consider small for some of the first high density developments here. 

You versus about 15 of us have been playing this game for awhile now. We've provided documentation, sources, and people that are experts in the areas being addressed have all chimed in. You discount everything if it doesn't fit your narrowed vision of the world and resort to using the "line of the day" to defend your position when you get backed into a corner on your previous position. You have yet to justify your position at all except for making claims that some family member's cousin's brother's uncle shared a drink with some top exec 40 years ago and some how all that applied back then still applies today. At some point you need to realize when a certain line of thinking is past its time. You attack people saying they are being youthful idealists and dismissing their point. Yet you are the first to support any similar enthusiasm that would 6-lane every road in Norman and add half a dozen more highways with 83-level overpasses. 

Norman has plenty of people wanting to invest money here. The problem right now is still city council's molasses nature of passing the high density ordinance language to get the areas zoned. Once that happens these projects can start progressing. Until then, everything is in a holding pattern. Perhaps you should start focusing your energy on asking your local councilman on why they don't have the language passed yet. Are you holding them accountable for what isn't going right in Norman at this time or are you just going to blindly re-elect him next election? 

If Norman is going to be prepared for commuter rail then we need to start preparing to build density in the core of Norman. Whether the station ends up being downtown or next to campus, these developments are going to be the key to success. It's time to get the language passed and start letting these developments move forward. With the road blocks right now, no one is going to bother risking an investment when they could be in violation before construction is done.

----------


## venture

> All of a sudden you don't believe in the growth model (borrow and spend now and wait for the resulting growth to pay back the debt)?  How about the same place all the money comes from to keep spreading Norman out all over the prairie?


But that's different money though isn't it? That sort of development that sprawls Norman to almost 200 sq miles is completely sustainable...right? Not to mention the wish list that these sprawlers should be served with a commuter rail stop on Tecumseh Road in north Norman where there is hardly any population density. Kerry...I think we are all fighting a losing battle with this. It is like beating a pinata after all the candy has already been removed and the kids have dumped koolaid on it...but it is still tied up to the tree hanging on and being defiant. At some point it just becomes sad and pathetic to look at.

----------


## ou48A

> You already have developers wanting to spend millions in putting in new high density developments, but nothing can move forward until the city finalizes the language and zoning areas. I find it interesting that you are now down playing these are small scale apartments when...complexes that are 6 stories high and house 500 people, I wouldn't really consider small for some of the first high density developments here. 
> 
> You versus about 15 of us have been playing this game for awhile now. We've provided documentation, sources, and people that are experts in the areas being addressed have all chimed in. You discount everything if it doesn't fit your narrowed vision of the world and resort to using the "line of the day" to defend your position when you get backed into a corner on your previous position. You have yet to justify your position at all except for making claims that some family member's cousin's brother's uncle shared a drink with some top exec 40 years ago and some how all that applied back then still applies today. At some point you need to realize when a certain line of thinking is past its time. You attack people saying they are being youthful idealists and dismissing their point. Yet you are the first to support any similar enthusiasm that would 6-lane every road in Norman and add half a dozen more highways with 83-level overpasses. 
> 
> Norman has plenty of people wanting to invest money here. The problem right now is still city council's molasses nature of passing the high density ordinance language to get the areas zoned. Once that happens these projects can start progressing. Until then, everything is in a holding pattern. Perhaps you should start focusing your energy on asking your local councilman on why they don't have the language passed yet. Are you holding them accountable for what isn't going right in Norman at this time or are you just going to blindly re-elect him next election? 
> 
> If Norman is going to be prepared for commuter rail then we need to start preparing to build density in the core of Norman. Whether the station ends up being downtown or next to campus, these developments are going to be the key to success. It's time to get the language passed and start letting these developments move forward. With the road blocks right now, no one is going to bother risking an investment when they could be in violation before construction is done.


But there is nothing of the very high end quality that moves the needle that spurs other new development. We need major incentives and large numbers of high end jobs located in or near the core of Norman to see redevelopment.
What's going on now is basically the same old stuff built on the cheap and will look bad in 20 or so years... It really is the same type of stuff that's been built in the suburban areas of Norman for decades.

The projects you site are simply not a major amounts of development money and basically amounts to peanuts in the grand scheme of things.

But I do agree that the city needs to get it act together on all of this.

----------


## ou48A

> All of a sudden you don't believe in the growth model (borrow and spend now and wait for the resulting growth to pay back the debt)?  How about the same place all the money comes from to keep spreading Norman out all over the prairie?



Actually I believe in both (redevelopment and the suburban life + rural) and have said so but you and several others are just to blinded by you own set of thoughts to see where I indicated that fact.

I feel this way because for every person who wants to live in a urban core area there are going to be far more who want a different life style, such as suburban or rural. But no matter what said here there is nothing wrong with living those life styles if that's what those people want.

----------


## Just the facts

I am not surprised you think the growth model works.  If it did every level of government in the US would be so flush with cash we couldn't spend it all.  We also seem to have a fundamental disagreement on what is meant by 'suburban'.  I gather you think of 'suburb' as income-segregated housing, 3-tier dendritic street network, commercial shopping areas with large surface parking lots, and single pod land use (office park here, shopping center over there, apartments down there, etc...).

I prefer a T3 type of suburbia.  Like green eggs and ham, I think you would prefer it also if you tried it.  Here are some picture showing T-3 suburban.

Transect Collection | T-3 SUB-URBAN

----------


## heyerdahl

> The projects you site are simply not a major amounts of development money and basically amounts to peanuts in the grand scheme of things.
> 
> But I do agree that the city needs to get it act together on all of this.


??

One of the developments that was denied would have been on par with LEVEL or The Edge at Midtown- two of OKC's most significant residential projects.

----------


## ou48A

> ??
> 
> One of the developments that was denied would have been on par with LEVEL or The Edge at Midtown- two of OKC's most significant residential projects.


OK, but what type of clientele were  they aiming at... How big was the project.
Would it have raise the areas per capital income by enough that we would seen other large scale projects that start buying up occupied land, clear it, and redevelop it to on any significant scale... 
We need many high income jobs for this to occur in a meaningful way... 

Norman is in competition for development capital. This money knows few boundary's.
 There are other developments that have much better risk / reward prospects.

----------


## ou48A

> I am not surprised you think the growth model works.  If it did every level of government in the US would be so flush with cash we couldn't spend it all.  We also seem to have a fundamental disagreement on what is meant by 'suburban'.  I gather you think of 'suburb' as income-segregated housing, 3-tier dendritic street network, commercial shopping areas with large surface parking lots, and single pod land use (office park here, shopping center over there, apartments down there, etc...).
> 
> I prefer a T3 type of suburbia.  Like green eggs and ham, I think you would prefer it also if you tried it.  Here are some picture showing T-3 suburban.
> 
> Transect Collection | T-3 SUB-URBAN


Its not a matter of what works.
Its a matter of what people want.... and that will never really change in  free society.

----------


## venture

> Actually I believe in both (redevelopment and the suburban life + rural) and have said so but you and several others are just to blinded by you own set of thoughts to see where I indicated that fact.
> 
> I feel this way because for every person who wants to live in a urban core area there are going to be far more who want a different life style, such as suburban or rural. But no matter what said here there is nothing wrong with living those life styles if that's what those people want.


Look, if you are going to call people "blinded by you(r) own set of thoughts" then at least look in the mirror and do it...because you are exhibiting the same behavior. So let's be fair here.

The problem with the OKC area as a whole is that there hasn't really been a sustainable offering of urban living until just recently. Yes there will always be those that want to live in a suburban setting, and personally I prefer being in a less dense area, but there is a growing trend for more urban living and high density units. Of course when I move out away from the urban core, I don't expect city utilities and services to follow.

----------


## venture

> OK, but what type of clientele were  they aiming at... How big was the project.
> Would it have raise the areas per capital income by enough that we would seen other large scale projects that start buying up occupied land, clear it, and redevelop it to on any significant scale... 
> We need many high income jobs for this to occur in a meaningful way... 
> 
> Norman is in competition for development capital. This money knows few boundary's.
>  There are other developments that have much better risk / reward prospects.


So you are sitting here talking about investment in the community and all of that, and you have zero knowledge of the high density developments that have been proposed? Why are you acting like you "know" what is going on when you just admitted to having no clue at all? At least fight to retain at least one shred of credibility you haven't lost yet on this forum. 

How big was the project? Are you not even paying attention to this thread? LOL 



Those houses it would replace would be low end and range from $60-160k in value. Would it spur more development in that area? Absolutely. That's a no brainer. Let's not forget you go over one more block to the west and home values skyrocket up to as high as $457k. I don't think people working at McDonalds are living there.

----------


## venture

Some news over the summer on the high density ordinance explaining that the zoned area is going to be from Campus Corner up to Downtown. That is going to be a great area to revitalize. 

High-density ordinance on hold in Norman until 'vision' can be assessed | News OK

----------


## ou48A

> So you are sitting here talking about investment in the community and all of that, and you have zero knowledge of the high density developments that have been proposed? Why are you acting like you "know" what is going on when you just admitted to having no clue at all? At least fight to retain at least one shred of credibility you haven't lost yet on this forum. 
> 
> How big was the project? Are you not even paying attention to this thread? LOL 
> 
> 
> 
> Those houses it would replace would be low end and range from $60-160k in value. Would it spur more development in that area? Absolutely. That's a no brainer. Let's not forget you go over one more block to the west and home values skyrocket up to as high as $457k. I don't think people working at McDonalds are living there.


An average new one bedroom apartment in Midland TX is going for $1500 a month and unlike Norman it comes with a very cooperative and eager  community. There are more than a few places like Midland TX in the USA right now... Norman is in direct competition for apartment  development dollars that come from all over the world.....

As it stands Norman can't compete with these rates of return without significantly changing our wealth equation...It's pretty much no brainier where the majority of the this type of money is going to flow... to the best rates of return. 

Clearly I don't know everything there is to know about what make a developer decide where to build but  I do know that for them the money and their prospects have got to be right and the fact that you do understand scale or the hundreds of millions needed for Norman very specifically speaks very poorly to your own knowledge and credibility because you haven't come close to getting the big money pictuer part right yet.  Learn to follow the big money and you might.

----------


## soonerguru

> An average new one bedroom apartment in Midland TX is going for $1500 a month and unlike Norman it comes with a very cooperative and eager  community. There are more than a few places like Midland TX in the USA right now... Norman is in direct competition for apartment  development dollars that come from all over the world.....
> 
> As it stands Norman can't compete with these rates of return without significantly changing our wealth equation...It's pretty much no brainier where the majority of the this type of money is going to flow... to the best rates of return. 
> 
> Clearly I don't know everything there is to know about what make a developer decide where to build but  I do know that for them the money and their prospects have got to be right and the fact that you do understand scale or the hundreds of millions needed for Norman very specifically speaks very poorly to your own knowledge and credibility because you haven't come close to getting the big money pictuer part right yet.  Learn to follow the big money and you might.


Midland? Midland? Midland?

You really don't get it, or else you're being purposely obtuse for the case of pure sophistry. This is borderline troll behavior at this point. I'm out. It's impossible to have a discussion with you. You are a righteous ideologue.

----------


## venture

> An average new one bedroom apartment in Midland TX is going for $1500 a month and unlike Norman it comes with a very cooperative and eager  community. There are more than a few places like Midland TX in the USA right now... Norman is in direct competition for apartment  development dollars that come from all over the world.....
> 
> As it stands Norman can't compete with these rates of return without significantly changing our wealth equation...It's pretty much no brainier where the majority of the this type of money is going to flow... to the best rates of return. 
> 
> Clearly I don't know everything there is to know about what make a developer decide where to build but  I do know that for them the money and their prospects have got to be right and the fact that you do understand scale or the hundreds of millions needed for Norman very specifically speaks very poorly to your own knowledge and credibility because you haven't come close to getting the big money pictuer part right yet.  Learn to follow the big money and you might.


Oh this is just getting laughable, what's next the apartment rates in San Angelo and the puppet is liking the post right away on queue. I'm with Guru...this is just borderline troll behavior and you aren't worth the attention anymore. The game was fun, but you are in the minority here and just really aren't worth it anymore. Thanks for the entertainment. The rest of us will get back to discussing the issues serious and with some facts to back us up.

----------


## ou48A

> Midland? Midland? Midland?
> 
> You really don't get it, or else you're being purposely obtuse for the case of pure sophistry. This is borderline troll behavior at this point. I'm out. It's impossible to have a discussion with you. You are a righteous ideologue.


Apparently your going to stick your head in the sand too.

Yes Midland TX... Why Midland, because money seeks the higher rates of return and for the foreseeable future Midland and a good number of other places like Midland *are a better investments for big money than Norman.*

Its things like this that make a huge difference to us and its time to start understanding we are in competition with other places for these dollers. Norman needs to get far more serous about offering incentives for high wage jobs if they want quality redevelopment on any significant scale>

Midland is a very wealthy place, with very nice amenity's for its size. It shows what wealth creation can do for a community.
According to this Midland had the #2 per capita income in the USA
Midland second highest US city in personal income per capita - Mywesttexas.com: Top Stories

----------


## ou48A

> Oh this is just getting laughable, what's next the apartment rates in San Angelo and the puppet is liking the post right away on queue. I'm with Guru...this is just borderline troll behavior and you aren't worth the attention anymore. The game was fun, but you are in the minority here and just really aren't worth it anymore. Thanks for the entertainment. The rest of us will get back to discussing the issues serious and with some facts to back us up.


You fail to understand how the money impacts Norman and its scale!
You fail to understand  how far behind we are in being truly competitive for the scale of the  things you want!

You fail to understand that Norman and all of Oklahoma is in in direct competition for investment dollars from around the world and that if we don't make our own investment environment right with the right laws, regulations, infrastructure and education and much more,,,, that we won't ever even come close to reaching even an average USA per capita income.

----------


## soonerguru

> You fail to understand how the money impacts Norman and its scale!
> You fail to understand  how far behind we are in being truly competitive for the scale of the  things you want!
> 
> You fail to understand that Norman and all of Oklahoma is in in direct competition for investment dollars from around the world and that if we don't make our own investment environment right with the right laws, regulations, infrastructure and education and much more,,,, that we won't ever even come close to reaching even an average USA per capita income.


You are making a sophomoric macroeconomic argument to justify Norman's poor civic planning. You're mixing metaphors.  People agree that Norman needs more jobs, DUH, and better paying ones, DUH. The point is that Norman is not going to position itself to compete for growth unless and until it embraces its inner city. Being a bedroom community with a rotting urban core -- and stagnant leadership -- won't get done what you want done. Quit acting like everyone else is an economic neophyte.

----------


## soonerguru

> Apparently your going to stick your head in the sand too.
> 
> Yes Midland TX... Why Midland, because money seeks the higher rates of return and for the foreseeable future Midland and a good number of other places like Midland *are a better investments for big money than Norman.*
> 
> Its things like this that make a huge difference to us and its time to start understanding we are in competition with other places for these dollers. Norman needs to get far more serous about offering incentives for high wage jobs if they want quality redevelopment on any significant scale>
> 
> Midland is a very wealthy place, with very nice amenity's for its size. It shows what wealth creation can do for a community.
> According to this Midland had the #2 per capita income in the USA
> Midland second highest US city in personal income per capita - Mywesttexas.com: Top Stories


Great, and isn't it also an absolute $hithole where nobody wants to live? And what on earth does it have to do with Norman? It seems like a very poor analogy.

----------


## Just the facts

Midland, TX - home to this proposal.  How would you like this in downtown Norman OU48A?

----------


## ou48A

> Midland, TX - home to this proposal.  How would you like this in downtown Norman OU48A?


That's absurd for Norman 
But its needed in Midland, if you knew the place at all you would know that.

----------


## ou48A

> Great, and isn't it also an absolute $hithole where nobody wants to live? And what on earth does it have to do with Norman? It seems like a very poor analogy.


Your showing your ignorance of the situation.... Other than its water, Midland, the town its self is not a butt hole place... it's growing very fast and has many very nice high end things.......

* but it really doesn’t make any difference what you and I think about the place.* 

*Some NYC investor is pouring his money into several places just like Midland  **** That's the point.******

The question is how do we get these investors to invest in Norman and on a scale that makes a diffrence*

That's what your side is missing the boat on

----------


## Just the facts

OU48A - you remind me of Goldilocks and the Three Bears.

This tower is too big and absurd for Norman
This development isn't high dollar enough for Norman
This project is.....

You have access to the internet - pick any project in the world that you think would be 'just right' for Norman, because I am starting to think there isn't one.

----------


## heyerdahl

> The question is how do we get these investors to invest in Norman and on a scale that makes a diffrence[/B]
> 
> That's what your side is missing the boat on


Well, it wouldn't hurt to be a oil patch boom town hundreds of miles from the closest city. Midland and Williston, ND are economic anomalies incomparable to Norman.

Some comparable cities getting big investments: Places like Ann Arbor, MI; Boulder, CO. College towns in major metros that are investing in their core, building density, and trading outdated wide roads for bike/ped infrastructure.

----------


## ou48A

> Well, it wouldn't hurt to be a oil patch boom town hundreds of miles from the closest city. Midland and Williston, ND are economic anomalies incomparable to Norman.
> 
> Some comparable cities getting big investments: Places like Ann Arbor, MI; Boulder, CO. College towns in major metros that are investing in their core, building density, and trading outdated wide roads for bike/ped infrastructure.



The point  I'm trying to make is that high incomes jobs  do attract development and the resulting investment and how investment can help attract high end jobs.  

At this point Norman really isn't competitive on the world or US stage for out side investors to come in and build large scale high quality buildings that would occupied by people with 6 figure incomes,,, at least on on a scale that changes the equation.. Norman has a well deserved reputation of being a very difficult place to do business in... We need to change that too.
I only brought Midland up to help illustrate the point of how wealth attracts investors.

Again and for about the 3 time I'm not against doing some of the things that are being sujested.

----------


## ou48A

> OU48A - you remind me of Goldilocks and the Three Bears.
> 
> This tower is too big and absurd for Norman
> This development isn't high dollar enough for Norman
> This project is.....
> 
> You have access to the internet - pick any project in the world that you think would be 'just right' for Norman, because I am starting to think there isn't one.


So I'm suppose to pick my dream house with knowing how I'm going to pay for it.
Like so many things you dwell in that's putting the cart completely before the horse.

Get the money situation right, then we can talk...That's what most good investors / bankers would say.

----------


## Just the facts

I don't get it OU48A.  Somehow we drifted into circular reference land.  So now you are saying Norman can't have a quality project because we don't have anyone here to finance/propose/develop such a project but we can't attract those types of people because we don't have any quality projects?  That is one hell of a catch 22 and doesn't bode well for Norman's future.  We might as well close the city gates, roll up the sidewalks, and turn out the lights.

----------


## CaptDave

> You are making a sophomoric macroeconomic argument to justify Norman's poor civic planning.


And there is no economic justification for suburban sprawl - the most economically efficient way to arrange dwellings and businesses is to maximize density.... and around and around we go.

----------


## ou48A

> I don't get it OU48A.  Somehow we drifted into circular reference land.  So now you are saying Norman can't have a quality project because we don't have anyone here to finance/propose/develop such a project but we can't attract those types of people because we don't have any quality projects?  That is one hell of a catch 22 and doesn't bode well for Norman's future.  We might as well close the city gates, roll up the sidewalks, and turn out the lights.


You are going to need very large amounts of money.... now tell us where it's going to come from?




A very big chunk of it will need to come from the investment community... but for the foreseeable future the investors have much better prospects, even in a generally national stagnant economy.
I don't get why you can seem to understated the money part of a project... 
The money is always the biggest hurtle on building anything this significant.
The fact is that we can dream all we want but with out the resources/ money most of it is a wasted effort.

----------


## Just the facts

Well - no one is going to finance a plan that isn't defined, so lets start defining one.  Come up with something good that increase the tax base, encourages business expansion, while utilizing existing public infrastructure and it is possible the good people of Norman would self-fund the proposal.

Just for fun, lets call it NAPS - Norman Area ProjectS.  I'll let you pick the first project.

----------


## OKVision4U

> OU48A - you remind me of Goldilocks and the Three Bears.
> 
> This tower is too big and absurd for Norman
> This development isn't high dollar enough for Norman
> This project is.....
> 
> You have access to the internet - pick any project in the world that you think would be 'just right' for Norman, because I am starting to think there isn't one.


Norman could really do well w/ a 8 - 10 story Tower (or Twin Towers) w/ high end apartments / condos with retail on the lower floors.  Place this at the corner of Chautauqua & Imhoff area.  And looking east facing the east.

This is a great need that could really have an impact.

----------


## Just the facts

> Chautauqua & Imhoff area


High density living without any of the benefits of high density living?  People don't live on top of each other so they can hear the people above them - they do it so they are within walking distance of life's daily necessities.  If Norman had an 8 story residential tower it would either need to be adjacent to Campus Corner or in downtown Norman.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Midland, TX - home to this proposal.  How would you like this in downtown Norman OU48A?


That building would be freaking awesome somewhere along Class or NW Expressway, preferably somewhere near the Founders Tower. With it's current design however, it does not belong in the core of a city. This would be cool for Norman, but it would have to follow much more urban design principles as the only logical place for this in Norman would be in the core.

----------


## OKVision4U

> High density living without any of the benefits of high density living?  People don't live on top of each other so they can hear the people above them - they do it so they are within walking distance of life's daily necessities.  If Norman had an 8 story residential tower it would either need to be adjacent to Campus Corner or in downtown Norman.


JTF, that entire area is HIGH density.  Several apt complexes.  This is also the area that other condos are located, but they are outdated.  

This type w/ retail below, Starbucks / Book Store / Rest / ...would work fine.

----------


## warreng88

> High density living without any of the benefits of high density living?  People don't live on top of each other so they can hear the people above them - they do it so they are within walking distance of life's daily necessities.  If Norman had an 8 story residential tower it would either need to be adjacent to Campus Corner or in downtown Norman.


Yeah, the best place for a truly high density development would in the parking lots north of Boyd on the west side of University Blvd. You would be right across the street from Blackbirds and In the Raw and right down the street from central Campus Corner which is just north of the campus. Not sure who owns those parking lots though.

----------


## OKVision4U

> That building would be freaking awesome somewhere along Class or NW Expressway, preferably somewhere near the Founders Tower. With it's current design however, it does not belong in the core of a city. This would be cool for Norman, but it would have to follow much more urban design principles as the only logical place for this in Norman would be in the core.


... I can see this Class A Tower directly on 1-35 & Hwy 9 North corner.  It could be its own destination piont w/ other mid level offices adjacent.  ....similar to Houston @ Galleria did years ago in Uptown area.

----------


## Just the facts

How many dwelling units per acre do you consider 'high density'?  You can put a 100 units in one building but if that building sits on 10 acres it is only 10 units per acre, but because of the distance between structures it isn't walkable.  This is why Le Corbusier is infamous.

----------


## OKVision4U

> Yeah, the best place for a truly high density development would in the parking lots north of Boyd on the west side of University Blvd. You would be right across the street from Blackbirds and In the Raw and right down the street from central Campus Corner which is just north of the campus. Not sure who owns those parking lots though.


...that would work too.

----------


## OKVision4U

> How many dwelling units per acre do you consider 'high density'?  You can put a 100 units in one building but if that building sits on 10 acres it is only 10 units per acre, but because of the distance between structures it isn't walkable.  This is why Le Corbusier is infamous.


Several 3 story apt complexes now.  This area has a great deal of walk-ablility to events / campus / and easy access to Hwy 9 for commuters.

----------


## BDK

> Yeah, the best place for a truly high density development would in the parking lots north of Boyd on the west side of University Blvd. You would be right across the street from Blackbirds and In the Raw and right down the street from central Campus Corner which is just north of the campus. Not sure who owns those parking lots though.


A little off topic, but In the Raw is dead, sad to say.

----------


## venture

> Norman could really do well w/ a 8 - 10 story Tower (or Twin Towers) w/ high end apartments / condos with retail on the lower floors.  Place this at the corner of Chautauqua & Imhoff area.  And looking east facing the east.
> 
> This is a great need that could really have an impact.


On the land owned by OU? I'm not sure they would really go for it. Personally I would hate to live over there with the stench from the water treatment and compost facilities.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> ... I can see this Class A Tower directly on 1-35 & Hwy 9 North corner.  It could be its own destination piont w/ other mid level offices adjacent.  ....similar to Houston @ Galleria did years ago in Uptown area.


Just looked at that area, seems cool. Again, sorry Norman fans, I would rather see this in OKC, but if it were to be in Norman, that would be a good place. Like I said, I am not familiar with Norman, so to me, the only place I thought of was the core, but it would need be redesigned on the ground level and have better street interaction. I am not aware of any place in Norman that would fit a good collection of suburban oriented massive skyscrapers.

----------


## OKVision4U

> On the land owned by OU? I'm not sure they would really go for it. Personally I would hate to live over there with the stench from the water treatment and compost facilities.


...not the OU land, but on the West side of Chatauqua & Imhoff )( Sw Corner There are thousand of people living in that area now.

----------


## warreng88

> A little off topic, but In the Raw is dead, sad to say.


Really? When did that happen? We went down to Blackbird's about a month ago and I thought it was still open.

----------


## venture

> Just looked at that area, seems cool. Again, sorry Norman fans, I would rather see this in OKC, but if it were to be in Norman, that would be a good place. Like I said, I am not familiar with Norman, so to me, the only place I thought of was the core, but it would need be redesigned on the ground level and have better street interaction. I am not aware of any place in Norman that would fit a good collection of suburban oriented massive skyscrapers.


I get you would rather see this in OKC, which I don't see a place for it in Norman right now anyway, but why would you be posting in the Norman section that "OMG this would be cool in this part of OKC!!!!" It would be like going to an Omaha forum saying "OMG this building would be better in Dallas"...it makes no sense. 

Regardless. Proposals have been raised in the past for high rise developments near I-35. The most recent was I-35 and Lindsey (west of the interstate) but that was years ago and never went anywhere. The next major commercial/office space development is going to be the UNP complex development. The six buildings, 3 stories each, with adjacent corporate hangars with direct airport access, is going be the main project for now. Once that is developed and filled up, then we can looking at other high rise endeavors - unless some operation is going to fill a large portion of it right off the bat. High density housing is going to be the primary/main draw for right now in the areas already highlighted near Campus Corner north to downtown.

----------


## Just the facts

> Several 3 story apt complexes now.  This area has a great deal of walk-ablility to events / campus / and easy access to Hwy 9 for commuters.


It is hard to tell if you are serious or just out to make stuff up, but either way I can use you as prop for spreading my message.

Do you consider this dense and walkable?

----------


## OKVision4U

> Just looked at that area, seems cool. Again, sorry Norman fans, I would rather see this in OKC, but if it were to be in Norman, that would be a good place. Like I said, I am not familiar with Norman, so to me, the only place I thought of was the core, but it would need be redesigned on the ground level and have better street interaction. I am not aware of any place in Norman that would fit a good collection of suburban oriented massive skyscrapers.


...I would love to see this in OKC core as well, I think it would work there too.

I am not comparing Norman to Houston, but when the Placed this tower in the Galleria area, it was because with this in mind.  Build the tower next to the people w/ money ( and give them access to shop).  At that time in Houston, ...downtown was not easy to get around and shop.

----------


## OKVision4U

> It is hard to tell if you are serious or just out to make stuff up, but either way I can use you as prop for spreading my message.
> 
> Do you consider this dense and walkable?


..Yes, very serious.  Please look at the SW corner of Chatauqua & Imhoff ( old car wash & for sale ).  Yes, those buildings on the North of that corner is 3 story apt.  Buildings to the South are apt too.   It works very well.  The Mixed use Tower would work w/ Residential & Retail below.  Thank you for the map, that helps.

----------


## venture

> ...not the OU land, but on the West side of Chatauqua & Imhoff )( Sw Corner There are thousand of people living in that area now.


Those apartment complexes, most of them, aren't significantly old - so acquisition costs are going to be pretty high. Of course one you tear them down you destroy any density you have there. Whereas farther north, you are removing old single family houses to put in a development that will have 25-30 units per acre. That is a much more logical area to development. Plus you feed off of Campus Corner as well.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I get you would rather see this in OKC, which I don't see a place for it in Norman right now anyway, but why would you be posting in the Norman section that "OMG this would be cool in this part of OKC!!!!" It would be like going to an Omaha forum saying "OMG this building would be better in Dallas"...it makes no sense. 
> 
> Regardless. Proposals have been raised in the past for high rise developments near I-35. The most recent was I-35 and Lindsey (west of the interstate) but that was years ago and never went anywhere. The next major commercial/office space development is going to be the UNP complex development. The six buildings, 3 stories each, with adjacent corporate hangars with direct airport access, is going be the main project for now. Once that is developed and filled up, then we can looking at other high rise endeavors - unless some operation is going to fill a large portion of it right off the bat. High density housing is going to be the primary/main draw for right now in the areas already highlighted near Campus Corner north to downtown.


Ummm, JTF posted a picture of it asking if someone would like to see it in Norman and I said sure, that would be cool. I was simply responding to an already posted question, and I stand by it. If you wanted Norman to become its own distinguished city, what better way to start than getting some unique high-rises as landmarks for its core?

If given the choice, I would choose for it to be in OKC, but lets say this building were proposed in the core of Norman, I would support all the way, it would just need to be pushed up against the street more with better street interaction, only if it were going into the core.

----------


## OKVision4U

> Those apartment complexes, most of them, aren't significantly old - so acquisition costs are going to be pretty high. Of course one you tear them down you destroy any density you have there. Whereas farther north, you are removing old single family houses to put in a development that will have 25-30 units per acre. That is a much more logical area to development. Plus you feed off of Campus Corner as well.


I'm suggesting building on the SW corner of Chautauqua & Imhoff.  The comment on older units was saying that the existing condos in that area now ( single / 2 story ) are outdated.  Thus, new condos would be a hit.  AND, the only high end apt / condo tower.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Really? When did that happen? We went down to Blackbird's about a month ago and I thought it was still open.


It closed sometime this summer.  I was down there in July (I think) and they were gutting it.  A lady overseeing things told me a new pub was going in there.

----------


## Just the facts

> Ummm, JTF posted a picture of it asking if someone would like to see it in Norman and I said sure, that would be cool.


To be fair - I posted that for OU48A to demonstrate that he was talking in circles.

----------


## LocoAko

> ..Yes, very serious.  Please look at the SW corner of Chatauqua & Imhoff ( old car wash & for sale ).  Yes, those buildings on the North of that corner is 3 story apt.  Buildings to the South are apt too.   It works very well.  The Mixed use Tower would work w/ Residential & Retail below.  Thank you for the map, that helps.


I still don't believe you're being serious. 

Just because there's a couple of student developments does not make this "high density". Besides a 7/11 gas station the nearest thing to walk to that is commercial/entertainment is Campus Corner, which is 1.5 miles away. I've lived in Traditions for a summer and walked ... once ... to Main Street for a night out. It was a nightmare and I'd never do it again, especially in Oklahoma summer heat. 

You and I must have very different ideas of what "high density" development means....

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> To be fair - I posted that for OU48A to demonstrate that he was talking in circles.


I know you were asking him, not me. I was just responding for sh*ts and gigs; knowing this will likely never happen.

----------


## OKVision4U

> I still don't believe you're being serious. 
> 
> Just because there's a couple of student developments does not make this "high density". Besides a 7/11 gas station the nearest thing to walk to that is commercial/entertainment is Campus Corner, which is 1.5 miles away. I've lived in Traditions for a summer and walked ... once ... to Main Street for a night out. It was a nightmare and I'd never do it again, especially in Oklahoma summer heat. 
> 
> You and I must have very different ideas of what "high density" development means....


I said place a High End Apt / Condo Tower on that location, ...with the lower floors having a Starbucks / Bookstore / Restaurant / etc. and this will Sell.  This location becomes (The draw).  It's location is best for Students / 20 - 30 Single group / and urbanist.  The condos would be perfect.  Apts would be THE only tower apt available in Norman.  Don't get too confused w/ luster of campus corner.  People don't want to live next door to the Night Life, and remember this.  When Dad's are paying the bills for the daughters, the don't want them next the bars.  lol.

----------


## Dubya61

> Norman needs more density and more projects in general and that alone will do wonders for attracting rick people that ou84 thinks is the most important metric for a city. 
> 
> Oddly, some of the most desirable and livable cities in the country are not ones with high ratios of rich people. Odd, isn't it?


HOW CAN THIS BE?!?!?!  The only time I'll ever be happy is when I'm declared the richest man in the tri-city area and the tri-city area is declared the richest tri-city area in the region!  [/sarc]

----------


## lasomeday

The issue with Campus Corner is parking.  For it to go up, it needs parking garage or two.....  I know that urban walkable places don't need cars, but we are in Oklahoma and it is zoned and necessary because of lack of public transportation.

Campus Corner connecting to Main is essential to increase the urban vibe of Norman.  It could really become a great place if some developments increased the connection between the two.  Stillwater is getting closer to this and its Main Street is further from campus.

----------


## Geographer

> The issue with Campus Corner is parking.  For it to go up, it needs parking garage or two.....  I know that urban walkable places don't need cars, but we are in Oklahoma and it is zoned and necessary because of lack of public transportation.
> 
> Campus Corner connecting to Main is essential to increase the urban vibe of Norman.  It could really become a great place if some developments increased the connection between the two.  Stillwater is getting closer to this and its Main Street is further from campus.


I believe this has been stated before on another thread...but there is SO much parking available near campus corner.  There is plenty of street parking in the surrounding neighborhoods, huge lots of parking on the west side of University...parking should be campus corner's last worry.

----------


## OKVision4U

> JTF, that entire area is HIGH density.  Several apt complexes.  This is also the area that other condos are located, but they are outdated.  
> 
> This type w/ retail below, Starbucks / Book Store / Rest / ...would work fine.



JTF, there a plenty of customers ( Apt / Condo / Retail ) people on that corner.  Plus, quick access to HWY 9 for the commuters.    ....what do you think?

----------


## HangryHippo

> I believe this has been stated before on another thread...but there is SO much parking available near campus corner.  There is plenty of street parking in the surrounding neighborhoods, huge lots of parking on the west side of University...parking should be campus corner's last worry.


Should be, but it won't be.  And a garage for Campus Corner would go a long way toward alleviating concerns about additional development for those that have them.  I agree with you that I believe there is more than enough parking for CC, but many do not.  A garage is preferable if parking is going to be added because we could put housing on top and front it with pedestrian amenities.

----------


## Geographer

Just an FYI....we have strayed so far from the topic of this thread..haha..Lindsey Street.

----------


## CuatrodeMayo

> For some reason, a city of 600K can't get that (OKC).


Much of it comes down to the pervasive "culture of cheapness" in Oklahoma that I have not seen anywhere else in this magnitude.

----------


## dankrutka

> Should be, but it won't be.  And a garage for Campus Corner would go a long way toward alleviating concerns about additional development for those that have them.  I agree with you that I believe there is more than enough parking for CC, but many do not.  A garage is preferable if parking is going to be added because we could put housing on top and front it with pedestrian amenities.


What about a mixed use garage on parking lots north of Hideaway and the one serving the businesses on the west side of Asp (I think the entrance is near the little sushi place). Could the space from those two lots hold a garage and the Buchanan side could have retail spaces and fill the void in the street wall?

----------


## OKVision4U

> Much of it comes down to the pervasive "culture of cheapness" in Oklahoma that I have not seen anywhere else in this magnitude.


...I think it started with that first group of people that decided to build a house in the priarie.  He did not have many resources ( trees / stone ) so he dug a hole and threw sod on the top.

and we have been plagued w/ that "start" ,ever since.  Home of the metal building.

----------


## HangryHippo

> What about a mixed use garage on parking lots north of Hideaway and the one serving the businesses on the west side of Asp (I think the entrance is near the little sushi place). Could the space from those two lots hold a garage and the Buchanan side could have retail spaces and fill the void in the street wall?


My thought was maybe get the lot behind the President's house on University and build a sizable garage there.  If that wouldn't work because of the university, then what about the lot you mention at White and Asp?  You could build something there.

----------


## soonerguru

> Much of it comes down to the pervasive "culture of cheapness" in Oklahoma that I have not seen anywhere else in this magnitude.


Ironically, we built some our most beautiful buildings with some of the finest materials during the Great Depression.

----------


## soonerguru

> I'm suggesting building on the SW corner of Chautauqua & Imhoff.  The comment on older units was saying that the existing condos in that area now ( single / 2 story ) are outdated.  Thus, new condos would be a hit.  AND, the only high end apt / condo tower.


This sets a new standard for patent absurdity on this forum. This is a laughably bad idea. Perhaps you should read more and post less.

----------


## OKVision4U

> This sets a new standard for patent absurdity on this forum. This is a laughably bad idea. Perhaps you should read more and post less.


Guru... do you even got out at all?   ....Maybe you should get out more and look around at the other college towns.  Austin ?  They have several like this.  That means ( Multi Million Dollar ) investments have been made previously, for the exact same purpose.....  So, the idea in not laughable, just the first in the market place.  That makes it even better ( financial ) move.

guru, ...don't even talk about $$$ w/ me.

----------


## soonerguru

> Guru... do you even got out at all?   ....Maybe you should get out more and look around at the other college towns.  Austin ?  They have several like this.  That means ( Multi Million Dollar ) investments have been made previously, for the exact same purpose.....  So, the idea in not laughable, just the first in the market place.  That makes it even better ( financial ) move.
> 
> guru, ...don't even talk about $$$ w/ me.


Why yes, I was in Austin a month ago. The high rise apartments are downtown, in a dense urban area, where they should be. Next question?

----------


## OKVision4U

> Why yes, I was in Austin a month ago. The high rise apartments are downtown, in a dense urban area, where they should be. Next question?


Yes, there are some downtown too.  Downtown should have some, like OKC.  Placing a residential tower w/ retail / Starbuck / Book Store / rest. would work perfectly in that specific location ( Chautauqua & Imhoff , SW corner ).  Now please tell me why you think it would not?

----------


## soonerguru

> Yes, there are some downtown too.  Downtown should have some, like OKC.  Placing a residential tower w/ retail / Starbuck / Book Store / rest. would work perfectly in that specific location ( Chautauqua & Imhoff , SW corner ).  Now please tell me why you think it would not?


Because it is poor planning. There is no interaction with any street life at all. I agree a mid rise apartment complex would work

----------


## OKVision4U

Cuatrodemayo, soonerguru is an example / part of the problem.  Most people around here "think small first" and it holds things back.

----------


## OKVision4U

> Because it is poor planning. There is no interaction with any street life at all. I agree a mid rise apartment complex would work


This (demographic) for vehicle traffic is there.  Most people do not want to live next to "bars / night life".   Like I said before, most Dad's that send the daughers to OU would much rather have the "sweethearts" in a tall tower than a 2/3 story apt.  Most apt. are accessible from Hwy 9....  ( There must be a market for this, previous millions have been invested in the segment too).

Easy access to campus.  This would become the anchor spot for attivity.  (never intending it to be campus corner).

----------


## CuatrodeMayo

> Cuatrodemayo, soonerguru is an example / part of the problem.  Most people around here "think small first" and it holds things back.


You and I are not friends.  SG is a respected poster on this site.  You, not so much.

----------


## OKVision4U

> You and I are not friends.  SG is a respected poster on this site.  You, not so much.


You are correct, you are not my friend.   That would be for "real people in the real world".  

unodemayo, YOu will find that I'm not that concerned regarding ( Blog status in an internet world ).  It's really not a goal of mine.

----------


## David

What the heck is up with you and parenthesis, Vision? Are you aiming for incomprehensibility?

----------


## OKVision4U

Well, it helps this way David.  The main point ( the adjective or secondary point) continues through the statement (but can leave more room for a third point (if needed).  Sorry, I should have made myself more "clear".

----------


## warreng88

Vision, I am going to go out on a limb and say that you really don't care what other people think of you, would that be accurate? I guess my question for you is, what is your purpose for being on this forum? You belittle people for thinking different than you, call them names, for what? Because they have a different opinion? I am on this forum for information. Occasionally I get to share some things with my fellow posters that provides insight on a specific subject. I am willing to learn and admit when I am wrong. I have done it many times before on here. Can you say the same? Are you here to learn or to share your "vast knowledge" with the rest of us? Or are you just hoping we will understand your brilliance but knowing we are all ignorant idiots who wouldn't know a roundabout from a roustabout?

----------


## warreng88

> Well, it helps this way David.  The main point ( the adjective or secondary point) continues through the statement *(but can leave more room for a third point (if needed).* Sorry, I should have made myself more "clear".


Missed an end parenthesis...

----------


## OKVision4U

> Missed an end parenthesis...


I'm glad my internet assistant / secretary caught that.   :Wink:   Thnx.

----------


## OKVision4U

> Vision, I am going to go out on a limb and say that you really don't care what other people think of you, would that be accurate? I guess my question for you is, what is your purpose for being on this forum? You belittle people for thinking different than you, call them names, for what? Because they have a different opinion? I am on this forum for information. Occasionally I get to share some things with my fellow posters that provides insight on a specific subject. I am willing to learn and admit when I am wrong. I have done it many times before on here. Can you say the same? Are you here to learn or to share your "vast knowledge" with the rest of us? Or are you just hoping we will understand your brilliance but knowing we are all ignorant idiots who wouldn't know a roundabout from a roustabout?


Warreng88, what does this have to do with a project in Norman?  ...you're a little off topic.   Stay-up with the rest of the kids on the playground.

----------


## Dubya61

> Warreng88, what does this have to do with a project in Norman?  ...you're a little off topic.   Stay-up with the rest of the kids on the playground.


To be fair, what does a high-rise near OK Hwy 9 have to do with Norman's plans to improve Lindsey St?  Maybe you should stick to the topic, too.  I suspect warreng88 is just expressing some frustration with your discordant, demeaning attitude.

----------


## Just the facts

> Much of it comes down to the pervasive "culture of cheapness" in Oklahoma that I have not seen anywhere else in this magnitude.


You summed up my thoughts perfectly.  It really hit me in the "what businesses would you like" and "OKC Retail" threads and I concluded OKC is a discount city.  It is kind of depressing.

BTW - Culture of Cheapness...  I'm going to work that into my lexicon.

----------


## warreng88

> Warreng88, what does this have to do with a project in Norman?  ...you're a little off topic.   Stay-up with the rest of the kids on the playground.


If I may quote Kevinpate:

"Hmmm, not a chevy answer. not a ford answer. not even a yugo answer. Must be a dodge. Yah, that seems to fit."

----------


## OKVision4U

> You summed up my thoughts perfectly.  It really hit me in the "what businesses would you like" and "OKC Retail" threads and I concluded OKC is a discount city.  It is kind of depressing.
> 
> BTW - Culture of Cheapness...  I'm going to work that into my lexicon.


This culture of cheapness / small thinking, keeps the expectations of our state too low.

----------


## Dubya61

> You summed up my thoughts perfectly.  It really hit me in the "what businesses would you like" and "OKC Retail" threads and I concluded OKC is a discount city.  It is kind of depressing.
> 
> BTW - Culture of Cheapness...  I'm going to work that into my lexicon.


Back in my youth, I was buying my first road bicycle.  I had a good friend helping me navigate the bike shops and options and he told me, "No one ever regretted buying too much bike."  I used his advice, bought exactly what I wanted, and kept that bike for a LOOONG time.

----------


## venture

> To be fair, what does a high-rise near OK Hwy 9 have to do with Norman's plans to improve Lindsey St?  Maybe you should stick to the topic, too.  I suspect warreng88 is just expressing some frustration with your discordant, demeaning attitude.


I'm going to take part of the blame.

I'm going to respond to the various posts above but I'll put them in this thread: http://www.okctalk.com/norman/30576-...tml#post684243

----------


## OKVision4U

> Back in my youth, I was buying my first road bicycle.  I had a good friend helping me navigate the bike shops and options and he told me, "No one ever regretted buying too much bike."  I used his advice, bought exactly what I wanted, and kept that bike for a LOOONG time.


ODOT uses some of the same "old way of doing things" in engineering & certainly design.  Clover-leafs are just not what we need to build in today's time.  I want the Best in Design & Engineering for all new inter-changes, I-240 & I -35...the new project still has clover-leafs.  My families safety deserves more than just "OK".  Have we ever complained to ODOT for building our Best?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> ODOT uses some of the same "old way of doing things" in engineering & certainly design.  Clover-leafs are just not what we need to build in today's time.  I want the Best in Design & Engineering for all new inter-changes, I-240 & I -35...the new project still has clover-leafs.  My families safety deserves more than just "OK".  Have we ever complained to ODOT for building our Best?


TBH, I have kind of changed my stance on this, perhaps other posters are right, if the traffic counts don't support it yet, it will be a hard sell and waste of money to build something we won't need for another 30+years

----------


## ou48A

> money follows money.


That's exactly what I have been saying......!


And the best way to do that is for the City of Norman to get off their butts and get enough high paying jobs to locate in the core of Norman. The investment money would then flow in and the multiplying effect would then be seen at good rates.

This is not entirely a build it and they will come deal... 
Companies and their investors have got to have real solid reasons to locate in Norman's core. But thus far the city of Norman remains largely uncompetitive in capturing new or relocating high wage wealth creating business. Norman needs offer better incentives.

For some reason too many people think its wrong for Norman  to help our business community in the same ways that the truly competitive community's do... 
We need to get this right before we even think about significant redevelopment in core Norman or it will fail.

----------


## David

> Well, it helps this way David.  The main point ( the adjective or secondary point) continues through the statement (but can leave more room for a third point (if needed).  Sorry, I should have made myself more "clear".


No wonder it makes no sense, that isn't how you structure sentences in anything resembling standard english. You would do well to write normally if you want to be taken seriously.

----------


## ou48A

> Well, businesses are saying they are currently choosing places where there is an abundance of educated labor. I can't imagine a better reason for adding more housing in Norman's core. And all along Lindsey Street for that matter (see what I did there?).


The vast majority of current planed development  won't be anything but student housing in about 10 years, if not well before that. That's just the way these deals always work in Norman's environment.

If you want the multiplier effect on investor money we need $500,000 + condos with enough good core Norman jobs to fill them. That's what I have seen work well in Dallas. 

Something else I have seen a lot of in Dallas (Highland Park) is people buying 750,000 + homes some times 2 or 3 of them, tearing them down to build new homes worth millions. There are a lot of worn out looking property north of campus that could some day see this type of redevelopment or hopefully some condos. But we have got to get enough of the great jobs in the core of Norman for significant high quality development.... that would in its self help attract and keep a segment of professionals of all age ranges.

----------


## Just the facts

OU48A - how about this idea.  Instead of Norman spending million to try and lure GE how about the City of Norman offer anyone with over a $5 million net worth a $500,00 cash payment for moving to Norman.  That way we can eliminate the middleman.

----------


## ou48A

> OU48A - how about this idea.  Instead of Norman spending million to try and lure GE how about the City of Norman offer anyone with over a $5 million net worth a $500,00 cash payment for moving to Norman.  That way we can eliminate the middleman.


That's not realistic.
But being competitive enough with the rest of the world  to get GE to locate in Norman is!

----------


## Stew

> OU48A - how about this idea.  Instead of Norman spending million to try and lure GE how about the City of Norman offer anyone with over a $5 million net worth a $500,00 cash payment for moving to Norman.  That way we can eliminate the middleman.


I like that idea.

----------


## Just the facts

I don't know why OU48A doesn't like that idea.  It has much faster results than trying to lure GE.  All those rich people will need homes, cars, services, material goods, entertainment, etc...  It is trickel down on a micro scale.  Why spend money on GE and hope it brings properity when you can just buy prosperity.

----------


## ou48A

> I don't know why OU48A doesn't like that idea.  It has much faster results than trying to lure GE.  All those rich people will need homes, cars, services, material goods, entertainment, etc...  It is trickel down on a micro scale.  Why spend money on GE and hope it brings properity when you can just buy prosperity.


My way creates broader prosperity and is far better for the community. It is realistic and is done in many other community’s around the world.
Your plan, as so often the case, isn't even realistic and worth any further discussion.

----------


## venture

Lindsey Project Outline updated last week: http://ci.norman.ok.us/sites/default...010-31-13f.pdf

Couple notes...


They will be adding another traffic light at Wylie Road - one is not here at the present time.The overall look will be something like Lindsey east of Jenkins, just with bike lanes.Triple canopy option will be include, but depending on the size of trees they get it'll probably take 20-30 years before it is even noticeable.ROW/Utility relocation starts in January and ends December 2014.Bidding begins April 2015.Construction starts July 2015 and ends July 2016.I-35 interchange starts July 2015 and ends October 2016.

So if you were expecting to see anything soon, you'll be waiting for awhile.

----------


## kevinpate

Just what Lindsey really, really needed ... another stoplight. 

Yea.

----------


## BG918

So they are constructing a new bridge with bike lanes and sidewalks at Imhoff Creek just east of Berry.  How far will those new sidewalks extend east from the new bridge, all the way to the existing sidewalks at Chautauqua?  Hopefully they will, as well as the bike lanes and streetlight improvements.

Also it would make sense for the Imhoff Creek bridge to have enough clearance below to allow for a multi-use trail to go under it per the Norman trails master plan.  Even if that trail is not constructed in the next couple years they should plan ahead for it.  The long-range plan is for a paved trail along the creek greenbelt from Lions Park to Imhoff.

----------


## Just the facts

So 4 stop lights in 1 mile.  Doh....  Now Lindsey will have 4 lanes of congestion instead of just 2.  Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

----------


## ou48A

> So 4 stop lights in 1 mile.  Doh....  Now Lindsey will have 4 lanes of congestion instead of just 2.  Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.


I would bet that the new lights will be timed to maximize traffic flow and be able to be controlled from a central location.
 4 lanes allows for far more traffic than 2.

I hope this plan includes right turn lanes at the lights. I hope the bridge its self is wide enough for 4 lanes.... Until they rebuild Lindsey to the east better timed lighting would help move a larger volume of traffic though.

----------


## ou48A

> So they are constructing a new bridge with bike lanes and sidewalks at Imhoff Creek just east of Berry.  How far will those new sidewalks extend east from the new bridge, all the way to the existing sidewalks at Chautauqua?  Hopefully they will, as well as the bike lanes and streetlight improvements.
> 
> Also it would make sense for the Imhoff Creek bridge to have enough clearance below to allow for a multi-use trail to go under it per the Norman trails master plan.  Even if that trail is not constructed in the next couple years they should plan ahead for it.  The long-range plan is for a paved trail along the creek greenbelt from Lions Park to Imhoff.


It would make sense to build a bridge that created a more level road way surface.
This would make the bridge higher and perhaps longer?

----------


## Just the facts

> I would bet that the new lights will be timed to maximize traffic flow and be able to be controlled from a central location.
>  4 lanes allows for far more traffic than 2.


That's good because the extra capacity is going to induce more people to use it until it returns to its current state of equilibrium.

----------


## Geographer

LOL!!!! Another stop light...this has got to be a joke.

I have officially lost ALL faith in the city of Norman.

Oh well! We tried.

It's not like they heard a presentation on exactly how to FIX Lindsey from one of the leading experts or anything recently.

----------


## ou48A

> That's good because the extra capacity is going to induce more people to use it until it returns to its current state of equilibrium.


Then by using your theory we should turn Lindsey into a walk way, bike path and build a trolly line.
But that would induce demand onto other narrow broken down Norman streets just like the current 2 lane Lindsey street already does a very good job of doing.

----------


## ou48A

More people would probably use Wylie  if it did not have so many, what seem like unnecessary stop signs.

----------


## ou48A

> I'm sorry, but you don't get it. You can't simply time your way out of this problem. *Every single time* someone approaches Lindsey from the North or the South, you are going to trigger a timer. Sure, they could time the lights to favor E/W traffic, but eventually, you're going to have to stop traffic. It really doesn't matter how cruel you are to N/S traffic, you're going to have to make E/W traffic come to a complete hault. You do that 4 times in a mile and yeah, you're going to have problems.
> 
> Debating it matters very little. All I have to do is just wait for my point to be proven. You'll be cursing the street lights before long but being in love with them, you'll no doubt just blame the timing of them for ever and ever amen. To those who think street lights and more lanes are the answer, it is almost always about not enough lanes and poor timing. Incredibly predictable.


I'm not saying that timing the lights is the total solution but doing so should help some during the high volume traffic periods on Lindsey. To help clear traffic out faster they need to be time differently at different times of the day and also for OU and emergency events. That's pretty commonsense thinking that even you should be able to understand.

----------


## BG918

> I hope the bridge its self is wide enough for 4 lanes.... Until they rebuild Lindsey to the east better timed lighting would help move a larger volume of traffic though.


The section cut shows 2 lanes plus bike lanes and sidewalks on each side for the Imhoff bridge.  This is consistent with what Lindsey will be like from Berry to Jenkins.  Although OU could eventually push for a landscaped median between Elm and Jenkins where there is currently a turn lane, similar to the one east of Jenkins and the one that will be built from 24th to Berry.  I would assume the bike lanes on west Lindsey would connect all the way to OU?

I honestly don't see this helping or hurting traffic and I do hope a more permanent solution to funneling traffic via Hwy 9 is the next project after this one is complete.

----------


## Just the facts

Man that is some good stuff Sid.  Personally I had to laugh at the timing issue.  If the lights could be timed so no one had to stop why would they need a light to begin with (think about that for a minute).  What happens to all this 'timing' if someone pushes the crosswalk button?

----------


## ou48A

> The section cut shows 2 lanes plus bike lanes and sidewalks on each side for the Imhoff bridge.  This is consistent with what Lindsey will be like from Berry to Jenkins.  Although OU could eventually push for a landscaped median between Elm and Jenkins where there is currently a turn lane, similar to the one east of Jenkins and the one that will be built from 24th to Berry.  I would assume the bike lanes on west Lindsey would connect all the way to OU?
> 
> I honestly don't see this helping or hurting traffic and I do hope a more permanent solution to funneling traffic via Hwy 9 is the next project after this one is complete.


Thanks for clarifying that.
I believe this will help traffic some because there are a decent number of business and residents who are located with in a few blocks of Lindsey that use the street all the time. As you move west from Berry on Lindsey the traffic does seem to thin out some by the time you get to I-35.  Obviously Lindsey needs 4 lanes from Elm west and this will eventually happen but the time table is still not known according to what I have been told.

One of the things that is not talked about very much on the Lindsey street project are the major drainage improvements that are many decades overdue. This along with the street improvements should improve property values and encourage redevelopment.

----------


## ou48A

> Man that is some good stuff Sid.  Personally I had to laugh at the timing issue.  If the lights could be timed so *no one had to stop* why would they need a light to begin with (think about that for a minute).  What happens to all this 'timing' if someone pushes the crosswalk button?


They would be overridden by a computer for a longer period of time during peak traffic just like they already do in other places. Walkers would be required to stand around a little longer.
But no where did I say that nobody would ever NOT stop as you imply... When it comes to what others say you and Sid  read whatever  you want to read into it and then twist anything the way you want. This has happened across multiple threads on this board.

----------


## Just the facts

You're right - I must have applied a different meaning to 'maximize traffic flow' than what you meant.

----------


## Geographer

Here is probably how the meeting went:

"How do we make the traffic on Lindsey Street flow better?"

"How about another traffic light? Those don't stop traffic flow ever, right?"

"RIGHT! ...let's do this!"

----------


## venture

So this gets done in 2016...it'll be clogged be 2018 and then they'll be like "da'f..?! We must not have added enough lights and lanes." 

Ahhh what a mess it will be.

----------


## Geographer

I got my Urban Street Design Guide in the mail today....maybe I should just start leaving PDF copies of the book all over the Norman city hall conspicuously? 

#guerilla

----------


## venture

> I read very little on the subject honestly. I can tell you though from experience and a fair amount of mathematical training, signalized timing only works to enhance 2 directions of travel. If you look at the traffic counts on Lindesay, they are not that lopsided. You're either going to have N/S traffic upset because you've greatly favored E/W traffic or you're going to opt for a more balanced approach, which means more signals simply create fewer lanes of traffic moving at the same time.
> 
> You want to believe I'm against signal optimization... nothing could be further from the truth. But like most machines and processes, signalized intersections have limitations. 
> 
> As I was flying into Detroit the other day, it was simply stunning to watch traffic backed up at intersections with signals on the same street traffic was flowing from all directions where roundabouts were installed. The whole world is ripping out signals for passive, more efficient roundabouts and we're building new roads with signals.
> 
> You think me and Kerry are the only ones 'not getting it'? Perhaps the rest of the world has figured it out and you and a few planners in Norman, Oklahoma don't get it? Perhaps experts came in and tried to help you but you didn't listen?  Don't try to play me for stupid. I've yet to see a progressive engineering DOT not be installing roundabouts. Again, I really don't need to waste my breath. Time will prove me correct.  You'll be begging for more timing and more lanes in 10-15 years.


Sid, you can't talk sense into stupid. We've been over this.  :Smile:  The problem is these developers who share OU48's thinking are stuck in the 80s. Maybe it is something as simple as them being shielded from the horribly progressive cities that have learned from their mistakes and embrace new solutions. 

I think anyone with common sense would understand that if a main issue with all of this is football traffic, then more needs to be done to force them down Hwy 9. That road always has significantly more capacity potential than Lindsey every will. You also have more parking availability at LNC. What idiot would seriously want to keep dumping thousands of cars into a residential neighborhood? Of course there is a solution to that. All the residents of that area can easily request and force the city to make their street a no parking zone for game day traffic. Take away the parking, you eliminate the need for them to go there. LNC has PLENTY of parking.

As far as Lindsey being faster to the stadium by car. Yay Google Maps. Lindsey/I-35 to the Stadium = 6 min. Hwy 9/I-35 to the Stadium = 7 min. Is one freaking minute really worth it? That is on a day with no game day traffic. Let's not forget Jenkins is 4 lanes until just north of Constitution. To me that seems to be the no brainer solution with plenty of road capacity. 

All this talk of Lindsey going 4-lane through to Campus is just wishful thinking. It is going to be a massive fight for that to happen and I'm not sure Council members really want to keep risking re-election - which will happen. 

One last idea. Maybe instead of lights, we can have OU48 and his cronies go out and hand direct traffic. Surely they can do better. Hopefully their health insurance is up to date.  :Smile:

----------


## ou48A

> Sid, you can't talk sense into stupid. We've been over this.  The problem is these developers who share OU48's thinking are stuck in the 80s. Maybe it is something as simple as them being shielded from the horribly progressive cities that have learned from their mistakes and embrace new solutions. 
> 
> I think anyone with common sense would understand that if a main issue with all of this is football traffic, then more needs to be done to force them down Hwy 9. That road always has significantly more capacity potential than Lindsey every will. You also have more parking availability at LNC. What idiot would seriously want to keep dumping thousands of cars into a residential neighborhood? Of course there is a solution to that. All the residents of that area can easily request and force the city to make their street a no parking zone for game day traffic. Take away the parking, you eliminate the need for them to go there. LNC has PLENTY of parking.
> 
> As far as Lindsey being faster to the stadium by car. Yay Google Maps. Lindsey/I-35 to the Stadium = 6 min. Hwy 9/I-35 to the Stadium = 7 min. Is one freaking minute really worth it? That is on a day with no game day traffic. Let's not forget Jenkins is 4 lanes until just north of Constitution. To me that seems to be the no brainer solution with plenty of road capacity. 
> 
> All this talk of Lindsey going 4-lane through to Campus is just wishful thinking. It is going to be a massive fight for that to happen and I'm not sure Council members really want to keep risking re-election - which will happen. 
> 
> One last idea. Maybe instead of lights, we can have OU48 and his cronies go out and hand direct traffic. Surely they can do better. Hopefully their health insurance is up to date.


Cheap shot posting tactics

----------


## ou48A

> I read very little on the subject honestly. I can tell you though from experience and a fair amount of mathematical training, signalized timing only works to enhance 2 directions of travel. If you look at the traffic counts on Lindesay, they are not that lopsided. You're either going to have N/S traffic upset because you've greatly favored E/W traffic or you're going to opt for a more balanced approach, which means more signals simply create fewer lanes of traffic moving at the same time.
> 
> You want to believe I'm against signal optimization... nothing could be further from the truth. But like most machines and processes, signalized intersections have limitations. 
> 
> As I was flying into Detroit the other day, it was simply stunning to watch traffic backed up at intersections with signals on the same street traffic was flowing from all directions where roundabouts were installed. The whole world is ripping out signals for passive, more efficient roundabouts and we're building new roads with signals.
> 
> You think me and Kerry are the only ones 'not getting it'? Perhaps the rest of the world has figured it out and you and a few planners in Norman, Oklahoma don't get it? Perhaps experts came in and tried to help you but you didn't listen?  Don't try to play me for stupid. I've yet to see a progressive engineering DOT not be installing roundabouts. Again, I really don't need to waste my breath. Time will prove me correct.  You'll be begging for more timing and more lanes in 10-15 years.


In this case the vast majority of the traffic congest is east-west... Having the lights timed to reflect this during peak traffic times on Lindsey can only help, as will 4 lanes. As I already  indicated the timing should be adjusted to meet the changing demands during the day. This will limit the N/S delays.

----------


## venture

> In this case the vast majority of the traffic congest is east-west... Having the lights timed to reflect this during peak traffic times on Lindsey can only help, as will 4 lanes. As I already  indicated the timing should be adjusted to meet the changing demands during the day. This will limit the N/S delays.


Hum. So limited N/S delays = more light changes. Which means less E/W traffic able to go...yet it means less E/W congestion?

----------


## venture

> Cheap shot posting tactics


I know. How dare I bring posts with facts and figures that can be measured into the discussion. Just like those nasty property values of the $300-500k home on the north side of Lindsey Street that are suppose to be rental dumps. Or the 10 year decline in traffic on Lindsey. Or the roundabout efficiency numbers. Such terrible facts! How dare they show up in a discussion forcing some people to just completely ignore them like they don't exist because they keep them from proving an unintelligent and uneducated point? Damn facts getting in the way.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> LOL!!!! Another stop light...this has got to be a joke.
> 
> I have officially lost ALL faith in the city of Norman.
> 
> Oh well! We tried.
> 
> It's not like they heard a presentation on exactly how to FIX Lindsey from one of the leading experts or anything recently.


You're doing better than the city of Edmond when it comes to stop lights lol. . . Edmond has a freakin fetish for them or something and it's like every new street they widen or rebuild has to have a new traffic light, it's ridiculous!!!!!

----------


## Stew

Last I read of this topic I was under the impression there were to be roundabouts instead of traffic lights but now that's not true. Geeze, I had such high hopes for Norman to lead by example. How disappointing.

----------


## ou48A

> All this talk of Lindsey going 4-lane through to Campus is just wishful thinking. It is going to be a massive fight for that to happen and I'm not sure Council members really want to keep risking re-election - which will happen.


No, its not wishful thinking... It may require a lengthy time period, like 10 or 15 years, maybe more.. But its going to happen. The forces that you criticize who were powerful enough to make sure Norman didn't spend it's limited resources to meet your satisfaction are going to make sure that Lindsey Street is eventually 4 lanes to Elm. 
The people who will make this happen don't care about reelections.

----------


## kevinpate

> Last I read of this topic I was under the impression there were to be roundabouts instead of traffic lights but now that's not true. Geeze, I had such high hopes for Norman to lead by example. How disappointing.


Well, to be fair, the world needs examples of what not to do too.  Like you, I do wish it wasn't us in this instance.

----------


## venture

> No, its not wishful thinking... It may require a lengthy time period, like 10 or 15 years, maybe more.. But its going to happen. The forces that you criticize who were powerful enough to make sure Norman didn't spend it's limited resources to meet your satisfaction are going to make sure that Lindsey Street is eventually 4 lanes to Elm. 
> The people who will make this happen don't care about reelections.


Hmm...so a special interest group strong arming there way, bypassing any public approval requirement and answering to know one to get get it done? Is this Norman or Chicago?  Ideally most of them will be dead from old age before it even gets close to finalized, since local residents there will fight it and eminent domain procedures are always positive press events for people. Definitely smells like a bunch of dirty and crooked people.

Thankfully I don't associate myself with those types. So with that, I should probably stop entertaining myself responding to your nonsense.  :Smile:

----------


## ou48A

> Hmm...so a special interest group strong arming there way, bypassing any public approval requirement and answering to know one to get get it done? Is this Norman or Chicago?  Ideally most of them will be dead from old age before it even gets close to finalized, since local residents there will fight it and eminent domain procedures are always positive press events for people. Definitely smells like a bunch of dirty and crooked people.
> 
> Thankfully I don't associate myself with those types. So with that, I should probably stop entertaining myself responding to your nonsense.


You can be hopelessly little kid like naive... It's not all old people who want this!

 The congestion and the time wasted on Lindsey street (that will continue) is one of the biggest complaints that OU people hear from student's, facility and staff year after year. Some emergency personal have already expressed how the congestion delays their responses. This could be costing lives and causing additional property damage?.... which by far trumps any of your concerns about not building 4 lanes all the way to campus.  

Nearly everybody but a very small but vocal minority which you are very much apart of put's the needs of ten's of thousand of people above a few trees and old homes that are in most cases not in good condition and are often rental property.

In spite of what you may think there are sound logical reasons why very smart, well educated people what to see 4 full lanes in both directions from campus to I-35 on Lindsey. 

Even Boren has basically indicated that something needs to be done but with the way you have repeatedly  stereotyped old people with bigoted remarks he couldn't possibly be smart enough to have a valid opinion and have smarter people than you advising him on the issue.

----------


## venture

> The congestion and the time wasted on Lindsey street (that will continue) is one of the biggest complaints that OU people hear from student's, facility and staff year after year. Some emergency personal have already expressed how the congestion delays their responses. This could be costing lives and causing additional property damage?.... which by far trumps any of your concerns about not building 4 lanes all the way to campus. 
> 
> Nearly everybody but a very small but vocal minority which you are very much apart of put's the needs of ten's of thousand of people above a few trees and old homes that are in most cases not in good condition and are often rental property.
> 
> In spite of what you may think there are sound logical reasons why very smart, well educated people what to see 4 full lanes in both directions from campus to I-35 on Lindsey.


Hey look...every single issue you mentioned what addressed already in this thread. So you just continue to prove what we have been saying. You are blocking out ideas and accurate, factual points that contradict what your world should look like. 


Congestion and wasted time on Lindsey? Hwy 9 to Jenkins is 1 minute longer than taking Lindsey.Emergency _personnel_ have concerns about congestion no doubt. A lot of that didn't go public until very late in the debate, which you never touched on until it was in the Transcript. Yes congestion is bad there, but that doesn't mean the only solution was 4-lanes the entire way with street lights. They have a station a quarter mile from a roundabout right now, where was their opposition to it?Few trees and old homes that aren't in good condition? Thank you. You are just rendering worse and worse. Go back earlier in this thread with maps and everything showing property values of those "old homes" you are talking about. The proof was presented, why continue to ignore it? What is your angle?Sound and logical, perhaps. Outdated? Definitely. What do you care though? You'll be dead before most of this is done anyway and those of us that have to live with it for another 60 years get to try to fix and undo the mistakes made by people with your mindset.

----------


## ou48A

> Hey look...every single issue you mentioned what addressed already in this thread. So you just continue to prove what we have been saying. You are blocking out ideas and accurate, factual points that contradict what your world should look like. 
> 
> 
> Congestion and wasted time on Lindsey? Hwy 9 to Jenkins is 1 minute longer than taking Lindsey.Emergency _personnel_ have concerns about congestion no doubt. A lot of that didn't go public until very late in the debate, which you never touched on until it was in the Transcript. Yes congestion is bad there, but that doesn't mean the only solution was 4-lanes the entire way with street lights. They have a station a quarter mile from a roundabout right now, where was their opposition to it?Few trees and old homes that aren't in good condition? Thank you. You are just rendering worse and worse. Go back earlier in this thread with maps and everything showing property values of those "old homes" you are talking about. The proof was presented, why continue to ignore it? What is your angle?Sound and logical, perhaps. Outdated? Definitely. What do you care though? You'll be dead before most of this is done anyway and those of us that have to live with it for another 60 years get to try to fix and undo the mistakes made by people with your mindset.


Maybe you might need to know some of the right people....
Its still going to happen no matter how you feel.

----------


## venture

> Maybe you might need to know some of the right people....
> Its still going to happen no matter how you feel.


Hmm no response and just dodging as usual. Yeah I'm done with you.

----------


## CaptDave

Not that it matters to "the right people" in Norman.....

How the complete streets movement is improving our communities | Better! Cities & Towns Online

----------


## ou48A

> Hmm no response and just dodging as usual. Yeah I'm done with you.


That's more than fine but you had better get use to the idea that its coming rather you like it or not.
It really is just a matter of when?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Yeeeaaah, after an experience a couple days ago with this road, I'm definitely siding with ou48a on this. The traffic was horrible and I can't see how anyone would think a two lane street and roundabout would help.

I will have to start dealing with this road everyday starting in less than a month and it will suck if traffic was the way is was, every day.

----------


## ou48A

> Yeeeaaah, after an experience a couple days ago with this road, I'm definitely siding with ou48a on this. The traffic was horrible and I can't see how anyone would think a two lane street and roundabout would help.
> 
> I will have to start dealing with this road everyday starting in less than a month and it will suck if traffic was the way is was, every day.


I first experienced this street in the mid 1960's and it should have had 4 lanes or more even back then.
Thankfully its only a very tiny minority that wanted roundabouts and 2 lanes. The reality is they are very isolated in the real world Norman decision making process.

PS: Just wait until some student's car breaks down in the middle of the road and you have someplace you really need to be.
I wish you the best of luck in your endeavor. :Wink:

----------


## venture

> Yeeeaaah, after an experience a couple days ago with this road, I'm definitely siding with ou48a on this. The traffic was horrible and I can't see how anyone would think a two lane street and roundabout would help.
> 
> I will have to start dealing with this road everyday starting in less than a month and it will suck if traffic was the way is was, every day.


You do realize with a roundabout that traffic is able to keep flowing right?  :Smile: 

The current setup is horrible with traffic lights and too many curb cuts.

----------


## LocoAko

> Yeeeaaah, after an experience a couple days ago with this road, I'm definitely siding with ou48a on this. The traffic was horrible and I can't see how anyone would think a two lane street and roundabout would help.
> 
> I will have to start dealing with this road everyday starting in less than a month and it will suck if traffic was the way is was, every day.


It always seems like the majority of the traffic I experience on Lindsey is due to traffic lights, honestly. Obviously volume is a huge part of it but at least roundabouts would keep things moving...

----------


## Geographer

I totally agree.

The delays in moving through Lindsey is due to the TRAFFIC LIGHTS.  If you hit all of the green lights, it takes no time to get through there.

Hmm.

So...should we implement something that makes it to where you basically hit green lights ALL OF THE TIME (roundabouts)? 

Nope, we're adding in another light.

c00l.


I don't want to get into this debate again, but we're really not addressing the actual issue on Lindsey.  Adding more lanes will increase the amount of cars that can be on that road at once, that's not debatable...but if all those cars are being stopped at traffic lights, then we're still having the same problem.

Dan Burden's design called for 4 lanes (you realized that, right?) with roundabouts.  I just don't understand why people are against having continuous traffic. What is the fascination with traffic lights that stop your ability to constantly move?

----------


## HangryHippo

Norman has really screwed the pooch on this Lindsey redo. And basically every other urban issue they take up. Pretty incredible considering all they had to do was consult Blair Humphreys and the OU ICQ for some really good ideas.

----------


## BG918

> Norman has really screwed the pooch on this Lindsey redo. And basically every other urban issue they take up. Pretty incredible considering all they had to do was consult Blair Humphreys and the OU ICQ for some really good ideas.


I heard Blair Humphreys resigned at ICQ to help run his family's company.  I wonder if it was that or was it something else?  I'm hopeful the ICQ will help Norman with future urban issues and that city leadership is on board.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> It always seems like the majority of the traffic I experience on Lindsey is due to traffic lights, honestly. Obviously volume is a huge part of it but at least roundabouts would keep things moving...


So my question to you is how would a roundabout work on a 4 lane road? If you had two cars simultaneously trying to enter the roundabout, there could be a collision and the car on the left could also obstruct the car on the right from seeing incoming traffic.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> You do realize with a roundabout that traffic is able to keep flowing right? 
> 
> The current setup is horrible with traffic lights and too many curb cuts.


The other day was horrible though, bumper-to-bumper for nearly 2 miles. I just don't see how a roundabout could handle that much traffic.

----------


## Geographer

> So my question to you is how would a roundabout work on a 4 lane road? If you had two cars simultaneously trying to enter the roundabout, there could be a collision and the car on the left could also obstruct the car on the right from seeing incoming traffic.



WSDOT - How to drive a roundabout

Scroll down to the multilane roundabout section

----------


## Roger S

> Dan Burden's design called for 4 lanes (you realized that, right?) with roundabouts.  I just don't understand why people are against having continuous traffic. What is the fascination with traffic lights that stop your ability to constantly move?


It gives people a handy place to stop so they can text safely while driving.

Example text: "Sorry I'm late. I'll be there in about 15. Stuck at this stupid traffic light on Lindsay!"

----------


## shawnw

> The other day was horrible though, bumper-to-bumper for nearly 2 miles. I just don't see how a roundabout could handle that much traffic.


I'm not an expert, but I suspect there are much bigger roundabouts in the world that handle much more traffic. 

That said, I'm a bit less confident in the ability of some drivers in the area to properly execute driving a roundabout, thereby causing perceived issues with the roundabout design.


I don't know what the traffic count is on Lindsey, and I haven't read this entire thread, but this doc has a capacity chart in it... http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications...067/000674.pdf

----------


## CaptDave

> The other day was horrible though, bumper-to-bumper for nearly 2 miles. I just don't see how a roundabout could handle that much traffic.


This might help......

----------


## venture

A lot of good response for PluPan to look at. Found a couple videos of larger roundabouts...

----------


## CaptDave

^ Ourston is probably the foremost engineering and design firm for roundabouts in the US. After speaking to one of their engineers/planners, I realized a huge roundabout was not the best solution for the OKC Boulevard (even though I loved Cuatro de Mayo's renderings). But it seems like they would work very well on the Lindsey corridor. Maybe those "right people" in Norman should contact them and learn more about the options available to them.

----------


## venture

We'll probably be talking about this around 2020 when the updated Lindsey is back to being plagued with traffic backups and accidents. However, whats done is done and so be it. 

The next areas to look at are Lindsey to campus, which provides a great opportunity for single lane roundabouts to keep traffic moving through there. Get rid of every traffic light. The next snag point are the pedestrian crossings on Lindsey. If we can prohibit large vehicle traffic down that road, then putting in pedestrian bridges should be looked at. Very tasteful, brick arches to fit in with the rest of the campus. 

Asp Ave put in a single lane roundabout there. Boren has stated he is open to putting on in at Jenkins and they could put up a really nice art piece in the center of it - maybe sports related. 

George Ave has the room for a two lane roundabout. 

Lindsey and Classen is an interesting case. Busy intersection, but large amount of land there. You also have the new higher density development going in at that corner as well. A larger 2-lane roundabout would really go along with that transformation in that area.

----------


## catch22

This reminds me so much of the commercial with Jimmy Fallon (?) where he is trying to convince the baby that more money is good. But the baby doesn't want it.

You can have continuous flow of traffic!

Baby: "No!"

But it's faster and safer than stopping at every light!

Baby: "Nooo!! *giggle*"

----------


## catch22

Here it is.

OMG this is so relevant.

----------


## venture

> This reminds me so much of the commercial with Jimmy Fallon (?) where he is trying to convince the baby that more money is good. But the baby doesn't want it.
> 
> You can have continuous flow of traffic!
> 
> Baby: "No!"
> 
> But it's faster and safer than stopping at every light!
> 
> Baby: "Nooo!! *giggle*"


Some just never grow up.  :Smile:

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> WSDOT - How to drive a roundabout
> 
> Scroll down to the multilane roundabout section





> This might help......





> A lot of good response for PluPan to look at. Found a couple videos of larger roundabouts...


Ok well, consider me sold on it then. The videos seem to prove themselves, so I think it might be a good idea here then. Lets try it and see what happens. I still think it will cause more traffic on game days, but that is a small part of the year.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Never really thought of that, that is a very good idea. Wonder if this is still being considered or is a done deal. . .

----------


## venture

> Never really thought of that, that is a very good idea. Wonder if this is still being considered or is a done deal. . .


From what has been released, any roundabout for West Lindsey is dead. They are in fact going to add another light as well between Berry and McGee to make it even "better". Ideally as they progress east on Lindsey they get away from the lights and go to more roundabouts to keep traffic moving.

----------


## Geographer

No roundabouts will be seen on Lindsey west of Berry. City Council and city engineers pretty much shut that down.

----------


## rezman

> I prefer 2 lanes, no median, bike lanes, and angled parking (if possible).  Back in parking is even better.


Reverse parking would  be cool to see more of, but there are so many people who can't park straight in a parking space driving forward let alone trying to back into one.

----------


## Jeepnokc

> No roundabouts will be seen on Lindsey west of Berry. City Council and city engineers pretty much shut that down.


Sometimes I wish we had a "boo" button next to the like button.

----------


## gamecock

> Reverse parking would  be cool to see more of, but there are so many people who can't park straight in a parking space driving forward let alone trying to back into one.


I know this is off topic, but sadly this is something I have noticed here relative to other places I have lived...or maybe it's just a sign of the times...but a lot of people don't even try to make sure they're in the lines...they pull in and if they got it right, they got it right...if not, oh well...I have left notes on people's cars encouraging them to park in the lines...and I have squeezed into parking spaces just to prove a point...it's maddening....

----------


## Bob Loblaw

I'm stunned that no one has mentioned the City's press release issued late yesterday afternoon regarding a meeting next week to discuss the intentions for Lindsey Street - makes me wonder if most of the folks that dragged this thread all the way to 30 pages actually live in Norman?  

Anyway, read on........

Press Release

For Immediate Release

Contact:          Stacey Parker
City Of Norman
366-5404
stacey.parker@normanok.gov 

**Map Attached**

All interested persons are hereby given notice that the City of Norman, in conjunction with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT), is proposing to reconstruct a portion of West Lindsey Street from 24th Avenue SW to Berry Road in Norman, Oklahoma.  Please see attached map.  

A public informational meeting and open house to present initial project information and receive public input will be held on Monday, March 3, 2014 from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm in the Main Conference Room located at Sooner Legends Inn and Suites at 1200 24th Avenue SW.  The meeting will include a presentation about the proposed improvements to West Lindsey Street including why the improvements are needed, the type of improvements proposed and the expected impacts to motorists and the surrounding community.  The primary purpose of the meeting is to obtain information from the general public and project stakeholders to further assist in the Environmental Assessment process including the identification of critical social, economic and environmental effects that may result from the project.

West Lindsey Street is currently a 3-lane roadway through the project area.  The project consists of widening West Lindsey Street from 24th Avenue SW to Berry Road from three lanes to a divided 4-lane roadway, replacing the Imhoff Creek Bridge and addressing the storm water flooding that has affected this area for many years.  This project also includes upgrading the traffic signals along West Lindsey Street at the intersections of 24th Avenue SW, McGee Drive and Berry Road. The upgrades to West Lindsey Street will provide a safer and more efficient transportation corridor for the traveling public.

The City of Norman strives to accommodate the needs of all residents, including those who may be disabled.  If you would like to attend this meeting but find it difficult because of a disability, architectural barrier, or another special need, please contact Mr. John Clink at (405) 366-5424, by email at John.Clink@NormanOk.gov or by writing to the City of Norman, Engineering Division, PO Box 370, Norman, Oklahoma  73070.
Project Location Map.jpg

----------


## warreng88

Four lane divided street. Yawn. I would hope they would add sidewalks to either side and possibly a bike lane or two. Wonder when they are going to redo Berry to Elm?

----------


## Just the facts

The question is - will these 'improvement' actually make Lindsey better?  Anyone saying Yes, please define 'better'.

----------


## David

> I'm stunned that no one has mentioned the City's press release issued late yesterday afternoon regarding a meeting next week to discuss the intentions for Lindsey Street - makes me wonder if most of the folks that dragged this thread all the way to 30 pages actually live in Norman?


How is it that stunning? Why would living in Norman or not have anything to do with whether or not we've seen a press release less than 24 hours after it is released?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> The question is - will these 'improvement' actually make Lindsey better?  Anyone saying Yes, please define 'better'.


It will certainly make it look better. It will be prettier than what is currently there and increase traffic capacity. Hopefully landscaping will be added.

----------


## Geographer

I've given up on debating what I believe Lindsey street should look like...that's the only reason I don't really post on this thread anymore.  Planners in Norman do not even really view this issue as a planning issue, but simply straight up public works.  There's not much you can do when people working for the city in the planning department don't really care.

This new Lindsey street will look like Main Street around the 24th Ave intersection...a really bad central median with traffic congestion.

----------


## ou48A

> It will certainly make it look better. It will be prettier than what is currently there and increase traffic capacity. Hopefully landscaping will be added.


There is no doubt that it will look better from the very start. 

Many have been avoiding  this stretch of Lindsey because of the congestion.... Business people knew this and knew of reputation this area had for flooding.... This made Lindsey a much less desirable place for business development.

This project now makes both significantly better.... which should lead to redevelopment of Lindsey in due time.... making the area look even better.

----------


## venture

> I've given up on debating what I believe Lindsey street should look like...that's the only reason I don't really post on this thread anymore.  Planners in Norman do not even really view this issue as a planning issue, but simply straight up public works.  There's not much you can do when people working for the city in the planning department don't really care.
> 
> This new Lindsey street will look like Main Street around the 24th Ave intersection...a really bad central median with traffic congestion.


This. It's been debated, the design was picked...it is what it will be. Some people are happy with a suburban/Edmond-like Norman and that's what we are getting. 

With that said, I am going to look forward to the moronic comments made by those that said this will help with congestion when traffic still backs up due to additional traffic lights being added.

----------


## ou48A

> This project also includes upgrading the traffic signals along West Lindsey Street at the intersections of 24th Avenue SW, McGee Drive and Berry Road. The upgrades to West Lindsey Street will provide a safer and more efficient transportation corridor for the traveling public.


If done right better traffic lights should help traffic flow more smoothly, particularly during peak travel..... 
They could stand to have a better traffic light system in much of Norman.

----------


## HangryHippo

> If done right better traffic lights should help traffic flow more smoothly, particularly during peek travel..... 
> They could stand to have a better traffic light system in much of Norman.


The irony of you referring to it as "peek" travel is not lost on me.

I guess peek travel is what will be taking place on Lindsey with all the new stoplights and curb cuts backing traffic up and increasing congestion.

----------


## heyerdahl

Obviously there is tremendous congestion on Lindsey Street which is why every day at both rush hours there are 2 or 3 cops pulling people over for speeding in this area.

----------


## Just the facts

> With that said, I am going to look forward to the moronic comments made by those that said this will help with congestion when traffic still backs up due to additional traffic lights being added.


This^.  Congestion will get worse, injury accidents will increase, and the quality of business structures will not improve - at least that is my guess.

----------


## ou48A

> Obviously there is tremendous congestion on Lindsey Street which is why every day at both rush hours there are 2 or 3 cops pulling people over for speeding in this area.


Rather you care to admit  it or not the real facts are that Lindsey Street is the most congested street in the entire OKC metro area and it also has the highest accident rate for a street in the OKC area as it is now..It wouldn’t take much to improve the situation, and they will!

----------


## venture

> This^.  Congestion will get worse, injury accidents will increase, and the quality of business structures will not improve - at least that is my guess.


It was interesting how the business community in that area didn't want the solution the city picked.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> Rather you care to admit  it or not *the real facts are that Lindsey Street is the most congested street in the entire OKC metro area* and it also has the highest accident rate for a street in the OKC area as it is now..It wouldn’t take much to improve the situation, and they will!


Really? If this is not just rhetoric or hyperbole,  I would like to know what the basis of this statement is. Smells fishy to this observer.

----------


## CuatrodeMayo

Probably not even in the top 10.

----------


## Geographer

If you think expanding Lindsey will solve all traffic problems, I advise you to travel down Robinson between Flood and Porter during in the mornings and early evenings.  That whole area is a nightmare...and it even has 4 lanes!  :Smiley127:    (plus 4 lighted intersections that constantly stop traffic)

----------


## Plutonic Panda

4 lanes each way or 4 lanes total? If they really want to be ahead of the game, I'd say widen it to six. You have to have everything working together though in order for it to work. You can't just widen it and not change the traffic lights or consolidate all of the traffic to that road and not widen other roads. Everything has to work together in order for traffic to flow smoothly.

----------


## venture

> 4 lanes each way or 4 lanes total? If they really want to be ahead of the game, I'd say widen it to six. You have to have everything working together though in order for it to work. You can't just widen it and not change the traffic lights or consolidate all of the traffic to that road and not widen other roads. Everything has to work together in order for traffic to flow smoothly.


4 lanes total...if they would go anymore than that, the person approving it should be taken out back and slapped upside the head for being an idiot. Widen it to 6? Really? You really don't believe in having any foot traffic in a neighborhood do you?

----------


## kevinpate

> If you think expanding Lindsey will solve all traffic problems, I advise you to travel down Robinson between Flood and Porter during in the mornings and early evenings.  That whole area is a nightmare...and it even has 4 lanes!    (plus 4 lighted intersections that constantly stop traffic)


A fair chunk of the traffic you reference is created by traffic to/from Norman North, folks using Flood and Robinson as the conduit in/out of town it is intended to be, and a major artery for west side to get to the DT core.  If that combination did not generate a lot fo traffic for the morning and pm drive it would be a larger concern in my mind.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> 4 lanes total...if they would go anymore than that, the person approving it should be taken out back and slapped upside the head for being an idiot. Widen it to 6? Really? You really don't believe in having any foot traffic in a neighborhood do you?


Ok, then that is part of the problem why is it so congested. It encourages business to relocate knowing they will be safe from any major traffic issue while knowing that the street still has a large traffic count. You apparently hate 6 lane streets for some reason, but I don't see any neighborhoods around that street. So I am not sure how that would affect walkability.

----------


## venture

> Ok, then that is part of the problem why is it so congested. It encourages business to relocate knowing they will be safe from any major traffic issue while knowing that the street still has a large traffic count. You apparently hate 6 lane streets for some reason, but I don't see any neighborhoods around that street. So I am not sure how that would affect walkability.


This is the problem. People are so short term minded and no one ever PLANS for the future anymore. This is what several of us have been getting at. We've been over this too much already. If you haven't been able to get a clue on the position of those who were wanting more from this, then there is no point. 

Do I hate 6 lanes roads? No. They have their place. Usually as major arteries to get commuters from one part of town to another, not as a gateway street to an area where people want to be build more density. Shields is a good example. It is a commuter artery to move people. How has that street done for business development? How walkable is Broadway south of 2nd in your beloved Edmond? You really don't get any sense of density, to the extent you can in a suburb, until you get to downtown. 

Do you even understand what walkability truly means? Here is a hint...it is not walking across a vast river of concrete or several hundred yards from one business to the next. As far as no neighborhood...depends again on how you define it. The entire street goes right into a neighborhood and lets not discount the fact that behind the one row of businesses on both sides you have nothing but houses. Then of course you also have probably a half dozen apartment complexes as well. 

Look...some people have the ability to envision what something could be, and some can only see what is about to smack them in the face. Not everyone has a great imagination or an expansive mind. The vision people had for what Lindsey could become, with proper planning, is a lot better than what we are going to get stuck with.

----------


## ou48A

> Really? If this is not just rhetoric or hyperbole,  I would like to know what the basis of this statement is. Smells fishy to this observer.


When things about Norman start smelling fishy that's usually when you know you are a depending on a form like this way to much to keep you well informed.
 I would suggest that you attend or watch the Norman city council meetings and the the other discussions they have on TV, where its more than just the platitudes of this thread.




> Probably not even in the top 10.


It's not even a little  bit surprising that you would be so far off base.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



There has been a lot wrong said in this thread...... One of the biggest misconceptions on this thread is that Norman traffic is not congested when in fact 2 city of Norman surveys show that Norman congestion is one of the residents biggest concerns!!!!!!!! Its only a very tiny and often radical part of the community that believes otherwise.

The fact is that west Lindsey is the most accident and congested street in the greater OKC area and maybe the state. Those who think otherwise need to watch this video where a city of Norman expert in his area of specialty  discusses those facts. 

He completely destroys many of the arguments that have been on this thread with facts.
He also talks about a wide range of  problems and offers clarity to the misinformed.

----------


## catch22

most congested? LOLOolOOLLlolol000L

I can think of about 20 streets that are more congested.

----------


## soonerliberal

> The fact is that west Lindsey is the most accident and congested street in the greater OKC area and maybe the state. Those who think otherwise need to watch this video where a city of Norman expert in his area of specialty  discusses those facts.


Robinson on both sides of I-35 is busier than Lindsey around the clock on a consistent basis.  Hwy 9 during rush hour is busier than Lindsey during rush hour.  12th St NE near Alameda is busier than Lindsey on a consistent basis.  Just 3 examples...

----------


## venture

> most congested? LOLOolOOLLlolol000L
> 
> I can think of about 20 streets that are more congested.


Hey now, you need add more !!!!!!!!!!!! to your post to prove your point.

Anyway, we've done this go around for how long now. Here is how it'll go down... several of us will post ideas and thoughts from experts that counter established thinking. We'll also provide facts to counter arguments that get ignored. Then we'll have counter points made that blatantly ignore what we are saying and go on about something other stuff or pick up on points that some random expert says only once their previous argument has already been disproved. Then we'll get the posts about how great the new design is, how it needs to be bigger, and the circle .... of OU48 and PluPan liking each others posts. Does that about sum it up?

Decision has been made, some agree - some don't. Norman is just putting a band-aid on the situation and it'll still result in congestion and accidents. Anyone who doesn't get that is either blind or just doesn't have the gift of common sense and vision. What's done is done. Norman is bound to fall in the trap of being transformed into a completely suburb like Edmond with no sense of uniqueness.

----------


## Geographer

> Robinson on both sides of I-35 is busier than Lindsey around the clock on a consistent basis.  Hwy 9 during rush hour is busier than Lindsey during rush hour.  12th St NE near Alameda is busier than Lindsey on a consistent basis.  Just 3 examples...


GASP! But those are at least 4 lane roads!! How can that be!?

But in all seriousness, increasing lanes will increase your capacity for a time, but it also will induce demand. It's been proven time and time again.

The constant stop-go caused by the excess of street lights combined with an excess of curb cut drive-ins causes the crashes...not the road itself.  The more conflict points you have the more accidents you are going to have.  Adding more lanes does not decrease the amount of conflict points a street has...adding in another light at Wylie will only add to the stop-go nature of Lindsey.

----------


## Just the facts

> The fact is that west Lindsey is the most accident and congested street in the greater OKC area and maybe the state. Those who think otherwise need to watch this video where a city of Norman expert in his area of specialty  discusses those facts.


Asking a Director of Public Works if roads should be widened is like asking the CEO of Lockheed Martin if we should go to war in the Ukraine.  What did you expect him to say?

----------


## venture

> GASP! But those are at least 4 lane roads!! How can that be!?
> 
> But in all seriousness, increasing lanes will increase your capacity for a time, but it also will induce demand. It's been proven time and time again.
> 
> The constant stop-go caused by the excess of street lights combined with an excess of curb cut drive-ins causes the crashes...not the road itself.  The more conflict points you have the more accidents you are going to have.  Adding more lanes does not decrease the amount of conflict points a street has...adding in another light at Wylie will only add to the stop-go nature of Lindsey.


Not to mention, look at the average speed of the drivers where we have a similar setup to what West Lindsey will have. Lindsey from Jenkins to the tracks is in this similar configuration and those kids aren't doing 35. 24th Ave NW yesterday...I was doing around 45 and people were flying by me. Heck, even on Robinson the average speed gets around 50 by the airport and well over 35 east of the underpass. What we'll likely end up with is a Lindsey where people are going to be doing well more than 35 mph. Without a reduction in curb cuts and lights, this is going to lead to more rear impact crashes and probably much more substantial ones.

----------


## venture

> Asking a Director of Public Works if roads should be widened is like asking the CEO of Lockheed Martin if we should go to war in the Ukraine.  What did you expect him to say?


You are talking to an individual that also went for months on this thread about football traffic being the main reason for this and then when the Transcript had a quote for the fire chief, suddenly emergency response was his number one reason. Just ignore the part where there is a roundabout a little over a quarter mile away from the fire station on East Main.  :Smile: 

I think we all pretty much gave in to the 4 lane road. Whatever. If congestion is something that needs to be tackled you don't add in more traffic lights and curb cuts. You build in roundabouts, 2-lane ones just like what Manhattan, KS has going into KSU's campus, to keep traffic flowing and mitigate speed. That also makes it much more pedestrian friendly and encourages new developments to build closer to the street - encouraging walkability and higher density development...raising property values...increasing tax income.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> NORMAN — A plan to widen W Lindsey Street from three to four lanes has business owner Tim Sweatte concerned that his drive-in restaurant may suffer economically from the change.
> 
> Classic 50’s Drive-In has been in the same location at 1521 W Lindsey for 57 years, Sweatte said.
> 
> “It’s been a successful run. Lindsey was still a dirt road when my father, Juel Glenn Sweatte, opened it as Glenn’s Drive-In,” Sweatte said.
> 
> The drive-in later was operated for 28 years as a Sonic, until becoming the Classic 50’s Drive-In in 1985. Its main business — at least, 80 percent — is college students, Sweatte said.
> 
> Widening Lindsey to four lanes between 24th Avenue SW and Berry Road, with a landscaped median, will mean cars leaving his drive-in will have to exit west away from the University of Oklahoma campus.
> ...


W Lindsey business owners in Norman concerned about widening plan | News OK

I think this will be good. All in all, I still don't like round-a-bouts and when you hit a light green, you are able to move much faster than having a guaranteed slowdown at a round-a-bout, but I am glad there are bike lanes in this for sure. They need to be separated from the road though.

----------


## BG918

I'd like to see Norman's bike lanes painted red, not just in OU's color but also to be more visible.  The improvements to the sidewalks will be really good for this corridor, and the landscaping/trees.

----------


## gamecock

"Both Sweatte and Brennan are concerned that landscaping in the median also will reduce their visibility."

This is such a frustrating comment. Many places around here desperately need more landscaping, and then you get comments like this. Hopefully, their concerns will be disregarded.

----------


## venture

> W Lindsey business owners in Norman concerned about widening plan | News OK
> 
> I think this will be good. All in all, I still don't like round-a-bouts and when you hit a light green, you are able to move much faster than having a guaranteed slowdown at a round-a-bout, but I am glad there are bike lanes in this for sure. They need to be separated from the road though.


Well the trick with a roundabout setup is that the speed stays fairly consistent. So instead of going form 35 to 0 to 20 to 35 to 10 and every other variation as traffic and the lights moderate flow, with a roundabout you can keep things pretty steady. Doesn't meant there won't be any yielding at times, but it also means it'll be safer for bikes and pedestrians. I'm perfectly fine with a 4 lane road with a very well done median. Manhattan, KS has a roundabout on Bluemont heading into KSU's campus that is 2 lane around. It also have a monument of some sort in the middle of it. I would love to see these along Lindsey with various monuments for Norman and OU to just bring something extra to the corridor.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Well the trick with a roundabout setup is that the speed stays fairly consistent. So instead of going form 35 to 0 to 20 to 35 to 10 and every other variation as traffic and the lights moderate flow, with a roundabout you can keep things pretty steady. Doesn't meant there won't be any yielding at times, but it also means it'll be safer for bikes and pedestrians. I'm perfectly fine with a 4 lane road with a very well done median. Manhattan, KS has a roundabout on Bluemont heading into KSU's campus that is 2 lane around. It also have a monument of some sort in the middle of it. I would love to see these along Lindsey with various monuments for Norman and OU to just bring something extra to the corridor.


well, the other part here would be getting people to properly use the roundabout. When I get behind people on the roundabouts in Midtown, they'll often come to a full stop even when there is no people, so hopefully they could used to them....

----------


## venture

> well, the other part here would be getting people to properly use the roundabout. When I get behind people on the roundabouts in Midtown, they'll often come to a full stop even when there is no people, so hopefully they could used to them....


We have one here on Main Street in East Norman and I haven't experienced any issues with people, even when traffic can be pretty heavy in the afternoon.

----------


## Geographer

Well, let's beat this dead horse again...

First, I do agree that it will be harder to enter this businesses with the median....

....But that is because there are no roundabouts at the intersections for easy turn-around on Lindsey.  It's generally not safe to do a U-turn on Lindsey in a turn-lane at an intersection because of the constant flow of traffic.  If this business owner would like to make it easier for people to enter/exit his business in either direction, then he needs to be clamoring for roundabouts.

Using his example about college students not being able to head back east when leaving Classics....they could simply drive 479 feet to the west, enter the roundabout, and have a very easy time driving around the roundabout until they are driving back east on Lindsey.

That's the beauty of roundabouts, it makes navigating and turning around much, much easier.

----------


## Just the facts

Where were these business owners when the City was making the decision?  This train has already left the station.  Maybe they should look into selling and moving their operations to the Downtown Norman/Campus Corner area where they don't need to worry about how people are going to drive to their business.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> We have one here on Main Street in East Norman and I haven't experienced any issues with people, even when traffic can be pretty heavy in the afternoon.


Well, for some reason, and I go to Browns nearly every day, people like to stop for no reason on them. Honestly, I am not against round-a-bouts; I even advocate for them to built in Edmond around the UCO campus and in downtown(I know you don't like me talking about Edmond here, but I just wanted to make sure you understand I am NOT against round-a-bouts).

----------


## venture

> Well, for some reason, and I go to Browns nearly every day, people like to stop for no reason on them. Honestly, I am not against round-a-bouts; I even advocate for them to built in Edmond around the UCO campus and in downtown(I know you don't like me talking about Edmond here, but I just wanted to make sure you understand I am NOT against round-a-bouts).


Well as the various driver threads have proven, we can't fix stupid.  :Smile:   Once this is all said and done it is going to be interesting to see the accident statistics. Chances are it'll go up and more significant accidents with people rear ending each other or crashes from people making u-turns.

----------


## CuatrodeMayo

I work steps away from the roundabout at 10th & Walker and have for the last 6 years. While there is an occasional "hesitant" driver that stops dead at the entrance to the circle, the vast majority of drivers have gotten used to it. There is rarely more than 3 or 4 cars queued up. It has been highly successful.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> I work steps away from the roundabout at 10th & Walker and have for the last 6 years. While there is an occasional "hesitant" driver that stops dead at the entrance to the circle, the vast majority of drivers have gotten used to it. There is rarely more than 3 or 4 cars queued up. It has been highly successful.


I like the round-a-bout and for the most part, it does work ok, but more than not, I get behind some nitwit that comes to complete stop like it is a stop sign and then continues, maybe it's just my luck....

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> *Well as the various driver threads have proven, we can't fix stupid.*   Once this is all said and done it is going to be interesting to see the accident statistics. Chances are it'll go up and more significant accidents with people rear ending each other or crashes from people making u-turns.


True dat! I'm anxious to see how people are going about the reverse angled parking, seems that would be something neat to in downtown Norman, since Edmond apparently can't handle it.  :Stick Out Tongue:

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Has anyone seen this video? I was browsing Norman's website and came across it

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Here is a breakdown on it

 Widening Lindsey Street from 3 to 4 lanes with additional lanes at intersections 
 Major storm water improvements 
 New two lane bridge with on-street bike lanes and sidewalks over Imhoff Creek (See Lindsey Street Typical Cross-Section on Imhoff Creek Bridge below) 
 Continuous sidewalks on both sides of the street 
 Triple landscape canopy including raised center median (See Lindsey Street from 24th Avenue SE to Berry Road Typical Cross-Section below) 
 Better access management for adjacent properties 
 Multi-modal improvements including on-street bicycle lanes and transit opportunities 
 Aesthetic enhancements including decorative pavement, wayfinding and roadway lighting 
 Underground utilities 
 Accessibility for disabled individuals 
 Updated conventional signalized intersections along the corridor including Lindsey/24th Avenue SW, Lindsey/McGee Drive, Lindsey/Wylie Road and Lindsey/Berry Road.


LINDSEY STREET FROM 24TH AVENUE SW TO BERRY ROAD 
TYPICAL SECTIONS FOR PROPOSED DESIGN WITH RAISED MEDIANS AND TRIPLE CANOPY

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Timeline

A summary of the tentative project schedule is shown below: 

 December 18, 2012 Engineering Design Begins (SAIC/Poe) 
 April 2013 Engineering Design Phase I Storm Water Complete 
 June 2013 Environmental Assessment Begins 
 November 2013 Property Owner Meetings 
 November 2013 Storm Water Box Culvert Plans 90% Complete 
 January 2014 Utility Relocation Begins 
 December 2014 Right-of-Way/Utility Relocation Complete 
 January 2015 I-35/SH-9 Construction Begins 
 April 2015 Bid Opening - West Lindsey Street Project 
 July 2015 Construction Begins  I-35/Lindsey Interchange 
 July 2015 Construction Begins - West Lindsey Street Project 
 July 2016 West Lindsey Street Bond Project Complete 
 October 2016 I-35/Lindsey Street Interchange Complete 

Here is the contact info to voice out, which I'd recommend

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr. John Clink, Capital Projects 
Manager, at (405) 366-5424 or email at john.clink@normanok.gov.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

It also appears OU48a was right about Lindsey being congested




> Lindsey Street 
> 24th Avenue SW to Berry Road 
>  No. 1 rated storm water problem in 
> Norman 
>  *No. 1 traffic congestion corridor in 
> Oklahoma City metropolitan area* 
>  Crash rate is nearly 3 times the 
> national average for similar 
> roadways 
> ...

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Here is a couple more graphics

It appears and Round-a-bout is still a possibility in this.



So if that is the case, have they started construction yet? The timeline says it will start this month, but I'm sure if a round-a-bout could still be included. If it was considered in the design, I did not see what exactly went out for bid, but nothing is permanent, things can change.

Here are some traffic counts

----------


## venture

> It also appears OU48a was right about Lindsey being congested


No one disputed it was congested. The dispute was how to best create a corridor that would be favorable for that part of town and not focused solely on being a commuter artery to get people out of Central Norman during a football game. So I don't know why you are trying to relight that fire again.




> Here is a couple more graphics
> 
> It appears and Round-a-bout is still a possibility in this.
> 
> So if that is the case, have they started construction yet? The timeline says it will start this month, but I'm sure if a round-a-bout could still be included. If it was considered in the design, I did not see what exactly went out for bid, but nothing is permanent, things can change.
> 
> Here are some traffic counts


Nothing has started yet as far as I know.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> No one disputed it was congested. The dispute was how to best create a corridor that would be favorable for that part of town and not focused solely on being a commuter artery to get people out of Central Norman during a football game. So I don't know why you are trying to relight that fire again.


I was actually responding to a few comments about OU48a being wrong about the overall congestion. Catch22 said he was wrong and could think of 10-20 streets that are more congested, the graphic I posted was in response to that.






> Nothing has started yet as far as I know.


It seems the round-a-bouts are still a possibility then, right? If they put something for bid, can it be changed?

----------


## warreng88

Bike lanes, wide sidewalks and lots of trees? I'm ok with that. Although I would prefer the bike lanes to be painted crimson and cream all the way to the highway. It looks like that is the plan east of Berry, but the graphics might be a bit off.

----------


## Geographer

Hopefully they figure out a way to cut down on curb cuts (the main source of congestion/wrecks on Lindsey).

Roundabouts would have helped with "congestion issues" as well.

----------


## soonerfan_in_okc

those intersections look awful.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Interstate 35 interchanges open in Norman for OU season opener | News OK

----------


## LocoAko

Not sure if this is the best thread for this, but here we are.

Oklahoma Transportation Commission approves $71 million I-35 project | News OK

----------


## Robert_M

Don't know 100% if this is related to this project but Lindsey street between 24th and McGee has the East bound lane closed with East bound traffic diverted into the center lane. They have been marking utilities for weeks now so maybe this is finally moving forward.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> Don't know 100% if this is related to this project but Lindsey street between 24th and McGee has the East bound lane closed with East bound traffic diverted into the center lane. They have been marking utilities for weeks now so maybe this is finally moving forward.


It looks like they have torn up both sides of Lindsey to put in new utilities in piping. I don't know what they moved but I am sure it is for the widening to happen later.

----------


## kevinpate

Maybe all that is simply to put in fancy french drains before the next big rain?

----------


## Jersey Boss

PRESS RELEASE

City of Norman

201 West Gray 

Norman, Oklahoma 73069

For Immediate Release:  June 12, 2015

Contact:  Charlie Thomas, Project Manager, 366-5443, charlie.thomas@normanok.gov 

Road closure – Lindsey Street from Flood Avenue to Berry Road


Beginning Tuesday morning, June 16, 2015, Lindsey Street from Flood Avenue to Berry Road will be closed to perform sewer replacement work.  PM Construction, under contract with the Norman Utilities Authority, will continue replacing sewers along Lindsey Street.



Access will be limited to only local residents, as needed.  Drivers are urged to use alternate routes via Berry Road to Brooks Street to Flood Avenue.  Delays can be expected.  Signs will be placed by Action Safety Supply Co. to assist drivers.  Weather permitting, work should be complete and Lindsey re-opened by Friday, June 19.

 The Sewer Maintenance Project is an annual $2.7 million sewer replacement project.  It is funded by the $5/month sewer maintenance fee paid by utility customers, as approved by voters in 2001. The project replaces old damaged sewer lines and manholes in the project area bounded by Brooks Street to the north, Imhoff Creek to the west, Timberdell Road to the south, and Elm Avenue to the east.  The total project is scheduled to be complete by September 2015.

Questions or comments may be directed to Charlie Thomas, Project Manager, 366-5443 or charlie.thomas@normanok.gov. 



PLEASE SLOW DOWN AROUND ALL CONSTRUCTION AND WORK ZONES !!

----------


## Tritone

I'm so glad I only have to contend with this on Sundays.  If this was part of my daily commute, well, I'm happy it's not.  Condolences to those who deal with this on a daily basis.  Will this all be finished before the worship services at Lindsey and Jenkins start up in the fall?

----------


## ou48A

> I'm so glad I only have to contend with this on Sundays.  If this was part of my daily commute, well, I'm happy it's not.  Condolences to those who deal with this on a daily basis.  Will this all be finished before the worship services at Lindsey and Jenkins start up in the fall?


During the worship services at Lindsey and Jenkins this fall you will need to show a ticket for everyone in the vehicle before they will even let you drive down Lindsey to the east of I-35… Access from all other streets will be restricted to ticket holders and certain home owners only… violators will face stiff fines

----------


## Plutonic Panda

I'm not sure if this has been posted before but here is the design for the Lindsey St. Bridge over I-35.





Some more here: Lindsey Street / I-35 Bridge Aesthetics, Norman, Ok - Retaining Walls, Sound Barrier Walls, Concrete Bridge Design | Creative Design Resolutions, Inc.

----------


## dankrutka

This is a neat way for those passing through to feel that they are driving past OU. I like the seed sower.

----------


## soonermike81

> This is a neat way for those passing through to feel that they are driving past OU. I like the seed sower.


Good eye, I didn't even catch it at first glance. Does anybody know the history behind the seed sower?  I know Van Gogh did a series of paintings that featured him. Is that what inspired our statue?  Or did someone else paint it before Van Gogh? Just curious as I never knew anything about the story behind it. Haven't seen him anywhere outside of OU and at the museum in Amsterdam.

----------


## kevinpate

> Good eye, I didn't even catch it at first glance. Does anybody know the history behind the seed sower?  I know Van Gogh did a series of paintings that featured him. Is that what inspired our statue?  Or did someone else paint it before Van Gogh? Just curious as I never knew anything about the story behind it. Haven't seen him anywhere outside of OU and at the museum in Amsterdam.


This may help a bit
The Sower - University of Oklahoma - Norman, OK - Figurative Public Sculpture on Waymarking.com




> ...
> From an OU brochure:
> Our university seal features the Seed Sower, an emblem of our first university president, David Ross Boyd. Boyd walked across the Oklahoma prairies sowing the seeds of education, as well as literally planting many trees throughout the region. The Seed Sower statue at the entrance to our beautiful South Oval reminds us that we, too, should sow seeds today that will blossom in years to come. OU's motto, "Civi et Reipublicas," translated to "For the citizen and the state." and reminds us that an OU education prepares students to become future community leaders.
> *Name:* The Sower
> 
> *Figure Type:* Human
> 
> *Artist Name:* Paul R. Moore
> 
> ...

----------


## macfoucin

> On Monday, April 4, the northbound Interstate 35 at Lindsey Street off-ramp will close to allow the ODOT contractor to reconstruct the state Highway 9 to northbound 1-35 on-ramp. The ramp will remain closed until the new Lindsey Street Bridge over I-35 is open in late fall of 2017.


 from Timeline ? Lindsey Street Project

----------


## Plutonic Panda

I can't wait to check the area out when all of this is said and done.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Main Street is going to be even more busy. I will love this when it is done but we are in for some headaches

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Bridge closes on Monday April 25th until 2017.

----------


## HangryHippo

Do you happen to know when the rest of Lindsey St. (to Berry) will close?  Or the section over Imhoff Creek that they're replacing the bridge over?

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> Do you happen to know when the rest of Lindsey St. (to Berry) will close?  Or the section over Imhoff Creek that they're replacing the bridge over?


For now just the bridge closure. The rest of Lindsey will stay open.

Looks like Summer 2016 (Possibly from May to July they start) for Lindsey widening and closure of Imoff Creek bridge (4 months to complete)

Timeline ? Lindsey Street Project

----------


## vaflyer

> Do you happen to know when the rest of Lindsey St. (to Berry) will close?  Or the section over Imhoff Creek that they're replacing the bridge over?


Imhoff Creek section of Lindsey is tentatively scheduled to be closed from July to November.

----------


## HangryHippo

Thanks for the answers!

----------


## ou48A

> Imhoff Creek section of Lindsey is tentatively scheduled to be closed from July to November.


If this^ is true, Im not sure of the wisdom behind the decision of why Lindsey would need to be completely closed at the Inhofe bridge?

Several large whistles could very easily be placed north of the current bridge with a by-pass ramp built with dirt, large rock and asphalt for a temporary by pass. This would have been a low cost solution for one of Normans major arteries. 

 Its also being done during football season which will prolong the impact of congested street and inconvenience thousands of visitors. This congestion has already slowed life and death response times several times that I know of.

Im also not sure why this bridge project should not be delayed until December 5, 2016?
This goes down in my book as  poor planning and inconsiderate to visitors and residents by the City of Norman.

----------


## Scott5114

> I’m also not sure why this bridge project should not be delayed until December 5, 2016?
> This goes down in my book as  poor planning and inconsiderate to visitors and residents by the City of Norman.


Lindsey is already going to be inaccessible from I-35 because of the project at that end of the street. Now is the best time to do it, when drivers are already having to detour to Highway 9, so it's easier to just have them continue east on SH-9 to Jenkins to detour around both projects. 

Besides, while OU football is important to Norman's economy it is not the reason for the city's existence. Planning of infrastructure projects like these can be complex and there's often other factors at play beyond the obvious. As a city resident, if planning determined that they could save a substantial sum of money by doing a project during football season, for instance, I would be heavily in favor of saving the city money instead of worrying about inconveniencing sports folk. Same thing if there were a grant that had a certain expiration date, etc.

----------


## ou48A

> Lindsey is already going to be inaccessible from I-35 because of the project at that end of the street. Now is the best time to do it, when drivers are already having to detour to Highway 9, so it's easier to just have them continue east on SH-9 to Jenkins to detour around both projects. 
> 
> Besides, while OU football is important to Norman's economy it is not the reason for the city's existence. Planning of infrastructure projects like these can be complex and there's often other factors at play beyond the obvious. As a city resident, if planning determined that they could save a substantial sum of money by doing a project during football season, for instance, I would be heavily in favor of saving the city money instead of worrying about inconveniencing sports folk. Same thing if there were a grant that had a certain expiration date, etc.


For the cost of several loads of dirt and asphalt along with 2 or 3 very large DIA whistles that could be reused, Lindsey could have been kept open for thousands of every day travelers…. This is also a safety issue that could delay emergency response times….

----------


## Jersey Boss

The most obvious way to speed this project along is to require that the work is done around the clock and not just in the daytime when the majority of vehicles are on the road. I never could understand why major road construction is not done this way here.

----------


## riflesforwatie

As of this morning, traffic has been shifted to the outside lanes on southbound I-35 to allow for work on the center supports of the Lindsey Street bridge. Anyone know how close they are to finishing the bridge on the new westbound-SH9-to-northbound-I35 ramp? I assume they'll want to open that soon so that they can put northbound I-35 on the outside lanes.

----------


## ChargerAg

Bridge between Flood and Berry is supposed to reopen this week.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Looks like the bridge over Lindsey is getting close. I'm sure the businesses on Lindsey are wanting this to get completed and maybe get some of that business back.

----------


## HangryHippo

I saw an article somewhere that said the bridge over the interstate is supposed to be complete sometime in May, but Lindsey St. itself is not due to be complete until the end of October.

----------


## Pete

Good grief, what a mess this is and it really impacts Highway 9 as well.

Merging onto I-35 from 9 is like Death Race 2000, and of course traffic backs up forever.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> I saw an article somewhere that said the bridge over the interstate is supposed to be complete sometime in May, but Lindsey St. itself is not due to be complete until the end of October.


October even sounds early. They still haven't finished the giant underground stormwater drain deal.

----------


## HangryHippo

> October even sounds early. They still haven't finished the giant underground stormwater drain deal.


I agree with you, but that's what I read.  I think it was an article in the Norman Transcript...?  I'll see if I can find it.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> I agree with you, but that's what I read.  I think it was an article in the Norman Transcript...?  I'll see if I can find it.


I believe you but it doesn't feel like much progress. http://www.lindseystreetnorman.com/phasing/

It says Nov. 2017 there also something like 2 million in incentives if they finish early.

----------


## HangryHippo

It doesn't at all.  I drove it the other day and couldn't believe how little progress it looked like they had made.  They're going to have to start making up time somewhere if they want the incentives.

----------


## Boomer3791

We live in SE Norman and I drive Hwy. 9  to I-35 daily. I also have kids in school in Norman and have to drive surface streets to get them there. I can tell you firsthand that Lindsey Street is a nightmare. They're nowhere close to being done this year (2017). I think me and my uncle and a Bobcat would have made more progress than those buffoons have. It's embarrassing for the city and a tragedy for the merchants. There will be very few businesses left on Lindsey when they finally get it reopened. Meanwhile, the I-35/Hwy.9 project has progressed smoothly and from the looks of it, should be done in a few short months. Traffic on Hwy. 9, especially west-bound, will improve greatly once that happens.

----------


## tfvc.org

> Good grief, what a mess this is and it really impacts Highway 9 as well.
> 
> Merging onto I-35 from 9 is like Death Race 2000, and of course traffic backs up forever.


I have to drive through Norman to get to and from work.  Anymore I drive right up Classen.  Takes just as much time ~2-5 minutes and less of a chance of getting creamed or my car damaged.  About a year or so ago I hit a curb and bent my rims, had to replace one of them.

----------


## gman11695

Does anyone know when the Highway 9 to NB 35 ramp is going to open?

----------


## vaflyer

> Does anyone know when the Highway 9 to NB 35 ramp is going to open?


The tentative plan is to open the ramp on Wednesday, March 8th. (Source: http://www.lindseystreetnorman.com)

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Looks like SH-9 will be using the new northbound entrance starting tomorrow:

ADVISORY FROM ODOT: The northbound I-35 on-ramp from westbound SH-9 East will be closed and northbound I-35 will be narrowed to one lane between SH-9 West (mm 106) and Lindsey St. (mm 108B) from 9 p.m. Thursday to 6 a.m. Friday for ramp work. Following this closure, drivers will be shifted to the new northbound I-35 on-ramp from SH-9 East.

----------


## ChargerAg

Drove down lindsey last night and they had opened the new portion of the road toward berry.   It sure beat the old beater temp road.    Looks like they had already torn out the temp road on the south and were starting on the north.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Drove down lindsey last night and they had opened the new portion of the road toward berry.   It sure beat the old beater temp road.    Looks like they had already torn out the temp road on the south and were starting on the north.


Praise God, lol.  That temp road is a beast.  Any chance you could snap some pictures?

----------


## ChargerAg

Well this sounded like a good idea to snap a picture but turned out to be really hard.   Between the bumper to bumper traffic and all the construction equipment I couldn't get a clear shot.    All you can see from this picture is the cars are on the new road and that they are working on where the temp road used to be.   I'll see if I can get a better picture later in the week maybe in the evening.   Oh I did notice that they are starting to put the columns on the bridge over the creek.   Looking forward to seeing how nice those turn out.   


road.jpg

----------


## HangryHippo

Awesome, charger.  Thanks!  I'm also looking forward to seeing how the columns turn out.

----------


## _Cramer_

All of the renderings on the site look amazing. I also noticed the timeline states the entire project is to be finished by Thanksgiving!

----------


## HangryHippo

I was on Lindsey St. and managed to get this picture of the new columns above Imhoff Creek.  Column work hasn't started on the north side of Lindsey yet. 
IMG_1318.jpg

----------


## ChargerAg

Walked over the bridge and took some photos.   I was a little worried about how this bridge would turn out.   In the first photo you can still see concrete on the ends of the bridge and it looked very half baked.   I am starting to think they aren't done.   You can see on the corners that there is electrical pipe so I am thinking they will add more.   I also took a picture of the column.   If you look at the ground you can see what i believe will be some night time lighting for the columns.     I think think bridge is going to look sharp at night.   Lastly is a picture of Lindsey.   You can't see much except that they have the outside lanes torn up now.  
unnamed.jpgunnamed2.jpgunnamed3.jpgunnamed4.jpg

----------


## Pete

Thanks for sharing.

Going to be a massive improvement when complete.

----------


## ereid

Lindsey Street Bridge reopening celebration this Friday! 

https://goo.gl/t3c5ku

----------


## HangryHippo

Praise God!  This has been a LONG time coming.

----------


## BG918

> Walked over the bridge and took some photos.   I was a little worried about how this bridge would turn out.   In the first photo you can still see concrete on the ends of the bridge and it looked very half baked.   I am starting to think they aren't done.   You can see on the corners that there is electrical pipe so I am thinking they will add more.   I also took a picture of the column.   If you look at the ground you can see what i believe will be some night time lighting for the columns.     I think think bridge is going to look sharp at night.   Lastly is a picture of Lindsey.   You can't see much except that they have the outside lanes torn up now.  
> unnamed.jpgunnamed2.jpgunnamed3.jpgunnamed4.jpg


Thanks for the pics.  Is there clearance underneath the bridge for a future bike trail along Imhoff Creek?  I thought that was in the long-range plan for this creek corridor.

----------


## ChargerAg

> Thanks for the pics.  Is there clearance underneath the bridge for a future bike trail along Imhoff Creek?  I thought that was in the long-range plan for this creek corridor.


Just the drainage box under the bridge.   Its a shame that there aren't bike trails along the creek.    They haven't done much more with the bridge since I took these photos.   They did make some brick benches  that sit on the bridge.

----------


## BG918

> Just the drainage box under the bridge.   Its a shame that there aren't bike trails along the creek.    They haven't done much more with the bridge since I took these photos.   They did make some brick benches  that sit on the bridge.


That's unfortunate, and short-sighted.  Any future bike trail will have to cross Lindsey which will be a pain when it easily could've been incorporated into the design to provide the clearance to go underneath.

----------


## ereid

Keep in mind that the bridge won't be ready aesthetically this Friday. It will be functional, and that's what is most important right now.

----------


## benjico

> That's unfortunate, and short-sighted.  Any future bike trail will have to cross Lindsey which will be a pain when it easily could've been incorporated into the design to provide the clearance to go underneath.


For a city of its population and geographic size, Norman's bike system is abysmal - especially for a college town. Would love to see more trails/bike only lanes down there. 

Not sure what it would take (or where it be located) but a "central Oklahoma bikeway" that connected Norman to OKC to Edmond would be an incredible recreational resource for multiple cities and counties.

----------


## mattjank

> For a city of its population and geographic size, Norman's bike system is abysmal - especially for a college town. Would love to see more trails/bike only lanes down there. 
> 
> Not sure what it would take (or where it be located) but a "central Oklahoma bikeway" that connected Norman to OKC to Edmond would be an incredible recreational resource for multiple cities and counties.


Yes! I'd love to ride from Norman to OKC for work, but any of the routes I'd take scare me, and I've been road riding for 17+ years. The thought of riding down, Santa Fe, Western or Eastern in traffic makes me shudder. 

Also getting across Norman (West-East) for most of the day is not fun.

----------


## HangryHippo

Has anyone seen pictures from this morning's event?

----------


## LocoAko

> Has anyone seen pictures from this morning's event?


From https://twitter.com/drstratman:

----------


## Ross MacLochness

> 


Wow!  I didn't know the new Lindsay was gonna be so pedestrian friendly!!

----------


## Colbafone

> Wow!  I didn't know the new Lindsay was gonna be so pedestrian friendly!!


Plu Pan is going to be SO DISAPPOINTED when he finds out this was actually a pedestrian only bridge from the beginning.

----------


## HangryHippo

> From https://twitter.com/drstratman:


Thanks very much!

----------


## David

I am impressed and even a bit surprised at the turnout. That is a lot of people.

----------


## BG918

> For a city of its population and geographic size, Norman's bike system is abysmal - especially for a college town. Would love to see more trails/bike only lanes down there. 
> 
> Not sure what it would take (or where it be located) but a "central Oklahoma bikeway" that connected Norman to OKC to Edmond would be an incredible recreational resource for multiple cities and counties.


Extending the trail along the RR tracks would be an easy way to connect the cities.  In the mean time I hope Norman can start to move forward with its bikeway plans including the Imhoff Creek trail.

----------


## ChargerAg

> Extending the trail along the RR tracks would be an easy way to connect the cities.  In the mean time I hope Norman can start to move forward with its bikeway plans including the Imhoff Creek trail.



Where did you get the chart of the bike paths?   Is this something recent that has been discussed?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Plu Pan is going to be SO DISAPPOINTED when he finds out this was actually a pedestrian only bridge from the beginning.


They kept telling me they were going to ensure it had 12 lanes but I didn't ask whether it was for cars or pedestrians.

----------


## baralheia

I drove over the new bridge today... Still some work to be done on the northbound side, but it's nice. A bit disappointed by the lack of a U-turn lane, however. Maybe it's still being worked on. The SPUI on Main has U-turn lanes, but they've never been used - they're blocked by planters for some reason.

----------


## HangryHippo

> I drove over the new bridge today... Still some work to be done on the northbound side, but it's nice. A bit disappointed by the lack of a U-turn lane, however. Maybe it's still being worked on. The SPUI on Main has U-turn lanes, but they've never been used - they're blocked by planters for some reason.


This was something I was wondering about after I drove it for the first time. Why the hell is it so wide with so little space for traffic compared to the overall width and no u turns?

----------


## Scott5114

Did you know Dallas is west of Norman now?

----------


## Roger S

^ 

HA! I wasn't even aware there was a West 35 until you get to Denton TX.... Maybe Denton annexed Norman and didn't tell anyone.  :Wink:

----------


## OUman

Oops, looks like someone reversed the "South" and "West" signs.

----------


## Scott5114

> Oops, looks like someone reversed the "South" and "West" signs.


Actually, the 35 and the 9 were swapped (Interstates are supposed to be listed first, for obvious reasons). 

Someone at OkDOT might be lurking the forum (or another forum where I posted it); it was fixed when I went by there today.

----------


## Robert_M

> I drove over the new bridge today... Still some work to be done on the northbound side, but it's nice. A bit disappointed by the lack of a U-turn lane, however. Maybe it's still being worked on. The SPUI on Main has U-turn lanes, but they've never been used - they're blocked by planters for some reason.


Always wondered about this myself as well.  The Lindsey bridge has them also and stripped for them even though they are yellow but they have a No U-Turn sign up on the poll.

----------


## Scott5114

I don't believe those are meant to be U-turn lanes. The left-turn ramps make a natural U shape, but the bridge is built with straight sides because it's easier than contouring the bridge to the actual shape of the lanes on the bridge. I looked at a couple of Kansas SPUIs and they're constructed the same way.

----------


## jn1780

> Actually, the 35 and the 9 were swapped (Interstates are supposed to be listed first, for obvious reasons). 
> 
> Someone at OkDOT might be lurking the forum (or another forum where I posted it); it was fixed when I went by there today.


I'm sure someone noticed it while they were installing it, but a slightly wrong sign was probably better than no sign at all.

----------


## baralheia

> I don't believe those are meant to be U-turn lanes. The left-turn ramps make a natural U shape, but the bridge is built with straight sides because it's easier than contouring the bridge to the actual shape of the lanes on the bridge. I looked at a couple of Kansas SPUIs and they're constructed the same way.


If you look at the Main Street SPUI on Google Maps, you can see the U-turn lane on the north side of the bridge and it's pretty clear that's the intended use of that lane - but it's blocked by three square planters. Interestingly, however, the Main Street SPUI is asymmetric - there's no provision for a U-turn lane on the south half of the bridge.

----------


## rcjunkie

> Always wondered about this myself as well.  The Lindsey bridge has them also and stripped for them even though they are yellow but they have a No U-Turn sign up on the poll.


According to the master plan, these "U-turn Lanes" were installed for future use. At least they are planning and looking ahead !!!!!

----------


## ChargerAg

bridge side.jpg

Finally made it over to snap a photo of the side of the creek bridge.   I guess in theory they could run a bike trail down there but I doubt it would be very feasible.    I am still interested in learning more about where people have heard they are thinking of putting a bike trail along the creek.

----------


## BG918

> bridge side.jpg
> 
> Finally made it over to snap a photo of the side of the creek bridge.   I guess in theory they could run a bike trail down there but I doubt it would be very feasible.    I am still interested in learning more about where people have heard they are thinking of putting a bike trail along the creek.


It is part of the Norman Greenways Master Plan.  See pages 8 and 9.  https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...-Xiin7vPrOaiOw

The trail will connect Lions Park to a future trail along the north side of Hwy 9 running through the Imhoff Creek greenbelt.  Brooks, Lindsey and Imhoff would be the only street crossings, but if they had planned ahead they could've eliminated this at Lindsey with a wider culvert under this bridge.

----------


## _Cramer_

Does anyone have an update on the progress of Lindsey? I think I saw something the City or a group posted on twitter about how the drainage was better on McGee..?

----------


## Roger S

No update other than I saw an announcement on Facebook that the Sooner Legends restaurant is closing citing the Lindsey construction as the reason.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Ya Sooner Legends closed on Oct. 9th (just the restaurant). They are opening back in 2018. 

This construction should be done before 2017 is over and I am betting the businesses are excited for this to be over.

----------


## HangryHippo

Other than the stretches where no one appears to be working on anything, there's no reason this project should have taken THIS long.

----------


## Jersey Boss

The city should have specified to the contractors performing this job that it was to be a 6 day a week, two shift operation. The loss of sales tax monies, loss of businesses, and decreased revenue to existing businesses was inexcusable.  This spec should be mandatory on arterial roads with this amount of work.

----------


## stile99

I'd rather see deadlines and penalties written into the contract instead of specifying shifts.  That's the contractor's problem and the city really doesn't need to get involved with that.  What they SHOULD do is when a contractor says "I can do it in X months for Y dollars", then add in Z penalty for going over.  And no, there's no leeway for weather, a contractor familiar with working in this area would know to factor that in, especially if they know they'll be held to their word.

----------


## BoulderSooner

The contract would have made 500k for finishing 100 days early.   They will collect 0 dollars

----------


## Robert_M

They are installing the permanent signal lights at McGee and Lindsey and still lack several driveways to be poured especially on the North side.

McGee drainage North of Lindsey is better but they only have one side done for most of it to Boyd

----------


## ChargerAg

Was shocked to see the new bike lanes on Lindsey were painted bright green.    At first I hated it but after driving it several times over the weekend I like it.  Lindsey now has a Denver/West coast sort of feel.    Most of the stores and shops along lindsey don't match the niceness of the new street.     

Lindsey 1.jpgLindsey 3.jpgLindsey 5.jpg

----------


## HangryHippo

Thanks for the great pictures!  

I love the bright green bike paths - they look awesome.  I also really like the backlit street signs that the new light poles have.  I do wish they'd get this project done though.  It has taken FOREVER.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

I was there when they were painting them. It did not look straight at all but I'm glad they came back and fixed it up. I was a bit worried.

----------


## dankrutka

Wow wow wow! Good job, Norman!

----------


## Zuplar

I get the point of painting the bike lanes, but dang that's a terrible color. You'd have thought they could have found something that would have been more complimentary. The ones I've seen Norman do further south also haven't seemed to hold up. Fading and chipping, but that could just be paint quality like OKC had.

----------


## ChargerAg

> I get the point of painting the bike lanes, but dang that's a terrible color. You'd have thought they could have found something that would have been more complimentary. The ones I've seen Norman do further south also haven't seemed to hold up. Fading and chipping, but that could just be paint quality like OKC had.


that was my first impression of Lindsey as well.   But then the more I drove it the more it really has the feel of a ultra modern street.   Its really a great road that takes you into OU rather then the tired old Lindsey of the past.     Hoping that such a nice road causes some renovation to the buildings along the street.

----------


## HangryHippo

> that was my first impression of Lindsey as well.   But then the more I drove it the more it really has the feel of a ultra modern street.   Its really a great road that takes you into OU rather then the tired old Lindsey of the past.     Hoping that such a nice road causes some renovation to the buildings along the street.


Agreed.  And I love the green - it pops and hopefully reminds people that lane is not for their cars.  If it can somehow prompt some renovations, that would be icing on the cake!

----------


## traxx

Isn't green the traditional bike lane color?

----------


## Zuplar

> Isn't green the traditional bike lane color?


I googled this cause I got to thinking you might be right, and you are.

https://nacto.org/publication/urban-...ke-facilities/

----------


## SOONER8693

Drove west from campus to I-35 yesterday on Lindsey. All of the lanes are not yet open, but, basically look ready to open the entire street. Compared to the old Lindsey, this one is a huge WOW.

----------


## ChargerAg

> Drove west from campus to I-35 yesterday on Lindsey. All of the lanes are not yet open, but, basically look ready to open the entire street. Compared to the old Lindsey, this one is a huge WOW.


I don't think they will open the outer lanes until they are done putting up the light posts and other cleanup.

----------


## Scott5114

> I get the point of painting the bike lanes, but dang that's a terrible color. You'd have thought they could have found something that would have been more complimentary. The ones I've seen Norman do further south also haven't seemed to hold up. Fading and chipping, but that could just be paint quality like OKC had.


A lot of times colors for road-related things are not chosen for aesthetics, but rather because they are mandated by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices at the Federal Highway Administration. They tend to operate on the results of experiments showing which colors and methods are most effective, rather than how they look. For example, neon yellow probably clashes with most things, but they've chosen that as the color for pedestrian signage because it's shown to be most effective.

For bike lanes in particular, this memorandum applies. The Lindsey Street bike lanes are part of what's called an "interim approval", meaning a substantial amount of experimentation has been done indicating that the treatment is a good idea, and now additional cities and states have a chance to try it out for themselves. If the green pavements are shown to consistently perform better than unpainted bike lanes, they may be added to the Manual of Uniform Control Devices as the national standard. (Occasionally, interim approvals fail, and are then revoked. This recently happened with a road sign font that was supposed to be more legible than the existing font, but when applied in the field was shown to have no meaningful improvement in most cases, so the experiment was dropped.)

----------


## HangryHippo

Does anyone know when this project is supposed to be completed?

----------


## Zuplar

> A lot of times colors for road-related things are not chosen for aesthetics, but rather because they are mandated by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices at the Federal Highway Administration. They tend to operate on the results of experiments showing which colors and methods are most effective, rather than how they look. For example, neon yellow probably clashes with most things, but they've chosen that as the color for pedestrian signage because it's shown to be most effective.
> 
> For bike lanes in particular, this memorandum applies. The Lindsey Street bike lanes are part of what's called an "interim approval", meaning a substantial amount of experimentation has been done indicating that the treatment is a good idea, and now additional cities and states have a chance to try it out for themselves. If the green pavements are shown to consistently perform better than unpainted bike lanes, they may be added to the Manual of Uniform Control Devices as the national standard. (Occasionally, interim approvals fail, and are then revoked. This recently happened with a road sign font that was supposed to be more legible than the existing font, but when applied in the field was shown to have no meaningful improvement in most cases, so the experiment was dropped.)



My follow-up addressed this.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> Does anyone know when this project is supposed to be completed?


December 2017.

----------


## HangryHippo

> December 2017.


Awesome. Thanks for the reply.

----------


## BG918

Are there plans to extend the green bike lanes to campus?  What about sidewalks east of Pickard?  And when are they planting the median trees in December?

----------


## ChargerAg

> Are there plans to extend the green bike lanes to campus?  What about sidewalks east of Pickard?  And when are they planting the median trees in December?


The sidewalk has already been extended on the north side of lindsey between pickard and campus.   Its a big improvement as before there would be sidewalk and then you would cut through somebodies yard.    

I wondered if they might extend the green lanes but wondered if the fact that between pickard and campus is asphalt and not concrete like the rest.   I am not sure if the paint would stick as well.  Also would it show up as well as the white lines on black pavement?

----------


## BG918

> The sidewalk has already been extended on the north side of lindsey between pickard and campus.   Its a big improvement as before there would be sidewalk and then you would cut through somebodies yard.    
> 
> I wondered if they might extend the green lanes but wondered if the fact that between pickard and campus is asphalt and not concrete like the rest.   I am not sure if the paint would stick as well.  Also would it show up as well as the white lines on black pavement?


Good point on the asphalt.  Are there any plans to rebuild that stretch of Lindsey through campus or is Lindsey “done”?  

I think it would be cool to see OU do red bike lanes on the south oval and down Brooks mall to distinguish from the green lanes on Lindsey.

----------


## HangryHippo

> And when are they planting the median trees in December?


I'm curious about this as well - will the trees be planted next month?

----------


## Scott5114

> I think it would be cool to see OU do red bike lanes on the south oval and down Brooks mall to distinguish from the green lanes on Lindsey.


They couldn't; it would be against the MUTCD. The green lanes are only possible under an interim approval from FHWA. (See the link above.)

I don't know if it's used in the United States, but elsewhere red lanes are used to mark bus-only lanes.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> I'm curious about this as well - will the trees be planted next month?


I would guess they will get everything fully open then plant a while after that.

It looks like they are finishing the lights now at Wylie Road then putting up the new lights on each side of the road for night driving. Bus stations are almost all done now too.

----------


## HangryHippo

> I would guess they will get everything fully open then plant a while after that.
> 
> It looks like they are finishing the lights now at Wylie Road then putting up the new lights on each side of the road for night driving. Bus stations are almost all done now too.


Neat.  Thanks for the updates FtGF!

----------


## Jersey Boss

http://www.normantranscript.com/news...53684cdb3.html


In Norman, cyclists are allowed on both roads and sidewalks, except for Campus Corner sidewalks. Also, bike's aren't allowed anywhere marked by the appropriate signs.

In the case where a cyclist is riding on a sidewalk and approaches an intersection, city ordinance states they must stop, dismount the bike and walk it across, as if they were a pedestrian. Otherwise, it is a citable offense.

Bike lanes are available in Norman on parts of Brooks Street, Boyd, Oakhurst, Brandywine, Beaumont, Shiloh, Vicksburg and McGee, while some are planned for Lindsey Street once construction is finished. Cyclists are not required to be in bicycle lanes.

"In the state of Oklahoma, thats an option; its not required," he said. "Mostly, its for those inexperienced riders that have an issue with riding in the roadway."

Those who ride in the roadway are asked by city ordinance to ride as close to the right as possible, and cyclists must go with the flow of traffic. Cyclists must not only be treated like they are driving another vehicle on the road, they also must assert themselves in such a manner.

"You let the public know you own it," he said. "We teach not being timid. An inexperienced rider rides as far to the right and hits debris, curbs or grates because theyre trying to let people pass them. That little bit of debris can pop a tire. It can be pretty chaotic in an accident."

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> They couldn't; it would be against the MUTCD. The green lanes are only possible under an interim approval from FHWA. (See the link above.)
> 
> I don't know if it's used in the United States, but elsewhere red lanes are used to mark bus-only lanes.


San Francisco has red painted bus lanes somewhere if memory serves right.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> http://www.normantranscript.com/news...53684cdb3.html
> 
> 
> In Norman, cyclists are allowed on both roads and sidewalks, except for Campus Corner sidewalks. Also, bike's aren't allowed anywhere marked by the appropriate signs.
> 
> In the case where a cyclist is riding on a sidewalk and approaches an intersection, city ordinance states they must stop, dismount the bike and walk it across, as if they were a pedestrian. Otherwise, it is a citable offense.
> 
> Bike lanes are available in Norman on parts of Brooks Street, Boyd, Oakhurst, Brandywine, Beaumont, Shiloh, Vicksburg and McGee, while some are planned for Lindsey Street once construction is finished. Cyclists are not required to be in bicycle lanes.
> 
> ...


That last paragraph is just dumb. That causes road rage and can get you get killed. Be smart and ride to the right. If you see debris, move around it.

----------


## Scott5114

> That last paragraph is just dumb. That causes road rage and can get you get killed. Be smart and ride to the right. If you see debris, move around it.


The thinking behind riding down the center of the lane is that it causes other traffic to perceive you as another vehicle since you're acting like one, and thus treat you like one (i.e. not crowd you/try to share the lane with you, don't try to make turns in front of you, etc.)

I don't trust motorists to think, so on the rare occasions I ride a bike, I stick to the bike lanes and sidewalks. (Most of the time the sidewalks aren't being used by any pedestrians anyway.)

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Yeap. I ride my bike all the time(20+ miles a day) and no way do I trust people to treat a bicycle like a car.

----------


## jccouger

I heard Lindsey is fully open?

----------


## riflesforwatie

> I heard Lindsey is fully open?


Drove it last night at 8 pm and it wasn't yet. Haven't seen it today.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Not even close to fully open.

They still have a few lights to fix up and lane painting to do. Plus one or two bus stops. Should be in the next few weeks I would guess.

----------


## swh113

> Not even close to fully open.
> 
> They still have a few lights to fix up and lane painting to do. Plus one or two bus stops. Should be in the next few weeks I would guess.


Went through this morning and lanes still closed.  But the city's Facebook page posted this morning that it will be open late this afternoon.  I will believe it when I see it....

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> Went through this morning and lanes still closed.  But the city's Facebook page posted this morning that it will be open late this afternoon.  I will believe it when I see it....


Checked on it late Friday and it is all 100 percent open. Feels good! Looks awesome and I hope they get the word out.

----------


## ChargerAg

All the lanes are finished and open but they still have touch up work to do.   I noticed this weekend that there are still light poles that are not installed and some other misc work.

----------


## Robert_M

Still various lane closures and such going on but mostly open to the full extent.  Also noticed the past few days they have been cutting concrete on the new bridge.  Not sure what they are fixing but to be already making repairs isn't good.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Still various lane closures and such going on but mostly open to the full extent.  Also noticed the past few days they have been cutting concrete on the new bridge.  Not sure what they are fixing but to be already making repairs isn't good.


Their Lindsey St. website says various repairs have already been required but doesnt specify any more. Typical OK road quality Im sure.

----------


## _Cramer_

Could someone post some pics?  The City Facebook has a few videos with city staff, but no pics.

----------


## dankrutka

Drove Lindsay today and it’s a big change. However, the only cyclist I saw was riding in the sidewalk... it’ll take time.  :Wink:

----------


## Pete

Took these on Sunday; generally from the I-35 interchange east to toward the campus.

----------


## David

Oh wow, those green bike lanes really stand out.

----------


## Geographer

What a great street leading into OU

----------


## BG918

Looks great, long overdue.  Waiting until spring to plant the median trees?  Will there be any trees planted in the ROW between the curb and sidewalk?

----------


## Lazio85

Where are the trees? Yes, it is a pleasure to drive this every morning.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> Looks great, long overdue.  Waiting until spring to plant the median trees?  Will there be any trees planted in the ROW between the curb and sidewalk?


Still in the plan. They are still finishing up things after intersections now.

----------


## jccouger

The real difference is at night.

Before Lindsey was pretty sketchy & dark. Now it is well lit all the way from 35 to campus and it won't be long before it is bustling at almost all times with pedestrians.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Looks great, long overdue.  Waiting until spring to plant the median trees?  Will there be any trees planted in the ROW between the curb and sidewalk?


I'm not sure where they're actually planting the trees, but I inquired and was told they'll be planting everything in the spring.

----------


## ChargerAg

> I'm not sure where they're actually planting the trees, but I inquired and was told they'll be planting everything in the spring.




There's one more piece to the puzzle, and that is the landscaping, O'Leary said. We just took bids about a week and a half ago and city council is scheduled to award that contract on Feb. 13, and *we will begin work on that in March*.

The landscaping plans include trees and other plants along the medians to provide a canopy along the corridor in the coming years.


http://newsok.com/lindsey-street-pro...rticle/5581660

----------


## HangryHippo

> “There's one more piece to the puzzle, and that is the landscaping,” O'Leary said. “We just took bids about a week and a half ago and city council is scheduled to award that contract on Feb. 13, and *we will begin work on that in March*.”
> 
> The landscaping plans include trees and other plants along the medians to provide a canopy along the corridor in the coming years.
> 
> 
> http://newsok.com/lindsey-street-pro...rticle/5581660


Well there you have it.

This line ("The landscaping plans include trees and other plants along the medians to provide a canopy along the corridor in the coming years") has me wondering if they're only planting trees in the center medians or they'll also be planting along the sidewalks?  I'm assuming (and hoping) it's both as it would look odd if they're only planted in the center medians.

----------


## HangryHippo

Norman City Council apparently approved the landscaping bid for Lindsey St. at their meeting yesterday and work is supposed to begin on 2/15.  It will include landscaping in the center median and on both sides of the street.

----------


## Roger S

One of my friends from Norman posted this pic of the bike lane to Facebook this morning. 

Think they're just trying to keep from Edmonding their Norman with this version of spelling?

36378330_10156719532828338_603339735678582784_n.jpg

----------


## HangryHippo

Have they wrapped up the landscaping yet?  Last time I was down in Norman, it wasn't close to being done.

----------


## ChargerAg

they seemed to knocked out the south side landscaping very quick and then the north side stalled for some reason.

----------


## Lazio85

> One of my friends from Norman posted this pic of the bike lane to Facebook this morning. 
> 
> Think they're just trying to keep from Edmonding their Norman with this version of spelling?
> 
> Attachment 14721



I took that exact same picture yesterday.


20180628_162244 by lazio85, on Flickr

----------


## Roger S

> I took that exact same picture yesterday.


He just posted more pics of crews out there looking at it... Maybe they will get it fixed before it becomes a national embarrassment.

----------


## Jwalt

Too late, it was on this evenings Chive gallery: Its summertime, and the nailing it is easy  A gallery for pretty dumb mistakes.

----------


## seajohn

During last week's torrential rain, the new Lindsey street was flooded around Wylie.  I'm sure our crack street planning department has something in the works for the future to fix though.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

I noticed today the McAlisters on Lindsey had closed. Somewhat surprised based on how busy it always was. I guess they are just sticking to the new location in UNP.

----------


## soonerheart

Long term Lindsey still needs to be 4 landed all the way to Elm and a better traffic light system added.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

A lot of people using turning lanes the wrong way.

Lindsey is also looking pretty bare with McAllisters going out now as well.

----------


## mattjank

> A lot of people using turning lanes the wrong way.
> 
> Lindsey is also looking pretty bare with McAllisters going out now as well.


It closed mid October. Also saw in the Transcript that Taco Bueno on Lindsey is now closed as well. Lots of empty store fronts.

----------


## _Cramer_

I don't understand why they don't make it a permanent three-lane road with, curbs, sidewalks and nice lighting all the way to Elm? The center lane could be used as a turn lane. It could be adjusted on game day to be a permanent east or west bound traffic flow either before or after the game? Yes it would cost, but I think it would help with University traffic.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> I don't understand why they don't make it a permanent three-lane road with, curbs, sidewalks and nice lighting all the way to Elm? The center lane could be used as a turn lane. It could be adjusted on game day to be a permanent east or west bound traffic flow either before or after the game? Yes it would cost, but I think it would help with University traffic.


I think that ship sailed long ago. A plan for a traffic circle at Berry  was also proposed by OU for better traffic flow was shot down as well.

----------


## BG918

> It closed mid October. Also saw in the Transcript that Taco Bueno on Lindsey is now closed as well. Lots of empty store fronts.


Good opportunity to increase density and add infill housing in certain areas along Lindsey.

----------


## HangryHippo

> Good opportunity to increase density and add infill housing in certain areas along Lindsey.


Yep.  Ideal time to do so.

----------


## mattbrafford

Steve, Can you see if you can figure out if anything is planning on going here.  NAPA moved locations in early 2018 and Bryan's car corner closed down overnight.  There is no more "For Lease" signs and it is an ideal location being on Lindsay Street right off I-35.  I believe I saw a surveying stake on the corner there too. 
Screen Shot 2019-01-18 at 10.50.09 AM.jpgScreen Shot 2019-01-18 at 10.52.47 AM.jpg

----------


## HangryHippo

> Steve, Can you see if you can figure out if anything is planning on going here.  NAPA moved locations in early 2018 and Bryan's car corner closed down overnight.  There is no more "For Lease" signs and it is an ideal location being on Lindsay Street right off I-35.  I believe I saw a surveying stake on the corner there too. 
> Screen Shot 2019-01-18 at 10.50.09 AM.jpgScreen Shot 2019-01-18 at 10.52.47 AM.jpg


This will make for yet another killer On Cue.  lol

----------


## macfoucin

> This will make for yet another killer On Cue.  lol


According to Norman Development FB page "OnCue Express has purchased 4 strategic parcels at the high-traffic corner of Lindsey and 24th Ave SW. OnCue paid $1.4M for the nearly 8 acre area. No timeline for construction has been released.

The two western most parcels are currently vacant, the third was most recently a Napa Auto Parts and the forth was a used car lot until their closure in late December.

OnCue currently operates two locations in Norman: one at E Lindsay and Classen Blvd and one at Tecumseh and Flood. OnCue also has plans to build a new location at Classen Blvd and Highway 9."

https://www.facebook.com/83149970038...2027626333210/

----------


## HangryHippo

> According to Norman Development FB page "OnCue Express has purchased 4 strategic parcels at the high-traffic corner of Lindsey and 24th Ave SW. OnCue paid $1.4M for the nearly 8 acre area. No timeline for construction has been released.
> 
> The two western most parcels are currently vacant, the third was most recently a Napa Auto Parts and the forth was a used car lot until their closure in late December.
> 
> OnCue currently operates two locations in Norman: one at E Lindsay and Classen Blvd and one at Tecumseh and Flood. OnCue also has plans to build a new location at Classen Blvd and Highway 9."
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/83149970038...2027626333210/


Well, I'll be damned.  I CAN tell the future.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

That one on the corner of Lindsey and 24th will be very heavily used. Same goes for the classen and hwy9. Good picks.

----------


## ChargerAg

Anybody know when they start on the new building where swatters wine used to be?

----------


## SEMIweather

> According to Norman Development FB page "OnCue Express has purchased 4 strategic parcels at the high-traffic corner of Lindsey and 24th Ave SW. OnCue paid $1.4M for the nearly 8 acre area. No timeline for construction has been released.


Jeez, they really must be getting a serious infusion of capital from Phillips 66.

----------


## Pete

With this recent property acquisition, by my running spreadsheet OnCue now has 47 locations in central OK that have been completed or where property has been purchased for future development.

In addition, I'm tracking a handful of possible purchases.

----------


## Robert_M

Midwest Wrecking has the two old buildings torn down and were busting up the old asphalt this morning.

----------


## SoonersFan12

> One of my friends from Norman posted this pic of the bike lane to Facebook this morning. 
> 
> Think they're just trying to keep from Edmonding their Norman with this version of spelling?
> 
> Attachment 14721


Did they get that fixed or is it still there? I am not sure if I like the green, it makes me think it is grass instead of a bike lane

----------


## AP

That's a pretty universal color for bike lanes.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> Did they get that fixed or is it still there? I am not sure if I like the green, it makes me think it is grass instead of a bike lane


Ya it was fixed that week.

green in all our bike lanes in Norman

----------


## David

> That's a pretty universal color for bike lanes.


It's from the nationwide road standards documents even, if I am remembering correctly.

----------


## SoonersFan12

> Ya it was fixed that week.
> 
> green in all our bike lanes in Norman


That is good, thank you for the update!

----------


## macfoucin

I couldn't find it's own thread.  Sooner Legend's is closed for good. https://www.koco.com/article/sooner-...loses/33385779

----------


## SoonersFan12

> I couldn't find it's own thread.  Sooner Legend's is closed for good. https://www.koco.com/article/sooner-...loses/33385779


Not very surprised but very sad about this!

----------


## Robert_M

There is now an auction sign out in front of Sooner Legends for a date of October 1st.  Appears to be for property and furnishings.  Says to be stripped and lists things like the kitchen equipment, a/c units, and parking lot lights.


https://www.dakil.com/event/sooner-l...tel-restaurant

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> There is now an auction sign out in front of Sooner Legends for a date of October 1st.  Appears to be for property and furnishings.  Says to be stripped and lists things like the kitchen equipment, a/c units, and parking lot lights.
> 
> 
> https://www.dakil.com/event/sooner-l...tel-restaurant


I always felt like this place was on the verge of closing before the pandemic then I think that was the final nail.

----------


## macfoucin

Sooner Legends to be torn down, no word on what it will become.
https://oklahoman.com/article/567847...o-be-torn-down

----------


## mugofbeer

It's getting where about half of west Lindsey needs to be torn down.

----------


## BG918

> It's getting where about half of west Lindsey needs to be torn down.


As long as its replaced with quality new development.  This one of two front doors for OU (the other being Main to University) and they should be involved in making sure it is the gateway the university deserves.

----------


## mugofbeer

I totally agree.  I'm amazed the value of real eastate isn't holding up Lindsey quality more.  I'm sure the widening project hurt businesses along with Covid.

----------


## Robert_M

Midwest Wrecking has started demolishing the Sooner Legends building.

----------


## macfoucin

Demo of Sooner Legends is complete.  Walls are going up at the OnCue across the street.

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Also the ill fated "Slice House Pizzeria" looks like it has been leased? No idea what is going in though.

----------


## Romulack

Building permits were issued in March for "Velvet Taco"

----------


## mattjank

> Building permits were issued in March for "Velvet Taco"


I hope its the same Velvet Taco with numerous Dallas area shops. Will give Torchy's some competition. The Nashville hot tofu and chicken fried cauliflower tacos are fantastic. 
Can't wait

----------


## macfoucin

> I hope its the same Velvet Taco with numerous Dallas area shops. Will give Torchy's some competition. The Nashville hot tofu and chicken fried cauliflower tacos are fantastic. 
> Can't wait


It is according to Norman Development FB page.

----------


## BG918

Anyone know what is going in at Lindsey & Lahoma?  It’s where Sooner Liquors used to be.

----------


## BimmerSooner

Press and Plow

----------


## BG918

> Press and Plow


Thanks, I had heard rumors about a bar/coffee shop.  This will be a good addition to the neighborhood.  Hopefully they will have longer hours than the one in N Norman and are open into the evening.

----------


## BimmerSooner

Starbuck's going in on the southwest corner of Lindsey and Berry.

----------


## BG918

> Starbuck's going in on the southwest corner of Lindsey and Berry.


Interesting, anyone have a site plan?

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

Haven't seen one but I am happy that old falling apart Shell station is gone.

----------


## BimmerSooner

My current curiosity on Lindsey centers on the parcels of land immediately east of Berry and on the north side of Lindsey.  I've noticed a bunch of dirt piles that have been delivered there recently. 
 Seeing that, I searched the assessor's website and found that it is, as of April 1 of this year, owned by Garner Crossing, LLC.  They developed the higher end apartments of the same name at the intersection of Apache and Jenkins. So I'm assuming potentially something similar to be built on Lindsey.  I'm not 100% sure how to interpret the assessor's sales data, but at a minimum they paid $750K for the two adjacent lots there, or $1.5M for both.  I assume the former.  Nonetheless, one wouldn't think someone would pay that much without plans to develop it pretty robustly.

----------


## wunderkind

Really like Press & Plow. Better espresso than Starbucks (which might not be setting the bar very high LOL).
Glad to lose the eyesore that was the former Shell Station at Berry and Lindsey but with such a small area for a Starbucks and the affinity for drive-through coffee, won't it clog up that intersection?

----------


## FighttheGoodFight

> My current curiosity on Lindsey centers on the parcels of land immediately east of Berry and on the north side of Lindsey.  I've noticed a bunch of dirt piles that have been delivered there recently. 
>  Seeing that, I searched the assessor's website and found that it is, as of April 1 of this year, owned by Garner Crossing, LLC.  They developed the higher end apartments of the same name at the intersection of Apache and Jenkins. So I'm assuming potentially something similar to be built on Lindsey.  I'm not 100% sure how to interpret the assessor's sales data, but at a minimum they paid $750K for the two adjacent lots there, or $1.5M for both.  I assume the former.  Nonetheless, one wouldn't think someone would pay that much without plans to develop it pretty robustly.


As long as the bulldozer that has been "for sale" there for the last 10 years does away I'll take it.

----------


## W8N2SKI

> Interesting, anyone have a site plan?


This is from a while back from the Norman Development Facebook page
+Starbucks Norman.jpg

----------


## BG918

> This is from a while back from the Norman Development Facebook page
> +Attachment 17803


Gross, a drive-thru only?  Makes sense closer to the highway but not here.  Did the city approve this?

----------


## W8N2SKI

> Gross, a drive-thru only?  Makes sense closer to the highway but not here.  Did the city approve this?


Based on the number of parking spots on the plans, I believe it will be a walk-in location as well. They have already started the groundwork and foundation, so I am guessing the city has already signed off it.

----------

