# Civic Matters > Suburban & Other OK Communities > Norman >  Vote on Norman Transportation Bond Package today

## johnpwoods

If you live in Norman I encourage you to vote yes today.

For more information on the transportation package - http://progressnorman.com/

----------


## vaflyer

Wife and I plan to vote "no" but we expect it to pass.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Wife and I plan to vote "no" but we expect it to pass.


do you mind sharing why??

----------


## ou48A

Just returned from voting. I walked, but I don’t believe I will walk to the voting booth again. Too many broken down sidewalks and low hanging trees. 

I voted yes on the bond package. IMHO it’s too important to our quality of life and the advancement of the city’s growth not to vote yes. 

I look at it like this…. If a new or expanding business perceives that a City won’t do the things that it takes to take care of its own needs then why would we want to part of that city’s future?

FYI Republicans are also voting in a runoff for their state senator.

----------


## ou48A

Question: why did the city of Norman schedule this bond election when they did? 

It sure seems like far more people would have voted if they would have waited until this fall’s elections.

----------


## vaflyer

> do you mind sharing why??


A couple of reasons

1)	The Lindsey street project, which is half the bond cost, is extremely expensive for the benefits received.
2)	The City of Norman does not seem to understand people have limited budgets. Instead, every year the city has a new thing they are asking money for. For example, animal shelter, library, tornado sirens, public safety tax and bonds, etc. Next, things on that list include sanitization, library, and parks.  I want the City of Norman to state what their priorities are and what they are willing to live without.  I do not mind providing funds to the city for worthy projects but I do not have a bottomless piggybank.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Question: why did the city of Norman schedule this bond election when they did? 
> 
> It sure seems like far more people would have voted if they would have waited until this fall’s elections.


more people voting is not always helpful to get things passed

----------


## ou48A

> more people voting is not always helpful to get things passed


That’s very true…. However it seems like the responsible thing to do…. but that’s just me.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> A couple of reasons
> 
> 1)	The Lindsey street project, which is half the bond cost, is extremely expensive for the benefits received.
> 2)	The City of Norman does not seem to understand people have limited budgets. Instead, every year the city has a new thing they are asking money for. For example, animal shelter, library, tornado sirens, public safety tax and bonds, etc. Next, things on that list include sanitization, library, and parks.  I want the City of Norman to state what their priorities are and what they are willing to live without.  I do not mind providing funds to the city for worthy projects but I do not have a bottomless piggybank.


are these bonds raising taxes??

----------


## twade

> are these bonds raising taxes??


Yes, the bonds will be funded with additional property taxes.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Yes, the bonds will be funded with additional property taxes.


ok thanks

----------


## twade

I voted at just before noon. The poll workers estimated that only about 60 out of 2500 had voted in our precinct.

----------


## kevinpate

> Question: why did the city of Norman schedule this bond election when they did? 
> 
> It sure seems like far more people would have voted if they would have waited until this falls elections.


I think you actually just answered your own question.  More voters does not necessarily equate to more yes votes for raising property taxes in Norman.

----------


## Just the facts

I'm think that scheduling it when Republicans are the majority voters isn't going to help either.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> I'm think that scheduling it when Republicans are the majority voters isn't going to help either.


republicans are happy to tax themselves when the know just what they are getting ...      local govt is way way different than national politics

----------


## ou48A

> republicans are happy to tax themselves when the know just what they are getting ...      local govt is way way different than national politics


I agree… People who are on government assistance are probably less likely to want to see their taxes increased and there is a great tendency for most of them to be Dem’s.
I understand why they don’t always hold a bond elections during other major elections but IMHO local elections should be held when they can expect a high turnout. It just seems like the civic thing to do…. But again that’s just me.

----------


## gamecock

> Yes, the bonds will be funded with additional property taxes.


I already voted yes, and I hope it passes. I would really like to see Lindsey Street improved both functionally and aesthetically. It is not an attractive gateway to OU. From the City of Norman:  "If approved, for a Norman home with a market value of $100,000, the tax increase would be about $3 per month. For a home with a value of $150,000, the tax increase would be about $4.63 per month. Over 80% of Norman homeowners would pay less than $4.63 per month."

----------


## ou48A

With so many visitors coming to Norman I have always wondered why Norman didn’t have a little higher sales tax and let some of the visitors pay for a small part of the bonds?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

I live in Edmond, but I do hope this passes for Norman. It seems like this would really improve visitors overall opinions of the city and help alleviate traffic as well.

----------


## ou48A

49 of 49 precincts reporting

CITY OF NORMAN

PROPOSITION 
Votes%

FOR THE PROPOSITION - YES

5,762       61.4%



AGAINST THE PROPOSITION - NO

3,627       38.6%

----------


## ljbab728

It passed easily

http://normantranscript.com/new/x143...portation-bond

----------


## twade

So with this bond election and the widening of Lindsey east of Jenkins, how long do you think it will be before serious talks begin to widen from Berry to College?  

I don't think it will ever happen, so it kind of looks like we just moved the bottleneck farther into the city.

----------


## ou48A

> So with this bond election and the widening of Lindsey east of Jenkins, how long do you think it will be before serious talks begin to widen from Berry to College?  
> 
> I don't think it will ever happen, so it kind of looks like we just moved the bottleneck farther into the city.


Solutions need to be found in the next 2 or 3 years and implemented in the next 10 years.
 The state and city should have done this about 50 years ago when the interstate was installed.

After the completion of improvements from Berry to I-35 the stretch of Lindsey from Berry to College will very likely become the most congested street in the state if it isn't already.

My first preference would be to buy additional right of way on the north side of the street. There are fewer homes on the north side and some of them are not in great condition. With this additional right of way the street should be 4 or 5 landed.

At a minimum the city of Norman should start buying up property on the north side of the street as it naturally becomes available for sale. Also the state should help Norman and OU by making Lindsey Street from I-35 east bound a state highway.

----------


## HangryHippo

Lindsey a state highway?  You've got to be kidding.  While we're at it, why don't they just put the lanes underground and deck over them with green space all along Lindsey's current path?

----------


## Just the facts

4 lanes, center turn lane, and a 25mph residential speed limit makes a lot sense.  That can't fail. [/sarc]

----------


## ou48A

> Lindsey a state highway?  You've got to be kidding.


Apparently you don’t know that Lindsey street was once a state highway….



 and not than many years ago in the grand scheme of things.
Making it a state highway again should make eligible for funding and better maintenance. That would be smart for the city/OU to want.
Also why is there is no state highway leading to the heart of one of the state’s most visited places and largest investments?

----------


## ou48A

> 4 lanes, center turn lane, and a 25mph residential speed limit makes a lot sense.  That can't fail. [/sarc]


Norman and OU have grown significantly in the last 50 years and they will both continue to grow. but nothing you have proposed is a practical solution for Norman.
When 10 of thousands are inconvenienced and with it being a real safety issue maybe its time to remove part or all of the necessary residential area to make this project happen.
Normans traffic congestion has also left a poor impression on prospective business.

----------


## heyerdahl

Trying to find middle ground here on the central Lindsey Street issue.

Lindsey between Berry and campus really is congested- More than 15,000 cars per day on a 2 lane street with lots of stoplights is definitely the upper limits of what it can handle.

But can you imagine how a 5-lane road would impact that area? That's 50-60 feet of asphalt- the extra travel lanes will encourage lane-jockeying and speeding during off-peak hours. The traffic count will increase as people who were avoiding Lindsey with other routes begin to switch back. In the end, those who don't live in the immediate neighborhood (and have no interest in it) get a faster commute home to Moore or wherever as they pass through, while those who have actually invested, lived, and spent time there are stuck with the consequences. That's not very equitable.

You could justify adding a center turn lane, removing some traffic signals in that stretch, and adding a 10' sidewalk and trail. Those three measures would really reduce traffic congestion at peak hours. The layout would be more like Lindsey currently is west of Berry, but without the huge mess of commercial driveways and businesses that make that stretch dangerous.

Lindsey Street passes through a dense urban part of town. Amazing that I see bikers and pedestrians trying to use the shoulder and ditch to use the street all the time. How could we justify spending money on widening the amount of space for cars before we have even provided such a basic public facility as a sidewalk?

----------


## BG918

> Trying to find middle ground here on the central Lindsey Street issue.
> 
> Lindsey between Berry and campus really is congested- More than 15,000 cars per day on a 2 lane street with lots of stoplights is definitely the upper limits of what it can handle.
> 
> But can you imagine how a 5-lane road would impact that area? That's 50-60 feet of asphalt- the extra travel lanes will encourage lane-jockeying and speeding during off-peak hours. The traffic count will increase as people who were avoiding Lindsey with other routes begin to switch back. In the end, those who don't live in the immediate neighborhood (and have no interest in it) get a faster commute home to Moore or wherever as they pass through, while those who have actually invested, lived, and spent time there are stuck with the consequences. That's not very equitable.
> 
> You could justify adding a center turn lane, removing some traffic signals in that stretch, and adding a 10' sidewalk and trail. Those three measures would really reduce traffic congestion at peak hours. The layout would be more like Lindsey currently is west of Berry, but without the huge mess of commercial driveways and businesses that make that stretch dangerous.
> 
> Lindsey Street passes through a dense urban part of town. Amazing that I see bikers and pedestrians trying to use the shoulder and ditch to use the street all the time. How could we justify spending money on widening the amount of space for cars before we have even provided such a basic public facility as a sidewalk?


I assumed there will be new sidewalks added when they widen the road?

----------


## Just the facts

Funny, the west part hasn't even started yet and already we know where the next traffic congestion is going to be.  So they say Lindsey has the highest traffic accident rate in the state.  I can only assume that the vast majority are low speed accidents since it seems clear that no one hardly gets above 15 mph.  A 5 lane Lindsey might see fewer accidents but I bet they do a lot more damage.

----------


## Snowman

> Lindsey a state highway?  You've got to be kidding.  While we're at it, why don't they just put the lanes underground and deck over them with green space all along Lindsey's current path?


It was a spur off of sh44/sh74 from the 1920s through 2009

----------


## SoonerBoy18

If I lived in Norman, I would have voted Yes.

----------


## heyerdahl

> I assumed there will be new sidewalks added when they widen the road?


Yes, the western portion from I-35 to Berry will have a sidewalk and be widened to 5 lanes. I was referring to the area from Berry to campus which will not be changed by this project. Some other posters were already calling for this section to be 5-laned as well.

----------


## ou48A

> Trying to find middle ground here on the central Lindsey Street issue.
> 
> Lindsey between Berry and campus really is congested- More than 15,000 cars per day on a 2 lane street with lots of stoplights is definitely the upper limits of what it can handle.
> 
> But can you imagine how a 5-lane road would impact that area? That's 50-60 feet of asphalt- the extra travel lanes will encourage lane-jockeying and speeding during off-peak hours. The traffic count will increase as people who were avoiding Lindsey with other routes begin to switch back. In the end, those who don't live in the immediate neighborhood (and have no interest in it) get a faster commute home to Moore or wherever as they pass through, while those who have actually invested, lived, and spent time there are stuck with the consequences. That's not very equitable.
> 
> You could justify adding a center turn lane, removing some traffic signals in that stretch, and adding a 10' sidewalk and trail. Those three measures would really reduce traffic congestion at peak hours. The layout would be more like Lindsey currently is west of Berry, but without the huge mess of commercial driveways and businesses that make that stretch dangerous.
> 
> Lindsey Street passes through a dense urban part of town. Amazing that I see bikers and pedestrians trying to use the shoulder and ditch to use the street all the time. How could we justify spending money on widening the amount of space for cars before we have even provided such a basic public facility as a sidewalk?


If Lindsey between Berry and campus has 15,000 daily vehicles the actual number of people is probably in excess of 20,000.

If we want a 10 wide sidewalk and trail and any additional traffic lanes it would require additional right of way (ROW).

If we buy more ROW, why not take it only from the north side of the street? How many people would this relocate?
I wouldnt think it would be more than a couple of dozen. Also some of these are rental properties that are not in great condition. Some of this land might see redevelopment, with a better street and the removal of nearly blighted property.

I dont believe its fair to tens of thousands of people to keep this stretch of Lindsey Street as it is today when keeping it like it is when it only benefits a very small number of people. I believe thats a pretty solid middle ground position.

Is it fair to do nothing when thousands others who live in nearby residential areas around campus see the traffic counts on their streets increased because drivers are currently avoiding a congested Lindsey Street? 

If we are going to talk about public safety is it fair to the thousands who could have their emergency services delayed because of congestion?

With the stadium expansions and more likely to come, traffic congestion is actually a very serious problem in Norman during football games. It frequently delays emergency response times. Emptying the traffic out of the campus area sooner helps. It makes this a safety issue.

Besides improving commute times a modern Lindsey Street would also reduce gasoline usage and reduce air and noise pollution in other nearby OU areas. This helps the quality of air for residents and it saves the drivers money. Win/ win.

Trees could be transplanted and replanted with better suited trees. It could be a better looking entrance to OUs campus.

As OU and Norman continue their growth I believe a better Lindsey Street enhances their abilitys to grow and that this stretch of Lindsey in question should be first, on the next list, of major transportation projects for city of Norman streets.

----------


## Just the facts

The only problem with that is Induced Demand.

This might be a little to mathmatical for some people but I am posting a link to it anyhow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

----------


## ou48A

> The only problem with that is Induced Demand.
> 
> This might be a little to mathmatical for some people but I am posting a link to it anyhow.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand


Induced demand….. In this case the more of it the better! A growing and healthy major research university is good for our state and community.

Healthy roads are part of the equation for growth and success.
Right now this stretch of Lindsey Street is sick.. and it’s somewhat of a hazard to tens of thousands.

----------


## Just the facts

The more what the better?

----------


## Stan Silliman

Did it pass? Many Normanites have told me Lindsey Street bond issues have passed in the past (did you see what I did there?) yet nothing was done leading to a distrust of city government. 
I office near Braums so if it happens this time, I'll brace myself.

----------


## Just the facts

It passed - you will soon be cruising Lindsey with narry a care in the world.

----------


## rcjunkie

> It passed - *you will soon be cruising Lindsey with narry a care in the world*.


Unless your headed east toward OU and once you reach Berry Road and encounter bumper to bumper traffic.

----------


## Just the facts

> Unless your headed east toward OU and once you reach Berry Road and encounter bumper to bumper traffic.


...which will back-up all the way to I-35.  The question isn't congestion or no congestion - it is how many lanes of congestion.

----------


## kevinpate

Yeah, it passed.  So no more W Lindsey St eateries for me once they start the work until after it is done.  Life is too short to have to be annoyed and struggle to get to one's food.  It'll be worse than having too little food in the house with too many relatives passing through over a weekend.

----------


## ou48A

> Yeah, it passed.  So no more W Lindsey St eateries for me once they start the work until after it is done.  Life is too short to have to be annoyed and struggle to get to one's food.  It'll be worse than having too little food in the house with too many relatives passing through over a weekend.


Some of the eateries will still have relatively easy access.

The way I look at it is…… if it isn’t good enough to go to a small amount of additional trouble then it probably wasn’t that good to start with.

----------


## ou48A

> Unless your headed east toward OU and once you reach Berry Road and encounter bumper to bumper traffic.


It maybe another 10 or 20 years but the rest of Lindsey will eventually see significant traffic congestion reducing measures. 
There is movement in that direction, but it might take a lot of time.

----------


## BG918

> Yes, the western portion from I-35 to Berry will have a sidewalk and be widened to 5 lanes. I was referring to the area from Berry to campus which will not be changed by this project. Some other posters were already calling for this section to be 5-laned as well.


Eventually they'll need to expand the section from Berry to Jenkins to 4 lanes, no turn lane, with sidewalks on each side.  At the same time do landscaped medians on the center turn lane between 24th and Berry with turn lanes at intersections, similar to what they are doing on Lindsey between Jenkins and Classen.  Isn't the Lindsey RR underpass funded and will eventually start construction after the one on Robinson is finished?

----------


## kevinpate

> Some of the eateries will still have relatively easy access.
> 
> The way I look at it is if it isnt good enough to go to a small amount of additional trouble then it probably wasnt that good to start with.


Fortunately we have no shortage of decent eateries in Norman so one only need struggle if s/he chooses to do so.  Though we're still lacking locally at the upper end of the eatery spectrum, the dang tasty anyways places are well distributed around Norman.

----------


## vaflyer

> Isn't the Lindsey RR underpass funded and will eventually start construction after the one on Robinson is finished?


I do not believe the Lindsey RR underpass is funded. The Robinson underpass was funded with bonds from the last transportation bond election and with some stimulus funds. Neither of those sources included funding for the Lindsey RR underpass.

----------


## ou48A

On the link is a city of Norman video of what Lindsey Street should look like.


Toward the very end of the video they show where Lindsey Street will be widened to 2 west bound lanes starting just east of Berry Road and just west of the bridge over the small creak. But they do not show a dedicated right turn lane from west bound Lindsey turning north on Berry Road. 

This is a pretty big mistake not to include this in the Lindsey St project. 
It wouldn’t cost very much more money and it would help improve traffic flow on the most congested street in Oklahoma. 

While the light is red, traffic will slowly fill up the 2 Lindsey Street west bound lanes east of Barry road. 
The more vehicles they can load up in this area while the light is red the more traffic they can move though the intersection on a green light.

A dedicated right turn lane would increase capacity by not forcing vehicle to slow down for right turning vehicles. It would free up additional spaces for more vehicles to move though a green light. This would reduce the back up behind them and probably lower the number of rear end collisions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXXSR...ayer_embedded#!

----------


## jedicurt

in this video, is the space between the white lines and the curb, bike lanes? or is this just a lot of space in their video rendering

----------


## Just the facts

Surely they aren't building 87 curb cuts in one mile of road.

----------


## venture

> in this video, is the space between the white lines and the curb, bike lanes? or is this just a lot of space in their video rendering


Yes. At the start of the video you can see the bike lane decal on the pavement.

----------


## jedicurt

> Surely they aren't building 87 curb cuts in one mile of road.


did you actually count them?

----------


## jedicurt

> Yes. At the start of the video you can see the bike lane decal on the pavement.


awesome... didn't catch that the first time.  that is really good news

----------


## Snowman

> Surely they aren't building 87 curb cuts in one mile of road.


The rendering looked like it only cared about the road, it neither showed that the side walk would have the number of cuts required if they even put them in the correct position along the road nor did it bother to pave a sidewalk to the crosswalks going over Lindsey at the lights. Given the width of the road they probably will not be able to avoid curb cuts without buying an amount of land that would leave the business along the way without enough parking for code.

----------


## Just the facts

> did you actually count them?


Yes I did.  It was either that or watch people buy storage lockers on TV.

----------


## ou48A

FYI
I didn’t hear it all, but the topic of poor city planning for football traffic was brought up by at least one city council member at the city council meeting early this morning.

More so than ever the congestion and parking is noticeably worse this year. It’s actually become a safety issue that needs to be addressed ASAP by the city, OU, and the state.

----------

