Is Norman going downhill??

[kevinpate]

East Main ... not recalling any others on the primary N/S or E/W roads. Some in newer neighborhoods, mainly west-side are the only other ones which spring to mind. Speed bumps in several neighborhoods, but all requested by residents I think. They could use repainting but they are fine otherwise.

[ou48A]

Arthritic old bodies should not be driving vehicles. Sorry.

People used to drive 40 mph through the streets in Chautauqua. I remember a child being killed by a collision once a few years ago. The traffic calming mechanisms are a good idea. They also have the intrinsic benefit of saying, "This is a nice neighborhood, we have nice things here, please slow down." The traffic circles are even better at that. I always thought that the circle on East Main would be a great place for urban development (especially if/when/ever the Porter Avenue streetscape becomes a vibrant eastside activity spine) - I wish the City of Norman would actively pursue redevelopment along there.

I know of the one on East Main... a few located inside neighborhoods/developments, remind me did the City implement more of the circles or was that just talk?

Apparently you didn’t read my post very well because I said “I was driving”!

And according to a study cited by a Norman city council member the traffic calming devices kill more people than they save. Are we just supposed to ignore the city councils over reaction to one heart breaking event?

[ou48A]

East Main ... not recalling any others on the primary N/S or E/W roads. Some in newer neighborhoods, mainly west-side are the only other ones which spring to mind. Speed bumps in several neighborhoods, but all requested by residents I think. They could use repainting but they are fine otherwise.

I can assure you the vast majority of people in my area of north west Norman do not want or like the traffic circles or traffic calming bumps in our area.

[blangtang]

Overall I don't think Norman is going downhill, but I do think without OU, Norman would be just another hellish suburb. OU keeps pushing things forward in the campus area, and I sometimes wonder if the high water mark will have been reached if and when Boren retires. But thats another thing...

Maybe some momentum has been lost recently with the widespread disappointment of UNP, that was a big thing at the time and the vision and expectations were high. Oh and that Rock Creek bridge over I-35 seems really pointless to me, but I don't live in that part of Norman, maybe ou48a likes to comment on that.

Another thing that comes to mind was the "no" vote on the new downtown library project. For whatever reason, the people just didn't buy into it, and that project would have had the ability to transform and maybe extend redevelopment in the downtown/Main Street/Porter. Now it appears a new downtown library has been shelved for the time being...

[jedicurt]

The traffic circles don't bother me at all, when they are installed correctly. The one near my house they just slapped in the middle of the intersection then didn't understand why the low laying areas for water flow where getting all torn up with the traffic having to drive in them now.... finally after about a dozen horribly done patch jobs, they came and ripped out the problem areas and repoured the strip of concrete and that seems to have finally corrected the problem.

As for the speed bumps. well, they scrap the bottom of my girl friends Firebird (which while low to the ground is still at it's factory height). so i can just imagine how many other people are getting their vehicles damaged by these.

[ou48A]

Overall I don't think Norman is going downhill, but I do think without OU, Norman would be just another hellish suburb. OU keeps pushing things forward in the campus area, and I sometimes wonder if the high water mark will have been reached if and when Boren retires. But thats another thing...

Maybe some momentum has been lost recently with the widespread disappointment of UNP, that was a big thing at the time and the vision and expectations were high. Oh and that Rock Creek bridge over I-35 seems really pointless to me, but I don't live in that part of Norman, maybe ou48a likes to comment on that.Another thing that comes to mind was the "no" vote on the new downtown library project. For whatever reason, the people just didn't buy into it, and that project would have had the ability to transform and maybe extend redevelopment in the downtown/Main Street/Porter. Now it appears a new downtown library has been shelved for the time being...

There are probably more important projects in Norman that were needed first but the Rock Creek Bridge helps relieve congestion on Robinson from NW 36th to NW 24th. Years from now when Norman has grown a great deal bigger this bridge will seem a lot smarter.
I don’t remember the details but I believe the developer of the UPN was required to pay a significant part of the cost of this bridge.
I have been critical of Norman leaders but in fairness to them the decision to build the Rock Creek Bridge is the type of forward thinking we need more of on projects city wide.

We don’t need to wait until a problem is so bad that it limits our options.

[ou48A]

The traffic circles don't bother me at all, when they are installed correctly. .

I have seen several large moving company trucks that have had difficulty negotiating around the traffic circles in my part of town…. I have also seen several people having problems in winter weather. In each case I have seen monetary damage done both to the vehicles and to the traffic circle signs.

I have seen fire trucks and ambulances slowing way down to make their way around them.
If I had voted for these traffic devices would really hate to be confronted by somebody who had additional damage caused to their home while it burned or by a family member of a heart attack victim.

[Bunty]

The city of Norman should attract more business and industry by offering health insurance for everyone who works there. You would get your insurance premiums tacked onto your utility bill every month. Don't live in Norman but work there? No problem. You would get it taken off your paychecks. Prospective employers would surely love the idea of no longer having to worry about offering health insurance to their workers. However, I don't know of any other city doing this, or if it would even be considered feasible.

[venture]

Norman is going to continue to struggle a little bit as it keeps spreading out. We keep seeing the suburban area of Norman, which is the more conservative areas, that are probably transplants from elsewhere in the Metro that want it to be a suburb. Then you have those in the core, the blue area of Norman, that wants to keep it the small college town feel. The trick is getting a good balance between the two.

[Spartan]

Apparently you didn’t read my post very well because I said “I was driving”!

And according to a study cited by a Norman city council member the traffic calming devices kill more people than they save. Are we just supposed to ignore the city councils over reaction to one heart breaking event?

Which city council member?

[Spartan]

The city of Norman should attract more business and industry by offering health insurance for everyone who works there. You would get your insurance premiums tacked onto your utility bill every month. Don't live in Norman but work there? No problem. You would get it taken off your paychecks. Prospective employers would surely love the idea of no longer having to worry about offering health insurance to their workers. However, I don't know of any other city doing this, or if it would even be considered feasible.

Uh no.

[Dubya61]

Why not? What a radically fresh way to embrace what is Norman's different culture.

[jedicurt]

The city of Norman should attract more business and industry by offering health insurance for everyone who works there. You would get your insurance premiums tacked onto your utility bill every month. Don't live in Norman but work there? No problem. You would get it taken off your paychecks. Prospective employers would surely love the idea of no longer having to worry about offering health insurance to their workers. However, I don't know of any other city doing this, or if it would even be considered feasible.

I must agree with Spartan....

umm, no

[Bunty]

I must agree with Spartan....

umm, no

Why not? Because it would be impossible for the city of Norman to offer as low priced insurance premiums than private employers, therefore not really a good deal? At any rate, I don't see why employers need to be in the health insurance business any more than they need to offer car and home insurance.

[mcca7596]

At any rate, I don't see why employers need to be in the health insurance business any more than they need to offer car and home insurance.

Interesting point. Only thing I can deduce is that ultimately one's health is most affected by their jobs in terms of hours spent doing an all too often non-enjoyable task (which equals stress).

[jedicurt]

Why not? Because it would be impossible for the city of Norman to offer as low priced insurance premiums than private employers, therefore not really a good deal? At any rate, I don't see why employers need to be in the health insurance business any more than they need to offer car and home insurance.

Because i live in norman, and work outside. so would they allow me to opt out? no, they wouldn't. and i would want to. because i happen to work for a company that provides me with very affordable and good health insurance.

The reason they wouldn't let me opt out is that is how they get the low premiums that they would be able to offer. by requiring everyone to be involved and paying. plus (under your plan) we would be tacking it onto the utility bill. so who collects that? are we putting that burden on the utility companies? is the city of Norman going to have to create a group specifically to collect this tacked on payment? how many people, and at what salary? is it per household cost or per person? if it is per person, who goes Door to Door to verify the number of people covered in each home? What about college kids that live in the dorms? are they not covered? or do we tack theirs on to their student fees and make the University hand over that money? now what about Students that are paying the utility tax, do they have to now show a utility bill when they pay their tuition so that they don't get double taxed? (the university won't like the added step, i can assure you). And for those that live outside of norman but work here... you said that the employer would have to take it out of their paychecks, sounds like a lot of extra work for a payroll clerk to me.

And these are the issues i was immediately able to think of. i'm sure there are many many more once you actually sit down and start trying to write it up for implimentation

Sure your idea sounds great from a distance looking down on it. But it gets significantly more complicated the moment you get close to it. The added bureaucracy and "burdens" that the city would have to put onto utility companies along with the University would be difficult to get passed, approved, and implemented.

[vaflyer]

Oh and that Rock Creek bridge over I-35 seems really pointless to me, but I don't live in that part of Norman...

I use the Rock Creek overpass daily. It does relieve traffic on the Robinson and Tecumseh overpasses, both of which are very busy especially during rush hour.

In the original UNP TIF, the city was supposed to use $15 million from the TIF to buy the conference center from the hotel. When the hotel was nearing completion, the hotel operator agreed to let the city out of its obligation to buy the conference center in exchange for using those TIF funds to build the Rock Creek overpass. Originally, the overpass was supposed to cost $14 million, with $7 million coming from the TIF, $4 million from ODOT, and $3 million from other sources. Since the city combined the construction of the part of the bridge over the interstate with the widening of I-35, the city was able to save $1 million in traffic control costs. (The city could not build the approaches at that time because they needed to acquire the right of way and had to move utilities.) The two contracts for the bridge were then let during the depths of the Great Recession so the bridge cost the city around $10 million instead of the estimated $14 million. Thus, smart planning by the city and some dumb luck enabled the city to save a significant sum of money on the overpass and ultimately provided the taxpayers with needed infrastructure at a very reasonable price.

[Dubya61]

Interesting point. Only thing I can deduce is that ultimately one's health is most affected by their jobs in terms of hours spent doing an all too often non-enjoyable task (which equals stress).

The only reason employers offered health care insurance in the past was because it was an employment incentive. It became so common place that many began to think of it as a requirement from the employer. Now, sadly, it is.
Norman could make one HUGE group or exchange and get the business that employ in Norman to pay less to Norman than to the insurance company (and Norman would become one huge insured area). Norman could then get into bed with Norman Regional and get them to act as an HMO.

[Just the facts]

And according to a study cited by a Norman city council member the traffic calming devices kill more people than they save. Are we just supposed to ignore the city councils over reaction to one heart breaking event?

For the record - no one is buying that non-sense.

[ou48A]

For the record - no one is buying that non-sense.

It was said…. I don’t remember who said it..... but it was talked about.
I saw it on TV during one of the city council meetings.

[ou48A]

It’s pretty clear that common sense is missing with people who think wide scale use of speed bumps save lives.

Ambulance_delays


Patients Killed by Speed Humps (Article published in April 2003)


The Chairman of the London Ambulance Service, Sigurd Reinton, recently claimed that speed humps are killing hundreds of Londoners by delaying 999 crews. He said “For every life saved through traffic calming, more are lost because of ambulance delays.”

There are about 8,000 heart attack victims in London every year, and London has a particularly poor survival rate. One reason is no doubt because even a small delay increases the death rate enormously. For example 90% of victims survive if treated within 2 minutes, but it falls to 10% if treatment is delayed for 6 minutes. So for every additional minute of delay caused, up to an extra 800 victims of cardiac arrest could die. This compares with a total of 300 people who die from traffic accidents.

Mr Reinton complained that the increasing number of anti-car measures such as speed humps, road closures, road narrowing and throttle points caused significant delays in responding to emergencies. Ambulances had to go even slower if carrying a critically ill patient.

Note that Kevin Knight, who is responsible for local London Ambulance services, also spoke against speed bumps using the same arguments at the recent council Environment Portolio holders meeting. He said they were now meeting the government target of reaching 75% of life threatening calls within 8 minutes (Editor: which is not good enough to save most heart attack victims - see above), but it was getting more and more difficult to do so and even a few seconds delay could impact the chance of survival for heart attack victims. Traffic calming features caused significant delays - for example 50% of the ambulances from one station would have had to go through the proposed Leesons Hill “throttle” where there would be queuing traffic.

Research in the USA supports these claims. One report from Boulder, Colorado suggests that for every life saved by traffic calming, as many as 85 people may die because emergency vehicles are delayed. It found response times are typically extended by 14% by speed-reduction measures. Another study conducted by the fire department in Austin, Texas showed an increase in the travel time of ambulances when transporting victims of up to 100%.

Note that Kathleen Calongne who lives in Boulder, Colorado has produced a note that gives more details on the opposition to speed humps in the USA and includes detail references to the above mentioned research - please contact B.B.R.A.G. if you would like a copy, which is a summary of a 400 page report on the subject of speed humps.

P.S. The full submission by Sigurd Reinton to the Greater London Assembly Speed Hump Inquiry in early 2004 can be seen at LAS_Report

[ou48A]

For the record - no one is buying that non-sense.

It’s only a matter of time before lawsuits are filed against city’s who have large numbers of speed bumps……
because as can be seen on this link.....
IMAGE

..... “even minor delays in emergency vehicle response time is far more detrimental to public health and safety than can be offset by any perceived reduction in spending”.



The results of 2 different US studies.

[YO MUDA]

I like the speed humps in my area, keeps my grandkids and the neighborhood kids safe from all these wannabe nascar types.

[Just the facts]

Sorry - I see someone is buying it.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

£1·5m speed hump row - Telegraph

They cite the claims once made by Sigurd Reinton [the same Sigurd Reinton cited above] of the London Ambulance Service that traffic calming costs 500 lives per year. Now, however, Reinton will say only that "lives might be lost", and that he would like more research.

[ou48A]

I like the speed humps in my area, keeps my grandkids and the neighborhood kids safe from all these wannabe nascar types.

According to 2 different sources the risk of dying from a delayed response is significantly greater than being hit and killed by a car in areas without speed bumps.

There have been several people die in fires just in Norman in the last 10 or 15 years… There are several medical emergencies virtually every day just in Norman where seconds do matter. I hope you never have family member or friend who needs the quickest possible response.

More traffic cops would likly be more effective.