Heritage Hills and Mesta Park residents seek to discourage neighborhood traffic

[Montreal]

I live on Shartel in MP and just park my car in the street to help calm traffic. The folks across the street also park in the street, and it makes a world of difference compared to when there's only one car in the street. I also drive 20mph max through the neighborhood and take my time at stop signs to help deter people from speeding through.

I don't mind traffic (foot, car, bike) down the street at all; I just wish it was calmer. That way I could let my toddler play in the front yard or walk him to the park and be a little more at ease. I hope my neighbors feel the same way. I'd prefer more impactful traffic calming measures like curb bumpouts and better street design than stop signs, but at least the stop signs are way cheaper. Also, Shartel being 30mph is pretty ridiculous IMO.

Either way, it looks like Ian McDermid didn't actually file his original appeal in time, according to Next Door, so he'd have to take the case to district court to appeal.

[d-usa]

No. People drive speed limits they feel comfortable with. It's a proven fact.

People also consistently drive 5 over whatever the speed limit is, because they operate under the "it's speeding, but hopefully not enough to get pulled over" mindset. That's what they are comfortable with, not going X but going 5 over X.

[Plutonic Panda]

People also consistently drive 5 over whatever the speed limit is, because they operate under the "it's speeding, but hopefully not enough to get pulled over" mindset. That's what they are comfortable with, not going X but going 5 over X.

Not true.

A national study that was conducted by the Federal Highway Administration said that there was no change in the speed of the drivers regardless of lowering or increasing the speed limit. The average speed of the drivers remained the same

- https://sites.psu.edu/siowfa15/2015/...-faster-safer/

[Plutonic Panda]

I live on Shartel in MP and just park my car in the street to help calm traffic. The folks across the street also park in the street, and it makes a world of difference compared to when there's only one car in the street. I also drive 20mph max through the neighborhood and take my time at stop signs to help deter people from speeding through.

I don't mind traffic (foot, car, bike) down the street at all; I just wish it was calmer. That way I could let my toddler play in the front yard or walk him to the park and be a little more at ease. I hope my neighbors feel the same way. I'd prefer more impactful traffic calming measures like curb bumpouts and better street design than stop signs, but at least the stop signs are way cheaper. Also, Shartel being 30mph is pretty ridiculous IMO.

Either way, it looks like Ian McDermid didn't actually file his original appeal in time, according to Next Door, so he'd have to take the case to district court to appeal.

I can come to an agreement with lowering the speed limit on Shartel to 25MPH. Add traffic circles at major intersections and raise crosswalks on neighborhood cross streets to create a sense of more pedestrian activity. I don't see any issue with that.

[Montreal]

If anything, I'd rather have more traffic diffuse throughout the MP/HH neighborhoods instead of funneling them to Broadway/Classen. Then those two streets can be calmed down more to help connect the surrounding neighborhoods.

[Plutonic Panda]

Lower speeds actually does make a huge difference when it comes to pedestrian safety.

Never once did I say otherwise even though statistics are showing pedestrian fatalities have been increasing while there has been recent push over the last several years. Lowered speed limits, "complete streets," and more focus on pedestrians yet fatalities are still going up. Of course, correlation doesn't equal causation, but the same is said for lowered speed limits and I even pointed that out in my post which you seemed to overlook that part.

Speeds can be reduced by reducing the number of lanes or using traffic calming devices such as roundabouts. In fact, if you can implement roundabouts correctly, traffic must slow down yet can flow without stopping This would create a safer environment for walkers and can get traffic through in the same amount of time (or less!) than you would if you just raised speeds. This is because even though you may have the opportunity to drive faster at peak speeds, you still have to stop at every light and wait on traffic. Roundabouts let you keep flowing despite going much much slower. Depending on the street, the net time you spend on the slower street can actually be less than that of the faster street.

Of course speeds can be reduced by narrowing streets. Speeds could be reduced by adding speed bumbs every 30 ft. That doesn't mean it's the right solution. As we discussed in our other little suburban debate, you have to give cars priorities in some areas.

I completely support roundabouts at some areas along Classen which is an exception for me because I am against roundabouts in the majority of cases. Though lets not kid ourselves, roundabouts are not necessarily the safest solutions for pedestrians or bicyclists. There are mixed results with different studies that lay claim that roundabouts can actually be a less safe alternative for pedestrians and cyclists than 4 way stops or lights. Of course, the safest thing of them all would be pedestrian bridges to separate modes of transit by grade. You see this design in several areas in Netherlands and Finland.

Classen is rarely busy enough for it to need the number of lanes it has currently and even if it was, is it worth lowering the quality of life for those who use the street locally so that people who live far NW can get home faster? what about the people who live or work right on that street who might not appreciate 40+ mph traffic out their door? What about the folks who can't afford a car or can't drive that rely on crossing that street every day to make ends meat? There is a dude who literally has to cross in a motorized scooter every day... I have seen him almost get hit on several occasions. Is speed worth it if we're risking lives?

That is very shortsighted. OKC is growing and narrowing Classen, the only north to south arterial in the immediate area will not bode well for the current and future drivers that will use this street. If it is narrowed, it will need to be widened again in the future. Might as well keep it as. There are plenty of six lane streets that are way more pedestrian friendly than the 4 lane ones around OKC. It's about design. Not the number of lanes. Another option the city could pursue is having parallel parking on the third lane outside of rush hour.

As for the people who can't afford a car, mass transit and better access is the answer. Reducing Classen by a lane would cause more problems than it would solve. The costs outweigh the benefits on that one. There is so much more than can be done and needs to be.

Even though all these things I'm suggesting are getting overlooked and a few posters on this are crossing their arms at an increased speed limit by 5MPH and keeping the current six lane configuration, I also propose these ideas. Have a look.

For Classen:
*Increased bus service/ BRT

*Reconstruction of Classen to allow for a streetcar on each side and a smaller median with better landscaping

*Mid-block crosswalks

*Barnes Dance crosswalks at major intersections

*Protected dutch style bike lanes

As for streets like Shartel I propose these improvements

*Raised crosswalks at major intersections and at every east to west street crossing

*More landscaping along slightly narrower roads with green painted bike lanes

*Traffic circles at every intersection

*more pocket parks and place making features to remind drivers they're in a neighborhood

If I were in control of this I'd even add Broadway into this by narrowing it and reducing the speed limit there turning it into a Grand Boulevard.

Here are some links that describe what I'm referring to if anyone has any questions.

Barnes Dance Crosswalk: https://www.citylab.com/transportati...es-dance/4189/

Traffic circle in neighborhoods: http://www.seattle.gov/transportatio...ficcircles.htm

General guide to crosswalks: http://www.sfbetterstreets.org/find-...ng/crosswalks/

[Plutonic Panda]

On your note about arterials... I think it's false to presume that in cities arterials are an absolute necessity. Sure, it's annoying to drive the grid several miles due to stop and go, but arterials tend to get clogged at rush hour bc all work traffic gets funneled on to them rather than evenly dispersed throughout the grid. Arterials are built for a max capacity of cars but that max capacity is usually only reached twice a day. The rest of the time, those roads are wasted and dangerous space.

I view arterials as a necessity for good traffic flow throughout the day. It is part of a road system which benefits drivers and that is important as you can obviously have cities with poor walkability but not cities without roads. You aren't going to build roads or freeways wide enough to have free flowing traffic during the pinnacle of rush hour but you can do things that will shorten the rush hour window and keep commuters somewhat satisfied. Of course if you're the type who doesn't care about drivers, then sure, I see your position. I care about drivability as well and that needs to be factored in. Arterial set-ups help with that. Even San Francisco, NYC and Vancouver have arterial roads.

Also, just because dallas or other cities has something doesn't mean we need them too! While they may "work", are they safe? Do they provide the maximum benefit to people who live in the vicinity? For the whole city? As I always say, it's good that OKC is "behind" other cities so that we can learn from other places like dallas. We must ask ourselves: Do we wanna be like them? We have the unique opportunity to learn from mistakes and successes and build what we wan't here while we are still young in our growth.

Now I didn't say just because Dallas have them that means OKC has to. My point was OKC needs to look at other cities because it rarely seems to do that. OKC isn't special. No harm in looking at cities like Dallas that are very successful and promoting prosperous economies cities like OKC could only dream of right now.

As for your comment about it's good that OKC is behind other cities, I just don't even know what to say to that without saying something rude so I'll just leave it at I simply disagree.

Do I want OKC to be like Dallas, a city which has some of fastest growth rates in the US, tops list after list for job growth, education growth, tech growth, corporate relocations and so on and so on? Absolutely, yes I do.

[Plutonic Panda]

If anything, I'd rather have more traffic diffuse throughout the MP/HH neighborhoods instead of funneling them to Broadway/Classen. Then those two streets can be calmed down more to help connect the surrounding neighborhoods.

I don't see what your first statement has to do with the last as the last one can easily and arguably be better achieved without the first one happening so I'll disagree with you and leave it at that.

[PhiAlpha]

Do I want OKC to be like Dallas, a city which has some of fastest growth rates in the US, tops list after list for job growth, education growth, tech growth, corporate relocations and so on and so on? Absolutely, yes I do.

Pedestrian-wise, downtown Dallas and the surrounding is an awful urban planning example to follow. Compared to cities like Fort Worth, Denver, Austin and many others, it has a miserable pedestrian experience at best.

[riflesforwatie]

If anything, I'd rather have more traffic diffuse throughout the MP/HH neighborhoods instead of funneling them to Broadway/Classen. Then those two streets can be calmed down more to help connect the surrounding neighborhoods.

I think this could be helped by removing the one-way stubs where 18th to 22nd connect to Broadway (someone else suggested this up-thread). Not as much you can do to improve the connectivity to Classen since there are some houses built up on that side.

As for the question of pedestrian safety on Classen - the problem is a combination of the speed, the roadway width, and the intersection geometry. Western/Classen/16th/13th is "weird" and way too wide to be safe for pedestrians (or cyclists). I would bet traffic counts north of 23rd support six lanes, but I would doubt they do south of 23rd. I'd also bet that the 85% rule or whatever they use to set speed limits would support speeds less than 35 mph from 10th to 18th. When I drive that segment most people seem to take it at or below the current speed limit.

[Urbanized]

We're drifting a bit off-topic here, but I wanted to point out that the term "walkable" is a bit of a misnomer. Too often "walkability" is confused with "accessibility." The litmus test for walkability is not whether or not an able-bodied young man in his twenties CAN cross a street easily enough. It's not even whether people of all ages and physical abilities can cross it easily, though that is certainly a much better barometer.

"Walkability" also includes a DESIRABILTY or "walk appeal" aspect; that is, do you WANT to walk here? Is it comfortable? Visually stimulating? Does it pull you down the sidewalk? Or is walking here instead a just a chore required to get you to a destination?

There are many factors involved in creating a walkable environment, and whether or not an able youngster can sprint across a street and avoid being hit by a car is pretty much the lowest rung on the ladder.

[d-usa]

True. Eastbound Memorial Road between May and Penn has a sidewalk now, and even extended it to the road for the bus stop. So it's easy to walk from May to Penn, but there is still nothing really there to make me want to walk there unless I had to walk.

[Montreal]

When we lived in Deep Deuce, we walked to Bricktown/Downtown/Automobile Alley far less than we would've liked. It wasn't very comfortable navigating a stroller across the neighborhood thresholds. For Bricktown, we either had to carry it down stairs or walk on the street across the train tracks on Russell M. Perry. For Downtown, it was braving the crossing at Gaylord. For Automobile Alley, it was the intersection of Gaylord and 4th. Relatively minor and focused improvements would make a world of difference for walkability.

Now, I doubt we'll ever walk to the Plaza District because Classen is such an imposing barrier. Uptown, Midtown, and even the Paseo are all more attractive destinations (even though there is still definite room for improvement for walkability to those as well).

[Buffalo Bill]

When we lived in Deep Deuce, we walked to Bricktown/Downtown/Automobile Alley far less than we would've liked. It wasn't very comfortable navigating a stroller across the neighborhood thresholds. For Bricktown, we either had to carry it down stairs or walk on the street across the train tracks on Russell M. Perry. For Downtown, it was braving the crossing at Gaylord. For Automobile Alley, it was the intersection of Gaylord and 4th. Relatively minor and focused improvements would make a world of difference for walkability.

Now, I doubt we'll ever walk to the Plaza District because Classen is such an imposing barrier. Uptown, Midtown, and even the Paseo are all more attractive destinations (even though there is still definite room for improvement for walkability to those as well).

Re: walking to Uptown, Midtown; what would be great is more cars, am I right?

[turnpup]

The city has started installing the new stop signs. Heads-up to those of you who regularly drive through the area to be alert to the changes.

[OKCbyTRANSFER]

Yep, noticed that last week, caught me off guard and I thought "I don't normally stop here". Shartel & 15th if I remember.

[aintaokie]

No problem with stop signs. The neighborhoods are beautiful to drive through. A slow drive down Walker Ave means more time to enjoy the surroundings. As for residents wanting "their" streets to themselves. Bahhhhhhh.......

[Uptowner]

It will be interesting to see how often the stops get ran by cars, and which ones, now seeing as its pretty much indiscriminate as to where or why the stops are, and their frequency on the N-Sbound lanes. The consensus from traffic professionals is that too many stops causes pedestrian hazards from peds that assume cars will stop and cars that have decided not to stop and are looking out for cops and other cars, not peds. #MAGA