Norman Transportation Plan "Moving Forward"

[ou48A]

I think like I mentioned earlier from Main Street to the North is the best option. Lindsey to Brooks has the Duck Pond park and a power substation. Those aren't going anywhere. You have all houses on the east side of the tracks. Brooks to Boyd houses all the way. Boyd to Duffy is a bit easier. You have Front Street that can update, but some houses will need to be moved. Duffy to the north would be alright. There is a lot of parking that would need to be removed. Also the Legacy Trail will need to be completely torn up and removed. So that might be a no go right away.

On the west side of the tracks from Books north with a few exceptions there is nothing but old apartments or very old houses that are mostly in very poor condition. I’m not sure that a road like this on its south end would need to be 4 landed.
Considering the magnitude of the project it wouldn’t be very difficult to move the power substation.
Near the Duck Pond a screening wall for noise could be used to block both train and traffic noise.
I would suggest that an over pass be built over Robinson street.

[ou48A]

Finally, who are we making Norman accessible for by installing additional lanes? Car lanes are not increasing a level of accessibility, they are only marginally increasing the speed of accessibility, and only for those who are able to own and drive a car.

There are more than a few people who will not frequent the campus area merchants because of the extra time it takes caused by slow moving traffic.
Adding extra car lanes save time. This increases accessibly to more people and increases the money spent in the area.
Thus increases property values and the general economic heath of the area.

[ljbab728]

[QUOTE=ou48A;477760]

The Students at the FW end have a bus and rail system to take them closer to their destination and chances are that they have parents to pick them up.

That is hardly a reason to move the Norman station. I am in favor of some kind of transportation from the Campus to the station which would only be required twice per day. That is much more reasonable than building a new station. You seem to be focused on strictly university students. Norman has a large population that is non student and a campus location is certainly not an advantage for them.

There is not nearly enough room near the current Norman train station to build a smaller Norman hub station.

Norman will not need anything massive like OKC is planning. The current station with some small additions or modifications would still work fine. The Norman area could qualify for more than one transit station and if it is needed it should be on the far north side of Norman. I'm also not opposed to a location near the campus as long as it's not the duck pond area and as long as the Amtrak station is left alone.

Very few people including students consider the current station within walking distance. They are not willing walk to the downtown Norman third world train station that is well out of their personal comfort zone, daytime or night time.

How did you become an expert about this? University students are much more willing to walk than the public as a whole, It is definitely within walking distance. Does than mean they might not prefer to have transportation? Maybe, maybe not.

[venture]

I think we could get a very reasonable solution for a light rail/people mover system for Norman that would meet most demand. Something like this...



http://www.parrypeoplemovers.com/PPM30-35-spec.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parry_People_Movers

Small people mover rail cars that can work on existing rails and ones that are inset in a city street. They aren't massive and would work pretty well with what we have. Not sure on the exact cost per car, but they are fairly new - at least these specifically. I would see around 5 lines rolled out that would connect most of Norman. Of course these can be shrunk, lengthened, or combined to best fit the need of the city. Stations won't need to take up that much room and would work best being near areas of existing parking. Also schedules can follow demand without much issue.

Line 1 (Blue) - OU to Downtown: Lindsey Street Station/Memorial Stadium > Sarkeys & Devon Buildings > Campus Corner > Downtown/Amtrak
Line 2 (Red) - Sooner Mall to Downtown: Sooner Mall Station > Main & 24th > Norman High > Downtown/Amtrak
Line 3 (Orange) - North Norman to Sooner Mall: I-35 & Indian Hills/Entertainment Parks > Norman Regional Healthplex > UNP > Brookhaven > Sooner Mall Station
Line 4 (Green) - NCED to OU: NCED/Technology Pl/Hwy 9 > Weather Center > Lloyd Noble > Reaves Park/Sam Noble (well walking distance)/OCCE > Lindsey Station/Memorial Stadium
Line 5 (Purple) - Riverwind to Sooner Mall: Riverwind Casino > Ed Noble South/Lindsey Street > Sooner Mall

If the system would catch on with high demand could see running a line that loops OU > Lindsey Street/Ed Noble > Hwy 9 > Weather Center > OU ... also others would run along 36th West, 12th East, and also extend the Orange Line up into Moore.

[BG918]

I vote for no widening of any streets, returning Main Street to two-way traffic through downtown, putting in a streetcar from Norman Regional to the south end of the OU Campus, and starting interurban service to downtown OKC.

Making Main and Gray 2-way should be priority #1. 1 lane each direction with a center turn lane. Maybe in the future build a landscaped median with trees. Also eventually extend the streetscape completed in 2004 west of the tracks to University.

[kevinpate]

I can scarcely imagine the congestion that would exist if either Main or Gray were reduced to three lanes, with one being a restricted turning lane.

[JayhawkTransplant]

If you are interested in providing input regarding a long-range transportation plan for Norman, please attend one of the ward meetings. Here are the remaining dates and locations. You do not have to be a member of the ward to attend a meeting.

Mon, Oct 24 - Ward 6 - Eisenhower Elementary, 1415 Fairlawn Dr. - 6:30PM
Thurs, Oct 27 - Ward 1 - Kennedy Elementary, 621 Sunrise Street - 6:30PM
Mon, Nov 7 - Ward 7 - Madison Elementary, 500 James - 6:30PM
Wed, Nov 9 - Wards 3 and 8 - Truman Primary, 601 Meadow Ridge Rd - 6:30PM

[Snowman]

I think we could get a very reasonable solution for a light rail/people mover system for Norman that would meet most demand. Something like this...



http://www.parrypeoplemovers.com/PPM30-35-spec.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parry_People_Movers

Small people mover rail cars that can work on existing rails and ones that are inset in a city street. They aren't massive and would work pretty well with what we have. Not sure on the exact cost per car, but they are fairly new - at least these specifically. I would see around 5 lines rolled out that would connect most of Norman. Of course these can be shrunk, lengthened, or combined to best fit the need of the city. Stations won't need to take up that much room and would work best being near areas of existing parking. Also schedules can follow demand without much issue.

Line 1 (Blue) - OU to Downtown: Lindsey Street Station/Memorial Stadium > Sarkeys & Devon Buildings > Campus Corner > Downtown/Amtrak
Line 2 (Red) - Sooner Mall to Downtown: Sooner Mall Station > Main & 24th > Norman High > Downtown/Amtrak
Line 3 (Orange) - North Norman to Sooner Mall: I-35 & Indian Hills/Entertainment Parks > Norman Regional Healthplex > UNP > Brookhaven > Sooner Mall Station
Line 4 (Green) - NCED to OU: NCED/Technology Pl/Hwy 9 > Weather Center > Lloyd Noble > Reaves Park/Sam Noble (well walking distance)/OCCE > Lindsey Station/Memorial Stadium
Line 5 (Purple) - Riverwind to Sooner Mall: Riverwind Casino > Ed Noble South/Lindsey Street > Sooner Mall

If the system would catch on with high demand could see running a line that loops OU > Lindsey Street/Ed Noble > Hwy 9 > Weather Center > OU ... also others would run along 36th West, 12th East, and also extend the Orange Line up into Moore.

Line 5 is probably not going to Riverwind, a bridge alone across the river could cost as much as the rest of the system you propose and the only other ones withing a 15 mile radius are interstates (which not going to allow rail to share a lane, maybe if it has the ability to go of track and at highway speed but even going off track is pretty niche in models built).

So far I think every study at this point is recommending a stop at both Norman station and the campus, I may be getting it mixed up with a different stop but I think at least only recommended the campus for special events like games and graduation.

[BG918]

I can scarcely imagine the congestion that would exist if either Main or Gray were reduced to three lanes, with one being a restricted turning lane.

They have also discussed in the past taking out the angled parking and putting in parallel parking on both sides which would keep the street at 2 lanes each way with a center turn lane or landscaped median...think 23rd St between Broadway and Western in OKC. You could probably fit 2 bike lanes in there too and do away with the landscaped median which would be nice.

Of course the downtown business owners like the angled parking.

[venture]

Of course the downtown business owners like the angled parking.

As a driver I hate it. I always stay in the middle lane until I down to the tattoo shops since people just tend to rely on the force when backing out there.

[CS_Mike]

If there is any serious consideration given to expanding streets to support gameday traffic, then I would highly prefer that money be spent on building park-and-ride locations on the north and south sides of Norman. Shuttle service could be implemented to and from campus on gamedays, and expanded service to main street can be given consideration on other days. And if planning is actually done correctly, those same park-and-rides could later double as commuter rail stations, and at that time they can cease the shuttle service because rail will then be available to accomplish the same task.

[ou48A]

From what I hear……

The city wants to 4 lanes Lindsey from I-35 to Berry, then 3 lane Lindsey to Elm St.

Some would like to build an extension from HY 9 & I-35 northwestward along the river before turning north on Western / 60th. IMHO this^ is a great idea but the extension and HY 9 in south Norman needs to be upgraded to near interstate standards.

There appears to be wide spread concern about economic and safety issues caused by serious congestion during several types of events and even daily. The emergency services response time is a major concern but as things have become so crowed some people are starting to stay away (not spending money) because it takes so much more time than it once did.

Apparently there are several special interest groups pushing hard for money to be spent on their special interest.
The bicyclist wants many miles of new bicycle paths.
Some want the city to provide on demand transportation for the handicap.
Some want to go ahead and build a large park and ride facility near the RR tracks in north Norman that would be buses only for now. But there is apparently a huge problem with the on time performance of the current bus service that is caused by congested streets that will hinder wide spread use.

[blink]

As everyone has been saying, Highway 9 needs to be converted into an expressway, so on ramps/off ramps, traffic lights under/above it. The amount of traffic on it during the day is ridiculous, and once a light turns red, you can expect to be congested all the way to I-35. If Norman continues to grow like it is, I can only imagine how horrible highway 9 will be in a few years. It would also be great to have a ramp directly from Hwy 9/I-35 South to the New Castle/Riverwind area since most people that go south onto I-35 from highway 9 are doing this anyway and clog up the people getting on I-35 from Lindsay.

[ou48A]

Reliving the congestion on the I-35 Bridge is a big reason why I made this earlier post.

…..4 lane Jenkins from Lindsey south. Build an over pass over HY 9. The road would then become limited access and continue south and then turn west with a bridge over the river before connecting with I -35. This would give OU a southern entrance and relive some congestion on Lindsey.

Norman needs another bridge over river somewhere in the southern parts of town. The river channel at the location that I suggested would not require a bridge nearly as long as the I - 35 bridge.

[Snowman]

Reliving the congestion on the I-35 Bridge is a big reason why I made this earlier post.



Norman needs another bridge over river somewhere in the southern parts of town. The river channel at the location that I suggested would not require a bridge nearly as long as the I - 35 bridge.

Given the state budget for transportation I would expect an extension to the proposed turnpike plan which will end at i35 near Flood road (which could then going along the north then east of Norman and connect with highway 9 from the other side) is more likely than any new freeways in our lifetime.

[Pioneer]

FYI, I learned tonight that the City is reviewing our feedback that we have been generating through this site. So please continue with the suggestions. This came from members of City Council and the City Manager. They are needing real feedback from citizens of Norman in what we need both short-term and over the next 20-30 years. They project Norman to grow by at least 35%.

[MDot]

FYI, I learned tonight that the City is reviewing our feedback that we have been generating through this site. So please continue with the suggestions. This came from members of City Council and the City Manager. They are needing real feedback from citizens of Norman in what we need both short-term and over the next 20-30 years. They project Norman to grow by at least 35%.

We're famous! Yay! =) and Norman is gonna be a major city before too long if they grow that much in 20-30 years.

[venture]

FYI, I learned tonight that the City is reviewing our feedback that we have been generating through this site. So please continue with the suggestions. This came from members of City Council and the City Manager. They are needing real feedback from citizens of Norman in what we need both short-term and over the next 20-30 years. They project Norman to grow by at least 35%.

Very good to know. Especially since my Councilman is completely worthless. Contacted him about crimes going up in East Norman...not a peep.

[j7m7l7]

Here's a top list for Norman Transportation needs in my opinion (from living on the east side):

1) Classen Blvd. north of Highway 9 and 12th to Boyd NEEDS a center turn lane. Many apartments are in this area with residents turning left (very dangerous)

2) 12th Avenue between Boyd and Robinson needs 3 lanes in each direction (traffic is horrific)

3) Constitution Street needs 2 lanes on each side and/or a center turn lane (handles way more traffic than it was ever meant to)

4) Highway 9 needs to be limited access without lights. Also, 2 lanes should be provided for entrance to northbound 35 at western terminus.

I am sure there are more, but these are at the top of my mind in terms of pressing needs. Classen in particular is very dangerous with the left turns into Crimson Park and the Cottages, as well as Best Western, stores, etc.

[Pioneer]

Norman Transcript buzz concerning the Transportation Plan.

http://normantranscript.com/headline...portation-plan

Also, the council is asking whether Norman even needs a Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Currently, we are on the short list of cities our size that do not have one. They said that up to this point the city has never constructed a long term plan for our transportation system. That's obvious when trying to get from one corner of the city to the other.

[ou48A]

Given the state budget for transportation I would expect an extension to the proposed turnpike plan which will end at i35 near Flood road (which could then going along the north then east of Norman and connect with highway 9 from the other side) is more likely than any new freeways in our lifetime.

As far as the state budget goes a lot of this comes down to how effective our local leaders are in selling a plan to others so that funding can be secured.
In due time better economic times are ahead.

If we don’t move forward with our own bold ideas now the ideas of others will be moved ahead ours, by the state.

[ou48A]

The University of Oklahoma’s future growth and research spin offs will have a major economic impact on our state; we can in part sell our transportation needs as an investment in our state. Congested travel lowers our quality of life. We need to stay ahead of the travel problems so that we can continue to attract high quality researchers and visitors who will continue to spend money in Norman.

Since Norman draws visitor’s from all across the state for many events, building support for some these projects should not be that difficult. But it’s going to take hard working leaders to get it done.....
.

[ou48A]

I would be very curious to know the daily vehicle count over the 4 lane Canadian River Bridge that was constructed several years ago on state high way 4 south of Mustang.

I have a strong feeling that a new river bridge south of Norman on the Jenkins river extension would carry far more daily traffic and help relive congestion on HY 9, west Lindsey and on the I-35 river bridge.

[Just the facts]

Any plan in Norman that makes it easier for the area to grow geographically is going to result in even more congestion. Atlanta tried to out-build congestion and it simply can't be done because new roads and more lanes only do one thing - produce more traffic. If you want to solve the congestion problem then purse policies that actually produce less congestion. Stop spreading everything so far out that driving becomes the only viable means of transportation. Stop making roads 4 and 6 lanes wide with speeds above 45 mph that make riding a bicycle unsafe and simply crossing the street a life-risking event. Stop requiring businesses to dedicate more land to parking than they do to the actual building themselves. Encourage people to live in higher density housing within walkable neighborhoods.

My plan for Norman:

1) Remove all one-way streets
2) Create an urban development boundary
3) Implement a streetcar linking OU to Norman Regional Hospital via downtown Norman
4) Connect downtown Norman to Oklahoma City via a regional rail line
5) Create a downtown Norman urbanization plan that encourages mixed use development, mid-rise housing, national retail, and urban parks.
6) Reduce most landscape requirements around new development while also requiring pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to adjacent developments.
7) Eliminate all parking requirements.

[Pioneer]

http://normantranscript.com/headline...on-master-plan


The Norman Transcript

November 16, 2011
Transportation Group gets moving on master plan

By Joy Hampton
The Norman Transcript

NORMAN — Norman is conducting a comprehensive transportation plan to address and prevent problems now and in the future.

It’s a multistage project, senior project manager Charles Schwinger told Norman city council members Tuesday evening.

Schwinger is with H.W. Lochner Inc., a Kansas City, Mo.-based company that provides engineering, planning and consulting services for building and improving infrastructure.

“This is really going to be a living document,” Schwinger said.

The “Moving Forward” process kicked off with the appointment of 17 members of the community to a visioning committee. Nine of those people met for two hours as part of the visoning process on Tuesday afternoon.

The “listening phase” of the project is currently underway, Schwinger said, as Norman conducts public meetings in each ward of the city and solicits information through social media. The next portion of the listening phase will gather public input through a survey.

The visioning committee and the city council and staff are working with Lochner to develop a survey which will be sent to 1,800 Norman residents in order to gather a scientific sampling.

Schwinger said it is hoped that at least 400 out of the 1,800 will respond to the survey. In addition to the scientific sampling, the survey will be put online so that all interested persons who live or work or shop in Norman can contribute to the feedback as Norman creates a vision and develops goals and solutions to better meet the city’s growing transportation needs.

Beginning questions at the public level are: Should we have a transportation plan? If so, what are the boundaries? There are poeple who do not think a plan is needed, Schwinger said.

While the ward meetings were not heavily attended, he said a wide range of viewpoints were expressed and a number of ideas were contributed which is the point of meeting with the public.

Early drafts of the proposed survey show questions relating to the types and number of trips people make, and the identification of problem areas and issues. Transportation includes more than motor vehicles. A comprehensive transportation plan looks at public transit such as CART, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, traffic signals, speed humps, and public parking among other issues. Drainage is tied with the planning for street improvements. All of those things are represented in the survey.

The challenge in creating the survey is to collect the information needed without being too lengthy.

The survey will also test the waters on whether people are willing to pay for these improvements.

Joy Hampton 366-3539 jhampton@ normantranscript.com