Edmond GO Bond Task Force and Projects

[Zorba]

Road improvements are ranked about 1, 2 and 3 in importance to Edmond citizens it seems, and this covers a bunch. WIll be interesting to see if Edmond puts their money where their mouth is because this will increase prop taxes a bit.

I got my ballot in the mail the other day. It doesn't say what the millage increase is on the ballot. Website says 15 mill, which for me is about a 14% increase in property taxes.

As it always is with these things, some of the projects I'm excited about, others not as much. Really I think it shows just how punishing and impractical car infrastructure is for cities to maintain. Also wish it would include more trails and sidewalks/safe crossings to get to parks, other gold plating the soccer complex or Mitch park sports fields in an attempt to attract a few extra tournaments. Really wish it was finishing the trail around Arcadia.

[Zorba]

It is a big need. And as someone up thread pointed out, Edmond continues to grow. So streets get widened but city of Edmond wants to continue to pretend that it's a bedroom community circa 1974 and have the speed limit be 35mph on a six lane road with 8 stoplights per 100 yards.

Edmond needs more efficient traffic management but the powers that be don't appear to care. Pothole ridden roads and insane traffic really cut into the QoL in Edmond.

I know the money isn't there for it but I'd like to see a lot stoplights replaced with round abouts. I'd like to see several stoplights removed. I'd like for the larger thoroughfares to have a speed limit of 45. I'd like to see some of the roads redesigned to encourage slower driving rather than just sticking up a speed limit sign of 25 on a 4 or 5 lane road and expecting people to not drive fast.

I'm mayor Goldie Traxx and progress is my middle name.

The stops lights are growing like weeds in Edmond. And once they are installed they will never go away. It should be illegal for cities to offer stop light to developers. The way the guidelines work, it requires almost no justification to install a light and a ton of justification to remove one and over the last decade Edmond will put one in for anyone that asks.

[progressiveboy]

Summary of a meeting to discuss the upcoming GO bond. I assume this gets voted down next month based on the article and what little I've seen from Edmond residents. They want roads fixed, but dont really want to pay extra for them.

https://nondoc.com/2024/09/30/edmond...-park-meeting/

Who will pay for them? if that is the case? Eventually, Edmond will have to step up to the plate if they want quality roads and a livable city. Edmond needs more taxpayers and more high paying jobs to be able to fix their roads and have a great quality of life! It is time for Edmond to grow and not just be a bedroom community.

[Richard at Remax]

Edmond needs to also not let NIMBYs turn down 90% of anything proposed

[Plutonic Panda]

Edmond needs to also not let NIMBYs turn down 90% of anything proposed

No offense but projects are rarely turned down in Edmond. Just the ones that are cool and unique like the Shoppes at Spring Creek Expansion and 18 on Fink etc. Apartments are the biggest target. Two apartment projects on the fringes of the city were recently killed due to NIMBYs.

[Plutonic Panda]

The stops lights are growing like weeds in Edmond. And once they are installed they will never go away. It should be illegal for cities to offer stop light to developers. The way the guidelines work, it requires almost no justification to install a light and a ton of justification to remove one and over the last decade Edmond will put one in for anyone that asks.

They could remove them. Just needs to be a change in leadership. Some traffic lights are good but Edmond has damn near zero sense of functional city planning IMO. Like the new traffic signal near that grocery store on Covell. They could have built an access road to connect with the traffic signal for the YMCA. Would have been more expensive since two new access road would have been needed to be built to achieve what the goal was but Edmond is going Edmond.

[Zorba]

They could remove them. Just needs to be a change in leadership. Some traffic lights are good but Edmond has damn near zero sense of functional city planning IMO. Like the new traffic signal near that grocery store on Covell. They could have built an access road to connect with the traffic signal for the YMCA. Would have been more expensive since two new access road would have been needed to be built to achieve what the goal was but Edmond is going Edmond.

Yeah, there is absolutely zero need for that light. Maybe for the 30 minutes around school letting out, but that is it. My buddy that does a lot of road/bridge projects around the states talks constantly about how they can't fix roads correctly due to the inability to remove bad traffic lights (and driveways).

[onthestrip]

Edmond needs to also not let NIMBYs turn down 90% of anything proposed

Im anti-nimby and I too agree that they shouldnt be voting down projects but this is a bit hyperbolic. The focus needs to be on bringing in new retail. Any retail category where the town sees leakage to OKC, they need to focus on bringing that to Edmond to retain and grow the sales taxes.

[jdross1982]

Im anti-nimby and I too agree that they shouldnt be voting down projects but this is a bit hyperbolic. The focus needs to be on bringing in new retail. Any retail category where the town sees leakage to OKC, they need to focus on bringing that to Edmond to retain and grow the sales taxes.

Which is exactly why I think it is so important for Edmond to develop and grow the retail area around Showbiz. If the rumors are true and Whole Foods is really going in this area, it should be a major catalyst to bringing exactly what you mentioned. If only Target was willing to build a 2nd in Edmond on Covell and Kelly across from Lowes.... lol

[Hollywood]

Which is exactly why I think it is so important for Edmond to develop and grow the retail area around Showbiz. If the rumors are true and Whole Foods is really going in this area, it should be a major catalyst to bringing exactly what you mentioned. If only Target was willing to build a 2nd in Edmond on Covell and Kelly across from Lowes.... lol

Will be interesting to see what goes in on that corner (SE Covell and Kelly). Was told that out of the entire state, that is the most "desired" location for a Chick Fil A (within the company) but that is not to say they will. Just "desired".

[Midtowner]

Im anti-nimby and I too agree that they shouldnt be voting down projects but this is a bit hyperbolic. The focus needs to be on bringing in new retail. Any retail category where the town sees leakage to OKC, they need to focus on bringing that to Edmond to retain and grow the sales taxes.

I disagree that Edmond is always NIMBY. They just don't like multifamily housing or dense residential development.

[jdross1982]

Will be interesting to see what goes in on that corner (SE Covell and Kelly). Was told that out of the entire state, that is the most "desired" location for a Chick Fil A (within the company) but that is not to say they will. Just "desired".

If that is the case, I would think they would have plenty of choices to pick from as there is the space behind pepperori grill and behind the bank. or behind lowes or the south of lowes. Although, none of these spots would be preferable as they would be off the main streets, I would contend that their customers would know exactly where they are located and would find them regardless of where they are.

As for across the street, I believe this area has huge growth opportunities and I am curious to see what will become of the area. I have seen in the past that it would be apartments and senior living center but it could have changed.

[Elrenogolf]

Do you guys think these bonds are still going to pass? Seeing a lot of no signs around town and no messaging on social media.

[Midtowner]

Do you guys think these bonds are still going to pass? Seeing a lot of no signs around town and no messaging on social media.

This is generally how things look. There is a very loud and obnoxious portion of the Edmond electorate who are extreme NIMBY and support folks like Brian Shellem (or however you spell it) for office. By their social media presence and the yard sign count, you'd think they were firmly in control of the city's political future. They tend to lose almost every election though as the quiet and reasonable people show up in force pretty dependably. If they hadn't scheduled this on 11/5, I'd be more confident though.

[scottk]

Do you guys think these bonds are still going to pass? Seeing a lot of no signs around town and no messaging on social media.

Edmond outsider here....So, I asked my circle of friends that live in Edmond City limits their thoughts on GO, and ALL are voting no. These are individuals that have lived in Edmond anywhere between 10 to almost 30 years in Edmond and include young married couples, families, single individuals, and DINK's. The reasoning is collectively they don't want to see their monthly mortgage/property taxes go up anymore.

My guess is with the raised property values, it created essentially a domino effect on raising homeowner's premiums (congrats your 250k home you bought in 2010 is now 400k to insure), along with bad weather claims raising everyone's costs, along with just general inflation. This is yet another thing to tack on to a monthly number that seems to be jumping higher and higher. $600 dollars or so on average a year for the foreseeable future.

Edmond residents did pass, overwhelmingly around 80%, the school bond for EPS back in February. So if there are a large number that see this as the best way for progress in a community, and view the increased property taxes as the best way to do it, then maybe it will pass with a similar margin.

[Midtowner]

The yes campaign is extremely amateur. This should have been an easy sell and they have been completely MIA except for a flyer they sent out full of misspellings.

They got $70K for that campaign? I've been waiting all month for them to do some sort of last minute blitz or something, but crickets.

The Council should all resign if they're okay with that.

[Plutonic Panda]

If Edmond votes no, none of those c@cksuckers better ever complain about traffic again.

[Midtowner]

If Edmond votes no, none of those c@cksuckers better ever complain about traffic again.

Oh they'll complain. They'll complain about how the city would replace its 50 year old offices and build a YMCA before building roads.

[mugofbeer]

Do you guys think these bonds are still going to pass? Seeing a lot of no signs around town and no messaging on social media.

I get this 3rd hand so take with a grain of salt. Many no's are not voting "no" because of NIMBY sentiment but because the wording of the bond issue is such that it will allow bond issue proceeds to be used for anything, not for intended purposes. I was told the issue guidelines were written in haste to get this issue in now so it will not interfere with an upcoming school bond issue and a renewal vote of a sales tax that expires off soon.

[BoulderSooner]

The yes campaign is extremely amateur. This should have been an easy sell and they have been completely MIA except for a flyer they sent out full of misspellings.

They got $70K for that campaign? I've been waiting all month for them to do some sort of last minute blitz or something, but crickets.

The Council should all resign if they're okay with that.

1,000,000% agree at the min the road portion of this should have been a very easy sell ..

most of my neighbors are going to vote yes to at least that portion ... but i worry about it passing

[Hollywood]

I’m conflicted. I voted yes on all but I didn’t want to. The city should have handled most if not all of these things in the past 15 to 20 years but it is what it is. I viewed my yea votes as an investment in catching up with the understanding we just have to hold the city to the fire more so in the future.

I live half the week outside of Bentonville and seeing how a city with half the population and a third of the land mass is serviced really highlights the lack of foresight by COE. Examples: Bentonville has two more fire stations than Edmond and their police department staffing is the same as Edmond’s, again for half the population and a third of the mileage. Those are just two of the more visible ones.

[Zorba]

Will be interesting to see what goes in on that corner (SE Covell and Kelly). Was told that out of the entire state, that is the most "desired" location for a Chick Fil A (within the company) but that is not to say they will. Just "desired".

That's some hard hitting growth for the city.

[Zorba]

This is generally how things look. There is a very loud and obnoxious portion of the Edmond electorate who are extreme NIMBY and support folks like Brian Shellem (or however you spell it) for office. By their social media presence and the yard sign count, you'd think they were firmly in control of the city's political future. They tend to lose almost every election though as the quiet and reasonable people show up in force pretty dependably. If they hadn't scheduled this on 11/5, I'd be more confident though.

How exactly is voting against the city taking on a ton of debt to poorly build out more stroads that will massively burden the city with forever maintenance costs NIMBY? Most YIMBY proponents aren't exactly in the "Let's expand roads all to encourage "growth" while ignoring currently underutilized land" camp.

Edmond has massively screwed up every road expansion they've done since I've moved here 11 years ago. Put in a 15 million dollar road expansion to end at the same crappy 2 lane intersection with no pedestrian provisions, so you get half a mile back ups. The intersections are the bottles necks, but we keep expanding roads at great expense to end at an intersection built in the 1960s. Then add numerous new lights, to really make sure that 15 million dollars provides no real capacity increase. There are 4 lane roads all over the city that are un/underdeveloped, why will adding more all of sudden create massive growth as opposed to just more sprawl and underdeveloped, low tax base land?

Let's spend some of that money to develop all the un/underdeveloped land already serviced by oversized stroads that don't pay for themselves. Let's actually approve some density where we already have the infrastructure for it. Let's stop destroying our current road investments by promising traffic lights and numerous driveways to every developer that is going to put in a fast food restaurant. Let's redevelop Broadway through downtown in a way that will attract more people and encourage more development (and hopefully higher density housing).

Driving up housing costs to pay for needless road projects is not YIMBY, and will not fix Edmond's problems.

For the record, I voted No on the roads, Yes on the Parks. Parks will actually improve the quality of life in Edmond.

[Zorba]

The yes campaign is extremely amateur. This should have been an easy sell and they have been completely MIA except for a flyer they sent out full of misspellings.

They got $70K for that campaign? I've been waiting all month for them to do some sort of last minute blitz or something, but crickets.

The Council should all resign if they're okay with that.

The yes campaign is literally advertising for it with a stop light. "Hey Edmond, would you like your property taxes to go up 15% so you can stop at 50% more red lights as we follow the urban design playbook from 1962?"

[Midtowner]

How exactly is voting against the city taking on a ton of debt to poorly build out more stroads that will massively burden the city with forever maintenance costs NIMBY? Most YIMBY proponents aren't exactly in the "Let's expand roads all to encourage "growth" while ignoring currently underutilized land" camp.

Edmond has massively screwed up every road expansion they've done since I've moved here 11 years ago. Put in a 15 million dollar road expansion to end at the same crappy 2 lane intersection with no pedestrian provisions, so you get half a mile back ups. The intersections are the bottles necks, but we keep expanding roads at great expense to end at an intersection built in the 1960s. Then add numerous new lights, to really make sure that 15 million dollars provides no real capacity increase. There are 4 lane roads all over the city that are un/underdeveloped, why will adding more all of sudden create massive growth as opposed to just more sprawl and underdeveloped, low tax base land?

Let's spend some of that money to develop all the un/underdeveloped land already serviced by oversized stroads that don't pay for themselves. Let's actually approve some density where we already have the infrastructure for it. Let's stop destroying our current road investments by promising traffic lights and numerous driveways to every developer that is going to put in a fast food restaurant. Let's redevelop Broadway through downtown in a way that will attract more people and encourage more development (and hopefully higher density housing).

Driving up housing costs to pay for needless road projects is not YIMBY, and will not fix Edmond's problems.

For the record, I voted No on the roads, Yes on the Parks. Parks will actually improve the quality of life in Edmond.

Interesting strawman.

Where have you reviewed the plans for any of the proposed projects which are proposing things as you are describing them?