Heritage Hills and Mesta Park residents seek to discourage neighborhood traffic

[Pete]

Heritage Hills and Mesta Park residents seek to discourage neighborhood traffic

The Oklahoma City Traffic and Transportation Commission will consider an application to add 19 new 4-way stops in the historic neighborhoods north of NW 13th, South of NW 23rd, west of Broadway and east of Classen.

Generally known as Heritage Hills and Mesta Park, an affluent resident commissioned local engineering firm Johnson & Associates to submit the application with petitions of support from many residents.

Not shown on the two graphics are 3 more intersections that were requested through individual applications: N Shartel at NW 15th, N Hudson at NW 18th, and N Harvey at NW 18th.

Bill Carey, Jr., who owns one of the largest homes in the area on NW 16th, originally had engineer Tim Johnson file the applications on his behalf then later asked for continuances so the necessary petition signatures could be gathered.

Johnson states in his letter to the commission that the primary goal of its Traffic Calming Study was to deter area pass-through traffic.

In response to the applications, the City of Oklahoma City performed detailed analysis on each intersection, measuring traffic volume, speeds and frequency of accidents.

In all 19 cases, the intersections fail to meet the city's minimum standards to warrant the new stops. However, the traffic commission is not bound by these findings and can either approve or deny each or all of the requests.

For 6 of the intersections, the minimum number of petition signatures were not obtained. And 3 had been previously considered by not approved.

The applications represent more evidence of growing tensions in the area regarding the redevelopment of Midtown to the south and Uptown to the north. Local residents had previously opposed development in both areas, often citing increased traffic and street parking.

The traffic commission will consider the requests April 17th at 1:30PM in City Council Chambers. The meeting is open to the public.

[catch22]

I certainly can understand why they feel this way, but stop signs won't deter much traffic for very long. In Portland when the highways get clogged (every afternoon) the next is the arterials which soon get clogged. And then the neighborhoods get the traffic, stop signs or not. Stopping every 350 feet is better than being stopped and moving 15 feet at a time. All they will be doing is increasing noise during rush hour from people having to constantly stop and accelerate again.

[sooner88]

I'm sure their bigger worry is the speed people reach in between stop signs. A lot of people use Walker and other streets to cut through but drive like they're still on Classen, Broadway, etc. I'm not sure if the answer is more stop signs, but there are a lot of families out around that time and I imagine they are worried about the safety of their children. At the same time they are in one of the closest neighborhoods to downtown, so the thought of completely eliminating or deterring a majority of through traffic is pretty unrealistic.

[Roger S]

I'm sure their bigger worry is the speed people reach in between stop signs. A lot of people use Walker and other streets to cut through but drive like they're still on Classen, Broadway, etc. I'm not sure if the answer is more stop signs, but there are a lot of families out around that time and I imagine they are worried about the safety of their children. At the same time they are in one of the closest neighborhoods to downtown, so the thought of completely eliminating or deterring a majority of through traffic is pretty unrealistic.

I agree. I think this probably has more to do with the fact that speed limits seem to be pretty much disregarded these days. Not that the stop signs won't be disregarded to a degree as well but they'll at least work to calm the speeds. I'm sure the people speeding through there won't have any issues with jack rabbiting the stop signs.

I will continue to travel through those neighborhoods because I love looking at those homes.... Stop signs are just going to give me more time to enjoy the view.

[shawnw]

Agree about still cutting through but having more time to ogle...

[TheTravellers]

Once again, idiots in charge of our streets don't have a clue. MUTCD specifically says stop signs shall not be used for speed control.

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/...tm#section2B04 (05 YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control.)

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/...tm#section2B07

As has been said, it's going to do is piss drivers off and they're going to speed from one to the next, not coming to a complete stop at any of them. I did the same thing at the absurdly placed stop signs in our old neighborhood of Seminole Point. And our idiot drivers that can't handle stop signs (2, 3, or 4, doesn't matter) will make this a complete clusterf*ck with all the nice drivers waving everybody else on even when they don't have right-of-way.

[Roger S]

Once again, idiots in charge of our streets don't have a clue. MUTCD specifically says stop signs shall not be used for speed control.

Actually it says "should not" but as I've already argued in another thread this morning... that's semantics...... If it were up to me I would look at using some sort of physical impediment to speeding like speed humps.... Let them tear up the suspension on their vehicles if they still want to speed through the neighborhood.

[jerrywall]

I like what was done on N. Western near 50th. It forces you to slow down without barriers. It's natural.

[TheTravellers]

I like what was done on N. Western near 50th. It forces you to slow down without barriers. It's natural.

Agreed. Same thing that's on 36th a few blocks west of Classen. Although the street dept. needs to keep them painted with reflective paint, they're not easy to see at night with all the tire scuff marks on them.

[Pete]

The application clearly states the primary goal is to get people to stop using these streets.

[TheTravellers]

The application clearly states the primary goal is to get people to stop using these streets.

Stop signs shouldn't be used for that purpose either.

They should just make them cul-de-sacs, then, because people will go where they want if there's any connection at all, stop signs or not, speed bumps or not, just gate the whole damn neighborhood... Not sure of the neighborhood, maybe it's still Mesta Park, but going south down Broadway from 22nd to 17th, on the west side, every street is right-turn only (turning south) from that street to Broadway, you cannot turn onto them from Broadway. That kind of thing (full or semi cul-de-sac) is pretty much the only way they can truly cut down on the amount of traffic.

[Pete]

It's nothing more than trying to keep people from driving on their streets.

The City studies showed there were no real issues with speeding, accidents or even traffic volume.

I really hope the Traffic Commission doesn't cave on this issue.

[Ross MacLochness]

I don't mind putting out extra stop signs, but each street should be pretty equal so that if drivers do decide to drive through MP (which they will and isn't really a problem), there will not be a path of least resistance. If all roads are equalized traffic will be dispersed evenly rather than trough only a few key streets.

[turnpup]

It's a tough issue. This is an open, urban, neighborhood so people should of course be free to drive the streets. No question.

However, as a resident, I experience on a daily basis the automobile traffic that speeds, and/or that fails to yield at yield signs or many times doesn't even slow down at a stop sign. Riding my bike route each day, especially on weekdays, is treacherous. Just about every day I have at least one near-miss. Drivers on their way to work toward downtown on Hudson, Walker and Shartel in particular really do plow through those streets at high rates of speed.

Maybe the phraseology used for the purpose behind the proposal would've sounded better as "Residents seek to discourage speeding and lawbreaking neighborhood traffic." At each meeting I've been to where the traffic plan has been discussed, the focus has always been on deterring *accidents*, not deterring *people*, from our neighborhood.

[Brett]

That map looks a lot like Norman around the University of Oklahoma.

[Pete]

Every single neighborhood wants traffic to slow down, come to a complete stop at signs, etc.

I'm sure it's felt more strongly in these expensive neighborhoods that are located in the city core.

But the City studies show these are not significant issues and thus don't warrant any of these proposed signs.

And at the end of the day, these neighborhoods should be treated exactly like Jefferson Park and others in similar situations.

Through traffic is part and parcel of living in these area.

[TheTravellers]

It's a tough issue. This is an open, urban, neighborhood so people should of course be free to drive the streets. No question.

However, as a resident, I experience on a daily basis the automobile traffic that speeds, and/or that fails to yield at yield signs or many times doesn't even slow down at a stop sign. Riding my bike route each day, especially on weekdays, is treacherous. Just about every day I have at least one near-miss. Drivers on their way to work toward downtown on Hudson, Walker and Shartel in particular really do plow through those streets at high rates of speed.

Maybe the phraseology used for the purpose behind the proposal would've sounded better as "Residents seek to discourage speeding and lawbreaking neighborhood traffic." At each meeting I've been to where the traffic plan has been discussed, the focus has always been on deterring *accidents*, not deterring *people*, from our neighborhood.

Agree totally on the last point. And they should look at options that will discourage accidents and speeding, not just throw up stop signs 'cos they're cheap and path of least resistance for them.

I hear you on your points in your 2nd paragraph, we live at 35th/Venice and people blow through the 4-way stop there super-damn-fast on an hourly basis. I've wanted to contact OKCPD and tell them they should have a motorcycle cop stationed there, and ask for a 5% finders fee for all the tickets they'd write...

In the end, I don't really care that much about it 'cos we're never in that area and we don't live there, but it's just a shame they keep going down the wrong path and can't figure out the right way to do it (like they can't figure out the right way to fix a lot of other traffic problems).

[jerrywall]

My wife gets mad at me when I old man and sit near the stop sign in my neighborhood with a sign that says "FULL STOP KIDS AT PLAY". She says I'm not allowed to do it anymore.

[DoctorTaco]

Stop signs are the wrong approach here. Bulb-outs at the intersections would do more to narrow the streets and slow traffic than a swath of new stop signs will.

[Ross MacLochness]

Maybe the solution then isn't more stop signs but bump outs at the intersections or other physical changes to the environment. Cars will slow if the street is designed to force them to do so!

[shawnw]

I'm cool with removing the few long stretches that don't have stop signs and also changing the yield signs to stop signs because of the misuse. BUT, if we do that? Then we also need to remove the "exit only" street modifications at Broadway that keep folks from turning into the hood.

[jerrywall]

Are bump outs and bulb outs the same thing? Is there also a name for when the median is designed to narrow and slow traffic (or is that the same thing?)

[KayneMo]

Are bump outs and bulb outs the same thing?

Both are known as curb extensions, but I think a bump-out is used more commonly for a curb extension that's in between streets, and a bulb-out is the curb extension at corners.

Is there also a name for when the median is designed to narrow and slow traffic (or is that the same thing?)

Chicane, maybe?

Speed humps would be more effective, I think.

[OKCisOK4me]

Ironically, I drove north on Walker through Heritage Hills yesterday afternoon and I treat that street like any regular street--by obeying the speed limit. It's unfortunate that other people can't do the same. Oh well, it won't deter me from enjoying the beauty of that historic neighborhood.

[AP]

Every single neighborhood wants traffic to slow down, come to a complete stop at signs, etc.

I'm sure it's felt more strongly in these expensive neighborhoods that are located in the city core.

But the City studies show these are not significant issues and thus don't warrant any of these proposed signs.

And at the end of the day, these neighborhoods should be treated exactly like Jefferson Park and others in similar situations.

Through traffic is part and parcel of living in these area.

I think this is what people in this thread are missing. I drive through and used to run through these neighborhoods often, and speeding wasn't really an issue. I really think this is about the owners not wanting anyone driving through these neighborhoods, regardless of how fast they drive.