|
Post by chief322 on Jan 27, 2006 5:12:41 GMT -5
With the elimination of odd/even numbering on streets and the elimination of North and South, will cross street information be given as part of the dispatch or will this have to be requested?
Also, how does this new system that is being implemented for re-addressing take into consideration for future subdividing of properties that are not already subdivided. My Monroeton property, according to deed, is made up of 5 lots. Would my home address be assigned 5 individual address numbers, or is this just those pieces of property with frontage?
For the record, I am very much in favor of this re-addressing as it will be a benefit to all, if used correctly.
Anyone with knowledgeable information?
Thanks!
Tim
|
|
|
Post by 911guy on Jan 27, 2006 9:42:01 GMT -5
TIM! You are my hero! How I was hoping that someone from the field, for which the entire readressing project is being done for, would come forth with SOME type of questions or comments! At the risk of sounding arrogant, perhaps no one else knows the story of the readdressing project better than myself. When I read the Evening Times articles, my blood boils. More about that in a moment. To directly answer your question, here is how it works: Take ANY given road in the county as it is represented on a map - a line. Let's take a one mile stretch of road. Let's assume that the left (east-west) or bottom (north-south) part of the line is the beginning of the road. At that point, the numbers are 1 on the top/left and 2 on the bottom/right. At the end of that line, the numbers are 999 on the top/left and 1000 on the bottom/right. (NOTE: Based on what I am reading in the paper, that may have been changed to 499 and 500) Regardless, the line/road is now divided into equal-length segments. Pick any spot on that line, and you can calculate what number it is, based on the distance from the beginning of the line. So even if there is NOTHING there today, if you build something, there is already an address for it, based on it's location. Does that make sense? Maybe this mini-example will help? The | lines represent houses: 43 101 | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | | | 18 66 74 134 Regardless of the number of lots assigned to a deed, your current home will have one address based on the centerline of your existing home or the driveway, depending on the setback distance and visibility of the structure. If someone built either side of your home, they would have addresses based on their physical location along the road. Because there is extra room built-in for things like office complexes, trailers set with the narrow end facing the road, etc., even next-door neighbors could have addresses that aren't necessarily the next number in the sequence. In other words, your address might be 1482 Route 220, and your next door neighbor might be 1498 Route 220, depending on the distance between the two. There is SO much confusion surrounding the readdressing issue and I don't know why. We had meetings to explain it in several places throughout the county, including Fire Chief meetings and 911 meetings. Oh, well. It's nothing new. The press reports from The Evening Times, while perhaps accurately quoting elected officials, are full of half-truths at best and close to out and out fibs As far as announcing cross streets and the like, that will be up to the 911 center. For what it's worth, let me tell you how it happens in the "south" of PA. Frankly, the way it's done around here is basically how I envisioned it being in Bradford County once addressing was completed. Here is an example dispatch: 1- [Tones] 2- [Municipality Name] 3- [Street address] 4- [Residence Name (if known)] 5- [Nature of call] 6- [FULL List of apparatus] 7- [Repeat 2 through 5, except for full list of apparatus] 8- [Time] It is done that way for EVERY fire and EMS call, regardless of the nature of the call. Cross streets and additional details are given to the first unit responding and any additional units that request it. Hope that helps. How about some feedback from areas that have already adopted the new addressing?
|
|
|
Post by chief322 on Jan 27, 2006 20:26:51 GMT -5
Jeff:
Glad you are still checking in and really glad to hear from you. My Monroeton home has two street addresses as my property has two lots with acreage and three set behind. My current street addresses are 111 and 113 bridge street with my actual/physical house sitting on 111 bridge.
As far as the cross streets being given, again I have no problem with a request as long as it is immediately availabe and right now that is not the case. Also, cross streets will differ depending on route of travel, so this information should also be readily available or it really defeats the purpose of the scope of the project.
Lastly, It was my understanding from attending the chiefs meetings that any road name changes from current depended on those that shared names within the same zip code. Why is it that Towanda and Monroeton cannot share bridge street as a name, or cherry or walnut when they are in different zip coded areas.
Tim
|
|
|
Post by 911guy on Jan 28, 2006 9:28:16 GMT -5
Good questions, Tim. Here is my take on it. And yes, I am acutely aware that I in NO WAY intend, pretend or presume to speak for Bradford County's addressing project. As far as same streets in two zip codes; on PAPER, this doesn't seem to make sense. However, you have to think in terms of worst-case scenarios. Child callers. Cell phone callers. People with only PO boxes. Visitors/guests to a home, etc. Lancaster County readdressed a number of years ago and took the path of least resistance when it came to changing names, i.e., left similar or duplicate names in neighboring zip codes and it sometimes causes confusion, especially if the zip codes are split in the same municipality. The workaround is to assign different block ranges for the two that have the same name. For example, let's say Towanda and Monroeton keep Bridge Street because the borough councils won't budge. In that case, Bridge Street in Towanda gets (and remember, this is ONLY an example) numbers 0-5000 for "it's" Bridge Street. Monroeton might get numbers 5001-10000 for it's Bridge Street, so that you don't have identical addresses near each other. It "works", but if you multiply that process for every street that no one wants to change, you end up with calls from someone visiting their family/friends in "Towanda" (even though it may not be Towanda Borough), calling 911 from 5010 Bridge Street...now, is that one of the Towanda addresses or a Monroeton address? It all comes down to how much people (elected officials) are willing to sacrifice in 2006 to fix the problems, so that the generation in 2026 can look back and say, "They did the right thing" or "Why didn't they fix ALL the problems all at once, so that we don't still have problems and have to try and fix it again?" As far as cross streets, I guess I don't understand why cross streets would change depending upon your direction of travel? Let's take Brocktown Rd. Except for the couple of little streets in Powell, the cross streets would be 414 and 220. Now obviously, it makes a difference for YOU to know which end is going to be the best access. That's where some of the other components of addressing come in. At least two come to mind. Generally speaking, roads are addressed from West to East and South to North, so for Brocktown Rd, low numbers would be on the 414 end and higher numbers on the 220 end. In addition, the ordinance calls for - as street signs are replaced - the use of street signs that include the block range on the sign. Keep asking questions! It's the only way people will learn and understand. Much can be learned from your neighboring counties and cities that have been there, done that. Ask Stermer about Chemung County! As humans, there will ALWAYS be errors and better ways, but for the sake of those we protect, we must make it as foolproof and "perfect" as possible.
|
|
|
Post by 911wacker on Jan 28, 2006 22:06:38 GMT -5
Actually Chemung county just completed recently a change in the numbering system they use to comply with "national" standards, but when we intially went from rural route addressing to numbered adressing in the early 1990's it was like christmas in July!! Yes, some road/street names had to be changed but after it was siad and done nobody gripes about it now. We found this system to be far more user friendly than we had ever imagined it would be.
Probobly the largest benefit to this was the ability to provide cross streets for every address, initially this was done on nearly every call in the county. Now that responders are familiar with the system, you seldom hear a request for cross streets. Its a learning curve, but well worth it.
Something we did in our town when the new addressing took place was drive around on training night with maps of the town and record the closest existing address to every intersection in the town on the longer streets and roads. This proved to help us learn even faster, and saved time when responding to future requests.
I sure hope that the local authorities see past the "heritage" as they call it and decide to do the right thing to help us respond more effectively in their own towns. The only people they are hurting is themselves and the people they represent, because without the change we still have confusion as a possible scenario!!
|
|
|
Post by Valley3 on Jan 28, 2006 23:58:44 GMT -5
The controversy stems back to when county officals started to try and sell the re-addressing to the municipalities. They municipalities were asked to change duplicate road names, most agreed to that. They were also told if you don't we will assign unique number ranges for the duplicates to tell whos is whos. BUT the municipalities were also told by county officals, we will NOT be changing addresses if you already have a city style addressing system, we are only changing the rural route addresses. Now the county wants to change all addresses, many have been done without the property ower being notified. There are many areas of PA. and NY. that have re-addressed the rural routes and left the city style addressing in place. The municipalities are also being told that the county system will not work using both types address, I find that hard to believe since many areas already do it both ways. I see pros and cons with changing the city style addressing and it will take mutual co-operation to get over the hump.
|
|
911Mom
Full Member
Welcome to the real world!
Posts: 60
|
Post by 911Mom on Jan 29, 2006 0:22:31 GMT -5
Unfortunately the administration changed in the middle of all this. We are now trying to correct misinformation that was relayed by the previous administration. Please bear with us.
|
|
|
Post by 911wacker on Jan 29, 2006 6:02:18 GMT -5
Regardless of the information, agreements and promises that did or did not happen. The project still needs to be completed for everyone to benefit. I really don't see why changing a street name or number would be such a big deal when you look at the end results. If someone asked me tommorrow to change my address whether it be just a new number or a different street name I would do it because the END RESULT is for the benefit of many. To many are being selfish and making a stand for something that was essentially agreed too several years ago. It sounded like a great idea to them until they would have to change the name of their own street instead of the people next door. If they themselves or someone close to them had to wait an extra 10 minutes for an ambulance, fire department or police agency during a critical event because of a "duplicate" address, this would not even be an issue.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Repasky on Jan 29, 2006 12:43:15 GMT -5
I have sat back long enough and listened to this and now it’s time for me to add my two cents. Jeff, you said you went to all the meetings, including the Chief’s meeting and explained all this and can’t understand why people don’t get it. Let me remind you, I was at those meetings. In fact, I was the one that sat by you and supported the whole idea when you were getting the heat at a community meeting in Sayre. You stood there and told all those in attendance that unless the street name changed, they would not have to change anything with your address. From that meeting, I also was in attendance at other meetings, including the Chief’s meetings; I’m still the chairman of the 911 committee and also sat on the committee that was formed for the readdressing. At no point, was it EVER said that every house in the county would have a new address, and don’t tell me it was. It was always said there would be rural readdressing and city readdressing.
I am all for readdressing and always have been. There is a problem with duplicate street names and now is the time to fix it. There is NOT a problem with house numberings in a non-rural setting. I also remember the post master from the Towanda post office saying the postal service has been wanting to do this for some time now, but didn’t want to be the “bad guys” and this was going to help them tremendously. The Morning Times ran an article about the postal carriers in Sayre stating they knew nothing about this and was never consulted. They may be correct, “they” were never consulted, but the US Postal Service was!
The readdressing committee has since fallen by the wayside. There was first the resignation of the chairman of this committee. Then there was your resignation, Jeff. Jason Finnerty resigned, Steve Polzella, who took over for Jason then resigned, then came Karin and Scott to fill those vacancies and the chairman was never replaced. The commissioners came to the first meeting and then never attended another one.
To sit back now and get mad because elected officials are in an uproar about all this is ridiculous, let alone coward less. Someone needs to speak up and admit that people were lied to and correct these problems now. Someone needs to take ownership of this project and do it right.
Jeff, you stated “at the risk of being arrogant”. Let me say that your speech from your soap box was arrogant. I’m sorry to be so blunt, but maybe it was that arrogance that started this whole problem and the fact that it was easier to tell the people what they wanted to hear instead of what you had planned.
|
|
|
Post by 911guy on Jan 29, 2006 19:28:27 GMT -5
Fair enough, Rob. If a scapegoat is needed so that some blame can be placed somewhere and make everyone feel better, blame away. I will take the hit for anything that I stated and COULD not follow through on, but I will NOT take the hit for something I NEVER intended or took actions on contrary to my public remarks. I will now expand upon my first remarks where I said, "The press reports from The Evening Times, while perhaps accurately quoting elected officials, are full of half-truths at best and close to out and out fibs."
You are 100% correct. In those meetings, what you described is EXACTLY what was discussed and presented - no less, no more. What I don't "get" is why so many people still don't understand the BASICS of the project, regardless of the renumber/don't renumber existing city streets debate. What APPARENTLY changed (based solely upon what I read in the paper and the bit I have gleaned from here) is at least one key thing - the need for renumbering existing city-style addresses. That specific action was NEVER part of the agenda while I had any part of it. I DO know that Jason disagreed with me on that matter. I don't know Scott and I would NEVER presume to speak for Karin, so I cannot and will not speak to the current mindset.
If things are in any way similar to how they were 2+ years ago, the biggest problem USED to be with the Bradford County Office of Community Planning and Grants. Jason worked for and answered to Ray Stolinas, even though his salary came from 911 funds. They believed that the entire county's addressing scheme should be uniform and redone in every case where uniformity did not exist. The ordinance that every municipality signed did, as recently reported, state that existing city-style addressing could USUALLY remain, unless it was not standardized, such as "1/2" or letter addresses (232 1/2 Main St, 232-A Main St) or if odds and evens were on the same side of the street, such as exists in some cases in Towanda (maybe more). We (Jason and I) met with my counterpart in Tioga County, PA, as they were going through the process just slightly ahead of Bradford County. Their philosophy was essentially, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. While I personally agreed with that philosophy, I was but one voice. Jason was just as entitled to his opinion as I was, but as you point out, it is one thing to have that opinion to yourself, and another to make public presentations that state one thing, and operate under a different agenda when the time comes to implement it.
Please understand - the LAST thing I want to do is make this whole thing WORSE for the county. Both sides (the county and municipalities) bear some responsibility for the confusion. The WORST thing that can happen is to allow the situation to derail this most-important project instead of communicating directly with each other, and avoid embarrassing and counter-productive press reports that only serve to fuel doubt and skepticism.
If I ever gave the impression that I agreed 100% with ANY one side of the issue, I apologize. My ONLY concern is that the project not be delayed amid bureaucratic banter while people's lives and property continue to be at risk.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by 911wacker on Jan 29, 2006 19:59:00 GMT -5
My ONLY concern is that the project not be delayed amid bureaucratic banter while people's lives and property continue to be at risk. DITTO!!
|
|
|
Post by chief322 on Jan 30, 2006 5:56:58 GMT -5
Okay my brothers, this thread was not meant to be a pissing match of who said what at what time. This project is going full steam ahead, regardless of what has happened in the past.
Jeff should not have to defend his part of the project during his tenure as well as Robbie should not have to defend his position during the on-going. Rob, I agree that what was started originally by the committee has basically been put to the wayside.
Speaking as a former CFO that had charge of a jurisdiction of both town and rural areas, I am for our re-addressing needs. Township route numbers with no home addresses were confusing, particularly for our police and EMS divisions.
On the cross street question again, with home owners with xx amount of road leading to their homes, didn't they have to name that road? Would this not be a cross street, as it is now a marked road, regardless if it were a public one? Travel up any township road once and you would be amazed at the amount of expanded driveways, which now must be marked with a road name. All of these signed roads, both public and private, must be added to district maps for responder use.
When a caller screen is placed active, will the cross street be shown? I have heard to many times in the past where a field unit has asked for this information only to be told to wait. This is not a bust on our dispatching division as they can only work with the tools readily avaiable to them. I am only asking if this will be made readily available to both the field and dispatching units?
Please lets keep this civil as a lot of decent and knoweledgeable information has been presented by all.
Tim
|
|
|
Post by canton1 on Jan 31, 2006 9:22:21 GMT -5
Oh stop your whining valley boys. I have to change mine cause the Postal Services wanted to. The 911 Center asked them to wait and they would move the schedule and do that area next. Nope--Bigger Government Rules I guess.
When they did get it done the did it 100% backwards from that the 911 Center will be doing it.
I guess that the best thing that we need to do is make everyoen happy and not worry if it will be fast and easy to find a place when there is a emergency.
STOP WHINING
|
|
|
Post by 2Truck on Jan 31, 2006 18:28:04 GMT -5
How are maps going to be handled? Will the county be issuing maps to each organization or will organizations be required to have outside organizations (or themselves) make their own map books?
|
|
|
Post by GVEMS11 on Jan 31, 2006 20:09:44 GMT -5
PLEASE can we have county map books? That would make things so much easier if everyone was literally on the same page. Then, an answer for directions to XYZ Road could be as simple as "Page 23, Grid A-1". I know... wishful thinking.
|
|