Yesterday, we had the first meeting of the new Indian Nations Council of Governments bicycle advisory group. Since this was the preliminary meeting, it included introductions and a brief discussion of goals and brought us up to date about on-going projects. This group may be meeting once a month, so there should be more to report shortly.
==============
INCOG BAG Meeting
17JAN2008 1130A
Members
Ed Wagner
Monica Barczak
Josh Gifford
David Darcey
Chris Zenthoefer (not present)
Tom Brown
Lisa Frankenberger
Patrick Fox
Mark Brown (not present)
Glen Sams (not present)
The Big Picture
The subcommittee is composed of people with diverse backgrounds in cycling. There are current and former racers, tourists, and commuters representing a variety of occupations.
We share a common goal – to get more people on their bikes in the Tulsa region – and we realize that the vast majority of existing cyclists are recreational riders rather than transportation cyclists. However, it's critical to recognize the impact of infrastructure, particularly traffic lights and bridges, when it comes to transportation riders. For a recreational cyclist, a road or bridge closure is a nuisance, but easily avoided. For a transportation cyclist, it can represent a major problem if it prevents riding to a destination like work. As the plan evolves, it must encompass the needs of all cyclists.
Naturally, we embrace the traditional five E's of bicycling advocacy: Education, Engineering, Enforcement, Encouragement, and Evaluation. We support the development of a comprehensive master bicycling plan, that includes elements from Complete Streets and Safe Routes to School.
The Nagging Little Details
It's easy to get bogged down in discussions about plan details. A perfect illustration: Patrick showed the group one of Portland's blue bike boxes, and we were sidetracked for a few minutes talking about it. Anyone familiar with the email advocacy groups will be aware of what I've called how-many-bicycling-advocates-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin arguments. The people involved care passionately about their positions, but to the vast majority of readers, the discussion is a waste of time. Unfortunately, I'm one of those people who bite hard on such arguments.
(As an aside, be aware that I use the word 'argument' in its primary definition, a reasoned discussion. If I want the other kind of argument, the knock-down-drag-out kind, I need only say the wrong thing to my spouse.)
Monica yanked us back from that fruitless pursuit and I thanked her for it. For the present, we need to focus on that big picture up above and use it to set our goals, then develop a plan to reach those goals. The plan is a series of steps, some interlinked and some independent, almost like a road map. And the nagging little details are the individual steps necessary to achieve those goals.
Some of those steps may include:
Public service announcements modeling safe and proper bicycle use, both from a cyclist's viewpoint and that of a motorist.
Funding for BikeEd in an effort to reach school children, adult cyclists, and motorists.
Include knowledgeable cyclists in street planning as a normal part of the process.
Efforts to change building codes to incorporate bicycle parking.
Encouraging employers to promote bicycle commuting.
Promoting Bike To Work events.
Comprehensive Bicycling Master Plan, a larger document that includes the Trails Master Plan and much more.
Most of that list is nothing new, but they are popular efforts that have met with some success. As always, the devil is in the details. Another way to phrase that is the large print giveth and the small print taketh away. A plan can have glowing, laudable goals, yet if it lacks supporting details, it will never come to fruition.
Trail Projects and Updates
The locally infamous 'FEMA' bridge project over Little Haikey Creek should start moving dirt this month. The bridge was backordered. It's a pre-fabricated construction.
The Mingo Valley Trail is in negotiations with ODOT over bridge placement at 71st Street.
The Osage Prairie Trail Extension is looking for funding to continue trail construction north of Skiatook. Ultimately, the plan is to extend it to Barnsdahl, or if possible, Pawhuska.
The River Park Trail will be re-located west of the Creek Nation Casino, possibly funded by the Creek Nation. An astounding information tidbit – the new dual trail costs $290 per linear foot!
2007 Enhancement Grant Awards
South River Parks Extension
Fry Ditch Creek Trail (Bixby)
Mingo Valley (Admiral to I-244)
Osage Trail Trailhead (Skiatook)
Sand Springs, Visual Detection
A word about Sand Springs – the city is looking to attain LAB Bicycle Friendly City status.
Ed,
Thank you for the update on cycling in the city, and thank you for being on the committee. I would ride my bike to work, from 21st & Mingo to 169 & Pine area, but there just aren't paths for that. Garnett is 2 lane passed Admiral and 169 isn't acceptable either. There is no really safe way for me to do it. We do ride on the path from 41st down to 11th when the weather is nice and plan to ride further when the paths are complete and join each other. We didn't get out as much as we would have liked last summer, but plan to this year. The paths are really nice!
You group contains many kinds of bicyclists but did you consider having people who don't currently bike on a regular basis? Just seems like if you want to make something more attractive, you shouldn't only ask the people already doing it. See what it takes to get the "everyman" excited about bicycling.
Cyclists with diverse backgrounds on the INCOG committee? NOT. Where da bicycling homeless vet at? Where da bike cop at? Where da Santa at? Where is State Senator John Trebelcock, recently busted for DUI and watching his sub-prime SafeAuto insurance go through the ROOF? And, NO Biker Fox?
With a bunch of spandex-clad bike weenies mulling over a lame agenda like that, I'm liable to crash the party next month with a snide and snarky sign. But, I'll spare you. I'll be busy kicking down ILLEGAL signs like they just cross the BORDER.
I suppose the committee is a start. In the meantime, I'd write a nice letter invite to this guy.
(http://bp3.blogger.com/_OmgN7CaAxbk/R4q0tCNvjrI/AAAAAAAAAPQ/iSVJTz4bCHA/s320/200801_E1_spanc46283_e1kivisto11.jpg)
Tulsa Energy Czar calls for more bicycling, walking
By JASON WOMACK World Staff Writer
1/11/2008
America can curb its reliance on foreign oil if the country can do away with traffic jams.
"Congestion has been the biggest cause of gasoline demand for the last 20 years," Tom Kivisto, president and CEO of SemGroup LP, said Thursday during the Tulsa Press Club Page One Luncheon.
Tulsa-based SemGroup and its subsidiaries move energy products from the wellhead to the wholesale market place. The company, through its subsidiaries, provides services to the crude oil, natural gas, natural gas liquids, refined products and asphalt industries.
Kivisto, who co-founded SemGroup in 2000, advocated policies that encourage fuel-efficient vehicles, energy conservation and roads that cater to people rather than SUVs.
"I would love to see every highway in this town . . . have a bicycle and walking path," Kivisto said. "We have to stop the madness."
The endorsement may seem strange for the head of one of the nation's largest privately held energy companies. But Kivisto maintains that the right energy policies and incentives are a matter of national security.
The U.S., he says, demands about 40 percent of global gasoline supplies and is made up of households that boast more vehicles than licensed drivers.
The country is also facing the rapid industrialization of China, a nation that could surpass America as the largest consumer of refined fuel.
"We are not going to compete well for transportation fuels," Kivisto said following his speech.
Kivisto advocates tax incentives for fuel-efficient cars, mopeds and even bicycles rather than providing more money for ethanol, an alternative fuel often blended with gasoline. The fuel takes more energy to make than it ultimately produces, Kivisto said.
"Crude oil and the products associated with crude oil will still meet 80 percent of our transportation demand," he said. "We are just not going to get away from it."
Kivisto said money is better spent on improving the nation's transportation system, much of which is in "poor or worse condition."
"It is wearing down faster than we can repair it," he said.
He contends that the development of mass transportation is rarely effective and that energy prices will eventually cause people to move closer to their jobs.
Kivisto also favors the development of public spaces to make people want to choose other modes of transportation.
"We have to build walking opportunities," he said, adding support for pedestrian-friendly development of the Arkansas River corridor.
"We are going to put water in that river," he said. "It's going to happen."
quote:
Originally posted by Wingnut
Ed,
I would ride my bike to work, from 21st & Mingo to 169 & Pine area, but there just aren't paths for that. There is no really safe way for me to do it.
One goal of any bicycling advocacy group is to get people like you onto their bikes in a way that develops confidence and skill. And we have to acknowledge that the majority of bicyclists ride for recreation, not transportation. That will change this summer when gasoline prices are expected to exceed $4/gallon. Many occasional cyclists will use their bikes to run errands or ride to work. In my house, we call it the bread-and-milk-and-eggs run.
You may be surprised to learn that - for the most part - Tulsa motorists are very accommodating toward cyclists, particularly commuters that they see every day, and those who ride legally and predictably. What works for us, and what produces the fewest conflicts is remarkably simple. Drive your bike just as you would your car. Ride in the right-hand tire track. Stop at stop signs and redlights. Signal your turns. These are the principles of vehicular cycling. If you could learn them and apply them, you'd find that getting around Tulsa on a bicycle is relatively easy.
Sure, you'll still encounter the occasional horn-blaring fool, but he'll still be a fool whether you're on two wheels or four.
I'm an instructor with the League of American Bicyclists. We'll probably offer the Road1 classes again later this year, and they include all that I mentioned above.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
You group contains many kinds of bicyclists but did you consider having people who don't currently bike on a regular basis? Just seems like if you want to make something more attractive, you shouldn't only ask the people already doing it. See what it takes to get the "everyman" excited about bicycling.
It's a good point. What would it take to get our hypothetical 'everyman' on that dusty bike out in the garage? My thought has been that economic forces have more influence than any others. When gasoline gets too expensive or if the family needs to save money, John Doe turns to walking or cycling for short trips. That's the stick, but is there a carrot?
I had nothing to do with the selection of people for this committee. I'm just a foot-soldier. But I do think it's important that they have some experience as cyclists because they'll be asked to apply their knowledge and expertise. INCOG has a flow chart somewhere that shows the steps in developing one of their projects, and at some point there's always an opportunity for public input.
As I see it, the subcommittee will churn out a bunch of ideas, select some that are attainable and decide on the steps necessary to achieve them. Then we'll have to figure out how to measure the results. I could be wrong. I frequently am. Fortunately, I know that Patrick is reading this over my shoulder (in a figurative sense) so if I screw up too badly he'll undoubtedly offer corrections.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
Quote
I'm an instructor with the League of American Bicyclists. We'll probably offer the Road1 classes again later this year, and they include all that I mentioned above.
I would take that class.
And if ever there were such a thing as group commuting rides, I would be very happy. Is that something that might be part of a Bike to Work event? A little OT - but is there such a thing as Critical Mass in Tulsa?
Thanks for the update, Ed. I especially appreciate the updates on the trail projects.
When we have a class schedule worked out, I'll be sure to post it here. Last year, classes were offered through Tulsa Parks. I hope we can do that again.
As for Critical Mass rides, I generally oppose them. Despite good intentions at the beginning, they've devolved into lawless, anti-car demonstrations. Favoring bicycle transportation on a personal level doesn't require hating or fearing motor vehicle traffic. In fact, cyclists need motor vehicle traffic to sweep the road free of debris and to keep its surface smooth.
There is another group ride called a Courteous Mass, but it doesn't have the notoriety of Critical Mass, probably because they observe the rules of the road. It doesn't generate nearly as much press attention.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
When we have a class schedule worked out, I'll be sure to post it here. Last year, classes were offered through Tulsa Parks. I hope we can do that again.
As for Critical Mass rides, I generally oppose them. Despite good intentions at the beginning, they've devolved into lawless, anti-car demonstrations. Favoring bicycle transportation on a personal level doesn't require hating or fearing motor vehicle traffic. In fact, cyclists need motor vehicle traffic to sweep the road free of debris and to keep its surface smooth.
There is another group ride called a Courteous Mass, but it doesn't have the notoriety of Critical Mass, probably because they observe the rules of the road. It doesn't generate nearly as much press attention.
Courteous Mass ... that's nifty. I'm going agoogling. Thanks again, Ed!
quote:
Originally posted by dayzella
Courteous Mass ... that's nifty. I'm going agoogling. Thanks again, Ed!
Soooooo yesterday. Since it's election time in the City, why don't you spandex-clad bike weenies send every candidate an issues questionnaire, like all the other special interest mafia groups (//%22http://www.backthebadge.com%22) that come out of the woodworks to grovel for political influence?
[:P][:P]
quote:
Originally posted by tulsasignnazi
quote:
Originally posted by dayzella
Courteous Mass ... that's nifty. I'm going agoogling. Thanks again, Ed!
Soooooo yesterday. Since it's election time in the City, why don't you spandex-clad bike weenies send every candidate an issues questionnaire, like all the other special interest mafia groups (//%22http://www.backthebadge.com%22) that come out of the woodworks to grovel for political influence?
[:P][:P]
Your the idiot that makes cycling difficult for the rest of us you half wit.....
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
Your the idiot that makes cycling difficult for the rest of us you half wit.....
Yep. Kick 'em when they down, people![:P][:P] Where da beef at, boy?
Help me out, people. How can ONE person, an alleged HALF wit, POSSIBLY make cycling difficult for EVERYBODY, when the overzealous cops on the lookout for the EASY bust, the vague laws, and the IGNORANT motorists ALREADY conspire to do a bang up job of making cycling a BIG pain in the arse?[:(!][:(!]
Does anyone have any info about the bike trail that is, was, supposed to go along the I44 expansion? It runs right along my neighborhood behind the Promenade, where they have already widened the road. But then when they widened the Yale overpass, it was like they completely threw out any notion of a trail? I thought I had read that they were going to connect all the way to River Parks with that trail. It would make a nice way for neighborhoods all along there to get to River Parks or even to the mall, movies, etc. if they wanted. Its like I have this nice little park that goes for a few blocks then dead ends.
Artist....if I recall right, the connectivity of that trail to the north was effected by the planned revisions to the 41st St/I44 interchange. Apparently it's to be a big project and until the highway and street plan are finalized it's almost impossible to route a trail through the area.
As it is now, the signed bike route runs along 41st, then turns north just east of Promenade. We were through there earlier today, and given the heavy traffic along 41st, I'd be a little hesitant about making that left on my bike. A newbie would be genuinely terrified.
If I learn any more about that section, I'll let you know.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
You group contains many kinds of bicyclists but did you consider having people who don't currently bike on a regular basis? Just seems like if you want to make something more attractive, you shouldn't only ask the people already doing it. See what it takes to get the "everyman" excited about bicycling.
Yep. You pose an interesting dilemma, mr. grizzle. Generally, getting someone to commit to regularly attend and participate in something like the Bike Advisory Group, who only has passing interest, is difficult. I try to address this on a broader scale in most of my presentations. I see four types of cyclists (or potential cyclists) out there: The strong and fearless. These folks will ride anywhere.
The enthused and confident. Mainly club cyclists who are comfortable on the road and in group rides.
The interested but concerned. They're fearful in traffic, but the group offers the greatest potential for growth.
No way, no how! This is pretty much self-explanatory.
By far, the largest group is the interested but concerned, and so, like our Advisory Group dilemma, the bigger dilemma is how to get these folks moved from "interested and concerned" to "enthused and confident". This doesn't mean you have to wear spandex, as our friend Paul is suggesting (I don't), but the bottomline is if cycling, everyday cycling, doesn't gain a larger, visible presence, cycling in Tulsa will always be relegated to second tier status. The cyclists can change this "second tier" status, but only if we show up in mass (and I don't mean critical mass.) everyday so vehicles are forced to pay attention to us, and treat us with the respect we deserve on the road. So, help us. Tell us what will get you on the road...
quote:
Originally posted by pfox
The cyclists can change this "second tier" status, but only if we show up in mass (and I don't mean critical mass.) everyday so vehicles are forced to pay attention to us, and treat us with the respect we deserve on the road. So, help us. Tell us what will get you on the road...
The spandex cyclists themselves have to get BEYOND their own little world of spandex, carbon fiber, and VO2 max.
Instead of just rolling on the Avery Drive, they should roll on EVERY bike path where they have a right to roll, Memorial, Riverside, and the BA.
They have NO one to blame, but themselves, for the IGNORANT motorists who yell and scream at the few, BEYOND spandex, who chose to ASSERT their inalienable RIGHTS to the road. They gave up their rights, simply by NOT exercising them.
On ANY given Wednesday evening, during the summer, starting from 17th and Jackson, West Bank River Park, over 300 strong, they are already cranking MAJOR miles, 40 PLUS, to Keystone Lake, Coyote Trail, and the North Road. For whatever reason, they feel they need to be CODDLED and PANDERED, just to bike to work, less than 5 miles. What are you guys? WEENIES?
Forget about bike lanes. Forget about EXPENSIVE retro-fits of commercial buildings to put in showers. Forget about bike boxes, aka great BIG slippery blue rubberized ink spots at the intersection. They are all simply CODDLING and PANDERING measures, over-engineered by Copenhagen roadway engineering SOCIALISTS and picked by skinny-legged INCOG biking wonks who NEED to show something for their cushy two-week paychecks.
If you guys really want to see where bicycling is happening in this town, hang out at Daycare Center for the Homeless.
Forget about Devour Downtown. Pick up a free QT Market Fresh sandwich at the Sallie and talk to some of the skid-row types, who really NEED basic transportation, just to get a meal.
Forget about some idealistic notions of bombing Africa with bikes. Bomb J3:16 with bikes.
If you want bicycling for the rest of town, hit corporate Tulsa where they will listen, the SKYROCKETING employee healthcare costs, caused by a whole lot of FAT employees driving SUV's to work. Go talk to the HR Nazis in this town when they cut the Rx coverage, charge DOUBLE for the kids' doc visits, and getting an EARFUL from their automatons, who are usually quiet as Santa in solitary confinement at DLM. Talk about Donald Shoup's The High Price of Free Parking.
The City could just about afford to do street "repairs," if it could 86 the SKYROCKETING employee healthcare costs.
While we are picking on the City, 86 Tulsa Transit's DESTRUCTIVE grip on mass transit. DE-regulate it. Hey, it worked for the airlines. Why shouldn't some Tulsa transportation entreprenuer make big bucks by figuring out how to get motorists out of their cars by offering transit OPTIONS.
If Hooter's Air got wings, imagine Hooter's Bus! Man, oh man, Tulsa Transit would have NOTHING on the Hooter's Bus, except clipped WINGS!
With all due respect to Bill Boatwright, Tulsa Transit ONLY think they know better. Well, guess what, genius? You DON'T. Why? Because you guys have NO profit motive to LISTEN to the MARKET. Taxpayers don't count, because most of them drive and are really too IGNORANT to care about transit. Or, they are too POOR to know they have an inalienable right to travel, without an automobile.
You guys could give a CRAPOLA, when one of your PAYING customers politely suggest turning the bus shelters 180 degrees, to protect the customers, instead of the landscaping, from the road noise and spray.
Hey, Bill, what kinda CAR you driving by YOURSELF, everyday to work? If Tulsa Transit really did its JOB, there wouldn't be a personally owned motor vehicle in their parking lot. Boatwright and gang are all too well-paid to take their own stinky buses to work everyday.
Guess what, people? The "Complete The Streets" geniuses say there are almost 100,000, or 28%, Tulsa taxpayers out there who don't have access to vehicles, presumably motor vehicles. You guys are RIPPING off almost 1/3 of the taxpaying population.
Why is it that when some Downtown hack tries in vain to breath life support to light rail for Downtown Development, the next breath is TAXES?
If you guys really want REAL Downtown Development, think DE-regulated transit. It's been done, ya know. Way before a bunch of geniuses decided to burn down the Greenwood Black Wall Street, a profitable PRIVATE bus system rolled the Aunt Jemima cheap kitchen help to Maple Ridge.
Instead of 20 minute headways, 5 minutes. Instead of 5 transfers just to get from 61st/Yale to Admiral/Mingo, cut that down to ZERO, without paying the taxi premium.
Guess what? As long as Tulsa Transit sucks on government subsidies, they have NO incentive to listen to the market. Tulsa Transit has NO incentive to treat their drivers like the professionals that they really are. DE-regulate transit.
Cut the single occupant motor vehicle traffic in HALF with buses, guess what's left? Nice, wide, four-lane, 40 foot bike PATHS all over town.
All you skinny legged INCOG bike weenies and wonkettes just need to QUIT with the petty weed-pulling, and GROW the GRASS. But, then again, why should you bother? You guys are the ones with the cushy, two-week paychecks paid by some old lady's property TAXES.
Interesting perspective TSN, never would've really considered that getting people to ride buses having a direct effect on bikeability.
I would ride the bus everyday if it was an option, I would even take a bike to the bus, I just can't afford a 2 hour commute.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
I would ride the bus everyday if it was an option, I would even take a bike to the bus, I just can't afford a 2 hour commute.
See, there ya go, Bill Boatwright et al. DO yer damn JOB. Then again, why BOTHER? You guys have NO profit motive to do so.
All you guys do is live on some old lady's property taxes, go to stupid meetings, do stupid studies, and drive your nice, spiffy LEXUS to work, by YOURSELF.
You guys can't EVEN do transit RIGHT to take your OWN stinky buses to work. Your damn parking lot is full of single occupant motor vehicles, driven to work by your own FAT bus DRIVERS.
Help me out, people. THAT has to be the MOST lamest waste of some old lady's TAXES.
Good grief, at least offer some homeless VET a RIDE, every now and then.
DE-regulate transit, DAMMIT.[:(!][:(!]
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
Interesting perspective TSN, never would've really considered that getting people to ride buses having a direct effect on bikeability.
Note to C-Dog: Try taking a few deep breaths, let loose your inner Lance Armstrong, and take your head out of those LCI classes, every now and then.
Now, imagine what we'd all drive, IF the gub'mint controlled the auto industry:
(http://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Yugo.jpg)
But, in one UGLY color, PUKE grey, and ONLY on Sundays, AFTER church. [:P][}:)]
What about us jogging nuts? Not everyone likes to cycle. I love to run on the trails around "T" Towne.[:)]
If I could run (a near-impossibility due to broken bones and dead-flat feet) I'd like to run with the local Hashers in one of their hare-and-hound events. I knew some of them in Pittsburgh and they always had a good time.
But there's a question here too. Why do some runners insist in running on the road wearing dark clothing well before dawn? I get annoyed when I encounter cyclists riding without lights. Shouldn't runners at least wear light colored clothing or carry a blinkie light?
True story - As I rode to work one morning in the dark, I spotted something moving up ahead in my lane. As I got closer, I realized it was another cyclist, riding without lights or reflectors while wearing camoflage! He said, "These car drivers are CRAZY! I think they're trying to kill me!"
I saw him just that one time and never again. Maybe they got him.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
If I could run (a near-impossibility due to broken bones and dead-flat feet) I'd like to run with the local Hashers in one of their hare-and-hound events. I knew some of them in Pittsburgh and they always had a good time.
But there's a question here too. Why do some runners insist in running on the road wearing dark clothing well before dawn? I get annoyed when I encounter cyclists riding without lights. Shouldn't runners at least wear light colored clothing or carry a blinkie light?
True story - As I rode to work one morning in the dark, I spotted something moving up ahead in my lane. As I got closer, I realized it was another cyclist, riding without lights or reflectors while wearing camoflage! He said, "These car drivers are CRAZY! I think they're trying to kill me!"
I saw him just that one time and never again. Maybe they got him.
I can never understand why people run on the streets. I do not run on streets. I stick to the jogging trails. I would not mind running to work if they had showers to wash off with when I got there, and if I could run on a jogging trail all the way to work.. Running on the streets is not safe at all.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
I can never understand why people run on the streets. I do not run on streets. I stick to the jogging trails. I would not mind running to work if they had showers to wash off with when I got there, and if I could run on a jogging trail all the way to work.. Running on the streets is not safe at all.
[/quote]
The reason someone would run in the streets is because there are NO sidewalks. The idea is to run against traffic in the middle of the outside lane.
Showers at work? You think some building manager is gonna do an expensive retro-fit to coddle you? Whydon'tcha just towel off with a wet rag? Naaaaaaaaaah. Forget it, weenie.[:P]
I run in the streets all the time. I prefer it because the asphalt is a lower-impact surface than concrete sidewalks, and there aren't expansion joints every 4 feet to trip over. It's perfectly legal to run on non-arterials, as long as you keep to the left. I just hop up on the curb if a driver is coming up and things look tight.
All that said, I avoid high-traffic areas when at all possible. There are too many drivers not paying attention.
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
It's perfectly legal to run on non-arterials, as long as you keep to the left. I just hop up on the curb if a driver is coming up and things look tight.
All that said, I avoid high-traffic areas when at all possible. There are too many drivers not paying attention.
The following City ordinances apply:
37 TRO 100
Right-of-Way shall mean the privilege of the immediate and prior use of the roadway before other traffic.
Traffic shall mean pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, vehicles, streetcars and
other conveyances, either singly or together, while using any street or roadway for
purposes of travel.
37 TRO CHAPTER 11
PEDESTRIANS - RIGHTS AND DUTIES
Section 1100. Pedestrians Subject to Traffic-Control Signals.
Section 1101. Pedestrians' Right-of-Way in Crosswalks.
Section 1102. Crossing Street.
Section 1103. When Pedestrians Shall Yield.
Section 1104. Pedestrians Walking Along Roadways.
Section 1105. Pedestrians Soliciting Rides, Employment, Business or
Contributions.
Section 1106. Blind Pedestrians.
Section 1107. Pedestrian Procedure.
Section 1108. Penalty.
SECTION 1100. PEDESTRIANS SUBJECT TO TRAFFIC-CONTROL
SIGNALS
Pedestrians shall be subject to traffic-control signals as described in Section 606 of
this title, but at all other places pedestrians shall be granted those rights and be subject to
the restrictions stated in this chapter.
Ord. No. 12405
SECTION 1101. PEDESTRIANS' RIGHT-OF-WAY IN CROSSWALKS
A. When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver
of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a
crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon that half of the roadway upon which the vehicle
is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the
roadway as to be in danger.
B. No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk
or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.
C. Whenever any vehicle is stopped at a crosswalk, the driver of any other
vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass such stopped vehicle until
the overtaking driver has ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.
SECTION 1102. CROSSING STREET
Every pedestrian shall cross the street within the crosswalk or at an intersection,
whether or not such intersection is controlled by traffic-control signals; provided, however,
that this provision shall not apply to residential neighborhoods, except where a major
street passes through such neighborhoods or traffic-control devices are provided. A
pedestrian crossing a street in a residential area shall take the shortest possible route to the
opposite side of the street and at a right angle to the side of the street.
Ord. No. 13227
SECTION 1103. WHEN PEDESTRIANS SHALL YIELD
Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point, other than within a marked
crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, shall yield the right-of-way
to all vehicles upon the roadway.
SECTION 1104. PEDESTRIANS WALKING ALONG ROADWAYS
A. Where sidewalks are provided, it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to
walk along and upon any adjacent roadway.
B. Where sidewalks are not provided, any pedestrian walking along and upon
a roadway shall, when practicable, walk only on the left side of the roadway or its
shoulder, facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.
SECTION 1105. PEDESTRIANS SOLICITING RIDES, EMPLOYMENT,
BUSINESS, OR CONTRIBUTIONS
No person shall step or stand in the roadway or median used to channel traffic for
the purpose of soliciting a ride, employment, business, or contributions of any kind from
the occupant of any vehicle; provided however, that sworn public safety officers may
solicit contributions for a charitable project officially adopted by their bargaining agents.
Ord. No. 17372
SECTION 1106. BLIND PEDESTRIANS
Blind pedestrians shall be given the right-of-way over all other pedestrians and
vehicles and shall indicate such right-of-way by holding out horizontally a white cane in
the direction they desire to travel over crosswalks on any street, avenue, alley or other
public way.
SECTION 1107. PEDESTRIAN PROCEDURE
A. Pedestrians facing an official green traffic light signal, except where the sole
green indication is a turn arrow, may proceed across the roadway within any marked or
unmarked crosswalk, unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian signal.
B. Pedestrians facing an official steady yellow traffic light signal, are thereby
advised that there is insufficient time to cross the roadway before such signal turns red
and no pedestrian shall enter the roadway on such yellow signal.
C. Pedestrians facing an official red traffic light signal shall not proceed across
the roadway.
D. Pedestrians facing an official "WALK" signal may proceed across the roadway
within any marked or unmarked crosswalk. Any pedestrian who has begun the crossing
during the "WALK" signal may complete such crossing.
E. Pedestrians facing an official steady "DON'T WALK" signal shall not enter the
roadway.
F. Pedestrians facing an official flashing "DON'T WALK" signal are thereby
advised that there is insufficient time to cross the roadway before a steady "DON'T WALK"
signal is exhibited and no pedestrian shall enter the roadway when such signal is flashing.
Ord. No. 13253
SECTION 1108. PENALTY
Unless otherwise provided for in this chapter, every person violating any provision
of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of an offense and, upon conviction, shall be
punished by a fine of not more than ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($100.00), excluding
costs, fees and assessments.