Here’s the code:

“Section 9-05-001-0015 Right of Way At Intersection: Upon approaching an intersection, any person riding or operating bicycles in a bicycle lane shall yield the right of way to all vehicles within or approaching such intersection; except, that all vehicles which must stop or yield before entering an intersection because of a stop or yield sign and all vehicles making a left-hand turn at an intersection shall not proceed into such intersection nor make such a turn without first yielding the right of way to all bicycles within or approaching such intersection, and shall proceed only when it is safe to do so.”

Translation: if you are in a car you don’t need to be concerned about any cyclists to the right of you when making a turn — it’s their job to avoid you. And if you are on your bicycle and run down by a car in this fashion, don’t expect to collect from the driver’s insurance company, because you were “per se” negligent under the law.

My favorite part about this is that bicyclists even have to yield to cars that are behind them, approaching the intersection but overtaking them.

It’s pretty much not possible for a cyclist to cross an intersection in Flagstaff without putting herself at risk, because she would need to know the intentions of the drivers that may overtake her (and run her over) on the way through the intersection.

–Erik Ryberg

And there was some astute analysis in there, and discussion of exactly how Portland got from where it was to where it is. Something that came up more than once was the role of raucous, extra-legal or semi-legal or illegal actions of the locals. There was mention of a “People’s Department of Transportation” and of course critical mass. I’ve never been a fan of critical mass here in Tucson but I do admit that civilly disobedient challenges to the status quo have played an important role in bringing about change. The Stonewall Riots, for example, and of course the sit-ins in the ’60s that inconvenienced the privileged classes in the Jim Crow South. Why shouldn’t we inconvenience motorists here in Tucson sometimes?

But I see so much progress in Tucson on this issue that I question whether antagonizing drivers is ever going to be the right way to go. Even the Tucson Police Department is finally coming around to acknowledging that bicyclists are legitimate road users who have a right to exist and survive their trip. That’s a big step forward from just four years ago, when cyclists were treated with open disdain and contempt by the TPD traffic division and its supervisor, Sergeant Tim Beam. (Beam used to be supervisor of the traffic investigations unit, but now heads up the photo-radar department and thankfully does not have the involvement with cyclists he once had. His replacement is, I think, a big reason we have seen such a change in how TPD handles motor-vehicle/bicycle collisions and the lighter hand taken with traffic tickets given to cyclists.)

That said, we obviously have a long way left to go. Tucson is plagued by sprawl and wide roads that encourage people to drive fast and go long distances for what they need. And there’s a freeway that needlessly cuts our city in half. It’s going to take some bold vision and planning to reverse course, and that’s where I see us as having a different challenge than Portland had. We need to retrofit whole communities and lifestyles to get people on their bikes. We need to knock it off with the cookie-cutter developments in the hinterlands and we need to start giving people alternatives to their mode of transportation and to where they need to go in the first place. No number of bike lanes will help the person who needs to go three miles in the hot sun to a decent grocery store. That person needs better bus service and a closer grocery store. And they might also appreciate living arrangements that offer an option to live closer to work. Which means more building up and less building out.

How can we make those bigger design changes happen? Is there a role for rabble rousing to solve our problems? Or is it hopeless until gas finally hits $6 or $8 or $15 a gallon?

–Erik Ryberg

Why do we tolerate this in our city? Our freeway interchanges have far better landscaping — and shade — than this.

–EBR

–EBR

A couple of years ago I had a case in Sells that required me to travel there with maddening frequency.

During my many visits, I got to watch ADOT complete the drainage project portrayed in the photo above. It runs alongside Highway 86, which bisects town in a long, hot swath. I remember thinking how it might be fun to ride a bmx bike into that drainage ditch, if only I owned or knew how to ride a bmx bike.

But crossing that drainage structure on anything but a bmx bike seemed a little daunting. And it’s not like there are many available spots to do so — it’s a long walk between road crossings.

So what I have been puzzling over for some time now is, what were the ADOT planners thinking when they designed this? Did it not occur to anyone that people have to cross this highway to get from the north side of Sells, where many people live, to the south side, where many of the tribe’s services and the stores are? (Satellite image of Sells here.)

Did the ADOT planners ever go to Sells? Did they build a model of this drainage system and look at it? Because it seems like if they had done so, it would have been really obvious that some pedestrian facilities should maybe be included.

I don’t know how much was spent on this thing and I don’t know how bad the problem was that it was designed to solve (I am hoping it was designed to solve an actual problem). But I do know that it shouldn’t take a wild-eyed, university-educated, free-thinking, bike-riding vegetarian pedestrian activist to notice that people in Sells might like to be able to walk across the high-speed highway that goes right through the middle of their town.

It makes you wonder if the Fourth Avenue Underpass debacle, whose awful design has been the subject of mitigation studies and the site of one fatality, was so unusual.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the traffic engineers could find a way to make sure these things stop happening?

–Erik Ryberg

What should it take to lose your driver’s license? From the Orange County Weekly:

Danae Marie Miller, 22, of Newport Beach, is accused of killing bicyclist Amine Britel on San Joaquin Hills Road with her car. Miller was allegedly drunk; since 2005, when she was 17, she has racked up 15 to 17 traffic tickets for various infractions. Her driver’s license was not suspended because she clears her record at traffic school.

Mr. Britel’s memorial site is here. Although dated, more information about his considerable athletic achievements can be found here.

–Erik Ryberg

Pedestrian struck in crosswalk dies

A 79-year-old man who was struck by a vehicle on the west side last week died Sunday.

The vehicle hit Jose Jesus Garcia in a marked crosswalk near the intersection of West St. Mary’s Road and North Cherokee Avenue around 4 p.m. Wednesday, said Sgt. Diana Lopez, a spokeswoman for the Tucson Police Department.

The driver, whose name hasn’t been released, is facing a citation.

Marisa Gerber

I was talking to my friend Collin the other day. He has invented some clever computer robots that compile crash data in Tucson and he runs various analyses on the data. He has enough information now to learn some interesting things about when most crashes occur and (possibly) why. For example, his database showed that cyclists are less likely to be hit on Mondays. He found that to be puzzling until he realized that some Mondays are holidays, which probably accounts for the dip.

Anyway, during the conversation he said, “After looking at this crash data all I can say is I am glad I’m not a pedestrian. Those guys have it way worse than us cyclists do.”

My condolences to Mr. Garcia’s family. I hope one day this city is safer for all of us who, like Mr. Garcia, choose alternative means to get to the places we want to go.

–Erik Ryberg

(Apologies for the advertising in the above video)

Tucson has embarked on what it calls a “Sustainable Land Use Code Integration Project,” whose objective is “…to prepare a sustainability analysis of the Land Use Code, identify a series of recommended amendments to the [code], and ultimately to draft amendments that implement the City of Tucson’s sustainable goals and policies.”

A well-known threat to Tucson's sustainability is its over-abundant bike parking, which experts like Jason Wong,the developer interviewed in the above story, tell us is currently limiting our business's ability to prosper and thrive. So the City Council will be voting on a proposal to improve our sustainability by reducing the onerous bike parking requirements that are currently inhibiting sustainable development in the city.

You can attend the meeting and voice your support for more sustainability and fewer bikes at 5:30 PM on March 8 at the Mayor and Council Meeting, 255 W. Alameda Street.

Lots more information about this issue can be found here (Living Streets Alliance Website) and here (TucsonVelo.com story).

In case you are curious about what sustainable development looks like in the eyes of Mr. Wong, here's a satellite view of one of the properties he developed:

According to the internet (ahem), Mr. Wong is Director of Development for Red Point Development, Inc.. Here's what their Website says: "Red Point envisions, and succeeds, in creating sustainable and timeless communities and projects that are in balance socially, economically and environmentally. Our mission is to combine all of the resources, experience and knowledge available to us, and through our associates, to develop high-quality projects that create value for our partners as well as the surrounding community."

It's pretty to think so, isn't it?

--Erik Ryberg

Now I am sure my readers all agree how wonderful it will be to get another parking garage downtown.

I’ve been looking around on the web to try to figure out where the exit and entrance points of this thing will be, but can’t quite make it out. I don’t have a lot of confidence that the traffic engineering here will be any better than it was when they designed the new Fourth Avenue tunnel.

But of course we all know that the key to invigorating downtown is more parking garages.

–Erik Ryberg

–EBR