Re: Tulsa's Bicycle Friendly City Application...

(Image from Hygge House)

From Patrick Fox, Multimodal Transportation Planner at INCOG:

Good Morning Bicycl(ist) Friendly Committee,

I spoke with Bill Nesper, coordinator for the Bike Friendly Program.  Unfortunately, Tulsa was not selected in this round to receive a Bicycle Friendly Community Award.  While this is obviously disappointing, it is uncommon for first time applicants to be selected.

They will be providing us with formal feedback within 6 weeks on why we were not selected, but he did give me some quick notes, which I'd like to pass along to you all now.  Let me say this first: There were many positives with our application, mainly that we have "cornered the market in Oklahoma" on trying to be a progressive, bike friendly community.  He said there is no other city even close in the State, or the region, for that matter.  So we have to be proud of that.  Additionally, he was
quick to point out that the league recognizes all of the progress we've made over the years, with our trails and programs, however the criteria for this program is fairly rigid, and we were deficient in a few areas.

That being said, here, briefly, is why we were not selected:

1) Lack of On-Street Accommodations for Cyclists.  Translation: Shortage of properly designed, striped and marked Bike Lanes or Wide Shoulders.

Our policy here in Tulsa has revolved around expanding our Multi-Use trails, which is good, but those trails have to be complemented by a good, safe on-street system.  We do have designated "Bike Routes", about 35 miles of them, BUT this is much, much different than an actual physical "accommodation".  An "accommodation" is a physically separated extra place on the street for cyclists, delineated by a stripe, marking, or widened shoulder.  A "Bike Route" is simply a normal street with signage that identifies it as a bike route.  In the eyes of the Bike Friendly Committee, and of the national league, "accommodations" are preferred.

2) Lack of an adopted "Complete Streets" Policy.  This is a new name for a policy directive that many cities are adopting, including places like Louisville, Seattle and Chicago. The short of this is: "Complete Streets" is an adopted, guiding principle to design, operate and maintain streets to promote safe and convenient access and travel for all users; pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and disabled users, as well as cars and trucks.  This can be accomplished by -

A.  Designing, operating and maintaining the transportation network to improve travel conditions for bicyclists, pedestrians, transit and freight, in a manner consistent with and supportive of the surrounding community;

B.  Providing where practical an array of facilities and amenities that are  recognized as contributing to "Complete Streets", including: street and sidewalk lighting; pedestrian (sidewalks/crossings) and bicycle safety improvements; access
improvements for freight; access improvements in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act; public transit facilities accommodation, including but not limited to pedestrian access improvement to transit stops and stations; street trees and landscaping; and street amenities; and

C. Implementing policies and procedures with the construction, reconstruction or other changes of transportation facilities on arterial streets to support the creation of "Complete Streets" including capital improvements and major maintenance,  recognizing that all streets are different and in each case user needs must be balanced.

3) Lack of parking ordinance or parking facilities for bikes.  Most Bike Friendly Communities have a Bike Parking Ordinance.  We have parking requirements for cars, but no ordinance that requires bike parking in our development process.  It's pretty simple.  All public facilities should have accommodations for bikes, and a bike parking requirement can be included as part of all new commercial or mixed use development.

4) Expand Motorist and Cycling Education. This is really a statewide issue.  If we could push for "sharing the road" and questions about cycling laws to be included as part of the driver licensing process, this would go a long way.  Additionally, if our police officers better understood the laws that protect cyclists, and there was a designated bike liaison from the TPD, this would be good.  I have spoken with
several officers that told me that very little if anything was taught to them about cycling during regular training or the academy.


5) There was some information that I was just unable to provide that might have been helpful, such as what percentage of our streets and bridges have widened shoulders that would potentially accommodate cyclists.  Basically, there are about 8,800 miles of arterial roads in our community, and I couldn't get an accurate number of miles of those that have wider shoulders versus those that didn't.  This is a bit of a daunting task, but I will work to figure this out.


I am looking forward to working with you all to fill the gaps listed above, and to continue to promote cycling in our community.  As we get more formal feedback, I will distribute it to you all.

Regards,

Patrick M. Fox
Multimodal Transportation Planner,
INCOG
201 West 5th Street, Suite 600
Tulsa, OK 74103-4236 

Is Tulsa Bicycle Friendly?

Brian Potter asked if Tulsa is a bicycling-friendly city. I almost cringe at the term because LAB often hands out their bicycle-friendly awards based on the facilities available in a particular city. While some amenities are necessary and desirable, it seems that LAB overlooks their own bicycling education program. Being bicycle-friendly involves more than bike paths, parking, or multi-mode transportation possibilities. They're a good start, but not the ultimate goal.

Motorists/cyclist

But our focus is on Tulsa, so let's discuss some aspects of cycling here. The main concern of nearly any road going cyclist is his interaction with area motorists. In general, I'd say that the overall relationship here is good. Most Tulsa motorists are accommodating toward road cyclists. They drive competently and safely, sharing the road with us. There are some exceptions, of course, but in my experience, they're thankfully rare. I should probably qualify that statement by saying that I commute to work regularly, and I see the same motorists day after day. They come to expect a bicycle rider somewhere on the commute. But even when I'm outside my usual hours or usual route, I seldom encounter hostile, irate motorists. I'd like to think that's because I take the lane when necessary, causing motorists to pass only when it's safe, but maybe being a big 220 pound guy has something to do with it too.

Cyclist/cyclist

Most of the cyclists I've met on the road have been courteous and safety-minded. Some few, self-absorbed types have been so intent on their training that they couldn't respond to a simple, friendly wave, but I suspect they're arrogant dicks off the bike too. Occasionally, I've come across sidewalk riders who dart across traffic unpredictably. They're usually kids. I've seen numerous adults riding sidewalks in both Tulsa and Owasso. Once or twice I've met some wrong-way riders too, but again, they're thankfully rare.

Pedestrian/cyclist

I haven't heard complaints involving pedestrian/cyclist incidents that are more routine in cities like New York or Chicago. A few years ago, the River Parks Authority held a meeting about such conflicts at the northern end of the river trail. As I recall, the solution involved painting lines on the trail, dividing it into lanes, and providing more signage. Has anyone heard of other bicycle/pedestrian conflicts?

Law enforcement/cyclists

Most area law enforcement agencies have been positive and proactive regarding cyclist's complaints with one significant exception. I've had contacts with several agencies regarding enforcement or motorist/cyclist conflicts with very good results. Some officers are still woefully ignorant of both safe bicycle practice and bicycle law, but when an opportunity arises to educate his superiors, I won't hesitate to do so. I've been pleasantly surprised at their professionalism. That 'one significant exception' mentioned above involved a department that could not admit their deputy was enforcing his personal bias rather than the law.

Planning/public works/cyclists

The biggest failure I see in this area is in planning. Cyclists are the red-headed stepchildren of area transportation planners and public works departments. We should be getting routine accommodation when it comes to planning and designing streets and intersections, yet that is not the case. Frankly, I don't understand the willful exclusion of cyclists from area transportation planning. It seems our governments would rather design and build expensive infrastructure without any input from those of us who would expect to use it. I'm not talking about adding more linear parks, bike trails, or paths. I'd like to see traffic signals that reliably detect cyclists and building codes that require adequate bicycle parking. I'd like to see streets designed with cycling included as a normal part of the traffic flow. Those streets would be free of easily identified hazards to two-wheeled travel, like rough railroad crossings, wheel-trapping drainage grates, or angled motor vehicle parking.

In conclusion

As I passed the Shell station this morning, gasoline was at $3.10 per gallon. Every time the price spikes like this, more people turn to bicycles for cheap, simple transportation. Most of them begin as recreational cyclists. In fact, as I cruised garage sales on the Tour de Owasso last weekend, every garage I stopped at had a couple of bikes stored in a corner. Now, these folks might not consider riding to work every day, but they'll certainly think about using that dusty old bike to get milk-and-bread-and-eggs from the grocery store. We need to encourage them to try it.