August 2017 TPCBAC AGENDA and Packet Guidewebcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government... · B. Review of applicable Pima County guidelines for participants of BCCs

August2017TPCBACAGENDAandPacketGuide

MainTPCBACMeetingAgenda p.2

June2017DRAFTTPCBACMainMeetingMinutes p.5

(pleasereadpriortotheAugustmeeting)

TPCBACRollingAttendanceChart p.10

Eventflyers:

LivingStreetsAllianceandSafeRoutestoSchoolTucsonFreeMobileBikeRepair

p.11

Prop101(CityofTucson)StreetsOpenHouse p.12

PimaCountyReporttoT-PCBAC p.13

PlacesforBikeConferenceMaterials:

WantPeopletoBike?SkiptheSweetTalkandBuild p.15

Rich?Poor?TwoChartsShowBothKnowGoodBikingWhenTheySeeIt

p.18

FortheLivableStreetsMovementtoRemainRelevant,itMustBecomeMore

Inclusive p.21

LinktoPlacesforBikesConferencedebriefslidesatTucson’sBigJumpLeadership

Meeting p.25

TPCBACBylaws(adopted12/11/02andamended3/12/08) p.26

TPCBACSubcommitteeBylaws p.31

PimaCountyAdministrativeProcedures(re:JointBoard,CommitteeandCommission

Appointments(County/City)) p.32

LinkstoArizonaStateOpenmeetingandConflictofInterestLaws p.36

[DRAFT]CityofTucsonBoard,CommitteeandCommissionAnnualReview

p.37

ArizonaDailyStararticleonPimaCountyTransportationAdvisoryCommittee

p.38

TransitandLeft-handTurns,fromWard6WeeklyNewsletter,7/17/17

p.42

ArticlesofInterest:

PortlandBike-ShareLaunchesProgramforPeopleWithDisabilities

p.45

Whyridingabiketoschoolisoftenillegal p.47

Firststatewidebicycletaxinnationleavesbike-crazyOregonridersdeflated

p.50

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the Tucson-Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee and to the general public that the Tucson-Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee will hold the following meeting which will be open to the public:

Meeting Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 6:00 PM

Meeting Location: Ward 6 Office, 3202 E. 1st St. Tucson, AZ, 85716 (large community room only)

Please arrive by 5:50 PM. If a quorum of 12 members is not reached by 6:10 PM all staff are required to leave and the meeting will be canceled.

AGENDA Agenda Item Projected Duration

1. Call to Order; introductions and approval of previous meeting’s minutes. 5 min

2. Call to Public 10 min

This is the time when any member of the public may address the BAC. Due to time constraints, the total time allocated for this is 10 minutes. Individuals are allowed three minutes each. If additional time is needed to address the BAC, it may be considered as an agenda item for a future meeting.

3. Announcements and updates from related entities 10 min

As a way to check in after the summer break and energize members for the meeting, please provide a brief update on the latest accomplishments and events from your group.

GABA (Wayne Cullop)

CASAz (Wayne Cullop) Living Streets Alliance (Kylie Walzak) PBAA (Elaine Mariolle)

4. Staff Reports 15 min

In addition to providing optional written reports, please provide members with a 2-3 minute update on the latest accomplishments, project news, and events.

City of Tucson (Andrew Bemis) Pima County (Matt Zoll) Oro Valley (Nancy Ellis) Marana (Brian Varney) Sahuarita (Adelina Martin) Pima Association of Governments (Sam Sanford) University of Arizona (Jessica Hersh-Ballering)

5. Law Enforcement Staff Reports from TPD and PCSD 10 min

6. People for Bikes’ Places for Bikes Conference Update 10 min

7. TPCBAC member updates, review of bylaws, process and procedures 30 mins

A. Review of City of Tucson BCC (Boards, Committees, and Commissions) Handbook

B. Review of applicable Pima County guidelines for participants of BCCs

C. Review of NEW BCC Annual Review process, timeline, and outcomes

8. Pima County’s Road Repair Program 20 mins

9. Protected Left-Hand Turn Signals 10 mins

10. Adjournment

Next Meeting is Wednesday, September 13th, 2017, 6:00pm at the Ward 6 office.

If you require an accommodation or materials in accessible format or require a foreign language interpreter or materials in a language other than English for this event, please notify the Tucson Department of Transportation Office at 791-4391 at least five business days in advance.

The Tucson-Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee conducted a public meeting on June 14, 2017 at the City of Tucson Ward 6 Office, 3202

E. 1st St. Tucson, AZ

DRAFT Meeting Minutes, NOT APPROVED prepared by Collin Forbes

1. Call to Order; introductions and approval of previous meeting’s minutes.

Lane Santa Cruz called the meeting to order at 6pm. BAC Agreements to facilitate the meeting:

● One Diva, One Mic ● Move Up, Move Up ● No one knows everything, together we know a lot ● Be aware of time ● Take care of yourself ● Be curious

Also, an introduction exercise where everybody was asked to share a moment of embarrassment on their bikes. Motion: by Ray Copenhaver to approve the minutes as amended with clarifications of quotes from various speakers. Seconded by David Bachman Williams. Passed with unanimous voice vote.

2. Call to Public

Stephen Cuslat was concerned about the new green pavement markings on Kolb Road. Cars go through now and aren’t always respectful of cyclists. You have to be really careful to avoid

turning cars and there’s some serious potential for injuries. In particular, visiting cyclists wouldn’t be aware of traffic patterns.

3. Law Enforcement Staff Reports from TPD and PCSD

Sgt Mike Allen reported for Tucson Police Department:

In May there were no fatal collisions and no “serious injury” bicycle crashes. In the 2017 grant from the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GoHS), they have about $2500 left to spend for the rest of federal fiscal year, ending in October. They are going to enforce the 20mph speed limit on Bicycle Boulevards. The speed limit signs have been up long enough for people to be used to them. The money should give about 40 hours of enforcement time. Ryan Fagan did a ride along with Sgt Allen in April and offered his brief impressions. The police are keenly aware of the built environment and how it influences people’s behavior. They are concerned that people are cited repeatedly for the same offences and citations aren’t helping. During his ride-along, two cyclists were pulled over. One was riding an electric bike and turned left on a red light from the right lane. He might have had a turning arrow, but he was in the wrong lane for the turn.

4. Presentation Summarizing Recent Research on Protected Bike Lanes

Joey Iuliano, had research from the US Portland Researchers Identified Four types of Transportation Cyclists

● Strong & Fearless < 1% ● Enthused & Confident ● Interested but Concerned ● No Way, No How

The “Strong & Fearless” types are not so concerned about the type of infrastructure. They would prefer infrastructure, but will ride on major streets anyway. Bicycle Activists are making Impromptu Bike Lanes. There were pictures before and after from Seattle WA and Witchita KS. In Seattle, people went out at night and painted a lane. In Witchita, the bike lane had toilet plungers at the intersections.

2014 Study in Austin, Portland, Milwaukee, San Francisco & Washington DC. A mix of video, rider surveys, resident surveys and ridership counts.

● There was measured increase in observed ridership on all facilities within one year of installation of the protected bike lanes. Increases greater than overall increases of bike ridership.

● Design Matters substantially. ○ Cyclists agreed they felt safe at protected intersections designs. Some are better

than others. ○ Type of barriers matter a lot. Paint was poor on the surveys. Everyone preferred

plastic bollards or planters for a physical separation. ○ 37% Drivers surveyed thought that safety of driving had increased. 30% thought

no change. 26% thought safety had decreased. 7% had no opinion. ○ No collisions in 144 hours of video

● Survey Results ○ 75% of residents supported building more protected bike lanes ○ 50% of the residents thought the street works better for all people ○ 43% of residents thought it increased the desirability of neighborhoods ○ 59% of drivers said no change in travel time ○ 30-55% of residents though the parking was decreased even in cases where a

minimal amount of parking was removed. US Researchers to follow: John Pucher and Jennifer Dill. In Europe: Marques and Hernandez-Herrador. Takeway: Cycle tracks increase ridership, but a good network is important too. Ryan Fagan had information from Europe: Seville Spain had a study which shed light on the controversy about effect of cycle tracks and bikeways on cycling safety. They differentiated between bikeways and network connectivity. There’s a causal relationship between cycling safety and network Between 2006 and 2010, they built a whole network in their city. They assumed ridership from 2005 and earlier was about the same as it was in 2006, and tracked ridership during construction and from 2011 to 2013. Population was stable. From 2007-2013 and beyond, risks of cycling were cut in half. In 2006, there were 3 million trips and in 2013, there were 16.3 million trips. Collisions per million dropped while the

ridership increased. Traffic count dropped by 16% from 2007-2013 but authors didn’t think this was significant. Study Highlights…

● Risk dropped after the creation of a network of segregated bikeways ● Connecting the bikeways increase the positive effect of bikeways on cycling safety ● “Safety In Numbers” theory confirmed. Qualitatively and quantitatively ● Causality between risk, infrastructure and number of cyclists seems bidirectional.

5. Concurrent Subcommittee Meetings

Subcommittee minutes are separate.

6. Letters from Subcommittees to be Approved and Sent

Urban Core Subcommittee approved two letters. ● Asking for Road Safety Assessments on 22nd Street/Star Pass Blvd. This is going to be

addressed to city council members in addition to the TDOT department head. ● Letter on Proposition 101 priorities. With the clarification of the Grant Road section is

between Swan and Wilmot. It’s the only section of Grant Road which is going to be repaved under Prop 101.

Motion to approve the two letters came from the committee. Passed with unanimous voice vote. Facilities Subcommittee had one letter.

● Separated buffer lane on Kolb between Sabino Canyon and Sunrise. The letter is to be sent to Priscilla Cornelio. There’s an opportunity to have more than a single stripe bike lane. They changed the paragraph making suggestions for striping. For the rest of the project, proposed a 2-foot buffer using 8-inch wide white stripes with diagonal hash marks between them.

Motion to approve the letter came from the committee. Passed with unanimous voice vote.

7. Summer Meeting Schedule Discussion

Are people going to be gone? Lots of people saying “I’ll be gone” Motion: by Josefina Ahumada to skip our July meeting. Seconded by Ray. Passed with unanimous voice vote.

We could reserve this space and time for subcommittee meetings in July.

8. Questions for Staff (No reports at this meeting)

No questions for Staff 9. Questions for Related Entities (No reports at this meeting)

No questions 10. Announcements

Elaine Mariolle: El Tour Kickoff, Loop The Loop will be Saturday September 16.

BICAS is doing the Hottest Day of the Year ride on June 24. Ride around town and a tour of the new BICAS building. Ending at Mansfield Park.

11. Adjournment — 8:02 pm

Attendance:

Josefina Ahumada, South Tucson David Bachman-Williams, Pima County Brian Beck, Pima County Ray Copenhaver, Town of Marana Paul Durham, Pima County Ryan Fagan, Ward 6 Collin Forbes, Pima County Jessica Hersh-Ballering, UA Joey Iuliano, Ward 4 Aaron Lien, Mayor’s Rep Elaine Mariolle, Pima County Joe Pickens, Oro Valley Eric Post, Pima County Lane Santa Cruz, Ward 1 Ken Shelor, Pima County Robin Steinberg, Pima County Bob Webster, Sahuarita

Audience:

Mike Allen, TPD Andy Bemis, TDOT Ann Chanecka, TDOT Stephen Cuslat, Citizen/Cyclist Mary Alice Do, Ward 6 Nancy Ellis, Oro Valley Mark Molina, TPD Chris Ortiz y Pinto, Ward 6 Sam Sanford, PAG Meagan Sudhoff Gabe Thum, PAG Matt Zoll, PCDOT

TPCBAC Rolling Attendance Chart

Name Rep Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec*** Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017

Josefina Ahumada South Tucson ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

David Bachman-Williams Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Brian Beck Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Raymond Copenhaver Marana ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Wayne Cullop Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Raphael Duarte Pima County ✔

Paul Durham Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Ryan Fagan Ward 6 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Collin Forbes Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Bruce Hermes Ward 2 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Jessica Hersh-Ballering UA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Joey Iuliano Ward 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Aaron Lien Mayor's Rep ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Elaine Mariolle Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Anne Padias Ward 5 ✔ ✔

Joseph Pickens Oro Valley ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Eric Post Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Darlane Santa Cruz Ward 1 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Ken Shelor Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Robin Steinberg Pima County ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Kylie Walzak Ward 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Ed Yasenchack DMAFB ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

TPD Representative TPD ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

PCSD Representative PCSD ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

TDOT Representative TDOT ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

PCDOT Representative PCDOT ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

REQUIRED ATTENDANCE. In accordance with Section 10A-134(e) of the Tucson Code, a member will be automatically and immediately removed from the Committee if that member misses four (4) consecutive meetings or fails to attend at least forty (40) percent of the meetings in a calendar year.

*** We Did Not Make Quorum in December 2016.

Free Mobile Bike Repair!

Free

Youth

Helmets

Provided by

SATURDAY

AUGUST 19TH

10AM-12PM

Tucson Delivers| [email protected] | 520-622-9000

Please join us for a…

The City of Tucson Department of Transportation (TDOT) invites the public to an open house to kick off Tucson Delivers – Better Streets.

x Meet the team; ask questions and provide written comments x Show us on large maps where streets need improvements x Learn how streets are designated for repair x Hear an update on the Proposition 409 Road Recovery Bond Program

In May, Tucson voters approved a five-year, half-cent sales tax increase (Proposition 101) to fund public safety capital needs and street repairs. Of the $250 million in additional revenue expected to be collected, approximately $100 million will be used for street repair. Approximately $60 million will be used for major roads, and approximately $40 million will be used to repair local streets. Major roads to be repaired were part of Proposition 101 and approved by voters. The City's Bond Oversight Commission (BOC) will oversee the street repair plan and designate local streets for repair, using a comprehensive engineering analysis to evaluate local street conditions, along with public input. The best way for Tucson residents to communicate their concerns to the BOC is to fill out comment cards at the open house. For accommodations, materials in accessible formats, foreign language interpreters, and/or materials in a language other than English, please contact Adriana at (520) 622-9000 by August 17, 2017. Para acomodaciones especiales, materiales en formatos accesibles, interpretación en idiomas foráneos, y/o materiales en idiomas que no sean inglés, favor de contactar a Adriana al (520) 622-9000 para el 17 de agosto de 2017.

STREETS OPEN HOUSE TUCSON DELIVERS – BETTER STREETS (PROPOSITION 101)

Thursday, August 24, 2017 – 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Brief Presentation at 6:15 p.m.

Sabbar Shrine Center, 450 S. Tucson Blvd.

mailto:[email protected]

Pima County Report to T-PCBAC

August 2017

Matt Zoll, PCDOT

• Progress continues on the Pantano River Park project from Glenn to Tanque Verde and

the project is on track for completion in October 2017. As many of you have seen, we’ve

also constructed the first 1,000 feet east of Craycroft on the south bank of the Pantano.

We’re continuing to meet and work with property owners east of there with the goal of

implementing the Pantano River Park all the way to Glenn by end of year.

• The Sunset Road extension project including a new roadway and bridge over the Santa

Cruz connecting I-10 and Silverbell has been completed. The project also includes a new

Loop segment of pathway along the south side of the road between I-10 and Silverbell

and also a pelican (two-stage) bike-ped crossing of Sunset. Separately a new pathway

extension along the Santa Cruz was completed connecting Diamond Street to Sunset.

• Construction of the Camino de la Tierra bike/ped bridge on the south bank of the Rillito

River is on schedule for completion by September. The bridge will allow pedestrians and

cyclists to cross east-west over Camino de la Tierra and not have to worry about the at-

grade intersection or crossing the roadway through the wash. The original application

for funding can be found here:

http://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Transportation/

Bike%20Maps/Rillito%20-

%20CDLT%20Draft%20TE%20Round%2018%20Application%208-10.pdf. We also were

able to secure Federal Transportation Alternatives funding, RTA, and other sources.

• Currently constructing a traffic calming project on Dodge Boulevard to slow drivers at

the bike/ped crossing north and south of the Rillito. The improvement includes a raised

ped/bike crossing (speed table) and on-pavement vertical panel signs instructing drivers

to yeild. Speeds were found to be 38 mph for the 85th

percentile speed so after the

improvement project we should see those speeds reduced to around 20 mph at the

speed tables.

• Regional partners including South Tucson, Tucson, Pima County and the RTA continue

work on the design and construction of the El Paso & Southwestern Greenway pathway

project. The project includes a 6-mile paved shared use path (and separate dirt path

where feasible) that runs from just east of I-10 at St. Marys to The Loop at the Kino

Environmental Restoration Project southeast of 36th

Street and Campbell Ave. You can

find out more about the project at

https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/bicycle/masterplandocument_final_may2012.pdf.

http://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/Transportation/Bike%20Maps/Rillito%20-%20CDLT%20Draft%20TE%20Round%2018%20Application%208-10.pdf



https://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/bicycle/masterplandocument_final_may2012.pdf

• Loop outreach and bike safety classes provided by the Pima County Bike Ambassadors

continues through the summer with classes and outreach locations listed at

www.bikeped.pima.gov.

• Printed new Loop map in July, have distributed approximately 3,600 of these maps in

the past month. Updating the regional bike map, which should go to print by next week.

• Construction completed on Old Vail Middle School SRTS project and Summit Elementary

School SRTS project. Construction also completed on Colossal Cave Road improvement

project, which includes bike lanes and a pathway on one side connecting area

neighborhoods to the local elementary school.

• Design continues on Kolb Road project, Sunrise to Sabino Canyon Road. Includes two

travel lanes, center turn lane, sidewalks, and bike lanes

• Bike-pedestrian crossings study ongoing, reviewing intersection improvement

alternatives. Intent is to finish the study in the fall and begin to implement some near-

term, lower-cost projects and seek funding for higher-cost projects.

• School safety trainings continue at 41 elementary and middle schools and various bike

clubs and bike camps. There are currently 20 schools with the Team Bike program,

wherein Pima County provides bicycles, repair equipment, supplies, safety manuals,

helmets, and bike safety training.

http://www.bikeped.pima.gov/

WANT PEOPLE TO BIKE? SKIPTHE SWEET TALK AND BUILDJuly 20, 2017

Michael Andersen, PlacesForBikes staff writer

Tucson, Ariz.

People don't start biking because they like bicycles. They start to like bicyclesbecause they bike.

That's roughly the conclusion of a new paper (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856416307418?via%3Dihub) by researchers in theNetherlands and California, published this month in Transportation Research.And it should be a lesson for anyone looking to improve cities by increasingbike use.

Don't waste time trying to convince people to feel warmly about bicycling. If youmake biking convenient and pleasant, the warmth will follow.

Behavior change campaigns are moreeffective than attitude change campaigns

Want people to bike? Skip the sweet talk and build | PeopleForBikes http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/want-people-to-biking-s...

1 of 4 8/7/17, 12:50 PM

Biking in Denmark. Photo: Jonathan Maus. Used with permission.

There are two basic kinds of advertising campaigns: "attitude change" and"behavior change."

"Just Do It" is an attitude change campaign, intended to associate Nikeproducts with grit and determination. "Fourth Meal" was a behavior changecampaign, intended to convince you that going to Taco Bell at 10:30 p.m. is agood and normal idea.

According to researchers Maarten Kroesen, Susan Handy and Caspar Chorus,much bicycling and mass transit promotion focuses on shifting people'sattitudes about transportation — in part because we know people who havepositive attitudes about bikes, buses and trains are more likely to use them.

But the researchers wondered whether attitudes actually shape actions — orvice versa.

So they polled 1,376 Dutch people twice, one year apart, about theirtransportation attitudes and actions. The results were overwhelming.

"The effect of cycling behavior in year one on cycling attitudes in year two is 94percent larger than the effect of cycling attitudes in year one on cyclingbehavior in year two," said PeopleForBikes research director Jennifer Boldry,who saw Chorus present his research at the Scientists for Cycling Colloquiumlast month in Arnhem-Nijmegen, Netherlands. "In other words, the behavior-attitude effect is almost twice as large than the attitude-behavior effect."

For Boldry, it's an argument for bike boosters to refocus on improvingconditions for biking — both social and infrastructural.

In other words, skip the videos and brochures and focus on events and roaddesigns that actually get people on bikes.

"Behavior changes attitudes to a much greater degree than attitudes changebehavior," she said. "That is, if we get people to ride, attitude change willfollow."

SHARE


2 of 4 8/7/17, 12:50 PM

Tucson bike shop entrepreneur: "Itdefinitely starts with A to B"

Noe Mencias, owner of Cicli Noe in South Tucson. Photo: Kikie Wilkins(https://www.kikiewilkins.com/).

Halfway around the world from Arnhem-Nijmegen, Noe Mencias goes to workevery day on the front lines of bicycle transportation. His one-man bike shop(http://ciclinoeusa.com/) in South Tucson, Ariz., serves many of the area's daylaborers.

Though Tucson's bike network is far from Dutch in quality, its bike lanes andpaths are better than most U.S. cities'. That's made bike transportation viable,though not always inherently attractive, for thousands of people trying to makea living in the city without much money.

But time and again, Mencias said, his customers who start biking for practicalreasons realize that bicycles are good for other things, too.

"It definitely starts off with A to B," he said. "And then they start to takeadvantage of it. And then they start getting kids involved."

Mencias said he sees the transition over the course of multiple visits to hisshop. A customer will describe going to work one day and then having an ideaon the way home.

"I usually hear things like, "On the ride back, [I decided] I'm gonna take thelong way," he said. "I hear that pretty frequently."

PlacesForBikes (http://peopleforbikes.org/placesforbikes) helps U.S.communities build better biking, faster. You can follow us on LinkedIn(https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/18032465/), Twitter (http://twitter.com/PlacesForBikes) or Facebook (http://facebook.com/PlacesForBikes) or sign upfor our weekly news digest (http://www.peopleforbikes.org/pages/placesforbikes-weekly-news-digest) about building all-ages bikingnetworks. Story tip? Write [email protected].

SHARE


3 of 4 8/7/17, 12:50 PM

RICH? POOR? TWO CHARTSSHOW BOTH KNOW GOODBIKING WHEN THEY SEE ITJanuary 23, 2014

Michael Andersen, Green Lane Project staff writer

When city, business and community leaders talk about the ways that betterbiking is good for the economy (http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/three-infographics-that-show-how-urban-economies-are-shifting-bikeward),it's sometimes easy for people to assume that this is a secret code for "betterbiking is good for rich people."

But most participants in an economy, after all, aren't rich. A lot of us are poor.And new Census data confirms that good biking is especially good for poorpeople.

Check out these two charts, based on 2006-2010 Census data released inOctober (http://data5.ctpp.transportation.org/ctpp/) that gives us a moredetailed demographic picture than we've ever had before about the peoplewho use bikes to get to work.

The poorer you are, the more likely you areto use a bicycle for transportation.

Rich? Poor? Two charts show both know good biking when they se... http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/rich-poor-both-know-go...

1 of 4 8/7/17, 12:51 PM

Source: U.S. Census Transportation Planning Products.

If rich people used bikes to get to work exactly as much as poor people do, thischart would be cut into perfect quarters. And this pie is actually quite evenlysliced — maybe moreso than any other way people get to work.

But as you can see, bikes are disproportionately important tools for the lowest-income workers. The reasons are simple, and something any bike commuterwould recognize: biking to work is cheap and, in a growing number of cities,convenient.

In states where rich people bike, poorpeople bike, too.

SHARE


2 of 4 8/7/17, 12:51 PM

Source: U.S. Census Transportation Planning Products.

Thanks to its many bike-friendly cities, Oregon is an outlier, but the trend isclear: things that make bike commutes appeal to rich and middle-classworkers also seem to make them appeal to poor workers.

The horizontal axis above shows the rate of bike commuting among workerswho make more than $35,000 a year. The vertical axis shows the rate amongworkers who make less than $20,000.

The choices these two groups face are often different. Where a middle-classoffice worker might be choosing a bike commute instead of becoming a two-car household, a poor grocery worker might be choosing a bike commuteinstead of relying on bumming rides, walking — or not even applying for jobsthat aren't close to bus lines.

But as this chart shows, everyone in the economy faces choices. The work ofcities is to help more people make the choices they and the people in theircommunities like. And when it comes to biking, there's not a lot ofdisagreement among poor, rich or middle class about what people like.

SHARE


3 of 4 8/7/17, 12:51 PM

USA NYC LA CHI SF DEN CAL SE OH STL TEX DONATEHOME STREETFFIILLMMSS

Donate / Contact / About Us / Newsletter ! "

“I’

For the Livable Streets Movement to Remain Relevant,It Must Become More Inclusive

By Ronnie Matthew Harris Jul 28, 2017 # 1 THIS POST IS SUPPORTED BY

Members of Go Bronzeville and Slow Roll Chicago celebrate Walk and Bike to School Day. Photo: GoBronzeville

ve often thought that if planners were botanists, zoologists, geologists, and peoplewho know about the earth, we would have much more wisdom in such planning thanwe have when we leave it to the engineers.” – attributed to William O. Douglas, $

For the Livable Streets Movement to Remain Relevant, It Must B... http://chi.streetsblog.org/2017/07/28/for-the-livable-streets-movem...

1 of 9 8/7/17, 1:05 PM

Ronnie Matthew Harris

former associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court

Now, of course, urban planning would be wholly impossible without the care and concern ofengineers and others engaged in the more technical aspects of planning. These words, however,attributed to Justice Douglas, have at their core an essential truth with regards to equitableurban planning policy and practice. To be truly effective, enabling communities towards asustained flourishing, planning has to be more than an exercise in technical drawing. Planningrequires a multidisciplinary approach that is as multi-faceted as communities themselves.

Never is that truth more essential truth than in the contextof bike and pedestrian infrastructure development.Encouraging communities to take advantage of bike/pedopportunities requires a deep understanding of thesociopolitical and economic barriers that historic urbanplanning advanced. That in turn relies on augmentingtechnical expertise with a more holistic approach in orderto realize the full potential of planning.

Justice Douglas did not speak those words yesterday. Thereis nothing new or novel in the concept of getting peopletogether across a range of disciplines to explore how wemight better our communities; and yet the great irony is that despite that well-establishedtruth, discussions on planning and development generally remain the exclusive domain of thesingular, dominant voice, a single profession, group or individual, in splendid isolation from thecommunities they serve.

Organizations like People for Bikes are, however, aiming to buck that trend. It was evident to meat their recent inaugural “Places for Bikes” conference, held last month in Madison, Wisconsin,that People for Bikes is moving the conversation forward on how to create equitable access toworld-class cycling infrastructure. The gathering was, in my mind, the embodiment of thatessential truth attributed to Justice Douglas.

At a time when there are still too many examples of government agencies and communityorganizations who plan and develop policy in silos, it was impressive to witness the extent towhich People for Bikes is committed to diversity, not only racial, ethnic, and cultural diversitybut gender, cross-sector and interdisciplinary diversity. Bike/ped advocacy groups, like so manysocial movements in America, are at a critical fork in the road where is becoming impossible toremain monolithic and expect to be relevant.

$


2 of 9 8/7/17, 1:05 PM

Last month’s Place for Bikes conference. Photo: People for Bikes

By bringing together a diverse, broad cross-section of business people, biking industry leaders,civic stakeholders and politicians, nonprofits, community leaders, academic and mediaprofessionals, People for Bikes is using what I believe are the essential parts to move the leveron the much-needed internal cultural shifts among bike/ped advocacy groups. This kind ofcommitment to diversity, equity, and willingness to make the hard cultural shifts can moreoverbe transformative toward positioning bike/ped advocacy as a small conduit, albeit a crucial one,for racial and economic justice, for racial healing from the systemic, institutional bigotry inpublic policy and urban planning.

It is a widely acknowledged fact that communities of color have disproportionately born thebrunt of harmful postwar urban planning, such as the construction of expressways thatdestroyed some communities and isolated others. The 21st century, however, presents theopportunity to right some wrongs. If done correctly, improvements to bike/ped infrastructurehave the potential to break down some of the barriers that 20th Century redlining built. Theycan help curb the trends related to public health disparities.

But this potential only be realized through significant cultural change, through the engagementof some of the most disenfranchised members of our communities: the elderly, single parents,the unemployed, and the underemployed. At Go Bronzeville, a local community-led initiative topromote walking, biking, and transit use, of which I am the director, we understand the vitalrole of this kind of community engagement for ensuring that the socio-economic benefits ofimproved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure are accessible to those who need them the most.The extent to which community members are involved in planning and building these resourceshelps determine the extent to which they’ll embrace them. $


3 of 9 8/7/17, 1:05 PM

Residents check out a Divvy bike at a Go Bronzevilleevent. Photo: Go Bronzeville

If we fail to harness that potential, if we do not lookfor opportunities to engage collectively andintentionally and if we are complacent in the face ofracial inequity, we will wind up on the wrong side ofhistory. On the other hand, if we are proactive aboutdoing the challenging, but necessary, work to engagewith and include marginalized groups, there isincredible potential for righting past injustices thatthat continue to negatively impact communities ofcolor.

Can you imagine the power in that moment whenlimitless imagination (e.g. bike highways) andresolve meets industry demands, all while correctingthe mistakes of the previous century? Perhaps that’sthe kind of outcome that Justice Douglas envisioned;perhaps that’s at the heart of what People for Bikeswas aiming for with their conference. In this pivotaltime in history, let’s make sure that places for bikes are also places for people.

Filed Under: Bicycling, Chicago Policy, Events, Neighborhoods, Walking, Blue City Cycles, equity, GoBronzeville, People for Bikes, Places for Bikes, Promoted

$

Subscribe to our

DDAAIILLYY EEMMAAIILL DDIIGGEESSTT

Enter Email SIGN UP


4 of 9 8/7/17, 1:05 PM

YoucanviewafewslidesfromthePeopleforBikes/PlacesforBikesconference,plusthelocalTucsondelegation’sdebriefatthislinkhere:https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PDqOGUpOx11iZAYzCIKFV2rnCxeu2nQUCo2x8LD5STc/edit-slide=id.g23d9a874d3_0_5

By-Laws of the Tucson-Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee;Adopted October 10, 2007, Amended March 12, 2008 – Page 1 of 5

TUCSON-PIMA COUNTY BICYCLE ADVISORYCOMMITTEE (TPCBAC) BYLAWS

(Adopted December 11, 2002; amended March 12, 2008)

A committee established by Tucson Code, Sec. 10a-130, Article XII, and Pima Co. Resolution 1998-109

ARTICLE 1. NAME AND PURPOSES

A. NAME. The name of this organization shall be the Tucson-Pima County Bicycle AdvisoryCommittee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”).

B. PURPOSES. The purpose of the Committee shall be to:

(1) To confer with and advise the governing bodies of the city and county on communityconcerns relating to bicycling.

(2) To organize community programs and projects to provide information and education tothe community on bicycling.

(3) To review and make recommendations on proposed local, state and federal legislationrelating to bicycling.

(4) To act as an official advisory agency to the city and county governing bodies fortechnical questions and concerns related to bicycling.

(5) To render an annual report of committee activities to the governing bodies of the city andcounty, and to file minutes of committee meetings with the two (2) governing bodies.

(6) To recommend such action to the governing bodies of the city and county as thecommittee deems necessary or desirable to accomplish the above functions, and to put itspolicies into practice.

ARTICLE 2. MEMBERSHIP

A. NUMBER OF MEMBERS. The committee shall consist of no fewer than seventeen(17) voting members, seven (7) of which shall represent the City of Tucson and ten (10) shallrepresent Pima County. In addition other municipalities and governmental entities such asthose mentioned in Article 2 C (3) may each appoint one (1) voting member.

B. QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS. The membership of the Committee shall not beemployees of the City of Tucson or Pima County.

C. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS.

(1) City of Tucson Appointees. The Mayor and members of the Council shall eachappoint one (1) person, for a total of seven (7), to serve as voting members of theCommittee. In addition, the City Department of Transportation shall appoint one (1)member of the Department's staff to serve as a non-voting Ex-officio member of theCommittee.

(2) Pima County Appointees. The Board of Supervisors shall appoint ten (10) persons,each of whom shall have been proposed by the Department of Transportation, toserve as voting members of the Committee. In addition, the Department ofTransportation shall appoint one (1) member of the Department's staff to serve as anon-voting Ex-officio member of the Committee.


(3) Other Voting Appointees. Other municipalities and governmental entities locatedwithin Pima County but not part of City of Tucson or Pima County governments,such as, the towns of Oro Valley, Marana, Sahuarita, the city of South Tucson, theUniversity of Arizona, Pima Community College, and Davis Monthan Air ForceBase, may each appoint one (1) individual as a voting member of the Committee.

(4) Other Non-Voting Members. The Chair may appoint individuals representing othernon-governmental or municipality entities within Pima County as nonvoting, ex-officio members of the Committee. In accordance with Section 10A-137(a) of theTucson Code, the chairperson of a body may, with the consent of a majority of thecurrent members of the body, appoint no more than four (4) advisory (Ex-Officio)members to the body. Ex-Officio members may be appointed for a period of two (2)years, and may be re-appointed.

D. LENGTH OF TERMS

(1) City of Tucson Members. The term of each voting city member shall be coterminouswith that of the elected official making the appointment. In no case may a memberserve more than eight (8) continuous years on the Committee. (2) Pima CountyMembers. The length of term of each voting county member shall be two (2) yearsfrom the time of appointment.

(2) Other Members. The length of term of each voting member appointed by anothermunicipality or governmental entity shall be determined by the appointing authority.The length of term of each non-voting Committee appointee shall be no longer thantwo (2) years.

(3) When an appointment is made to fill a vacancy that has occurred prior to the normalexpiration date of a term, the replacement shall serve the remaining portion of theterm for the member they are replacing.

E. REQUIRED ATTENDANCE. In accordance with Section 10A-134(e) of the TucsonCode, a member will be automatically and immediately removed from the Committeeif that member misses four (4) consecutive meetings or fails to attend at least forty(40) percent of the meetings in a calendar year.

F. VOTING. Each voting member shall have one (1) vote, which must be exercised inperson.

ARTICLE 3. OFFICERS

A. OFFICERS The officers of the Committee shall be a Chair, a Vice-Chair, a Secretary and aParliamentarian,.

B. QUALIFICATIONS OF OFFICERS. Only voting members who have served on theCommittee for a minimum of six (6) months shall be eligible to hold the office of Chair orVice-Chair, unless the composition of the Committee does NOT meet this criterion.

C. DUTIES OF OFFICERS


(1) Chair. The Chair shall: assure notice of meetings be given to members of the Committee;preside at meetings of the Committee; appoint special groups, Ex-Officio members, sub-committees and the chairs thereof, as necessary to conduct the business of the Committee;cause the decisions of the Committee to be communicated and implemented; act as theofficial spokesperson for the Committee; and all other duties normally associated withposition of Chair.

(2) Vice-Chair. The Vice-Chair shall: in the absence of the Chair, preside at meetings of theCommittee; assume the office of the Chair should a vacancy occur prior to the normalexpiration date of that office; and, perform such duties as may be directed by the Chair.

(3) Secretary. The Secretary shall record and keep minutes (including attendance) of allmeetings of the Committee; maintain, in cooperation with Tucson and Pima County staffmembers, up to date membership records, prepare ballots for election of officers; in theabsence of the Chair and Vice-Chair, preside at meetings of the Committee; and, performsuch other duties as may be directed by the Chair.

(4) Parliamentarian. The Parliamentarian shall assure adherence to an orderly meeting protocol,and in the absence of the Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary, preside at meetings of theCommittee; and shall perform such other duties as may be directed by the Chair.

D. ELECTION OF OFFICERS

(1) Nomination of Candidates.

(a) Nominating sub-committee. Two (2) months prior to an election meeting, the Chairshall appoint three (3) members of the Committee to serve as a nominating sub-committee, and shall designate one of them as Chair of the sub-committee.

(b) Nominations by the nominating sub-committee. At or prior to the regular meeting thatimmediately precedes an election meeting (hereinafter referred to as the "pre-electionmeeting"), the nominating sub-committee shall present to the Chair a list that includesat least one ( 1 ) candidate for each office. At that pre-election meeting, the Chair shallpresent to the Committee the names of these candidates, all of whom must be presentand agree to stand for election.

(c) Nominations from the floor. Following the required presentation of the nominatinggroup's candidates at the pre-election meeting, the Chair shall ask for nominations fromthe floor. Voting members may nominate additional candidates for each office, andeach candidate so nominated shall be present and agree to stand for election.

(2) Date of Election Meeting. The election of officers shall be held each year at the regularmeeting in May. Special election meetings may be held at other times, as needed to fillvacancies.

(3) Election Procedures.

(a) Candidates will be listed in the agenda for the meeting when the election will be held.


(b) Order of election. The Chair shall be elected first, the Vice-Chair second, the Secretarythird and the Parliamentarian last. The result of each election shall be announced beforeproceeding to the next election.

(c) Voting. Voting shall be accomplished by a show of hands, or voice. Each votingmember shall vote for no more than (1) candidate for each office.

(d) Outcome. To be elected to an office, a candidate must receive a majority of the votescast for that office, but in no case less than a majority of a quorum.

E. LENGTH OF TERMS. The length of term for each office shall be one (1) year, beginning onthe first day of June, which is the month immediately following the date of the electionmeeting; provided, however, that the term shall not extend beyond the expiration of theofficer’s membership (Unless there is reasonable expectation that the member will be re-appointed, this shall not prevent their election).

F. CONDITIONS. No member shall hold more than one (1) elected office at any time

ARTICLE 4. SPECIAL GROUPS

The Chair may appoint sub-committees composed of committee members, and non-Committee members, as necessary to advise and/or assist the Committee on specific projects,events, or issues. The Chair may designate another elected officer to coordinate the activities ofthe sub-committees.

ARTICLE 5. RESIGNATION OR REMOVAL OF MEMBERS

A. RESIGNATION. A member may resign from the Committee at any time by so notifying theirappointing official, in addition to providing a courtesy notification to the Chair, Secretary,City Clerk and County Clerk.

B. REMOVAL. In accordance with Section 10a-134(e) of the Tucson Code, a member may beremoved from the Committee for failure to meet the attendance requirements, or for otherreasons resulting from legislative action by their Appointing Authority.

ARTICLE 6. MEETINGS

A. NOTICE OF MEETINGS. The Chair shall cause notice of meetings to be given to theCommittee members, and such notice shall specify the time and place at which each meetingis to be held. This notice shall comply with the appropriate Arizona open meeting laws.Notice shall also be published when a regular meeting will not take place

B. NUMBER OF MEETINGS. Regular meetings shall normally be held in April andMay of each calendar year and once each month during eight (8) of the remaining ten(10) months of that year. In addition, special meetings may be held whenever deemednecessary by the Chair, or a majority of the members.

C. QUORUM. A majority of the authorized membership of the Committee shall constitute aquorum.


ARTICLE 7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

The Committee shall provide to the Tucson City Council, Pima County Board of Supervisors,and other Appointing Authorities, as well as to appropriate departments, units and/or subdivisionsof the City of Tucson, Pima County, and other Appointing Authorities, such reports as may berequested or otherwise required to fulfill the purpose for which the Committee was established.Minutes of all meetings of the Committee shall be filed with the Tucson City Clerk and the PimaCounty Clerk.

ARTICLE 8. LIMITS OF AUTHORITY

A. EXPENSES AND OBLIGATIONS. In accordance with Section 10A-132 of theTucson Code, neither the Committee, nor any of its members, shall incur any expenses orotherwise cause the City of Tucson and/or Pima County to be obligated in any manner unlessauthorized by the affected Governing Body.

B. LOBBYING ACTIVITIES. No member shall lobby as a committee member for any purposeunless specifically authorized by the City of Tucson Mayor and Council, the Board ofSupervisors, or their Appointing Authority.

C. ENDORSEMENTS. No member shall represent his or her personal involvement in anyactivities or endorsements as being those of the Committee, unless authorized by theCommittee.

ARTICLE 9. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY

The Tucson Department of Transportation and the Pima County Department ofTransportation shall provide the Committee with support staff and resources sufficient to enablethe Committee to fulfill the purposes for which it was established. Other jurisdictions appointingmembers may provide staff support, either temporary or permanent.

ARTICLE 10. PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY

Mayor and Council Rules of Procedure take precedence over the rules contained inRobert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. Robert's Rules of Order shall govern the order ofbusiness of Committee meetings in all cases to which they are applicable and insofar as they arecompatible with the Mayor and Council Rules of Order and the bylaws of the Committee.

ARTICLE 11. AMENDMENT

Bylaws of the Committee may be amended, repealed or adopted by an affirmative vote of not lessthan two-thirds (2/3) of the voting members present and voting at a meeting of the Committee atwhich a quorum is present. Notice of proposed amendments, or of intent to repeal and/or adoptnew bylaws, must be given to all members at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting at whichthe vote is to take place.

- Must have at least 3 members who are appointed members of the full public body - The subcommittee Chair must be an appointed member of the BAC - A quorum consists of more than 50% of the body (i.e.- 5 members; 3 makes quorum) - Non-members may participate on subcommittees, but do not have a vote. Only appointed BAC members may vote on subcommittee items that are being recommended to the full body.

LinkstoArizonaStateLawonOpenMeetings,ConflictofInterest(requiredtoreviewbeforeparticipatingasamemberofaPimaCountyBoard,Committee,orCommission)https://azgovernor.gov/sites/default/files/openmeetinglaw101_0.pdfhttps://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/sites/all/docs/agency-handbook/ch07-2013.pdfhttps://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/sites/all/docs/agency-handbook/ch08-2014.pdf

[DRAFT]CityofTucsonBoard,CommitteeandCommissionAnnualReviewphotocopiesoftheDRAFTversionoftheannualreviewprocesswillbeavailableattheTPCBACmeeting

http://tucson.com/news/local/road-runner-committee-faces-tough-task-of-prioritizing-tucson-

area/article_4e6200ac-7aa8-51dc-a466-ab54a1817b6d.html

Road Runner

Road Runner: Committee faces tough task ofprioritizing Tucson-area road repair

Murphy Woodhouse Arizona Daily Star 17 hrs ago

BUY NOWA northbound car skirts a pothole in Tucson.

Kelly Presnell / Arizona Daily Star

The newly formed Pima County Transportation

Advisory Committee got a taste of the challenging

work that lies ahead at its very first meeting last

Tuesday.

MORE INFORMATION

! +3

Road Runner: Committee faces tough task of prioritizing Tucson-a... http://tucson.com/news/local/road-runner-committee-faces-tough-t...

1 of 5 8/7/17, 12:49 PM

Though the agenda was mostly formalities —

electing chairs and co-chairs, an overview of the

open meetings law, an in-the-weeds conversation

about the nature of pavement, as well as its decline

and preservation — several Green Valley residents

sat through the several hours of !uorescent-lit

proceedings to lobby on behalf of their crumbling

roads.

“The roads here in Pima County are the worst ones

that we encounter,” said Green Valley resident

Christi Heintz, who has properties in two other

states, giving her a means of comparison. “The

roads are crumbling. It re!ects the infrastructure of

the town and it re!ects a poor economic

robustness.”

As every regular Road Runner reader will know,

Heintz’s roads are not alone. Nearly 800 miles out of

unincorporated Pima County’s 1,235 miles of local

streets are in poor or failed condition. Using figures

in a white paper provided to all committee members

Friday, the cost of getting those roads into good

condition would be about $175 million.

However, unincorporated Pima County’s estimated

share of the new 25-cent road property tax is about

$8.2 million for the first of five years of collection.

Deciding how to divvy up that sum between

numerous deteriorating local streets — the

exclusive focus of the e"ort — by early October and

presenting recommendations for approval to the

Board of Supervisors is the complicated task before

committee chair Lucretia Free and her 12 fellow

members. After that, the committee will tackle the

remaining years of the tax, along with a number of

Road Runner: New roadproperty tax plandiminishes supervisorcontrol

Pima County supervisorspass tentative budget with25-cent road tax

" RIDE ALONG: Pothole-ridden Ruby Road inArivaca

Pima County's new $1.3Bbudget includes tax hikefor road repairs


2 of 5 8/7/17, 12:49 PM

other local transportation issues.

“I think that nothing touches every resident of Pima

County more intimately than the roads,” Free told

the Road Runner. “We’ve all either walked them,

drove them or biked them or motorcycled them.

People care about it.”

The committee is made up of two nominees from

each county supervisor and three from County

Administrator Chuck Huckelberry. Free said some

have spent years serving on similar boards or in

public o"ice, while others are relatively new to such

proceedings, a diversity of experience she cited as a

strength.

Other county jurisdictions will share $11.3 million

over the first year, the apportionment of which is

based on a town or city’s share of total assessed

value. Recommendations for specific projects within

those jurisdictions will be made jointly by their

governing boards or transportation advisory

committees and the county’s newly formed advisory

committee.

Over 80 percent of Tucson’s local roads are in poor

to failed condition, according to recent data

included in the white paper.

Only a fraction of Marana’s and Sahuarita’s are, and

nearly 12 percent of Oro Valley’s are in such

condition. South Tucson did not submit data,

according to the white paper.

E"orts to work on Tucson’s local roads will also be

helped along by the voter-approved Proposition 101


3 of 5 8/7/17, 12:49 PM

Murphy Woodhouse

sales tax, $40 million of which will go to such work

over five years.

Because the scale of the problem outstrips the

available funding, Free said transparency and public

involvement, as well as technical input from the

county transportation sta", are critical to ensuring

that the process is perceived as fair.

“I think that people want to be heard. That’s the first

step. Now there’s an outlet for our community to

share their concerns,” she said, adding later that

whatever method the committee uses to choose

what work is done where must be “as objective as

possible.”

If you want to weigh in, the next meeting will be

Monday, Aug. 14, starting at noon at the Abrams

Public Health Center, 3950 S. Country Club Road.

For information on the committee and the road

property tax, go to tinyurl.com/y9btl8d4

Contact: [email protected] or 573-4235. On Twitter:

@murphywoodhouse

You May Like

Husband Divorced

His Wife After

Diabetes

Breakthrough Leaves

We Can Guess Your

IQ Level with Only

Sponsored by Revcontent


4 of 5 8/7/17, 12:49 PM

From Ward 6 Council member Steve Kozachik’s Newsletter 7/17/17

Transit / Left-Hand Turns One impact of the widening is that it’s going to be making it tougher for pedestrians to cross. That’s also true at large intersections throughout the city. And at large intersections, due to the speeds cars travel, the car crashes that occur can sometimes be severe. In an effort to make our driving/walking/biking experiences safer, I raised the idea with TDOT of moving to what are called Protected Left Hand Turn signals. While there’s resistance, we met last week and agreed to identify some intersections and give it a try as a pilot project. We’ll gather data over time to see if the intersections with protected left’s are safer. If so, I’d like to see the pilot program expanded. If not, it was worth the try.

The debate we had was pretty easy to frame. It’s safety vs. moving cars. I was looking at accident data as well as reflecting on observations I make while out on the road. Engineers look at cycle times and how we can synchronize signals in favor of keeping cars rolling along. Differing world views perhaps with legitimate arguments on each side.

If our signals were timed together right now, and if we had common conditions at all of our intersections, I’d be more inclined to resist trying the Protected Left test. But our signals are not sync’d up, we have differing cycle times at intersections throughout the city, synchronization is already compromised by HAWK lights, and the data shows Protected Left’s reduce collisions, with cars, pedestrians and bikes. I believe it’s worth testing to see how the community fares at some of our major intersections and not compromise safety in favor of movement.

There are a variety of traffic signal options we have in place. Some are safer than others.

A common type you see is called “Permissive-Only.” There’s no left turn arrow, only a green ball on the signal. Motorists go when there’s a gap in on-coming traffic.

“Permissive/Protected” left hand turns have both the green ball, and a green arrow. Drivers can turn during the green ball cycle, but there will be on-coming traffic. And there’ll be pedestrians in the crosswalk to keep in mind. When the signal turns to a green arrow, that’s the “Protected” phase during which there is no on-coming traffic.

Then there’s the “Protected-Only.” This is the option I’ve asked to have implemented on a trial basis at some of our major intersections. With the “Protected-Only” left hand turn, you may only turn left when there’s a green arrow. And when you get that arrow, there will be no on-coming traffic, and peds will have already navigated their crossing.

Data from studies throughout the country validate that protected left hand turn intersections result in reductions in accidents. In a study conducted by Li Chen, Cynthia Chen and Reid Ewing, and reported in Accident Analysis and Prevention I found this table. It contains a lot of data, but don’t be put off by that. The conclusions are easy to discern.

They studied before and after conditions in a variety of traffic control situations. For what I’m demonstrating, the data that matters is in the bottom row of each segment. Where you see “CG” that’s just their control group where no special treatments were included in an intersection. The “TG” is the treatment group – intersections in which left hand turn changes were tried. “PP” is protected/permissive, and “PO” is Protected-Only.

They looked at data historically for 5 years, and then studied what happened 2 years after changes in treatment were made. Across every condition, where you have a Protected-Only left hand turn condition, every type of crash is decreased. That’s multiple vehicle crashes, left-turn crashes, rear-end collisions, over-taking collisions, pedestrian crashes, and bicycle crashes.

Engineers love data. The data in the table is, or should be compelling. For left-turn crashes, PO has a 77% reduction in crashes whereas PP has a 17% reduction. And that trend is the same throughout the study.

Adding the PO will reduce the amount of green ‘thru-traffic’ time available during the cycle. That’s the frustration factor our TDOT folks are concerned about. It’s understandable if the only purpose of the road is to move cars. But we have multiple modes of travel going on throughout the city. Safety plays a role in how we manage our streets, too. I think we can balance the two in ways that reduce the number of crashes and fatalities we’ve seen on our roadways.

I appreciate the willingness from our staff to give this a shot. They’ve committed to bringing back in two weeks a list of the intersections at which we’ll try the PO turns. Then it’ll take a little time to change out the signal components. During the time we’re making these decisions and changes, there’ll be some considerable educational outreach to alert drivers, peds and bicyclists where the Protected-Only pilot will take place. Surprises on the roadway are also not a great way to foster safety.

I’ve already reached out to our bike and pedestrian advisory committees and will be asking them to help in getting the word out. With all of us working on this together I believe we’ll have a successful test, hopefully demonstrating what other studies have shown, and ultimately resulting in safer roads in Tucson.

BY RACHEL DOVEY | AUGUST 1, 2017

A

Portland Bike-Share Launches Program for People WithDisabilities

(Credit: Biketown)

year after the launch of Portland’s Nike-sponsored bike-share, the program is hoping to expandits user-base to cyclists with disabilities using a mix of tandem, hand cycles and three-wheeled

bikes.

“Adaptive Biketown,” as its known, is the first city-sponsored bike-share program for disabled riders inthe nation, according to Fox-12 Oregon. Like the umbrella program, it’s owned by the Portland Bureauof Transportation with support from Nike.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the adaptive program differs from the bike-share founded lastyear in that its intended mostly for cyclists biking for exercise and recreation, rather than commuting.Its rollout was limited to several locations where cyclists can “ride on relatively smooth trails, awayfrom traffic,” according to the paper.

But the process of creating it hasn’t been without bumps. As Jen Kinney wrote for Next City last year,

Portland Bike-Share Launches Program for People With Disabilitie... https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/portland-bike-share-launches-progr...

1 of 8 8/7/17, 12:58 PM

the city began considering an adaptive program at the urging of City Council Member (then candidate)Chloe Eudaly, whose son has cerebral palsy. When they first assembled an advisory committee to helppioneer the program, however, officials didn’t fully understand what the process would look like,according to the Times.

“The first time they wanted to speak to us, they were like, ‘Give us a list of disabilities, and give us a listof the bikes that work for them,’ and that’s just not the way it works in the world of disability, becausethere’s just so much diversity,” Jennifer Wilde, who works with a nonprofit assisting people withdisabilities, told the Times.

The discussion opened up broader questions.

“What you’re really talking about is how do you make all aspects of the built environment responsive toall people, yet at the same time support values of sustainability,” the founder of another nonprofitadvocacy organization told the paper. “If environmental policies have a target to change behavior andimprove people’s lives, are those targets responsive to and inclusive of different kinds of people —people that might have difficulty seeing, difficulty moving around, difficulty hearing?”

BECOME A NEXT CITY MEMBER TODAY

Rachel Dovey is an award-winning freelance writer and formerUSC Annenberg fellow living at the northern tip of California’sBay Area. She writes about infrastructure, water and climatechange and has been published by Bust, Wired, Paste, SFWeekly, the East Bay Express and the North Bay Bohemian.

FOLLOW RACHEL EMAIL RACHEL

TAGS: BIKE-SHARE, PORTLAND

! ✉

Get our best reporting, job of the day, and smartestreader. Sign up for our daily newsletter.

SIGN UP DAILY WEEKLY

×

Portland Bike-Share Launches Program for People With Disabilitie... https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/portland-bike-share-launches-progr...

2 of 8 8/7/17, 12:58 PM

Our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy have changed.By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to the new PPrriivvaaccyy PPoolliiccyy and TTeerrmmss ooff SSeerrvviiccee.

Why riding a bike to school is often illegal

Maura Flanagan teaches at the Brooklyn Transition Center, a high school for students withemotional disorders. Some students are autistic, others have been kicked out of previousschools.

BTC has a full complement of guidance counselors, therapists and special educators to workwith its students, but one of the most promising additions has been a bikeshare program.

Last fall the school was selected for a first-of-its kind experiment from the New York Departmentof Health. A handful of Flanagan's students were recruited to ride to and from school. They tooka bike safety class, were given helmets, and started pedaling around Brooklyn's streets. By thisspring, 15 students had bikeshare memberships—as well as a greater sense of independenceand confidence.

"When you learn to ride a bike, there's a big pride in that, especially the first time you cross abridge in New York City or the first time that you ride your bike home by yourself," Flanagan said."There's a diOerent level of pride than just taking the subway or walking home."

But a program like this wouldn't even be legal in many U.S. cities, where teenagers are trustedwith 3,500-pound cars before they can ride a 45-pound bikeshare bicycle. San Francisco, SanDiego, Portland, Baltimore, Birmingham and New Orleans all require bikeshare riders to be 18.

In the United States, more than $23 billion a year is spent getting kids to school; almost nothingis spent on bikes, and this blind spot is costing cash-strapped municipal governments.

"We should absolutely be giving these kids memberships or reduced-fee memberships becauseit lowers our costs," said Gabe Klein, co-founder of the transportation consultancy CityFi andformer transportation commissioner in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

Advertisement

Loan amount: $200,000Arizona0 points, Refinance

See Loan options

NMLS#:381076

NMLS#:77797Lic#:MB0018461

NMLS#:155732Lic#:0910138

Disclosures Powered by Informa

$970 /mo.-0.250 pts30 Yr Fixed

SPONSORED

4.146% APR

Next

$927 /mo.0 pts30 Yr Fixed

SPONSORED

3.781% APR

Next

$941 /mo.-0.125 pts30 Yr Fixed

SPONSORED

3.904% APR

Next

See more Low Rates

This app lets Uber andLyft drivers easilyswitch betweenplatforms

New North Koreasanctions are unlikelyto make Kim blink

This app is designedto turn anyone into awine expert

Paid Content

Argentinian Farmer

Social Surge - What's Trending

Mortgage

Bikesharing gives independence to these teens

by Matt McFarland @mattmcfarlandJuly 25, 2017: 11:11 AM ET Recommend 1.2K

by Outbrain

B U S I N E S S C U LT U R E G A D G E T S F U T U R E S T A R T U P S

Why riding a bike to school is often illegal - Jul. 25, 2017 http://money.cnn.com/2017/07/25/technology/culture/bike-student-...

1 of 4 8/7/17, 1:09 PM

In Minneapolis, a student parktakes in a bicycling program.

In many municipalities, it would be cheaper for the government to buy a child a new bike eachschool year, rather than paying for bus service. In 2013, $914 was spent per U.S. student ontransportation. A serviceable bike can be bought for half that figure. And a bikesharemembership could be bought for even less.

Related: The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars

It's a diOerent story elsewhere in the world. Chinese children are welcomed on the country'sthriving bikeshare systems at age 12. In Paris, home to Europe's largest bikeshare program, 14-year-olds are allowed. Milan's bikeshare has a set of small bicycles designed to fit children.

Unearths Two-TonMysteryNocartridge

You should never shopon Amazon withoutusing this trick –…Honey

HomeLight hasIntroducedOver 69,234 Sellers…Homelight

Unique Device AllowsDermatologists ToClose Wounds…quilldevice.net

Hot List

TheseCEOshavehadtheirpayslashed17%

AmazonsaysitmighthaveviolatedU.S.sanctionsonIran

U.S.slapssanctionsonVenezuelanpresidentNicolasMaduro

Bitcoinsplitintwo,here'swhatthatmeans

Hikemessengerischangingthewaymillionsof


2 of 4 8/7/17, 1:09 PM

to the company that operates their bikeshare system. These companies are inclined to set highage minimums rather than pay additional insurance costs.

Research shows that children who exercise in the morning concentrate better in school. Whenmore people rides bikes, air quality improves, aiding everyone's health. Having a bicycle alsoteaches responsibility and confidence.

"Kids get to see [that] their parent recognizes they're a functioning human being, whose job is todevelop and grow as opposed to being a FedEx package, whose job is to be ferried from oneplace to another," Lenore Skenazy, author of the book Free-Range Kids, told CNN.

In small pockets of the U.S., some people are starting to understand bikes' potential.

Minneapolis Public Schools has a fleet of 40-some bicycles that travel from school to school.Students, from 4th to 8th grade, learn how to ride safely on city streets and respect rules of theroad.

But these same students, like schoolchildren across the country, don't have access to the localbikeshare. The operator of the system told CNN it believes it's important for riders to understandtrapc rules. And since 16-year-olds generally have driver's licenses, that's the age they picked.

CNNMoney (Washington)First published July 25, 2017: 11:11 AM ET

Pay no interest until October 2018with this card

$200 just for using this credit card

Rack up unlimited miles with thisastonishing credit card

3 cards charging 0% interest until2019

The highest paying cash back cardhas arrived

Refinance your mortgage – check fortoday’s low rate! NMLS#174457

Compare savings accounts andopen a new account today!

Take advantage of a steady interestrate with these CD accounts

You can earn 10x returns in yoursavings with these banks

Advertisement

CNNMoney Sponsors

Paid PartnerNextAdvisor

Paid PartnerGoBankingRates


3 of 4 8/7/17, 1:09 PM

First statewide bicycle tax innation leaves bike-crazy Oregonriders deflatedDemocratic Gov. Kate Brown expected to sign $15 excise tax on bikes over $200

By Valerie Richardson - The Washington Times - Monday, July 17, 2017

In Oregon, a state known for its avid bicycling culture, the state Legislature’s

!

Oregon bike tax 'between $8,000 and$15,000 right off our bottom line,' localshop saysKMTR - Springfield, OR

"

First statewide bicycle tax in nation leaves bike-crazy Oregon rider... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/17/first-bicycle-ta...

1 of 3 8/7/17, 1:09 PM

approval of the first statewide bike tax in the nation has fallen flat withriders.

Democratic Gov. Kate Brown is expected to sign the sweeping $5.3 billiontransportation package, which includes a $15 excise tax on the sale ofbicycles costing more than $200 with a wheel diameter of at least 26 inches.

Even though the funding has been earmarked for improvements that willbenefit cyclists, the tax has managed to irk both anti-tax Republicans andenvironmentally conscious bikers.

SEE ALSO: Oregon governor to sign unprecedented bill providing freeabortions for all

BikePortland publisher Jonathan Maus called it “an unprecedented step inthe wrong direction.”

“We are taxing the healthiest, most inexpensive, most environmentallyfriendly, most efficient and most economically sustainable form oftransportation ever devised by the human species,” Mr. Maus said.

Oregon Republican Party Chairman Bill Currier blasted what he described asMs. Brown’s “endless obsession with finding new and innovative ways to takemoney out of the pockets of Oregon taxpayers.”

PHOTOS: Most overrated professional athletes

“She just continues to view the people of her state as nothing more than apiggy bank to fund her efforts to impose job-killing policies,” said Mr. Currierin a statement. “Now add anti-healthy, environmentally-unfriendly policies tothat list.”


2 of 3 8/7/17, 1:09 PM

The bike tax is aimed at raising $1.2 million per year in order to improve andexpand paths and trails for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Supporters point out that Oregon has no sales tax, which means buyerswon’t be dinged twice for their new wheels.

Oregon relies instead on its income tax, among the highest in the nation at9.9 percent for top marginalized individual filers, according to the TaxFoundation.

Two-wheelers are a big deal in Oregon: Portland was ranked the third-mostbike-friendly city in 2016 by Bicycling magazine, citing the 7.2 percent ofresidents who commute by bicycle.

Bikers cheered last year when Portland passed a four-year, 10-cent-per-gallon tax on gasoline aimed at improving roads, but the measure also fueledcomplaints that bicycle riders have failed to pay their share for such projects.

Rep. Earl Blumenauer, Oregon Democrat, defended the state bike tax, callingit a “modest fee” that raises the profile of the bicycling community in thetransportation debate.

“One of the arguments we hear repeatedly is that cyclists don’t have any skinin the game … so there’s been blowback,” Mr. Blumenauer told BikePortland.

The Street Trust, a Portland pro-bike group, praised the overalltransportation package while saying that the bike tax “sends the wrongmessage to those trying to help.”

“Let’s be frank: This bike tax is very disappointing,” said The Street Trust’sRomain Bonilla. “It’s also well worth the investments in bike safety andaccessibility. There are more opportunities ahead for us to stand up for ourshared priorities and mitigate the negative impact of the bike tax.”


3 of 3 8/7/17, 1:09 PM

Documents

August 2017 TPCBAC AGENDA and Packet Guidewebcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government... · B. Review of applicable Pima County guidelines for participants of BCCs