BIKE: Sidewalks and Bicycle Facilities

[Mike Librik or Amy Babich]

Andrew Wimsatt wrote:

> Sidewalks and Pedestrian Elements
>
> Sidewalks provide distinct separation of pedestrians and vehicles,
> serving to increase
> pedestrian safety as well as to enhance vehicular capacity. Sidewalks
> are typically an
> integral part of the transportation system in central business
> districts. In rural and suburban
> areas, sidewalks are most justified at points of community development
> such as at schools,
> recreation areas, and local businesses, that result in pedestrian
> concentrations near or along
> the highways. In typical suburban development, there are initially few
> pedestrian trips
> because there are few closely located pedestrian destinations. However,
> when pedestrian
> demand increases with additional development, it may be more difficult
> and more costly to
> go back and install pedestrian facilities if they were not considered
> in the initial design.
> Early consideration of pedestrian facility design during the project
> development process may
> also greatly simplify compliance with accessibility requirements
> established by the
> Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) and
> the Texas
> Accessibility Standards (TAS).

Taking this opportunity to climb up on my high horse, I would note that this description of sidewalks as
pedestrian space misses an obvious fact that is consistently missed whenever talking about pedestrian
space and sidewalks. That is, the space for pedestrian movement exists whether or not a sidewalk is in
place. A sidewalk is a definite improvement to this space, but the the pedestrian right of way exists
because there is a strip of public land adjacent to the roadway, not because a sidewalk has been built.
That is, when the public right of way (the public land on which the road is built) is wider than the
road itself (as it is in the vast majority of cases, at least within cities) then there is a distinct
margin "up on the grass" that is specifically retained for public uses, of which pedestrian movement is
one such use.

While this fact can be pieced together looking at various laws, there is nothing in the codes that
specifically states that a tenant on a property adjacent to a right of way (and so far as I know one
cannot plat a property for sale unless it is adjacent to some public ROW) must maintain a useable
walkway in the strip of public land between the roadway and the property line. In particular, there
seemed to be nothing in the guidelines above stating this fact, nor elsewhere in the state
transportation laws or the Austin city code. Therefore it is very difficult to increase public awareness
of this fact. It would be really, really good if TXDoT's manuals admitted this, and set guidelines for
this facility. Such guidelines would let tenants know how they are supposed to maintain this land
adjacent to their property (the tenants responsibility to maintain it is clearly stated, but not the
requirement of pedestrian access), and to let citizens know when their rights to use the public walkway
are being infringed, and to let city inspectors know a consistent standard to hold a violator to.

Sorry to carry on like this, but it is frustrating when I see the view that suggests that pedestrian
space does not exist off the street unless sidewalk is built. The fact is, we have a complete,
connected, pedestrian network all over the place, at least in the cities, or we should have this network
if only tenants did not freely put all kinds of shrubs, walls, parking spaces, etc. in this space. And
it is damned hard to get anyone to do anything about it. This network would not cost millions of dollars
of tax money to install, but requires only that individual tenants do a little bit on their own land to
maintain it. I just wish that the standards such as those listed above took this into account, and that
citizens could count on reliable government support when trying to fix this problem.

Anyone who is interested should note that the Austin Pedestrian Plan is up for revision, and I am trying
to get this type of facility (walkway in the absence of sidewalk) defined for Austin. Having a
consistent expectation as to what is to be provided for pedestrians in the absence of sidewalk would be
a great help. As it is, the pedestrian's due is left to the whim of the inspector, and is therefore very
difficult to defend in court, should a tenant choose fight tooth and nail for right to do whatever they
choose with this public land.

--
Mike Librik
Easy Street Recumbents
512-453-0438
45th and Red River St.
Central Austin
info
www.easystreetrecumbents.com
www.urbancycling.com