Facebook post from Twisted Spike states they are shooting for a December 10th opening.

An interesting perspective and update by Steve on pedestrians and automobiles.

http://m.newsok.com/article/5531422

An interesting perspective and update by Steve on pedestrians and automobiles.

http://m.newsok.com/article/5531422

Say what you want about Steve, but I'm really happy to have a a widely known journalist who brings up these issues and generally promotes walkability and who seems to understand the relationship between streets and cars and streets and people. Auto alley is definitely hindered by it's streetscape and the stubbornness of the folks who wish to see the bullseye crosswalks unchanged.

I think the area and businesses would be vastly improved if the street was narrowed even further to two lanes or two lanes with a center tun lane/mid street parking. Unfortunately, with the contruction of the streetcar, Broadway will be reverting back to 4 lanes.

I know that driving through Auto Alley, especially at night, is confusing as hell to me. I'm still never sure if any of the intersections are supposed to be stop signs, yield signs, who has the right-of-way, and where the actual cross walks are supposed to be.

That stretch of road is neither pedestrian friendly, nor vehicle friendly, in my opinion.

I know that driving through Auto Alley, especially at night, is confusing as hell to me. I'm still never sure if any of the intersections are supposed to be stop signs, yield signs, who has the right-of-way, and where the actual cross walks are supposed to be.

That stretch of road is neither pedestrian friendly, nor vehicle friendly, in my opinion.

Those yellow signs have yield-to-pedestrian symbols on them, so you yield to pedestrians if they are crossing. If there are none, then you would keep driving ahead. Other than that, there's nothing special about the road. If there's a stop sign you stop, if there isn't one, then you keep going. You have the right-of-way unless a pedestrian is crossing the signaled crosswalk or crossing one of the non-signaled pedestrian walkways that features the yield-to-pedestrians signage.

Don't over think it. The only thing that has changed for drivers are really just the yield signs in the middle of the road. ;]

The only thing that has changed for drivers are really just the yield signs in the middle of the road. ;]

Which are mere suggestions anyway considering that if a vehicle hits a pedestrian at a point where there is no stopsign or light, it"s legally the pedestrian's fault...

But even with the signs, most pedestrians I see still cross mid-block rather than at the crosswalks. And many cars stop for them. Then, cars trying to cross Broadway can't tell who is stopping and when. And then there are the cars that struggle to back out of the angled spots. Basically it's a mess. I don't think the "paddle" signs were a good solution.

Seems like putting mid-block pedestrian cross walks with in-ground flashing lights in and removing the paddles would be a decent compromise while keeping the aesthetic otherwise.

Block it off with pavers and planters and put a roof/canopy over it and only allow the streetcar as a pass-thru.

Anytime you have to use signs or words as a traffic calming measure, yer street is poorly designed.

Seems like putting mid-block pedestrian cross walks with in-ground flashing lights in and removing the paddles would be a decent compromise while keeping the aesthetic otherwise.

I say this every single time I drive through there.. I hate the paddle signs and a lit crosswalk would be much better and I think both drivers and pedestrians would take more notice.

Anytime you have to use signs or words as a traffic calming measure, yer street is poorly designed.

This.

This.

+2

This would be the perfect spot to install protected bike lanes next to the sidewalks with parking pushed towards the middle of the street. Could do this all the way up to 23rd, as it's effectively 5 lanes where it only needs one in each direction.

Which are mere suggestions anyway considering that if a vehicle hits a pedestrian at a point where there is no stopsign or light, it"s legally the pedestrian's fault...

Say what?

Say what?

From the Municipal Code (https://www.municode.com/library/ok/oklahoma_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=OKMUCO2010_CH32MOVETR_AR TXIIIPE&searchText=)...


32-455. - When pedestrians must yield right-of-way.

(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles upon the roadway.

(b) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.

(c) The foregoing rules in this section have no application when pedestrians are prohibited from crossing at designated places.

^Right. So Ross is incorrect. Crossing at the marked crosswalks in AA would never put the pedestrian "at fault".

Good thing we're legally required to carry pedestrian insurance. Also good that my car insurance has "uninsured pedestrian" coverage.

Not serious, but sheesh.

^Right. So Ross is incorrect. Crossing at the marked crosswalks in AA would never put the pedestrian "at fault".

Correct..... Or if you are going by the scoring system... You get points for hitting a pedestrian outside a crosswalk but you get negative points for hitting one in a crosswalk. ;)

I have voiced this in other threads as we have many topics that sway this direction due to walkability etc.

But if OKC would actually enforce and make a point to hand out warnings (and even citations) to 'jaywalkers' then the pedestrian vs vehicle mentality would be eased. Nothing is more frustrating then having to stop or slow down or something from people running across traffic lanes where there is no walk indicator (and there is usually a crosswalk within a block of the jaywalker).

AA is full of crosswalks, there is seriously zero reason to not use one other than being lazy.

But if OKC would actually enforce and make a point to hand out warnings (and even citations) to 'jaywalkers' then the pedestrian vs vehicle mentality would be eased.

I'm pretty certain there are no jaywalking laws in Oklahoma City.... and if there are the OCPD is one the biggest offenders because I'm always having to stop for them crossing Main Street at the new headquarters.

I have voiced this in other threads as we have many topics that sway this direction due to walkability etc.

But if OKC would actually enforce and make a point to hand out warnings (and even citations) to 'jaywalkers' then the pedestrian vs vehicle mentality would be eased. Nothing is more frustrating then having to stop or slow down or something from people running across traffic lanes where there is no walk indicator (and there is usually a crosswalk within a block of the jaywalker).

AA is full of crosswalks, there is seriously zero reason to not use one other than being lazy.I don't think police officers should be giving jaywalkers warning let alone tickets. I don't see the problem with it. I have been doing it for years and nothing has happened to me. I use common sense though when I walk across the street. It is worse in LA and San Francisco than it is in OKC and yet cops there don't care either unless you do it right in front of them as if you're trying to provoke them. But I jaywalk all the time in San Fran and they don't care. Why should they in OKC?

I'm pretty certain there are no jaywalking laws in Oklahoma City.... and if there are the OCPD is one the biggest offenders because I'm always having to stop for them crossing Main Street at the new headquarters.

Jaywalking laws are often at the state level.

Jaywalking laws are often at the state level.

City muni codes read exactly word for word the same as the States... 47 O.S. 11-501 a. (http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=82298)

It's in 502 and 503.

502:

(b) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

503:

(c) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
^
This is the big one, people darting between traffic (stopped or moving) when they are less than 20 feet from an actual crosswalk path.

I don't think police officers should be giving jaywalkers warning let alone tickets. I don't see the problem with it. I have been doing it for years and nothing has happened to me. I use common sense though when I walk across the street. It is worse in LA and San Francisco than it is in OKC and yet cops there don't care either unless you do it right in front of them as if you're trying to provoke them. But I jaywalk all the time in San Fran and they don't care. Why should they in OKC?

In the past 3/4 months, I have seen 4 people almost hit as they were crossing mid-block on 10th. They didn't walk the extra 100 ft. to the signaled crossing.

In the past 3/4 months, I have seen 4 people almost hit as they were crossing mid-block on 10th. They didn't walk the extra 100 ft. to the signaled crossing.

Happens all the time on 10th. Some of the worst is when church lets out or is starting at Frontline and parents are crossing with their entire family mid-block when the crosswalk is just feet away.

Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.

1) Neither 10th or Broadway have adjacent intersections with signals in the areas being discussed
2) Regarding Broadway, where are the marked crosswalks again?

Obvs not justifying darting out in traffic, however during heavy traffic times, even at the non-marked-but-presumed crosswalks, traffic is so heavy and cars don't yield so you have to kind of take matters into your own hands if you hope to cross the street faster than you could have walked down to the next light (6th) and crossed with a walk sign. Just playing devil's advocate here though.

1) Neither 10th or Broadway have adjacent intersections with signals in the areas being discussed
2) Regarding Broadway, where are the marked crosswalks again?

Obvs not justifying darting out in traffic, however during heavy traffic times, even at the non-marked-but-presumed crosswalks, traffic is so heavy and cars don't yield so you have to kind of take matters into your own hands if you hope to cross the street faster than you could have walked down to the next light (6th) and crossed with a walk sign. Just playing devil's advocate here though.

There are marked crosswalks at 10th and Broadway and 10th and Robinson.

I don't drive fast through AA but I feel like I should be driving faster because of the way the road is designed. I like to drive slow there because I like to see all that is going on in the area. Forget the paddle yield signs and flashing light crosswalks, redesign the street to make traffic slower and the street more pedestrian friendly.

On a sort of related note, do you guys watch Adam Ruins Everything? He had an episode not long ago called Adam Ruins Cars or Driving or something like that. He talks about some of the stuff we discuss on these boards. I find his show interesting but take it with a grain of salt because he tends to come up with a point of view and then find sources to back up his point of view and his sources are questionable at times such as using Vox as a source. Anyway, it's an interesting episode if you can catch it. He says a lot of the same things about traffic and cars and pedestrians that we say here.

There are marked crosswalks at 10th and Broadway and 10th and Robinson.

And then at 10th & Harvey, then 10th & Hudson.

Adam Ruins Everything is a great show that addresses commonly misunderstood issues, but, of course, I'd do follow-up research on any episode. Here's the jaywalking skit from the car episode I think you're referring to:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-AFn7MiJz_s

I know there are crosswalks on 10th, and at 10th/Broadway, I was referring to the core part of AA on Broadway where there are not.

I know there are crosswalks on 10th, and at 10th/Broadway, I was referring to the core part of AA on Broadway where there are not.

Right, there are crosswalks at 10th and Broadway and 6th and Broadway. If we are able to add them on 7th, 8th and 9th that would be a big step in the right direction.

I think I see the confusion here in this thread (specifically shawnw). I want to make it clear what we are calling "crosswalks" versus a signaled crosswalk. There does not need to be a signaled crossing (with a light) for something to be designated as crosswalk.


a crosswalk at an intersection is defined as the extension of the sidewalk or the shoulder across the intersection, regardless of whether it is marked or not. The only way a crosswalk can exist at a midblock location is if it is marked. Most jurisdictions have crosswalk laws that make it legal for pedestrians to cross the street at any intersection, whether marked or not, unless the pedestrian crossing is specifically prohibited.

So by definition, there is crosswalks at every intersection in AA. shawnw, I believe your argument is that you are wanting painted crosswalks at every intersection?

I was playing devils advocate and saying we could not cite folks for jaywalking under state statutes because on Broadway there were neither adjacent lights or crosswalks.

I get what you're saying. And that is incorrect. The law is that they must cross at the intersections and not randomly throughout the street. There is unmarked crosswalks at every intersection, therefore anyone crossing at any other point in AA is simply being lazy; thus could be deserving of a warning or citation.

I get what you're saying. And that is incorrect. The law is that they must cross at the intersections and not randomly throughout the street. There is unmarked crosswalks at every intersection, therefore anyone crossing at any other point in AA is simply being lazy; thus could be deserving of a warning or citation.

You're not reading it right. You can cross the street at a place other than the intersection. The key statute is Title 47, 11-503(c):



Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.

Which is not the case down Broadway.

That is a good point. I suppose an intersection without a signal light would allow pedestrian to cross outside of the implied crosswalk. I would still be hesitant due to the subjectiveness of this part of the statute:

(b) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

So to correct my earlier post, you can legally cross anywhere in AA as long as you don't force a vehicle to yield in an impossible manner (good luck).

Adam Ruins Everything is a great show that addresses commonly misunderstood issues, but, of course, I'd do follow-up research on any episode. Here's the jaywalking skit from the car episode I think you're referring to:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-AFn7MiJz_s
Yeah, that skit is form the episode that I was talking about.

From Downtown OKC Inc:

Happy to announce @AutoAlleyOKC board will appoint a pedestrian safety task force to examine crosswalks, speed limits, ADA access, lighting.

It's about time. When I worked at Hideaway, crossing that street was like playing a game of frogger. I eventually got so jaded that I just started walking out and hoping people wouldn't hit me.

Excellent and welcome news

I hadn't driven up Broadway in a while, but I did a couple weeks ago and agree it's really confusing with the paddle signs. Glad to see they are going to take a hard look at it.

At various times in just the past two weeks, one (or both) of the paddle signs at 10th, 7th, and 6th have been knocked down, or hit, or carried to the side of the road, or otherwise harmed, and in at least a couple of cases later returned to service. I am certainly happy they're looking at the problem!

The paddle signs clearly weren't thought through. At 6th and 10th, there are walk signs and traffic lights. Are drivers really supposed to stop at a green light to yield to a pedestrian walking through a wait sign?

Spend some money OKC - make your premier urban retail district (Auto Alley) safer for walking pedestrians - and you will get more money!

https://t.co/u4sMkjYxYn

This is a survey from the Auto Alley pedestrian safety task force. Please take a few minutes to fill this out if you have an opinion on pedestrian safety in AA.

I was just about to point out that I observed last night that most of the pedestrian crossing signs (paddles) are very damaged and in some cases completely destroyed. That entire area is completely unsafe for pedestrians and vehicles. Some serious changes need to be made as soon as possible as a deadly incident WILL happen at any time - there is more sand at the bottom of the glass than the top for such an incident.

Yep. The necessity of signage to create safety indicates that the street is not obviously or inherently safe. The fact that the signage in this case is so badly damaged tells me that this street is badly hindered by safety issues. Lowering the speed limit, adding ped-crossing signs etc will only work to an extent. What is needed are physical changes to the landscape (like a reduction in lanes, enhanced crosswalk bumpouts, street trees, crosswalks, improved lighting, etc.).

I like the flashing-light crosswalk ideas.

These were highly effective in California. Really get the attention of motorists.

https://t.co/u4sMkjYxYn

This is a survey from the Auto Alley pedestrian safety task force. Please take a few minutes to fill this out if you have an opinion on pedestrian safety in AA.
Done.

I used the comment section at the end to say that I think a better street design (tree lined median, bike lanes, crosswalk islands) would do more to slow traffic and make it safer for pedestrians than signs and stripes would.

I like the flashing-light crosswalk ideas.

These were highly effective in California. Really get the attention of motorists.

OU has at least one on campus and I agree that they're a good alternative until physical changes can be made.

The only bad thing having those flashing crosswalk lights, when it snows, the plows take them out. As they scratch the ground, the blade will take them out.

The ones in Norman I've seen appear to be recessed

The only bad thing having those flashing crosswalk lights, when it snows, the plows take them out. As they scratch the ground, the blade will take them out.

That's never been a problem that I know of with the ones I see here in the pavement in school zones.

Broadway is a stroad.

https://www.google.com/search?q=stroad&oq=stroad&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l3.2426j0j4&client=ms-android-motorola&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

The ones in Norman I've seen appear to be recessed

Yes, they are recessed. I've seen a few close calls on Elm on campus, where these are installed. They seem to work fairly well. As a driver, they get my attention effectively. I don't think they're as good as a full signalized intersection or a HAWK beacon, but they're certainly less disruptive.

I'm OK with flashing crosswalk lights in the pavement, but I don't want flashing pedestrian crossing signs. The latter would be just as effective as the paddles.

I'm OK with flashing crosswalk lights in the pavement, but I don't want flashing pedestrian crossing signs. The latter would be just as effective as the paddles.

What about both? That's how the OU ped crossings I mentioned are set up...