Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

Why All the Outrage Over Bike Boxes?

Yesterday afternoon, I spent 15 minutes on the air with KOMO Radio’s Ken Schram, talking about what Schram called the “war on cars.”

Before going on the radio, I prepped for a conversation about road diets, parking-meter fee hikes, and a proposed increase in the commercial parking tax—you know, the stuff downtown businesses and neighborhood associations are all worked up about. What I didn’t anticipate: A rant from Schram (echoed by his fellow KOMO host Dori Monson, who ranted yesterday about “bike Nazis”) about bike boxes, street markings that allow bikes to stop at intersections in front of cars.

Seattle’s getting four bike boxes—one, already installed, at 12th and Pine, two at 12th and Madison, and one at 7th Ave. S. and S. Dearborn St. The “boxes” consist of green paint markings that direct cyclists to move in front of cars, preventing drivers from taking a right turn around cyclists (or into cyclists’ paths).

Perhaps even more than “road diets,” which replace driving lanes with bike lanes and add a turn lane for cars, the bike boxes have brought out anti-bike, pro-car contingent, which argues that it’s unfair to make drivers wait for cyclists at red lights.

From the cyclist’s point of view, of course, this is an asinine argument. First, the primary point of bike boxes is to make cyclists more visible to drivers. When drivers hit cyclists—and yes, cyclists do frequently get hit in right-hook accidents by inattentive drivers—the inevitable refrain is, “I didn’t see her!” Bike boxes make drivers more likely to see us.

Second, cyclists already have the right to block cars in traffic. If I’m first at a traffic light, I’m allowed to take the lane—there’s no law obligating me to scoot over when a car comes up behind me, any more than a driver is required to pull out of the way to let a car behind him pass.

Third, and most importantly: It isn’t logically consistent to argue that cyclists should have to follow the rules of the road (AKA, act like a car) and that cyclists should have to get out of the way the instant a driver shows up on the scene. If you want me to ride on the right side, obey traffic laws, stop at stop lights, and stay off the sidewalk, it makes no sense to say I should move to the side—i.e., act like a pedestrian—the second I keep someone in a car from turning right.

Either cyclists are road users with all the rules and responsibilities that implies, or we aren’t, and we should be allowed to break the rules but expected to cede most of the road to cars. You can’t have it both ways.




  • Jakers

    How is taking a right turn at a red light taking a turn “into cyclists’ paths?” Should the cyclists be stopped behind the line too?

    True “cyclists already have the right to block cars in traffic” but they don’t have the right to cut in front when there is no space.

    Simply put, we need to better educate the public about the rules cyclist follow and ticket them when they the don’t follow them.

  • Jakers

    How is taking a right turn at a red light taking a turn “into cyclists’ paths?” Should the cyclists be stopped behind the line too?

    True “cyclists already have the right to block cars in traffic” but they don’t have the right to cut in front when there is no space.

    Simply put, we need to better educate the public about the rules cyclist follow and ticket them when they the don’t follow them.

  • TJ

    Isn’t Dori Monson a KIRO host?

  • Dream_On_M

    I wish for dedicated bike paths where I could just zone out and pedal to work and back. No ‘on your left’, bell-ringing, and tourist dodging. Just pedaling. You can tax me, fee me, license me and I’ll donate my monthly gym fees. I’d even volunteer to help build and maintain.

    So tired of all the driver/biker emotional drama. We are all idiots – especially when on/in our vehicles.

  • Jay

    The bike box is part of a bike lane – think about it. Would you turn right on red from the left lane of a 4 lane street?

  • http://pstransitoperators.wordpress.com/ Jeff Welch

    Yeah, maybe that’s why she said she’d been on air with KOMO’s professional kvetcher, Ken Schram.

  • 42-year Seattleite

    These drivers are whiners. When was the last time you saw a bicyclist stop and wait at a red light? These bike boxes are areas where cyclists can slow down and check cross traffic before jumping the red light. You’ll get your turn for your right-turn-on-red quickly enough.

  • Pete

    Most cyclists like most drivers are responsible and drive/ride with care. Does the SPD cite cyclists who violate rules of the road? Could cyclists contribute to the city by paying a registratioin fee for their bicycle? Now that we are ALL sharing the road, shouldn’t bicycles have annual ‘tabs’ like cars/trucks?

  • thinker

    So Jay if what you say has any meaning then a car could never take a right when there is a bike lane. I ask you to think about it.

  • takes two

    Cyclists already do contribute to the city. City streets are paid for mostly with property tax and sales tax. This is well documented. If a cyclist does not have a car, they are subsidizing motorists driving on city streets. Most cyclists do also have cars, but this is bit beside the point.

    It is motorists who are getting away with subsidies from property tax and sales tax. These are just the facts–you can look them up.

    Yes, the SPD often does cite cyclists for violations.

  • Bry

    Anyone who would use the term ‘bike Nazi’ in that sort of setting is just being an asshole for the hell of it. It may get ratings or whatever but the mistaken assumption is that folks like Schram or Monson actually give a flying @%$! about the merits of bike boxes versus having to possibly wait an extra few seconds at 4 intersections.

    They’re just hamming it up for their SOV-biased audience: it’s almost certain that not a single Seattle cyclist tunes in to KOMO Radio while making his or her way around town…..

  • Jay

    Not until they can safely merge across the bike lane to make a right turn. A bike lane is no different than a traffic lane and under the law a bike has the same status as a car.

  • David Sucher

    The right-turn-on-red issue is a legitimate problem, even for me. (I basically think that most anti-bike people are probably just feeling guilty that they are too fat and lazy to ride etc etc.)

    I do think that at one of the City’s proposed bike lanes — e.g. the one on Roosevelt north of NE 75th — is not well planned. It seems crazy to put bikes on Roosevelt when they should be on low-volume streets like parallel 8th NE.

    But basically the country — and that includes Seattle — is pretty fucked-up in almost every regard. Just look at the people who can’t read e.g. they think that Holmes’ statement about Conlin says that Conlin won. Ohmygosh…that includes Publicola! Am I ever embarrassed.

  • seandr

    As a sometime cyclist, I’m pretty jazzed about the bike lanes, sharrows, and route marker signs that have appeared all over the city’s roads. Greg Nickels, I sincerely thank you!

    But I don’t understand the point of bike boxes. There are plenty of problems facing cyclists on the road. Which problem, exactly, are the bike boxes trying to solve?

  • Jakers

    I can see the use of a car box when the bike lane ends at the intersection and does not continue to the next block. It is an okay way to merge the lanes, but nowhere do people driving cars in the right lane have a box that lets them move to the front of a lane to the left, nor can cars drive in a bike lane, nor can cars drive on the sidewalk in some cases, nor can cars park for free on the sidewalk at the entrance of a building, nor do cars get to ride on the road without paying licensing fees, nor do drivers get to drive a car without a license; SO YOU’RE WRONG, cars do NOT have the same status as bikes.

  • AC

    You can’t make a right turn on red in Manhattan. Ever get nearly right-hooked in Seattle while stepping off the curb because a driver is looking left for a gap in traffic to make a right on red? I’d love to see them removed from most if not all Seattle intersections. It would make intersections much safer for everyone.

  • Diogenes

    I’m one of those weird cyclists who stops for red lights. And when I do, I don’t go scooting up the right side of the road; I get right out in the middle of the lane and take up a full space between cagers.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    Um… actually that’s a really routine construction. Where there is a bike lane and a right-turn-only stub, the bike lane typically shifts to the left of that bit of car lane to make cyclists who are going straight get out of the way of drivers who are turning right.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    I find this equally mystifying.

  • cyn cyn cynical

    The City also thinks that 6th Ave S is a good bike route. Even though it is not a heavily used north/south arterial, 6th Ave S is heavily used by east/west by freight backing into and out of warehouses. Crazy blind spots. Recipe for disaster!

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    Also, read the actual rules of the road here:
    http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/bike/laws.htm
    You’ll notice that it quite plainly states “A bicycle is a legal road vehicle, just like a car. This means that bicycle riders have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers.”

  • jakin’ it

    “nor can cars drive in a bike lane, nor can cars drive on the sidewalk in some cases, nor can cars park for free on the sidewalk at the entrance of a building, nor do cars get to ride on the road without paying licensing fees, nor do drivers get to drive a car without a license”

    I guess you’ve never been to the ID.

  • Anonymous

    Erica: I love my bike, but frankly most of the “outrage” that you reference is mostly in response to the kind of arrogant anti-car rhetoric you and your little clique spew out daily. Believe me, I would love to take my bike everywhere instead of sitting in a box with a motor, but that simply isn’t possible in the real world. We have got to learn to share the road.

    As for the bike boxes, it is still to be seen if they help or hurt the right turn situation. Personally, unless I am on a dedicated trail, I prefer the philosophy of less engineering and more common sense.

  • takes two

    I believe free right on red is a federal requirement in order to get highway funds.

  • cyn cyn cynical

    By law, isn’t slower traffic supposed to move the right and allow faster moving traffic to pass on the left. Wouldn’t this also apply to bicyclists if they are indeed abiding by the rules of the road?

  • jdb64

    It does sound dreamy, but I ride the Myrtle Edwards dedicated bike path to work and back and there is still plenty of “on your left”, bell-ringing and tourist dodging. *Sigh*

  • fgruben

    But motorists are required to pay for many things more than just the property tax and sales tax that they pay. Or do you presume that cyclist’s are the only people that pay those taxes? While being required to buy insurance is a little bit much for a cyclist, having a bike license is only right. McShwinn wants money, just not from cyclists. People have to license their cats and dogs. Why not bicycles?

  • Anonymous

    I hate bicyclists. Mostly because of things like this.

  • TJ

    Read on.

    She writes “A rant from Schram (echoed by his fellow KOMO host Dori Monson, who ranted yesterday about “bike Nazis”) .”

  • Pedestrian

    My rant is bicyclists on sidewalks and walking paths. SLOW DOWN. I don’t have a rear view mirror on my head. If you need to go that fast stay on the *&^%*&% road. I’m going to start putting up white cordboard cut outs of pedestrians wherever people are smashed into causing broken bones, brain injury and DEATH!!

  • thinker

    Jay and Eldan,
    This would all work if it was true. If bicycle riders have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers then they would wait their turn in traffic and never pass a car on the right in the same lane and only do so in marked cyclist lanes. I think this is not true however.

  • TJ

    It wouldn’t be such a problem if pedestrians also didn’t step into the crosswalk when the “don’t walk” signal starts flashing.
    It’s not only to warn the pedestrian that the light will change, but it’s also to give the driver a chance to make a free turn on the red.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    Bicycle advocates online are as ruthlessly dickish in their presentation as are car advocates. No offense, Erica, but compared either Josh you can come off as positively shrill on this topic, in contrast to your other writings here. That tone and tenor does nothing but antagonize people. Pro-bike advocacy is neither civil rights nor women’s rights nor anything of that magnitude, and bicycling is as a going concern a distant red-header cousin of proper mass transit for people’s priorities.

    In other words, pro-bike people don’t have the luxury of being dickish or shrill in their advocacy, because most people simply don’t give a shit, and those that do and are on your side generally–like me, for example, being a centrist in all this stuff–are turned off by the FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUU sort of tone a lot of this writing takes.

    On the street, it’s the same thing but on a different twist: car drivers have always had bikers around them. Motorcycles, mopeds, bikes. I do lump them all together. The problem that I think a lot of car drivers have is this, which always aggravated the hell out of me when I drove myself:

    I’m driving down a road, and cannot pass because either it’s illegal where I am, or there simply isn’t any room, and I’ve got a bicyclist in front of me. There is ample room on the right for classic ‘bike lane’ passage. If the bicyclist–cruising along at say 10-20mph–could skooch over, I can pass and we all win. But no… because bicyclists here most times tend to stay right in the lane. That is a pure dick move. When I rode my bike for years, including commuting a few, I routinely moved over OUT OF COURTESY and to not be an ass.

    The fact that bicyclists tend to zip in and out of traffic is secondary. If you have the mobility and resources to pop in and out of sidewalks, alleys, roads, and lanes, you can move over 10 feet to not be a douchebag that impedes the flow of traffic. Being self-entitled to the lane and screwing up the flow of traffic for everyone else but bicyclists does nothing to endear biking or help any causes. Every time it’s done, it’s one more tiny nail in the coffin of acceptance and allying with that one driver you’ve pissed off to prove a point.

  • thinker

    Also there would be no right hooks if there was no passing on the right.

  • thinker

    Also there would be no right hooks if there was no passing on the right.

  • Johns

    …and switching to all-walk pedestrian phases would get rid of that problem. Then there would be no “free right on red” but right turns wouldn’t have to conflict with pedestrians.

  • kurisu
  • Johns

    not in a single lane situation, no. Otherwise the expectation would be that a slower car would move to the right and allow another car to pass it in the same lane.

  • Johns

    not in a single lane situation, no. Otherwise the expectation would be that a slower car would move to the right and allow another car to pass it in the same lane.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7J3DMRSL6VTVVMZOXLRRL55VZE Jim D

    When I’m on my bike at a red light and car comes up behind me with their right-hand signal blinking, I voluntarily scoot over and wave them past. I realize I have the legal right to obstinately sit there and block the car, but what’s the point? It’s just common courtesy; share the road works both ways. Can’t we just get along? Jeez!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7J3DMRSL6VTVVMZOXLRRL55VZE Jim D

    When I’m on my bike at a red light and car comes up behind me with their right-hand signal blinking, I voluntarily scoot over and wave them past. I realize I have the legal right to obstinately sit there and block the car, but what’s the point? It’s just common courtesy; share the road works both ways. Can’t we just get along? Jeez!

  • Jakers

    @eldan, do WSDOT laws govern non-state roads? I understand that a bike is “a legal road vehicle, just like a car,” but that means that it has the same legal use of a road like a car, but does not mean that it the same across the board.

  • TJ

    I like all-ways walks. But you don’t have to institute those if you want to get rid of free right turns. You just post a sign “No turn on red.”

    My point was that currently, free right turns are allowed, pedestrians do get (nearly) hit by drivers occupied with traffic coming from the left, and don’t see that pedestrian that has walked up to the corner and stepped off the curb. And my point was that part of that problem is due to the fact that pedestrians also do not obey the rules of the road.

  • Jakers

    I wish I had the same for driving in my car! I agree whole-heartedly that “We are all idiots!”

  • Jakers

    “I disagree with you, but I’m pretty sure you’re not Hitler.”

  • Jakers

    They are good for pushing bikes to the front, kind of like carpool lanes that don’t have to stop when entering the freeway.

  • Jakers

    right on.

  • Jakers

    Walkers want to be able to mindlessly walk around without being cognoscente of their surroundings.

  • Jakers

    All great points, but I don’t think the passing on the right applies to city driving, I think that is a highway law, but I might be wrong.

  • Jakers

    All great points, but I don’t think the passing on the right applies to city driving, I think that is a highway law, but I might be wrong.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    http://tdc-www.harvard.edu/mink/bike/info/bostraf.htm

    “If you block traffic long enough to cause a delay or backup, however, common courtesy (and the law) require that you pull over to let cars pass.”

    And I said:

    “The fact that bicyclists tend to zip in and out of traffic is secondary. If you have the mobility and resources to pop in and out of sidewalks, alleys, roads, and lanes, you can move over 10 feet to not be a douchebag that impedes the flow of traffic. Being self-entitled to the lane and screwing up the flow of traffic for everyone else but bicyclists does nothing to endear biking or help any causes.”

    I never said never take the lane. Seriously; I grew up and lived ages 1-30 in Connecticut, where everyone drives basically. We have crap for mass transit and distances prohibit realistic bike commuting for many unless you work in the same town as you live or adjacent–I was lucky for that. Most of my commutes were 20-30 minutes by car because I had no choice.

    A *lot* of Connecticut commuting is done on side roads and off the highways by the nature and layout of our state. Despite that we still had many people commute *locally* by bike I almost never had a problem with people on bikes there wrecking traffic flows. I rarely would see it in Massachusetts, Long Island, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and New York, places I also drove multiple times per year. It happened, sure, but even now I have to struggle to remember specific instances.

    Once I moved here and drove the first 1.5-2.0 years before I got rid of my car I saw it more in that time in Seattle than I did in my entire life driving in Connecticut from age 16-30.

    Why are Seattle bike riders different?

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    Thank you for saying more simply what I have been trying to say.

  • Jakers

    Joe for President of the Cyclist/Driver Association

  • roadsharing ch. 3

    Sometimes as a ped I realize I *could* step out and force a car to deaccelerate suddenly and yield the right of way to me. Often I choose not to; it’s often more efficient time wise an energy wise to wave the car through, then I cross.

    (sometimes an uber polite driver starts disputing my directions and insists with hand motions etc. that I must cross. Yuk, what a bunch of na— I mean what a bunch of ….control freaks.)

  • Anonymous

    I often take the far left of the lane at red lights (and yes, stop. Unless it’s clear I’m not triggering it.) to allow a driver to make his right on red without worrying about me.

    More to the specifics of the bike-box installed: I walked by it today, and I found it an odd first stab. When I read about it, I assumed it was going down hill. This is a bumpy fast road used by lots of bikes, and I often go as fast as traffic. Taking a lane is the only safe way to go those speeds on this road.

    But no, it’s going uphill. There is no way bikes are going to be riding in a car lane uphill. This is just bizarre.

    As an aside, a King Cab was sitting square in the center of the bike box, chatting on his cell, with 3 occupied SPD rollers sitting right there. For some reason this struck me as funny as hell.

  • Anonymous

    Erica *loves* it when you call her shrill.

  • kurisu

    Fair enough, you never said that, but you also never said you were comfortable with bicyclists taking the lane. The width of some of the roads here in Seattle probably has a lot to do with it; also that there are more bicyclists. But realistically, I had the same frustration – and wasn’t comfortable riding in the road – until i took the “Urban Cycling Techniques” class, and now I feel more comfortable driving around bicyclists. With a few notable exceptions it’s rare that bicyclists slow me down by more than 2 seconds. The arboretum drives my wife crazy, but there’s really nowhere to go if you are a bicyclist. Curbs, poor pavement and curves.

  • kurisu

    Fair enough, you never said that, but you also never said you were comfortable with bicyclists taking the lane. The width of some of the roads here in Seattle probably has a lot to do with it; also that there are more bicyclists. But realistically, I had the same frustration – and wasn’t comfortable riding in the road – until i took the “Urban Cycling Techniques” class, and now I feel more comfortable driving around bicyclists. With a few notable exceptions it’s rare that bicyclists slow me down by more than 2 seconds. The arboretum drives my wife crazy, but there’s really nowhere to go if you are a bicyclist. Curbs, poor pavement and curves.

  • http://www.joeszilagyi.com/ Joe Szilagyi

    I’ve emailed with her many times; she’s a sweetheart as long as no one crosses her bike path.

  • seandr

    The “right turn situation” I’m aware of occurs when the light is green and a car turns right and hits a cyclist coming through on the inside right. This happens all the time, and many cyclists have been injured or killed this way. I’ve personally had numerous close calls with drivers who didn’t signal their right turn.

    Bike boxes are no help, given that this situation doesn’t occur when everyone is stopped at a red light.

  • Barleywine

    You sound like you’re trying to be polite to the drivers; but if you’re not ready to cross you might turn your back, read the paper, sit in the lotus position or make some other sign that you’re not interested at the moment.

    Just a tip from a fellow ped.

  • steveb

    I LOVE that you use the term “Walkers” as something offensive, as if you aren’t a “Walker”. Stupid walkers, I’ll continue to hop anywhere I please, thank you very much! Best part: No hop-lights, so I can cross anywhere & anytime.
    Hop to the future with me!

  • JL

    While I appreciate the bike route markings on streets, I really hate the name “sharrow.” I get that it’s a “share arrow.” But it reminds me more of the word “harrow,” meaning a steel grate which gets dragged along the ground behind a larger vehicle. Not the image I want in my mind when I’m pedaling along between cars.

  • jdb64

    “I often take the far left of the lane at red lights (and yes, stop. Unless it’s clear I’m not triggering it.) to allow a driver to make his right on red without worrying about me.”

    I do the same. No bike box necessary! (Not that I’m against them….)

  • Hans

    Because, then where do you stop? Why don’t pedestrians have freaking licenses then? Huh?

  • 42-year Seattleite

    Not my observation, takes two. I’ve seen cyclists violate the rules of the road right in front of police cars, with no response from the guys in blue. It’s almost like they KNOW they won’t get cited.

    Can somebody get the numbers from SPD traffic, how many citations they issue against bicyclists each year? I bet it’s fewer than one a day.

  • 42-year Seattleite

    Before bike boxes, bicyclists just used the ped crosswalks, to position themselves in front of the line of cars. “Bike boxes” are an awfully expensive ($15,000 a pop!) substitute for the same functionality.

  • ohai

    By hating people, you’re doing nothing constructive. Not only are you raising your blood pressure and stressing yourself out, but you are making yourself just another jerk on the road by being worked up about it.

    Take a breath, realize we are all humans, and just talk with people.

  • ohai

    Did I detect sarcasm there?

    Believe it or not, there are plenty of cyclists who wait for red lights and plenty of drivers who do the same. There *are* law-abiding people in this city, you know.

    And to answer your question, the last time I saw a cyclist stop and wait at a light was this morning on my commute to work. I stopped at every single red light and every cyclist around me did the same.

  • Hans

    I think the one (tiny little) thing you are not realizing is that people in cars almost never realize how fast a bicyclist can go. Bikes often can take off from a dead stop far faster than a car! As a result, when a light turns from red to green, people sitting in their cars just step on the gas and turn right, blindly assuming the bicyclist hasn’t even started yet! This is the problem that I believe they are trying to address.

    And to all you whiners about having to sit in your car behind bicyclists that have pulled in front of you: just watch, those bicyclists will probably be gone long before you get your lazy-ass foot off the brake and step on the gas. Yes, you will be passing them in 5 seconds time, but they should all be off to the right (or left depending on the bike lane) by then!

    So, stop your jealous whiny complaining about why bikes get to go in front of you. Think of it as a privilege they get for having to exert their little legs out in the freezing cold and not use any fossil fuels you so happily burn up on a daily basis.

    And yes, most bicyclists have cars and licenses and pay fees too!

    Sheesh, this is a stupid thread! I can’t believe so many people are tied up in knots about bicyclists “taking over” Seattle. Really? Come on people!

  • Hans

    Oh, right, it’s the bicyclists fault! So, then why don’t you run some over on your way home? I hate people that generalize all people into classes! What are you? A bicycle hating nazi?

  • Hans

    Let me ask you a question: how would you feel if a bicyclist yelled at you (the pedestrian) to get off the sidewalk? That’s how many car drivers treat the bicyclist when they are riding on the road! I can’t believe so many people feel so explicitly entitled to sole use of the public ways! Ugh!

  • TMN

    Yep, bikes are pretty awesome vehicles when you say it that way.

  • seandr

    Hans, thanks for the reply. I share your bewilderment at all the anger on this issue.

    Honestly, based on what I’ve seen and read, the red-light scenario you mention seems far less of a problem to me than the green light scenario I outlined.

    The most memorable example of a cyclist killed by right turn on green was the incident on Eastlake in which a dump truck turning right killing one kid and injuring another . In response, the city painted the bicycle lane green through the intersection so that right-turning drivers can better see that they are turning into a bike lane.

    That seems like a sensible design to me. Stacking bikes in front of cars at a read light? Not so much.

  • git your car oughta here

    I wasn’t clear I guess. I am not being polite. I am selfishly governing the interaction for my ends. One goal is it’s quicker to wave the driver thru; often it takes longer for them to stop. I also prefer to cross without a car hovering there. Also their stopping and starting and hovering idling wastes gas.

    My “waving” at them to go on thru is a pretty clear sign I would think, though admittedly a fair number seem to want to fight me on this, they wave back, insisting that I cross and disobeying my waving them through. I find this controlling and faux polite. I think as I am the pedestrian the car ought to do what I say and they should direct me to cross if I prefer for them to just keep going on thru. The complexity of these interactions as well as the issues you raise….pedestrians need a whole codebook to know if their stance and location indicates desire to cross etc., drivers must interpret, etc., all indicate that if there are that many peds crossing the intersection could probably use a traffic signal.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    WSDOT doesn’t make laws. It’s quoting the Revised Code of Washington, i.e. state law, so it applies to all public roads in the state. I just linked to that page because it was the first readable, plain English summary I found on Google.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    This is like arguing that the law doesn’t apply to drivers because most break the speed limit.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    Viewed through that lens, they’re a pedestrian enhancement if they give the crosswalk back to pedestrians….

  • fred

    so “Jakers”….what should we do about the drivers who turn right without using signals while talking on their cell phones? education and tickets don’t seem to be having an impact on that issue. this happened to me AGAIN last night. a bike box wouldn’t have helped in this situation, but they are a good idea as it allows cyclists to be seen by drivers.

    all road users need to get over this “i’m right – you’re wrong” mentality and learn how to share the road. a good start would be to stop using electronic communication devices while driving (or cycling!) AND letting other users of the road know what you are going to do next. these are 2 simple things that we can all start doing right now that will have a positive impact on everyone.

  • Barleywine

    I did wonder if you were joking at first, but no.

    “disobeying my waving them through. I find this controlling and faux polite.”

    I find that hilarious. Are you sure you’re not pulling my leg here?

    I’d add the same rules apply when you’re the only one at a bus stop and the bus coming isn’t the one you want: Turn away, give a head shake and a low wave off, something. Don’t stand there like an eager puppy until the bus stops & opens the door, then explain that no, you wanted the express.
    But don’t wave them on. That’s just not your call to make.

  • sarah

    There are more than 70 comments the article re bike boxes. Bloody bike boxes.

    There are only 6 comments on the article re hearings regarding budget cuts for the City and the County.

    Make your own assessment of that disparity in what seems to be important to Publicola readers.

  • sarah

    There are more than 70 comments the article re bike boxes. Bloody bike boxes.

    There are only 6 comments on the article re hearings regarding budget cuts for the City and the County.

    Make your own assessment of that disparity in what seems to be important to Publicola readers.

  • Barleywine

    I see your comment re bike boxes, but not your solution to the buget cuts. Please link me, or let me know what you’ve come up with.

    I’m all gears…

  • DutchCyclist

    Reading these comments is just depressing…it’s like a bunch of MS DOS programmers in the 1980s debating whether GUIs are the end of world. Makes me really glad I’m interviewing for a job back in a European country where the things Erica says are just common sense.

    Have any of the anti-bike box folks actually lived in a country with decent bike infrastructure and used it daily?

    There are easily thousands of bike boxes across the Netherlands, for example. (Actually, they’re actually a second-class treatment for an intersection there — first-class is to have an all-way bicyclist-only phase of the intersection. ;-)

    Jeez.

  • Ski9266503

    My solution, Barleywine, is fair taxation. Unfortunately, I’m in the minority, and apparently you don’t think that’s a solution or it would have occurred to you.

  • Barleywine

    I’m not sure what you mean by fair taxation.

    If you mean tax the heck out of us to pay for much-needed services, I agree. But how would you do that, and which services are much-needed? And where would you cut, if anywhere?

    And are we on the wrong thread for this one?
    Me thinks we are.

  • peternatural

    F-f-four bike boxes in Seattle? Not three, or two, (or zero), but f-f-f-four?! Oh, it is so unfair… this war on drivers has GONE TOO FAR! Boo (effing) hoo!!

  • Common Sense

    Bike boxes aren’t about giving priority to cyclists. They are about preventing death and injury. In 2007 two Portland cyclists were killed in right turn accidents. Many more people across the country have died in similar accidents. Bike boxes are an answer to that problem.

    They are good for motorists and cyclist alike.

    Consider an intersection with a bike lane and no bike box. As a motorist, you are required to wait until the bike lane is clear before making a right hand turn. If you make that turn without seeing a bike and cause a death or injury, it will cost you a great deal of time, money, grief, and likely take a severe emotional toll.

    If that intersection has a bike box, the cyclists will be ahead of you, clearly visible, and out of your way much sooner than with out it so you can safely make a right turn.

    Yes, it might cause you a minor delay if you’re going straight through as you wait for the cyclist to take the bike lane on the other side. The cost of the delay? You’ll sit at the next stop light a few seconds less.

  • Jakers

    I agree with most of you statement. If everyone was responsible and courteous, most of these problems wouldn’t exist and the real problems would be easier to solve. Distracted driving should be punished like DUIs and DUIs should be punished 10 more than they currently are. I am okay with bike boxes when the bike lane ends/merges at an intersection.

  • Jakers

    That’s a pretty good angle for promoting them. I could be swayed to support them if cyclists had to keep off sidewalks unless otherwise marked as mixed use.

  • Jakers

    That’s a pretty good angle for promoting them. I could be swayed to support them if cyclists had to keep off sidewalks unless otherwise marked as mixed use.

  • Jakers

    So you do you hate yourself?

    You might disagree with @isaG75, but I’m pretty sure she’s not Hitler.

  • Jakers

    So you do you hate yourself?

    You might disagree with @isaG75, but I’m pretty sure she’s not Hitler.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    For what it’s worth, I get around by bike more than on foot, and I wish cyclists would get off the damn sidewalks. When we’re going any faster than a brisk walk it’s an annoyance to pedestrians, and going faster than a jog is safer–even for the cyclist, never mind pedestrians–on the street.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    For what it’s worth, I get around by bike more than on foot, and I wish cyclists would get off the damn sidewalks. When we’re going any faster than a brisk walk it’s an annoyance to pedestrians, and going faster than a jog is safer–even for the cyclist, never mind pedestrians–on the street.

  • http://sustainableseattle.blogspot.com/ eldan

    For what it’s worth, I get around by bike more than on foot, and I wish cyclists would get off the damn sidewalks. When we’re going any faster than a brisk walk it’s an annoyance to pedestrians, and going faster than a jog is safer–even for the cyclist, never mind pedestrians–on the street.

  • Anonymous

    The purpose of a motor vehicle license is to make sure people who drive motor vehicles have a basic level of skill at driving and knowledge of the law so as to reduce the number of crashes and other incidents resulting from a lack of these things. The license fee is a revenue generating measure instituted in large part because the cities taxing authority is severely limited. Since about 3% of trips in Seattle are by bicycle and bicycles don’t impose the same kind of costs on the rest of society that cars do, it’s hard to justify a bicycle license and license fee either from a public safety/economic externalities standpoint or from a revenue raising standpoint.

  • Anonymous

    The purpose of a motor vehicle license is to make sure people who drive motor vehicles have a basic level of skill at driving and knowledge of the law so as to reduce the number of crashes and other incidents resulting from a lack of these things. The license fee is a revenue generating measure instituted in large part because the cities taxing authority is severely limited. Since about 3% of trips in Seattle are by bicycle and bicycles don’t impose the same kind of costs on the rest of society that cars do, it’s hard to justify a bicycle license and license fee either from a public safety/economic externalities standpoint or from a revenue raising standpoint.

  • Anonymous

    The purpose of a motor vehicle license is to make sure people who drive motor vehicles have a basic level of skill at driving and knowledge of the law so as to reduce the number of crashes and other incidents resulting from a lack of these things. The license fee is a revenue generating measure instituted in large part because the cities taxing authority is severely limited. Since about 3% of trips in Seattle are by bicycle and bicycles don’t impose the same kind of costs on the rest of society that cars do, it’s hard to justify a bicycle license and license fee either from a public safety/economic externalities standpoint or from a revenue raising standpoint.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t know him, but my guess is that Hans was trying to use irony.

  • Almost clipped

    …but I have had a bicylist yell at me to watch where I was going in the middle of a crosswalk when I had the walk signal. I can’t believe so many people feel so explicitely entitled to sole us of the public ways! Ugh!

  • Jen

    Agreed. I think this debate about having cyclists get licenses goes far beyond the issue of who’s paying for what. If, as Erica says, “… cyclists are road users with all the rules and responsibilities that implies …” then they should be considered road users and be licensed.

    If people had to be “licensed cyclists” then perhaps their cause would be taken more seriously.

  • Pedestrian

    I’m sorry Hans I don’t recall telling the bicyclist to get off the sidewalk I just said slow the F*&^ down. If you want people to respect you on the road or anywhere else try modeling the behavior. When you act like an a%%^&*@ people tend to respond in a similar manner.

  • Gomez

    I am always tickled at the repeated straw-man references to this phantom menace of “outrage over cyclist infrastructure”, outrage I’ve never actually seen or heard of, outside of columns and blog entries decrying this alleged outrage. I sense some frustrated projection!

  • Gomez

    I am always tickled at the repeated straw-man references to this phantom menace of “outrage over cyclist infrastructure”, outrage I’ve never actually seen or heard of, outside of columns and blog entries decrying this alleged outrage. I sense some frustrated projection!

  • Gomez

    And no, Ken Schram manufacturing a discussion doesn’t really count.

  • Brent

    The volume of the anti-bike vituperation and frothing seems to be in inverse proportion to the cost of the paint.

    Perhaps the mayor should be spending millions of dollars instead of thousands of dollars on these projects. Then the jobs-for-jobs sake unions and the chamber would be on board.

  • onshay

    Check your logic thinker and then please try again…

  • http://twitter.com/Kingbashten Kingbashten

    I’m a daily bike commuter, and I say: don’t ride right-parallel to a car that’s in the right lane and is approaching an intersection — get behind it!

    All of these pro-biking policies and new design elements are great, but at the same time, bikers need to stay hyper-vigilante in their awareness and proactive about their riding strategies. It seems like many bikers want to be able to ride with cars and not have to think at the same time.