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.

New York Times: How to Make Bike Lanes Work Better

Over at the New  York Times, five writers are debating whether New York’s huge new system of bike lanes—installed at the behest of Mayor Michael Bloomberg without much discussion or input from citizens, i.e. exactly the opposite of the way we do things in Seattle—is working. (Since adding more than 250 miles of bike lanes, Bloomberg has come under intense pressure from drivers to remove them.)

Refreshingly (and also unlike Seattle), the discussion focuses more on how to make the lanes work better than on whether they should exist at all. One writer argues that New Yorkers need to be patient and give people time to get used to the lanes: “Did people really think that New York would become Copenhagen overnight?” Another points out that the number of law-breaking cyclists—the ones who run lights and buzz pedestrians—are far outnumbered by those who play by the rules.

And a third—Governing magazine writer Alex Marshall—suggests some concrete ways New York’s whole transportation system could be made safer for everyone. In addition to starting a bike-sharing program, turning one-way streets into two-way streets, and promoting biking on all streets, not just busy thoroughfares with bike lanes, Marshall suggests changing the law so that drivers are expected to look out for cyclists, not the other way around:

Change the legal relationship between pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. In boating, the slowest, smallest vessel has priority, generally speaking. Thus the motorboater looks out first for the sailboater, not the other way around.

If drivers knew their insurance rates would go up if they hit a cyclist, they would be more cautious.

Something similar should happen here. Although the passage of “Elle’s law” helped, right now, when a driver hits a cyclist or a pedestrian, there is still no presumption of fault, even if just for liability purposes.

That should change. If drivers knew their insurance companies would raise their rates or cancel their policies if they hit a cyclist or pedestrian, they would be more cautious when turning onto a crosswalk or opening a car door. Right now, more people don’t bicycle because it’s simply still too dangerous, even with bike lanes. From my studies of the Netherlands and other bike-saturated places, it is the proper arrangement of these legal lines that is even more important than the painted lines on the streets marking a bike lane.

It’s a great idea—and, sadly, a novel one. As long as drivers who don’t bike outnumber cyclists, it’s hard to imagine such a dramatic reversal of accountability.




  • Mikos

    I still think sharrows, not lanes, are the way to go. I have had a least one driver swerve at me when I rode outside a lane, apparently believing that the lane is the only place a bicyclist can ride even when it is unsafe. Sharrows tell drivers to be alert for riders. That’s a better message.

  • Rohr

    Sharrows don’t do shit. They were created by mayor Nickels so that he could announce more miles of “bicycle facilities” without actually doing anything substantive.

  • Rohr

    Sharrows don’t do shit. They were created by mayor Nickels so that he could announce more miles of “bicycle facilities” without actually doing anything substantive.

  • Grover

    In Seattle, there are virtually no bicyclists during cold, or wet weather, which is about half the year. Yesterday, even when it was not raining and about 50 degrees, when driving between the Safeco Field area and the top of Queen Anne, I did not see a single bicyclist, while counting over 800 motor vehicles.

    It is just patently stupid to take any room on streets to give them to bicyclists — wihch make up only a tiny fraction of all trips even in the summer — when there are basically zero bicyclists during the 6 months-plus when the weather is bad in Seattle.

    Cars, vans, trucks, buses, and other motor vehicles are just vastly superior to bicycles for virtually all trips. This is why the vast majority of people use motor vehicles instead of bikes.

    Bicycles should be banned from streets. All they do is get in everybody else’s way. Why should motorists be subjected to “street diets”, when the bike lanes are almost empty even in good weather, and completely empty in bad weather.

  • Anonymous

    You really counted all the cars you saw on the way to work?

  • joolian

    Grover … you allegedly do a lot of vehicle counts. Do you really really like counting things? Missed your calling as an usher? Is it the Asperger’s? Enlighten us.

    Love,
    Your “virtually no” winter biking friend

    PS You’re in my way too.

  • Grover

    I wasn’t going to work. lol

    But, it was really easy to count “all” the bikes I saw on that trip.

  • Mikos

    Grover–
    Your hyper-awareness of bicyclists earns bonus points in my book. Keep it up.

  • http://www.twitter.com/joeszi Joe Szilagyi

    If you argue that we ban pedestrians from sidewalks–all those cross walks and red lights slow down automobile traffic–people might subscribe to your newsletter.

  • Grover

    Thank god we ban pedestrians from city streets. Are you suggesting that pedestrians should be allowed to use traffic lanes, like bikes do?

  • http://www.twitter.com/joeszi Joe Szilagyi

    My snark has blown past you like a bicycle blowing a red light, I’m afraid.

  • Sedso

    I proposed this change recently to one of Seattle’s most infamous enviro-lebrities (you know who you are A.S.) I wish I still had his response when he told me this would make no difference at all. I lived in NL when the law was changed in 1998 to make hitting a bike or pedestrian presumptively negligent. The driver can still contest it, but the presumption is that the driver is negligent. It made a big difference in NL. It was hotly debated there, too. They have more than their share of idiot bikers high on dope and clueless pedestrians. Changing the law doesn’t make it OK to walk out in the middle of the street with your headphones on, or riding a fixie down Queen Anne hill (fixies are not street legal in NL). But it does cause drivers to be more careful, and it shifts the financial leverage to the bikers and walkers who are paying attention and obeying common sense rules.

  • Grover

    When I discovered that the official Seattle bicycle counts are conducted by “voluneers” (Cascade Bicycle Club) in September (one of the best months in Seattle for biking) on scheduled days at scheduled locations advertised well in advance to everyone (Cascade Bicycle Club), I decided to do my own counts. How amazing that the official Seattle bicycle counts are grossly exaggerated! Who would have thunk it?

  • Grover

    When a bicyclist holds up a bus full of passengers or a row of cars, who is that benefitting?

    When long lines of cars are stopped at traffic lights because a road diet has reduced the lanes going through an intersection from 2 in each direction to only one, who is that benefitting?

  • Brad, also in Seattle

    If I could change one law in the United States, it would be to create that same presumptive negligence referred to in the article and I would gladly trade it for rural freeways without speed limits.

    Besides great laws regarding collisions, we need to make fuel usage much more expensive. I would think that a $3.50 tax on a gallon of gas as they also have in Europe would also spur cycling and transit use.

    And yes, I know that we would have to not only get it past Boehner and McConnell but Obama too. Oh well.

  • Anonymous

    Incorrect. Sharrows were invented in Denver.

  • joolian

    Tiresome anti-bike crank allegedly “counts” cars and bikes, no doubt on his preferred “cars driving at highway speeds on local arterials” route, to the top of Mt. Queen Anne, and sees no bikes.

    Who would have thunk it?

  • Dream On

    “I would think that a $3.50 tax on a gallon of gas as they also have in Europe would also spur cycling and transit use.”

    No, but it’d be great for the electric car industry. As much as people like you love to push their lifestyle on everyone, there’s still no way to drop off/pick up the kids from daycare, go to work and hit up the grocery store on a bike.

  • Grover

    Hey, Joolian, dear. How many bicycles did you see on your commute today? Almost as many bikes as cars? lol

  • Bruce goodchild

    This is absurd! I see many people in Boston, where I ride all year
    in all weather, riding every day. Seattle weather is more severe
    than Boston’s? I don’t think so…..

    bruce.

  • Ross

    That’s a uniquely Anglo view on things. It’s like no one in any english speaking country has ever heard of cargo bikes, or bike baskets. Getting to work and doing grocery runs is perfectly doable on a bike, even for a large family. It’s also pretty easy to drop off the kids too, they have bikes designed for that kind of thing you know.

    Not saying it’s easier than driving the car, but it’s doable. Better for you too.

  • Anonymous

    Everyone benefits, actually. Road diets more than cover the slight increase in trip times via reductions in time wasted because of accidents on street designs that encourage unsafe speeds. In fact, we could easily increase US life expectancy by driving less:
    http://www.vancouversun.com/news/hour+driving+could+reduce+life+minutes+Study/2514598/story.html

    I don’t mean you personally, of course. I’m sure you’re a very safe driver. Very safe, counting the cars.

  • http://spifflines.blogspot.com/ John Bailo

    For me, the key to quality biking is that perfect sweet spot between high density cities and remote rural areas…where there are not so many cars, and yet things are close enough to be bikeable and where they can maintain bike lanes and more importantly, bike paths along greenbelts. This is what I grew up biking in Queens, NYC (for some reason all the bike talk about “new york” seems to only mention Manhattan, whereas, there is — or was — a fantastic East-West network of interconnected parks that runs from Flushing Meadows into Nassau County). Kent comes closest to those memories which is why I live here. I love the peacefulness of the Soos Creek Trail — but the Interurban is of course the workhorse, taking me between towns and all the way to Southcenter Mall…my stopping ground for teriyaki.

    Counter-intuitively, I think one of the biggest problems for bikes here is the high volume of cars on the side streets. This is due to the state not building an adequate highway system. Portland, by contrast, offers a highway system where cars can get on a nearby exit, speed on the freeway, and jump back off…taking them out of the neighborhood routes. Here in Puget Sound, one can drive for miles and miles without being able to take an accessible high speed route…or that route becomes so clogged because of inadequate design, the cars spill onto the streets.

    http://www.nycbikemaps.com/maps/queens-bike-map/

  • Mikos

    John–

    I think your analysis explains why I used to commute on my bike between Mount Vernon and White Plains in the early 80s but don’t have the courage to do so in today, between north Seattle and downtown. The parkways took most of the commute vehicles off the side streets and made them relatively safe places to bike. I enjoyed it. When I commute here, I’m always in survival mode. As a result, I mainly bike for exercise and recreation, largely avoiding commute periods. I’d like to combine my commute with biking, but don’t want to ruin the pleasure I get from the latter.

  • mX.

    Um… gonna have to call bullsh*t on the lack of science here. Were you driving w/ your eyes closed and counting the cars by the bumpers you hit or was it 4AM. That you didn’t see any may be all the more argument for increasing awareness, especially given the liberal sprinkling of messengers which are always around downtown.

    For my own survey, Cap Hill to Fremont (either via the UDist or downtown), I don’t recall a day that I haven’t seen a bicycle. Of course, I mostly cycle myself, so my eyes are “open”.

    Claims of superiority are subjective according to your measurements. Bicycles are:
    - Cheaper to own / maintain
    - Cheaper to build infrastructure for
    - Easier to park
    - Engender a greater sense of connectivity / community amongst users
    - Healthier for users
    - More fun than sitting in traffic
    - And less likely to kill

    … to name a few advantages. The vast majority of people use cars et al., because we’ve created a society (physically and culturally) that isn’t very accepting of or conducive to cycling. But that is a weak argument for persisting down that path.

  • Grover

    Wrong. The people being delayed by the bicyclists are harmed by wasting time stuck in “traffic.” The environment is harmed by cars at red lights wasting gas and emitting exhaust.

  • Grover

    Just for you, joolian, I counted cars and bicycles again today, Christmas Eve, on a drive around Queen Anne Hill between 1 and 2 pm. I drove from the top of the hill down the Counter Balance, past the bicycle shop on Roy, then west on Mercer to Elliott, north to the Staples store on Elliott where I got a few odds and ends, then north on 15th W. to Nickerson, then up 3rd W. to Queen Anne Ave again.

    Most of these streets are supposedly bicycle routes. In fact there are bicycle lanes and sharrows on Nickerson, Roy and Queen Anne Ave. N., and bus lanes on Elliott and 15th W which bikes can use. I counted 550 motor vehicles and ZERO bicycles. Fifty degrees and LIGHT rail. Anyone surprised?

  • Mr. X

    Gee, why am I not surprised that ECB neglected to mention that bicycle mode split in NYC has actually fallen (and before you jump on the stats and analysis provided in the link – most of which are from bikers on a bike blog trying to discredit the American Community Survey – please note that the same study did show an increase in the mode split for cycling in Seattle)

    http://www.streetsblog.org/2010/10/01/did-nyc-bike-commuting-decrease-in-2009-thats-what-the-census-says/

  • Mr. X

    The bicycle mode split for Boston is 2.1% – which is even lower than Seattle’s.

  • Gomez

    So they were brought here by Mayor Nickels so that he could announce more miles of “bicycle facilities” without actually doing anything substantive.

  • Gomez

    Um, I wouldn’t consider a predominant, near-universally substantiated worldview “unique”.

  • Anc

    This post makes alot more sense now that I know Grover = Norman.

    Carry on.

  • Jwells

    Streets are for people, not for cars. We have given ALL our public streets to cars already, and now we have gridlock and an unsustainable future — not to mention ugly and dangerous roadways. It’s time to take back our streets. It’s time for pedestrians and bikes to reclaim the streets. And it’s time to put people back at the center of our transportation plans.

  • Jwells

    No, that’s not true. Many bikes are built to carry children and groceries. If these things are too far apart to be accomplished on bikes/transit, you should consider advocating to get more transit to your neighborhood, or move to a better location – one that doesn’t require cars for every single errand.

  • joolian

    I’m still confused. Norman? What “newsletter” are we talking about here? The Journal of Irreproducible Results?

  • Natehc

    They were an important first step, on par with Portland’s “Share the road” License plates. They sent the message that bikes are normal on the road.