Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Children of India, Rejoice! | Scary Mary Poppins! »

Wednesday, December 6, 2006

The Bicycle Master Plan Meeting

posted by on December 6 at 9:22 AM

Here’s the Seattle Timesreport on last night’s Bicycle Master Plan meeting in Ballard, at which the city officially unveiled its draft of a 10-year plan to make Seattle more bike-friendly (a draft plan that was hotly debated after appearing here on the Slog last week).

Bicycle overpasses, “road diets,” bike lanes down Western Avenue in downtown, bicycle boulevards parallel to busy urban throughways like Aurora, “sharrows” on Broadway they’re all coming, according to the plan.

The Times’ take:

On the streets of Seattle, the balance of power is about to shift.

Missed last night’s meeting and want to see the plan in person (rather than online)? There will be another meeting tomorrow night from 6:30 to 9:00 p.m. at Rainier Community Center, 4600 38th Ave. S.

RSS icon Comments

1


What is a "sharrow"? I couldn't find it in the dictionary.

Eli, what was your take on the meeting?

Posted by what? | December 6, 2006 9:55 AM
2

Apparently a sharrow is an arrow painted on the street that means "share this lane". Share + arrow. In other words, fuck all diddly.

Does the city have any other plans to accomodate other tiny, scofflaw minorities?

Posted by Fnarf | December 6, 2006 10:12 AM
3

A "sharrow" is a big arrow painted on the road that reminds motorists the share the space with cyclists. It also sort-of demarcates a lane in which the cyclists should ride.

Click here for more.

As for my take on the meeting... Well, I wasn't able to go. Sorry. But I'm sure more than a few Slog readers were there. Maybe they can tell us more.

Posted by Eli Sanders | December 6, 2006 10:14 AM
4

Like much of this plan, a "sharrow" is well-intentioned way to lure bicyclists into a false sense of security until WHAM, someone makes a right hand turn or opens a car door.

I'd rather see the money spent on a smaller system of dedicated bike paths than all of these sharrows and bike lanes.

Posted by Sean | December 6, 2006 10:56 AM
5

Fnarf, do you have a life outside of commenting on EVERY single Stranger slog post?

I bet you are lot of fun at parties.

Posted by Jeff | December 6, 2006 10:59 AM
6

While I think road diets are utter idiocy (especially on arterials), a lot of the other ideas are great - particularly designated bike bridges over I-5 and the Ballard Bridge corridor.

Posted by Mr. X | December 6, 2006 11:08 AM
7

FNARF is the best commenter on this blog. He's just doing what he's good at.

Posted by Sean | December 6, 2006 11:09 AM
8

Wow. Fnarf has a lot to be proud of then Sean. Must be a nice life.

Posted by Jeff | December 6, 2006 11:41 AM
9

I was at the meeting last night. And the first meeting a couple of months ago.

The plan goes way, way beyond the "21 miles of new trail" upon which the Times article focuses. The intention is to mainly use existing roadways and make them more bike-friendly, with a goal of expanding bike arterials to something around 250 miles within the City. Currently it's around 40 miles, I think.

There were a lot of complaints from cyclists about sharrows, restriping and road diets, since these simply put bikes onto the same roads as cars. But let's get real: There's no way we're going to get bicycle-dedicated roadways criss-crossing Seattle. At least not right away.

What we CAN do right now is make folks in cars more aware of bicyclists -- sharrows do this. And give bikers more room -- road diets acheive this.

Route signage is another aspect that is being focused on. Not only will this help cyclists find there way from point-to-point, it's an added reminder to drivers that bikes exist on these particular routes and roads.

Years from now (once this plan has some momentum), I hope we can focus on getting rid of on-street parking ("car storage" I heard one guy refer to it as) on non-commercial streets like Dexter and create much safer bike lanes.

Posted by DOUG. | December 6, 2006 11:51 AM
10

Yes, I know, it's "their".

Posted by DOUG. | December 6, 2006 12:01 PM
11

Oh, and Jeff: I'm DYNAMITE at parties. You couldn't handle me at parties.

Posted by Fnarf | December 6, 2006 12:14 PM
12

Do you introduce yourself as: 'Hey I'm Fnarf, yeah I comment on every Stranger slog post. I'm that guy."

I bet that slays.

Posted by Jeff | December 6, 2006 12:18 PM
13

I'm still undecided about Sharrows. They work OK on Pine, but I suspect some places it would be a farce to have them.

Any talk about making auto traffic stop at crossings with the Burke by the UW?

Posted by golob | December 6, 2006 1:04 PM
14

Does Pine have sharrows? If so, they're new. All I've seen is a regular bike lane.

The only sharrows I know of in Seattle are by the Fred Meyer in Fre-lard. Those sharrows are tiny. The proposed sharrows will be much larger and more visible to drivers.

Posted by DOUG. | December 6, 2006 1:20 PM
15

Maybe it is on Pike. Somewhere East of Melrose...

Heh. I'll look for them tonight.

Posted by golob | December 6, 2006 1:50 PM
16

The ideal sharrow is almost a full lane width. Check out the size of the ones they put in Portland:

http://bikeportland.org/2005/09/28/new-sharrow-markings-in-nw/

I'm curious if the tone of the meeting in South Seattle is similar to that in Ballard. Bike accomdations south of I-90 are largely a joke.

Posted by lee | December 7, 2006 4:22 PM
17

While we're all busy 'sharrowing' each other (?), how about street signage on the Burke-Gilman, so you know which streets you're crossing. You know, like normal vehicles get.

I'm for almost any improvements to the bicycle sitch in town. ESPECIALLY truly safe routes parallelling 15th-Ave-Ballard-Bridge, and Aurora, and Rainier Ave. conduits. Coming from Michigan, Seattle has kick-ass bicycle accomodations. Yeah, they're not 100% perfect, but they're over-all pretty good.

Build more consistant and safe routes through the city, esp. to downtown, and more people will try bicycling. Just no back-pedalling on what we've already got. 'k? Thx.

Posted by treacle | December 8, 2006 2:55 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).