Bill would allow cities to create ‘shared streets’ with walk/bike priority and 10mph speed limits

Bell Street in Belltown, pictured here in 2014, is similar to what is sometimes called a residential shared street." Pike Place is similar to a commercial shared street." The proposed bill could have implications for both uses as well as Seattle's Healthy Streets.

A proposed bill in the State House would resolve confusion by establishing a new set of rules for a shared street." No existing streets would become shared streets by default. Instead, a local authority (such as SDOT in Seattle) can choose to designate certain nonarterial" streets as shared streets. On these streets:

• Vehicular traffic traveling along a shared street shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian, bicyclist, or operator of a micromobility device on the shared street." (Note: I believe vehicular traffic" might instead need to say something like motor vehicle traffic" since bicycle riders are also vehicle users under RCW 46.61.755)
• A bicyclist or operator of a micromobility device shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian on a shared street."

The proposed bill would exempt shared streets from the section of laws governing bicycle-motor vehicle interactions (RCW 46.61.770), which requires people biking to stay to the right except in certain situation and to move to the side to allow overtaking if it is safe to do so. The same code also limits people biking to riding no more than two abreast. These bicycle-motor vehicle interaction rules would not be needed on shared streets because people biking would have right of way, and people driving should not expect to pass. If you're in a hurry, you're on the wrong street.

Shared streets would also be excluded from rules requiring pedestrians to give right of way when not using crosswalks and rules outlawing crossing intersections diagonally or within a block of a traffic signal (RCW 46.61.240). They would also be excluded from rules requiring people walking on roads without sidewalks to travel as far as is practicable form the edge of the roadway" and to move clear of the roadway upon meeting an oncoming vehicle." (RCW 46.61.250).

Much of the discussion during the public hearing on HB 1772 Monday focused on busy commercial streets like Pike Place or downtown Leavenworth. It provides a path for safer environment for people to gather in the economic centers in their communities," said bill sponsor Representative Julia Reed (D-36) during the hearing. So think about places like Pike Place Market or the Main Street in Leavenworth as examples of really good opportunities for shared streets, where local jurisdictions can have the option to designate these streets while providing the appropriate safety measures, such as a maximum speed limit of 10 miles per hour."

Shared streets wouldn't need to only be for downtowns, though. I'm sure many of you have examples of streets or blocks like this in your neighborhoods and cities where this could help improve safety for folks who are using the street," said Reed.

The business district use case for shared streets could be great, especially when used in conjunction with car-free hours. Imagine a street that is car-free during peak hours, then a 10 mph shared street during off hours. And then imagine if every neighborhood had such a street, not just Pike Place.

The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO"), of which SDOT is an active member, has published guidelines for what it calls a commercial shared street" that is very similar to what legislators discussed during the hearing. The organization's Urban Street Design Guide includes all kinds of possible design elements to accommodate deliveries and other needs without sacrificing the safety and comfort for people, and they suggest that such streets could be closed to traffic during parts of the day using movable bollards or planters.

Illustration of a commercial shared street" from NACTO's Urban Street Design Guide.

However, legislators should also consider how this law could be used to reduce confusion around facilities such as Seattle's Healthy Streets. Essentially upgraded neighborhood greenways, Healthy Streets are supposed to have fewer and slower-moving motor vehicles in order to encourage biking, walking and rolling, but they have one genuinely confusing element: Road Closed signs. The roads are not actually closed, but closing" them is the only way to legally allow people to walk freely in the street because state law prohibits or significantly restricts it otherwise. It's also not great to get people accustomed to the idea of driving around Road Closed" signs because sometimes they are closed for real.

NACTO also has design standards for a concept they call residential shared streets," which are sort of like Healthy Streets but with a more purposeful design. Bell Street in Belltown is perhaps a better example of this concept. It probably doesn't make sense to build many of the elements included in the guide on a residential street that has sidewalks, but it could be perfect for all those streets in the southend and north of 85th that are lacking sidewalks. Seattle has already been using Healthy Streets as a way to make some of the city's sidewalkless streets safer, but a proper shared street concept with a state-supported designation would make the task easier and more effective.

Illustration of a residential shared street" from NACTO's Urban Street Design Guide.

Luckily, the state legislature does not need to go into deep detail about how these streets are designed, they just need to give local jurisdictions the legal wiggle room to create their own design concepts that fit the contexts of individual projects (WSDOT could even create design concepts that local jurisdictions can use to help keep things at least a little more uniform across city limits). For example, the bill would also amend the law to allow local jurisdictions to set 10 mph speed limits on shared streets. The minimum allowed speed limit currently is 20 mph for nonarterial streets thanks to a 2013 law. Having the ability to set speed limits as low as 10 mph might make sense on a street like Pike Place, but 15 mph might make more sense on a Healthy Street through a neighborhood. Even a child can bike faster than 10 mph, especially down a hill, and Healthy Streets are supposed to serve in part as transportation routes for bicycling. I can't tell from reading the current bill language whether it would allow setting a 15 mph limit or if it only allows 10. Here is the proposed wording in the version of the bill as of press time (page 3 in this PDF):

Local authorities in their respective jurisdictions may establish a maximum speed limit of 20 miles per hour on a nonarterial highway or part of a nonarterial highway or a maximum speed limit of 10 miles per hour on a shared street as defined in section 1 of this act."

Does it need to say limits as low as 10" or limits of 15 or 10" in order to allow 15? I am not a lawyer, but legislators may want to check. UPDATE: I believe the phrase may establish" means local authorities don't need to lower the speed limit on shared streets, but that's another thing worth double checking. For example, we should ensure that SDOT has the option to maintain the existing 20 mph speed limits on Healthy Streets while still using the shared street designation for its other benefits.