Same-Sex Marriage Bill REJECTED in New York State Senate
Video: Times Square Obama Afghanistan Protest Arrests
Catholic League Pissed at PETA
New Photo Brings Flying Overweight Debate Back
Live Video: Same-Sex Marriage Debate in State Senate
The NY Times' City section has a sprawling feature about biking in the city by writer Robert Sullivan. Sullivan (who wrote the wonderful Rats about the rodent's history in NYC) noticed how his bike rides these days are much more pleasant—compared to 1987 when it included "navigating honks and taunts, the mayhem that was then on Cathedral Parkway"—thanks to more recent bicycle-friendly measures and, overall, more bicyclists on the road.
But Sullivan does understand why many drivers and pedestrians don't like bikers, citing the example of the Brooklyn Bridge, where "Lance Armstrong types" and "Really Cool Bikers" battle with tourists and other bikers for room. So he offers "four sure-to-be-scoffed-at suggestions for better bike P.R.":
NO. 1: How about we stop at major intersections? Especially where there are school crossing guards, or disabled people crossing, or a lot of people during the morning or evening rush. (I have the law with me on this one.) At minor intersections, on far-from-traffic intersections, let’s at least stop and go.NO. 2: How about we ride with traffic as opposed to the wrong way on a one-way street? I know the idea of being told which way to go drives many bikers bonkers. That stuff is for cars, they say. I consider one-way streets anathema — they make for faster car traffic and more difficult crossings. But whenever I see something bad happen to a biker, it’s when the biker is riding the wrong way on a one-way street...
NO. 3: How about we stay off the sidewalks? Why are bikers so incensed when the police hand out tickets for this? I’m only guessing, but each sidewalk biker must believe that he or she, out of all New York bikers, is the exception, the one careful biker, which is a very car way of thinking.Sullivan does emphasize, "To be clear, cars are more likely to kill nonbikers; we still live in a world ruled by the ruthless car," and rattle off the times he's been nearly killed by cars as a bicyclist and a pedestrian.NO. 4: How about we signal? Again, I hear the laughter, but the bike gods gave us hands to ring bells and to signal turns. Think of the possible complications: Many of the bikers behind you are wearing headphones, and the family in the minivan has a Disney DVD playing so loudly that it’s rattling your 30-pound Kryptonite chain. Let them know what you are thinking so that you can go on breathing as well as thinking.
The NYC Department of Transportation says bicycling has grown 35% between 2007 and 2008. For more information about growing bicycling in NYC, check out Transportation Alternatives, which also has ideas for walkable communities.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Good suggestions, particularly #1. I myself have been guilty of not stopping at intersections, and just rolling through if its clear, but I'm going to change this about my riding behavior, as I've experienced it from the other end when some cyclist just rolls through not watching for traffic.
Sullivan says: "To be clear, cars are more likely to kill nonbikers; we still live in a world ruled by the ruthless car,"
Tell that to the Chinese woman who has been in hospital for two weeks after being smashed by a cyclist on the 'safe' Grand Street Bike Lane that TransAlt has been demanding to protect the occasional cyclist who uses it. The Chinese-language press has had coverage of this.
DOT "says bicycling has grown 35% between 2007 and 2008"
From what? 10,000 per day to 13,500? Or what?
This manipulating of statistics is DOT's forte, which operates in a culture of lies and deceptions for years, whether in the past when it was pro-auto or currently when it is pro-bike.
Take everything DOT says with a fair dose of skepticism.
Honestly, I have witnessed some really scarry, angry cyclists making a point of feeling entitled to ride down the pedestrian side of the Brooklyn bridge when bike traffic gets heavy.
Every time I walk on the bridge, I see cyclists aggresively pursue dominance on the bridge, even when they'rre totally in the wrong, and hit or side swipe people walking; often turning around to shout at them for "being in the way".
I know this may not be popular, but I think the bike/pedestrian separation at the Brooklyn Bridge should be removed and pedestrians have the right of way.
All the other bridges should have separations, but Brooklyn Bridge is a major tourist spot where theres alot of photo-taking and generally people not paying attention. I've seen too many collisions with people on bikes and the biker act surprised that a couple of people from Iowa snapping photos of Manhattan weren't constantly looking to see if someone was coming.
Tourists bring us lots of money. Brooklyn Bridge is the same to me as Times Square, so either show patience and walk your bike or take another less tourist-addled bridge.
Here come the comments...
David - I totally agree about the Brooklyn Bridge. I always ride over the Manhattah Bridge, which is the logical choice for cyclists. When I jog across the Brooklyn Bridge, I am flabbergasted by the number of spandex riders I see coming by yelling at pedestrians to get out of the way. I always scream at these jerks:
"You should know better! Use the Manhattan Bridge! Share the road!"
If you are trying to train on your bicycle would you ride through Times Square? Would you ride down 5th Ave? NO! Then why ride the Brooklyn Bridge, another extreme tourist trap. Remove the bike lanes and make bikers walk over with everyone else. The Manhattan Bridge has a dedicated bike lane for speed demons.
No. For starters, the Manhattan Bridge sucks - I have always biked over the Brooklyn Bridge, and just because it tends to attract more tourism doesn't mean that bikers should be forbidden to ride on it. I have just as much right to enjoy that bridge as the clueless, stupid, and possibly quite blind pedestrians that cannot clearly see a division in the lane specifying where they should properly stand around craning their necks like jackasses. I have no problem slowing down and waiting for people to move when things get congested, but if I'm trying to bike through and some moron is wandering around in the wrong lane, you better believe he's getting a goddamn earful.
As far as trainers go, I agree that if they have beef with the congestion they should train on another bridge, but as it stands I'm only biking a few days out of the week and I plan to ride wherever the hell I please.
YES, 99centmenu. YES. Cyclists should be FORBIDDEN from using the Brooklyn Bridge-- not because it's a tourist attraction, but because time and time again they show they lack the maturity, patience, and the intelligence to understand that by virtue of it being a tourist trap, they're not going to have the luxury of being able to zip down the path unimpeded. There WILL be crowds of people wandering into the bike path taking pictures. There WILL be people absent-mindedly going into the bike path to admire the landscape and architecture. That's just the way it is.
If you-- along with the rest of your obnoxious brethren-- can't handle that reality to the point of needing to scream red-faced at tourists, hurl insults at people and be an all around asshat, we definitely need to close off the bike path to you guys, because we don't need assholes like you to serve as this city's "ambassadors" for tourists who come here from all over the country and the world.
The bike lane on the Brooklyn Bridge is the safest way for people who live in Brooklyn to get to the greenway on the west side of the island. Telling people to go across the Manhattan Bridge means that bikers hit Bowery and Canal to try to get to the safety of the greenway, and would likely result in more bike accidents rather than less.
I don't think the suggestion is to NOT use Brooklyn Bridge, it's not to use it to TRAIN, i.e. go at high speed. If you are using the Brooklyn Bridge on your bike, don't expect to be able to zip along. If you want to fly along and get a good work out, go elsewhere. If you are going for transportation reasons, be careful and realize it is slow going.
I ride a bike and have been since the 70s. Yet...I think the concrete enclosed bike lane on 9th Ave bet 30th and 14th is the WORST idea the bureaucrat nanny-state has ever come up with. Traffic is now backed up for blocks, pedestrians routinely step into the bike lane at intersections, there are now multiple traffic lights for cars going straight, cars making a left, bikes, and pedestrians, and cars cannot make any left turns w/ out waiting and backing up in yet another lane. This is good intentions run amok, and the backed up traffic, all honking horns, makes living on 9th Ave much worse than before. All so that maybe 4 bikes an hour during the day can cruise thru. Many bicylists dont even use it because its such a confusing mess at intersections. God help us if they install this nitemare on EIGHTH Ave!!!
It's been scientifically proven (that is, by direct observation and statistics) that it is more dangerous for a bicyclist to wait for the light to change from red to green at an intersection clear of traffic, than to go through it. Notice I said clear of traffic -- many people do not seem to get the difference between between clear and not-clear, possibly including the writer of the article mentioned, which seemed rather dumb overall.
Apparently most of the laws and rules for bicycles are made up by people who never ride them and know little or nothing about them. So rules and signals which are set for motor vehicles are mindlessly applied to everyone and everything on the streets.
This is going to become a problem because now that bicycles are being encouraged, many inexperienced riders are going to venture forth into the melee.
Show me any of these "scientifically proven" statistics that says its safer to run a red light than wait for it to turn green.
A few years ago, the British government noticed that there was a sex difference in the statistics of bicyclists killed at intersections -- more women were killed than men. They found out it derived from a cultural difference -- men were considerably more likely to run red lights than women. Why was this safer? Because when traffic piles up at a red light, motorists often can't see bicycles. They're also more impatient and therefore more aggressive. Also, there is often competition among drivers to see who can be first to get across the intersection when the light changes. Finally, motor vehicles often turn into the path of bicyclists (and pedestrians) at intersections without warning. For all these reasons the congestion at a red light is a dangerous place for a bicycle to be, and it's best to get away from it as soon as possible.
How about bike racks on the front of buses?
They are only a couple hundred dollars each, a pittance compared to the cost of a new bus.
I agree with his suggestions about staying off the sidewalks (I cannot believe some people are stupid enough to do this) and hand signaling. Hand signaling alone would probably cut the number of cycling accidents down by a significant amount, for most of the close calls I've seen/had have been because of a lack of communication between driver and biker.
Everything else is purely subjective. it's really not necessary or practical to have to stop at every light, and I'm pretty sure most people already stop at major intersections simply because they're busy all the time. The same thing goes for riding against traffic - if we're talking about going the wrong way down Broadway, then you're definitely putting yourself at risk, but again not all one ways are as narrow or as busy. Has this guy ever been a bike messenger? You simply do not have time to be a car, that's why they hire someone with a bike.
Really, the only way for accidents to be prevented in cycling, much like any other activity, is to try your hardest not to be stupid and to keep yourself fully aware. If people are going to bike the city streets they need to accept the possibility of being in an accident.
All of these suggestions for better biking behavior are fine and good, but I somehow doubt the legion of bat-out-of-hell bike delivery men will heed these rules. Those guys are a serious safety threat to themselves and those around them, and as long as they're riding the wrong way down an avenue and trying to weave through a mass pedestrian crossing, the nonbiking public will have an image of biking that is negative.
I thought the same thing when reading the article. Almost every person I see on a bike going the wrong way is a deliveryman, and usually at night without the legally mandated lights or helmet.
But just like vehicle speeding in the city, if there is no enforcement of the laws involving bikes there is no real incentive for bike riders who happen to be inconsiderate to follow the rules.
I'm fine with all these suggestions and I'd like to add another of my own. Get as many reflective or light emitting things on your bike as possible! Try to wear something light colored if you think you'll be biking after sundown. As a cyclist and a driver, I have been alarmed of late how many cyclists I see with absolutely no reflectors on their bikes, no lights, and wearing all dark clothing and going down narrow streets at night. The weather is warming up, get your bikes bright for spring!
Sure to be scoffed at? By whom? Not only don't I scoff, I already practice all those suggestions. No matter if an intersection has traffic or not, I wait for the light, and despite starrygordon's citationless supposed study, I've never had any problems by being law-abiding. I signal left turns, although admittedly, I don't signal right turn or braking. I never ride on the sidewalk or the wrong way, either on a one-way street or on the wrong side of the road. If I ever do get into a serious accident, I'll have the law on my side.
As for the Brooklyn Bridge, everybody should use a modicum of common sense. I won't zoom by and all I ask is that pedestrians stay on their side.
you drive a car>you get fat>you get diabetes.
You ride a bike>you inhale exhaust fumes>you develop C.O.P.D.
I am getting really tired of an 'apologist' letter for cyclists every month. Any cars obey the 30 mph speed limit in NYC? Any bike lane free of double parkers? Yet, we are supposed to demonstrate 100 percent compliance. Lastly, everyone knows that a large percentage of bikers going the wrong way are delivery, so why not boycott your precious food delivery rather than take it out on the commuter?
While satisfactory for venting, the argument of "Well, he's wrong, too" doesn't hold much weight.
wac0202, you're not supposed to demonstrate 100% compliance, just enough to show that you're serious about sharing the road. Cars and pedestrians don't demonstrate compliance 100% but at least they do maybe 70-80% of the time.
Cyclists don't do SQUAT. At best, they will comply 30-40% of the time. If I had a nickel for every damned time I saw someone riding against traffic, riding around in the dark without lights, or casually discarding some unspoken but important rule of commuting, I'd be a guzillionaire.
So if you're sick of all these "apologist" articles, don't bash the authors; make the effort to correct and educate the countless jerks who have made the creation of these articles necessary.
If I had a nickle for every car I saw turn without signaling, changing lanes without signaling, not coming to a complete stop at stop signs, not yielding at yield signs, running red lights, speeding, honking in quiet zones, double parking, leaving the vehicle with the engine running, parking at hydrants and no stopping zones, driving with lights off at night, driving while talking on cell phones, cutting tight turns into oncoming lanes, stopping in the crosswalk or in front of the stop bar, parking in the crosswalk, darting, cruising, and general reckless driving... I would have become a billionaire on the way to work this morning.
If you think cars are demonstrating 70-80% compliance, you are living in a fantasy. You probably are so used to the non-compliant behavior that you don't even notice it. The rate of fully compliant drivers is 10% or less. And all I can say is that at least when bikers and pedestrians don't comply, nobody gets killed.
IvoryJive, I've never driven a car in my life. I walk extensively and use the bike to commute on those days when I don't use public transportation. Guess you really "stuck" it to me, huh?
Next time you're criticized, try coming up with a more clever answer than, "Whoever calls me out is a motorist; therefore, I will get back at them with an anti-motorist response." Okay? Makes you look a lot less stupid, especially when the person you're talking to doesn't drive.
BTW, we all know the laundry list of things you allegedly saw motorists do "on your way to work this morning" is 100% horse shit and just designed to rattle the motorist that you THOUGHT you were talking to. So gimme a break. Come back to this discussion when you're able to talk about this issue like an adult and not a petulant 14 year old whose first response is to go, "Nyah! Well, you too!"
I'm sorry you have so much difficulty understanding me but let me clarify some things for you:
I've never driven a car in my life
I never said you did.
Guess you really "stuck" it to me, huh?
Nope, and I wasn't trying to.
Next time you're criticized
Actually, you didn't criticize me. You were replying to someone else called wac0202.
try coming up with a more clever answer than, "Whoever calls me out is a motorist; therefore, I will get back at them with an anti-motorist response."
To be clear, you brought up the comparison of compliance between different modes, not me.
Makes you look a lot less stupid, especially when the person you're talking to doesn't drive.
I don't see what the fact that you do or don't drive has to do with my point that drivers don't comply "maybe 70-80% of the time", as you say. But thanks for calling me stupid - you are clearly the winner of the emotional maturity award here.
we all know the laundry list of things you allegedly saw motorists do "on your way to work this morning" is 100% horse shit
Now who's being naive?
As I posted a few months back on returning from my first trip to London: Good and lotsa bike lanes, things well marked, considerate and attentive bikers/drivers/peds (only prob was we tourists, with the right/left, different markers, etc. Hey at least I tried!). Was soooo weird wandering around the Russell Square area at 1AM, seeing three bikes paused at a light, vests, helmets, little blinking lights, no traffic, waiting to proceed. Now if only the crappy drivers in NYC and clueless bikers (yeah, you lady who just missed nailing me as you blissfully passed a stopped bus on the left, no helmet, earbuds in place, against the light on 15th & 1st last week) would get some clue on cooperation and common sense. "What a wonderful world it would be....)
I am always horrified when I see bicyclists without helmets. Some NYC stats:
"Nearly all bicyclists who died (97%) were not wearing a helmet.
Helmet use among those bicyclists with serious injuries was low (13%), but it was even lower among bicyclists killed (3%)."
http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm
In London a large number of major bike routes have a little
"box" of sorts at each intersection between the cross walk and where cars should stop at a red light. Effectively, when there is a red light, bikers can ride up to this little box and sit as a group in front of the cars and get the right of way when the light changes. This allows them to be seen by the cars waiting to go and also discourages them from just riding through intersections and is much safer for everyone.
NY has been slowly adding these also.
NYC intersections already have boxes, of a different sort. And an awful lot of drivers already don't care about them. Even with hefty fines if they "block the box."
I've made an inquiry to the mailing list where I saw the story; if they have an archive, I will be able to get the URL from it. Otherwise I may be able to hunt it down anyway. Since the story runs contrary to conventional wisdom and the prevalent fetish for mindless obedience, I suspect it may have been disappeared by now.
I don't suppose anyone is still reading this, but here's the cite Spirit of '76 supposedly wanted:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23393622-details/article.do
One has to suspect that the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute has been instituted by people strongly interested in the sale of bicycle helmets. Therefore, the stats may be a bit suspect. The ones I've read indicate that a helmet improves your chances of surviving a serious crash by five or ten percent or so, although there is a good deal of disagreement. This may or may not outweigh the costs of wearing a helmet.
In reference to the "countless" jerks remark, there are about as many jerks on bicycles as there are driving motor vehicles, walking, skating, pushing pushcarts, and so forth. Maybe a few more. That is because a certain number of people are jerks, not because of their mode of transportation.
Brooklyn Bridge should probably be recognized as a national tourist trap monument for pedestrians only. Cone off one of the motor vehicle lanes and let bicyclists use that. In general it's a bad idea to mix bicycles and pedestrians.
In reference to the "countless" jerks remark, there are about as many jerks on bicycles as there are driving motor vehicles, walking, skating, pushing pushcarts, and so forth. Maybe a few more. That is because a certain number of people are jerks, not because of their mode of transportation.
Agreed. The reason so many cyclists you see out there are jerks is because the environment for cycling is so dangerous that the reckless types tend to be the only ones braving it. It's no miracle that the cities with the best traffic safety records and highest cyclist compliance rates are also the ones with the highest rates of cycling. Once you build safe facilities for cyclists, safe and sensible people (not the jerks) will come out and start riding, because the activity is now perceived by them as safe.
Having safe cyclists on the road causes a snowball effect as more safe, responsible friendly people witness growing numbers of like-minded people cycling and they join in as well, because it is an easy and sensible way to travel around when you're not afraid of getting killed. Suddenly the number of safe cyclists is outnumbering the unsafe ones by 5 or 10 to 1 and rather than look like the only jerk in the pack, even the jerks begin to comply more. Then as the mode share for cycling creeps up to 5, 10, 15%, there are so many cyclists on the road that cyclists, drivers and pedestrians are fully aware and expecting each other at intersections, making streets safer for everyone.
But the first step to all this is building a network of bicycle facilities that responsible, friendly people will perceive as safe, and will be adequate to reliably get them from their origin to their destinations. DOT knows this repeatedly demonstrated process from places like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Portland, and Seattle and is admirably advancing it here. But there are going to be the anticipated growing pains like we are reading about here today. But I bet cycling jumps another 50% this summer and we'll start inching ever closer to the safe bicycle culture you'll find in other cities.
Forget bike lines. There should be bike ROADS. A 2,500 lb vehicle (usually traveling faster than the posted speed limit) should not be sharing the road with a person on a bicycle. I suspect that most of the cocky cyclists in Manhattan have never driven an automobile where they ride. If they did, they would realize how close to injury or death they really are.
>>>I have just as much right to enjoy that bridge as the clueless, stupid, and possibly quite blind pedestrians that cannot clearly see a division in the lane specifying where they should properly stand around craning their necks like jackasses
Some people in NYC REALLY hate tourists eh? You do not have the right to mow people down who are taking pictures, no.
Get the bikes off the Brooklyn Bridge. The path is too narrow and a white line is insufficient protection for NYers and non-NYers alike who want to enjoy the view.
Let the bikes take the Manhattan.
www.forgotten-ny.com
While we're at it we have to widen the 12th Avenue bikeway. I gave up riding that years ago -- the racers rule and if you want to ride leisurely or stop to LOOK at something you're going to get an earful.
The racers set the tempo. That has to stop.
www.forgotten-ny.com