Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
GMA: Adam Lambert, No; Chris Brown, Yes
Report: Wife Scratched Tiger Woods' Face, Chased His SUV; Update: Police Unable To Interview Couple Today
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Street Artist Proposes on Subway Signage
A recently-released study [pdf] conducted by Hunter College students posits that—are you sitting down?—"a large number of cyclists routinely disobey many traffic laws." But wait, didn't these Hunter kids already alert the public to the scourge of cyclist scofflaws back in November? Indeed, they did, but according to City Room this new report is "a rigorous and scientific version" of the previous observational study, which monitored 3,000 cyclists chosen at random at 69 locations. The new version used a wider sampling compiled of 5,275 observations of riders at 45 randomly generated intersections across Midtown from First to 10th Avenues and 14th to 59th Streets. According to the study:
- 37% of the cyclists observed blew through red lights
- 28.7% of riders paused and then ran the light.
- 10% rode against traffic
- Only 29.8% of the riders wore helmets.
- 91 percent of the riders observed were male.
- 3.7% of the cyclists were observed riding on
sidewalks.
- 29.3% did not use the designated lane when there was one.
The release of the study happens to coincide with the launch of Biking Rules, Transportation Alternatives' campaign to promote "civic-minding riding" on NYC streets. On National Bike to Work Day, the group handed out thousands of booklets to cyclists, introducing a new 'Street Code' encouraging riders to yield to pedestrians and respect traffic laws. The group says they've got 250 volunteers who'll help promote the campaign directly to bikers in all five boroughs.
And just like last year, Transportation Alternatives spokesman Wiley Norvell was not impressed with the Hunter College study, telling City Room, "They picked probably one of the only areas of the city that is bereft of bike lanes. It makes no mention of bicycling infrastructure. It’s like we’re talking about this in 1995 and they haven’t been paying attention for the last five years."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Excellent title!
Study: Gothamist writers don't proofread their own work!
i've been almost hit by a hell of a lot more cyclists than drivers. i think i'll start throwing elbows next time one blows through a crosswalk on my right of way.
frankly, everyone on wheels in this city is a prick.
Totally agree with you. I've been run right over, knocked to the street by a jerkoff delivery guy who was ON the sidewalk and didn't have the decency to ring a bell or yell. They're always flying up in front/behind you. They blow lights and they're reckless. I'm all for throwing out a leg or an arm. It would do those cyclists some good to be fearful of pedestrians the way we are of them.
And the worst part is that people like this make law-obeying cyclists look bad, people get the mentality of "well if this schmuck runs lights and rides on the sidewalk, they all do." I have routinely yelled at other cyclists while riding my bike when they have been behaving like asses.
Good for you! I wish more of the jerky riders got yelled at. I'm mainly referring to delivery guys, actual bike riders are usually quite considerate.
let the first pedestrian who has never crossed the street when they didn't have the right of way cast the first stone. i am so tired of hearing people complain about bikers running red lights. the fact is, everyone does it; cars, pedestrians and bikes. none is better than the other.
as far as advocating violence to bikers as wobble and etypical suggest, please remember that our krypto chains weight about 10 lbs. kthxbye
I would never lay a hand on those bad ass bikers out there... Many of them haven't showered in months and have extensive criminal records.
Pedestrians don't have much potential to hurt others when they cross against the light or walk the wrong way on a one-way street, like cyclists.
"Pedestrians don't have much potential to hurt others when they cross against the light or walk the wrong way on a one-way street, like cyclists."
They have the potential to hurt themselves when they're jaywalking. But then again, pedestrians are *never* at fault even when jaywalking. Oh no no noooooo...
You got some set of balls, flynn! You don't condemn illegal cyclists but you condemn pedestrians. That is, everyone who is able to walk? 99% of mankind?
In a pedestrian/bike crash, the pedestrian gets much more injured from the bike's momentum. The cyclist is further protected by the steel bike frame. Pedestrians have ZERO protection from a speeding bike.
Your narcissism is amazing. Arrogant attitudes like that explain why the public here gives you so much flak.
@ thefacts
'You got some set of balls, flynn! You don't condemn illegal cyclists but you condemn pedestrians.'
please learn to read an entire post before commenting. or just learn to read.
i stated:
"the fact is, everyone does it; cars, pedestrians and bikes. none is better than the other."
the point you are trying to make is moot. or rather the attack you were trying to make.
I did read it, but you ignored the part of my comment that pedestrians have no momentum and cannot harm cyclists.
And your ignorance is astounding. Attitudes like yours is why everybody else gives you flak on Gothamist. Bicycle frames protect bicyclists? But I should know to expect nothing resembling reality from a man who owns a bike but categorically refuses to ride it. Actually, I suspect you're like Calvin of Calvin & Hobbes fame. When you were young and tried to learn to ride, the bike just kept jumping you and trying to kill you, didn't it? That explains your hatred of the infernal machines.
Yes, pedestrians (me included) cross against the light but if I walk into a car/bike I won't kill or maim it!
did you just threaten me?
and to think: the internet used to be a civil place for open dialogues!
But, but, but, SUVs are so dangerous. It's absolutely none of the cyclist's responsibility to make this whole thing work! How dare you speak ill of cycling!
Based on my own unscientific observations:
* 99% of pedestrians observed walked through red lights
* 28.7% of pedestrians crossed in the middle of the street, not at crosswalk.
* 65% did not look both ways before crossing
* 10% walked in the street, not on sidewalk
* 29.8% of the walkers were talking on phone, wore headphones, or was generally not paying attention.
* 29.3% walked in sidewalk more than 2 people wide (Mostly tourists though)
exactly.
everyone's a criminal.
and if there were no laws, there would be no criminals.
its really nifty what you just did there. i mean really, really nifty. it's almost like you've totally invalidated the point of that study through the sheer power of your mind meat. almost. nice try though.
Based on my own unscientific observations of your unscientific observations:
* 0% of the pedestrians you listed move fast enough to cause an injury to someone else while breaking said laws.
Don't get so defensive, sunshine. If a bicyclist disregards basic traffic laws, they lose the moral high ground to complain about things like cars parked in bike lanes.
But when a pedestrian waits for a light to change in the cross walk, 10 feet from the curb, and I come down the street on my bike at 20mph, we both risk serious injury!!!
Stupid people are everywhere. In cars, on foot, and on bikes. Everyone scapegoating bikes is not the answer.
i certainly agree with that comment. but wiley norvell displays an attitude that makes a lot of people cringe. thumping your chest but not taking responsibility for the safety of others around you. bikes are a mode of transportation not a political statement and cyclists need to follow rules of conduct like everyone else for the benefit of everyone...even the stupids.
No kidding, we don't hear about that many fatal hit and runs by pedestrians.
Most riders I see are safe. It's the 1 in 10 a-hole that causes the danger. But they come on bikes, in cars, on feet, in uniform and so on.
Sidewalks and wrong way are what get me. It is almost always professional riders, but then I do love my dinner delivered. So maybe I am to blame.
Based on my own scientific observations:
80-90% of modern day cyclists are self righteous, self centered douche bags who can't take criticism and must always counteract complaints made against them by ranting about what motorists and peds are doing wrong.
34 RCNY 4-12(p)(1) states that bicyclists should ride in usable bike lanes, unless they are preparing to turn, or are avoiding unsafe conditions (including but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, pushcarts, animals, surface hazards).
Other regs I've personally violated recently and regularly:
—34 RCNY 4-12(e) Operator's hand on steering device. No person shall operate or ride a motor vehicle or bicycle without having his/her hand on the steering device or handle bars.
—VTL 1236 (a)&(e) Bicycles must have a white headlight, a red taillight, and reflectors between dusk and dawn.
(b) Bicycles must have a bell or other audible signal
There's an important distinction in 4-12(p)(1) in that, unlike the other sections mentioned, it says should, not must or shall.
The law specifically grants a cyclist discretion as to whether or not to use available bike lanes. As long as they are following all other applicable laws, they can choose to ride in the street.
greenermj: I know you read bicycle defense fund and think it told you what the what the law was. However next time you want to make a symanitc point (and I would avoid doing it in court because should and shall, must mean the same thing there)you should (must, shall) read the code. Which I have copied below.
—34 RCNY § 4-12(p) Bicycles.
(1) Bicycle riders to use bicycle lanes. Whenever a usable path or lane for bicycles has been provided, bicycle riders shall use such path or lane only except under any of the following situations:
(i) When preparing for a turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(ii) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, pushcarts, animals, surface hazards) that make it unsafe to continue within such bicycle path or lane.
Note on above: section ii does not mean that if the road is kinda bumpy you can ride in the road. It means if there is a 3 foot pothole you can come over into the other lane to avoid that pot hole only.
"It’s like we’re talking about this in 1995 and they haven’t been paying attention for the last five years."
Dude needs to tighten up his math skills and realize he totally missed out on the millennium new years celebration.
My favorite is the fact that less than 30% of city bike riders don't wear helmets.
While they do not care about the urban environment they are creating congestion in - since the only truly green people in the city take the greatest public transit system in the nation.
Thankfully they also are also of low intelligence and don't care about themselves.
Cry me a river the next you read of a biker going down.
You Reap what they sow.
spiritross
"since the only truly green people in the city take the greatest public transit system in the nation."
really?
The individual carbon footprint of each commuter can be much higher or much lower than the average depending on commuting mode choice: a person commuting by SUV may produce six times the greenhouse gas emissions as a subway rider traveling the same distance. A walking or biking commuter travels that same distance with zero emissions.
What about the emmisions of the factories that construct the bikes? Or the massive gas guzzling vehicles that ship the bikes? Or the toxic chemical rubber processing facilities for the tires?
Face it. You're in the pocket of Big Huffy, you fascist.
Someone walking or biking will exhale more carbon dioxide than the previous two categories.
A seasoned cyclist will also consume more protein than the average commuter to make up for lost calories. That increased food intake will hit the environment as well.
No free lunch.
"
Someone walking or biking will exhale more carbon dioxide than the previous two categories.
A seasoned cyclist will also consume more protein than the average commuter to make up for lost calories. That increased food intake will hit the environment as well.
No free lunch."
Wow - maybe the stupidest and least accurate thing ever written on this site. Congrats. How deep into your bowels do you need to reach in order to pull out your nuggets of wisdom?
Recent studies suggest that many cyclists blow a lot more ass-resulting in harmful vapors being secreted into the environment
Get back to work, Senator Inhofe.
This is why I rarely feel bad when I hear someone got splattered all over the street. If you blow through a red light and get pulverized, I cite Buffalo Theory.
I think I mentioned this last time this study came out:
Why are they only studying the behavior of cyclists and not also pedestrians and motorists for comparison? Cyclists are not a race or class of people, they are simply people on a bike. Cyclists are frequently also pedestrians and motorists on the very same day.
The question should be - why do PEOPLE, WHEN riding a bicycle, fail to comply with traffic rules MORESO than when riding in a car or walking? Except they didn't collect any data on traffic rule compliance for motorists or pedestrians so we have no idea if cyclist compliance is relatively higher or lower. I'll bet that far less than 37% of pedestrians in midtown stop at don't walk signs - most just "blow through" them unless there is a car coming on fast.
What I would suspect you would find is that compliance with traffic rules decreases for each mode as the threat of enforcement decreases and the perceived risk of crash decreases. Pedestrians can see 360 degrees unobstructed, can stop and change direction in tenths of a second, and have virtually no threat of enforcement, and are therefore probably least likely to comply with traffic rules. Cyclists have 360-degree vision, approximately 10-20 foot stopping distance and pretty good evasive turning capabilities, though far less than pedestrians, so you see a somewhat higher rate of compliance. And motorists have significantly obstructed side and rear vision, stopping distance of 50-75 feet, much more limited turning capabilities, and the highest enforcement threat, so probably the highest rate of compliance.
Studying those differences would be much more interesting and useful than simply isolating one mode of transportation and pointing a finger at them.
Good point. However, I think it's also a matter of danger to others, in which case the order goes:
Motorists --(MASSIVE gap)---> Cyclists --(large gap)--> pedestrians. It would take one high-flying cyclist to kill a man, and one very high-flying pedestrian to seriously injure one. I agree that, ideally, everyone (cyclists and motorists especially) would be more mindful of the rules, but it's a big city. To a certain extent, aggressive maneuvering on our thoroughfares is just a part of life.
Look at the amount of jaywalkers on, say, Prince and Broadway during rush hour. Folks just don't seem to give a shit that a car is coming and enjoy blocking traffic which causes problems for EVERYONE, not just motorists.
It's like they're daring cars to hit them.
Except they didn't collect any data on traffic rule compliance for motorists or pedestrians so we have no idea if cyclist compliance is relatively higher or lower.
You'd have to be a total fucking idiot to not know that more than 45% of motorists stop at red lights, that over 90% of them go in the same direction as traffic and that over 97% of them don't drive on sidewalks.
Yes, but in motorists' terms, those are gross violations that are hard to ignore and easy to punish.
How many "block the box?" How many exceed the speed limit on city streets? How many double park? How many park or drive in a bike lane?
Those are violations that risk life and limb of cyclists and pedestrians, and likely have similar percentages that ignore the letter of the law.
They only studied what they studied. If someone else has data about what you mentioned then we can compare and contrast. But even if you're right, it's still just moral relativism in defense of bikers who break the law.
I love watching TA and their spokes-coyote Wiley sputter all over themselves over something like this. It doesn't matter if they studied in places where there were bike lanes. It just proves what we already know, that most bikers don't obey traffic laws. And the reason why they do or don't isn't really relevant to those of use trying to walk across the street every day, nor is it relevant whether people jaywalk.
When a biker blows through a light I wait and say RED LIGHT loudly right as they pass by. I hope that becomes a trend.
Let me dust off the old adding machine:
Commuter cyclists +
Casual cyclists +
Critical Mass cyclists +
Messenger cyclists +
Delivery guy cyclists +
Pedicab cyclists +
Training for that next century cyclists +
Just for running errands cyclists
=
Nearly all cyclists
They all ride with different mindsets, behaviors, and objectives. Lumping them all together like this is like asking "How often do New Yorkers double park?" and throwing in FedEx trucks and black cars into the count.
great point
I drive a car to work and ride a bike in the city. Cyclists are wreckless and self righteous, and sorry to say but most likely responsible for their injuries in accidents with cars.
The city designated all these cycling lanes but no one is willing to go up or down a block to use it. There's a wide bike lane on grand street, but all the cyclists are on Delancey, a death trap, because to go one block down is inconvenient.
You know it''d be really convenient for me to be able to go north on Broadway, I always have to go down to sixth ave to head uptown. Anyone wanna start a grass roots movement to make B'way a 2 way street?
I've always been puzzled by this behavior. As a cyclist, I plan my riding to utilize bike lanes as much as possible. In Fort Greene, I came across a dozen people in a ten block span riding south against traffic in the Bedford Avenue bike lane - forcing me to risk my life by riding into traffic to avoid them.
Meanwhile, there's a perfectly good bike lane running south two short blocks away on Franklin.
Not all cyclists are self-righteous, but every time I go out for a ride and encounter behavior like this, I start to believe that most of them are.
I wish those Hunter students would come out to Queens and log motorists who routinely ignore stop signs and invariable speed on Crescent Street once it becomes one-way south of 30th Avenue.
It would also be worthwhile counting the pedestrians who jaywalk, obstruct bicycle lanes and do not wait on the curb to cross the street.
Cyclists aren't alone in this free-for-all NYC traffic lunacy.
I can remember when I lived on West 95th Street in Manhattan and cars on West End Avenue would speed up to make the turn onto the Henry Hudson Pkwy. Not only that, they would run the red light. All this happened in front of an elementary school.
I can also recall the bicyclist who was using his cell phone while bicycling on West End Avenue and was wobbling all over the road.
New York City will never be a good place for cars, pedestrians, or bicyclist because all those groups are simply selfish. They have no concern for other people or the law. Until people change, those Hunter students will be able to do study after study to prove what people already know.
What's a carbon footprint?
any study on the Boulevard of Death?
You just have to love all the generalizations around here. "Everyone on wheels in this city is a prick." And all the hatred toward any bicyclist. Funny thing is that the figures disprove that. The highest figure is only 37%. Hardly every cyclist. And the other figures are lower.
If you look closer, ~66% of riders ran red lights.
Any data on how many pedestrians cross against the light?
BTW, in many places a bike lane is just as bad as riding in traffic (yes, I'm talking to you 8th avenue). Some bike lanes inexplicably end at busy intersections (although Columbus Circle just rectified this, the Port Authority dumps the bike lane into a mass of aggressive taxis). Others are used as waiting areas for limos and, quite often, police cars. Although I love Bleeker street lane, it's riddled with tire snagging sewer grates (the kind with the long slats paralel to the sidewalk) and mis-aligned manholes. I've already covered the Broadway lane in previous posts -- which is constantly blocked with pedestrians and people with hand trucks.
I'm tired of being accused of not paying attention while riding. I guarantee you that the people MOST aware of cars and pedestrians are the cyclists. If you're surprised by one -- then YOU are not paying attention.
Naturally, if many more people take to bicycling, the complaints will be from bicyclists about each other. Too many bikes and speeds will drop as streets get more congested with them. As a pedestrian, I've had cyclists zip by me very close but they always seem to manage avoiding hitting me. When I drive, I know they're around so I don't lurch out into the street or stop in the middle of a crosswalk. To me, the mix of traffic is just a fact of life and I always try to be aware of what's around...
"cyclists need to follow the rules of the road like everyone else"
sooo.. not paying attention to red lights, not watching where they go, riding the wrong way, riding on the sidewalk, and yelling at people? like everyone else?
careful what you wish for – i'd say everyone's already following the same rules.
new Headline::::
Pedestrians disobey traffic rules and jeopardize cyclist safety!! 50 percent of peds found in bike lanes EVEN when there is a SIDEWALK available. Cyclist has no alternative but to swerve into street, car hits her. She is maimed for life.
sorry but since WHEN has a cyclist KILLED a pedestrian? give me a break.
If she swerved into traffic that was her own stupid fault. I view bike lanes that are adjacent to the sidewalk as mere sidewalk extensions. That's because there are a lot more pedestrians on the sidewalk than there are bikes in the bike lane. And if they don't like it too fucking bad.
And bikes do kill pedestrians, though it's rare. But what the hell does this moral relativism have to do with anything? Bikers always want to change the subject when someone talks about how they don't obey traffic rules.
Here is your problem, you view "bike lanes that are adjacent to the sidewalk as mere sidewalk extensions." They're not, stay the heck out.
Do you step off the sidewalk into the bike lane? Do you look before you do?
New York City has two types of bicyclists.
Hard working immigrants, who can't afford a car or a metrocard.
And self righteous yuppie douchebags trying to make a political point and show how "green" they are.
One group I feel nothing but sympathy and respect for, because they just do what they have to to work and survive in this city.
The other I think are a group of over entitled whiny assholes, who cry and moan about every so called "injustice" and "abuse" they claim are inflicted on them by car owners, pedestrians and the city.
Do you actually believe that? How incredibly stupid.
I ride a bicycle because it's fast and it's cheap, and I'm neither hard-working nor an immigrant. I don't see why I should have to sit in a car in a traffic jam or hang around waiting for a bus or a train if I'm smart enough and strong enough to do something else. If you want to be a slave to what you see on television, so be it. I prefer to think for myself.
As for the Hunter survey, it's a crock. They don't even seem to be aware that helmets are (thank God) not required by law. In any case most of the law has been concocted by bureaucrats sitting in offices who have no idea of how traffic actually works. The way things are set up at present, it is safer for bicyclists to run red lights. And most bicycle lanes are death traps.
As for assholes and zombies, they abound. They're not confined to one mode of transportation or another.
"As for the Hunter survey, it's a crock. They don't even seem to be aware that helmets are (thank God) not required by law."
What possible argument is there against wearing properly fitted bike helmets? They help prevent brain injury and save lives. The studies are out there.
There isn't room enough in this blog to give all the reasons why bicycle helmets are evil, so I'll focus on just two.
First, a political one: bicycle helmets make bicycle riding seem like some kind of weird, dangerous behavior carried on by childish people in the midst of traffic while more sober, mature citizens try to carry on the urgent business of speeding everywhere in their automobiles. This not only encourages the kind of stupid prejudice you see above, but also affects the minds of the police and other authorities. As a result, whenever there is a crash involving a bicycle and a motor vehicle, the bicyclist is usually blamed, which of course gives people the idea that it's all right to knock off a few bicyclists, and reinforces the prejudice against bicycling. In European and Asian countries where bicycling is a common, accepted means of adult transportation hardly anyone wears a helmet.
Second thing: I don't like having something on my head all the time. Therefore, I don't want a bicycle helmet on my head. Every time you do something you don't like because of fear or oppression, you die a little. I'd rather live. I have weighed the chances of taking serious injury from not wearing a helmet, which are rather small, against the certainty of feeling bad about wearing a helmet and found the former a better bet than the latter. You may have different feelings -- if so, enjoy your helmet -- but please stay off my case.
This is only scratching the surface.
You might not like wearing a helmet but I'll bet you like having control of your bowels and being able to feed yourself. If you smash your head against the curb and become permanently disabled, I'll bet you expect tax dollars to be used to pay someone to change your diaper.
Just grow up and wear a helmet already.
Heh I'm fine with people on bikes and motorcycles not wearing helmets...go ahead have fun
Now if you crack your melon and want me to pay for it then
the party is over, pay for that cracked melon your own self
I'm sure you wouldn't have it any other way
couple things:
a bike lane is not an extension of the sidewalk, if you treat it as such you will get hit by a cyclist, and while unfortunate, it will be your fault. (this is why i take delancey instead of grand: a ped actually knocked me down for being in his way on the bike lane, whereas cars just speed like nuts, but will let me take the right lane on delancey.)
regarding the bike lane law: most bikes lanes, i.e. 6th ave, are the width of a car door and placed directly next to parked cars. i do not use the 6th ave bike lane because it poses a physical danger to me as a bike rider. i may ride in the lane if drivers knew they could get a ticket for opening a door dangerously, by not looking, etc.
it does matter that pedestrians walk against the light because they will look for cars only and if they see a bike they will continue, and get hit by the bike, and while unfortunate, it will be their fault.
pedestrians are a danger to cyclists, both on bridges and the streets. if a cyclist is riding at a fast speed of, say, 13 mph, and a pedestrian walks in front of him without looking, all parties will be injured, and while unfortunate, it will be the pedestrians fault.
regarding red lights, cyclists do not intentionally want to hit anyone, and any cyclists maneuvering through red lights in manhattan must be an experienced manhattan rider, since it takes a lot of bike handling skill and awareness to pull those moves without dying. no one should see a green light and think they could close their eyes while passing through the intersection. always be aware. a cyclist sees you, so try to see them, and if you see them at the last second, try to remain calm and freeze, don't run in every direction possible. the red light game is a game peds and bikers play together. yeah, cars shouldn't play, they weigh multiple tons. but bikes, let them play, they only weigh about 25 pounds. we just all got to look, ALL. bikers and peds.
anyone who doesn't care when a bike rider is injured or killed is less than human. bad things happen, often due to bad choices. it doesn't mean you should be so cold to humanity.
wear a helmet, your liberal crying is cliche and annoying.
get off the fucking sidewalk bike rider, unless you're trying to avoid getting run over by a cab or something.
food deliver guys should wear helmets and get tickets for all the shit they do, because they are reckless AND unskilled riders. leave those bonehead moves to the professionals.
in summation, bikes are closer to pedestrians than cars, otherwise they wouldn't let us on the bridge paths, so let's let the rules designed for cars be bent a little--about as much as peds bend their own set of rules, all within civil and social reason, of course.