Palin: "Absurd" Not To Consider 2012 Run
Wall Street Throwing More Money at Republicans
Paterson Bombshell Rumor Watch: Resignation Imminent?
Paterson "Bombshell" Just PG-13?
More Bald Eagles Spotted In Harlem!
Author Robert Sullivan, who writes provocative bicycling op-ed pieces for the Times when he's not writing about rats and the American Revolution, has a suggestion to solve the ongoing tension between cyclists and pedestrians on the Brooklyn Bridge walkway. He proposes that the city ban bicycles entirely from the walkway, and shift them down to the motor vehicle roadways by creating physically protected bike lanes.
It's a bold idea, and surely one that would be welcomed by pedestrians tired of being terrorized by speeding cyclists. But will bike riders feel ghettoized? Last time Sullivan tried to arrange detente between cyclists and pedestrians, a classic flame war reliably ensued. This time, let's try weighing the merits of Sullivan's proposal by direct democracy:
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
oh man, here we go...
Totally unrelated, but whenever I see your screen name, this song instantly pops into my head:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_Comes_the_Hotstepper
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0crujosNNo0
nah, na na na nah
Unless asshole bikers change their dickish attitudes on the brooklyn bridge, I say move them to the street level.
I'm a cyclist on this bridge and I agree with you, Cynic. Cyclists on the BB are the rudest I have seen in the city, and they are the biggest assholes I've encontered - they ride with whistles in their mouth, constantly blowing them at everyone, or they shout constantly. Yes, I know it's annoying when the pedestrians stray across the line to get a photo but SLOW THE HELL DOWN! You are sharing that space, there is no reason to act like you're in a race across that span! One of them even punched my friend who was riding his bike in the opposite direction. He was well within his portion of the bike lane, there was no reason for this! They create a very uncomfortable environment up there and I think this is one reason people hate cyclists. I don't blame them if that's their only exposure to cyclists. I'm embarrassed, as a cyclist, to see what they do up there. I'd ride across with the cars if they gave us a lane. No problem.
I'm a cyclist; it's my normal way of getting around the city. I favor moving bicycles to the roadway not just on the Brooklyn Bridge, but on all bridges with normal street access. Bicycles and pedestrians don't mix well at all and should be separated. Bicycles can be moved to the roadway by coning off a lane, or, if reasonable speed limits (30 mph) were made and actually enforced, they could share lanes. It is true that the present use of bridges as raceways for hotdoggers would have to be terminated.
Remarks about how everyone should be nicer are a waste of time. A certain number of people are assholes, whether they're driving, riding or walking. That isn't going to change.
No no no, BK Bridge is such a main artery, removing one lane will make the current traffic nightmare even worse!
Leave it as is, bikes and pedestrians have been doing just fine, in fact, the pedestrians are usually at fault for constantly walking into the bike lane.
Sounds fine. If they give bikes an entire lane, protected by bollards. Otherwise, there's plenty of blame to go around for the tension on the boardwalk. Too many idiots zooming past and even more idiots who can't understand the symbols denoting which side is for bikes only. The latter are especially annoying when they walk on the wrong half then get mad when bikes try to get past.
since they're so gung ho about being healthy and shit anyway, kick them off all the bridges entirely and set up some canoe stations on either side.
what about putting the cars on the pedestrian walkways and using the traffic lanes for bikes? any takers?
Give cyclists a car lane in each direction on the BB. It's a win-win.
for who? have you ever seen the amount of car traffic that picks up on the bridge's three tiny lanes? The third lane actually breaks off early towards the BQE and there are always a 30 car line for it. That leaves only two real lanes for flowing traffic, if one were to become a bike lane there would be only one lane for cars. Crazy idea. just crazzzy.
Auto drivers will adjust, just as they are adjusting to new traffic configurations around Times Square.
Don't build it, and they won't come. There's no reason New Yorkers should bow down to automobile hegemony - just because motorized vehicles are loud and menacing, and because so many people are brainwashed by car-culture advertising. Autos on the BB often are carrying just one person - hardly an efficient use of New York's precious public space.
I'm sorry did you just mention auto industry advertising?
hate to break it to you, but bikes usually carry one person too. a car lane would move way more people than a bike lane.
But bikes take up much less space than cars, so more bikes (commuters) per square foot of public space. And bikes don't produce the noise, pollution, infrastructure destruction and menace associate with automobiles.
You can do that - it would put too many people at risk.
It's frustrating that many cyclists in NYC are not respectful of traffic laws but this idea is too much of a public safety threat and should never go through.
I just have three words to say to everyone regarding this issue:
SUCK IT UP.
as an avid cyclist who avoids the brooklyn bridge at all cost due to how unsafe it is, i fail to see why this is couched as a "win" for pedestrians and a "lose" for cyclists. what cyclist WANTS to hit a pedestrian who jumps in front of their bike? i certainly don't - which is why i refuse to bike over the brooklyn bridge. move the bike lane down!! my daily commute would be shortened if i could actually use the brooklyn bridge. asthma?? what? don't we all bike in traffic everyplace else in the city?
I've walked that bridge hundreds of times. I've lived overlooking an on-ramp for years and I was able to see what traffic was like on both levels at different times and days.
In my experience there are never more than 10 bicycles on the Brooklyn Bridge at any given time. 8 of them are tourists.
No need to change anything.
you've clearly never BIKED over the bridge and experienced a tourist's small child jumping in front of your bike when it is almost too late to stop -- OR, a fully grown tourist jumping in front when it WAS too late. i have. and no, i was not "speedracing" at the time. tourists pay zero attention to where they are walking on that bridge. too scary for me.
I need to see numbers here. I just don't see a NEED for any change.
How many cars per day?
How many pedestrians per day?
How many bicycles per day?
I would guess the ratio at 100 cars to every 4 pedestrians and 0.25 bicycles
But you're taking it for granted that those numbers will stay the same forever and ever. They won't; especially if we encourage safe cycling routes, more able bodied people not having to deliver large items will get out of their cars and onto bikes.
Also, there are no more than 10 bikes at a time on Brooklyn Bridge? I call bullshit on that one.
yeah, I call bullshit too and agree with june1000. it's impossible to have a safe bike ride over that bridge -- so many clueless pedestrians wandering into the bike lane (and yeah, it's also hard for tourists to take pics with cyclists whizzing by)! I think moving it to a dedicated lane is a great idea.
For the record, there *are* cyclists out there who RESPECT pedestrians and want the city infrastructure to reflect their needs as well as those of bikers.
Ban tourists from the bridge. Problem solved.
Until asshole bikers, pedestrians and drivers change their dickish attitudes this so-called "war" will continue.
Another city biker who avoids the Brooklyn Bridge like the plague. I would love to have a protected lane, on any level.
I think its clear that the incivility applies to both the pedestrians and the bikers. I've seen several examples of both. It's compounded by the close proximity, and the presence of so many clueless tourists.
That said, I would hate to lose the beautiful view of the city I get from biking over the Brooklyn Bridge. But small loss for a much smoother ride!
anyway the real problems is the immobile dicks taking pictures/slow pokes that you can't get around without getting in the bike lane. stopping or being gimped should be illegal during the busier times.
why - what gives you the impression that only speed walkers are allowed on the bridge? Meandering is totally allowed, even if it fucks up your ride.
I recently walked across the bridge for the first time in years, and found it ok. It seems pretty straightforward - as long as the pedestrians stay on their side and don't walk three across like a group of goddamn tourists, and the cyclists stay in their lane, it should be fine.
I guess that's a big "as long as."
Brooklyn Bridge is one of the few places where I totally sympathize for tourist trying to take a nice family picture. Its almost impossible with asshole speedracers running down three year olds.
Your retarded three year old needs a good parent to remove them from the middle of the bike lane.
The rest of your retarded family needs keep moving their fat Wisconsin cheese asses when in either lane lane and wait to get onto the sections for pictures and information placards to stop with mouths agape.
Now here, you're absolutely right. That is, if we can't just keep them in Wisconsin to begin with.
let's close the bridge to anything on wheels and put some crappy lawn furniture on it.
Can we make a closed off lane for tourists? I'm sure pedestrians and cyclists would both benefit.
I would also like to do this for sidewalks.
I am all for not having to dodge pedestrians on the bridge. I'm also for making it harder to commute via car. I mean seriously if you're commuting in a car via the bridge what planet are you living on?
That said there should be a toll for cars on the bridge. I'm sure if you gave it a $5 toll the hit to traffic from the lane given over to bikers would be more manageable. As a cyclist I'd even be willing to pay a toll, say $1 to the car's $5.
"I'm also for making it harder to commute via car."
Ah, that's such a wonderful idea. I'm glad you're putting your all behind it.
"commuting in a car via the bridge what planet are you living on?"
So all bridges should ONLY be used by cyclists and pedestrians? Is that what you're saying here?
why can't some sort of rail be put up to physically separate the biking and walking lanes? for every time i've seen cyclists on the walking side of the walkway, i've seen 5-10 pedestrians strolling along on the bike side. if you put bikes in the roadway, people are DEFINITELY going to die (and count me among the folks that actually think neither drivers, cyclists, or pedestrians really ever DESERVE to die).
the bike lane on the walkway is/would still be wide enough for two-way traffic. there are much narrower two-way bike squeezes on parts of the riverside bike paths. isn't there some wanna-be Eagle scout out there somewhere that would do this for a merit badge or something?
I ride across the Brooklyn Bridge about 3-4 times a week to commute. Getting to work is fine, but coming home is an absolute disaster, and using the Manhattan Bridge is worth the extra time.
The problem on the Bridge is indeed clueless tourists. However, it IS the Brooklyn Bridge, and tourists are going to want to walk across it, and tourists are never going to stop being clueless.
I would support use of the car lanes, or if possible, limited use of the car lanes (say from 3-8pm) for bikes. Frankly, though, even though it would be inconvenient for me personally, banning bikes on the Bridge entirely would probably be justified. I'm pretty amazed nobody has died or committed murder up there.
you seem to be an open, balanced, and fair-minded individual. what are you doing here??
How about restricting the current deck to bikes only and adding a pedestrian deck overhead? Yes, this would cost significant $$$, but this would be a long-term solution.
I like this idea.
I live in Brooklyn and go to school in lower Manhattan, and sometimes like to walk home via the bridge. Cyclists are not the problem. The problem is the groups of tourists who stop and stand anywhere they like to take pictures.
How about creating a physical divider between the pedestrian lane and the bike lane rather than just painted lines? solves the ped / bike problem without screwing up traffic and everyone still gets a nice view.
Just ban photography on the bridge. Seriously, that's 90% of the problem right there. Just say it's a security issue.
Tourists - you can enjoy the view from the bridge without needing photographic evidence that you did so. Just let it go.
Ridiculous. The pedestrian walkway affords views unattainable elsewhere in the city. Do NOT ban photography because bicyclists are making life miserable for people stopping to take pictures. Since this walkway is so narrow pedestrians should have the run of the place without having to worry about being flattened.
What's with he need for speed, anyway?
www.forgotten-ny.com
My comment was for Rev Waldo, but Moveable Type is not cooperating.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Hi Forgotten NY,
Have you forgotten that photography was banned on the Brooklyn Bridge for most of the Cold War?
Just busting chops; love your blog!
as a cyclist who has had a pedestrian crash on the bridge i am all for this. people (read tourists) just don't pay enough attention on the bridge and it really does become dangerous.
I don't think the problem is just tourists. Pedestrians in general seem to be completely oblivious to traffic patterns. There needs to be a public awareness campaign or something, I think everyone is tired of getting stuck behind trios of side-by-side fat women with rolling suitcases steamrolling an entire sidewalk or running into people around corners 'cause they can't stick to the right side.
>>>The problem on the Bridge is indeed clueless tourists. However, it IS the Brooklyn Bridge, and tourists are going to want to walk across it, and tourists are never going to stop being clueless.
It is not clueless to want to stand on a narrow bridge walkway and enjoy a view you will never otherwise see if you are out of town. Or even if you are from town.
I'm all for this proposal. Get bikes off the Brooklyn Bridge pedestrian walkway.
www.forgotten-ny.com
Kevin, I never said it was clueless to want to visit the Bridge. It IS clueless to wander into the bike lane, or to be completely oblivious to the fact that bikes will be coming through, or to cluster in the middle of the walkway instead of on the caissons where the walkway widens. I agree that there is a need for something to be done, and it isn't getting rid of the tourists, but the reality is that the tourists are, in fact clueless.
The tourists have some nerve acting like tourists on this tourist attraction. Jeez.
More people should consider biking the Manhattan Bridge. It's always empty as hell, one side is entirely for bikers, and it dumps you off in Brooklyn one block over from the Brooklyn Bridge.
I think it would be better if cyclists were kept off the Brooklyn Bridge between 8 am and 10 pm. They can use the bike lane on the northern side of the Manhattan Bridge instead.
In Brooklyn, the two bridges almost converge, and in Manhattan the distance between them is about 3 minutes for someone on a bike. However, a cyclist can travel much faster (i.e. exceed the speed limit) on the Manhattan bridge, because they don't have to avoid pedestrians. So using the Manhattan bridge should not lengthen a cyclist's commute to downtown Manhattan.
Consequently, cyclists can travel as fast as they like, and pedestrians can take in the views from the BB without worrying about high-speed collisions.
It's impossible to keep the stupid fucking pedestrians from walking in the bike lane, so I'd rather be riding with the cars.
the bridge was empty the last time I've walked across it.
though it was 30 degrees or so. I could count the people on that bridge that day with one hand.
and, I'd say the main problem are tourists, sometimes 6 abreast. I will say these tourists are not the comic book guy fat ones, guess those can't walk a block without gasping for air.
even in the hottest day of summer, you'll still see walkers and bikers but the cold keeps some away.
Bikes and peds cannot peacefully co-exist on the brooklyn bridge, it's a fact. Since you aren't going to get rid of the peds, as a biker i'm more inclined to just ban bikes on the bridge. Sure, it's the best view in the world but it's too much of a headache with the tourists and then you do have the 4oish year old cantankerous dickhead lance armstrong nutjobs that yell at everyone. As long as we have a dedicated bike lane on the manhattan bridge I'm good. if we had a lane on the bottom, also goo but I'm not holding my breath. the brooklyn always gives me flats from it's damn splinters too.
How about this:
* Make bicyclists register their bikes at he DMV and charge them a fee to do so.
* Make them pay to get a bicyclists license. Have a point system where they are fined and assigned points for running lights, stop signs, riding the wrong way, etc.
* Take the money and build a bike/pedestrian bridge.
How about this, too:
* Make pedestrians register their shoes at the DMV and charge them a fee to do so.
* Make them pay to get a pedestrian license. Have a point system where they are fined and assigned points for jaywalking, walking in bike lanes, encroaching on street space, etc.
* Take the money and build a bike/pedestrian bridge.
i feel more stupid for having read this.
Stop making sense!
Notice the juvenile comment from the Spandex Nazis to your sensible idea.
Except bicycles are not motorized vehicles.
They're not motorized but are still suppose to follow traffic laws.
The Brooklyn Bridge is a nightmare to bike across, its crowded, slow, and riding on boards sucks.
Any bicyclist in their right mind would take the Manhattan Bridge. Its smoothly paved and you can pretty much go as fast as you want. Easy.
Can I just point out that without the bikers, there would be no ped/bike ramp on that bridge. It was the bikers who demonstrated, blocked traffic, screamed and yelled until the city was forced to include in in the bridge renovations, I think it was the 1980s.
In the 1990s, you had to wait at the end for a buddy to ride together over the bridge at night or someone would jump you and steal your bike and wallet.
I used to ride it all the time, now I avoid it because of clueless tourists (who should be given walled off lanes everywhere in the city please)
Cars and bikes don't mix in tight spaces. Keep 'em up top. Here's a thought: why can't a major world city build pedestrian and bike only bridges over the rivers? Why does every use have to get crammed onto 19th and early 20th century spans? Grow up, NYC.
as a non-tourist pedestrian i don't have much trouble on the bridge with cyclists personally (the gawking pedestrians, on the other hand...), nor have i witnessed any accidents, but the boardwalk space has always struck me as a bit too narrow overall to effectively and safely accommodate 2 lanes of 2-way traffic, especially when they're moving at such different speeds. maybe it would be somewhat easier for cyclists to have a dedicated bike lane on the roadway where they could move along speedily and in the direction of traffic, not needing to worry about someone darting in front of them to get a photo of empire state.
BSNYC put it perfectly today. I'm inclined to agree with him, but it kills me to do so, that "schluffing" apologist.
Last time I was up there some nasty bitch spit at me because I was walking on the line even though the pedestrian-to-bike ratio was around 100-1 at the time. Seems like there are at least 15 pedestrians on that bridge for every bike (I could be wrong as I'm not there during commuting hours). But could it be possible for [gasp] people to walk their bikes over the bridge, considering that it is a narrow and confined area with lots of people in it?
i guess i dont understand how cyclists are being "assholes".
take the time someday to count how many signs or warnings there are along the bridge clearly marking one lane for bikes and the other for pedestrians.
there is literally something like SEVENTY signs!
if 70 signs or markings isn't enough for pedestrians to figure out which lane they are supposed to walk in, i'm not sure that makes cyclists the assholes.
it would be like a pedestrian stepping off a sidewalk and into the middle of a highway, and then calling the drivers assholes for being in their way.
grow up, people.
This is insane - I live right down the street from the bridge on the Manhattan side and would love to use it to bike to Brooklyn when I need to go there...but I've so far stayed very clear of it because I know from experience how the clueless idiot tourists clog it up.
I'm sure there are also jerk bikers who do speed down the lane - but I'm going to put almost all of the blame on the morons who can't step into their proper lane. I suppose you can't blame tourists...but you should be able to fine them - cars get fined when parked in bike lanes (HA! - at least they SOMETIMES do...rarely) - do the same thing with pedestrians...step in the bike lane? Here's a ticket. Take the money and put it into NYC's crumbling infrastructure.
This is insane - I live right down the street from the bridge on the Manhattan side and would love to use it to bike to Brooklyn when I need to go there...but I've so far stayed very clear of it because I know from experience how the clueless idiot tourists clog it up.
I'm sure there are also jerk bikers who do speed down the lane - but I'm going to put almost all of the blame on the morons who can't step into their proper lane. I suppose you can't blame tourists...but you should be able to fine them - cars get fined when parked in bike lanes (HA! - at least they SOMETIMES do...rarely) - do the same thing with pedestrians...step in the bike lane? Here's a ticket. Take the money and put it into NYC's crumbling infrastructure.
If everybody just kept to their side there would be no problem. Panic stops due to some backward walking tourist who wants to take a photo of the other tourists they are with are not fun. They should be fined since it is a real safety hazard.
agree!
Regardless of who is at fault, cyclists or pedestrians, the bottom line is that the current situation is untenable. The Bridge is a tourist draw, and it isn't going to change. The tourists aren't in a hurry, any more than they are in Times Square. They screw over pedestrians who are actually trying to get someplace, too: when they stop, they either clog the bike lane, or they force everyone else to go into the bike lane simply to get around them and keep moving.
A dedicated bike lane with a barrier on the roadway would probably help everyone, cyclists and pedestrians alike.
also agree!
Serious bike commuters avoid the bridge like the plague. I cycle over it on early weekend mornings when almost noone else is around (between 6-7AM) and even then I'm super careful. Not sure how I feel about the ban since it's really a nice view from the BB walkway and losing it as a cyclist would be disappointing. Getting off and walking it on a pair of cleated cycling shoes would be a complete PITA too.
Manhattan Bridge is the solution (though tourists and old ladies/workers from chinatown will wander onto the north side from time to time.
oh no my special shoes
Oh noes I train and compete in a sport that require special equipment, I'm so stupid.
If you wanted to mock me about anything, do it about my sweat-wicking, ridiculously colored, padded-lycra tights.
I commute via bicycle every day and 95% of the time, I take the Brooklyn Bridge. It is certainly true that some tourists do not pay attention and find themselves in the bike lane when they ought not be. Some do not understand English and so calls to "Move right, bike lane!" are not understood. But my experience has revealed that most of the time, people get how the system works. An alert cyclist (note to cyclists: you have to pay attention, too) rides at a reasonable speed and anticipates the stray ped. There will always be close calls - I've had them - but I've found the risks of collision with something or someone to be on par with riding through Chinatown to get to the Manhattan Bridge, or along the West Side greenway.
By the way, joggers? Stay off the bridge during rush hour, when the tourist/commuter mix is at its peak, and look over your shoulders when moving into potential bike traffic, wherever you happen to be. You know better.
I commute via bicycle every day and 95% of the time, I take the Brooklyn Bridge. It is certainly true that some tourists do not pay attention and find themselves in the bike lane when they ought not be. Some do not understand English and so calls to "Move right, bike lane!" are not understood. But my experience has revealed that most of the time, people get how the system works. An alert cyclist (note to cyclists: you have to pay attention, too) rides at a reasonable speed and anticipates the stray ped. There will always be close calls - I've had them - but I've found the risks of collision with something or someone to be on par with riding through Chinatown to get to the Manhattan Bridge, or along the West Side greenway.
By the way, joggers? Stay off the bridge during rush hour, when the tourist/commuter mix is at its peak, and look over your shoulders when moving into potential bike traffic, wherever you happen to be. You know better.
Agreed. I think one of the things that exacerbates the problem the most is the presence of joggers - going faster than people walking but slower than bikes and usually jogging in and out of the bike lane. Not that there's any way to stop joggers, but they should not be there at rush hours. Cyclists are trying to commute to/from destinations, tourists are there to marvel at the landmark, but joggers? There is the ENTIRE CITY to be jogging in - why choose this already clogged artery for recreational exercise? The rest of the people are there by necessity but joggers are just in the way. Jog the promenade, jog Cadman Plaza, or jog Fort Greene Park if you want an incline, or just jog earlier/later in the day, but please not the Brooklyn Bridge at rush hours.
Whatever solution is proposed, first you have to acknowledge that the Brooklyn Bridge as a tourist destination is good for New York, and whatever level of tourism it can attract should be safely accommodated. Once you admit that, you are trying to accommodate people that are non-urban, slack-jawed gawkers, many of whom don't speak English and cant read the signs, and are dumbfounded by being on the bridge. Part or all of the reason they are there is to get a great photo with the bridge and/or the skyline in the background. Any cyclists should be totally respectful and understanding of that.
It seems to me that the problem isn't the space for walking. Sure it's narrow, but there's enough room. It seems to me that there isn't enough room for stopping, looking and taking photos. If we can't build an elevated walkway, I say we build an observation deck. At the center of the span, the suspension cables dip below the top of the superstructure and there is a vast clear expanse of space where a wooden deck could be built over the steel trusses. You could put benches and those coin-op binoculars they have at the Empire State Building. This would be ample room for tourists to do all their gawking and photo snapping. You could charge people to enter this area - tourists are used to pumping out wads of cash every time they do something in NYC - and that would completely finance the modest construction, and then some.
Then you install flexible bollards down the middle of the bridge to further emphasize the delineation between the bike and ped lanes, and add signs pointing to the observation deck so tourists know the place their guides told them to go to get a picture is up ahead and they won't stop and clog up the ped lane which is what forces people to wander into the bike lane in the first place.
One other thing I would add to the design is maybe some way of slowing the bikes down - like speed bumps or something. Not sure what would do the trick - maybe a turnstile at the narrow points?
How about putting little dividers between the bike lane and the pedestrian lane? Or do something like an invisible fence, where pedestrians get a little shock if they cross over. Or ban them altogether?
Can't cyclists just all equip their ridez w/ a 'clingy-clingy' bell to alert tourists?
You can't be serious. I have a bell on my bike that is entirely useless; everyone ignores it. the only thing that (kinda) works is yelling.
CLINGY-CLINGY!
The bike lane on the bridge is clearly marked with nice pictures of bikes on it. The pedestrian lane with nice pictures of people. I don't know why tourists don't understand these signs. I think there should be signs along the way in every language, particularly French, German, Japanese and Korean telling people to stay the eff out of the bike lane.
Nobody should bother trying to ride their bike over the Brooklyn Bridge. Take the Manhattan instead.
Thank you, you answered the question I have been searching for which was whether or not to place keywords when blog commenting. mirc . mirc indir
No bikes on car level; it already takes drivers too much time getting on and off the bridge in both directions, especially when patrol cars take up lane at the on ramps.
Bikes should be walked at tight parts of the bridge.
Short barricades should be put up on the walkway as lane dividers.
Encourage more bike riders to use the Manhattan Bridge, or make the bike lane on Bklyn Bridge in-bound to NYC and the Manhattan outbound from NYC.
Can't take any lanes from cars; might as well put tolls up for the choking traffic that will result.
what the fuck, CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS ARE NOT GROUPS, I WALK AND I DRIVE AND I RIDE A BIKE, WHAT THE FUCK
it's new york. we can deal with all. pedestrians are jerks, cyclists are jerks, the chicken-wing man is a jerk. whatever. do your best to be decent and let the rest roll off your back.
keep fucking that chicken
how about they just build a new foot bridge as alternative for pedestrians and cyclists to cross the river? if the brooklyn bridge wasn't so convenient, i'd never ride that nightmare otherwise
They could easily (but not affordably) but planks over the car lanes to make a very large path, but this will never happen.
As a cyclist, however, one who used to ride his bike over the BB twice a day, 5 days a week for about 5 years (not as much these days since I moved - now use the MB), I absolutely love the idea of giving over a car lane to cyclists. I would be sad to not see the amazing views, but it would be much better for all non-four wheeled transport.
I don't live in NYC; I live in LA. However, it seems to me, from reading the posts of my fellow cyclists (and pedestrians and drivers) that everything would be better if everyone would simply exercise caution in a congested area, both on the bridge and on the overpass.
As a cyclist/public transit commuter in LA (a city known for car culture) I would be very happy to understand the problems of NYC bike commuting more. I'm going to be visiting (and biking) in the spring. Message me at my blog: http://lifewithoutwheels.wordpress.com.
I know in LA, I would appreciate a dedicated bike lane in some places. In fact, the city is hashing out a Bike Master Plan as we speak; however, there are definitely places I would not want to be next to vehicles. Let's face it, automobile drivers, in general, drive like they own the road, and everyone should just get out of their way (I mean everyone, other cars too!). At least that's how they drive in LA, with a cell phone pressed against their ear. I take a route to work that cuts through neighborhoods and winds a little longer than my actual commute just so I can avoid the auto traffic on busier yet shorter streets.
Anyhow, I hope whatever the solution is, that it ends up beneficial and safe to all.