Re: Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected Bike Lanes, June 2nd!
patti
Well, since we've a lively forum going....
Ever travel on 8th Avenue north of 42nd St in the left-sided bike lane? It's a dangerous zone with much traffic naturally flowing left - across the bike lane - and with many car services blocking the lane outside office buildings. It's far more hazardous at 5 or 6 p.m. than travelling uptown on the right-side of 8th Ave.
Design, placement and enforcement of bicycle lanes are important considerations, if their use is to be practical, safe and effective.
Patricia Collins
UWS Bicyclist
--- On Thu, 5/28/09, Ken Coughlin <coughlin.ken@gmail.com> wrote:
|
Rich Conroy
I have a picture of the 8th Ave. lane completely crowded by pedestrians; it was like this all the way from 42nd to 58th (attached)
Advocates of protected bike lanes are focused, rightfully, on encouraging new cyclists. That’s great, but in the process, let’s not coerce or punish the cyclists that have already been cycling for years. Regrettably, those pushing for creation of new separated bike facilities haven’t put the same energy into repealing mandatory use of bike path laws. A recent spokesperson for a major bike advocacy organization was recently quoted in the press as saying “It would be criminal NOT to use them.” I’m not sure if he realized it, but it IS criminal (in a misdemeanor sorta way) not to use them.
Along the way, as I think we’ve seen in this conversation, there are a number of assumptions that have yet to be borne out, and which I think are pretty debatable.
1. That bike lanes will encourage more cyclists and increased numbers of cyclists will make cyclists a more legitimate part of traffic. The assumption here is that most of those cyclists will graduate from protected bike lanes to other traffic lanes. Will they? If they don’t, I actually think that separated bike lanes have the effect (with the law behind it) of telling cyclists “their place” which is out of the rest of traffic. I’m not sure how facilities which separate cyclists from traffic can legitimate cyclists as part of traffic in the short term. Every time I hear a driver tell me “you’re supposed to be in the bike lane”, I’m reminded that bike lanes de-legitimate cyclists rights to use the roads, even roads that don’t have bike lanes (which is where I hear that most often). Over the long run, I actually think we are undermining our rights to use the roads unless the Mandatory Bike Lane laws are repealed.
2. That traffic is dangerous & that 5,000 lb SUV’s will never respect cyclists. I ride in traffic (Amsterdam, Columbus, Broadway) all the time, and rarely experience the bullying of trucks, buses, or anybody else for that matter. It happens, but those drivers are the distinct minority. To hear Separated Bike Lane advocates talk, you’d think most drivers are homicidal lunatics who want cyclists off the road. Again, just not my experience. But then I also ride in such a way that deters aggressiveness & risk-taking by others. And I find that cycling as if I were a vehicle on the road actually generates more respect, not less, from drivers.
3. As people become more used to bike facilities, they will figure out how to use them. I don’t know. At least half the pedestrians I encounter on the UWS cross against the red, while traffic is coming through, without looking. Despite traffic & walk signals being around for decades, that little red hand still hasn’t tipped off a lot of pedestrians that they should check the intersection before crossing. My experience on the West Side bike path (I’m a daily user, except I try to avoid it on weekends) is that pedestrians are generally oblivious to signage and markings delineating the pedestrian lanes adjacent to the river from the bike lanes. If cyclists try to bike in the pedestrian-only zones on the Hudson Greenway, they will get a ticket from Park Rangers, but I’ve never heard of or seen pedestrians being ticketed for obstructing the bike lanes when alternatives are readily available. Thus I’m not convinced that these facilities treat cyclists equally or democratically.
4. That this is an either – or proposition. “The alternative is to throw in the towel and say protected lanes will never work in NYC” Let’s not set up false choices here. Go ahead and build those lanes. But don’t oversell them as a one-size fits all safety device, and please do change NYC and NYS traffic law that requires cyclists to use them.
With Regards,
Rich Conroy
Bicycle Education Programs Director
Bike New York
212-932-2453 x159
www.bikenewyork.org
From: patti c
[pc2xx1@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:28
PM
To: uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com
Subject: Re: [UWS Discussion]
Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected Bike Lanes,June 2nd!
|
Well, since we've a lively forum going.... Ever travel on 8th Avenue north of 42nd St in the left-sided bike lane? It's a dangerous zone with much traffic naturally flowing left - across the bike lane - and with many car services blocking the lane outside office buildings. It's far more hazardous at 5 or 6 p.m. than travelling uptown on the right-side of 8th Ave. Design, placement and enforcement of bicycle lanes are important considerations, if their use is to be practical, safe and effective.
Patricia Collins UWS Bicyclist
|
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243531701591
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com.
Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com
for questions.
David Crockett
Hi Rich,
There are a couple of tidbits I wanted to respond to in your last message. First, your picture is of a Class 3, or un-protected, un-buffered lane, which I think is worth noting. But more importantly, it's of an area with the most critical shortage of pedestrian space in all of NYC. The people in that photo are so discouraged by the congestion on the sidewalk that they are literally taking their life in their hands, walking in traffic, rather than suffer the shortage of pedestrian space. So I'm not sure that your photo speaks particularly well to the level of respect that pedestrians do or don't have for cycling facilities.
Furthermore, I think it's categorically true that traffic is dangerous. Regardless of the level of comfort with traffic of the individual cyclist under discussion (and yours, as mine, seems quite high), it is an incontrovertable fact that a 5000lb SUV is a potential lethal hazard to a cyclist, regardless of their level of respect or best intentions. If they don't see you, if they really really like cyclists, that's not going to change the amount of momentum that they've generated, or how long it takes their brakes to slow their vehicle.
I also don't think it's actually the assumption that cyclists will "graduate" out of the protected lanes. It's the assumption that cyclists will gradually integrate into the street environment, using dedicated facilities where available.
You talk a lot about integrating with traffic. But ultimately, it's counterproductive to tell cyclists to just go out and behave like cars - they are fundamentally different machines, with different needs and vulnerabilities. What we are seeking instead is a street code (both behavioral and legal) that recognizes those differences and provides cycling with its own space, facilities, and considerations.
What this looks like, as many previous respondents have noted, is Amsterdam or Copenhagen, where the bicycle has truly become a vehicle in its own right, complete with dedicated routes, lights, laws, and signals. While we may lose something in speed, we will gain a lot in safety and legitimacy. For myself, I will happily add a few minutes to my bike trips if the result is fewer (or no) dead cyclists on our streets.
nj
I have a picture of the 8th Ave. lane completely crowded by pedestrians; it was like this all the way from 42nd to 58th (attached)
Advocates of protected bike lanes are focused, rightfully, on encouraging new cyclists. That’s great, but in the process, let’s not coerce or punish the cyclists that have already been cycling for years. Regrettably, those pushing for creation of new separated bike facilities haven’t put the same energy into repealing mandatory use of bike path laws. A recent spokesperson for a major bike advocacy organization was recently quoted in the press as saying “It would be criminal NOT to use them.” I’m not sure if he realized it, but it IS criminal (in a misdemeanor sorta way) not to use them.
Along the way, as I think we’ve seen in this conversation, there are a number of assumptions that have yet to be borne out, and which I think are pretty debatable.
1. That bike lanes will encourage more cyclists and increased numbers of cyclists will make cyclists a more legitimate part of traffic. The assumption here is that most of those cyclists will graduate from protected bike lanes to other traffic lanes. Will they? If they don’t, I actually think that separated bike lanes have the effect (with the law behind it) of telling cyclists “their place” which is out of the rest of traffic. I’m not sure how facilities which separate cyclists from traffic can legitimate cyclists as part of traffic in the short term. Every time I hear a driver tell me “you’re supposed to be in the bike lane”, I’m reminded that bike lanes de-legitimate cyclists rights to use the roads, even roads that don’t have bike lanes (which is where I hear that most often). Over the long run, I actually think we are undermining our rights to use the roads unless the Mandatory Bike Lane laws are repealed.
2. That traffic is dangerous & that 5,000 lb SUV’s will never respect cyclists. I ride in traffic (Amsterdam, Columbus, Broadway) all the time, and rarely experience the bullying of trucks, buses, or anybody else for that matter. It happens, but those drivers are the distinct minority. To hear Separated Bike Lane advocates talk, you’d think most drivers are homicidal lunatics who want cyclists off the road. Again, just not my experience. But then I also ride in such a way that deters aggressiveness & risk-taking by others. And I find that cycling as if I were a vehicle on the road actually generates more respect, not less, from drivers.
3. As people become more used to bike facilities, they will figure out how to use them. I don’t know. At least half the pedestrians I encounter on the UWS cross against the red, while traffic is coming through, without looking. Despite traffic & walk signals being around for decades, that little red hand still hasn’t tipped off a lot of pedestrians that they should check the intersection before crossing. My experience on the West Side bike path (I’m a daily user, except I try to avoid it on weekends) is that pedestrians are generally oblivious to signage and markings delineating the pedestrian lanes adjacent to the river from the bike lanes. If cyclists try to bike in the pedestrian-only zones on the Hudson Greenway, they will get a ticket from Park Rangers, but I’ve never heard of or seen pedestrians being ticketed for obstructing the bike lanes when alternatives are readily available. Thus I’m not convinced that these facilities treat cyclists equally or democratically.
4. That this is an either – or proposition. “The alternative is to throw in the towel and say protected lanes will never work in NYC” Let’s not set up false choices here. Go ahead and build those lanes. But don’t oversell them as a one-size fits all safety device, and please do change NYC and NYS traffic law that requires cyclists to use them.
With Regards,
Rich Conroy
Bicycle Education Programs Director
Bike New York
212-932-2453 x159
From: patti c [mailto:pc2xx1@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:28 PM
To: uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com
Subject: Re: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected Bike Lanes,June 2nd!
Well, since we've a lively forum going....
Ever travel on 8th Avenue north of 42nd St in the left-sided bike lane? It's a dangerous zone with much traffic naturally flowing left - across the bike lane - and with many car services blocking the lane outside office buildings. It's far more hazardous at 5 or 6 p.m. than travelling uptown on the right-side of 8th Ave.
Design, placement and enforcement of bicycle lanes are important considerations, if their use is to be practical, safe and effective.
Patricia Collins
UWS Bicyclist
--- On Thu, 5/28/09, Ken Coughlin <coughlin.ken@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Ken Coughlin <coughlin.ken@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected Bike Lanes, June 2nd!
To: uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com
Date: Thursday, May 28, 2009, 12:34 PMAs someone who has used protected bike lanes extensively in European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam, I know that they CAN work wonderfully, providing a safe space for commuting cyclists that pedestrians respect. I would urge my cycling brethren not to give up just as we're getting started.
Protected bike lanes are now an anomaly and many New Yorkers don't know what they are or what to do with them. As they become more widespread, their use will be better understood and respected. But this requires some break-in time (maybe even a few years, depending on the pace of development). We also need to remember that many of us are intrepid people willing to brave, say, Amsterdam Avenue at rush hour on a bike. Many, many potential cyclists are not, and they will only hop on their bikes when it appears safe to them to do so. Protected bike lanes send a strong message that cycling is a (relatively) safe activity and that the city endorses and welcomes it. Once the potential cyclists start getting this message, the floodgates will open and, as the number of cyclists on the streets grows, we will begin to be viewed as legitimate road users, not inconvenient interlopers as we are now.
The alternative is to throw in the towel and say protected lanes will never work in NYC. I don't buy that. And, as experienced a cyclist as I am, I'd take a bike lane any day over making the daily wager that trucks and 5,000-pound SUVs traveling more than 30 mph will respect my presence.
Ken Coughlin
Member, Community Board 7On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Larry Reilly <larrybike@gmail.com> wrote:
As a life long biker in Manhattan, I share the views echoed by Rich and Chuck. The protected bikelanes that DoT built in 1980 soon became a magnet for pedestrians and garment center pushcarts. Real Estate interests led to their quick demise despite increased bike volumes with minimal impact on traffic speeds.
The NYC traffic rules - 4-12 (p) do require bikelane use except that section 4-12(p)1(ii) allows for a judgement call as to their usability.
(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.
Hope this helps clarify
Larry Reilly
Former President of TA, & NYC DoT Bike Coordinator in the 1980's'
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Rich Conroy <richc@bikenewyork.org> wrote:
I think Chuck points to some of the overlooked issues in the campaign to create more protected bike lanes. The protected bike lane is not a one-size fits all solution for all cyclists, yet the law is written in such a way that all cyclists are required by existing traffic law to use them. The problem for experienced cyclists is that protected bike lanes and multi-use facilities mix cyclists with pedestrians. A cyclist who is confident in traffic and can ride 15-20 mph doesn’t really want to be mixed up in slow and frequently unpredictable pedestrian traffic. Traffic on the streets has some rules, predictable patterns, and interactions. Pedestrian traffic has few if any rules (except when crossing streets). That’s why it’s generally considered a bad idea for cyclists to ride on the sidewalk, and many municipalities (including NYC) ban adults from cycling on the sidewalk. What happens with physically separated paths is that they become sidewalk extensions, forcing cyclists to slow down to near walking pace, or into a speed up – slow down – speed up – slow down, as they encounter patches of pedestrian traffic in the bike lane. Nor am I terribly confident that pedestrians will learn skill that they don’t need to use on the sidewalk (like paying attention to surroundings, not wandering aimlessly while texting, not creating a four-abreast pedestrian obstacle, etc).
Whether cyclists are truly better off in separated bike lanes is really a debatable point. Another point of view is that cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. What this means is that cyclist skill—acting like a vehicle in traffic—is an effective way to prevent crashes, and that many, though not all crashes, are caused by cyclists’ failure to do so. I know this may seem anathema to some, who believe that cyclists can never be in the wrong, or that cyclists are always victims of motorist aggression, but the bike crash studies and statistics simply don’t bear that out. Many protected bike facilities have some issues in terms of their ability to treat cyclists as vehicles, and instead wind up turning cyclists into little more than pedestrians mounted on a machine. Some of us don’t want to be treated that way.
And here’s the rub, while I’m all for reducing the free public space given away to motorists, I hardly think that protected bike lanes are democratic for cyclists. First, under NYC law, cyclists are forced to use these facilities, even if a cyclist has the experience, knowledge and skills to cycle safely in traffic. That’s right, NYC has a mandatory use of bike lane law, and people have gotten ticketed, arrested, and bikes confiscated for failing to follow that law. Second, cyclists can get a citation for cycling on the sidewalk with pedestrians (and rightly so), but I haven’t heard of any pedestrians getting cited for walking in the bike lane. That’s not exactly equal and democratic treatment. Third, I’ve found that bike lanes give motorists yet another excuse to tell us that we don’t belong. “Get in the bike lane”.
I’m not against the creation of new separated bike lanes; however, I am against being coerced into using them, and being treated like I don’t belong on the roads. To the claim that cyclists need their own road space or special road space, I have to reply: almost every lane is a bike lane under NYS and NYC law.
With Regards,
Rich Conroy
Bicycle Education Programs Director
Bike New York
212-932-2453 x159
From: Tila Duhaime [mailto:tilatila2@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:39 AMSubject: Re: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected Bike Lanes, June 2nd!
Chuck, and interested UWS Renaissance Members,
I applaud you as one of the pioneer cyclists on the New York City streets, and I'd like to respond to your main gripe about pedestrian/cyclist interactions on physically separated bike lanes. I believe, along with hundreds if not thousands of others who have worked to tame auto traffic to foster everyday cycling, that such lanes are an important part of the larger livable streets movement to promote people over cars, and I would hate to have the perfect be the enemy of the good on this particular point.
First, I must disagree that these lanes "are not safe passage ways for bicyclists" because of wayward pedestrian traffic. They can be less convenient, or less speedy, routes than you and I might like when pedestrians wander into the lanes, but most rational cyclists would gladly accept a matchup against a clueless pedestrian in the bike lane than a clueless or careless motorist on the roads at large. Many bikers are killed every year from run-ins with autos on the streets of this city; none, to my knowledge, are killed by errant pedestrians in dedicated bike lanes. Most of the Hudson River Greenway, now the busiest bike path in the country, is accessible to and is regularly used by pedestrians as well as cyclists; while you make a very good point that walkers often stray where they shouldn't, the truth is that cyclists are still better off riding on such physically separated paths than they would be if forced to stay on city streets with auto traffic.
I don't doubt that you, Chuck, can travel faster from point A to point B if you just "deal with car traffic" instead of using protected lanes or greenways; I also know that thousands of Upper West Siders would rather not run the statistical risks of injury or death that you accept when you do so. We have asked for such lanes in our neighborhood in an attempt to democratize the current misallocation of road space and to encourage cyclists who are less experienced, and probably less calloused to the risk of serious injury, than you are.
Secondly, as with any modification in longstanding traffic patterns, there is a learning curve for street users, drivers and cyclists and pedestrians alike, to learn the new rules of the road. With out-of-town pedestrians, like many people in the new Times Square district, this is for the most part a lost cause. I can't tell from your email where you have encountered these "aimless", "eyes closed" pedestrians, but in my experience, the nicer you ask for your right of way, the less likely they are to be angry. Recent experience has shown that residents and other people who regularly encounter protected bike lanes DO learn where they are expected to walk, ride, and drive over a relatively short period of time. The DOT is experimenting with different visual or physical cues, like coloring the lanes, to alert pedestrians to the fact that one section of the street is different from another. In other countries and parts of this country, such design elements have taught pedestrians in short order which part of the street is theirs and which parts are reserved for use by bikes or cars. I am confident that New Yorkers are smart enough to catch on: they eventually learned to scoop up after their dogs, didn't they?
I'm sorry that you've decided not to speak in favor of allocating more road space, however imperfect in your view, to cyclists on the Upper West Side. We know that having more bikers on the road like you makes cycling safer and more appealing for everybody. I would love to have road veterans like yourself advocate for better cycling infrastructure here, and I invite you to reconsider your position.
Ride on,
TilaOn Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Charles Rose <crose5rsd@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Lisa,
I have been riding my bike on the streets of Manhattan my entire adult life. I am 62 years old and have been commuting to work and riding my bike to get me everywhere since the summer of 1974 -- 35 years. I don't think the "Protected" bike lanes on Broadway, or the "protected" bike lanes on any street are at all safe to bikers. I will go out of my way to avoided these dangerous "protected" bike lanes. Until these lanes are cordened off from pedestrians, these are NOT safe passage ways for bicyclists. Pedestrians walk in these "proteced" bike lanes without paying any attention to way they are. They consider this space their space and get angry as cyclists ask for thier right of way. I am terribly disappointed with all of the new bikeways. I would rather deal with car traffic..........than the dangers of pedestrians aimlessly walking with thier eyes closed in these completely unproteced "bike" lanes.
So, I am sorry, but I will not be joining you on the the 2nd. Not until the bike lane are truely "protected" and safe from pedestrians.
Chuck Rose
> From: lisa@sladkus.com
> To: uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com
> Subject: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected Bike Lanes, June 2nd!
> Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:26:27 -0400
>
> Greetings,
>
> I hope this email finds you well. We at the campaign have enjoyed a fun Bike Month, and we can't help but be giddy about the amazing changes that are happening to our streets. If you haven't been down to experience the NEW Broadway, it's worth a trip. What a hoot to sit in the middle of Times Square in a lawn chair.
>
> Despite our excitement about Broadway, we have to wonder...WHAT ABOUT US? Why not continue this enlightened transportation policy and bring it to the Upper West Side?
>
> So, we need your help. On June 2nd, we plan to ask Community Board 7 to support protected bike lanes on the Upper West Side. Come out and explain why you want these in your community, why they make us safer, happier, calmer, (insert your reason here).
>
> June 2, 6:30 p.m.
> Jewish Lifecare
> 120 West 106th Street (at Columbus)
>
> Find me or Tila Duhaime before the meeting and we'll help you sign up to speak during the public session.
>
> As always, please don't just hit "reply" to this email. If you have a question, feel free to email me at lisa@sladkus.com or lisa@transalt.org.
>
> Thanks so much. See you on the 2nd.
>
> Lisa Sladkus
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243477587804
> To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
>
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243483432768
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243489140766
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243522926843
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243525863258
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
--
“The worst crimes were dared by a few, willed by more, and tolerated by all.” -- Tacitus, on the Roman Republic's degeneration into emperorship.
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243528520048
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243531701591
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243534098441
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to uws-discussion@lists.livablestreets.com. Please contact uws-discussion-manager@lists.livablestreets.com for questions.
Steven Phillips
Hi Rich, I don't think anyone believes most drivers are homicidal lunatics. Those of us who ride in city traffic do only rarely experience outright bullying by trucks, buses and so forth, as you point out. However, as you point out, it does happen, and it only needs to happen once for you to be mincemeat. And it doesn't matter whether it's a homicidal lunatic at the wheel or just someone making a cellphone call -- mincemeat is mincemeat. That risk really limits the number of people who choose to ride in city traffic. Good luck on getting the mandatory bike lane law repealed. No sarcasm there -- I also feel the law is a bit excessive, although I don't chafe against it as much as you do. If I choose not to use a bike lane it's generally because it's clogged, and the law permits me that freedom. -- Steven Rich Conroy wrote:
Show quoted text
> > I have a picture of the 8^th Ave. lane completely crowded by > pedestrians; it was like this all the way from 42^nd to 58^th (attached) > > Advocates of protected bike lanes are focused, rightfully, on > encouraging new cyclists. That’s great, but in the process, let’s not > coerce or punish the cyclists that have already been cycling for > years. Regrettably, those pushing for creation of new separated bike > facilities haven’t put the same energy into repealing mandatory use of > bike path laws. A recent spokesperson for a major bike advocacy > organization was recently quoted in the press as saying “It would be > criminal NOT to use them.” I’m not sure if he realized it, but it IS > criminal (in a misdemeanor sorta way) not to use them. > > Along the way, as I think we’ve seen in this conversation, there are a > number of assumptions that have yet to be borne out, and which I think > are pretty debatable. > > 1. That bike lanes will encourage more cyclists and increased numbers > of cyclists will make cyclists a more legitimate part of traffic. The > assumption here is that most of those cyclists will graduate from > protected bike lanes to other traffic lanes. Will they? If they don’t, > I actually think that separated bike lanes have the effect (with the > law behind it) of telling cyclists “their place” which is out of the > rest of traffic. I’m not sure how facilities which separate cyclists > from traffic can legitimate cyclists as part of traffic in the short > term. Every time I hear a driver tell me “you’re supposed to be in the > bike lane”, I’m reminded that bike lanes de-legitimate cyclists rights > to use the roads, even roads that don’t have bike lanes (which is > where I hear that most often). Over the long run, I actually think we > are undermining our rights to use the roads unless the Mandatory Bike > Lane laws are repealed. > > 2. That traffic is dangerous & that 5,000 lb SUV’s will never respect > cyclists. I ride in traffic (Amsterdam, Columbus, Broadway) all the > time, and rarely experience the bullying of trucks, buses, or anybody > else for that matter. It happens, but those drivers are the distinct > minority. To hear Separated Bike Lane advocates talk, you’d think most > drivers are homicidal lunatics who want cyclists off the road. Again, > just not my experience. But then I also ride in such a way that deters > aggressiveness & risk-taking by others. And I find that cycling as if > I were a vehicle on the road actually generates more respect, not > less, from drivers. > > 3. As people become more used to bike facilities, they will figure out > how to use them. I don’t know. At least half the pedestrians I > encounter on the UWS cross against the red, while traffic is coming > through, without looking. Despite traffic & walk signals being around > for decades, that little red hand still hasn’t tipped off a lot of > pedestrians that they should check the intersection before crossing. > My experience on the West Side bike path (I’m a daily user, except I > try to avoid it on weekends) is that pedestrians are generally > oblivious to signage and markings delineating the pedestrian lanes > adjacent to the river from the bike lanes. If cyclists try to bike in > the pedestrian-only zones on the Hudson Greenway, they will get a > ticket from Park Rangers, but I’ve never heard of or seen pedestrians > being ticketed for obstructing the bike lanes when alternatives are > readily available. Thus I’m not convinced that these facilities treat > cyclists equally or democratically. > > 4. That this is an either – or proposition. “The alternative is to > throw in the towel and say protected lanes will never work in NYC” > Let’s not set up false choices here. Go ahead and build those lanes. > But don’t oversell them as a one-size fits all safety device, and > please do change NYC and NYS traffic law that requires cyclists to use > them. > > With Regards, > > Rich Conroy > > Bicycle Education Programs Director > > Bike New York > > 212-932-2453 x159 > > www.bikenewyork.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* patti c [mailto:pc2xx1@...] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:28 PM > *To:* uws-discussion@... > *Subject:* Re: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected > Bike Lanes,June 2nd! > > Well, since we've a lively forum going.... > > Ever travel on 8th Avenue north of 42nd St in the left-sided bike > lane? It's a dangerous zone with much traffic naturally flowing left - > across the bike lane - and with many car services blocking the lane > outside office buildings. It's far more hazardous at 5 or 6 p.m. than > travelling uptown on the right-side of 8th Ave. > > Design, placement and enforcement of bicycle lanes are important > considerations, if their use is to be practical, safe and effective. > > Patricia Collins > > UWS Bicyclist > > --- On *Thu, 5/28/09, Ken Coughlin /<coughlin.ken@...>/* wrote: > > > From: Ken Coughlin <coughlin.ken@...> > Subject: Re: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected > Bike Lanes, June 2nd! > To: uws-discussion@... > Date: Thursday, May 28, 2009, 12:34 PM > > As someone who has used protected bike lanes extensively in > European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam, I know that they > CAN work wonderfully, providing a safe space for commuting > cyclists that pedestrians respect. I would urge my cycling > brethren not to give up just as we're getting started. > > Protected bike lanes are now an anomaly and many New Yorkers don't > know what they are or what to do with them. As they become more > widespread, their use will be better understood and respected. But > this requires some break-in time (maybe even a few years, > depending on the pace of development). We also need to remember > that many of us are intrepid people willing to brave, say, > Amsterdam Avenue at rush hour on a bike. Many, many potential > cyclists are not, and they will only hop on their bikes when it > appears safe to them to do so. Protected bike lanes send a strong > message that cycling is a (relatively) safe activity and that the > city endorses and welcomes it. Once the potential cyclists start > getting this message, the floodgates will open and, as the number > of cyclists on the streets grows, we will begin to be viewed as > legitimate road users, not inconvenient interlopers as we are now. > > The alternative is to throw in the towel and say protected lanes > will never work in NYC. I don't buy that. And, as experienced a > cyclist as I am, I'd take a bike lane any day over making the > daily wager that trucks and 5,000-pound SUVs traveling more than > 30 mph will respect my presence. > > Ken Coughlin > Member, Community Board 7 > > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Larry Reilly > <larrybike@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=larrybike');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('gmail.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=larrybike');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=larrybike@...>>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=larrybike">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=larrybike@...>> > wrote: > > As a life long biker in Manhattan, I share the views echoed by > Rich and Chuck. The protected bikelanes that DoT built in 1980 > soon became a magnet for pedestrians and garment center pushcarts. > Real Estate interests led to their quick demise despite increased > bike volumes with minimal impact on traffic speeds. > The NYC traffic rules - 4-12 (p) do require bikelane use except > that section 4-12(p)1(ii) allows for a judgement call as to their > usability. > > (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.* > > Hope this helps clarify > Larry Reilly > Former President of TA, & NYC DoT Bike Coordinator in the 1980's' > > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Rich Conroy > <richc@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=richc');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('bikenewyork.org', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=richc');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=richc@...>>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=richc">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=richc@...>> > wrote: > > I think Chuck points to some of the overlooked issues in the > campaign to create more protected bike lanes. The protected bike > lane is not a one-size fits all solution for all cyclists, yet the > law is written in such a way that all cyclists are required by > existing traffic law to use them. The problem for experienced > cyclists is that protected bike lanes and multi-use facilities mix > cyclists with pedestrians. A cyclist who is confident in traffic > and can ride 15-20 mph doesn’t really want to be mixed up in slow > and frequently unpredictable pedestrian traffic. Traffic on the > streets has some rules, predictable patterns, and interactions. > Pedestrian traffic has few if any rules (except when crossing > streets). That’s why it’s generally considered a bad idea for > cyclists to ride on the sidewalk, and many municipalities > (including NYC) ban adults from cycling on the sidewalk. What > happens with physically separated paths is that they become > sidewalk extensions, forcing cyclists to slow down to near walking > pace, or into a speed up – slow down – speed up – slow down, as > they encounter patches of pedestrian traffic in the bike lane. Nor > am I terribly confident that pedestrians will learn skill that > they don’t need to use on the sidewalk (like paying attention to > surroundings, not wandering aimlessly while texting, not creating > a four-abreast pedestrian obstacle, etc). > > Whether cyclists are truly better off in separated bike lanes is > really a debatable point. Another point of view is that cyclists > fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. > What this means is that cyclist skill—acting like a vehicle in > traffic—is an effective way to prevent crashes, and that many, > though not all crashes, are caused by cyclists’ failure to do so. > I know this may seem anathema to some, who believe that cyclists > can never be in the wrong, or that cyclists are always victims of > motorist aggression, but the bike crash studies and statistics > simply don’t bear that out. Many protected bike facilities have > some issues in terms of their ability to treat cyclists as > vehicles, and instead wind up turning cyclists into little more > than pedestrians mounted on a machine. Some of us don’t want to be > treated that way. > > And here’s the rub, while I’m all for reducing the free public > space given away to motorists, I hardly think that protected bike > lanes are democratic for cyclists. First, under NYC law, cyclists > are forced to use these facilities, even if a cyclist has the > experience, knowledge and skills to cycle safely in traffic. > That’s right, NYC has a mandatory use of bike lane law, and people > have gotten ticketed, arrested, and bikes confiscated for failing > to follow that law. Second, cyclists can get a citation for > cycling on the sidewalk with pedestrians (and rightly so), but I > haven’t heard of any pedestrians getting cited for walking in the > bike lane. That’s not exactly equal and democratic treatment. > Third, I’ve found that bike lanes give motorists yet another > excuse to tell us that we don’t belong. “Get in the bike lane”. > > I’m not against the creation of new separated bike lanes; however, > I am against being coerced into using them, and being treated like > I don’t belong on the roads. To the claim that cyclists need their > own road space or special road space, I have to reply: almost > every lane is a bike lane under NYS and NYC law. > > With Regards, > > Rich Conroy > > Bicycle Education Programs Director > > Bike New York > > 212-932-2453 x159 > > www.bikenewyork.org <http://www.bikenewyork.org/> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Tila Duhaime [mailto:tilatila2@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=tilatila2');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('gmail.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=tilatila2');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=tilatila2@...>]">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=tilatila2">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=tilatila2@...>] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:39 AM > > > *To:* uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...> > > *Subject:* Re: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for > Protected Bike Lanes, June 2nd! > > Chuck, and interested UWS Renaissance Members, > > I applaud you as one of the pioneer cyclists on the New York City > streets, and I'd like to respond to your main gripe about > pedestrian/cyclist interactions on physically separated bike > lanes. I believe, along with hundreds if not thousands of others > who have worked to tame auto traffic to foster everyday cycling, > that such lanes are an important part of the larger livable > streets movement to promote people over cars, and I would hate to > have the perfect be the enemy of the good on this particular point. > > First, I must disagree that these lanes "are not safe passage ways > for bicyclists" because of wayward pedestrian traffic. They can be > less convenient, or less speedy, routes than you and I might like > when pedestrians wander into the lanes, but most rational cyclists > would gladly accept a matchup against a clueless pedestrian in the > bike lane than a clueless or careless motorist on the roads at > large. Many bikers are killed every year from run-ins with autos > on the streets of this city; none, to my knowledge, are killed by > errant pedestrians in dedicated bike lanes. Most of the Hudson > River Greenway, now the busiest bike path in the country, is > accessible to and is regularly used by pedestrians as well as > cyclists; while you make a very good point that walkers often > stray where they shouldn't, the truth is that cyclists are still > better off riding on such physically separated paths than they > would be if forced to stay on city streets with auto traffic. > > I don't doubt that you, Chuck, can travel faster from point A to > point B if you just "deal with car traffic" instead of using > protected lanes or greenways; I also know that thousands of Upper > West Siders would rather not run the statistical risks of injury > or death that you accept when you do so. We have asked for such > lanes in our neighborhood in an attempt to democratize the current > misallocation of road space and to encourage cyclists who are less > experienced, and probably less calloused to the risk of serious > injury, than you are. > > Secondly, as with any modification in longstanding traffic > patterns, there is a learning curve for street users, drivers and > cyclists and pedestrians alike, to learn the new rules of the > road. With out-of-town pedestrians, like many people in the new > Times Square district, this is for the most part a lost cause. I > can't tell from your email where you have encountered these > "aimless", "eyes closed" pedestrians, but in my experience, the > nicer you ask for your right of way, the less likely they are to > be angry. Recent experience has shown that residents and other > people who regularly encounter protected bike lanes DO learn where > they are expected to walk, ride, and drive over a relatively short > period of time. The DOT is experimenting with different visual or > physical cues, like coloring the lanes, to alert pedestrians to > the fact that one section of the street is different from another. > In other countries and parts of this country, such design elements > have taught pedestrians in short order which part of the street is > theirs and which parts are reserved for use by bikes or cars. I am > confident that New Yorkers are smart enough to catch on: they > eventually learned to scoop up after their dogs, didn't they? > > I'm sorry that you've decided not to speak in favor of allocating > more road space, however imperfect in your view, to cyclists on > the Upper West Side. We know that having more bikers on the road > like you makes cycling safer and more appealing for everybody. I > would love to have road veterans like yourself advocate for better > cycling infrastructure here, and I invite you to reconsider your > position. > > Ride on, > > Tila > > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Charles Rose > <crose5rsd@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crose5rsd');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('hotmail.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crose5rsd');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crose5rsd@...>>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crose5rsd">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crose5rsd@...>> > wrote: > > Hi Lisa, > I have been riding my bike on the streets of Manhattan my entire > adult life. I am 62 years old and have been commuting to work and > riding my bike to get me everywhere since the summer of 1974 -- 35 > years. I don't think the "Protected" bike lanes on Broadway, or > the "protected" bike lanes on any street are at all safe to > bikers. I will go out of my way to avoided these dangerous > "protected" bike lanes. Until these lanes are *_cordened off from > pedestrians,_* these are NOT safe passage ways for bicyclists. > Pedestrians walk in these "proteced" bike lanes without paying any > attention to way they are. They consider this space their space > and get angry as cyclists ask for thier right of way. I am > terribly disappointed with all of the new bikeways. I would rather > deal with car traffic..........than the dangers of pedestrians > aimlessly walking with thier eyes closed in these completely > unproteced "bike" lanes. > So, I am sorry, but I will not be joining you on the the 2nd. Not > until the bike lane are truely "protected" and safe from pedestrians. > Chuck Rose > > > > From: lisa@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('sladkus.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa@...> > > To: uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...> > > Subject: [UWS Discussion] Let's Hear Your Voice for Protected > Bike Lanes, June 2nd! > > Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:26:27 -0400 > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > I hope this email finds you well. We at the campaign have enjoyed > a fun Bike Month, and we can't help but be giddy about the amazing > changes that are happening to our streets. If you haven't been > down to experience the NEW Broadway, it's worth a trip. What a > hoot to sit in the middle of Times Square in a lawn chair. > > > > Despite our excitement about Broadway, we have to wonder...WHAT > ABOUT US? Why not continue this enlightened transportation policy > and bring it to the Upper West Side? > > > > So, we need your help. On June 2nd, we plan to ask Community > Board 7 to support protected bike lanes on the Upper West Side. > Come out and explain why you want these in your community, why > they make us safer, happier, calmer, (insert your reason here). > > > > June 2, 6:30 p.m. > > Jewish Lifecare > > 120 West 106th Street (at Columbus) > > > > Find me or Tila Duhaime before the meeting and we'll help you > sign up to speak during the public session. > > > > As always, please don't just hit "reply" to this email. If you > have a question, feel free to email me at lisa@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('sladkus.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa@...> or > lisa@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('transalt.org', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa@...>.">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lisa@...>. > > > > Thanks so much. See you on the 2nd. > > > > Lisa Sladkus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Archive: > http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243477587804 > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>.">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>. > Please contact uws-discussion-manager@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...> > for questions. > > > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243483432768 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243483432768> > > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>.">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>. > Please contact uws-discussion-manager@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...> > for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243489140766 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243489140766> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>.">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>. > Please contact uws-discussion-manager@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...> > for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243522926843 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243522926843> > > > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>.">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>. > Please contact uws-discussion-manager@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...> > for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243525863258 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243525863258> > > > > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>.">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion@...>. > Please contact uws-discussion-manager@... > <http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" onfocus="javascript:this.href=deObfct('lists.livablestreets.com', 'http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager');" title="http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...>">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager">http://us.mc302.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=uws-discussion-manager@...> > for questions. > > > > > -- > “The worst crimes were dared by a few, willed by more, and > tolerated by all.” -- Tacitus, on the Roman Republic's > degeneration into emperorship. > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243528520048 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243528520048> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@.... Please contact > uws-discussion-manager@... for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243531701591 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243531701591> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <mailto:uws-discussion@...>. Please contact > uws-discussion-manager@... > <mailto:uws-discussion-manager@...> for questions. > > > > -- > Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1243534098441 > <http://www.livablestreets.com/projects/uws/lists/uws-discussion/archive/2009/05/1243534098441> > To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to > uws-discussion@... > <mailto:uws-discussion@...>. Please contact > uws-discussion-manager@... > <mailto:uws-discussion-manager@...> for questions. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >
Maggie Clarke
So what if increased number of riders never graduate from new protected lanes? They increase the number of riders on the street and thereby encourage more people to ride and legitimate bike riding amongst the general public which is not accustomed to seeing many riders. Having more riders in the street further gives us standing to demand more space in the street. In Europe the riders seamlessly go from protected to unprotected lanes and back again. Not everything is separated or marked. So what if a driver yells something at you? We're New Yorkers who believe in something. When did that stop anyone from doing the right thing? This is horse-hockey that "bike lanes de-legitimate cyclists rights to use the road". It's certainly not true in other places. One could have argued in earlier times that we should not have sidewalks to protect the pedestrians, because some people thought it fine to walk in the streets with the horses and trolleys and then the cars. But pedestrians have secured their own, very expensive and extensive infrastructure and it's taken for granted that they deserve it. We deserve protective infrastructure too. Riding in NY shouldn't just be for those with high risk tolerance.
And being For more separated lanes is a totally separate issue from being for/against mandatory bike lane laws. You are assuming that all people who are for more street real estate being given to bicycle riders are automatically not for repeal of the Mandatory bike lane law? One can spend one's energies to volunteer to get one or the other accomplished or both. One side should not attack the other.
At 02:11 PM 5/28/2009, you wrote:
That bike lanes will encourage more cyclists and increased numbers of cyclists will make cyclists a more legitimate part of traffic. The assumption here is that most of those cyclists will graduate from protected bike lanes to other traffic lanes. Will they? If they don’t, I actually think that separated bike lanes have the effect (with the law behind it) of telling cyclists “their place” which is out of the rest of traffic. I’m not sure how facilities which separate cyclists from traffic can legitimate cyclists as part of traffic in the short term. Every time I hear a driver tell me “you’re supposed to be in the bike lane”, I’m reminded that bike lanes de-legitimate cyclists rights to use the roads, even roads that don’t have bike lanes (which is where I hear that most often). Over the long run, I actually think we are undermining our rights to use the roads unless the Mandatory Bike Lane laws are repealed.
Recommended viewing for the 21st century: www.storyofstuff.com
Maggie Clarke, Ph.D.
www.MaggieClarkeEnvironmental.com
Environmental Scientist, Educator
mclarke@hunter.cuny.edu
New York City