Comments on: NYC Gets Its First-Ever Physically-Separated Bike Path

By: Jarred

Jarred — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:35:00 +0000

I grew up in chelsea in the 70′s and 80′s. Sometime in the 70′s they started to put permanent bike lanes through out the city. It didnt work, within a matter of months they destroyed them. These were not just painted lines they were concrete barriers like they’re putting in now. How come no one is bringing up the fact that we tried this already ? Anyway I wish the new ones would go the way of the old ones. These lanes are going to be an excuse to open up a whole new revenue source of cycling tickets. you watch.

By: Tom RAd

Tom RAd — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:42:07 +0000

Too intelligent!! What’s becoming of New Yorkers?

By: Andy Trafford

Andy Trafford — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:54:35 +0000

“I have yet to encounter a cyclist who honors the traffic signals.”

Whenever you want this to change, just let me know and I’ll be happy to meet you for a pint. As long as you’re paying.

By: Mark Walker

Mark Walker — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:55:11 +0000

Walking Citizen: “We have one of the best public transportation systems in the world. Let people take the subway or bus and walk.”

But WC, if more people ride bikes, you’re more likely to get a seat on the subway.

By: Citizen With Two Feet and a Brain

Citizen With Two Feet and a Brain — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:02:47 +0000

Give me a break. If we want to waste time talking about letter-of-the-law, then New York City’s “walking citizens” break the law more than any other group of street users.

Walking Citizen: You rarely obey your traffic signals, you are often spaced out and oblivious to what’s going on around you, you are frequently found standing three feet off the curb while waiting for the light (often forcing cyclists to veer into on-rushing traffic).

By: mike

mike — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:42:50 +0000

Walking Citizen — actually, the Department of Sanitation doesn’t have a problem with protected bike lanes.

If you are so concerned with pedestrian safety, please concentrate on the real issue at hand — motor vehicles.

By: Walking CITIZEN

Walking CITIZEN — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:41:19 +0000

In addition to GREEN = GO and RED = STOP

Bicyclists MUST HONOR *** ONEWAY *** traffic

By: Walking CITIZEN

Walking CITIZEN — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:39:07 +0000

Why do we spend millions of taxpayer $$$ on this nonsense. In a few years time, the municipal leaders (yeah, right) will be removing these stupid bike lanes. We have one of the best public transportation systems in the world. Let people take the subway or bus and walk.

By: Walking CITIZEN

Walking CITIZEN — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:36:38 +0000

GREEN = GO
RED = STOP

I have yet to encounter a cyclist who honors the traffic signals.

GREEN = GO
RED = STOP

By: Walking CITIZEN

Walking CITIZEN — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:35:08 +0000

In addition to unplowed snow in the winter … how in the heck to the street sweepers maneuver the bike lanes. Unplowed snow will be a pedestrian hazard. Unswept bike lanes will create a dirtier city.

By: Bob Lothrope

Bob Lothrope — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:53:47 +0000

Awful, awful. I would never ride a bike on such a dangerous sidepath. Besides the aforementioned problems of deliveries, pedestrians (guess where exactly they’ll wait to cross the avenue) and left-turning cars, there’s also the issue of unplowed snow and other junk, with no way to get around it because a curb is on one side and parked cars are on the other.

Most of Europe is moving away from these designs.

Unfortunately the NYPD will probably ticket cyclists who do the safe thing and ride in the street.

By: Eddy

Eddy — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:31:52 +0000

I like the fact that they will have Traffic Signals for cyclists

By: ddartley

ddartley — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 03:06:25 +0000

Kiuli, if you care about public health and safety, you’ll eventually realize that the ideal future New York City is closer to one in which pedestrians can “cross the street as if they owned the world” than the present is.

By: Doc Barnett

Doc Barnett — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 18:39:31 +0000

“lets hope your politically driven agendas do not transform this stretch of 9th ave into a ghost town.”

And when it doesn’t, do you promise to get a clue? Nearly all businesses on city streets live and die by _foot_ traffic.

I find a “thats life” attitude about pedestrian death more than a little appalling. Personally I would like to see fewer people killed regardless of exact circumstances, but surely you’re aware there is a spectrum of them on 9th Av and throughout the city. Sometimes pedestrians make fatal mistakes, other times they’re abruptly killed by cars when crossing entirely correctly or–several dozen times a year–run down on the freaking sidewalk. In all cases if the car were taken out of the picture and replaced with another pedestrian there would have been a harmless jostle, followed by some kind or unkind words, and no need for a funeral service.

By the way there is only one way to “cause” auto traffic (a different thing from worsening it): driving autos. If you want to cause less, then drive less. A nice side effect is that your chances of having to rationalize that someone’s loss of life was just life after your car has crushingly ended it are correspondingly lowered.

By: kiuli

kiuli — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 18:01:57 +0000

this is the worst idea ever. causes more traffic than ever before and local businesses are suffering along this stretch. sorry that 2 pedestrians have been killed but thats life. i consistently see pedestrians cross the street as if they owned the world, so it may be their own fault. they do not always have the right of way. you should provide exact details of these instances. propaganda shall i say? lets hope your politically driven agendas do not transform this stretch of 9th ave into a ghost town.

By: alex

alex — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:00:15 +0000

Seems like a good idea, but I see no reason why pedestrians will not see the new bike lanes as extensions of the sidewalk and just swarm the bike lane.

By: gecko

gecko — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:53:14 +0000

Following the “Safe Routes to School” level of focus for safety for each new cycle track might be a good way to start improving safety as they are being built.

Closely engaging local businesses and communities would also help.

A “Towards Zero Deaths” campaign would be ultimate.

By: Doc Barnett

Doc Barnett — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:17:33 +0000

How many will have to die? At least one more than the lane’s current death toll of zero, and more than are regularly killed in an un-separated lane for it to mean something. How many people will have to die with the mixed infrastructure before you decide it’s not “stupid” to try something new?

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:04:13 +0000

All of you are stupid. This is a death trap, how many people will have to die from left turning cars before DOT understands how dangerous this for bikers.

By: Chris Orbach

Chris Orbach — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:57:42 +0000

Smith — I didn’t say it was a bad idea across the board — just that it was a bad idea in this particular location. I didn’t say anything about giving motorists more street space. But giving LESS in an already congested area is madness, especially when you’re trying to SLEEP above the consequences of it.

And, John — The data is WRONG. I LIVE HERE.