It’s a shame to see transit users sniping at other transit users. Save your animosity for the people who killed congestion pricing by preventing it from coming to a vote in the state legislature.

Third, Just put up stop signs yourself. One on each side of the street. DOT takes signs down overnight with no notice so why can’t the people put one up?

While Ms. Dewing will likely keep on believing whatever fantasy she wants about bicycles in the city, maybe we need to emphasize the oft-neglected benefit of bike lanes – it slows the cars down. Speeding is out of control and bike lanes are a great win-win tactic towards getting cars to travel at city-appropriate speeds.

Many Upper East Side “advocates” (I don’t know whether to count Ms. Dewing in this group) have worked hard to block the installation of bike lanes on the Upper East Side–largely with great success–so the complaint that bicyclists don’t use the lanes is really just a complaint that the bicyclists have not (yet) been forced out of the Upper East Side.

If these “advocates” were a little less narrow-minded, they might realize that many of their neighbors use a bicycle as transporation and that 75% of the bicycle traffic on the UES is generated by their own insatiable lust for take-out food.

In any event, the law does not require the bicyclists to use a bike lane that is not reasonably safe or available for use, as it should be.

I think one of the “Summer Streets” days, I’ll ride the length of Park Ave. with my kids, with signs mounted on their bikes. Here are some thoughts on what the signs might say (suggestions are welcome):

“I Could Ride to School if Summer Streets was Year-Round.”
“Make New York Streets Safe for Children”
“New York Families Deserve Safe Streets.”
“Do You Really Miss The Cars?

This is a fundamental problem with bike lane design. Unlike walking on sidewalk, where speed differences are not that great even between swift walkers and slow-pokes, speeds and abilities in bike lanes vary dramatically. I don’t enjoy traffic, but I’ll often take 10th Avenue over errant bikers and roller bladers on the congested Hudson River bike path… lovely as it may be.

There is no such thing as a “deferral” unless it is a funded deferral. If they had the money, and were merely waiting for construction to get cheaper, that would be a good thing. But this deferral is unfunded.

What is happening is the rate of ongoing normal replacement is being cut below the level required to keep the system from deteriorating.

If cyclists are legally compelled always to use bike lanes, then it is generally better to have no bike lanes at all.

Let no advocate forget that.

And, as long as the riding public is led to believe that the board is screwing them there will never be the political will to move any other resources, congestion pricing, tolled bridges, gas tax, whatever in the direction of farebox relief and/or system expansion and service improvement.

Here it is (from Bicycle Defense Fund website).

—34 RCNY § 4-12(p) Bicycles.
(1) Bicycle riders to use bicycle lanes. Whenever a usable path or lane for bicycles has been provided, bicycle riders shall use such path or lane only except under any of the following situations:
(i) When preparing for a turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(ii) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, pushcarts, animals, surface hazards) that make it unsafe to continue within such bicycle path or lane.

Anyway, compulsory bike lane laws should give their advocates pause. In the name of “safety” bicyclists are forced to use a specific lane, whether it’s safe or not, whether they cyclists want to use it or not. There’s a lot of cheering for bike lanes on Streetsblog, without the realization that cyclists may then be compelled to use them. Bike lanes may serve motoring interests just fine, insofar as they “get cyclists out of the way.”

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/safebicyclenyc.pdf