Skip to content
by Ben Fried
Young: Incident “was ruled an accident”? Who “ruled”? You mean the cops decided it was an accident on the spot without any real investigation? Based on what the taxi driver told them while Young lay there in shock or was absent en route to the hospital?
That new bike lane for Broadway will make a big difference but I really wish there was a more eastern ave route down from Central Park with a bike lane as well. 2nd ave has a “bike route” for a few blocks but that doesn’t really mean crap. But going down Broadway with a protected path sure will make it better.
The Times head and lead drip with windshield perspective. What’s the most important thing about this story? The loss of “Two Traffic Lanes,” of course! The lead calls it “surprising,” there’s a “there are questions” line straight out of the Brodsky playbook, and one of those questions is “whether people would flock to dine and relax so close to a busy route’s speeding taxis, noisy trucks and exhaust fumes.” So how exactly is closing two lanes of traffic going to make those things worse? The Times seems to live in a galaxy of its own. A Ford Galaxy, perhaps.
The News head and lead are better, concentrating on the positive side of the changes. The other side of the story is duly given but the overall presentation is more balanced.
The TA Queens Committee sends it’s well wishes to Assemblywoman Ellen Young. We were helping her plan a riding tour of flushing, hosted by her office. Not sure if it will still go off as planned but we hope she has a speedy recovery.
Exactly right Mark. It’s so funny. Skeptics complain that reclaiming roadway makes unpleasant public spaces because of smog and traffic. So what then – it should remain 4 lanes and create even more smog and traffic?
That great for Broadway Boulevard in midtown. I wonder if the DOT and PD could stop going out of their way to make Broadway below city hall a boulevard of death for bicycles.
Ellen Young story:
Clearly the Your Nabe version of the events is not necessarily the full, accurate story, but going by it, since it’s the only public version of the story, the taxi driver is definitely at fault!
“she was clipped by a taxi cab as it swerved to avoid her”???
I wish there were more details available, but if that’s all that happened, then that’s the taxi driver’s fault.
Taxis improperly “swerve to avoid” me ALL THE TIME–while I’m riding in a straight, predictable line. What they’re doing is pretty much passing me, way too close. It’s reckless and dangerous, and if one of them were ever to “clip” me, it would be COMPLETELY their fault. If that’s anything like what happened to Young, then the authorities were wrong to let the driver off the hook. But WTF else is new.
It’s a bad write up. I read “swerve to avoid” to mean that Young was going the wrong way. But then, there followed no detail about what she was doing that required anyone to swerve and avoid her. If she was going in a straight line in the right direction, she deserves an apology from Stephen Stirling (who, I notice, did not forget to check off the HELMET: YES/NO box from his cyclist crash reporting handbook, even though her head looks perfectly fine in the photo). And thank God the “incident was ruled an accident”, that highly specific and technical term of traffic crash law that is always being so solemnly ruled upon.
“Was not wearing a helmet at the time.”
That point always gets me, was the cabbie, who swerved to avoid Ms. Young, AND STILL HIT HER, wearing his seatbelt? -That which is actually required.
Re: “Futility Vehicle”
“I haven’t actually made a formal study of the Land Rover’s gas mileage. I’ve simply stopped driving the car to anywhere other than our metro stop (1.5 miles; about a quarter tank of gas) or the supermarket (.88 miles, maybe an eighth of a tank of gas) or the gas station.”
How wasteful! Can’t she walk or ride a bicycle to the metro stop and supermarket?
About the NY Times, yes, it’s disappointing they’ve got their heads stuck in a Ford Galaxy, but, remember, they’re also the organization with a specially designed “green” building that doesn’t support bicycle parking.
Re: “Law Would Let S.F. Cyclists Blow Stop Signs”
We could use that law here, too. Most cyclists already treat stop signs as yield signs and stop lights as stop signs. Making it legal would help de-criminalize a practice that often helps protect cyclists (by allowing them to negotiate intersections more safely).
Re: “Subway stations to suffer from budget pinch”
I am deeply concerned that without a massive influx of resources and dramatically better management, we will no longer be able to afford to maintain our subway system and it will completely fall apart.
It’s a good thing I’ve started cycling.
(by allowing them to negotiate intersections more safely).-Urbanis
Hear! Hear! I dont think enough riders, nor peds nor drivers understand this point. Once ped and car traffic is clear, to run that light is, I strongly believe, essential to cyclist safety.
(I am deeply concerned that without a massive influx of resources and dramatically better management, we will no longer be able to afford to maintain our subway system and it will completely fall apart.)
Too bad more people weren’t concerned when the financing of the 2000-04 and 2005-09 MTA Capital plans was arranged, when it might have made a difference. Actually, the transit union, the Straphangers, the business community, just about everyone was screaming “no!” and the legislature just went ahead and did it anyway.
“It’s a good thing I’ve started cycling.”
What’s unsafe about waiting for a green light, then scanning as you proceed through? Seems pretty clear and straight-forward. Certainly more predictable than a law which suddenly makes cyclists the red light runner.
What’s unsafe about stopping at a stop sign, scanning for cross traffic, yielding (if there is any), and then proceeding when it’s clear?
Seems safer than the “stop light optional”, “blow off stop sign” proposal. That many bicyclists like to do it, doesn’t make it any safer.
If you want cycling friendly laws, how about:
-Explicit language that allows cyclists to take full traffic lane.
-Elimination of mandatory use of bike lane laws.
-Safe minimum passing distance laws for motorists.
Who’s kidding who here? “Party Hearty” Marty has a chauffeured driven car. He should shake hands with Rangel. They are both cut from the same piece of cake. what a bunch of BUMS.
“If there is to be a length of time after the installation of new asphalt and before the permanent markings are installed, I would have to think that there are requirements for temporary markings to be installed by the contractor.”
In response to "DOT: Seaman Avenue Bike Lanes Won't Return This Year"