Despite the horrific nature of the Chinatown tragedy, I don't believe that it represents the majority of situations involving pedestrian injuries and fatalities. I would tend to think that most injuries occur in the street rather than on the sidewalk. Therefore altering the streetscape to slow the original design speeds, decreasing lane width (and correspondingly increasing sidewalk width and adding bicycle lanes), and implementing parking policies that allow for daylighting would seem to have a greater impact on pedestrian safety than adding bollards.

Any comments to the contrary would be appreciated because this is just something that I have to started to think about.

> Europeans generally line streets with bollards to keep cars from parking on sidewalks

Maronite Catholic at Remsen on Henry fills the sidewalks and bike lanes with SUVs each Sunday, and they're protected by cops who'll ticket any resident who double parks to load (that's me). It's pretty offensive civilly let alone on fourteenth and first amendment grounds. I'd love it to be physically impossible.

Anecdote: I dented my car's right door parallel parking with no curb for reference. The sidewalk had sunk to level with the road, so no curb told me I had cut too far in, and up against an iron flowerbed.

It seems to me that bollards actually slow down traffic, because they bring the curb level up to an altitude where drivers can see it. And bollards, unlike the invisible curb, in the same way as parked cars, send a message to drivers that if they go too far out of their lane, they will pay with their car. The damage of hitting a bollard is way more than that of hitting a Jersey barrier.

It's sixteen degrees outside. I'm not moving my car until it's warmed up a bit. Do you want me to get a ticket because I'm idling for a few to warm my engine up before pulling into stop-and-go traffic?

I think it's enough to enforce the laws already on the books. Isn't it illegal to idle an unoccupied car? And certainly double-parking, the cops don't give a rat's ass.

A one minute limit in school zones would be a great step. Help support that resolution!

NYC has a routinely-ignored, 3-minute idling law already on the books. (Admin Code 24-163) Imagine a cop checking his watch; three minutes is unenforceable.

NYC needs an enforceable (and enforced) one-minute idling law that targets all vehicles--including EMS vehicles not in the active service. The public needs education to know that the law is there and that they have a right to ask drivers to turn off.

Here's how you can help right now:

Speak out for NYC Intro 2007-163, which restricts idling in school zones to one-minute. This is the first step toward citywide restriction.

Jan. 26, 2009, 10 AM (250 Broadway, 16th fl.) is the final committee hearing. Come speak your mind!

Jan. 28, 2009, 9:30 AM (City Hall steps) is the rally before the vote. Come hold a sign, wave a fiery stick, walk on your hands, speak up!

Let our elected officials know that when it comes to the safety of our streets enough is enough. It is time to get smart and get tough. Idling is harmful to health and environment, wasteful and against the law. Now, we can add 'dangerous to pedestrians.'

The Chinatown tragedy might never have happen if the driver had simply turned the key.

They invented the Jersey Barrier so that cars could go faster.

Today walkin down Franklin with my dog an SUV did a three-point-turn onto the sidewalk about a yard from me. Using the sidewalk saved him from having to pull a five-pointer, I think.

So he clears me by a yard, makes eye contact, waves thank-you when I spin around surprised; it's not as if he's about to hit me. But, man, big fukken SUV on my sidewalk, up over the curb like it wasn't no thing.

Just not okay.

Seems like as more meters are removed and replaced with the Muni-meters that we may actually be opening up our sidewalks to more incursions by cars. Whatever happened to the idea of turning old meter posts into bike racks?

Now, imagine that in addition to a standpipe several feet from the edge of the sidewalk, there had been several heavy bollards at the edge of the sidewalk. Things would have worked out quite differently.

The auto industry has come a long way in recent years making cars a lot safer for passengers. Why not use some of this technology to make trucks, particularly trucks used for local delivery in congested urban areas, safer for pedestrians too? Large high visibility windshields, not unlike the windsheilds we see on busses, would help eliminate blind spots and enable drivers to see pedestrians who are right in front of them. Higher end cars are equipped with rear view cameras. Why not have these in trucks, or better yet, have sensors that automatically stop the truck when it's in reverse and detects an object (or person) within 18 inches of the rear bumper?

Maybe delivery trucks, or all motor vehicles for that matter, should turn off automatically if sensors don't detect an adult sized driver in the drivers seat. How many times have we heard about run-away vehicles or motor vehicles operated by small children? If we can have hybrid GPS enabled taxi cabs we certainly should be able to have better delivery trucks.

Gimmie an "S"!

"S"!

Gimmie an "H"!

"H"!

Gimmie an "E"!

.......Oh shit, the "E" is stuck in committee. It must be Bloomberg's fault.

You're absolutely right about the reason for bollards in European cities. However, the effect is to keep cars from parking *or* jumping up onto the sidewalk.

The bollards make a strong visual statement as well that cars are not permitted on the sidewalk.

Also in some streets in Madrid and Seville, there are retractable bollards that prevent any vehicles except those owned by password-equipped residents from entering. (I think they can also buzz delivery vehicles in). The streets where those exist are remarkably calm.

Bollards in general, in my experience at least, create safety for pedestrians and keep cars from infringing on their space. They are by no means perfect, nor are they a magic bullet that will prevent every tragic crash. They are just part of a comprehensive approach.