Vision Zero picks up speed
  • zero
    While billed as a way to reduce pedestrian and bicycle deaths, many viewers perceive the effort as really being motivated by a desire to wrestle control over NYC speed limits and roadways from Albany.

    Does that mean I am against it?     No.

    It just means that that this campaign is a little more clever than it first appears.
  • Off to Albany the advocates go....

  • Nothing is easier than giving New Yorker's a place to complain, then showing the complaints to Albany:

  • And as soon as we can stop kids from running out into the street and pedestrians from crossing where a driver doesn't expect them we can really become safe. I suggest a collar that gives people shocks when they do something stupid like this. Because after all, it's always the driver's fault.
  • In my view, pedestrian and bicycle deaths could actually increase over the length of this campaign, yet the organizers could declare it a success.

    ....after all, the goal is to show concern for the deaths [this earns one votes] and get control over traffic rules from Albany [this gives one power]. 
  • Probably that collar should be worn by some of the parents whose precious little angels are running out into the streets.
  • whynot_31 said:

    In my view, pedestrian and bicycle deaths could actually increase over the length of this campaign, yet the organizers could declare it a success.


    ....after all, the goal is to show concern for the deaths [this earns one votes] and get control over traffic rules from Albany [this gives one power]. 


    The goal is also to decrease traffic violence. Car drivers collectively kill more people than gunmen in this city.
  •  @ Mike Dunlap...Maybe so, but it's not always the driver's fault. So, they'll get tickets but all the people that jaywalk get away free. The discrimination against vehicles is blatant. I don't think any driver purposely wants to run down someone whereas a shooter purposely has to pull the trigger. You're not comparing apples to apples. It's acceptable to give drivers tickets, not so much walkers.
  • By stating that the primary goal is reducing biker and pedestrian injuries and deaths, the proponents of Vision Zero have effectively insulated themselves from accusations of "power grabbing" by Albany politicians and car advocates.

    The advocates learned this technique the hard way: A few years ago, they failed in their attempt to toll the East River bridges.

    This time, their goals are the same, but they are being more clever about their tactics and messaging.
  • You do realize, pragmaticguy, that DeBlasio is not simultaneously campaigning against unsafe bicycling practices. I doubt whether it is safe for a cyclist to wear noise-blocking headphones while riding, but I've seen that many times. Or for a cyclist to talk on his cell phone while riding, but .. ditto. How about tickets for the cretins blithely walking through crosswalks while texting? Or parents letting their little darlings play in the street while unsupervised? No, any pedestrian or biker death is automatically the fault of the driver and the "victim" must never be blamed. And certainly not the city's ill-advised "bump-outs" which can cause a vehicle to swerve unintentionally. 
    [By the way, I don't drive, never did; I walk, take public transportation, and bike.]
  • morralkan said:

    No, any pedestrian or biker death is automatically the fault of the driver and the "victim" must never be blamed.



    You cannot be serious. Car drivers kill cyclists and pedestrians in this city almost every day and very, very rarely receive anything more than minor citations for it.
  • I don't think any driver purposely wants to run down someone whereas a shooter purposely has to pull the trigger.



    Of course, but the end results are what I described. Car drivers now kill more people in this city than gunmen. And they do far more damage in other areas.

    They rip up and down Crown Heights avenues in their giant machinery, greatly endangering its residents and polluting the area in numerous ways, from their noise to their dirty exhaust to the incredible amount of glass, metal, oil, and other garbage they scatter everywhere.

    Bravo for De Blasio and anyone else who wants to reduce the immense amount of damage cars do to our neighborhoods.
  • Part of the genius of the map is that it allows everyone (bikes, cars, pedestrians, trucks. etc) to complain about everyone:
      

    This makes it appear as if Vision Zero has everyone in mind, and is out for everyone's best interests.    It implies that there are ways in which everyone can win;  no group will lose.
  • Throughout the city, DOT and the politicians are doing everything they can that does not require the permission of Albany:


    The real fun begins a few months.    

    • If pedestrian and bicycle injuries and fatalities go down, the politicians and the advocates can proudly declare success. Then, they can state that they could be EVEN MORE successful if they could remove additional cars from midtown during workdays, and that tolling the East River Bridges would accomplish this.   They would promise that all revenues would go to very popular things:   Parks, improving subway and bus service.   They would implore the public to hate Albany even more than they already do.   
    • If ped and bike injuries don't decrease, they can make the same speech!     They can't lose.  


  • So, Mike, does that imply that EVERY death is the fault of the driver?

    Also, you really do have a thing about motor vehicles. ("They rip up and down Crown Heights avenues in their giant machinery, greatly endangering its residents and polluting the area in numerous ways, from their noise to their dirty exhaust to the incredible amount of glass, metal, oil, and other garbage they scatter everywhere.") 
    "Giant machinery"? I'm assuming you grow all your own food and that any else that comes to your house is helicoptered to your roof.
    If you find all this exhaust, etc so horrible, perhaps you should move someplace like Oregon, Idaho, or wherever. I'm sure the extremists out there would be glad to have you. NYC is obviously NOT the place for you.
  • Nah, I'm fine here, thanks. We have a long way to go still, but things are moving in the right direction. City leaders are now getting much more serious about the incredible amount of death and destruction car drivers cause in this city.
  • Serious press is now being paid.    The NYT just profiled four injured people that its reading demographics can readily identify and sympathize with:

    http://t.co/vdRCvbteYd


  • As a pedestrian, bicyclist, motorcyclist, and driver in this city for eleven years, I have a cautiously optimistic view of Vision Zero.  

    Historically, the enforcement of moving violations against cars has been practically non-existent.  If anything, the NYPD discriminates in favor of drivers.  You're far more likely to get a ticket for running a red light on a bicycle than for doing the same in a car.   I've been stopped four times at motorcycle-only checkpoints, and ticketed for such infractions as failing to have my visor fully down on a hot August day, but never once in a car.  Speed limits are a joke, and drivers who do hit pedestrians are very rarely charged with even a traffic offense, not to mention criminal charges.

    In the last month, I've witnessed some things I've never seen before.  I saw a cop on the service road at Bedford and Eastern Parkway actually pursue and pull over someone who ran the light there.  I've seen cops with radar guns parked on Park Ave under the BQE, hunting for speeders.  

    It's about time cars have had their comeuppance.  
  • I don't know whether enforcement is yet up citywide, but it is certainly up in the 77th pct, which covers Crown Heights north of Eastern Parkway:

  • eastbloc said:

    It's about time cars have had their comeuppance.



    Total agreement with your post (obviously); the only thing I would change there is "cars" to "car drivers." The numerous cars that come ripping up Franklin Avenue all day, often in an especially dangerous side-by-side competition, are not piloting themselves. They are being wielded by people with a complete, neighborhood-menacing disregard for anything but themselves.

    (I realize you know all this; just using the opportunity to make a point about the importance of language in this discussion. This too is an area where things are improving as media outlets and government officials are starting to be much more thoughtful about the wording of this stuff. "Accident" being used in the cases of wreckless car drivers smashing into people and property is another error being reconsidered.)

    Anyway, thanks for the post and encouraging anecdotes about cops pursuing law-breaking drivers (which driving a car makes 100% of us at some point). More evidence that Bill Bratton is serious about aggressively pursuing traffic violence; something Ray Kelly was completely disinterested in attacking.

  • The most reckless drivers in this city are driving cop cars. They completely disregard traffic lights, stop signs, and all rules that they enforce against other drivers... Whether their sirens and flashers are on or whether it's lunchtime and they are going for pizza.
  • Vision Zero is about ending all traffic fatalities, not just pedestrians and cyclists. Car passengers and drivers are killed in motor vehicle collisions. A nine year old passenger was killed this weekend. 

    In order to control our streets we need to power to make our own laws. This is not a power grab, it's sensible that the city of millions with a density unlike any other in the state needs a different set of standards for traffic behavior. I am in favor of automated enforcement, such as speed cameras and red light cameras, though I think street redesign will be the most effective. 

    Vision Zero is also a change in mindset for all users of the road, that we have to take care of each other. Instead of cyclists vs pedestrians and car vs cyclists, we have to realize we all have responsibility when using the streets for our own safety and the safety of our fellow citizens.

    Vision Zero is about making streets more forgiving. Everyone makes mistakes, pedestrians, drivers, everyone. Those mistakes should not have be fatal. We've had a mindset that auto crashes are "accidents". They are not. When you build wider streets for high speed, people with powerful engines will speed.  An engine is designed for power. But our neighborhood streets are not an autobahn, it's the streets we live and walk on, so it's time to change the design of our streets for life at people speed, not machine speed.
  • Bike's gather at St. John The Divine on May 3rd, for the annual Blessing of the Bicycles:

    bikes
  • Meanwhile, in areas that are less well served by public transportation, a hearing on Vision Zero results in a conversation that generates 403 posts:

  • It isn't politically feasible, but what if we stopped tolling on all of the bridges we presently do (Whitestone, Throggs Neck, Verrazano , GW, etc) and started tolling the East River.

    This way we would not be punishing those who don't have access to good public transportation for not taking it, and would instead punish those who do have access to good public transportation for not taking it. 


    The correct answers are we don't do that because:
    -We could not use suburban tolls to subsidize urban density.

    -We would create urban and suburban sprawl, which modern urbanists hate.

    -We have a belief that the suburbs are wealthier than the cities, which is increasingly not true in NYC 
  • whynot_31 said:

    This way we would not be punishing those who don't have access to good public transportation for not taking it, and would instead punish those who do have access to good public transportation for not taking it.



    While many in the suburbs aren't rich, a large number is affluent enough to live in the city but has chosen not to in order to save money, have a bigger living space, hoard more stuff, etc.

    That's great and all, but NYC should be allowed to charge them for their ability to leech off the city without putting much into it. The bridge and tunnel tolls are way too low for these people already.
  • NYC had a commuter tax until 1999.   It isn't coming back anytime soon.

  • If you want to charge suburban commuters for their access to the city, then you should increase tolls on the George Washington Bridge, the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, the Throgs Neck and Whitestone Bridges and the Outerbridge Crossing and Goethels Bridge.  Conversely, you should remove the toll from the Verrazano Bridge, and should refrain from tolling the East River Bridges (since those are internal within the city, and are used by city residents).  

    Of course, city residents should also be able to use the various bridges and tunnels for free or at half the toll charged to non-residents, since they already pay city income, commuter and property taxes.
  • As of today, city residents now have easier access to city collision data.

    Data:
    https://data.cityofnewyork.us/widgets/h9gi-nx95

    Article about said data:
    http://www.streetsblog.org/2014/05/07/nypd-crash-and-fatality-data-now-easier-to-use-and-updated-daily/#more-325007

    There are lots of ways to use and misuse this data.
  • The current tolling regime has the Port Authority tolling suburban commuters and the MTA (through the old Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority tolling NYC residents. This regime was supposed to guarantee that city drivers supported mass transit with their tolls and interstate transit users paid for interstate transit facilities. I think that it works okay as a regime. Sam Schwartz says otherwise.
  • Who is Sam Schwartz, and where does he say otherwise? Thx.
  • Sam Schwartz is also known as "Gridlock Sam", because he is believed to have invented the term "gridlock".    He writes a column about traffic that appears in a few places.  


  • Sam Schwartz says that there should be tolling on city bridges to discourage use of free bridges and city streets and to force traffic onto highways and parkways where it belongs. He advocates for every driver crossing a major bridge or entering a tunnel paying a toll. He proposed setting toll rates according to two criteria, charging more in those parts of the City where there is generally the heaviest congestion and plentiful transit alternatives, and less where there isn’t.

    A more equitable transportation formula
    1. Only apply pricing where there is:
    • Serious Congestion
    • Good Transit
    2. Make it performance driven:
    • Guarantee a 20 minute crosstown trip from 1st to 8th
    Avenues
    • Lower prices during poor economic times; higher prices
    during better times.
    3. Lower or eliminate tolls at poor transit locations

    He also advocates for the building of three new bridges in NYC
    1. Between Hoboken and Midtown
    2, Between Downtown Brooklyn, Governors Island and the Battery
    3. Between Greenpoint, LIC and the new Cornell NYC tech area on the East Side

    Those bridges would be for pedestrians and bikes only and would be tolled at 50 cents each way.

    See more details here: http://www.move-ny.org/
  • So...if we put tolls on the Brooklyn Bridge would pedestrians and bicyclists have to pay there too? I'd hate to see the uproar that would cause.
  • They don't say, but I don't think that their arguement about tolling works unless you toll EVERYTHING (after all have you seen the congestion on the walkway of the Brooklyn Bridge?) including the walkways. Actually, under the logic here, the bridge from downtown (which actually would be Carol Gardens/Red Hook) should probably have a lower toll as is in a location with less transportation alternatives than the Brooklyn or Manhattan bridges.
  • So...if we put tolls on the Brooklyn Bridge would pedestrians and bicyclists have to pay there too? I'd hate to see the uproar that would cause.



    One of the things I would like to come out of Vision Zero is for the city to end the risk that pedestrians and bike pose to each other on the Brooklyn Bridge.

    The walkway is simply too narrow for the two groups to coexist;   The tourists are here for too short of a period to ever "be effectively taught" to stay in their lane. 

    One of the first things I would do is banish all the the bikers to the Manhattan Bridge during prime hours of conflict (anytime the weather is above 40 degrees and it is daylight) weekends or give them access to a lane on the actual roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge.

    ...the Brooklyn Bridge vehicular traffic travels at about 5 MPH during these "prime hours of conflict", so I don't see how them losing a lane to bikes would negatively affect them.
  • Losing a lane to bikes would slow them down even more... 1 mph or less... and that would be absolutely intolerable.

    Some may derive pleasure at the thought of car drivers fuming while bikes speed...  those of us who drive in (and especially into and out of) this city do not find anything amusing at the prospect.
  • I agree, but think it would make the Brooklyn Bridge a huge tourist attraction for internationals.

    Tourist $ may be more powerful than drivers
  • Okay, just so I understand, your argument is traffic is slow anyway, so lets get rid of a lane of traffic- creating longer traffic jams with cars idling- so that guys in spandex and a bunch of french tourists can ride across the Brooklyn Bridge during the time when the bridge is most used?
  • As a first choice, I'd actually send bikes to the Manhattan Bridge bikeway, and ban them from the Brklyn Br. "Path"

    This would allow the tourists to peacefully walk over the bridge. Along the bridge they could view advertisements for this website:
    http://explorebk.com/2014/05/08/walk-across-brooklyn-bridge-dumbo-brooklyn-bridge-park/
  • I would agree with that, but I'd then ban peds from the Manhattan bridge south lane and turn it into a dedicated eastbound cycle lane, with the north lane dedicated for westbound cyclists.
  • Correct.

    And, I suspect peds and bikers could (and would) enforce the use of their paths to the degree that rule breaking would be rare.

  • whynot_31 said:

    One of the things I would like to come out of Vision Zero is for the city to end the risk that pedestrians and bike pose to each other on the Brooklyn Bridge.



    Have there been any major cyclist-pedestrian collisions on the bridge?
  • They don't result in deaths. They result in fist fights, bruises, and lost revenue.

    I've seen the occasional stretcher and ambulance, but I don't think many people get admitted.
  • Why lost revenue?
  • My first premise is that I believe the best money to flow into the NYC Dept of Finance is not my own.

    My second premise:
    If the path was all peds, I believe more tourists would use it as a leisurely way to see the sights, and have a greater chance of eating lunch in Brooklyn, as well as buying shirts proclaiming "Brooklyn".

    http://explorebk.com/2014/05/08/walk-across-brooklyn-bridge-dumbo-brooklyn-bridge-park/

    They would tell their friends at home in Ohio or France about how great it is, and there would be a snowball effect.

    At present, the path has reputation among bikers and pedestrians as being crowded and filled with jerks, with everyone defining the other as the "jerk" and the "crowd".

  • whynot_31 said:

    They don't result in deaths. They result in fist fights, bruises, and lost revenue.

    I've seen the occasional stretcher and ambulance, but I don't think many people get admitted.



    Weird. I've biked over the bridge a couple hundred times in the past year - I bike to work most days - and I have not even once seen any of those things.

    You must be walking/biking the bridge at very different times than I do.
  • whynot_31 said:


    My second premise:
    If the path was all peds, I believe more tourists would use it as a leisurely way to see the sights, and have a greater chance of eating lunch in Brooklyn, as well as buying shirts proclaiming "Brooklyn".

    http://explorebk.com/2014/05/08/walk-across-brooklyn-bridge-dumbo-brooklyn-bridge-park/

    They would tell their friends at home in Ohio or France about how great it is, and there would be a snowball effect.

    At present, the path has reputation among bikers and pedestrians as being crowded and filled with jerks, with everyone defining the other as the "jerk" and the "crowd".



    Come on.

    99% of the pedestrian traffic not intentionally headed to the promenade turns around and goes back to Manhattan once they get over the bridge and see a long walk to who knows what ahead of them. This has zero to do with cyclists.

    0.00% of people from Ohio and France are going home and telling friends, "Whatever you do, don't walk the Brooklyn Bridge."
  • You have to be stupid, thrive on confrontation, or actually be heading exactly to Park Row to cycle on the Brooklyn Bridge.  The Manhattan Bridge is right next to it and a far less irritating ride, between the wooden boards and the clueless tourists standing in the bike lane to snap photos.  It's this way more or less regardless of time, although it does depend on the weather.

    The BB shaves off probably half a mile and a few minutes from my commute, but is in no way worth it.
  • whynot_31 said:


    OK.  Thanks for the info.

    One of the worst aspects of our car-sick culture is that the dominance of car drivers often pits cyclists and pedestrians against each other in competition for small spaces... while the people that kill and maim scores of others are left with the vast majority of the travel space.
  • Whether DeBlasio leaves office in 4, 8 or 12 years, ^this^ will continue to be true.

    However, the city might be able to collect additional revenue from them, and claim some of that space back.
  • The speeding crackdown seems to be everywhere. Driving out on Long Island there were more cops on the highway with cars pulled over than I ever saw. Had one client get an eight point violation for doing 80 in a 55 (dumb shit) on the LIE. Oh well, back to using the radar detector.
  • Police often step up speeding and DWI enforcement during the summer, and on holiday weekends.

    In NYC, I not only perceive a lot of more cars stopped for moving violations, but also a lot more parking tickets being issued.   The agents also seem to be using the "boot" and tow trucks to get the point across.  
  • Atlantic Ave. in the 75th pct. must give out more tickets than any other in the city. There's usually three or four cars just waiting to pull someone over when I'm traveling there about 9:30am. It's like a mobile stop and frisk.
  • eastbloc said:

    It's like a mobile stop and frisk.



    The difference being that people in this case are actually known to be wielding deadly instruments while demonstrably breaking the law.  Stop and frisk is just guessing.
  • More of her is needed:

  • My favorite part is the guy riding his bike on the sidewalk while the car drivers get a lecture on the law and politeness:

  • whynot_31 said:

    My favorite part is the guy riding his bike on the sidewalk while the car drivers get a lecture on the law and politeness



    Yeah, car drivers and cyclists both constantly break the laws, and both groups have many jerks among them. The big difference though is that only one group kills or cripples thousands of New Yorkers every year. Not that that really matters, of course.
  • I think safety plays a secondary, but important, part of this campaign.
  • Albany will soon decide whether to give NYC the ability to lower the speed limit to 25 mph

    Passage is less than certain.

  • DiBlasio has seemed to start an end run around Albany by making many streets "slow zones". He has done this on much of Atlantic and I noticed it on E.P. this morning too.
  • whynot_31 said:

    Albany will soon decide whether to give NYC the ability to lower the speed limit to 25 mph

    Passage is less than certain.



    Now certain:

    https://twitter.com/StreetsblogNYC/status/479844119057932288
  • Coming on the heals of LICH and the charter school defeats, this is a much needed win for DeBlasio.

  • He may need the win but I don't know if drivers are going to be thrilled with this because even though on many streets due to traffic the speed doesn't get much above 25 it makes it sound like things will get even slower. This whole initiative could be much ado about nothing and just leave a bad taste in many peoples' mouths.
  • He will need to shower fewer deaths, accidents and/or more revenue to overcome such feelings.

    Or, play with statistics, to present same.
  • He better stick with showing fewer deaths. I don't think that the revenue increase due to speed cameras and such will prove to be a major point of success except to people like Mike Dunlap who appear to hate motorized vehicles.
  •                                          

    He better stick with showing fewer deaths. I don't think that the revenue increase due to speed cameras and such will prove to be a major point of success except to people like Mike Dunlap who appear to hate motorized vehicles.



    I'm nominating this for comment of the day.
  • He better stick with showing fewer deaths. I don't think that the revenue increase due to speed cameras and such will prove to be a major point of success except to people like Mike Dunlap who appear to hate motorized vehicles.



    1) I don't think anyone supporting the cameras cares about the revenue increase.

    2) Not that I'd care if I were, but I'm certainly not alone in hating cars. And the realization of how much death and destruction they cause is clearly growing, thus VisionZero being something more and more politicians are supporting. Cars kill or cripple millions of people every year. I hate war, cancer, and the like for the same reason. I know... crazy. Oh well.
  • I don't hate cars. But I do hate there being excessive numbers of cars driving at excessive speeds in the city, and the car-driving minority's demands that the vast majority of roadway space be reserved for their usage .

    Those are very different things. Cars are useful and fun— they're just not usually the right tool for urban transportation.
  • We really need speed cameras. Has anyone noticed the speed limit sign that displays the speed cars are actually going at Eastern a little past Washington? It's great to see all the cars ignoring the speed limit and going between 30-40. If only we had a body who had the legal authority to stop and issue monetary punishments to those exceeding the legal limit.
  • I've been driving in this city since 1968. It didn't take very long to discover that the only way I could get pulled over by a cop in NYC was to honk my horn at one (which I actually, stupidly, did back in my student days because two cop cars were sitting in traffic jawing with one another, completely preventing anyone else from proceeding down 113th Street).

    So, sadly, until serious, continuous enforcement (whether by radio cars, motorcycle cops or speed & red light cameras) becomes a fact of life in NY, speed limit signs and traffic lights are likely to have little impact on driver behavior.
  • I have not owned a car since moving to NYC in 2003, but I rent cars regularly to escape the city on weekends.

    The only ticket I have ever received was coming off the Throggs Neck Bridge in Queens. There is something like a 45 mph limit on the Clearview Expressway, and the layout makes it very easy for the police to hide and to pull cars over.

    It is much harder for the police to hide on local streets, and -until recently- traffic enforcement was not rewarded by the chain of command.
  • Maybe a win for him but let's see how the general population feels. Slower speeds might embolden people to jaywalk more as they feel they can make it across the street.
  • The Patrol Borough vehicle was parked off of Nostrand and Eastern had a Vision Zero banner draped across the back. Anyone else reminded of the under new management banners fixed to the front of a failing restaurant?image
  • I saw a guy step off of the corner on the east side of EP at this intersection and stand in what is now the merging right lane, to pick up some change he had spotted in the street. He seemed oblivious to the fact that 1) it was rush hour on EP; 2) cars still use the lane to merge once they have crossed the intersection, and 3) that he could be hit from behind as he was bent over with his butt in the air.

    All of these changes simply embolden stupidity as folks compete to become a Darwin Award finalist.
  • I think part of the problem stems from people (drivers, peds, bikes, etc) taking progressively more risks, because similar risks haven't resulted in injury before.

    Even if they don't increase their risk taking behavior, the law of averages eventually catches up with a lot people.
  • whynot_31 said:

    In my view, pedestrian and bicycle deaths could actually increase over the length of this campaign, yet the organizers could declare it a success.


    ....after all, the goal is to show concern for the deaths [this earns one votes] and get control over traffic rules from Albany [this gives one power]. 



    The goal is also to decrease traffic violence. Car drivers collectively kill more people than gunmen in this city. 


    Just thought I'd come here and share this. Interested to see if there is going to be any sort of public campaign to decrease these deaths...

    A shocking study by the Health Department reveals that 200 kids age 15 through 17 died from gunfire — more than any other cause of injury between 2002 and 2011.

    Sixty-three others died from stabbings.

    Bullets proved far more deadly than cars. Eighty teens died as a result of car accidents, the second-leading cause of death.

    Thirty-five died from suicide by hanging and 33 from accidental falls.

    More than 53 percent of the teen deaths were classified as homicides. Two-thirds of those victims were black.

    The study’s findings come amid a spike in shootings in the Big Apple this year — as well as new constraints on street stops by cops looking for weapons.

    Bedford-Stuyvesant and Crown Heights in Brooklyn was the most deadly area for teens, with 31 gun-related deaths.


    http://nypost.com/2014/07/07/200-city-teens-killed-by-guns-during-10-year-period-study/
  • Homeowner-
    As you are aware, a large scale campaign to decrease those deaths will be mounted when it is perceived as bringing the campaigners power.

    So, um, don't hold your breath.

    We may want to invent a metro card for local youth we care about: It would only allow them to travel to parties that happen west of Vanderbilt Ave, and would force the hosts to overlook any differences they may have and let them in.
  • The red light cameras seem to have a good ROI

    Prepared by Bernard O’Brien
    New York City Independent Budget Office

    "Preliminary data for fiscal year 2014 indicate the city received about $41 million in revenue from camera-generated red-light, bus-lane, and now speeding summonses, as well as $14 million in ticket revenue from traffic violations written up by police officers. The proportion of revenue generated by cameras rose from 38 percent in 1999 to 75 percent in 2014.

    The budget for this fiscal year, 2015, assumes that revenues from these sources will total about $62 million.

    The jump (from about $2 million to $8 million) in anticipated revenue from camera-generated speeding summonses is attributable to Albany’s recent approval of an increase of 120 in the number of speed cameras to be installed in school zones across the city. Twenty speed cameras have been in use in the city since January 2014 as part of a pilot program approved last year by the state.

    The jump from $24 million in 2007 to $45 milion in 2008 in revenue from red light camera summones followed a state-authorized increase in the number of cameras installed throughout the city.

    Revenue from red-light camera summonses also spiked in 2011 to $71 million as a result of a ruling that unpaid red light summonses (in addition to unpaid parking tickets) would count towards the $350 threshold for having your car towed for unpaid tickets. Many motorists were required to pay delinquent red light camera fines that year in order to reclaim their vehicles from the tow pound."

    Click for snazzy graph:
    http://ibo.nyc.ny.us/cgi-park2/?p=793


  • So maybe THAT'S the real reason for reducing the speed limit to 25MPH. Think how much more money could be generated by reducing it to 15MPH !
  • Of course it's the real reason. That's why it's being done all over the country. Hell, soon bicyclists that ride faster than 25 will be ticketed.
  • Actually red light cameras have a solid history of reducing accidents, injuries and deaths. But yes they do increase the amount of fines. But you know you break the law you face consequences so your really don't have a case to complain.
  • Demonstrating the ROI in terms of safer streets is beyond the scope of the NYC Independent Budget Office.
  • True but to ignore that return just gives way to emotional knee jerk reactions of "all they want is moneys!"
  • For some it may.

    Others know that it is difficult to measure those who are alive, but would otherwise not be.

  • As a result of calming traffic in Park Slope, the CO of the 78th now gets to oversee the part of the NYPD that has historically done the most work on moving violations: The highway patrol.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/78th-precinct-top-transfers-head-nypd-highway-patrol-article-1.1869410?utm_content=bufferb1c97&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
  • I never said I was against red light cameras. Hell, I even got a ticket from one once but I knew I was wrong and I had no qualms about paying it. I just mentioned that they generate lots of money. Not only for the entities using them but for the companies that maintain them who usually end up with nearly 50% of the revenue.
  • Because they don't take points off an driver's lic, red light cameras extract something akin to a sin tax.

    Like taxes on alcohol and tobacco, they are imposed under the guise of discouraging consumption. However, they seem to merely tax a population that doesn't seem to mind paying for a rude, unhealthy habit.

  • Is drinking alcohol rude? If so, then the bar owners in the area must be major contributors.
  • I regard running a red light as being rude and unhealthy.

    ....because I enjoy alcohol, I regard it as a vitamin.

    Note: Not all vitamins are necessary, but all must be consumed in moderation.
  • 6 Months into Vision Zero: The 77th Pct is cited as being the best (most assertive) in Brooklyn North.

    http://transalt.org/files/news/reports/2014/Report-Card-Six_Months_of_Vision_Zero_Traffic_Enforcement.pdf?v=2

    Page 5.