so most of us know when atl side comes around its custom to just dbl park on the other side.. now what these assholes have been doing and i didnt really notice was when you dbl park on a street with a bike lane they give u a ticket for "blocking the bike lane" and thats a $125 dollar ticket that they dont reduce !!
now this has created even more of a fiasco now because you have to dbl park outside of the bike lane .. ugggh
(photos coming soon) _________________ hello.thank you.good bye.
"death to emo post whores"
sweet tea Cooler Ham
Joined: 26 Feb 2006 Posts: 4981 Location: the jewish
Tue Dec 02, 08 10:16 am EST
i assume you're providing ramps so that bicyclists can ride over your car. _________________ Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit
jeffrey blimp collector
Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 3521 Location: Prospect Lefferts Gardens
Tue Dec 02, 08 10:21 am EST
This has been the case for as long as I can recall on streets like 3rd street in Park Slope.
Be extra careful parking outside the bike lane stripe too, as they will give a ticket if you're just barely on a bike lane stripe or even if you're just too close to the bike lane stripe in their opinion. _________________ i extend my battery life by averting extreme injustice and inherent evil
supreme_ian "Anonymous Guest"
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 462 Location: BKLYN
Tue Dec 02, 08 10:22 am EST
sweet tea wrote:
i assume you're providing ramps so that bicyclists can ride over your car.
Ive been driving & double parking LONG before there was EVER a bike lane !
more importantly i have NEVER with my own eyes seen a human in the damn bike lane on any of these blocks !! _________________ hello.thank you.good bye.
"death to emo post whores"
i assume you're providing ramps so that bicyclists can ride over your car.
Ive been driving & double parking LONG before there was EVER a bike lane !
more importantly i have NEVER with my own eyes seen a human in the damn bike lane on any of these blocks !!
That doesn't matter. It's like parking front of a broken fire hydrant. You're not allowed or a disabled ramp in the middle of a street which no one uses. In fact double parking in itself is illegal even during alternate. It's only by tradition that NYC overlooks it during alt hours. _________________ "I'm a Chain Belt...that's called the Quart of Blood Technique. You do that, a quart of blood will drop out of a man's body."
supreme_ian "Anonymous Guest"
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 462 Location: BKLYN
Tue Dec 02, 08 10:34 am EST
um no its totally different a fire hydrant is a fire hydrant NO matter what. you KNOW you dont park in 1. too close to 1 etc. thats just known fact.
also KNOWN fact is dbl parking during alt side street cleaning is OK hence why SO many ppl do it. i can tell you dont have a car because you wouldnt be talking about it like its a huge inconvenience to you. IMO over 60% of bike lanes are a waste of my tax dollars. they should make big central bike lanes kinda like highways. not all these stupid little ones on side streets that barely have foot traffic ! _________________ hello.thank you.good bye.
"death to emo post whores"
vidro3 's Taxes subsidize your parking space
Joined: 12 Feb 2008 Posts: 1347
Tue Dec 02, 08 10:40 am EST
by law it is always illegal to double park during ASP.
in practice the police let you get away with it most of the time, doesn't mean they have to.
um no its totally different a fire hydrant is a fire hydrant NO matter what. you KNOW you dont park in 1. too close to 1 etc. thats just known fact.
also KNOWN fact is dbl parking during alt side street cleaning is OK hence why SO many ppl do it. i can tell you dont have a car because you wouldnt be talking about it like its a huge inconvenience to you. IMO over 60% of bike lanes are a waste of my tax dollars. they should make big central bike lanes kinda like highways. not all these stupid little ones on side streets that barely have foot traffic !
I obtained my driver's license when I was 18 back in '83, bought a 1979 Honda Accord Hatchback in the same year, all in Kings County. I know the laws. Double parking is not legal at anytime. Like I said the City gives you a pass during alt hours. Don't believe me? Ask anyone who double parked besides somebody else's car during alt hours and couldn't be contacted to move their car. Big ticket and a occasional tow if the cops had to get involved. Now, I agree with you there should be a highway for lanes, never the less the bike lanes present are for bikes only 24/7/365.25. If you choose to park in them you risk getting a ticket. _________________ "I'm a Chain Belt...that's called the Quart of Blood Technique. You do that, a quart of blood will drop out of a man's body."
supreme_ian "Anonymous Guest"
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 462 Location: BKLYN
Tue Dec 02, 08 10:48 am EST
it being "illegal" isnt the dispute... what it was is just meter maids giving you the damn bike lane ticket.. what ever if they give you the dbl parking ticket after alt side cleaning is over fine. so be it. no dispute from me. but its this bike lane ticket that pisses me off the most..anyway it was more of a rant than anything
Idle.. if youve had a car for that long you have double parked on alt side days and know exactly where im coming from or you live in a 1 dense area of brooklyn where other ppl dont have cars or have a garage.. the ticket blitz is just silly... _________________ hello.thank you.good bye.
"death to emo post whores"
Boygabriel G Train Devotee
Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Posts: 2494 Location: Somewhere between Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Bushwick
Tue Dec 02, 08 12:16 pm EST
supreme_ian wrote:
um no its totally different a fire hydrant is a fire hydrant NO matter what. you KNOW you dont park in 1. too close to 1 etc. thats just known fact.
also KNOWN fact is dbl parking during alt side street cleaning is OK hence why SO many ppl do it. i can tell you dont have a car because you wouldnt be talking about it like its a huge inconvenience to you. IMO over 60% of bike lanes are a waste of my tax dollars. they should make big central bike lanes kinda like highways. not all these stupid little ones on side streets that barely have foot traffic !
haha. You should really read up on stats and studies before you mindlessly rant against bike lanes. Especially when your rant is based on the "right" to double park in them. _________________ Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
modsquad Carneviento Devotee
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 Posts: 1464
Tue Dec 02, 08 1:07 pm EST
Idlewild wrote:
That doesn't matter. It's like parking front of a broken fire hydrant. You're not allowed or a disabled ramp in the middle of a street which no one uses. In fact double parking in itself is illegal even during alternate. It's only by tradition that NYC overlooks it during alt hours.
I agree with Ian. This is not about reciting traffic law, it's about how to deal with the chronic problem of parking and getting around the law temporarily. Unless you are an "officer of the Court" why bother stating it's against the law, we already know that! We all break the law. I submit to you Idlewild that your avatar "breaks the law", not traffic just copyright.
modsquad Carneviento Devotee
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 Posts: 1464
Tue Dec 02, 08 1:41 pm EST
Boygabriel wrote:
haha. You should really read up on stats and studies before you mindlessly rant against bike lanes. Especially when your rant is based on the "right" to double park in them.
Re: bike lanes. I work around Union Square a lot and given all the bikes lanes that converge there, there is so little space to lock up your bike. The only reason the city is painting bike lanes is to bolster Queen Bloomberg's congestion pricing scheme. The new traffic jams created by the bike lanes will be a fait accompli. I don't know what "studies" there are but what I see with my own eyes is lots of green paint leading to nowhere.
supreme_ian "Anonymous Guest"
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 462 Location: BKLYN
Tue Dec 02, 08 1:43 pm EST
Boygabriel wrote:
supreme_ian wrote:
um no its totally different a fire hydrant is a fire hydrant NO matter what. you KNOW you dont park in 1. too close to 1 etc. thats just known fact.
also KNOWN fact is dbl parking during alt side street cleaning is OK hence why SO many ppl do it. i can tell you dont have a car because you wouldnt be talking about it like its a huge inconvenience to you. IMO over 60% of bike lanes are a waste of my tax dollars. they should make big central bike lanes kinda like highways. not all these stupid little ones on side streets that barely have foot traffic !
haha. You should really read up on stats and studies before you mindlessly rant against bike lanes. Especially when your rant is based on the "right" to double park in them.
WELL LETS SEE...
fact # 1 i lived in brooklyn for my whole life & years 13-17 i rode a bike no bike lane my mom never got a ticket for parking in 1 and drivers didnt feel like they were driving in a obstacle course (like most do now due to the bike lane) *older drivers who drive on narrow streets with bike lanes complain they feel boxed in and scared to drive* <--- and thats what causes accidents !
fact # 2 while posted at my homies crib in brownsville on a SUMMER day NOT 1 human being rode a bike down this bike lane on his block. i see the same on my friends block in bed sty & even some in crown heights.
fact # 3 i know that parking in the bike lane is NOT legal i NEVER said i do it or WANT to do it. i was just stating something i was a witness to !
fact # 4 you cant bike in the snow & the % of ppl who bike ALL year round is lower than warranting so many bike lanes in such a season based city..Also with out cars.. the city wouldnt write parking tickets and get $ so whats worth MORE to nyc some poorly placed bike lanes of HAPPY car drivers who can potentially get parking tickets to finnance bullshit for the ever so $$$ hungry nyc ! _________________ hello.thank you.good bye.
"death to emo post whores"
You're making it sound like there is bike lane on every block ruining the flow of traffic throughout the city. Sheesh. The fact is if you want to keep a car in the city you're going to have to do some work to park it. _________________ "My main objective is to be professional but to kill him." - Mike Tyson
That doesn't matter. It's like parking front of a broken fire hydrant. You're not allowed or a disabled ramp in the middle of a street which no one uses. In fact double parking in itself is illegal even during alternate. It's only by tradition that NYC overlooks it during alt hours.
I agree with Ian. This is not about reciting traffic law, it's about how to deal with the chronic problem of parking and getting around the law temporarily. Unless you are an "officer of the Court" why bother stating it's against the law, we already know that! We all break the law. I submit to you Idlewild that your avatar "breaks the law", not traffic just copyright.
Call Toho studio. _________________ "I'm a Chain Belt...that's called the Quart of Blood Technique. You do that, a quart of blood will drop out of a man's body."
Mougar Carneviento Devotee
Joined: 30 Aug 2008 Posts: 1258
Tue Dec 02, 08 4:17 pm EST
I don't give a crap if someone parks in the bike lane between 11:30PM and 1:00AM, or whatever those hours are. What pisses me off is going along Bergen/Dean or up Bedford during commuting hours and having to avoid an average of 2 cars per block parked in the bike lane. It is even worse on 1st/2nd ave in Manhattan.
MonkeeJones Tell The Truth
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 Posts: 53
Tue Dec 02, 08 7:00 pm EST
Hate to burst peoples bubble but it's not a scam. People who park in bike lanes are inconsiderate plane and simple. Just because most meter maids were remiss in enforcing the rule doesn't make them wrong for enforcing it now. If the choice is you getting a $125 dollar ticket or a cyclist being forced into traffic I give you the ticket every time. The world would be a better place if we all (and by all I include myself) would step outside our self involved bubble of a life and think about the good of others instead of how they make our lives a little less convenient.
vidro3 's Taxes subsidize your parking space
Joined: 12 Feb 2008 Posts: 1347
Tue Dec 02, 08 9:14 pm EST
everyone gets angry when they suddenly get charged for what had been free.
they never say, 'well gee, it's great that i got to illegally double park twice a week for 20 years but this ticket sure is a bummer.'
it's always about the injustice of the ticket.
Carmen Mayor of Snark Slope
Joined: 22 Jun 2006 Posts: 3172 Location: 7th st at 5th ave
Wed Dec 03, 08 12:12 am EST
Parking in a bike lane is a quick way to get a mirror ripped off or your car scratched to shit. Beware of those bike messengers. _________________ whoa hey whoa hey whoa
homeowner "Way Too Incestial"
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 2116 Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Wed Dec 03, 08 12:37 am EST
supreme_ian wrote:
fact # 4 you cant bike in the snow & the % of ppl who bike ALL year round is lower than warranting so many bike lanes in such a season based city..Also with out cars.. the city wouldnt write parking tickets and get $ so whats worth MORE to nyc some poorly placed bike lanes of HAPPY car drivers who can potentially get parking tickets to finnance bullshit for the ever so $$$ hungry nyc !
This is what gets me. The number of people using bike lanes Nov-Mar is going to be relatively few, especially in the outer boroughs. While bike messengers may use them in the city, only the hardcore bikers are biking through a NYC winter. Think back to the subway strike of a few years ago. Even then, the numbers of people biking to work didn't appreciate significantly. More people walked and carpooled, simply because riding a bike in 10 degree weather isn't the most fun thing, and add in rain and snow and its downright miserable. Why then take a street like Bedford Avenue which was a heavily used truck route and put a bike lane on it, squeezing all the existing truck traffic from three lanes to two. It just doesn't make sense when there are weeks were there are only a handful of bikers using the lane. As a taxpayer, why aren't my tax dollars being spent on mass transit which has a much larger usage than on bike lanes which are used on a regular basis by a very tiny minority of residents?
joncane Regular
Joined: 11 Aug 2005 Posts: 171 Location: Sterling
Wed Dec 03, 08 10:55 am EST
homeowner wrote:
This is what gets me. The number of people using bike lanes Nov-Mar is going to be relatively few, especially in the outer boroughs. While bike messengers may use them in the city, only the hardcore bikers are biking through a NYC winter. Think back to the subway strike of a few years ago. Even then, the numbers of people biking to work didn't appreciate significantly. More people walked and carpooled, simply because riding a bike in 10 degree weather isn't the most fun thing, and add in rain and snow and its downright miserable. Why then take a street like Bedford Avenue which was a heavily used truck route and put a bike lane on it, squeezing all the existing truck traffic from three lanes to two. It just doesn't make sense when there are weeks were there are only a handful of bikers using the lane. As a taxpayer, why aren't my tax dollars being spent on mass transit which has a much larger usage than on bike lanes which are used on a regular basis by a very tiny minority of residents?
The kids' playground across the street from me is empty this time of year and will stay that way until the spring. Wanna stop putting taxpayer dollars into that too? It would make a great municipal parking lot.
I ride my bike to work all the time. The reason that i sometimes avoid bike lanes is that they are so crowded with double parked cars and (worse yet) lawbreaking drivers who endanger my life by using it as a passing lane. I'm happy to give you a guided tour on 3rd Ave one day and we'll see how far we can go before having our path blocked. If the laws were strictly enforced and it were practical to ride in bike lanes, I'm sure lots more riders would do so. That's why you only see a "handful" of cyclists in the lane.
And yes - some cyclists behave irresponsibly, and i'm not here to defend that. But let's not pretend that a cyclist breaking a traffic law presents nearly the danger that a driver breaking the law does. When drivers stop double parking, passing in bike lanes, speeding, making illegal broken U-turns, etc, I'll be the first one to support ticketing for cyclists who disobey the law. Until then, let's acknowledge that the drivers who break traffic and parking regulations are in far greater supply and present a far greater danger.
Actually a cyclist passing the red or riding on the sidewalk presents huge dangers. It works both ways with bikes and cars. _________________ "I'm a Chain Belt...that's called the Quart of Blood Technique. You do that, a quart of blood will drop out of a man's body."
vidro3 's Taxes subsidize your parking space
Joined: 12 Feb 2008 Posts: 1347
Wed Dec 03, 08 12:15 pm EST
Idlewild wrote:
Actually a cyclist passing the red or riding on the sidewalk presents huge dangers. It works both ways with bikes and cars.
right, a 200lb cyclist+bike vs a 2000lb car.
since F=MA the car kills you, the bike, not so much.
Mougar Carneviento Devotee
Joined: 30 Aug 2008 Posts: 1258
Wed Dec 03, 08 12:17 pm EST
I'm ok with bikes running red lights, as long as they aren't hitting pedestrians or cutting off cars. I think riding a bike on a sidewalk is just stupid though.
joncane Regular
Joined: 11 Aug 2005 Posts: 171 Location: Sterling
Wed Dec 03, 08 12:25 pm EST
Idlewild wrote:
Actually a cyclist passing the red or riding on the sidewalk presents huge dangers. It works both ways with bikes and cars.
For the record, I'm not an apologist for cyclists who break traffic laws, and I acknowledge that some riders present a danger to others. I'm just as happy to hassle a cyclist on a sidewalk as i am a driver in a bike lane. But let's not pretend that the bicycles present nearly the danger that cars do. Each year hundreds of pedestrians are killed by cars in NYC, and that usually includes a dozen or so on the sidewalk. I doubt that you could find more than a couple of pedestrian deaths caused by cyclists.
Physics is a funny thing - a 200 pound bike/rider combo traveling at 15-20 mph doesn't do the same damage as a 2000 pound car doing 30-40. Don't hassle me for having a BB gun if most folks are walking around with machine guns.
The 200 pound cyclist breaking a red and having a car smack into him is clearly a danger to him or herself and the driver if said cyclist goes through the windshield. What also amazes me is I see more cyclists doing this with their kids riding on the back. And for the record I am not pitting cars against bikes, but acknowledgement should be made that if you're on a set of wheels and you act recklessly you are a danger to yourself and everyone else near you. _________________ "I'm a Chain Belt...that's called the Quart of Blood Technique. You do that, a quart of blood will drop out of a man's body."
joncane Regular
Joined: 11 Aug 2005 Posts: 171 Location: Sterling
Wed Dec 03, 08 12:41 pm EST
Idlewild wrote:
The 200 pound cyclist breaking a red and having a car smack into him is clearly a danger to him or herself and the driver if said cyclist goes through the windshield. What also amazes me is I see more cyclists doing this with their kids riding on the back. And for the record I am not pitting cars against bikes, but acknowledgement should be made that if you're on a set of wheels and you act recklessly you are a danger to yourself and everyone else near you.
i will, and have readily acknowledged that. And as i've said, I am not excusing them.
Now i'm waiting for drivers to acknowledge the dangers they create for cyclists when they make illegal u-turns, pass in bike lanes, park in bike lanes, etc. This thread was started when the OP referred to ticketing those who blocked a bike lane while double parking as a "scam". Being ticketed for blocking my safe route to work is not a scam - it's the law. The fact is that traffic enforcement agents sometimes look the other way if you double park during street cleaning, but it must be done so w/o blocking the bike lane. Nothing unclear or scam-like about that.
Boygabriel G Train Devotee
Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Posts: 2494 Location: Somewhere between Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Bushwick
Wed Dec 03, 08 1:31 pm EST
Idlewild wrote:
The 200 pound cyclist breaking a red and having a car smack into him is clearly a danger to him or herself and the driver if said cyclist goes through the windshield. What also amazes me is I see more cyclists doing this with their kids riding on the back. And for the record I am not pitting cars against bikes, but acknowledgement should be made that if you're on a set of wheels and you act recklessly you are a danger to yourself and everyone else near you.
There's no excuse for dangerous biking (or dangerous travel by anyone), but a vast majority of bikers do not fly through red lights willy-nilly.
At the end of the day its about self-preservation and you won't last long if you fly through red lights without slowing down & looking first. _________________ Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
Boygabriel G Train Devotee
Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Posts: 2494 Location: Somewhere between Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Bushwick
Wed Dec 03, 08 1:37 pm EST
homeowner wrote:
This is what gets me. The number of people using bike lanes Nov-Mar is going to be relatively few, especially in the outer boroughs. While bike messengers may use them in the city, only the hardcore bikers are biking through a NYC winter. Think back to the subway strike of a few years ago. Even then, the numbers of people biking to work didn't appreciate significantly. More people walked and carpooled, simply because riding a bike in 10 degree weather isn't the most fun thing, and add in rain and snow and its downright miserable. Why then take a street like Bedford Avenue which was a heavily used truck route and put a bike lane on it, squeezing all the existing truck traffic from three lanes to two. It just doesn't make sense when there are weeks were there are only a handful of bikers using the lane. As a taxpayer, why aren't my tax dollars being spent on mass transit which has a much larger usage than on bike lanes which are used on a regular basis by a very tiny minority of residents?
First of all, a lot of people still bike in the winter. Especially short distances around Brooklyn because we all know buses and the G train don't run that frequently.
Second of all, I find the 'my tax dollars' argument to be very troublesome. Do you actually know what the funding looks like for biking versus, say, highways and roads? Beyond that, I almost never ride in a car (not taxis or anything), so why should MY tax dollars go to repairing roads that are partially worn down by people who drive to work or drive to the grocery store?
I really don't like the 'my tax dollars' argument, especially for something that's as relatively small budget as painting bike lines on roads. _________________ Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
Last edited by Boygabriel on Wed Dec 03, 08 1:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
Boygabriel G Train Devotee
Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Posts: 2494 Location: Somewhere between Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Bushwick
Wed Dec 03, 08 1:54 pm EST
supreme_ian wrote:
WELL LETS SEE...
fact # 1 i lived in brooklyn for my whole life & years 13-17 i rode a bike no bike lane my mom never got a ticket for parking in 1 and drivers didnt feel like they were driving in a obstacle course (like most do now due to the bike lane) *older drivers who drive on narrow streets with bike lanes complain they feel boxed in and scared to drive* <--- and thats what causes accidents !
Oh my god! The old people! Quick! Remove all bike lanes!
Streets with bike lanes aren't "narrow". The city follows very strict guidelines for how wide a lane or street has to be. They only put in bike lanes on streets that have room for it.
What I find far more common is streets that are wider than one lane, but not wide enough for two lanes, so cars just drive all over the place, not in a straight lane, yet not in two separate lanes.
These are typically the streets that get bike lanes. Cars can continue to drive single-file, but bikers get a dedicated (and much safer) bike lane.
supreme_ian wrote:
fact # 4 you cant bike in the snow & the % of ppl who bike ALL year round is lower than warranting so many bike lanes in such a season based city..Also with out cars.. the city wouldnt write parking tickets and get $ so whats worth MORE to nyc some poorly placed bike lanes of HAPPY car drivers who can potentially get parking tickets to finnance bullshit for the ever so $$$ hungry nyc !
Where as you need to double park in bike lanes, what, twice a week for 2 hours at a time? Yeah, that's a great reason to get rid of or ignore bike lanes. _________________ Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
homeowner "Way Too Incestial"
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 2116 Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Wed Dec 03, 08 2:20 pm EST
Boygabriel wrote:
homeowner wrote:
This is what gets me. The number of people using bike lanes Nov-Mar is going to be relatively few, especially in the outer boroughs. While bike messengers may use them in the city, only the hardcore bikers are biking through a NYC winter. Think back to the subway strike of a few years ago. Even then, the numbers of people biking to work didn't appreciate significantly. More people walked and carpooled, simply because riding a bike in 10 degree weather isn't the most fun thing, and add in rain and snow and its downright miserable. Why then take a street like Bedford Avenue which was a heavily used truck route and put a bike lane on it, squeezing all the existing truck traffic from three lanes to two. It just doesn't make sense when there are weeks were there are only a handful of bikers using the lane. As a taxpayer, why aren't my tax dollars being spent on mass transit which has a much larger usage than on bike lanes which are used on a regular basis by a very tiny minority of residents?
First of all, a lot of people still bike in the winter. Especially short distances around Brooklyn because we all know buses and the G train don't run that frequently.
Second of all, I find the 'my tax dollars' argument to be very troublesome. Do you actually know what the funding looks like for biking versus, say, highways and roads? Beyond that, I almost never ride in a car (not taxis or anything), so why should MY tax dollars go to repairing roads that are partially worn down by people who drive to work or drive to the grocery store?
I really don't like the 'my tax dollars' argument, especially for something that's as relatively small budget as painting bike lines on roads.
Bike lanes are being sold as an alternative to the use of cars. The transportation alternative folks tout them as being another way to reduce the amount of car traffic currently clogging streets. Why then is it troublesome to ask whether or not the money would be better spent on another type of transportation alternative such as mass transit? It seems to me that there are plenty of people (elderly, disabled, parents with multiple small children) for whom the addition of buses or bus routes would be preferred over bike lanes. For me its not a car vs. bike argument, its what is the best use if you are looking for non-car alternatives. The decision to go with bike lanes means money is not being spent on other things, and I simply wonder if there is any logic behind why the decision for bike lanes has been pushed in a place where public transportation alternatives could be expanded or further developed?
As for the "a lot of people bike in the winter", I'd suggest to you that there is a pretty narrow demographic of people who bike year-round (young, mostly male, single, with no kids). Bike lanes are supposed to encourage people who don't actively bike to feel safe to use it as an alternative means of transportation. Among that group I don't think that biking in the snow or the rain is a realistic option such that they'll opt to hop on their bike in February to run the kids to the museum or library.
vidro3 's Taxes subsidize your parking space
Joined: 12 Feb 2008 Posts: 1347
Wed Dec 03, 08 2:40 pm EST
homeowner wrote:
Boygabriel wrote:
homeowner wrote:
This is what gets me. The number of people using bike lanes Nov-Mar is going to be relatively few, especially in the outer boroughs. While bike messengers may use them in the city, only the hardcore bikers are biking through a NYC winter. Think back to the subway strike of a few years ago. Even then, the numbers of people biking to work didn't appreciate significantly. More people walked and carpooled, simply because riding a bike in 10 degree weather isn't the most fun thing, and add in rain and snow and its downright miserable. Why then take a street like Bedford Avenue which was a heavily used truck route and put a bike lane on it, squeezing all the existing truck traffic from three lanes to two. It just doesn't make sense when there are weeks were there are only a handful of bikers using the lane. As a taxpayer, why aren't my tax dollars being spent on mass transit which has a much larger usage than on bike lanes which are used on a regular basis by a very tiny minority of residents?
First of all, a lot of people still bike in the winter. Especially short distances around Brooklyn because we all know buses and the G train don't run that frequently.
Second of all, I find the 'my tax dollars' argument to be very troublesome. Do you actually know what the funding looks like for biking versus, say, highways and roads? Beyond that, I almost never ride in a car (not taxis or anything), so why should MY tax dollars go to repairing roads that are partially worn down by people who drive to work or drive to the grocery store?
I really don't like the 'my tax dollars' argument, especially for something that's as relatively small budget as painting bike lines on roads.
Bike lanes are being sold as an alternative to the use of cars. The transportation alternative folks tout them as being another way to reduce the amount of car traffic currently clogging streets. Why then is it troublesome to ask whether or not the money would be better spent on another type of transportation alternative such as mass transit? It seems to me that there are plenty of people (elderly, disabled, parents with multiple small children) for whom the addition of buses or bus routes would be preferred over bike lanes. For me its not a car vs. bike argument, its what is the best use if you are looking for non-car alternatives. The decision to go with bike lanes means money is not being spent on other things, and I simply wonder if there is any logic behind why the decision for bike lanes has been pushed in a place where public transportation alternatives could be expanded or further developed?
As for the "a lot of people bike in the winter", I'd suggest to you that there is a pretty narrow demographic of people who bike year-round (young, mostly male, single, with no kids). Bike lanes are supposed to encourage people who don't actively bike to feel safe to use it as an alternative means of transportation. Among that group I don't think that biking in the snow or the rain is a realistic option such that they'll opt to hop on their bike in February to run the kids to the museum or library.
Your premise is incorrect. Biking increased dramatically during the 2005 transit strike. According to transalt bike traffic across the east river bridges increased 500%.
To your first point, the amount of money spent on bike lanes is a small fraction of what is spent on roads and mass transit. With a system that has a budget in the billions, the marginal difference of $10 or $20 million won't do much and you get more bang for your buck allocating it to bike lanes.
Last edited by vidro3 on Wed Dec 03, 08 2:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Boygabriel G Train Devotee
Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Posts: 2494 Location: Somewhere between Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Bushwick
Wed Dec 03, 08 2:41 pm EST
I understand your point that "not all people bike", but not all modes of transportation are used by all people. That being the case, do you really think painting bike lanes is an unworthy use of public funds?
Reducing traffic and encouraging public health are definitely benefits to increased bicycling, but they're far from the only reasons. That being the case, I don't think it's fair to suggest, as you seem to be doing, that all money spent on bike lanes should be spent on public transportation instead. _________________ Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
supreme_ian "Anonymous Guest"
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 462 Location: BKLYN
Wed Dec 03, 08 4:43 pm EST
ahahahahaa first off let me say
some great essay's have been written here. we should print some and mail em to what ever fool is in charge of the nyc dot.. now as for the bike lanes more ppl drive and take mass transit than bike. to hell what what ever indy survey you try and show me and what ever else thats just proven fact.
so how does the city cry broke and the mta is a pile of shit factor into bad placement of bike lanes and wasting MY tax dollars !!
bike lanes CREATE more traffic than reduce when you turn a huge 2 lane street into a 1 lane with a bike lane that is barely used that creates TRAFFIC.. as stated in my FACTS see fact #4
last i saw a bike didnt get a $65 parking ticket or a $125 Crosswalk ticket bikes basically generate 0 revenue for the city.. no $ from the gas tax no $ from tolls nothing !
and you living on the G train know better than most that your train line SUCKS and has needed improvement for over 15 years ! _________________ hello.thank you.good bye.
"death to emo post whores"
vidro3 's Taxes subsidize your parking space
Joined: 12 Feb 2008 Posts: 1347
Wed Dec 03, 08 5:13 pm EST
supreme_ian wrote:
ahahahahaa first off let me say
some great essay's have been written here. we should print some and mail em to what ever fool is in charge of the nyc dot.. now as for the bike lanes more ppl drive and take mass transit than bike. to hell what what ever indy survey you try and show me and what ever else thats just proven fact.
No one ever tried to prove that more people bike than drive or use mass transit. Homeowner said above that biking did not increase appreciably during the 2005 transit strike. That statement is incorrect. Over the 3 day strike about 500,000 more people biked into manhattan than normal.
Quote:
so how does the city cry broke and the mta is a pile of shit factor into bad placement of bike lanes and wasting MY tax dollars !!
I don't know, you brought it up. Here's a guess. First, what you consider a waste others might consider a boon. Second, the City already gives the MTA a huge chunk of money every year. You get to a certain point where throwing $10million at a $1Billion problem doesn't make sense
Quote:
bike lanes CREATE more traffic than reduce when you turn a huge 2 lane street into a 1 lane with a bike lane that is barely used that creates TRAFFIC.. as stated in my FACTS see fact #4
last i saw a bike didnt get a $65 parking ticket or a $125 Crosswalk ticket bikes basically generate 0 revenue for the city.. no $ from the gas tax no $ from tolls nothing !
what do you mean by "create"? More cars? No. Slower speeds? Yes. Bike lanes do not create more cars. They slow them down and eliminate them. Every single traffic engineering study ever has shown that less road space results in less traffic on a given street. So bike lanes actually reduce traffic.
The $624million the City takes in in parking fines pales in comparison to the $13Billion traffic congestion costs.
Boygabriel G Train Devotee
Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Posts: 2494 Location: Somewhere between Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg and Bushwick
Wed Dec 03, 08 6:30 pm EST
supreme_ian wrote:
ahahahahaa first off let me say
some great essay's have been written here. we should print some and mail em to what ever fool is in charge of the nyc dot.. now as for the bike lanes more ppl drive and take mass transit than bike. to hell what what ever indy survey you try and show me and what ever else thats just proven fact.
so how does the city cry broke and the mta is a pile of shit factor into bad placement of bike lanes and wasting MY tax dollars !!
bike lanes CREATE more traffic than reduce when you turn a huge 2 lane street into a 1 lane with a bike lane that is barely used that creates TRAFFIC.. as stated in my FACTS see fact #4
last i saw a bike didnt get a $65 parking ticket or a $125 Crosswalk ticket bikes basically generate 0 revenue for the city.. no $ from the gas tax no $ from tolls nothing !
and you living on the G train know better than most that your train line SUCKS and has needed improvement for over 15 years !
hahaha. you called your statements FACTS.
That's awesome. _________________ Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
homeowner "Way Too Incestial"
Joined: 20 Jan 2006 Posts: 2116 Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Wed Dec 03, 08 7:29 pm EST
The average daily ridership of NYC MTA is 6.4 million people. Using Transportation Alternatives numbers the average numbers of daily bikers in NYC is 120,000. Again I ask, why are we putting money into bike lanes instead of improving mass transit?
ETA: Also, I think you guys are grossly understating the cost of bike lanes and the associated work (traffic medians, road repaving, etc) that comes with it. Here is a link on the Sand Street bike path which is currently under contract for $4.6 million for a two to three block stretch of lanes)
Also interesting to note that the article states that currently only about 1500 bikes cross the bridge daily
whynot_31 Benevolent dictator
Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 6161 Location: Prospect Heights
Wed Dec 03, 08 9:30 pm EST
I bike around the park at midnight, that's about it.
I fall into the "pro-bike lane" group because I am "anti car".
Its kind of like recycling. It never makes money for the city, Its a pain it the ass that forces the average person to sort their trash. I still like it, because it forces people to look at and touch their trash. ...maybe they will use less stuff as a result.
The bike lane analogy: Maybe it will force people to take transit because they no longer have two lanes on every street and a free parking space at the expense of those of us in the city that don't own cars and want some open space. _________________ Hey you! Enlighten up.
OpossumQueen Minister of Propaganda
Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 1933 Location: Park Slope
Wed Dec 03, 08 10:43 pm EST
a fantasy from a person who is too scared to bike as much as I want for lack of safe bike lanes:
Lots of people get rid of their cars here. Parking garages are mostly zipcars. More buses are added to existing routes. One side of each street goes from residential parking to a full bike/skate/skate-board lane.
vidro3 's Taxes subsidize your parking space
Joined: 12 Feb 2008 Posts: 1347
Thu Dec 04, 08 12:19 am EST
homeowner wrote:
The average daily ridership of NYC MTA is 6.4 million people. Using Transportation Alternatives numbers the average numbers of daily bikers in NYC is 120,000. Again I ask, why are we putting money into bike lanes instead of improving mass transit?
ETA: Also, I think you guys are grossly understating the cost of bike lanes and the associated work (traffic medians, road repaving, etc) that comes with it. Here is a link on the Sand Street bike path which is currently under contract for $4.6 million for a two to three block stretch of lanes)
Also interesting to note that the article states that currently only about 1500 bikes cross the bridge daily
I think the sands street path and others such as Kent ave and all of the greenways are paid for by a $61million federal grant. It's in the City's Bike Master Plan. Most of the bike lanes do not get the same treatment as Sands St. or the 9th ave track in manhattan. Most bike lanes are simply painted lines on the street and that is the type the original poster was complaining against.
You are posing a false choice. It is not, Fund Mass Transit or Fund Bike Lanes. We already fund mass transit a lot. and funding bike lanes could actually improve mass transit. How? More bike lanes will result in more bikers - it's an "if you build it, they will come" scenario as evidenced by the huge increase in biking during the transit strike and during the summer streets events.
more people bike, less people drive, your bus runs faster.
It has nothing to do with a small amount of money spent on bike lanes, or phony waterfalls, or changing the name of the Triboro bridge.
sweet tea Cooler Ham
Joined: 26 Feb 2006 Posts: 4981 Location: the jewish
Thu Dec 04, 08 1:10 pm EST
homeowner wrote:
The average daily ridership of NYC MTA is 6.4 million people. Using Transportation Alternatives numbers the average numbers of daily bikers in NYC is 120,000. Again I ask, why are we putting money into bike lanes instead of improving mass transit?
one reason is that the trains are crowded at rush hour and there's basically not much to be done about that -- i don't have the link handy, but very few of the lines can accomodate additional or longer trains than already run at peak times. infrastructure that encourages people to find other ways to get to work does improve mass transit by controlling the demand for it.
i never ride my bike in the city because the traffic scares the crap out of me. if bike lanes were separated and dependable, i would give you my seat on the rush hour 4, at least when it isn't sleeting. _________________ Bumping ancient threads with bot-like bullshit
meganlibrarian "Anonymous Guest"
Joined: 13 Jan 2006 Posts: 427 Location: in the gutter looking @ the stars
Thu Dec 04, 08 1:59 pm EST
sweet tea wrote:
i never ride my bike in the city because the traffic scares the crap out of me. if bike lanes were separated and dependable, i would give you my seat on the rush hour 4, at least when it isn't sleeting.
And yes, that does help other car and subway riders. Less people driving cars and less people riding the subway=more space for cars to park and subway riders to stand.
Oh, and if you got a ticket for parking in the bike lane, you are in the minority. I see about 30-50 cars a day parked in the bike lane in the 8 mile (16 mi round trip) span I travel. I've been riding almost every day during the week (and many weekend days) since March and I've literally witnessed a cop writing a ticket ONCE. ONCE! That's about 3,120 miles traveled and one lousy ticket for all the hundreds of cars I swerve around as their owners sit and chat on their cell phone or eat a sandwich or jack off or whatever.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Subscribe in a reader
