MY BOOK
ARTICLES
Peak Freaks
Hurricane NYC
From Grief to Action (pdf)
The Coming Energy Crunch
Auto Asphyxiation
Alarmingly Useless
LINKS
Kunstler
Oil Drum NYC
NoLandGrab.org
Starts & Fits
Dope on the Slope
Brooklyn Views
Polis
Atlantic Yards Report
Transportation Alternatives
Rushkoff
Planetizen
Global Public Media
Laid Off Dad
Bird to the North
Auto-Free NY
Gothamist
Gotham Gazette
Mom
Previous Life
Winds
READING
Catastrophe Notes
Small Urban Spaces
High Tide
Powerdown
Rendezvous With Rama
Ancient Sunlight
Geography of Nowhere
The Power Broker
Resource Wars
Invisible Heroes
Nothing Sacred
ARCHIVES
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
January 2010
ARTICLES
Peak Freaks
Hurricane NYC
From Grief to Action (pdf)
The Coming Energy Crunch
Auto Asphyxiation
Alarmingly Useless
LINKS
Kunstler
Oil Drum NYC
NoLandGrab.org
Starts & Fits
Dope on the Slope
Brooklyn Views
Polis
Atlantic Yards Report
Transportation Alternatives
Rushkoff
Planetizen
Global Public Media
Laid Off Dad
Bird to the North
Auto-Free NY
Gothamist
Gotham Gazette
Mom
Previous Life
Winds
READING
Catastrophe Notes
Small Urban Spaces
High Tide
Powerdown
Rendezvous With Rama
Ancient Sunlight
Geography of Nowhere
The Power Broker
Resource Wars
Invisible Heroes
Nothing Sacred
ARCHIVES
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
January 2010
» Thursday, June 16, 2005
|
Biking the Eco-Metropolis
The bike wreck on Fifth Avenue and Warren Street in Park Slope last Thursday was as bad as it gets. Elizabeth Padilla, a 28-year-old non-profit lawyer, was killed just six blocks from her apartment. She was cruising down Fifth Avenue at about 9 a.m. when the driver of a P.C. Richard delivery truck, Ioseb Peikrishvili, swung open his door directly in her path. She swerved out of the way just as a big, 10-wheeled ice cream delivery truck was passing, leaving her no room to maneuver. With her shoes clipped in to her pedals, she was unable to get her feet on the ground.
George Zampetis, a witness I spoke with, said Padilla was "squeezed, pinched, and rattled around" between the two trucks before she fell to her left. The rear wheels of the ice cream truck crushed her skull and she died instantly. The driver, Jose Cruz, had "no idea" he had run someone over. "He was absolutely shocked," Zampetis said.
By the time I came on the scene, one of Padilla's feet was sticking out from under a blue tarp. Crowds were gathering around the yellow police tape and detectives were going about their investigation. Some of the witnesses who saw the grisly aftermath seemed pretty traumatized. I found the whole thing chilling. I bike down Fifth Avenue all the time. In fact, only two weeks prior, two blocks away, I had crashed into the curb after being cut off by a careless cabbie. The body lying for way too long in the middle of the street under a plastic tarp could easily have been me or any one of a number of friends.
Padilla was the third New York City cyclists to die in just the last six weeks. On April 26, 59-year-old banking administrator Jerome Allen was run over from behind by a hit-and-run SUV driver while biking on Hylan Boulevard in Staten Island. And on May 10, Brandie Bailey, a 21-year-old waitress, was struck by a private sanitation truck on Avenue A in the East Village. All in all, nine cyclists have been killed on the streets of New York this year, and 198 since 1995. Don't quit biking just yet. There are more cyclists on the streets than there ever have been and deaths and injuries per cyclist are trending down the last 10 years.
Nevertheless, it still very much feels like the city and the police don't seem to care a whole lot when cyclists get killed. The cops essentially blamed the crash on Padilla, claiming that she "cut in between" the two trucks. The police didn't even give the careless slob in the P.C. Richard truck a summons for illegally opening his door into the path of a cyclist. After the crash, the driver of the ice cream truck was sitting on the curb talking on his cell phone. Did the cops check his phone records to see if he was on a call at the time Padilla was run over? They won't answer that question, but you can bet not. Cyclist and pedestrian deaths in New York City aren't investigated like that. They're chalked up as "accidents" and the cost of doing business in NYC.
Not that a $100 summons to a traumatized appliance delivery guy is going to bring back a dead woman who, by all accounts, was a lovely woman and a genuine asset to her community. Nor will a $100 summons fund the construction of buffered, protected bike lanes for New Yorkers who wish to get around by the cleanest, cheapest, most efficient form of urban transportation there is. An alliance of local bike advocacy groups is calling on Mayor Bloomberg to convene a task force. Among other things they want a rigorous analysis of all cyclist fatalities over the last 10 years, more and better bike facilities, safer street design standards, and a public education campaign to make motorists more aware of cyclists..
This is all good and necessary and the right thing to do. Yet, it still feels like not enough. Cyclists can yell at City Hall all they want. Today, there doesn't appear to be a single elected official working in that building who is going to step up and start forcing the city to make the changes that need to be made. Conditions aren't going to get significantly better for New York City cyclists until the Mayor of New York City says that they need to get better. And cyclists are just too small of a minority in New York City to force a mayor to do that. What we need to do is begin to fold cycling priorities into a larger Eco-Metropolis initiative. Then we need a candidate to run for mayor on an Eco-Metropolis platform.
Let's start fleshing that out. What would the Eco-Metropolis look like? How would it work? Let me know your thoughts.
10:17 PM | Link |
Comments
Post a Comment (You'll be taken to Blogger's site and then returned back to this page.)
R.I.P. Kirsten Malone. She was a few years ahead of me in high school, and we looked up to her as a member of the avant garde.
You are right on, Aaron. I have had my own near misses in the last few weeks, some with a kid in a bikeseat on back, others when alone. This problem entails police who drive in bike lanes; or police who sit idly while drivers occupy the precious few lanes there are for bikes (check out Plaza Street sometime--it's ridiculous.)
You are right to call on the Mayor. He needs to get himself on a bike once a week and ride around the city--and thousands should join him--in taking a stand.
That a human life is the "cost of doing business"should cause us to scream, take action, or put away our bikes and quit. That last one is not an option. I'll do what I can to get the campaign for the Mayor to ride weekly (forget his goofy subway rides).
You are right to call on the Mayor. He needs to get himself on a bike once a week and ride around the city--and thousands should join him--in taking a stand.
That a human life is the "cost of doing business"should cause us to scream, take action, or put away our bikes and quit. That last one is not an option. I'll do what I can to get the campaign for the Mayor to ride weekly (forget his goofy subway rides).
Andy,
Is there such a campaign underway or are you inventing it? That's a great idea. Unfortunately, I don't see the mayor getting on a bike in during the election season in the current political climate. In an election year it seems as though NYC politicians play even more to the needs and desires of the outer borough motorist voter. The only elected who seems to be saying the right things on these issues at the moment is Public Advocate candidate Norman Siegel.
--A
Is there such a campaign underway or are you inventing it? That's a great idea. Unfortunately, I don't see the mayor getting on a bike in during the election season in the current political climate. In an election year it seems as though NYC politicians play even more to the needs and desires of the outer borough motorist voter. The only elected who seems to be saying the right things on these issues at the moment is Public Advocate candidate Norman Siegel.
--A
Obviously New York City has to do more to protect its bicyclists, but I'm not sure separate bike lanes do much good. In general, they make bikes feel more comfortable in the middle of the block, where they're relatively safe, but they are useless at corners, where most crashes happen.
In this particular case, if there had been a bike lane on Fifth Street, the Appliance truck probably would have pulled over and blocked the lane -- presumably, he had a delivery to make -- and Padilla would have had to pull into a traffic lane to pass him, right into the path of the ice cream truck.
I think it's a good idea to ask deeper, more systemic questions -- what would an Eco-Metropolis look like -- because adding painted lines to streets, without changing a lot of other things, won't do much to make bicyclists safer in New York.
In this particular case, if there had been a bike lane on Fifth Street, the Appliance truck probably would have pulled over and blocked the lane -- presumably, he had a delivery to make -- and Padilla would have had to pull into a traffic lane to pass him, right into the path of the ice cream truck.
I think it's a good idea to ask deeper, more systemic questions -- what would an Eco-Metropolis look like -- because adding painted lines to streets, without changing a lot of other things, won't do much to make bicyclists safer in New York.
Well, the truck couldn't have blocked a buffered bike lane. Buffered lanes put the bikes between the sidewalk and the parked cars. They are unblockable. But, yeah, the downside of buffered lanes (in places where cars are parked) is that they can be dangerous at corners where motorists may turn in to cyclists that they can't see behind the parked cars. In Europe, these buffered lanes tend to work well, in part, because the cars there are so much smaller. Cyclists are the tallest vehicles on the road. Here in NYC the view of cyclists might be blocked by tinted-window, SUV's. And motorists are idiotically agressive here as well. They don't care.
All that being said, there are definitely engineering solutions to all of these problems. As soon as we make cycling a priority in the urban environment, these problems are all completely solvable and, in fact, have been solved in cities around the world.
All that being said, there are definitely engineering solutions to all of these problems. As soon as we make cycling a priority in the urban environment, these problems are all completely solvable and, in fact, have been solved in cities around the world.
Do they really have bike lanes in Europe between the sidewalk and parked cars? I'd like to see examples; it seems counterintuitive to me.
Buffering a bike line in this way would protect bikes from cars (in the middle of the block, at least), and that's a good thing of course. But there would be a lot of unpleasant interaction between bikers and pedestrians getting in and out of cars. If space was tight, bikers might also have the novel experience of getting doored on the passenger side.
Things would be even worse at corners. Bikes are tall and visible over parked cars, but drivers won't pay attention to them, because bikes on the other side of a row of parked cars aren't really on the street -- until they get to the corner, and suddenly intrude on the driver's consciousness.
If you ride a bike down one of these paths, the only safe way to go is very slowly, with a full stop at every intersection. Even if you technically have the right of way on this path, it can be dangerous to try to assert it. So the path would work well for little kids who are learning to ride, and elderly people trying to get a little exercise, but not for serious, confident riders who are trying to get somewhere.
I'm not an expert on these things, and I my instincts on this subject might well be wrong. If you can show me examples of successful paths with this design on busy city streets, I'd be interested. But I don't think this kind of bike lane would help very much.
Buffering a bike line in this way would protect bikes from cars (in the middle of the block, at least), and that's a good thing of course. But there would be a lot of unpleasant interaction between bikers and pedestrians getting in and out of cars. If space was tight, bikers might also have the novel experience of getting doored on the passenger side.
Things would be even worse at corners. Bikes are tall and visible over parked cars, but drivers won't pay attention to them, because bikes on the other side of a row of parked cars aren't really on the street -- until they get to the corner, and suddenly intrude on the driver's consciousness.
If you ride a bike down one of these paths, the only safe way to go is very slowly, with a full stop at every intersection. Even if you technically have the right of way on this path, it can be dangerous to try to assert it. So the path would work well for little kids who are learning to ride, and elderly people trying to get a little exercise, but not for serious, confident riders who are trying to get somewhere.
I'm not an expert on these things, and I my instincts on this subject might well be wrong. If you can show me examples of successful paths with this design on busy city streets, I'd be interested. But I don't think this kind of bike lane would help very much.
Mitch,
You can actually see a photo of one of these kinds of buffered bike lanes right here:
http://www.naparstek.com/Bike%20lane%20bollards.jpg
Or up in the "Shouts" box on the left-hand side of this page.
When a city simply cares to prioritize bicycle infrastructure, there are all kinds of ways to make bike lanes work well and safely.
You can actually see a photo of one of these kinds of buffered bike lanes right here:
http://www.naparstek.com/Bike%20lane%20bollards.jpg
Or up in the "Shouts" box on the left-hand side of this page.
When a city simply cares to prioritize bicycle infrastructure, there are all kinds of ways to make bike lanes work well and safely.
Aaron --
That's a nice picture (is it Berlin? I'd like to go there someday) but it doesn't really answer my concerns.
The picture shows a nice quiet time of day, without much traffic anywhere, and the only pedestrians are a couple walking a bicycle. What happens at rush hour, when people need to cross the bike path to get to or from their cars or to cross the street. Do pedestrians look for bikes before they cross the path? How fast can bikes go without risking collisions?
The picture also doesn't show what happens at that cross street, off in the distance. Do bikes have to stop and check for cross-traffic and turning cars? What happens if they don't? (Of course, in Germany, you can generally assume that everybody will obey traffic laws. You probably can't transfer that assumption to Brooklyn...)
Basically, the picture shows a bicyclist riding on the sidewalk. There are situations where the sidewalk is the best place to be, but usually it is worse than than the street. Where I live (Madison, Wisconsin) bicycle fatalities are pretty rare, but a few weeks ago a biker riding on the sidewalk rode into the side of a FedEx truck, landed on her head, and died. The FedEx driver didn't see her because he was checking for traffic on the cross street. So he turned right into her path.
That's the kind of accident you get when bikes ride on sidewalks, and I don't think the path in the picture would be much different.
If there engineering solutions to the problems I see, I'd like to hear about them, but in general I think adult bikers in cities belong on the street, and the challenge (which involves engineering, education and enforcement) is to make the streets safe for them.
That's a nice picture (is it Berlin? I'd like to go there someday) but it doesn't really answer my concerns.
The picture shows a nice quiet time of day, without much traffic anywhere, and the only pedestrians are a couple walking a bicycle. What happens at rush hour, when people need to cross the bike path to get to or from their cars or to cross the street. Do pedestrians look for bikes before they cross the path? How fast can bikes go without risking collisions?
The picture also doesn't show what happens at that cross street, off in the distance. Do bikes have to stop and check for cross-traffic and turning cars? What happens if they don't? (Of course, in Germany, you can generally assume that everybody will obey traffic laws. You probably can't transfer that assumption to Brooklyn...)
Basically, the picture shows a bicyclist riding on the sidewalk. There are situations where the sidewalk is the best place to be, but usually it is worse than than the street. Where I live (Madison, Wisconsin) bicycle fatalities are pretty rare, but a few weeks ago a biker riding on the sidewalk rode into the side of a FedEx truck, landed on her head, and died. The FedEx driver didn't see her because he was checking for traffic on the cross street. So he turned right into her path.
That's the kind of accident you get when bikes ride on sidewalks, and I don't think the path in the picture would be much different.
If there engineering solutions to the problems I see, I'd like to hear about them, but in general I think adult bikers in cities belong on the street, and the challenge (which involves engineering, education and enforcement) is to make the streets safe for them.
Mitch,
I've got a ton of photos of European bike infrastructure such as the one above, though, my collection is not at all comprehensive. I've been meaning to post them online for some time now so maybe I'll get to that.
Regarding some of your points: Yeah, there's less traffic in Berlin than NYC, in general. But many of the photos I took were snapped when there weren't very many people or cars in the way so that you could see the infrastructure clearly. So, who knows. And, yes, Germans sure do obey traffic laws better than New Yorkers do.
The cyclist is not riding on the sidewalk. He's riding in a bike lane. If you stopped and asked him, or the two people walking in the sidewalk, that's what they'd tell you. And if you rode your bike on the sidewalk or parked your car in the bike lane you'd get dirty looks. So, no he is not on the sidewalk.
But, yes, sometimes the bike lane is more a part of the sidewalk. Other times, it's more a part of the street. Does this cyclist have to stop or look both ways before crossing the street? Yes. And he has to be extra careful of turning cars, though, like I said, there aren't really any tinted window SUV's in Berlin. So, the cyclist tends to be the tallest vehicle on the street. He's much more easily seen than he would be on the same bike lane in the US. I don't think anyone in a crowded urban environment should have the expectation that they'll just be able to move at high speed, continuously, without stopping or making way for others, no matter what their mode of transit. So, can a cyclist in Berlin go ripping down this bike lane really fast without worrying about it? No, probably not.
It sounds like you are advocating that cyclists share the road with cars. Here in NYC that works well in many places and at various times of day. But in many other places and times, it really doesn't work well at all. Significant numbers of NYers won't even get on a bike because they fear having to share the road with cars.
I don't think it makes sense to be fundamentalist about any one approach. Northern European cities have already put in place lots of really good solutions for urban cycling infrastructure and design that we could use in NYC. In some spots you share the road. In other spots you need your own infrastructure. They've really thought about it a whole lot more than American cities and have a lot of great stuff in place. In fact, there are some Dutch towns that are now getting rid of all infrastructure and boundaries and just having bikes, cars, peds, and mass transit all share space unmediated, governed only be eye contact. Google "woonerf."
I'll try to get some stuff online soon.
I've got a ton of photos of European bike infrastructure such as the one above, though, my collection is not at all comprehensive. I've been meaning to post them online for some time now so maybe I'll get to that.
Regarding some of your points: Yeah, there's less traffic in Berlin than NYC, in general. But many of the photos I took were snapped when there weren't very many people or cars in the way so that you could see the infrastructure clearly. So, who knows. And, yes, Germans sure do obey traffic laws better than New Yorkers do.
The cyclist is not riding on the sidewalk. He's riding in a bike lane. If you stopped and asked him, or the two people walking in the sidewalk, that's what they'd tell you. And if you rode your bike on the sidewalk or parked your car in the bike lane you'd get dirty looks. So, no he is not on the sidewalk.
But, yes, sometimes the bike lane is more a part of the sidewalk. Other times, it's more a part of the street. Does this cyclist have to stop or look both ways before crossing the street? Yes. And he has to be extra careful of turning cars, though, like I said, there aren't really any tinted window SUV's in Berlin. So, the cyclist tends to be the tallest vehicle on the street. He's much more easily seen than he would be on the same bike lane in the US. I don't think anyone in a crowded urban environment should have the expectation that they'll just be able to move at high speed, continuously, without stopping or making way for others, no matter what their mode of transit. So, can a cyclist in Berlin go ripping down this bike lane really fast without worrying about it? No, probably not.
It sounds like you are advocating that cyclists share the road with cars. Here in NYC that works well in many places and at various times of day. But in many other places and times, it really doesn't work well at all. Significant numbers of NYers won't even get on a bike because they fear having to share the road with cars.
I don't think it makes sense to be fundamentalist about any one approach. Northern European cities have already put in place lots of really good solutions for urban cycling infrastructure and design that we could use in NYC. In some spots you share the road. In other spots you need your own infrastructure. They've really thought about it a whole lot more than American cities and have a lot of great stuff in place. In fact, there are some Dutch towns that are now getting rid of all infrastructure and boundaries and just having bikes, cars, peds, and mass transit all share space unmediated, governed only be eye contact. Google "woonerf."
I'll try to get some stuff online soon.
If I gave the impression that I am one of those Foresterite fundamentalists who are ideologically opposed to bike paths, then I gave the wrong impression. I think well-designed bike paths are wonderful, and I use them all the time. About half of the route I take to work every morning is on an off-street path that is safe, pleasant. If you could build something similar along Fifth Avenue, I'd say "go for it."
But it doesn't look like you can. The paths I use follow lakeshores or railroad grades, so street crossings are infrequent (I guess they're like the greenways in New York). A buffered bike lane down Fifth Avenue would cross a street every 200 feet or so. It would protect bikers in the middle of the block, where they are relatively safe, even on the street, but at every intersection they would be in more danger than if they were riding down the street.
These crossings are dangerous for bikers because the bikes suddenly appear on the street, surprising right- and left-turning motorists who are not expecting them. Of course the drivers shouldn't be surprised; as you pointed out, bikes are tall and very visible. But motorist don't look for bikes, so they don't see them. If cars run over bikes because they're not looking, that's their fault, of course, but guess who suffers?
To make things worse, bikers behavior at these crossings is often less than perfect. It's true, as you say, that bikers can't expect to move continuously at high speed down a city street. Most bikers accept that they have to stay alert, and be prepared to stop as circumstances require.
But most bikers are not willing to come to a full stop every 200 feet. If you build a path that requires these stops, riders will not cooperate. The more confident riders will simply avoid the path and take their chances on the street. The others, who are afraid to ride on the street, will make the required stops at first; but eventually they will get impatient and start rolling into the street. That's when people get hurt on bicycle sidepaths.
Maybe it's different in Germany, but I'm not sure about that. There are a lot of statistics from northern Europe showing that sidepaths are more dangerous for bicycles than streets are.
About the "woonerf:" I've read about them (I think there was an article in the New York Times a while ago), and I think they're an interesting idea. I would like to see a woonerf in this country, but I wonder if something like that is possible. It may be the sort of arrangement -- like subways without turnstiles -- that doesn't work unless a society has a consensus on how to interact.
But it doesn't look like you can. The paths I use follow lakeshores or railroad grades, so street crossings are infrequent (I guess they're like the greenways in New York). A buffered bike lane down Fifth Avenue would cross a street every 200 feet or so. It would protect bikers in the middle of the block, where they are relatively safe, even on the street, but at every intersection they would be in more danger than if they were riding down the street.
These crossings are dangerous for bikers because the bikes suddenly appear on the street, surprising right- and left-turning motorists who are not expecting them. Of course the drivers shouldn't be surprised; as you pointed out, bikes are tall and very visible. But motorist don't look for bikes, so they don't see them. If cars run over bikes because they're not looking, that's their fault, of course, but guess who suffers?
To make things worse, bikers behavior at these crossings is often less than perfect. It's true, as you say, that bikers can't expect to move continuously at high speed down a city street. Most bikers accept that they have to stay alert, and be prepared to stop as circumstances require.
But most bikers are not willing to come to a full stop every 200 feet. If you build a path that requires these stops, riders will not cooperate. The more confident riders will simply avoid the path and take their chances on the street. The others, who are afraid to ride on the street, will make the required stops at first; but eventually they will get impatient and start rolling into the street. That's when people get hurt on bicycle sidepaths.
Maybe it's different in Germany, but I'm not sure about that. There are a lot of statistics from northern Europe showing that sidepaths are more dangerous for bicycles than streets are.
About the "woonerf:" I've read about them (I think there was an article in the New York Times a while ago), and I think they're an interesting idea. I would like to see a woonerf in this country, but I wonder if something like that is possible. It may be the sort of arrangement -- like subways without turnstiles -- that doesn't work unless a society has a consensus on how to interact.
Post a Comment (You'll be taken to Blogger's site and then returned back to this page.)