Papa Tom

Years ago, I was part of a minority that obeyed the traffic lights and other rules. Today, I was the ONLY one.

What happened? The bikeway is chaos now, and it's the cyclists - and nobody BUT the cyclists - who have made it that way.

Lightingguy

No, it's the pedestrians and cars as well, you're just not that used to seeing so MANY cyclists in one place with so many breaking the so-called rules. It's the wild, wild east, no doubt about it.

This article has a pretty good feel for the issues of cycling in NYC:

August 4, 2012
If Kant Were a New York Cyclist By RANDY COHEN
THE rule-breaking cyclist that people decry: that’s me. I routinely run red lights, and so do you. I flout the law when I’m on my bike; you do it when you are on foot, at least if you are like most New Yorkers. My behavior vexes pedestrians, drivers and even some of my fellow cyclists. Similar conduct has stuck cyclists with tickets and court-ordered biking education classes.

But although it is illegal, I believe it is ethical. I’m not so sure about your blithely ambling into the intersection against the light while texting and listening to your iPod and sipping a martini. More or less.

I roll through a red light if and only if no pedestrian is in the crosswalk and no car is in the intersection — that is, if it will not endanger myself or anybody else. To put it another way, I treat red lights and stop signs as if they were yield signs. A fundamental concern of ethics is the effect of our actions on others. My actions harm no one. This moral reasoning may not sway the police officer writing me a ticket, but it would pass the test of Kant’s categorical imperative: I think all cyclists could — and should — ride like me.

I am not anarchic; I heed most traffic laws. I do not ride on the sidewalk (O.K., except for the final 25 feet between the curb cut and my front door, and then with caution). I do not salmon, i.e. ride against traffic. In fact, even my “rolling stops” are legal in some places.

Paul Steely White, the executive director of Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group of which I am a member, points out that many jurisdictions, Idaho for example, allow cyclists to slow down and roll through stop signs after yielding to pedestrians. Mr. White e-mailed me: “I often say that it is much more important to tune into the pedestrians rather than tune into the lights, largely because peds jaywalk so much!”

If my rule-breaking is ethical and safe (and Idaho-legal), why does it annoy anyone? Perhaps it is because we humans are not good at weighing the dangers we face. If we were, we’d realize that bicycles are a tiny threat; it is cars and trucks that menace us. In the last quarter of 2011, bicyclists in New York City killed no pedestrians and injured 26. During the same period, drivers killed 43 pedestrians and injured 3,607.

Cars also harm us insidiously, in slow motion. Auto emissions exacerbate respiratory problems, erode the facades of buildings, abet global warming. To keep the oil flowing, we make dubious foreign policy decisions. Cars promote sprawl and discourage walking, contributing to obesity and other health problems. And then there’s the noise.

Much of this creeping devastation is legal; little of it is ethical, at least where, as in Manhattan, there are real alternatives to the private car. But because we’ve so long let cars dominate city life, we take them, and their baleful effects, for granted. The surge in cycling is a recent phenomenon: we’re alert to its vagaries.

But most of the resentment of rule-breaking riders like me, I suspect, derives from a false analogy: conceiving of bicycles as akin to cars. In this view, bikes must be regulated like cars, and vilified when riders flout those regulations, as if we were cunningly getting away with something. But bikes are not cars. Cars drive three or four times as fast and weigh 200 times as much. Drive dangerously, you’re apt to injure others; ride dangerously, I’m apt to injure myself. I have skin in the game. And blood. And bones.

Nor are cyclists pedestrians, of course (at least not while we’re pedaling). We are a third thing, a distinct mode of transportation, requiring different practices and different rules. This is understood in Amsterdam and Copenhagen, where nearly everyone of every age cycles. These cities treat bikes like bikes. Extensive networks of protected bike lanes provide the infrastructure for safe cycling. Some traffic lights are timed to the speed of bikes rather than cars. Some laws presume that in a bike-car collision, the heavier and more deadly vehicle is at fault. Perhaps as New York City’s bike share program is rolled out, these will become the case here.

Laws work best when they are voluntarily heeded by people who regard them as reasonable. There aren’t enough cops to coerce everyone into obeying every law all the time. If cycling laws were a wise response to actual cycling rather than a clumsy misapplication of motor vehicle laws, I suspect that compliance, even by me, would rise.

I choose my riding style mindful of my own safety and that of my neighbors, but also in pursuit of happiness. Uninterrupted motion, gliding silently and swiftly, is a joy. It’s why I ride. And it’s why Stephen G. Breyer says he rides, sometimes to work at the Supreme Court: “The advantages? Exercise, no parking problems, gas prices, it’s fun. An automobile is expensive. You have to find a place to park and it’s not fun. So why not ride a bicycle? I recommend it.” I don’t know if he runs red lights. I hope so.

Papa Tom

Good article, but today, the only ones behaving like idiots were the cyclists. The drivers - even the taxi cabs - were doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing. The pedestrians were also right where they were supposed to be pedestrianizing.

Sorry to be at odds with you again, Lighting Guy, but it's my opinion that, whether or not other travelers are doing the right thing, we cyclists are responsible for keeping our side of the street clean. In Manhattan, we are a big part of the problem - and not the solution.

Lightingguy

Nope, not at odds at all. There's seemingly an on-going introspective amongst cyclists with a well developed ethical sense, about our "image" in society. Not badly timed either.

This was one comment I read:

"I don't want to be a hood ornament and b. despite what the article writer in the OP sez it reflects badly on all of us. Doing ANYthing illegal just gives the idiots behind steering wheels that much more reason to hate all of us.

I know cause even out in the boonies I feel some of that wrath.

The double standard is amazing: despite cars breaking as many or more rules, bicyclists get maligned much more.

I don't get it, but I feel it every time I go"

It certainly verbalizes the frustration many have and I suspect that in Manhattan many riders have simply either given up on trying to do the right thing and ride responsibly, or never know how to do so in the first place, as all they know is what everyone around them is doing. As well, many folks living outside of NYC simply cannot fathom how crazy the pedestrians are as they do their thing. The Times article touched on that, but I made the comment that the NYPD should forget the crackdowns on cyclists, there aren't enough of us, and simply start writing jaywalking tickets. The city's budget crisis would be over in a flash.

That said, riding in NYC is frustrating. Riding in the boroughs even more so. There is zero possibility of ever getting all the cyclists in Brooklyn to start obeying any sort of common sense laws that could be enacted. Too many people from too many countries that just like the way they drive, they cycle just as badly.

SB

Bacciagalupe

I've NEVER seen anyone obey traffic signals on the West Side Greenway. I'm one of the few that do, and even I will blow through some of those lights.

I also haven't noticed anything different the last bunch of times I've taken the Greenway, including last Friday afternoon and Saturday morning.

FrankieV

Great article.
Right on the money.
Papa Tom - I ride the greenway all the time and I have never seen what you describe.
People walk right across your path.
Taxicabs and tour buses turn right in front of you.
This is just the way it is and will continue to be.
If you expect it, you can deal with it.
Only cyclists breaking the rules. Pleeeeze!

aixaix 

I've been riding on the West Side path off and on for years, and now do so once or twice a week. Things have gotten better, especially when it isn't densely packed.
That said, there are plenty of jerky riders, drivers and pedestrians. Cabs & limos stopping in the pathway, bikers riding three abreast, paying no attention to overtaking cyclists and entering the path without looking, people strolling along oblivious to everything but their phones or their tunes, crossing without looking: I've seen this nearly every time I've been on it this summer.
Despite all this, there seem to be fewer close calls and a generally less angry, confrontational attitude on everybody's part.

Needs

The past couple weekends there have been park police and even NYPD out on the Greenway stopping bikes at red lights and telling riders to remove one headphone. Even then, last weekend, I watched one guy completely ignore the cop who told him to take off his headphones and cut in front of about three guys as he went riding off.

That said, I don't think the red light running on the greenway causes that many problems. People generally seem cautious once they see cars/buses moving (cars turning left off the West Side Highway are the main hazards). The most dangerous infraction I regularly see is people refusing to yield to pedestrians as they try to cross the path at marked walks, or particularly, some bikers yielding and others not.

Papa Tom

My argument has always been that, no matter how ridiculous it may appear for a cyclist to stop and wait at a red light when there isn't a car around for miles, there needs to be some sort of "order" that takes every last bit of guesswork about what we are going to do when when drivers and pedestrians are present.

When we are in our cars, seeing other cars blow through red lights is generally the exception, not the rule. For this reason, we can feel reasonably comfortable proceeding through an intersection when we have a green light. Based on the behavior I've seen with cyclists, I never know WHAT to expect when I am in my car and a cyclist comes into view. Is he/she going to stop at the red light? Will he signal his turn or just cut across the lane when the whim hits? Will she turn as a vehicle, or will she suddenly jump on the sidewalk and try to beat me out by crossing as a pedestrian?

If cyclists would just stick to the prescribed rules - the same rules we so readily cite when someone honks us off the road and calls our bike a toy - there would be a lot less confusion on the drivers' side, which is what I think leads to a lot of close calls and perpetuates drivers' attitudes that we are all lawless cowboys.

nigelsane

Papa Tom, I generally agree with you regarding stopping at red lights. I commute to SoHo from Queens and stop at every red light, EXCEPT on the Greenway. I used to stop and wait out the lights, but I have in fact given up (as someone mentioned further upthread), as it's demoralizing to be the only one waiting at the light as the rest of Manhattan, even the granny I passed on the cruiser two minutes ago, passes me by. On the Greenway, the lights in the midtown section at least serve a purpose, for buses and taxis to reach the water or get back on the West Side Highway, and I'll often stop at those. But there are several lights further downtown, past Chelsea Piers, that serve no function whatsoever, not even for pedestrians to cross, and I'm just not going to wait at those lights anymore.

It's definitely a slippery slope, and I don't feel 100% able to justify why I'm okay bending the rules on the Greenway, but generally wait out the light everywhere else. Maybe it's because the Greenway is generally pretty well designed and separates bikes from pedestrians and cars.

I think we're both equally annoyed by cyclist scofflaws, but it's a little ridiculous to say that cyclists are the only ones breaking the rules on the Greenway. Next time you ride there, count how many joggers you pass on the sections where they have their own space. They're always wearing headphones so they can never hear my bell, and they often run two abreast. I'll never understand why they choose to run next to the highway, closer to the car exhaust and risking collisions with cyclists instead of running where they're supposed to, next to the Hudson, far from the cyclists and the cars.

Once, I politely asked two guys taking up the whole lane to move over, and they told me to mind my f-ing business. I told them the city built this nice path for cyclists and the nice path over there for peds and joggers, and they told me to go f myself. Are cyclists really causing all the problems on the Greenway?

Okay, sorry about the rant on joggers.

nigelsane

Wow I just re-read that and I sound just like a driver complaining about cyclists on the road. I need to relax.

nigelsane

And here's a pretty good rebuttal to Randy Cohen's article:
I think I fall somewhere in between, but probably closer to Salmon than Cohen.

Papa Tom

>>>Are cyclists really causing all the problems on the Greenway?<<<<

The day in question - this past Monday - yes, they were. But I do agree that walkers, skaters, and drivers can be equally rebellious. As the rebuttal above says, though, I believe a lot of that comes from watching cyclists act like we're exempt from the law, which leads others to just say "F- it...if THEY'RE not gonna follow the rules, I'M not gonna, either!" Good rebuttal.

Lightingguy

"When we are in our cars, seeing other cars blow through red lights is generally the exception, not the rule. For this reason, we can feel reasonably comfortable proceeding through an intersection when we have a green light. Based on the behavior I've seen with cyclists, I never know WHAT to expect when I am in my car and a cyclist comes into view. Is he/she going to stop at the red light? Will he signal his turn or just cut across the lane when the whim hits? Will she turn as a vehicle, or will she suddenly jump on the sidewalk and try to beat me out by crossing as a pedestrian?"

This is totally an educational issue in that a concerted effort needs to be made to teach cyclists on how to ride legally and safely. How to make it happen ?, haven't a clue. Pamphlets at bike stores when you buy a bike ?, a class on safe riding techniques ?. Those two might help but how do you reach the thousands of folks that don't buy a bike at a bike store and commute because they have too ?. Police enforcement with a "soft hand" - I.E. non-confrontational, just educational ?. Maybe, but that eats up a lot of time for the officers and many of them are not so inclined to be patient or helpful. All of the above plus lot's of publicity is going to be required to assimilate cycling into the general transportation scheme. And in this country, it's a tall order to attempt to overcome the prejudices of all those pickup driving rednecks out in the countryside, or worse the soccer mom in the SUV.

"If cyclists would just stick to the prescribed rules - the same rules we so readily cite when someone honks us off the road and calls our bike a toy - there would be a lot less confusion on the drivers' side, which is what I think leads to a lot of close calls and perpetuates drivers' attitudes that we are all lawless cowboys.:"

I think motorists are going to dislike cyclists no matter what, as they see us as attempting to share the already crowded infrastructure. Here's a scenario:

I'm stopped at a light, one lane going straight, one a left turn. Same thing for on-coming traffic. I do "the right thing" and do not lane split but instead hang back behind, say behind the 5th car stopped. There are cars behind me and it's rush hour. The lane has no shoulder due to the loss of space from the inclusion of a left turn lane. Light goes green, all 5 cars proceed, typically one or two will turn right, with one typically not using a turn signal. I proceed and have to take the lane to get thru the intersection and continue to take the lane to clear the intersection until maybe 50-100 ft beyond the intersection where the shoulder re-appears.

Option 2. I lane split and proceed to the very front of the line of stopped cars. I position myself so the first car cannot make a right turn against me. Let's assume a No Turn On Red. It's 50/50 that the car is turning and is too lazy to use a turn signal, so I'm being proactive and avoiding an accident. And quite frankly, if there's a No Turn On Red sign I'm blocking the first car anyway and on purpose. I observe at some point that there is zero cross traffic in view so I hop the light. I quickly get across the intersection and onto the road with a shoulder. I avoid any confrontation with motorists behind me as I delay them for those precious 2-3 seconds as I claimed the lane.

They hate me for being on the road in the first place and taking the lane, delaying them in their commute to work.

OR:

They hate me for running a red light. Even though doing so avoided any delay and anger at my presence in the first place.

In this event, the road design is clearly not setup to allow safe cycling. There's no lane/shoulder for a cyclist, so I'm already fighting the infrastructure before I have to deal with the motorists. That's bad and had the road been better designed, the confrontations would not occur.

So big time money needing to get laid out to change our road system to accomodate cyclists.

Then there's the pedestrian problem.......

zacster

I've been taking the approach that you always stop at a red light, but I WILL proceed if there is no car or pedestrian coming in any direction on the one way streets. On any major street or avenue I just stop and wait. But here's the thing, in my uncrowded neighborhood in Brooklyn, I find myself just waiting, just to show that cyclists can obey the law.

When I was in Seattle a few years back with my bike, I always just waited. But everyone else did as well. Even the pedestrians wait, except I didn't when I was walking. It just seems silly when there is no traffic at all. That's just the NY'er in me.

And here's a decision I make frequently enough in NY, if I go through a red light, I'm getting myself out of the traffic that is built behind me. It is much safer than waiting in some cases.

Papa Tom

Glad to see so many of you have opinions on this and that we can have a civilized discussion.

Anyway, since my last ride, it seems the section of the path up in the 90's (where bikes were detoured into the gardens) is now complete. I was a little disappointed to see that bikes are apparently no longer allowed on the Battery Park Promenade, as this was my favorite part of the ride.

Also, the path is, once again, in shambles adjacent to the future One World Trade Center. A detour takes you through streets and little pieces of the promenade to get all the way downtown. I'm not sure I ever remember a time when the whole path was open from end-to-end.

This used to be near the top of my list of weekend rides. I suppose it's still a great way to commute and run errands around the city, but I don't think I'll be taking out-of-town guests here to see the city anymore. It's just too dangerous.

Stacy

I think one of the problems is a fair portion of people riding on the Greenway have never had a driver's license or any form of Driver's Ed. They ride like pedestrians and don't have a clue about riding on the right, passing on the left, stopping for lights, or even turning on lights after dark. Some don't even seem to be aware it's a two way bike path.

Another portion are probably licensed drivers who think they can ignore traffic laws while riding.. and for the most part, they can.

The rest of us stop for red lights on the Greenway when there's traffic or a large crowd, but run the empty crossings where there's rarely any traffic. Even if there is some kind of enforcement present they'll often waive you through.

Lightingguy

So basically, NYC is NEVER going to be Amsterdam !

aixaix 

I've never been to Amsterdam so I have no idea how law-abiding drivers/peds/bikers are over there. Do riders generally stop for red lights? Are pedestrians more conscious of riders on shared paths and bike lanes? Is it safer per capita than NYC for riders and walkers?

Stacy

No NYC will never be Amsterdam. For better or worse, it will always be NYC.

Papa Tom

Wwwwwait a second...New York WAS Amsterdam. In fact, it was NEW Amsterdam, which makes it even BETTER than Amsterdam!

zacster

I've been to Copenhagen and everyone is aware of the cyclists as they are everywhere and everybody. The re isn't an us against them mentality at all. Every cab driver said "watch for cyclists before opening the door and stepping out.". Young old big small, everybody rides. They wait for the lights, ride at a moderate pace, lock their bikes to every pole available, and are not part of traffic, they ARE the traffic.

This issue with the lights would go away if there were so many bikes on the cross traffic that we'd be crashing into each other.

Steve B.

And totally off topic, in your neck of the woods, specifically on Mannetto Hill Rd., this MHR being the one that runs between Washington Ave. and Round Swamp and is immediately north of the Northern Parkway, just east of the Washington Ave. intersection, is a sign on the south side of the road (against the fence that is the property edge of the parkway right-of-way) that states "International Boundary". Suffolk County erected this sign and it states that this was the boundary of "New Amsterdam" and New England", being Dutch or British territory in the late 1600's. It is now of course,merely the Nassau/Suffolk border.

Papa Tom

The British and the Dutch squabbled over territorial rights on Long Island for many, many years, then eventually settled down and learned that living and working together was a much easier, less deadly solution. So why can't cyclists and drivers in Manhattan share the road?

Lightingguy

Humble pie being eaten and an apology to Papa Tom for poo-pooing somewhat his complaints about cyclists in NYC

There are a lot of total moron's riding bikes in NYC and I think I've encountered about half of them in the last month.

I've been working 9-5, M-F (not my usual schedule) the past month at my job in the heart of Brooklyn, so have been commuting the 26-28 miles, one way, as much as possible from S Shore of LI. Typically will ride home in the afternoon, leaving car and extra cloths at work, bike back in the morning. Doing this twice per week for 3 weeks, plus once the first week. so 7 total RT's.

My route takes me down parallel to Flatbush and then on the so called bike path on Flatbush Ave. between Ave. V and past the Belt. Then I simply ride the white stripped breakdown lane to the Marine Parkway Bridge and onto the Rockaways, then east.

As a result of it being summer, there are a LOT of folks riding home from the beach at the same time I'm heading south TO the beach. The vast majority riding the stretch south of the Parkway, choose to skip having to cross over Flatbush to the east side to make use of the "new" bike path alongside Floyd Bennett. I don't do this either as at rush hour it's a Royal PITA to wait for the lights. The cops can give me a ticket for not making use of the bike path, never seen this happen. The wait for the lights to cross Flatbush and back is something like 5 or more minutes typically. So everyone coming up from the beach is on the west side of Flatbush, where the option is 1) The old bike path that is now a broken concrete sidewalk, with ton's of debris, glass or shrubbery that has been left to overgrow the path. Or 2) ride the wrong way - north, in the southbound breakdown lane. Not too big a deal unless there are a lot of riders, which can then make it dangerous as the car lane is cars doing 50-60 in a 30, so chaos can result in the breakdown lane. The problem is generally that the City should have simply renovated the bike lane on the west side of Flatbush, skipping the dumb thing next to Floyd Bennett. Yes I can alleviate the problem by taking the new path.

Then I get to the Rockaways. Once east of Jacob Riis Park, you're on Rockaway Beach Blvd., which had a car lane converted a few years back to a bike lane, one in each direction, east and west. Nice lane's actually, pretty painted symbols of a cyclist that indicates which direction you should ride. Trouble is the "Rockaway Wrong-Ways" as I have dubbed them. Folks on beach cruisers, usually 50-70 year old men, cigarettes dangling out of mouth, that pay no attention to the new bike lane and didn't pay attention, or care that they ride against traffic and have been doing so for decades, I assume. They frequently come out of a one-way street, sometimes the wrong way and simply turn into you without looking. 3 encounter/near misses in 2 weeks and I mean really close - ****-in-my-shorts near misses. I'm not talking about the riders that I can see heading towards me from 1/2 a mile, but the sudden "where the F _ _ K did HE come from", near misses. And I'm READY for them and they still catch me by surprise. Then the kids also riding home from the beach, also riding the wrong way, though they actually are trained to pay attention and then head for the sidewalks when they see me.

Total friggin chaos and I can state that I've had many fewer negative encounters with cars then with cyclists, but it all hopefully goes away in September when it starts to get cold again and the kids are back in school.

But there are simply an amazing amount of cyclists in NYC that do not have a clue.

Rant over