The New York Times ran an interesting OpEd piece over the weekend calling for a ban of bikes on the footpath of the Brooklyn Bridge. One with which all cyclists should thoroughly agree. With is proposal to ban cyclists on the footpath but to create dedicated bike lanes on the Brooklyn Bridge roadway, Robert Sullivan hits the nail on the head. Trading shared pedestrian space for roadway is a deal we should always be made.
The problem with the turf war between cyclists, pedestrians, runners, et. al. (described in this New York magazine article using Central Park as a microcosm) has always seemed misdirected. The focus of these groups, each with their own hard-core, self-focused views on the topic, should be at who to carve up the limited space available to them, it should be on how to create more space. The issue shouldn’t be with the other groups, it should be with the zillions of cars that plague the city.
With European Union mandates as a driving force, most major cities across the EU have some sort of traffic limiting plan in place. Some are permanent, such as London charging a fee to drivers entering the center of the city, while others are periodic. Every month or so, cars are banned in Rome and the historic center is declared an isola pedonale(pedestrian island). If you have any idea how deep the Roman love of their cars runs, you can appreciate the accomplishment of the isola pedonale. The point is there are ways to make it work and their on display in large metropolises all over the world.
Navigating The Brooklyn Bridge
What to do about New York? In addition to reviving Mayor Bloomberg’s apparently now forgotten congestion pricing plan, why not ban cars on a few main arteries around the city. Why not open one avenue somewhere in the middle along with five or six east-west streets for pedestrian traffic (which would include cyclists)? As Sullivan suggests on the Brooklyn Bridge, there would have to be dedicated bike lanes created as well, otherwise, we’re back to the current poorly-focused turf war. But, coupled with the eastside and westside bike lanes, you’d have three north-south routes and six or so east-west routes. Some cross-streets, perhaps the major ones, i.e., 14th, 23rd) would have to remain open to traffic. In exchange, the city could get rid of the ill conceived bike lanes on 8th Avenue and 9th Avenue, along with the slightly better one on Broadway (slightly better at least until the stupidity that reigns supreme with the Times Square debacle). The city already has its pilot run with the closing of Park Avenue during the summer. Why not make it permanent?
Not following much in the way of the whole debate, I can’t imagine that anything here is original. I much preferred it when there were no “sophisticated” bike lanes wreaking havoc for both cars and cyclists alike. It was easier to get around the city and much, much safer. Whatever the solution is, the real issue is that we’re all missing the issue in the first place. The focus of all non-driving groups should be creating more dedicated non-driving area and not on beating each other up over the limited space there is today.
That’s today’s view from the back.
Share This Post: add to del.icio.us | Digg it | Stumble It! | Add to Facebook
