Bike Accident in Prospect Park on Saturday
Comments
-
Something just occurred to me, and maybe it's been said already.
The inside of the park is off-limits to bikes, roller blades, and even most runners don't run in there. So if you are walking or just strolling or enjoying the park, stay IN the park unless you are leaving. Then use the same caution you (should) use when crossing a street.
Maybe Peds could agree to ONLY cross at the (numerous) crosswalks, and bikers could be forced to stop or at least slow at those when peds are present. I know some do this already, but many don't.
Walkers and people ambling along could stay IN the park, and everyone could stay out of the fast lane, unless they are moving quickly on a bike, or a cop car that won't stop at the red lights ;-)
Just seems to me that everyone needs to compromise, but I know no one will, so we can keep discussing the idea scenarios, but nothing will happen.
-
^^^ this is all very sensible and it's all been previously pointed out (by me). Predictably, it has all been steadfastly ignored. While others argue that speed at impact is the problem, I maintain that impact is the problem.
-
When I was last in Germany, I was truly amazed at how they have managed to highway system in which people can go as fast as they desire in the outside lanes. As you are aware, it is one of the few places in the world that has been able to accomplish this.
The system works because everyone knows the laws and there are strict penalties for violating them. Driving is truly a privilege there, and many of the laws are written in a way that the police officer has substantial discretion. For example, when there are speed limits, they are prefaced with "as conditions warrant".
Whyfi and KosherDave-
You seem to be suggesting that we create a similar, excellent system on the park loop.So, yes, let's fantasize.
Would you be ok with a system in which the speed limit was enforced not only by posted limits (i.e. 25 MPH), but also supplemented by police officer discretion re: speed relative to crowding? I would be.
Perhaps such enforcement and discretion would lead to stricter norms throughout the park re: issues like BBQing everywhere, dogs off leash during on leash hours, sex in the Veil of Cashmere, etc.
However, I do not know how we could get to such a "new set of norms" in light of the fact that most people want to enjoy the park in a casual, carefree manner.
Clearly, it seems most park goers do not want to adhere to strict rules when they are at the park, and the Park Service seems to respond by allowing quite a range of behaviors.
If you were to poll the average park user, I suspect that very few of them want to have to watch out for a speeding bicyclist, or a group of speeding bicyclists. Yes, the average park goer just wants to amble about.
As you are likely to point out, "we all have to do things we don't have to do".
But here's where the problem in that logic comes in: They are the majority, and we are a country that likes to let the majority rule on many issues.
In light of their majority status, those in favor of some bikers being able to travel much faster than the other park users (strollers, joggers, pedestrians, dogs, casual bikers, etc) must make a strong argument as to why their preferences about how the park drives are used should be over ridden.
As you correctly point out, only a very small minority of bikers go really fast.
BTW, you are not alone. I suspect everyone reading this would like to be the only people who used the park.
-
whynot_31 said:
You seem to be suggesting that we create such a system in Brooklyn, with regard to the park loop.No, I'm suggesting that the groundwork for such a system is already in place if not for the frequent obliviousness of park goers. And again, let's not pretend that I'm in favor of a free for all - I, like the vast majority of cyclists, think that all-out efforts have no place in the park, other than race day.
whynot_31 said:Would you be ok with a system
Does it matter?
whynot_31 said:...in which the speed limit was enforced not only by posted limits (i.e. 25 MPH), but also supplemented by police officer discretion re: speed relative to crowding.
No, not if this means that spillover happens in the cycling lanes when the rest of the park is available for pedestrian spillover. Also, it's worth noting that the bike lanes account for about 1.4% of the total space of the park. Spillover elsewhere.
whynot_31 said:While I am certainly ok with a plan in which we gradually move toward having strict norms in the park, I do not know how we could get there in light of most people wanting to enjoy the park in a casual, carefree manner.
I'm sure that most people would like to drive in a casual, carefree manner, but education has (mostly) disabused them of the notion, hasn't it?
whynot_31 said:Frankly, most park goers do not want to have to watch out for a speeding bicyclist, or a group of speeding bicyclists. In light of them being in the majority, why should their preferences be over ridden by a very small minority of bikers?
As you like to point out - life isn't fair. It's not a matter of people watching out for cyclists, if a matter of people looking out for themselves. And again, only 1.4% of the park is the domain of cyclists - you think that it's too much ask awareness in this area?
whynot_31 said:BTW, like I suspect everyone reading this, I secretly wish I was the only person who used the park.
I don't. People are a part of the park. Instead, I wish that people acted more like me. My code of personal conduct is something like this - what would happen if everyone acted as I act? If the ensuing visualization results in chaos, I adjust my behavior.
-
First a minor correction: Germany's highways are far from a "free for all". They have rigorous norms, and the lack of speed limit is possible only as a result of a strict process of training, screening and consequences.
You have repeatedly stated that you want the majority of park users to change their behaviors to accommodate the small minority of bikers who travel fast.
While I do not agree with your goals, I am curious as to how you would create such a change. Clearly, you do not feel the present set of implicit norms are adequate.
Would you be open to requiring all prospective park users to have to complete a training course? I would not. I do not feel that would be reasonable.
Instead, I opt for a situation in which limits are placed on how fast bikes can travel during peak times.
As you point out, you are a "good biker" and wished more people would act like you, because you consider the effect of your actions on the majority of park users.
I believe most bikers are good bikers, and continue to point out that most of the bikers in PP are considerate of others, and that we are only talking about a minority of bikers.
It precisely because of this minority status that their privileges can be ethically subjected to the norms of the larger group. As a result of living in a society that tries to assign the preferences of each person equal value, the question merely become one of how we (as a society) should best go about the process of implementing our collective wishes.
Yes, it sucks to hold a minority viewpoint, but the belief is that by giving up some privileges, the overall population and society will come out ahead. It's a central premise to democracy and part of what folks like to refer to as the social contract. By recognizing that "what's popular actually becomes what is right", life can actually be very fair.
Whyfi-
I am glad you are part of the majority that uses the park in a way that you minimize your impact on the majority.So, as a member of the majority-
What would you do with the bikers who continue to engage in actions that negatively affect the majority?
What would you do with bikers who use the 1.4% of paved land in a way that it presents a hazard to the other bikers, joggers, strollers and squirrels who also must share and use this the small tracts of pavement?
(note to readers: the fact that we have no idea who was involved in Saturday's accident really has nothing to do with how we are killing time).
-
look, they give directions...
-
EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES
While out on a bike ride, at a deserted intersection in Brownsville, I stopped at a red light, waited patiently. On the other side of the street, on the sidewalk, four boys came along, riding two to a bike. All four boys were under twelve years of age. The fourth boy, the smallest of the crew, says to the others, about me, dismissively, “He acting like he a car.”LOL! That kid is right. A bike is not a car! We are just supposed to ACT like they are, even when it makes no sense. I hope that kid grows up to be a lawmaker, stays on point. I also hope I don’t have to wait that long. I want to not fear getting a ticket for listening to my own common sense, that on a bike, sometimes you’re safer following the taoist counsel: be like water, like wind; ride where it’s empty.
-
That they were weaving only reinforces my point that too many are ignorant of lane designations. If people stay in the proper lane, and have caution when crossing or otherwise entering a faster moving lane, most problems go away.
What you really seem to be saying is that there is never a situation when an emergency veer into another lane in the park is appropriate. I think this is completely unrealistic. There will always be situations where riders decide avoidance is better than risking injury (as in the example of swerving to avoid a collision with a small child that has run into the roadway). If we are using cars as our default, if a car swerves to avoid a dangerous object (say something falling off a truck immediately in front of it), the cops are given discretion to determine whether that action is unsafe or necessity before issuing a ticket. Why should bikers be any different?
Yes, it would be great if everyone was more observant and more responsible. But in this case ALL bikers should be riding defensively whether they are out for a leisurely ride on a tricycle or drafting off of Lance Armstrong as part of their quest to achieve cycling greatness. Everyone should ride with the understanding that it is possible that a child could run into the roadway, a pedestrian could step off the curb with headphones, an dog could get away from its owner and sprint onto the road, etc. Also remember that for every person like you that is in the park daily, there are others who use it only a limited number of times a year. Those same people are never going to think "Let me look up the rules before I go to the park".
-
Just wondering: do any of you multiple-manifesto writers have daytime jobs?
-
If anyone was there, I'm still wondering what actually happened...bike on bike, bike on pedestrian? How bad were the injuries--if it's as bad as the OP made it sound and depending on the circumstances (speeding?) maybe it could help push the park/cops into enforcing some of the road rules more (particularly for cars and bikes).
I jog or bike the loop almost daily and cross it many times a day to walk my dog, and several times a week I hear the "serious" bikers yelling meanly at me or others. "Get out of the fucking way" to moms and nannies with strollers who waited for the crosswalk sign, etc. I really feel like they aren't great at sharing as a group. I guess they couldn't afford a fancy bike like mine that not only goes straight but can swerve left and right.
-
I'm a welfare cheat.
-
whynot_31 said:
You have repeatedly stated that you want the majority of park users to change their behaviors to accommodate the small minority of bikers who travel fast.Incorrect. I have repeatedly stated that I want the majority of park users to change their behavior so as to conform to the guidelines already in place. I think that this is the last time that I'll bother mentioning this. While I directly counter relevant points, it seems that any points that I makes are patently ignored. If you're trying to "win" through attrition, you have it.
whynot_31 said:
While I do not agree with your goals, I am curious as to how you would create such a change. Clearly, you do not feel the present set of implicit norms are adequate.Would you be open to requiring all prospective park users to have to complete a training course? I would not. I do not feel that would be reasonable.
If you want a suggestion from me, come back with a non-asinine suggestion, on how to educate park users of the existing rules, of your own.
whynot_31 said: It precisely because of this minority status that their privileges can be ethically subjected to the norms of the larger group. As a result of living in a society that tries to assign the preferences of each person equal value, the question merely become one of how we (as a society) should best go about the process of implementing our collective wishes.
Yes, it sucks to hold a minority viewpoint, but the belief is that by giving up some privileges, the overall population and society will come out ahead. It's a central premise to democracy and part of what folks like to refer to as the social contract. By recognizing that "what's popular actually becomes what is right", life can actually be very fair.
This is essentially a long-winded way of saying, "98.6% isn't enough - we want more" correct?
whynot_31 said: What would you do with the bikers who continue to engage in actions that negatively affect the majority?
What would you do with bikers who use the 1.4% of paved land in a way that it presents a hazard to the other bikers, joggers, strollers and squirrels who also must share and use this the small tracts of pavement?
And they're in the wrong? Yelling, "don't be a douchebag!" or "we have the light!" is a good place to start, 'specially if they're of the spandex variety. Many of these guys strive to be size 0 skinny and they wear shoes with soles that don't flex and that have little-to-no traction - on pavement, they're no match for a determined 95 lb girl.
And to be clear on my 1.4% figure - this is only the two outer lanes and does not include the inner lanes that available for strollers, joggers and squirrels. So, to be more precise, it's actually 0.7% of the park that's actually available to faster movers.
-
I am not trying to win thru attrition, but I am glad you feel the need to distance yourself from those who are inconsiderate.
However, I have become curious why is it that you have not mentioned that
"Pedestrians have the right of way"
as stated in red on the below link?http://www.prospectpark.org/visit/activities/bicycling
Doesn't this contradict your belief that fast bikers have been given exclusive domain over any part of the part.
Hasn't the public spoken loud enough? Must we involve the authorities?
-
I will say that I wish the signs at the park were clearer. There are very few of those signs that tell people about the change in lanes when cars aren't driving. At every crosswalk (and therefore at every entrance to the park's road) there should be a sign that explains the lanes during XX hours and the lanes during YY hours. I see so many people biking on the runner's lane during weekend hours, etc. because they just see the painting on the ground and assume that's the rule. People don't usually go out of their way to see if they are in the right, they tend to just assume they are. Make the signs clear and everywhere. Enforce people being in the wrong lane.
If we could somehow get rid of cars then it should simply be
PARK -- Pedestrians -- Pedestrians -- Roller Blades & Slow Bikes -- Fast Bikes
That should be clear. There should be signs telling people to only pass on the right when biking - Reminding all people to stop at cross walk signs - Reminding people to be aware.
Honestly, you don't need a license to do any of the activities in the park except drive, so there should be signs for everyone so there is no excuse for not knowing.
-
homeowner said:What you really seem to be saying is that there is never a situation when an emergency veer into another lane in the park is appropriate.
No, that's not what I'm saying. Am I really the only person in the park that watches traffic development ahead of me? Am I the only person that covers their brakes and checks over their shoulder (for overtaking traffic) when I think that I might need to take evasive measures? Sometimes swerving is necessary, but it's not often necessary. When you do have to resort to it, you should have enough awareness and preparation to not swerve in to even great danger.
homeowner said:there are others who use it only a limited number of times a year. Those same people are never going to think "Let me look up the rules before I go to the park".
A favorite saying of members of law enforcement is, "ignorance is not an excuse." Well, it's not, 'specially given the scores of signs along the parkway.
-
WhyFi said:
No, that's not what I'm saying. Am I really the only person in the park that watches traffic development ahead of me? Am I the only person that covers their brakes and checks over their shoulder (for overtaking traffic) when I think that I might need to take evasive measures? Sometimes swerving is necessary, but it's not often necessary. When you do have to resort to it, you should have enough awareness and preparation to not swerve in to even great danger.A favorite saying of members of law enforcement is, "ignorance is not an excuse." Well, it's not, 'specially given the scores of signs along the parkway.
I am sorry that fast bikers must share the park with other users, and that the law is on the side of the other users.
Perhaps fast bikers will be in the majority someday.
-
whynot_31 said:
I am glad you feel the need to distance yourself from those who are inconsiderate, but I am curious why is it that you have not mentioned that"Pedestrians have the right of way"
as stated in red on the below link?Pedestrians have the right of way on any street - does this mean that it's okay for me to walk down the middle of Eastern Parkway? No. Assuming that I was engaged in conversation with reasonably intelligent people, I didn't think it necessary to point out this non-point.
-
xlizellx said:
I will say that I wish the signs at the park were clearer. There are very few of those signs that tell people about the change in lanes when cars aren't driving. At every crosswalk (and therefore at every entrance to the park's road) there should be a sign that explains the lanes during XX hours and the lanes during YY hours. I see so many people biking on the runner's lane during weekend hours, etc. because they just see the painting on the ground and assume that's the rule. People don't usually go out of their way to see if they are in the right, they tend to just assume they are. Make the signs clear and everywhere. Enforce people being in the wrong lane.If we could somehow get rid of cars then it should simply be
PARK -- Pedestrians -- Pedestrians -- Roller Blades & Slow Bikes -- Fast Bikes
That should be clear. There should be signs telling people to only pass on the right when biking - Reminding all people to stop at cross walk signs - Reminding people to be aware.
Honestly, you don't need a license to do any of the activities in the park except drive, so there should be signs for everyone so there is no excuse for not knowing.
Correct, getting rid of cars would be a nice step in the right direction and yes, people are making this more difficult than it needs to be.
-
No, I'm quite sure that pedestrians do not have the right of way in NY. They only have the right of way in crosswalks and when they have the signal. Here is my source:
http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/bclc/web/NewYork/nypedestrians.htm
However, pedestrians do have the right of way in the park. The park is a special place, with special rules.
I think some bikers need to have this pointed out to them. Here's is the complete set of rules. I have bolded the last item:
• Pedestrians always have the right of way.
• Cycling is permitted only on the main Park roadway, Center Drive, and Well House Drive. Cycling is not permitted on Park paths.
• Be aware that authorized vehicles use the roads at all times.
• Cyclists must travel in a counterclockwise direction and obey all traffic signals.
• When the Park Drive is closed to motor vehicles, use traffic lanes - the recreation lane is for runners and walkers.
• When the Park Drive is open to motor vehicles, use the right half of the recreation lane.
• By law, bicycles must be equipped with bells. Helmets are required for children under 14, and are suggested for everyone.
• Do not wear headphones.
• Signal for turns and lane changes. Be cautious when passing others and warn them of your presence.
• Only one rider per bicycle.
• Always use headlights, taillights, and reflectors after dark.
• No racing allowed, except at scheduled and permitted events.I think this last point is where a definition of "racing" should be made. This is where the speed limit should be enforced on cars as well as bikes.
I'd enforce it on roller bladers and strollers, who exceeded 25 mph as well.
No one group has the exclusive domain over any area of the park; Not even 1.4% of it.
...the public has clearly stated that the park is a place for everyone, and has sided with pedestrians over bikers.
Please join me in asking those going too fast to slow down. It would be silly to have to utilize the police in order to enforce common courtesy and established rules.
-
whynot_31 said:
Hasn't the public spoken loud enough? Must we involve the authorities?What public? People that complain on message boards? Not exactly a random sample, is it? But, by all means - contact the authorities of you think that a park goers welfare system needs to be kicked off. In this instance, I like to believe that enough has been done to ensure the people can look after themselves but if you feel you need an additional leg up, go for it.
-
I believe the public created the rules on the Prospect Park website.
I am sorry fast bikers disagree with the rules, and feel they were not adequately represented.
...this, however, does not excuse them from the rules. Nor should the "marginalization" of fast bikers infringe upon others safe and peaceful enjoyment of the park.
-
If a car hits a pedestrian, it is almost always at fault (unless, for instance, someone jumps out from between cars into the roadway), ergo peds always have the right of way. Do you really not know this?
And racing is not defined by speed. Racing is defined by competition. If you'd enforce 25 mph, bully for you, but I can tell you (again, for what, the 7th or 8th time?) that speeds very, very rarely exceed 22mph and those that cause you unease are more likely traveling at 15-19 mph. Should we set the limit at 15, instead? Would that make you feel safer?
-
do you believe that the "no racing rule" was written to apply to two 10 year olds on bikes, reaching a maximum speed of 8 mph?
I am glad you feel the 25 mph limit is appropriate.
In the event that fast bikers still present a danger at 22 mph, I believe the public should have the right to lower the limit.
-
WhyFi said:
The rules that say that the recreation lanes are for runners and walkers and the traffic lanes are for cyclists and skaters? Oh.Um, isn't the bright red writing there to clarify any confusion?
What does the park department need to do to make it clear?
(p.s Gotta go home. See you back here in a while)
-
If a car hits a pedestrian, it is almost always at fault (unless, for instance, someone jumps out from between cars into the roadway), ergo peds always have the right of way. Do you really not know this?We are in New York State, it does not have the same pro-pedestrian laws as places like CA. I have provided a link to pedestrian laws outside of the park.
I have also provided links to the rules that establish the right of peds inside the park. While fast bikers may not understand (or even like) that pedestrians have far more rights in the park than elsewhere, this does not mean they can simply ignore the rules.
Fast bikers have to adapt to their surroundings. Despite wanting to be the group that makes the rules, they are not.
Perhaps fast bikers could slow down out of respect for the rules and their fellow park goers?
...if that "appeal to respect" doesn't work, perhaps they could slow down simply to avoid a public outcry that causes police enforcement?
-
As racing involves all-out efforts that necessarily ask participants to exert themselves to the very threshold of performance and control, yes, I think that it would rightly apply to 10 year olds even if their max speed is 8 mph. Do you think that a park official would neglect to point this out if said 10 year olds were in danger of plowing in to others?
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds