A Path Perfect for Cyclists, Except Where It Crosses Drivers' Paths
06-28-06, 06:11 PM
#1
Banned.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A Path Perfect for Cyclists, Except Where It Crosses Drivers' Paths
The New York Times
28 June 2006
A Path Perfect for Cyclists, Except Where It Crosses Drivers' Paths
By THOMAS J. LUECK
The Hudson River Park bike path is an experiment in urban planning and common self-restraint.
The path, a narrow ribbon of pavement that separates a teeming urban waterfront from the near constant din of a major highway, opened in 2001, giving cyclists their first unimpeded access from Lower Manhattan to Midtown. And the cyclists love it — it was crowded with spinning wheels and zipping 10-speeds at noon yesterday — making the Hudson River path one of the nation's busiest.
But for all the path's success, questions about its safety have loomed. Will cyclists who are given the luxury of an unimpeded, parklike environment put on the brakes to let vehicles pass? Will motorists, who routinely dart off the West Side Highway across the bike path, return the favor?
Those questions have taken on new urgency since Sunday, when Dr. Carl H. Nacht, a 56-year-old physician and bicycle enthusiast, died from injuries he sustained on Thursday when he was struck by a police vehicle as he rode along the path at 38th Street.
Yesterday, a cyclist riding the path from Chambers Street to 59th Street found several points of hazard, too commonly ignored by cyclists and drivers alike.
On Thursday, Dr. Nacht was struck by a police tow truck that turned into the Pier 76 impound lot from the West Side Highway, crossing the bike path.
The accident, resulting in the first fatality of a cyclist on the Hudson River path, underscores the risks to riders at more than a dozen intersections where trucks, buses, cabs and other vehicles make their way to riverfront businesses and institutions like the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum and the Chelsea Piers sports complex.
"People with vehicles simply have to realize they are entering cyclists' territory," said Paul Steely White, executive director of Transportation Alternatives, a cyclists' advocacy group. Although his group, parks advocates and many transportation experts have praised the design of the Hudson River Path, Mr. White said the death of Dr. Nacht demonstrated a need for more precautions to protect cyclists from vehicles.
But the ride yesterday revealed another cause for concern. Despite traffic lights and signs at most hazardous intersections that warn cyclists of the danger of vehicles crossing the path, few of the cyclists abide by the rules.
"Almost everybody rides through the red lights," said Bill Durgin, 35, a photographer who stopped on his bike ride from a waterfront tennis court near Houston Street to his home on North Moore Street.
Nearby, at the entrance to Pier 40, a ramshackle parking garage at the foot of Houston Street, the state's Department of Transportation has constructed a "speed table" for cyclists. The device creates a slightly elevated speed bump for motorists driving over the bike path, but retains a level surface for cyclists.
The state, which designed the bike path, has also installed traffic lights at the Pier 40 entrance. As elsewhere along the path, the lights flash red and green images of bicycles, leaving no doubt who is ordered to stop.
But yesterday, almost nobody stopped unless a vehicle was about to cross. Streams of cyclists, young and old, fast and slow, blithely rode through on red.
"There are just too many other signals that tell cyclists they are no longer part of the street network, and they are in a park," Mr. White said. "That is a good thing. They should isolate the cyclists."
Mr. White's group, suspecting that the speed of vehicular traffic on the West Side Highway may be a culprit because it can force drivers to exit too abruptly across the bike path, dispatched researchers yesterday with radar speed guns.
He said the researchers measured southbound traffic at 37th Street, a block south of where Dr. Nacht was struck, where the posted limit is 35 miles per hour. About 40 percent of the vehicles surveyed were speeding, Mr. White said. The worst offenders, 13.5 percent of those recorded, were driving 40 miles per hour or faster.
Lisa Kuhner, a spokeswoman for the State Transportation Department, said yesterday that it was constantly exploring new safety measures for cyclists and motorists who cross paths on the bikeway, and was installing more speed tables, like the one at Pier 40, across from Gansevoort Street, at the 24th Street entrance to Chelsea Piers and at the 59th Street entrance to the Intrepid museum.
Cycling advocates said the Hudson River Park path had made a huge contribution to cycling in the city because it linked to a path in Riverside Park, allowing people to ride from the Battery far into the upper reaches of the West Side of Manhattan.
As a result, thousands of cyclists, who are drawn each day for exercise and recreation, are joined by growing numbers of commuters riding to Midtown or Lower Manhattan from the Upper West Side. The path is also used by Brooklyn residents who are willing to brave the Brooklyn Bridge and a slow slog across the congested streets near City Hall.
Yesterday, for a rider making the trip from Brooklyn, the Hudson River Park bike path north of Chambers Street appeared like a cyclist's paradise, seeming to whisper the phrase "faster, faster" as Lower Manhattan gave way to TriBeCa, SoHo and Greenwich Village.
But there were challenges ahead, even on an overcast Tuesday.
Near Little West 12th Street, construction along the path funneled cyclists into a narrow passage less than eight feet wide. Chain-link fencing and a working backhoe pressed in ominously on both sides.
At 22nd Street, the Chelsea Piers complex posed a hazardous turn, where cyclists must cut across a lane of traffic entering the complex.
At 37th Street, a stretch of nine blocks, extending to 46th Street, seemed the most hazardous. Eight intersections, all with traffic lights for cyclists, provided access across the path to a stream of buses, taxis and trucks bound for the city's tow pound, boat terminals and the Intrepid.
The congestion eased after 46th Street. Back near Houston Street, Mr. Durgin, the photographer, paused on his vintage Raleigh three-speed. He said he had been riding on the path about four times a week for three years. Cyclists' widespread disregard for stop signs is serious, he said, but the path itself is a valued addition to the city.
"I'm riding my bike a lot more simply because it is here," he said.
(end)
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/ny...=1&oref=slogin
28 June 2006
A Path Perfect for Cyclists, Except Where It Crosses Drivers' Paths
By THOMAS J. LUECK
The Hudson River Park bike path is an experiment in urban planning and common self-restraint.
The path, a narrow ribbon of pavement that separates a teeming urban waterfront from the near constant din of a major highway, opened in 2001, giving cyclists their first unimpeded access from Lower Manhattan to Midtown. And the cyclists love it — it was crowded with spinning wheels and zipping 10-speeds at noon yesterday — making the Hudson River path one of the nation's busiest.
But for all the path's success, questions about its safety have loomed. Will cyclists who are given the luxury of an unimpeded, parklike environment put on the brakes to let vehicles pass? Will motorists, who routinely dart off the West Side Highway across the bike path, return the favor?
Those questions have taken on new urgency since Sunday, when Dr. Carl H. Nacht, a 56-year-old physician and bicycle enthusiast, died from injuries he sustained on Thursday when he was struck by a police vehicle as he rode along the path at 38th Street.
Yesterday, a cyclist riding the path from Chambers Street to 59th Street found several points of hazard, too commonly ignored by cyclists and drivers alike.
On Thursday, Dr. Nacht was struck by a police tow truck that turned into the Pier 76 impound lot from the West Side Highway, crossing the bike path.
The accident, resulting in the first fatality of a cyclist on the Hudson River path, underscores the risks to riders at more than a dozen intersections where trucks, buses, cabs and other vehicles make their way to riverfront businesses and institutions like the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum and the Chelsea Piers sports complex.
"People with vehicles simply have to realize they are entering cyclists' territory," said Paul Steely White, executive director of Transportation Alternatives, a cyclists' advocacy group. Although his group, parks advocates and many transportation experts have praised the design of the Hudson River Path, Mr. White said the death of Dr. Nacht demonstrated a need for more precautions to protect cyclists from vehicles.
But the ride yesterday revealed another cause for concern. Despite traffic lights and signs at most hazardous intersections that warn cyclists of the danger of vehicles crossing the path, few of the cyclists abide by the rules.
"Almost everybody rides through the red lights," said Bill Durgin, 35, a photographer who stopped on his bike ride from a waterfront tennis court near Houston Street to his home on North Moore Street.
Nearby, at the entrance to Pier 40, a ramshackle parking garage at the foot of Houston Street, the state's Department of Transportation has constructed a "speed table" for cyclists. The device creates a slightly elevated speed bump for motorists driving over the bike path, but retains a level surface for cyclists.
The state, which designed the bike path, has also installed traffic lights at the Pier 40 entrance. As elsewhere along the path, the lights flash red and green images of bicycles, leaving no doubt who is ordered to stop.
But yesterday, almost nobody stopped unless a vehicle was about to cross. Streams of cyclists, young and old, fast and slow, blithely rode through on red.
"There are just too many other signals that tell cyclists they are no longer part of the street network, and they are in a park," Mr. White said. "That is a good thing. They should isolate the cyclists."
Mr. White's group, suspecting that the speed of vehicular traffic on the West Side Highway may be a culprit because it can force drivers to exit too abruptly across the bike path, dispatched researchers yesterday with radar speed guns.
He said the researchers measured southbound traffic at 37th Street, a block south of where Dr. Nacht was struck, where the posted limit is 35 miles per hour. About 40 percent of the vehicles surveyed were speeding, Mr. White said. The worst offenders, 13.5 percent of those recorded, were driving 40 miles per hour or faster.
Lisa Kuhner, a spokeswoman for the State Transportation Department, said yesterday that it was constantly exploring new safety measures for cyclists and motorists who cross paths on the bikeway, and was installing more speed tables, like the one at Pier 40, across from Gansevoort Street, at the 24th Street entrance to Chelsea Piers and at the 59th Street entrance to the Intrepid museum.
Cycling advocates said the Hudson River Park path had made a huge contribution to cycling in the city because it linked to a path in Riverside Park, allowing people to ride from the Battery far into the upper reaches of the West Side of Manhattan.
As a result, thousands of cyclists, who are drawn each day for exercise and recreation, are joined by growing numbers of commuters riding to Midtown or Lower Manhattan from the Upper West Side. The path is also used by Brooklyn residents who are willing to brave the Brooklyn Bridge and a slow slog across the congested streets near City Hall.
Yesterday, for a rider making the trip from Brooklyn, the Hudson River Park bike path north of Chambers Street appeared like a cyclist's paradise, seeming to whisper the phrase "faster, faster" as Lower Manhattan gave way to TriBeCa, SoHo and Greenwich Village.
But there were challenges ahead, even on an overcast Tuesday.
Near Little West 12th Street, construction along the path funneled cyclists into a narrow passage less than eight feet wide. Chain-link fencing and a working backhoe pressed in ominously on both sides.
At 22nd Street, the Chelsea Piers complex posed a hazardous turn, where cyclists must cut across a lane of traffic entering the complex.
At 37th Street, a stretch of nine blocks, extending to 46th Street, seemed the most hazardous. Eight intersections, all with traffic lights for cyclists, provided access across the path to a stream of buses, taxis and trucks bound for the city's tow pound, boat terminals and the Intrepid.
The congestion eased after 46th Street. Back near Houston Street, Mr. Durgin, the photographer, paused on his vintage Raleigh three-speed. He said he had been riding on the path about four times a week for three years. Cyclists' widespread disregard for stop signs is serious, he said, but the path itself is a valued addition to the city.
"I'm riding my bike a lot more simply because it is here," he said.
(end)
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/ny...=1&oref=slogin
06-29-06, 01:40 AM
#2
----
funny, I read this article today and wondered if anyone would post it.
I've been living in NYC for this past month and been riding all over the city on my bike. I used to live here long before this path was completed and must say that this path has improved bike transport in this city immensely. It has gone a long way towards increasing ridership. Many of my friends who would never have ridden in the city are now riding and it is in large part due to this path.
Riding on the streets of New York is a challenge even to experienced commuters. If I counted the number of near misses with cabs, vans, trucks and SUV's I've had on the streets and avenues as opposed to the near misses I've had on the bike path mentioned in the article they would far outweigh the apparent dangers on the path.
Though I feel the article is in large part accurate in it's description of the path and it's hazards there are a lot of issues at play here so if you're looking for a black and white: Bike paths bad-ride on streets good, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.
#1 I, for one, feel the path offers much more positive good than negative. This was the first death on the path since it's completion and given it's round the clock use- although any injury or fatality is a failure- it is inevitable that some accidents will happen. This could just as easily been me or someone I know so I take this very seriously and I feel even one is too many.
#2 The article leaves out certain mitigating factors that make it a gray area IMHO. Here's some additional info:
A) The unfortunate accident happened at 11:30pm. A time when there are still many cyclists on the path. Whether the victim was wearing light colored clothing or had operating lights on the bike has not been established in any other article.
B) It was reported in the Times earlier in the week that the cyclist's fatal injury was the result of his hitting his head on a parked tow truck after being struck by the truck pulling into the lot. The cyclist was not wearing a helmet at the time. I'm not saying that in any way absolves the tow truck driver of responsibility or that he might have survived had he been wearing a helmet I'm only siting it as a possible contributing factor to his death as opposed to a non-fatal injury.
#3 Any one who rides this path with regularity will either admit to running the bike red lights or will at least report that the large majority of us do run them. A tow truck driver who pulls into that lot should be aware of that and be cautious but my experience in NY is that it's usually more of an excuse to try to intimidate pedestrians and bicyclists as if to say, "Hey, you run the light and I hit you- it's your bad." This is an attitude I see played out again and again on the streets of Manhattan where, as a pedestrian, if you're caught in the crosswalk on the green some cars will actually gun it and run right at you as if to "teach you a lesson."- my biggest fear is that this might have been one of those cases and it would be a complete travesty if the driver gets away with that.
I think there are many design issues with the Hudson River path (And the one on the East River), which I would be happy to be specific about in some other post or thread. But I think this is a tragic accident and like many accidents it is often more complex than we would like it to be in order to support some already formed point of view. This one involves issues of cyclist visibility, driver responsibility, ingrained attitudes about cyclists on the part of drivers, cyclists' responsibilities, helmet use and efficacy, and design, construction and maintenance of cycling facilities. But it ain't just about bike paths.
I've been living in NYC for this past month and been riding all over the city on my bike. I used to live here long before this path was completed and must say that this path has improved bike transport in this city immensely. It has gone a long way towards increasing ridership. Many of my friends who would never have ridden in the city are now riding and it is in large part due to this path.
Riding on the streets of New York is a challenge even to experienced commuters. If I counted the number of near misses with cabs, vans, trucks and SUV's I've had on the streets and avenues as opposed to the near misses I've had on the bike path mentioned in the article they would far outweigh the apparent dangers on the path.
Though I feel the article is in large part accurate in it's description of the path and it's hazards there are a lot of issues at play here so if you're looking for a black and white: Bike paths bad-ride on streets good, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.
#1 I, for one, feel the path offers much more positive good than negative. This was the first death on the path since it's completion and given it's round the clock use- although any injury or fatality is a failure- it is inevitable that some accidents will happen. This could just as easily been me or someone I know so I take this very seriously and I feel even one is too many.
#2 The article leaves out certain mitigating factors that make it a gray area IMHO. Here's some additional info:
A) The unfortunate accident happened at 11:30pm. A time when there are still many cyclists on the path. Whether the victim was wearing light colored clothing or had operating lights on the bike has not been established in any other article.
B) It was reported in the Times earlier in the week that the cyclist's fatal injury was the result of his hitting his head on a parked tow truck after being struck by the truck pulling into the lot. The cyclist was not wearing a helmet at the time. I'm not saying that in any way absolves the tow truck driver of responsibility or that he might have survived had he been wearing a helmet I'm only siting it as a possible contributing factor to his death as opposed to a non-fatal injury.
#3 Any one who rides this path with regularity will either admit to running the bike red lights or will at least report that the large majority of us do run them. A tow truck driver who pulls into that lot should be aware of that and be cautious but my experience in NY is that it's usually more of an excuse to try to intimidate pedestrians and bicyclists as if to say, "Hey, you run the light and I hit you- it's your bad." This is an attitude I see played out again and again on the streets of Manhattan where, as a pedestrian, if you're caught in the crosswalk on the green some cars will actually gun it and run right at you as if to "teach you a lesson."- my biggest fear is that this might have been one of those cases and it would be a complete travesty if the driver gets away with that.
I think there are many design issues with the Hudson River path (And the one on the East River), which I would be happy to be specific about in some other post or thread. But I think this is a tragic accident and like many accidents it is often more complex than we would like it to be in order to support some already formed point of view. This one involves issues of cyclist visibility, driver responsibility, ingrained attitudes about cyclists on the part of drivers, cyclists' responsibilities, helmet use and efficacy, and design, construction and maintenance of cycling facilities. But it ain't just about bike paths.
Last edited by buzzman; 06-29-06 at 09:53 AM.
06-29-06, 08:04 AM
#3
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ogopogo's shoreline
Posts: 4,082
Bikes: LHT, Kona Smoke
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Jury deadlocks in cyclist's death case
Source
A trial in the traffic death of a Madison bicyclist last summer ended in a mistrial late Wednesday when jurors, who had deliberated for nearly 12 hours, said they were at an impasse and could not reach a verdict.
Prosecutors now have 30 days to decide whether to retry Tracy Sorum, 30, of McFarland, who remains charged with homicide by negligent driving for the June 30, 2005, death of Jessica Bullen, 29, of Madison. Bullen died after she was struck from behind by a car driven by Sorum in the town of Cottage Grove.
Sorum testified Tuesday that he took his eyes off the road because he had something caught in his throat as he drove on Hope Road. He said he was looking at his throat in his rearview mirror when Bullen suddenly crashed onto his windshield.* He said he never saw her before that.
"Anytime the jury comes back without a guilty verdict, it's good for my client," Sorum's attorney, Stephen Eisenberg said. "I feel it's tragic. It's sad. Tracy's a good guy and Jessica was a wonderful person. There are no winners. But I still feel it was just an accident."
The jury of eight women and four men began its deliberations about 10:45 a.m. At 3 p.m., jurors sent a note to Dane County Circuit Judge Patrick Fiedler indicating that they were deadlocked at 6-6. Fiedler sent back a seldom-used "Allen instruction," which tells jurors to make an honest and sincere effort to reach a verdict. The jury responded with other questions on burden of proof and criminal negligence and a request to view Bullen's bicycle and wasn't heard from again after 4 p.m., other than to order dinner.
About 10:30 p.m., Fiedler gave jurors a choice to continue deliberations, go home for the night or consider whether they were at an impasse. A few minutes later, the jury returned to say that further discussions on a verdict would be fruitless.
Assistant District Attorney John Norsetter, who prosecuted the case, was meeting with Bullen's family after the jury made its decision and was not available for comment.
Norsetter contended in his closing argument Wednesday that Sorum took an unreasonable risk when he decided to look into the mirror at his throat while continuing to drive on a road known to be popular with bicyclists. Had Sorum been paying attention, Norsetter said, he would have had more than 12 seconds to see Bullen in front of him.
"He was on autopilot. He wasn't thinking," Norsetter said. "He was behind the wheel of an automobile and he wasn't thinking."
Eisenberg said the outcome of this case demonstrates that car crashes like this one should not result in criminal charges. He said it shows that the state will have a hard time finding a jury that will convict someone under such circumstances.
"I don't think these cases should be crimes," Eisenberg said.
A trial in the traffic death of a Madison bicyclist last summer ended in a mistrial late Wednesday when jurors, who had deliberated for nearly 12 hours, said they were at an impasse and could not reach a verdict.
Prosecutors now have 30 days to decide whether to retry Tracy Sorum, 30, of McFarland, who remains charged with homicide by negligent driving for the June 30, 2005, death of Jessica Bullen, 29, of Madison. Bullen died after she was struck from behind by a car driven by Sorum in the town of Cottage Grove.
Sorum testified Tuesday that he took his eyes off the road because he had something caught in his throat as he drove on Hope Road. He said he was looking at his throat in his rearview mirror when Bullen suddenly crashed onto his windshield.* He said he never saw her before that.
"Anytime the jury comes back without a guilty verdict, it's good for my client," Sorum's attorney, Stephen Eisenberg said. "I feel it's tragic. It's sad. Tracy's a good guy and Jessica was a wonderful person. There are no winners. But I still feel it was just an accident."
The jury of eight women and four men began its deliberations about 10:45 a.m. At 3 p.m., jurors sent a note to Dane County Circuit Judge Patrick Fiedler indicating that they were deadlocked at 6-6. Fiedler sent back a seldom-used "Allen instruction," which tells jurors to make an honest and sincere effort to reach a verdict. The jury responded with other questions on burden of proof and criminal negligence and a request to view Bullen's bicycle and wasn't heard from again after 4 p.m., other than to order dinner.
About 10:30 p.m., Fiedler gave jurors a choice to continue deliberations, go home for the night or consider whether they were at an impasse. A few minutes later, the jury returned to say that further discussions on a verdict would be fruitless.
Assistant District Attorney John Norsetter, who prosecuted the case, was meeting with Bullen's family after the jury made its decision and was not available for comment.
Norsetter contended in his closing argument Wednesday that Sorum took an unreasonable risk when he decided to look into the mirror at his throat while continuing to drive on a road known to be popular with bicyclists. Had Sorum been paying attention, Norsetter said, he would have had more than 12 seconds to see Bullen in front of him.
"He was on autopilot. He wasn't thinking," Norsetter said. "He was behind the wheel of an automobile and he wasn't thinking."
Eisenberg said the outcome of this case demonstrates that car crashes like this one should not result in criminal charges. He said it shows that the state will have a hard time finding a jury that will convict someone under such circumstances.
"I don't think these cases should be crimes," Eisenberg said.
