adgrant

Your position seems contradictory to me. Its impossible to stay 4 feet away from parked cars and still be in the bike lane for most bike lanes in Manhattan. Therefore most bike lanes in Manhattan are not safe and should probably be removed.

If the city was serious about bike lanes and bike safety, it would not allow street parking on streets with bike lanes and not allow parking adjacent to bike lanes on the avenues.

Stacy

For those who aren't familiar with the area -

Sixth avenue is a major one-way avenue, with about six lanes of traffic and one lane of parking on each side. Bus lane is on the right and a very narrow bike lane is on the left. Faster traffic generally travels in the middle. Since the bike lane is only about 3 three feet wide it's impossible to ride 4 feet out from parked cars and still ride in the bikelane.

36th Street is just north of Herald Square, Macys, etc where Sixth Avenue crosses Broadway, so the cyclist had just traveled through several chaotic intersections. Also it's not unusual for tourists, shoppers, venders, and other pedestrians to block the bike lane in that area, especially during rush hour.

To make matters worse, NYPD has ticketed cyclists along Sixth Avenue for riding outside the bike lane. I think the fine is something like $150.

Yes some laws are different from the rest of New York State. For example, NYC doesn't allow a right turn on red. No junior licenses either.

KonradNYC

You completely misunderstood me. I said nothing about pedestrians being held responsible for a bike accident. I meant that in addition to creating stricter penalties and charges for motorists whose bike lane violations results in a cyclist's death, there should also be additional penalties for any vehicle which causes death to a pedestrian while in a crosswalk ("vehicles" would include both motorists & cyclists...not much cyclist bias coming from me when it comes to the rights of pedestrians).

Obviously motorists are not supposed to hit pedestrians or cyclists...I'm proposing stricter penalties if those collisions occur in a bike lane or crosswalk.

Bacciagalupe

Konrad: Thanks for the clarification. Extending extra legal protections to crosswalks seems rather unnecessary though, since that is the only place a pedestrian is supposed to cross in the first place, yes? Or do we need separate laws for pedestrian-vehicular crashes on the sidewalks?

I do not quite see the utility behind such laws, particularly given the infrequent nature of the infractions. (E.g. will extra penalties for hitting pedestrians on a sidewalk really reduce pedestrian deaths?) I'd even view a PR campaign for driver awareness as more effective than passing new laws and levying extra penalties.



Stacy: FYI it is, in fact, legal to operate your bicycle outside of the bike lane in NYC under two circumstances: 1) making a left turn and 2) to avoid obstructions in the bike lane.

See Transit Alternatives for more info.




To clarify (yet again ): I am definitely saying that it is the responsibility of the cyclist to stay out of the door zone whenever possible. In NYC, this does mean riding on the outer side of the bike lane and occasionally taking the lane.

Although it is not quite comparable to this very unfortunate incident, think of it this way: There are plenty of laws and penalties for stealing a bike. But when you park your bike outside, it is still your responsibility to lock it up; no one's going to do it for you. In a similar way, you cannot rely on vehicle operators to do the right thing to keep you safe; it's up to you to operate your vehicle in the manner that is appropriate to your vehicle type in order to keep yourself safe.


Fine by me, as long as I can do it safely. I don't care if a car honks, I will generally take a lane rather than ride too close to a car that looks like the driver is about to pop open a door.


Sorry to hear about that, I can definitely see how that can lead to your opinions.

I'm fine with some improvements to the existing bike lanes, and I believe they would vastly improve major roads like Houston Street. However, I am not convinced that total segregation is the answer (for NYC), for two reasons: 1) the existing bike lanes do appear to be generally safe (as the overwhelming majority of fatal crashes are happening at intersections), and 2) segregation can result in cyclists entering an intersection in a way that motor vehicle operators do not expect, which can lead to more crashes.


Why? Is someone else going to operate your vehicle for you?

To put it another way: there are only so many ways to stop jaywalkers. But if a jaywalker gets hit, who had the primary (not exclusive, just primary) responsibility to keep the pedestrian safe?

Of course the ideal situation is for motor vehicle operators to look before opening the car door. In real life, that simply doesn't happen. For example, it is quite possible for the driver to not see a cyclist in a bike lane, especially if the cyclist is in the driver's blind spot.

My point is that in order to ride safely in a dense urban environment, you cannot rely on the motor vehicle operators seeing you. As a cyclist you feel obvious, but often are not, especially to the vehicles in front of you.

Stacy

Yes but that wasn't my point. Any cyclist traveling on Sixth Avenue is required to use the bike lane. Riding four feet out from parked cars isn't a legal option.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgx1_LV_GQI

bac

Not under the law it isn't.

If car #1 threw out his driver's side door out into traffic, and it got ripped off by passing car #2, it's CLEARLY and 100% car #1's fault. The same applies when "car #1" is a bicycle.

... Brad

stevesurf

Of course the cyclist should stay out of the "door zone" if the bike lane permits it. However, there is no required "responsibility" to do this, as long as they are riding at a reasonable speed and are in compliance with how they are operating their vehicle, in this case a bicycle. However, it is the primary responsibility of the driver to not exit their vehicle into a moving traffic lane, and injury caused by this action is enforceable.

There are many jurisdictions that place bike lanes that overlap in the "door zone"; cyclists should always try to ride in the "non-door zone" in these cases, as long as they feel safe to do so, understanding that the legal, primary responsibility lies with the parked vehicle's occupants to open their door(s) only when it is safe. This is enforceable. If a cyclist gets hit in a vehicle traveling lane that they took over or tried to take over is less clear as to whose fault it is, than a "dooring" situation.

It is not an "ideal situation", it is the law. Period. There is no law stating that a cyclist must travel in the "non-door" portion of the bike lane.


*edit* furthermore, here's the NYS Law on motorists and bike lanes:

Bacciagalupe

It is? Then what's the applicable statute? Is it vehicular manslaughter? Reckless endangerment? What are the penalties? Why did the driver only get a citation for parking in the bike lane?

Of course, you could claim there is some sort of anti-cyclist bias at work. If you were talking about the NYC DOT, I might agree with you. But the DA's office is not a part of the DOT. I can't picture Robert Morgenthau letting a criminal act, especially one that has gotten some press attention, go unexamined.


Shifting primary responsibility to the motorist, by the way, hardly eliminates the various mitigating circumstances that could prevent even a careful motorist from dooring a cyclist by accident. The driver can easily misjudge the cyclists's speed; their distance behind the car; their distance to the left or the right of the car; the cyclist can be obscured by other vehicles and/or weaving in and out of traffic. And of course, the cyclist might look the wrong way and not notice the open car door.

Ultimately the problem is that no matter how many laws are passed, no matter where you believe the legal responsibility lies, you as a cyclist cannot rely on a driver to see you.

And to me, you bear the primary responsibility to ride in a safe manner, the same way you bear the primary responsibility to buckle your seatbelt, to not jump onto the subway tracks, to not mix bleach with ammonia, not to drop a toaster in the tub, and so forth.

Catch my drift yet?

Air

No one is saying that a bicyclist shouldn't pay extra attention and stop themselves from getting hurt or killed.

But people who break the law and cause someone's death through either recklessness or carelessness should still be prosecuted. I would say illegally parking and not paying attention to opening a door falls under that heading. You're right, the DA doesn't go after these people but there are plenty of instances of when a bicyclist is killed by a drunk driver the penalties are less than if they killed someone in a car. The person is still dead but they don't carry the same punishment. It's probably not sexy enough to spend the time on for when re-election comes back around.

Giving them a free pass will do nothing to help increase our safety on the road whereas some heavier fines or jail time might give people a bit more pause. When there are traffic cameras people don't blow through the lights nearly as much because they're afraid of the penalties. When the media ignores the fact that a driver did something that caused harm they send a message to the DA that no one cares and there's no reason to do anything about it. The entire thing is a giant system - to break that pattern it has to start somewhere. If mainstream media was up in arms every time a pedestrian or bicyclist is killed because of the carelessness of a driver you'd see some changes accordingly.

Air

From Times-Up

Air

I vote for the bias.

fprintf

Garrison Keillor, host of the public radio show Prarie Home Companion, payed tribute to David Smith on the air on December 15th. Apparently he was an amazing song writer.

https://prairiehome.publicradio.org/programs/2007/12/15/