transportation town hall

So, we're just back from the Transportation Town Hall at the Swinging 60s Club. Simple summary: the Hassidim are pissed.

The slightly glib summary would also mention that business owners are also pissed. So was this lady behind us, who represented everyone's palpable displeasure with the new bike lanes on Kent Street.

Speaking as a dude who bikes every day and is wholeheartedly in favor of bike lanes, including one on yummy wide Kent Street, I can get their beefs.

The Hassidim can't safely drop their kids off and it does sound like some cops didn't get the memo about stopping exceptions, leading to some perhaps dubious tickets.

The business owners and their bunged up deliveries most certainly get the short end of the stick.

So, the bike lane is not ideal. As a biker, I don't ask for the world. I want a basically car-free space, where I feel might rights and person are respected: I am not scrapping for a wee sliver of the road that I most certainly deserve to be on.

Anyhow, David Yassky sort of played conciliator and agreed that there should be further discussion amongst affected parties.

Which leads me to a few final thoughts:

1. People, we got our asses kicked. The Hassids, business-owners and pissy lady factions showed up en masse. All we bikers had were a few valient, voluble bikers...but just a few!

Anyhow, I am new to this politics stuff and perhaps Yassky was posturing/throwing a bone. If there is a subsequent pow-wow of some consequence, bikers should be heard!

2. This section of Kent is part of the proposed Brooklyn Greenway. I am a fan of the Greenway and do a bit of work for them. It absolutely seems like a great project. Still, I would be curious to know how necessary a continuous Kent path is...I suspect it does make a very real difference and I for one like it and I would gladly stop if the cars stopping also do it in an orderly fashion that respects my space.

Can we Learn to Live within our Means?

So, this morning, front page of the New York Times is this article.

I was struck by this quote:

Clearly the market does not need the oil because demand has collapsed,” said Francisco Blanch, a commodity strategist at Merrill Lynch. “Just look at new car sales. That gives you a sense of the magnitude of this crisis.”

So, apparently people have continued to NOT use their cars, and therefore, among other things, there is less need for oil, which becomes gas. This is all contrary to this article which claims:

The sharp decline in gasoline use earlier this year — with volume down nearly 10 percent in some weeks — suggested to many people, including the automobile companies, that a permanent change in American habits might be at hand. But with gasoline prices falling drastically in recent weeks, some American drivers are returning to their old ways.

The October 29th article goes on to say that historically, after times when gas is expensive, such as the seventies oil crisis, Americans have returned to burning gas with wanton disregard.

But in the late 1980s, as prices eased, people switched back to larger cars. With prices low through the 1990s and early 2000s, sport utility vehicles became the vehicle of choice for many Americans. Those vehicles, because they were technically light trucks, were subject to lower efficiency requirements.

And, this is all evident on the streets everyday, filled curb-to-curb with Tahoes, Escalades and other massive idiot-boxes.

The reality is that Americans will never get rid of their cars. We've built a society that is dependent on them. As an aspirational society, where consumption equals social standing, big fancy cars aren't going away either.

But the recent fall in consumption is heartening to me.

If people can make small changes in their lives that can have such a dramatic effect in the aggregate, then there is hope for the future. The problem is getting people to stick with it.

Willy Lewis, a nurse’s aide, said he just started mowing his lawn every week again after mowing it every third week this summer to save gasoline. Katina Sneed, a housewife who would like to work as a secretary, complained that higher gasoline prices had impeded her ability to find employment.
“I didn’t have enough money to put in the car to look for a job” until the last few weeks, she said. “I can do a little more searching now.”

I mean, Mr. Lewis, really... do you need to mow your lawn so often? Couldn't you do a trim with a manual lawnmower? And Ms. Sneed... have you heard of the internet? Where do you have to go to look for work? Do they still have hiring halls in Louisiana?

Here's hoping that everyone goes to manual power for at least a little bit. We live beyond our means when it comes to credit, and when it comes to energy. When you are the power source, you are living within your means, any more is credit at the expense of economic and ecological factors. If you ride your bike to get around, you've done a huge bit, keep doing it, and lets all do it together so we can be safer...

I mean bike commuting.

My optimism may have been overstated

Things are better for cyclists in New York than ever before. That is a fact.

Then this came up on the internet yesterday:

Please attend tomorrow night's Brooklyn CB1 meeting to speak out in favor of the new Kent Ave bike lane, a key route in the Brooklyn bike network and a vital link in the greenway connection:

CB1 Transportation Committee Meeting

Wednesday, November 12

211 Ainslie Street, corner of Manhattan Avenue

6:30 pm --- registration for public speaking ENDS at 6:15 (get there at 6pm and sign up!)

Bike lane opponents have sent a letter to elected officials, the press and City Hall. It is imperative that local cyclists and supporters of livable streets attend tomorrow night's meeting, sign up to and continue to speak in favor of this important transportation improvement for the neighborhood, for now and for the future.

Those bike lane opponents were primarily the residents of the buildings along Kent Avenue, who were pissed that they couldn't park their cars on the street anymore. Then there were business owners who couldn't load and unload in front of their businesses. On the other side were guys wearing all sorts of 'technical' fabrics and carrying helmets in their hands.

Here's what I learned:

The internet is a wonderful place to stir up hysteria, and the business owners have a point.

So, to the first point. There was no threat of the bike lane being recinded. None. The commuity board voted for the lane to be put in... and that's it. Apparently they can't vote for it to be put OUT. The hysteria on the internet was just that.

The residents along Kent were angry that they had lost their free on street parking. I reminded them, to a chorus of boos, that free street parking was not a right in New York. On the other hand, I thought the businesses were right. They have to be able to unload and load to maintain their businesses.

Lets always remeber that as cyclists we are members of a community, and we have to respect others. We cannot, as Bike Snob says, enter our 'cone of smugness' and not look out.

Oh yeah, read Bike Snob, he does this way better than I do.

Things seem to be better for Bike Commuters

This morning, Jeff brought this to my attention.

The summary is:

The power that be has decided to tackle the great bugaboo in NYC cycling accessibility, which is secure parking for your ride.

I really do think that the more secure parking areas there are, the more bike commuters there will be. It's a simple correlation. I bet there are more people riding bikes in NYC parks for fun on a summers day than there are commuters on any day of the week. Take all their bikes and you'd have a beautiful sight like the one above, taken in Japan.

Of course, in Japan bicycles and parked bicycles are so ubiquitous that they're running out of parking spaces and have to come up with novel parking garages like this one:





I wasn't sure there would be enough parking for all the joyriders turned crusty commuters.

With that question in mind, I decided to examine the issue mathematically. Taking the great 2768591 square foot icon of New York, the Empire State Building, and dividing it by the requisite 7500 square feet of space per bike rack means that the Empire State Building would have to open 369 bike parking spaces on 34th street and 5th. Which would be wonderful, because my optometrist is around there.

The only fear I have is that we'd be concentrating our bikes in a sheltered space allowing bike thieves all the time in the world to steal my possessions. Maybe - hopefully - they'll require a security guard.

Now, the story was originally broken by the Post as is mentioned in the NY1 video. For the sake of journalistic integrity, I checked out the article and was shocked, SHOCKED, to discover the following comment from a fellow reader:

Metamorph wrote:
4 more years of this whiny lunatic? Real estate values are crashing, and this gasbag wants to impose ridiculous requirements like this on builders? Bloomberg is an out of touch busybody with an overbearing sense of "nobles oblige."

Well, I agree! It's about time that Bloomberg, ultra wealthy noble that he is, ought to oblige us with a place to park our no-cost transportation. 'Nobles Oblige' indeed, ya douchebag.

Well, regardless of the parking situation, I'll keep riding - until I can have this guy's commute.

Much love, and promising more posts, more frequently now that I'm unemployed.

-Harry