Local Leader Launches Preemptive Attack Against Three Proposed Bike Lanes


by on Mar 23rd, 2012

Existing and proposed bicycle routes in Community Board 15. Dotted red lines are "potential bike routes." (Click to see the full map)

Community Board 15 Chairperson Theresa Scavo is blasting the city’s plan to add three new bicyle routes in the Sheepshead Bay area, saying it puts cyclists’ lives at risk.

The city’s master plan for bike lanes identifies Avenue Y, Avenue T and Avenue P as potential bike routes within the boundaries of Community Board 15. The exact paths of the bike routes are:

  • Avenue Y between Ocean Parkway and Knapp Street. Knapp Street is also a proposed bike route between Emmons Avenue and Gerritsen Avenue.
  • Avenue T between Stillwell Avenue (where it branches off to Bath Beach and Coney Island) and Gerritsen Avenue.
  • Avenue P between Stillwell Avenue (where it joins another proposed bike route heading up Bay Ridge Parkway) and Nostrand Avenue. At Kings Highway there is a proposed spur that runs up Kings Highway into Canarsie.

While the bicycle routes might look good on paper, providing east-west bike paths to connect Southern Brooklyn communities, as well as intersecting major bike routes already in existence, Scavo said the reality of those roadways does not provide cyclists with safe passage.

“First of all, those plans were made 10 years ago,” Scavo said, referring to the city’s master plan for increased bike transportation. “Avenue P is so dangerous, there are trucks double parked. Avenue Y, with Marhsalls going in and Stop and Shop – how can you have a bike go by those parking lots? It’s ludicrous!”

Scavo has mentioned the issue during her Community Board 15 report at a handful of recent civic meetings. She also contacted the Department of Transportation Brooklyn Commissioner Joseph Palmiere to express the Board’s opposition.

However, according to a DOT spokesperson, the agency has no intention of implementing those routes anytime soon. Additionally, due to recently passed legislation first introduced by City Councilman Lew Fidler, the DOT would need to hold a hearing in conjunction with the local community board before implementing any new lanes in New York City.

But Scavo said she’s just sounding the alarm so that the community is aware, and to keep the DOT from wasting its time with a plan that would be dead-on-arrival.

“I am just alerting them that those are not good locations and don’t even try it,” Scavo said. “Avenue Y is a bottleneck. Avenue T is a bottleneck. And Avenue P is death for anyone who would bike there. I made it clear: those places for bike lanes are out of the question.”

Related posts

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Gene2T

    Bike lane on ave P>? lol  it’s like… 6 flags only better! more adrenaline 

    • Howard from Midwood

      Having more bike lanes is a good idea in my view. So long as the street is wide enough.
      Avenue P has two lanes on each side for much of it’s stretch.
       

      • Guest

         I’m all for bike lanes. However, Avenue P is just plain dumb.

      • http://www.njluxurymotors.com Arthur Borko

        Ave P is not appropriate for Bike Traffic. It’s a major vehicular thoroughfare for trucks between BayRidge/Bensonhurst and Midwood.

  • Cyclelife bike group

    Thanks Theresa, these are terrible bike lane plans. But more bike lanes for the area are in order. 

    • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

      These aren’t bike lanes, they’re bike routes.

      • Cyclelife bike group

        interesting that you make a note of the distinction. Well marked lanes in areas with cops patrolling and ticketing illegally double parked cars will make the area safer for transportation alternatives. 

        • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

          I’m aware. I make the distinction since routes and lanes are 2 different things. Routes (class 3) will have a sign on the side of the road designating it as such but will not have any markings on the roadway, unlike lanes (class 2) which are marked on the roadway. Neither drivers nor the NYPD will likely be aware of the bike route, and the NYPD should be ticketing double parked cars irrelevant of the roads’ status as a bike route. As someone who advocates for bike lanes here in south Brooklyn, I make an effort to be informed and pedantic in these matters, which is how I recognized that Scavo is just grandstanding.

  • Georgia

    The DOT better think twice for these ridiculous bike routes. Way to congested school buses, double parked cars don’t forget the trucks they can not help it either. They have to deliver and where are they going to park. Now you have a bike lane this does not make any sense but what in this city makes sense? I am down the block from Marshealls I am thinking about the nightmare with all that congestion. 

    • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

      Why should some assholes who double parked their cars or delivery trucks force me to contend with cars in open traffic? They should be ticketed for obstructing traffic. You’re valuing a motor vehicle breaking the law over the safety of a cyclist.

      • Georgia

        Be ticketed absoulity. A good place is Ane U the city could make a lot of money there are plenty of double parked cars & trucks. This causes inconveince for all city buses also. In plain english people don’t care. In all neighborhoods there are all kinds of obstructing traffic. My concern is Ave Y with a bike route lets not get off the subject here.

        • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

          Agreed on Ave U, last time I drove back from my grandma’s driving east from McDonald Ave was a slalom course; I spent more time in the opposite lane than my own.

          I don’t think Ave Y is a good place for a bike route or bike lane. That much was settled in my top comment about how Scavo is grandstanding about a change on a map, but not on a road.

          Your comment though, perfectly illustrated how people are willing to put up with cars constantly breaking the law, but at first mention of a bike lane they get up in arms about it, as if that is the reason traffic might be bad on the road, not the cars themselves. The community doesn’t utter a peep about the NYPD not enforcing parking and moving violations of cars, but when someone proposes a bike lane, which would SAVE lives, people come out of the woodwork to voice their opposition. That mentality of valuing car complacency over the safety of cyclists is just maddening and it breaks my heart when the neighborhood I love thinks in such irrational and anachronistic terms.

  • BrooklynBus

    The worst ones are Avenue P and Knapp Street where a traffic lane would be taken away. Driving in Brooklyn with only two highways is slow enough. We don’t need it to be any slower. I was in Queens last weekend and had to drive from Astoria across to Bayside. Didn’t expect the trip to take only 15 minutes. That type of trip in Brooklyn would take 45.

    • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

      Read my comment and learn the difference between a bike route (class 3) and bike lane (class 2) and you’ll realize how right my assessment of Scavo’s grandstanding is based on the difference between what you thought was proposed and actually was.

      • BrooklynBus

        I just looked at the bicycle map for the distinction. But you are wrong when you say that drivers will not notice the distinction for a route. A route asks you to share the lane with a bicycle. That means if there is only one lane and a bike in front of you, you cannot pass it and I don’t believe that bikes have to pull over to let you pass if they don’t want to. You must just follow it at 20 mph or less. Okay for chronically congested streets as far as not delaying cars, but not safe for bikes either. You would have to be nuts to ride a bike on Avenue J on the potential bike route.

        • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

          That means if there is only one lane and a bike in front of you, you cannot pass it

          That’s the case with any cyclist on any one lane road. If I were to take the lane, which is my right to do so you have no right to pass me unless I pull to the right and allow you to. That has nothing to do with bike routes since those are just preferred routes for cyclists, not roads with special rules for drivers/cyclists.

          N.Y. VAT. LAW § 1234.a:
          Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skate shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand  shoulder in  such  a  manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Conditions to be taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, fixed  or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, in-line skates, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or traffic lanes too narrow for a bicycle or person on in-line skates and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within the lane.

          And drivers will not notice the distinction because if you ask any driver if they’re aware Sheepshead Bay Rd, or Emmons Ave are bike routes you’ll hear a no 99% of the time.

          I can also argue that by definition, any street with curbside parking precludes riding on the curb since parked cars create an unsafe condition which puts me in danger of being doored. I take the lane for safety reasons on Sheepshead Bay Rd. and you bet your ass I don’t pull to the right to let you pass within inches of me there because it’s too narrow for side by side traffic.

          I don’t entirely blame you, though, for thinking otherwise, because despite the DOT’s efforts to implement bike routes/lanes, they’re not doing as good a job educating drivers on the rights of cyclists and their obligation to share the road. I feel that’s a crucial component in cyclist/driver coexistence, and that’s what was missing when a driver did not acknowledge my right to the road and intentionally attempted to run me into a parked car this Saturday in crown heights.

          • Bloombergsucks

            You sound like a pompous cyclist. YOU need to learn to share the road with automobiles. Automobiles have a right to go 30 mph. Your bike can’t do that. You know that. Don’t like it? Take your bike and move on out to the country. This is the big city. We have turned important roads that were two lanes each way for years into one lane to appease you and it has done nothing for safety. Only punish.

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            The guy who claims that cars have a right to go 30mph is calling someone pompous? Tell that to the cop who’d ticket you for reckless driving for going 30 in low visibility or a snow storm. Don’t confuse maximum speed limit for minimum speed limit. Your problem is that your definition of “sharing” is just cyclists yielding their safety to your convenience.

            Oh, and you make yourself seem even more like an ignorant jackass by telling someone to go out to the country, where cars are the only viable mode of transport, from the city, where the majority of the population don’t own cars and rely on alternate modes of transportation. Stop playing the victim by pretending you’re being punished when you’re in traffic, because YOU are traffic.

          • http://485i.com Brian Van Nieuwenhoven

            Ummm, have to correct you – no one has a right to any speed on the road unless there is a speed minimum set. 
            If you are not taking a freeway from point A to point B, there is no reasonable expectation for traffic to move at or near the speed limit at all times.

            The city is filled with local streets that are treated like highways, but they are all local streets regardless and you may have to contend with slower-traveling motor vehicles AND bicycles and anything else that may typically happen on a local street. You might have to stop for kids crossing against the light… or for store deliveries that are briefly stopping and unloading… or for pushcarts that are being brought to their destinations. 

            Most drivers think the opposite – they must go 30-40mph at all times on a 30mph road unless there is a red light or a traffic line. Even a bike that’s going 25mph will get aggressively honked off the road until the crazed driver behind him/her gets the  right of way to pass in order to achieve that extra “entitled” 5mph. Many drivers don’t think like that, but certainly at least a couple hundred thousand of them do (including every taxi driver and commercial driver) and many more act as if they think that way without even realizing it.It’s not the slower-travelling road users who are incorrect, it’s those who think that a 30mph zone is a 30mph guarantee. We shouldn’t even need the bike lanes and the bike routes – they’re only a concession to a dangerous driving environment on local roads that are not being used by motor vehicles for what they were designed for – sharing.

          • BrooklynBus

            Where in that law does it state that bikes own the roadway and can block a lane and not have to pull over for a faster car?  It says bikes must keep to the right and not interfere with traffic where there is no designated bike route. The only time you have that right if there is a sign indicating that the lane must be shared by cars and bikes.  The ones I’ve seen have only been a few blocks long where it is no problem to drive behind a slow bike, but not for miles where it does become a problem.

            If there is no lane share indication, you do not have the right to use the entire lane on one lane roads without giving cars the right of way such as Sheepshead Bay Road which is not even a bike route as you say it is. Show me otherwise.

          • Andrew

            It’s right there in the law that he quoted: “Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skate shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand  shoulder in  such  a  manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Conditions to be taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, fixed  or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, in-line skates, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or traffic lanes too narrow for a bicycle or person on in-line skates and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within the lane.”

            The law doesn’t distinguish between bike routes and non-bike routes. The only purpose of a bike route is to recommend a route through an area to cyclists who are passing through and might not be familiar with the local streets.

            I don’t know where you get the idea that class 3 bike routes have any legal significance on whether bikes may “take the lane” or not, but you’re wrong. The law has now been quoted twice in this thread.

          • BrooklynBus

            Okay but that doesn’t give someone the right to just stay in the traffic lane (unless it is a ride share lane) for blocks and blocks delaying traffic. He must move over the first chance he gets to let traffic pass when there are no more surface hazards in his path. You can’t consider every car door a hazard unless someone is behind the wheel. He can only stay in the car lane “when reasonably necessary.”

          • Andrew

            If the traffic lanes are too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within the lane, then the cyclist may take the lane. That’s stated explicitly as an example of one of the conditions to be taken into consideration. The law doesn’t give a maximum distance.

            In my experience driving (I don’t bike, so I can’t speak from that perspective), I find that cyclists usually pull to the side within a block or two to let faster traffic by – but if they’re tailgated, honked at, or otherwise threatened, all bets are off.

            Again, this is the case regardless of whether the street is a designated class 3 bike route or not. The law is exactly the same in either case.

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            A perfect demonstration of why I take the lane: http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/animations/lane-control/

            and a good write up
            http://cyclingsavvy.org/hows-my-driving/

            about the benefits of taking the lane, for drivers as well as cyclists with a video displaying the difference in behavior of drivers when a cyclists is taking the lane, and when he’s hugging the right. It’s written from the perspective of a Floridian, but every law applicable exists in NY save for the 3 foot clearance. Hopefully we’d get that soon in NYS.

          • etherealglimpse

            In the bike map, sheepshead bay rd is not a bike route/path etc. http://d.pr/FeRB

            Emmons is however. 

  • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

    /facepalm

    This is just grandstanding by Scavo. Routes are class 3 and unmarked, with the exception of a sign along the road saying “Bike route.” All the DOT would be adding is an orange line on a map, and no one in Sheepshead Bay would even know a bike route was added with the exception of cyclists.

    This is why I stand for bike LANES (class 2, marked) on Emmons Ave, to upgrade the bike route to a bike lane so drivers are aware of bicycle traffic.

    I will agree that Avenues P & Y are not the safest place to ride and should be reconsidered, but I don’t agree that T is a bottleneck and it does not get enough motor traffic to even cause a stir; I often ride it both East and West. Scavo is beating the drums of war to stir up bicycle haters who are completely ignorant of what the DOT is proposing, which she herself is probably guilty of. Instead she should be offering alternatives to the proposed routes.

    • nolastname

      Avenue T is worse than Avenue U from Coney Island Avenue to Ocean Avenue.  Probably a traffic signal problem combined with the schools.
      I avoid that area of T 8am-5pm. 

    • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

      Exactly.  Bike lanes to not cause traffic.  They might actually make auto traffic flow better because there might be one less double parked car.

  • Allan from Gravesend

    Unfortunately cyclists have been given more roadway without taking any responsibility for observing traffic laws.  Identifying so-called bike routes just give them a feeling of entitlement that they equally share the road with motor vehicles.  On narrow two way avenues cars are forced to avoid them by veering towards the center reducing any cushion of space between on coming cars and  increasing the chances of head on collisions.  Drivers and cyclists are at greater risk.  Here is a photo that I took during last year’s city bike tour along Neptune Avenue at Ocean Pkwy.  The light is red for the bikers as you can see.

    • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

      Unfortunately motorists have been given more roadway without taking any
      responsibility for observing traffic laws.  Identifying so-called lanes just give them a feeling of entitlement that they equally share
      the road with cyclists.  On narrow two way avenues cyclists are forced
      to avoid them by veering towards the parked cars reducing any cushion of
      space between opening doors and  increasing the chances of head on
      collisions.  Drivers and cyclists are at greater risk.  Here is an article about how Sheepshead Bay has 3 out 5 of the most dangerous roads based on car-pedestrian fatalities: http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2011/02/brooklyns-most-dangerous-roads-are-right-here/#more-13451

      Yay! I get to play road entitlement madlibs again!

      Oh and btw, the NYC bike tour doesn’t ride through Ocean Pkwy/Neptune.

      • Allan from Gravesend

        Hey Lost, I’m glad we agree that pedestrians, cyclists and motorists are at risk using our roadways.  Motorists don’t deserve a pass for bad driving and deserve to be penalized for going through stop signs, red lights, etc.  But cyclists and pedestrians should also respect the traffic laws.  And I’m sure you’d admit that cyclists and pedestrians only wait to cross when there is no traffic barring their way rather than wait for the light to change.  Everyone has to obey the laws.  And whether it was the NYC bike tour or other sponsored event by TA you can see that      there was a lack of concern about obeying traffic signals.  And by the way I had the right of way as a pedestrian to cross Neptune Avenue but prevented by the pack of riders that flew past. And that’s when I took the pic.

        • nolastname

          Cycles should have registrations of sort. An identifying plate. Delivery, messenger, racers, places that rent them out….and no not the kiddies. People that ride on the streets. Again I won’t argue the usual cons to that, just seems right.
          Think of all the $ the city can make giving out laminated plates.

        • Janen

          Most cyclists I see do not think that the vehicle and traffic laws apply to them. When have you ever seen a cyclist stop at a red light… never!  Maybe the police should start ticketing them when they break the law

      • nolastname

        And I get to say put some ID on it. Ya’ want what cars got. Identify your mode of transportation. 
        I will not go through the usual arguments. 

    • http://www.brucebrodinsky.com Bruce B

      In our neighborhood, close to 0% of cyclists obey traffic rules. I would challenge anyone to walk the neighborhood with me and find one that does. If they want more road, they have to stop making excuses, like ” cars drive badly too”.

      • Andrew

        In our neighborhood, close to 0% of drivers obey traffic rules. I would challenge anyone to walk the neighborhood with me and find one that does. If they want exclusive access to the roads, they have to stop making excuses, like “cyclists drive badly too”.

        • BrooklynBus

          You know that is not true.

          • Andrew

            So saith the one who had no idea that he was legally obligated to yield while turning across a bike lane, and nearly killed a cyclist in the process.

          • Bloombergsucks

            What a bunch of crap and you know it. Cyclist do not pay attention and do whatever they please. Cyclist will make up any lie to further their cause and dispute all facts. Please ust stay on your own turf in Park Slope or Williamsburg eating your $10 chocolate bar. Automobiles are a part of life here.

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            Your attempt at making a point is as successful as Michael J. Fox attempting Origami, with apologies to Mr. Fox of course.

          • Andrew

            I don’t ride a bicycle, I’ve never lived in Park Slope or Williamsburg, and I certainly don’t pay $10 for chocolate. Nice try, though.

            There are a lot of people in New York, and they’re not all exactly like you. I suggest you make peace with that fact, since it isn’t likely to change any time soon.

          • BrooklynBus

            You can’t yield to someone who can’t be seen.  He knew my intentions because my signal was on.  I did not know his intentions. Just because he is not obligated to wear reflective clothing, it would have been smart for him to do so at night in a rain.  He also could have blown a whistle or horn to alert me he was there.  A functioning horn is required of bicycles but he probably just didn’t have one.  You are certainly not being objective here, but when are you?  Cyclist always right, motorist always wrong.  That’s how you see it.

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            You do realize that you just created a hypothetical with absolutely no evidence to back it up to justify your actions and simultaneously accused someone of absolute blame on one party. Pot, meet Kettle.

          • Andrew

            I’m sorry, Allan, the law is the law. And according to the law, you are required to yield to cyclists when turning across a bike lane. That means that, legally, the onus is 100% on you to make sure that you are not turning across a cyclist’s path. That’s the law regardless of the time of day, regardless of the weather, regardless of what the cyclist’s wardrobe.

            You don’t have to like the law. You don’t have to think the law makes sense. But the law is the law, and you broke it.

            Fortunately, the cyclist took evasive action in time.

          • BrooklynBus

            Andrew, you have no way of knowing he took evasive action. He may have wanted to make a left turn anyway. If he was paying attention and saw the signal and wanted to go straight, it would have been just dumb to keep going without momentarily stopping to let me make the turn. But in you book cyclists don’t have to be smart or use common sense because the law is the law.

          • Andrew

            @164b88b5feda652c00faa544c6ebc3f8:disqus The cyclist was, in fact, turning – you said so yourself in the previous thread. But that doesn’t change the fact that you broke the law by failing to yield.

            Be my guest and make all the suggestions you want for how the cyclist should have responded. But don’t tell me that drivers obey the law when you yourself brazenly broke the law and announced it on a blog.

          • BrooklynBus

            To Andrew: You can’t yield to someone who makes himself invisible by being dumb enough not to wear reflective clothing at night in a fog. I’ll repeat we have no way of knowing if he took evasive action or not.

            A friend of mine hit a cyclist who was racing at 11PM dressed in all black. My friend was traveling at 10mph across an intersection where the street light was broken. He wasn’t looking where he was going and took evasive action at the last moment and wasn’t hurt. I was in the passenger seat and saw him coming at the last few seconds

  • ReadBetweenTheLines

    Doesn’t anyone see what’s actually going on here?

    These bike lanes they keep trying to add to South Brooklyn streets are part of the plan to attract hipsters/yuppies to come to our neighborhoods.

    http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2011/12/cycling-advocate-makes-case-for-emmons-ave-bike-lane-community-stands-opposed/

    http://www.sheepsheadbites.com/2012/01/transportation-alternatives-takes-this-months-monthly-ride-to-emmons/

    • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

      WAKE UP SHEEPLE! PEOPLE WANT TO COME HERE AND PATRONIZE OUR BUSINESSES! /sarcasm.

      • guest

        Some do. Absolutely. Some however, truly envision a world of turning all of Brooklyn into Wyoming and will gladly overpay to make it that way. 

        • Guest

          What does that mean?Turning Brooklyn into Wyoming?

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            I think he’s against turning Brooklyn into dairy farms or something, I can’t figure out his babbling. Maybe he’s lactose intolerant and hates cheese?

          • Guest

            I bike and I drive, but I only stick to class 1 lanes. The drivers in NY are just too unpredictable.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

            That’s a good idea. This would diminish the population greatly and these arguments would become unnecessary.

            The hipsters will move back to Wisconsin. It’s cheaper to live among the dairy farms there.

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            I for one would love to see dairy cows grazing in Marine Park, it would make the soccer games more interesting.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

             I can just imagine the inventive rule changes.

          • Andrew

            He thinks that real New Yorkers all drive cars, while in Wyoming people use other modes.

            He might be surprised to learn that most New York City households (and most Brooklyn households) don’t have cars, while virtually every Wyoming household has at least one car.

          • Bloombergsucks

            Stop spewing crap from your piehole.  In your view though I suppose all those cars on the street and in peoples driveways are placed there by magical forces or maybe you believe they are transformers?

          • nolastname
          • Guest

            Huh? Just because you see cars on the street doesn’t mean they represent the majority of people.  If you see dogs on the street, does that mean there are more dogs than people in New York City?

            The majority of New Yorkers, about 54%, do not own cars.  An even larger majority do not use them to drive to work every day.

          • Andrew

            I didn’t say that there were no cars. I said that most New York City households don’t have cars. Do you know what “most” means?

    • Howard from Midwood

      And the folks from downtown, Red Hook, Park Slope, etc. don’t come here already!? 

      Ever hear of that big bicycle path that has been around way before we were?
      It’s called Ocean Parkway! 

      • guest

        I have to agree with readbetween. Sure people can come here via Ocean Parkway But it’s not difficult to argue that everything being done with the roads and bicycle lanes does coincide with the arrival of the hipsters. Bloomberg knows their parents and that these idiots for the most part aren’t the brightest of the bunch and will happily shell out more money then they should. As  Mr. “We love our rich people” has said, he is more inclined to tailor to them and say screw you to everyone else who has established themselves here.  

        • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

          Your conclusion makes more sense if you were to say “everything being done with the roads and bicycle lanes does coincide with the arrival of the dutch.” I mean they’re the ones who love bicycles and NYC was once known as New Amsterdam! By golly, you’ve uncovered a conspiracy worthy of the Da Vinci code!

          All jokes aside I’m rather not enjoying this side that SHB is showing lately. People are unwelcoming to the Chinese/Russian/Turkish immigrants, but they’re unwelcoming to NYC transplants as well. Politicians are pandering to one particular group and much too willing to give taxpayer money to religious groups. The residents are complacent with ineffective transportation and unwilling to consent to changes that would alleviate problems. Businesses shutter due to lack of community support and the ones that replace them just further saturate the market. This area can be great, but no one is willing to accept that to become great we cannot be stagnant and changes must come. Progress cannot be be made by saying no to everything. I know this side of the neighborhood isn’t the real Sheepshead Bay and we cannot allow such an ugly side to become the face of our community.

          • http://www.brucebrodinsky.com Bruce B

            I agree. Seems like (as I wrote previously), the theme song of SB is Groucho’s ” Whatever It Is, I’m Against It”. Cheap stores? No good. Fancy stores? No good. And every idea can be shot down with “creates parking problems”. Let’s just barricade SB so nobody can get in.

          • BrooklynBus

            That’s what the Upper West Side is proposing by making the entire area a slow zone with a 20 mph speed limit at all times on all streets to discourage all auto traffic from going through the area. They don’t realize it woud also slow down buses too. But what do those NIMBYs care about anyone else? And DOT is actually considering it.

            Imagine if every neighborhood thought that way. I hope we are better than that in Sheepshead Bay.

          • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

            The MBCG and CB15 were planning to submit a slow zone application themselves before a DOT rep told them MB didn’t qualify because of the school/hospital concentration in the area. Slow zones are meant to increase police traffic enforcement and slow traffic to safer speed. They only deter fast and reckless drivers, not reasonable and responsible drivers. The speed at which buses already run in Manhattan is well below 20mph because of traffic congestion, so if the slow zone does function as a traffic deterrent it will actually improve bus speed and efficacy.

          • Andrew

            @twitter-16898606:disqus Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of people who travel to the Upper West Side do so by subway. Once there, they get around the area on foot. This would hardly form a barricade – it would make it a safer and more attractive area to visit.

          • BrooklynBus

            There are plenty of times when you can go the speed limit in Manhattan. Sometimes you can go 30 or 40 blocks without stopping. You can get from 96th Street to 14th Street in a matter of minutes. How ridiculous would it be for cars to crawl at 20 mph when there is no traffic. The MTA would have to add running time during times of light traffic increasing costs unnecessarily. Rather than do that, more likely they would just increase headways.  Taxi fares would go up because they would also have o travel slower. This is just a NIMBY proposal that says “screw you, keep out of our neighborhood.”  What would travel in this city be like if the limit on every street was 20 mph and everyone had to listen because there were camera on every block?  Think about that.  The City would just stop.

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            “How ridiculous would it be for cars to crawl at 20 mph when there is no traffic”

            Because these are city streets and not highways.  People are dying from being hit by cars at 30+ mph.

          • nolastname

            Guest may be exaggerating a bit about the hipsters. There are a lot of folks coming from Green Point, Williamsberg, Dumbo and Soho via bike lanes. The williamsberg Bridge is awesome but the on ramp is a PIA Many of the people that left Manhattan to those parts are now very interested in Sheepshead Bay and believe it or not Far Rockaway is starting to happen.
            I don’t believe bike lanes are the savior for the side of SHB, it’s attitude that needs change.
            All jokes aside, please delete your last one.

        • NI51965

          You have too much time on your hands, if you worry that “hipsters” are going to invade. 

        • Brianbeach85

          What are you talking about, hipsters? What do these areas have to do with hipsters? I am a 26 year old who was born & raised in Brighton beach who enjoys riding my bike around Southern Brooklyn. These bikelanes cater to New Yorkers- period. I appreciate them, and you must not ride a bike since you don’t. 

    • NI51965

      Nothing ruins a neighborhood more, than having young people who work move into it. And hippies disappeared about 35 or so years ago.

      • http://www.brucebrodinsky.com Bruce B

        I’m afraid beatniks might move in.

        Signed,
        Maynard G. Krebs

        • http://twitter.com/Lostinservice Lostinservice

          Work!

  • Brianbeach85

    Republicans= paranoia

  • Danny G

    I love how Scavo’s all like “This wont work! This won’t work either! And definitely not this one!” without any mention of another place that it WOULD work.

  • Andrew

    Two of the three bike routes appear on the 1997 Brooklyn Bicycle Network map. They only show up on the current map because they’ve never been formally removed. They’ve been there since the Chris Lynn days.

    There is no active proposal to install any of these bike routes (and as @twitter-16898606:disqus  points out, they’re bike routes, not bike lanes). The Sadik-Khan DOT has never installed bike lanes without community support, and community support is now required by law.

    So what exactly is Scavo afraid of?

    I do agree with her about the dangerous conditions on P and Y. Is Scavo working with DOT and the NYPD to do something about them?

    • BrooklynBus

      Scavo is afraid of another Oriental Blvd when she woke up one day and a bike lane suddenly appeared without any community consultation or approval. And the CB and neighborhood groups have been trying unsuccessfully to get it removed for the past 5 years.

      • Andrew

        Then Scavo will be glad to know that the current DOT commissioner, unlike (apparently) her predecessor, always consults with the community before installing bike lanes. She did so even before it was required by law.

        And, for at least the third time, the proposals, if they can be called proposals at all, are for bike routes, not bike lanes.

        • BrooklynBus

          “And, for the third time, the proposals, if they can be proposals at all, are or bike routes, not bike lanes.”

          Why are you directing that statement at me?

          Perhaps Sadik-Khan consults with communities first as you say before she institutes bike lanes, but she also showed no willingness to listen to the community to overturn a decision made by her predecessor, a decision that the overwhelming majority of the community was against. They even proposed to move the lane two blocks over, not eliminate it, and DOT doesn’t want to hear that either.

          • Andrew

            Perhaps so. But what does that have to do with the issue at hand?

            (By the way, Fidler’s new legislation also requires community input before a bike lane is removed, and that isn’t something Sadik-Khan’s DOT has always done.)

          • BrooklynBus

            Because you claim Sadik-Khan is so community minded.  I just wanted to show you she is not.

          • Andrew

            You’re putting words in my mouth again. All I said is that she’s never installed bike lanes without support of the local community board.

          • Bloombergsucks

            She certainly is not that open to listening or even caring about community concerns. She has flat out lied about having the support of the community boards when writing letters in local newspapers. She, the savior of cyclists, queen of the bikes, adversary of speed, has dangled her CARkeys with a wide eyed toothy grin in front of the camera as if to give a big F**K YOU to every last New Yorker. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am sure she does not live anywhere within the 5 boroughs and thus does not contend with any of her “safety improvements” that have gone up at an alarming rate in the past 5 years. This woman has too much power and like Bloomberg will not let anything get in her way to do what she wants. 

          • Andrew

            Tell us how you really feel.

  • Pingback: Today’s Headlines | Streetsblog New York City

  • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

    If there were a safe way to bike from Park Slope to Sheepshead Bay there would often be one less car on the road, mine.

    A bike lane on a street like Ave P would not slow traffic at all. It might stop someone from double parking.

    • http://www.nedberke.com Ned Berke

      I do the ride between Park Slope and Sheepshead fairly often. Where’s the problem?

      • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

        Getting from Ocean Parkway to Nostrand Ave.  I could get killed going around the entitled double parkers.

        • http://www.nedberke.com Ned Berke

          Oh, I see. Have you tried going down Avenue P? I hear it’s okay.  ;)

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            I think I will try to be on Bedford as much as possible.  Every intersection on Ocean Pky is a nightmare

          • http://www.nedberke.com Ned Berke

            I’ve almost lost my life a few times on Bedford as well. Between the doors and the guys who like to push over into the bike lane to screw with cyclists, it gets aggravating. Honestly, when I need to get between Sheepshead Bay and Prospect Park, I go up on East 15th Street and down on East 14th Street. It’s fast and quiet for the most part, and both streets have access over the train line that cuts across Midwood. 

          • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

            that sounds like a plan.

          • BrooklynBus

            That’s right.  If I rode a bike I would do the same.  Those are the types of streets where bike routes belong, not on heavily trafficked streets.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/lisanne001 Lisanne!

             Side streets are always best, unless they are too narrow. Bedford is a narrow two way street that really can’t support bike lanes very well.

  • LLQBTT

    I rode my bike in and around Sheepshead Bay for many years, and at all times of the day, in traffic, on side streets in rain, in snow, hot, freezing, alongside buses, big rigs and so on and so on.  Ms. Scavo hasn’t the first clue what it’s like to be a cyclist there, and her grandstanding is just that. 

    Here’s when I felt safest:  When I had a dedicated ROW.  Examples, Ocean Pkwy bike path (EXCEPT for the extremely dangerous intersections, i.e.ALL) and the Shore Pkwy bike path (west of Bay Pkwy and east of Emmons).

    The next safest was on a very quiet street.

    So, since these are not readily available on an east-west through route in Sheepshead Bay, and I am not advocating for one (as much as closing Neck Rd to traffic would be the closest to cycling/pedestrian nirvana and would revitalize the street and make it a destination almost immediately), then it makes the most sense to have (i) a well-marked bike path on 1 of these streets OR (ii) and ‘shared’ lane that is extremely weel marked as such.  The problem with (i) & (ii) however is that the markings wear out, so this year’s well marked route is in 3 year’s time barely noticeable.  Nowadays, I will seek out bike routes if they are convenient for my route because they ARE safer.  Riding ‘out there’ in mixed traffic is extremely dangerous.

    Oh, and don’t worry, except for day trips, the hipsters have no plans to ‘invade’ Sheepshead Bay any time like ever. 

  • BrooklynBus

    Me: “How ridiculous would it be for cars to crawl at 20 mph when there is no traffic”

    Chicken Underwear: “Because these are city streets and not highways. People are dying from being hit by cars at 30+ mph.”

    Yes they are not highways and that’s why the speed limit is 30 and not 50.  The problem is that 30 is an average number that was chosen.  The truth is that on many streets is it perfectly safe to drive at 35 or even 40 mph.  While on many side streets, 30 is way too fast and a more appropriate speed would only be 15 or 20 mph.  On very narrow streets, it should only be 10 or 15 mph and those speeds are for good weather. You have to use common sense which unfortunately cannot be legislated.  

    The city doesn’t want to spend the money to put signs on every street indicating what is appropriate for that particular street.  It would also be somewhat impractical unless technology in the future could find another way of doing this.  So they picked 30 mph as an an average speed limit.

    People see 30 and think that is the speed they should go on any street regardless if it makes sense or not and that’s why pedestrians are hurt or killed. According to your logic since fewer people are killed when the limit is lower we should just lower the limit to 20 all over.  How about 15 or 10 all over? That would mean even fewer deaths? Let’s just outlaw motor vehicles all together. Then we only have to worry about collisions between speeding cyclists and pedestrians.  Then we can even outlaw bikes and not have to worry about that either, only people bumping into each other. 

    • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

      Because drivers don’t use common sense.  Once most people get in a car they want to get from point A to point B as soon as possible.

      • BrooklynBus

        That is absolutely ridiculous.  If most drivers did not use common sense there would be far more accidents than there are. It would mean that the likelihood of someone getting into an accident when getting into a car would be over 50%. The truth is that accidents are the exception not the rule. Most people get behind the wheel hundreds or thousands of times without having an accident.

        To say that most drivers are bad is like saying most MTA workers or most government workers or most cyclists don’t use care and are bad. Yes there are some aggressive drivers who only care about getting from point A to point B and for them the speed limit is how close the next car is in front of them.  I also deplore such drivers, the ones who change lanes 10 times or more within a single minute. But the vast majority are  drivers who exercise caution and are not like that.  

        • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

          No, I think most drivers are good.  That is why the streets are not flowing in blood.

          But on accident every hundred or thousand times is still a lot.  

          As I type this my children are walking home from school and all I what sits on my mind is that one of  the most likely cause of death for a child in NYC is being hit by a car.

    • Andrew

      No, Allan, 30 is not an arbitrary number. A pedestrian struck by a car at 40 mph is 3.5 times more likely to be killed than a pedestrian struck at 30 mph. That’s why the city speed limit is 30.

      Just as there are a few streets with higher speed limits, there’s no reason that there should be no parts of the city with lower speed limits. If a highly dense, highly pedestrian-oriented, highly transit-accessible neighborhood like the Upper West Side wants the speed limit lowered to 20, I see nothing wrong with that. Through drivers can stay on the highway, avoid the area entirely, or respect the 20 mph limit as they pass through an area in which they are the interlopers.

  • JoeCH

    This map shows roughly a 3-mile stretch where currently no east-west bike route is available. You can argue all day and night which street is the best place is to put one, but don’t for second pretend it can’t be at least one of them. If not P, then R. If not T, then S. People need to bike east-west and are going to do so even if no bike route is provided, so you might as well pick one and make it safer for bikes instead of going on and on about the EXISTING dangers like double-parked trucks, driveways, and bottlenecks. Those dangers only emphasize how urgent the existing need for bike infrastructure is.

  • murray lantner

    Avenue T would make a wonderful bike lane, Avenue Y not bad, Avenue P not good, unless some other modifications to Avenue P are made.  I’ve been asking for an Avenue T bike lane to be striped for years. 

  • Pingback: Today’s Headlines | Body Local NYC

  • Janen

    There is no room for bike lanes on Avenue Y, the traffic in the late afternoon is already a nightmare being backed up. 
    Lately the way they are converting many streets from two lanes into one and painting all those ridiculous lines in the streets there is not even enough room for cars let alone bikesBTW all bikers out there should remember that there are traffic laws which have to be followed while riding your bike, this means when the light turns red, stop going through red Lights!!!

    • http://www.chickenunderwear.com Chicken Underwear

      But Ave Y is a one lane street.  A bike lane will not change that.  Painting “those ridiculous lines”  will not slow traffic.  In fact it might make traffic move steadier by discouraging double parking.

  • Guest

    Why can’t we get protected  bike lanes like near Prospect Park or Grand Street in Manhattan? You have the Bike lane between the side walk and parked cars, so its much safer Besides we have the room to do it in southern Brooklyn. They should have done that with Redford ave in the first place. Make it a protected Class 1 bike lane.