City Council Passes Legislation To Reduce Citywide Speed Limit, With Mixed Support From Local Pols

51

25 mph speed limit

The New York City Council yesterday passed legislation that reduces the citywide speed limit on residential streets from 30 miles per hour to 25 mph, a move that lawmakers and advocates said would, if properly enforced, dramatically reduce traffic-related injuries and fatalities.

After state legislators voted in June to allow the city to lower the speed limit, the Council approved the bill, sponsored by Councilman David Greenfield, that aims to slow vehicles on streets where speed limits are not posted – meaning roads overseen by the state Department of Transportation (such as expressways and parkways) will not be affected. The reduction is part of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Vision Zero initiative, which aims to dramatically curb traffic injuries and deaths over the next decade.

“Reducing the default speed limit in New York City is the lynchpin of Vision Zero,” Greenfield said in a statement to the press.

City officials said they plan to launch a three week publicity campaign about the speed reduction on Monday, according to the New York Times, and the new speed limit will go into effect on November 7.

The nonprofit Transportation Alternatives also backed the Council’s move, saying “if properly enforced, the new speed limit could prevent more than 6,500 traffic injuries in the next year and cut the annual number of pedestrian fatalities in half.”

The group urged de Blasio to quickly give his stamp of approval to the bill – which the mayor is expected to do and sent out his own statement praising the Council’s vote – and stressed that the NYPD and city Department of Transportation need “to send a stronger message about the dangers of speeding by continuing to improve traffic enforcement and public information initiatives.”

“Unsafe driver speed is the number one cause of traffic deaths in the city, killing more New Yorkers than drunk driving and cell phone use at the wheel combined,” Transportation Alternatives said in the same statement. “A pedestrian hit by a driver going 25 mph is twice as likely to survive as a person hit at 30mph.”

While Councilman Jumaane Williams, who represents portions of Midwood as well as Flatbush and Ditmas Park, was in Cleveland for the vote, he said in a statement Tuesday he would have voted against it.

“I fully support the need to reform traffic laws in New York City, and the majority of proposals offered in ‘Vision Zero,’” Williams said. “When the issue of the citywide reduction previously came before the Council, I voted to give the City discretion on lowering the speed limit, since I believed the City deserved to make this decision. At the same time, I believe that this legislation is too broad in the form passed today and I would have voted against it.”

“Instead of an overall speed limit reduction, the better approach is to study the City’s various neighborhoods and major arteries and assess, with specificity, where a lower speed limit makes the most practical sense,” Williams continued. “For example, it makes sense to carve out school zones as necessary places to have a lower speed limit, as many young people populate these areas. Many side streets and other ‘Slow Zones’ in my district would also benefit from a lower limit. In fact, I would vehemently support lowering the speed limit on many residential streets in my district – with some areas even lower than 25 mph.

Williams goes on to say that he will “continue to support increased enforcement, through speed cameras and stepped-up enforcement of current traffic rules and regulations, and have consistently done so.”

Another local member of the Council, Mark Treyger, who represents Coney Island and Gravesend, voted in favor of the bill, but expressed concerns about enforcement.

“There’s little dispute that there has been a serious number of traffic-related fatalities and there’s no dispute that speed kills,” said Treyger. “The issue that I continue to raise is the issue of enforcement … and making sure it does not become a mechanism for increased revenue, like for these cameras where some of them are problematic. I think it should be for the true intention – to save lives.”

Treyger pointed to the controversial placement of a speed camera on Shore Parkway next to a Belt Parkway exit ramp, as first reported by Sheepshead Bites, as an example of “gotcha” enforcement to be avoided.

“To me, [‘gotcha’ enforcement] undermines the entire program [of Vision Zero]. The intention should not be to harm working families who are just trying to get home,” he said.

Another area pol praised the legislation as potentially life-saving.

“Lowering the speed limit can drastically reduce a serious fatality. My district has a high population of seniors and reducing the speed limit could mean the difference between life and death.  No one should ever have to experience the loss of a loved one to a traffic accident,” said Councilman Chaim Deutsch.

To see a copy of the bill, you can go here.

Photo via Governor Andrew Cuomo.

With additional reporting by Ned Berke.

  • NoName

    If only they did this for the reasons indicated and not for the possible increased revenue potential in speeding tickets.

    • fdtutf

      What, specifically, makes you think that’s the case?

      To put it another way: What do you think would be different if they were actually doing this for the reasons indicated?

      • BrooklynBus

        They would place the cameras in front of schools, not near highways entrances and exits. They would also look to place them at high accident locations.

        • fdtutf

          Right, because
          – pedestrians only ever get hit in front of schools, and
          – making spot changes to behavior is the point, not trying to get motorists to slow down more generally, and
          – speed cameras are only effective EXACTLY where they are placed. It’s not like getting people to slow down as they get off an expressway will encourage them to continue to drive slowly as they approach city streets or anything like that.

          • BrooklynBus

            The cameras were approved with a certain understanding that they would be placed in front of schools. To do an about face and page them instead on expressway service roads is a violation of trust. Next thing you will lobby for is to have these cameras which were introduced to protect students, be in effect 24 hours a day to generate even additional revenues, the prime goal, not increased safety.

          • fdtutf

            I didn’t know I was a lobbyist.

            The “violation of trust” you’re talking about is the city’s effort to actually enforce the traffic laws. The fact that you object to that enforcement speaks volumes about you, and the fact that you put it in those terms speaks even more volumes: “We were promised that the city would only enforce the law near schools. Now, after we trusted them to let us violate the law everywhere else, they’ve changed their minds!”

            On what planet is that an honorable stance?

          • BrooklynBus

            First of all a 25 mph speed limit is ridiculous. Any driver will tell you that. On most streets under many conditions 35 mph is perfectly safe and to summons those drivers for going 36 mph is insane. Now that does not mean you shoudn’t drive at 10, 15 and 20 mph when there is no traffic under certain circumstances.

            That said, I was talking about trust. When government promises one thing and then does something else is a violation of trust. They are looking for more revenue and are using increased safety as an excuse to provide tat revenue. You are naive if you cannot see that. Lowering the speed limit will do absolutely nothing to get reckless drivers off the road. Someone doing 70 on Ocean Parkway with a 30 mph speed limit will continue to do 70 mph with a 25 mph speed limit. Those are the nuts who crash and kill people, not te average motorist going 35 mph when conditions warrant.

          • fdtutf

            First of all a 25 mph speed limit is ridiculous. Any driver will tell you that.

            I accept that drivers think a 25 mph speed limit is ridiculous. I do not accept that drivers should be the sole arbiters of what is and isn’t an appropriate or safe speed limit.

            On most streets under many conditions 35 mph is perfectly safe and to summons those drivers for going 36 mph is insane.

            What basis do you have for proclaiming that “35 mph is perfectly safe” ever, on any streets, under any conditions at all? What’s that based on?

            Now that does not mean you shoudn’t drive at 10, 15 and 20 mph when there is no traffic under certain circumstances.

            Unfortunately, to most drivers that’s exactly what it means.

            Lowering the speed limit will do absolutely nothing to get reckless drivers off the road. Someone doing 70 on Ocean Parkway with a 30 mph speed limit will continue to do 70 mph with a 25 mph speed limit. Those are the nuts who crash and kill people, not te average motorist going 35 mph when conditions warrant.

            You’re omitting the more frequent and therefore more serious problem, the average motorist going 35 mph when conditions don’t warrant it.

          • BrooklynBus

            I don’t agree that the average motorist is going faster than what is safe. If that is true we would be seeing a hell of a lot more injuries and deaths. Instead of hearing in the news about one or two fatalities or injuries a day, there would be 25 or 30 a day, and the media would not even be abe to report on them because they would be so frequent. Every single forever fatality is reported on by the media. How any hundreds of thousands of auto trips are safely made every single day?

            If I am driving at 35 mph, and everyone else is doing likewise, and have clear visibility all over (no parked cars blicking my view or am far enough away from the parked cars so that I have ample warning if something should suddenly appear), the pavement is smooth and clear, there are no cars to the right or left of me, and there are no pedestrians or bikes or animals anywhere in the area and would be able to stop in time if any would appear, I am driving at a safe speed.

          • Andrew

            I don’t agree that the average motorist is going faster than what is safe. If that is true we would be seeing a hell of a lot more injuries and deaths. Instead of hearing in the news about one or two fatalities or injuries a day, there would be 25 or 30 a day, and the media would not even be abe to report on them because they would be so frequent.

            News flash: there are a lot more than 30 pedestrian/cyclist injuries per day. In 2013, on average, a pedestrian or cyclist was killed in traffic about once every two days and was injured in traffic nearly twice per hour. That’s 44-45 ped/cyclist injuries or fatalities per day.

            http://www.streetsblog.org/2014/01/31/nypd-16059-pedestrians-and-cyclists-injured-178-killed-in-traffic-in-2013/

            (Or are you referring only to fatalities? I’m not willing to treat 10 thousand pedestrian/cyclist fatalities per year in New York City as remotely acceptable, as you apparently are.)

            Every single forever fatality is reported on by the media.

            Um, no, certainly not.

            If I am driving at 35 mph, and everyone else is doing likewise, and have clea r visibi lity all over (no parked cars blicking my view or am far enough away from the parked cars so that I have ample warning if something should suddenly appear), the pavement is smooth and clear, there are no cars to the right or left of me, and there are no pedestrians or bikes or animals anywhere in the area and would be able to stop in time if any would appear, I am driving at a safe speed.

            If you are driving at 35 mph, I would humbly suggest that you don’t have the time to determine whether “there are no pedestrians or bikes or animals anywhere in the area” – remember what happened to you on First Avenue, when you didn’t realize there was a bike in the area?

            (And how often are there no cars to your right or left? The city doesn’t have many one-lane streets with no parking on either side.)

          • Guest

            So what is an appropriate speed limit since you’re so full of answers?

          • Andrew

            The cameras were approved with a certain understanding that they would be placed in front of schools. To do an about face and page them instead on expressway service roads is a violation of trust.

            The details of the “certain understanding” are spelled out in the law authorizing the use of speed cameras.

            Are you suggesting that the city has installed cameras in locations not authorized by the law? If so, were talking about a violation of the law, not a violation of trust.

            Our are you suggesting that you simply misunderstood the details, and that it turns out that they aren’t what you thought they’d be? And then you’re blaming the city for your misunderstanding?

          • BrooklynBus

            All the publicity before the law was passed is that these cameras would be placed by schools to protect children entering and leaving schools. The legislation, however defined the distance as a quarter mile radius from any school which includes every small charter school. Under that definition a quarter of the city falls under the definition as “near a school”. That was intentional misleading, not a misunderstanding.

          • Andrew

            All whose publicity? The city had been trying to obtain state authorization for speed cameras for years; it was only the most recent compromise, which made it into law, that restricted them to school zones and school times. The city’s intent had never been to only implement them at schools – not under Bloomberg and not under de Blasio.

  • bill

    Is there a study of ACTUAL accidents of vehicles (incl. bikes) that were going no faster than 30 MPH with a determination of how much less damage would have occurred if said vehicle was going 25? What makes 25 MPH safe? Obviously 0 MPH is the safest so why allow any speed?

  • Gene Kuflick

    If vehicles would stop mowing down people this wouldn’t be an issue.

  • ROSALIE907

    I see drivers all the time going more than 30 MPS so without speed cameras on streets what makes anyone think they’re going to drive 25 MPH? They do this by schools, parks, avenues and streets. What has to be done is catch them, ticket them and if they drive over the speed constately take their license away (although there are many drives on the streets driving without licenses everyday) and maybe even show them the effects of driving over the speed limit.

  • guest

    This whole thing is dumb and will accomplish nothing for safety. It will however increase revenue for the city. It will never matter if the speed limit is 25 MPH, 15 MPH or 8 MPH. If some dumbass wants to speed (and I am talking actual speeding like 50 MPH or 85 MPH on a city street) they are going to do so, just as they always have.

    All this will do is create more road rage. So thank you Bill and Polly. Enjoy your pay raises courtesy of all the working class and lower class drivers this will affect. You can see the NYPD foaming at the mouth and salivating already.

    This will accomplish absolutely nothing. The actual real bad speed demons, the ones who don’t give a crap about causing bodily harm to others will remain on the loose. Why? Because just like age, this is just a number that means NOTHING.

  • Don Jameson

    There is going to be a huge boom in the sale of reflective plate covers.

    • Criminals_Cops_Law_Makers

      Pi gs aka cops have them on their personal cars

  • anonymous

    What this city needs more than anything else is slower traffic. This is the lynchpin that we have been searching for. We don’t need to spend time or effort on other things like better mass transit, better school programs, more jobs, better roads, better hospitals. We could focus on improving conditions at well-known dangerous intersections. But No, let’s focus on slowing down traffic throughout the city and further suffocate it. That’s where I want to live and I bet there are lots of people who want to buy a house where traffic doesn’t move either. Yeah zero vision.

    • BrooklynBus

      Remember back when DOT’s goal was to speed up traffic? Now they have everything backwards.

      • fdtutf

        “Traffic” consists of more than just motor vehicles. And it seems they’ve switched from a focus on speed to a focus on safety. It’s interesting that you object to that.

        • BrooklynBus

          No they switched from trying to reduce travel times which is better for the economy, to frustrating drivers, increasing road rage and frustration, and harassing citizens in order to increase revenues due to the city’s inefficiencies in managing its finances, thus driving out the middle class. Increased safety if it even happens, is just a byproduct, not the reason for this initiative. You believe everything goverment tells you.

          Curious if you bothered to click on the yahoo link I cited.

          • fdtutf

            No they switched from trying to reduce travel times which is better for the economy, to frustrating drivers, increasing road rage and frustration, and harassing citizens in order to increase revenues due to the city’s inefficiencies in managing its finances, thus driving out the middle class.

            Translation: I’m going to drive as fast as I need to to get where I’m going, and anybody who gets in my way be damned, and how DARE the city try to actually enforce the traffic laws!

            Increased safety if it even happens, is just a byproduct, not the reason for this initiative. You believe everything goverment tells you.

            I assure you that I don’t. And I don’t really think your tendency to disbelieve everything government tells you is particularly healthy.

            Curious if you bothered to click on the yahoo link I cited.

            I did. It has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

          • BrooklynBus

            Your translation is incorrect.

            I do believe some of what government says, but have heard enough BS to know that many ties we are being told the truth all the time.

            Interesting that you do not think that legalized robbery has nothing to do with this discussion. Summoning drivers who are not posing any danger simply because government decided on a ridiculously low speed limit is legalized robbery too.

          • fdtutf

            Okay, then I’ll try again.

            No they switched from trying to reduce travel times which is better for the economy, to frustrating drivers, increasing road rage and frustration, and harassing citizens in order to increase revenues due to the city’s inefficiencies in managing its finances, thus driving out the middle class.

            Translation: DOT switched from a single-minded focus on getting every obstacle out of the way of drivers, to the detriment of other road users, to trying to make the roads usable for the entire population, not just motorists. And motorists are fscking pissed about it. Especially when there’s any talk of actually trying to enforce the traffic laws.

            Better?

            Interesting that you do not think that legalized robbery has nothing to do with this discussion. Summoning drivers who are not posing any danger simply because government decided on a ridiculously low speed limit is legalized robbery too.

            Interesting that you think that enforcing the law is “legalized robbery” and that drivers have a right to speed. But then, you’re also the guy who thinks nobody but drivers should decide how fast drivers should go, so that’s not really surprising.

          • Allan Rosen

            No. Not Better. DOT switched from trying to eliminate bottlenecks so traffic can flow smoothly and decrease vehicular trip times to getting the ear of Transportation Alternatives whose purpose is to slowing down traffic even further causing more congestion and air pollution using the euphemism called traffic calming so that bies will

            This philosophy has caused the city to instate ridiculously low speed limits on major arterials and across the city so tar more motorists can be fined for driving at a safe but illegal speed of 36 mph.

            This will increase driving times even more at the same time the MTA is doing nothing to improve mass transit except instituting a handful of SBS routes which is viewed as a panacea to improve bus service, when the truth is that 90 percent of the bus routes will never benefit from SBS.

          • Allan Rosen

            (end of first paragraph) so that bikes will become a faster mode of travel than cars as they continue to go through red signals.

          • fdtutf

            DOT switched from trying to eliminate bottlenecks so traffic can flow smoothly and decrease vehicular trip times to getting the ear of Transportation Alternatives whose purpose is to slowing down traffic even further causing more congestion and air pollution using the euphemism called traffic calming so that bikes will become a faster mode of travel than cars as they continue to go through red signals.

            As I said: “DOT switched from a single-minded focus on getting every obstacle out of the way of drivers, to the detriment of other road users, to trying to make the roads usable for the entire population, not just motorists. And motorists are fscking pissed about it.”

            You’re just complaining because the needs of road users other than motorists are being taken into account.

          • Allan Rosen

            Why would motorists care about the roads being made more user friendly to other users of the road? Do you hear anyone complaining about curb cuts, or curb extensions? No because they make sense as do some bike lanes.

            They are complaining about making the roads more inconvenient for the vast majority of motor vehicles to appease the small minority of bike riders and the lowering of speed limits to ridiculously low speeds.

            I bet you have no idea how it even feels to drive long distances at speeds no greater than 25 mph on a street. In many cases, when the road is wide open, it feels like you are standing still. I would never drive at 35 on a local street if it was at all unsafe.

          • fdtutf

            Why would motorists care about the roads being made more user friendly to other users of the road? Do you hear anyone complaining about curb cuts, or curb extensions? No because they make sense as do some bike lanes.

            Sorry, I thought this was obvious.

            Motorists care when they have to give up road space or other privileges. Of course they don’t mind road changes that don’t hurt them; who would? But motorists are generally unwilling to accept that other users’ needs sometimes have to come before theirs, because motorists are accustomed to having the roads pretty much to themselves.

          • Andrew

            Why would motorists care about the roads being made more user friendly to other users of the road?

            Because making the streets more user friendly to other users of the street often requires restricting motorists’ perceived right to do whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want.

            Do you hear anyone complaining about curb cuts, or curb extensions?

            Nobody’s talking about curb cuts anymore. (ADA was passed in 1990.)

            Plenty of motorists complain vociferously about curb extensions.

            They are complaining about making the roads more inconvenient for the vast majority of motor vehicles to appease the small minority of bike riders and the lowering of speed limits to ridiculously low speeds.

            Nice how you’re ignoring pedestrians who are simply trying to cross the street or wait for the bus or pick up a bagel.

            I bet you have no idea how it even feels to drive long distances at speeds no greater than 25 mph on a street. In many cases, when the road is wide open, it feels like you are standing still.

            Bingo. Your complaint is all about perception.

            Yes, on a wide street engineered for high speeds, driving at 25 mph feels very slow. But those high speeds, it turns out, are not safe with pedestrians around. I’d love to see all of those streets reengineered for lower speeds, but that takes time and money, and we can’t wait until the job is done citywide.

            I would never drive at 35 on a local street if it was at all unsafe.

            And you’re not going to be convinced that your driving is unsafe until you kill somebody.

            I’m not willing to wait that long.

          • Allan Rosen

            Yes, on a wide street engineered for high speeds, driving at 25 mph feels very slow. But those high speeds, it turns out, are not safe with pedestrians around.

            You neglect the fact that on many streets during a good portion of the day, there are no pedestrians around. Why should those drivers have to drive at only 25 mph greatly increasing travel times?

            But since your experience is only in dense areas with tons of pedestrians, you cannot even imagine a street with no pedestrians around, but they do exist in many parts of the city you have never set foot in. You think you know everything but you do not. You are not the expert you pretend to be. All knowledge is not gained from citing quotes from the internet.

          • Allan Rosen

            Blockquote should have ended after the first paragraph.

          • Andrew

            You neglect the fact that on many streets during a good portion of the day, there are no pedestrians around. Why should those drivers have to drive at only 25 mph greatly increasing travel times?

            Just because you don’t notice them as you drive past at high speed (you know, kind of like when you didn’t notice the cyclist you had just passed before cutting him off on a left turn) doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

            The time of day when pedestrians are fewest in number – overnight – is when pedestrian crashes are most likely to be fatal. Perhaps, just perhaps, high speeds have something to do with it.

            But since your experience is only in dense areas with tons of pedestrians,

            My experience is in many parts of the city, some of which are absolutely hellish for pedestrians and cyclists and bus riders. I guess those people just don’t count in your book.

            you cannot even imagine a street with no pedestrians around,

            You’re not going to notice any pedestrians if you assume none exist and you don’t bother looking for them as you zip by at 40+ mph.

            but they do exist in many parts of the city you have never set foot in.

            Every major arterial street in New York City carries pedestrians. No, not as many as 5th Avenue, but enough to be killed by speeding drivers.

            You think you know everything but you do not.

            It’s funny how you keep repeating this, when I often make it quite clear that I’m happy to learn. I do, however, insist on basing my opinions on actual facts, which seems to be an unpopular approach among many.

            You are not the expert you pretend to be.

            I’m not the one who claims to be an expert.

            All knowledge is not gained from citing quotes from the internet.

            I’d rather learn from the Internet than from a supposed expert who relies only on gut feeling, who can’t follow the most basic of quantitative arguments, who is happy to base decisions solely on anecdotes, who seriously believes that he was forced to give up his dream job due to bus fumes.

          • guest

            You are hopeless. Simply and utterly hopeless. That’s why this city is headed in a downward spiral. You can’t comprehend anything that doesn’t agree with your vision of punishing every single driver. You’re so driven by driving that point home you just let the wool fall over your eyes. The sick part is, the city agrees with you only because you hipster sheep have tons and tons of trustfund money.

            The city has in no way changed it’s focus to safety. It’s expanded it’s focus to finding the largest source of disposable income at the hands of it’s citizens. First it was the private bus lanes that help nobody. Now it’s the lower speed limit so that it’s much much easier to nail someone and increase city and state revenue. (Why do you think Albany finally got on the bandwagon? They were promised cash. Don’t kid yourself.)

            You truly believe 25 MPH is going to make a difference? It is ridiculous. For years the speed limit was 30 or higher. What the hell is so different now? Hipsters on unicycles. Please.

            What ever happened to cross on the green not in between? What happened to look both ways before crossing the street? Didn’t your parents ever tell you not to play in the street? Why is that? Because there is traffic in the street.

            When you can explain to be why before the Bloomberg era and hipster explosion, everyone got along fine maybe you’ll be taken seriously. I hope YOUR taxes go up. I hope YOU have to worry about getting an unfair ticket for doing nothing wrong. Vision zero is a fricken joke.

            Oh and thanks for also helping to kill off our environment a little faster. Slower speeds and more stops means more crap into the atmosphere. But you don’t care about that. You’re fine with raising vegetables in already polluted soil. Just as long as that driver you hate so much gets his/her just reward for doing nothing wrong.

            Politicans in general. Liberal or conservative don’t care about anything except MONEY. That’s all this is pal.

            About the almighty dollar and how to get more of it from a large majority of the city’s population and into the government’s hands.

          • BrooklynBus

            The only thing I would disagree with you is the exclusive bus lanes. They do help bus riders in certain instances. No one measures inconvenience to others, however, which also needs to be considered.

            The ones in Sheepsead Bay are not necessary and neither help nor hurt anyone (except drivers who don’t abide and are ticketed). There is just not enough traffic to justify them, and I really doubt if the buses save any time because of them.

          • fdtutf

            This is so incoherent that it doesn’t deserve a thoughtful response, so this is all you’re getting. Enjoy!

          • anotherguest

            Finally. Someone has shut you up.

          • fdtutf

            But it pretty much takes complete incoherence, which I just can’t be bothered with.

          • Guest

            You put more words in people’s mouths than anyone I’ve ever seen.

  • BrooklynBus

    Anyone who doesn’t believe that lowering the speed limit was not done to increase the numbers of speeding tickets and therefore increase revenue should read this article. It is a real eye opener and shows that government can get away with anything it damn pleases. I like what that Florida sheriff states that anyone driving within the speed limit is particularly suspicious.

    https://autos.yahoo.com/news/how-cops-take-millions-from-motorists-not-charged-with-crimes-215603712.html

  • stalinesque

    Time to lose your license plates. Use your neighbor’s instead

  • Tom

    This is an opportunity to make streets safer for all on and around roadways for the benefit of all – drivers included. Many communities, in the wake of lower limits, enact a “Keep Kids Alive Drive 25″ educational campaign to engage motorists in observing the newly posted limit. Learn more @ http://www.KeepKidsAliveDrive25.org

  • Tina52

    I wish the police would go back to strictly ticketing bad driving, as they used to. This 25mph law is just plain wrong. But something must be done. Sit at any intersection for a few minutes, and watch, it’s absolutely insane what is going on. I guess it’s going to take a few more deaths to really crack down on this serious problem

    • Guest

      There needs to be an across the board focus on turn taking. Pedestrians, cyclists, and motor vehicles alike.

      • anonymous

        I agree… if they truly wanted to improve safety, they would require periodic education for all drivers, instead of simply sending in a check for additional city revenue.

        • Guest

          And the pedestrian responsibilities in this situation are what again? I was referring to “across the board’. That includes pedestrians and bicyclists.

  • Pingback: Sheepshead Bites » Blog Archive We’re Not Encouraging You To Troll DOT’s #25MPH Initiative, But We Know You’re Going To Anyway » Sheepshead Bay News Blog()

  • Guest

    Lunatics.