Novermber 5, 2006 New York view bike lanes as part of transportation

Op-Ed Contributor
Rolling Thunder - The New York Times

By SAMUEL I. SCHWARTZ
Published: November 5, 2006

EVEN my own daughter, Deena, complains to me: “Dad, I know you’re a big fan of bikes but you’ve got to do something about them. I almost got run over by a woman on Second Avenue!”

About 300 people are killed each year in traffic accidents in New York City, about half of them pedestrians hit by cars. On average, one pedestrian dies each year after being struck by a bike. But if one were to measure the complaints I get, one would imagine the statistics were reversed.

What is it about the conflict between bike riders and pedestrians that’s got so many people riled up and what can be done about it? It’s important to look at this historically.

The complaint meter first began to rise after the 11-day transit strike in April 1980. The bicycle messenger industry, which started in earnest in the 1970s, had hit its stride by 1980 (before the widespread use of e-mail or even faxes). During the strike, New Yorkers discovered bikes as a great way to commute. Then there was an awful six-week period starting in June when three women died after being struck by bikes.

I was the Department of Transportation’s assistant commissioner under Mayor Ed Koch, who, buoyed by a visit to Beijing, where he saw bike lanes used by tens of thousands, envisioned a network of physically separated bikeways up and down Manhattan.

In the summer of 1980, the mayor directed the department to install bikeways. From Washington Square Park to Central Park, the curb lanes of Fifth Avenue, Broadway and Seventh Avenue were separated from traffic by asphalt islands, giving bikers a lane of car-free roadway all their own.

Within days the complaints started to pour in. Most of the grumbling was from pedestrians concerned about reckless cyclists coming close to knocking them down (the three deaths were fresh in their minds). Some were from drivers who felt there was more congestion because of the loss of a lane.

The department’s investigation found that pedestrians considered the bike lanes to be extensions of the sidewalk; they stood in the lanes waiting for the lights to change, where bikers often yelled at them. (The conflict between bicyclists and pedestrians is much more visceral than any between car drivers and pedestrians. You can see a biker’s face and hear his words.)

Mr. Koch made his own observations and found many bike riders traveling outside the lanes. He had us install traffic signs along the bike lanes in typical Koch-ese — “Use it or Lose it.” But even though the lanes were largely successful — and car traffic didn’t slow nearly as much as people thought — criticism mounted.

During a limousine ride up Avenue of the Americas with Mr. Koch and President Jimmy Carter, Gov. Hugh Carey pointed out the bike lanes to Mr. Carter and joked, “See how Ed is wasting your money.” Within weeks, the mayor directed us to remove the barriers separating the lanes, which afterward were designated only by painted lines.

I think we made a mistake. We succumbed to the emotions of the moment. Had we kept the bigger picture in mind, we could have produced a network of separate bike lanes, a widespread public education program and tough enforcement that would have combined to promote good transportation policy and safety.

Now what do we do in 2006?

First, we need to establish a clear hierarchy for the use of city streets. Pedestrians come first; we started out as a walking city and it will be our greatest strength going forward. This means bikers must yield to pedestrians — even errant ones. Biking is a superb form of transport we should encourage. Drivers must yield to bike riders — even errant ones.

Second, we must enforce the rules. Police officers should write summonses specifically for “failure to yield” by bike riders (and car drivers). When you ask the Police Department to write summonses generally, they’ll do just that — produce lots of summonses, including many for minor infractions like not having a reflector. In fact, the Police Department has so far written 40,000 summonses to bike riders in 2006; no one I’ve spoken to has noticed better behavior. Instead, let’s focus on what really matters — making sure bicyclists respect the right of way of pedestrians — and crack down on bike riders who don’t.

Third, let’s advance the network of bike lanes citywide. I’d even re-introduce physically separate bike lanes. This program needs to be communicated in a mass campaign explaining rules of the road and each group’s responsibility. For example, drivers need to know they are forbidden to enter a bike lane to turn; bikers need to know that they must not block crosswalks; pedestrians must learn they can’t use bike lanes as sidewalks.

Finally, we need to recognize that our economic and physical well-being are advanced when more people are able to enjoy our streets. Car traffic must be reduced and more room made for pedestrians and bike lanes. London and Stockholm understand this — that’s why they introduced congestion pricing and sharply reduced car traffic.

Our time has come.

Samuel I. Schwartz is the president of a transportation consulting company and a transportation columnist for The Daily News.