By Gus Saltonstall
An Upper West Side rally is set for the first weekend of May in opposition to the recent proposal from the city to install a two-way protected bike lane along 72nd Street.
The rally, hosted by “The No 72nd Street Bike Lane Coalition,” will take place on May 2 at 10 a.m. at West 72nd Street and Broadway.
“Many in our community have serious concerns about how this plan would function on a corridor as busy and complex as West 72nd Street,” reads a message from the coalition. “This is particularly concerning for our many older residents and individuals with limited mobility, who rely on safe, direct access to cars and taxis. Under this proposed design, some would need to cross an active, bidirectional bike lane or travel further distances to reach transportation.”
The coalition also launched a petition in opposition to the proposed 72nd Street bike lane, which would run from the Hudson River Greenway to the East Side Greenway. The petition has been signed 113 times as of Wednesday afternoon.
Earlier this month, the Upper West Side Community Board 7’s Transportation Committee passed a resolution in support of the redesign. The resolution will be reviewed again and voted on at CB7’s full board meeting on May 5, which is taken into advisement by the city.
Currently, West 72nd Street has four lanes of vehicle traffic, two in each direction, and two lanes of parking. The plan reallocates the roadway’s 60 feet, giving approximately nine feet to a two-way bike lane, which would run along the north side of the curb.
The proposed new corridor would then have two parking lanes, two traffic lanes (one in each direction), and the new bike lanes. There would be approximately 25 fewer parking spaces, with those spots re-designated as loading zones and pedestrian islands.
Among the supporters of the proposed bike lane is Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who said the following when the plan was announced, “The proposed two-way protected bike lane on 72nd Street is welcome news for cyclists and pedestrians alike on the Upper West Side. Protected bike lanes make our streets safer for everyone, reduce emissions by encouraging New Yorkers out of their cars, and with 620,000 daily cycling trips citywide, the demand is clear.”
Read More:
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here. And you can Support the Rag here.
Another attack on the elderly and those with impaired mobility. Maybe part of the effort (see op ed by a Yale prof named Moon in the Times yesterday) to drive the elderly out.
Street Redesigns of this sort increase street safety for all road users, drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists, regardless of age. Suggesting that this is an attack on the elderly and disables is not supported by the evidence.
They try to increase safety but the fact is that riders rarely yield to pedestrians and that’s a problem.
Ride the greenway, the busiest two way bike route in the city, and watch how 80-90% of pedestrians won’t exercise their right of way and cross when bikers are near because they’re conditioned to that reality. Pass Chelsea Piers and Pier 57 and see how they have to pay security to physically stop riders in favor of the pedestrians who have the right of way. IF riders obeyed the law that cost would not have to be taken.
I ride 72 between Columbus and CPW, and between WEA and Riverside in total safety now.
Between Columbus and WEA I take a one way street. I will not change this after the new configuration is complete because with constant delivery activity, pedestrians crossing etc, it won’t be any safer.
I’m a cyclist & rarely see fellow cyclists yield to pedestrians.
The elderly and the car commuters.
Man the barricades
NO JUSTICE , NO PEACE!
How is that? The street won’t be any harder to cross. It’s still the same width. Nothing is going to really change for pedestrians.
They create pedestrian islands further out from the curb. Pedestrians walk across the bike lane and wait for the light to change. Then they go across the traffic lanes to the next pedestrian island. The total distance travelled across lanes of car traffic is reduced. This increases pedestrian safety, because it reduces the amount of time that pedestrians are exposed to vehicle traffic.
Comments like that lead me to believe you don’t really live in this city.
Cars mostly obey traffic laws. bikers and pedestrians don’t.
What changes is that cyclists more often than not just plow right on thru pedestrian crosswalks without even slowing down, irrespective of walk signals and red lights.
Absolutely not true. Anyone getting into or out of a car or bus on the north side of the street would have to cross two lanes of bicycle/ebike traffic to get to/from their vehicle.
To get in a cab today you needn’t cross the stree. Now we’ll have to cross a two way bike lane. Much harder.
An fake coalition group aiming to get a statistically insignificant 200 signatures? Eye roll.
DOT has said this is moving forward, they have my full support. Cope and seethe NIMBYs!
Check your facts there are hundreds and hundreds of legitimate signatures online and on paper.
It’s pathetic to see a TransAlt advocate dismissing actual neighbors as ‘statistically insignificant’ just to push a lobbying agenda.
Cheering for feckless DOT policies doesn’t make you right; it just makes you a mouthpiece. If your only move is telling people to ‘cope and seethe,’ you’ve already admitted you can’t defend the actual merits of the project.
Best use of feckless in a web post this year.
I’m an actual neighbor and not affiliated with TransAlt, I am just a fan of safe streets. The population of the UWS is ~225k so lets be very generous and assume they more than double the current signatures and get to 1k. That’s ~0.5% of the neighborhood. and by any definition is statistically insignificant.
We already had an election for mayor and the more pro transit candidate won, which is why we have this DOT implementing these better street designs. You can refer to the original WSR article on the project for my thoughts on the merits.
It’s only going to be people within a few blocks of 72nd Street that you might expect to sign the petition — now up to 605 — not the entire population of the Upper West Side.
UWS Dad,
The City’s budget is in bad shape – in fact the Mayor is now proposing pausing contributions to the pension fund. That is pretty major stuff.
Given budget issues, as a parent, I’d prefer that the City focus on public schools and many other things – not more bike lanes.
And it seems to me that much of the support for the Mayor was about protecting rent-stabilized housing and affordable housing and “growing” new affordable housing (not bike lanes).
Hilarious. We also had an election (two) in which a president was chosen, only to have both of his terms plagued by the so-called “resistance”. Activist judges, paid protesters causing chaos and violence, non-stop lies stoking racial division by the MSM and Democrats in Congress. Please spare us the attempt to silence a mere petition by concerned citizens.
Exactly! And these are the same UWS liberals who cry crocodile tears about global warming, “the environment” and air quality, while every single effort to limit 2 ton exhaust-spewing killer cars is met with outrage. Outrage at the loss of their parking spots, that is. Sorry but you don’t have a god-given right to a parking spot for your air pollution machine.
This is not about car vs.bike; it’s about pedestrian vs. bike.
Notwithstanding the the discourteousness of some bicyclists, the actual threat to pedestrians is obviously cars and trucks. This is extremely well documented.
Clean air and safety technology has improved greatly over the years. You have to accept that there are limits as to how much sacrifice people are willing to accept in the name of mitigating climate change. Did you not learn that from COVID?
I’m not what to make of your comment. It is so full of hatred and vitriol that it’s hard to figure out what you stand for. So, the real test here is not whether this is a good plan or not, but rather to what lengths you will go to punish car owners.
You clearly have lost the plot.
So then this isn’t about the bike lane, it’s about limiting automobile use? Because we already charge heavy tolls to drive into the city, thirsty parking meters, ginormous garage taxes, and congestion pricing.
Unless you use public transportation or bicycles for 100% of your travel needs, and never purchase or use anything whatsoever that gets to Manhattan on a motor vehicle, you don’t get to complain about motor vehicles. And if you’re concerned about pollution, you should be concerned about the traffic jams that this new configuration will invariably cause.
Nothing is as black and white as what you said about traveling or delivering goods. Reducing pollution is the goal at this time, not eliminating it.
Your unbelievably condescending comment and taunting tone demonstrate such a callous disregard for your neighbors and community that it’s hard to believe you have any good intentions for the Upper West Side at all. Is this about “winning,” or about what’s best for the community at large? I urge other readers to consider your comments with the biggest of eye rolls.
This is about getting streets that are safer for pedestrians, so yes I would consider that as having good intentions for my neighbors and the UWS. Like we’ve seen in many prior street redesigns, once this happens, it will be hard to imagine it was ever a 6 lane highway (including parking lanes).
This project is quite literally in my back yard and I walk 72nd all the time with my kids so this one is close to my heart.
I would hardly call West 72nd street a “six lane highway.”” Maybe for ants?
(Translation: callous disregard for my parking spot)
If they have your full support, why are you hiding your identity behind UWS Dad? You could be a bot as far as we know.
Says the Great Sounding Anodyne Good Person. LMAO! Most people want to keep their identity private online. That’s not special.
A bike bot.
What is your definition of a real coalition group and what makes this one fake? Most of us only heard about this bike lane last week so they are a brand new organization
Whenever I hear someone label an opponent “fake”, I immediately think of a group with which we are all familiar.
You know, “fake news”, “fake claims of insurrection”, fake this and fake that.
It’s a junior-high-school-style name-calling label that usually conceals a lack of any substantive argument.
I was actually shocked that there is literally nothing on who put the petition together, who is in this so called coalition. There’s barely a paragraph on what their ask is!
If you are a real group that claims to represent the neighborhood, wouldn’t you want to come out and say who exactly is in this so called coalition?
Your neighbors and the businesses and buildings along the street, you fool! Go to the rally and find out .or continue to sit at your computer and type nonsense. What have you done for your community lately?
I plan to go to the rally and show my strong support for this project!
@moderator, just wondering, is calling people ‘fools’ in keeping with the civil and constructive spirit of the comment section?
Maybe it’s time you take a look back at some of the things you’ve posted over the years when someone doesn’t agree with you when it comes to open streets, dining shacks, and now this. It works both ways. 🙄
IS taunting people who disagree with you as UWS Dad did — “Cope and seethe NIMBYs!” is in keeping with the civil and constructive spirit of the comment section?
Maybe she meant “jester”
No it isn’t. Sorry.
Thanks I appreciate the clarification.
UWS Dad. Who exactly are you?
Just a dad living on the UWS who spends too much time in the WSR comments.
Given the tone on these comments, I totally support UWS Dad’s refusal to doxx himself by giving you his name. I agree with everything he’s said here – I also live along 72nd, understand the resistance some folks have about this proposal, but ultimately believe it will be good for the neighborhood. UWS Dad has a right to say so without being dragged through the mud.
Sounds like you totally live here. Upper Washington State Dad
Cope and seethe when the political power is against you all again.
they should be embarrassed, but then no one feels shame anymore.
These opponents are using the bike lanes as the bogeyman to oppose the whole redesign. Much of the redesign will actually help those with limited mobility. There will be two fewer traffic lanes, additional islands for pedestrians to use to safely cross, plus bus loading platforms. And designated loading areas to reduce double parking.
The designated loading areas will fill up during the day and early evening hours and then be empty at night.
None of that will reduce double parking. Lots of businesses and housing . Moving trucks , freight, cabs and Ubers will be double parked 24/7. The only way to make this work is make all curb space loading zones and zero parking for cars on the whole avenue. And don’t forget the Empire bins that are coming will eat up at least 25 percent of curb space.
This is an excellent idea. Parking is an irrational use of the limited space available and serves a tiny minority.
The plan doesn’t remove many parking spaces. As a 72nd Street resident, I can tell you that many of us who don’t own cars benefit from the ability of automobiles to provide services to us.
“The proposed new corridor would then have two parking lanes, two traffic lanes (one in each direction), and the new bike lanes. There would be approximately 25 fewer parking spaces, with those spots re-designated as loading zones and pedestrian islands.”
Try again?
25 fewer spaces from CPW to Riverside Blvd, right?
Two fewer traffic lanes induces congestion.
Nope…as others have mentioned here…fewer lanes for cars reduces congestion . Drivers always predict a traffipocalypse, but it never happens. So many examples of this fact around NYC, but here are two that come to mind: Banning cars in Central Park did not increase traffic on surrounding atreets, neither did the 14th St. ban on private autos. Only ~25% of households on the UWS own cars, so drivers should only get 25% of the street. The DOT plan looks about right.
Fewer lanes for cars may discourage traffic, but that’s not the same as reducing congestion.
The percentage of UWS households that own cars is irrelevant to this conversation, that has almost nothing to do with who uses West 72nd Street for parking and driving. The plan won’t change the frequency of buses and it won’t reduce the need of residents to use taxis and car services, and pretty much the same number of emergency vehicles are going to need access.
It has on West end Ave you can’t even double park it’s too crowded
This is not in fact the case. Please read the studies on induced demand.
Interesting that you used the word “induced”. You are familiar with the concept of induced demand? More lanes encourages more vehicular use of the road. Fewer lanes (wait for it . . ) DISCOURAGES vehicular use.
72nd street is an entryway to the West Side Highway. Heavy use is a given.
Please explain how crossing the 2-way bike lane to wait in the pedestrian island for a bus is safer for those with limited moblity vs today’s design where we wait on the sidewalk.
You have to get there safely can you walk out of your apt building safely ? I bet you can except when the e-vehicle is riding on your sidewalk, which still happens even with the wider bike lanes and more bike lanes. The more that is built the more egregious illegal riding occurs.
Wonderful news about the bike lane! So much better and safer for everyone in the neighborhood (particularly the elderly and children) when we can reduce fast-moving and dangerous cars.
Will this increase the amount of e-bikes ?
In my opinon that would be a greater danger.
It’ll get many of the e-bikes out of Central Park which is a good thing IMO.
Agreed. I’m more concerned about e-bikes than cars. Cars are regulated and generally follow laws. E-bike riders don’t think laws apply to them. On a daily basis I have a lot more close calls with e-bikes than cars.
I think this is an awful idea. But I would be a lot more OK with it if e-bikes were banned from the bike lanes.
And this will just cause more congestion and cars to idle more. Which causes more congestion. This will not get people to stop driving.
The childish hatred of cars on WSR is so provincial and narrow minded. It is truly sad.
And note that I am in favor of paid parking – I don’t disagree that cars should have to pay more of their share. But beyond that, the comments here are embarrassing. And note that I do not own a car.
LMAO “Cars are regulated and generally follow laws”. Say that to the 205 people who were killed by cars last year alone. I see cars breaking traffic laws everyday without a beat. Just yesterday, I saw a car do an illegal u-turn from a bus stop, through a double yellow line, onto incoming traffic that had the green light. GTFO
Until bikes are regulated and tickets are given out the city will nevewr settle this problem
A greater danger than cars?? Quick – how many humans were mowed down by cars in this city last year? and how many by bikes? I’ll wait ….
205 people were killed by cars last year alone. 3 people were killed by e-bikes since 2023. They don’t want to see this
Where were those 205 people killed exactly? Not in traffic jams on West 72nd Street, I don’ think.
Yes this would allow for more e-bike expressways!
More ebikes and fewer cars are more dangerous than fewer ebikes and more cars? Do any stats prove that?
Does the Rag publicize and (thereby) promote every protest in the neighborhood? Or just the pro-car minority? Sign me up for the counter-protest.
Same here! Where is the counter protest. More bike lanes!
Me too, and I have a healthy head of GRAY HAIR. I will be there.
As a 50-year member of the West Side YMCA who rides Citi Bikes on 72nd Street regularly, I can wholeheartedly attest for me there is absolutely no need for bike lanes on that street.
Riding 72nd Street is never a problem. Lots of space to move along safely in both directions. Traffic never an issue.
Is this actually just another plan to reduce automobile ownership on the UWS?
I ride 72nd St from York to 5th Ave and back. It’s dangerous.
It will be safer with a protected bike lane.
I understand the needs of people with limited mobility. I also understand the needs of cyclists. This bike lane is necessary.
Thank you!!!!
No need to own a car in NYC, maybe just live in your vacation home instead?
This revulsion to cars is ridiculous. people are entitled to have cars that are mostly used oustside the city because you can’t park on the upper west side anymore. This is 2026 not the horse and buggy era
Oh. OK. Thanks.
Any other lifestyle choices you’d like to make for me?
Do I hear echoes of “My country, love it or leave it”? Do you even understand that reference – and why it is so frightening?
Most of us don’t own cars, but we benefit from the benefits that motorized vehicles provide. The bigger issue is many and probably most bicyclists don’t obey traffic rules, mainly stopping at red lights — they’re also supposed to warn other drivers and pedestrians when they are making turns, using hand signals, which I’ve never seen any bike rider in New York do.
https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicyclerules-english.pdf
I obey the rules and use hand signals.
In that case, if I see a guy using hand signals, I can confidently say “There goes Paul.”
Look, we all know that some cyclists obey the rules, the problem is that some (probably many, perhaps most) do not.
Bronxite, that first sentence is smart and funny and deserves some love. I’m smashing the thumb.
Of course it is…the same way the city has imparted an 18% parking tax…they can’t exactly come out and say “we won’t allow you to have a car” (though I’m sure the current Mayoral administration is working on more socialist strategies to get us closer to this every day), so instead they will impart taxes, additional rules, congestion pricing, and rejiggering of street design to further push people to behave the way they want them to, the way they feel is in the best interest of the city. Freedom of choice gets marginally narrower and narrower without most realizing it is happening.
I WISH the city had a real parking tax. Or at least started charging for most spaces like DC does.
The parking tax is a luxury tax. And before you complain about the hard working Upper West Siders who must have their car to get around… 1) did you know the average price of a parking garage in the UWS is approaching $1,000 a month? And 2) as Manhattan residents, we are actually EXEMPT from the extra 10% tax on our ‘home’ garage. So this luxury tax is actually 0.0875% less than sales tax would be. So we are actually getting a TAX BREAK.
Darn, hate those pesky facts…
Pesky fact. The tax is 18%. Yes, there is a 10% reduction as a resident but expires every year and needs to be applied for each time. E
That still leaves a tax of over 8% on that $1000 monthly fee.
Yes, pesky facts indeed. This is not a tax break.
The reapplication process is a few clicks. Takes me a while 30 seconds. And it is not each year, but every 2 years. You can’t handle 30 seconds every two years?
The parking tax replaces the 8.875% sales AND USE tax. So it is essentially 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.
But I am also one to admit when I am wrong. I looked at my exemption certificate and it is an 8% tax discount, not a 10% discount. So that amounts to a total tax rate of 10.375% instead of the standard sales tax of 8.875%. In other words, the city is really gouging us with their extra 1.5% parking tax (/s/) which amounts to $15/month above sales tax tacked on to the $1,000/month parking fee.
freedom of choice? to store your private property for free in public space? sounds insanely entitled.
im glad you’re leaving. better for the rest of us
How much do cyclists pay to park at bike racks or chain their bikes to posts and grates, all on public sidewalks? Cyclists rely on maintained public roads for their daily travels, yet unlike auto drivers pay no registration or licensing fees, no garage taxes, no congestion pricing fees, no tolls, no parking meters. Who’s the freeloader here?
1) Cyclists, like everyone else who lives in the city, pay taxes that help maintain public roads. 2) Bikes cause less damage to those roads, don’t need vast areas of space to park and create less congestion, which explains why they don’t pay congestion or parking fees. Feel free to rant all you want, but even with all those fees carowners pay less than their share of the costs.
Bikes also travel less than motor vehicles do.
DOT road maintenance budget is funded almost entirely by taxes, which cyclists pay just like everyone else, while not causing damage to the roadway unlike an average-sized 2-ton vehicle. Drivers are the freeloaders.
Assuming the cyclist pays sales, property, and income taxes, cyclists are actually paying their fair share for road upkeep. I say it all the time. As a car owner, I pay registration and licensing fees, but those fees do not cover the full cost of operating the DMV and the state uses money from the General Fund (taxes) to cover the shortfall. I also pay taxes for road upkeep in the form of gas tax, but this does not cover the full cost of road upkeep and the state and city use money from the federal government (via income taxes) as well as their income/sales/property taxes to make up the shortfall. Congestion fees are put in place to lower congestion in the central business district. Use of bicycles in the CBD lowers congestion, therefore there is no reason to toll them. Tolls are also used for upkeep of bridges, tunnels, and certain roads – most, if not all do not allow bicycles. The few bridge paths that allow bicycles are shared paths with pedestrians, and the cost of upkeep of those paths are no different whether bicycles are allowed or not. So zero net cost. As far as the impact of bicycles on roadways, there is none. If a cyclist parks their bicycles in a commercial parking garage, the price is lower than a car due to the lower space it takes up, but that cyclist would have to pay the parking tax. But a driver doesn’t have to pay a parking tax – they can park on the street for free! Same for meters. Garages and metered parking are paying extra for an added convenience.
So as for freeloading, cyclists who do not own cars are actually subsidizing you and I owning a car, not the other way around.
“cyclists who do not own cars are actually subsidizing you and I owning a car”
I’d be interested in seeing actual numbers to back up what you say.
I always love when people are too lazy to do their own research. Today, people expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter. Is it actually laziness? Lack of ability? Or maybe they think so highly of their own beliefs and are so sure of themselves that they feel like the mere threat of a challenge will be enough to get others to back down.
Either way…. Here:
https://www.budget.ny.gov/pubs/archive/fy25/ex/agencies/appropdata/MotorVehiclesDepartmentof.html#:~:text=The%20FY%202025%20Executive%20Budget,3%2C228%20FTES%20for%20the%20Department.
https://www.budget.ny.gov/pubs/archive/fy25/ex/agencies/appropdata/TransportationDepartmentof.html#:~:text=The%20FY%202025%20Executive%20Budget%20includes%20a%20workforce%20of%208%2C495,bridges%20for%20years%20to%20come.
All due respect, the State DOT budget summaries you present in no way support your assertion that the majority of funding is derived from households without cars. It may well be the case, but it is not addressed here.
But you know, the general situation of state funds being directed towards services that one or another subset of the population might not personally use is not exclusive to road transportation. Households without children subsidize schools with their taxes, people subsidize athletic fields and basketball courts and libraries with their taxes whether or not they ever use them. It’s the price we pay for living in a community. Things that are unessential to some will be seriously essential to others and vice-versa.
Use of bicycles takes from transit and Lyft knows this and that is why they own Citibike, to push people off bikes and onto rideshare.
Bike share is a last mile program. It does not push people off transit. The idea is that you take transit to get you close to your destination and then use bike share (Citibike, etc.) to get you even closer, ideally within just a block or two, of your actual destination. But you don’t have that out in the burbs where you live, so I guess you wouldn’t know that.
72nd Street has metered parking, it isn’t free except at night.
If it is, I support it for that reason as well!
No, it’s simply a plan to allow less experienced bikers to ride city streets safely. I live in the neighborhood. I would love to use a cargo bike to transport my children. I am not comfortable doing it now because I am not a biking pro. A protected bike lane on 72nd Street will be great news for my family.
No “ protected” bike lane will make cargo biking with your children safer!
It is a plan to induce congestion and then push private vehicles out.
lol – and what if it is another plan to reduce automobile ownership? In my book (and I suspect that of many others), that’s a good thing – cleaner air, quieter streets, more users of mass transit, a more pedestrian friendly city!
Newborn elephants weigh 200 – 250lbs. They’re the world’s second largest babies. The first being motorists after a new bike lane is proposed.
Just wait til you grow up Mike M, and discover you too are older, maybe you too get hit and become disabled.
Then when you cry as you’re taken to the ER we will call you baby too
Ahhh yes, this protest is for the truly jobless
This will be a protest attended mostly by victims of e-bike/bike accidents and their loved ones. I encourage everyone in this comment section to see those who they disagree with as human beings with real reasons for believing wha they believe. Throwing around labels like “NIMBY” and “jobless” is a convenient way to turn the other cheek on your neighbors who have real trauma associated with this issue.
holy crap why would you protest street design that makes things safer for everyone? go protest in front of the NYPD precinct and beg for them to enforce the law.
I agree with you about urging the NYPD to enforce the law. Until traffic laws are generally obeyed by e-bike, bicycle, and moped riders, a street design such as this one does little to make things safer for pedestrians. In my view, it creates a potentially more dangerous environment.
Ultimately this is just for the benefit of venture capital backed business @ the cost of everyone else / city life. You could ride your bike wherever you wanted before and get food delivered to you before. The bike lane thing, for the last many years, was just a Trojan horse for big business enshittification of nyc.
I am not a venture capitalist funded business, just a dad who likes to ride his bike with his daughter. I will benefit.
I would come out and laugh but some of us have jobs. This is going to look like that geriatric protest of the 96th St bus lane which Gale Brewer organized and it’s going to be just as effective at stopping the project as well as generating ridicule of the protestors.
Sal Bando,
Worth reminding:
1. Tons of people of all ages work remotely. (I go to the office, but occasionally when I am on the West Side during weekdays it is amazing to see all the people, all ages, at restaurants)
2. People have a right to an opinion. And IMO ridicule is not OK or something to be complacent about.
Wow what a heartless and cruel remark.
I want to rally in support of the bike line.
Very surprised that Congressman Nadler would suggest that bicycling reduces car use (…. encouraging New Yorkers out of their car) – in NYC bicycling reduces bus and subway use.
Bicyclists are not former car drivers – they are former mass transit users.
(It is a different situation in places where there is no reliable mass transit – for example Bentonville Arkansas where Wal-Mart is headquartered has implemented biking infrastructure. But no reliable mass transit)
I still drive my car. I just prefer not to when I don’t need it. I’ve had my license since I was 16 and I’ve had a car my whole life. I just like having options and freedom to do something else besides driving or public transport. We aren’t Russia. We can have more options.
Hahah…Nadler ONLY travels by car and his security is always double parked on 70th idling while waiting for him to barely move.
Biking is a great substitute for hiring a car across town, which buses and subways are considerably less great for. So yes it can reduce car use, by replacing former car riders, to use your lingo.
What’s that, you wouldn’t ride a bike cross town? Well that’s your loss. It’s a lot quicker. Cold? Put on a coat. Hot? Take an e-bike.
another mark:
Are you saying that bicyclists typically used Uber (“hiring a car”) – not bus and subway?
As an electric scooter rider I’m looking forward to hitting 30 mph on that strip to get to CP faster. Thank you Zohran!
the speed limit is 15, but you were trying to be sarcastic and clever.
No. He was being honest. Why couldn’t he go 30mph?? A speed limit only matters if there’s enforcement which there is not! Wild West. That’s what the UWS has been called. There is NO REGULATION of e-bikes or electric scooters because the City Council will not pass regulation to license them! So let’s build more e-bike expressways to speed on with zero accountability. That’s what your city government and your community board are doing to serve you.
Would you support the bike lane as a condition for the passage the e-bike licenses? My guess is NO. Now tell me I’m wrong.
“A speed limit only matters if there’s enforcement which there is not!”
This is correct – the 20th Precinct has written a total of 31 speeding tickets in all of 2026. That’s an average of two per week. There is essentially no enforcement of speeding laws for cars, trucks, and motorcycles on the UWS right now. We need to start enforcing the laws against speeding that we already have.
“20th Precinct has written a total of 31 speeding tickets in all of 2026”.
I believe you.
But how many speeding tickets were issued by the speed cameras that are now in place?
How many speeding cars do not get camera tickets because their owners block their plates, put on a plate cover, don’t have plates or have fake plates (ghost cars)?
Because of all the speed cameras.
It seems like the solution everyone is looking for is designated loading zones for small businesses (which they dont have now) and curbside access for taxis (which we also don’t have now). People need access to the curb! But blocking the bike lane won’t give us that because we don’t have it now.
One lane in each direction will cause congestion . Are they planning on zero double parked vehicles blocking the one lane?
As a matter of fact, at the DOT meeting, Patrick Kennedy (the DOT rep) said he really, really hopes that is the case. Self enforcement! He thinks that people won’t double park (or triple park like on the block between West End Ave and Riverside Dr) because people “will choose on their own to not inconvenience others.” He’s delusional.
If you see the reality on other streets like East 79th Street, people still double park and they use the median to go around.
Yes, and if you go around the corner to Riverside Dr., the members of the mosque double park there between 72 and 75th streets.. and that is already one lane in each direction. So you have cars heading north and south squeezing by each other in both directions in the south bound lane. That is what is in store for 72nd St.
Looking at this again bikes will also be riding in the gray area and the yellow strip area. Will be a free for all. At least cars stop at red lights.
Wow, where to begin
I am a resident of 72ndSt, I have raised 3 children here. They were lucky to grow up in this block full of the best of an UWS life.
I am a victim and a survivor of an e-vehicle crash.
( Rag article “ when her life changed in an Instant”) I suffered a TBI, leaving me paralyzed on my right side.
There were no consequences for my assailant and there are no consequences for anyone riding an e-vehicle and causing crashes!!!!
The DOT’s redesign takes into consideration only the 1% of bikers. Its claim that it will make pedestrians safer is an outright lie.
I’m proof of this lie!!!!
Since I was hit reckless e-vehicle riding has only gotten worse. Much of this is due to all this added bike infrastructure that does absolutely 0 for pedestrian safety.
This redesign does not take into account the disabled( me), the elderly( my 94 yr old mother), my grandchildren, and the businesses whose businesses will now be greatly impacted.
Shame on the elderly elected officials themselves who gave this a green light!!!!
Pamela, I feel for you and I am very sorry for your situation.
I too am a victim of such bad behavior, but in my case it was a motorcycle (full size Triumph, not a little scooter) that its rider decided to ride on the sidewalk. While I do not have a TBI, I did require surgery on my leg and I will never be physically 100% for the rest of my life. In my case, the NYPD had him on a silver platter – even though he fled the scene, the NYPD had MULTIPLE videos of him on the sidewalk and clear images of his license plate as well as multiple eye witnesses. But the NYPD blew the case by not properly getting identifying information so the judge threw out the case. Meaning my assailant got off scott free as well with no consequences, and my assailant actually hit me on purpose because I wouldn’t move out of his way on the sidewalk.
But I am not going to go out and argue against something that could make other motorcycle riders safer. One bad apple… Additionally, your assailant was not riding a bicycle or even an electric bicycle. He was riding a motor scooter- it doesn’t matter if it is gas or electric powered. Now I am definitely not blaming you for your situation, but if you had seen your assailant coming at you, I am 100% sure you would have done whatever you could, like stopping, stepping backwards, or quickening your pace, to protect yourself. Now, if someone is crossing a street with a bike lane on it, most intelligent New Yorkers have learned to look both ways while at least crossing the bike lane, with or without the light. Since bike lanes are a much smaller portion of the road to be focused on, it makes cyclists or e-vehicles in either direction are much easier to spot. Had your situation been with you crossing a bike lane and your scooter rider riding in that bike lane, the chances of you noticing the guy would have been infinitely higher, allowing you to take such protective actions as I mentioned above. So instead of fighting them, why not embrace the infrastructure changes that are proven, by years of data, to lower the number of injuries and deaths for ALL road users after installation?
I do wish you the best of luck and as full a recovery as possible.
It’s human nature to want speed and convenience. If every person on an e-bike used a moped, we would not need any bike infrastructure. The majority of users on bike lanes are e-bikes or e-scooters.
So you are saying that e-bike and e-scooter users should switch to mopeds?
That is worse for our environment. The purchase and use costs of mopeds are higher. Legally they require licensing and have age restrictions. They are also more dangerous to other road users in a collision since they are heavier, faster, and less maneuverable.
And from my observations, the majority of bike lane users are e-bikes riders and Citibike riders.
I remember your article and I always hoped there would be a follow up. When I posted that I’d been hit by cyclists 3 times I was met by complete derision and told to get off my phone (which had nothing to do with me) among other things. No one even considered that the cyclists were at fault. Best response yet was that more people are hit by cars than bikes, as if that ever stopped any cyclist from jumping a curb or speeding around a bus in the middle of 72nd and Broadway. It’s disturbing reading through the comments here. Anyone who lazily posts NIMBY has no idea of the reality of the situation.
Cali Please join e- vehicle safety alliance
Will do, thank you! 😊
Jerry Nadler, bike lane supporter, hasn’t been on a bike in decades. He rides around in an SUV with armed security. Same goes for Brewer.
I see Gail Brewer a lot around the neighborhood but I’ve never noticed her armed detail. Does the city really give that to council members?
Where do I sign up to rally in favor of this improvement!
Judging by the comment sections here, we live in one of the most toxic communities. People are just so ready – eager, in fact – to see the absolute worst motives in their neighbors. Sometimes I wonder if other major cities around the world are like this. Do people who live in Madrid, Hamburg, or Tokyo hate their neighbors this much?
The difference is that America is a diverse low trust society. Part of it is because anyone can come here from anywhere in the world and become American. Spain, Germany and Japan are homogenous ethnostates where Spain is only for the Spanish and Germany for the Germans and Japan for the Japanese, even if they have immigration, no immigrant will be fully accepted as Spanish or German or Japanese. That is a fundamental difference right there, that and the implied promise of upward mobility in this country and people want outward signs of that.
I’d appreciate information on the following:
1. Is the expectation that with a protected bike lane, bicyclists (articularly Citibikes and racing bikes) will now stop at red lights?
Citibikers and racing bicyclists will put pedestrians first?
2. What is envisioned with bus riders having to step into/across the bike lane to access the bus stop?
3. Will the new bus stops have sufficient space and bus shelter? Of special concern would be the bus stop at the NW corner of Broadway that serves multiple buses.
4. It appears that DOT seeks this change to encourage and expand bicycling (it is not just “safety”) – what happens when more recreational bicyclists use this corridor as DOT apparently intends?
5. What happens when more stress/confusion is put on the already complicated Broadway intersection? For example, turning buses at 72nd and Broadway with more bicycles going through?
6. How will stores on the north side get deliveries?
7. What is the plan for the mosque? The taxi and Uber drivers who park/double-park to attend prayers? (BTW the mosque was welcomed there years ago, pre-dating the City’s wish to grow bicycling and parking reduction efforts)
8. What is the plan to address the various food trucks that park illegally – for example, food trucks that are parking in the loading area meant for Trader Joe’s?
At the community board meeting the owner of Tip Top shoes and Manager of Acker Wines were quite upset about the new plan for 72nd St. and they said it would greatly affect their ability to receive and send out deliveries. Perhaps the city should eliminate some parking to make loading and unloading zones for deliveries.
The city announced loading zones in the same meeting. Everyone’s pretending like they didn’t hear the DOT say that several times during the meeting.
Single lane roads are inherently safer than double lane roads. Merging from one lane to another is the cause of over 10% of all car accidents in New York City.
One day, self driving cars that have no “blind spots” will be required to traverse the city, but until then, please limit multi-lane roadways in our neighborhood.
We have blind spot detectors now.
I support this. Just makes sense for a highly populated modern city. I live on 72nd Street – this will create more order and safety. Good to see the progress.
A disproportionate giveaway to the bike lobby!
Is anyone looking at the big picture here?
The more our streets become tied up with
— the new large garbage bins to come, roadside dining and bike lanes, the more funneled our streets become —leaving much less room for emergency services and commercial deliveries. Reality check people!
Listen to Jerry, people! The data clearly shows that such redesigns are safer for all road users. Change is hard. Our streets haven’t seen meaningful change in 80 years, while other major cities are pulling way ahead of us in keeping pace with a changing world.
A changing world where the middle and working class get short changed, got it.
This plan is just horrendous. Traffic will be at an absolute stand still.
If protestors, if the citizens of NYC truly want a safer, cleaner, more convenient and rational city they would protest the dominion of and clutter by automotive vehicles. The majority of pols and many citizens genuflect to drivers of motorized vehicles, making ineffectual swipes at controlling the deaths, congestion, and pollution caused by cars and the loss of invaluable space they occupy. Any and all minor whims or whines by drivers are are met with a stampede by pols to satisfy this small minority of the NYC population, drivers. The problems on the streets of the city are caused by cars and trucks, not bicycles, yet gold is thrown to drivers of motorized vehicles, sawdust to people traveling on the greenest of vehicles. Cities were not made for cars, but we shoehorn them in anyway. Best we protest cars, not bicycles!
Congestion pricing would contradict your argument in total.
Love this proposal! Can’t happen fast enough. I’m so tired of the huge highway running through the neighborhood.
I’m a cyclist and ride nearly everyday around the City, AND I have a car which is garaged at great expense, rarely driven IN the City, except to get out of the City. I’ve never had a problem cycling on West 72nd St. as it is. Yes, may cyclists don’t ride properly (obeying the cycling rules, giving hand signals, etc., and obeying the traffic LAWS), although I do. E-bike riders (many of whom are delivery workers) are the worst, IMO. ANY MOTORIZED vehicle, including those using batteries (like Scooters, “Onesies,” and E-bikes) should licensed just like cars. Frankly, I don’t see the need for a protected bicycle lane on W. 72nd St. But I’d like to encourage more cycling. I love this quote: “The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart. (Iris Murdoch, writer (1919-1999)).”
And to that I’d say: my family would totally love to bike more in the city! But we live at 72nd and West End. When we look down 72nd towards Central Park, we just don’t see a world where our daughters can react quick enough to cars pulling over to load and unload passengers. A protected lane connecting the parks through a major corridor of the neighborhood feels accessible and friendly and helps the next generation learn new habits. I believe that this is possible while also ramping up enforcement and emphasizing the importance of yielding within the lanes.
Not to stir up a hornet’s nest, but: there are bike lights at the corners of 79th and Amsterdam and 66th and 3rd, and as a driver who has to make a left turn, I see bikes yielding to them. Ignore the death block that is the bike lane PAST the light – can folks who live at 79th give feedback on how successful those bike lights are in getting cyclists to wait their turn across the intersection?
In my experience, food delivery workers sometimes do stop at the bike lights when the bike lights are red.
However, Citibikers go through red.
We don’t have the option to opt out of safety. New York City can’t have the people blocking progress. Not allowed to build housing. Not allowed to build modern safe streets. People are literally afraid of any and all change. It’s New York City. New York City is supposed to have the best streets. New York City is supposed to be safe. New York City’s supposed to be the best.
Don’t like it move to Florida. There is an endless supply of people wanting to move to NYC to experience the walkability and safety of New York City. People are struggling the afford cost of living increases gas is $4+/gallon. That impacts everything. What ever we can do to lower the need for gas and create a safe & affordable street for people we should be doing. I support this.
The endless supply of people wanting to move to NYC all want to live in the same 15 neighborhoods. They are here to build their careers and mate, not necessarily because they want the “walkability” and “safety”.
Of course people are afraid of “change” when they will end up worse off and with less choices than they had before. Using public transportation is a sacrifice and there’s limits as to how much sacrifice people will accept. Even the urbanists know it. But they’re good at telling others to take the train while they prefer to ride their e-Citibike or e-scooter over the trains. NYC is supposed to be the best and that means that NYC is NOT supposed to be a luxury product which is what Bloomberg (who sowed the seeds of the urbanist movement growing in NYC) envisioned.
I live in an apartment building on the north side of W. 72nd St. These bike lanes will affect me and my family and my neighbors personally. I am all for bike lanes, but this is not the way to do it. In order for me and my kids, and the other kids, and the elderly in my building to get into their car, or cab, or Uber, or access a ride, we will have to cross two lanes of bike traffic. We all know that most bikers don’t obey the speed limit laws. Not to mention all of the delivery drivers on E bikes speeding down the street at 35 miles an hour. Even when getting off the bus going westbound on the north side of W. 72nd St., passengers will have to cross those bike lanes. Wholly unsafe. And there is no way that delivery drivers won’t still double park, thereby blocking the entire flow of traffic westbound on W. 72nd St. No traffic will ever be able to get down the block.
The advocates of this plan may believe that the bike lanes will make it safer for the bikers, but it will be much more unsafe for the residence of the buildings on the block.
I know of two disabled people in a building on the north side of 72nd and their doormen will literally have to come out and block the bike lanes to get them into and out of taxis, etc.
” some would need to cross an active, bidirectional bike lane ”
The same people already must cross in front of moving bicycles in traffic lanes. That is more dangerous and unpredictable than a bike lane. Cyclists are growing in number and need safe lanes free from cars.
There are already protected bike lanes throughout the city. Why should 72nd Street be any different?
No, if you are on the north side of 72nd Street and you hail a cab or call for an Uber/Lyft you don’t have to cross anything.
Protected lanes make sense in the right places. And the right places for bikes going crosstown in that area are 70, 71, 73, and 74 streets.
They’re quiet and safe and easily transversed. I do it frequently.
No separate lane is necessary.
Why can’t cars go down 70, 71, 73, or 74th Streets?
It’s not a question of transit, it’s a question of access ON 72nd Street. This plan is doomed to failure, you can’t have just one lane of traffic in each direction. It’s unfair to residents and to businesses.
They can and they do and there are so few of them that these streets can be shared, safely, between cars and bikes.
The only times I feel unsafe on them is when a rider comes AT me riding the wrong way, forcing me to possibly veer when traffic may be overtaking from behind.
Other than that the ride is usually relaxing, at least as much as on a bike lane which I have to share with ebikes going 1.5 – 2X my speed while passing within a foot.
I think the point was, that if you’re taking a group of kids out to a car/cab/Uber then you expect the driver to be able to pull up to the curb, and now those kids, or the elderly, will have to cross through the bike lanes to get into said vehicle. It was absolute hell when 3 dining sheds went up on 72nd, IN AN ACTIVE BUS LANE, and we had to walk into the middle of the street to get on and off the bus, so now the bike lanes will be added to the mix.
Maybe I missed this part of the conversation, but does anyone know if the dining sheds are still going to be allowed on 72nd once these changes take place?
I hear you, but as a parent teaching my kid how to be a New Yorker, they’ve learned how to look before exiting a cab. I’ve found the cyclists to be very accommodating when they see a family or elderly person who needs a little more time.
Cabs have never been able to pull up to the curb, there are parked cars there.
Usually, yes, but that’s where the ability to double park — or double stand — is needed. If I want to hail a cab, I can walk out just passed the parked cars, and if I order an Uber, it can wait for me there. This plan doesn’t allow for anything but quick stops to let somebody in and out of a car. So if you’re coming back from the airport with 3 pieces of luggage in the trunk, that’s going to block traffic in the one lane where it’s allowed. For most of the day, there will be multiple vehicles on both sides of the street that are forced to double park, and that center median won’t be wide enough for two-lane traffic, so the plan won’t work even before you consider the irresponsible bikers.
There will always be double parking, it is not being jerks about it that is the issue.
The people claiming “cars follow the rules, bikes don’t” must live in a different nyc than I do. I see cars speeding, running red lights and stop signs, and/or making illegal turns literally every day. I see cyclists breaking the rules, too, but to claim one population is generally rule-abiding and the other isn’t just doesn’t match the observable reality of our streets
I read this as I sat in my apartment mid-block of W83rd Street listening to the cars blaring their horns on CPW.
Can we please make the car horns as loud inside the car as they are outside?
There they go again. Why do we put up with this?
It’s bad enough the air pollution they cause. Do they really have to add noise pollution too?
Anything that encourages people to bike is a HUGE win for the city.
Glad to see the city finally acknowledge the reality of increased bike traffic. This will help with safety.
Say goodbye to your parking spots! Say hello to beautiful bike lanes!
There will still be parking spots.
I thank the members of the coalition for using an ounce of logic to point out and address how reckless this is. There is hardly a busier cross-town street on the UWS, perhaps excluding 96th. Adding these bike lanes will be a nightmare for elder residents and a hazard for the neighborhood kids. There are several other options for a cross town bike lane, and I encourage them to be considered instead of 72nd street.
Please no bike lane at 72nd street. Bikers think that they own the street and this is an invitation for disaster.
Please bike lane at 72nd street. Cars think that they bike the street and this is an invitation for disaster.
So pleased to hear about this rally, I’ll be there. Bikers are a menace, and will be until they are licensed and can get tickets for the same violations as motorists.
Uh… cyclists CAN get tickets for the same violations as motorists. The law is there. The problem is that NYPD don’t give tickets to cyclists OR motorists. The fines are the same for infractions whether on bicycle or in a car. The only difference is that you don’t get points on your license if you get a bicycle ticket rather than a motor vehicle ticket.
Bike lanes are good.
The problem is simply people who break the law – The bike rider in NYC is our indigenous criminal
Yeah, and how many of those bikes will be E-bikes? Who protects the bicyclists from the motor (E) bikes? “Protected”, what a joke.
Having lived alongside plenty of new bike lanes in London for years, my experience is that when new dedicated bike lanes are added, more “average-intensity” cyclists will be more likely to use them. (Again in my experience), this is a group much more likely to obey whatever traffic laws/rules/norms are put in place. And once those people are the majority of riders, the avid/intense cyclists fall in line with the rest of the pack.
I understand the worry and criticism, but that’s just how I’ve seen it play out, a few times. 5 or 10 intense cyclists behave very differently once they’re surrounded by/intermingled with 20 or 30 average cyclists.
My other personal observation is that people going through a neighborhood on bikes are more likely to stop and drop into a business impromptu because it catches their eye/reminds them of something they need or want to do – as compared to people going through in an Uber or even on a bus. Businesses should likely see/experience this as a big potential increase in their foot traffic, which outweighs the potential loss of anyone who would only come to their business if they could park in front of it.
(NB I moved to 73/Bway a couple years ago, love it, I understand why there is an instinct to protect it)
To add…of course retail and local businesses are impacted by various factors – rent, gentrification, demographic change, ecommerce and so on. These are major issues in this neighborhood.
You mentioned you moved here a few years ago,
If you’ve not been to the independent and longtime stores, urge you to check them out: Tip Top shoes, 72nd Stationery, Gartner’s hardware, Fischer Bros & Leslie among others.
Cabe Franklin,
Not enough space to discuss this fully but briefly:
In this area, a walkable area, people typically walk to local small stores like Gartner’s hardware – they are not using Uber.
Customers of Tip Top shoes walk, bus, subway – not Uber.
These are some of the long-time neighborhood stores.
A bike lane will not result in Citibike or racing bicyclists “noticing “ Gartner’s – and shopping there. A bike lane will not result in more business
Your observations are actually consistent with research out there. After bike lanes are install, the NYCDOT have found that safety increases, as well as traffic speeds, and local business net profit.
A two-way bike lane on the North side.
.
The North side is Westbound for vehicles.
So one of the bike lanes will be going East on the side where vehicles go West.
Pedestrians will understandably be looking to see traffic going West.
If bicyclists – especially Eastbound – don’t stop at the red lights (and right now, most bicyclists ignore red lights) then pedestrians are seriously endangered.
The folks on here supporting these bike lanes all have the same thing in common – they seem to have forgotten that e-bikes terrorize the road AND PEDESTRIANS. No one is coming for the leisurely biker who abides by the rules of the road. The concern is with regard to the reckless Citi-E-bikers who wear their AirPods, oblivious to the world around them, who I along with MOST PEDESTRIANS have had very close encounters with. The concern is with regard to delivery drivers who hit speeds way outside of the speed limit, who again MOST PEDESTRIANS have had very close encounters with. For those less fortunate, both of these populations have caused FATALITIES AND HOSPITALIZATIONS. Bicycle deaths are at a 24 YEAR HIGH. Without enforcement of traffic laws, this bike proposal will result in serious injuries at best and fatalities at worst, with the elderly and young children at the highest risk. This is not something we can take lightly. This is not something we can blindly take a chance on. If proper enforcement could exist in tandem this would not be as big of a concern, however with limited resources this is not an option. If you are a biker, please have compassion. No one is trying to prevent your means of transportation, however supporters ARE trying to PROACTIVELY prevent avoidable deaths and injuries. It’s time we stopped reacting to bad policy, and started to prevent it in the first place.
Is allocating scarce street space to bikes the best use of that space compared to other needs (pedestrians, buses, deliveries)? If safety is the goal, why not prioritize higher-injury corridors or bus-heavy streets that serve more vulnerable populations?
Engineers have nothing better to do so they ruin every street they can. They constantly favor a small minority of people who ride bikes in traffic. The fact is, cars are getting more and more energy efficient, and the population keeps growing, which means more cars, not fewer. They are out of touch with reality.
Why not simply put the bike lanes on an already less-busy street like 71st or 70th or 73rd Streets, just one-directional bike traffic per street.? No commercial businesses with loading needs, no bus routes, no on- ramp to the West Side Highway, it will be both better for current 72nd street interests and a much more pleasant ride for cyclists.
IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE PLAN, GO TO THE RALLY! SATURDAY, MAY 2 10:00 AM 72nd and Broadway/ Verdi Square