By Gus Saltonstall
Hundreds of people gathered Saturday on a brisk morning at Verdi Square for a rally against the recent city proposal for a two-way bike lane along 72nd Street.
Multiple speakers connected to “The No 72nd Street Bike Lane Coalition,” which hosted the event, took turns expressing their worries to the crowd that the new bike lane would take away pedestrian access to street curbs, especially for senior citizens, and make it more challenging for businesses along the corridor to unload shipments. They also protested the speed at which the plan from the city’s Department of Transportation seemed to be unfolding.
“This plan was going to be approved under the radar,” Darryl, one of the organizers of the rally, who did not provide her last name, told West Side Rag. “We just want to bring the subject to everybody’s attention, so we can get fair and proper community input. We like bike lanes. I bike. But to be stepping off of your curb onto a bi-directional bike lane is suicide.”
Currently, West 72nd Street has four lanes of vehicle traffic, two in each direction, and two lanes of parking. The plan would reallocate the roadway’s 60 feet, giving approximately nine feet to a two-way bike lane on the north side of the road. It would add loading zones for delivery vehicles and concrete platforms where pedestrians can wait to cross the street and exit and enter the M72 and M57 buses.
If implemented, the 72nd Street 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.
“I think the proposal ignored virtually every aspect of a resident’s point of view,” said an Upper West Sider who attended the rally but did not share his name with the Rag. “It starts with safety issues. We have a lot of elderly, so for them to have to cross a two-lane, cross-directional lane that has not just bicycles but also many motorized vehicles, and also not to take into account commercial vehicles and businesses that need to get deliveries. You lose parking spots for residents that need cars to get to work every day.”
The DOT states that the installation of bike lanes leads to fewer injuries, particularly among seniors.
There was also a sizable contingent of people at the rally in support of the proposed West 72nd Street bike lane, including Dan Schwartz, who stood silently at the outskirts of the rally with a homemade sign reading, “Build the bike lane.”
“I live here in the neighborhood, my kids ride bikes and they need a safe way to get to Central Park and across town,” Schwartz said. “This bike lane is going to make it a lot easier on 72nd Street.”
As the Rag spoke to Schwartz, a woman walked over and said, “I hope a bike splatters you,” before quickly walking away. She did not answer our attempted follow-up question.
“What’s your reaction to that type of rhetoric?” the Rag asked Schwartz.
“It’s the west side,” he said with a shrug.
Upper West Sider Austin Celestin was also in attendance at the rally in support of the bike lane proposal.
“It’s a shame that people dichotomize pedestrian safety and cyclist safety,” he said. “I do believe we need enforcement of regulations on e-bikes; one injury is one too many. I was hit a few years ago and needed crutches, but I think bike lanes make it more predictable and more visible. Having that set place that a bike lane provides is something that would be huge for cyclist safety and pedestrian safety because it makes everything more organized.”
Worries specifically surrounding electric bikes were a theme from the rally.
“I wish the city and state had handled the regulations on the electric bikes before they tried to sneak this new bike lane in,” local resident Carol Stevens told the Rag. “I live here. It’s bad as it is. There’s no space to unload things. This will just make it worse. I’m not in support of the bike lane.”
Representatives from multiple businesses along West 72nd Street, including Tip Top Shoes and Gartner’s Hardware, also attended the rally to show their opposition to the bike lane proposal.
At one point, it appeared that Curtis Sliwa, local activist and New York City mayoral candidate, was going to share his opinion on the proposed 72nd Street bike lane. Sliwa walked through the crowd in his red Guardian Angels uniform and beret, but he was apparently only exiting the nearby train station.
The Upper West Side Community Board 7 had been scheduled to vote on the proposed bike lane May 5. But that action has been pushed back to the board’s June meeting, so the DOT and community board can gather more input from the community on the issue.
You can submit feedback — HERE.
Read More:
- DOT Proposes Major Redesign of 72nd Street, Including New Two-Way Bike Lane
- Opposition Group Schedules UWS Rally Against New 72nd Street Bike Lane Proposal
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here. And you can Support the Rag here.
The West 72nd Street Block Association’s own survey showed that 59% oppose the redesign.
Who did they survey? All road users? All New Yorkers? Everyone who lives and works in the neighborhood? Or just the block association members?
What’s the matter with you??? I will only speak to the part of the plan that directly impacts me. I live on 72nd between West End and Riverside. The congestion related to the Islamic Cultural Center (the city will NEVER enforce parking regulations there) is already a nightmare. Eliminating lanes will make it exponentially worse. Anyone who says otherwise is just wrong. There is already regular double and triple parking multiple times a week, sometimes multiple times during the same day. So, right, let’s eliminate more lanes of traffic so that when a taxi or Uber stops to drop or pick up someone, traffic can come to a complete standstill. And deliveries. Classic example of the DOT and people like you not knowing what the facts on the ground are.
nonsense
How long until the bike lobby comes up with a list of local business to boycott and wishing to go broke like they did in Astoria?
I hope so! We should know what businesses are against improvements like this.
A woman walked up to a man holding a sign that said “Build the bike lane” and told him she hoped a bike would splatter him. Then she ran off before a reporter could ask her to repeat it on the record. Cowardly and grotesque.
Think about the logic. She’s so worried about cyclists hurting pedestrians that her response is to wish exactly that on someone she disagrees with. The mask slipped. This was never about safety. It’s about parking spots and the inconvenience of sharing a street.
Schwartz said his kids need a safe way to bike to Central Park. Nobody at that rally had an answer for that, because there isn’t one. DOT data shows protected lanes cut injuries, including for seniors. Concrete pedestrian islands save lives. Chaotic shared roadways take them.
Build the lane. And grow up: Nearly everyone at this protest was far too old to be behaving like a toddler having a temper tantrum. It’s pathetic.
“It’s about parking spots”
I think you let your own mask slip and revealed your own preference (and that of many bikers) that won’t be happy until all parking and cars for that matter are removed from the city. Talk about not wanting to share the road. And while bikers are busy railing against the evil automobile, they’re perfectly happy to ignore traffic signals and mow down pedestrians who have the temerity to attempt to cross the street.
Do you know how many bikers I see daily between West End and Riverside on 72nd? Basically none. This is a “solution” in search of a problem that doesn’t exist, at least on my stretch of 72nd. The bike people want a one-solution-fits-all. More lanes. Yes, more bike lanes are a win, I agree. But the engineering has to take account of the unique situations on the ground.
I’ve been knocked over and injured twice by bicyclists not obeying traffic regulations, once by someone who came up from behind me on the sidewalk (!) and literally ran me over. They didn’t even stop to see if I was dead. At this point, I have no sympathy for the bicyclists who want more and more bike lanes. They never want to be accountable to obey traffic regulations. I can’t even begin to tell you how many times bicyclists have wished me dead on Twitter. I don’t have a car, and believe me, the bike people do not share the street.- they’ve taken it over.
This sort of hysteria works better when we can’t all see the streets you’re talking about, where cars dominate and cyclists are a small portion at the margins, at most.
I agree that there are far more cars than bikes, but I see bikes go through traffic lights way more than cars. And I don’t know what that woman was talking about, with the bike lanes providing more bike visibility I am not seeing that at all
Thank you for posting this. The animosity is unbelievable. I think it’s ironic that people labeled me as old, but the first time I was hit I was in my 30’s, and then twice after that before I was 50. All 3 times the bikes ‘came out of nowhere,’ jumped the curb, etc. There was no ‘crime’ because I opted to go to a private orthopedist instead of Mt. Sinai ER.
very well said thank you
Evidence that streets with bike lanes are safer for pedestrians…?
And what about motorized vehicles inside bike lanes…?
DOT study from 2014 on what happened when DOT first started installing protected bike lanes downtown and on the Upper East and Upper West Sides:
https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2014-09-03-bicycle-path-data-analysis.pdf
Summary:
-Total injuries (drivers, cyclists and pedestrians) dropped by 20%
-Travel times on streets with protected bike lanes either improved or remained the same
-When compared to similar corridors, streets that received a protected bicycle lane saw a greater increase in retail sales
DOT analysis from last year of the protected bike lanes on First and Third Avenues:
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2025/02/19/safety-first-on-third-dot-numbers-show-a-roadway-safer-for-all-users
Summary:
-Injuries to cyclists dropped by 10 percent at a time when the roadway experienced a 79-percent increase in bike traffic
-Pedestrian injuries dropped 63 percent
-Installation of protected bike lanes reduced deaths and serious injuries among all road users by 18.1 percent, with a 29.2-percent decline for pedestrians.
So we have over a decade of evidence that streets with protected bike lanes are safer for everyone, better for businesses (that’s what the loading zones are for and people on bikes don’t need to look for parking!) and don’t make automobile traffic any worse.
Anyone who looks at a NYC street and thinks that people on bicycles are the primary threat to everyone’s safety are not paying attention.
A 12 year old study when almost 100% of the bikes were non-motorized.
And a one year old study…read the entire post!
My own eyes see the streets as slower.
There were no e-bikes in 2014.
The DOT are the experts on safe street design. Not random people off the street. They have decades of experience and data and studies. If you want to challenge those studies, go ahead and make your case. But right we have an issue of public health and safety with experts on one side saying this will improve safety and self appointed people who have done no research, have no experience, and no accountability.
At some point we have to tell good people that their personal vibes are not enough evidence to overturn public health decisions made my professionals.
“I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help”.
If you really want to argue that we should privatize the streets, go ahead. I highly doubt there would be any free parking though.
There is no free parking on West 72nd Street. Clearly you don’t live here Josh. The point is, this design will substantially endanger pedestrians, because bikers don’t stop for lights and don’t obey speed limits.
And bikes competing with cars will behave differently? Anecdotally, where there are separated bike lanes the e-bikes ride on the sidewalks much less.
From what I see, people who aren’t deliveristas do run red lights, but we do it carefully, after scanning the intersection to make sure it’s safe. Deliveristas, not so much – a lot of really hectic unsafe riding. Though addressing their employment conditions, which force them to move as fast as they possibly can just to make a living, might help too. So would never ordering any food delivery.
I see the DOT and posters like you saying the data shows the streets are safer wirh bike lanes but don’t know where to see the original data/study/paper. Do you know wherr to fibd this? My question is does this data adress a bike lane like the one proposed for 72nd St which is bidirectional that citizens will have to cross midblock to get on or off a bus? This is very different from most bike lanes in the city and will pose different problems.
no its not. there is a 2 way lane on 1st ave and 5th ave at the least.
Where is this two-way lane on fifth avenue? There certainly is not a bike lane along the park–let alone a two-way lane.
1st and 5th Avenues are one way for cars which allows bus stops to be on the opposite side of the street as the bike lane. Nobody has to cross it modulo co to wait for a bus. The 72nd St redesign requires his riders to do that.
You are using an off-the-cuff statement by one person as justification for a plan that is opposed by hundreds of local residents?
The opposition is not just to the bicycle lane, it is to the whole concept.
You are also using the estimable Mr. Schwartz’s perceived need for his daughters to have a safe way to bike to (and presumably from) Central Park as an imperative for adoption of this plan. If walking their bikes to the park is out of the question, any of the side streets north and south of 72nd seem like a perfectly adequate alternative.
Wow, a woman wished a man would be “splattered” by a bike for holding a sign, and your response was to call it off-the-cuff and change the subject. That is a moral failure, full stop. Own it.
You have completely missed the point of what was said. They were not addressing the “splatter” statement. They were talking about how the Rag used one person as representing many people.
Perhaps you aren’t from around here? “Splattered” is what happens when somebody drives very quickly through a puddle or slush.
“Schwartz said his kids need a safe way to bike to Central Park.”
Options:
If he finds the current configuration of 72nd St. too dangerous for his kids, he could have them use any of the eastbound one-way streets; they see much less traffic than 72nd St, and there’s no oncoming traffic to deal with.
They could walk to Central Park. There’s literally no place on the UWS that’s more than 2/3 of a mile to Central Park. Sounds like great exercise to me.
He could make sure that his kids know (and obey) traffic laws. That’s not an absolute guarantee of safety, of course, but a cyclist that’s not speeding, not going the wrong way down one way streets, not passing red lights and stop signs, not weaving through traffic, and not playing with their phone is immensely safer than they would be otherwise.
This is the right answer. A. It’s safe, and B. It accommodates *everybody’s* concerns and might let us all live in peace together.
Right. Telling your kids to choose the road with busses going both ways is already BOGUS.
There’s an East bound bike lane on 78th Street. From RSD to CPW. Low traffic street to boot.
That’s very odd, or perhaps I don’t get it? 78th Street going east comes to a dead end on Columbus Avenue. As with the xtown bus, one must go to 81st st. to get to CPW.
people just appear on these random side streets? wouldn’t he have to live near there, 6 blocks from where the lane is proposed>>
“…wouldn’t he have to live near there…”
He would not. I’m not a lawyer or anything like that, but I’m just about positive that you don’t have to live on a block in order to be able to ride a bike on it.
The line about parking spots is getting old. Maybe you should take your own survey and ask how many people don’t have cars and are still against this. I’m a senior and I’ve never met anyone who’s been hit by a car…plenty of people hit by bikes though, including babies in strollers. 😖
i have two kids who used to be in stroller and my biggest fear in the world is they will be run over by a reckless driver jsut walking to their friends house. considering there are hundreds of car accidents in NYC every single day with death and severe injuries, with no consequences for the driers, i’ll take my chance with my kids live on the safer street design. consider yourself lucky you don’t know any people killed by drivers. maybe you should read the news andf see how many people were killed by drivers just this past week, including the 9 yr old boy.
This is exactly right. I understand why some human beings are put off by the dramatic increase in bicycle and e-bike traffic. It’s new. It’s disruptive. People (including my elderly father, while riding on a bike path) have been injured by e-bikes and bikes. But to any rational observer, it’s overwhelmingly clear that the real threat to human beings is good old cars and trucks. It’s not even close.
I have a baby in a stroller. I want decisions made based on the hard data recorded by the NYPD and not by people who take a kind of anti-scientific pride in their own lack of any evidence whatsoever.
NYPD does not record all the ‘data’ on bike injuries for a variety of reasons.
https://www.ourtownny.com/news/our-town-wins-awards-for-exposing-gaps-in-pedestrian-bike-injury-reporting-JG5796975
Our Town linked to this recently published (May 2026) study that looked at every patient presenting to the Bellevue Health Center with micromobility (bike, e-bike, and e-scooter) related injuries from 2018 to 2023. The study found 914 patients with micromobility related injuries over those five years (almost 7% of all patients).
There were 321 traditional bikers hit by cars, 62 e-bikers hit by cars, and 55 e-scooters hit by cars. There were also 9 bikers hit by buses and 7 hit by motorcycles.
There were 48 pedestrians hit by traditional bikes, 15 hit by e-scooters and 6 by e-bikes.
https://journals.lww.com/neurosurgery/fulltext/2026/05000/the_fast_and_the_fragile__neurosurgical_trauma_in.2.aspx
A separate study and a separate issue.
And a takeaway from the one you cited is that 50% of the injuries related did NOT involve cars.
That is how badly they are operated, you don’t even need a car.
Oh, and if so many aren’t related to cars, then how many of the ones that are are the fault of the biker?
I ask this as a regular bike rider who actually notices that ebikers can be a real threat to me as well.
“I’ve never met anyone hit by a car” is not data. It’s a sample size of your address book.
In 2025, roughly 5,000 cyclists in NYC were injured by motor vehicles. Total traffic deaths hit 205, the most of which were pedestrians and drivers, not people hit by bikes. DOT’s own numbers show protected bike lanes reduce deaths and serious injuries for everyone on the street, including seniors and including pedestrians, by 18 percent. That is the entire point. The lane protects YOU too.
Like a turkey voting for Thanksgiving…
For anyone who can read, this convo started out with a comment about parking spots and devolved into this. The fact that I don’t know anyone personally who was hit by a car doesn’t mean I’m not aware of children killed by cars and guns. This also doesn’t change the fact that I know children who’s lives were decimated after being hit by grown men on speeding on bikes. I’m sure someone here will now find a way to turn that into a commentary about men vs women cyclists.
Your anecdotal “evidence” is not a substitute for verified facts about how dangerous cars are. All I’ve done is bring this to the comment section’s attention.
West 72nd Street isn’t all of New York City.
If you only want to look at deaths, since August 2011, there have been exactly 2 crash-related fatalities on West 72nd Street west of Central Park: one motorist and one cyclist.
You are on slightly firmer ground with injuries, 260 over the period almost equally apportioned among cyclists (87), pedestrians (87), and motorists (83), with 3 classified as “unknown” That averages to 17.3 injuries a year and one death every 7 1/2 years.
As noted elsewhere, there’s not much point to reporting a bike injury because insurance payouts are unlikely.
You can generate this data yourself at crashmapper.org. Use the Custom map option and draw a rectangle around 72nd Street. The data is summarized at the bottom of the window.
“Our Town Wins Awards for Exposing Gaps in Pedestrian-Bike Injury Reporting
Our Town’s story on e-bike collisions, and New York City’s scarce reporting on injuries, earned multiple awards at the New York Press Association’s Better Newspaper Contest.”
https://www.ourtownny.com/news/our-town-wins-awards-for-exposing-gaps-in-pedestrian-bike-injury-reporting-JG5796975
This is what biking acolytes refuse to acknowledge. Auto based injuries are always reported and often exaggerated because of insurance while bike caused injuries go unreported because there’s no recourse.
And that’s why so many of us can say we know victims of bikes while so many of you call it anecdotal.
And for what it’s worth I bike several times a week and I see how we’ve conditioned pedestrians to avoid us, to the point where they won’t assert their right of way in crosswalks.
Do you expect people to “assert their rights” when they are in danger of serious injury or death?? I have forcefully yelled “Hey!” at bike riders who almost rode smack into me. Needless to say, I accomplished nothing, beyond expressing my well-founded anger.
There must be a better way.
This isn’t about parking spots, on most of 72nd st. Daily street cleaning and meters are the norm. Though the triple parking for the Islamic cultural center is not addressed in this proposal.
When the bike lane is there and a single roadway is there where do the yellow cars go to pray.
Go to the East side this will be more about parking.
Count me in. Never had a car in the city and am very against this proposal. Unsafe.
Do you know what’s unsafe? Biking from CP to Rivwrside park in an unprotected bike lane.
Build the protected bike lane already!
But why build it on 72nd St?
Because there is a park exit on 72nd street. If you build it on another street, bikers from the park still need to get to there. On 72nd street, they can just exit from the park.
Maybe stop doing things that aren’t safe.
You’ve had a few good points overall, but comments like this one, and “Perhaps you aren’t from around here? “Splattered” is what happens when somebody drives very quickly through a puddle or slush.” hurt your argument, and your credibility.
What do you think it means?
It means that your insulting tone overshadows your argument. I thought I made that clear.
Operating any kind of vehicle on city streets has a degree of danger to it; “splatter” has been variously described in this conversation as “grotesque” and “violent,” when it is nothing of the kind in the context in which it appeared in the article.
Sometimes the truth hurts.
Kids are more likely to get hit by e-bikes than cars.
False and a completely dishonest lie. You should delete your comment if you’re going to argue in bad faith.
Motor vehicle injuries are the leading cause of unintentional injury death for kids in NYC, and 80% of those deaths are kids hit by cars while walking. In New York State, twice as many children are killed by cars as by guns. Bikes account for 1% of all pedestrian fatalities citywide. One percent. Cars are the other 99%.
That 1% could be your child, parent, sibling or friend.
And your point is what exactly? Because 1% of pedestrian fatalities are from bikes, making them safest mode of transport in terms of impacts on children, we should make biking harder and make it easier for people in cars? So 100% of deaths are from cars, and the total number of deaths goes up? Do you understand how these statistics work?
200 of biker and 100 lb of ebike at 20mph vs a 60lb kid. That’s 3000 lbs of impact force.
Can you do the math for an SUV?
Now imagine 6,000 lbs of car at 50mph!
It’s not one or the other. People have the right to not be hit by either.
If a stranger assaults me and beats me with his fists do I thank him for not having a gun?
Well, yeah.
I was wrong. Force is equal to the mass times the acceleration. We do not know the acceleration (change in velocity over time) so we cannot calculate the force of the impact. But, common sense tells us it would be dangerous.
From what I remember about physics, the force of the impact depends on the velocity of the bike and the mass. I think the formula is force = mass times velocity squared. I could be wrong–I never said I was a good physics student.. I will try to do the math and post later.
It’s momentum that we’re concerned with here. That’s mv (mass * velocity). Acceleration doesn’t matter here.
I think acceleration is important to determine force. Either way, if you are hit, you are not going to obsess over force vs. momentum.
Can you provide the evidence for that?
Can you provide the evidence showing the opposite?
I went by this protest in the middle of running some errands to support the bike lane as well, but my kids accurately surmised it was ‘boring’ and we didn’t stick around long. What I did hear was a bunch of elderly, almost no one with kids or anyone under 50 throwing around exaggerated rhetoric like the above comment that a ‘bi-directional bike lane is suicide’. These elderly UWS are welcome to their opinion but as DOT notes, bike lanes result in lower rates of injuries for seniors.
Thanks to Dan and Austin for showing their support!
My son was there he’s 27, my younger son also there he’s 19, and my niece who has a 3 yr old and and 1yr old. Maybe you weren’t looking very closely .
I guess you also don’t have a mother who might be around my age or older .. all of whom you are happy to throw babies , elderly, and disabled into a mix of severe danger!
Severe danger? There’s just no evidence of that, sorry.
As the DOT has said, where these bike lanes have been implemented, the street has gotten safer & you can feel it. I don’t even bike, I just want safer streets for my kids!
There is nothing noble about having kids or being under 50.
I disagree, raising the next generation is difficult, requires sacrifice, and dare I say it is actually very noble.
Public transit requires sacrifice, but there is only so much sacrifice people are willing to take. The pandemic taught us this.
I guess this was not “ A fake coalition group aiming to get a statistically insignificant 200 signatures? Eye roll” after all.
Remember saying that last week?
I stand by my mathematically correct comment that the petition & gathering is statistically insignificant relative to the population of the UWS.
The entire population of the UWS can’t be expected to care about traffic issues on 72nd Street. The correct universe is residents, businesses, and commuters who use the street itself.
The petition is up to 1,263 signatories at this writing, and it looked like several dozen more were collected on Saturday. When you factor in the likelihood that a significant swath of people in the area don’t have any knowledge of this issue, that is a significant amount.
The stats are worse for the urbanists. At least you have regulatory captured enough government agencies, nonprofits and corporations to do your bidding.
Does the “bike lanes result in lower rates of injuries for seniors” specifically take in to account 2 way bike lanes that have to be crossed to get on or off a bus?
Instead of this designed why not two one way bike lanes on the less busy surrounding streets with no buses and few businesses?
That’s pretty condescending. Acting like the only people who matter here are under 50 with kids just dismisses everyone else as irrelevant or “boring.”
Let me guess – you grew up in the suburbs where your parents still live, moved to the city, landed a high-paying tech job, found your scene, and now you think you get to define how everyone else should live here. It just comes off entitled.
Nowhere did I say these elderly protestors opinions don’t matter but equally their opinions don’t count for *more* than parents or younger folks that live in the neighborhood who weren’t at all represented at this protest.
This is about a street redesign… no one is being told how to live their lives. The elector mayor and his DOT have been put into power by the voters and these protestors sure seem to think they have a special veto power!
The problem is us parents are too busy parenting to hang out at a protest like this! Can’t wait for the bike lane.
Of course you are, dear. We understand. Parenting is so difficult. If your kiddos are such a 24/7 burden why not take them to a protest (anything you care about) and expose them to the concept of democracy and civic discourse. It will be more useful to them in the long run than hanging out on their devices.
Actually attending this rally did spark a nice conversation with my 5 year old on who the mayor and how he is elected. But there wasn’t a lot of civic discourse on display at this rally, just some folks ranting into a microphone
Can’t wait for you to get older, which, by the way, is inevitable. Unless it’s not. However, maybe now you’ll appreciate your own parents.
Some one percent of New Yorkers commute by bike. Less than 30% ride bikes. Special privilege has been given to bikers over any other underfunded dire problem in this city with the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars!! And those who are daily injured are completely ignored by this city.
When a flood of electric powered bikes descend upon a city with no regulation and very little enforcement of traffic violations we are very definitely being told how to live.
I’m a parent of two kids who like to bike ride a lot. I think this is an awful idea. And I think there are a lot of others like me. so please don’t act like you speak for everyone.
And again – the anti-car people are only hurting their cause, not helping it, with the non-stop negativity towards cars. They are in fact safer than the e-bikes because there are generally consequences for poorly driving a car, but nothing for an e-bike. And they are also harder to miss – the bikes come sneaking up on you at full speed, often with no regard for traffic signals.
But you keep living your best life.
If you think there are consequences for drivers, you should take a look at the super speeder article in the Times this week.
The consequence for poorly driving an e-bike is that you aren’t surrounded by a steel cage. If you hit someone you can go flying too and you’re much more likely to die in any kind of collision with a car. I think that is a much strong incentive than a $50 ticket.
Please do not approve this. This will be a traffic nightmare. Traffic will basically be at a complete stand still.
There is absolutely no traffic on 72nd street, it is a dead-end street at CPW. I cross it all day long. Please stop.
72nd St is one of the few entrances to the West Side Highway. Those cars will continue to use it. Also the M72 and M57
I dunno Jeff, look around, Nobody else on either side of the argument thinks there is absolutely no traffic on 72nd Street. If that were the case, then why would the Department of Traffic be trying to fix it?
I live on 72nd Street and WEA and to say “there is absolutely no traffic on 72nd street” is absolutely false. Now, if you wanted to say there was “little” traffic between Columbus and CPW, I would agree with you but your general statement about 72nd Street is flat out a mistake.
I am neither a biker or car driver, so I am somewhat ambivalent to this plan. However, if there is no enforcement of double parked cars (and triple parked cars in near the Islamic Center), there will be increased traffic on certain parts of 72nd Street and I find it hard to believe, maybe disingenuous, that people think that delivery persons on e-bikes are going to stay confined to the bike lanes on 72nd.
Great to hear. The bicycle gang tends to scream the loudest so always gets their way. The opposition does not mobilize well. This is just a bad idea. Major crosstown streets are not meant for bikes. If they insist doing something like this, go up or down a block. But I still think this is a lousy idea.
And before all of the bikers start whining about cars parking for free, I am supportive of some kind of resident parking pass that car owners are charged. Cars are not the devil. I have had many more close calls from bikes and e-bikes than cars.
And I say all of this as someone who enjoys bike riding.
The bicycle gang is supporting Transportation alternatives and Streetopia. Wonder who is funding them…Door Dash?? Uber Eats? Lyft?? Grub Hub? Look and see.
Mark Gorton.
Not pointing a finger at you, but I think people tend to exaggerate what they term close calls with bikes. That perception would also be mitigated if pedestrians didn’t stand in the bike lane and/or street while waiting to cross against the pedestrian signal. The traffic light is for vehicles, not pedestrians. When it flashes not to cross, continuing to do so is going to put you in the path of a turning vehicle which has a green light.
Pedestrians in New York have the right of way in marked and unmarked crosswalks at intersections. Drivers (and cyclists) must yield when pedestrians are crossing with a “Walk” signal or when no signals are present.
As of April 2026, cyclists must come to a complete stop—not just slow down—and wait for pedestrians to fully cross the road at intersections without traffic lights How often do you see that happen?
Bikes take off BEFORE light changes and continue moving AFTER.
That’s actually legal. Look at the Leading Pedestrian Interval laws, passed in 2019. Bikes are allowed to move through the light when the walk sign changes, not the red light.
When they do it while ppl have already left the curb? Give me a break! Peds have to look both ways, coming and going. There’s always a bike speeding toward us that disregards the lights. We DO have the right of way…
That’s only a subset of the times that bikers transit an intersection while the light is still red.
Your points about pedestrians are well taken, but if you spend 15 minutes at the corner of Amsterdam and Broadway at almost any time of day you will see multiple bike riders flouting the law in multiple ways.
The bikers want to make this debate about cars vs. smog-free, environmentally sensitive bicycles, but wholly separate from that is that the plan is bad for businesses, pedestrians, automobile and delivery drivers, emergency vehicles, and people who live on 72nd Street.
In no way is this bad for emergency vehicles. In fact, the bike lane is a perfect emergency lane that FDNY and EMT vehicles use all the time all over the city.
That woman who wished a violent accident on the protester must be proud of herself.
As moronic, nasty, and cowardly as she is, I hope she doesn’t suffer such an accident.
She wished him “splatter.” Since she probably lives in New York, you can be fairly certain that she has survived splatter and will do so again.
Bikes and Electric scooters are much more dangerous and wreckless for pedestrians than drivers in the 70s, parks and UWS.
Right… Did you read the previous article literally posted before this one?
“ Woman Killed in Wrong-Way Car Crash on West Side Highway Near 79th Street”
Car drivers are a menace. 2000 lbs of steel are much, much more dangerous than a bike every single time. Adding bike lanes will improve safety for pedestrians, cars, and bikes.
Yeah yeah. Yimby- funded by developers and a transplant.
That was on the West Side Highway at 3:40 AM. Did you even read the article? How is that any part of this discussion?
Apples and oranges.
Cars follow norms that bikes do not want to. Case closed.
The city critically needs a cross-town bike lane to connect the Hudson greenway and central park, and to make biking actually SAFE for families, older adults, and more cautious bikers. Our current system of no protected crosstown bike lanes means there’s so much inequality in biking – only the most seasoned bikers can make this commute safely under the current system.
I understand that people on this one block are resistant to change, but they’re holding the rest of the UWS hostage. I hope our local politicians and community boards are forward looking and put the climate, sustainability, and affordability needs of local residents above a handful of a few loud, grumpy NIMBYs and business owners on this one street.
Also, there currently are not enough bidirectional bike lanes in the neighborhood, and as a result, ebike riders on many roads (Amsterdam etc.) already go the wrong way down one-lane bike paths. It’s really wonderful and prudent to make this design bi-directional from the start, so people won’t be encouraged to break the law.
The rest of the UWS meaning the loud minority of urbanists, got it.
I’ve been biking for 64 years and while I totally agree with the need for bike lanes on our avenues the vast majority of our neighborhood cross streets are perfectly safe for responsible bike riders.
The greatest risk I encounter is from people riding against traffic on one way streets. They force me to either stop, or risk veering into a traffic lane I can’t see.
Next time you’re on the Greenway watch as 80-90% of pedestrians are too cowed by riders to assert their right of way in crosswalks.
Then apply that to people looking to cross a two way bike lane on 72nd.
Take 74th to the park and 73rd to the river and avoid the larger presence of buses, pedestrians, and deliveries.
It’s safer!
“inequality in biking..” Perhaps people on the block aren’t simply resistant to change but have real, legitimate concerns and to dismiss business owners like you do – well that’s a shame. I hope their concerns turn out to be nothing more than concerns if this passes.
As many other posters have said, perhaps side streets may be better set up for removing parking and installing protected bike lanes and two way-bike lanes aren’t necessary when you simply have to go one avenue over.
Removing parking anywhere is a concern, death by a thousand cuts will not work.
So these bikes are cross through traffic? Exactly the thing that the other proposal wanted to eliminate.
Just saying that the city critically needs a cross-town bike lane doesn’t make it so and doesn’t make the one on 72nd Street the only possible route.
Bicyclists are required to obey traffic laws. Many and possible most don’t, e-bikes and the traditional kind. You say it yourself: because it is inconvenient for some cyclists to go one way on a one-way street they are “encouraged” to go the wrong way. Let’s leave the roadways to the seasoned bikers who obey the law.
Anyway, the joke is on you. If you funnel all of the crosstown bike traffic onto 72nd Street, the bikers on the avenues are going to finally have to stop at the red light.
Why can’t the e bike riders going the wrong way on Amsterdam go to Columbus for a downtown bike lane? Surely that isn’t too strenuous on an e bike.
Beats me, but they currently don’t! You constantly have to look both ways when crossing any bike lane. Bidirectional bike lanes make so much sense on major street arteries, if people aren’t actually getting ticketed for going the wrong direction.
It’s pretty bold to claim you’re fighting for “safety” while calling the actual seniors on this block “grumpy NIMBYs”. And business owners? Who needs them. Why not get rid of the ramps and elevators while you’re at it? There are fewer people who need them, and they’re probably just “holding back” your personal playground, too.
This entire bike movement is ageist and ablest. They’re not even trying to hide it.
Diapers are ageist and ablest. Taxation is ageist and ablest.
Act accordingly.
Best,
Former baby, now tax-paying former baby.
They want a city for themselves and people like them, like big real estate. Just look at a politically involved urbanist real estate broker like Jason Haber’s streeteasy profile and that’s the kind of city he wants the streetscape to be an autocracy for!
https://streeteasy.com/jasonhaber
““I think the proposal ignored virtually every aspect of a resident’s point of view,”
That’s usually the case. All this bike lane will do is put more pedestrians at risk for bicycle collisions, as cyclists do not follow the rules of the road. Anyone who fails to realize this is either divorced from reality or doesn’t live here.
Why would pedestrians be more at risk if the bike lanes are created? There are bikes on 72nd St now without bike lanes. I can’t imagine that herding all the bikes into bike lanes would be more dangerous than the free-for-all that exists now.
Riders in traffic have to exercise greater care and more defensive awareness than riders in bike lanes.
What you don’t want to acknowledge is that’s a good thing.
72 is easy at its end blocks and difficult between Columbus and West End. Why? Deliveries.
That’s not going anywhere.
All the status quo does is it forces riders to exercise care for two blocks. And folks like me handle it quite easily by riding one or two blocks over.
If they put a two-way bike lane on the north side of the street, it will attract riders who otherwise would have taken side streets, increasing the two-wheeled traffic.
One practical result will be that if you parked in the parking lane, which would be south of the bike lanes, you would have to cross two lanes of bikers or go to a crosswalk, wait for the light, and then walk between the parking lane and the bike lane to get to your car. If you want to open the passenger-side doors, they’ll be hanging out there in the bike lane.
There are other elements of this plan that show equal lack of foresight.
Bikes do a good job of taking from public transit.
We can’t have nice things because people hate change. I hope DOT moves forward with this proposal because the reality is it will be better for everyone, regardless of the perceptions of this loud minority.
Loud minority? Do the math. Approximately 100,000 bikers. Nine million residents and pedestrians of New York.
I think it’s the bikers that are the loud minority. There are 1200 signatures for the online petition and they seem to have had dozens more on paper at the Saturday rally.
The streets are fine as they are! Leave it!
I guess it’s better for the old people to walk out into 4 lanes of traffic with bikes that are mixed in and unorganized while everyone is trying to avoid all the double parked vehicles dropping off your amazon packages? Somehow that seems less like “suicide”? This whole brouhaha represents the worst of the UWS, namely, old people who complain about everything at every turn. People are just trying to make change the will benefit everyone. The bikes will go up and down 72nd with or without an organized bike line – seems like it makes sense to make it safer than to keep it “as is” with all the double parking, bikes everywhere, and 4 lanes of traffic.
Old people don’t walk out into 4 lanes of traffic to get on a bus. We stand on the sidewalk and thr bus pulls right up. With the redesign we will have to cross the 2 way bike lane to wait for the bus. And when we cross the street at the lights the cars stop at the red light. The bikes don’t, especially at the new mid block light
“Old people are the worst” – just wonderful. It says a lot about you.
Do you get the feeling that this group of biker bros who are funded by hedge funds, tech companies, food delivery companies, Lyft who owns Citibike, etc. want a city that resembles the broad lawned narrow minded suburbs from which they came?? And along with that they envision a city where no one is over 40. Well, got news for them. On the UWS 30% of the residents are over 50. I think that qualifies them amongst this group as old or elderly.!
Were it not for the over 50 crowd this city might still look like it did in the 70’s and 80’s and many of these youngsters wouldn’t find it at all pleasing. Frankly it’s a depressing thought. We seem to have lost respect for our elders and any understanding of what they did to restore and rejuvenate a city of burnt out buildings and blocks and blocks of rubble.
The loading zones will likely be occupied by cars with parking placards which will cause trucks to unload while double-parked. The number of placards needs to be severely reduced.
Have any of you seen the ads in the subway for electric scooters – OLTO – “that are built for the bike lane” – top speed 28Mph?
https://www.infinitemachine.com/olto?lp_location=wf
Class 3 go 28 MPH. Those are illegal in NYC–even if Whizz leases/sells them. There are also legal Cass 2 OLTO scooters on the website. Both are heavy so have a dangerous amount of kinetic energy when use.
0.043 percent of UWSers, most of whom have probably not been on a bike in decades, protested a bike lane in the most obvious spot in the whole neighborhood for a bike lane. How about a speed bump or two in the bike lane near the intersections? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bike lane speed bump, that should be a thing.
Speed bumps would be great, but why stop at in the bike lane? They should be in the street as well. I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen a driver gun it to beat a yellow (or run a red). I guarantee they’d think twice if there were speed bumps at regular intervals.
My understanding is no speed bumps on bus routes because a lot of people are standing inside the buses. But that shouldn’t affect the bike lane.
They have custom speed bumps to accommodate buses.
That’s fair, thanks for pointing that out
If you are politically connected you can get a full speed bump along a bus route. 166th Street along the QM2 and QM32 has one.
I was crossing Riverside Drive in the 80s last week. I had the green light, cars stopped. As I was crossing, a biker whizzed by, nearly running me over. I shouted “Obey the traffic lights!” “F.*** You,” the biker answered.
That biker is not in the minority. It’s a rare biker that obeys traffic rules. I’m opposed to the lanes on 72nd Street. I support licenses and mechanisms that make bikers follow the same rules as cars. I’m a native New Yorker, never had a driver’s license, but I’m more afraid of bikers than I am of cars.
Cyclists really do need a protected cross town bike lane on the West Side, and for obvious reasons it needs to be on one of the major streets. It’s not at all clear that it needs to be bi-directional on a single street, however, though I can see the argument for that.
The other issue here, and its increasingly significant is that e-bikes are not really the same as bicycles and we should consider whether they should be treated as bicycles and allowed in bicycle lanes. (To be clear: I view pedal assist bikes that do not go faster than 10-15 mph as equivalent to regular bicycles.)
For obvious reasons it should be off the major streets because those are the ones with lots of commercial activity. They have far more pedestrian traffic and delivery workers will interfere with the bike lane routinely.
Curious to know why you think a protected bike lane needs to be on a major street? What’s the difference if the bike lane is on 73rd Street or 72nd Street (I can understand perhaps if the major street included a road through CP such as 86th or 96th).
That level of use is what the major streets are there for, whether that use is via car, bike or walking.
Fair point and appreciate the response. My thought is that the major cross streets tend to have bus routes and more commercial traffic than some of the side streets. Given that 72nd Street is not a cross town street, wouldn’t everyone’s concerns be addressed if we added a protected bike lane to say 71st Street and 73rd Street (one in each direction)?
It’s just a thought that perhaps addresses everyone’s concerns, whether you are for against the 72nd Street plan.
We have been needing that bike lane for years. 86th street too. Only two neighborhoods in Manhattan without it are upper west and upper east and we can be connected safely. The rest of city gets deliveries with bike lane fine.
but 72nd Street doesn’t contain a cut-through to the UES -yes, it has access to CP but not a cut through like 86th or 96th
Here’s an idea: I think this redesign is a horrible idea. But if they are going to do it (which I hope they don’t), put in speed bumps every 20 feet or so. That will slow down the bike riders.
completely agree with you! But then, I suspect that the deliver people on e-bikes will stay out of the bike lane (though, I suspect they are going to do so even without the speed bumps).
Another waste of millions that no one needs.
his West 72nd Street bike lane proposal has all the hallmarks of a New York City Department of Transportation special: a “community process” that arrives after the decision, “data-driven” planning that somehow never includes a real-world impact study, and a design that treats neighborhood concerns as an optional courtesy rather than a requirement.
We’re told this is about safety, yet there is still no serious accounting for enforcement of fast, heavy e-bikes operating through a dense residential area with a large senior population. Apparently we’re just supposed to hope physics behaves differently here.
The underlying logic also doesn’t survive contact with reality: a project justified in the name of mobility for a tiny fraction of users, imposed on a corridor used daily by thousands of residents, small businesses, and pedestrians.
And of course, the usual cast of advocacy influence—most visibly Transportation Alternatives—sets the tone, while affected residents are invited to comment after the script is already written.
At some point, “planning” stops being planning and becomes performance art. This is well past that point.
Exactly!!! The DOT needs to be revised from the top down!!
I don’t this is as much about the redesign as it really about the status and actions of ebikes and bicycles with regard to the law . The subject seems to come up in every bike-related article on the WSR. Maybe one of these local candidates for office could be convinced to push NY to require licensing, registration and insurance for these vehicles and adult operators? Why does this class of vehicle get to use the road without assuming the responsibilities that go with it?
You quoted the one guy who was standing there with a sign in opposition, when the article should’ve focused on the 150 people who came to oppose it as well as the 1500 people who live and work on the block who are scared for their lives to navigate this dangerous e-vehicle double lane expressway
If there were 1,500 anti-plan protestors and 150 pro-plan counter protestors, then the latter group is 9% of the total. The article was 833 words long, it quoted TWO counter protestors, not one, accounting for 196 words. That’s almost 24% of the article. I think WSR did a good job in balancing its coverage.
The article featured both perspectives. I realize that’s scary in a world where nuance and open discussion are scorned.
Why can’t we have a safer design and bike lanes? I think the concerns are about the adjacent bidirectional bike lanes just off the curb of a commercial street . Why would anyone oppose having the plan revised? This doesn’t seem safe for walkers or bikers of any age!
There is an easy compromise here, install the bike lane, along with speed bumps, on all of them throughout the city. Slow the e-bikes down, especially in central park so we can slow those spandex monsters down too.
And the issues of red running+driving the wrong way?
Why do people fight SO HARD to keep private property on public streets? Parked cars belong in garages, not blocking street access for people actually moving across the city.
Garages closing on the UWS is not helping things, getting rid of parking minimums is not helping things.
Free car storage is a large benefit for small but loud minority. The squeaky wheel gets the grease…. Hence all these fake coalition groups that get spun up every time there’s a proposal to improve the streets
None of the groups are fake. None of the groups care about cars. I moved to NYC in 1981. Never drove. Still don’t. I’m a pedestrian only. Try listening and waking up, and as long as you can wake up. You also make the crazy assumption that you will always want to ride a bike. What if you get some illness that prohibits it? What if the weather prohibits it? Buses, subways, and walkways should get the attention and funding that bike lanes do. Nine million pedestrians versus 100,000 bikers.
As I’ve stated many times, I don’t bike. I’m purely interested in this project as it will make 72nd street safer for pedestrians.
Public transportation already gets far more funding than bike lanes as it should!
Do you not know that 72nd St. parking is metered?
Do you really suppose to ban day time street parking?
Now, until 1950 overnight street parking was banned in Manhattan. Good reason to bring that ban back. But that means more garages. No basement Trader Joe’s, Targets, and Wholefoods.
Right now garages are closing and there aren’t new garages being built.
Because developers are buying them + developers are getting variances which allow them to avoid building garages in big new residential buildings, eg the West 72nd Trader Joe’s space, which the law says should have been parking — well technically parking could have been built on above ground floors, but it’s usually in basement spaces.
This plan is not primarily aimed at reducing parked cars. It knocks out 25 parking spaces over four long blocks, so less than 3.5 spaces per block.
What it seems to be designed to do is satisfy a small-yet-loud minority that wants everybody else who lives, works, owns a business, shops, or travels on West 72nd Street to suffer so that they can have an easier time doing an inherently unsafe and entirely voluntary activity.
Those parked cars pay for the privilege of being there.
Don’t visually impaired people have some rights under ADA? Now they can fine their way to the bus stop on the sidewalk. I don’t understand how they are expected to get to the bus stop on the pedestrian island. They get the where the stop is today and then how do they cross the bidirectional bike lane! The e-bikes are silent.
I’m not suggesting e-bikes riders are psychopaths who would intentionally his them but the person could step out when it is too late to swerve or stop.
How can the city make buses less accessible to those who Ned them most?
why not a gated, grade-separated lane in the center of the street? away from curbs, allows for cyclists to use the center of the roadway, and frankly adding it just south of verdi square might actually calm traffic.
the only alternative being ‘no’ is not going to make any progress.
Times have changed, New Yorkers need to change to.
Cars & trucks make a lot of noise. Bicycles do not. We can no longer rely on our ears when approaching intersections, and must get in the habit of using our eyes.
Look both ways, and don’t absent-mindedly step in the street.
That is all.
Transport 300 lbs of flour or 10 sheets of drywall on a bike or ride to Deep River CT from NYC and get back to us.
Also, you are blaming pedesrtrians because e-bike drivers (many on illegal Class 3 “bikes”) run reds at maximum speed and drive the wrong way.
What about the visually impaired!? They used to be able to count on traffic being stopped when they had the walk signal.
Old people resisting change! Make the Upper West Side Great Again by keeping cars central to their lives! Why is sharing the road such an ordeal?
Not resisting change. Resisting law breakers. BIG difference.
Finally the majority uses its voice. Unless and until bikers obey traffic rules, all bike lanes should be blocked, including existing ones.
“I live here in the neighborhood, my kids ride bikes and they need a safe way to get to Central Park and across town,”
Or…if that’s your true concern, your kids could just walk their bikes to Central Park.
More importantly, the city needs to prioritize pedestrian safety. Legalizing jaywalking was a poor choice. It may not have been enforced but it didn’t need to be given carte blanche. Adding 2-way bike transit, pedaled and motorized, on an already busy and cluttered thoroughfare adds more unnecessary potential danger. If you’re going to give bikes more unfettered access opportunities, there should at least be common-sense enforcement in place regarding safety for both pedestrians and cyclists.
Everyone is fighting for roadway. Who in city council and the mayor’s office is looking at the big picture here, and common sense needs? We now have roadway dining, Citi Bike parking, bike lanes, daylighting, and open streets. How do all these programs affect emergency services and deliveries? They slow them down and make it impossible to do their jobs.
I oppose this. Mostly because of the regular lack of accountability by the bike lobby. I have zero belief that anything more will change the behaviors we regularly see. If a child is behaving poorly do you give him/her more free rein? Our community board is loaded with trans alt people. There is no respect or representation for anyone who raises legitimate concerns about reckless behaviors. All there is is deflection. Why can’t Priscilla’s Law even make it to a vote? And as far as DOT data, they have loss my trust as an agency that sees anything other than the proliferation of bikes. We are in a tough situation and it is impossible to have an intelligent discussion about any of this. Just read these comments. Despite the screen names, I’m sure many of you are actually intelligent people. It’s like arguing with a 5 year old who is overtired.
Flip those placards around and I bet the other side says “No Kings”
Such a frustrating proposal. It is already impossible to cross the street, for example on Amsterdam, because of bikes and particularly ebikes speeding thru red lights. Makes no sense to add bike lanes WITHOUT also enforcing traffic safety rules. We already have stats on how many pedestrians have been hurt — what will it take to show a little common sense?
The bike lane will make everyone safer. All people are already crossing the four lanes of traffic and trying to avoid the bikes that are already there.
Statements like this “stepping off of your curb onto a bi-directional bike lane is suicide.” are just hyperbole and do not reflect the current situation. Today, people are stepping off the curb into an chaotic situation with bikes already on both sides of the street with no bike lane.
There are several streets in the 70’s that already have bike lanes (70th st is one of them). So there really isn’t a need to have a bike lane on 72nd St.
what is the real reason for this??
Protected bike lanes:
“Improve safety for bicyclists, drivers, and pedestrians”
“Increase sales in business districts”
“Boost property values”
https://www.pasadenacsc.org/blog/facts-about-protected-bike-lanes
This is also discriminatory for our local Muslim community that prays at the mosque on 72nd street.
Every issue raised in the article would be mostly solved with ENFORCEMENT. To me, that’s the bottom line. If bikers stopped at lights and yielded to pedestrians, it could work. Absent of enforcement, it’s just lipstick on a pig.
It’s charming to see that people still, naively, think that demonstrations like this matter. The bike-loving elites that run the city want bike lanes and bike lanes there will be.
Bike-loving elite here. Amen.
Maybe an elevated bike lane? Tandem express pool? Or dirigible docking stations on rooftops? Perhaps parachuting to work?
Elevated is a really good idea!
As a 60-seomthing man who bikes everywhere, I am opposed to this plan and the creation of a bike lane on 72nd Street, for three main reasons.
First, it is inaccurate to suggest that there are “two lanes of traffic” in each direction on 72nd Street. This does not match “the facts on the ground,” which is that double-parked and delivery vehicles create a situation in which there is only one lane in each direction (on some blocks) – and even then, it is sometimes necessary for drivers to travel into oncoming traffic to get around blocked lanes.
Second, I very frequently travel from the UWS to the UES, and I use the 72nd Street corridor (W.. 72nd, Park Drive, E. 72nd). Yet even as an older man, I have never felt unsafe or had any issues making this trip – in ~50 years. Which leads me to…
Third, in all my extensive bike travels, I have rarely, if ever, seen enough bike traffic on 72nd Street to WARRANT a bike lane. It is, frankly, unnecessary.
For these and safety reasons – I also walk a lot, and like many, many elderly and disabled people, I find bike lanes to be more of an impediment than a “help – believe this plan is ill-conceived and, ultimately, unnecessary, and will only INCREASE the concerns of, and dangers to, the elderly and disabled.
Registration, licenses, insurance, bells, lights, and all regulations that are on cars need to be on all bikes NOW! Pedal bikes and electric bikes alike need to obey the law, stop for pedestrians, and travel in the proper direction. Enough is enough. If not, we need a class action lawsuit against TA and the bike lobby.
Sadly, it is a suit we would lose, since the TA and bike lobby are not legally responsible for what individual riders do. Even if bikes and e-bikes had licenses, registration, etc., the City would not be responsible for individuals not obeying the laws.
A law is only as strong as the enforcement teeth that accompany it. And the City and NYPD simply do not have the time or manpower to focus on traffic violations – sometimes even by motor vehicles, much less bikes and e-bikes. And I know you know that the NYPD is no longer allowed to “chase” a car, bike or e-bike while they are in a patrol vehicle, since it creates a greater danger to the public than simply letting the person get away.
So while your ideas are all good ones, NONE of them are likely to be enforced – particularly to any significant degree – any more than the current laws are enforced. 🙁
I would choose more rats over more bikes. They equally annoy drivers and pedestrians.
This is America, streets and roads are made for cars. Deal with it.
This redesign is the height of folly, driven by the bikes rule the road agenda of Transportation Alternatives. They don’t care that pedestrians will be injured they will simply prattle on about the “people’s right to cycle” guaranteed by the 350th amendment to the constitution. The sad thing is that most cyclist’s won’t use it if it takes them a block out of the way they’ll just keep endangering the rest of us.
So a couple dozen people turned out and we’re supposed to think that’s some silent majority?
I find the bike lane in my neighborhood on Amsterdam Ave. works very well. But this is a one-way street. And the bus stops are on the opposite side. There is always congestion on 72nd St. Two bike lanes would be a headache in the making.
With the advent of e-bikes, restoring that bike lane to a traffic lane would be better.