New Haven Independent

Posted by: on whalley | December 19, 2007 1:49 PM

I wish he had asked the cop why the rest of the force has no clue. On one block they shout for me to get out of the road, on the next they shout at me to get off the sidewalk.

They need complete enforcement. Not this half-assed approach they seem to take.

A bike runs a red light, that's illegal.
A car refuses to give proper clearance (2' or 4' I forget what it is in NH) that's illegal.

You have to say: "Mr. Officer Sir, why the hell don't any of you guys know what they hell you're doing? Why do you selectively enforce the law? The law is the LAW isn't it? Don't you think the right hand should have some clue what the left hand is doing given that your job is apparently an important one?"

Bike lanes won't correct stupidity.

Posted by: John J | December 19, 2007 2:56 PM

I'm always amazed by how many bike riders I see on the sidewalks. My babysitter and my 17 month old child were run over last week getting off the bus at Elm and Temple. Both were knocked to the concrete. Scared my babysitter to death. It was a kid on a bike - he got thrown, they got thrown, and then he got up and rode off.

My child could have been seriously injured. I do feel for the bikers, but bikes belong on the street. Cars and bikers should be able to co-exist. Bikers afraid of the ice in the winter time need to get real and either walk, take the bus, or move to freaking Florida. (Or wait a few more years for global warming to take better hold.)

It does seem that many people don't know no bikes on sidewalks is a law. If I had a dime for every college student I see riding around on the street I'd have a lot of dimes. Ticketing people would help spread the word.

The city should be cracking down on the bikers on the citywalks.

Posted by: charlie | December 19, 2007 4:53 PM

I agree, John J. Cyclists on sidewalks can be dangerous. But it should be combined with a massive campaign of tickets against reckless motorists, seeing that they are far more dangerous. Speeding tickets should have a $400 City of New Haven surcharge, for example, since speeding in a crowded area with pedestrians is much more dangerous than speeding in a suburban wasteland.

Posted by: JMAC | December 19, 2007 5:19 PM

John,

Bicycles on the sidewalk are not always a danger to pedestrians. In fact, on Orange Street, the sidewalk is twice the size on the bicycle lane. Furthermore, cyclists are at risk of being clipped by cars driving down the street and by open doors in the parking lane.

Posted by: JackNH | December 19, 2007 6:00 PM

Some of the New Haven police think of bicycles as things children should ride-- not adults. (One said that to me two years ago after a drink or two at a local pub.) They are suspicious of grown-ups on toys. They need some education in this regard . . .

Posted by: charlie | December 19, 2007 7:29 PM

Agree. They need to spend a day in Copenhagen.

Posted by: Ned | December 19, 2007 8:19 PM

I ride my bicycle to work everyday, but some car drivers (thanks for supporting terrorists and religious fanatics, and then complaining about air pollution, oil spills, foreign wars, traffic, etc.) must think I'm out for a joy ride - no, that's how I get to work. Sorry, no points for your Prius, or anti-Bush bumper stickers either. Yes there are bicyclists who are rude, but it's the person, not the vehicle. How many of the cars, on the streets of New Haven, are suburbanites smogging city air anyway. Can you imagine the freakout if 5,000 people from New Haven decided to drive, en masse, into Guilford some morning? You wouldn't fart in someone's face, but spewing car exhaust on everyone is perfectly acceptable; really have your kid suck on your exhaust pipe, and snort some brake lining dust then get back to me. Don't you love the airbag warning stickers, in cars, that show the little tike's brains being squirted out of its sweet little head on impact - too funny! But bicycles are such a menace - my head is going to explode.

Posted by: Waterbury Wendy | December 20, 2007 8:10 AM

You've got to be crazy to ride a 10 lb. pedal vehicle with no protection in the same lane as a 2500 lb. rolling bomb traveling 3 to 5 times as fast. The damage potential of a sidewalk accident involving bicycle/human, at low speed, is far less than one involving bicycle/car at high speed.

And besides, bicyclists seem to always run red lights and stop signs, fail to signal and ride anywhere in the street the like. Keep the bikes off the streets and put them back on the sidewalk where they belong.

Posted by: on whalley | December 20, 2007 8:16 AM

Sorry Ned but an awful lot of petroleum is involved in the manufacture, sale and maintenance of bicycles and bicycle accessories.

Unless you lube your drive train with olive oil and roll on cork tires (that would have to be tubeless) and of course your frame would have to have been shaped, cut, welded and sanded all without any machines.

If you want to say that one bike doesn't require as much petroleum as one car I'll agree but to make it sound like there is no petroleum involved with bicycles from their build to their death is just ridiculous.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | December 20, 2007 10:05 AM

I'm with Wendy! I would ride my bike more if that was the case. I am to afraid to drive in the street, as my guess is many people are. I see how bad alot of car drivers are with bikes in the street, it is scary. I think more would consider bike riding if the side walk was an option.

Posted by: David B. | December 20, 2007 10:39 AM

Several lights in New Haven will only change if the biker weighs a few tons; enough to set off the pressure sensitive pad at the intersection. I stop, then run those lights when the intersection is clear. Believe it or not, some of these are actually on "Bike Routes". I can provide a list from from memory if NH wants to fix these.

Rather than enforcement of bike law, I'd like to see enforcement of parking laws. Tow the MF-ers that park in the bus stops and in the no parking zones in intersections and near schools, and everybody, bikes and cars together can share the road safely. I don't believe that New Haven can't find a way to make parking enforcement profitable. Look no further than a similarly sized New England college town: Cambridge, MA for a model of how much money a city can make enforcing parking.

Of course bikes shouldn't be on the sidewalk. You want to change things? Next time you're a pedestrian and you see a bike coming, don't move over for them, and tell them they belong in the street. I do it. A bike should only be on the sidewalk when it's being walked.

People on bikes on sidewalks aren't bikers, they're people who happen to have a bike. Bikers have helmets, headlights, and taillights, and they ride in the street.

Posted by: BikeCommuter | December 20, 2007 10:49 AM

I agree with John J--bicycle riders on sidewalks can be scary to pedestrians. ("Dangerous" is a strong word--I've never heard of anyone being killed by a bike in New Haven, whereas cars run over pedestrians every day.)

And yet, even though I believe that bikes should not be ridden on sidewalks, I do it myself fairly often. Why? The general lack of bike paths, bike lanes, sharrows, and other elements of bicycle infrastructure makes the streets fairly unwelcome to bikes in most places. Whitney Avenue is a madhouse of impatient drivers following too close and jockeying for position. Whalley is a highway masquerading as a street. Riding a bike in most streets in this city is anxiety-producing and dangerous, and until that changes there will be people riding bikes on the sidewalks.

John J's suggestion that bicyclists either walk or move to "freaking Florida" is contemptuous and unrealistic. A better solution would be for him to spend his energies supporting efforts to make New Haven a more bike-friendly city, which would do more than anything else to reduce sidewalk riding.

Posted by: robn | December 20, 2007 10:56 AM

the prospect of bicyclists going off of the sidewalks onto the streets is a much more expensive proposition than it sounds. Its not just education and enforcement that has to be done, but some serious road repair on major roads. Cyclists shouldn't be asked to ride over bus ruts, drain grates and sand patches. Also there as to be some reconsideration of where the lanes are...The Orange Street Lanes don't really get you all the way downtown becuase as they approach, they're swallowed up by the thinning road.

Posted by: Bruce | December 20, 2007 11:05 AM

On Whalley,

You make an excellent point that petroleum is involved with the manufacture and maintenance of bicycles. It is also involved with the manufacture and delivery of food (fuel) required to power a bicycle. But to compare this with the petroleum involved in manufacturing and operating even a small, efficient 2,000-3,000 lb automobile is kind of pointless.

Here is a link to a graph comparing energy usage (not manufacture, granted) of different means of transportation. http://www.humanvalues.eu/index_files/ecologicalfig7.gif

This is based on European data assuming (I think) 2 people typical loading per car. That said, you can double the size of the automobile consumption for the typical one person per car US driving habits.

Nothing is 100% clean -- not fuel cells, solar, bicycles or other human-powered devices. But when one vehicle is on the order of tens or even a hundred times more efficient than another, you can pretty well consider its consumption insignificant in comparison.

Posted by: charlie | December 20, 2007 11:16 AM

Ironically, biking on the sidewalk is actually much less safe than riding on the street, because cars can't see you at all the intersections and curb cuts. Obviously the people complaining above are not cyclists.

Have fun driving your oil-guzzling, 3,000 pound Iraq War/Obesity machine around the suburban wastelands, Wendy! Just keep in mind that hitting something at 40-50MPH, even if you have 3,000 pounds of solid steel around you, is still going to kill you. I don't think that most of the city-hating suburbanite drivers realize this, given that the average suburbanite is much more likely to die (given the increased risks due to driving at speeds of greater than 25MPH) than the average resident of even the poorest, most crime-infested housing project in Newark, New Orleans or any other urban area. Hopefully you now do, and will slow down!

Posted by: Cheri | December 20, 2007 11:33 AM

I see bike cops riding on sidewalks all the time. I also see them running red lights, as well as talking on hand held cell phones while driving their cars. They set a lousy example for road safety, and it's no wonder why the streets around certain areas of New Haven are such a drag to bike on, especially when drivers are rarely ticketed for dangerous traffic violations.

Posted by: on whalley | December 20, 2007 11:53 AM

Sorry Charlie, but I'd much rather be crushed so tightly in a car wreck that my insides squirt out my nostrils than be shot/stabbed/raped to death by some crackhead that has flocked to a city for all of the handouts and "free" services over $5.

If my death is going to pointless it may as well be pointless for me. I don't want some junkie/vagrant/trash scumbag to profit from my demise.

I don't know what's worse. Being killed by some soulless robot in a future war or being killed by a worthless addict for pocket change.

At least robots are kind of cool.

Posted by: david streever | December 20, 2007 1:11 PM

If you are a cyclist, you belong in the road.

I totally understand the fear: I felt it too when I first started riding here.

But in the many, many miles I have biked (I bike an average of 15 miles per day, every day, throughout March to November, and walk/bike only a few miles a day Dec to February) I have been in far more danger my first few months, when I biked on sidewalks.

You put pedestrians & others at risk. It's very frustrating to see some idiot riding on the sidewalk on Orange street. Honestly, you just need to be a little assertive, a little confident, VERY! careful, and ride to the outer edge of the bike lane. You will not be doored if you are paying the attention you should pay as a driver.

With that in mind, there are things that are wrong with the law. For instance: red lights.

As someone pointed out, many red lights in New Haven simply DO NOT work for bicycles.

They will never switch, because you don't weigh enough to trigger them.

What should you do? Sit like a fool until a car arrives to trigger it?

As an individual, I could totally support a ticketing blitz against cyclists on the sidewalk.

What holds me back is the large number of cyclists who have been run down by a driver who admitted to seeing them, but thinking that he/she had "the right of way", and then were not ticketed.

New Haven is a city that clearly has little interest in actually doing the policing required to protect it's pedestrians & cyclists. I'm dissapointed & appalled by the poor enforcement track record of the police, who sit & watch drivers run red lights, who then appear on videos to threaten to crack down on cyclists.

It's frankly disgusting that you can't ticket someone who DELIBERATELY puts a cyclist in the hospital by running them down, and then you say you'll ticket a cyclist for running a red light which he/she can not trigger with their bike. If I wait a minute with no traffic, and then walk it through, is that OK?

It's sad that we have such poorly educated police officers & a complacent City Hall. Where is the safety advocate?

Posted by: John J | December 20, 2007 2:34 PM

Great post David!

Hey JMAC -

Orange St. sidewalk appears to be safe, but what if you are walking down the sidewalk and realize you forgot something and turn around quickly. Nobody does an about-face, so you swing around and that is when a bike rider can collide with you. Sure maybe we are talking about an Appointment in Samarra. Maybe if you're that unlucky you deserve it?

But maybe we should start trying to get the damn cars to slow down. $400 fines are a bit high, but I like the idea of raising them high enough so people feel it. Target commuter times. Someone mentioned Copenhagen. That is dead on. We should create a day where no cars can drive around the city unless it's an emergency. Just to get people thinking about it. We should get radical!

I think as others have said that we need to make this bike law more visible and give bikers the support they need to make it on the streets.

Oh and Wendy...getting knocked over and smashing your head on the concrete can do some pretty scary damage from 5-6 feet in the air.

To slide off topic a bit: this is a great read ZOOM: The Global Race to Fuel the Car of the Future. Picked it up at the NHFPL. Zipping through it.

p.s. I apologize for my Florida comment. I really do side more with the bike riders than the car drivers.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | December 20, 2007 2:50 PM

I do have to defend the city on that. They have a plan in place and are working on it

They started the study in 2003

http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/CityPlan/pdfs/EnvironmentalInitiatives/Greenways/Appendix2SharetheStreetsProgram.pdf

http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/CityPlan/EIGreenwaysProgram.asp

It is not as simple as a little tweek here and there it is a massive project. I know Mike the new guy at traffic and parking has a passion for this. So I am sure that now that he is at the helm things will improve for bickers in the city.

Posted by: Waterbury Wendy | December 20, 2007 5:15 PM

Bicycling on the street is as safe as walking on the street.

Bikes:

-- inherently unstable (two wheels only)
-- afford no protection to the rider
-- pedal powered and slow to react

Cars:

-- 2500 lbs plus of force at 30+ mph

They shouldn't be mixing on the streets.

Posted by: robn | December 20, 2007 6:01 PM

Ticketing campaigns against cyclists instead of auto-drivers is a little bit like arresting the guy who brought a knife to a gun fight. Its missing the point of who's behavior is profoundly more dangerous.

Posted by: sally | December 20, 2007 6:09 PM

Cyclists should never be on the sidewalk. Period. The city needs more bike lanes. The city also needs drivers who are courteous to cyclists by being aware of their environment and who look before opening a door to making a quick turn.

The city also needs cops who don't ticket almost exclusively young black men cycling on the sidewalk in certain areas. Just a rumor I've heard that this goes on.

Posted by: Mike Ortiz | December 20, 2007 6:27 PM

I have sat in on meetings from cyclists who made some vailid points of the dangers of riding in the inner city. After the meeting I walked outside to see the same cyclist go through a red light and nearly get crushed by an s.u.v.

They like to cry about the dangers but don't have an ounce of common sense. Stop crying and drive a car or better yet try mass tranist you liberal cry babies.

Posted by: Andrew | December 20, 2007 8:03 PM

Let's not forget all those adventurous, recreational bikers that like to bike into traffic, swerving in and out in a game of chicken. I have no problem with the police stopping and ticketing those bikers, if only to save them from a painful and perhaps debilitating trip to the ER. Seeems there's is a disconnect between communter bikers and teen bikers and law enforcements attitude towards each.

Posted by: robn | December 21, 2007 9:21 AM

HUUUUHHH??

So a liberal crybaby is someone who follows the law by riding their bike in the street? Nice crass generalization Mike O...but I guess it makes sense in terms of consistancy since most of the people in todays comtemporary culture who use phrases like "liberal crybaby" are the same ones that (hold on for another crass generalization) support the shredding of the Constitutional and have no problems with their politicians doing things like....

...indiscriminate military violence, profiteering from said military violence, prison-camps, wire-tapping, suppressing free speech, revealing CIA identities for political retribution, falsifying evidence, destroying evidence, planting fake reporters at press conferences, holding fake press conferences, abandoning entire cities in distress from natural disaster, profiteering from said natural disaster, child labor, child slave labor, prostitution, innapropriate sexual contact with congressional pages, supporting anti-gay policy but secretly cruising for gay sex at airports, diverting tax dollars to religious organizations, shielding unscrupulous lobbyists from legal inquiry, making laws like NCLB which directly benefit family members, falsifying military service records, inhibiting voter access by reducing numbers of voting machines in poor neighborhoods, stopping poor and black people from voting through use of "caging lists", ....

Posted by: on whalley | December 21, 2007 11:01 AM

@ROBN

"follows the law by riding their bike in the street?"

I have my own definition of what a "liberal crybaby" may or may not be and it has nothing to do with anything here but since when has: " to see the same cyclist go through a red light and nearly get crushed by an s.u.v." been referred to as "following the law?" Last time I checked cyclists had to obey all traffic laws.

Posted by: robn | December 21, 2007 11:17 AM

OW,

A cyclist riding through a red light is, like a cyclist riding on the sidewalk in New Haven, breaking the law. You are correct that cyclists must follow the same rules as autos becuase they are considered vehicles.
That being said, the former Chief of Police is on record recognizing that bad physical conditions of some roads and recognizing that some roads are plagued by speeders dangerous to cyclists, and left enforcement pretty much up to the discretion of Police officers in the field.

Posted by: Transituser | December 21, 2007 12:25 PM

There is a CT motor vehicle ordinance 14-286, a "bells on bikes" law, that mandates bicylists to give an audible warning when going by pedestrians and other bicyclists on sidewalks, streets and cross-walks. This would have prevented my permanent hand injury, a torn ligament that cannot be remedied by surgery without scar tissue complications, and a close call with a sidewalk bicyclist on the snowbank laden south side of Chapel Street on Monday of this week.

Having such a "bell" and using it when passing a parked car with a passenger about to exit would also prevent bicylists from getting door injuries.

This is my nth try to make folks aware of this simple low cost remedy to prevent bicycle-pedestrian injuries. In the late 1990's a group of us wrote to Mayor DeStefano about this solution. However, the Register's Randy Beach in his column made us look like a bunch of old kvetches and the Mayor dropped the matter.

Posted by: robn | December 21, 2007 1:43 PM

TU,

You are correct about the audible warning "bells on bikes" law however, near to that passage, the state allows municialities to outlaw bikes on sidewalks if they choose...New Haven has technically outlawed them, but also allowed them in practice becuase of unsafe roads. Good move in terms of liability (kind of a liability limbo) but it doesn't really solve the problem.

Posted by: Matt Uva | December 21, 2007 2:39 PM

There was some mention of CT Gen. Statute 14-286, as a "bells on bikes law". 14-286a expressly prohibits riding a bicycle anywhere except the street.
This isn't a matter of interpretation.
I'm always amazed at how few people understand that this is the law, especially when there is a similar law in all 50 states in this country.

And, wow, remind me to never go cycling in Waterbury. Wendy might be aiming for me.

Posted by: robn | December 22, 2007 10:57 AM

Matt Uva,

The CT statutes say exactly the OPPOSITE of what you wrote. Bicycles are allowed on sidewalks if they use an audible signal to warn pedestrians of their approach...EXCEPT if localities ban them on sidewalks...which New Haven does on paper but not in practice.

CT General Statutes
Sec. 14-286. ....(a) Each person operating a bicycle upon and along a sidewalk or across any roadway upon and along a crosswalk shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian and shall give an audible signal within a reasonable distance before overtaking and passing a pedestrian. Each person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall within a reasonable distance give an audible signal before overtaking and passing a pedestrian or another bicycle operator. No person shall operate a bicycle upon or along a sidewalk or across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk if such operation is prohibited by any ordinance of any city, town or borough ...

Code of Ordinances City of New Haven
Sec. 29-10. Vehicles on sidewalks.
No person shall drive....bicycle....upon any sidewalk or footpath in the streets or public squares of said city, except going in or out of driveways.

Strangely, the New Haven Ordinance also bans horses and wheelbarrows. By the way, for those who continually bittch and moan about cops riding bikes on sidewalks, the CT ststutes allow it as an exception in Sec. 14-286e.

Posted by: Transituser | December 23, 2007 5:44 PM

Thank you RBN. It would be great if the new chief of police puts horns or bells on his police bikes as an example to other bicyclists that the law mandates their use not only on sidewalks but also on crosswalks and roadways.

Posted by: Matt Uva | December 24, 2007 10:57 AM

Okay, okay. CT14-286a + NH29-10 expressly prohibits riding a bicycle anywhere except the street.

Posted by: Matt Uva | December 25, 2007 5:04 PM

Alright, I may have referred to the wrong statute...
I *was pulling from memory after all...

So I used to have a nifty little computer on my bicycle that told me how fast I was going. I can recall many days with an average speed of 16mph (that includes standing still for lights, slowing for traffic, etc) and a top speed of 38mph. How'd you like that coming down the sidewalk?
I always ride in traffic because it's where I belong. I don't get on the highway. I tend to avoid the larger "thoroughfares" (read: Whalley, Whitney), and hug the right hand side of the road when I must use a road like Rt. 34.
I'm not some raving left wing loony either. My other vehicle is a 10mpg Chevy Tahoe, a step up from my old 6mpg '95 Range Rover. I did live for 3 years car free, just to prove it could be done, but my current job requires the car.

I ride every chance I get because I'm pretty busy and I find the bicycle to be a faster mode of transportation within New Haven and parts of West Haven.

I've never really had any real "run-ins" with motorists, and I honestly believe it's because I treat cars as slow moving obstacles within New Haven proper, and dangerous beasts outside of the city. I don't ever expect anyone to realize I'm supposed to be on the road, and I'm always watching a block or more ahead. It's amazing how safe you are when you pay attention.

As for enforcing traffic law, bicycle or motor vehicle, New Haven doesn't really see the money from traffic tickets. Traffic enforcement is usually used as a means to get a suspicious vehicle to the side of the road, which is why the majority of bicycle-related tickets have been given to young non-white males. Check the police blotter in the NHR, almost all the good "busts" start with, "A routine traffic stop led to..."

Do I sometimes roll through a stop sign or red light? Sure I do, after looking several times and making sure I'm okay. I don't do it in front of police officers, mostly out of respect -- if I ever did get a ticket, I'd just go and pay it (after a trip to the xerox machine and the frame shop, of course).

I guess what I'm getting at...
"Can't we all just get along?"
Seriously. I might be on a bike, you might be in a car. We both have someplace to be. Take a little consideration for the bicycle/motorcycle/etc, as we choose to ride something with a little less protection. We can't all afford Volvos y'know?

Cheers! Happy Holidays!
-Matt

Posted by: Streever | December 25, 2007 6:11 PM

Hey Mike Ortiz,

maybe you can refresh my memory. I'm David Streever. When have we met at a meeting?

Maybe you can also clarify what you're saying when you talk about one cyclist breaking the law.

It seems to me that a lot of people in general--driver & cyclist alike--enjoys doing whatever they like, and getting away with it. Most of us here on this comments board--like myself--are saying that's a problem we have to deal with.

It's not cars vs bikes or fix gear vs gears or any other nonsense. The reality is we all need to work our hardest to create a safe environment for all forms of transportation.

You can hate cars, bikes, suvs, scooters, or whatever you like, but maybe you should actually get involved, instead of just venting your frustrations.

Why did you come to our meeting, out of curiosity, Mr Ortiz? Maybe you'd like to come back again. You'd certainly be welcome, if you're coming to be part of our efforts & hard work.

Posted by: Transituser | December 26, 2007 5:22 PM

Matt asks "why can't we all get along?" That would be great if people obeyed laws that made sense like "bells on bikes" or not running red lights.
Since a sidewalk bicyclist tore a ligament in my hand, I have wondered so many times "why can't bicyclists get bells or horns for their bikes?" They must not be expensive and they would prevent injuries to the bicyclists such as when a pedestrian on a sidewalk or in a crosswalk walks in front of them and causes them to fall off their bikes.
Please let us all know what the trouble is with bells, horns whatever that stops you all from getting one.

Posted by: Chase D | December 28, 2007 1:28 PM

Regarding roads vs. sidewalks for bikes: given the current situation, I would say that bikes on sidewalks is more appropriate that bikes on the roads. What's more dangerous: a pedestrian getting hit by a bike going 10mph or a cyclist getting hit by a car going 40mph? With the exception of those blind intersections, its much safer to be on the sidewalk.

That said, neither sidewalk nor road are a good fit for cyclists. Roads were designed for cars and sidewalks were designed for pedestrians. A bicycle has little in common with either of these modes of transit and hence is always unsafe and awkward when going in the road or the sidewalk. If cycling is to be a serious mode of transit (and I think it should be) then bikes really need their own lane. Not as a shoulder on the road, but separated from the road as a sidewalk is (by a curb, some grass, parallel parked cars, whatever) - but also separated from pedestrian traffic.

Posted by: Mike Ortiz | December 28, 2007 8:35 PM

Hey Robn, where do I start, on your left wing nonsense. Can you recall an assault on American soil since 911, don'y hurt yourself. Those poor savages at Gitmo were picked up on the battle field attempting to chop off heads of innocents, but I'm sure that dosn't concern you and your close minded ideology.

And since you mentioned sexual indiscretion, why not start with Bill Clinton, or Ted Kennedy of John Kennedy, the list goes on and on.

You also refered to this war our poor soilders are fighting but people like you don't support. I happen to come from a military family and idiots like you can sleep safe at night because of the sacrices made, so you could regurgitate that same garbage spewed in most liberal school of thought.

I did not want to make this a political issue, I just wanted to give cyclist another option such as mass transit, there nothing wrong with taking the bus is there?.

Hey Robyn it's not necessary to comment on every issue that opposes yours.

Posted by: Ralph Ferrucci | December 29, 2007 8:36 AM

There is an alternative to whether bike should on the sidewalk or on the road.

In 2000, I went to Germany. In Germany ther ration of bikes to cars is 100 to 1 if not more.

Most road were only one lane on each side and there were 2 sidewalks.

One was for pedestrians and one for bicycles.

This can be done in New Haven on some of the most dangerous area to ride in the street like Downtown and Whalley.

On less dangerous roads we need to increase bicycle lanes.

Motorists need to know that bicyclists have the same right to the road as they do.

Posted by: Bruce | December 31, 2007 8:44 AM

Chase D: " Roads were designed for cars and sidewalks were designed for pedestrians."

This is not true. Many of the roads in New Haven were first built in the 17th and 18th centuries -- well before cars were invented. Bicycles (which were invented here) were on these roads for a long time before cars started to share them.

There's no good reason why both motorized and non-motorized vehicles can't coexist on the streets. The speed limit in New Haven is 25 MPH. With proper enforcement and awareness, safety should not be an issue.

Posted by: bikecommute | December 31, 2007 12:10 PM

Mike,

Mass transit? Are you going to pay to improve mass transit so it works for all those cyclists? I have a couple of guesses who's the crybaby at tax time. And what on earth does this have to do with liberals? Or is that just a blanket statement for things that make Mike cranky?

More generally:

I'm pretty much through with people who *never* commute by bike telling me how it works. The law puts bikes on the road for good reason. Bikes on sidewalks are bad news -- bikes move much more quickly and maneuver much more slowly than pedestrians.

Bikes in New Haven often move just as fast (or faster) than motor traffic. Maybe if a few people got out from behind a window and onto a bike, they'd be a little friendlier, better exercised, and more in touch with the city. Maybe people would calm down a bit and we could have cars and bikes sharing the road and treating each other like mutual traffic. If motorists drove responsibly in the city to begin with, this wouldn't be an issue. Once I stop seeing countless 1000+ lb vehicles running stop signs and red lights left and right, I'll concern myself with careless cyclists who do the same.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | December 31, 2007 12:36 PM

Bruce
You are right..love the history fact about the bike too. But as a non bike person who is playing with the idea that I need to start using it as a mode for transport, I fear the road. I fear that 3000 lb. vehicle driving right behind me because I can not move aside to let them go by. I see how alot of cars do not respect the cyclist in New Haven.
I realize that those of you who ride your bikes every day feel the side walk is not an option and those of us that do not ride bikes, well read the rude comments above.
The question is how to get those of use that are not seasoned cyclists out on our bikes. What would make that option more of a choose for us. Why is it not an option? As cyclist instead of criticizing the non cyclist try to understand what we fear. Try helping to make it so more would choose this as a mode of transport, instead of isolating it as some kind of exclusive group. You can sit there and judge or you can walk in there shoes and figure out a way to make it more of an option in this city.
As you read this you see that people fear the streets so maybe instead of a bike lane in the road widen the side walk and have the bike lane there. I would ride my bike if that was were the bike lane was.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | December 31, 2007 12:45 PM

PS.
Widening the side walks for bikes would also make the road smaller, which is one of the traffic calming plans for the city. As stated in one of the storys post in the NHI. So it would kill two birds with one stone.

Posted by: bikecommute | January 1, 2008 7:36 PM

My frustration is aimed towards motorists with the "get on the sidewalk and outta my way" attitude. I don't blame anyone who's hesitant to ride on the road in New Haven -- there's good reason for that hesitation, primarily in the form of those uncooperative motorists.

I do think putting a bike path *out* of the road is a good idea. Drivers are oblivious to the current bike lanes (turning across the lane without looking/signaling, blindly opening car doors, etc), and frankly I often feel safer in the main road than in the bike lane. The key to safe riding basically involves forcing drivers to recognize you as traffic -- taking the lane when necessary (esp at lights) and *preventing* drivers from passing when it's not safe. Plenty of good info on this at bicyclesafe.com.

While I love the separate bike path idea, I realize how involved this is and I'm not holding my breath. In the meantime, I'll claim my place in traffic.

Posted by: Matt Uva | January 1, 2008 9:49 PM

Ah the bells...
I have bicycles equipped with bells and bicycles not equipped with bells. I really see no problem with using them -- I have also toyed with horns and whistles as well.
Of course, they don't necessarily make my cycling any safer. If I ring my bell or vocalize, "On your left" to a pedestrian, the generally either jump right into my path or begin to act like squirrels crossing the street. Cars rarely hear any of my "sound devices" (but for some reason I always hear their radios...). I'm not saying that bells are pointless, just ineffective compared to alert cyclists and considerate motorists.

Posted by: bikecommute | January 2, 2008 11:54 AM

+1 on the bells. Having used them in the past, they're just as likely to confuse a pedestrian as to alert them. Maybe if more people used bells it would be different (there are countries where they seem to work). But especially against the iPod generation, they're practically useless. With cars, they're *completely* useless. Using a bell to avoid getting doored will only get you, well, doored. I'm guessing most motorists don't feel obligated to honk every time they pass a parked car, and neither should cyclists need to signal their presence -- it's the job of whoever is entering or exiting the car.

Posted by: Chris Gray | January 3, 2008 2:42 AM

Sam Gurian, at the time a healthy 70-year old who did the books for The Elder Newspaper, was hit by a bicyclist (who fled) precipitating a stroke. Due to his good health and strong will, he made a remarkable recovery but could never again do our books. The last time I saw him, he was back to working out in the old JCC gym.

I lived carless in New Haven for most of my adult life. I biked quite a bit. I used mass transit a lot. I mostly walked. Now, disabled and often transporting a very elderly passenger, I drive.

While, at one time or another, I probably broke every law about biking, I never doubted that - while dangerous to the rider - bikes are street vehicles.

For entirely personal reasons (the first girl I fell in love with, at age 11, died in a car accident, at age 19), I had always hated cars, even when I had to use them. I even made money driving a school bus for a while.

Anything we can do to discourage the use of cars is O.K. by me, but I know that, as a practical matter, in one form or another they will be with us for the foreseeable future. So, I hope Cedarhillresident's optimism about the City's Greenway plans is well founded and I hope DeStefano has the sense to steal Ralph's German-inspired idea.

Bells, horns and whistles are best left for New Year's Eve.

Posted by: robn | January 6, 2008 3:56 PM

kind-of a late post, but check out this video of traffic in india and then decide how New Haven rates for traffic anarchy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8Doy_7sOoM