New Haven Independent

Posted by: ROBN | October 20, 2008 9:29 AM

AWESOME!

New Haven needs more good solid citizens like the people who attended this event.

Posted by: AMF | October 20, 2008 11:48 AM

I would say that New Haven needs more good solid citizens like the people who MADE THIS HAPPEN, and are still making it happen.
AWESOME x 2!

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | October 20, 2008 12:21 PM

Let's have a rally against the presence of bicycles, skateboards and roller skates on the streets, where the danger of being hit by 2500 lb. rolling bombs is far greater than ON THE SIDEWALK.

Posted by: David Streever | October 20, 2008 12:45 PM

Broken... record..... :)

I'll be uploading video soon of the roller derby presentation!!!!

alphonze,
read the studies, buddy. Why don't you e-mail me & I'll send you the studies (world-wide studies) showing that your chance of an accident goes from 5-24 times when you get off the road and on the sidewalk.

dls@davidstreever.com

I'd be happy to send you the studies & statistics, done by a variety of organizations (including Finland!)

You can even register a fake email if you don't want me to know you.

Posted by: robn | October 20, 2008 12:52 PM

AC,

The holiday season is not yet upon us so its a bit early for Grinchiness.

Posted by: Giulia | October 20, 2008 1:36 PM

AC, bicycles belong on the street, not on the sidewalk. Its the law.

Posted by: Quentin | October 20, 2008 1:36 PM

I think that this event was a ray of hope in what has otherwise been troubling times in our community. It is truly a testament to the goodwill of a certain few and provides encouragement that... holy Jesus! Did you see that picture of Streever? His head is freaking gigantic. Like an orange on a toothpick! I mean, that's a huge noggin! That's a virtual planetoid! Has its own weather system! Anyways, back to what I was saying, this event provides encouragement that the work of these wonderfully caring people really can make our streets safer...

-Q

Posted by: anon | October 20, 2008 2:56 PM

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, April 2006: "Children less than 10 years old are not mature enough to make the decisions necessary to safely ride in the street."

There are 10 year olds out there who are smarter and more coordinated than some of the adults I know.

So where do you draw the line -- at what point do you propose to start forcing people to ride in the middle of Route 80 in the middle of the night, when the drag racers are approaching?

How about someone who is mentally handicapped, or a first time rider who hasn't ridden a bike since she was 10 years old?

When do you want to try to force her onto the Tomlinson Bridge's 70 mile per hour rush hour traffic?

Posted by: William Kurtz | October 20, 2008 3:23 PM

No extreme position is very useful in the real world; sure, statistically, cycling on the sidewalk is more dangerous than cycling on the road--but statistically, the average American has what, 2.5 kids? Do you know how hard it is to find clothes for that .5 kid? Not to mention the effect he has on standardized testing scores in schools.

Likewise a ten-year old child on Route 80 in the middle of the night would be safer on the sidewalk than in the street--at least until that inattentive drag racer decides he wants a hamburger and turns into the McDonalds parking lot at 80 mph.

Posted by: Josh Smith | October 20, 2008 3:37 PM

This was a great event! Thanks to everybody from Elm City Cycling who came out to help run our table. It was most appreciated, and it was a lot of fun.

Ride safe and stay safe, everyone. I hope to see a lot more events over on this side of town in the future. :)

Posted by: JMS | October 21, 2008 3:59 AM

It was a nice event. My son had a really good time along with a bunch of his neighborhood pals.

JMS

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | October 21, 2008 12:41 PM

David --

You promised you weren't going to speak to me again. I wrote, oh yes you would. And sure enough, you have!

Guilia - The law must be changed.

By the way, I wouldn't allow my teenager to ride down Dixwell Avenue in the street. And no cop will ever ticket him for riding on the sidewalk. Not when they don't ticket bicyclists who run red lights, fail to signal for turns and ride in the center of a car lane.

Alphonze (David has spelled it correctly -- that is indeed what shows up on my birth certificate. how'd you know?)

Posted by: Bill Saunders | October 21, 2008 4:45 PM

I take it that this was a city sponsored event.

What was the overall budget for the days festivities, and where did the money go???

I know that the little Bike Rally on East Rock this summer cost in excess of $20,0000. Despite the positive message, this price tag seems excessive.

Posted by: anon | October 21, 2008 6:01 PM

Bill, even assuming the price for this event was $20K (seems a reasonable guess, right?), it would be considered an effective use of money considering the number of people reached and the amount of media coverage, including round-the-clock TV news on Sunday. For $20K, the city certainly couldn't have bought anywhere near that amount of advertising or reached that number of people with a message like this.

Besides, I think that much if not all of this event was privately funded.

Posted by: Bruce | October 22, 2008 10:18 AM

Alphonse: Actually, the police are currently issuing $75 tickets to bicyclists found riding on the sidewalks, so tell your teenager to stay away from downtown. You seem disappointed that police are not stopping other dangerous illegal bicycle behaviors but then you encourage other dangerous illegal behaviors. I guess you choose to obey whatever law suits your convenience.

BTW, riding in the center of a car lane is perfectly legal and is advised by the DOT if there is insufficient room for a car to pass (at least 3ft by law). The more visible a cyclist is, the safer he or she is.

Posted by: David Streever | October 22, 2008 10:49 AM

Bill,
Regardless of the source of funding (private) I would ask if the huge number of deaths due to traffic accidents a year shouldn't be a national priority.

Alphonzo,
you're right. But I laugh now when I read you. That's an improvement, right?

your name is whatever I say it is, because you don't have a real identity. Drop me an e-mail.
Thanks.

Anon,
have you lost something? I didn't try to force your non-existant developmentally disabled 10 year old onto anything. You must have me confused with someone else. You really need to work on your parenting skills if you have your 10 year old developmentally disabled daughter riding on route 80 or riding in the middle of the night.

Anyone can find highly specific exceptions to general rules & order.

For instance:

"I didn't slow down for the yellow light because I was afraid of the cars behind me so I t-boned a biker instead who was legally riding"

Good luck with that, Anon, I have a clever idea, we can re-write all the laws to contain all rare instances when a lazy person doesn't want to do the right thing. Why don't you help me collect signatures on a petition for that?

Wake up.

I'm talking to full-bodied, mostly, intelligent adults (the majority of tickets seem to be going to yale students)

Yes, it's time to join the rest of the grown-ups, and get off the sidewalks.

As an FYI, no one is issuing tickets to 9 year olds. That's a dirty thing to bring up, Alder Chen isn't even in office anymore, & I think at best it's old news. why do you keep trying to invoke the spector of that?

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | October 22, 2008 12:12 PM

"...but then you encourage other dangerous illegal behaviors."

You and those who agree with you must be insane. You consider riding along with cars and trucks safer than riding on the sidewalk.

So you mean a pedestrian hit by a bike is more likely to suffer more severe physical injury than a bicyclist hit by a truck?

Tell that to my neighborhood bicycling buddy with a metal plate in his head, a limp in his gait and severe retardation for over 20 years, since he was hit in the middle of the street by a speeding car. (True.)

You are encouraging disaster to happen, especially for youthful bike riders. And all for the sake of your bloody transportation convenience.

And, David, if that makes you laugh, you need to re-evaluate your priorities.

Posted by: anon | October 22, 2008 12:37 PM

I think you missed the point - it wasn't about developmentally disabled people, it was about a first time rider, the kind that society would theoretically like to encourage to ride more, who perhaps A) hasn't ridden much in 30 years, B) is on a street with dangerous potholes and no bike facilities, C) is surrounded by cars zipping around her at 40 miles per hour, and or D) is accompanying her child.

There are more than a "few exceptions" which cause people to feel unsafe riding on the road. Maybe young men who ride at 20 miles per hour feel safe there, but talk to New Haven residents more often because the vast majority don't. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble.

Posted by: Bill Saunders | October 22, 2008 6:52 PM

Anon Dave --

If this was a privately funded/organized event, big kudo's to the organizers/donors (who are they?-- they deserve to be recognized!).

I'm not interested in a debate about whether the 'investment' is 'worth it' or not.

Rather, my question about budget transparency (whether the funding be public, or private) is an effort to demystify how public events, such as these, happen. What financial resources does it take to pull off, and where does the money come from? Hopefully, more groups will be empowered put on diverse public events in the future. The reality is, it does not have to cost a lot of money. Volunteerism and civic donations should go a long way. Just remember -- you don't have to wait on a government handout to get started!

Posted by: David Streever | October 22, 2008 11:46 PM

Anon,

a friend of mine recently started biking
he's in his late 20s
never biked

he started in a parking lot
then he rode the canal trail
now he's competent

Where did you learn to drive? on a sidewalk? no, in a parking lot or other facility.

Let's be honest here, there are options OTHER than having a novice who is unskilled scare, injure, and hurt pedestrians & also hurt themselves when they forget in the giddy rush of their first cycling trip to look both ways and sail into an intersection and die.

Until you advocate first time drivers learn how to drive on sidewalks, I think you don't have a great case for this.

Alphanzi,
E-mail me, OK? You're uninformed & it's lame. Less than 1% of all accidents occur as you describe, so despite your buddy's sad story, you have to understand that it's not indicitive of reality.

Bill Saunders:
Great points. Yes, events like these are surprisingly inexpensive. If you want volunteers feel free to get in touch. It's not hard to get them to show up for a good cause.

Posted by: Bruce | October 23, 2008 10:41 AM

AC:
"You consider riding along with cars and trucks safer than riding on the sidewalk."

In many cases, yes I do. This is a common misconception. One of the big dangers of riding a bicycle on sidewalks comes when you cross a driveway or side-street. Vehicles look into the street for oncoming traffic but do not expect a bicycle to come darting out off the sidewalk. Statistically, it has been convincingly demonstrated that this is more dangerous than riding in the street where the bicyclist is much more visible, riding with traffic, and easy to avoid.

"You are encouraging disaster to happen, especially for youthful bike riders. And all for the sake of your bloody transportation convenience."

I am pretty sure that children are legally allowed to ride on the sidewalk until 14 or 16. I'm not sure what you mean by "transportation convenience". I ride in the street because it has been proven to be safer for me and others around me. If the city were full of dedicated unbroken bicycle routes (like the canal trail) I would happily ride on those because they are safer than the street. I have no agenda other than helping others ride safely, if that's what you're implying.

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | October 23, 2008 12:04 PM

You ride in the street because it is more convenient for your. You no longer have to walk your bike across the street.

Safer? Please... Hogwash.

Posted by: Bruce | October 23, 2008 2:19 PM

AC:

I ride in the street because A) it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk and B) I believe it to be safer in most cases. Suppose you were right and I do it for my own convenience. What possible motive would I have for encouraging others to do the same? Perhaps I'm just evil and I want others to get injured.

I strongly encourage you to search "bicycle sidewalk safety" on google and see what pops up. I also encourage you to keep your mind open to the possibility that you could be wrong. Otherwise it is impossible to learn.

"For Ottawa, both the fall rate and injury rate on sidewalks were four times higher than on roads. In Toronto, 9 and 6.4 times higher respectively." (http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc/aultman.html

"A study of these risks was made in 1994 and showed that sidewalk cycling is almost twice as dangerous as cycling in the street, and cycling against the traffic on the sidewalk is over four times as dangerous as cycling in the street." (http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm)

Posted by: Bill Saunders | October 23, 2008 2:23 PM

Bruce,

The statute, as I remember it, is that children under 16 are allowed in the road as long as they are wearing a helmet, otherwise, they must ride on the sidewalk. But the statute is unenforceable, as it has no penalties.

But let's be realistic here -- I'd much rather see the police have some reasonable priorities for bike enforcement -- let's start by issuing tickets to all those knuckleheads that ride the wrong way up one way streets.

Posted by: Bill Saunders | October 23, 2008 6:42 PM

Somewhere between the 'Letter of the Law' and Safety Statistics should be a comprehensive plan that does include designated multi-use sidewalks, or some reasonable standard to be responsibly allowed onto the sidewalk.

Frontage Road, Lower State Street, and Longwharf all have areas where the sidewalks do make more sense for cyclists, especially during peak hours, and would go a long way to connect up the city with safe cycling alternatives.

Afterall, a multi-use path is just a sidewalk with a name-change.

Posted by: Bruce | October 24, 2008 9:36 AM

Bill, I totally agree about the priorities and also the multi-use path. The example I always use is the stretch of Whitney Ave in Hamden just North of New Haven (by the waterfall). Off-road paths can be safe if they do not cross a lot of sidewalks and side-streets.

The police are cracking down on sidewalk riding downtown because they get a lot of complaints from pedestrians. I don't think they are cracking down necessarily for the safety of bicyclists.

Posted by: David Streever | October 24, 2008 9:19 PM

watch alponce not reply... he has a hard time with reality.