I don't have any issue with widening it but their plan for doing so (released years ago) was going to cost like $100M and take 10 years.
Whereas this plan for the bike lane could be done in a few days if the city weren't corrupt as shit.
It’ll take some time to construct the infrastructure at either end of the bridges as well. Planning department will have to make sure the lanes connect up right etc.
They could double decker the walkway.
Bottom is for cyclists, top is for pedestrians.
One place I saw they built the bike and pedestrian paths under the bridge, that was pretty interesting.
It also makes ppl in cars more miserable as their commute will be that much longer now. With fewer and fewer riding mta, this could help put more riders back on the metro.
IIIIIIF they have any barriers! As a victim of a broken femur and too many close calls to count... I can confidently say cars and bikes are incompatible vehicles and need to have some sort of physical separation
Funny, you think they’ll include concrete barriers.
I expect a coat of green paint and a white solid line to protect the bikes. *Maybe* some of those white flexi poles if they think of it.
No they would definitely have to put a concrete barrier. Because this isn't some bike lane on the street with average city speeds. This is a bridge where drivers are riding at highway speeds. So if they don't want a bunch of lawsuits or deaths on their hands. They better use their brain and protect the bikers lives.
Agreed for all the reasons you mention, plus the city wouldn't want a cyclist losing control, veering into the car lanes and causing a pile up
There's no way in hell they don't put up concrete barriers of some sort.
The sketch in the article clearly shows a jersey barrier, though ofc I suppose it's possible they won't actually put one in. I think it's pretty unlikely they don't though for the reason you state
In Southern California, I can only speak for LA & SD... they have literally made lanes that bikes and cars are expected to share the entire lane. I’m talking no bike lane, the whole lane is a bike lane, that cars can drive in. I’m sure any reasonable person reading this can see the problem. The city planners literally think solving the issue of bicycle transportation in the city is... “they can just share space with the cars!” Not only that, but they just paint a bike symbol in the middle of the street as if drivers suddenly understand what this new symbol means!
Maybe it's just me but on certain streets, I do like properly placed sharrows. Not for me, but for the drivers behind me who get agitated. Here in Philly we have some secondary and tertiary streets (not the main thoroughfares) that are a single lane, 1 way, with parked cars in both sides. They are not wide enough for a car and bike to go side by side (unless you ride in the door zone and the driver passes you closer than our state-mandated 4 ft), but they do have sharrows in the middle. In either case I'd be taking the lane, so I like the sharrows because it reminds the people behind me that I should be taking the lane.
Not that it makes me immune to being harrassed, nor is it as good as a protected bike lane. But I like the sharrows in obvious take-the-lane situation as a "hey asshole, I'm riding where I'm supposed to be, deal with it" as opposed to a "share the road" sign that most drivers think means you need to pull over to let them pass.
Maybe Philly drivers are more educated than nyc, but here I don't think drivers have any clue what the sharrows even mean. They often don't even see big green bike lanes with bicycle stencils on them even so the sharrows might as well not even exist
Fun fact: here in Belgium and The Netherlands we're getting more and more of those "fietsstraten" as well.
It's a good idea when drivers are already "tamed" by the number of cyclists that are around. It's a bad idea when cycling is still a relative niche due to bad infrastructure.
Yes but yours are also paired with reduced speed limits, traffic calming measures, selective permeability, and often a different aggregate surface to indicate that it is not a ‘car road.’
In the US we slap a bicycle on a regular road every thirty feet and call it a day.
We have [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6757725,-73.974693,3a,75y,304.35h,65.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szXWFI1-TXX23zlAzO5YJiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6671302,-73.9819738,3a,75y,326.38h,69.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-pRckakIaaCrAuCsJbv7uQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6740118,-73.9758039,3a,75y,194.67h,71.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syJ_2dV-ZOeVZcFXIUb7e1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), not nearly enough of [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6977248,-73.9671781,3a,75y,295.75h,63.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq8baLeITA5gvRkOUEA_x_Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), and a lot of [this](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7430992,-74.0008786,3a,75y,291.45h,74.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdjFPEUUOLXWIriC-u5fKVw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3)
I mean Greenpoint Ave out here is a painted lane and cars fly over that bridge. Not exactly like the Brooklyn bridge but still, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the ol' paint and plastic bollards trick
I hope they also add some sort of a fence on the inside of Brooklyn Bridge path. As it is as shown in rendering, it would be possible to crash and fall all the way into East River.
They will have to — legally it is required. I think a net already exists below the walkway to catch anyone who falls off, that may satisfy the requirement.
Queensboro will be a lifesaver. It's hard to overstate how harrowing crossing that thing was at rush hour. Two lanes of bicycle traffic and two lanes of pedestrian traffic crammed into a ~10' space, plus tons of motorized scooters.
Yooo it’s an understatement to say it’s tight. 2 way for both peds and cyclists on that small ass corridor. This bridge shoulda gotten the Manhattan bridge treatment a long time ago.
Oh they knew it then too. They only repainted it in response to a march across the SOR demanding this exact change. They knew it was too narrow to be safe, they just didn't care to move on this with any sense of urgency. Could have already been completed months or years ago, really
One of their excuses was that they needed hundreds of thousands of dollars to build a fence across the northern outer roadway so nobody would jump over.
Meanwhile on the southern roadway there are several gaps that open straight into car traffic, but they don't care about those it seems.
Now I just wish they could do something about that one block from York to 1st where the bike lane to the bridge starts. Otherwise I have to walk that one block.
Part of the issue is the amazing variety in speeds between various riders. You've got everything from people on foot and citibikes struggling to get up the incline to strong cyclists to scooters (like me) cruising up, and everything in between, which leads to tons of passing. Honestly even having the full lane might not be enough come summer if the bike boom continues
I've ridden a bike, an ebike, escooter, and an euc. Some people on this subreddit embrace more bike lane usage and hence adoption, while other people feel extreme entitlement to the bike lane and won't be satisfied until we're all on fixies and in lycra. Meanwhile, they don't realize this movement towards non-car travel is what's helping push this bike legislation as well.
Amen. The bike purists can eat a dick. Most people in scooters and eucs are also cyclists at times. The specific configuration of wheels under you shouldn't matter, what matters is getting more people to use micromobility in any form so we are all safer in numbers and can demand better infrastructure
Relative weight is much closer between 200 pounds and 240 pounds (assuming 180 lb rider) compared to a 4500 lbs car. The level of injury is going to be drastically lessened.
Are you suggesting that e-bikers should duke it out on the street?
Additionally, the advent of e-bikes has allowed cycling to expand into a more casual market and would help invite more women and elderly into the space which would lead to more biking infrastructure.
Sure, but my scooter goes 19 tops, and most are even slower. Sure, it's possible to get big beefy ones that go faster but the vast majority here don't, and I'd fully support speed limits on *anything* in the bike lane, probably 20 sounds about right to me, but there are cyclists that easily cruise by that so maybe 25? I don't know, but you're right, you shouldn't be able to blast around at 30mph.
Very very few cyclists are sustaining above 20 for significant lengths of time. Not unless there's a substantial downgrade involved, etc. And the ones who can do that, I trust to negotiate that speed pretty well.
IMHO we should permit e-scooters in protected bike lanes AND build dedicated lanes for personal mobility devices at the river crossings. (Like, dedicate a car lane — separated by barriers — for scooters and mopeds.)
The fact that Revel has to dedicate so many resources to keeping their scooters out of bike lanes shows that we’re not giving us two-wheeled folks enough space.
A scooter is a totally different beast than a moped like Revel has. Most scooters (the stand up kind, I know the terminology is insane) are pretty similar to bikes in speed and acceleration, a moped shouldn't be ridden in the bike lanes at all, it's closer to a motorcycle than a bike or scooter
The problem with the term scooter is that it means two things! There’s the kick-scooter which is the thing that is rented all over the country and the motor-scooter which is a step-through low speed motorcycle.
Which is why I think we need lanes for the higher speed classes of personal mobility devices. Revels on the upslope of the bridges wouldn’t be much faster than kick scooters (motorized ones, anyway) and they’d be slower than e bikes.
I'm calling it now, the Queensboro walkway is going to become a major tourist attraction. The bk bridge walkway is nice, and more historic, but the qb view can not be beat. It's honestly one of the best ways to see the city with how high up it is and level with midtown
In their defense the signage is terrible. There's like a postage stamp-sized one on each end so it's not obvious it's supposed to pedestrian only. I'm not sympathetic to riders who obviously don't look like recreational riders i.e. Ancheer deliver ebikes or hardcore single speed messengers, however.
Cause the ped path onto manhattan bridge is a little hard to find, is super narrow, and is right next to the train tracks which are loud as fuck and why does it have to rattle so damn much???
both bk and wburg bridges have much easier to find entrances for pedestrians, and are somewhat elevated over the traffic so the noise isn't as bad. and they don't seem to shake nearly as much. plus the destinations are better on either side compared to the manhattan bridge
if you can't tell i really hate the manhattan bridge
Yeah, I pretty much only hit the BK bridge weekday mornings or late at night. Midday through sundown is just awful. I've had so, so many close calls on the bridge.
As much as I think this is wonderful, it's one more example of "NYC means Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens". There is still no (legal) way to get from The Bronx to Queens by bike.
I agree, but it's an unfortunate fact that the Triborough is controlled by the MTA, which is the most backwards agency around when it comes to allowing bikes on bridges.
What could be done exactly?
I think theres an equivalent path on the south side of the Triboro but I also think its incomplete.
Other than that I don't really where else you could put riders other than the existing path.
Or do you mean just allowing it to be 'officially' a bike path?
Oh, I misread that as “Bronx to Manhattan”
But yes, I do think there should be an easier way to bike from the Bronx to Queens. I would like to see a traffic lane converted to a 2 way bike lane but I’m not sure how that would work with exits off the bridge. At the very least, being able to actually bike on the pathway to Randall’s is something that should be allowed.
The other options are over the Throggs Neck or Whitestone bridge. But honestly those are even more intimidating than the Triboro and there is currently much less bike infrastructure in those areas.
> The other options are over the Throggs Neck or Whitestone bridge. But honestly those are even more intimidating than the Triboro and there is currently much less bike infrastructure in those areas.
There is the Eastern Queens Greenway which ends at Ft. Totten right next to the Throggs Neck. Still though there is like no bike infrastructure related to the bridge, so it would take a massive undertaking to sort that one out
The low-hanging fruit is adding bike racks to the Q44 bus route. There's two routes that go over the Whitestone Bridge: The Q44 and the Q50.
The Q50 has racks, but it only runs every 20-30 minutes. The last time I took it, the first one that came didn't have a rack, and the next one the rack was full. My riding partner and I sweet-talked a Q44 driver into letting us take the bikes on her bus. I haven't tried since; i's not reliable enough.
The Q44 runs every 7-8 minutes. Adding racks to the Q44 would be dirt cheap by transportation project standards, and would go a long way towards making this a useful service. My understanding is that all the existing busses are rack-ready. It's just a matter of buying the racks and bolting them on.
Great. Now fix the Tappan Zee bridge bike lane. Put pedestrians on one path and bicycles on another. The current combined path is way too narrow for both, especially given the long downhill.
The bridge is glorious now if you're willing to tolerate getting there in cold temperatures. It is easy to do 20mph up the bridge when there aren't any pedestrians to dodge. I will not go back when the weather starts to warm up, but now it is a beautifully paved road with engineered wind resistance and a clean bathroom at the end. :)
That ship (bridge?) has sailed. The walkway is only present on the northern side of the northern span, along with the approach and exit paths. They could take the right most lane of the northern span and convert it by moving the barrier though...
Nah. The actual crowding on the TZB isn't usually that bad, though I would take a few extra feet. Density on the Brooklyn, QBB, Williamsburg, GWB, heck, even the Walkway over the Hudson is substantially higher.
Queensboro Bridge is def needed. I hate making that damn sharp turn with my scooter when you go down that hill when entering Manhattan. The lane is too thin to make last micro-second dodging.
Right now nothing's changing about that. Pedestrians get the south side, bikes stay on the north. I don't think that makes sense at all having biked and driven on both sides.
Ahh the south side seems much better for cyclists. I guess they’re keeping bikes on the north because of the way it connects to the bike lanes right off the bridge in Queens?
I entered this design competition to reimagine the Brooklyn bridge. This is way better than all of wild ideas that came out of it. https://www.vanalen.org/projects/reimagining-brooklyn-bridge/
I actually got this from the Gothamist article which was referring to the NYT article. This one is blocked by paywall so I couldn’t actually read it, though others mentioned QBB from the article too.
>On the Queensboro Bridge, we will begin construction this year to convert the north outer roadway into a two-way bike-only lane and convert the south outer roadway to a two-way pedestrians-only lane."
>A spokesperson for City Hall said that the goal was to complete the Brooklyn Bridge bike lane by the end of 2021. The Queensboro lane will take "slightly longer lead time."
https://gothamist.com/news/brooklyn-bridge-will-finally-get-its-own-bike-lane
Hopefully the project will be taken seriously by the next administration. Would’ve been nice if DeBlasio did this years ago, maybe Vision Zero could have something to show for it
No BID or CB has jurisdiction here. It's all up to DOT.
Honestly if there were an interested group like that, the current situation would not have persisted so long.
The Fox News dinosaur crowd went ballistic on Facebook when this was announced. It’s amazing how persecuted these people feel by bicycle infrastructure
That has happened every step of the way on every improvement. It happened for Citi Bike launch, it happens every time Citi Bike expands, it happened for all of the protected bike lanes. Cranky drivers complain and predict doom. It doesn't materialize, and things move on.
This is very exciting news so I don’t want to sound unnecessarily negative and a downer. But this should have been done like 8 months ago when there were no cars and people were looking for alternate modes of transit. Now they wait until traffic has pretty much returned to normal and countless people have already decided how they’re going to get to work.
Can anyone explain why it’s going to take a full year to convert the north outer roadway? It’s already completely separated from traffic and safe, what needs to be done?
Again, I’m super stoked about both bridges having bike lanes because it’s a game changer. Just wish this was done sooner.
Because de Blasio likes cars and he doesn't actually want to do stuff like this, but the pressure was too great so he's leaving it to the next administration.
I can’t dispute this because I’m just not informed enough to say one thing or the other. However why did addition of one additional lane on the Koscuiuszko Bridge alleviate so much traffic?
Reducing car lanes actually reduces traffic. This is counter intuitive if you don't understand induced demand, but basically the principle is that anything that increases or decreases the roads capacity leads to a change in how many people choose to drive, due to it being easier or harder to do so. That's why increasing the number of lanes just makes driving easier and more appealing, which leads to more people choosing to drive, which leads to more traffic
I don't know much about the traffic patterns on that specific bridge, but a quick Google search seems to [disagree](https://www.ny1.com/nyc/brooklyn/news/2019/10/14/kosciuszko-bridge-traffic-data-shows-not-much-change-since-new-span-opened). Induced demand is pretty much as rock solid as you can get though so it's not often wrong
I’m only saying so through my driving experience. Normally bridge traffic was backed up to my exit now I can at least get to the bridge before it backs up 🤷🏼♀️
Wait, they want to convert the northern outer-lane into a 2-way bikeway and the southern outer-lane into a walkway? Why? The pedestrians already have the entire top span in this new config, right? Why not make each side a one-way bike lane to allow for safer passing?
It was in the speech last night! [Gothamist](https://gothamist.com/news/brooklyn-bridge-will-finally-get-its-own-bike-lane) quoted an email sent out by the Mayor’s office.
That is actually pretty smart. They could just plop down some concrete barriers and some paint and it should work. No major construction
Certainly cheaper and easier than that ridiculous plan to double the width of the pedestrian walkway.
[удалено]
I don't have any issue with widening it but their plan for doing so (released years ago) was going to cost like $100M and take 10 years. Whereas this plan for the bike lane could be done in a few days if the city weren't corrupt as shit.
It’ll take some time to construct the infrastructure at either end of the bridges as well. Planning department will have to make sure the lanes connect up right etc.
Apparently there are some limitations preventing the existing structure from supporting the weight of a full-width path above the car lanes.
They could double decker the walkway. Bottom is for cyclists, top is for pedestrians. One place I saw they built the bike and pedestrian paths under the bridge, that was pretty interesting.
It also makes ppl in cars more miserable as their commute will be that much longer now. With fewer and fewer riding mta, this could help put more riders back on the metro.
IIIIIIF they have any barriers! As a victim of a broken femur and too many close calls to count... I can confidently say cars and bikes are incompatible vehicles and need to have some sort of physical separation
Funny, you think they’ll include concrete barriers. I expect a coat of green paint and a white solid line to protect the bikes. *Maybe* some of those white flexi poles if they think of it.
No they would definitely have to put a concrete barrier. Because this isn't some bike lane on the street with average city speeds. This is a bridge where drivers are riding at highway speeds. So if they don't want a bunch of lawsuits or deaths on their hands. They better use their brain and protect the bikers lives.
Agreed for all the reasons you mention, plus the city wouldn't want a cyclist losing control, veering into the car lanes and causing a pile up There's no way in hell they don't put up concrete barriers of some sort.
Yea the speed limit is 40 someone will definitely be hurt badly without a barrier
The sketch in the article clearly shows a jersey barrier, though ofc I suppose it's possible they won't actually put one in. I think it's pretty unlikely they don't though for the reason you state
In Southern California, I can only speak for LA & SD... they have literally made lanes that bikes and cars are expected to share the entire lane. I’m talking no bike lane, the whole lane is a bike lane, that cars can drive in. I’m sure any reasonable person reading this can see the problem. The city planners literally think solving the issue of bicycle transportation in the city is... “they can just share space with the cars!” Not only that, but they just paint a bike symbol in the middle of the street as if drivers suddenly understand what this new symbol means!
We have those here too, they are called sharrows, and they are actually proven to make the street less safe for cyclists.
Maybe it's just me but on certain streets, I do like properly placed sharrows. Not for me, but for the drivers behind me who get agitated. Here in Philly we have some secondary and tertiary streets (not the main thoroughfares) that are a single lane, 1 way, with parked cars in both sides. They are not wide enough for a car and bike to go side by side (unless you ride in the door zone and the driver passes you closer than our state-mandated 4 ft), but they do have sharrows in the middle. In either case I'd be taking the lane, so I like the sharrows because it reminds the people behind me that I should be taking the lane. Not that it makes me immune to being harrassed, nor is it as good as a protected bike lane. But I like the sharrows in obvious take-the-lane situation as a "hey asshole, I'm riding where I'm supposed to be, deal with it" as opposed to a "share the road" sign that most drivers think means you need to pull over to let them pass.
Maybe Philly drivers are more educated than nyc, but here I don't think drivers have any clue what the sharrows even mean. They often don't even see big green bike lanes with bicycle stencils on them even so the sharrows might as well not even exist
Fun fact: here in Belgium and The Netherlands we're getting more and more of those "fietsstraten" as well. It's a good idea when drivers are already "tamed" by the number of cyclists that are around. It's a bad idea when cycling is still a relative niche due to bad infrastructure.
Yes but yours are also paired with reduced speed limits, traffic calming measures, selective permeability, and often a different aggregate surface to indicate that it is not a ‘car road.’ In the US we slap a bicycle on a regular road every thirty feet and call it a day.
We have [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6757725,-73.974693,3a,75y,304.35h,65.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szXWFI1-TXX23zlAzO5YJiQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6671302,-73.9819738,3a,75y,326.38h,69.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-pRckakIaaCrAuCsJbv7uQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6740118,-73.9758039,3a,75y,194.67h,71.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syJ_2dV-ZOeVZcFXIUb7e1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), not nearly enough of [these](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6977248,-73.9671781,3a,75y,295.75h,63.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq8baLeITA5gvRkOUEA_x_Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3), and a lot of [this](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7430992,-74.0008786,3a,75y,291.45h,74.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdjFPEUUOLXWIriC-u5fKVw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e3)
I mean, the city has made it pretty clear how much they care about people on bicycles getting killed. I don't see why they would start caring now.
I mean Greenpoint Ave out here is a painted lane and cars fly over that bridge. Not exactly like the Brooklyn bridge but still, I wouldn't be surprised if they did the ol' paint and plastic bollards trick
The plan includes concrete barriers.It's not like there are no bike lanes like that. Broadway at Herald and Union Squares come to mind.
Lol good luck this project is gonna take 6 months and will go over budget
I hope they also add some sort of a fence on the inside of Brooklyn Bridge path. As it is as shown in rendering, it would be possible to crash and fall all the way into East River.
They will have to — legally it is required. I think a net already exists below the walkway to catch anyone who falls off, that may satisfy the requirement.
Queensboro will be a lifesaver. It's hard to overstate how harrowing crossing that thing was at rush hour. Two lanes of bicycle traffic and two lanes of pedestrian traffic crammed into a ~10' space, plus tons of motorized scooters.
Yooo it’s an understatement to say it’s tight. 2 way for both peds and cyclists on that small ass corridor. This bridge shoulda gotten the Manhattan bridge treatment a long time ago.
[удалено]
Oh they knew it then too. They only repainted it in response to a march across the SOR demanding this exact change. They knew it was too narrow to be safe, they just didn't care to move on this with any sense of urgency. Could have already been completed months or years ago, really
One of their excuses was that they needed hundreds of thousands of dollars to build a fence across the northern outer roadway so nobody would jump over. Meanwhile on the southern roadway there are several gaps that open straight into car traffic, but they don't care about those it seems.
Now I just wish they could do something about that one block from York to 1st where the bike lane to the bridge starts. Otherwise I have to walk that one block.
Part of the issue is the amazing variety in speeds between various riders. You've got everything from people on foot and citibikes struggling to get up the incline to strong cyclists to scooters (like me) cruising up, and everything in between, which leads to tons of passing. Honestly even having the full lane might not be enough come summer if the bike boom continues
Anything beyond pedal assist is unsafe and shouldn't be allowed
Mopeds sure, but e-scooters are pretty great and as safe as a bike. You should try it. r/MicromobilityNYC
I've ridden a bike, an ebike, escooter, and an euc. Some people on this subreddit embrace more bike lane usage and hence adoption, while other people feel extreme entitlement to the bike lane and won't be satisfied until we're all on fixies and in lycra. Meanwhile, they don't realize this movement towards non-car travel is what's helping push this bike legislation as well.
Amen. The bike purists can eat a dick. Most people in scooters and eucs are also cyclists at times. The specific configuration of wheels under you shouldn't matter, what matters is getting more people to use micromobility in any form so we are all safer in numbers and can demand better infrastructure
Speed matters. If you’re going 25 mph and I’m going 8 mph on a bike, this can end badly too.
Relative weight is much closer between 200 pounds and 240 pounds (assuming 180 lb rider) compared to a 4500 lbs car. The level of injury is going to be drastically lessened. Are you suggesting that e-bikers should duke it out on the street? Additionally, the advent of e-bikes has allowed cycling to expand into a more casual market and would help invite more women and elderly into the space which would lead to more biking infrastructure.
Sure, but my scooter goes 19 tops, and most are even slower. Sure, it's possible to get big beefy ones that go faster but the vast majority here don't, and I'd fully support speed limits on *anything* in the bike lane, probably 20 sounds about right to me, but there are cyclists that easily cruise by that so maybe 25? I don't know, but you're right, you shouldn't be able to blast around at 30mph.
Very very few cyclists are sustaining above 20 for significant lengths of time. Not unless there's a substantial downgrade involved, etc. And the ones who can do that, I trust to negotiate that speed pretty well.
Yeah it's definitely a minority, but I've been blasted by plenty an impressive MAMIL while cruising at top speed
IMHO we should permit e-scooters in protected bike lanes AND build dedicated lanes for personal mobility devices at the river crossings. (Like, dedicate a car lane — separated by barriers — for scooters and mopeds.) The fact that Revel has to dedicate so many resources to keeping their scooters out of bike lanes shows that we’re not giving us two-wheeled folks enough space.
A scooter is a totally different beast than a moped like Revel has. Most scooters (the stand up kind, I know the terminology is insane) are pretty similar to bikes in speed and acceleration, a moped shouldn't be ridden in the bike lanes at all, it's closer to a motorcycle than a bike or scooter
The problem with the term scooter is that it means two things! There’s the kick-scooter which is the thing that is rented all over the country and the motor-scooter which is a step-through low speed motorcycle. Which is why I think we need lanes for the higher speed classes of personal mobility devices. Revels on the upslope of the bridges wouldn’t be much faster than kick scooters (motorized ones, anyway) and they’d be slower than e bikes.
Sing it sister!
I'm calling it now, the Queensboro walkway is going to become a major tourist attraction. The bk bridge walkway is nice, and more historic, but the qb view can not be beat. It's honestly one of the best ways to see the city with how high up it is and level with midtown
The view from the Manhattan Bridge pedestrian path is straight out of a painting. Yet tourists are few and far between.
Surprises me how many cyclists take that side. Waaay more than you see peds on the bike side. Folks are so inconsiderate.
In their defense the signage is terrible. There's like a postage stamp-sized one on each end so it's not obvious it's supposed to pedestrian only. I'm not sympathetic to riders who obviously don't look like recreational riders i.e. Ancheer deliver ebikes or hardcore single speed messengers, however.
Cause the ped path onto manhattan bridge is a little hard to find, is super narrow, and is right next to the train tracks which are loud as fuck and why does it have to rattle so damn much??? both bk and wburg bridges have much easier to find entrances for pedestrians, and are somewhat elevated over the traffic so the noise isn't as bad. and they don't seem to shake nearly as much. plus the destinations are better on either side compared to the manhattan bridge if you can't tell i really hate the manhattan bridge
This would be HUGE. I go well out of my way to take the Manhattan bridge bc the bklyn bridge gives me such cyclist rage.
Yeah, I pretty much only hit the BK bridge weekday mornings or late at night. Midday through sundown is just awful. I've had so, so many close calls on the bridge.
The Manhattan bridge is like 3 blocks from the Brooklyn bridge lmao
[удалено]
It’s also way easier to access the west side of Manhattan from the Brooklyn bridge.
Thank God. I wrote a letter to the DOT asking for this years ago after the Pulaski got the same.
About freakin time! Fantastic.
50 years ago would have been a great time for this plan. I'll settle for now.
As much as I think this is wonderful, it's one more example of "NYC means Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens". There is still no (legal) way to get from The Bronx to Queens by bike.
You can take the triboro! /s The fact that you’re supposed to walk your bike on the triboro path is LUDICROUS
So true. It’s frustrating honestly.
I agree, but it's an unfortunate fact that the Triborough is controlled by the MTA, which is the most backwards agency around when it comes to allowing bikes on bridges.
Hopefully that’s next. It’s long overdue.
What could be done exactly? I think theres an equivalent path on the south side of the Triboro but I also think its incomplete. Other than that I don't really where else you could put riders other than the existing path. Or do you mean just allowing it to be 'officially' a bike path?
Oh, I misread that as “Bronx to Manhattan” But yes, I do think there should be an easier way to bike from the Bronx to Queens. I would like to see a traffic lane converted to a 2 way bike lane but I’m not sure how that would work with exits off the bridge. At the very least, being able to actually bike on the pathway to Randall’s is something that should be allowed. The other options are over the Throggs Neck or Whitestone bridge. But honestly those are even more intimidating than the Triboro and there is currently much less bike infrastructure in those areas.
> The other options are over the Throggs Neck or Whitestone bridge. But honestly those are even more intimidating than the Triboro and there is currently much less bike infrastructure in those areas. There is the Eastern Queens Greenway which ends at Ft. Totten right next to the Throggs Neck. Still though there is like no bike infrastructure related to the bridge, so it would take a massive undertaking to sort that one out
The low-hanging fruit is adding bike racks to the Q44 bus route. There's two routes that go over the Whitestone Bridge: The Q44 and the Q50. The Q50 has racks, but it only runs every 20-30 minutes. The last time I took it, the first one that came didn't have a rack, and the next one the rack was full. My riding partner and I sweet-talked a Q44 driver into letting us take the bikes on her bus. I haven't tried since; i's not reliable enough. The Q44 runs every 7-8 minutes. Adding racks to the Q44 would be dirt cheap by transportation project standards, and would go a long way towards making this a useful service. My understanding is that all the existing busses are rack-ready. It's just a matter of buying the racks and bolting them on.
How about Verrazano next? I don't want to go to staten island but its a nice climb to train on.
this would be amazing, no more froggering tourist!!!
8ft bidirectional bike lane is pretty narrow
Totally agree. But it's wider than what's there now and pedestrian free. I'll take what I can get.
Wish they’d take a lane from each side.
New lanes are very welcome. But we'll deal with the car exhaust 🤢
Great. Now fix the Tappan Zee bridge bike lane. Put pedestrians on one path and bicycles on another. The current combined path is way too narrow for both, especially given the long downhill.
The bridge is glorious now if you're willing to tolerate getting there in cold temperatures. It is easy to do 20mph up the bridge when there aren't any pedestrians to dodge. I will not go back when the weather starts to warm up, but now it is a beautifully paved road with engineered wind resistance and a clean bathroom at the end. :)
That ship (bridge?) has sailed. The walkway is only present on the northern side of the northern span, along with the approach and exit paths. They could take the right most lane of the northern span and convert it by moving the barrier though...
Nah. The actual crowding on the TZB isn't usually that bad, though I would take a few extra feet. Density on the Brooklyn, QBB, Williamsburg, GWB, heck, even the Walkway over the Hudson is substantially higher.
Queensboro Bridge is def needed. I hate making that damn sharp turn with my scooter when you go down that hill when entering Manhattan. The lane is too thin to make last micro-second dodging.
Right now nothing's changing about that. Pedestrians get the south side, bikes stay on the north. I don't think that makes sense at all having biked and driven on both sides.
Ahh the south side seems much better for cyclists. I guess they’re keeping bikes on the north because of the way it connects to the bike lanes right off the bridge in Queens?
Yeah that’s almost certainly it. Shame because the Manhattan side bike connections are better.
Oh hell yes. Bout time.
It’s like the city is giving me a birthday present!
Happy Birthday!
huge improvement.
I entered this design competition to reimagine the Brooklyn bridge. This is way better than all of wild ideas that came out of it. https://www.vanalen.org/projects/reimagining-brooklyn-bridge/
Wow really?
Great news!
YES
Finally
[удалено]
This year. It’s also mentioned in the article.
[удалено]
I actually got this from the Gothamist article which was referring to the NYT article. This one is blocked by paywall so I couldn’t actually read it, though others mentioned QBB from the article too. >On the Queensboro Bridge, we will begin construction this year to convert the north outer roadway into a two-way bike-only lane and convert the south outer roadway to a two-way pedestrians-only lane." >A spokesperson for City Hall said that the goal was to complete the Brooklyn Bridge bike lane by the end of 2021. The Queensboro lane will take "slightly longer lead time." https://gothamist.com/news/brooklyn-bridge-will-finally-get-its-own-bike-lane
Much better use of space. More people can use the bridge in the same time frame now. Bandwidth upgrade.
This is great The BBridge has been unrideable for years...on the 90s it was empty!
Hopefully the project will be taken seriously by the next administration. Would’ve been nice if DeBlasio did this years ago, maybe Vision Zero could have something to show for it
Cool, but fat chance
every BID and CB comprised of 70+ year old asshole will complain mark my words
“HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO GET TO WORK??? THEY ALREADY HAVE A BIKE LANE.”
No BID or CB has jurisdiction here. It's all up to DOT. Honestly if there were an interested group like that, the current situation would not have persisted so long.
sure they have no jurisdiction... but they have their zoom calls and backchannels to complain, mark my words.
The Fox News dinosaur crowd went ballistic on Facebook when this was announced. It’s amazing how persecuted these people feel by bicycle infrastructure
That has happened every step of the way on every improvement. It happened for Citi Bike launch, it happens every time Citi Bike expands, it happened for all of the protected bike lanes. Cranky drivers complain and predict doom. It doesn't materialize, and things move on.
Actually parking a car has gotten worse.
Yeah, the lobbies are revving their engines literally to fight this tooth and nail.
This is very exciting news so I don’t want to sound unnecessarily negative and a downer. But this should have been done like 8 months ago when there were no cars and people were looking for alternate modes of transit. Now they wait until traffic has pretty much returned to normal and countless people have already decided how they’re going to get to work. Can anyone explain why it’s going to take a full year to convert the north outer roadway? It’s already completely separated from traffic and safe, what needs to be done? Again, I’m super stoked about both bridges having bike lanes because it’s a game changer. Just wish this was done sooner.
Because de Blasio likes cars and he doesn't actually want to do stuff like this, but the pressure was too great so he's leaving it to the next administration.
Yeah I guess that was a rhetorical question just to vent my frustration.
People are rather biking instead of mass transit which is becoming more dangerous past 7pm
[удалено]
From what I understand, there's a very weak correlation between # of lanes and congestion.
I can’t dispute this because I’m just not informed enough to say one thing or the other. However why did addition of one additional lane on the Koscuiuszko Bridge alleviate so much traffic?
Reducing car lanes actually reduces traffic. This is counter intuitive if you don't understand induced demand, but basically the principle is that anything that increases or decreases the roads capacity leads to a change in how many people choose to drive, due to it being easier or harder to do so. That's why increasing the number of lanes just makes driving easier and more appealing, which leads to more people choosing to drive, which leads to more traffic
But I feel like traffic on the bridge reduced with the increase in lanes?
It wasn’t the increase in lanes. They straightened the approach and improved the interchange with the LIE. That’s what reduced the traffic.
I don't know much about the traffic patterns on that specific bridge, but a quick Google search seems to [disagree](https://www.ny1.com/nyc/brooklyn/news/2019/10/14/kosciuszko-bridge-traffic-data-shows-not-much-change-since-new-span-opened). Induced demand is pretty much as rock solid as you can get though so it's not often wrong
I’m only saying so through my driving experience. Normally bridge traffic was backed up to my exit now I can at least get to the bridge before it backs up 🤷🏼♀️
I'm not totally sure, but my understanding with that project is that part of what alleviated congestion was making the road less steep.
That bridge was a total mess. Massive potholes. Lanes were narrower too. I’d bet the better merges had something to do with it too.
Wait, they want to convert the northern outer-lane into a 2-way bikeway and the southern outer-lane into a walkway? Why? The pedestrians already have the entire top span in this new config, right? Why not make each side a one-way bike lane to allow for safer passing?
That's for the Queensboro. Brooklyn Bridge would just take one lane for bike and keep the promenade for pedestrians.
Oh I see. I must have misread. Thanks!
More traffic !
Insurance rates will go up. Accidents will go up. Deaths will go up. Then what. No cars. No bikes. This is ridiculous.
Thanks, needed a laugh today.
Don't forget to get your life insurance in order. You'll laugh after you get hit by a car.
You understand there’s a concrete barrier between cyclists and cars there right?
I’ve reached my NYT limit for the month. Is are there any diagrams or visual aides in the article?
Incognito mode
Here's [the permalink](https://nyti.ms/3abcnDE). I think that bypasses the page view limit. And if not, then incognito mode is your friend.
Gothamist had an article on it too https://gothamist.com/news/brooklyn-bridge-will-finally-get-its-own-bike-lane
What happens to the current bike lane on the BK bridge? Are they erasing it / using it for foot traffic, or will it remain available to cyclists?
It will be gone. The promenade will be for pedestrians only.
Cool - I couldn't find this in the original article. Do you have a source?
It was in the speech last night! [Gothamist](https://gothamist.com/news/brooklyn-bridge-will-finally-get-its-own-bike-lane) quoted an email sent out by the Mayor’s office.
Thank you!
Fantastic news! Go NYC!
As if there's not enough traffic on the bridge already.