In the weekend New York Times, Robert Sullivan tackles the nightmare that we all know and many avoid: the Brooklyn Bridge elevated path. Designated half pedestrian walkway, half bike lane, the white line separating the two is never enough. Tourists often wander across the line with cameras glued to their faces, unaware of the cyclists zooming towards them; and cyclists, well, sometimes they zoom too much. Sullivan’s solution: instead of signs and bollards, just separate the two—give bicyclists a protected lane on the lower level, among the cars. This suggestion will surely sound unpleasant to many bicyclists: they will lack the scenic views of the upper level and it sounds like a bad deal for anyone who enjoys breathing oxygen. Sullivan resisted the idea as well, but argues that “if we bicyclists cede the Brooklyn Bridge walkway, then it might be a step toward winning the public’s respect. Then, just maybe, pedestrians would call a truce and recognize that their real enemy is the car …” It’s a respectable argument, one definitely worth mulling over, but we still voted no on the Gothamist poll asking whether bikes should be banned from the upper level (64 percent said yes at the time of writing this post).
Bicyclists vs. Pedestrians: An Armistice [NY Times]
Vote: Ban Bikes from the Brooklyn Bridge Walkway? [Gothamist]