Brooklyn's Dangerous Intersections
The tragic death of an eight-year-old boy on Saturday, who was struck by a car on Adams and Livingston Streets while riding his bike with his dad, is raising awareness about the dangers of downtown streets to bicyclists and pedestrians. The Brooklyn Eagle reports that “residents wonder if a solution for a gauntlet of deadly…
The tragic death of an eight-year-old boy on Saturday, who was struck by a car on Adams and Livingston Streets while riding his bike with his dad, is raising awareness about the dangers of downtown streets to bicyclists and pedestrians. The Brooklyn Eagle reports that “residents wonder if a solution for a gauntlet of deadly Downtown intersections will ever be found.” The non-profit Transportation Alternatives has compiled statistics for the area, showing that 39 people (28 pedestrians and 11 bicyclists) were hit by motor vehicles at that same spot from 1995 to 2005. “A half a block east on Livingston Street, eight pedestrians were struck during the same time period; one of them died. A block north, at the notorious Adams/Livingston/Fulton Street intersection, 32 people were struck and injured,” they write. “A few steps away, at Adams and Willoughby, 11 people were hit. Next to this, at Fulton and Willoughby, one more. At Fulton near Red Hook Lane, another one.” We have 150 miles of bicycle lanes in Brooklyn, with many more in progress, and the DOT instituted a six-month trial of a new downtown traffic plan beginning in June, hoping to ameliorate the recurring issue. Clearly, though, it’s not enough. One Brooklynite has been lobbying for a pedestrian overpass to curve over Adams Street, so pedestrians and bicyclists can avoid it altogether.
Another Victim of Downtown Traffic [Brooklyn Eagle]
I was thinking about this on my bike ride in to the office this morning (downtown brooklyn over manhattan bridge and up first ave) — running the usual gauntlet of double-parked trucks, blocked bike lanes, crazy taxis, etc.
I think what we need is a new team of “elite” traffic enforcement agents who focus exclusively on issuing citations for traffic flow issues. Currently, violations are issued primarily by traffic agents who spend most of their time writing tickets for double parking, expired meters, parking in no standing zones, blocking hydrants, etc. In many cases, the ones actually causing problems for bicyclists, pedestrians and other motorists, and often creating blind spots and bottlenecks (which, in turn, endanger bicyclists and pedestrians) are vehicles which are either immune, with placards, or get their tickets dismissed en mass. Most are never ticketed anyway.
So, I propose hiring specialized, trained DOT enforcement agents charged with enforcing the rules of the roads they create — bike lanes, bus lanes, triple-parking, crosswalks, left turns from center lanes, blocking the box, etc. Just as DOB inspectors issue citations to those who violate DOB rules. They would be classified as non-moving violations, but would carry steep, punitive fines (maybe $300 and up). They would be different color and would not be subject to the same appeal process and bulk dismissals process as parking tickets. Give these agents a device that allows them to take a date- and time-stamped picture of the violation and files it electronically with each violation. Dispatch them on foot or on bikes or scooters to patrol high-incident areas. Maybe they wouldn’t need to even stop moving violators — just photograph, enter the plate, and let the system mail a citation.
NYPD has proved time and again that enforcing road rules simply isn’t a priority. DOT has no teeth. The parking ticket people, while they perform an important function, simply aren’t enough of a threat. Only by creating a new agency with real authority and a mission to clean things up can any progress be made towards bringing order to the streets.
Imagine what the roads would be like if the authorities managing them had a reputation of being efficient and ruthless with violators.
I’ve often wondered why drunk drivers get off so easily too. And steve does make a good point- the father bears some responsibility which I am sure is causing him great pain.
I don’t want to say give the driver a pass- and I am not -, but there is another part of the reality. Driving a car demands focus but think of how visually distracting a NYC street is. It’s hard enough to keep track of the cars around you, the lights, the pedestrians. But then add in bike riders, who are far smaller and more agile than cars, and don’t necessarily wear bright colored clothing that could catch your eye. It’s almost like camouflage- in daylight, bike riders can be less visible than at night when they’re using reflective clothing and bike lights.
bike riders also seem to think that because they are in a bike lane, nothing should happen to them. Sad to say, there’s no force field protecting the bike lane, and cars may swerve to avoid another car. If you’ve ever been forced off a road because someone veered out in front of you, the last thing you’re worrying about is the bike rider when you’re trying to control your vehicle and avoid crashing into another car full of people.
Then put all of this together on a frenetic, hi traffic roadway and you are asking for an accident to happen.
I think the city really bears the responsibility on this for not thinking out bike lanes and car traffic. they’re a great thing, but a lot more thought and design should have gone into it. And I’m a great believer in public transportation. For my money, the City should be doing a lot more to improve it, but the reality for the moment is that the city is packed with cars, and not just personal cars. Vehicles are the lifeblood of the city and taking away car lanes to make protected bike lanes will just make traffic even worse.
Amen, carfreenation. I’m not anti-car by any means but it’s clear to me that at least 1/4 of the drivers currently on American roads shouldn’t be allowed behind the wheel, ever.
There’s a personal responsibility disconnect with cars that we don’t find with anything else. We even call them “accidents”, as if collisions aren’t the result of careless or inept drivers but a roll of the metaphysical dice.
Let’s say the guy driving that car was instead carelessly cleaning his gun and it fired, killing the same kid. Would he get off? Hell, no. He’d likely be charged with reckless endangerment if not involuntary manslaughter.
Four years ago, a female acquaintance was killed on her motorcycle in Red Hook by a truck running a stop sign. The driver didn’t have a license either. He got a ticket for “failure to yield”.
Nevertheless, I do blame dad. NYC streets are what they are, not what we’d like them to be. “Rights” aren’t a bulletproof vest. Putting a little kid on a bicycle on a busy avenue, bike lane or not, is simply being ignorant of the reality of the danger out there.
Is automobile traffic as inevitable as rain? Will we let our children be run down in the streets, like dogs?
Why does nobody blame the driver, who apparently failed to yield to a young cyclist who had the right-of-way? Not even a measly $25 ticket? I know he felt bad, as he should have, but he broke the law, and it led to a death. In my book, that’s manslaughter. Did anyone check his cell phone records? Was he on the phone when the accident happened? Certainly seems like a lot of people driving in downtown Brooklyn are talking on their phones, even though it’s the equivalent of driving after 3 drinks.
Why does nobody blame the DOT, who in the interest in auto-efficiency, won’t take a lane away so that there’s a true protected bike lane on Adams Street? Is one death worth saving a few seconds for people who should be taking public transportation anyway, who are just too cheap to pay the tolls on the Battery Tunnel, where they wouldn’t even have the option to run down helpless pedestrians and cyclists.
And why blame the Dad? Wasn’t he riding on a city-provided bike path on a Saturday? Perhaps he was going to the protected bike path on the Brooklyn Bridge. Isn’t the city encouraging us to cycle. This same accident could easily have happened if they were crossing the street as pedestrians.
This is a horrible tragedy, but it doesn’t have to be this way. In other countries, they target ZERO pedestrian and cyclist deaths, and they are succeeding. In Europe, you are 1/3 as likely to die in an accident as a pedestrian or cyclist, and many more people cycle. Here, we don’t seem to care.
Enough!
Thanks, as well.
Ironically I am 100% anti censorship.
But I’m all for maintaining dignity and resisting the exploitation of a minor’s death. That photo pushed the limits.
Thanks
Apologies. We replaced the photo.
As a cyclist, cardriver and parent, I find this photo insensitive and tacky.
Changing the photo does not sugarcoat it, it respects the family.
Because everyone is already appalled that it happened, and have stated so above. The picture doesn’t convince anyone any more, its just ghastly.