RSS
Home
Staten Island City Councilmen don't 'see the point in bike lanes'
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
What's wrong with this picture?
Very little, until you put it alongside this one.
Queens has 27 bike lanes, paths, and routes. The Bronx has 14, stretching the entire length of the borough from Fordham to Mott Haven. Manhattan has 36, crossing the grid and circling the island. Brooklyn has a whopping 43. Staten Island has 11, most of which are short and disconnected.
Currently, the DOT plans to add five miles of bike lanes to New Dorp roads on Staten Island. Thank you, DOT, though the PLANYC has pledged to implement 200 miles of new bike lanes for cyclists to the five boroughs and it seems that once again, the island gets the table scraps instead of the main course.
The above is an image of the new five miles of shared bike routes. They will allow cyclists to better connect to the bike lanes along Father Capodanno Blvd and Bay St, which lead to the ferry terminal and along South Beach, Midland Beach, Miller Field, and the many parks in the center of the island.
And even so, these five miles are contested by Staten Island City Councilmen James Oddo, who claims "the neighborhood doesn't want them." City Councilman Vincent Ignizio calls these safety measures "luxuries," adding, "No one is biking to work from my district to Manhattan." These men ignore that:
A) People likely do and they have no clue (I ride the ferry with one man who rides his bike from Dongan Hills to work in Manhattan, and another who rides from Hugenot--to catch the 5 am boat).
B) Once the streets are safer, residents will be more inclined to commute by bicycle to Manhattan.
C) There are those who work on the island itself and wish to ride to work, or residents who cycle recreationally or on errand, who lack safe cycling routes.
The Staten Island Advance claims "neighbors who live on and around Jefferson say they're worried bike riders could get hurt if they're lulled by the street markings into a false sense of security on such a busy street."
Spare us the patronizing attempt at concern. Street markings, signs, and traffic rules are there for a reason. If drivers do not heed them and pay attention to their surroundings, then of course people will get hurt. Cyclists are not vulnerable in congested areas for nothing. If bike route markings give cyclists a "false" sense of security, it is because car operators are not driving safely.
Just because Staten Island is the most car-centric borough does not mean our elected officials ought to ignore those who desire alternative transportation over the costly burden of an automobile. The bus routes are roundabout and the train, though well-timed, only serves those living closest to the eastern shoreline. The Verrazano Bridge is auto-only.
In fact, this should be a wake-up call for the DOT and advocacy groups such as Transportation Alternatives to focus more energy on Staten Island. If cyclists do not feel safe riding in their own borough, it will discourage those who otherwise would commute by bike from the island to the other boroughs with more substantial infrastructure.
Besides being home to the most drivers, Staten Island also boasts the most green space and parks of all five. It's sad that our city councilmen show little interest in encouraging cycling on the island by providing safer roads, lessened pollution, and bicycle awareness to those who would otherwise have an interest in riding--especially by implementing lanes so close to family-friendly areas such as the parks and beaches. Sad that our city councilmen don't realize that safer roads aren't just a product of the quality of the asphalt, but of fewer cars, and their ignorance of how fewer cars lead to less wear and tear on the road, lessening the frequent need for repavement.
Sadder still that they are not willing to compromise on shared-road bike markings and signage--not even to speak of a separate bike lane, but simple awareness reminders--in tandem with re-paving the roads.
Apparently, Mr. Oddo does not understand what our "core" is "about," as he prefers to support those who drive while intoxicated and waste over $53,000 of campaign funds on personal expenses. Maybe Mr. Ignizio ought to re-read the mission statements of the Environmental Protection Committee, the Land Use Committee, the Standards and Ethics Committee, and the Transportation Committee on which he serves, after eschewing a measure that, by encouraging cycling, would cut down on pollution, increase physical fitness, better preserve the roads, and ease traffic congestion.
No wonder Staten Island cyclists don't feel safe.
Related Articles:
Comments
