NYPD apologizes for yesterday's Central Park ticketing

[fiamme red]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/nyregion/23cycle.html

[BillG]

That's pretty impressive.

[fiamme red]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/get_it_outta_park_x2GC5T4jUQDrn5Hd4RXhYK

A city lawmaker wants to turn Central Park and Prospect Park into no-drive zones.

City Councilwoman Gale Brewer (D-Manhattan) will introduce a bill today that would restrict vehicles from traveling along the main, 6-mile loop in Central Park and inside Brooklyn's Prospect Park...

[MerckxMad]

The reason the tickets were withdrawn, according to the article, was that they were returnable in Traffic Court, where they would most likely have been dismissed with laughter. In Criminal Court, the charge would have been for violating park rules and could have been taken more seriously.

[fiamme red]

The reason the tickets were withdrawn, according to the article, was that they were returnable in Traffic Court, where they would most likely have been dismissed with laughter. In Criminal Court, the charge would have been for violating park rules and could have been taken more seriously.The actions of the NYPD don't make sense. They go in person to someone's house to apologize for a summons that he received (which, by the way, I've never heard of the NYPD doing), which surely implies that he shouldn't have received it in the first place. Then the inspector states that the summonses have been voided because they were improperly issued (i.e., due to a technicality), not because they shouldn't have been issued at all.

[SEABREEZE]

Originally Posted by fiamme redThe official speed limit for cyclists is 15 mph, despite what the CP website says. Here's an article from 1991 when it was instituted.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...3C1A9679582 60

And there is one sign that clearly states a 15 mph speed limit (courtesy of NY Velocity):

Then you have ahumblecycler
Again, I do not know rules and such but a quick google search turned this up

http://www.centralparknyc.org/visit...cle-riding.html

Bicycle Riding

Offering both hilly and flat terrain, Central Park provides cyclists with varying levels of difficulty. Circling the entire Park, the drives provide three long-distance routes of 6.1 miles, 5.2 miles or 1.7 miles. There are shorter distances if you cross the Park at a number of scenic locations.

Bike Riding in Central ParkThe Park is closed to traffic on Monday through Friday, 10am to 3pm and 7pm to 7am the following morning, and weekends from 7pm Friday to 7am Monday. In addition, the East Drive is closed weekday mornings (open only 3pm to 7pm), and the West Drive is closed weekday afternoons (open only 7am to 10am). When the Park is open to traffic a bikers' lane is always available, though we do not recommend using the Drives when they are open to traffic. The Park is officially closed from 1am to 6am.

No permit is required to bike in Central park, however there are several laws and rules that every cyclist must obey:

* Pedestrians have the right of way at all times.
* At crosswalks, cyclists must slow down, yield to pedestrians and then proceed cautiously.
* Cycling is prohibited on all pedestrian pathways.
* Cyclists are required to obey all traffic laws, such as traffic signals, stop signs, and a maximum speed limit of 25 mph, though it is recommended they travel at a speed appropriate to their surroundings.* The law requires that children under 14 years of age wear a helmet, but it is recommended that all cyclists wear a helmet.
* They must always travel counterclockwise around the park.
* Cyclists must use only the outer half of the recreation lane when the drives are open to cars; when they are closed to cars, cyclists m

Then the NYT reporter writes

The speed at which Mr. Regen, 49, had been traveling as he coasted down a hill on West Drive inside the park was not terribly fast — 25 miles per hour, according to the ticket. That is the same speed at which cars are permitted to travel when the roads are open to them.

But parks department regulations dating from 1991 limit bike riders to 15 m.p.h, though even the police say this lower limit could be better posted inside the park.

So why and who is The Official Website of Central Park http://www.centralparknyc.org/visit...cle-riding.html
-Very confusing and misleading, One says one thing and the other says another.... WHO DO YOU BELEIVE

[rugbysecondrow]

Apologizing is hard to do, which I why I make a habit out of not doing it. :)

Hopefully some balance is struck and all parties are better for it going forward.

[Ray]

Apologizing is hard to do, which I why I make a habit out of not doing it. :)
I have to really know I was wrong in order to apologize - none of this "I'm sorry if what I said may have offended you" - that's both namby pamby because its pretty clear you're not sorry for anything you did (because you're NOT) and implies the other party is the jerk for taking offense (which they might have been!).

BUT...

When I know I made a mistake, I'm more than willing to apologize and mean it, and its AMAZING how much it disarms people when you just come right out and say "I was wrong - I blew it - sorry" and mean it. Folks generally just don't know what to do with that. They're usually all worked up and PO'ed and ready to tear you a new one and you just leave them with all of this hostile energy feeling vaguely stupid. You can't do it often (because that means you're screwing up a lot, which is a problem), but used judiciously, its the most effective thing you can imagine. And if you're in a passive aggressive enough mood when you do it, its even kind of fun to watch the apologizee try to deal with it. :D

-Ray

[Louis]

Seems to me the laws / rules could use some clarification.

[Dlevy05]

What a convoluted pile of crap. I'm getting even more pissed as I realize that it's the very same poor citizens of NY who received the tickets that are paying for these idiots to wake up every morning, sit around a table and decide everything from the speed limit itself, to 'How can we make more money today?'

Plus, a cop going door to dorr apologizing is a cop that NEEDS to find something better to do. There's enough damn crime out there already, and enough budgets being cut and policemen being laid off.

[EDS]

What a convoluted pile of crap. I'm getting even more pissed as I realize that it's the very same poor citizens of NY who received the tickets that are paying for these idiots to wake up every morning, sit around a table and decide everything from the speed limit itself, to 'How can we make more money today?'

Plus, a cop going door to dorr apologizing is a cop that NEEDS to find something better to do. There's enough damn crime out there already, and enough budgets being cut and policemen being laid off.


The NYPD spends $22 million annually on salary for cops that do nothing, but due to budget cuts the NYPD's staffing is now at its lowest point in two decades. So it makes complete sense to utilize NYPD officers in central park to trump up charges against cyclists as part of a political hissy fit.

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2011/03/nypd_has_22_milion_rubber_room.php#

[fiamme red]

From the Wall Street Journal:

A deputy inspector with the New York Police Department, Kim Royster, said nine of the tickets would be voided because the cyclists were "erroneously cited for a vehicle and traffic law violation." The remaining ticket was for 28 mph and was properly issued, she said. She later said the 10th ticket "will be reviewed and may be voided at a later date."

The 28-mile-an-hour biker? Michael Margarite, a 31-year-old who works at a private-equity fund and is an amateur racer. "At least they didn't get me doing an interval workout," Mr. Margarite said. His ticket was for $275.

So by coincidence, the one cyclist who was going faster than 25 mph also had his citation order him to appear in criminal court, not traffic court? I'm very confused. :confused:

[soul survivor]

Think this "apology" by the NYPD may have arose from involvement of the mayor's staff, who have been pushing the bike lanes big time.

[torquer]

Thread drift, perhaps, but on the same page that the Times published the article about the cops apologizing, they published the continuation of the page one story about the confusion on Long Island which led to one cop's death: "The accidental killing of a police officer by another has drawn focus to the phenomenon of police overresponse to a crime scene."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/nyregion/23nassau.html?ref=nyregion
Now this is tragic, versus the mere annoyance of the Central Park fiasco. And whether CP represents "overresponse" is debatable. But a similar atmosphere of confusion due to uncoordinated policies and overlapping responsibilities does appear to link the two situations.

[BobbyJones]

Ah...if the NYPD could only accept my apology instead of giving me a ticket.

Funny how that works.

At least they didn't shoot someone by mistake- this time.

[rugbysecondrow]

It is easy to kick the cops, but know this, they don't typically act on their own in instances like this. The police may be the hammer, but somebody else has a hold of handle. I would bet that there was a directive to use the police in this respect and when it backfired, they are using them again to take the fall.

As petty as issuing the tickets might have been, it is equally as cheap to take pot shots at the police like this. Look further up the chain folks.

[EDS]

It is easy to kick the cops, but know this, they don't typically act on their own in instances like this. The police may be the hammer, but somebody else has a hold of handle. I would bet that there was a directive to use the police in this respect and when it backfired, they are using them again to take the fall.

As petty as issuing the tickets might have been, it is equally as cheap to take pot shots at the police like this. Look further up the chain folks.

The police commissioner's involvement, and misuse of resources, is at issue.

[victoryfactory]

Devil's advocate:
I bet 90% of people who use the park are terrified of
25mph silent bikes sneaking up on them (or groups of bikes) surprising them and
startling them as they walk their dog or push their baby around. They just
go too fast for pedestrians to feel safe. They don't allow cars at certain
times so why would another wheeled vehicle traveling at 25mph (and
silent to boot) be ok ?

I also bet if they took a vote, the cyclists would be out, majority rule being
an imperfect concept.

The 10mph, upright tooling around idea of cycling that park planners and civilians have is very different from the training rides that we like to do as avid roadies.

Real road cycling doesn't really mix with traffic and pedestrians.

VF

[EDS]

Devil's advocate:
I bet 90% of people who use the park are terrified of
25mph silent bikes sneaking up on them (or groups of bikes) surprising them and
startling them as they walk their dog or push their baby around. They just
go too fast for pedestrians to feel safe. They don't allow cars at certain
times so why would another wheeled vehicle traveling at 25mph (and
silent to boot) be ok ?

I also bet if they took a vote, the cyclists would be out, majority rule being
an imperfect concept.

The 10mph, upright tooling around idea of cycling that park planners and civilians have is very different from the training rides that we like to do as avid roadies.

Real road cycling doesn't really mix with traffic and pedestrians.

VF

I encourage you to spend some time in central park on a weekday before 7 am. Fortunately, the obliviots are still in bed.

[Fixed]

every bike forum is talking about new york cops and bikes
cheers

[rugbysecondrow]

The police commissioner's involvement, and misuse of resources, is at issue.


I believe this. I just don't like to see the boots on the ground guys take it on the chin for policy/political directive issues.

[BobbyJones]

VF -So there's no misunderstanding, i'm saying this with friendly sarcasm:

The sidewalks next to the roadway are there because....?

I can't ride on the sidewalk - please don't walk in the roadway.
I can't ride my bike in a field - please don't walk your dog (off leash, no less) in the road.

And the "rec lane" on the side of the road? Yeah, the one with the bicycle painted on it - please stay of that one when you're walking with your baby, drinking coffee and texting. Yours is the one with the pedestrian looking thing painted on it, assuming you're afraid of the sidewalk that's completely separated from the roadway.


Devil's advocate:
I bet 90% of people who use the park are terrified of
25mph silent bikes sneaking up on them (or groups of bikes) surprising them and
startling them as they walk their dog or push their baby around. They just
go too fast for pedestrians to feel safe. They don't allow cars at certain
times so why would another wheeled vehicle traveling at 25mph (and
silent to boot) be ok ?

I also bet if they took a vote, the cyclists would be out, majority rule being
an imperfect concept.

The 10mph, upright tooling around idea of cycling that park planners and civilians have is very different from the training rides that we like to do as avid roadies.

Real road cycling doesn't really mix with traffic and pedestrians.

VF

[fiamme red]

VF -So there's no misunderstanding, i'm saying this with friendly sarcasm:

The sidewalks next to the roadway are there because....?Not to mention the many miles of paved trails in the park that are off-limit to bikes.

[firerescuefin]

Devil's advocate:
I bet 90% of people who use the park are terrified of
25mph silent bikes sneaking up on them (or groups of bikes) surprising them and
startling them as they walk their dog or push their baby around. They just
go too fast for pedestrians to feel safe. They don't allow cars at certain
times so why would another wheeled vehicle traveling at 25mph (and
silent to boot) be ok ?

I also bet if they took a vote, the cyclists would be out, majority rule being
an imperfect concept.

The 10mph, upright tooling around idea of cycling that park planners and civilians have is very different from the training rides that we like to do as avid roadies.

Real road cycling doesn't really mix with traffic and pedestrians.

VF

You can write a hundred responses why the reasoning used by VF is wrong.....but that won't change that this response is 100% spot on...not rational, but it perfectly summarizes the rationale leading up to the situation.

[victoryfactory]

You can write a hundred responses why the reasoning used by VF is wrong.....but that won't change that this response is 100% spot on...not rational, but it perfectly summarizes the rationale leading up to the situation.


Bingo!

I rest my case. It is not my reasoning it's my boss. (the devil)
When people are in a park and the traffic is not allowed, they will walk
wherever they want to. They won't follow rules, they wont stay in their lanes.
so cyclists become the bad guys because we are going too fast for them.


-Devil's advocate

[Dlevy05]

It's not just that. The second that people are given the freedom to use a pathway, the way they see fit, (walking, cycling, driving) there is always a group (in this case pedestrians) that are just too childish to take on the responsibility of looking out for their own lives. It is a pedestrians job to know what's around them at all times, especially because they are the most mobile of all moving things on a roadway. Yet somehow peds are some of the most oblivious moving targets around.

The fact that cyclists and cars need to yield to peds is backwards. It should be the other way around. Do you think it's any coincidence that on water, it is the smaller boats that yield to the larger ones? NO. It's common sense: the moving hazard that has the greater agility should yield, period. (This is assuming that all other laws are being followed)

But, the second you void the pedestrian of the responsibility to look out for their own lives, they assume the world will do it for them - And that's wrong. One should never assume that an outside source will care for their well being. The attitudes of pedestrians in the bay area vs Boston is the perfect proof of what I'm talking about.

[JD Smith]

The fact that cyclists and cars need to yield to peds is backwards. It should be the other way around. Do you think it's any coincidence that on water, it is the smaller boats that yield to the larger ones? NO. It's common sense: the moving hazard that has the greater agility should yield, period. (This is assuming that all other laws are being followed)

But, the second you void the pedestrian of the responsibility to look out for their own lives, they assume the world will do it for them - And that's wrong. One should never assume that an outside source will care for their well being. The attitudes of pedestrians in the bay area vs Boston is the perfect proof of what I'm talking about.

Wow. This is the exact same rationale used by car drivers in situations where a cyclist gets doored, buzzed, or nudged off the road.
Believing that those most capable of inflicting harm automatically get the benefit of the doubt is the lazy way out. It's the route taken by those who don't want to admit their actions, regardless of size, is a reflection of how they value human life. In a civilized society, we do assume others will take some care for others' well being. At the very least, when a life an death situation presents itself, we'll choose their well being over our perceived right to a small amount of space at a particular moment in time.
The reason we have special protections for children, the reason we take special care for the elderly and pregnant women is because they are the most vulnerable in so many situations. Would you say these groups should never expect others to take care for their well being? Traffic presents it's own unique situations, and has it's own group who are more vulnerable.

[Lifelover]

every bike forum is talking about new york cops and bikes
cheers

Amazing when you consider that only 10 tickets were issued. With all the whining you would have thought they issues 1000s

[EDS]

Amazing when you consider that only 10 tickets were issued. With all the whining you would have thought they issues 1000s

Yet you were compelled to read the thread. Hmm.

[Lifelover]

....

Real road cycling doesn't really mix with traffic and pedestrians.

VF

And real road cyclist don't want to mix with pedestrians.

I'll take my chances with cars over families out for a stroll any day. It is completely inconsiderate (and stupid) to ride in "training mode" anywhere where pedestrians are allowed or expected. This is just as true in rural settings as a city setting.

If that is your only option for a location to train you should find a different hobby.

[Dlevy05]

Wow. This is the exact same rationale used by car drivers in situations where a cyclist gets doored, buzzed, or nudged off the road.
Believing that those most capable of inflicting harm automatically get the benefit of the doubt is the lazy way out. It's the route taken by those who don't want to admit their actions, regardless of size, is a reflection of how they value human life. In a civilized society, we do assume others will take some care for others' well being. At the very least, when a life an death situation presents itself, we'll choose their well being over our perceived right to a small amount of space at a particular moment in time.
The reason we have special protections for children, the reason we take special care for the elderly and pregnant women is because they are the most vulnerable in so many situations. Would you say these groups should never expect others to take care for their well being? Traffic presents it's own unique situations, and has it's own group who are more vulnerable.

I have to say:

1. I disagree, and
2. I wasn't referring to anything connected to life and death in society (elderly, children, etc). I think either you did not interpret my statement correctly, or I failed to speak clearly.

Granted that I said "...assuming all other laws are followed..."

Any situation resulting in a cyclist or ped. getting nudged off the road, buzzed or doored is a result of negligence on the part of the driver.

For instance, the 'all too common remedy' of a cyclists' fear of being doored, would be to create a wider bike lane, or something targeting the SYMPTOM..

When, in in fact, the PROBLEM was that the driver was not aware of his surroundings, and didn't take responsibility for the space around him.

It is simply a matter of confusing the symptom and the actual problem that's going on here.

I see no reason why cyclists need to adhere to a 15mph speed limit. The government, having the ability to create boundaries for its citizens, needs to delegate responsibility accordingly, and in this scenario, bicyclists have been restricted, in an attempt to be forced to take on the responsibility of the pedestrian. However, if there really is a need to increase peds' safety, it should be done so by solving the problem, not targeting a symptom. Additionally, doing so is only catering to the ridiculous fears of the peds. If peds are being hit, and their lives are in danger, then the real problem lies beyond an arbitrary speed limit.

[Lifelover]

I have to say:

1. I disagree, and
2. I wasn't referring to anything connected to life and death in society (elderly, children, etc). I think either you did not interpret my statement correctly, or I failed to speak clearly.

Granted that I said "...assuming all other laws are followed..."

Any situation resulting in a cyclist or ped. getting nudged off the road, buzzed or doored is a result of negligence on the part of the driver.

For instance, the 'all too common remedy' of a cyclists' fear of being doored, would be to create a wider bike lane, or something targeting the SYMPTOM..

When, in in fact, the PROBLEM was that the driver was not aware of his surroundings, and didn't take responsibility for the space around him.

It is simply a matter of confusing the symptom and the actual problem that's going on here.

I see no reason why cyclists need to adhere to a 15mph speed limit. The government, having the ability to create boundaries for its citizens, needs to delegate responsibility accordingly, and in this scenario, bicyclists have been restricted, in an attempt to be forced to take on the responsibility of the pedestrian. However, if there really is a need to increase peds' safety, it should be done so by solving the problem, not targeting a symptom. Additionally, doing so is only catering to the ridiculous fears of the peds. If peds are being hit, and their lives are in danger, then the real problem lies beyond an arbitrary speed limit.

What are you talking about? The problem is a simple one.

At some given speed, cyclist and peds can not safely utilize the same space.
The only available answers are to eliminate the cyclist or the ped, or limit the speed.

YOU may not agree the the safe limit is 15 MPH, but that does not make it arbitrary.

[Dlevy05]

Do you think the 25mph speed limit for cars in residential areas is because 25 really is the safest speed one can go on those roads given the conditions?

A speed limit doesn't solve anything but offer more time (given that the same scenarios would happen at a higher rate of speed) for the ped and the cyclist to react. But it doesn't prevent the actual dangerous scenarios from happening. Either a more proper delegation of responsibility between the cyclist and the ped, separate lanes, or whatever else, would solve the actual problem.

YOU may agree with the limit, doesn't make it reasoned or rational.

[victoryfactory]

This whole issue is about directing traffic in a way that
allows lots of people with different interests to use the
same limited space without hurting each other.
Here in the West we try to use laws, signage, enforcement
etc. In the rest of the world the biggest vehicle always has
right of way and there is a pecking order after that. I promise
you that if you pull that head down cell phone talking not
even looking up crap in Malaysia or Indonesia or china or
Thailand or Dominican etc etc you will be run down.
So which way do we want? Rules that limit our freedom
and which nobody follows anyway or the third world style
might is right unwritten rules which if not followed lead to
accidents?
Great thread.

VF

[rugbysecondrow]

This whole issue is about directing traffic in a way that
allows lots of people with different interests to use the
same limited space without hurting each other.
Here in the West we try to use laws, signage, enforcement
etc. In the rest of the world the biggest vehicle always has
right of way and there is a pecking order after that. I promise
you that if you pull that head down cell phone talking not
even looking up crap in Malaysia or Indonesia or china or
Thailand or Dominican etc etc you will be run down.
So which way do we want? Rules that limit our freedom
and which nobody follows anyway or the third world style
might is right unwritten rules which if not followed lead to
accidents?
Great thread.

VF

Stop making sense VF.

[zap]

Creeping along is about as safe as one can go when peds are about.

Probably the best thing cyclists can do in NYC is get together and lobby for some cycling time in CP, say early am. No peds-no red lights-etc.

[r_mutt]

there are many nuances in play in central park for the cyclist. pedestrian traffic is dependent on time of day. most of the cyclists who are training for racing, are in the park at 5:30 am until about 7:30 am and after 7:00 pm when the park is closed to traffic. it's filled (it used be to anyway) with tri-athletes, cyclists and runners. there are no families crossing the park in the am. the issue is that these "laws" are being enforced when there is no car traffic, very little pedestrian traffic, and all of a sudden with no warning.

no one who is an active racer is usually training in the park on the weekend when tourists are there (unless a race is scheduled at 6 am). the cyclists who are going full tilt on the weekend and are yelling at tourists when the park is extremely busy are usually weekend warriors and the cyclists who rides their bike 10 days a year. i would bet that most avid cyclists are fairly responsible when riding in CP in regards to pedestrians crossing the street. of course, i may be wrong.

like the other thread that was closed, it's difficult to understand the situation in Central park unless you actively ride there. sorry rugbysecondrow, but there is some truth to that statement.




And real road cyclist don't want to mix with pedestrians.

I'll take my chances with cars over families out for a stroll any day. It is completely inconsiderate (and stupid) to ride in "training mode" anywhere where pedestrians are allowed or expected. This is just as true in rural settings as a city setting.

If that is your only option for a location to train you should find a different hobby.

[rugbysecondrow]

like the other thread that was closed, it's difficult to understand the situation in Central park unless you actively ride there. sorry rugbysecondrow, but there is some truth to that statement.

I don't disagree, but there is nuance to many places we all ride. My point is not that riding in CP doesn't have challenges, but that many of those challenges are similar to challenges elsewhere in the US as well. Its not like it is the only park where pedestrians and cyclist have to coexist.

I guess I see more similarities than differences in most situations.

[EDS]

YOU may not agree the the safe limit is 15 MPH, but that does not make it arbitrary.

It is arbitrary when it is in fact not the legal speed limit, as has been acknowledged by the parks department.

[r_mutt]

I don't disagree, but there is nuance to many places we all ride. My point is not that riding in CP doesn't have challenges, but that many of those challenges are similar to challenges elsewhere in the US as well. Its not like it is the only park where pedestrians and cyclist have to coexist.

I guess I see more similarities than differences in most situations.


:beer:

[zap]

Have to agree with the Rugby dude, CP is not that unique with regards to cyclists vs other park users.

[torquer]

This just in:
"On Wednesday, the Department of Parks and Recreation disavowed the 15 mile-per-hour speed limit for cyclists that it announced two decades ago and which is posted in small print on signs found in Central Park.

Officials with the parks department said the inclusion of the 15 m.p.h. limit on the signs, which enumerate many park rules, down to the ban on picking flowers, was an oversight."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/nyregion/24bike.html?src=me
I originally heard it on NPR (or maybe WNYC, their local affiliate) this morning.

[r_mutt]

Have to agree with the Rugby dude, CP is not that unique with regards to cyclists vs other park users.

on paper yes, this is true. but in reality, not really. this is not something that can be read about and fully understood. again, have you ridden in central park with any consistency anytime in the last year? do other parks give out phantom speeding tickets? do they not enforce stop signs for 40+ years, and then decide to enforce them randomly? it's not a black and white issue. i'd rather not have this discussion all over again with someone who reads about it and believes that they can grasp the situation.

[victoryfactory]

This just in:
"On Wednesday, the Department of Parks and Recreation disavowed the 15 mile-per-hour speed limit for cyclists that it announced two decades ago and which is posted in small print on signs found in Central Park.

Officials with the parks department said the inclusion of the 15 m.p.h. limit on the signs, which enumerate many park rules, down to the ban on picking flowers, was an oversight."
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/nyregion/24bike.html?src=me
I originally heard it on NPR (or maybe WNYC, their local affiliate) this morning.


That is an outstanding and unusual occurrence. Kudos to the city.
Thanks for posting.
And let's get back out there in the early AM to train.

VF

[soul survivor]

Riding and traffic laws pose difficult issues because of the inconsistency in enforcement. For example, in Bergen County, I have not in the last 10 years been stopped for going through a red light or stop sign. However, in Piermont/West Nyack in NYS (just over the border from Bergen County), I have been stopped for slowly going through a stop sign.

The issue is expectations -- if the police simply took the position that they were going to enforce all traffic laws against riders -- as they surely could -- then riders would know the rules and either obey or pay the consequences. Becauase the police haphazardly enforce the rules, the riders simply don't know what to expect. That's unfair.

[Bob Ross]

do they not enforce stop signs for 40+ years, and then decide to enforce them randomly?

^^^That really is the crux of the issue now. It's not like anyone is clamoring for a special dispensation to be allowed to break the law or terrorize pedestrians; we're simply asking that circumstances revert to the way they've been for decades, because any excuse offered for why those circumstances (suddenly, inexplicably, & without warning or justification) changed reeks of politics, abuse of power, and outright lies. Since the beginning of this year there's been an officially sanctioned witch hunt against competitive- and fitness-oriented cyclists, and that is what makes the current Central Park situation very different from nearly any other MUP.

[SEABREEZE]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/nyregion/24bike.html?src=me

Vickie Karp, a parks department spokeswoman, said the signs were outdated and placed there in the 1990s by the Central Park Conservancy, the private nonprofit group that helps manage the park. The signs would be removed, Ms. Karp said. The parks department’s position, she said, was that cyclists must follow the same speed limit, 25 m.p.h., that the Transportation Department set for the roadways.

ON THE NET Central Park Conservancy SITE

http://www.centralparknyc.org/visit...cle-riding.html

Bicycle Riding

Offering both hilly and flat terrain, Central Park provides cyclists with varying levels of difficulty. Circling the entire Park, the drives provide three long-distance routes of 6.1 miles, 5.2 miles or 1.7 miles. There are shorter distances if you cross the Park at a number of scenic locations.

Bike Riding in Central ParkThe Park is closed to traffic on Monday through Friday, 10am to 3pm and 7pm to 7am the following morning, and weekends from 7pm Friday to 7am Monday. In addition, the East Drive is closed weekday mornings (open only 3pm to 7pm), and the West Drive is closed weekday afternoons (open only 7am to 10am). When the Park is open to traffic a bikers' lane is always available, though we do not recommend using the Drives when they are open to traffic. The Park is officially closed from 1am to 6am.

No permit is required to bike in Central park, however there are several laws and rules that every cyclist must obey:

* Pedestrians have the right of way at all times.
* At crosswalks, cyclists must slow down, yield to pedestrians and then proceed cautiously.
* Cycling is prohibited on all pedestrian pathways.
* Cyclists are required to obey all traffic laws, such as traffic signals, stop signs, and a maximum speed limit of 25 mph, though it is recommended they travel at a speed appropriate to their surroundings.* The law requires that children under 14 years of age wear a helmet, but it is recommended that all cyclists wear a helmet.
* They must always travel counterclockwise around the park.
* Cyclists must use only the outer half of the recreation lane when the drives are open to cars; when they are closed to cars, cyclists m

__________________________________________________ _____

The above info was on Central Park Conservancy site prior to the issuing of tickets.
Some city department didn't do there research, enforcing someting that was already changed...
As one can see, this had to be cleared by some city official for the conservancy to post.. IMHO they had no choice but to void the tickets. Futermore the Conservancy or who ever was responsible to do so, never bothered to change the prior 15 mph limit for bikes, on the signs, once the rules changed

However the media dont tell the story this way.

[Lifelover]

^^^.... that is what makes the current Central Park situation very different from nearly any other MUP.


What makes the CP situation different is that only people from NYC would bitch and whine this much about the city issuing 10 tickets in the last few decades!

It was 10 tickets, not marshall law!

[BobbyJones]

This is getting old.

Again, feel free to come on up and ride a few miles in our shoes.



What makes the CP situation different is that only people from NYC would bitch and whine this much about the city issuing 10 tickets in the last few decades!

It was 10 tickets, not marshall law!

[Bob Ross]

What makes the CP situation different is that only people from NYC would bitch and whine this much about the city issuing 10 tickets in the last few decades!

It was 10 tickets, not marshall law!


You haven't been paying attention.

It was 10 speeding tickets on Tuesday alone.

Since January there have been several dozens ** of tickets for running a traffic light...during the hours that the park is officially "traffic-free".


** edit: 230, according to this article: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2011/03/quit-picking-on-the-bicyclists-city-councilmembers-tell-nypd

[r_mutt]

What makes the CP situation different is that only people from NYC would bitch and whine this much about the city issuing 10 tickets in the last few decades!

It was 10 tickets, not marshall law!

from Amy Archer in "The Hudsucker Proxy"

"Norville Barnes, you don't know a thing about that woman. You don't know who she really is. Only a numbskull thinks he knows things about things he knows nothing about."

[Lifelover]

You haven't been paying attention.

It was 10 speeding tickets on Tuesday alone.

Since January there have been several dozens of tickets for running a traffic light...during the hours that the park is officially "traffic-free".


I get it now. I was not aware that in NYC traffic lights do not need to be obeyed on off hours!

That would explain a lot I see from drivers with NY plates around here.

[SEABREEZE]

What makes the CP situation different is that only people from NYC would bitch and whine this much about the city issuing 10 tickets in the last few decades!

It was 10 tickets, not marshall law!


Just like to point out the fact if something is incorrect and one complains about it, be they from Chicago , Detroit, LA, San Fran, Virgina Beach, and then the tickets are voided, its clear to me that there bitching as you describe it, is justified.

If you received a ticket locally, and you thought it was incorrect , you to would protest it.

[rugbysecondrow]

If you received a ticket locally, and you thought it was incorrect , you to would protest it.
You are correct.

As an outsider, I can value the perspective of the insiders, but there is something to be said for distant perspectives. As I read the article and listen to you all, it seems that there are issues in the city as a whole regarding cyclists/bike riders, bike lanes, interaction with peds, residents, traffic etc. The recent actions at CP seems to be a symptom of that, rather than the problem itself. It seems animosity isn't confined to CP but are fairly widespread across the city. These individual tickets might solve a mini-problem, but the issues seem much greater to me? It is with that perspective, correct or incorrect, that I think precedent in CP is not the issue, but rather cyclists and cycling in the city as a whole.

Am I misunderstanding? I likely am, but trying to make sense of some of this. I understand that many would just like it to "go back to the way it was", but change is inevitable and has to be managed. I have never been able to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[Bob Ross]

I was not aware that in NYC traffic lights do not need to be obeyed on off hours!

For the few -- well, actually there's 47 of them, not sure that counts as a few -- that actually do have "off hours", yes, historically there has been no necessity for adherance to traffic laws that apply during "on hours".

[Ahneida Ride]

The government, having the ability to create boundaries for its citizens,


We the People should (and have in the US Constitution) create boundaries
on the Government.

[SEABREEZE]

You are correct.

As an outsider, I can value the perspective of the insiders, but there is something to be said for distant perspectives. As I read the article and listen to you all, it seems that there are issues in the city as a whole regarding cyclists/bike riders, bike lanes, interaction with peds, residents, traffic etc. The recent actions at CP seems to be a symptom of that, rather than the problem itself. It seems animosity isn't confined to CP but are fairly widespread across the city. These individual tickets might solve a mini-problem, but the issues seem much greater to me? It is with that perspective, correct or incorrect, that I think precedent in CP is not the issue, but rather cyclists and cycling in the city as a whole.

Am I misunderstanding? I likely am, but trying to make sense of some of this. I understand that many would just like it to "go back to the way it was", but change is inevitable and has to be managed. I have never been able to put the toothpaste back in the tube.


Yes I beleive its the cumalative effect of the present situation city wide with regards to the crack down of bicyclist.

Others have already pointed out its the weekend warriors, the recreation riders, the walking pedestrians, and runners not following the rules in the park and city streets.

Sure the competitive early am riders are being affected, especially when they are finished by 7.30 am, when the park is virtually empty.

It sucks, but the city has to draw the line, regardless of who is affected.

To many complaints by citizens of the city.

In Dade county Fl, they out lawed pit bulls, because of all the incompitent dog owners. So the entire county is now subject to this, because of the few, same applies to NYC because of the more than few, because the city is so populated, the law obiding have to pay for it.

This can be said of many laws local municipalities introduce that the majority it infuriates. Do we like it, no it sucks, but we have to deal with it.

[r_mutt]

We the People should (and have in the US Constitution) create boundaries
on the Government.


:beer:

[BumbleBeeDave]

It's effin' New York effin' CITY!

EVERYBODY there has issues with EVERYBODY! Look sideways at somebody in the car next to you and get shot! People punch each other out over whether it's OK to eat spaghetti on the subway! Every day is a different near riot with different participants! It's law of the effin' JUNGLE! :rolleyes:

http://sleepny.lefora.com/2011/03/18/fight-on-new-york-city-subway-over-spaghetti/

Keep your eyes open, your mouth shut, and your hand on your wallet (and your spaghetti!) if you value your life and ever want to see your family again! :eek: :crap: :help:

BBD

As I read the article and listen to you all, it seems that there are issues in the city as a whole regarding cyclists/bike riders, bike lanes, interaction with peds, residents, traffic etc.

[54ny77]

So awesome. "Spaghetti Subway Wars: Revenge of the Sauce." :hello:

It's effin' New York effin' CITY!

EVERYBODY there has issues with EVERYBODY! Look sideways at somebody in the car next to you and get shot! People punch each other out over whether it's OK to eat spaghetti on the subway! Every day is a different near riot with different participants! It's law of the effin' JUNGLE! :rolleyes:

http://sleepny.lefora.com/2011/03/18/fight-on-new-york-city-subway-over-spaghetti/

Keep your eyes open, your mouth shut, and your hand on your wallet (and your spaghetti!) if you value your life and ever want to see your family again! :eek: :crap: :help:

BBD

[fiamme red]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/get_it_outta_park_x2GC5T4jUQDrn5Hd4RXhYK

A city lawmaker wants to turn Central Park and Prospect Park into no-drive zones.

City Councilwoman Gale Brewer (D-Manhattan) will introduce a bill today that would restrict vehicles from traveling along the main, 6-mile loop in Central Park and inside Brooklyn's Prospect Park...http://brooklyn.ny1.com/content/top_stories/136228/mayor-expresses-opposition-to-bill-banning-traffic-in-parks

"If you did not allow cars in the park during rush hour, and, for example, these parks don't totally, generally they don't allow cars other than at rush hour, if you didn't do that the rest of the city streets would be overloaded and it would create an awful lot of traffic,” said the mayor.

Says the guy who made Broadway into Narrowway and turned Times and Herald Squares into tourist lounges. :rolleyes:

[r_mutt]

the real deal:

bikelash (http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2011/03/28/the-bikelash-continues/?cm_mmc=Twitter-_-Bicycling-_-Content-Blog-_-RoadRightsBikelash)

[deanster]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/nyregion/23cycle.html

With some of the really bad publicity recently where cops have knocked riders to the ground it is just a nice gesture to the bike community that not all cops are bad...just a simple message.

[BumbleBeeDave]

the real deal:

bikelash (http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2011/03/28/the-bikelash-continues/?cm_mmc=Twitter-_-Bicycling-_-Content-Blog-_-RoadRightsBikelash)

. . . and statement of the situation. Mionske is right on target, as usual.

BBD