Sections

City: Ends justify the means on the Prospect Park West bike lane

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Get our stories in your inbox, free.

Like The Brooklyn Paper on Facebook.

Does Machiavelli ride the Prospect Park West bike lane?

City lawyers sounded a bit like the 15th-century Italian political theorist in court papers this week, partly arguing that when it comes to the controversial cycle path, the ends justify the means.

Responding to a lawsuit by bike lane opponents, the city fired back that installing the two-way protected cycle was done only after extensive analysis and a process that was “rational and reasonable in all respects.”

The legal brief — filed on June 9 in Brooklyn Supreme Court — also points out that the city charter gives the Department of Transportation sole power over regulating vehicular and pedestrian travel.

The brief argues that the lane did just that, calming traffic, providing better park access and stopping cyclists from riding on the sidewalk.

“These three goals were all met,” it reads.

But the brief skims over some of the legal questions raised in a lawsuit filed by Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes, which argued that the city fudged data and silenced opposition before and while it installed the controversial bike lane.

“Their papers are replete with factual, logical and legal flaws,” said lawyer Jim Walden, who represents Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes.

The documents come in response to the March lawsuit filed by the two ad-hoc neighborhood groups that claim the “experimental” cycle path has created dangerously “inconsistent traffic patterns” and “limited visibility.”

That lawsuit also alleges that the Department of Transportation intentionally mislead the public and tried to silence bike lane opposition, citing an exchange between an assistant transportation commissioner and a bike blogger that discusses “neutralizing” anti-bike lane efforts.

Last year, the city removed a lane of traffic to install the two-way bike path at the request of Community Board 6, which hoped to calm traffic on the hectic street.

There was some opposition — drivers and senior citizens among them — before the lane was painted last June, but protests took off in earnest when the lane, which runs from Grand Army Plaza to 15th Street, was finally installed last summer.

Since then, the Department of Transportation has consistently trumpeted it as a success because fewer cars now speed on the formerly three-lane boulevard, and fewer cyclists get into accidents. Polls also show that residents are largely in support of the bike lane, with 44 percent wanting to keep the bike lane exactly as it is and only 28 percent wanting it removed entirely.

The city is now moving to dress up the lane with plans that include pedestrian islands and rumble strips — basically small speed bumps for cyclists — designed to please opponents and make the street less chaotic.

The rumble strips — essentially speed bumps to alert cyclists that they are approaching a pedestrian crossing — were installed this week.

Critics still call the changes “cosmetic” and “too little, too late.”

Updated 6:17 pm, June 17, 2011: Alters the story slightly.
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Get our stories in your inbox, free.

Like The Brooklyn Paper on Facebook.

Reader Feedback

ty from pps says:
Natalie O'Neill and her stupid brain strikes again!

The ends justify the means? Did you actually *read* the legal response?!

It argued exactly the opposite. It CLEARLY showed the long community-based process, the clear evidence supporting the installation, the clear evidence of the success post-installation, etc. etc. etc.

What MEANS are you talking about?!

AARGH! I wish someone would take away your computer. You're obviously not smart enough to read or write with any semblance of rationality.
June 17, 2011, 10:23 am
Steve from PPW says:
If by the "means" Natalie O'Neill means a four-year long public process with numerous community board meetings and volunteer work, the support of local city council members and neighborhood residents, and a bottom-up, data-driven approach to studying the street, then, yes...

...the ends justify the means.

Why must the Brooklyn Paper continue to sow controversy and attempt to pit neighbor against neighbor? Why can't Brooklyn get a newspaper and reporters who actually respect the people who live here and want to it to be a better place? Shame on Natalie and Gersh.
June 17, 2011, 10:50 am
Steve from PPW says:
Critics still call the changes “cosmetic” and “too little, too late.”

---

Which critics? Who are you quoting here? This is not journalism.
June 17, 2011, 10:51 am
Dave from Park Slope says:
Hard to decide which is more nonsensical: this article or Jim Walden's "legal" papers.

Soon this absurd anti-community, anti-safety lawsuit will be a fading memory.
June 17, 2011, 10:53 am
L from PPW says:
Really? Jim Walden thinks the city's legal papers, which are filled with more footnotes and supporting documents on one page than you can find in Walden's entire filing on behalf of NBBL, "are replete with factual, logical and legal flaws."

Pot, meet kettle.
June 17, 2011, 10:58 am
Mike says:
This is among the most ludicrously biased articles I've read at the Brooklyn Paper. Must be the NYPost overlords. Gersh, what's going ON?
June 17, 2011, 11:13 am
Jerry from Park Slope says:
Natalie, you should be embarrassed to have your name on this garbage. Maybe not as embarassed as Jim Walden, but you should still be pretty ashamed. Did you even read the briefing?
June 17, 2011, 11:26 am
Jym from PLG says:
=v= This reporting is simply astonishing. It would seem that Ms. O'Neill is angling for a promotion somewhere higher up in Rupert Murdoch's media empire, and the prerequisite for that is to abandon the reality-based community entirely. Fox News, here she comes!
June 17, 2011, 12:04 pm
eliot from park slope says:
Um, Natalie, did you actually read the brief? It deals quite extensively with the lawsuit's allegations on data and methodology, specifically on pages 12-15. Here's just one example, among many:

"p. 13: “Petitioners, and their purported expert, accountant Eric Fox, take issue with DOT’s use of three-year averages in its crash analysis. ..
Petitioners, however, fail to square their assertions with the accepted industry practice of using three years’ worth of data when performing before and after crash comparisons….For this reason, DOT typically uses three years of before-crash data when evaluating traffic improvements (and indeed, used three-year data in April 2009 when it originally presented the PPW Project plan to the Community Board)…And even if there were any validity to petitioners’ criticisms of DOT’s use of three-year-average data, the most relevant indicator — crashes involving injuries — dropped by 50 percent between 2009 and 2010, and dropped by 33 percent in the same period if “side street” crashes are omitted.”

Ok, not exactly beach reading, but as a reporter you should be able to read legal documents.
June 17, 2011, 12:16 pm
Kalahari Dessert from Bklyn says:
Meanwhile, Iris Schumer (whose idea it was to make the City waste a bunch of money on this ridiculous lawsuit) gets fatter and fatter (both physically and in the metaphorical corrupt Brooklyn political manner). And we won't even mention her demagogue hubby, so famous for giving the go ahead to George Bush on the Iraq War and then whining when the country and City's coffers went empty. What a couple!!! They should move to LA if they love cars so much.
June 17, 2011, 12:23 pm
an editor from the brooklyn paper says:
Natalie, this is unacceptable work. Please see revisions below:

(sensationalist lede removed)

Responding to a lawsuit by bike lane opponents, the city fired back that the two-way protected cycle route has been a safety success and described a lengthy community process as proof that installation of the lane is “rational and reasonable in all respects.”

The legal brief — filed on June 9 in Brooklyn Supreme Court — declares that the lane has calmed traffic, provided better park access and stopped cyclists from riding on the sidewalk.

“These three goals were all met,” it notes.

The brief responds at length to the central claim in the lawsuit filed by Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes, but critics remain unsatisfied.

Jim Walden, who represents Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes. responded that “Their papers are replete with factual, logical and legal flaws,” but declined to offer any specific examples.

The documents come in response to the March lawsuit filed by the two ad-hoc neighborhood groups that claim the “experimental” cycle path has created dangerously “inconsistent traffic patterns” and “limited visibility.”

That lawsuit also alleges that the Department of Transportation intentionally mislead the public and tried to silence bike lane opposition, citing an exchange between an assistant transportation commissioner and a bike blogger that discusses “neutralizing” anti-bike lane efforts.

Last year, the city removed a lane of traffic to install the two-way bike path at the request of Community Board 6, which hoped to calm traffic on the hectic street.

There was little opposition before the lane was painted last June, but opponents organized one protest this winter. Supporters of the lane have organized a number of rallies and "family rides" with thousands in attendance.

The Department of Transportation has consistently trumpeted it as a success because fewer cars now speed on the formerly three-lane boulevard, and fewer cyclists get into accidents. Polls also show that residents are largely in support of the bike lane, with 44 percent wanting to keep the bike lane exactly as it is, 28 percent wanting to keep it with improvements and only 28 percent wanting it removed entirely.

The city is now moving to dress up the lane with plans that include pedestrian islands and rumble strips — basically small speed bumps for cyclists — designed to please opponents and make the street less chaotic.

The rumble strips — essentially speed bumps to alert cyclists that they are approaching a pedestrian crossing — were installed this week.
June 17, 2011, 12:32 pm
Gary from PPW says:
Absolute crap analysis, Natalie. Who really wrote this? Louise Hainline?
June 17, 2011, 12:58 pm
Tom from Around says:
Natalie is an award winning graduate of the Gersh Kuntzman School of Snarky Pseudo-Journalism! How dare any of you criticize her! Or him! Or it!

Just mourn for the formerly great Brooklyn Paper before Murdoch got hold of it and created a nest of Natalies...
June 17, 2011, 1:09 pm
Community Member from Brooklyn says:
Natalie:

The City's response to the law suit and Brad Lander and Richard Bashner's amicus brief goes into great detail about the community proces -- the "means" -- that led to the "ends" of a two-way protected bike path on PPW. How in the world could you possibly call this process Machiavellian?

http://www.streetsblog.org/2011/06/16/citys-response-to-ppw-lawsuit-matter-of-factly-dismantles-nbbl-claims

I know, I know. Everything is just a big joke to your editor Gersh Kuntzman. And you certainly don't get paid enough to bother reading legal briefs. And if you write a few more bike lane hit-jobs, you'll be off to greener pastures at the New York Post.

But it's still kind of sad. The Brooklyn Paper used to do good work. It used to be a real voice for our communities. Something has changed. What happened?
June 17, 2011, 2:13 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Even I think Natalie's reporting is bad on this issue and she is not right about something that people know about.
June 17, 2011, 4:17 pm
Jacob from Clinton Hill says:
This is a new low for journalism. This article is extremely biased from start to finish, reporting opinions as facts, and omitting the actual facts. Disgraceful.
June 17, 2011, 4:20 pm
Jacob from Clinton Hill says:
Wow, "an editor from the brooklyn paper" made a version that actually reads like a legitimate news story. I guess I'll just read that one instead.
June 17, 2011, 4:23 pm
Jacob from Clinton Hill says:
Natalie, for an example of how to write a legitimate news story about this issue, you may want to read this, since this is where my readership is going:
http://parkslope.patch.com/articles/city-ppw-bike-lane-is-in-best-location

Then you could read the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standards
which lists "truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability" as the foundations of ethical journalism. Sadly, Natalie, your article meets almost none of those standards.
June 17, 2011, 4:29 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
First off, enough with the impersonations, especially from you bike zealouts. Let me ask you all something. Does the news always have to agree with whenever your read or hear it? Is it only biased when they disagree with you? What if O'Neill agreed with you? Would put her on a pedestal just for that? You have to learn that you live in a country where not everyone has to agree with you. As for that "End justifies the means claim", I never bought into it, because nobody should get something that was done in such esoteric measures. This isn't just the bike lanes, there have been other major projects that have done this as well and that includes the WTC site and Atlantic Yards, and there are many just like you who get defensive over what is going on there despite how many back room deals were done for those as well. I guess I am one of the few here that can see what is really going on, while the rest just keep on drinking that koolaid that they are given so much.
June 17, 2011, 4:39 pm
Mike from Downtown BK says:
This is really poor journalism. If you read the legal brief, and even if you tally up the amount of space devoted to various topics, it clearly does not "virtually ignore" the charge related to data analysis. In terms of the charge of silencing opposition, it's not even clear how a city agency would do that. What does that charge even mean? That agency officials spoke to members of community groups? Is that such a novel thing?
June 17, 2011, 5:08 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal,

First of all nobody is a bike zealot.

Second. There were no back room deals. Just because you (from far, far away) did not plan / approve the lanes does not mean there was no community input.

More importantly. WHAT???
June 17, 2011, 5:29 pm
Ty from pps says:
So, it seems most of Brooklyn agrees... Natalie, shape up or... well... or... keep writing the same sensationalist, fact-free crap that you boss seems to love to publish.
June 17, 2011, 5:37 pm
Or from Yellow Hook says:
More Pol Pot than Machiavelli
June 17, 2011, 5:47 pm
eliot from park slope says:
Tal -- No, responsible journalism doesn't have to align with my personal opinion -- but it does have to align with reality.

This article claims that the City's brief "largely ignores" something that it in fact devotes several pages to directly addressing.

It's right there, in plain English, for anyone to read.

The author pretends it's not there. In other words, she is lying.
June 17, 2011, 5:59 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
First off, I believe that there is no such thing as bike zealouts as much as I believe that there is nobody calling for Israel to be wiped off the map, and I suggest you read the blog of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, because he has called for it. Anyway, none of you have answered my questions. I still think it's because she doesn't take your side. For the record, I do look at Streetsblog, and I have seen numerous personal attacks on anyone who has opposed bike lanes, especially on NBBL and those that side with them. Keep in mind that data can be fudged. Also, Hainline does have a camera that looks at that very bike lane, so anything she reports is not done arbitrairly.
June 17, 2011, 8:13 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal

This article reads more like a press release. It just does.

Hanlnie's camera is 100% arbitrary. She shows the medial what she wants to. You believe what you want to.

When was the last time you were on PPW?
June 17, 2011, 8:26 pm
Peter from Brooklyn Heights says:
Natalie/Gersh
For crying out out..you both should be ashamed of yourselves for this, and shame on the Brooklyn Paper for letting it see the light of day.

I'd call it 'drek', but drek would be insulted.
June 17, 2011, 10:32 pm
judahspechal from bedstuy says:
In the internet age we have lost all sense of reality from make believe. This case proves it. Can anyone truly say who's against & who's for. The pro lane people come in force. Don't believe me? Say something against bike lane. You'll find out.
June 17, 2011, 10:37 pm
Peter Kaufman from Brooklyn Heights says:
Jane,
I suggest you read both the plaintiff's brief, and the city's response (they're both available over at streetsblogs).

Long story short, the lane was put in at the request of the local Community Board, which has repeatedly voted in favor of it.

Multiple meetings and public hearings were held.

The reporter of this article should be embarrassed for parrotting what Jim Walden (the plaintiff's attorney) says.

This coming week, barring further delay, NBBL's lawsuit will be bounced out of court.

Now go and enjoy the lane, and help us get some in Bay Ridge. :)
June 18, 2011, 7 am
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
I will finally get a chance to see this unwanted bike lane in person when I drive to go to the court hearing on Wednesday. I am looking forward to walking on it and finally measuring how long it is myself and to meet the ten thousand people at the courthouse who will be there to show that they do not like this bike lane. I promise I will be there to show what is going on and that you don't just have to be from America to participate in the justice system.
June 18, 2011, 8:52 am
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal

You never actually saw it. WOW!

You are going to DRIVE from the court to the bike lane. Good luck with that.

It is about 9/10 of a mile long.
June 18, 2011, 10:22 am
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
I plan to stand side by side with Louise Hainline and show my support for their courageous stand against zealots and parents who want to make sure their kids can walk across the street. I salute her for her bravery in the face of children who terrorize the street on bikes and don't plan on growing up to be drivers. I look forward to meeting her and the other members of Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes who are the real heroes of New York City.
June 18, 2011, 10:37 am
mike from GP says:
Wait, what? This article doesn't match what they City said at all. Uh, maybe the writer should re-read it.
June 18, 2011, 10:55 am
Jym from PLG says:
@Tal - You're also standing side by side with Rupert Murdoch to show your support for his craven stand against accuracy and good journalism.
June 18, 2011, 2:02 pm
Scott from Park Slope says:
Can we find out where Iris Schumer lives so the Community Board can vote to install 50 bike racks on the sidewalk in front of her house? How about pushing for a week-long bicycle rally on PPW a la Sturgis, SD?
June 18, 2011, 4:51 pm
Peter Kaufman from Brooklyn Heights says:
@Jym,
I am convinced that "Tal" is either some kind of performance artist - a la Andy Kaufman, or someone with some kind of Asperger's.
June 18, 2011, 5:46 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
First off, I was not on my computer this morning, so whoever made those comments wasn't me, especially when I was at my job. Whenever I hear that end justifies the means claim, I find it nothing more than just an excuse to aviod what really happened, and Bloomberg has a history of doing that. On a side note some of the comments aimed at me are very insulting and I expect an immediate apology from those who made them, and especially from those that are impersonating me, so I do agree with judahspechal on saying that if you disagree, you get attacked. If you want hear only your voices and your own views, then go back to that close minded website known as Streetsblog where you belong.
June 18, 2011, 6:29 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
I was not at my computer yesterday at 6:29 when I could not have been in my house so stop it Mike just stop it. You are the imposter and I will report you and demand an apology. Even though I have been impostered, my point is still important and no one can stop me from having free speech to say that Bloomberg does not know as much about traffic engineering as Louise Hainline who has been studying the bike lane with a camera unlike Bloomberg who doesn't know that. I believe the people who live on that street because they are impartial observers to this controversy who only want to stop the danger from pedestrians and cyclists who get in the way of cars. I stand by Hainline because only she knows the truth and we need people like her fighting for cars so they can go two-ways in the park as they did before Streetsblog banned them.
June 19, 2011, 9:27 am
ty from pps says:
The "Tal" shtick is getting REALLY old. I would like to not see comments from *any* version... real or imposter. But I would settle for the real Tal having his say... and then ignoring him.
June 19, 2011, 7:11 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, you tend to be a good suspect here, because once again, I wasn't on my computer this morning at all when I was going for a Mets game today. Anyway, I do find bike lanes to be nothing more than a pet project. Don't any of you feel concerned that schools, firehouses, hospitals, and even senior centers will be forced to close due to the lack of funding of the city budget. However, at the same time your mayor had money to place bike lanes, pedestrian islands and plazas, charter schools, and even new sports facilities for the Mets, Yankees, and Nets. How is that he can't help the public sector where it's really needed, but doesn't mind giving so much more to helping his pet projects and rich buddies? BTW, I didn't just single out bike lanes on that claim either. Also, I would love to hear why the need for bike lanes outweighs just about everything else in the public sector that is being threatened to be closed down or just downsize in numbers.
June 19, 2011, 7:58 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal

Bike lanes are a really cheep way to make the city better.
June 19, 2011, 8:13 pm
ty from pps says:
The ENTIRE bicycle infrastructure program SINCE 2007 including everything from design to outreach to construction has cost.... wait for it... $8.8 million. Most of that figure was paid with FEDERAL dollars, not the city budget.

Meanwhile, this past year's street paving budget was $190.4 million. The extra pothole filling that was necessary after this rough winter cost an extra $2 million... i.e., MORE than the entire cost to the city for the last 5 years of bicycle infrastructure improvements.

Hmm... $1 per person to have a huge reduction in injury and death on the city streets. Not bad I'd say. Great cost-benefit there!

How are charter schools even in the same sentence as bike lanes? Are you that much of a clown?
June 19, 2011, 11:59 pm
ty from pps says:
(remember that's $1 per person over 5 years... so really, 20 cents per person.)
June 20, 2011, Midnight
henry ford from flatbush says:
Natalie,

You should know better than to write anything that does not come straight from the streetblog manifesto. Any time you don't toe the line, you will be skewered by the bike nazis in the comment section of your article. Though I'm sure you already knew that.
June 20, 2011, 10:33 am
Stall Barpihay from Unpleasantville, NY says:
DING! We have a winner. 44 comments before someone compares people who bike to Nazis! Congrats!

Asking the reporter to read the legal document before describing it as Machiavellian is not the same as asking her to read from the "streetblog manifesto."
June 20, 2011, 11:36 am
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Ty, my point of that was stating how Bloomber claims he never has the money to help in the public sector, but plenty when it comes to his pet projects and rich buddies. Last time I checked, charter schools were privately owned, and they are not considered public at all. Also, Bloomberg didn't mind subsidizing new sports facilities for professional sports teams such as the Mets, Yankees, and even Nets when at the same time he said that the city was broke. Why give so much money for bike lanes and pedestrian plazas when there are so many streets that have had numerous potholes never fixed? Again, you fail to answer why your needs for bike lanes outweigh just about everything elese in the public sector that I mentioned.
June 20, 2011, 11:44 am
henry ford from flatbush says:
I never compared people who bike with nazis. I compared streetsblog bots who can't come up with an original thought on their own to nazis. The type of people who launch personal attacks against anyone that doesn't toe the line. It only took 1 comment to win that prize. I think I'll call it the Progressives That Sound Like Tea Party Zealots prize.
June 20, 2011, 12:06 pm
ty from pps says:
Henry -- No, it took 1 comment to point out that Natalie O'Neill doesn't even try to be a journalist. She goes straight to writing a salacious, inflammatory piece... and then right before she's done she goes back and inserts some random bits to make it sound like it's grounded in facts.
June 20, 2011, 12:16 pm
scott from park slope says:
It is truly unfortunate that the few Park Slope elitists are unwilling to share Park Slope with the masses. The bike land is and has always been an access issue. Park Slope Elitists do not want people from the other side of Flatbush on their streets. There is no other reason to fight a bike lane on an uncrowded 3 lane road!
June 20, 2011, 1:13 pm
gary fisher from flatbush says:
Henry Ford...willing to admit he called people Nazis on a technicality and that comparing Tea Partiers to Nazis is the moral equivalent.

Classy.
June 20, 2011, 2:53 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Let me just set the record straight here by saying this. I have absolutely nothing agains those that want to ride bicycles, it's the attitude that they express that I am against. Sometimes, I can't understand what is your beef when others want to state their side when you guys got to have your say on that. Nobody is forcing you to agree with them or trying to silence you either, so quit doing this to others. What countries do some of you come from? I would find it an irony to think that you are Americans when acting as if freedom of choice only means it for and not for others. Just keep your egos to yourselves and respect others the way you want them to respect you.
June 20, 2011, 6:47 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Oh and one more thing. I will see any of you in person on Wednesday at the court hearing in Brooklyn since I will be there to support Louise Hainline for her courage. If you want to apologize to me in person that would be where you will be allowed to do it so that we can settle this and find out who the imposters are and who the real me is. I will be at the downtown Brooklyn court house so please come and meet me where we can talk about this.
June 20, 2011, 8:54 pm
common sense from bay ridge says:
Yes Gary, Tea Party types and streetsblog dittoheads share a very authoritarian streak that most people associate with Nazis. If it makes me classless to point it out, then that's ok with me.

Certainly, the previous posters personally attacking Natalie for failing to have her article approved by critical mass organizers set the standard for classlessness in this comment section.
June 20, 2011, 10:26 pm
common sense II from bay ridge says:
You know who were Nazis? Nazis.

Tone it down a bit and make the same point, common sense/henry ford.
June 20, 2011, 10:47 pm
eliot from park slope says:
"Henry Ford" is a weird pseudonym for someone complaining about Nazis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dearborn_Independent
June 21, 2011, 5:18 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
For whatever anyone can say about Natalie being biased on this article, I can say similar things to how many Streetsblog editor are biased on their end, so be careful about what you say here.
June 21, 2011, 6:44 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal

Your are comparing apples to oranges.
June 22, 2011, 4:59 am
Mike says:
Streetsblog is open about the fact that it's advocacy journalism. The Brooklyn Paper claims to be an unbiased news source, but falls short with articles like this.
June 22, 2011, 12:43 pm
station44025 from Park Slope says:
Poor Natalie, getting blamed for writing the article that she clearly just copy-pasted from some text prepared by NBBLs PR firm. If Tal works for them too I certainly hope they're not charging very much. Also, Tal, please do not walk in the bike lane if you actually exist and do manage to get to Brooklyn.
June 22, 2011, 5:10 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Keep in mind that freedom of speach and the press implies to all, not just a few. It feels that everytime someone in the media is against your way of thinking, you have to slam them as being biased. However, you guys act as if your website can say whatever you please. If you don't like what they are saying, you can always write a letter the editor, but don't take your anger out on me. For the record, I have seen the media mention many things that I don't agree with them, but I am not calling them biased or acting as if the editor should be burnned to the stake. On a side note, posting around 5 AM shows that some of you really need to get a job or even a life.
June 22, 2011, 5:19 pm
Steve from PPW says:
Sorry, Tal, I would have posted a reply at 5:20 PM, but I was at work.
June 22, 2011, 11:13 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal

You bring this anger on yourself.

From far away and without really know the facts you are advocating for a transportation system that will be dangerous for myself and my family.
June 23, 2011, 6:39 am
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
First off, not everyone can ride a bicycle. Secondly, riding a bicycle is hardly going green if you weren't driving in the first place. Seriously, why do cyclists need a special lane when the original ones didn't need this? All they needed to do was just flow with the traffic rather than against it. Another reason why some believe that the ends justify the means here is because Bloomberg plans on closing public schools, firehouses, hospitals, and senior centers due to funding. Then again, I guess to you bike zealouts, as long as you get your bike lanes, it doesn't matter what gets the royal screw job. On a side note, cut the personal attacks.
June 23, 2011, 8:25 am
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Tal

You (You, a TROLL, posting from far, far away) must know more than me (Me a parent of 2 public school kids).

What public schools is Bloomberg planning on closing? News to me? Bloomberg is just trying to kill the Unions, in that sense he is no better then the Governor of Wisconsin.

If you were her you would understand that bike lanes (specifically Class 1 bike lanes) are the only safe way to ride from on place to another.

I am considering allowing my kids to ride to school in the fall because it is the fastest and easiest way to get there. But it is not SAFE. It would be SAFER if there were more and better bike routes.

Get used to the personal attacks because you are messing with the safety of my family for reasons I can not begin to understand.
June 23, 2011, 10:27 am
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Other Michael, calling someone a troll just for disagreeing is very uncalled for where I come from. If anyone here is acting like a troll here, it's you, not me. Afterall, I am not the one making the personal attacks here. According to Louise Haineline's camera, that bike lane is hardly used, and she has the evidence all recorded. The only time it ever does seem used is when Paul Steely White of TA brings his flash mob for that. If you want safety, then start following the traffic laws rather than acting like victims to them. You are already messing with safety by acting as if the rules don't apply to you, so I am not to blame here.
June 23, 2011, 4:04 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Mike, I know you are the impostor. Stop impostoring me. I could not have posted at 4:04pm because I was in the bathroom.

The bike lane is not ever used and just like the ends don't justify the means for the WNBA persecution and Hamas throwing stones at Israeli soldiers the same is true here.

All you bicyclists need to understand that all you need to do is follow the old existing laws just like people always did like when they used to wait for streetcars in the street, but those were removed because they were thinking about the long term, not the short term, and in the long term the streets were built for cars, just like it was said in the 1800s when all the streets were built. I have a looseleaf binder full of printouts from the NY Times City Room and Queens Crap proving that a lot of people drive in New York and therefore the streets were built for cars.

In summary, please stop impostering me and pretending that anyone uses the bike lane. I know it isn't true and Louise Hainline can prove it because she has a spy camera in her mansion.
June 23, 2011, 4:51 pm
ty from pps says:
Who ever is the "imposter" Tal... just stop. Let Tal make his out-of-touch, ridiculous comments all by himself. Then we can start ignoring him.
June 23, 2011, 9:13 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Yea, I don't wanna get pissed and an inposterer
June 24, 2011, 8:46 pm
Other Michael from Park Slope says:
Now I have been imposterized.

I could not have written that yesterday at 8:46pm because I was out in Prospect Park, hypnotically convincing children that if they ever get in a car they will never get out.
June 25, 2011, 6:26 am

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not BrooklynPaper.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to BrooklynPaper.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.