Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Every Child Deserves a Mother ... | The Water Wars »

Monday, June 16, 2008

Whose Streets?

posted by on June 16 at 15:16 PM

Bikers’ streets. For three Saturdays, anyway, and for six hours each day, in New York City:

Emulating similar experiments in Paris, London, and Bogotá, Colombia, New York City will close off to traffic a 6.9-mile route from the Brooklyn Bridge to East 72nd Street on three consecutive Saturdays, giving New Yorkers to a chance to explore and enjoy “car-free recreation corridors.”

RSS icon Comments


WHOSE, not "who's".


Posted by Joe Who | June 16, 2008 3:22 PM

bullshit substitute for bike lanes.

Posted by max solomon | June 16, 2008 3:24 PM

Whose embarrassing typo? My embarrassing typo! (Thanks for the correction.)

Posted by Eli Sanders | June 16, 2008 3:29 PM

No, Eli, you're supposed to say "Same fuckin difference, god. You knew what I was tryign to say. Fuckin grammer nazi's."

Posted by Ben | June 16, 2008 3:31 PM

We had car-free day yesterday in Vancouver. They shut down parts of Commercial, Main, Kits and the West End. Apparently there was Mexican wrestling on Commercial, though I didn't make it down there.

Posted by Gabriel | June 16, 2008 3:33 PM

I think we will all get to know ourselves a little better after a day when bicyclists have nobody to complain about but each other.

Posted by elenchos | June 16, 2008 3:38 PM

Fuck this. They should do it on a Wednesday.

Posted by DOUG. | June 16, 2008 3:40 PM

You know, in real cities, they just shut down the streets to all auto traffic other than bicycles and pedestrians, and only allow the trucks in from 2 am to 6 am ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 16, 2008 3:41 PM

Seattle will start a study group to determine the feasability of doing a bike only day. It will take at least 10 years to get the results of such a study...

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | June 16, 2008 3:42 PM

@9 - actually, we plan to do a series of studies and public forums, conduct a few public votes, and then kill it at the last minute when we find out that it will actually cost real money that isn't for a for-profit sports organization ...

Posted by Seattle Study Society | June 16, 2008 3:44 PM

And by "real cities," WiS of course means Vancouver BC and Santa Barbara. Because, you know, he's lived there and stuff.

Posted by joykiller | June 16, 2008 3:48 PM

Will, can you actually give an example of a 'real' city that shuts all of its streets to auto traffic during the day?

Posted by Gabriel | June 16, 2008 3:50 PM

@10...awww now that is the Seattle we all know and love!

Posted by Original Monique | June 16, 2008 3:52 PM

Will, in what universe do bicycles and pedestrians constitute a type of auto traffic? That's what your post said. We know what you MEANT, of course (and we know you're wrong, too, as you always are), but this is different. Your cognitive skills, such as they were, are rapidly disappearing. You're a short ways away from totally babbling gibberish.

Posted by Fnarf | June 16, 2008 3:58 PM

New York has added a ton of bike lanes recently. Manhattan biking still looks fatal, but, uh, much less so than before.

Posted by Eric F | June 16, 2008 4:08 PM

All of its streets? I didn't say that and NYC isn't even looking at all of their streets.

In general, major cities shut down - permanently - ribbons of walkable boulevards to all but pedestrian and bicycle traffic, with trucks able to service the shops only during night (generally 2-6 am or 1-7 am).

Examples: Bordeaux, Nantes, Nice, Marseilles, Milan, Naples, Rome, various parts of Germany, Spain, etc.

If I meant "all the streets" I would have used the word "all".

Which, Fnarf's delusions and Gabriel's assumptions to the contrary ... I never did.

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 16, 2008 4:09 PM

Oh, Will meant cities that aren't United States cities and that don't resemble the development of United States cities; even the most urbanized ones.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 16, 2008 4:13 PM

In Denver, on the 16th St. Mall, they only allow pedestrians. No cars. God forbid a truck of any kind ever. No bikes or skateboards or roller skating. Except on Sunday. For bikes. It's confusing and you need to keep that straight and not go roller skating there on Sunday. You'll get a ticket. Which you HAVE to pay. Boy did I ever find out. It sounds like you could roller skate there in Sunday if you read the sign but that's not the case. And then you better pay that shit or they come after your ass. This was years ago but still.

Bicycle fuckers.

Posted by elenchos | June 16, 2008 4:17 PM

Yeah, that's not what you said the first time, Will. Grammar has utterly defeated you. Meaning has utterly defeated you.

Posted by Fnarf | June 16, 2008 4:19 PM

ahhhh - Seattle already does car free days. Two days each month, Lake Washington Blvd is closed to motorized traffic between Mt Baker Beach and Seward Park.

Posted by boyd main | June 16, 2008 4:20 PM

Wow, and we've doing here for 40+ years. Take that johnny-come-lately NYC!

Posted by boyd main | June 16, 2008 4:24 PM

@10, how DARE you conduct a study without first consulting the neighborhoods??!!

Posted by Angry Seattle Neighborhood NIMBY | June 16, 2008 4:25 PM

Classic WiS. Write something stupid, get called on it, move the goalposts, never admit it happened.

Posted by Gabriel | June 16, 2008 4:38 PM

Um, dude, my original post doesn't have the word "all".

Like, ever.

Frickin space case grammar nazi.

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 16, 2008 4:42 PM

I like that Will just called someone else a space case.

Posted by Wow | June 16, 2008 4:52 PM

Will, you could've written 'many cities have pedestrian streets that are closed to autos,' but you didn't. You wrote 'in real cities, they just shut down the streets to all auto traffic...' You didn't qualify this as 'some streets' or 'certain boulevards.'

Posted by Gabriel | June 16, 2008 4:54 PM

So, what does this have to do with actual solutions that might actually impact anyone other than a few tourists?

Posted by Wow is Mom upside Down | June 16, 2008 4:55 PM

Has anyone seen my grammar? I lost her when we set out walking down this pedestrian boulevard that has no light rail on it.

Posted by Gabriel is the Sword of God | June 16, 2008 4:58 PM

Hey, where did I leave my Hummer?

Isn't parking free here?

I hear you ban smoking in your bars - are you animals or what?

Posted by Subway Sally | June 16, 2008 5:01 PM

Won't the cyclists get complacent? They should at least have one drunken Mexican-American guy from Texas cruising up and down the street in a brown 1990 Chevy Imapala. Keeps folks on their toes.

Posted by CP | June 16, 2008 5:51 PM

NYC for many years has made the Central Park loop road bikes-only on weekends in summer; the news is they are now adding another bikes only route along the east river.)

So no, we haven't got NYC beat by 40 years just by having the Lake Wash. blvd. bikes only thing in summer.

What are we, anyway, a bunch of dumb provincials, desperate to prove something?

As far as WiS, you can pick on grammar and avoid the substance which is that yes, lots of cities have banned autos on lots of central streets and it works great.

Posted by PC | June 16, 2008 9:13 PM

Now that PC agrees with me, I'll have to disavow my former true statement.

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 16, 2008 11:03 PM

Yes the truth in the face of groupthink, whether among Christian right wing nuts or "progressive" urban hipsters, produces cognitive dissonance, and the amygdalia reaction sets in, requiring circle the wagons, ad hominem attacks. Yawn, yawn, big news.

IOW: why, how kind. You are quite welcome, WiS.

On to other matters:

1. Correction on NYC comments: I was wrong saying the new bike area is along east river drive, it IS along several avenues going north south on the east side of Manhattan. Very cool. WiS is EVEN MORE right to compare to other cities.

2. Once again another city is even more green than us.


3. A look backwards. What seems to bother folks the most is my main theme from the start was Obama will have flaws and limitations, we just didn't know what they were yet. This was proven in the primary campaigns. I don't hear anyone saying what they said way back after Iowa and around Super Tuesday that he's going to win so massively and unite everyone, Democrats, independents and even republicans. What I hear Obama folks saying now is (a) he doesn't need OH and FL -- basically he's given up on some hard core Demo possibilities; (b) we hate, hate hate HRC and anyone who ever said anything pro HRC thus we don't even want to unify with the HRC wing of the party, giving up the unity theme; (c) anyone who talks of his flaws is a big fat racist (a/k/a utter denial).

So even pointing out crude factual errors like Josh saying Obama was a juggernaut as if Obama he swept the last 14 primaries and got a popular vote margin of 10-20 points produces a bitter, attack the truthteller reaction. know this groupthink appraoch is exactly what old style politics is all about. Ironic, no?
Division? Red, blue, Obamatron, Clintonista, etc.?

Bitter tribal hatred suppressing common ground and raitonal discourse. Yawn.

4. Suggestion: Get over it dudes. Unity!

5. I take back the notion Solis Doyle is a good pick.

--connections to Axelrod and Chicago aldermen is old style Chicago politics not new style politics.
--slap in the face of HRC is old style Chicago politics not new style unity politics
--"she's a Hispanic leader" um she isn't, she's hispanic, and that is old style identity politics not new politics
--she sucked, she didn't plan for caucuses, but that doesn't matter it's old style pick off the toher tribe's members and turn their loyalty around old style etc.
--stupid to start organizing the VP campaign schedule when you don't know who it is (Richardson and Nunn for example would have totally different shcedules)
--Obama campaign keeps denying this choice sends a message that HRC won't be the pick -- oh really?

Either this is a lie, old style politics, or a total fuck up in the Obama campaign,
proving that maybe, just maybe, his staff hododwinked him and led him to a bad decision i.e. he has flaws at times.

(Unlike all the Obama supporters, natch; they're different, new, pure, right; they remind me of nothing more than the Jesus loving crowd back in my high school who really discovered the "good news' and wanted to share it with everyone! Jocks, hippies smoking pot, why everyone could see the good news!! :) :) :) ))

A la prochaine....

Posted by PC | June 17, 2008 8:09 AM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.