Update: This guy was really on our side, conducting subersive art. Interestingly, no one really from the opposition, or the press, questioned him.
This morning, dueling protests were held in suport of, and opposed to, the Prospect Park West bike lane. There was a lot of press coverage, and on both sides, it looked like everyone came from central casting; grumpy old people on one side, Park Slope-types on the other (along with me, from Brooklyn Heights).
I’m guessing there were 250 folks or so on our side, outnumbering those opposed, a good 5:1. I listened to the other side, and perhaps not surprisingly, their arguments were really all over the place. On the one hand they argue that they are now constantly dodging cyclists (because they now need to look both ways), while at the same time they claim hardly any bicyclists are using the lane.
With a contingent of the NYPD between the two sides, traffic on Prospect Park West continued to move unimpeded, but at a sane speed. To me, that is the greatest benefit of the lane, traffic calming. As reported previously, a study done last spring/summer, shows that before the bike lane was put in, less than 15% of traffic obeyed the speed limit (30 MPH), and three out of ten cars traveled at 40 MPH or above. Now that number is down 95%, which is a good thing for everyone, because the chances of being killed when struck by a vehicle traveling 40 MPH, are 85%.
A Gothamist reporter caught me there, and I was quoted,
“People would just gun it. Now, because it's a little constricted; psychologically the drivers feel they have to slow down.” In response to the keep-bikes-in-the-park argument of the protesters, Kaufman laughed. “I would suspect every one of these people who are saying that the bikes belong in the park were opposed to taking the cars out of Prospect Park in the first place.”
I think proving my point, was the guy in the pic at the top, who stood with those opposed to the lane. He wasn’t very talkative when I asked if he could take his picture. I didn’t see anyone on his side of the sawhorse suggest to him that maybe he wasn’t helping their cause.
Sarah,
You are correct,and I note that in a later post. I do find it weird though, that neither anyone from the media, or the 'anti-side', went to talk to him.
Posted by: PBK | October 23, 2010 at 02:42 PM
i think he was actually on the pro-lane side. he was infiltrating!
Posted by: sarah | October 23, 2010 at 01:56 PM