Sections

The need for speed bumps: Parents try to tame Cobble intersection

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

Children walking to school will be hit by unseen, speeding cars unless the city installs bumps and mirrors at a dangerous Hicks Street intersection, claim Cobble Hill parents.

As a service road for the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, Hicks Street attracts plenty of hurried drivers — but in recent years, the crossing at Kane Street has become packed with children heading to PS 29 two blocks away, according to families.

“People are in a rush and can’t see the little kids about to cross the street,” said Madeley Rodriguez, the mother of a PS 29 second-grader who has witnessed several near-misses. “If we don’t fix it now, something bad is bound to happen.”

Hicks Street has two lanes of northbound traffic and one lane of southbound traffic, separated by a median that serves as an overpass above the highway. Pedestrians — many of them condo dwellers on Tiffany Place — say crossing from the median is particularly dangerous because motorists tend to hug the curb and a tall fence obstructs views, making it difficult for drivers to see walkers and vice versa.

Even with stop lights and a crossing guard, parents say the corner is an accident waiting to happen.

“The neighborhood is changing and the street is not,” said Rebecca Katz, who lives near the intersection and doesn’t let her toddler out of his stroller when they walk past. “Every weekday, you see a bunch of kids coming over the BQE with huge trucks racing by.”

Officials with the Department of Transportation met with residents last week to discuss installing speed bumps on Hicks Street and other nearby danger zones, including Henry and Kane streets and Henry and Baltic streets — a process that would require a months-long study.

A Transportation spokeswoman said that the agency will look into extending the sidewalks on Kane and Hicks streets and provide a temporary speed board in the area.

Slowing down motorists on their way to the BQE won’t be easy — but parents say the city must do something before it’s too late.

“Everyone is frightened, yet we have all this talk and no action,” Katz said.

Reach Kate Briquelet at kbriquelet@cnglocal.com or by calling her at (718) 260-2511.
Updated 5:30 pm, July 9, 2018
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:


Reasonable discourse

SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
You car about children? Shame on you!! This is all about cyclists! If you put a speed bump in you stand the chance of injuring a precious cyclist! Better to just ban all cars or all children! You will not harm a single thread of our precious spandex!!
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:41 am
mike from GP says:
Glad some folks are doing something about this! When I first encountered the situation a few months ago, I was shocked about how dangerous the street was. It's unfortunate that we've had highways rammed through our city, but at the very least we can slow drivers down at the exits and entrances.

Keep up the good work, PS 29 parents!
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:46 am
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
to be fair the BQE has been there for a while and the neighborhood changed around it. I think there was some controversy about the BQE cutting the neighborhood in half. I suspect it might have been more industrial then. Doesn't matter. The school exists and this is indeed, a dangerous situation. Speed bumps seem a reasonable solution
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:51 am
S from Bklyn says:
Actually, speed humps are totally fine for cyclists, as much as some like to stir the us v. them pot. As a regular cyclist, I'd much rather ride over a speed bump than hear that a child was killed by a speeding driver.

Cyclists and pedestrians are allies in the effort to make streets safer.

Glad people are working to make this street safer.
Feb. 13, 2012, 9:03 am
ty from pps says:
SwampYankee -- I thought you lived here forever and spoke for all "real New Yorkers"?!?! You *suspect* the area was more industrial then? Why don't you know?
Feb. 13, 2012, 9:18 am
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
I'm old, but not as old as the BQE. I generally try to speak form personal experience. If the transplants that arrived in the last 10 years would do the same we could raise the level of discourse.
Feb. 13, 2012, 9:22 am
mike from GP says:
Huh, funny, I'm a "transplant" who arrived here 13 years ago. I always speak from personal experience, and from the research I've done.
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:09 am
St from Cobble Hill says:
Born and bred in Brooklyn. Third generation. But I'm in favor of speed bumps and agree that drivers are out of control here and all over.

Why do some need to always make this an issue of natives versus "transplants." You were a transplant at one point, too. And considering that New York's very own Robert Moses divided the neighborhood in half, cutting off "native" Brooklynites from each other, maybe it's a good idea to start listening to the transplants for once.
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:25 am
John from Tiffany Place says:
I usually don't comment on articles, but as someone who regularly walks a child to PS 29 across this intersection, I would agree the something needs to change here.
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:27 am
Laura from Columbia St. Waterfront District says:
Crossing Hicks is indeed more dangerous than need be, especially during rush hour, and not just for children. The article rightly points out that because of the way the street is designed, there is only about 24" separating drivers and pedestrians standing on the bridge waiting to cross AND neither pedestrians nor drivers can see each other due to the fence condition. Slowing drivers down with speed bumps might work, but even if cars are traveling at 25 mph they could still do serious damage to a kid, especially if the driver can't see the child in time to brake.

What about just paring Hicks down to a single northbound lane and splitting that leftover lane so that half of it gets allotted to the left hand side of the street and the other half to the right hand side? Then at least there will be more than ~24" between speeding cars and pedestrians waiting to cross.
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:33 am
frank from furter says:
Its too bad they just don't build a bulb out....but the problem with that is two fold. One pedestrians tend to stand off the curb in the street and the cars tend to drive over the bulb out!
At least the picture shows only one person standing right at the edge with the people with carriages standing back(in the traffic field its know as testing traffic when a person with a carriage pushes the carriage ahead into the street when the light is still against them)....
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:52 am
ty from pps says:
Hmm, SwampYankee, how exactly is it "speaking from experience" when your first instinct is to insert a anti-bicycle rant? Oh, right, bicycles are "new" and strange, right? And real Brooklynites would never use one... umm.... because they're not stupid and know the streets are too dangerous... umm... because of the cars that are driven by "real new yorkers" and.... ummm... brooklyn pedestrians are tough and don't whine about "transplant hipster" things because they're delicate snowflakes from a cul de sac... but not at this intersection, this is a real problem for real brooklyn people... umm.... the streets should be made safer, but not too safe that people could ride bikes... umm... cuz that's what "transplants" do, not new yorkers.
Feb. 13, 2012, 11:47 am
SwampYanke from ruined Brooklyn says:
Cyclist will balme cars for thier bad behavior but in my EVERYDAY
Feb. 13, 2012, 11:54 am
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Cyclist will balme cars for thier bad behavior but in my EVERYDAY experience cyclist are much more likely to run red lights. The law requires them to stop and wait for the light to turn green. Many, if not most cyclists ignore this law. This is true, you know this is true. and now you will tell me that cars make you break the law.
Feb. 13, 2012, 11:58 am
ty from pps says:
SwampYankee -- You're a friggin' idiot. I'm sorry. I was going to reply with something intelligent... but there's no point. Yes, people on bicycles are evil incarnate. All of the hundreds of pedestrian deaths and injuries on the streets are caused by bicycles. Why shouldn't you take a discussion about ENGINEERING THE ROADS to improve safety for ALL and continue ranting about bicycles and how the damn hipster transplants (in lycra?) make you so angry... get off my damn lawn!

Cuz, we all know, bicycles are "kiddy toys" right? Not appropriate for adults to get around the city... adults are only supposed to drive cars... umm... and I guess walking is OK too, right?
Feb. 13, 2012, 12:08 pm
ty from pps says:
Oh yeah -- and my everyday experience has shown me that folks in this town don't know what a sidewalk is for. Isn't it against the law to stand in the road while waiting to cross? Shouldn't you be on the sidewalk... this experience tells me that all pedestrians are law breakers and DESERVE to be hit by a car. That'll teach 'em a lesson.
Feb. 13, 2012, 12:12 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty, so cyclist don't blown red lights each and every day? You are dancing all around my point that many, many cyclists run red lights. I know because I have been hit twice. Drew blood once. so tell me Ty, why is OK for cyclists to run red lights?
Feb. 13, 2012, 12:37 pm
K. from ArKady says:
There is no need to install speed bumps. The children make excellent speed bumps. Unlike the expensive concrete ones they are easily replaced when worn out. Plus they do less damage to the vehicle in the event you hit one too fast.
Feb. 13, 2012, 12:46 pm
Chris from BK heights says:
I lived near this intersection for 15 years before moving 3 years ago. Speed bumps will probably help. But what about a burst of short red lights approaching the Union St crossover? As long as traffic doesn't back up to the tnnell it should be fine. It would reduce the speed cars gain approaching Union and make all intersections safer not just the one. The only other light on the strip is by the pedestrian overpass and cars have a habit of blowing through that too.
Feb. 13, 2012, 12:50 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampYankee -- Who said it was?!?!?!? Like I said, you're an idiot. How you IMMEDIATELY turned this issue of safer street engineering into an anti-bike rant is AMAZINGLY stupid. But....

Tell me, SwampYankee, why is it OK for cars to break the law? I know, cuz I've been hit once. Do you not see how dumb you're being? Do you really lack any self-reflective ability? Or is that not an "adult" thing?

How does the need to improve traffic regulation compliance by cyclists add ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to a discussion of Street Engineering Improvements?!?!?!
Feb. 13, 2012, 1:02 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
See Ty, you proved my point. Like I said above cyclist excuse their bad behavior because "cars do it". It always ends up like that with you people. You can't take individual responsibility. It's like arguing with a creationist. I ask again and again do many cyclists run red lights and you refuse to give a direct answer. Arguing with a cyclist is like me playing chess against a pigeon. No matter how good I am , you will knock over the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like you are victorious.
Feb. 13, 2012, 1:57 pm
Roy from Cobble Hill says:
The Cobble Hill Association, the Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association and the Columbia Street Waterfront Neighborhood Association have been working on improving pedestrian safety and environmental remediation for ten years. We received a $300K grant from Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez and came up with a great plan. You can check it out at:

http://www.nycedc.com/resource/bqe-enhancement-study

The study recommended a modular "tool kit" of solutions. The pedestrian safety component was the leas t costly and is the element that we have been lobbying for as the first step. Only one minor problem-- government has no $$$ to implement! We have presented the pedestrian safety portion of the project at the "Participatory Budgeting" process run by Council member Lander and are hoping that he will consider funding this critical first step towards improving the BQE trench corridor.
Feb. 13, 2012, 3:29 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampIdiot -- I know you are addicted to pointless bicycle rants because you think bicycles are "childish." But... How does the need to improve traffic regulation compliance by cyclists add ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to a discussion of Street Engineering Improvements?!?!?!
Feb. 13, 2012, 3:46 pm
ty from pps says:
Swampy -- And since you're so dense -- I'll explain. I wrote "why is it OK for cars to break the law? I know, cuz I've been hit once." to *try* to point out how dumb it is to write what you wrote -- namely, and I'll paraphrase, "All bicycles are a dangerous menace because I was hiht by one."

Get it?
Feb. 13, 2012, 3:50 pm
Jet Jones from Park Slope says:
Guys like swamp can't help themselves, and really don’t know any better. They live in these pseudo fantasies, where Brooklyn was a crime infested pit of despondency. They long for this dystopian daydream where a man can just be a man, where he doesn’t feel uneducated and out of touch like he often does when faced with the general art and culture of modern Brooklyn. Guys like Swamp, find themselves feeling increasingly irrelevant in a place where their tough guy dispositions and boisterous behaviors are looked at as outdated and unnecessary.

I suggest ignoring people like Swamp, just don’t feed the troll. In the end there is nothing he can do or say to change what Brooklyn has become and what it will become.
Feb. 13, 2012, 4:52 pm
Meathead from Real Brooklyn says:
Please excuse anti-bike rants. Bike lane hating is the topic du jour at the circle jerk known as the Die Hipster Blog. Only hipsters and transplants want pedestrian and bike safety. Real Brooklynites know how to dodge traffic; why do you think they called them the Brooklyn Dodgers?
Feb. 13, 2012, 5:35 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty,
Still dodging the question. Who is being dense? I've asked you 3 times. Do you agree than many cyclist routinely run red lights? Answer that question please. One question, asked 3 times, and you still can not answer.
Feb. 13, 2012, 6:14 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Yes, Jet, I am so irreverent I've generated all these response telling me how irrelevant I am. It seems most important to you to identify me as having "tough guy dispositions and boisterous behaviors". I suspect from you hipsterish rant about "art" and "culture" you are here to teach me these things? You don't know the first thing about me. I have seen more true art and culture in this city in the last year than you will see in a lifetime. Sorry you got stuffed in your locker so many times in high school beta-male.
Feb. 13, 2012, 6:20 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
I don't know if speed bumps will actually work. I still think that the claim that cars speed so much are exaggerated at times just to make them feel bad. Then again, what good would they do when you have a group of people who have no respect for the law whatsoever? According to numerous studies, it was found that cyclists are actually more likely to flout the laws more times over than any motorists did, and Hunter College even used cameras to prove that. Also, since rogue cyclists have the tendancy to go the wrong way, they give almost no warning for that. On a side note, the name calling from some of you bike zealots is really out of line, and very unintelligent. In the words of Al Gore, "You just committed the assault on reason." Also, I find name calling and other insults to be the path of the weak and cowardly.
Feb. 13, 2012, 6:50 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Hey Jet, lets look at the intersection of hipster, cyclist, Brooklyn and Art. That would be the famous Brooklyn/Hipster/Cyclist/Artist Mathieu Lefevre. You know him right? Lets look at his art: http://mathieulefevre.com/

What a bunch of crap! Please tell me how this is art? Dried hunks of paint. Please, educate me as to what I am missing.
Feb. 13, 2012, 6:55 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Thanks Tal.
Please note who is doing all the name calling and not answering the fair and reasonable questions.
Feb. 13, 2012, 7:07 pm
Hipsterminator from Brooklyn says:
@Meathead from Real Brooklyn says:

Please excuse anti-bike rants. Bike lane hating is the topic du jour at the circle jerk known as the Die Hipster Blog. Only hipsters and transplants want pedestrian and bike safety. Real Brooklynites know how to dodge traffic; why do you think they called them the Brooklyn Dodgers?
Today, 5:35 pm

HERRO STEVIE....
Feb. 13, 2012, 7:13 pm
Hipsterminator from Brooklyn says:
Meathead's real name:

Domain name: draculasteeth.com

Administrative Contact:
iblastoff! notstevelam@gmail.com
Lam, Steve
206 Annapolis Circle
Ottawa, ON K1V1Y9
CA
1-613-260-8854 Fax:

HERRO STEVIE.....
Feb. 13, 2012, 7:15 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampDouche -- Let's recap.

Your question: "so tell me Ty, why is OK for cyclists to run red lights?"

My response: "Who said it was?!?!?!?"

And my follow-up (asked TWICE), "How does the need to improve traffic regulation compliance by cyclists add ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to a discussion of Street Engineering Improvements?!?!?!"

Who's the one "dodging" questions?

Do you really need me to respond to each of your dumb questions? Umm. OK. Yes. There are cyclists who do not stop for red lights. There are also pedestrians that cross against the light (without looking). There are also cars that drive 50 mph down city streets.
Feb. 13, 2012, 7:47 pm
ty from pps says:
Wow, SwampDouche -- What's with the comments about Mathieu Lefevre??

He probably deserved being crushed by a truck, right?
Feb. 13, 2012, 7:49 pm
mike from GP says:
Maybe we can get back on topic here, folks. Enough with the trolling and name calling.

So what can we do to support this traffic safety effort? What spots in your neighborhood are dangerous?
Feb. 13, 2012, 7:58 pm
Pat I from Out of Brooklyn says:
Jet -

Why is it that you and your ilk claim that Brooklyn was some sort of crime riddencesspool before the whimsical, zany, penny farthing riding, 200K MFA in Pre-colonial typsetting and Transgendered Puppetry colonists arrived?

You folks ruined a perfectly good enighborhood. You have douchebags from flyover states marching in and opening egg cream stores because "Before usBrooklyn didn't know what a real egg cream was".

Your arrogance knows no limits. I grew up not too far from the location mentioned in the article. in fact my school overlooked the BQE. We used to ride bikes all over the place - all those on bikes were KIDS. Not adults - KIDS. We rarely had accidents and we were pretty damn wreckless.

We did not have bike lanes. We knew how to cross a street. What we didn't know what was it was like to have an overwhelming sense of self importance. Put the damn speedbumps in. Screw the cyclists. If exercise is that important to you , get up 15 minutes early and walk or jog to work. What's next Stroller lanes? Hoop and stick lanes? speed walking lanes? When does it end?

Christ, what a bunch of whiny a**weeds.

PS: Yo - Swamp Yankee! How's it goin'?
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:02 pm
Mouth Breather from Yo Brooklyn says:
Oh, snap. Looks like da pests are comin' up in theyz IROCs. Gonna chase them Zooeys, Joshes and Meghans back to Ohiotucky. Look at me, look at meeee!!

Oh wait, dats just da sound of my rent going up. Time to cash in on dat disability and move to Florida.
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:03 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty, for the 4th time: Do you agree than many cyclist routinely run red lights? the question is a binary. A simple yes or no will do.
As for Mathieu Lefevre I didn't say a thing about except that his art was crap. You continue to make assumptions and put words in my mouth. Do you think his art is good? Another simple question you are incapable of answering.

Hey Pat, Hey Hipsterminator! Nice to hear from some non-transplants.
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:10 pm
Pat I from Out of Brooklyn says:
Meathead, The Brooklyn Dodgers got their name from dodging street cars not bikes, you bedbug infested imbecile.

I have to admit though transplants are good for something, they enable real Brooklynites to get the latest I-Phones at deeply discounted prices because you
sissyfied beta males sh*t your skinny jeans and hand over your phone to the nearest gritty, urban, blog worthy hispanic even before he (or she) asks for it.
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:11 pm
mike from GP says:
Pat, Swamp and others, please work out your anger issues elsewhere.

Let's talk about what we're going to do to reduce the carnage on our streets.
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:19 pm
Pat I. from Out of brooklyn says:
Carnage? Carnage?!? Are we talking a friggin' street interesection or Omaha Beach?
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:31 pm
mike from GP says:
Pat -- Tens of thousands of people with severe injuries, and hundreds of people are killed each year in traffic crashes in the city. More people are killed in traffic crashes in NYC than are murdered with guns.

Yes, carnage, most of it preventable.
Feb. 13, 2012, 8:37 pm
pat I. from Out of Brooklyn says:
It's part of living in an urban area. Ever see this nonsense
in Rome or Barcelona (or bike lanes for that matter)? No. People must take responsibility for their actions and need to be aware of their surroundings.

Maybe I'm old school. NY may be more crowded but more folks are riding bikes. when I rode through the streets outlined in the article, cars were huge, no one gave a crap about speed limits and far more drivers drove are intoxicated.
Feb. 13, 2012, 9:02 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampDouche -- I'll cut and paste. Did I still not answer your questions? Really? You are seriously dim. I wonder if it's from being such an "adult"

ty from pps says:
SwampDouche -- Let's recap.

Your question: "so tell me Ty, why is OK for cyclists to run red lights?"

My response: "Who said it was?!?!?!?"

And my follow-up (asked TWICE), "How does the need to improve traffic regulation compliance by cyclists add ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to a discussion of Street Engineering Improvements?!?!?!"

Who's the one "dodging" questions?

Do you really need me to respond to each of your dumb questions? Umm. OK. Yes. There are cyclists who do not stop for red lights. There are also pedestrians that cross against the light (without looking). There are also cars that drive 50 mph down city streets.
Today, 7:47 pm
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:15 pm
mike from GP says:
So we just accept senseless and preventable deaths because we live in a city? Huh? Sounds like the same attitude people had towards cholera deaths in NYC back in the 1800s. People resisted building plumbing. Thousands died for lack good sanitation. Now? Cholera is unheard of in NYC.

So, excuse me, but no, I will not accept the deaths and injuries of my friends and neighbors.

And you do in fact see bike lanes, traffic calming, bike share and all this "nonsense" in Rome and Barcelona. It's everywhere.
Feb. 13, 2012, 10:17 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty, cut and paste:
Do you agree than many cyclist routinely run red lights?

you answer the question with a question. for the 5th time then, and please, just a yes or no without the name calling:
Do you agree than many cyclist routinely run red lights?
Feb. 14, 2012, 4:15 am
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Mike from GP,
How come I get called out by name whilst others are insulting me and calling me names? I think the anger issues are elsewhere. Ty continues to mock and call me names while I ask reasonable questions about street safty. I guess I know where you stand. So I ask you the same question Ty will not answer:
Do you agree than many cyclist routinely run red lights?
Feb. 14, 2012, 4:19 am
ty from pps says:
SwampIdiot-- I will cut and paste AGAIN because your reading comprehension is very minimal.

"Do you really need me to respond to each of your dumb questions? Umm. OK. Yes. There are cyclists who do not stop for red lights. There are also pedestrians that cross against the light (without looking). There are also cars that drive 50 mph down city streets."

By the way -- when you asked Your question: "so tell me Ty, why is OK for cyclists to run red lights?" and I responded "Who said it was?!?!?!?" THAT was an answer to your question. And you've been avoiding the actual TOPIC since by continuing your childish anti-bicycle rant.

Again for the FOURTH time -- I will ask you...

What does the need, yes the need, for improved traffic regulation compliance by cyclists add ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to a discussion of Street Engineering Improvements?!
Feb. 14, 2012, 9 am
ty from pps says:
P.S. I'm glad you think Brooklyn is "ruined." That probably means it's getting better.
Feb. 14, 2012, 9:01 am
Joseph from Kensington says:
A lot of cyclists stop at red lights and then go through them when they see there is no traffic coming. It’s the same with pedestrians crossing against the signal. As far as out right blowing the light, I suppose some cyclists do that and I would blame that mostly fixed gear riders who ride with out conventional brakes. I would also say that they are a minority amongst bike riders in the city. Are they doing something extremely dangerous when they blow the lights? Of course they are, not only to themselves but they endanger drivers and pedestrians. Now with that said, car drivers who speed and blow lights in our neighborhoods are endlessly more dangerous than people on bicycles.
Swamp your concerns about cyclists are valid but you come across as overzealous. You can’t ignore one safety concern because another completely separate issue exists. Your entire argument is essentially “Bike riders don’t wait at red lights all the time; therefore speeding cars are dangerous is a moot point.” Arguments don’t accomplish anything.

Also as another native I just want to ask that you ignore rants such as PatI’s moronic rambling about egg cream and the strollers, things like that give us all a bad name. Most of us are normal reasonable people, and are happy to see the neighborhoods change for the better.
Feb. 14, 2012, 9:38 am
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Thanks Ty. so if cyclist go through red lights I propose they are a hazard to children. As for pedestrian, well, they are not a hazard to children. Recall the topic we are commenting on is hazards to children. Bikes going thought red lights can hurt children, pedestrians can't. As for childish and rants I suggest you go through all of you comments above and see who is childish and ranting. Look at all those exclamation points, insults and capital letters. Someone whit your obvious anger issues should not be in or on a moving vehicle of any sort.
have a nice day!
Feb. 14, 2012, 12:10 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Joseph, it is perfectly legal for a pedestrian to stop and go through a red signal (I'm not speaking of a don't walk sign). It is never legal for a bicycle to stop and go through a red signal. Cyclists break the law every day. It is not OK to stop and go through a red signal. It is illegal. Don't like it? Change the law. Those are the facts. Spin up whatever fantasy you like or blame anybody else, but if you are on a bicycle, and go through a red light, you have broken the law
Feb. 14, 2012, 12:14 pm
Joseph from Kensington says:
Swamp, it is illegal for cars to drive above the speed limit, it is illegal for cars to Double Park, it is illegal for cars to blow through red lights, and it is illegal for cars to make u-turns where it is not permitted.

If your main concern is upholding the law, than I suggest you start with car drivers. When they break the law, people can get seriously hurt, even killed. Those are the facts. Spin up whatever fantasy you like or blame anybody else, but if you drive a car and do any of these things you have broken the law.
Feb. 14, 2012, 12:31 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampIdiot -- The TOPIC is about re-engineering the intersection to improve visibility and the safety buffer.

Such a change would be an improvement related to ALL road users... cars and bikes alike. The pedestrians will have a better view of the cars. The pedestrians will have a better view of the bicycles. The drivers will have a better view of the pedestrians and not drive as closely to those waiting on the sidewalk. The cyclists will have a better view of the pedestrians and not ride as closely to those waiting on the sidewalk.

Get it? Do you? The topics is ROADWAY ENGINEERING.... not an open invitation for childish rants about how much bicycles are ruining Brooklyn.
Feb. 14, 2012, 1 pm
Jackie from Brooklyn says:
Guys, guys, guys, why are you arguing with this moron? SwampYankee literally has no life outside of posting anti-hipster rants on internet message boards. If he perceives it to be “hipster” he hates it with a passion. This is his thing, he's not even a troll, he seriously is just that pathetic.
Honestly how do you read his posts and not laugh, he really thinks he's this lone Clint Eastwood type character fighting to save his home from the ‘hipsters invasion”. That’s all this sad chump has. I feel bad for the poor meat sack that married and reproduces with this man child.
Feb. 14, 2012, 1:53 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
ty, errrrr, hate to tell you this but the word ENGINEERING does not appear in the article. Nope, not anywhere, not once. Whatever article you read it is not the one above. So you fail to both obey traffic laws and fail at reading comprehension. and you wonder why no one likes you
Feb. 14, 2012, 2:20 pm
ty from pps says:
Swampy -- you are a serious douche and probably suffering from a brain injury. You're right, the WORD "engineering" didn't appear. But the entire article is ABOUT street engineering.

Headline -- The need for speed bumps: Parents try to tame Cobble intersection

Quote: Officials with the Department of Transportation met with residents last week to discuss installing speed bumps on Hicks Street and other nearby danger zones, including Henry and Kane streets and Henry and Baltic streets — a process that would require a months-long study.

A Transportation spokeswoman said that the agency will look into extending the sidewalks on Kane and Hicks streets and provide a temporary speed board in the area.

Please Swampy. Go amuse yourself elsewhere... ya know, by telling your children they are not being "adult" enough.
Feb. 14, 2012, 3:15 pm
ty from pps says:
Swampy -- Please show me where the words Bicycle or Cyclist appear in the article?
Feb. 14, 2012, 3:16 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty,
you are not very good at this are you. You continue to answer questions with question. If you must I never claimed that it was an article about cycling. Ty, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. I know you want this article to be about traffic engineering, but it's not. It's not all about you Ty.
Feb. 14, 2012, 3:47 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty, the article does not have the word engineering in it. You are just spinning stuff up in your head. It was an article about parents wanting speed bumps to protect their children. You have worked yourself up to the point where your tampon is going to shoot across the room. Why don't you take a long bike ride to calm down?
Feb. 14, 2012, 3:50 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampIdiot -- What do you think is the definition of Roadway Engineering? Do you think it has something to do with ponies and rainbows? Or perhaps it might involve speedbumps, sidwalk extensions and traffic accessories like speed boards and other markings?

If it wasn't an article about cycling, why did you immediately launch into anti-cycling BS?
Feb. 14, 2012, 4:07 pm
SwampYankee from ruined Brooklyn says:
Ty,
Well if you can insert whatever you want into the article then I think it is about ponies and rainbows and puppies. You know the old saying about when the only tool you have is a hammer everything is a nail? That's what's happening here. You are a rabid, raving cycling madman. Every thread on Gothamist or the Brooklyn paper that might, just might be related to anything on a street is immediately turned into a pro-cycling rant by you and the rest of you single issue, myopic law-breaking brethren. Once again, since you claim this article is about engineering please show me the word engineering? It's a simple question for a simple man. Which line says engineering? Or should we just trust your interpretation of the article? Ty, somewhere a tree is making oxygen for you. You should find that tree and thank it
Feb. 14, 2012, 4:19 pm
Or from Yellow Hook says:
"Cyclists and pedestrians are allies in the effort to make streets safer"

Hahahahahahahahaha!
Feb. 14, 2012, 4:44 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampIdiot -- To be sure, you most certainly are a VERY simple man.

Did you know i could have a whole conversation about quarterbacks and wide receivers and so on without mentioning the word "football" -- I guess you couldn't figure out what the conversation is about, huh? I have to say, "SwampIdiot, we are going to talk about football now. The topic is football. When I speak of football-related things, don't forget we're talking about football. OK?"

But, yes, in your simple(ton) world, when we talk about various items related to re-engineering a roadway, we most certainly can't be talking about roadway engineering! We're talking about.... what?
Feb. 14, 2012, 5:07 pm
SwampYankee from runied Brooklyn says:
so Ty,
The Giants won the Tour de France a couple of weeks ago? The article was about child safety, not traffic engineering. It just is not want you wanted it to be. Kind of like your life. I'd call you a ——, but you lack the warmth and depth
Feb. 14, 2012, 5:31 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
You can't have true safety in the streets unless EVERYONE follows the rules. This doesn't just go for motorists, but also for cyclists and pedestrians as well. Why should only one group have to regulated so highly, while the others don't. When cyclists and pedestrians flout the laws, they are actually putting themselves into harm's way. Don't get me wrong, but I am not saying that they deserved to get hit, but when you place yourself into harm's way, you pretty much had what was comming at you. Since it's been shown that bicycles can actually hurt/injure people, they are looked at as a threat to pedestrians as well as motor vehicles, which is why there are called to have them undergo licensing, registration, and insurance. The only reason why so many bike zealouts oppose this isn't because they don't want to be part of the system, but because it will mean that they can now be tracked and be held responsible, accountable, and even liable for their actions.
Feb. 14, 2012, 6:04 pm
ty from pps says:
SwampyDouche --

The article is about INSTALLING SPEED BUMPS and WIDENING THE SIDEWALK.

You are so effing dumb it's amazing. I'm glad you only do "adult" things, less chance of you going outside where you might interact with people.
Feb. 14, 2012, 7:09 pm
ty from pps says:
Oh -- and here's Tal. Are you two related?
Feb. 14, 2012, 7:09 pm
John from Bay Ridge says:
Haha, wow, Tal and SwampYankee are like a tag-team in a C-grade wrestling match on public access TV.
Feb. 14, 2012, 9:33 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
For the record, I have never heard of this SwampYankee person, so I share no affiliations with him, and he will probably say the same about not being affiliated with me as well.
Feb. 16, 2012, 6:14 pm
Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY says:
Just stop with the personal attacks. Back on topic. If cyclists would only follow the rules, there would be no need for traffic calming. Motorists face demerrit points and huge fines when caugt breaking the law. Cyclists get off scott free. and they pay far less taxes than the moral majority of law-abiding motorists. I am really getting sick of all the one-siddedness of the tone of the debates on this page. I constantly debunk the weak percepectives of the streetsblogger zealouts (you know who you are, especially Other Michael and Other other Michael and Michael hold the other, and most of all, that dastardly Daquan13). Irreguaurdless, I am taking a stand like Israel against the mob that is Hamas. One day I will be prooven to be correct but I won't accept your apologies b/c youve never shown me a shred of respect
Feb. 17, 2012, 10:31 pm

Comments closed.

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.

Keep it local!

Stay in touch with your community. Subscribe to our free newsletter: