If You're Gonna Steal...Don't Learn From These Guys

Normally, bike theft is not a laughing matter.  But I am relaying this story as a "Sunday funny" because of the thief's ineptitude.

In New Hampshire, a couple of guys cased out a bike shop.  At least, that much can be surmised as they bypassed the cheap bikes and took three with a combined retail value of $16,000.  

In the wee hours of morning, before the shop opened, the perps backed a van into the shop's front door.  They tossed two of the bikes into the back of the van and the other on the roof.

But they forgot to shut the rear door of the van.  And the bike on the roof fell off as they drove away.

Bob Beal, the shop's owner, said it took a year to get those bikes and will probably take at least another to replace them.  But, as the crooks' bungling was recorded, and the fire department later responded to a call for a burning van--which the thieves abandoned and apparently torched--I suspect the criminals will be caught sooner rather than later. 

I would imagine that Mr. Beal will be compensated for his losses.  But I am sure he and his customers would rather have those bikes.

Note To North Country: Don't Repeat NYC Bike Policy Mistake

Yesterday I wrote about an example of bicycle infrastructure and policy crafted, so it seems, by non-cyclists.  The new Brooklyn Bridge bike lane seems to combine every bad decision made by this city's planners when it comes to cycling.  What's worse, or at least as bad, as the lane itself is that motorized bicycles and scooters are allowed to share it with completely human-powered bikes.

Photo by Jay Petrequin for 

Now the folks in Warren County--part of my home state's "North Country"--are contemplating that same policy mistake on a popular bike lane.  The Warren County Bikeway winds its way through the woods from the village of Lake George through the city of Glens Falls, and connects cyclists with Adirondack Park and other parts of the North Country.  The county administrators are debating whether to allow electric bikes on the lane.

Now, I am not against electric bikes in principle:  They keep people on two wheels after their bodies have been decimated by injuries, disease or simply old age.  And, they are quieter and less polluting--at least in their normal state--than the motorized bikes--which, in my opinion, are just scaled-down motorcycles-- commonly used by delivery workers. 

E-bikes differ from their motorized counterparts in several ways.  First, of course, is their power source.  But more to the point, the motor in an e-bike is not made to power the bike by itself.  Rather, it's there to augment the rider's leg juice on a hill, against the wind or simply when the rider tires out.  

Within the category of e-bikes, there are three basic types: 

Type 1 is designed to assist the rider in getting the bike to speeds up to 20 MPH.  At higher speeds, the motor cuts off until the bike slows down.

Type 2 is like Type 1, with a throttle added.  This feature can be used to cross an intersection, make a right turn or in any other situation in which quick acceleration is helpful.

Type 3 is the same as Type 2, but with the ability to reach 28 MPH.

If the bike lane is wide enough and secluded from traffic, I have no problem with Type 1, or even Type 2.  The problem is that the latter is often modified into a Type 3, and Type 3s are made to go even faster.  Also, Type 3 riders tend to ride more than they pedal. 

I think making clear distinctions about what is and isn't allowed, and enforcing such regulations, would make it safe and practical for Type 1 and even Type 2 riders to share a lane with those of us who ride completely human-powered bikes.  Such an arrangement would make particular sense on the Warren County bike lane, as many riders are vacationers who bring their bikes on RVs or trailers to Lake George or some other North Country destination.  And many of those arriving in RVs are retirees who might not otherwise cycle if there wasn't a "boost."

This Bridge Should Be Seen And Not Crossed

Photo by Jake Offenhartz, for the Gothamist

 The new Brooklyn Bridge bike lane opened on Tuesday. However, I probably won’t be using it any time soon.

The old joke about compromises is that they make no-one happy.  The thing about jokes is, of course, that they convey truths.  Such is the case for the new lane.

Mayor de Blasio was opposed to any lane on the bridge.  Advocates wanted a single lane in each direction.  The new lane is two-way, on the Manhattan-bound part of the bridge.  While it is separated from traffic by concrete barriers connected with chicken wire, cyclists who’ve used it report feeling nervous about traffic so close by.

What would concern me more , though, is some of the traffic allowed in the lane: motorized bikes and scooters, including those making deliveries for Doordash and other services. Anyone who’s used the Queensborough/59th Street Bridge lane can recount all-too-close encounters with them.  Well, the new Brooklyn Bridge lane is even narrower: six feet for two-wheeled traffic in both directions.

Such claustrophobic conditions pose another hazard:  If a cyclist has a flat or other issues, there is no room to pull over, let alone fix the problem.

So, while cyclists will no longer have to dodge selfie-taking and otherwise bike-oblivious pedestrians on the wooden upper deck, I don’t see how the new lane makes cycling safer, let alone more pleasurable, on the Brooklyn Bridge.  For now, I will stick to my tried-and-true New York wisdom that the Brooklyn Bridge should be seen and not crossed!