Letters
 

Newsday, August 6, 1987
 

David N. Dinkins-Manhattan. Editor's Note: The writer is ManhattanBorough President.

In your editorial "Bike Ban" [July 24], you correctly point out that although the city has announced a program to protect pedestrians from bicycles, motor vehicles actually pose a much greater threat.  While 640 city pedestrians were injured by bicycles last year, nearly 15,000 were injured by motor vehicles, according to the New York City Police Department.

My concern for the safety of pedestrians in Manhattan prompted me to form a Planning for Pedestrians Council, which would make recommendations for improving the safety and quality of pedestrian life.

The council, which comprises  architects, planners and other experts, is headed by Bill Simmer, a vice president of the Regional Planning Association. One of the issues I have asked the council to consider are cyclists and their riding patterns. I am particularly concerned about bicycle messengers and the threat that many of them pose to pedestrian safety.

I therefore agree with your editorial that the proposed experimental bicycle ban is worth a try. It is our hope, however, that the city will develop clear criteria to evaluate the success of the ban. What will be the impact of the ban on pedestrian safety throughout the borough?  Will accidents increase outside the area of the ban?  What will be the impact of the ban on the livelihood of bicycle messengers, many of whom have families to support?  Perhaps a reform of the piecework system, whereby messengers are paid according to how many items they deliver, is worth considering.

Your editorial did not mention one significant component of the city's bicycle program: proposed legislation to regulate messenger bicyclists. Requiring all messengers to be licensed would be more effective than banning all cyclists from selected avenues. It would also be fairer in that it would not affect bicycle commuters or recreational cyclists, or penalize messengers who obey traffic regulations.