I do agree with the fact that seeing a ghost bike is a bit uncomfortable especially when it is placed in front of your house or on your walk to the store. However, it is a reminder and a memorial. It reminds us of the dangers out there for cyclists, as well as a lack of respect from many motorists towards cyclists. It also memorializes a life, one that was lost while someone was taking a joyful ride down to the park or whilst on a commute to work.
I never gave much thought to it until a friend of mine was killed in my neighborhood in Oct. of 2008. Seeing his ghost bike on the way to the drugstore or train makes me a bit uncomfortable but then it reminds me of how great a guy he was. His wake was packed with people who had nothing but great things to say about him, I’ve never seen such a turnout before.
Some people just don’t understand the significance of a ghost bike, but you cannot blame them for it.
R.I.P Arturo Flores
—
posted to NYCMTB.com
read the article about Arturo Flores here
NYC: August 10: Hearing on the "Proposed Rules Governing the Removal and Disposal of Derelict Bicycles" »
from ghostbikes.org:
Please note the change in date and location of this event due to amended proposed rules.
The NYC Department of Sanitation proposes to adopt a new rule called “Proposed Rules Governing the Removal and Disposal of Derelict Bicycles”. This rule would add a new section numbered 1-05.1 of Chapter 1, Title 16 of the Rules of the City of New York and delete other rules shown in brackets in their proposed rules.
On page two, section (2) the rules state:
“Ghost rider” shall mean a derelict bicycle that has been placed on public property and apparently intended as a memorial for someone who is deceased and which may be painted white or have a sign posted on or near it, or flowers or other mementos in the basket.”
Page three states:
“…in the event that a ghost rider is affixed to public property, a notice shall be affixed to the ghost rider advising the owner that such ghost rider must be removed within thirty days from the date of notice. This notice shall also state that the failure to remove such ghost rider within the designated time period will result in the removal and disposal of the ghost rider by the department of sanitation.”
If you are concerned that NYC Ghost Bikes will be removed within 30 days, please submit your written comments and/or present your comments at the public hearing.
Written comments regarding this proposed rule may be sent to the office of the Deputy Commissioner for Legal Affairs, New York City Department of Sanitation, 125 Worth Street, Room 710, New York, NY 10013 or comments may be submitted electronically through NYC RULES at www.nyc.gov/nycrules on or before August 10, 2010. Seehttp://nyc.gov/html/nycrules/html/proposed/proposed.shtmland click “comment.”
Here are some suggestions of issues with the rules as proposed to include in your response:
1. Ghost bikes (referred to as “ghost riders” in the document) are regarded as inherently derelict when they are first described. This means that any ghost bike may be subject to removal. We do not believe that all ghost bikes fall under the criteria that determine derelict bikes, and we strongly oppose removal of all ghost bikes.
2. Several of the derelict bike criteria are vague and unhelpful in removing abandoned bikes, and should be further explained or removed.
The first listed characteristic of a derelict bike describes it as “unusable.” This description is too vague, as it does not explain what the bike might be used for and what makes it unable to be used. Additionally, the ghost bikes are used as functioning memorials, so we wish that this characteristic not be applied to any ghost bikes.
The second characteristic states that a derelict bike may be missing parts. It specifies some parts with the exception of the seatpost, saddle, and front wheel, which may beremoved by a rider for security reasons, but does not include a comprehensive list of parts. Given that some ghost bikes are stripped of unnecessary parts, we wish that the rules more specifically describe exactly which parts must be missing to categorize a bike as derelict, and whether the bike must be missing merely one part, or several.
The third characteristic specifies that a derelict bike may have flat or missing tires. Many ghost bikes have flat tires, though this does not make them an eyesore or a public hazard. Additionally, a completely functioning bike is equally at risk of being locked up with flat tires, due to vandalism, road debris, an unexpected slow leak, or other common bike commuting hazards. We wish that the rules be modified to remove the criterium of flat tires.
3. If ghost bikes are their own category, given that they are removed after a time period of 30 days rather than five, they should be able to have their own criteria to determine which bikes would be considered derelict.
4. The City should create a public database or set up a notification procedure so that interested groups can easily track if any bikes are slated for removal and respond appropriately. A public database would also help bike owners who have left their bikes locked outside and are not able to retrieve them in the five day period to coordinate a way to get their bikes.
5. The rules as proposed do not include an appeals process if any person wishes to challenge a bike’s designation as derelict. The City should create and implement a policy that would allow interested parties to repair a bike determined to be derelict or challenge this designation if it is inappropriately assigned. Additionally, when a bike is tagged for removal, the City should include a document that specifies which criteria the bike has fulfilled to be designated as derelict.
6. You may wish to include in your response the value you see in ghost bikes and other street memorials, as well as any personal stories of your experiences with these memorials.
For related news articles see:
http://www.ghostbikes.org/press/city-could-make-memorial-ghost-bikes-vanish-memorial-bikes-could-go-away-under-plan-remove-der
http://www.ghostbikes.org/press/sanitation-department-wants-remove-eyesore-bike-death-memorials
Aug 10 2010 - 11:30am
125 Worth Street, Third Floor Boardroom (Room 330)
Ghost-Bikes Aren't Disappearing After All »
Ghost Bikes aren’t disappearing, after all.
The white-painted bikes left behind at fatal bicycle accident scenes to memorialize fallen riders and to serve a danger warning to future pedestrians and cyclists were facing the possibility of removal under a new Department of Sanitation plan, the Daily News reported.
But family members who lost a loved one on city streets disputed the proposal.
The Daily News reported that the City Sanitation Department axed its plan to remove the bikes after an outcry from families of the killed cyclists.
“This is shocking. I can’t believe it,” Lizi Rahman told the Daily Newsabout the possibility of losing the ghost bike memorializing her son, Asif, at 55th Road and Queens Blvd. “I go there because that’s where he breathed last. When I go there, people see me cleaning the ghost bike. They stop and talk to me. They feel close to the family.”
The ghostbikes, are part of the Street Memorial Project, which was developed in 2007 to remember those killed in street bike accidents and to raise awareness for bike safety in the city. So far 67 “ghost bikes” have been chained near the sites of 108 known bicycle fatalities.
The plan to remove the “ghost bikes” along with abandoned bikes that are left to rot on city signs, parking meters and other property was prompted by a handful of complaints, Michael Bellew, head of the agency’s cleaning unit told the News.
The public weighed in on the matter at a hearing on July 20th from 9:30 am to 11:30 at 125 Worth Street.
I have to admit to being somewhat torn about the ghost bike question. Of course memorializing bicyclists is important, but the space-consumptive nature of the ghost bike in the public sphere is off-putting to me. Ghost bikes do take up space where it is as a premium, and the reason why the bike advocates think it’s great is the same reason I pause over it somewhat: the in-your-face-there’s-a-victim-of-a-vehicle who died here. Fine, I get that.
But where are the very public, very prominent memorials for pedestrians who die the same way?
Or the public memorials for homeless people who die on the streets?
Of course we want safe streets. Absolutely. But why are bicyclists entitled to very public, and I guess now we’re supposed to allow them to be permanent, displays of mourning when others, also arguably victims of unsafe streets, are not?
City nixes plan to remove 'ghost bike' tributes after outcry from families of dead cyclists »
from New York Daily News
by Frank Lombardi and Katie Nelson
June 21, 2010
City hall has nixed a plan to yank the poignant “Ghost Bike”
tributes after an outcry from the families of the dead cyclists
they memorialized.
Painted white and chained to signposts and fences near where
New Yorkers were run down, the bikes were to be removed come
September under a Sanitation Department plan revealed
exclusively Monday in The News.
“A memorial bicycle (ghost rider) will only be removed …
if the memorial bicycle meets the derelict bicycle criteria,”
the department said in a statement Monday. That means if the
memorial bike is in bad shape — missing tires, handlebars,
or pedals — it still may be clipped from its post.
The original removal plan was to give a 30-day notice and then,
no matter what, trash the bikes that were put up by the Street
Memorial Project, a community group. The city’s sudden change
of heart was welcome news to the families of the dead cyclists.
Lizi Rahman, who Sunday night remembered her dead son Asif’s
25th birthday at his “Ghost Bike” at 55th Road and Queens
Blvd. — where a truck killed him — was overjoyed.
“All day I have been thinking, they are taking a part of my
son’s memory from me,” she said.
“I’m glad to know they have decided (to let the bike’s stay),”
she said, softly weeping. “Very much. The load has been taken
off me.”
For Mary Beth Kelly, whose 56-year-old husband was hit by a tow
truck as the couple cycled from a restaurant to their home in
the upper West Side in 2006, his Ghost Bike also means much.
Dr. Carl (Henry) Nacht died exactly four years ago on Tuesday
along the Hudson River Greenway.
“It was the last place my husband and I were fully alive,” Kelly
said of the ghost bike memorial at 38th Street and the West Side
Highway.
Hearing on the "Proposed Rules Governing the Removal and Disposal of Derelict Bicycles" »
from the NYC Street Memorials group at ghostbikes.org:
The NYC Department of Sanitation proposes to adopt a new rule called “Proposed Rules Governing the Removal and Disposal of Derelict Bicycles”. This rule would add a new section numbered 1-05.1 of Chapter 1, Title 16 of the Rules of the City of New York and delete other rules shown in brackets in their proposed rules.
On page two, section (2) the rules state:
“Ghost rider” shall mean a derelict bicycle that has been placed on public property and apparently intended as a memorial for someone who is deceased and which may be painted white or have a signe posted on or near it, or flowers or other mementos in the basket.”
Page three states:
“…in the event that a ghost rider is affixed to public property, a notice shall be affixed to the ghost rider advising the owner that such ghost rider must be removed within thirty days from the date of notice. This notice shall also state that the failure to remove such ghost rider within the designated time period will result in the removal and disposal of the ghost rider by the department of sanitation.”
If you are concerned that NYC Ghost Bikes will be removed within 30 days, please either submit your written comments and/or present your comments at the public hearing.
For a related news articles see:
http://www.ghostbikes.org/press/city-could-make-memorial-ghost-bikes-vanish-memorial-bikes-could-go-away-under-plan-remove-der
http://www.ghostbikes.org/press/sanitation-department-wants-remove-eyeso…
Jul 20 2010 - 9:30am -Jul 20 2010 - 11:30am
125 Worth Street Room 819
Note that you can also send written comments to Dept Comm. for Legal Affairs, New York City Dept. of Sanitation 125 Worth Street, Room 710 New York City 10013
White bikes don’t mean fashion in nyc.
But as the majority of traffic currently exists in New York, there isn’t room for both bikes and cars to be happy. There is too big a dichotomy because NYC was built around cars. So, on one hand it’s unfair to expect cyclists to adhere to a city plan that excludes them. On the other hand, we can’t evict cars from a city that was built for them (unfortunately). This is an issue that remains unresolved, despite Biking Rules’ efforts to promote positive attitudes between car drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. We still live in NYC and everyone is trying to get everywhere as fast as possible. That is a huge part of what attracts people to NYC and I’m not sure how easily that mentality can be changed.”
— Fixiepostcard’s nicely reflective thoughts on the NYC Bike Culture Summit. (via merylfriedman)
