Observed by IamEntitled on Sun, Oct 28 2007
MTA parks in the bike lane to get takeout from McDonald's, and is surprised upon his return to see the guy on the bike snap his photo. (Note the guy on the bike who had to steer into traffic around this parked MTA vehicle.) The "BIKE LANE • BIKES ONLY" sign and marked bike lane were of course clearly visible to the offending driver, who summarily ignored it. As plenty of parking spaces were available free of charge on this Sunday morning, such actions make the folks at MTA look like a pack of sloths.
7 Comments
Login or Register to comment.
Posted on Wed, Oct 31 2007 at 11:11 AM
I personally don't understand why there are so many private car looking city vehicles around. Never mind parking plaques. Why are the taxpayers footing the expenses?
And in the guys defense, he probably isn't being paid all that much, and if they gave you a free car with free gas wouldn't you use it?
I fault the administration not the workers.
Posted on Wed, Oct 31 2007 at 08:01 PM
The reason the cars look like "private cars" is because it's cheaper for the city not to paint them or add decals. It's a way of SAVING the taxpayers money. The official plate on the back, and sometimes a sticker on the door is all they need to identify it as a city vehicle.
And I'm sure this site is not against city workers using city vehicles to do their jobs, they just want the cars parked properly while doing it. This is a good example of laziness. People just want to park right next to where they are going.
The only vehicle that should be exempt from this is a police car. Even for something non-emergency like getting food they should park close, because an emergency could come over the radio at any time and wasting even 15-30 extra seconds to get to the car could sometimes make a big difference in the outcome of an event!
Posted on Wed, Oct 31 2007 at 09:38 PM
im not disagreeing with you. im saying why does the city have so many of these cars?, Of course we understand with no question the need for emergency vehicles of every type. What im saying is why does these small agencies sometimes have all thse cars in their fleet?
Why cant the city make a better example and make their supervisors take mass transit to where ever they are going on city buisness?
Posted on Tue, Nov 13 2007 at 06:53 PM
Neo and 14: this is not a city vehicle. MTA is not a city agency.
Posted on Wed, Nov 14 2007 at 05:01 PM
The MTA might not be a city agency, but it does do a vital city service. Either way, the reason it is not painted, is to save money, city agency or not.
Posted on Tue, Nov 20 2007 at 01:30 AM
Forget that it is not an agency. 14Feet is correct, it does a VITAL city service and receives OFFICIAL license plates.
Posted on Sat, Nov 24 2007 at 06:02 PM
My understanding from #7 and #8 is that everyone who does a VITAL city service—including those at Finance who process parking violations and those at DOT who paint stripes on roads and those at ACS who are Child Protective Specialists (to name a few) and so on (=tens of thousands of employees) should feel entitled to park in a bike lane in order to get McDonald's take out or whatever other reason. Fortunately the decent and hard-working tens of thousands of city employees don't use OFFICIAL vehicles (or private vehicles) to do this, nor do the vast majority of MTA employees.
Leave a comment
Comments will be posted after being reviewed by our moderators.
Please be constructive and respectful.
Threatening comments will be traced and investigated.