Streetsblog New York City

The Weekly Carnage is a Friday round-up of motor vehicle violence across the five boroughs and beyond. For more on the origins and purpose of this column, please read About the Weekly Carnage.

A crash at Broadway and 97th Street injured a pedestrian and sent a cab into scaffolding. Photo:DNA

Fatal Crashes (2 killed this week, 11 this year, 3 drivers charged*)

• Midwood: 58-Year-Old Pedestrian Hit by One Driver, Fatally Struck by a Second in Hit-and-Run (ABC 7, NY1)
• Staten Island: Nelson Coelho, 23, Struck Trying to Cross SI Expressway (Post)

Injuries, Arrests and Property Damage

• Greenwich Village: 63-Year-Old Pedestrian Hospitalized With Head Injuries After Driver Hits Her (DNA)
• UWS: Crash Involving Cab Driver Injures Pedestrian, Sends Vehicle Into Scaffolding (DNA)
• Bronx: Man Driving Tractor-Trailer Illegally on Hutchinson River Pkwy Crashes Into Overpass, Injures Bridge Inspectors (DNA, Post)
• Midtown: Ten Injured in Collision on Park Avenue (DNA)
• Crown Heights: Two-Car Crash on Eastern Parkway Leaves Seven Injured, Six Seriously (DNA)
• Dyker Heights: Four Pedestrians Struck in Two Separate Crashes; No Criminality Suspected (News)
• Tompkinsville: Drunk Driver Smashes Into Pole, Injuring Passenger (Post Blotter)
• Sunnyside: Driver Injured After Her SUV Flipped in Two-Car Crash (Advance)
• New Brighton: Woman Driving With Suspended License, 3-Year-Old Son in the Backseat Nearly Runs Down Cop (Advance)
• Cypress Hills: Carjacker Crashes Minivan Into Divider During Police Chase (DNA)

Read more…

How does Andrew Cuomo plan to pay for the new Tappan Zee Bridge? The state isn’t saying — and it isn’t letting the public weigh in, either.

Why won't the Cuomo administration say how it plans to pay for a new Tappan Zee Bridge? Photo: Angel Franco/Newsday

The Cuomo administration won’t release its financial plan for the bridge until April or May, according to a report in the Journal News. That’s just months before construction is scheduled to start, and months after the state starts soliciting proposals from contractors. It’s far too late for New Yorkers to debate the right way to pay for the enormously expensive bridge.

In the meantime the administration is refusing to disclose its current thinking on the bridge financing or to provide the numbers that might let New Yorkers weigh the options themselves. Repeated Streetsblog inquiries to the governor’s press office have been ignored. A Streetsblog freedom of information request for financial plans generated by state agencies or by Merrill Lynch, which the state contracted to perform financial planning for the Tappan Zee Bridge, was denied on the grounds that they were inter- or intra-agency materials. Streetsblog has appealed that decision.

The Cuomo administration isn’t even letting legislative leaders in on its thinking. In a hearing held Wednesday, Senate Finance Committee Chair John DeFrancisco noted that the legislature has to approve Cuomo’s budget, including his transportation spending, by April. “Tell me how we can do that when the answer is almost uniformly, ‘We are still studying it’?” he asked NYS DOT Commissioner Joan McDonald, according to the Times Union.

Finding the money to pay for the new Tappan Zee won’t be easy. Right now, the state’s official price tag, as stated in its draft environmental impact statement, is $4.64 billion for the bridge, though many press reports have put the cost at $5.2 billion. The high cost is due to the state’s desire to build a bridge twice as wide as the current one (but which still won’t include transit lanes).

The question of how to pay for the bridge should concern all New Yorkers. As Streetsblog reported yesterday, if the bridge were funded entirely by the drivers who cross it, a conservative financial analysis estimated that the one-way E-ZPass toll would have to rise from $4.75 to around $16 just to cover the cost of construction. In a more extreme but still plausible scenario, it would take $30 tolls to pay for the whole thing. Would Cuomo tolerate tolls that high?

If Cuomo won’t accept $16 tolls, where would the extra revenues come from? In a scenario where tolls double but don’t triple, there would still be a gap of at least $1.2 billion dollars.

Read more…

This map shows the planned scope of IndyConnect, Indianapolis's bold new transit plan. The proposal is now in jeopardy because of a legislative rider regarding labor rules. Larger version here. Image: Urban Indy

Over the last few years, greater Indianapolis has been thinking big about transit. They developed a plan to double bus service and add new rail lines. They even identified funding (a 0.3 percent income tax hike) and built a viable political coalition around the vision — which represented a dramatic shift away from the old car-centric approach that has dominated transportation planning there for decades.

All that work is now hanging in the balance of a partisan standoff unrelated to the actual transit plan. Network blog Urban Indy reported yesterday that an Indiana House committee had voted down the transit legislation 11-10 after a Republican lawmaker inserted language into the bill that would make the transit system “right-to-work.”

The folks at Urban Indy, who have been advocating hard for this bill, are beside themselves. But a shred of hope remains, explains blogger extraordinaire Curt Ailes:

To be clear, the transit portion of the bill never seemed to be at the heart of the debate over HB1073; it was always the labor. The bickering could be see as an extension of the passionate debate of the past few weeks over Right to Work legislation which passed the House yesterday with Democrats coming up on the losing end of that debate.

This officially puts HB1073 in the failed bills category but does not altogether bury it from being passed in some other form this session.

Read more…

A rendering of the Rudin family plans for new condos at the site of St. Vincent's Hospital. Rudin wants to include 152 parking spaces, while the community board wants zero. Image: Rudin via WSJ.

The City Planning Commission approved a Rudin family request to build 50 percent more parking than allowed at the site of the former St. Vincent’s Hospital in Greenwich Village. The commission’s unanimous approval came last Monday despite opposition to the parking garage from the local community board and evidence that Rudin hadn’t met the city’s own requirements for granting exemptions to parking maximums.

The advisory recommendations supposedly guiding the commission had been split over the garage. Community Board 2 urged that no garage be allowed at all, as the entrance would be the fourth on a single residential block of West 12th Street. Borough President Scott Stringer, however, approved of the Rudin request to build 152 parking spaces, rather than the 98 the developers would be allowed under the city’s parking maximums.

Additionally, the commission’s report suggests that all community members who testified on the issue of the parking garage at its public hearing opposed the extra parking spaces. “A number of speakers in opposition stated a concern for the proposed garage on 12th Street,” reads the report [PDF]. “These speakers said that the requested special permit to increase the size of the garage should be denied.”

Regardless of those recommendations, it’s debatable whether Rudin was even eligible for a special permit to exceed the parking maximums. To get such a permit, developers need to show that there isn’t enough available parking in the area to meet the projected demand from project residents.

Calculations performed by both Streetsblog and the Municipal Art Society show that wasn’t the case in the Village. “When the residential units are expected to be built there will be 740 available overnight spaces and 154 available weekday midday spaces within a quarter mile radius of the site,” wrote MAS in testimony submitted to the City Planning Commission [PDF]. “This is more than enough spaces to accommodate the 137 cars that the applicant is estimating will result from the addition of 450 new housing units.”

Read more…

Building a new structure twice as wide as the current Tappan Zee Bridge could create a financial black hole, where people who never use the bridge end up paying for its construction.

“Rate shock” was the name given to the electricity industry’s financial crisis in the 1970s and 1980s, when utility company finances buckled under the weight of escalating nuclear power costs. Not only were the costs of the nukes spiraling out of control, but the electricity rate hikes required to pay for them caused energy use to flatten, as customers pinched by the high rates were forced to conserve. Facing higher costs but flat sales, the utilities made up the difference with further rate hikes, until their customers rebelled, the dividends stopped flowing, and utility investors lost billions.

You have to wonder if the same fate awaits the New York State Thruway Authority with its Tappan Zee Bridge rebuild. This time, though, it won’t be investors holding the bag. It’ll be New York State drivers and taxpayers — and maybe even New York City transit riders.

These numbers are scary. They suggest that the finances of a replacement Tappan Zee Bridge could be shakier than the roadway of the existing one.

The potential catalyst is the extraordinary toll hikes that will almost certainly be needed to pay for the replacement Tappan Zee. The carrying costs on the $5.2 billion project — that’s the official figure for a span that’s twice as wide as the current bridge but without exclusive transit lanes — are so high that if they’re borne entirely by drivers using the bridge, the current $4.75 auto toll (one-way with E-ZPass) may need to triple. Call it “toll shock.”

But that’s not all. A toll increase of that magnitude — in the $10 ballpark — would almost certainly send “demand” (the number of car and truck crossings) into a tailspin. That in turn could necessitate another toll hike to ensure that bondholders stay paid and set up another round of the downward spiral — the same whirlpool that nearly swallowed dozens of utilities a few decades ago.

I’ve run some numbers, and they’re so disturbing that even I’m not sure how much credence to give them. But with the fast-tracking of the jumbo-sized, jumbo-priced rebuild, I felt it was less risky to put them out than to sit on them.

Read more…

Good on you, Jimmy. What's next? Photo: DNAinfo

Bravo, James Vacca.

On Wednesday Vacca joined Council Member Gale Brewer in calling attention to the needs of blind and sight-impaired pedestrians, particularly as they apply to new pedestrian plazas.

Brewer has introduced a bill requiring textured pavement around the perimeters of plazas and bike lanes, while other bills would speed up the installation of audible pedestrian signals and mandate accessible online notifications concerning changes to street design. DNAinfo reports:

“This is a serious civil rights issue,” said City Council Transportation Committee Chair James Vacca, who said he first became aware of the challenges of new street designs from his father, who was blind.

Vacca’s assessment is spot on. Being able to navigate your way to the grocery store without fear of being run over is a civil rights issue. As is taking a bike ride through your neighborhood. As is crossing the street with your elderly mother. As is surviving the walk home from school. Especially so when the risk of being hurt or killed in traffic is higher for some New Yorkers than others.

Vacca has spent a lot of time on camera since taking the helm of the transportation committee, and he has yet to call attention to the hundreds of road deaths and thousands of injuries that occur annually. He has yet to credit the new pedestrian spaces, bike lanes, and street redesigns for making New York a safer city.

After a year devoted to nitpicking street safety improvements and targeting those who need them while pandering to parking scofflaws, maybe he and the council will at last turn to the business of safeguarding the rights of everyone who deserves to move about the city safely.

There’s been plenty of buzz over the last few days surrounding Congress’s efforts to pass a multi-year transportation bill.

Rep. John Mica's five-year transportation bill will be unveiled tomorrow. Photo: 13 News

When Congress adjourned last month, the Senate had made significant progress on a two-year bill. In the House, Rep. John Mica had repeatedly promised a five- or six-year bill, but nothing had been introduced. Now, finally, Congress is showing signs of picking up where they left off. Here’s a rundown of the latest:

Details of House Transportation Bill Emerge…

According to multiple sources, the House transportation bill – called the American Energy & Infrastructure Jobs Act – reauthorizes highway and transit programs for five years at around $52 billion per year, for a total of $260 billion. It seems likely that the bill would use revenue from oil and gas drilling fees. Mica is reportedly still pushing for a sixth year.

Rep. Bill Shuster said yesterday that T&I Committee Democrats would get their copies of the bill today, and the full text would be released to the general public tomorrow. Shuster had much more to say about the future of federal support for transportation, and Streetsblog will have more on that later today.

…And Next Week Will Be Busy…

Once the full text is released, three House committees need to bring portions of the bill into markup: Ways and Means, Natural Resources, and of course Transportation and Infrastructure are all planning markups for next week. T&I’s markup for the House bill is tentatively scheduled for next Thursday at 9 a.m., but it does not yet appear on the committee’s legislative calendar.

Read more…

New Yorkers submitted dozens of suggestions for bike-share station locations in Chelsea alone. Next week, local residents are invited to a Community Board 4 meeting to determine where stations will go. Image: NYC DOT

When bike-share launches this summer, 10,000 new public bicycles will be available at 600 stations in Manhattan and Brooklyn. The stations will typically be located about 1,000 feet apart from each other, ensuring a quick walk to a public bike from anywhere below 79th Street and in northwest Brooklyn. The exact location of the stations — this corner or that one, on the street or on the sidewalk — is largely up to each neighborhood to decide. The hyper-local planning begins next week at a workshop for the Chelsea and Hell’s Kitchen neighborhoods [PDF] and continues throughout the service area over the next two months.

Last fall, DOT officials said that public comments will help determine where to place bike-share stations. Community boards can say “the following locations are ‘hell no’ for whatever reasons,” DOT Policy Director Jon Orcutt told Manhattan CB 2 last October. The stations have to be spaced appropriately and follow certain guidelines — no stations on narrow sidewalks or in parking spaces on busy avenues, for example — but within those constraints locals will get to choose where the bikes go.

Next Tuesday, the city’s first bike-share planning workshop will take place. Hosted by Manhattan Community Board 4, State Senator Tom Duane and Assembly Member Richard Gottfried, the event will be an important opportunity for people who live or work in Chelsea and Hell’s Kitchen to help shape this significant addition to the New York City streetscape. The difference between a bike-share system where most stations are on the sidewalk and one where most stations are in the curbside lane may be determined at these meetings, for example.

After Tuesday’s meeting, the next workshop will be the following week and cover Manhattan Community Board 2′s district: SoHo, Tribeca and the West Village. For a full and up-to-date listing of the workshops, including time and location, head over to DOT’s bike-share timeline.

Here’s what’s going on around the Streetsbog Network today:

Baltimore's Mt. Royal Avenue was supposed to look like this. But bike lanes have been nixed, to the dismay of students at nearby universities. Photo: Baltimore Velo

Baltimore Bungles its Complete Streets Policy: The city of Baltimore has a golden opportunity to build more livable college campuses. Unfortunately it appears intent on wasting it. Students at the University of Baltimore and Maryland Institute College of Art are upset over the city’s move not to include bike lanes on Mt. Royal Avenue. The road was to accommodate all modes as part of a special Midtown Complete Streets redevelopment plan.

But this week students learned that the presidents of both universities said there should be no bike lanes on the street, and the city has complied. “Since complete streets aren’t really complete without bicycling accommodation – we found this a bit strange,” a blogger at Baltimore Velo responded. And students aren’t taking it lying down. According to the blog: “MICA students who feel misrepresented by their leadership in this instance have begun to work on petitions and letters to send to the president’s office.”

Miami’s Parking Corral Push: Advocates in Miami, Florida continue to push valiantly for a more people-friendly streets in this car-friendly state. Locals are hard at work right now trying introduce the city’s first on-street bike parking, also known as a bike corral. Network blog Transit Miami reports that they have selected the city’s Wynood Arts District for the site. The Miami-Dade Bicycle and Pedestrian Advocacy Committee has endorsed the proposal and will be taking it to the city’s public works department. “The City of Miami District 5 has a tremendous opportunity to take the lead in building Miami’s first on-street bicycle parking corral to accommodate the burgeoning demand,” said Transit Miami’s Craig Chester. Check out the whole post for a great list of reasons bike corrals are good for business.

Virginia Lawmakers Throw Out Bill to Protect Pedestrians and Cyclists: A bill that could have helped ensure the safety of vulnerable road users died an untimely death in the Virginia House of Representatives yesterday. The “Due Care” requirement for motorists would have required drivers to “exercise caution” around children, incapacitated individuals and others who face heightened risk. The law also would have mandated motorists “exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian or the operator of a human-powered vehicle and shall give an audible signal when necessary.”

That innocuous language was rejected by four out of seven members of the committee, all Republicans, said Bruce Wright at Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling. Wright addressed committee chair Barbara Comstock (R-McLean) in a letter on behalf of the state’s cyclists, calling it “hard to believe.” “It doesn’t seem to be too much to ask motorists to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a pedestrian or a bicyclist.”