I believe this lane has appeared as a "proposed" Class II route since the Bike Master Plan was issued about 10 years ago, and as you can see from the vintage green signage this was designated as a bike route back in the 1980s under Koch. Thanks DoT--better late than never.

Pix here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/43954081@N00/962836837/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43954081@N00/962837187/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/43954081@N00/962837063/

There's nothing on East 91st yet, so we'll have to wait and see whether the opposition to running the lane up the 91st Street "promenade" is effective.

Aaron, can you post a diagram of the alternative route for the westbound lane using 89th streets that opponents have proposed?

My daughter attends a very small nursery school/summer not far from the block under discussion. We are one of four families in a class of 21 that regularly bicycles with their kids to school. The school's staff confirmed to me that up until 2004 or so, at most there might be havwe been one parent bicycling in. This is admittedly an unscientific poll and may reflect coincidence, but I believe there has been a dramatic uptick in neighborhood/family cycling on the UES over the last few years that is not captured by the screen line run by DoT further downtown. Installing this bike lane on 90th/91st street would increase cycling even more on the UES.

I'm glad to see the coveage today indicating that DoT recognizes that the people how happen to live next to this car free block don't have some kind of absolute veto as to what use it can be put:

"A spokeswoman for the Department of Transportation, Molly Gordy, said the city has installed bike lanes on the Upper West Side and the Lower East Side despite community opposition to the plans. "We find after installation the projects fit well in these communities," Ms. Gordy said in an email message."

Amen.

I have brought my kids (age 5 and 9) to play to this closed-off block of 91st Street a number of times; we do so whenever we have take a trip to the post office. I've never heard anyone refer to it as a "promenade," but the name reflects the pride you rightfully take in this wonderful amenity, a car-free block next to a playground. I'm all for open space like this for kids, and its nice to have a mix of age and socio-economic groups (although to me, the mix on the "promenade" is not all that different than what you see at other playgrounds in this area, such as Seabury or Hunter in the off-season).

I think you are wrong in suggesting that a one-way marked bike path uphill on this block of 91st Street would "disturb" things. Compare John Finley Walk, along the East River at 81st-90th Streets. That's a Class I (segregated) bike lane. If anything, the level of bike traffic there is far greater than what you would see on 91st Street with a Class II (painted) lane. There you have bicycles, kids, seniors (including lots of wheelchair and walker users), dog walkers, yuppies, etc. all mixing together. Why do you assume bicycles would be a problem on your block if they aren't on John Finley Walk?

Also, you have not responded to the comments about the kids who ride their bikes and skateboards down the hill on this block (at very high speeds). I had to pull my little one out of the way of skateboarders more than once on this block. The bicyclists who would use the proposed one-way bike path up this hill would not add to the danger that is already there. I don't know whether your comment about "mountain bikers" was intended to be ironic but in fact there are few mountain trails presenting as a steep a grade as this block. Bicyclists preceding up the proposed path would in most cases move at pedestrian speed.

Your comment that bicyclists "cover a great deal more ground than strollers or walkers" makes it sound like you are not around bicycles or bicyclists very much, and you are harboring many unwarranted and unstated assumptions about how bicycles mix with pedestrians. Check out John Finley some time and then try to tell me why you bicycles work there but would not on East 91st Street. You have not made a case that a one-way Class II bike lane on this block would be a "disturbance."

You sound like a 1960's southern gentlemen complaining that all those newly activist African-Americans are too "uppity."

Of course you don't like how cycling advocates deliver their message. You don't like the message.

Your stuff about European climate is silly. In Copenhagen it's rainy for 6 months of the year, in Paris it's broiling in the summer and the density is comparable by some measures, the weather in Berlin isn't all that different than NYC.

NYC could easily be one of the world's best biking cities.

I do think, however, the comparison of NYC to some European cities with regards to cycling is somewhat strained in the context of the social models that govern them and scale and the climate. What did Bloomberg say recently while promoting congestion pricing…”Hey, it is a capitalist system.”? That is just not the starting point of policy making in the places you mentioned. European income taxation rates bare witness to that and effect to dampen disproportionate distribution of wealth among its citizens by means of earnings. As a result, a bicycle is just an affordable alternative to an automobile to an extent unimaginable in the U.S.. Secondly, the places you mentioned, even London, are not the metropolis (?) that New York is. Central Amsterdam is probably no bigger than Greenwich Village in area and density and Copenhagen not much larger. London is big, but does it have any high rise buildings? Lastly, and most importantly, the moderate climate in Europe is much more conducive to cycling as a day in day out way of getting around than what we experience in NYC. In London, 80F is considered a heat wave, and 40F an artic blast.

Personally, I have always thought the Italian personal transport of choice - Vespas and motorbikes - a much more NYC adaptable and practical and fun means of getting around and reducing the congestion problem except again for the winter weather factor, and the CB complaints about the noise.

Why not focus your concern on the real problem in the neighborhood: The massive glut of motor vehicles clogging our streets, ruining our city and degrading oour children's future on this planet.

Bicyclists and pedestrians are perfectly capable of mixing without a whole lot of trouble. Playing tag and bicycling both happened on my street growing up. They weren't mutually exclusive activities.

DOT's plan is no big deal. Let's stop the ped-bike infighting and nitpicking and start focusing on the real problem that's all around us: A city that's basically given over virtually all of its public space to motor vehicles.

I think one reason for this hostility is that bikes and pedestrians interact more closely. Cars can do a lot more damage, of course, but bikes tend intrude routinely on pedestrian space, while traveling at speeds that are not extreme, but are fast enough to make walkers and sitters uncomfortable.

It's not unreasonable to expect to walk -- on sidewalks, or the 91st St. "play street" or the paths around the Boat Basin, or wherever -- without having to look both ways or over your shoulder to keep from getting run over. Bikers should respect this desire, and traffic engineers and bike advocates need to find ways for bikes to get where they want safely, without running into pedestrians.

Bikers' and pedestrians' interests are not identical, but they have a lot in common; so it's sad to see them sniping at each other like this.

Have you been to a Community Board meeting lately? Pop in to the next CB8 transpo committee meeting in Manhattan and then tell me who in that particular room is the "elite."

It definitely isn't anyone who rides a bike.

The elite seems to be a group of people whose greatest goal in life is nothing more than to have free, convenient, on-street parking on the Upper East Side.

And, yes -- they've mostly got gray hair, New York accents and quite a bit more wealth than the majority of UES cyclists who, by the way, happen to be new immigrant delivery guys and young professionals who live too far from the Lexington Ave. subway or don't want to be a sardine.

There are a lot of older people riding bicycles out there, and it would be great if there were a lot more. Take a look at the bicycling rates of seniors in places like Amsterdam or Copenhagen - very high. Will we get there? Maybe not, but it's something to aim for, and foolish to deride as impractical, and ignorant to cast as infantile.

I don't agree with anon's characterization of them as yuppies, however. Yuppies, for all their obnoxious obsessions with yellow ties, jelly beans, power breakfasts and telling off waiters at cheap Indian restaurants, at least had a work ethic. Yuppies would never dream of riding a bicycle as a means of transportation like their good for nothing, lazy bum, idling off spring do in obvious juvenile rebellion.

I _have_ been made to fear for my life by cyclists. As a pedestrian, I've had countless near misses, and one actual collision while legally crossing a street. As a very experienced cyclist I have been forced into near-death encounters with cars by idiot bikers on countless occasions. I have a lot of sympathy for all non-motorized modes, but truly, there are a lot of bikers out there who are a menace. Go spend some time on the promenade by the 79th St. boat basin with a toddler on a weekend afternoon, and then tell me that all cyclists are saints. Sure, overall, cars have far more negative impact. But in the PR wars, cyclists are their own worst enemies, day in and day out.