I think I remember reading that the MTA is not into LRT for whatever reason, but i happen to think an LRT would probably be a better choice to implement first in the outer boroughs than for Manhattan if for no other reason than implementation will be cheaper in Q/K/B/R than in Manhattan

Larry,
I grew up in NYC, i have a NYC accent, and am 32 years old, so i guess I'm a gen-X-er. And when I worked in Manhattan i took MTA Subways & Buses. However, my mother rides the subway to work every day. So don't hate on us native NYers. Not all of us are agin' necessary changes for sustainability.

-joby

The Airtrain is not Light Rail. It is a form of rapid transit like the subways. Its branded Advanced Rapid Transit by the manufacturer. The main difference is that it utilizes a linear induction motor.

I suggest a Public Use Microdata Sample (run) to check means of transportation to work and vehicle availability by the following two demographic characteristics:

Age

How long at current address.

My assumption -- older and long time residents who abandoned the transit system (and in many cases the city) in 1970s and 1980s are more likely to own and us motor vehicles. Younger residents and those who have been moving to NYC as NYC are less likely to use both.

Elected officials are more likely to be in, and represent, the former group, who are also more likely to vote and show up to public meetings. The size of this group, however, diminishes each year.

A-Sad-But-True Historical note
164th street is so wide because it was once the ROW for the New York and Queens County Railway a trolley line that ran IIRC roughly from main street in Flushing (IRT) to Jamaica (IND)

Looks like your memory is correct:

http://www.forgotten-ny.com/NEIGHBORHOODS/freshmeadows/freshmeadows.html

I know the perfect way to traffic calm that road: bring back the trolley.

JF:
I guess counter-intuitive might not have been the best choice of words, but I agree with your analysis.
I never thought about the clashing one ways the way you did, but that makes sense.

A-Sad-But-True Historical note
164th street is so wide because it was once the ROW for the New York and Queens County Railway a trolley line that ran IIRC roughly from main street in Flushing (IRT) to Jamaica (IND)

I think it's not so much about intuitiveness as about what people are used to. The rules they're used to (adding parking and road capacity ease traffic) work fine when there's plenty of space and money to expand car facilities, but they're absolutely off-base when these reacourses are scarce.

The clashing one-ways was probably intentional: if a street is one-way in the same direction for its entire length, it tends to be used as a through street, but if it's eastbound for part of the way and westbound for the rest, it tends to only attract local traffic.

The unofficial way involves going to the meetings and parties where these community leaders hang out, getting an influential (but not necessarily elected) person to back the plan, and building consensus for it through a series of conversations and emails. That's what people like Gennaro mean by "we weren't involved": we didn't hear about this from people we know and respect at the Wildebeest Club ice cream social.

Of course, the DOT borough commissioner isn't likely to be at the ice cream social, and neither are T.A. staffers. Other people missing: new arrivals, immigrants, twentysomethings, people without much free time, people without political aspirations. It's not the most democratic way to do things by a long shot. But I think that going this route can avoid having this fight again and again.

There are basically three headlines that you can have on this: "Community Leaders Protest Traffic Safety Plan," "Community Leaders Welcome Traffic Safety Plan," or "Community Leaders Split on Traffic Safety Plan." The old guard doesn't like the "split" headline any more than you do, so if you can get enough of them that the rest know that the choice is "split" or "welcome," they'll go with "welcome."

My experience with Jim Gennaro when I lived in Fresh Meadows was positive, and generally he's very responsive to community concerns. So if he's against this, it's probably because community groups opposed to this plan have been very vocal in their opposition to the plan.

Having read the actual plan, I think its great, and my only complaint is that the direction DOT has the one way pointing kind of breaks up the continuity of Jewel Ave, as further down Jewel the one way is pointing in the opposite direction.

Overall, i have to say that there seem to be two reasons people seem opposed to safe streets/bike lanes. 1 - a perception that less road space = more traffic, even though the opposite is true, and 2 - a negative perception of bicyclists themselves.

Regarding the first perception, this is the sort of thing that people have to see to understand, because it is really counterintuitive. In regards to the second perception Bicyclists are just like any other group of people, most are cool, but there are always a few not-so-nice people. If we want the changes that we want (AND NEED), then that perception is going to have to change.

A new process needs to be organized to make local leaders more involved earlier in the process and gains input from them at each step in the process.

That common element is power, and it enters this fight in a host of slightly different ways. People who see themselves as "community leaders" hate the idea of a project that they don't control or at least have a say in. They get absolutely foaming-at-the-mouth furious at the idea of "those bureaucrats downtown" pushing a solution on them. They also hate not getting credit for anything that people like, whether they've done anything to deserve the credit or not.

The result is that even when you've got a plan that's mostly good and will probably save some lives and make the intersection much more pleasant and welcoming for the people (including kids) who have to walk through it every day, the Community Leaders will find reasons to oppose it just because they didn't get a say and won't get credit. Even when it's requested by someone like Mayersohn, if the wrong people are pissed off she'll turn around and denounce the plan.

I'm not saying that windshield perspective doesn't play a role; I'm sure it does. And there are plenty of other underlying issues. But I think that the power issues can make the difference between a handful of motorist "community leaders" who quietly try to undermine a plan like this and the kind of boiling rage that mobilizes people to rant at community meetings, hold rallies and issue press releases.

Somebody died at that intersection not even a year ago -- a letter from the victim's family to each of these know-nothings ought to shut them the hell up.

But these politicians are agin' it because it will also help bicyclists.

Has the political climate really deteriorated that far?