This was round one and we lost, but pricing opponents may have won a Pyrrhic victory. They will find that they will ultimately have very few people thanking them and a whole load of people continuing to complain about fare increases, service cuts and high levels of congestion in their neighborhoods.

The ball is now firmly in the court of Silver, Brodsky and Weprin, et al. They and the entire Legislature will have to answer for this once the MTA has to revise its capital plan. They will need to convince us as to how they will remedy likely budget shortfalls. And if Bloomberg continues to act on initiatives within the city's purview -- ending placard abuse, market rate pricing for parking, better bus lanes, more protected bike lanes, etc. -- he can still create a lasting legacy as a bold leader on sustainability issues.

I encourage all of you who feel discouraged to channel some of that into reminding electeds of what we expect from them. Here is a letter I sent to all my representatives immediately after pricing's defeat.

This is a sad day for environmentalists, transit advocates and anyone concerned about the long term sustainability of our great city. Congestion Pricing, after much debate, analysis and even significant refinement by the state legislature, deserved an up or down vote from our legislators.

This is also the day that I lost faith in Albany as a democratic institution that can be held accountable to the two-thirds of New Yorkers that support congestion pricing. So now - it's up to you to fill the $17 billion MTA Capital Plan. No Excuses - how exactly are you going to work toward that? Where exactly will the money come from? How will people be encouraged to take mass transit if they can drive for free but it costs $2 and rising to take the subway?

The environmental movement is changing and evolving. I hope you evolve your thinking will along with us. Part of the disconnect I felt during the congestion pricing debate is that environmental policy is not as rooted in the traditional class and identity politics that the New York Democratic Party still seems overly locked into (and believe me, I'm a lifelong Democrat from a union household and care deeply about equity issues). While I'm all for a progressive income tax structure, there are limits to taxing good behavior (like working and contributing to society) and much more opportunity for the tax structure to discourage actions that harm the environment (like driving into congested areas when a transit alternative exists or wasting water/energy).

 

For instance, a millionaire tax dedicated to mass transit is frankly not a very creative idea and does not really attack the root of a problem, which is too many people driving into a congested area, causing health problems, pollution and economic losses. I hope you'll keep an open mind about using market mechanisms like user fees for roads/bridges, gas taxes, higher parking meter fees to advance the goals of environmental protection to fund automobile alternatives like mass transit, cycling infrastructure and more pedestrian friendly streetscapes. 

 

Environmentalists are looking for our elected officials to not just merely represent a jumbled set of constituent desires, but to stand on principle for protecting the environment against often narrow, short-sighted and frankly extremely selfish desires. Sometimes that might mean that you need to explain to your constituents why you disagree with them, encourage them to think of the greater good and point out to them what they stand to benefit if lots of people behave in more environmentally friendly ways in their neighborhood. In the end, I think your constituents will respect you more for having core beliefs and explaining your position on issues based on your principles.

Glenn McAnanama

President, Upper Green Side

It's still a good time to write something to your elected officials and tell them how you feel. Another great next step is to give money to the NYLCV's Climate PAC, Transportation Alternatives and other city and neighborhood organizations that supported congestion pricing. Finally, stay in touch with your electeds, get to know their staff members, get active in campaigns for candidates you believe in, and go to community board meetings.

This is not over.

Last week the Dept. of Transportation extended the car-free time on the West Drive of the Central Park loop one extra hour, from 7am to 8am. While this is far short of the goal of a totally Car-Free Central Park, and DOT's failure to make similar improvements in Brooklyn's Prospect Park is inexcusable, the additional car-free hour represents a step in the right direction.

Members of Upper Green Side and Transportation Alternatives woke up early to celebrate the new car-free hours and monitor the situation. DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan stopped by to join the celebration where we thanked her for the extra hour and lobbied her for a total traffic ban in both Central and Prospect Parks. She complimented us on our positive attitude, saying, "I love how with TA folks it's always 'Thank you, and...'"

There were many park users on-hand to celebrate as joggers, cyclists, parents, children and dog owners enjoyed the park uninterrupted by the typical armored column of motor vehicles rumbling down the West Drive. But we did have to turn around a few motorists trying to enter before 8am, telling them they were risking a ticket.

We also kindly asked some motorists that somehow did get into the park to "Slow Down"

A tipster points us to a few good pictures on Flickr from the morning.

In Brooklyn, where over 10,000 Prospect Park have sent postcards to DOT in support of a three-month car-free trial, a coalition of local organizations issued a press release suggesting that "City Hall overlooked several clear and easy options to make Prospect Park safer, healthier and more enjoyable for Brooklynites." These incremental improvements include:

Life Near the Queensboro Bridge
A Streetfilm by Nick Whitaker
Running time: 3:44

"There's never a quiet time anymore. And there's never a clean time anymore. And there's never a safe time anymore. It's always traffic first."

In this StreetFilm, Upper Green Side's Glenn McAnanama takes viewers on a brief tour of 86th St. and Second Ave., a heavily congested intersection on the northern boundary of Mayor Bloomberg's proposed congestion pricing zone.

It's 4:00 pm and it's ugly.

On Monday, July 9 the transportation committee of Community Board 8 on Manhattan's Upper East Side took up the issues of congestion pricing and a new pair of crosstown bike lanes.

Congestion pricing, it turns out, was the evening's non-controversial issue. Even after a series of impassioned speeches against Mayor Bloomberg's traffic reduction plan the committee voted to support it, 10 to 4 with one abstention.

"You've treated us to quite a debate," Dept. of Transportation Bike Program Coordinator Josh Benson said as he stood up to present the 90th and 91st Street bike route plan (download it here).

"You haven't heard anything yet," heckled one member of the crowd.

Ryder Pearce sells DOT's Upper East Side bike route plan to a skeptical Community Board 8.

Benson then introduced DOT staffer Ryder Pearce, a youthful member of the City's Urban Fellows program, making his first-ever Community Board presentation.

As a part of the City's ongoing bike network build-out, Pearce said, DOT plans to stripe new, Class II bike lanes along E. 90th and E. 91st Streets with a small segment running along E. 89th Street near the East River and a special treatment for the pedestrian-only block of 91st Street between Second and Third Avenues.

"As you can see there are no crosstown routes on the Upper East Side right now," Pearce said, pointing to the New York City bike map. The new lanes would connect the East River Greenway directly to Central Park's 90th Street entrance, also known as the Engineer's Gate. Along the way, the bike route would link Carl Schurz Park, Gracie Mansion, Asphalt Green and the Guggenheim Museum and "would provide for the growing residential population" living in new towers around York and East End Avenues, a long walk from the nearest subways.

Controversy over the bike route centered around the one-block stretch of 91st St. running through the Ruppert Yorkville Tower Condominiums. The block has been closed to motor vehicle traffic since the 1970s and is considered by many to be a neighborhood "play street."

Recognizing the community's concerns, DOT presented the Board with four different design options for the pedestrian street: no markings, a marked bicycle lane, directional pavement markings and signs. DOT's preference, Pearce said, is "to keep the residential feel" of the "shared space" by not putting down a bike lane or any other markings. For a number of people in the room, none of the options were good.

"There are children and elderly who consider that street a park," one Yorkville Tower resident said. "People want to walk there without having to look both ways and worry about getting run over. I am absolutely opposed to this bike path."

Pearce pointed out that cyclists on the westbound street would be traveling up a rather steep hill. He observed the street during several site visits, noting, "You don't see cyclists shooting through. You don't see them running people over." An older man in the crowd shouted back, "Oh, yes they do!"

Four or five community members stood to speak on behalf of the bike route plan. As seems to be the case in most New York City bike lane battles these days, supporters had youth on their side, opponents had New York City accents.

Glenn McAnanama, president of the Upper Green Side said he thought DOT had chosen the ideal crosstown bike route. "Ninety-first Street is the natural connection from the Greenway to the Park," he said. "If you go too much further north you're getting into a lot of traffic at 96th and further south, you're not connecting to the Central Park entrance."

"The fears are overblown," McAnanama said. He pointed to the new bike route running through Carl Schurz Park at East End Avenue and 86th Street as an example of "shared space" working in the neighborhood. "People were very afraid before the lanes were put in, but there haven't been any problems," he said. "Cyclists know and sense a shared space.

Members of the Community Board weren't convinced. One Board member said, "I for one believe bicycling is a recreational activity. I don't believe that it is a legitimate mode of transportation."

As the meeting wound down and it became clear that DOT's plan wasn't going to gain CB8's blessing on this night, a man in the crowd began dictating a motion to committee chair Chuck Warren:

Whereas illegal biking is found more often than legal biking; Whereas biking causes danger to children and old people; Whereas bicyclists should be licensed in the City of New York and an extensive education program should be inaugurated and the bicycle laws strictly enforced at all times so that they obey the traffic laws…

The committee's final resolution didn't include this language. It rejected DOT's plan and asked the agency to go back to the drawing board. Community Boards, it is important to remember, only have "advisory" power over city agencies and City Hall has said that it would go forward with its bike network build-out over Community Board objections.

Earlier this week, I received a request  in writing from Gary Altman, the Legislative Counsel of the City Council to testify at a hearing on March 1st. The topic of this oversight hearing is: How do we achieve the PlanNYC2030's Sustainability Goal to Improve Travel Times by Adding Transit Capacity for Millions More Residents, Visitors and Workers? For reference here is the presentation on congestion (warning pdf) put out by the PlanNYC2030 folks.

As I am learning in the process of making Upper Green Side an official 501c3 non-profit, there are limits to how much legislative lobbying that is allowed, but when asked in writing to testify at a legislative hearing, that is not considered lobbying but rather responding to a question asked by the legislative body.

So now that I know this is totally kosher for Upper Green Side to make an appearance, I thought I would pose this question to the esteemed readers of Streetsblog to write in here their top three answers to that question. And please consider the gamut of public policy alternatives that might help achieve this goal.

Photo: Sixth Avenue and 43rd Street at 1pm on Tuesday, February 20th - Blocked box, pedestrian crosswalk blocked.

Among the three cyclist fatality clusters identified by the joint report by the City Departments of Health, Police, Parks and Transportation, the Queensboro Bridge is by far the worst. The entrance intersection at 60th and Second also claimed the award for the most unticketed incidents of block the box in the Borough President's study of lax enforcement of basic traffic rules.

My local group, Upper Green Side, approached Councilmember Jessica Lappin to bring attention to this issue and she shared our concern about safety. Based on our conversation, she wrote this letter below to Department of Transportation Commissioner Iris Weinshall.  You can take action yourself by telling Councilmember Lappin of your concerns around the Queensboro Bridge (212-535-5554) and also by filing your own personal complaint about safety around the Queensboro Bridge to the Department of Transportation.

Dear Ms. Weinshall:

            I am writing regarding the dangerous Queensboro Bridge path used by cyclists and pedestrians in my district.

            The Queensboro Bridge site is the most fatal crash cluster for cyclists and pedestrians in Manhattan. According to NYPD data, between 2002 and 2004, motor vehicles killed 5 pedestrians, 3 cyclists and injured 765 pedestrians and 141 cyclists in the one square mile area around the Queensboro Bridge path's Manhattan entrance located at East 50^th Street to East 69^th Street, between 5^th Avenue and the East River. By comparison, at the Queens entrance of the bridge no cyclists or pedestrians were killed and only 94 pedestrians and 10 cyclists were injured.

            The Queensboro Bridge area was highlighted as one of the most dangerous sites for cyclists and pedestrians in a joint report from the New York City Departments of Health and Mental Hygiene, Parks and Recreation and the New York City Police Department. This report confirms the reality that people live with as they risk their lives trying to exit the Queensboro Bridge.

            I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your reply. If my office can be of any assistance please do not hesitate to contact my Policy Director, Caroline Mello, at (212) 535-5554. Thank you for you assistance in this important matter.

Sincerely,

JESSICA LAPPIN
Council Member
5^th District, Manhattan