Photo: Gothamist

"Access-A-Ride drivers are instructed to observe all restrictions on parking and standing. However, due to traffic, drivers are often challenged to find safe locations to either pick up or drop off customers."

How many holes in that statement do you count?

Gothamist is taking submissions for an end-of-year photo gallery of egregious bike lane blockers. Here are a couple of recent candidates that leap to mind.

A Parks Department sanitation truck struck a 78-year-old woman using a motor-assisted wheelchair in the Eighth Avenue bike lane this morning shortly before 10 a.m., just north of Bleecker Street. The victim suffered head trauma and was taken to St. Vincent's Hospital, where she is in serious condition, a police spokesman said. No further details on the collision are available at this time. NYPD said the investigation is ongoing.

The driver was heard repeating that he "didn't see" the victim, according to Michelle Ernst of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, who passed the scene of the crash this morning and sent in this picture.

Streetsblog has requests in with DOT and the Parks Department to determine if a policy is in place governing the use of protected bike paths by city vehicles. We'll post more information as it becomes available.

Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer is one of Capitol Hill's strongest voices for walking, biking and transit. Soon after arriving in Congress in 1996, he started the Congressional Bike Caucus, now more than 160 members strong, and he's the founding chairman of the House's new "Livable Communities Task Force," which he announced two weeks ago here on Streetsblog.

Blumenauer's bike commute to the Capitol has become as much a personal hallmark as his predilection for bowties. So when he came to New York this weekend to stump for a progressive federal transportation bill, the congressman didn't pass up the chance to tour our city's evolving bike infrastructure with Paul Steely White and Noah Budnick of Transportation Alternatives. Clarence Eckerson and his camera were there too, of course.

Watch this Streetfilm to hear Blumenauer's thoughts on the big federal transportation bill, the emergence of a national movement for safe biking and walking, and the difference between protected bike lanes and regular old Class 2 facilities. Then ask yourself: When will we get to see a rep from New York City walk, bike, or ride the bus with Clarence?

Painted lanes are not enough, East Siders told CB8 last night. Photo: BicyclesOnly/Flickr.

Thanks to groundwork laid by Transportation Alternatives' East Side committee, yesterday's proceedings offered further evidence that, as Charles Komanoff wrote a few weeks ago, cyclists are shedding their status as "the embattled minority." By and large, the discussion lacked duke-it-out drama. During the public comment period, eight speakers testified in favor of the resolution, including TA's bike advocacy director Caroline Samponaro, who delivered a few hundred signatures for good measure. None spoke against. And when it came time for the board to take up the matter, a few CB 8 members identified themselves as bike commuters.

People spoke movingly about their harrowing experiences trying to ride in their own neighborhood, and about the inadequacy of un-protected bike lanes. "Painted lines on the road are not safe," said Jack Russell, 62, a 29-year resident of Yorkville. Given the lack of protected space and the disconnected state of the East River greenway, several cyclists testified that they ride far out of their way -- over to the Hudson River path -- to get downtown. Anthony Romer, a recent transplant from Madison, Wisconsin, told the board that he just doesn't ride as much since he moved to New York: "If I ride here, I put my life on the line."

It's true that community board members were not asked to render a decision on a specific route. But they had plenty of real New York City examples to draw from (not just tales from Europe) as they formulated their votes. Anyone who's ventured outside in Manhattan recently can picture the Ninth Avenue bike lane and the newly transformed Broadway, which were invoked on more than one occasion last night. If last night's vote is any indication, it's hard to argue with the impressive safety records of these existing Class 1 bike facilities. They provide solid proof that safer streets for cyclists are safer for pedestrians too.

Three years ago, when local resident and activist Glenn McAnanama approached CB8's transportation committee about better bike lanes for the neighborhood, the idea that bike infrastructure makes streets safer didn't gain much traction. "Whenever cycling came up they turned it into a discussion of scofflaw cyclists," he said. "Increasing the number of cyclists in the neighborhood was not on their agenda." He views last night's vote as a sign that the CB has committed to street safety and wants to "get more iterative with the DOT."

The vote of confidence in protected bike lanes would never have happened without the advocates and volunteers working on TA's East Side campaign. "Last night was really the culmination of a year-long effort by our East Side committee to be more engaged with the community board," said Samponaro. "Going to your community board and advocating for these things at a local level can bring change."

For Samponaro, the signature moment of the night came when 11-year-old Clark Vaccaro talked about the dangers he faces on his ride to school. "I don't think the CB expected that," she said. "It becomes very hard to vote against these measures when you see the faces of people who are asking for them."

It'd be nice to see this Euro design elsewhere -- though I wonder if it might be slippery when wet.

Bike lanes: In some cities people are so desperate for them they'll go so far as to mark their own. Here in New York City, it feels like every time I get on my bike there is a new bike lane -- sometimes on the left, sometimes buffered, and sometimes completely separated from automobile traffic.

I recently had the opportunity to go for a ride with the NYC DOT bicycle boys, who explained the classes of bike lanes and showed off some of these inventive facilities.

Tonight's debate will be broadcast on NY1.

To date, Thompson has uncorked a steady flow of escalating anti-bike lane statements, couched in a demand for greater "community input." The argument never squared with DOT's habit of seeking community board approval for bike projects, nor does it jibe with recent resolutions in favor of protected bike lanes passed by Manhattan Community Boards 7 and 8. So Hawkins' sources offer up a few other explanations for Thompson's stance:

George Arzt, a veteran Democratic political consultant, said Thompson appears to be making a grab for working class, outer borough votes with his calls to remove bike lanes and dump Sadik-Khan.

"It's a 718 issue, as we used to say," said Arzt. "He sees this as an advantage to do something for the car drivers, many of whom hate the bicycle lanes and are fearful of running over a cyclist."

Ross Sandler, a New York Law School professor who served as transportation commissioner under Mayor Ed Koch from 1986-1989, said that vast improvements in public safety over the past 20 years have increased competition for public space, which goes towards explaining Sadik-Khan’s controversial role in the political landscape, as well as the growing clamor for her removal.

"Everybody wants that space," Sandler said. "Parkers, truckers, drivers, cyclists, skateboarders. It is the most competitive space in the city."

One good thing about Thompson's hostile rhetoric toward real-world livable streets improvements: On TV tonight, we might actually get to watch New York's next mayor go on the record explaining how he believes this intensely contested space ought to be allocated.

The debut Streetfilms Shortie caught an errant scooter blocking a bike lane. This time it's New York's Finest, camped out in the Manhattan Bridge bike path at Canal and Chrystie.

A half-step forward, two steps back.

A reader sent in this photo from Park Slope, where restaurateur Irene Lo Re has been railing against the Fifth Avenue bike lane.

It is in Aunt Suzie's window now, along with the sign for free bike air.

Is this just another salvo in AAA's war against people-friendly city streets -- or maybe a small token for taking up the cause? There's no way to be sure, but it might call for raising the profile of the Bike-Friendly Business awards.

Thompson tells NY1 he'll "review" recent safe street projects.

• After the Ninth Avenue protected bike lane was installed in 2007, injuries among all users dropped 56 percent.
  
• The protected Broadway bike lane between 42nd and 35th Streets brought a 50 percent drop in injuries.

Given quality of life improvements like these, it would make sense for mayoral challenger Bill Thompson to promise to at least stay the course, if not to one-up the incumbent. And in his responses to the Transportation Alternatives Candidate Survey, Thompson comes across as a big believer in the benefits of livable streets. New MTA revenue streams, expanded BRT service, ramped-up traffic enforcement, on-street parking reform -- when playing to the TA crowd, the candidate is nearly pitch perfect.

But depending on whom he's talking to, Thompson is either eager to expand on the safe streets initiatives of the past few years or eradicate them on day one -- starting with a shake up at DOT and removal of the Grand Street lane.

If increased safety and community board approval wouldn't be enough for a project to be judged a success by Mayor Thompson, what criteria would he use? Though we were assured several times that the candidate supports bike lanes, our conversation with a Team Thompson spokesperson did little to clear things up.

"It's a wide range of factors," said the spokesperson. "It's not just the small businesses in the area, it's also the community. I can't comment on something in the future. I mean, obviously you have to look at each bike lane separately, right?"

Despite a lot of talk about "community," the spokesperson did not mention health or safety as factors in determining worthy projects.

"We've heard from the community. Not just the community board, but from small business community members, neighbors in the area that felt like the bike lane has actually hurt business in the area. Obviously with the economy the way it is, you want to do all you can to help the small businesses of New York. Again, I just want to make it clear that he does support bike lanes. He's said it over and over again."

So when it comes to livable streets initiatives under the Thompson administration, the litmus test won't be public health, or even environmental impact, but feelings and anecdotes. When you single out one of the city's most effective cyclist safety improvements for immediate demolition based on who's screaming loudest, a promise of theoretical support simply doesn't hold water. No matter how many times you say it.

One section of the Kent Avenue two-way bike path has been painted. Two more will follow. Image: NYCDOT [PDF].

We've got another dispatch from the ongoing bike lane drama that is Kent Avenue. At Wednesday night's information session hosted by Brooklyn CB1, the DOT team gave a short presentation [PDF] outlining their plan to address truck traffic changes caused by converting Kent to one-way flow. Then the public was invited to comment.

Truck routes in North Williamsburg and Greenpoint.

A couple of things to keep in mind. The traffic changes are happening in three phases. So far only the first has been completed. Once the whole thing is finished and truckers have had some time to learn the new traffic patterns, the straightest shot heading south goes nowhere near Wythe or North 11th. DOT intends to promote this route, which takes trucks down McGuinness Boulevard instead, and work with the local police precincts to keep truckers off streets where they're not supposed to drive.

As for the notion that the project makes streets less safe (some opponents went so far as to say the new traffic patterns will endanger children), it's hard to take seriously. This is not just a one-way conversion: The crossing distances will be shorter and the roadway narrower on Kent Avenue, which motorists used to treat as a little stretch of autobahn in Brooklyn. Now that traffic will be calmer.

The bike lane was always intended to be a precursor to the Brooklyn Waterfront Greenway. The new design now occupies the greenway footprint, so opposing the bike lane is tantamount to opposing the greenway. An area undergoing as much residential development as North Brooklyn sorely needs this new space for pedestrians and cyclists. Walking to the waterfront will feel much safer and more appealing, and biking to the Williamsburg Bridge won't just be limited to a few brave souls. CB1 embraced those improvements when it approved the greenway plan last April [PDF]; the same benefits should feel much more tangible once the Kent Avenue bike lane is completed next month.

Come out tonight and support the city's first two-way, on-street protected bike path.

DOT representatives will be presenting their plan to address traffic changes caused by the new one-way vehicular flow on Kent. The new design establishes the greenway footprint and re-establishes on-street parking and loading zones. No new truck routes have been created, though southbound truck traffic will travel differently than before. Plenty can be done to mitigate the truck traffic changes, but there's a lot of hearsay and misinformation floating around. You can be sure that some North Williamsburg residents living close to those designated truck routes will be there tonight, and they'll be loud. A show of support for safe cycling would give a big boost to this important link in the city's bike network.

The meeting gets started at 6:30 (sorry about the late notice) at 807 Manhattan Avenue -- the entrance is on Calyer Street.

Apparently not. Lo Re appeared in the Post today, up in arms about the Park Smart pilot on Fifth Avenue, accusing the city of "killing small businesses." Park Smart charges motorists higher rates to park during the midday peak, freeing up curb space so drivers don't spend so much time cruising for spots. Also appearing in the Post story were Joe Leopoldi, whose hardware store is not even located in the Park Smart zone, and Judi Pheiffer of Bob and Judi's Coolectibles. These are the same handful of merchants Lo Re mentioned by name when I asked her who was opposed to the bike lane.

Catering to the parking whims of drivers strikes me as a poor business strategy for merchants in walkable, transit-rich Park Slope. It sure didn't guarantee success for Tempo, a dining establishment on Fifth and Carroll. They closed their doors for good a few days after I took this photo right outside their entrance.

Time Warner sets up an operation in the Sands Street bike path. Photo: Gothamist.

A well-placed source tells us that DOT is working with the post office and delivery companies to keep the mountable bike lane clear, and that the agency is considering the addition of a direct crosswalk between the Sands Street path and the entrance to the Manhattan Bridge path.

"We are working on ways to properly guide cyclists safely from the end of the Sands Street path to the start of the Manhattan Bridge path," a DOT spokesperson said when we asked for confirmation.

The project isn't finished yet, so it's still in the adjustment period. But without any bollards from Navy to Gold, it's going to take constant enforcement to keep that block clear for cyclists. As Gothamist noted last week, it's a very short trip from the bike path to the Brooklyn tow pound.

With summer winding down, we can expect to see a big push ahead of the September 15 primaries. Hope the long weekend leaves you refreshed and ready.

If you need inspiration, click over to nycbikemaps' YouTube channel for more videos like this one, showcasing some of what livable streets advocates have helped achieve as of late, and what many free riders and their elected enablers would love to take away.

See you Tuesday and feel free to use the comments section as an election week open thread. Who do you think are the best candidates when it comes to livable streets and a sustainable city?

Tony Avella and Bill Thompson. Photo: Daily News.

Thompson got started with a restrained, "I think you bring your own team to the table." Then Avella took the first rip at the city's new bike lanes and public plazas.

"There has to be community involvement," he said. "You can't just dictate from the top: 'Hey, tomorrow, here's a bike lane, here we're gonna close off the street,' without having communication with the elected officials, the community boards, and the neighborhoods, and that's why she should be fired."

This prompted an escalation from Thompson: "I favor bicycle lanes, however, you are hearing the complaint all over the city of New York, because the communities have not been consulted. They've been ignored. Bicycle lanes have been dropped upon them and there has been no discussion. That's wrong and that shouldn't continue."

Avella and Thompson don't seem to have a very good grasp of the facts on this issue. DOT's plaza program is entirely opt-in. They won't build a plaza in your community unless someone from the neighborhood asks for it. New Yorkers are basically competing with each other to get these public spaces added to their streets. Oh, and attacking the new plazas on Broadway is kind of like pledging to pave Bryant Park at this point.

When it comes to bike lanes, DOT, if anything, has rather timidly avoided going against the grain of community board votes. The Grand Street bike lane? Approved by Manhattan CB 2. Eighth Avenue cycle track? Approved by Manhattan CB 4 and CB 2. The Kent Avenue bike lane? Approved by Brooklyn CB 1. Meanwhile, DOT has not striped a bike lane on Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. Boulevard because CB 10 has yet to approve it. They added a bike lane to Empire Boulevard only after Brooklyn CB 9 explicitly asked for one.

Are there exceptions? Thankfully, yes. Otherwise even more power over transportation policy would be vested in people like Vinicio Donato, the chair of Queens CB 1 since 1975. Last year Donato's board wrote a letter to DOT opposing the Vernon Boulevard bike lane. Streets are safer because the DOT went ahead and striped the bike lane anyway.

So when these candidates moan about the lack of community input, they're basically pledging to halt any progress toward making New York City's streets less car-centric. Why make streets safer and less clogged with cars when you can cater to a minority of self-interested motorists? I suppose we'll see soon enough whether, after 16 years in exile, New York City Dems can ride that message back to City Hall.

Council Members Vincent Ignizio (l) and James Oddo scientifically prove that bikes can't fit on Jefferson Avenue in Dongan Hills. Photo: SI Advance

For its part, three times in the past two months the Advance has editorialized against bike infrastructure, while criticizing NYPD for enforcing laws intended to keep drivers out of bike lanes. Here's a passage from the first screed, published July 4, entitled "The City's Bike Obsession":

More people should ride bicycles, for a number of reasons. But in the real world, that's not going to happen to the degree the cycling true believers fantasize about. Many people simply can't. And the great majority of those who have the physical ability have no desire to ride bicycles for transportation or sport -- especially on city streets. So hard-core cyclists will always be a finite minority, no matter how many bike lanes the city creates. And the notion that all these new lanes will promote a massive surge in cycling is pure fantasy.

Not only do they object to safer cycling conditions on the grounds that so few Staten Islanders bike -- in part because it isn't safe -- Advance editors claim that helpless motorists are bound to occasionally act out against cyclists who insist on exercising their right to the road.

You really have to read this August 21 editorial in its entirety for the full effect, but here's a sample:

An ugly incident of road rage recently on Father Capodanno Boulevard underscores the folly of the Bloomberg administration's over-the-top infatuation with dedicated bicycle lanes.

The particulars of the incident -- this time between a motorist and a bicyclist -- are in dispute. The bicyclist says the enraged motorist got out of his car and pushed him off his bike.

The motorist, who was arrested and charged with assault and harassment, insists he merely tried to pull the bicycle off the street after the bicyclist had gotten off it.

What seems certain, however, is that the confrontation was the direct result of the city's contradictory and confusing policies regarding the rights of bicyclists and drivers, respectively.

In other words, if a driver stops and exits his vehicle to physically accost a cyclist in a bike lane, Mayor Bloomberg made him do it. Amazingly, the Advance stops short of calling for charges against Graziuso to be dropped. Perhaps a cyclist-induced temporary insanity defense is in order.

Foran urges cyclists and others interested in safer street conditions -- bike riders aren't the only vulnerable ones, after all -- to contact the mayor, DOT Commish Janette Sadik-Khan, and Council Member John Liu to show support for Staten Island bike lanes and continued enforcement of the law. And it couldn't hurt if Messrs. Ignizio, Oddo and Molinaro, and the editors of the SI Advance, were admonished to tone down their rhetoric, before the next like-minded road rager decides to take action.

City Council member Alan Gerson didn't have much new to say at his sidewalk protest of the Grand Street bike lane. But a handful of reporters and a few cyclists pressed him to defend the idea that projects designed to improve street safety should be subject to greater City Council review.

Gerson's assertion of "dangerous conditions" on Grand Street basically amounted to this: The row of parked cars on the south side used to protect only pedestrians; now it protects pedestrians and cyclists, so there's a perception among some of the older residents that they're at greater risk because cyclists are riding next to the curb.

But do the data back up the perception? In a word, No. According to DOT's study of Grand Street, injuries are down 28.8 percent since the protected lane was installed nine months ago. Which only makes sense, because the parking-protected bike path has narrowed the traffic lane, sending cues for drivers to slow down and making a safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

Gerson was not swayed by statistical evidence. "Sometimes anecdotal testimony reflects the reality," he said. For bike lane opponents, however, reality intruded rather inconveniently this afternoon.

A couple of speakers employed the time-honored "no one uses the bike lane" argument. Since they were standing right next to the bike lane in question, it was plain to see the dozens of people riding by during the course of the event. (A DOT traffic count last month tallied 990 cyclists in one 12-hour span.) Other well-worn assertions -- that the bike lane has hurt business and worsened congestion -- were similarly offered without supporting facts.

All the while, Gerson attempted to portray himself as an advocate for street safety who just wants to get everyone on the same page, by taking into account such factors as "the needs of traffic flow." When a reporter suggested that this was a recipe for inaction, Gerson argued that it is ultimately futile "to pit local neighborhoods against cyclists."

Set aside, for the moment, that the Grand Street bike lane is probably quite well-used by neighborhood residents (Gerson's district is nearly 80 percent car-free). Who's doing the "pitting" here? Fewer people are getting hurt on Grand Street now than before the protected bike path was installed. Wouldn't a public servant committed to safer streets try to preserve those gains? If there's some tension between pedestrians and cyclists, Alan Gerson could use his "town halls" to get people talking about how they can get the most out of a much-needed safety enhancement. Instead, he's simply escalating the conflict.

Video: Elizabeth Press

Last night at the Council District 1 candidates debate, in the "lightning round" (one-line answers), a question was "Grand St. bike lane: good or bad."

All the candidates came out strongly against it to the cheers of some in the crowd. Only PJ Kim, the last to comment, tempered his statement with, "but we must not demonize bikers." They all either flatly opposed congestion pricing or want carve-outs for residents (pandering, hmmm?) and opposed East River tolls.

On the congestion pricing question (about 1:31:00 into this audio file posted on the Lo-Down), Pete Gleason and Alan Gerson were the two to outright oppose the idea -- although the incumbent Gerson voted for pricing last year. Margaret Chin, the only candidate to express any support for bridge tolls (check the 1:32:00 mark), qualified her answer by saying that car-poolers should be exempt.

Any exemption for congestion pricing or bridge tolls, of course, opens the door to more exemptions. The first people who will take advantage? Exactly the same placard-holders whom District 1 candidates rightly blame for clogging downtown streets.

We're talking about a district that is absolutely pummeled by bridge traffic, where about 80 percent of the households don't own a car. Those who do own one earn nearly two-and-a half times those who don't, on average [PDF]. There was a great opportunity here for a savvy candidate to separate from the pack on livable streets issues. And yet, no one chose to grab it.