Norma and Gordon Yeager died following a car crash this month. Photo: Times-Republican

And while this heartwarming story (more about the couple’s sweet life than their sad death) seems unique, it is not. It is quite common for the media to miss the point in stories about crashes involving older drivers.

While we don’t know the medical facts of this particular case, the elderly are more likely to die or sustain debilitating injuries in crashes that would cause less serious harm to younger people. After age 70, drivers are twice as likely to be involved in fatal crashes, per mile driven, as they were when middle-aged; after age 85, they are nine times more dangerous to themselves and others.

Two weeks ago, Gordon Yeager failed to yield at an intersection. He and his wife died. The crash sent another couple to the hospital. Missing from most media reports was the fact that Gordon Yeager “was facing pending action by the Iowa Department of Transportation to have his license removed” at the time.

The media conversation around aging drivers tends to focus on the anguish surrounding the question of when and how to take the car keys from Grandma or Grandpa, but rarely do these stories take us all the way to a family’s decision to do so. In a landscape built for cars and a culture built on the sanctity of independence, it feels horrible to be responsible for circumscribing a loved one’s life. As hinted at by the inconclusiveness of these stories, we often avoid this responsibility. Because there’s more hand-wringing than decision-making going on, it can take several traffic crashes before a driver is barred from the road, whether voluntarily or by family members or the government.

The desirability of extending the driving life of older people is largely taken as a given. Consequently, the media tend to play up assuaging statistics showing that older drivers tend to self-regulate and drive less; they offer non-threatening solutions such as more driver education, more automotive technology, or use of car-based services.

It would be better to focus not on the means — driving the car — but the motive, which is maintaining the mobility that a landscape built around personal vehicles will inevitably deny the aged.

Because driving and cars are bound up with cultural values, emotion rules. The act of getting a driver’s license is infused with the headiness of freedom and individualism, making the denial of one seem to be a loss of these fiercely held ideals. Licensing has been made a rite of passage, making un-licensing nearly a death rite.

But set aside Gram and Gramps for a minute. Set aside even the alarming transformation of 78 million Baby Boomers into Grams and Grampses in the next few decades. What about everybody else? Today, we are all at greater risk of injury and death than we would be if fewer people, young and old, got around by driving. And even if we’re not elderly now, it’s in our own self-interest to get steely-eyed about the future — that is, if we wish to avoid becoming the subject of angst-ridden family conferences and if we wish to avoid being killed (or becoming a killer) just making our way to the supermarket. Instead of looking at stories like the Yeagers’ through the haze of tears, we should focus on what we can do now to ensure that we don’t face the choice of too many seniors: Drive or stay at home.

Some of the steps we can take will be personal, like deciding to make the next move, not the last move, to a home in a walkable area. Or getting and staying fit now so we can safely bike or walk as we age. A whole host of other solutions necessarily involve government, some of which, such as increasing pedestrian safety, can be accomplished quickly and cheaply. Others will take decades to be realized: big changes in how we plan and redevelop our communities and aggressive expansions of transit, intelligently tailored for town and region. Spare the Kleenex please, and let’s get to it. We’re not getting any younger.

Anne Lutz Fernandez, a former investment banker and marketing executive, is co-author, with anthropologist Catherine Lutz, of Carjacked: The Culture of the Automobile and Its Effect on Our Lives.

DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan with City Council Member Melissa Mark-Viverito (left) and Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs (background right). Photos: Brad Aaron

Joined by East Harlem seniors, advocates and City Council members, transportation commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan today kicked off a program to provide new and improved sidewalk seating.

CityBench, a product of PlaNYC 2.0, will bring 1,000 shiny steel benches to locations across the five boroughs. The first two were installed outside the Leonard Covello Senior Center on E. 109th Street, where Sadik-Khan said the primary aim of the initiative is to make streets and sidewalks more accommodating to seniors and the mobility-impaired.

“CityBench brings a new design standard that elevates our streetscapes and simply makes it easier and more enjoyable for New Yorkers of every age to walk and take transit,” said Sadik-Khan. The benches will be sited strategically near bus stops, commercial districts and areas with large populations of seniors and the physically disabled. Members of the public may also recommend locations via 311.

“Not only will these benches allow seniors and other residents to sit down and rest, they will also enable them to chat with their neighbors about their day, their families, and the overall state of the community,” said Mark-Viverito, who was lauded by Sadik-Khan for her work in bringing separated bike lanes to First and Second Avenues. Council Member Jessica Lappin and Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs were also on hand.

The lion’s share of funding — 80 percent — for the $3 million CityBench program comes from the Federal Transit Administration, with New York State DOT covering another 10 percent.

After the crowd from the presser had for the most part dispersed, I spoke with bench designer Ignacio Ciocchini, who is director of design for Chelsea Improvement Company. Ciocchini said every facet of the bench was developed with the city in mind, from the powder-coated steel, designed to dissipate heat and shed snow, to the 26-inch seats, allowing for what Ciocchini described as “proper social space” and intended to leave room for whatever a pedestrian might be carrying, from a shopping bag to a small child.

“It fits all sizes,” said Covello Center executive director Suleika Cabrera. “It’s fantastic.”

Residents can suggest a CityBench location by calling 311.

Whether in rural or urban contexts, complete streets make sure there is room for all users to have safe space on the street. Image: TSTC

Complete streets legislation passed both houses of the state legislature unanimously yesterday. With Governor Andrew Cuomo expected to sign the legislation, safer and more inclusive road design should be coming soon to streets across the state.

“Everyone knew that something had to be done,” said AARP New York legislative director Bill Ferris, “so the political will was there.” In the five largest upstate counties, a pedestrian is killed by a car every ten days. On Long Island, a pedestrian is killed once a week, and in New York City, once every two and a half days. Older pedestrians are disproportionately killed in traffic crashes.

Complete streets legislation would require planners to take account of all users, including those on foot, on a bicycle, or with limited mobility, when designing a road that receives state or federal funds.

After stalling out in the Assembly in the past, the complete streets bill passed this year due to some changes to the legislation’s language and support from the governor’s office, said Ferris. “The argument that it was an unfunded mandate was put to bed,” he explained, by including a provision clarifying that municipalities wouldn’t have to spend more on complete streets projects than what was already allocated from state and federal funding. Since the governor’s office participated in the crafting of that language, explained Ferris, “we believe that the governor will sign this into law.”

In addition to support from Cuomo’s office, the complete streets bill was able to continue forward in the Senate despite the change Democratic to Republican control, thanks to support from the new chair of the transportation committee, Charles Fuschillo. “Senator Fuschillo picked up the reins on this issue from last year and pushed it over the top,” said Ferris.

Assuming that the complete streets bill is signed into law, Ferris said that AARP will next be looking into ensuring that there is sufficient funding for pedestrian and bike projects and the state DOT’s Safe Seniors program.

Older people are at much greater risk of being killed by a car while walking, especially in downstate New York. Image: Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

Pedestrians over the age of 60 are particularly at risk when walking on the streets of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, a new report from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign shows. According to “Older Pedestrians at Risk,” an updated version of similar research from last year, the pedestrian fatality rate for those over 60 is more than 2.5 times as high as for those under 60. Senior citizens over the age of 75 are likelier still to be killed by cars while walking, with a fatality rate 3.1 times higher than for those under 60.

Between 2007 and 2009, 433 pedestrians over the age of 60 were killed in traffic crashes in the tri-state area. Two hundred and seventy one were killed on roads in downstate New York. Programs like New York City’s Safe Streets for Seniors have saved lives, said Tri-State, but they need additional funding for more widespread implementation.

Bill Ferris, the legislative director for AARP in New York, said the Tri-State report “showed some disturbing trends in how older persons are disproportionately killed walking in their own communities. This is unacceptable to AARP.”

The Tri-State authors identified four reasons that older pedestrians were disproportionately in danger from traffic. Older people are less able to quickly move out of the way of an oncoming vehicle and likely to sustain greater injuries from the same crash, two factors which contribute to an elevated pedestrian fatality rate nationwide. Design-wise, seniors suffer when streets are designed for a younger population, as when traffic lights don’t provide enough time for a slower person to safely cross the street.

In the tri-state area, however, older pedestrians are at even greater risk of being killed by cars than they are nationwide. The ability to remain active without needing to drive is a major boon for the area’s seniors, but staying out and about does mean staying exposed to the risk of traffic crashes.

Large numbers of older, active residents is part of why Brooklyn had the highest pedestrian fatality rate for people over 60 of any county in the entire tri-state area, an ignominious title that belonged to Manhattan in last year’s report. Brooklynites over the age of 60 made up 46 percent of all pedestrian fatalities in the borough even though they only make up 16.3 percent of the population. Factsheets for each county in the region can be found on Tri-State’s website.

As the region’s population continues to age, ensuring that older residents are able to walk safely will become only more important. “It all points to the need for New York State legislature to pass complete streets legislation in order to make our roads safer for all users,” said Ferris. Complete streets legislation, currently pending in Albany, is particularly important considering the finding that seniors are disproportionately killed on large arterial roads, the kind of streets that are targeted by the bill.

I had to pull this Marcia Kramer segment out of the headline stack and post it, because you’ve got to see it to believe it.

Earlier this week, CBS2′s chief political correspondent went down to Borough Park to expose the pedestrian refuge threat. Intro: “The Department of Transportation has struck again.” With its outlandish Safe Streets for Seniors program!

Safe Streets for Seniors targets sections of the city with high populations of senior citizens and high rates of pedestrian injuries. It’s linked to a broader citywide initiative called Age-Friendly NYC. When Mayor Bloomberg, DOT and the Department for the Aging launched the program in 2008, they aimed to improve pedestrian safety for seniors in 25 neighborhoods. Borough Park is one of those focus areas, and the pedestrian refuges DOT installed on Fort Hamilton Parkway are designed to make it safer to cross the street.

Marcia Kramer doesn’t say a word about that in her report. She refrains from acknowledging, in general, that people walk.

She does say that pedestrian refuges, still under construction, are frowned upon by local rabbis, slow down fire trucks, and get in the way of ambulances. These refuges are also, apparently, killing local businesses and forcing delivery vehicles to park on the sidewalk. Take Kramer’s word for it.

The rabbis seem to be mainly concerned about emergency vehicle response. While to my eye there’s no evidence in this video that the refuges are causing fire trucks to lose time or making ambulance drivers engage in maneuvers that they don’t already use to negotiate traffic-clogged streets, it’s worth taking a closer look at these claims, because they’re so common among traffic calming foes.

First of all, FDNY recently embarked on its own internal traffic calming project. Because the 442 trucks in the department’s fleet are involved in several hundred major crashes every year — 684 in 2008 — FDNY started testing out the policy of driving normally when responding to less urgent calls. FDNY chief Salvatore Cassano told the Times:

“Often, responding to a call can be even more dangerous for our members than the incident itself,” Mr. Cassano added. “We want to minimize the danger this poses to firefighters and the public.”

So FDNY recognizes that rounding corners at high speed in huge trucks can pose risks that outweigh the benefits of responding a few seconds earlier.

Here’s how Traffic author Tom Vanderbilt has described the trade-offs of designing roads to maximize fire response times:

…the risk of dying in a fire in the U.S. is roughly the same as drowning: In one year, 1 in 88,000, and, over a lifetime, 1 in 1100. The risk of dying in a car crash, according to the article, is 1 out of 6500 in a year. The risk of being killed while being a pedestrian? “A one-year risk of one in 48,500 and a lifetime risk of one in 625.”

Designing roads to meet some supposed emergency response criteria, for that dramatic last-second rescue, actually helps raise the risk of dying in a much more common way: In traffic.

And while Kramer sees an ambulance swerve around a stopped car into an oncoming lane and blames the pedestrian refuge, maybe we ought to take a closer look at the driver’s decision. A growing body of research suggests that driving emergency vehicles at high speeds may not appreciably benefit patients. Slate reported earlier this year on a recent study in the Annals of Emergency Medicine, which found no correlation between patient mortality rates and the time it took to get patients to the hospital:

The authors studied more than 3,000 trauma patients—those with low blood pressures from bleeding, head injuries, and difficulty breathing—and looked at various time intervals after a 9-1-1 call. The times were compared with outcomes for the patients in the hospital. The result: shorter intervals did not appear to improve survival.

Update: Local City Council Member Brad Lander has a piece in the neighborhood paper Hamodia today supporting the Safe Streets for Seniors project in Borough Park. It’s not online but here’s an excerpt about the need for this project:

On December 31st, 2009, a 74- year-old woman was hit by a truck and killed as she crossed Fort Hamilton Parkway at 49th Street in Boro Park. In April of this year, a 55-year-old person was killed crossing Fort Hamilton just a few blocks away. Nearby, several other pedestrians have been struck by cars. In 2008, when a car collision at Fort Hamilton and 44th Street killed two people, a local resident called it the “corner of death.”

So when the NYC Department of Transportation came out to Community Board 12 back in June to tell us about their plans to install a few pedestrian islands at key intersections along Fort Hamilton Parkway — as part of their “Safe Routes for Seniors” program — I thought it made sense to try to save the next senior citizen from getting killed. Boro Park has a high concentration of seniors, and we’ve seen too many of them hit by cars in recent years.

Reader Lisa Sladkus sent in these photos of new pedestrian refuges on West End Avenue in the 60s. Above is the refuge that just went in at 66th Street, and after the jump you can see one on 61st Street. Both are awaiting plantings in their tree pits.

These refuges are the most visible improvements in DOT's Safe Streets for Seniors project on the Upper West Side [PDF], one of 25 areas where street safety measures are slated to help reduce the risk of traffic injuries for older New Yorkers. The UWS project will also lengthen walk signals, install leading pedestrian intervals to give pedestrians a head start before traffic can turn into the crosswalk, and add curb extensions at more than a dozen street corners on Amsterdam, Broadway, and Central Park West. Some of those neckdowns have started to pop up already, and more are coming in the next two years, once the Department of Design and Construction gets down to it.

Other neighborhoods receiving Safe Streets for Seniors improvements this summer are Chinatown, Jamaica Hills, Borough Park, Midwood, and Sheepshead Bay (where safer streets go unappreciated by Brooklyn Community Board 15).

Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs. Photo: City Hall News

The Age-Friendly New York City agenda includes 59 initiatives meant to make it easier to age in the city, including building traffic calming public spaces and redesigning the city's most dangerous intersections. Bloomberg's remarks didn't specifically mention the pedestrian safety aspects of the plan, but he did reaffirm his commitment to follow through on the entire Age-Friendly program. "When we take on a project," he said, "we actually do it." 

Quinn focused more closely on street redesigns. "Through complete streets, we're making New York a place that's safe in every way for seniors," she told the audience. In April, Quinn stood with AARP in front of the Ninth Avenue protected bike lane to participate in a safety audit. Discussing that experience last night, Quinn said that the redesigns of Eighth and Ninth had helped fix "two very problematic corners" at 23rd Street.

Perhaps most striking, it seems that livable streets advocates have a potential ally in Deputy Mayor Gibbs, who oversees the Age-Friendly New York City program. Discussing NYCDOT's Safe Routes for Seniors program, Gibbs had particular praise for neckdowns at dangerous intersections. "It creates an intentional bottleneck that not only makes the distance shorter, but slows down the traffic as it approaches the intersection," she said, "so you have a double benefit."

To keep seniors safe, one area that would especially benefit from Gibbs' influence is Manhattan's East Side.

The wide avenues there remain particularly dangerous for older pedestrians: AARP called attention to the problem in January, and Yorkville is targeted for a Safe Routes for Seniors treatment. While the original plans for re-designing First and Second Avenues included pedestrian refuge islands, which are of particular benefit to older New Yorkers, along most of the corridor south of 125th Street, as of this month the administration will only fully commit to pedestrian safety improvements south of 34th Street. 

When asked whether she'd support restoring refuge islands to the full extent of the original plan, Gibbs said she just didn't know that level of detail about the First and Second Avenue redesign, which isn't under her direct supervision. The original plan earned the support of community boards and elected officials representing the length of Manhattan, and more importantly, would save seniors' lives in East Harlem, the Upper East Side, and Midtown. It's an essential, and shovel-ready, way to make good on the promises of Age-Friendly New York City. 

The intersection of Bleecker and Carmine is located in New York's most dangerous county for older pedestrians. Photo: A. Strakey/Flickr.

Older pedestrians across America are at higher risk of being killed in a car crash, but the problem is particularly acute in downstate New York. Nationally, pedestrian fatality rates are 1.5 times as high for Americans 60 and older than for those under 60. In downstate New York, older pedestrians are killed 3.7 times as often. The pedestrian fatality rate for those over 75 is even higher, almost five times that of those under 60. 

Between 2006 and 2008, 290 pedestrians aged 60 or over were killed by drivers in downstate New York.

Culling information from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Tri-State found that of the 12 downstate counties, Manhattan had the highest rate of pedestrian fatalities among senior citizens. Because seniors walk more in New York City, the need to build streets where they can get around safely is all the more striking.

"In most of the country, once you age out of driving you're kind of stranded," said Tri-State's Michelle Ernst. "New York is great because you can walk, but that means that more older people are exposed to the dangers of being hit and killed by an automobile." Brooklyn had the second highest rate of pedestrian fatalities among older residents, followed by Nassau County, Staten Island, and Orange County. County-by-county fact-sheets are available on Tri-State's website.

Tri-State offered a number of recommendations for how to address the crisis of senior safety. In Albany, they highlight complete streets legislation, which has strong backing from AARP, and vulnerable user legislation, like Hayley and Diego's law.

At the local level, they recommend instituting or expanding programs like New York City's Safe Routes for Seniors, which targets pedestrian infrastructure in neighborhoods with high concentrations of older residents. "NYCDOT has been a leader in this field," said Ernst, highlighting infrastructure improvements like pedestrian refuge islands and longer crosswalk times as particularly important for older pedestrians.

Finally, Tri-State called for shifting federal funds from the Highway Safety Improvement Program and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program to pedestrian safety.

AARP is due to release a similar report on older pedestrian fatalities in five upstate counties as well. That report could "spur some activity with some upstate legislators" said Will Stoner, AARP's Associate State Director for Livable Communities. Assembly Transportation Committee chair David Gantt, whose support is critical for passing complete streets legislation, represents Rochester. 

Ernst stressed that taking these steps can help take the fear out of crossing the street and make New York a safer place to grow old. "It's grandparents," she said. "They've seen so much in their lives that to be struck down while walking down the street is just really tragic."

CB 15 member Mitchell Shpelfogel questions why pedestrian refuges should be installed to make streets safer for seniors to cross, instead of dedicated left-turn signals.

But that didn't stop the members of CB 15 from proving that real authority should be kept far, far away from the appointees who serve indefinite tenures on community boards. After the Q&A on Select Bus Service, they sank their teeth into a DOT presentation about a Safe Streets for Seniors project which promises to deliver safety enhancements like longer crossing times, sidewalk extensions, and pedestrian refuges to several intersections with histories of injury-causing crashes. Below are a few typical concerns raised by board members after each presentation.

You might think some, if not all, of these objections to safer streets and better transit were offered in a spirit of jest. I honestly can't tell whether that's the case. Read on and judge for yourself -- sincere NIMBYism, or one community board's idea of a cruel joke?

From the Q&A on Select Bus Service:

• Sure, SBS is successful and popular in the Bronx, but you can't compare the Bronx to Brooklyn. 
• "With Mayor Bloomberg aiming to go green," said one participant, "the thought of hundreds of thousands of paper receipts worries me."
• "Why would you even take the bus?" (Editor's note: 42,000 people ride the B44 every weekday.)
  

From the Q&A on DOT's Safe Streets for Seniors project:

• Pedestrian refuges with tree pits are bad because "trees make about 100,000 people in New York sneeze." Also, when the trees shed their leaves in the fall, the refuges will be rendered virtually invisible to unsuspecting motorists.
  
• "People who drive cars are idiots," so just forget about traffic calming devices like pedestrian refuges, which might get in the way of the idiots who drive cars.
  
• An elderly gentleman complained that when he's driving and turns his car, pedestrians in the crosswalk are sometimes in his way. When asked to elaborate, he said, "They're confused, I'm confused. I just pray they're aware of what's happening around them."
  
• A refuge that's already been constructed at Coney Island Avenue and Brighton Beach Avenue has been a disaster, according to CB member Mitchell Shpelfogel. "Maybe there's a sense of seniors feeling more comfortable," he said, "but the damage to cars has increased."
  

Kicking off a day of street surveys across the state, the group met at the corner of Ninth Avenue and 23rd Street, an intersection that had been particularly hazardous for the older residents of the nearby Penn South co-op.

One Penn South resident recounted her memories of living above the intersection before a redesign of the corridor brought refuge islands along Ninth to protect both pedestrians and cyclists. "Every time I heard a siren on Ninth Avenue," she said, "I ran out to see if it was one of our seniors."

Council Speaker Christine Quinn praised "the success we've had at 23rd and Ninth," and promised that the city would "replicate" it. "I'm looking forward to more safely strolling across intersections across the city," Quinn said. Quinn also noted the development of Age-Friendly NYC, a set of 59 initiatives to help New York City become more hospitable to a growing senior population. Traffic calming and street redesigns were an important piece of that document.

AARP's top pedestrian safety priority is complete streets legislation working its way through the state legislature. That bill, which has the support of the chairs of the transportation and aging committees in both the Assembly and Senate, would ensure that all streets statewide are designed with the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, people with disabilities, and transit riders in mind.

AARP street surveys account for drivers who speed and block crosswalks, pedestrian crossing times as they relate to signal lengths, and other important safety metrics. Five-hundred intersections across New York State were to be observed today, 70 of them in the city. Results will be sent to both the state and local departments of transportation. Once the data is analyzed, Quinn said, individual council members will follow up with DOT on trouble spots in their respective districts. Some city-wide policies may be necessary, added Quinn, but "a lot of that will come from the data."

New council transportation chair James Vacca, an AARP member himself, said that New York City needs to be "a safe, safe haven" for all its residents. Improvements are necessary, he said, in order for senior citizens to have "safe access to anywhere they want to go."

Vacca and Quinn could step up by attaching their names to Intro 120, which would require NYPD to publicize traffic crash information, enabling citizens and advocates to more effectively push for safety improvements. Plugging the bill today was co-sponsor Jessica Lappin, chair of the Committee on Aging. "We are a city of walkers," said Lappin, but "when you start pushing a stroller around, you start to notice where there aren't curb cuts, or where it's hard to cross the street."

Select Bus Service's new low-floor buses will make it easier for seniors to get on and off the bus. Image: Second Avenue Sagas.

Last night the MTA and DOT continued their tour of East Side community boards, presenting plans for better bus service and safer streets to the Manhattan CB 11 transportation committee. Attendance was low, but the community board made clear that its chief concern was the plan's impact on senior citizens.

CB 11 represents the area east of Fifth Avenue between 96th and 142nd Streets. Because the MTA and DOT are still determining whether buses will run next to the curb or in an offset lane in this district, Joe Barr, DOT's director of transit development, noted that he's looking to hear specifically where the bus lane should run. The committee lacked both a quorum and its chair, however, so a more thorough discussion of the two designs was tabled until next month's meeting.

The few questions that surfaced from CB members mainly underscored concerns for seniors. Concerns that were, for the most part, easily resolved. After Barr mentioned that the sidewalk on bus bulbs would be raised to make boarding more level, one board member asked whether bus riders would have to step up onto the higher curb. Her worry dissipated after Barr explained that there wouldn't be a step up, only a gradual slope.

It didn't come up in the Q&A session, but older New Yorkers stand to benefit from the plan's safety improvements, with pedestrian refuge islands creating shorter, more manageable distances to cross on the East Side's wide avenues. 

Another issue that didn't surface last night but falls right in the middle of the CB 11 district is street safety near the Triborough and Willis Avenue bridges. When the East Side plans were first presented last month, Elena Conte of the Pratt Center for Community Development suggested that planners consider improvements for pedestrians and cyclists who use the Willis Avenue Bridge and encounter extremely hazardous conditions near the foot of the Triborough.

"It would be a mistake if they don’t look at the bike-pedestrian safety around the Triborough Bridge, even though it technically might be outside the scope" of the project, Conte told Streetsblog. "That area is crying out for it, it’s a horror show, and it’s important to both the South Bronx and East Harlem."

The presentation did reveal a few new details about the plan. Barr said planners are looking at creating a midday window when regulations against parking in the exclusive bus lanes would not be in effect, so businesses can receive curbside deliveries. Under current plans, he said, SBS service would run on weekdays until 11 p.m.

In addition, Benson told the crowd that some of the pedestrian refuge islands would only consist of paint at first. "We won't be able to build them all in one season," he said. "We'll be playing a bit of catch-up." Finally, while the renderings of the design still show flexible bollards between the bike lane and the floating parking lane, those bollards are no longer part of the plan. Instead, there will only be paint, as on Grand Street.

The Rego Park senior focus area, which includes several blocks of Queens Boulevard, is slated for pedestrian improvements. Click here to enlarge. Image: NYCDOT.

DOT presented two plans to improve safety in Forest Hills and Rego Park, including a preliminary Safe Streets for Seniors proposal which encompasses a significant stretch of the traffic nightmare that is Queens Boulevard. Although the committee didn't vote on either one, members by and large reacted favorably.

Rego Park is home to one of 25 "Senior Pedestrian Focus Areas" that DOT has targeted for safety improvements due to a high density of crashes involving older pedestrians. Throughout the focus area, said DOT's Hillary Poole, signals will be recalibrated to give pedestrians more time to cross the street, and deteriorating pedestrian infrastructure will be replaced or refurbished. The project might also include some combination of high-visibility crosswalks, neckdowns, pedestrian refuge islands, road narrowing, or leading pedestrian intervals, pending results of a DOT study. The agency hasn't yet decided whether Queens Boulevard itself would receive a much-needed expansion of pedestrian space, but a wide variety of safety improvements are on the table for the whole area.

These ideas went over well with the committee, which seemed eager for some immediate action. One member asked whether the focus area could be expanded to a few intersections he felt were missing. Committee chair John Dereszewski told the DOT presenters that "if there's anything that doesn't have any cost, like signs or paint, you shouldn't wait for the final report."

The committee also heard a presentation from Queens DOT Commissioner Maura McCarthy proposing a street redesign for 67th Drive between Austin Street and Queens Boulevard. Motorists drive down that stretch too quickly, residents say, especially since their vision is limited by a hill along the street.

67th Drive at Queens Boulevard. Image: Google Street View.

DOT recommended giving 67th a road diet by converting it from a two-way to a one-way street and using that space to turn one lane of parallel parking into angled parking. According to McCarthy, the narrower street would reduce traffic speeds and add 20 new parking spaces.

A telling moment came when McCarthy mentioned an alternative traffic calming solution -- daylighting 67th Drive, which would make pedestrians more visible to motorists by removing parking spaces near intersections. The entire room groaned audibly. (Similarly, when Poole noted that the Safe Streets for Seniors redesign in Brighton Beach included a bike lane, she quickly caught herself: "Not to say we're installing any bike lanes here!") So, while the committee appeared ready to embrace the prospect of relatively major street redesigns for the Safe Streets for Seniors projects, the loss of a few on-street spaces to improve safety on 67th seemed too much to bear.

As for the one-way-plus-angled parking proposal, Dereszewski said that if the recommendation "were a stop sign, we'd vote on this today without objection." The committee informally decided, without objection, to consider DOT's recommendations and talk with the residents of 67th Drive before making any decisions.

AARP volunteer Marlene Ramsey tracks safety conditions on Third Avenue. Photo: Noah Kazis.

Third Avenue is seven lanes wide at this location, so it's perhaps no surprise that so many tragedies occur there. Small fixes, though, could make a big difference. Volunteer Marlene Ramsey identified the crosswalks, badly in need of repainting and more visible zebra stripes, as the biggest problem with the intersection. Standing next to her, Alice Wade requested countdown timers for walk signs. Without them, she said, "I have to rush across the street and be scared I'll fall."

Some of the surveyors had personal experience with the hazards of Third Avenue. Volunteer Bobby Lee, who lives between Second and Third Avenues, explained his motivation for fighting for safer streets. "There was an older adult in my neighborhood who got run over by a bus," he said. "The bus driver was traumatized and the older adult was dead." Susan Ryckman, who lives on Third Avenue, reported, "I had two close calls walking here today. It really is dangerous."

The survey results will be released in the near future, and AARP will send the findings to NYCDOT in hopes of making Third and 49th safe for pedestrians. But the work won't end there. The volunteers, all of whom were new to transportation activism, will soon put their experience to work on their own blocks, conducting walkability surveys.

AARP volunteers from the other four boroughs, as well as from nearby suburban counties, will also perform similar surveys. Together, says AARP's Will Stoner, these activists will help advocate for a statewide complete streets bill in Albany in the current legislative session, part of a campaign for livable streets at the local, state, and federal levels that should pay big dividends for all street users. "If you design a roadway for someone older," said Stoner, "it'll be safer for people with baby carriages or really anyone else."

Greenpoint maven Miss Heather, who blogs at New York Shitty, has noticed an increase in the number of seniors wheeling their electric scooters through neighborhood bike lanes. The reason, she suspects, is that "some of our sidewalks do not necessarily make the best terrain for such vehicles (or pedestrians, for that matter)." 

After I shot this video a passerby asked me why I was laughing. I assured her I was not laughing at this woman for having mobility problems and using a scooter. I explained to her that I have seen no less than five people employ the bike lanes on Manhattan Avenue in just such a manner this week alone.

Inasmuch as some might think to the contrary, this neighborhood is not just for the young and wealthy. It’s for everyone. Way to go my fellow Greenpointers. THIS is what I call “taking back the streets”!

Streetsblog contributor Captain Disko has observed likewise down in the Slope, where double-parked delivery trucks lead to whole new hazards.

DOT's Safe Streets for Seniors has targeted problem spots around the city for upgrades, but obstacles to senior mobility are clearly more widespread. When faced with the choice of impassable sidewalks or taking their chances among much faster moving vehicles, what are scooter-dependent seniors to do?

Two drivers fled the scene. One remains at large. The other was found by police and said he didn't know he'd hit anyone. No charges have been filed.

From the Daily News:

James Dong, 60, a customer operations representative at Con Ed, was on the Bowery in Manhattan about 1:30 p.m. As he was about to enter a company vehicle, a tractor-trailer came roaring down the street, slammed into him and kept going.

"There were body parts all over the street," said Jill Haas, 48, a small-business owner from Chicago.

Dong was pronounced dead at the scene, where fellow Con Ed workers cried and looked on in amazement.

The driver, who was unaware he hit Dong, was stopped on a highway in Brooklyn but was not charged.

It seems doubtful that Mr. Dong's age had anything to do with his death. He, like so many pedestrian victims before him, was simply at the wrong place (i.e. on a street, on a sidewalk, in a restaurant) at the wrong time (i.e. when another driver neglects to pay attention to where the hell s/he is going, or how fast s/he is traveling, regardless of the fact that his/her vehicle is negotiating an environment where most fellow street users are not wrapped in steel).

Which is the bigger menace to society: a driver who flees the scene after tearing apart a live human being with his vehicle, or one who tears apart a live human being with his vehicle without noticing? That's a trick question, of course. In New York City the answer is none of the above -- or, possibly, cyclists.

Mr. Sydnor and Ms. Morrissey appear to be two of the many seniors, whether in New York or elsewhere in the US, for whom the streets are more dangerous than most.

A few hours earlier in Queens, Bernard Sydnor, 69, was operating his motorized wheelchair across the street at Jewel Ave. and Parsons Blvd.

About 11 a.m., a car slammed into the Community Board 8 member and Korean War veteran.

Sydnor, who lives alone but has two adult sons, was rushed to New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens, where a spokeswoman said he was in critical condition Friday night. His sons were by his side.

The driver who hit Sydnor stayed at the scene and was not charged.

Early Friday, Bridget Morrissey, 74, took her daily trip to her daughter's nearby home in Bay Ridge for her Alzheimer's disease medication.

The great-grandmother was crossing 75th St. at 14th Ave. at about 7 a.m. when a gray car crashed into her and didn't stop.

Morrissey, who worked at a nursing home for 35 years before retiring, died at the scene.

No arrests have been made.

The location of the Bay Ridge Parkway hit-and-run that claimed Bridget Morrissey is bracketed by intersections where two other pedestrians have been killed since 1995. Jewel Avenue in Queens, where Mr. Sydnor was struck, was the site of much-needed safety improvements last year -- implemented over the objections of the local community board and City Council member. Last year DOT also launched Safe Streets for Seniors, a plan to revisit streets in each borough with the elderly in mind.

But short of a Vision Zero strategy, engineering is only part of the solution. Enforcement, and, ideally, subsequent changes in driver attitude and behavior, are critical. Again, to paraphrase Michael Kodransky: Had three New Yorkers been killed by falling cranes on Friday, the city would be in an uproar. That pedestrians every day face death at the hands of motorists, who now apparently need not even remain at the scene to be cleared of wrongdoing, should be greeted with the same level of outrage and scrutiny.

And in case you need another reminder of how far gone we are, even in that rare instance when a driver is prosecuted, remember Tenzing Bhutia.

Photo: New York Daily News 

A recent poll conducted by AARP finds that Americans over the age of 50 are cutting down on car trips due to rising gas prices, but are finding public infrastructure, or lack thereof, to be an obstacle.

Almost one of every three people (29%) polled say they are now walking as a way to avoid high gas prices. But as those people set out to walk, almost 40% of the 50+ population say they do not have adequate sidewalks in their neighborhoods. Additionally, 44% say they do not have nearby public transportation that is accessible. Almost half (47%) of poll responders say they cannot cross the main roads safely – 4 in 10 pedestrian fatalities are over the age of 50.

Still, 40 percent of poll respondents say they have walked, biked, or taken public transit more frequently since gasoline prices began trending upward. More than half, 54 percent, say they would use alternate modes of transportation if conditions were improved.

As older New Yorkers can attest, impediments to car-free mobility are not exclusive to suburbs and exurbs. Washington, DC, for example, ranks ninth -- better than Arizona but worse than Florida -- in pedestrian fatalities among those over age 65, according to AARP. (New York state is third worst, behind Hawaii and Alaska.)

With some 35 million members, AARP is a formidable lobby. As a member of the National Complete Streets Coalition and backer of legislation that would steer federal funds toward making roadways accessible to all users, it promises to be a player in next year's big transportation appropriations bill.

Photo: Tuan Phan/Flickr

In the last week or so, the New York Times, the Sun, Gothamist and Curbed have all run stories about the City's plan to build new bike lanes across the Upper East Side and the community members who are flipping out about it. The whole thing is entirely reminiscent of the intense irrationality surrounding the City's recently implemented plan to stripe bike lanes on 9th Street in Brooklyn.

The Upper East Side controversy centers on the block of 91st Street between Second and Third Avenues. That particular block is a quiet, pedestrian "play street," closed to motor vehicle traffic for about thirty years now. Here's how the Times reported it on Sunday:

But this month, the quietude has been interrupted by a tug of war over a plan to install a bicycle lane through the space. The bike lane would connect Central Park and the East River bike path with one-way paths along East 91st and 90th Streets.

Here's the thing: The Times story, like all of the others, is incorrect. DOT has no plans to install a bike lane on that stretch of 91st St. DOT's preference and plan is to leave that block alone.

Streetsblog was the only press to cover the Community Board 8 transportation committee meeting on July 9 where the City presented its plan. At that meeting, DOT representatives said repeatedly that they preferred to "to keep the residential feel" of that block by not striping a bike lane or any other markings on that stretch of 91st Street.

Rather, the bike lane would start and end on either side of the block. The pedestrian street would be part of the bike route leading to Central Park's "Engineers Gate" at 91st Street and Fifth Ave., but it would not be physically changed in any way at all. It would still be a public street and "shared space" prioritizing pedestrians. Cyclists moving through the street would only be permitted to travel westbound, which is actually a relatively steep uphill bike ride. Eastbound cyclists would be directed to 90th Street.

DOT's "controversial" plan, in other words, is to do absolutely nothing to the community's beloved "play street" except, perhaps, guiding all potential fast-moving, downhill cyclists away from 91st Street over to the new eastbound bike lane on 90th.

Below is the slide from DOT's Powerpoint presentation discussing that particular block (download the whole presentation here). Note that, rather than dictating terms to the Community Board, DOT presented four different options for this stretch of 91st Street. Granted, none of the options was, "No Bike Lane on 91st St.," which is what Board members ultimately voted for. The feeling in the room was summed up by one CB8 transportation committee member who said, "I for one believe bicycling is a recreational activity. I don't believe that it is a legitimate mode of transportation."

And these, dear readers, are the people who help oversee New York City transportation planning and policy on the neighborhood level. Have you looked in to the possibility of becoming a member of your local Community Board?

For those who are just coming in to the story, a few weeks ago the Department of Transportation put forward a thoughtful, responsive and well-designed "Road Diet" plan for Park Slope's dangerous, crash-prone 9th Street. Sadly, a rather well organized group of residents led by a Community Board 6 executive committee member named Robert Levine has set out to kill the plan (or, at least, get rid of the bike lane portion of it).

Here is an unedited video clip of Levine making his case against DOT's plan at last month's CB6 board meeting:

Levine says at the outset, "I'm not against traffic calming. I'm not against bike lanes. I think the combination of both on 9th Street is a dangerous situation." To Bob, the bike lanes and the traffic calming are two entirely separate things.

I've now sat through three community meetings on this issue and have tried hard to explain how neighborhood streets designed to accomodate motorists, pedestrians, transit users and cyclists tend to be safer, more functional and more community-friendly than streets designed only for motor vehicle traffic. Bike lanes, in other words, are traffic calming and congestion relief and even a way to free up some parking spaces if they help people making local trips to leave their cars at home. U.S. planners call this idea "Complete Streets." In Europe, many call it "Shared Space."

While Levine is relatively calm in the video clip above, it has been exceedingly difficult to explain these ideas because each time I have spoken at a meeting he has, literally, tried to shout me down or use some procedural tactic to prevent me from being allowed to speak. It seems that the last thing Levine wants is for his neighbors to actually see DOT's plan and understand it.

Why all of the emotion and anger over this project (and where the heck was it when a 77-year-old woman was mowed down on 9th St. and Seventh Ave. in August 2004, about four doors down from Levine's own house)?

Bike lanes are clearly the primary target. But in the video above Levine's intensity kicks up a notch when he gets to the topic of double-parking:

We were told years ago that we can double park on 9^th Street the way one-way streets can [on street cleaning days]. The precinct captain told us at a block meeting that we would be allowed to do that since it wouldn't block the buses and there would still be plenty of room because the street is wide. And that lasted about a month until the meter maids started giving out tickets.

The bike lanes, it seems, are in the way of Bob Levine's double-parking. And while you might think that city officials would never prioritize double-parking over facilities that keep cyclists safer, get them off the sidewalks and help the city as a whole become more environmentally sustainable, Levine has been effective in getting elected officials to press his case.

State Assembly Member Jim Brennan has contacted DOT on behalf of the Ninth Street Block Association and in a letter to Acting DOT Commissioner Judith Bergtraum, State Senator Eric Adams wrote, "Prior to placing these lanes on a street used as a main traffic hub, one must consider alternatives." Adams asks, "What studies or proof has been provided to demonstrate that bike lanes contribute to a decrease in accidents?" Adams' Chief of Staff, Ingrid P. Lewis-Martin likewise told me on the phone, "the jury is out" on whether bike lanes make streets safer.

Actually, the jury delivered a clear verdict on that issue.

In September 2006 New York City's Departments of Transportation, Public Health and the NYPD came out with a report entitled, Bicyclist Fatalities and Serious Injuries in New York City 1996-2005 (PDF). The unprecedented multi-agency study found that of the 225 bicyclists who were killed on the streets of New York over that ten year period, only one fatality took place in a marked bike lane. The report concluded that bike lanes enhance motorists' awareness of bikes and are a significant contributor to cyclist safety.

If, however, as seems to be the case with Levine, your interest is in removing cyclists from 9th Street rather than keeping them safe, there is still a significant body of independent research showing how a "Road Diet" like the one proposed for 9th Street helps pedestrians and motorists by reducing the rate of car crashes, smoothing traffic flow and making a street safer and more comfortable for all users.

Bike lanes, it turns out, can be beneficial to New Yorkers who aren't even using bikes.  

Fortunately, Levine seems to be fighting a losing battle. This week's Brooklyn Papers letters page contains an absolute outpouring of support for DOT's plan and at its most recent shout-down, the Park Slope Civic Council managed to pass a motion thanking DOT for its "response to long-standing community concerns regarding the unusually high rate of motor vehicle crashes, injuries and fatalities along Park Slope's 9th Street" and offering some good suggestions for how to make the plan more palatable to the neighborhood. Council Member Bill de Blasio supports DOT's plan and it looks like a number of other elected officials are coming aboard as well. There will be an important meeting of CB6's transportation committee on Thursday, May 17 that supporters of DOT's plan need to attend.

I'm optimistic that by the end of July we'll see slimmer, trimmer, safer 9th Street. But the opponents of this plan have the energy, local political clout and free time to make things difficult. Let's just hope the politicians allow the planners do their job.

On Wednesday, Community Board 8 in Manhattan unanimously approved a proposal for conducting a feasibility study to physically connect Roosevelt Island to the Queensboro Bridge pedestrian and bike path. The proposal was put forth by Ellen Polivy of the Roosevelt Island Residents Association (RIRA) and the Roosevelt Island Community Emergency Response Team (CERT).  She made a compelling presentation to Community Board 8's transportation committee, citing the numerous benefits of the link from a public health, environmental and emergency preparedness perspective.

This is not a new concept. There used to be electric trolleys going over the Queensboro bridge and there was a stop at Roosevelt Island halfway across the bridge. People would then walk across to a building (see above photo of the Roosevelt Island elevator building) that had a number of elevators. These elevators were so big that they could fit the trucks and automobiles that supplied the island.

As recently as August 2004, Roosevelt Island residents faced what they refer to as "the perfect storm" of transportation problems (from a recent NY Times article - Times Select only)

...for a brief time, Roosevelt Island was cut off from the city that surrounds it.

All the means of access to the sliver-shaped island were out of service for about an hour that day, Aug. 12. The tram was down for a periodic tune-up. The Roosevelt Island Bridge, which lifts to allow boat traffic to pass through, was stuck in the open position. Electrical problems temporarily halted service on the F train.

However, the Department of Transportation is not considering the pedestrian-access proposal at this time. They cite security risks, the landmark status of the bridge and the need to maximize the flow of vehicles into Manhattan.

Kay Sarlin, a spokeswoman for the city Department of Transportation, raised doubts about a passageway that would have to be nearly 135 feet high.

''It's not feasible,'' she said. ''They'd have to remove a lane of traffic to put in an elevator.''

With an average of about 180,000 vehicle crossings a day, the Queensboro is one of the city's busiest bridges, and according to Ms. Sarlin, eliminating a lane for an elevator would hamper traffic. A stairway could not be installed because people with disabilities could not use it, she added, noting that such a change would also cause security problems. Further, she said, since the facade of the bridge has landmark status, altering it would present a problem.

Let's take each of these criticisms and see if they make any sense.

Security Risk: Here's an island with a projected population of 15,000-20,000 in the next few years, on an island that lacks a permanent pedestrian link to the rest of the city. In fact, the main emergency route of escape for residents, the lift bridge to Queens, is often closed in light of security risks to the UN when that body is in session or hosts major events and shipping traffic is routed to the eastern side of Roosevelt Island. In the case of a Category 3 hurricane hitting NYC, the whole island would need to be evacuated, and officials have not provided details of the escape plan to the CERT or the RIRA. It's a security risk for there to be no permanent link to the rest of the city.

Landmark Status: While it's great that the Queensboro Bridge has achieved landmark status, this status should not override legitimate security and public health priorities. Rather it should ensure that any alteration harmonizes with the structure's aesthetics -- you know, the way the building that connected the island to the bridge for four decades did.

Removing a Lane of the QBB Would be Bad: This assumes that maximum flow of automobiles into Manhattan would be a good thing, when in fact we know that the current design generates dangerous conditions for pedestrians and cyclists on the Manhattan side of the bridge. Even specific requests for action from the local City Councilmember Jessica Lappin have so far not resulted any safety improvements by the DOT. Never mind that we might just want fewer cars to be able to enter the Central Business District for environmental and public health reasons.

When asked about why the Community Board supported the proposal, David Liston, CB8 Chair wrote via email:

"We passed a resolution asking the City to look into the feasibility of providing another means of access to and from the Island by pedestrians and the physically challenged."

"The feasibility study we're asking the city to undertake would identify a variety of means of egress/ingress between Roosevelt Island and Manhattan and Queens. One suggestion was to look into a method utilizing the Queensboro Bridge -- making Manhattan accessible to Roosevelt Islanders on foot and those using mobility assistance devices."

"Making all parts of the borough accessible to all is a worthy goal and one the Community Board fully supports."



With the Community Board now unanimously supporting a feasibility study, it will be up to the new DOT Commissioner to reconsider this proposal.

Dear Neighbors

Seventy-five percent of our community members are concerned for their safety because of traffic, while only 6 percent are concerned about crime!

Just two weeks ago, another pedestrian was killed by a truck trurning from Ninth Avenue onto 16th Street. On Friday morning a 55 year old lady with a walker was killed by a bus turning west from Ninth Avenue on 45th Street and last night a young woman was critically injured by a truck turning into the Lincoln Tunnel lanes from 37th street at Ninth Avenue.

In all cases the pedestrians had the light, and the drivers walked away with summons.

We must obtain more enforcement at intersections, officers who care more about pedestrian safety than flow of cars and who are qualified to issue summons.

City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn and the Chair of the Public Safety committee are hosting town hall meetings to give community members the opportunity to voice concerns about and suggest improvements to current police operations in their neighborhoods.

Tuesday, February 27
Mc Burney YMCA
125 West 14th Street, btwn 6th - 7th Ave.
6:00pm-8:00pm

We must also change the laws so that the life of a pedestrian is worth more than a summons! Join the hundreds who will gather at City Hall to rally for Pedestrian Safety.

Citywide Rally
Sunday March 4 at 3 pm
City Hall

Please join us. These are critical times and we must speak up for our safety.

Best

Christine Berthet ,
Co founder
Chekpeds