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 

Peter Hornbeck was killed on January 10th 2004 in a horrific hit and run crash on 96th and Park Avenue. The driver who killed him was speeding, had his license already revoked for prior speeding and the vehicle itself was stolen. The site of his death will be the memorial site for all pedestrians killed on city streets this Sunday at 1:30pm.

Last night I attended Community Board 8's Transportation Committee meeting to propose the installation of basic pedestrian protections on the Park Avenue medians. As reported in this morning's New York Sun, the idea was rejected for a variety of reasons. "Longtime neighborhood residents," the Sun reports, "said they hated to sacrifice the aesthetics of a landmark city street for a safety issue they felt was no big concern.

While I certainly don't expect Park Avenue's median to be restored to its verdant, pre-1922 width any time soon, the photo above illustrates the absurdity of pitting streetscape aesthetics against pedestrian safety. Clearly, Park Avenue was once a whole lot more beautiful and a whole lot more safe than it is today as a roaring six-lane parkway. As we've written before, there are lots of ways to make a street safer for pedestrians. Even bollards, the most basic and functional of pedestrian safety measures don't have to be ugly.

Peter Hornbeck's fiancee Rachael Myers volunteered to speak at the meeting. Rachael was walking with Peter the night that he was killed. With Rachael's permission, I thought I would share with you what she said last night since it had a deep impact on me and many other people in the room:

In an article published in the New York Times this past week on the issue of installing barriers at the Park Avenue medians, it was reported that some residents were surprised that this issue had emerged. After all, only one person was killed while crossing Park Avenue in 2003 and another in 2004.

As the girlfriend of the person killed in 2004 and a witness to the crash, I can tell you that one person is too many. What exactly are we willing to sacrifice for the "touch of Paris" look of the medians on Park Avenue? Are we willing to sacrifice two human beings?

Those of us that were close to Peter will feel that loss forever. But the loss to our community is something that we will never know and never be able to calculate. Pete spent his free time volunteering to care for homeless dogs at a local animal shelter on East 92^nd street. He was an outspoken environmentalist who was returning to graduate school at Hunter so that he could teach Earth Science to high school students. We will never know how he would have touched these lives if given the opportunity. It is important to try to keep this in mind when looking at statistics and numbers and trying make a cost/benefit analysis.

Some may think that we can solve this problem through increased traffic enforcement, and that is certainly part of the solution, but police cannot be everywhere at all times. In this case, the driver's record indicates that he had little respect for police and traffic laws. He not only was driving a car that was uninsured and reported stolen, his driver's license had been revoked due to prior speeding infractions. All previous efforts by the police to get this driver off the road were ineffective. When such drivers refuse to stay off the road, our only hope is that traffic-calming measures and pedestrian-friendly street design will be in place to protect our fellow citizens.

I can assure you that even if the proposed median barriers protect only one person in the future, it will be worth it. Not only for the friends and family, but for the countless lives who are affected by just one individual; it will be worth it for the entire community.

While we failed to win Community Board support for new pedestrian protections on the Park Avenue medians last night, Rachael's statement made a difference, we got the discussion started, and this issue isn't going away. Hopefully we can make some changes happen before the next horrific headline.

Photo: New York Historical Society via Jeff Prant

The Case for Physically Separated Bike Lanes
A Streetfilm by Clarence Eckerson
Running Time: 8 minutes 30 seconds

Happy New Year! As part of its commitment to create 200 miles of new bike lanes in the next three years, New York City's Department of Transportation plans to build out 70 miles of new bike lanes in 2007. The devil, as always, is in the details.

In this outstanding Streetfilm New York City cyclists, planning and policy experts and even the former Mayor of Bogota, Colombia make the case that the designers of New York City's bicycling infrastructure need to do more than just paint lines on asphalt. Like all of the world's best bike commuting cities, they argue that New York needs to design and build more and better physically-separated bike lanes.

If you are looking for an important livable streets issue to work on in 2007, this short video is worth watching.

Related:

• The Debate Over Physically-Separated Bike Lanes Continues
• London's Cycling Design Standards: A Model for NYC?
• Gridlock Sam Tells the Story of NYC's First Bike Lanes
• Cyclists and Pedestrians: Fighting Over the Scraps
• This is What a Bike-Friendly City Looks Like
• Tillary Street: Bike Lane or Parking Space?
• A CRISPier Way to Build NYC's 200+ Miles of New Bike Lanes?
• Houston Street Redesign: The $30 Million Missed Opportunity

Photo: Aaron Naparstek

There are many users of curbside space in New York City. Taxis, School Buses, Access-A-Ride and other private automobiles need curbside space to pick up and drop off people, often disabled, elderly or children. Trucks making deliveries to businesses and residents need curbside space to load and unload goods and packages. These are essential needs. Kids have to get to school. People with health issues need to see their doctors. Residents in taxis need access to their buildings.

But currently all of these needs are subservient to something far more frivolous -- free curbside parking for the owners of private automobiles. The owners of private cars have another option -- indoor parking garages. While this may not be affordable for everyone, that misses the point. We should be aiming to discourage people from parking on city streets that consume valuable curbside space as well as minimizing the number of cars driving around this city.

As you can see in the typical scene above, a phalanx of private automobiles blocks the right-of-way of a school bus, a UPS truck and a Fed Ex truck as well as several other vehicles trying to pick up and drop off people at the doctor's office further down the street. A six lane street is reduced to only one lane in each direction causing traffic to bottle up in every direction.

Why not accept that there are many legitimate reasons to access the curb and assign them each a place suited to their importance? Why not charge market rates for curbside parking? Why not stand up to the elite minority of New York City residents who benefit from free curbside parking to the detriment of the rest of us?

One of my biggest frustrations on crutches was finding taxis in places or times of poor bus service. Even more frustrating was watching people basically cut me in line for the next taxi by either running ahead of me or just standing further up the block than me, snagging the next available taxi. Furthermore, it was most often the case that the taxi would stop for pick-up or drop-off in a lane of moving traffic, the cross walk or (much to my chagrin) a bike lane.

All of this may change in the future if the Taxi & Limousine Commission follows some of the advice of the Design Trust's "Designing the Taxi," (PDF file) which looks at many revolutionary new ideas that would transform how the taxi system operates. But specifically, this photo of a mini-taxi stand that a person could walk up to, press a button and have a light pop-up for any taxi to see and for them to look for intrigued me with it's beautiful simplicity. Taxis could also simply take a quick break in one of these to wait for a person to enter the taxi, preventing endless cruising around the city.

A good start in Manhattan would be to situate these every three to four blocks on the main avenues and then also between every avenue on the main crosstown streets. In the outer boroughs, these should be located in areas without good mass transit service and near major shopping destinations. All it would take to have a safer, more convenient, high class taxi pick-up and drop-off system is giving up a few dozen free or metered parking spaces per neighborhood, which may be a nice side benefit in that it would reduce the incentive to drive to that area and take mass transit or walk instead.

The thing I found most interesting about yesterday's news was the fact that Mayor Bloomberg actually showed alongside DOT Commissioner Iris Weinshall at yesterday's press conference.

The New York Times story gives a bit of insight into the Mayor's thinking on these matters and some back-and-forth within the Administration:

Mayor Bloomberg has been a fan of the countdown signals, but Iris Weinshall, the city's transportation commissioner, had some doubts. "The mayor for a number of years has talked to me about countdown signals," she said at the news conference yesterday. "He saw them in other cities. It was, I think, a very good exchange back and forth as to whether we should put them up or not."

In some cities where the countdown signals are used, officials have noticed that elderly people, in particular, tended to underestimate the length of time it would take them to cross. The mayor acknowledged that concern but said: "I'd rather give people information and then let them make decisions. Hopefully most of them will make intelligent decisions."

Portland's Older Adults Bike Program
A Clarence Eckerson Street Film
Running time: 3:37
Download: 17.37 MB

The Portland Office of Transportation recently launched a new program to re-introduce older adults to bicycling. Many of the participants haven't ridden bikes in over 50 years.

On crutches, my transportation options have severely dwindled to a few options. Cycling is completely out. The subways are pretty much completely out of the question because of the lack of elevators and escalators between on my usual routes to work and other normal destinations. In my initial research, I found that only 53 of the city's 468 subway stations meet requirements laid out in the Americans with Disabilities Act. I was happy to find a good updated listing of the elevators at the Disabled Riders Coalition website (they point out that they are frequently out for repairs).

And walking is a real struggle over longer distances. Since I can only manage to walk about 5 city blocks before needing to sit down, I have learned the locations of all the benches in my area. But Manhattan has a major advantage over anywhere else to be on crutches. Within five blocks, I can find pretty much everything I could need - a nice park, several wonderful restaurants, bars, coffee shops, diners, a pharmacy, a movie theater, clothing and electronic stores. I can get groceries and take-out delivered to my apartment. And as my upper body strength has improved, I have been able to venture farther and farther.

Normally I walk to work, but 43 blocks on crutches would be a marathon.

So instead I've been taking the bus. The newer model of buses with flat entrances are a real boon for folks on crutches and in wheelchair, but many others still require walking up a couple of stairs. While the bus was much slower than the subway, because of traffic, it was a much more pleasant experience since I enjoyed the scenery and getting a seat. It's rare that I get a seat on a bus, but on crutches I found 90% of people very willing to give up their seat. The bus is a very different experience with a seat. I was able to relax and read a book while traveling to work.

The other major means of getting around town was of course, taxis. I used these mostly when I was going to places that were far from mass transit or would require 2-3 buses to get there. The problem was finding them and getting into and out of them. Demand for taxis is very high at certain times, like rush hour and during rain storms. During these high demand times, competition was fierce. The good neighborliness of the bus was replaced by a "every man & woman for themselves" mentality. And it's hard to compete on crutches against agile 20-somethings running and grabbing cabs as soon as they see someone get out of one.

Disembarking from taxis was also a challenge. Many side streets do not have a good pick-up and drop-off area so the taxi has to drop me off in the middle of the street, blocking traffic for the extra 1 minute it takes for me to get out and up back on the crutches. And the honking behind the taxi began after 10 seconds. In one case, the car directly behind the taxi saw me struggling with the crutches and stopped honking, but the two cars behind him continued their blaring horn honking. Without even knowing the problem ahead of them, they felt entitled to let the whole area feel their displeasure at being obstructed for just a minute.

I think anyone involved in urban planning, transportation or even designing street furniture, should have to walk around on crutches for a day/week. They would learn a lot about what people with limited mobility appreciate. Even better would be to confine them to a wheelchair, since I was able to still do small flights of stairs (with considerable effort, but very doable) that a person in a wheelchair would not be able to do. There are many buildings that are still not ADA accessible because of one step at the front entrance.

On my short list of improvements to the city landscape are:

• At least one bench on every block to provide a resting area for people.
  
• Taxi stands at least every 3-5 blocks on each Avenue, perhaps with a shelter and seating at major transportation hubs.
• Switch bus fleet over to models without stairs at the entrance. This saves a great deal of time for loading/unloading folks in wheelchairs.
  
• Greatly accelerate installation of elevators at all major subway station with a goal of completing the whole system by a target date. Until then, offer surface options that offer similar inter-borough routes.
  
• Provide grants and other incentives to improve ADA access to more buildings.

In addition to helping disabled and elderly folks, these improvements would make the city considerably more baby/toddler friendly. Getting unnecessary automobiles off the streets which clog traffic would greatly improve the speed of the modes of transportation that the disabled and elderly use. Bus Rapid Transit will be a major improvement over current conditions, but it will only be available in certain limited areas.

Pedestrian Plaza in Stone Harbor, New Jersey

Towns along the New Jersey shore are in constant competition to attract visitors from New York, Philadelphia and all around the region. The same is true of major cities, residential neighborhoods and shopping districts but over a longer cycle. Since the beaches are relatively similar in most areas, they mostly compete on how "pleasant" the area is to people, offering conveniences and neighborhood amenities that differentiate them from the rest. Creating a high quality Pedestrian and Bike friendly enviroment is one way that many are competing for tourists dollars.

Stone Harbor, NJ is one shore town that has done quite of bit of work in making their town safe for pedestrians and disabled folks by creating pleasant places to relax, shop and even do good by the environment. Avalon, NJ has also done some of these, but with more of an emphasis on cycling amenities. Here is a little photo tour of some interesting pieces of urban planning straight from the Jersey Shore.

Convenient Recycling Station in Pedestrian Plaza

Pedestrian Crossing Sign Near Busy Intersection

Midblock Crossing From One Pedestrian Plaza to Another

Public Benches Every Few Blocks to Take a Rest

More Public Benches Near Shops

Prime Reserved Street Parking for Disabled Folks

Safety Ramps at Curb Cuts

In Nearby Avalon, NJ there is More Provision for Cyclists

Clear Signs About Sidewalk Use

And Some Gentle Safety Reminders