Photo: MetroDCLiving.com

In its report on the "unpriced consequences of energy production and use," the NRC was acting under a congressional mandate to map the health impacts of various energy sources. Climate change was not factored into the NRC's conclusions, but the report nonetheless had a grim tale to tell about transportation fuel consumption.

The NRC found that the manufacture and burning of fuel for U.S. cars and trucks produced $56 billion in external costs in 2005, the year that the report was requested. That hidden cost averaged between 1.2 and 1.7 cents per vehicle mile traveled, depending on the type of fuel used.

In discussing the relatively small difference between the external costs of conventional gas-burning autos and the costs of hybrids or electric vehicles, the NRC wrote:

Although operation of the [electric vehicles and grid-dependent hybrid vehicles] produces few or no emissions, electricity production at present relies mainly on fossil fuels and, based on current emission control requirements, emissions from this stage of the life cycle are expected to still rely primarily on those fuels by 2030, albeit at significantly lower emission rates.

In other words, hybrids and electric vehicles are still likely to consume serious amounts of coal -- at least until the nation adopts an effective renewable electricity standard. The NRC notes that "further legislative and economic initiatives to reduce emissions from the electricity grid could be expected to improve the relative damages from electric vehicles substantially."

Given that cleaner electricity is a significant priority for transit and freight rail as well, perhaps it's worth mentioning: transportation reform is also electricity and energy reform.

Mexico City's dedicated-lane rapid transit bus system, Metrobus, carries as many as 250,000 riders a day. Photo: vonKinder/Flickr.

On Thursday, representatives from governments on the forefront of creating sustainable cities will discuss their strategies to help stop climate change (Thurs. Oct. 8, 9:15 a.m. - 10:45 a.m., Eisner & Lubin Auditorium). Kristina Alvendal, Stockholm's vice mayor of city planning, will explain her "Walkable City" plan, which focuses on a denser, safer urban environment. Steve Heminger, director of the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, will talk about the importance of walking to California's climate change mandate, which involves regional targets for greenhouse gas emissions. Finally, Jon Orcutt, Director of Policy at the NYC DOT, will discuss the greenhouse gas implications of the city's pedestrian planning efforts.

Don't forget, there's also a cocktail reception tonight, as well as on Wednesday and Thursday evenings, where you'll be able to schmooze with many conference luminaries. Tonight's reception will feature a keynote speech by NYC DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan.

The Walk21 Conference takes place at NYU's Kimmel Center from October 7-9. More information about each event can be found in the program (click to download). You can register for the conference here.

Improving pedestrian space: Montreal's Place Jean-Paul Riopelle features sculpture installations and an 88-tree urban forest. Photo: Wallyg via flickr

Later in the day, there's going to be a workshop on "nutritional deserts." No, not "nutritional desserts." This panel takes an urban planning approach to neighborhoods lacking affordable, healthy food options. How Retail Food Availability Shapes Walking Patterns (Wed. Oct. 7, 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm, Room 406, NYU Kimmel Center) is all about how cities can help out there neighborhoods by encouraging greenmarkets, community food gardens, and supermarkets. The workshop will be moderated by Kelly Williams of New York's Project for Public Spaces and will discuss how advocates and cities can shift zoning and land use policies to support access to healthy food in urban environments.

The Walk21 Conference takes place at NYU's Kimmel Center from October 7-9. You can register for the conference here.

Orszag's idea, in a nutshell, is that controlling the nation's skyrocketing health care costs, which are fueled in part by the obesity epidemic, would ultimately slow the growth in spending on Medicaid and Medicare, two of the government's three main entitlement programs.

The House and Senate health care bills include grants to help cities become more walkable, but those funds are in jeopardy. Photo: panuta/Flickr.

The link between walkable, bikeable, denser communities and public health is explored in depth by reporter Christopher Steiner, whose new book cites research by University of North Carolina economist Charles Courtemanche that found a causal relationship between the price of gas and U.S. obesity.

For every long-term $1 increase in gas prices, the national obesity rate drops by 10 percent, according to Courtemanche. That relationship goes a long way towards explaining why the House and Senate health care bills include "community transformation" grants to entice cities and towns into building bike paths, playgrounds, and other pedestrian-friendly improvements.

The grants are not assured of surviving the intense health care negotiations now going on in the Capitol, however, because they have become a full-fledged talking point for GOP critics in the House and Senate.

Congressional transportation wonks are focusing much of their energy on the battle over reauthorizing federal transport programs and the climate change bill, but it's worth noting that they also have a dog in the health care fight.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) doesn't think walking has much to do with public health. Photo: MSNBC

Sen. Mike Enzi (WY), senior Republican on the health committee, slammed the legislation for seeking to "pave sidewalks, build jungle gyms" and expand bike access to help improve public health:

We need to root out the waste, fraud and abuse that is driving up health care costs -- not create a whole slew of new wasteful programs.

It's unclear whether Enzi knows that the federal government already has a program to encourage biking and walking, nor whether he's aware of their demonstrated public health benefits. But his talking point is already migrating to other Republicans, who have twisted the health care bill's proposed "community transformation" grants into a big-government bogeyman.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) picked up Enzi's baton today in a speech against the health bill:

[E]arly indications are that it will direct billions of dollars to things like having the government build sidewalks and government-subsidized farmers markets.

The idea here is to use tax dollars to encourage healthier lifestyles. But at a time when Americans are buried under medical bills and frightened about losing the coverage they have, farmers markets and sidewalks aren’t the reforms they have in mind.

Photo by pawpaw67 via Flickr.

Now she's making the publicity rounds promoting her book, Free-Range Kids. In a recent interview with Salon, she pointed out that  while many American parents are terrified to let their children walk a few blocks or ride public transit, they think nothing of driving them everywhere -- even though car crashes are the leading cause of death for children in the US:

Skenazy: If you don't want to have your child in any kind of danger, you really can't do anything. You certainly couldn't drive them in a car, because that's the No. 1 way kids die, as passengers in car accidents.

Salon: Rationally, why aren't cars the bogeyman instead of stranger abduction?

Skenazy: It would change our entire lifestyle if we couldn't drive our kids in a car, and it's a danger that we just willingly accept without examining it too much, because we know that the chances are very slim that we're going to have a fatal car accident. But the chances are 40 times slimmer that your kid walking to school, whether or not she's the only one, is going to be hurt by a stranger.

Skenazy's answer gets to the heart of why it is so hard for people to accept the many ways in which automobiles hurt everyone in society, perhaps especially children -- through crashes, through polluting the air, through promoting obesity. We can imagine a life in which our children are not allowed to play outdoors, walk to a friend's house or spend any time unsupervised. But we just can't imagine life without cars.

Or can we?

If drivers don't acknowledge the risk of speeding, street designs and enforcement practices have to do it for them.

When it comes to speeding, many American motorists don't worry about safety. They just worry about getting caught.

Those are the findings by researchers from Purdue University who surveyed nearly 1,000 motorists about speed limits and driving habits. They found that many drivers are cynical about the safety benefits of driving within speed limits, and many think they can drive safely while speeding as long as they won't get caught, according to the report in Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour.

"So the faster you think you can go before getting a ticket, the more likely you are to think safety's not compromised at higher speeds," said Fred Mannering, a professor of civil engineering at Purdue, in a press release. "For whatever reason, respect for speed limits seems to have deteriorated."

The case for traffic-calming and automated enforcement is already strong. This makes it even more airtight. Drivers are basically ignoring posted limits on roads designed to accommodate speeding. (Traffic author Tom Vanderbilt wrote a great post last month about the multi-pronged wrongheadedness of this approach to street design.) Since drivers respond more to the threat of tickets than the inherent dangers of speeding, automated devices like red-light cams and speeding cams are essential to thoroughly deter this behavior.

In New York, the design part of the equation is improving while the enforcement component lags, thanks in large part to a police department that seems more concerned with moving traffic than reining in reckless driving.

Effective traffic enforcement would be more manageable for NYPD if it weren't for Albany. David Gantt, the Rochester Assemblyman who killed bus-lane enforcement cams this June, has stifled red-light cameras for New York and other cities for years. Evidence like the Purdue study has yet to sway him.

The fact that this story was picked up by health reporters is an encouraging sidenote. Livable streets advocates will have powerful allies if public health authorities recognize unchecked speeding as the catastrophe that it is.

Transportation Alternatives' CrashStat 2.0 is now out of beta, with improvements in performance and functionality.

The most obvious change is that the data loads a lot faster, and the icons are cleaner. There are more data points, too: the map now features stats by borough as well as community district. And there are icons indicating community facilities like schools and hospitals.

Originally launched in 2004, CrashStat allows users to access official data on city pedestrian- and cyclist-involved crashes from 1995 to 2005.

Stats are now viewable by community district.

If you spend much time in upper Manhattan, you know it's blessed with hundreds of acres of parkland, much of which serves to showcase the area's naturally rugged terrain. To help bring attention to this sometimes overlooked resource while promoting public health, an organization called CLIMB (City Life is Moving Bodies), in conjunction with Creative Arts Workshops for Kids, hosts an event called Hike the Heights, an "urban safari" through parks from Morningside Heights to Inwood. Streetfilms correspondent Mark Read has the lowdown.

On Tuesday WNYC's Brian Lehrer asked listeners to send in their suggestions for future "Summer Streets" locations. Responses -- which included Flatbush Avenue, one tube of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, and the Henry Hudson Parkway -- were mapped here.

Other picks?

Streetfilms' Clarence Eckerson delivers this snappy video recap of yesterday's press conference announcing "Summer Streets," the Ciclovía-style car-free event that will open six miles of Manhattan thoroughfares to pedestrians and cyclists for three Saturdays in August. One quote from Mayor Bloomberg, which doesn't seem to have made the cut in this morning's media coverage, addresses (tentatively) the potential of the event to change the way people look at the city:

We have to try different things if we're going to keep this city vibrant and interesting. We also have to stop talking about global warming and actually do something. I can't tell you this is going to make a big difference, but it says to people, "There's other ways to get around."

New York's Ciclovía-style car-free event will go by the name "Summer Streets," Mayor Bloomberg and Transportation Commissioner Sadik-Khan announced at a press event this afternoon. Streetfilms' Clarence Eckerson was on hand to capture footage, which he plans to edit for your viewing pleasure in the near future. To tide you over until then, here are some highlights from the press release (and more photos after the jump):

“We anticipate that hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers and visitors will take advantage of streets temporarily opened for recreation,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “We hope the Summer Streets experiment will become as much a part of the New York experience as strolling the Coney Island boardwalk, participating in the 5-borough bike tour, or listening to the Philharmonic in the park.”

“In Bogotá, they call it Ciclovia, or bikeway. In Paris, it’s the Plage, or beach. Here in New York, Summer Streets will literally turn the streets of our city into a pedestrian park,” said Commissioner Sadik-Khan. “The streets themselves are among the most valuable public space that the City has to offer, and finding the room within our existing street space for those on two feet or two wheels is a true application of our goals for a sustainable future under the Mayor’s PlaNYC initiatives and the DOT’s strategic plan.

”Fitness, dance and yoga classes will be held at a central stage along the route, with additional exercise and health activities hosted by community groups at select cross streets. Event sponsors will also organize activities, and bike rental facilities will be available along the route, including at hotels.  Rest areas will be stationed along the route for water and bike repair, and serve as meeting areas to link up with friends and family members. At the 72nd Street link to Central Park, the car-free route will occupy the southern half of the road only, while the north side will remain open to two-way vehicle traffic...

The Police Department will direct traffic around the route and all parking will be restricted starting at midnight on the day of the event. Additional staff and volunteers will be on hand to facilitate the event.

Top photo: NYCDOT; other photos: Transportation Alternatives.

Last month we reported that DOT was planning a major car-free event this summer in the mold of Bogotá, Colombia's weekly Ciclovía. Details emerged on Friday in the Downtown Express:

On three Saturday mornings in August, the Department of Transportation will ban cars from nearly 5 miles of city streets to make way for cyclists, joggers and walkers. Starting at the beginning of Centre St. in Lower Manhattan, then moving north onto Lafayette St., Fourth Ave. and Park Ave., people will be able to travel all the way to 72nd St. and then to Central Park by walking down the middle of a street.

The streets will be closed to cars on August 9, 16 and 23 from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. On 15 major east-west streets, like Canal, 14th St. and 42nd St., cars will be allowed to cross the car-free zone.

While much of the coverage in the Express and New York Sun focused on objections to "closing" or "shutting down" routes for cars, the virtues of opening streets for pedestrians and cyclists were not lost on everyone:

The chairman of the City Council's committee on transportation, John Liu, said a project like this has been discussed for several years, and would reinforce a trend, rather than posing an inconvenience.

"This is not likely to create a huge ripple in the fabric of Manhattan," he said. "It may even begin to wean people off dependence on personal automobiles."

Later today, DOT and Mayor Bloomberg are holding an official announcement and going public with the name and branding of the event. Cyclist celebs Lance Armstrong and David Byrne will be on-hand, and Streetsblog will have more as the story develops.

If there's one thing a neighborhood overrun by traffic doesn't need, it's more public parking garages. But that's exactly what New Yorkers who live by the mouth of the Lincoln Tunnel will get if the City Planning Commission allows current development patterns to continue.

Case in point: In January, the developer Glenwood Management requested permission to build a 400-car parking garage attached to a new residential property in Hell's Kitchen. The application -- for 310-328 West 38th Street -- is the latest in a string of special permit requests to build parking in the area. It is currently pending before the City Planning Commission, which is scheduled to render a decision on June 6th. If the commission turns down the application, it could signal an important shift in the ongoing redevelopment of Hell’s Kitchen, which has seen a wave of new construction since a 2005 rezoning took effect.

The last time Streetsblog looked at the parking situation in Hell's Kitchen, local activists were fighting a provision in the new zoning that enabled substantially greater quantities of accessory parking -- spaces intended for building residents or commercial tenants. That battle is still playing out in court. The recent rash of permit requests represents another front in the effort to keep cars from overwhelming the neighborhood's streets.

A number of new buildings include plans for parking that exceed the amount allowed for residents. Glenwood Management, for instance, is only permitted to build 232 spaces for residents -- 114 under the pre-2005 zoning, according to local activists. The additional spaces will then be used by the developer as a public garage. At issue throughout Hell's Kitchen, in essence, is whether the city will allow developers to include public parking garages in new buildings without restriction.

"These regulations were put in place in 1973, more than a generation ago, and I don't think City Planning has ever denied any of those [requests]," says Christine Berthet of the Clinton/Hell's Kitchen Pedestrian Safety Coalition (CHEKPEDS). "As long as each public garage meets the guidelines, they approve it." What gets left out of the discussion is the total effect of those garages on traffic and air quality, she notes. "They never look at it as an aggregate."

In the case of Hell's Kitchen, that aggregate is poised to grow at a rapid clip. Already this year, developers have proposed building garages in the neighborhood totaling more than 500 parking spaces, Berthet estimates. With hundreds of new buildings planned on the West Side, she believes the trend will spiral out of control if left unchecked.

The effect on local streets could be considerable, in terms of both traffic generation and the pedestrian environment. "The Department of City Planning doesn't seem to take seriously the fact that parking generates traffic," says Nick Peterson, a vice president at planning firm Alex Garvin & Associates, "but if a new garage opens on a block that provides a net increase of 200 parking spaces, that's 200 cars that weren't there before. It's pretty obvious that new cars are on the road as a result." As for the pedestrian environment, he adds, "A parking garage is a dead space along the sidewalk -- there is no reason to go in and out of a parking garage except to park or pick up your car."

Traffic heads west on 37th Street towards the Lincoln Tunnel.

The garages in Hell’s Kitchen will be especially tempting to commuters exiting the Lincoln Tunnel. The neighborhood is already one of the most congested in the city and suffers the third highest asthma hospitalization rate among Manhattan's twelve community board districts. New parking facilities will only compound the problem by inducing more commuter traffic.

That is not the intent of the planning commission, which considers traffic volumes as well as demand for parking when it grants developers' requests, but observers say induced commuter driving will undoubtedly result. "There is often this disconnect between the planned condition and reality," says Peterson. "When you walk down a street and see a parking garage in a residential building, does the sign say, ‘Parking for Residents Only’? No. It says, simply, ‘Parking’ or ‘Public Parking.’"

When reached for comment, a Department of City Planning spokesperson referred to a commission report (PDF) on a recent parking application, which states that new garages are needed to offset the loss of parking incurred by new development, and to accommodate the influx of new residents.

Berthet takes issue with this stance because it assumes that existing parking lots were intended to serve as parking in perpetuity. In fact, she notes, the lots that are about to get displaced were supposed to serve as placeholders until developers could assemble parcels to build on. "They were not intended to be permanent fixtures," she says.

Meanwhile, DOT has committed to the Clinton/Hell's Kitchen Neighborhood Traffic Study, evaluating measures to, among other things, improve pedestrian safety in the neighborhood. The hesitation on the part of the planning commission to deny developers' parking requests seems at odds with DOT's efforts to tame traffic as well as Mayor Bloomberg's long-term sustainability agenda, but there are signs the commission may adopt a position more consistent with the goals of other agencies.

"In the last two hearings that we went to, we could see that the City Planning Commission is moving in its position," says Berthet. The commission has been more willing to place restrictions on new parking facilities, she notes. The report mentioned above, for example, required a development on 11th Avenue to provide monthly parking instead of the usual hourly parking -- a small step, but one that may signal more significant changes to come.

Before rendering its decision on the 11th Avenue garage, "the commission took into account the concerns about traffic, the decreasing supply of parking and the proposed use of the parking," said a department spokesperson in an email message. "The traffic analysis was based on a large share of the proposed parking spaces to be used by local residents. Accordingly, the commission required the garage to provide for monthly rather than largely hourly parking. This will serve local residents and businesses but reduce transient traffic."

In addition to weighing its priorities differently, the planning department should work more closely with other city agencies, Berthet says. Specifically, she’d like to see tighter coordination between the officials making transportation decisions and the ones making land use decisions. "Where you need parking is really a transportation issue," she says, especially when that parking will be used by commuters and other non-residents.

Making these long-term changes will not be easy. Peterson notes that the planning department is subject to pressures from community boards, which tend to favor more off-street parking. And some of the most effective ways to better manage parking supply, like raising the tax on spaces, lie outside the department’s control.

But for now, the planning commission has the authority to curb the quantity of parking being added to Hell’s Kitchen, if it so chooses. Without a swift change to current practice, developments winning permits today are likely to generate traffic far into the future. Even if the city zoning text is eventually amended to put a stop to the proliferation of public parking, dozens of garages in the neighborhood will get approved in the meantime. "We may have a nice law at the end, but what are we going to do with all this parking that gets built between now and then?" Berthet asks. "We will be stuck with it for the rest of our lives."

Photos: CHEKPEDS

Speaking at Tuesday's Fit-City Conference, Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan announced that a Ciclovía-style car-free street event is in the works for this summer. New York is not alone. According to a story published earlier this week on RedOrbit, several other American cities are considering the same thing:

Others are planning ciclovia, or "bike path," programs in which networks of streets are temporarily closed to driving and open for non-motorized play. Last summer El Paso, Texas, staged the first ciclovia in the United States, and now Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Cleveland, and Portland, Ore., are working on similar events.

Details of the New York Ciclovía have yet to be revealed. Streetsblog will fill in the blanks as this story develops.

Photo: themikebot / Flickr 

With development projects across the city threatened by an uncertain economy, critics of Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards project believe that a slowdown in construction could burden Prospect Heights with decades of blight. A slide show by the Municipal Art Society, called "Atlantic Yards or Atlantic Lots?," offers a bleak look into the future, like this rendering of neighborhood blocks destroyed for "temporary" surface lots that would accommodate some 1,400 cars.

MAS is calling on Governor David Paterson to suspend demolition in order to prepare an interim development plan, and has a link to a web form through which members of the public can contact Paterson directly.

Aerial photo by Jonathan Barkey.

While other insurance companies belittle those who can't or don't drive, another -- Progressive -- is living up to its name by being the first major US insurer to offer a "Pay As You Drive" policy, allowing customers who drive less to pay less for coverage.

As explained in a New York Times "Freakonomics" article on the negative externalities of driving, Progressive will offer "MyRate" PAYD plans in six states.

Drivers who sign up for MyRate will install a small wireless device in their cars that transmits to Progressive not just how many miles they drive but also when those miles are driven and, to some extent, how they are driven: the device measures the car’s speed every second, from which Progressive can derive acceleration and braking behavior. Which means that Progressive will not only be able to charge drivers for the actual miles they consume but will also better assess the true risk of each driver.

The Freakonomics guys believe that PAYD insurance may be the most practical and likely means to curtail driving in the US, where other methods, like congestion pricing and gasoline taxes, are politically unpopular -- even though congestion, carbon emissions and car crashes cost Americans more than $300 billion per year, according to studies cited in the article. 

Regardless of its societal benefits, as a private sector initiative PAYD is undoubtedly a risky move for the first company to try it.

But if Progressive’s PAYD insurance can induce some of its high-mileage customers to drive less and especially to drive more safely, resulting in smaller claims payouts for Progressive and fewer negative externalities for everyone, then it could truly be a win-win-win situation.

Except, perhaps, for Progressive’s rivals.

Photo: ASurroca/Flickr 

Thank you for contacting me in support of Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing proposal. As you probably are aware, on March 31, the City Council approved a home rule message authorizing the state to approve Mayor Bloomberg's plan. The vote was 30 members in support and 20 against. I voted in support of the proposal. However, neither the State Assembly nor the State Senate acted in time to move this plan forward.

Anyone who drives in New York understands that congestion is a major problem, particularly in the Central Business District (CBD). Heavy traffic doesn't just anger and inconvenience drivers. It impacts our economy and environment as well. It is estimated that congestion costs the city $11.6 billion worth of lost business revenue, productivity, operating costs, and fuel and vehicle costs. In addition, because of our poor air quality, New York City asthma hospitalization rates are more than twice the national average.

Congestion pricing was one significant way to address these issues. It would have reduced traffic, improved air quality and public health, and provided critically needed funding for mass transit. Currently, our public transportation system is stretched to the limit. Nowhere is this more evident than the East Side. The Lexington Avenue subway line is operating at 110% capacity and, with 65,000 riders daily, the M15 is the most heavily utilized bus line in the Western Hemisphere.

Congestion pricing would have allowed the city to receive a one-time federal grant of $354 million for short-term mass transit improvements and allowed the city to use the congestion pricing fees to bond out an estimated $4.5 billion for major transit projects. These funds would have gone towards critical capital projects like the Second Avenue Subway, Bus Rapid Transit on First and Second Avenues, and East River ferry service. In addition to these large scale projects, if congestion pricing has been implemented, my Council District will have benefitted immediately from these short term transportation improvements:

• 46 new subway cars, primarily for the E & F lines
• 5 additional buses on the M101/M102/M103 lines
• 4 additional buses on the M86 line
• 2 additional buses on M66 line
• 3 additional buses on M31 line
• 6 additional buses on M15 line
• 10 additional buses on X90 line

Unfortunately, we won't be seeing these short term transportation improvements any time soon. However, I remain committed to the long term goal of reducing traffic and improving air quality in our city and will continue to work with our city's elected leadership to advance those goals.

Thank you for taking the time to contact me on this issue. I heavily weighed your views, and those of my other constituents, in formulating my position. As always, please feel free to contact me with any specific questions about this or any other issue facing our city.

Sincerely,
JESSICA LAPPIN
Council Member
5th District - Manhattan

The following report was submitted by Carol Wood, a Murray Hill resident, along with Emilia Crotty, Bicycle Education Program Associate for Bike New York. Both are members of the NYC Bicycling Coalition.

Last Thursday evening, March 20, nearly 200 East Siders turned out for a "Town Hall Meeting" with NYC Police Commissioner Ray Kelly at Baruch College. The event was sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, who touted it in her latest newsletter as a chance to "discuss crime and quality of life issues."

As a New Yorker whose neighborhood is tormented by homicidal drivers -- my corner is #1 in pedestrian deaths citywide -- I jumped at the chance to raise our top cop's awareness of street safety. And I wasn't alone: In the elevator to the 14th floor auditorium, a woman began telling me how afraid she was to ride her bike around Murray Hill and that she hoped people would ask questions about traffic.

In her brief opening remarks, Rep. Maloney had to perform a little bait-and-switch: The commissioner would be taking questions on "the safety of our streets and homeland security," she said. But this mandate was ignored by the audience, which asked questions on a variety of topics. Interestingly, the issue of traffic safety was raised repeatedly.

The woman, who had been hit by a car, made an important point: That NYPD officers on the street and at intersections make it their priority to move motorized traffic, not to protect pedestrians' crosswalk space or their safety.

She repeatedly stated that it is this "car first" attitude that makes streets dangerous. She also commented that officers need to focus on more accurately reporting crashes, particularly by questioning the driver AND the pedestrian/bicyclist involved, and by correctly reporting the physical details of the crash (her own "accident report" mistakenly described the crash scenario).

Someone mentioned that car crashes were preventable, not "accidents," drawing a loud round of applause.

Shortly after, a man complained about the exercises in which officers gather in packs and then race their squad cars around the city (a.k.a. "Critical Mass for Cops"). Kelly said this is a homeland security exercise intended to keep terrorists off guard because they would not know where the cops would end up next (another CM tactic).

Maloney interjected that the NYPD's tactic of gathering in various places had helped to break up the drug trade in her former East Harlem neighborhood, by "disrupting their activities." This rationale did little to satisfy a complaint that police tactics are disrupting citizens' activities, rather than those of terrorists.

From that point forward many of the questions from the audience addressed homeland security, including data collection and intelligence. Some speakers supported more wiretapping; others claimed that we live in a police state. Sprinkled in between were very specific comments from individuals living next to drug addicts and nightclubs or who have difficulty traveling in a wheelchair due to homeland security measures.

Photo: Carol Wood

Dave Lutz of the Neighborhood Open Space Coalition has been digging through the Municipal Archives and look what he found: a 1938 memo from Robert Moses to Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia about the need to create a network of dedicated bike paths in city parks. Moses's reasoning looks odd to modern eyes, in part because he argues for bike paths as a purely recreational amenity. His rationale for bike infrastructure fails to see cycling as transportation (sound familiar?), choosing instead to segregate bike facilities from the street network.

In this section, where Moses makes a public health argument against having bikes on the street, you can see the streets-are-exclusively-for-cars mindset that famously led him to construct rights-of-way that excluded rail and even buses:

The need for taking children off of public streets where they are constantly threatened with serious injury, and are themselves a hazard to motorists is imperative, and is evidenced by the increasingly numerous letters received from parents and others interested in the welfare of the youth of the city. Every motorist is aware of the hazard created by children of the adolescent age exploring the whole width of the roadway...

Recognizing that bicycles have no place on public highways, and fully aware of the marked rise in enthusiasm and growing interest in bicycling on the part of the general public within the city limits, park executives have for some time been studying the entire park system to ascertain local unsatisfied cycling needs, and where proper facilities can be located advantageously to furnish the opportunity for bicycle riding without too long a delay and without involving large expenditures for construction.

Lutz's sleuthing inspired another tipster, Daniel Bowman Simon, to cull together a collection of press reports from the time, including this coverage of the bike path plan in the New York Times. To Moses's credit, when discussing the impact of the Central Park bike path on cars driving through the park, he offers a surprisingly prescient argument for a road diet:

"All of these pavements," Mr. Moses said, "are now unnecessarily wide, and reducing their width by one lane will have no material effect on the movement of traffic though the park."