The Montague Street Business Improvement District along with DOT's Urban Art Program today unveiled the "69 Meters" public art project. Hand-knitted cozies will adorn all the street's parking meters through mid-June. Says the BID:

69 Meters is a collaboration between [textile artist Magda] Sayeg -– the founder of Knitta Please, the guerilla knitting collective -– and nearly 50 volunteer knitters. Artworks were created by dozens of Brooklyn residents and were also contributed by knitters as far away as San Francisco, Paris, and Santiago, Chile. All of the artists are women. 

BID Photographer Jonathan Hökklo snapped these photos. More after the jump.

Enjoying a game of four-square out on the street in Jackson Heights. Photo: Transportation Alternatives.

Using surveys and other data collected before and after last year's car-free events, Transportation Alternatives sheds some light on the upward trend in their new report, "I Walk in My Street" [PDF]. Here are some of the notable findings reported by TA:

• Before Summer Space, only 42% of respondents said they would visit Montague Street more often if it were closed to auto traffic; during the closure this number jumped to 72%.
• The percentage of respondents who rated the pedestrian experience of Montague Street as “Good” or “Very Good” increased from 79% before the closure to 97% during the events.
• 100% of those surveyed at the 78th Street Play Street felt that the event “enhanced the park and farmers’ market.”
• Pedestrian streets encourage walking: during the Williamsburg Walks event, 47% of those surveyed said that they had walked to the event, a 14% improvement over normal levels.
• Montague Street retailers experienced 26% higher sales during Summer Space than on comparable days in 2007, on average.

It takes a lot of preparation to put on a pedestrian street, and TA's report also includes detailed explanations of how each neighborhood pulled it off. You can learn how the organizers went about community outreach, city permitting, volunteer coordination, the whole shebang. While it's too late to apply for a pedestrian street this summer, if you're interested in bringing one to your neighborhood in 2010, it's never too early to get cracking on a game plan.

Before the four "New York City Waterfalls" began gushing along the East River this June, DOT marked a bike route passing by each installation and released a guide to go with it. In this Streetfilm Elizabeth Press shows us a recent bike tour of the falls, led by DOT commish Janette Sadik-Khan. Special bonus feature: commentary from "Waterfalls" artist Olafur Eliasson about his work.

In these shots from tipster Jeff Prant (more after the jump), Brooklyn Heights residents take advantage a car-free Montague Street this past weekend. Though the July 4th holiday, overcast skies, and inadequate publicity are all suspected to have affected turnout on its first week, those who missed out can enjoy Montague "Summer Space" events on Sundays through the rest of the month.

A tipster sends this shot from earlier today of a newly-painted bike lane on Prince Street.

After the jump, DOT bike program coordinator Josh Benson answers a question from a City Room reader about painted lanes.

Q: I’ve seen green paint in the bike lanes in some neighborhoods (like Brooklyn Heights). How do I get them painted in my neighborhood? — Posted by Adamsky

A [Benson]: The high-visibility green bicycle lane on Henry Street in Brooklyn Heights is an experimental treatment we are testing on bicycle lanes where the potential for bicycle/motor vehicle conflict is high. It is our belief that the green markings will improve motorist awareness of bicycle lanes at key conflict points. Test locations include curbside bicycle lanes, such as Henry Street and Adams Street in Brooklyn, and Prince and Bleecker Streets in Manhattan and complex intersections such as Ninth Avenue and 14th Street in Manhattan. We are continuing to collect data on how the high-visibility green treatment affects driver and cyclist behavior as well as the durability of the treatment itself. If the treatment proves effective and durable, it will be integrated regularly into new bicycle lane projects to highlight points of potential conflict to motorists and cyclists. 

Anyone else seen these signs around town?

Cyclists heading up the Clinton Street bike lane in Brooklyn Heights are getting a nod from the construction crew whose elevator is jutting into their right-of-way. The big orange markers, labeled "Department of Transportation," start a full block ahead of the obstruction at the corner of Montague Street.

No word from DOT as to whether the city is now requiring contractors to post an alert when they block a lane.

Taken in May, the picture below shows a much more disruptive project on the Sixth Avenue bike route, in Manhattan. That monster squatted the lane with no warning at all. (See "Bike Lanes are for Bikes -- Right?")

Filed by Laura Conaway. Photos by Laura Conaway.

The McBrooklyn Blog spots this freshly painted high-visibility bike lane on Henry Street in Brooklyn:

Could be that the NYC Department of Transportation actually listened to groups like Transportation Alternatives, which advocates painting bike lanes a solid color in order to improve visibility and curb blockage by motor vehicles. Bikers have reported that the Tillary Street lane is painted green, and the lane along Henry Street in Brooklyn Heights is also painted.

Looks like it might be working. While a car did drive into the bike lane, it quickly -- "Oops!" -- swerved back out again.

Writing about Google's new Street View feature in this week's Brooklyn Paper, Brooklyn Heights Blog publisher Homer Fink finds out why the New York City Police Department has doled out more parking summonses in Brooklyn Heights this year than in any other precinct in New York City:

The first thing you notice when trolling the virtual streets is that people sure love to double park in our neighborhood. On the days the photos were taken, countless delivery trucks, vans and civilian vehicles congested the area. While it may take days, weeks or months for us to really find something juicy in this vision of Brooklyn Heights preserved in time like a bug in amber, many natives who have since moved out of the area are using Street View as a way to take a virtual trip down memory lane.

I want you to know that I have decided to support the Mayor's congestion pricing proposal. I firmly believe that the ever more pressing danger of climate change, and the immediate threat to the City's economic and respiratory health posed by excessive traffic, require a serious response.

I recognize that many features of the Mayor's proposal will need to be reworked. In particular, the boundaries of the "charge zone" and the pricing of the tunnels need further thought. Fuel-efficient cars and trucks should be exempt from the charge. Most important, I have insisted that our neighborhoods in northwest Brooklyn must be protected by residential parking permits, and that the whole City must see a significant improvement in bus service (through more express bus lines and dedicated bus lanes on major arteries) before any congestion charge goes into effect. But looking at the entire picture, I believe the right thing is to join the Mayor's effort.

• The mayor's congestion pricing plan will create "undue hardships for many New Yorkers." 
• The transit system is inadequate "to accommodate many of the New York City residents who currently commute to Manhattan by car," particularly the elderly and disabled.
  
• The majority of traffic into Manhattan is created by commuters from outside New York City so they should pay more.
• "Because a congestion pricing proposal of this magnitude has the potential to become a bureaucratic catastrophe, the details of administration and reinvestment must be carefully worked out well before the plan is approved."
• "While several large corporations are in support of the Mayor's plan," Millman has "not yet heard the same positive feedback from small, locally owned businesses."
  

Here is the complete text of Millman's letter:

Dear Neighbor,

I am writing in response to your recent email message regarding the Mayor's congestion pricing plan. I agree with you that, ideally, congestion pricing could generate much needed revenue for improvements to and expansion of our mass transit system, and significantly reduce the amount of traffic, pollution and emissions of greenhouses gases in New York City. Unfortunately, when I met with representatives of the Mayor's Office to discuss the details of the proposal, I was not convinced that the current plan will succeed in accomplishing these goals without creating undue hardships for many New Yorkers. I have concerns with many aspects of the Mayor's plan.

One clear concern with the plan is that the mass transit system is severely inadequate to accommodate many of the New York City residents who currently commute to Manhattan by car. In fact, the MTA's policy of removing token booth collectors and the excessive lag times for repairs to broken elevators and escalators in subway stations, are just two of the recent examples of the transit system's failure to meet the needs of the elderly, the disabled, and other commuters who have difficulties navigating stairs.

Additionally, the data provided by the Mayor's Office overwhelmingly suggests that the majority of traffic into Manhattan is created by commuters from outside New York City. I am convinced that the congestion pricing plan should take this data into account by shifting a larger portion of the burden to commuters from the northern suburbs, Long Island and New Jersey.

I also questioned the Mayor's Office about how the City would collect the fee, including administration and infrastructure changes, and they admitted that there is no firm plan to date. Under close scrutiny of estimated administration costs, implementing the proposal will be significantly more expensive and complicated than originally anticipated. There has been no concrete explanation of the process by which the generated revenues will be invested into the mass transit system, or of how much money will be used to cover the administrative costs of the program. Because a congestion pricing proposal of this magnitude has the potential to become a bureaucratic catastrophe, the details of administration and reinvestment must be carefully worked out well before the plan is approved.

Furthermore, while several large corporations are in support of the Mayor's plan, I have not yet heard the same positive feedback from small, locally owned businesses - many of which are based in Brooklyn and other boroughs but conduct transactions in Manhattan on a daily basis. I am not convinced that these small business owners will come to the same conclusion as larger corporations that can more easily absorb the additional costs. For example, the current plan makes no distinction between a delivery truck from a multimillion dollar corporation and one from a bakery in Gowanus with fewer than a dozen employees - both would be charged the $21 commercial fee. I believe that the Mayor's plan must incorporate exemptions or reduced rates, or otherwise take steps to account for these real differences.

I certainly agree we must take action to improve the air quality and traffic problems in our Borough and City, but for congestion pricing to work for New York, it will have to work for all New Yorkers. The Mayor's Office agreed to supply me with additional information on the proposed congestion pricing plan, and I hope changes to the plan will be considered to address some of my reservations. While congestion pricing may prove to be the best idea, in its present form, I have many questions and concerns about the Mayor's proposal.

Thank you for sharing your ideas with me.

A note from Transportation Alternatives putting this morning's pedestrian fatality in Brooklyn Heights in context:

This morning's pedestrian fatality on Henry Street and Montague Street in Brooklyn Heights is not an isolated event. According to Transportation Alternatives' Crashstat data, six pedestrians have been hit at the intersection of Henry and Montague Street since 1995. Today's fatality is the seventh.

Between 1995 and 2004, 35 pedestrians total were hit at every intersection along Montague Street in Brooklyn Heights. Meanwhile, pedestrians have been hit along the entire length of Henry Street in Brooklyn Heights. From the intersection at Cranberry Street to the intersection on Atlantic Avenue, 37 pedestrians were hit by cars.

Two years ago, Transportation Alternatives highlighted the severity of pedestrian crashes along Henry Street on the front page of our magazine. We urged DOT to publicize its own crash maps and use them to analyze the efficacy of traffic calming and other pedestrian safety measures.

From a Streetsblog tipster:

At 6:00 am a garbage truck (CSI company?) turned from Montague Street on to Henry Street and hit and killed a mid 50's pedestrian. Her shoes and back pack were splayed on the street and I believe that a tire crushed her...

I live on Montague Terrace around the corner from the accident and I always hear these commercial trucks whizzing around at night but, even worse, when they compact the garbage after the stops, the liquid garbage goo from the restaurants and food stores leaks out the back of their trucks and leaves oily slicks on the ground for bicyclists and pedestrians and cars to skid and crash on.

Photo: Henry Street at Joralemon, Brooklyn Heights.

The neighborhoods of north Brooklyn have long been some of the most abused by regional traffic and transportation policy. So, it is not a surprise to see that the Tri-State Transportation Campaign has managed to convince twenty-eight Brooklyn neighborhood organizations to sign-on to a strongly worded letter urging Mayor Bloomberg to "formulate and implement a thorough, urgent traffic management and relief strategy."

The groups signing-on to the letter (Disclaimer: My neighborhood organization, Park Slope Neighbors, is one of them) say that they support "well-planned growth," but add:

The city's traffic situation dictates that development must be mass transit oriented, and be planned and implemented concurrently with significant transportation improvements. These improvements must effectuate policies designed to defend and enhance quality of life in our neighborhoods.

Because of the Bloomberg Administration's failure to "articulate clear, goal-oriented transportation policies or priorities" the groups note that, "worthy city transportation initiatives are few, and many drift along as studies, failing to deliver any public benefit."

They urge the Mayor to "implement a people-first policy in our neighborhoods" and suggest that: 

Traffic engineers should not be in charge of the character of our neighborhoods. City planners who understand place-making and know how to converse and work with residents should be.

Finally, the groups come right and suggest that a full-scale overhaul of the city's transportation bureaucracy might be in order:

We would appreciate a reply from your office on these serious matters. We do not want another letter from the transportation department about why nothing can be done and how years of more study are required before any decisions can be made or anything concrete can be accomplished. The city must do a better job than that and test more innovations on a practical basis. If that requires changing institutional arrangements within city government to get more done, we encourage you to proceed in that direction.

July 13, 2006
Honorable Michael R. Bloomberg
Mayor
City of New York
City Hall
New York, NY 10007
Re: Need for new transportation policies
Dear Mayor Bloomberg:

Our organizations write to call on your administration to formulate and implement a thorough, urgent traffic management and relief strategy for Brooklyn and the entire city.

Traffic and transportation have been significant quality of life, environmental and public safety problems throughout Brooklyn for many years. Now, booming development and city government's failure to link transportation infrastructure improvement and traffic management to ambitious development policies are blanketing our streets with cars and trucks.

Worsening traffic congestion and transportation capacity problems may indeed prove to be limiters to development. We want you to know that our organizations support well-planned growth in Brooklyn and all of New York City. But the city's traffic situation dictates that development must be mass transit oriented, and be planned and implemented concurrently with significant transportation improvements.  These improvements must effectuate policies designed to defend and enhance quality of life in our neighborhoods and leverage and enhance the huge investment New York has already made in mass transit and vibrant neighborhoods, such as people-first "traffic calming" plans for residential streets.

Your administration must articulate clear, goal-oriented transportation policies or priorities, such as San Francisco's "transit first" policy, which also encompasses development projects. Because this administration has thus far failed to do so, worthy city transportation initiatives are few, and many drift along as studies, failing to deliver any public benefit. Consider for example:

* The rezoning of Downtown Brooklyn addressed transportation in a superficial fashion, creating the need for a remedial study by the city which has proceeded at a snail's pace and shows no sign of reaching a conclusion or being translated into real improvements.

* An ambitious and widely supported "traffic calming" plan developed by the city for Downtown Brooklyn and surrounding neighborhoods - aiming to create better pedestrian conditions and deter excessive traffic - was unilaterally discarded by the traffic engineering-minded NYC Dept. of Transportation.

* The rezoning of Williamsburg and Greenpoint will fuel steep growth in the area's population, but the city's plan simply declined to address transportation issues. Subway overcrowding is already a problem there. The city's transportation commissioner recently refused a request by elected officials to undertake a transportation plan for the district to address the traffic and mass transit pressure that rezoning-induced growth will create.

* City government has failed for decades to address the absence of any mass transit capacity increase for Brooklyn, the city's most populous borough, most recently in the MTA's 2005-2009 capital investment program.

* A joint city/MTA study of "bus rapid transit" options to get our buses moving through traffic congestion has taken years to reinvent a concept for redesigned bus stops and lanes recommended by NYC Transit in the early 1990s. This low-cost, high-yield transit capacity application is sweeping transportation planning around the globe but is being taken up in New York at the pace of the B63 bus. The schedule for implementation is unclear. If other NYC DOT initiatives are any guide, it is unlikely anything will ever be done.

* The city began a review of truck routes and the laws and rules that are supposed to govern them, with a view to reducing truck impacts on communities, during Mayor Giuliani's administration. The study has recently been completed, but many of its common-sense recommendations could have been implemented years ago. Brooklyn neighborhoods have yet to see any tangible benefit from nearly a decade of work.

We urge you to take the bull by the horns and adopt new perspectives, priorities and projects with a sense of urgency regarding transportation in Brooklyn.

NEW PERSPECTIVES

City government should acknowledge that:

1.      There are limits to the traffic impacts that city neighborhoods can bear.

2.      Booming development requires improvements to mass transit and the street infrastructure.

3.      There are tradeoffs that need to be made between moving as many cars as possible and streets that work well for communities, pedestrians, buses and bicyclists.

4.      Neighborhoods need more protection from ever-increasing volumes of trucks. 

NEW PRIORITIES

Implement a people-first policy in our neighborhoods. Traffic calming should take precedence over traffic flow. The city should fully implement its Downtown Brooklyn traffic calming program and extend it to other neighborhoods. It is needed to protect residential areas from cut-through traffic, trucks on inappropriate routes and to maintain and improve the neighborhood qualities that make Brooklyn a great place to live. Traffic engineers should not be in charge of the character of our neighborhoods. City planners who understand place-making and know how to converse and work with residents should be.

NEW CAPACITY

The city should take the lead in developing a comprehensive look at Brooklyn's mass transit capacity in light of development and demographic trends and promote an official city government agenda for Brooklyn mass transit capacity expansion. We cannot begin too soon to promote ideas for the next MTA 5-year rebuilding program (2009-2014). We understand that NYC Transit is not a city-controlled agency but we nonetheless expect our Mayor to represent our interests when it comes to NYC Transit and the MTA. 

Mr. Mayor, you can wield tremendous influence and leverage over these agencies if you exert it. For example, you were able to win Transit's cooperation in the creation of the recently-released Staten Island transportation plan. We urge you to do this on an even more ambitious scale here in Brooklyn.

NEW POLICY

The city must explicitly adopt transit and pedestrian-oriented development guidelines that include:

1.      Zoning policy changes that eliminate parking requirements and impose Manhattan-like parking limits in built-up areas or areas zoned for high density.

2.      Residential parking permits in areas beset with commuter,
entertainment or other non-resident generated demands for non-residential parking.

3.      Straightforward discussion of the transportation impacts of major developments. Current EIS practices of obfuscating or papering over impacts are counterproductive.

4.      Street management priorities that include practical application of "bus rapid transit" systems on as many bus routes as possible, as soon as possible, not many more years of consultant studies.

5.      Incentives for transit-oriented development, such as density or financial bonuses for large retailers that limit parking construction in areas near transit lines.

We would appreciate a reply from your office on these serious matters. We do not want another letter from the transportation department about why nothing can be done and how years of more study are required before any decisions can be made or anything concrete can be accomplished. The city must do a better job than that and test more innovations on a practical basis. If that requires changing institutional arrangements within city government to get more done, we encourage you to proceed in that direction.

Sincerely,

Bay Ridge Community Council
Boerum Hill Association
Brooklyn Heights Association
Carlton Avenue Block Association
Cobble Hill Association
Fort Greene Association
Gowanus Community Stakeholder Group
Neighbors Against Garbage
North Brooklyn Alliance
North Brooklyn Development Corp.
Pacific 400 Block Association
Park Slope Civic Council
Park Slope Neighbors
Polish Slavic Center Community Services
Pratt Center for Community Development
Prospect Heights Neighborhood Development Council
Prospect Heights Parents Association
Prospect Lefferts United for Services
Save Our Streets (SOS) of Greenpoint
South Midwood Residents' Association
Tri-State Transportation Campaign
Union Street Block Association
United Jewish Organization of Williamsburg
United Puerto Rican Organization of Sunset Park (UPROSE)
The Vinegar Hill Neighborhood Association
Vox Pop
Waterfront Preservation Alliance of Williamsburg and Greenpoint
Williamsburg Watch