New lane markings split up an already-tiny space for pedestrians and cyclists on the Pulaski Bridge. Photo: New York Shitty

There's been some discussion recently on the issue of cyclists and pedestrians unhappily sharing the Brooklyn Bridge's crowded promenade. Similar ped-bike conflict is heating up on the Pulaski Bridge, linking Long Island City and Greenpoint.

The Pulaski's eight-foot wide greenway is about half the width of the Brooklyn Bridge promenade and accommodates cyclists and pedestrians traveling in both directions. With bike commuter rates soaring in North Brooklyn, the pedestrian vs. cyclist shouting has begun. Local Brooklyn bloggers Restless and New York Shitty both recently published posts on the issue.

As on the Brooklyn Bridge, DOT recently striped in some new markings but that doesn't really seem to be solving the fundamental problem: Plenty of space dedicated to cars and trucks while the cleanest, most efficient and environmentally-friendly modes of transportation -- biking and walking -- are largely squeezed into the margins.

Pulaski Bridge motorists, meanwhile, seem to be oblivious to the whole thing, content to speed along their free-flowing, six-lane right-of-way. 

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

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

Truck routes in North Williamsburg and Greenpoint.

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

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

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

L-r: City Council candidates Ken Baer, Doug Biviano, Ken Diamondstone, Jo Anne Simon, Evan Thies.

It was an opportunity for the candidates to show how well they understand the most critical transportation problems facing New York City by rebutting Reina with a well-reasoned argument. Traffic generated by the free price on Brooklyn's three East River bridges overruns the 33rd District, which includes parts of Greenpoint, Williamsburg, Brooklyn Heights, Cobble Hill and Park Slope. Congestion pricing, supported by outgoing rep David Yassky, should be as much a no-brainer here as it is in Lower Manhattan.

Only one candidate, Doug Biviano, a former campaign staffer for Kucinich 2008, came close to giving Reina what he asked for. "I'm not against congestion pricing," he said, "but I think we have to be careful about unintended consequences. Do we want to hit people with that toll? In this climate, I don’t think we want to. That would kill contractors."

Biviano was followed by Evan Thies, who played an active role in last year's campaign to pass congestion pricing as a consultant for Environment Defense and the Pratt Center. "I do absolutely support congestion pricing," he said to some applause. "Neighborhoods like this are disproportionately affected by the traffic that’s created by the lack of congestion pricing. Contractors in the outer boroughs supported congestion pricing, because instead of spending time in traffic, they’d be spending more time working for clients." Thies later named congestion pricing his top transportation priority and noted that the next City Council will need to take it up again in 2010 to fund the MTA Capital Plan.

Jo Anne Simon, an attorney who serves as Democratic district leader in the 52nd Assembly District, gave another strong statement in support of pricing. "The gratuitous traffic that comes over the bridges is just that, gratuitous," she said. "We’re a doormat. It’s costing us in infrastructure; it’s costing us in health. The challenge for us as policy makers is to convince people in the outer boroughs that congestion pricing benefits them too. It’s not just for Manhattan."

Ken Diamondstone and Ken Baer, the other two candidates at the forum, also endorsed congestion pricing. Baer took the more enthusiastic stance, noting that pricing revenues can help plug the MTA Capital Plan's $10 billion hole. Diamondstone said he "believes strongly" in the policy but thinks exceptions must be made for people with disabilities and, in a novel carve-out suggestion, musicians.

By this point in the debate, candidate Isaac Abraham was long gone.

Abraham, whose base is in Williamsburg's Satmar Hasidic community, left soon after taking a swipe at the Kent Avenue bike lane, about 30 minutes into the event. (He told the crowd of about 50 that he had a wedding to attend.) At least Abraham made an appearance, which is more than we can say for no-show Steve Levin, a protege of Brooklyn Democratic boss Vito Lopez. The day before the debate, Levin backed out of his commitment to attend.

On the question of truck traffic, the need to fund the Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel was widely invoked by the candidates, but council members can't do much to advance a project that needs billions in federal cash to get built. The more intriguing responses came from Simon and Thies. Simon raised the prospect of truck tolls on the East River bridges (you can do it with E-ZPass transponders, she said), which would put a halt to the free counterclockwise route that sends trucks through downtown Brooklyn streets, while Thies proposed giving Traffic Enforcement Agents the authority to "bust trucks for traveling on non-truck routes."

It wasn't the only question on which Simon and Thies distinguished themselves. While the two Kens showed a solid commitment to street safety measures like automated enforcement and traffic-calming infrastructure, Simon and Thies consistently displayed a broader and more current grasp of transportation issues.

Responding to a question about improving streets for walking, biking and transit, Thies was the only candidate to broach the politically difficult subject of off-street parking reform. "I'd like to prevent garages from being built in developments near subway stops," he said. "It’s bad urban planning, it brings traffic." Simon, meanwhile, made the evening's sole statement on bike-share, a project that she said "needs to be pursued."

Aside from Abraham's early turn at the mic, fireworks over bike lanes failed to transpire. One audience member did mention that she fears cyclists while driving at night, and asked the candidates if they would push legislation requiring cyclist registration and helmet use. To read what they had to say, check out "Audience Question #1" over at TA's candidate survey blog.

By all accounts, the new plan enjoys the support of former opponents, including the Satmar Hasidic community and businesses along Kent that would see loading zones return. While supporters may have had the numerical advantage last night, they were not the loudest.

"DOT could barely get through its presentation," reports TA's Wiley Norvell, with lots of heckling coming from residents of North 11th Street (which is already a truck route but would receive diverted traffic). The meeting had already been going on a few hours by the time public comment on Kent Avenue started, Norvell said, and not that many people testified. "A lot of people who were there to speak in favor felt a little browbeaten."

There was no vote on the agenda last night.

No one is dismissing the issue of truck traffic, which could be mitigated, in part, by stricter route enforcement. But the latest plan is the product of an already long and contentious public process. "DOT came up with a design that satisfied those concerns," said Norvell. "There's never a perfect scenario that leaves everyone grinning ear to ear, but there's always a safest scenario."

Another Greenpoint resident has come forward reporting to have seen a police car, in violation of NYPD policy, chasing the speeding white mini-van that took the life of Violetta Kryzak in April.

Earlier this week, a reader who chose to be identified as 'Alex B.' emailed Streetsblog, writing that she had witnessed the chase. In an email exchange that followed, Alex B. explained what she saw: "I was on Manhattan between Norman and Meserole [Editor's note: seven blocks south of where the fatal collision took place] when two cars sped past me -- clearly one chasing the other. I remember being sure that the second car was police, although it was unmarked -- possibly because it had its lights on."

Her account matches the story of three other eyewitnesses. Their testimony runs counter to the version of events given by the 94th Precinct's commanding officer, Deputy Inspector Dennis Fulton, who told attendees of a precinct community council meeting that the department "has no indication that [a police pursuit] happened."

The NYPD’s public information office has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

Manhattan Avenue minutes after the deadly crash. (Image: Greenpoint Gazette)

The NYPD continues to dispute eyewitness accounts of the events that preceded the vehicle-on-pedestrian collision that took the life of Violetta Kryzak, a 38-year-old mother and Greenpoint resident.

Despite the statements of three separate eyewitnesses stationed several blocks from one another who claim that at least one police vehicle was following the speeding white mini-van that struck and killed Kryzak, the 94th Precinct’s commanding officer maintains that a police pursuit did not occur.

At a precinct community council meeting last week, Deputy Inspector Dennis Fulton said that he can only go on what witnesses say, but that he has "no indication that [a police-pursuit] happened."

Streetsblog contacted the NYPD's Public Information Office for clarification about the contradiction between eyewitness accounts of the day’s events and Deputy Inspector Fulton’s understanding of what occurred. "Everybody’s going to say something," said a spokesperson.

The family of Violetta Kryzak has secured legal representation. A private investigator hired by the family’s lawyers is conducting interviews and searching for surveillance cameras that may have caught the alleged chase on tape.

The NYPD’s Internal Affairs Bureau also has an investigation underway, said Fulton.

The New York City Police Department denies that it was involved in a high-speed police chase preceding the vehicle-on-pedestrian collision that took the life of Violetta Kryzak, a 38-year-old Polish-American mother and Greenpoint resident, despite eyewitness accounts to the contrary first published by Streetsblog.

On Monday, at the 94th Precinct Community Council’s monthly meeting, Deputy Inspector Dennis Fulton, the precinct’s commanding officer, told approximately 40 assembled neighbors, “At this point it appears as though there was not a high-speed chase,” adding, “To make sure, it’s being investigated by our Internal Affairs Bureau. But it does not appear that anyone was following [the perpetrator].”

Fulton's statement contradicts numerous eyewitness accounts of the fatal crash. Three weeks ago, I reported on this tragedy for Streetsblog, and everyone I spoke with seemed sure that the police had pursued a white mini-van up Manhattan Avenue at a very high speed. The day of the crash I was told by Kamil Uminski, a 20-year-old man who witnessed the van strike Violetta Kryzak, “There were two cops chasing a white van up the avenue.”

Less than an hour after I heard Deputy Inspector Fulton deny that there was a high-speed chase, I emailed with a neighborhood mom named Sydney, who claims to have seen an unmarked police vehicle pursuing the white mini-van. I don't have Sydney's last name, only her email address, as a mutual friend put us in touch when I told her I was writing a follow-up story about this incident. Sydney replied to my inquiry: “I was slowly driving down Manhattan Avenue between Bedford Ave. and Norman Ave. headed west [Editor's note: eight blocks south of where the fatal collision took place] when the mini-van flew past my truck very close at an unbelievable speed nearly taking my rear view mirror with it. The van was occupying the opposite lane of Manhattan Avenue, which is a two-lane street and also headed west, in other words driving head-on into oncoming traffic. Seconds after the van passed my truck an undercover cop car in hot pursuit passed me traveling at the same speed and following the van as it weaved through traffic down the busy street.”

Yet another eyewitness, Cody Dennison, who claims to have seen police officers pursuing the white mini-van ten blocks south of the crash site, responded to an inquiry by email. He wrote: “The white mini-van was being pursued by a gray 4-door undercover police sedan with siren lights driving just as fast as the mini-van. I think there were two gray sedans but they were moving so fast I only saw one for sure. I saw the one gray sedan just as plain as day. And I said out loud, 'Why would they chase the driver towards the precinct?'"

Why indeed? According to the NYPD Patrol Guide: “Department policy requires that a vehicle pursuit be terminated whenever the risks to uniformed members of the service and the public outweigh the danger to the community if [the] suspect is not immediately apprehended.”

An afternoon high-speed car chase down Manhattan Avenue, a relatively narrow two-way street with two travel lanes, two parking lanes, two bus routes, scores of storefronts, a handful of churches and high pedestrian volumes, must outweigh the danger posed to the community by all but the most dangerous criminals, let alone Jose Maldonado, the 28-year old car thief who struck and killed Violetta Kryzak.

Everyone in the neighborhood knows as much, and I imagine the police officers at the 94th Precinct do as well. Perhaps this is why Deputy Inspector Fulton denied that there was a chase: To admit as much would be to admit that his officer’s acted negligently and violated procedural guidelines.

Either that’s the case or the eyewitnesses I’ve spoken to are mistaken.

The police department has not responded to numerous requests for comment.

The aftermath of yesterday's deadly car chase on Manhattan Avenue. Photo: Graham T. Beck

Manhattan Avenue, the bustling main street in my usually quiet Brooklyn neighborhood, became a multi-block crime scene yesterday afternoon when a mini-van driver, reportedly fleeing police at high speed, struck and killed a woman near India Street before crashing into a parked SUV five blocks further north.

The pedestrian who was struck, Violetta Kryzak, a 38-year old Polish immigrant and mother, was taken to Bellevue Hospital and pronounced dead following the crash. The driver of the van, Jose Maldonado, 28, is awaiting charges after being taken to Woodhull Hospital with a broken toe.

I was out walking my dog when I came upon the scene. Several people I spoke to near the multi-vehicle pileup told me that two unmarked, gray police cars without their sirens on were pursuing the mini-van down Manhattan Avenue at extremely high speed.

"There were two cops chasing a white van up the avenue," said Kamil Uminski, 20, who witnessed the van strike the pedestrian. "[The van driver] was flying -- like 100 miles an hour -- ran a red light at India Street, hit the lady, kept going, and I guess this is where he lost it."

NYPD has been unwilling to explain what prompted the high-speed chase, or even acknowledge that officers were pursuing the vehicle that struck the woman.

I've probably seen a thousand police chases on TV and in the movies, but this was the first time I'd come across the aftermath of the genuine article. It was easy to see why, in real life, the tactic has been discredited in all but the most extreme circumstances.

According to Geoffrey Alpert, a professor of criminology at the University of South Carolina, research indicates that most suspects chased by police are not serious criminals, but "deadbeats making stupid decisions to avoid being caught for not having a license or some offense that would be very minor compared to what happens when they initiate a pursuit."

Even when the suspect is being pursued for a serious crime, the outcome of these tactics is often deadly. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported that in 2001, 365 people died in police pursuits, including 140 who weren't in a police car or a vehicle being chased.

Yesterday's tragedy on Manhattan Avenue made these statistics all too real, and left many of the people I spoke to questioning the judgment of the police. As Miss Heather, the author of the Greenpoint neighborhood blog newyorkshitty, wrote to me in an email, "I cannot believe the police decided to pursue this guy down Manhattan Avenue which is without argument TEEMING with pedestrians. Very. BAD. Decision."

According to Leonard Levitt, who wrote the column "One Police Plaza" for Newsday and now pens NYPD Confidential, the police department has "taken the lead in swearing off high-speed pursuits as dangerous to both civilians and officers.” As to whether or not there are exceptions to this ‘swearing off’, Streetsblog has a request in with NYPD's public information office.

Given the tragic outcome of yesterday's pursuit, it seems a sensible time to ask: Is a police chase in the city ever appropriate? The television shows and movies that make screeching tires the stuff of everyday law enforcement send an unambiguous message: the faster the cops give chase, the greater their dedication to justice. But walking down Manhattan Avenue this morning, past piles of shattered glass, stains that I couldn’t help seeing as blood splotches, and the faces of people who might have been in mourning, police pursuit seemed a whole lot more complicated than getting a bad guy and burning some rubber.

As committee chair, Teresa was instrumental in winning New York City's first on-street bike parking, last summer's Williamsburg Walks event on Bedford Avenue and -- don't forget this -- a 39-2 Community Board vote in favor of the suddenly controversial Kent Ave. greenway plan.

It's also worth noting that the Kent Avenue bike lanes were the by-product of a decade of community-driven planning as part of the Brooklyn Greenway Initiative. Williamsburg's politically-powerful Hasidic community, offended by the loss of parking space and the potential increase in short-sleeved, female goyim rolling through the neighborhood, has vowed to make life miserable for cyclists.

We'll try to get some more details in the new year. In the meantime, get some rest over the holidays, folks. The backlash is for real and it's gonna be a fight in 2009. You can fax a letter to Mayor Bloomberg to express your support for the Kent Avenue bike lane.

The Kent Avenue lane at work, with squad car. Photo: i'm not sayin, i'm just sayin.

Convened by City Council members Yassky and Reyna, the meeting got off to a rough start after MTA reps delivered news about service cuts that will affect the neighborhood. The tone was set for a contentious discussion of Kent Avenue. "Business owners came out against it," said Sholom Brody, a member of TA's Brooklyn Committee. "The problem is 'no standing'; they're really upset about the stretch between Clymer and Division Avenue," a small portion of the lane's full length.

The parking situation has already been through community board review. In April, CB1 approved plans for the Brooklyn Waterfront Greenway, which would offset the removal of parking spots on Kent by identifying new spaces on side streets. (The current bike lane is a stopgap until the Greenway is built.) All told, DOT made three presentations to the community board about the project [PDF]. Opponents now say this process was insufficient.

An NYPD ticket blitz immediately after the parking rules took effect appears to have inflamed opposition, and the usual canards, of course, are in full effect. According to Brody, one bike lane opponent claimed to have seen only 20 cyclists use the lane over the course of a full day, a figure that DOT refuted with its own 12-hour count -- 500 cyclists.

Streetsblog regular Dave "Paco" Abraham inspected the new lane on a recent ride organized by the Brooklyn Greenway Initiative. Any hindrance to drop-offs and deliveries caused by the "no standing" rule need not give rise to a hot-blooded confrontation, he says. "The problem is very workable and the BGI and CB1 supporters readily admit it should be addressed and corrected."

Fine-tuning is already underway. "DOT has been working with local businesses and the community to address changes brought about by the project and will continue to look for ways to minimize any impacts," said spokesman Scott Gastel. The agency has set aside a bus pickup and drop-off zone outside one school and approved a loading zone for a local business.

Despite signals that the kinks will be worked out, a vocal opposition based in the neighborhood's Hasidic community is not embracing a conciliatory tone, to put it mildly.

All indications are that the all-out war approach is a non-starter. "We often see issues like Kent Avenue turned into a referendum on bicycling. That doesn't get us anywhere," said TA's Wiley Norvell. "Turning Kent back into a dangerous truck route with no provision for the hundreds of bicyclists who use it every day would be reckless."

The bike lanes are an interim step on the way to completing the Brooklyn Waterfront Greenway. CB1 already approved the permanent, physically separated bike path, and the shift of on-street parking spaces that it entails, back in April. Nevertheless, approval of the buffered lanes is hardly a sure thing.

The pedestrian safety measures involve removing parking spaces near dangerous intersections. "Daylighting" these locations by removing cars will make pedestrians more visible to turning drivers.

Here are the details from Transportation Alternatives, which says public support at tonight's meeting is critical:

When: Monday, September 9th, 6:30 pm (you MUST sign up by 6:10 pm if you want to speak!)

Where: Swinging 60's Senior Citizens Center, 211 Ainslie Street (corner of Manhattan Avenue), Brooklyn

Tipster Ryan Lee sends along some photos of new bicycle lanes being marked on Manhattan Avenue in North Greenpoint, Brooklyn today. He writes that the new lanes stretch from Ash St. to Greenpoint Ave. on both sides of the street and bike boxes are going in at the intersections.

As always, you can find lots of other Eyes on the Street contributions -- and submit your own -- right here.

When I first met Brian McCormick, Milton Puryear and Meg Fellerath in the spring of 2002, they were picking up trash and planting tulips alongside a Brooklyn-Queens Expressway off-ramp in Cobble Hill. I asked them what they were up to and they told me they were working to create a waterfront greenway for Brooklyn -- a linear park running from Greenpoint to Red Hook. I didn't have the heart to tell them they looked like a gang of juvenile delinquents paying off 40 hours of community service for shop-lifting. Clearly, these people were either insane or visionary.

At the time, Brian, Milton and Meg had no serious funding, no office and no particularly powerful allies or sponsors. They just had a great idea and a ton of persistence. They kept picking up trash, planting flowers, organizing the community and pushing their idea. Today the Brooklyn Greenway Initiative is a professional non-profit organization with capital funding from the federal government, an office on Columbia Street and all kinds of high-powered allies and sponsors. They may or may not be insane, but they are definitely visionary.

Personally, I find the Brooklyn Greenway Initiative to be one of the most inspired and exciting community-driven development projects in all of New York City (take that, High Line). This Thursday evening, BGI is hosting a benefit event on the beach at East River State Park. There will be cocktails, hors d’oeuvres and music. If you are not already involved in the Greenway, this is a great chance to get in on the ground floor of shaping the future of Brooklyn’s waterfront and, in the process, creating a more livable city.

Thursday, June 28th, at 6:30 pm
East River State Park, Williamsburg, Brooklyn
RVSP: Buy tickets online
View the invitation (pdf)