BRT + bike: East Side avenues have enough space for physically separated busways and protected bike lanes.

Sometime next month, reports Pete Donohue in today's Daily News, DOT intends to release detailed plans for First and Second Avenues. So far, we've only seen what an "off-set" bus lane configuration would look like, but DOT and the MTA are still considering a range of options. It's pretty clear that off-set bus lanes, placed between curbside parking and traffic, won't qualify as world-class.

Unlike separated lanes, off-set lanes require camera enforcement -- and state legislation -- to function properly. Albany rejected bus cams last year, and even if legislators suddenly change their minds, a camera-enforced off-set configuration invites conflict. Buses would have to contend with cars and delivery trucks trying to access the curb. Separated lanes eliminate that conflict and, paired with protected space for cyclists, invite more biking and walking.

So what would real-deal BRT look like on the East Side? The image up top is one of two options that Transportation Alternatives is backing to deliver the maximum benefits for transit riders, cyclists and pedestrians. The window of opportunity to get these ideas out there won't stay open much longer.

"We are pushing for a visionary design that's going to catalyze thousands of pedestrians, cyclists and bus riders, and turn them into champions of BRT," said TA's Wiley Norvell. "We know there will be opposition to change on First and Second Avenues, regardless of what is proposed; what is critical is that the design delivers the kind of new mobility that will build its own constituency of ardent supporters." Each option is projected to reduce the 70-minute travel time along the whole M15 bus route down to about 40 minutes, Norvell said. Implementing the same improvements applied to the Bx12 route on Fordham Road would only bring travel time down to 60 minutes.

Follow the jump for the other preferred design, showing a center-median bus-and-bikeway.

A center-median BRT configuration, with a protected bike lane similar to the new path on Allen Street.

Keep in mind that these are conceptual plans, and there's a great deal of flexibility in the details. In both configurations, local buses would operate in the separated busway, with smaller local stations placed in the median. Correction: In the first configuration, local bus service continues unchanged along the curbside. In the second, local buses would operate in the separated busway, with smaller local stations placed in the median. The second design can accommodate either two bus lanes in between stations, so BRT buses can pass the locals, or bays spaced at intervals for local buses to pull over and allow BRT buses to pass. Elements like bikeway design, curbside parking, and turning restrictions on vehicles could likewise vary within the framework of these plans.

Also, don't forget that BRT enhances service mainly by reducing the amount of time buses stand still or get bogged down in traffic. Average speeds improve dramatically, but these buses won't be zooming down the avenues.

Organized support for a multi-modal solution for the East Side is starting to coalesce. "If the DOT doesn't put bikes in their BRT designs, they're missing an opportunity," said Kurt Cavanaugh, managing director of the East Village Community Coalition, a local advocacy group. "Planning for buses and bikes together makes it as sustainable as possible."

Second-rate design is really not an option on this one. We have a mayor who's gone to the mat for congestion pricing, a DOT commissioner committed to safer, greener streets, and an MTA chair who's made better bus service priority number one. If New York can't pull off a visionary design for sustainable transportation now, maybe we never will.

We have been considering ways to incorporate bike facilities and expect to be reporting back to stakeholders soon.

Not a whole lot to go on there, but it's good to hear that DOT is looking into the possibilities. The recent organizing around this issue has been formidable. Community Board 8 passed a resolution last month favoring protected bike lanes for the East Side. And last week, Transportation Alternatives delivered more than a thousand letters to transportation commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan asking for protected bike lanes on First and Second.

East Side residents sign on for safer, greener streets.

"We're really hoping to put a finger on the scales, and push for fully-protected bike lanes while the DOT and East Side communities work on improving the M15 corridor," said Transportation Alternatives' Wiley Norvell. "To not address the huge demand for biking on First and Second avenues, something the DOT pledged to do as step number one in its 1997 Bicycle Master Plan, would be a huge missed opportunity."

TA counted 3,356 cyclists on the First and Second Avenue corridor during a 12-hour stretch last month, a figure that far exceeds the DOT's 2008 screenline count at 59th Street, Norvell said. All those cyclists are a fearless bunch -- braving rivers of traffic and some of the city's most intimidating cycling conditions. Imagine how many more New Yorkers would bike down the avenues if they didn't feel they were risking life and limb.

Norvell says TA staff and volunteers have been gathering letters from East Harlem down to the Lower East Side in support of protected bike infrastructure. Yesterday's delivery put hundreds of letters in the hands of East Side electeds, including City Council Members Rosie Mendez and Daniel Garodnick.

"The meetings were very positive," said Caroline Samponaro, director of TA's bike program. "Their staff agreed that we shouldn't redesign First and Second avenues without including provisions for cyclists and pedestrians."

Active support from East Side representatives will be critical as plans for the corridor advance. "Every project is about political will," said Samponaro. "What these projects need is political leadership from the electeds. They need to be the spokespeople for their constituents."

The optimal re-design of First and Second avenues would give buses and cyclists "space that allows them to travel safely and efficiently without having to compete with each other," she added. "These corridors can serve the non-driving majority and set a standard for how other major avenues will be treated."

Headless meter poles on Madison Avenue, awaiting rebirth. Photo: Wiley Norvell.

New York's trusty single-space parking meters are a dying breed. They've served commercial corridors admirably, but they're rapidly giving way to muni-meters (which are much better suited for innovations in curbside pricing, like DOT's PARKSmart program).

The downside of the shrinking meter supply: New Yorkers have even fewer options to lock up their bikes. While DOT is in the process of adding 5,000 bike racks in the next few years, the rate of rack installation hasn't kept up with the rapid pace of meter removal. So cyclists could breathe a little easier last week, when DOT revealed that it will repurpose defunct meter poles as bike racks, a policy that advocates had been urging the agency to adopt.

We're already seeing signs of re-born meters out on the street. Transportation Alternatives' Wiley Norvell sent this pic of headless poles on Madison Avenue, where DOT will convert four meters per block (two on each side of the street) into bike racks.

Prior to voting overwhelmingly in favor of protected bike lanes at last week's Manhattan CB 8 meeting, the board also approved a motion to convert meters to bike racks on Madison from 69th Street to 90th Street. But not before a lengthy debate prompted by the board's liaison to the Madison Avenue BID. Apparently concerned about sidewalk clutter, the BID doesn't want converted bike racks on the avenue itself, but on the corners of each side street instead. (This would defeat the purpose of the conversion, since there are no parking meters on side streets.) The notion that customers ride to their shops has yet to gain sway with this particular BID.

As Norvell told Streetsblog, more official bike parking is good news for everyone who uses the sidewalk. "Lack of on-street parking is why bikes end up chained to anything and everything that's nailed down," he said. "Converting these existing poles to bike racks is a fast and inexpensive way to increase the supply and keep sidewalk clutter under control."

So, what will the meters look like once the conversion is complete? We have a request in with DOT for an image of the final product. Norvell tells us the re-purposed meters will incorporate the "hoop" design of the city's new official bike rack. For some out-of-town previews, here's how they do it in Sacramento and Baltimore. And Matt Roth at Streetsblog San Francisco wrote up a great piece this summer detailing how several other cities handle the disappearing parking meter problem.

Painted lanes are not enough, East Siders told CB8 last night. Photo: BicyclesOnly/Flickr.

Thanks to groundwork laid by Transportation Alternatives' East Side committee, yesterday's proceedings offered further evidence that, as Charles Komanoff wrote a few weeks ago, cyclists are shedding their status as "the embattled minority." By and large, the discussion lacked duke-it-out drama. During the public comment period, eight speakers testified in favor of the resolution, including TA's bike advocacy director Caroline Samponaro, who delivered a few hundred signatures for good measure. None spoke against. And when it came time for the board to take up the matter, a few CB 8 members identified themselves as bike commuters.

People spoke movingly about their harrowing experiences trying to ride in their own neighborhood, and about the inadequacy of un-protected bike lanes. "Painted lines on the road are not safe," said Jack Russell, 62, a 29-year resident of Yorkville. Given the lack of protected space and the disconnected state of the East River greenway, several cyclists testified that they ride far out of their way -- over to the Hudson River path -- to get downtown. Anthony Romer, a recent transplant from Madison, Wisconsin, told the board that he just doesn't ride as much since he moved to New York: "If I ride here, I put my life on the line."

It's true that community board members were not asked to render a decision on a specific route. But they had plenty of real New York City examples to draw from (not just tales from Europe) as they formulated their votes. Anyone who's ventured outside in Manhattan recently can picture the Ninth Avenue bike lane and the newly transformed Broadway, which were invoked on more than one occasion last night. If last night's vote is any indication, it's hard to argue with the impressive safety records of these existing Class 1 bike facilities. They provide solid proof that safer streets for cyclists are safer for pedestrians too.

Three years ago, when local resident and activist Glenn McAnanama approached CB8's transportation committee about better bike lanes for the neighborhood, the idea that bike infrastructure makes streets safer didn't gain much traction. "Whenever cycling came up they turned it into a discussion of scofflaw cyclists," he said. "Increasing the number of cyclists in the neighborhood was not on their agenda." He views last night's vote as a sign that the CB has committed to street safety and wants to "get more iterative with the DOT."

The vote of confidence in protected bike lanes would never have happened without the advocates and volunteers working on TA's East Side campaign. "Last night was really the culmination of a year-long effort by our East Side committee to be more engaged with the community board," said Samponaro. "Going to your community board and advocating for these things at a local level can bring change."

For Samponaro, the signature moment of the night came when 11-year-old Clark Vaccaro talked about the dangers he faces on his ride to school. "I don't think the CB expected that," she said. "It becomes very hard to vote against these measures when you see the faces of people who are asking for them."

Among the items on Community Board 8's October agenda is a resolution in support of protected bike lanes on the Upper East Side. As we heard from Transportation Alternatives yesterday, neighborhood involvement has propelled this once-unlikely measure to this point, and friendly voices will be needed to bring it home. The CB 8 meeting starts at 6:30 at the Ramaz School Auditorium, 125 E. 85th Street.

Tonight in Upper Manhattan, Inwood and Washington Heights Livable Streets will hold a regular meeting to discuss, along with other topics, the proposed Dyckman Street Greenway Connector. Thanks to the consistent work of its core members, this group is starting to get attention from local electeds. A good showing tonight can only help build momentum. Meeting details and other discussions can be found on the IWHLS Livable Streets Community page.

"This past month at CB 8 has really been all about neighbors convincing neighbors," Samponaro says. "Residents of all stripes came out to support protected lanes at the last committee meeting, and it made a big impression on the board."

Turnout will be crucial for tomorrow night's meeting, when board members should be reminded of the benefits of protected bike lanes for all street users, including reduced crossing distances for pedestrians and fewer conflicts between sidewalk users and cyclists who don't feel safe riding in street traffic. Longtime UES advocate Glenn posted salient talking points earlier today.

If you've ever made the case for safer streets to Community Board 8, or if you've been waiting for an opportune moment, now's the time to follow up or follow through.

WHAT: Community Board 8 Full Board Meeting
WHEN: Wednesday, October 21, 6:30 p.m.
WHERE: Ramaz School Auditorium, 125 E. 85th St.

WHEREAS, Manhattan Community Board 8 is concerned about the safety of all people who use our streets and sidewalks,

WHEREAS, protected bike lanes have brought measurable safety improvements to other neighborhoods in Manhattan,

WHEREAS, many members of the Upper East Side public, business community, and elected officials have all expressed support for protected bike lanes in petitions, surveys, letters, and public testimony,

WHEREAS, Manhattan Community Board 8 wishes to encourage safe, responsible cycling in, to, and from this district,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that CB8 supports the DOT's initiative to create protected bike lanes and requests that DOT prepare a study for a neighborhood bicycle network that includes Class 1 protected bike lanes (including information on projected impacts on pedestrian safety, bike safety, parking, truck traffic, and neighborhood business) that would be subject to review and comment by Community Board 8.

The resolution passed unanimously.

Though there were glimmers of hope at CB 8 forum last week, given the board's history when it comes to bike infrastructure, this is an amazing development. We'll have more coverage later, but for now cycling and pedestrian advocates, and anyone interested in safer Upper East Side streets, should mark their calendars for the big day: October 21, when the resolution is scheduled to be taken up by the full board.

In the meantime, congratulations to everyone who made this happen.

From the first (and only) town-hall meeting of the Manhattan Borough President’s Planning for Pedestrians Council in 1987, to Manhattan Community Board 8’s “Bicycle Forum” this week, I’ve sat through innumerable gatherings on cyclist-pedestrian conflicts.

Cycling and pedestrian advocates, with Charles Komanoff at left, gather on the UES in 2007. Photo: Jonathan Barkey

The CB 8 forum on Tuesday evening did have hopeful elements, however. Local residents wanting more bike and pedestrian infrastructure and fewer cars outnumbered those who wanted cyclists put in their place. None of the five elected officials in attendance played the anti-bike card; all seemed receptive to the livable streets agenda. And one or two attendees who professed to be terrified by bicycles even took pains to support bike lanes.

Some highlights:

• Deputy Borough President Rosemonde Pierre-Louis “commend[ing] City DOT and Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan for their visionary work to make New York City more walkable and bikeable.” (City Council Member Jessica Lappin had a more guarded version of the same message.)
• Council Member Daniel Garodnick deflecting criticism from a pro-congestion pricing audience member by insisting he had been a “strong, outspoken supporter” of Mayor Bloomberg’s toll plan and, by implication, could be counted on to champion traffic pricing in the future.
  
• A diverse collection of Upper East Siders — a 50-something male attorney who has cycled to work for decades, a young woman who recently took up bike-commuting, a female African-American community board member, and a husky pedestrian who pronounced himself too un-coordinated to ride a bike — passionately and eloquently speaking up for cycling and cycle facilities. Here are some of their remarks:

“Cycling makes me healthy.”
“After biking to work, I feel good all day.”
“Cycling is saving my life.”
“Broadway is really great, Second Avenue is awful.”
“Summer Streets was fabulous.”
“There’s been nothing to teach people how to use these new streets.”
“A message should be sent by the community board to the District Attorney and the NYPD that there needs to be a re-evaluation of our priorities to protect cyclists and pedestrians.”

Okay, it wasn’t all a lovefest. There were these complaints from several women of a certain age, CB 8 members all:

“Transit is a priority, cars are a priority, bikes are not a priority.”
“The thought of having double, triple, quadruple the number of cyclists terrifies me.”
“The bicyclists have become the darlings of the [Bloomberg] administration, even though the number of bicyclists is a rounding error compared to the number of fire engines, buses and taxis.”
“One day we woke up to find all these circles and lines on our streets.”
“You’re afraid to go outside … You can’t be sure you’re not going to be killed [by a bicyclist].”
“I’d like to see bicycles registered and bicyclists licensed.”

None of the electeds took up the call for registering bikes. NYS Assembly Member Jonathan Bing and NYS Senator Liz Krueger did call on Albany to stiffen penalties for restaurants whose delivery cyclists flout laws against riding on sidewalks. Lappin has a local law in the works to allow the city to penalize the owners of restaurants and other businesses whose delivery staff ride on sidewalks or violate one-way rules or red lights. A hearing on her Intro. 624 is set for 10 a.m. next Thursday.

Garodnick has a bill pending, Intro. 813, to require the NYPD to post delivery-bicycle violations on line “to help send a message and give restaurants a reason to improve their practices.” Garodnick is also drafting legislation to increase penalties for operating motorized bicycles, which in his view are becoming more common (I agree), on sidewalks.

My verdict on the forum? The pervasive tonedeafness toward bikes (e.g., transportation committee co-chair Jonathan Horn categorizing all cyclists as either recreational or delivery) would have dumbfounded a visitor from Portland or Copenhagen. Any practitioner of risk management or harm reduction would have been appalled by the electeds’ indifference to motorized mayhem. And it’s still possible that the make-the-bikes-go-away ladies will carry the day at the October 7 CB 8 Transportation Committee meeting, when issues raised at the forum get turned into resolutions.

There was also a disconnect between the officials’ insistence that “pedestrians’ grievances about bikes is one of our top complaints” (Garodnick) and the sparse turnout (around 50, many of whom were pro-bike). Still, I came away feeling that, unlike 22 years ago, the embattled minority isn’t cyclists but the anti-bikes. We may never get them to turn against autos, but we might, finally, be outnumbering and out-organizing them.

CB 7's transportation committee will host DOT staffers to discuss future bike facilities on the Upper West Side -- specifically, potential locations for protected bike lanes. We're trying to confirm, but we have word that Manhattan Borough Commissioner Margaret Forgione and bike coordinator Josh Benson will be there. [Update: Hayes Lord will be representing DOT.] Either way, this has the makings of an important opportunity to weigh in on UWS livable streets improvements. The DOT segment of tonight's meeting begins at around 8 p.m.

Across the park starting at 6:30, the CB 8 transpo committee will hold a "bike forum" that, based on its description, will focus mostly on cyclist behavior. Given CB 8's tendency to oppose bike infrastructure almost by default, Upper East Side cyclists may want to make their presence felt.

Update: The UWS Streets Renaissance Campaign has put together a white paper on the benefits of protected bike lanes for community board members. Here's the PDF.

Kent gave a presentation to about 50 citizen and community activists from the East Side regarding the efforts in New York City and elsewhere to redesign urban space for the needs of people and communities over the moving of traffic. The event was organized by State Senator Liz Krueger.

Kent began with an overview of the insights of his mentors, Holly White and Jane Jacobs, as to the challenges and opportunities of creating "great places" in New York City. Kent then explained what PPS has done in cities around the world to reclaim public space from motor vehicle traffic. Kent acknowledged the promising trends under the current DOT, but criticized the slow pace and timid scope of efforts to date. He advocated for a dramatic expansion of livable streets measures, such as market rate curbside parking and conversion of roadway space to non-traffic uses, and against the privatization of public space, such as the fashion week event at Bryant Park.

After the presentation, participants engaged in six different small group discussions. Each group was asked to come up with a particular spot on the Upper East Side that they believe could become, with some planning and resources, a "great place."

One group called for a transformation of Lexington Avenue and 86th Street, by (among other things) creating a traffic circle instead of a simple rectilinear intersection; installing a separated bike path on Lexington Ave and bicycle racks at the intersection, given the number of commuters who bike to this important mass transit access point; and additional plantings of trees.

Another group stressed the many amenities found along Riverside and Hudson River parks -- such as the restaurant at the 79th St. Boat Basin and the cantina at W. 66th Street -- and suggested that the East River Esplanade incorporate similar concessions and destinations, as well as innovative playgrounds to attract and anchor people and supplement existing amenities (monotonous benches and doggie runs). This group also discussed other interesting ideas, such as utilizing the cul-de-sacs at which many Upper East Side streets terminate at the East river as public spaces; increasing the number of pedestrianized blocks (such as the block on 91st Street between Second and Third Avenues); using existing ferry infrastructure to open up Mill Rock Island for community use; and curtailing or eliminating cars from Second Avenue.

Kent stressed that making great places requires long term campaigns waged by advocates who are "zealous nuts."  While no concrete plans came directly from the workshop, the level of receptivity and support for the ideas presented by Kent and the breakout groups was surprising and inspiring, and may augur big changes for the staid East Side in the future.

Photo: slurv/Flickr

Almost six months after DOT installed "controversial" new cross-town bike lanes on the Upper East Side, Manhattan's Community Board 8, which opposed the city's plan for lanes on 91st Street, has formed a "91st Street Task Force."

Of particular concern last year was the feared intrusion of cyclists into a section of 91st Street, between Second and Third Avenues, that has been closed to cars for decades. When the Task Force held a meeting earlier this month, item one on the agenda was: "The different designations available for streets that are closed to traffic, with their precise legal definition."

Streetsblog called CB 8 to ask about the committee but did not get a call back.

In other news, a centuries-old chunk of Antarctic ice shelf seven times the size of Manhattan disintegrated today. Scientists cite "rapid climate change in a fast-warming region of Antarctica" as the cause of the collapse.

Photo: bicyclesonly/Flickr

• Diminishing free on-street parking discriminates against working class people in favor of the very rich.
• Residential parking permits will encourage residents to drive more because they will be assured of free parking spaces. The current system is best because it gives on-street free parkers a motive to use their car less.
• It is an "insult" and to ask residents to pay even a $125 administrative fee a year for a residential parking permit "to park on their own block."
• There should be an elaborate ranking of permits, with residents ranking the highest, employees of certain local businesses beneath that, employees of other local businesses below that, etc.

One of the most irritating things about the process was the consultants' materials and questionnaires. There were set up from the motorists' perspective; there was no attempt to ask participants how parking policy affected non-motorists. One CB8 member at my table hard a hard time getting her brain around the idea that there were important uses to which curbside spaces could be put other than free parking, and there was certainly nothing in the consultants' materials or spiel to suggest that there might be. (I mentioned BRT lanes, increased commercial parking for local deliveries, and sidewalk widening in response and stressed that these served the non-car-owning majority of residents. The response was that the city should first implement BRT, and once it's in place then all the traffic will go away of its own accord without congestion pricing or changes in parking policy. Dream on!)

The materials and presentation assumed that park-and-ride would be a major problem in the neighborhoods adjacent to the congestion zone. There was almost no discussion of the possibility of expanding or prioritizing commercial and metered parking. The goal of the exercise seems to be to obtain feedback on four very similar variations of the same residential parking permit proposal. And there was no attempt to gather information about the participants themselves. Folks at my table were rattling off the facts regarding their multiple cars and where they were registered. I'm sure the consultants have no idea how many members of the non-car-owning majority have participated in these workshops.

On the plus side, there was unanimous universal disapproval of parking permit abuses. And I think I may have convinced some people that even though I didn't have a car, as a taxpayer and resident I should have an equal say in how curbside spaces should be managed (something I expect some would have disagreed with at the beginning of the session). Although the majority of attendees were staffers or appointees of electeds (another gross bias in the population whose opinion was being "sampled"), I did appreciate the workshop format, which is far more open than the public hearings where the pols monopolize every minute.

Upper East Side City Council Member Jessica Lappin has announced legislation that would make business owners responsible for cycling violations committed by their delivery workers.

City Room has the scoop:

Ms. Lappin, a Democrat who represents the Upper East Side, said she has regularly received complaints from constituents about unsafe conditions. A nine-year-old constituent, Annabel Azziz, wrote to her, saying, “We can’t take a walk without being nervous of bicycles zooming next to us.” Another constituent, an elderly woman, was hit by a bike last Thursday and needs hip replacement surgery as a result, she said.

Although she did not have statistical evidence, Ms. Lappin said she believed that workers who use bikes are in general less responsible than recreational cyclists, who, she said, were more likely to use helmets and obey traffic laws.

“I hear in community meetings, night after night, that people are afraid to walk down the street,” Ms. Lappin said in a phone interview.

Under the bill, the employer of a worker found to have broken the law while using a bicycle for commercial purposes would be liable for the violation. Ms. Lappin said that shifting the liability from workers to their employers would give businesses a greater incentive to ensure that their employees are following the law.

Bicycle riders who violate traffic regulations can be fined between $100 and $300, with an additional $200 fine if the rider hits a pedestrian. Ms. Lappin said her bill would not increase the penalties, but only shift the fine from the workers to the employers.

Streetsblog has certainly had its share of animated discussions on cyclists and traffic law, but Lappin's proposal immediately reminded me of a recent story in New York Magazine describing the horrendous working conditions endured by Chinese restaurant bike delivery workers, including the loss of income they face when a customer complains about cold food due to 'slow' delivery (not to mention what happens if they're injured in a crash). How would Lappin's proposal affect that dynamic? Might business owners simply deduct incurred traffic fees out of an employee's pay? Just one of many angles to consider, of course.

Also, anyone know what the fine is for a motorist who hits a pedestrian these days?

Photo: bondidwhat/Flickr

The City's plan to stripe a bike lane across the Upper East Side continues to generate "controversy." I put that word in quotes because, well, check out the video above and see for yourself what all the fuss is all about. The video was filmed on a beautiful Saturday afternoon at about 2:00 pm, theoretically, prime time for a neighborhood "play street." Yet, you'll see almost no one using the street except two cyclists, one of them a 9-year-old boy, slowly making their way up the pedestrianized street. They are clearly a danger... to no one.

Conflict over the City's bike plan centers around the car-free block of 91st Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenues, pictured above. What is most remarkable about this conflict is the fact that the City isn't planning to make a single design change to the neighborhood's beloved pedestrian mall. DOT's plan is to end the bike lane on either side of the car-free block. Central Park-bound, uphill-traveling cyclists will be able to use the street as part of their bike route. Pedestrians will still have priority.

DOT representatives, elected officials and community members held a site visit a few weeks ago. Word has it, bike lane opponents assembled a Potemkin playground complete with about a dozen children playing in the middle of the street. According to one participant, no more than five minutes after the meeting ended, all of the children picked up their toys and returned to a small park area south of the neighborhood's "play street" where they normally play when not being used as props.

As was the case during the 9th Street bike lane controversy in Park Slope, Brooklyn, it would be hard to take these vociferous opponents of white stripes on asphalt seriously, except that local elected officials do take them seriously. The Upper East Side opposition even has a City Council member from outside the district fighting against the new bike route. After the jump you'll find a letter from Daniel Garodnick, someone you might think of as one of City Council's smart, progressive bright lights and a good potential choice as New York City's next Council Speaker.

Question for Mr. Garodnick: If a Council member can't stand the neighborhood-level political heat over a mere bike lane, what kind of leadership is he likely to show when it comes time to help New Yorkers understand and accept the array of changes that have to be made in response to climate change, fossil fuel depletion and other large scale environmental challenges now impending?

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?

In this StreetFilm, Upper Green Side's Glenn McAnanama takes viewers on a brief tour of 86th St. and Second Ave., a heavily congested intersection on the northern boundary of Mayor Bloomberg's proposed congestion pricing zone.

It's 4:00 pm and it's ugly.

On Monday, July 9 the transportation committee of Community Board 8 on Manhattan's Upper East Side took up the issues of congestion pricing and a new pair of crosstown bike lanes.

Congestion pricing, it turns out, was the evening's non-controversial issue. Even after a series of impassioned speeches against Mayor Bloomberg's traffic reduction plan the committee voted to support it, 10 to 4 with one abstention.

"You've treated us to quite a debate," Dept. of Transportation Bike Program Coordinator Josh Benson said as he stood up to present the 90th and 91st Street bike route plan (download it here).

"You haven't heard anything yet," heckled one member of the crowd.

Ryder Pearce sells DOT's Upper East Side bike route plan to a skeptical Community Board 8.

Benson then introduced DOT staffer Ryder Pearce, a youthful member of the City's Urban Fellows program, making his first-ever Community Board presentation.

As a part of the City's ongoing bike network build-out, Pearce said, DOT plans to stripe new, Class II bike lanes along E. 90th and E. 91st Streets with a small segment running along E. 89th Street near the East River and a special treatment for the pedestrian-only block of 91st Street between Second and Third Avenues.

"As you can see there are no crosstown routes on the Upper East Side right now," Pearce said, pointing to the New York City bike map. The new lanes would connect the East River Greenway directly to Central Park's 90th Street entrance, also known as the Engineer's Gate. Along the way, the bike route would link Carl Schurz Park, Gracie Mansion, Asphalt Green and the Guggenheim Museum and "would provide for the growing residential population" living in new towers around York and East End Avenues, a long walk from the nearest subways.

Controversy over the bike route centered around the one-block stretch of 91st St. running through the Ruppert Yorkville Tower Condominiums. The block has been closed to motor vehicle traffic since the 1970s and is considered by many to be a neighborhood "play street."

Recognizing the community's concerns, DOT presented the Board with four different design options for the pedestrian street: no markings, a marked bicycle lane, directional pavement markings and signs. DOT's preference, Pearce said, is "to keep the residential feel" of the "shared space" by not putting down a bike lane or any other markings. For a number of people in the room, none of the options were good.

"There are children and elderly who consider that street a park," one Yorkville Tower resident said. "People want to walk there without having to look both ways and worry about getting run over. I am absolutely opposed to this bike path."

Pearce pointed out that cyclists on the westbound street would be traveling up a rather steep hill. He observed the street during several site visits, noting, "You don't see cyclists shooting through. You don't see them running people over." An older man in the crowd shouted back, "Oh, yes they do!"

Four or five community members stood to speak on behalf of the bike route plan. As seems to be the case in most New York City bike lane battles these days, supporters had youth on their side, opponents had New York City accents.

Glenn McAnanama, president of the Upper Green Side said he thought DOT had chosen the ideal crosstown bike route. "Ninety-first Street is the natural connection from the Greenway to the Park," he said. "If you go too much further north you're getting into a lot of traffic at 96th and further south, you're not connecting to the Central Park entrance."

"The fears are overblown," McAnanama said. He pointed to the new bike route running through Carl Schurz Park at East End Avenue and 86th Street as an example of "shared space" working in the neighborhood. "People were very afraid before the lanes were put in, but there haven't been any problems," he said. "Cyclists know and sense a shared space.

Members of the Community Board weren't convinced. One Board member said, "I for one believe bicycling is a recreational activity. I don't believe that it is a legitimate mode of transportation."

As the meeting wound down and it became clear that DOT's plan wasn't going to gain CB8's blessing on this night, a man in the crowd began dictating a motion to committee chair Chuck Warren:

Whereas illegal biking is found more often than legal biking; Whereas biking causes danger to children and old people; Whereas bicyclists should be licensed in the City of New York and an extensive education program should be inaugurated and the bicycle laws strictly enforced at all times so that they obey the traffic laws…

The committee's final resolution didn't include this language. It rejected DOT's plan and asked the agency to go back to the drawing board. Community Boards, it is important to remember, only have "advisory" power over city agencies and City Hall has said that it would go forward with its bike network build-out over Community Board objections.

In the past, my group, the Upper Greenside, has worked with Lappin to bring new greenmarkets to our neighborhood as well as other environmental issues. Based on our conversations about traffic, she seemed very positive about the idea of congestion pricing. She once wrote a letter to former DOT commissioner Iris Weinshall at our request about the dangerous traffic congestion around the Queensboro Bridge.

Last Friday, while Mayor Bloomberg was testifying in front of the State Assembly about congestion pricing, I accompanied Ann Seligman from Environmental Defense on a visit to Lappin's legislative office to advocate for the mayor's plan. Lappin jumped in immediately, saying, "I support congestion pricing, I just have some tough questions about the details." She described her position as close to Governor Spitzer's. She wants to see something happen but has some concerns over the plan's details.

 
I was glad to hear that her position was generally pro-congestion pricing, but I'm still disappointed in her lack of leadership on this issue, especially when compared to Council Member Dan Garodnick who shares much of the Upper East Side with Lappin.

If you live in Lappin's district, consider calling her office at (212) 535-5554 to give her a push in the right direction. Better yet, she's hosting a town hall meeting this Thursday. I strongly encourage Livable Streets advocates to show up and and ask her and other elected officials about their positions on congestion pricing, bicycling and and other urban environmental issues.