Shared lane arrows point the way between the Hudson River Greenway and 181st Street. Previously, this was a one-way street. Photo: c34 via Flickr.

Two months after winning support from Manhattan Community Board 12, a safer connection to the Hudson River Greenway is now in place at 181st Street.

Before, Riverside Drive north of 181st Street served as a one-way highway on-ramp, forcing cyclists exiting the greenway to either ride against traffic or dismount. Cars, too, drove the wrong way to get back on local streets without entering the Henry Hudson Parkway, creating unsafe conditions.

Now, DOT has turned a short stretch of Riverside back into a two-way street with shared lane markings painted in both directions. At the cost of a few parking spaces, this critical Upper Manhattan greenway entrance has been made safer and more easily accessible.

The changes check off one item on Community Board 12′s list of requested bike infrastructure improvements, which it passed unanimously this July. Perhaps some high-quality bike lanes for Upper Manhattan will be next.

The current configuration of this block of Riverside Drive, which feeds directly onto the Henry Hudson Parkway, makes it impossible to legally bike from the west side greenway (accessible via the overpass at the top of this image) onto local roads. Under a plan approved by CB 12's transportation committee, it will be converted to a two-way street. Image: Google Maps

Right now, Riverside Drive north of 181st Street runs one-way and quickly becomes an on-ramp to the Henry Hudson Parkway. The only entrance to the Hudson River Greenway in the area is on that block, meaning cyclists exiting the much-used path must either illegally ride against the highway-bound traffic or dismount and walk south along the sidewalk. At the same time, drivers parked on that block often drive in reverse to 181st Street rather than go forward onto the highway. That’s created unsafe conditions which local activists have fought hard to fix.

The new configuration would change the section of Riverside before it becomes a true on-ramp into a two-way street with shared bike lane markings, reported Bike Upper Manhattan member Brad Conover, who attended last night’s meeting. Parking would be removed from the west side of the street, a fact which the community board grudgingly accepted, noting in its resolution that it would like to find replacement parking elsewhere.

“Bike Upper Manhattan applauds CB-12 Traffic and Transportation Committee’s resolution last night endorsing DOT’s plan to correct one of the most glaringly unsafe street designs in Washington Heights,” said Conover. “Cyclists exiting the Westside Greenway at 181st no longer will be dumped into oncoming one way traffic.”

In the long-term, DOT told the community board, a redesign of the park could provide cyclists with a ramp that connects directly onto 181st Street. Those changes would be years away at the earliest, however. In the meantime, the changes will help connect Washington Heights to the country’s most-used bike path.

In the wake of its long-planned bike lane forum, Manhattan Community Board 12 has finalized a resolution calling for a major study of bike infrastructure of Upper Manhattan, available in full above. Overall it’s a strong demonstration of support for the expansion of bikeways in the area.

Perhaps most importantly, the resolution, which passed by a unanimous vote of 33-0, makes clear that there is broad community support for new bike infrastructure in the area. “Residents of CB12 suggested ways to improve current bike lanes and paths within our community’s parks and streets enjoyed the support from those in attendance in addition to a petition signed by 1,300 residents of CB12,” reads one clause. Given the near-inevitable complaints from some quarter or another that accompany any significant change to the street, such a record of grassroots support is quite valuable.

Based on suggestions, the resolution puts forward a list of bike projects that CB 12 would like DOT to study and report back to them about.

First among them is a safe bike connection between the Hudson and Harlem River Greenways, on or near Dyckman Street. Community members have long proposed that this be a separated bike path. CB 12 also asked for studies of how to improve bike and pedestrian access to the George Washington, Henry Hudson and Broadway Bridges, as well as the West Side Greenway at 181st Street, which currently lets cyclists off at a one-way highway on-ramp, forcing them onto the sidewalk.

Upland from the greenways and bridges, CB 12 urged DOT to study how cyclists can safely move uptown, downtown, and crosstown. Those lanes, they hope, would be integrated with the Parks Department’s long-term plans and connect to bike routes in parks.

CB 12 is famously loathe to lose any parking, and this resolution is true to form. The board urges DOT to search for new parking spots near where bike lanes might remove them, a potential flashpoint if DOT presents specific plans.

Local livable streets activists are pleased with the progress. “Bike Upper Manhattan is glad to see the Community Board as a whole and the Traffic & Transportation Committee reflecting the strong community support for safer bicycle facilities,” said Jonathan Rabinowitz of Bike Upper Manhattan, “and we look forward to the results of the study the board asked for from DOT and its quick implementation.”

Dyckman at Broadway and Riverside Dr. Photo: Brad Aaron

After years of delays, a citizen-generated plan for a separated bike path in Upper Manhattan will get an audience tonight.

The Dyckman Greenway Connector would, as the name suggests, link the east- and west-side Greenways a short distance from the northern tip of Manhattan, in Inwood, completing an uptown circuit for commuters and recreational riders. It would also help bring order to what is now a chaotic environment for area cyclists and pedestrians.

The bike path concept was first proposed to Community Board 12 in early 2008, and for the last three years has languished. At various times, advocates were told by CB 12 and DOT that each was waiting on action by the other. Proponents were repeatedly assured the connector would be addressed in a long-awaited neighborhood traffic study, but after the study was released with no mention of bike facilities, DOT told Streetsblog that CB 12 had asked that the project be excluded. Last winter, the CB 12 transportation committee turned away residents who had come out to endorse the proposal, and refused to reschedule discussion until the spring on the grounds that cold weather would keep seniors from attending.

Nevertheless, CB 12 has formally asked DOT for a feasibility study, and tonight’s “Bike Lane Forum” will ostensibly be dedicated at least in part to the Greenway connector concept. Along with residents of Inwood and Washington Heights, representatives from DOT and Transportation Alternatives are scheduled to attend.

If I might break character for a minute: July will mark my fifth year living in Inwood, and based strictly on personal observations, this spring has already brought a noticeable uptick in the number of cyclists on the streets, despite the fact that bike facilities — lanes and racks — are virtually non-existent here. I don’t bike myself, but as a pedestrian I would spend a lot more time and money on Dyckman, along with Broadway and other streets for that matter, if they were more pleasant places to walk. It’s entirely conceivable that, combined with changes in the works for the intersection of Dyckman at Broadway and Riverside Drive, a Greenway connector could supplant the summertime hordes of cruising motorists and motorcyclists with activity that’s more conducive to a livable neighborhood.

Tonight’s forum will be held at ARC XVI Ft. Washington Senior Center, 4111 Broadway, at 6:30 p.m.

DOT's plan for 181st Street includes a part-time bus lane and pedestrian safety features, but it's less ambitious than other options the agency presented last year. Image: NYC DOT

With five bus lines, two subway stops, a busy commercial strip, the only entrance to the Hudson River Greenway for blocks, and major bridge crossings at both ends of the street, Washington Heights’ 181st Street is a tangle of cars, buses, bikes and pedestrians. For years, DOT has been looking to redesign the corridor entirely, with the goal of finding a way to serve all those different needs.

In a plan presented to the local community board last Monday [PDF], DOT finally came out with its proposal for the street. With a slew of pedestrian safety improvements and a bus-only lane designated for the evening rush hour, the plan should be a major improvement for the neighborhood, but like other recent redesigns on 34th Street and First and Second Avenues, it’s far less ambitious than what could have been.

As recently as last fall, DOT was considering a protected bus lane for this project. Local elected leadership seemed split. At a presentation on the project to Community Board 12, an aide to Denny Farrell conveyed the Assembly member’s opposition to a major reconfiguration, while local City Council member Ydanis Rodriguez seemed open to the ambitious reallocation of space, telling CB12, “We have to make a certain level of radical change in how traffic is organized in that area.” The changes on the table now are positive, but not radical improvements.

Currently, 181st Street has two travel lanes and a parking lane in each direction on the wider blocks east of Broadway, narrowing to a single travel lane and parking lane on the blocks west of Broadway. The proposed changes mostly focus on the eastern section, as no buses continue on to the narrower section.

Under the proposed design, pedestrians will be safer thanks to a curb extension at the intersection of 181st and Haven Avenue, leading pedestrian intervals where 181st meets Broadway and Fort Washington Avenue, and, if the community board wants them, pedestrian refuge islands at St. Nicholas Avenue. Longer-term plans to extend the sidewalks at St. Nicholas and Amsterdam Avenues would calm traffic further.

For bus riders, the curbside parking on the south side of 181st Street would be replaced with a dedicated eastbound bus lane from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., improving reliability by clearing the way for Bronx-bound buses at the very beginning of their routes. On the block between Audobon and Amsterdam Avenues, which a DOT spokesperson said was where buses suffered the biggest delays from congestion, the bus lane would be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

The entire project is part of DOT’s Congested Corridors program, and the plan includes left-turn bays to help traffic move more smoothly. Curb parking will be replaced with loading zones during designated times, intended to minimize the rampant double parking along 181st. By keeping the through lanes clear, said the DOT spokesperson, these features will also keep buses moving smoothly.

Finally, the plan calls for a few new safety features on north/south streets intersecting 181st, including a southbound bike lane on Fort Washington between 183rd and 181st Streets and a traffic-calming center median on St. Nicholas between 183rd and 179th.

An option the DOT chose not to pursue would have given 181st Street New York City's first physically separated bus lanes.

That’s a fair number of changes to a stretch barely over half a mile long, but it’s much less than what was on the table in October. One option, for example, would have built New York City’s first physically separated bus lanes on 181st. With one in each direction and a raised bus stop mid-street, that plan would have provided one fewer traffic lane and one fewer parking lane than the current plan, but done much more for transit riders.

Another option was an approach that would have made 181st a real multi-modal street. With large sidewalk extensions on the whole corridor, a buffered bike lane and a bus lane, this discarded option would have redistributed space from drivers to every other user of the street.

In another rejected option, 181st Street would have become a true complete street, with extra room for pedestrians, cyclists and bus riders.

One reason DOT trimmed its sails was the decision to maintain two-way automobile traffic along 181st. In addition to Farrell’s aide, a former chair of CB 12 and several other local residents expressed opposition to a one-way street in October, and the DOT spokesperson confirmed that the department acceded to that request. Council Member Rodriguez did not respond to Streetsblog’s request to comment for this story.

There were also technical problems with the more ambitious options, he said. In the protected busway scenario, buses would have difficulty turning into a physically separated busway, the spokesperson said, while in the multi-modal proposal, cars cutting across the unprotected bus lane to park would slow buses. Given the success of offset bus lanes on First and Second Avenues, however, at least the second objection seems easily overcome.

Dyckman Street at Broadway and Riverside Drive: In the few minutes before and after this photo was taken, in addition to innumerable pedestrians, nearly a dozen cyclists passed through. About half were delivering food; others appeared to be students, or adults commuting or running errands. Will the city heed repeated requests to tame Dyckman, for cyclists and pedestrians alike, with a separated bike path? Photos: Brad Aaron

It’s been over three years since residents of Inwood first proposed a separated bike path for Dyckman/200th Street, one that would link Manhattan’s east- and west-side Greenways and help foster a safer and more humane environment for neighborhood cyclists and pedestrians. So persistent are advocates of the project, known informally as the “Dyckman Greenway Connector,” that they persuaded the notoriously auto-centric Community Board 12 to ask DOT for a feasibility study.

That was in late 2008. Since then, things haven’t moved an inch.

According to DOT personnel, an analysis of the connector was to be included in the Sherman Creek-Inwood traffic study, unveiled in the spring of 2010. However, though it outlines a number of planned improvements — including what looks to be a significant redesign of the hellish interchange at Dyckman, Broadway and Riverside Drive — the study makes no mention of bike infrastructure, on Dyckman or anywhere else.

“It is hard to understand how the DOT decides to put in protected bicycle facilities in some neighborhoods but continues to deprive Inwood of any such facility, and declines even to study the Dyckman Greenway Connector,” says Maggie Clarke, longtime Inwoodite and a chief proponent of the plan. To Clarke’s point, it’s difficult not to notice the fact that Inwood joins East Harlem among Northern Manhattan neighborhoods to explicitly, and to this point unsuccessfully, request the city’s help in improving cycling conditions.

A traffic island separating Dyckman from Riverside serves as a cyclist and pedestrian refuge -- sometimes.

Not that there is any reason to believe whatever DOT may someday come up with would get the blessing of CB 12. The full board did pass a resolution requesting a study — but the transportation committee did not endorse the concept, and committee members loaded the reso with conditions. The transportation committee has also repeatedly stalled discussion of the project. Last November, it abruptly canceled a scheduled hearing on district bike facilities, closing the agenda to advocates who were poised to present hundreds of signatures in support of safe cycling infrastructure in Northern Manhattan. The committee then said it would not reschedule during the winter, as cold weather would suppress senior turnout.

Finally, a CB 12 bike forum was set for June 16, where safe streets backers hope to make their case.

“All bicycle infrastructure in [the district] is apparently waiting on the forum,” says Jonathan Rabinowitz of Bike Upper Manhattan. “Once that’s done, we will press the CB to endorse our petition, which calls for the Greenway connector.”

Just to keep it interesting: A DOT spokesperson told Streetsblog that CB 12 asked the agency to consider the Dyckman lane separately from the Sherman Creek-Inwood study. But like everyone else, the agency is waiting for the June forum, where, the spokesperson said, “we plan to discuss bike facilities for the neighborhood” with the community board. Streetsblog will have more details as this elusive event draws closer.

A new skyscraper development in Washington Heights could put up to 550 parking spots next to the 191 St. 1 train station at Broadway, marked by the red circle. Image: Quadriad

The Quadriad buildings, which would be constructed on both sides of Broadway at 190th Street, would stand in stark contrast to the neighborhood’s stock of low-rises. As reported in the Manhattan Times, there are two plans on the table. One would mean the construction of two towers for market rate housing, each more than 20 stories tall, on either side of Broadway, which Quadriad says could be built without rezonings or special permits.

The company’s preferred option, dubbed the “New Strategy” plan, is to erect four buildings of 23, 33, 39 and 42 stories. The company says the project’s 650 or so housing units would be a combination of market rate sales or rentals and affordable housing (as defined by the city, which would still put the units beyond the reach of most Upper Manhattanites). The company would need city approval for its preferred plan.

Until recently, not much was known about the parking component of the proposal. Quadriad Chief Operating Officer Charles Lauster told Streetsblog in February that the company wanted “to get more input from the community before we get specific about the parking issues.” At a Wednesday night meeting of the Community Board 12 committee on land use, some of those specifics were revealed. Local resident and DNAinfo reporter Carla Zanoni was there:

Henry Wollman [Quadriad president and CEO] said the “New Strategy” plan (the one that includes the 42-story building) would include parking for approximately 500-550 cars and that they are currently looking into different garage systems to accommodate that type of load.

He also said that they were looking to create that amount of parking in response to community interviews they’ve held in which residents said “parking is a big problem in the neighborhood.”

Despite the fact that only around 25 percent of households in Upper Manhattan own cars, and that the area is served by a number of buses and two subway lines — the “New Strategy” plan would include partial renovation of the 191st St. 1 train station at Broadway — Quadriad will probably get no argument from CB 12 that its district suffers from a lack of parking. It’s more likely that the promise of an 85 percent parking spot to apartment ratio won’t be enough to satisfy the folks who killed a neighborhood Greenmarket to preserve unfettered access to 19 curbside spaces.

Assuming Quadriad and CB 12 come to terms, and if the project gets the all-clear from the City Planning Commission and City Council, residents of Washington Heights and Inwood — pedestrians and drivers alike — may find themselves wanting a new strategy to deal with the traffic generated by those 500+ parking spots.

With reporting from Noah Kazis.

The Plaza De Las Americas market is set to get a proper plaza on 175th Street. Image: Steven Maginnis via Flickr.

DOT presented the latest design concepts for a permanent Plaza De Las Americas to Washington Heights residents last night, showing a plan to pedestrianize the full block of 175th Street between Broadway and Wadsworth Avenue, in order to make a new space for residents and the popular market currently operating at that location. The design — 95 feet deep and 165 feet wide, extending all the way into what are currently the parking lanes on Broadway and Wadsworth –  won plaudits from those in attendance.

The new design will introduce curves to the street grid, with waves of trees, benches and lights lining the plaza along the north and south. Much of the space will be left open, with moveable furniture, so that vendors have the most flexibility to set up tents and trucks as needed.

The design presented last night includes a number of features added at the request of community members who attended a similar workshop in September. Granite bollards will line the east and west of the plaza to protect against errant cars, for example, and amenities like a public restroom and a small storage kiosk for vendors were added.

The final pieces of the plaza’s design are still being worked out. An artist will be selected to bring public art to the plaza in the next few weeks, and the selection of materials for items like benches or pavers is still underway. The design should be completed by this fall. Construction is scheduled to start in spring 2012 and last one year.

Last night’s workshop, which was attended by around 15 residents, had an informal, participatory feel. Coffee and cookies were provided along with a bilingual presentation: The slides shown were in Spanish and the main conversation was held in English with a translator.

“It’s an improvement over what’s there now,” said Community Board 12 land use committee chair Wayne Benjamin after the meeting. “Right now, it’s a very wide intersection being used as a plaza.” Benjamin said that he still wanted to see what specific design features are selected and expressed disappointment that no Upper Manhattan artist was a finalist for the plaza’s public art.

“It’ll bring much improvement for our community,” agreed Rafael Osoria, an aide to Assembly Member Guillermo Linares. “Now, it’s terrible.”

Cyclists heading north on St. Nick can wait to cross Amsterdam Avenue in a bike box, before they enter a parking protected contra-flow lane on the other side. A pedestrian refuge island also shortens crossing distances and calms traffic. Photo: BicyclesOnly via Flickr.

DOT’s planned safety improvements for the intersection of St. Nicholas and Amsterdam Avenues are currently being installed, as shown in pictures snapped by Streetsblog reader BicyclesOnly. Major features include shorter crosswalks, additional pedestrian space, and Upper Manhattan’s first segment of physically-protected bike lane.

Up to now, the intersection has been a dangerous one. According to a DOT presentation from April, 23 pedestrians were injured there from 2006 to 2009. It’s no mystery why. With two large, fast-moving avenues crossing at an irregular angle, it was a recipe for trouble.

The redesign installs a pedestrian refuge island and a Greenstreets triangle to shorten the distance across the intersection on foot. It also turns the blocks of St. Nicholas on either side of the intersection into one-ways, headed into the intersection. Motorists who want to continue on St. Nicholas in either direction need to do a dogleg onto Amsterdam and then turn back to St. Nicholas. Here’s a map:

Image: NYC DOT

Cyclists in the northbound bike lane on St. Nicholas — the only on-street bike lane in that direction — get an innovative new treatment from DOT for their uphill passage. Sharrows direct them from a bike lane on the right side of the street to one on the left side, where they cross over a traffic calming concrete island and into a bike box. From there, they are guided across Amsterdam and into a one-block, contraflow bike lane up St. Nicholas, protected by angled parking. Southbound riders aren’t quite so lucky; they’ll travel south in the St. Nicholas bike lane as usual, but have to take a detour onto Amsterdam and then turn left to reconnect with St. Nicholas. Even so, the general traffic calming effect should be welcome.

Sharrows lead cyclists across St. Nicholas traffic and over an island that sends motor traffic onto Amsterdam Ave. To the left of the frame will be a large Greenstreets triangle. Photo: BicyclesOnly via Flickr.

DOT workers installing the one block-long contraflow bike lane on St. Nicholas. Photo: BicyclesOnly via Flickr.

Upper Manhattan needs more bike infrastructure, including a safe connection between the Hudson and Harlem River Greenways.

Build bike lanes? Manhattan’s Community Board 12 doesn’t even want to talk about bike lanes.

When members of the Inwood-Washington Heights Livable Streets Group showed up with local bike lane supporters to what was supposed to be a public hearing on the issue Monday night, the transportation committee chair informed them that there wasn’t any space on the agenda for the group to make their presentation, much less hear public testimony, according to a report on DNAInfo. That public hearing has now been pushed forward indefinitely.

The procedural controversy stems from a petition started by the Livable Streets group to improve the bike infrastructure of Upper Manhattan. They’re asking for designs like a protected lane along Dyckman Street, connecting the greenways on the west and east sides of Manhattan, and bike lanes over the area’s bridges. You can add your name to the current 826 signatories here.

The livable streets activists were first invited to present their petition to the community board last month. “It was a long discussion that first time, and a very hostile reaction,” recalled Brad Conover. Three of the four members of the Transportation Committee in attendance came out against bike infrastructure, arguing that cyclists don’t deserve new lanes because they don’t follow the rules of the road, and that any lane that took away parking was a non-starter.

At that point, the Community Board decided that it needed to hear from the community, said Conover, and scheduled a public hearing on the issue for this past Monday, November 1. That was confirmed by DNAinfo as recently as last week.

Cycling in Upper Manhattan never was discussed on Monday, however. When Conover and other activists showed up, they asked to make a ten-minute PowerPoint presentation explaining their proposal. The committee said there wasn’t time, setting off a lengthy argument over whether or not to allow the presentation. “At the end of half an hour, they said no,” said Conover.

The public never got a chance to speak either. It was a “miscommunication” that there would be a public hearing on Monday, said the committee; rather, there would only be a discussion of when to hold a public hearing.

Conover said that he thinks the public hearing was cancelled because the anti-bike lane members of the committee felt outnumbered. “The fear in the room was palpable,” he said. “They keep adjourning and delaying until somebody shows up who will speak in opposition.”

The public hearing may take place at November’s meeting of the full community board, or may be put off until the January transportation committee meeting, said Conover.

One option for 181st Street would create a two-way, separated transit mall. Image: NYC DOT

Following a series of public workshops going back to 2008, DOT has put forward some big plans for Manhattan’s traffic-clogged 181st Street. Over the next few months, the department will choose one of three options to ease traffic and improve safety on the street. While every option offers some significant benefits for Washington Heights pedestrians, one keeps traffic patterns largely unchanged while the other two would truly transform the corridor.

At a public meeting on the project held last night, the testimony tended to support only the smallest changes and raise concerns about the effects of prioritizing transit or cycling on the area’s motorists. But Upper Manhattan residents who want to see significant improvements for walking, biking, and transit seem to have an ally in local Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez, who called on the community to embrace big changes.

181st Street needs a reboot. With one lane in each direction, it is clogged with traffic between the un-tolled Washington Bridge to the east and the George Washington Bridge to the west. Five bus lines carry riders to and from the Bronx, two subway stations disgorge straphangers, and the sidewalks are crowded with pedestrians on the busy commercial strip. The street lacks loading zones, making double-parking a constant problem. And the only entrance to the Hudson River Greenway for blocks is at 181st Street.

On the four blocks between Amsterdam Avenue and Broadway, the differences in how DOT’s three options balance all these demands are substantial. (You can see the details in this PDF from June; the designs haven’t changed since then.) Alternative 1 only makes small changes to the status quo, most prominently by adding left turn lanes along 181st. In addition, medians in a few locations and restricted turning regulations would significantly improve pedestrian safety at the most dangerous locations, according to Atma Sookram, a consultant working on the project.

In contrast, the other two choices prioritize the majority of residents who don’t drive.

Alternative 2 would create a two-way, protected transit mall along this stretch, with raised medians serving as bus stops. Car traffic would be reduced from two-way to one-way westbound to make room for the buses. Because the transit mall is short, explained Sookram, the benefit to transit riders would be more in reliability than in speed. “It’s just not very long,” he said, “so there’s only so fast they can go.”

In Alternative 3, buses are given a single unprotected westbound lane, a buffered bike lane is included, and the sidewalks are widened by around a foot and a half (more at intersections). Both Alternatives 2 and 3 include the safety improvements in Alternative 1 as well.

Alternative 3. Image: NYC DOT

West of Broadway, 181st Street narrows and the buses have completed their routes, so DOT offered less dramatic changes. Every alternative would look the same along that stretch, with some new turn lanes and a curb extension. Additionally, every alternative would replace some metered parking with loading zones — which should help with deliveries and reduce double-parking — and stripe a southbound bike lane on Fort Washington Avenue between 183rd and 181st.

DOT is still in the process of deciding which plan to implement, though a final report is expected in March, according to Manhattan Borough Commissioner Margaret Forgione. “We will not proceed with anything without community support,” she announced at the beginning of the meeting.

Many speakers at last night’s meeting were hesitant to disrupt vehicle traffic at all. “The two alternatives where cars have to go eastbound on alternative streets, in my view, sadly are non-starters” said a former chair of Community Board 12. “These one-way things scare the heck out of me.”

An aide for powerful Assembly Member Denny Farrell also preferred Alternative 1, worrying about displaced traffic.

An important counterweight to those arguments came from Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez, who spoke eloquently in favor of thinking big. “We have to make a certain level of radical change in how traffic is organized in that area,” said Rodriguez. “I call for everyone in the whole community to understand that all of us sometimes have to sacrifice something.” Rodriguez didn’t specifically mention any of the alternatives, however.

As is typical at CB 12, which has scuttled plans for a greenmarket over concerns about the temporary unavailability of vehicle storage, parking also emerged as a flashpoint. The owner of a barbershop on 181st Street rose at one point to claim that if parking were removed from the street, 40 percent of businesses would close. In response, Forgione firmly explained that this was a common belief across the city, but that “sometimes we do surveys and what we find is that a very high percentage of the customers walk or come by public transportation.” She promised to work on the issue with the local BID, which also expressed concerns about losing parking.

Each of the alternatives eliminates some of the 183 parking spaces currently along the corridor. Alternative 3 actually removes the least parking, while Alternative 2 removes the most.

One thing that everyone in the room could agree on is that doing nothing is not an option. “It’s not acceptable the way it is and it’s only going to get worse,” said Forgione. “We need to keep a little momentum with this.” Rodriguez repeatedly said that he wanted to see a new 181st Street included in the city’s 2011-2012 capital plan, which would require swift action.

The four Democrats running to replace Eric Schneiderman in the State Senate - Miosotis Muñoz, Mark Levine, Anna Lewis, and Adriano Espaillat - met last night to debate transportation policy. They were joined by Green Ann Roos, not pictured.

Five candidates vying to become Upper Manhattan’s next state senator met in the 168th Street Armory last night to make their case to the car-free voters of Riverdale, Inwood, Washington Heights, West Harlem, and the Upper West Side. At a debate sponsored by Transportation Alternatives and WE ACT for Environmental Justice, important differences emerged over how best to solve the MTA’s budget crisis and make streets safe for pedestrians and cyclists.

Democrats Adriano Espaillat, Miosotis Muñoz, Mark Levine, and Anna Lewis were joined last night by Green Party candidate Ann Roos. Whoever wins, the victor’s first term will be dominated by the ongoing budget crisis afflicting the state of New York, which affects transit quite directly. State legislators made the MTA’s funding crisis even worse last December by stealing more than $100 million in dedicated transit taxes to plug gaps in the general fund. The debate began with a revealing discussion of how each candidate would secure adequate funding for transit given the current fiscal climate.

Assembly Member Espaillat, considered the front-runner due to an advantage in name recognition, strong fund-raising and prominent endorsements, began with a warning: “It would be irresponsible of me to say there’s not a deficit that’s going to hit across the board,” he said. Without new revenue, the legislature will be forced to make impossible choices between priorities like education, health care, and transportation.

Though he didn’t make a specific revenue proposal during the debate, afterwards Espaillat told me that “congestion pricing is certainly something that we must bring back to the table.” He argued against cobbling together a piecemeal funding scheme for transit, saying that “the main engine of economic development in our community” needs a “solid revenue stream.” Even so, he maintained his opposition to any tolls over the Harlem River bridges, which carry torrents of toll-shopping drivers through the district.

Mark Levine, considered to be a close second to Espaillat, also argued that congestion pricing would be the best solution. “I also support, short of that, a plan to toll the East River bridges,” he explained. Harlem River bridge tolls were conspicuously absent, however, a stance that he earlier explained to Streetsblog by characterizing those bridges as essentially local streets.

The other two Democrats, Muñoz and Lewis, each suggested reinstating the commuter tax to raise revenue.

While each candidate disregarded moderator instructions to offer transit solutions aside from the standard calls to better manage the MTA, Lewis was particularly vociferous in her denouncements of the authority. “I don’t believe it’s because they’re underfunded,” she argued in response to Espaillat and Levine. “What they’ve done is, for the most part, cooked their books. It’s all a lie.”

Roos rejected any attempt to balance the budget that would affect working- or middle-class New Yorkers — which, in her view, even encompassed road-pricing solutions that would benefit lower-income residents. “I am opposed to fare hikes,” she said. “I am opposed to service cuts. I am opposed to borrowing. I am opposed to congestion pricing. I am opposed to tolls on the East River Bridges. I am opposed to a commuter tax.” What isn’t Roos opposed to? A more progressive income tax and a stock transfer tax, she said, could fund transit and more.

In contrast to some other districts, none of the candidates here dwelled on the most recent round of service cuts. Instead, they emphasized the need for more capital improvements. With tiles falling from station ceilings and broken elevators making it difficult to reach the deeply-buried stations uptown, poor maintenance seemed to be a higher priority than lost bus lines.

After station repairs, though, each had a different priority for improving local transit. Levine would restore lost bus services, while Lewis would work on accessibility for the disabled. Espaillat suggested adding two new Select Bus Service routes to the district — which includes the Fordham Road SBS — one along 181st Street into the Bronx and one connecting to downtown.

When it came to improving street safety, each candidate promised to support the construction of more protected bike lanes, to the extent that they could as a state representative. Levine, who began his remarks by noting that he is a T.A. member and that his whole family bikes, praised the bike lanes on Ninth Avenue and Broadway, saying they’ve “proved the fears of local businesspeople to be unfounded. I think this is ultimately economic development.”

Other suggestions varied widely, however. Lewis put the burden of safety on the victims, pushing helmet laws for cyclists and suggesting that when walking down poorly lit streets, “perhaps we need to ask ourselves to wear protective outerwear to make it easier to see people.” The latter suggestion drew some muffled laughter from the audience.

Levine laid out a laundry list of improvements, including narrowing lanes, expanding medians, and installing countdown clocks at every pedestrian crossing. “Enforcement of the current laws is unacceptably weak,” he said, arguing that police in Upper Manhattan were even less attentive to traffic safety than in the rest of the borough. Overall, he suggested, “I don’t think that motor vehicles should have a monopoly on our streets.”

Muñoz suggested increasing penalties on unsafe drivers. “You’re in a vehicle, you’re in a weapon,” she said.

Espaillat began by calling for lower speed limits, “because it is often speed that leads to these very tragic accidents.” He spent the bulk of his time, though, proposing a comprehensive traffic study of the area. The study would focus on the prevalence of two-way north-south avenues, he suggested, saying that the pedestrian crashes he heard about usually involved cars turning off of those avenues. The DOT’s recently-released pedestrian safety study backs up Espaillat’s intuition, finding that almost half of all pedestrian fatalities in the borough occur on major two-way streets.

In a lightning round of questions at the end of the debate, each candidate promised to support a residential parking permit program and bike/ped access on the state-run Henry Hudson Bridge.

Voters will choose between the four Democrats soon: Election Day is less than a week away, on Tuesday, September 14.

Candidates for the 31st Senate District: Miosotis Muñoz, Mark Levine, Anna Lewis, and Adriano Espaillat. All except Lewis have confirmed they will attend tonight's debate to talk transportation.

Labor Day and the Jewish high holidays make this an abbreviated week, but with the critical primary elections just seven days away, the state’s political world is going full-tilt. Tonight, at least three of the four candidates running to replace Eric Schneiderman in the State Senate will meet at a debate co-sponsored by Transportation Alternatives, WE ACT for Environmental Justice, and the Upper West Side Streets Renaissance to talk about how they plan to provide for the transportation needs of the Upper West Side, West Harlem, Washington Heights, Inwood, and Riverdale.

Whoever wins the seat will be replacing one of the more pro-transit members of the State Senate. Before entering the Senate, Schneiderman represented the Straphangers Campaign as a private attorney, and in office he publicly embraced PlaNYC. However, even Schneiderman remained out of sight during the most recent fights over MTA financing.

The three candidates expected to show up tonight are Adriano Espaillat, Miosotis Muñoz, and Mark Levine. Espaillat currently serves in the Assembly representing an overlapping district; Muñoz was an aide to Congressman Charlie Rangel and Manhattan borough presidents C. Virginia Fields and Ruth Messinger; Levine was chair of Community Board 12′s transportation committee and founded a credit union for low-income Upper Manhattanites. A fourth candidate, Anna Lewis, has not yet confirmed whether she will attend, according to a DNAinfo report.

Streetsblog last looked at the race in June, noting that while each of the candidates to represent this largely car-free constituency expressed strong support for transit, none would support tolling the free Harlem River bridges that run through the district. Plenty of other revenue sources got the thumbs up: Espaillat was a vocal congestion pricing supporter, Muñoz wanted to reinstate the commuter tax, and Levine was even willing to toll the East River bridges on top of a commuter tax. But when it comes to new tolls inside the district, these candidates seemed to draw the line.

To find out where they stand on transit funding, what they’d do to improve pedestrian and cyclist safety, or to pose your own question, show up tonight at 7:00 p.m. at the Armory Foundation, located at 216 Ft. Washington Ave., between 168th and 169th Streets. The debate will be moderated by West Side Spirit reporter Dan Rivoli and Columbia urban planning prof David King.

At a Monday night meeting with the transportation committee of Manhattan Community Board 12, DOT rolled out a slew of much-needed street improvements for Washington Heights and Inwood. Several are still in the preliminary stage, but one major intersection in the Heights is slated for an overhaul this fall.

The crossing of St. Nicholas and Amsterdam Avenues, at W. 162nd Street, is a hub of neighborhood activity, with access to the C train, four bus lines, a grocery store and other retailers, as well as the Morris-Jumel Mansion. It's also a confusing, hazardous mess. From 2006 to 2009, according to DOT, 23 pedestrians were injured there, while CrashStat shows scores of collisions and one pedestrian fatality between 1995 and 2005.

DOT plans to clean up the area [PDF], replacing asphalt with green space, shortening crosswalks, adding a protected bike lane segment, shifting bus boarding areas, and improving commercial loading access.

Specifically, an existing Greenstreets triangle at W. 161st Street will be expanded into what are now auto lanes, and will stretch to W. 162nd Street. Northbound cyclists in the adjacent bike lane on St. Nicholas will have to contend with only one lane of drivers between W. 160th and W. 162nd. After a dogleg through the intersection, the lane picks up on the north side of 162nd as a parking-protected segment for one block. As Brad Conover of Inwood and Washington Heights Livable Streets points out, while southbound cyclists should benefit from the replacement of northbound car traffic with back-in angled parking on the 162-163 block, only northbound cyclists will have a protected bike lane.

"I am happy that DOT is redesigning this dangerous intersection and is including a protected lane," Conover told Streetsblog, "but my preference would be for protected bike lanes running north and south for the entire length of either St. Nick or Amsterdam so that a biker could ride safely from Inwood or Washington Heights to the Upper West Side or Central Park."

As for pedestrian amenities, the aforementioned swath of expanded green space will include a bus stop. And two additional new spaces are planned: a Greenstreets triangle north of W. 162nd and a pedestrian refuge in the center of Amsterdam, also on the north side the intersection. St. Nicholas will also be resurfaced from W. 155th to W. 168th, making for a smoother ride for cyclists and bus riders.

Up in Inwood, the results of the Sherman Creek traffic study are in [PDF]. Conclusion: Inwood is flooded with auto traffic (particularly around the "free" University Heights bridge) and is a dangerous place to walk. The study contains recommendations for improvements to many neighborhood intersections, but since they are expected to be revised we'll forgo breaking them down for now. One corridor to keep an especially close eye on is Dyckman Street, where advocates hope that any overhaul will include a separated bike lane connecting east- and west-side Greenways -- infrastructure that IWHLS members believe would spark a virtuous cycle in Upper Manhattan.

"The 'corridor treatment' for Dyckman Street from Riverside Drive to the Harlem River Drive will (I'm hoping) build momentum for a north-south bike lane," says Jonathan Rabinowitz. "Vigorous advocacy and the help of real-world examples in our own neighborhood will lead to more improvements and a safer Washington Heights and Inwood."

Photo:rickweller/Flickr

Per an email from project coordinator Ellen Macnow of the Parks Department, via Inwood and Washington Heights Livable Streets: 

A contract has been signed with the firm Lichtenstein Consulting Engineers, and they will start work soon. Lichtenstein is charged with producing designs for the bridge, including structural improvements, new ramp access and new protective fencing. Their work will result in a contract to be bid out for construction, which is funded by Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC program.

Public comment meetings will be scheduled in the spring.

Macnow says the High Bridge Coalition "will be working hard this year to engage the local and advocacy communities in the design." (Parks has already conducted at least one round of public input, in August of '07.) There was also concern upon the project's announcement nearly three years ago that access would be limited to daytime weekend hours, a fear Macnow tried to mitigate. "We want everybody who wants to use the bridge to use the bridge," she said.

Built as part of the Croton Aqueduct in 1848, the High Bridge spans the Harlem River to connect Washington Heights with the High Bridge neighborhood. It stopped carrying water in 1958, and was closed to the public completely in 1970.

On a sidewalk strained to capacity, Ydanis Rodriguez stands with drivers. Photo: MT

As vehicles stack up at lights, drivers, hoping the line will inch up before the light turns red, inevitably get stuck in the intersection and are ticketed.

"If you drive 125th Street there's a team of one to two traffic agents moving traffic," Rodriguez said. Ticketing drivers instead of helping move traffic on the street amounts to harassment, he said.

Rodriguez has put calls into the head of traffic enforcement to hopefully find a solution to the problem.

One solution that must not have occurred to the council member is for drivers to obey the law. Clogged intersections are a major contributor to the gridlock that so offends Rodriguez, and crosswalk violations pose a significant safety risk to people on foot. For these reasons, city traffic law is fairly unambiguous when it comes to proper motorist protocol:

No operator shall enter an intersection and its crosswalks unless there is sufficient unobstructed space beyond the intersection and its crosswalks in the lane in which he/she is traveling to accommodate the vehicle, notwithstanding any traffic control signal indication to proceed.

But Rodriguez would apparently rather shift enforcement resources to "helping move traffic," which to us sounds like code for ushering drivers through intersections teeming with pedestrians. This in a district where roughly 80 percent of households don't own a car. It must also be noted that, during his campaign, Rodriguez bragged of helping quash the effort to toll northern Manhattan's "free" bridges, ensuring 181st Street's status as a traffic magnet for the foreseeable future (while endangering his constituents' access to adequate transit service).

A Rodriguez staffer indicated to Streetsblog that we'd get clarification on where Rodriguez stands when it comes to balancing motorist convenience and pedestrian safety, but his office ultimately did not respond to our questions. DOT's planned revamp of 181, meanwhile, has been delayed by at least a year, according to the Times.

At October's Walk21 Conference, I got the chance to tour the High Bridge, a viaduct connecting Manhattan and the Bronx which has been closed to the public for nearly 40 years.

Opening the High Bridge to pedestrians and cyclists has been a long-held goal for many New Yorkers. (I remember reading about this effort back in 1998, during a postcard campaign directed at then-Parks Commissioner Henry Stern.) Many community groups, non-profits, and public agencies have advocated for its restoration, including the City Parks Foundation, The High Bridge Coalition, and C.L.I.M.B.

Over the years, many target opening dates have been announced, but recently momentum has really picked up. Very early in 2010, community input and design will finally begin. Then, if all goes well, it shouldn't be long until we can all walk and bike across this magnificent structure.

Since he didn't see a bus coming, the gentleman in the picture above sincerely couldn't understand what the problem was. But his co-worker, also pictured below, was incensed, screaming at the woman and, indirectly, at me, for taking photos. He was angry and aggressive enough that the guy above asked him several times to calm down.

After about 10 minutes, the third man returned (they had stopped so he could use an ATM), and they drove off, honking as they went.

This woman, who could easily be someone's grandmother, is tired of the indignities that too often accompany city bus travel ...

... and this guy publicly berates her for sticking up for herself.

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.

The intersection of Ft. Washington Ave. and W. 168th St. may soon be a little calmer for a few hours each week. But don't tell CB 12.

The new market will occupy about five street spaces, but in its coverage of a recent committee meeting, the Manhattan Times finds that the board remains preoccupied with motorist convenience.

Committee members and other board members in attendance expressed concern about aggravating the already terrible traffic around the hospital.

"That's something you have to look at very closely," Board Member Emilia Cardona said.

"The north-south traffic is horrible already," added committee member George Preston.

It's true: The hospital area is a traffic sewer. And the best way to ensure it stays that way is to shoot down and nitpick any proposal that would enable pedestrians to repurpose their streets. Lest anyone mistake CB 12's motives with an actual desire for equity among street users, this is the board that overruled the wishes of over 1,000 Greenmarket supporters based on the testimony of three -- three -- who preferred the auto-centric status quo.

In other news, one of the drivers CB 12 members are tripping over themselves to accommodate flipped his car last night near the pedestrian-heavy intersection of W. 207th Street and Broadway in Inwood. Fortunately, no parking spaces were harmed.