While the path was closed due to repairs on the adjacent wastewater treatment plant, greenway users were forced to take an arduous and unmarked detour. This reopening restores the connectivity that makes the greenway the most heavily-used bike path in the country and a particular favorite of cyclists who don’t want to ride with motor vehicles.

"Bike Path Closed" is about all the information cyclists will get about the closure of the heavily-used Hudson River Greenway between 135th and 145th Streets. Photo: Noah Kazis

The Hudson River Greenway is the most heavily used bike path in the United States, carrying roughly one-seventh of all cyclists entering Manhattan below 50th Street. In Upper Manhattan, where there are fewer bike lanes and much less on-street protection for cyclists than further south, it is truly the backbone of the bike network.

Despite the greenway’s centrality to the city’s bike network, a ten-block stretch of the path between 135th and 145th Streets has been closed for a week, with scarce effort to provide an alternative route for cyclists and other park users.

Last Wednesday, a fire at the North River Wastewater Treatment Plant forced that plant offline, sending untreated sewage from Manhattan’s entire West Side directly into the Hudson. As part of its round-the-clock repairs, the city Department of Environmental Protection closed the greenway where it runs in front of the plant. A DEP spokesperson said that the greenway was closed to allow for emergency responder access, but would not elaborate further.

The plant is separated from the street grid by both train tracks and the West Side Highway, so it’s not implausible that the greenway space is needed for vehicle access or staging. I did not, however, see any vehicles, emergency or otherwise, on that stretch of the greenway this morning. Since the area in front of the wastewater plant was restricted, it was difficult to get a good view of the entire closed-off greenway segment and what it’s being used for.

As I learned when I rode my bike up to the area to investigate, the closure forces cyclists heading north or south on the greenway into a confusing, time-consuming, and potentially dangerous detour without any sort of signage or guidance.

Just the first set of stairs cyclists must climb to get from the greenway to Riverside Drive at 135th Street. Photo: Noah Kazis

I started out riding north on the greenway this morning to investigate. Between 125th Street, where I entered the greenway, and 135th Street, there was no warning of any impending detour. Only when I reached the yellow tape blocking off the path was I alerted. There a single sheet of paper read, “Bike Lane Closed.”

A security guard told me that I should detour east on the remaining half-block of 135th Street but did not know what to do after that. It turned out there were two options involved, neither of which were indicated by any kind of sign: looping back south and then cutting east to Broadway, or climbing roughly four stories worth of stairs up to Riverside Drive. Since Riverside is relatively low-traffic and marked as a bike route, I chose the stairs.

Biking north on Riverside, there are no signs alerting cyclists where they can cross over the tracks and the highway back onto the Greenway; you have to either ask around or already know. The first crossing that doesn’t seem forbidden comes at 148th Street. Again, it’s stairs all the way down.

Northbound cyclists can cross with a bit more ease, at least while the detour is in effect, by using a ramp at the 145 Street entrance to Riverbank State Park. But cyclists on Riverside Drive are greeted at the park entrance with a bright “No Bikes Allowed” sign, sure to keep most from trying to use it as a crossing.

To use the most convenient route around the greenway closure -- and it's not very convenient -- northbound cyclists would have to disregard this sign. Photo: Noah Kazis

While the greenway is closed, a park ranger told me, cyclists will be allowed to use this ramp and walk their bikes through the park. This concession was only given grudgingly. The ranger said just yesterday state park officials asked the city to send cyclists up the steps at 148th Street rather than through their park.

For cyclists riding the other direction on the greenway, the detour directs you to an elevator up to Riverbank Park, from which you can cross the ramp back onto Riverside, though no directions for what comes next are available.

Headed south on Riverside, cyclists can access the greenway at 125th Street, and again the signage is non-existent and the loops required to make it down to the water aren’t intuitive unless you know the area.

For cyclists, the effects of this detour are substantial, and Streetsblog has received several messages from long-time city cyclists and new bike commuters about their experiences. Those who depend on the car-free greenway for safety and comfort are thrust without warning onto Manhattan streets. Once on those streets, there is no indication of how to get back to the greenway and no alternative protected route.

DEP said they do not yet have a timeframe for when the greenway will be reopened. Until it is, they need to work with the Parks and Transportation Departments to provide clear guidance for how cyclists ought to detour, just as would happen were a major road closed for any substantial amount of time.

CB 9 is the fourth full board to vote in favor of taking automobiles off the Central Park loop drive for a trial period starting this summer, joining CBs 5, 7 and 8. In addition, committees from CBs 1, 10 and 11 have also endorsed the plan.

Before the meeting started, City Council Member Robert Jackson announced that he was in support of the trial, though not ready to take cars off the loop drive permanently. “I’m willing to try anything,” Jackson said.

Brad Taylor, a board member, explained the importance of taking cars off the loop to the West Harlem community. If the drive isn’t closed, he said, “traffic that wants to cut across to Midtown will be coming through our community. If they don’t have that option, they’ll stay where they are on the East Side or the West Side.”

Car-free park advocate Ken Coughlin cited a 2007 survey that found one third of the drivers on the Central Park loop came from the Bronx, ten percent from New Jersey, and six percent from Westchester. That adds up to 1,200 to 1,800 cars per day “that would not be on Harlem streets if it were not for the availability of the Park Drive,” he said. “Harlem has the most to gain from this trial.”

Said Lenna Nepomnyaschy, a long-time resident of the community district, in support of the proposal: “Having cars in the park is unbelievably horrible to see. All of a sudden the cars come in, there’s honking, there’s exhaust, there’s anger. There’s just not enough space for everyone.”

In order to ensure that the trial provides information that is as accurate as possible, the board amended the resolution to request that the car-free period extend sixty days after Labor Day, in order to be able to measure the effect of the closure on heavier traffic days.

In 2006, car-free Central Park advocates delivered a petition with an unprecedented 100,000 signatures to City Hall. Image via Streetfilms

Despite the impressive shows of support from three Manhattan community boards over the last two weeks, the effort to take cars off of the Central Park loop for a summer-long trial hit a major snag last night. In a resounding vote of two to one with two abstentions, the transportation committee of CB 9 voted against the car-free trial.

Before last night, the car-free Central Park trial won the endorsement of five committees in three different community boards, with only one no vote between them all. Those committees were far larger than the CB 9 committee. Wednesday night’s vote at CB 8 was something along the lines of twenty to one. In contrast, it’s hard to say that the two opponents of the car-free trial last night have a much stronger claim to speak for the residents of Morningside Heights and West Harlem than the one supporter.

According to Ken Coughlin, a long-time leader in the effort to get cars out of Central Park, the two people who voted against the trial appeared dead set against it from the start. He also noted that the NYPD representative in attendance at the meeting made his opposition to the car-free park trial no secret.

Taking cars out of Central Park doesn’t require community board support; this is a decision that will be made at the mayoral level. So last night’s CB 9 vote isn’t an insuperable obstacle for car-free park advocates. Given the mayor’s current opposition to taking cars out of Central Park, however, building as strong a grassroots coalition of support as possible is critical.

To that end, it’s possible that advocates could bring the issue back before the full board meeting of CB 9 in two weeks with the goal of having the larger body overturn the committee’s decision.

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.

• In January Karen Schmeer was mowed down by men suspected to have stolen over-the-counter allergy medicine from a CVS pharmacy in Manhattan.
• Last August, 27-year-old restaurant worker and father of three Pablo Pasares was run over in Long Island City by a man after an alleged drug buy.
• According to witnesses, a car thief was fleeing police when he hit and killed 38-year-old Greenpoint mother Violetta Kryzak in April 2009.
• In February 2009, a video camera captured an apparent Staten Island chase that led to the death of a couple with young sons.
• Last July, a pedestrian and motorcyclist were struck by a man fleeing the NYPD in Washington Heights following an armed mugging.
• One year ago this month, nine people, including five pedestrians, were injured when officers responding to a call in a marked NYPD squad car collided with another car and careened onto an East Village sidewalk.

We received two reports last night that the West Harlem Piers bike path -- a critical link in the Hudson River Greenway -- is finally open after several months of puzzling delay. (NYCEDC informed Streetsblog last week that the hold up was indeed due to problems securing materials for a safety rail.) Now the construction fence is down, and, as you can see in these photos from reader Paula Froke, cyclists are enjoying the unbroken stretch of greenway.

Streetsblogger Urbanis cheers the end of a long wait:

After raising a stink about it a few weeks ago, I was amazed to discover on my ride home this evening that the West Harlem Piers bike path was open -- yes, all the fencing was removed, and I sailed free and clear along the new bike path all the way to 135th Street, where it connects with the existing bike path running around Riverbank State Park. Not having to brave ten blocks of traffic on Riverside Drive was a dream.

More piers pics from Paula after the jump.

From Streetsblogger Urbanis:

[The] West Harlem Piers bicycle path, connecting the Hudson River Greenway between 135th and 125th Streets, has not still opened (after a promised opening of May or June this year). The completion of this link will allow cyclists an entire off-street route from Dyckman Street to Battery Park; currently, cyclists must exit the Greenway at 135th Street and ride in traffic along Riverside Drive to 125th Street. Even worse, while there is a bike lane provided for southbound commuters (which is a favorite parking spot for unloading trucks), no bike lane exists for northbound commuters.

The site remains fenced off but it has looked completed for months -- why the delay?

We put in several calls and e-mail messages to DOT and Parks, but no one we've found can tell us when the fencing will come down. A September story in the Columbia Spectator says the project is on hold due to "problems constructing a railing."

As part of our back to school coverage, and in light of news from the past week, we thought it would be a good time to report on programs aimed at keeping kids safe on city streets.

In addition to its ever-so-slowly evolving Safe Routes to School effort (three years in, improvements are soon expected to be completed at 12 out of 135 "high priority" schools), the Department of Transportation trumpets Safety City as a cornerstone of the agency's commitment to curbing the leading cause of preventable childhood death among city kids between the ages of 5 and 14. An educational program for school children that combines classroom instruction with outdoor lessons on simulated life-sized streetscapes, six Safety City campuses are located throughout the boroughs.

Negotiating West Harlem's narrow sidewalks, active road construction sites, and crosswalk signals so short that adult classroom volunteers had to block auto traffic with their bodies as kids scrambled across the street, a group of third graders made its way to the W. 158th Street Safety City last spring for a day of so-called "hands-on experience."

Safety City instructors must surely see a lot of unruly children, as a good chunk of classroom time was devoted to preemptive behavior management. Rules were spelled out repeatedly, and threats issued ad nauseam, before each activity. But as it turned out, much of the inevitable talking and fidgeting was necessitated by DOT teaching methods. As one instructor chatted casually with the students' parents, and flirted with their teachers, another led the kids in a game of "Jeopardy." Though the name of the game was appropriate, given the subject matter, the emphasis was on points, prizes and platitudes. (Question: "Cross the street how?" Answer: "Safely.") Kids who became overly excited by the prospect of taking home a DOT pencil or whistle had to be calmed down repeatedly. One instructor prodded the children into paying attention by warning them that, if they didn't, "I will be reading about you in the paper."

That admonishment, more than anything, epitomizes Safety City's message to kids: Streets belong to motor vehicles, and humans use them at their own risk.

The children were directed to memorize a chant, to be recited mentally at every corner: "Stop, look and listen. Make a safe decision." The sloganeering was reinforced by the "Safety City Rap," a repetitive "Barney"-esque video that seemed to serve mostly as a lunchtime babysitting tool. Not once during the day were students told of the rightful place of pedestrians in the urban environment, and not once was auto traffic depicted as anything other than an uncontrollable force of nature.

The class eventually moved outside to the fenced Safety City streetscape, where every sidewalk was clear of obstructions, every crosswalk was freshly painted, every pedestrian signal worked perfectly, and no speeding vehicles could be found. The whole of outdoor instruction consisted of kids (1) crossing a crosswalk in small groups, with hands in the air to make themselves visible; (2) lining up to ride bicycles one at a time around a sidewalk loop, stopping and dismounting to walk the bikes across the street; and (3) filing into the back seat of a car to learn how to fasten a seatbelt.

At the end of the long day, the children left the immaculate streets of Safety City for the untidy reality of W. 158th, each of them equipped with a bright yellow DOT goodie bag. Lumbering uphill, as they approached the first of many hazardous intersections they would encounter on the way back to school, they dutifully raised their hands.