Since last fall, Gerson has agitated against pedestrian and bike improvements, going so far as to introduce a bill that would subject street safety projects to City Council oversight. During the current campaign, he's done nothing to distinguish himself from the rest of the District 1 field when it comes to green transportation policy. He recently told the crowd at a candidates forum that he now opposes congestion pricing, after voting for it last year. So, what's up with the endorsement from one of the city's most prominent environmental advocacy organizations?

NYLCV spokesman Dan Hendrick said the decision came down to Gerson's voting record. "He had 100 percent on our scorecard, which is very meaningful to us," he said. "In terms of actually being there when the votes were needed, he was there." The NYLCV graded City Council candidates based on 13 bills, giving extra weight to the congestion pricing vote along with four bills intended to make buildings more energy efficient. (Of the five weighted bills, pricing was the only one to pass the council.) If bills didn't reach a vote, candidates received credit for co-sponsoring them.

Remarkably, Council Member Melissa Mark Viverito, running for re-election in District 8, did not receive an endorsement from NYLCV, despite making a much more vocal stand in favor of congestion pricing than Gerson and scoring a perfect 100 on the scorecard. Hendrick explained that Viverito did not return the NYLCV candidate questionnaire, a prerequisite for gaining the group's endorsement, prior to the organization's July board meeting, where members decide whom to endorse. The board will consider Viverito for its next round of endorsements, he said. That round will be released after the September 15 primary, however, which will effectively decide who wins the seat. Viverito faces five primary challengers.

So we have a perverse result, where Gerson gets rewarded despite railing against projects that make green transportation safer, and Viverito receives no meaningful credit for getting out in front on congestion pricing, a transformative sustainability policy. Gerson's vote for congestion pricing was a no-brainer for his Lower Manhattan district. If congestion pricing is ever going to clear the stumbling block in Albany, New York City will need to elect more people who are willing to speak forcefully in favor of it like Viverito.

City Council member Alan Gerson didn't have much new to say at his sidewalk protest of the Grand Street bike lane. But a handful of reporters and a few cyclists pressed him to defend the idea that projects designed to improve street safety should be subject to greater City Council review.

Gerson's assertion of "dangerous conditions" on Grand Street basically amounted to this: The row of parked cars on the south side used to protect only pedestrians; now it protects pedestrians and cyclists, so there's a perception among some of the older residents that they're at greater risk because cyclists are riding next to the curb.

But do the data back up the perception? In a word, No. According to DOT's study of Grand Street, injuries are down 28.8 percent since the protected lane was installed nine months ago. Which only makes sense, because the parking-protected bike path has narrowed the traffic lane, sending cues for drivers to slow down and making a safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

Gerson was not swayed by statistical evidence. "Sometimes anecdotal testimony reflects the reality," he said. For bike lane opponents, however, reality intruded rather inconveniently this afternoon.

A couple of speakers employed the time-honored "no one uses the bike lane" argument. Since they were standing right next to the bike lane in question, it was plain to see the dozens of people riding by during the course of the event. (A DOT traffic count last month tallied 990 cyclists in one 12-hour span.) Other well-worn assertions -- that the bike lane has hurt business and worsened congestion -- were similarly offered without supporting facts.

All the while, Gerson attempted to portray himself as an advocate for street safety who just wants to get everyone on the same page, by taking into account such factors as "the needs of traffic flow." When a reporter suggested that this was a recipe for inaction, Gerson argued that it is ultimately futile "to pit local neighborhoods against cyclists."

Set aside, for the moment, that the Grand Street bike lane is probably quite well-used by neighborhood residents (Gerson's district is nearly 80 percent car-free). Who's doing the "pitting" here? Fewer people are getting hurt on Grand Street now than before the protected bike path was installed. Wouldn't a public servant committed to safer streets try to preserve those gains? If there's some tension between pedestrians and cyclists, Alan Gerson could use his "town halls" to get people talking about how they can get the most out of a much-needed safety enhancement. Instead, he's simply escalating the conflict.

Video: Elizabeth Press

Anyone heading over to Chinatown for lunch? If not, and you work in Manhattan, you might want to change your plans. This rally, promoted by Council Member Alan Gerson, promises to be a can't-miss event:

Rally to Protest Dangerous Conditions with the Grand Street Bike Lane

WHEN: Friday, August 21, 2009 at 12:30pm

WHERE: Corner of Grand St and Mott St

WHAT: Rally to protest dangerous conditions caused by the Grand Street bike lane and to demand that the NYC Department of Transportation conduct more community outreach before deciding where to place bike lanes.

WHO: NYC Council Member Alan J. Gerson, local business owners and residents

That would be the same "dangerous" bike lane that has calmed traffic by narrowing the right-of-way for motorists. Oh, and it gives cyclists a nice, protected east-bound link in Lower Manhattan's bike network.

Alan Gerson wants "more community outreach." That's one way to put it. Given that the bike lane was vetted by Community Board 2, which approved the project in a nearly unanimous vote last year, isn't this more like a demand to give small, vocal groups veto power over street safety projects? I think it's pretty much official at this point: The District 1 City Council contest is a race to the bottom when it comes to livable streets.

To reiterate, the place to be at 12:30 today is the corner of Grand and Mott. After the jump, more pictures of the hazardous Grand Street bike lane.

1st District Council candidates say safety measures like the Grand Street lane are out of step with their community. Photo: Ian Dutton

When it comes to giving their potential constituents some relief from the auto armada, the 1st District challengers have plenty of deserving targets to train their fire on. But forget the placard abuse, the free ride for car commuters who pour over the East River bridges, and the city's nonsensical truck toll system. Here's what challenger Arthur Gregory said when asked what he views as the district's most pressing transportation issue:

You can drive through Central Park at certain times. And certain times you can't. Have the bike paths the same way. When there's congestion because of cabs, people are going to work, they're doing business, or deliveries in the morning then you say, listen, you can't really use the bike paths now.

Okay, so Arthur doesn't get biking as transportation, or the fact that bikes take up much less space than cars. His views on cycling would have come across as backwards even during the dark ages of the Midtown bike ban, 22 years ago. (If only he'd thought this bike thing through as much as his well-reasoned position on delivery truck schedules -- read the whole interview, he says some good stuff.)

The thing is, the other candidates don't compare all that favorably. In fact, they practically trip over themselves to condemn one of the most important cycling safety measures in their district, the protected bike path on Grand Street.

Chin gave the following assessment of the Grand Street bike lane:

Grand Street cuts across many different neighborhoods. You have different needs and you have different usage, and no consultation. Just an item on the community board agenda... That bike lane (between Chrystie and Canal) is the stupidest thing, that's what people in the community say. It just created a lot of congestion. But the city says 'we think it's a good idea. We just think people will get used to it.' Wait a minute. You can't just impose that on a community.

This is a common refrain. It's easy for the candidates to profess support for safer streets in the abstract, but what about specific projects like Grand Street, or the seemingly unassailable addition of pedestrian refuges to hazardous crossings? Their standard response: Say it's no good and blame the community process that preceded these real-world improvements.

In the case of the Grand Street bike lane, that process involved a nearly unanimous CB2 vote in favor. The community board system has its flaws, but I think it's fair to ask: If approval from the local CB doesn't cut it for these council candidates, what sort of "community input" requirement would they like to see fulfilled before every attempt to make streets safer?

Signed consent from SoHo boss Sean Sweeney?

Relax guys, you can keep your jackets. Photo: SliceofNYC/Flickr

Intro 416-A would require motorcycles in New York to be equipped with EPA-stamped exhaust systems -- a federal mandate since 1983, but one that is rarely enforced. Though replacing or altering EPA-approved mufflers is against the law, installations of louder after-market equipment are common.

NoiseOFF, a Queens-based org dedicated to combating noise pollution, writes:

Modified motorcycles can reach noise levels in excess of 100db(a); a level that easily triggers an involuntary stress response commonly known as "flight or flight." This results in the secretion of adrenaline, with ensuing spikes in cardio-respiratory rates, muscle tension, and elevated blood pressure. For affected residents, the never-ending cycle of noise constitutes a serious health issue.

"It is already illegal to ride with loud pipes in NYC," says NoiseOFF founder Richard Tur. "Intro 416-A is designed to allow better enforcement of the law."

A similar local ordinance was adopted in Denver. The New York iteration is sponsored by Council Member Alan Gerson. It would allow for graduated fines for repeat offenders, as well as confiscation of illegally-equipped motorcycles.

Not surprisingly, such laws are unpopular with motorcycle owners and lobbying groups, who claim they discriminate against their vehicle of choice while letting drivers of loud cars and trucks off the hook. Sound from other vehicles is, in fact, already regulated under current city code, but the New York bill nevertheless got plenty of attention from motorcycle enthusiasts when it was introduced late last year.

"We're still working diligently to get it passed," a Gerson spokesperson told Streetsblog.

While the new bill would ideally raise the profile of noisy motorcycles as a quality of life concern city-wide, some NYPD precincts are already well acquainted with the problem. Police in Inwood and Washington Heights, where neighborhood streets often double as a race course, routinely ticket riders and have impounded over a dozen motorcycles this year.

Alan Gerson.

Itching to tell DOT what you think of recent changes to Lower Manhattan streets? You can tonight at 6:30, when the second installment in Alan Gerson's "Traffic Town Hall" series gets underway at Old St. Pat's Gym (near 275 Mulberry Street).

Fellow Council Member John Liu, running for citywide office in the crowded comptroller race, is also scheduled to put in an appearance, and Manhattan DOT Commissioner Margaret Forgione will be on hand to soak it all up.

Publicity materials for the event frame it as a chance to "present your views and ideas" to DOT. At the first Gerson town hall, this translated into griping about pedestrian refuges, bike lanes, and other safety measures. Tonight's agenda invites more of the same: The critical issue of "traffic islands" gets top billing on the docket.

Sidewalks where children's lives are at risk from reckless drivers, even when parents and teachers are right there next to them? That seems not to have made the cut.

It's safer to cross Grand Street. The arrogance!

Lower Manhattan City Council rep Alan Gerson held a "transportation town hall" Monday night, following up on his pledge last year to closely monitor creeping safety enhancements to New York streets. Fellow City Council member John Liu, a candidate for comptroller, also made an appearance at the forum.

Based on a report in the Lo-Down, a new blog covering the Lower East Side, the session successfully gathered up ideas from ill-informed cranks:

The Grand Street bike lanes and center islands installed last year were ridiculed by several residents of Co-op Village. Harold Jacob accused DOT Commissioner Margaret Forgione of lying when she told him the center median was installed because pedestrians had been killed by cars on Grand Street. Jacob said he believed the changes had, in fact, made the street more dangerous. Because there is less room to maneuver, Jacob claimed fire trucks and ambulances can't safely pass through. "You've actually put lives in danger," he told DOT officials.

Another resident contended the islands, opposed by Community Board 3,  were "arrogantly conceived and arrogantly carried out." More than one speaker blamed Mayor Bloomberg, accusing him of "destroying Grand Street." Some people demanded that the medians be removed -- others wanted the bike lanes eliminated.

A quick CrashStat check reveals that, contrary to Mr. Jacob's gut assertion, several people have been killed by autos while walking on Grand Street in recent years. Co-op Village, like many other housing developments in the area, is home to a big senior population. Those pedestrian refuges make Grand Street safer to cross and less intimidating to older New Yorkers. Rolling back critical safety improvements that improve seniors' quality of life -- is that really the kind of "community input" that Gerson wants to align himself with?

Not long ago, Alan Gerson spoke in favor of giving pedestrians more space at Petrosino Square.

[T]here will not be a DOT "bike lane" bill introduced by Gerson [on Tuesday]. Gerson is working on a bill with lawyers to create a better process of review for both Council and Community input into street reconfigurations, which can, but don't necessarily, include bike lanes. In our district alone this bill would refer to the "bus bumps" on Lower Broadway, the "stripes" on Rutgers Street, the Grand Street traffic islands and the Chatham Square reconfiguration. This last fiasco has the community up in arms, as DOT came to the CB3 hearing last week and basically announced no major changes to the plan could be made no matter what the community said at the hearing.

So after decades of cars-first transportation planning, which has been particularly unkind to Gerson's constituents, now that DOT is acting in the interests of cyclists, pedestrians, and transit patrons -- i.e. the overwhelming majority of street users -- it's clearly time for City Council and community board oversight.

We put in a call to Transportation Alternatives to get their take on Gerson's initiative. Here's what Wiley Norvell had to say:

Street designs by their very nature will never achieve consensus. It doesn't matter whether we're talking about truck routes, whether we're talking about bike lanes, whether we're talking about parking.

Safety is not the job of community boards; it's not the job of council members. It is the job of the Department of Transportation.

More on Gerson's bid for streets reform reform as it develops. In the interim, think it's time to rain fire yet?

On a day when you'd hope City Council members would be focused on the Bikes in Buildings bill, Manhattan City Councilman Alan Gerson is planning to introduce a new piece of legislation aimed at giving someone -- presumably City Council -- greater opportunity to "review" DOT bike infrastructure plans before they are implemented.

Details are sketchy at this point. All we've got is the sub-title of his proposed law so it's probably unfair to jump to conclusions, but let's go ahead and do just that. I think we can pretty well assume that Gerson is looking to set up a process that gives City Council members greater control over DOT's bike network build-out, particularly, critical bike safety projects like the ones that have been popping up in his district recently.

By Council Member Gerson:
..Title
A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to review of bicycle lanes.
Transportation Committee

We'll be putting in a call to Gerson's office. If you live in Lower Manhattan, you can too.

In separate letters issued this month to the Department of Environmental Protection, Thompson and Stringer present lists of unanswered questions pertaining to Local Law 41, adopted by the City Council in May 2005. The law required that all tour buses with engines that are at least three years old be retrofitted with best available technologies to reduce diesel particulate levels, and gave companies until January 2007 to either do the retrofits or apply for waivers.

Over three years later, only one company, Gray Line, has brought any of its buses into compliance. According to a DEP report, as of last August just 61 of the 204 tour buses on New York streets meet the law's requirements. The report, Thompson wrote, "shows a very disturbing lack of progress and, in fact, a widespread non-compliance with the law."

According to a 1999 study referenced in a recent New York Post article, a typical Gray Line bus "emit[s] about 25 times more diesel particles than the average bus."

Thompson takes the DEP to task for its tardiness in issuing the first of its required annual reports pertaining to Local Law 41. It was eight months late and, judging by the follow-up questions submitted by Thompson and Stringer, left many issues unaddressed, such as whether DEP is recommending license revocation for companies that aren't obeying the law.

"Tour Buses No -- Tourists Yes" is not only concerned with air pollution, but also noise pollution and physical safety. In September, sight-impaired West Village resident Lloyd Burlingame told NY1:

"I have to depend on my hearing to know when to cross the street and these tour buses, between the racket they make and these guys blathering, I put myself in danger every time they're here and I try to cross the street. So it's a particular problem for people like me."

Also in the NY1 report, City Council Member Alan Gerson said he wants legislation that would regulate tour bus times of operation, routes and frequency. (Enforcement, apparently, is another matter.) And said Villager Milton Polsky: "We have nothing against the tourists, but we'd like to see them walk and enjoy our wonderful sights here."

Photo: Richard Hsu/Flickr

Manhattan Community Board 2 member Ian Dutton reports that this morning city officials held a groundbreaking for the renovation of Petrosino Square. As part of the project, the square, which lies on Lafayette Street between Kenmare and Spring, will be expanded, as one of Lafayette's two southbound travel lanes will be turned into park space. Writes Dutton:

Interestingly, the loudest round of applause from the crowd of local residents, many elderly Italian citizens, appeared to come during [Council Member] Alan Gerson's remarks regarding freeing up useless road space on Lafayette St. for community use. "Today is an historic day as we transfer a lane of pavement to more space for an expanded park -- space for the people who appreciate the neighborhood and space for public art."

Though long-time Little Italy residents might not appreciate the impact of crowd- and traffic-attracting street festivals, the value of proper use of public space hasn't been completely lost on this audience.

City Council Member Rosie Mendez has introduced a bill to overturn the NYPD's parade permit rules, which require groups of over 50 to obtain a permit before assembling. Enacted a year ago, the rules were seen as a way for the city to subvert Critical Mass rides and have been the subject of civil rights action and at least one lawsuit.

Mendez, along with Alan Gerson and Gale Brewer, were to introduce the "First Amendment Assembly Act" yesterday. According to a media release, the bill [PDF] "decriminalizes parading without a permit and allows groups that need exceptions to various laws, such as traffic laws, to obtain such for their events."

Streetsblog has posted consistently on how the NYPD seems more intent on harassing cyclists than protecting them. And just last week Commissioner Ray Kelly got an earful from citizens who are fed up with unsafe conditions for cyclists and pedestrians.

The full press release from Mendez follows the jump.

COUNCIL MEMBER MENDEZ INTRODUCES BILL TO PROTECT THE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE

Wednesday March 26th 2008

At today's Stated City Council meeting, Council Member Rosie Mendez (District 2, Manhattan), along with Council Members Alan Gerson and Gale Brewer, will introduce a bill to balance the NYPD's duty to ensure public safety with citizens' right to free assembly. If enacted into law, the bill will override the parade permit rules adopted by the NYPD a year ago which were created without City Council oversight and require any group of 50 or more to obtain a permit. Currently, anyone in such a group without a permit is subject to arrest.

A copy of the legislation being introduced can be downloaded from the Assemble For Rights NYC website:
http://www.assembleforrightsnyc.org/files/a4r/legal/parade_bill_final_draft.doc

"Groups wishing to assemble and stay within the limits of the law should not be required to obtain a permit; the First Amendment is our permit" stated Council Member Mendez. "Larger assemblies that want the police to
assist in managing traffic along their route and ensure security should be able to apply for a permit through a fair and transparent process. This bill sets forth clear guidelines for each instance."

The First Amendment Assembly Act, based on legislation drafted by the civil rights advocacy group Assemble For Rights NYC, decriminalizes parading without a permit and allows groups that need exceptions to various laws, such as traffic laws, to obtain such for their events.

A parade permit will not be required when:
* A group believes their proposed assembly will not prevent other lawful uses of the same city public space and the expected attendance of the assembly will be less than 100, or
* The assembly is an immediate and spontaneous response to an event.

The Act also sets forth guidelines for the NYPD to facilitate peaceful assemblies even when a group should have obtained a permit but did not. Furthermore, the Act also encourages calmer resolutions to assemblies which become too difficult for the NYPD to facilitate: these guidelines include providing clearly communicated dispersal orders and reasonable opportunities to disperse before making any arrests.

The Act is similar to rules which were created to govern assemblies in Washington D.C. in the wake of mass arrests that eventually cost D.C. millions in civil penalties. D.C.'s laws have successfully reduced tensions between police and citizens there, and significantly reduced that city's legal liability to wrongful arrest civil suits, while ensuring public safety.

Assemble For Rights NYC (http://assembleforrightsnyc.org), is a coalition of over two dozen organizations dedicated to keeping free speech alive and well in New York City.

Photo: Doug Letterman/Flickr

Yesterday we noted that District 1 City Council Member Alan Gerson was the only Manhattan representative to indicate that he would vote against the congestion pricing plan in its current form, according to an "unofficial roll call" conducted by the New York Times. We contacted Gerson's office to find out why, given the upsides for a district in which 79 percent of households are car-free, which is saddled with chronic gridlock and which, ostensibly, will someday benefit from the pricing revenue dependent Second Avenue subway line. An aide told us the council member's staff was "trying to get a correction," and has submitted this letter to the paper:

Dear Editor:

Your article, "Traffic Plan In Trouble", misstates my position. I have consistently stated that I would support congestion pricing if the Bloomberg Administration enhances or modifies the commission's plan in four critical areas, on which the plan remains silent or deficient: the Holland Tunnel/ Canal Street corridor; bus management, including clean engine standards for all the buses the plan will bring into lower Manhattan ; non-pricing traffic management, which carries over into non-pricing hours; and equity among city residents. I have proposed detailed recommendations, based on community and expert input. Implementing the commission's plan without those enhancements or changes will worsen congestion and pollution on many streets, including the canal street corridor. Meetings are scheduled to discuss these proposals. I remain optimistic that the City Council and the Administration will reach agreement on the best possible traffic plan for all New Yorkers.

At our request, Gerson's office also sent over the council member's eight-page position paper on congestion pricing [PDF], in which he describes the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission report as "deeply disturbing."

Significant sustained congestion avoidance and reduction requires focus on the various specific, localized congestion points and causes. It is unbelievable to me, that the TMC's staff report does not once mention the Canal Street corridor or the Holland Tunnel.

I repeatedly urged the commission to incorporate a focus on this hottest of traffic hot spots. The New York Metropolitan Traffic Consortium (NYMTC) has spent several years developing a Canal Area Traffic Study (CATS). One would think that any serious TMC plan would evaluate how to build on NYMTC's work and would propose resources to support and implement NYMTC's findings and recommendations.

Three additional flaws become apparent upon examination of the analyses undertaken by the commission to date: the overemphasis on revenue generation; the failure to consider needed mitigation of adverse impact from increase in commuter buses, proposed in several schemes; and the lack of regard for the impact of different proposals on the integration and unity of the City.

Like some pricing opponents, Gerson worries about a "gentrification of the streets" effect:

Many of us over the years have become increasingly concerned about the widening stratification of our city, with parts of Manhattan becoming elite enclaves. Commission analyses have shown the relative progressivism of most congestion pricing measures. However, those analyses do not take into account the non-financial perception and actual experience of areas cordoned off by several congestion pricing schemes as socially apart from the rest of the city. To avoid this, all plans should aim to minimize the cordoning-off effect.

As also noted yesterday, this isn't the first time Gerson has been polled as anti-pricing. Considering the number of problems he has with the plan as written, and the reductive nature of "yes/no/maybe so" surveys, it isn't hard to see why.

Photo: J Blough/Flickr

We're just catching up to this piece of good news in The Villager last week:

With the Houston St. renovation project on the West Side finally nearing completion, we were pleasantly surprised to discover that the sidewalks between Sixth Ave. and W. Broadway on the street's south side have doubled in width. And, in an interesting twist, the existing trees were left in place - right in the middle of the pavement. Ian Dutton, vice chairperson of Community Board 2's Traffic and Transportation Committee, said this was not a mistake by the Department of Design and Construction. "People really expressed concern that trees were being destroyed needlessly in this project," Dutton said. "So I think that was D.D.C.'s way of preserving these trees."

Surprisingly, some people had expressed concern about widening the sidewalks. Dutton said Lucy and Leonard Cecere, who own a building at MacDougal and Houston Street, feared they'd have more snow to shovel in the winter, while Sean Sweeney, the Soho Alliance's director, thought wider sidewalks could become a "circus," attracting an influx of vendors and performers on top of the vendors who already congregate there under a deal with St. Anthony's Church.

But Dutton said he believes that only a path needs to be cleared in winter, not the entire sidewalk. "I think it has actually changed the mood of the street," Dutton said of the mid-pavement trees. "It almost feels like a European promenade."… Meanwhile, Councilmember Alan Gerson is still fuming at the Department of Transportation over the project's having narrowed traffic islands at pedestrian crossings heavily used by local senior citizens. "I am at my wit's end with this department," he declared at C.B. 2's meeting last Thursday.

If, however, you want to know how many people were hit by cars or where the most dangerous intersections are in your neighborhood, CompStat won't help you. Those numbers aren't there. And if you're looking for details of an incident in which someone was hurt or killed by a driver, your quest is likely to be frustratingly difficult, if not impossible. Even if you're a member of a New York City Community Board.

Ian Dutton knows this story well. After Hope Miller, 28, an aspiring actress from Queens, was killed on Houston Street on September 25, Dutton -- who serves on CB 2's Traffic and Transportation Committee and lives a block from where Miller died -- began making calls. According to media reports, the driver of the truck that killed Miller, 48-year-old Roger Smiley of Brooklyn, was charged with leaving the scene, operating a vehicle while impaired by drugs, and resisting arrest. He was not, however, charged with killing Miller. Dutton wanted to know why.

He started with Rita Lee, a senior advisor in Council Member Alan Gerson's office, who gave him a few phone numbers. Some of them didn't work anymore. When he got through to the office of New York County District Attorney Robert Morgenthau (left), Dutton says most the people he talked to were "outwardly dismissive." Claiming no record of an incident involving a Roger Smiley or Hope Miller, DA office personnel instructed Dutton to get an arrest number from the police.

Since the site of the crash is near the boundary separating the two, Dutton was then bounced between NYPD Precincts 1 and 6. It took ten phone calls to find someone willing to offer any help -- an officer at the 6th Precinct who told Dutton that, when a driver kills a pedestrian, a charge of homicide is brought if drugs or alcohol are involved. If the driver is sober, the offense merits a traffic ticket.

"That sounded ridiculous," Dutton says, "but it sounded like it was the modus operandi."

Dutton was finally able to get Smiley's arrest number, but when he called the DA's office back he was told the number didn't exist. He was also asked repeatedly who he was and why he was calling.

Dutton then returned to Lee and asked if she could get any information on the case. Lee learned that two charges, DWI and negligent homicide, may be issued against Smiley. But Lee said those charges were pending and could take years to be filed. This was over a month ago.

At this point, says Dutton, "I couldn't tell you what's going on."

Though his efforts got him little more than what proved to be a useless arrest number, Dutton doesn't think he was stonewalled due to the nature of the case. Rather, he believes Manhattan DA staffers simply didn't want to risk catching flak for talking to an outsider. And he doesn't think questioning city authorities about pedestrian injuries and deaths is a waste of time, regardless of the result.

"It's important that both the police and prosecutors know that people care about this," Dutton says. "It's tearing up communities."

Photos: Morgenthau from Viewimages.com, Hope Miller memorial from Galvoguy on Flickr.

From Time's Up!:

Cyclist and pedestrian advocates gathered [Tuesday] night at the corner of Houston Street and 6th Avenue where Hope Miller was killed by a drug-impaired driver on September 25th. An honorary plaque provided by Street Memorials and a memorial stencil, bearing Hope Miller's name and date of death, were placed near the crash site.

Speakers included Charles Komanoff, Economist and author of "Killed by Automobile", Time's Up! Executive Director Bill DiPaola and City Council Member Alan Gerson, who spoke about the importance of pedestrians within the fabric of New York City and asked when the City will make pedestrian safety its number one priority. Time's Up! volunteers spoke as well on the City reneging on their plan for long-promised bike lanes on Houston Street.

Afterward, those on bicycles took a lane of Houston Street riding together for safety to Bowery and 4th Street for a similar memorial stencil to honor the most recent victim, Julia Thomson, who was killed by a drunk driver on September 30th.

Photos of Hope Miller and Julia Thomson stencils by Phillipp Rassman via Flickr.

Following the Gotham Gazette's surprising report that he was the only Manhattan City Council Member firmly against Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing plan, Lower Manhattan City Council member Alan Gerson has issued a statement clarifying his position. Gerson says that, in fact, he "supports appropriate variations of congestion pricing as part of a broader traffic management plan."

Gerson's District 1 encompasses the southernmost tip of Manhattan. Census data indicates that 79% of the households in Gerson's district do not own a car. Gerson's complete statement can be found after the jump. They're talking about it on Gotham Gazette.

STATEMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER GERSON ON CONGESTION PRICING

Council Member Gerson supports appropriate variations of congestion pricing as part of a broader traffic management plan. Gerson looks forward to working with the 17-member New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission. There are many creative ways in which the State and City can implement such a plan and it is essential that New York City residents get the most thoroughly researched and workable one.

Improving air quality, reducing traffic and improving non-polluting bus service remain high priorities among others for Gerson. Beginning this summer, the Council Member will hold a series of traffic town hall meetings throughout Lower Manhattan to gather information on congestion pricing proposals and other ideas for these goals. The Council Member will incorporate community input and present a detailed traffic management proposal later in the fall.

Gerson praised Mayor Michael Bloomberg for his leadership in raising the congestion pricing idea, and Council Speaker Quinn for her support. Gerson also praised Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver for putting in place a process that will assure that New Yorkers have the appropriate, in depth conversation over this issue. The Council Member has confidence that the process will lead to a plan that will meet short-term and long-term goals for New Yorkers throughout all five boroughs.

Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan and Chinese Chamber of Commerce Chairman David J. Louie will distribute free NYC bicycle helmets to delivery workers on Tuesday, June 26th, 2007. The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene will also distribute reflective safety vests at the event. The helmet fitting and distribution will be held from 12:00 pm to 2:00 pm at the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association, 62 Mott Street.

The event is intended to inform businesses and bicycle operators about two new laws that take effect on July 26th, 2007 and were sponsored by Council members Gale Brewer and Alan Gerson, both of whom attended today's announcement.

The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has begun a pilot program to provide delivery workers with reflective vests that increase cyclists' visibility and allow for easy display of identifying information. Under city law, commercial cyclists must display a sign indicating their employer's name and a personal, three-digit identification number.

Reported in the New York Times:

Chad Marlow, who represents the New York City Pedicab Owners Association, said the association agrees with much of the legislation, but plans to file a lawsuit challenging some elements of it. He said it believes that the Council was within its rights to impose a cap as the city does with taxis, but that the restriction on electric motors and the provision giving the police the power to ban pedicabs from Midtown run afoul of the law.

Four council members abstained from yesterday's vote, raising objections to the restriction against electric motors.

At a council hearing before yesterday's vote, Councilman Alan J. Gerson, who supported the original legislation but removed his name from the current version of the bill, said, "They're nonpolluting, they're quiet; why should the city care if they are electric assist or not?"

As promised, members of Manhattan Community Board 2 and Transportation Alternatives held a rally yesterday where many elected officials spoke of the need for improved bicycling and pedestrian facilities on the Interstate Highway in our midst, Houston Street. Eighty years ago, Houston Street was a narrow street not much wider than Prince or Bleecker Streets are today. Since Robert Moses-era widening and reconfiguration, many pedestrians needing two traffic light cycles to cross have sought refuge on an eight-foot median as six or eight lanes worth of cars zoom by. Today, those refuge islands are being reduced in size in an effort to accommodate even more traffic and cyclists are being killed on Houston Street at a rate of about one every six months.

Streetfilms brings you video footage of the rally, including these words from Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer:

Everybody who lives in this community knows Houston Street is a highway to hell. It's the death street. Children know it. Seniors know it, and tragically, cyclists know it. We do not need another Queens Boulevard in Manhattan. ... So as Borough President, I will tell you that the No. 1 issue facing Manhattan is traffic congestion, and pedestrian safety. This is a wake-up call to the city. If we don't do something proactive, we're going to have more people die under the crush of large vehicles, and that is totally unacceptable to the people who live in this community, and the people who live in this city, and I'm very pleased to join with this great coalition, and I'm looking forward to participating in a human chain that will make it very clear to the planners that this can be accomplished.

The video also features pointed remarks by State Senator Martin Connor, Assemblywoman Deborah J. Glick (at lectern above), Councilman Alan Gerson, Philip Mouquinho of Community Board 2 and Kate Mikuliak representing Councilwoman Rosie Mendez.

To vividly demonstrate what's happening on Houston Street, another Streetfilm looks at the corner of Houston and Broadway, with footage that shows why it makes no sense to remove median space to encourage traffic. Community activist Charle-John Caffero, notes that most of the economic activity generated on Houston Street is from pedestrians, and explains how eight feet of pedestrian refuge island will be reduced,

Leaving pedestrians, which are the majority of street users here, having no space to stand or being able to cross Houston Street because the timing of the light is so short. They inevitably get caught on this pedestrian haven, which at least gives them a little protection. That protection is going to be taken away by DOT.

Mark Gorton of the Open Planning Project, explains a broad result of the creation of the left-hand turning bays:

They think Houston needs more traffic? It needs a lot less! I mean, they're just encouraging more driving.

One block south of Houston Street, Prince Street's one traffic lane and two parking lanes create a vastly different experience. Houston Street was originally laid out to be as wide as Prince Street, but was expanded to its present Interstate Highway width and feel relatively recently. As the New York Times explained in a 2004 article:

Houston's plainness stems from the 1930's, when it was widened to accommodate the digging of the IND subway line, and from the 1960's, when it was laid with a daunting eight lanes of traffic. Until these developments, Houston was just another pleasant crosstown street, the width of a Prince or a Bleecker. In an eerie set of photographs taken in 1929 to record pre-demolished Houston, a girl is shown stepping into shadow, toying with her hair, crossing the street casually near Mercer, the same way a girl might nowadays cross, say, West Broadway.

Contrast that image with the images in the film of clusters of people huddling together on an eight-foot median to avoid being hit by heavy, fast traffic.