This was the scene at City Hall yesterday afternoon as Mayor Bloomberg put his signature on the Bicycle Access Bill. The mayor also signed Intro 780, which will increase the amount of bike parking in commercial garages and lots. Bill sponsors David Yassky (dark tie) and Oliver Koppell (red and navy stripes) were on hand, as were buildings commissioner Robert LiMandri (far left), DOT commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan (center) and TA director Paul White (glare in his lenses).

The new rules governing bike access to buildings won't take effect for a few more months. In the meantime, the best strategy for eventually reversing your building's bike policy is to talk amongst your co-workers (not to your employer just yet) and hash out potential bike access plans.

The passage of these bills elicited many pro-bike pronouncements from elected officials, some of which have been reprinted for your reading pleasure after the jump.

Bill sponsor David Yassky, in a press release before the City Council passed the Bicycle Access Bill:

“In a city in which one in eight kids has asthma, this bill is a long overdue step towards reducing carbon emissions, improving public health, and building a sustainable transportation infrastructure,” said Council Member Yassky. “I look forward to the Council passing this bill tomorrow so that we can begin the implementation of this important piece of progressive legislation.”

An email blast from speaker Christine Quinn's office after City Council passed the bill:

Dear New Yorker,

Good news!  Last week the New York City Council took steps toward creating a more sustainable transportation infrastructure in our city by passing two important pieces of legislation:

Intro. 0780-A (Koppell) - bicycle parking in garages and parking lots.  (To view a copy of the bill click here.)

Intro. 0871-A (Yassky) - bicycle access in commercial buildings.  (To view a copy of the click here.)

One of the main obstacles to bicycle commuting is the inability to park your bicycle in a secure location once you have arrived at work. 

These bills address this problem by improving bicycle access in commercial buildings and creating thousands of bicycle parking spaces in city garages and parking lots.  The legislation also encourages cycling by creating a bicycle commuting task force that will explore partnerships with private entities to build sheltered bicycle parking in public and/or private spaces.  The task force will issue its report by December 31, 2010.

Together, these proposals will improve public health, reduce carbon emissions, and provide a more affordable option for New Yorker's daily commute.

Remarks by Bloomberg in the press release sent after yesterday's bill signing:

“Making bicycling a safe, low-cost, and fun means of getting around town is a key component of PlaNYC, our Administration’s vision for a greener, greater New York.  Under the leadership of Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, the Department of Transportation has made great strides in turning that vision into a reality: over the past three years, we’ve seen a 45 percent increase in bicycle commuting in our City, spurred by our creation of more than 200 miles of bike lanes as well as the installation of 3,100 bicycle racks and 20 sheltered bike parking structures.  Also, the Council recently adopted zoning requirements crafted by the Department of City Planning to ensure that new buildings over a certain size will be designed to include bicycle parking facilities.

“These two pieces of legislation aim to take these successes several significant steps further."

DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan speaks at a press event yesterday. That's bill sponsor David Yassky in the green tie.

"This will open up commuting by bike for New Yorkers," said Council Speaker Christine Quinn today. "We can use bikes as a main mode of transportation." She was speaking to a packed house. The security guards at City Hall were turning people away from the council chamber because the galleries had reached capacity.

"No other city in the country has a policy like the one City Council passed today," said Transportation Alternatives director Paul Steely White in a statement on the significance of the bill. "When we open the doors of New York City’s workplaces to cyclists, tens of thousands of commuters are going to get on two wheels."

For many cyclists forbidden to bring their rides to work, today's vote was a long time coming. TA first called for bicycle access legislation in 1993, as a plank in its Bicycle Blueprint. Since then, multiple bills like Intro 871 have come and gone without becoming law.

"This is historic, a very, very major step," said John Kaehny, who served as director of TA from 1994 to 2004. "I can't think of something that comes close to this from the City Council. This is very important because they've done something big. More than anything else, it validates bicycles as legitimate."

Gaining passage for Intro 871 entailed a combination of confronting and cajoling one of the quintessential New York City interest groups: the real estate lobby. Organizations like REBNY -- the Real Estate Board of New York -- don't like the idea of a bicycle access mandate, and they wield a lot of influence. To overcome that inertia, everything had to line up perfectly.

TA's constant advocacy has mobilized efforts over the course of many years. This time around, all the other pieces fell into place: a persistent sponsor in David Yassky, a Council Speaker in Christine Quinn who represents a cyclist-heavy district, and perhaps most crucially, a mayor and DOT commissioner who came out strongly for the bill. Even with the stars seemingly aligned, it took one last push from more than a thousand cyclists to put the bill over the top.

What does this all mean for bike commuting in New York? Well, the change won't happen overnight. The bill takes effect in 120 days, and then it's up to individual tenants to petition their building managers for access (we'll explain how to do this in a future post). Odds are, as Kaehny told me, "it's going to be a fight the whole way." The bill sets the stage for thousands of mini-battles between bike commuters and landlords who will try to claim exemptions from the law. Ultimately, the bill will be judged a success if commuters come out on top in the vast majority of those fights.

There are gaps in the legislation that will need to be plugged. The bill explicitly covers one building type -- office buildings that have freight elevators -- so there's plenty of room to extend its applicability. A future bill could fortify this version, for instance, by guaranteeing bike access to schools, or to office buildings without freight elevators. After today's vote, there's every reason to believe those improvements are achievable.

Intro 871 would make it much easier to -- gasp! -- bring your bike to work. Photo: Transportation Alternatives [PDF]

Should the zoning amendment pass, it would be good news for New York City bike commuters in years to come. The lack of a secure place to put your ride is one of the main obstacles to commuting by bike, and the zoning change will gradually alter the equation as new housing, workplaces, and commercial development get built. (The amendment now includes exemptions for low-income housing, but not the bike parking-for-car parking swap proposed at a previous hearing.)

A related measure, the Bicycle Access Bill (Intro 871), could deliver immediate benefits to nearly all bike commuters in the city by improving access to existing workplaces. As things stand, most landlords and building managers simply don't permit people to bring bikes inside. Intro 871, sponsored by David Yassky, would help remedy the situation and has already progressed through one hearing in the transportation committee. A revised version of the bill is expected to be released in the next few days, and Yassky's office is "very optimistic" that a second committee hearing will take place within approximately six weeks, according to spokesman Danny Kanner.

Intro 871 is one to keep a very close eye on. While a majority of the council has signed on as co-sponsors, the Real Estate Board of New York has signaled its opposition the bill. Not that the pro-bike side is without its own heavy hitters. A group of high-powered business leaders and lawyers sent this letter [PDF, or follow the jump] to Council Speaker Christine Quinn, asking her to continue the "championing of sustainable, healthy and cost effective transportation modes" (disclosure: Streetsblog publisher Mark Gorton is one of the signatories). Quinn's office has not returned inquiries about her stance on the bill.

Dear Speaker Quinn,

We write to you today as professionals and as cyclists. We are both business people and lawyers and we wish to be bicycle commuters. Many of our peers as well as employees of the companies we own, manage, and work for are discovering the physical, mental, and practical benefits that come with cycling. Yet there is a crucial inequity that separates us from those who commute by car: secure storage. It is not only this imbalance, but the opportunity for a solution, that prompts this letter. We urge you to continue your championing of sustainable, healthy and cost effective transportation modes by supporting City Council legislation Intro. 871, The Bicycle Access Bill.

When people drive to work they have several ways to store their cars. They can look for a curbside parking space, they can park in an off-street garage, or they may even have a parking facility in their destination building. Cyclists have to deal with issues of access, inconvenience, and security. Although the DOT and some BIDs have made great strides in providing curbside bike racks, supply has not kept up with demand in midtown and the financial district. Most riders have to chain their bikes to whatever sign, pole, scaffolding, or rack they can find in the vicinity.

A good bike is of value to both its owner and a thief, so many of us are reluctant to leave our bikes on the sidewalk even when racks are available. The better the bike, the more likely a theft. Some 70,000 bikes are stolen every year in New York City and less than 2% are ever recovered. Every time we ride to work, we gamble on whether or not our transportation will be there for the ride home, many of us will not cycle to work if we can’t park indoors.

Bicycle commuting is efficient in many ways. Riding to work allows people who are committed to fitness, but who work long hours, to combine transportation and exercise. More bicycle commuters mean fewer private and hired cars on the city’s clogged streets and fewer passengers on overcrowded subways and buses. Moreover, people who cycle to work have been shown to be more productive and happier on the job. And, as property owners and managers who permit access to buildings have already discovered, it will not increase operational or insurance costs.

PlaNYC 2030 calls for the promotion of cycling as a sustainable mode of transportation. Because Intro. 871 is an important step in achieving this goal, we urge you to support it.

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and her city-owned Chevy Suburban. Photo copyright Steven Hirsch.

New bike infrastructure in New York City could be on the chopping block as the City Council and Mayor Bloomberg revise spending projections downward. On Sunday, Speaker Christine Quinn and the City Council released $495 million in proposed budget cuts over the next two years, including an item that would slash spending on bike network expansion in half. DOT's bike network funds would drop from $9.6 million to $4.8 million in 2009, and from $11 million to $5.5 million in 2010. Download this PDF and scroll down to the first item numbered 841, "Reduce Bike Network Development Funding."

A spokesman for Speaker Quinn's office did not specify why the bike network was targeted for spending cuts, saying only that painful steps were necessary to close the city's budget gap. In an interview on WNYC earlier this week, Quinn said that the council's financial staff were charged with identifying programs that are "not necessarily the core function" of city agencies.

The proposals now enter the ongoing budget negotiation process between the council and the mayor's office. In November, Bloomberg released a separate list of budget fixes, which did not include cuts to bike network funding. (Interestingly, the mayor's proposals did include a measure to raise more revenue from parking meters below 60th Street [PDF, page 24].) Yesterday Bloomberg ordered city agencies to identify additional spending reductions by December 22.

If you believe a safer bike network is a core function of DOT, contact information for Speaker Quinn's office and your council member can be found on the City Council website.

The transportation committee of Manhattan Community Board 2 will meet tonight to consider a proposal for a protected bike path on Eighth Avenue. If built, the cycle track would join the Ninth Avenue bike lane as the city's primary on-grid Class I bicycle facilities.

It seems not everyone embraces the prospect of improving pedestrian and bike safety. In notifying the neighborhood about the meeting, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn's office referred to the project as a "drastic design change." The hyperbole obscures the fact that the number of travel lanes will not be affected, though it is true that cyclists would have a "drastically" safer route if, as proposed, the current buffered bike lane were swapped with the lane of parked cars.

You can tell CB2 you support a safer bike network at tonight's meeting: 6:00 p.m. at the NYU Silver Building, 32 Waverly Place, Room 509.

• City Council Member Tony Avella: "[Avella is] an obscure pol, and attacking CP allowed him to grab attention while promoting his anti-tax agenda. But he may have gone around the bend, ranting about routine horse-trading for council members’ votes."
• Comptroller Bill Thompson: "The city comptroller has been mildly supportive of congestion pricing, though he’s always been careful to attach caveats ... Why take a bold stance on something that might never happen?"
• City Council Speaker Christine Quinn: "[S]he used last week’s vote to demonstrate leadership on a contentious issue ... Plus, wrapping her arms so tightly around CP also earned Quinn a big chit with Bloomberg..."
• Congressman Anthony Weiner: "[I]n the campaign, he’ll cast congestion pricing as Manhattan-centric and elitist, like Quinn. Weiner was thrilled to see her so far out front."

And don't forget Marty Markowitz, whose most notable contribution to the congestion pricing discussion has probably been his vehement opposition to new bridge tolls. 

On a related note, the Daily Politics reports that Deputy Mayor Kevin Sheekey issued a not-so-subtle warning on the radio this morning that state pols will be judged on where they come down, and could be supported or opposed accordingly in future races.

Whether or not the plan passes in Albany, how will congestion pricing influence your vote for the next mayor?

The Times reports that Silver, introducing the plan "as a courtesy to the new governor," agreed not to "block" it "in exchange for some version of the new tax on anyone making more than $1 million." But some Republican lawmakers who might otherwise support congestion pricing are opposed to the "millionaire tax" (as is Mayor Bloomberg).

And Assembly Democrats were peeved when Governor David Paterson seemed to dismiss the prospect of legislative pay raises in today's Times story, according to the Daily Politics.

One lawmaker deemed it "disingenuous" for the new governor to come around praising Democrats at a time when he needs their support very badly - not the least of which for Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing plan - and not mention that he plans to tank something that is of utmost importance to them.

"It puts another chill on enthusiasm for the new governor - beyond all the other letdowns and setbacks we've seen already," the lawmaker said.

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver didn't mention the pay raise issue, either, the lawmaker said.

The City Council has yet to pass the home-rule message needed to place pricing in Albany's hands, though Speaker Christine Quinn says she is "optimistic" the votes will be there.

Care of the Observer Politicker comes this video from earlier today. Speaking at City Hall, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn turns around a question from a reporter on whether the MTA can be trusted with congestion pricing revenues, given that promised upgrades tied to the recent fare increase will be delayed. Quinn calls the MTA's actions "outrageous," and suggests the congestion pricing lock box will give the city more control over the transit agency.

Said Quinn:

"To me, this is a strong reason why we need congestion pricing. It's a reason why we need a separate, sustainable revenue stream targeted at capital expansion of mass transit in the City of New York ... We need that money to go somewhere separate, where the MTA's board is not the final and only authority over it."

The Observer's Azi Paybarah says Quinn is "optimistic" that pricing will get approval by the council.

Standing behind Quinn is the undecided Bill De Blasio. 

At the first part of today's congestion pricing hearings, Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan and Rohit Aggarwala, director of the Office for Long-Term Planning and Sustainability, fielded questions from the City Council's nine-member State and Federal Legislation Committee. Several other Council members, including Speaker Christine Quinn, were also there to ask questions, and the chamber was packed with supporters of both pro- and anti-pricing groups.

The hearing followed word this morning that State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno has introduced a congestion pricing bill in Albany -- the same legislation that Governor Paterson announced on Friday, which is based on the recommendations of the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission. Quinn began the proceedings with a short but full-throated speech in support of pricing, saying, "The benefits so far outweigh any of the negatives, the concept of inaction is simply, in my opinion, not an option. We have to seize this moment to create a sustainable revenue source for mass transit." Then, after Sadik-Khan delivered her comments (which got big applause), the Council members started popping questions.

Two Council members who have not declared a position on pricing took part in the Q&A during the time I was there to observe. One was Larry Seabrook, a Bronx Democrat who has been identified as a possible swing vote on the committee. "How are we going to say these projects won't stay on the drawing board for another 30 years?" he asked, referring to projects in the MTA capital plan targeted for the Bronx.

Sadik-Khan assured him about the lock box language in the current bill, adding, "I don't see any other way to fund the projects that your district so desperately needs without the revenues from the congestion pricing program." Seabrook repeated his position that the lock box must be ironclad, but appeared satisfied that his concerns had been addressed, wrapping up by thanking the commissioner for considering his district.

The other undecided Council member was Tish James, who represents Fort Greene and Clinton Hill. James first asked if low-income New Yorkers, especially those who have to make trips to Manhattan hospitals, would receive any discount under the current plan. Aggarwala responded by pointing out that most New Yorkers rely on transit or for-hire vehicles to make hospital trips. The transit riders will receive better service, he said, and cab fare will be lower as a result of reduced travel times, yielding a de facto drop in the cost of hospital trips.

James also reiterated Anthony Weiner's claim that pricing will give the federal government an excuse to reduce transit funding for New York, but seemed to back down from that position after Sadik-Khan and Aggarwala rebutted it. "What gave me consolation is that [the Bush] administration is a lame duck and their days are numbered," James said.

Stay tuned for more highlights, and don't forget tonight's hearing, when the council will receive public testimony.

Dear Neighbor,

The New York City Council's Transportation Committee will be voting on a bill on Wednesday March 12th requiring the New York City Department of Transportation (DOT) to study and make improvements at dangerous locations. In an effort to address recent incidents of pedestrian and bicyclists fatalities, the Council has been working with the DOT to study these accident locations and to make safety improvements where necessary. This bill would require the DOT to conduct the following three types of safety analysis at traffic accident sites to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety:

Annual Safety Audits of Pedestrian Accident Locations: DOT would be required to report its findings to the local community board and council member whose district the accident location is located.

Safety inspections at locations exhibiting a pattern of pedestrian and/or bicyclist accidents: DOT would be required to act upon the safety recommendations from the inspections, if any, and to make the results of its inspections and recommendations, if any, available to the public upon request.

Comprehensive study of pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries: DOT would be required to submit the study to the Council and Mayor.

Please feel to reach me at the office if you have further questions.

Some of these measures have been brewing for about a year now, at least. They were brought up at a contentious transpo committee hearing last April by Chairman John Liu, who seemed visibly frustrated that the (pre-Sadik-Khan) DOT appeared to have no set strategies for reducing, or even tallying, pedestrian injuries and fatalities. At that time, DOT reps said the agency was working on its first ever comprehensive study of pedestrian casualties, to be completed by year's end. DOT has not responded to repeated requests from Streetsblog regarding the status of the study.

Note: Advocates are already suggesting that the term "accident" be replaced by "crash."

Congestion pricing's first test in the City Council will be a vote this month by the State and Federal Legislation Committee, chaired by Maria Baez, D-Bronx. Speaker Christine Quinn, a pricing supporter, gave the measure a boost by assigning it to Baez's panel instead of the Finance Committee, chaired by pricing opponent David Weprin, who had requested it. Quinn added two members to Baez’s committee last fall, improving the plan’s chances for passage. But committee member Lew Fidler, D-Brooklyn, says the nine-member panel is split. He pegs the uncommitted Larry Seabrook, D-Bronx, as a potential swing vote.

Seabrook is one of 20 council members to sign the letter requesting "fairer" fees be assessed on New Jersey drivers as part of any congestion pricing plan. He is also one of eight council members to officially endorse PlaNYC last June.

Crain's also notes that Fidler predicts a close vote in the council as a whole, while John Liu believes pricing will pass after some tinkering to make it easier for Albany to swallow.

According to the Sun, Governor Eliot Spitzer's office is drafting a congestion pricing bill, while legislators who have remained cool to pricing are preparing to deal on everything from bus routes to pay raises (for themselves). Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver wants "some form of a rebate for lower-income motorists" who drive into the pricing zone, along with an additional toll for New Jersey drivers crossing the Hudson. Members of the City Council, which must sign off on the plan before it goes to Albany, are also asking Mayor Bloomberg to work in an extra Jersey fee, or else gain a pledge of additional transit funds from the Port Authority.

Bloomberg irked Albany Democrats when he recently made a hefty half-million dollar donation to the Republican cause, then justified the move yesterday by saying that the Assembly and the governor have not stepped up for the city -- an injury-insult combo some say will hurt the mayor's agenda, and especially congestion pricing. As if daring Dems to take the low road, the mayor brushed off such talk.

"Think about what you're saying," he said. "You're saying that those decisions are made based on politics rather than what's right for the city. We certainly need congestion pricing, and it would be an outrage. Just for anybody to suggest that that's the basis on which they're going to make decisions, or that others would make a decision, I find reprehensible."

Surveying the long month ahead, a Monday Crain's editorial said that, with Bloomberg's presidential flight of fancy finally over, a win on congestion pricing is crucial for the mayor to remain relevant.

While both proponents and opponents have jiggered polls to support their cause, it is clear there is no public groundswell to impose a steep fee for driving in Manhattan. The qualified support of [Comptroller William] Thompson and [Council Speaker Christine] Quinn could be at risk as they take their own reading of public sentiment as they prepare for the 2009 race.

Suburban legislators remain overwhelmingly against the plan. Democratic Assembly members will be putting pressure on Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver not to back the mayor. Republican senators from Long Island, desperate to turn back Democratic challengers this November, have every reason to stand against the mayor.

It will take an aggressive effort by the mayor to push through congestion pricing. Much is at stake for him as well as for the city.

"(This) is an absolutely great idea," said Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing), chairman of the council's Transportation Committee. "We need to rediscover and utilize this tremendous natural transportation resource to overcome many of the challenges faced by a growing city."

Operating costs for the five borough ferry service could reach up to $100 million annually, according to Liu, and will require the city to combine them with debt service on capital expenditures, like building docks. But when compared with other mass transit expansions, he added, "this is a very manageable investment for the long term."

Sounds expensive.

Now, thanks to documents published by the Traffic Mitigation Commission, we have a better idea of how big this Livable Streets Lock Box fund will be: Roughly $39 million a year. As spelled out in the "Increase Cost of Parking" document in Appendix J of the Commission's final report:

Annual Funding for NYC DOT Fund:
$22 million Eliminate Manhattan resident parking garage tax exemption:
$17 million Increase rates for on-street parking (widely considered a low estimate).
Total: $39 million

Though perhaps modest by London standards where the Mayor just announced that the City would be spending $100 million a year on bicycle projects, the Fund could get bigger in the future if it also receives revenue from curbside parking reforms being contemplated by DOT. However, big questions about how the money will be spent remain. The Traffic Commission called for the fund to be spent on:

"transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and parking management improvements, including, but not limited to, expanded ferry service, bus signalization, BRT investments, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian enhancements."

Yet, in her State of the City address earlier this week, Council Speaker Christine Quinn called for the creation of a "comprehensive five-borough, year-round New York City Ferry System." Ferries require heavy subsidies. The Staten Island Ferry costs the city about $74 million a year to operate and New York Water Taxi is currently going bust. Quinn's proposed ferry network will be expensive. And yet the city is entering a period of budget cuts.

The Speaker is in a powerful position right now. The Mayor is dependent on her to deliver congestion pricing in City Council. So, how will Quinn's new ferries be paid for? Is she aiming to redirect the Livable Streets Lock Box funds to ferries?

With some neighborhoods more than three quarters of a mile from a subway station we need to examine other modes of transportation. It's only natural to look at our natural highways ... our water ways ... to move New Yorkers efficiently and sustainably.

That's why we are proposing and the Mayor has agreed to begin developing a comprehensive five-borough, year-round New York City Ferry System.

Once again, this is an idea that came straight from listening to New Yorkers.

At a hearing that my colleagues Joe Addabbo, John Liu and I held in Broad Channel, we heard complaint after complaint about commute times from local residents.

Soon after, we began exploring the concept of a pilot ferry service for the Rockaways ... got a commitment from the Mayor to fund it ... and that service should be up and running by this summer.

But why limit ourselves to Rockaway?

Imagine getting on a ferry in Hunts Point for a day trip to Coney Island.

Or commuting from Astoria to downtown without having to brave the traffic at the Triboro Bridge.

Or traveling from Brooklyn to Queens without waiting for the G train.

And think of how it will enhance our infrastructure, open up our waterfronts and create jobs.

Later this month, we'll unveil a detailed plan for developing what will be one of the most significant transit initiatives in recent New York City history.

Before we do, I'd like to thank the Mayor, my colleagues, and Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, for helping us make this vision a reality - and for working with us to keep our city moving forward.

Tomorrow the Hudson River Park Trust is set to vote on a plan by the Related Companies to redevelop Pier 40 on W. Houston Street as a ~$600 million entertainment complex, which would include a permanent home for Cirque du Soleil and the Tribeca Film Festival, and would draw thousands of visitors per day.

Neighborhood residents say the Related plan would ruin the pier's current use as a park and would bring unwanted auto traffic to the area. According to Community Board 2 member (and Streetsie Activist of the Year) Ian Dutton, the Related plan includes over 10,000 daily vehicle crossings of the Hudson River Greenway. Pier advocates have formed a group called the Pier 40 Partnership, which put together a counter-proposal and has pledged to raise tens of millions of dollars toward a much needed rehab of the pier.

On Sunday, hundreds showed up to protest the Related plan and express support for keeping the pier for neighborhood use. The Times reports:

"We love Pier 40," said Mellora, 14. "We need the fields," added her mother, Bonnie Ansbro. "It builds a sense of community. We don't want these kids to travel all over the city to play."

"Keep the park a park," said Rich Caccappolo, president of the partnership, whose members include Craig Balsam, a founder of Razor & Tie Entertainment; Chris McGinnis, a real estate developer; and Fred Wilson, a venture capitalist. "It's not a circus, a performing arts center, or a huge destination that'll draw 1,000 cars."

The Villager, which probably has the most thorough coverage of the Pier 40 story, last week called on City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and other officials to step in on behalf of the neighborhood.

The community looks to [Quinn's] for support to save the pier from becoming an extravagant entertainment destination, and to help support the groups that will contribute to creating a low-impact but viable alternative. She needs to tell the Trust she supports the Partnership's alternative - and, in the strongest terms possible, that Related's proposal is unacceptable. Speaker Quinn, the community will remember your leadership on this pivotal issue.

Rendering from Pier 40 Partnership via The Villager

Move over, Ted Kheel. On the eve of the Congestion Mitigation Commission deadline to sign off on some form of congestion pricing, Lew Fidler tells the Observer he will introduce his own 9 CARAT STONE plan to his colleagues on the City Council tomorrow.

The Fidler Tax'n'Tunnel proposal, for those who've somehow forgotten, would avoid congestion pricing by, among other measures, increasing parking rates and traffic violation fees, building $18 billion in tunnel infrastructure, removing one-way truck tolls, moving city agencies out of Manhattan's Central Business District, and convincing the federal government and/or automakers to develop hydrogen cell vehicles. It would be paid for through a one-third of one percent regional payroll tax.

Fidler says his support is diverse. "I want to be very clear," he told me. "I have co-sponsors for elements of this plan that are ardently in favor of congestion pricing, ardently against it, and people who haven't yet committed. But even if they're in favor of congestion pricing, and they put their name next to one of my resolution points, they think that point is a good idea, and some of them [the resolutions] survive with or without congestion pricing."

Fidler said it's not likely his proposal will go to a vote before congestion pricing, since in addition to the mayor, the City Council Speaker supports congestion pricing. "What's wrong is my plan isn't part of the debate," Fidler says.

Fidler's plan was analyzed by Environmental Defense and the Pratt Center for Community Development last year, who concluded that it, along with proposals by Congressman Anthony Weiner and Keep NYC Congestion Tax Free, would promote driving.

Photo: Lila Glogowsky

Spurred by the death of third-grader Prince Harris, Jr. (pictured), the fourth pedestrian to die this year along a notorious stretch of Ninth Avenue, the Clinton/Hell's Kitchen Pedestrian Safety Coalition (CHEKPEDS) is again urging the city to convene an interagency panel "to address this critical health issue."

On Friday, 8-year-old Harris was on his way to a park with his father and siblings when he reportedly "darted on W. 17th St." and was hit by a Toyota Scion, driven by an unidentified 44-year-old man. Harris's father said the Toyota and a taxi "were speeding down the block to make the light." The driver stayed at the scene and was not issued a ticket.

Today CHEKPEDS issued an e-mail bulletin offering condolences to the Harris family, and imploring the city to turn its attention to the pedestrian casualty epidemic.

The "new DOT" is moving fast and all problems cannot be tackled in one day. Priorities must be set, and in our book none is more important than pedestrian safety. 11,000 injuries and 163 deaths annually would qualify as a national disaster if they were all happening in one day. But they keep happening year after year.

In March, CHEKPEDS worked with Community Board 4 to draft a letter (PDF) to City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer asking them to organize a citywide task force "bringing the various players to the table to address street and signal engineering, agencies jurisdiction, enforcement and traffic safety laws, reporting traffic problems and police procedures in accidents." But it hasn't happened.

Also over the weekend, a speeding taxicab jumped a curb and struck three members of the same family, killing 60-year-old TV helicopter pilot Paul Smith; no criminal charges have thus far been reported. On Staten Island, a 4-year-old is "fighting for her life" after being hit by a car yesterday while trying to cross the street with a group of other children; the unidentified driver was not ticketed. And yesterday morning in Coney Island, the driver of a charter bus making a U-turn hit an 60-year-old woman, knocking her down and running over her abdomen; the driver was not charged.

This weekend's carnage comes after last week's angry memorials to Hope Miller and Julia Thomson, who were run down five days apart at the end of September.

Photo of Prince Harris via New York Daily News

1. Mayor Bloomberg does not have a "green light" to move forward with congestion pricing, nor has he been granted any new powers. The deal denies him the authority to impose a pricing charge until approved by the City Council and state legislature.
2. The feds may still yet give New York City congestion pricing start-up funds despite the missed Monday deadline.
3. The deal mandates a very specific timeline by which the process will move forward and a 17-member commission that may become an important forum for the congestion pricing and and broader transportation debate, good things could emerge.
   
4. Transportation policy and livable streets issues have moved to the top of New York City's civic agenda and will remain in the political spotlight for some time to come.
   
5. There are a ton of things that could still derail congestion pricing.

Assuming the oft-stalled legislature approves yesterday's deal in the next week or so, the next hurdle will be the demand that the feds give New York City at least $200 million in congestion pricing pilot program funds by October 1, before the newly created Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission has even voted to approve pricing. If the feds don't pay up by this deadline the legislation is voided and pricing is dead.

If the feds do come through with money and the Commission approves the pricing "Implementation Plan" by the Jan. 31, 2008 deadline, then three separate legislative bodies will still have to vote to approve the Plan: the City Council, State Assembly and State Senate.

Council Speaker Christine Quinn of Manhattan has issued strong statements in support of pricing, but it is hard to know whether she can actually deliver her members. Make your own judgments about the Senate and Assembly. Perhaps the biggest obstacle is the clock. A lot has to happen on schedule and as we see here, politics is messy. Time is short -- 2009 is a mayoral election year, Quinn is a candidate and pricing is controversial. Bloomberg is gone in 2010.

If everything goes right, congestion pricing could be up and running by 2009, though many variables will influence that. It depends on how quickly the charging system is installed, how fast the mayor can get start-up funds from City Council or other sources that he controls and whether a lawsuit or has the potential to delay things. Even before yesterday's deal, pricing opponents like Bronx State Senator Ruben Diaz, Sr. were saying, "I cannot understand how these plans can be made without an environmental impact study being conducted first."

Whether or not yesterday's deal succeeds, the transportation reform movement has already won a huge victory. For decades, transportation has been a second-tier concern in New York City behind crime, education and housing. The congestion pricing debate has changed that, moving transportation policy to the top of the civic agenda, perhaps, for good.

In the past, transportation policy reformers have often found themselves pitted against the city's power players and marginalized by City Hall. Since the mayor proposed congestion pricing, he has been shoulder to shoulder with the advocates. It is a remarkable turn-around. There is no more talk about traffic congestion being a sign of a prosperous and healthy city. Traffic has been re-branded by the Mayor, big business and editorial boards across the political spectrum as a costly, harmful problem that needs solving. Finally, livable streets are being understood as one of the foundations of a prosperous, healthy, sustainable city.