Streetsblog New York City

A protected bike lane on the Pulaski Bridge — calming traffic heading to McGuinness Boulevard and providing much more breathing room than the bridge’s narrow bike/ped path alone — has cleared a significant planning hurdle. In a letter to Assembly Member Joe Lentol [PDF], DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan said that the proposal meets traffic analysis requirements, and that an engineering study and recommendations will be made by the end of the year:

Since December, we have analyzed traffic data and we are confident that one Brooklyn-bound lane can be removed from the Pulaski Bridge without an adverse effect on traffic flow… However, there are some engineering questions remaining about how to properly design and install such a bicycle path on the bridge. To resolve these questions, we are initiating an engineering study with a structural engineering consultant.

The most likely engineering concerns are related to the bridge’s wide joint gaps, which could ensnare narrow bike tires, and how to maintain an adequate physical barrier between bicycles and motor vehicles on the drawbridge section of the span. DOT expects to wrap up the study and recommendations later this year, according to Sadik-Khan’s letter.

While this update puts the study schedule behind the March deadline that Lentol had cited at the beginning of the year, it’s a good sign of progress.

In the meantime, advocates continue to build support for the bike lane. The Transportation Alternatives Queens volunteer committee, which has a petition supporting the lane with 300 signatures, will be gathering more signatures on the Queens side of the bridge path on Saturday, May 11, from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m.

The bridge path would complement a separate proposal to bring bike lanes to 11th Street in Long Island City, connecting north to Queens Plaza and the Queensboro Bridge. ”DOT and CB 2 have already agreed to this,” TA volunteer Steve Scofield told Streetsblog via e-mail. “We’re expecting their exact proposal and an implementation date in a matter of weeks.”

Quick update on the campaign for a protected two-way bikeway on the Pulaski Bridge: We don’t know if DOT is going to implement one yet, but we know when they’ll make a decision. Yesterday, Assembly Member Joe Lentol sent out word that DOT chief Janette Sadik-Khan told him the agency will wrap up its feasibility study of the bikeway by March:

Although the response from Commissioner Sadik-Khan did not provide a definitive answer to the likelihood of the dedicated bike lanes installation, it did explain that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs unit is investigating the matter. The investigation will examine various factors, including the traffic conditions on the roadway, the structure of the movable bridge and the connections on the Brooklyn and Queens sides of the bridge. The investigation is slated to be completed by March 2013.

Lentol asked DOT to study the bikeway in October, after hosting a public meeting about the increasingly crowded conditions on the bridge’s narrow bike-ped path. DOT announced their feasibility study the next month, saying the main engineering challenge would be designing physical protection for cyclists that works on the drawbridge section of the roadway.

As Lentol noted in his statement yesterday, converting a southbound traffic lane on the bridge to a protected bikeway would also help control drivers’ speeds as they head off the bridge onto McGuinness Boulevard, which has a terrible safety record:

“I have long advocated for traffic calming measures on McGuinness Boulevard and this proposed bike lane would undoubtedly slow drivers down, while making the Pulaski Bridge safer for pedestrians and cyclists who travel along this road everyday. This bike lane is a common sense solution to a multi-faceted problem and I hope Commissioner Sadik-Khan’s investigation will result in the correct decision to make this bike lane a reality.”

The narrow bike and pedestrian path across the Pulaski Bridge has long been a concern for bridge users and local residents. Earlier this month, Assembly Member Joseph Lentol hosted a meeting to air the issues and find a solution. Now, Lentol is asking DOT for a two-way protected bike lane on the bridge.

“This is not us versus them,” Lentol told Streetsblog, saying that attendees at the meeting wanted to find a solution that works for both pedestrians and cyclists. “I think everybody is in consensus that there ought to be a way to take away the southbound right lane of traffic and dedicate that to cycling and give the walkway back to the pedestrians,” he said.

The big hurdle, he noted, is convincing DOT to figure out a way to make that happen, which is why he’s appealing to the top in a letter to Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan. “I understand that there are inherent engineering challenges that need to be overcome,” Lentol wrote, “but I have faith in your ability to motivate the DOT engineers to make it happen.”

Funding for the project could fall into place if DOT commits to the project. While Lentol said he doesn’t have direct access to discretionary funds, he can request Multi-Modal Funds from the New York State DOT to help pay for the project. But “the only way you can spend it is if the Department of Transportation has a project they approve,” he added.

Lentol was quick to note that removing a lane of southbound auto traffic on the bridge, in addition to providing space for bike riders and walkers, would help calm traffic on notoriously dangerous McGuinness Boulevard, which is a continuation of the bridge on the Brooklyn side. ”If we could get a speed camera on McGuinness Boulevard and slow the traffic coming off the Pulaski Bridge,” he said, “It would work in tandem.”

Tackling enforcement and design on the same roadway could yield real benefits. “This would be a nice coordinated effort,” Lentol said. While Albany needs to take action on speed camera legislation, the engineering side of the equation could be solved by DOT.

Council Member Letitia James and Assembly Member Joseph Lentol joined local residents on Park Avenue in Brooklyn yesterday to push DOT and other city agencies to implement recommendations from the Myrtle Avenue Revitalization Partnership’s pedestrian safety plan. The plan calls for a set of pedestrian safety improvements and traffic enforcement measures to make Park Avenue less of a BQE service road and more of a neighborhood street.

“Government’s most primary responsibility is to protect its citizens,” Lentol said. “We definitely need traffic calming measures.” Lentol also called for an expansion of speed cameras in the city. “Speed kills,” he said. “We’ve got to slow these cars down.”

Over a two-hour period on a recent afternoon, MARP clocked 40 percent of drivers on Park Avenue speeding, with the fastest hitting 53 mph. When a student from Benjamin Banneker Academy broke out the speed gun yesterday afternoon, the first reading came back at 38 mph. New York City’s speed limit is 30 mph.

M. Blaise Backer, executive director of MARP, called on city agencies to begin design and implementation of the report’s recommendations. “Park Avenue is broken, and it can be fixed,” he said. “We have to get DOT’s attention.”

Council Member James echoed the sentiment. “We really need to get all of the entities involved to focus on this,” she said. James and Lentol were joined by representatives of Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz and Transportation Alternatives at the event.

Community participation in formulating the plan has been significant. If you’d like to learn more about how MARP and its partners collaborated on the report, the Center for Architecture will host a panel Friday morning featuring architects, planners and community members.

On Friday we noted that Assembly Member Richard Brodsky's latest anti-transit argument -- that "the actual cost of free and discounted student fares is close to zero" -- doesn't hold water. A letter from Brodsky addressed to MTA CEO Jay Walder calls for reinstating student MetroCards, laying blame for the program's potential elimination at the MTA's feet while neglecting to mention Albany's leading role in reducing funds for student transport. 

Brodsky's office sent us a copy of the letter [PDF], which is copied in full below. Among its 24 signatories, the overwhelming majority represent New York City:

Dear Hon. Walder,

We write to you as long-standing advocates for mass transit funding, as those who have regularly supported state funding for the MTA's capital and operating needs, and as those who represent students and parents across the MTA region.  We understand the continuing difficulties caused by the national recession, and the difficult decisions you are making as a consequence.  We believe that we share a desire to reform, expand, and improve the MTA, even as new leadership takes over, and as PARA 2009 makes real changes in legal, operational and fiduciary practices at the MTA. 

That being said, we write to make sure you understand the depth of our concern about MTA plans to end free and discounted student travel.  We cannot criticize any exercise that reviews all MTA expenditures and services in the face of the economic downturn.  But we reject any decision by the MTA to end free and discounted student travel as an element of a final package of changes. 

We reject that decision because it is not an accurate or intelligent analysis of the MTA's fisc [sic]. While the MTA asserts it needs $214 million in additional state and city aid to preserve the program, the actual cost of free and discounted student fares is close to zero.  We reject the MTA's assertion that the program must be valued at the ostensible lost revenue, and point out that state and city funding for the program actually exceeds the cost of providing the service. 

We reject that decision because it is a dangerous, unfair, and self-defeating political tactic. We understand the use of political tactics in budget controversies.  But there are limits, and the decision to put students and families out there as a pawn in the struggle to increase City and State funding crosses a line.

Read more...

Graffiti at the Metropolitan Ave. subway station on the G line.

Streetsblog will be keeping an eye on Save The G, a new blog advocating for service improvements on the beleaguered G subway line. The blog is being produced by a coalition of civic groups and elected officials from Brooklyn and Queens, including, Queens Civic Congress, NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign, Regional
Plan Association, GWAPP, North Brooklyn Greens, Fort Greene
Association, Bed-Stuy Neighborhood Stabilization Task Force, and
Assemblyman Joe Lentol.

Photo: Triborough on Flickr

Westchester Democrat Richard Brodsky has emerged as the State Assembly's leading critic of Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing plan. Later today Brodsky will release a report on the steps of City Hall characterizing the Mayor's congestion pricing plan as a regressive tax that puts most of the burden on poor and middle-income drivers (and ignoring the fact that only 4.6% of New York City residents drive to work in Manhattan's Central Business District and most poor and middle-income New Yorkers use transit).

In his radio address this weekend, Mayor Bloomberg urged state lawmakers to "put aside their competing interests and come together" on the issue of congestion pricing. "To leave this half a billion dollars just sitting on the table would be absolutely ridiculous." In response, Brodsky told the New York Times:

We don't have any competing interests. We're interested only in the public interest, and the first thing the public interest requires is someone to actually look at the mayor's plan, fairly and thoroughly.

Yet, over the last five years Assembly Member Brodsky has accepted at least $16,700 in campaign contributions from parking garage interests, according to the New York State Board of Elections. Brodsky's parking industry contributions far exceed those of any other state legislator (though Queens City Council Member David Weprin leads the pack with his $20,500 $40,650 haul). Specifically, Brodsky's contributions have come from the Metropolitan Parking Association and the Mallah family, the owner of several parking companies and sometimes referred to as New York City's "parking royalty."

The Mallah family has interests in several parking corporations including Merit Parking, Mallah Parking Corporation, Advance Parking, and Icon Parking. Shelly Mallah is also associated with New York City's Metropolitan Parking Association and has made campaign contributions to its political action committee.

Vincent Petraro, the executive director of the Metropolitan Parking Association, a trade group representing about 800 lots and garages in New York City, has served as an intermediary for political campaign contributions for Sheldon Mallah, according to the NYC Campaign Finance Board. Petraro is also a board member of Queens Chamber of Commerce and chairman of its Legislative Advocacy Committee.

Parking industry contributions to Richard Brodsky:

$1,000	12/01/05	Sheldon Mallah
$1,000	12/01/05	Sandra Mallah
$500	3/28/05	Metro Parking Association
$400	3/25/04	Sandra Mallah
$500	5/20/04	Sheldon Mallah
$1,000	5/20/04	Sandra Mallah
$2,000	4/29/04	Sandra Mallah
$800	3/25/04	Sheldon Mallah
$500	12/30/03	Sheldon Mallah
$1,000	12/30/03	Sandra Mallah
$1,000	6/26/03	Sheldon Mallah
$2,000	6/23/03	Sandra Mallah
$1,000	3/03/03	Sandra Mallah
$1,000	11/22/02	Sandra Mallah
$1,000	8/26/02	Sandra Mallah
$1,000	8/26/02	Sandra Mallah
$1,000	5/06/02	Sandra Mallah

TOTAL: $16,700

How do Brodsky's parking industry contributions compare? No other state legislator even comes close to the levels of contributions received by Brodsky from the Mallahs and the Metropolitan Parking Association since 2002.

Marty Golden	$1,500
Denny Farrell	$1,000
Sheldon Silver	$1,000
Joe Lentol	$750
John Sabini	$500
Danny O’Donnell	$500
Rory Lancman	$500
Michael Cusick	$250
Mark Weprin	$250

Photo: Tim Roske/Associated Press via the New York Times

Police officers from Brooklyn's 94th precinct are, at this moment, clipping bike locks and seizing bicycles parked along Bedford Ave. according to Community Board 1 Transportation Chair Teresa Toro. The precinct gave Community Board members no advanced notice of the police action. Phone calls to the precinct have gone unanswered. Toro, who also works for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, reports that Council Member David Yassky's staff is looking into the situation and says:

CB1 recently wrote to the 90th and 94th Precincts asking them to establish an abandoned bike tagging and removal program. Such a program would ensure that bikes being removed are indeed abandoned; and there would be notice given to the bike owner to remove his/her bike by a given date.

Biking is on the upswing in our community, and I'm proud of that. I find it unacceptable that the precinct is taking such a negative initiative and I intend to follow up. In the meantime, I am calling the 94th Precinct (interesting, there is NO ANSWER on the phone so far despite three tries and counting). I am also letting our local elected officials know about this action.

I find this particularly outrageous, given Mayor Bloomberg's and NYC DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan's recent efforts to promote more and better biking and walking alternatives for New Yorkers. Perhaps the 94th Precinct didn't get the memo yet.

If you also oppose this action by the precinct, please write and/or call the precinct to let them know, and PLEASE copy our elected officials and CB1.

Captain Paul Vorbeck, Commanding Officer [pictured]
94th Precinct
100 Meserole Avenue
Phone 718 383 3879
Fax 718 383 8095

Assemblyman Joe Lentol
619 Lorimer Street
Brooklyn NY 11211
Phone 718 383 7474
lentolj@assembly.state.ny.us

Councilman David Yassky
114 Court Street
Brooklyn NY 11201
Phone 718 875 5200
Fax 718 643 6620
yassky@council.nyc.ny.us

The 94th Precinct was in the news a few days ago for taping notices to bikes parked in Williamsburg warning cyclists to "obey the traffic rules and regulations." The area around the Bedford Avenue subway station has been the scene of frequent bike seizures.

Local elected officials appear to be moving from a "tax on the middle class" critique of Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing proposal to a "park-and-ride" argument. Check out these two letters from senior Brooklyn Assembly member Joseph Lentol to constituents. In the first letter, written May 15, Lentol says that he is giving congestion pricing "his full review and consideration." He expresses no specific opinion or concerns about the plan:

 

Now check out this May 25 letter. Ten days after the first letter Lentol has formulated a critique. He is worried "whether or not the proposal addresses those individuals who will drive into the district to park and then ride subways into Manhattan." This "park-and-ride" issue appears to be emerging as the congestion pricing hot-button among elected officials all over town. Clearly, it's time to dig up the data from Transport for London's "boundary impacts" studies. Stay tuned for that.