Streetsblog New York City

Seven years ago, when Tim Tompkins took over as president of the Times Square Alliance, one of New York's largest BIDs, security and cleanliness were the top concerns. Despite incessant traffic and "pedlock," few decision-makers were focused, at first, on the vision of Times Square as a world-class public space where people take precedence over motor vehicles.

Speaking to a standing-room audience at the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research building last week, Tompkins recalled when the lack of regular stabbings and violent crime seemed good enough for the crossroads of the world, and the quality of public space felt too esoteric to address. Gradually, Tompkins helped build public support for dramatic changes, starting with the re-design of Duffy Square. Working with NYCDOT, Tompkins began chipping away at the space allocated to cars and opening it up to pedestrians. Shortly after the completion of Duffy Square last October, said Tompkins, DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan approached him about closing down a portion of Broadway to vehicles to create public plazas.

Now, cities around the country view the new Times Square plazas as potential precedents for transforming their own under-utilized or overcrowded streets into quality pedestrian space. Streetsblog San Francisco caught up with Tompkins during his west coast trip to talk about the new Times Square, how it came about, and the lessons we can draw from its ongoing transformation. Here is an edited transcript of the interview. 

Matthew Roth: What in your opinion has been the biggest change in Times Square over the past decade?

Tim Tompkins: The challenge of Times Square as a public space had changed. It’s not enough that it's just sort of safe to be there. This is one of the world's great public spaces. What's missing?

Over the last couple of decades we've learned a lot about how to make parks great, and that parks are important to life of the city. I think there's been an evolution over the last decade thanks to organizations like [Streetsblog], and Project for Public Spaces, and Transportation Alternatives that have said, "There is another part of the public realm, there is another part of city life that we need to pay attention to."

What I see is that what’s been happening is part of a larger movement in terms of the revitalization of cities. It’s kind of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, where you need to take care of the basics of comfort and security first before you can even think about anything else. That played out with respect to nature and parks, but wasn't really playing out in the streets and sidewalks. I think not only in Times Square and in New York City, but in a bunch of places... we've been paying attention to that. And that’s been the paradigm shift that’s driving a lot of this.

Continue...

Let's face it, walking out the door and getting on the road as a user of any transportation mode -- from feet to bike to car -- is an act of faith. To a certain extent, you have to trust the other people out there to follow the rules. Sure, you're always on the lookout for those who are disregarding traffic laws, but if you really thought no one was going to be playing along, you probably wouldn't dare to set foot in the public space.

That implicit trust -- the necessity of it and the fragility of it -- is the topic of today's featured post from the Streetsblog Network, by Boston Biker. It's a long post, worth reading in full, but here are some of the most salient points:

Photo by Joe Nangle via Flickr.

If you think about it, almost all of our traffic control systems are either lights, or paint, or other similar “symbolic” control devices. You trust others and they trust you. On an average trip you are placing your very life in the hands of hundreds, if not thousands, of total strangers... The reason why you are alive to read this is because no one has crossed the center line, or run a red light, or any of the many other things they could have done easily and killed you...

This is why I think people who drive cars get so upset when cyclists run red lights. It is not because cyclists are breaking the rules (everyone does that, and often), it is because they are breaking the shared trust. It is offensive to the group because that trust is what keeps them alive. If you are a cyclist and you run red lights this is not something you should brush off lightly...

This idea works for just about any person driving/riding any kind of transportation. Car drivers run red lights also, they also make turns with no signals on, bikers go the wrong way down streets, pedestrians walk out against the signals...etc...etc. The point is each and every time anyone does this, not only are they breaking the rules, they are breaking down the shared trust...

Continue...

Halfway through this afternoon's rally in support of a new federal transportation bill, there came an accidental but telling moment. A group of tourists, attracted by the hundreds of orange flags planted in the National Mall for the rally, walked through the event and whispered questions to attendees about its purpose. Once their curiosity was sated, the group lost interest and ambled away.

The tourists may well have been speaking for most senior lawmakers on Capitol Hill, where this week's growing momentum towards a six-month timetable for taking up the next long-term infrastructure bill was abruptly squelched by GOP senators' inability to find consensus among their members.

As the subscription-only CQ reported today:

Efforts in the Senate to take up a six-month extension of surface transportation law this week appear dead, over objections by a few Republicans to passing it without a full debate, said James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, the ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee.

... Inhofe said Tuesday that at least two Republicans objected and that there is not enough floor time to finish a bill this week under normal procedure. 

The Senate's lack of progress means that officials working on the nation's transit, roads, bridges, and bike paths will likely have to continue operating under a second short-term extension of the 2005 transportation law, this time lasting until December 18.

Despite the prospects of continuing uncertainty on the local level, House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) remained upbeat and focused on a singular goal: getting his colleagues to elevate infrastructure to the top-of-mind status currently occupied by health care (followed by financial regulation and climate change).

"Encircle the White House," Oberstar advised the organizers of today's rally, who parked heavy-duty construction equipment along the sidewalk to symbolize their plea for more transportation spending. "Encircle the Senate!"

Continue...

Safe streets advocates are understandably excited by the prospect of a Manhattan district attorney with an interest in holding dangerous drivers accountable for the death and destruction they impose upon the city every day. But few, if any, expect radical change right away. As attendees at Tuesday's legal symposium on vehicular crime learned, even prosecutors who pursue the cause of traffic justice are often stymied by weak laws and courts that tend to be forgiving of motorists who maim and kill.

Maureen McCormick has specialized in prosecuting reckless drivers for 14 years. She led the Kings County Vehicular Crimes Bureau in Brooklyn, and now works for Nassau County DA Kathleen Rice. On Tuesday, McCormick said she believes the state's criminally negligent homicide statute, by virtue of its status as a Class E felony -- the least severe of all felony categories -- is "illogical on its face." Further, McCormick said, courts often go soft on killer drivers by twisting the language of the statute in ways unintended by the state.

McCormick cited a 2008 case as an example. Here is her account from a March Streetsblog interview:

As recently as May 2008, New York's highest court held that a 17-year-old driver who violated his junior license by driving with four unrelated passengers, without seatbelts, and who also was speeding at 70-72 mph through a curve with a posted caution speed of 40 mph, and who lost control sending the car over an embankment and killing three of his passengers, could not be held criminally liable (People v. Cabrera, 10 NY3d 370 [2008]). This decision alone has resulted in numerous defense motions to have cases dismissed claiming that "speed alone" or any traffic infraction "alone" is not sufficient to sustain criminal negligence. Our position is that this is nonsense.

McCormick wants state legislators to tell the courts they are misinterpreting the law. Another panelist, Oregon civil attorney and bike lawyer Ray Thomas, suggested that instead of trying to read defendants' minds -- the Cabrera case turned on the driver's perception of risk -- states should rely on objective, definable criteria. Continue...

A quick reminder: You can RSVP for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign's annual benefit up until 3 p.m. tomorrow. The word from Tri-State's Veronica Vanterpool is that they've lined up a great space with a tasteful selection of wine, beer and hors d'oeuvres. The schmoozing figures to be a Streetsblog reader's dream. Local transpo officials, community leaders and activists, the non-profit stars you know and love -- they'll all be there. And, of course, during the evening Aaron Naparstek and Clarence Eckerson will share honors with New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez.

Here are the details:

Tri-State Transportation Campaign Annual Benefit
Thursday, October 29, 6:00 - 8:30 p.m.
The Gates, 290 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY
Tickets available from $150

New York's trusty single-space parking meters are a dying breed. They've served commercial corridors admirably, but they're rapidly giving way to muni-meters (which are much better suited for innovations in curbside pricing, like DOT's PARKSmart program).

The downside of the shrinking meter supply: New Yorkers have even fewer options to lock up their bikes. While DOT is in the process of adding 5,000 bike racks in the next few years, the rate of rack installation hasn't kept up with the rapid pace of meter removal. So cyclists could breathe a little easier last week, when DOT revealed that it will repurpose defunct meter poles as bike racks, a policy that advocates had been urging the agency to adopt.

We're already seeing signs of re-born meters out on the street. Transportation Alternatives' Wiley Norvell sent this pic of headless poles on Madison Avenue, where DOT will convert four meters per block (two on each side of the street) into bike racks.

Prior to voting overwhelmingly in favor of protected bike lanes at last week's Manhattan CB 8 meeting, the board also approved a motion to convert meters to bike racks on Madison from 69th Street to 90th Street. But not before a lengthy debate prompted by the board's liaison to the Madison Avenue BID. Apparently concerned about sidewalk clutter, the BID doesn't want converted bike racks on the avenue itself, but on the corners of each side street instead. (This would defeat the purpose of the conversion, since there are no parking meters on side streets.) The notion that customers ride to their shops has yet to gain sway with this particular BID.

Continue...

As the Senate opened its second round of climate change hearings today, Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter delivered the urban case for climate legislation, outlining an array of infrastructure improvements and green reforms that would be made possible by federal action to reduce carbon emissions.

Testifying on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, Nutter singled out his city's "complete streets" policy as a key element of the local revitalization that has attracted more private investment and new residents to Philadelphia:

Over the past five decades, Philadelphia lost jobs and residents. The pulls that caused people to leave our city and others like it were driven in part by government policies that valued highways over transit and new tract housing over older row homes. But, in recent years, Philadelphia has begun to witness a rebirth... people and jobs are moving in and private investments are being made. People again view our walkable neighborhoods and public transportation systems as assets to value and nurture.

Nutter also described a series of sustainable infrastructure projects that his city is prepared to launch once long-term funding is secured. The Senate climate bill sets up a new block grant program that would provide that long-term funding, directing money to metro areas for energy efficiency and conservation projects.

Among the Philadelphia proposals mentioned by Nutter were the city's "green corridors" program -- now in line for a $6 million pilot phase -- that would install landscaped sidewalks to collect storm water as well as new energy-efficient streetlights and traffic signals. A parallel effort, known as "green streets," would increase tree cover and install curb bump-outs with sidewalk planters to decrease heat-trapping.

"Our experience... is characteristic of so many cities that are moving forward with these investments," Nutter told the Senate environment committee, which will hear from more than two dozen witnesses today alone.

Republican witnesses offered a counterpoint to the urban experience, focusing almost exclusively on the high cost that regulating emissions would impose on traditional fossil fuel-burning industries.

"We are in favor of green jobs but not at the expense of the heartland, of red, white, and blue jobs," Bill Klesse, CEO of oil company Valero, told the environment panel.

Today's hearing can be followed live here, courtesy of the committee.

The future of transportation in this country is currently under debate by a bunch of old folks in Washington. But what about those who will live in that future, people now in their 20s and younger?

How to influence their transportation choices is the topic of today's featured post on the Streetsblog Network. Lewis Kelley, a student at the University of Montana who writes the Imagine No Cars blog, has this to say:

Photo by carfreedays via Flickr.

We…can't think of the "young" as being a monoculture. Here in Missoula, there are two high schools with two different cultures. One is set in our urban core with almost no parking; most of the students walk, bike, or take our public transit (since there is no room for school buses to park and drop off kids). There must be between 100-200 bikes parked at the high school every day. The other is more suburban, and has a parking lot the size of several football fields with kids getting there with either a vehicle, dropped off by parents, or on a school bus.

Local culture is probably the most important factor. If there is no bicycle culture present in a city, the work that must be done to get people on board with bicycle transportation and for them to see the need to get out of the car is hugely increased. All the blogs, books, and newspaper articles written about the new trend, environmental, and health concerns will do little... social interaction person to person is probably the most powerful and effective way to spread such ideas.

Kelley is right. Infrastructure and planning choices that emphasize safe passage for pedestrians and cyclists are a primary factor in opening the door for active transportation choices. If you design a school so that it makes sense to bike there, kids will do that. They will have fun doing it and tell their friends how much fun it is and then their friends will want to do it, too.

If you design a school so that they can only get there by car, that's what they'll do. That's what will be cool.

And the choices they make as adults will likely be heavily influenced by those experiences -- as will the impact they as individuals have on the global and local environment.

Those gray heads in Washington have a pretty heavy responsibility. The future doesn't really belong to them. And it's going to look a lot different from the past. It would be great if they could remember that.

More from the network: Crossroads wants transportation to be an issue in the 2010 Pennsylvania race for governor. Urban Velo is looking for your pictures showing how much you love biking in the city. And Muscle Powered writes about the mean streets of Nevada.

Before week's end, the Senate will pass a six-month extension of the nation's four-year-old transportation law -- setting the stage for another showdown with the House, where transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar remains on the fence about abandoning the push for a new long-term bill before 2010.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) confirmed yesterday that the upper chamber would scale back its original plan to delay the next federal transportation law by 18 months, as was originally proposed by the Obama administration.

A six-month extension is "expect[ed] to pass," Reid said on the Senate floor last night. That leaves the ball in Oberstar's court, with time running out before the expiration of the one-month reprieve under which state transportation officials are now operating.

If the Senate can keep its six-month extension within the budgetary boundaries set by the House "pay-as-you-go" rule, which requires any new spending to be offset by cuts elsewhere, that may force the hand of Democrats in the lower chamber.

An early answer from the House side may well come tomorrow, when Oberstar is scheduled to appear at a rally sponsored by the construction equipment industry aimed at drumming up support for passage of a new infrastructure bill before the end of the year.

Judged by statistics on violent crime, New York may be the safest big city in America. But its amazingly low murder rate masks a less encouraging trend: With 300 city-wide road deaths a year, reckless driving now rivals homicide as a mortal threat.

Don't take our word for it. This is the message from Cy Vance Jr., the candidate who next Tuesday is all but certain to be elected Manhattan's next district attorney. Speaking at today's legal symposium on vehicular violence at the Cardozo School of Law, Vance called the number of city traffic fatalities "extremely large" when compared to its 500 annual murders, and reiterated his campaign pledge to make vehicular violence a priority on his watch.

"Safety on our streets is going to be a very, very important issue for our office," said Vance, who noted that his son is a Manhattan cyclist.

Vance restated his commitment to allotting additional resources to the Manhattan DA's Vehicular Crimes Unit, as well as his intent to curb dangerous driving with prevention techniques currently applied to other potentially deadly behaviors. Vance also said he plans to approach traffic crime through the "community justice" model [a concept explained in this PDF], working with NYPD precincts to identify specific problem areas.

Much of today's event -- co-hosted by the Cardozo School, Transportation Alternatives and the Tri-State Transportation Campaign -- was devoted to what other states are doing to hold killer drivers accountable. We'll delve into that in a follow-up post. Vance said that he, too, plans to look nationwide to keep up with case law.

"I have a lot to learn," he said. "I will be an active student."

Via TreeHugger, Copenhagenize reports that Volvo is in the final stages of testing technology to improve safety for people outside its products -- a "pedestrian detection" system available in S60 models next year:

It is meant to spot all pedestrians in front of the car as well as off to the sides in a 60 degree angle. It will warn the driver with a red flashing light on the windshield if the car is on a collision course with a pedestrian.

If the driver doesn't react quick enough it will brake automatically up to 25 km/h and stop by itself if the car is traveling under 25 km/h.

The system cannot recognize bicyclists yet, but engineers are working on it.

At first blush, a car on the lookout for pedestrians seems like a can't-lose safety measure. But a lot depends on how drivers compensate, knowing that their vehicles can mitigate their own lapses in judgment and attention. Might a safer, smarter car lead people to take more risks and exercise less care behind the wheel?

Since this is exactly the sort of question that comes up again and again in Traffic (recipient of the 2008 Streetsie for best book), I emailed author Tom Vanderbilt to get his take on the merits and drawbacks of Volvo's new tech. Here's what he wrote back:

It's hard not to be of two minds about this. On the one hand, I'm all for personal responsibility and putting the driver in charge. On the other hand, there are certain times when even the most cautious driver might be plagued by some shortcoming in perception or attention -- e.g., a few months ago I almost hit a cyclist because I did not see them in my right-rear blind spot, and I wasn't expecting a cyclist to be there. It's unfortunate that it doesn't work at night, given the overrepresentation of pedestrian fatalities at that time, partially having to do with visibility. But in any case the real question is whether even with negative behavioral adaptation there's still a net safety gain. And the other bright spot is at least someone besides Honda is actually thinking about pedestrians from the car's point of view.

Continue...

There's still time to submit photos for our next slide show. We're looking for pictures of bikes at work -- hauling, delivering, getting the job done. International submissions are definitely welcome.

The shot below, showing the Santa Cruz candy man on his way to hawk his wares on the boardwalk, captures the spirit perfectly. It comes from Richard Masoner, the author of Streetsblog Network member Cyclelicious.

A couple of specific items on our wish list: messengers, pedicabs and food delivery. The ordinary stuff, you know?

In case you didn't get a chance to see our two earlier slide shows, check them out. One is on bike traffic (that beautiful thing), the other on cars and trucks hogging space that could be used by people.

Send your pics to me at sarah [at] streetsblog [dot] org, or tag them with "streetsblog" and "workbike" in Flickr.

We want to put up the results on Friday, so get your pics in by Thursday morning if you can.

And thank you.

Vice President Joe Biden will return to his home state of Delaware today to announce that California car company Fisker Automotive will reopen a shuttered General Motors plant to build a moderately priced plug-in hybrid that goes by the code name Project NINA.

Fisker's investment in the Delaware plant was made possible by a $528 million loan from the U.S. Department of Energy, which has offered $8.5 billion since June to producers of plug-in hybrids.

When that $8.5 billion is combined with the DoE's $2.4 billion in stimulus grants to car battery producers, Bloomberg notes that the Obama administration's total investment in low-emissions autos has topped $11 billion in six months -- about $500 million more than the annual budget of the Federal Transit Administration.

The DoE loan to Fisker has attracted its share of media scrutiny, with the Wall Street Journal suggesting that former Vice President Al Gore's backing helped the company win government support.

Henrik Fisker, CEO of his namesake company, responded that the loan was conditional and "will be repaid, with interest, to the American taxpayer," telling critics of the NINA cars' $40,000 price tag that "any new technology is expensive."

Fisker also noted that this year's $11 billion haul is just the beginning of Washington's investment in hybrid electric cars -- the market for which remains unproven. During the hectic days of last fall's financial bailout, Michigan lawmakers secured enough funding to guarantee $25 billion in loans for makers of more fuel-efficient cars. (By way of comparison, the U.S. DOT estimates that the nation's transit networks need $50 billion to get their equipment into a state of good repair.)

The loans to Fisker and Tesla, which got $465 million from the DoE in June, come from that $25 billion pot. And the government gave the hybrid automakers an undeniably good deal -- interest rates as low as 5 percent, compared with up to 20 percent on the private market, and a repayment window of 25 years.

Will the government's growing subsidies to automakers dissuade conservatives from claiming that transit is the nation's only subsidized mode of transportation? The chances aren't good.