Streetsblog New York City

Today on the Streetsblog Network, a couple of very thought-provoking posts.

First, Living Car-Free in BigD calls jaywalking an indicator of livability, connected to the idea of the woonerf, or shared street space. Car-Free's author notes how in his city -- where jaywalking is not the norm -- a good traffic day for pedestrians is one where the signals aren't working at all. That's when drivers are forced to negotiate each intersection as human beings rather than as machines:

Taking to the streets in Midtown Manhattan. (Photo: nydiscovery via Flickr)

Have you ever noticed how much safer and more polite Dallas drivers are when traffic lights are out, operating as blinking reds and the drivers are left to their own devices, responsible for their own safety. Interesting how they begin to cooperate with other drivers, no? Well, I have noticed.

Similarly, four-way stops are drastically much safer than any other form of regulated intersection. One reason is because of reduced speed in areas where stop signs are utilized rather than signals. The other primary contributive factor, is that (although not necessary due to literally written protocol for who goes first at 4-way stops) there is a necessary communication to some extent between the drivers: eye contact, a slow roll to indicate that "I'm moving. Hold back buddy," maybe even a honk or two...or this.

Over at The Urbanophile, Aaron Renn takes on the always difficult topic of race in a post called "The White City." Renn writes about how Midwestern Rust Belt cities need to engage their African-American citizens in any move toward more progressive transportation policy, and that successful policy change must arise from the local community, no matter what color it is:

What's needed in places like the Rust Belt are a mixture of indigenous solutions and imported ideas that are tailored to the local community. It can't just be trying to buy urban widgets from elsewhere like some sort of "public transit in a box" solution. The Midwest would do well to consider developing an indigenous urban R&D program to mitigate this.

Race aside, Renn has a point. What we see every day across the Streetsblog Network is the incredible variation in regional experience. What's right for Portland won't necessarily be right for Atlanta. What's exciting is that people around the country and the world are learning from each other as never before.

Clarence recently dug up a few unused nuggets from last year's junket to Melbourne, Australia. Watch and see how curbside space in residential neighborhoods has been repurposed for plantings that double as traffic calming treatments. Whatever red tape they had to hack through to plant trees in the roadbed, not just on the sidewalk, they've hacked through it in Melbourne. Have to say, though, the trees planted in the bike lane (or the bike lane painted around the trees) had me scratching my head.

Earlier this month, Streetsblog Capitol Hill reported on the fallout from Congress' failure to prevent an $8.7 billion "rescission" -- fancy legislative talk for the cancellation of funds -- from taking effect on September 30. Though media coverage focused largely on the rescission's impact on road projects, the lost money has hit clean transportation hard.

Existing law required the rescission to affect all funding categories proportionally, meaning that state DOTs would have to take back a share of highway money equivalent to the share of canceled funds for bicycle and pedestrian paths (a.k.a. "transportation enhancements" or TE) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), which allows road money to be used for transit.

But some states had already obligated all of their available funding in certain transport programs, and so DOTs were given flexibility to cancel more than a proportional share of money for TE, CMAQ, and Recreational Trails, another federal outdoors program.

How many states took the opportunity to cancel a bigger slice of TE, CMAQ, and Trails money? The folks at advocacy group America Bikes have crunched the numbers, and here's what they found:

• 46 states, in addition to Washington D.C., canceled more than a proportional share of transportation enhancements money: AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, and WY.
• 34 states, in addition to Washington D.C., canceled more than a proportional share of CMAQ money: AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, HI, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MO, MN, MT, NH, NC, NM, OH, OK, OR, RI, SC, TN, TX, UT, WA, WV, WI, and WY.
• 31 states, in addition to Washington D.C., canceled more than a proportional share of Trails money: AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, IA, KY, ME, MA, MD, MI, MS, MO, MT, NY, NJ, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, UT, VT, WV, and WI.
• 4 states opted to send less than a proportional amount of transportation enhancements money back to the U.S. DOT, making extra cuts elsewhere: AL, AK, MA, and UT.
• 14 states opted to send less than a proportional amount of CMAQ money back to the U.S. DOT, making extra cuts elsewhere: AL, FL, ID, MA, MI, MS, NE, ND, NV, PA, SD, VT, and VA.
• 16 states opted to send less than a proportional amount of Trails money back to the U.S. DOT, making extra cuts elsewhere: AL, AK, CT, ID, KS, MN, NE, NV, NM, NC, ND, TN, TX, VA, WA, and WY.

No matter how you slice it, however, the rescission took a serious toll on clean transportation funds as well as those for roads. Meanwhile, Congress has yet to come to decision on how to approach the Oct. 30 deadline for extending the 2005 infrastructure bill one more time.

Editor's note: The above data has been updated to reflect current reporting as of Tuesday, Oct. 20.

Transportation's effects on public health are rarely discussed by policy-makers, but they remain very real -- and the National Research Council (NRC) put a number on them Monday, reporting that cars and trucks have about $56 billion in "hidden" health costs that are not reflected in the price of oil or electricity.

In its report on the "unpriced consequences of energy production and use," the NRC was acting under a congressional mandate to map the health impacts of various energy sources. Climate change was not factored into the NRC's conclusions, but the report nonetheless had a grim tale to tell about transportation fuel consumption.

The NRC found that the manufacture and burning of fuel for U.S. cars and trucks produced $56 billion in external costs in 2005, the year that the report was requested. That hidden cost averaged between 1.2 and 1.7 cents per vehicle mile traveled, depending on the type of fuel used.

In discussing the relatively small difference between the external costs of conventional gas-burning autos and the costs of hybrids or electric vehicles, the NRC wrote:

Although operation of the [electric vehicles and grid-dependent hybrid vehicles] produces few or no emissions, electricity production at present relies mainly on fossil fuels and, based on current emission control requirements, emissions from this stage of the life cycle are expected to still rely primarily on those fuels by 2030, albeit at significantly lower emission rates.

In other words, hybrids and electric vehicles are still likely to consume serious amounts of coal -- at least until the nation adopts an effective renewable electricity standard. The NRC notes that "further legislative and economic initiatives to reduce emissions from the electricity grid could be expected to improve the relative damages from electric vehicles substantially."

Given that cleaner electricity is a significant priority for transit and freight rail as well, perhaps it's worth mentioning: transportation reform is also electricity and energy reform.

The Community Board 8 committee vote this month in support of protected bike lanes for Manhattan's Upper East Side was nothing short of momentous. Wednesday's full board decision presents an even bigger hurdle, though by no means an insurmountable one. The reason, says Caroline Samponaro, director of bicycle advocacy for Transportation Alternatives, is community input.

"This past month at CB 8 has really been all about neighbors convincing neighbors," Samponaro says. "Residents of all stripes came out to support protected lanes at the last committee meeting, and it made a big impression on the board."

Turnout will be crucial for tomorrow night's meeting, when board members should be reminded of the benefits of protected bike lanes for all street users, including reduced crossing distances for pedestrians and fewer conflicts between sidewalk users and cyclists who don't feel safe riding in street traffic. Longtime UES advocate Glenn posted salient talking points earlier today.

If you've ever made the case for safer streets to Community Board 8, or if you've been waiting for an opportune moment, now's the time to follow up or follow through.

WHAT: Community Board 8 Full Board Meeting
WHEN: Wednesday, October 21, 6:30 p.m.
WHERE: Ramaz School Auditorium, 125 E. 85th St.

A sobering post today from the Streetsblog Network on the importance of preparing our transportation system for the effects of climate change. Megan McConville at The City Fix reports on a panel titled "Perspectives on Adaptation to Climate Change," hosted by the Engineers Forum on Sustainability.

The message? "We can no longer focus exclusively on avoiding the unmanageable, but must begin managing the unavoidable."

McConville writes:

Photo by WhosThisValGirl via Flickr.

Dr. George Eads of Charles River Associates discussed four impacts of climate change that will affect our nation’s transportation infrastructure:

1. Sea levels will rise, jeopardizing coastal roadways, railways, airports and transit systems.
2. An increase in the number of hot days and heat waves will influence how infrastructure withstands high temperatures.  For example, highways could experience increased rutting (the carving of deep grooves by traffic) due to softer asphalt.
3. A greater number of intense precipitation events could cause added transportation disruptions, as could more frequent strong hurricanes.
4. Finally, rising arctic temperatures could threaten ice roads and highways built on permafrost in Alaska.

Transportation professionals must act today to minimize disruptions to the nation’s transportation systems tomorrow.  First, climate change must be incorporated into decision frameworks.  Federal, state, and local governments, in collaboration with owners and operators of infrastructure, should inventory critical infrastructure, particularly in vulnerable coastal areas.  When making investment decisions, governments and private infrastructure providers should consider climate change adaptation in their long-term capital improvement plans, facility designs, maintenance practices, operations, and emergency response plans.  They should apply risk-based investment analyses that weigh the costs of adapting infrastructure against the costs of failure.

It's good to know that at least some engineers out there are thinking about these things. But how long will it take this awareness to make it to the local DOT level?

More cheery news from the network: Copenhagenize links to some great videos about the Bike Church of Asbury Park, New Jersey (originally at WalkBike Jersey, we missed it the first time around). Bike Friendly Oak Cliff has a photo of some innovative bike parking at a local tavern. And DC Bicycle Transportation Examiner has pictures of one possible solution to the bike-rail connection problem.

Bike lanes: In some cities people are so desperate for them they'll go so far as to mark their own. Here in New York City, it feels like every time I get on my bike there is a new bike lane -- sometimes on the left, sometimes buffered, and sometimes completely separated from automobile traffic.

I recently had the opportunity to go for a ride with the NYC DOT bicycle boys, who explained the classes of bike lanes and showed off some of these inventive facilities.

Mayoral contender Bill Thompson continues to elaborate on his opposition to the city's expanded bike infrastructure. In an interview published Friday, Thompson told the Downtown Express that just because injuries are down on Grand Street since the installation of a protected bike lane last year, doesn't mean those improvements should be preserved.

According to Dept. of Transportation statistics, accidents of all types are down by nearly 30 percent on Grand St., but Thompson said those were not enough reasons to keep the lane.

“Then you move forward,” Thompson told the Express. “So you'll have a safer street where the businesses are going to wind up closing? That's not what you're looking to do. You're looking to strike that balance so it works.”

He said last week that he would have his transportation commissioner take a new look at any lanes that seemed to be problematic, such as along Grand St. and in Astoria, though he did not promise to definitely close any. He favors bike lanes and suspects ones on wider streets such as on Eighth and Ninth Aves. are working better.

So in Thompson's view, safety gains on Grand Street, proven by measured reductions in injuries, are no match for unfounded accusations that, all evidence to the contrary, bike lanes are bad for business. The implication: car traffic propels commerce even in dense, walkable lower Manhattan. Also, let's not forget that the vast majority of Grand Street's curbside parking has been retained. Eliminating the bike lane would simply allow motorists to resume driving faster and double-parking without blocking vehicles behind them. How is that good for business?

I'm not sure whether candidate Thompson can be swayed by studies, common sense, and the vision of a city where better streets for pedestrians and cyclists attract more foot traffic for local businesses. At this point, it seems pretty clear that his ear is more attuned to whoever whines the loudest.

In an apparent quest to see which local daily can issue the most ridiculously auto-centric assessment of the problems plaguing the public realm, the "New York" Post has some competition.

Commenting today on pending action by the Taxi and Limousine Commission to ban the use of electronic devices by cab drivers while their vehicles are in motion, the Daily News wonders: What's the problem?

According to the News, keeping cab drivers off the phone should only be required when passengers are present -- apparently because News editors believe distracted driving is a mere annoyance, rather than a well-documented threat to public safety:

The present TLC rules forbid cell chatting while cabbies are driving. That's reasonable; you shouldn't have to listen to your hack yack while you're paying $2 per mile, no more than you should be forced to listen to the radio at full blast.

But when drivers are alone, using their cabs as cars -- just like millions do -- they should live by the same rules as the rest of the population.

So instead of advocating for more stringent distracted driving laws for everyone who gets behind the wheel, the editors of the Daily News would prefer that we "cut some slack" to thousands of professional drivers who patrol streets teeming with vulnerable pedestrians and cyclists 24/7/365. Never mind that cell-phone-using drivers, hands-free or no, are four times more likely to be involved in a crash. And remember that national summit a couple of weeks ago, when the U.S. secretary of transportation declared distracted driving a "deadly epidemic"? Honestly, people: Where have you been?

For the record, the Post is in favor of the new TLC rules. And no wonder. It's hard to believe a position so ill-informed as that of the Daily News editorial board could be held by anyone who reads a newspaper on a daily basis, much less publishes one.

Editor's note: After we published this post, DOT contacted us to clarify the scope of the Brooklyn Bridge rehab and to clarify their statement on potential safety enhancements to the promenade. We have updated the post accordingly.

Cyclists and pedestrians have uneasily shared scarce space on the Brooklyn Bridge promenade for years. As people use the walkway in ever greater numbers, it only becomes more crowded for pedestrians, more stressful for cyclists, and more dangerous for everyone involved. Is there an end in sight? In a Times op-ed last month, Robert Sullivan suggested that the upcoming overhaul of the bridge would provide a good chance to disentangle the promenade by giving cyclists their own space. The rehab plan that's moving forward now, however, includes no such solution.

New York City DOT is scheduled to begin a massive renovation project on the Brooklyn Bridge in December, with the contract awarded to Skanska Koch. The overhaul has been in the works since the state DOT listed the bridge in bad condition in 2007, and it will give the bridge some long-needed repairs, taking care of cracked concrete and other structural issues. But there's more to the project than just maintenance:

• Arguing that the on- and off-ramps for car traffic are too narrow, the city will widen many of them from one lane to two.
• Steel safety barriers will be added to the bridge's roadway, to prevent cars from crashing into the East River. These barriers are required for the project to receive federal stimulus funding.
  
• A side project, set to start in 2012, will revamp the gateway to the Brooklyn Bridge on the Brooklyn side by reconstructing the entryway at the crossing of Tillary and Adams Streets.

Overall, the rehab project (which doesn't include the revamp of the Brooklyn-side gateway) is set to cost $365 million, of which about $30 million is coming from federal stimulus funding.

None of that money is slated to improve the bridge for the thousands of pedestrians and cyclists who use it every day. DOT has no plans right now to address the crowding on the promenade, but the agency does say it will act accordingly if a crash proves that safety enhancements need to be made. Update: DOT contacted us to clarify their statement, saying they were speaking about monitoring street safety in general, not the specific condition that exists on the promenade. "The agency is always looking for ways to improve safety," said spokesman Seth Solomonow. "We take appropriate actions no matter where they're needed in the city. We're not waiting for a crash to prove that improvements need to be made."

A walkway overhaul, he added, would not be a natural fit for the rehab project, which is limited to structural problems with the ramps, not the whole span. "We are not rehabbing the whole bridge," he said. "What you drive on and what you walk across is not going to change."

It's only a matter of time before some poor tourist gets hit and injured (or worse) by a cyclist trying to navigate through the crowds that the bridge attracts. And when the revamped Brooklyn-side gateway starts enticing more cyclists and pedestrians onto the bridge, the problem is only going to get worse.

There's no shortage of ideas to fix the problem. The city could, as Sullivan suggests, install a protected bike lane on the roadway. Or they could construct a bike path over one of the road beds. It is not out of the ordinary for New York City's bridge reconstruction projects to improve bike-ped infrastructure. One phase of the Williamsburg Bridge reconstruction, completed in 2002, included the addition of a new 18-foot wide footpath/bikeway in addition to structural repairs. With hundreds of millions of dollars now targeted for the Brooklyn Bridge, there's got to be a better way to allow cyclists and pedestrians to safely use it.

Today on the Streetsblog Network, Portlandize is talking about freedom -- the freedom to move about your community without fear, the liberty to make use of public spaces as a human being, not as the operator of a motor vehicle. It's a post that gets to the heart of the issues we talk about on our blogs every day of the week:

This doesn't look much like freedom. Photo by Daniel Greene via Flickr.

[M]any cities have taken space that was the domain of people, just people, and have pushed them out of it, unless they are in automobiles... [M]uch of small town America has become simply highways with strip malls alongside. Most often, this was done without any consultation of the citizens -- for instance, Interstate 5 was laid out in North Portland, and all the residents who lived in the path of the freeway were simply told they had to move, no choice about it.

What this resulted in was an increasing suspicion, and finally a confident opinion in many places, that if you weren't in a car, you didn't belong outside of your house/apartment/yard. It became more and more difficult to move around outside of your own yard if you weren't in a car in many places. Because of this, many places in the U.S. have inherited cities populated with metal boxes instead of trees, grass, flowers, and most notably, people. Because of this, many places in the U.S. have inherited cities that are noisy, smelly and stressful. Because of this, many places in the U.S. have inherited cities in which their children must stay inside, cannot go anywhere on their own, where children and parents alike feel afraid to enter public space, and where, once you step out your front door, you must be on guard.

Last week we put up a slide show of cars and trucks hogging space around the country and the globe. The images, sent in by blog network members and readers, illustrate the pervasiveness of the problem.

At the same time, the response indicates the growing number of people who can see that we've got a problem here -- and who are organizing to do something about it. And that is how change begins.

More form around the network: Copenhagenize finds a growing number of ads that make cycling look downright normal -- and attractive. Planning Pool has the results of the American Planning Association's 2009 Great Places in America contest. And if you haven't seen the video of a girl getting a ride to preschool on her dad's Xtracycle yet, Car Free Days has it for you. You want freedom? That's what freedom looks like.

Editor's note: Today we have a guest post from Democratic Rep. Earl Blumenauer, who has represented Oregon's 3rd Congressional District since 1996. He is the lead sponsor of the House's "CLEAN TEA" climate legislation and founded the Congressional Bicycle Caucus.

With much excitement, today we are launching the Livable Communities Task Force -- an official initiative of the House Democratic Caucus that will work to improve community livability and Americans’ quality of life.

This means reducing the nation’s dependence on oil, protecting the environment, improving public health and investing in housing and transportation projects that create jobs and give people more commuting choices.

As Chairman of the Livable Communities Task Force, this is an exciting moment for me. When I first came to Congress 13 years ago, people sometimes looked at me funny when I used the term “livability.” They had no idea what I was talking about. Today, not only are blogs like yours dedicated to transportation, infrastructure, and livability, but other leaders in Washington are talking about how to make our communities more livable.

The Obama administration is leading on this issue, having recently established the Partnership for Sustainable Communities with six “livability principles” for coordinating policy across the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

What a difference a year makes.

The Task Force is made up of 20 members from around the nation who are leaders on everything from transportation and building efficiency to renewable energy and community gardening. In the coming months, we will work with members of the administration to hold briefings and strategy sessions on everything from the livability provisions in the energy and climate legislation that passed the House to the pending transportation re-authorization.

After spending a lifetime in public service working to make our nation’s communities more livable, it feels like the pieces are coming together. America was ready for change when President Obama came into office. It is exciting that in 10 months we have moved legislation that will rein in global warming pollution. With the leadership of Secretary LaHood and Chairman Oberstar, we are gearing up for a transportation bill that will make smart investments in low-carbon transportation, give people more commuting choices, and reduce America's dependence on oil.

It is an honor to lead this unique Task Force and, and I am eager to work with Congressional leaders and members of the administration who are committed to protecting our environment and making our communities safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

The biggest thing going this week is Wednesday's Manhattan CB 8 vote on protected bike lanes. Trash trucks, climate change and bike fashion round out a full slate of events. And if you live in Queens and have been thinking of joining TA, be sure to check out Tuesday's LIC party.

• Monday: The Five Borough Bike Club's monthly meeting features a Nova Scotia travelogue. 6:30 p.m.
• Tuesday: Transportation Alternatives will hold a membership party in Long Island City especially for Queens residents. 6:30 p.m.
• Tuesday: A Greenpoint/Williamsburg community group with possibly the greatest acronym ever -- Organizations United for Trash Reduction And Garbage Equity (O.U.T.R.A.G.E.) -- will discuss ways to minimize the impact of garbage trucks in the area. 7 p.m.
• Wednesday: Manhattan Community Board 8 is scheduled to vote on a resolution in support of protected bike lanes for the Upper East Side. 6:30 p.m.
  
• Friday: The Steven L. Newman Real Estate Institute will host a conference on the important role local transportation infrastructure plays in the city's economy. 8:30 a.m.
• Saturday: The Time's Up! Green Apple Climate Tour will precede a ride highlighting future sea level rise. Events will be held at 2 p.m. and 4 p.m., respectively.
• Saturday: The Hub in the West Village hosts what is billed as the city's first fashion show featuring clothes to wear while bicycling. 9 p.m.

Keep an eye on the calendar for updated listings. Got an event we should know about? Drop us a line.