Today’s Headlines

Gelinas: Which Mayoral Candidates “Get It” on Livable Streets? (City & State)
Queens Woman, Accused of Killing Husband with SUV, Charged With Second-Degree Murder (Post)
Weiner Really Likes Bike-Share, But Still Wants To “Rip Out Your F*cking Bike Lanes” (WNYC)
Daily News Finds Reluctance to Put People’s Safety Over Moving Traffic on Queens Boulevard
E-Hail Having Tiny Impact on Taxi Industry, Mostly Off-Hours and in Outer Boroughs (NYT, WSJ)
“I Love Bicycles,” Says Jim Walden, Repeating PPW Process Lies (American Lawyer via Bklyn Spoke)
Times Union Columnist: Still More Questions Than Answers on How Cuomo Will Pay for Tappan Zee
Couldn’t Make It to Voice Tunnel at Summer Streets? WNYC and Animal Have Got You Covered
Bike Rental Companies Aren’t Going Out of Business All Over Town Due to Bike-Share (WNYC)
676-Acre S.I. West Shore Site, Once Planned for NASCAR, Sold for Development (Advance)
Overnight GWB Road Work to Leave One Upper Level Lane Open in Each Direction for Next Year (DNA)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

tyler

Who cares what Weiner thinks about bike lanes… He’ll never be in a position to ever have a say about them — he won’t even be elected to his co-op board, never mind public office. Maybe Louise Hainline will let him join her little group — even though I’m sure she would never allow him to live in her building.
kevd

Could someone tell me what this tortured sentence means? Ignoring the “an urban planners” – I have no idea what “have trouble finding parking in the outer boroughs” is intended to imply.

“If this seems a bit Johnny-come-lately to a popular idea, the rest of Weiner’s 11 transportation and infrastructure policies in the booklet seems like what you’d get if you focus grouped an urban planners who have trouble finding parking in the outer boroughs. “
Anonymous

Gelinas’s City & State piece is as clear an indication of the “arrival” of the Livable Streets movement as I’ve yet seen. Bravo to her (and ditto for her superb Post column yesterday on traffic violence) and to all of us who have labored to bring about the changes she summarizes so beautifully.
Anonymous

Can we just never hear from A****** W***** again?
kevd

I wonder what percentage of the Post’s readership suffered aneurysms after reading her fantastic piece, yesterday!
Anonymous

The best thing about the Gelinas piece is her refusal to quietly pass along the “bike lanes are okay so long as the ‘community’ approves it” line from the candidates. Every time someone says that, she smacks them down. And good.

If I were her editor, I’d send out to do a piece on Jim Walden and the rest of the PPW pro-speeding, pro-double-parking crowd.
Bolwerk

None of the candidates polling in the high single digits or better “get it.” In fact, I’m not sure any of them get it period, except maybe Sal Albanese – to my knowledge, still the only candidate to support subway expansion.
Reader

I also like this part:

“Advocates have done a good job, too, of making sure they don’t confine their efforts to wealthier neighborhoods. Earlier this month, the streets geeks were out in Brownsville, Brooklyn, to inaugurate the poorer neighborhood’s first bike lanes, and are constantly making the point at community meetings that the most dangerous streets for children to cross are outside of core Manhattan.”

Bill De Blasio has been criticizing TA for years, saying that it’s too focused on wealthy neighborhoods. He’s trotting out his “Tale of Two Cities” baloney and applying it to plazas and bike lanes. Glad to see Gelinas looking beyond the sound bites.
Anonymous

You’re right–that’s a really good part.
Anonymous

I have more trouble with “an urban planners”.
Anonymous

Agreed. The problem with Gelinas looking into which candidates “get it” is that the conclusion seems to be that none of them really do.
kevd

I don’t think the DOT has been as active as they should have been in terms of bringing livable streets improvements to un-gentrified and un-gentrifying neighborhoods.
That there are now some Bike Lanes in Brownsville and a plaza in E. NY are good steps. But a look at the NYC DOT bike map makes it clear where most of those sorts of improvements have taken place. Though I wouldn’t blame TA for it.
kevd

Yeah. Thats a typo. But really, what are they implying?

That they are too over-educated and effete to find the parking that is clearly there (so no more should be added)? That they don’t drive and therefore don’t understand how hard it is to park? That as professional urban planners they don’t care about finding space for parking when it is needed?

I am genuinely confused. It feels like a slight, but I can’t understand in what way.
Anonymous

Don’t know. I think it’s a slight against Weiner’s policies rather than against urban planners but I could be wrong.