Skip to content

Collapse

Jonathan

I disagree with Brad. 1.The list below allows us to present ourselves as concerned citizens with a
I disagree with Brad.

1.The list below allows us to present ourselves as concerned citizens
with a broad agenda of livable-streets improvements that will benefit
everyone, the young and the old. If we frame our agenda as a question,
like "What can we do in CB 12 to create livable, walkable, bikeable
streets that are not swamped with noxious and threatening automobile
traffic?" it will allow the councilmember to contribute his own ideas
for this and for us to help educate him as to the problem (seven
automobile bridges, the Trans-Manhattan Expressway, Henry Hudson
Parkway, Harlem River Drive etc.) in a mutually beneficial dialogue.
Let's get that question on his agenda, and then we will benefit in two
ways:
A)He will help us work with DOT and the community board to accomplish
his ideas along those lines, and
B)He will help us reach out to other neighborhood groups that are
already organized and have existing congruent agendas. This is one
thing that elected officials are really good at doing, and we should
take full advantage of it. As we are all aware, our organic group
membership on the whole is exceedingly soft and apathetic.

2.Presenting a larger, more adventurous proposal allows him to reject
it for his own particular reasons. For instance, imagine this
dialogue:
Us: 	We'd like you, councilmember to advocate for a protected bike
lane up and down Broadway.
Him: 	Well, that's very interesting. As you know, I'm a fierce
advocate of bicycling. In fact, I made sure that the Hudson River
Greenway stretches all the way through my district, from 125th Street
to Dyckman Street, and I'm working with my counterparts in the Bronx
to stretch that all the way through Inwood Hill Park and across the
Henry Hudson Bridge.
Us: 	Yes, but that doesn't help cyclists who just want to go up and
down Broadway.
Him: 	There are a lot of different interests on Broadway, such as the
hospital, the bus terminal, the small businesses like gas stations and
funeral homes, and the MTA, and we have to balance everyone's
interests. I'll see what I can do, and remember, I was able to get the
Greenway connected all the way through to Riverside Park via the new
West Harlem Piers Park in my district.

3.In order to accomplish our longer-term goals, we will need to form
coalitions with other neighborhood groups that are already organized
and have existing agendas. In order to do that, it would be helpful to
be as incremental as possible so that we are able to combine our
agenda with the agenda of those other groups in a way that moves
everything forward. We should use the attention of elected leaders in
order to help us form those coalitions so that we can actually get
something done.
.
Thanks for reading all the way through,

Jonathan

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D.
<mclarke@...> wrote:
> What I mean is, which north south corridor, what arrangement on the street,
> and which corridor for rapid transit.
>
> At 12:43 PM 1/14/2010, you wrote:
>
> I am suggesting that we get CB12, and the local politicians, including
> Jackson, to support the same kind of motions that both CB 7 and CB 8 passed
> recently asking DOT to study the feasibility of a protected bike lane on a
> N/S ave. (CB8 also asked that the bike lanes be incorporated in rapid bus
> transit plans for 1st and 2nd ave.).
> I have raised this with CB12 Trans comm and reported on it in other emails.
>
>
> Bradford D. Conover
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D. [ mailto:mclarke@...]
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 12:05 PM
> To: inwood-livable-streets-discussion@...
> Subject: RE: [Inwood Livable Streets discussion] Robt Jackson will meetwith
> us
>
>
> Can you be more specific about what you're asking for?
>
> At 11:19 AM 1/14/2010, Bradford D. Conover wrote:
>
> There is a section in Dist 7 that covers Broadway, so I would think
> Jackson's support would be necessary eventually, particularly if the upper
> Westside proposal to DOT ultimately selects Broadway as the location for the
> protected lane. I am not sure it needs to be specific at this stage, just
> find out where he stands on the issue, and if he opposes, why?  The idea is
> to plant and reinforce the seed, that this is the direction many CBs in NYC
> are headed and that a bike lane to be effective needs to be a complete
> network.  If DOT moves forward with such improvements enhancing the
> livability (and market value) of other neighborhoods, CB12 should not be
> left out. I also think an express bus running n/s in a protected lane on
> Westside is an idea which should be encouraged, particularly in view of
> DOT's planned one year shut down of the no 1 subway for major repairs. The
> issue of bus congestion at the end of the line, is a related, but separate
> issue.
>
>
> Bradford D. Conover
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Rabinowitz [ mailto:jonathan.rabinowitz@...]
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 10:34 AM
> To: inwood-livable-streets-discussion@...
> Subject: Re: [Inwood Livable Streets discussion] Robt Jackson will meetwith
> us
>
> Brad, look at Jackson's district at this site:
> http://gis.nyc.gov/doitt/nycitymap/
>
> Use the "show additional data on map" feature to see the city council
> districts. The seventh (Jackson's) district's EASTERN boundary between 178th
> St and 170th St is Haven Ave. It's a shame, but Jackson will likely just
> punt to Ydanis on your proposal as it covers Washington Heights.
>
> District 7 does cover Broadway between 159th and 125th however
>
> Rita, do you have a bicycle educator in mind?
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Bradford D. Conover <brad@...>
> wrote:
>> Unless I am misreading them, except for crosswalk, the proposals
>> relate mostly to Inwood.  How about his participation/support and/or
>> hosting of the traffic calming workshop in spring with CB12 to
>> consider asking DOT to study/construct a protected bike lane on an
>> avenue running N/S to connect WH/Inwood to proposed bike lane on
> avenues on upper west side?
>>
>>
>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D. [ mailto:mclarke@...]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:36 PM
>> To: inwood-livable-streets-discussion@...
>> Subject: Re: [Inwood Livable Streets discussion] Robt Jackson will
>> meetwith us
>>
>> Looks like a good list.  Let's get a little more specific on some.
>> What repairs on the Greenway?  What exactly are we asking him to do
>> about the summertime auto rallies?  Also, I think we want a couple of
>> speed bumps on Dyckman west of Henshaw.
>>
>> At 11:13 AM 1/13/2010, you wrote:
>>
>> So there we go!
>>
>> 1. Build a separated bike lane along RSD between Dyckman St (RING
>> Garden) and the N-bound onramp to the highway as part of the DGC;
>>
>> 2. Fix the perennial crummy condition of pavement on Broadway with
>> concrete;
>>
>> 3. Ensure access to the Henry Hudson Bridge bike path;
>>
>> 4. End the summertime auto rallies on Dyckman St near the Marina;
>>
>> 5. Repair the Greenway between West 181st St and Dyckman St;
>>
>> 6. Add a crosswalk on Bennett St. at the IND 190th St Station.
>>
>> Anything else?
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D.
>> <mclarke@...> wrote:
>>> The only hitch is that Jackson's district is northeast of Broadway
>>> and doesn't cover Dyckman between Broadway and Nagle. Ydanis
>>> Rodriguez has the rest. IIRC, the Greenway connector should go along
>>> RSD between the RING Garden and the Greenway, yes?
>>>
>>> Yes, Riverside Drive is often forgotten, but it is a speedway and
>>> part of the proposal.
>>>
>>> Things on Jackson's side of the neighborhood include the Bx12 idling
>>> on Isham St,
>>>
>>> I thought that was east of Broadway.
>>>
>>> the auto rallies held on Dyckman near the marina, access to the Henry
>>> Hudson Bridge bike path, the crummy condition of the Greenway between
>>> West 181st and Dyckman, and the lack of a crosswalk on Bennett St at
>>> the 190th St IND station.
>>>
>>> yes and the crummy condition of Broadway.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Aaron Wolfe <aaronewolfe@...>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Let's make sure he knows about all of our goals, but I think we
>>>> should focus on the Dyckman connector because of the momentum that
>>>> project seems to be gaining.
>>>>
>>>> Aaron
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Jonathan Rabinowitz
>>>> <jonathan.rabinowitz@...> wrote:
>>>>> Dr. Clarke,
>>>>>
>>>>> I would have responded earlier were I living in Jackson's district.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest meeting him in February. That gives us an entire month to
>>>>> get the word out, and we can set the agenda at the January meeting
>>>>> (Tuesday 19th, at the yoga studio).
>>>>>
>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D.
>>>>> <mclarke@...> wrote:
>>>>>> Good question.  I'm stymied at the lack of response (other than
> yours).
>>>>>> My first thought is to have our meeting start 45 minutes before we
>>>>>> tell him to show up, but we also need to have a decent showing.
>>>>>> How do we do this other than make phone calls.  But we don't have
>>>>>> phone numbers.  We need to get this!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At 07:52 PM 1/10/2010, you wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, when?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D.
>>>>>> <mclarke@... > wrote:
>>>>>> A quick note on my way out (again).  Ran into Robert Jackson at
>>>>>> RING this morning (our electronics recycling day, which he
>>>>>> sponsored) and I said we want to meet with him, do we need an appt
>>>>>> on a Friday.  He said he'd come to meet us wherever we meet.
>>>>>> Let's set up a time.  So we need to get our "asks" in a row and
>>>>>> get this going!
>
>