<mclarke@...> wrote:
> St. Nick is already a bike lane south of the hospital.  How far north does
> St. Nick even go?
>
> At 01:50 PM 1/14/2010, you wrote:
>
> Based on traffic congestion, Broadway would be a poor option - St. Nicholas
> is pretty clear, and Amsterdam would be a possibility, though going all the
> way east, one might as well use the Harlem River path.
>
> R
>
> RoughAcres/RL McKee
> 447 Fort Washington Avenue, Suite 63
> New York, NY 10033
> M: 917.526.0050 • E: rlmckee@...
> W: http://www.roughacres.us
> __________________________________
> Principal, RLM Marketing & Advertising
> Member, Community Board 12 (Manhattan) - ON STRIKE:
> http://tinyurl.com/yg3rxvk
> Member, Northern Manhattan Photo Group; Sustainable Streets Initiative;
> Transportation Alternatives; DINAction; RINGarden; Artists United
>
> "The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and
> impartial justice to all its citizens." - Thomas Jefferson
>
> "When I walk through those [Senate Chamber] doors, I leave my Bible
> outside." – NY State Senator Eric Adams, voting "Aye" on marriage equality
> 12/2/09.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 14, 2010, at 1:33 PM, Bradford D. Conover wrote:
>
> That is something to discuss.  I would think, ideally, if feasible, it
> should be same avenue running the entire length of Manhattan.  I do not
> think CB7 has progressed enough so that we know what avenue will end up with
> protected bike lanes to our south in CB7. We could reach out to them for an
> update. That would need to connect through Harlem as well. I believe
> Broadway center isle was part of the upper westside groups "Blueprint"
> proposal.
>
> Based on my own observations in WH, I would think Broadway (on both side of
> center isle) and Amsterdam (already has painted lanes both ways) would both
> be candidates. However, I have not studied or lived in area long enough to
> know best option. Right now, it is the Concept that I am pushing. The
> proposed CB12 workshop would explore concrete alternatives for location and
> type of protected lanes as well as other traffic calming measures. And if
> the community was behind it, ultimately it would be DOT that would probably
> dictate which avenue and what type of protected lane. The Hudson Greenway is
> great, but pushing the only protected bike lane to the outer edges of the
> city is not really incorporating biking within the city as a viable means of
> commuting.
>
> Same for rapid bus service, I think the concept is important to drum up
> support for and which avenue might best accommodate a rapid bus is something
> to be explored.
>
>
> Bradford D. Conover
> Conover Law Offices
> 75 Rockefeller Plaza, 20th Floor
> New York, New York 10019
> (212) 588-9080 (tel)
> (212) 763-5001 (fax)
> brad@...
>
> Disclaimer: Please note that this email does not constitute legal advice nor
> does it create an attorney-client relationship until our firm undertakes a
> formal engagement in writing.
>
> This message may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
> If you are not the stated recipient, please notify the sender immediately,
> via reply email or telephone and destroy all copies of the email message.
> Unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Thank
> you.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Marjorie J. Clarke, Ph.D. [ mailto:mclarke@...]
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 12:59 PM
> To: inwood-livable-streets-discussion@...
> Subject: RE: [Inwood Livable Streets discussion] Robt Jackson will meetwith
> us
>
> 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
> Conover Law Offices
> 75 Rockefeller Plaza, 20th Floor
> New York, New York 10019
> (212) 588-9080 (tel)
> (212) 763-5001 (fax)
> brad@...
>
> Disclaimer: Please note that this email does not constitute legal advice nor
> does it create an attorney-client relationship until our firm undertakes a
> formal engagement in writing.
>
> This message may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
> If you are not the stated recipient, please notify the sender immediately,
> via reply email or telephone and destroy all copies of the email message.
> Unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Thank
> you.
>
>
> ________________________________
> 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
> Conover Law Offices
> 75 Rockefeller Plaza, 20th Floor
> New York, New York 10019
> (212) 588-9080 (tel)
> (212) 763-5001 (fax)
> brad@...
>
> Disclaimer: Please note that this email does not constitute legal advice nor
> does it create an attorney-client relationship until our firm undertakes a
> formal engagement in writing.
>
> This message may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
> If you are not the stated recipient, please notify the sender immediately,
> via reply email or telephone and destroy all copies of the email message.
> Unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Thank
> you.
>
>
> -----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!