C.B. 4 refashions Ninth Ave. at meeting

Volume One, Issue 23, February 23 - March 1, 2007

By Chris Lombardi

As Community Board 4’s Transportation Committee met on Wednesday night in the C.B. 4 offices high above Times Square, members could be heard speaking of Amelia Chiemienti, who was killed on Feb. 7 at the dangerous intersection of Ninth Ave. and 16th St.

Although the evening began with a discussion of bus traffic and grew heated with proposals on charging money for driving in midtown, without a doubt, the climax was a presentation on the future of Ninth Ave. and possible changes for the corner where Chiemienti was hit.

Proposals for the area included eliminating two northbound lanes on Ninth Ave. between 14th and 16th Sts., converting that space to either a median or an expanded sidewalk on the west side of the avenue.

Jo Hamilton, chair of the Greater Gansevoort Urban Improvement Project steering committee, along with C.B. 4 Transportation Committee member Joshua David, said that in the wake of Chimienti’s death, they asked planning consultant Samuel Schwartz to devise proposals for the future of Ninth Ave. between 14th and 16th Sts. They emphasized that the Department of Transportation hopes to start re-directing traffic, with interim detours and other temporary measures, after meetings in early spring, after which they will work on more permanent measures.

“Before they do, however, we wanted to get the committee’s input about some options,” said Hamilton. All of the meeting’s proposals were to be drawn up based on “the principle that the space of those northbound lanes not go back to usage by cars,” she said, and also include a northbound bike lane. The committee ended up endorsing these principles on Wednesday night.

Hamilton then presented three options, two of which created a median in the middle of Ninth Ave. to be used for green space, tourist information or other non-driver uses yet to be determined — and one of which would narrow the avenue significantly below 14th St. while aligning it with Hudson St.

Comments about the median from committee members included:

“You could do a nice green space there.”

“In plans like that, someone always ends up in the wrong lane, and they spend a lot of time driving against traffic, trying to get back.”

“You know, this committee did propose a pay toilet in the area awhile back. One of those nice French ones!”

The third choice, favored by Transportation Committee co-chair Jay Marcus, took the extra space and instead created a significantly broader sidewalk on the western half of Ninth Ave. It also included a pedestrian walkway at 14th St.

“I like this better. You can do something with that space,” said one committee member.

“With that big of a sidewalk, are we in danger of massive sidewalk cafés?” asked another.

“We could zone against that, maybe call the sidewalk something else,” answered a third.

“Notice that this proposal takes 16th St. from a three-signal intersection to a two-signal,” noted Hamilton, asking for comments.

As the discussion ended, with Hamilton promising to take the suggestions back to Schwartz, who will forward them to D.O.T., one committee member said: “I’m looking forward to very large sidewalk cafés.”

Just prior to this discussion, the committee tackled a more global approach to traffic snarl when Brad Hoylman, general counsel for the business group Partnership for NYC, talked about his group’s “Growth or Gridlock?” study. Hoylman said they had found that congested traffic, most of it below 60th St., costs New York $13 billion a year in unrealized business and lost productivity, prompting the Partnership to strongly push for improved management and design of freight-loading facilities in Manhattan, increased fees for on-street parking, with fewer special parking permits; an integrated transit system including upgraded bus, ferry and commuter rail; and charges for both vehicle use of certain roads and entry into highly congested zones.

This last recommendation, known as a “congestion charge,” would be enforced by an EZ Pass-like system and the use of cameras at intersections. Such pricing, according to Hoylman and the Partnership, has already helped London generate $238 million for public transit while eliminating 17 percent of daytime traffic (about 70,000 vehicles) in their central business district. Of these, more than half shifted to transit, 20 percent to 30 percent changed their trip route, and 15 percent to 25 percent shifted to carpool, bicycles or changed the time they chose to travel, said Hoylman.

The committee agreed to draft a letter in support of the Partnership’s proposal, addressed to Mayor Bloomberg and Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, and add a note endorsing the “regional rail” approach promoted by the Institute for Rational Urban Mobility (and covered in the Feb. 2 issue of Chelsea Now).

Other items on the committee’s agenda included the Port Authority’s newest proposals for a new bus garage above the terminal, which Berthet thought would still not address the lingering issue of charter and tour busses, and the usual raft of sidewalk café permits and street fairs, including relocating June’s massive Pridefest to Eighth Ave. between 16th and 23rd Sts. (see this week’s “The Buzz” for details).

The meeting adjourned after 9 p.m., nearly an hour later than planned, after the committee had properly bewailed the new D.O.T. budget. “They are actually creating new staff positions,” said Berthet, “in order to issue new parking permits!”