bike racks placed in parking spots on franklin ave

Chloe, I like your not-so-thinly veiled threats against the members of the board in real life.

Stay classy.

Chloe as I'm sure you are aware, Franklin Ave is named after Benjamin Franklin, but did you know that during the early part of his life he was a slave owner and even advertised rewards for runaway slaves in his newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette? It was not until his later years that he became an abolitionist and founded an anti-slavery society. People change for the better or worse, and being a 5th generation native new yorker I can attest that neighborhoods also change for better or worse. You can fight the best fight fairly or not, but change whether you view it for the better or worse, is inevitable.

Stop using reason as a crutch, whynot. Let go of those crutches for one minute.

I also tagged along to the meeting (would love to hear some more perspectives on the proceedings from those who were there), and a few other things were said/resolved that I think bear repeating.

In reaffirming their original position (support for the bike corral), the board also asked the DOT to look into three additional issues: 1) turning the old parking meters on Franklin between St. Johns and Eastern Parkway bike racks (thereby adding more bike parking), 2) asking the DOT to report back to them in the spring on their assessment of the usage and success of the corral, and 3) adding parking meters/muni meters to Franklin north of St. Johns (to Park or Prospect - the northern boundary was not confirmed). This last recommendation, if implemented, would be particularly advantageous for both the disabled (who are permitted to park, with placards, in metered spots without paying or observing time limits: http://www.nyc.gov/html/mopd/html/resources/trans_parking.shtml) and the merchants and churches who rely on car traffic (as turnover at parking spaces would increase, making it easier for folks driving in to find parking along the retail strip). The transportation committee can only make recommendations, but the DOT agreed to look into these matters.

While I hear the arguments choleroyale and those at the meeting make with respect to the disabled, much of the meeting centered on the question of PROCESS. Those petitioning for the removal of the corral were (correct me if I'm wrong) most upset with the fact that they felt they had not been consulted, and thus felt that their voices had been deemed unimportant by those in power (or those with the wealth, time, and privilege to know how to speak to power - in this case, a successful new business). I understand why this frustrated people at the meeting, too, as the chair (for reasons understandable from his position) was insistent that the process did not keep the committee from considering all relevant issues (including the disabled and churchgoers) in their original deliberations.

The process (for better or worse) is what it is - everything that happened was perfectly legal and perfectly by-the-books, though that doesn't make people happy - but I can't help wondering whether the package offered at the second meeting - a bike corral, new meters (which would improve car access for churches and the disabled), new sidewalk bike parking, and a report from the DOT on the success of the corral - could have been much less polarizing if it had been more fully explained and understood the first time around. I'm not blaming anyone, just noting that it seems like there may have been room for compromise.

Is there still room? Chloeroyale, would you be interested in joining with others to push for meters along Franklin and for holding the DOT to task to report on the success of the corral in a few months' time? The Crow Hill Community Association also announced at the meeting that they want to offer their own meeting as a place for dialogue on this issue - would such dialogue, especially if it worked toward these goals, help improve the problem of process (which seems so central)?

I understand why this corral has become such a flashpoint - it's a malleable symbol for everything from environmentalism to gentrification. What I'm wondering is whether there's a way to fit it into a more comprehensive effort to improve the streetscape for everyone on Franklin (bikers, the disabled, drivers, and everyone else) going forward.

At the meeting, the DOT said that they are seeing "more bikes than expected" at the corral (given that it's the dead of winter, hardly prime bike-riding season) and that the bikes they are seeing there turn over twice as fast as cars parked along the street (which, in theory, means more customers coming and going for local merchants).

One interesting question asked by a committee member about other bike corrals (just in Brooklyn, as it was phrased) was about which businesses partner with the DOT on corrals. In Park Slope and Williamsburg, they're coffee shop/cafes, and on Smith Street, it's a deli/bodega. The gist of the question seemed to be "which businesses see these corrals as beneficial," but they didn't get that much further into it.

It does seem logical that only certain businesses are going to be interested in the corrals.

For example, I doubt a fancy restaurant would see a corral as beneficial because "dressing up and going out to eat" doesn't always match with riding a bike.

Likewise, I would imagine that businesses who tend to serve people who are young and healthy (many bars, coffee shops, etc) would tend to want a corral because thats exactly who tends to ride bikes.

Conversely, it is sort of hard to imagine a business that serves a customer base that is disproportionately older or disabled wanting one. I don't expect to see one requested by the proprietors of a Diabetes Clinic in the near future....

The diabetic centers are usually able to get around the "no street spots will be reserved for PWDs" rule, by instead requesting Loading and Unloading Zones. Access-a-ride, and the Ambulettes than use these spots.

...You might be able to get a business on Franklin Ave to successfully request such a zone. In my experience, the parking agents are ok with a person with a disabled permit parking in them.

Chloe:

Sadly we both live on the same planet, the only planet we have or likely will have for the foreseeable future.

That being the case, it would be best if we all could just get along. (as per Rodney King).

Before we continue beating each other over the head about one parking space, it might be helpful to understand the bigger picture here.

The reason I believe that bikes are becoming more popular throughout the US, not just Crown Heights or Brooklyn, is that people realize that cars are not sustainable. Sadly America relies heavily on fossil fuels for transportation. We are now entering an era of "extreme energy" where the remaining fossil fuels can only be obtained through extreme measures, such as hydrofracking, tar sands mining, deep sea drilling or drilling in virgin rain forests. The costs of obtaining these fuels are very high, and these costs are being passed on through to the consumer.

The impact of these costs will fall hardest on the poor, who are often people of color. So race is definitely a consideration in this discussion and people of color have an interest in developing a green economy.

I think it's not a coincidence that our first black president is making this green economy a priority for his second term.

So let's look beyond turf fighting to see what's best for Crown Heights, and especially people of color. Bikes which are more affordable, more sustainable and improve the health of the user, unlike cars which are unaffordable, unsustainable and a major contributor to our obesity crisis, should be the first choice for transportation in congested areas like Franklin Avenue. For those unable to ride bikes, such as the disabled, I've noticed that many are making use of electric scooters. Personally I'm always a little anxious when I see handicapped plates because I'm concerned that driver might be on medications or might have some other impairment. Certainly operating an electric scooter on a sidewalk is a lot safer for all parties concerned if the operator is in any impaired.