The Hoboken City Council voted 7-2 to approve a resolution ending the Grand Street bike lane pilot program after hearing opposition against it at last night’s meeting.
By Daniel Ulloa/Hudson County View
Bike Hoboken Executive Director Andrew Wilson was one of several who spoke against ending the pilot.
“First of all, I think it’s really important for us to level set: The old design on Grand Street was unsafe and it led to numerous, real documented injuries of our neighbors. I want to give you one example,” he began.
“Last year, there was a 50-year-old woman, she was walking across Grand Street in the crosswalk, a driver was making a left-hand turn, the driver hit her with the side of her car, she was knocked to the ground, the driver ran over her body with her car before she felt a thump and realized she was running somebody over … I bring this up because the new design prevents this sort of injury from happening.”
Jersey City activist Kevin Davis spoke passionately about the need for bike lanes for safety.
“When I lived in Hoboken, I biked on the Grand Street bike lane and when I moved three blocks away from Hoboken in the Jersey City Heights, I know I’m the boogieman, I still use the Grand Street bike lane, and when you put in the pilot, I used it even more,” he exclaimed.
“I think it’s great, it separates me from the cars and the biggest danger for when I’m biking are cars and I’m gonna make a prediction about what I think happens tonight: I think the votes 5-4 against keeping the pilot, the administration’s gonna keep it anyways, and in four months, they’re gonna get data, no one’s gonna trust it, and none of the five people that are opposed to the current Grand Street bike lane are gonna change their mind.”
Still, other residents and activists felt that this point of view was the exception, not the norm.
“They don’t want it. A few outliers do. Some of them live in Jersey City. They don’t experience it every day. I never see people use it. I use it as a pedestrian sidewalk … Obviously the majority of the public don’t want it,” asserted resident Mary Ondrejka.
“I’m appalled bikers from Jersey City would have the audacity to tell us what to do with our town! They do not pay taxes in our town! Most of the bikers who slip on through don’t live on Grand. We’re not here to accommodate bikers!”
Lauren Rico said she lives on Grand Street and takes care of her grandson and the bike lane makes running errands extremely difficult.
“Have you ever tried to put a three-year-old in a car seat who doesn’t want to get into the car seat, and the carriage, and all his belongings, and traffic is backed all the way up? … They’re screaming at me … and I don’t have a recourse,” Rico said.
3rd Ward Councilman Mike Russo, a co-sponsor of the resolution, said that drivers far outweigh bicyclists in the Mile Square City and that often gets forgotten or ignored.
“This idea was tested for 10 months … Bicycling and micro mobility is still a fringe mode of transportation. We should not have a short-term convenience for a small population that overrides the convenience of the masses,” he argued.
Russo continued that bollard sticks were ripped out by snowplows and took up parking spots, noting that a similar study could be done elsewhere.
“The people who live on this block of this protected bike lane … are being inconvenienced on a daily basis. And the bikers who use it have a once-in-a-while convenience … I’m begging my colleagues: Vote to revert back to it’s original configuration,” he said to applause.
2nd Ward Councilwoman Tiffanie Fisher expressed that “we know the residents in the neighborhood don’t want it” and said former Mayor Ravi Bhalla, now a state assemblyman in the 32nd Legislative District, rammed it through for the sake of good press.
“There was no consideration given to the quality of life, this was a mayor who consistently looked for headlines and a mayor who was a coward as it relates to bike lanes and I’ll give you that example. Way back when, I think it was 2018, there was a conversation about doing a pilot bike lane on Clinton all the way up to the high school or the block before the high school,” Fisher asserted.
” … And they had a public meeting about it, and we had it at Wallace [Elementary School] in the basement and I went to it, I was curious, I was kind of new on the council and just didn’t understand how these protected lanes fit on our narrow streets … It was 98 to 2 [against], and our mayor left in the middle of it.”
She added that the process has been “dishonest” from the onset and the bike lane shouldn’t be discussed further without a public meeting.
“It’s clear a lot of people don’t like it. Some people do like it. I ride in a bike lane. My suspicion is … that most of the opposition is based on convenience. Undoubtedly, it’s been a big inconvenience,” expressed Councilman at-Large Joe Quintero
“I’m in support of this and want to see us keeping the pilot to be clear.”
Ondrejka yelled out angrily.
“Mary, please let him speak,” Hoboken Council President Ruben Ramos said.
“I’m supportive of this because I want to see it to its conclusion. We planned it for a year and let’s keep it for a year. Grand Street is where I feel the safest,” Quintero continued, emphasizing data collection should continue until the pilot ends after one year.
Later, 1st Ward Councilman Paul Presinzano, the other co-sponsor of the measure, said he supports the ending of the pilot since many were against it at a town hall meeting held on the matter.
“It appeared before an election. Nobody was consulted from the area. I’ve counted bikes. I’ve counted infractions … I did a study back in 2021 … The only thing that’s increased on two wheels is e-delivery,” he declared.
“When we have residents show up to a meeting, and they’re passionate … this council needs to open its eyes and pay attention.”
5th Ward Councilman Phil Cohen said this is an issue that is important to everyone and acknowledged the inconveniences, but said there are still positives.
“The jury is out whether this is good. Clearly a lot of people have their minds made up. But I have heard from people who do use it … It helps business, and it has people safe,” he expressed.
Ramos said he’d be voting for the resolution since bike lanes around the city’s permitter make sense, but bike lanes in the interior on narrow streets are more difficult to navigate.
The governing passed the resolution 7-2, with Cohen and Quintero voting no.
“What will be the plan to start to revert its original configuration?” Russo asked.
“I’ll get back to you,” Business Administrator Jennifer Gonzalez said.
Editor’s note: Chief news correspondent John Heinis contributed to this report.
Like cycling and bike lanes can and do increase safety tremendously. However, this PILOT was imposed on the community, lacked any meaningful input and done without much forethought. A perimeter bike lane makes a ton of sense and would be very beneficial. That’s an idea that is simply overdue.
As for the three people of Bike Hoboken with one from California dictating policy, that simply makes no sense in a city of 55,000. The traffic in Hoboken is now problematic, the impact from the overdevelopment and is not going away. Once 5pm rolls around, even earlier, the roads are becoming jammed up with parents rolling in their SUVs and kids, workers coming and going and all the ills that overdevelopment delivers including pollution.
Understand that some feel this as a loss. It was done with no planning and combined with the Ravi bollards, a total disaster for ego, power and central control. Oh and Mary has been walking on designated bike paths for years. She thinks its for her. Maybe someone should tell her she’s not a bike and to get on the sidewalk before she’s run over.
First of all enough is enough, bike transportation coordinator??? Really why not just include it in the parking authority?? This is exactly whats wrong with government. I just returned from the Netherlands you know where Europe has got transportation right fir 1000 years. Share the road and stop wasting $, go Redwings!