The Jersey City Council failed to introduce an emergency resolution to contract an engineer to begin moving forward on a permanent protected bike lane in the Heights during last night’s meeting.
By Daniel Ulloa/Hudson County View
“There is still some debate around the support of the bike lanes on Franklin and Manhattan Avenue,” began Ward B Councilwoman Mira Prinz-Arey.
“I understand that while the grant is restricted to those locations, if we approve the design, can we move the design to another street or streets should there be a consensus on that?”
Department of Infrastructure Director Barkha Patel said it was likely possible, but the resolution would have to be redone.
Ward C Councilman Rich Boggiano asked how much the engineering contract would be for, to which Patel said $162,000, the same answer she gave during caucus, which includes creating the bike lane design and a construction management budget.
“If it doesn’t pass eventually, we’re out $162,000. Actually, the taxpayers of Jersey City are out $162,000. Something should be done. This is ridiculous!” Boggiano exclaimed.
“I think this should be delayed until we get further knowledge. We have a number of problems in this city that are not being funded.”
Ward E Councilman James Solomon asked how much the New Jersey Department of Transportation grant, which was extended until mid-June, was worth.
Patel responded $670,000, to which Solomon said they should not want to squander that opportunity.
“We really don’t know what’s going on. And to spend any money when we don’t have the full knowledge on is a shame,” Boggiano interjected.
Councilman-at-Large Danny Rivera the Office of Emergency Management (OEM), along with the fire and police departments, said through leadership that they were against the proposal in a recent meeting.
“We are going to vote on something the Public Safety Department stated is not safe,” he noted.
“I’m all for a resolution to maybe put it on another street. I am 100 percent for this project, but we need to make sure public safety is on board.”
He noted there is a school for the blind and a firehouse, among other important businesses, in the neighborhood before he asked to hold off on the vote.
“John, I think this should be delayed until further study. Danny’s 100 percent correct. I know the block associations up there are very, very much against this,” Boggiano said.
“There was a request to add it to the council agenda, so the council is going to decide whether they want to proceed,” Business Administrator John Metro explained.
“Because we cannot amend this resolution now, I cannot vote for this,” Rivera said.
“The comments you’re referring to are not feedback on the traffic safety benefit and the traffic design,” Patel replied, noting that the the resolution wording has to be specific for the grant they were awarded.
“All I need is a motion to add it to the agenda,” Deputy City Clerk Amanda Bransky said.
Ward D Councilman Yousef Saleh asked his colleagues to back him up as he made the motion, which was seconded by Solomon.
“I think our bike advocates are some of the best advocates we have. They did their job. My issue is we have to do a better job of this city. I personally made phone calls and talked to directors in public safety,” stated Ward A Councilwoman Denise Ridley.
She added that other bike lanes in the city were studied further before being added, sharing some of the concerns about public safety as well, before voting no.
“After the pilot was done there was some opposition to doing the full length of the bike lane,” Rivera interjected.
Saleh said he was open to a compromise where the permanent protected bike lane was only on Franklin Street before he and Solomon voted yes.
“I just can’t lose that if we don’t add this to the agenda tonight. We have to give her clear direction on how to move forward,” stated Solomon.
“I don’t want to see that go to waste. I’m going to vote yes,” Ward F Councilman Frank “Educational” Gilmore said after a long pause. He also said they also needed more clarity going forward.
Rivera doubled down that he was not going to go against the recommendations of the Public Safety Department.
“I am not in favor of putting people’s lives at stake here. All we had to do was sit down with public safety once again,” he exclaimed, noting that other bike lanes did not have safety concerns around them.
“We received this information late as a council. I have no problem with bike lanes. It’s a safety issue,” echoed Council President Joyce Watterman, who ultimately abstained beause she said she was not clear on the plan.
The vote was 5-3-1, with Prinz-Arey, Saleh, Solomon, Gilmore, and Councilwoman-at-Large Amy DeGise voting yes, Ridley, Boggiano, and Rivera voting no, and Watterman abstaining.
“This motion failed. This resolution will not be added to the agenda,” Bransky said to a puzzled audience. “It’s six [votes] to add a resolution.”
Enough with the bike lanes. They take up valuable road space, and contribute to traffic and congestion. The roads were built for automobiles, they are financed with money from drivers through registration and gas taxes. The money they already spent on bicycle lanes could have been used to maintain the roads (particularly Marin Boulevard and Jersey Ave).
Even with the protection in place bicycle riders are at risk for injury because of their exposure. The bicycle lanes seem to give them an entitlement and a false sense of security. Regardless of what they (cyclists) do, and how they ride everyone want to blame automobile drivers when there is an accident.