August 17, 2004

To Whom It May Concern:

As a cyclist living in Fort Lee, New Jersey who frequently commutes to Manhattan by bicycle, I am extremely disturbed to hear of the planned closure of the George Washington Bridge pedestrian/bicycle path during the evening hours. Not only does this planned closure inconvenience scores of bridge users, but it also seems to make little sense in terms of the purported effect of increasing security.

Closing the bridge to bicycles and pedestrians after 9 p.m. or even after midnight will have the effect of a curfew on those residents who rely on their bicycles or feet for transportation. Even if the buses that cross the bridge will allow bicycles on board while the sidewalk is closed, the buses do not run 24 hrs. In fact, the last time I checked, the last bus crosses from Manhattan to Fort Lee between midnight and 1 a.m. And the mini-buses stop running at 10 p.m., leaving time gaps of 40 minutes or more between the larger-bus crossings. What is a person to do if he or she misses the last bus across the bridge?

I think this presents a serious problem. With a bicycle, or even on foot, one always has an option for crossing the bridge. However, with neither of the above available, a person could be literally stuck on the wrong side of the bridge, unable to return home. Take a cab? Sure, if you've got $25 on you. That's the last price I was quoted on a yellow cab ride across the GWB. I live 2 blocks from the bridge off-ramp in Fort Lee, but because the ride would take me outside the 5 boroughs, apparently the taxi metered rate does not apply.

What other options are there? Hitchhiking? Illegal, and very dangerous. Swimming the Hudson? Obviously ridiculous. So if one arrives at the bridge after the last bus leaves, one is left with the choice of a) Spending the night away from home; b) Spending $25 or so on a 2-mile cab ride (if you can find a cab, and if you have the money!); or c) Doing something illegal in the effort to get home. These three unappealing options basically create a curfew for would-be bridge users without cars. If you're not home by midnight, you can't get home.

And on the other hand, what of those people who commute to jobs or other commitments on the opposite side of the bridge before 6 a.m.? The number of recreational cyclists alone who cross the GWB from Manhattan to NJ each morning before 6 for a pre-work ride would probably astound decision-makers in the PA. Has anyone taken a poll or counted how many people actually use the bridge path between midnight and 6 a.m.? My lifestyle would be severely limited by this planned closure. Bicycle races I attend every weekend in Central Park or Prospect Park start by 6 or 6:30 a.m. There is no way I could attend these races if the bridge were closed until 6 a.m.

I hear that the bridge sidewalk is being closed due to insufficient funding for security guards during night hours. This makes no sense to me at all. Surely the Port Authority and law enforcement realizes that for any potential terrorists or wrongdoers, it would be the easiest thing in the world to get onto the sidewalk from either side of the bridge despite the gates being closed. Perhaps the isolation of a closed sidewalk would only make wrongdoing easier. Potential terrorists could work undisturbed. If there will be guards on the bridge during night hours, then why can't they work while bridge users cross? If there aren't enough guards to keep track of those legitimate bridge users (usually identifiable between midnight and 6 a.m. by their purposeful movement from one side of the bridge to the other), then how will they keep track of potential security threats?

If it is for bridge sidewalk users' own security that guards are needed, then what good does a guard sitting in a booth in one of the towers honestly do to a jogger or cyclist half a mile away on the bridge sidewalk?

This planned closure seems ridiculous to me not only for the severe limits placed unfairly on bridge users who rely on the sidewalk for transportation and/or recreation, but also for the security concerns it dubiously claims to address. The most disturbing thing, however, is the fact that the PA would never even consider closing the GWB (or any bridge) to vehicular traffic for anything but a clear and present security threat, despite the obvious fact that vehicles present a much greater security hazard than pedestrians or cyclists do.

Why discriminate against residents of NY and NJ who do not own cars? Why not close one vehicular lane of the GWB and use the funds saved for security on the pedestrian/bicycle path? Perhaps if the decision-makers involved are forward-thinking at all, they will discard the unfair sidewalk closure and work on a solution to keep access to the bridge open to all users while maximizing security.

Respectfully,

Katherine Lambden