\u201cWe\u2019re trying to balance both those issues of having enough space for both the bike lane, and the moving lane, and the loading zones,\u201d said the project\u2019s manager, Preston Johnson, at a CB2 Traffic and Transportation Committee meeting on Wednesday<\/a>. \u201cSo it\u2019s a street with a lot of users and we\u2019re trying to balance all of those users.\u201d<\/p>\n \t\t\tRecommended<\/p>\n \t\t The agency\u2019s proposal would convert the currently east-bound protected bike lane into a two-way crosstown path, between Varick and Chrystie Streets. By year\u2019s end, DOT plans to complete with the western section between Varick to Centre Street, and finish up the remaining six blocks to Chrystie Street next year.<\/p>\n The redesign belongs to DOT\u2019s years-in-the-works redesign of Canal Street<\/a>. The agency wants to add more space for pedestrians and cyclists between the Manhattan Bridge and the Holland Tunnel. For cyclists, the crosstown paths will provide a key safe route from the East River bridges to the Hudson River Greenway, the nation\u2019s busiest bike path.<\/p>\n Rather than install a bike lane on Canal itself, DOT decided bike riders should take Grand Street across town for the most part, before reconnecting to Canal on the less busy western end at Varick Street and to the Manhattan Bridge via the two-way bike lane on Chrystie Street .<\/p>\n DOT plans to remove Grand Street\u2019s \u201cfloating\u201d parking lane that currently sits between the existing bike lane and moving traffic on the south side, and install the eight-foot bike lane, along with another three feet for a barrier. <\/p>\n Cars still get the majority of the roadbed, which is 34 feet for most of the stretch, with a moving lane and a parking lane. The National Association of City Transportation Officials recommends against<\/a> two-way bike lanes at just eight feet, saying those \u201cshould be avoided except on short street segments.\u201d The Grand Street bike lane extends for 16 blocks. <\/p>\n DOT has installed far wider paths in recent years, including the 16-foot two-way bike lane on 31st Avenue in Astoria<\/a>, along with the double-wide bike lanes on Second Avenue<\/a>, Third Avenue<\/a>, Sixth Avenue<\/a>,\u00a0Ninth Avenue<\/a>,\u00a010th Avenue<\/a> and\u00a0Queens Boulevard<\/a>. Even the Bloomberg-era bike lanes on Prospect Park West<\/a> are two feet wider.<\/p>\n Manhattanites urged DOT to shave off more space from motorists and give it over to cyclists and pedestrians. One brought up the deadly consequences of slim paths and pointed to the fatal crash in May between a cyclist and an illegal e-scooter rider on the Queensboro Bridge\u2019s<\/a> bike path. At 11 feet, that passage is actually three feet wider than the path DOT proposed for Grand Street.<\/p>\n \u201cFour feet is almost dangerously narrow for two-way,\u201d said resident Elias Schultz at a CB2 Traffic and Transportation committee meeting about Grand Street on Wednesday. \u201cE-bikes can go quite fast, we don\u2019t want head-on collisions like we saw on the Queensboro, so I would just wonder if you could reduce the width of that kind of extra, XL, fat moving lane by one or two feet\u2026 but not if it will delay further.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThere are so few available safe cross-town travel options for cyclists in this part of Manhattan,\u201d Schultz added. \u201cMaking Grand Street two way is just huge.\u201d<\/p>\n Another resident, who identified herself only as Cassidy, said a tight two-way cycle path would leave everyone unhappy. \u201cA two-way bike lane that\u2019s too narrow is not going to please anybody, because it\u2019s going make the bikers act crazier, they\u2019re going to bump out onto the sidewalk, the pedestrians aren\u2019t going to be happy, so I would love to see DOT take more space away from vehicle storage,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n That dissatisfaction boiled over in a heated debate over whether DOT should even move forward with the path. \u201cOne day, you will all be elderly and frail,\u201d said resident Irene Wu at the committee meeting. \u201cAnd when you\u2019re waiting for that emergency vehicle to get to you, minutes will feel like hours and you will hope, you will wish, to have these traffic lanes back that were taken away for these bike lanes.\u201d<\/p>\n However, protected bike lanes offer unfettered access for first responders, who are otherwise obstructed whenever car traffic backs up, noted DOT\u2019s director of the cycling and micro-mobility unit. <\/p>\n \u201cEmergency vehicles are using these two-way lanes for access along these corridors,\u201d Shawn-Paul Macias said at the meeting. \u201cThe idea is to provide options in the city, right, that\u2019s one of the goals, get more people out of cars, hopefully freeing up the street for emergency vehicles.\u201d<\/p>\n \t\t\tRecommended<\/p>\n \t\t One member of the CB 2 committee still questioned the idea of diverting bikes onto Grand Street in the first place, rather than keeping them on Canal Street or another adjacent crosstown road.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve never liked the Grand Street cross [connection],\u201d said Dan Miller. \u201cI\u2019ve always thought that something can be worked out either south of Canal or on Canal. So I would vote against it.\u201d<\/p>\n DOT\u2019s Manhattan borough commissioner cited vague \u201cconstraints\u201d of space and traffic on Canal Street, as well as wanting to get the project going this year, for its reasoning behind opting for Grand Street. Canal has six lanes for the movement and storage of cars on, and congestion pricing reduced demand on the roadway<\/a> by about one-fifth.<\/p>\n \u201cGiven some of the space and traffic constraints on Canal Street, we proposed this bike lane on Grand Street, with a connection on Canal Street,\u201d Danielle Zuckerman told the CB 2 committee on Wednesday. \u201cI think just given the implementation schedules and resources this year, we\u2019re implementing a segment of Grand Street this year, as well as a segment of Canal that includes some of the pedestrian spaces and curb extensions. So we\u2019re hoping to get both of these things in by the end of the season.\u201d<\/p>\n Supporters of the project still called on DOT to move ahead with the bike lane, even if it is imperfect. \u201cThere is not room on Canal, so it is our best shot at getting a cross-town bike lane,\u201d said CB 2 member Janet Liff. Chris Sanders, a Manhattan safe streets advocate, added: \u201cGrand Street for the protected bike lane makes the most sense to connect the [River] path safely with the Manhattan Bridge. It\u2019s not perfect, but I support it.\u201d<\/p>\n Several members of CB2, meanwhile, argued that DOT should hold off on Grand Street until it wraps up installing new traffic signals on the two-way bike lane on Lafayette Street and Fourth Avenue.<\/p>\n \t\t\tRecommended<\/p>\n
\n \t![\"DOT](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Duggan-Canal-2-e1757621698973.jpg\")
\n \t\t<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Grand-Street-bike-lane.png\")
The new Grand Street bike lane won\u2019t be so grand. Graphic: DOT<\/p>\n
\n \t![\"Fixing](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Manhattan-Bridge-Arch-2-e1753316883182.jpg\")
\n \t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
![\"Eyes](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/IMG_8725.jpeg\")