Location: Let's talk about the Summer Streets program. Has it gone as good as you would have hoped?

Mr. White: You know, when the city first announced Summer Streets, we were thrilled. The indications from other cities are that when streets are given over to biking and walking on weekends, it's been a huge success, but skeptics here in New York thought that not enough people would come out; but we have just had throngs of people coming out walking and biking, and it has really just exceeded our expectations for success. We are calling the summer of 2008 the 'Summer of Car-Free Streets,' and a few years from now we might look back at this summer as the summer when car-free streets hit the big time and people woke up to the enormous latent demand for car-free living and walking.

Were there any objections from businesses during Summer Streets?

The feedback from businesses really depends on what type of business you are talking to. Restaurants love it. They are seeing many more customers, not just during the event, but also after it from people who are lingering in the area. Parking garages hate it because they're parking fewer cars. I am not too worried about parking garages.

Do you think the increase of cycling in the city is indicative of a short-term or long-term trend?

All of the long-term trends point to more bicycling and public transit use. We are seeing a convergence of realizations right now that the more bike-friendly, the more pedestrian-friendly, the more transit-oriented the city is, the better the city does. I think that many decades from now many people will look back to the car-crazy 20th century as an anomaly. And I think that the 21st century is going to bring a return to what cities were in the first place, which is human interaction and exchange, and you simply can't maximize that if your streets are engineered for cars.

Last year was one of the worst years in recent memory for bicyclist fatalities. As long as people are being killed, cycling seems like it will be nothing more than a secondary mode of transportation. What are you guys doing about it?

Cycling is not inherently risky. What makes cycling risky is streets that are not designed for cycling. If you look at cycling in cities that have been catering to cyclists for many years, like Amsterdam, you don't see high injury or fatality rates. To change the equation on N.Y.C. streets, we encourage a wider application of protected bike lanes. That's probably the No. 1 way to insulate cyclists from many of the dangers that exist on our streets. There is much more that needs to happen on the enforcement side on speeding and reckless driving. Streets must be safer if we're going to see people cycling and walking in much higher numbers.

How do you compile stats for injuries and fatalities?

We have a Web site at crashstat.org that is state of the art. It renders on an easy-to-read map the historic rate of injuries and fatalities in New York, both counting pedestrians and cyclists. Right now, the limiting factor is getting timely data. That needs to change, and we are hoping that we are coming close to the day when monthly crash data will be posted to the Web, instead of how it is now, with data being put out every two or three years. That is critical to understand the problem as it exists, and to see the patterns in crash maps. Crashes are not random, and many of these accidents are preventable.

What about the issue of bike storage? Is it problematic if cycling commuters don't have a safe place to keep their bike?

I would put secure bike parking at the top of the list with secure bike lanes. The Department of City Planning did a survey a few years ago of would-be bikers, and it found that the lack of safe storage was the No. 1 deterrent. A bike is no different than a stroller or any other useful but sometimes bulky object, and you should be able to bring it inside. I am very surprised at the number of developers and building managers and owners that don't recognize how easy it is to enable easy bike access to buildings, and we hope to see progress on this.

Let's talk about Mayor Bloomberg. His second term is winding down and he has been involved and interested—to a degree—in changing the way people get around in N.Y.C. How do you rate his mayoral record on that score?

Well, I think he has certainly done more than his predecessors to raise the sustainability flag, and PlaNYC has certainly been an ambitious undertaking. We are all disappointed that we lost the first round of congestion pricing. We all learned a lot that first round, and there are ways that congestion pricing can be tweaked so that it's more equitable and more effective in reducing traffic. I think the final analysis of Bloomberg's green legacy can only be ascertained a year or two from now when we see how parking policy is addressed, because parking policy is out of control. Off-street parking is proliferating at an alarming rate and threatens to eclipse a lot of the gains that have been made improving our bicyclist and pedestrian environment.

What do you say to the commuter who lives nowhere close to convenient mass transit, and the easiest way for him or her to get to work is by driving?

To be fair, many drivers don't have a great transit alternative, but the majority of drivers have a decent transit option. A few years ago, we released a study that showed that a majority of those who drive into N.Y.C. have a transit option and they are just not taking it, because they prefer their own car. To get some of those drivers to switch to transit … it's going to take a series of carrots and sticks that in the final analysis are going to benefit everyone. The other thing we are seeing on this issue is that more motorists want other options. Whereas before it was like, 'You'll pry my cold, dead fingers from my steering wheel,' now it is like, 'Help me get out of this thing. I am getting fat, I'm wasting money, give me a decent transit alternative.' You must be worried about the M.T.A.

Everyone is worried about the M.T.A. The M.T.A. has a credibility crisis on its hands, and they need to become much more transparent if the public is going to trust them with their fare and toll money; and so we're looking to the Ravitch Commission to help the M.T.A. recognize what is necessary to solve many of its problems, and what it's going to take to get the necessary leadership from the State Legislature. I hope it's not too late, because the debt bomb has already started to explode, and if we had already started congestion pricing, for example, we would have hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds, and now that's going to be a bit harder. And it's not just going to be congestion pricing. It's going to be reinstating the commuter tax; it's going to be looking at new sustainable sources of revenue to dig the M.T.A. out of the $17 billion hole it's in.

Last question: mayoral race. Are there any candidates that you guys are supporting?

First, let me say that the 2009 elections are going to be extremely important, and we are looking at the 2009 elections as the make-or-break year for sustainability solutions being expanded or being rolled back. Right now, we are talking to a number of candidates and educating them about not just continuing Mayor Bloomberg's legacy but also expanding it. We like what we see from some of the candidates, but in the coming months we are going to ask them to be much more specific about what they are going to do to ensure that our transit system is brought to a state of repair, and that necessary expansion programs are done and done on time, and that the city's investment in the M.T.A. continues to increase, not decrease as it has done over the last several years.