Park Slope says: “One Way? No Way.” CB6 says: “Let’s Study It.”

In the aftermath of last Thursday’s CB6 transportation committee meeting on the DOT’s proposal to convert Sixth and Seventh Avenues in Park Slope, Brooklyn to one-way arterials, some observers are noting that the motion that came out of the meeting may not accurately reflect the input of the nearly 700 people who came out to oppose the plan. As Norman Oder points out at Atlantic Yards Report, the language voted on by the committee leaves the DOT plenty of leeway.

Judge for yourself. Here’s the text:

Motion 1: CB6 thanks DOT for their efforts to improve pedestrian safety and facilitate the flow of traffic in and around Park Slope as dialogue and discussions are always beneficial; however, we request that DOT not proceed with their proposal to convert 6th and 7th Avenues from two-way to one-way streets at this time because there are too many questions about the impact of this change and how it would affect the neighborhood’s traffic flow and pedestrian safety.

We further request that DOT continue to work with the Community Board and the Park Slope community in resolving Park Slope’s very real traffic and pedestrian safety problems. For example, the perceived/actual high rate of speed of vehicles traveling on 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West, and the congested Union Street approach to the Grand Army Plaza . By working more closely with the Community Board and community we are committing to work with DOT to produce an improved set of remedies and actions designed to further enhance pedestrian safety and facilitate the safe movement of vehicles within our community.

Motion 2: CB6 would table making a recommendation on the 4th Avenue proposal until after such time as we have had a chance to engage DOT in a more comprehensive discussion of the traffic planning needs and challenges facing the Park Slope community.

Streetsblog’s Aaron Naparstek (who, full disclosure, is a member of the committee) reported the next day that the committee "fully and unequivocally" rejected the DOT proposal. But AYR’s Oder was correct when he wrote that things were a bit more complicated, and that what actually happened was that "the committee, expressing disapproval, voted to table discussion on the plans until further talks with DOT and implementation of community-requested changes." Watch video of the motion’s passage by Kevin Burget here.

  • The full Community Board, which votes on this proposal on April 11th, and Park Slope’s elected officials, need to understand that anything less than outright rejection of DOT’s proposal will be unacceptable to residents of the neighborhood. In just four days last week, 2,000 people signed Park Slope Neighbors’ petition calling for rejection of the one-way changes.

  • P

    Seriously though, with such strong support for two-way streets shouldn’t there be some movement to restore 8th Avenue and PPW to two way status?

    I understand that PPW is a longer term project because of the complexity of traffic at GAP but 8th Avenue shouldn’t be too much of a problem. (Unless the DOT demands that intersections that currently have stop signs become signalized.)

  • Boerum

    Man, you guys got burned. “Unequivocal rejection” my arse. Now you know how it really works: The Community Board doesn’t serve and protect the neighborhoods. It serves and protects its relationships within the city bureaucracy. A nice little lessson for 700 Park Slopers to absorb….

  • mfs

    I dunno, that resolution seems like a diplomatic version of “hell no”

  • Eric

    mfs, you must be reading a different resolution. CB6’s is about as resolute as cereal that’s been sitting in a bowl of milk for three days.

  • Boerum

    “no” is no. cb6’s resolution is not a “no.”

  • Alice Sandgrund

    It seems that CB6 left lots of wiggle room in their motion. Indeed, they are a bunch of lowly worms.

  • Thats a good one. CBs have no direct accountability to the communities they represent, they are only accountable to the Borough President – just ask folks in the Bronx. Park Slopers should ask Marty if he likes superhighways.

  • Fascinated

    So what happens now? Who on the community board drafted the proposal? (And does this person perhaps have aspirations to political office?) And seeing as the members of CB6 are all political appointees, um, what do we expect?
    We need another rally. It would backfire to piggyback onto the Little League parade down Seventh Avenue (which is in, what, two weekends?). But I guarantee that Marty Markowitz, publicity whore that he is, will be standing at the Ninth Street entrance to Prospect Park to wave on all the young players. And if you happen to shout out a “no way to one way” — say, when the cameras are rolling? — well, I don’t see how that would hurt.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Lander and Levin to DOT: A Safer Fourth Avenue Can’t Wait

|
City Council members Brad Lander and Steve Levin are urging NYC DOT to move forward with safety improvements for Fourth Avenue in Park Slope despite a vote against the proposal by Brooklyn Community Board 6. The Daily News reported today that in response to the CB 6 vote, DOT might take out some of the left-turn […]

Brooklyn Community Board 6 Meeting on 9th Street Ped Safety and Bike Lanes, Park Slope One-Ways, Grand Army Plaza and Red Hook Bike Lanes

|
Last Thursday, Community Board 6’s transportation committee voted to approve bike lanes, traffic-calming and pedestrian safety plans for 9th Street in Park Slope, Brooklyn. A vocal contingent from 9th Street, some of whom are members of the Community Board, are trying to kill the plan. Come out to show your support for a bike lane […]