The DOT should, in conjunction with this effort in Central Park, ban motor-vehicle traffic in Prospect Park, remove all the signals and crosswalks, and turn the Prospect Park drives into truly shared spaces for pedestrians, cyclists, roller-bladers and scooter-ers. Let eye contact rule, and let NYPD and Park Enforcement crack down on cyclists who fail to cede right of way to pedestrians. And then we can see which system makes these similarly designed parks safer.

This is a great idea, but CP and PP aren’t apples to apples. The former is a cluster f#ck at least an order of magnatude greater than the latter. I totally agree that steps one and two for both are get the cars out 24/7 and tear down the traffic lights, though.

This DOT proposal is depressing. We’re still configuring the loop around 20 unnecessary hours of driver shortcuts a week. Why is there no leadership on this? F the DOT.

Why doesn’t the barricade go across the entire length of the car lanes when cars are not permitted to be in the park? Then pedestrians would only have to cross one lane of bicycle traffic and the choke point would be more likely to slow any fast cyclists.

Activated signals are in place in Prospect Park and they don’t work. People don’t know to push the beg buttons to cross, largely because that’s not a thing that anyone has to do outside the park. Sadly, we won’t be able to make real progress until we rip the band-aid off and get cars out altogether.

Great comments Andy. The way to do signal activation is to use motion sensors and shorten crossing distances at every crossing. As soon as ped steps off curb, but before ped steps into cyclist/runner/official vehicle traffic, first phase of signal change is automatically activated–flashing red for traffic on the loop, 5 second countdown for ped waiting at barrier to cross. After 5 seconds, ped gets green to cross, loop traffic has solid red. Or something like that.

And yes, keeping the runners on the outside of the loop would limit conflicts.

It all depends upon time of day, location, etc. 20 mph is certainly reasonable on a summer day at 4 PM. It’s not at 11 PM or 6 AM. If this speed limit is enforced as you say, which is probably exactly what will happen, the park will now be worthless to any serious cyclist looking to do a few laps at a pace high enough to be worthwhile from a fitness/training standpoint. That includes those considerate enough to do their laps when the park is nearly empty. I know these types of cyclists tend to be derided around here, but they pay taxes like any else, and their needs are just as legitimate as people who want to jog, walk their dogs, play basketball, whatever. If we can’t accommodate them in the park, then start building facilities which can (not velodromes but road courses as these are two different types of riding).

I honestly feel the best solution here involves four things:

1) Ban cars from the park entirely.
2) Remove the traffic signals.
3) Grade separate the busier crossings and fence off the road for at least 1000 feet on either side of the bridge so people crossing are forced to use it.
4) Have physical barriers between the bike lanes and the jogging/walking lanes.

3) isn’t as far-fetched or expensive as it sounds. I’ll bet there’s only a handful of really busy crossings meriting grade separation. In those cases, have the roadway dip down so pedestrians don’t have to climb stairs or ramps to cross the bridge. That’s the main reason why people often shun grade-separated crossings. It’s nearly winter now, and the park will not be heavily used until late spring. That means it’s a great time to get started building these crossings as it will entail minimal disruption.

As for speed limits, I’m of the opinion that any vehicle not legally required to have a professionally calibrated speedometer can’t legally be held to speed limits. That basically means once cars are out of the park, there are no legal speed limits for the loop. In practice though, cyclists seldom exceed about 35 mph, even downhill, so we’re not turning the loop into the Indy 500. So long as we grade separate busy crossings, or those at the bottom of hills, speeds like this shouldn’t present an issue.

Beg buttons are terrible for pedestrians for the precise reason you state. Automatic detection, as Steve mentioned, is the way to go.

Bingo, that is what I was getting at. During car free hours, this ceases to be a roadway, it becomes a park path. There should not be cars on it unless there is an emergency. Similar to the west side bike path, the number of cars should be limited to a point where a lane of traffic does not have to be reserved for them. What are we fighting for when we are fighting for a car free park?!

The “beg buttons” they use in Germany are HUGE. They are well placed, conspicuous and light up when pressed so the peds know the light is gonna change. Not against automated detection however. I’ve seen it work well with a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon on a busy street in New Jersey.

I’d rather cycling and walking have their own space. Especially considering that cycling is more or less off limits anywhere else in the park but the drives.

I’m not defending pedicabs, but I don’t think the pedicab driver was responsible there based on what I read. When you pass any vehicle, you need to do it with enough margin and paying attention so that if the vehicle you are passing changes trajectory suddenly, you are able to slow down or avoid it safely (swerving into pedestrian territory doesn’t qualify).

Runners might drift over to the inside of the loop nonetheless as an energy/distance-saving measure, and through force of habit. Behavior would change eventually, but not instantly and it wouldn’t be perfect.

The fences are only being proposed in parts of the park with two car lanes. The idea is that during “car-free” hours, there will still be one car lane available, but the total width will be reduced to make it easier to cross. This is also supposed to slow down cyclists and help prevent the type of crash that took Jill Tarlov’s life (it happened on one of the car lanes, at the 63rd St crossing, which is on the list).

Fences are obviously cheaper, and the park precinct seems to have enough spare time to put them in an take them out every day. They already do that at the park entrances to close them to motor traffic.

Are you sure? I thought they all had two car lanes. If I’m wrong then your worry about cars moving into the bike lane is very valid!

Erik McClure has it right (see his earlier comment): Remove traffic signals altogether, “*Let eye contact rule*, and let NYPD and Park Enforcement crack down on cyclists who fail to cede right of way to pedestrians.”

One sure way to *keep* car traffic in the park is to validate its presence by keeping traffic lights—”pedestrian activated” or otherwise

I’m sorry, but bottlenecking the CP roadway as shown in the rendering is an absolutely horrible idea. The volumes of users of *every* mode are just too high. There’s that, and the speed limit.. fact is, it’s stupidly easy to exceed 20mph on the downhill after Harlem Hill without even pedaling. I get what the impetus for this is, but this particular plan is utter fail.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.
I just don’t understand why most of the posters here also agree with you, but want to crucify a driver going 26 mph in what is basically an identical situation.
Common sense tells anyone who has ever traveled that speed limits need to be set reasonably, or no one will take them seriously. It just seems that everyone has a blind spot to that reality when it affects a mode other than the one they use.

Non-emergency security presence does not require a motor vehicle (shoes, bikes, horses could easily cover the entire park). If there are going to be hours for motorized traffic, sanitation vehicles can do their rounds then.