Not announced or official yet, but:

Tuesday, February 28th @ 6pm in the Picnic House – Public Meeting

We have a task force meeting January 24th, I will report back then.

I've met Natalie (the journalist in question) and she's ok. She's actually pro-bike. But journalism in general has gotten pretty lazy. And this is not exactly front page of NYT reporting. Plus, Brooklyn Paper is under common ownership with the NYPost (Murdoch-owned), and I've been told the editors slant the bike reporting.

At least good to read that the Park admin is pushing back on the hysterical elements of the story.

The Road Sharing Task Force met again last night to discuss proposals to present to the community. Mitch and I represented Kissena. On the whole, I am very excited with their recommendations.

The recommendations will be presented at a public meeting on February 28th. I'm pretty sure it will be in the picnic house like the last meeting. I encourage you all to attend.

For now, they have asked we keep the recommendations under wraps until all community boards and other interest groups have been consulted.

Dear Road Sharing Taskforce Members,



I just wanted to remind everyone that our next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 28th at 6pm in the Prospect Park Picnic House. As you all know, this is a public meeting where we will share the recommendations that have been presented to Parks and DOT. Please let the members of your respective organizations know of this meeting and encourage them to attend. We really want the public to see the proposed changes. I look forward to seeing you all on the 28th.


Hope to see many of you there.

Thanks for the bump Josh,

For those that can make it, come on out. It will probably be packed and have the usual professional agitators, but I hope the ideas presented will be well received.

I'm really bummed to miss this. Was hoping to get to meet the "new sheriff in town" but I'll be in SF.

(Doubtless it will roll smoothly without me though )

I've been reading a lot of crap around the blogosphere that is very negative and weird.

First of all, for anyone who has been paying attention, the task force has made it clear that we are working with all interest groups to design a solution to safely share the park. Cyclists want a safe space as much as pedestrians, dog walkers, etc.

For some reason, this has been either poorly communicated or misconstrued, and many in the public, especially in the cycling world seem to think our task is "figure out a solution to deal with cyclists." So I've been seeing these posts encouraging people to come to fight against the proposals that are trying ban / limit / hurt / enforce against cyclists.

That is not the case. I find the assumption that new sharing ideas will be bad for cyclists to be pretty funny and in a way speak to our collective persecution complex.

BIKE LANE! 10 FEET!

But you should all come out and support. Except Jeff Owens, he might fight with some dog owners.

Task Force Report please!

I guess the cat is out of the bag...

Holy Cow this is HUGE!

I for one, welcome our new Park Overlords.

Yeah, sounds surprisingly reasonable!!! I can't wait for the park west idiots to file a lawsuit.

Thanks, Mike. I bet that calm, rational, considerate input from guys like you and Jules were a part of making this happen. I just wish I coulda been there to tell everyone to ride bikes, drink beer, and go fuck themselves. ;-)

All hail the black market!

I'm really pumped about this outcome. Will we have to stop at lights?

Fantastic outcome; full credit to Mike, aka behind-the-scenes-operator-extraordinaire

What is killing me is that the yahooos over on the prospect peloton list have their panties up in a bunch over the nytimes article. WTF.

You can please some of the people....

@ Joe

I'm guessing part of the deal in giving cyclists a whole lane is requiring stopping at lights. I hope this is only if someone is waiting....i hope.

FYI: nobody can ever say, publicly, that NYPD will not enforce a vehicular law.

There will be a pilot program to test flashing yellow lights and pedestrain activated crosswalk buttons, for which we'd be required to stop at if activated. That is a year or so down the road.

my comment to the PPP yahoo group:

Folks,

It is somewhat hard to get the jist of what is being proposed through a written
newspaper article. So I again encourage you to come see all the slides and
documentation tomorrow.

Cycling races won't be harmed. That was a priority of ours. The right lane will
be reserved for cars during traffic hours (7-9a,5-7p) and when cars are not in
the park: "passing cyclists" and park vehicles. That is us, for the most part.
We want the general rule to be fastest to the right. It will take education to
get this right, but it will work well, I hope. If you would like to be part of
the education process, we will happily embrace your efforts.

There won't be excessive lane marking to make you slip. The middle lane will
remain much as it looks now. There won't be boogeymen or trolls under the bridge
either.

Some of the other ideas you have mentioned (Haig et. al.) are being looked at in
feasibility studies but we were unable to implement them before the spring.

If you are looking for a public park with a DOT roadway to come out and say "run
all the red lights without regard to traffic laws" you are crazy. So you'll need
to readjust your expectations accordingly.

If you have concerns about how enforcement has been done over the winter, please
bring those concerns to the meeting. Bring all relevant details, not "my friend
got a ticket" stories.

Congratulations on living up to your "grumpy" moniker quite well. I'm feeling
like a grumpy old man as I read the negativity!

Best,
Michael

lol

nice work michael

this sounds like a pretty good plan

From what I'm reading - big thumbs up. Seems like a very reasonable proposal, though sadly the entirely unreasonable "car lobby" will undoubtedly be pissed at any encroachment on their "right" to get someplace 3 minutes faster. Fuck 'em.

Most importantly - kudos to Mr. Perlberg and all those involved in helping to drive toward this promising solution - will make the park road more enjoyable for all users....

Nice work Mike. Thanks for representing.

Never mind the peloton folk, they whine and complain about EVERYTHING on that board. I find them much more pleasant in person.

Eric

28feb

a few points on proposed re-stripping plan per NYT article today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/nyregion/changes-planned-for-prospect-park-loop.html?_r=3&smid=tw-nytmetro&seid=auto

1. generally a very big improvement, however, key is to publicize rules and post rules&times of activity ie. when acr are in park.
2. the auto lane really must have a 'BIKE SHARE' stripping indicated so that as joggers area expands and when cars are not scheduled to be in the park that it is known and understood that the far right lane is a "SHARED" thorough fare.
3. cross walks are "zebra Striped" and that the "predominant short cuts are signed to be take CAUTION and be AWARE of motorists&cyclists.

nice job Mike, Mitch etc...
-h

I'm really surprised that the post gave the meeting an accurate characterization:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/prospect_park_traffic_redesign_gets_xtl1dts8HoYrL7qATeMZSI

but then still managed to quote the one slightly wacky speaker in the room.

Anyway, sounds like this will actually happen. Sweet.

My major worry is that because the outer lane will be marked for vehicles -- and for most of the park's hours will not contain vehicles -- there will be strife in that lane. If it is claimed by pedestrians, a very dangerous situation will arise, with cyclists hemmed in on both sides by slower and less linear traffic.

One thing of which we can be certain is that the car lane will not remain empty during non-car hours. The question is, who will take it over?

29feb

attended last nights presentations at the 'picturesque prospect picnic house' and the first round of comments/questions, and i second Jeffrey's comment re:vehicle lane. i spoke to a Task Force member(Lee Silverman) regarding the Vehicle Lane with the suggestion that it be stripped as "Bike Share" similar to any other single lane thorough fare to and his objection centered around the "funnel" at the bottom of the hill and a high potential for confusion when cars are in the park. my thought is that when cars are in the park it should still function as any other roadway would function as a "share"..ie. that cyclists must obey roadway laws (as must motorists) and that they have equal rights to occupy the cartway.

suspect that the Road Sharing Task Force anticipates a Phase 2 elimination of cars from the park however, that is highly optimistic unless it is implemented as part of Phase1 and the confusion in the interim will present unsafe conditions per Jeff's comment above.

another cogent comment was for lights at crosswalks to 1. blink yellow as default, 2. blink red when a pedestrian calls(push button) for crossing, 3. be on full red for stops but only during AM & PM vehicle hours. this will afford a clarity to cyclists for 1A. slow 'Caution', 2A. slow stop/yield to pedestrians crossing ie foot down clip out, 3A, slow full stop along with cars, clip out foot down.

MichaelP please bring these points up to the Task Force Committee with the intention of including them in the Phase1 "stripping modifications" for this Spring 2012.

mtg notes:
phase1 - spring 2012 re-stripping per published revisions. "Predictability"
phase2 - revise/update lights &crossings; add plantings etc at shortcuts to better control intermediate crossings; review inpark jogging/running course; etc

comments/questions/facts:
a. several, re-cars and traffic outside park.
b. one, do not like bike paths on park south av.
c. several eliminate cars all together.
d. define skate board/roller blade use areas or prohibit. / provide "Clarity" & Publish changes well &clearly!
e. provide flashing lights at crosswalks (if expect cyclists to stop some will some will not then chaos/danger).
f. facts per recent in=park study, Average vehicle speeds 35mph! &hill at +40mph.
g. ppk: mornings 7am-9am 700vehicles /hr avg; evening 5pm-7pm 250vehicles /hr avg.
h. (in house KCC consensus that Prospect Peleton folks need to be "educated" in good behavior and good neighbors actions with in the park)

all in all, changes will be an improvement!
-h

@Jeff....I asked about that in a roundabout way at the last task force meeting. I asked, can the fastest cyclist (i.e. someone who is constantly passing) therefore ride in that lane as long as they are passing (i.e. all the time), provided that they yield when park/police vehicles come through? And she said, "yes."

If she makes cyclist access to that lane more explicit she calls too much attention to the fact that cyclists are actually getting a fair bit of the road!

So I think we can take the rule at face value...if you're going faster and need to pass, use it as you need it, as long as you yield to auth'd vehicles. Fast group rides can use it because they're always passing.

The caveat is that we have to be really careful/courteous about yielding to vehicles and sticking to the left side of the lane.

These will be printed as palm cards to distribute:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=1PTI2WJjxWFY95X56wm2HSyQPQk0026X6nK6xbrIvq2i73XQGG_T2Foiu_pxB

Parks would like our help in getting these out to the public, particularly at busy entrances and spots in the park on weekends.

Mike

Good card...they should make giant sign versions and place around park for a few months.

Are they printing the cards? Are you getting a stack of them?