You have to close the park to cars at all times, otherwise it’s going to keep being confusing.  Those road markings just make no sense.  There’s a bicycle symbol painted on the inner lane, but bicycles are supposed to be on the outer lane when the park is closed to cars.  

Just makes no sense to design a park (!) for driving — and for only four hours a day of driving at that — and then expect everyone to figure it out for the other 100+ hours that cars aren’t allowed in.

Ban cars, repaint the lanes.  Both are good steps the park can take right now to clear up confusion.

I agree with you.

I haven’t been on the loop drive since last week. But when I was there, there were orange barrels, not cones, on the downhill from about Center Drive. As a cyclist, I found them confusing and think that they’d be dangerous when the drive is crowded with pedestrians and cyclists. Plus, I don’t think the barrels will do anything to slow down fast cyclists. I attended the Task force meeting and most people there agreed that the barrels, while appreciated as an attempt to do something, are not the right solution and will only cause more problems.

I agree with E. 18th resident and most people at the Taskforce meeting, until cars are out of the park, it’s difficult to make rules and signs for safe sharing of the park loop of runner, pedestrians, cyclists and others.

You have NO evidence of your assertions… and it’s this attitude that prevents even a simple 3-month study of a park closure.

Simple solution: leave your iPod and cell phone at home.  I have logged thousands of miles running the Prospect Park loop and have never come close to a collision with a bicycle, car, roller skater or pedestrian.  Because I pay attention to my surroundings.  It really isn’t that hard.

No — Because I think that cars in a PARK is an absurd thing. If it was the other way around, would you vote for it?  Let’s say the park roads were never open to cars, but someone says, “Let’s open the park to cars and make the park roads part of the city grid.”  Are there ANY arguments that would justify desecrating a park like that?  I’d say NO. 

Yes, Fred, but I didn’t actually make a claim.  You said, “the cars will simply jam the surrounding streets, increase air pollution, delay bus service and truck deliveries.”  Those are CLEAR assertions based on nothing.  What is the volume of traffic in the park?  Can the surrounding street absorb that volume?  Would behavioral/route changes ameliorate any changes in volume?  etc. etc.  ALL of which can be TESTED and MEASURED.  You have done none of that.  You have simply said “Banning cars is not the answer” and provided baseless assertions to back up that statement. Do you see the difference?

I live on one of the streets next to the park and believe me, I am not a person who supports any more traffic on the periphery of the park. But personally I just don’t see people driving through the park to get from one place to another. I think most people who drive through the park do it to drive through the park. I do not think banning cars in the park would affect traffic very much at all. But like TB said all of this is conjecture until we see the results of actual studies. Speaking of which I thought there were some done a couple of years ago, but I have no idea where we can find the data.

I was in the park Sunday and observed the orange barrels. I was confused because I did not see any construction vehicles. Now I understand the purpose of the barrels.

I also think the roads should be clearly marked concerning bikers/joggers.

Is it realistic to put speed restrictions on bike riders? There is danger in everything, but if you can not ride fast in the “safety” of a park, then where can you ride fast? However, if a speed limit is imposed bikes will have to be equipped with speedometers. Also, the bikes will have to undergo annual inspection to ensure the speedometers are working properly.