Parks Conservancy, in Betrayal to Mission, Issues Agenda-Driven Report to Integrate an E-Mobility Expressway Around 6 Mile Loop

11/19/2024 by Andrew Fine

Devotees of Central Park awoke to a shocking article in the New York Times today, on how the Parks Conservancy and Sam Schwartz plan to “reimagine” the roadway around the park to accommodate unwanted, high-speed e-bikes and scooters with token consideration of pedestrians, the elderly, children, people with disabilities, and frankly, anyone concerned with safety and serenity in Central Park. Remember, as the Conservancy, the DOT, Parks, and Schwartz Engineering have forgotten, that the presence of the high-speed vehicles was, and is still a “pilot” program. However, like so many of these “pilots”, we know that they are just a ruse. It’s how the DOT, and other City agencies slip in unpopular programs and minimize outrage before eventually making them permanent. Remember also that the “mission” of the Conservancy is that “Central Park as a sanctuary from the pace and pressures of city life, enhancing the enjoyment and wellbeing of all.” While repeatedly mentioning that they consulted “stakeholders” (which wreaks of special interest groups), apparently they didn’t read their own “survey” that listed park-goers concerns in this order: 1) Safety from e-bikes and bikes, 2) Safety at pedestrian crossings, 3) lack of enforcement, 4) pedicabs. While Schwartz does make a few useful suggestions, the entire report seems built around a familiar theme- e-bikes at any cost, safety be damned! Here are just a few points on the report.

1- Pedestrians are encouraged to avoid crossing the Park Drives, instead, they should be directed to “historic arches” and to take the “scenic route” while crossing the park. How many of these arches exist, on the East Side, for instance, between 74^th and 104^th? One! Are seniors expected to walk a mile out of their way just for safe passage? And, why is the time of 3230 wheeled individuals/day prioritized over the 112,000 pedestrians/day who would be inconvenienced.

2- The report states that we should do away with traffic lights, because they are “largely ignored” anyway. They look to reward bad behavior by changing the rules. Not great. How about listening about enforcement, and doing something about it?

3- Suggestion of “Pedicab Reform Working Group”. Say what! How is this for an idea- ban the damn pedicabs from the park! We have all seen their behavior, their absolute disregard for every traffic law in the park, the overloading of passengers, the loud music, and that they are more e-cabs than pedicabs nowadays. Besides congesting the crowded south end of the park, they are predators. They rarely display pricing, and they have the unfortunate habit of ruining the day of a well-intentioned tourists.

4- The report has statistical issues. They claim that 45% of all users of the road are “bicycles”, 3% are other mobility devices, and 48% are pedestrians and joggers. First, the number of pedestrians would be much higher if it were not for the dangerous conditions caused by speeding e-vehicles on the Drives. Second, are we really to believe that only 6% of the 45% cyclists are e-bikes? Really? They also say that 4% of park users use e-bikes to get around the park. If so, why are e-vehicles getting 33% of the roadway? Why not just combine them with the regular bikes and say add signs that slow traffic stay left?

5- Runners. Boy do they get shafted! Do you hear me New York Road Runners, NY Flyers, and NYC Runs? The idea of removing the wooden railing that separates runners from walkers along most of the drive and combining them will make running in the park more difficult, annoying, and impossible at times. We have plenty of tourists. They like staring at the buildings on CPS, taking selfies, etc, we don’t need them where we are trying to run. Further, combining a one way run lane with a two way pedestrian lane has disaster written all over it!

As I mentioned, Sam has thrown a few crumbs to pedestrians. Best of them is the idea of converting the sidewalks of the East 86^th Street Transverse to bike lanes. Despite some logistical concerns, like access to the police precinct, and the mid-park bus stop, this can make sense and would take some of the pressure off the park. He mentions that glaring gap in the pedestrian walkway on Park Drive South that is nonsensical and has to be made contiguous. There is also mention of possible rumble strips, speed bumps or elevated pedestrian crossing where the traffic lights are currently meant to provide safe crossing.

At the end of the day, one has to ask, why? Why is the Conservancy undertaking a “reimagination” to build a Doordash Expressway around Central Park? Who is behind this? Who does this benefit? It’s not seniors, it’s not the disabled community. It’s not families with children. Who are the “stakeholders” that the Conservancy met with 40+ times one on one to concoct such an unwelcome plan?  This totally disregards the original mission of being an oasis from the hustle and bustle of everyday city life. I would urge readers, please, reach out to your elected officials and the Conservancy to voice your displeasure. Tell them to read their own mission statement. This plan must be stopped dead in its tracks, before one of us is, crossing the Park Drives.

Feel free to join us at The NYC E-Vehicle Safety Alliance who have organized to tame the menace of unregulated and out of control e-mobility devices on our streets, our sidewalks, and in the parks. Enough is enough!