The First Auto-Free Parks Movement

Read the latest news on this subject.

It was also during this period that park users first voiced objection to motor vehicles on the loop drives. In 1966, the Parks Department responded by barring cars from the drives during summer weekend hours. In 1967, a volunteer bike patrol was put in place to help keep cycle traffic flowing in one direction, repair flat tires and offer simple first aid. [2] For the next decade, different parks commissioners experimented with closing hours, sometimes extending them to longer periods of the day and year, sometimes cutting them back.

The Current Debate

Organizing by Transportation Alternatives is drawing political attention to the idea of eliminating automobile traffic from Central Park. In October 1991, the City Department of Transportation released a preliminary study of current traffic patterns and what the agency saw as the likely effects of six other traffic scenarios. In the meantime, the office of Manhattan Borough President Ruth Messinger released its own report in favor of auto-reduction, The Benefits and Traffic Consequences of an Car-Free Central Park. [3]

The debate could be decided on philosophical grounds alone: does the city ultimately place more value on the sanctity of its parks — and, by extension, on the quality of life of its inhabitants — or on the convenience of its drivers? But New York is a city driven by politics, not philosophy. Running through the DoT's Central Park study is a bias against auto reduction, with no fundamental examination of the impact an Car-Free Central Park would have on traffic patterns, the environment and safety.

Traffic Patterns

It's not at all clear that an Car-Free Central Park would, in the long run, exacerbate traffic jams in the surrounding areas. New York City has at least two good precedents that show traffic can remain unaffected or actually decline when routes are closed. When Washington Square was closed to auto traffic in the early 1960s, and again when the West Side Highway collapsed in 1973, after brief periods of readjustment, there were no discernible increases in traffic in adjacent areas.

Motor traffic is elastic; the construction of new roadways or extra vehicle capacity promotes additional car trips; when routes are eliminated, drivers find alternate routes, or — better yet — find alternate modes of transport. [4] In the case of the Central Park drives, “downstream” gridlock in midtown might actually be alleviated by eliminating a route into the area.

Further, the loop drive is not a vital auto route. Less than 3% of vehicles entering midtown Manhattan from the north use the park. Virtually all of these vehicles carry discretionary traffic — private cars, taxis and limousines; closing the park to cars would not directly affect vital commercial loads. In theory at least, all the motorists using Central (and Prospect) Park for commuting purposes could be easily accommodated on public transport with a mere two or three additional subway trains a day.

NOTES: