WINDSOR TERRACE -- Two neighboring community boards, a civic group and a lawmaker are opposing a proposal to make Prospect Park car-free all the time, saying a cyclist organization's plan to ban rush-hour traffic would clog neighborhood roads and increase local pollution and noise.

That puts them in opposition to the "Car-Free Prospect Park" proposal by Transportation Alternatives, which could make the park totally auto-free all the time. The city has not accepted the proposal, nor has it studied the idea. Vehicles are currently allowed to use park roads (or "drives") during morning and evening weekday rush hours, but otherwise, the roads are car-free.

"It's all about the process. That's the primary issue, first and foremost," said District Manager Jeremy Laufer of Community Board 7 (Sunset Park-Windsor Terrace) after a press conference held during the height of the Thursday morning rush hour at Park Circle in Windsor Terrace.

Two community board chairs, Board 7's Randy Peers and Board 14's Alvin Berk (Flatbush-Midwood), along with Assemblyman James Brennan (D-Park Slope-Windsor Terrace), and Windsor Terrace Alliance leaders, joined together to make their case to the city.

Need 'Open and Fair Process'

"Our communities are united in our call for an open and fair process as well as redress of our local transportation concern," said Berk, Peers and Brennan, reading from a letter they sent to Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan of the NYC Department of Transportation (DOT).

The letter asks that the DOT chief "consult with all communities that border Prospect Park before making any further changes to local traffic." Currently, cars can travel northbound between 7 and 9 a.m. and southbound from 5 to 7 p.m. Mondays through Fridays.

"Many of our residents are incensed that a bicycling advocacy group met with preferred communities to campaign for eliminating cars from Prospect Park, but ignored others," their letter said. "It is inconceivable that DOT would implement a plan made by advocates, not communities, without discussion with the very residents who would be most affected by such a scheme."

"Already, there are backups. Closing the park's roads would create additional backups, exhaust and noise on our streets," said Berk. Peers agreed that Windsor Terrace would experience the same on its residential roads. "There's conflict between the people in our neighborhood and the traffic in the neighborhood," Peers said.

"There are serious concerns," said a statement from the Windsor Terrace Alliance, noting continuing complaints about local traffic. "After circling Bartel Pritchard Square, these vehicles would be squeezed into one eastbound lane of Prospect Park Southwest."

Bike Group Sees 'Little Impact'

Transportation Alternatives organizers said they gathered more than 10,000 signatures on petitions in support of their plan presented to Mayor Bloomberg. The petition foresaw little community impact. It wants a three-month-long trial run to test the rush-hour car ban to measure its impact on local traffic and the quality of life.

As for the lack of communication with the community, Transportation Alternatives "takes issue with that claim." Its volunteers have interacted with people within the boards' neighborhoods, and, said spokesperson Wiley Norvell, the group's position on the total car ban "has been well-known for many years."

The existing traffic bans began in the 1970s, when the park first implemented traffic-free Sundays. This grew to encompass weekdays and nights, except for rush hours. There are no plans by the DOT to adopt the Transportation Alternatives plan, said spokesperson DOT Scott Gastel.

The civic leaders, taking a pre-emptive position, ask that the DOT first fully consult with the communities involved around the park before any changes are made, should the bike advocacy group's plan be considered. It also asks for a DOT traffic study of traffic issues outside the park, specifically along Prospect Park Southwest, Parkside Avenue and Ocean Avenue, where rush-hour traffic would presumably increase.