A Close Look at the Good Designs for Brooklyn’s Grand Army Plaza
Four important ideas for improving NYCDOT’s Option B
By Annie Weinstock
Grand Army Plaza has been a thing of vehicular wonder since 1927 when it was first coined the “Death-O-Meter”. Plagued by confusing traffic patterns and a major psychological barrier to accessing Prospect Park, Grand Army Plaza has always been badly in need of a rethink.
For as long as I can remember, there have been attempts to do that, clawing back public space wherever possible and making the area friendlier to bikes. Indeed, there have been some positive changes, particularly for cyclists.
Today, we are once again in the midst of a Grand Army Plaza redesign. Two options are offered by NYCDOT:
- Option A consolidates the movements on Flatbush Avenue, adds some pedestrian space, and reduces the number of bicycle and pedestrian conflicts with traffic.
- Option B creates an entirely new traffic pattern for the circle, most notably, eliminating the very wide segment of roadway between Prospect Park and Grand Army Plaza.
Option B is exciting. It directly connects Prospect Park and Grand Army Plaza and eliminates one particularly annoying and unsafe crossing for cyclists. It also consolidates movements on Flatbush Avenue and eliminates many bicycle and pedestrian conflicts with traffic. Option A is the less exciting option, and it would be disappointing if they picked it. The advocates are rightfully excited about Option B. For this piece, then, I am going to focus on Option B.
Understanding Option B
There have been many great ideas for Grand Army Plaza, some more radical than Option B. In 2006, the Grand Army Plaza Coalition (GAPCo) and the Design Trust for Public Space launched a visioning competition for Grand Army Plaza. Transportation Alternatives hired Jan Gehl, the world-famous Danish public space architect. Many ideas emerged from these processes. But Option B is what we have today and if actually gets built, it would be huge.
To explain how Option B is an improvement over today, here is a side-by-side comparison.
The most obvious improvement about Option B over today is the elimination of the southern segment of the traffic circle to reconnect Prospect Park with Grand Army Plaza. To make this work form a traffic perspective, eastbound cars on Union Street towards Eastern Parkway or Flatbush Avenue southeast-bound must turn left and head northbound around the inner traffic circle to exit.
The other key change is the direct movement of southeast-bound traffic along Flatbush Avenue. Today, those vehicles must travel southbound along the inner circle, use the southern segment of the circle which bisects Prospect Park and Grand Army Plaza, and then continue along Flatbush. In the new design, southbound Flatbush traffic travels alongside northbound Flatbush traffic, down the eastern side of the inner traffic circle.
More minor, but positive, changes include the removal of the slip lane between the inner loop and Union Street; raised intersections and curb extensions at various points; and a de-mapped block of St. John’s Place closest to GAP, due to the redundancy of the street.
Improving Option B
Here are four ideas for improving Option B:
- Eliminate the southbound portion of the western side of the inner traffic circle.
The most glaring issue with Option B is the continued presence of the southbound segment of the western side of the inner traffic circle. Currently this section of the inner traffic circle is one-way southbound. In the redesign, it becomes two-way. The northbound section of the western side of the inner traffic circle will allow traffic from Union Street to reach Flatbush and Eastern Parkway. However, the southbound section is entirely redundant as the relatively light traffic attempting to reach Union Street westbound or Prospect Park West can do so via the outer traffic circle. It is merely a shortcut for drivers, which flies in the face of the stated goals of this project.
2. Extend Flatbush Avenue bus priority through Grand Army Plaza
The advocacy community has been focused on creating bus priority along Flatbush Avenue. Indeed, NYCDOT has an ongoing project to give buses priority on Flatbush from Downtown Brooklyn to Grand Army Plaza, and just today released their options. But why end these designs at Grand Army Plaza, especially since Flatbush may well be reconstructed through GAP for this project.
Any reconstruction of any portion of Flatbush Avenue should include full bus priority. And because bus lanes work much better when they are in the center of the road, that’s where I propose they be placed. Amazingly, center-aligned bus lanes on Flatbush is one of NYCDOT’s alternatives. If the city is serious about bus priority on Flatbush, they should ensure that it extends through Grand Army Plaza.
3. Better pedestrian access to the plaza from points east and west
Any person wishing to reach the improved plaza from points east or west would have to walk a significant distance. For example, people coming from St. John’s Place in the east or Berkeley Place in the west would be forced to walk blocks out of their way and cross several intersections in order to access a plaza which should be a straight shot! Thus, I recommend two changes to reconnect these communities with their central plaza:
- Pathways through the berms: For some reason, the “berms” (those green spaces surrounding the center of the plaza) are fenced off and have been for years, despite the recent restoration which replaced “the existing chain link fence with low, decorative steel fencing.” The berms create a serious severance problem for community members wishing to cross the plaza, resulting in a huge detour for cyclists and pedestrians alike. The redesign could be a great opportunity to bring the communities surrounding the plaza together by providing more direct walking and cycling links to and across the plaza, opening up the berms in strategic locations.
- Midblock crossings at the roadways: Because the berms will still be cut off from the plaza by the inner traffic circle, midblock crossings would provide the last bit of directness needed for people to reach the plaza without walking miles out of their way. Midblock crossings would create far more direct and safer access to the communities living on either side of the plaza. Midblock signals could be timed with the intersection signals to cause minimal additional delay for traffic.
4. More thought should be given to bike movements.
Cycling around Grand Army Plaza was vastly improved in 2011/12 with the addition of better bike connections around the south side of the plaza and a two-way bike lane along Plaza Street.
Option B adds a protected bike lane along the southern side of the plaza which helps to reduce conflict between pedestrians and cyclists. However, it gives little thought to improving bike connections through the rest of the plaza.
For example, people bringing their bikes into the plaza should have a simple way of connecting to points north. With Option B, they’d have to cross a bunch of streets to tie in with the bike network, or else, go out of their way to the south. Perhaps that redundant southbound lane on the western side of the plaza (see #1 above) could be reallocated to bikes in both directions, with the midblock crosswalk to assist. Surely bikes need that shortcut more than cars.
Doing this would also provide a much more direct connection from Vanderbilt to Prospect Park.
Additionally, a direct linkage through the north side of the plaza, crossing the roads and the northern berms could be considered though would be complex. And if #3 above is adopted (midblock crossings and pathways through the berms), these should allow bicycles as well.
Finally, why not extend the Flatbush Avenue bikeway, along Flatbush through Grand Army Plaza?
In Copenhagen, just about every possible origin and destination is served by bike infrastructure. We should ensure that every new design that is being proposed in NYC does exactly that. Why not start with Grand Army Plaza.
