BREAKING: City Prevails in Prospect Park West Bike Lane Challenge

bike lame rally BREAKING: City Prevails in Prospect Park West Bike Lane Challenge

Role on. (Streetsblog)

Let the good times roll.

The city just announced that Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Burt Bunyan ruled in the city’s favor, following an Article 78 challenge filed by two neighborhood groups. There had been some question during the latest round of hearings as to whether a full case would proceed or if the judge would simply dismiss the case. Now we know it’s the latter.

“This decision results in a hands-down victory for communities across the city,” Transportation czarina Janette Sadik-Khan said in a release. “The plaintiffs have been dead wrong in their unsupported claims about the bike path and DOT’s practices. This project was requested by the community, they voted repeatedly to support it, and their support has registered in several opinion polls. Merely not liking a change is no basis for a frivolous lawsuit to reverse it.”

The case largely focused around whether the bike lane was requested and built in consultation with the community, or whether it was “an experiment,” as the judge’s decision puts it, that was inappropriately left in place after locals had rejected it. Justice Bunyan found that the petition lacked merit it so he has dismissed it.

How did this whole fight get started? Blame the bike lames!

The Obsever has reached out to Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes, one of the petitioners, for comment. It is not clear if they will appeal the decision. The decision seems pretty damning, though. “The threshold issue is whether petitioners’ bikeway claim is timely.” Hard to turn back the clocks on that.

From Justice Bunyan’s decision:

First, it cannot be disputed that the bikeway had an impact on petitioners who obviously were aware of it, as evidenced by their complaints to DOT. Second, petitioners were on notice that DOT had no intention of removing the bikeway, since DOT was merely enhancing it following  its construction in June-July 2010. Third, DOT never stated to CB-6 that it would remove the bikeway should its January 2011 implimentation results prove to be adverse to the community. Lastly, if, as petitioners allege, DOT’s plan to construct the bikeway  had a “predetermined outcome,” then DOT never had any intention of removing the bikeway, regardless of the outcome of its implimentation study. Thus, the relevant statute of limitations  began to run in June-July 2010, at the latest, when the actual onsite construction began and was completed. The statute of limitations expired,  at the latest, in November 2010, at which point no further event needed to take place  in order for petitioners to claim to be aggreved by the bikeway’s presence.

So, it would appear, in complaining early and often, bike lane opponents sealed their fate.

With surging poll numbers in support of bike lanes and now this, is the bicycle backlash maybe finally over? Well, not if the Daily News has its way.

Update 9:17: NBBL attorney Jim Walden released the following statement, making no indication of whether or not there will be an appeal, though more information could be revealed tomorrow.

We respectfully disagree with the Court’ determination.  There is little doubt that, had the Court permitted our discovery motion (which we believe the law requires in these circumstances), we would have proved that DOT specifically sought to present the bike lane as a pilot/test project which, based on the results of its safety study, might be removed.  Thus, there was no “final” agency action.  This is exactly what the DOT Commissioner told the Borough President in no uncertain terms.  We expect to appeal this decision and are confident we will prevail.

Update 10:15: Councilmember Brad Lander, who represents most of Prospect Park West, is out with a statement echoing his previous support for the lane. Here’s part of it:

“The installation of the Prospect Park West bike path has been a huge success, making the boulevard safer for pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers alike.  Most residents of Park Slope have indicated that they like the new, safer Prospect Park West and want the bike path to remain.

“I don’t think any of us – on either side of the debate – thought we would be spending so much time debating one mile of green paint, inside or outside of a courtroom.  I am glad to put this behind us, and I look forward to working together to find common sense ways to make our streets safer, our neighborhoods more livable, and our city more sustainable.”

NBBL also sent along an amended statement, after it had more time to review the decision:

The Judge had a very different and very independent view of the facts—different, in fact, than either party.  He dismissed our Petition without prejudice to us, held that DOT never made a decision concerning removal of the bike lane, invited us to demand that from DOT, and then re-file if DOT refuses to remove it.  At the same time, he granted our long-standing demand for public documents, which DOT wrongfully withheld.  Although we respectfully disagree with the Court’s determination on the statute of limitations, we will need time to review his comprehensive analysis before deciding on our options.

Note that the group has now stridently taken the decision dismissing its claim and is now stridently spinning it in its favor.

This post has been updated an expanded from its original version.

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Comments

  1. Anonymous says:

    In a city with perhaps more than its fair share of arrogant narcissists, bicyclists take the cake. Perhaps wind in the face  lowers the IQ, but I’ve yet to see a bicyclist pay the slightest attention to a stoplight or any traffic signage at all. Correction: I did see a cyclist stop for a red light once. He was a tourist.

    I wish the City would spend less money enabling these egotistical scofflaws and more money policing their flamboyant disregard for public safety.

    1. Faramir says:

      This is obviously somebody who never rides a bicycle and is very infatuated with himself.

    2. Your generalizations are insulting.  I could say the same thing about car drivers

       Yes, there are bicyclists that don’t stop at lights, but they are far outnumbered by the car drivers that flout the laws regarding cell phone use, yielding to pedestrians, or double parking.  I wish the City would spend less money enabling these egotistical scofflaws and more money policing their flamboyant disregard for public safety.

    3. And I Own a Car says:

      Give me a break. If we’re going to generalize and stereotype then the fact of the matter is that no group of NYC street users is more selfish, arrogant, destructive and massively entitled than the New York City motorist. In a big, crowded, transit-rich city there is no more selfish act than a single passenter driving around in a gigantic SUV. Perhaps being surrounded by a dozen cup-holders lowers the IQ. 

    4. ohhleary says:

      I ride every day and see plenty of cyclists stop for red lights and stop signs, and I myself stop at every one as well.

      I can relate – I only remember the cars that nearly run me over or drive aggressively, not the ones that don’t. But unlike you, I don’t go on the Internet and make stupid, gross generalizations.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Regardless of the relative behavior of drivers, cyclists or anybody, this suit is over.  An appeal at this point would only show how NBBL and SFS have nothing better to do while their neighbors enjoy a great project that has made the area safer.  Please give it up.  No one will take an appeal seriously, except maybe the Post.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I just p a i d $21.87 for an i P a d 2-64GB and my boyfriend loves his Panasonîc Lumîx GF 1 Camera that we got for $38.76 there arriving tomorrow by UPS.I will never pay such expensive retail prices in stores again. Especially when I also sold a 40 inch LED TV to my boss for $657 which only cost me $62.81 to buy.
    Here is the website we use to get it all from,http://bit.ly/Bid1st

    NOW 100% WORKING

  4. Brooklynite says:

    Please just stop printing crap from Jim Walden and his publicist Linda Gross already. These people lost. None of their arguments have borne out in court or anywhere else. Their case is complete garbage and was never intended as anything more than media fodder. At Walden’s last appearance in court he was standing there apologizing to the judge. The guy is a clown. The so-called “Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes” no longer deserve your attention or anyone else’s.

  5. Done says:

    A nobody who lost a court case would never be heard from again. Time to return Louise Hainline and Lois Carswell to the obscurity from which they came.  Chuck Schumer is free to go back to the Senate.