Prospect Park West Bike Lane to Go Back in Court After NBBL and SFS Win Appeal

Appellate court rules unanimously that August 2011 dismissal improper.

In case you thought the battle over the Prospect Park West bike lane was over, you better buckle up your helmet.

A new court ruling has pumped some air into the bike lane opponent’s tires on Wednesday night, and they are trying another attempt to get the Department of Transportation-installed bike lane removed.

The New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division ruled unanimously to appeal the August 2011 dismissal of Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes and Seniors for Safety’s suit to remove the bike lane by Judge Bert Bunyan.

Judge Bunyan’s statute-of-limitations dismissal was based on the fact that NBBL and SFS only had four months from the completion of the two-way bike lane, which was June 2010, to file suit. However, the opposition claims the DOT deferred to make the project “final and binding” only until after the bike lane’s post-construction study period, which ended in January 2011. 

The court also stated that the suit should not have been dismissed on a technicality before it determined whether or not the Department of Transportation’s project was a meant as “trial” or “permanent” project in the first place.

Now the ruling orders “a full factual hearing” on whether or not the Prospect Park West bike lane’s installation was on a “trial or a permanent basis.”

As evidence in favor of the NBBL’s belief that the DOT installed the one-mile strip of green paint as a trial, Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, who referred to the bike lane as a “disaster” in 2010, claims that the DOT’s Commissioner told him so.

Outlined in the court documents is Markowitz’s claim:

“The affidavit of Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, asserting that NYCDOT Commissioner Sadik-Khan told him, at a meeting on March 1, 2012 that ‘the PPW bike lane would be implemented on a trial basis’ and that ‘any decision to finalize the PPW bike lane’ would be based on data collected during a postconstruction study.”  

Jim Walden, who represents anti-bike lane groups Neighbors for a Better Bike Lane and Seniors for Safety, said they are ready for the courtroom. 

“We are gratified by the Court’s decision, and we look forward to finally forcing the truth from the Department of Transportation,” said Walden, the petitioners’ lead attorney from Gibson Dunn and Crutcher. “As we have maintained all along, DOT broke the rules, fudged the data, and orchestrated actual harassment against people who disagreed with its tactics:  it is just shameful.”

Eric McClure, the founder of Park Slope Neighbors and a staunch supporter of the bike lane, said that the appeal is not a “victory” for the opposition, considering three of the four causes of action the group claimed were dismissed. 

And with only one cause left, to prove if the project was trial or not, McClure said that the continued fight by NBBL and SFS isn’t one for the over-all good of the neighborhood.

“But like Ahab with his White Whale, this small group of malcontents, who are neither for better bike lanes nor for safety—nor representative in the least of the vast, vast majority of Park Slope residents—continues an irrational quest to undo one of New York City's best and most popular complete-streets projects. We're hard-pressed to understand what motivates them, but it's clearly not the goal of making something better or safer.”

But is the bike lane going anywhere?

Seth Solomonow, the DOT Press Secretary, said that they are not worried about the ruling.

“We’re confident that the Prospect Park West bike lane is here to stay. We’re very pleased that three of the four causes of action were dismissed by the Appellate Court, which also returned to the trial court one claim for a limited finding on a technical issue,” he said. “We are fully confident that the trial court will decide that there is absolutely no merit to what is left of this case. In the meantime, local residents will continue to enjoy the safety that this community-requested and supported lane has provided every day for the last two and a half years.”

Park lover December 20, 2012 at 07:11 PM
Iris Weinshall and Louise Hainline don't care about their neighbors. All they care about is parking.
Chicken Underwear December 20, 2012 at 07:18 PM
Double parking.
Park Sloperstein December 20, 2012 at 08:20 PM
Oh, for chrissake, Dotti Cunningham. The bike lane has been there for two years. We know for a fact that it is not "extremely dangerous." It is not even mildly dangerous. It's not a "disaster" as Marty Markowitz predicted it would be. No one has been hurt or killed by the bike lane. It's a great improvement to the neighborhood.
Park lover December 20, 2012 at 08:57 PM
I was knocked over by a jogger on the sidewalk once. Therefore, sidewalks are extremely dangerous. Where do people like Dotti get the idea that we can engineer common sense into streets? People are always going to make mistakes - the bike lane makes those mistakes have less lethal consequences.
Anthony Vassallo December 21, 2012 at 02:46 AM
Wow, James Walden -- front running coward. When Ratner and his crew were subverting eminent domain to build the Barclays Center and all the other stuff, he and his firm was too busy taking in money from those clowns to deal with that injustice of labeling a middle class neighborhood as blight and tossing people of color and modest means out of their well-kept homes. But, of course, when it is time to pick on the City on behalf of some well-to-do car owners, good old Jim is fighting for truth, justice and the American way. Some advocate.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »