Lawsuit to remove the PPW bike lane

Random would be an improvement.

WhyFi said:

Random would be an improvement.

Literally true. At least they could randomly enforce laws (speed limits) that actually exist.

After that we can move on assessing various vehicular threats to public life & limb.

whynot_31 said:

The police will move on to a new cause in a while:

Cell phone talking drivers

Drivers who block the box

Horn honkers

Dogs off leash

Trash out on the wrong day

Fare jumping

....I expect to get a random ticket about once every two years, whether I am guilty or not.

I see what you're saying, but some of those things are clearly bigger threats to public safety or congestion, one of the biggest problems in the city.

And I don't ever expect to see a ticket written for horn honking, ever. If I do it might be the happiest day of my life.

Same with trash. The bldg next to mine could use a good ticket blitz.

Returning to the subject of bikelanes:

The administration seems to remain in favor of them, despite the lawsuit to have the one on PPW removed

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/nyregion/30bike.html?ref=nyregion

Let's hope the lanes have public support.

....this may be what they are trying to build.

Just peaked out my window and the ride the lanes event to celebrate the lanes looks well attended.

Also, I'd like to address the argument that the lane "ruins the beautiful look of PPW" I've heard and read from many who are against the lane. I was walking down the park side of PPW during street cleaning, and I have to say it looked 10 times better with no cars parked along the park side. I know those parking spots aren't going to be taken away, but I find it amusing that people say the bike lane obscure the views of the park, when it seems so clear that the parked cars far more noticeable and not pretty than the bike lane.

This is pure NIMBYism by the folks who live on PPW. No more and no less. They are inconvenienced by more congestion at the corner of Union and PPW, by findiing it more difficult to park or double-park their cars with only two rather than three traffic lanes, and, worst of all, having to pause and ...horrors... look both ways before crossing the bike lanes.

Those folks, moneyed as they are, are not accustomed to inconvenience, so they're raising hell. Everything else they say is simply rationalization.

I wish the police would ticket people for bad interneting!

its about a bunch of old home owners nimbys vs mostly younger renters. those nimbys have money and political clout vs renters.

ringrunner said:

Hay, I am a old home owner and think the bike lane is great. Oh no. I just own an old home, but I still think the bike lane is great

A majority of Park Slopers and NYers in general share your view.

Weinshall & Co are on a sinking ship.

As one of the fabulously wealthy property owners on Prospect Park West (in addition to my awesome property I own two nuclear submarines with solid gold conning towers) I don't really care one way or another about the bike lane. But since it's there, I do wish people (adults) would stop riding on the street and the the sidewalk (both sides). I admit it's gotten a little better, but now there's no excuse for it to happen at all.

Once all the real bike lanes are in nyc, i'll take up biking once more. after nearly one close call many many moons ago, i gave up on bikes. drivers suck ass who don't care for anyone but besides themselves. tons of those jerks on the road all day long.

Judge Rules in Favor

of PPW Bike Lane

“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.”

source: http://www.observer.com/2011/08/breaking-city-prevails-in-prospect-park-west-bike-lane-challenge/

If nothing else, it means that ULURP still has meaning.

I'm glad DOT was found to be in conformance with ULURP.

...In the future, I hope that they document their compliance even more extensively, so such challenges (be them from rich, poor, or whoever) are avoided.

Markowitz does not hold a powerless office.

...he simply does not use his office in such a way that it provides much good. Please compare and contrast to Mhtn BPO Scott Stringer

P.S. The NYT is reporting that the case was thrown out because the statute of limitations expired.

NYT wrote: The judge, Bert A. Bunyan of State Supreme Court in Brooklyn, found that the residents’ lawsuit was filed after the statute of limitations had expired for a legal challenge to the lane, a mile-long, two-way path installed last summer along one of Brooklyn’s wealthiest boulevards.

The plaintiffs, a pair of well-connected civic groups in Brooklyn with ties to Iris Weinshall, a former city transportation commissioner, had accused the city’s Transportation Department of cherry-picking statistics to create a favorable portrait of the lane and misleading residents about its benefits. The judge’s decision did not address those claims or the merits of the lane itself.

I agree.

...my rudimentary understanding of ULURP makes me believe it was complied with.

I wonder if this whole experience will make people participate in their community boards more?

To me, the ruling says "Community members have a way to influence local life through the community board. If a group approaches the community board and follows the ULURP procedures, and the community board approves said request, the decision takes more than a mere lawsuit to repeal."

...or maybe this is just how I would like it to be interpreted.