City May Nix Statute of Limitations Argument in PPW Bike Lane Suit

A return to court for the Prospect Park West bike lane on Wednesday saw a potential change in direction for the city’s defense against the suit.

After weeks of arguing that the lawsuit calling for the removal of the Prospect Park West bike lane is invalid due to a statute of limitations claim, the city said that it would consider dropping the statute of limitations motion altogether if it would help to “expedite” the case.

"The Prospect Park West project is not a pilot—and never was. However, we won't let this issue be used as a sideshow to delay this case from being resolved on the merits themselves,” said city attorney Mark Muschenheim after a morning in court before Judge Bert A. Bunyan. “The key issue is whether there was a rational basis for this project, and the record is clear that the community requested the project to improve safety, and the data show that it's done the job it was intended to do.  Thus, we are willing to forego the statute of limitations defense if it means speeding up the resolution of this case on the merits." 

Part of the city’s defense in the lawsuit has hinged on the fact that the bike lane was not a trial project, and therefore any suit concerning the lane is beyond the statute of limitations. In the city’s filed last month, it also contended the lane couldn’t have been located anywhere else in Park Slope, that it was installed based on industry guidelines and that all analysis of the lanes has been correct and sound.

If the city could prove that it never called the lane a “trial” project, Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes and Seniors for Safety, the two groups suing the city over the lanes, would have no case.

The city’s move to consider nixing the statute of limitations argument came after Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan filed an affidavit on Tuesday contradicting Borough President that Sadk-Khan had specifically told him the lane was a “trial” project, and would be removed if it had an adverse affect on Prospect Park West safety.

“Today was a very important day,” said Jim Walden, the Gibson Dunn & Crutcher partner who is handling the case pro bono, referring to the city’s plans to potentially drop its statute of limitations claim. “We believe that quite clearly what is happening is that big lies are being told to protect smaller lies.”

The bike lane opponents first filed the in March. The groups have argued that the lanes are not only dangerous and “arbitrary,” but that the Department of Transportation skewed statistics in the bike path’s favor.

Bike lane advocates, however, dismissed the legitimacy of the entire suit. 

“By any reasonable measure, this charade is over,” said Paul Steely
White, Executive Director of Transportation Alternatives. “The city
set hard data against fact-free grandstanding to defend commonsense
street safety improvements that the vast majority of neighborhood
residents love and asked for in the first place. Any concerns about
these improvements have been exhaustively addressed and it’s time to
move on. The people of Park Slope deserve better than to have their
time wasted by a puffed-up PR stunt.”

Judge Bunyan adjourned the case until August 3, when he will hear arguments on whether Councilmember Brad Lander and Sadik-Khan will have to testify in court.