"The main issue before the court was whether state law gives DOT the right to control the streets as long as it does so rationally. Secondarily, the judge also considered the validity of the argument put forth by the so-called Court Street Merchants Association that the bike lane hurt their bottom lines and made the roadway less safe. On both counts, O'Neale sided with the city."
"The redesign of Court Street reflects a proven approach used across the city and around the world - one that has been shown to improve safety for everyone, whether they're walking, biking, or driving, and to support local businesses,"
"We appreciate the court's ruling, which affirms the city's ability to deliver street improvements that protect the people who live, work, shop, and take their children to school on Court Street."
Judge Inga O'Neale found that the Department of Transportation had a rational basis to install the Court Street bike lane and related features. The court held that promoting cyclist safety constitutes a rational governmental purpose and that state law permits DOT control of street design when actions are rational. The judge noted a city law requiring expanded protected bike lanes supported DOT's authority. The court rejected claims from the Court Street Merchants Association that the bike lane harmed business revenues or made the roadway less safe. DOT leadership characterized the redesign as improving safety and supporting local businesses.
Read at Streetsblog
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]