The cause for the dismissal had nothing to do with the benefits and drawbacks of the two-way bike lane, or even the manner in which the Department of Transportation went about installing it, but rather the amount of time the plaintiffs had waited to file their suit, and whether the bike lane was ever considered temporary.
As a city-issued press release quoted by the Brooklyn Paper puts it:
The plaintiffs argued that because the decision to install the bike lane was temporary, the time to challenge it had not begun when the lane was installed. The Court rejected that argument and found that in fact the decision to install the bike lane was meant to be permanent.
But mere technicalities won’t keep the misleadingly named group Neighbors for Better Bike Lanes from being heard. Their lawyer, Jim Walden, tells the Paper in his best Darth Vader voice: “This is just the first battle in what is inevitably going to be a longer war.” Seems pretty avoidable to me…