A judge heard oral arguments in lawsuits against two controversial Citi Bike locations today—one for Soho's Petrosino Square and the other in front of a Greenwich Village co-op.

If you'll recall [leans back into rocking chair, puts whittling stick down and places grandchild on knee] the rack in Petrosino Square is controversial because the park is so tiny—it subsumes about a third of the tiny park's space, where numerous art installations used to reside.

The City argued ("absurdly," as Parks Advocate Geoffrey Croft opines) that Petrosino Square is actually DOT property, and that the Citi Bikes belong there because they enhance the recreational experience of the folks who pass through. Considering how much the DOT has marketed Citi Bike as a commuting tool, this does seem far-fetched. But we'll let attorney Jim Walden regale you with his knee-slapping analogy as to why the City is wrong, courtesy of the Post:

“Funny, you have a duck, and you know it’s a duck because it walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, it introduced itself as a duck, and it’s wearing a T-shirt saying, ‘I am a duck,’ with a corporate logo emblazoned on it,” Walden said, extending the metaphor, “This is not a cow.” The courtroom, packed with activists who oppose the rack’s placement in Petrosino Square, a triangular sliver of parkland between Lafayette and Centre streets just south of Spring Street, erupted in laughter.

Oh, bless me. See? You don't need all that foul language to be funny!

A City attorney countered that “bicycling is a common incidence in parks and the infrastructure to support it."

Why is it Petrosino Square and not Petrosino Triangle? I'll tell you some other time, go on and wash up for dinner.

The arguments against the second rack in Greenwich Village must have been more tenuous—it only earned a passing mention from the Post, which was previously very eager to paint the rack as a Public Menace Only Sated By Geriatric Blood.