Gothamist: Queens Blvd Bike Lane? Cyclists Say Yes, DOT Says No

RatherBe

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:13:51 -0500

Uh...

The Edge

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:30:02 -0500

I'm sure the hardest thing about wearing spandex for you was telling your parents about it.

RatherBe

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:47:40 -0500

Trying what? You make yourself out as enough of an asshole without my help.

The Edge

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 21:15:20 -0500

Way to pull that one out of your ass. Although I'm sure it's not the only thing that's been pulled out of there. Keep trying, Liam.

RatherBe

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:28:17 -0500

Did you become scared of gay people when your father pissed in your mouth?

The Edge

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:59:15 -0500

You two are arguing about spandex? Now that's just gay.

RatherBe

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:36:59 -0500

The composition is actually quite different. Just like you're quite a moron.

thefacts

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:16:03 -0500

FYI, Lycra is Dupont's brand name for spandex, like Dolphin is HEMC's brand name for douchebag.

RatherBe

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:24:27 -0500

FYI what those 'nazi's wear is Lycra, not spandex.

thefacts

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:09:14 -0500

Of course, DOT and its Diktator, Sadik-Khan, do not want a bike lane here, because it makes sense and would please most people. For the longest time, I thought Queens Blvd would make a great place for a bike lane. It is very wide and traverses much of the length of the borough. Its width is dangerous for pedestrians but its width benefits cyclists - room for a bike lane. Not the main roadway, but the service road, which seemingly is where this group was riding. Watch these DOT dummies suggest some quiet, narrow sidestreet in Queens, which would pit the NIMBYs against the Spandex Nazis, and no one would be pleased, except the autocrats at DOT who still would be collecting bloated salaries and benefits, and their Czar, Sadik-Khan, posing for furhter photo ops to show off the spandex pants that she wears under her skirt. Phew!!

bsalamon

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:26:44 -0500

why not add more stop signs on the side-streets?

Think twice

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 13:33:36 -0500

Because fencing off one of it's lanes for bicyclists or—gasp, bus rapid transit— is outrageous...outrageous I tells ya!!

RatherBe

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 13:11:47 -0500

Queens Blvd isn't that dangerous to ride on if you know what you're doing - eventually things should be done to make it safer for less experienced riders though.

lushintransit

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:15:43 -0500

Here's an idea: let's try to go a year without killing a pedestrian on the road before we go altering traffic patterns that would *put* pedestrians on two rolling wheels with no covering.

Ph

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:07:25 -0500

You're out of your fucking mind if you willing ride a bike on that thoroughfare, lane or not. Seriously, fucking batso.

slyseekr

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:23:45 -0500

Queens Blvd really wasn't the most dangerous street to bike, that'd probably be between 6th & 8th aves in Manhattan or around the Atlantic/Pacific area in Downtown brooklyn. Biking Queens Blvd. is relatively easy, straight through to Queens Plaza/Queensbridge; the street is suicide for pedestrians, however.

goodcow

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:15:11 -0500

I've biked down Queens Blvd. many times before. It's really not that bad, but then I actually follow the traffic lights there. In fact, I feel less safe biking down Roosevelt Avenue simply because it's so damn narrow. I've almost been doored by livery cabs there and then you have large groups of people jaywalking even when I have the right of way. Not to mention people who just walk out into the street out of nowhere.

ides_of_march

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:07:27 -0500

Even with a bike lane, you'd be a maniac to ride a bike along that road.

spiritross

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:04:07 -0500

Bikes should not be allowed on Queens Blvd. End of story You wanna kill yourself Go jump off the Kennedy Bridge