bobtehpanda Posted January 22, 2016 Share #201 Posted January 22, 2016 I'm not questioning all of that. Queens Blvd has been known to be one of the deadliest boulevards around. Seems mind boggling to place bike lanes there. Not only that but the traffic is a mess there too. Why make it even more congested and put more cyclists at risk? Very cute smart one. If there was a parallel straight road down the middle of Queens, I'm sure they wouldn't hesitate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted January 23, 2016 Author Share #202 Posted January 23, 2016 If there was a parallel straight road down the middle of Queens, I'm sure they wouldn't hesitate. Not sure why that matters if they claim that they care so much about cyclists and avoiding fatalities. I just don't see Queens Blvd set up for that, regardless of the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted January 23, 2016 Share #203 Posted January 23, 2016 Not sure why that matters if they claim that they care so much about cyclists and avoiding fatalities. I just don't see Queens Blvd set up for that, regardless of the circumstances. Queens Blvd in its current setup isn't really good for anyone other than the people passing through. If there was a parallel route close by they'd probably route cyclists down that instead, but instead the QB is the only direct link between Kew Gardens/Jamaica and the QB, so cyclists end up dying because they'd rather risk the straighter, shorter route rather than zigzag through the maze that is the Queens street gird, or lack thereof. The benefits of a bike lane to pedestrians are only that they shorten the crossing distance and slow down the service road, which shouldn't be going that fast compared to the Queens Blvd main road anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.