A Queens judge has ordered the city to remove a partially installed protected bike lane on 31st Street in Astoria, saying the Department of Transportation (DOT) didn’t follow required procedures and didn’t adequately address critical safety concerns.
The ruling, issued by Judge Chereé Buggs in early December, directs DOT to “take all steps reasonably necessary” to restore the stretch between 31st Avenue and Newtown Avenue to the configuration it had before work began in August. The agency has 30 days to comply, according to court filings obtained by local outlets.
What the judge found
Buggs’s decision centered less on whether bike lanes reduce crashes and more on how the project was carried out. The judge concluded DOT failed to satisfy mandatory consultation and certification rules — specifically, it did not adequately consult the Department of Small Business Services or the Mayor’s Office for People with Disabilities. The ruling also said DOT didn’t meaningfully reconcile its plan with safety warnings from the Fire Department.
FDNY conducted a field demonstration that, according to the ruling, showed ladder trucks might be unable to reach upper floors beneath the elevated subway structure if the design stayed as proposed. The judge described DOT’s proposed mitigations — rumble strips, signage and stop signs — as insufficient in light of those findings.
Plaintiffs argued the lane would also make crossings more dangerous for schoolchildren, seniors and people with disabilities and would impede loading for local businesses and access for emergency vehicles. Among the plaintiffs were longtime neighborhood establishments such as Parisi Bakery, King Souvlaki and Sotto la Luna, along with St. Demetrios School, which serves roughly 800 students from preschool through 12th grade.
Why DOT put the lane in
DOT presented the project as a Vision Zero safety intervention: the agency flagged the 31st Street corridor as among the top 10% most dangerous roads in Queens. City figures cited in coverage noted approximately 190 injuries on the corridor between 2019 and 2024, including a number of serious injuries and fatalities — the sort of data DOT says supports protected curbside lanes that separate bikes from moving traffic.
The department has defended its outreach efforts and the broader evidence base for protected bike lanes reducing injuries. A spokesperson for the city Law Department said officials are reviewing the judge’s ruling and evaluating next steps.
Transportation advocates reacted sharply. Ben Furnas, executive director of Transportation Alternatives, called the decision “reprehensible” and urged a swift appeal, arguing the ruling could put New Yorkers at greater risk by undoing proven safety measures.
A rare legal check on street redesigns
City agencies usually enjoy wide discretion to redesign streets; lawsuits over bike lanes and bus lanes are frequently dismissed. That’s why this decision stands out: judges often defer to DOT’s technical judgment under state law, but Buggs ruled the agency’s procedural lapses and failure to square the plan with FDNY’s findings tipped the balance in favor of the plaintiffs.
Observers on both sides warn the ruling could have ripple effects. Opponents see it as vindication of neighborhood concerns about parking, deliveries and school safety. Supporters fear it could slow future safety projects and set a precedent for successful challenges when outreach or interagency coordination is perceived as imperfect.
The dispute also touches on how modern tools intersect with public safety planning. From route guidance to emergency communications, new technologies change expectations about response and access; debates about street design increasingly fold in conversations about how people and services navigate the city in real time. (For a look at recent navigation and emergency-communication developments, see how Google Maps is adding a conversational AI copilot for navigation and the move to allow texting 911 via satellite networks.)
What happens next is likely to be legal. The Law Department is considering an appeal, and advocates on both sides are preparing for further rounds of public argument. On the ground in Astoria, the immediate effect will be practical: chalked lanes and barriers installed this summer may soon be stripped from a street whose safety problems helped set the whole fight in motion.
The case underscores a persistent tension in New York streetmaking: how to move quickly to prevent injuries while bringing enough neighbors, businesses and first responders along to avoid legal — and literal — roadblocks.