Biking in Boston

lexicon506 said:
Is this such a bad thing? The burn means you're not only getting to where you need to go but getting some *actual* exercise doing so. I've biked the bridge and a person of just average fitness at any age should be able to do it easily at their own speed. And if you do it enough times it'll only get easier.
Click to expand...

For someone like me it doesn't make a difference. I'll ride up it at 15 mph and not care about how drenched in sweat I get because at either end I'm taking a shower. But if you're using it to run errands or just generally get around I can see how the slope could be annoying. I think a majority of people expect off street bike paths to be relatively flat. The community path undulates up and down a ton whereas paths like the Minuteman, Mass Central, or Bruce Freeman are essentially pan flat for their entire lengths. The bridge itself to a seasoned rider is just a small bump but to a lot of people it probably seems huge at first, since a lot of people will go out of their way to avoid hills at all costs.

But like you said, do it enough times and it'll only get easier.
 
DAVE said:
I think if its meant to be a route for people to use to commute or just do casual trips to places, then yeah its not a great thing. I'd rather not have to show up places covered in sweat lmao
Click to expand...
Exactly. As exercise, it's great to get that hill climb, but I think it is a bit aggressive for casual users and commuters.
 
The lack of width, pull-offs, or similar, makes it somewhat more stressful than it really should be. There is mixed traffic, ranging from people strolling the path to folks on e-bikes rolling along at full-throttle. There is no room for a slow lane.

My favorite users are the old guy with his circus-bike style e-bike who likes to scream up and down the path at full throttle, and the guy who has fitted his road bike with a two-stroke engine.
 
IIRC, that hill has a 5% grade. And for comparison, I think similar Dutch paths try to limit grades to 2% to keep it more comfortable and useable for people of all abilities. Grades can go higher where necessary, but I can't tell that was necessary here.

Also, my last post might have sounded more negative than I really intended. I use and like the path. I even like the occasional "thigh burner" for fun. But I'd prefer a bike network that mostly let's me get around quickly, while using the roughly the effort of a brisk walk. Most of the Community Path is like that. Anything described as a "thigh burner" is an annoyance for some, a deterrent for others, and should be avoided in future bike projects aimed at casual/commuter riders.
 
ritchiew said:
IIRC, that hill has a 5% grade. And for comparison, I think similar Dutch paths try to limit grades to 2% to keep it more comfortable and useable for people of all abilities. Grades can go higher where necessary, but I can't tell that was necessary here.

Also, my last post might have sounded more negative than I really intended. I use and like the path. I even like the occasional "thigh burner" for fun. But I'd prefer a bike network that mostly let's me get around quickly, while using the roughly the effort of a brisk walk. Most of the Community Path is like that. Anything described as a "thigh burner" is an annoyance for some, a deterrent for others, and should be avoided in future bike projects aimed at casual/commuter riders.
Click to expand...

Anyone know what the longfellow bridge is? I take a blue bike up that bridge both ways each day and it's definitely a bit of a slog in my dress shirt..
 
yeah if the glx path bridge is 5%, i'd guess longfellow is closer to 2-3%
 
sneijder said:
Anyone know what the longfellow bridge is? I take a blue bike up that bridge both ways each day and it's definitely a bit of a slog in my dress shirt..
Click to expand...
Pulling some numbers from wikipedia and google maps, Longfellow averages a bit over 2%. The steepest part probably doesn't go over 2.5%.

And I hadn't considered the Blue Bike issue. They're wonderful for commuting/casual riding, but they're also heavy, non-aero, and not designed for power. Everything is a *little* bit of a slog on a Blue Bike. Designing paths for that seems like a good goal.
 
I can confirm.

I grabbed a Blue Bike for the stretch yesterday. It was noticeably different with its weight.
 
Opposition to the proposed bike lane in the Berkeley Street speedway (between Washington and Columbus) is getting silly. Though I'm not sure this letter is as helpful as the letter writer thinks it is (and kudos to the Boston Sun's editor on the placement of the next letter as sort of a Parthian shot)
 
Roxxma said:
Opposition to the proposed bike lane in the Berkeley Street speedway (between Washington and Columbus) is getting silly. Though I'm not sure this letter is as helpful as the letter writer thinks it is (and kudos to the Boston Sun's editor on the placement of the next letter as sort of a Parthian shot)
Click to expand...
I am amused that the writer is concerned about the ugly white posts defacing the city, but seem to have no concern for all the ugly, pollution spewing cars defacing the city. Seem they live in an alternative reality.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I am amused that the writer is concerned about the ugly white posts defacing the city, but seem to have no concern for all the ugly, pollution spewing cars defacing the city. Seem they live in an alternative reality.
Click to expand...

Ugh... " Given the increasing and irreversible number of cars on the road each year, along with Boston’s designation as being one of worst traffic congested cities in the country, the real challenge is to move cars and trucks as efficiently as possible through the city..."

No, Barry (writer), the job of the city is to holistically serve all of its residents needs which does include mobility but not to turn every road into an expressway.

I imagine that if Barry got his way and people sped by in three lanes of 45mph traffic in front of a daycare center, we'd have a much bigger disaster than flex posts marring the pothole-marked landscape that is Berkeley Street.
 
Recently, Mayor Wu addressed a convention of mayors touting Boston’s “going green” plan, and, no doubt, did not mention resident push back, goal shortfall, and that the misbegotten project to turn Boston into a cyclist dream city is a colossal failure.

He's a crank, but is he wrong?
 
king_vibe said:
Recently, Mayor Wu addressed a convention of mayors touting Boston’s “going green” plan, and, no doubt, did not mention resident push back, goal shortfall, and that the misbegotten project to turn Boston into a cyclist dream city is a colossal failure.

He's a crank, but is he wrong?
Click to expand...

I'd like to think we'd strive for metrics to weigh against initial OKRs and make an assessment that way rather than agree with hyperbole served up be someone who's very anti-cyclist (or at the very least anti- biking infrastructure).

From personal anecdotes, the city has come a long way in the two decades I've been a cycle commuter.
 
Last edited:
king_vibe said:
Recently, Mayor Wu addressed a convention of mayors touting Boston’s “going green” plan, and, no doubt, did not mention resident push back, goal shortfall, and that the misbegotten project to turn Boston into a cyclist dream city is a colossal failure.

He's a crank, but is he wrong?
Click to expand...
I wish the focus wasn't so much on "being green" and "reducing carbon emissions" which seems to really trigger the carbrains. Instead if they brand it as reducing congestion with mode shifts (getting more cars off the road so your commute can be faster and free up parking utilization on newbury st) there wouldn't be so much kneejerk backlash.
 
sneijder said:
I wish the focus wasn't so much on "being green" and "reducing carbon emissions" which seems to really trigger the carbrains. Instead if they brand it as reducing congestion with mode shifts (getting more cars off the road so your commute can be faster and free up parking utilization on newbury st) there wouldn't be so much kneejerk backlash.
Click to expand...
The problem (from anecdotal experience, mind) is that the geometric argument also isn't readily accepted. While I've had more success in saying that, "Only 359 cyclists removes a mile of traffic (laid end to end with no spacing even) and 359 people in a city of 654,000/117,000/80,000/etc. is nothing", it still triggers the same old false arguments: convenience (not in traffic!), what about mobilitiy impared individuals (you mean even the ones that cannot drive like seniors?), it kills businesses (we've all seen the data here, you get the idea). We're also still having to explain the destination geometry problem to people who profess to understand flow dynamics but can't comprehend that the destination cannot change to embrace expanded lanes without destroying what makes it a valuable destination in the first place. They've been told and shown their whole lives that driving is how you get around and that a car is a symbol of success and advancement. It's entwined in their personal value in society and anything that challenges that narrative is simply out of touch with reality.
 
jbray said:
The problem (from anecdotal experience, mind) is that the geometric argument also isn't readily accepted. While I've had more success in saying that, "Only 359 cyclists removes a mile of traffic (laid end to end with no spacing even) and 359 people in a city of 654,000/117,000/80,000/etc. is nothing", it still triggers the same old false arguments: convenience (not in traffic!), what about mobilitiy impared individuals (you mean even the ones that cannot drive like seniors?), it kills businesses (we've all seen the data here, you get the idea). We're also still having to explain the destination geometry problem to people who profess to understand flow dynamics but can't comprehend that the destination cannot change to embrace expanded lanes without destroying what makes it a valuable destination in the first place. They've been told and shown their whole lives that driving is how you get around and that a car is a symbol of success and advancement. It's entwined in their personal value in society and anything that challenges that narrative is simply out of touch with reality.
Click to expand...

But we're not asking the drivers to themselves mode switch to bikes, but rather trying to convince them that (enough) other people will be willing to do it if biking were safe and convenient. Maybe all the suburbanites who only hang out with other suburbanites would feel that way, but they surely can fathom how many ubers & personal cars we can take off the road if all the college students, other young fit people, and crazy biker enthusiasts (like me) would use bikes for all of their intercity trips. Right? Riiiight???
 
sneijder said:
But we're not asking the drivers to themselves mode switch to bikes, but rather trying to convince them that (enough) other people will be willing to do it if biking were safe and convenient. Maybe all the suburbanites who only hang out with other suburbanites would feel that way, but they surely can fathom how many ubers & personal cars we can take off the road if all the college students, other young fit people, and crazy biker enthusiasts (like me) would use bikes for all of their intercity trips. Right? Riiiight???
Click to expand...
This is the essence of the argument with diehard drivers. (It works for transit improvement as well).

These people, when stuck in traffic, are never self-aware enough to realize that they are part of the dreaded traffic they are stuck in. They always project traffic as being "other guys" who are in their way. If you can convince them that a given alternate mode improvement (bike lanes, transit, etc.) will get those traffic causing "other guys" out of their way, there is a chance that they will become supportive of the efforts. It just can't be about them, personally.
 
cburns said:
I'd like to think we'd strive for metrics to weigh against initial OKRs and make an assessment that way rather than agree with hyperbole served up be someone who's very anti-cyclist (or at the very least anti- biking infrastructure).

From personal anecdotes, the city has come a long way in the two decades I've been a cycle commuter.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that at least at the in person events, the anectdotes about bike safety are really hard to argue against. Someone who's saying 'but it's going to take me 2 minutes longer!!?!" is awfully quiet when you describe being doored by impatient drivers and passengers or the fear that you have when you're carrying your child on a bike seat even while riding carefully and legally. Anyone with windshield perspective arguments have to work very hard to not come off as a jerk.

Wish we could get more of those kinds of letters to the editor/opinion pieces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top