Sometimes it's easier to seek forgiveness than permission. I think it's great that they just plowed ahead with this. Now people with genuine grievances can be heard as opposed to a process where everyone who loves the sound of their own voice who turns up at every public hearing and helps slow the whole process to a stop before it's even started.
Biking in Boston
- Thread starter statler
- Start date
Sometimes it's easier to seek forgiveness than permission. I think it's great that they just plowed ahead with this. Now people with genuine grievances can be heard as opposed to a process where everyone who loves the sound of their own voice who turns up at every public hearing and helps slow the whole process to a stop before it's even started.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,599
- Reaction score
- 2,707
This is the right thread: it has basically functioned as "Biking in the Boston Core" Roughly the Hubway cities of Boston, Cambridge, Brookline, Somerville.
And then the Biking in the bubs thread functions as a "rest of state" thread.
And edge cases like Watertown, Arlington we've proven flexible
And then the Biking in the bubs thread functions as a "rest of state" thread.
And edge cases like Watertown, Arlington we've proven flexible
Totally agree. I'd rather get something imperfect done now, and tweaks made as problems pop up, then try to get 100% consensus on theoreticals with a large number of people who are afraid of any kind of change at all.
The thing is, there actually HAS been outreach and discussion.
From the Cambridge Day (which has, by far, better reporting than Curbed Boston):
It is interesting to see how the movement towards safe bike infrastructure is exposing a big division in the Cambridge business community and, especially, in the government and City Council. Cambridge has 16 miles of protected lanes left to install according to its plans, and it's now clear that Denise Simmons will be fighting them on behalf of that subset of business owners.
From the Cambridge Day (which has, by far, better reporting than Curbed Boston):
It is interesting to see how the movement towards safe bike infrastructure is exposing a big division in the Cambridge business community and, especially, in the government and City Council. Cambridge has 16 miles of protected lanes left to install according to its plans, and it's now clear that Denise Simmons will be fighting them on behalf of that subset of business owners.
Beacon Street in Boston is finally getting safer, thanks to a protected bike lane, pedestrian improvements, and dropping one lane (from 3 to 2), which won't affect vehicle throughput even at peak:
http://bostoncyclistsunion.org/acti...-is-coming-to-beacon-street-boston-this-fall/
"Beacon Street protected bike lane as it approaches Mass Ave."
"The red line indicates the street’s capacity to move motor vehicles with 3 lanes. The blue line represents the street’s capacity with 2 lanes. The black line shows current motor vehicle volumes."
http://bostoncyclistsunion.org/acti...-is-coming-to-beacon-street-boston-this-fall/
"Beacon Street protected bike lane as it approaches Mass Ave."
"The red line indicates the street’s capacity to move motor vehicles with 3 lanes. The blue line represents the street’s capacity with 2 lanes. The black line shows current motor vehicle volumes."
millerm277
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
- Messages
- 488
- Reaction score
- 544
Call me very skeptical of their preferred Mass Ave intersection lane design. I think you're going to wind up with a much more problematic intersection for cyclists, (especially with typical BPD levels of enforcement of traffic laws) than if you'd gone with the separate right turn lane design.
I suspect you are now going to wind up with a line of right turning cars blocking thru cyclists at peak times. At lower traffic times, you will now have cars making right turns in front of cyclists without paying attention. I fail to see how either situation is better than the separate right turn lane.
-------
Otherwise I think the lane drop is fine and shouldn't be a problem for anyone in this stretch.
I suspect you are now going to wind up with a line of right turning cars blocking thru cyclists at peak times. At lower traffic times, you will now have cars making right turns in front of cyclists without paying attention. I fail to see how either situation is better than the separate right turn lane.
-------
Otherwise I think the lane drop is fine and shouldn't be a problem for anyone in this stretch.
Yup. I doubt the bollards will be enough. I'm unclear as to what the left non-lane is, but that should be left/straight, the current left/straight (in the pic) should be straight only, and then the current right/straight should be right only.
The bike lane on Morton Street has become a right turn lane onto Cemetery Rd ever since they striped it. And cars come flying in, even though it's only barely enough room for a car lane.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
The issue with this is that it'll eventually turn into a one lane road at times. Between Delivery (UPS,USPS,FEDEX) and Rideshare (Uber,Lyft,Taxi,Livery) the road will be blocked for a good bit of time. This is unless they create some loading zones along the street.
It's mostly residential (which helps) but I worry about how accurate the capacity chart is. Maybe increased traffic congestion on this street will take more cars off of it and on to other roads.
It's mostly residential (which helps) but I worry about how accurate the capacity chart is. Maybe increased traffic congestion on this street will take more cars off of it and on to other roads.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,558
- Reaction score
- 3,189
This point is completely correct. Today Beacon drives as a single lane in the center, because of the high rate of double parked vehicles on both sides!
And that's why this road diet works. The data shows that there is very little time when they need more than two lanes. The illegal stopping will still occur, but during most times, the capacity is well under for even just one lane.
I'd argue to create more loading zones if they showed a need for more than one travel lane for a longer duration of the day, but the second lane just serves to allow the illegal stopping to continue, and this is helping keep up support for this project from abutters.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,558
- Reaction score
- 3,189
The road diet works, if you have better parking enforcement. Should be viewed as a revenue opportunity for the City. Double parking on an arterial like Beacon should carry a huge fine with rapid towing.
fattony
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,099
- Reaction score
- 481
Common decency is all it takes to prevent double parking on most roads. Over-sized roads like Beacon and Charles invite double parking. There will be a little chaos immediately after the change, but I would expect people to start behaving normally within a short period of time without any special enforcement.
^Or Boston police could actually hand out tickets to people who double park. Growing up here, I learned during high school that hazard lights = "park anywhere you want for up to 30 minutes" lights. And that's just ridiculous.
JeffDowntown
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 4,558
- Reaction score
- 3,189
I find little "common decency" among Boston drivers. Flouting traffic and parking laws is endemic in Boston. So I seriously doubt your claims. Double parking is behaving normally in Boston
Uncivil_Engineer
New member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 87
- Reaction score
- 4
The Fenway-Yawkey path connection has earned itself a public meeting.