Biking in Boston

[soundguise]

More bikes than cars out today on Cambridge St in Cambridge. I was just in a queue of 10 bikes and we were all weaving cars parked in the bike lane. And to think they want to not have a lane on this road. (Note; not the one in Allston, or the one in Boston, or the one in Charlestown)

If you want to weigh in on this issue the Cambridge City Council meeting on Monday April 29th will be taking comment and voting on the policy order that would delay that project and others. If you want to get involved, Cambridge Bicycle Safety is organizing people to speak. You can get involved at this link or check out the info they have put together at https://www.cambridgebikesafety.org/

 

[ritchiew]

Well, shit.
Cambridge voted last night to delay building the rest of the bike network.

Whether called bike-lane extension or delay, order passes 5-4 after 5.5 hours of comment - Cambridge Day

A policy order about bike lane installation in Cambridge that some saw as a “delay” and some saw as an “extension” to be used only if needed passed the City Council early Tuesday on a 5-4 vote.

www.cambridgeday.com

About 300 people spoke at the city council meeting. I didn't listen to the full 5+ hours, but the parts I tuned in for, literally everyone wanted these bike lanes built. It was actually really depressing to listen to. People talked about friends who have been killed or maimed when hit by a car. Many speakers described their own injuries. Someone was a dancer in the Boston Ballet until he was hit while biking. The car broke his bones, and now he can't dance. Someone's "relatively minor" injuries required months of physical therapy. In the end, it was more important that a few people can store their personal automobiles in a public right of way.

 

[sneijder]

Well, shit.
Cambridge voted last night to delay building the rest of the bike network.

Whether called bike-lane extension or delay, order passes 5-4 after 5.5 hours of comment - Cambridge Day

A policy order about bike lane installation in Cambridge that some saw as a “delay” and some saw as an “extension” to be used only if needed passed the City Council early Tuesday on a 5-4 vote.

www.cambridgeday.com

About 300 people spoke at the city council meeting. I didn't listen to the full 5+ hours, but the parts I tuned in for, literally everyone wanted these bike lanes built. It was actually really depressing to listen to. People talked about friends who have been killed or maimed when hit by a car. Many speakers described their own injuries. Someone was a dancer in the Boston Ballet until he was hit while biking. The car broke his bones, and now he can't dance. Someone's "relatively minor" injuries required months of physical therapy. In the end, it was more important that a few people can store their personal automobiles in a public right of way.

This shouldn't affect the projects that are already in progress right (Mass ave from harvard to arlington border), River St, etc? Just delays the main st, cambridge st, and broadway implementations. Obviously a big loss still.

 

[ritchiew]

This shouldn't affect the projects that are already in progress right (Mass ave from harvard to arlington border), River St, etc? Just delays the main st, cambridge st, and broadway implementations. Obviously a big loss still.

I think that's right, yeah. There's some problem with Cambridge's website so I'm having a hard time finding the exact language of what passed last night.

I'd be kinda worried about the unfinished projects, too, though. If this is where the city council and mayor stand, there could be wiggle room to delay or half-ass those projects, too. Construction has started on only one tiny part of River Street last I checked. I don't know what's going on on Mass Ave. I'm not really going to be convinced these bike lanes are happening until they're actually built.

 

[StreetsblogMASS]

We confirmed with the City that it will delay the Main Street safety improvement project, which had been slated for installation this year. Now, it's being pushed back 'til 2025:

After Marathon Meeting, Cambridge City Council Narrowly Votes to Delay Street Safety Projects - Streetsblog Massachusetts

Last night, after hours of public comment from hundreds of residents who overwhelmingly spoke out against the change, a narrow majority of Cambridge City Councilors endorsed a policy order that could delay bike and pedestrian safety improvements on several busy streets. The policy order cites...

mass.streetsblog.org

 

[grand_junction]

Well, shit.
Cambridge voted last night to delay building the rest of the bike network.

Whether called bike-lane extension or delay, order passes 5-4 after 5.5 hours of comment - Cambridge Day

A policy order about bike lane installation in Cambridge that some saw as a “delay” and some saw as an “extension” to be used only if needed passed the City Council early Tuesday on a 5-4 vote.

www.cambridgeday.com

About 300 people spoke at the city council meeting. I didn't listen to the full 5+ hours, but the parts I tuned in for, literally everyone wanted these bike lanes built. It was actually really depressing to listen to. People talked about friends who have been killed or maimed when hit by a car. Many speakers described their own injuries. Someone was a dancer in the Boston Ballet until he was hit while biking. The car broke his bones, and now he can't dance. Someone's "relatively minor" injuries required months of physical therapy. In the end, it was more important that a few people can store their personal automobiles in a public right of way.

Followed this saga through to the end on Monday. The most frustrating part about all of it is that the proponents of the delay didn't even have anything meaningful to say about what, exactly, this delay was going to allow them to do. The Cambridge Street project that kicked off at the end of last year had three separate community engagement meetings already before any designs were created. This year the plan was to have another set of meetings to receive feedback on the designs that were in the works, and then revised designs, and another suite of community engagement all before any actual infrastructure work happened starting in 2025. That's a year's worth of meetings before any work began.

The only real concrete holdup cited was a zoning tweak to allow for private parking lots to hold cars that are not customers of the adjacent business, something that surely could be put in place in a year's time. Otherwise, there's no plan that I've seen on what exactly the delay will enable, except time to allow residents to "adjust", but no concrete suggestions on how the designs could be better, how outreach and mitigation could be better, and why that can't be done over a full year.

 

[RandomWalk]

Sandbagging to buy time to get a majority on the council to erase the ordinance?

 

[ritchiew]

Followed this saga through to the end on Monday. The most frustrating part about all of it is that the proponents of the delay didn't even have anything meaningful to say about what, exactly, this delay was going to allow them to do. The Cambridge Street project that kicked off at the end of last year had three separate community engagement meetings already before any designs were created. This year the plan was to have another set of meetings to receive feedback on the designs that were in the works, and then revised designs, and another suite of community engagement all before any actual infrastructure work happened starting in 2025. That's a year's worth of meetings before any work began.

The only real concrete holdup cited was a zoning tweak to allow for private parking lots to hold cars that are not customers of the adjacent business, something that surely could be put in place in a year's time. Otherwise, there's no plan that I've seen on what exactly the delay will enable, except time to allow residents to "adjust", but no concrete suggestions on how the designs could be better, how outreach and mitigation could be better, and why that can't be done over a full year.

Yeah, it was pretty wild how little the anti-bike people had to say at the meetings I went to. It was usually just the vaguest of "concerns" without anything more. Residents and council members would occasionally mention "problems" caused by existing bike lanes, then never really say what those problems were. At one meeting a woman said almost verbatim "I oppose the bike lanes because I don't like change," and that seemed like the fullest, most coherent anti-bike lane argument I had heard yet.

People who opposed bike lanes used to just say that bikes shouldn't be in the street, and free parking is more valuable than safety, and bike lanes shouldn't be built. It doesn't work to bluntly say that in Cambridge anymore, but they mostly haven't figured out anything else to say. So a "delay" in the name of "caution" is just a way to stall this until it doesn't happen.

 

[KCasiglio]

At one meeting a woman said almost verbatim "I oppose the bike lanes because I don't like change," and that seemed like the fullest, most coherent anti-bike lane argument I had heard yet.

The belief in the non-existent right to have your town/neighborhood locked in amber at the exact moment you personally bought a home there is so bafflingly widespread.

 

[393b40]

The belief in the non-existent right to have your town/neighborhood locked in amber at the exact moment you personally bought a home there is so bafflingly widespread.

At least she's honest about it. I can respect that even if I don't like it. I also think that kind of person is much more convincable unlike the ones who wrap up their argument in twenty different layers of misdirection.

 

[Longfellow]

Honestly while the decision is of course stupid and does endanger me personally as someone who bikes down one of these streets to commute I don’t find it surprising.

Part of why I decided to stay in Boston after school was reading local Facebook groups from my hometown — I encourage other people who are forward minded to look at those too. What I discovered is there’s a certain category of gen X person who spends too much time online and sort of blindly lashes out at any headline designed to make them mad— bike lanes, liberal politicians, home construction, taxes— these people are everywhere and it’s a miracle that anything can get done at all.

But who knows, maybe we can turn back the clock 50 years by banning bike lanes lol — maybe they’ll bring back the trackless trolleys if we do

 

[lainpimicaja]

Honestly while the decision is of course stupid and does endanger me personally as someone who bikes down one of these streets to commute I don’t find it surprising.

Part of why I decided to stay in Boston after school was reading local Facebook groups from my hometown — I encourage other people who are forward minded to look at those too. What I discovered is there’s a certain category of gen X person who spends too much time online and sort of blindly lashes out at any headline designed to make them mad— bike lanes, liberal politicians, home construction, taxes— these people are everywhere and it’s a miracle that anything can get done at all.

But who knows, maybe we can turn back the clock 50 years by banning bike lanes lol — maybe they’ll bring back the trackless trolleys if we do

There is an excellent book that analyzes a lot of these phenomena in local planning (case studies are largely from a housing permitting standpoint, but highly relevant to transportation planning, too; analysis focuses on Cambridge and other municipalities in Eastern MA). The analysis finds that people most involved in housing decisions in local communities are overwhelming anti-housing and wealthy, older homeowners. The book's called Neighborhood Defenders - highly recommend it.

 

[StreetsblogMASS]

Posting here as well, because the project *might* build new protected bike lanes on South Huntington between Heath Street and the Riverway:

Huntington Ave. Redesign Will Eliminate Last Mixed-Traffic Segment of the Green Line By 2027 - Streetsblog Massachusetts

On Tuesday evening, officials from the City of Boston and the MBTA officially kicked off a planning effort that will ultimately redesign Huntington and South Huntington Avenues in Boston’s Mission Hill neighborhood. The project will likely eliminate the last segment of the Green Line where...

mass.streetsblog.org

 

[vanshnookenraggen]

Very curious to see how they will make this all fit.

 

[#bancars]

There is an excellent book that analyzes a lot of these phenomena in local planning (case studies are largely from a housing permitting standpoint, but highly relevant to transportation planning, too; analysis focuses on Cambridge and other municipalities in Eastern MA). The analysis finds that people most involved in housing decisions in local communities are overwhelming anti-housing and wealthy, older homeowners. The book's called Neighborhood Defenders - highly recommend it.

Can second this book recommendation--very good if a bit stuffy in an academic sense. Lots of frustrating anecdotes about NIMBYism in Greater Boston gone amok. I've seen one of the authors (Katherine Einstein) present a few times and she's really cool--does a lot of really important research on modern urban challenges.

 

[HenryAlan]

Very curious to see how they will make this all fit.

Yeah, the space is tight, ranging between 55 and 60 feet. The article points out that it will require eliminating parking and/or re-routing private vehicles on to the Riverway through that corridor.

Making that happen, while also making space for a Green Line transitway and new Green Line stations, would almost certainly require the removal of on-street parking, or re-routing vehicle traffic to parallel streets like the Jamaicaway.

 

[The EGE]

Interested to see how the shared transitway will work with the green line and busses. Seems to work well in other countries. Are there other surface sections of the GL where this would work well? Also be another notable instance of diesel-under-wire in the system, further reinforcing the fact that we should be procuring in motion charging trolleybusses.

It’s also my understanding that all platforms will need to be raised for Type 10 level boarding (GLX was provisioned so platform height could be increased). Will the Type 10 platform height be too tall for busses?

Type 10 platforms will be 14" above top of rail, which is likely incompatible with buses. The likely solution is to have a lower platform for buses just before or after the Green Line platform. This does present a potential bunching issue where the bus and train are in the wrong order, and one is waiting for the other at every stop. Not a big deal for this stretch, which has two E/66/39 stops in 2200 feet and two E/39 stops in 1200 (likely going down to one each, plus maybe a 66/39 stop kept at Fenwood). I don't think it'd be as workable for Comm Ave (6400 feet, 5 B and 7 57 stops) or inner Huntington (4800 feet, 4 E and 4 39), both of which also have more ROW width.

A note of correction: trolleybuses/IMC and LRVs cannot share overhead. Trolleybuses use two poles and two wires for power and ground; LRVs use a pantograph against a single wire for power, with ground through the rails. (Pantographs have advantages over trolley poles for LRVs, in particular higher speed.) In places where the two share street, they use separate wires - see Church Street in SF for example: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.767...e0!5s20210501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

 

[Stlin]

Type 10 platforms will be 14" above top of rail, which is likely incompatible with buses. The likely solution is to have a lower platform for buses just before or after the Green Line platform. This does present a potential bunching issue where the bus and train are in the wrong order, and one is waiting for the other at every stop. Not a big deal for this stretch, which has two E/66/39 stops in 2200 feet and two E/39 stops in 1200 (likely going down to one each, plus maybe a 66/39 stop kept at Fenwood). I don't think it'd be as workable for Comm Ave (6400 feet, 5 B and 7 57 stops) or inner Huntington (4800 feet, 4 E and 4 39), both of which also have more ROW width.

A note of correction: trolleybuses/IMC and LRVs cannot share overhead. Trolleybuses use two poles and two wires for power and ground; LRVs use a pantograph against a single wire for power, with ground through the rails. (Pantographs have advantages over trolley poles for LRVs, in particular higher speed.) In places where the two share street, they use separate wires - see Church Street in SF for example: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.767...e0!5s20210501T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

There's a few BRT systems out there with 14/15in boarding; I believe CTfastrak and Cleveland Healthline both are, and both operate similar NFI Xcelsiors to the MBTA. I know those are isolated subfleets, and may have mods to enable precision docking, but fundamentally are similar buses. At most it's probably add on sensors.

 

[HenryAlan]

There's a few BRT systems out there with 14/15in boarding; I believe CTfastrak and Cleveland Healthline both are, and both operate similar NFI Xcelsiors to the MBTA. I know those are isolated subfleets, and may have mods to enable precision docking, but fundamentally are similar buses. At most it's probably add on sensors.

The problem with specialty buses would be that they wouldn't work anywhere that doesn't have the raised platforms. So in this example, the 39 would be compatible with platform height at 4 of its stops, and the 66 for just 2. I don't think it can work without some really unproven tech to raise and lower the buses. The best option here would be either separated platforms as @The EGE suggests, or routing the buses out of the transitway for stops, to avoid the bunching concern.

 

[JeffDowntown]

The problem with specialty buses would be that they wouldn't work anywhere that doesn't have the raised platforms. So in this example, the 39 would be compatible with platform height at 4 of its stops, and the 66 for just 2. I don't think it can work without some really unproven tech to raise and lower the buses. The best option here would be either separated platforms as @The EGE suggests, or routing the buses out of the transitway for stops, to avoid the bunching concern.

Air suspension systems on buses have had "kneeling" capabilities for several decades. It is hardly "unproven tech".