Biking in Boston

[Arlington]

From the Boston Globe, the Somerville Cyclist killed in Medford on the MVP was not from a disadvantage population who couldn't afford lights or helmet (which we don't know were being used or not, but if not, its not for lack of resources).

The cyclist, Mohamed Zeidan, 29, originally from Minnesota, had been undergrad student body president at Amherst, and was a 4th-year medical student at Tufts.

Meanwhile, we now learn that "16 at I93" (The earlier-reported location) is actually 2364 Mystic Valley Parkway...a DCR road with residential driveways on one side and park land (with no friggin bike path) on the other. While originally about the same "2-lanes each way, no shoulders" as Memorial Drive width) it has since "calmed" to 1 lane in each direction by a zebra-paint median https://goo.gl/maps/odMt5

 

[elemenoh]

And then this letter appears in the latest Jamaica Plain Gazette:
Dangerous bicyclists need to learn to share the path

The writer complains about the behavior of a bicyclist using the SW Corridor bike path, and says "I know there are signs that say this is a bike path. But everyone uses this path. Cyclists, runners, joggers, walkers, strollers and even dogs."

 

[Matthew]

Fighting over scraps... it's ridiculous.

 

[cden4]

I can definitely understand the frustration from the perspective of someone who drives and hasn't tried to ride a bike along the Charles River when they see a bike in the road when a path is right there. As someone who bikes all over the city, I completely agree with the other posters that the paths along Memorial Drive are essentially useless for bicycling. The sidewalk along the seawall is bumpy as hell (half of it is actually the large stones that make up the seawall) and it's heavily used by pedestrians. The dirt track is okay but it's full of joggers and also quite bumpy on a bike. The only place left for someone who wants to bike at more than a walking speed is the roadway.

The only streets where bicycles are not allowed are limited access highways that are posted "bicycles prohibited". I have biked on Memorial Drive before as I do on other city streets that don't have bike lanes, simply by taking the lane. It was more pleasant than the path but not so pleasant in other ways (mainly the drivers honking and yelling at me!)

This whole situation is a result of a public agency (DCR) absolutely failing at accommodating the needs of the people using their parks and parkways. They seem to be great at repaving the parkways and installing lots of safety features for cars (new guardrails, reflectors, etc) but when it comes to creating enough space for all the pedestrians and bicyclists using the parks and even just maintaining the paths that are there, they are miserable. So what we're seeing now, especially as more and more people are bicycling is that people are getting fed up trying to use the paths and are using the roadway instead. I guarantee most of the bicyclists using the roadway would prefer to have a nice bicycle-only path to use instead, but the road is the lesser of two evils at the moment.

So it's really in everyone's best interest to push DCR or whatever politician can help to actually make some meaningful improvements to the Charles River Paths so that everyone has a nice space they can actually use. It would really reduce the stress and frustration that we are all dealing with because DCR sucks so bad.

 

[cden4]

Meanwhile, we now learn that "16 at I93" (The earlier-reported location) is actually 2364 Mystic Valley Parkway...a DCR road with residential driveways on one side and park land (with no friggin bike path) on the other.

Amazing. Even when DCR does a road diet, they f*** it up. Instead of the painted median, that space should have been dedicated to bike lanes. Instead, they have a tiny shoulder and a useless median. Does anyone who does their roadway striping have half a brain at all?

 

[Shepard]

I think that DCR's re-do of Nonantum Road could give some cause for optimism. That seems to me to be the right template. So, the question is, why won't they extend that to all the river roads?

 

[rinserepeat]

Sorry, I kind of lumped you in with fattony. His initial response is the one that pissed me off.

By the way, I have slowed down substantially from my younger days. It doesn't change the fact that some roads are just not conducive to bicycles. The lanes of Memorial Drive (including the NONEXISTANT shoulder) are barely wide enough for cars. It has nothing to do with how fast I am driving. Also, considering many bikes kind of "wobble" from their lane into the path of cars, it's even that much more dangerous on a street as unforgiving as this one.

Thank you bigeman. It's funny, whenever I'm with somebody else and we see bikes on Memorial Drive it's an immediate "WTF?!?!" kind of moment for both of us. I guess it was wrong to assume that most people would agree that riding a bicycle on a near-highway, thin twisty multi-lane road, when there is a much less dangerous path a few feet away, is INSANE. Although, it's also wrong to think that a couple responses, in either direction, comprises "most people". I stand by my post that I don't think bikes should be allowed to ride in the middle of this road.

Edit: Arlington, that's an interesting chart. I wonder how many of those rear-end accidents are because the bicycle swerved in front of a car that was trying to pass it.

Edit 2: Fattony, just wondering, would you ever dare ride your bike down Storrow Drive? I don't really see how it's that much different from Memorial.

that "bike path" is horrible - it's too narrow, in rough shape, and clogged with people - so I understand why someone would be riding on the street there - especially if they want to move faster than 5 mph.

memorial drive is really poorly designed in general - I agree it's not so great for cyclists. I wouldn't ride on the street there personally - because I think most drivers are like you and are not expecting me to be there and especially because most people don't know the laws regarding bikers' legal rights (probably because the current laws are only 5 years old and there's been almost no education of people who obtained licenses before then).

this might be helpful for you to watch

 

[bigeman312]

A co-worker of mine was hit on the way to work this morning. A co-worker that I am partially responsible for her choosing to ride to work. Without saying who is at fault (because I wasn't there), and in the middle of being part of this discussion, nonetheless, how can I do something to improve our current infrastructure? I am obviously interested in urban planning (why else would I constantly post here) and bike as my main form of transportation.

The way I see it, the problem isn't cars, drivers, bikes, cyclists, people, dogs, etc. The problem is our inadequate infrastructure/education. Memorial Drive is a perfect microcosm of our state of infrastructure in this region. We have an outdated "parkway" designed for cars to go 30-45 mph. We have a leisurely path next to a river, designed for people to move <6 mph. Even though this is technically part of what's supposed to be Boston's bicycle super-highway, and this road has an extremely wide right-of-way, there is nowhere for anybody travelling between 6 mph and 30 mph (which happens to be just about every cyclist) to travel safely.

To vilify the mode which you are not using is shortsighted.

Walking down the path and being nearly run over by a cyclist going 6 times your speed, or having a cyclist come within inches of striking your child or dog sucks. It really does.

Riding a bike on this "path" and having an uneven surface with no room to ride, especially not at speeds which you expect, while people and dogs constantly jump out in front of you, doing your best to avoid them, all while getting jeered and yelled at sucks. It really does.

Riding a bike in the road while cars are constantly yelling, honking, passing at unsafe speeds within inches of killing you sucks. It really does.

Driving a car on what you assume to be a highway, expecting to get to your destination in a timely manner, hence why you purchased an expensive fast vehicle in the first place, only to find a cyclist going absurdly slow for a highway (let's say 12 mph) is blocking your lane and making you very nervous and uncomfortable sucks. It really does.

This is not about what mode you choose. Without being too preachy (which I already have, whatever), what steps can I, an ordinary civilian who honestly believes things can and should be much better for all users, take to improve our infrastructure?

</rant>

 

[Matthew]

This is really about getting DCR to shape up and start taking their mission as a parks and recreational department seriously. It's also about holding the cities to their word: if they want to continue touting the Paul Dudley White path as "world class bicycle infrastructure" then it's high time that they follow through on that.

So I would recommend contacting your elected officials at all levels and writing them a polite but firm letter, or making a phone call to their staff, telling them that this is important to you. And have your friends and family do the same.

That, at least, is a start.

 

[pixelsand8]

Driving a car on what you assume to be a highway, expecting to get to your destination in a timely manner, hence why you purchased an expensive fast vehicle in the first place, only to find a cyclist going absurdly slow for a highway (let's say 12 mph) is blocking your lane and making you very nervous and uncomfortable sucks. It really does.

I agree with the rest of your post but as somebody drives a lot I can't say that I've ever had one situation where waiting behind a cyclist has caused me to not get somewhere in a timely manner. It's never even caused me to miss a green light. It's no different than waiting behind a tractor in farm country or a horse carriage in Amish country. You slow down and wait till you can pass safely. There really isn't much time lost, the problems are mostly psychological from having to slow down. Like how most would probably prefer to move at 60 mph for an hour than sit in a traffic jam for the same distance.

The main thing that stresses me out about cyclists as a driver is that they are small, move fast and often unpredictably, can be difficult to see, and if I were to accidentally hit one they'd want to gang up and put me in jail for murder. Waiting to pass them safely is the least of the problem. Memorial is especially easy because there are two travel lanes, so if you are stuck behind a cyclist in the right just wait for the left lane to clear and pass it just as you would a slower car. One lane two way streets with lots of oncoming traffic in theory would be the worst but again, I rarely if ever find myself in this kind of situation.

 

[rinserepeat]

And then this letter appears in the latest Jamaica Plain Gazette:
Dangerous bicyclists need to learn to share the path

The writer complains about the behavior of a bicyclist using the SW Corridor bike path, and says "I know there are signs that say this is a bike path. But everyone uses this path. Cyclists, runners, joggers, walkers, strollers and even dogs."

I don't like the SW corridor - it feels like it wasn't designed for bike commuting - it's for someone to peter along on a beach cruiser going barely faster than walking speed. maybe DCR doesn't have funds, but that whole plowing thing last winter made me think they really don't understand (or care) that THOUSANDS of people use these paths for transportation on a daily basis - and that failure to act is just causing conflict among various modes - especially as more and more people bike places.

the recent battle over comm ave makes me think we still have a very long way to go in convincing politicians that this is a pressing issue.

 

[Arlington]

Without being too preachy (which I already have, whatever), what steps can I, an ordinary civilian who honestly believes things can and should be much better for all users, take to improve our infrastructure?

Short term: Be the change you wish to see in the world.* As a cyclist model safe behavior that works cooperatively with both pedestrians and motorists:

- Buy & install a front light, if you don't have one. Its the law. We expect it of everyone. An run it day or night, like motorcyclists do (or should).

- Buy & install rear light, and a mirror. Your bike is a serious road vehicle and should take this seriously. And 40% of fatalities are from being run down from behind. Lights are cheap. Learn from things like the $5 Third Brake Light that saves 900,000 accidents annually. Even the Amish are required to have flashing electric lights on their buggies. No religious exception. If the Stoltfus family can put up with it as the one thing civilization asks, so can city slickers.

- Get off your bike and walk it, if you are crossing "with" a pedestrian sign or in zebra. You are a pedestrian only when feet on the ground >= wheels on the ground.

- Stop at stop signs and wait out the whole red light cycle. Don't think of it as delay, call it "interval training". It says to drivers "we're doing this together and I hate lights as much as you do." Like college cafeteria food, it promotes the bonding of shared adversity.

-Get a bell and ring it, especially approaching limited-visilibity places.

-Join an advocacy group. The speed separated paths come next.


*Not a Gandhi quote, but it is the bumpersticker version of something he did say: "If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change. As a man changes his own nature, so does the attitude of the world change towards him. ... We need not wait to see what others do."

 

[bigeman312]

Short term: Be the change you wish to see in the world.* As a cyclist model safe behavior that works cooperatively with both pedestrians and motorists:

Thanks for the response.

- Buy & install a front light, if you don't have one. Its the law. We expect it of everyone.

Check.

- Buy & install rear light, and a mirror. Your bike is a serious road vehicle and should take this seriously. And 40% of fatalities are from being run down from behind. Lights are cheap. Learn from things like the $5 Third Brake Light that saves 900,000 accidents annually. Even the Amish are required to have flashing electric lights on their buggies. No religious exception.

Check on rear light(s). I do not have a mirror. Good call, though, and I plan on purchasing one this weekend.

- Get off your bike and walk it, if you are crossing "with" a pedestrian sign or in zebra. You are a pedestrian only when feet on the ground >= wheels on the ground.

I do this MOST of the time. I should probably do this a little more. What is your take on places where a path crosses a road? For example, I bike through the crosswalk on the Alewife Station Access Rd (where the Alewife Linear Path crosses), after yielding to any oncoming traffic.

- Stop at stop signs and wait out the whole red light cycle. Don't think of it as delay, call it "interval training". It says to drivers "we're doing this together and I hate lights as much as you do." Like college cafeteria food, it promotes the bonding of shared adversity.

Check. I treat red lights as red lights and always wait for the whole cycle. I treat stop signs as yields only if there are no cars around.

-Get a bell and ring it, especially approaching limited-visilibity places.

I don't have one, but badly need one. I'll purchase this with the mirror this weekend.

-Join an advocacy group. The speed separated paths come next.

Have any recommendations? I live somewhat in your area, and I know that Somerville has many active community groups. Thanks for the response.

 

[Arlington]

Check. I treat red lights as red lights and always wait for the whole cycle. I treat stop signs as yields only if there are no cars around.

I'm going to say that's a great start. For me the thing is to be "obviously safe" around cars, in every sense, to the point of over dramatizing. Like speaking a foreign language, if it doesn't feel strange, you probably aren't going to be understood.

Have any recommendations? I live somewhat in your area, and I know that Somerville has many active community groups. Thanks for the response.

Statewide, there's MassBike. For Somerville, there's also PathFriends.org (if that's your thing).

And every city/town these days has a bike group. Find yours. Let them know you exist and that you know they exist. I joined MedfordBikes.org, and follow them on facebook. Its a start.

As for getting paths of the sort that might have saved the Somerville cyclist killed in Medford, that's the Mystic River Master Plan. In this last legislative session it advanced to funding of construction drawings, which is a key "gating" step (that makes it "shovel ready"). For that there's http://mysticriver.org/ and letting your state Rep and Senator know you care, and let them know you'd like to see construction funded.

And note to other cyclists here: If you don't have your headlight on, I find it really hard to see you in my mirror. I'll try to also check with a head-swivel, but c'mon, get a light.

 

[pixelsand8]

While I couldn't agree more with the lights and bell, this other stuff I can't quite get on board with, as somebody who both drives and bikes.

- Get off your bike and walk it, if you are crossing "with" a pedestrian sign or in zebra. You are a pedestrian only when feet on the ground >= wheels on the ground.

I don't see why it matters whether you are on or off the bike. Speed matters though. If you are acting as a pedestrian, either by crossing as one or riding on a sidewalk, slow down to a pedestrian speed - 3 mph or less, preferably less. Also always give peds the right of way.

- Stop at stop signs and wait out the whole red light cycle. Don't think of it as delay, call it "interval training". It says to drivers "we're doing this together and I hate lights as much as you do." Like college cafeteria food, it promotes the bonding of shared adversity.

Bad call. If you are waiting with cars and have an opportunity to separate yourself from traffic and potential turning conflicts, you should do it. One's safety is not worth sacrificing so you can "bond" with other users of the road who have the benefit of a metal cage surrounding them. It feeds into to this false idea that all road users are equal when in fact cars tend to have a massive advantage in most instances. Sure many car drivers won't understand this and get irked but that's really their problem and not yours as a cyclist. Just don't be stupid or reckless, run the reds when you've stopped for an extra moment and made absolutely sure you are safe.

Urban cycling is one of the few areas of life that I think laws should be broken on a routine basis as they were written for cars, not bikes, and while it's good to be law abiding it's better not to be dead. In terms of promoting better views towards cyclists, people over complicate this stuff. One's job in traffic, whether as a bike, car or ped, is simple, it's to get to your destination safely in a reasonably timely matter with minimal (or no) impediment to other users. Save the communication for advocacy meetings and other venues that are set up to accommodate it.

 

[Randomgear]

A great resource for cycling in urbanish areas is John Allen's "Street Smarts" pamphlet - available free of charge on the web: http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/

As much as I believe that this pamphlet is a fantastic resource, John Allen and I have serious differences in opinion far more frequently than not especially over bike infrastructure.

 

[Arlington]

I don't see why it matters whether you are on or off the bike. Speed matters though. If you are acting as a pedestrian, either by crossing as one or riding on a sidewalk, slow down to a pedestrian speed - 3 mph or less, preferably less. Also always give peds the right of way.

Well, as you can see, I like the answer "its the law." (as far as "going" with a red light and a white "WALK" sign). If its just your two wheels, you're a road vehicle. To take advantage of "pedestrian" things, you are asked to be a pedestrian.

Bad call. If you are waiting with cars and have an opportunity to separate yourself from traffic and potential turning conflicts, you should do it.

Sure, bikes can/should work their way up the right side and toe right up to the stop line. If you're ready to go on the green you'll be a car length beyond even the first car before it gets off the line (given its inertia and particularly if it is turning). If you're on the line and on the ball, it should not require running the red to get ahead of any turning conflicts. The traffic will find you again soon enough, except, your way, it finds you from behind...the direction from which 40% of fatalities come.

Urban cycling is one of the few areas of life that I think laws should be broken on a routine basis as they were written for cars, not bikes, and while it's good to be law abiding it's better not to be dead.

Well, I see breaking the law as being needed in 1 fewer area of life than you do. I don't see how stopping for reds is a killer, and I believe it is good "politics"

 

[davem]

I do the Idaho stop, because it makes sense. And it's safer. Oh, and a bike cop I was riding behind in the Back Bay yesterday did it right in front of me.*

If there are other cars stopped at the light I typically make a big show out of coming to a full stop and checking both directions far more than I actually need to. If there is a pedestrian around I'll wait for them to start crossing before I "run the red" as well, for added effect. I've yet to have a driver upset, since I make it obvious I'm not blowing through the red but crossing because it makes sense.

I might be more apt to actually follow the law as written if the city/state did the same. But when they do things like install a bike lane to the right of a right turn lane, I really can't take having to unnecessarily wait at a light seriously.


*At the next intersection a car blew through a stop sign and almost hit the bike cop. He caught her at a light, gave her a firm talking to and a ticket. I was so happy I almost fell off my bike.

 

[pixelsand8]

Well, I see breaking the law as being needed in 1 fewer area of life than you do. I don't see how stopping for reds is a killer, and I believe it is good "politics"

That's fine if it works for you (and avoids tickets) but as a whole it's not doing cyclists any favors. Treating them as road vehicles is not accurate - it makes them into inferior cars. In reality they are a cross between vehicles and pedestrians, we need laws, rules and expectations that reflect that reality. Versatility is one reason it's such a valuable form of transit and yet you want to almost completely neutralize that in the name of appeasing car drivers (and I disagree it's good politics). If the idea of breaking the law bothers you think of it as civil disobedience, with the long term goal of positive social change for everybody. If all cyclists utilize the Idaho Stop eventually it will be reflected in the law.

If there are other cars stopped at the light I typically make a big show out of coming to a full stop and checking both directions far more than I actually need to. If there is a pedestrian around I'll wait for them to start crossing before I "run the red" as well, for added effect. I've yet to have a driver upset, since I make it obvious I'm not blowing through the red but crossing because it makes sense.

This is what I would consider "good politics".

Another thing you have to consider is that if cyclists were required to follow the law to a T with heavy duty enforcement than nobody would ride a bike because it would just be a goofy, awkward and inefficient experience. This is probably why many car drivers are so insistent cyclists "follow the law" - it would mean far fewer cyclists clogging up their roads.

 

[rinserepeat]

the ONLY REASON we have extensive traffic laws is because motor vehicles are dangerous. stop signs and traffic lights didn't exist until a critical mass of people were driving cars - and bikes have been around for much longer.