Biking in Boston

[DAVE]

I know im preaching to the choir here, but deserves to be said. Theres two places where I see a good amount of bikers in Boston: Columbus Ave by Northeastern (good bike infra and university nearby) and then Mass Ave right by the Harvard Bridge--and its all people going back to Cambridge from their jobs lmao. You can just tell from the cycle map from google maps the huge gap in bike infra in most of Boston, especially SEast vs. NWest (Southie, Dorchester, Roxbury, Hyde Park, Mattapan etc.).

The biggest difference though is Cambridge/Somerville have continuous routes that take special attention to intersections. Boston has a lot of bike paths, but sooooo many little gaps everywhere. Those small gaps in between really make or break your bike network. So often there will be a mid to shite bike lane (but at least something) that just ends at an intersection so that cars have 4 different lanes to go straight or take a turn. Example at Columbia x MassAve:

 

[FK4]

I wish a bit more attention was paid to the quality of the pavement too. A car's shocks can largely absorb bumps and cracks but on a bike you can get thrown off the pedals or seat or your bag could fall out of the basket, which deters anyone but young, fit, experienced riders. Cambridge does a great job resurfacing the street right before they do any quick-build installations (see the new Hampshire St build, Inman Square, Garden St, Mt Auburn St, Lower Mass Ave installations. But Boston just takes an old car or parking lane which is saddled with paint markings, potholes, uneven sewage covers, uneven patches of repaired pavement, and throws down a flexpost and paint. The lane is safer from cars but still an unpleasant experience as you're jostled about, especially with lower profile road bike tires.

Since asphalt lasts MUCH longer with just the weight of bikes on it, that resurface of the bike lane is several orders of magnitude higher ROI than fixing a car lane (in $ spent per road user).

So. Fucking. True. It's often just sloppy the way this is done, and not infrequently also dangerous.

 

[FK4]

Agreed. Take Columbus Ave., as an example. When the paint lanes between Mass Ave and Dartmouth went in, I switched from riding the last bit of South West Corridor park for my commute to using Columbus. Those lanes seemed god sent at the time, as such infrastructure as there was, wasn't very good. Now we don't want to see that type of lane, but I'm still comfortable enough on them. Nevertheless, I can't stand riding that section of Columbus anymore, because the surface is complete disaster. To really ride that route, you need a third eye, to watch the pavement, while the first two look at parked cars to the right, and moving cars to the left.

This is exactly the example i thought of when reading the comment youre responding to.

 

[#bancars]

I know im preaching to the choir here, but deserves to be said. Theres two places where I see a good amount of bikers in Boston: Columbus Ave by Northeastern (good bike infra and university nearby) and then Mass Ave right by the Harvard Bridge--and its all people going back to Cambridge from their jobs lmao. You can just tell from the cycle map from google maps the huge gap in bike infra in most of Boston, especially SEast vs. NWest (Southie, Dorchester, Roxbury, Hyde Park, Mattapan etc.).
View attachment 42860

The biggest difference though is Cambridge/Somerville have continuous routes that take special attention to intersections. Boston has a lot of bike paths, but sooooo many little gaps everywhere. Those small gaps in between really make or break your bike network. So often there will be a mid to shite bike lane (but at least something) that just ends at an intersection so that cars have 4 different lanes to go straight or take a turn. Example at Columbia x MassAve:
View attachment 42861

Good post, but I'll chime in and throw out a few other locations in Boston proper where (anecdotally) I see a lot of people cycling:

1) Charles River bike path
2) Southwest Corridor
3) Commonwealth Avenue in Allston from Packards Corner to Kenmore, including the BU Bridge
4) Franklin Street in Lower Allston, including the Franklin Street ped bridge and the section of Harvard Street that continues into Cambridge and the river paths

One big thing in common is that most of these areas feature good, separated cycle infra that is mostly continuous (e.g. Charles River + SW Corridor), or are otherwise critical links between neighborhoods where folks don't really have a lot of other options to get from point A to point B (e.g. Franklin St + ped bridge over the Pike; BU Bridge).

On a related note, JP and Allston have the highest bike modeshares of any neighborhood in Boston. For JP I think most of that comes from the SW Corridor and paths along the Emerald Necklace. For Allston, the Comm Ave protected bike cycletracks surely help, and maybe the Brighton Ave bus/bike lanes (debatable given their questionable utility) but I think a lot of it may be a function of low household car ownership and high student population (I cycled to school as a grad student at BU from Allston).

Neighborhoods that I think really punch below their weight when considering density and proximity to job centers: South End, Southie, Fenway, and Mission Hill. These places with the proper bike infrastructure could see cycle modeshares of 10-20% like many core neighborhoods of Montreal.

 

[FK4]

I know im preaching to the choir here, but deserves to be said. Theres two places where I see a good amount of bikers in Boston: Columbus Ave by Northeastern (good bike infra and university nearby) and then Mass Ave right by the Harvard Bridge--and its all people going back to Cambridge from their jobs lmao. You can just tell from the cycle map from google maps the huge gap in bike infra in most of Boston, especially SEast vs. NWest (Southie, Dorchester, Roxbury, Hyde Park, Mattapan etc.).
View attachment 42860

The biggest difference though is Cambridge/Somerville have continuous routes that take special attention to intersections. Boston has a lot of bike paths, but sooooo many little gaps everywhere. Those small gaps in between really make or break your bike network. So often there will be a mid to shite bike lane (but at least something) that just ends at an intersection so that cars have 4 different lanes to go straight or take a turn. Example at Columbia x MassAve:
View attachment 42861

Ive said this before on here, but my biggest problem with Boston's traffic and bike planning is they very carelessly will take superfluous stretches of pavement in areas where those exist for bike lanes, with no regard for the major intersections where these stretches lead to. The areas where there simply are no easy ways to make a bike lane are exactly those areas where there tends to be congestion and dangerous driving. And I dont think it's always a good idea to simply slap down bike lane paint on some windswept stretch if a biker who doesnt know better will suddenly find themselves hurled out of a bike lane into some pseudo-shared lane precisely at the point where the whole road narrows and driving gets more dangerous.

A classic example of this is Centre St by Faulkner. There are bike lanes on either side of Allandale Rd, but right at the intersection, Centre gets an extra lane in each direction for the turns onto Allandale, and to accommodate these lanes, the through lanes of Centre get shifted over. So this is an intersection where approaching cars, already driving 40-50mph, suddenly get shunted abruptly over by one lane each, and right at that very point is also where the bike lane runs out. Literally, if you bike here you are thrust from a bike lane into a travel lane where the drivers in this lane are busy looking to their lefts (away from bikers) to make sure they dont crash into the suddenly-created left turning lane which is full of cars.

And this is replicated all over Boston. The key areas where the bike lane ends are also the most dangerous intersections for cyclists. Any area that doesnt have some convenient extra strip of pavement to accommodate a quick paint job to create a bike lane is always also going to be an area that traffic planners think that traffic is too dicey in said intersection to make a bike lane and worsen traffic. So it's this weird paradox where roads that are already not all that dangerous to bikes just because they're already super wide are those that are low hanging fruit for bike lanes, and the areas that are innately the most dangerous for bikes are also the very last spots to get anything for bikes only. That is first and foremost the most critical problem in Boston.

It would be smarter in many cases to not even have done anything with bike lanes and create a false sense of security without committing simultaneously to addressing the most dangerous intersections. But sadly, this backwards type of thinking seems prevalent across Boston traffic planners, and is not limited to bikes. Hence, we have the same brainless proposals and plans we occasionally see to throw on some bus lane only paint on some strip of road that already was so wide that traffic wasn't bad in that area and it didn't need a bus lane. So you get the bus speeding into the same congested intersection as before.

At any rate, the city should not have any instances where a biker suddenly has the bike lane run out, without any warning, in the middle of a busy intersection. This is extremely dangerous. At the very least, the bike lane should just be striped to go onto the sidewalk, or, alternatively, there should be a million painted signs on the lane warning the biker that they're entering a no bike lane area and dangerous intersection. I would have so much less hatred for our city officials if I didn't feel like they truly didnt give a shit about legitimate risks to my safety caused by such thoughtless planning and lack thereof.

 

[HenryAlan]

A classic example of this is Centre St by Faulkner. There are bike lanes on either side of Allandale Rd, but right at the intersection, Centre gets an extra lane in each direction for the turns onto Allandale, and to accommodate these lanes, the through lanes of Centre get shifted over. So this is an intersection where approaching cars, already driving 40-50mph, suddenly get shunted abruptly over by one lane each, and right at that very point is also where the bike lane runs out. Literally, if you bike here you are thrust from a bike lane into a travel lane where the drivers in this lane are busy looking to their lefts (away from bikers) to make sure they dont crash into the suddenly-created left turning lane which is full of cars.

Yes, that's a very dangerous spot, and similar to it, is basically the entire length of VFW Parkway. It is a parkway, it's beautiful, it should have good recreational facilities, but it doesn't. The bike lanes on the street are actually pretty good, but they have that same exact problem at every intersection. What drives me crazy about this, is that there is a wide, grassy, tree-lined median the entire route between Centre St. and Spring St. It is the perfect spot for a paved, multi-use path. It would get all kinds of use from joggers and bike riders and massively improve safety for both groups. And yet, I've never once seen a single mention of this idea in any planning documents, advocacy work, etc. It boggles my mind that such a perfect place for a lengthy trail is being ignored.

 

[bigeman312]

Yes, that's a very dangerous spot, and similar to it, is basically the entire length of VFW Parkway. It is a parkway, it's beautiful, it should have good recreational facilities, but it doesn't. The bike lanes on the street are actually pretty good, but they have that same exact problem at every intersection. What drives me crazy about this, is that there is a wide, grassy, tree-lined median the entire route between Centre St. and Spring St. It is the perfect spot for a paved, multi-use path. It would get all kinds of use from joggers and bike riders and massively improve safety for both groups. And yet, I've never once seen a single mention of this idea in any planning documents, advocacy work, etc. It boggles my mind that such a perfect place for a lengthy trail is being ignored.

I think that's a slightly different problem, and it's worth pointing out what that difference is here.

For reference, I love biking on the VFW (I'm a crazy person and this doesn't mean I think the facilities are adequate for encouraging cycling among the gen pop). There are wide shoulders, very infrequent side streets to worry about being hooked and no parked cars to worry about being doored. Then, you turn onto Centre, there is a bike lane - and not a door zone one either! Which is great! But when you get to the stretch of Centre being referenced, as you approach Allandale, it becomes a death trap. And not just a death trap, but a death trap that cyclists are being funneled into from the bike lane.

So, the VFW only has the similarity of being a missed opportunity to encourage cycling among a wider segment of the population.

The stretch of Centre being referenced is being used as a classic example of a small, dangerous gap into which cycling infrastracture funnels cyclists. This is not like the VFW.

 

[FK4]

I think that's a slightly different problem, and it's worth pointing out what that difference is here.

For reference, I love biking on the VFW (I'm a crazy person and this doesn't mean I think the facilities are adequate for encouraging cycling among the gen pop). There are wide shoulders, very infrequent side streets to worry about being hooked and no parked cars to worry about being doored. Then, you turn onto Centre, there is a bike lane - and not a door zone one either! Which is great! But when you get to the stretch of Centre being referenced, as you approach Allandale, it becomes a death trap. And not just a death trap, but a death trap that cyclists are being funneled into from the bike lane.

So, the VFW only has the similarity of being a missed opportunity to encourage cycling among a wider segment of the population.

The stretch of Centre being referenced is being used as a classic example of a small, dangerous gap into which cycling infrastracture funnels cyclists. This is not like the VFW.

It is a great point Henry makes, tho—it’s stunning that the idea of a bike lane or mall á la Comm Ave is something that’s never, ever been proposed by anyone. I’ve never heard of it (and honestly, never even considered it!)

 

[bigeman312]

It is a great point Henry makes, tho—it’s stunning that the idea of a bike lane or mall á la Comm Ave is something that’s never, ever been proposed by anyone. I’ve never heard of it (and honestly, never even considered it!)

Absolutely agree! I should have made that clear. Great point, but different problem.

 

[HenryAlan]

The stretch of Centre being referenced is being used as a classic example of a small, dangerous gap into which cycling infrastracture funnels cyclists. This is not like the VFW.

Maybe I'm not understanding your description, although I'm pretty familiar with the Allendale/Centre St. area. But it seems to me, that VFW does the same thing at every single intersection! There is a bike lane until about 50 yards before the intersection, that then merges with a car lane. The bike lane returns only after you have passed through the intersection. And for the record, like you, I enjoy biking on VFW, but I don't feel that I can recommend that to anybody, due to the way the bike lanes disappear every few hundred yards.

 

[bigeman312]

Maybe I'm not understanding your description, although I'm pretty familiar with the Allendale/Centre St. area. But it seems to me, that VFW does the same thing at every single intersection! There is a bike lane until about 50 yards before the intersection, that then merges with a car lane. The bike lane returns only after you have passed through the intersection. And for the record, like you, I enjoy biking on VFW, but I don't feel that I can recommend that to anybody, due to the way the bike lanes disappear every few hundred yards.

Ah yes I understand now! There are some intersections on the VFW that absolutely do fit that description. I wasn’t seeing the trees for the forest

 

[sm89]

NACTO_Dont-Give-Up-at-the-Intersection.pdf

The biggest difference though is Cambridge/Somerville have continuous routes that take special attention to intersections. Boston has a lot of bike paths, but sooooo many little gaps everywhere. Those small gaps in between really make or break your bike network. So often there will be a mid to shite bike lane (but at least something) that just ends at an intersection so that cars have 4 different lanes to go straight or take a turn. Example at Columbia x MassAve:
View attachment 42861

 

[Stlin]

My personal biggest pet peeve as someone who bikes into Back Bay from Cambridge, is actually Comm Ave. Assuming you're sticking to marked lanes, Crossing into Boston on Mass Ave, you'd join Comm Ave on a right side bike lane... which immediately goes away as the underpass traffic merges and the bike lane is suddenly on the on the left side of Comm Ave, against the mall. You're functionally forced to either ride in mixed traffic or cross 2 lanes of high speed traffic coming up the underpass to rejoin the bike lane.

Additionally, the back bay network is annoyingly directional. From Comm Ave, there are zero southbound bike lanes between Mass Ave and Arlington, leaving you to mixed traffic. However, going home is a different story, with multiple northbound lanes on Hereford and Dartmouth, followed by the parking protected Beacon bike lane to the Mass Ave bridge. It's much comfier going home from Back Bay, when the low-friction experience should be getting into town. Granted, the proposed Boylston bike lane will help a lot, but Berkeley will be a northbound bike lane, so it'll still be annoyingly difficult to get to.

 

[king_vibe]

 

[king_vibe]

I'm sure that the Boylston protected bike lane will be completed in the next 90 days, as was promised.

 

[HenryAlan]

My personal biggest pet peeve as someone who bikes into Back Bay from Cambridge, is actually Comm Ave. Assuming you're sticking to marked lanes, Crossing into Boston on Mass Ave, you'd join Comm Ave on a right side bike lane... which immediately goes away as the underpass traffic merges and the bike lane is suddenly on the on the left side of Comm Ave, against the mall. You're functionally forced to either ride in mixed traffic or cross 2 lanes of high speed traffic coming up the underpass to rejoin the bike lane.

Additionally, the back bay network is annoyingly directional. From Comm Ave, there are zero southbound bike lanes between Mass Ave and Arlington, leaving you to mixed traffic. However, going home is a different story, with multiple northbound lanes on Hereford and Dartmouth, followed by the parking protected Beacon bike lane to the Mass Ave bridge. It's much comfier going home from Back Bay, when the low-friction experience should be getting into town. Granted, the proposed Boylston bike lane will help a lot, but Berkeley will be a northbound bike lane, so it'll still be annoyingly difficult to get to.

Yeah, I can see how that Comm Ave lane shift would suck. I've only ever crossed through that intersection, never made a turn, so my Comm Ave. experience is pretty good, using the underpass and then continuing on the left side. I haven't tried it, but have you considered Marlborough St as an option? There's no bike lane, but traffic is usually pretty light.

 

[Stlin]

Yeah, I can see how that Comm Ave lane shift would suck. I've only ever crossed through that intersection, never made a turn, so my Comm Ave. experience is pretty good, using the underpass and then continuing on the left side. I haven't tried it, but have you considered Marlborough St as an option? There's no bike lane, but traffic is usually pretty light.

Honestly I usually do use Marlborough - but I'd still say it's generally not a good thing when the parallel road is a better option than the one with a bike lane.

 

[cden4]

My personal biggest pet peeve as someone who bikes into Back Bay from Cambridge, is actually Comm Ave. Assuming you're sticking to marked lanes, Crossing into Boston on Mass Ave, you'd join Comm Ave on a right side bike lane... which immediately goes away as the underpass traffic merges and the bike lane is suddenly on the on the left side of Comm Ave, against the mall. You're functionally forced to either ride in mixed traffic or cross 2 lanes of high speed traffic coming up the underpass to rejoin the bike lane.

Additionally, the back bay network is annoyingly directional. From Comm Ave, there are zero southbound bike lanes between Mass Ave and Arlington, leaving you to mixed traffic. However, going home is a different story, with multiple northbound lanes on Hereford and Dartmouth, followed by the parking protected Beacon bike lane to the Mass Ave bridge. It's much comfier going home from Back Bay, when the low-friction experience should be getting into town. Granted, the proposed Boylston bike lane will help a lot, but Berkeley will be a northbound bike lane, so it'll still be annoyingly difficult to get to.

This is why back when the Boston Bikes program was initially formed, a key part of the initial plan was a bi-directional protected bike lane along the entire length of Dartmouth St from Columbus Ave to the Esplanade. Unfortunately that has since been abandoned.

 

[grand_junction]

My personal biggest pet peeve as someone who bikes into Back Bay from Cambridge, is actually Comm Ave. Assuming you're sticking to marked lanes, Crossing into Boston on Mass Ave, you'd join Comm Ave on a right side bike lane... which immediately goes away as the underpass traffic merges and the bike lane is suddenly on the on the left side of Comm Ave, against the mall. You're functionally forced to either ride in mixed traffic or cross 2 lanes of high speed traffic coming up the underpass to rejoin the bike lane.

Additionally, the back bay network is annoyingly directional. From Comm Ave, there are zero southbound bike lanes between Mass Ave and Arlington, leaving you to mixed traffic. However, going home is a different story, with multiple northbound lanes on Hereford and Dartmouth, followed by the parking protected Beacon bike lane to the Mass Ave bridge. It's much comfier going home from Back Bay, when the low-friction experience should be getting into town. Granted, the proposed Boylston bike lane will help a lot, but Berkeley will be a northbound bike lane, so it'll still be annoyingly difficult to get to.

The Comm Ave stuff there is one of my least favorite pieces of bike infrastructure (if it can even be called that) in the city, it drives me nuts. You're on the right and then shift left for the Charlesgate intersection and then back to right heading into Kenmore, and if you're trying to cut over to the Fenway via Brookline Ave basically forget about it, the left lane there is a death trap.

And yeah, there are definitely alternatives, but some of them are out of the way and not easy to follow, and Comm Ave is the Google Maps recommendation! I don't know why the city is so bad at wayfinding, either

 

[bigeman312]

The Comm Ave stuff there is one of my least favorite pieces of bike infrastructure (if it can even be called that) in the city, it drives me nuts. You're on the right and then shift left for the Charlesgate intersection and then back to right heading into Kenmore, and if you're trying to cut over to the Fenway via Brookline Ave basically forget about it, the left lane there is a death trap.

And yeah, there are definitely alternatives, but some of them are out of the way and not easy to follow, and Comm Ave is the Google Maps recommendation! I don't know why the city is so bad at wayfinding, either

All of the things said are valid and true, but the worst thing about Comm Ave isn’t even mentioned and that’s trying to go left onto Mass Ave when coming from Back Bay. It’s a common movement and it’s a death trap.