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/
www.cambridgeday.com
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.
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.
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.
mass.streetsblog.org
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
mass.streetsblog.org
Mass.StreetsblogMA said:
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.
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.
Air suspension systems on buses have had "kneeling" capabilities for several decades. It is hardly "unproven tech".
