Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 485 posts

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#161

Post by tsieling »

RHSeeger wrote: post #72
ahoy wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better bike infrastructure will encourage groups of people who don't currently bike to start. More protected lanes means more kids, more old folks, more women of all ages, will start cycling. And more cycling is a good thing!

There's many things that are good things. However, you need to balance them against the cost (money, space, time, whatever) required to achieve them. For some smaller roads, the cost might not be worth the benefit.

The cost of things should indeed be considered. Depending on region, tax money subsidizes every mile driven (one well done source here https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/driving... but there are many, many others). A switch to cycling amounts to a much lower subsidy per mile, so if we want to talk costs then the argument for cycling infrastructure becomes even stronger.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#162

Post by philamonster »

just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

I lived in Boston/Cambridge/Somerville/JP/Brighton etc etc for nearly a decade from mid 90's to early 2000's, half of it as a bike messenger and lived all you describe daily, 365. Hundreds of accounts in that time that do not paint a very warm picture of American "city" living during this era. For every stupid thing someone has done to or near me in a car I have seen an equally shocking occurrence on a bike. Maybe not daily but hooo boy, people are always stupid traveling in any mode of transportation. I don't think anything will change re: bike barriers unless the auto is completely removed from the picture like in various EU cities. EVEN THEN, people will still people on bikes. Count on it...

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#163

Post by sevenf0ur »

just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

Well at least you didn't get "coal rolled": https://www.reddit.com/r/bicycling/comments/9b16vl/a_truck_c...

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#164

Post by Eric_WVGG »

biswaroop wrote: post #49
Eric_WVGG wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in Boston/Cambridge about eight years ago and found it to be the most bicyclist-unfriendly city I had ever lived in (there are certainly worse, I just haven’t had that misfortune). I’ve been honked at by obnoxious drivers before, but only in Boston would drivers routinely slow down to call me a “f----ing f-gg--t” for being on the road. NYC drivers might be jerks, but I never got the impression that they were…

It's gotten far better. As a grad student who races for MIT and trains on the roads around Boston's suburbs, I've found most drivers to be surprisingly patient with us cyclists. There's the fair fraction of drivers who turn without signaling, but the only anger I've gotten from drivers is when I've run a red light (deserved it). The suburbs to the west are packed with road cyclists, and good weather weekends mean the…

Good to hear. I dropped by Boston last summer and was mildly shocked by how friendly everyone seemed, was wondering if I was just interacting with tourists or if they introduced prozac to the water supply.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#165

Post by ben7799 »

mhb wrote: post #39
chadash wrote: post #27

> "Local law now requires the city to erect vertical barriers between cyclists and cars on any roadway that’s rebuilt, expanded, or reconfigured" I'm all for better bike lanes, but it seems kind of extreme to require this for all new roads [0]. I used to live in Cambridge and rode my bike quite a bit. I never felt like I needed a dedicated lane on every side street, just on the main drags (where some of the new prote…

On a lot of streets, won't the only way to do this be to eliminate parking on one side of the street? Should be interesting.

This is Cambridge, MA.. it is incredibly hard to go most places in Cambridge and ever find a parking space on the side of the street.

If you are not a resident the majority of non-metered parking is not legal for you to park in.

The metered parking has strict maximum time limits and they enforce parking aggressively. It can be very hard to find a parking space at all.

If you need to travel in for business/pleasure in a car you basically are forced to either go to a subway/train station with a parking lot and then park there and take the subway/train/bus into Cambridge, or you will need to go in and have a parking garage ($$) to park at, and then walk a long way.

It is seriously stressful to use a car in Cambridge and Somerville.

It's already so dense & hard to use cars that the retail businesses don't really have anything they can complain about. By locating their business their they already decided to be hostile to customers who want to use a car.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#166

Post by justinator »

viburnum wrote: post #123
just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

The thing about cycling is that it’s basically fast walking. In places where cycling dominates people only ride as fast as a quick jogger (10 mph is a 6 minute mile). The correct model for cycling isn’t space on the road, it’s an extra sidewalk with an accommodating turning radius. This is what you actually see in The Netherlands. People think of public spaces as roads and as roads as places for cars to drive and par…

This is what you actually see in The Netherlands.

Huh? In the city center, speeds are greatly reduced for cars and bikes, but getting between metropolitan areas, both speeds can climb. You do know there's a whole bike highway system in the Netherlands, right?

I think the, "bikes as fast pedestrians" model is a bit outdated. I don't want to be seen as a very fast person on foot, while on my bike. I can hit 30+mph in a sprint, and go many hundreds of miles in a week.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#167

Post by gnulinux »

tashoecraft wrote: post #120
gnulinux wrote: post #75

As a biker in Cambridge, I have mixed feelings about this. Biking in Cambridge is subpar, I lived in Berkeley, CA 4 years and biking was MUCH more comfortable there. I'm worried this will hinder the progress and slow down constructing new bike lanes. I want more protection BUT I also want bike lanes every where. If they're not gonna construct more bike lanes because now it has more regulation, this is a negative deve…

I feel like unprotected bike lanes are near useless. Atleast in NY, drivers don't really care. Ubers/cabs will pull over quickly to let people off blocking them. Pedestrians don't look for bikes when they cross them, and bikers are often forced to leave the lane due to obstruction.

Same in Boston area, and I think this is a cultural problem that needs to be solved. I never had this problem when I was living in the Bay Area.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#168

Post by btrettel »

CydeWeys wrote: post #139
gugagore wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a certain burden to being vigilant and self-defensive on the road. Even if I'm not protected in intersections, a protected bike lane means that there's a lot less time I need to be worried that a car will hit me. However, you're bringing up the point that protected bike lanes may make intersections even more dangerous for cyclists. While your reasoning makes sense, do you know if there's anything to corrobora…

They're not. Protected bike lanes are for sure safer than unprotected bike lanes. If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough . Amsterdam for example doesn't have these kinds of issues because their design (and especially light signaling) is better.

> If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough. Amsterdam for example doesn't have these kinds of issues because their design (and especially light signaling) is better.

I agree. The problem is that I have never seen those sorts of lanes in the US. The choice is between semi-protected lanes which may be worse or no lanes. I don't know precisely which is better, but I usually choose to not use the protected lanes due to issues at intersections.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#169

Post by asdff »

viburnum wrote: post #123
just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

The thing about cycling is that it’s basically fast walking. In places where cycling dominates people only ride as fast as a quick jogger (10 mph is a 6 minute mile). The correct model for cycling isn’t space on the road, it’s an extra sidewalk with an accommodating turning radius. This is what you actually see in The Netherlands. People think of public spaces as roads and as roads as places for cars to drive and par…

I think average is closer to 12mph, at least according to google maps. I definitely could haul ass and go nearly twice that fast, but when I'm riding to go someplace and not to burn calories, the last thing I want to do is ride at a pace that's going to make me sweaty.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#170

Post by justinator »

just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

a white man in a mid-size SUV leaned out his window and said loudly to me, "I hope you get hit!"

My usual retort to this, as the cyclist:

"I hope you find true Love!"

Post reply on HN