
Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law - cienega
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/04/protected-bike-lanes-traffic-safety-cambridge-bicycle-plan/586876/
======
just_steve_h
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-size SUV leaned out his window
and said loudly to me, "I hope you get hit!"

This morning on my way to work, a driver popped out of a side street from my
left side directly in front of me. As I was along side of him, he swerved hard
to the right and into a parking lot (no signal of course).

I've been a daily bike commuter in Cambridge for 12 years. We desperately need
infrastructure that forces drivers to respect cyclists as equal road users.
There is hardly a day that I don't _almost_ get hit by car while cycling.

~~~
viburnum
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 park, so they get hung up on “sharing the road,”
but really the thing to do is shrinking the road and enhancing places for
people.

~~~
zymhan
You won't find a cyclist who opposes dedicated, protected lanes that are
separate from roads and sidewalks.

It is almost always the car drivers who don't want to sacrifice the single
lane required to make a two way, protected bike lane. Case in point, Peachtree
St in Atlanta ~3 years ago.

[https://www.ajc.com/news/traffic/bike-lane-plan-for-
peachtre...](https://www.ajc.com/news/traffic/bike-lane-plan-for-peachtree-
road-hits-dead-end/vPZiz5EQrgdwDpcuyTK4cK/)

[https://www.ajc.com/news/local/bike-lanes-peachtree-road-
for...](https://www.ajc.com/news/local/bike-lanes-peachtree-road-for-the-
percent-wheels/SqL6Q0veuNzA7JlCPTSL2H/)

~~~
rayiner
Atlanta is a great example of where it makes no sense to have bike lines. I
lived in Atlanta for eight years. It’s a commuter city. The only people biking
are relatively privileged yuppies living in the fancy new apartments and
condos that have sprung up recently. Why spend public money, and inconvenience
drivers in the process, for their sake?

If we’re going to use up a lane, let’s do it in a socially responsible way and
make it a dedicated bus lane, which is what most people in need in Atlanta use
to get around.

~~~
bobwaycott
> _Why spend public money, and inconvenience drivers in the process, for their
> sake?_

Because the cyclists, too, are part of the public? It's not like that public
money is solely sourced from automobile drivers. Many people I know who live
and work and pay taxes in Atlanta cycle _and_ drive, depending on where
they're going. Are you really suggesting auto-drivers are more important
citizens whose convenience matters more than the safety of others? Should
Atlanta also start de-prioritizing safe sidewalks and crosswalks so people who
are walking all over Midtown and downtown don't inconvenience the drivers?
Suggesting the many people who aren't traveling along on 4 or more wheels
should be ignored for the sake of convenience to those who are seems awfully
silly.

~~~
wozniacki

      Because the cyclists, too, are part of the
      public? It's not like that public money is
      solely sourced from automobile drivers.
    

Then, would you be not opposed to requiring bicycles to be registered,
bicyclists to be licensed & taxed just like cars & vehicular traffic does?

If you want a lane all to yourself isn't only fair that you pay your fair
share toward the building, maintenance and repair of the lanes? Why should you
get to use them free of cost?

~~~
zymhan
We do pay our fair share, over half of the road funding in Georgia comes from
general revenue, i.e. taxes everyone pays regardless of vehicle.

Don't act like my bike puts as much wear and tear on the road as your 3 ton
SUV or the 18-wheelers and delivery trucks.

------
mkoryak
I found a "simple trick that makes all drivers around me nice".

I put a pigeon on my helmet 8 years ago[1]. Everywhere I go I see smiles. I
really makes every ride fun. One of my friends recently started also doing it,
so its starting to catch on.

Pigeonriding transforms me from an awkward software engineer into an
interesting person who people want to talk to. I have only had a handful of
bad experiences[2] with drivers and other bikers in 8+ years that I have been
riding (a few of those years I commuted on a bike year-round).

[1]:[http://www.pictureboston.com/blog/2011/08/14/a-leica-
camera-...](http://www.pictureboston.com/blog/2011/08/14/a-leica-camera-
street-scene-from-bostons-north-end/)

[2]:[https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=1&v=2hJ_hzjlQsw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=1&v=2hJ_hzjlQsw)

~~~
r_klancer
OMG DID I JUST SEE YOU IN UNION SQUARE, SOMERVILLE? (Or was it your friend?) I
noticed the pigeon.

(File under: it's a small world, I probably shouldn't act so surprised.)

~~~
mkoryak
That was my friend. He bikes in cambridge every day while I moved to the burbs
and only commute when biking for an hour wont make me cold/wet.

------
pselbert
Every person I know that bikes in Chicago has been hit at least once.
Fortunately none of them have been seriously injured, but it is a constant
danger.

There are lots of bike lanes downtown but they aren’t protected or respected.
We have a long way to go to make biking a safe form of transport like it is in
the Netherlands.

~~~
dominotw
I personally know 3 ppl that died in chicago. Two of them were my coworkers,
died in the same year. :/

Sorry but if you have kids and family you are fucking stupid to ride bikes on
the street in chicago. White bikes on sidewalks are not street art. Go to
lakeshore path/606 if you are dying to ride bikes.

I got doored 2 yrs ago escaped only with broken wrist.

~~~
bluejekyll
Then I assume you would support a similar law in Chicago as Cambridge passed?

~~~
dominotw
Yes but aren't you back on the street with no protection where there are no
bike lanes( most of chicago)?

~~~
bluejekyll
I don't know Chicago, but I do know what's happened in San Francisco over the
last 20 years. It's taken a long time, but the city is finally starting to
take protected bike lanes seriously, sadly much of that is in response to
lives lost.

When I first got here, it was just a fight for standard bike lanes. For either
to happen, more people need to get on their bikes and ride. Contributing to
your local bike coalition is also great way to help push these issues forward.

If everyone follows your advice and chooses to not ride because of the danger,
then nothing will change, and the lives lost to poor road infrastructure and
poor driver education will have been for nothing.

~~~
dominotw
> If everyone follows your advice and chooses to not ride because of the
> danger, then nothing will change

Are you seriously suggesting some ppl risk their lives for 'change'? Sorry I
really don't want to trade my life for bike lanes, there are ppl counting on
me to stay alive.

~~~
bluejekyll
No, I don't want people to risk their lives for anything. I want things to
change. 40,000 people die a year in the US while driving or riding in cars,
following your logic, that is also extremely risky, and so we shouldn't do it.

~~~
dominotw
I am not sure thats a correct analogy. Driving a car to work is not an
optional activity for most ppl. Ppl riding their bikes in the city are doing
it for fun/thrill/whatever, its an optional activity for 90% of the ppl doing
it.

I have a theory that most of these ppl would stop doing it once the
thrill/'cool factor' goes away with protected bike lanes.

~~~
bluejekyll
That's an interesting theory. I think I've seen some studies that show the
opposite:

85% increase in cycling with better infrastructure:
[https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/tomguha/85-increase-
cycling-a...](https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/tomguha/85-increase-cycling-
attributable-better-infrastructure)

This shows a direct correlation between lower risk and increased cycling:
[https://nacto.org/2016/07/20/high-quality-bike-facilities-
in...](https://nacto.org/2016/07/20/high-quality-bike-facilities-increase-
ridership-make-biking-safer/)

I especially like this quote: "A virtuous cycle is clear: With more
infrastructure come more riders. Perhaps counterintuitively, with more
infrastructure and more riders, safety improves. And the more bicycles there
are traversing a city, the more it reaps numerous returns on investment,
including the health benefits of cleaner air and greater physical activity."
from [https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/buildings-and-
cities/bike...](https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/buildings-and-cities/bike-
infrastructure)

I don't think most people who are biking while commuting are doing it purely
for the thrill, but that is a plus, no doubt.

------
chadash
> _" 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 protected bike lanes were amazing to
have).

[0] Actual ordinance available at
[http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID...](http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID=5905&highlightTerms=cycling%20safety%20ordinance).
I could be misinterpreting the language, and it seems they will allow for some
very limited exceptions, but the default seems to be that a typical side
street would have a dedicated bike lane.

EDIT: after reading the actual ordinance again (and as a comment below pointed
out), it seems that this only applies to streets that are rebuilt or improved
_and_ are part of the city's plan for streets that should include bike paths.
In other words, most random side streets wouldn't get bike paths.

~~~
strictnein
Don't they get snow? With vertical barriers I'm confused how a plow will be
able to properly clear the street.

~~~
amalcon
Most of the existing separated bike lanes are incorporated into the sidewalk,
and therefore protected by the curb. There are a few that are "protected" by
rows of parked cars or bolted-down pylons, but this would seem to not be legal
under the new law.

I'm actually not sure how they manage to get those bike lanes cleared, seeing
as how the sidewalks are always covered in snow, but there seems to be some
method.

~~~
CydeWeys
There are smaller vehicles that are used to plow just the bike lanes in some
parts of the world.

It probably doesn't matter so much though because the percentage of people who
continue biking even in cold winter and with adverse snow conditions is quite
low.

~~~
LeonidasXIV
> It probably doesn't matter so much though because the percentage of people
> who continue biking even in cold winter and with adverse snow conditions is
> quite low.

This is not necessarily true. Here in Copenhagen the amount of people cycling
in winter is not significantly less than at other times of the year. That
said, we don't have much snow, but the bike lanes are cleared before the road
lanes (to incentivize not taking the car into the city).

~~~
amalcon
The problem is more that twilight is around 4:30PM from December through
February, rather than the weather. Though I suppose this might be less of a
worry if cycling infrastructure were safer.

------
hirundo
This is long term controversial issue. If you think the right answer is
obvious you probably haven't dove down to the details, where it's much
murkier. See in particular John Forester's _Effective_Cycling_. Forester
believes that "cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of
vehicles" and are not segregated from them. There are studies in this area
pointing in both directions. One such concluded that putting bikes on multi-
use trails makes cyclists less safe. A lot depends on the design of the bike
paths, and a badly designed one can increase the risk over none at all.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_Cycling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_Cycling)

~~~
ahoy
I don't know a single cyclist who agrees with that statement.

~~~
btrettel
I've been a transportation cyclist for roughly a decade and I agree with
everything he said. Many cyclists do, particularly more experienced ones.

Bike lanes can be helpful, but they are not the panacea many people make them
out to be. I think the main benefit bike lanes have is increasing the number
of cyclists which leads to the "safety in numbers" effect. I think far too
many bike lanes are made poorly, however, and these ones seem to be less safe
than if there was no bike lane.

~~~
CydeWeys
And yet protected bike lanes are proven to vastly increase the number of
people who are willing to bike, which then makes biking safer for everyone
because of sheer numbers. I'm a confident enough cyclist to bike in the
street, take the lane, and ignore all the honking assholes, but my girlfriend
isn't. The protected bike lanes are great because it means we can bike to
things together.

~~~
btrettel
I don't know if the increase in the number of cyclists outweighs the problems
with the intersections.

I get the impression from your various comments here that you have never rode
a bike in the US, so perhaps our experience differs.

On my daily commute in Austin I cross I-35 via a bike lane that is sometimes
semi-protected. I think many inexperienced cyclists think that this is "safe"
because it's sometimes protected, but I consider it to be actually a fairly
dangerous intersection that I take reluctantly. Whenever the bike lane crosses
a car lane, there are signs saying to yield to cyclists, yet I can only think
of a single instance where a driver yielded to me without me having to use my
air horn.

I can't find the details right now, but a local bike activist's wife actually
stopped cycling because she found this intersection so dangerous:

[https://bicycleaustin.info/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=5464](https://bicycleaustin.info/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=5464)

(I don't see a mention of the particular intersection in that link, but as I
recall this was it.)

Perception and reality can differ a lot, and I think that's what my criticisms
come down to.

~~~
bretthoerner
It’s sad to me that I immediately knew the crossing in Austin you were talking
about and it made me shudder. Thankfully I’ve never had to use it as a
cyclist. However I do live near a “protected lane” in Austin that puts both
bike lanes on one side of street. All that ends up doing is ensuring drivers
never check the bike lane when they turn through it. It’s awful.

~~~
CydeWeys
It sounds to me like it's a very poorly designed intersection that isn't
actually protected, then. I know some intersections like that here in NYC and
yeah, they suck (one example being 2nd Ave in Manhattan through midtown at the
bridge and tunnel). When there's a reasonable alternate route available I'll
tend to take them.

------
larrymyers
I'm a huge fan of protected bike lanes. Chicago has a few of them, and they
are far less stressful to ride on compared to just basic striping on the road.

By far the biggest issue I have with striped bike lanes is trying guess when
an Uber driver is going to do something crazy when picking up or dropping off
a passenger.

~~~
CydeWeys
My biggest problem with unprotected bike lanes here in Manhattan is that they
are _so_ frequently illegally blocked, not just by Taxis/FHVs but also by
people parking in them. And a lot of the unprotected bike lanes are basically
just the door zone of a line of parked cars, so you need to ride to the far
outside of it to avoid getting doored.

There's entire block-long stretches that I'll stay out of the unprotected bike
lane entirely for, because it's so frequently blocked or so close to parked
cars that it's more dangerous to be in there.

The protected bike lanes, on the other hand, are _much_ better. I wish we'd
get this law here.

~~~
asdff
The fine for parking your car in a bike lane should really be a tow. Predatory
towing companies in my town can grab a car in 10 minutes; it's spooky. They
even have scouts. I feel like towing companies should be chomping at the bit
to get action on this parking ignorance with bike lanes, which seems to be
universal in any city with them.

~~~
CydeWeys
Definitely. There's so much money to be made here in ticketing and towing
people that are parking illegally. You would easily pay the salaries of the
people doing it and then also send a lot more revenue back to the general
treasury.

It always astounds me that they don't have more enforcement agents out there.
On my 10 minute bike ride I routinely see at least one ticketable infraction
per minute. Hell, give me a ticket book (and a percentage cut for my trouble)
and I'll gladly go earn ticket revenue for the city myself.

------
king_panic
I used to bike every morning from my house on Morrison Ave in Somerville to
Riverside Boat Club, then from RBC to Central Square. I would then bike the
reverse in the evenings.

Rides could be treacherous because the tension between drivers and cyclists
when they share the road. There is a hard division established for commuting
by foot (sidewalks) and drivers (roads), but none for cyclists. Both cyclists
and drivers feel entitled to roads, but there are few parameters around how
they interoperate with one another.

I think designating a division for cyclists is a great idea in a city with a
high volume of cyclists.

------
danielecook
Just got back from a trip Amsterdam. If you want to see what the future of
Cambridge could be - take a trip there. The cycling infrastructure is
phenomenal and very heavily used. It seems the majority of streets had
dedicated and protected cycle lanes on both sides. Even more impressive is
that it doesn't stop at the city limits. It goes far far out into the
countryside. They even had parking garages for bikes.

------
just_steve_h
I also wonder what all our resident PRIVATE PROPERTY enthusiasts think about
on-street parking: what other of my 250 sq.ft. objects may I store on public
property for free?

~~~
misthop
how big is your car? Damn....

~~~
WhompingWindows
10 feet long, 2.5 feet wide

~~~
leetcrew
> 2.5 feet wide

no passenger seat or they all sit behind you in single file?

------
gnulinux
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 development. If this will not happen, this
is a positive development. Time will show. I'm hopeful but skeptical.

~~~
ghaff
Cambridge also seems to have a disproportionate number of unsafe bicyclists
(and pedestrians) for some reason. Maybe it's all the students. It's probably
a net good thing that cycling lanes are being improved although there are
certainly tradeoffs given the traffic and parking situation. However, whenever
I'm driving home up Beacon Street after dark, there are invariably cyclists
zipping around with no lights, going up streets the wrong way, and pedestrians
dressed in dark colors randomly quickly stepping out from behind parked cars
into the street.

The bike lanes that now exist probably make things safer overall but there's a
lot of dangerous behavior out there on the part of many types of
infrastructure users (including cars as well).

~~~
wool_gather
> Cambridge also seems to have a disproportionate number of unsafe bicyclists
> (and pedestrians) for some reason.

There's a certain "vicious cycle" element to this. If bicycling generally
appears unsafe, then mostly (over)confident, risk-tolerant people will do it.
Those are the same people who are comfortable getting away with unwise things
like running stoplights the wrong way at dusk on their no-brakes fixie with a
single tiny red blinkie mounted high on their messenger bag. ;)

It's also tied into a common argument against biking infrastructure: "Why
would we build this? There aren't any people biking now." Chicken-egg, but
there are many people who won't bike if it seems unsafe. And those people have
a good chance of behaving more sensibly when they are convinced to ride.

~~~
just_steve_h
Right. The argument "not that many bikes, why build bike lanes?" is a bit like
"nobody crosses the river on a raft, so why build a bridge?"

------
povertyworld
Protected bike lanes are key. I commute to work by bike, and use biking as my
main form of transportation. My city has created many bike lanes, and
encourages bikers to prefer those roads. Unfortunately, bike lanes have really
just become double parking zones for delivery workers, ride shares, and people
just who don't feel like looking for a proper parking space while their
partner shops. Having to go around people double parked in the bike lane feels
much more dangerous than biking on a regular street, since I have to go out
into the middle of the road to pass them.

------
Finnucane
I live and work in Cambridge and one of the new separated lanes is on my
regular route to work. The design, I think has been mostly an improvement,
with quibbles. There's definitely less chance of getting doored, but I don't
like that the lanes go right through bus stops. Also, cars turning at
intersections don't see you on the other side of parked cars.

A big plus, though is that the city actually keeps the lane cleared in winter.
The regular bike lanes get to be pretty bad and blocked by parked cars when
there's a lot of snow.

------
souterrain
While Baltimore is reversing protected a bike lane implementation as a result
of pressure from retail business and constituents who prefer cars. (The
neighborhood in question is one of the most affluent in the city.)

[https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-
city/bs...](https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-
ci-roland-park-bike-lane-20190329-story.html)

~~~
dsfyu404ed
My city did that. Only they waited for most of the businesses to fold first.
What a great reward for weathering the recession those businesses got. Turns
out when you kill parking in favor of bike lanes in a small city that does a
lot of business by being a commerce destination for the surrounding towns it
doesn't work well. Also nobody bikes here because the entire city is hills
(plenty of people walk though) so bike lanes are an attempt to solve a problem
that doesn't exist but they tried it anyway because they're politically
fashionable, details of the specific situation be damned

~~~
souterrain
This part of Baltimore doesn't fit this model, however, since parking was not
removed. The bike lane was inserted between the parking zone and the curb.
Previously, the bike lane was between the rightmost travel lane and the
parking zone.

Poor driving, or factors related to poor driving, may be a contributor.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2018/08/30/dc-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2018/08/30/dc-
baltimore-drivers-are-nearly-bad-it-gets-allstate-says/)

Or, it may just be an anti-cycling bias, but I don't have evidence to support
this.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
I'm not saying Baltimore did that. I'm just saying you can't just go around
with a hammer looking for nails because you have a politically popular hammer.
It's not going to work in every case.

------
ummonk
As both a driver and former cyclist, this is a great development that all
cities should be doing.

------
emanuensis
This is a shift from car centricity to a transport centricity for roads.
Looking back in time we had one from horses to trolleys to cars. Now we could
be beginning to see them in a broader light. Transport is growing now to
include all kinds of electrified (and Rapid!) transit, eg scooters, ebikes,
hoverboard... When i lived in Cambridge, ell before the concept of a protected
lane, bicycling was commonly known and utilized as the fastest means of
transport: the pinnacle of sneakernet.

------
Tiktaalik
Every city should be doing this. It's shameful how little attention we've paid
to cyclist safety with city designs up to this point.

~~~
Chardok
Its especially frustrating how cities will try almost anything to alleviate
traffic instead of encouraging cycling. Its less taxing on the roads, it
doesn't pollute, it doesn't require a schedule and best of all it takes up
peanuts in space compared to a parking spot.

------
barrad0s
There is already barely any parking in Cambridge, driving there already
sucks... Let's see how much worse this is gonna get.

~~~
biswaroop
Good. Parking and driving are not well-suited to narrow roads in high density
cities. There have been tons of studies that show this. This is as a Cambridge
resident who struggles to find parking when I occasionally have to. Parked
cars are truly a blight on our beautiful streets. Protected bike lanes are
definitely [edit: probably] part of the route towards greater livability.

~~~
wool_gather
I agree mostly, except that there needs to be a _usable_ non-bicycle
alternative to cars too. I love riding, but not everybody can do it all the
time, for a large variety of reasons. Reducing in-city car usage is good, but
just forcing it to be even more unpleasant is not going to solve anything.

~~~
ahoy
Sounds like a job for.... public transportation!

~~~
analog31
Indeed, cycling and public transit go hand in hand. Even in the Netherlands,
people don't ride bikes exclusively. For longer distances, they may ride their
bikes to the train station, then take transit to the city center, or something
like that. This makes it a lot easier to live without a car.

------
u801e
The major problem with protected infrastructure is that they do a poor job at
managing intersection conflicts. Intersections are where the majority of
collisions happen. If traffic cannot see other traffic when approaching an
intersection, then some type of signage or traffic signal is required to
control approaches to the intersection. But if you have too many modes of
transportation making use of the intersection, then the phased signals start
taking too long and you start having compliance issues. This then leads to
more collisions.

------
galago
I live and work in Cambridge, MA. In my opinion, Cambridge and Somerville are
not very bicycle friendly due to the fact that main streets were laid out
before cars were common. As a result, there is basically only one route (via
Beacon) to work for me via bicycle. Grid-cities like SE Portland, OR where I
formerly lived, were much easier because you can ride on a street parallel to
the artery, not on it. Its nice to see what Cambridge is doing, but its a much
harder job than other cities face.

------
danbr
I work in Kendall sq and have wanted to ride my bike into Cambridge the past 5
years.

I’m (almost) deathly afraid to ride make the short 4 mile trek across the
river for exactly this reason. I lament every day I get on the T to slog for
45 minutes on a decrepit, slow, and usually broken train system. I arrive to
work bothered by my commute almost every day.

For Boston/Cambridge being such a bio and tech hub, it’s entire transit system
(roads, busses, trains, biking) is amongst the worst I know of in the US.

Sad.

------
surge
I try to cross the street in my downtown are just walking from my parking
garage to the office and some driver's think I don't have right of way and
turn left or make right turns into me, because as a person, I don't count,
even though I have the walk signal.

I'm almost tempted to just start video recording when I'm making the trip, and
start reporting these people after getting their plate number.

------
dahfizz
So all new street construction has to include bike lanes. Is there any
provision to ensure a steady pace of road maintenance/upgrades? I think this
strategy has a real risk of stagnating the already slow rate of road
maintenance in a lot of places.

In places like Cambridge where there is money, it seems like a smart move. But
making construction more expensive won't work everywhere.

------
dsfyu404ed
As much as I hate Cambridge I'm having a hard time finding fault with this.
Bike lanes fit their needs really well.

~~~
jdgoesmarching
Are there scooter companies in Cambridge? I've been hoping they would spur
some major cities to invest in bike lanes but I'm not sure if that's the case
here.

Either way, solid win all around.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
The entire state of MA is highly unwelcoming to anything with two wheels and a
motor that is less than a motorcycle (and even then it kinda sucks for them
too). You say "scooter" or "moped" and suburban soccer moms and uptight
politicians get images of New Dehli in their heads and that's too low class
for MA so any organized attempt at doing that gets blocked by the power of
arbitrary enforcement.

As another commenters mentioned they were there briefly before the .gov told
them to get lost. The other thing about MA is that it's highly totalitarian.
The government is mostly benign and the single party nature of the state means
it doesn't cause too much discontent but trying to pull an Uber and provide a
service that has popular support before the regulators can kick you out
doesn't really work in MA because the people have little choice in the manner,
the .gov can just say "this isn't good for you" and that's the end of it.

~~~
coleca
MA already had laws statewide mandating bike lanes on new construction and
renovation. This has led to the situation near my house where a highway
intersection (Route 1 and 495) was rebuilt and a bike lane added for about
1000 feet on a road that has a 55mph speed limit. There is no bike lane on the
rest of Route 1, just around the intersection where the construction happened.
Now we have a bike lane that will never be used confusing the drivers trying
to figure out where they should be when taking the entrance ramp onto the
highway. This is a suburb around 40 miles outside of the city.

I’m all in favor of bike lanes but these types of blanket mandates aren’t the
solution because it eliminates the community’s ability to use common sense and
apply the law logically. So you wouldn’t be encouraging biking across a ramp
with no signals and cars going from 55 mph to 65 mph for example.

~~~
frosted-flakes
Well, it seems to me that constructing bike lanes piece-meal as roads are re-
built is the most cost-effective way to do it, even if it results in a super
fragmented bike lane network at first.

As far as bike lanes across freeway entrance ramps goes, great, if it's done
right. The bike lane should be painted solid green or red where it crosses the
ramp, with a "Yield to " sign. The rebuilt interchanges in my city are like
this, and the coloured lane is a visual obstruction that forces drivers to
take notice of any cyclists on it. I've both cycled on and driven across these
lanes, and they work well, far better than the alternative.

Also, bike lanes on 55 mph roads is fine if there are no alternative roads for
cyclists to use. Often, this just means paving a wide shoulder and putting
regular "" signs as reminders to drivers. Even if only a few people a day ride
it.

Edit: it looks like the commenting platform strips out the "U+1F6B2 BICYCLE"
character, used twice above.

------
tosser0001
It will be interesting to see what effect this has. A few things I predict:

1\. The price of housing with off-street parking will rise even faster now.

2\. A lot of off-street parking in the neighborhoods will be eliminated,
forcing some people who have to drive to work outside the city to move.

3\. The speeds of cars will increase because the roads will feel wider

~~~
amanaplanacanal
How wide are the typical lanes there now? I believe the newest best practice
is for 10 ft wide lanes, though many cities have been making them 12 ft for a
while. Narrower lanes are great for slowing traffic down.

------
perfunctory
Emigrate to the Netherlands. No, seriously. Vote with your feet.

~~~
IshKebab
Not really viable for most people though is it? And "it's fine in the
Netherlands so we don't need to bother here" isn't a great attitude either.

------
cure
It is funny to see Cambridge labelled a 'Boston suburb'. That was clearly
written by someone who has never visited Cambridge, MA or even the Boston
area.

~~~
est31
Never been there, could you explain?

~~~
sokoloff
I live in Cambridge, MA and would need it explained.

~~~
psychometry
Cambridge is a city of 100k people, not a suburb. For comparison, Boston has
600k.

~~~
ummonk
I wouldn't describe Cambridge as a suburb, but plenty of suburbs have
populations larger than 100k.

~~~
CydeWeys
The key distinction is that suburbs are largely residential and composed of
lower density housing, which does not describe Cambridge accurately.

~~~
ben7799
Waltham is further away too and has > 100k people. It's hard to say if these
cities are suburbs or not.

Waltham, Newton, Cambridge, etc.. are very dense.

There is a clear delineation in density with a lot of these. Usually it's
whether the town/city is inside 95, but Lexington is not very dense and is
inside.. I think Lexington fits the mold of suburb where as Newton & Waltham
feel urban.

~~~
CydeWeys
What about Somerville? I've been there a few times and at least the parts I
was in felt more like a small city than the suburbs. Everything was well-
connected with mass transit and walking seemed to be a very popular mode of
transportation (which it isn't in the 'true' suburbs I've been to).

------
framebit
I really appreciate the mental model expressed here:
[https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/15/how-to-
turn-a-...](https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/15/how-to-turn-a-
stroad-into-a-street-or-a-road)

The TL;DR is that a street is in a dense area that's slow speed and welcoming
to all forms of transit, A road gets cars at a fast speed from point A to
point B, and a "stroad" is the worst of both worlds and a common anti-pattern
in many sprawly areas.

------
throwawaysea
Asking for anyone who might know: how is it that this article is at the #1
spot on the front page already. It was submitted by an account created 21
minutes ago, and it seems unusual that it would displace things like the
Assange story, which has over 800 comments.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
Up-vote rate over time is highly weighted and it's east coast business hours
right now so there's a lot of people from MA mashing the upvote button.

~~~
close04
The voting mechanism here is a bit opaque. I think it also considers trends.
So a an article with 60 votes in a short time period will probably climb
higher than an article with 800 votes but slow increase.

Activity on the submission (views and comments) probably also has an
influence.

------
Palptine
Cambridge can't even fix potholes and plow snow, but this is where they decide
to spend money. Some real galaxy brains.

------
ztravis
(insert bike credentials here)

For me one of the largest (if not THE largest) factor* in bike safety is route
choice, and the main factor in that for me is density and speed of car
traffic. As comfortable as I feel "vehicular" cycling (e.g. cutting across
lanes to take a true left turn, taking the lane to avoid the "dooring zone"
along parked cars), those are the moments when I am most exposed and at risk.
Likewise the safest intersections are those that do not have cars passing
through!

As an example, a colleague of mine commutes from near my house to our office,
and we take very different routes - him along a major artery with (mostly)
protected bike lanes, me along back streets with sharrows or no bike markings
at all. Even in a protected line, he has to contend with fast and constant
traffic alongside him, frequent intersections where he has no protection and
is even harder to see (since he's popping out from behind a line of parked
cars); the intersections are constantly in use and drivers turn and accelerate
faster to make smaller windows in the faster traffic. My commute along back
streets is leisurely; I can ride in the middle of the street without fear of
getting doored or getting overtaken at speed unexpectedly, and intersections
are calm. Of course the major artery is more direct (and so perhaps slightly
faster), but it's also a major designated bike route and for that reason sees
a lot of bike traffic even though I think it's less safe.

Of course in denser neighborhoods and cities it may be difficult to find "back
streets" with minimal car traffic and which still get to where you're going.
Still, I think that should be a goal of new bike infrastructure development -
I'm happy to act like a car, make turns from the correct lane, stop at red
lights, signal, etc., and I don't need a protected bike lane either - a normal
road with light, slow car traffic is fine. A set of these which connects the
major neighborhoods in a community (e.g. running parallel to arteries but not
quite in the central areas) makes for a very nice bike experience (c.f.
Berkeley's bike boulevards which is naturally my inspiration here!).

So, when this article mentions the requirement of protected bike lanes on all
streets, while I think that's great and I love seeing bicycling given more
consideration in urban planning, I also think that it seems a little coarse.
Some roads don't need to have any bike traffic at all, some roads can be
wonderful for biking without any modification at all, and some roads ought to
be made better for biking but in more nuanced ways (primarily traffic easing -
roundabouts, narrower roadways, removing through-access, etc - that
discourages car traffic without impeding bike traffic). Of course if you want
to build independent bike trails (or non-grade lanes, or other more
significant changes) that's wonderful too!

 _Other important factors IMO:

_ Cyclist density - everyone should bike! Probably preaching to the choir here
but there's safety in numbers, drivers get used to seeing cyclists and how
they behave, and it makes it easier to advocate for better infrastructure.
Also relevant on a micro-level for route choice * Cycling experience/behavior
- including "vehicular" maneuvers, general awareness of dangerous/risky
situations and driver behavior * Lights

