Hey, there! Log in / Register
Mass. Ave. gets floral bike-lane markers
By adamg on Sun, 09/06/2015 - 6:42pm
.@unionRob @bostonbikeunion @MassBike @ofsevit @StreetsBoston @universalhub viewed from a northbound #MBTA 1 bus pic.twitter.com/Vquk1O3mPz
— TransitMatters (@transitmatters) September 6, 2015
TransitMatters shows us the new lane dividers along Mass. Ave. near Beacon.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Meanwhile the woman in the
Meanwhile the woman in the video is riding her bike in the car lane...
Is she supposed to run over
Is she supposed to run over the flowers and cones?
Yes, you can
First it is called a lane, not a "car lane"
State laws allow the bikers to use a full lane. I don't see anything wrong with this. Infact using a full lane is much more safer than the false sense of security which bike lane provides.
one thing wrong...
she's not wearing a helmet.
Stop it
OH! OH MY!
Please stop it with the helmet jazz.
People act like a lack of a helmet exonerates drivers from driving safely. It's OK for drivers to get away with murder because the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet. And they do get away with murder. It happens every damn day in this country.
A helmet isn't going to do you much good when there's a tractor-trailer pulling a right-hand turn over the top of you.
Take the time you use worrying about helmets to focus on drivers paying attention and you will see a much more benefit.
hook, line and...
jeezis you people are easy to bait. Don't feed the trolls! I'm fat enough already ferchrissakes!!
Thankfully, that is
Thankfully, that is completely legal.
Whoosh
The implication in the OP is of course that while it is legal, the laws should be changed to enforce the separation between bicycles and motor vehicles where a dedicated bike lane is present. Because physics can't be changed by legislation and a cyclist in a place where he *can't* get run over by virtue of not being in the path of two tons of metal doing 40+ on the bridge is safer than a cyclist in a place where he's *asking* to disrupt to flow of vehicular traffic by forcing said two tons of metal to brake suddenly or execute an unexpected lane change, (unexpected from the point of view of the guy to the left of him who can't see the cyclist).
What?
Are you implying that bike lanes are safer as there are no cars? Kinda hard to tell from your comment.
In case you've never been outside, here's an interesting fact: People (cops, delivery trucks, cabs, normal cars) park in the bike lane all the time. It's hard to find a bike lane in which something isn't blocking it. Shocking, I know.
So as a cyclist your choice is to bypass the laws of physics and occupy the same space and time as one of these vehicles or ride in the "car" lane. Smart cyclists look ahead and move into the "car" lane a few blocks ahead of time when they see something blocking the bike lane. The woman in the video either had to move into the middle lane to avoid an upcoming obstacle or the obstacle is behind her. The video is all of 10 seconds; BTW.
Guess what: Boston NEVER tickets for parking in the bike lane. Seeing as how cops are a big offender, why would they? It's one of the [valid] arguments against bike lanes: they are pointless if people use them as double-park lanes. Someone put out the flower pots in an effort to avoid this problem but unless the entire bike lane down Mass Ave has these dividers then the problem remains.
another problem
Riding in a bike lane is a good way to get "doored".
Nope.
That bike lane is in the turning side of a turning lane. Going straight through in the bike lane is asking to get squished by someone making a right turn.
Using the travel lane to go straight through makes the probability of being hit by a car much much lower than using the bike lane.
The physics apply either way but the logistics say to use the travel lane when going straight through.
Your ignorance is showing.
Then put the bike lane
in the middle of the street and not on the outside. Motor vehicle left turns are already banned on most of Mass Ave anyway, and you're less likely to get doored.
The real ignorance is thinking that drivers in cars can magically see you when you're not in the bike lane and approaching them from the rear or the side where they can see you, and that they'll always check.
If you want safety, then you want separation where you can get it. And if you don't want ill will from the drivers already constantly complaining about cyclists flouting the rules, then you also want strong enforcement of that separation both ways and you don't want cyclists running red lights, or acting like wheeled pedestrians when they feel like it.
Please learn the rules
First of all, cyclists are not restricted to the bike lanes. There are many times when somebody would not want to be in the bike lane - such as taking a left turn, or not conflicting with motorists taking right turns who may not be paying attention.
Secondly, the only car lanes in existence in Massachusetts are those on limited access highways as posted.
You are correct. And by law
You are correct. And by law cyclists are not restricted to bike lanes or "car lanes" but can also ride their bikes on sidewalks. Pedestrians may be arrested for walking in "car" lanes or bike lanes.
Also whereas it is illegal for small children to ride in a car if not buckled into a child seat it is legal for cyclists to transport todlers on their handlebars or to tow them in behind the bike in a foldup child carrier. The Boston Bicycle Coalition recommends that a responsible cyclist when towing a child carrier will look back occasionally to verify that the kid hasn't fallen out.
?
What do child seats have to do with this new bike lane?
(also, what's the Boston Bicycle Coalition?)
Can you add some chicken for $3?
That's a nice word salad you got there, but I'd like to make a meal of it.
You are also welcome to provide factual statistical evidence - like that used to mandate child seats in cars - to demonstrate why you think that kids in trailers and seats is a dangerous thing. Please also cite the law that says that "pedestrians can be arrested for walking in bike lanes". I'd love to hear about it. You can find that online. A link to the BCU site's supposed quote that you are citing would do wonders for your credibility, too.
Take your time.
Actually biking on the
Actually biking on the sidewalk is illegal in many cities and towns.
What?
No, actually, the laws for carrying children on a bike are ridiculously restrictive. You can't carry a child anywhere on an adult bike except for in a harnessed infant seat unless they are 5 or older and over 40 pounds. I can't legally take my 39-pound second grader (who rides a bike independently several miles) on my bike using an age- and ability-appropriate seat (cargo bike seat or child seat without harness for older kid). I'm technically supposed to spend hundreds of dollars on a special needs harnessed seat that holds a tall-enough kid, because mine weighs 5-10 lbs less than a lot of peers, and because some lawmaker thought weight has something to do with safety skills. I could take my severely autistic nephew on the cargo bike though, even though he wouldn't hold on, because he weighs enough.
Calm down everybody
I never said she was doing anything illegal. I just thought it was ironic that the only cyclist in a video whose subject was a new bike lane was not using said bike lane. Maybe she was turning left. Maybe she hates bike lanes. Whatever the case may be is her prerogative. I just thought it was ironic. Didn't mean to get anybody's knickers in a twist (although I guess I should have known better given the sensitive nature of this issue on this site).
As my 8th grade science teacher used to say, "May the fleas of a thousand camels infest my armpits. "
Wait
Your 8th grad science teacher was Max Klinger?
If I were going straight...
Were I riding on that stretch and intending on going straight through the light, I'd be where she is. Why? Because I fully expect vehilcles making right hand turns from the right-most (non-bike) lane to yank that wheel regardless of the presense of cyclists or pedestrians. That's a learned expectation.
How do I avoid getting right hooked? By trying like heck to not ride to the right of an auto that might be turning right.
I know, knickers and twist. This diatribe is really not for you -- it's to help cyclists understand how to ride more safely, and to help motorists understand why cyclists are doing things that seem to have no purpose but annoy you when, in fact, they're doing those things because they can't trust you to avoid running them over otherwise.
How do I avoid getting right
Ding Ding Ding Ding!!!! We have a winner!
So...
If no one uses those bike lanes, they just there to "show those cagers who's the boss," why in the world is the city wasting countless millions on painting the roads funny colors instead of fixing the potholes and making the said roads safer for everyone?
Still useful.
That bike line is still useful to the cyclist who wants to turn right onto Beacon St. I think the complaints about double parking aren't really applicable here, since there's no parking lane, and the bike line itself is too narrow for cars to park in without blocking the regular travel lane.
I can't imagine why someone would do that... Oh wait...
https://youtu.be/bzE-IMaegzQ?t=1m16s
Wow...
The bike haters pounced quick on this one. Listen, I know you're probably sitting in traffic behind the wheel of you car, getting angry over nothing, but you need to learn the state bike laws. Also, why do you hate cyclists?
Cyclists
That's a big word there bud, conjures up the image of Lance Armstrong or something along those lines. Definitely not an image of a patchouli-reeking hippie and a rusty old Peugeot. How about "bike monkey" instead?
Similarly
In my younger more naive days, I used to think the word "motorist" implied a person who was skilled, tested, and competent at the art of negotiating a giant hunk of metal at speeds no one could ever run at. But here we are with morons with a cheeseburger in one hand and a cell phone in the other, typing out their hatred of all things nonmotorized while holding the steering wheel between their knees and occasionally noting a red light.
No such thing.
There is no such thing as a car lane. It's a travel lane.
It's also on the turning side of a turning lane. It's safer to use the travel lane when going straight through.
Your ignorance and childish delusions of entitlement are showing.
If the bike lane is
on the inside of a right turning lane, it was striped wrong and should be removed.
It is pathetic the city has
It is pathetic the city has had a week to install bollards and hasn't yet done so.
If you want something done
If you want something done right, you gotta do it yourself.
The person that did this is a hero! I'm so tired of being endangered because the city and MassDot does nothing. We have a right to walk, bike, roll our wheelchairs, and be safe.
Here's an article about pedestrians losing their right to travel.
http://aeon.co/magazine/society/step-by-step-americans-are-sacrificing-t...
In this case, not MassDOT
BTD is responsible for this stretch of Mass Ave.
Just went by the flower pots
Just went by the flower pots tonight. I found it to be rather touching and a lovely gesture in honor of the doctor who was killed at that intersection, or at least that was my impression of its intention when I first saw it. There was a cyclist standing near the ghost bike with a reflective vest -- I wonder if this was the person who placed the flower pots.
Hopefully these changes to this stretch of Mass. Ave. will help prevent another senseless tragedy. Wise decision to remove that particular Hubway station. Inexperienced riders should not be getting on rental bikes at one of the most dangerous intersections in Boston. Hope the new measures will vastly improve the safety of cyclists. Of course traffic enforcement and ticketing would be nice too...
I wonder when the city will
I wonder when the city will re-pave the rest of Mass Ave., which is an absolute mess. Aside from the crookedness of the lanes, the bike lanes are so jacked up that cyclists often swerve around holes or pop in and out to avoid other obstacles. I've seen quite a few near misses with cars.
^ THIS
^ THIS
The stretch from Westland to Boylston is an absolute disaster, and the bike lane is even worse than the general purpose lanes.
Repaving wouldn't make that much of a difference.
Anything less than cycle tracks with signals just gives a false sense of security to cyclists. Current standard bike lanes put bicycles in the door zone or force them to weave in and out of faster traffic to avoid obstacles like taxis, buses, police cars and other double-parkers. They also give the false impression that bicycles are not allowed on the rest of the road.
I prefer the narrower streets that only have sharrow markings and add signage reminding motorists that bikes are allowed to use the full lane. When I see people riding in door zone lanes it's like watching Russian roulette.
If I were biking (or walking)
If I were biking (or walking) and saw flower pots dividing the bike lane from the general lanes, I'd move them. They're dangerous, and prevent cyclists from merging left in the many situations where it's important to do so.
Bollards are planned
Or, at least, flexible dividers will be placed there, what ever you wish to call those.
The flower pots are only increasing awareness that this is bike space, not car space.
I believe it's a bike, segway
I believe it's a bike, segway and motorized wheelchair lane. These are the modes of transportation most frequently using these lanes, at least as I've observed having lived here for 10+ years. Cars obviously need to stay out of the bike lane as much as possible. Does anyone know the legality of runners using the bike lane? Groups of runners daily use these lanes as tar is less damaging impact-wise to the body.
Dollah fine
A jogger running in the bike lane? That's . Get caught again in the same calendar year? The fine doubles.
How to merge left?
So how will a cyclist who wants to go straight and avoid being right-hooked merge to the left? Do you have to slalom around the barriers? That seems rather dangerous.
Also, bollards can't do a
Also, bollards can't do a darn thing to prevent right-hooking, since there must be a gap in the bollards in the actual box of the intersection.
Do it before the protected
Do it before the protected lane starts at Back Street.
What happened to the bus stop?
There used to be a bus stop at that exact location -- Mass Ave, inbound, on the near-side corner with Beacon. The 1 and maybe CT1 stopped there, and perhaps others.
Did the stop move? Where did those bus stops go? The MBTA still shows the 1 bus stop at the "old" location...
The stop moved across the
The stop moved across the street, I believe.