Hey, there! Log in / Register
Bostonians who haven't used Bluebikes to get a discount on them
By adamg on Thu, 10/12/2023 - 2:49pm
The city today announced a program under which Bostonians who have not gotten a Bluebikes pass for the last three years can get one for $60 a year, compared to the normal $129 annual rate.
Bostonians who get MassHealth or SNAP or who meet income requirements can get a year pass now for $5 instead of the previous $50 annual fee.
Neighborhoods:
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
More clueless bikers on
More clueless bikers on pedestrian paths.
Elaborate
What do you define as a "pedestrian path".
And since you never get out, how has this impacted you?
Heaven forfend that people in need of economical transport get access to it!
As a Blue Bike member
I will say that *some* Blue Bike users are kind of clueless about who sidewalks are meant for.
The same used to be said about Zipcar users, but I haven’t seen a Zipcar in a bit.
Yes
I refrained from replying earlier with the same thing but.
In Chelsealand, lots of people have memberships.. and I agree, we now have bikers who don't know that you aren't supposed to ride on the sidewalks.
The other thing I see more and more is painted over Bluebikes. Aka stolen ones, the frame is unique so its not hard to know these are stolen and just painted over.
And as far as zipcar.. they are dying. Every week I get a $15-20 off a rental these days so they be hurtin for rentals. Which works out great for me b/c the only reason I keep paying the 7/mo for the account is for the van and pick up truck parked at home depot. An hour rental is about 15 now, which makes it free for me when I have to lug stuff home from HD.
To clarify
I wasn’t talking about the probably stolen Blue Bikes. That’s a completely different headache.
As a long time Zipcar member
They've doubled their rates in the past year which are double what they were even a few years before that. The cars are in poor shape and the stench of pot and air fresheners is almost unbearable.
If Zipcar fails it's entirely because they took a popular service and completely squandered it.
I'm about to cancel my membership.
You can thank Hertz
You can thank Hertz or Avis for that.. I ferget who bought them a few years back. But ever since they were sold to a major car rental company, they now suck.
I agree, the rates are silly stupid high. I will never rent a car for more than an hour or two now. Who can afford 120/day or more. I get better rates from Enterprise thats walking distance from my house if I need to rent for a day or more.
And yes, I'm tired of getting into dirty cars. Or cars that look like they have been in a derby and got smacked to all hell and back. I rented a van a while back that clearly had been side swiped the entire length, and they replaced the door, with one from another van in another color. Looked like a jalopy. And I was paying a premium of 22/hr for this?!?
And the pot smoke, there was a car parked in a remote area of Admirals Hill a while back. It **always** smelled like air fresheners trying to cover pot odor. The car almost always had a flat which leads me to believe people rented the car just to smoke pot in. I complained and complained.. all I got was some credits, and the car remained. They just didn't care.
I've been on the fence about cancelling, but again, I primarily use it because a van and a pick up are parked at the home depot so its easy to buy a buncha stuff and rent it for an hour to bring it all home. I also cannot bring propane cylinders on a MBTA bus otherwise I probably would just cancel as thats my primary reason to rent one these days.
I have a four digit member ID I've been a member for so long.. sad to see what this service has turned into.
I see Flexcar or some other car service similar to zipcar is in town. Might start to investigate that.
When I was in Harvard Square
When I was in Harvard Square for work I actually got smashed into on the sidewalk twice by people on bikes and both times got yelled at by the people on the bike, it was infuriating. I have been having similar experiences in Chelsea lately. People just flying down the thin sidewalks and almost hitting people. I fully understand why they don't want to be on the street... But if you are going to be on the sidewalk you gotta slow down. I think it's ironic they are on the sidewalk because they think drivers are too aggressive but then act aggressively against pedestrians. Then when you express that aggregation cyclists pop up and say you hate bikes and you don't know what you are talking about!!!
Shoulder check
I've been known to throw a shoulder check to prevent my being injured/control the collision. No excuse for sidewalk riding - its a bike, you can round the block in a short time!
I'm not fast and even at my
I'm not fast and even at my thinnest I'm not small. So when a bike is flying at me I can either stiffen up and they take the hit or stay loose and I take the hit. Both times I chose to stiffen up. The time they really went in on me it was because their bike bent in the collision... I was pulling a thousand pounds of equipment on a cart and diving out of the way wasn't an option. So they got the full blunt of the collision. It was near the Pit, I think they were trying to get a shortcut in somehow and it was quite a gutsy move.
Regardless of where it is
Regardless of where it is pedestrians, people on foot, have the right of way unless otherwise noted. So the semantics around what a "pedestrian path" is would be easily answered by anything that is not explicitly signaled for bikes or cars (or trucks or horses etc.)
I would say that I may not agree with all the sentiments of the person you replied to BUT I do not understand your last point. If they are flying down a sidewalk and almost hit a pedestrian how is that aby different from someone in a car running down a cyclist? If we say we shouldn't do that would it not be crass for an auto enthusiast to reply "well why are you against people driving to work?" You are e titled to your preferred mode of transportation, that does not give you permission to run down pedestrians on foot.
It's pretty obvious...
...that "pedestrian paths" was used to mean "paths where nobody but pedestrians are nominally allowed".
Consider the source
I've heard people refer to the Minuteman Bikeway - that has Bike in the name - as a "pedestrian path".
Interesting take
So, if a passage is designed for one means of transport, that means has supremacy?
Food for thought.
Not So
You don't have the right of way at a signalized intersection if you don't have the light.
You don't have the right of way on a marked bike-only path - e.g. SE Corridor where bike and ped lanes are clearly separated.
*unless otherwise noted
*unless otherwise noted
All the stipulations you mention would fall unless otherwise noted.
The presence of lights notes you do not have the right of way
On a marked bike path that would be noted as well.
Odd Timing
Wouldn't April or May have been a better time to roll this out than October??
I did get a kick out of the Mayor saying folks that qualify can get a "free" pass for $5.00. Boston is so expenses even something that is free costs money.