Hey, there! Log in / Register
A bike lane of her very own
By adamg on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 9:45am
When Charlotte woke up this morning, she found a brand new bike lane down Columbus Avenue:
... Thank you Boston! It's beautiful. It's just what I always wanted!!!
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
I wonder whats taking the
I wonder whats taking the kenmore-mass ave lanes on commonwealth so long, they were supposed to be installed in May.
I had the pleasure of riding
I had the pleasure of riding on it this morning, and was just as surprised. I thought we only got bike lanes in Boston after much public discussion, engineering studies, and ultimate fanfare from the mayor's office. This was totally unexpected, and a pleasure. Hopefully, they will put one in going the other direction next. While there is technically already an off street bike lane along part of this route, it is hard to use due to pedestrians, and doesn't go far. My commute is now greatly enhanced!
Good luck with that.
Designated bike lanes decrease accidents - in San Antonio. In Boston? I doubt it. In Boston, any bike lane that is not physically separated from the traffic gives me chills.
Why? If the alternative is
Why? If the alternative is actively riding in the same lane as traffic, I'll take a painted stripe bike lane. In many ways it is safer. As a contrast, you should take a look at the Lalemont Trail in the Southwest Corridor, which is physically separated. I consider that to be a fairly dangerous path because it is used by many non-bikers (who will likely not use the Columbus Ave. bike lane), and it isn't obvious to cars on cross streets that there is a bike lane at all, so many will turn in front of a bike about to enter the intersection.
When I see a statement like yours, I wonder whether you have much experience with urban biking. Is it a simple kneejerk reaction, or do you have an experience based reason to back up the comment?
I have plenty of urban
I have plenty of urban biking experience, and am not a risk-taker or a spandex-wearer. I'd much rather ride in a lane with car traffic moving at less than 40 MPH than be forced into a bike lane that is in a door zone (that is, a substantial part of the bike lane is within 4 feet of parallel-parked cars). Being doored is a MUCH more likely kind of collision than being rear-ended, and any cycling infrastructure should reflect that.
Bike lanes can also cause conflicts at intersections -- if you're going straight through an intersection, you really DON'T want to be to the right of a right-turning car. Cambridge's dotted-lines on their bike lanes reflect this -- that the right-turning-car should merge to the right INTO the bike lane before making the right turn (after checking for traffic in the bike lane, just like any other right merge).
A bike lane is no excuse for
A bike lane is no excuse for a cyclist to be less vigilant. Of course there are still hazards such as doors and cars turning right. What I like about it, though, is that it does establish a space where cars should not generally go, and it's clear to cyclist and driver. I don't know if you've ever ridden on Columbus Ave., but it is pretty wide, wide enough for cars and bikes to not need to share a lane in most circumstances. But cars tend to see the entire lane as their domain. Adding the bike lane narrows the cars operating space, makes them slow down, keeps them from getting too close to the bikes, etc. These are all good things. Just the same, I'll move into the car lane when necessary, and will always pay attention to what is happening there.
A bike lane doesn't just
A bike lane doesn't just "establish a place where cars should not generally go", it sends a message, both to drivers and cyclists, that this is generally the correct place for bicycles to be. Yes, I can (and do) ride outside the bike lane when needed, and the law does not require me to use the bike lane at all. But many people, both drivers and cyclists, don't know that.
I've never ridden on Columbus Ave, but I frequently ride on Beacon St. in Brookline, which had bike lanes added a year or so ago (maybe more). I have gotten honked at more often since they've added the lanes than in over ten years of riding on Beacon before they put the lanes in, even when there's an obvious blockage in the bike lane ahead. I find that because of both the honking and the visible presence of the lanes themselves, that I sometimes don't maintain as much of a margin of safety around the door zone as I do on streets without a bike lane. And if that happens to me, an experienced cyclist, all the more so will it happen to inexperienced cyclists.
Now, if they could construct bike lanes that would be completely outside the door zone and that would have guidance, for both cyclists and drivers, of how to resolve merging conflicts at intersections, I'd be all for it. But from the picture, the Columbus Ave lane doesn't appear to do this.
You are not forced to use a bike lane
Nobody is forced to ride in the bike lane in the door zone. When I talk about biking in the city, people always ask, but what about the parked cars and their doors. Just give yourself enough space, regardless of where the paint might be located, and you're safe from the hazard. Unfortunately, the location of the bike lane would tempt many inexperienced riders into being in the wrong place.
There are other ways to mark the pavement that are less confusing, like those little bike symbols on Mass Ave in Cambridge between Harvard and Porter. How about a lane without the bike marking at all, so it's just a buffer zone that narrows the lane for cars without giving a suggestion for where bikes should ride.
Irrelevant
I know my way around a revolver. It does not mean therefore that I want to have much experience with Russian roulette.
Cooper's Rules
If you want to make an analogy, make it accurate. The point is that somebody who knows guns would never point one at something they don't intend to shoot. So a knowledgeable gun owner would not play Russian roulette. Likewise, a knowledgeable cyclist knows how to safely ride in traffic.
Bike lane = more driver
Bike lane = more driver awareness. Even when they dont see a bike, they see the lane, which reminds them to look for bikes
More awareness = more comfort for cyclists, which causes some who might feel unsafe to start biking on streets again.
More bikes = more driver awareness
More bikes = More demand for bike infrastructure
More bike infrastrcuture = more safety and more bikes = more infrastructure = more safety and more bikes....
I noticed that this morning!
In my neighborhood (Northampton St) it was only on the inbound side, so I guess if I ride my bike to work, I'll have to take the T home :-P. Seriously though, I may consider riding in on Friday, since Columbus Av is the majority of my commute.
Go to PUBLIC MEETINGS!
There was a public meeting about this on Aug. 4th. http://www.livablestreets.info/node/2243
Here is a list of upcoming meetings courtesy of Livable Streets Alliance: http://www.livablestreets.info/taxonomy/term/9
Add a 25 mph limit to Columbus & I think things get much better
Two comments on the new bicycle lane:
1. There was little forethought to protect against the car commuters that make the left-hand turn at Cunard St, from in-bound Columbus Ave into the Northeastern parking lots. The cars that go straight naturally want to impinge upon the bicycle lane at this point.
That's what I did this morning. The idiot ahead of me who made the turn failed to signal his intention (quelle surprise!) making me fall back on my instincts, which were to swerve into the bicycle lane, without visual confirmation that it was empty. I'm pretty vigilant for bicycles, so there was low probability of disaster—easy for the fully protected car driver to say—but still, I'm bad.
2. I've always thought that the section of Columbus Ave from Melnea Cass to Arlington Street ought to have a speed limit of 25 mph. I drive that stretch frequently, and there is no way to confidently and safely brake from 30 mph to a full stop in order to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalks.
A 25 mph speed limit would enhance bicycle safety, too, at a 30 second increase in automobile travel time.
How about enforcing the existing speed limits first
Speed limit signs are so infrequent, and they're hardly ever enforced. Let's try enforcing the current ones before putting up new ones.
(And no, I don't mean speed traps all TF over the place to make this place a nanny state; I mean enforcing people whose rate of speed compared to the type of roadway is clearly irresponsible, like the people who go tearing around corners and flying down residential streets at 40mph.)
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
The Boston municipal speed limit is 30 mph unless o/wise posted
eeka, The Boston municipal speed limit is 30 mph unless otherwise posted. That's why there are so few signs.
And how many people know
And how many people know this?
Not SHOULD know this, but actually know this?
H. 3265 An Act Relative to the Speed Limit in Cities and Towns
You, of course, are right, J, Massachusetts drivers exhibit an anarchic, me!-first attitude toward traffic regulations, including the recently enacted law prohibiting automotive Right Hooks against bicycles.
If anyone was wondering, the speed limit of 30 mph in a thickly settled area is given in the Mass. RMV Driver's Manual in Chapter 4, on page 80 of the document (p. 3 of the pdf). (The very next page helpfully provides the meaning of [color=red]Red[/color] and [color=green]Green[/color] in traffic signals.)
A little googling around surfaces this: House Bill 3265, filed by Liz Malia, An Act Relative to the Speed Limit in Cities and Towns would "would reduce the speed limit in thickly settled areas and in business districts from the current level of 30 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour." Let's hope H. 3265 dies an anonymous death.
I like the way Seattle does it better: marked arterial roads have a speed limit of 30 mph, while everything else is 25 mph. With this set up, I would have Columbus Avenue designated not an arterial.
It's a funny thing, though. In my experience Seattleites actually seem to know the 30/25 rule, though frequently honoring it in only the breach. It gives me hope for the conversion of the ME!-First Massachusetts driver into some kind of civic sanity.