City installed flexible barriers this morning. Photo by Greg Hum.
The Globe introduces us to Jonathan Fertig, who spent $40 buying potted plants and traffic cones to protect the new bike lane on Mass. Ave. at Beacon, in an example of "tactical urbanism." He's now raised more than $2,200 to add more barriers (meanwhile, the city, good to its word, installed its own mini barriers today).
Greg Hum shows us the difference:
Zero conflict @ Mass Ave/Beacon thks to cones and plants between bike lane and buses. @universalhub @rightlegpegged pic.twitter.com/cRqWTxWTNk
— Greg Hum (@thehum) September 9, 2015
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Please Do More Things Like This
By John Costello
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 7:32am
Local governments are filled with good people but also sign holders waiting out until the day the pension vests. There is a culture of maintenance of the status quo and not innovation. It's not their fault, it's just sometimes the big entity cannot see the little picture.
Good for this guy but this action can go both ways. Space savers can be considered a type of Tactical Urbanism as well, so can some Charles Bronson impersonator being a crime vigilante.
Civic and citizen have the same roots in Latin, just remember the concept of both when you decide to expand the width of bike lanes or hold a sit down picnic in Kenmore Square during rush hour.
Traffic vigilantism
By Lunchbox
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:29am
It's not for private citizens to decide the safety measures that should be taken on public roads, no matter how laudable the goal or even how effective the measure is. Leave it to the professionals.
And let's not forget what happened when Kramer repainted the Arthur Burkhardt Expressway from 4 lanes to 2...
Cuz the professionals are so
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:35am
Cuz the professionals are so good at their jobs. See every 2 lane 'parkway' marked for 4 lanes in Boston.
The Professionals ARE good at their jobs, if we'd let them do it
By Greene
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:32am
Engineering transportation infrastructure is a well-developed area of study and professional urban development advisors, traffic planners, and civil engineers are very good at what they do.
The political process that decides how much money they have access to, on the other hand, complicates things.
In the case of the "parkways"
By roadman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:59am
it's not just money that is a roadblock (pardon the pun). DCR in particular is notorious for "bending" rules due to "environmental" and "asthetic" concerns. The four striped lanes within a two lane alignment of the 'parkways' - not to mention the unacceptable safety hazard of all those large trees on the edge of the road - are an example of this problem.
Their mission
By RickW
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 1:36pm
Remind yourself what the C and the R in DCR stand for. Not sure why you have quotes around environmental and aesthetic.
Then perhaps the DCR shouldn't be
By roadman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 1:59pm
in the business of operating and maintaining roads that people rely on to get from place to place. This "recreational parkways" bit is such a farce.
And I delberately put both terms in quotes because they have become overused excuses to not do things properly. But who care if you have substandard width lanes on a road,. As long as somebody has arbitrarily decided it looks pretty. Or to perserve every tree possible, even though half of them are so old they're likely to fall over within the next year or so.
Um, you know what a "park" is
By Irmo
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 2:32pm
Um, you know what a "park" is? Those parkways are meant to be safe to walk along as well as drive through. Drive slow enough not to worry about the trees, and you'll be driving slow enough not to risk anyone else.
definition of the problem is the problem
By DaveA
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:15am
The problem with transportation engineering is not the competence of the people, but what they are asked to solve and the unspoken assumptions and mindsets. "If we let them do it" then they would continue to design for a world optimized for cars and trucks with occasional begrudging "accommodations" made to allow people who are not in cars to occasionally be allowed on the street for brief periods of time as long as they don't get in they way of anyone else. Or they go the other extreme and pain bike lanes and sharrows everywhere. We do actually need a conversation where engineers are asked to justify their decisions and demonstrate how their design will serve the needs of all users. The process is inherently political; just because there is a technical aspect does not give engineers a pass on participating in development of consensus.
Who killed the Doctor?
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:41am
Will this ever be known?
Can someone please call the police station, ask for the detective-in-charge or something?
OH THE HUMANITY!!!!
By Burt Batman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:40am
OH THE HUMANITY!!!!
You missed two things
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:16pm
The sign saying THIS IS FOR CYCLISTS
The fact the bus should NOT be stopping here - it is NOT a bus stop.
But do continue in your fantasy land where anything a driver does is okay, but anything set up to make drivers behave themselves and, you know, obey the laws, is somehow sacrilegious or blasphemous.
Not The Same
By BlackKat
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:10am
Space savers are for saving public property just for your own selfish use.
This person's flower pots were for saving public property for public use in the manner it should be used.
What will the city be
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 7:33am
What will the city be installing? I hope they're substantial enough that the buses don't just crush them anyway.
"Zero conflict"
By aldos
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 7:45am
Captioning the photo of a bus passenger stepping into oncoming bike traffic. Wasn't the bus stop supposed to be relocated to the other side of the intersection?
The MBTA has moved the bus stop further down the street.
By BikeWithKids
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 7:58am
The MBTA bus driver should not have stopped here, as it is no longer an official bus stop.
Bus stop is in front of Marlboro Market
By bostonzest
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:20am
Just past the corner of Marlborough Street. I don't know if this is temporary but it could be a good spot because there is already no parking to the corner because of a hydrant.
And, I suspect that the parking spaces on the southbound side between Beacon and Marlborough will be gone and will be used as the bike lane when this is finished. The lines seem to indicate that.
Bus vs. Bike
By Eve
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 7:57am
I think bike vs. pedestrian is a slightly better match-up than bus vs. bike (I wouldn't want to get hit by either but if I had to choose...). And it's not like the bike lane is consistently full of bikes in the same way the road is full of cars.
Much easier for someone
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 2:52pm
Much easier for someone getting off the bus to take a quick look right, down what should now be an unobstructed bike lane, than for a bus driver who has a million other things to pay attention to and is in control of a long unwieldy vehicle to check for passing bikers (not that bus drivers shouldn't be doing that).
I usually hate when people try to flip bike vs. car into bike vs. pedestrian (aka telling bikers to go on the sidewalk in busy districts) but this is one case where it makes total sense and is way better than the alternatives.
I certainly hope that all bus
By chaosjake
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:39pm
I certainly hope that all bus stops will continue to have the bus pull over to the curb, like appears to have been done here by relocating the bus stop. However, if you were going to have the bus stop with a bike lane on the right, all bike traffic should be required to stop for exiting passengers, just like car traffic is required to stop for passengers exiting E line trains along Huntington.
Buffer Space
By Andrea
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 1:42pm
It looks like the buffer space where the plants/cones are is pretty adequate for someone to step off the bus, look out for a bike, and then continue across the bike path.
I am conflicted about this.
By jillian
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:15am
I am a cyclist, and don't appreciate being side-swiped by a bus trying to let passengers off. I've actually had this happen to me, and it was not fun. Getting the T to pay for the ambulance bill (not covered by my insurance) was the un-funnest part.
On the other hand, these buses are designed to safely let people on/off by pulling into a curb. When the bus does not, it can be difficult, dangerous, or downright impossible for some people to get on/off the bus. I think the bus is even required to pull into the curb by that BCIL ADA settlement.
I ride the bus almost every day , and see people struggle with this. I struggled with this myself when my son had mobility issues and then spent time in a wheel chair. And the large scar on my leg is proof that the hinge on the front of the bus is quite sharp when you fall on it. Incidentally, that bus had not pulled all the way to the curb and the T payed the bill not questions asked.
I don't know this area at all, so maybe this isn't even an actual bus stop as someone else insinuated. And I generally cycle in places that have no designated bike lane anyway. But I am wondering how these two needs can be equally addressed.
The bus stop was moved as part of this redesign.
By peter
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:18am
The bus stop was in fact moved, so that BCIL ADA compliance *is* possible.
A wonderful start
By Markk02474
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:03am
There is a bike path added to the GLX that added many millions of dollars that needs some contributions too while you're at it. Its cheaper to give cyclists free rides on the GLX than build that path, but that would make too much sense.
This turned out better than a Billerica town selectman who took it upon himself to repaint a few faded sidewalks this summer and got slapped with fines and charges of defacing public property.
http://www.whdh.com/story/29589899/billerica-selec...
Well, the paint was much more permanent, and not to code.
By Greene
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:23am
.
But leaving it unpainted was up to code?
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:51am
And painting it himself made the career bureaucrats at his town's DPW look bad, which was the far worse crime.
Actually, leaving the crosswalks
By roadman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:53am
unpainted was up to code. From the 2009 MUTCD:
Wait.
By JPNative617
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:34am
Just curious about this Greg Hum character - he's a bike safety advocate, yet films himself drumming while biking in traffic in the snow? Makes sense.
Is it worse than talking on the phone
By Ari O
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:47am
While driving?
No, probably not.
Civil Discourse
By ElizaLeila
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:18am
And this is a perfect example why these threads devolve off topic so quickly.
Rather than addressing the issue presented, you choose to attack against cars and their drivers.
I am not anti-bicycle, I am anti-idiots on bicycles. I am not anti-car, I am anti-idiots in cars.
Yes, if a cyclist is riding a bike in the snow, I hope they're dressed properly and have appropriate tires especially when the roads aren't plowed the best. Add drumming while riding in the snow and with traffic? A potential recipe for disaster. Not the smartest move.
After his treatise on the Grand Junction, etc.,
By issacg
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:16am
Ari O. gets a pass for anything except a most egregious falsehood so far as I am concerned.
A "potential recipe for disaster"...
By lbb
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:41am
A "potential recipe for disaster" that will affect exactly nobody but the cyclist. You can be "anti-idiots on bicycles" if you want, but you should recognize that, like most idiots in the world, their idiocy means no skin off your nose. Unless you're his mom and have a license to worry about what he's wearing and what kind of tires he has (in the absence of evidence that they're just fine, thanks), maybe it's best to not try and manufacture an issue out of this non-issue.
I call BS.
By chaosjake
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:06am
As a Boston pedestrian, I can unequivocally say that idiots on bicycles are a menace to anyone on foot.
I call BS.
By BlackKat
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:14am
Since we're playing anecdote wars, I can unequivocally say I have never been run over by a bicycle.
And I could just as easily
By chaosjake
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:28am
And I could just as easily say that I've never been run over by a car. It wouldn't be quite true, since I've been struck by both two cars and two bikes (every single time in a marked crosswalk!), but it would be fun.
See, I didn't submit any anecdotes about what's happened to me in the past. I simply stated that reckless cyclists endanger more than just their own safety. Which is an empirical fact.
I have
By Anonnie
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:51am
Luckily it only required 30 stitches and a year of PT. And I had health insurance and paid sick time.
FWIW, my transit modes are T>walk>bike>zipcar
If
By ElizaLeila
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:37am
If he slides under my car as I am driving safely beside him as a result of his having improper tires for the road surface, it does become my problem.
But again, this is besides the point. And thank you for telling me how I should or should not think and have opinions about the world around me.
Fine, suit yourself
By lbb
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 12:56pm
If you want to manufacture issues out of non-issues, go right ahead. I'm curious, though -- how many times has a cyclist slid under your car under any conditions (other than said cyclist being hit or doored by another driver)? How many times have you heard of this happening to anyone?
It is quite possible that when I leave my workplace this evening, a piano will fall on my head, but the smart money bets against it.
ohforcryingoutloud
By ElizaLeila
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:22pm
n/t
And this is a perfect example
By Rob Not Verified
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:15am
aka "the Internet"
Um,
By whyaduck
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:30am
a distraction is distraction whether talking on phone while driving or drumming while riding a bike (in or out of snow).
Phone intoxicated drivers are far more dangerous
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:21pm
If he drums and rides and falls he hurts himself. He doesn't crush the brain of an internationally known surgeon and continue on with his day like nothing happened.
Any massive motorized vehicle has vastly more potential for mayhem and murder than a guy on a bike playing drums. Remember that.
Its a hazard
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 8:56am
It impedes vehicles from moving over to allow emergency vehicles to pass.
So do medians.
By baepp
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:25am
But there are still plenty of those around!
Cars are what impedes
By Kinopio
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:33am
Cars are what impedes emergency vehicles the most, by far. If you are so concerned about emergency vehicles getting somewhere quickly then you should be for getting cars off the road. One way to do that is to have people switch from cars to bikes.
If you are so concerned
By roadman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:11am
about emergency vehicles getting somewhere quickly, then you should be advocating for:
A law mandating that all emergency vehicles responding to a call must use their lights and siren continously - none of the "bilp blip - 5 seconds before entering an intersection" nonsense or these "but the abutters don't like the noise BS".
A law mandating that Boston adopt emergency vehicle priority at all signalized intersections. This would also require Boston to finally mount most of their traffic signals overhead, which would inprove visibility as well.
However
By KSquared
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:24pm
There are some circumstances in which running lights only is preferred, at least from the EMS side of things. So your request that all responding/active emergency vehicles use sirens 100% of the time is not super feasible.
Emergency vehicle priority would be nice, so long as there was actually a clear intersection to get through - which is hard at certain intersections at certain times of the day.
Please elaborate
By roadman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 5:32pm
Emergency vehicle trying to get to scene, or rush critical patient to hospital, needs to get through traffic as fast as reasonably possible.
Now explain how running with lights only is better than running with lights and siren in that situation.
It's Hard To Hear
By BlackKat
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:10pm
Maybe the vehicle's occupants are trying to talk on the radio to their dispatcher or to a patient.
Here's the couple I've personally experienced:
By KSquared
Fri, 09/11/2015 - 8:49am
-Responding to a call where someone is in a state of mental distress and you don't want a blaring siren to introduce yourself minutes before you actually see the person
-Transporting someone who is extremely anxious/scared/nervous about their current medical emergency and who would probably not benefit from hearing the siren for the duration of their ride
-Transporting someone who is experiencing some congestive heart failure who thinks that everything is fine and you want to make sure they think that until they get to the hospital, lest their vitals take a plunge
All good points
By roadman
Fri, 09/11/2015 - 9:32am
However, neither scenario # 1 or # 2 justify the current practice I've observed where ambulances generally do NOT use sirens when approaching intersections. Seems to me that giving drivers a clue that "hey, emergency vehicle approaching" trumps any medical scenario.
As for # 3 - agreed sirens are not necessary if the transport is determined not to be critical. However, if the situation changes to a critical one during the transport, then the siren should be used.
Over the years, I've had a number of near-misses (mostly as a driver, but sometimes as a pedestrian) - including two near head-on collisions with Wakefield police cruisers responding to calls by traveling the wrong way in the opposite lane of the street) with emergency vehicles. All of these cases could have been avoided had they used their sirens.
Where can I buy 5+ traffic
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:00am
Where can I buy 5+ traffic cones for $40?
Ask and you shall receive.
By cybah
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:20am
http://www.amazon.com/Cintz-Marker-Cones-9-Inch-Or...
Only 11.99
OR
http://www.amazon.com/3M-Traffic-Safety-Cone-18-In...
for 18.99
Hero!
By Felicity
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:21am
Hero!
And how to cyclists get killed?
By whyaduck
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:29am
Picture #1.
The cyclist has no room, really, to maneuver quickly/easily if he needs to, away from the bus.
I rode mega miles for years into and out of the City and would always hang back behind a bus and or truck, as a matter of course. But, hey, what do I know.
You know enough to not have been killed.
By issacg
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:14am
unless you're posting from beyond the grave, which would make you something indeed!
You're assuming the biker is trying to squeeze past
By ian
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:17am
instead of the bus merging over into him. I've had that happen to me several times with the MBTA, not really sure how you'd avoid it other than slamming on your brakes any time you see a bus in your periphery.
Don't want the large bus
By roadman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:12am
merging into you. Then don't pass the large bus ON THE RIGHT. And if you choose to pass the large bus on the right, then acknowledge that you are at least 50% at fault when they hit you.
What?
By BlackKat
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:20am
Can the bus not see to the right? Is Mr. Magoo driving it? If unable to see then the bus has no business being there.
Um....
By jillian
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:12pm
I was hit by a bus that merged into me. Except I never passed the bus. The bus passed ME on my left.
It happened so quickly, I had little time to break/move faster/otherwise respond, and got spooshed between the bus and the parked car to my right.
My experience has happened to a few cyclists I know, and I would wager just as likely or more likely than the cyclist passing the bus scenario.
So let's not assign blame just yet, before accidents have even happened.
Ah yes
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 3:24pm
The fallacy of "cyclist passing turning truck/pulling over bus".
It is indeed that - a fallacy. What really happens is "bus pulls over abruptly as if attempting murder" or "truck half-passes then abruptly turns".
The rest is just fairy-tale bullshit ... or Roadman Kool-aid.
That's the "Before" picture
By Ron Newman
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 10:44am
but it still made me cringe just to look at it. It's about the most dangerous thing you can do on a bike.
And, no helmet either!
By JPMom
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:48am
Foolhardy; not smart.
And the helmet was so helpful
By lbb
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 1:00pm
And the helmet was so helpful to the doctor who was killed.
Don't get me wrong, I always wear a helmet while I'm on the bike. But I'm not so stupid as to believe that it makes me bulletproof, and I'm not so arrogant as to imply that a lack of a helmet implies a cyclist caused his/her own injuries.
Gee, Thanks for the ad hominen attack!
By JPMom
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 1:28pm
I don't think I implied any of the things you assumed.
The traffic jams were awful
By tofu
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:38am
The traffic jams were awful today, I averaged 6mph on my commute in. I would have loved to bike in, but had to take the super-heavy laptop plus some other stuff with me. I am planning on keeping my car off the roads tomorrow despite the forecast rain.
This city needs to not just embrace cycling as a "OK, fine" concession; it needs to promote it as a viable, safe mode of transportation. Props to this guy for doing what he did all while making the road prettier (the city could put planters with flowers in that no-mans zone)
not for long
By Anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:57am
What ever the city installs (or this guy puts down) will get destroyed by the plows on the first snowfall (no matter how small the amount is). Not to be a bummer sauce, but the plows take out whatever they want.
And when it starts snowing?
By anon
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 9:59am
Will the plows only plow to the white posts? Will they destroy them? Will they be removed? Inquiring minds want to know.
Hopefully
By BlackKat
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:21am
The way most cities do protected bicycle lanes or paths, that plow them, is with a Bobcat or similar vehicle.
Spoiler Alert
By Michael
Thu, 09/10/2015 - 11:26am
They will destroy them
Pages
Add comment