These "problems" seem mostly like people whining about having a cycletrack rather than 4 lanes of car traffic. That said, I never quite understood the point of this - it doesn't actually lead anywhere, so there won't be any cut-through bike traffic except North End residents. It just seems like this shouldn't be a priority for a cycletrack. Why not a corridor that is heavily used by cyclists going from place to place, such as Cross St/Washington St inland, or Cambridge Street near Charles Circle, or Charles St, or the roads around the Common and Public Garden, or Summer St, or really almost every major road in the area except for this one?
Meekly piping up to say that I use the cycle track five days a week, weather permitting...and I'm a winter cyclist. The volume of bikes in Boston in general is still very low right now due to how much it has rained this spring. I think it's very unfair to judge it's usage at the moment, especially w/ it still being under construction. It actually is a fantastic connector from the downtown financial district area to both Charlestown and Cambridge via Revere Park and the dam. MUCH safer than atlantic avenue & I feel substantially more safe biking on the new track as opposed to the old faded bike lane w/ double parked cars, pot holes, and people making random illegal u-turns. My main problem w/ it so far is pedestrians who randomly wander in while staring at their phones and oblivious runners w/ ear-buds. The only real design fault I can concretely say I don't like is around the cross-walks...pedestrians have to cross the cycle track to cross the street/press the button for the signal. It's a recipe for disaster, especially with the confused tourists.
I agree that it's unfair to judge its usage at this point, and I'll agree that it's marginally safer than most bike lanes in Boston, but I disagree that it's a fantastic connector
I've begun using this cycle track to get between my office on State St and the Charlestown bridge. I was very excited to start using it instead of braving Congress/Sudbury/N Washington, even though it's a full half mile longer, but so far I'm pretty disappointed.
It's obnoxiously difficult to get to it from the financial district (at least if you're someone like me who doesn't want to get another ticket and thus actually follows traffic laws).
It begins and ends randomly with absolutely zero accommodation for bikes getting back into traffic (northbound dumping you onto the sidewalk at Charter St, in the middle of a sharp curve is a horrible decision - it's difficult to look over your shoulder to see if there's any traffic coming while also trying to dodge the various street furniture and line yourself up with the wheelchair ramp; I've never even seen another cyclist going southbound, since the cycle track is on the wrong side of the street).
Too many pedestrians walk on it instead of the sidewalk, and are either oblivious or unwilling to kindly move. This is not helped by the fact that in several places they narrowed the sidewalk so much that pedestrians have to use the cycle track to pass one another.
None of the signals on it are turned on yet, and the sightlines make it difficult to see the vehicular signal, so you have to approach each intersection more cautiously.
There isn't enough room between it and the travel lanes to fit a car waiting to turn, and if drivers wait behind it, they can't see oncoming traffic. So many just block the cycle track.
It doesn't actually connect to anything useful. Even once the N Washington St Bridge is replaced and includes cycle tracks, the official plan still calls for the Commercial St cycle track to end where it presently does at Charter St, with only sharrows (!) for the ~600 ft between there and the N Washington St cycle tracks.
This cycle track remains a solution in search of a problem. This money would have been better spent adding a cycle track down the greenway (where there should already be one! Come on, that was the perfect opportunity to add one years ago!), or down Congress/Washington. Both of them would have been more useful, easier to access, connected more people and places, and provided useful bike infrastructure where there presently is none.
There are lots of reasons, both good and bad, why bike infrastructure is rolled out piecemeal. In my experience, once you get some good infrastructure, you'll get more adjacent to it. So for now, you've got a 0.5 miles cycle track with poor connections. In a few years, you'll get some connections.
It comes incrementally, and something's got to go first.
(I'm not arguing that it was engineered well, constructed well, or anything else project-specific)
Seeing as it's what I do for a living, I'm well aware that the infrastructure is added piecemeal.
However, in this case the city doesn't plan on adding any connecting bike infrastructure in the future. If you look at both the N Washington St Bridge plans, and the CHB plans, they specifically do not call for a connection to the Commercial St cycle track. So future new construction will retain that gap, meaning we'll be stuck with it for a very long time, because the city isn't going to rebuild the road again for a very long time.
It'll be a lot more than a few years before that cycle track connects to anything.
As a novice bike rider in the city, I appreciate the track. It keeps me away from the cars that might accidentally hurt me and on a path that is fairly consistent in terms of flatness.
I did have to swerve around some people just standing in one of the lanes and then another group of people who were walking in a lane against the flow of bike traffic. There is a huge sidewalk next to it for them.
you will see that there appear are serious problems with decreasing the lanes of car traffic. It is people "whining" as you say for what appears to be very good reasons.
The North End is a tight, congested area of the city. In our excitement to satisfy the bike zealots, those city officials who thought this project a great idea, might be eating crow. Removing car lanes for traffic that is not decreasing, never mind the delivery trucks and tour buses, which are also not going away, leads to:
"Commercial Street has become an obstacle course for vehicles and pedestrians now that the cycle track has removed 10 feet+ from the street. Lanes are often blocked by delivery trucks, tour buses and yes, double parking. The stretch along the ball fields and the Charter Street intersection has been a series of “everyday near misses,” according to locals. Walkers trying to cross the street are confronted with a myriad of conflicting traffic signals, 2-way bike traffic and reduced sight lines."
Have you ever driven Commercial St? Volumes are pretty low since it's not a through road. The only place it ever backs up is sometimes approaching N Washington St, but that direction was kept 2 lanes so the queue never really extends that far.
4 lanes was overkill for that road from the beginning. 3 is still plenty.
4 lanes probably made sense for Commercial Street when it was in fact a major commercial street, and also had a railroad running down the middle of it. But, despite the name, it's a pretty quiet neighborhood street these days, and the only problem it has is the rampant double parking due to lack of sufficient loading zones.
Your comment is not true at all. Traffic backs up on Commercial (which arcs around the entire North End) from almost one end to the other multiple times a week.
I'll admit I'm only on Commercial St once a day, but I bike through around 5 pm, which should be the peak hour, and have never seen it backed up more than the few blocks by N Washington St.
I live off of Cambridge St. It too is rarely full when I am around as I work out of town and and gone from 7AM to 6PM, however when I do stay home you can see it is at or above capacity for much of the day. It is mid day traffic the fills it up. Mainly because of the medical offices in the area.
This also happens to be a heavily used bikeway and there are demands for a cycle track. As the street is at capacity for cars and trucks it isn't clear how this will be done.
And despite being at capacity truck double parking is apparently a problem.
In reality it's the car owners that are zealots, no? They never want to give up anything; they think cars are the most important thing in the world and that pedestrians and cyclists are the problem. Then of course there is the whining about traffic. In order to decrease car traffic we need to come up with other viable solutions. One of those solutions are safe & effective bike paths. The better they are the more ppl will utilize them. Same with the T - the better it is the more ppl will leave their cars and utilize it.
These "bike zealots" also pay taxes and should have the ability to bike safely in and around the city. And before I get flamed I am not one of them. I just see that we as a city need to stop being so car dependent and have other options to use.
As for this project why the city wouldn't fix items that are not right while they are still doing construction is just foolish. But it is how we do.
You clearly know nothing about the area if you are siding with the whiners. There is no traffic problem there that isn't caused by having to stop at lights. The real whiners are probably the profiteers of death who put out their little parking signs and get free parking during funerals.
Again, with emphasis: THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH TRAFFIC HERE. I ride it every day. Just a short backup at the light.
The Connect Historic Boston cycletrack did not decrease the number of general purpose lanes: there were 3 general lanes before, and 3 general lanes now.. Along Commercial St, which already had regular bike lanes, they achieved space for the cycletrack by combining the width of the existing bike lanes.
Double parking was already an issue, it's just that previously double parking "only" blocked the bike lane, and now it blocks cars. If residents would like the city to replace some parking spaces with delivery zones or drop-off areas, I'm sure the city would oblige.
It connects the downtown and Greenway bike lanes to the bridge. It takes bikes out of the traffic feed. The bike lanes there were heavily used before they started building this. There is zero need for more car traffic there, and once the bridge is replace there will be much use of this.
I also see families using it to get to the school AND to the ball fields - something I NEVER saw before! People even yet fairly young kids go it on their own to get to practice and games (the old "glove on the handlebar" trick).
People using wheel chairs and scooters have found it accommodating, too.
It is being used. It will be used more when it is complete. I use it every day.
Later on in the video (42:38), he continues the exchange:
NR: I want to know - all three of you - your past business expenses, err, experiences. What? starting from 2013?
MG: I’ve been with the city for 20 years.
NR: You’ve been with the city for 20 years?
MG: I have two masters degrees from MIT.
NR: From MIT?
MG: And I’m qualified to do this job.
NR: Mmmokay.
I wasn't at this meeting, but I've been to several on this subject and others in the North End over the last 15 years. This type of treatment happens every time.
Connect Historic Boston is a nice idea, but unfortunately so far it has resulted in the construction of expensive bike facilities on streets that won't actually benefit that many people. If the idea is that tourists will go in a loop around downtown Boston, it might succeed if the circle is ever actually completed.
The main issue, though, is that the more pressing need for bike facilities is the radial routes into and out of downtown (Cambridge St, Congress St, Merrimac St, Congress St, Boylston St, Charles St, Beacon St.) The City has no plans for any of these streets because the Mayor doesn't want to take any space away from cars. It's really quite sad.
Comments
These "problems" seem mostly
These "problems" seem mostly like people whining about having a cycletrack rather than 4 lanes of car traffic. That said, I never quite understood the point of this - it doesn't actually lead anywhere, so there won't be any cut-through bike traffic except North End residents. It just seems like this shouldn't be a priority for a cycletrack. Why not a corridor that is heavily used by cyclists going from place to place, such as Cross St/Washington St inland, or Cambridge Street near Charles Circle, or Charles St, or the roads around the Common and Public Garden, or Summer St, or really almost every major road in the area except for this one?
Meekly piping up to say that
Meekly piping up to say that I use the cycle track five days a week, weather permitting...and I'm a winter cyclist. The volume of bikes in Boston in general is still very low right now due to how much it has rained this spring. I think it's very unfair to judge it's usage at the moment, especially w/ it still being under construction. It actually is a fantastic connector from the downtown financial district area to both Charlestown and Cambridge via Revere Park and the dam. MUCH safer than atlantic avenue & I feel substantially more safe biking on the new track as opposed to the old faded bike lane w/ double parked cars, pot holes, and people making random illegal u-turns. My main problem w/ it so far is pedestrians who randomly wander in while staring at their phones and oblivious runners w/ ear-buds. The only real design fault I can concretely say I don't like is around the cross-walks...pedestrians have to cross the cycle track to cross the street/press the button for the signal. It's a recipe for disaster, especially with the confused tourists.
Yeah it's crap
Yeah it's crap
Nice, France has a similar
Nice, France has a similar setup to what you're describing
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.695115,7.2707984,3a,75y,132.05h,77.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9dNz5b_h_AcsQWLF-UJrkg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The problem solves itself culturally - you get yelled at for being stupid and being in the bike lane and run over if you don't get out of the way.
I agree that it's unfair to
I agree that it's unfair to judge its usage at this point, and I'll agree that it's marginally safer than most bike lanes in Boston, but I disagree that it's a fantastic connector
I've begun using this cycle track to get between my office on State St and the Charlestown bridge. I was very excited to start using it instead of braving Congress/Sudbury/N Washington, even though it's a full half mile longer, but so far I'm pretty disappointed.
It's obnoxiously difficult to get to it from the financial district (at least if you're someone like me who doesn't want to get another ticket and thus actually follows traffic laws).
It begins and ends randomly with absolutely zero accommodation for bikes getting back into traffic (northbound dumping you onto the sidewalk at Charter St, in the middle of a sharp curve is a horrible decision - it's difficult to look over your shoulder to see if there's any traffic coming while also trying to dodge the various street furniture and line yourself up with the wheelchair ramp; I've never even seen another cyclist going southbound, since the cycle track is on the wrong side of the street).
Too many pedestrians walk on it instead of the sidewalk, and are either oblivious or unwilling to kindly move. This is not helped by the fact that in several places they narrowed the sidewalk so much that pedestrians have to use the cycle track to pass one another.
None of the signals on it are turned on yet, and the sightlines make it difficult to see the vehicular signal, so you have to approach each intersection more cautiously.
There isn't enough room between it and the travel lanes to fit a car waiting to turn, and if drivers wait behind it, they can't see oncoming traffic. So many just block the cycle track.
It doesn't actually connect to anything useful. Even once the N Washington St Bridge is replaced and includes cycle tracks, the official plan still calls for the Commercial St cycle track to end where it presently does at Charter St, with only sharrows (!) for the ~600 ft between there and the N Washington St cycle tracks.
This cycle track remains a solution in search of a problem. This money would have been better spent adding a cycle track down the greenway (where there should already be one! Come on, that was the perfect opportunity to add one years ago!), or down Congress/Washington. Both of them would have been more useful, easier to access, connected more people and places, and provided useful bike infrastructure where there presently is none.
Bike infrastructure is rolled out piecemeal
There are lots of reasons, both good and bad, why bike infrastructure is rolled out piecemeal. In my experience, once you get some good infrastructure, you'll get more adjacent to it. So for now, you've got a 0.5 miles cycle track with poor connections. In a few years, you'll get some connections.
It comes incrementally, and something's got to go first.
(I'm not arguing that it was engineered well, constructed well, or anything else project-specific)
Seeing as it's what I do for
Seeing as it's what I do for a living, I'm well aware that the infrastructure is added piecemeal.
However, in this case the city doesn't plan on adding any connecting bike infrastructure in the future. If you look at both the N Washington St Bridge plans, and the CHB plans, they specifically do not call for a connection to the Commercial St cycle track. So future new construction will retain that gap, meaning we'll be stuck with it for a very long time, because the city isn't going to rebuild the road again for a very long time.
It'll be a lot more than a few years before that cycle track connects to anything.
As a novice bike rider in the
As a novice bike rider in the city, I appreciate the track. It keeps me away from the cars that might accidentally hurt me and on a path that is fairly consistent in terms of flatness.
I did have to swerve around some people just standing in one of the lanes and then another group of people who were walking in a lane against the flow of bike traffic. There is a huge sidewalk next to it for them.
Will be great when it is done, I think
If you read the article again,
you will see that there appear are serious problems with decreasing the lanes of car traffic. It is people "whining" as you say for what appears to be very good reasons.
The North End is a tight, congested area of the city. In our excitement to satisfy the bike zealots, those city officials who thought this project a great idea, might be eating crow. Removing car lanes for traffic that is not decreasing, never mind the delivery trucks and tour buses, which are also not going away, leads to:
"Commercial Street has become an obstacle course for vehicles and pedestrians now that the cycle track has removed 10 feet+ from the street. Lanes are often blocked by delivery trucks, tour buses and yes, double parking. The stretch along the ball fields and the Charter Street intersection has been a series of “everyday near misses,” according to locals. Walkers trying to cross the street are confronted with a myriad of conflicting traffic signals, 2-way bike traffic and reduced sight lines."
Have you ever driven
Have you ever driven Commercial St? Volumes are pretty low since it's not a through road. The only place it ever backs up is sometimes approaching N Washington St, but that direction was kept 2 lanes so the queue never really extends that far.
4 lanes was overkill for that road from the beginning. 3 is still plenty.
4 lanes probably made sense
4 lanes probably made sense for Commercial Street when it was in fact a major commercial street, and also had a railroad running down the middle of it. But, despite the name, it's a pretty quiet neighborhood street these days, and the only problem it has is the rampant double parking due to lack of sufficient loading zones.
Your comment is not true at
Your comment is not true at all. Traffic backs up on Commercial (which arcs around the entire North End) from almost one end to the other multiple times a week.
I'll admit I'm only on
I'll admit I'm only on Commercial St once a day, but I bike through around 5 pm, which should be the peak hour, and have never seen it backed up more than the few blocks by N Washington St.
Cambridge St
I live off of Cambridge St. It too is rarely full when I am around as I work out of town and and gone from 7AM to 6PM, however when I do stay home you can see it is at or above capacity for much of the day. It is mid day traffic the fills it up. Mainly because of the medical offices in the area.
This also happens to be a heavily used bikeway and there are demands for a cycle track. As the street is at capacity for cars and trucks it isn't clear how this will be done.
And despite being at capacity truck double parking is apparently a problem.
In reality it's the car
In reality it's the car owners that are zealots, no? They never want to give up anything; they think cars are the most important thing in the world and that pedestrians and cyclists are the problem. Then of course there is the whining about traffic. In order to decrease car traffic we need to come up with other viable solutions. One of those solutions are safe & effective bike paths. The better they are the more ppl will utilize them. Same with the T - the better it is the more ppl will leave their cars and utilize it.
These "bike zealots" also pay taxes and should have the ability to bike safely in and around the city. And before I get flamed I am not one of them. I just see that we as a city need to stop being so car dependent and have other options to use.
As for this project why the city wouldn't fix items that are not right while they are still doing construction is just foolish. But it is how we do.
Whining is the term for it
You clearly know nothing about the area if you are siding with the whiners. There is no traffic problem there that isn't caused by having to stop at lights. The real whiners are probably the profiteers of death who put out their little parking signs and get free parking during funerals.
Again, with emphasis: THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH TRAFFIC HERE. I ride it every day. Just a short backup at the light.
I don't know why you are
I don't know why you are maintaining that there is no traffic here. I live it everyday. You are dead a$$ wrong. And unhelpful to the conversation.
Swearing sure helps the conversation
But a bigger point, you contribute to traffic, what have you done to personally help reduce the burden you place on others in traffic?
Just admit that you live in a city and dealing with traffic is part of it.
This project did not decrease lanes of car traffic
The Connect Historic Boston cycletrack did not decrease the number of general purpose lanes: there were 3 general lanes before, and 3 general lanes now.. Along Commercial St, which already had regular bike lanes, they achieved space for the cycletrack by combining the width of the existing bike lanes.
Double parking was already an issue, it's just that previously double parking "only" blocked the bike lane, and now it blocks cars. If residents would like the city to replace some parking spaces with delivery zones or drop-off areas, I'm sure the city would oblige.
Critical Connector
It connects the downtown and Greenway bike lanes to the bridge. It takes bikes out of the traffic feed. The bike lanes there were heavily used before they started building this. There is zero need for more car traffic there, and once the bridge is replace there will be much use of this.
I also see families using it to get to the school AND to the ball fields - something I NEVER saw before! People even yet fairly young kids go it on their own to get to practice and games (the old "glove on the handlebar" trick).
People using wheel chairs and scooters have found it accommodating, too.
It is being used. It will be used more when it is complete. I use it every day.
That looks like a totally
That looks like a totally unbiased account that was definitely not written by someone who was opposed to the project from the beginning.
great presentation too
Masterful use of bold, italics, and all-caps.
Faults?
"City won't to fix"
Think that has anything to do with the way city representatives are treated each time they attend a meeting? Take, for example, this exchange between Mr. Vineet Gupta and a North End resident at an early informational meeting about the cycle track:
--
https://youtu.be/B4XF0hMPVRU?t=2133
That is embarrassing. Why
That is embarrassing. Why didn't other people in the room come to Mr. Gupta's defense and call out this racist dirtbag?
Because it's (insert neighborhood here)
and if you're not from there...that's why. But seriously: He's been a planner with BTD for close to 20 years. That makes him a snow expert.
Qualifications
Later on in the video (42:38), he continues the exchange:
NR: I want to know - all three of you - your past business expenses, err, experiences. What? starting from 2013?
MG: I’ve been with the city for 20 years.
NR: You’ve been with the city for 20 years?
MG: I have two masters degrees from MIT.
NR: From MIT?
MG: And I’m qualified to do this job.
NR: Mmmokay.
I wasn't at this meeting, but I've been to several on this subject and others in the North End over the last 15 years. This type of treatment happens every time.
Anyone know who that guy is?
And what his "qualifications" are? Besides where he was born, and obviously not including public speaking.
An offensive question from a
An offensive question from a resident doesn't negate the fact that the cycle track has some serious design flaws that the city refuses to address.
CHB Causeway St cycle track drainage problems
Seems the Connect Historic Boston is an opportunity for the infrastructure designers to learn on the job.
http://streetsmarts.bostonbiker.org/2017/02/10/drainage-failure/
Connect Historic Boston is a
Connect Historic Boston is a nice idea, but unfortunately so far it has resulted in the construction of expensive bike facilities on streets that won't actually benefit that many people. If the idea is that tourists will go in a loop around downtown Boston, it might succeed if the circle is ever actually completed.
The main issue, though, is that the more pressing need for bike facilities is the radial routes into and out of downtown (Cambridge St, Congress St, Merrimac St, Congress St, Boylston St, Charles St, Beacon St.) The City has no plans for any of these streets because the Mayor doesn't want to take any space away from cars. It's really quite sad.