Cambridge opens new bike lanes along Brattle Street

1. Pedestrians
2. Bikers
3. Subway Riders
4. Buses (not having bus only lanes for the entire routes of #9, #7 and #11 is embarrassing for our city).
5. Pedi-cabs
6. Uber / Lyft
7. ZipCar
8. Taxis
9. Cars that belong to actual Boston residents
10. Cars that belong to Mass suburbanites
...(the other 48 states)..
58. Cars that belong to NH residents.

Pretty much nailed it

By Snuggles
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 3:14pm

Except I'd put Taxis ahead of Uber/Lyft, and maybe ahead of ZipCar.

Some of the taxi medallion holders are bad, and I'm so sick of lying and attitude from many drivers about the credit card machine, and the whole taxi thing needs an economic rethinking and technology updates. But Uber the company (not the drivers) is a nasty company, and knowingly broke laws to get advantage over law-following taxis, so I'd put Taxi ahead of Uber on the list. And Lyft just hitches itself to Uber.

I have not much bad to say about ZipCar, unlike Uber. But anyone can use a taxi without needing to pay a classist membership fee, and can at least hail or go to a cab stand without their movements being tracked, and avoid other modern corporatism like that.

I'd elevate buses above bikes

By blues_lead
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 7:15pm

I'd elevate buses above bikes, just because there are only a few routes with buses and many with bikes - bikes can usually take a parallel route to avoid conflicts with buses, but buses cannot deviate.

I'd also add rt 1 to the list of routes that need exclusive lanes their whole length.

Mayor Walsh will never allow

By cden4
Thu, 07/13/2017 - 3:36pm

Mayor Walsh will never allow for bike lanes on Broadway. Where would people double park?

i hate driving in cambridge

By bostnkid
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 9:39am

narrow streets getting narrower.

I agree. Driving in the

By Kinopio
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 9:52am

I agree. Driving in the Boston area is a bad idea. Good thing we have subways, buses, sidewalks and increasingly more bike infrastructure.

How can you agree with the

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 9:54am

How can you agree with the statement "I hate driving in Cambridge" if you don't drive?

Some of us

By Sally
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:18pm

bike and walk and take the T AND occasionally drive, which is often why we prefer biking, walking, and taking the T.

This is crazy

By Michael
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:19pm

But maybe a person once owned a car, lost the car because it was rear-ended and totaled by someone texting and driving, decided owning a car was more trouble than it's worth, and has lived ever since with a combination of walking, MBTA, occasional biking, and occasional Zipcar for grocery runs and saved tons of money in insurance, gas and repairs and countless hours looking for parking. But maybe I'm just projecting

How can you agree with the

By anon
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 7:45am

How can you agree with the statement "I hate driving in Cambridge" if you don't drive?

I own a car. I hate driving in Cambridge. So, when possible, I don't drive and take my bike instead. If biking is not possible, I often take the red line or bus.

I don't understand how that is hard for people to comprehend. If someone says they hate being crowded in a train car, so they drive all the time, that doesn't seem difficult to understand...

Everyone should hate driving in Cambridge

By Snuggles
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 10:01am

Then they wouldn't do it unless they absolutely have to, such as for deliveries to stores.

And people who actually walk could stop being third-class citizens, after cars and bikes.

If you think cars hate the percentage of bicyclists who ride in the street but ignore traffic laws, pedestrians who wait in the heat/cold at every crosswalk light, for the light and then for 3 cars to run the red, just love it when a bicyclist comes blasting through the crosswalk at any time afterwards, from any direction, street or sidewalk.

In policy, give top priority to pedestrians and public transit, for convenience and pleasantness. Otherwise, it just looks like you're trying to keep the number of cars low enough to make driving viable for the wealthy, and everyone else's needs are incidental.

You know what I hate?

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 10:35am

Jaywalking pedestrians, face shoved in their phones, who scream BIKES RUN RED LIGHTS when THEY are the ones crossing against the light and got "almost hit" (meaning: surprised) by a cyclist travelling on the GREEN light.

Stop jaywalking, pull your phone out of your rump end, and we'll talk.

City needs to meet us half way

By Bob Leponge
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 10:58am

At least a quarter, maybe closer to half, of the lights in my neighborhood have long parts of the cycle during which the pedestrian signals display "don't walk" and, simultaneously, any possible vehicular traffic that could cross the cross walk also has a red light, "no turn on red," etc.

Waiting for a light when there's no possibility of cross traffic sucks. The prevalence of "Don't walk, for no reason" signals has us trained to pretty much ignore the traffic signals.

Re: BobLP

By Anony- Mouse
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:20pm

@Bob: It's not technically jaywalking peds that are the problem. If the light cycle is messed up and you take advantage of an opening in traffic to get across, then good for you. We all do that, especially when traffic is light.

What's not cool is paying zero attention to oncoming (or turning) bikes & cars, and just mindlessly crossing despite the red Don't Walk sign. This applies if the pedestrian has their face in their phone or not.

Along with potential safety issues, it backs up traffic for the unfortunate and/ or misguided fools who have no choice but to be in a car (Bus, Uber, Taxi). And it's impolite.

Any light where there's a

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:40pm

Any light where there's a cycle track is going to require multiple phases, the majority of which won't allow pedestrians to cross. No more green-yellow-red for one street, then the other. For example, Broadway in Kendall Square.

Jaywalking pedestrians sometimes mess it up for pedestrians too

By Snuggles
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 11:04am

When there's no light, the smart walker learns to time their crossing with the auto traffic, and stay back from the curb to signal this intent (because some drivers will stop and halt all auto traffic at really stupid times otherwise)... but then some walker who doesn't know or care about smooth flow will just waltz out in front of a car, throwing off the timing and causing the other walker to have to wait even longer for traffic to clear.

But, when law-abiding pedestrians are getting the shortest end of the stick regarding being allowed to simply move about in public places, it is not fair to say "I see people walking out into the street looking at their phones, so I'm going to use that as an excuse to disregard all walker issues and continue to prioritize cars over everyone else."

Cyclist in the city

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 11:37am

Should have to register and take a safety class. Also by registering them cops can then enforce traffic laws by citing them for running red lights.

In an alternate universe

By Michael
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:24pm

Where registering and licensing drivers is making any impact on the quality and behavior of drivers, this just might work

Cities already ticket cyclists

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:53pm

You know why they don't do it more often?

They have to do it proportionally with ticketing the real dangerous vehicle operators - motorists.

What you really want is more ticketing for all modes.

How?

By merlinmurph
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:53pm

[I]Also by registering them cops can then enforce traffic laws by citing them for running red lights.[/I]

Seriously, how? Especially since cyclists can get cited now without registration.

Cyclists can already get

By DTP
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 1:23pm

Cyclists can already get ticketed for running red lights.

Source: the red light ticket I got on my bike in Cambridge

Also, registration for bikes is a non-starter, largely because a large share of bikes in the city are ridden infrequently, not by the person they're registered to, or part of a bike-sharing program, etc. Too many challenges for too little benefit.

Newsflash

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 1:55pm

The vast majority of cyclists have driver's licenses - talking 90+%

What we clearly need is more emphasis on the laws regarding cycling and driving around cyclists on the driving exam ... and to retest everyone every ten years.

Who should have to take safety classes?

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 2:01pm

Or, shall we ask it this way: who is killing people with their vehicles?

It isn't cyclists.

Repeat Unicycle Anon

By anon
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 9:11am

Need to learns to use plural!

Also hate

By C'mon guy
Thu, 07/13/2017 - 10:26am

Pedestrians standing on the curb at a crosswalk with no intent to cross, just staring into the phone standing at the crosswalk. When you stop they seem surprised and say something like "Oh, no, I'm not going". Ride down Mt. Auburn or Cambridge St. and see if you can tell who's actually going to cross and who is just staring.

If they're standing on the

By DKB
Mon, 08/07/2017 - 9:44am

If they're standing on the curb, they're not in the crosswalk. You don't have to stop and you shouldn't. So many Boston drivers are full of some kind of "let's be extra courteous so everyone will be confused about who should go next" thinking. If a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, stop for him. If not, don't.

There was absolutely no

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 10:24am

There was absolutely no reason for this street to be two lanes, this is an amazing idea, it improves safety for all who use the road.

Please keep in mind I say this as a Cambridge resident and someone who travels this street every day

There was a very good reason.

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:23pm

There was a very good reason. You could double park when making a delivery or dropping off a person with mobility issues.

Look at the picture

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 12:54pm

There are two parking lanes.

Deal with it.

How is a truck making a

By anon
Thu, 07/13/2017 - 1:24am

How is a truck making a delivery supposed to deal with it, if there are no open parking spaces on the block? Or there is a space, but it's car-sized so the truck can't fit?

Before, they could double park, and it was a non-issue. Now they'd block the one general lane.

Ever hear of loading zones?

By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 07/13/2017 - 10:59am

Put one on every block and you're good.

And if 2 trucks show up at

By anon
Thu, 07/13/2017 - 7:03pm

And if 2 trucks show up at once?

Then they can circle the

By DTP
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 9:20am

Then they can circle the block, find a different spot, or come back later - the same thing that you have to do in your car when there's no open parking space.

So we took a commercial

By anon
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 11:30am

So we took a commercial street that had loading capacity for multiple trucks, and reduced it to one truck at a time, resulting in increased traffic, pollution, and delivery costs from circling. In other words, we created a problem where there didn't use to be one. How is this an improvement?

Because if you take a more

By DTP
Mon, 07/17/2017 - 8:44am

Because if you take a more holistic view and focus on more than just the singular issue of trucks making deliveries, you'll see that we fixed a multitude of other problems.

Creating one problem in the process of fixing many problems is still an improvement.

Zoning

By ElizaLeila
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 12:15pm

Depending upon the building type going in, Zoning covers this. Although, the age of may Boston buildings makes then non-compliant. But the new buildings going in ...they should have loading built in to assist in keeping streets (more) clear for cyclists, peds, and other traveling public.

don't worry, this lane doesn't look like it'll stop that...

By peter
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 1:52pm

I don't see any physical barriers (maybe those orange cones will be replaced by posts?), so folks will still double park. What really gets me is how often they do this despite there being an actual parking meter spot open, which they are blocking by double parking in the bike lane.

Double parking is illegal,

By anon
Fri, 07/14/2017 - 10:59am

Double parking is illegal, unsafe, and causes major traffic issues.

People with mobility issues can use the parking spaces for pick ups and drop offs.

I actually like it

By anon
Wed, 07/12/2017 - 10:33am

You don't have places where every special little beemer driver decides there is a special lane for him or her - everyone in their lane and place and stuck there. No ambiguity means no special people cutting lines, making their own lanes, or roaring around already stopped vehicles to run red lights.

You just get in line, take your turn, and low stress. In a hurry? Use I-93.