Hey, there! Log in / Register
Boston's newest effort to protect parked cars from dings working out great
By adamg on Tue, 10/25/2022 - 12:51pm
Josh Bittker snapped the spiffy new lane near MGH yesterday: "The new Cambridge St. protected parking lane looks great!"
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
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
Pretty much Washington St
Pretty much Washington St after work as well...we need to protect the cars and buses and trucks!
From the Twitter thread
Pretty dangerous, especially with the fire station and hospital along this stretch. Maybe not as dangerous as a bike running reds though, depends who you ask.
Also from the Twitter thread
"The problem is no green paint!"
Green paint
Green paving is great, and I do wish Boston would use more of it, but alas, people are still stupid or jerks or what have you. Just this morning, I came across a pedestrian walking on a green colored bike lane in Sullivan Square, right next to a sidewalk. Boston is gonna Boston.
The fact that all of these a
The fact that all of these a-holz find it cheaper/easier to park in a bike lane rather than pay for parking proves that towing and parking fines are waaaaay too low. Maybe the inconvenience of a trip via commuter rail to Worcester to get their heap out of car jail along with a $300 parking fine would be persuasion enough to convince them to act like responsible citizens.
Towing and parking fines
They're not low...they're non-existent.
Someone would have to enforce the bike lane for anyone to even know about towing and parking fines.
The more illegal the parking job...
... the less likely you are to get a ticket.
Stay ten minutes too long at a meter? Ticket. Valid resident sticker in a resident space, but forgot about street sweeping? Towed. Double park in a busy travel lane, park on the sidewalk, or run over a bunch of flex posts and park in the bike lane? No ticket.
It's not going to happen
But the only way of effectively handling enforcement is to mount cameras on city vehicles and MBTA busses and automatically send tickets.
Yeah, that's not going to happen. But neither is active enforcement.
Is it actually possible to tow a vehicle...
Nestled between these upright bike lane dividers without actually trashing the lane dividers?
Sure
Start towing from the front (or rear) of the line of cars.
Try one of these nifty things
https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/a15281/tiny-robots-move-car-a...
Fixing up a keyed car is
Fixing up a keyed car is pretty expensive too. There should be severe consequences for people who break laws and endanger others.
Agreed
All those bikers that run red lights should have severe consequences for their actions. I think this is the first time we agree on something!
Sounds great
As long as there is enforcement for the cars that run red lights. It happens at about 90% of intersections I travel through.
100% agree
All red light runners should be punished to the highest level.
The great part is, you can
The great part is, you can say that, even though you don't actually mean it, because it will never actually happen, so you'll never actually have to live with the consequences of your supposed beliefs. I think the kids call it "virtue signaling" these days.
Thanks for telling me how I feel about this topic
I was so confused prior to your enlightenment. GTFO!
No charge.
No charge.
Lol! Your head is going to explode …
… when the Idaho Stop is formally written into the rules of the road in MA as it is in other states.
But it isn’t yet, Lee
And it never will be.
How about
The fines should scale to the hazard presented.
Then car fines can be $10,000 and bike fines $10.
And when someone kills a biker because they ran
A red light? Or a biker running a red light that causes additional accidents? Did you think about that? What should we fine motorcycles? $10 too because they can’t really cause anymore damage than a bicycle running a red light.
The entitlement is strong in this one with her e-bike.
Projecting much?
So do you have some data on secondary causes of car crashes? Sounds like $10 compared to the amount of red lights run and actual damage caused by taxpayer subsidized cars is the correct math.
*
*
Show us some data on that Robbie
https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/SASStoredProcess/guest
Check out Table 29
Crashes, by First Harmful Event, Manner of Collision, and Crash Severity, 2020
Seems like 4.4 million crashes in involving motor vehicles hitting other motor vehicles or fixed objects amounting to 23,000 fatalities. About 44,000 crashes with cyclists amounting to 923 fatalities.
Also worth brushing up on how fault is determined in crash investigations. Sure this is from Illinois but you can apply the base concepts while accepting the subtle differences with MGLS.
https://www.daveabels.com/car-versus-bicycle-accident-statistics/
Car drivers do that much more often than bike riders
This morning's commute, every single time I stopped at a red light, I had to watch 3-5 cars pass through the cross street after my light had already turned green. You can shut right up with this talking point.
robo is just baiting
his troll trap
So you think it’s ok that bikes run red lights, but
Not cars? I’ve already said cars should face the same repercussions as bikes running red lights. Not sure what your point is?
Huh? Where did I say that?
You really aren't very good at this.
“Car drivers run more red lights than bike”
“I can shut up right now with that talking point”
It’s like listening to a child when they get in trouble - “but they did it too”.
he is good at trolling. He
he is good at trolling. He doesn't really care about the subject.
So, your ok with bikes running red lights?
You clearly don’t understand what a troll is too. I think we’ve gone over this before too
Sealioning
How cute.
Oh honey
Coursera has lessons in statistics. You need one.
I love how all the bikers refuse to answer my basic question
And instead throw around troll name calling or cars bad, bikes good blah blah. Sounds just like someone that used to be in office. Hmmm
check the receipts, All of
check the receipts, All of your questions have been answered.
"why is no one answering my bad faith questions?!"
Curious!
Bad faith question?
Are you bikers so entitled that you’re also delusional? Here, I’ll make it clear as it can be:
Should a biker running a red light be punished along with a vehicle running a red light?
I’m blow away that the bike brigade on here deflect on this basic question. If you respond with anything aside from an answer, you’re deflecting so don’t bother.
again check the records
Stop asking the same questions over and over. Other pages count.
I can’t decide if …,
… the robo is so desperate for attention that it will say anything it thinks will get a response. Or if it is the clever invention of a better streets activist. It certainly does provide excellent opportunities for the cyclist, pedestrian and respectful motorist community to respond with good information and intelligent informed responses to it’s nonsense.
Who knows.
still waiting
For the data on secondary caused crashes.
Yes, red light runners should face the full extent of the law
Its weird that you seemed to think otherwise.
Now that your question was answered, do you think those fines should stay at the $150 across the board for cyclists/motorists or should it vary depending on the weight and top speed of the vehicles?
Oh and speaking of deflecting, you do often ignore and run away from questions and hard data thats presented to you in good faith. I think on this very thread you've been asked to provide counter data but curiously haven't followed up.
Do the signs get the message across?
What does that sign say? If it's a P with a slash, that technically allows loading, and the legal place to do it would be where the truck double parked, according to the parking arrangements along other protected bike lanes.
If loading is not intended here, where is the nearest spot for a FedEx truck?
As far as flex posts meaning bike lane/no parking, what was the city's intent in this Street View from two years ago, where there were both flex posts and meters? https://goo.gl/maps/iRdZyJy4TaJuMAah6
Double parking
If you spend any time on Cambridge St you will find that double parking is the rule. More common after 7PM, but it is happening most of the day to some extent. Not too common before 8AM. Stops sometime after 11PM.
The bike lane on Boylston
The bike lane on Boylston Street between Tremont and Washington has no cars in it. However, it left the road with only two car lanes. One of the lanes is perpetually full of trucks and cars unloading. This is legal on parts of the stretch, illegal on others, and one part downstream on Essex allows it outside the PM rush.
One travel lane is not enough to handle the traffic, and it's a perpetual intersection-blocking backup that didn't use to exist.
The city needs to decide how many travel lanes they want, and make sure it functions that way in practice.
There was plenty of traffic there before the bike lanes
Sounds like the real issue is a lack of enforcement for illegal parking, which existed on that stretch pre-bike lane.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3523024,-71.063649,3a,75y,95.4h,78.79t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2vHx5CcMVvO1_iO6IehBqQ!2e0!5s20140601T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Oh and I was also intentionally rear ended here when all we had was 3 car lanes and a sharrow. The protection here was drastically needed.
“ The bike lane on Boylston
“ The bike lane on Boylston Street between Tremont and Washington has no cars in it.”
When? I see them there regularly. Its an extremely dangerous place for cyclists to have to pull out into traffic to get around these dirtbag drivers because the street curves and drivers like to speed here to catch the green or yellow light at the next intersection. They like to run the red light here too so they can keep barreling down Essex.
No parking is illegal (in the
No parking is illegal (in the city of Boston)
You guys, this is OK
They're just running in for a minute.
Hat Trick!
That Honda is in a bike lane right next to a no parking sign AND a fire plug!
Parking in front of fire plug
Pre bike lane this was pretty common. Main motivation is there is ATM at Bank of America there.
The fire plug directly across the street also frequently has cars parked in front of it. Sometime it is a truck from the firehouse because the truck won't fit in the lot - the truck does give the hydrant about 6 inches clearance. More often it is a car just stopping in at the liquor store.
People who drive to an ATM
People who drive to an ATM should be banished to the suburbs.
Not often
I see fit to give you the benefit, but right? What person not on foot is well-served by that machine?
The Brighton Ave BoA was always a culprit, especially because there was nominal space in front of it with a hydrant! The Comm Ave one is much easier for direct vehicular access, although one would also be forced on a good outbound detour if they're not headed that way in the first place.
Anyway, if you have a car, and your credit is such (expletive) that you're in such dire need of cash as to make an emergency urban stop for some, then you're doing money wrong.
congestion charge
Why can't they impose a fee to drive your car downtown? Like London did. It might help if the T worked, but still. I'd pay it.
Because
You'll never see an elected official on a bicycle.
That there's no congestion charge is one of the few effective examples of a "laws for thee and none for me" proposal getting rightly stuck back up the (expletive) of those who suggested it.
except Mayor Wu
except Mayor Wu
Does she do it
In February?
Yes.
Yes.