Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2026 The Somerville Times. All rights reserved.
(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries and letters to the Editor of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)
By M. Lee
On a recent visit to Somerville, I nearly got hit by a cyclist. Three times.
I came to town expecting raw oysters and friendly chats, not evasive maneuvers that would make a Cirque du Soleil performer break a sweat.
It started innocently enough: I was strolling down Kirkland Street toward Beacon Street after lunch with a friend in Harvard Square. The sun was shining, the birds were chirping, and I was enjoying that rare urban sensation of having nowhere I urgently needed to be. That’s when a blur of bike blew through a stop sign. I jumped back. No helmet. No hand signal. No shame.
Later, I attempted to cross Beacon Street for buck-a-shuck oysters at Café Saint-Germain — a noble mission if ever there was one. But yet again, another cyclist, apparently indifferent to the existence of traffic lights or the fragile mortality of pedestrians, came barreling through. For the record, I wasn’t even doing the infamous diagonal cross to Dali, which I’ve since learned is a daredevil move that might as well be called the “Squid Game of crosswalks”.
The final straw was at the corner of Dimick and Marion. Another bike, another near-miss, another heart palpitation. This was no Tour de France; this was the kind of maneuver that belongs on TikTok under #UrbanStunts where I didn’t sign up to play.
According to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 85, Section 11B, cyclists must follow the same traffic laws as cars: stop at lights, yield at crosswalks, and generally not behave like gravity-defying anarchists. It’s one thing if they want to risk their own skin by blowing through stop signs or skipping helmets, but I draw the line at risking mine.
Maybe the Somerville Police need to take a week, park a cruiser at each major intersection, and start writing citations like they’re giving out free scones at Petsi Pies. Maybe that’s what it will take for cycling culture to prioritize safety alongside speed.
To be fair, I’m just a visitor. I live elsewhere now, but I was born and raised in Boston, and I return often. I’ve always avoided renting a car when I’m here — not because of the traffic, but because I don’t trust the drivers. Ironically, now it’s the cyclists who scare me more. And that’s saying something.
Thank goodness for the MBTA, with all its quirks. At least the T doesn’t sneak up on you in a bike lane.
So to my two-wheeled friends in Somerville: I salute your commitment to sustainable transportation. I admire your calf muscles. But could you please obey the traffic laws? I’d like to return home with memories — not medical bills.
If you found this article of interest, please consider sharing it.
Wow, this is one of the boomer posts that reminisces about the good ole days of Somerville filled with lifeless parking lots. Oh yea bikes are scary; comparing a 40 pound bicycle to a 4000 pound car or even heavier pickup truck is a joke. Get a life!
“I’d like to return home with memories — not medical bills.”
You did though didn’t you? You are talking about ” nearly” getting hit, not actually having been. That is important to remember even if it was uncomfortable for you, you did not in fact go to the hospital.
Hard to know what happened in the third example but it seems like in the first two you are claiming a near crash because a cyclist went through the intersection at vaguely the same time you did? That’s a stretch and a half.
The intersection of Kirkland and beacon has no signal separation, meaning cyclists are subject to right hook risks if they wait for the green. It is very typical to see cyclists go through with the pedestrian window there for that reason. This can be legal under MA law if the city just put up a sign saying so. Such a sign and some yield to pedestrians indications would go a long way. Allowing cyclists to use advanced pedestrian windows on crossings is proven to increase safety: https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bike-lpi-study-memo.pdf
Similarly cyclists treating stop signs like yield signs has proven safety benefit: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2022-03/Bicyclist-Yield-As-Stop-Fact-Sheet-032422-v3-tag.pdf
Demanding that cyclists follow these laws designed to regulate automobiles actually makes cyclists less safe by forcing them to wait around in intersections (the most dangerous place for cyclists), be more exposed to right-hooks, and have cars impatiently passing as they are just getting up to speed and stuck in their blind spots. Let’s change these rules to actually improve safety for all road users before demanding more police enforcement of something the city council has literally already told them to knock off because it fails to do so: https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2023/08/27/somerville-city-council-wants-cops-to-stop-cracking-down-on-cyclists-who-run-red-lights/
I do not appreciate an outsider coming in and demanding more counter productive police enforcement, which the community and city council have already consistently demanded the police cease doing, because of non-incidents while people continue to be killed by cars every week in this state and injured every day. A cyclist has not killed a pedestrian in this state anytime on record, so explicitly acting like bikes are more of a risk is just fear mongering. Talking about hypothetical injuries from being hit by cyclists while downplaying the reality people being killed by drivers is frankly unacceptable. I appreciate the local paper publishing this without clarifying any of the relevant local historical or broader statistical context even less.
I know this is an opinion piece but you still chose to publish this and there is still an obligation to the facts. Is this really the standard of reporting Somerville Times accepts when it comes to bikes?
Oh, and for a point of clarification helmets are not required for anyone over 16 in MA.
“At least the T doesn’t sneak up on you in a bike lane.”
Perhaps you should look before crossing them? Not every time a bike “sneak[s] up on you” in a space dedicated to their movement is it actually even their fault. Sometimes pedestrians can also do things that endanger others. Unlike someone in a car, a cyclist is likely to take damage if they hit someone. They aren’t trying to hit you. Cyclists and pedestrians have mutual obligations to consider each others safety but it should be clear the real threat to both is the same, the car.
Cyclists and pedestrians can easily coexist without the same regulations as automobiles. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqQSwQLDIK8&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD
I cross that intersection daily. I have never felt threatened by a bike. However, I have felt threatened by cars. And with good reason.
Studies show that drivers break the rules as often as cyclists but with far deadlier consequences. Thousands of pedestrians are killed every year in the US. Virtually all by cars, none by bikes.
If you are truly concerned about street safety, you are barking up the wrong tree. Drivers break the rules too and cars are, by a wide margin, a far, far bigger threat to pedestrians.
I live nearby and have done the “infamous diagonal cross to Dali” many times without anything like the experience this letter describes. Like others, I don’t find the story credible—and bikes aren’t the problem.
In 2022, 7,522 pedestrians were killed by cars in the U.S.
Deaths caused by bicycles? Fewer than 10 to 20 per year nationwide.
It is clear. Cars are the far bigger danger. More bikes = safer streets
@Slaw –
Your views on breaking the law if it is convenient for you are not my main motivation for commenting here, although I find the idea intriguing. I have a few crimes in mind myself.
I want to address your suggestion that the Times is somehow biased on this issue. I have observed that it has remained neutral in most, if not all, controversial matters like this, and they seem to welcome feedback and opportunities to publish op-eds with opposing viewpoints. You might give that a try. I doubt that you would be refused.
This story gives a tired and old perspective that merely serves to prioritize cars over people, accessibility, and sustainability.
Yes, it is problematic that cyclists have close encounters with people walking and crossing streets. However as many have already stated, these laws are designed for cars, not the vulnerable person riding their bike in the streets that are also designed for cars.
Improving bicycle infrastructure and designing roads to be safer for all road users, not just cars, is what this and other densely populated cities need. Calling for more police enforcement is a temporary and ineffective bandage on an issue that has been festering for decades.
@Gaspar Fomento Drivers break rules too, but they do so in 4,000–5,000 lb vehicles that regularly kill or seriously injure people. Both drivers and cyclists break rules, but cars cause far more harm.
As others have said, more bikes and fewer cars make streets safer. Bikes aren’t the problem.
I have lived in the exact neighborhood described in this article and the visitor to Somerville’s depiction is 100% accurate!
I walk to work along Beacon Street every day for more than 5 years, and have watched the addition of the bike lanes and have the same experiences as the Original Poster. On a weekly basis I am nearly hit by bicyclists while crossing in the crosswalk during the pedestrian light. On a daily basis I see many bicyclist go through red lights without pausing or slowing down. For the last two years, I no longer attempt the diagonal crossing at Beacon and Washington Streets but even walking in the crosswalk well within the length of the pedestrian light does not protect me from impatient bicyclists rushing through the intersection.
Yes, I know there are bicyclists who are following the rules, and when they do I will thank them for stopping for myself and other pedestrians. However, they are definitely in the minority.
Instead of attacking people when you disagree with them, let’s work together to make the streets of Somerville safe for everyone.
Why hasn’t there been a proactive attempt by Somerville and the surrounding cities to educate all citizens – bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists – on how we all should be using the the streets as more environmentally friendly modes of transportation are promoted? Why is it impossible to find anything about bike lane usage rules and regulations on the Somerville website?
Let’s stop yelling at each other and yell at Mayor Ballantyne and the City Council to promote ways to ensure everyone knows what they should be doing to make Somerville a friendly, stroll-able and bike-able city.
“Your views on breaking the law if it is convenient for you are not my main motivation for commenting here, although I find the idea intriguing. I have a few crimes in mind myself.”
Not about convenience. My evidence and argument had nothing to do with that it is about safety. You are demanding people follow the letter of the law even when it makes them less safe because it wasn’t actually designed with them in mind at all. Police should not be enforcing laws that make people less safe. That is a waste of public resources and creates potential for needless escalation.
“Instead of attacking people when you disagree with them, let’s work together to make the streets of Somerville safe for everyone.”
I think siccing the police on people is, at very least potentially, an attack, and far more dangerous of one than criticizing what someone says online.
Git Gud lol
I, personally, am demanding nothing. What about you?
@Dan D I’ve lived in this exact neighborhood for over 30 years and use that intersection daily. The visitor’s account is highly exaggerated. I walk the streets of Camberville every day and have never felt threatened by bikes.
Cars, however, are a real danger. I regularly see drivers run red lights, blow through stop signs, speed, ignore crosswalks, and talk on their phones.
Cyclists generally stop, check, and proceed safely. Compare that to drivers who blast through fully red lights at high speed.
Which is the greater threat? As @Dave noted: over 7,000 pedestrians killed by cars each year—almost none by bikes.
We need more bikes, not fewer. Every person on a bike means one less car. That means safer streets, cleaner air, and fewer emissions.
Bikes are the solution—not the problem.
Response to: Letter to the Editor 6-4-25
I concur with everything said in this Letter to the Editor. I too have been nearly run over by cyclists. I have also nearly missed cyclists with my car because they were not following rules on the road. I just want them to follow the laws!
Amazing that cyclists take flack for nearly running over pedestrians and for nearly being run over by drivers. Seems to some people the cyclist is always at fault…
I have no sympathy for both drivers and cyclists that fail to yield to pedestrians (I have seen both modes ignore safety rules!!). I fully admit that I, as a cyclist, do not always come to a full stop at stop signs; but at the very least, I will always slow down, look both ways, and will always stop if someone is trying to cross.
It disappoints me that many simply don’t follow the concept of yielding and right of way. I understand the frustration and lack of nuance that comes with the “Arrive at a full stop – for an empty intersection” rule, but you get a lot of awareness from the lack of enclosure around your bike, and responsible people should be using that visibility. I’d very much be in favor of more enforcement on egregious offenders. Ideally, that could be kept away from people who occasionally skirt rules but still have safety in mind.
Who cares what a random pseudononymous guest columnist says? Why was this even worth publishing? Why was this person allowed to omit their name?
The fact of the matter is that bike lanes are a life saving improvement to our city’s municipal infrastructure. Thousands of us use them every single day, and without them, far more of us would be choking our streets with traffic, and it would be far more dangerous for those brave enough to try walking or biking as things were decades ago.
I’m sorry you had (or imagined) a bad experience. But please understand that before these lanes came along, thousands of us regularly had bad experiences trying to get around the city we live in. Clearly there’s more work to be done, but we’re moving in the right direction and we’re not going back to how things used to be.