Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2021 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 Arah Schuur
With the bridge closures, detours, and overall increase in people trying to get around Somerville, most drivers, cyclists, pedestrians and transit users can agree on one thing – traffic is terrible! The solution? Add more protected bike lanes.
According to studies from Europe and the U.S., making room for protected bike lanes decreases congestion and improves travel time for drivers.
In New York City, one of the most congested cities in America, an analysis of over seven miles of streets with protected bike lanes showed that not only has safety improved for all users but that travel times for vehicles has improved even as car travel lanes and parking lanes have been reduced. In a similar study of a pro-bike lane policy in Graz, Austria similar results were seen: a 30% reduction in traffic jams. The 2019 Traffic Index confirms that commuters are spending more time in traffic in cities across the United States however two cities – Salt Lake City and Portland, Oregon – have decreased their car travel times even as their population has increased. They have achieved this by investing in transit, bike sharing and protected bike infrastructure.
The results are in: more protected bike lanes lead to less traffic congestion. Why does this happen?
- Multi-modal roads can carry more people. A road with three car travel lanes and two parking lanes can carry about 12,000 people per hour. The same road with one dedicated bus lane, a two-way protected bike lane and one car travel lane can carry over 30,000 people per hour.
- When cycling feels safe, more people bike and fewer people drive, reducing the number of cars on the street. Both attitudinal surveys and before/after counts have demonstrated that protected bike lanes are (and feel) safer, so more people ride bikes in them. This means fewer cars competing on our streets and smoother traffic flow.
- When bikes and cars are separated, both move more smoothly. Unlike painted bike lanes or “sharrows,” protected bike lanes physically separate cyclists and motorists and give everyone their own space to operate. No more cars piled up behind a cyclist climbing a hill in the middle of the auto lane, and no more cyclists having to squeeze past backed-up cars waiting at an intersection. Adding separated facilities for cyclists makes city streets work more smoothly for everybody.
There are many reasons why more protected cycling infrastructure is good for Somerville, including safer streets for all users (as required by the city’s Vision Zero commitment), environmental justice (reducing pollution from cars in high-traffic areas) and transit mode shifting (as called out in SomerVision 2030 and Somerville Climate Forward.)
In addition, years of data and research from other cities shows that more protected bike lanes will help traffic. So if you are frustrated by what seems like ever-worsening congestion and you would like to move more smoothly through our city, you should be supporting the effort to add more protected cycling infrastructure throughout Somerville.
If you found this article of interest, please consider sharing it.
Unless they widen the roads dramatically there will never be enough room for bikes and cars. Both are angry. A car has to swerve into the oncoming traffic to avoid hitting cyclists. Most cyclist have a chip on their shoulder and taunt drivers. It’s just a crowded dangerous mess. Cyclists seem to hog the road. Drivers are afraid of hitting them. Driving sucks, period. Then there’s the joggers on the sidewalks. Common courtesy does NOT. Exist in Somerville. Sad.
The assumption the author makes, that adding bike lanes reduces traffic congestion, does not align with the observed reality. When a two-lane stretch of road designed for vehicular traffic is reduced to one lane it increases traffic congestion in multiple ways. Traffic speeds slow to the lowest common denominator, which in worse case scenarios is a cab looking for a passenger, a driver who is lost and trying to find a street sign, a distracted driver, etc. The loss of a right turning lane brings traffic to a stop when a driver has to stop and wait for a safe moment before turning. Drivers making left turns also bring the traffic behind them to a halt while awaiting a safe opportunity to make a turn.
The environmental impacts have already been documented as air pollution levels have increased in metropolitan areas that have implemented these policies without given consideration to the environmental impacts.
While improving safety for bicyclist is important, we need to pull off the blinders that only focuses on pleasing the 1% of commuters with reactionary measures while ignoring the impact to the remaining commuters. We also need to get the 1% who want to have 50% of the road to begin paying their fair share of road use taxes.
Article compares Somerville to cities that in no way compare like traffic patterns, density, use of rotary system, going through local squares and more. Somerville is one if the most densely populated cities in the country due to 2 and 3 family homes.
Eddie, it’s really telling how you criticize cyclists but don’t criticize drivers. Sure, cyclists do have a chip on their shoulder. Wouldn’t you if your life was threatened by two tons of steel not following the rules of the road? If a cyclist breaks a law, who loses? Maybe the cyclist. And if he does, it’s his fault. But he’s not putting others at risk. If a driver runs a red light (which I witness every single day at just about every single intersection), he’s putting not only himself at risk but others, too. It’s not an equivalency.
Great letter, and I agree!
There is one error you might want to fix:
“No more cars piled up behind a cyclist climbing a hill in the middle of the auto lane”
It’s not an auto lane! Check out MGL Chapter 85 Section 11B. “Every person operating a bicycle upon a way… shall have the right to use all public ways in the commonwealth except limited access or express state highways where signs specifically prohibiting bicycles have been posted.”
In other words, people can use bikes in the city street, as they have since long before cars were very unfortunately invented.
And to Eddie, and all the Eddies who will undoubtedly reply to this letter…
The issue is a spatial one. Since left-behind personal vehicles block so much public space on the street, they will need to be prohibited except in special paid areas, like garages, where they can’t cause so much trouble for everyone.
The writer makes a critical point: our cities will not work if we all drive cars. They don’t work now… because so many people are using cars. In terms of efficient and pleasant public spaces and throughput of humans, society NEEDS people to walk, bike, and take the bus. We need people to stop using cars as their primary transportation. Society doesn’t need anyone to use a private car for their primary transportation (only car dealers need that, and that’s why they are called dealers!).
It’s not personal. It’s just geometry.
Back to the protected bike lanes: It’s insane to expect the people (who we need) to ride bikes to do so in the three pathetic potholed feet between a lurching bus and a block full of parked (and often idling) cars. But that’s exactly what city officials prescribe for us. And then they like to brag about how “green” their cities are to other mayors on Twitter, all from the comfortable air conditioned safety of their chauffered steel cage vehicles. And perhaps if our city has ‘award winning’ planners they will even give us a terrifying lane to share with three bus routes from 5am to 9am weekdays. *cough, Roslindale.*
Why do some people get to leave giant, health-wrecking deadly objects in dangerous places and others don’t? I’ve been here 15 years and I’m still wondering the same thing. There’s no right to street parking. There IS a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness… and it’s pretty clear that cars are a major obstacle to that, despite the fantasy sold over 100 years in car ads.
To badly paraphrase the great urban leader, former Mayor of Bogota, Enrique Penalosa, “That sucks that you spent ten thousand dollars on a car, but it’s not my problem.” Wow. Yeah.
It’s not Equitable for us to have to share space (and air) with vehicles that can easily kill us. When it comes to the public realm, sharing is only fair. City planners are getting used to designing for humans again, not cars. We all need to encourage them to keep doing so.
The safety of all humans needs to come before the personal car storage needs of the few. And I’m not even getting into public health and the climate, even though I’m sick from from summer ozone right now (it feels like suffocation, like “holy shit, I can’t breathe” you know what I mean?) and will likely have to go to the ER sometime in the next 24 hours. Street parking is a magnet for cancer and heart disease. Imagine if we not only could ride safely on the street, but could also breathe free of the poison PM 2.5, ozone, and carbon monoxide that comes from idling personal vehicles. That might be the beginnings of an equitable city.
Elected officials, know this: Your constituents are all equal, but their transportation choices are anything but. It’s time to follow the excellent work of our advocates and lead on freeing the streets for the cleanest and most efficient forms of transportation.
Cheers!
@Eddie
If you take another look at the issue in the view of people traveling via a mode of choice rather than cars/driving versus cyclists I think you will start to agree with this article.
1. A driver doesn’t have to swerve into oncoming traffic to get around a person on a bike. If they wish to overtake the person on a bike, they need to wait until it is safe to pass. This is law, at the state level. Create safe infrastructure for that person on that bike, then the driver has to do less to pass safely.
2. People have chips on their shoulders when they continually disregard human beings the right to travel safely. When a person on a bike almost gets hit due to carelessness, indifference, and or malice by drivers, then they feel the need to ride more aggressively and stick up for themselves. This is the same for people who drive. When others in traffic take advantage of others, cheat traffic rules, and drive carelessly, they can feel the same anger and distrust. So if you say that people on bikes taunt drivers, you must admit that people who drive do the exact same thing to all road users, regardless of the mode they choose to travel by. By using infrastructure to provide safe travel for people on bikes, that removes a cause of the symptom you are witnessing.
3a. People on bikes don’t hog the road. If you think that then you are not allowing them to travel safely. For one, they take up less space than a car, so there is that. Two, on streets that have parked vehicles, positioning themselves outside the door zone so they don’t lose their life when a person opens their door carelessly is important. If that is a 10 ft lane, then that puts them in the middle of the lane. It’s no more space than a vehicle takes up carrying one person, which is the majority of today’s traffic (you can anecdotally confirm this by observing 8-9 am traffic).
3b. If you feel that people are getting stuck behind this one person, then you are not looking at the total trip time and speed limits. The greater Boston area’s speed limits are at 25 and 20 in safety zones. People on bikes go between 10 and 20 mph. And the average moving speed in the area is 20 mph off peak and 11 at peak. People on bikes do not slow down people in personal vehicles, it’s the number of people driving personal vehicles. Many drivers will feel the need to overtake a person on a bike but only find themselves waiting at the same intersection. It is no faster, no quicker. Make cycling and bus travel more attractive, and single occupancy vehicle use will drop, thus increasing average city speeds.
4. People in cars should be afraid of hitting other road users, especially people on bikes and on foot. A motor vehicle is 2+ tons that can cause severe damage to people and objects with very little effort from the operator. It’s a very big responsibly to hold. When behind the wheel, you hold so many people’s lives in your hands/actions. It should not be taken lightly.
Your unprompted joggers comment makes it seem like you are angry at random people and that you hold your convenience above everyone else’s safety and use of the streetscape.
Eddie – motorist should pass only when safe — one of the first rules that people learn while preparing to take the drivers license written test. So, if there’s oncoming traffic when passing then the motorist is driving unsafely and is bound to cause a crash. It is not the fault of the bicyclist but rather the motorist who should learn to wait until it is safe to pass.
TheoNa is always entertaining with all that hot air and misinformation. Never let the facts get in the way of a selfish, cranky rant, right? Sorry, but bike riders number far greater than 1% of those on the roads. And anyone suggesting that less driving and more cycling doesn’t help reduce carbon emissions is either cracked or crooked. Maybe a bit of both in this instance. So tragic that you have to suffer the indignity of having to share the roads with cyclists. Oh, the humanity.
The population of cars here is increasing each and every year. Not breaking even or going down. I have biked this city for over 50 years and have yet to have a problem by being careful and using common sense. There is a percentage of bad bikers and drivers that is probably unlikely to change. I don’t know if it is about the same amount for both or not but I would guess it would be. I do know I would rather skip the stupid painting of the city streets for bike and use the money for paving at least the side of the road that is used for biking. We would at least a better place to bike. Although I can longer do this do to mobility issues. Our work and personal time is dependent on cars and there is no way around it. Carrying medical equipment and making many calls a day just leaves public transportation out of it besides not having the ability to bike anymore. The landscape of this city means we will have to get along somehow as the roads are too small to do accommodate both. It is a pain but there is really no other way until technology changes to where we have better alternatives. My biggest pet peeve is that bikers are not responsible for their actions. They need to be insured.
I own a car and I ride a bike.
1. Pretty much every time I’m driving my car, I wish I had taken my bike instead (or walked). Cars are a terrible way to get around Somerville. You get where you’re going faster on a bike and you don’t have to hunt for parking.
2. Riding a bike gives you an appreciation for just how terrible drivers are. You spend a lot of time dodging idiots who’ve cut right in front of you or parked in the bike lane or who are paying no attention to what’s going on around them. You don’t have that luxury of being oblivious on a bike. Paying attention is essential to your safety.
3. Cyclists get angry when you do something that endangers them.
4. Safest time for me to roll through an intersection is when it’s empty or there’s no cross-traffic. That way I don’t have to worry about knuckleheads coming from the same direction I am either turning or drifting into me. It also helps get cars through the intersection more quickly when they get the light or after they brake for the stop sign. So, you’re welcome.
5. Cars pass constantly pass bikes on the left. We make way so you can do it. Cyclists aren’t shaking their fists and getting worked up about that. Meanwhile, I’ve heard the gripes of many motorists peeved I’m passing them on the right when they’re stuck in traffic behind a line of other cars. See #1. You should have ridden a bike.
6. Agree completely with the letter. I’d like to see more residential streets turned into one-ways with the sidewalks bumped out, more trees planted, the parking limited to one side and a bike lane added (though a sharrow is also fine on a one-way).
7. Cities in Europe way older than Somerville have figured out how to prioritize public transit and bikes on their streets, with rotaries and narrow streets and the whole nine yards. It has been done. We’re not unique.
Maybe we should just go back to horse-drawn buggies?
The horses would emit zero carbons and at the same time they would provide free fertilizer which in turn would help fortify green space. Think about it, it could work?
The type of bike lanes that are proposed would mean the loss af multiple parking spaces. I’ve seen it in Cambridge. It creates severe inconvenience in a city where parking is extremely limited already.
Another issue I have seen is that if a passenger opens the car door, there is a danger of hitting a bicyclist passing on the right, where the bike lane will be.
These bike lanes limit the width of a street, which increases difficulty for emergency vehicles’ travel when time is important.
Ask a firefighter or ambulance driver.
As a city we used to be able to live here easily without hardly needing a car. I am speaking for the elderly which are not very mobile which I now fit in. We had places of business like supermarkets and small stores and so much more within easy walking of almost every part of this city. Here in Winter Hill we have quite a number of older people who do not have any way of shopping unless they drive or are driven. Some of us who can walk a bit cannot use some of the sidewalks and have to use the street. Over the years we have made this city more car dependent. I know this is only a small part of the problem. But now that I am in this position I can recognize it.
I drive a car, bike and walk everyday. In your article you say:
“When cycling feels safe, more people bike and fewer people drive”
I believe that is a true statement, however, cycling in Somerville will never feel safe to me. They City can paint a bike lane on every street and corner but the reality is the sheer number of residents will never make it is as safe as the City thinks or wants it to be. (There are over 80k people living in a 4 square foot mile City.) I see bike lines painted in busy busy roads that I would never ride on. They just create a FALSE SENSE OF SAFETY. I noticed Mystic ave along RT. 93 has bike squares painted. Who in their right mind would ride their bike with 18 wheeler trailers blowing by them at over 50mph?
A whole article and comments on traffic congestion and no one has mentioned Uber and Lyft?? These are a huge unchecked menace and our government should be putting limits on these services or charging a lot more in taxes or registration fees. These companies claim to be “ride sharing”, which is not really true. Most of them are single passengers and it feels like they are 30% of the cars in Camberville. Tax em and use the money for bike ways and sidewalk fixes.
Dana – Thanks for the note on the misuse of “auto lane” – it should be “travel lane.” If I could edit, I would!
I’ve been accompanying my 16-year old nephew around on a bike this past week and teaching him that when there’s no safe protected option, the safest thing to do is to use the full travel lane, as Massachusetts law allows. He responded to me that “it’s too embarrassing to be honked at” — a barrier to more teens cycling that I didn’t even consider!
I appreciate the robust – and polite – discourse this has created.