Cambridge Civic Journal Forum

January 31, 2023

Arlington to Harvard Square on a Bicycle

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling,transportation — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 1:44 pm

The video embedded in this post is of my bicycle ride on Massachusetts Avenue from the Arlington town line to Harvard Square and Brattle Street, November 29, 2022. I recorded continuously, so the video runs for 15 minutes. I have added narration explaining my actions. I describe many different riding conditions and strategies, so think that your patience to watch it all the way through is warranted. Most of the time, I chose not to ride in the designated bikeway, in the interest of my safety or to avoid obstructions. I didn’t cause delay for anyone: quite the contrary, the traffic signals established travel times and at the end, I caught up with a truck that had passed me 12 minutes earlier.

This is a high-definition video. For the best viewing experience, expand it to fill the screen.

December 17, 2021

Pandemic Council Term Ends as the Pandemic Rages On – Dec 20, 2021 City Council Agenda

Filed under: Cambridge,campaign finance,City Council — Tags: , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 1:38 pm

Pandemic Council Term Ends as the Pandemic Rages On – Dec 20, 2021 City Council Agenda

That's All Folks!This will be the last meeting of the 2020-2021 Cambridge City Council which will likely be remembered for its lack of cohesion and the distant quality of its remote public meetings held in Zoom. The increased access of remote public comment was arguably a plus but any advantages were outweighed by the scripted nature of call-in comments driven by social media and the complete lack of meaningful interaction between members of the public and between elected officials and the public. A two-minute Zoom speech with the clock ticking followed by an abrupt mayoral cutoff is hardly a model for public participation. Perhaps even more problematic was the tendency for consequential policies to be developed and implemented in relative isolation and obscurity.

As the councillors head for the exits until Seven of Nine of them return to base for the January 3 Inaugural, here are the more interesting and/or disturbing items on this week’s agenda:

Manager’s Agenda #1. A communication transmitted from Louis A. DePasquale, City Manager, relative to an update on COVID-19.
Placed on File 9-0

This should be an interesting update in light of the recent surge in positive Covid tests in Cambridge and elsewhere. I won’t be at all surprised if additional restrictions are forthcoming. I hope there can be a little more light shed on the principal causes of the current surge. Is the Omicron Variant a factor? Personally, I’m getting my booster today and I hope everyone has done so or is scheduling it for very soon.

Unfinished Business #5. That the City Council adopt a municipal ordinance to reduce or limit campaign donations from donors seeking to enter into a contract, seeking approval for a special permit or up-zoning, seeking to acquire real estate from the City, or seeking financial assistance from the City; Ordinance #2020-27. [Tabled – Nov 8, 2021; Passed to 2nd Reading – Dec 6, 2021; To Be Ordained on or after Dec 20, 2021]
Mallon amendment to make ordinance contingent on approval of Home Rule Petition and Governor’s signature FAILS 4-5 (AM,MM,DS,TT – YES; DC,PN,JSW,QZ,SS – NO); Ordained 7-1-0-1 (Toomey – NO; Simmons – PRESENT)

As I have said before, this proposal seems like a real can of worms with varying interpretations of who should or should not have additional limits placed on their political campaign donations. Disclosure should be enough. In truth, the amount of questionable political donations and the number of candidates willing to accept such donations have declined significantly in recent years. Even with their donations limited, I expect that the role of “independent expenditure political action committees” will likely only grow.

Resolution #1. Thanks to Manikka Bowman for her years of service on the Cambridge School Committee.   Councillor Simmons, Mayor Siddiqui
Resolution Adopted 9-0

Resolution #2. Thanks to Councillor Tim Toomey For his years of service to the City of Cambridge and its residents.   Councillor Simmons, Mayor Siddiqui
Resolution Adopted 9-0

Resolution #6. Thanks to City Councillor Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler for his public service.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone
Resolution Adopted 9-0

Congratulations to all departing elected officials, but a special shout-out to Councillor Tim Toomey who has been diligently doing his job for many years through a variety of political environments. I wish him all the best in his retirement and fully expect that he will continue to provide constituent services well beyond his exit from political office.

Order #1. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to appoint a 20-25 person Cycling Safety Ordinance Implementation Advisory Committee to advise and improve upon the implementation of the citywide bicycle safety infrastructure and to establish recommendations on mitigating any concerns raised in regard to this infrastructure, with the appointments to be announced no later than January 31, 2022.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toomey
Charter Right – Zondervan

Order #2. That the City Manager is requested to convene meetings between his office, the Director of the Traffic, Parking, and Transportation Department, and with the heads of the Neighborhood Business Associations, with the Neighborhood Associations, and within each of the Cambridge Housing Authority’s senior buildings, to ensure that these stakeholders are given the opportunity to collaborate on devising new plans that will inform the City’s approach going forward in establishing citywide bicycle-safety infrastructure that works for bicyclists, motorists, pedestrians, seniors, those with mobility impediments, the local business community, and all our residents.   Councillor Simmons, Councillor Toomey
Charter Right – Zondervan

I fully expect a lot of double-speak as some councillors pretend to actually care about the concerns of many residents who are now facing or will soon be facing the impacts of some major changes in roadway configurations regardless whether they provide any net benefit. I also expect very little acknowledgement of the unintended consequences, e.g. the inability of delivery people to legally do what they need to do. The basic template usually reads something like “blah blah blah … and such that this does not in any way change the mandates of the Bicycle Safety Ordinance” – even if everything being requested is fair and reasonable. There are some times when I feel as though we have no representation at all – proportional or otherwise.

Order #4. That the Cambridge City Council go on record requesting that Massachusetts Municipal Depository Trust create a portfolio option as soon as possible for all municipalities that has no exposure to fossil fuels or prisons or their funders.   Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone
Order Adopted 8-0-1 (Simmons – ABSENT)

This may be all well and good, I still think there’s some hubris on the part of elected officials in wanting to dictate how the retirement money of employees must be invested.

Order #5. That the City Manager is requested to confer with the appropriate City departments to ensure multi-family properties on the market are reviewed as quickly as possible as potential affordable housing acquisitions.   Councillor Nolan, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor McGovern, Vice Mayor Mallon
Order Adopted as Amended 8-0-1 (Simmons – ABSENT)

Order #6. That the City Council go on record urging the Baker Administration and the Legislature to reverse course and changes and do whatever it takes to continue the Emergency Rental Assistance Program and Residential Assistance for Families in Transition program as they are currently operating, and making use of additional ARPA funds as needed.   Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

Committee Report #1. The Housing Committee met Sept 23, 2021 to discuss the Condo Conversion Ordinance.
Report Accepted, Placed on File; Order Adopted 7-0-0 -2 (McGovern, Toomey – PRESENT)

At some point there needs to be an analysis of the cumulative effect of all the policy decisions that have been made or proposed over the last several years in the housing arena, especially in regard to the question of the net shift from privately-owned housing toward government-owned or government-controlled housing. Order #5 seems to suggest that whenever a multi-family home is up for sale the ever-deepening pockets of Cambridge should outbid all others and take it permanently off the market rather than have anyone own something in which they can build some equity.

Order #10. That all items pending before the City Council and not acted upon by the end of the 2020-2021 Legislative Session be placed in the files of the City Clerk, without prejudice provided that those proposed ordinances which have been passed to a second reading, advertised and listed on the Calendar under "Unfinished Business" during the 2020-2021 City Council term, along with any other pending matters on the Calendar listed as "Unfinished Business," shall be forwarded to the next City Council and further provided that any items pending in committee or appearing on the City Manager’s “Awaiting Report List” may, at the discretion of the appropriate body, be forwarded to the next City Council.   Mayor Siddiqui
Order Adopted 9-0

Communications & Reports #2. A communication was received from Anthony Wilson, City Clerk, transmitting an update regarding legislative activity.
Placed on File 9-0

I really hope that most of the items in “Awaiting Report” are allowed to expire and that the new 2022-2023 City Council starts off with a relatively clean slate. One of the items goes back 5 years. In truth, there is no good reason that so many of these items should be languishing so long for a report back. If the associated Order called for something that is either infeasible or purely symbolic or just plain silly, the City Manager and staff should simply provide a timely single-paragraph response saying as much. If a majority of councillor are still insistent on pursuing some initiative, chasing wild geese, tilting at windmills, or obtaining some information, they can always file another Order or have it out with the City administration. – Robert Winters

Late Order #11. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to coordinate with the appropriate City personnel in order to establish an indoor mask mandate in common spaces of all buildings and indoor environments throughout the City of Cambridge, and that he report back to the City Council on this matter in a timely manner.   Councillor Simmons, Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Toomey
Order Adopted 9-0

Late Order #12. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to allow all employees who are able to perform their duties remotely to work from home until further notice.   Councillor Zondervan
Order Adopted 9-0

Late Order #13. That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to establish a proof of vaccination requirement for certain activities and establishments in the City of Cambridge, including but not limited to indoor dining, bars, nightclubs, gyms and indoor entertainment venues; and report back to the City Council by its January 10th meeting.   Mayor Siddiqui, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Nolan, Councillor Carlone, Vice Mayor Mallon, Councillor McGovern, Councillor Simmons, Councillor Sobrinho-Wheeler, Councillor Toomey
Order Adopted as Amended 9-0

August 14, 2018

Tight spot on Huron Avenue

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling — Tags: , , , , , , — jsallen @ 1:01 pm

I am expanding here on comments which I made on a post in the Cambridge Bikes Facebook group.

The overhead view from the post shows a stretch of Huron Avenue near Sparks Street.

Huron Avenue and Sparks Street, Cambiridge, Massachusetts

Huron Avenue and Sparks Street

I see here a retrofit to a car-centric street design in an attempt to accommodate bicyclists of all ages and abilities, a popular goal of bicycling advocacy.

This stretch is downhill right to left in the overhead view. A common explanation for the buffer (diagonally-striped area) to the left of the bike lane is that it is to protect cyclists from overtaking motorists — but it places the bike lane in the door zone. A bike lane in the door zone is unsafe for any bicyclists, but it is worse here. Motorists don’t have x-ray vision. A look in the driver’s side mirror won’t show a bicyclist until rather late on a right-hand curve: bicyclists are hidden by the parked cars behind. Bicyclists can travel as fast or nearly as fast as cars here, also worsening the dooring hazard. and do best to merge out and ride in the stream of motor traffic. This also improves sight distance for motorists who might (horrors!) have to slow a little to follow a bicyclist.

On the other side of the street, the bike lane leads bicyclists into the right-hook zone at Sparks Street in the expectation that all right-turning motorists will yield. The green-painted crossing is an attempt to accommodate bicyclists who do not check for traffic behind them, whether due to lack of skill, a stiff neck, inattention or misplaced trust. But, not all motorists yield. A bicyclist needs to be extra careful here, casting a look over the shoulder, and preferably merging left to block a right-turning motorist or let that motorist pass on the right.

Is it actually possible to design safely for all ages and abilities here? A speed hump could help by slowing motor traffic. Removing parking spaces would make a big improvement, but parking spaces are sacred to residents and business owners, and illegal parking (as in the bike lane on the south side) is tolerated as a minor sin. Moving the legal parking to the uphill, soutth side, would reduce the dooring risk. On the south side, bicyclist are traveling more slowly and sight lines are better.

But above all, a major change in motorists’ behavior is needed — a cultural change: reduction in speed, and respect for bicyclists who safely far enough from the parked vehicles to avoid dooring. Attempting to bring about bicycling accessible to people of all ages and abilities using paint first, without the public will to step up enforcement, gets things backwards. In the mean time, children might ride slowly on the sidewalk, but grownups do best to use defensive driving techniques, as I have described.  The major motorist behavior change can be expected (with autonomous vehicles) — in a decade or three.  If  shared use becomes dominant with motor vehicles, there also will be less need for parking spaces and that would be good too.

March 14, 2018

The Marcia Deihl bicycling fatality

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling,Deaths — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 5:19 pm

Cambridge City Councilor Craig Kelley has obtained a copy of the crash reconstruction report in Marcia Deihl’s fatal collision with a truck on March 1, 2015, and posted the report online. I thank Mr. Kelley for performing this public service.

My understanding is that a Freedom of Information Act request was necessary to obtain a copy. That is not as it should be. The public needs to know the how and why of crashes, to avoid them and guide policy.

Quick summary: Deihl rode out of the driveway on Putnam Avenue from Whole Foods, collided with the front bumper of the truck, which was headed east in the lane closest to the driveway, and went under its front wheels. Here. You can see the ghost bike in the image. (It is before the driveway but the crash occurred at or after the driveway.)

Half-trigger warning: this post isn’t relaxing reading and neither is the report, but they don’t include any gruesome images, or except for the last few pages or the report, descriptions more graphic than what you have just read.

So, what about the report?

Unfortunately, the investigation leaves questions unanswered, which it might have answered. Only in the synopsis at the start of the report does the State Police investigator repeat part of the report of Cambridge Officer Sullivan who interviewed the truck driver at the scene. Sullivan’s report says that the driver “checked to his right but didn’t see anything but snow so he started to pull over. He stated as he was pulling over he started to put on his hazard lights. He felt a bump and thought he ran over a snow bank.” He also said that he was pulling over to park and then walk to a construction site to see if it was ready for the dumpster he was carrying.

The report doesn’t raise, or answer, the question whether the driver was looking ahead prior to pulling over, as he was approaching the driveway. There was also no discussion of the role that snowbanks might have played in blocking sight lines. You will probably recall that the winter of 2015 was the snowiest one ever recorded in the Boston area. 94.4 inches had fallen from Jan. 24 through Feb. 22, 2015.

Deihl pulled out of the driveway either just as the truck was passing, or she passed it. The initial point of impact was the front of the truck and — as identified by a GPS recorder in the truck — it was going only 5 mph at that point (slowing to a stop).

One thing that calls out to me in the report is the intensive examination of the truck but cursory examination of the bicycle (p. 12 of the PDF, p. 7 of the report). What if, for example, Deihl’s brakes had failed? Were the steel rims of Deihl’s old English three-speed bicycle wet? Steel rims are as slippery as ice when wet, and rim brakes barely work then. The temperature reached 30 F on the day of the crash, which occurred at 3 PM, but snowmelt might have wetted the rims. Or did the bicycle have a coaster brake, in which case wet rims wouldn’t have been an issue? Did Deihl skid on packed snow or ice? Also the autopsy report is rather perfunctory. Medical condition leading to loss of control? — last page of the PDF. “Bicyclist rideout” crashes like this one are rare after childhood, suggesting to me that something unusual went wrong.

The key to this crash would seem to be why Deihl came out of the driveway and collided with the truck, rather than stopping to let it pass. But the trucker also pulled over to the right — Deihl may have turned right assuming that the truck would clear her. — page 9 of the PDF.

Deihl was required under the law to yield to traffic in the street before entering it from a driveway. If she pulled out of the driveway ahead of the truck, the trucker could have prevented the crash as long as it was not too late for him to avoid the collision by braking or swerving. He was at fault if he failed to look. If Deihl was passing him on the right, she would have been close to the side of the truck and probably in its right-side blind spot. And sight lines may have been blocked by a snowbank.

It’s incredibly frustrating that:

  1. The investigator didn’t know what he is doing in a bicycle investigation (scenario repeated with the Anita Kurmann fatality in Boston later the same year);
  2. It took a FOIA request to see the report;
  3. Advocates use these tragedies to justify whatever pet projects they have. (Sideguards, says Alex Epstein. They would be irrelevant in this collision with the front of a truck: more about them here. Separate bike traffic from car traffic, says Pete Stidman. Just how would a sidepath have worked on a day when the street was lined with snowbanks is another valid question. Most likely, it would not have been usable. Comments by Epstein and Stidman are here. Neither of them had seen the report when they made their observations.)
  4. Advocates are avoiding adequately informing bicyclists about the hazards of trucks and how to avoid them.

Well, the advocates at the American Bicycling Education Association are an important exception. I am proud to be an instructor in its program. An animated graphic on safety around trucks is here and if you click on the title at the top of the page, you can find out how to sign up for a course (online or in person) which will cover that topic and much more.

I thank Paul Schimek for many of the observations in this post, and for drawing my attention to the availability of the crash report.

And again, I thank Craig Kelley for making the report available.

February 16, 2018

A look at the Brattle Street bikeway

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 1:06 pm

In 2017, Cambridge installed a two-way separated bikeway on Brattle Street between Mason Street and Brattle Square. In the video here, I take a look at part of that bikeway, from Church Street to Brattle Square.

This is a high-definition video. For best viewing, start the video playing, click on “Youtube”, and then click on the Full Screen Icon — the square at the lower right.

February 13, 2018

Cambridge InsideOut Episodes 291-292: Feb 13, 2018

Filed under: Cambridge,Cambridge InsideOut — Tags: , , , , , , , — Robert Winters @ 10:47 pm

Episode 291 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 13, 2018 (Part 1)

This episode was broadcast on Feb 13, 2018 at 5:30pm. Topics: Feb 12 City Council highlights – bike lanes, Inman Square redesign, Vision Zero, and more. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube]

Episode 292 – Cambridge InsideOut: Feb 13, 2018 (Part 2)

This episode was broadcast on Feb 13, 2018 at 6:00pm. Topics: Cambridge Historical Commission landmark designation reports, fate of the “Tenant Right of First Refusal” bill, and more. Hosts: Judy Nathans, Robert Winters [On YouTube]

[Materials used in these episodes]

September 24, 2017

Not left, Felton

Filed under: Cambridge — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 8:39 pm

OK, I couldn’t resist the palindrome, but this is a serious post anyway.

Site of near-collision at Cambridge and Felton Streets.

I nearly left-crossed another cyclist today, on my bicycle, as I turned left from Cambridge Street onto Felton Street. It could have been a very serious collision. He came storming out of the shadows past the black parked SUV in the photo, on the new separated bikeway. I wasn’t looking in his direction at the right time to see him in time to yield. (I had to look in different directions to yield to street traffic, sidewalk traffic in both directions, crosswalk traffic — and now, this parking-screened conflict. “He came out of nowhere,” someone else might say but the Transporters in Star Trek are fiction: he came from where not visible in time reliably to allow yielding.) The short stretch where parking is prohibited before the intersection is supposed to make it possible for left-turning drivers to yield. The bikeway is really only designed for bicyclists riding slowly. It doesn’t work to yield to a cyclist going 20-25 mph.

Startled, I yelled WHOAH! as I crossed just in front of him. He yelled back “I have the right of way.”

His sense of entitlement doesn’t exactly reflect prudence, but if I’d collided with him, I would have been held at fault.

In 45 years bicycling in Boston-area urban traffic, I’ve never collided with a motor vehicle, but I’ve had a couple of near-collisions with other cyclists: both in Cambridge, both at night: a near head-on on the path along Memorial Drive in front of the MIT dorms — the other cyclist had no headlight; the other, I was riding westbound on Harvard Street and a cyclist traveling the wrong way on Dana Street or Ellery street crossed at speed a couple of feet in front of me — also, no headlight.

The new installation on Cambridge Street gives bicyclists the sense of entitlement to enter intersections from screened conflicts, at speed. Bicyclists and motorists turning left here need to be extra-cautious. I don’t see how it would be even possible for the driver of a long vehicle turning left to see a bicyclist in the bikeway in time to yield.

Bicyclists riding fast are much safer riding with the motor traffic, but now the travel lanes are too narrow for motorists to pass bicyclists, and only the very strongest bicyclists (or those with electrical assist) are able to ride fast enough that motorists won’t want to pass.

I was on my way to the Bow Tie Ride when this incident occurred. The Bow Tie Ride was a tame affair indeed, average speed around 5 miles per hour due to the large number of participants of varying abilities. Traffic management by the Cambridge Police and volunteers was very good, but I didn’t have time to finish the ride at that speed and left partway through.

April 20, 2017

Sheet of ice draws praise from bicycle advocates

Filed under: Cambridge,cycling — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — jsallen @ 12:32 pm
Snowmelt drains across "protected" bikeway on Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge

Snowmelt drains across “protected” bikeway on Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge

OK, spring is around the corner, so I’m a bit late with this post. But the issue I describe here will occur every year, at least until global warming puts an end to snows or converts central Cambridge into an extension of Boston Harbor.

The headline of the February 17 Boston Globe article with this picture is “Snowbank becomes accidental hero for area cyclists”.

The shiny area in the bikeway is meltwater from said snowbank. When the temperature drops below freezing, the meltwater becomes a sheet of black ice. This problem is unavoidable with a street-level barrier-separated bikeway. I discussed it at length years ago in connection with the 9th Avenue bikeway in Manhattan, a bikeway which, on the other hand, I have some nice things to say about.

Neither Steve Annear, author of the article, nor anyone quoted in it, makes any mention of the black-ice problem.

From the article: “’I like this snowbank-protected cycle track,’ Ari Ofsevit, a local cyclist, said on Twitter.” Ari usually ranges widely, imaginatively and thoughtfully in discussing transportation improvements his blog. I usually agree with him, but not in this case.

The article cites Joe Barr, of the City of Cambridge:

Barr acknowledged that the snow mound separating the bike lane and the road has offered a sense of protection to cyclists, but he said it could also be masking damage to the base of the flexible posts.

“We won’t know that until we get some more melting. But it certainly looks good on the street,” he said.

And Richard Fries, Executive Director of Massbike, commented: “It’s great. It won’t last that much longer, but it does help to hammer into people’s heads [road] patterns and driving habits,” he said. “Because it’s there, it makes the existing bike lane more visible to drivers and more prominent.”

Segregation promotes a sense of entitlement on the part of the majority group –in this case, motorists. How do I explain to horn-honking motorists that I have to ride in “their” travel lane, now narrowed to make room for the barrier, to avoid crashing on a sheet of black ice?

Or for that matter, to progress at my usual 15 miles per hour so I’m not stuck behind a cluster of bicyclists who are traveling at 8 miles per hour?

Or to avoid being right-hooked and crushed under the back wheels by a right-turning truck at Douglass Street?

Or that the rear-end collisions that this installation protects against are vanishingly rare on urban streets?

Or that parallel Harvard Street, Green Street and Franklin Street would serve admirably as low-stress through bicycle routes, if the city made the right kind of improvements?

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress