Changes increasing bike safety in Porter Square remove parking, revive conflict from up the road
A bicyclist heads south through Porter Square on Tuesday, where city transportation planners expect to make changes for safer riding. (Photo: Marc Levy)
Preliminary plans for protected bike lanes through Porter Square were presented Tuesday by the city, feeling familiar and raising familiar divisions among residents.
Plans call for the installation of quick-build flex posts with pavement marking changes and signs separating cyclists from car traffic on a 0.3-mile stretch of Massachusetts Avenue from Roseland Street to Beech Street, and for the removal of significant numbers of parking spaces along curbs, sparing those needed for people with disabilities. The focus was on “moving people and goods, not their vehicles,” project manager Andreas Wolfe said.
The design was similar to the one bringing months of conflict over a related project farther north on Massachusetts Avenue, where business owners said the changes threatened their livelihoods. That section was completed in November, but concerns filled City Council meetings in December and January, culminating in two orders passed Jan. 11 seeking to make the bike lane planning process more open to input from neighbors.
Reaction was swift to the Porter Square plans described by the Traffic, Parking, & Transportation department in a Jan. 11 announcement. “To receive this email regarding the protected bike lanes between Roseland and Beech clearly stating that the only things that will be considered are flex posts, street painting and signage feels like a slap in the face,” Angela Hofmann, owner of the Nüssli118 vegan food shop, said in comments emailed to the council ahead of its Monday meeting.
Cycling activists said the elimination of parking may be premature, but cheered the project and noted that their advocacy for safer streets stretches back more than five years, when Bernard “Joe” Lavins was killed by a tractor-trailer in Porter Square. “While some safety improvements were made, there are still no safe, protected bike lanes [on Massachusetts Avenue] in Porter Square. We firmly believe these protected bike lanes are vital to creating a safer and more vibrant square for people biking, walking, using public transportation and driving in Porter Square,” Cambridge Bike Safety said in an email sent to its subscribers Friday.
Qualifications and limitations
The project is part of the city’s updated Cycling Safety Ordinance, which requires the city to complete installation of these separated bike lanes by April 30. City planners outlined two possible designs on Tuesday, with Wolfe calling them “preliminary ideas” that are “very early on in the process.”
Staff started by noting that Porter Square is a transit hub with more than 14,000 daily riders passing through its red line T stop and on three key bus routes. Statistics from a 2020 study showed 35 percent of shoppers arrived by public transit.
An additional consideration in the area is the catenary wire system powering the MBTA’s buses. These high-voltage wires limit possible designs because firetrucks need ample space to navigate their ladders around the overhead wires. While the MBTA has considered phasing out the catenary wire network, the city says plans for its removal are not far enough along to be included in the timeframe required for this project.
Design options
The first design presented by Wolfe keeps car travel lanes but replaces parking – except what’s designated as accessible – with a protected bike lane. The second design also removes parking in favor of the protected bike lane, but switches out one car travel lane for a dual-purpose priority bus lane and loading zone, identical to the design in North Massachusetts Avenue.
Along the stretch, several areas deserved special attention. The first is the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Somerville Avenue, which was overhauled in 2018 in response to Lavins’ death, where city staff contend that the road is too narrow to support installing protected bike lanes. Wolfe also noted that the MBTA owns the bridge running under the intersection, exempting the area from the Cycling Safety Ordinance.
The city is also considering changes to the traffic flow on Upland Road, a side street that runs into Massachusetts Avenue. Options include turning it into a one-way street to Massachusetts Avenue – which would eliminate left turns onto it – or a one-way street from Massachusetts Avenue.
Hundreds hear plans
Staff mentioned that the meeting was well attended, with more than 300 people joining the public Zoom call. Comment first skewed highly positive, and many commenters praised the design for making a notoriously dangerous section safer. “I’m very much looking forward to protected bike lanes here,” said Jenny Turner-Trauring. (The youngest person to comment was next: Turner-Trauring’s daughter, who said, “I always have to walk my bike on the sidewalk when we’re going on that stretch because the street isn’t safe.”)
As comment wore on, more residents voiced concerns similar to those raised in the North Massachusetts Avenue debate. “I think most of the people here are very much for [improving] the bicycle situation. I am very much against it. It seems as though bicycle vision is running the city,” said Pam Winters, a resident of Porter Square.
Outside of general comments on bike lanes, residents brought up several technical concerns with details from the city’s presentation. “I’ve heard from multiple sources that the T is planning to deactivate the catenary wires as early as mid-March. If that were the case, then it would seem that all obstacles to permitting … parking there would be removed,” said Nate Fillmore, a member of the Cambridge Bike Safety group. “That would be really helpful to creating a project that the whole community can get behind.” There were also options for parking on side streets and possibly on Lesley University lots, speakers said.
There will be least one more community meeting in the winter and targeted outreach to businesses as designs are polished, city staff said, and results of a public survey would be made available on the project’s website.
Bono remembers that when Mr. Lavins was killed riding his bike through Porter Square, the bike ideologues and fanatics pounced immediately, describing Mr. Lavins as an “experienced bicyclist,” as if he could not possibly have been doing anything risky or wrong. When the State Police and District Attorney’s Office finally released their accident report, the dishonest bike ideologues immediately pounced again, this time attacking the report before the ink was even dry. Why, Bono wondered? Could it be because they refuse to acknowledge the bicyclists’ own responsibility for bike fatalities in Cambridge, lest that “slow down” the relentless march toward more of the “infrastructure” they dishonestly and falsely assert is the “only solution” to “bicycle safety”?? There is something creepy in the way these bike fanatics use the deaths of bicyclists to advance their skewed agenda, without examining the true facts of how some of these people are getting hurt and, in some cases, ending up dead. It’s as if they love “waving the bloody shirt…,” without really caring a hoot about the persons killed. If Mr Lavins was trying to cut in front of a turning 18-wheeler where he should not have been (and there’s a so-called “J-Bar” right there at that intersection for safer crossing) then don’t we owe it to the safety of bicyclists to emphasize how important their own conduct as bicyclists is, and actually have rules for their safety – and for everyone else’s – which are actually enforced, by the AWOL CPD?? A Teamster truck driver friend passed by the scene of the accident shortly after it happened. A grisly scene, to be sure. He was upset at how quickly the Instapundits on the radio were trying to blame the truck driver, despite the apparent facts and eyewitness testimony. He was angry at the irresponsible cheap shots from the ignorant people who have no idea – having never trained to drive a big rig like the one involved, as he has – what can happen to a tractor-trailer if you slam on the brakes suddenly because somebody on a bike has just done something really stupid. You can actually flip the trailer onto an adjacent car (or bike!) and crush it… If the bike zealots are really SERIOUS about BICYCLE SAFETY, Bono would like to know why they never want to talk about – or do anything about – their own reckless and irresponsible behavior?? We need to do some serious parenting here and start getting them to follow some rules, for their own safety, and for the safety of everyone else. Infrastructure is not the “panacea” to their “problem” the way they would like to claim it is. They like that because it leaves them completely off the hook for whatever might happen to them due to their own dangerous behavior. Blame everybody else for their own mistakes. To correct this, and to get serious about bike, and other, safety, a good look in the mirror would be a good place to start. (Poor Bono has spoken.)
“the focus was on moving people and goods not their vehicles”.
So a family
So weather permitting
So age depending
So health depending
So small business drop off
So etc etc
Cambridge has declared war on vehicles and the citizens that need them. Fuel efficient, delivery trucks, electric – all vehicles.
So sad the elderly – the families – the small businesses – the handicap all need to submit to the bicycle bullies. Sigh
Bono needs to ask himself why these changes are being made across Cambridge, Massachusetts, the USA, and the world.
Bono needs to ask himself why 90% of the city council supports this project and more separated bike lanes.
Bono needs to ask himself why people continue to vote for and support these changes.
Bono needs to ask himself why he is so focused on the death of a cyclist while continuing to ignore the many other injured cyclists and the many other would be cyclists who say they don’t ride because they feel unsafe.
Bono has many questions he needs to ask himself before he speaks.
Since they are taking away lanes and parking spots,cities of Cambridge and Somerville should also stop asking taxes on vehicles from people living in this area. They are not able to expand or build extra infrastructure to accommodate for increasing population but want everyone to pay property taxes on their vehicles .
Additionally, it would be nice to educate and enforce basic traffic laws to the bicyclists.
Less parking, more traffic, less handicap accessibility and you want to lower the vehicle tax? And to boot for the bicyclists to have a permit, lights, safety test etc? Wow the nerve. Jk
Go get a bike (most stolen bikes ever recently) and ride it in the nor’easter or freezing temps outside. My goodness the city is destroying itself for these bicycle bullies.
Destroying = more difficult for older/elderly, handicapped, families to get around the city. Reduction of small businesses increasing Amazon delivery vans. Just add it to the list of reasons families are leaving in droves. Ugh.
Can’t the bike lanes be installed in a manner that isn’t so blunt force for all except the bike lanes…
Bono should remember that this bicycle infrastructure was in the planning stages (2015 Bicycle Plan) before the deaths of Phillips and Lavins. Be critical of the lanes or the speed of their rollout without exploiting their deaths.
(Allegedly) “Concerned Citizen” needs to be more concerned about actual facts. Please provide accurate data on public opinion in Cambridge, such as it is. What portion of the Cambridge population want bicyclists to follow rules – for their own and others’ safety?? (Perhaps this question has never been asked by the people who commission and control Cambridge “surveys,” which are often rigged to provide “results” favorable to the agenda they – those who instruct the “consultants” which questions to ask – wish to promote.) I haven’t the slightest doubt that the vast majority of Cantabrigians (exclusive of the minority of relentlessly dishonest bike ideologues) would like to see traffic enforcement rendered truly serious for bicyclists. Can anyone deny that they (and the rest of us; the majority) would be much safer were they to ride their vehicles in a safe manner, obeying traffic laws, rules of the road, and being considerate of others? (God forbid.) It’s bike zealots, not Bono, who repeatedly exploit the deaths of bicyclists, and they will do it again, at any unfortunate chance they get regardless of who may be at fault and this is, in fact, explicit in the article above. [Did “Concerned Citizen” actually read the article??] Cambridge voters vote their pocket books and other perceived interests. (What percentage of eligible voters even vote?) One of the two new councillors recently elected was one of only two top-tier contenders who declined to sign the ignominious “bike pledge,” which would tie the hands of councillors – should they adhere to it – to never learning from mistakes and adjusting policies accordingly, not what anyone who isn’t all about grandstanding should want. Bono believes these policies have been adopted in an undemocratic city, in an undemocratic fashion, because they happen to be favored not just by a small group of very aggressive bike bullies, but because they have been quietly promoted for years – yes, since at least 2015 – by bicyclists who have been dug in for years in various city departments. (Shall Bono name them?) They’ve been pushing these policies in whatever dishonest and manipulative ways they’ve been able to, and allowed to. Were that not the case, why would there be such an uproar when otherwise somnambulant citizens finally wake up to what’s going on around them?? In sum, these changes are being introduced in Cambridge because a minority of ideologues, including longtime, unaccountable city staff) have been allowed to get away with it, with just enough of a retroactive “rubber stamp” from enough city councillors to claim that it’s “city policy.” (Ho-hum.) I believe the vast majority of Cantabrigians would like bicycling to be safe, but want the safety of everyone else to be recognized as important, too! And we want, above all, the bicyclists who are constantly screaming about THEIR safety, to recognize this, and stop “waving the bloody shirt” at every opportunity, and start taking some responsibility for their own safety – and ours – by adopting and adhering to sensible (already existing) rules for themselves and all their pals.
p.s. Bono has, indeed, spoken again! “No one safe, until everyone is safe!”
Bono, that’s a lot of words to say absolutely nothing. Who are these bike zealots and what were their “dishonest and manipulative ways?”
P.s. Bono indeed ignored most of the other questions he should have asked himself yet again.
The changes aren’t “increasing bike safety”. They’re INTENDED to increase bike safety, but it’s unclear if they will actually increase or decrease safety until the change is made and there’s hard evidence.
The trackless trolleys are going away forever in March. I don’t see how much sooner anyone could expect that change to happen.
The first search result showed pre-pandemic Red Line ridership at Porter to be 8850. Bus and Commuter Rail riders are a tiny fraction of this. Plus the majority of these people are commuting from Porter to jobs in other places. People parking at meters to shop and dine in Porter are not in that situation.
Poor “Concerned Citizen” – He/She/They has trouble grasping simple points: 1) Bicyclists routinely ride unsafely in Cambridge 2) They do this because there is no meaningful enforcement of rules for bicyclists in Cambridge; CPD are essentially AWOL; it appears to be “city policy” to not enforce rules for bicyclists 3) This puts themselves and others at considerable daily risk and annoys others to the point of having no sympathy for their constant whining about “safety” 4) Bicycling “activists” beat down anyone who raises any of these issues, whenever and wherever they can 5) Bicyclists have been killed because of the dangerous way they ride 5) Bike bullies refuse to allow this serious matter to even be discussed, let along thoughtfully considered and addressed, to their own sometimes MORTAL detriment 6) Cambridge city staff are criminally negligent in putting bicyclists’ lives at risk by ignoring this dimension of safety, and they know this; who put “bike lanes” in the door zones?? (Not Bono!) 7) “Bicycle” safety is not THE ONLY THING that matters; what about OTHER PEOPLE?? (A difficult concept for many bicyclists to grasp, evidently.) 8) “Infrastructure” is NOT the exclusive “answer” to bicycle OR OTHER safety 9) Many of the most dedicated and vociferous bicycle “activists” have trouble grasping these simple points 10) There are those who do; Bono, for one, appreciates them; but they are drowned out by the I-D-E-O-L-O-G-U-E-S (and there are plenty of those…) “Concernedcitizen” appears to be one of them, albeit of the relatively subdued variety, evidently incapable of thinking clearly about these very simple and straightforward concepts. Bono wonders – out loud – “What’s so damn complicated??” (Bono could go on at even greater length, if necessary, but does he really HAVE TO?? Bono sincerely wishes these concepts were grasped by others without the need for long-winded explanation.)
Bono, you missed the question again! Absolutely none of those many points are dishonest or manipulative. They are ways of advocating for safety. Have they stormed city hall? Have they directly threatened members of the city council into voting a certain way? Do they blackmail? No.
I’m in favor of better bicycle lanes but this has grown utterly ridiculous. People that neither bike nor drive will now have cars and trucks rolling down their side streets confused and speeding as they try to work around the disaster that is soon to be upland, while families or disabled trying to get their kids around will have nowhere to park at local businesses and rely on amazon delivery vehicles (who ALWAYS respect bike lanes, parking rules or even one way streets) will rule the streets and line Jess Bezos’ pockets . The bike lane to hell is truly paved with the best intentions.