A policy order about bike lane installation in Cambridge that some saw as a “delay” and some saw as an “extension” to be used only if needed passed the City Council early Tuesday on a 5-4 vote.
The vote took place just after midnight from a Monday meeting because more than 300 people signed up to speak on the order. That took from 5:30 p.m. until 11:10 p.m., and councillors decided they had time at the meeting to handle only the one item, leaving everything else on the agenda for a rare resumed meeting starting at 10 a.m. Tuesday.
Councillor Patty Nolan was the swing vote, and she sided with the councillors looking to extend the deadline on the city’s Cycling Safety Ordinance by a year and a half around the installation of bike lanes on Main Street, Cambridge Street and Broadway. The change would prevent installation there under the original timeline of May 1, 2026, pushing the date to Nov. 1, 2027, unless zoning is enacted to make up for lost parking spaces through allowing private parking to be shared.
“It’s torn me up,” Nolan said, reading off a long statement to give her reasons for voting as she did: The city has learned from rough bike lane installations in the westerly parts of the city, and “we should take the time to do it better for the east side.”
The kind of language around deadlines voted at this meeting probably should have been in the 2019 ordinance and its 2020 amendment all along, Nolan said.
Her statement was so long that Mayor E. Denise Simmons tried to cut Nolan off – repeatedly.
Along with Nolan and Simmons, councillors in favor were Paul Toner, Joan Pickett and Ayesha Wilson.
Those opposed were councillors Burhan Azeem, Sumbil Siddiqui and Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler and vice mayor Marc McGovern.
McGovern summed up his critique of the order as “Extension, delay, tomato, to-mah-to,” and said his vote was driven by concerns about bicyclists such as his son. “Let’s do it within the current timeline, because I for one just don’t want to keep my fingers crossed for another 18 months” that there are no more bicyclist deaths.
Nearly all of the 300 public speakers were opposed to the order for the same reasons as McGovern – safety – but resident Audrey Cunningham, speaking late in the meeting, said she had a petition with 400 names supporting delayed installation with new parking zoning in place. She described it as a “silent majority of seniors, pedestrians and every other resident who lives and shops here” who believed “there was no reason why the date for completion for bike lanes cannot be extended until all voices are heard and their well-being given equal consideration” with the proponents who were concerned about their lives and safety. A rough count of a petition taking up multiple pages in the night’s council agenda packet of 1,734 pages showed around 350 names in support of a potential delay in installation.
Simmons picked up Cunningham’s theme. “When I say I want everyone to be safe, I have to think about senior citizens who were conspicuously absent from this meeting, in part because they can’t get out late at night or they don’t want to, they feel very unheard,” she said. “I just had a meeting with over 30 senior citizens – we were talking about something else, but of course bikes came into the conversation – and the big thing that they always say over and over is that we don’t feel safe, but most importantly, we don’t feel heard.”
That extended beyond senior citizens to people with disabilities, Simmons said.
The meeting was held in a hybrid fashion, allowing people to call in or use their computers to attend and speak, and there were several senior voices during public comment – with around a dozen of them bicyclists who supported the installation of protective infrastructure or pedestrians who said the lanes made them feel safer as well.
There was also a voice from among residents with disabilities, Sarah Dylan Breuer, who said bike lanes made it easier for her to get around the city on her wheelchair. “It’s about so much more than cycling,” she said. “If you notice tree roots growing in the sidewalk, they push the paving stones up, they create these cliffs and a wheelchair gets caught on them. People take their trash out, they leave the can on the curb. People put out a basketball hoop, they leave the basketball hoop on the curb. Where does my mobility go when that happens? It goes into the street.”
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.
Whether delayed or started tomorrow I just hope the next round of lanes is rolled out with better community engagement and enforcement plans for cars jumping into the lanes and a way to repair the 400$ bollares without breaking the budget.
Hopefully the delay really does mean better planning, and better bike lanes, compromise and safety for all.
It won’t. It will mean compromising safety for cars and further delays for every safety project if the people who voted for it get their way.
I have a secret petition with 10,000 names. Please update the article.
The delay isn’t going to change anything. Moving metered parking to side streets will be the same, load zones and handicapped parking will be the same.
Even with legalization to allow the public to use private parking lots, no private parking lot owner is going take on the increased liability unless the City pays them—or at least pays for their liability insurance—which the City isn’t going to do.
@q99 Too late, check out the situation on Mt Auburn Street at the intersection of Aberdeen Ave. Walked by yesterday at 5 pm, total chaos. There will be accidents there. Drivers, pedestrians and cyclists are all endangered.
Delays in implementing bike lanes not only increase the risk of accidents—which bike lanes are proven to reduce—but also give opponents like Pickett, Toner, and others motivation to oppose or remove them, potentially leading to more injuries and deaths.
Moreover, there is no evidence that bike lanes harm anyone, yet they are known to save lives.
It’s unfortunate that Toner, Pickett, and their allies prioritize the convenience of a few over the safety of many.
Patty Nolan’s vote against bike lanes is particularly disappointing, contradicting her stated values. A true betrayal.
The vast majority seem to want implementation of bike lanes as soon as possible for multiple reasons:
Safety!
Accessibility & related pedestrian improvements
Clean air
Health benefits of cycling
Climate
More equitable transportation
Less traffic & fewer parking woes
Greater access to city services & businesses…
What needs to be done now to allow rapid completion of safe bike lanes? Is timely completion contingent upon additional parking? Will additional parking even be needed if more people bike, and we get public transportation working?
@TCCcambridge. Talk about chicken little…
TCCambridge yes it’s really unfortunate the JV or better yet Freshman team designed and implemented these so called bike lanes. Lmao but actually not funny it’s very sad. We all want efficient and safe bike lanes – these clearly are not.
They made fools of themselves and now the bicycle yes bullies are out en mass. Cry some more tears the jv lanes are delayed not because the city doesn’t want them or have the money. They are delayed because the “experts” have some altruistic polyanna dream that actually doesn’t work.
Yes TC look with your own eyes at brattle, garden, mass ave n cam where the “Protected bus lanes” are now get this – parking spots! This was some after thought when the experts realized umm how are the paint cos going to get the paint to their customers or how are delivery trucks going to deliver goods to small businesses. Pathetic.
The Patty Pause! If she decides to run again she is going to run the table in the next election. Thank you Patty!
@prc Can you describe what a safe and efficient bike lane looks like, to you? Because I would disagree, I think that the quick builds that have been built already are safe and efficient.
@prc
Genuinely incredible to call other people bullies while telling them to cry more because their safety concerns were ignored. Who is bullying who here exactly?
The second to last paragraph is simply incoherent. Genuinely what are you even talking about?
Again you say “We all want efficient and safe bike lanes”
What does that mean to you though? Because you seem to oppose every actually existing and potential bike project in the city. I’ll ask again, what is an example of a bike project you support?
Of course you disagree cwec the bicycle yes bullies don’t get their way, toss all the toys down crying. So predictable and pathetic – par for the course of the type of individuals the c council is dealing with.
Anyways the focus should be on how to improve design implementation and function not on anger towards a councilor. Everyone wants bike lanes just not the jokes of ones installed.
Think of it this way. If mass Ave n cam was done well the rest of mass would want more of them – be begging for more of it. Self reflection is hard to do but it’s much needed for these to be rolled out successfully to the rest of the city.
Let’s hope the jv crew in charge got / gets more education of what to do – they certainly have plenty of what not to do – look for yourself!
This is not some random aka prc job to highlight which designs work in the city. Who cares which design prc likes. This has nothing 0 bearing on where bike lane infrastructure is in Cambridge – Paused!
The reason the lanes are paused is because of the turmoil created for pedestrians, motorists, senior citizens, handicap, bus lanes, peeling up war paint on the roads, small businesses etc etc.
Again if it was done to a majority of citizens approval everyone would be clamoring for more of em. At this point the city council righty so is afraid of them.
Great job – experts!
Retool and make them better it’s not that complicated.
@prc I’m sorry if I’ve offended you, that wasn’t my intent. You just say that the current projects are not safe and efficient, so I want to know what can be done to get us there. As you say, we all want safe and efficient bike lanes, so how do we get to a point where we agree that they are safe and efficient?
No offense taken!
Western Avenue was just named #1 in America’s 10 best new bike lanes of 2015 by People for Bikes.
Clearly wouldn’t pick garden st unless I was the plastic pylon salesman. Can you imagine the “excitement”of announcing thatLinnaean st will follow the garden st model because it was so successful! Maybe the parents of g&p would like it because the principal wouldn’t be able to commute in anymore jk.
Have no idea but it’s does feel safe on western ave biking, walking and yes I’ve driven there as well. Done them all and felt safe on all fronts. Ok so I’ve taken the bait and answered – now the paid shills will attack me. “It’s not feasible on brattle” “this design is to cost prohibitive” etc etc whatever.
When the screeching, anger and petitions stop – let’s get it right!
Clearly the majority of what’s happened has not been done correctly. The city council realizes this and are taking a breath. They are going to get this right. 👏 Danke!
It’s very common:
https://foxbaltimore.com/amp/news/local/ex-mayor-jack-young-regrets-hurrying-baltimore-bike-lanes-calls-for-more-public-engagement-vehicular-lanes-harford-road-hamilton
@prc The problem with that is that our bike lanes _are_ broadly popular. The four councilors that voted against the delay and signed the CSO Pledge earned more first-round votes than the five councilors that voted against it. 252 people showed up to speak in support of completing the bike lanes on schedule, only 10 showed up in favor of the delay. Roughly ~1000 people emailed the council to ask them to vote against the delay, only ~600 emailed to ask them to vote for the delay.
By every objective measure we have, the bike lanes are being done to a majority of citizens’ approval.
@prc I agree, Western Ave has a great bike lane, grade separation is the gold standard when it comes to protected bike lanes. I would prefer it to have dutch-style protected intersections, too, but baby steps.
The thing about the CSO projects is that they are explicitly quick build, they’re known to not be perfect because we can’t rip up and completely rebuild all of these streets, but we still want the safety improvements that the quick-build projects bring. I think that the intention is that when these streets are rebuilt at the end of their useful life, they’ll be redone like Western Ave (and soon to be the case on River Street, too).
I don’t think anyone here is a “paid shill”, I don’t even know who would have money to give out to people arguing on the internet about bikes lol. I’m not trying to bait you or whatever, just trying to share perspective and understand yours.
Appreciate the civil dialogue. I’m used to seeing slaw and frankd leading with insults not to me but to anyone that has a different opinion. You and Chris c go a long ways to removing the term bully.
Anyways hopefully some compromise can be found. For example if they made garden like western it would have gone a long way. Tossing up plastic pylons making the street one way isn’t winning the hearts and minds of the public or c council.
@prc – unfortunately designs like Western *are* cost prohibitive. They also shut roads down for longer since you have to move curbs and pour concrete instead of just paint and posts which can be done in a week. Quick build projects are a step on the way to full-build, not a final solution. And quick-build bike lanes *are* safer than painted lanes between parked cars and moving traffic. I don’t think anyone wants to a) be the person to fling me into traffic with their door or b) be the person who runs me over. My “bike bully” dream is to have full-build curb level cycletracks, but delaying the rollout of interim quick-build certainly doesn’t get us closer to full-build! This delay seems to get us nothing. People say they want the bike lanes “done right” but there was nothing in the justifications for the delay that told us what that would look like and, most importantly to me, **how they will use the delay to achieve that** If the City wants to delay the development of a network that will one day look like Western Ave just because some people don’t “feel heard,” well, that’s just not productive. Every road in the country is designed with vehicular traffic in mind above all else, and the car has been prioritized in our society. Do you know how long people who can’t/don’t use cars haven’t “felt heard”? It’s why we have to form advocacy groups and show up and speak up and BE heard. Cars are the status quo; people haven’t had to show up and speak up to get parking or another lane added to a roadway– it just happens for them. Now things are changing, and it’s not just Cambridge that sees the need for the change. Perhaps Cambridge could do well to emphasize that quick-build is NOT the final solution, and show designs of what a full-build will look like? Again, the safe streets advocates ALSO want Western Ave– trust me!! :)
@prc The bike lanes were not rejected by a majority. In fact, more people testified and wrote emails against the delay.
The opposition comes from a vocal minority who have not demonstrated any real harm caused by the bike lanes; they simply fear losing some convenience.
It’s disheartening to see individuals prioritize their own convenience over the safety and lives of others.