A way to reuse private parking to make up for the loss of street spaces to protected bike lanes arrived Monday, but it was too late to get the creation of some lanes back on schedule.
As a result, the deadline of the city’s Cycling Safety Ordinance to install the lanes on Main Street, Cambridge Street and Broadway, which had an original timeline of May 1, 2026, was changed to Nov. 30, 2026. It passed as a 7-2 vote signaling a compromise, as the proposal at the start of the night was to allow the work into November 2027.
The night began with more than 100 people speaking during a public comment period to urge the council to reject an extension entirely and get the creation of the bike lanes back on its original schedule. Many noted that since the deadline was voted originally, on April 30, three more bicyclists had died: Minh-Thi Nguyen and Kim Staley, who were struck and killed in June by turning trucks, and John Corcoran, who was killed Sept. 23 by an SUV on Memorial Drive.
Nguyen’s death was four months ago to the day, said her friend Alexa Gomberg in a shaky voice, “and yet we’re still here in this room because some people think we don’t need to have more bike lanes immediately in this city.”
What the bicyclists wanted – no extension of the installation timeline – was already impossible.
“At this point, because of the delays over the past year, we cannot meet the original May 2026 deadline,” said Brooke McKenna, the city’s transportation commissioner, to councillors.
Parking change
The original vote on the matter in the spring, which passed 5-4, was to give staff time to craft zoning language letting businesses apply to open their lots as general off-street parking. That would help with the loss of street parking to lanes that has drawn complaints from some business owners, seniors and others who rely on cars to get around. That’s been a theme despite work by the city’s Traffic, Parking & Transportation Department to shape roadways with bike lanes to keep some general spaces as well as loading zones and spots for people with disabilities or mobility issues.
[documentcloud url=”https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25245725-102224-ptdm?responsive=1&title=1″]
The so-called Parking and Transportation Demand Management language was ready within 25 weeks – “pretty quick, compared to what we thought it was going to be,” vice mayor Marc McGovern said Monday – and sent off to the Planning Board and the council’s Ordinance Committee for what was expected to be a fast process to adoption. The zoning could be in place “as fast as three months,” assistant city manager Iram Farooq said. “It’s completely within the council’s hands.”
Planners looked at some 45 “flexible parking corridors” around Cambridge and found an expected loss of 800 to 900 parking spaces to bike lanes, but a gain of as many as 3,400 off-street parking spaces that could be freed up by the proposed zoning.
Interested businesses
While city staff have not had a lot of conversation with individual property owners, Farooq said, the PTDM idea came about because there have been businesses who made their interest in sharing their parking lots known.
Councillor Paul Toner confirmed that. “I know of at least two places on North Mass Ave. that are anxiously waiting for us to make these changes, because they’re more than happy to lease their current space to people in the neighborhood for parking,” Toner said. “They’ve been on hold because their insurance companies don’t want to sign off on it until they see it in writing from the city that this is allowed.”
“I’m not expecting too much controversy over this, because this is something we’ve all been hoping for and asking for,” Toner said.
The application process would be faster for lots of 20 or fewer spaces and take up to two months for larger lots, staff said.
Fears of inducing demand
Municipal spots are also likely to become available, such as at the King Open School on Cambridge Street. There was even some concern that the rapid availability of new parking would undo progress the city has made in encouraging residents to get rid of their cars.
“We’re potentially creating four times as many parking spaces,” councillor Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler said, wondering if Cambridge would be inducing demand – and how staff would even keep track of what was happening.
Parking spaces in new construction have been hashed out by building permits, but it’s been so many years since Cambridge issued new commercial parking permits that a Commercial Parking Control Committee will have to be reformulated from scratch, McKenna said. The committee will keep track of the changes, but she underlined that “we don’t anticipate a lot of new parking being created. We anticipate better utilization of existing parking.”
Shortening the timeline
The original spring discussions included concerns that there would be less parking around Newtowne Court public housing, which was answered decisively by Monday – residents won’t lose spaces. Another debate from April did return: whether the process of writing the new zoning created a “delay” or granted an “extension.” Toner, McGovern and others resurfaced the argument with the question of whether the new date should be for November 2026 or a year later. The language arrived saying 2027.
“I’m simply trying to give you the flexibility, but if you get it done quicker, great,” Toner told staff, arguing for the longer window. “I don’t want us to be back here again because you’re saying, ‘Oh, gee, we need six months more.’”
McKenna, though, had already told the council that the placing of loading zones, handicapped spaces and other concerns raised by bike-lane installations could be achieved by December 2026, leading McGovern to propose the change that cut a year off the deadline.
Political will
From the start of 2023, Cambridge Street had seen 110 crashes, of which 40 included injuries – 20 involving bicyclists and eight involving pedestrians; Broadway saw 93 crashes, 23 of which included injuries, with 10 involving cyclists and seven involving pedestrians. On the short stretch of Main Street awaiting bike lanes, there had been 13 crashes, three of which included injuries and two of which involved bikes. “I don’t see the need to wait an additional year and have more additional crashes and injuries,” Sobrinho-Wheeler said.
There was also something of a psychological issue at play, McKenna said, that suggested Toner’s offer of flexibility could backfire.
“The success that we’ve had, our ability to roll out the separated bike network as quickly as we have [is due to] the political will that we’ve had behind us,” McKenna said. “Having a later deadline, some members of the community want us to push this as far out as possible. If we have a final deadline of 2027, it becomes very difficult for us to accelerate that and finish everything earlier.”
Not every councillor appreciated being in that position.
The only citizen voice in two hours of public comment who raised challenges brought on by bike lanes was that of Jason Alves, of the East Cambridge Business Association, while the rest were bicyclists pleading for safety with personal tales of harrowing close calls and references to the three recent deaths. But there are “businesses who rely on parking, loading zones, handicap spaces,” councillor Ayesha Wilson said, advocating for a methodical process that ensured all voices were heard. “This is about wanting to move as a community.”
It would be better if staff were dictating logistical needs, because to “put it back on us as elected officials to make this a political back-and-forth is really heartbreaking,” Wilson said. “I’m not feeling this political game that we have to be in the space of making a vote for you all to ultimately do the job.”
“I needed to be on record naming that, because this position sucks,” Wilson said.
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.
Dear Jason Alves of the East Cambridge Business Association,
Your strategy of opposing safe bike lanes is backfiring. Like many mentioned during the meeting, i simply stopped biking to any businesses on Cambridge st east of Inman square. I often go to Inman, but that’s it. I refuse to patronize any shop that is ok with me getting injured.
People with cars shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
To be precise, it passed 5-3-1, then Councillors Nolan and Wilson changed their vote to “Yes”. Regardless, I’m glad we were able to compromise but would have preferred the original timeline.
Interesting how Councillor Wilson finds herself in a version of hell that she herself created.
Thank goodness!
“800 to 900 parking spaces to bike lanes, but a gain of as many as 3,400”
Now that the cries for parking have been responded to, can we please design the cycle tracks so that they are installed correctly, not half-hazardly resulting in obstructed views and compromised with odd turns and obstructions (looking at you, Hampshire Street) all to accommodate a couple of parking spaces?
The amount of available off-street options means, for example, longer term parking on Cambridge could be eliminated on one side completely, with loading zones and pick up/drop zones only on the opposite side. This would allow for greatly improvement multi-mobility corridors for bike riders, wheelchair users, scooters, and desperately needed widened sidewalks and ample planting zones for street trees.
Time to make our city safe and beautiful!
I’ve always been amused how the word “encouraging” can be used in the English language to mean “making things deliberately difficult and inconvenient”
3….2….1….
@bahmutov Jason Alves represents business owners who are misinformed about how people get to their businesses, so he says what they ask him to say. If we want him to change his tune, we’ve got to show the owners that they’re vastly over estimating the number of people who drive to them and under estimating the lost business from cyclists who won’t use Cambridge Street.
Related to @cjfman’s point above:
The City’s Economic Development division conducts customer studies in business districts in the city, and the newest one (2023) is for East Cambridge. Importantly, they intercept actual customers entering businesses and ask them a variety of questions about their shopping goals, businesses they wish were available, and how they got to the business that day. The transportation data is very clear – the very large majority of customers usually arrive outside of cars: 57% walk, 36% take transit, and 32% bike, and in comparison, only 21% of actual customers usually drive to Cambridge St businesses. These data have been consistent over many iterations and districts over a decade. The only big change is that the bike share has been growing considerably on the East side of the city. The attachment is page 11 of this PDF has the full details: https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/CDD/EconDev/Districts/EastCambridge/CDD_East_Cambridge_Business_District_Assessment_2023.pdf
Ironically a neighbor just emailed me yesterday because she was accosted by the person retained by the city to collect data from residents as they were shopping. Those folks were following shoppers and intruding while they shopped and waited in line and insisted that they could be interviewed by more than one data collector!! They were as described to me “obnoxious” and “intrusive.” So much for data collection we as taxpayers are funding!!
I note the photo credited to Marc Levy on rooftops in East Cambridge purportedly showing a plethora of empty parking spots. Please note, one rooftop is that of the Cambridgeside whose property is being developed long-term and has mostly empty unused, unleased, vacant sf!!! The other rooftop showing empty parking spaces is that of the municipal parking garage. Note 40 Thorndike has entered into a 30 year lease for over 340 parking spaces and 40 Thorndike is completely empty with no tenants. The photo displayed is a gross distortion of parking in East Cambridge.
I find it incredible to hear Ayesha Wilson complaining about the political position that she herself helped put the city council in. After hearing 200+ people speak against the bike delays in April, the city councilors had to realize that their position was unpopular. The fact that Patty Nolan and Ayesha Wilson changed their votes after seeing the results is cowardly and embarrassing.
Cambridge prioritizing parking over the safety and comfort of bikers is depressing but not surprising and the fact that this solution may INCREASE the number of parking spots shows that Cambridge isn’t committed to decreasing car dependency and meeting our goals to combat climate change.
I want to thank Councillors Toner and Wilson for solidifying my decision to donate and campaign for their opponents next year. After they GAINED thousands of parking spaces, they still endorsed additional delay that the City said was not needed. The lack of perspective from Councilor Wilson, having to be put in the “heartbreaking” situation where she had to perform responsible follow up of the policy she put into effect, is especially motivating.
Thank you to Councilor Zusy for bringing her fresh perspective!
@MIghtyMouse, the surveys at CX are for a different program, they are for parking demand management policy, not the business intercept surveys. I do hope you take a moment to look at the East Cambridge business intercept study (https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/media/Files/CDD/EconDev/Districts/EastCambridge/CDD_East_Cambridge_Business_District_Assessment_2023.pdf). The findings are interesting and as I mentioned, they ask people a lot of different questions, about open space, what brought them in, what sorts of businesses are missing, etc.
I would imagine the point of trying to get surveys from everyone who is shopping or dining is to ensure that the sample is complete; so that there is a clear / accurate accounting of who came that day. I was intercepted at Cafe Beatrice a few weeks ago, and the person was polite and respectful. One would imagine the owners would no longer allow these surveys within their businesses if the behavior was as your friend described.
I have never seen two survey takers inside one location. Is that the claim from your friend? It would seem easy to rebut. At CX, I did see somebody recently collecting surveys at Cafe Beatrice, and another person at Lamplighter. I am not sure what their policies are, but I highly doubt anyone is encouraging double counting within a single location. In any case, if your friend drove he or she would be double counted as driving.
Why do Toner and Wilson disregard actual injuries and deaths while focusing on unsubstantiated claims about business harm?
Unfortunately, @Jake L, the concerns about induced demand are valid. Increasing parking availability leads to more people driving, ultimately worsening parking conditions.
This concept, though seemingly paradoxical, is well-documented in urban planning textbooks.
By neglecting resident safety, Toner and Wilson are worsening conditions for drivers, demonstrating a lack of foresight.
One would expect urban planners to understand these fundamental principles, but evidently, they do not.
It seems that those opposing bike lanes prefer more cars on the road. I guess they like traffic jams. Consider how much space 15 bikes take compared to 15 cars.
I’ve also stopped supporting businesses that oppose safety improvements.
Some people undermine their own interests.
@MIghtyMouse I was questioned by a city survey worker. They were perfectly polite and respectful. They were nothing like you report.
@Chris Cassa +100. When will business owners and councilors like Toner, Wilson, and Simmons realize that drivers are a small minority of customers?
Studies consistently show that bike lanes benefit businesses by attracting more cyclists and pedestrians, who make up the largest customer base in Cambridge.
Businesses complaining about bike lanes without evidence risk alienating more customers than drivers represent.
Councilors adding parking will worsen traffic and parking by encouraging more driving.
Some people remain remarkably short-sighted.
@MightyMouse, MAPC has studied parking utilization and found that 30% of parking is not used. You can look at data of specific buildings in East Cambridge.
https://perfectfitparking.mapc.org/
Third Square and other buildings in Kendall presented similar information to the Planning Board last year. East Cambridge and Kendall have far more garage parking spaces than needed.
@Qwerty People insist on parking right in front of the convenience store—garages aren’t enough if it means a short walk.
@MrNice is correct: Induced Demand is real. More parking leads to more drivers, more traffic, and ultimately less parking. It actually worsens things for drivers.
Books like The High Cost of Free Parking by Donald C. Shoup and Paved Paradise: How Parking Explains the World by Henry Grabar make compelling arguments against pro-car policies, showing how they can degrade the city for everyone. Rethinking these policies could make cities healthier and more sustainable.
Many people who complain about having to park a block or two away because of the bike lanes.
Ironically, many of them would not question or complain about walking a similar or longer distance across a parking lot in front of a big box or grocery store.
Querty, people live in East Cambridge not down in Kendall. People shop and lug groceries and seniors and disabled need access, not a quarter a mile away from shops and churches etc. I have no idea about what the big companies have but that simply does not benefit the groups most vulnerable. I see so few cyclists on the streets even those streets with bike lanes already perfected. Note, I was an avid cyclist. I biked to and from Boston for years as an undergraduate and then as a worker. I prefer the vehicle lanes, not sandwiched up against the curb or buses or parked cars. Truly that is the safest ride. No matter the bike lanes I have seen in Cambridge each intersection remains a death trap. There is a sudden void of protection that seems to go unnoticed by the cyclists.