Hey, there! Log in / Register

Walsh: Time for city contractors to equip trucks with side guards to reduce odds of bicyclists, pedestrians getting crushed when the trucks turn

Mayor Walsh is proposing a requirement that companies that equip their trucks with

Neighborhoods: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Walsh truck-guard proposal241.92 KB


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Just like the T, while driving city vehicles.

up
Voting closed 0

..two way sneeze through wind vents, chrome fender dents, and factory air conditioned air from a fully equipped air conditioned factory.. with the look of real wood.

(bonus points if you know the reference).

On a more serious note, it is nice to see mounting evidence of a modern data driven approach to urban governing after that long night of paper piles, arbitrary enforcement, myth making and peruke revivals.

up
Voting closed 0

I wish boston would crack down on dangerous and aggressive drivers

up
Voting closed 0

Think the DOT might have something to say about that , amongst others,
"The Court held that the means used to achieve safety was unrealistic and that the increase in the number of trains and train operators actually enhanced the likelihood of accidents. "
(Insert truck in place of train language )
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Commerce+Clause

up
Voting closed 0

Did they do legal research skillfully?

If anything, it is smart constituent responsiveness and if it gets shot down, it is at least some evidence of thinking about the problem rather than doing a photo op with a bicycle.

This is the cool pattern. Look at the data on Allston Christmas and see if there is a useful city response besides a photo op series.

Look at the overall data set and send a bunch of audit observers on a city wide exploration to see the details of exactly what is there.

up
Voting closed 0

your legal arguments are dubious.

  • are city trash trucks involved in interstate commerce? That depends...
  • is this increasing the number of trucks on the road? No
  • is it unrealistic that this will improve safety? No

The referenced case were trains that crossed state lines in their duties, clearly interstate, and there were unclear effects on safety. And what makes you believe the DOT will even step in on this? Arizona was hurting transport of goods. This does not reduce capacity of any trucks or prevent them from driving any routes.

up
Voting closed 0

They already tried to institute safety idiosyncrasies years ago , it didn't hold.Interstate could be interpreted to mean the parent company is from out of state. Or , all it would require is tagging the truck with an "apportioned " plate. Dude , I am by no means a lawyer, but have been around the block a few times , many blocks as a matter of fact.This action is a placebo, it will never fly. People just need to use more diligence in operating whatever they are operating.Commerce is the life's blood of our society, it's three dimensional.You can't email everything. You have to be realistic with respect to time , space , and distance. Don't like big trucks in the city to feed the economic monster, smaller ones will cause congestion , more of them , and increase the unit cost of the products they convey.

Did you miss this part ?

(Insert truck in place of train language )

Where does the trash end up ? Out of state....
Increased amount of trucks if you limit size or capacities , or time restraints.

up
Voting closed 0

Read the Mayor's statement again, it doesn't require all trucks in the city to be so equipped, it says something to the effect that, if you want to bid on city jobs, your trucks have to have these guards, a far cry from limiting the number a railcars in a train, requiring certain sized mudflaps on ALL trucks, etc. Municipalities and other non-federal agencies have required increased pollution control equipment, use of bio-diesel, alternatives to standard back-up beepers and lots of other things without running afoul of the Commerce Clause. I say this is a proper use of the City's role in the marketplace, to promote smart innovations.

up
Voting closed 0

>Don't like big trucks in the city to feed the economic monster, smaller ones will cause congestion

I don't think this is accurate. Any time you have a truck that makes multiple stops, the limiting factor may be the speed of loading/unloading. More trucks with same number of deliveries/pickups = more people loading/unloading, meaning the whole process is faster and the trucks get off the road faster. At the very least, it's probably a wash.

Smaller trucks have the additional benefit of being able to use urban-sized parking spots and loading zones without needing to obstruct a travel lane.

up
Voting closed 0

" More trucks with same number of deliveries/pickups = more people loading/unloading, meaning the whole process is faster and the trucks get off the road faster. At the very least, it's probably a wash."

That's not how it works in the real world. If it were , the driver would be dropping pallets of goods on the sidewalk and be moving on to his next delivery. Anyone want to guess how many pallets fit in a 53' trailer ? Businesses aren't going to put their entire workforce on the street to receive product, that's a fact , jack !

And with respect to fitting in the peanut size loading zones , you still have to have additional space in the rear to offload and stage. good luck with that !

up
Voting closed 0

Federal law prohibits municipalities from regulating even intrastate transportation; but it has an exception for safety-related laws, which this seems to be. Still, I would expect litigation challenging any such ordinance.

up
Voting closed 0

But somebody's going to have to explain to the drivers that they still have to look out for peds and cyclists even though they have a "side gahd".

up
Voting closed 0

to the cyclists why it's a bad idea to pass vehicles on the right (desite an idiotic state law that makes it legal to do so), and explain to the pedestrians that - NO, you do not have absolute right of way and should not walk blindly into traffic.

There, fixed it for you.

up
Voting closed 0

NO, you do not have absolute right of way and should not walk blindly into traffic.

Don't tell Matthew.

up
Voting closed 0

Somebody should tell truckers to NEVER EVER EVER pass a cyclist half way and then turn, running them over.

Also, NEVER EVER EVER turn such that you RUN OVER PEOPLE ON THE CURB.

But you probably think that guy waiting for the crossing light deserved to die so horribly in central square because TRUCKS ROCK!!!!

THAT is the PROBLEM.

up
Voting closed 0

to NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER pass a large truck on the right (regardless of what the idiotc state law says).

And we also need to change the laws to require cyclists using bike lanes (where provided) to STAY IN THOSE LANES. A driver in a car is expected to stay within marked lanes on the street - it should not be any diferent for cyclists using special entitlement bike lanes.

Funny how these types of accidents never happened before when cyclists were expected to use the same facilities as other road users, and were expected to follow the same laws (like only passing on the left).

up
Voting closed 0

A driver in a car is expected to stay within marked lanes on the street

ROFLMAO. I needed a chuckle this morning.

Funny how these types of accidents never happened before when cyclists were expected to use the same facilities as other road users, and were expected to follow the same laws (like only passing on the left).

And your citation for this factoid is, what?

up
Voting closed 0

And when he encounters a double parked car? Well, he STAYS IN THAT LANE because you aren't allowed to change lanes, ever.

Right.

up
Voting closed 0

How am I supposed to turn left, smart guy?

up
Voting closed 0

You can make a "left" without leaving the bike lane using a hook turn: http://cycleguide.dk/2010/05/how-to-do-a-hook-turn/ It's a useful technique when you need to make a left across a fast, multilane road (e.g., 3 lanes of traffic, 40mph+).

Cyclists are already bound by the same traffic rules as cars requiring them to use the rightmost lane, with the usual exceptions for passing, turning, safety, etc. If Boston drivers want to clamor for enforcement of lane usage rules, well, good luck with that!

up
Voting closed 0

wheels are squeaking.

Although I do agree with the idea of bike guards in theory, however, as a cyclist I know enough to hold back when I see a truck turning right, knowing that they do indeed have blind spots. I also hold back for cars turning right as I do not want to be caught between them and the curb. I do not place myself in dangerous situations but, unfortunately, I see way too many cyclists still blowing (at fast speeds) through red lights and stop signs and displaying dubious riding techniques (like the dudes who like riding down the Harvard/Mass. Ave. bridge between two lines of traffic going in to the city, instead of using the bike lane. An accident just waiting to happen.)

up
Voting closed 0

in between lanes on the Mass Ave bridge is a pretty regular thing, as it is on many other city streets. Sometimes, there is a bike in the bike lane, a bike in between the travel lanes and a bike on the double yellow lines!

up
Voting closed 0

I'm talking about the ever common "right hook".

I'm sorry so many of you motorons are so dim with regard to actual conditions. The reality is that most cyclists killed in such a manner did NOT pass on the right - the vehicle passing THEM on the LEFT and then turning across/through them did the killing.

The classic example of this didn't even involve a moving cyclist, but a pedestrian on a sidewalk in Central Square.

up
Voting closed 0

I suburban bike. When I'm stopped at a stop sign, a huge number of cars will pull up next to me until I'm in their blind spot, then turn. Or they'll give up their turn at a four-way stop to wave me through, only to zoom past me 6 inches from the edge of my handlebars half a block later.

Responsible bikers don't want to die, so they stay out of your way. Don't put them there.

up
Voting closed 0

Swirls , too many people , too big of trucks , something's going to give. Faneuil Hall used to be a market , now it's loaded with people. They are there to get stuff,somewhat do you do, email it ? I was there when it was a market , now it's a people magnet. That's reality, it's crowded. EVERYONE has to be careful.Calm down ,now !
I forgot to mention, Swirls , that they just did over the Plymouth waterfront, and now there is a marked bike lane on Water Street. Can you dig it?

up
Voting closed 0

Would be helpful. There was a bicyclists hit this morning in Cambridge between Inman and Central by a garbage truck. Hopefully the cyclists is ok.

up
Voting closed 0

This is what a sideguard looks like.

http://tinyurl.com/k2kno5c

up
Voting closed 0

The city should mandate Nerf trucks.

up
Voting closed 0

Or adobe.

up
Voting closed 0

Walsh, it's time to fix Boston Public Schools. Can that be a higher priority than padding trucks?

up
Voting closed 0

IMAGE(http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/assets/icon-black-or-white.png)

up
Voting closed 0

Where are they in the regulation? Major oversight! So, where is the data on side guard cost vs. effectiveness? How much does it cost for each life saved?

up
Voting closed 0

That will make trucking safer in the city!

Having spent time recently visiting a patient at Tufts medical center, I was frequently entertained by the feat of Silver Line tandem buses turning from Kneeland St on to Washington St. and only able to do it by a couple inches. Bad planning! More entertainment came at the pedestrian crossing at the T station. Frequent red lights always run by cyclists and frequently by pedestrians.

up
Voting closed 0

Go ahead - google stuff. It is good for you. Road diets work to improve traffic flow, and adding cycletracks in NYC improved speeds on some streets and did not affect others.

up
Voting closed 0