Hey, there! Log in / Register
Public-works driver gets talking-to for parking in a bike lane
By adamg on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 7:34pm
This morning, Finn snapped this photo on Congress Street at High:
What could be more #Boston than a @BostonPWD van parked in the city's take on a fancy new "protected" bike lane?
Shortly after 6 p.m., Public Works responded:
Thank you for notifying us. The driver and supervisor have been spoken with.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Why don't you find something
Why don't you find something better to do with your time than complain about a vehicle in the bike lane?
Except
if you're riding a bike on a city street, in a bike lane, and come upon a van parked in the bike lane, then you have to veer out into all that city traffic to get around this obstacle. Why bother with the expense of bike lanes if the city workers don't respect them? Maybe that city worker should be assigned to a bicycle instead of the van for some period of time.
Why bother with the expense of bike lanes
when cyclists continue to ride in the street outside these lanes, on sidewalks, in the pedestrian paths across Boston Common, and pretty much wherever they darn well please.
Get the wet wipes
Someone regurgitated a generic talking point again ...
"Generic" talking point?!? How about a
LEGITIMATE talking point. When drivers or pedestrians encroach on your precious special space, it's "OMG - Johnny get the guns out." But when somebody makes the suggestion that cyclists should be required to stay in that same space - i.e. -the lanes that THEY HAVE DEMANDED be provided, it's OMG, how dare you require that. There's a tern for that, it's called a "double standard".
Drivers cannot legally drive on the sidewalks, and pedestrians cannot legally walk in the street where a sidewalk is provided. So why should cyclists be any different?
Cleanup
Cleanup on aisle 9.
Drivers cannot legally park/drive in the bike lanes
Yet you rarely see the police enforcing that law. Cyclists are no different, its illegal for us to ride on the sidewalk but you almost never seen the police enforcing that.
So if there is a law made requiring us to stay in the bike lanes, how do we deal with blocked bike lanes? Do we queue up and wait for the blockage to pass? Dismount, walk on the sidewalk until we can get back on the bike lane?
Do you extend the same lawfully required actions when a bike is in the lane in front of you? Do you wait for a safe moment to pass and merge into next lane? Or do you tailgate the cyclist and buzz them at an unsafe distance?
(1) Because the law does not
(1) Because the law does not requires bicyclists to use a bike lane.
(2) Because using a bike lane is not always the safest thing to do, especially if it is full of debris or if it is in the "door zone" of parked cars.
(3) Because if a bicyclist is preparing to turn left, he or she will need to merge into the left-most lane in order to turn left.
(4) Because a faster bicyclist may want to pass a slower one.
A bike lane is like any other restricted lane. It is not designed to keep certain vehicles in. It's designed to keep other vehicles out. It's like an HOV lane or bus lane. If you meet the requirements to use the lane, you can use it, but you don't have to.
Bikes not in bike lane
I once saw a pedestrian walking on the street where there wasn't a crosswalk.
Therefore pedestrians should require a license, carry insurance and be required to pass a test before being allowed to walk in the City of Boston.
Why bother with the expense of parking spots
when drivers continue to park in the street outside these spots, on sidewalks, in the pedestrian crosswalks, in front of fire hydrants and pretty much wherever they darn well please.
How long do you think it took him to complain?
He took a photo, he uploaded it to Twitter, tagged it to PWD (and me, to be honest).
So probably not much more time than it took you to post a complaint about him filing a complaint.
He should've used the rat app
311.
And at about 6:30pm at this
And at about 6:30pm at this exact same spot there was a FedEx van I had to bike around. It was fully on the bike side of the protected barriers.
For those that complain about bike lanes, this section of Congress went from two lanes with a bike lane that everyone drove in, to two lanes with a protected bike lane (since shortened bc of nearby construction/jersey barriers). The result? Traffic flow improved bc it kept out the massholes who would swerve around and then try/fail to merge back in a half block later.
That Fed Ex Driver
She likes to drive in the lane, but doesn't like to have pictures taken of her driving in the lane or see the video of her driving in the lane.
?
government vehicles should not be blocking lanes designated for separate vehicles
no vehicle should, but its pretty sad when its the city's own. people love to complain about bicycles getting in the way of cars or 'being where they shouldnt' (despite the fact that the laws are very clear that bicycles have every justification to be on the streets)
maybe if cars didnt go into bike lanes, there would be fewer issues in that regard.
i'm a realist though and fully recognize that we are more likely to solve world hunger before we solve people being blindly antagonistic while commuting. by any method, or vehicle, mind you. anybody that is smug because of their ~*superior*~ form of transportation should make america great again and deport themselves.
Commute in context
First : I am a bike commuter
Second : Make note of the type of vehicle this is. The ceiling of the van has been raised. This would indicate that it's a vehicle for transporting people that have some kind of mobility problem,
boston public works
transports passengers now?
also, illegally parked is illegally parked whether you're carrying a handicapped person or not.
I took this photo. I would
I took this photo. I would like to note that, for better or worse, the vehicle was not being used to transport people. It was being used to transport garbage bins.
Question
Scenario: The Ambulance (or police/fire) is at the entrance to this jersey barrier blocked bike lane. Up ahead, they have an emergency call that they can almost visualize, on Congress street. But, the 2 lanes of traffic are not moving, there is no place for the vehicles to move over to, there is no place to move ahead through the red light (which, I might say, most cars don't pull through the red light even if there is space to do so. They are at a standstill. Do they wait it out or veer off into the bike lane where there is no traffic? (if the ambulance fits into that lane) Just a thought.......
In this scenario
are Public Works Trucks parked per usual in the bike lane? Cuz that would affect my answer.
Emergency vehicles are entitled to any lane
Emergency vehicles -- acting on an emergency -- are entitled to any lane. They can advance through an intersection in the left hand turn lane and not turn left. They can cross the double yellow. They can certainly drive (or park!) in a bike lane.
I don't know of a single bicyclist who would have a problem with that.
What we do have a problem with is police officers (and ambulance drivers) who park in the bike lane when the lights aren't on -- either because they're working a detail, grabbing lunch or a coffee, or anything else for that matter.
Bike lanes are emergency lanes
Your scenario simply does not happen. We could throw a couple of hay bales there, though ...
These bollards appear ONLY where the lane is large enough to accommodate an emergency vehicle (and where standard issue entitled drivers who are too special to use their own lanes will block that space or use it as a special private ME ME ME travel lane).
In other words, the bike lane is making sure that the emergency vehicles can get where they are going (I have hopped a curb to get out of their way and I don't mind that at all). Without the bollards, special entitled drivers will use that lane and block those vehicles.
You might want to go and visit this area of the city sometime so that you will get this.
My Favorite Bike Lane Video. need 3 mins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ
This reminds me of the photo I tweeted a few weeks ago.
Mass Ave bike lane:
When drivers encounter those pesky plastic bollards designed to keep cars out of the bike lane, some are choosing to just run them over and destroy them.
Apparently, being able to stop one's vehicle wherever one desires is more important than:
--preserving public infrastructure (i.e., not destroying it)
--maintaining a safe, separated lane for bikers
I'm all for bike lanes, both
I'm all for bike lanes, both as a cyclist and a driver who would rather have bikes in a known, predictable zone.
But this is a city, and cities function because of a system that includes deliveries and drop-offs. There needs to be places where a taxi, ride share, shuttle van, etc can pick up and drop off passengers. And there needs to be places for both businesses and residents to receive deliveries from UPS, Amazon, Instacart, Foodler, etc.
Not excusing behavior like the van in the picture above - I'm simply saying that for many who make quick stops around the city, they're forced to choose from any number of bad options: block a bike lane, block a travel lane, double park, park in a residential spot, park in a driveway, park in a no parking zone, etc.
Not Applicable
There are tons of delivery zones downtown. Pretty much every block has several such spaces. And most of the larger buildings have loading docks too.
There are no loading zones or
There are no loading zones or loading docks on the stretch of Congress that has the buffered bike lanes. https://goo.gl/maps/x47g3WJ75MM2
Maybe some of these buildings have entrances on the Federal Street side. But how is someone driving to a Congress Street address supposed to know that? It would be too easy if the city put up signs saying "all drop-offs and deliveries on Federal Street [forward-right arrow]".
This is true in some
This is true in some instances, but what made this particularly galling is that the vehicle was actually stopped right on the corner of Matthews Street, which is essentially nothing but a giant loading zone (slash cigarette parlor):
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.354912,-71.0549229,3a,75y,204.18h,70.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHFp8UZW_ne4W0INndhLWIQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
which lane to block?
My question when I see something like this is (in the absence of no-stopping zone designated for commercial use) is why couldn't the van just stop in the car lane instead of the bike lane? Delivery and work detail trucks stop double park all the time. My suspiscion is that it feels conspicuous/less illegal to park in a bike lane.
Because that would be worse
Because that would be worse for everyone, including bicyclists.