On June 30th, the Boston DCR held its fourth meeting about the “final design, construction plans, and traffic impacts” for the rehabilitation of the BU Bridge.”
I will only discuss the plans for the bike lanes, but if you’re interested you can view full presentation that touches on other considerations here.
In case you haven’t heard, the BU Bridge will be losing a car lane and gaining two 5-foot wide bike lanes (one in each direction) as part of the BU bridge rehabilitation project, first proposed back in October. The lane reconfiguration chosen since then will turn two lanes of traffic each way into one midway on the bridge, which will look like this:
Other bike lane designs were taken into consideration were not chosen such as barrier separated bike lanes (to not exclude bikers from being able to change lanes), bridge cantilever extensions (physical modification not allowed since bridge deemed a historical monument), so this three-car-lane/two-bike-lane design is what will be put in place.
And the intersection of the bridge with Memorial Dr. on the Cambridge side will be redesigned from its current chaotic lane-less rotary:
to a more organized “roundabout”:
The DCR hired engineering consultants who found that one major source of congestion over the bridge is traffic in and out of the rotary: In its current state the rotary is wide and lacks any sort of lane markings, encouraging drivers to drive fast around it, making it unsafe for cars and cyclists merging into/exiting the rotary and pedestrians crossing the paths of vehicles coming in and out of it.
The redesign into a “roundabout” includes narrower car lanes which will be clearly marked/painted to keep cars in the rotary moving slower, allowing incoming and outgoing vehicles to exit more easily and efficiently than before. The DCR stated traffic engineering simulations show this redesign will improve traffic flow. Slower car traffic will also make the intersection safer for pedestrians and cyclists.
The renovation will take place in three different phases based on three different working sections, and the renovation time line looks like this:
During each phase only two lanes of traffic will be open (one lane per direction), while the other two will be occupied by construction crews. The proposed plans to accommodate cars and cyclists during construction is to paint sharrows and post signs informing that cyclists can and should take up the entire width of a lane as needed.
The 45 minute presentation was followed by over an hour of Q&A. Some points I noted from the Q&A were:
- The lack of redesign of the intersection of Commonwealth Ave. on the Boston side. There was one slide on this intersection with no current changes. Not much could be done to this intersection since it would have been a much larger project than just renovating the BU bridge.
- The “bridge” effect, or the tendency for drivers to accelerate over bridges with a “hump” or a “bow”, making it unsafe for cyclists. While bike lanes help by giving cyclists their own space, their usefulness only extends as far as the safety they bring, which is not very much as long as cars speed by the narrow bike lane. Some way to physically separate cyclists from cars or slow cars down by way of signs/slowers/flashing yellow lights would help make the bridge safer for cyclists.
- Permanent signs or light indicators to let drivers know to slow down or share the road.
- A trial run of the all the planned traffic changes before they become permanent and a study of how these changes affect traffic conditions rather than just simulations.
In previous meetings the DCR has actually pointed out that they had in fact been doing several “trial-runs” of some very specific changes, such as adding cones to narrow the lane of the merge onto the bridge off Memorial drive. They never officially reported the effects of this change, though. As for the four lanes into three change, the bridge is set up with three lanes right now as sidewalk renovation is currently happening, but the DCR rep did not say whether the traffic has worsened or not since the lane closure.
- At the intersection with Memorial drive, the redesign plan indicates no bike lane at the intersection since it only extends across the bridge. Instead there is just a sharrow(arrow indicating drivers to share the lane with bikers). This intersection could use bike boxes and extension of the bike lane to this intersection.
- The narrowing of the entrance lane leading to the merge off Memorial Dr. onto the BU bridge poses a problem for cyclists also merging onto the bridge.
the shoulder on Memorial drive turns into a sharrow before turning into a bike lane. Instead of widening the sidewalk, why not extend the bike lane all the way down to Memorial Dr. so cars wouldn’t have the tendency to ignore the sharrow and cut into the narrow shoulder remaining for bikes?
Galen went up and expressed a few concerns we had as student bike commuters. First, that the bike lanes would inevitably draw inexperienced cyclists to it as any bike lane would, and that considerations such as bike specific stop lights, signs for cyclists, or anything else to keep cars aware of cyclists would be a good idea in keeping the bike lanes safe rather than making them appear so. Second, bike boxes at the intersections to give cyclists space at red lights, allowing cyclists to make safe left turns and prevent cyclists from blocking pedestrian crosswalks. While bike boxes appear in the latest Memorial Dr. intersection plans, they have not yet been finalized. And finally, during the school year when BU students cross the BU bridge intersection with Comm Ave. in hordes throughout the entire day, would there be any police detail during mornings and evenings as construction goes on to people safely across?
What struck me was that after nine months and four meetings, no cycling advocate who did speak up had ever asked the DCR representatives and the traffic engineers present at the meetings, the people deciding on and designing these renovation plans, the simple question of whether they had ever ridden a bike over the BU bridge; the dangers are much more easily experienced than said. The question was finally asked during the fourth meeting when one gentleman approached the microphone and asked the DCR representatives whether they had, to which one replied sheepishly, after a brief moment of hesitation, “no.” The traffic engineers were present too, and there was indeed a bike specialist part of that team, but it is clear that many issues remained unaddressed. If the DCR is ready to take cycling seriously, perhaps it’s time to get the DCR on a bike.
