Dan reads (gasp!) a book

Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Dan O writes:

On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:39:33 AM UTC-7, Radey wrote:
Joe Riel writes:
Radey writes:
Joe Riel writes:
Dan O writes:
On Friday, May 30, 2014 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote:

snip

If traffic is backed up, it's not uncommon for a 'nice' driver to stop
before a driveway to allow a car in the oncoming lane to turn left, in
front of it. If you are passing cars on the right, your view of the car
that will suddenly cross your path is limited.

Your point is well-taken, but why is 'nice' in scare quotes? Ought
drivers be required to block proper left turns on the off chance that,
done without due care, they might injure someone?

The driver stopping is trying to help a fellow motorist, which is
commendable, however, if doing so endangers you it isn't so nice in
practice. While it may not be illegal, it would be questionable if done
with an open lane to the right. Should a bike lane be considered an
open lane?

Sure, a bike lane is an open lane. No, it's not reasonable to require
drivers in a backed up lane to actively block others from turning.

My neighbors across the street where I used to live have a line of
backed up traffic in front of their houses most mornings. If one of
them wants to turn left into his own driveway is he supposed to drive up
the street until he can make a u-turn into the backed up lane?

"Supposed to" is too strong; but that's what I'd do... unless I was
on a bike, in which case I'd just weave my way across between the
stopped / slow moving cars.

It could be miles, literally. There could be several clogged
intersections before a suitable turn-around. No one in Massachusetts
drives that way, and I would be quite foolish to expect them to.



When I lived in Boston in the late 80s they made the breakdown lane on 128
a 4th lane and ticketed and towed anyone with a flat or other breakdown in
the breakdown lane. Is it still like that? They didn't seem like they'd
do anything to aid cycling if it came at the expense of drivers.

It is still like that; there are long stretches where there is
absolutely nowhere to bail if your car dies. 93 is worse, its breakdown
lanes are legal for traffic only during posted hours, and drivers must
adjust their exit plans accordingly. Mass. was the first place I heard
the term "breakdown lane", so the idea that one might travel on one for
long distances was a bit of a shock.

I suspect that there is quite a bit more cycling in Boston, Cambridge
and nearby suburbs than you remember. Mostly student age, but quite
visible, and just getting over peak fixie. Cycling in Boston is
actually more pleasant than driving, because in either case I'm always
completely lost, and it's much easier stopping to ask directions on a
bicycle.

Radey wrote:
Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Dan O writes:

On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:39:33 AM UTC-7, Radey wrote:
Joe Riel writes:
Radey writes:
Joe Riel writes:
Dan O writes:
On Friday, May 30, 2014 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote:

snip

If traffic is backed up, it's not uncommon for a 'nice' driver to stop
before a driveway to allow a car in the oncoming lane to turn left, in
front of it. If you are passing cars on the right, your view of the car
that will suddenly cross your path is limited.

Your point is well-taken, but why is 'nice' in scare quotes? Ought
drivers be required to block proper left turns on the off chance that,
done without due care, they might injure someone?

The driver stopping is trying to help a fellow motorist, which is
commendable, however, if doing so endangers you it isn't so nice in
practice. While it may not be illegal, it would be questionable if done
with an open lane to the right. Should a bike lane be considered an
open lane?

Sure, a bike lane is an open lane. No, it's not reasonable to require
drivers in a backed up lane to actively block others from turning.

My neighbors across the street where I used to live have a line of
backed up traffic in front of their houses most mornings. If one of
them wants to turn left into his own driveway is he supposed to drive up
the street until he can make a u-turn into the backed up lane?

"Supposed to" is too strong; but that's what I'd do... unless I was
on a bike, in which case I'd just weave my way across between the
stopped / slow moving cars.

It could be miles, literally. There could be several clogged
intersections before a suitable turn-around. No one in Massachusetts
drives that way, and I would be quite foolish to expect them to.



When I lived in Boston in the late 80s they made the breakdown lane on 128
a 4th lane and ticketed and towed anyone with a flat or other breakdown in
the breakdown lane. Is it still like that? They didn't seem like they'd
do anything to aid cycling if it came at the expense of drivers.

It is still like that; there are long stretches where there is
absolutely nowhere to bail if your car dies. 93 is worse, its breakdown
lanes are legal for traffic only during posted hours, and drivers must
adjust their exit plans accordingly. Mass. was the first place I heard
the term "breakdown lane", so the idea that one might travel on one for
long distances was a bit of a shock.

I suspect that there is quite a bit more cycling in Boston, Cambridge
and nearby suburbs than you remember. Mostly student age, but quite
visible, and just getting over peak fixie. Cycling in Boston is
actually more pleasant than driving, because in either case I'm always
completely lost, and it's much easier stopping to ask directions on a
bicycle.

I found a lot of nice places to ride when I was there. I just didn't like
the crazy drivers. When I finally moved to Albany though people there
thought I was a crazy driver. I guess it wears off.

I lived a couple of years in central square, then Dorchester for a while
and Brighton. I was able to get around on my bike without much trouble.

But whenever I hear someone talking about controlling the lane I think of
Storrow Drive or even Mass ave at rush hour.

--
duane

On 6/2/2014 3:32 PM, Duane wrote:
Radey wrote:
Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Dan O writes:

On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:39:33 AM UTC-7, Radey wrote:
Joe Riel writes:
Radey writes:
Joe Riel writes:
Dan O writes:
On Friday, May 30, 2014 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote:

snip

If traffic is backed up, it's not uncommon for a 'nice' driver to stop
before a driveway to allow a car in the oncoming lane to turn left, in
front of it. If you are passing cars on the right, your view of the car
that will suddenly cross your path is limited.

Your point is well-taken, but why is 'nice' in scare quotes? Ought
drivers be required to block proper left turns on the off chance that,
done without due care, they might injure someone?

The driver stopping is trying to help a fellow motorist, which is
commendable, however, if doing so endangers you it isn't so nice in
practice. While it may not be illegal, it would be questionable if done
with an open lane to the right. Should a bike lane be considered an
open lane?

Sure, a bike lane is an open lane. No, it's not reasonable to require
drivers in a backed up lane to actively block others from turning.

My neighbors across the street where I used to live have a line of
backed up traffic in front of their houses most mornings. If one of
them wants to turn left into his own driveway is he supposed to drive up
the street until he can make a u-turn into the backed up lane?

"Supposed to" is too strong; but that's what I'd do... unless I was
on a bike, in which case I'd just weave my way across between the
stopped / slow moving cars.

It could be miles, literally. There could be several clogged
intersections before a suitable turn-around. No one in Massachusetts
drives that way, and I would be quite foolish to expect them to.



When I lived in Boston in the late 80s they made the breakdown lane on 128
a 4th lane and ticketed and towed anyone with a flat or other breakdown in
the breakdown lane. Is it still like that? They didn't seem like they'd
do anything to aid cycling if it came at the expense of drivers.

It is still like that; there are long stretches where there is
absolutely nowhere to bail if your car dies. 93 is worse, its breakdown
lanes are legal for traffic only during posted hours, and drivers must
adjust their exit plans accordingly. Mass. was the first place I heard
the term "breakdown lane", so the idea that one might travel on one for
long distances was a bit of a shock.

I suspect that there is quite a bit more cycling in Boston, Cambridge
and nearby suburbs than you remember. Mostly student age, but quite
visible, and just getting over peak fixie. Cycling in Boston is
actually more pleasant than driving, because in either case I'm always
completely lost, and it's much easier stopping to ask directions on a
bicycle.

I found a lot of nice places to ride when I was there. I just didn't like
the crazy drivers. When I finally moved to Albany though people there
thought I was a crazy driver. I guess it wears off.


I meant that I guess it rubs off.

I lived a couple of years in central square, then Dorchester for a while
and Brighton. I was able to get around on my bike without much trouble.

But whenever I hear someone talking about controlling the lane I think of
Storrow Drive or even Mass ave at rush hour.

Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Dan O writes:

On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:39:33 AM UTC-7, Radey wrote:
Joe Riel writes:
Radey writes:
Joe Riel writes:
Dan O writes:
On Friday, May 30, 2014 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote:

snip

If traffic is backed up, it's not uncommon for a 'nice' driver to stop
before a driveway to allow a car in the oncoming lane to turn left, in
front of it. If you are passing cars on the right, your view of the car
that will suddenly cross your path is limited.

Your point is well-taken, but why is 'nice' in scare quotes? Ought
drivers be required to block proper left turns on the off chance that,
done without due care, they might injure someone?

The driver stopping is trying to help a fellow motorist, which is
commendable, however, if doing so endangers you it isn't so nice in
practice. While it may not be illegal, it would be questionable if done
with an open lane to the right. Should a bike lane be considered an
open lane?

Sure, a bike lane is an open lane. No, it's not reasonable to require
drivers in a backed up lane to actively block others from turning.

My neighbors across the street where I used to live have a line of
backed up traffic in front of their houses most mornings. If one of
them wants to turn left into his own driveway is he supposed to drive up
the street until he can make a u-turn into the backed up lane?

"Supposed to" is too strong; but that's what I'd do... unless I was
on a bike, in which case I'd just weave my way across between the
stopped / slow moving cars.

It could be miles, literally. There could be several clogged
intersections before a suitable turn-around. No one in Massachusetts
drives that way, and I would be quite foolish to expect them to.



When I lived in Boston in the late 80s they made the breakdown lane on 128
a 4th lane and ticketed and towed anyone with a flat or other breakdown in
the breakdown lane. Is it still like that? They didn't seem like they'd
do anything to aid cycling if it came at the expense of drivers.

It is still like that; there are long stretches where there is
absolutely nowhere to bail if your car dies. 93 is worse, its breakdown
lanes are legal for traffic only during posted hours, and drivers must
adjust their exit plans accordingly. Mass. was the first place I heard
the term "breakdown lane", so the idea that one might travel on one for
long distances was a bit of a shock.

I suspect that there is quite a bit more cycling in Boston, Cambridge
and nearby suburbs than you remember. Mostly student age, but quite
visible, and just getting over peak fixie. Cycling in Boston is
actually more pleasant than driving, because in either case I'm always
completely lost, and it's much easier stopping to ask directions on a
bicycle.

I found a lot of nice places to ride when I was there. I just didn't like
the crazy drivers. When I finally moved to Albany though people there
thought I was a crazy driver. I guess it rubs off.

I think it does rub off.

I lived a couple of years in central square, then Dorchester for a while
and Brighton. I was able to get around on my bike without much trouble.

I have spent my time here in or near Lowell, which isn't exactly Boston,
and working between 128 and 495. I rarely see Boston on a weekday, so
I can't say for sure how it is.

But whenever I hear someone talking about controlling the lane I think of
Storrow Drive or even Mass ave at rush hour.

Ha ha. But you can do that now, (one morning out of the year):
http://www.bostonbikes.org/events/hub-on-wheels/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bostonbikes/13154336063/

--

On 6/3/2014 1:14 PM, Radey wrote:
Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Duane writes:

Radey wrote:
Dan O writes:

On Sunday, June 1, 2014 7:39:33 AM UTC-7, Radey wrote:
Joe Riel writes:
Radey writes:
Joe Riel writes:
Dan O writes:
On Friday, May 30, 2014 10:12:46 AM UTC-7, JoeRiel wrote:

snip

If traffic is backed up, it's not uncommon for a 'nice' driver to stop
before a driveway to allow a car in the oncoming lane to turn left, in
front of it. If you are passing cars on the right, your view of the car
that will suddenly cross your path is limited.

Your point is well-taken, but why is 'nice' in scare quotes? Ought
drivers be required to block proper left turns on the off chance that,
done without due care, they might injure someone?

The driver stopping is trying to help a fellow motorist, which is
commendable, however, if doing so endangers you it isn't so nice in
practice. While it may not be illegal, it would be questionable if done
with an open lane to the right. Should a bike lane be considered an
open lane?

Sure, a bike lane is an open lane. No, it's not reasonable to require
drivers in a backed up lane to actively block others from turning.

My neighbors across the street where I used to live have a line of
backed up traffic in front of their houses most mornings. If one of
them wants to turn left into his own driveway is he supposed to drive up
the street until he can make a u-turn into the backed up lane?

"Supposed to" is too strong; but that's what I'd do... unless I was
on a bike, in which case I'd just weave my way across between the
stopped / slow moving cars.

It could be miles, literally. There could be several clogged
intersections before a suitable turn-around. No one in Massachusetts
drives that way, and I would be quite foolish to expect them to.



When I lived in Boston in the late 80s they made the breakdown lane on 128
a 4th lane and ticketed and towed anyone with a flat or other breakdown in
the breakdown lane. Is it still like that? They didn't seem like they'd
do anything to aid cycling if it came at the expense of drivers.

It is still like that; there are long stretches where there is
absolutely nowhere to bail if your car dies. 93 is worse, its breakdown
lanes are legal for traffic only during posted hours, and drivers must
adjust their exit plans accordingly. Mass. was the first place I heard
the term "breakdown lane", so the idea that one might travel on one for
long distances was a bit of a shock.

I suspect that there is quite a bit more cycling in Boston, Cambridge
and nearby suburbs than you remember. Mostly student age, but quite
visible, and just getting over peak fixie. Cycling in Boston is
actually more pleasant than driving, because in either case I'm always
completely lost, and it's much easier stopping to ask directions on a
bicycle.

I found a lot of nice places to ride when I was there. I just didn't like
the crazy drivers. When I finally moved to Albany though people there
thought I was a crazy driver. I guess it rubs off.

I think it does rub off.

I lived a couple of years in central square, then Dorchester for a while
and Brighton. I was able to get around on my bike without much trouble.

I have spent my time here in or near Lowell, which isn't exactly Boston,
and working between 128 and 495. I rarely see Boston on a weekday, so
I can't say for sure how it is.

But whenever I hear someone talking about controlling the lane I think of
Storrow Drive or even Mass ave at rush hour.

Ha ha. But you can do that now, (one morning out of the year):
http://www.bostonbikes.org/events/hub-on-wheels/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bostonbikes/13154336063/



Imagine that. lol. You know where the big sign is (or was) that says
"If you lived here you'd be home by now" I think it was near the
entrance to the Mass Pike? I would love just once to go by that without
stopping for ages.