Might want to check on Mass Saves insulation rebates too. That high of a heating bill in general sounds like a lack of sufficient insulation problem. Would suck to drop $$$ on a new system only to still end up with $400-$500 heating bills.

New windows/wrapping drafty windows in plastic wrap can help too.

> Huge eye roll here. I bet the author would enjoy the quick 10 minutes from 128 to the airport down the pike...

Maybe if you're going 128 mph, but if you follow Google maps it's 17 minutes from 128 to the airport. Likely much, much longer when it isn't midnight. I get a max of 55 minutes during rush hour traffic if I play around with start times.

> The highway was desperately needed at the time (and still needed). There were no viable alternatives at the time and this route was the least destructive too.

Uh, no. Did you miss the part where Alston had 3 fucking train stations at the time? Trains are absolutely a viable option if we dump $20B+ into them like we did with the Big Dig and other urban highway projects. Sprinkle in some pedestrian, bike and bus infrastructure for the last mile and suddenly you have a really nice transportation system that doesn't involve razing people's houses and leaving everyone else with a nasty loud eyesore.

Ah, so like a few others in the Davis Sq area. I haven't personally met him or seen anything obvious from them, but kinda assumed when you said "shitty politics".

> It's part of the reason why, as much as I love off-road biking, I've become a bit of a skeptic about the rail trail movement. And I'm wondering if it's a good idea to be using these prime rights of way for bike use exclusively -- maybe we need to be promoting the restoration of rail instead or maybe even dual use if possible?

A few things:

1. Rail trails aren't for bike use exclusively. They may be the most visible use, particular on corridors like the Minute Man which has a strong bike commuter community, but they are ultimately multi use. Maybe we need to frame these trails differently from a marketing/PR POV though, since NIMBYs do feel a strong urge to latch onto the "crazy biker mowing down pedestrian" stereotype which is misleading and overblown.
2. I think rail w/a trail is a good model, and I've rather see that, but these ROWs are pretty narrow to support that. Most were double tracked at one point, but ROW has been encroached upon for decades so they tend to end up pretty narrow. Finding 15 feet of space plus some space for greenery and trees is hard enough at points. We can't just throw down a single rail track and call it a day either; we'd need double track sections for safe passing of trains, we'd probably want electric trains for maximum efficiency and headways; we'd want to fix all the at grade crossings if we want safer crossings and faster trains... etc. We could do subway style trains instead, but each mile of subway costs half a billion in the US at best... so for a few miles of transit expansion the State needs to drop several billion (see GLX in Somerville/Medford, a $1 to $2B project depending on what you count). It would be AWESOME if we could actually support transit and multi use pedestrian/cycling infrastructure but I don't see much political support for actual transit improvements beyond token improvements (GLX is good enough for most politicians, now let's spend $10B on highways!!! Even if that makes 0 sense).
3. I think we really need to streamline these things and remove a LOT or maybe ALL of the local input. NIMBYs shouldn't get a dozen community meetings to bitch about every little thing about a project. We've built dozens of rail trails in MA. The State, be it MassDOT, DCR, the MBTA, etc, all know how to handle multi use trails. The Feds have guidelines for this too if we really need a second opinion. We do not need some input from NIMBYs in Belmont who want to be super duper helpful by suggesting a dozen costly improvements that will take years to implement.

> At the very least we need to overcome suburban NIMBYism and to do that we need to resurrect Sylvester Baxter's visionary 1890 plan for Boston to become an integrated metropolis/city-state.

I don't know much or anything about Sylvester Baxter, but I think we just need to start ignoring NIMBYs. We've given them too much political and PR power by broadcasting their vocal minority views. Rail trails are an excellent use of ROW if we're not actually going to build transit. We should take every mile of unused track that the MBTA/MassDOT/local freight companies own and start ripping them out or improving them. There's no need to wait 3 decades to find out if CSX or Pam Am or whoever actually wants that freight line. Take it by eminent domain and build some trails on it. Add a clause for transit and if we ever get serious about dumping tens of billions into the MBTA we'll replace the trails with trains and maybe subways + a trail above or if space permits a commuter rail train + trail.

What kind of politics is/was Dave's involved in? I haven't heard anything about them, though Darwin's and others in the area have had some clear political slants based support for certain local officials.

To be fair, the Belmont section does have to run parallel to the Fitchburg Commuter Rail tracks. Having to deal directly with the MBTA likely slows things down.

IDK why they separated the project into 2 phases and are taking 4 years to design it though. It's not really rocket science: keep people away from active trains, add some crosswalks with flashing lights (HAWKs if you want to get fancy) and call it a day. Way safer than the existing routes to get out there and way more capacity since sidewalk riding is extremely limited.

The Charles River stuff basically connects to the Watertown Greenway too (using either Kingston Ave or the nice connector path here), so it could really provide a nice way for someone in Belmont to reach Harvard without touching a City street.

Hopefully one day they extend / improve the Charles River stuff too. No reason it couldn't go past Waltham towards Newton. Just a matter of routing and acquiring or dedicating some ROW to it.

Short answer: the Town of Belmont is filled with your typical pseudo suburban NIMBYs who will stop at nothing to get everything they want and nothing you want.

Long answer: funding trail improvements takes time. Designing them should be the fastest part, since you literally just need to throw down 10 to 15 feet of asphalt and design a few connectors. Things can get a bit complex if you're crossing multiple roadways, and if multiple Towns/Cities/State Agencies need to be involved, things get more annoying. In this case, Belmont's section actually runs parallel to the existing MBTA Fitchburg Commuter Rail Line. This is due to the Central Massachusetts Railroad (of which these rail trails are being built on the old ROW of) ran parallel to the Fitchburg tracks from the Fitchburg Cutoff (now a path in Cambridge next to Alewife) to the old Clematis Brook Station. This is seen nicely on Wikipedia under the Stations and Junctions section of the Mass Central Railroad page.

Ultimately having to deal with the MBTA almost certainly adds some time to things. Throw in funding and their extremely slow planning process... and yeah, this is taking way longer than necessary. At least there's some quieter side streets to take that roughly follow the existing ROW up to Belmont Center... from there I can't wait for the path to exist to avoid taking the busier streets around there.

> I really appreciate the city doing it all at once instead of wasting time and money splitting it up into tiny segments.

The town of Belmont has entered the chat

They're literally going to take 5 years or more to design, fund and build their tiny 2 mile stretch over two fucking phases. 🦥

A few years minimum, because Belmont is doing it in 2 phases and they haven't even started construction on Phase 1 yet.

More details here: https://belmontcommunitypath.com/project-background/ and here: http://belmontonian.com/news/belmont-community-path-on-the-tip-of-a-milestone/

The second one says four fucking years to a full 100% design, so they're moving very fast 🦥

Interesting. If something is by right, why would the zoning board be involved? Do they still approve/disapprove by right proposals?

In addition we can only raise property taxes by so much due to laws from the 80's like Prop 2.5 which limit residential property tax growth. So even if tomorrow a city like Somerville said "yeah so we're going to jack taxes up to fund major infrastructure investments"... They literally couldn't do that. It's definitely a contributing factor to how we're piece mealing infrastructure improvements like only doing 1 street per year, at a rate so slow by the time we've addressed every street in a given City we'll have to start over again.

Oh and even if say Somerville or Cambridge decided to fix things, that doesn't matter if towns like Lexington, Concord, etc are allowed to continue denying any new dense housing buildings. We need every City and Town within MA to step up it's game, otherwise things will continue to get worse. No one town can fix things.

Yeah I mean that's the ultimate plan... unfortunately due to the City's poor planning the concrete barriers aren't available yet. The alternative was to not open these bike lanes until the spring, which would probably have resulted in more vehicle conflicts.

Maybe a 311 report or such like I described above could expedite installation at this particular intersection. I think that's your best bet. Sorry this happened to you. :\

Ah, so a right hook basically. They probably need to raise the crosswalks at that intersection and make it clearer where the bike lane is.

Probably worth a 311 report: https://www.cambridgema.gov/commonwealthconnect

plus a follow-up email to Cambridge's City Councilors: https://www.cambridgema.gov/Departments/citycouncil/members

and maybe CC Cambridge Bike Safety or try them first: https://www.cambridgebikesafety.org/join/

City Councilors Burhan Azeem and Patricia Nolan are pretty pro cycling; I've met both at events around the City and they would probably take this more seriously than some other City Councilors would. Cambridge Bike Safety is really well organized and the folks there would probably help guide you to the right people to fix that intersection.

> I think there needs to be more physical infrastructure to force drivers to stay out of cyclists' way, they can't just provide guidance and hope for the best.

That's the plan:

> Beginning next week, the City will install Phase 1 of the Brattle Street Safety Improvement Project, between Mason Street and Sparks Street. Previously, we announced that we would delay installation to the spring, but we have adjusted our approach after re-evaluating the feasibility of using temporary materials.

> We plan to use tube-style cones to separate people biking from vehicle traffic until concrete curbing becomes available this winter. These cones are taller and have a heavier base than a typical traffic cone.

They're planning on doing this; see the project page for details: https://www.cambridgema.gov/streetsandtransportation/projectsandprograms/brattlestreetsafetyimprovementproject

Concrete curbing is the ultimate plan but the City is dumb and didn't order them soon enough, so they've been delayed. It was decided, after a lot of pushback from Bike Safety groups like Cambridge Bike Safety, to use cones and other temporary dividers to proceed with the bike lane now vs in the spring.

I imagine concrete curbing would have helped you, but drivers are notorious for ignoring biking lanes in general so... who knows.

Medford just got a new contract with National Grid: https://medfordma.org/2022/09/29/city-providing-energy-cost-relief-to-residents-with-community-electricity-aggregation-renewal/

Rates went up from 11.507 cents/kWh to 15.358 cents/kWh - 33% increase. It's good until December 2024 but who knows what we'll end up with then. And still half the cost of the National Grid Basic supply rate of 33.891 cents/kWh.

> and van drivers driving around with their doors open. I'd bet they're trying to save time to meet quotas or something. :( Thanks Bezos.

I started noticing this a few months ago and it seems like it caught on. I guess they figure since UPS/FedEx drivers can drive around with their doors open why can't they. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> As someone who frequents this path, it's quite nice but arguably not wide enough. There's people taking leisurely strolls in large groups and cyclists biking through (sometimes also in groups). I think it'd be nice to see a contraflow bike lane down the middle of the path to provide some structure for where to expect cyclists.

Hmm, yeah at peak hours it can get fairly crowded. I'd probably rather see dedicated bike lanes added to Highland Ave, plus cross streets (Willow, Cedar, and Lowell) and separated lanes on Broadway (only paint at the moment). That would provide some alternative dedicated routes for cyclists plus calm some of those streets so people can spread out more.

> The city's planning a renewal/redesign in their chunk of the path. It'll be interesting to see how they balance this being a park with it also being a commuting path.

IIRC the Linear Park/Path was built prior to the Minutemen opening, so it wasn't ever really designed to handle the traffic it gets now.

I think they really just need to widen a few spots from 10 ft to 12-15 ft depending on space availability. That should leave plenty of park space. See how Somerville did their community path (ignoring the future path extension, which will have this same issue being a 10 ft path, thanks to GLX budget issues) for an example of how you can have a nice multi modal path with some park like amenities.

> It also sounds like the path hasn't been repaved since it was built 35 years ago. If that's true, that really speaks to the efficiency of spending on bike and pedestrian infrastructure

It helps that people walking and biking weigh a fraction of your typical compact sedan. And with most people opting for SUVs and pick-up trucks... We can see why the roads are trash. (That plus an overall lack of road / transportation in general maintenance in the last 20 years).

I believe either the car lane or bike lane, but not on sidewalks or recreational bike paths. That's based on the actual law here: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section1E

Plus this page from the Salem PD has some notes: https://www.salemma.gov/salem-police-department/awareness/pages/scooter-law

Though this ultimately depends on the type of scooter I believe. Slower scooters can likely get away with bike path riding for example (I see it all the time, no one cares if you're going <20 mph and slowing down for pedestrians and slower cyclists). Don't go flying 30 mph in a bike lane either, if you can reach those speeds you probably belong in the right most travel lane.

There's a post about it here: https://www.reddit.com/r/camberville/comments/yshu68/judge_skeptical_of_bike_lanes_on_narrow_brattle/

Yeah the parcels they outline look like really good spots to cap. You could really expand the pedestrian/cycling/transit access with a few caps and new street connections.

Would be cool if the entire turnpike could be capped from BU to Mass Ave. I know there's already at least one project going on around Mass Ave, so who knows... we might someday have some improved pedestrian access throughout that corridor.

That depends. If you do not have a resident permit you need to move your car every 24 hours. If you do, then I believe you do not have to move your car unless there's street sweeping or snow removal. There might be a 48 or 72 hour rule but the last time I went looking for Cambridge's version the best I could find was the 24 hour rule for non-permit cars.

Source: https://www.cambridgema.gov/iwantto/parkacarincambridge

Relevant bit:

> Understanding When Meters are In Effect

> Signs at meters that say "Except" during certain hours and days, mean that the meters and the maximum time limit are not in effect on those days or during those times. For example, a sign that says "2-HR Parking, 8AM - 6PM, Except Sat & Sun" means:

> * you must pay to park there Monday through Friday, between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., > * you may only park for up to two hours.

> Outside of the posted time, you may park for more than two hours and you do not have to pay the meter. Other signs (e.g., street sweeping) may require you to move your vehicle. Otherwise, if you have a Resident Parking Permit, you may park for the the entire time that the meters are not in effect. If you do not have a Resident Permit, you are still required to move your vehicle every 24 hours.

Filing a complaint against a Cambridge taxi with the CPD's Hackney division will get you a remarkably quick response from CPD. I reported a taxi driver for parking and then driving in a bike lane on Mass Ave last year. Within a few days I got a response back from a CPD Hackney division officer. They claimed to have spoken to the taxi driver who gave them a sob story about having a medical emergency (diabetic and needed a donut from dunks was their claim). The officer really didn't seem to give a shit but they did at least speak to the driver. And that driver now has a complaint on file if anything serious happens in the future.

So needless to say: report them if you want, but expect nothing to come out of it. Probably worth it just so that driver thinks twice about fucking around in the future. That's what I like to think my report did. But who knows. CPD really doesn't seem to like doing any real work.