i, like many others, am alternately a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian. i don't think going from one exteme to the other is the solution.

This has to be the stupidest idea I have ever heard in my entire life !! when is this city going to stop kissing the bicyclists behinds ???????????

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to attend any of the meetings, but I think this is a long overdue project. I know these kinds of projects quickly turn polarized with people reacting based on feelings rather than facts. I just reviewed the parking study posted on the City's website, and the results are fascinating, so I hope everyone takes a look. It shows that midday parking in the area of the proposed cycletracks is used as long term parking by people with parking permits who are not residents of Beacon Street. It appears that non-Beacon Street Somervillians are using it as a parking lot while they go to work or school. The study recommends that parking spots along that stretch have time limits during the day to discourage commuter use. (Beacon Street residents would be exempt from all time limits.) This would *open up* spaces for short-term parking, which would support our local businesses. Even if reconstruction of the street weren't happening, this would be a good idea! I think the study shows that all proposed uses of Beacon Street can be supported in the redesign, so I think there is space for protected bike lanes, particularly given the high volume of bike traffic in the area.

What about people with disabilities? How are they supposed to get to the Beacon Street shops if you take away the parking? What about families with small children who live in those houses? There has to be a better way to share that public space among everyone who needs to use it.

There is plenty of parking for everyone on Beacon Street with cycle track-- but the parking that's there has to be properly managed. Instead of thinking of it as an on and off switch, think of it as a series of dials:

Can people park all day anywhere? Or should some business parking be put aside for short term parking? This would help the businesses serve their customers better than what's there now.

Can some of the big parking lots be made available for parking over night? Star market? The manager has said he's open to this.

Are driveways completely full or empty? Is there space for people to use their driveways better than they do now?

Can a new Somerville permit be put in place that allows only people on Beacon Street to park there? Many people park on Beacon and walk to Cambridge or the T where they can't park.

I am not saying there will be no people hurt by a cycle track, but the hurt can be less and then the community can fully benefit from a healthy and low cost way of getting around. Not everyone can afford a car. They should be able to bike safely.

I am a Beacon Street resident and a Somerville taxpayer. I am also a patron of the local businesses on Beacon Street. Because I don't own a car (I use Zipcar), I don't drive to Walmart to do all my shopping, and I have much more money to spend next-door at Petsi's, Café Rustica, Kiki's, O'Sullivan's, Pho, Zoe's, Seven Hills, and Wine and Cheese Cask.
As one of thousands of daily bike riders on Beacon Street, I believe my life-and-limb safety is far more important than the luxury of us being able to park in front of our own houses on a busy road. Some residents have their own off-street parking but aren’t using it because there's ample, basically free on-street parking (paid for by taxpayers). Where do these cars go twice a week when there's street sweeping? They don't just disappear.
For most of the small businesses near Star Market, driving customers already park in the Star Market lot, and I know that Star Market would be interested in forming a shared parking agreement. At businesses like Kiki's and Cafe Rustica, there's no reason that anyone in Somerville should be able to park their car in front all day. Those spaces should become 1- or 2-hour parking for customers during the day, or become metered. Then strategically preserve parking in front of the couple of businesses that actually have significant driving customers, like the Laundromat.
Cycletracks, with a few tweaks, will boost our property values and be a win-win for the neighborhood.

And the assault on drivers continues. I used to live in Somerville, but was forced to move out because my family absolutely needed a car and the city threatened to to the same on my street. We loved Somerville and I loved commuting by bicycle everyday, but unfortunately were were "kicked out". People need to understand that driving might be the only option for someone based on their profession, work location or other circumstance. (i.e. it is not safe to have an infant on a bicycle or city bus). Somerville was not designed to accomodate both parking and large bike passages. Bicycles shouldn't be allowed to own the road. Cars and bike need to learn to share the road.

When we lived in Somerville (for 10 years), my wife drove 20min to work(no other options) and I rode my bicycle to my job in the city. Because my wife got squeezed out of parking options, we had to move away. Now my wife drives 20min to work and I drive 45min. We are very conscious of the environment, but we had limited choices on our budget. I'm sure there are lots of people like us. So all those environmentalist and bicycle advocates can chew on that!

Stop the prejudice mistreatment of car owners!

Alex, clearly, you don't have experience parking in Somerville, so please don't assume you know how it works. On street sweeping days or snow emergencies, sometimes people have to pay to park at meteres or garages because there isn't parking anywhere near the home. Or they get up at 5am to shuffle cars around before ticketing starts. Other times one drives around for 20-30min looking for a space. That space is often many blocks away....

...For my wife that meant walking several blocks in the dark with an infant in tow on a snowy 20degree night. Not the safest option. The worse part, you never know when it will happen so you can't even plan for it. Also, they don't park for free on taxpayers dollars, parking spaces don't require additonal maintenance and we pay for parking stickers for the "privilage" to park near our homes. I could go on and on about the challenges of parking in Somerville, so please don't assume you know what it's like. I rode a bike to work everyday for many years in Somerville. If you think you are risking life and limb with the current situation perhaps you need to slow down. Just as with driving a car, you are safest when driving defensively. Give yourself room in case a car door opens, look to see if parked cars are occupied, and most importantly slow down so you are able to stop quickly when needed. People will always make mistakes and you will always encounter poor drivers and poor bicycle riders, if this wasn't the case there would never be a car accident. Accidents are a fact of life and we can only do our best to mitigate the risk in a reasonable manner.

This is an incredible project. I bike down Beacon street every single day, have nearly been "doored" by people on the street dozens of time, and think that this project is perfect, overdue, and wonderful. In the last 3-4 years, I've noticed the number of cyclists on this stretch more than double. I've also seen tension between cyclists and motorists increase. This is a proposal that will increase safety, increase cycling, and decrease opportunities for negative interactions between motorists and cyclists. Bravo to the city and to others who are supporting this!

A dedicated bike lane is likely to increase the property value, not hurt it, will encourage many cyclists to come down Beacon who are currently taking other routes (and they will stop at local businesses). And many of those cyclists are able to buy houses. The comments reported in this article are groundless insults by people and, honestly, seem a little out of touch and crazy. :)

Hubway on Beacon street is turning this into a bicycle arteria. And better bicycle infrastructure will lead to healthier folks, less cars, more likelihood to stop at local businesses, and more. Folks like me will (as I have done) get rid of their cars and replace place them with car sharing systems like Zipcar and rely much more on bikes, the T, and and a car only when I need it.

This is a wonderful plan!

I am also a Somerville resident, homeowner, pedestrian, bicyclist, driver, and transit rider. I live about a half mile from Beacon St. It's one of my primary routes into Cambridge and Boston and I often frequent the local businesses there. When the City added bike lanes to Beacon St a few years ago, it was a huge improvement. Taking it to the next level by creating cycle tracks would be even that much better, and would appeal more to families and older folks who are not as comfortable bicycling between parked cars and moving vehicles.

Based on the parking study and what I've seen from using Beacon St personally, I think there are definitely ways to preserve and manage enough parking so that businesses continue to thrive and so that local residents can reasonably find on-street parking near their homes. It's not an all or nothing situation. As others have stated, if some of the businesses can create parking sharing agreements, for example to allow customers of neighboring businesses to use the Star Market parking lot, that would take some of the pressure off of the on-street spaces. Also, setting up a Beacon St permit zone to keep commuters from other parts of Somerville from parking on Beacon St during the day and walking into Cambridge would certainly keep spaces open for people who live on or are visiting Beacon St.

I'd love to see the City look at similar solutions from Washington St to Inman Square so that the cycle track can be extended even further!

LSG: The proposal is not to eliminate all parking. There will more than a hundred parking spaces, over the entire affected area, which can be set aside for disabled parking and more.

Our household moved to Somerville with a car and got rid of it. But the reason had much more to do with streetsweeping and with the fact that there is both a good car sharing systems in Somerville and increasingly good bicycle infrastructure. Some people need cars, definitely! But decreasing the need for cars for the large number of people who would cycle at least some of the time if it was safer and more convenient seems like a good investment from a number of perspective.

Moreover, decreased need for car ownership has the major potential to relieve tension around parking in Somerville if more people -- like our house -- are willing to get our cars off the streets altogether.

Also, as a cyclist and customer of P&K deli -- I'm going to consider stopping shopping at P&K deli knowing that the ownership is so dismissive of my business and working against projects like this would that increase the quality of my commute and my ability to visit his shop!

I keep seeing this comment about the bicycle lane increasing properties values. I would like to provide some insight here as well. When I sold my condo in Somerville, I was told that the value was 20% less than other comps because of the poor parking situation in my area. Sure enough, it sold for about 15% less. From what I've learned in this exact situation, I think property values will surely decrease. However, if you have some solid evidence to the contrary please share.

I also agree with Charle that it shouldn't be all or nothing, but I also think this plan is an "all" for bicycles. Obviously the fair compromise is the current setup where bicycles and car share the road.

I realize I'm spouting off a lot here. That's because I'm bitter and disappointed about having to move. I no longer need to find parking on the streets of somerville now that I don't live there. And as someone who drives in Somerville everyday to get to work, this dedicated bike lane would make my commute faster since I wouldn't get stuck behind bicycles. However, I still oppose it because I feel the pain of those residents looking for parking and I'm willing to share the roads with bicycles as a result. I think that kind of perspective should amount to something.

Question: If a resident doesn't have off-street parking, that resident/homeowner may have to park several blocks from their home to accommodate cyclists travelling through Somerville? There has to be a compromise. My daughter and son-in-law have 4 children - haven't seen a bike yet to accommodate 6 people and there are times when walking is not an option. As for cyclists being intimidated by cars and/or hurt, there are cyclists who pay no attention to the 'rules of the road' and contribute to accidents and injuries. Not everyone rides a bike to and from work nor should anyone be forced to do so. It is a choice. How many of our elected officials or planners cycle to work. Seems to me City Hall parking lot is always full of 'City Hall permit parking' only

Hi John,

I'm sorry to hear you were squeezed out of Somerville! I think city living presents a challenge to anyone trying to raise kids without the benefit of off-street parking. I know a lot of new families move to other locations because they prefer easier parking, better schools, and bigger homes, but I agree that it's frustrating when you like a community to feel like you have to leave.

I don't think this is an "all" for bicycles. I think the proposal is to provide relief to Beacon Street residents through time limits on non-Beacon Street residents. Currently, over half of the cars parked in the area during the evening belong to people who are not residents of Beacon Street.

I'm no expert on property value impacts. However, it's certainly no surprise that a property without off-steet parking in a dense area would be priced lower than a similar property that has either off-street parking or a property that is located in a less dense part of the city with more on-street parking. But those aren't really "comps" then because the properties have different amenities. It seems like this proposal would preserve access to parking for residents, so I'm not sure I follow how this would decrease property values. If anything, I would think a safer, more attractive, and bike and pedestrian friendly street would increase value for local residents, but again, I'm no expert.

Rob

What people can't seem to get through their thick skulls is that we already have a fair and compromising system in place. Bicycle and drivers share the road. If a bicycle rider doesn't feel safe, then work to educate both drivers and bicycle riders of the rules of the road, don't just remove cars for the equation. ....

Rob,
To clarify on the property values, this was not a comparison of on street to off street. We compared condos with on street parking in neighborhoods with ample residential parking and my neighborhood with limited on street parking for residents, due to the fact that it was a business district with a majority of spots metered. So when you remove parking options you turn an area with ample parking into an area like the one I lived in. I'm guessing our location was better than these others given that we were close to restaurants, buses, etc. Yet the value was less. Like I said, this was my direct experience. You are free to think what you like, but it's not how it played out for my family. It would be nice to see real numbers here since everyone keeps throwing that information out as if it were fact.

If we could have afforded a home with off street parking, I am 100% sure we would have stayed. This was our only problem with Somerville.

I would like to know what percentage of the people we are addressing here with the bicycle improvements. Is this like 5% of the Somerville population? And just for the record I do bicycle, but not on SOmerville streets anymore. But this is getting crazy. I am sure my father is not going to be able to peddle using his crutches.

Cycling improvements are necessary, but eliminating 111 parking spots? That's ridiculous. Look at what improvements were made in Union Square: They ADDED parking spots (not just more, but safer too), AND created safe cycling lanes. Unless they can figure out another place for cars to park, they need to rethink the way they are going to make these cycling improvements.

The bikes are coming. MBTA ridership surge could overwhelm the system: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/06/14/surging_mbta_ridership_could_overwhelm_system_report_warns/.
Car travel is not likely to improve. Bikes are one answer. And Beacon is "the city's most heavily used bike corridor" and so the perfect place to promote them [http://www.somervillema.gov/departments/ospcd/transportation-and-infrastructure/beacon-street].

I believe this is a big win for the local economy. Who are these riders? Based on my rides, I see many headed to work/school in Kendall. If the Boston Metro is to continue to be a desirable location for high tech workers, then it will continue to be desirable to the likes of Google and biotech.

It's possible a cycle track is too much. Maybe there are less intrusive ways of promoting bikes on Beacon. Certainly it will need ample crosswalks, just like a road.

Based on the city's study, these 111 spots are way underutilized. +1 on Rob's points.

As to property values - suggestions they'll go up:
Bicyclists are better consumers: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/03/23/why-bicyclists-are-better-customers-than-drivers-for-local-business/
A bike parking spot generates more spending than a car spot: http://thisbigcity.net/how-bike-lanes-can-boost-the-economy/
Spending on bike infrastructure yields more jobs: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/01/07/combat-joblessness-stripe-a-bike-lane/

Resident. I bike, walk, T & drive.

Unfortunately I have not been able to attend either of these meetings. As a resident (on the Cambridge side, full disclosure) who walks, runs, drives, and bikes on Beacon every day, I believe these proposed changed are for the better. This is especially true in terms of safety for cyclists and pedestrians. We can all work together to ensure safety of our less able community members is also ensured. Safety trumps parking in my book!

But Benjamin, nobody is suggesting making one whole side of the street disabled parking (let alone "all" of it). It seems to me that the burden should be on the people who are seeking to make one whole side of the street less accessible to people with mobility issues to prove why the able-bodied cannot be accommodated without further limiting those who already have a tough enough time getting around in this town.

I am a Somerville resident. I either bike or drive on Beacon st. everyday and both are terrifying. This is long overdue and I welcome the proposed improvements.
I question how many of those 111 spots are actually used. When I pass through I always see an excess of empty parking spots on Beacon st. especially the section from Washington st. to Porter Sq.

I agree with Michael, safety trumps parking in my book!

LSG, bicycle safety is promoted lamely and sporadically in Somerville; bike enforcement is neither promoted nor practiced (check out Union Square sidewalks)...

Wait, the cycletrack will end at MUSEUM STREET?!?!

This is the most dangerous section of road for bikers in the STATE. Adding a protected bike lane for 3/10ths of a mile will do nothing! If you are going to do it, do it right and have the cycletrack run the complete stretch of Beacon street to the Cambridge line. If you can't do that, then don't bother and just pave the road already.

This plan is a joke!

All,
1. Parking study that this plan is premised on: conducted first on May 19th, well after Harvard, Lesley and Tufts concluded finals. Still think the study is valid?
2. Cycle safety: in the 28 months concluding April 2012 there were 36 cycle accidents on Beacon St. Of those over 60% took place at intersections. Of the remaining 20 odd accidents, most took place closer to Inman Square. So how does this cycle track at the opposite end of the street where few cycle accidents occur improve safety?
3. Business will increase if cycle tracks go in: the City of Somerville bolsters this claim with reference to studies of other cities. My personal favorite is the study of 9th Ave. in Manhattan. I doubt it would be possible to find a more disingenuous and inapt comparison than 9th Ave. Manhattan and Beacon Street.

This latter point, however, is typical of the level of analysis engaged in by the Planning Dept. of Somerville. The plan is based on faulty premises, skewed analysis with holes in it you can drive a truck through, and a genuine lack of care or concern for the people who will be most severely impacted by it, the residents and businesses of Beacon Street. The City's shame for the its ham-fisted and unenlightened piece of urban planning should be outdone only by its shame for how it continues to cram this plan down the Beacon Street neighborhood's throat. This is not how representative governance is supposed to work. It's a disgrace.

Speaking as a resident and a believer in evidence-based discussion, I feel compelled to address Mr. Ruccio's points:
1. The school year may not affect parking demand. Harvard undergrads live on campus and do not own cars. Grad students and staff work year-round. Lesley's undergrads may have an impact if any are Somerville residents who dump their cars on Beacon Street. Tufts is far away.
2. Yes, ideally the entire stretch of Beacon Street will have cycletracks for the greatest safety benefit. Protected cycletracks prevent dooring crashes, one of the most common and severe types. Dooring killed a woman in Central Square several years ago--she was thrown under an MBTA bus. Since many bicycle crashes go unreported, police numbers also lowball reality.
3. The increase in business revenue from bicyclists is well supported for several business types, based on data from Portland, Oregon (less dense than Somerville), Toronto and San Francisco. Increased revenue was measured for convenience stores, bars, and restaurants; whereas driving and walking customers spent more at supermarkets. Over 21,000 people were surveyed in the Portland study: http://tinyurl.com/aqnugtn
Locally, 71 parking spaces were removed on Mass Ave in the Back Bay a year ago for bike lanes. Businesses protested and threatened to sue Boston. A year later, bike lanes are in, everyone's still in business, and I've heard at least one owner openly endorse the bike lanes. Can we learn from this?

Evidence based discussion? Alex you're making tons of assumptions. There hasn't been an actual parking study released yet that takes into account when the schools were in session to rule out the effect of colleges (the current study LIES about doing this). And as someone who knows quite a few grad students (some of them at Tufts!) who have cars registered, live here, that both work and go to school, you're certainly lacking "evidence" in re: student car dumping. The city even states on the T&P website that there is a parking shortage. I have to street park my car and can tell you it's certainly much easier to find on-street residential parking in the Summer - working stiffs like me often go on these things called "vacation" during this time as year as well. Also as someone used to bike to work everyday on Beacon and still bikes it regularly, I find the proposed design for a raised cycletrack to be not ideal for cycling - there are just too many driveways and intersections that the track will have to dip down to cross. NATCO even recommends NOT having a raised track on streets with tons of driveways and intersections because of this. Flat track or extended bike lanes make much more sense, especially since the highest cycling volume areas in the current proposed design will be just regular bike lanes anyway. And the Mass Ave comparison for businesses is ridiculous - Beacon is much less commercial and has far less pedestrian traffic and public transit options than Mass Ave.

A couple of notes here. The door problem applies to motorists as well as bikers. When I am doing either I have this habit of watching for heads in cars. Granted you can't always see the shorter people but you just have to drive the right speed and watch out. In taking and old street and trying to convert it I can't help but notice Assembly square wit all the housing being added and this being built new why these things would not be a part of the new layout and construction. That would be the time to do it. Then maybe they will lose the revenue from the housing they are bulding from that space that they would lose. And contrary to the neighborhodd and how much it will hurt it and how much the people do not want this it will most likely be built due to the fact that Somervile does cater to small intrest groups and not so much as to what the residents want. More so in this administration than in all the others. I have been here that long, I know.

Car dependent people should just face reality and move out to the 'burbs. Let people who walk, bike, and take transit live in Somerville.

Car owners, stop asking your non-driving neighbors to pay higher property, sales and income taxes so you can use a minor arterial street as your personal free parking space. This is America, not the USSR. Want socialized parking... move to China.