Sidewalk isn't the same as a sidewalk level bike lane. If biking on the sidewalk, you have to yield to pedestrians. If you're biking in a sidewalk level bike lane, pedestrians should yield to you.

That still shows a 109 second slow zone from North Station to Community College northbound. If it's been removed, it happened between 5 (when I rode and it was still there) and 7pm (when op posted). In that case, it'll probably show on the dashboard either tomorrow or the next day.

Edit - it's now tomorrow, and the dashboard does in fact show the speedup!

So, it's not safe to block the bike lane. It's also not safe to block the road. Where would you put them?

Now you see how the people using the bike lane feel?

There are two full traffic lanes. When a car is stopped in the driving lane, ambulances will use the other one. The lanes are fairly large, so there's even room for traffic to move out of the way of the ambulance if needed. Seems pretty simple to me. How is it handled on existing narrow one lane streets?

Blocking the bike lane puts people in danger. Blocking a traffic lane causes inconvenience. It's not the same.

Sure. They can block a traffic lane.

I 100% trust developers to follow the profits. If people want parking, it won't be profitable to build housing without parking, and they will build parking.

People who need a car will rent an existing apartment with parking spots. People who don't, can rent an apartment without spots. If there's more people who need parking than people who don't, then developers will continue to build parking. And people will park in the off street spots their apartment provides.

Thank you!

Hey op, could you please post a link to that tweet? I'd like to have a look at the link inside the tweet.

Who is saying no cars ever? I certainly am not saying that, and I doubt many other people are either. There's plenty of parking already, and plenty of people who live in Cambridge perfectly fine without a car.

If not having a car is really that big of a problem, developers will simply continue to build parking. Because otherwise they wouldn't be able to sell their new buildings. It wouldn't take a government mandate. If not having a car is OK, then forcing developers to build parking is wasteful. It just takes up so much space that could be used for anything else instead.

If that is the case, it won't take a government mandate for developers to build parking spots. If there's demand for parking spots, then developers will build them, because they wouldn't be able to sell their properties otherwise. If there is no demand for parking spots, then it's wasteful to require them.

Cities having finite space is a great reason not to have parking minimums. We need more housing, not more wasted space.

What would your idea be to make it better then? I'm open to hearing about other ideas.

You must be very new to Reddit if that's the most negative comment you've ever seen.