BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

Thanks much for the updates and the photos gordon. Looking forward to attending one of these sessions.

Thank you very much Godon. I am glad to know they already have an approved plan to build a bridge connecting Duck Hollow and Hazelwood trails. Did the representative from Riverlife mention whether funding for right-of-way, final design or construction has been identified and available? If not, I'd like to help the process along if possible.

Will this bridge they are planning to build be next to the Glenwood bridge??? Wouldn't it be just easier to build a bicycle ramp that leads to both sides of the Glenwood bridge??

It might be easier but once you look closely at the existing Glenwood Bridge and its sidewalks and structure, it might be easier to build a new separate bike/ped structure to cross the tracks. I'd like to see these shelved plans. They ought to be available for comment at some point.

@mjost7 and cycleguy: I'm afraid I don't have more information on the Duck Hollow connector project. You could contact RiverLife or better yet, ask their representatives at the next Open House meeting!

Please write to Darla Cravotta about duck hollow. She was very kind in responding to me. This area is my pet peeve. With the closure of hazelwood trail, cycling on 2nd avenue, especially the one lane outbound is very dangerous. Also, it's just amazing that duck hollow just ends. It just ends. Now we are forced to illegally walk up to and over the tracks. Seriously, even a little wooden inclined bridge over the tracks just to get us to 2nd ave would be an improvement. Ok easier said than done I know. Build it with Legos. People living in Swissvale, Edgewood, etc don't have many practical options except going all the way to rankin bridge and waterfront/south side trails which adds miles and isn't safe either between the bridge and waterfront enterance. Or climbing Forbes to squirrel hill, which is tougher than one would think. Sorry rant over. I'm just on this patch so often and I really miss the hazelwood part.

It's really too bad improvements couldn't be made for cyclists to get across the Glenwood bridge. Seems like such a huge waste of time,effort, and especially money,(probably in the 10's or even 100's of thousand dollars),having to build a new bridge next to another we already have,(Glenwood Bridge). I will try to go to the nest planning meeting and hopefully talk with Darla Cravotta.

I might be at the JCC meeting. I'll bring it up. Is there a way to ask questions?

@Italianblend: Did you mean the Open House meetings? It's more like a poster presentation at a science conference. You just walk up to the persons next to the posters and ask questions.

thanks for the review gordon. With the Open House format, there are panels explaining how the planning process works, and the ability to provide some input into the goals and some specifics. The new bike plan will help put an official seal of approval on moving forward, as well as make it easier for the city to look for funding. the last plan was published in 1999 by an intern, and for the most part is complete. there's still 2 opportunities to attend July 19, 2016 6:00pm – 8:00pm fb Jewish Community Center / 5738 Forbes Ave / Pittsburgh, PA 15217 July 25, 2016 6:00pm – 8:00pm fb Pittsburgh Bike Share / 3328 Penn Ave / Pittsburgh, PA 15201 http://localhost/2016/06/22/city-creating-new-bike-plan-announces-community-meeting-dates/

also note with the open house format, you don't have to stay the whole time. you can just show up, add your input and leave at any time during the hours

I am glad I attended the one in Manchester/North Side last night. I was able to add some detail to other people's suggestions concerning Duck Hollow, which isn't even north, and neither am I. I put in a couple of good words at the HealthyRide post, talking up one of my suggestions for siting a new station. I specifically asked that a "hovenring" be constructed at the Saline-Greenfield-Irvine-Second-JailTrail junction. I think I enlightened at least one person to the notion of needing to do something beyond bike lanes. I explained that adding bike lanes may help the stated objective of getting more people on bikes, but it does nothing for the hundreds of miles of streets in the city, and roads outside the city, that do not now and will not ever have bike lanes. We ride there, too, and there, the objective should not be to get more bikes on the street but to make it safe to ride. That will require several things, all of them outside the purview of this meeting: speed enforcement, driver education, cyclist education, maintenance of road surfaces, and more than lip service to cyclists' needs when roads are redone. One additional constructive concern: In the section where we were to decide where to spend city road money, there was nothing about reconstructing the city steps. Money for that has to come out of that same budget we were deciding how to parcel. If it categorized under one of the half dozen slots, it was not obvious how. What I suggested is that the city (City Planning? not sure which department) raise its voice to call for a separate funding source for getting that work done over the next few years, separate from money for paving, bike lanes, and everything else they were talking about. As has been pointed out elsewhere, a single intersection in Cranberry is being upgraded from a double left turn lane to a triple left turn lane, at the cost of over $7 million. That money could rebuild every staircase in the city. How did Cranberry get that money? They asked. Are we asking?

@stu - We asked for some assistance with the city steps, to develop a program to sustainably fund their upkeep. http://localhost/2016/03/17/pittsburgh-selected-for-a-program-to-figure-out-how-to-fund-city-owned-steps/

Also, this is for the bike plan, not the ped plan. just saying.

The final meeting is tonight: July 25, 2016 6:00pm – 8:00pm fb Pittsburgh Bike Share / 3328 Penn Ave / Pittsburgh, PA 1520