Allegheny County and Sandcastle Waterpark are expected to announce an agreement within days that will allow completion of the last missing piece of a biking and hiking trail linking Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10194/1072356-455.stm#ixzz0tYIbMHqr
Finally, indeed.
From the article, it sounds like the new ownership (which took over last year?) changed course relatively quickly from the previous owners? I admit, I've not followed the details of this discussion, but either:
1) The current owners realize there's lots of bad press to be had if they hold out any more
or
2) They genuinely realize that the trail will be a Good Thing(tm) for the park.
I was more confident the trail would finally be completed after new ownership took over last year.It's great news!!
Hoody-freakin hoo!
New bridges going up... bikes on trains... Sandcastle getting their heads out of their you-know-whats... what's goin' on here? Are the planets aligned or somethin?
now that's how I like to start my day, with awesome news like that. Tomorrow lets make the good news involve saving puppies too.
New bridges going up... bikes on trains... Sandcastle getting their heads out of their you-know-whats... what's goin' on here? Are the planets aligned or somethin?
My sentiments exactly! This is such a great development.
What better destination for a bike ride on a hot day than a water park? The opportunities to gain business from passing groups of riders are huge, and it's surprising that the old investment group didn't realize this.
I'm seeing "Lycra days" in their future...
I agree with Ascobi.I know I, and others, will stop by after a long ride on a hot day.The previous owner(s) are really stupid! Total morons!! Having more access,not only by cars, but now by bikes, will most likely get more people into the water park.I would also stop by Kennywood accept the trail access to the amusement park will be seperated by a cliff.My point is, making more and easier ways to get to a place of ones establishment,adds revenue to your buisness!! Not everyone has a car. If I had a buisness I would be overjoyed with also a bike trail going by so I could get more cyclists and walkers into my place.
if this really happens i am immediately planning my trip to dc that i have been putting off planning
The new owners are Spanish if that has anything to do with it.
I would imagine Sandcastle will get a lot of bike traffic from the Southside next year.
the new owner is actually from california. so that might explain it too, hence this quote:
""We're thrilled to be on the trail," Mr. Judy said in a phone interview from California on Monday. "It's been a very high priority for me to get this done." He said the park owners did not want to be the only missing link."
oh my bad, i guess he is just representing them. still.
Lets hope the work being done on the southside trail that causes it to close during the week is done soon.
Total anecdotal evidence, but I was once bike
touring through germany and totally stopped at a
water park that I happened past on a bike path. I
hit it hard.
BikeFest ride to Sandcastle, anyone?
(or as soon as the trail's officially open)
YEAH! DUDE!
They have some sort of jitterbug dance at Sandcastle on Sunday nights. I've never beent here, cause I haven't wanted to give them money I had to work for, but I feel the need to drop them a dime or two.
I think bicyclists should FLOCK to Sandcastle.
Can you help me visualize this? So now (or until recently) you ride from the South Side Works, then on the lookalike Baldwin Trail, and then people take a risk and walk/ride on the rocky railroad access road under the Glenwood Bridge, and cut across the Sandcastle parking lot to the Waterfront, and can continue to to the southeast from there. Will the new trail run right next to the train tracks there?
hmm... someone might want to warn sandcastle that they may need to up their bike rack collection? I envision a dual function sandcastle logo / rack sitting in front. Though their "branding" people might not like that. Maybe a few iconic sandcastle items in sturdy metal outline kind of racks could be cool. Sunglasses, bikinis, water slide, etc. That would be very cool.
ieverhart, that's what I was asking about in the other thread about the bridges.
What better destination for a bike ride on a hot day than a water park? The opportunities to gain business from passing groups of riders are huge, and it's surprising that the old investment group didn't realize this.
They will not make money from bikes. Not enough to pay for a parking spot.
I think there will be good opportunities for bikes and water.
But that is 1) only very minor revenue for Sandcastle and 2) only if the bike trend keeps going.
And even then, it would benefit them more from "turn-of-the-19th-century" type publicity hype than direct revenues.
They don't want to hold out on doing the right thing. Good for them.
They don't want the bad publicity they would soon start getting for obstruction. Understandable.
But the moeny they might make from bikers? Extremely unlikely to exceed the revenues they would get from a dozen more parking spaces.
The thing that could happen with unsupervised groups of 13-15 year-olds? They would gladly pay much more than the expected revenues from bicyclists to avoid those headaches.
Sure there counerarguments to what I'm saying here. Those counterarguments? Kinda like "If they put out a cup asking peopel to donate quarters for needy CEOs, they would surely make some money!" True enough. But...
Their business is motor vehicles with families that drop enough money in afternoon to buy 3 or 4 bikes.
Transportation bikers will rarely, if ever, drop a few C-notes for an afternoon of manufactured fun. We're too DIY.
Unless the percentage of trips done by bike increases from 0.9% to maybe 20% or 25%, they ain't gonna get beans from bikes. Don't kid yourself.
They are doing the right thing for publicity and political capital, not for cold, hard cash. Good for them.
i can't wait for my first trip to sandcastle
i have never been to sandcastle. i am way more likely to go if a bike path leads me there. woo.
I'd guess the trail beneath the Glenwood Bridge will run a little north of the gravel area next to the railroad tracks. But as far as I know they haven't publicly released any maps detailed enough to show the exact path. They've just said they have an agreement with the owners of the land north of the tracks to build a connection between the Baldwin Borough trail and Sandcastle, once the agreement with Sandcastle is final.
Like ejwme said, yeah they are going to need to install bike racks or something. Looks like car parking is $6 a day...and boat docking is actually FREE...so would they make bike parking free too? http://www.sandcastlewaterpark.com/admission.php#prices
Mick, I can totally see those families riding their bikes on the South Side Trail continuing on for a couple more miles to get to Sandcastle. And I, for one, who have never been to Sandcastle (like Erok and Caitlin), will be happy to make a trip or two a season now that it's more accessible. So the amount they make off of us may be negligible, but who knows if there is a new growing market out there with cyclists (maybe not so much commuters, but certainly with trail users)? Also, a new ticket holder is a new ticket holder, regardless of the parking issue.
Though I do agree, this was probably a good will publicity move... either way, we win and they win too.
Sandcastle reaching capacity has nothing to do with parking but how many people will actually fit in the park. I think for Southside and Oakland residents, improved accessibility to the park via the trail will sell a few more season passes. If you're a student it's not exactly a walk in the park to get to the waterfront.
I see kids and families from Southside, Homestead, and other neighborhoods biking to Sandcastle who wouldn't have gone there before. More visits. Less hassle.
And when bridges are refurbished to allow bicyclists to safely bike across the Mon at the Glenwood Bridge and the Carrie Furnace Hot Metal Bridge upstream from the Waterfront, people from neighborhoods north and east of the river, like Squirrel Hill, Swissvale, and Braddock, will be able to get there much more easily, too. The Nine Mile Run Trail got a new bridge in May, so it's much easier to bike to the north end of the Glenwood Bridge from neighborhoods like Homewood now than it was a few months ago.
Why spend 30 minutes in stop & go traffic in a car when you can bike to Sandcastle in 15 minutes?
Exactly. There is so much potential for the Duck Hollow trail to connect more of Pittsburgh.
I'm more likely to park at Panther Hollow and ride via trails to Sandcastle with my kids, than driving through Homestead and dealing with all of that crap.
My kids go nuts for the "dancing water fountain" at REI. Their heads will probably explode over Sandcastle.
Good hot weather ride - water feature tour - PPG Place, Troy Hill water park (?), North Side riverfront, Station Square plaza, South side works, someday Sandcastle.
It has been a good 2 weeks for trail news!
- 2 New bridges have been erected.
- Amtrak will be starting roll on / off service next summer
- and now sandcastle
How about a group ride to Kennywood?
i'm down for a flock to sandcastle
Ok, the dancing water fountain in that REI plaza is just about the coolest thing in the world. I completely embarrassed myself on a first (and last) date there playing with it (I'd never seen one before, it was 87 degrees, and I was on a cheesecake high). He thought it was immature. I figured if I drove, it didn't matter if I soaked my own car seats. Well, it would have been embarrassing if I had any dignity.
I'd flock to Sandcastle. I like the water feature tour ride, that's a fantastic lineup. Sandcastle's done a wonderful thing.
Immature? What a tool. 
as season pass holders, my roomates and i would ride to sandcastle like every freaking day. this is awesome. we're thinking about writing letters "as concerned season-pass holders" to encourage them to actually go through with it.
Totally disagree with Mick. I,my wife, and 3 children,who never go to Sandcastle, will often go now when we cycle by.I go trail riding with 12 others from work and in my neighborhood who will now go there on a warm day when cycling near Sandcastle.I believe there will be a lot of others like myself who will now go much more often when walking or cycling by.
You're right Raphael!! My next door neighbor and my cousin will be buying a season pass once the trail is complete.I will most likely do the same for my family!! Many others will also be buying season passes when they complete the trail.Don't tell me this won't help Sandcastle revenue.
Seems to me that if they replaced two of those $6/day parking spaces with bike racks that could hold 50 bikes, for free, they'd be screaming with delight at all the business it would gain them. I can see them in the 2012, 2013 seasons saying "Why the hell didn't we do this 10 years earlier?"
Heh. Seriously. I am willing to bet that in the first couple months of next season they will have bikes locked to trees and they will either a: put up a sign telling people not to do that, or b: install some bike racks.
@rsprake: Or C: Charge $3 to lock up a bike.
I'd pay $3 for a bike locker. I'd pay $5. If there were no other options and I was feeling rich, maybe $6, but probably not. $3 for a lock on a rack? Not.
Aside from my quarterly bike locker rental, I've only ever paid for bike parking in China. In Beijing they have giant corrals on the street and some guy there watching the bikes. It all seemed pretty sketch to me, but there were a couple hundred bikes inside so I figured it must be okay. You pay the guy 1 yuan when you go to pick up your bike. It was around $0.11 at the time. It wasn't really bike valet, because you didn't have a ticket or anything. I guess the guy was just there to make sure nobody loaded your bike in a truck, or started stripping it down or something.
I'd pay an amusement park a $2-3 if they had bike valet.
Raphael as season pass holders, my roomates and i would ride to sandcastle like every freaking day. this is awesome. we're thinking about writing letters "as concerned season-pass holders"
Wow!
I would never have guessed that a regular poster here was a season ticket holder. I'd be tickled if I were wrong about this.
Questions: How much does a season pass cost? Do you have to pay for rides in addition, or does the pass cover everything? Do they have a lap pool?
It would be great if you wrote to them. Any viable business pays attention to communication from their customers. A letter from you would mean more to them than letter from non-customers
My wife and I have Kennywood season passes this year.
Sandcastle has a great 2 for $99 deal. That covers everything but inner tube rentals for the wave pool and the go-carts. It's a pretty great place to hang out near the river, have a beer or two, and generally just enjoy the summer and keep cool.
New article, says the deal is "only days away" (and all the other cool stuff that happened this week):
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10198/1073410-139.stm?cmpid=news.xml
can we for real have a flock to sandcastle day? i haven't been down that way in a few years, but from what i recall, you can take the south side trail all the way to the waterfront through sandcastle when the gates are open during normal hours of operation. is this correct?
hell yes. with a stop at paige's!
YESSSS. paige's. don't think we'd be able to get on/off the trail there because of a fence along the side of the road. we'd just have to take carson all the way to homestead and people FLY on that stretch....but safety in numbers.
"you can take the south side trail all the way to the waterfront through sandcastle..."
the section from the end of the SS trail under the Glenwood bridge is doable with fat tires, but it's mostly large fist size stone. I usually walk my skinny tires through since it's only about 300 yards or so. Very easy to do.
As for ice cream - be careful crossing the tracks & get in line!
What or Who is Paige's???
The ice cream place under the bridge as seen on a few Rick Sebak documentaries. Great place!
i had no idea the trail was cut off from paige's - i'd never ridden it down there. too bad.
i love paige's cause it's very much the sort of place that was quite abundant and i used to frequent all the time back home when i was younger - the 1950s style ice cream stand.
@Noah
There's a gate in the trail fence right across from Page's (it's never been locked in 9+ years) and is just before the pump house construction and weekday trail closure. I cross here all the time to go up Beck's Run road and have never had any issues. There is a set of double RR tracks that is very active, but sight lines are good, just be careful. Use the trail to the left of the building after crossing the tracks and you will be right at the traffic light.
Nice, thanks for the advice! Paige's here I come.
happy noms to you!
Update from Jon Schmitz on the missing link between southside and homestead.
This kind of news is precisely why I hate top-down government decision making. The development of these trails shouldn't be shrouded in secrecy because counsel says so, or because non-profits are courting anonymous donors.
If we want a trail, we don't need a sugar daddy or mommy with political ties to bank roll it. Get policy legislated to recognize bike trails as a viable commuting alternative worthy of Gas Tax funding or just pass a friggin hat for mass donations.
A $3.1 million trail segment funded through mass donations? So we all pitch in, and then we just have to find the other $3,099,000 someplace?
And what secrecy? A reporter contacted the county and the ATA, and they provided status info. Are you complaining that they didn't volunteer this info until someone asked them?
Anyway, roads funded by gas taxes don't seem to receive any more step-by-step construction publicity than this trail is getting (probably less). Nor do they seem immune to construction delays. So I doubt funding trails through the gas tax would change those aspects.
Thanks for posting the update.
It's just frustrating - and wondering if that number is three years old.
@Sloaps - did someone hijack yur user name to post those comments under the John Schmitz link? It just doesn't sound like you, to me.
1. This kind of news is precisely why I hate top-down government decision making.
How is top down goverment decision making reflected in the article or the situation? A property owner has been unwilling to cooperate with trail development. A few months ago it was reported that progress had been made, and property owner now appears to be cooperative. Funding remains an issue, and the projected target date of 11-11-11 may not be met (for financial and scheduling reasons). I don't see top down government decision making reflected there.
2.The development of these trails shouldn't be shrouded in secrecy because counsel says so, or because non-profits are courting anonymous donors.
What secrecy? That Sandcastle has been uncooperative is not a secret. That trail construction costs money is not a secret. That Sandcastle would prefer that construction not interfere with their "season" should be presumed. To what great "conspiracy" are you referring?
3.If we want a trail, we don't need a sugar daddy or mommy with political ties to bank roll it.
Sugar Daddies and Sugar Mommies often work faster and more effectively than either legislators or mass donations. We don't need them, but they played a large roll in the ability to get the Millvale Trail connection conceived, designed, funded and constructed in about 27 months.
4. Get policy legislated to recognize bike trails as a viable commuting alternative worthy of Gas Tax funding or just pass a friggin hat for mass donations.
Trails have been developed with Gas Tax funding. Transportation Enhancement funding has been used for trail development throughout western Pennsylvania. At this time, using gas tax revenue for ANYTHING other that bridge repair and basic road maintenance is next to impossible. You know that as well as I do. If you want to pass a hat for mass donations, I am certain that Bike Pittsburgh or Friends of the Riverfront would be happy to take cash or checks.
Sorry. I am tired, and was able to resist responding to Timito re: car ownership. I couldn't resist responding to this, too.
P.S. Hats off to Linda Boxx, for her OPENNESS in saying that the goal of completing the trail segment around Sandcastle by 11-11-11 may not be feasible -- more than 7 months before that target date.
All reasonable points, Sara. Admittedly, not my most thoughtful post.
"I am tired, and was able to resist responding to Timito re: car ownership"
If only the rest of the forum had your constitution...
Here is some news:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11101/1138518-455.stm
- Duqusne to the Waterfront is supposed to open mid-June.
- Sandcastle / Scrapyard section should be open by 11-11-11
I rode through the Sandcastle and scrapyard property on Sunday. Other than some spray paint marking a water line there was no sign of anything having been done yet. 11/11/11 is a dream.
a vaportrail?
I think having it truly done to the waterfront is going to put that much more pressure on things. Maybe not all good though. I, for one, know that with that link done, the slight bit on railroad ballast past sandcastle suddenly becomes trivial. Anyone who has a bike that made it across all the towpath will have little problem on a mile with a few small rocks. Could increased traffic like this be bad…?
A positive thing, and I think a sign of goodwill to balance the decades of intransigence, would be for Sandcastle to allow cyclists to traverse their parking lot while the trail is being finalized. I few "share the road" signs and some sharrows markers would be wholly sufficient.
It'll never happen, though.
That's what makes it so frustrating to me. There is already a low traffic, low speed road that Sandcastle uses to connect the parking lots.
wait, why can't bikes cycle across their parkinglot?
Because it's theirs and they are presumable worried about liability and insurance.
but cars can drive across their parkinglot?
Yeah, a place that serves alcohol and sends people down 80 foot water slides is worried about some bikes crossing the parking lot. Nutty, eh?
FWIW, I’ve crossed Sandcastle’s parking lot lots of times during the summer when they are open and have never been approached by staff/security. The only issue I’ve encountered is whether the gate located closest to town is going to be open or not, and even then it’s only an issue in the late evenings. Of course I ride through trying to be polite and courteous, saying hello to the parking attendants, etc.
I could be mistaken, but, from a liability perspective, Sandcastle's arse is covered if you are technically a trespasser. So, they may well be happy/willing to let people pass "illegally."
Their signs prohibit all through traffic, but I've never heard of any cyclist not being allowed through when they're open. The parking attendants seem to have no problem with it.
Steven, the parking attendants may not be paid enough to have any problems with anything.
Somehow I'd envisioned people on bikes getting harrassed - if it's not happening, then it's not really an issue. I'd hate for someone to make it all the way to Sandcastle from DC and then get some guy in an orange vest "just doing his job" turning them around or toward roads they're not prepared to ride on.
I've been harassed going through the Sandcastle lot. Threatened with arrest by some mustachioed man even. It's been a couple of years, but it happened enough times that I avoid cutting through the lot.
I know this has been mentioned before but their liability concerns can be addressed by the Recreational Use of Land and Water Act, title 68, section 477 that protects landowners from liability when they allow public access to their property for recreational use.
http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/brc/publications/Pubs/RUWLA.pdf
The tendency is to apply this ruling to undeveloped land but, as a temporary measure while a formalized trail is being built, I imaging this could apply.
I could be mistaken, but, from a liability perspective, Sandcastle's arse is covered if you are technically a trespasser. So, they may well be happy/willing to let people pass "illegally."
probably not. my understanding is that if they are aware that people are likely to trespass, they are just as responsible for their land as they would be if it were open to the public.
If they take a stance and tell you that what you are doing is illegal (as Norfolk Southern does on the Millvale to Sharpsburg path), they are retaining their provate interest in the property. If they turn their heads and make no comment, the argument can be made for a de facto public easement. If you are on their property and they have mad eit clear that you are there illegally, they should have no liability in case of accident -- but they would still be sued if anything happens, and then the question of liability is left in the hands of the courts (and/or juries). Most corporations would simply prefer to eliminate the possibility of any lawsuit against them.
Kordite: If the courts have determined that the act you cited doesn't apply to land like Sandcastle's (and your cite seems to establish pretty clearly that it wouldn't), how could it be made to apply, even as a temporary measure? Seems like it would take an act of the legislature, no? This existing law wouldn't protect Sandcastle at all, as far as I can see, temporarily or not.
In fact, once the trail is in place, it looks to me like the act still wouldn't apply. It fails 4 of the 5 tests: it's a developed property (with signs and fences), it's not in a rural area, it's enclosed, and it's used for Sandcastle's business. (I can't tell if it's considered a large property, the fifth test.) I guess only a judge can decide for certain, given the vague rules, but it seems Sandcastle would have great difficultly convincing anyone the bike path meets these tests.
Perhaps I was wrong to read "courts have tended to read the Act narrowly" to be less than an absolute. It's that "tended" statement that implies that there have been cases where they have not interpreted it narrowly. One would need to investigate the entirety of case law to see if this particular situation has already been covered or if it is unique. I suspect that given the easement and the temporary nature of the parking lot bypass it would be more to the unique side.
And, of course, the easement takes the trail out of this act altogether. It is legally no longer Sandcastle's responsibility. I am wondering how that might apply to the temporary parking lot bypass.
I suspect that the answer, whether legally justified or not, will be what it has been. "No trespassing but we're not going to tell our gate employees about this or, if we do, we're not going to pay them enough to care."
