I sent this email to the mayor's office. Am I the only one who thinks this is a bad design?
"Hello Mr. Roberts,
I have been riding my bike to work from Wilkinsburg to Oakland for the past fifteen years, year round. I was thrilled when bike lanes were added to Forbes Ave between Braddock and Dallas, and even more so when street cleaners kept them clean. The bike lanes on Wightman were also welcomed: a strip outside the parking lane that discouraged motorist from turning the street into a two lane road.
However, I and others (read the Bike Pgh posts) feel that the lane being constructed on Schenley Ave. from the main Carnegie Library to Phipps is ill-conceived at best and a nightmare at worst.
1. It is impractical to ride inbound from Squirrel Hill because there is no convenient or safe way to get to the lane from the CMU side.
2. It is impractical to ride outbound to Squirrel Hill because cyclist are blocked in by the row of parked cars–and I saw barriers being installed on my ride in this morning–and the stop sign by Phipps and the park welcome center. Cyclist like myself riding in that direction will just not take the bike lane, opting instead to ride with the traffic, now on a narrower road and thus unable to move over for cars to pass because there is no extra room.
3. It is impractical for two lanes of bike traffic: the lane is the size of a normal bike lane, but must be shared with two-way traffic and cyclist need to negotiate getting in and out of the lane without an adequate route.
4. It greatly slows motor traffic in all directions by adding a four-way stop intersection at Phipps and the Schenley Park welcome center. While well intended, a simple “yield to pedestrians” sign, like in front of the Pitt Student Union, would be sufficient in securing pedestrian and bike safety crossing at that intersection.
5. It endangers both pedestrians and cyclist in front of Phipps by making pedestrians cross in front of bikes as they come and go from their cars.
6. It removes much needed parking by eliminating all the spots in front of the Frick Fine Arts Building.
7. It will make special events at the Phipps a disaster waiting to happen. During special events at Phipps, valet parking is often provided to accommodate the crowd. In the past, valets would park cars around the corner and/or on the lawn in front of Phipps. Under the current configuration, this will be impossible without major inconveniences and accidents. There will be no way to safely carry out this operation.
8. The bike lanes will be difficult to keep clean of debris and snow, especially if barriers go up. This will force cyclist back on to the now much narrower road.
9. It will absolve cyclist from their primary task of being defensive riders. Making it easier to ride without consequence will have the opposite effect: it will encourage less attentiveness on the part of cyclists leading to more mishaps. (See #5 above, e.g.)
10. It will create greater animosity between motorists and cyclists. Most cyclists are motorists as well. We understand both sides. Most want safe conditions, not special treatment. The changes on Schenley Drive do not create safe conditions, and are harmful to both cyclist and motorist.
Bike lanes like this work well where there is a long stretch of road with high speed traffic and few intersections. It does not work on Schenley Drive. Regardless of the money provided for this initiative, everyone will be better served by a simple bike lane similar to that provided on Wightman: a three foot path between the parking lane and the traffic, that still requires bikes and cars to ride and drive responsibly and doesn’t impede either’s progress or enjoyment. As one who rides this route twice a day, 200+ days a year, I’ll probably end up riding with the cars, for my own safety."
followers
2014-08-28 14:52:37
I think you're right about the Squirrel Hill connection up Schenley Drive. To fix that the bike lanes would need to be extended up that way. I think that's quite doable. There's enough road space. But for now, I would continue taking the right lane of Schenley Drive downhill from Squirrel Hill.
I also agree that it slows down motor traffic, but I see this as a good thing. There are pedestrians crossing there all the time.
Also, BTW, a lot of the commentary written on the Bike Pittsburgh message board (including mine) was written as the lanes were being implemented, when parking was still being allowed. It doesn't make sense now that the bollards are up.
jonawebb
2014-08-28 14:55:29
Most of these are anecdotal at best.
5. It endangers both pedestrians and cyclist in front of Phipps by making pedestrians cross in front of bikes as they come and go from their cars.
Does it?
7. It will make special events at the Phipps a disaster waiting to happen.
Will it? We don't know that do we? They are smart people, they will figure it out.
8. The bike lanes will be difficult to keep clean of debris and snow, especially if barriers go up. This will force cyclist back on to the now much narrower road.
This is yet to be seen. The city plans on clearing these during the winter.
9. It will absolve cyclist from their primary task of being defensive riders. Making it easier to ride without consequence will have the opposite effect: it will encourage less attentiveness on the part of cyclists leading to more mishaps. (See #5 above, e.g.)
Really? Is that what's happening in DC, Chicago, or NYC?
10. It will create greater animosity between motorists and cyclists. Most cyclists are motorists as well. We understand both sides. Most want safe conditions, not special treatment. The changes on Schenley Drive do not create safe conditions, and are harmful to both cyclist and motorist.
Speak for yourself. I want special treatment.
rsprake
2014-08-28 15:05:53
I worry about the Blvd of the Allies terminus where the bike lanes go briefly up the on-ramp. I generally go straight and up to the oval at this intersection. I'm always afraid that a car will assume I am going to head up to Blvd of the Allies (the way the lanes now indicate) run me over when they try to go right and I try to go straight.
(To alleviate this, I usually try and take a place in the lane towards the end of the bridge where the sight lines are still good.)
andyc
2014-08-28 15:20:17
I would have vastly preferred to see this cycletrack on the opposite side of Panther Hollow Rd/Schenley Drive.
It would then have connected to the sidewalk/trail options to avoid the the freeway through the park, planted you on the better side of the road in terms of destinations (the playground and phipps are nice and all, but the museum, etc is the bigger attraction) and made connecting to/from schenley drive through the golf course easier.
I don't know if the notion was somehow that having a break in the cycletrack there in particular was problematic? I don't see the big picture the placement decision was a part of.
Maybe at some point we can just have it turned into a protected lane and get another going the opposite direction. One can dream.
byogman
2014-08-28 15:39:16
I'm guessing the plan is to connect to Overlook by going through Anderson Playground and the tunnel under the Blvd of the Allies. Car free.
jonawebb
2014-08-28 15:56:04
jonawebb: yes. +1 every thing you said. I've been (constructively I hope) critical, but mostly I'm glad that lane is there.
It's mostly okay. A little dodgy while folks get used to that all-way stop. I almost got hit this morning by someone impatiently squirting around a left turning driver coming from the golf course as i made the left from Schenley Drive. I even got in the lane and stopped legally beforehand. karma, i think not. The yield to pedestrians signs that were there previously did not work very well and you had to step out in front of cars to get them to stop. As for people walking from their cars across the bike lane, that happened to me yesterday. Not a huge deal, but another reason why i won't be descending on that side.
lee
2014-08-28 16:04:40
The google machine tells me that "the fear of anything new and different" is called "neophobia."
I don't know about other places, but Pittsburgh has a profound case of the Neophobia Blues.
(Disclaimer: I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV.)
atleastmykidsloveme
2014-08-28 16:40:06
"I’m guessing the plan is to connect to Overlook by going through Anderson Playground and the tunnel under the Blvd of the Allies. Car free."
I guess I still don't understand. Overlook is one way for cars right now. Presumably they're not trying to cut it off for them.
Anyways, if there were a car free way onto overlook I guess it would be a pretty ride and all, but its value as a transportation amenity is pretty limited because it's so wildly indirect. So I hope that's not a plan in lieu of doing something real about Panther Hollow road. Because then I cry the other type of tears.
byogman
2014-08-28 17:05:07
I assumed that the onward connection would be under the bridge, past the swim pool and onto Overlook. I also assume that things will be made to work for the runners and walkers.
Consider that this particular cycleway might not be for you , the regular commuter, but for recreational cyclists who are just tooling around. As a personal example, I avoid the North Side and the South Side trails; there's just too many strollers, runners, and whatever. It's much simpler to use the streets if you're trying to get someplace.
So let's just see how this works out (or not).
ahlir
2014-08-28 17:22:05
It would be easier to say oh well if this street weren't such a disaster. Even if the sidewalk "route" didn't suck so much that would be something.
byogman
2014-08-28 17:54:47
I think it's all wonderful.
If I remember way back when, when we first started paving some streets, nabobs were nattering - what's the point? These paved sections aren't all connected?
My uncle used to complain like hell, "I can't get everywhere I want to go on the pavement? And sometimes puddles form at the interface of the paved and unpaved, and I get very muddy!"
Imagine if we had stopped at the first two miles of paved roads because everything wasn't exactly perfect immediately, simultaneously, everywhere.
vannever
2014-08-28 18:18:08
Imagine, if you will, if they had scrapped the GAP when it only reached between OhioPyle and Confluence because the road crossing at RamCat was often used by local folks on their Quads and there were strong feelings! And you know, you're just never gonna get a trail through Kennywood! And there's no room for bikes on the Hot Metal Bridge! dern starry-eyed dreamers. scrap the whole damn thing, that's what they should have done.
vannever
2014-08-28 18:23:06
I'm not saying it's bad; but I am assuming resources are relatively scarce. Not that what I want can't happen eventually regardless, but I'm sorry, Overlook is a pretty silly thing to prioritize and to the extent that might eat funding that could be used to address a real transportation need, it's a setback.
byogman
2014-08-28 18:31:02
Some notes:
1. It really would have been nice to have the url for the powerpoint that was used to sell this stuff to the funders. On the other hand, this thread might not have come into existence. Such is life.
2. Many, if not most, of us use bikes as transportation. I do not consider this project as having to do with us. It's for all the other users of bicycles (even you and me! on a weekend, in our roles as recreational bikers).
I mean think about it: it's going to connect the "civic center" to a string of parks. If you're a regular commuter you have plenty of street options for Oakland to/from points east. You know what they are.
--> And, hey, coming home this evening I went up the cycl-a-way to get on to Schenley Dr through the golf course. Guess what? They've milled off the line demarcating the parking lane! And I had to go around some woman parked in the middle of the bike lanes. (Waiting, for something.)
Discuss.
ahlir
2014-08-28 19:05:41
I don't think these projects should have us as the focus, but efficient transportation facilities can easily double as recreational ones. It's not like the jail trail is all that scenic and it sure gets used plenty recreationally!
But there's hardly any transportation benefit from highly indirect routes, no matter how pleasant they are otherwise. So, less for us, more for the folks who wouldn't consider riding otherwise, but can we please focus efforts on efficient connections from A to B and then get two for the price of one?
And anyways, I'm sure this is being sold on the potential of it being a transportation facility. For sure, that's the only way it pays for itself over time. If it's built in such a way that logical continuation, its placement in the planned network means it can't fulfill that potential, it was a bad plan, sorry.
Done with my hijack on overlook now. Gah! Just so frustrated.
byogman
2014-08-28 21:24:07
There is a split in thinking in the bicycle design world, and the Schenley Drive implementation is its most obvious use case around here.
In one camp, we have the People For Bikes folks, who are the thinking and some of the money behind this push. Paint and bollards, and separated bike lanes, is the way to go, according to them, and the mayor and Bike-Pgh are going along with it.
In the other, while I don't know if a formal organization is behind it, but the most visible and active Facebook page is called "
Cyclists Are Drivers". Their thinking is that bikes and cars should use the same space. Sharrows, traffic calming, and routine lane-taking are the ways to go.
To be honest, I'm with the latter camp. It involves far less actual infrastructure changing, but tackling the far more difficult task of changing the assumed priority and sense of entitlement of the motoring community. It also involves training and retraining just about everyone who's on the road.
I said I'd hold out on judgment of these new lanes, and I'll hold myself to that. IIRC this has an 18-month evaluation period (I think I got that at one of the public meetings Steve Patchan had about the lanes before he left), so two winters and a whole year for everyone to get used to how they work.
Anything to get 10 times as many cyclists out there than are out there now, I'm not going to quibble about how we do it.
stuinmccandless
2014-08-28 22:50:24
I honestly like Overlook Drive when I'm riding back to Squirrel Hill from South Oakland. It's a pleasant ride, good views, with little car traffic, and wide roads. And it avoids those very short sightlines coming over the hill down to Greenfield Ave on Blvd of the Allies.
I also like W Circuit Road when coming back to Squirrel Hill from Central Oakland. It's not as steep as Schenley through the golf course and is a nice ride.
It is true that these routes aren't the shortest way to go. But I'm not riding a bike because I want to get where I'm going in the shortest time possible.
If I was extending bike lanes out from the new lanes in front of Phipps I would take advantage of these less-used roads first.
jonawebb
2014-08-29 07:41:41
Does anyone know how you would use the lane to commute from Sq. Hill? I just don't get it. Even coming from the trail through Anderson playground means coming down overlook the wrong way...although it would be good to put a two-way bike lane on Overlook Drive I guess. I wonder if anyone actually asked any cyclists who ride this area.
I just don't get what you do to go the 'wrong' way at the beginning and end of the lane.
I'm more in the 'bikes are vehicles' camp as well: What I worry about is when I use the road after coming down Schenley Drive, drivers will think I 'belong' in the bike lane.
This fear is based on an incident where a police officer yelled at me out his window to "get in the bike lane" for getting in the left of the car lane to turn left, even though I was signalling!
sfabius
2014-08-29 07:51:14
I don't think the lanes are ready to be used to commute from Squirrel Hill yet. They need to be extended. I would still use the road. There are lots of good options -- you're going downhill, mostly, after all.
And ignore the motorists (& cops) who think cyclists belong in the bike lanes. Not true in PA. If it comes down to it, fight them in court.
There's quite a bit of literature on this idea (bikes are vehicles), also called Vehicular Cycling. See John Forrester's "Effective Cycling," which started the movement, for example. He takes things too far in my opinion -- opposes bike lanes, for example -- but there are a lot of good ideas in there.
jonawebb
2014-08-29 08:01:07
My only big complaints are that it's a little tricky to make a left turn to stay on schenley drive to go up the hill by the golf course to squirrel hill. I typically take that to circuit dr and climb the nice windy hill for fun.
I'm just assuming I would do this by riding to the crosswalk and attempting to cross the right turning traffic there (now that they are required to stop instead of "except right turn". I havn't really tried it yet though, I'll scope it during rush hour today and see how I feel about it.
I like that you can connect via the underpass from anderson playground to the pool and on to overlook drive (or just take the trails up to the back side of the track). I never really used overlook much, but probably will a bit more now. Sometimes, i'll just take the bridle trail instead (but usually avoid it when school is back in session and the weather is nice due to all the runners).
The second issue I had was that the terminus near schenly plaza is a bit weird, and last time I was there, it wasn't clear where to go or what to do if you're heading westbound.
benzo
2014-08-29 08:16:51
There sure seems to be a lot of knee-jerk reaction to the new lanes. My take is that the schenley lane was seen as low hanging fruit. It was cheap to implement and everyone involved will learn a lot along the way. Indeed, it worries me that the prominent Penn ave lane is being built without much experience.
With that said, I don't think the situation is a disaster as described in the first post. The implementation isn't perfect but I don't think it is more dangerous than what existed before. If anything, the narrowed perceived space for eastbound cars will reduce speed and everyone will be safer. Before, the lanes were huge and people treated schenley drive as an interstate.
I'm hoping that because there is so much space in schenley and relatively few complications compared to most parts of the city, we will see further extensions to the lanes or a reworking of the intersections to make entry/exit logical, convenient and safe.
dfiler
2014-08-29 12:47:30
"The posts divide the bike lanes from traffic, they tell people to slow down & respect the space…It looks great." --former skeptic, on new bidirectional protected bike lane near an Austin, TX, elementary school (also a Green Lane Project facility).
http://buff.ly/XZfrfu
epanastrophe
2014-08-29 15:22:44
Does anybody know why the parking lane was milled off near Phipps? Was it making the driving lane too narrow?
jonawebb
2014-08-29 19:30:42
My doubts about make a left on to schenly drive towards sq hill during rush hour were proven wrong. The new all way stop sign seems to work well at making it pretty easy to navigate a left turn safely using the freshly reprinted crosswalk. Might even be better than the previous configuration.
I'm still underwhelmed by the western terminus by Schenley plaza. I'll probably take the road if I'm going westbound. Hopefully this lane gets extended all the way to Bouquet st eventually (at least bigelow).
benzo
2014-08-29 21:45:10
per tweet / instagram by BikePedPGH, the parking next to the bike lane is gone:
http://t.co/NrH0o2PJsU
epanastrophe
2014-08-29 22:26:43
That looks like an insane amount of bollards. Also, are the street sweepers/snow clearers going to have to jump the curb to get in there?
sgtjonson
2014-08-30 07:29:17
Don't worry Pierce, cars will take out some of those bollards soon enough.
edmonds59
2014-08-30 08:52:29
The cleaning could be an issue. The lanes were already pretty rocky last week.
sfabius
2014-09-01 06:46:02
During the announcement press conference, Pedro mentioned that one thing learned while visiting other cities is that a pickup fitted with street cleaning and plowing equipment was a better solution than buying an expensive but small, custom vehical for maintaining the lanes. That much made sense to me but who knows what that means in terms of maintenance level.
dfiler
2014-09-01 08:16:23
pretty sure they already have such equipment, for alleys and other small streets. has anyone tried asking 311 to use it?
epanastrophe
2014-09-01 09:05:25
I live on a dead end street with parking on one side. We see the small city plow maybe twice a winter. Small salt trucks maybe a few more times.
helen-s
2014-09-01 13:42:34
I agree with what Stu said about the two ideologies in bike infrastructure. One is to separate the lane and create a tight barrier for cyclists while the other is to calm traffic creating a road for both uses. In low speed pedestrian area of the city pedestrians and bikes should come first, cars second.
I am definitely a person who is in the vehicular cycling camp in most occasions. What is the point in these protected lanes in the areas they are going in? Schenley drive is a heavy pedestrian/bike area first and cars comes second. There should be speed humps, sharrows that 80 year old ignorant anti-cyclist can even see, and traffic calming measures. In my opinion they would be used in much better areas. Add them to thoroughfares where cars and cyclists should be separated more. Penn Ave in the strip is another heavy pedestrian traffic area. What will be the point in confining cyclist to a small lane? Use traffic calming measures. I seen cars race through the strip and add more danger to pedestrians going a speed that is not necessary for a major market district of the city than cyclists.
Maybe this is low hanging fruit first, maybe there are people who won't even go on Schenley drive without a protected bike lane, maybe I am not seeing this clearly. I hate being confined to a lane especially in an area that was fairly easy without it.
The Schenley lane does add more order to the road though. Before cars acted like it was two lanes and it got chaotic. Not that there is any point in ranting an opinion here I guess. "Yay bikelanes, yay!" I guess.
shooflypie
2014-09-01 19:40:49
Riding in on the west end of the schenly drive bike lanes towards schenly plaza, the one thing I thought would be great would be to reconfigure the timing of the traffic signals to have an all pedestrian mode like they have at craig st, to allow cyclists to cross from the bikeway to the westbound travel lane. That would give them an all clear to cross over.
Currently the two safest ways to do this are to:
A) To illegally cross the intersection during the green light for Schenley drive extension,the road between library and schenly plaza. Seems safest, but illegal.
B) Move (via the crosswalk) from the end of the bike lane to put yourself in line at the front of the traffic queue to cross Schenley drive when the light turns green, but that seems less safe, as the light could change while you're in the crosswalk and put you in a more compromising situation. There is little education, signage, or experience for pittsburgh cyclists to pick up on this, a bike box would help.
benzo
2014-09-02 07:49:19