BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

WESA is reporting the road closed over an hour later. Not a good sign. I wonder if the cyclist was using this as an alternative to the mess that is the construction on West Carson street. Rt. 65 doesnt strike me as a first choice for any cyclist.

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/02/21/Ohio-River-Boulevard-closed-while-search-goes-on-for-missing-cyclist/stories/201402210139 Some video here: http://www.wtae.com/news/local/allegheny/route-65-closed-after-bicyclist-reportedly-hit/24598140

Hoping this takes a turn for the positive.

I'm hoping I don't know who it is. I mean , it sucks whether I know the person or not, but I know personally at least one who'd be there, then. Haven't heard back from my initial inquiry, so I'm worried.

Hopefully a good samaritan already found the cyclist and took it to a hospitals and that's why they can't find the person.

bikeygirl wrote:Hopefully a good samaritan already found the cyclist and took it to a hospitals and that’s why they can’t find the person.

This is what I am hoping as well. AGH is pretty close, but I can't imagine that they didn't already call around? Keeping my fingers crossed. Maybe the cyclist isn't hurt that bad and is home, relatives?

Ick. Traffic was still backed up on California approaching 65 when I passed through at 7:20...that's a long time to be searching for someone.

Yeah, I have a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Hard to come up with an explanation. Ch 11 just reported they are *still* looking.

yeah, in a weird way, the fact that the cyclist isn't found yet is giving me some hope. it's not clear if the truck even stopped. early reports were saying a red truck, and there's a pic in the PG of a white truck, but it doesn't mean that that's the truck in question

Rte 65 is a tough stretch of road for a cyclist. I know few people who even consider it, especially in this stretch. In many, many years of riding this route in a car, on a bus and on my scooter, I can count the number of cyclists I've seen on this road on my ten fingers. (I am discounting the more experienced riders that I occasionally see on other parts of Route 65....I mean in this area specifically.) Best guess, based on local familiarity, is that this is someone who came across the McKees Rocks Bridge, then headed uphill on Route 65 northbound (no sidewalks, no shoulder, so in the travel lane). After a quarter mile the road would have leveled out, and he would have been hit a quarter mile or so further on. There are no cross streets, and very few driveways in the immediate vicinity. A mile further on, the Bellevue business district (on Ohio River Boulevard) begins. There are auto supply shops, fast food restaurants, small businesses, gas stations, etc.) in that stretch. By the time the rider would have gotten to Kendall, a quarter mile past the bridge where they got hit, there would have at least been a sidewalk to consider using. More local residents would know to detour three or four blocks to the right (outbound) to the network of local streets that parallel the Boulevard. Unless they were in a hurry to get to that business district, of course! (There are few other destinations for which it would make sense for a cyclist to choose to be on ORB on this section of roadway.)

From Twitter: "Bob Hazen WTAE ?@HazenWTAE 2m UPDATE: Cops now say bicyclist hit on Rte 65 road bike home. He's doing fine, driver not facing charges @WTAE pic.twitter.com/TznARgCu6e"

The "driver not facing charges" is assumed. Even if the story didn't end as well.

latest from kdka: "The driver was in a box truck and allegedly hit a male on a bicycle. In fact, the driver was adamant that he hit someone, saying the cyclist became airborne, despite the fact that the victim was nowhere in sight. But the only thing at the scene was debris, including a bike seat."

I'm relieved, but... very confused. "Police said the driver involved called 911 immediately, but was unable to locate the cyclist. The cyclist’s parents told investigators that he was not harmed and pedaled away after he was struck because he thought he would get in trouble. It is not clear how old the victim is."

where did you read that one?

erok wrote:where did you read that one?

Sorry, here: http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/route-65-shut-down-after-accident-involving-bicycl/ndXRf/

Wow. I'm glad to hear that the cyclist wasn’t seriously hurt, and that the police took this very serious. I wonder what the cager reactions to the road being closed down are going to be though. I expect the 'bikes don't belong' chorus, but to shut down a major artery for over three hours during morning rush is going to create a lot of ill will & unfortunately it probably wont be directed at the truck driver. I can only hope (dream?) that at least some of the comments are about the need for better bicycle infrastructure.

That stretch of road was probably the first road I cycled on when I moved to Pittsburgh. Agree that it's not nice Last linked article says the guy hit the cyclist with his mirror I guess we're still not enforcing the 4' rule? Sounds like the guy who got hit is a minor

The guy can't at least get a ticket for violating the four-foot law? Oh: "A McKees Rocks teenager was riding his bike to the Bellevue McDonald's early this morning when he slipped and fell off his bike on the highway, also known as Route 65, just before 6 a.m., said Bellevue police clerk Fred Fisher. 'He slid on some ice or mud or something and his bike went into traffic, and he fell on the sidewalk,' he said." From http://www.post-gazette.com/local/north/2014/02/21/Ohio-River-Boulevard-closed-while-search-goes-on-for-missing-cyclist/stories/201402210139#ixzz2tyyPPk5a

Ah. We can also take solace that the guy didn't think he hit somebody and then just kept going, ala Jeep guy and others Typical stupid comments on the PG forum

Pierce wrote:I guess we’re still not enforcing the 4? rule?

Unfortunately, Pierce, the 4' law is a friggin' joke. Not worth the paper it was written on. Difficult to enforce to begin with, and made even more so by the unwillingness of the Pittsburgh Police to even try to enforce it, and the lack of awareness at the DA and Judicial levels.

ORB needs a road diet.

The fact that the kid split makes me think there's more to this. We'll never know.

Like maybe he wasn't supposed to be riding his bike to McDonald's at 6 in the morning on Route 65... typical teenager stuff, I think.

Glad this has a good ending. At least the driver called 911 right away. Sounds like a kid maybe going to work? For all we know he had no lights or reflectors. Too many unanswered questions to start pointing a bunch of fingers. Just happy the guy is okay.

That's on my way to work at the Bicycle heaven bike Museum bike shop , I was at the site not long after the event and right away I was told by people that the biker hit the truck and more less took off maybe thinking it was his fault and booked,,,most inport no one hurt,,

jonawebb wrote:Like maybe he wasn’t supposed to be riding his bike to McDonald’s at 6 in the morning on Route 65… typical teenager stuff, I think.

your right

this is why the river trail should be built longer / all the way to Emsworth and more

bicycle heaven wrote:this is why the river trail should be built longer / all the way to Emsworth and more

While I agree totally with the need to extend the trail; It wouldnt get you up to the McDonalds or any other business away from the river. Cyclists need to get to all of the places that a car drivers need to get to. When politicians realize that cycling is more than a recreational activity maybe something will change.

Marko82 wrote:Cyclists need to get to all of the places that a car drivers need to get to. When politicians realize that cycling is more than a recreational activity maybe something will change.

this

Marko82 wrote:Cyclists need to get to all of the places that a car drivers need to get to. When politicians realize that cycling is more than a recreational activity maybe something will change.

Granted, I'm still a little pissed off about the kangaroo court experience I had earlier this week, but we are failing in this area. The city hired a Cycling and Pedestrian Coordinator in 2010, and part of his charge was to implement the initiatives in the 2009 plan as described here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40149428/09_pgh_bike_initiatives.pdf A lot of those, almost five years on, are still a pipe dream. Especially enforcement for anyone other than pedestrians. If you kill a cyclist with a car, it's a roll of the dice whether or not you are charged. Anything less (like the four foot law) is not even a gamble. Free pass for motorists. And I'm still waiting for the coordinator of this program, Stephen Patchan, to follow up as promised on conversations with the Police about better ways to enforce the laws. You can use a hotline to call in a litterbug, but you can't even effectively use 9-1-1 to report threatening behavior by motorists. Feels more and more like we're losing...

Re getting to either Bellevue business district by bike, either PA65 or Calif/Lincoln. There is this non-trivial issue of a 130-foot elevation difference between the river trail and Rt 65, 250 up to Cal/Linc. Easiest way to deal with it is to not have to climb it all at once, but rather already be at that elevation, i.e., Ohio R Blvd needs to be an option. Possibly not the only option, but at least one of them.

The North shore bike trail that goes pass the Rivers Casino pass Bicycle Heaven that ends at the WATER PLANT could go all the way to Ohio very easy as its a nice peace of land just like other trails along many rivers but the WATER PLANT does not give a F maybe because no one complains,,,just think of all the bikers who could use that rideaway along the river to get to work or VISIT PITTSBURGH

Meaning Alcosan? I don't see how you can get any sort of bike path through there, short of building a bridge. Even if you did, you're still stuck on the wrong side of a set of railroad tracks for a long ways. No, I think the question to answer is not "How do we get to Emsworth without climbing a hill?" but rather "How do we get from Preble Avenue to the McKees Rocks Bridge on a sub-5% grade?" We also need to think about the bigger picture. Answer this question: How do we as a society reduce by 50% the number of motorized vehicles traveling through the MRB/Termon/65 intersection?

I was told that Alcosan / water plant wants no part of the bike trail because of Terrorism ,they don't want anyone by the water ponds.I do know its gated and guarded very well.I have looked it over and seems to me they can put a path right through it but maybe just needs fenced in but that's a big cost but I am telling you if a trail could be made it would be a flat straight shot all the way to ohio,All of the people who live along 65 could easy drop down by the tracks to ride the trail into pittsburgh.I guess it would be close the the tracks but many are not used by trains now a days and as a kid we would ride our bikes along most of Bellvue Avonworth / Emsworth with no problem and kids still today.I know it would take work but anything can be done and just think of how many people could use that trail,

I'm not sure there's a way to get alcosan to budge here, or the owners of 1600 West Carson on the opposite side. Kind of a travesty. In my dreams I scream "people on bicycles are light and trails don't have be all that wide. Shut up with the excuses! Cantilevers, cantilevers, cantilevers, do it you idiot!!". Stairs with bike rail until you can do it right from the streets! I'd say the same thing for creeks that feed into our rivers. JUST DO IT. Why do I care? I don't ride recreationally hardly at all. Because I think it's not either or/transportation vs. recreation facilities. Long term, recreation facilities become transportation facilities if they're going to/from anywhere useful. Even if the connectors aren't built, even a park and ride can help reduce vehicle miles travelled and creates the demand for connectors in the future. And bigger long term picture, think, these recreational facilities are the closest thing we'll ever get to "highways" in our context. Lower, stress, more predictable, and faster than surface streets (generally, the jogger 4 abreast thing gets old). You wouldn't want a road network for cars without them and the same is equally true for bikes. Even if most will not ride all the way on to Ohio with them. End rant.

Simply crossing the Alcosan property is not going to happen. It really is a security area. I wonder if a chain-link tunnel could work...

Just to be clear, Alcosan is not the bad guy here. The department of homeland security, or some agency like that, was the one who determined that all water treatment plants - or at least those serving cities of a certain size - were at risk of terrorist attack. Getting a public access way that close to a protected facility will be pretty much impossible. But, let's put blame where it belongs. Alcosan is not together bad guy here. Or at least not the most important bad guy. They are probably no higher than third on that list. Because if a trail DID get through Alcosan, it would have to share a right if way with the Norfolk Southern mainline, which carries 60 or more high speed trains a day. It would also be necessary for the trail to cross the railroad at some point or points, to get people off the trail. That is just no going to happen.

If you run the trail to the right side of the tracks you don't need to cross any tracks and with lots of room, again my point,,Alcosan just does not care about you or a bike trail .Its dead end at Alcosan.Alcosan will have a big party like they do every year see it on tv news papers but you will never here anything about bikers to come by and share the event even though its right off of the bike trail,,,,,no,,nothing,,,don't belive anything its all about money someone does not want you to know it can be done,,thats what I belive,,,,,,,

BIG GOVERMENT ALCOSAN..yes that's what you need and they will tell you what you get and tell you what they want you to think,give me a bull dozer and I will make a trail in 24 hours lol,,,,that's all I have to say,,,,,,THE TRAIL ENDS AT THE WATER PLANT,

bicycle heaven wrote:If you run the trail to the right side of the tracks you don’t need to cross any tracks and with lots of room, again my point

If you run the trail on to the right side of the tracks then you don't go through Alcosan. And if you got through Alcosan then you on a wrong side to the tracks.

I know before the plant on the north side that's right but I think the tracks go over a bridge at some point ? or make a crossing that's easy to do now a days,,and I don't need someone to say that's not safe,,,try riding a bike along 65 now that's not safe.I do agree that it would take work but just like the other trails but hey got it done.

Looking at the terrain, I think that's the problem. The steep hill gets very tight just past the water plant. So even if you somehow get over the tracks to the east side you still have a very tight fit just northwest of the plant. It would take some real engineering to make a bike path fit there given the train tracks.

I'll shout it again, cantilevers, cantilevers, cantilevers! Surely, in an era when this can be done: We shouldn't balk at the prospect of building a something with the overhang of someone's deck.

It's a lot easier to build stuff in a authoritarian state. In a democracy, everybody whines about spending money.

Except when we spend it in the same ways we always have, on the things we always have. Then it doesn't matter how many billions it costs. I swear, there are no battles that matter more than the funding formulas that put people to sleep. Win that big once, defend it a couple times, and then people forget about it and there's actually a revenue stream to do things.

Well, OT, but really all funding is constantly under attack. It's just a question of how much political power the defenders have. E.g., big weapons programs have contractors distributed strategically across the country so representatives have employers in their district ready to raise a stink if they cut funding. And big road-building programs have dedicated funding sources, yes, but also lots of contractors who do the actual work, and who complain if the funding doesn't happen -- not to mention all the folks who depend on using the roads to get to work, truck drivers who need the roads to haul stuff, etc. Of course there is inertia in the system, but that inertia comes from lots of money and benefits going to people. There's no way to write a bill dedicating funding that doesn't allow future legislation to take that funding away.

The political muscle coming from revenue streams is inevitable. Don't know if there's a way to co-opt that/them for our stuff? For sure, you can't get much done if you have to fight a political battle EVERY time. In spite of current drama, I maintain, relative to drama levels/political interest, funding formulas are still the most important thing going. Concentrating efforts there first, is, I think, our only chance to create the kind of improvements that would have a categorical rather than incremental difference in the cycling environment.

bicycle heaven wrote:I know before the plant on the north side that’s right but I think the tracks go over a bridge at some point ? or make a crossing that’s easy to do now a days,,and I don’t need someone to say that’s not safe,,,try riding a bike along 65 now that’s not safe.I do agree that it would take work but just like the other trails but hey got it done.

There are a couple of rr bridges but main way stays all the way up to Monaca yard -- https://maps.google.com/maps?q=15219&hl=en&ll=40.674975,-80.245965&spn=0.011343,0.025234&sll=41.117935,-77.604698&sspn=5.767621,12.919922&hnear=Pittsburgh,+Pennsylvania+15219&t=m&z=16

I really don't see the need to build a trail beyond Western Pen. The population and commercial centers any trail would serve are along PA65 and California/Lincoln. The 10 riders per hour that would trickle in from Monaca are far less important than the dozens to hundreds who might ride from Bellevue at either level, or across the river from Stowe-Rocks or the Bottoms, if you could tame MRB traffic. Again, solve that 200+ foot elevation change.

well, haruphmf harumpf, speaking as an actual resident of Monaca, a fine town of tree-lined boulevards, world-famous Yolanda's pizza, a giant coal pile and I believe three tattoo parlors, ummm... from Monaca, we take 51 South to Coraopolis, then Neville Island to skip a few hills, then rejoin 51 South at McKees Rocks. Then either: (new in 2014) MRBridge, California Street, the new ADA switchback ramp to Butler Street, to the Ft.Duq bridge OR (when PennDot is done with Carson St.) 51 down to Ft. Pitt bridge. But as to your Belleview-MRB/City traffic, a solution is to take the outside 8 feet of either side of that beautifully paved Route 65 (northwest of MRB) and mark it as a bike lane. I think Stu is quite right that Route65 is the elevation where the solution (and the need) exists; the river is too low, Lincoln Ave is too high, and Rt65 is Goldilocks. We really haven't seen much bike infra in that fringe of the city, and perhaps the recent exercise demonstrates the need.

jonawebb wrote:Well, OT, but really all funding is constantly under attack. It’s just a question of how much political power the defenders have. E.g., big weapons programs have contractors distributed strategically across the country so representatives have employers in their district ready to raise a stink if they cut funding. And big road-building programs have dedicated funding sources, yes, but also lots of contractors who do the actual work, and who complain if the funding doesn’t happen — not to mention all the folks who depend on using the roads to get to work, truck drivers who need the roads to haul stuff, etc. Of course there is inertia in the system, but that inertia comes from lots of money and benefits going to people. There’s no way to write a bill dedicating funding that doesn’t allow future legislation to take that funding away.

,,,,,you got that right

" I really don’t see the need to build a trail beyond Western Pen. The population and commercial centers any trail would serve are along PA65 and California/Lincoln." True, but the problem of accessing trail doesn't necessarily look all that difficult and riding trail is nicer and faster than road when the trail will take you there and trail would encourage a lot more ridership as a result. Just doodling around on google maps for a few minutes looking for gradual rises from the Bellevue Area and found farragut avenue alongside what looks like a feeder creek from the river. Wouldn't need much extension to join up with a trail. Continue as it changes names to Brighton Avenue toward the left in a semi-circle and it winds up on Lincoln Avenue by what looks like a large apartment building with bus stops right there. Now, though the grade looks ok, you still may not be able to carve out enough space on Brighton Avenue on the leftward semi-circle to make riding comfortable uphill for many. But you can look at stairs and a rail perhaps to take you from the end of Farragut to the end of Lincoln Avenue, too. Further along the Ohio, but still close enough to downtown to imagine a healthy commuter fraction, you can serve the western end of Avalon potentially and Ben Avon/Emswoth via Spruce street, double back interestingly enough on a totally separate section also known as Brighton Rd. or continue up to the Ben Avon trail. Here the gradient and double-back is sharper, but in principle, again, I think you can offer both options and a friendlier option for those not strong or comfortable enough to climb in the street, steps with bike rail to take you across the creek up to Brighton Road you just need to zig-zag it a bit. This sort of pattern repeats a number of other places I've checked out with google maps that start with some creek or whatnot feeding to the rivers. There's a gradual route up from the river along the creek via a narrow road alongside that's mostly doesn't look heavily used, , steep sides to the valley, and opportunities to cut out climbing effort via stairs and bike rail. We can and should use this pattern to our advantage. North side of the Ohio is just another example. And hey... Vannevar just made Monaca sound pretty nice, didn't he?

byogman wrote:Vannevar just made Monaca sound pretty nice, didn’t he?

Clinton liked her, too.

Dang, I wish I could remember the expression that Reddan used in describing Brighton Road between Lincoln and Jacks Run. My recollection is that it included reference to a sphincter. Among the least bike friendly roads I've come across. Especially heading from Jacks Run/Farragut to Lincoln, which is windy AND uphill. But, I need to back out of this discussion. I commute in from Emsworth on a regular basis. This trail concept, if implemented, would identify me as a primary beneficiary. But, I hate the Chateau Trail so much that I use it no more than a handful or times a year. (I like other trails, just not the Chateau Trail.) The odds are high that I would not use this trail, even if extended to Emsworth, for the same reasons that I avoid the Chateau Trail. I'll stick to the roads. Safer, in my assessment and in my terms. So, I am not a candidate user, and therefore not a relevant party in this discussion.

Sorry to hear of the current state of Brighton road over the section I was positing here. Luck of the draw somewhat whether google street view tells you in terms of traffic levels. I didn't assume it was ok now, but was hoping since it looked slightly empty-ish for its value as a connector that could make it a target for the sort of improvements that would make it more accomodating. OK in the downhill direction at least?? Just curious. I'm not understanding where the chateu trail is. Does it go by another name and/or can you map it for me? Thanks

Chateau Trail is what I use to describe the section of trail between the Casino and the penitentiary. That is the old Chateau neighborhood. Brighton in the area you mention is not bikeable in either direction...except perhaps by very experienced riders.

Ah. The thing that irritates me about that trail is how they bottleneck an already narrow trail artificially. If they didn't do that and you had reasonable access to it, would you still prefer road? What if they made it a reasonable (jail trail-ish) width. What then? My purpose here is not to assume you're a representative case, I think the most important rider is the one who wants to but is not quite there yet. Nor is it to say this is realistic. Just curious. Thanks.

I had an eye opening experience on that section of trail a couple of years ago when a guy stepped (very unexpectedly) from the bushes onto the trail. It was an innocent fisherman who had stepped into the bushes to relieve himself. I don't know who was more surprised or more frightened in the encounter. It made me sort of hyper aware of how narrow the trail is, how overgrown it is, and how isolated it is. And, there are good roadway alternatives. Inbound, Beaver Avenue from McClure is wide open, flat and easy riding. Outbound, since I have to climb a hill somewhere, I find it easier (or just as easy) to take Brighton out of the Park on a shallow hill, then take a slow gradual climb on California past the McKees Rocks Bridge. Just my preferences, as a woman who tends to bicycle commute alone. That sometimes includes rides in dawn/dusk conditions, but almost never in full dark conditions.