My question was prompted by photos in the "bloomin bikes" thread. Does anyone follow the rules of the road when riding in Pittsburgh? My one experience riding in the city limits involved a trip down a one way street in the wrong direction.
Wrong way cycling and sidewalk riding is pretty common in Philadelphia. I wonder if I'm going to encounter a lot of it when I get out with yinz.
to my recollection, there is only one guy on here who rides on the sidewalk. he rides on the sidewalk by Halkett Street in Oakland during his morning commute to avoid riding on Forbes for 50 feet because he doesn't want to ride around the block to avoid crossing a bunch of lanes of traffic.
LMAO!
It's all about education. Learn how to ride in traffic, following the rules, and both being nice and being assertive, but mainly being visible and predictable to motor traffic.
yes, of course it's perfectly fair to look at a couple of photos and use that to make sweeping generalizations. wtf?
Sidewalk riding is pretty common on the long block of Forbes Avenue in Squirrel Hill that has two bike shops, but the sidewalks are relatively wide there. My guess is about 1/3 of the bike traffic on that block is on the sidewalk. But other nearby blocks seem to have less sidewalk riding.
I don't see wrong-way cycling very often. But I expect it's mostly confined to certain blocks where the alternative is particularly time-consuming or unsafe.
But following all the rules? I suspect few cyclists follow them all, at all times Come to a complete stop at every stop sign, instead of just slowing way down? Signal at every turn, even if there's no one around? Always audibly signal before passing a pedestrian on a bike path, even if you know they see you? Riding safely and following the law aren't identical.
I sometimes ride on sidewalk - particularly Friday and
Saturday around midnight with all the drunkards on the street. For example, going up Forbes from Braddock, if it's drunk hour, I'll be on the sidewalk even though there is a bike lane there.
Also, I live right at the west end of The Blvd of The Allies bridge into Schenley. I'll ride on the sidewalk if I'm going to be headed over the Panther Hollow bridge so I can avoid crossing 4 trafficly lanes and going up hill to a clover leaf.
I'm fairly polite to pedestrians. For example, I'll get off of my bike to pass someone with a baby carriage or who is walking a toddler.
I will do my best, but pedestrians don't listen, hell, they don't even see my when I am riding towards them on a bridge, so I don't often say anything. I will hit the sidewalk if it is convenient for both myself and the cars, which is sometimes often downtown. I will also thank those who get their kids out of the way, as well as go slow if I see a friendly leashed animal that might cause some trouble for the owner. I avoid one-ways like the plague, but if it is an alley downtown, I will use it, hell, I see cars use them too.
The one thing I refuse to mount on my bike is a horn or bell, so that may lead to people not hearing me say anything, but oh well.
@ orionz06
I'm curious - why would you refuse to mount a bell?
I'll use sidewalks under certain circumstances (usually where I know they're almost never used by pedestrians anyway). But wrong way cycling in my opinion is a really really bad idea. Your chances of getting in an accident are so much higher because cars aren't looking for you and probably can't see you if they're turning onto the alley.
@Mick
Limited room on my bars on the road bike and one more thing to break on the mountain bike.
The only wrong way riding I ever do is Semple between that side alley near Forbes and Bates. Ever since they paved it last year, it's probably the best riding street in Oakland. It also has relatively little traffic compared to even nearby Atwood and McKee.
Navigating the streets in southern residential Oakland can be tricky in this regard. They're mostly one-ways but, they're also generally wide enough to fit a car and bike side-by-side, albeit in the door zone. For this very reason, I feel much more comfortable in the opposite-direction door zone (passenger side doors) where there is less often someone getting out and even if they do, they can more readily see you coming.
I'm not condoning reverse one-way riding, but that's my two cents on it.
Considering how popular flockofcycles is with the folks of this board, I think its a much safer generalization to say that we all ride by the rules whenever possible (there are times when safety may warrant riding different from time to time, however).
"The one thing I refuse to mount on my bike is a horn or bell, so that may lead to people not hearing me say anything, but oh well."
Just keep your u-lock handy and swing it about when you come upon some peds. A couple whacks with the ol' u-lock will have them scramblin'. If they don't get the message, oh well.
There are a few stop signs in suburban developments I regularly fly through at full speed. There are intersections that do not have stop signs where I do stop or nearly so because it is safer to do that than to proceed through it at speed as the law would allow.
There are laws that do far more good than harm.
There are laws that need to be updated.
There are traffic signs which must be obeyed.
There are traffic signs which exist mainly because someone got killed in a car, by a car.
Don't get these confused.
I do my best to stop at every light/sign. This morning I had a few people at a bus stop look at me quizzically, because I waited for a green on a completely deserted street.
That being said, no one is perfect, I've accidentally run stop signs because they were behind a tree, or not used a turning signal because my hands were occupied with braking. I don't think anyone really follows all of the rules 100%, but I like to think that those who know the laws try to as best they can, and those who (ride on sidewalks, ride the wrong way, etc) don't know that they shouldn't. In my small hometown, you always ride either on the sidewalk, or against traffic if there was no sidewalk. Then again, there weren't many bike commuters over the age of 16...
I've found that using sidewalks should be done infrequently and for good reasons, a few of which were mentioned above. I've often caused myself as many problems as I've solved by hopping on the sidewalk. As for following the traffic laws, three years of law school and four years of practicing taught me a few truisms about how the law works. One is that if you want the law's full protections, you need to simultaneously be obeying it. If you're hit by a car (or hit a pedestrian) while ignoring a traffic law, the concept of comparative negligence may come into play in assessing who was at fault and the percentages of fault. The bottom line: it would be a shame to get hit by a car, have $100,000 in injuries and damages, and only be able to recover $50,000 because you were 50% at fault due to your own violation of the traffic laws. I don't want to come across as being pedantic here, but that's pretty much the legal reality of the situation.
that's a pretty good way to put it, I think.
And a really strong argument to be as knowledgeable as possible about traffic laws.
There's not as much wrong-way and sidewalk cycling here as you might expect, but there is a lot of "Idaho-stopping". Perhaps there are just fewer one-way streets here than in Philly.
Many people who bicycle in cities do so as a replacement for walking what would otherwise be a walkable distance. (Incidentally, it seems to me that "bikeshare" programs are specifically targeted at this demographic.) If you are thinking of biking as a substitute for driving, you don't mind going around the block, that's the way it works. But if you are thinking of biking as a substitute for walking, then you naturally ride on sidewalks and up one-way streets.
RF: you aren't required to use hand signals if your hands are needed to maintain control of your bicycle. And that's just common sense, so don't sweat it.
I used to do the Idaho Stop, but the more drivers I saw on their cellphones, the less I did that...
I sometimes Idaho stop at stop signs, but I find that red lights give me a great chance to show off/practice my trackstand. Now I don't mind if the light is red or green (unless I'm in a hurry...).
Riding on the sidewalk, of course, is not necessarily against "the rules" unless you're in a "business district" (300 feet frontage of businesses within 600 feet of roadway per 52 Pa. Code § 37.202).
Idaho Stop = Pittsburgh Left for cyclists. Once the locals get the hang of the concept, it'll be smooth sailing. We're not so much breaking the law as we are bending it for reasons of common sense.
excellent point quizbot
you aren't required to use hand signals if your hands are needed to maintain control of your bicycle. And that's just common sense, so don't sweat it.
It's common sense, but I'm not sure it's part of PA law. Looking in the statutes here, it says you must continuously signal for the last 100 feet before turning, says how to signal on a bike, but nothing about it being optional if it's too hard. There's nothing in the bike-specific statutes about this either.
Seems the law needs to better match what cyclists really do.
Idaho stop for bikes= Pittsburgh stop for cars.
It's not like traffic actually stops for a 4 way stops in Pittsburgh.
I always think it's odd when a car is clearly at a 4-way stop before me, I come to a stop, and then they wave me on.
I will ride on the sidewalk if it looks safer (some hills and certain bridges).
OK, thanks for the information. I've come close to an accident with a wrong way cyclist on both a bike (in New Brunswick, NJ) and in my car (here in Phoenixville there's a woman who insists on riding against traffic on shoulderless roads.) In Philly sidewalk riding happens so often there's a campaign against it on the part of some businesses.
Riding on sidewalks is usually "against the rules" even when it isn't against the law, imho. Done, but rarely and with caution for short distances.
Agree with Mick and Quizbot, but still. I usually avoid the Pittsburgh left, too.
The thing about signalling requires a better keyboard, so, later.
I like what people have said so far, my experience is described nicely by the generalizations above with a few exceptions:
When I'm testing a bike, typically coming out of Dirty Harry's in Verona, despite the signs painted by Verona on the sidewalks (no bikes, the circle/bar over a bicycle picture), I ride the sidewalk. It's a new bicycle/new hardware/broken bicycle - I'm not hopping into ARB traffic immediately to crash AND get run over, and if I have to walk to the end of the block with the bike every time they tweak something to test it out, I'll be there all day. I totally accept that this is wrong, and if there are peds I wait for them to pass/do their thing.
The only other time I ride on the sidewalk is described best by my thought process as it happens "where the hell am I, oh shit, thank god a cut I better get on the sidewalk", often immediately followed by a dismount, or I'm going so slowly I'm more like a pedestrian with wheels. Coincidentally, this always follows the only times I ride the wrong way down a one way - it's always by accident.
Stop signs - in the city it's 100% (way too much else going on for me to pretend like I'm going to be aware enough to skip it safely) but rarely do I put a foot down unless I'm going to be waiting for others.
Stop lights 100%. Sometimes I dismount and hop up on the sidewalk (like at the top of a big hill, to take a break and get out of the way). Only times I've ever run them was with a group and the drivers were waving me through.
I do both sidewalk riding and wrong way sidewalk riding in 2 places:
Rarely I will ride from East End Ave to Forbes on the sidewalk in the mornings if the traffic is bad. I go slowly (walking speed), and only if 1) I can clearly see that there is no one on the sidewalk and 2) no one at the bus stop shelter.
I almost always go the wrong way on the side walk up Greenfield Ave from 2nd Ave to by the Catholic school. My rationale is that it is very wide, there is almost no pedestrian traffic and that going in the street has too many blind spots for my tastes.
Stop signs, I often do Idaho stops in Edgewood down Savannah and East End Ave. The rest of the city I come to a full stop because I'm paranoid when I'm far from home....
Most bizarre not-following-the-rules was coming back on smallman around 2 am one time, had a pgh police car/officer flash the lights and then stick his arm out the window to wave me by at a four-way stop. Very odd.
I think any cycling 'infraction' against the law is easier to excuse simply due to the proximity with environment. I understand the whole 'same as a car' arguments often used, but to me bicycles have advantages, and should receive those in the law. Hence my heavy adoption of the idaho stop, even if it isn't legal.
I forgot to ask in my opening post if yinz have a lot of bike 'ninjas' around.
"My one experience riding in the city limits involved a trip down a one way street in the wrong direction."
It was the first day of my first Pittsburgh to DC trip, and I was being led around by a resident.
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/pics/crazyguyonabike/docs/00/00/35/42/large/letsride.jpg?v=Ad
I will never wear a black belt with brown shoes, or vice versa, that's the only rule I hold as immutable. All other rules are situationally adjustable.
it says you must continuously signal for the last 100 feet before turning
This is silly. I don't think I've signaled for the last 100 feet very often. We are supposed to take one hand off the bars, brake, downshift, maintain the steering over potholes/patches, change lane position, watch for drain grates of death, and be looking around for cars about to run you over as you turn -- all at the same time? It might sound fine on paper to someone who hasn't ever thrown a leg over a bike, but in practice it isn't sensible.
I will generally signal enough until I have some confirmation from the drivers, if any. When I am turning my head and waving my arm it seems to grab the attention of even the most stubborn of drivers. Now they may not know what the signal means, but with their attention they are generally smart enough to know what is going on.
The only way I'll signal for the last 100 feet is when I'm making a left turn, braking very little or not at all, and can just bring my hand back to my bars as I lean into the turn. Needless to say, it usually doesn't work that way.
@the historian http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/pics/crazyguyonabike/docs/00/00/35/42/large/letsride.jpg?v=Ad
HTTP 403
The website declined to show this webpage
This error (HTTP 403 Forbidden) means that Internet Explorer was able to connect to the website, but it does not have permission to view the webpage.
Signalling. I apply the dual questions of "What information do you [=other drivers] need, and what are you going to do with it?"
They need to know I am going to get in front of them, so I signal lane changes. They need to know I am going to slow down, so I give them plenty of warning and/or time, which is occasionally accompanied by standing out of the saddle. They need to know I am going to change direction, once I am in front of them, so I tell them.
But 100 feet? Bullshit. Yeah, what they said: Holes in the street. Buckled pavement. Squirrels. Whatever. No, safety matters far more than some words written in a book. This sounds like a rule that was written by a bunch of non-cyclists 80 years ago around a big table, and nobody has ever thought to challenge it.
Visible, safely, predictable, and courteously. Nothing else matters.
Visible, safely, predictable, and courteously. Nothing else matters.
+1
On the other hand, if bikes keep getting more popular, I think there will be a backlash where the (largely car-driving) citizenry will demand that law enforcement be draconian for bikers.
I could be wrong, but at some point bike will be perceived, quite rightly, as a threat to car culture. Or at least I hope so. 
"If you’re wondering what the rectangular lights are on the front and rear of the bike–they’re turn signals. It drove me nuts that many younger drivers didn’t seem to understand hand signals so I made turn signals using 2 sets of super bright amber LED strobes that I control via a center-off toggle switch on the handlebars. (I also added a brake light while I was at it that’s triggered by a micro lever switch attached to the rear brake cable.) It’s a DIY project I’d recommend and cost less than $30." from http://www.ecovelo.info/2010/02/15/gallery-anns-schwinn-frontier-fs/#more-14793
Mick,
Here's the link to the page in Neil Fein's journal:
http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?o=RrzKj&page_id=78671&v=8z
In retrospect, I found the following amusing:
"The ride is over trails, roads, parking lots, highways. Bruce and Dom seem fond of highway overpasses. Pittsburgh is a pretty bike-unfriendly city, and the residents seem to hold the word "bikeable" to a different standard than I'm used to.
"One high, curving overpass the two of them ride onto looks particularly unsafe, and I decide to take the sidewalk. Dom pulls back to ask about that, and it turns out that I'm going to be cut off from the roadway at the end of the overpass. I tell him I'll catch up in a bit.
"It turns out there's a significant flight of stairs I need to negotiate. I take my 75-pound bike down one step at a time, and very slowly. Dom rides back while I'm doing this, but there's really not all that much he can do to help. I have to walk my bike through about fifty yards of scrub and rocks to get back on the roads.
"Route 837 is widely seen in the larger biking community as a highway o' death. Neil had gone ahead, and I asked Bruce and Dom if there was any way of rerouting. They point out a couple of side streets that will let us cut off some of the highway, and hopefully let us catch up to Neil. "
fungicyclist, thanks for that link to the turn signals. I may try that, although since I don't have an electric assist on my bike I don't know if it's workable.
I'm going out on a limb here and boldly asserting the power assist is superfluous to the turn signal and brake lights. Though I've no evidence to back up this wild assertion, I'll claim one could fabricate such a contraption for under $10.
Oh, wait, sorry, yes I do:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqz4PzAXzd8
This one's pretty cool:
http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2009/03/diy-bike-signals-with-accelerometer.html
There are thousands, if not tens of thousands of DIY plans for this sort of device out there.
No, I haven't one myself, yet. In the lull between morel season and the Green Quilts, I think I'll fab one.
I'm solidly in agreement that "Visible, safely, predictable, and courteously" is a splendid mantra, but, save for "safely", it dances around the real issue: communication.
If more then a few wheelpeople in Pgh had LED matrices fore and aft, which could function as not only brake lights and directional indicators but also as messaging devices, the attitude of Pgh drivers would change more quickly then it would otherwise. Though I believe this, I (really) have no evidence to support it. However, it is a testable hypothesis.
The messages could be programmed, and controllable by a simple switching device. Heck, one could likely interface some portable computing doohickey like an iPhone. Messages could include, (but obviously are not limited to), "Thank You", "Pardon Me, But I'm Taking This Lane", "Please Back Off, You're Scaring Me", "Hey, I'm Here", "Kiss Your Mother With That Mouth?", and the immortal classic "F*CK YOU MOTHERF*CKER, JUST TOOK A PICTURE OF YOU AND DOWNLOADED IT TO THE POLICE!"
Call me crazy, but I think holding a mirror before an as*hole is the best way to get them to face their behaviour. Barring that: public shame and humiliation. Pillory Rules!
And, though the notion triggers an involuntarily shudder, with such a message board one could attract sponsors...
Ride fearlessly. (Brought to you by...)
I'm under the impression that some sidewalks, like on certain bridges or on non-commercial blocks are ok to ride on. Some even state that it's a shared use. I frequently go up the 5th avenue (bus lane side) sidewalk toward Oakland between Birmingham Bridge and Craft. It's wide and whenever I see pedestrians (or more likely, a parked car, grr) I temporarily dip into the bus lane. I would be more likely to use a sidewalk going uphill as I can usually pick up enough momentum downhill to keep up with traffic.
Sidewalks on bridges are almost never business districts. Use of the sidewalk from 5th avenue from the B'ham Bridge to the slip ramp is legal, beyond that is not. However, it is probably safer than riding on the "shared use sidewalk" over the Smithfield St Bridge, for instance.
I think the laws about bikes on sidewalks are messed up, fwiw. The idea that you can't ride on a sidewalk through a burned out warehouse district but you can blast down a sidewalk in a neighborhood full of children is... bizarre.
"he rides on the sidewalk by Halkett Street in Oakland during his morning commute to avoid riding on Forbes for 50 feet because he doesn't want to ride around the block to avoid crossing a bunch of lanes of traffic."
perhaps you are talking about me, but i can assure you that i'm not the only person who sidewalk rides where it's safer than dodging jerks in moving weapons on 5th ave. traveling toward downtown through oakland on a bike that can't do 25mph easily is one of those.
also, i'm riding a trials bike - i don't enjoy mixing in with 35-45mph traffic on forbes or fifth much on a bike with a 24 tooth front chain ring. it kind of pisses people off and feels kind of dangerous - take it from someone who does dangerous things on bikes regularly.
in my opinion, forbes and fifth should be two way. get rid of some on street parking or encourage more ridesharing and cycling if you still need space 3 bus lanes through oakland.
i am always amazed that have more problems with cars on 5th avenue when there are like 4 lanes available. what's up with that?
I don't know. I was doing about 12-15 up Forbes tonight without any real problems. I think problems with motorists are mostly random. Well, not actually random, but they're more closely correlated with how much of a jerk someone is than where you happen to be when you meet them.
Fifth through Oakland has enough paved real estate to be a prime candidate for a total reworking. Bus lane, two-way bike lane, two lanes of cars. I'm for keeping it (and Forbes) one way. But I'll leave it for the brains to figure out properly.
Is there any really good reason not to make Fifth and Forbes both two-way streets, rather than the one-ways they now are? Doesn't the livable/safe streets consensus disfavor one-way streets, as opposed to bidirectional streets? (Or did I make that up?)
At the very least fifth should become two main travel lanes like it is before Bellefield. I bet traffic would remain unchanged or be reduced. All those lanes do is allow more cars in to clog it up.
And about 10mph into a 25mph headwind inbound on 5th this AM.
If 5th goes two-way, the dedicated bus lane goes away. I like dedicated bus lanes on principle. I dislike two-way bike lanes because one of those lanes is always going to be on the wrong side of the motorized traffic. Bike lanes on one-way streets are also problematic because people use them to go the wrong way. contraflow bike lanes on one-way streets are handy for that, though they do introduce some crossing conflicts. I've seen people make left turns in front of a BUS on 5th avenue, like they simply didn't see it (or not perceive it, which is actually pretty likely).
For the most part, I think 5th avenue basically works. Allowing bikes in the contraflow bus lane might be reasonable, if the cyclists could be counted on to be patient and not try to overtake the busses on the right or left.
Forbes and 5th one way allow for traffic flow - in particular, timed lights, which are nearly impossible on two-way streets.
Now, my opinion is that they should slow the timing down on the lights 3 or 4 mph, but that is a different question.
I don't mind either one of them being one-way. Biking down the one-way bit of Forbes isn't bad at all. The lanes are narrow and well-defined and I don't feel bad placing myself right in the middle of any of them. I can keep up with traffic and make the lights. 5th, on the other hand, has this giant ambiguous bus/parking/delivery truck/turning lane on the right. It seems kind of stupid and find it somewhat dangerous to bike in. If you bike on the right side of the road you'll get boxed in/cut off by busses, right hooked by people trying to turn or park, and passed by people thinking you aren't actually in a lane, but that they are. I usually bike in the lane to the left of this, and skip the mess on the right.
one way also eliminates the "goddamned left turners!!!!!" issue, as my father puts it (well, a sanitized version of his eloquence).
I like it the way it is, the lights timed to slow but move traffic, I think it's good infrastructure. It's the drivers I'm not fond of.
I don't know what it is, but traffic on Fifth always seems to be going faster than Forbes. To me, biking on Forbes feels safer than Fifth because of this as well as the gentle downward slope starting at Magee Hospital all the way to the Carnegie Museum. I can keep general pace with traffic on Forbes, but Fifth feels less comfortable to me because of the faster traffic and the uphill.
Forbes should get a right lane sharrow while Fifth deserves a true dedicated inbound bike lane. Make the contra-flow bus lane a shared lane as well.
The speed limit is 35 of Fifth and 25 on Forbes right? Add in more lanes and people go wild when it's not grid locked.
I think an alternative to reverting Fifth back to two-way, the on-street Bus Rapid Transit idea should be considered. Take out the parking lane and make it a two-way busway and divert the Forbes buses onto it. Have the Forbes buses reroute back to Forbes along (a new two-way) Bellefield Ave. I'm pretty sure that you could accommodate for this, two or three lanes of traffic and a bike lane as well if the parking lane were removed. However, the only issue is the big bend near Robinson Street and how to continue the busway through Uptown and into Downtown. This latter part I'm not sure how to realize.
Well, if there were a s*load of express buses going between oakland and downtown, it would be pretty lame to just skip over uptown, even though the volume of riders would be lower than in oakland.
Perhaps they could have route numbers like EXP-a and EXP-b. They'd stop at all stops in Oakland and Downtown, but they'd alternate stopping at every other bus stop in Uptown. Odd stops for the -a express and even stops for the -b express.
Edit: in Oakland and Downtown they could have special high-volume bus stops and in Uptown they could use the existing lanes and stops.
I'm not sure you need to continue a westbound bus lane in Oakland any farther than the turnoff onto the Blvd of the Allies. My impression is there isn't much congestion on Fifth between there and downtown, since so much traffic heads onto the Blvd, even with just two lanes.
Rerouting eastbound Forbes Avenue buses onto the Fifth Avenue bus lane might not speed things up. You avoid some congestion sometimes, but add two more intersections/traffic lights to the route.
Impala: There's onstreet parking on both sides of forbes, so only the middle lane flows. Also, the "drain" for 5th is huge.
@dwillen: the safest thing to do on 5th is hang out just to the right of the lane line and wait for the bus in front of you. Not the fastest thing, but probably some of the safest riding in the city.
@pseudacris: the young/old/infirm/heavily laden passengers will find it difficult to walk the extra distance. But if you do discharge at any stop, and only pick up at alternate stops, you don't gain much. I favor dispensing with the fare boxes, and using the back door all the time.
I would be opposed to sharrows in the right lane on Forbes. I hardly ever bike in the right lane. If you need to turn left, you'll be in the left lane. If some jerk is parked with their flashers on in front of McDonalds (diy drive-through?) or there is a line of 5 busses at 6:13pm, I will be in the middle lane.
How about sharrows in every lane? Also on 5th.
Dan, you forgot to mention the wheel-eating pavement between Oakland and S. Bouquet, and the bus stop immediately after the latter.
Regardless, that stretch of Forbes is one of my favorite places to show cars that sometimes I can keep up.
@lyle: I don't think they'd need to walk farther. If the express buses ran every 10 minutes at alternate stops, the most anyone would have to wait would be 20 min.
@Pseudacris True-if they RAN every ten mintues. If there were SCHEDULED for every 10 minutes, no one would have to wait more than an hour. Or maybe 2. All joking, when they put the T in, they bent to pressure and had it stop at every block on Broadway. Acording to google, there are two stops that are 200 feet apart.
I broke the rules tonight. I was heading home after 10p from the cultural district. I decided to go through the strip dist. Got creeped out in Spring Way (lurkers) and didn't want to get creamed on Smallman or Liberty. So, I took a cue from a couple of ninja cyclists I saw zip by and decided to ride the wrong way up the Penn Ave sidewalk from ~23rd to 31st st. I felt MUCH safer - better lighting, curb cuts, and very few pedestrians.
Acording to google, there are two stops that are 200 feet apart.
Just being pedantic, but the two stops at your link are Neald inbound and Neald outbound. And I think Google is putting Neald outbound in the wrong place. It's actually adjacent to Neald inbound.
A better example is Hampshire outbound, a few stops north of there. It's about 200 feet from Fallowfield station. I think it's the closest pair of T stops by far.
The TDP says stops should be 700 feet apart on frequent service routes, but less where there are "significant topographical challenges". (I think this is how consultants say "hills".) So I expect Hampshire will be the first to go when they get to that stage of the Transit Development Plan.
On the other hand, Hampshire inbound is better positioned (about 400 feet from one station, 600 from the other). If you get rid of the outbound stop but not the inbound, it'll be confusing, and the inbound stop is arguably OK per the guidelines due to the hills.
After Hampshire, the next-closest pair of stops on Broadway are about 600 feet apart, close to the guidelines already, and a number of stops on Broadway are over 1000 feet apart. So apart from Hampshire, pushing the stops on Broadway out from 600 feet (and up) to the suggested 700 feet or more wouldn't eliminate many stops.
Getting the buses to run on time should be easier once PAT gets real-time bus position data working.
You go, pseuda. My rule #2 is personal safety rules over rules.
@psued: "I don't think they'd need to walk farther. " They would when they disembark, no? If the nearest stop to your house is odd, and the nearest stop to your destination is even, one way or the other you're walking. (otherwise, the odd/even stop scheme will decay substantially)
@Steven: real-time bus positioning? You say this like you know something I don't -- spill!
@edmunds59: You beg the question; what is your Rule #1? Don't kill anyone?
My Rule #1 is "Don't Die".
"@Steven: real-time bus positioning? You say this like you know something I don't -- spill!"
I think the new fare boxes enabled them to implement GPS tracking. I'm not shocked if the funding to roll out the system doesn't exist though.
Rule #1 Brown belt/brown shoes, black belt/black shoes.
Rule #2 Personal safety over rules.
Rule #3 Don't die, today. More of a guideline than a rule actually, since I try not to be absolute regarding things over which I have limited control.
Rule #4 Breathe the air and take in sunlight the way an oenophile takes wine.
Rule #5 Be on time.
Ideally that's really all I worry about.
Rule #1: Don't talk about Fight Club.
Rule #2: DONT TALK ABOUT FIGHT CLUB!
Real time bus positioning? I had the vague impression that there is a clause in the driver's contract that forbids it.
Paging Stu from McCandless.
Paging Stu from McCandless.
PS Purple belt with pink shoes OK?
"PS Purple belt with pink shoes OK?"
Oh, hell yes, but that's double black diamond expert territory if you can pull it off.
on the original topic, it occurred to me riding to work today that i see people riding on the sidewalks every day. my commute traverses most of morewood, and the cmu contingent really seems to dig the sidewalks. almost had someone pull off one out into the street in front of me yesterday. and i sometimes see folks heading 15+ mph on the sidewalk upstream. that's dangerous, if you ask me!
Rule #4 Breathe the air and take in sunlight the way an oenophile takes wine.
? With a spittoon ??
Ha, ha, sure!
hey bill, check your pms. if you dont have one from me send me one i can reply to.
@edmonds
"Purple belt with pink shoes OK?"
Oh, hell yes, but that's double black diamond expert territory if you can pull it off.
It's what I'd put on today if I were hiking for Appalachian Trail, for sure.
cburch, just did.
Here's what I know about bus GPS.
1) Most of the buses can receive GPS signals. This is what allows the in-bus display to tell you the name of the next stop.
2) I do not know if there is a mechanism for sending positioning data to HQ. I have had conflicting reports on this. One says it does not exist. Another says it exists but is not enabled. A third says it is physically possible but that monetary restrictions prevent their use because it really relies on using positioning data from cell towers, which is private data for commercial use, which involves money, which means no.
3) As to there being a clause in the labor contract prohibiting use of that data (or enabling the mechanism), this too is not known for sure.
4) The new fareboxes are supposed to be able to collect positioning data, but that is more for being able to count the number of riders getting on and off at a stop.
Frankly I do not know who to believe. I do know, though, that this was off-the-shelf equipment and software 10 years ago, and if the problem is money, I'd rather see fewer buses on the street and more ability to actually use what is there.
Having live GPS data for each bus in hand, they could provide lots better service in a dozen ways, which I will not elaborate on here.
Is there any highly technological GPS way to prevent 2, or 3, G2 buses from going by a stop 15 feet apart and 60 seconds before I get to the stop? That would be super awesome. That happens to me at least once a week.
I would probably ride the bus a lot more if I could get real-time tracking data. I really hate standing there at the stop (just happened to me this morning) not knowing if the bus was early and I missed it, or if it's just late. It's definitely enough to tip the balance in favor of riding my bike almost every time. I went from having a bus pass to riding the bus once or twice a month.
ditto salty. Also, there might be two or three different options for me for a bus route, and having some idea which one is on time would help me choose which one to commit to. Waiting 20 minutes for a 10-minute bus ride is ridiculous.
@ stu
As to there being a clause in the labor contract prohibiting use of that data (or enabling the mechanism), this too is not known for sure.
I'm puzzled.
Is the contract not public? Is there some clause in it that may (or may not) be interpreted to include real-time tracking?
Thank you Stu, for providing us so much information on transit.
20 years I've been riding buses, through about six contract cycles and a strike, and I have never once seen even an old copy of the ATU85 contract. I've been able to get my hands on an amazing amount of usually not seen data, but that ain't one of them.
I do know that the cameras on all the buses cannot be used for disciplining drivers. They are primarily used in proceedings against passengers who commit crimes on buses, from vandalism to assault.
There's a CMU project underway for providing real-time data streaming of bus locations having nothing to do with PAT data or the lack of same. It's smartphone based. I have details, just not handy.
What salty & edmonds59 refer to are two of the couple dozen items I mentioned above. I've been after PAT since the mid-1990s to get and implement this stuff. If someone would please hand me $100K, I'd develop that for them, but meanwhile I need to eat, so I've pursued other employment.
I have a SmarTrip card I use when I am (semi-frequently) in Washington, D.C., and using their transit system. You can recharge your farecard online and track your balance. You can also check your archived usage, both on the Metrorail and Metrobus systems. The following shows two trips, one on the Circulator and another coming in from Upper Northwest on the bus and transferring to the subway to come into downtown.
I had thought it tagged what bus stop you got on with GPS data, but it seems it doesn't (thought it does log your Metrorail entry/exit stations). That would have been cool.
# Date & Time ? Desc. Operator Entry Location/
Bus Route Exit
Location Product Change
(+/-) Balance
10 12/29/10
01:10 PM Entry DC Circulator 60001:E-W:601:East-West StoredValue FF -1.00 2.95
11 12/30/10
10:19 AM Entry Metrobus D6 - SIBLEY-STAD ARM D1 D3 D6 StoredValue FF -1.50 1.45
12 12/30/10
11:03 AM Transfer Metrorail Dupont Circle N StoredValue FF 0.00 1.45
13 12/30/10
11:24 AM Exit Metrorail Fed Center SW StoredValue FF -1.10 0.35
I think I'm remembering right that many bus shelters (high volume) have GPS-enabled boards announcing when buses are coming. They obviously have a different system setup and funding structures, but I hope that some of these "best practices" can be imported to Pittsburgh.
Thanks for the comments on riding in and around Pittsburgh. I was concerned after some bad experiences riding in urban areas.
edmonds59:
You rule for posting your rules. Seeking clarification: black shoes/black belt with Whites (once Summer begins of course)? Blue suit/brown accoutrements? Really?
For the sake of those reading these, I shortened my rule to "Don't Die". The unabridged version is "Try Not To Die".
Worry? What, me? Newman, Alfred E.
I don't own a thing white, so, I'm outa rules.
What fashion of wheelman are you then???
(If it is not abundantly apparent, then let me be most explicit, this line of mine is intended entirely for amusement.)
"Karl Kron (Lyman Hotchkiss Bagg, 1846-1911), writing in “10,000 Miles on a Bicycle,” in 1887, devotes a chapter to “White Flannel and Nickel Plate.” His contention is that white must be kept clean and is more impressive. “As regards the solitary rider, the sheen of his plush jacket in cold weather, like the whiteness of his flannel shirt and breeches in summer, gives an ‘object lesson’ to everyone he meets, for it plainly proves that he has not been tumbled into the mud ... It shows, therefore, that the bicycle is a safe vehicle and a clean one ... The glittering spokes of an all- bright bicycle enlighten the stupidest landlord (that the rider is) ... a man of substance ... to be treated with deference.” There is an old account of a meet at which they voted a tall handsome man in white, mounted on a full nickel machine, as the best appearing rider." from "The Bicycle Uniform from Head to Foot" at http://www.thewheelmen.org/sections/publications/pdf/05.pdf
As the second bike on the bus (twice today! Up from "once *ever*"), I'd be happy if people just followed "the rules" for which rack to use. It is somewhat less fun putting a bike on the rack closest to the bus when there is a bike on the rack farthest from the bus (also twice today; wtf?!)
[catching up; boy this is one long thread]
Some random comments:
-- In Canada, the rolling stop is called an "American stop"
-- Riding on the sidewalk in Pittsburgh is unnecessary, unless you're on the Ft. {Pitt, Duquesne} Bridge, or on Liberty during rush hour (no peds, no cars... nice and relaxing).
-- never, ever, trust a car driver; especially if they have a turn signal on.
Maybe PAT should turn its Rack'n'roll demo card (PDF) into a sticker and stick one on the front of each bus. Some people may just not remember some of the finer points (use the rack closest to the bus, put the support arm over the tire but not the fender). (A specialized sticker with just a few points like those might work even better.)
What if the person with the bike closest to the bus gets off first? I assume moving the other person's bike is bad etiquette, but not moving it leads to the "bad" situation described above.
I never knew the fender rule, although doing a quick test on my bike I don't think it makes a difference. The fender is close to the tire and it doesn't take much pressure to just bend it to touch the tire, and it's certainly flexible enough.
Yeah, you know salty, I was thinking the same thing when I read the card.
And sprite, it's probably "somewhat less fun" to have to pull the inside bike out if one gets off first.
There's no apparent way in my mind to "rule" a solution to this conundrum.
However, if a social convention is advanced and adopted within the bike-bus community, perhaps this issue can be resolved amicably?
The "rules" stipulate once one loads their ride, they should occupy a position in the front of the bus. Maybe PAT showed some foresight with this rule? If whomever has their bike in a slot, (any slot), sees someone preparing to load their bike onto the rack, gets off and inquires as to that rider's disembarkation, the two can work out reasonably which bike should go in which slot. Who knows, perhaps each could help the other rack and unrack the rides? Loaded commuting pedalcycles can be unwieldy.
This solution requires consideration, altruism and civility, so I've no illusion it is in any way workable.
But I've been wrong before.
(I realize I'm coming off cynical. Sorry, cranky. Actually, bottom brackety. Think the notion's decent enough to get it out despite my "bad attitude"(toads be coming out my mouth tonight), so I hope whomever can regard the idea sans snark.)
I think it's easier to get a bike off the rear rack (the one closest to the bus) around an occupied front rack than to get it on. Gravity and all.
But in any case, if you load your bike in the rear rack, there's a problem only if (a) somebody else loads a bike, AND (b) you get off before they do. Whereas if you load in the front, there's a problem any time (a) somebody else loads a bike, and sometimes an additional problem if (b) they get off before you do. As a first approximation, you have a problem three times as often:
A loads in rear rack
A on, B on, A off, B off (problem unloading)
A on, B on, B off, A off
A loads in front rack
A on, B on (problem loading), A off, B off
A on, B on (problem loading), B off (problem unloading), A off
If whomever has their bike in a slot, (any slot), sees someone preparing to load their bike onto the rack, gets off and inquires as to that rider's disembarkation, the two can work out reasonably which bike should go in which slot.
If your bike is in the rear slot, there's never any advantage to fighting your way off the bus, negotiating whose destination is closer, and then (half the time) swapping positions. It's always quicker to wait for the other cyclist to board, then decide if swapping is even appropriate while the bus is moving. (But there's little reason to bother, since unloading from either position is pretty easy.)
On the other hand, if you've been forced by a prior Cyclist A to use the front rack, Cyclist A has left, and cyclist C now wants to board, he'd have to use the rear rack and reach over your bike to load his. That's harder. Then it might be appropriate to offer to unload your bike and negotiate your destinations prior to reloading (especially if it looks like he's having trouble). But I expect such 3+ cyclist scenarios are still rare. The simple "rear rack first" rule works pretty well almost all the time.
That is undoubtedly the most detailed analysis of bus/bike loading ever carried out... well, maybe undoubtedly is too strong - these are the internets.
Anyways, my point was that sprite might have been "cyclist C", so her frustration may have been misplaced. Maybe it's unlikely, but possible...
There is no "rear rack first rule", while there is a "ride in the front of the bus rule", precluding "...fighting your way off the bus..."
If "unloading from either position is pretty easy" then there is not a "problem three times as often", is there, as what, two out of three of those "problem" scenarios involve unloading?
The only "problem", given your assumptions and logic, is the one sprite experienced, where the front rack is already occupied. If this in fact true, then a "rear rack first rule" does indeed solve all the problems and I'm sure sprite's employer can effect such a rule.
I, for one, welcome our new Googooglian overlords.
Pardon me for arguing for civility rather then more laws, rules and regulations?
(For what it's worth, I'll always place my bike in the rear rack, nearest the bus.)
Given Tuesday's miserable weather, the "rarity" of scenario "C" is questionable. salty's point has merit.
Anyways, my point was that sprite might have been "cyclist C", so her frustration may have been misplaced.
Fair enough. Personally, should I find myself in such a predicament, I fully intend now to interview the cyclist with the inconveniently located bike, and only then decide whether said cyclist is deserving of a glare and appropriate muttering. (Or maybe I'll just mutter and glare nondirectionally. Yeah, that sounds easier.)
There is no "rear rack first rule", while there is a "ride in the front of the bus rule", precluding "...fighting your way off the bus..."
The rear rack first rule is on the PAT card I linked to. It's also in their video on how to use the racks, where it flashes on screen for almost one entire second. Can't understand how people could miss it.
And sitting in the closest open seat to the front doesn't mean you can just jump off the bus. The closest open seat isn't always very close. There are often people standing near the driver even when there are seats farther back. And you have people getting on and off the bus to get past. Plus you may have to explain to the driver why you're getting off the bus without paying a fare. I'm guessing often Cyclist C will have her bike all loaded by the time you can make it off the bus.
If "unloading from either position is pretty easy" then there is not a "problem three times as often", is there, as what, two out of three of those "problem" scenarios involve unloading?
People who intentionally use the front rack instead of the rear rack not only cause problems to happen three times as often, but the additional problems are loading ones. So it's worse than "three times as often" would indicate.
(For what it's worth, I'll always place my bike in the rear rack, nearest the bus.)
Then you'll get no glaring and muttering from me.
I'll grant you it does appear in the video for almost a second, and does state on the card that the rear open position is to be taken. My bad; there is a "rear rack rule".
I had to ride around town on various errands for a few hours before during and after the evening rush and did notice two buses with a brace of racked bikes, which was encouraging, but may have led to "C" and sprite's unfortunate circumstance.
There is "front of the bus" guidance on the card. It's pure conjecture how easy or difficult it might be in any given circumstance for a biker to disembark from a bus. Experience and time will tell how this plays out, if anyone's paying attention.
People who intentionally use the front rack can only cause problems three times as often if one assumes removing the bike is a problem, and your assertion is that unloading from either position is pretty easy." If loading the front slot causes one problem and loading the rear causes zero, then loading the front rack intentionally causes infinitely more problems, which is not exactly a helpful statistic for decision making.
Accusation, interrogation, glaring and muttering on the other hand can be nothing but helpful in building a rational and reasonable social contract and bond between pedalcyclists. Heck, under the "Castle Law", you'd probably be justified in blowing their ass away for loading up on the front rack.
I for one am glad Manson has taken to glaring and muttering against global warming.
Sorry to suggest rationality and civility might be an approach to the issue, especially when it's so evidently lacking in my own efforts.
Sticker in the window's a fine idea and likely easily accomplished.
Given how very very rarely I've encountered other people racking on that route, naturally my first assumption didn't include more people racking on that route 
But of course it's possible and makes me feel better in all ways so thanks for hypothesizing.
I was also first-off on the first bus and can confirm that off was easier than on.
I just make sure that I talk with the person getting on after me (or who's already on) to verify who's getting off first.
I'm all for rationality and civility, when every other option has been exhausted.
They also make 3-bike bus racks, and I think Stu's mentioned before that one PAT bus has a 3-bike rack. Maybe someday demand will force PAT to get more. That would exacerbate this issue, but what a great problem to have!
Seattle's King County Metro has the three-bike racks and they get a lot of use.
Their video covers multi-bike loading and unloading on the web site and in a video.
:::edit:::
and -- thanks Portland -- here's a nifty video showing our same racks with a technique for the second bike being loaded and unloaded to the inside position.
I think the racks in that video from Portland (Maine) are a little different from ours. One of the wheel slots is open on one side, for instance, and it looks like their racks are mounted lower. But the technique looks like it would work for ours too. Thanks for posting the links!
perhaps a seperate issue, but if one is to put the bar over the wheel not the fender, and one has lovely full fenders... where does the bar go? My fenders cover enough of my wheel that putting it only on the wheel ensures it is not high enough to capture the wheel (almost had a bike bounce out of the rack that way). Not sure about putting it over the fender. Getting on/off the bus with the bike often here that tense Jeopardy Final Question Music urging me to hurry, for some reason, so I think I'm missing something. Shy of following Stu's advice to find a bus waiting with a rack somewhere... What am I missing?
I have a couple of fendered bikes, and have had no problems with putting the J-hook up on the fender rather than trying to fit it under. So far, I have had no trouble. I just make sure the hook is as close to the stem as I can get it.
The 3-bike rack was on bus 2600, which I haven't seen in years. All the 2600s and 2700s are almost 15 years old and will be retired soon.
They are recycling racks, I'm happy to report. Bus 2756 once had a rack and has breathed its last, as this photo aptly shows.
