BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

There is a long thread around here somewhere about this very topic. Can't find it though.

http://bike-pgh.org/bbpress/topic/whats-up-with-the-south-end-of-hot-metal

Agreed, and that's the hope for sure.

My recommendation for now if you wish to cross on Hot Metal from the South Side (in order to be as PC as possible) is to either:

a) Ride on the road along Water Street until you come to the light. Most likely there will be at least one stopped car at the light. In any case, stop, dismount and put the bike on the gravel sidewalk to your right and cross the crosswalk (when appropriate and safe).

b) Instead of riding on Water Street, ride on the next parallel street over, Tunnel Blvd. Stop at the stop sign and safely cross the crosswalk there and then cross the one at Water St.

Personally, I often opt for the latter because in general you can slowly proceed without dismounting. I haven't gotten any gripes about riding along the sidewalk on Hot Metal Street, the "controversial" sidewalk is apparently only the Water Street one directly in front of the AE corporate office.

I commute this route to the SouthSide Works most days and I've had to deal with this as well. A manager at the SouthSide Works development told me the other day that two people walking in or out of the building at the corner entrance were hit by cyclists going around the corner.....something that's worth keeping in mind. A buddy of mine with the URA said that the park being constructed should extend the bike path around the near side of the building and then behind it along the riverfront, which will hopefully ease the problem somewhat, if not entirely. It seems like an easy compromise would be to put up a sign for cyclists to watch pedestrians right at the corner. (I'm left to wonder why they put the entrance of the building right at what might have been expected to be busy corner instead of in the middle.)

You can currently see where the trail will eventually lead behind AE and down along the riverfront. Next time you are on the bridge, look right behind the building, you will be able to see the framework.

This will make things safer for anyone on the sidewalk in front of AE, but is going to be a nightmare for anyone using the trail. The new trail will come up right next to the switchback leading to the bridge crossing. Anyone going from the trail to the bridge, or vice-versa, will need to complete a 180 degree turn in a very small space.

The smartest design, would have been to put the AE building on the other side of their current driveway. Then they could have filled the gap between the building and the bridge with park space, similar to what is on Grant between PNC and the Blvd of the Allies ramp.

No problem. They'll put up a sign saying "walk your bikes" and then tell everyone how great it is.

They will need to physically block the side walk and give clear directions on what to do. South Side Works, take the street, trail go this way.

The new trail will come up right next to the switchback leading to the bridge crossing. Anyone going from the trail to the bridge, or vice-versa, will need to complete a 180 degree turn in a very small space.

I'm not sure this is correct. There's one segment of bridge railing, facing the new trail segment, which looks like it's intended to be removed when the trail is complete. I suspect that, coming off the trail behind the AE building, you will either make a right to head towards the Hot Metal/Water St intersection, or left onto the ramp.

Still may be a bit of traffic chaos, with bikes and peds coming straight down towards the sidewalk, coming straight up from the sidewalk, AND merging 90 degrees to and from the new trail, but at least we won't have the hard 180 betwixt trail and ramp.

I biked through there yesterday. There are a bunch of "no bikes on the sidewalk" signs there now.

I don't personally mind telling people to take the street for now, but I agree that those 180s look a way too tight. I'd hate to try to get a recumbent or tandem through there. I'm not even sure about my own ability to navigate that when there's people coming the other direction.

i do mind people having to take the street. forcing bikes into the street at intersections is always a bad idea, for one thing.

for another, the sign does seem to clearly indicate that the sidewalk is part of the trail. and we have no indication that this is a business district. so we have every right to ride on the sidewalk.

i always ride at a walking pace when i'm around pedestrians, and i advocate that for everyone else. but i say if the sidewalk is where you feel most safe, continue riding there. if someone raises a stink, we can raise one right back.

thanks for the clarification reddan. I hope you're correct, that situation would be much easier and safer.

Question for anyone: Isn't the eventual plan also to run the trail under the hot metal bridge, to create one continuous path, rather than having to cross Hot Metal Street traffic?

If that's the case, it will certainly alleviate any issues with the sidewalk in front of American Eagle.

I enter and exit from the corner. If more people do it, then drivers will expect it and - hopefully - respect it.

It's all about awareness and anticipation. I would believe by now that everyone expects to see bicyclists in the southside works, just as people expect pedestrians everywhere at night on Carson. If it's expected, then it's anticipated - and that's how people drive and also how accidents occur nowadays.

forcing bikes into the street at intersections is always a bad idea, for one thing.

It's bad because they're funneling traffic into the intersection but there's no signal phase for it. It's completely uncontrolled.

They'd never do that with a road.

If that's the case, it will certainly alleviate any issues with the sidewalk in front of American Eagle.

I'm not sure that's true -- what if you want to ride from the Jail Trail to the UPMC Sports Medicine place?

I am fine with riding on the street. I just wish AE would have proactively looked for a solution. Unfortunately, I think they will continue this stance until someone is killed at that intersection by someone making a right without a signal.

The problem of being dumped into the street at the apex of the right turn there is that the traffic entering the turn lane there have no idea they will be merging with the bike traffic from the separate and unseen parallel bridge ramp.

Likewise, permitting the building to be occupied by AE with the incomplete trail link resolving the bike/ped bridge ramp traffic seems to be a property owner/renter assumed risk if they opt no to do anything else.

The gravel path across the street is a joke; its a median never designed to have a path: there are no curb cuts at the cross streets, just 8" blind drops and worse situations with traffic because half or more of it is operating on British traffic rules. We all know how observant drivers are even when you are on their sheet of music.

The BBI inspector for the area spoke to me about AE's barricades and I get his point about bikes on sidewalks, but most importantly he got my issue with the expensive development of the bike/ped bridge who's ramp puts that traffic on the sidewalk without options.

I get the feeling that someone, somewhere up the AE corporate chain of command, is not a cyclist, never was a cyclist, and for that matter is rarely a pedestrian, but has significant influence over how this situation is being handled from within that building.

An architectural change is the most drastic solution, but likely the best solution. While I can understand that entrance being an entrance to the building, it does not make sense that it should be the main entrance to the building. Bikes/peds or not, that's simply a bad place to site the primary entrance.

If we could get through to the management chain that they really should choose to build a better entrance, a lot of this argument would simply disappear. The building is so new (I mean, even Google Street View still shows the construction cranes), you'd think they could just decide to make the alteration as part of it still being under warranty.

I've ridden this intersection multiple times this week, and every time have had an awkward experience with turning traffic as I took the street. I was imagining a wider apron at the corner that I could slow down and make eye contact with drivers and turning cyclists/crossing peds (or just shorter curb that people could just bump over). At the very least, make the handicapped apron on the curb extend to more of the 90 degree sidewalk corner. Secondly, I feel that signs are not the answer as sign over-use allows no clear signal to be displayed.

Well, there really weren't any signs to speak of on that trail, or, at least very few, before yesterday....now, there's a sign coming come down the bridge ramp to the SSW, saying to watch pedestrians (a decent idea, I believe), followed by a sign signaling bikes to detour onto Water Street (could be worse), and another at the corner, telling cyclists that the rest of the sidewalk is pedestrian only. And, of course, when I considered leaving the sidewalk follow this dictate and turn onto Water Street, I stopped because there were two cars turning right at the corner. Suffice it to say there's a good chance I'll be ignoring this last sign any time there's a lot of car traffic at this intersection, using Water Street when it's free of cars enough to want to use it.

If there was some actual planning into this area to take into account the bike traffic, there would be no right turn onto Water St coming from Hot Metal and instead make the traffic turn onto the low-traffic Tunnel Blvd. a block parallel to it.

I agree.....I'm not sure the Hofbrauhaus would be thrilled since they'd lose the road that provides direct entry, but maybe not. I wonder if there is enough room on that shoulder of road to put up some kind of physical barrier that would allow bikes to ride onto Water Street at the corner but be shielded from traffic. I'm thinking something roughly comparable to the way jersey barriers are used on Second Avenue to separate a protected bike path for a block or so. Although jersey barriers would be total overkill there and might be easy for cars to wreck into.

Remember: City of PGH Ordinance 419.10 PROHIBITING SKATEBOARDS, ROLLER SKATES, SKOOTERS AND BICYCLES ON SIDEWALKS IN BUSINESS DISTRICTS.

b. Violation and penalty. Any person violationg any provision of this section shall be fined $25 plus costs.

This was established, from what I remember, in 1988 when a bunch of adolescents were causing havoc on skatesboards on the streets of Squirrel Hill.

We all use the sidewalks at times but be aware.

I believe someone measured this particular sidewalk, and mentioned it may not qualify as a "business district"? Is that true, or did I imagine it?

^ditto

But I don't make it a habit of reminding non-cyclists of this. [keepin it on the dl ]

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/BIKE/WEB/bikelaws.htm

Section 3508. Pedalcycles on sidewalks and pedalcycle paths.

...(b) Business districts.-- A person shall not ride a pedalcycle upon a sidewalk in a business district unless permitted by official traffic-control devices, nor when a usable pedalcycle-only lane has been provided adjacent to the sidewalk.

dwillen, i believe it was Lyle who checked that out. if i recall correctly, he determined that it was just short of the 300 feet required for it to be considered a business district.

The signs coming down the bridge, are they official city signs or more of AE exerting themselves?

Has Mr. Patchan been looped in on this? I was in communication for a while with city council trying to get the barriers removed, but it seems like AE is using it's power to now get things changed more officially.

I would be fine with a "No turn on red" sign (that was enforced, ha!) and a every-cycle ped crossing across water street. Would mean you only had to wait less than a minute if the situation looked dicey when first arrived.

Yeah, that was me. It's an open question whether the vacant lot is an "industrial site", though, and as soon as the construction is complete, it will be.

No right turn onto Water St - on red or green - seems like it ought to be mandatory in any case. That doesn't eliminate the direct access to the Hofbrauhaus.

Seems like the best solution would be to make it a one way road going out, with a contra-flow bike lane on the other side. Cars can easily turn right on the next street down and get to the same places.

Do you think you could get a tractor-trailer to the loading zone for the hofbrauhaus? In my minds eye, I can't picture that working without a left turn from Hot Metal onto Water.

I hate the SS works so much

These new signs are definitely official signs. The annoyance of them was compounded by the fact that road crews removed the jersey barriers on second avenue below the Jail trail that separated the bike path....except the one jersey barrier that they left sticking out at an angle from the corner before you go up the hill....forcing cyclists to veer out into the road to get around it. Anybody have any clue why this was done?

The "chute" was abysmal - good riddance! Although, it would have been better if they had just pushed them out and cut the cars down to 1 lane each direction.

Well, I have sent off a few different 'statements' about this. I know a lot of us use this on a daily basis (I did til I moved) and it is annoying to see what was once a fantastic example of good cycling infrastructure slowly crumble.

Some helpful links:

This is in District 3, so Mr Kraus is the best bet there:

http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/district3/html/district_3_feedback.html

Also, for sending suggestions/comments about the traffic at water street, Pat Hassett is the city traffic engineer:

pat.hassett@city.pittsburgh.pa.us

The "chute" has apparently been dismantled for resurfacing of 2nd Ave. Once that work is done I expect it to be rebuilt.

this seems like a good opportunity to get something positive done at that corner... i think some of the heavy hitters should try and get some ideas into the city before everything is put back how it was