Contact 311 about the leaves.
2014-10-02 09:08:08
38
Phipps Conservatory bike lane problems
While riding in the inbound lane past Phipps today and yesterday, people using a parking payment kiosk yelled out to me that I'm supposed to use the bike lane. Last week, it was a police officer going by in a van telling me the same thing. (I use the bike lane going home from work each day, but it's too inconvenient to use going into Oakland from Squirrel Hill, requiring crossing the road three times to get on and off the lane.)
As we all know, bikes are not required by state or local law to use bike lanes, and the road through the golf course and past Phipps is plenty wide enough to safely accommodate both bikes and cars.
I stopped and talked to both car parkers this week. A woman who was taking a class at CMU said she's not against biking or upset with bikers, but it's the bike lane that she has issues with--about two dozen parking spaces in front of Phipps have been removed, from the Schenley Park bridge next to the main Phipps entrance. Last week, the president of the Squirrel Hill Urban Coalition asked me what was up with parking in front of Phipps because his wife was having trouble finding parking when taking classes at CMU. (Note, these are both older women having parking issues, a constituency that it would be nice to not have a conflict with.)
I'm afraid that the current truncated bike lane has made biking through Schenley Park more problematic than it was before: Drivers who are having trouble parking are blaming bikers; drivers who are backed up in traffic at the new stop signs at the Schenley Visitor Center are blaming bikers (the needed traffic control and calming could have been implemented without the bike lane).
Beyond all that, one side of the path on the Oakland side of the bridge is now covered in fallen leaves, creating a safety hazard; bike lane maintenance has been an ongoing concern and will be become more of an issue when winter hits.
2014-10-02 08:43:21
I don't see these as problems. You can and should still bike in the travel lane past Phipps as you always have - the bike lane hasn't changed that, it just hasn't directly benefited you. People, including the police, need to learn that bikes aren't required to use bike lanes just because they're there, and it sounds like you're doing what you can to help educate people.
Why are these people parking in front of Phipps and walking to CMU? I'm not that familiar with CMU but aren't there two garages on campus? Surely one of them must be closer to their class, and vehicle storage is not in my opinion the best use for a park (or a street). There will NEVER be enough on-street parking for people, especially as long as it remains underpriced.
Yes, the bike lane will need to be maintained and resources will need to be allocated for that. I believe Public Works is aware of that. Maybe now that bike infrastructure seems to be more of a priority for the current administration, these things will be taken care of better.
I use the new cycle path and think it's great. In fact, because it's there I now ride with my 12 year old daughter to her school in Oakland every day. I see a lot of others using it too so they must find it to be some benefit as well.
2014-10-02 09:21:36
Maybe we need some sharrows on street near the bike lanes?
2014-10-02 09:49:11
I agree with Mick, some sharrows will help.
Also, CMU has a public parking garage right on campus; I believe the evening rates (after 5pm) are cheap. Why would anyone park in the park (so to speak); it's a long walk. I realize it's probably a bit cheaper, but so what? And there's always the bus.
2014-10-02 10:01:24
There are better uses for parks than free (or at least cheap) parking for people who are not using the park for anything else.
2014-10-02 10:27:56
Ahlir some people care about things being cheaper/ need to save the money and the argument of "so what" is completely flippant. I'd walk a few extra blocks to save a couple of dollars.
I'm glad the mayor is interested in making the city more bike friendly. Some of these new bike lanes seem pointless to me and more of a statement rather than an improvement. I never thought that stretch through Schenley was problematic or dangerous in either direction prior to the bike lanes being added.
2014-10-02 10:39:31
@ Tetris_d Some of these new bike lanes seem pointless to me and more of a statement rather than an improvement. I never thought that stretch through Schenley was problematic or dangerous in either direction prior to the bike lanes being added.
I live just a few blocks from there. I go along that road very often. I agree with Trtis_d. It's nice to have bike riders acknowledged, but this isn't a lane that was needed.
OTOH, I do not view parking in the parks for non-park users as a positive thing, so it's pretty much a wash.
2014-10-02 10:49:14
@ahlir " I realize it’s probably a bit cheaper..."
That one or two dollars a day saved by parking in Schenley Park probably makes a big difference to your average college student. The trick is to convince them that if they left the car at home and biked to class they could save even more - much much more - and they might enjoy the trip too.
Many years ago when I was in grad school (1980’s) I used to park up on Center Ave. and walk down to the Pitt campus. I only rode my bike recreationally at the time so commuting by bike never really entered my thought process. Looking back, I could have commuted by bike and actually gotten to class quicker than by driving and walking. I would have saved all that gas money too. I wonder how many of those drivers parking in Schenely Park would be in the same situation.
2014-10-02 11:19:59
"Some of these new bike lanes seem pointless to me and more of a statement rather than an improvement. I never thought that stretch through Schenley was problematic or dangerous in either direction prior to the bike lanes being added."
I would agree. The more I hear people discuss this particular one (Phipps) the more it sounds like a really poor choice for a first phase project, or even as a statement.
I think the entire park should be dis-incentivized to drivers as a connection to the highway system. It's a holdover from 1950's thinking pattern of making every available street part of a motor highway network. A bike lane in a park should be a moot point.
2014-10-02 11:37:49
Regarding the usefulness of the three new cycletracks, I think more than a few of us would agree that they weren't really needed, since we're used to riding on road stretches that would make the old Penn Ave, Schenley Dr and Saline St. feel downright blissful.
However, over the past month I've seen many riders that looked like they would not be riding on those streets had the bike lanes not been put in. This to me makes the investment worthwhile, not only as we're getting more people to ride but also because it may lead to bigger things. Peduto did say 5 miles of bike lanes, right? We're at two miles or so. Hopefully more useful lanes (to us) will come over the next few years.
As far as the intersection near Phipps goes, a roundabout might be a good solution here? There's certainly enough space and it's a flat area. I realize Pittsburgh commuters are not familiar with these, but they totally work. Obviously this doesn't mean they are the right solution for this intersection.
2014-10-02 12:38:06
You're right, it was a bit flip to chastise people for being cheap, possibly for good reasons. Especially since I'm pretty cheap myself. One of the reasons I ride a bike is the cost benefit (another being convenience).
I understood the original post to refer to people who were taking extension courses at CMU. And live in Squirrel Hill. And are apparently elders. Parking in front of Phipps doesn't make much sense. But that's an opinion and maybe I should keep it to myself.
2014-10-02 12:41:03
To make myself clear: The Penn Ave bike lane is a wonderful, near-miraculous thing.
There might actually be some people that have ridden because of Saline Street, or Phipps, (or Beacon and Wightman) when they would not ride otherwise.
Or there may not be such persons. I've never met one.
2014-10-02 13:24:33
If they live in SqHill, they are by definition very close to at least one of 61ABCD/67/69, all of which pass directly in front of CMU.. If they are elders, they may very well qualify for a free bus pass.
Do you see where I'm going with this? "What are you doing driving?"
2014-10-02 13:54:49
That CMU garage is free after 5 and on weekends, unless it has changed very recently.
I also hate to see park space used as parking for people not out to enjoy the park (or through traffic), and that aspect of Schenley has angered me as long as I've been here. I was thrilled to see that a long stretch of formerly-free parking on Circuit Rd. now has a pay station. Fewer people seem to be parked there in the mornings, and I enjoy my trip through the park even more.
2014-10-02 14:02:05
Is making double bike lanes on one side of the street common in other areas?
I've only ridden on the one at the bottom of Greenfield and it's almost annoying enough to make me not use the lane when I'm going into Oakland. I don't like having to screw around all the turns and bushes once that section goes off the road and I don't like having to squeeze through the bollard at the end or cut across the two lanes if I don't want to go the windy way
For some reason, I thought the bike lane in Schenley Park was on Panther Hollow Rd. Instead, I just realized it's on Schenley Drive, one of the tamest roads in town, with shoulders on large parts of that section already there.
How much decorative bike lanes do we have to install before we can get useful ones? Reminds me of the stupid trail that runs along the Waterfront, which I never use because it cuts through a million shop entrances/exits and has a gravel section. Instead, I'm still jumping over curbs and running down a muddy hill on the other end of that shopping complex (by Macy's) because it's less annoying
2014-10-02 14:11:35
@ Pierce A bike lane on Panther Hollow Blvd would be awesome beyond words!
2014-10-02 15:32:36
I bears repeating that the the Schenley Park lanes are probably meant for recreational bikers not necessarily for the commuters. It will eventually connect to the Oval and then to Pocussett. (As I understand it.)
Use them if they're convenient. If not, don't.
I find the Saline lanes ok. I even don't mind that on-road stretch: the (admittedly small) payoff is a shorter path to the trail.
2014-10-02 18:08:26
@Ahlir
If it dumps out on Blvd of the Allies, it kind of seems like a bike lane to nowhere for recreational users who aren't comfortable on the road. I guess I can see kids and families just doing a loop or whatever, but why not just use the park trail network for that?
2014-10-02 18:19:50
@Pierce: The plan is to have it turn into the street next to the park, go under the Blvd then up to the Overlook road. Some of this was posted a while ago.
2014-10-02 18:22:54
It would be great for a fully developed network of bike lanes to get dropped on the city overnight - but barring that, you have to start somewhere.
Owning and operating a car is expensive. Anyone who claims they can afford that but can't afford the cost of parking has their head up their ass. Likely willfuly.
2014-10-02 18:29:05
@ahlir
So it's a bike lane in a park, that in the future is going to connect to, what, disc golf?
@salty
"– but barring that, you have to start somewhere." I'd prefer starting places that actually *will* connect to places in the future. The easy hanging fruit mentality is getting on my nerves.
2014-10-02 18:48:52
Anyone with half a brain knew the "Getinthebikelane!" shouting would start. I could offer some suggestions as to how to deal with that but it's been suggested that some of my methods would be impolite.
2014-10-02 19:00:17
@Pierce: What is this thing you speak of, "disk golf"?
I see a biking path from Oakland to Squirrel Hill (and back) suitable for people who fell intimidated by cars and would like some reassurance that they won't simply get run over if they dare to ride on a street (or take their kids along).
I think all of us, whether they remember or not, in the beginning found traffic intimidating. Hugging the curb, and praying you would not get run over. Eventually you got over it, even routinely took the lane. But that first bit was a bit hard, wasn't it? You had to will yourself into traffic and deal with the anxiety, until you got used to it. That's great for you (and me). But other people might need a gentler curve. In the end: more people on bikes. It's all good.
2014-10-02 19:45:32
Couple of things ...
The Schenley cycle track goes to Anderson playground. If you go into the playground and follow the road to the turnaround, you're about 10' from the sidewalk along the Blvd of the Allies. There are two possibilities to connect from here to Parkview and hence to South Oakland: (a) designate the sidewalk across the bridge as shared use; (b) give the road a road diet and add a bike lane to Parkview. In either case, going through Anderson playground allows bikes to connect with the Boulevard of the Allies without getting involved in traffic on the ramp from Panther Hollow Bridge to the Blvd.
Many people think that the highest and best use of Schenley Park is something other than serving as a free/cheap parking lot for CMU and Pitt. But don't forget all the parking around the statue in front of Phipps. When I moved to Pittsburgh, this was public parking. Then it got to be reserved for Phipps during the spring and fall flower shows. Then it got to be reserved for Phipps all the time. I have no clue how this happened. But one way to address the loss of parking for the cycle track would be to revert, say, half the parking around the statue to public parking at whatever rates prevail for the existing nearby spaces.
Could the stop sign for cars headed from Oakland to the Blvd across Panther Hollow Bridge be moved closer to the crosswalk? When I try to get from the cycle track to Schenley Drive headed for SqHill, cars headed out of Oakland have to stop at the stop sign, then again at the crosswalk -- but they aren't inclined to stop twice and there's currently enough room to accelerate to a pretty fast speed.
As for "get off the road into the bike path", public education is needed. Plus training for the police (there were reports of a similar problem of police understanding on the Penn Ave bike lanes)
2014-10-04 00:26:29
@ pierce From reading most of your posts, I suspect you are a veteran commuter that wants to get from point A to point B fast and safe. Makes perfect sense. Many folks start riding on a bike path/lane and then maybe riding with groups on the road with a Team Decaf or other group and so-on. The progression would be they move to where you are now, but not everyone makes it to a full commuter that rides all year through about every condition on our roadways like yourself. Keep in mind, for some starting out a little ride through a park is the beginning. They got to start somewhere.
The start of bike lanes might not be perfect, but as they get put in place, I would imagine it is easier to present the next step to the city to connect them.
Thanks Mary for your post. Very educational.
2014-10-04 10:21:37
I went for a ride yesterday specifically to hit a couple of the new lanes.
Went to the Phipps one expecting to not like it, but I think it really works OK. I'm not sure, if it's intent is to allow people to commute from A to B, where it gets anyone, but aside from that, it's good. There REALLY needs to be a stop sign at the end of the lane at the Anderson playground driveway. As a cyclist, if I want to go under the underpass on to Overlook Drive, I can move around to get enough sight line to not get t-boned. There was a woman coming out of Anderson playground in an suv with a child in the back seat who literally had to take a leap of faith to pull out and go. That's pretty effed up.
Saline St was cool. Although I will never take that crappy "path" that cuts back along the tree line and behind the b'ball courts. I just go on the street when the lane ends. Prior to the lane I never stayed on the path once out from under the underpass anyway.
I suppose while I appreciate the concept of "making a place where you can ride with your kids", I only accept it to a point. Since we can't bike-lane every piece of roadway on the planet, at some point we're all going to have to pull up our pants and demand that we be able to safely ride on streets, bike lane or not. Even kids should be able to ride on fucking neighborhood streets (like the Run)(or parks) without getting hit by fucking cars.
2014-10-06 06:51:12
I actually use the lane in front of Phipps going outbound (from Bigelow toward Phipps) not too infrequently. It is the inbound lane I find a little odd. I do agree that the lanes have multiple objectives and probably the first objective should be to provide a welcoming place for less aggressive / experienced cyclists. In fact, if one of my daughters was riding along one the last thing I would want is a stravassole doing a time trial down one of those lanes.
For what it is worth Geneva has an extensive mix of dedicated bike paths, marked zones on the sidewalks separating bicycles and pedestrians and marked lanes on the streets that wind up in all sorts of interesting places (like somewhere in the middle of the street if necessary). What they most definitely do NOT have is a 4' law. It is nothing like Copenhagen or Utrecht but you certainly can get around on a bike once you figure out the system and develop a degree of understanding for the French/Swiss drivers...
2014-10-06 07:44:34
> There are two possibilities to connect from here to Parkview and hence to South Oakland: (a) designate the sidewalk across the bridge as shared use ....
FWIW, since it's not a business district, riding on the sidewalk is perfectly legal, though it may bear reinforcement with signage.
2014-10-08 13:30:30
"The plan is to have it turn into the street next to the park, go under the Blvd then up to the Overlook road. Some of this was posted a while ago."
That sucks. I'm trying to commute not take a tour of the city. Panther Hollow Road is the elephant in that room. It's a straight shot from Oakland to Squirrel Hill and it's 4 lanes because motorists already jammed up the Parkway and surface streets. Cut a lane out of each direction, put up barriers, and a climbing lane up Hobart, done.
2014-10-08 15:10:08
It would be cool if Overlook were a 2-way street for bikes only, which would make a lot of sense if the cycletrack connected. It's one of my preferred ways to leave Oakland when I have the time, and I bet it would be really fun to ride downhill. Assuming they didn't make a narrow little bike lane that would totally ruin it.
I can kind of understand that some of their design choices are meant to make the less-confident feel comfortable, but I don't see how that would be accomplished with infrastructure that confuses even experienced riders. If we see that it's too hard to get into the bike lane we'll ignore it, and if the lane ends somewhere awkward or we need to exit we can just bust some kind of quick move to get smoothly back into traffic. But novices are more likely to have to dismount and maybe walk, wait a longer time for a break to merge, and just generally feel stranded, awkward and perhaps embarrassed (I would have been). That's not good marketing.
2014-10-08 15:43:27
“The plan is to have it turn into the street next to the park, go under the Blvd then up to the Overlook road. Some of this was posted a while ago.”
Really, you can hop on the paved multi-use trails and already connect to overlook road via the underpass to the pool or access the sidewalk on the bridge to access parkview by following the path around the perimeter of Anderson playground. It's not really marked, and there is no wayfinding signage, but that much is doable now.
2014-10-08 15:44:27
^What Lee said.
2014-10-08 17:41:21
@Lee, @Benzo:
There are two sorts of bikers: people who use it as transportation, and people who use it for recreation. To me, what's going on in Schenley Park is for the latter group. If it can be used by the former (like the EFT and the JHT) that's great but it's not required. The goal should be to routinize the use of bicycles in the city, for whatever purpose.
I guess it depends where exactly you live, but I live in SqH and work in Oakland. My direct routes are Schenley Drive and Beeler/Wilkins/Murray (maybe Forbes, but I've been on the buses enough times to feel apprehensive riding on the way up, and I get annoyed by the pavement on the way down). I might wander over to Overlook if it's a really nice day and I'm in the mood. And I'm ok with cars on Panther Hollow Rd; we should have the decency to give them some place to go. I mean, you know, like we do for cigarette smokers.
More generally, I have only two pet peeves:
1) the lack of sharrowing, like on Forbes between Oakland and Marg. Morrison (not to mention 5th, or Penn). Every 4-lane street must have right-lane sharrows (and signage): to me, as a regular rider, this is much more important than all the other stuff: it grants legitimacy to biking and drivers will notice that. (And it's cheap to implement!)
2) theutterly complete lack of speed limit enforcement . This is totally inexcusable. Can we get that new police chief guy to look into it? And then, 20mph limits on city streets.
As a dues-paying member of bikepgh, I would like to know that they are working on these issues.
2014-10-08 18:48:34
We already have more miles of trails than any recreational cyclist is going to use. Hell, they can ride all the way to D.C. It doesn't make any sense to add more of it and (although the kid riding with training wheels downtown would suggest otherwise, that people ride for fun on small stretches of road) I'm dubious people are recreationally riding back and fro around Phipps. (ignoring the fact that there's already trails around there that go by the same area)
I think making regular destinations and departure points easily and safely accessible by bicycle would do far more to routinize cycling in the city. Despite the playground connector, I still think this is a bikelane to nowhere. Even when connected, it looks like it will just make a southern arc back into Oakland, which is already pretty well connected... to Oakland, where it starts.
2014-10-09 15:50:02
@Pierce wrote
"We already have more miles of trails than any recreational cyclist is going to use. Hell, they can ride all the way to D.C. It doesn’t make any sense to add more of it and (although the kid riding with training wheels downtown would suggest otherwise, that people ride for fun on small stretches of road) I’m dubious people are recreationally riding back and fro around Phipps. (ignoring the fact that there’s already trails around there that go by the same area)"
While I agree that the Phipps bike lane is less than useful for commuting, I have to disagree with your entire first paragraph. I hear the same b.s. from car drivers all the time. The last thing we need is division in the ranks.
2014-10-10 05:49:26
Last night, on the way home I took the Phipps bikelane from Oakland to the 3-way intersection. It was relaxing, as compared to riding up on the road.In the inbound direction I would still take the road (the new stop sign makes life easy).
Sharrows and speed limits are what we need to make the city as a whole bikable. Bikelanes help.
2014-10-10 08:18:30
*speed limit enforcement
2014-10-10 09:13:10