More bike lanes (Pittsburgh, Liberty, McDonald: student loans, tax, live)

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

Wow...the PG commenters are real pieces of work. Every bike article that comes out brings out the swarms of disgruntled self centered drivers

And you are someone who only sees your point of view. The fact is these lanes are not the best use of a public resource from a cost benefit analysis. Penn Avenue proves that. We are getting all these lanes so a few politicians can further their own agenda of looking good on a national stage. Public resources should be used based on cost benefit analysis not based on some politicians ambitions or the screaming of some small group. The current administration has made getting around downtown more of a nightmare than it already was.

[Pretzelogik]

Pittsburgh's steep streets are a battle for residents in the winter Why not?

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

Gosh it really does sucks when a majority needs to give up a little space for a minority. Minorities wouldn’t need to be so vocal if the majority wasn’t trying to keep them quiet. Without a loud voice and a mandated stake at the table, minorities (no matter what they are made up of) would continue to be marginalized. In this case, people can be killed without safe and connected bike lanes.

I imagine there isn’t much worse of a feeling than to be part of a minority that is being railed against continuously by the majority when all you want is a little bit of room to enjoy your life. And yes, this goes far beyond bike lanes, but this whole “small groups shouldn’t make anyone in the majority change anything” way of thinking really drives me mad.

Of course you use inflammatory rhetoric. The fact is Penn Avenue is a mess at various times because of the bike lane. This is a tiny minority making a mess for a huge majority. Getting around downtown is a nightmare sometime even late in the evening and it is getting worse. We should be spending taxpayer dollars to fix that before spending taxpayer dollars to appease some tiny minority and promote the personal agenda of a few politicians.

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

And you are someone who only sees your point of view. The fact is these lanes are not the best use of a public resource from a cost benefit analysis. Penn Avenue proves that. We are getting all these lanes so a few politicians can further their own agenda of looking good on a national stage. Public resources should be used based on cost benefit analysis not based on some politicians ambitions or the screaming of some small group. The current administration has made getting around downtown more of a nightmare than it already was.

In that case, maybe we shouldn't plow or salt dead end streets, since that use of public funds only helps that small group that lives on that street.

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

In that case, maybe we shouldn't plow or salt dead end streets, since that use of public funds only helps that small group that lives on that street.

That is an essential city service which has a positive effect on some people without a negative offset. In the case of something like the Penn Avenue bike lane, it helps a very small number of people while hurting many more. The city spent a bunch of money to actually hurt people.

In addition I rarely if ever see bikes doing anything but being operated recklessly. The go on sidewalks, ignore traffic signals, and weave in between cars.

All of these bike lanes are to achieve a single purpose and that is to get Peduto and a few others noticed on the national stage. It is pure politics not spending the taxpayers' money in the most cost effective way.

[xdv8]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

All of these bike lanes are to achieve a single purpose and that is to get Peduto and a few others noticed on the national stage. It is pure politics not spending the taxpayers' money in the most cost effective way.

Do you really not see how promoting Pittsburgh while making the urban improvements that other major cities have done a decade ago is a good thing and cost effective? You have the typical narrow focus that Pittsburgh needs to fight tooth and nail. Maybe Penn downtown isn't he best, so scrap all other bike lanes? That's not smart nor will it help promote Pittsburgh as a place for younger people (likely not you.)

I have never ridden a bike for transport, I own a car but bus to work. Bike riders do often irritate me but I also understand that part of that irritation is because of the lack of infrastructure for them.

[ferraris]

It boggles my mind how people can see large multi-thousand dollar machines, requiring tons of storage space and regular, costly maintenance and insurance as some how a more "essential" service than bikes. Not to mention the safety and environmental costs.

Yes, bike riders are smaller in numbers, but the spending is proportional (and probably still in favor of cars, even with Bicycle Bill as mayor).

And I say this as someone who is primarily a car/bus user.

[xdv8]

Originally Posted by ferraris

It boggles my mind how people can see large multi-thousand dollar machines, requiring tons of storage space and regular, costly maintenance and insurance as some how a more "essential" service than bikes. Not to mention the safety and environmental costs.

Yes, bike riders are smaller in numbers, but the spending is proportional (and probably still in favor of cars, even with Bicycle Bill as mayor).

And I say this as someone who is primarily a car/bus user.

They can't bike home 15 miles away after work and they only care about heir own personal inconveniences.

[eschaton]

I can see why drivers might have been inconvenienced by the bike lane on Penn Avenue, as it was a narrow street which lost two-way traffic as a result.

But the new bike lanes? Come on. Fort Pitt Boulevard is very lightly trafficked. There's no reason at all for it to be a three-lane, one-way road. There are so few "active" businesses (and street parking spots) on that road that I think the amount of cyclists benefiting will be greater than the number of drivers who are inconvenienced.

Stanwix is more problematic, because it's a higher-traffic road. But a lot of the issues with the road - such as people zooming by too fast - would be alleviated by shrinking the width of the lanes, which adding bike lanes would naturally do.

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

I walk daily to and from my office via Penn Avenue in the Strip and have yet to see any massive traffic back-ups as a result of the bike lane there. I HAVE seen numerous cyclists outbound on Penn Avenue continue outbound---against traffic---though, which is illegal. The city might want to consider a better alternate route for cyclists to continue outbound once they reach 16th Street other than the laughable current route that advises you to go up the alley behind McDonald's and then wraps you back across Penn and over to Smallman, which I feel is dangerous even for motorists, let alone cyclists and pedestrians.

IIRC there are plans to eventually continue the bike lane to the 31st Street Bridge. This would eliminate all the street side parking on the southern side of Penn Avenue through the heart of the Strip District though, unless they decided to make Penn Avenue only one lane through the Strip. Actually, that might be a great idea - I never really see the second lane on Penn getting much use unless it's the weekend and the weather is nice, and if there's congestion on Penn you could always switch to Liberty for a few blocks.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by xdv8

They can't bike home 15 miles away after work and they only care about heir own personal inconveniences.

Be thankful not everyone lives where they work. People would be on top of each other. Take out the money that the automobile industry generates for the nations economy vs that of the bicycled economy and you'll see another major economic issue like 2008-2009. The country/world needs automobiles and so does da 'burgh.