New Oakland Bike Lane (Pittsburgh: 2014, safer, designs)

[tclifton]

Originally Posted by Der Schwabe

Arguably, you have no options. You can go different places - so you have the ability to go places (obviously), just as you would if you decided to walk there, take a bus, bike, or uber to any number of places in the city and greater area. But you have no options as far as how you get there. You can't simply bus, bike, uber, or walk out to where you live. Those are the options people enjoy.

The only options I care about are:
1) When to go somewhere
2) Where to go

The "How" option is meaningless to me.

A car gives me such far greater latitude in those options than the other ones.

[Goinback2011]

Originally Posted by BigPizzaHutFan

I'm glad that I live and work in the city and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. I couldn't imagine having to drive on the freeways around here every day.

I take the T downtown to work. My 3 year old car has 7k miles on it. The harebrained scheme to eliminate traffic signals at Stanwix and Liberty next year will make it unwalkable. But it will be perfect for bike riders who disregard traffic signals anyway. Until they get sued.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Catia

While I understand many prefer to bike & live close to their work, that's not realistic for many folks, as the sole method of transportation, especially families with children.

If you actually buy a house & your employer changes locations, or your job is eliminated, most people can't just pack up & move if their new job is on the other side of town. No one can really bank of their job being there in the same exact location for the next 30 yrs in this economy.

I'm not understanding some of BB's points. Not everyone, in fact most people couldn't just have a bike only. It just wouldn't be practical.

If you work in a trade, you will be driving to worksites, biking with tool boxes that weigh 100lbs & tools that could never be carried on a bicycle.

Social workers/case workers need cars for home & site visits all over town.

There's traveling nurses & medical assistants all over the area.

If you have children & need to take one to school, one to the Dr & then also go to work, & take one to sports practice after school, it's almost impossible. I couldn't see doing this in the winter either.

The reasons/necessity for people not going the bicycle only route is a reality, not just a bunch of lazy people.

I suppose if you are a single renter without children, or a long term lease, you have the option to pick up & go where & when the job market carries you elsewhere, because you have less financial responsibilities, but that's more of a nomadic alternative lifestyle, not something that could truly work for the majority.

And your point is? It's not like anyone is advocating for cars to be illegal.

[BigPizzaHutFan]

Originally Posted by Der Schwabe

Transportation options are certainly not always so convenient, but you make choices in where you live that let you to determine how easily and flexibly you commute and get around.

My wife and I made a conscious decision to buy a house in Beechview over more "affluent" areas for precisely this reason; Easy T access to the things we do every day, and easy access to the arteries when we have no choice but to drive. It's been the best thing we could have ever done for our quality of life. A mortgage that's less than 8% of our income per month is nice too.

[BigPizzaHutFan]

Originally Posted by Goinback2011

I take the T downtown to work. My 3 year old car has 7k miles on it. The harebrained scheme to eliminate traffic signals at Stanwix and Liberty next year will make it unwalkable. But it will be perfect for bike riders who disregard traffic signals anyway. Until they get sued.

Real world experience with similar schemes in European cities says that you're wrong. Sorry.


(I cross at the Stanwix and Liberty intersection multiple times a day and it is a nightmare. Drivers don't care.)

[Goinback2011]

Originally Posted by BigPizzaHutFan

Real world experience with similar schemes in European cities says that you're wrong. Sorry.


(I cross at the Stanwix and Liberty intersection multiple times a day and it is a nightmare. Drivers don't care.)

It's going to get much worse when they don't stop at all.

[BigPizzaHutFan]

It's been a successful idea in larger cities than this. I'll rely on their experiences as opposed to the opinion of a guy on the Internet.

[Goinback2011]

Originally Posted by BigPizzaHutFan

It's been a successful idea in larger cities than this. I'll rely on their experiences as opposed to the opinion of a guy on the Internet.

I would like to see a list of cities with comparable intersections that have lots of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. You have that right?

[norcider]

Originally Posted by Goinback2011

I take the T downtown to work. My 3 year old car has 7k miles on it. The harebrained scheme to eliminate traffic signals at Stanwix and Liberty next year will make it unwalkable. But it will be perfect for bike riders who disregard traffic signals anyway. Until they get sued.

Because unlike cyclists, motorists never disregard traffic signals. When is the exception the rule?

[Goinback2011]

Originally Posted by norcider

Because unlike cyclists, motorists never disregard traffic signals. When is the exception the rule?

Once the signals are gone only the injured will need to worry about it. And their lawyers.