Bike Lanes Advisory Board (Pittsburgh, Penn: live in, versus, safe)

[prnlvsxy]

Looks like there has been a lot of complaints about the existing bike lanes downtown such that a council member has proposed an advisory board that oversees the creation of any new lanes.

Mayor Peduto's chief of staff said the mayor's office has received lots of complaints about the lanes and agrees that the advisory group would offer a structured way of resolving problems.


Bike lane proposals in Pittsburgh might get more scrutiny | TribLIVE

[szug-bot]

I question the need for a board....that is another layer of government. Could they just allow public opinion for any taking of public street area?

Is Scott Briker correct - there ARE "policies for planning and engineering bike lanes"? I am not aware that there are. I thought the city just does it. Sure, there is are standards - width, and those cute painted symbols, but i do not think there is an actual policy. Fort Pitt Boulevard businesses might agree with me.

Good for Kail-Smith to push back against a powerful lobby. I am not anti-bike, not by a long shot. The approach as of late of bike interests weighs heavily to one side, though.

[tyovan4]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

I question the need for a board....that is another layer of government. Could they just allow public opinion for any taking of public street area?

Is Scott Briker correct - there ARE "policies for planning and engineering bike lanes"? I am not aware that there are. I thought the city just does it. Sure, there is are standards - width, and those cute painted symbols, but i do not think there is an actual policy. Fort Pitt Boulevard businesses might agree with me.

Good for Kail-Smith to push back against a powerful lobby. I am not anti-bike, not by a long shot. The approach as of late of bike interests weighs heavily to one side, though.

I support the Board, and I applaud the inclusion of diverse interests groups in it. Hopefully now, some common sense and pragmatism will prevail in this aspect of planning. I think we all want everyone to be safe, but decisions have been extremely one-sided in favor of certain special interests. This will hopefully make things more balanced and produce better outcomes.

The cycling lobby only cares about itself:

At the Bike Pittsburgh nonprofit, advocacy director Eric Boerer said the city performs many of the tasks that would be prescribed under Mrs. Kail-Smith’s bill. His organization does not oppose a bicycling advisory committee, he said.

Still, “we have concerns that this bill might be more concerned with oversight rather than making the city better for biking. We want to make the best use of people’s time,” Mr. Boerer said.

Proposed board would advise Pittsburgh on bike lanes | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

This board should be good - it can help keep safe those who choose to bike, but can also help protect the interests of the vast majority of everyone else who choose not to bike - instead of having this special interest's needs specifically catered to.

[Enough_Already]

Originally Posted by prnlvsxy

Looks like there has been a lot of complaints about the existing bike lanes downtown such that a council member has proposed an advisory board that oversees the creation of any new lanes.

Mayor Peduto's chief of staff said the mayor's office has received lots of complaints about the lanes and agrees that the advisory group would offer a structured way of resolving problems.


Bike lane proposals in Pittsburgh might get more scrutiny | TribLIVE

The bike lanes have resulted in a very underutilized asset compared tho the previous use of those assets for cars. This is a result of Peduto's ambition to be recognized on the national stage and the loud lobbying of a very small but vocal minority. Using these spaces for cars would be a much better use of scares and expensive taxpayer resources.

[AaronPGH]

The point of the increasing number of bike lanes + bike share stations is to make it easier for people who can to switch to riding a bike versus a car. It's not an overnight change, it's something that happens slowly over time as you improve the infrastructure and connect more pieces of the network. I shouldn't be surprised at how short-sighted people on this board are by now, but it still gets me every time.

An advisory board is cool if selected correctly. Better than public opinion at least, which is basically like letting Yahoo news comments section design a city.

[xdv8]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

The bike lanes have resulted in a very underutilized asset compared tho the previous use of those assets for cars. This is a result of Peduto's ambition to be recognized on the national stage and the loud lobbying of a very small but vocal minority. Using these spaces for cars would be a much better use of scares and expensive taxpayer resources.

Do you live in the city or do you have a business impacted by any of the bike lanes installed?

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Is Scott Briker correct - there ARE "policies for planning and engineering bike lanes"? I am not aware that there are. I thought the city just does it. Sure, there is are standards - width, and those cute painted symbols, but i do not think there is an actual policy. Fort Pitt Boulevard businesses might agree with me.

Yes there are policies, as an overreaching example:


United States Department of Transportation Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations - Guidance - Bicycle and Pedestrian Program - Environment - FHWA




FHWA requires (more or less) bike/pedestrian facilities for new/improved roadway projects with federal funding.


I would wager that most major roadway projects in Pittsburgh have some (if not a lot) of federal funds so they are required to comply with FHWA regulations and policies or they could be more stringent.

[WhoIsStanwix?]

Originally Posted by Enough_Already

The bike lanes have resulted in a very underutilized asset compared tho the previous use of those assets for cars. This is a result of Peduto's ambition to be recognized on the national stage and the loud lobbying of a very small but vocal minority. Using these spaces for cars would be a much better use of scares and expensive taxpayer resources.

I would like to see data that backs this claim. It isn't completely preposterous, but take Penn Ave as an example...a parking lane was taken up, not a travel lane. I haven't heard too many stories of people not being able to find parking, they're just increasing the utilization of garage parking by what, 100 cars every couple of hours? Say there are 600 cars per day that are diverted from street parking to garages. Even if less than 600 bikes per day use the lane, doesn't the net increase in total utilization of the same downtown space prove beneficial as opposed to detrimental?

[PghYinzer]

The approach to bike lanes in the city does seem lopsided in the favor of bikes. This is due to it being completely lopsided in favor of cars for the past 50+ years. It looks like favoritism because before it was being completely ignored.

[Lost_In_Translation]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

The approach to bike lanes in the city does seem lopsided in the favor of bikes. This is due to it being completely lopsided in favor of cars for the past 50+ years. It looks like favoritism because before it was being completely ignored.

That's legit, plus the fact that Pittsburgh is a 19th century city so right of ways are not large, which means a loss of a lane is a huge issue for the car dependent. City was built before cars, was forced to accommodate them and is now trying to provide alternate means. Just imagine the rage if the streetcar system was attempted to be rebuilt.