Realistic ideas for Murray avenue

← Back to Forums


byogman
Member
#

I’m going to be meeting with a member of the squirrel hill urban coalition on Wednesday and want to start a little discussion here first. BTW there was receptivity to the notion of a bike/ped/transit committee, but then again it might just fall under the mater planning committee… we’ll see. This just me giving some input to people involved in long term planning, and not even folks who can directly make anything happen.

There’s a lot to talk about with biking and squirrel hill, but I think Murray avenue needs to be at center stage reflecting its importance as a connector across the long axis of squirrel hill, and to greenfield and beyond.

So, right, Murray avenue needs to support a lot of motor vehicle traffic, a lot of bus traffic, a lot of parking, and I’d like it do a better job for cyclists.

Between Beacon and Murray the congestion, light timing, and flatness make things quite unscary alraedy. Adding sharrows would be nice. Downhill on Murray from Beacon I also think sharrows are the answer, maybe with a little more traffic calming / crosswalk type work. Uphill to Beacon is the big problem. It’s not a terrible hill, it’s the most consistently gentle way up through Squirrel Hill in fact, but it’s long and trafficky and just not something people except for a few hardy souls consider being in lane for.

If I could have my way I’d just advocate for removing the uphill side parking. And maybe Murray from Wilkins to Marlboro parking demand is enough lighter you indeed can do that. Back to the climb toward Beacon (want to focus on big stuff first) there is the lot just north of the gas station for folks doing business right there and a (not full that I generally see) lot on Phillips on the right hand side that could probably use some better signage.

However, I very, very strongly doubt just removing that parking would ever get the green light. Would be perceived as death for a business district that struggles as you go further down the hill. So then, if we’re trying to not decrease the overall amount of parking, what to do? My first thoughts went toward my dislike of parallel parking, both to execute, and to wait for others to execute.

Could we do angled parking saving the hassle, and do on one side and then not need on the other? We chew up more space on the one side for sure, but we also save ourselves two door zones in the process, right?

Trouble is, backing up out of angled parking you have more trouble with blind spots than existing parallel parking. So then, would angled parking where people back in be accepted? Different, but still seems at least as easy as parallel, right?? And then visibility pulling out is great.

Leaning toward that as my version 1 suggestion, and specifically putting that parking on the downhill side, where it would moderate traffic. Then work on better crossings and crossings in more places going down the hill to appease the merchants on the other side and calm traffic further for more bike friendliness. Thus clearing road space for… you guessed it! A bike lane in the uphill direction on Murray.

And then there are a bunch of different ways even that could go, which I do want to hear thoughts on but this more than a long enough lead in.

Now, shoot this thing to swiss cheese and tell me what to do instead!


jonawebb
Participant
#

I’m glad you’re doing this. I ride those streets every day. The traffic is not a problem for me, but it is an obvious barrier to less experienced riders. Just this weekend, I saw someone dinging his bell as he rode up the sidewalk on the west side of Murray between Hobart and Beacon this weekend. I can understand the need for that, but it’s kind of rude and happens to be illegal.
I was a little confused by your street names. I think you meant “between Beacon and Forbes” in your fourth paragraph.
I saw something indicating that they were experimenting with back-in angled parking on Schenley Drive on the Flagstaff Hill side. If so that would make it easier to make an argument for that. But I don’t know if it survived the initial roll-out.
All we really need is a climbing lane up from Forward to Beacon, with sharrows downhill. Is there enough space for a (parking protected) climbing lane up Murray? I don’t see it. Everything is very narrow, you’ve got truck and bus traffic.


Benzo
Participant
#

I hate angled parking. I think it’s dangerous. I doubt we will ever be able to remove parking on murray due to resistance from all sides.

When I go to squirrel hill, I don’t ever ride on murray unless I’m going somewhere on murray. I’ll either take shady or whitman for several reasons. Murray is slow and congested, lots of traffic lights, and no dedicated bike space.

What I would like is to have good signage to direct cyclists through squirrel hill. One thing would be to have a few signed routes that take you from murray in greenfield and west to Whitman or right to shady and then possibly way-finding signs at cross streets identifying what businesses are located near that intersection a block over on murray (you could possibly have businesses who want to be included on the signs help pay for the costs of signage identifying their business).

Instead of just individual streets and signs that tell you how to get to downtown or squirrel hill or some other nieghborhood / landmark. I’d love to have a set of defined routes, with route numbers or route names that would be well signed and available on the bike-pgh map. Kind of like what they have with the PA state routes or the US Bike Route System being developed.

These would just be local level routes that help cyclists get around along well defined routes. I know ease of use is being considered with respect to the better bikeways vision, but that’s years away from connecting a lot of places in a meaningful way. However, I don’t want this signage to be different for each neighborhood, I’d love to have a system agreed upon and followed consistently around the city.

Example Signage from http://cyclemoco.com/2012/11/bike-route-signs-a-matter-of-format/

Example route map from http://www.goboguides.com/

Example of local bike ‘routes’ from north side bike ped committee
http://www.pittsburghnorthside.com/NorthsideCommunityResources/ParksandRecreation/NorthsideBikePedCommittee/tabid/135/Default.aspx

Their PDF map of north side bike routes: http://www.pittsburghnorthside.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=m8ciEPHszJU%3d&tabid=135

How about a sign like this around the danube, pretend the danube is murray ave and the lines across are cross streets. You could have numbered entries for buisnesses. Install a couple copies of this along shady / whitman.

Just trowing some of this out there as brainstorming and such.


byogman
Member
#

Jonaweb, quite correct about my confusing labeling. Three sections of Murray, between Beacon and Forbes (already ok, sharrows would be nice), north of Murray (not my focus here), and between Pocusset and Beacon, which is the interesting/tough/high value part inasmuch as a friendlier climb might be possible.

And quite correct that with existing configuration there isn’t room for a parking protected climbing lane. Thought experiment is that with angled parking (specifically reverse angled parking to address the blind spot backing in the the street danger), you chew up space on one side but gain spots so maybe then you can eliminate parking on the other side and get space for a modest climbing lane?

Benzo, just curious about the dislike for angled parking. Does it extend to reverse angled parking (nose out) too? That seems pretty benign to me. It’s true I often take Pocusset/Wightman myself because there’s less traffic. But there’s nothing Pocusset/Wightman conveniently gets you to that Murray can’t whereas you can’t say the same thing in reverse at all. That, and simplicity (having the two main business arteries with some provision for cyclists) is a major plus.

Shady is just ugly in my experience. Sure, less stopping, but it’s steeper and the drivers are nastier. I don’t even want to think about proposing anything there because I think the number of people that would choose it over Beachwood Blvd or Murray (if we can put something on Murray) is very, very small.


byogman
Member
#

OK, made one rather stupid statement.

“But there’s nothing Pocusset/Wightman conveniently gets you to that Murray can’t whereas you can’t say the same thing in reverse at all. ”

The clear exception is to the remaining dead-end of Pocusset and then the de-motorized section. So that has to be counted as a factor.

I still thing Murray has to be tackled directly though, the local business core is always going to be far and away the biggest driver of traffic.


Benzo
Participant
#

I could be ammenable to back in angled parking, how about we try that out on bigelow blvd in Oakland by the cathedral of learning (between 5th and forbes) instead of the head in parking as an experiment. It would just be some paint and wouldn’t really change the setup substantially at all?

The current setup with pull in angled parking sucks, a lot. People just can’t see when they are backing out of a space.


jonawebb
Participant
#

Measuring on Google Maps, Murray around Hobart is say 38 feet.
Searching on the web, it looks like an angled parking space takes about 13.5 feet at least. So you have only 24.5 feet left for two lanes + the biking lanes.
An 11 foot lane (like PPC is planning for Schenley drive) is kind of narrow. Two lanes leaves 2.5 feet for the climbing lane.
Wow, that’s tight.
I would still take it, though, if it could be done.


StuInMcCandless
Participant
#

I’ve said it before in other threads, but I’ll mention it again here since you have a new audience. Start making noise about wanting a direct connection from the Pocusset/Greenfield corner to the upper dead end of Saline Street. Probably a switchback arrangement, like the north end of the Fort Duquesne Bridge, and the just-built one in Manchester from the Beaver/Chateau/Island corner up to California/Marshall.

Having that would take a lot of the pressure off of Murray to provide the connection to downtown, maybe a little less so to Oakland. The point you would need to make is, having that there means a lot more cyclists would be *crossing* Murray, not *traveling* it.


andyc
Member
#

Before tackling Murray, how about just adding to Wightman / Pocusset features? The most obvious “next step” is probably a bike lane up the northern side of Pocusset. (for the short climb)

The eastern end of Sq Hill has Beechwood which is pleasant if not particularly direct.

I don’t want to mess with Shady Ave. It’s the primary N-S route through the area for anyone that doesn’t want to be stuck behind bus and truck traffic. It’s my primary driving route but I almost never ride my bike on it.

Paradoxically, I sometimes take Murray up the hill *because of* the heavier traffic since most people know that they’re not going to get too far too fast on Murray anyway.


andyc
Member
#

A switchback from 4 mile run would be great.
A climbing lane up Greenfield Ave would be fine too.

There is a switchback path that comes up from near the really shady looking garage to the bridle path. I’m not sure if this is private or part of the park.

There used to be a little-used footpath up from the run to Greenfield road but this was steep on foot.

Does anyone know if the new Greenfield bridge has cycling infrastructure integrated into its design?


byogman
Member
#

The amount of lane space taken by angled parking depends on the angle and the length of the vehicle. I think it’s ok to say no to the quad cab pickups and do as narrow an angle as can give an acceptable bike lane for anything minivan length or shorter. I’d want to shoot for a four foot climbing lane.

Yeah, it’ll be tight.

I’m happy to talk about Pocusset and at least the block of Wightman from Pocusset to Melvin. They’re important too and in some ways feel more like the next steps. They’re just not as important and the coming outage of the greenfield bridge will reduce their importance for a while.

The connection to downtown thing, once your looking from Pocusset down into the Hollow is also damn important. But the funds necessary to do it are… well, I don’t know.

Squirrel Hill to downtown matters. Believe me, I feel it, I ride it every day. But Squirrel Hill north (and beyond) to Squirrel Hill south (and beyond) matters even more. I want to lead with connecting closest destinations, that’s more what people will choose to bike. And it will make this more of a single neighborhood and hopefully help revive the southern end of it.


buffalo buffalo
Participant
#

Does anyone know if the new Greenfield bridge has cycling infrastructure integrated into its design?

Last I heard–and this was at the DPW/SHUC meeting at the JCC, nine months or more ago I think–was that there would be a (paint) bike lane going one direction, but sharrows only the other direction, and that PennDOT-required lane widths precluded anything more. There should be a post around here somewhere with better (less distant) recollection of the meeting; I posted about it, and BY was there as well.

So, as far as I recall, the answer is no–but that was before the new mayor, so…maybe?


byogman
Member
#

My recollection is about the same as yours, though I didn’t specifically remember the sharrows, only a “rideable” (3 foot shoulder). But I have a lousy memory.

The sidewalk was going to be wide, but only on one side, which maybe should be looked at for a change given what’s been done with Pocusset Street in the interim, though that was very much part of the discussion at the same forum, just the two pieces of the conversation didn’t connect.


sarapgh2
Participant
#

Regarding uphill Murray vs Shady – I ride uphill Shady a lot and really prefer it to Murray. There is much more space and I have no issues with traffic there. Murray on the other hand – too tight, too many peds, much more difficult. A Sharrow downhill on Murray would be grand. (For those who haven’t ridden Shady uphill, give it a try sometime and see what you think.)

I like the idea of having Wightman/Shady as uphill alternatives to Murray. and I love the signage idea with recommended routes.

Finally – I’m totally behind the idea of poccusset to down to saline and then to jail trail. Although it seems way out there, if we ever got it done people would use it all the time and be absolutely amazed at the practicality of it. Those who feel the hills are too much to get into downtown would find this as a very usable option. It would be huge imho.


Pierce
Participant
#

I used go from Greenfield to Swissvale through Sq Hill and used Shady as part of the route too. Much preferable to Murry uphill.


byogman
Member
#

I’ll have to try Shady uphill again I suppose. Maybe let a couple bad drivers color my impression too much. For myself.

As a general purpose facility, trying to bring more people into biking?? Even if there is better road space I don’t really see how I could recommend it over Murray just for topographical reasons.

Total climbing using Murray for the main portion (I’m counting starting point Murray at Pocusset, ending point Forbes at Shady and regurgitating what google tells me) is 125 feet.

Murray is a very steady 5.1% according to veloroutes, which for a new cyclist is frankly already slightly pushing it.

The climb using Forward/Shady is 177 feet before it ducks down again at Beacon.

For someone who doesn’t ride a lot, an extra 52 feet of climbing, more than 40% more, is not a small determinant on preferred route.

Also, the gradient from Tillbury to Beacon, for 91/177 feet of the climb is 7.2%, again, according to veloroutes.

I’m not sure you can call anything sustained at that gradient inviting to a new cyclist, and again, this gradient figure is about 40% worse than Murray.


byogman
Member
#

I also like andyc’s comment


Paradoxically, I sometimes take Murray up the hill *because of* the heavier traffic since most people know that they’re not going to get too far too fast on Murray anyway.

Relative speeds matter a whole lot in terms of people’s ability to get in lane and make a left, deal with obstructions in the bike lane (it’ll come up), and also to the stress levels when riding up the bike lane and being passed by cars.


byogman
Member
#

I also like Benzo’s comment


I could be ammenable to back in angled parking, how about we try that out on bigelow blvd in Oakland by the cathedral of learning (between 5th and forbes) instead of the head in parking as an experiment. It would just be some paint and wouldn’t really change the setup substantially at all?

The current setup with pull in angled parking sucks, a lot. People just can’t see when they are backing out of a space.

So, who do we contact to make this happen?? There’s definitely research out there pointing to the (intuitively obvious) safety benefits of backing into a private nook rather than into the middle of the lane.


buffalo buffalo
Participant
#

> So, who do we contact to make this happen??

Your City council office would probably be the place to start. You could probably try going to City Planning directly, but it’s likely that both would prefer you went through your Councilperson.

(Unless Murray is either a County or State road, in which case all bets are off, but I don’t think that’s the case.)


Ahlir
Participant
#

Great discussion!

1. I ride up Murray from Forward on a somewhat regular basis. I find it’s ok to climb. The grade is easier than it looks and there’s enough slack that the traffic doesn’t bother me. Once past Beacon it’s all fine (take the lane). Going downhill is somewhat annoying due to speeding cars (since at my speeds, I take the lane)

2. Shady is a nice climb, but you end up at Beacon, which corner is significantly higher than Murray; not so great if you’re then heading west. And the bit to Forbes is a pain (in both directions).

I’m not sure I’m for major changes to Murray, yet. And there’s a whole lot more users than bikers.

We should start with sharrows Forbes-Forward (and, actually, on to Loretta). And more prominent signage. More important: a posted 20 mph speed limit Forbes-Phillips (and ideally to Forward). Enforced. Heck, I’d settle for the current limit being enforced.

Also, more ∩-racks. (Did you see the new brown, squirrel-shaped racks at Forbes & Shady? Cool. Haven’t tried them yet.)

So @byogman: Sharrows. Speed limit.

And now that I’m thinking about it: some boxes at the major intersections (Beacon, Forward, Forbes?)


J Z
Participant
#


byogman
Member
#

Try them both as a single leg drills and report back on which you prefer then. That’s actually entirely serious.

Starting out as a new rider is really just about that hard if you’ve been inactive for, oh, say, a decade prior. Which was me two years ago. It’s a lot of people. I still remember wrestling with the bike and my chubby weak self, desperately trying not to put a foot down on Greenfield, Bates, or the trail through hollow, probably going 3mph or so over most of it.

This was as the October and early November temps were dropping. Even so I was regularly sweating through my eyebrows, stinging my eyes and barely able to see in front of me. It took a good bit of crazy to stick with it. Fortunately I had a good supply of crazy to draw on.

We can’t set the bar that high.


Benzo
Participant
#

I’m having a hard time understanding why more people are debating shady vs murray when whitman is there and has bike lanes and is not that bad of a climb.

Why don’t people want to just take this route? How could we make that more attractive?


Benzo
Participant
#

“So, who do we contact to make this happen?? There’s definitely research out there pointing to the (intuitively obvious) safety benefits of backing into a private nook rather than into the middle of the lane.”

If you’re talking about the back in angle parking in oakland. City council seems nebulous. The dividing line is on bigelow blvd. It’s either district 8 (dan gilman) or district 3 (bruce kraus).

May also want to ask the oakland green team, who host the bike/ped committee for oakland. http://www.opdc.org/programs-services/community/oakland-green-team/

I would say the green team might be a place to start and have them work through council if they like that idea.


edmonds59
Participant
#

“Starting out as a new rider is really just about that hard if you’ve been inactive for, oh, say, a decade prior. Which was me two years ago. It’s a lot of people.”
Pittsburgh is just a hard damn place to ride period. I grew up in Ohio, and in the spring, when you were out of shape, you could go out and glide along for 30 or 40 miles and still have a nice ride. This is why I am no longer dismissive of people who put bikes on car racks and ride on trails. I’ve even become more accepting of doing that myself, if it gets me riding.


byogman
Member
#

Wightman is not bad overall, though it’s important to keep in mind that the end of Pocusset before Wightman is steeper than Murray, and the first block of Wightman (Pocusset to Melvin) is steeper even than Shady.

I remember being kinda shocked by that in my earliest days on the single speed… coming up from the waterfront with a full load and then nearly falling over on this little nothing of a rise I never much noticed much before when I was practically already home.

I’m very sympathetic to the argument that it’s the most logical place to start due to lower traffic volumes, the other side of Pocusset being a quiet dead end to the de-motorized street, and the wightman street bike lanes starting at Beacon.

There’s a bit of a difference here between what I’m thinking in terms of a time sequence of might actually happen (where pocusset/wightman is first) vs. the order in which I’m talking about things. I really do want to focus on a route to the commercial core now. That deserves explanation.

One of the things that is acknowledged within the squirrel hill urban coalition is that the master planning doc is in need of a significant update. That is my chief goal, to get an uphill bike lane to the commercial core in that document at the time of rewrite.

This matters significantly even if we had something on pocusset/wightman. Using the same metric as used in the murray/shady comparison, murray at forward to forbes at shady, it’s 60% longer and 20 feet more climbing. Looking at businesses that are on Murray not Forbes it’s even more indirect than that and really pretty absurd. You just can’t avoid addressing the big enchilada.


salty
Participant
#

I’ll have to read through this thread later but just wanted to say I’d be interested in a bike/ped committee. I’ve been a SHUC member since I moved here but I’ve never been to a meeting. I had some email conversations with them when the CMU/Forbes Ave lanes were proposed but it just kind of trailed off. So, this could be a good impetus to get involved.

FWIW when I lived on Alderson off Shady I almost exclusively used Wightman, although I was usually headed to Pitt so that kind of biased me in that direction. Sometimes I took Shady, but almost never Murray. Now I live on the north end of Wightman so if I’m on Murray it tends to be that side and not the hill side. Definitely seems like a tough nut to crack.

I think the single biggest safety improvement would be banning left turns from or to the end of Murray at Wilkins. Especially “from” – I have had so many people pull out in front of me while I was doing 25 down the hill, it makes me pucker up every time.


bk7j
Member
#

I commute through this area every day and agree with an above commenter that I generally don’t ride on Murray unless I’m going somewhere on Murray. I CAN do the uphill from Forward to Phillips, but I don’t like to, because I really hate having impatient cars behind me. I would love to see a safer riding zone there but I can’t envision anything realistic.

These days I tend to take Forward up Pocusset to Wightman. Yes, it’s a bit steeper, but lack of traffic makes it much less stressful. That would be my vote for better cycle infra, particularly since there are so many other bikes that use Wightman. I’d say at least half of my close passes come on Wightman between Melvin and Beacon, but at least they’re usually moving slowly.

[Perhaps ironically, the one time I encountered a real asshole driver was on Phillips when I was already going downhill at ~18mph. Some people just can’t stand to see a bike in front of them.]


richierich
Member
#

As a neighborhood resident who rides through or across this area almost daily, my biggest concern is for the health of the business district. Whatever major changes eventually happen on Murray should be helping to get people shopping and dining there. I would think that better biking and (perhaps moreso) pedestrian infrastructure would help a lot here because the most likely and frequent customers are those who live nearby. Get rid of some parking and we might lose a few patrons from far away but replace them with residents.

I don’t find Murray to be especially unsafe, and there are plenty of alternative routes for those just passing through, but it is definitely unpleasant. If it were a more enjoyable ride I’d be more inclined to take frequent little shopping trips or go out for food or coffee.

Murray would be better with:
– downhill sharrows well out of the door zone
– a bus-only lane at least uphill instead of parking to speed up the buses, get more people to use them to commute out and come in to eat etc., and reduce bus-bike conflict because leap-frogging with buses is the most stressful thing about the street right now. It’s hard to break away uphill and in heavy traffic, and bus drivers do not seem concerned with not hitting us. I wish we still had those trolleys.
– red light cameras and/or whatever else would make the Murray-Forward intersection less dangerous and confusing. This intersection helps to disconnect the south and the Forward business district (what’s left of it) from the rest.
– fines for unnecessary honking (it exists and we should have it). Horns are supposed to be a safety feature, not a soundtrack to commerce.
– traffic enforcement or more protected pedestrian crossings like at Forbes & Murray and Shady.

This is mostly not a bike-specific list, but would make the cycling much better nonetheless and might be an easier sell because other groups would be helped at the same time.


Mick
Participant
#

I don’t think any program that reduces parking on Murray is even a starter.

It’s really quite easy to kill off a storefront neighborhood. And it’s tragic.


Mick
Participant
#

@ Ahlir Speed limit.

Yes.

I have it on good authoriy that Pittsburgh occasionally ticketed speeders before WWII- that is, before radar existed.

It can be done.

Perhaps labor intensive, but clearly part of “Protect and Serve.”

So. Speed limits and police oversight.

To me, these are high priority. They make life harder for the police and much, much safer for everyone else. Will we ever get them?


Xuth
Member
#

I too ride this area daily to get to and from work. I too choose what are steeper hills of pocusset and wightman over climbing murray because of the traffic. One of the things that is that there are several small public parking lots in the area that are under utilized because they’re not well known. They should be made more obvious and possibly have a couple more created and then there is absolutely no reason why removing on street parking on one side of murray couldn’t happen.

One thing that people have mentioned is Beechwood Blvd. Despite the fact that I live right next to it, I tend to avoid it where there are bike lanes because I refuse to ride in the door zone of cars. The city of Pittsburgh and its bike advocates seem all too happy to put bike lanes in door zones and other dangerous places which make it more difficult for cyclists to ride safely. There are some places on Beechwood where there’s genuinely enough space to parking spaces, a gap, and then the bike lane like is done on wightman but they don’t do that there. In others, the parking space is too narrow to fit a car so all cars are parked over the line into the bike lane. This really should be fixed.

Also, what would it take to get an area bike/ped/transit planning committee for the area going? I would like there to be community people advocating for these things (and would be willing to be one of these people) but don’t know how to get such a thing started around here.


byogman
Member
#

“It’s really quite easy to kill off a storefront neighborhood. And it’s tragic.”

Very correct. And that’s part of why I’m trying to preserve as much parking as possible. And do better signage for the (usually pretty empty) lot on Phillips.

But Richierich touched on the the big point, the biggest problems right now revolve around the pedestrian environment, the nasty intersection at the base of the hill being the biggest wart in a collection at that area and then disconnect between the forward and even the nicer looking stuff under the Morrowfield and the busier, healthier area up the hill (quite a bit up the hill to get to the stuff that’s consistently healthy).

I have very little idea of what’s possible/realistic there, but I do know a few things:

There will always be parking gripes and some pressure but there’s underutilized capacity on the lot at phillips which could get more usage with better signage and crossings, serving locals some of whom drive but some of whom don’t has to be top priority especially in an urban neighborhood, bikes are pretty fast in comparison to relying on the bus, incomparably so for multi-stop trips in a business district, and they’re getting much more popular, the bicycle riding on the sidewalk on Murray right now is understandable but degrades the pedestrian environment and should be strongly discouraged, and that a lot of people who could and might prefer to use Murray to climb because of directness, more consistent gradient use, or availability of places they might make a pleasant stop at a business use alternates because the stop and go and traffic contention make it unpleasant.

I think this adds up to sharrows downhill, more pedestrian oriented crossings, a (necessarily small) bike lane, but something not sidewalk uphill, and trying to make the most out of single side parking as possible. That’s just my opinion, but I think it’s at least ~pretty~ well justified.


jonawebb
Participant
#

Yeah, BTW, a pedestrian crossing at Mineo’s would make sense. Stop pretending that it’s illegal. People are crossing there all the time. Put in a crosswalk to make it a bit safer.


byogman
Member
#

Heck yeah!

Not that I can eat at Mineo’s but the kosher dairy pizza oriented place is right there. Also, having another point of access to the under-utilized lot on Phillips a touch closer to the main action.


richierich
Member
#

While we’re adding crosswalks, right in front of the Giant Eagle would be a good place. People could walk to the corner, but don’t.


salty
Participant
#

Those bike lanes on Beechwood were there long before Bike Pittsburgh existed, but I agree about the door zone, having nearly been doored there last week. In my dream world I’d get rid of parking on one side and install wider bike lanes.


Xuth
Member
#

The ones from Forward to Browns Hill Rd are ancient but are not what I’m talking about. Those I don’t care about and just ignore. I’m talking about the ones that were installed about 2 years ago between Forward and Forbes (and further north but those are less of a problem since the road is wider there). There are places where parked cars literally don’t fit between the curb and the left side of the bike lane (primarily in the curves just south of Forbes).


salty
Participant
#

My memory is suspect but I believe the entirety of Beechwood was painted the same way back in the 90s (80s?) – no separate “lane” but a single white line with some margin from parked cars, plus the “bikeway” signs.

The lanes themselves are definitely more recent. I don’t think they’re any worse than the old “bikeway” lines, assuming you’re comparing the leftmost edge, and in some cases they might have narrowed the car lanes a bit to provide more room. It’s definitely worse towards Browns Hill (IIRC, I don’t go to that end often), but they’re not up to snuff even on the 5th Ave side.


Xuth
Member
#

I live one house away from Beechwood. About two years ago, the area north of Forward was resurfaced (well the middle of the road anyway, the outer edges were ignored). After it was resurfaced they totally redid the striping. And the “driving lane” was made slightly narrower, a bike lane was added such that it straddled the freshly paved and old deteriorating pavement and the remaining section was allocated to parking. The driving and bike lanes are consistently wide but the parking area varies from about 9 ft to 5 ft wide (I went out and measured this at one point but don’t have the measurements anymore).

Both the fact that the bike lane straddles fresh and deteriorating pavement and the fact that parked cars need to overhang the bike lane in places (primarily around the curves in areas that don’t need to have on street parking on both sides of the street*) make this implementation particularly bad in my opinion.

* on one side single family homes with fairly good parking and on the other is frick park in an area with a parking lot.

← Back to Forums

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.