BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

Yes on east liberty blvd! Another 1/2 mile or so of bike lanes!

I think it might take a bit of time for drives to adjust to going to one lane instead of two.

it's pretty obvious that it's a bike lane, and there's huge cross hatches to tell people not to drive there.

i'll have pics up tomorrow.

i also think it's amazing that they eliminated a lane of car traffic for this.

Color me cynical, but I'm curious how long 'til drivers actually don't drive there. It's plainly marked, for sure, but plenty of drivers treat that stretch of road as a raceway as it is.

That said, I am excited (and thankful) about this since I ride on that stretch of road frequently.

These lanes work well. I was pleasantly surprised to come upon E. Lib. Blvd. on my way in to work this morning! All drivers were obeying the lane restrictions, even without complete signage or shared lane markings (which I imagine are forthcoming). The only flaw I could see was that drivers are accustomed to being in the right lane to turn off of the Blvd. so they used the bike lane for their approach to an intersection. I think it will get figured out pretty quickly. Although it was a raceway in the past, I think as a driver you would feel like you were speeding down the shoulder if you cut over into the bike lanes now - all of the crosshatching is pretty obvious.

I'm a little concerned by the spacing issues with the busses, though - busses were using the far right "lane" which is actually smaller than a driving lane and hatched up with giant white lines and on the right of the bike lane. The bus had to straddle the bike lane. I guess it's going to work simply because busses and bikes are more infrequent and actually travel about the same speed.

In any case - huge props to bike pgh. and the city peeps that are making this stuff happen. What a wonderful start to my week (and my whole winter for that matter)! Thanks all.

I haven't explored yet--how far does the lane extend? From Negley to Negley Run? Or all the way to Hamilton? I'd love it if it extended to Hamilton--we use that stretch quite a bit to get to Frick and the Co-op.

The lane goes from Negley to Frankstown, about half a block from hamilton.

this provides an amazing alternative to penn ave

people are still definitely getting used to it. i'll have more up shortly

it's about a 1.5 miles each way, so 3 more miles of bike lanes

I am really happy because I reguarly ride that road and live two block away. I would have been happy with jut new asphalt but, bike lanes are a nice bonus. Plus, it helps make east lib a little bit more pedestrian friendly.

The 4 lane roads around east lib are super overkill and don't fit in with the normal pittsburgh road setup.

Did you guys at Bike-pgh lobby for this or did the city take the initiative?

Just as an aside, Mac, I love your picture. Ya know, Werner Herzog attended Pitt.

Bike PGH worked really closely with the city and East Liberty Development on this.

ELDI did the traffic/feasibility study and we got the engineering done by a traffic engineering firm

Yeah, this is really, really awesome. Suddenly there's a trailer-friendly route from my place to Point Breeze.

I suggest we send the city thanks via the 311 line.

Wow! Holy crap, yes, it's amazing that a car traffic lane has been eliminated in favor of bikes. Something I never thought I'd see here.

Thanks for your hard work Bike Pgh!

some photos here:

http://bike-pgh.org/2008/10/13/east-liberty-blvd-goes-on-a-road-diet-gets-new-bike-lanes/

how will this affect everyone's commute? i know i frequently ride from free ride and the coop to bloomfield and lawrenceville.

i'll now be taking hamilton to ELB to negley to friendship as opposed to my old route of reynolds to fifth to shady to ellsworth to aiken

I wish this affected my commute. Perhaps ya'll can do the same thing on Negley?

I suspect either myself or my wife will use it several times a week, though, to get to the Co-op or the climbing gym.

Also, there were cones around the lanes this morning.

Took our first trip with the kid trailer this weekend down the new bike lanes. Little dicey turning left from Highland Ave, might have to try cutting through Home Depot's parking lot to avoid this.

Traffic is definitely slower the blvd now, I have seen a few cares continuing to use the bike lane as a lane of travel, better signage could help. Something like "Bicycles Only" might help.

This route makes it much more viable for us to bike to 2 grocery stores(co-op and TJ's). The whole that is the Center/Baum corridor keeps us away from WF and GE with the kids.

The main problem I see with the lanes are the abrupt end at busy intersections that leave inexperienced cyclists to fend for themselves, similar to the Liberty Ave lanes. The ELB lanes are great except for the ends though, while the Liberty lanes are hit and miss the whole way, although this is to be corrected, if I'm not mistaken.

These lanes give me hope that the incredible speeches at the recent press conference at Taza d'oro where more than empty promises.

Many thanks to all involved.

it's very important to remember those speeches. it's up to us to hold it to them, and also thank them when things happen.

thanks for bringing that up e.

> I have seen a few cars continuing to use the bike

> lane as a lane of travel

If anyone can get pictures of cars using the lanes for travel or parking, post them to http://pittsburgh.mybikelane.com/ That sort of documentation can be utilized when advocating additional signage, enforcement or other changes to the system to make it safer.

Take Euclid across instead of Highland. There's a light at the intersection with ELB, and it's low traffic and easy to turn. That's my preferred route.

I was talking with a coworker today, she knows that I commute by bike, so she brought up the new bike lanes. She thought that if there were no bikers in the bike lane that it was ok to drive there!!! I was kind of shocked that someone would think this, but I guess non-bikers really do not have the same common sense on stuff like this.But I think she understands it now and will hopefully stay off the bike lanes!!!

Thanks for the heads up on Euclid, we'll try it next time.

Got a response form emailing 311.

"Summary of action taken:

Additional signs aren't necessary and are not as visible as the lane markings.

Enforcement will be actively involved in securing the bike lanes.

A. Broadwater"

I'm not sure how more signs won't help or are less visible. Most drivers seem to take notice of things at eye level(signs) much more readily than things at ground level (lane markings). In fact I wouldn't mind arguing that more signs would make enforcement less necessary. I'd rather police didn't ever have to patrol the area to keep drivers out of the bike lane. I'm sure they have better things to do.

You are both right. The area needs more signs because not all of the scheduled signs are up. The City has a current shortage of man-power at the sign shop. Signs had to be made by a third party. Unfortunately the signs are not ready yet, but the City was tied into a paving schedule. The paving schedule is important because sections of the bike lane are in-lays inserted into the pavement and not painted on the asphalt.

So there may be a miscommunication. I assume A. Broadwater interpreted your request as additional signage besides the required signage already scheduled to be installed.

Thanks for speaking up Stephen, glad to know more is to be done.

I finally rode the whole stretch of ELB tonight. A few comments:

1. It ends kinda abruptly at Frankstown. I knew it was ending, but somebody not familiar with the road and the changes wouldn't.

2. The new pavement between Negley Run and Frankstown is awesome. That stretch of road used to be painful.

3. The speed limit on ELB is 35mph?!?! Please say this is going to be changed?

Does anybody know what the plan is for the site of the recently-razed highrise at the corner of ELB and Larimer?

Brian, are you saying 35 is too low or high? Seems about right to me.

More cars in the bike lane last night, I've been going out of my way to use ELB to see how things are shaping up, haven't been there yet without seeing at least one car using the bike lane.

Brian, are you saying 35 is too low or high? Seems about right to me.

Too fast, I think, with the bike lanes in place. I mean, Washington Blvd is posted at 35, and that's a four lane road with no sidewalks or crosswalks.

So my wife and I use this road (and now bike lanes) daily, to and from work. We know the crossing guards by face and frequently chat with them when stopped. This one guard has told us that she has been telling car drivers who ask about the bike lanes that it is okay for them to drive over the bike lanes "as long as there aren't any bikes" in them. Are there any bumps or rumble strips or traffic calming devices planned for this stretch beyond the stripes and signs? It is unclear what is "legal" and what is "courtesy" related to these lanes. And I can say from daily experience that I see at least 2 vehicles acting aggressively every time, weaving in and out of the bike lane and traffic lane. I have yet to see a patrol car pull someone over for that. Old Pittsburghers hate changes...

i only biked BY it yesterday, as i was heading up negley from shadyside toward highland park, and i happened to look down the street to see the bike lanes (i had never bothered to look before), and even in that tiny sample, there was a car driving down the closed lane.

to me, the white slashed stripes and the clearly denoted cycling lane scream "don't drive here!" but it appears other people interpret them differently.

after this has had some time to settle in, how do people think this is doing?

i don't ride it daily, but it seems that drivers have adjusted

Apparently they used watercolors for some of the lines--the markings just off Negley are already mostly gone, revealing the dotted white lines beneath.

that would have been chalk. it's part of the city's cost cutting measures

Last week, I emailed Steve Patchan at City Planning about the quickly-disappearing lines, asking if he might work with DPW to get some repainting done soon.

Thanks to those who contacted me regarding the absent bike lanes. The CIty is developing a schedule to refresh the lines and make additional revisions to ELB. You should expect to see a finished product as soon as the weather permits.

Thanks for your advocacy!

The lines disappear because 1) The paint the city uses to line stripe is the same water-based stuff you see in church parking lots. It's cheap, it lays out fast and it's cheap. 2) In our climate and the city's road deicing practices, if we get two seasons out of the paint, then we're very fortunate. 3) People drive over it and wear it off. 4) The paint doesn't bond well to older pavements and loses reflectivity quickly.

As far as pavement striping and markings go there's waterbased, solvent-based and thermoplastic. You can also use marking tape for the lettering and signage which is melted onto the pavement.

Any word on the Liberty Avenue bike lane pavement markings, because they're gone too? I have the torches if you have the tape

Liberty Ave will also be refreshed. The project schedule will be determined by if Liberty Ave is repaved (the repaving schedule hasn't been released yet).

Couldn't find another more recent thread about this. Had a few thoughts about riding the lanes last night with the kids strapped to the Xtracycle.

Still no Bikes Only signs. Any word on this happening?

The day before I got to watch a PAT bus travel IN THE BIKE LANE for at least 75% of the length of ELB. Does this mean we can use the bus lanes now? I continue to see cars use the bike lane as a passing lane, which makes me wonder if this puts cyclists using these lanes at greater risk than before they existed?

One of the intersections has the bike lane turning into the right turn lane with no mention of the bike lane ending, or who should yield to who. I think a Yield to Bikes sign is in order at intersections.

Every time I ride these lanes I'm still amazed the city was convinced to remove an automobile lane and install a bike lane. Hope springs eternal.

I've seen motorcycles use the bike lanes on ELB and the Birmingham bridge.

and the intersections should probably have a "shared" right lane for motor vehicles to merge into the bike lane and turn.

The turning lanes are dangerous and need some more paint and a sign telling people who should yield to who, but as a cyclist you just have to pay a little attention.

The bus driver should know better and if you can note the number on the bus and the route you should report them.

The day before I got to watch a PAT bus travel IN THE BIKE LANE for at least 75% of the length of ELB. Does this mean we can use the bus lanes now?

Don't we already, at least, about equally often?

One of the intersections has the bike lane turning into the right turn lane with no mention of the bike lane ending, or who should yield to who. I think a Yield to Bikes sign is in order at intersections.

Anyone changing lanes must yield to traffic already there. This is no different. I don't believe that driving (or cycling) can be done safely if people have to constantly read, understand, process, and act on written instructions. There have to be a minimal set of consistent principles -- people just can't think quickly enough to operate at these speeds unless those operations are habitual and mostly unthinking. There are already far, far too many signs on the roadways as it stands.

Every time I ride these lanes I'm still amazed the city was convinced to remove an automobile lane and install a bike lane.

Me too.

Lyle, in Hawaii all of the highways have bike lanes just like this with turning lanes, every turning lane has a sign saying cars must yield to bikes and it lets everyone that is new to the island know how to treat that intersection.

The bike lane continues with dotted lines as well.

This is not unique to Hawaii, but it is the only place I have seen it in person.

i haven't been there for about a week, but the contractor was taking a reeeeeaaaaly long time to finish this. i don't know where they're at at the moment, but they may not have finished yet

Lyle in theory I agree with you, but less signs would require better education for new drivers and better street design. We have neither right now. Gotta work with what we have. Many motorists in Pgh don't look out for bikes, in busy traffic it would be pretty easy to get right hooked by a driver unaware of who has the right of way. Signs can be a reminder of this until education and design catch up with theory.

We don't have the signs right now either.

So your argument that we "gotta work with what we have" sounds fishy, to mix a metaphor.

I'll go out on a limb and suggest that putting up signs will be significantly easier than rebuilding the streets or re-educating the driving public, as we do have pre-existing signposts and an entire workforce that is highly skilled at affixing signs to said posts.

That said, I agree that the input burden on vehicular operators is way too high already.

There may not be "Bikes Only" signs, but I have noticed that, as a driver, the bike signs and the painted bike symbols on the road are more frequent than before. Either that or it's just b/c the paint is new.

Also, I live just off ELB and I'm constantly amazed at the people who will try to cut up the right side of me while I'm turning onto my street (in my car). While that can't be easily fixed, some better turning markers would help. My neighbor mentioned something about better turn lane markers when we were discussing the lanes, b/c she knows I bike and was asking me what happened to the lanes (when they were gone a couple weeks ago).

Honestly, the intersection that really needs some help is Larimer and ELB. Bikers in the bike lane are susceptible to being cut off by cars turning right...and I'm not sure what can be done about that, but I noticed that while driving towards Penn Ave. one night.

brief semi-related thread hijack

Also, for those who are interested in zoning changes, a zoning hearing is currently scheduled for Aug. 20 re: the corner of ELB and Collins St. ELDI (East Lib. Development) has proposed a 12 unit apt. bldg. w/ 12 parking spaces for that corner, with the parking lot access on ELB right between Collins and Sheridan, which is a very busy area.

Anyone who wants more information on the situation please feel free to email me at in.daburgh@gmail.com, as there are some other issues that the residents of Sheridan and Collins (incl. myself) are concerned about. However, as it will likely affect the safety of bikers in the bike lanes, I figured I'd put something up on here. Thanks for the brief zoning hijacking.

Lyle,

Lets not get into semantics. We have sign posts and sign making shops and the relatively minor amounts of money and manpower to make signs and hang them.

We do not have huge sums of money and the support of the government and populace to undertake a wholesale redesign of the transportation infrastructure. Until then we need to use the means and methods at our disposal to make our streets as safe as possible, as soon as possible, while keeping an eye towards larger changes in the future that will integrate cycling, walking and public transportation back into our city in an intelligent and efficient manner.

If there is something fishy about that, well, toss me in the Mon.

I'll throw this into the mix:

There are two schools of thought for traffic signage, and it relates to the psychology of driving and the interplay with the surrounding environment.

One school says we need posted signs for everything, not just for wayfinding, speeding and such, but also for redundantly informing or reiterating situations within a given corridor.

Say you're in the middle of nowhere. You see a signs that tell you what road you're on, the speed limit and how far to the next town. Then you see "no passing zone" signs on blind turns, "deer crossing" signs, "share the road" signs, "watch for falling rock" signs, "dangerous curves ahead," "hidden driveway." Some folks think we need all of these signs, while others believe that motorists cannot process some or any of these signs through a given corridor and should remove all of them.

It's all still up in the air at this point. Traffic engineers and transportation planners are usually held up by lawyers and politicians when attempting the latter.

greenbike, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "people cut up the right side of me". Can you explain more?

Eric, I'm not proposing a redesign of anything. I'm the one proposing that we work with what we have: a consistent set of principles that people already practice every day, and that we not confuse the ordinary, the elderly, the inexpert and the out-of-towners by asking them to process something new. Though in this case, the something new is at least consistent with the something old.

greenbike might be a case in point, though I surely hope not...

A no passing zone sign is probably redundant because drivers know that a solid line means no passing and a dotted line means you can. They generally don't know who gets the right of way in the case of the ELB turning lanes, and quite frankly neither do a lot of cyclists.

Lyle: Sorry about that...I sometimes say things that make sense to me in my head, but whoops...!

I meant to say that while I'm in the left/traffic lane on ELB, people try to cut by me on the right side (in the bike lane) even though I'm making a right turn. It's quite dangerous and a PAT bus caused an accident with a car right at Sheridan and ELB roughly a month ago by doing something similar. Took out a fire hydrant.

Yeah, see, that's where the paint on the road is tempting you to do something that is contrary to those principles I was talking about. You're trying to make a right turn from the left lane.

You should make a right turn from as near as practicable to the right side of the roadway.

That means you look and make sure that you're not running over anybody to your right, merge into the bike lane, and then turn right. We don't turn right across through lanes.

If you don't merge into the bike lane first, you are just setting yourself up to right-hook a cyclist who overtakes you on the right, and nobody wants to do that.

If I'm riding up the street on a bike, and I see someone with their right turn signal on, to the left of me and in front, there's no way I want to ride to the right of them. So I have to stop and wait for them to understand that I'm not going to get myself right-hooked. That sometimes means I have to put my foot down.

In those cases, it would be so so much easier if they would just merge into the right lane, just like any other right lane, and then I can easily go around them, legally and safely, on the left.

We've created a new facility on the roadway, it has been proven motorists can't figure out the safe and legal way to deal with it, are you proposing we do nothing to explain and educate the road users?

Or am I missing something?

If there is no direction given on how to process new traffic patterns, how exactly are the "ordinary, the elderly, the inexpert and the out-of-towners" expected to deal with this? Use all the mad skillz so obviously on display in the streets today?

Assume stupidity,ineptitude and distraction, not intelligence, competence and observation.

I've been re-reading "Effective Cycling". When I first read it 15 years ago I found the discussion on bike lanes largely academic considering all we had was Beechwood. I'm still not sure if I believe bike lanes do more harm than good, but this discussion definitely provides evidence to support that conclusion. And it's not just a hypothetical situation in a book, it's something we can all go out and experience.

Like Lyle said, "the paint on the road is tempting you to do something that is contrary [to normal traffic principles]", leading to a conflict. So, is the paint helping or hurting? Or, maybe more to the point, does the good it does (separating cars and bikes on the straight parts) make up for the problems it causes at intersections? Forester's argument is certainly that it does not; I'm still undecided.

salty: Forester's argument is certainly that it does not; I'm still undecided.

Yeah, and there's another argument that Scott made on a different thread that the lane attracts cyclists, and the increased number of cyclists causes beneficial changes in motorist behavior.

I'm not sure yet how to integrate these two arguments. Both have merit. In the absence of unbiased science, we end up with religious wars or arguments based on analysis and logic, which many people just don't like.

Eric: I'm saying that the facility isn't all that new. It's a lane, that's all. If motorists don't already know what to do when changing lanes ("yield to traffic already present in the lane") then a sign isn't going to help. The simplest signs in the world, with the most uncomplicated desired behavior, are still almost universally ignored. It doesn't get any simpler than

this

edit: why, oh why can't I inline images? I wanted to put a rainbow unicorn here

It's a lane, that's all

Perhaps, to many road users, it isn't a lane like any other, so is not subject to the usual standards of operation. (Might explain the whole "casually parking in the bike lane" phenomenon that is so prevalent) My memories of the PA driving manual are sketchy, but I'm pretty sure bike lanes weren't covered.

There's where the education comes in, methinks; but how does one impart such after the fact, without some form of on-the-spot direction? Wish I knew...

correct me if i'm wrong, but i thought the turning lanes on elb were more or less as lyle described, a merge into the bike lane, then right turn. i think there's even signs that say "Begin Right Turn Here" with an arrow. it's not right turn from left lane. the problem with elb is that people drive like maniacs, and don't want to wait until they are "supposed" to turn right. rather they see that right turn, really really want to get to it, so they get over and gun it to the intersection. why that's also dangerous is that there are drivers who actually do drive well, and actually wait until you should merge to the right, but there may be agressive drivers already in it.

ELB has turning lanes that drivers are supposed to merge into.

The trouble with bike lanes that I have noticed is that some people then seem to think that bikes should only be on the streets with designated bike lanes. But that is just the pain in the ass minority.

It's possible that I'm still misunderstanding greenbike's explanation. From the description, I didn't realize there was a turn lane at that intersection.

In that case, if you're trying to enter the turn lane and some maniac blasts around you on the right, there's no way a sign will change his behavior. That's what police are for.

yeah but erok, I don't think the new thermo lines on the road convey to the motorist at each intersection that the right lane is "shared." As I can recall, the only intersection with a break in the solid lines of the bikeway to a shared, dashed line is at the intersection with highland avenue.

the intersections at collins/negley run, stanton and negley - as i can recall - are all solid lines upto the intersection and could convey a little better to motorists and cyclists the rights-of-way.

"If motorists don't already know what to do when changing lanes ("yield to traffic already present in the lane") then a sign isn't going to help. The simplest signs in the world, with the most uncomplicated desired behavior, are still almost universally ignored. "

This is just patently false. I'm not going to bother with examples that are obvious on every street in this country.

I agree with that statement from Lyle.

For example, "stop here on red" with an arrow pointing to the stop bar on the pavement, are two items that are completely ignored.

so much so, that i've witnessed on several occasions vehicles parked ahead of the stop bars and the sensors for traffic lights, and the traffic signals looping through the sequence fail to give that vehicle a green.

good times.

Or they have to backup because they are keeping a bus from being able to make the turn.

Alright, no more arguing with the followers of Forrester for me.

Pseudo-science FTW!

I fully agree with Lyle's assertion that the safest situation is having a simple set of principles that all road users follow. I don't think you can easily "patch" exceptions with signs because people are too likely to ignore them. Better to avoid the ambiguity in the first place like what they did with the Wightman lanes.

Eric, I like to think I have an open mind and in fact I'd be happy if Forester was wrong. If painting lines and putting up signs really makes me safer, I'm all for it. You say that motorists don't look out for bikes, and we should "assume stupidity, ineptitude and distraction", and I agree - so why should I believe those same drivers would pay attention to signs?

The whole premise of Forrester's arguments rely on the fact that drivers will follow the the directives set out by lane markings and signs.

I wouldn't say that's the whole premise, but regardless, I'm sorry I brought his name up - I honestly didn't realize how controversial his ideas (and his persona) were until I just did a little googling. I don't really have much interest in getting into a debate about him.

In any case, I do think "act like a car" is pretty sound advice, but I don't think that necessarily implies "bike lanes are terrible". I don't have much experience with bike lanes, and in general I am happy to see them. If they encourage more people to ride, that's certainly a very positive effect. If they put me in a position where I'm more likely to get right-hooked, I'm dubious that a "yield to bicycles" sign is likely to do anything to improve that situation.

Eric: Alright, no more arguing with the followers of Forrester for me.

I read Forrester. I am suspcious of some of his stats. For example, an off road bike trail, like the jail trail, having higher injury/fatlity rates than on road riding? I don't think so.

I suspect that he might be at least cherry-picking stats.

Someday, I'd like to go to the libray and check his sources. It would only take an hour or two to do a good number.

Of course, we might want to check and see if more contemporary data matches.

Mick

"I'm not going to talk to you, because you're a brainwashed fanatic," is just not a good starting point for constructive engagement.

Now Lyle, I said I wouldn't argue with you, not talk to you.

And then I went and continued the debate anyway. I blame my Irish heritage.

...Irish...hmmm, that would seem to indicate that a trip to the pub might be in order.

So, I'm going to jump in here with some random observations from the Denver/Boulder area, where I am stationed for a few weeks:

* Boulder has tons of bike lanes and crosswalks. And lots of 4 lane roads. This is massively confusing if you aren't from the area. Speed limits are 35mph, minimum, and yet you are expected to stop on a dime when a pedestrian or cyclists enters the road. Overall, the design is confusing. IMHO.

* Bike lanes that parallel then join roads are also very confusing. It also leads to cyclists jumping on to the roads in front of cars.

* Car and truck traffic in the Boulder area is, however, more tolerant of cyclists on the road. I've been on some very fast (55mph) two lane roads without great shoulders, and nearly everyone gives you a wide berth and doesn't seem too miffed by that.

* Sharrows in Boulder mean cyclists get the WHOLE LANE.

* Many Denver/Boulder suburbs have a system of paths and lanes as well. Some of these are generally well-designed (most of Broomfield), but others aren't (around Interlocken). The poorly designed lanes actually follow right hand turn lanes, meaning cars will be sitting next you, probably assuming you are turning too. My habit in these cases has been to take the right-most straight lane, bike lane be damned.

Other, unrelated, observations. Lots of cyclists ride on roads that are, it seems, the equivalent of route 8. Crazy.

I just rode over to ELB to check out the new lines. It sure looks like the lanes are solid right up to the corner in some places. I don't recall this being the case with the paint. This is not good.