Nov. 18th: Public Meeting on Bike/Ped Planning in Oakland

You may remember that a little over a month ago we asked you to take a survey about your experience walking and/or biking in Oakland. Well, the results are in and they are helping shape the future of the Fifth/Forbes Corridor near Carnegie Mellon University.

There is a public meeting an incredibly important public meeting taking place on CMU’s campus on Thursday we just found out about mere minutes ago that will address these safety concerns and go over some preliminary concepts on how to fix them. From the study itself:

These next stages, the interview and public workshop sessions, will be critical to the success and direction of the project. Therefore, at this time it would be premature to assume any concept will move forward until the interview sessions are conducted with the key stakeholders and the public workshop will been held. With the combined input of these two events, the concepts can then be distilled into sound recommendations for design and implementation.

Oakland Transportation Management Association (OTMA) received PCTI funding to conduct a Pedestrian Safety Assessment/Plan in Oakland in conjunction with CMU.

Their preliminary findings are ready, and will be presented at an open-house style workshop on Thursday, show up anytime between 3-7 p.m.

The goal of the Study is to provide a safe system that accommodates “all users, walkers, bicyclists, transit riders, and automobile drivers.”

Your participation could be very valuable in efforts to make Oakland more user friendly from a transportation standpoint.

CMU Campus, University Center, Dowd Room [map]
November 18, 2010 from 3-7 p.m.

Phase I of the Study is complete, and can be viewed here.

For more information, contact Mavis Rainey at

Not a member of BikePGH? Join today! We need you to add your voice! Bike Pittsburgh works to protect cyclist’s rights and promote the vision of making Pittsburgh a safer and more enjoyable place to live and to ride. For more info, check out:

Leave a Reply

Supported by