2017 City Capital Budget
This is where the paint meets the pavement. the mayor just released the 2017 budget, complete with potential projects. there’s some good developments in it. Command F “bike”
So, just because a project is listed in here, doesn’t meant that it’s happening.
For instance, there’s ~ $3M for the mon wharf switchback included.
Here’s my summary of other stuff that I saw re: bikes
$380K for the “Bike Infrastructure” line item is the most the City has ever spent (i think) of city money. This line item was larger for the 2016 budget, but included $200K/$600K City/Federal funds
I’m real excited about there being $200K for bike/ped thermoplastic paint included in the pavement budget, which is new. Formerly, if there was a street that needed repaved, in order to put the higher quality road markings on, they’d have to dip into the “bike infrastructure” budget, when it should be coming from the repaving budget. so this is a huge behind the scenes step forward, not just for money, but for operations.
They put money in for the 18th St bike lane, improving crossings at Baum and Centre, Brighton Rd, and Ellsworth.
Bike Share expansion made it in. Washington Blvd Trail (which will connect Negley Run to Butler), and the Trolly Trail in the West End.
other things that should include bikes in the overall project, just not specifically a bike project are the Allegheny Circle project, Broadway Ave project, and the South Side Neighborhood St, which will be traffic calming on some parallel streets to E Carson, and include a path for bikes/peds under the birmingham bridge (so you don’t have to go back to E Carson).
Also, I think this has the potential to be a huge debate “As part of Mayor Peduto’s continued efforts to deliver core municipal services, the Operating Budget reflects a departmental reorganization, including the creation of the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure to improve the planning, financing and implementation of transportation projects citywide, to strengthen the coordination of all mobility initiatives, and to develop and execute a long-term vision for smart transportation in the city. ”
check it out here:
Also the $200K for the City Accelerator Step Assessment is great. This will help figure out how to better manage all of the steps
Speaking of the $3m for Mon wharf switchback there was an online letter to editor today in the trib. Bottom line was typical trib reader: I’d be embarrassed of we spent $3m on that. Just put a sign up at end of jail trail that says trail ends here.
I skimmed. These caught my eye:
Capital Budget, page 57:
~$550,000 Washington Boulevard Multimodal Path, Washington Boulevard and Allegheny River Boulevard
~$300,000 Trolley Trail Phase 2, West End
Operating Budget, page 349:
$130,000 Emerald View Park: Fort Pitt Tunnel Trail Connection
All three sound interesting.
A trail from Negley along Washington Blvd and Allegheny River Blvd connecting to Butler St sounds great; I hope it will be separated from the road, since car traffic is so fast there, and cyclists have been struck and injured there http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2011/05/31/Two-bicyclists-seriously-injured-in-hit-and-run/stories/201105310129 . We need a safe way for cyclists to get from the Washington bike oval to the sidewalk of the Highland Park Bridge. A bike/ped bridge over Allegheny River Blvd, perhaps?
What is the Trolley Trail?
The Emerald View Park / Fort Pitt Tunnel Trail Connection sounds nice, though probably not a bike trail.
Trolley trail i think is an extensiin of that little bit of trail off of Noblestown rd. I believe they want to extend it into the west end proper.
Some year, can we please start discussing a Saw Mill Run Bikeway? As I laid out (in 2010!) in the Wabash Tunnel thread, I would like to see a connection from West Carson St west of the West End Circle, using the (unnecessarily about to be torn down) railroad bridge over West Carson, then using the old RR right-of-way down past the Wabash Tunnel, to Hargrove St, at least for starters. I’d like to see it extend all the way down to Transport Street by the 51/88 fustercluck, but one thing at a time.
Other projects with potential bike impact, some of them more long-term:
- Replacement of a bridge in West Ohio St/Ridge Ave (2017)
- Reconstruction of Smithfield St from Forbes to 6th Ave (2017-2020)
- Replacement of the Swinburne Bridge (2017-2022)
- More Penn Ave shenanigans, from Graham St to Evaline St (2017-2019, with the bulk of the work in 2019)
- Reconstruction of the South Negley bridge over the Busway (2018-2019)
- Replacement of the Charles Anderson Bridge, which carries BOTA from Oakland into Schenley Park. It appears it’s coming down in 2020, and the city will spend a cool $37.6 million to replace it. Hopefully some bike lanes might be included?
That $200k line item in the paving budget is absolutely huge; as close as we’ll probably get to dedicated funding for the Complete Streets executive order for street repaving.
Also, the bikeshare expansion – a sizable one – will now be funded by the City? Isn’t that different than what they’re people said in outreach meetings this summer?
Sorry, Bikeshare funding is actually tabbed as “other” meaning a grant of some sort. Even better!
yeah, i don’t know if they secured it yet, but i believe they are seeking federal funding for bike share expansion
I too am really excited about the pavement budget now including a line item for ped/bike paint. And it is an even bigger deal than the dollar amount suggests.
Biking infrastructure has historically faced an uphill battle because it was seen as separate from regular planning and construction. It wasn’t inherently part of a project. Instead it was merely a nice extra. With the budget including money for proper paint, it is an indicator that use and planning for use of paint, is now a standard thing.
How many years has it been a line item? Or is this the first year?
@dfiler Yes, Peduto’s Complete Streets Executive Order was intended to cover regular street paving projects as well as larger capital investments, meaning that any street up for repaving should be evaluated for all modes.
The East Street project on the Northside was the city’s first example; NS Bike/Ped Committee proposed the road diet and bike lane addition knowing that the street was soon to be repaved and the paving/bike lane improvements were implemented concurrently saving time and money. The bike lane portions needed a separate line item in the budget, however, which could’ve stalled the project had planning not started so early. That problem would theoretically be eliminated with this new funding.
dfiler: this is the first year, and is something that we’ve been pushing for for years. A big part of the problem is that we advocated (successfully) for the City to use a higher quality thermoplastic on many of the bike infrastructure projects. thermo tends to last 7x paint, however there’s a higher up front cost. However…. the City does not have an in-house way to install thermo, they can only install water bourne paint with city workers/equipment, so it has to be contracted out. That is why the money would formally come from the “bike infrastructure” line item (reducing the number of new projects), and not the “paving budget,” until now, since there’s a line item in the paving budget.
the first year this has been a line item under the paving budget, not the first year for a general “bike infrastructure” line item
@erok said “Trolley trail i think is an extension of that little bit of trail off of Noblestown rd. I believe they want to extend it into the west end proper.”. I heard from Kathryn Hunninen of Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy that “The Trolley Trail is off of Noblestown Road, connects with Crafton Borough. And I believe the second phase is to bring it all the way in to the West End. I drove by it once, it is a nice asphalt surface. Southwest Pittsburgh CDC has been the lead on that, with City Planning and Council District 2.”
Is this the Clearview Park Trail (as labeled in Google Maps) parallel to Crafton Blvd? (I’ve been on that. It’s crushed limestone, not asphalt.) This idea came up before:
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Click here to login.