BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

« Back to Archive
237

Detour to start on Eliza Furnace/Jail Trail

From today's Post-Gazette

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10233/1081711-53.stm


Can't say I'm all that fond of the detour they propose, crossing to and staying on the South Side may make more sense.


Also, I find myself wondering if this isn't something that should have appeared on the Bike-Pgh web page by now? I don't see it. This is not a criticism, just a suggestion.


Does Mr. Patchen still work for the city? Does he not communicate with Bike-Pgh? Did no one know this was going to happen this week? I was certainly surprised to see the detour starts Wednesday. I would think this site (not the boards, but the site Bike-PGHitself) should be a first stop for people looking for updates about regular commuting routes.


Having detailed, up to date, info on detours etc. would be far more of a benefit to me than discounts at merchants etc. Again, this is just meant as a suggestion, not a criticism. The P-G posted it but there could be so much more info--like a map of the detour etc. Who else but Bike-Pgh?


jeffinpgh
2010-08-21 19:32:25

interesting....saw a truck TRY to get under this overpass in mid July.




pratt
2010-08-21 20:08:38

Here is the previous thread on the subject:

http://bike-pgh.org/bbpress/topic/jail-trail-detour-next-year


Every time I read about it, they propose some new method of detouring trail users.


First, it was build the bridge next to the old one, then tear the old one down, then it was dump everyone onto Second Ave to fend for themselves, now we are to cross over HMB and through parking lots and back over at "Middle Access Drive"? Where the heck is that? How do we cross Second Ave and get back on the trail?


Either the PG reporters aren't real good at their job, or the people in charge of this project can't figure out what they're going to do with all these bikers. Either case, I don't blame bike-pgh one bit.


dwillen
2010-08-21 20:16:29

Either the PG reporters aren't real good at their job, or the people in charge of this project can't figure out what they're going to do with all these bikers. Either case, I don't blame bike-pgh one bit.


Niether am I. What I was trying to say is that who else will know how to get the right information than cyclists? I was hoping (and knowing the city it's probably a false hope) that the city would communicate this sort of stuff to Bike Pittsburgh as the best possible organization to disseminate this information properly.


I'm guessing no one knew about this except the contractor, someone at the DPW, and someone who called the PG. And I was just looking at the map and have the same question as Dan, where/what the heck is "Middle Access Drive?"


jeffinpgh
2010-08-21 20:22:51

There is a crosswalk / tiny staircase that accesses the trail about 100 yards past the bates bridge. I would assume that it will cross back there?


spakbros
2010-08-21 20:33:42

Staircase? Trail riding has now become the Pittsburgh version of a cyclocross!


buzz1980
2010-08-21 22:06:33

non drive side portage please


spakbros
2010-08-21 23:10:04

So, this is my daily commute. At the risk of being pissy, I'll ask: where the hell am I supposed to go?


I'm not specifically pissy about the fact of a detour due to construction. What I'm pissy about is the fact that I *know* in my heart of hearts that they'd never close a motor vehicle road without a detour plan.


My pissiness is exacerbated by the recent partial closures of the trail along the Allegheny on the north side in the morning. Yeah, I can tell that it's bridge inspectors, and they're probably doing valuable work. I just resent the fact that I know that they'd never close a highway at some arbitrary point without posting detours. Yes, I know that I can detour back, go up to the road, bypass the Ft Duquesne bridge part of the trail, then drop back down. And be later for work. Again, not a big deal, except that I know they'd never do this for a motor vehicle road.


I put up with it for the first two days, then started riding through the closed part. To the credit of the people doing the actual work of the bridge inspection, they didn't even blink.


jz
2010-08-22 03:44:03

I am missing a piece of the puzzle I think....


The detour referenced in the first media link above would seem to indicate that trail users would be detoured off the EF Trail at the Hot Metal Bridge, coming inbound. They would then use the internal circulation road at the Pgh Technology Center to get past Bates Street. But, where is the cityside connection to the trail? Others are more familiar with the trail than I. The gap in fence (intentional) on the EF Trail that leads to Second Avenue in the vicinity of the Pgh Technology Center. Is that towards the City from Bates Street? That's got what, a half dozen steps between Second Avenue and the Trail?


swalfoort
2010-08-22 23:55:32

I can see it now, a road constuction detour that makes you carry your CAR up a flight of stairs. But sir, it's only four or five steps....


marko82
2010-08-23 00:08:55

"Middle Access Drive" seems to be the road into the PTC that extends south from Bates. That street name appears in the name of an inactive PAT bus stop near there in Google Maps. (On the other hand, many PAT stops have incorrect location data, so it could really refer to the next intersection west of Bates.)


I don't know why they couldn't have built a ramp over the steps up to the trail as the first step in this project. And if the detour routing is along the north sidewalk on Second Avenue, maybe put some asphalt down to make a rideable surface. It seems to be Belgian Block with lampposts stuck in the middle, plus vegetation. (Or are they going to build a detour lane for the trail right on Second Avenue?)


steven
2010-08-23 02:10:09

I think the only possible detour is via the tiny steps (and narrow twisty ramp) that leads from the trail down to Second Avenue. I suppose it's too much to ask that they build a temporary ramp over Second Ave. for us?


Here's a map that I think shows the cutoff from the trail.


erink
2010-08-23 02:40:39

Damn, 5 lanes on bates street? 18 ft overhead clearance? Will we be blowing away the sidewalk on bates? Does anyone know what is going on with this project?


cuse
2010-08-23 02:41:49

Alas! As the Bike Snob puts it, "the indignity of commuting by bicycle."


I occasionally have to go to the Pittsburgh Technology Center complex, and I usually take Bates down the hill, connect to the trail and then take the "exit" at the map location posted by ErinK. There's a wheelchair ramp that works if you go slowly around the hairpin turn. Keep an eye out--half the time I go right by it; it's not really marked at all, and hard to see until you're right on it.


Of more concern is the light at 2nd Avenue. The PTC driveway forms a T junction, with a magnetic sensor at the end of the driveway. If there's no car there, the green light for 2nd Avenue traffic doesn't get interrupted, I don't think. There's a pedestrian walk signal button which takes forever to activate it... and in any case, bikers aren't pedestrians. Various upstream traffic patterns mean that there are somewhat frequent breaks in oncoming car traffic, AKA opportunities to just "go for it" with or without the light.


So, take the unmarked detour around this late-breaking construction project, wait forever and/or disregard a red light, and then hop up a wheelchair ramp or nearby steps. Sounds pretty much par for the course to me!


ieverhart
2010-08-23 04:57:55

For my commute, I'm going to cross the river and take the South Side trail into town rather than trying to navigate 2nd Avenue. I bet American Eagle is going to love the increased traffic on their little corner domain.


kordite
2010-08-23 11:23:04

For my commute, I'm going to cross the river and take the South Side trail into town

+1 --unless they make significant modifcations to the light @ieverhart references above. But even then probably South Side...now we'll just wait for someone to close that too. I think there is a project starting soon to raise the roof on the railway tunnel under that grassy strip there that will close that road.


Meanwhile, a big truck was parked on the trail delivering some construction equipment just at the overpass this morning at 7:00.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 11:49:45

saw that. I don't really know how this is going to effect me (I'm awful with street names/directions), as I take the trail to and from school, and home from work...


rubberfactory
2010-08-23 12:09:13

Detour information included in the construction documents used to be here.


Mebbe Mr. Patchan could snoop around and post the "Maintenance and Protection of Traffic" drawings for us. As I can recall, the construction documents weren't a very large set, and the MPT drawings were near the back of the set.


If the project has been awarded, then the documents are public record and can be viewed by anyone at this point...


sloaps
2010-08-23 13:08:24

Since I mentioned the pending project at the other end of the Hot Metal bridge above I'll link this for you

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10205/1075105-147.stm


Early next year, CSX will begin to tear up Tunnel Park at the SouthSide Works to raise the roof in the railroad tunnel that lies underneath.The Panama Canal is nearly 2,200 miles from Pittsburgh, but ripples from a $5.25 billion canal expansion will be felt here starting next year.


--snip---

At the SouthSide Works, a $15 million to $25 million project calls for removing the grassy median between South Water Street and Tunnel Boulevard, taking the roof off the railroad tunnel and installing a new one that is 18 to 30 inches higher.


CSX officials said the construction, expected to start early in 2011 and last a year, will cause some disruption to traffic, pedestrians and bicyclists. A temporary detour of the bike trail that passes through the corridor is possible, but the trail will not be closed.


The project area stretches from 26th Street to Hot Metal Street.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 13:37:19

@jeffinpgh - no that ain't the document. The city had 11x17 size construction documents posted online during the bidding period for the project. Not there now.


The CSX project is funny. Norfolk Southern has lines between the slopes and flats on southside and has had the ability to stack up sea cans and trailers on their lines since forever.


sloaps
2010-08-23 13:57:57

Wow, the sidewalk police at American Eagle are going to crap a brick when they have bobcats and semi trucks running over their precious sidewalk and dozens of snarky signs. I can't wait until they try and browbeat the construction workers.


dwillen
2010-08-23 14:04:19

Damn, 5 lanes on bates street? 18 ft overhead clearance? Will we be blowing away the sidewalk on bates? Does anyone know what is going on with this project?


They got tired of trucks getting smashed vertically, now they are going to funnel 5 lanes into 2 and smash them horizontally instead.


dwillen
2010-08-23 14:09:26

This is nuts. How are we supposed to get back on the trail, when heading downtown?


chinston
2010-08-23 15:24:31

So they completely avoid using the sidewalk on the north side of Second Avenue. Not too bad, though it will still be necessary to cross Second Avenue at a light.


steven
2010-08-23 16:29:23

I feel for everyone when this stuff happens. For what it's worth, often times the one or two people in DPW who know about stuff like this aren't necessarily authorized to talk to media, so nothing comes out from the city unless a lot of effort was made to keep in touch with DPW about.


I could be wrong, but that's the way it goes for us, and even though our friends in City Planning are great, they can't always help make this sort of connection... then, everyone gets upset because the notifications are so last minute.


In other detour news, there is a huge blinking detour coming sign at south highland and center today. With that Spoon place offering a clusterfuck of 'valet' parking, and construction there, its going to S U C K.


caitlin
2010-08-23 16:52:20

FWIW, there are other ways to get downtown. Just riding on 2d avenue wasn't too bad in the years before the trail was built (as long as it wasn't raining). I'm not sure what it's like now. Last time I saw it there were some formidable surface defects, and I'd guess that the intersection with Bates is going to be a mess with construction vehicles. I'll probably wind up using 5th avenue inbound every day (though I'm thinking of switching to Forbes to avoid the traffic jam between Amberson and Craig). Anybody who wants company from the East End to Downtown on weekday mornings around 8:30 should PM me. Likewise for the return trip, usually about 6ish, on either Forbes(*) or Liberty -- or 2d Avenue/Irvine/Hazelwood if we're looking for extra exercise.


(*) I rode this recently and decided that there's only one part of it that's bad, and the rest is ok. The bad part could be improved fairly inexpensively.


What's going on at S Highland and Center?


lyle
2010-08-23 17:05:43

I would personally avoid the speedway that is 2nd Ave at all costs to get downtown.


rsprake
2010-08-23 17:21:57

@lyle Rode 2nd avenue on the way out of town Sunday morning. Surface is fine someplaces, "Pinch Flat Pennsylvania" in others, and as @rsprake points out a speedway in the morning. I'm not worried I'll get downtown I may just take 2nd to the ramp back up depending on the construction, it's pretty okay in that area actually.


Highland/Center--they are going to close Southbound Highland(at least) for a bit and take out the traffic Island etc. Part of the Deal with Target is to return more of Penn Circle to two-way traffic flow.


@erok--looking back I can see that I seemed critical. I didn't mean to be, I just think this is a place where Bike-Pgh could leap in a fill a void in a really useful way--but that would pre-suppose that the city actually let you know, and maybe it just never occurred to them that more than three days notice could be useful to commuters? Thanks for the map!


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 17:43:32

I'm more concerned with the bike and ped traffic that is using Bates to access the Hot Metal Bridge. With that roughshod access path soon to be closed, it will either divert all the bikes and peds to the Second Ave intersection or the access point about 1000 feet down Second to the west from there. As someone who has used the "fun" button press ped signal there, I can attest that it takes almost 3-5 minutes for the ped signals to activate.


If trail access will be cut off at Bates streets, the very least that will need to be done is to automate the ped signals. Sorry PennDOT, you can't take away bike/ped access somewhere without reasonably improving it somewhere else in its stead.


impala26
2010-08-23 17:47:04

I worked at Ansaldo (Union Switch & Signal) for much of 2009, so know the lay of the land at the other end of Technology Drive.


Here's what you do to avoid the mess: Get on Hot Metal, then double back to come down toward the south side of Second Ave. Wiggle into the parking lot next to whatever building that is, and carefully thread your way through that lot onto Technology Drive proper. Ride down to the far traffic light, right in front of Ansaldo.


A couple of choices. You could exit onto Second here, turn left and ride Second Ave about 200 yards. My preference is to get on the outbound sidewalk, between Ansaldo's parking garage and the street, and ride the sidewalk not quite all the way to the next traffic light (Brady Street). Wait for a break in the traffic and cross Second, into a rather dismal looking equipment yard almost underneath the Birmingham Bridge. There is an access path up to the trail from there. It's a bit rough, but I made it up and down every day on my road tires.


I suppose you could ride down to the Brady St signal and double back 50 yards. Depends on how many cement trucks you want to deal with.


Do not ride past Ansaldo or on the river side of its parking garage, as Technology Drive dead-ends here, and you really really really do not want to drop down into the cement plant.


Google Street View shows a lot of trucks at this spot, but it changes every day. Most days in 2009 there was nothing parked there.


stuinmccandless
2010-08-23 17:59:52

Sorry PennDOT, you can't take away bike/ped access somewhere without reasonably improving it somewhere else in its stead.


They do seem about to do just that, although I hold out hope they'll adjust the light timing. This is going to put a serious crimp in the plans of some of the regular roller bladers I see out there on my commutes, esp. if they are used to parking up at the Oakland end of things.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 18:00:41

Perhaps someone could "improve" the ped-crossing button. I think a small rock and a strip of duct tape would do it.


lyle
2010-08-23 18:33:02

@JeffinPgh maybe it just never occurred to them that more than three days notice could be useful to commuters?


I'm guessing that it stretches their minds to think of bus and T riders as "commuters." Their minds probably don't stretch far enough to consider bike riders in that category.


mick
2010-08-23 18:33:08

Mick, you are right. I just lost my head there for a bit...


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 18:54:52

just got word that they will be adding ramps. apparently the whole detour will be wheelchair accessible.


erok
2010-08-23 19:01:16

Erok, where will the ramp(s) precisely be located and are they to be temporary or permanent?


impala26
2010-08-23 21:03:42

If you are headed out this way going home tonight, be advised that some work has begun. You can get by, but a bit before 4:30 this afternoon there was a backhoe clearing landscape etc, trucks parked on the path.


@impala, I noticed today that there is a concrete ramp (stairs one side, ramp the other) that leads down from the trail to a curb cut (one of the new ones with the yellow bumpy thing that allows visually impaired people to locate the cut) at the traffic light. And the curb has a cut on the other side as well. So that area of the junction I would say is permanent. The bends may be too sharp for some to ride a bike through, but you'll probably be standing at the light anwyay.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 21:27:32

the western end of the detour to get people from the trail to second ave and across at an intersection. i haven't seen it in person yet, but there is supposedly a signal to get across. i'm planning on checking it out tomorrow.


the ramps are supposedly temporary


erok
2010-08-23 21:28:20

@erok, be a shame if they take that ramp out. But maybe they plan to expand it? If I remember my camera I'll try to grab a photo in the morning.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-23 21:30:04

The biggest thing that bothers me about these projects is that there are, or will be 3 major projects taking place on the trails, that aren't even related to trail-specific improvement. The Bates St bridge, tunnel raising and the water pump house on the SS trail are taking away lots of trail access.


buzz1980
2010-08-23 21:51:04

I think the Bates St project is a-ok if it means a semitrailer doesn't rip the overpass down as I'm biking across it...


noah-mustion
2010-08-23 22:26:00

I used forbes to get home today. I think I prefer it to liberty now. It's not quite as jammed up as grant st at the start, the average speed is about 12-15 mph which is quite comfortable for controlling a lane, and the only bad part is the bit right after the bham bridge. But even that is manageable.


lyle
2010-08-23 23:01:40

I don't mind Fifth and Forbes to get between Oakland and Downtown, and I'll probably use those rather than the detour. If you're going right at rush hour, though, it can be intimidating to people who are less comfortable in traffic.


hoffmannj
2010-08-23 23:48:48

I took Bates->2nd->Hot Metal at about 6pm. I was actually planning to take the bike/ped bridge but then I saw there was no curb cut and wasn't about to try to jump it with a car up my ass so I took the normal bridge - screw it.


This was after I saw a cop car on Bates nearly splatter a guy in a crosswalk carrying a pizza with his family in tow. I guess those "yield to peds in crosswalk" signs are only a suggestion - big surprise.


salty
2010-08-24 05:06:51

Here are some photos of the area at 2nd Ave and "Middle Access Drive"


The Technology Center Side:

IMG_1255


The jail trail side of the street, lots of gravel piled up where that curb cut is located:

IMG_1257


Looking down the ramp:

IMG_1256


And the entrance to the ramp from the trail:

IMG_1258


In the first photo, you can see the push to cross button on the far side, I neglected to see if there was one on the trail side. If not, that's a serious problem that the city ought to fix. These were taken around 7 a.m.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-24 11:50:28

That looks like a fine, ADA-compliant ramp. For someone on crutches, or in a wheelchair.


lyle
2010-08-24 12:59:49

I'm not sure that's the ramp for the detour. Based on the posted diagram, it looks like there will be two ramps. The original ramp is aligned with the western side of Middle Access Drive. The new one is aligned to the eastern side. It's also supposed to be ten feet wide; the old one looks narrower.


I wonder if the other elements of the detour are built yet. The diagram shows a path off the bridge that seems to go around the back of the bus stop there (the cross-hatched area), for instance. If the detour will go into effect Wednesday as the P-G reported, and they really do follow the plans, they have considerable work to do before then.


steven
2010-08-24 13:19:04

They haven't started any other construction in that area, that's for sure. They did clear some vegetation up toward the parkway east on-ramp at Bates Street. (Maybe bikes will get routed up on the parkway!)


jeffinpgh
2010-08-24 13:26:18

I checked out the area myself as well. The two curbs at the north end of Bates/2nd are still gravel at the moment. If anyone is planning on using Bates to get to Hot Metal, stay on the road, or at least get on the road around the vicinity of the Hideout/Parkway underpass and proceed straight across 2nd toward the PTC or like an oblique left to get on the sidewalk there. I think with traffic it's easier to proceed straight across, then wait for the intersection to clear to get to the sidewalk.


Getting to the trail/Hot Metal from Bates is so much simpler with the dirt path... thus why I'm so frustrated with this project. I'm also frustrated like everyone else about how all these construction projects are going on at once. The Bates corner sidewalk has been gravel for around a month already...


impala26
2010-08-24 13:53:29

Yeah, I'm hoping that ninety degree turn onto Second doesn't end up being the detour.


I switched to using Penn Ave for my commute home. Not as nice as the trail, but seemingly nicer than the detour.


jz
2010-08-24 14:42:16

i feel the frustration too, but look on the bright side - in less than a month there will be a new trail open from the northside to milvale, and soon a new trail by the convention center.


yeah it sucks, but they are at least going to be doing this work in the winter when trail use is down.


there are road/bridge closings all the time in this town. i'm glad that people are active and complain enough that they have to throw a bone and provide the detour.


also, why is the pitt news the only one talking about this aspect of the project:


Using $3.6 million of city, state and federal funds, the city will replace the old railroad bridge with a taller, wider bridge, said Chuck McClain, the city’s project manager for bridges and structures. The new bridge will accommodate the proposed Mon/Fayette Expressway into Oakland — and 17-foot-6-inch tall trucks.... The city acquired the bridge from PennDOT about 20 years ago, and because car drivers don’t use it, officials don’t give it high priority, McClain said.


“If the bridge was not part of the Mon/Fayette Expressway, I doubt if we would be replacing it,” he said.


erok
2010-08-24 15:13:12

The Mon/Fayette Expressway? I thought that project was buried long ago.


bradq
2010-08-24 15:18:21

there's no funding for the MFX, but it's never been officially killed or pulled off the table. If there was a budget windfall that project would be shovel ready. ::shivers:: I'm hoping that by the time they find the funding someone will have the sense to kill it.


tabby
2010-08-24 15:20:55

I'm hoping that by the time they find the funding someone will have the sense to kill it.


Don't worry, we'll all have hoverbikes in the year 2317 anyway...and teleporters.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-24 15:24:25

Now that I've worked through my frustration about the "Surprise!" nature of this detour announcement, honestly the detour itself isn't that bad--just a little more time consuming. I don't mind riding on Forbes, or Liberty, or Penn, or etc. but if you don't like riding with a lot of traffic, the trail is still the way to go, just allow more time.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-24 15:39:05

I totally wouldn't count on it jeff. The MFX was initially proposed in the 1950s- the region was totally different economically and of course transportation planning was just starting to really focus on moving car and truck traffic. We're already so far from the vision of the MFX that I can totally imagine being on our hoverbikes and teleporters and that road being built anyway just because the paperwork has been signed off.


tabby
2010-08-24 15:44:24

MFX^H^H^H Mon-Fayette/SOuthern Beltway -> MFSOB


It's a zombie, I tell you. You cannot kill the damned thing, no matter how many times you kill it.


Thank you for the heads-up. Yet even one more wiggle towards building it.


stuinmccandless
2010-08-24 18:20:34

They closed the trail Thursday evening after rush hour.




kordite
2010-08-27 01:21:21

I tried the detour out tonight. It's a bit tight, but actually not that bad. They really put a lot of amenities to help people find the detour. I'm a fan.


msprout
2010-08-27 02:56:42

The detour is well marked, and yes a bit tight in places. On the way in this morning I just stayed on 2nd Ave up to the ramp and went back to the trail there. It was fine, though probably only a good idea if you can ride at a pretty good clip through that stretch. I'll probably use the detour on the homebound leg.


My main concern about the detour is that they built the temporary ramp (which is nice and wide by the way) up to the trail out of wood with a plywood deck. Not sure how well that will withstand rain and winter, but I guess it's easy enough to replace if it warps, and there's always the wheelchair ramp 20 feet down the walk.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-27 12:31:07

Yeah, not so terrible coming in this morning. I think it added only a couple of minutes. Snow could make some of the narrower stretches treacherous, though. I also have to think this is going to hurt the bike rental place's business, though. I'm not sure how eager people are going to be to rent bikes if they have to take the detour just to get to the Hot Metal Bridge. Maybe more folks will start by heading over Smithfield St.


I suppose I should appreciate the fact that there is at least a well-used bike path in the first place, for there to even be the possibility of a detour.


chinston
2010-08-27 13:31:52

coming from southside in the dark, I don't remember seeing any detour signs facing toward me (I only saw the ones facing the northern side of the HMS bridge, on my way back down to the detour). once I stopped and turned around, I saw the signs and the detour, but tbh, the traffic was pretty heavy on 2nd this morning, and I was really nervous. I'll probably just catch the bus from downtown on my way home until this is done with...


rubberfactory
2010-08-27 21:06:16

I took the detour to the Bates street light, then went up Bates toward Oakland. Do-able, but with all the traffic coming down the hill it is almast impossible to get to the sidewalk, and the entrance to the Parkway is um, interesting.


marko82
2010-08-27 22:00:10

Thought this was tangentially relevant.


http://11foot8.com/


Lots of fun watching trucks have their tops pealed off.


kordite
2010-08-29 17:23:38

Traffic was light on the trail from downtown, or maybe I left work too early.


Anywho, the pedestrian signal at the designated crossing on second avenue was pretty fast. There was a car waiting for a green to turn left into the technology center and it gave me the signal less than a minute after I hit the button.


sloaps
2010-08-30 22:05:11

I might just be nitpicking, but there still don't seem to be any visible signs about the detour when coming across the HMB from south side works....second time I've absent-mindedly bypassed the little walkway to try to get to the trail, heh.


rubberfactory
2010-08-30 22:32:32

but there still don't seem to be any visible signs about the detour when coming across


I don't think that's nitpicking at all. There ought to be a couple signs that say "Detour to Eliza Furnace Trail toward Downtown" or something like that with an arrow pointing into the walkway.


But here's my nitpick. Yesterday I watched a guy on a mountain bike ride across the parking lot of the building by the hot metal bridge and then down over the grass to the walkway to get up to the bridge. Okay, so you saved possibly sixty seconds and the possibility of having to slow down to pass a pedestrian on the sidewalk sure. But that grass will die when you do that enough times, then you'll have a rut and erosion etc. It's not the best executed detour ever, but why kill the grass to save at most a minute?


jeffinpgh
2010-08-31 12:08:12

Detours always suck. If they didn't then that route would be the primary, lol. Whether you are walking, riding or driving... it is always annoying to the the detour signs in front of you. Even if you are just walking into a building and the door is closed for some reason and you have to walk around to the other side... I am like "Ow man!!!" HA


jim
2010-08-31 16:54:28

Why not just take Second Ave and forget about the whole trail detour?


sarah_q
2010-08-31 20:23:18

Traffic on Second Avenue can be murder.


chinston
2010-08-31 20:33:35

@chinston Traffic on Second Avenue can be murder.


You're exaggerating there.


Traffic on 2nd ave is a $500 traffic citation, not murder.


I mean, the cyclist is still dead and all, but "murder" would be a crime.


mick
2010-08-31 21:04:37

Never mind the traffic. The damn pavement alone can kill you.


stuinmccandless
2010-08-31 21:23:20


jeffinpgh
2010-08-31 22:05:40

The stretch of Second Avenue from the underpass to the trail detour is actually fine, and I do go that way inbound sometimes. (I'm getting a kind of enjoyment out of the detour, it's something different). On the way home the traffic waiting for the Hot Metal Street light and then roaring along toward Greenfield Ave etc.--while certainly not unmanageable--makes the detour more peaceful.


On the inbound leg, once you get down near Brady Street and Metaltech though the pavement goes bad quickly and doesn't get better until you get to 10th street. No problem if don't mind pinch flats but otherwise not much fun with cars around. But the trail is actually a tad less 'congested' these days and better route along there anyway.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-31 22:05:41

Wow, edit seems to have duplicated.


jeffinpgh
2010-08-31 22:07:49

Just past Metaltech, just before Brady, is where that path up to the trail is. Use the curb cut by that equipment yard.


My major beef with Second's pavement is outbound by the jail. Inbound is bad, too, but at least there are no parked cars between Brady & 10SB, so the longitudinal crack is less an issue. My bigger problem there is speeding cement trucks.


stuinmccandless
2010-09-01 14:10:49

Stu,


They've built a nice big, 10 foot wide, plywood ramp up to the trail at Second and Middle Access. It's easy to get up at the moment. Winter won't be kind to the plywood but we'll see how they handle that.


Also, they adjusted the push to cross buttons so that they actually work. Longest I've waited is about 50 seconds after pushing the button. (Or, in reality, touching the button and having it chirp at me).


jeffinpgh
2010-09-01 14:58:54

I was walking down 2nd today and almost got run over by 3 different cyclists who came up behind me on the sidewalk, going quite fast and not bothering to signal. I know it's the trail detour, but there's nowhere else to walk, either!


Also, is the sidewalk of Bates going to be closed, as someone said? I go 2nd -> Bates -> Boulevard of Allies, so that's going to be a problem.


I could just get on a bike, but with the choices of a) Boulevard of the Allies, b) Swineburne Street, and c) Bates Street, I think I'd rather just walk the 2-3 miles at this point. Any secret Greenfield -> South Oakland routes I don't know about?


jeg
2010-09-02 00:04:41

Are you starting from the Run, or somewhere higher up in Greenfield?


If you are walking, there is a bushwacking trail from the beginning of junction hollow up to some stairs to the Blvd of the allies bridge on the Oakland side, but you'll have to blaze a trail through the japanese knotweed this time of year.


If you're riding, just go through the park, or take junction hollow and pick your way around the side streets east of Forbes to get to south Oakland.


dwillen
2010-09-02 00:20:48

i go up swinburne pretty regularly, and i find it to be quite pleasant. sure, it winds a good bit, and the shoulders aren't exactly large, but (at least for the times of day i go through) there's really never much traffic going up, and they usually give me tons of room. plus i think it's the least steep way up the hill, after you get up the bottom of greenfield.


hiddenvariable
2010-09-02 00:32:34

I'm on Haldane.


I'll have to check out that trail. Japanese knotweed just might be better than drunken Bates Street cat-callers (at 6 pm? really? can't wait until it's dark at 4!).


It seems kind of silly to go all the way up to Schenley Plaza then back through side streets. I mean, I've done it and it works no problem, but it's twice as long as the most direct walkable route, and I like walking, so meh.


Thanks!


jeg
2010-09-02 00:37:20

For what it's worth, I've never actually biked up Swineburne, but it's basically unwalkable and seemed nasty from the car. I'll be commuting right in the middle of rush hour both directions. Maybe I'll give it a shot, though.


jeg
2010-09-02 00:39:24

and for what it's worth to you, i've been commuting around pittsburgh for about 8 years now, and i'm quite comfortable in most traffic. if taking the lane to force cars to go far around you makes you nervous, i could see it being not the best way. it's basically like walking up it - you're totally "in the way", but there's enough places to pass you that most cars don't seem to mind.


hiddenvariable
2010-09-02 01:01:03

I walk from 5th Ave and McKee through the park. I live the next street over. I never even thought of going down the hill and over to Bates, the park trails are just so nice.


From your place to South Oakland:

2.2 miles

or

2.0 miles

vs.

1.7 miles


For the extra quarter or half mile, I'd take the park over Greenfield Rd and Bates. They have lots of gravel trails that are shaded and much more pleasant than Bates. You'll save yourself a walk up and down the hill too.


dwillen
2010-09-02 02:31:20

I have to get to the very south of Oakland. So through the park is a ~50 minute walk, vs. a ~30 minute walk down 2nd (formerly the Jail Trail) and up Bates.


I know I'm nitpicking here. An extra 20 minutes is worth feeling/being safer (although the perceived un-safeness of Bates etc. might be in my head/due to unfamiliarity more than anything). After all, I said I like walking, and if I card about time so much I'd suck it up and ride a bike up Swineburne. :)


Coming from the person who used to have a 2 hour each way car + bus commute, ANY of these options is just fine (and I'll probably try all of them at least once), I'm just exploring my options.


Thanks again!


jeg
2010-09-02 09:19:26

Jeg, keep in mind that starting Sept 5th there is going to be a new bus route, the 58 Greenfield. The route is literally a combined route between the former 56E and the 56U. It continues to operate Greenfield-Downtown service via Second Ave, but also does a loop around Greenfield and goes to Oakland via the Boulevard of the Allies and Forbes and Fifth.


I've been trying for some time now to get a path built from the Junction Hollow Trail to the steps near the Boulevard of the Allies Bridge. I really think primarily it would simply be a matter of maintenance because much like an earlier poster stated, the area around there is vastly overgrown with Japanese Knotweed.


impala26
2010-09-02 16:06:01

Also, how long is it going to take to rebuild the sidewalk corners on the north side of the Bates-2nd Avenue intersection? Downhill is fine, I just take the lane, but uphill I take the sidewalk and it's really hard to access when it's just a pile of loose gravel.


impala26
2010-09-02 16:09:09

Impala26, is this the trail we thought about hacking our way through, back in April or somesuch?


stuinmccandless
2010-09-02 17:22:03

jeg:


If you take junction hollow to boundary, then make the left at the first street sign (forget the name) that looks like a driveway, walk about 20 feet straight ahead and ascend the staicase there, it takes you right up by Iron City bikes.


Might be faster honestly, and more pleasant at the very least.


spakbros
2010-09-02 17:29:57

Yeah Stu, it is. Though, it might be slightly modified compared to my original idea.


impala26
2010-09-02 17:51:30

There ought to be a couple signs that say "Detour to Eliza Furnace Trail toward Downtown" or something like that with an arrow pointing into the walkway.


Your wish is granted. Sometime today they put up a sign that said "Trail Access to Downtown" so that people coming across the Hot Metal Bridge will know to take the detour.


kordite
2010-09-02 22:39:09

@Impala26:

I've been trying for some time now to get a path built from the Junction Hollow Trail to the steps near the Boulevard of the Allies Bridge.


Gondola. Rope-tow. Incline.


I sincerely think something like this can be a solution. It's all well and good for us bikers to puff up about our climbing chops, but if we're serious about bike commuting in Pittsburgh we really do need solutions for the hills. This is why the city had inclines all over the place, way back when.


ahlir
2010-09-05 01:20:13

It really isn't that steep. If a few people spent an afternoon trail building, it would be easily bikeable, up to the stairway, at least.


I think the problem is, it really isn't clear who we need permission from to build said trail, and there is a property owner at the end of the [PUBLIC!!!] stairs who didn't seem too excited about more people walking by her house.


dwillen
2010-09-05 02:43:06

On the pathway from Parkview (next to the Blvd of the allies) to Juno st.


@dwillen I think the problem is, it really isn't clear who we need permission from to build said trail, and there is a property owner at the end of the [PUBLIC!!!] stairs


I need to recontact the city folks about this. The first time, they said they didn't know but some work was starting on public walking right-of-ways and that I should get back to them.


There are a lot of highly politicized details about both paths in general and this path in particular.


mick
2010-09-17 16:03:45

I was riding by on Friday evening when they started demolishing the bridge. I imagine it's gone by now.


Bates Street Construction: Week 4


kordite
2010-09-19 12:43:36

went by there last night - it was hard to tell but i think it is down... they were working quite late on a saturday night


noah-mustion
2010-09-19 13:09:24

Another view of what I imagine to be the Last Bump.



pseudacris
2010-09-20 00:02:35

Went by there today... way too much daylight.


Also when I started thinking about it, why didn't they have some kind of "maximum height" sign warning truckers? I mean, I see one on one side (per @Pseudacris), but wouldn't it have been cheaper to just add one on the other side? (Even one with sensors and flashing lights?) Was this actually a trucker problem and not an underpass problem?


Looking around, I noticed the big pile of stone on the east side. Will it get reused as part of the rebuild or just hauled off as junk? It's pretty good stock; I keep wondering about the human labor that went into it: each stone had to be cut and dressed, individually.


When MacAdam invented the first modern roadbed the surface (essentially crushed stone) was created by hand: people chipped away at stone to render it in the specified size (some fraction smaller than the prevalent width of a carriage-wheel thread). I can barely imagine the amount of human effort that went into it.


Anyway, it was a nice week-end for riding.


ahlir
2010-09-20 03:24:44

Southbound, there was a warning sign on the bridge itself, a sign on Bates just north of the parkway (with blinking lights, I think) and even one up on the Blvd of the Allies warning tall trucks not to turn onto Bates.


But they just had the usual yellow warning signs showing the height limit with some arrows. Maybe they really needed better graphics on the signs: Truck Stuck under Bridge, Driver Swearing and Waving Arms, Boss Firing Driver, Spouse Screaming at Driver. A bit more creative signage and they might have been able to keep the old bridge. :-)


steven
2010-09-20 07:51:37

we could just put one of these up:




rubberfactory
2010-09-20 09:25:57

Why don't they put those signs (or something like it) up everywhere there is a low clearance bridge or tunnel? That seems so sensible.


lyle
2010-09-20 11:03:38

That's a great simple idea. Definitely not a PennDot jurisdiction.

Assuming this is not in Britain, seems like they could have gotten it a little more over the lane heading TOWARD the bridge.

Picky, picky.


edmonds59
2010-09-20 11:43:14

the problem with signage is that drivers have to not only SEE the signs, but UNDERSTAND what they mean for their vehicle.


It could have also been a GPS error - if the GPS told him that route was clear, he might have thought the signs were out of date/wrong. With all the weight limits on bridges, height restrictions, and other funky pittsburgh traffic nonsense, I can't imagine trying to get a vehicle that size anywhere in the city with ease.


I also admit I biked past it and gawked, laughed, and took pictures with my cell phone. I felt bad about it while doing it, but couldn't stop.


ejwme
2010-09-20 12:20:07

There was a sign but the problem was that you approached the underpass on a downward grade. So, while the functional height below the bridge was 11'6", the grade made it practically less. A short truck that was 11'5" might have made it, a full length tractor trailer that was 11'5" would get wedged.


Well, that and people are, in fact, stupid.


kordite
2010-09-20 13:19:55

well, the cynic in me thinks it's not so much the trucks hitting it, and will refer back to that pitt news article that says that the raising of this bridge is critical for the mon-fayette expressway to happen. the less-than-cynic in me thinks that it increases options for the port authority to send buses.


erok
2010-09-21 14:54:11

Well, the sky is limit (literally) right now on the trail bridge. Still gotta clear the parkway east but the old B&O bridge has gone the way of the B&O itself.


jeffinpgh
2010-09-21 15:28:48

The cynic in me says this was the Turnpike Auth'y making sure they never put a railroad back in there.


lyle
2010-09-21 15:33:26

I think it's just all about the MFX


tabby
2010-09-21 17:49:57

is the eliza furnace trail detour-less yet?


dmtroyer
2011-08-16 03:46:33

^ Not as of Sunday evening.


pseudacris
2011-08-16 04:02:23

I just drove under the new bridge yesterday. It is still under construction, but it looks pretty far along.


scott
2011-08-16 12:36:42

Looks like the ramp on the east side is now complete. I'm not sure about the ramp on the west. Railings, etc., still need to be added, I think, and there are several big piles of dirt and gravel. But it looks like the big pieces are almost complete. I would love to get an expected finish date!


chinston
2011-08-16 13:28:58

Longest project ever.


rsprake
2011-08-16 14:10:03

thanks for the info. I was going Oakland->Downtown this morning (which I don't often do), and might prefer just zipping down fifth anyhow.


dmtroyer
2011-08-16 14:15:32

Oakland->Downtown on Fifth is usually pretty cool, if traffic isn't too heavy. I take the lane and keep up with traffic, in general, the biggest problem being stopped traffic, and that one little grade past the Birmingham Bridge. Dippy to Smithfield St in 15-20 minutes is do-able; I've done it in 12. Takes much longer on the trail.


stuinmccandless
2011-08-16 14:19:56

^ I rode by today and thought the same as rice rocket - it looks done, then I remembered that the trail behind AE and the Hofbräuhaus House looked done in the spring, but it remains closed too!


teamdecafweekend
2011-09-18 03:53:55

As of Thursday the 15th of September (project week 55)








Paved on one ramp. Probably paved by now on the other. Some landscaping and bushes planted. Probably some more to be done. Maybe some chain link fencing.


It looks to me it could be done very soon.


kordite
2011-09-18 20:29:23

Paving's done. More landscaping and a chain link fence to keep people from falling onto Second Avenue. I could imagine them opening up before the end of the week.


kordite
2011-09-20 01:19:22

I can't wait. I am so tired of the detour. Well, mostly tired of having to take the ramp off of the hot metal ped bridge. The sight line either way you go is not good.


stefb
2011-09-20 09:46:47

I agree with Stef. I almost got run over during my commute last week coming up the ramp and making the U-turn onto the bridge. Luckily I saw the other guy just in time to stop.


dvilliotti
2011-09-20 12:21:09

When riding in to work late this morning there was a group of 5 non-construction worker looking guys standing around in hardhats and high-visibility vests, with one carryiing a clip board.

I asked when it would be done- they said October 3rd.


helen-s
2011-09-20 19:07:18

^ helen s as many times as I've passed workers there I was never smart enough to think to ask when its done. You are awesome.


marvelousm3
2011-09-20 19:11:50

Nah, just curiouser than most people.


helen-s
2011-09-20 21:38:57

Woohoo!


I haven’t rally looked, but have they connected the bridge/trail down to the Bates sidewalk? Or do you have to go all the way down to the current detour ramp?


marko82
2011-09-22 20:02:37

You will still use the ramp to get on and off at Bates.


rsprake
2011-09-22 20:20:09

Yesterday evening I did not notice that there were tire tracks going through the opening in the fencing on the west end, and I did not follow them through to the fence on the other end.


helen-s
2011-09-22 21:50:36

I'm not saying I followed the tracks today either but my commute today was without detours.


kordite
2011-09-23 00:35:16

Soooo unofficially if some rebellious biker took a ride thru the trail he/she could make it non stop and non detour?


marvelousm3
2011-09-23 00:43:29

Mr. M- I would not recommend it when there are workers around. It is still an active construction site plus we don't want to appear too eager.


helen-s
2011-09-23 17:39:11

I miGHT have seen someone who looks a lot like me go through there this mirning, but I don't use mirrors so I'm not sure.


marko82
2011-09-23 19:18:18

@ Marko to bad you couldn't of asked your twin if it seemed like it was worth the wait and how nice it was not to use the detour.


marvelousm3
2011-09-23 19:22:01

i did not pass thru there last night around 11:45 after OTB and some guy did not yell at me from across the street


noah-mustion
2011-09-24 15:17:59

In my imagination it looks like there is a bunch of nice greenery along the ramps over the bridge. In my fantasies there'd be a fix-it station, too.


benstiglitz
2011-09-24 17:19:30

I'm sure the downhillers will appreciate the convenient "ramp" down to Bates St.


Like Nick and I were discussing last night while (not) standing on the bridge, it pisses me off because I'm sure it will be billed as "bike infrastructure" but in reality it's worse for us than what was there before.


salty
2011-09-24 18:32:04

What are the odds of "making" our own rough-shod path from the Bates Street sidewalk under the Parkway over pass up to the trail? Too steep? Are they going to fence that part off near the trail bridge?


I've been bellyaching about this aspect of the project for the last year or so.


impala26
2011-09-24 19:04:08

I think it's way too steep - certainly for riding and even walking would be no picnic.


Nick said they were talking about some kind of ramp on the 2nd ave side. I'm not quite sure how that would work (I've never used the official detour), at the least it would seem to involve a lot of sidewalk riding.


salty
2011-09-24 20:47:27

There's no way to make a more graded rough-shod path from about Hodge St. (the street that runs around and behind The Hideout Bar) up to the trail bridge abutment?


Otherwise, the only other way up to the trail is going to be to hit the crosswalk button at Bates and 2nd. and go along the far sidewalk to Hot Metal, or to turn right at the bottom of Bates (street or sidewalk) and enter via the access ramp nearly a quarter mile down 2nd. The latter option is no problem for heading downtown, but would be if you want to head to the Hot Metal Bridge to the South Side... which is basically a huge chunk of the East End and especially Oakland populace.


impala26
2011-09-24 22:47:33

I don't know the spot or what it looks like, but what's the possibility of a staircase with a slot to put the bike tire? I know there's one on the Montour Trail. These would be ideal where it's too steep to put a trail but there's enough need for access that *something* should be put there.



From this page.


stuinmccandless
2011-09-24 23:41:25

Stu, I think that that could be a possible BikePGH project or something. I don't think there's ANY way the city would be putting something like that.


My question to you Stu is, how steep of a grade can a set of steps like that be made? The slope underneath those overpasses is pretty steep; it has to be just shy of 45 degrees or so. Could it be built in something roughly like a rounded "L" shape if that's too steep?


impala26
2011-09-25 00:41:31

The one on the Montour is already a little hard to use, even though it's fairly shallow. Much steeper and it would probably be easier to lift the bike and carry it.


The ramp converts the weight of the bike into a force pushing it laterally. I find that can be harder to deal with that just some additional weight. Losing your footing due to the lateral force could also be a concern (though I haven't been on the trail bridge just after rain or snow yet).


steven
2011-09-25 01:50:18

I'm not the one to try answering that. I look at monster staircases (e.g., 10th St up to Duquesne U or Rising Main Ave on the North Side) and just carry the bike on up, while 10-steppers are enough to dissuade many.


I guess I need more info, maybe a picture. What's the real problem here, and what's the overall public gain by doing anything? or the loss by doing nothing?


stuinmccandless
2011-09-25 02:06:25

Impala - hm, I'll have to look at it again in the daytime. I was having trouble picturing where it used to connect at all, looking at streetview has refreshed my memory: http://g.co/maps/f77j8


I think the problem is, where those pillars for the parkway bridge are, they actually excavated that whole area a few feet. Plus the bridge itself is a few feet higher. So, overall there is a lot of elevation change to make up and not a whole lot of space to do it. But, at least I have *some* hope now - I need to go look at it in the day. The only thing I could really see at night was an extremely steep hill parallel to the trail leading down to the sidewalk on Bates.


salty
2011-09-25 03:11:47

I didn't say it would be an easy or workable idea. It just irks me that some accommodation for it wasn't in the plans for the bridge in the first place. Like someone said earlier in this thread, project planners will advertise how this bridge is improving bike infrastructure, when in actuality it has nothing to do with bike infrastructure at all (road widening and height clearance) and actually DECREASES bike route options by removing the access path from Bates Street.


impala26
2011-09-26 13:41:49

I think there is room for a kicker lip and a nice landing ramp.


orionz06
2011-09-26 16:16:30

If a group tramples the landscaping there enough maybe they will find a solution.


ndromb
2011-09-26 18:01:33

I have only taken the "access ramp" from Bates once but don't think it's the end of the world that it's around the corner now.


rsprake
2011-09-26 18:30:49

i think a good option will work itself out... people always make it work... within the first couple weeks I think we'll see good options springing out of the collective consciousness about getting to the trail from bates that don't involve crossing the road, no one likes crossing roads


imakwik1
2011-09-26 18:47:16

What road needs crossing? You come down Bates, turn right and get on the trail.


rsprake
2011-09-26 19:36:32

maybe i missed something but the closest access is not the most convenient thing in the world (the old detour onramp to the trail, is their a closer one?) if you aren't going to downtown, for example if you're walking to the southside works, that's pretty out of the way.


I don't think it's a dealbreaker but I don't understand why they didn't provide direct access... I think it's pretty shortsighted, especially when considering the elderly and disabled. Its about 2,300 ft of walking that is unnecessary, that could be the round trip mile that makes the trip not feasible for some people (actually 4600ft.)


imakwik1
2011-09-27 01:37:02

I think is just saying that you don't have to cross the street to get there if you stay on 2nd


aryn
2011-09-27 01:56:25

sure, but now people have to make a choice of getting hassled/hurt/annoyed by cars or walk a half mile out of the way


imakwik1
2011-09-27 02:17:14

ADA rules (for those same elderly and disabled) limit the slope of a walking path. With the trail now higher in that area, maybe there wasn't enough room to run a sloping path up to trail level in the available space.


Wikipedia says pedestrian overpasses built to interstate highway standards have to have 17 feet of clearance. The old bridge had 11.5 feet. I think the new bridge is thicker too. So say it's 6 feet higher up.


The old path was about 150 feet. It didn't climb the full 11.5 feet though, since Bates, heading south, drops down, as the path climbs up. Say it went up 8 feet in 150 horizontal feet. That's a grade of 5.3%, well within the maximum ADA grade of 8%.


A new path along the same route, climbing the extra 6 feet, would have a grade of 9.3%, over the limit. So a path there would have to turn and parallel the trail, maybe. To get the same grade as before, they would need to extend the connector another 110 feet.


Also, if they used the existing route and a steeper path, there might not have been enough clearance going beneath the parkway. If the old path couldn't be raised as it went beneath the parkway, it would have to climb the additional elevation (perhaps 6 feet) in just 40 feet in the segment south of the parkway.


Or not. These numbers might be all wrong.


I agree that elderly and disabled folks on foot, planning to walk down Bates and across the HMB, would likely prefer to cross Second at the light, not walk up and get on the trail. But that doesn't seem like a big deal. Pedestrians do this all the time. Having to push a Walk button and then wait is more of an issue for cyclists.


steven
2011-09-27 03:35:07

I was thinking about sneaking across the trail this morning because I was running late for class but chickened out because I didn't know what time construction workers start in the morning. As I took the detour like a good little biker I looked over and seen 6 different bikers ride thru the trail. That's it no more Mr nice Guy.


marvelousm3
2011-09-27 11:06:48

sure, but now people have to make a choice of getting hassled/hurt/annoyed by cars or walk a half mile out of the way


There was that mom (in Florida I think) last year who tried to cross the road with her young kids and bags of groceries. They ended up trying to charge her when one of the kids was struck and killed by a car. The crosswalk was waaaaaay up the street, and her apartment complex was directly across the multi-lane road from the bus stop.


pseudacris
2011-09-27 12:14:50

Oh geez. Is there a handy link with a picture illustrating this new bridge?


atleastmykidsloveme
2011-09-27 12:16:31

One page back on this thread are some photos by Kordite of it in an almost-finished state. Also, I think someone (TDW?) posted some images in the Wheelset of Fortune thread.


pseudacris
2011-09-27 12:19:51

But that doesn't seem like a big deal. Pedestrians do this all the time. Having to push a Walk button and then wait is more of an issue for cyclists.


And the accommodations made at the intersections are above and beyond what we are used to seeing. The sidewalk areas around the crosswalks are huge. I don't have any idea what the crosswalk timing is like however.


rsprake
2011-09-27 13:22:42

i've been hit at an intersection exactly like that by a car running a redlight because they "just didn't see me" in the middle of a sunny summer day. run the path up to the trail at the maximum allowed slope and then run it beside the trail at the same slope till they meet, it's really just a lack of common sense on the part of the planners that peoples best option is to cross the street here.


as i said before I don't think that it will be long before there is a reasonable alternative worked out by everyone who uses that path daily that almost everyone will be able to use. also it's not a big deal that they have to cross the street, but when the first person gets hit at this intersection it'll change everyones tune. lets hope that doesn't happen.


imakwik1
2011-09-27 17:48:31

Nice pics!


ndromb
2011-09-29 05:24:45

Tried to be a rebel today and sneak thru and there was a couple of construction workers loading up equipment on their truck.


marvelousm3
2011-09-29 11:39:49

so the ribbon cutting for this is on monday at noon.


i heard that the head of the Turnpike Commission will be there to give a speech. weird. this isn't on the turnpike....why would this guy...oh...hmmm...no...but... The Mon Fayette dammit!


erok Posted 1 year ago -

also, why is the pitt news the only one talking about this aspect of the project:


Using $3.6 million of city, state and federal funds, the city will replace the old railroad bridge with a taller, wider bridge, said Chuck McClain, the city’s project manager for bridges and structures. The new bridge will accommodate the proposed Mon/Fayette Expressway into Oakland — and 17-foot-6-inch tall trucks.... The city acquired the bridge from PennDOT about 20 years ago, and because car drivers don’t use it, officials don’t give it high priority, McClain said.


“If the bridge was not part of the Mon/Fayette Expressway, I doubt if we would be replacing it,” he said.


here's the source: http://pittnews.com/newsstory/city-to-rebuild-problematic-bates-street-bridge/


erok
2011-09-29 15:17:22

I have just been skimming this thread but was wondering: So is or isn't bike pgh gonna be there? I was speaking with someone this morning and we agreed that the bicycling communty should be there.. The city or whoever could have just redid the overpass (since it was a traffic issue) and didn't HAVE redo the bike path, right?


stefb
2011-09-29 15:26:19

I'm confused.


The article cited above references the bridge as part of the M/FE... but it also says it was a rail bridge converted to rails-to-trails use. Ok, so now its a trail. Question #1 - does the TPC intend to reclaim the current trail as part of the M/FE?


OR - Does the TPC intend to route the M/FE beneath that bridge and up Bates Street?


Or am I just dense?


atleastmykidsloveme
2011-09-29 15:39:58

I think it's the beneath option, ALMKLM


tabby
2011-09-29 15:47:03

No, the damn road would go straight up Panther Hollow, AFAIK, because there's nothing there. *cough* [trying to refrain from using profanity, and failing miserably]


stuinmccandless
2011-09-29 15:51:47

BikePGH isn't speaking at this.


erok
2011-09-29 16:05:49

You won't have to speak since there might be dozens of BikePGH stickers all over the new bridge.


Idk, I have an awful memory, terrible foresight and wear thick glasses to see presently.


sloaps
2011-09-29 16:13:58

oh crap stu that's no good at all.


tabby
2011-09-29 16:19:03

I would really like to show up at the bridge opening with a bunch of anti-MonFayette signs. Yes, we're happy they gave us a bridge back, but there was a perfectly operable bridge (from our perspective) there already. The main reason for this bridge is to allow big trucks through, in no small part because the MFX/MFE/MFSoB plans to feed it a lot more.


Remember, the ONLY thing that's preventing the road from being built is the promise of money. The money itself doesn't need to be there. That's damn scary. It's based on traffic and engineering studies done when gas was 50 cents a gallon, or less, and we were hell-bent on building, building, building.


If I get to this opening, I will not be applauding. I'll have a picket sign and prepared to speak to the press.


stuinmccandless
2011-09-29 16:38:44

From the article: "..If you make one big mistake like tearing a top off a tractor, you’ll be out on the street,” he said."

I fail to see how there's a problem with that. People are freakin' amazing.


edmonds59
2011-09-29 17:01:03

I have to be at class by 1, but I'm in for picketing the MFE beforehand.


jeg
2011-09-29 18:44:25

wait, what? They are building an expressway through Panther Hollow????


sarah_q
2011-09-29 18:55:54

Worried about those poor turkeys, Sarah?


reddan
2011-09-29 19:07:42

@Stu: Wow.... a truck road up Panther Hollow? Are you freaking serious?


This whole thing is looking mighty dark and sinister to me!!! More info please?


EDIT


Just found this website..... and there seems to be a "Major Road" indeed by the Panther Hollow general area, but can't zoom enough in the map to clarify. It could also be Greenville Ave.


Hrm.. need clarification :/


http://monvalleyhelp.com/project/proposed-new-trails


EDIT EDIT


On a closer look, the map does not seem to have a new road on Panther Hollow.... hrm.


Enlightement would be appreciated....


bikeygirl
2011-09-29 19:33:17

Dan, if those turkeys are displaced they will go right to Squirrel Hill and they'll be even angrier!


I work in Morgantown so I wouldn't mind a good connection between the two areas... but right through Panther Hollow? Really?


sarah_q
2011-09-29 19:57:04

UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE


@Stu et,all:


(1) *YES* the MF/E is expected to dump traffic on Bates St.


(2) *YES* the TCP is paying for the bridge/part of the trail, and is part of the MF/E proposal to balance different transportation systems.


(3) *NO* there will be NO MF/E related-roads going into Patnther Hollow trail. Only Bates St. is slated for that (which is enough).


Panther Hollow **has never** been part of the Plan to be included on the MF/E Proposal.


One of my co-workers was part of the Deisgn Advisory Team for the Oakland and Hazelwood Communities studying the MF/E impact, and he has assured me that Panther Hollw is safe.


The MF/E is itself not a good thing for our region environmentally and economically ((regardless of what they might say), and that in-itself is a strong reason to picket the ribbon cutting.


In terms of the Panther Hollow trail, it is not true that is part of the MF/E plan.


bikeygirl
2011-09-29 20:34:15

I did not think going up Panther Hollow was doable as it sort of ends, unless they road dumped onto Craig Street.

I did see 4 turkeys in Gesling Stadium last Friday.


helen-s
2011-09-29 21:22:30

"sort of ends" is not really an obstacle when you have gobs of money to bulldoze stuff and build ramps and bridges... but I'm at least somewhat encouraged by bikeygirl's information.


salty
2011-09-29 22:53:47

"The MF/E is itself not a good thing for our region environmentally and economically ((regardless of what they might say), and that in-itself is a strong reason to picket the ribbon cutting."


I get the environmental problem but what is the economic one? Typically increased infrastructure is good for a region economically. Just curious.


ETA: also, who thought it would be a good idea to route trucks up Bates St. What happens when they get to the top -- they are in the middle of Oakland? This is not a good truck route.


sarah_q
2011-09-30 00:37:03

i was going to guess that bates is involved so that traffic from the MFE can get on 376... but you can only get on 376 eastbound there, which would be back in the direction that they came from. perhaps they will redesign that interchange?


melange396
2011-09-30 01:40:32

on second thought, traffic could get from 376 to the MFE via the exit onto bates. theyd be avoiding the major choke point on 376 caused by the idiotic sqill interchange and tunnels.


melange396
2011-09-30 01:44:25

This road, if they build it, will cost somebody FOUR BILLION DOLLARS. If we had $4B, which we don't, we could fix every broken or inadequate bridge and road that already exists. Every ped and bike project imaginable in the area barely gets out of 8 digits; this is halfway to 11. And $4B later, we still haven't fixed one broken or inadequate bridge, and have 40 MORE miles of immense infrastructure to maintain going forward.


That's the obvious reason. The not-obvious reason gets into the "peak oil" argument, that we (humanity, all nations together) are already past the point of being able to pull petroleum out of the ground any faster than we did in 2005-6, it's now declining, and we're adding 20 million petroleum powered cars to the world fleet every year. Thus, there's no point in building a huge new road to handle all this traffic they're expecting, because there won't BE any, because gas is going to cost $10/gallon in the not-too-distant future, on its way to $20 and beyond.


stuinmccandless
2011-09-30 01:49:09

From my intern work at the City Planning, I found out that according to their plan, the ENTIRE I-376 Interchange would be redone at Bates Street. It basically involves eminent domain-ing most of the properties in the Bates St. swale/ravine area from Boulevard of the Allies to 2nd Ave. The new interchange purported would interface DIRECTLY with the Boulevard.


The MFE project is, as Stu basically said, a feel-good cash-sink advertised by leaders who liked when building new highways was in vogue (1970's). I believe the first plans of the MFE came in the early or mid-80's if that gives folks any idea as to who we're dealing with.


It's an outdated and expensive plan that has no business being even TALKED about it today's current economic and socio-political climate.


impala26
2011-09-30 03:03:40

Stu – I’m going to elaborate further on something you said at the beginning of your post. You said “If we had $4B, which we don’t”. I’ll go one step further and say we won’t – not ever. The math isn’t there.


There are two sources of funding available here – the state of the Feds. PA is broke. They barely balanced the budget this year. Unlike the Feds, they can’t run annual deficits. The years into the future are going to be the same – they are going to have trouble finding the money to balance the budget, let alone build this thing. I think they’ll have too many more pressing needs to spend what money they have.


The Feds can borrow the money to do it and pass it through to the state – maybe. There’s a practical problem here. The Federal deficit -- which is debt – is growing at a faster annual rate than the underlying economy. Both of these rates of growth are exponential functions. The function that has the higher exponent -- here debt -- will over time always run away from the one that has the lower exponent. At some point even for the Feds the amount of debt will overwhelm their ability to borrow more money for anything, including something like this. I think we are basically at that point now.


They could always try to simply print the money – monetize the debt without actually borrowing the money. That won’t work either because the resulting inflation will eventually reduce the purchasing power of the money needed to finance the project to the point that they can’t buy the labor and materials to do it.


Either way they’re screwed and it won’t happen. When this project was proposed 20/30 years ago, oil was plentiful, gas was cheap and we were wealthy enough to be able to afford this sort of thing. As you pointed out with your peak oil reference, none of this true now. The fact the money isn’t there and won’t be only makes it this more unlikely to happen. But the promoters don’t know these things or don’t know want to know it and willfully ignore them. They’re either too thoughtless or too stupid to see the status quo they believe in has changed. The just obliviously continue to spout the same lines and rationales they always have. They’re smoking too much hopium on this one.


cdavey
2011-09-30 03:45:51

Dumping more traffic on Bates? Sheer genius. :/


sprite
2011-09-30 13:09:20

One word: Boondoggle



erok
2011-09-30 15:43:57

@Salty: The MF/E gains nothing from going up Panther Hollow and dumping traffic to Forbes avenue @ Craig St, so rest assured that will not happen.


@Impala and Cdavey are right: Moneywise in-regards to the MF/E, neither the State, City, nor the TPC have money to get this built. If any, fixing the bridge/trail in the name of it is just a feeble attempt by some to keep the project alive, but no one has the money nor time for it.


One should obviously stay alert for developments, but with the current economy and the outdated-goals of the project, don't think anyhting will come of it anytime soon.


bikeygirl
2011-09-30 15:49:14

The practical implications of the M/FE dumping into the City of Pittsburgh include property acquisition on a staggering scale.


And bikeygirl is right (and Stu, too) - the M/FE is a cash trough, and as long as certain lawmakers can keep it alive, there are legion engineers, PR firms, caterers - you name it, feeding from it (I know, I used to work for one providing "public information" and arranging "public meetings" - lots of billable hours there!).


Studies will continue, meetings here and there will be held, but I suspect/hope nothing will come of it.


atleastmykidsloveme
2011-09-30 16:12:11

If you think the turnpike can't get funding, then why would you believe another mode - rail - could?


Turnpike can't leverage the borrowing they once could, same as everyother government, so a Public-Private Partnership is the policy de jour for capital investment. PPP Legislation has been stalled since January in Harrisburg, I suspect because not enough PA companies will benefit - it's basically seasoned foreign entities vs. loose knit American partnerships backed by foreign venture capital.


So, there's time to make picket signs and buttons.


sloaps
2011-09-30 16:43:02

On the same website BikeyGirl cited, I saw this project, for light rail: http://monvalleyhelp.com/project/light-rail-spine-line-homestead


Now it's a little less than the Mon-Fayette project which is still possibly beyond our means, but I feel is a lot more useful to alleviate our city traffic issues and diversify transportation options. If ever the M/FE project would look like it was a possibility, I would want to shove this proposal into their face and say, what happened to THIS project?


gimppac
2011-09-30 19:02:51

Anyone going to the dedication thing today at noon?


impala26
2011-10-03 14:26:34

if so, there is a last minute location change:

WHEN: 12 noon, Monday, October 3


Location Change!

Due to the high probability of rain, we will be moving the event to Technology Drive. We will just block off a portion of the road and our background will be the entire project. We will have a commemorative ribbon to cut.


Please park on Technology Drive.


erok
2011-10-03 14:57:26

Someone pleeeease video this. I'd like to find out who says anything about anything other than the bridge or trail itself.


stuinmccandless
2011-10-03 15:33:07

So this new bridge that was built for cyclist & walkers, even though the walkers & cyclist were perfectly happy with the old bridge, is being dedicated a few hundred yards from the actual bridge because the politicians would half to walk too far from their cars in the rain because the new bridge for walkers & cyclist no longer connects the street (Bates) directly to the bridge. I’m so glad they improved everything for the walkers & cyclists.


Honestly, I’m glad they redid the bridge and this intersection. This has been a vehicle choke point for decades and was in need of a fix. As a car driver I hope it makes traffic flow smoother and safer. But if they dedicate this as somehow contributing to Pittsburgh’s bike infrastructure they are just blowing smoke.


marko82
2011-10-03 16:05:13

Politicians need a dose of Rule #5, the poor dears.


stuinmccandless
2011-10-03 16:09:22

The bridge was replaced to better serve the truck traffic that passes beneath it. I guess if they really wanted to be pricks about it, the could have just tore it down. It seems to me they didn't have to replace it at all, so I'm not sure why the tone, Marko?


atleastmykidsloveme
2011-10-03 16:43:14

"Not being pricks" is not the same as "doing something for the cyclists" - what was there was fine, and in some ways better, for us.


As long as it doesn't come down to "well, we can't give you money for because we spent all that money on that bridge", or "look at all we've done for bicycling", etc. I don't care too much. But, I'm way too cynical to believe that's not going to happen, possibly behind closed doors.


salty
2011-10-03 18:02:04

ALMKLM, I guess I should hold my sarcasm until after I hear the politic’s speeches. But the 'tone' is because most people will look at this as spending several million dollars towards BIKE infrastructure instead of CAR/TRUCK infrastructure. True, they probably could have torn all this up without replacing the bridge, but they didn’t do this project for us cyclists – in fact it made the connection to Bates more difficult.


Last week I had three separate discussions with people about how putting bike racks on busses is a total ‘waste of money’. I can see these same people reacting to this bridge the same way – just like Sen. Coburn wants to remove what little funding there is. And unlike the bus racks, this bridge is no improvement for non-motorized transportation.


marko82
2011-10-03 18:04:10

@Salty - It strikes me that this project is primarily about the traffic BENEATH the bridge, not the trail atop it. The biking/trail aspect is completely secondary, in that regard. And I guess I don't follow the infrastructure grape vine closely enough to be able to say whether this has been promoted as bike or rails-trails infrastructure.


I agree, however, it would be a shame for an already critical slice of the public to view this as "more public money wasted on bicycles."


But as far as "not being pricks" vs. "doing something for cyclists," i'm not sure that describes the dynamic here. That would suppose leaving the bridge as it was as an option, and clearly the previous bridge was THE problem (for vehicular traffic underneath).


atleastmykidsloveme
2011-10-03 18:18:36

i think the concern is that someone somewhere (that is normally opposed to our collective wills, such as they are) will say "look how much we're doing for you!" with the reopening of this trail. while we're all very happy to be able to use it again, to claim that it was done for us after removing a perfectly adequate bridge (for us), and replacing it with one that is arguably less valuable (to us), and removing our access to it for over a year, well, that's a bit much to take, isn't it?


hiddenvariable
2011-10-03 19:19:20

Shortly after the Veterans Bridge/I-279 was done, the mayor of Pittsburgh, Tom Murphy, was investing heavily in Cranberry Township real estate. Made millions.


His "#1 priority" at the time was revitalizing downtown.


Right.


If the MFE goes through, there is plenty of money to be made in real estate in Fayette, Washington, and Green counties.


Basically, the driving force behind the expresway is not only the money to be made constructing it, but also a similar level of profit to be made in real estate speculation and construction.


If the MFE construction starts looking inevitable, I might purchase land adjacent to the GAP or Sheepskin Rail-Trail in some location with OK access to the MFE. The price of that land won't go down when there MFE is completed. There is bound to be some options like Edward M's plan (only not half-assed "triple cheap cabins" in a lot without a sewage plan).


Ex-urb land close to the MFE will not be getting cheaper.


It mades sense to me that if* they do the MFE that they would use the Bates Street Valley for access to the east end.


*Doesn't mean I support the MFE. Just that some of the plans they had made no sense at all at the Pittsburgh end. Like now, for example.


mick
2011-10-03 19:35:33

Hm. A bit much to take? I dunno, if they had NOT replaced the bridge at all. Saved all of that money. That might have been a bit much to take for trail users.


Maybe I'm changing my mind here: I'm starting to think that the fact they DID replace the bridge represents an enormous trail infrastructure investment (whether we like the finished product or not). They didn't have to replace the bridge: their goals were higher clearance and more lanes. But they chose to respect the trail and replace the bridge.


(Now I'm sure there is some contract language somewhere requiring the maintenance or replacement of the bridges beneath the trail... and IF the bridge was replaced with satisfying THAT requirement in mind, then again, this is, at least in part, a trails infrastructure investment.)


So, yeah, I guess I've done a 180 on this one.


atleastmykidsloveme
2011-10-03 19:42:11

Thanks to the location change I actually got to *use* the bridge in the middle of the day! Woohoo! Can't say I'm sad to see that detour go...


jeg
2011-10-03 19:50:56

I think I'll swing over that way in a few minutes myself...be nice to *ahem* check out the new bridge in daylight.


reddan
2011-10-03 20:00:21

I don’t mean to be overly negative about this project; it’s just that I don’t think it does anything for trail users.


As an alternative to replacing this bridge they could have gradually sloped the trail down to street level on each side of the road and put in a crosswalk for the cyclist and walkers to use. I bet this would have saved $1M easy. Yea this would be inconvenient for cyclist heading straight into town, but if they would have promised to use that saved $1M for some meaningful BIKE infrastructure I think I could live with the crosswalk.


With my limited one day tour of DC last year, they had many at-grade road crossings and narrower than usual sections of trails, but I think they have many more miles of trails because they didn’t build million dollar bridges everywhere.


marko82
2011-10-03 20:57:32

I don't see how you "did a 180", it sounds more like you just validated exactly what you were thinking from the start. But, you're right, we're a bunch of babies for whining about it instead of being grateful that we didn't get screwed over.


salty
2011-10-03 20:58:18

Yeah, I think this is the problem when we get too many cynics in one place...


Frankly, I haven't heard any gripes from non-bike people yet, so it seems like we might just be blowing smoke. I'm just a bit upset that direct access to the trail from Bates Street wasn't taken into account, given that it existed prior to the new bridge.


impala26
2011-10-03 21:11:06

For what it's worth, one of my closest friends was sad to see the old bridge go. He owns one of the few local auto body and heavy truck shops big enough to fix the endless tractors, trailers, box trucks, etc. that routinely got wedged under the old bridge. That bridge was a factor in a lot of good work over the last 2 decades, and will be sadly missed by at least one person!

Also for what it's worth, I'm surprised that they didn't just demolish the old bridge and put up a permanent detour given the prevailing economic conditions. Anyway, the lack of access from Bates Street is unfortunate, but IMHO doesn't outweigh the upside - part of which is that it is much less likely that the trail will be turned into an on-ramp for the MFX.


jmccrea
2011-10-03 21:34:38

I just stopped by the finished project site and was almost delirious with rage. They disrupted hundreds/thousands of cyclists for a year, spent millions and removed a VERY useful access point, all to bail out some incompetent truckers and to clear the way for a boondoggle that will likely never get built? The Bates Street entrance was arguably the easier to get to than either of the trails' other access points and now it is just that much more like the many loathsome "trails" that go from

nowhere to nowhere.


Two thumbs down.


ieverhart
2011-10-05 21:54:36

I suppose I should go over there myself and check it out, but I just don't get over there that often, and for that matter I've never had the need to use Bates on two wheels.


So, if they were to do something to remedy this, what should they do? Would a simple staircase on the uphill side be sufficient? Sure we'd like an ADA-accessible ramp, but simple/cheap/fast works for me.


stuinmccandless
2011-10-05 23:23:45

Checked it out today. was coming across the hot-bra (i mean hot metal) bridge to ride the trail and there was a guy counting bikers and walkers. Bridge looks nice but I never rode it before so I can't say if it is better or worse.


dbacklover
2011-10-05 23:33:19

So, if they were to do something to remedy this, what should they do? Would a simple staircase on the uphill side be sufficient?


A staircase would resolve some of the issues, though it would require a dismount for cyclists. It is a pretty steep hill and I doubt there is enough room to do a path even with switchbacks. I walked down and back up a steep grassy slope but it was bad enough as is and in any kind of bad weather or loaded down, it would be dangerous.


Like so many things, retrofitting this to include a staircase or other access option will be way more difficult or expensive than just having designed the thing correctly the first time. (Actually, I will take the position that the thing was designed correctly the first time; that is, the bridge they demolished last year was totally adequate.)


ieverhart
2011-10-06 03:31:20

@Stu


My IDEAL fix (Option A) would be to install an ADA compliant ramp from the Bates Street sidewalk (west side of street) up to the trail between the trail and parkway. To be perfectly honest, I do not think this would be prohibitively expensive because earth would simply be need to be moved/graded and pavement added. No actual ramp structure or anything need be built in the area I just described.


EDIT: (The amount of earth that would have to be moved/grade at this location to make an ADA compliant ramp could make this cost-prohibitive from my calculations.)


Alternatively, (Option B) a staircase with a guide rail for bikes could be constructed along side the trail bridge connecting to the same sidewalk either between the trail and parkway or between the trail and Second Ave.


To effectively compare the costs these two options one would need to figure out roughly how much earth would need to be moved for Option A and how much a staircase structure (Option B) with an approx. 14-15 foot vertical rise would cost.


But all this begs the same question: both of these options are practically miniscule in cost compared to the entirety of the project, so why weren't they just part of the project to begin with? Now that all the equipment is gone from the site, the same task would now be likely twice as much.


Sorry, my civil engineering geekiness is showing...


impala26
2011-10-06 03:32:41

i was pretty pissed too when i saw it. i feel like i was misled in a way as to what it was going to be like once complete. i was under the assumption that the entrance would be just to the right, not like a quarter mile to the right. i couldn't believe that with the amount of money that they got for this project that this was the best they could do. what a wasted opportunity.


erok
2011-10-06 03:37:13

I shake my head every time I've ridden the new bridge - just a thoughtless design, totally failing to take into account the natural, normal behavior and needs of cyclists and pedestrians. Clueless.


chinston
2011-10-06 05:29:32

@Impala for Option A, wouldn't the west abutment for the I-376 bridge and the new trail bridge need extended as retaining walls over the entire length of a slip ramp?


If a new ramp starting from the bates street sidewalk and ending on trail grade were to meet ADA and the elevation change is ~20ft, then that ramp length would be between 250ft and 400ft for a slip ramp between 1:12 and 1:20 - depending on ADA compliance.


That's a long ramp, with two long retaining walls founded on drilled foundations. Probably cost as much as the new trail bridge.


sloaps
2011-10-06 09:18:27

@sloaps


Ah, I failed to take into account that the retaining walls are not currently built that far underground.


I did a decent survey of the site earlier today. From what I could see, I would propose a modified Option A. In this modified option, there would be some slight excavation between the trail and parkway (but obviously not enough to need new retaining walls). Instead of trying to make the ramp come straight down to Bates parallel to the trail, I would have it bend 90 degrees under the parkway bridge as soon as meets an appropriate height clearance. Finally, grade the earth there slightly so that a single switchback could be made to snake around the parkway bridge supports and meet the Bates sidewalk. A variant of this would be to make a different switchback to connect to Hodge St. on the other side of the parkway bridge.


This modification would change Option A so that there would be much less excavation, would not interfere with either bridge structures/bases, and the overall length of the ramp would be shorter because it would meet Bates/Hodge further up-slope. Some small minor retaining walls along the ramp might be needed, but I think it could TOTALLY be done. As to WHO would be doing this now, that's beyond me.


impala26
2011-10-06 16:37:32

The ramp to the west seems fine for bikes headed that way (just paint in a lane on 2nd). Having a (2-way?) lane from Bates to the Hot Metal would take care of the other directions.


While these are not clean separate-roadway solutions, the fact is that we're talking about people who are willing to go up or down Bates and presumably can deal with having to mix it up a bit with cars.


The "correct" solution would be a separate path that lets bikes avoid the Bates hill altogether. (And, since I'm not a civil engineer and don't need to be realistic, let me propose that this be a switch back down the hill to Hodge, accessed from in between the two commercial properties at the top.)


ahlir
2011-10-07 15:25:58

Can I gripe about the plantings? Nice to see some redbud trees there, snuggled in between the already-dying generic evergreens. Doesn't look like TreePgh helped plan that stretch...I hope the redbuds make it.


pseudacris
2011-10-07 19:56:45

I really do want to keep working on this idea to still get some form of access right there.


However, it's almost like karma... has anyone seen the sidewalk along Bates Street lately? It's an absolute mess. There is some sort of line work being done, and I would guess a gas line as I saw a Peoples Natural Gas truck out there with the late-night workers a few nights ago.


It would be awesome if they reconstructed entirely the length of sidewalk they're messing with, but I certainly don't have my hopes up.


Sometimes... I feel like Bates Street is going to be the death of me...


impala26
2011-10-09 17:01:41

Not that I promote "modification" of public property, but the ramp isn't that steep and certainly ride-able for most bicycle "enthusiasts" at the slope that it is. Someone just needs to start a trail with a fat-tired mountain bike and it'll slowly evolve into something that everyone can use.


But yeah, that sidewalk is now garbage because of whatever digging and jackhammering they're doing.


rice-rocket
2011-10-10 22:11:30

Does anyone know when they are goin to open the part of the trail that goes behind Haufbrough House?? It seems to be close to completion.


zjc2a
2011-10-31 01:44:25

No idea. It's been close to completion all summer long.


rsprake
2011-10-31 04:09:54

The ramp to the west at Bates seems OK. But coming from Oakland, that means crossing traffic.


My favorite part of the old ramp at Bates, was cruising down Bates, then smoothly avoiding the lights to get to the Hot Metal Bridge.


I explored the new set-up a few days ago.


I thought about making a DIY ridable trail up from the east side of Bates. I decided it would be do-able with a lot of work, but the trail would be dangerous for anyone who tried to take it at speed. Like almost certain there'd be serious injuries if what I had in mind was there and possibly deaths.


I'm no engineer, but it seemed to me, to do an ADA compliant ramp, it would take about 45 yards of elevated ramp (I paced it out). At some point it would be almost 3 yards off the ground.


Another approach would be to dig a bunch of dirt out near the top of the hump.


I have no idea how much this would cost - not cheap.


So, I'm reconciled to getting off the bike and pushing it uphill. For me, it's "plant-the-feet-push-the-bike-then-brake-and-step" steep. Possibly hazardous when wet and certainly hazardous with slush.


Damned shame when the old Bates street entrance was a great piece of infrastructure.


mick
2011-10-31 15:17:59

Hey Mick, I'll do you one better.


I think a more ad-hoc ramp or whatever could be more effectively achieved if one were to start at roughly the spot where the sidewalk crosses Hodge Street. Basically roughly where the old access path was.


Once you cross Hodge along the sidewalk going towards Second Avenue, veer roughly 45 degrees off the sidewalk and up the earth embankment. This is steep on only the first few feet and then it flattens out quite a bit. The problem with this is the overhead clearance with the parkway bridge. There's no way one could really "ride" this trail like this, but they'd have to walk their bike instead.


From there it would just be a quick 90 degree turn once you clear the parkway bridge.


I think if "DIY" construction were done to achieve access like the old path, this would be roughly the footprint it would have to follow.


impala26
2011-11-01 02:56:15