BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

No. Unless they are removing that lane of parking.

Probably just someone making a bid to get the World Observed Trials in the 'burgh in oh'12.

There are so many things wrong with that photo (and I don't mean the one of the sharrows).

Those parking spaces are to be removed. When you ask? God only knows.

Glad to hear that scott.

Thanks for the photo Benzo! It made me chuckle for a moment at the stupidity of it.

Benzo's picture also documents something else I've been complaining about for years: The old style, two slabs of cement type of paving the city used to do. On streets like this, that longitudinal crack between the slabs is almost exactly where one's line of travel should be -- just far enough out to avoid doors -- so the only real thing to do is to take the lane.

Getting rid of parking will help here, but this is just soooo common around the city (Brighton, Perrysville, Second by the jail, etc.).

The only real mistake I've seen from the contractors putting in the sharrows so far happened at Friendship and Gross. The sharrows are supposed to be in the middle of the curve, but they put them against the curb on Gross, one heading into the back of parked cars.

Those parking spaces are to be removed. When you ask? God only knows.

I have an angle grinder. Someone lend me their hi-viz vest.

^^^what Stu said. Another example that comes to mind is Fort Duquesne Boulevard. Ugh!

On the note of sharrows, anybody notice some of them appear to be burnt on Ellsworth?

There's something in a different thread, but the plastic is actually melted on the tarmac. I'm too lazy to find the proper link, though.

like this?

Orange jersey in the back. "Team OTB"? I feel like those could sell well.

Team Off The Back, closely related to Team DFL.

The only thing I see wrong with this picture is that the guy riding is in the midst of a dab. Sweet old Ibis 24/20 trials bike though. Might be a 26/20, made those too. I nearly bought one of those 10 years ago or so, and they were kind of ancient then.

so i guess that was before they completely eliminated the seat? is that a seat post sticking out? youch

What's with the watermelon? And I don't know if that '70 Pontiac is a junker; looks to be in better shape than most '70 Pontiacs looked in 1978.

There is a white seat on there.

Up until sometime in the 2000's you were required to have a seat, even in the "modified" class that this bike falls in. Most bikes sported the tiny plastic kids BMX uni seats until Monty went and just put a little felt pad on the top tube and called it a seat. Eventually both stock and mod classes of bikes had some rule changes, with it especially affecting the stock category.

gawd, didn't even notice the white seat - thought that was the background

Hard to notice the seat when it is that close to those shorts. They are magnificent.

So, I found another sharrow fail at Brighton Rd at Eloise st... it goes right in to the legal parking spaces... Is this the fault of the design or implementation?

Map

Looks like the car is parked illegally... (as per the "no parking pictogram" on the curb right next to it).

According to that sign, the car is parked legally so this is a sharrow fail. Good catch. Please call or write 311 to report it.

Actually, the sharrows are this close to the curb for a couple blocks before Brighton rd turns up the hill. I'll report to 311.

311 still has no resolution on the first sharrow fail.

311 Response Web Form Submission Receipt

Your submission has been assigned ticket number: 26393

INCIDENT ADDRESS

Brighton Rd Between Eloise St to California Ave

TOPIC OF CONCERN

Other

MESSAGE

Bicycle "Sharrows" are too close to the curb on Brighton Rd beginning at Eloise St and extending till the intersection with California Ave. The sharrows are so close to the curb that legally parked vehicles along this street block the path intended for cyclists. See attached Image.

LATITUDE 40.45465411266823 LONGITUDE -80.01480102539062

Here's the original 311 ticket (submitted february 9th):

311 Response Web Form Submission Receipt

Your submission has been assigned ticket number: 24383

INCIDENT ADDRESS

S. Millvale Ave between Baum Blvd and Center Ave

TOPIC OF CONCERN

Parking

MESSAGE

Bicycle sharrows were installed on S. Millvale ave between baum blvd and center ave. However, parking meters and parking spaces were not removed, legally parked cars are regularly blocking the expected path of cyclists.

LATITUDE 40.45393161399137 LONGITUDE -79.94757413864136

And the response

311 Response Web Form Reply Notification

The following reply has been made to Ticket ID #24383:

We have notified the appropriate personnel about this issue. The Service Request ID Number associated with this request is 274571.

Thank you for contacting our 311 Response Center!

Gross St. between Friendship and Penn was laid down the same way. I left another ticket w/311.

Do other people feel that the sharrows on Liberty Avenue seem to be perfectly aligned with the pothole zone of crumbling pavement?

This is to acknowledge that the City of Pittsburgh has entered your Service Request.

The Service Request ID is:283516

If you need to contact the city again concerning this issue, please refer to that number.

We will inform you when this request has been completed.

Thank you for allowing the City of Pittsburgh to serve you.

04/19/2012 10:04:01

Summary of Service-Request:

"Bicycle "Sharrows" are too close to the curb on Brighton Rd beginning at Eloise St and extending till the intersection with California Ave. The sharrows are so close to the curb that legally parked vehicles along this street block the path intended for cyclists. "

Location: Brighton Rd Between Eloise St to California Ave

i noted this also on the north side on brighton when they put them in. i assumed that parking would be removed, as it is supped to be on millvale, but hasn't been yet.

It's acceptable that the sharrows are closer to the curb when there is no parking. It's only a problem when there's parking.

By the way, I'm also a bit confused on what the expected cyclist behavior is over the Millvale bridge.

Should you proceed at the same distance from the curb indicated by the sharrows before the bridge, or should you slide over to the right in to the bike lane for the length of the bridge and merge back in to the lane position of the sharrows on the other side of the bridge?

Do what makes you feel safe. Pittsburgh has no idea.

There's some sense in maybe moving to the right when on the bridge. Taking the lane helps you avoid getting hooked, but there are no intersections on the bridge, so that's not an issue.

But I agree that your safety judgement beats the city's suggestion.

I just thought it was weird that there would be a sharrow indicating one position and then 25 feet later a bike lane with a different position and switching back 25 feet after the bike lane.

I'm just concerned that it's not obvious to either cyclists or motorists what to expect here. Mostly though, I'm concerned about the merge back point.

If I am not mistaken it's supposed to be a bike lane all the way to Baum but Pittsburgh never finished it. Hence the sharrow that directs you into the parked cars.

It is my understanding that we as cyclists have no legal obligation to ride on the separate bike lane when provided (due to issues such as cars or road flotsam in the lane)so I would say if you feel more comfortable not moving over and having to wrassle cars for your lane after the bridge, then do so. That being said, I think it would be courteous to move over if there were cars waiting to pass you.

I like letting cars pass.

I hate coming up Liberty when the lights turn flashing yellow.

Before that, with he lights working, the drunkards come in waves. I can wait for them to pass and get through Bloomfield with very little wait and have no cars (not even one) pass me on the street.

Can we please just get rid of that 'lane' on Millvale Ave Bridge? I'm lucky that I have few dangerous interactions with drivers, but they all seem to happen on this bridge---Even at speed, I get honked at and close-passed by drivers who seem to believe that the fact a bike lane exists, even one overrun with gravel and debris as this one perpetually is, requires a cyclist to use it. (It happened again tonight--at 20+mph I was honked at aggressively, then passed at about 2', by a car...which then made an unsignalled left at Yew St just off the bridge...) At the very least, I'd like to request sharrows alongside the bikelane marking to indicate that using either is acceptable. (By the way, over a year later, the sharrows between Baum and Centre are still pointing at parked cars.)

Benzo wrote:The following reply has been made to Ticket ID #24383: We have notified the appropriate personnel about this issue. The Service Request ID Number associated with this request is 274571.

I've submitted a new ticket, #49618, referencing this one and noting that 15 months later nothing has been done.

I had some guy lay on his horn for a long time while I was outside the bike lane on the bridge passing two slower cyclists, He wasn't happy when I gave him the finger, and pulled in to the bike lane twice in front of me to 'send me a message'. I just pulled out my phone and started taking pictures of his car and license plate, he left pretty quickly.

Benzo wrote: Should you proceed at the same distance from the curb indicated by the sharrows before the bridge, or should you slide over to the right in to the bike lane for the length of the bridge and merge back in to the lane position of the sharrows on the other side of the bridge?

Being someone that rides with a mirror to see what is behind me, it makes that situation very simple. I would move to the right on the bridge and time my remerge back into the lane between cars behind me. I find that doing that will also make drivers more happy because some had a chance to pass. Of course I most likely pass them back at the next light, but that is another thread.

Sharrows were recently painted on N Highland Ave between Penn Cir N and E Liberty Ave (yay!) ... but as on Millvale the sharrows point you directly into a line of legally parked cars (boo!). How is it possible that nobody involved realizes how inane and dangerous this is?

because there is something lost in translation between the people making the decisions and the crew actually painting the marks. guy in office does research, checks variables against known installation patterns, verifies state regulations, works in community feedback, plans accordingly. guy on road crew goes to site, drops a stencil on the road, sprays some paint, goes home. (situation hypothesized within 96% accuracy.)

scott wrote:Those parking spaces are to be removed. When you ask? God only knows.

Parking meters on millvale between center and baum removed, and replaced with new computer pay box. Sharrow still points in to legally parked cars.

I have found that when 311 doesn't work, getting your city councilperson involved (if the problem is in their district) is helpful. They have staff who specifically work on things like this, and are responsive.

I sent a 311 about the Millvale sharrows. Apparently it was planned as a bike lane but there has been hesitation to remove the metered spaces. There are four parking lots on that street. I think we can afford to lose what, four?, spaces.

jonawebb wrote:I have found that when 311 doesn’t work, getting your city councilperson involved (if the problem is in their district) is helpful. They have staff who specifically work on things like this, and are responsive.

FWIW, Highland btwn Penn and Penn Circle I believe is district 9 (Burgess). Millvale btwn Centre and Baum is district 8 (Peduto), or possibly 7 (vacant).

sharrows have been added to Atwood and lanes have been added to S.Bouqet (from Forbes down to Joncaire.)

pbeaves wrote:sharrows have been added to Atwood and lanes have been added to S.Bouqet (from Forbes down to Joncaire.)

This is good. I'm curious to see if they influence drivers behavior on s Bouquet.

pbeaves wrote:lanes have been added to S.Bouqet (from Forbes down to Joncaire.)

Clarification: Lanes run (both directions) from Sennott to Joncaire. The two short blocks between Fifth and Forbes and Forbes and Sennott retain the parking lane, as does the section from Joncaire past Bates to Dawson. Will be interesting to see what happens to North Bouquet and the upper sections of South B when Pitt finishes the Public Health buildings construction and reopens the section above Fifth. It was previously parking on both sides, but...

The upper bit of Bouquet is (was) a Pitt parking lot. I suspect it will be the same unless the new addition includes significant parking. It's not a through street so maybe some sharrows would be enough to make bikers happy. I used Bouquet in the past but eventually concluded that the continuity of the sidewalk at Fifth somehow indicated that this was not a real street. Thackeray works just fine. The traffic along Bouquet is necessarily pretty slow, so cars are not a problem for bikers. I usually just take the lane; I've yet to get honked or buzzed. On the other hand the intersections at Rbt Clemente and Jonquaire are a mess; drivers and bikers (at least me) never quite seem to know how the precedence works. And speaking of Jonquaire, it really really  needs to have one side converted to a bike path. The left side (looking down) seems like the obvious one. And an excellent opportunity for Pitt, the owner of the fronting property, to demonstrate its support of the biking community (Pitt students and staff being regular bikers on that street). And the city cleans up the right side for pedestrians. And speaking of Bouquet, why is there an N and an S? I thought the north/south divider in Pittsburgh was Center St. What happened? Does Pitt completely own the N bit?

Ahlir - if I Google jonquaire pittsburgh the only real hits I get are your posts. Did it used to be spelled that way, is it a personal campaign to change the spelling, or just a mistake? Fwiw, I kind of like riding up it, but I don't like riding blocks/cobbles downhill. 5th is the N/S dividing line for Neville and streets west (Craig, Dithridge, Bellefield, Bouquet). For Millvale and east (all the way to Trenton) it's Penn.

Benzo wrote:This is good. I’m curious to see if they influence drivers behavior on s Bouquet.

Damn, I actually thought this was on lower Neville ave / Boundry st. I was confused. I'm still not sure why we don't have sharrows here, as this is a HUGE bike throughway. Maybe bike-pgh and/or the city has better plans for this stretch. I'm hoping so.

I like Joncaire as well. And sorry about the spelling; I've been confusing the street name with a different place name. Here's something about the person. As further penance, I offer the following: Joncaire's Blockhouse: 1719(21), Niagara Falls, Niagara County. Also known as Fort Joncaire, and Magazin Royal. Daniel Joncaire, French "white indian", built a stockaded cabin and warehouse for trading, in Lewiston at the foot of the portage (base of gorge) about 7 miles from the future Fort Niagara.

As far as I know, N Bouquet is a publicly accessible st. I've used it before. It's a good route to get from, say, the Pete/Sutherland to Joncaire St since Oakland ave is one-way heading toward the hill. It's also good if you're coming into Oakland via Bayard st and don't want to ride on Fifth ave. Just hang on Bayard until it turns into O'Hara, go up a small hill, and coast down N Bouquet to Joncaire. There is a light and everything at Fifth, so I feel like it's ok, @Ahlir, although Thackery is fine too if that's your preference.