PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II - Page 632

Austinlee · #**12621** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 1:23 AM**

East End residents, ya might wanna hit this up:

Pittsburgh to hold transit meetings for eastern neighborhoods next week

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2...ox&utm_medium=social&utm_source=Facebook

Private Dick · #**12622** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 1:34 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyC

I use Ellsworth every evening around 6 pm. Yes, there is a lot of traffic, but it has definitely been backed up by people that have no business riding a bike on a street.

This is where you will generally lose this audience. Everyone should be able to ride a bike on a street.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyC

When I used to ride my bike, I worked my 🞵🞵🞵🞵 off to make sure I was maintaining speed on these streets.

Real proud of ya.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyC

So yes, people that can't hack it shouldn't be backing up traffic.

Agreed! Just like children, the elderly, and fat people should not be allowed on sidewalks. Those fuckers just slow my 🞵🞵🞵 down.

White people shouldn't be permitted on the dance floor either -- wreck my flow out there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillyC

After living in India and Thailand, I just don't get excited to encourage that sort of mess.

You got a point there... Pittsburgh definitely would turn into India or Thailand if we let these bikers take over our streets.

BrianTH · #**12623** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 10:47 AM**

I am another East End driver, and I have not had any notable problem dealing with the increased bike activity. It is in fact a bit more common that I have to slow down and wait for an opportunity to pass a biker at the safe, legal distance, but as noted by another poster above, I doubt that has added much to my actual travel times.

Maybe because I have never been a serious biker myself, I don't really even notice that sort of thing. I certainly would not discourage people from biking just because they are new at it or not in great shape. Aside from the obvious point that those very people may well get a big health benefit from biking, there are plenty of studies suggesting that when it comes to biking in urban areas, there is safety in numbers--the more bikes on the road, the more drivers learn how to deal with them, learn to look for them, and so on.

So if you want Pittsburgh to be a safer city for ALL bikers, you should encourage ANY potential biker to give it a try. Even the slow ones.

BrianTH · #**12624** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 10:52 AM**

7 stories is fine for Uptown as far as I am concerned. I would personally prefer the Lower Hill be more like 10+, but I'd probably settle for a consistent 7 there too, provided it was the block-filling sort of development.

BrianTH · #**12625** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 11:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Austinlee

East End residents, ya might wanna hit this up

So does this mean they are getting ready for the next BRT phase?

glowrock · #**12626** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 11:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeneW

Yes, this. People drive way too fast in the city and the police never seem to pull anyone over for speeding. I'd love to see a top speed of 25 in the whole city and have it actually enforced.

Really? 25 on Bigelow? 25 on Blvd. of the Allies? 2nd Ave.? There's such a thing as wanting speed limits to be enforced, there's also such a thing as being ridiculous in wishing it to take as long as humanly possible to travel across town. Between people being cool with bicyclists traveling 10mph in the middle of a traffic lane, people wanting ever lower speed limits in general, etc., you're advocating for a literal traffic gridlock situation for many hours per day. And it's not like there are real alternatives in Pittsburgh for getting across town right now.

If you think people drive too fast in Pittsburgh, you've obviously never driven in many other cities. Pittsburgh drivers are generally VERY slow by comparison, excepting I-79 as a major outlier.

Aaron (Glowrock)

glowrock · #**12627** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 11:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyPittsburgh

People riding bikes have the same right to be on the road as you do, if it requires you to slow down for a mere block so that you can then pass them or just wait until they turn, then so be it. Cars and bikes can co-exist, but not if you get pissed at bikes for doing what they have a right to do.

Cars and bikes CAN coexist, as long as NEITHER vehicle's operator is behaving like a freaking boorish 🞵🞵🞵 douchebag. Unfortunately, both car and bicycle operators tend to be boorish 🞵🞵🞵 douchebags most of the time.

Aaron (Glowrock)

BrianTH · #**12628** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 1:03 PM**

I saw one of these Downtown (Forbes and Grant) and wondered what it was . . . the new bike share stations are being installed:

https://twitter.com/healthyridepgh

BrianTH · #**12629** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 1:54 PM**

Gilman wants to use license-plate recognition rather than stickers for residential permit parking:

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/bl...uncilman-wants-parking-tech-upgrade.html

BrianTH · #**12630** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 1:58 PM**

More photos of OneJet's Hawker 400 jets:

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/gal...the-new-regional-jets-flying-out-of.html

They look pretty sweet to me.

BrianTH · #**12631** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 2:15 PM**

US Steel is struggling:

http://triblive.com/business/headlines/8253660-74/steel-company-longhi

Maybe if we hand them a second block to develop in the Lower Hill on a no-bid basis, that will help.

RespectCondor · #**12632** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 2:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by glowrock

Really? 25 on Bigelow? 25 on Blvd. of the Allies? 2nd Ave.? There's such a thing as wanting speed limits to be enforced, there's also such a thing as being ridiculous in wishing it to take as long as humanly possible to travel across town. Between people being cool with bicyclists traveling 10mph in the middle of a traffic lane, people wanting ever lower speed limits in general, etc., you're advocating for a literal traffic gridlock situation for many hours per day. And it's not like there are real alternatives in Pittsburgh for getting across town right now.

If you think people drive too fast in Pittsburgh, you've obviously never driven in many other cities. Pittsburgh drivers are generally VERY slow by comparison, excepting I-79 as a major outlier.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Its about traffic calming. Bringing top speed down and bringing average speed down are two different things. it needs to be done in a smart way, you cant just change all the speed limits without re-synching the stop light system. Thats also why I don't think any of this will happen for a long time if at all. hopefully this would also be worked in with a better bus and public transportation plan, Pie in the sky I know. But other cities have done it so its not impossible.

You are right there are some roads that wouldn't/shouldn't be affected, the ones you listed being the most obvious. You don't exactly see a lot of pedestrians or cyclists on those roads right now anyhow because they make sense as high speed motorways. But I would be fine with seeing Penn Ave between East Liberty and Wilkinsburg slow down. People are essentially speeding to the next stop light there. During rush hour when these a lot of these roads are at their most packed your not getting down Penn going any faster than 10 MPH on average anyway. It's only after 9/10 o'clock at night that you can actually go fast enough (the posted speed limit) to make most of the lights anyway. It takes 20-30 min to get between squirrel hill and regent square on Forbes Ave during the evening rush hour.

RespectCondor · #**12633** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 2:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by glowrock

Really? 25 on Bigelow? 25 on Blvd. of the Allies? 2nd Ave.? There's such a thing as wanting speed limits to be enforced, there's also such a thing as being ridiculous in wishing it to take as long as humanly possible to travel across town. Between people being cool with bicyclists traveling 10mph in the middle of a traffic lane, people wanting ever lower speed limits in general, etc., you're advocating for a literal traffic gridlock situation for many hours per day. And it's not like there are real alternatives in Pittsburgh for getting across town right now.

If you think people drive too fast in Pittsburgh, you've obviously never driven in many other cities. Pittsburgh drivers are generally VERY slow by comparison, excepting I-79 as a major outlier.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Its about traffic calming. Bringing top speed down and bringing average speed down are two different things. it needs to be done in a smart way, you cant just change all the speed limits without re-synching the stop light system. Thats also why I don't think any of this will happen for a long time if at all. hopefully this would also be worked in with a better bus and public transportation plan, Pie in the sky I know. But other cities have done it so its not impossible.

You are right there are some roads that wouldn't/shouldn't be affected, the ones you listed being the most obvious. You don't exactly see a lot of pedestrians or cyclists on those roads right now anyhow because they make sense as high speed motorways. But I would be fine with seeing Penn Ave between East Liberty and Wilkinsburg slow down. People are essentially speeding to the next stop light there. During rush hour when a lot of these roads are at their most packed your not getting down Penn going any faster than 10 MPH on average anyway. It's only after 9/10 o'clock at night that you can actually go fast enough (the posted speed limit) to make most of the lights anyway. It takes 20-30 min to get between squirrel hill and regent square on Forbes Ave during the evening rush hour.

Minivan Werner · #**12634** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 2:36 PM**

In response to the losses US Steel just released a revised rendering of their new HQ:

Austinlee · #**12635** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 2:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minivan Werner

In response to the losses US Steel just released a revised rendering of their new HQ:

Lol

I was just thinking of making a similar joke. Nice work.

eschaton · #**12636** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 2:50 PM**

Been riding my bike into town again, now that I have a helmet for my 19-month old son to ride in with me on the bike. Riding with a kid is great, because you get these irate people ready to cuss you out, and then they see there is a kid with you and their face drops.

Anyway, I went down Railroad Street for a change today, since I've been heading in on Penn/Smallman mostly. The construction at The Yards/Three Crossings has really come along since the last pictures posted. There is a lot of foundation laid, and several elevator cores seem to be nearing full height. The new road Buncher is laying seemed to be done as well, complete with street lights. Looks really incongruous with dirt/rubble on either side though. There was a gap in the fencing, and I was tempted to go down it and check it out in more detail, but decided against.

eschaton · #**12637** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 3:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RespectCondor

You are right there are some roads that wouldn't/shouldn't be affected, the ones you listed being the most obvious. You don't exactly see a lot of pedestrians or cyclists on those roads right now anyhow because they make sense as high speed motorways. But I would be fine with seeing Penn Ave between East Liberty and Wilkinsburg slow down. People are essentially speeding to the next stop light there. During rush hour when a lot of these roads are at their most packed your not getting down Penn going any faster than 10 MPH on average anyway. It's only after 9/10 o'clock at night that you can actually go fast enough (the posted speed limit) to make most of the lights anyway. It takes 20-30 min to get between squirrel hill and regent square on Forbes Ave during the evening rush hour.

I wish I had the links handy right now, but I've read that the Dutch "woonerf" model works wonders.

The basic model is as follows.

1. Remove all stop signs and traffic lights.
2. Make there no curbs/grade separation between the road and sidewalk.
3. Put down textured road surfaces (brick, stone, etc)
4. Where there are long roads with straight sight lines, break them up through things like alternating street side parking, plantings, etc.

Basically the idea is to ensure roads are by definition shared spaces where people are biking, walking, or just hanging out in them. Cars typically cannot go faster than 10-15mph. This means should a car hit a pedestrian, it won't be a fatal accident. Drivers also never go on "autopilot" because they must always be vigilant, making them more careful.

The funny part is, these systems actually result in quicker commutes within an urban area. 15mph with no stops is actually much faster than 25mph with stops and traffic signals.

BrianTH · #**12638** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 3:15 PM**

Just idle musing, but part of why that approach works overall for reducing commuting-congestion is that the very idea of designated higher-speed, motorized-vehicle-only urban roads (up to and including limited-access highways) has not worked out as hoped. That is fundamentally because the peak capacity of road lanes is very low. So trying to funnel your peak load into relatively few high-speed road lanes is not a good idea. Instead you want to spread your load out as much as possible (and also to divert peak load to technologies with much higher peak capacities, like rail or busways).

The problem is getting there from here. People in the U.S. are so engrained with the notion that a good urban situations for cars means access to a high-speed road--all despite usually having great familiarity with the resulting congestion problems--that they strongly resist the suggestion of any other approach on the belief it must be an anti-car policy.

hyperion1110 · #**12639** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 4:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by themaguffin

Really, you have to use a straw man? Really?

Yeah, I used neither straw nor men. People overreacted to him having an opinion. He's entitled to say what he thinks. If people disagree, they should write something like, "I have to disagree with what you wrote, because [insert justification]."

Anyhow, that's just my opinion. Take it or leave it.

themaguffin · #**12640** Posted **Apr 29, 2015, 5:22 PM**

Quote:

Yeah, you didn't really say anything wrong in your original post. You just had the temerity to have an opinion, which I guess is too much for some people to handle.

That's your opinion. Yes we can take it or leave it, but it's a fact that you used a straw man argument. You equated the "temerity" of having an opinion (an implied different opinion) would be "too much for some people to handle."

That's factually inaccurate.

Now back to development...