Archive

Bike lane proposals in Pittsburgh might get more scrutiny | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

Bike lane proposals in Pittsburgh might get more scrutiny

Bob Bauder
PTRCITYBIKES1072516
James Knox | Tribune-Review
A cyclist rolls down the Penn Avenue bike lane in 2016 near Seventh Street in Pittsburgh's Downtown.

Controversy over Pittsburgh’s growing number of dedicated bicycle lanes prompted a city councilwoman Tuesday to propose an advisory board that would oversee the creation of new lanes.

Councilwoman Theresa Kail-Smith of Westwood said her office has received numerous complaints about existing lanes Downtown from residents who say they take up space for street parking and cause traffic congestion. She said the 10-member board, if approved, would listen to all suggestions before recommending new lanes.

“It’s not that we want to stall or delay bike lanes,” Kail-Smith said. “There’s nothing in writing right now that says these are the policies and procedures you need to follow for putting in bike lanes. We want to make sure we’re enhancing the city of Pittsburgh’s infrastructure.”

Scott Bricker, director of Pittsburgh’s largest bicycle advisory group, BikePGH, disagreed. He said Pittsburgh has policies for planning and engineering bike lanes and has followed those policies. BikePGH would be a member of the advisory board, according to the legislation.

Bricker said it seems as though the board would mirror Pittsburgh’s Complete Streets Advisory Committee, which is planning improvements to make city streets safe and accommodating for all modes of travel.

“We’re not at all opposed to the formation of a bike committee,” Bricker said, adding that he hopes it would follow national best practices for bicycle safety. “It seems like it might be redundant.”

Kevin Acklin, Mayor Bill Peduto’s chief of staff, said the mayor’s office has fielded plenty of complaints about the lanes and agrees the advisory group would offer a structured way of resolving problems.

“This creates a formal process so people who have complaints have a place to go,” he said.

Kail-Smith called existing lanes “ugly” and said she hopes the group can find a more attractive design.

Her bill calls on the group to meet at least monthly and provide a report to City Council at least 120 days before installing a new lane. It also calls for a public meeting at least 90 days before installation.

Pittsburgh has protected bike lanes on 2.2 miles of its 1,300 miles of street, according to BikePGH. They include East Ohio Street in the North Side from Chestnut to East Street; Schenley Drive in Oakland from Schenley Drive Extension to Bigelow Boulevard and Schenley Plaza to Anderson Playground; the Roberto Clemente Bridge; Saline Street in Greenfield from Greenfield Avenue to the Eliza Furnace Trail; and Penn Avenue from Sixth Street Downtown to 16th Street in the Strip District.

The city has plans in 2017 to construct a protected lane Downtown along Fort Pitt Boulevard from Grant to Stanwix Street and along Stanwix to Point State Park. Some business owners and residents have complained that a bike lane would make it difficult for cars to access buildings along busy Fort Pitt Boulevard.

Plans also include a lane along part of East Street. The combined cost is estimated at $800,000.

Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.