PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[TBone7281]

6/21/2012

Lot 24 is topped out!

Well, they put up a good chunk of the 4th floor this week anyway.


DSCN1666 by tbone7281, on Flickr

[guyFROMtheBURGH]

Lot 24 will be a good model of how the Strip will grow. I'm liking the fact that it only took out a parking lot

One question: Will the name always be 'Lot 24'? I really hope they come up with a better long-term name for it.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by guyFROMtheBURGH

Lot 24 will be a good model of how the Strip will grow. I'm liking the fact that it only took out a parking lot

One question: Will the name always be 'Lot 24'? I really hope they come up with a better long-term name for it.

Well technically I think it's considered "phase 2" of the Cork Factory, if i'm not mistaken.

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by guyFROMtheBURGH

Lot 24 will be a good model of how the Strip will grow. I'm liking the fact that it only took out a parking lot

One question: Will the name always be 'Lot 24'? I really hope they come up with a better long-term name for it.

Originally Posted by Austinlee

Well technically I think it's considered "phase 2" of the Cork Factory, if i'm not mistaken.

While it is a continuation of the Cork Factory Apartments, I'm fairly sure Lot 24 is the official name. From the beginning that's what they've been calling it and this is from McCaffery Interests (the real estate developer):

The four-story building derives its name from the former surface parking lot at 24th and Railroad Streets where it will be located.

They seem very pleased with themselves.

[TBone7281]

Since the last time I posted about the map, I've added the following:

Civic Arena/Lower Hill District redevelopment
UPMC - Center for Innovative Sciences
Doughboy Square Apartments
New office building at 28th and Sidney st in SSW
Magarac - Braddock
Goodwill Headquarters Apt conversion
Hilton Homewood Suites - Moon
UPMC East

That should almost do it for projects that were suggested. If I missed anything, or I forget to add anything new that comes up, let me know.

-Tony

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by guyFROMtheBURGH

Lot 24 will be a good model of how the Strip will grow. I'm liking the fact that it only took out a parking lot

One question: Will the name always be 'Lot 24'? I really hope they come up with a better long-term name for it.

Here's their Facebook page (they don't seem to have a real webpage) which has a Lot 24 logo so it seems like the official name. I kind of like it, simple and direct.

[TBone7281]

Originally Posted by GeneW

Here's their Facebook page (they don't seem to have a real webpage) which has a Lot 24 logo so it seems like the official name. I kind of like it, simple and direct.

Real webpage: http://www.lot24inthestrip.com/

I'd say it's pretty official.

[Private Dick]

If this dude would be one of my neighbors at Lot 24, I don't wanna live there. The chick is pretty cute though -- no way she's actually into that guy.



Also, if ghosts are always hanging around the pool, again, I don't wanna live there.

[BrianTH]

"Lot 24" is vaguely industrial-sounding (dare I say Rust Belt Chic?). That fits in with "The Cork Factory" without being too cheesy, and in my view is better than something more generic.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Private Dick

If this dude would be one of my neighbors at Lot 24, I don't wanna live there. The chick is pretty cute though -- no way she's actually into that guy.

GBF?

Anyway, he looks harmless.

[Private Dick]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

GBF?

Anyway, he looks harmless.

GBF... had to look that one up. Yes, I'm sure he's harmless... and I hope I wasn't coming across as homophobic or anything in jokingly saying I wouldn't want to live there if he was a neighbor. I just thought he looked like a dweeb with the harido and suspenders.

I like the name too. Like the bar Lot 17 in Bloomfield. Great project all around for Pittsburgh.

[Jonboy1983]

I like the name "Lot 24" as well. It screams contemporary warehouse/undustrial and I think it will fit in quite nicely with the surroundings. It looks like the warehouse of tomorrow more or less, and warehousing is what allowed the Strip to become what it became, warehouse, trucking, and wholesale. I love going to the Strip, and I'd like to see it develop even further...

[Private Dick]

Dutch experts propose cycle tracks for Oakland, highest level of safety in infrastructure

http://www.popcitymedia.com/devnews/...kes062712.aspx

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 2012

After two days of ThinkBike workshops, the City of Pittsburgh is ready to bring the highest level of bicycle infrastructure to Oakland.

Based on the recommendations of Dutch mobility experts, the City is beginning the process of installing separated cycle tracks in the Fifth-Forbes corridor of this heavily trafficked neighborhood.

According to the City's Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator Stephen Patchan, cycle tracks represent the most progressive piece of bicycle infrastructure currently available, and offer the highest level of safety for both cyclists and motorist.

Cycle tracks are on-street, bicycle-only paths, and often include physical barriers, such as curbs, between automobiles and cyclists. In Homestead, a cycle track was recently installed along the Great Allegheny Passage. The proposed track in Oakland would be the first in Pittsburgh.

Patchan says the city has no timeline for installing the cycle tracks, and will conduct extensive public outreach and engineering studies before selecting a design and location. He says the project will necessarily impact existing conditions for automobiles.

[Topher51]

I drove by the site of the new soccer stadium yesterday and saw that they had removed most of the fencing and brought some equipment on site.

I don't know if the ground breaking has taken place yet, but it looks like they are about to get started.

[diesel21]

While these types of bicycle facilities have proven successful in some areas with extra right-of-ways to work with, if this is done on Forbes, it could create some immense traffic problems. Either an automobile travel lane will have to be eliminated (leaving 2) or the parking lane will have to be eliminated (causing its own share of problems by leaving no street parking on Forbes). I would think that the best place to do it (if you were dead-set on it) would be on Fifth, by eliminating the bus lane. This leaves all existing travel lanes on Fifth and Forbes intact for cars. The major problem with this is that it puts all of the buses on Forbes.

Something else worth noting is that the Fifth/Forbes area in Oakland is also under consideration for BRT. Now, personal feelings on BRT aside, how is this all going to fit together with dedicated bike facilities? How much regular auto access will be left if, let's say, both are constructed? Recall that BRT will also have its own dedicated lanes. I can't help but wonder if the right hand isn't aware of what the left hand is doing on this case (certainly wouldn't be the first time for the City).

[glowrock]

I actually wonder the same thing about this, diesel21. How is this bike track going to mesh with a potential BRT system up and down Forbes and Fifth? Given that these are just about the only streets with any sort of real vehicle capacity to get between downtown and Oakland, eliminating much in the way of vehicle lanes seems to be a lose-lose situation. Might be great for bicyclists, but drivers will literally be stuck in complete gridlock for much of the day and night as a result. I agree that something needs to be done, but I'm just not sure what that something is.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Private Dick]

Well, Forbes is already going to be cut down to just 2 lanes (one eastbound, one westbound) once it reaches Craig St., as part of the CMU plan to improve traffic flow, revitalize that strip of Forbes, increase safety, and provide dedicated bike lanes.

Forbes is an absolute mess as it is currently -- come along with me on a little trip:

3 slow, eastbound-only, narrow lanes with parking on 1 side from the Oakland "entrance" to 3 higher speed lanes around the curve under the Pitt walkway to Schenley... which turns into parking on 2 sides at Schenley Plaza, then to basically 5! one-way lanes (with the "lane" in front of the Carnegie frequent occupied by parked buses) until Bellefield where it becomes 2 very narrow left-turn lanes to Bellefield and a suggestion of 3 lanes eastbound. Cross Bellefield and it is now 2 lanes eastbound and 2 westbound lanes to turn right onto Bellefield. Continue east past Dithridge and you now have 2 westbound lanes and a parking lane and 2 lanes eastbound (1 of which is again often occupied by parked school buses). At Craig, you now have 2 lanes each direction which then quickly change to short stretches of non-metered, 1-hr parking on each side which reduce lanes of travel to 1 lane in each direction! Then just before you hit the bridge before CMU, it is back to 2 higher-speed lanes each direction with no street parking. It continues that way all past CMU until Morrison, where it becomes 1 lane each direction with parking on both sides.

Consider that this takes place in an urban area over a distance of just 1.5 miles!

Talk about about the greatest fucking transportation planning clusterfuck of all time.


To diesel21... Forbes has "immense traffic problems" as it is. The parking lanes along Forbes through the business district cause much more traffic trouble than they are worth. They provide very little parking capacity compared to the volume of traffic through the corridor and contribute significantly to delays through the stretch. This proposal for dedicated bike lane infrastructure takes plans for the BRT fully into account. In fact, they are part of the same comprehensive transit plan design that is in the works for Oakland.

To glowrock... as I said just above, the dedicated bike lanes and BRT lines are part of the same plan. Traffic flow on Forbes is currently woeful due to terrible design -- I think you can realize that by following along with the course I described above... or just driving it at any time of day, to say nothing of the experience of doing it around rush hour. I've posted a few times on this thread about the bike lane/BRT combos that have been in talks and planning for Pittsburgh. This is something that has been in the works for a little while now. The City, BikePGH, 8-80, ActiveAllegheny, and Port Authority, among other groups have been collaborating on this... looking at models which are currently in use and successful in NYC (1st & 2nd Ave bike/brt projects), Minneapolis, Colombia, China, and others.

I've posted a few events specifically dealing with this topic before... CityLive has put on a few programs about it. I'm not in Pittsburgh anymore, so I haven't been going to the meetings, but I encourage more people who are interested and who can contribute to PLEASE go -- Pittsburgh needs good urban minds at these things!

[diesel21]

Private Dick, I will agree with you 100% that the Fifth/Forbes corridor in Oakland is in desperate need of updating, and this needs to be done considering all transportation options. I drive through it every day at rush hour, so I am constantly reminded of it. That being said, planners must be aware that by changing any component, there will be a resulting change in traffic flow, for positive or negative. There are also bottlenecks that cannot be removed, no matter what (the tight turn on Forbes as you pass underneath the Pitt pedestrian bridge comes to mind). Both Fifth and Forbes carry approx 17,000 vehicles per day, with 9% and 5% being trucks and buses, respectively. Not small numbers. Reduction in the size and/or number of lanes will lead to slowed traffic and increased gridlock (we've seen this with the construction of the new Pitt dorms temporarily closing a lane on Fifth).

Parking is another interesting one. While removing the parking lane may seem inconsequential, it will do two things. One, removing the parking lane on Forbes will add a burden of approx 130 parking spaces to the existing parking capacity. That may seem little, but keep in mind that these are relatively high turnover meters due to their cost. Over the course of a business day, that's a fair number of people needing to park elsewhere and, let's face it, Oakland does not have much additional parking capacity (garage rates are higher than Downtown because of demand). Secondly, removing parking (and the newly installed pedestrian holding areas on the corners) will increase the speed of the traffic flow. That may be good, and may be bad. The risk is that it increases traffic speed to the point where it creates in effect a boulevard, and is less safe due to the high speeds.

Lastly, to the point of CMU reducing Forbes to one auto travel lane in each direction through their corridor, I believe that segment was removed from the main body of their Master Plan and moved to the Appendix as a suggestion. It doesn't surprise me that PennDOT is hesitant to reduce the carrying capacity of their road, given the traffic it handles.

[Private Dick]

^ Sure, I completely agree that altering any one component is going to create waves one way or another... and I would assume this is being taken into account given the expertise of the parties involved in implementing the types of projects.

Not totally true that "reduction in size and/or number of lanes will lead to slowed traffic and increased gridlock" though... especially not with the information given to us from a construction event (such as the Pitt dorm on 5th) which causes lane closure without any modification to the rest of the route. Presently, we have buses creeping along and stopping on Forbes in one of the three very narrow traffic lanes creating unnecessary bottlenecks on the whole course through Oakland... as auto traffic is slower in one lane due to the presence of the bus, and slowed in the other 2 lanes due to constant lane changing by drivers... it has an awful cumulative effect behind the bus; coupled with many intersection lights and street parking on the opposite side of the street producing snags, and you get what we have now... inefficient and unsafe transit in all forms (car, bus, bike, pedestrian)>

Studies show that having 2 widened traffic lanes and a dedicated BRT lane allows for more efficient traffic flow than 3 narrower travel lanes. Generally, the bike lane is constructed adjacent to the BRT lane. I'm not sure what the design for Forbes will be, but I imagine that it will be something like that ... 2 traffic lanes, BRT lane/bike lane, and maybe parking.

To your point about the on-street parking and the frequent turnover associated with it on Forbes... that frequent turnover is a big problem on a major through corridor. Very few things snarl and back up traffic worse than parallel parking in a dense area with very narrow traffic lanes. One driver backing up to parallel park actually causes two lanes to slow or stop (the lane immediately adjacent to the street parking and the bordering lane... in Forbes' case, the middle lane... as cars wait and/or maneuver around into other the other lane). Then with Forbes, you have the third lane occupied by stopping buses all day long... see how much of a morass it becomes?

As for parking capacity, a BRT/bike lane setup does not mean that all street parking will be eliminated. Still, garages in Oakland are rarely full... I've never once not been able to park at the UPMC garage off Forbes, the one behind the Parkvale Bank, Soldiers & Sailors, or any of the garages on the northern side of Forbes. People parking on the street are short-term parkers going into one of the businesses on Forbes or a side street. Anyway, another multilevel garage will likely need to be constructed sometime rather soon.

Speedwise, the number of untimed lights along the first stretch of Forbes in Oakland kills any chance for high speed. The speed problems that exist currently are between Schenley Plaza and Bellefield and then from Craig along the CMU campus. A project like this would have the effect of moderating that racing syndrome that overtakes drivers after getting out of a bottleneck through the business district.

[BrianTH]

Of course to sort all this out you really need to consult professionals. But I'll just note that one thing that has come out of a lot of studies of real-world traffic on roads is that conflicts (involving different kinds of vehicles, vehicles changing lanes, vehicles parking, vehicles turning, and so on) can have very large effects on real-world peak capacities. That is a large part of why road redesigns that lose lanes but also reduce conflicts can actually come out ahead in terms of traffic flow.