Want more wishes? Ask.
Derrick
speaking for myself and not my employers
>> I think I'd like to take this conversation into another vein. In my own
>> opinion, it seems that one thing that all the Pro-Burghers have had in
>> common is that they haven't yielded any one thing that needs improvement
>> in Pittsburgh. They all see content, nay -- *proud* of the town. I'd
>> like to wake up the discussion by asking any Pro-Burgher what, in fact,
>> THEY want to see change in this town.
>> What might YOU change in this town?
I'll take the bait...
I was born in Pittsburgh -- left for Nashville circa 1971 -- moved back
in the mid 80's -- and left ASAP for Dallas!
What I found most frustrating during my second tour of duty in the 'Burgh
was the relentless labor strife in the region. The various unions seem
to have been largely responsible for killing a newspaper, causing a major
grocery chain to pull its stores out of the area more than once (Kroger
and Thoroghfare) as well as the deprivation of education every year
because of the annual teacher strikes.
Even granting that most of the concerns of the unions are valid, the
perception is that the region is "strike happy" and that there is
an "us versus them" attitude of the labor force. I am sure that other
factors are also at work, but I find it interesting that the large
corporations that used to call Pittsburgh home are moving out and/or
downsizing their presence (Rockwell, Eljer, et al).
I think the _perception_ of a hostile workforce (along with the other
negatives pointed out in other posts) has kept major firms from
relocating to the Pittsburgh area...in spite of the fact that the city
was named "most livable" by Rand-McNally in 1985.
All that being said, if I had never lived elsewhere (particularly in
vibrant cities like Nashville and Dallas), I would probably consider
the town an OK place.
--
=============================================================================
Bob Nelson: Dallas, Texas, U.S.A.
bne...@netcom.com
=============================================================================
YES! I agree completely with this one. I have no problem with cyclists
being on the road, as long as they know how to behave properly (like
a car--all the time), and can stay sufficiently out of my way if they
can't keep ahead of the car when I'm driving. :-) I really hate when
they ride facing oncoming traffic or weave back and forth. I also really
hate when they insist on riding on the sidewalk (when I'm walking), when
there's a perfectly good street for them to ride on--I never hear them
coming up behind me. And while we're on the subject of who belongs
where--runners, stay off the street! As my husband always says, "I _will_
run you over." Right after I get the cyclist. :-)
--Sue B.
I'll boil it down: One side says "Boo." The opposition says "Not." Repeat.
I think I'd like to take this conversation into another vein. In my own
opinion, it seems that one thing that all the Pro-Burghers have had in
common is that they haven't yielded any one thing that needs improvement
in Pittsburgh. They all see content, nay -- *proud* of the town. I'd
like to wake up the discussion by asking any Pro-Burgher what, in fact,
THEY want to see change in this town.
(Please withhold the retort, "I'd like to see the Anti-Burghers LEAVE."
That's a really, really pitiful, weak, inflammatory, puerile hate. I
want a more interesting discussion, not a urination playoff.)
After all, the Anti-Burghers are (evidently) all trying to get the hell
out of here, and so they need not worry about long-term local changes.
But the Pro-Burghers, well, they're here for the duration, and their
votes matter, their say matters, and their actions matter. At least,
these matter more for the Pros than the Antis.
So let's see the objective view:
Pro-Burghers, what's left to do?
What might YOU change in this town?
--
Ward C. Travis Pittsburgh PA USA "The fact is the sweetest dream that
tra...@transarc.com (412) 338 4388 labor knows." - R. Frost
How Refreshing Ward. Thankyou.
I have only one thing at this time. First, some quick background.
I am org. from Shaler, and did 6 years in the Marines after high school.
Now I am going into my junior year at Pitt for EE.
I feel that this point may be futile, but I would like some feedback.
It seems, not just in PGH, but all over, that people are to dependent on
their vehicles. I thought that perhaps the public transportation was
lacking, but I took the bus for my first year of school and it only
required a very small amount of extra effort on my part. (Lucky for me.
Trying to park in Oakland [cheaply] is impossible.)
It is interesting to drive into or out of the city at 9:00am or
5:00pm. So many cars with only one person in them. And traffic is so
slow and heavy. I dream of one day seeing more buses than cars during
rush hour, all going 55mph, not stop and go.
I think the American way has made too many of us lazy. So many
people thinking about what is theirs and what they expect to be coming to
them. I digress.
Can anyone expand on what I have said? I know that I am not the
most eloquent of presentators, but...
Anyway, my point is that more people should try to take the bus.
Parking would be easier for those who might need drive during an unusual
circumstance, and we could even find time to read a book or the newspaper.
Mike
--
______________________________________________________________________________
Mike Schrauder mgss...@pitt.edu or schr...@a.psc.edu
u of pgh EE soph
(ie. BEH is my home)
This is *exactly* why some bikers seek sanctuary on the sidewalk. I am
not saying that it is right, but even if you are a courtious driver, there
are many out there who are not. Many a time I have been very nearly
killed, while obeying all the traffic laws on my touring bike. (Twice by
people on car-phones.)
I completely agree with the person that suggested that perhaps a
biking system is in order. Sure does keep the air clean.
Susan Lynn Bowser Basista <sb...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> YES! I agree completely with this one. I have no problem with cyclists
> being on the road, as long as they know how to behave properly (like
> a car--all the time), and can stay sufficiently out of my way if they
> can't keep ahead of the car when I'm driving. :-) I really hate when
> they ride facing oncoming traffic or weave back and forth.
Biker stupidity really bugs me when I drive, so I try to behave well
when I'm on my bike. I find that usually if I assert myself as a car
then I am respected, at least when I am not seriously in the way. But
as for weaving and passing, please keep in mind that bikers have to be
extra careful of road and other conditions (like parked car doors...)
and that you can't assume they will stay way off to the right for your
convenience. They want to arrive alive, just like everyone. The law
says (at least, last time I checked, a different decade in a different
state :-) that bikes may not use the sidewalks and that they have full
use of the roads. So if a biker has no choice but to slow you down on
a narrow road, then please relax and wait for a chance to pass safely.
- John (wishing for more bike paths, but putting bridge repair first)
Well, I've worked or gone to school in oakland for almost 8 (jeez!)
years, and during that time I've lived in Mt. Lebanon, Beechview, South
Oakland, North Oakland, and Greenfield. I have, at various times,
driven, ridden busses, ridden the T, walked, and bicycled to work or
school.
When I was living in the South Hills, rode public transportation for a
long time, and then I got a car and became one of those
one-person-per-car commuters, and I MUCH preferred it to riding the bus.
Okay, I'll admit that during rush hour, driving a car isn't much of a
win over riding the bus, but if it's possble for to commute at off-peak
hours, driving, at least to Oakland is much more time-efficient and
convienient. As for parking cheaply, it just depends on how far you're
willing to walk after you park the car. I found that I could generally,
get in to work at CMU faster by driving, even including a 10-minute walk
from my parking spot to my office.
Now, I live about 2.5 miles from the office, and I bicycle from doorstep
to doorstep, and it's definitely the way to go. (Nevermind the
hypocrites who expect cars to "act like cars, all the time" AND "stay
out of my way".)
Jeff
While in Pgh all I used my car for (before it was stolen 1.5 weeks
ago, that is) was to drive *out* of the city during times or on routes
not used by buses. I found keeping and parking a car to be an
expensive pain in the ass. Who needs to pay for parking and monthly insurance??
> It is interesting to drive into or out of the city at 9:00am or
>5:00pm. So many cars with only one person in them. And traffic is so
>slow and heavy. I dream of one day seeing more buses than cars during
>rush hour, all going 55mph, not stop and go.
On those few occasions when I have been driving out of the city near
Friday afternoon rush hour, I have noticed that about 90% of the cars
have only one occupant. You don't see that kind of ratio in cities
with better public transit systems. To me, it seems that Pgh has one
of the higher ratios of (cars used) / (population), and roads which are
utterly inadequate to handle it.
> I think the American way has made too many of us lazy. So many
>people thinking about what is theirs and what they expect to be coming to
>them. I digress.
Just look at people who live in, say, Shadyside, Sq. Hill, or
Wilkinsburg (all of which have abundant bus service to Oakland and
downtown) who routinely (note the choice of words) use their cars. On
many days, walking from Shadyside or Sq. Hill serves the bill--and you
actually get exercise that way too!
You don't have to look too far to see examples of such laziness.
> Anyway, my point is that more people should try to take the bus.
>Parking would be easier for those who might need drive during an unusual
>circumstance, and we could even find time to read a book or the newspaper.
I agree. Although after having my car stolen and junked, I miss the
luxury of being able to go out of town on a whim (now I have to plan
it either via public transit or renting a car), I certainly don't miss
the hassle of keeping the car in the city, or the monthly insurance
payments. I don't understand why more people in similar situations
aren't similarly inclined.
todd
[quotes from motorists whining about cyclists deleted...]
>Biker stupidity really bugs me when I drive, so I try to behave well
>when I'm on my bike. I find that usually if I assert myself as a car
>then I am respected, at least when I am not seriously in the way. But
>as for weaving and passing, please keep in mind that bikers have to be
>extra careful of road and other conditions (like parked car doors...)
>and that you can't assume they will stay way off to the right for your
>convenience. They want to arrive alive, just like everyone. The law
>says (at least, last time I checked, a different decade in a different
>state :-) that bikes may not use the sidewalks and that they have full
>use of the roads. So if a biker has no choice but to slow you down on
>a narrow road, then please relax and wait for a chance to pass safely.
hrm. I had a copy of the section of the vehicle code concerning
'pedacycles' last week, but I seem to have misplaced it for the moment.
Perhaps I'll post it if I dig it up... anyways, what I remember:
- bikes are allowed full use of the road. Riding two abreast is also
completely legal! It does say something to the effect of 'cycles should
stay to the right hand side of the lane (or to the left possibly on a
one-way street or when approaching a left turn), "when it is safe to do
so".' I distinctly remember the degree of freedom there with regards to
the 'safe' part. I don't particularly want to impact a car door
belonging to someone who didn't think to look when opening it, and
having to look for people potentially getting out of cars distracts my
attention from the rest of the road. Also, as John says, some weaving
around is necessary to avoid potholes and the like. I usually stay to
the right, and it usually doesn't bother me too much. However, if it is
unsafe to do so, I have the right to use the whole lane if I want to.
What really annoys me about this is that motorists are completely
obnoxious about the whole thing. Furthermore, I think that it is
completely reasonable that a cyclist travelling at or near the posted
speed limit should be allowed the entire lane; at speeds of 20mph or
more, I _REALLY_ don't want to (1) impact a car door or (2) be unable to
avoid an obstacle because someone has decided to break the speed limit
and pass me on my left, so I usually move to the left to assert my
position. Funny thing is, I've had people beep at me, then illegally
pass me, while EXCEEDING the speed limit myself, I recall a specific
incident a few months ago where I was travelling at ~40mph down Shady
Avenue (the limit is 25), having someone come up close behind me and lay
on the horn, then gun it, pass me, make a nice gesture, and then pull
close in front. I don't think most people would consider doing that if
I were in a car, but somehow it's ok to do it to cyclists. Bzzt! By
the vehicle code, cyclists ~= motorists.
- cyclists are permitted to ride on the sidewalk, if it is 'unsafe' to
ride on the road. However, the other part of this, which cyclists often
ignore, is that you are required to audibly notify any pedestrians you
overtake, either vocally or with a bell or horn. I'm not sure that that
is effective; I don't go zipping down sidewalks if I ride on them, I
maintain a slow pace (<5mph, people walk at @2-4), and only overtake
pedestrians if there is sufficient space to do so. My sidewalk riding
is limited to a few special cases, usually: going across the schenley
bridge, at least until it's open [soon!], approaching problematic
left-hand turns [yes, mainly an optimization on my part, but probably a
little safer to get to the left when it's clear], etc...
of course, along with the above rights come vehicular responsibilities:
cyclists are required to obey all traffic laws (speed limits, stop
signs, traffic lights, signaling, etc), and also, there is a stipulation
that cyclists may NOT use the road or sidewalk if there is a bike lane
available and it is safe. Of course, there aren't many bike lanes here,
and the one I usually use (Beechwood) is something of a joke, parts of
it are filled with parked cars and it doesn't really _GO_ anywhere but
to the park...
As far as the part about obeying all traffic laws, I'll admit that I
take certain liberties; if I can see there's nothing coming I'll usually
blow a red light or stop sign, and sometimes I exceed the speed limit
(if I can :-). This has a lot to do with momentum, it's much easier to
regain by pushing your accelerator down than by cranking; once you work
some to get it, you don't want to lose it. So, perhaps I'm no angel,
but I don't do this to put anyone at risk, and I _do_ want to get where
I'm going alive and in one piece, which gives me an extra incentive to
be careful--- cyclists don't have any of the protection from accidents
that you get with cars; I get hit, I get hurt bad.
anyways, given a suitable bike lane, I'd gladly get off your damned
roadway and we'd probably both be a lot happier.
So, a few brief points (cheap shots?) before I shut up:
- motorists have little respect for motorists and cyclists. cyclists
have little respect for motorists, but tend to respect other cyclists.
hrm, wonder who the problem is.
- automobiles tend to cause a lot more problems than bikes: pollution,
traffic jams, and parking problems, namely.
- if you commute by automobile, and especially if you're one of those
who make no effort to carpool and transport only yourself... well, you
should probably be shot. Interesting to see that the HOV lane on 279 is
now open to cars with *2* or more people. What a joke. I don't think
I'd mind seeing cars so much if there were 3 or 4 people in each one...
there'd probably be less than half as many of them to worry about.
yeah, I've got a zillion other opinions on the subject, i really don't
feel like rehashing the same crap that came around several months ago,
find someone who archived it.
BTW, if anyone would like to sponsor me for the MS-150 bike tour on June
11, or if you're interested in going (150 miles in 2 days), send me mail.
todd.
Ah, well that's another thing! I'd like to run them off of the road, too.
:-)
BTW, I don't have any problem with people biking to work, or wherever.
(If my knees could handle it, I would have done it a long time ago
myself. But that's another thing.) And most "serious" bikers know
what they're doing, and behave "responsibly." It's the nonchalant
idiots that pay no attention and have no idea what they should/
should not be doing that really annoy me. But anyway...
--Sue B.
P.S. If you're going to ride on the sidewalk, at least get a bell.
I'm tired of having the s**t scared out of me when some cyclist
suddenly passes me and I never heard him/her coming.
Excerpts from netnews.pgh.general: 1-Jun-94 Re: What's NOT perfect
here.. by John Hage...@ece.cmu.ed
> Susan Lynn Bowser Basista <sb...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> > I really hate when
> > they ride facing oncoming traffic or weave back and forth.
>
> Biker stupidity really bugs me when I drive, so I try to behave well
> when I'm on my bike.
Thank you. :-)
> as for weaving and passing, please keep in mind that bikers have to be
> extra careful of road and other conditions (like parked car doors...)
> ... So if a biker has no choice but to slow you down on
> a narrow road, then please relax and wait for a chance to pass safely.
I'm not talking about parked car doors and narrow roads. I realize that.
So I'll give some examples: The other day while driving (well, actually
my husband was driving) through East Liberty to get to North Oakland,
we were appraoching an intersection. Just ahead of us were a couple
riding their bikes (trust me, these were not "serious" cyclists).
They were too busy talking to each other and not paying any attention
to the traffic around them, weaving back and forth until they reached the
intersection. I think he was behind her, then casually drifted up next
to her, they chatted, then I think he pulled in front of her. Never
once did they look at the cars around them. I guess you had to be there.
Then there was the teenager who took his good old time getting through
another intersection, crossing from one sidewalk to the next in front of
traffic, without any regard for his surroundings.
Well, anyway, enough of this. I need to eat my lunch. :-)
--Sue B.
Excerpts from netnews.pgh.general: 2-Jun-94 Re: What's NOT perfect
here.. by todd j. de...@pitt.edu
> Furthermore, I think that it is
> completely reasonable that a cyclist travelling at or near the posted
> speed limit should be allowed the entire lane; at speeds of 20mph or
I agree completely, as I've said before. Guess I didn't make myself
clear enough. Oh-well.
--Sue B.
P.S.
Excerpts from netnews.pgh.general: 2-Jun-94 Re: What's NOT perfect
here.. by todd j. de...@pitt.edu
>BTW, if anyone would like to sponsor me for the MS-150 bike tour on June
>11, or if you're interested in going (150 miles in 2 days), send me mail.
Sorry, I'm already sponsoring a couple of friends.
: Pro-Burghers, what's left to do?
: What might YOU change in this town?
I think Pittsburgh is a pretty good place to live. Happiness doesn't
depend so much on where you live as what is inside of you. Every place
has good and bad points. What Pittsburgh needs is better roads. Not
more roads, just improve the ones that are already built.
ken