The Portland, Ore., transit authorities discovered a few years ago that it was easier and cheaper to get people out of their automobiles and into alternative transportation modes (bicycling, walking, telecommuting, etc.), rather than into mass-transit vehicles (buses, light rail, ferries or trains). The key element for alternative transportation is urban design, a function in which Portland excels.

The current Pittsburgh streets are no longer suited for bicycles or walking; they are too congested, single purpose and harrowing. Because they are mostly designed for the exclusive use of automobiles, they also contribute, by default, to urban blight, violent crime, drug use, uncivil behavior and environmental damage, and all this at an intolerable level. It’s a disgrace to our reputation in the world.

There is a very straightforward way to enhance Pittsburgh’s alternative transportation infrastructure, and it is not very expensive. Consider our high-density urban areas: Oakland, the South Side, Downtown, the South Hills and the East End. Currently, there are no through bicycles routes in any of those areas. Safety is the number one hindrance limiting bicycle commuting. By delineating simple bike lanes with signage, painted lines and improved pavement, more people would leave their cars behind and bike to work at least 10 months per year. Most cities in the West have done this, and with considerable progress.

Bicycle routes, in addition to being well-defined and maintained, must be contiguous through the entire city, east and west, diagonally and along the perimeters. The current bicycle paths are designed for recreational use — they do not go anywhere. Pittsburgh could emulate other cities that have been more successful in containing automobile congestion.

Emil Lester
Edgewood
The writer is the proprietor of City Cafe.

First Published: January 28, 2019, 5:00 a.m.