Glen Osborne man pushes for bike-path study
John Orndorff hopes bicycling enthusiasts and municipalities will support a plan to study extending a proposed bike trail through the Beaver Valley and into the Sewickley area.
Backed by a matching donation of up to $2,000 from the Sewickley Valley Community Fund, the study could determine the feasibility of a bike path that could connect the Ohio River Trail Council's path along the Ohio River from Monaca to Coraopolis, said Orndorff of Glen Osborne.
The proposed extension would connect from the Ambridge-Aliquippa Bridge into Ambridge, Leetsdale, Edgeworth and Sewickley. It would continue over the Sewickley Bridge into Moon and Coraopolis, where it would link with the Montour Trail.
The study would cost $8,500, Orndorff said.
“To have a bike route established — even if it's just simply signs reminding motorists that this is a road that is shared with cyclists — provides a safer corridor for cyclists and, perhaps, for runners and others who would … use this bike route for exercise,” he said.
Orndorff said other communities are establishing connections to larger bike trails, which increase quality of life for those nearby.
“People are becoming more and more conscious of their lifestyles, and having a bicycle route provides a safe corridor for them to cycle (and) would encourage that kind of lifestyle,” he said.
If completed, the study would produce a route map detailing areas for signage, recommend improvements to existing roads and intersections, and provide information on construction costs, Orndorff said.
He said a bike route into Sewickley would boost retail possibilities.
“When you do create bicycle routes, the retail outlets experience an increase in business,” he said.
Bobby Cherry is an associate editor for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-324-1408 or email@example.com.
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 â 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.