Showing posts with label Bill Peduto. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Peduto. Show all posts

Friday, July 16, 2010

The AVR Saga Continues

I couldn’t resist.  I had to write something after I saw the latest Article in the Trib about the AVR.*  As if that wasn’t enough, there was a follow up article in the City Paper. 

To sum it up: AVR wants to implement service from Arnold to  Steel City Plaza via their current right of way from Arnold to the Strip, breaking off (and I’m assuming) using street trackage on 26th St, crossing Liberty and using the East Busway to gain access to Steel Plaza.  They want to do this because: #1 They feel access to Steel Plaza will provide the greatest intermodality (can’t argue that, given the context) and #2 struggles with property owner below 21st ST (Buncher) continue, even though the STB ruled in favor of AVR owning the easement to their ROW in the lower Strip. 

A couple thoughts on the Trib article: 
I wonder if the Allegheny/Westmoreland County commuter proposal has really “lost steam” as the article suggests.  Granted, not much has been said about it lately, but throughout this planning process, there have been large gaps in time between updates. 

I also get the impression that really no one is on board with the AVR’s proposal, accept the AVR.  County and Port Authority officials seem to be awfully quiet about the whole thing. 

Then the City Paper article popped up.  This article brought up further issues, such as the proposed Buncher TOD development in the Strip.  Included in this was talk of an LRT line to Lawrenceville.  Additionally, the article questioned the validity and thoroughness of AVR’s study on connecting their transit line with Steel City Plaza.  There was no mention of the Allegheny/Westmoreland Commuter Rail proposal in this article. 

A couple thoughts on the CP article:  
Wow, the plot thickens.  I had seen articles about the proposed development in the Strip but had not heard talk about an LRT line to Lawrenceville.  I have to wonder where exactly that all came from (aside from Patrick Dowd’s mouth).  Considering PAT nixed the convention center spur, I don’t know how likely this line to Lawrenceville would be.  I’m certainly not opposed to the idea; however, I'm not holding my breath for them to build one.  Consider that the first Spine Line Study was completed in 1993.  Nearly twenty years later, we are close to having a tiny portion of what was supposed to be the Spine Line (The NSC).

My overall thoughts:  
There have been many developments in a short amount of time.  In addition, I’m not exactly sure what is really going on vs. what is conjecture.  Nothing is guaranteed at this point, not even AVR’s plan.  Dowd’s comments are right on about wanting to increase connectivity within the city, not just into and out of the city.  For my money, I’d rather see an extension to Oakland, transformation of the busway to LRT, or an LRT line to Lawrenceville through the strip before commuter rail. 

Additionally, I have to wonder where the commuter rail plan stands.  Again, if AVR forges ahead as is, they will be creating a single line transit system that will be limited in how it can tie in with other forms of transportation within the region.  You will never have a system of these lines in Pittsburgh where you can get from one point in the region to another (beyond Arnold to Pittsburgh).  A heavy type commuter rail would at least give the ability to operate inter-mixed with freight traffic, and would make the dream of having a system from one end of the county to the other at least a possibility.  As unlikely as that may seem, it is still MORE likely than a similar system using River Line style light rail. 

Having said that, any project that would decrease the number of vehicles on the road and the amount of time that people spend in cars would be welcome.  Commuter rail can spur TOD.  If someone moves to a walkable community near a train station from a suburban cul de sac because it provides access to the city that in itself is a victory.  Oakmont isn’t in the city, but it’s a perfect, ready made TOD community (with the exception of a super market, but I digress).  It would certainly not be a bad thing to expand a walkable community like Oakmont. 

Additionally, as a commenter In the City Paper article suggests, a golden opportunity to generate support for a commuting alternative is being missed here.  Route 28 sees 60,000 cars a day.  Route 28 is also undergoing major construction.  If even 10% of those people are convinced to try AVR’s transit line, that would be a great start to establishing a well patronized and effective commuter alternative.  If some sort of system were not started until, say 2014-2015 time frame, then people would be much less likely to ditch their cars.


As always, I guess the bottom line is:  The more we stand around and talk, the more things don’t change.















*As an aside, I like how the Trib gets their barbs in there specifically about the Port Authority and publicly funded transportation. 
Specifically: 
“Ardolino said the venture would not ask for funding from the cash-strapped transit agency.
"We're trying to keep Port Authority out of this equation," he said. "They have a role, but we'd rather not burden the authority any further."”

Then the subtle jab against publicly funded transportation at the end:
 "I'd be all for it if it would be mostly self-supporting,"
 Of all the quotes during interviews, I find it curious that this one is the one they would include...  

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Back from the Dead

Ok, I wasn’t really dead, just consumed with life outside of blogging.
A lot has happened in a short amount of time with the planned commuter rail plan for Arnold/Greensburg.

The story first appeared here and has become significantly more complex in the mean time. Apparently, not only has AVR secured financing for the Arnold to Pittsburgh line, but they intend to move forward with it, and are at least exploring other options for its operation. i.e. potentially pursuing a River Line style (light) of operation vs. a WES or Tri Rail operation. (heavy).

I’m not sure what to think of this. If you read the AVR proposal they have their own ideas on implementation, and basically don’t care what Allegheny or Westmoreland County think.

I can see two perspectives on this:

-AVR is trying to grease the skids so to speak. They (as I am) are not impressed with the pace of the overall project while costs escalate and the Rte 28 project progresses. Because this news is so out of left field I would not be surprised if this is in fact the case. This is what I hope is really happening. In fact, I hope it works. We’re on our tenth year of talking about this, and I see this having the potential to go the way of every other transit project in Pittsburgh if action is not taken.  (That place is no where)

- AVR is serious about this propsal.  I REALLY hope that they aren't serious about their proposal. I say that because a light rail style of operation, whether diesel or electric severely limits its interaction with either a Greensburg line operation or Bill Peduto’s shuttle, or any other standard rail line for that matter. Currently, operations such as the River Line must be segregated, by time from heavy operations. Meaning, if light operations occur from 5 AM to 7PM for example, then no heavy trains can operate on that trackage during that time and visa verse. This is fine for the AVR tracks, but not good for tying in with the NS (Greensburg) or Amtrak/CSX (Peduto Limited). If the AVR gets their way, then their operation will be forced to be a stand alone operation, even if some other commuter operation would come to fruition. Basically, you would have yet another mode of operation that does not tie in well with any other operation. That greatly decreases the operation’s effectiveness and chances it could operate successfully. No word on whether they expect to receive operating subsidies, or whether they expect to be able to operate at a profit.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Transportation* and the Mayoral Race Part 1

It's hard to focus on just transporation for something as "small" (relatively speaking) as a Mayoral campaign. The Port Authority which serves as the mass transit provider for Pittsburgh is not confined to the city limits and is not controlled by the mayor. However, given Pittsburgh's current position as an older city with lots of aging infrastructure (bridges, tunnels and curves oh my!) and with a half billion dollar (and unpopular for that matter) transit project going on within the city limits, these issues have high billing in this election.

This post is meant to be as non-biased as possible. I will do my best to pick apart each bit of information that I do get as evenly as possible. The first post will describe the plan of our incumbent mayor Luke Ravenstahl.

I have contacted his re-election office with the simple question of "What are your plans for transportation infrastructure and transit if re-elected as mayor?" To this point I have not received a response.

There is however the "infrastructure wish list" which was published as just that, a wish list for stimulus funds, which were at that time in the pipeline, and Pittsburgh was taking its place in line. The stimulus money has since been doled out, but I think this list provides a good blueprint of where his administration stands on these topics. Most of the items on this list address current infrastructure (Greenfield bridge repairs, major sewer repairs, etc.) . I certainly can't say anything bad about that, lord knows we have lots of old infrastructure in Pittsburgh.

However, I see little imagination, and little planning for the future in this list. Where's the transit expansion? Where's the commuter rail line Bill Peduto talked about? Maybe there's another wish list out there. If there is I sure can't find it.

Additionally, if you look on the "issues" section of his re-election page, you find his "Blueprint for Pittsburgh's Renaissance." (As an aside, saying Pittsburgh is undergoing a renaissance, is absolutely ludicrous, and actually hurts the recovery efforts of the city. Get the city out of Act 47, and stop the population loss, and then we'll talk). Nowhere in this blueprint is the word transportation or transit even mentioned. The number seven point on his "blueprint" got me excited. However, like all his other points, transportation or transit were not mentioned.

From what I was able to gather (and that's not a lot), transportation, transit and infrastructure are not too high on his list. My guess he is willing to let Dan Onorato fight those battles. I will update this column when someone from Mr. Ravenstahl's campaign responds to my question.

*For the purposes of these posts I will consider transportation to be an all inclusive term to include transportation infrastructure, and transit.

Monday, December 29, 2008

Now We're Thinkin'

An article in today's Post Gazette talks about a proposal study to, what else, study. More specifically to study the feasibility of a heavy rail shuttle (for lack of a better term) that would run from Hazelwood through Oakland, on existing tracks (owned by CSXT but operated by Allegheny Valley Railroad (AVR)), and then run to Lawrenceville (on tracks owned and operated by the AVR).

The concept is designed to link areas of high tech concentration, almost creating a high tech corridor. The second part of the idea is to spur growth in Hazelwood, which I'm not sure if you have driven through there lately, but it's near death, and moving towards the "light", and by light, I don't mean economic revival.

(I wonder if this whole study has anything to do with the loss of D'Imperio's market. A market that has closed because of increased crime and lost business, and whose closing has caused quite a bit of controversy. It may sound crazy, but this could be an overture to show residents of Hazelwood, that hey, someone gives a crap about this neighborhood. Thus meaning that it's chances of completion are slim to none. I am going to put my cynicism aside for a moment and assume the proposal is genuine.)

If the proposal was truly made in good faith, it's an encouraging sign and overall, a good idea. It shows that local leadership (government) is willing to think about alternatives to expanding transportation, aside from building more highways. It could also act to attract high-tech businesses to Pittsburgh, in a continued effort to re-make its image as a High Tech oasis amid a rust belt dessert.

However, there are a couple of ideas to keep in mind before we all get too giddy about the idea:

#1. Even if this idea does come to fruition, this would be study #1 of approximately 100,000 yet to come. Translation, this idea is a looooooong way from being anywhere close to reality.

#2. Is this the most cost effective way to do things? Granted, it's great that the infrastructure is already there, and the fact that it's in relatively good shape (Good enough that Amtrak runs 2 trains a day over CSX owned portions of it. The AVR owned portion may need some work). However, Heavy Rail is not cheap to operate, especially over short distances, and for a (at most) 5 mile shuttle, that seems like it could be expensive. You would need high ridership to make it cost effective, and I'm not exactly sure running a frequent shuttle between the locations would justify the operating costs.

That's not to say it couldn't work. I think if you incorporate it as part of a larger system, and slightly re-designed it, you would have a hell of an idea. You've already got talk of a Heavy Rail system using self propelled rail cars* with one line going from Arnold to Pittsburgh, and the other from Greensburg to Pittsburgh, why not integrate it?

Food for thought, and since I'm such a dork, who finds dreaming up transportation systems in my head fun, I will be creating a post soon that will discuss such a system, that already exists...IN MY HEAD.

*As an interesting side note, a company called Colorado Rail Car, built a self propelled rail car called the "DMU" or Diesel Multiple Unit. These were the proposed vehicle for a heavy commuter system in Pittsburgh. (they actually ran a demonstration train from Oakmont in 2004) While doing a little research for this post, I found an interesting message on their website, it looks like the DMU isn't the answer. I wonder what potential impacts this could have on a commuter system in Pittsburgh?