Transportation Ignorance

I like to make fun of the Trib, but I have to hand it to them, they've been all over the transportation/infrastructure stuff!

Check out this article from yesterday's Trib. 

This article seems to provide a really good barometer of Pennsylvania's public opinion concerning our transportation and infrastructure situation. 

The bad news is everyone appears not to care.  At least not enough to address it.  My crack analysis shows that only a little more than a quarter of your average Pennsylvanian thinks that transportation and infrastructure should be a priority for our incoming state government.  The silver lining to that cloud is that we Pittsburghers seem much more keenly aware of the issues facing our Commonwealth when it comes to repairing our infrastructure and upgrading our transportation systems.  Given the general apathy, I'm sure the rallying cry for the next four years at least will be much the same as it has been: "Don't take my money to pay for your fancy shmancy public transportation" 

Given the low numbers, it's not suprising to see that a majority of those interviewed would not support higher costs to support infrastucture/transportation improvements.  Even less suprising is that those numbers are highest in rural areas. 

The biggest question I have is: why don't people care?  Eventhough Corbett has pledged up and down he will not raise taxes, he, and his appointed transition committee members seem keenly aware of the poor state of our infrastructure.  Why doesn't your average Pennsylvanian feel the same sense of urgency?  The news on the state of our infrastructure has not been kept in the dark.  Yet, most people are still concerned with lower taxes than a bridge collapsing, or getting cars off the roads. 

Mid-week Train Links

Here’s a couple of links I found today, both rail related.

First, in the total surprise department, the Trib issued a transportation (other than auto)  friendly column yesterday. 

Check it out here

Before you get too excited, links at the bottom of the page are a little less Bizzaro-Trib in nature.  After reading this article you can find out how “liberals” have been proven to be “stupid”. 

Enough attempted humor.  The article is dead on, and fits in well with what experts in transportation and infrastructure have been screaming into deaf ears.  Our transportation system is second rate and getting worse, because as we aren’t spending money to fix it and integrate it.  In this country, if it’s not about cars it’s a conspiracy against our Freedom, or some such nonsense.  While we are busy doing this:



the rest of the world is improving its infrastructure, in this case its rail systems. 

Second, This link comes from the Post Gazette.   Apparently the midst of a budget/funding crisis where the fare from every rider counts is the perfect time to practice Union tomfoolery. 

I am a pretty progressive person (especially when it comes to transportation, which should be no suprise) but there’s nothing like cutting off your nose to spite your face.  Apparently purposely screwing with people’s schedules and pissing off the riders is a great way to stick it to the man. 

What is this, kindergarten?  Grow up; you make a lot of money for what you do, and your employer is in a constant state of funding distress.  The last thing the Port Authority needs, and deserves is a black eye because some self-entitled workers want to stick it to them.  

Nothing Set in Stone

First things first.  Don’t call it a bailout (that goes for you too PG).  That insinuates the Port Authority immediately screwed something up*.  The Port Authority didn’t say; “Hey, let’s throw away our state funding on hookers and blow!”  The state promised dedicated funding for public transportation.  Their plan was arguably a stupid idea and they had no plan B when it didn’t work.  Now they can’t balance the budget while providing a sustainable transit funding source.  The blame for this immediate crisis lies with the state.

Now to the topic at hand; there is yet to be consensus among the SPC members that they will sign this off on this transfer of funds. 

Apparently, some on the committee are saying that this is just another band-aid.  I would agree.  No one thinks this is permanent.  However, I would also argue the Port Authority shouldn’t be pushed off the cliff to prove a point. 

  

Permanent funding absolutely needs to be established.  Forcing the Port Authority over the edge and using Western Pennsylvania’s transit users as pawns in the process is not the right way to bring about the needed change. 

The move is meant to buy time to allow steady funding to be established WITHOUT the massive cuts, increased wear and tear on roads, and increased traffic headaches that will occur as a result. 

Not helping the cause is the fact that there seem to be some clear highway advocates within the SPC, especially in areas that are not densely populated and do not have a big public transportation footprint. 

Chairman Charlie Camp seems to be a leader among them, stating: 

"We're tired of the mass transit funding issue coming at the cost of highways and bridges and being put on our table."

I believe that to be a short-sited and erroneous statement.  The money is coming from projects that were not started.  This money would not have been spent on improving our highways.  Additionally, if the cuts are allowed to go through, they will cause major increases in road usage, and therefore increases in wear and tear on our already tired roads and bridges.  Not spending the money to keep the Port Authority going is NOT going to help Western Pennsylvania's roads.

Bottom line, it looks like it’s going to be yet another nail biter in this already very nervous year for the Port Authority and their riders.

If you care about keeping service at least at status quo, then here are a couple of contacts:

To reach the General Comments address:  comments@spcregion.org

To reach the Transportation Planning Director:  dipietro@spcregion.org

*As I've stated before, the Port Authority has done plenty over the years to warrant anger towards their financial situation.  However, this particular situation has nothing to do with the current regime at the Port Authority.  It's also easy to blame the Unions.  It's true that their negotiated advances did a lot to push us towards this point.  However, the Unions have a legal contract in place and Steve Bland cannot just legally back out on that contract and make the sweeping changes that are called for in some circles.  

Breaking Down the AVR Proposal Part 1

I’ve been critical of AVR’s plan for commuter rail.  That’s not to say that there isn’t value to what they are doing.  With that in mind I’ve put together some of what I feel are issues/risks/opportunities for this proposal.  I broke the proposal down into construction and operation.  The first installment will cover construction and each section will lay out potential issues and opportunities (if applicable) 

Keep in mind as well, there is no public report available for this.  I’ve gathered my ideas and thoughts through articles and material available on the internet.  There are no concrete figures save the $171million “private loan” and the $228 million overall cost.  Beyond that, there is currently no detail available. 

Construction

Stations

There aren’t many major issues with the construction of stations from Arnold, PA to 26^th St. in the Strip. 

There are just a couple of concerns that I think it is important to highlight.

Tarentum Bridge Stop:  One of the issues AVR has apparently taken with the current Commuter Rail study is the lack of a stop past the current end of track in Arnold, PA.  They want to extend the route, approximately a mile north along the river to a stop around the Tarentum Bridge.    

While I don’t have a problem with this in theory, geography makes implementation tricky, and probably expensive.  The east side of the Allegheny River under the bridge is just a thin strip of flat land, with a steep hillside to one side and the river to the other.  There is enough land for at least one track, as this is the former PRR Railroad Allegheny Division right of way.  The tracks are gone, but the right of way is still intact.  However, there is little room for a station with parking and multiple tracks.  Additionally, gaining auto access to this strip of land would be challenging.  If the designers envision direct access from the Tarentum bridge (which I am guessing they will), steep ramps will have to be built from the bridge.  These ramps will need to provide enough clearance for Tugs to operate underneath them.  It can be done, but it would be expensive.  Again, there is no word whether this cost is included in the $228 million figure quoted in the Trib/Post Gazette. 

Another option that could be used would be to either make an access road off of Lower Braeburn Road in Lower Burrell or move the station further north so that it would be situated at the bottom of Lower Braeburn Road.  Both of these have potential issues as well.  I am still not sure there’s enough room underneath the bridge itself for a station, even without using ramps off of the bridge.  Also, with the second option, you will lose the convenience option.  I am betting they are trying to capitalize on the ease of travel to the Tarentum Bridge and therefore maximize on ridership.  If people have to drive out of their way to get to a station that is isolated by geography then there is no real reason to spend the money to put it there.

26^th St. Intermodal Terminal:  26^th Street is a decision point for the AVR.  They will either keep to their ROW to 16^th street, or leave their right of way at 26^th St, travel at grade on 26^th street and join the Busway on the far side of Liberty.  

If the latter is chosen, this point could become particularly important.  According to this idea, an intermodal terminal would be built at 26^th street and the AVR would possibly interchange with an LRT line coming up from downtown (don’t ask me how this would happen…)

The nearby property owners will become important in this instance.  A light rail vehicle can’t just hang a left at an intersection and the Strip is filled with dense development..  To get an idea of what it takes to turn a light rail vehicle, see the below map.

View Larger Map

  Land will have to be acquired and buildings potentially demolished.  This is sure to meet with resistance from local business/property owners.  This will add to the already expensive costs of terminal facility construction in an urban environment.

Right of Way Construction:

One advantage that AVR has is that of an existing ROW.  (ahh the joys of existing infrastructure).  They already own the property and the tracks.  All they have to do is upgrade it.  They will have to add stations, passing sidings, signaling, and probably upgrade the road crossing protection over what they currently have.  While still expensive, the hard part (ROW acquisition) is already taken care of. 

That is until…

you get to 26^th St. 

As discussed before, the AVR may elect to continue using their right of way and easement to reach 16^th St.  If this is the case, while not ideal for operations it is ideal from a cost standpoint. 

The other option would be to operate at grade on 26^th St. across Liberty where it would run on (or alongside) the Busway to the Penn Center Station and onto Steel Plaza.  This option could end up being very costly, and may not be physically feasible at all. 

View Larger Map

As I alluded to earlier, a train doesn’t turn on a dime.  The line would have to curve to meet 26^th St, and again, would probably have to cross a privately owned parking lot.  The AVR would then need permission to dig up the entirety of 26^th Street to lay rail.  This would involve closing off Liberty Ave and Penn Ave to dig up the pavement and lay rails. 

I don’t know the timeframe for how long these roads would have to be disrupted for or the cost to install rails and update the traffic control equipment (both for auto traffic and trains). 

The going gets tougher once across Liberty Ave.  There is currently a bridge across the NS Pittsburgh Line that buses use to access the Busway.  There is a grade after Liberty to get over this bridge.  If trains are to use this they must make sure the grade is not too steep to operate.  They also have to ensure that the bridge is rated.  Remember, Light Rail is a relative term (River LINE style cars are approx 20 tons) and they are crossing a highway style bridge.  Assuming those requirements are met the ramp will have to be dug up and tracks laid.

The next challenge is the Busway itself.  After having to emplace a hard right hand curve at the Busway end of the bridge, the line will have to deal with the Busway itself.  This is not privately owned and is owned by the Port Authority.  They must agree to allow tracks to be put into place on their route.  (There is also no indication whether PAT will or won’t be responsible for operating this AVR service).  Again, IF PAT agrees to this request, the Busway will have to be torn up and tracks laid.   As the route would near the Penn Center Station, there is more room and the two routes could operate parallel to each other. 

An additional problem would face this proposal south of the Penn Center Station.  Soon after the station, the T ROW into Steel Plaza goes underground and stays that way for the 1000 or so feet to Steel Plaza.  This would mean that diesel propulsion may not be practical.  At the very least cars would not be allowed to idle in Steel Plaza, and may not be able to be operated underground at all without an electrical back up or third rail system.  Although this would be a short distance requirement, it still would mean additional infrastructure and vehicle costs.  Also, tracks would have to be re-laid because of gauge difference. 

A final construction issue is future T service to the East.  I know it’s a pipe dream, but there has always been talk of making the East Busway into a T line.  Right now that possibility will always be there.  If you built a different gauge line in from the East, you are removing that possibility. 

It’s clear there are some challenges.  I like the idea of the line going all the way to Steel Plaza.  This line is unlikely to ever be able to link in with a like mode of transportation.  Giving people ready access to the T and East Busway to get elsewhere in the city is critical if this service is going to succeed.  It’ seems as though construction is feasible.  The question right now is; is it practical?  

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.

Trainapalooza

In a town where transit related articles aren't always easy to come by, I got probably a little more excited than I should have to see three separate articles about commuter/HSR relating to Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania. I'll write more (especially about the HSR entries) in a later post, but just to get them all out there, here they are in no particular order:

Commuter Rail: In an apparent reversal from a previous article in the Post Gazette, the Greensburg line is apparently not dead. Additionally, the costs estimates came back less than expected(sweet). I'm still not sure how many more studies must be taken but at $208 million, these lines look like a steal (Thank you existing infrastructure). Also, for anyone interested, public comment will be held June 29th in Greensburg, and June 30th in New Ken. Hours for both are 6-9 PM.

HSR:
The Pittsburgh to Cleveland Connection: It's been stated by other bloggers that it would make better sense for Pittsburgh to connect to Cleveland (and Chicago) before it connects across the state to Philadelphia and Harrisburg. I for one, agree, and apparently so does Jason Altmire. In a meeting yesterday he said that a link between Pittsburgh and Cleveland is a "missing link" to Obama's proposed HSR system. Apparently, a connection between the two cities would be eligible for funding... however, before they can think about any corridor, they must begin to work on it. Leading us to our third trainapalooza article...

A slow start to HSR: California and several other corridors have a jump start on us for HSR funding. Although Philly to Pittsburgh has been designated an HSR corridor, that's about the only thing that has happened. Jason Altmire wants to take steps forward to begin working towards HSR corridors to and through Pittsburgh, although no concrete steps have been outlined.

Connect '09 Recommendations Announced

The results of the Port Authority's Connect '09 study have been released. The report has not been uploaded to the website yet, but it should be soon, as the Post Gazette and Trib both have stories detailing the findings.

The report focused on three main options to improve efficiency and service (in no particular order): The Grid system, Better Radial System and Better Radial "Plus"; all of which are designed to reduce costs while increasing efficiency and ridership.

The "Grid System" idea was axed pretty quickly because it involved a number of feeder routes to existing separated grade lines, such as the T or East/West Busway. It was determined that this would not generate the needed ridership, and would also increase costs and lead to increased fares. (This is a shame, I think this concept has promise if you have a robust enough backbone system to support such operations. Think Chicago or Boston)

The "Better Radial System" is still in the running. This system maintains Downtown and Oakland as urban "hubs" and concentrates on moving people to these two hubs. As a result, some service would focus on moving people primarily to Oakland (thus bypassing Downtown) and moving others primarily to Downtown (thus bypassing Oakland). This would ultimately speed service to those hubs by reducing the number of buses and routes that have to get stuck in Downtown traffic BEFORE getting to Oakland, and visa verse.

The third system, known as The "Better Radial System PLUS" involves the changes outlined in the Better Radial System, and also involves a number of significant improvements to bus service. In my mind, this is the best choice of the two remaining choices, however, it will involve more investment to get it running than the "Better Radial System".

• "Rapid" Bus Service: 61 series, 71 series and 500 would become like a "BRT light" system used by other transit authorities. Changes would include dedicated lanes where possible, priority signaling at intersections, upgraded stations, and "limited" service (A reduction in number of stops). This operation would be similar to Los Angeles Metro's "Rapid" service.
• 28X, more of an "Xpress": Right now, the 28X Oakland to Airport service has a slow meandering route to the airport that includes a number of stops in Robinson Town Center. Operational changes under this idea would have the 28X bypass Robinson Town Center, slashing transit time to the airport. RTC access would be provided by extending the current 100 route.
• More bus only lanes: This service concept would provide for bus only lanes (like 5th Ave in Oakland), and priority signaling wherever possible.

Universal Changes proposed include:

• Reduce the 16,000 stops on the Port Authority system by a significant number (The actual number, I believe will be determined by another round of studies)
• Eliminate variations of a single route
• Route number overhaul (YES!) which would change many bus route numbers and get rid of the antiquated T route numbering system completely in favor of a color coded system.
• Construction of new park and ride facilities.
• Downtown routes would centralize on fewer streets with fewer stops, with the goal of simplifying operations and improving efficiency.
• Creation of "transit centers" throughout Allegheny County in areas where several routes converge, i.e. RTC or East Liberty. These centers would have updated schedule information, as well as a climate controlled environment.

Overall, not too shabby, there's nothing glaringly wrong with this plan. I also like the basic premise, transit improvements on a budget, making the most out of the system we and resources we have Right Now.

I know this study was based on things we can change right now, but I still would like to see a capital improvement plan that would, ohhhh I don't know, get us an integrated separated grade transit system (See any recurring themes here?)

Reaching for the Stars

Today's Post Gazette and Tribune Review* had an article about an ambitious (that would be an understatement) plan for rail service in Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. Dan Onorato is requesting a total of $17.5million dollars for this plan. $10.5 million of this request is to get the New Ken to Pittsburgh commuter rail plan off the ground, and $7 million is to begin studies on an LRT link to the airport, an LRT link to Oakland (could it be...the Spine Line completed??!!!) along with a "people mover" system to connect Pittsburgh's neighborhoods.

Wow, that's a lot, and if you scroll down further through the article you will find that the price tag for all this is a measly $3.5 Billion. Mr. Onorato feels that now is the time to act and take advantage of the "...sea change of philosophy in Washington." He has requested the help of Reps Mike Doyle, and Jason Altmire, an outspoken transit proponent to secure this money.

First of all, however realistic this plan is or how likely the funding is to occur, I've gotta hand it to the guy, I like the way he thinks. A world class city deserves world class transportation.

My idealistic side thinks that Dan Onorato and Jason Altmire are forward thinkers who have a great vision of what transportation and transit should be in the region and are willing to go for it.

However, my pragmatic side has to get his side of the story in. Does anyone really believe that this will happen? I like just about everything that Dan Onorato is quoted as saying in this article. However, history is not on his side. Additionally, people didn't like the $500 million for the NSC, do you think they will it like if you change the M to a B? I know that Pittsburgh would get so much more out of this project than the NSC, but I think the average tax payer is only looking at the price tag, and not what you're getting for the price.

Having said that, there are a lot of options here. If Pittsburgh could just get one of the "options" discussed by Dan Onorato, it would be great. I would take a "people mover", I would take a downtown to Oakland LRT, and I would even take an LRT line to the airport.

For now, I'm happy for what we've got. By that I mean, I'm glad we've got at least two progressive leaders who are taking steps to improve mobility, and actively improve our city, and our region.

*Just Kidding! The Trib doesn't actually cover transit, unless it's to bash the NSC.

A Piece of Good News, No Matter How You Look at It.

The Trib had an article a few weeks ago about potential development for the former LTV Steel site in Hazelwood. I have wanted to write about it for sometime, but there has been a lot of other transit related news to discuss. Check out the article here.

In a nutshell, Bombardier, whose people mover division (think the subway on tires at the airport, or skybus) is located in West Mifflin wants to put a test track at the Hazelwood site. That's good news for a couple of reasons.

#1: If this proposal is to take place it represents re-development of a former brownfield site within the City of Pittsburgh. Re-development is good. Re-development within the City of Pittsburgh is even better. Additionally, it is an investment in the future. With the recent re-investment in transportation systems both in the U.S. and abroad, the indication is that this test facility and West Mifflin factory, and all the jobs that go with those two would be here to stay for the foreseeable future.

#2. From a transit/transportation perspective, this could makes Pittsburgh look good. To have a test facility for future transit projects increases Pittsburgh's standing in the transit world, and perhaps, down the road, could lead to future transit investments in Pittsburgh, either by Bombardier, or other transit/transportation companies. I realize I am being optimistic, and that generally optimism is pretty dangerous, but sometimes it just feels good.

Now for the reality/common sense check. First this isn't finalized yet. Obviously, negotiations between the city (URA) and Bombardier must take place. After that, they still have to get the proper permits to begin construction.

Additionally, the third last paragraph just doesn't make sense. Apparently, someone from the URA had the foresi...delusion to request that Bombardier "...eventually connect it with a transit system that links the site with the Pittsburgh Technology Park in Oakland and to Downtown".

Whaaaa?????? Did I miss something? Are we going to give the skybus another shot? All indications are that this will be a rubber tire people mover TEST track i.e. a CLOSED LOOP. Additionally, a rubber tire people mover is completely incompatible with any other mode of transit currently used by the Port Authority. Even if this is a steel rail test track, it is very unlikely that it will be compatible with Pittsburgh's current LRT system, or that it would be compatible with a heavy rail commuter service.

I would agree that whatever facility they build should have access to public transit, be it bus, or a commuter rail line, but I sincerely hope they are not suggesting that they take this system and attempt to extend it to Oakland or Downtown, thus creating yet another form of transportation that doesn't really go anywhere or connect to anything. ugh.

Just let them build it and be happy about the development.

The Keystone Corridor

I'm pretty sure just about anyone who reads this blog is interested in transportation/transit topics and has probably already seen via the Post Gazette, Trib, or numerous other blogs that the Obama Administration has officially unveiled the plan for a National HSR (High Speed Rail) system.

Pennsylvania is in the running for funds to build a connection between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg which would complete a HSR corridor between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.

A couple quick thoughts on my part:

-I want better Amtrak service than what we have now. The route over the Alleghenies (owned and operated by NS) is not the best route right now for HSR. It's heavily trafficked, and has many curves and steep grades. Couldn't we connect to Cleveland with HSR, and add more "standard" trains with better scheduling east to Harrisburg and beyond? I'm not saying don't throw money into upgrading the current route and adding trains. I'm saying significant upgrades could be made to the current route without making it an HSR route (at least for now). For the larger picture, this would free up more money for projects that are closer to reality (California for example) and still provide Pittsburgh area residents with an alternative to an expensive flight or a long drive.

-Having said all of that; I will gladly take any HSR funding that comes our way, and if I were given the opportunity to ride to Philadelphia on an HSR train, I would welcome it.

-Also, I think it's ridiculous to even mention the MAGLEV in the same sentence as this HSR plan as the Post Gazette has done. This plan is in no way shape or form supposed to give a Pittsburgh MAGLEV money, and I think to even entertain the thought is to invite trouble and slow down the process of doling out the money. I will say that a MAGLEV from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia would be incredible, and a great advancement. However, I say, take what you can get when you can get it. We are in the running for HSR funding, let's go for that instead. Not to mention, I can't imagine the ungodly price tag for such an animal.

The Maglev again??? Are you freakin' kidding me!!???

I was perusing the land of transit-hate known as The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, and found a very interesting, and I have to say disturbing article about the Pittsburgh Maglev project. This project that somehow seems to cling to life is ready to receive another shot in the arm.

Before I bash this project (and I will), I will tell you that I am not against MAGLEV technology. It's potential to move people between cities cleanly and VERY quickly (in excess of 200MPH) is very attractive. I also think that the fact that the main proponent company named MAGLEV Inc. is local company in McKeepsort is great as well.

The only problem is, the Maglev is a TERRIBLE idea for a local rapid transit. It's incredibly expensive, and I think would be a better application over a long distance route (from Pittsburgh to Philly.)

According to an article in the Pittsburgh Business times from '07, the last cost estimate done for the project was done in 2003, and at that point it was over $3 Billion for the 54 mile proposed line. If we all know anything about transit cost estimates, is that they tend to run over, just a little bit. They run over even more during times when material costs are high. Just look at the NSC (North Shore Connector), three years ago it was supposed to cost $435 Million, barely 3 years later, the cost is now $552 million.

Imagine the inflation on $3 Billion over 6 years. That's assuming that they start tomorrow. Who knows the actual date that construction would begin. By that point, more years could elapse and more inflation could occur.

Price alone should not necessarily kill the project, but look at what you are getting for the cost. You are getting a single route from Greensburg to the airport, with stops in Monroeville, Downtown, and the airport. Just how many people would really need to take the trip to the airport these days? Flights are waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyy down. The only real potential would be as a service to daily commuters from Greensburg, and perhaps from the airport (but I can't say how much of a market there really is for that) It could certainly attract riders in that capacity, but I don't know if that would outweigh the costs. The way the route is set up, I don't really see an additional value to it. Additionally, if it is only operating in this capacity, how much money is wasted by not operating during off-peak or off rush hour time periods?

There is enough transit half-assery in Pittsburgh already. You've got a number of incomplete and non-integrated( The T, and Busways that don't interconnect in any way) modes of transit already in place in Pittsburgh. We don't need a $3 Billion + addition to that list. Additionally, we've already spent a half a BILLION dollars to get across the Allegheny River. Do we really want to call that good enough? In my mind, and like I said in my post yesterday, one of the few silver linings about the NSC is at least it could be a spring board for expanding the T into the North Hills, or in the general direction of the airport. There is a limited chance that would take place if the NSC were the only major project, but there is a ZERO chance if the NSC was competing with a multi-billion dollar project in the Maglev.

I like the Maglev, its a great concept for intercity travel, but it's the wrong form of transportation at the wrong time in Pittsburgh.

Goodbye Joe Grata

While working on my holiday gluttony, I was surprised to see in the weekly "Getting Around" column on PostGazette.com that Joe Grata was going to hang it up!

He has offered about the only regular insightful, really transit/transportation focused writing in Pittsburgh since I have been here (on and off since 1999). It's weird to say it, but I took his writing for granted and was shocked to see him go, especially so quickly. I guess the Internet is catching up with the printed word, and the Post Gazette has offered him (as well as some other "big names" like Bob Smizik) a buyout and early retirement, and he accepted.

He was influential to me, reading his weekly columns really helped me to decide to start muddling my way through blogging. Additionally, in my mind he offered the only real qualified transportation/transit analysis in the region (among real paid writers). Much better than The Tribune-Review's answer to everything transit of "privatize 'em and let 'em sink or swim."

I don't know if the column will continue, or if it will fall by the wayside. I don't believe much, or anything has been said about it. It would be a shame to discontinue the column. Transportation/transit issues would lose one of their few legitimate voices, and it would be a slight to his hard work and insight over the years.

If nothing else, I personally appreciate his work, and will miss his keen insight on transit/transportation issues in the region.

Read his final column here

How to Spell Relief: AFL-CIO

I know this is old news by now, but like most Americans I took some time out to give thanks for all the privileges and luxuries I have as an American by nearly eating myself into a coma.

In a surprise turn of events, even as it seemed some sort of work stoppage was inevitable, both sides of the labor dispute, with the help of the AFL-CIO, were able to hammer out a contract in Washington D.C. I won't go into details on the story, legitimate news media such as The Trib and Post Gazette have done that sufficiently enough.

There are however, a few points that I find interesting, and that I hope more information will come to light about.

#1. The involvement of the AFL-CIO. Not too much has been said about this other than they really brokered the deal. This is surprising because they do not normally become involved in individual contract disputes, let alone help broker a deal. Joe Grata of the Post Gazette assumed that if the imposed contract were to hold up in court (which they must have thought it would have) it would have huge implications for organized labor in America. I think that is pretty plausible, in addition to an over-all environment in the U.S. that is not terribly friendly towards unions right now. People who are struggling to hold jobs for little money don't have alot of sympathy for bus drivers making $50,000 + a year, for example.

#2. The terms. Not too much has been said about the terms of the contract, and that is understandable because the contract hasn't been presented to the union members yet. Nonetheless, I'll be interested to see how close to the fact finder's recommendations the proposed contract is. Up until now, I've been pretty impressed with the way the Port Authority has handled the whole thing, not giving in to Union posturing about "we've negotiated to get to this point, we're not moving back" yada yada yada. It would be a shame if they threw it all away at the last moment just to avert a work stoppage. To me, that would serve as a textbook example of why we do not move forward as a region. It's early to be so pessimistic, and we will see when the actual terms come out.

The initial news is good, obviously, there will be no work stoppage. Hopefully the Port Authority can use this contract as a foundation to right the ship, and help to bring about the end of business as usual within the Port Authority and Allegheny County agencies.

Strike Update

Well, just like everyone who is interested in Pittsburgh transit/transportation issues (and of course people who rely on public transportation) I've been following the goings on with a lock-out/strike/work stoppage/whatever you want to call it pretty closely.

Alot's happened in the last 24-48 hours, so here we go:

Pat McMahon's a tv star:

What better way to spend a sunday afternoon, than by watching PCNC? I was suprised to see an interview with Pat McMahon concerning the looming strike. I attempted to find a link to the video on the internet, but god forbid they post that, it makes alot more sense and is much more relevent to the citizens of Allegheny County to instead post a video featuring "The World's Sexiest Man".

Nothing too earth shattering really, other than the fact it was nice to see him squirm.
No seriously, he looked as though at any moment he would break into hysterical tears and run off the set.

Priceless...

Aside from that entertaining bit, he stuck to the party line, we've negotiated to get to this point, we don't want to take a step backward, bla bla bla. The one note of interest was the fact that he brought up the trust fund to pay for retirees healthcare. I had heard about this as an alternate proposal, but don't know the details. At face value, I don't see a problem with a trust fund, but I don't know how much or if the union is looking for the Port Authority to kick in.

Someone let me know if you can find an actual link on the internet.

Meeting Canceled:

-ATU 85 was supposed to have a meeting yesterday concerning the looming work stoppage, but as the Post Gazette reported, the meeting was canceled. It apparently had something to do with an emergency meeting for Pat McMahon, and Steve Bland in Washington, D.C. More to follow on that.

-The Trib is reporting that because the meeting has been delayed, the stoppage has been temporarily avoided. The doomsday clock has been slowed, but is still ticking. Even if they stave off a work stoppage for the foreseeable future, the fact still remains that the Port Authority will run out of money in January and the employees will be laid off anyway.

Mr. Bland and Mr. McMahon go to Washington:

-As I talked about earlier, the meeting by the local ATU 85 has been temporarily canceled because of an emergency trip to Washington to discuss negotiation options with the AFL-CIO. Apparently both men met seperately with the AFL-CIO.

According to Steve Bland, the meeting, at least from the Port Authority's perspective was more fact finding on the part of the AFL-CIO. Call me a skeptic, but to me this seems that this information is being gathered in hopes strenghtening the Union's position as opposed to legitmately helping to bring the two sides together for a solution. We'll see. Also, Pat McMahon is quoted in the article as saying that as of Dec. 1st the workers will not walk off the job. Again, we'll see.

This is the first time he has said they will not walk off the job Dec. 1st. Previously, he has hinted to the fact but not said it in a quote. I wonder why the slight change in tune. Maybe it's because the general climate is not terribly sympathetic to Unions, or if it is as a direct result of the meetings in Washington, purely heresay on my part.


The plot thickens...

Between a Rock and a Hard Place

I found an interesting article from the Tribune-Review, by way of MassTransitMag.com (which is a great site about current events in the transit world, by the way). It talks about how the North Shore Connector is a large investment for minimal gains.

I don't know about you, but it has always seemed pretty clear to me that the Trib is not terribly friendly towards mass transit and is even more unfriendly to the Port Authority. That's not to say that there is not merit to certain points they bring up. This is an example of that.

There have been many bastardizations since the Spine Line Corridor Study was published in 1993. The final product we have been left with is a nearly half billion dollar project that nets the "T" 1.2 miles, and two stops. Truly, the project is a huge expense, that does little to address the strategic needs of Pittsburgh's transit system.

On the other side of the coin, Federal funding the likes of which Pittsburgh has seen for this project does not come along often. The government was willing to pay for it, and we would be foolish to turn it down.

I guess the bigger question is where do we go from here? Dan "the Man" Onorato himself has said that we are unlikely to see such a large amount of government funding for another 25 years. Do we attempt any additional expansions at all? Do we try and get state funding? Do we attempt a cheaper expansion to the western suburbs? Do we attempt an expansion to the east?

Unfortunately, there are lots of questions and nothing that is easily answered. For now our best bet would be to maximize on what we are getting. The area around the casino could surely support my bro T.O.D. Other than that, I can tell you my commute to Stiller games will be alot easier!