ALMONO raising funds for Hazelwood LTV (Pittsburgh, Duquesne: live in, moving, transportation)

[PITairport]

I don't think the MFE is quite "dead" as much as just lacking funding, which is nothing new in the history of this project. Looking at the sketch, it looks like it may actually be included in there, unless that's another major road.

With half of it built, it would be stupid not to complete the MFE. There should be room for both this project and the highway. The developers and Turnpike Commission would be silly not to work together on this. It would be best for the long term, as if funding does become available to finish the MFE in the decades ahead, the end result could be worse for both this development and the highway. Just because this would be a new development does not make it immune to eminent domain.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by PITairport

I don't think the MFE is quite "dead" as much as just lacking funding, which is nothing new in the history of this project.

You can't really kill an idea, but not only is it unfunded, there is no interest among many key putative stakeholders in getting it funded.

Looking at the sketch, it looks like it may actually be included in there, unless that's another major road.

There are no highways in the plan. If you are looking along the river, that is something they are calling the Blair River Road. Up on the hill is the existing Irvine.

Generally they were quite explicit about this in the PBT article. Previous master plans for the ALMONO site had contingency planning for the possibility of the MFE coming through. This one assumes it will not.

With half of it built, it would be stupid not to complete the MFE.

Wasting billions more just because you have already wasted billions is not a good argument. The MFE would destroy a lot of key land value, undermine existing communities in its path, and there are much better ways to accomplish its nominal goals.

There should be room for both this project and the highway.

Highways destroy land value not only directly where they actually go but also in wide swaths alongside them. The development areas along the Mon in the planned path of the MFE are relatively narrow, and so it would destroy a very large portion of their value.

The developers and Turnpike Commission would be silly not to work together on this.

The developers should ignore the Turnpike Commission as irrelevant at this point, and fortunately as I noted once these developments move forward it will become clear to all concerned that the MFE is not only dead, but cremated and scattered to the winds.

Just because this would be a new development does not make it immune to eminent domain.

Not legally immune, but politically. The limited interests that would be served by completing the MFE would have no chance of outweighing the much larger interests in preventing it, particularly given the ungodly cost of the project even before considering how it would destroy all this land value.

[BrianTH]

Here are more details on the ALMONO master plan (gloriously free of the monstrosity known as the MFE):

Rothschild Doyno Collaborative

[PITairport]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Wasting billions more just because you have already wasted billions is not a good argument. The MFE would destroy a lot of key land value, undermine existing communities in its path, and there are much better ways to accomplish its nominal goals.

The Mon Valley economy IS destroyed, including land values relative to the rest of the region. I love it when the anti-highway crowd state it would devastate the Mon Valley communities.. when they already were devastated without the highway.

Other nonsense is that it would "cut off" the communities, often said by the Braddock mayor, when in fact Braddock is already cut in half by rail and the busway - the very mode of transportation preferred by the anti-highway crowd.

You're argument seems centered around land value. No mention of the fact it adds jobs to the area and economic vitality. With the planned interchange at the Rankin Bridge, Braddock would be a 5 minute commute to downtown, and would immediately be more attractive to commuters who prefer to drive; some of whom may now consider the area as a place to live while they otherwise would not without the highway.

If housing values are the concern, the best way to fix that is to make the area attractive to live.

Highways destroy land value not only directly where they actually go but also in wide swaths alongside them. The development areas along the Mon in the planned path of the MFE are relatively narrow, and so it would destroy a very large portion of their value.

Its not only about the land value along the highway, but in the entire Mon Valley region, and as a whole it would increase as jobs are increased and the area becomes more attractive to buy real estate as access to the region is greatly increased.

The development area for new development may indeed be narrow due to topography, but its not only about new development, its also about redevelopment of existing areas and the positive impact of a new highway can be felt miles away.

Not legally immune, but politically. The limited interests that would be served by completing the MFE would have no chance of outweighing the much larger interests in preventing it, particularly given the ungodly cost of the project even before considering how it would destroy all this land value.

History has showed this is not the case, as this argument was put forth all along, but yet somehow sections of the MFE have been built.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by PITairport

The Mon Valley economy IS destroyed, including land values relative to the rest of the region. I love it when the anti-highway crowd state it would devastate the Mon Valley communities.. when they already were devastated without the highway.

It is possible to go from bad to worse. And with smart investments in transportation infrastructure, we could start a recovery process along the Mon. The MFE, however, would be disasterously counter-productive.

Other nonsense is that it would "cut off" the communities, often said by the Braddock mayor, when in fact Braddock is already cut in half by rail and the busway - the very mode of transportation preferred by the anti-highway crowd.

Limited-access multi-lane highways have a very different impact from rail lines or Busways.

You're argument seems centered around land value.

No, the argument would start with the observation you are talking about wasting many billions of dollars. The fact it also would destroy a lot of land value helps explain why that would in fact be a waste. But yes, you can't separate out transportation policy and land-use policy.

No mention of the fact it adds jobs to the area and economic vitality.

Any economic stimulative effect could be better achieved with projects that would cost less, serve many more transportation needs, support rather than undermine existing communities, and destroy a lot less land value.

With the planned interchange at the Rankin Bridge, Braddock would be a 5 minute commute to downtown

It would be about 9-10 miles from Braddock to Downtown. Apparently you are assuming people would be travelling at 120 MPH during their commutes.

If housing values are the concern, the best way to fix that is to make the area attractive to live.

Right, and people don't like to live right next to limited-access highways. So, part of making these areas more attractive for housing will include not wasting billions on pushing limited-access highways through them.

Its not only about the land value along the highway, but in the entire Mon Valley region

Again, there are cheaper and better ways to provide better transportation infrastructure for the Mon Valley.

and the area becomes more attractive to buy real estate as access to the region is greatly increased.

Limited-access urban radial highways promote greenfield development farther out along their path while undermining the existing communities they cut through on their way into core area. So only if you actually want to encourage sprawl and keep the existing communities in the region depressed would the MFE be your preferred option.

The development area for new development may indeed be narrow due to topography, but its not only about new development, its also about redevelopment of existing areas

If you care about redeveloping existing areas, a limited-access highway is a horrible choice.

and the positive impact of a new highway can be felt miles away.

Right, many, many miles away--aka, sprawl. Certainly there are stakeholders far from the existing communities of the Mon Valley who have long been licking their chops at the idea of the MFE.

History has showed this is not the case, as this argument was put forth all along, but yet somehow sections of the MFE have been built.

The parts of the MFE that got built were the ones going through areas where there wasn't as much land value to destroy, nor powerful incumbent stakeholders to protect that value. If you had to blow those sections through Oakland or Squirrel Hill, it would never have happened. And so the Oaklandization of the ALMONO site will in fact prevent this disaster from occurring.

[eschaton]

I have to agree with BrianTH here.

If you look at Pittsburgh, it's hard to argue the highways have been anything but a disaster for the city itself. Whole neighborhoods were destroyed (Schweitzer Lock), while others had their hearts ripped out (East Allegheny). The Northside in general would be in far better shape if they had found some way to redirect the highways in such a manner they didn't effectively block off downtown pedestrian access.

As to the broader point, I think it's hard to argue that Braddock and the like will be improved. Generally speaking, people don't want five-minute highway commutes. Instead, the people who are used to 30-minute commutes will be more likely to relocated down the MFE to somewhere where they can still have a 30 minute commute, but will be much further removed (for example, West Mifflin to Cecil Township).

I feel like the plans to have a southern ring road were by far worse however. The last thing we should want as a region is to make it easy to commute from suburb to suburb while bypassing the urban core entirely, as it usually presages the death of a downtown. Despite all of Pittsburgh's decline and now revival, Downtown has been an essentially stable employment center for 60+ years at the very least.

[BrianTH]

Bottomline is this issue is now moot--the MFE is unfunded, it isn't part of our regional transportation plan (which would have to happen before it could get funded), and developing these areas will make it impossible to resurrect.

[PITairport]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

It is possible to go from bad to worse. And with smart investments in transportation infrastructure, we could start a recovery process along the Mon. The MFE, however, would be disasterously counter-productive.

I think that the recovery of the Mon Valley would have started long ago if it had the expressway. Has Rt. 28 been a hinderence to the Allegheny Valley? I wouldn't think so.

Limited-access multi-lane highways have a very different impact from rail lines or Busways.

I'm referring to the physical barrier that the rail lines and busway have put on Braddock and Swissvale. The neighborhood has been cut in half, and both sides are isolated from each other as there are very few crossover points.


I think it is disingenuous of the non-highway supporters to suggest that Braddock and other communities would be cut in half by the highway - when they already are. The fact that Braddock is sliced and isolated from itself by a bus way of all things is some poetic justice for the highway supporters.

No, the argument would start with the observation you are talking about wasting many billions of dollars. The fact it also would destroy a lot of land value helps explain why that would in fact be a waste.

Well to be clear I said it would be stupid not to finish it, not that spending billions to finish it would be a waste.

And again, I really doubt overall property values would be destroyed by this in the big picture (meaning the entire Mon Valley), especially since they are already in the tank. We're not talking Beverly Hills here.

It would be about 9-10 miles from Braddock to Downtown. Apparently you are assuming people would be travelling at 120 MPH during their commutes.

You've never been in a car with me

But seriously, my point remains. It would open up Braddock to an easy commute, and this alone would put it on peoples consideration list when it would otherwise not be.

I have nothing against mass transit. The reality is many middle income folks don't want to step on a PAT bus. If some of these people were to move to the Mon Valley, it would diversify the demographics more, and I think that is a good way to revitalize a neighborhood... and thereby increase property value.

Right, and people don't like to live right next to limited-access highways. So, part of making these areas more attractive for housing will include not wasting billions on pushing limited-access highways through them.

"Right" next to the highway? I agree. But near the highway, sure they do. They want that access. Plus, its not only about where people want to live, its also about where business want to locate.

Limited-access urban radial highways promote greenfield development farther out along their path while undermining the existing communities they cut through on their way into core area. So only if you actually want to encourage sprawl and keep the existing communities in the region depressed would the MFE be your preferred option.

I don't think that would be the case with the MFE because there is very little greenfield space left along the missing link. So if businesses south of Pittsburgh want to have access to the highway, they will have to settle for the existing Mon Valley towns.

Right, many, many miles away--aka, sprawl..

There's that ugly six letter word again. Sprawl to me means having a 1/2 acre lot in the suburbs. People vote with their feet. Sprawl happens because people make a CHOICE, and many if not most want to live in the suburbs instead of the city center.

As for transportation planning - transportation should be planned to provide for the will of the people, not people planning to live and work to the will of the transportation planers.

And so the Oaklandization of the ALMONO site will in fact prevent this disaster from occurring.

Pittsburgh is definitely a revitalized city, and so I believe the inner neighborhoods such as Hazlewood and Homestead will be revitalized with or without the MFE. But its the others I'm worried about, such as McKeesport and down from there. I really don't think there will be an "Oaklandization" there.

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have to agree with BrianTH here.

If you look at Pittsburgh, it's hard to argue the highways have been anything but a disaster for the city itself. Whole neighborhoods were destroyed (Schweitzer Lock), while others had their hearts ripped out (East Allegheny). The Northside in general would be in far better shape if they had found some way to redirect the highways in such a manner they didn't effectively block off downtown pedestrian access.

As to the broader point, I think it's hard to argue that Braddock and the like will be improved. Generally speaking, people don't want five-minute highway commutes. Instead, the people who are used to 30-minute commutes will be more likely to relocated down the MFE to somewhere where they can still have a 30 minute commute, but will be much further removed (for example, West Mifflin to Cecil Township).

I feel like the plans to have a southern ring road were by far worse however. The last thing we should want as a region is to make it easy to commute from suburb to suburb while bypassing the urban core entirely, as it usually presages the death of a downtown. Despite all of Pittsburgh's decline and now revival, Downtown has been an essentially stable employment center for 60+ years at the very least.

I really don't think the highways have been a disaster for the city of Pittsburgh at all. Sure, when they are built things will need to be torn down, but that's true for any large scale urban construction project.

Based on this logic, Pittsburgh would have been better off without I-376 and I-279 too. If Pittsburgh didn't have any limited access highways, do you really think there would be one Fortune 500 company left downtown? These highways aren't one way; they bring people into the city too.

I'm not sure how the Northside has been blocked from pedestrian access from downtown. If anything it improved, as the Ft. Duquesne Bridge, part of the US interstate system, has a nice pedestrian bridge to Heinz Field.

[Impala26]

Sorry, but anyone who could prioritize the approx. four billion dollar MFE over the T "spine line" extention to Oakland which would cost in the one to 1.5 billion dollar range is just nuts to me. I remain unconvinced that the MFE would have any real significant impact on the Mon Valley towns. It would only lead to sprawl, yes "sprawl" of undeveloped greenfield sites in the Mon Valley region.

Face it, the math for the MFE does not add up at all.

[Evergrey]

Seconded BrianTH, eschaton and Impala26!

Now... let's talk about this enormous Hazelwood development and leave the never-to-be-completed MFX to another discussion thread. It's a bit frustrating when a topic gets sidetracked by a tertiary issue.

Mon-Fayette Expressway to open on July 11, 2011

Huge shock: Mon-Fayette Expressway is a disaster.