Extending the T (Pittsburgh, Washington, Denver: how much, transfer to, school)

[pman]

Originally Posted by bmantz65

The segment to Oakland was/is part of "The Spine Line" system which dates back to the 1960's and possibly earlier. Here is lots of information: The Spine Line

This 2006 report estimated an underground line to Oakland at $1.5 billion ($1.7 billion in today's money) and $2.5/2.7 billion to Wilkinsburg (and thus, a pretty easy connection to the East Busway): http://www.spcregion.org/ECTS/pdf/ta...l%20Report.pdf

Remember that the North Shore Connector used quite a bit of federal money and the same would have to happen for a line to Oakland. Locally there isn't much money and Pennsylvania is trying to figure out how to come up with money to maintain our existing infrastructure but it would be great to have more funding for transit capital projects such as the Oakland line.

I'd suggest that if a spine line were to be built that it should probably not use wilkinsburg for a transfer point but east liberty which would be far less track and tunnel and is a bigger intracity destination. perhaps a forbes ave surface trolley that runs forbes from downtown to oakland, then fifth through oakland, and shady to east liberty. over time he route can be improved as passenger loads dicate.
that mon valley proposal is atrocious. hazlewood to downtown via the strip? too bad they ripped out the old b&O.

[pman]

Originally Posted by ML North

This has been posted a bunch of times, but it's a relevant history of the Spine Line: Lost Tracks | Features | Pittsburgh City Paper

interesting is how little has really changed, in a sense, from the original proposal

city engineers Daniel L. Turner and Winters Haydock offered up their 1925 Report on A Recommended Subway in the First and Second Wards of Pittsburgh, or Proposed First Step in a Rapid Transit Program...Turner and Haydock's top priority? A route they called the "Fifth Avenue Line" -- a two-track subway line with 17 stops connecting the Central North Side to Downtown, Soho, Oakland, Shadyside and East Liberty.

that line still makes sense today, more so than the 2006 proposal. given that, maybe it IS worth doing one piece at a time, after all, Pittsburgh is still there, long after Turn and Haydock. in that sense, punch the T out one station stop under fifth ave...would you stop at consol or go straight to crawford-pride?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

This is part of why I like an extension along the Ohio. Allegheny Station's track is already facing that way and you still hit some wealthy suburanites, but you're creating a new usable corridor instead of basically laying tracks on the HOV lane. You also hit some areas in the city that could use the boost.

Yeah, going out to Sewickley would be pretty helpful. the Port Authority apparently has pretty good right-of-way) access all the way down the north bank as well. One of my coworkers actually has a friend who works for the Port Authority, and he said their original purpose for the North Shore extension was to get the T to the airport, but this was never announced, because Pittsburghers would think crossing the river twice was crazy (even though in terms of right-of-way it's actually cheaper for them).

That said, there would be some issues.

1. The string of city neighborhoods and boroughs (from Marshall-Shadeland to Emsworth) are all to one degree or another up on a bluff from the likely route along the river. Thus it wouldn't be incredibly convenient

2. I think taking it to Sewickley would require some backtracking to get to the airport. A line which crossed over at Neville or Coraopolis might make more sense.

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I'm sorry, even with some quick googling I still don't know what "CW" means? I could support an eastern expansion of the T, but not one that simply adds tracks to the busway. I do like the current bus system between downtown and Oakland though, aside from the lack of a dedicated bus lane along the entire route. During rush hour you're hard pressed to wait more than 3 or 4 minutes for a bus; I'd worry that rail expansion may carry more people but come less frequently.

CW = conventional wisdom.

The Port Authority, provided they got external funding, could save oodles of cash from a Pitt to Oakland T line. Oakland could be set up as a secondary hub similar to downtown. I think generally people will find bus to rail transfers far easier to deal with than bus-to-bus ones.

Here's a hypothetical line I just drew up. It's set up as a loop, which would allow the T to operate on busy city streets without taking up two lanes of traffic (and thus avoid being below ground except to get out of downtown). One downside would be it would be unidirectional, but a crossover point by McGee means if you want to get from Squirrel Hill to North Oakland you could get off the inbound and get on the outbound. A simpler route would turn onto Morewood and then go back down Fifth, but it wouldn't be useful for Squirrel Hill in that case, and there are a lot of Squirrel Hill to Oakland commuters.

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I don't think there are very many neglected areas along the existing T line. No doubt they would benefit from being connected to Oakland, but most places along the T are pretty nice as-is. Beechview and the southern bit of Mt. Washington are the only two I can think of that could use a little love and might also attract students. If anything I'd expect students to try to cram into Dormont primarily.

Well, I was also thinking they could reopen the Brown line one day, which would help the Southern Hilltop greatly.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Here's a hypothetical line I just drew up. It's set up as a loop, which would allow the T to operate on busy city streets without taking up two lanes of traffic (and thus avoid being below ground except to get out of downtown).

That looks just great. Please make it happen.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Yeah, going out to Sewickley would be pretty helpful. the Port Authority apparently has pretty good right-of-way) access all the way down the north bank as well. One of my coworkers actually has a friend who works for the Port Authority, and he said their original purpose for the North Shore extension was to get the T to the airport, but this was never announced, because Pittsburghers would think crossing the river twice was crazy (even though in terms of right-of-way it's actually cheaper for them).

That said, there would be some issues.

1. The string of city neighborhoods and boroughs (from Marshall-Shadeland to Emsworth) are all to one degree or another up on a bluff from the likely route along the river. Thus it wouldn't be incredibly convenient

2. I think taking it to Sewickley would require some backtracking to get to the airport. A line which crossed over at Neville or Coraopolis might make more sense.

Just looking at a map, Sewickley seems perfectly aligned with the airport. I'm not sure how the topography comes into play, though.

Yeah, literally following the Ohio right along the river bank wouldn't be too useful even though it would probably provide for faster speeds. I think it would be worth sacrificing a little bit of speed and even the separate right of way in order to follow the surface roads, though. It would allow for a lot more car free living and probably would have higher ridership.

I like the map you put together for Oakland. I could get behind that since it's not duplicating the busway, especially if the T gets a dedicated lane. Still, the NSC stub feels so incomplete right now.

[Goinback2011]

Isn't the proposal to have a T line run North?

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Goinback2011

Isn't the proposal to have a T line run North?

Yes, here is the more detailed article on it from the first page of this thread:

The Next Page: Go north, light rail - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Printer friendly

[wkw427]

I believe I saw a google maps link here on another thread from some time ago that showed the T branching out along the east busway, 28, north hov lane, and west busway to the airport, as well as a kennywood line and spine line..

Would be so nice if they actually went through with all of that. That way they could rebuild the incline on Troy Hill and have a station above/under 28

[Geeo]

While it's nice to dream, the reality is that these projects will not be built in our lifetime. The feds have cut back in funding projects like this, the state isn't going to do it, so if we want it, we'll have to do what Denver did and add an additional sales tax to pay for the construction. It's not cheap. But the folks in Denver saw the need for the future and voted for the tax and now they're building rail in several corridors.

[wkw427]

Here is the one I was talking about, it was posted here a while ago

Future Pittsburgh T Lines - Google Maps

By far the best propesition I have seen. Replace a bunch of the conjested roads and busways with light rail. . . .YES PLEASE