Pittsburgh's "popularity" a problem? (Houston, Atlantic: to buy, income, to live in)

[Tirade]

Originally Posted by Sahsyd_steve

This just makes me chuckle, sorry. People will complain all day about sitting in gridlock on the "obvious" routes but never consider alternatives. From Brookline, if 51 is congested (penndot has cameras and google maps has real time traffic so no reason for it to ever catch you off guard), go Pioneer to West Liberty to Warrington to Southern/Boggs to Sycamore/William (or the right lane of the tunnel) to Carson. Jump on Sarah at 10th to bypass 15+ blocks of gridlock on Carson, sit through a cycle or two at Becks Run, then it's an easy trip up Streets Run or Mifflin Road . If it took you an hour to make that trip you only have yourself to blame. Not to mention the south busway which bypasses the most congested area on 51 and the routes reach most of the significant areas in West Mif.

I didn't take 51. The gridlock I ran into was on Baptist Road. It was my first time on that road, and I had no idea that it got as congested as it did. Obviously I will be avoiding that road in the future.

I did end up having a smooth and trouble-free ride home via Carson Street. I'll be sticking to that route in the future.

[pman]

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

On one recent 28X trip I took, the bus was not a standard city bus but more of a long-distance coach-style bus with smallish luggage racks above the seats. They weren't much, but they were more than you would otherwise find.

I've seen plenty of "normal" city buses being used for the 28X after that time, so I can't say if it's a trend.

from a cost and operational perspective it makes more sense just to have the route come from an equipment pool of identical buses and PAT is in no position to change that. I'd think the appropriate source of funds would be the airport or something like the gas funds.

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

Extending from Allegheny Station roughly along the Ohio and crossing around Sewickley would also work.

why would you extend the T to sewickly instead of working out a deal with NS to run service on existing right of way?

[Tiger Beer]

Originally Posted by Devout Urbanist

Building and expanding highways encourages people to drive. This is known as induced demand. If you expand or build a highway it might alleviate congestion temporarily, but eventually people will cluster in far-flung areas accessible by the highway or abandon other means of transportation in favor of driving, which simply increases congestion levels. Urban planners have known this for decades, but it is rarely taken into account in America. Put simply, if you make room for more cars on the road that is exactly what you will get.

This is why I love Pittsburgh! A city where people know this stuff.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by pman

Why would you extend the T to sewickly instead of working out a deal with NS to run service on existing right of way?

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Where does this NS track run? Could the current T cars make a seamless transition to the track or would you have to transfer before the NS track? What about delays caused by freight train traffic? That's a huge obstacle for Amtrak, causing hour long delays at times.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

On one recent 28X trip I took, the bus was not a standard city bus but more of a long-distance coach-style bus with smallish luggage racks above the seats. They weren't much, but they were more than you would otherwise find.

I've seen plenty of "normal" city buses being used for the 28X after that time, so I can't say if it's a trend.

In Houston, to go to the major airport George Bush, they use cruiser like buses with luggage storage underneath that you have to access from outside the bus. Their second airport Hobby is just serviced by regular buses. Houston doesn't have an LRT to their airports and it doesn't look like it's coming in the near future.

I don't see why it's so difficult. 100 years ago, they'd think nothing of putting in rail and trolley lines. Now it's a major job costing billions requiring federal funding and the Feds won't fund HRT...only LRT. 50 years ago they were putting in interstates and expressways everywhere. Now, putting in a beltway around Pittsburgh is next to impossible. We can't even afford to build grand buildings like they did in the past. It's like we're becoming paralyzed because we can't afford to build the infrastructure.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by MathmanMathman

It's like we're becoming paralyzed because we can't afford to build the infrastructure.

It's nuts. The rest of the world is passing us by. High speed rail, better broadband, etc. in other countries is eclipsing the USA. We won't spend the money to improve our infrastructure.

[LIRefugee]

Originally Posted by juliegt

It's nuts. The rest of the world is passing us by. High speed rail, better broadband, etc. in other countries is eclipsing the USA. We won't spend the money to improve our infrastructure.

It's short-term thinking, the fear of investment because it costs money and not all investments result in a positive result. Also, I think there is misguided idea that ALL investment needs to result in some sort of direct net monetary gain versus a general societal gain that can be difficult to quantity. In general I perceive a narrower and narrower focus on short term gain and a focus on maximizing profits alone, for all things - an obsession with money and its acquisition in and of itself. I think it will undermine our infrastructure, physical and otherwise, the longer this focus continues.

In Houston, to go to the major airport George Bush, they use cruiser like buses with luggage storage underneath that you have to access from outside the bus. Their second airport Hobby is just serviced by regular buses. Houston doesn't have an LRT to their airports and it doesn't look like it's coming in the near future.

Like Houston, I don't see LRT making it to PIT anytime soon, and if it ever does, it would be incremental steps (such as to Bellevue first, then Sewickley, then Moon, then around to the airport terminal). I see no reason, though, beyond lack of funding, that some sort of dedicated fleet of coach buses could be used for the 28X and nothing more. You would need to have a fleet of six or more, though, to keep the current schedule and have backup equipment.

[MathmanMathman]

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

It's short-term thinking, the fear of investment because it costs money and not all investments result in a positive result. Also, I think there is misguided idea that ALL investment needs to result in some sort of direct net monetary gain versus a general societal gain that can be difficult to quantity. In general I perceive a narrower and narrower focus on short term gain and a focus on maximizing profits alone, for all things - an obsession with money and its acquisition in and of itself. I think it will undermine our infrastructure, physical and otherwise, the longer this focus continues.

The auto industry helped a lot with pushing the building of the interstate system. Maybe Detroit's industry is not as profitable today so can't push as much for more roads? If necessary, the gas tax should be increased so that our road system is self-sustaining. In the past, part of the gas tax was being diverted to cover part of the federal deficit but I think the gas tax is now falling short of covering even its own expenses.

I'm wondering if our methods for construction are just too costly or maybe because of union rules, overstaffed needed for the job?

Like Houston, I don't see LRT making it to PIT anytime soon, and if it ever does, it would be incremental steps (such as to Bellevue first, then Sewickley, then Moon, then around to the airport terminal). I see no reason, though, beyond lack of funding, that some sort of dedicated fleet of coach buses could be used for the 28X and nothing more. You would need to have a fleet of six or more, though, to keep the current schedule and have backup equipment.

Unfortunately, the distance is so long that really, HRT is needed. LRT is fine for short routes but if it is 10 miles or more, a faster transport is needed.

[pman]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Where does this NS track run? Could the current T cars make a seamless transition to the track or would you have to transfer before the NS track? What about delays caused by freight train traffic? That's a huge obstacle for Amtrak, causing hour long delays at times.

t cars are a different gauge than standard gauge (its known as pennsylvania trolley gauge, phillys trolleys also use it). amtraks pennsylvanian is usually early. commuter can and does run with freight though upgrades may be in order. remember the pennsy had four tracks from ny to chicago and only two are left. (though the east busway encroaches on the. right of way). it would likely be far cheaper to implement than a t extension and sewickley itself isnt that big. (whereas the railroad option could go to new castle, youngstown, or even cleveland on some runs) .trains would run less often than a t but thats probably ok for the market. its always cheaper to add capacity back than build new. fwiw the passenger station in sewickley used to be where ohio river blvd runs through town.

[trackstar13]

cry_havoc

Why are you even talking about Houston?

How is that relevant I brought it up to respond to another comment where I thought a poster was saying Pittsburgh was full of roads and I was pointing it wasnt. They actually meant it didnt have any roads because of the geography. Houston is 100% irrelevant now; Education is 100% irrelevant. We are talking about transportation infrastructure and nothing more. You made logical fallacies. You didnt ask any questions, so I had nothing to deflect and have answered any relevant questions related to the topic at hand. Im not interested on dwelling on your logical fallacies. Going forward please stick to the topic at hand and I will gladly answer questions.

It seems that you dont understand the transportation problems of Pittsburgh and how to fix them.[/quote]

Well Houston = ground zero for the "add a lane/highway philosophy" to traffic management so that is why we are talking about Houston. Education = %100 relevant because it is part of infrastructure and what happens when you have a growing community or "new" suburb? You start building new schools, new roads, and additional infrastructure. Pittsburgh has enough roads and schools for the current population, the main issue has been the shift of where people are living. With all of the expansion north, south, and east you have more people commuting in cars on roads that were not designed for so many cars. Pittsburgh needs a better combination of rail and bus service with modification of existing roads, not tons of new highways in order to further facilitate urban sprawl. Your posts lack a basic understanding of urban planning and your ideas that transportation infrastructure should be built independent of population growth and other infrastructure are illogical at best. Oh and you still didn't answer my previous questions.