speeding up the T (Manchester, Oakland: casino, vs, bus)

[BrianTH]

There is really no way to defend the North Shore Connector. The basic story is it started as just part of a proposed line from Squirrel Hill through Oakland and Downtown to the residential parts of the North Side, a line that while expensive would have had huge ridership and would have helped revitalize several neighborhoods.

Then there was a shakeup in the county government, which led to a shakeup in PAT governance. They killed the Downtown-East End part, basically saying the expense couldn't be justified for something that only benefited the city. They then rerouted the North Side part to the "North Shore"--at the time more of a concept for development than a reality. In the process, they specifically rejected proposals that would have preserved at least some of the idea of the original line, such as connecting from a transfer point with the East Busway past the Convention Center to the residential parts of the North Side. Finally, with the help of Governor Rendell and Senators Specter and Santorum, they got the feds to pay for 80% of the project.

And that was that: a once ambitious but justifiable project was turned into a wasteful boondoggle.

Edit: Oh, and as far as I am concerned the stuff about eventually going out to the airport is just rationalization. It simply makes no sense as an airport connection, and indeed wouldn't really improve on the existing approach of using the West Busway for that purpose.

[bboy36win]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Edit: Oh, and as far as I am concerned the stuff about eventually going out to the airport is just rationalization. It simply makes no sense as an airport connection, and indeed wouldn't really improve on the existing approach of using the West Busway for that purpose.

I'm not here to defend the connector, but if you look at a map, it does make sense that the first step you would take to get from downtown to the airport (other than a very LONG downstream tunnel under the Ohio) would be to the north.

[Copanut]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

There is really no way to defend the North Shore Connector. .

I won't disagree. But as one of the FEW Pirate Fans left, I'd love to live in the South Hills and take the T all the way to PNC Park. It makes my carbon footprint smaller. Like I care.

[greg42]

Originally Posted by bboy36win

I'm not here to defend the connector, but if you look at a map, it does make sense that the first step you would take to get from downtown to the airport (other than a very LONG downstream tunnel under the Ohio) would be to the north.

Yeah, I looked at that too a while back and was surprised, a little. The direct route from downtown really is that way, but you do need another river crossing. Given that much of the T is already on the proper side of the river, that still seems a little odd, but the topography would be challenging getting from there to the airport (although I'm not sure the topography going the north and along the Ohio way is any less challenging).

The T and busses both suffer from too many stops. Some of this is addressed in that transit realignment plan.

[slamont61]

If you ask me, the LRT - Airport will never meet up. Too much being spent on Mag-Lev studies. Therefor the Northshore connection is of almost no use at all except to shuttle some people to games and back. Nice idea but at that expense???

[raubre]

Originally Posted by bboy36win

I'm not here to defend the connector, but if you look at a map, it does make sense that the first step you would take to get from downtown to the airport (other than a very LONG downstream tunnel under the Ohio) would be to the north.

Whdere would it go after it goes north? West? If that's the case, it still would have to go down the river and cross back.

I would think if it would have to start somewhere, LRT service to the airport would start at Station Square, either go down West Carson (as if it were going toward McKees Rocks) or go to South Hills Junction then down near the Liberty Tunnels and hop on the Parkway.

I am confused on how the NSC going toward the North Shore would get you to the Airport. (Can someone explain it to me?)

[Copanut]

From the North Shore, along Rte 65 through Bellvue, Ben Avon, Avalon, possibly Emsworth, towards Sewickley, then cross over the river by Coraopolis and on to the airport. That's the way I used to go to the airport when traffic was backed up.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by bboy36win

I'm not here to defend the connector, but if you look at a map, it does make sense that the first step you would take to get from downtown to the airport (other than a very LONG downstream tunnel under the Ohio) would be to the north.

Really? Going north puts you on the wrong side of the Ohio from the airport, which means you are going to need another bridge or tunnel at some point. Incidentally, that is the same basic reason we use the Fort Pitt bridge to connect Downtown and the airport for car traffic.

[greg42]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Really? Going north puts you on the wrong side of the Ohio from the airport, which means you are going to need another bridge or tunnel at some point. Incidentally, that is the same basic reason we use the Fort Pitt bridge to connect Downtown and the airport for car traffic.

Yes, that's what I always said, but if you look at a map, noting where the airport is, the current T that exists on the proper side of the river is not at all ideally suited for making a run there, certainly not from anywhere south of Station Square.

The airport is north of the point. Anything to the south, including all that parkway alignment, means coming back north. It's hard to picture just driving it; you have to see it on the map to really believe it, then imagine a route that doesn't have to follow those same roads.

Now, if the goal is just the airport, clearly that damn tunnel is a waste. If you started from Station Square and followed the river for a bit, then turned a little to the left somewhere, that would be fine. But, of course, it does make sense ultimately to have something like the stadiums connected to the T. Point is, all the negative about the stupid tunnel aside, and I agree it's stupid alone by itself, the reality truly is that the North Shore is not out of the way in a route to the airport. It's more complicated, because now you need another river crossing, but it's not out of the way.

Look at a map, like this: pittsburgh, pa - Google Maps

[BrianTH]

It is true the airport is slightly north of west from Downtown, but it is only very slightly north--in fact a straight line to the airport wouldn't go through the North Shore, but instead would run up under the Ohio quite a distance before emerging on the south bank of the Ohio. So, either way from Downtown (south across the Mon or north across the Allegheny) starts as a detour from a hypothetical straight line route.

Moreover, a straight line route isn't practical due to the local topography, and in fact you have two major topographic challenges: you have to get on the south side of the Mon or Ohio, and then you have to get out of the Mon/Ohio valley (hence, for example, the need for the Fort Pitt Bridge and Fort Pitt Tunnel). Try the "terrain" function on Google Maps and you will see what I mean--there is a wall of hills between the Ohio and the airport. Anyway, going to the North Shore first solves neither of these problems, and isn't really on the straight line route either, so in practical terms it hasn't really gotten you any closer to providing a light rail link to the airport.

So fine, it is not "out of the way". But it isn't "on the way" either. It just has no rational relation to linking Downtown with the airport.

Probably the most sensible route would be to convert the West Busway to light rail, complete it to Downtown over a new Mon bridge (as was originally planned for the West Busway), and extend it along the current freeway route to the airport. But even that really makes no sense--you could just finish the West Busway as originally planned and keep this as an express bus route, and that would be competitive with all these options on speed and beat the daylights out of them on cost.

As for whether a light rail connection from Downtown to the stadiums is itself justifiable--maybe as one of many projects in a world with billions of dollars to spend on Pittsburgh light rail, but there is no way to justify it as a first priority in a world of much more limited funding. The ridership projections bear that out (it gets a tiny fraction of the projected riders of, say, a light rail link to Oakland), as does simple logic: I mean you can actually walk to the stadiums from Downtown, and not that many people are currently served by the T to Downtown, so it just isn't that useful of a link given the cost.