Get Ready for Route 28 nightmare. (Pittsburgh, Greensburg: 2015, construction, university)

[Blackbeauty212]

Which is why I simply dont understand Pittsburgh and PA lack of pushing for progressive transit....There is a desparate need for it and the roads show this....

If PAT was far more progressive than it is today, I have no doubt that it would get more and more people out of their cars...

Look at us right here on CD when someone new moves to the area, we almost never suggest using PAT unless its obvious like MT Lebonon or Shadyside to downtown....

[BrianTH]

Part of the problem is that public transit has been branded as something exclusively for hippies, poor people, and urbanites, as opposed to a technological tool which can be used to address certain problems that affect lots of people (whether or not they personally use public transit, where in metro areas they live, and so on).

It doesn't help either that in living memory we went through a period in which tons of money was poured into urbanized-area highway-building and public transit systems were allowed to degrade. For a while that meant highways commutes were typically much nicer, but now in many cases we have gone past the limits of that technology, and those highway commutes are getting worse and worse. But many people don't have any experience with what reasonable alternatives would look like and so can only think to try to recreate the brief (and ultimately doomed) Golden Age of urban highways.

[Geeo]

I'd like to give some credit to Port Authority. I used to work there and have seen the issue from both sides. If it were up to PAT, we'd have a stellar system with above and below ground light rail hither and yon, more busways, transit centers to transfer from bus to rail, feeder systems, park and rides, the whole nine yards. But the issue is always funding and political will. PAT's business is hugely labor and capital intensive. - all transit systems are. Your business isn't stationary - it consists of 1,000 buses and rail cars moving around the city taking on and discharging 250,000 people every day. It wears out quickly under those pressures. Money is the biggest issue, especially for capital projects. No single city could afford to build the system they want without an infusion of either federal or state dollars unless they raise the money themselves. That usually means higher taxes, which is politically unpopular. The tax issue then brings out the "I don't use it, so why should I pay for it crowd," as well as the city vs. suburban issues and the class and race issues, and the politicians listen to that. The feds have been reducing funding to public transit since the 80s, and it's doubtful that it will be coming back anytime soon. The state.... (well, we all know the story there with the budget).

Best of luck to the people who want to try a rail line from the Allegheny Valley to the Strip. They're going to need it once they find out how complex it's going to be to get up and running.

This isn't just a Pittsburgh problem - it's a national problem and applies to highway and bridge maintenance as well.

[BrianTH]

My hope is that a combination of urbanization, increasing congestion, and higher gasoline prices will finally change the political dynamic and allow for rational investment strategies at the state and federal level. But we may just have to wait out the generation that still has the Golden Age of urban highway building (roughly the 1950s and 1960s) in their minds.

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I'm not sure what measures you are using for these claims, but I don't think they are particularly relevant in any event. Getting commuters into Downtown, Oakland, and other central employment centers is a very particular sort of transportation problem. If you add more highway capacity to funnel car-commuters into Downtown, it is ultimately just going to lead to more congestion. That is because highways just don't have that much uncongested capacity when used by car commuters, and in situations like this uncongested highways tend to quickly induce usage to the point they become congested again.

To beat this problem you have to get as many commuters as possible into higher-capacity transportation modes, leaving the highways only to those who actually need them. And there are plenty of commuters already who could be using alternative transportation modes if we built them, and if we built them future development patterns would increase that percentage even more. It would also help if we initiated congestion-pricing on the relevant highways, but then of course you have to give people viable alternatives.

Generally, this really isn't about being anti-highway: highways can be great, in certain circumstances and used for certain purposes. But highways really aren't a good technology to use when the problem is getting commuters into central employment areas, at least not once you are hitting the point that there is congestion in the relevant corridors. We may well need more highway capacity in the Pittsburgh region for other purposes, but for this particular purpose it is a dead end approach.

Rt 28 is a nightmare though and many people who take Rt. 28 into the city live in places such as Tarentum, New Kensington, O' Hara, Harmar, etc which are further out than most buses go (or if they do get bus service near their house it's only about 2 times in the AM and PM for rush hr only). Rt. 28 needs to be fixed because it is probably the worst road in the area IMO. Also, Rt 28 isn't going to give the best idea of the city for someone who is driving it to get into the area from out of town.
I understand how you say this may increase congestion, but with the removal of the traffic lights that significantly slow down traffic and the fact there isn't much major development in the Allegheny Valley, it will solve traffic problems not create more. There may be some volume increase though if you figure that some people who could take 28 drive though Lawrenceville and the Strip to avoid the road which will in turn lower congestion in Lawrenceville. For the 19 years I've been around it's not the traffic on 28 that causes the problems, it's the red lights which need to go.

[Johnny C]

The days of the gasoline powered automobile are more numbered than most people realize. They will be around for a while, but the price of owning and operating them will eventually begin to limit their availability to the masses.

This is what it will take to change the American mindset on public transportation.

[Geeo]

Interestingly, during the gasoline shortage of 1979, PAT's ridership peaked at about 110,000,000. It's steadily decreased as gas got cheaper and cheaper. In those days, there was more federal money available to buy new buses to meet the demand. We'll see what happens next time.

[DaBurgh]

Originally Posted by Johnny C

All of you poor souls that rely on the Rtr. 28 corridor should consider buying a boat. This project should have been done 20 years ago. My thoughts and prayers to you and yours...

As silly as it sounds, I don't think it would be a bad idea if there were park and rides on each of the 3 rivers. May be tougher in wintertime though. I know I would certainly park it and hop on a boat for the commute into downtown.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by bradjl2009

Rt 28 is a nightmare though and many people who take Rt. 28 into the city live in places such as Tarentum, New Kensington, O' Hara, Harmar, etc which are further out than most buses go (or if they do get bus service near their house it's only about 2 times in the AM and PM for rush hr only). Rt. 28 needs to be fixed because it is probably the worst road in the area IMO. Also, Rt 28 isn't going to give the best idea of the city for someone who is driving it to get into the area from out of town.

I do understand the need to fix Rt 28, which is substandard for all purposes. But we also need something like commuter rail along that route to deal specifically with the congestion issue.

I understand how you say this may increase congestion, but with the removal of the traffic lights that significantly slow down traffic and the fact there isn't much major development in the Allegheny Valley, it will solve traffic problems not create more. There may be some volume increase though if you figure that some people who could take 28 drive though Lawrenceville and the Strip to avoid the road which will in turn lower congestion in Lawrenceville. For the 19 years I've been around it's not the traffic on 28 that causes the problems, it's the red lights which need to go.

I can guarantee you will eventually see a lot more traffic on 28, one way or another, after this fix. I wouldn't count against a change in development patterns, and in any event I know lots of people who drive through the City to bypass 28 (not just the route you named, but also through Highland Park and the East End).

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Geeo

Interestingly, during the gasoline shortage of 1979, PAT's ridership peaked at about 110,000,000. It's steadily decreased as gas got cheaper and cheaper. In those days, there was more federal money available to buy new buses to meet the demand. We'll see what happens next time.

Nationwide, transit ridership increased in response to higher gas prices this time too, but service is being cut anyway due to recession-related funding shortfalls.