Is Oakland-Downtown BRT really worth 200 million? (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh: live, buses, airport)

[pman]

it was also a half billion dollars not a billion dollars, not that it makes it the right decision. of course the nsc isn't terribly relevant to a new application, that's not the way it works.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by pman

it was also a half billion dollars not a billion dollars, not that it makes it the right decision. of course the nsc isn't terribly relevant to a new application, that's not the way it works.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? As in a new application for transit dollars? Or as in a new use? The NSC could definitely be used as part of a future T extension. I'd go as far to say that it should be used as part of a future extension.

[Blackbeauty212]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Also make the Bus Lane whole from Sixth Ave to Jumonville and keep the 61s on Forbes outbound and 71s on Fifth both ways. Very Simple and effective and probably costs a lot less than 200 million to put into place.

not sure i understand what you are suggesting that is different from the current routes for the 61s and 71s. is there a bus lane on sixth avenue?
.

The Outbound Fifth Ave bus lane should be contiguous from Liberty Ave Downtown, to Bellefield Ave in Oakland. But its not because of a break in the lane between 6th Ave (were all outbound buses make a right to Forbes) until Jumonville where the 71's have to make a left to get back onto Fifth.

The Outbound bus lane should be made whole in these sections, that way the 71's never need to deviate from Fifth Ave, and makes for a faster/direct trip into Oakland. while the 61's should continue to run via Forbes.

[_Buster]

Originally Posted by ferraris

I'm not sure what you mean by this? As in a new application for transit dollars? Or as in a new use? The NSC could definitely be used as part of a future T extension. I'd go as far to say that it should be used as part of a future extension.

Do you think it's feasible for them to do a relatively quick, 2 station extension of the T which would go to the central north side?

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by _Buster

Do you think it's feasible for them to do a relatively quick, 2 station extension of the T which would go to the central north side?

I can't say with any certainty as I'm not a civil engineer, but considering it was $500M for a tunnel under a river and three full stations it would seem like a $200M budget is in the ballpark for that, especially if it's above ground and has basic stops instead of full fledged stations.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by _Buster

Do you think it's feasible for them to do a relatively quick, 2 station extension of the T which would go to the central north side?

if they started today, it might be open in 2033. im sorry to say "relatively quick" would not/could not describe it, but i dont see why it couldnt be feasible without project overruns - much of that area is new, so the underground is not the great unknown.

what do you guys think - from the terminus, up a couple blocks along brighton road, then along North Avenue....then up to Troy Hill? ok, im getting carried away.

[pman]

Originally Posted by ferraris

I'm not sure what you mean by this? As in a new application for transit dollars? Or as in a new use? The NSC could definitely be used as part of a future T extension. I'd go as far to say that it should be used as part of a future extension.

as part of a new application for transit dollars. indeed, the nsc makes more sense as prt of the spine than a south hills interurban.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

if they started today, it might be open in 2033. im sorry to say "relatively quick" would not/could not describe it, but i dont see why it couldnt be feasible without project overruns - much of that area is new, so the underground is not the great unknown.

what do you guys think - from the terminus, up a couple blocks along brighton road, then along North Avenue....then up to Troy Hill? ok, im getting carried away.

I'm still a fan of roughly following the Ohio River neighborhoods and then crossing around Sewickley to get to the airport. It seems like an extension that could garner decent political support since it would serve low and middle income areas of the North Side, middle and upper middle class 'burbs along the river, and connecting to the airport would be a big help for everyone. And it could be done in a way that would support walkability and reduce dependence on cars.

[doo dah]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

for the record, that tunnel was gynormously expensive in part because of unexpected soil conditions. i wasnt living here at the time, but it certainly was common knowledge and reported in the post-gazette.

its too bad, but what would be the alternative? to just abandon a tunnel that was almost 50% done?

Also make the Bus Lane whole from Sixth Ave to Jumonville and keep the 61s on Forbes outbound and 71s on Fifth both ways. Very Simple and effective and probably costs a lot less than 200 million to put into place.

not sure i understand what you are suggesting that is different from the current routes for the 61s and 71s. is there a bus lane on sixth avenue?

it is possible that some aspects of our current system work as well as possible!?!

wasnt there a 'Violet Line' circulator in the east end, circa 2004? (i wasnt here at the time). that would be great.

The Ultraviolet Loop ran on Friday and Saturday nights, ran late into the night: Port Authority's UltraViolet loop route to end

[szug-bot]

^^^^ what a shame...if only i were rich. but hey, nothing's free. at least there still are the 54s, the 64, and the 75 to do the 'diagonals'.