Comprehensive Pittsburgh-area transportation discussion (York, Washington: spring break, 2013, car insurance)

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by ctoocheck

The Airport Multimodal study estimates the cost of Parkway West widening plus new Ft Pitt tunnel bores at $770, in 2003 (pg 6-3). Given inflation plus the faster rise of construction costs over inflation (and inevitable cost overruns), I would imagine this would all exceed $1Bil.

According to this inflation calculator, $770M in 2003 would amount to $992M today, which is still less than all the projects I listed in other cities except for the I-64 reconstruction in St. Louis. To put it another way, it'd cost about twice what the North Shore Connector did, but cover about six times as many miles.

Originally Posted by SteelCityRising

I feel as if we need a blend of network upgrades that include both mass transit and highway expansion. The Southern Beltway needs to happen. I-376 being expanded from four lanes to six lanes needs to happen. Otherwise we're in pretty good shape on the highway front. I-279 and Route 28, which service the northern and northeastern suburbs, respectively, are modern and adequate to service current and near-future capacities. Route 51 is a mess, but some of that traffic can be alleviated via the Southern Beltway, along with improving traffic light synchronization. I-79 is adequate for current capacity; it may need to be widened in the next decade at some point. I-76 has been undergoing improvements and is well on its way to being a prime highway. Ditto I-70.

I-279 needs nothing at all. In fact, it doesn't even need its HOV lanes, so maybe those lanes could be used as an express busway to the north, or the right of way for a T extension. I think Ross Park Mall would be the perfect place for the terminus. People in the northern suburbs could just drive to the mall and take the bus or train into the city if they wanted. As for PA 28, they're finally close to finishing the missing link, and traffic flow has improved immensely, but the bottleneck has moved north to the Highland Park Bridge interchange. The highway drops from four lanes to two through the interchange, so everybody passing through has to funnel into one lane in either direction. The interchange needs to be rebuilt soon. Other than that, highway access to the north is more than adequate.

I'd like to see PA 51 rebuilt as a four-lane boulevard with a tree-lined median between the Liberty Tunnel and Pleasant Hills. And the interchange with Lebanon Church Road can be rebuilt as a SPUI to save space. There's little development between the Liberty Tunnel and the West End Circle, though, so I have no problem with it being limited-access there. The interchange with the Parkway West should be rebuilt as a directional T, though, instead of the partial cloverleaf it is now. It'll save space and improve traffic flow, giving people on the Parkway West alternate routes. South of Elizabeth, I'd like to see all the substandard interchanges eliminated, and the road rebuilt like U.S. 22 east of Murrysville.

As for I-79, the only change I could see in the future is possible expansion to six lanes south of Bridgeville. That way it'd be six lanes all the way from the Parkway West to I-70. Speaking of I-70, they're in the process of rebuilding most of it between Washington and New Stanton to modern standards. The only exception will be the segment between the Speers-Belle Vernon and Smithton Hi-Level Bridges. By the end of this decade, though, most of I-70 will be in much better shape.

If I could extend the T to the airport, it'd be either via the West End and Crafton, or up the Ohio River to Sewickley and down through Coraopolis. If all those boroughs down the Ohio River were developed as streetcar suburbs, then surely the right of way for rail has to exist somewhere. Besides, I think a T extension would enhance Sewickley even more. As for Ohio River Boulevard, I'd give it the PA 51 treatment: a four-lane boulevard with a tree-lined median all the way from I-79 down to the West End Bridge. Same with Bigelow Boulevard between Bloomfield and Downtown, for that matter.

I also support eliminating the 10th Street Bypass to create better riverfront access downtown, and taking I-279 below grade through a cut-and-cover tunnel between Federal Street and Anderson Street to give the North Side a connection with the river. And I'm glad to see plans to cover part of I-579. The interchange with the Boulevard of the Allies and the Liberty Bridge needs to be redone, though.

As for the T to the east, I say do this:


1. Go underground between Steel Plaza and Consol Energy Center.

2. Eliminate Colwell Street and the remaining dilapidated properties along it, and bring the T above ground east of Consol Energy Center, using the former Colwell Street right of way.

3. Have the T merge with Fifth Avenue near the Birmingham Bridge, dropping one westbound lane, and building a tall curb or short wall between the car lanes and the T line except near intersections.

4. Build an oval with an eastbound track on Forbes Avenue and a westbound track on Fifth Avenue, dropping one or two lanes from each. Use a trolley on the oval track, and big trains passing through.

5. Take the T through Schenley Plaza, and build a new bridge near the Schenley Bridge, and eliminate Schenley Drive, replacing it with the T into Squirrel Hill.

6. Build a trolley extension on Forbes Avenue from Carnegie Mellon University to Schenley Plaza, with a stop at Craig Street.

7. Take the T down Forbes Avenue through Squirrel Hill to Regent Square.


I'm actually not sure how to get to Wilkinsburg from there, though, but once the T gets into Wilkinsburg, it should be easy to get out to a terminus at Monroeville Mall.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

suburban municipalities might not ALLOW anything more than the current status quo. some places do not have fire fighting equipment for buildings more than 3 stories (like one of my former places of residence in the mid-state). and, density will require a sanitary system, a more comprehensive stormwater management system....the works. thats tax dollars.....

No. My work subscribes to a publication for public finance professionals (which I am not, but since we represent public employees, it's useful to my work). There has been extensive work on this, and it's always worth it in terms of infrastructure cost versus tax revenue to allow the denser development to be put in. Plus of course many of the costs are borne by the developer, and if the costs are too high given shoddy local infrastructure, than well, that's not an area the market can develop.

Originally Posted by szug-bot

no, i think people WOULD be upset. it could be that we actually do have a balance - people who want suburbs live there....people who enjoy the amenities of density liver there. its not perfect, but really, there is an equilibrium established.

Yes, people would be upset - I said just that. But people would be upset because people don't like change, and it would make their life moderately inconvenient. Homeowners in neighborhoods in Seattle and Portland that have changed zoning to be denser hate it, because builders are buying out a few houses at a time and replacing them with small apartment buildings, changing the character of the neighborhood, and creating major street parking issues. But when they finally sell (probably to a developer) they'll still get far more money than they would have if zoning had remained the same.

[pman]

gnutella-was sewickley a streetcar or railroad suburb? ohio uses the old rr right of way through. the t is trolley gauge. id think you be better off with east west commuter rail than the t.

seems like the natural extension of the t west is the busway...and the airport is probably a waste of money at this point. the nsc cost more than commuter rail to latrobe would have. id also suggest wilkinsburg is the wrong place to end any spine line. the proper place is east liberty..the busiest transit station outside of downtown and only growing. it could be a transfer point from the busway and expanded commuter rail.

[JoeP]

I found the article I mentioned the other day.

Parkway West Work Planned Over Next Three Years

A few key points:

Physical and financial constraints rule out significant expansion of capacity on the parkway mainline, he said. Major reconfiguration of the substandard Carnegie, Green Tree and Banksville interchanges will come later, if funding is available.

"The bottom line is the Parkway West has a ton of asset management needs. The walls supporting the shoulders are in bad shape. The median barrier is crumbling. The pavement is 8 years old," Mr. Cessna said.

This article actually does a good job of outlining a lot of the issues...

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by JoeP

I found the article I mentioned the other day.

Parkway West Work Planned Over Next Three Years

A few key points:

Physical and financial constraints rule out significant expansion of capacity on the parkway mainline, he said. Major reconfiguration of the substandard Carnegie, Green Tree and Banksville interchanges will come later, if funding is available.



This article actually does a good job of outlining a lot of the issues...

Well that article was from 2012, and Pennsylvania just passed a big transportation funding bill, so maybe soon the substandard interchanges will get fixed.

The obstacles to capacity expansion right now are the Fort Pitt Tunnel and the two railroad bridges. If major work is done on them, then you can expect the Parkway West to have its capacity expanded soon thereafter.

[Craziaskowboi]

Apparently there are now plans to implement a BRT system between downtown and Oakland. The total cost is $200M, which just goes to show you that any major infrastructure project is going to cost beaucoup bucks.

[JoeP]

I don't think the tunnel will change and I'm ok with that. I think that changes can be made and transition fine to the tunnel as is.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by JoeP

I don't think the tunnel will change and I'm ok with that. I think that changes can be made and transition fine to the tunnel as is.

On second thought, the tunnel might not even need to be expanded if the Parkway West is widened to six lanes, because it could drop a lane at the U.S. 19 Truck/PA 51 interchange. The multimodal transportation study I linked to showed a design for one off-ramp to handle both movements at that interchange. Traffic getting onto PA 51 in either direction would use the same ramp to exit, but then the ramp would split, with traffic heading toward the Liberty Tunnel continuing right, and traffic heading toward the West End breaking off to the left via a flyover ramp. This setup would eliminate the existing substandard loop ramp right before the tunnel.

[armourereric]

The OP and myself are both participants at a roadgeek forum, AA roads, something I alluded to in a previous post inquiring about Blvd of the Allies traffic signals. I am a Pittsburgh native and grew up on Ivory Avenue and had to move as a teen due to 279.

Here is what I envision:

A 3 lane carrigeway with a zipper median 2 lanes going with rush, 1 lane contr-flow running in the east from Monroeville Mall along the parkway and then along the east bussway to downtown.

Same 3 lane setup from the Airport along the PW west. It is the central part where I get creative: Starting at the top of Greetree Hill have these HOT toll lane split off and enter Mt Washington in a tunnel high and to the south of the Ft Pitt tunnels, upon it's egress above Carson Street, ramps would connect to large parking garage facilities either near the southside location of the old Wabash Bridge with a people mover or bus circulator route going over a rebuilt Wabash Bridge to downtown, or a similar setup either near Station Square ir under the Liberty Bridge with a T connection. This 3 lane carrigeway would continue to straddle the southside of the river, recross and rejoin the parkway at the old J&L bend and contimue on to Monroeville. The carrigeway from the east woulf end up at parking garages in the lower strip with air rights development above and connector ramps to the 579/279 reversible lane complex. There would be on ramps in Wikinsburg and Oakland. All these lanes would be open to 3 occupant vehicle cars only and would have open road toll transponders charging a variable toll based upon parkway congestion.

[gg]

Local Leaders Tour Possible Sites For Bus Rapid Transit Lines « CBS Pittsburgh

Maybe there is hope. At least Peduto is thinking about future transportation needs instead of the backward car mentality. Busses and bikes. Sounds like a plan!