Where direction(s) will the metro expand in next? (Pittsburgh: home, neighborhood)

[Geeo]

Lots and lots and lots of money. Billions. Doubling the lanes in the tunnels means boring two new tunnels and building a new bridge next to the Ft. Pitt. And then where would it all land on the downtown side? Nobody wants to see more highways cutting off across Point State Park. It would look terrible. Then you would need to connect to the Ft. Duquesne Bridge somehow, which would be a nightmare. And to widen the parkway on the suburban side would require lots and lots of property acquisition, since development goes right up against the parkway. Add in new interchanges along the way, and you'll have people screaming about the inconvenience. People are moaning now because of the construction on the parkway. And at the end of the day, adding capacity only creates more congestion.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by Craziaskowboi

A lack of will is the only reason nothing gets done. If Caltrans can find a way to get eight lanes of I-5 over the San Gabriel Mountains, and CDOT can find a way to get I-70 over the Continental Divide and through Glenwood Canyon with minimal disruption, then PennDOT can find a way to enlarge a pair of tunnels, if only the agency grew some balls.

PennDOT can't even get enough money to maintain what we do have. Aside from money, and the changes in your map would easily represent more money that has been spent on new infrastructure here over the past decade, those sort of additions would probably require more neighborhoods to be pushed over or isolated behind a wall of a freeways.

It's just not worth it to me. As a general rule, I'm opposed to any freeway extension or widening.

[speagles84]

back to the OP's original question, I believe the north will continue to be the fastest growing region for the next 5 to 10 years. after that the development will be too far away from the cityto be profitable with regions west of the citystill undeveloped. another big factor that could come into play would be if there is any rail transit extensions into the suburbs. If there is that region that gets the rail could see some serious growth.

Boros/Townships that will become important:
Castle Shannon
Bethel Park
McKees Rocks
Bellevue
Verona
Oakmont
New Kensington

[lifepgh2op]

My answer: undeveloped land that feeds into the best school districts, just the way it's always been.

I just don't see people rushing to move into places with mediocre or poor performing schools.

[Merge]

Originally Posted by Craziaskowboi

MoDOT spent nearly $2B in St. Louis reconstructing and modernizing I-64, and building a new bridge and right of way for I-70. WSDOT can spend $1B burying the Alaskan Way Viaduct in Seattle. If those two agencies can do those things, then PennDOT can spend $1B turning the Parkway West into something that's actually worthy of a red and blue shield, and befitting a major city. Besides, improving transportation infrastructure was why Act 89 was passed in the first place.

If we were going to see $1 Billion on transportation infrastructure, I'd much rather see it spent to rehab the many bridges in Allegheny County that need work. Wasting all that money just to expand the suburban/exurban sprawl would be foolish given the real needs of Pittsburgh.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by lifepgh2op

My answer: undeveloped land that feeds into the best school districts, just the way it's always been.

I just don't see people rushing to move into places with mediocre or poor performing schools.

Yup.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by Geeo

Lots and lots and lots of money. Billions. Doubling the lanes in the tunnels means boring two new tunnels and building a new bridge next to the Ft. Pitt.

No, it doesn't. Behold:

Existing alignment


New alignment (crude rendering)


Just enlarge the existing tubes of the Fort Pitt Tunnel to hold three lanes each, and all that'd need to be done is a slight reconfiguration of the west (tunnel) end of the Fort Pitt Bridge.

Originally Posted by Geeo

Nobody wants to see more highways cutting off across Point State Park. It would look terrible.

Point State Park has nothing to do with improvements to the Parkway West or the Fort Pitt Tunnel.

Originally Posted by Geeo

Then you would need to connect to the Ft. Duquesne Bridge somehow, which would be a nightmare.

The Fort Duquesne Bridge has nothing to do with improvements to the Parkway West or the Fort Pitt Tunnel.

Originally Posted by Geeo

And to widen the parkway on the suburban side would require lots and lots of property acquisition, since development goes right up against the parkway.

An eight-lane highway designed to modern Interstate standards requires a right-of-way width of 146'. Behold:

East of Parkway Center Drive interchange


Expanding here shouldn't be a problem at all. For that matter, now that Parkway Center Mall doesn't exist anymore, the interchange can be eliminated.


East of Green Tree/Crafton/Mt. Lebanon interchange


A bit of a squeeze, but a minor realignment of the access road on the westbound side of the highway would enable a 146' right of way with noise barriers (indicated in light beige) without having to acquire any residential property at all.


West portion of Green Tree/Crafton/Mt. Lebanon interchange


The extra right of way for a reconfigured interchange makes this a squeeze, but even with noise barriers, the only property that'd have to be acquired are small portions of a couple of parking lots on the eastbound side of the highway.


West of Green Tree/Crafton/Mt. Lebanon interchange


PennDOT has discussed adding noise barriers on the eastbound side of the highway here anyway.


East of the Wheeling & Lake Erie Railroad Bridge


This is where the problem is, aside from the tunnel and the two railroad bridges. In order to avoid truncating some backyards on the eastbound side of the highway, something would need to be done on the westbound side. It's possible that the highway could be cantilevered over the frontage road for about half a mile, but if not, then the frontage road would have to be realigned, necessitating the demolition of three to five buildings directly across the highway from the closest encounter with the residential subdivision. The good news is, the area that I've highlighted is the only conflict point along the frontage road since the subdivision on the other side of the highway curves away, which would enable the highway not to encroach on the western or eastern ends of the frontage road. And though eminent domain should be used sparingly, if it does have to be used here, the land value is relatively low because single-story office buildings, warehouses and light industrial buildings aren't exactly high-rent. They're cheap to build and cheap to demolish.

West of the Carnegie/Heidelberg interchange


Even the extra right of way necessary for a lengthened westbound acceleration lane and eastbound deceleration lane would only necessitate a minor westbound ramp realignment for the West Busway. And there'd be virtually no property impact whatsoever.


Between the Rosslyn Farms interchange and the West Busway ramps


Expanding here shouldn't be a problem at all, even with the extra right of way necessary for the interface between the Rosslyn Farms and West Busway ramps.

Between I-79 and Pittsburgh International Airport, a quarter-mile segment of Boyce Road would need to be realigned, but there's otherwise no impediments to a six-lane highway. There'd be no impediments to any interchange reconfigurations, for that matter. If anything, the Green Tree/Crafton/Mt. Lebanon and West End interchanges take up more space than necessary as they exist right now.

In summary, widening the Parkwey West to eight lanes between I-79 and the Fort Pitt Tunnel would involve the following:

- Demolition of three to five low-rent commercial or industrial buildings
- Replacement of two railroad bridges
- Acquisition of portions of two parking lots
- Realignment of three frontage road segments totaling less than a mile combined
- Realignment of a busway ramp
- Construction of noise barriers where necessary

The highway ain't as hemmed in as everybody says it is. And no, I'm not saying that widening the Parkway West is easy to do, just that it's possible to do, which it is, despite people repeating the lie about how "it can't be done" often enough for it to have become "the truth."

Originally Posted by Geeo

Add in new interchanges along the way, and you'll have people screaming about the inconvenience. People are moaning now because of the construction on the parkway.

Wow, yinzers bitching about something? Knock me over with a feather.

Originally Posted by Geeo

And at the end of the day, adding capacity only creates more congestion.

I'm not even sure I believe that anymore, considering total vehicle miles traveled in the United States have been flat for a decade despite plenty of highway expansion projects. And if it's flat, well that just means the existing bottlenecks in the system need to be corrected, and guess what? The Parkway West is a 13-mile-long bottleneck, so it must be corrected even if vehicle miles traveled remain flat.

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

...those sort of additions would probably require more neighborhoods to be pushed over or isolated behind a wall of a freeways.

I just proved you wrong.

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

As a general rule, I'm opposed to any freeway extension or widening.

Even when the highways are ****ty and have legitimately dangerous design flaws?

"Invest in every mode but highways" is just as dumb as "invest in no mode but highways."

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by Craziaskowboi

I just proved you wrong.

Anybody whose argument for the feasibility of freeway expansions start with "Just enlarge the existing tubes of the Fort Pitt Tunnel to hold three lanes each" as a solution is not proving anybody wrong by its author.

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

Anybody whose argument for the feasibility of freeway expansions start with "Just enlarge the existing tubes of the Fort Pitt Tunnel to hold three lanes each" as a solution is not proving anybody wrong by its author.

I'm talking about the neighborhoods that'd supposedly get raped and plundered if the Parkway West was widened. I absolutely did prove you wrong about that simply by screen-grabbing satellite imagery and measuring distances. If the Parkway West was widened to eight lanes, there'd be no more than five buildings knocked down, and not one of them would be a residential property.



THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY DESIGN, PERIOD. IN FACT, IT'S THE UNCANNY VALLEY OF INTERSTATE DESIGN. IT'S GROTESQUE, AND NOT WORTHY OF THE RED AND BLUE SHIELD IT WEARS. RAIL LINES AND BIKE TRAILS UP THE ASS WON'T MAGICALLY CORRECT THE DANGEROUS DESIGN DEFICIENCIES OF THIS HIGHWAY. EVEN IF THE TRAFFIC LEVEL ON THIS HIGHWAY GETS CUT IN HALF, CARS WILL STILL GET REAR-ENDED HERE, AND THE HIGHWAY WILL STILL BE OVER CAPACITY. THIS MUST CHANGE.

[Merge]

Originally Posted by Craziaskowboi

I'm talking about the neighborhoods that'd supposedly get raped and plundered if the Parkway West was widened. I absolutely did prove you wrong about that simply by screen-grabbing satellite imagery and measuring distances. If the Parkway West was widened to eight lanes, there'd be no more than five buildings knocked down, and not one of them would be a residential property.



THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY DESIGN, PERIOD. IN FACT, IT'S THE UNCANNY VALLEY OF INTERSTATE DESIGN. IT'S GROTESQUE, AND NOT WORTHY OF THE RED AND BLUE SHIELD IT WEARS. RAIL LINES AND BIKE TRAILS UP THE ASS WON'T MAGICALLY CORRECT THE DANGEROUS DESIGN DEFICIENCIES OF THIS HIGHWAY. EVEN IF THE TRAFFIC LEVEL ON THIS HIGHWAY GETS CUT IN HALF, CARS WILL STILL GET REAR-ENDED HERE, AND THE HIGHWAY WILL STILL BE OVER CAPACITY. THIS MUST CHANGE.

If people don't want to drive under those conditions, then they don't have to. Don't move to the exurbs. It's a waste of my tax dollars to expand those highways only to enable more sprawl. I want the bridges fixed.