PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown I

[Wiz Khalifa]

Originally Posted by hyperion1110

In short, maglev and HSR should have cost parity when constructing the system. And maglev would be faster and cheaper to run. To me, the choice is obvious.

If this is true than I am wondering why the Chinese, after testing a Maglev system, decided to go back to what they concluded was more cost effective regular HSR. I'm thinking that maybe the upfront costs are so much higher for Maglev, that it would take way to long for the greater efficiency of the system to make up the cost difference.

[Steel Boy]

Oh no! Another rail proposal! This one is for the existing freight line that goes under Oakland, I believe. Isn't Port Authority instituting a new bus route in their transit reorganization plan that will go from Lawrenceville to Oakland? And it will actually stop on the street.

[Tombstoner]

Maybe a naive question: would they have to use the heavy rail that's already there or might they be thinking of using the right-of-way for light rail, in which case, it could be a great way to establish a section of an eventual Downtown to Oakland extention of the T?

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by qwho

Weird, I was reading this forum, and I got this in an email from corporate.

I hope this isn't the Morgantown PRT idea

Does anybody at the city/county/state level know what they're doing with rail? seems like everybody's just scrambling desperately now that the potential of federal money is there

[Grimacista]

Originally Posted by Tombstoner

Maybe a naive question: would they have to use the heavy rail that's already there or might they be thinking of using the right-of-way for light rail, in which case, it could be a great way to establish a section of an eventual Downtown to Oakland extention of the T?

That rail section goes through the Neville Street Tunnel which is only wide enough for the existing one rail track.

[Steel Boy]

Check out Port Authority's new master plan to reorganize the transit routes. They will start running a series of "rapid" buses with limited stops between downtown and the east end. The buses will be articulated and of a distinct color to designate which line it is. Cleveland is doing this with the Euclid Avenue corridor. It's like a rail line for a fraction of the cost and with much more flexibility. There is already a ton of bus service between Oakland and downtown Pittsburgh with daytime service every few minutes. Although a rail link between those two points would be nice, I don't see it happening, especially since the feds do not pick up most of the cost anymore.

[hyperion1110]

Originally Posted by Wiz Khalifa

If this is true than I am wondering why the Chinese, after testing a Maglev system, decided to go back to what they concluded was more cost effective regular HSR. I'm thinking that maybe the upfront costs are so much higher for Maglev, that it would take way to long for the greater efficiency of the system to make up the cost difference.

Despite all of the bravado (which sadly comes primarily from ignorant western journalists), China is still a very poor country. They're GDP per capita is about 20% that of the US. They're 1.3 billion population gives them a total GDP that is among the highest in the world. But that number is next to meaningless.

China building a maglev system is nothing but a status symbol, much like they're attempts to mimic US and Russia space capabilities. It goes along with the attitude that, "Gosh darn it! We're just as good as the West! And here's our shiny rocket, built from stolen US designs and built by slave labor!" As I said, the key to understanding China is that everything is bravado. They couldn't build maglev not because it's prohibitively expensive, but because they don't have the technical or industrial capability to build a national system. In fact, if I am not mistaken, the Chinese maglev system was designed and built by Germans.

[pj3000]

Is Maglev an efficient system answer to America's transportation needs?

Is a high-speed rail system more feasible in meeting these needs?

These are the questions that need to be answered. It is really not a matter of cost, in my opinion. Both systems will cost billions and billions (remember that America has never had a high-speed system; we invested in highways after WWII while Europe and Japan invested in railways). They way I view it is, does America invest billions in 1940s-era technology or invest in technological advancement?

But first, we have to figure out if Maglev's operation is practical for the lengths of travel for which it is being proposed.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Steel Boy

There is already a ton of bus service between Oakland and downtown Pittsburgh with daytime service every few minutes.

Every few minutes is kinda stretching it a bit. It's quite possible to stand for 20+ minutes without any buses you need passing, whether you are going inbound or outbound. Then, all of a sudden a 59U, 61 A B C D and F, etc. are all right behind each other. It is a terribly inefficient system between downtown and Oakland overall, especially given the fact that is only a few miles.

I welcome the addition of these "express" buses. We shall see how effective they are...

[hyperion1110]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Every few minutes is kinda stretching it a bit. It's quite possible to stand for 20+ minutes without any buses you need passing, whether you are going inbound or outbound. Then, all of a sudden a 59U, 61 A B C D and F, etc. are all right behind each other. It is a terribly inefficient system between downtown and Oakland overall, especially given the fact that is only a few miles.

I welcome the addition of these "express" buses. We shall see how effective they are...

Heck yeah! Nothing ticks me off more than the buses through Oakland. It's like they're all scared of something do they huddle together. You miss one, you miss them all for like 20+ minutes!

[Evergrey]

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/stories/2009/09/14/daily15.html

Tuesday, September 15, 2009, 12:18pm EDT

Peduto calls for neighborhood master plan in wake of hotel dispute between Craig Street business owners, CMU

Pittsburgh Business Times - by Tim Schooley

Pittsburgh City Councilman Bill Peduto pledged to establish a master plan for a key stretch of Forbes Avenue in Oakland this week in a letter he sent to Craig Street business owners who have expressed frustration over delays for a hotel near the corner of their business district.

Last month, an ad-hoc group called the Craig Street Businesses of Oakland sent a letter to Peduto and Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl protesting the role Carnegie Mellon University has played in delaying the development of the proposed Museum Park Hotel slated for a former gas station site near the CMU campus.

The business owners claim that Carnegie Mellon has come out against the hotel plan after originally supporting it because it has bought all the property surrounding the location and needs the hotel site for its own plans. (See related story)

In a letter dated Sept. 14, Peduto expressed a need for a larger master plan that can incorporate the needs of all parties.

“… It is evident that there is a great deal of change occurring on Forbes Avenue and Craig Street,” wrote Peduto. “It is imperative that you and your neighbors be involved in the discussions about future development in your neighborhood.”

Peduto has been working with Carnegie Mellon and the developers of the Museum Park project, a partnership between Brinton Motheral and Cambridge Venture Partners, for several months, he added, expressing confidence that a resolution can be reached.

Motheral said he would support Peduto’s recommendation as long as his hotel project is part of the master plan. A Representative with Carnegie Mellon was not immediately available for comment.

Originally, Museum Park LP, working with Carnegie Mellon, proposed a hotel that would be 12 stories tall, have 225 rooms and include a range of full-service amenities, such as meeting space, a restaurant and a health club. But Carnegie Mellon protested the project’s size and scale last March, leading the developer to redesign a smaller, limited-service hotel of seven stories and 144 rooms.

The city has not yet given final approval for the new, smaller hotel plan.


[email protected] | (412) 208-3826

[Johnland]

Originally Posted by Evergrey

http://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/stories/2009/09/14/daily15.html

Tuesday, September 15, 2009, 12:18pm EDT

Peduto calls for neighborhood master plan in wake of hotel dispute between Craig Street business owners, CMU

Pittsburgh Business Times - by Tim Schooley

Originally, Museum Park LP, working with Carnegie Mellon, proposed a hotel that would be 12 stories tall, have 225 rooms and include a range of full-service amenities, such as meeting space, a restaurant and a health club. But Carnegie Mellon protested the project’s size and scale last March, leading the developer to redesign a smaller, limited-service hotel of seven stories and 144 rooms.

The city has not yet given final approval for the new, smaller hotel plan.


[email protected] | (412) 208-3826

With all due respect to CMU, where do they get off dictating the height of a private enterprise hotel development? That's really calling the kettle black. CMU owns how many acres and has how much square footage in developed space and they can't abide by a measly 12 story hotel? All the land they own around that site is mostly ravine, isn't it? Why does the 12 story planned height upset them? My God, what if CMU were located in a Center City Philly, or any other major city, they'd really be busy stamping out development projects on their threshold. Don't they own that vast surface parking lot on the other side of Forbes? Seems to me that's a dismal use of land in Oakland. Where the hue and cry over that? I mean that site has been an abandoned gas station for years. You'd think they'd applaude hotel development.

[cdc]

Originally Posted by Johnland

With all due respect to CMU, where do they get off dictating the height of a private enterprise hotel development?

Its called "zoning" ... and it is dictated by the local government, not CMU.

[UrbaniDesDev]

__________

[Grimacista]

Originally Posted by cdc

Its called "zoning" ... and it is dictated by the local government, not CMU.

And that property is currently zoned as 'eyesore' and 'disgrace'. If they built a 10 story strip joint there it would still be an upgrade over the present situation.

[Wiz Khalifa]

Has anyone seen this map:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/07/progressive_map/index.html

It shows the shift of demographics over the last 5 years in metros concerning the migration of progressive ideas. Obviously, its not the greatest news if you are a progressive minded person living in Pittsburgh. Click on the link going back 20 years for an even more sobering graphic. It seems as though Pittsburgh is trending in the opposite direction of 95% of the country and that trend has not been reversed in the past 4 years, even during the disastrous Bush administration and the newest renaissance.

[Evergrey]

We've discussed Metro Pittsburgh's embarrassing presidential voting trends ad nauseum on two seperate occassions already. Whether that represents some mysterious "progressive quotient" is up for debate.

An interesting map nonetheless, Wiz... and really demonstrates how out of touch with the rest of America Metro Pittsburgh was during the 2008 election... but at least Obama loves us despite our mediocre support

[Austinlee]

but at least Obama loves us despite our mediocre support

Good point!

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by Wiz Khalifa

Has anyone seen this map:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/07/progressive_map/index.html

It shows the shift of demographics over the last 5 years in metros concerning the migration of progressive ideas. Obviously, its not the greatest news if you are a progressive minded person living in Pittsburgh. Click on the link going back 20 years for an even more sobering graphic. It seems as though Pittsburgh is trending in the opposite direction of 95% of the country and that trend has not been reversed in the past 4 years, even during the disastrous Bush administration and the newest renaissance.

I'm not sure it's that Pittsburgh was ever a progressive place. I think it's more that a lot of the moderates in the area have switched from Democrat to Republican in the past few decades. The switch may also have to do with how inept many of the local politicians are (and they are usually Democrat). I'm pretty sure most the switch was outside Allegheny County. I'm sure of this, because I remember seeing a map from the 1992 election where Greene, Beaver, Washington, and Mercer Counties voted Democrat while they are more Republican now. In all, the switch IMO may have more the do with people no longer just pulling the Democratic lever without looking at the candidates than how liberal/conservative the area is.

[Grimacista]

Originally Posted by Wiz Khalifa

Has anyone seen this map:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/07/progressive_map/index.html

It shows the shift of demographics over the last 5 years in metros concerning the migration of progressive ideas. Obviously, its not the greatest news if you are a progressive minded person living in Pittsburgh. Click on the link going back 20 years for an even more sobering graphic. It seems as though Pittsburgh is trending in the opposite direction of 95% of the country and that trend has not been reversed in the past 4 years, even during the disastrous Bush administration and the newest renaissance.

What exactly is 'progressive'? Why is it wrong that Pittsburgh has not gotten 'more progressive'? It is almost irresponsible to try to identify a population's political/ideological preferences by a label like 'progressive'. This map, like many others like it, means absolutely nothing.