PITTSBURGH | Development Rundown II

[AaronPGH]

I get it. Light rail performs better. But please explain how in the living hell we are ever going to get the money required to build out a real, useful LRT system? How long has it taken us to develop basically table scraps of a system? I don't want to be 75 years old when our first useable line has it's grand opening (and automated, flying cars are zooming around). We needed a proper transit system YESTERDAY.

I have always been an extreme optimist, but this is clearly a huge pipe dream.

[dfiler]

That article is hard to interpret. It seems like it is "herald[ing] transit growth". Yet the quoted statistics don't bear that out. For example, the number of trips taken by train or bus is up 1.07%. Yet our population grew .08%.

A quarter percent growth isn't anything to be excited about in my opinion. It might actually mean a smaller percentage of city dwellers used transit than the year before. If more than a quarter percent of our population moved from rural areas to cities with transit, then indeed, the percentage of people who use transit when available, actually went down!

I am a big proponent of urban density and public transportation. Yet the numbers in that article don't lead me to believe that transit is truly becoming more popular.


What I wouldn't give to be able to take light rail from near my home in regent square to downtown. I have a copy of the realestate brochure for my neighborhood when it was built at around 1905. It boasts "Hampton Place is located in the heart of Wilkinsburg -- is but two minutes walk from the Pennsylvania Railroad station. This system runs ninety passenger trains daily to and from Pittsburg. The plan is within a few minutes walk from five electric lines of street cars that traverse the entire city of Pittsburg."

Over a hundred years ago there were 90 passenger trains a day and 5 electric street car lines within walking distance of my home! Today there are zero.

[Wave]

Is it either/or in terms of LRT on the East Busway ROW? My understanding is that you can have the light rail line and busway on the same roadbed/trackbed.

The east busway was built in anticipation of later adding LRT on the route, so the construction standards used are already able to support the LRT vehicles and infrastructure without rebuilding the road. The LRT could carry heavy volume with several cars and the buses could still run the route with extensions off of the busway. The LRT could then theoretically be extended further along the mainline or elsewhere (if necessary or possible). If growth continues as it has been along the eastern corridor then I don't know if buses would be able to handle the volume of ridership needed or useful for the type of growth as East Liberty continues its torrid growth pace and Wilkinsburg takes off, not to mention the rest of the east end. And relative to other rail/subway solutions in the east end an LRT.Busway combo would be far less expensive.

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Converting the East Busway to light rail would be a waste of money. As we briefly discussed above, it already provides a popular service, the buses are actually faster than T-style LRVs, and it allows for transferless extensions of routes off the Busway.

However, one thing worth considering would be electrifying the East Busway for use by trolley buses.

[SkyPittsburgh]

Planning Commission Schedule is up and there aren't many changes since the last one, except for the renovations of a few East Liberty Baum Boulevard buildings. Other than that, the Black Box Theater is on there, a Squirrel Hill Entry Sign and Hot Metal Flats make an appearance.

http://pittsburghpa.gov/dcp/boards/planning-commission-schedule

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Wave

Is it either/or in terms of LRT on the East Busway ROW? My understanding is that you can have the light rail line and busway on the same roadbed/trackbed.

The east busway was built in anticipation of later adding LRT on the route, so the construction standards used are already able to support the LRT vehicles and infrastructure without rebuilding the road. The LRT could carry heavy volume with several cars and the buses could still run the route with extensions off of the busway. The LRT could then theoretically be extended further along the mainline or elsewhere (if necessary or possible). If growth continues as it has been along the eastern corridor then I don't know if buses would be able to handle the volume of ridership needed or useful for the type of growth as East Liberty continues its torrid growth pace and Wilkinsburg takes off, not to mention the rest of the east end. And relative to other rail/subway solutions in the east end an LRT.Busway combo would be far less expensive.

Two comments.

1. The T as it stands is much slower than the busway. My understanding is a large part of this is due to the actual rolling stock, not the track. Meaning if you put the existing T cars onto the busway, the result would be less speedy service.

2. Even if you had a different, faster system for the Busway, keep in mind that if you continued to run buses as well, the system could only be as fast as the slowest transit vehicle. So either the LRT would slow down the buses, or else the buses would result in a maximum speed for the LRT.

On the same general subject though, I read an article just the other day in a local magazine from last winter about the history of the Busway. One thing it discussed I found interesting is there were originally plans for a S Aiken station, which was blocked by NIMBYs. I do wonder how many people would now have second thoughts, given how successful it has become. Still, it is only four blocks from Negley Station. Something around Centre, Baum, or even S Millvale would be perhaps a better improvement.

[Found5dollar]

^ there was some hinting at a new stop at Bakery Square not to long ago.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Found5dollar

^ there was some hinting at a new stop at Bakery Square not to long ago.

I'm not sure I see the point of this. I mean, walking from the East Liberty station to Bakery Square isn't the nicest streetscape, but it only takes around nine minutes. If you put a stop at the overpass by East Liberty Boulevard, it would take around five minutes to walk to Bakery Square.

The one thing in its favor I suppose is it would be a cheap stop to build, given the topography there isn't troubling. But I don't want to see the East Busway turned into a local bus route which stops every few blocks, as it sort of defeats the whole purpose.

[dfiler]

Consider though, nearly all successful urban transit systems in the world feature numerous access points. They typically don't consist of just a few stops. If there is need for express service from the outer reaches of the service area, that too can be accommodated and the lesser used stops bypassed.

But you're right, those two location might be too close together for the current ridership. I don't use the busway so it would just be speculation on my part.

While googling the subject, I cam across a URA document from 2012, Bridging the Busway - A vision for Homewood & Point Breeze North.
http://www.bridgingthebusway.com/wp-cont...BTB-Executive-Summary_Screen-Quality.pdf

[photoLith]

I just read the gas meter in this new building on south 18th street in the southside and it has to be one of the ugliest abominations of a building I've seen in quite some time. They should have aesthetic regulations in historic neighborhoods to prevent schlock like this from marring the street scene. I want to know what architect designed it and though yeah, this pos looks great, lets build it!



Here's a similar building the next block over, not quite as atrocious but still it's pretty bad.

[dfiler]

Is that a garage? I'm surprised they were allowed a curb cut for the driveway. That generally means removing one or two public parking spots for the sole benefit of a private property owner.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by dfiler

While googling the subject, I cam across a URA document from 2012, Bridging the Busway - A vision for Homewood & Point Breeze North.
http://www.bridgingthebusway.com/wp-cont...BTB-Executive-Summary_Screen-Quality.pdf

I remember when that came out.

Point Breeze North is one of the most underrated neighborhoods in the city. Historic, largely intact neighborhood with many big grand houses. No business district, but it's only a short walk to the East End Coop and a few other things. Almost all of the residential portion of the neighborhood is in the "good feeder zone" for city schools as well. And of course great busway access. The only reason it's underpriced is because some black people live there, and it's across the busway from Homewood.

Originally Posted by photoLith

I just read the gas meter in this new building on south 18th street in the southside and it has to be one of the ugliest abominations of a building I've seen in quite some time. They should have aesthetic regulations in historic neighborhoods to prevent schlock like this from marring the street scene. I want to know what architect designed it and though yeah, this pos looks great, lets build it!

I think it would even be legal to build that in Allegheny West and the Mexican War streets. All city historic districts do is protect existing structures from remuddling after all - they do nothing to put strictures on new construction.

For whatever reason, architects really, really hate designing things which don't "look contemporary." Trust me, I'm married to one and know many others as a result. I'm really not sure I understand. If architecture is an art form, you should be able to play with historic concepts, the same way that a musician or visual artist can decide to do a work using traditional methods and materials. But the bias in favor of the "new" is nearly universal.

[photoLith]

Many historic neighborhoods have regulations in other cities that new buildings have to be built in traditional styles that meld well with the neighborhood.

[PGHpenna]

That new building on the South Side reminds me of the Brownstone facade removals that seem to be very much in vogue in NYC. It's definitely jarring to see a building like that amidst historic structures. On the other hand, it's important to consider that cities are constantly evolving, and diversity in both people and architecture make cities great.

The NYT did a great piece a few years back which, if nothing else, provided me with a few alternate perspectives to consider. It's a good read if you haven't done so already: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/realestate/the-brownstone-revisionists.html?_r=0

[photoLith]

^
Well... that's a pretty horrific trend.

[dfiler]

While style and taste is personal preference and changes with the times, it is pretty clear that some types of urban fabric are vastly preferable by the majority of people over the course of many centuries.

I think it is safe to assert that the modern building pictured above, will be viewed as horrifically ugly by pretty much everyone, especially when viewed over the course of decades or centuries. Now excuse me while go stab my eyes out.

[Evergrey]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I remember when that came out.

Point Breeze North is one of the most underrated neighborhoods in the city. Historic, largely intact neighborhood with many big grand houses. No business district, but it's only a short walk to the East End Coop and a few other things. Almost all of the residential portion of the neighborhood is in the "good feeder zone" for city schools as well. And of course great busway access.

Don't forget about Westinghouse Park!

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by photoLith

I just read the gas meter in this new building on south 18th street in the southside and it has to be one of the ugliest abominations of a building I've seen in quite some time. They should have aesthetic regulations in historic neighborhoods to prevent schlock like this from marring the street scene. I want to know what architect designed it and though yeah, this pos looks great, lets build it!

That's clearly a version of the highly publicized and lauded "Philly 100k House" from a few years ago.

[photoLith]

Well that Philly house isn't bad but the version in the southside needs to be torn down ASAP.

[GeneW]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I remember when that came out.

I think it would even be legal to build that in Allegheny West and the Mexican War streets. All city historic districts do is protect existing structures from remuddling after all - they do nothing to put strictures on new construction.

For whatever reason, architects really, really hate designing things which don't "look contemporary." Trust me, I'm married to one and know many others as a result. I'm really not sure I understand. If architecture is an art form, you should be able to play with historic concepts, the same way that a musician or visual artist can decide to do a work using traditional methods and materials. But the bias in favor of the "new" is nearly universal.

Yeah, if there's nothing historic about the building to begin with or if it's new construction, then you can build in any style you want. Witness this storefront on Western Ave or the condos on the corner of Beech and Brighton.

As an avid preservationist, I'm fine with that. A house that was built in 1870 should look like it was built in that time but if you build something new, I'd rather it was reflective of its own time than designed to be some awful faux "victorian" with stuck-on plastic gingerbread.

[Evergrey]

So I guess this means the American Lung Association won't be slandering Pittsburgh again this year?

http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/5766785-74/county-pollution-standards#axzz2vxlD5Is1

County meets federal air standards for first time in 2013


By Aaron Aupperlee

Published: Friday, March 14, 2014, 11:39 a.m.
Updated 2 hours ago

Air quality in Allegheny County met federal standards for fine particulate pollution in 2013, county officials said Friday.

Last year was the first time all eight monitoring sites in the county met U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards for PM2.5 pollution. Seven sites — Avalon, Clairton, North Braddock, Harrison, Lawrenceville, North Park and Fayette — met standards before. Last year was the first year the monitoring site in Liberty met federal standards, according to the county.

“This is a significant milestone for Allegheny County, especially at the Liberty air monitoring site, which historically has had the highest pollution levels in the county,” Health Director Dr. Karen Hacker said in a statement. “It marks a huge leap forward in our efforts to improve air quality. While our work is far from finished, we are proud to say that air quality in Allegheny County is the best it's been since the industrial revolution.”

...