User:Jungledrew64/Suggested PAAC Transit Alternatives

Hello, I Created this page in my user space to get some ideas out there about Port Authority of Allegheny County's bus/rail service. These are just some Ideas that I have been having collect dust in my head. Please read through, and if you have some ideas, add them separatly to mine. I ask that all edits to my ideas be only grammatical/spelling error corrections. If you feel there is a major flaw in logic somewhere, then please raise the issue in the discussion page. Hopefully this site can help to expand the Port Authority's service and quality through rider's ideas.

Downtown Improvements

Surface Bus Lanes

The largest problem PAT has downtown seems to be traffic to me. I have a very simple remedy to this. With some cooperation from the city and PennDOT the city could convert Penn and Liberty to a one way configuration with Liberty flowing into the Strip and Penn flowing out of the Strip. Liberty could have one contraflow buslane from Grant to Stanwix. Stanwix (which is currently 5 lanes total) could be setup in a 4-lane configuration with one contra-flow buslane from Liberty to 3rd. From there the busses could proceed down 3rd with a two lane configuration; where one of the two lanes is a buslane. Once 3rd reaches back to Grant or Ross it is kind of hard to find a good configuration. Ideally the busses should proceed down Grant to the East Busway without Buslanes, but as many know Grant gets very congested at rush hour. An alternative would be to use Ross and possibly put in a contra-flow lane there, but ross turns into bigelow and haeds east with no connection to the busway. Busses other than busway routes could use these lanes, and the port authority could eliminate most of the other buslanes downtown to open up more streets to mixed traffic. Obviously this plan is not ideal but here are the benefits:

• Less mixed bus/car traffic.
• Ability to collect fares prior to boarding through fare booths.
• Direct connections to the T at Wood Station and Gateway Station.
• More reliable bus transit times through downtown.

Some of the major drawbacks are:

• Implementing "platforms" in the "street" (See the Bus-Stop diagram).
• Cost of converting existing road configuration.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

Underground BRT option 1

Another option is to pave the LRT tunnels, with the tracks embedded, and use the old streecar platforms as bus stops for the busses. Busses could enter at the East Busway Penn Station, Station Square, and one of the new North Side Stations. This could bring alot of congestion into the downtown subway tunnels, so busses that run into downtown would have to be limited to major routes in a trunk-feeder system. Also the tunnels would have to be ventilated for the fumes from the bus exhaust, or the busses would need an electric mode for running underground.

Some of the benefits to this system are:

• No busses on downtown surface streets.
• Ability to collect fares at the station.
• Complete access to the T.
• More reliable bus transit times through downtown.

The major drawbacks are:

• Cost related to converting the railway to a rail/roadway.
• Cost to maintain a rail/roadway.
• Cost of ventilation solutions(Either installing fans or acquiring a new bus fleet).

Underground BRT option 2

The major drawback to underground BRT is the ventilation problems, but it is more desirable than buses on the street. So this solution gives the best of both worlds. Dig a trench through downtown for the buses to utilize. Instead of covering the trench with asphalt to construct a tunnel, the trench could be covered with steel grating. I have seen some older bridges that use this technique for the decks. This way surface traffic can run on top of the grate and the buses can run underneath. The grate is open to allow for the ventilation of the bus fumes, and when newer technology is available the grates can be removed and the trenches can be paved over to make a typical tunnel for the buses. I think an alignment similar to the surface bus lanes would be ideal.

Oakland Improvements

I see no alternative in Oakland other than an Elevated Rail or Subway configuration of the T into Oakland. I would use the existing terminus at Penn Station in downtown. From there I think the T should make a right into a tunnel which would take the T to the new Penguins arena. From the Penguins Arena I would turn left and continue along 5th Avenue in an Elevated Rail configuration through Uptown, Oakland, Shadyside, and Larimer where it would connect with the east busway. Future extentions/branches could include South Oakland, Hazelwood, Homestead (The Waterfront), Duquesne (Kennywood), Squirrel Hill, Bloomfield, Highland Park, and Wilkinsburg. These neighborhoods are some of Pittsburgh's most populous and Oakland is the 3rd Largest Central Business District in PA. It is crazy to not provide Light-Rail to the east end of the city.

Monroeville Improvements

In the Eastern Corridor Transit Study the Port Authority proposed an East Busway extension to Monroeville. I think this is an absolute priority since Monroeville is one of our most populated suburbs.

Airport Improvements

I know the North Shore Connector is controversial, but it is a great step towards expanded North Side/Airport service. As the Port Authority has stated the North Side is the most direct route to the Airport. Most likely they would go through McKees Rocks, which could use the T. So overall I think the Port Authority has this covered. However, I do not see how this takes priority over the East End.

South Side Improvements

I think the southside is a low priority right now, but it would be nice if the Port Authority provided Light-Rail service via the existing Rail Road tracks on the Monongahela river bank. I realize that this involves the purchasing of some right-of-way or reaching a usage agreement with the current owner, but that is feesable.

Specific Route Improvements

46K

The 46K Beltzhoover[5] route is extremely inefficient. The route wastes a large majority of it's time backtracking on itself, especially during rush hour. The route runs very close to the T's overbrook line, but does not utilize this at all. The route could much better serve the community through the following alignment[6]. The red path is the route leaving Beltzhoover for Bon Air and the blue path is the route leaving Bon Air for Beltzhoover. This route would provide a connection to the Boggs Station T stop and the Bon Air T Station stop for people commuting downtown. By running on Brownsville Rd. the route provides a connection to the 51C for direct access to E. Carson St. and Century III Mall. The buses that run this route would most likely be mini-buses since the 46K is usually less than half full. The frequency of service should be increased to every 10-15 minutes peak and every 20-30 minutes off-peak.

54C

The 54C is a very popular route for a large majority of its path, but at the tail ends of the path it's ridership is low. I think it would be better suited to a loop service through the following areas: Downtown -> South Side (E. Carson St.) -> Oakland -> Shady Side -> Bloomfield -> Strip District -> Downtown. This is essentially the route that the 54C utilizes today, except the route no longer ends at South Hills Junction or Allegheny Center. This would give both Downtown and Oakland residents access to all of E. Carson St. without having to transfer between buses. It will continue to provide access from Oakland to Shady Side, Bloomfield, and the Strip District. The people on S. 18th St. and the residents of Beltzhoover and Bon Air whom would loose 54C service, are already well served by the 51C to the South Side where a 54C could be caught. Also it would be beneficial to rename the route so that rider can see the distinction from th rest of the system.