Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ktxhopem3276 t1_j5hrrt5 wrote

Reply to comment by Rodriguezry in If only.. by metracta

You have stumbled on the problem with building more light rail. is very expensive to build it to all the suburbs. It is a lot cheaper to build dedicated busways in the core that are shared by multiple routes while buses use existing routes further out I. The suburbs. There is a project in the 5-15 year time frame to build rapid bus transit on the sourth shore of the Allegheny to new Kensington and a project in the 15-25 year timeline for some smaller bus improvements on the north shore of the Allegheny from Etna to Natrona.

https://nextransitdraftplan.blob.core.windows.net/finalplan/NEXTransit%20-%20FINAL-web%209-16-21.pdf

Map is on page 54

4

Sankara_Connolly2020 t1_j5hvoq2 wrote

Whats even more cost effective than building more busways is running DMUs on existing rail infrastructure that only run freight overnight… like the AVRR line to New Kensington that Port Authority wants to turn into a busway because they’re allergic to trains.

Ottawa started a similar line (mostly single tracked freight line with only overnight traffic) 20 years ago for $21 million. Adjust that for inflation, and triple that for shits and giggles, and you’re still looking at a much cheaper project with higher capacity, scalable, faster vehicles operating at 15 minute headways.

AVRR also owns the line running up the route 8 corridor. Just saying…

1

ktxhopem3276 t1_j5hyxgf wrote

they have claimed in the past that heavy rail is not cost effective at the ridership levels it would get in a monroeville study but that was a while ago. Not many medium sized us cities use heavy rail. Now I’m going to have to read up on it because I’m not familiar with the Allegheny river valley. A big reason I like living in the south hills is the trolley and I wonder how many people in areas like Hampton chose to live there because they want to be away from the hustle and bustle. The south hills townships are a lot more cramped and dense than the route 8 corridor

1

Sankara_Connolly2020 t1_j5i24u6 wrote

I’m not sure how feasible the Route 8 corridor would be, but the Strip to New Kensington absolutely would be and AVRR ownership has long been amenable to it. Investing in some lightweight DMUs (and their maintenance) and making some small scale track improvements would absolutely be cheaper than paving over the whole line for a busway, and would attract a higher ridership while providing faster, scalable service.

I especially like the idea of building a little shoulder station in the Strip that could serve as the terminus for both the AVRR line and the Oakland gondola, while connecting with the Penn/Liberty bus trunk for an easy transfer to Downtown.

Edit: here’s an article on the Ottawa DMU line I mentioned http://www.eastsiderailnow.org/o-train.html

2

ktxhopem3276 t1_j5i4tqe wrote

The prt 25 year plan in 2021 suggests studying rail versus bus for avrr so I don’t think they have decided either way yet. They will probably apply for a federal grant to do a study at some point. My concern with rail is all the transfers involved. From Dormont to Oakland takes an hour via the trolly downtown when I can drive it in 20 minutes in rush hour. Even if they built the trolly to Oakland they would have to alternate lines going to Oakland versus gateway and Northshore so service frequency might not be ideal

1