Politics and Place

DEFCON 2

2010-06-14T10:08:00.002-04:00

Pardon my French, but this is bullshit.

I am sick and tired of this. I am so frustrated with Act 44. The state legislature passed the buck down the line a few years, hoping something would pan out. When it didn't, we're in the same position we were before, but now we're dealing with one of the worst budget years in history. The state legislature has completely let down my trust, and has demonstrated an unwillingness to even seriously weigh the benefits and losses of this issue.

I'm sick of Northern PA. The congressional representatives and lobbyists were able to prevent the tolling of I-80 in a move that just plain wasn't fair. How many roads have been paved up there off of the dollars of Southern residents? Northern PA needs to recognize they are parts of this state. Not to mention the fact that transit systems aren't exclusive to the Southern communities.

I'm sick of the fact that public perception is still anti-transit. If the lack of funding was half a dozen other things, there would be a crowd of pitchforks at the state capitol. There is still this perception, for whatever reason, that transit is this side show issue for a fringe community of environmentalists and urbanists. In reality, one more bus rider is one less car on the road. Better for the public, better for the government, better for everyone.

Please, call your state senator and representative. Let them know that they need to get their act together and actually deal with this issue.

A Note on Numbers

2010-06-13T20:30:00.003-04:00

There are plenty of people who are far more qualified to talk about this then I am, but I just wanted to make an observation.

The preliminary numbers for 2009 population came out, and Allegheny County had 267 more residents than it had the previous year. Virtually every city over the last half-century has had to deal with population loss associated with the rush to the suburbs. But very few regions, Pittsburgh among them, have had to contend with population loss on a regional level. The fact that Allegheny county gained population, combined with the numbers about domestic in-migration a couple of weeks ago, and it paints a very different picture of the region than a decade ago.

I've been postulating a lot on the questions of population loss and brain drain recently, and it's interesting to see how they both get lumped into the same category. It is quite possible that a place can get smarter, even as it gets smaller. Just something to think about.

Is This Really What We Want?

2010-05-30T18:11:00.003-04:00

I've been meaning to write about this for a while, but things got in the way. But a recent conversation with an old friend brought it up again.

Does anyone really know what is going on with this? The Allegheny Valley Railroad is one of the most fascinating stories in the local transportation world (not quite Skybus-esque in its permanence, but close). I've personally never really seen the benefit of the Arnold line (or at least compared to some of the other proposals out there). It seems to me that the project isn't really designed out of necessity, but of convenience. As I've talked about before, commuter lines are risky business. Are we really aiding development by putting a commuter line out to New Kensington? If it takes 40 minutes to drive from Arnold to Pittsburgh, and 20 minutes to train, who is to say that I wouldn't just move a 20 minute drive away from the Arnold park and ride? But I digress.

Anyway, apparently Urban Innovations and the AVRR were unsatisfied with the speed of progress on the HDR report of last year. So they went out and got financing (notice the distinction: financing, not funding) on their own. From the information that my friend provided me (which I presume is regarding Urban Innovation's proposal), it looks like AVRR was upset that the proposals would only take the line into the Strip District at worst or Penn Station at best. The proposal made it sound that there would be some way to integrate the train with the light rail spur to Steel Plaza. I'm not entirely sure at the technical feasibility, but I'm not an engineer. The more important question is if that's the best goal to be working toward.

The Trouble with Tunnels

2010-05-21T17:00:00.002-04:00

This blog hasn't been shut down yet, I just haven't had time (or a computer) to post. Fortunately for you all, this article finally stirred me into action:

Jack Wagner is getting angry about cost overruns on the North Shore connector. Don't get me wrong, I'm not crazy about cost overruns either, though I recognize that is like getting angry at the tides or the wind.

It seems like the North Shore Connector has become a popular punching bag, representing either government waste or a personal attack on Dan Onorato. A few days ago, friend of the blog Jon Schmitz wrote about an Anthony Williams ad criticizing Onorato's "Tunnel to Nowhere" (which mistakenly describes the NSC as being funded by the drink tax).

In my opinion, it's funny that people are trying to peg Onorato, or Bland, or anyone else with the NSC, when in reality, they're just as quick to run away from it. The tunnel is a product of the past generation of community leaders, which has been inherited by this lot, and therefore they don't have as much stake in it (fun history lesson: this is still by far the most informative article on the subject). There hasn't really been a champion for this project since it's inception, which is why it's now our Big Dig. Had it been branded well, I think popular support would be a lot higher (and could probably have kept the spur to the convention center).

So if I may, let me take a shot at trying to defend this lovable mile of light rail track. Let me try to convince you that, even if we came by it in a way you don't approve, for a product you wish was better, and spending more than you think we should, the NSC is still a regional asset:

It expands the urban frontier. Downtown Pittsburgh, as the Golden Triangle, is hedged in by geography. New buildings aren't going to be built on rafts on the rivers. After we put all that money into the city's front yard, we aren't going to do anything stupid there (not that we haven't thought about it). 579 continues to be a roadblock in the way of Hill redevelopment, far more than Mellon Arena would be if it were left around (and, you know, the fact that it's a hill doesn't really make it any easier). The South Side is still too industrialized too really get really built up, and again topography doesn't help. You're left with the North Side, a neighborhood that has a lot of potential. The NSC essentially completes the annexation of Allegheny city from a century ago; it makes it possible to get from Grant Street to the Science Center in a matter of a minute or two. The North Side (and the North Shore, insomuch as it exists) becomes integrated into the Central Business District in a way that bridges alone could not. The North Side is close enough that we're not creating an edge city, but far enough away that we're creating a larger, denser space.
It has the possibility to change the layout of the Near North Side. I'm not saying it is an absolute possibility, but the NSC has the potential to change how the North Side looks. In the past, the area has been the site of some disastrous projects (Parkway North, Allegheny Center, etc.). The NSC has the potential to make density more desirable for the area. With more chance that people will want to use the service and property values may go up, maybe parking lots may make more sense as mixed use retail and residential buildings, or at the very least, parking garages.
You get a new Gateway Center Station out of it. Gateway Center has always been a poorly placed station, in my opinion. But this new plan repositions the station to a better location where it is actually more useful, in my opinion. Not to mention more aesthetically pleasing, from the sketches I've seen.
Because it's a gift, you ingrate. The county paid 3.3% of the budget for this project. The rest was federal and state money. Think of all the other places in the country or the state who could have got that funding, but we did. It's sort of like when you were a kid, and your grandparents got you Mega Bloks when you really wanted Legos and your mother would say "well think about all the poor kids who didn't even get a Christmas present". The NSC is our Mega Blok set. It may not be what you wanted, but you can still build with it.

Wheels on the Bus

2010-04-19T10:32:00.004-04:00

I heard from GiG that Megabus is resuming service to New York. Apparently I'm one of the last people to know, but I wanted to say something about it.

While I obviously prefer the train, I actually don't mind Megabus/Bolt Bus all that much. Unlike Greyhound, which seems to take forever because of so many stops, my experience on the budget lines has been fairly quick. The other reason the service is so great is cost. This weekend my ballroom partner and I are traveling to Boston via Megabus, and our tickets to travel out of DC on Friday afternoon are half the cost of our tickets to return via Amtrak on the red-eye train Sunday night.

Some of you may remember that Megabus actually had a brief presence in Pittsburgh already. For a while, early in it's life (the company has only been around in the US since 2006) Megabus provided service to Western destinations such as Chicago, Toledo, and Cleveland. The demand just wasn't there (it probably doesn't help that Pittsburgh is a major Greyhound hub for east-west travel, so there is already a substantial amount of service being provided in that direction).

After the failure of the Steel City Flyer, I'm still not sure I have a handle on how the market for intercity bus service is in Western Pennsylvania. I'm not sure why coach buses haven't taken off in the same way that you see them used on the East Coast. Travel times are really not that bad from Pittsburgh to other destinations. I imagine car ownership rates are higher in Pgh than they are on the coast, which means people feel less of a need to take a bus.

The connection to New York city isn't just a logistical bonus for Pittsburgh, it's a psychological boost as well. Pittsburgh's soul lies with the Midwest, but it's heart is in the East. The fact that the connection is with New York is not necessarily because it is the closest big city (Philadelphia or DC would probably fit that bill). It is because, fundamentally, connectivity to New York City is important. It has been that way for nearly New York's entire history. PIT still has nearly 50 more weekly flights to NYC than it does to the next most popular destination. Options that connect Pittsburgh to New York may not provide the economic ties of Pittsburgh-Cleveland, the Socio-cultural ties of Pittsburgh-Chicago, or the diasporic ties of Pittsburgh-DC, but they provide lesser forms of all three.

A final note: the schedule of the Megabus departure from Pittsburgh is within an hour of the Pennsylvanian departure. I'll be very curious to track Amtrak's ridership numbers in 6 months.

This is Bad News Bears

2010-04-08T16:06:00.002-04:00

So let's talk about I-80.

For those not following the story, the state has been trying to toll Interstate 80, a stretch of road running between Ohio and New Jersey and serving a dramatically smaller population than I-76. While not serving a large population, I-80 passes through 5 of PA's 19 congressional districts. Several of these congresspersons, including Kathy Dahlkemper in Erie, lobbied the DOT hard to prevent the state from tolling, saying that it would harm local businesses.

The fact that I-80 will not be tolled is a huge kick to infrastructure in PA. Not only will it hurt road preservation (which is a major concern for a state as old as ours), it will devastate both PAT and SEPTA. There is virtually no way that transit in PA will wind up with the same level of service that it has right now.

This is an example of parochialism at its absolute worst. Without I-80 tolling, the entire state suffers except for a narrow strip of population along the road. East/West or civilization/Pennsyltucky battles are the ones that most often get attention, but what we've got here is a North/South struggle, a confrontation between what is best for the state as a whole and what is best for a narrow sliver of the state. Instead of recognizing that the health of the populated areas of the state can help the entire state, a few locals are being obstructionists for the entire commonwealth. You think last year's budget was a disaster? Wait until this one.

I just want to make sure that everyone reads this, right from Dahlkemper's website:

“We had a sustained effort to oppose this tolling plan, with representatives at the local and federal level working together to protect the jobs and commerce generated by Interstate 80,” Dahlkemper said. “We stood tall against a scheme that would have forced rural Pennsylvanians to foot the bill for urban transit on the other side of the state, and we won.”

Oh, ok. I hope you can explain that to the riders of Erie Metropolitan Transit Authority.

At this point, we've got a couple of options. First, there are no bones about it, the state needs to tax oil revenues. Marcellus is a very different situation than it was in 2007- it's vital now for the state to start generating some revenue off of it. The state should also consider a gasoline tax increase, which is going to be an absolute pain in an election year (ie, it won't happen).

We need to get serious about this funding situation. We need to work together as a state, at least attempting to put aside local concerns, in order to have our state transportation system literally fall apart beneath our feet. Otherwise, you might not have to pay to get off I-80 in Barkeyville (pop 237), Plymptonville (pop 1,040) or Buckhorn (pop 176), but you also won't have much of a road to drive on.

Shopping Spree

2010-04-07T09:27:00.003-04:00

Big news about I-80, as I'm sure you've heard. I've got three tests on Thursday though, so my commentary is going to have to wait until tomorrow afternoon.

Just a quick post that I've been mulling over re: the PG's article on Lower Fifth Avenue retail. The article discusses the resurgence of retail options in the area of Fifth Avenue near Market Square and beyond. A couple of things struck me as particularly interesting.

I'm in the process of writing a term paper on retail gentrification, and I've noticed that gentrification tends to cluster in three categories. I use the term "Banana Belt" to describe high end, national chains such as you find in Shadyside. "Boutique Belt" describes areas with a high prevalence of unique shops, a la Lawrenceville. "Big Box Belt" is a corridor with a lot of large chains like Home Depot and Target (a la East Liberty). While these corridors aren't always clear cut, I would say that I'm noticing a high concentration of specialty stores in the downtown retail scene. This strategy is interesting to me, because it is fairly different from what has been done previously. When I talked to Tom Murphy about Fifth-Forbes development last year, he told me that his plan had always been to try to make downtown a unique corridor where there were options not available anywhere else. Unfortunately, for him, that meant Lord and Taylor and Lazurus (and unsuccessfully, Nordstrom). But as we're finding with the South Side, stores like that won't just stay in one place if the market wants them (the department store strategy was also a failure for other reasons, but work with me here). National retailers will do what national retailers do, which is expand. This tends to dilute the market, and make downtown less of a destination for shoppers. But a downtown (or any neighborhood, really) filled with independent shops not available anywhere else will be more successful, because these stores will not flee to the suburbs so quickly.

The second thing that I noticed is that there isn't actually a lot of new retail happening here- it's just retail that's shifting:

"Heinz Healey's men's store to move from Station Square"
"Nettleton Shop of Pittsburgh, a men's shoe store, to move from Oxford Centre"
"Larrimor's clothing store relocated from Grant Street "
"A popular Downtown hair salon, Izzazu Salon and Spa, also will move"
"He also intends to move Prantl's and Mancini's bakeries a short distance"

So out of the stores that were mentioned by name, only one has not had a presence in the immediate downtown area. What I would say that we are seeing is a shifting in the poles of retail in greater downtown. Station Square is nearly 15 years old, and while it's too early to write its eulogy, the retail options have certainly been thinning there. Grant street, Pittsburgh's center of wealth for a century, is starting to wane, at least from a retail perspective, in favor of the younger, hipper areas near Point Park and Market Square (keeping in mind, of course, that downtown is geographically microscopic compared to many other American CBDs). I'm not necessarily saying that the polarity of downtown retail is a bad thing. On the contrary, I'd actually prefer to not have to hoof from Kuntz & Ryder in Oxford Centre to Saks Fifth Avenue on Smithfield during my lunch break. Concentrating retail options in a particular section of downtown will likely produce a multiplier affect. But it will be interesting to see what Grant and Smithfield look like in 5 years.

Overall, I'm encouraged by what is happening downtown. Can't wait to see it again when I return in a few months.

Row, Row, Row Your Boat

2010-04-05T13:15:00.002-04:00

News today in my city of temporary exile is that ferry services will start running in the area around Georgetown and Navy Yard.

The ferry concept has always been fascinating to me, and often when I tell people I write about transportation issues in Pittsburgh, they ask me why there aren't water taxis running up and down the three rivers. It seems like every couple of years it reemerges as a potential project, and if I remember correctly, there is a water limo that runs from from the Strip District to the North Shore to Station Square. They've got one hour head ways on the weekend, but to my understanding they don't run during the day.

So why aren't there ferries running nonstop between and among river destinations? I feel like it's a market thing, more than anything else. Pittsburgh has a lot of riverfront destinations, to be sure, but it also has easy ways to get back and forth to them without actually having to take to the water (an expansive system of bridges certainly helps that).

In addition, for as much development has happened along the rivers, the heavy hitters of economic development are far away from the rivers. In the old days the rivers were the arteries of industry. Corporate offices, nice residences, and upper crust shops headed for the hills. So while there are a good number of brownfields that have become destinations (Station Square, South Side, Waterfront, Pittsburgh Technology Center), the heavy hitters of the city's economy (Oakland, Shadyside, Squirrel Hill, East Liberty, much of downtown) are a bit of a hike from the nearest dock.

A water taxi would be like any other type of transportation option. If the headways aren't there, than people can't consider them a valid option. Unless someone shows up with an armada and starts serving half a dozen destinations with 15 minute headways, plan on taking the bus from the South Side to the North Shore.

If A Transit Project Falls in the Forest, and No One is Around to Hear It, Does it Still Produce Economic Benefits?

2010-04-02T09:56:00.006-04:00

Back to the old meat and potatoes: transit.

The PG ran a story yesterday on the West Busway TOD proposal. Essentially residents of the neighborhood are looking for what happened in East Liberty- they want mixed use development along the corridor with easy access to downtown amenities.

The West Busway is not the East Busway. There are decades of history of service along the East Busway, stretching back to when it was a commuter line. It travels through one of the most population dense areas between New York and Chicago. It serves downtown, a vibrant university district, and a growing retail corridor (both big box and boutique).

The West Busway, on the other hand, serves an area with topographic challenges and little destination traffic. People getting on a bus downtown that runs on the west Busway are going home, not going shopping or to school or anything like that. In other words, the East Busway is basically a string of pearls: connected destinations with amenities. The West Busway is a very A to B service.

The "if you build it they will come" is always a tough argument. I want to believe it, because it justifies a lot of what we do. And in the old days, it was true. A company would build streetcar lines: housing and services would follow. But I would say that the paradigm has been shifting for the last 50 years, largely because of suburbanization. In the 50's, if I built my house out in the suburbs, I'd demand that they upgrade the rural road I take into the city to become a four lane highway. Now destinations dominate form, and transportation grows to accommodate the demand.

Transit oriented development is not the same thing as transit created development. The whole point of TOD is that development congeals in partnership with transportation services. The more I think about it, the more I'd say a TOD project is probably something that would have happened anyway. If I'm a developer, and what I value is proximity and density (as opposed to space and privacy, which is a very different demand pull), I would be building in these areas already, regardless of whether there is an official "TOD" policy.

Busways are fantastic neighborhood assets, but they aren't the silver bullet to serious issues facing a lot of the smaller communities around the city.

No Laughing Matter

2010-04-01T13:00:00.002-04:00

I contemplated writing an April Fools post, maybe something like "Mayor Publicly Announces Support for Passenger Rail in Pittsburgh". But that would just make me cry.

So instead remember that today is census day. I'm preaching to the choir here, but I implore you to fill out your forms. The census is absolutely vital from a public transportation perspective.

Begun, the Transit Wars have.

2010-03-29T12:59:00.002-04:00

Front page of today's WashPo.

When the tide is high (relatively speaking), and agencies aren't as worried about where their money is coming from, rail and bus riders can get along reasonably. But when times are tight and cuts need to be made, transit riders split up into modal factions (and geographic factions, but that's a different issue). And let's be honest, you don't hear too many train riders shouting about how unfair it is that the bus riders have luxury seats with frequent headways and reliable service.

This isn't just a Washington phenomenon. I would venture to say that every city with a modal mix has one mode (usually rail-based), with a dramatically more affluent ridership base. But by the same token, these bases are the most vocal in their opposition (or the most skilled at getting their voices heard), and these services are the ones that most transit providers percieve as a way to increase total ridership. There's something political here- Metro is going to try to minimize the damage that service cuts would do to a system that the people who complain to Congress the most (staffers and tourists) use.

The Transit Wars are inevitable, because modes represent different lifestyles. Transit isn't always a choice, sometimes it's a necessity. We need to lobby for programs that recognize that different riding constituencies have different needs and options. The FTA acknowledges that, now we just need to make sure Congress sees it.

Retiring the #Epictraintrip Tag

2010-03-24T17:02:00.002-04:00

I won't talk too much about it, but I do think that there are some lessons that can be gleaned from my recent adventure riding the rails for a week and a half. I recently took a trip across America, from DC to Chicago to Portland to San Francisco, to Chicago, to New Orleans, and back to Washington. In total I went through 29 states and 8273 miles. I met a lot of fascinating people, and saw some incredible scenery, but I also had a couple very important takeaways.

1) People ride the train. A lot. I now have the anecdotal evidence to support it. The train gets in to Pittsburgh at 11:45 PM en route to Chicago, and a lot of people complain about getting on or off there. There were a dozen big cities we passed through later at night where there was as much or more traffic. Cleveland, Toledo, Minneapolis, Memphis, Omaha, Atlanta: trains come in the night or early mornings. And yet people ride the train. Not to mention the small communities in between. Even when traveling in the middle of the week, our trains were crowded. People genuinely want rail travel, even if it's just because of cost.

2) Cities need to stop trying to be San Francisco. Our trip was the first time I was in that city, and it was fascinating. For me it was a bit of a hajj; I feel like every aspiring planner or urban thinker wants to move to San Francisco at some point, or wants to turn their city into San Francisco. But I think actually being in the city realized that, while it is all that and a bag of chips, a lot of cities already have the assets that make SF great. Like the story in the PG says, I've got all I could want here, I just need to make it better.

3) I saw the Columbia River gorge at dawn. I scaled the Cascades, Sierra Nevadas, and Rockies. I went through deserts and bayous. But the prettiest thing I saw was the first night, crossing the Allegheny river on the Fort Wayne bridge in the still of the night.

It Was His Sled!

2010-03-23T14:21:00.003-04:00

I've got a lot of writing that I need to catch up with after a week of touring the country. A lot of very interesting stories...

Anyway. A real quick story. Downtown grocery store Rosebud is closing and filing for bankruptcy. I wonder why the market failed. Was it a bad location? It seems like Seventh Ave is relatively central for the developing residential population. I suppose it is out of the way for a lot of people in skyscrapers who may have provided some lunchtime traffic. Was it the type of products being served? I can't say I've ever been in the store, so I'm not sure. Was it the lack of marketing? I suspect that contributed to it, considering that for two summers I've taken walks around downtown, and only recently discovered it.

Or could it be that the downtown residential community, as much as we talk about it, is still very much in its infancy? Is it still more PDP marketing than real population at this point? I'll be very curious to see the census figures...

Shady Liberty in the NYT

2010-03-06T11:40:00.004-05:00

I know this is a couple of days old, but the New York Times had a story on the redevelopment of East Liberty. I've got to say, the pictures make the city look incredibly drab, but I guess it is March.

I've got a couple of lines in the article that I think are worth commenting on.

"In the decade since, the city has replaced 1,400 high-rise public housing units with 450 new mixed-income units."

I'm awful at math, but I think that means a net decline of 950 housing units, and an even greater decline of low to moderate income housing. Very few people would tell you that the public housing was a good idea for the neighborhood. But when you lose that housing, people need to go somewhere (read Chris for more on that). Displacement is and has always been a component of urban renewal/revitalization.

"The development, called Eastside, stretches east along Centre Avenue, linking the Hillman Cancer Center of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, national and local retailers, and express bus lanes — known to Pittsburghers as a busway — to downtown."

This whole sentence is fascinating to me. "Eastside" is a great example of those neighborhoods where a name change is meant to signal a change in the makeup of the neighborhood (I suppose it sounds better than "Shady Liberty"). In my gentrification seminar, we talk about the use of names like SoHo and NoMa and DoWiSeTrePla to essentially create a new history and identity for a neighborhood. While Murder Heights it isn't, the name "East Liberty" signals different things to people than "East Side" does. Also, it's a Busway. You guys are getting one up there in the Big Apple soon, so you should probably learn about them.

"Railroad tracks and the adjacent busway remain “an institutional barrier” for the neighborhood, he said."

The busway and the railroad tracks are some of East Liberty's best assets, if they can be leveraged correctly. The issue isn't the structures themselves, it's how they relate to the neighborhood.

The place is not particularly pedestrian friendly, and it's going to stunt growth or become no more than a Waterfront-type development in the city. Big boxes and urban areas can play nice (It's fascinating to me that Baltimore got Wal-Mart to agree to a second floor store; regardless of your opinion of the company, it at least demonstrates that they acknowledge their one-size-fits-all store doesn't always work), but it involves proding by public and community entities.

Ink in a newspaper of record is always a good thing. But it's important to remember the rest of the story.

It's Alive! (Again)

2010-02-24T16:49:00.007-05:00

It's kind of amazing to me how quickly writing this blog has jaded me. If I saw this story about a potential transit line in Oakland a year ago, I would have been thrilled. I'm still excited, but it's not quite the same.

Let me be clear, if anywhere in Western Pennsylvania deserves a transportation improvement, it would be Oakland. The area is still heavily congested, even with Children's moving to Lawrenceville. Downtown and Oakland, if connected together by more development along the Bluff corridor, could eventually grow into a central business corridor to rival the major downtowns in the country. A service with high frequency between downtown and Oakland could spur development in the neighborhoods in between.

But Oakland already has one of the healthiest transportation systems in the region. Bus service is comparatively frequent. The Contra-Flow bus lane on 5th Avenue is incredibly handy. I wouldn't go so far as to call Oakland "over-served" by transit, but it is considerably more served than a lot of other neighborhoods. If some kind of downtown to Oakland system was put in place, it would lead to a massive readjustment of Port Authority service.

Funding is the critical issue here, as is obvious. This project has languished for 4 years (and that's just officially, the original idea for this thing is decades, now nearly a century old). A public-private partnership is the obvious answer, because the local government and the state are in no position to fund this thing the whole way through. The project isn't well-developed enough to try to get funding from the federal government. But I think that it would be more of a public-non profit partnership. The universities would need to step up big time if this thing had any chance of happening.

In terms of mode, I think most people would want light rail. Intermodality is great and all, but People would probably prefer the ability to transfer from Steel Plaza to Southbound trains. PRT is a pipe dream in my opinion. We all know that I'm pro-BRT, but I'm actually not sure that, unless there was some kind of elevated system, BRT makes a lot of sense here. The area is quite built up already, and a BRT system would probably be grafted onto the neighborhood without a whole lot of options for connectivity. I'd also be curious to see how all of this interfaces with the possible commuter rail line running between Hazelwood and Lawrenceville. Realistically, this is a question of priorities. There's only so many dollars for capital development in transit, and if you're looking at this project, plus this one, plus those projects in Westmoreland county, you really have to think long and hard about what is going to be the most bang for the buck.

There's a very serious question about development. I don't want to sound like the Cato institute, but development doesn't immediately chase after transit improvement. It needs to be cultivated carefully, and will absolutely take some time and money. Plus, just because you have a train/people mover coming through, doesn't mean it's a desirable place to be. Frequency is absolutely vital. No one should need to wait half an hour for service.

I would highly encourage you to set up an account on the website. A guy could spend a few hours reading all the documents there (this guy did).

If ground is broken in two years, I will eat my hat. Gears are in motion, but I can assure you that it will be some time until there is anything here. Keep on your elected officials, but don't get too excited. The history is Pittsburgh is littered with the ruins of public transportation ideas gone awry. How's that gondola coming?

A Little Light Reading

2010-02-16T11:40:00.003-05:00

My post the other day raised an additional question. In demeaning downtown, I said that they don't have a storefront bookstore other than Kirner's. That's not entirely true. The Point Park University bookstore is also open to the public, as Chris pointed out to me. I've got to wonder, though, how many people working downtown would feel comfortable going into a college bookstore during their lunch hour? Would it be weird to just walk in off the street to a university bookstore, even one that sells books other than textbooks?

Is a bookstore absolutely vital downtown? Apparently, there wasn't a big enough market to support one when Barnes and Noble closed. The downtown library is gorgeous, but it's not exactly a browsing-friendly place. It's very utilitarian- a lot of people ordering books and getting them delivered downtown and a lot of people using the public computers.

What would a bookstore add to downtown? I feel like it would provide a sense of identity for the neighborhood. There is an image that surrounds a bookstore- it's a spot of social gathering. Kramerbooks is a local institution in Dupont Circle, an impressive feat considering how many other landmarks it needs to compete against. The B&N in Georgetown is open until 10:00 at night, long after most other stores have closed up shop. There's something about a large bookstore that just tends to provide the perception of a healthy neighborhood. Even more important, though substantially less likely, would be a small, independent bookstore. Small bookshops are very valuable assets to residential communities.

Downtown doesn't have either at the moment, a testimony to its lack of a retail scene in general. Plenty of people can tell you that there isn't an easy fix to that. The city is in even more of a pickle now because it doesn't want to cannibalize its successes (some of which are already stumbling) in Lawrenceville, Shadyside, South Side, and other locations.

When I talked to Murphy a few months ago, he told me that the plan for downtown was always to return it to what it had been before- the prime regional retail destination, with stores and products unavailable anywhere else in the region. If that vision is going to get anywhere, it starts in the cramped stacks of a local bookstore.

Followup

2010-02-14T19:57:00.002-05:00

A followup to my county quiz- this time it's the city neighborhoods.

The Alpha Neighborhood

2010-02-13T12:14:00.004-05:00

It's been a really slow week for me, and I had cabin fever. At some point I'd really like to write about the outstanding work done on the web to help people through the snow, particularly by @pghtransit and How's My Street.

As I sat in mountains of snow, I started wondering: If I were mayor/director of Public Works, what would be the very first neighborhood I would plow and salt? In other words, what is absolutely the most essential neighborhood to the city's vitality? What is the center of Pittsburgh?

Ultimately I think it would come down to two neighborhoods- Oakland and Downtown. These places have been the cultural and economic capitals of the city for as long as I've been alive (albeit not a long time in the history of the city). Communities like Shadyside, the South Side, and Lawrenceville have carved out a niche in the city, but only downtown and Oakland have consistently been centers for the cultural elite.

At first blush, I think most people would say that the Golden Triangle has always been and will continue to be the heart and soul of Pittsburgh. Most of the region's corporate headquarters are located there, and the transportation system is designed to funnel people into and out of the triangle. No other area in the city comes close to matching it in terms of economic density; it's perhaps one of the most compact CBDs in the country. And of course, Grant Street is the physical center of power for city and county government.

But downtown is also stagnate. While there is a boom in terms of residential population, and the newest skyscraper in 20 years, Fifth-Forbes is still a relative dead zone. Traffic is still a mess, and probably always will be. Downtown is at least five years away from the critical residential population necessary for a real grocery store and other social services. Kirner's is the only bookstore in the entire triangle with a street-level entrance, and unless "Lives of the Saints" is your cup of tea, you're going to have a hard time finding something to read there. Perhaps even more importantly, downtown Pittsburgh is a citadel- forced by geography into a narrow sphere of influence. The Southside isn't the destination it was 10 years ago, and the North Shore (insomuch as it exists as a neighborhood, which it doesn't) has still not developed into the type of neighborhood some had hoped (and it's unlikely that the addition of a few T stops will help that). Even neighborhoods connected by land, the Hill and the Bluff, don't have much downtown influence beyond a few blocks.

Oakland, on the other hand, is a relative newcomer compared to the ancient downtown. Oakland, as a metonym, of course represents the universities and their spin-offs. Oakland probably produces an order of magnitude less economic wealth than downtown, but it also has a much more sizable economic population. More importantly, Oakland is expanding. The mark of Oakland (ie, people and culture) has expanded into Shadyside, East Liberty, Lawrenceville, and Squirrel Hill, and you'd be crazy to think that it's not going to someday reach its tentacles into Hazelwood.

This isn't really just a town/gown issue anymore. If anything, the roles have been reversed. The town is the one that is holed up in a steel tower, without as much influence in the community. The gowns are out in the neighborhoods, actively reshaping the city. Heinz and PNC didn't bring Google or Rand, CMU and Pitt did. Alcoa and Allegheny Energy didn't spin off YinzCam or Vivisimo.

So will the PAA usurp the Duquesne club as the nexus of Pittsburgh power? Will City Council move their meetings to the Cathedral? I don't think so (though I do think special sessions of City Council should use the English room so they could do the whole Prime Minister's Questions thing with the Mayor). But downtown sure doesn't have the pull that it used to. And maybe I'd put a little more salt on the 4000 block of Forbes instead of the 400 block.

Braddock's Folly

2010-02-02T14:53:00.004-05:00

First, we were all definitely upset about UPMC Braddock shutting its doors this month. This is definitely a blow to a community which has finally started sprouting a few green shoots. But by the same token, the hospital is doing a hell of a lot to try to offset the bad press it's received. They are going to make payments of almost 3 times the lost tax revenue for the next five years (note to Braddock: don't squander that money). The shuttle service is a very nice touch too.

Once UPMC made its mind up, there wasn't a whole lot anyone could do, and it was certainly saddening. But it might be the reawakening that some people need. A parochial, "my neighborhood is an island" approach often besets these communities, and people in Braddock were protesting in support of their hospital. Braddock could always look down the river and say "Well at least we've got a hospital", and now it's time to realize that's no longer true. I hope McKeesport takes a hard look at itself because of all this.

The key is now to think about what should be done with the building. While I think that Onorato's plan is well intentioned, I wonder if there is a better use for the place than senior living. Here is very much a clean slate. A new opportunity for something innovative. As Jane Jacobs says, new ideas come from old buildings.

I always loved the Torpedo factory in Old Town Alexandria. Perfect redevelopment of a space for artists to congregate and sell their wares right on the riverfront. Essentially, everyone works in their own office. To be fair, the building was part of a much larger redevelopment project. But I'm just saying, it's a pretty cool idea.

Obligatory High Speed Rail Post

2010-01-31T18:55:00.003-05:00

So let's talk HSR.

Overall, I'm glad to see a lot of the diversity. California and Florida I could care less about. I think North Carolina is a good investment, given the rapid urbanization in that state.

Ohio has its act together, and deserves the money that it got. That state is far too urbanized to have the kind of service it currently does.

It was enjoyable to watch how excited the press releases were on Thursday out of Specter and Casey's office about the money that Pennsylvania got, and then listen to how disappointed and angry they were that they didn't get any more money on Friday. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The maglev is a bad project. It doesn't interface well with anything else, doesn't really fit with the idea of "intercity" passenger rail, we don't have the population for it, and it's astronomically expensive for an untested system. I don't want to read too much into it, but I get the feeling that PennDOT felt that way too. To me, the application seemed a little weaker than the other ones that were submitted, and I suspect it was because the applicant knew that the project didn't have a chance of being funded.

I think some people are quick to blame the state for the lack of Western Pennsylvania projects. They think that it's Rendell or the legislature or whatever that doesn't like anything east of Harrisburg. I really don't think that's a fair statement. We already know what the results of the study are going to be (The exact same study was done just a few months ago) and that's the exact same reason that there wasn't a construction project west of Harrisburg. Topography, history, and freight traffic mean that Keystone west will never be as easy to do as Keystone-east. It's nobody's fault, just the way the world works.

Round two is coming up, where's my Cleveburghton Limited proposal?

Get Moving!

2010-01-27T17:00:00.001-05:00

I have every intention of writing about the HSR funding, but I feel like this should be done first.

Yesterday, Ravenstahl made an announcement about a new committee, Move PGH. The focus is on integrating transportation planning on all levels.

I'm cautiously optimistic about the plan. On paper, it's a fantastic idea. But it is bound by constraints. The city planning department is already understaffed and overworked. They do good work, but the city also has to be realistic to how much more work they can actually do.

The other big issue is cash. The city has very little money that isn't tied up in something else. Plus there are enormous preservation costs associated with a city that takes as much of a beating as ours does.

The fact that the city is thinking about integrated transportation planning is very good (although they should try to avoid reinventing the wheel: the SPC already does a lot of that). If money ever does become available, it's good to have shovel-ready recommendations.

Would You Be Willing to Take the Jump?

2010-01-25T14:06:00.004-05:00

New York Times has an article about the end of an era in Dayton, as NCR Corporation, the Fortune 500 Cash machine company, moves its headquarters to metro Atlanta. This passage was particularly striking to me:

Transportation costs were high, and flights to and from the airport often required “multiple hops” for customers and employees. And attracting top talent was a struggle, he said. “We had a very difficult time recruiting people to live and work in Dayton.”

True, downtown Dayton is profoundly challenged. And true, its main airport simply cannot match Atlanta’s vast offering of nonstop flights.

But Dayton chafes at the backwater implication. The metropolitan region is expanding, the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base is booming, and the good quality of life might look even better from the rear view mirror of a car stuck in Atlanta traffic.

In addition, Dayton is within a 90-minute drive of Cincinnati and Columbus, the home of Ohio State University. To suggest that talent is not already here and cannot be attracted here is “insulting,” said Ellen Belcher, the editorial page editor of The Dayton Daily News.

I've been able to convince myself that I could live in a lot of places that many people would run away from (Baltimore, Detroit, Cincinnati, etc.). But in all honesty, I'm really not sure I could take a position in Dayton. The city is in a very awkward place, both geographically (sure it's only an hour and a half drive, but if you want to go carless that's not a whole lot of help to you), and population-wise (at around 150k, it isn't really able to offer the critical mass that I think a lot of young people are drawn to.

I understand that Dayton has great quality of life measures, but so do plenty of larger places. The articles on the subject in the local paper are a healthy rational understanding at the issue, but they don't completely get it. Yes, Dayton has universities and Wright-Patterson and all of the other things that cities talk about in glossy brochures, but it wasn't enough. There is something apparently missing in Dayton, some X factor that every city wants to have.

I'm not a gigantic Richard Florida fan, but I understand that, at least in theory, his idea is correct. While neither gay nor particularly bohemian, I am in my early 20s and soon to be graduating from what I would probably say is a nationally-recognized university with a degree that God-willing has some earning potential. The majority of my friends are in the same boat. If I've been reading Florida correctly, we're pretty much exactly what every region is trying to capture. And I've got a list of maybe 35 domestic and 15 international locations I'd be willing to live in, and I've got to be honest, that's generous compared to a lot of people I know. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that many of us have a mental map of area where we will or will not be looking for our first couple of jobs (I actually have a physical map, but that's just because I'm a cartophile). I would say that is true both for my friends at the national level (Friend at Georgetown: "I need to live in a place with at least one daily nonstop to Europe") and the regional level (Friend at IUP: "I really don't want to live in Indiana County after I graduate").

In high school, right after I took my PSATs, the first direct mail I got from a college came from Carleton College, a liberal arts school in Northfield, Minnesota. There wasn't a chance in hell I was going to go to Carleton or any of the hundreds of other places who sent me mail in the successive years, talking about the size of their libraries or the number of student organizations they have or the percentage of people studying abroad. By junior year, there probably weren't more than a dozen places I was seriously considering, and I'd say that most of my friends were in similar positions. Right now a lot of metropolitan areas are doing the grown-up equivalent of this college tactic: talking about the size of their hospitals and universities or how their a day's drive from half the country's population or how high their quality of living was. But I'll be honest, none of those things matter to me, and most of my generation would agree.

I realize this post makes me sound horrible in so many ways (elitist, fatalistic, etc.) and I really don't mean it to. It's depressing to me that Dayton is in the situation it is, and I ardently hope that there is some way to bring X to the city. In my opinion, the solution lies in small business incubation, not luring (or fighting to keep) corporate headquarters (though I certainly don't think having high-speed rail coming through town would hurt). NCR is a painful story for Dayton, but I'm not sure their talent attraction and retention strategy is working.

And I Don't Give a Damn About a Greenback Dollar (Unless the Machine Rejects It)

2010-01-19T14:29:00.004-05:00

I return to my old stomping grounds today: The Port Authority has unveiled a new fare machine on several of its buses. The machines are part of a larger plan toward smartcards that will hopefully cut down on some overhead and make service more efficient.

One does have to keep in mind, however, that there are equity issues to consider with this fare media change. The elderly (or really, near elderly, as those that are above a certain age ride for free) are going to have particular issues with new fare media. I remember Steve Bland saying "the last paper dollar that is ever in circulation will be used on a Port Authority fare", and I'd absolutely believe it. A 1.2% rejection rate for currency isn't great, and could lead to some irate riders on a heavily crowded bus. I'm not saying that it's a bad plan, I'm just saying that people should be tolerant while the bugs get worked out.

Also, I kind of want an old farebox for my apartment.

P&P Q&A: Patrick Dowd

2010-01-11T18:33:00.003-05:00

Patrick Dowd may be the most fascinating member of Council. He walks a tenuous line between pro and anti mayoral factions in an attempt to work on issues rather than in a dichotomous relationship. You can tell by talking to him that he is an intellectual, but he speaks with an incredible amount of passion.

When I sat down with Councilman Dowd, he was fairly quick to talk about the importance of education in urban development, no doubt stemming from his background as an educator and school board member. "Education is the reflection of our values; the values of this city", Dowd told me. That is part of the reason that he took so much offense to the student tax, it was essentially imposing a penalty on city residents for pursuing their own intellectual development.

Councilman Dowd had a very interesting perspective when we were talking about the layout of the city. I used the term "enclave" to describe Polish Hill (not even Polish Hill specifically, just using the name of a community in his district). Dowd quickly refuted the description. "I don't think Polish Hill is an enclave anymore, and I'm not sure there are very many neighborhoods that are" (I would argue there are several, in particular places like Manchester and Fairywood). Dowd says that neighborhoods are working much more closely in order to combat problems that they all face.

Dowd notes that while both attraction and retention of talent is important, there is also something to be said for letting talent go. "People don't innately think of it this way, but students are Pittsburghers too, even if they are only here for a few years", he said. During the debate around the tuition tax, Dowd was inspired by the fact that students were getting engaged- not just with national politics like he saw during the run-up to the 2008 election, but with local issues that affected them.

Like all of the other Councilmembers I talked to last week, Dowd says that the pension issue is the fundamental concern for 2010, and says that he will make every effort to find a long-term solution rather than a quick fix (*cough*parking garages*cough*).

Something to Keep You Busy at Work

2010-01-07T22:38:00.002-05:00

Something I put together the other day. Good luck. I consider myself a reasonably-versed resident of this county, and even I couldn't do better than 107.

Information is courtesy of C. Briem.

P&P Q&A: Bill Peduto

2010-01-06T17:56:00.000-05:00

Our intrepid reporter was waiting for an interview with Councilman Peduto in the conference room that abuts the Council President's chambers. In walks former council president Doug Shields. "Who are you and what the hell are you doing in my conference room?" Shields intones in mock outrage. I introduced myself and explained that I was there to interview Councilman Peduto. "Oh", Shields says, "he's a bum." And he waltzes out of the room, chuckling.

I am pleased to announce that Councilman Peduto is anything but a bum, at least in my opinion. In talking to him it's clear that he's extremely knowledgeable in the issues effecting the city and has a laundry list of solutions he'd love to see implemented.

At first our conversation focused on transportation issues, something that I think we've both quite passionate about. We started talking about the Hazelwood-Lawrenceville line (which I am on record with having some issues about). But I'm not sure I've ever seen an elected official talk with such passion about a public infrastructure project, so much so that even I began to get excited about the project. Peduto acknowledges that there are serious issues with the Oakland and Baum stops because of the grade that would need to be ascended to get to the business corridors, but feels that the project has a lot of natural partners in the community institutions nearby. And more importantly, he sees it as an extremely critical component of an interconnected and multimodal system with commuter rail lines and (I was glad he mentioned) the Busway. He even mentioned that which shall not be named among the Pittsburgh transportation community. Peduto has a fantastic sense of the need for alternative transportation options in Pittsburgh, and I'd absolutely encourage him to use his soapbox to continue to be a voice for those concerns. We talked a little bit about his Zipcar diet, and he acknowledged how difficult it was to live car-free in a city like Pittsburgh (he described his walk to the closest Zipcar as "the longest driveway in the country". The problem as he sees it isn't so much the lack of a plan, it is the lack of privatization. It's fine to have an $11 billion wishlist, he says, but when you only get $1 or $2 billion, how do you decide how to distribute funds?

Peduto has been very involved with the e-government move in Pittsburgh, with the goal of making city government accessible to residents. That philosophy extends to his views on city planning. He described a situation early on in his tenure at council with the "Southern Fried, Parking Lot Out Front" Pep Boys moving into the Baum Boulevard Corridor. The key, he notes is keeping neighbors involved in describing what works and what doesn't in zoning and planning for them, and to recognize that even within small spaces (The Baum/Centre corridor, for example), there are multiple enclaves with different wants and needs.

The city is a dynamic and changing place, Peduto notes. A century and a half ago, Shadyside still had farmland. He sees urban farming and other innovative uses of space as extremely useful for places like Pittsburgh.

The Councilman has some very interesting thoughts on the Pittsburgh Diaspora. He says that the city should try to capture what is essentially an ethnic identity. After retirement, Peduto says half-seriously that he'd like to drive a Winnebago to every Pirates, Penguins, and Steelers away game. Calling it the "Bring 'Em Home" tour, he'd come equipped with information about housing and employment opportunities in Pittsburgh so that expats living across the country could have the information necessary to return back.

We briefly discussed Council. Peduto is now the most senior member of council, and he's noticed changes in Council over that time. There is less influence on policy and legislation, he feels, and more on politics and "gotcha". Nevertheless he is hopeful for the future: "Nine people means you've got to have a good working relationship with each other".

P&P Q&A: Bruce Kraus

2010-01-05T20:25:00.005-05:00

One of my new years resolutions for the blog was to do more interviews. And as we prepare to enter a Post-Bram world, my interest in Pittsburgh City Council continues to grow (it'll be substantially easier for me to follow them in Washington thanks to the forthcoming webcasting of Council meetings). So I decided to start my interviewing bent with a couple of City Council members.

My lead off hitter is Councilman Bruce Kraus. I say this with all honesty, he is one of the most genuinely nice people I have met at any level of government. You can tell by talking to him that he gets very passionate about issues that are important to him, but never to the point of being unreasonable and off-putting. Not to mention he's also a son of the South Hills (graduated from the high school right up the street from my parent's house, though he went to the other neighborhood parochial school).

Kraus represents one of the most interesting districts in the city. It includes both up and coming neighborhoods like the South Side Flats and South Oakland (I suppose "up and coming" might not be the right word choice for a student ghetto) and critically depressed places on the hill like St. Claire and Beltzhoover. We talked a lot about Brownsville Road, a major thoroughfare in his district that was formerly the center of retail activity South of the Mon. Kraus notes the major disinvestment that has occurred in these places, and says that at least part of the problem is is the perception of these places as unsafe ("When people are walking through Brentwood Town Center, safety is one of their least concerns", he said "not so in Carrick"). When I asked him what the solution was, he said that it wasn't more police, though they were a component. The key, he said, is investment in the neighborhood retail districts that focuses on the communities themselves. The Councilman noted that one of the best ways to bring development to these communities was to form a solid bloc of South Hills representatives (himself, Rudiak, and Smith).

The councilman and I talked a lot about the South Side Works, a project that he has mixed feelings about. He recognizes that the area is becoming an entertainment destination, but at the same time, he worries about the loss of unique identity (The opening of a second location for the Cheesecake Factory and McCormick and Schmick's, for example). One thing that I found particularly interesting was that Kraus felt like the parking garages at the site should have been free, at least initially, to build up support for the area before beginning to charge.

Councilman Kraus discussed with me the vision he had for the interconnectedness of all the entertainment and cultural districts in the city, connecting the Golden Triangle with the North Shore destinations and the South Side (sound familiar?). Kraus describes it as a "Vibrant Entertainment District", and it could develop into a wonderful asset for the city. I absolutely think this is a strong plan, and I'd encourage the Councilman to follow up on it (I would personally suggest an extension of the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership BID, but that's just me).

I'm extremely grateful for the chance to talk to the Councilman, and I am sure we will see much of him over the next couple of years.

Something that Slipped Under the Radar

2010-01-02T17:57:00.002-05:00

My good friend passed this along to me. I can't believe I missed it, considering how much I love statistics. Particularly interesting was this little gem:

Top 10: Automobile Dependent
(% driving alone to work)
1. New Homestead.....86.3%
2. Summer Hill............83.9%
3. Windgap................82.7%
4. Oakwood...............80.7%
5. Swisshelm Park.....80.7%
6. Lincoln Place.........78.5%
7. Overbrook.............76.7%
8. Brookline...............72.2%
9. Banksville..............71.6%
10. Stanton Heights...70.9%

Wonder if this plays into our smart development policies (or lack there of) coming out of a certain half of the 5th floor of 414 Grant...

New Years Resolutions

2009-12-26T10:10:00.001-05:00

As we wrap up 2009, and approach the 11th month of this blog, I've got a couple of goals for the next year on this blog.

More Posts- At the current pace, I'll probably have 200 posts by the end of my first year blogging, which is nothing to sneeze at. I'd like to at least keep that pace, and make sure that I'm putting out as many posts as I can 200+ miles away.

More Focus- I started off this blog without a clear idea of what I was trying to answer. And I still don't know for sure, but I realize that the posts that are the most fun to write boil down to three questions: "What can we do to make our neighborhoods more dynamic?" (community and economic development), "How do we make our city a more desirable place to live?" (talent attraction and retention), and "How do we make it easier to get around?" (transportation). While I'm not going to give up on other topics, I am going to place a renewed effort on posts about these subjects. Also, I am going to try to keep geographic focus on Pittsburgh, Western Pennsylvania, and the Midwest.

More Interviews- I've got a couple of great ones lined up in the early weeks of this year, and I have every intention of doing more this year. Call it the Studs Terkel approach to blogging.

More Collaboration- The Pittsburgh policy blogging community is pretty small and will have a serious blow dealt to it on the 22nd of January. We should follow the lead of GGW and have more collaborative efforts.

At some point in the year, I'd like to make the switch to my own domain (which may involve changing the name of the blog to something wittier or more appropriate). Suggestions would be welcome.

I'll be out of town for the next week, so happy early 2010 to you all!

Don't Rest on Laurels

2009-12-20T11:39:00.004-05:00

The news that Google is expanding in Pittsburgh is certainly noteworthy, and has generated a lot of buzz. The company is moving into the Bakery Square development, which, while not my favorite development project in the city (there's an awful lot of parking in the wrong places, in my opinion), is certainly better than them moving out to Cranberry.

Google is the kind of success story that the URA and the mayor would like to advertise. Google has plenty of brand recognition; it's turned into a verb for Godsakes. Netting a big client like this is a win for the city, no doubt about it. But if all the city is doing is trying to bring these types of companies to the city, it is looking at development the wrong way. There should be a two-pronged approach: bring in the big names, but also incubate the local start-ups. Having Google move here is nice, but having the next Google start here is even nicer.

I love extolling the virtues of Vivisimo, the locally-grown search engine whose president was recently invited to the White House. It's companies like his that are helping and will continue to help fuel the transformation of the city from a population-loser to a place that can effectively attract and retain world-class talent. The city and non-profits need to continue to drive home the fact that Pittsburgh isn't just a great place to expand, it's a great place to begin.

Big Bucks! No Whammies!

2009-12-16T16:32:00.002-05:00

The Fair Share tax continues to be in the news. I actually saw the story in the NYT this morning, above the fold. I've already written a handful of posts on the subject, but I think that, a few rounds in, it may be worthwhile to reexamine where the parties are coming from.

There is a lot of talk about the tax "dis-incentivizing higher education". While I appreciate the sentiment, let me say that, as a guy looking a mountain of debt in the eye for this fancy degree, another $1000 or so is a drop in the bucket. College is expensive, and that goes double for a school like CMU. We attend with an understanding that we are paying through the nose. Does anyone really think that the Tuition Tax will be all over College Confidential, scaring potential students away from attending school in Pittsburgh?

That being said, while the tax isn't this monstrous unethical breach of human decency which would force college students to go out on boats and pour their alcohol into the Mon, it may not be the best tax, particularly in it's present form. A commuter tax would be a bit more equitable, if you're not afraid of scaring businesses out of the city. At least you know the college students aren't going anywhere. I actually like Councilman Peduto's proposal. A lot of these are very good solutions, but I feel like many of these are just temporary fixes and don't deal with the long term structural issues.

There are ways that this tax could be made more palatable. I still think some kind of alternative use of the tax would be helpful to a talent retention strategy. You could set the tax at 1% of the tuition less demonstrated need, or freeze the tax at 1% of the tuition you pay upon entering the university (so that while your tuition goes up, your taxes don't).

The tax isn't pleasant. It may even be wrong. But give me something better. And more important, give me something sustainable.

Regionalism: What is it Good For?

2009-12-09T13:59:00.004-05:00

Regionalism is often extolled. We talk with pride about the Pittsburgh "region", this area of Western Pennsylvania. We have this "regional visioning project" (which is now evidently titled the "Power of 32"). Regionalism is something that we take seriously. We have the "Regional Enterprise Tower", and all of those "regional initiatives".

But I want you to look at this.

So out of those 32 counties in the regional visioning project, only one other than Allegheny has a population larger than the City of Pittsburgh. 1/3 of them have a population smaller than 50,000 people. I realize that population isn't the only indicator of regional cohesion, but can anyone really say that Allegany county has the same issues as Allegheny?

In a lot of parts of the country, suburban counties have populations similar to their urban neighbors. Montgomery and Prince George's are both larger than DC. Baltimore County is larger than Baltimore City. Montgomery, while not the same size as Philadelphia, is a little than half the size of its urban neighbor. Compare that to Allegheny's next closest neighbor, Westmoreland, who is less than 1/3 the size of it's western neighbor.

Maybe regionalism, as we understand it, isn't the most useful thing for us. I wonder if Alegheny county's desire (at least publicly) to work as a region is hurting us. The city of Pittsburgh is not the strong urban core that it used to be, and it will never be the strong urban core that Philadelphia, Chicago, and Washington are. It's got a fairly weak magnetic pull, relatively speaking. There may be some suburban spillover into the far-flung counties, and even some semi-urban areas (I use that term very loosely to describe Southpointe, Cranberry, etc.) but there will never be edge cities springing up in Bedford county.

Why should we direct focus to these places? I hate to be so obtuse, but what are they doing for me now (other than perhaps inflating our MSA population)? I don't deny that Indiana and Greene counties probably have very similar issues: an aging and declining population, shrinking small towns, loss of primary industries, etc. But while Allegheny faces those issues too, it does so on a scale radically different. The city, county, and a few outlying suburbs are dealing with a much different set of concerns: namely, how to be a globally competitive area. Let's be perfectly frank about this: that's not something a county Commissioner in Fayette needs to think about.

If there is a "region" it's a tiny slice of what every is saying that it is. I would say it looks something like this:

View Pittsburgh Region in a larger map

There are some things that regionalism can be useful for. But maybe "region" isn't the best term for what Cleveburgh is, or what the Power of 32 is trying to find. Perhaps it's more of a confederation. Density is destiny, and there is a particular portion of the "Pittsburgh Region" that shares the asset of density. As for the rest of the counties? I'm not sure what to tell you.

P.S.- Someone remind me to delete this post if I ever make a run for governor.

City Life

2009-12-07T10:22:00.003-05:00

Sorry it's been a couple of days since I've said anything, but finals season has been catching up with me.

I would definitely recommend subscribing to the regional business headlines list from the Allegheny Conference. Since I only read the Post Gazette, I would otherwise miss some interesting stories that pop up elsewhere, including this gem in the Trib on downtown residential life.

Downtown living fascinates me. Perhaps I've become spoiled by my current Walk Score, but coming back to the suburbs is always such a drag. You really don't realize how much of an advantage being in the middle of a city is until you live there. And given how much I'm paying in Washington, the $500 to $1,475 that one of the places was advertising seems like a very, very, reasonable proposition. I've got every intention of moving into a center city when I graduate, preferably Pittsburgh.

The natural advantage of downtown Pittsburgh is it's uber-compactness. Most downtowns are, by nature, compact. But because of natural geographic boundaries, downtown is very clearly demarcated. This means that access to transportation is very concentrated. The transportation system, while not great, is therefore at least accessible.

There are a few things that I would like to see pop up in downtown, or within walking distance of downtown, however. It's a good neighborhood, but it could be better.

Another Grocery Store- Rosebud is nice. But Downtown could do with a second location near Point Park.

An Easier Walk between Downtown and the Hill- Mr. Ravenstahl, tear down this interstate! Or at the bare minimum, come up with a better walkway.

A Library with Neighborhood Hours- Downtown has a fabulous library, and I've spent many a lunch break there. However, if it is shutting down at 6:00 every night, it's not particularly conducive to people who are living in the neighborhood.

A Movie Theater- I realize the Harris theater is downtown, and I don't want to take away from what they do. But sometimes you want to go see a blockbuster, and it would be nice to not have to get to the South Side.

Empty Spaces

2009-11-27T21:51:00.002-05:00

I don't really like the Newsweek types, but it was actually refreshing to see something other than the stereotypical Pittsburgh boosterism piece in the national press. Chris beat me to the punch, but I'll see if I can't add my own perspective.

The article was a little confusing in its lack of focus. It seems to be more of an introduction to "urban right-sizing" than anything else, without a whole lot of focus on Pittsburgh in particular (except for the rather bizarre use of "Lantern-Jawed" to describe hizzoner).

But thinking about the concept in the context of Western Pennsylvania, the discipline has merit. I would agree with Chris in that the focus on the city itself is rather narrow. Pittsburgh itself has at least some resources to be able to deal with vacant properties and whatnot. But places like McKeesport, Braddock, etc. do not. I wonder, would there be some way of collaborating on this? I feel like it could be a COG issue, but if the pot is too small, it'll just lead to bickering.

At least among the Pittsburgh population, I think there is a perception that this city is far and above better than places like Detroit or Cleveland, or at least is not dealing with the same issues. The Pittsburgh PR machine has been pretty good at perpetuating this idea of Pittsburgh's success story. Some residents of the region are acutely aware of the problem (I suspect those who live in these neighborhoods), but I think most residents, particularly young ones, don't see this as a serious situation. The geographic dispersion of the vacant properties has a lot to with it (out of sight, out of mind). I'd really like to see an investigative piece on the fact that the city is nearly 20% vacant, some of the inner suburbs even more, and how it is affecting services. Maybe I'll get around to it over Christmas break.

The Return of Bus+

2009-11-23T15:30:00.004-05:00

I like days that Jon Schmitz is in the Post Gazette, because it gives me something to talk about. Today's story is about the Better Bus plan (I still like my name better). $80.7 million is a lot of money. I highly doubt they're going to get all of the money that they hope to, but you should always reach for the high amounts in this game.

I think Uptown is a prime candidate for development. The model makes sense there, and I think it's a very smart step. The Mon-Valley on the other hand worries me. This is not a route that has a lot of traffic already (at least relative to routes in the city), so the demand isn't necessarily there. Improved service would be helpful, but dividends aren't going to be as evident. Be informed before you buy.

A Quoment: Fresh Produce

2009-11-18T16:20:00.002-05:00

Kuhn's backed out of the Hill. It's infuriating. One of the very first things I wrote about on this blog was the importance of fresh produce in a community. It's something that needs to happen quickly if development is to occur. I think that it will happen, now that much of the work is already done.

But in the meantime, what do we do? I'm very curious to know what kind of informal arrangements exist for getting produce. What I would really like to see is some Peapod-like nonprofit who started delivering groceries. People could fill out a form where they check boxes for the produce and groceries that they need. A van would go out daily to a grocery store, pick up the groceries, and return them to the customers.

Or start up an urban farm on the Hill, where people can grow their own produce. Or have one of the extra members of the mayor's security detail start pushing around a fruit cart. The lack of a grocery store is a major handicap to achieving a livable community walking distance from downtown. This has been a simmering issue for too long. Action!

Give Me More Davids and Less Goliaths

2009-11-17T10:20:00.003-05:00

There have been two dramatic closings along the Monongahela river over the past few weeks, and I've been thinking a lot about them. UPMC closed its Braddock hospital and Dish Network closed its McKeesport call center.

I'm just old enough to remember when Dish (Then EchoStar) moved into the building in McKeesport. I remember thinking that it was a pretty big deal, because the building was monolithic. Braddock hospital I have only had chance encounters with, and I have never been inside.

These two closings demonstrate something important. The community employer is dead. Braddock and McKeesport were one horse towns for a century. When those horses died (or were dramatically scaled back), they were replaced by smaller, New Economy community employers. Meds! Technology! These things were examples of the communities moving forward.

But customer service isn't manufacturing. And sometimes a non-profit can be just as concerned about the bottom line as a public corporation. Neither of these institutions spurred oodles of development around them. Dish was separated by the railroad tracks and a sea of parking from downtown, for Godsakes.

Big developments don't do what they used to. Fetterman knows better, and I expect something very innovative. The administration of Mckeesport is decidedly less progressive, so I worry greatly about the loss of Dish.

I would like to see those spaces used creatively. Small business incubators, perhaps? Or artist studio space? Smaller, more nimble, and more creative is the key. Don't try to fill a big space with a big tenant. Distinguish yourselves.

This is a painful fight, and I acknowledge that. The immediate response is to complain and to try to force the tenants to stay there. I imagine next the communities will shop around to try to bring in some other large business. But I hope that these communities can think beyond the immediate so that they don't get fooled again.

And let this be a lesson to the URA. Big development projects are not always fruitful. A community should never be beholden to one corporation, or even one non-profit.

A Quoment: Fair Share Tax

2009-11-15T16:50:00.004-05:00

So this isn't a fully-baked theory by any stretch of the imagination, but what if, after a student graduates, the city gives them some kind of credit worth the amount of their tax that can be used toward buying or renting in the city, or opening up a new business in the city? Wouldn't that provide an incentive for people to stay in the city after graduation, while simultaneously capturing revenue from a transient population that is only in the city for a brief period anyway? Just a thought.

Am I Really Writing This?

2009-11-10T11:54:00.006-05:00

So let's talk about this tax. 1% on student tuition in the city.

First, the bad things. People pay through the nose for tuition already. Trust me when I say I am well aware of it. By and large, the tax is imposed on people without a voice in city government. And yes, in theory, a tax on students is a disincentive to going to college in the city. It's a cheap political trick by Ravenstahl so that babushkas don't have to see tax increases.

Ok, now that it has been said, we need to think about this practically. I go to an urban university, so I have a bit of a perspective on it. I walk on city sidewalks, ride city public transportation, make use of city parks, get protected by city police officers, and appreciate clean city streets. I understand that my tuition defrays part of this burden that I put on the city, but I would go so far as to say that I make use of a disproportionate amount of city services (and, if you've been on Carson Street on a Saturday night, I think you may agree).

If you go to a university in the city of Pittsburgh, you have the ability to take advantage of wonderful opportunities. This is not a knock on other schools, but if you go to St. Vincent or LaRoche, you do not. Many of us who chose to go to urban universities go there because we expect a certain quality of life. I've always been very confused at the people who apply to both Pitt and Penn State or Carnegie Mellon and Notre Dame. When I was looking at schools the first thing that I said was that I wanted a big city (for me, that meant bigger than Pittsburgh). And I acknowledged that I was going to have to pay a premium for that. You can't expect to have all of the advantages of Oakland and expect to pay the same amount you would pay in State College.

Are people going to be upset about this? Absolutely. Will enrollment drop off? I seriously doubt it. I suspect that Point Park and Duquesne should be a little more concerned than Pitt and CMU, because, let's be honest, the former two are regional universities while the latter are national universities. I don't think that this makes the city any more hostile to college students.

No one is going to say "please tax me!". No one likes tax increases, especially on themselves. But you have to think rationally about this. You can't have your cake and eat it to. The city has made some stupid decisions, and I imagine that there are some places where efficiency can be increased. But public finance, by and large, is a zero-sum game. If you don't want to tax city services, tell me what you're going to do instead. I'm not saying that it's the best solution out there (I'm still interested in some type of commuter tax): I'm just saying we need to think rationally about this and not let our emotions get the best of us.

I'm really curious as to whether or not popular opinion would be different if the tax were on the college itself and passed along to the students rather then on the students and collected by the colleges. I suppose students expect the university to take care of these issues for them, so they may be more willing to pay the extra money as tuition than as tax.

Did I just agree with Ravenstahl? I plan on not getting used to it.

Walk of Shame: the Morning After

2009-11-04T13:48:00.008-05:00

22/32 on Election Predictions. Could have been worse. Some of them I wasn't expecting at all (23), other ones I'll admit I don't know too much about (26, 27).

I'll admit I underestimated Harris' support greatly. I'm not exactly sure where all his support came from. Was it the name? Was it his policies or demeanor? I've heard that he was both the progressive candidate and the conservative candidate.

Turnout was absolutely disgusting. This city deserves whatever it gets for the next four years. I can't say enough how disappointed I am with the city's turnout, particularly the East End, which claims to know better.

We could talk until our faces are blue as to whether one strong candidate could have beat Ravenstahl. If Acklin and Harris hadn't been competing against one another could one of them have picked up 5% +1? I know I said earlier this season that I felt like one of them should drop out, but I am beginning to see that they were pulling from different populations even as they were pulling from each other. Acklin wouldn't have gotten Harris' votes in the far East and North, Harris wouldn't have gotten Acklin's support in the South.

Matt is going to be (as a friend aptly put it) crucified. If you see him on the street, hug him for me. Don't be surprised if someone runs in the committeeman race against the Hoagie.

Acklin made some serious strides in the South, and definitely made a dent in Luke's numbers there. I continue to insist that the next mayor must come from the South Hills. Ladies (1, 2) and Gentleman (1), what are you going to be doing in 4 years? Mull it over, because people will be asking.

Lavelle and Rudiak are important adds to the Council and I congratulate both of them. I'm in particular excited by Rudiak. I've met her: she's good people. I hope old man Pedutes will keep an eye on her though, because I want to make sure she doesn't become like some other councilmembers. Her district is impoverished and neglected, and the administration has demonstrated that it can use that to its advantage.

The independents should be proud of themselves. A combined 45% against the Democratic and Republican nominee is not a bad showing. Luke has a difficult 4 years ahead of him now, one when regular people will be analyzing him as critically as the wonks have been. He can no longer hide behind inexperience. I sincerely hope that this is a watershed moment for him; that he realizes that Harris and Acklin brought up a lot of extremely important points, that some of their ideas were valid, and that if both of them are truly concerned about this city then they will be willing to help.

Or you know, meet the new boss and all that.

Election Predictions:

2009-11-03T16:57:00.003-05:00

These are purely speculation, but I'm just curious to see how close I would come. I suspect I'm overly optimistic, but we shall see. I feel like if I don't publish them I'll say "I told you so" to whatever the outcome actually is. I'm sure Chris has a more scientific approach, but I'm just shooting from the hip here (ward map for guidance):

Luke: 56

Acklin: 30

Harris: 14

Acklin will have his strongest support in Wards 4 and 14, and may even win both wards. I suspect he'll beat Dowd's numbers in 19, 20, 22, and 29. I also would not be surprised if he picks up on some anti-G20 sentiment in Wards 8-11.

Harris will probably win Ward 7, provided he and Acklin don't split it too much. I also suspect that he'll make inroads into some African-American wards (maybe 12 and 13?). I also think that his campaign will be able to capitalize on dissatisfaction with the goings on on the North Side to beat non-Ravenstahl numbers in 21-23.

Ravenstahl will have the closest race of his career. He'll win, but he'll run scared.

Ravenstahl collects less than 50% of the vote:

Wards 4, 7, 8, 11, 14, 17

Ravenstahl collects 50%-60% of the vote:

Wards 1, 2, 3, 5, 12, 19, 21, 22, 23, 32,

Ravenstahl collects 60%-70% of the vote:

6, 9, 10, 13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 25, 28, 29, 30

Ravenstahl collects over 70% of the vote:

24, 26, 27

See Something, Say Something

2009-11-03T10:21:00.003-05:00

This is yet another election day that I will be out of the region for. I will follow it as closely as I can, but my hands are geographically tied as to what I can do.

The onus is on you, in the region, to do your duty. It is even more so on the residents of the City of Pittsburgh. Why did all three of the local television stations air mayoral debates when the city itself is such a small percentage of the viewing market? It's because the mayor of the central city of the region has a disproportionate amount of influence on the direction Western Pennsylvania moves in. A vote in today's mayoral election is a vote not only for the present residents of the city, but for the future residents. I implore you with every fiber of my being to make a choice to vote in today's mayoral race.

You as city residents have something I pine for: a say in what Pittsburgh will look like 5 or 10 years from now when hopefully I'll be back and living in the city. You have the privilege of being able to choose the man to tackle the pension crisis, to improve the transportation grid, make neighborhoods more vibrant, and solving our talent attraction and retention problems. Your vote today, in an off year, is very much a critical one.

I realize that I'm preaching to the choir because most of my readership is either a) informed enough to have already voted or b) expats and aliens like me, but on the oft chance that you are not either of those things I urge you to vote, if nothing else because I am greedy enough to ask you to do it for me. Read the Q&As that I did with the independent candidates. Look through my work, or the work of the Comet or Pghisacity. It's easy to be informed, and even easier to get to the polling spot (I'm told there's no line at most of them).

If you stay home today, you're doing a disservice to yourself, your neighborhood, your city, and your region. Also, to me.

Puting the "Mute" in "Commuter Rail"

2009-10-29T08:01:00.003-04:00

The commuter rail study came out yesterday, and while I haven't been privy to the actual report at the time of this writing, I'm fairly familiar with the concept and can make some statements. I will revise this post to reflect updated information when I actually get a copy in my hands.

First, we need to not throw around words. "Commuter rail" line is not accurate. We're looking at a span of 6 miles or so, entirely within the city of Pittsburgh. It doesn't even manage to cross a river- pretty impressive for a a project in this city. Commuter rail also gives the impression that this is a 9-5 line, that is the focus is on getting people to and from work. But I've got to say that the population you can pull from that lives along the corridor and works in Oakland is nowhere near the population living on the East-West axis. Putting a park-and-ride lot in Hazelwood is an option, but you have to ask how much work people will go through to get to Oakland.

Let's talk about the Oakland stop. If the plan hasn't changed from the last time I saw it, the stop is beneath Forbes avenue on Neville St. While this stop is close to CMU, it's a fairly large hike to get to the beginning of Pitt's campus, let alone to the Medical buildings on the hill. Talk up the line all you want, but if people have to walk a mile to get to work, I don't care if the seats are made of leather and the wheels are diamond encrusted. And frankly, I feel that Pitt would be much happier with some kind of arrangement that suited them better (maybe run the train through the Cathedral?)

Ultimately, this is not a commuter line. It is what I'd call a "lifestyle" line, meant to promote connectivity. This is an admirable goal to be sure, and one that is actually not being accomplished at the moment (getting from 2nd Avenue to Butler street is surprisingly difficult, particularly via public transportation). But everyone needs to taper their expectations with this project. This is a case of trying to take advantage of what we've got, which may or may not be what we need.

Is this a good project? Not really. But Councilman Peduto should be commended for bringing it up. The transit community has found a ready ear in the Councilman, and I hope that the councilman continues to recognize the importance of transportation policy. I imagine that a North-South line would even be a valuable component of a regional transportation system. But the keystone of a regional rail plan?

One thing I will say: watch out for Hazelwood. This is a neighborhood on the rise. I know it doesn't look like it now, but eventually Hazelwood's good geographic fortune will catch up with it. Mark my words, it'll be the new East Liberty sometime in the next 15 years.

Carson Craziness

2009-10-22T09:36:00.005-04:00

This may have flown under your radar, but there was an absolutely outstanding report that gained some ink last week. A report was put out by Councilman Kraus' office regarding Responsible Hospitality Practices on the South Side. Now in an effort at full disclosure I will make note that the author, Bryan Woll, is a close personal friend and one of the few people I know more obsessed with city government than I am. That being said, I would still highly recommend this document as one of the most sophisticated perspectives on the South Side struggle in quite some time.

The fact is that a comprehensive solution is necessary. I have always been pro-BID, so I would encourage considering one for the South Side. It's a very unique neighborhood, and requires a unique structure of land use planning, taxation, etc.

I am curious about the situation between the South Side Works and the rest of Carson Street. Do they have different issues? Different solutions?

P&P Q&A: F.D. Harris

2009-10-21T08:00:00.000-04:00

Neighborhoods and Public Safety

What is the most underrated neighborhood in the city?

There are a lot of neighborhood gems in this city that remain unknown to most of the population. But right now, I'd have to say Larimer tops that list, largely because of the efforts of GET Larimer. Their mission is to "Leverage the natural opportunities of blighted areas through sustainableeconomical development and social entrepreneurship." It brings together grass roots community organizing, green sustainable development, urban farming, social entrepreneurialism, and so on. As Mayor, this is exactly the type of creative community efforts I want to support and nourish.

Neighborhoods south of the Mon often complain that they are unappreciated in city government. What steps will you take to better integrate these communities with the city as a whole?

I'm going to be a Mayor for all the neighborhoods, including the neighborhoods South of the river like Beechview, and those that sit in the East End or Northside, but also lack support from City Hall, like Hazelwood or Homestead. First, we need to stop taking resources out of these communities. These are neighborhoods that have lost their pools, their schools, their community centers, and now many are losing their libraries. We have to make sure that our resources are distributed in a way that ensures everyone has access. But we also need to nurture neighborhood business development. If we work to create neighborhood business districts we will go far in attacking a lot of ills faced in our communities. Thriving business districts will help reduce crime and bring resources back into the communities.

How will you work with the communities surrounding Pittsburgh to build a stronger region? Is city-county consolidation something you would consider?

We need to build a coalition of mayors with the area’s larger municipalities so that we can work together as a region, not just to solve problems, but to create opportunity. City- County consolidation will happen eventually, but only when it's Pittsburgh leading the way. Right now, you have a Mayor who says he wants to be the last Mayor of Pittsburgh, City residents who are legitimately worried about being left out of the process, and disenfranchised through consolidation, and a lot of unanswered questions. What we will see, and in fact has already begun, is a more organic consolidation where the smaller municipalities in the county will begin to merge services, or school districts, or municipal governance. Eventually we'll see a county that has already significantly merged and Pittsburgh will be the leading body that brings everyone together. However, a merger would be premature and ill advised at this time.

Is it more important to focus on retail options in the neighborhoods or in the central business district? What is your plan for spurring development in either/both?

We need to build our business districts in our neighborhoods while remembering that it it’s our downtown that brings us all together. A thriving downtown with a night life should serve as the crown in the jewel that is Pittsburgh, surrounded by thriving neighborhoods. It's not an either or, and if we look at it as such, we won’t be able to move past this fractured sense of ourselves.

How is public safety tied to neighborhood development? How will your public safety platform work with your economic development platform to make our neighborhoods stronger?

As I have already sort of hinted at, I think building our neighborhoods and providing economic opportunity in our communities is the foundation of a public safety platform. We can't address crime as if it exists separate from social and economic dislocation. My program to rebuild our neighborhoods, create walkable jobs, and invest in early childhood education, along with programs for school age children, treats our neighborhoods holistically and helps to rebuild our communities along with our neighborhoods.

Talent

Attract or retain? That is, should our energy as a city be spent bringing in new companies and talent from outside or nurturing and keeping local talent and ideas here?

This also is not an either or question. As we grow our neighborhoods and foster our talent we will attract investment and talent from outside. We will be more attractive as a destination for companies seeking headquarters and we will be able to compete with other cities for retention of recent graduates.

What steps will your administration take to foster civic engagement among Pittsburgh's college-age population?

Creating a culture of respect from the Mayor on down. Right now I think that a lot of young people are feeling disengaged because of the perception that the Mayor's office is only open to large campaign contributors. Locking out labor this summer, and skirting the rules to benefit corporate donors has a chilling effect on civic engagement. I think that starting by restoring that faith in the office will go a long way encouraging engagement.

How will you tap into the diaspora network? That is, how will you engage Pittsburghers who identify as such even as they no longer live in the region?

We will appeal to the Diaspora network directly. We'll reach out to "Pittsburghers" everywhere to invite them to see Pittsburgh not just as a piece of their past, but as part of their future. They are our best ambassadors and we want to invite them to see Pittsburgh as a destination, and as a place they may want to return to. We need to let our extended family know about growing opportunities, especially for those who already know and love Pittsburgh.

Transportation

Realistically, where do you see Pittsburgh's public transportation infrastructure in 15 years?

In fifteen years I think we will have a light rail system established, or in the midst of construction, and a bus system with routes that service the neighborhoods that need it most. I think we'll see some substantial changes for the better, with public transit being strengthened as we continue to focus on green development and sustainability.

As mayor, is it more important to lobby for connectivity to the Airport (which means moving out of the city proper) or to Oakland?

Well, connectivity to the airport is important as it will encourage more companies to do business here. We should use that to attract more business here. Right now, there is no easy way to get to and from the airport. Companies that locate in the Pittsburgh area actually have more incentive right now to locate out in Moon than in Pittsburgh. We need to make it easier to do business here.

Which is Pittsburgh's more important connection for High Speed Rail- West to Cleveland and Chicago, or East toward Philadelphia and the East Coast?

Connecting to the East Coast is crucial – connecting Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, and Philadelphia into the East Coast will lead to more jobs and more opportunity in our region. I am a big supporter of rail transportation, and would like to see it greatly expanded.

What would you do as mayor to make this city better for those pursuing a car-free lifestyle?

For starters, as mayor, I will push that developments which take public money will have to be biker and walker-friendly. But I'm very excited about my walkable neighborhood plan. We will create a tax credit for small businesses that create walkable jobs in our neighborhoods. This not only is a plus towards sustainability, but it will help develop our neighborhoods.

As a mayor, would you consider biking or taking public transportation to work?

While I do not personally bike, I look forward to being able to walk or take public transportation to work.

P&P Q&A: Kevin Acklin

2009-10-20T08:00:00.000-04:00

A few months ago I asked why none of the mayoral candidates were talking about transit. In an effort to get the candidates to talk about it, I asked them to respond to a series of questions about transit, and what I consider important issues in general. The following are the unedited responses to my questions by Kevin Acklin. Tomorrow I will put up the Harris Campaign answers. The Ravenstahl campaign has thus far been unreachable, but if anyone has a point of contact, I would be more than happy to post his responses.

Also, as a preemption, I am going to be screening comments for these posts. Make sure they're appropriate.

Neighborhoods and Public Safety

What is the most underrated neighborhood in the city?

All of our neighborhoods are under-served by the City, and in that respect all of them are underrated. The City as a whole is losing population, and that is a trend we can only combat by investing in all of our neighborhoods and making all of them attractive destinations for young families looking for a safe and supportive community.

Neighborhoods south of the Mon often complain that they are unappreciated in city government. What steps will you take to better integrate these communities with the city as a whole?

There’s no doubt that the South Hills neighborhoods don't get their fair share of attention from the City. That's why I am proposing to re-focus the URA on neighborhood development, and launch the Main Street Project, an unprecedented investment that would bring at least one community or development project to each neighborhood in Pittsburgh.

How will you work with the communities surrounding Pittsburgh to build a stronger region? Is city-county consolidation something you would consider?

It’s important that we have good working relationships with our neighboring boroughs so we can tackle important regional issues like public transportation, tourism, and taxes, and so we can lobby the state legislature as the voice of western Pennsylvania, rather than as individual voices competing for attention and resources. I would also consider city-county consolidation on administrative functions, but not on labor intensive functions like police or public works. And I would only pursue consolidation if I guaranteed to reduce costs.

Is it more important to focus on retail options in the neighborhoods or in the central business
district? What is your plan for spurring development in either/both?

It’s more important to spur development in the neighborhood business districts than anywhere else in town, because we must make the neighborhoods attractive destinations for new families if we want to grow our city. Our communities must be walkable, must have viable business districts, and must have suitable and affordable housing options. That’s where I will focus my attention as Mayor, and that's why I’ve called for the URA to refocus its attention on the neighborhoods instead of on downtown, I will restructure the Bureau of
Building Inspection so that it is actually out in the neighborhoods, ensuring quality in our housing stock. I’ve also, as I mentioned above, called for the creation of the Main Street Project to bring at least one community or development project to every neighborhood in Pittsburgh.

How is public safety tied to neighborhood development? How will your public safety platform work with your economic development platform to make our neighborhoods stronger?

Our public safety plan calls for adding 200 police officers on the beat, common-sense investments in the police force, and the creation of a Neighborhood Safety Commission to advise the Mayor on neighborhood crime issues that need to be addressed by the police bureau. This public safety plan would pay immediate dividends to our neighborhood business districts by making them safer and more attractive to patrons and businesses.

Talent

Attract or retain? That is, should our energy as a city be spent bringing in new companies and
talent from outside or nurturing and keeping local talent and ideas here?

Both.

What steps will your administration take to foster civic engagement among Pittsburgh's college age population?

I’ve been an active volunteer with many community and community groups, with pro bono legal work for victims of domstic violence, and with Big Brothers Big Sisters. A few years ago I started Renew Pittsburgh, which is a public service organization geared toward community problem solving. As Mayor, I would encourage all Pittsburghers — college students included — to follow my lead and get involved in community volunteer efforts just like those at Renew Pittsburgh.

How will you tap into the diaspora network? That is, how will you engage Pittsburghers who
identify as such even as they no longer live in the region?

People who I know that have left Pittsburgh never leave because they want to — they leave because they feel like they have to for a job, or for better opportunities. When I’m Mayor, we’ll invest in neighborhoods and business development, to protect our affordable housing stick and create jobs so that young Pittsburghers no longer feel like they have to leave their City to find work.

Transportation

Realistically, where do you see Pittsburgh's public transportation infrastructure in 15 years?

Realistically, without leadership to guide a new direction for our public transportation, I see it shrinking and serving fewer and fewer people, which is too bad. There is some interesting research that shows that those who have decided to stay in Pittsburgh stay here because they require public transportation. It’s the one amenity that no other community can offer; no other borough can offer what we have. When I’m Mayor, we’ll protect what public transportation amenities we have and we will expand them to make sure more Pittsburghers are served by them.

As mayor, is it more important to lobby for connectivity to the Airport (which means moving out of the city proper) or to Oakland?

Connectivity within the city.

Which is Pittsburgh's more important connection for High Speed Rail- West to Cleveland and
Chicago, or East toward Philadelphia and the East Coast?

One is no more important than the other, and under President Obama's high speed rail plan, we’ll be connected both ways.

What would you do as mayor to make this city better for those pursuing a car-free lifestyle?

I do not support the current batch of route closings that the port authority is considering. There are some who argue that we need to “right-size” our operations, but I argue that we need to expand them so they can better serve those who need them.

As a mayor, would you consider biking or taking public transportation to work?

Yes, I would. I take the bus and the T now. I don't see why I would stop as Mayor.

Debate #1: First Thoughts

2009-10-19T14:20:00.005-04:00

I just got a chance to sit down with the video from the first mayoral debate. My laptop gave up the ghost a few days ago, so I haven't been able to put together a cogent post in a while. But lets take a look at the debate.

The discussion about the G20 was ugly to watch. Harris was talking around the actual issue, Acklin wasn't being firm enough, and Ravenstahl was misconstruing the circumstances. Would Acklin turn down the G20? Of course not. But he had the difficult task of complaining about the police issues while simultaneously trying not to offend the police votes.

I think that both Acklin and Harris deflected the issue of their Republican background rather well. And frankly Ravenstahl can't simultaneously criticize their Republican leanings while simultaneously basking in his position as the Republican nominee.

Harris stumbled a bit with the issue of his residency. Ravenstahl and Acklin really pounded him. Frankly it's an issue I've had a lot of questions about. And I'm torn, because I understand his passion for the city, but at the same time he holds on to this suburban identity. Whether or not it was his intent is irrelevant, Harris has serious issues to address.

I liked Acklin's reference to Caliguiri. Though astute city historians would note that Caliguiri was only an independent when he was running, I believe he switched his registration back to Democrat after taking office.

Dok needs to stop making family references. For someone who is running on his own name, he's not. His answer was lackluster in this respect. But the whole focus on pedigree is a little upsetting. Acklin, Harris, and Ravenstahl all made references to their backgrounds, which is normal for a politician, particularly running on the local level. But all three of them need to have ideas about how to improve the city, not just family trees.

The question of population loss was a silly one. And none of the candidates really got a handle on it. Economic development is only a piece of the pie. I don't care how many Fortune 500 companies you bring into the city, if everyone goes out to the suburbs after work, it doesn't matter. I appreciate that Acklin was focusing on neighborhoods to answer the question rather than business development.

Acklin is throwing a lot of bones to the South. He seems to have embraced my Southern Strategy.

Did Ravenstahl pat Acklin's knee around 44:50? Weird.

Acklin's questioning of Ravenstahl fell flat. The first thing I learned from Matlock is that you always know the answer to the question before you ask it.

Ravenstahl actually asked a reasonable question to Acklin. I would really like to get a copy of this budget proposal.

The lightning round was actually fairly telling. Maybe those facts are useless. But the fact that Ravenstahl was off of the African-American population by 10% or Harris thinks that there are double the number of Fortune 500 companies means that perhaps they don't really understand the city. I was particularly incessed at the fact that Ravenstahl doesn't know the base fare of the Port Authority. For shame, Mr. Mayor. For shame.

Mt. Lebanon Loving

2009-10-13T12:21:00.004-04:00

The Forum had a piece about Mt. Lebanon as a model for sustainable neighborhood development on Sunday. And I won't dispute that Mt. Lebanon has a lot of what you would want in a neighborhood- sidewalks, retail, access to transportation, etc. I am unsure, however, that Mt. Lebanon is a reasonable model for other areas to follow.

To begin with, the community depended on public transportation from the beginning. It was one of the first streetcar suburbs, and maintains that connection by way of the light rail system. Realistically, is that a model that Robinson or Cranberry will ever be able to follow? I suspect not. As I've already stated, it's going to be very hard to retrofit these communities with street grids that make for a walkable neighborhood.

What then of the places that were built with a transportation infrastructure in mind? One could argue that Glassport or Homewood were also built in the same vein. Why, then, are these neighborhoods not reaping the same benefits of Mt. Lebanon? Mt. Lebanon has always maintained a very stable income level. It has always been one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the region. It was founded as an upper class development, and has largely remained such for the last century. In contrast, many other streetcar suburbs were built for what was then the middle class, and so the density was greater and the lots smaller.

Mt. Lebanon is a fairly good example of a New Urbanist-like locale. But its not a model that can be replicated. Unless you are willing to start from scratch, it is virtually impossible to retrofit dense neighborhoods to become Mt. Lebanon-esque. It emerged from a unique time and place. The solution isn't turning Carrick or New Eagle into Mt. Lebanon; it's accomplishing the same goal while using different strategies.

P.S.- Anyone know where I can find a map of tree cover for Allegheny county?

Old Money Pits Never Die, They Just Fade Away While Continuing to Inspire False Hope

2009-10-08T13:22:00.002-04:00

Maglev Application

In Which I Respond to the Stupid Flier

2009-10-07T17:44:00.004-04:00

It was a little exciting to see that I had been spammed this morning. The bus drivers who were passing out fliers warning of the impending destruction of all that is good and holy in Pittsburgh transit evidently thought that I was important enough to require convincing that the TDP is a bad idea (or else just Googled "TDP" and realized I'm one of only half a dozen people that are really passionate about it). Since someone yelled on my blog, I feel like I will do the same. While props go out on the wordplay ("Dis-Connect 09" is actually pretty funny), I feel like they fail to see the point.

No one is disputing the fact that the TDP is going to be painful for some people. Routes will be consolidated, modified, or eliminated. But as I've mentioned time and again, it's not all about the individual. If public transportation were all about getting you where you needed to go whenever you wanted to be there, it would be a government subsidized taxi. I'm not saying that moving individuals isn't public transportation's primary responsibility, only that there is a healty dose of utilitarianism involved.

The author of the post makes it appear as if Dan Onorato and Steve Bland are ruining the transit system of Allegheny county so that they can add buses to their private fleets. I am fairly certain that neither Bland nor Onorato are cutting service because they are evil people; they are just making decisions based on the constraints they face.

The last line of the paper irks me the most. "Stop these service cuts and fare increases!" What, then, would you like to do? Start advocating a change in land use policies that makes living in transit friendly corridors desirable. Vote for candidates that actively support transit, even if it means an increase in taxes. Come up with an elixir to give to bus drivers so that they don't age and therefore don't retire. Stop bitching and start a revolution!

Bikestation Opens in D.C. to Warm Welcome from Bicycling Advocates

2009-10-02T15:17:00.000-04:00

Posted at TheCityFix DC.

Trolley Tales

2009-10-01T15:42:00.003-04:00

So it turns out that I don't like streetcars very much. I guess I never really realized it until I was forced to write out my views.

I don't dispute the fact that there is very likely collusion that caused the demise of the streetcar in the postwar era. But you have to also recognize that streetcars were also competing with automobiles for the same space. This situation hasn't gone away. If anything, it's only been exacerbated. Every rider of a streetcar is not one less rider of a private automobile. Roads will continue to be congested, and streetcars will have to fight their way through that traffic, because the whole point is that they are not grade separated. It's the trade-off that comes with building a system with no tunnels or trestles; it's cheaper but less effective.

We perceive value in fixed rail. But I feel like at least part of the value we perceive is that rail is quicker than rubber. But I'm not certain that rails in the middle of the street are any quicker than rubber in the middle of the street. If you are concerned about the environmental aspects of buses, why not invest in hybrids or trolleybuses?

What I'm saying is this. Don't half-ass it. Either be able to separate a rail system at least partially from the street to a point where it is quicker than buses, or stick to the rubber wheels.

The Boulevard of Broken (Political) Dreams

2009-09-30T10:18:00.003-04:00

The Acklin office recently opened up a second campaign, along Brookline Blvd. He is clearly following a Southern strategy, which pleases me. I think that you'll see him poll quite well in South neighborhoods, not just because of the office, but because of all the flesh-pressing he's done on that side of the Mon.

I haven't actually been to the new office yet, though I plan on stopping by when I'm home in the near future. But I do think it is interesting that the office in on Brookline Blvd. this strip is to me one of the most fascinating main streets in the city. I've spent a lot of time on that street, and I've seen it's transformation over much of my lifetime. It's still a fairly viable commercial district (likely because Brookline has a large elderly population that appreciates the value of a main street district). But something I have noticed is the large number of campaign and district offices along the street. I remember in May during primary season, both Rudiak and Reilly had offices (Reilly's I think was in the old Blockbuster). Fontana and Wagner also have offices a few storefronts away, plus the district magistrate. All within a span of a few blocks.

I'm not suggesting that it isn't well and good for politicians to be close to their constituencies by having district offices. But a campaign office isn't a hardware store. Our local officials need to work on filling storefronts with more than just themselves.

The Saga of the DC Streetcar

2009-09-28T21:24:00.003-04:00

Author's Note: I'm currently taking a transportation systems class, and our first assignment is a paper on DC's proposed streetcar system. I've put together a draft of the paper, and I'd really like to get some of your opinions on it. It's frankly not something I'm particularly familiar with, so feedback from those of you who have been working on it longer than I have would be welcome.

After several decades of population decrease, the population of the District of Columbia is beginning to see steady and solid population increases. With this increase in population, coupled with the ever growing presence of the federal government and associated apparatus, Washington is seeing a surge of investment. And the city, designed during a period of high energy costs, is being rediscovered during the new age of expensive oil. All of these factors combine to form a perfect storm to reopen the discussion about streetcar usage in Washington.

Like many of its Northeastern and Midwestern brethren, Washington had an extensive streetcar system from the turn of the century until the beginning of the postwar era. Following that, the dramatic growth of the area around the city and the unparalleled dominance of the automobile made the streetcar system too expensive to run relative to the fares that it was generating. Today the only vestiges of Washington's streetcar past are a few tracks in Georgetown, the old Car Barn near the Key Bridge at what was then the fringe of the urbanized area, and in the American History Museum.

The nation's capital already has one of the most diverse transportation systems in the country. In addition to a host of private options, Washington also has a rapid transit system, several bus systems, two commuter rail systems, bike and carsharing services and an extensive cab system. The district intends to implement what it is calling "streetcar" service along several corridors. There is some disagreement as to what constitutes a "streetcar", however, because it is considered a subset of Light Rail Transit (LRT), depending on alignments (true streetcars do not utilize exclusive rights of way), fare collection (streetcars typically collect fares oncar, while LRT collects fares offcar), and other factors. In any case, the new service would be a different type of transportation mode than currently exists in the city. The goal is to provide service for short trips within the urban area.

As a mode of transportation, a streetcar's advantage comes in the form of its cost. Because it runs on the street, the right of way is already government owned. It runs using overhead wires in an attempt to cut down on emissions. Cars vary in size, but the vehicles purchased for the DC line are 66 feet long, a few feet longer than the standard articulated bus. The vehicles obey all traffic laws in much the same way as buses.

The proposed streetcar network would serve a population located outside the existing public transit catchment basin. There is not one specifically designed "streetcar masterplan", but several lines are under construction or in planning. The most advanced line is the Anacostia project, which seeks to connect the neighborhood to the Anacostia station on the Green Line. An additional line follows the H street corridor in Northeast Washington, ending near Union Station.

It is important to overlay a map of the the proposed route over the ward map of the district of Columbia. The Anacostia streetcar line runs through Ward 8, the district of the extremely controversial and powerful former mayor Marion Barry. While Barry's management of the city makes him a complicated figure in Washington political history, his influence cannot be understated. The H street line could potentially run through wards 5, 6, and 7, all represented by councilmen who took office in 2007. It is possible that at least part of the reason for moving ahead on the Anacostia segment before the H street segment could be Barry's influence.

The District Department of transportation makes the interesting choice of listing several cities with "streetcar" systems. The FAQs mention Memphis, Little Rock, New Orleans, Tampa, and Portland. The Little Rock system is little more than a Heritage line; according to the APTA ridership report it carried only 154,600 riders last year, an average of only 423 riders per day. Tampa and Seattle have only a few more riders, near 1,000 per day. Portland is the only streetcar system with a substantial ridership, but that is in part because of the city's commitment to curbing sprawl and their extensive light rail, commuter rail, and bus systems (and also because the line runs through the central business district rather than at the urban fringe). Early trends for the streetcar revival in the United States demonstrate that the systems cannot be expected to be the workhorses of the public transportation infrastructure, and at best they are going to be supplemental modes that will augment commuter services.

One of the primary rationals for building urban fixed rail systems is the economic development that it is thought to bring. However, the DC streetcar proposal needs to be viewed in the context of its anticipated ridership. The Anacostia line, for example, is expected to have a daily ridership of 1,400. Compared to other streetcar lines, the ridership is relatively high, but it is only a fraction of the average light rail system such as those in Buffalo, Baltimore, or Pittsburgh, let alone the more famous systems in St. Louis, Denver, or Dallas. Economic development that coalesces around fixed rail will therefore likely be in proportion to the ridership of the route, and also to its interconnectedness to the rest of the system (in this case the frequency of Metro service at the connection point between streetcar and rapid transit: the Anacostia station). The Anacostia station, while not at the end of the Green Line, is certainly not a major destination station in the CBD.

Ultimately, the district needs to be willing to have reasonable expectations for the streetcar system. A single line in Anacostia will not have anywhere near the economic development potential of a multi-line system stretching throughout the system. It will not have the same effect as the new light rail systems in Phoenix, Seattle, or Charlotte, which travel on separate grades at least in part through highly developed urban areas. In many ways, the flaws that caused the demise of the streetcar a half century ago (inability to easily navigate automobile traffic, lack of maintenance on roadways, etc.) have yet to be resolved for streetcars.

Short Circuiting the Circulator

2009-09-24T15:04:00.001-04:00

Posted at TheCityFix.DC

TOD for the T

2009-09-24T09:59:00.004-04:00

Though they've been talking about it since I was in Kindergarten, I've got a lot of hope that some time in the near future we will see development of the Castle Shannon T stop. I really feel like this station is one of the most underutilized in the system in terms of economic development potential. The station is close to shops and restaurants in Castle Shannon, a short trip to Mt. Lebanon, and a complete waste of real estate at the moment. The T has an uncanny knack of keeping it's major stations away from the street by oceans of parking (Washington Junction, South Hills Village, Dormont), which makes it hard for the station to be particularly effective at building a walkable neighborhood. The Castle Shannon station would be much better off if we could get some closer apartments.

Let Them Come to Beltzhoover!

2009-09-22T13:18:00.003-04:00

I anticipate a dizzying amount of stories about Pittsburgh's success in the coming days as the media tries to find something to do while they are in town. Some, I suspect will be very good and original. Most will be some riff on the same story. City meets industry, city loses industry, city gets different industry. So international press, if you want some good story leads, here's what I want to see:

Braddock- Talk about Braddock. If you want to see a place that is proactively on the turn around, this is it. Fetterman is our Corey Booker, our celebrity mayor. This is a place with a lot of good coverage and a lot of terrible glossing. This is a story that should get out there.

Mckeesport/Aliquippa/Clairton et. al- This is the opposite side of the story. These are places that haven't turned the corner in the same way Pittsburgh has. In some cases, the corner isn't even in sight. Someone needs to tell the story of these places.

Carrick/Arlington- If you don't want to leave the city, may I suggest these neighborhoods teetering on the brink? There are the neighborhoods (Lawrenceville, South Side) that people talk about a lot. Then there are the neighborhoods (the Hill, Near Northside) that are obviously disadvantaged. But then there many neighborhoods that just continue to stumble along the way they have been for 20 years or more, if not worse.

I also challenge any international journalist to write an article about Pittsburgh but not using the following words: Steelers, steel, bridges, "eds and meds"

A Quoment

2009-09-17T09:48:00.003-04:00

Barack Obama is spending more time in the city of Pittsburgh this month than I am, which is pretty extraordinary if you think about it (full disclosure- I won't be back in town until Podcamp Pittsburgh). It's been an absolutely fabulous chain of events thusfar for this city, and so right here, right now, I'd like to start a grassroots campaign: The Pittsburgher as the Time Person of the Year.

P.S.- There's been no shortage of Pittsburgh boosterism pieces as of late. But here's something I haven't seen a whole lot of. Look at the comments section of this Washington Post story. Does anyone else find it very interesting how many comments are DC residents who are now living in Pittsburgh, and not the other way around?

Promote the General Welfare

2009-09-16T10:43:00.003-04:00

"I understand you're a business, but the business is revolving around people,"

I've been thinking about this quote a lot this morning. It was in regards to the open house that Port Authority had on the TDP yesterday. There's a lot of trepidation about the plan, as to be expected. In a way it's like every service cut that I've lived through: people complain about the decrease of service or elimination of a route.

But is the Port Authority really a business? In the most semantic sense, I would argue no, because there are federal and state dollars going to its operation (though in these days of direct government investment, the lines are being blurred). I actually think that this perception, at all levels, that public transportation is a business is dramatically hindering its productivity.

Public transportation started out as a business. In fact, it was one of the earliest service industries in America if you think about it. A company amassed the capital to build, operate, and maintain both the fixed infrastructure and the actual cars. But the dominant forms of travel that emerged in the 20th century, automobiles and aircraft, do not follow that model. Cars drive on government built roads. Planes fly into government built airports through government regulated airspace. Long story short, the government now controls public transit.

And yet, we the general public expect public transit to be more like cars; more like a business. It's a paradox- a service providing positive externalities (decreased traffic and environmental burden) without being able to cover its own costs.

It's time to reevaluate what public transportation is. It's most assuredly not a business. It's a pooling of resources to provide a service that would be out of reach on an individual level. Like, I don't know, defense? Or, perhaps health care?

Super GLUE

2009-09-14T10:44:00.002-04:00

If you are still in the city, GLUE (the Great Lakes Urban Exchange) is having a get together on Thursday night at the Shadow Lounge (BTW, does anyone know if they'll be streaming?).

Please Please, Don't Give Me Your Money!

2009-09-11T10:16:00.004-04:00

I was going to write this at 1:30 last morning, but I'd probably be a little more coherent if i did it now.

The maglev project was awarded $28 million in federal funding. I don't know the specifics, but I do know that the money came from SAFTEA-LU, the last major transportation bill. It is extremely telling that in the 29 year history of the project, this is the most significant investment.

$28 million is a drop in the bucket with this project. It will rally supporters and make people think that this is still a real project, but only a few wonks will actually see what happened with the money. I'm fairly certain that capital costs were estimated for the Airport-Greensburg link at $3.75 billion in 2003. Breaking out my handy inflation calculator means that if you started the drills today, the project would be closer to $4.4 billion today. For a sense of scale, $28 million is approximately .6% of the total estimated capital funding.

Let's talk about what else you could get for $28 million:

You could basically fund all capital costs associated with the Hazelwood to Lawrenceville Railroad
20% of the Allegheny Valley Rail Road capital costs (I'm not saying it's a good project, but for comparisons sake)
32% of the Pittsburgh-Greensburg commuter rail capital costs
Some significant improvement to existing services. I don't have anything to substantiate this, but I would guess $28 million could probably come close to operating a second train between Pittsburgh and Cleveland for a year or two if you had a DMU.
A couple of really nice buses and enough operational funding to fund a bus line from the Airport to Greensburg for a year or so.

I'm not sure how many times I can say this, but I really think Maglev is not a good idea. A 55 mile system is far too small to be investing in a 250 mph system. Even PA-Philadelphia has a lot of problems with it (as I've said before, Cleveland and DC are much more critical links). When every other state in the lower 48 is focusing on getting conventional rail or HSR, Pennsylvania should not be the one out of line.

Maglev was a pretty good idea when my parents were in middle school. Apparantly so were leg warmers over jeans. I like to think that we've moved to a more sophisticated time. Senators, don't throw good money after bad. If GREEN-TEA has $4 billion for maglev (it won't), we'll talk. Otherwise, let's hunker down and work with some existing, proven ideas.

Daytime Doldrums

2009-09-11T08:54:00.001-04:00

A very interesting article in the WashPo yesterday that I think has some relevance for things that I have talked about before. If you're not terribly familiar with DC, Cleveland Park is a neighborhood along Connecticut Avenue. It's further out from downtown than neighborhoods like Adams Morgan or Dupont Circle, but closer than Friendship Heights/Chevy Chase. I've only had occasion to visit once; it's a fairly residential neighborhood.

Is that a problem? Apparently some residents think so, given the fact that many residents are concerned about the loss of retail options along the main drag. There are several different explanations, among them the fact that there isn't much office space around, and not a whole lot of dining options.

I guess I'm a little confused as to what the neighborhood wants. On one hand, they want a vibrant business district. But on the other hand, they want to preserve local services by limiting the number of restaurants. Are these things mutually exclusive? I think we might be thinking in a dichotomy that doesn't exist. But by the same token, I'm unsure an example of a regional destination that is also a close knit neighborhood really comes to mind. The only one that is even sort of both that I can come up with would be Squirrel Hill; do you have something better?

Buckeye Bullseye

2009-09-10T09:43:00.003-04:00

Ohio really has their act together on this rail stuff. I supposed I've known this for a while, but it hit me today when I was perusing the "3C is Me" website. It's not just the public opinion game, which they are clearly playing very well. It's the legwork done by a DOT that is actively involved with figuring out ways to connect together the cities of Ohio.

I've got a fair number of problems with the Midwestern proposal, primarily that it is way too Chicago-centric and frankly a little unwieldy. But I think that 3C deserves every penny of federal money it gets. Ohio is the new Missouri in terms of bellweather-ness, so let us hope that the corridor gets beefed up as an example to the rest of the country.

Something I would caution Ohio on though is to avoid saturating the service with a lot of stops. The Buckeye state is an extremely complicated state in that there are multiple very urban centers (six cities with over 150k residents) and dozens of dozens of dozens of tiny cities (There are 251 cities in Ohio, compared to 56 in Pennsylvania, even playing with the semantics, that's a lot of small towns). I hate to sound cruel, but every Podunk town in Ohio can't get a station. For this line to really be effective, I would argue that the train shouldn't stop anywhere other than Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati. Too many stops spoil the batter. Let the stops come when the train service is improved enough to separate between local and express routes.

Tomfoolery

2009-09-08T08:38:00.001-04:00

There probably aren't any readers of this blog who don't read Pittsblog already, but if you haven't seen it yet, I would highly recommend a piece (and the comment stream) about the mayor of the not so distant past, Tom Murphy.

What will it take for Murphy to be vindicated? I think that the best way to say it is that he is at least somewhat responsible for the situation we find ourselves in today, and I mean that in both the nicest way and the least nicest way.

In terms of significance to this city, I would argue that Murphy will at some point be viewed as one of the most important mayors in Pittsburgh's 20th century history, only eclipsed by Lawrence and Caligeri (and maybe, maybe Flaherty). The stadiums, and obviously, the Convention Center are assets we point to as being some of the most important in the region, despite the fact that there was a lot of criticism during Murphy's administration during construction. I'm not really qualified to talk about the whole idea of public financing for sports venues, but I can say that there is a large amount of investment

The Fifth-Forbes corridor is being redeveloped, but not necessarily in the way Murphy intended. It's now painfully obvious that large-scale retail development a la Lord & Taylor/Macy's didn't work. It will be extremely interesting to see what the occupancy rates of downtown condos will be in three to four years, because if we do ever see retail in the vacant storefronts of Wood or Fifth, it's going to be because the population downtown warrants it. The CBD is going to have a tough time holding on to stores unless there are shoppers in the immediate vicinity. If the middle of downtown does come back around, I think Murphy's vision, if not his actions, are part of the reason why.

Because he is in part-time exile in Washington, Murphy hasn't made his voice heard in the mayoral election. In the short term, this is probably a good idea, as I imagine there are people who would view his endorsement as a kiss of death. Still, from what I've been told from those that were around back then, you could see some of that progressive, community-organizing spirit of the young Murphy who knocked of the old establishment Ravenstahl in some of the progressive candidates of the present.

Bus+

2009-09-02T10:23:00.000-04:00

I've never seen Judge Judy, but I'm told she has a phrase: "Don't pee on my leg and tell me that it's raining". I've always liked the simplicity of that phrase.

So Port Authority, don't pee on my leg and tell me that it's raining. I read your description of Rapid Bus, and I take some issue with it.

To begin with, your chart comparing BRT and "Rapid Bus" is basically useless. I mean, take the first row. Yes, both "Rapid Bus" and BRT have frequent service. But I mean the 52 comes more frequently than Haley's Comet, so you could justify calling it "frequent service". Nearly everything on that chart is so relative as to make the chart worthless.

I understand what you're trying to do. You're trying to say that "Rapid Bus" is just like the BRT that we've all heard about. But it's not. "Rapid Bus" as you describe it isn't really some high end service. It's what we should expect from a regular bus line. Obviously we don't expect real time information at every stop, but at least a few of them (particularly downtown) should. Within the major corridors, of course there should be limited stops and frequent service.

For the moment, let's refer to "Rapid Bus" as "Bus+", I feel like that term doesn't make it sound like BRT, but it does sound like improved service. I like Bus Rapid Transit a lot. I like improved bus service a lot. But don't try to sell the Pittsburgh public something that it isn't getting. Otherwise there are going to be a lot of people who are dissapointed with service that they thought that they weregoing to recieve.

The City that John Built

2009-09-01T12:56:00.004-04:00

To expand beyond our MSA for a moment,

The New Republic has a very detailed piece about Congressman John Murtha and his relationship with Johnstown, PA. It's one of the finest pieces of journalism that I've read in some time, and it really makes one think about the relationship between small cities and the federal government.

I think many small cities have these congressmen and women that serve as their champions, giving them disproportionate amount of influence. Pennsylvania has two that specifically come to mind, Murtha and the elder Shuster, Bud, who represented the area around and including Altoona for nearly 30 years. Murtha and Shuster were able to leverage their positions on important committees (appropriations in Murtha's case, Transportation in Shuster's) to giving their small urban areas a connection to the rest of the world. As Jim Russell always points out, our proximity to DC the city has helped to put Pittsburgh where it is, I suppose for some places, proximity to DC the metonym is just as important.

On another note, on more than one occasion the article mentioned Johnstown as a "Rust Belt" city. I guess I've never thought of the stuff east of Pittsburgh as "Rust Belt", more like Appalachia. Is it the same?

A Day 50+ Years in the Making

2009-08-28T13:28:00.007-04:00

It is finished. Connect 09, the Port Authority's Transit Development plan has come out. In no particular order, here are my thoughts.

Major, major, major kudos go out to Illyrias for swiping the system map. Props to her are well deserved. I went to Kinkos and printed out a large copy of it.

Keeping the base fair at $2.00 is smart. I think that increasing the other fares are painful, but necessary. The one thing I'm not thrilled about is the loss of the downtowner fare. I realize that it's terribly confusing, but I really believe that there should be a special fare for getting to the stadiums and Station Square. Those are basically your most cost elastic destinations, because those are the easiest locales to get to without taking the bus. Pricing the cost of a T ride to Station Square at $3.00 is probably going to be unpleasant, and I imagine many people would rather walk than pay what is almost double the price of a current trip. Also, is anyone else beside me really interested to see what the fare from Station Square to the North Side on the T will be?

I'm extremely pleased with the idea of the rapid bus system. We have to understand that light rail is the pinnacle of a process, and bus rapid transit is an extremely important stepping stone. I'm particularly looking forward to the ability of the buses in Oakland to be able to change the light to be conducive to passing through. The absolutely essential thing is to make sure that the system is as most like BRT as possible. Often times, a line will be called BRT and it will make people upset because it's not (*cough*silver line/lie*cough*).

I really want to see a more close-up version of the downtown routing. I very much like the idea of having all seven of the circulation alignments connect with each of the other ones.

Stop consolidation is the single most important component of this project. Particularly in regards to the T and BRT systems, stop consolidation makes or breaks the project.

I can almost guarantee that the Transit Hubs are going to be more disappointing then we want them to be. I know that we want them to be climate controlled spaces with dry cleaners and coffee shops and real time information about when the next buses are coming. But I suspect it will just be a three-sided shelter in a sea of parking. I implore PAAC to not half-ass this particular part of the project, because I think that it's genuinely innovative.

Expect the number changes to be confusing, even if they are meant to make it easier.

All in all I am not disappointed by the TDP. Expect more in the coming days as I try to dissect some of the major route changes.

Meet the New Report, Same as the Old Report

2009-08-26T16:47:00.002-04:00

Sorry the new posts haven't been coming daily as of late, but I'm transitioning back to Washington and I'm still getting into the groove of things.

I did see, however, that PennDOT submitted its applications for HSR funding. And I am mighty pleased to report that Maglev is not on the table. We can all breathe a little easier now.

Keystone east is on there, as it should be. It was submitted track one, which is "shovel ready". I really hope they get the funding. The project clearly has legs, and I think that they can make a very good service even better.

Keystone West. They're asking for a little less than a million dollars. I can guarantee that nothing revolutionary will be said in the final report. Trust me, I've read all the old ones. We all know the story: There are 60+ freight trains daily along a national route, serious topographic hurdles, lack of strong demand, yada yada yada.

Look, I'm not opposed to Keystone West. But you have to know what we're getting into. It's going to take a mighty big carrot to get Norfolk Southern to be willing to allow multiple passenger trains on the track. It's going to take an even bigger push to build passenger-exclusive track (even the non-electric kind). In any case, I imagine it will be quite some time before we see a second train there.

In the meanwhile, I will try to amass my Vanderbilt-esque fortune so that I can build my own railway (the one that should be built) the Cleveburghton Limited.

Judgement Day

2009-08-26T11:00:00.003-04:00

I'm sure you're all waiting with baited breath for Friday.

A Quoment:

2009-08-24T07:26:00.003-04:00

Anyone catch last night's Mad Men? It was excellent. The story at Sterling Cooper revolved around Madison Square Garden, who's builders were concered about the "vocal minority" of residents who opposed the demolition of Penn Station. The dialogue worked on several different levels, but I was most struck by a line Paul said to Pete: "this city has no memory". Anyone else find this the most powerful line of the episode?

Buses Don't Get No Respect

2009-08-21T13:41:00.001-04:00

(Posted at TheCityFix DC)

The Next Big Thing

2009-08-20T18:29:00.002-04:00

This morning I made my brother come down to Morgantown with me. I wanted to see the Personal Rapid Transit system in all its glory. Unfortunately, it wasn't really all in its glory, since school wasn't in session. Because of this, the system was stopping at all stations instead of bypassing the ones that I didn't want to stop at.

The concept of the PRT is a very interesting one. For those of you who don't know, the loop consists of five stations, connected through a fixed concrete pathway traversed by eight-passenger cars. Upon entering the station, you select your destination, and have a car deliver you to that destination. The cars are electric, but rubber tired, so they get their electricity from the side of the wall (it's sort of like the Auto Racer at Kennywood).

The system was supposed to be a demonstration for the next wave of urban transportation systems (sound familiar?) Unlike ours, it actually got built. And while it shows its age, it's a fascinating system. And it makes me wonder- why don't we have "space age" technology like this anymore? Why don't innovative projects like this get tested in the same way as they did 30 or 40 years ago? Part of it, I think is cost. But we seem to have developed a fear of failing.

For Godsakes, if Richard Nixon could support this system, can't the current administration be at least as bold as he was?

A River Runs Through It

2009-08-19T20:29:00.003-04:00

I think that even Pittsburgh's most reluctant boosters are willing to say that the city is turning around. Ignore for a moment the purple people-eater that is the pension crisis and the still-declining population, Pittsburgh is not even the same place as it was when I started high school. If we can sustain this trend, I think that we've got a lot of potential, all things I've written about before. And I think that, as we have seen before, a rising tide, geographically speaking, raises many boats. With a strong central city, a metropolitan region grows stronger.

Unfortunately, I think that if there is one place that will not reap immediate benefits from a Pittsburgh recovery, I think the Mon Valley will be it. The stretch of river running basically in between Duquesne and Brownsville are some of the poorest in the state (I think most of the areas east of Duquesne, including Braddock, fall under the direct economic sphere of the city, and will probably turn around quicker than their upriver neighbors). There are dozens of communities across several counties that all have seen dramatic losses of population over the last thirty years. But this urbanized area has no single hub, instead it is a collection of low-density urban sprawl.

The challenge of the Mon Valley will continue to plague the region. While the Mahoning Valley has the advange of being a corridor between Pittsburgh and Cleveland, the Mon Valley connects Pittsburgh to...Cheat Lake? It's an industrial area in a post-industrial world (and I know people said that about Pittsburgh, and look at what's happened there, but population and social capital there is off the charts compared to anything Donora has to offer).

There are very nice things about most of these cities and boroughs. The problem is, that there's a lot of not so nice stuff in these cities and boroughs too. Clearly you can't put together a super-city cobbled together from all of the desirable elements of the other cities. So how do you make due with what you've got?

One thing is for certain- the balkanization of this corridor will absolutely kill it if nothing is done. I really want to see some kind of supra-governmental organization made up of the county executives/commissioners of Allegheny, Westmoreland, Fayette, and Washington counties. Or some kind of "River Tsar" (maybe that name might not sit so well with some of the older residents) who can coordinate efforts on a regional level.

I'm curious as to your take on the whole thing? How do you save an area with all the natural disadvantages of an urban area with few of the advantages? And if you can, try to avoid using the term "MFX" ;-).

From the Burgh to the Beltway

2009-08-17T16:33:00.002-04:00

(Posted at TheCityFix DC)

P&P Literary Review: Booked on the Morning Train

2009-08-13T16:50:00.003-04:00

One of the last books that I really had the chance to read this summer was a book by George Scheer, who is evidently a radio host in North Carolina. The book is called Booked on the Morning Train, and it chronicles the author's journey though America in what I believe was the fall of 1984 based on the teams in the NLCS during his travel. Considering that my friend and I are planning a trip of similar scope, I figured it would be worth a read.

The book was OK, I suppose. It was deeply personal, which was a little weird for me (I don't read a lot of travel writing). It's not that it wasn't an informative book, I just wasn't really interested in hearing about all of the time he spent off the train.

Plus Amtrak was really different during the 1980s. It was a different climate, one where Reagan was gunning for Amtrak. Rail was sort of an afterthought transportation-wise, and I think it wasn't really on the national attention radar. There where a whole lot more routes, and service went to a lot more places (I really wish I could ride the Pioneer). All told, I think his trip is very different from what a current trip like his would be in the present. That being said, it was an enjoyable read, and while I may not recommend it, it was certainly an interesting snapshot at a moment in history.

The End of An Igloo

2009-08-12T09:31:00.003-04:00

Abby Mendelson has an absolutely fabulous piece on the future of the Mellon Arena in Pop City. This is an issue I've been thinking a lot about, and I genuinely believe the future of the Mellon Arena and the Lower Hill is the seminal large-scale urban planning challenge of our generation in the city.

The first thing I think everyone needs to realize is that the area is a hill. It's simple enough, but I think it's lost on a lot of people. As someone who has taken one of those Cub Scout tours that start at Flag Plaza, there is a fairly serious height disparity between even the Lower Hill and Grant Street. I think that development on the near North Side will always be more appealing since the land, in a relative sense, is flatter. Unless you're going to install those horizontal escalators from the airport down the sidewalk on Centre, you are always going to have some resistance to walking between the Lower Hill and other city destinations.

In addition (and broad generalization here), Mellon Arena isn't really close to what you'd call the "vibrant" part of downtown. The most accessible roads from a walking standpoint are probably Grant, Ross, 7th and 6th, none of which are exactly "cultural corridors". The arena connects with downtown at it's easternmost point, which is basically where the stayed corporate headquarters are. If there is a "9-5 road" anywhere in the city, it is Grant street. This, I think, is part of the reason that North Side development is favored: it's a walk across the bridge from the cultural district, which can actually look pretty lively on a weeknight. The Lower Hill faces the challenge of being a neighborhood proximal to what is perhaps the most boring part of downtown.

I actually think the Mellon Arena gets a bit of a bad rap. I mean, don't get me wrong, I understand the havoc that it created for the neighborhood. But the arena doesn't cut the Hill off from downtown- I-579 does. Crosstown Blvd is a far more daunting hurdle to get over, and I think that no matter what the development at the Mellon Arena site is, the community won't be much better off unless there is a well crafted way of getting over all of the north/south traffic that runs on 579 and Bigelow. I know Congressman Doyle made a request for an earmark on the issue, and I'd really like to see that happen.

As for the physical structure itself, I'm torn. I really like the idea that was in the Post Gazette some time ago to open the arena into some kind of outdoor park, but God knows we have enough outdoor concert venues. Unless there's some kind of a cap, I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that any housing on the site wouldn't be upscale condos that would price out former residents even more than other development already has. As for mixed use retail, we've seen how much trouble we have bringing it to downtown; what makes us think we can cultivate it in a location that has all of the logistical hurdles of downtown with little of the pre-existing infrastructure?

I would love to see something incredibly innovative on the space, but I haven't got a clue as to what. Gigantic urban sculpture gallery? Urban wind farm? I don't really know, but it'll be a damn shame if it's a parking lot.

The Next Nothing: A Quoment

2009-08-10T17:42:00.003-04:00

In the span of a few hours, both independent candidates for mayor said something I'm uncomfortable with. Both Acklin and Harris referred to their vision of Pittsburgh as "The Silicon Valley of the East". This obsession with being "the next Silicon Valley" is unhealthy and should stop.

If we are going to set ourselves up to be the next silicon valley, we will not succeed. Silicon Valley is a product of a unique geographic and historical moment. I'm not entirely certain it can happen again in the same way that it developed in the 90s. Learn from it, emulate it, and be inspired by it: but don't try to replicate it.

Pittsburgh won't be the next silicon valley any more than it became the "Manhattan of the Alleghenies" in the 1920s. We won't be the "next" anything. Well, that's not entirely true. We could be the "next Pittsburgh". Let's work toward that.

The Ol' Switcheroo Trick

2009-08-10T11:12:00.002-04:00

I've been invited to start blogging at TheCityFix DC, and my first post is up there now. I still plan on having plenty of Pittsburgh commentary on this blog as I head back to the capital, but my DC/national stuff will start showing up over at TCF.

Bridging the Gap

2009-08-09T17:13:00.004-04:00

This weekend I went out to the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum in Washington. They had a special exhibit about 150 years of transit in Pittsburgh. It was interesting enough, though in my opinion there were way too many volunteers and it made the guests a little uncomfortable. But what I was really taken aback by was the age of people. It seemed as though every visitor to the museum while I was there were either over the age of 50 or under the age of 8.

Why did no one else my age show up? If I may opine, I think there is a disconnect between admirers of historical streetcars and those who advocate for future streetcars. I'll be completely honest, I have very little knowledge of or interest in the actual technology of streetcars. I know enough to know why I like them: they're quick, they're clean, and they're simple. Used correctly, they can promote economic development and social equity. As for horsepower or electric cable, I'll leave that up to the engineers. While I appreciate the aesthetic forms of some LRT systems, I must more appreciate function over form.

So it sometimes feels like I'm speaking a different language when I'm talking to a foamer. And I don't know about you, but I don't always get the feeling that these guys always want more streetcars. People my grandfather's age will wax nostalgic for streetcars in the 1940s, but decry the use of taxpayers dollars on an expansion out to Oakland. There is a disconnect between people who think about electrified transit as a solution for the present and those who view it as a historical technology to be appreciated but not replicated.

There ought to be some kind of "Congress of the American Streetcar" where history buffs and land use planners can sit down and connect. I realize some of you certainly cross over (ie, know the names of engine parts), but for the rest of us, I think it would be really helpful to start bringing in foamers into the larger discourse. There's a lot to be learned from the old men if we listen.

In Defense of Cranberry?

2009-08-07T14:15:00.006-04:00

If there is one place Pittsburgh smart growthers love to trash on, it's Cranberry. If you sat in on the City Council meetings during Act 48 discussion, you'd think that all the commuters from Butler county were some kind of occupying force, pillaging our land and quartering soldiers in our downtown office buildings. I remember at the Smart Growth Conference back in May, there was a collective rolling of eyes at my table whenever a member of Cranberry Township's Public Works department was announced as a member of a panel on sustainable local development issues.

There's no use beating around the bush; Cranberry and places like it are not good from a smart growth standpoint. They aren't good for public transportation, they aren't good for livable streets. They're just ugly. But the reality is, a city needs them. I think this is one of those places where talent attraction/retention and smart growth are at odds. Everyone loves Seattle, but Microsoft is still 10 miles away in Redmond. It still takes 2 hours to get from downtown San Jose to the Googleplex by public transportation. It's a reality that, try as we might to prevent it, greenfield development will continue to happen, because leaders would rather have suburban development in our region than suburban development in another region.

Is that a bad thing? Well, yes and no. When Westinghouse moved out to Cranberry, I was upset. But that's still people who are living in the region, going to the local museums, and spending their money in the regional economy. Is it as good as setting up shop at Carrie Furnace? Of course not. But part of what makes a city emulatable is a mix of geographic spaces from which to develop. Small start ups don't need the same space as gargantuan companies. Some people, when given the option, actually prefer a suburban home to a lively urban neighborhood (the rub is that we have to give them the option of the lively urban neighborhood). This doesn't mean that we should be building suburban office parks and residential development all the way Venango, and certainly there are ways (sidewalks, grid-ier layouts, less Byzantine zoning laws) that allow suburban and exurban development to take place in a more manageable way. Cranberry is the sodium in the diet of urban success- everyone needs a little of it, but get too much and you're in a lot of trouble.

Maybe American Eagle can serve as an example for us. After wandering around in the desert/Warrendale for some time, they eventually moved into office on the Southside. Call it boiling a frog, but some people just need to be eased in to our urban experiment.

I don't like APPLES (Always Put People in Little Enclosed Spaces) anymore than I like BANANAs (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone). If someone has a better fruit-related acronymn, let me know.

My Not Quite Fully Baked Theory on Why Detroit is in the Shape that It's In

2009-08-05T11:19:00.006-04:00

David Frum's article got me thinking. There are very, very few times that I agree with Mr. Frum, but I actually found his article very insightful. R2P asks:

If this was 1983, what would the author be writing about Pittsburgh? 1977
in Youngstown? Is there any difference between Detroit now and those two places
at the nadir of their own economic collapse?

I would argue yes, and I'll put forth two reasons:

1.) Detroit came late to the game. I made an attempt at a graph, but it's probably not all that helpful. Still, I think it's worth noting that Detroit was gaining population like crazy long after other Rust Belt cities like Cleveland and Pittsburgh had slowed down. Henry Ford started his first factory in 1903, nearly 20 years after J&L started making steel in Pittsburgh and almost 30 years after Edgar Thompson rolled out its first batch. This head start was absolutely critical to helping develop cultural and intellectual capital in Pittsburgh (the first Carnegie library was open a decade before Ford started). Detroit never had the advantage of historical fortune. It was a sizable shipping port and commerce center before the production of the auto, but it's industrial riches were acquired too late to be invested in culture and the city like they were in Pittsburgh and Cleveland.

2.) Detroit is a big city. By area, Detroit is the 55th largest city in the United States. Discounting cities in states like Alaska and Montana, nearly every city larger than Detroit is in the Sun Belt. The only Rust-ish belt cities larger than Detroit are Columbus, Chicago, and Indianapolis. Detroit is so big, Cleveland and Pittsburgh could both fit inside of it. Even with such a large population, this is still a huge area. Take your Google Map man and plop him down anywhere in Detroit, and you can get a sense of just how sprawling it actually is. It was a city that expanded with the automobile in mind. This makes Detroit's problem even more complicated, because it has all of the malaise of a post-industrial city without much of the high-energy-costs infrastructure.

In a way, Detroit is a transition city. It was sort of the last 19th century city and the first 20th century city. It is a Sun Belt city in a Rust Belt neighborhood; built for the combustion engine that sustained its growth. Unlike Charlotte or Tempe where the construction of the product was separated from its consumption, in Detroit, you drove your car to the factory to build more cars in a self-sustaining cycle.

A Visual Quoment

2009-08-05T09:49:00.002-04:00

Image: Washington Post

All in the Game, Yo

2009-08-04T00:01:00.000-04:00

I contend that The Wire is the greatest television program of my generation, quite possibly one of the greatest of all time. It's an incredibly complex narrative, as urban life is in reality. Season Two is my favorite; the struggle of industrial dockworkers in a postindustrial Baltimore tugs at my heartstrings. But I've been thinking a lot about an important plot point through season three and four- the election for mayor of Baltimore.

For those who don't remember, Baltimore of The Wire is governed by African American Mayor Clarence Royce. Royce isn't exactly corrupt, but he does view economic development as vital, even at the expense of the population. He gets challenged by two progressive city councilmen, Tony Gray (black) and Tommy Carcetti (white). Gray and Royce split the African American vote, and Carcetti is able to make enough inroads in the African-American community to win.

I've been struggling for a way to make this election work as a metaphor for our present election. I actually don't believe that Ravenstahl is as bad as Royce, but he obviously has to fill that role for this metaphor to work. I see a slight connection between the Grain Pier and the North Shore. But how do Harris and Acklin (can we start calling them "Harklin"?) match up to Gray and Carcetti? Dear reader, I was hoping you'd have some opinions.

An obvious difference between The Wire's Baltimore and Pittsburgh is that Baltimore was almost 2/3 African American, while Pittsburgh is about 2/3 white. But I think that the idea of a winning candidate being able to take advantage of a split of a bloc is obviously important. And here in Pittsburgh, it's the babushkas and the dedushkas that run the show. Ideally, the challenger would not only be making inroads into this community, but another challenger would be drawing his/her base from that pool. I contend that Dowd's best chance for election would have been if Jim Motznik would have run too (which clearly wouldn't have been allowed). But when both challengers are pulling base from each other, it gets complicated.

So Wireholics, what other connections between the fictitious election and the real one can you find?

BTW, kudos to the Pittsburgh Lesbian for getting Kevin Acklin talking about transit!

Can You Love it if You Left It?

2009-08-03T08:55:00.002-04:00

You should read this article about Flint, Michigan. It's very good, and it's from Slate.com, which is my absolutely favorite website. The article is about a special election for mayor, and two candidates, a 35 year old white man, and a 64 year old African-American woman. But I'm going to use a particular section as my springboard.

Clack promises to implement a "survival plan" for the city to stabilize the
budget and stave off receivership by the state, which briefly took over the city
in 2002. She plans to secure federal dollars to help close a budget gap and
rehire laid-off police as well as create an economic and jobs task force. "You
can only understand the pulse of this city if you've been here and been a part
of it," she says.

It's a veiled reference to Walling, who—like many other locals—left Flint after high school. He attended Michigan State University and earned a master's degree in urban affairs from the University of London. He then worked for the mayor of Washington and studied community and economic development in Minnesota before returning to Flint to take on Williamson in 2007.

It's a concept I grapple with a lot. I am, after all, a part-time 'burgh expatriate, with most of my time spent at a school several hundred miles away from my home. If, and when, I make my permanent return here, am I going to be viewed as a carpet-bagger?

There's something to be said for physical presence in this place. I know that there are stories I've written about this summer that I wouldn't have had a read on at school, even if I read the PG's web page every day. You are more attuned here; I can sit in on City Council meetings (though if Peduto has his way, I'll be able to stream them online) or watch the day to day evolution of Market Square as I eat my lunch. In that sense, Clack is correct. Without feet on the ground, you lose something.

But by the same token, remaining stationary in your city, particularly in a city without much in-migration, can produce a parochial frame of reference. Why do something different if you haven't seen anything different to compare it to? Not getting out of your comfort zone produces an unhealthy "us-against-the-world" attitude, which is dangerous for cities in the Rust Belt, where attracting new talent is vital to survival.

I've been thinking about this in the context of Pittsburgh. We like the concept of the local-boy-made-good a lot (what else would explain our inexplicable attachment to Donnie Iris?) but it doesn't sit well in the political sphere. Just a few years ago this city, which has one of the highest educational attainment ratios in the country, had a single city councilman with a college degree (and I'm pretty sure there are only 3 now). The mayor of the city could conceivably have come home from college to get his laundry done. I fear that Harris (expatriate time in Princeton) and Acklin (expatriate time in DC and Boston) are at a competitive disadvantage because some residents of the city assume time away from the city a as dislike of the city. I think there is a twinge of resentment in a lot of city residents at people who move away (perhaps it is misplaced anger at their own children or friends who left the city and haven't returned), coupled with an anti-intellectualism and distrust of "elitist" Eastern Seaboard cities.

This is not to demean people who do live their entire lives here, graduate from local schools, and make contributions to this region. But bashing returning expats isn't acceptable on the campaign trail, in Flint or Pittsburgh.

Opening Up a Can of "WHOUP" Ass

2009-07-30T22:13:00.004-04:00

So in case you haven't been following, the White House Office of Urban Policy (or, as some are calling it "WHOUP") has recently gained some traction. It seems that after a couple of months of limbo, the office actually will be doing something in the near future.

The question is, what is that something? When I first heard about the office, I imagined some kind of National Security Advisor-level position on urban policy. But clearly, the director of WHOUP is not going to be sitting with Obama and cabinet members, Thirteen Days-style, during tense negotiations over legacy costs. In a way, that's kind of sad, but it speaks to the fact that urban areas have a lot of problems, but not a lot of "the world will end tomorrow if we don't do something" problems.

I have some reservations about Adolfo Carrion as head of the office though. As I wrote a long time ago, New York City is not like the rest of urban America. Not only is it New York, but it's also BosWash, which is not really an urban pattern replicated anywhere else in the country. I really wish the head of the office came from some other city (I would obviously be happier with a Rust Belt city, but I'd accept any city that isn't New York, LA, or Chicago). Or maybe some kind of board with representatives from five or six geographic regions that rotate a chairmanship. I don't know. All of this is not to say that Carrion won't be good for the job, just that his New York background doesn't automatically give him a good vantage point to view the problems of urban America.

What do I want to see out of WHOUP in the next year? Well, a website would be nice. But more than that, I want to see name recognition for this office. Let's face it, John Q. Public doesn't follow the urban policy debate as much as many people who read this blog do. My parents probably don't know that this office exists. So WHOUP needs to get its (awesome) name out there. Put Carrion on the Sunday talk show circuit (or get him lined up for the Daily Show). Start to get the office involved with the burgeoning HSR program. But recognition is the first step toward discussion. And if people start hearing about the office, it's going to get to their councilmen and mayors, and the office will start getting worthwhile commentary without having to go to the states.

Getting Carded

2009-07-29T09:17:00.004-04:00

In keeping with yesterday's post about fare structure, I've got another question that I'll throw out there for general discussion.

There is some talk of going cashless on the T. That is, to say, any cash transactions would take place off the car, and you would be required to pay for your trip with either a permanent smartcard or a temporary paper smartcard. The idea is to make the T closer to a rapid transit system, so as not to be bogged down by cash.

A few problems with this scenario, the primary being this. PAT can't afford to put boxes at every station, so they would only go at high level stops. This excludes a not insignificant number of riders who travel from low platform stops (including the entire 52 line).

Would forcing people to pay with a card make the T go faster? To paraphrase to parody of Goldwater's '64 slogan: "In my guts I know it's nuts". I want to believe that we can run the T like an honest to God rapid transit system, but deep down, I know we can't. The two newest T stops are going to serve a lot of people who don't ride the T to work but will take it to the casino or the other recreational development on the North Side. I don't think it's in the best interest of the Port Authority to make the system more confusing for these people. In addition, you have all of the grandmothers in Castle Shannon that can't buy their card at Poplar and will put up a big stink about having to pay with the card. I say it's just not worth the aggravation.

If people want to use a smartcard, that's their prerogative, and they'd be smart to do so. But you're going to enter a world of hurt if you try to force someone to move to the smartcard.

The attempt to speed the T up is noble. But I'm not sure the exclusive use of smartcards is the answer. One could make the argument that if the T really wanted to be rapid transit, then it would only be stopping at high level stops (and even many of those are overkill).

Zoning Out

2009-07-27T20:38:00.003-04:00

The eventual arrival of the Smartrip cards in the Pittsburgh area brings up a lot of very interesting questions. We have taken the first step toward regional integration of our public transportation system, a la SEPTA. But it brings up a host of interesting questions about fair structures.

Have you met our zone structure (there's actually a really cool poster in the window of the Port Authority window downtown, but I can't find it online)? The zone structure is extremely confusing. Add in the zone structures of the other transit operators in the region, and you've got the transit manifestation of our balkanization problem.

So what can we do? How can we make our fare structure more equitable and simpler? Are these two mutually exclusive?

I actually kind of like the "pay as far away from downtown as you can be" method, which means that you pay upon entering inbound and upon exiting outbound. I think paying downtown is a bad idea, because it would really gunk up the works. The problem is, not every trip operates on this model. I'm constantly amazed at all of the people who get on my bus as I'm coming home. They get on well after downtown and continue to travel outbound. It doesn't seem fair to charge them for the entire zone when they get on after some people have gotten off.

Ideally there would be some way to pay by the number of stops that you go. There actually are bus systems with GPS that can keep track of what stop the bus is at (though I'm not sure if it's being used for revenue generation). I think this would help PAT practice price discrimination, being able to capture passengers that choose to walk the few blocks to the Giant Eagle because they don't want to pay the entire zone one fare. But I'm not entirely sure that's a workable option, considering that we don't have that technological capability.

The complication of Oakland as primary destination also complicates the situation. I don't usually ride the 44U, but does anyone know how they pay? I guess I always assumed that they avoided paying in Oakland, but I know that when I used to take the bus between downtown and Oakland, I always flashed my pass in Oakland. This confusing system needs to be standardized, I think.

I wonder if actually preserving the zone structure can be an incentive to switching people over to the smartrip. Semi-frequent transit users (people who aren't going to the same destination every day) are probably more likely to take transit when they don't have to think about how much it costs. I know from personal experience that I have no idea how much it costs for a ride from the Foggy Bottom metro station to Ballston, Friendship Heights, Metro Center, or any of the other stops I frequently go to. When my card is low, I put another $20 on it and don't think about it. Without the card, I'd probably continue to get angry about needing to have dollar bills or change, and I'd be less likely to ride. In fact, it makes riding transit more like driving a car. I don't calculate how much money I spend on gas for every trip I take; I put in $20 worth of gas and take trips until the light comes on. By having people think about multiple trips instead of individual trips, the cost appears to diminish.

The crossroads of the smartrip and the TDP offer a lot of opportunity to clean this whole thing up. I'm curious as to what yinz guys think.

A Rare Foray into the Political: If He Loses, This is How He'd Lose

2009-07-24T16:41:00.005-04:00

I don't usually write about something this explicitly political, but I can't resist.

Let me be perfectly honest. I don't think Luke will lose. But, I think he could lose. And if he does, this is how he would lose:

A Challenger Needs to Drop Out By Mid-to-Late September No one wants to admit this, but it's true. Harris and Acklin are going to pull support from essentially the same neighborhoods. Their voters are essentially the same. If both of them truly care about the city, they both need to recognize that only one of them stands a chance to win. I don't care which one it is (ok, that's a lie). If one of them hasn't bowed out before October, there is virtually no chance of either of them succeeding. The progressives of the city are imploring Acklin and Harris- look for the best interest of the city, not for the best interest of the candidate.
Stir Up Angst on the Northside The recent fight over the community-benefits agreement has shown that the mayor is not invulnerable on his own turf. Ravenstahl did extremely well in the 24th, 26th, and 27th wards, which are the far Northside neighborhoods. But he was winning by 60ish percent on the 22nd, 23rd, and 25th wards, which are closer to the river. If Northside United and the other community organizing groups can build up popular dissent in these communities, a reform candidate might be able to capitalize on this discontent. Ravenstahl would do well to shore up this constituency, otherwise he will have some trouble in his own backyard.
Know Your Neighborhoods If I could vote, I would vote for the candidate who could name every single neighborhood from memory. I have a sneaking suspicion that none of them could do it. How can you help New Homestead when you don't know it exists?
Adopt a Southern (and Western) Strategy The reform candidate(s) will win in the East End districts (7 and 14), regardless of what they do. They'll be competitive in a couple of other districts in the area (4 and 11). But Luke cleaned Dowd and Robinson's clocks in the South. There are ten wards south of the Monongahela. Eight of them went for Luke by over 65%, six went for Ravenstahl by over 70%, including an astonishing 77% percent in Carrick (29th) and 76% in Overbrook (32nd). If I were the chief of staff of Acklin or Harris, I would buy my candidate a book of bus tickets and put him on the 41D or the 51C or the 46K. Fundraise in Highland Park or Shadyside if you have to, but if you aren't walking Brownsville road or Brookline Boulevard during the day, you are going to lose. Brush elbows with the babushkas. There's a bit of an anti-East End bias in the South, so the two East End candidates need to spend a majority of their time reaching out to these communities.

In my opinion, it would take all of this and then some to defeat the well entrenched Ravenstahl. Not to say it can't be done, but there's absolutely no question it would be difficult for one candidate, let alone two.

Why Aren't any of the Mayoral Candidates Talking about Transportation?

2009-07-23T19:31:00.003-04:00

I've started paying attention to the mayoral race again. It's been a bit of a phony war thus far, without a whole lot of heavy hits by any of the candidates, though there have been a few shots across the bow.

I spent some time on the websites of the three major candidates (btw, does anyone else think it's interesting that Ravenstahl's campaign site is "Luke for mayor" while Harris and Acklin are "Harris/Acklin for Pittsburgh"? Maybe I'm reading into it too much). And while I really liked Dok's train-themed web page appealed to me, I've noticed that none of the three candidates have said anything about transportation solutions for the city of Pittsburgh. Dok has one line that says:

We will strategically address public transportation to encourage companies not just to move here, but to stay here.

While this is a good sentence, it's not really a "platform" per say. So what gives?

There's a couple of reasons. First, neither Harris or Acklin have serious issue pages. These two have to get their act together on their platforms, because at this point, Luke actually has the best issue page of the three. In addition, the mayor doesn't really have a lot of power over this issue. The city doesn't really have any kind of revenue-gathering capabilities. But a transit-friendly mayor can be a very important ally for the smart growth community.

But ultimately, I think the candidates are afraid of talking about transit. The Port Authority is a "county problem", and every time the fares get raised or the routes get cut, the city can sigh a sigh of relative relief while people get angry at other people. Many routes go out of the city into suburban communities (also "not the city's problem"). Taking a stand where one can be held accountable on transit is not a good idea from a political standpoint. But it would make for a candidate worth standing behind.

P&P Literary Review: Rules for Radicals

2009-07-21T07:39:00.000-04:00

Part of the process of getting my major approved is a set of interviews with professionals in the field that I want be in. During each of the interviews that I have had so far, I asked the man or woman I was talking to what was the one book I should read to get a good sense of their philosophy. I talked with a certain former public servant from Pittsburgh who has moved to Washington DC.

Interesting enough, the public servant suggested Saul Alinsky's tome, Rules for Radicals. The book is actually one of the most interesting I have read this summer. Though it is somewhat dated (I would say "binary") in its critique of the cultural system, it is an etremely telling book. The chapter "Of Means and Ends" could be retitled "Plan B".

Alinski's book is just as relevant as it used to be in many respects. The whole concept behind Alinski's line of reasoning is that the middle class is the dominant group that can be organized. From an urban perspective, it means getting the middle class population to become passionate about the problems in the status quo. While I'm not entirely sure how relevant his emphasis on proxies is, the focus on creativity is extremely important. In light of the recent protest on the North Side, I wonder how Alinski's theories can be applied to the Pittsburgh of today.

Who Killed the UV Loop?

2009-07-20T10:03:00.003-04:00

I hate to continually beat a dead horse, but a couple of conversations about zone structures and routing have continued to bring me back to the circulator model. Some astute readers of this blog may remember that there was once a bus that did approximate the circulator style of routing in Pittsburgh. A short lived weekend experiment, the UV Loop (which I still contend is one of the smartest names for a transportation system ever). I was actually able to track down a copy of the map and schedule.

Why did the UV Loop fail? Firstly, it failed because the money dried up. As this excellent summary by Chris Potter at City Paper describes, it was an issue, first and foremost, of funding. When the private funding ran out, the Port Authority could not justify the expense of operation based on the ridership.

But I think there were a lot of structural deficiencies in the UV Loop. To begin with, the route only ran on Friday and Saturday nights. And while I think that probably had something to do with the funding, it also handicapped the service. I think that there was a perception that this service was on a route that people took on the weekends, which is true. But it's also a route people take on weekdays too. If I'm a student who uses half a dozen different routes during the day to get to Bloomfield or the Strip, or Downtown, or the South Side, why should I take the time to use this route during Friday and Saturday evening?

The fact that the route had some weird permutations depending on which way you were circling also probably didn't help. I realize that this was partially because of the one way street system, but routes could have been designed so that they were traveling along the same streets both clockwise and counterclockwise.

But I think the final problem was that the bus wasn't taken seriously. I imagine that there was this perception of the UV Loop as being a Port Authority operated party bus, rather than a functual service. The babushkas couldn't find a benefit in this service for them, and they're the ones who write letters and complain to the Port Authority.

So if we want a Circulator, it's got to come from one of two (not mutually exclusive) ways. Either we need to design a system that serves the needs of all of the population, including the college students, or you Pitt and CMU students need to be lobbying your institutions for an institutional transit option that gets you around the city (may I suggest U Texas as a model?)

What Exactly Is Cleveburgh, Anyway?

2009-07-17T22:00:00.000-04:00

View Cleveburgh in a larger map

It's a reasonable question. Whether we define it as "tech belt" (9k hits on Google) or "Cleveburgh" (2k), I'm having a hard time determining exactly what type of metropolitan configuration this region is.

It's clearly not a megalopolis on the scale of BosWash. The more that I read and study this issue, the more I'm concerned about using ChiPitts as an example of a megalopolis. I don't think such a thing exists in the whole of America outside of the Northeast Corridor. There aren't half a dozen metros that close together in the whole rest of the country.

It's not really a big city/spillover city either. Milwaukee has seen a lot of growth due to it's close proximity to Chicago. Likewise Baltimore to DC (though DC is less populous, there's more money there). Suburbs of one city are literally bumping up against suburbs in the other city. I don't think Cleveburgh is nearly big enough to have that happen, and frankly, I'm not sure we want it to. I think we should be emphasizing the benefits of using already developed land such that people travel from city to city rather than in some amorphous sprawling landscape. Neither is it really a Metroplex, one of those very close city parings. Cleveland and Pittsburgh are nowhere near as close as Dallas/Ft. Worth or St. Paul/Minneapolis.

I feel like the closest comparison might be out on the West Coast. Pittsburgh and Cleveland have the potential to be Portland and Seattle. These two metros are clearly distinct, and yet they feed off each other. This is what we should be striving for.

Cleveburgh is an unwieldy vehicle. It is a large area, with many still undeveloped greenways and large income disparities between locales. This is a dangerous situation, as it leads to infighting. What we need is a geographic cartel, an agreement among Pittsburgh, Youngstown, Akron, and Cleveland that recognizes that a benefit to one is a benefit to all. No chance that it would ever happen politically, but think about the power that a organized front could have for the whole of the region.

It's Alive! (or, more aptly, undead)

2009-07-17T07:45:00.004-04:00

As proof that you can't keep a project (good or otherwise) down, PennDOT has announced its requests for federal high speed rail funding (feeling wonkish? Read the preapplication here). Keystone East isn't really a surprise (it's actually shovel-ready), and a lot of people who follow these things were expecting the Northeast Pennsylvania to New York proposal.

Pittsburgh to Harrisburg is on there too. They want to do a study and business plan to expand service to 6-8 daily round trips. They're asking for a total of $1.5 million in funding. That's good news, though I'll be anxious to see what comes out of the study (I also can't believe there hasn't been any study yet). Something tells me they aren't really going to tell us anything we don't already know- the ridership is probably there, but there are a lot of time sensitive deliveries over the NS route and it runs over a route that has difficult topography. Pittsburgh to Cleveland wasn't asked for, but Ohio is taking care of that, so never fear.

And then we come to this.

Pittsburgh High-Speed Magnetic Levitation Project Phase 1 -- funding to design and construct the first segment (Pittsburgh International Airport to Downtown Pittsburgh) of a Maglev, or magnetic levitation, line between the airport and Monroeville/Greensburg.

Transit connections between downtown and the airport are good things. Fundamentally, we are striving for intermodality, the ability to get anywhere without needing to use a car. Personally, I'm more of the mindset that we should be focusing our energy in the eastern corridor, but that's neither here nor there, I can see the desire for a transit connection to the airport (even though we already have a pretty good one *cough*28x*cough*). But Maglev and I have a rocky relationship since I first heard about it at the sixth grade science fair. While I think that it's a brilliant idea, and would love to see it implemented, I think that we've been burned too many times before with it. Let's face it, the value of a 200+ mph transit system is not in a 50 mile corridor, it's in a 200 mile corridor. The astronomical costs associated with Maglev don't really lend themselves to building short haul lines.

One of the telling things in the application was that there was no offer for matching funds from either the state or local government, while the state offered matching funds for Keystone East. I get the sense that the state isn't entirely serious about the option of Maglev, and frankly pieced together a pitch for high speed funding for a project that covers a distance much more suited to the FTA than the FRA. They're getting people's hopes up by asking for $2.3 billion to construct (remember the total pool is only $8 billion), while not really having any intention of going through with the project (BTW, who knew we had a PE and an EIS for maglev already? News to me. Oh wait, you mean the PE from 2003? I'm sure the situation on the ground is exactly the same as it was back then).

It's ok to let things die, it's a natural process. I would much rather see us talk seriously about a light rail extension than waste our energy on resuscitating the corpse of a project.

I will eat my hat if construction starts in January 2011, as the application suggests that it will.

Liberty Ave Red, Liberty Ave Blue

2009-07-16T18:42:00.001-04:00

I've been thinking quite a bit about this article in the Post Gazette. As someone who frequently avails himself of the current theater scene in the Cultural district, I can't help but think of the theaters that used to occupy their place.

I can't help but be reminded of Samuel Delany's book, Times Square Red, Times Square Blue. The book is about the history of Times Square, from a working-class leisure zone of sexual fulfillment into a sanitized locale safe for tourists. The descriptions of the author's sexual escapades, both heterosexual and homosexual, are unsettling and unnerving. But they are also, as a teacher once said, "unhousing", in that it challenges the reader's perspective on culture and class.

I'm too young to remember Liberty Avenue's red-light history, and I don't mean to romanticize a nostalgic past that I did not experience. I'mtrying to walk a very fine line between making an observation and making a value judgement about the whole thing. But one has to recognize that there are cultural dimensions to these reinvestment decisions, as uncomfortable as they might be to discuss in public.

Diamond in the Rough

2009-07-15T21:59:00.002-04:00

The post on the Rust Wire the other day about why Western PA is fairing better thank states a couple dozen miles away is interesting to me. In thinking about ways to go off on a tangent with the issue, I kept coming back to a seminar I had in high school on the fate of human societies. A large portion of the first semester was spent with two texts written by Jared Diamond of UCLA, Guns, Germs, and Steel and Collapse. The books sought to answer the questions of why societies flourished, and why they failed.

In trying to figure out why we are where we are now, GGS isn't really all that helpful. Greater Westylvania (including Northeast Ohio and Northwest PA) doesn't vary a whole lot in terms of natural resources or animals available for domestication. The topography is basically the same, and the geographic distance isn't really overwhelming such that the southeast of the region is dramatically better off than the northwest. So how about Collapse? If my notes are accurate, Diamond laid out 12 factors leading to a society's collapse: deforestation, soil problems, water management problems, overhunting, overfishing, introduced species, overpopulation, increased impact of the human population, climate change, environmental toxins, energy shortages, and overvegetation. While most of these aren't helpful, a couple are.

Western Pennsylvania made a choice, while it was still at the height of its population to dramatically change its environmental standard of living. This action put Pittsburgh on a trajectory different than its neighborhing metropolei. By the time the Cuyahoga was on fire in 1969, Pittsburgh had taken dramatic steps to make its rivers cleaner. In addition Pittsburgh's geography meant that the human population would always be relatively contained, and therefore would not dramatically increase their impact.

The interplay of the environmental, the political, the economic, and the geographical is fascinating to me. Pittsburgh was the beneficiary of a unique confulence of the right people with the right amount of money doing the right thing; a sort of confluence between Jared Diamond's theory of environmental destiny and the Great Man (or Great Person?) theory of history. Environmental decisions contributed to why Pittsburgh is in the shape its in, but if there wasn't a political force behind them, we could have been stuck in the position of our neighbors.

Some Light Reading

2009-07-14T18:39:00.003-04:00

Some of you have probably seen this already, but someone sent me an interesting link. I wasn't a huge fan of the writing, but I did really like the content. It is utterly amazing how similar our traffic flow situation is. In a way, that should be a good thing. We've had a century to think about essentially the same problem. Unfortunately for us, we haven't really come up with a great solution yet.

Still, it doesn't beat the classic City Paper article.

We Hardly Knew Ye

2009-07-13T12:25:00.001-04:00

I'm pretty sure most of you who read this blog know that the Steel City Flyer is ending service this week. The Busway Blogger opines Socratic.

We've got a funny relationship with coach buses in Pittsburgh, don't we though? I'll be the first person to admit that I strongly dislike coach buses, particularly Greyhound. They combine the supreme inconvenience of close quarters from airlines with the supreme inconvenience of extra time from train travel.

The Steel City Flyer was different though. It was a Mercedes bus, for godsakes. It was quick, and with very limited stops. There was fairly good intermodality with the Amtrak station. What went wrong?

Do you want to be completely honest? I think calling it a "bus" was a big disservice. If the Steel City Flyer was referred to as a "shuttle", I can almost guarantee that it would have had a higher ridership. It's an unfortunate reality that Greyhound service has scared people (particularly business travelers) away from bus travel.

I can't help but think what the Steel City Flyers ridership numbers would have been if it had been service to Cleveland. I know that we had Megabus already, but that's apples and oranges. Could a business service between these two cities work out? I think that perhaps it could.

There's a certain sweet spot that intercity bus service has to hit for it to work. It's a tad shorter of a distance than the sweet spot for HSR, probably in the 150 mile range. And there needs to be metros with a fairly large population on both ends. Harrisburg doesn't really have the population to support the reverse route. I think Cleveland does.

This closing isn't exactly the best news for the Keystone Corridor, but I don't think that it is the end of the discussion. The bus has to operate on infrastructure that is basically the same as the automobile infrastructure, so it is subject to the same constraints, while train travel is not.

So RIP, Steel City Flyer. An idea ahead of its market.

A Quoment

2009-07-11T13:55:00.004-04:00

Reuters has their compulsory Pittsburgh Boosterism Piece. It's actually a fairly nuanced one, as far as fluff pieces are concerned. It even mentions McKeesport (+1) though it also has a quote from the Allegheny Institute (-1). The one thing I disliked was that they felt the need to mention both the Steelers and the Penguins in the article.

On the face of it, it shouldn't bother me. But it does, because I've been reading these articles for months, and it seems like every single one of them feels the need to mention at least one of these teams (shockingly, the Pirates don't come up nearly as much). Perhaps this is the curse of successful small market teams; that their cities become personified by their teams. And obviously, the article goes into depth in other areas, providing the reader with a fairly good picture of the city. Still, must every story about Pittsburgh mention teams which everyone knows are from Pittsburgh? Are the Blazers mentioned in every story about Portland? The Austin Aztex? The Carolina Panthers? I suppose winning brings attention, but I'll take a description of Pittsburgh that mentions the Life Sciences Greenhouse over Heinz Field any day.

I'm reminded of one of my favorite lines in Wedding Crashers: "Crabcakes and football! That's what Maryland does!" I suppose if they set the film here, it'd have to be perogies instead.

Or we could always rename.

Hosing Down the Bus-Off Octagon

2009-07-09T14:00:00.002-04:00

In response to the Busway Blogger's comment, about the Bus-Off I wonder if I could put out some observations about the competition (voting is still going on, by the way).

I think all three of us did a few things in common. We all tried to avoid loading up on downtown stops too much, which I think was a good idea. Downtown is incredibly compact and very well served by transit already, so the need to add many more stops seems ridiculous. We also all avoided an uptown link, for what I'm assuming is the obvious reason that there is already enough service there.

All three of us covered East Carson street, at least up to the 10th street bridge. I know when I was designing my map, I had to think long and hard about that route, because it already is so transit heavy. I suppose that I rationalized by saying that it was an integral part of a circulator system, even if the route itself was not in dire need of the actual service.

Both Schloss and the Blogger have routes South of the Southside, something that I hadn't really given a whole lot of thought to. In hindsight, I think it's a very good idea. This is a corridor that is underrepresented in terms of service. I had sort of envisioned my system as a bit of a tourist-centered system (and tourists in this case could very well include people who live in the region but don't make it to the city on a regular basis). A route in the South doesn't really serve this purpose, but I see the benefit of it. I think a loop in the South using both Schloss' and the Busway Blogger's route could be advantageous, particularly if it connected to East Carson street at some point.

As for my east end routing, I will be the first to admit that it's not great. It doesn't really hit East Liberty or Shadyside where I want it to. It's squeezing through some narrow crevices. And Schloss and the Busway Blogger probably hit destinations in Bloomfield, Squirrel Hill, and Oakland better than I do. But for me it has never really been a question of service between point to point. Just about every destination in the east end is accessible to another by some bus line. The question for me is how to get from point to point to point to point. I was trying to create a route where you could get between any of a dozen points in the east end with one bus. Given a couple more miles, I think it could have been accomplished. I realize the route would appear to be winding and time consuming, but I think two features would speed up it's service: 1) a limited number of stops and 2) the fact that it is a local service, and different from many of the other services that are provided in the East end, it is only operating in a compact space rather than going out to the suburbs. The route may not be the best way to get from Oakland to Bloomfield. But I feel like it offers a better solution for getting from Oakland to Bloomfield to Shadyside to the PTC to the South Side.

Some Observations on the WCTA Study

2009-07-08T15:35:00.000-04:00

So I finished the WCTA study this afternoon, despite the fact that I had planned to finish it on Monday. No matter.

If you want the numbers, the Busway Blogger has that provided. I'm not going to retype it. I am, however going to give you just one number: 5.77. That is the ratio of the estimated operating costs for both the AVR and NS on an annual level compared to the total current budget of WCTA. Let me say that again: the estimated costs to run this commuter rail is over 5 times as much as the current budget for all WCTA lines. Chew on that for a second.

Having read the '77, '00, '03, and '06 studies already, there wasn't really anything revolutionary in this new document. Don't get me wrong, it's very good. The GIS is understandable, the writing is easy to read, and it was by HDR, who is one of my favorite consulting firms.'

As for the whole chapter 11 (which is all about TOD): We need to make a decision: what do we want this project to be? What purpose does it serve? Is it a congestion-alleviating device to ease the bottlenecks at the Squirrel Hill Tunnel and 28? Or is it a way to connect the communities of the East with downtown and Oakland via a fast transit system? Because those two things aren't exactly the same thing. I am in no way going to come out and say "commuter rail can't have TOD", because I don't think that is true. But I think that we have to recognize that commuter rail is not local service, and in particular, a commuter line does not a regional system make.
And I quote, from chapter 10, page 11: "On the negative side, regional stakeholders concluded that it would be difficult to implement a TOD scenario because of the lack of dependable transit service in all areas of the region".

Commuter rail does one thing. It gets you from point A to point B (with A being home-ish, and B being work). That is a very good thing. It eases traffic. But someone in Arnold is not going to take commuter rail to go to the grocery store. Someone in Irwin is not going to take commuter rail to see a show. The system isn't built for that. It's just not. We have to recognize that commuter rail serves one population: commuters. Unless and until there is a network of local bus lines around these commuter rail stations, it will continue to serve just commuters. And maybe that's what we want, and we just haven't used the correct language for it.

In a certain sense, a park-and-ride lot is the opposite of TOD. A park-and-ride lot encourages people to not live near the station and drive to the station instead. If built improperly, the infrastructure necessary for a park and ride lot (upgrading signals, widening access roads, etc.) could act counter to mixed-use development. It seems as though the study was at times suffering from schizophrenia- talking here about walk-up riders and medium to high density retail and residential space, and here about 400 car parking lots.

Don't try to make commuter rail fit a light rail paradigm, because it's going to make both of them look worse. Say what you will about the T. Bemoan it's infrequent service and knock on it's limited connectivity. But if I worked downtown and lived in an apartment along the line, I think I could get by reasonably well without an automobile. There are connections to nightlife, retail, food, etc. in both directions, and reasonably frequent service each way (certainly more than 4 trains each way). Sure, I would probably have to have a Zipcar subscription to use every now and again, but I could get by. But if I were to have an apartment a comparable distance away from a commuter rail stop in Jeanette, could I say the same thing?