University Times

A community initiative to build a bus rapid transit (BRT) system in Pittsburgh is taking shape.

BRT systems augment regular bus service to provide a flexible, faster, more efficient service by combining specialized vehicles on dedicated roads or bus lanes with intelligent transportation system elements to improve urban mobility and spawn economic development.

Last fall, a study was commissioned by Sustainable Pittsburgh and other community groups on developing a BRT system in the Downtown-Oakland corridor, with the ultimate aim of attracting federal funding to build such a system, said Darryl Phillips, lead traffic engineering at Parsons Brinckerhoff, the planning agency conducting the study.

“We are looking at transit options to improve connectivity between Oakland and Downtown, the two anchors of the corridor that includes Uptown and the Hill District,” with a possible extension of the system to the eastern suburbs, said Phillips Jan. 12. He was presenting an overview of the preliminary study findings at the first public meeting announcing the study, held in Alumni Hall’s Connolly Ballroom. The study is expected to be concluded by late 2012, Phillips said.

Although the Port Authority of Allegheny County is a sponsor of the initiative, this is not a Port Authority project, officials at the public forum stressed, because it will rely substantially on funding from the Federal Transit Authority and does not affect the Port Authority’s separate state-supported budget.

The “core” corridor bus routes, the 61 and 71 bus series, currently account for an average of 46,000 weekday rides, or 20 percent of Allegheny County transit ridership, Phillips noted. Those buses often are overcrowded, off-schedule and, due to numerous stops, are inconvenient for travelers going directly between Oakland and Downtown, he noted.

Sponsored by more than 30 community partners, including Pitt and UPMC, the project is studying best practices from among the 21 U.S. cities with BRT systems in place, as well as the more than 40 cities with BRT systems in the planning stages, Phillips said.

Potential components of a Pittsburgh system include dedicated bus lanes and traffic signals that allow buses to bypass traffic at intersections; many fewer stops; prepay options to avoid queuing upon bus entrance; specially branded and designed vehicles with additional doors to reduce loading/unloading times at stops; technology-enhanced transit stations with real-time information, and amenities at the bus stops including weather protection, heat, bicycle racks, security cameras, landscaping and public art.

G. Reynolds Clark, Pitt vice chancellor for community initiatives who serves on the BRT project’s stakeholders advisory committee, elaborated on the project’s goals and focus at last week’s University Senate community relations committee meeting.

“A bus rapid transit system has some very basic parameters to it,” Clark explained. “The bus comes on a very definite time schedule, operating like the ‘T’ or a train. It has more frequent, and more evenly spaced service, that is, it doesn’t stop every other block like the regular buses. Although at this stage it is purely hypothetical, Oakland would likely have only three stops: for example, one at St. Paul Cathedral, one at the Presby area and one near Carlow.”

The BRT system is expected to provide pre-pay options, Clark noted. “When the bus pulls up at the stop, you don’t have to queue up and as we do now tap your I.D. card [to gain entrance]. Some of the newer buses are articulated buses that have three entrances. They were purchased by the Port Authority in the long-range hope that a BRT system would be implemented,” he said.

“The Port Authority is very serious about this. This corridor is their life-blood, it’s the aorta of the Port Authority system because of the bulk of passengers every day and because of the economic impact for institutions and services along that corridor,” Clark noted.

A pre-boarding fare collection area at the BRT transit stops would provide opportunities for people who want real-time information, via kiosks, phone apps and other smart technology, he said.

“If someone is at a BRT station, they can find out information about what’s going on at The Carnegie and other cultural centers, events, maybe the area’s businesses. Also, riders can better plan their departure times, because the buses would be on a much tighter schedule,” Clark said.

Many important decisions need to be made before the project’s proposal is completed, he cautioned. For instance, where the BRT system routes would be established has yet to be determined.

“A lay person would say: The natural route is run them down Fifth Avenue and back out on Forbes,” Clark said. “But that’s contrary to what we’re trying to do with a BRT system because BRT buses would have to fight with the regular bus traffic and the vehicle traffic. Right now, part of the study is looking at where this corridor might be. It could be Fifth Avenue, it could be Forbes Avenue, it could be Centre Avenue, it could be some street or streets between Fifth and Centre avenues through the Upper Hill,” he said.

“It’s also not intended to go into the [center of] Downtown; it would probably stop at Grant Street and loop back. So for many riders, it  would require getting off one bus and onto another.”

There also is no decision as yet whether the BRT system should be extended past Oakland to Shadyside, Squirrel Hill, the East Busway, East Liberty or points farther east, Clark noted.

The BRT study is just the first step in the process. To qualify for federal transportation funding, Clark pointed out, “You have to do the physical impact assessments, land use, what it does to the eco-system, the noise, the air quality, how does the system control hazardous waste and contamination. These assessments have to be analyzed by other departments either at the state or federal level. Finally, we would present a proposal to the Federal Transportation Administration, because that would be the primary source of funding.”

What isn’t in doubt, Clark said, is the track record of positive economic effect that BRTs have provided to cities. “Wherever they have been located in these other cities, there’s been a demonstrated significant [positive] economic impact,” he said.

For example, Cleveland’s nine-mile BRT system, which cost $200 million, features a dedicated rapid bus lane on Euclid Avenue with its own stations and specially designed buses. According to Parsons Brinckerhoff representatives, studies show an influx of more than $5 billion in public/private investment, including expansion of the Cleveland Clinic, University Hospitals, the Museum of Art and other institutions into the Euclid Avenue corridor, since the system began operating.

“There’s a lot of excitement about this in Pittsburgh,” Clark said. “Obviously, it would have a major impact on Pitt and the other major institutions, as well as the local businesses that are in Oakland. You’ll be hearing a lot more about it in the upcoming weeks and months.”

More information on the project is available at gettherepgh.org.

—Peter Hart