University Times

Should Pitt develop a comprehensive transportation plan for Oakland? The Senate's Plant Utilization and Planning (PUP) committee debated that question with two Pitt officials Feb. 27.

While committee members praised the improved and improving state of parking and transportation at Pitt and in Oakland, they also urged the University to be more proactive in setting forth proposals in Pitt's interest and to take a longer-term view regarding such projects as the proposed Mon-Fayette Expressway and plans for the Schenley Plaza area between Hillman Library and Carnegie Library.

"Is there a comprehensive plan? No," acknowledged Joseph Phillips, director of Parking, Transportation and Services. Phillips and Eli Shorak, Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor, were invited by the committee to report on the state of transportation at Pitt. Shorak represents Pitt on several Oakland community planning groups.

Phillips said the parking and transportation office mainly takes its cue from Pitt's 10-year facilities master plan (1997-2007), which lays out institution-wide strategies for capital projects, and from public meetings and forums held on Oakland issues.

When Pitt seeks city approvals for capital projects such as the Multi-Purpose Academic Complex (MPAC) and the Petersen Events Center, adjusted parking studies are always part of the process, he said.

"The University also is represented, along with the major institutions in Oakland — UPMC, CMU — on a number of groups, the Oakland Task Force, Allegheny Conference, Oakland Transportation and Management Association, Oakland Business Improvement District, and any time these groups discuss plans for the area, transportation and parking is always on their agenda," Phillips said. "When they suggest improvements we certainly support those."

PUP committee chairperson Attilio Favorini said, "I'm not, and I don't think anyone on this committee, is questioning the University's involvement in discussions with the planning groups. The question is: Are there clear objectives that the University pursues as it's involved? I know how many conflicting objectives there are among Oakland's various stakeholders."

Favorini said that when specific issues arise, Pitt should be able to evaluate plans against a set of established institutional priorities, including the reduction of pollution and flow-through traffic in Oakland, the overall look of the Pittsburgh campus and adequate parking.

"For example, regarding Schenley Plaza, the Parks Conservancy has endorsed a certain plan for the plaza," Favorini said. "There was [an architectural] rendering in the paper. Is that proposal in the best interest of the University? It surely will have an impact on parking at the University, flow-through traffic, campus life. Does the University have a position?"

"It's not really a plan, it's a floated idea," Shorak responded. "It's the rendering of an idea. I think there's a consensus to get something better at Schenley Plaza, but that is just one suggestion. Remember, that's a public plaza, not University owned. There are a number of stakeholders, including The Carnegie."

Shouldn't the University put forward its own plan? Favorini persisted.

"It's important for the University to have input, but to put our own plan forward doesn't seem to be in the spirit of planning," Shorak replied.

Phillips said the Oakland Task Force (OTF) developed because of the perception that the University is "a 600-pound gorilla" pushing only its own agenda. "There's been a real change in how the University sees itself as part of a bigger whole," he said.

Shorak said that the change in philosophy has been a public relations success while furthering Pitt's capital projects. "Look what we've done the past few years: MPAC, the convocation center, Bouquet Gardens are not only built, but embraced by the community," he said. "If you tried the same proposals 10 years ago, you'd have no chance, especially in the areas where these projects are located."

Shorak said Pitt had not taken a position on the proposed Mon-Fayette Expressway, a $2 billion Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission project that would add a 24-mile section of toll road from Route 51 in Jefferson Hills north to Pittsburgh and Monroeville and would likely include an Oakland entrance and exit. "The turnpike commission is still doing the environmental impact study and looking at options for an Oakland ramp," Shorak said.

Phillips added that Pitt has had significant input into that study through participation in open forums and through groups such as the Oakland Task Force.

"The institution is deeply involved with that process. Full information is on the table through a vehicle like OTF, and the turnpike commission gives detailed information," Phillips said. "We're in a position to watch and see where it's going, and we're certainly concerned about congestion as well as the impact on the Oakland community as a whole while still looking at what it means to the University. Eventually, the University's stance is left up to the chancellor."

"But there's a difference between OTF and the University," said PUP committee member Ronald Hoelzeman. "Someone in the University ought to be articulating what we want and a longer-term plan of how we get there. There should be a more active stance on our part. Even if it makes us vulnerable to criticism, we have a stake in this. We should not allow things to just go on and we react. We ought to know what would be in the best interest of the University when these things first come up."

q Phillips also reported on several other parking and transportation issues.

* As a result of a consultant's assessment of Pitt's parking facilities, a new computer system will be considered that would give Pitt a better gauge on the kind and number of parkers in order to make parking more efficient.

"We'll be able to get better counts, who's in at what times — permit [holders], transients — so we can add a few more permits to this or that garage, or we could get more transients in at certain times. But these are what I would call 'small capacity' changes."

* Phillips said there is no waiting list for parking at Pitt, only for certain popular, centrally located parking areas. Many Pitt employees favor parking close to their workplace and often refuse parking at distances, he said. He added that Pitt provides information on non-Pitt parking operators as an alternative.

* At the PUP committee's request, Phillips said his office would explore the feasibility of extending the width of Bigelow Boulevard where Pitt shuttles stop to alleviate traffic congestion between Forbes and Fifth avenues.

* Phillips said the Pitt shuttle system carries 1.1 million passengers a year. The parking office will study whether more shuttles will be needed with the April opening of the Petersen Events Center, he said, adding that shuttles from lower-campus parking areas combined with upper-campus parking spaces will be adequate for public events at the center.

* Three feasibility studies, the latest done in 1997, indicate that building an underground parking lot at Schenley Plaza probably is cost prohibitive, Phillips said. The 236 spaces at the plaza, while prominent because of their location, represent a small fraction of Oakland's 10,000 spaces.

* Phillips said a study of Pitt's alternative-fuel vehicles revealed that their impact is negligible for reducing pollutants. However, reducing the number of vehicles in Oakland by having more people ride together or ride the Port Authority buses has had a real impact on reducing pollution, he said.

* Pitt has not heard from the Port Authority regarding fare increases, Phillips said. The University has a contract that provides free bus and light-rail rides throughout Allegheny County for riders with a valid Pittsburgh campus I.D. The contract runs through July 31 and automatically kicks in for another year unless either side requests renegotiation at least 60 days prior to July 31.

–Peter Hart