Rapid bus transit system would detract from more critical transit issues

Mayor Bill Peduto and County Executive Rich Fitzgerald want to create a bus rapid transit system between Oakland and Downtown. This would be a definite improvement for students looking to go ice skating or to a theater downtown, but the investment might not be worth it for the city as a whole. 

Allegheny County and the city of Pittsburgh need a comprehensive plan to improve transit. That means planning to improve service for Port Authority bus and T riders as well as drivers, bikers and pedestrians. Focus on the Oakland-Downtown bus rapid transit system is premature and might detract from a focus on developing a comprehensive way to improve transportation. 

It’s not that bus rapid transit is in and of itself a bad idea — in fact, it is an excellent way to improve bus service. Though implemented differently in each city, bus rapid transit has already benefited Pittsburgh bus riders greatly by bypassing traffic and reducing travel times on the busways. Additionally, smart off-bus payment systems and dedicated bus lanes — like those used in Cleveland’s Healthline — could improve service to any bus corridor by making buses faster and more reliable.

Furthermore, permanent lane conversions and station construction generally spur economic innovation. According to Forbes Magazine, every dollar spent building Cleveland’s Healthline has generated $114 in economic development. This type of return on investment is certainly worth pursuing.

Making bus rapid transit work requires careful planning and coordination as part of a citywide conversation in improving transit. Adding a bus rapid transit system from Downtown to Oakland could make the trip much faster — an estimated nine to 19 minute savings according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette — but it would do little to alleviate difficulty for commuters attempting to get  to work without being paired with other improvements, such as restoration of some services that have been cut in the past few years and a system to allow riders to track buses throughout the system. 

In fact, a system such as the one under discussion could significantly aggravate problems for drivers in Oakland. The current plan would convert either one lane of Forbes Avenue or another lane of Fifth Avenue into a bus lane. These streets are already busy and experience traffic congestion throughout the day. Decreasing the number of lanes will have a negative impact on the ability to drive through Oakland. For this reason, a project that aims to improve transit through this corridor might in fact make it more difficult for drivers.

For example, if all buses in a bus rapid transit corridor from Oakland to Downtown terminated in those neighborhoods, riders wanting to travel further would have to transfer. For these passengers, total travel times could increase. Just as importantly, fewer riders will want to take a system that requires a transfer. On the other hand, if the 61 and 71 bus lines are allowed to continue into the bus rapid transit system, they will introduce variability in arrival times and counteract the added reliability of bus rapid transit.

Engineers must work out all of these details. Unfortunately, debate and fiscal planning are coming forward for the proposed bus rapid transit system without a full study of how to build it and what impact it will have. We will be in a much better position to understand how this system works in a year or two after initial engineering studies — already budgeted — are completed. 

In the end, it might be the case that other bus corridors require more attention than the Oakland-Downtown corridor. Though the journey from Oakland to Downtown can be time-consuming because of road traffic, it’s a fairly simple process otherwise. Other areas, especially those that have experienced service cuts, are more in need of transportation.

Here, since the bus rapid transit system is unlikely to be the optimal way to improve transportation in the city, we see a dilemma between transportation development for the purpose of providing necessary service and transportation development for the purpose of economic development. This is much more than a simple policy decision. It is a priorities judgment that must be made with care.

If federal funding isn’t at high enough levels, bus rapid transit between Oakland and Downtown might not be a good investment, even with some funding. If the state government also helps out, bus rapid transit could be a good investment for the city. If little outside funding materializes, however, $200 million seems too steep a price to pay for this small part of the overall travel transit map. On the other hand, if that investment spurs billions of dollars in economic development, maybe the bus rapid transit system will pay off.

Ultimately, Pittsburgh and Peduto need to be careful in spending scarce transit money. The goal shouldn’t be to invest in a popular program, but to spend money where it can serve the needs of the citizens, whether for basic transportation improvements or economic development.

 Write Rohith at rop33@pitt.edu.