Pittsburgh Regional Transit’s first draft of its “Bus Line Redesign,” which proposes a nearly-from-scratch new vision for the agency’s bus system, is a bold and creative proposal that recognizes that the Pittsburgh of today is very different from the Pittsburgh in which the current bus system developed generations ago.
While the final plan will undoubtedly reflect some changes, the overall structure of the new map should remain intact. Still, there are unanswered questions about how the new system will work in practice, and its success will depend on those questions being answered in a thoughtful and strategic way.
What transit users will notice first about the proposal is a renewed emphasis on the highest ridership routes, along with a marked deemphasis on Downtown-bound routes. While the Golden Triangle will always be the primary hub of the bus system, this redesign includes many more routes that emanate from Oakland, that connect outlying neighborhoods and that terminate at high-frequency hubs such as busway and light-rail stations.
For instance, the proposed map includes a route from the Carnegie busway station through Dormont and Brookline to Brentwood, which connects western and southern neighborhoods without requiring a connection Downtown. It includes similar routes, including several in the East End and the Mon Valley. This reflects the reality that transit users aren’t just using buses to get to Golden Triangle office jobs: They’re going to medical appointments, jobs distributed around the county, to the store or the homes of friends and family.
These neighborhood routes also serve to connect the spokes of the remaining Downtown-based hub-and-spoke system, giving riders access to several more destinations.
The new system also more fully recognizes Oakland as a secondary center of jobs and transit activity. New routes with the prefix “O” connect the eds and meds center directly to Mt. Lebanon, Brentwood, Homestead and McCandless.
As the Editorial Board urged, PRT’s draft also effectively leverages existing assets, like busway or T stations, where several routes pass through or terminate, creating options for transfers to other parts of the city.
In some cases, however, it is unclear what the “hub” designation means in practice. For instance, Millvale is a designated hub, but no routes terminate there, and there is currently no transit infrastructure at the marked location, such as shelters or fare machines. We hope that PRT intends to make these hubs more than just designations on a map.
This points to an additional concern. The transit hubs will only be effective if the connecting routes’ schedules align. The new system clearly envisions more multi-leg trips, but if riders can’t reliably make their connections, many will stop using the system. The cutbacks implied in the new routes must come with enhanced reliability, or ridership will continue to decline — no matter how clever the map is.
Happily, these questions and concerns can be aired at one of 14 “pop-up” public engagement sessions over the next three weeks, culminating in an online meeting on the evening of Thursday, Oct. 24. Riders can also add comments directly on the draft map on PRT’s website.
The draft map comes as state legislators consider proposals for a dedicated funding stream for public transit around the commonwealth. PRT’s effort, with its creativity and emphasis on efficiency, should encourage legislators who are skeptical of investing in transit: New money won’t be spent on the same old ideas. It will be spent, if the PRT follows through, on creating a system that better serves more people and contributes to the region’s economy.
First Published: October 2, 2024, 9:30 a.m.
