Proposed changes to service in Greenfield will make transit an uphill climb for riders

By Ziggy Edwards and Ray Gerard for Junction Coalition

On Sept. 30, Pittsburgh Regional Transit (formerly Port Authority, now known as PRT) released the first draft of its Bus Line Redesign project.

Their proposal completely reroutes many transit lines. It also includes new schedules and new names for all the routes in the system. Because the changes are so complex and far-reaching, this article is the first in a planned series.

As it stands, PRT’s plan contains grim surprises for residents of Greenfield, Greater Hazelwood, and Lincoln Place. Future installments will focus on each of these areas.

Service cuts in parts of Greenfield

PRT’s interactive map shows a hole on Greenfield Avenue, where the 58 bus line now connects Second Avenue with Greenfield and other communities at the top of the steep hill. The redesign appears to merge the 58 with the 65, which now runs between Squirrel Hill and downtown.

As a result, people who live in upper Greenfield and work downtown would be redirected through Oakland. People who live in lower Greenfield and can’t walk up the hill would be cut off from the rest of the neighborhood. Greenfielders who have long enjoyed the benefits of the neighborhood’s central location could see their bus commute time double.

“I don’t understand it, why you just keep cutting, cutting, cutting, cutting,” said transit rider William Shorter at an Oct. 21 PRT pop-up event at the Giant Eagle on Murray Avenue. “People need these buses.”

“It would suck,” said Patrick Hassett, who has lived in Greenfield since 1989. “It would suck for me, my elderly buddies, and businesses that depend on transit for their employees and customers.”

Mr. Hassett said he has spoken with proprietors along Greenfield Avenue who are concerned that the route changes will make it difficult or impossible for people to get to their business.

Although Mr. Hassett considers himself a Greenfielder first since his retirement, he earned degrees in planning and transportation and worked for the City of Pittsburgh for 26 years in transportation and development.

When we met on Oct. 9 to review the map, Mr. Hassett identified Greenfield and Murray avenues as the two main commercial corridors that serve Greenfield.

“The most important transit spine is Greenfield Avenue,” he said. “Murray Avenue doesn’t penetrate the neighborhood like Greenfield Avenue does, although its commercial district is important.”

Pittsburghers for Public Transit’s director of communications and development, Dan Yablonsky, said the organization is holding meetings about the Bus Line Redesign every week to better understand what is being proposed and to shape their response.

Prioritizing bus rapid transit

The proposed plan’s effect on Greenfield is the opposite of PRT’s stated goal to “prioritize equitable investment by aligning service with land use and socio-economic changes.”

The source of the disconnect in PRT’s plan may be two-fold: the bus rapid transit model around which the plan is designed, and its “cost-neutral” funding scenario.

Mr. Hassett said bus rapid transit is not a new idea, and other cities like Kansas City and Indianapolis have been using it for more than a decade. Bus rapid transit focuses on connecting employment centers — in Pittsburgh’s case, downtown and Oakland.

“That system requires you to adjust the transit network so that service to the corridor is maximized. What suffers is local service,” he said.

“Right now, the buses filter through Pittsburgh’s many neighborhoods and smaller centers of employment,” he said. “The effect on Greenfield is obvious, but similar problems could occur with Lawrenceville, Squirrel Hill, and South Side [with this plan]. You still get local service, but it is less effective and more tuned to commuter needs. Many of the routes are redesigned to get you to Oakland.”

Mr. Hassett said discussions of bus rapid transit, or BRT, have been percolating in Pittsburgh for over a decade, too, but were previously shelved for competing transit priorities, plus a lack of funding and political support. He questioned whether the model of redirecting commuters to key job centers is an appropriate response to the effects of COVID-19 on transit demand.

“How have they modified the BRT model since the pandemic?” he asked. “You’d think people working from home would require more diffuse neighborhood service, not less.”

PRT’s cost-neutral plan means that the bus rapid transit investments would come at the expense of existing community services. In their Allegheny County Visionary Service report, Pittsburghers for Public Transit encouraged PRT to also consider versions of the Bus Line Redesign where service can grow with funding increases.

The Bus Line Redesign website includes a section imagining they will have 20% more funds. But those funds would not restore eliminated routes in neighborhoods. Instead, they are earmarked for increasing service on the proposed routes and establishing new “microtransit zones” in several neighborhoods including Oakland.

Mr. Yablonsky said, “We didn’t know what to expect, just that the framework they set up was cost-neutral. And like Laura [Wiens, executive director of Pittsburghers for Public Transit] always says, any redesign that doesn’t look at a growth scenario is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.”

Help turn this bus around

PRT says they are in the process of gathering feedback from transit users. At the time of this writing, they had scheduled several “pop-up” meetings for mid-October. You can review the Bus Line Redesign proposal and get the latest on meetings at engage.rideprt.org/buslineredesign/buslineredesign-home.

Mr. Hassett encouraged Greenfield transit users to ask themselves how the new routes would affect their ability to get to the Greenfield Giant Eagle, Magee Rec Center, St. Rosalia’s church, and other Greenfield destinations they need to visit. How much longer would the trip take, and how much more walking would be involved to get to the bus stop?

Pittsburghers for Public Transit says their organization is approaching the Bus Line Redesign with caution because of concerns like these. According to their website, their focus is “that PRT should ‘Do No Harm’ with the new design, at the least.”

Mr. Yablonsky invited residents of hard-hit neighborhoods to “organize with their neighbors and join up with [Pittsburghers for Public Transit].” He said the group will hold a Zoom organizing meeting on Nov. 13 from 7 to 8:30 p.m. where they will discuss the proposal and decide what changes to push for. Email info@pittsburghforpublictransit.org for details.

PRT will address the Greater Hazelwood community meeting on Nov. 12. See flyer on Page 2 for more information.

Junction Coalition is a grassroots advocacy group comprising residents of Four Mile Run and surrounding communities. Email junctioncoalition@gmail.com for more information.