Collectively, we have won some important housing, food and transit justice victories and set a new floor for what community benefit should be expected from development without the need for public subsidy. 

Over the past year and a half, neighborhood residents and organizational stakeholders from Pittsburgh United’s Housing Justice Table, Pittsburghers for Public Transit (PPT), Just Harvest, and the Pittsburgh Food Policy Council (PFPC), have been organizing for a just redevelopment of the Giant Eagle Shakespeare site on Penn and Shady Ave in East Liberty. 

We have shown that by building less structured parking we can free up millions of dollars to go towards real community benefits – affordable housing, transit investment, and expanded food access.

Black people deserve reparations, and trading car housing for affordable housing is one way to get there. East Liberty has been a site of violence against Black families. Once a thriving center of Black commerce and community, the last two decades of URA, City and corporate-led redevelopment has led to the displacement of thousands of Black residents– a trend which has only accelerated in the last few years.

The Giant Eagle Shakespeare is situated at one of the most transit-rich intersections in the City, with the renovated East Liberty busway stop and a dozen bus lines.

It’s important to remember that it is our public investments in things like great transit service that makes the Giant Eagle Shakespeare site so profitable, and helps generate demand for the proposed housing units. So we’re not asking for charity. We’re calling for developers to provide some community benefit in return for the profits that our public investments have helped them collect.

Our Coalition’s Most Important Gains So Far: 

• The reduction of 600 proposed parking spaces to 420, which means better air quality, safer streets for transit riders, pedestrians and cyclists, more incentive to take the 12+ bus lines to and from the site, a shorter parking structure and ~ $6,300,000 that can go to community-serving amenities below like more affordable housing, complete streets and transit passes. 
  
• 10% of housing units will be rented at the 50% Area Median Income (AMI) for 35 years, and the owner will accept Housing Choice Vouchers.  The affordable units will be indistinguishable and intermingled with the non-subsidized housing and will help address the need for deeply affordable homes in a city that has a shortfall of 20,000 affordable units. We celebrate that this is a higher standard of mandatory affordable housing units than the Inclusionary Zoning legislation that was won in Lawrenceville (10% of rental units at 50% AMI, with no obligation to accept housing choice vouchers). Most importantly, the developer will not use tax dollars or abatements through programs like the LERTA, TIF or TRID, so 10% quality affordable housing with a commitment to accept Housing Choice Vouchers should be considered a new floor for developers to provide affordable rental units without public subsidy.
  
• $50,000 will be set aside towards bus passes for the housing units. Along with the reduction of structured parking, free bus passes should incentivize transit usage as a default mode of transportation in one of the most transit-rich neighborhoods in Pittsburgh.
  
• Assurances to provide culturally responsive foods in the new Giant Eagle with an equivalent or greater selection and variety of fresh produce and other healthy foods, and a commitment to staffing the rebuilt store from the community. Advocates and community partners continue to participate in good-faith negotiations with the company about subsidized delivery and/or transportation to consumers who are reliant on this grocery store during the proposed store closing/redevelopment period. Both delivery and shuttle services for consumers without convenient food options can help ensure equitable access to food shopping while the store is closed for construction.

---

---

What’s Left to Win:

For Housing Justice: The rents on an additional 5% of the units (which will be rented at 80% AMI) should be lowered to meet the Housing Choice Voucher Payment Standards, so that 15% of the apartments are truly accessible to low-income residents. Moreover, we are asking for a commitment that if the developer should choose to take public subsidy or a tax abatement in the future, that any affordable housing commitments should be in addition to existing commitments.

For Transit Justice: The set-aside for transit passes should be increased from $50,000 to $123,337.50 to ensure that all housing units receive a full year transit pass, for 2-4 years. We are additionally calling on the developer to do an annual impact assessment of the transit passes on transit usage, parking demand and effect on the demand for rental units. 

For Food Justice: We want those assurances around product selection and variety to become public commitments. Giant Eagle should provide free grocery delivery and subsidized shuttle services to alternate stores for residents who are most at risk at losing food access during the renovation. There should be serious consideration given to providing a pop-up fresh food access point for pickup and delivery in Larimer and Homewood, and an on-going process and direct outreach to shoppers to solicit feedback as the redevelopment progresses.

Port Authority’s Quarterly Service Changes that go into effect this Sunday, November 22nd, will add weekend service to nearly all local routes in its system. This is an enormous victory and is the culmination of years of riders organizing neighborhood service campaigns with PPT over the last four years!

Additionally, Port Authority plans to DOUBLE service frequency on the 59-Mon Valley route, responding to another call that riders have been making since the start of the pandemic!

Service frequency will also be increased on the 1, 12 and 51.

The 1, 12, 51 and 59 are some of the local routes that have maintained high ridership throughout this pandemic. These changes make it more possible for transit-reliant communities to access their essential needs and jobs, AND for riders and transit operators to stay safe and socially distant while on the bus.

Congrats to all the riders who organized to win these permanent service increases!

22 – McCoy

93 – Hazelwood

2 – Millvale

39 – Brookline

“Without access to the 39 on weekends our neighborhood’s next closest transit access is a forty-minute walk to the T stop in Dormont. This means a lot for my community.”

– Nora Kelly, Leader on the 39 Brookline Neighborhood Service Campaign

…Although these service improvements are to be celebrated, the proposed temporary service reductions to other routes pose a serious concern.

The Port Authority has also included in this round of service changes some very significant frequency reductions on some routes that raise our concern. While these changes are intended to be temporary, service reductions without a clear timeline for full reinstatement can lead to permanent cuts, particularly coupled with the uncertainty around state and federal funding during this pandemic. We know that reduced service means reduced ridership, which in turn leads to reduced service… and this transit death spiral would be catastrophic for us all– for our riders and workers, for our air quality, our business community, and the region as a whole.

To keep these service cuts from becoming permanent, we have to continue organizing for a just and full recovery from COVID-19. We stand with transit riders across the country for a $32 billion dollar federal stimulus for our nation’s public transit systems, and a fair federal formula for transit. PA legislators must pass a progressive and sustainable dedicated transit funding source to keep riders moving through this pandemic and beyond.

Read more about this quarter’s changes on the Port Authority’s website or scan through the notes on changes below that were compiled by @PGH_BUS_INFO (a volunteer-run resource for your Pittsburgh transit service questions!)

Notes on Service Changes from the @PGH_BUS_INFO Hotline

Hey folks it’s service update blog time with your friends from PPT and @PGH_BUS_INFO Hotline. It’s been a long and trying year and quite a while since one of these blogs as traditional Port Authority changes haven’t been occurring in these non-traditional times of the pandemic.

This unorthodox round of changes is pretty darn big with a mix of good, bad and ugly!

Changes include a mix of service cuts, redistribution and improvements to some places. Below are some points we want to highlight about this quarter’s changes. See Port Authority’s website for the full rundown.

These changes start Sunday, November 22nd 2020 

———

1-Freeport Road

Service added on all weekdays to address Covid capacity limits and ridership volumes. Schedules fully revised.

The Pros – 1 extra later trip in both directions on Weeknights

The Cons – Sadly the Weekend didn’t see much TLC or later service 

2-Mount Royal

Service revised on weekends and Holidays, weekend service after doing the current weekend loop of MILLVALE and the strip have been  extended to Shaler, Mt Royal Blvd and North Hills 

The Pros – More service to N Hills and folks in Shaler can go places on weekends

The Cons – Service still ends too early and they axed 1 trip on weekends to presumably accommodate the weekend extension 

4-Troy Hill

Service via 9th Street Bridge restored after bridge work was completed. “Peak/ Rush Hour” Service reduced 

The Pros – not seeing many pros.

The Cons – Reductions in “peak/rush” service. Also unfortunate that this was one of the only Local routes that wasn’t included in the weekend service increase and they still lack service on Sunday. Not cool.

8-Perrysville

Service restored via Rachel Carson Bridge. Peak service reductions.

The cons – Anyone else sensing a trend in slashing rush hour service and late-night service?

12-McKnight

Service added on ALL DAYS. Schedule revised. Service via Rachel Carson restored.

The Pros – This is a “Hallelujah” The he North Hills corridor needed this extra love and slightly later service.

14-Ohio Valley

Reduced peak service 

The Cons – Oh look more rush hour reductions, which are only compounded to greater restrictions w the COVID capacity limits. Totally makes sense during a pandemic.

19L-Emsworth Limited

The cons – Reduced service squeezes more folks onto fewer buses at rush hour period 

20-Kennedy

Added Saturday, Sunday and Holiday Service! This gives much-needed weekend service to folks. But we’d like to see the buses run later.

22-McCoy

Sunday and holiday service added! A PPT Campaign victory! Would still love to see the buses run later on weekdays and weekends though.

26-Chartiers

Peak service reductions on 26 and 27

27-Fairywood

More peak service reductions.

29-Robinson

Saturday, Sunday and Holiday Service added 

31-Bridgeville

More peak service reductions makes rush hour travel even harder considering COVID capacity limits

36-Banksville

The pros – A PPT + rider victory! Saturday service re-introduction. Sunday + holiday service established for the 1st time in nearly 2 decades!

38-Green Tree

The pros – some late-night service is added!

The cons – The service reduction theme continues. The need for later weekend service remains unaddressed.

39-Brookline

The Pros – Sunday service restored!

The Cons – peak service reductions

40-Mount Washington

More service reductions throughout the schedule. At least 1 full trip cut in the evenings causing service to end earlier.

41-Bower Hill

More Peak service reductions 

43-Bailey

Service reductions across the board. This is starting to feel criminal.

44-Knoxville

Minor service increases for weekday service! Would love to see it extended to the weekend.

51-Carrick

Tons of added service! Makes us want to be partying in the streets – oh wait….COVID.

53L-Homestead Park Limited

Service reductions across the board

57-Hazelwood

Service reductions across the board

58-Greenfield

Service reductions across the board. And service was already bad on this route.

59-Mon Valley

A MASSIVE WIN for riders in the Mon Valley. Service increased to every 30-minutes for most of the day on weekdays (up from 60-minutes!). This is a huge improvement because the 59 has consistently had some of the strongest ridership of any route in the entire system. Lets build on this and spread it to the 55 thats intertwined with this route – and to every route across the system!

60-Walnut-Crawford Village

A rider victory! More service to the people with the addition of Sunday + Holiday Service. Port Authority had mistakenly announced that weekend would be added a few quarters back, but more buses never made it to the street. Now we need to see more weekend service.

65-Squirrel Hill

Frequency reduced and some trips cut…

67-Monroeville

Peak service reductions. The pros? [Error 404 not found]. Riders, the writers of this blog and some others might need an aspirin, a drink, and something for that feeling in the pit of our stomachs!

74-Homewood-Squirrel Hill

Sunday and holiday service added for the first time in over 20 years! This is much-needed and long-overdue. People can finally use the connections the 74 provides year-round. Unfortunately, the bus only runs once an hour and stops too early and the tight schedule encourages drivers to either speed or just be late.

87-Friendship

The Pros – Finally the 87 is looping town the way it should have for years even back as the 77D / 77F / 77G

The cons – Service reductions… need we say more? And there is still no weekend 87M service.

88-Penn

Service reductions. This is not good news when this line services hospitals and the strip district…

93-Lawrenceville-Hazelwood

Another big win for riders in Hazelwood who have been organizing for improved transit service. Saturday service re-introduced for the 1st time since the Route was practically new! Sunday + Holiday Service established for the 1st time ever on the route. This is especially important because the 58 and 65 had big cuts this round.

But unfortunately, weekends drop to hourly service. We have to do better.

G2-West Busway

Peak service reductions.

G3-Moon Flyer

Service reductions 

G31-Bridgeville Flyer

Service reductions 

O1-Ross Flyer

Significant service reductions. In case anyone wasn’t already thinking this, we must fight for dedicated transit funding at the local, county, and state levels.

O12-McKnight Flyer 

Significant service reductions. This feels like one step forward two steps back after it was announced last year that service would be expanded to CCAC…

P2-East Busway-Short

Both P1 and P2 are seeing service reductions. This is really not good news. The east busway was previously our most efficient transit asset. And there is still a decent volume of riders onboard here.

P3-East Busway-Oakland

More service reductions….

P7-McKeesport Flyer

Reductions in service 

P10-Allegheny Valley Flyer

Service reductions 

P12-Holiday Park Flyer

Significant service reductions with multiple cut trips

P13-Mount Royal Flyer

Service reduced to hour for rush hour. Really bad news for an express route.

P16-Penn Hills Flyer

Service reductions. (It feel like the copy paste function is stuck in the in on position….)

P67-Monroeville Flyer

Service reductions 

P68-Braddock Hills Flyer 

Service added on all days. Most ( but not all ) trips extended to Forbes Regional Hospital. This will be the ONLY Transit route that’ll directly serve Forbes Hospital and is a big deal for Mon Valley riders who have been calling for access to healthcare and jobs.

P71-Swissvale Flyer

Service reductions 

fin.

Comments Submitted to the Transportation and Climate Initiative from Pittsburghers for Public Transit and Philly Transit Rider’s Union 10/30/20

Dear Governors and Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) Leaders:

Transit rider member organizations have participated in the TCI MOU discussions for several years, and have constituencies that include frontline communities in the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh region. We, Pittsburghers for Public Transit (PPT) and the Philly Transit Riders Union (Philly TRU), hope to strengthen the equity language in the MOU, to both ensure that those with the most at stake have a strong voice at the table to determine how the TCI resources are allocated, and to ensure that they will receive a clear and measurable benefit from the cap-and-invest proceeds.

We recognize and appreciate the steps taken to include a minimum investment for “overburdened and underserved” communities, and the need to have state-level equity advisory bodies to oversee implementation. We also appreciate the acknowledgement that complementary policies to the TCI must be deployed, as market-based schemes do not themselves address carbon emissions due to transportation, and may, in fact, increase emissions and create worse outcomes in communities already heavily burdened by power plants.

PPT has been a signatory and collaborator in the Green for All ​Policy Design letter for an Equitable Clean Transportation Program​, the ​TCI equity toolkit​ and subsequent letter submitted in response to the draft MOU in March 2020. We support and echo the Green For All recommendations​ submitted on 10/23 around the equity commitments, and would like to further elaborate on a few specific points.

Our comments regarding the equity commitments for the MOU are as follows:

1. Proceeds must put into a ‘lock box’​ ​not to be raided for general funds. This is a high priority, because TCI runs the risk of becoming a regressive tax on low-income and Black and Brown communities if substantial resources are not protected and set aside to be directed by frontline communities. A TCI MOU approved by the governor by executive order could be modified or overturned by the legislature or subsequent governors. ​TCI without substantial resources allocated to “underserved and overburdened communities” is worse than no TCI at all.

2. The term “overburdened and underserved” should identify a specific and defined community across all the participating states. That might be a term in line with Title VI law, or “Environmental Justice” communities. This definition should encompass BIPOC residents, people with disabilities, low-income residents, older adults, and communities who experience poor air quality due to transportation, power plants, or other manufacturing emissions.

3. The percentage of dedicated investment dollars should be increased beyond the 35%, and the allotment should be determined relative to the percentage of overburdened and underserved communities in the state. We understand that ​PA is looking at the “underserved and overburdened” communities as those defined as EJ communities, which represent about a third of the state. Under that framework, the 35% represents merely an equal share of the proceeds, not a larger or more equitable share to help repair historic and current wrongs. Many other states apparently have an even higher percentage of EJ communities, which would be poorly served by a less-than-equal share of the revenue.​ ​We are calling for the carve out for “overburdened and underserved communities” to be a minimum of 150% of the state percentage of those communities. ​For example: if “overburdened and underserved” communities (defined according to Title VI or EJ standards) represent 35% of the state, then 52.5% of the TCI proceeds should be allocated for that constituency.

4. A significant percentage of TCI funds ​that are not part of the equity allotment s​hould be dedicated to funding the expansion of public transit​. Funding frequent, affordable, high quality public transit is a critical investment for addressing transportation emissions at the same time that it increases equity in our transportation systems.

Regarding the Community Advisory Body:

1. We believe that those who are targeted for the equity allotment should be the ones at the table to allocate resources and to design metrics to assess their efficacy.​ These Community Advisory Bodies must have the majority of seats filled with representative residents from disproportionately affected communities, who both live in that community and represent the demographics which define them as such. Representatives for the Community Advisory Body should additionally be chosen through an independent selection process, in concert with community-based organizations, and established as​ ​independent, non-political authorities.

a. The role of the Community Advisory Committee should include defining metrics for equitable outcomes, (including air quality monitoring and data tracking, changes to household income, public health impacts and increased jobs/services access). They should also advise on the RFP process and proposal evaluation criteria, and ensure communities are robustly engaged in all proposed infrastructure investments and programs.

2. Community Advisory Members should be paid for their time, local expertise, and reimbursed for travel. Moreover, community organizations should receive capacity grants for community outreach and education on the TCI program and develop their own proposals, including technical assistance. Funds for both of these should not be derived from the equity allotment, but be in addition.

Complementary policies we recommend:

1. At a minimum, TCI must do no harm to frontline communities already suffering from the emissions from electricity generation.​ We are deeply concerned about the disproportionate attention given to electrification as a remedy for transportation emissions, which will necessarily result in greater impacts on power-generation communities, and believe that it is unjust to secure resources for some underserved and overburdened communities at the expense of others. ​States must, in the MOU, commit to enacting, during the adoption of the TCI program and not at a later date, a complementary policy (such as California’s AB 617) that would guarantee significant emission reductions in disproportionately polluted communities.

Workforce development goals:

1. We uplift the calls for workplace development and job training, especially for workers affected by the transition to cleaner vehicles and for communities who are under-employed. There should be provisions for ensuring that these jobs pay prevailing wage and commit to union-neutrality.The TCI program should include​ ​supplier diversity goals to encourage proposals from women and minority-owned businesses.

Ensuring that the TCI Investments are Equitable and Effective:

1. The Participating Jurisdictions will annually review and report the impacts of each Participating Jurisdiction’s individual program, including with respect to equity. Annual reports will specify how TCI program proceeds are spent by each Participating Jurisdiction and include lists of projects and programs supported by TCI proceeds and the levels of investment received by each. We would especially call for a critical eye towards investments in electric-charging stations, for them to be weighed against investments in transit-supportive infrastructure like bus rapid transit corridors in terms of equity, efficacy in reducing transportation emissions and number of residents served.

Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to on-going conversations around TCI.

Sincerely,

Philly Transit Riders Union

Pittsburghers for Public Transit

At the final meeting for the Mon Oakland Connector, residents made it clear: investment needs to go to transit, sidewalks, and affordable housing – not the profits of investors.

On October 20th, During the city’s first attempt at a “Final Public Meeting” on the Mon Oakland Connector, the room was full to its 100-person capacity before the meeting even started. The City doubled the capacity and started the meeting late, but capacity was reached again. The city then organized a second meeting on October 29th. This added even more frustration to a project that residents have been organizing against for over 5 years.

See coverage from these meetings here:

• “Nearly 200 voice concerns at hearing for Mon-Oakland Mobility Project” from the Post Gazette
• “Residents Speak Out Against Proposed Free Shuttle Between Hazelwood Green And Oakland” from WESA
• “Shuttle Road Slammed at Packed Meeting” from the Junction Coalition blog
• “10/21/20: Little love for planned Hazelwood-to-Oakland shuttle” from Public Source

You can watch recordings of the meeting and give your feedback on the Mon Oakland Connector plan until Thursday, November 5th:

Instead of the Mon Oakland Connector shuttle roadway – which primarily benefits CMU & the foundations that own the Hazelwood Green development site – residents want to see investment in the Our Money. Our Solutions. alternative community-driven transportation plan.

The City is proposing to spend well over $20-million of public money to build The Mon Oakland Connector shuttle road that is estimated to move 180 people/day. This would make the MOC the City’s single most expensive “transportation” project. More costly even than the City’s share of the Oakland-Downtown BRT which is proposed to move 37,000-50,000 passenger trips a day!

When you look even closer at the project budgets and travel times you see that the primary beneficiaries of this public investment are Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Pittsburgh, and ALMONO Partners LLC (a foundation investor partnership of the Heinz Endowments, the Benedum Foundation, and the RK Mellon Foundation) – not the residents of Hazelwood who need true transportation improvements. You also see that the same travel times between these locations are possible by utilizing Port Authority public transit and/or combining the university shuttle systems.

Instead of sinking millions of public dollars into the Mon Oakland Connector shuttle road, more than 1000 residents and 23 community groups in Hazelwood have endorsed the “Our Money. Our Solutions” transportation plan which calls on the city to direct public funds to:

• Extension of the 75 across the Hot Metal Bridge into Hazelwood
• Irvine/Second Avenue sidewalk audit and replacement/install
• Building sidewalks and pedestrian connections along Second Ave.
• Improve street lighting on Irvine.
• Expand electric buses
• Build safe bicycle connections
• and more – read the full Our Money. Our Solutions. community transportation plan and sign in support here.

For more ways that you can learn about the Our Money. Our Solutions. transportation plan, the Mon Oakland Connector, and the resident-led fight for transit equity to connect Hazelwood & Oakland:

• Read the People’s Audit of the Mon Oakland Connector published by Tech4Society & Pittsburghers for Public Transit
• Get up to speed with this WESA article,‘A Moving Target’: Getting To The Heart Of Pittsburgh’s Mon-Oakland Connector Plan and this City Paper article, Report says traditional buses would serve Hazelwood corridor better than autonomous shuttles
• Watch Dean Bog video on The Run in his Neighborhoods series
• Scan through Junction Coalition’s website to read right-to-know requests and an in-depth history of the project and its proponents.

They’re back at it again: trying to use public dollars to build luxury transportation for wealthy developers.

After a disastrous first attempt at a final public meeting for the Mon Oakland Connector project, the City’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, the Universities and the foundations that own Hazelwood Green are holding a second meeting on Thursday, October 29th, 6-8pm.

Residents who live in Hazelwood, Greenfield, the Run, Oakland, and Squirrel Hill, and any taxpayers in the City of Pittsburgh who understand the importance of equity and efficiency in public investments needs to join.

We are asking stakeholders (City residents, organizational representatives, Mon-Oakland corridor neighborhood residents, transit riders, CMU and Pitt students, renters and homeowners) to speak up during the public meeting Q&A portion or in the zoom chat. We ask that you introduce yourself and share why you are a stakeholder, then lay out your concerns or the needs that you see should be uplifted instead of the MOC shuttle roadway.

Instead of investing millions in the Mon Oakland Connector roadway, the City, Universities, and Foundation Partners should invest in a true community-generated transportation plan.

The project will cost about $25 million that that the city will pay to build the road through the park, then the foundation and university partners will pay an additional $16+ million to operate a short-term shuttle.

Instead of sinking millions of dollars into this ineffective project, these entities should fund the community’s Our Money, Our Solutions proposal to extend the 75 bus service into Hazelwood.

Why is the Mon Oakland Connector so bad exactly?

1. The MOC shuttle fails as a transportation project.

The Mon-Oakland Shuttle is projected to carry 180 passengers a day, primarily to two destinations– Carnegie Mellon University and Hazelwood Green, at an extraordinary cost per trip. The Mon-Oakland Connector will also be obsolete almost at its start: The shuttle’s full daily ridership capacity of 180 riders will hardly mitigate the proposed travel demand to Hazelwood Green, which is anticipated to be 20,413 trips by 2028, and 61,000 trips by 2060. That means no relief for Hazelwood, Greenfield and Oakland residents on the increased congestion and air quality issues that will only worsen as Hazelwood Green builds out.

And City residents don’t just need to travel between Hazelwood Green and CMU! By contrast, extending the 75 bus service would create new, direct connections from Hazelwood to the Southside (read: food, jobs), to the whole of Oakland (read: healthcare, jobs), Shadyside, East Liberty, Bakery Square, Morningside and Aspinwall.

The travel time on the 75 between Hazelwood and Oakland would be just as fast as the proposed shuttle. It could be implemented tomorrow. It would serve thousands of residents rather than a few hundred. And because the service would be run by Port Authority, it would be sustainable, affordable, publicly-run and fully accessible. Almono Partners could even pay for the 75 buses to be electric buses, and it would STILL be cheaper than funding the Mon-Oakland shuttle “pilot” phase.

2. Projects like this cause gentrification and displacement.

Yesterday, The City’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI)’s Director Karina Ricks compared the Mon-Oakland Connector to the Atlanta Beltline and Bloomingdale Trail in Chicago. These projects and similar trigger gentrification and displacement in low-income neighborhoods and in neighborhoods with a majority of people of color.

3. The MOC is the single-most expensive transportation corridor investment that the City is making, while the City is experiencing a record $100 million dollar budget shortfall.

The City does not have the resources to address critical resident needs during a on-going public health and economic emergency, let alone fund a luxury microtransit pilot project.

4. The City’s public process for the Mon-Oakland Connector has been abysmal.

The “final” virtual public meeting on the Mon-Oakland Connector shuttle roadway and the shuttle service will also be the first time that the public has seen the shuttle proposal. And this Monday, DOMI’s Director Ricks said in the Post Gazette that “most of the ‘hard engineering’ for the city work has been completed. The public still can have a say on the landscaping, lights and elements that will be included in park recreation areas.

‘There is certainly much on the table for input,’ [Ricks] said. ‘This is the opportunity the neighborhood has to weigh in.'”

Weighing in on “landscaping and lighting” is not what public engagement looks like. For the last five years, residents in Four Mile Run and Hazelwood have raised concerns and questions about the need, the harm and the benefits about running an autonomous shuttle, building a $23 million dollar bike trail, then building a roadway for a manned CMU to Hazelwood Green shuttle through Schenley Park. For more about the City’s evolving project descriptions, and community opposition, check out this WESA piece from March.

5. Building the shuttle roadway through Schenley Park and Sylvan Avenue will diminish our limited City green space and recreational areas, and will likely reduce the efficacy of the Four Mile Run flood remediation effort.

The project calls for the clear cutting of 900 trees, mostly in the Panther Hollow portion of Schenley Park. There has been no published analysis of how adding the non-permeable surface of the shuttle roadway would affect the desperately needed floodwater relief in the corridor. The Mon-Oakland Connector roadway will also substantially diminish the size of the soccer field in Junction Hollow.

6. Running shuttles along the Junction Hollow commuter bike path and next to the playing field puts users at risk.

Many cyclists consider the Mon-Oakland Connector a degradation of the existing connection between Downtown, Oakland and Southside because the MOC will require cyclists to share the commuter path with motorized vehicles.

There are, however, important pedestrian and trail improvements that residents have fought for and won over the course of the last five years, including the pedestrian tunnel to Panther Hollow Lake, and addressing the dangerous “Chute” connection (the Eliza Furnace trail along Second Ave from Swinburne St. to Saline St). These improvements should not be held hostage to the shuttle roadway. Finally, we need to ensure that members of the Hazelwood/Four Mile Run/Panther Hollow/Greenfield community get to stay to enjoy these improvements, and that they are not pushed out to make way for them.

We are Calling You to Action!

We are asking stakeholders (City residents, organizational representatives, Mon-Oakland corridor neighborhood residents, transit riders, CMU and Pitt students, renters and homeowners) to speak up during the public meeting Q&A portion or in the zoom chat. We ask that you introduce yourself and share why you are a stakeholder, then lay out your concerns or the needs that you see should be uplifted instead of the MOC shuttle roadway.

The LAST VIRTUAL PUBLIC MEETING for the Mon Oakland Connector shuttle roadway project is scheduled for Thursday, 10/29, 6-8pm

Transit equity means that public transportation investments must benefit people, not corporate interests.

For more than two years, Pittsburghers for Public Transit has been advocating alongside residents for investment in a community-driven plan –Our Money, Our Solutions – instead of the City’s Mon Oakland Connector (MOC) shuttle roadway to connect Hazelwood and Oakland.

The MOC is a City-led project costing $20+ million of your tax dollars to build a shuttle road through Schenley Park – along what is now a car-free bike path and an expansive playing field used by youth sports groups and others from around the city.

The privately-operated shuttles proposed for the roadway would cost an additional $16+ million of foundation funding for a trial period, and would principally serve to connect CMU & Pitt in Oakland with the new Hazelwood Green development site.

Instead, Our Money, Our Solutions asks that those funds be reallocated to expand existing bus service, sidewalks, and bike paths between Hazelwood, Greenfield, and Oakland. This community-driven plan connects more people to more jobs, grocery stores, healthcare, and amenities than the MOC – all for significantly less money.

1,000+ residents and 25 community organizations from within the project corridor have signed as supporters of the Our Money. Our Solutions. alternative transportation plan. You think that would be enough to move the Mayor and City Council to rethink the MOC…. but sadly, that is not the case.

The City’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure (DOMI), CMU/Pitt, and the Foundation partners that own Hazelwood Green are plowing ahead with this project – despite the fact that:

• Pittsburgh is facing a$100 million dollar budget shortfall due to the pandemic, meaning the City is lacking resources to address critical resident needs to manage the ongoing pandemic and economic crisis.
• At $20-23 million dollars, this is the single biggest transportation corridor investment that the City of Pittsburgh is contributing to, and the shuttle service is projected to provide 180 passenger trips a day. Contrast that with the Downtown to Oakland Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor construction, which will provide between 37,000-50,000 passenger trips a day. 
• Expanded bus service will provide faster, more effective, and more affordable connections to and from Oakland and elsewhere for our most vulnerable residents.
• This project will be obsolete almost as soon as it is built. By 2028, Hazelwood Green is anticipating 20,413 total projected trips to that specific site. By contrast, the maximum daily capacity of the shuttle service is less than 1,000 riders. By 2060, Hazelwood Green is anticipating 61,000 total trips to the site.  
• There is no guarantee that the cost of riding these privately-operated shuttles will be affordable to low-income residents for the long term.
• There is no plan to protect renters in Hazelwood and Greenfield from the increased housing costs that large-scale development projects like the MOC inevitably bring.
• People are relying more than ever on our public parks for health and recreation.
• Running shuttles along our commuter bike path and next to our playing field puts users at risk.

We demand that our money be spent on affordable, effective, and equitable public transportation solutions for the residents of Pittsburgh today.

We will not let the Mayor and City Council hand our money and our parks over to developers. Please join us for the next meeting on Wednesday, Oct. 21 from 6 pm to 8 pm, where DOMI will present the latest design plans for the MOC, demand equitable investments.

More ways that you can learn about the Our Money. Our Solutions. transportation plan, the Mon Oakland Connector, and the resident-led fight for transit equity to connect Hazelwood & Oakland:

• RSVP to join the final virtual public meeting for the Mon Oakland Connector project.
• Give feedback now on the MOC via the public input website
• Sign the petition and read the community-generated Our Money. Our Solutions. transportation plan.
• Read the People’s Audit of the Mon Oakland Connector published by Tech4Society & Pittsburghers for Public Transit
• Get up to speed with this WESA article,‘A Moving Target’: Getting To The Heart Of Pittsburgh’s Mon-Oakland Connector Plan and this City Paper article, Report says traditional buses would serve Hazelwood corridor better than autonomous shuttles
• Watch Dean Bog video on The Run in his Neighborhoods series
• Scan through Junction Coalition’s website to read right-to-know requests and an in-depth history of the project and its proponents.

All public utilities and essential services have started assistance programs to support low-income residents survive the pandemic and economic depression.

The Port Authority must follow their lead and implement an emergency low-income fare program now.

Allegheny County residents have been hit hard by COVID-19 and the ensuing economic depression.

The data included in the recently released report, “No Greater Need, No Greater Opportunity: The Time for COVID-19 Fare Relief for Low-Income Pittsburghers is Now”  shows that the majority of people riding transit during COVID-19 are riding to access essential needs like food, jobs, and healthcare. And that the people riding transit are disproportionately Black and Low-income.

Moreover, the data shows that full-fares during an economic depression are harming Black and Low-income Pittsburghers and keeping them stranded from accessing life’s essentials.

Sign the petition now to support a COVID Fare Relief program to support access to food, healthcare, housing and jobs.

---

Volunteer to help connect with transit riders and collect support for this initiative

Allegheny County residents have been hit hard by COVID-19 and the ensuing economic depression. Nearly every other public utility and essential service has programs to ensure all people can access their life-sustaining resources.

Transit is no different.

Port Authority must start an emergency fare relief program now.

Click here to sign the petition for emergency COVID fare relief. And add your name below to help circulate the petition at transit stops. PPE will be provided, and signatures will be collected verbally so there will be no contact or sharing pens. Make sure to come with a full charge on your cellphone and an extra battery if you have it. We will also have paper petitions if you need to use them. Please contact us with any other access needs or questions – info@pittsburghforpublictransit.org

PPT releases a new report that calls on Port Authority to implement a COVID-19 Fare Relief program, for the lives of low-income riders and the health of the transit system.

On a sunny Tuesday, PPT members rallied under the colorful MLK mural near the Wilkinsburg Busway Station to release our new report, “No Greater Need, No Greater Opportunity: The Time for COVID-19 Fare Relief for Low-Income Riders is Now.” This report calls for Port Authority to implement an emergency policy. Noting that the fastest, cheapest way to do so would be to allow SNAP-eligible riders to show their EBT-ACCESS cards in place of fare payment. It analyzes months of pandemic ridership data, and was a collective research effort by more than a dozen PPT volunteers.

This report shows that the majority of people riding transit right now are Black, low-income, and traveling to access essential needs like food, healthcare, and jobs. It also shows that bus lines that run through predominantly Black & low-income neighborhoods saw the largest decreases in ridership when Port Authority re-implemented full-fare payment in June. Fares are keeping low-income riders from taking transit to access essential needs during a global pandemic and economic depression.

But along with the great need for this program, the report demonstrates why a fare relief measure is an important opportunity for the Port Authority. Ridership is at a historic low, between 30-35% of pre-pandemic levels. A COVID Fare Relief program could help stabilize and restore 9% of its ridership immediately. Moreover, because there is excess capacity on buses and a number of unique COVID-related funding sources, there is no more affordable time for this policy to be implemented. The Port Authority’s commitment to redistribute transit service to high-ridership lines during November’s service changes is an important step towards equity, and to help ensure that this policy would not require Port Authority to incur increased operating costs.

For the lives of low-income riders and the health of the transit system, Port Authority must implement an emergency low-income fare now.

Key Findings from Pittsburghers For Public Transit’s new report, “No Greater Need, No Greater Opportunity: The Time for COVID-19 Fare Relief for Low-Income Riders is Now.”

• Black residents and low-income residents represent a disproportionately high percentage of transit ridership during COVID-19.
• Transit routes serving Black neighborhoods have seen steep ridership losses from the reinstatement of full fares.
• Port Authority Transit ridership is at an all-time low (down 65-70%), and an emergency low-income fare program could allow PAAC to quickly regain 9% of its ridership.
• Port Authority can implement the program with little to no increase in operating costs by reallocating service to high-ridership routes (which Port Authority announced it would begin doing in November).
• Unique revenue sources that could cover the estimated annual fare revenue loss of $4M-$8M include: The $141M in CARES Act Funding received by the Port Authority, Cares Act Funding received by the County and/or State, philanthropic partner support for emergency COVID relief efforts.

Roundup of Coverage from Rally & Report Release

• See PPT’s Facebook Live broadcast of the rally and report release.
• “Advocates call for emergency, low-income fare program for Allegheny Co.’s public transit riders“, by Tom Lisi at the Pennsylvania Capital Star
• “Report from transit advocates says reduced fares can increase ridership during pandemic“, by Ryan Deto at the Pittsburgh City Paper
• “Report: Route changes, free fares for low-income bus riders would help Port Authority system“, by Kate Giammarise at the Pittsburgh Post Gazette
• “Advocates Call On Port Authority To Create Low-Income Fare Program“, by Kiley Koscinski at WESA
• DISK Institute Pittsburgh News Line on KDKA Radio 1020

Photos From The Rally!

Pittsburgh PA – On Tuesday, September 22, Pittsburghers for Public Transit (PPT) published a new report detailing why the Port Authority should immediately implement a transit fare relief program for low-income riders titled “No Greater Need, No Greater Opportunity: The Time for COVID-19 Fare Relief for Low-Income Riders is Now.”

This new report lays out how collecting full fares during the pandemic is disproportionately harming Allegheny County’s low-income and Black residents, and preventing these residents from accessing basic needs including groceries, healthcare and jobs. Emergency fare relief is in line with measures being taken by other public utility providers, to ensure that connections to critical services are not cut off in the midst of an unprecedented economic and public health crisis. 

Port Authority has stated that they are interested in a long-term low-income fare program. There is no better time to pilot its implementation. Transit agencies are facing an existential ridership crisis, with no clear pathway to recovering the 65-70% of pre-COVID-19 ridership that has stopped taking transit. Allowing SNAP-eligible riders to show their EBT/ACCESS cards to board could provide an immediate ridership boost without incurring increased operating costs. 

In May, PPT mobilized 31 riders and organizational speakers to call for this COVID-related intervention at Port Authority’s board meeting, when it became clear that the agency was planning to reinstate full fare collection after a 2-month hiatus. 

19 local and state political leaders followed suit with a letter to Port Authority calling for fare relief for low-income riders, and Allegheny County Council passed a Will of Council advocating for the measure.

Key Findings from Pittsburghers For Public Transit’s new report, “No Greater Need, No Greater Opportunity: The Time for COVID-19 Fare Relief for Low-Income Riders is Now.”

• Black residents and low-income residents represent a disproportionately high percentage of transit ridership during COVID-19.
• Transit routes serving Black neighborhoods have seen steep ridership losses from the reinstatement of full fares.
• Port Authority Transit ridership is at an all-time low (down 65-70%), and an emergency low-income fare program could allow PAAC to quickly regain 9% of its ridership.
• Port Authority can implement the program with little to no increase in operating costs by reallocating service to high-ridership routes (which Port Authority announced it would begin doing in November).
• Unique revenue sources that could cover the estimated annual fare revenue loss of $4M-$8M include: The $141M in CARES Act Funding received by the Port Authority, Cares Act Funding received by the County and/or State, philanthropic partner support for emergency COVID relief efforts.