[PRCo] Re: pat__service__cuts__2007.01.23-changed to 2/1/07

[John Swindler]

Yes, it is different this time.  The Transportation Reform Commission hired 
consultants that looked at PAT, SEPTA and several other transit agencies.  
Let's just say that there is an awareness now of some past practices.

As for converting 41 series bus lines to light rail feeders, this was part 
of the Parsons Brinkerhoff (?)study from around 1966 or so.  But I was 
referring to after light rail service started through Beechview in 
mid-1980s.

And I had a personal experience.  In late 60s, I commuted to Point Park 
College from Mt. Lebanon area.  In the morning for 9am class, I would take 
41A to Dormont Wye and transfer to 42/38.  It was a lot faster and 
dependable.  The 41A came down Pioneer Ave. and seemed to spend forever tied 
up in traffic at Saw Mill Run and on downtown streets.  Coming home in 
evening peak, would reverse process - this time to Sunset bus at Clearview 
Loop (could not depend on 41A outbound in pm peak) or take Overbrook to 
shuttle from Cretestone.  If after evening class, then 41A direct from 
downtown.  By then there was no congestion, and I only had to wait for one 
transit vehicle.  I also liked to get the 4th Ave. short turns in evening 
peak.  Again, avoided sitting in traffic.

But the lesson I learned later is that my time was free.  But the bus 
driver's time is not free.  It is the taxpayers (not the fare paying 
passengers) that are paying for the driver sitting in traffic.

John
>From: Joshua Dunfield <joshuad at cs.cmu.edu>
>Reply-To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>Subject: [PRCo] Re: pat__service__cuts__2007.01.23-changed to 2/1/07 Date: 
>Sat, 03 Feb 2007 17:21:16 -0500
>
>John Swindler wrote:
> > Could this really just be a process to mobilize PAT's constituancy to 
>lobby
> > the state legislature?  After all, it's worked the last 4-5 years, why
> > should it not work again.  (do a search of Post Gazette archives)
>
>No search needed for me; I remember how it went.  But as I said a few weeks
>ago, this time isn't the same.  The old way of scaring people was to put
>forward totally stupid proposals to cut all service after 7 p.m., or 9 
>p.m.,
>or Sundays.  The current proposal looks like a good-faith effort.  Of 
>course
>the earlier proposals were indistinguishable from good-faith but totally
>incompetent efforts, so who knows.
>
>[...]
> > But for those on this list, one might ask why most of the 41 series or
> > routes slated for abandonment were never changed to light rail feeders 
>years
> > ago.
>
>My guess is that feeding would be significantly slower, not even counting
>the ridership-killing inconvenience of a transfer.  Go ahead -- look up the
>schedules and prove me wrong.  The 42S/42L (if we're talking "years ago")
>wasn't exactly a speed demon, not that Overbrook is that much better.
>
>-j.
>

_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy 
Awards®   http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2