# General plan documents — allegheny_county-pennsylvania Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (``) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading. **Contains 5 documents.** OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: agricultural_resources, circulation, community_facilities, conservation, economic_development, energy_conservation, general_plan_existing_conditions, general_plan_framework, general_plan_implementation, general_plan_vision, historic_preservation, housing, land_use, open_space, resource_extraction, utilities. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-08-30. --- ## Land Use — Allegheny Places, Chapter 4A: Introduction/Future Land Use Plan - Source: https://www.alleghenyplaces.com/docs/DraftPlan/Chapter4A.pdf - Pages: 12 - Covers: land_use # CHAPTER 4: ## RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TOMORROW'S PLACES ## INTRODUCTION With a strong understanding of the County's foundations, *Allegheny Places* presents a desired future and describes the way to get there. This chapter conveys twelve plan elements, which collectively serve as a guide for public and private sector actions related to future growth, development and preservation in Allegheny County. * ■ Future Land Use Plan * ■ Historic and Cultural Resource Plan * ■ Economic Development Plan * ■ Housing Plan * ■ Parks, Open Space and Greenways Plan * ■ Resource Extraction Plan * ■ Agricultural Resource Plan * ■ Community Facilities Plan * ■ Transportation Plan * ■ Utilities Plan * ■ Environmental Resource Plan * ■ Energy Conservation Plan These plan elements incorporate a comprehensive set of goals, objectives and actions developed to embody the needs and aspirations of the diverse communities that comprise Allegheny County. *The Future Land Use Plan is the keystone of Allegheny Places – all the other elements of the comprehensive plan support its implementation.* The Future Land Use Plan ties together all the other elements that make up *Allegheny Places*. It describes the recommended distribution and desired character of future land uses. In particular, the Future Land Use Plan proposes that major development be largely directed to specific Places in the form of mixed-use communities, providing opportunities for people to live, work and play in the same place. The actions recommended in this chapter build on our strengths and address our weaknesses, and so provide opportunities for all of the County's places to prosper. <
> # INTERRELATIONSHIPS AMONG PLAN ELEMENTS The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Article III, Section 301.a(4.1), requires that comprehensive plans establish interrelationships between the various Plan elements. In *Allegheny Places*, the principal expression of the interrelationship between the many plan elements is the Future Land Use Plan. Interrelationships are also established between the individual plan elements. For example: ■ **Equity and diversity:** for all plan elements, challenges and opportunities are identified that are consistent with the Plan’s Equity and Diversity Principles. ■ **Housing and Economic Development:** recommendations for future housing are intended to provide more County residents with better access to employment opportunities. ■ **Transportation:** the recommendations for mass transit are a key element of the Future Land Use Plan. A number of Places on the Future Land Use map are “TOD” Places, which will provide County residents with better access to employment and other opportunities. ■ **Environmental Resources and Utilities:** many of the recommendations in the Environmental Resources plan address challenges identified in the Utilities plan. ■ **Future Land Use Plan:** recommendations from all of the elements are tied together in the concept of ‘Places’, including housing, economic development, infrastructure improvements, transportation and energy conservation. # CHAPTER 4 # FUTURE LAND USE PLAN ## ■ A PLAN TO GUIDE GROWTH The Future Land Use Plan is a guide for development and redevelopment in Allegheny County through the year 2025. It is based on the modest rate of growth projected to occur over the planning period: a future population of approximately 1.3 million people, with a net gain of 32,000 housing units and 190,000 new jobs. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor The Future Land Use Plan is built around the concept of ‘Places’. There are eight different types of Places, each of which has a unique identity. Most Places include a mix of land uses and build on existing infrastructure. The intent of Places is to provide an efficient and economical way to allow for both new growth and revitalization, meet a diversity of needs, support transit, reduce consumption of open space, and protect environmentally sensitive resources. The Future Land Use map (see Map 4A.1) shows the locations of Places, transportation and transit improvements, areas for infill development and for conservation, and a greenways network that links Places, parks, trails, waterways, and conservation areas. The Future Land Use Plan supports the revitalization of the County’s existing neighborhoods and riverfronts – top priorities for County residents. Many designated Places build on the existing business districts, downtowns, and main streets of many communities. County residents also expressed overwhelming support for utilizing existing infrastructure. Targeting future growth and development to areas where there is reliable existing infrastructure is a sound economic policy. Where infrastructure improvements are needed, targeting future growth and development to those areas will help to fund the improvements. Places will provide a density of population to help support new retail and other uses, and attract employment. Concentrating jobs and residences in designated Places will increase transit ridership potential. As the demand for transit emerges, the Port Authority can offer new routes or to extend existing ones. While designated Places are where the County will focus major development and redevelopment initiatives, there are many other areas of the County identified for infill development. Infill Areas will accommodate future growth and development in all municipalities of the County. It is important for municipalities to plan the use of their Infill Areas to meet the specific needs of the community and to be consistent with the goals of *Allegheny Places.* In addition, as per the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code Article III Section 301 (a) (5), a thorough review of contiguous counties' comprehensive plans was completed. The Future Land Use Plan is consistent with the existing and proposed development as well as objectives of these plans. See Supporting Documents for this element for a review of these comprehensive plans. ## DESCRIPTION OF THE PLAN The following major features are identified on the Future Land Use map: * ■ **Places** – Locations targeted for major development. * ■ **Infill Areas** – Locations for smaller-scale development. * ■ **Conservation Areas** – Areas where resources are protected and development is discouraged. * ■ **Greenway Network** – An interconnected, county-wide network of natural resources and recreational amenities. * ■ **River Network** – Made up of the County's major water features. * ■ **Transportation Network** – Major roadways, transit, rail, air and water transportation corridors. The Future Land Use map illustrates where particular land uses are supported by the recommended actions of *Allegheny Places*. It is flexible, rather than being a strict representation of a 20-year ‘build-out’. The map will be periodically revisited by the County to ensure its continued relevance and accuracy. **DESCRIPTION OF THE PLACES** Following are the eight Place types designated on the Future Land Use map: ### 1. Airport-Industry Airport-Industry Places are located in close proximity to Pittsburgh International Airport, and mainly include sites that have been targeted by the County and developers for office and light industrial development. Businesses that need to be close to a good ground and air transportation network will be expected to locate here. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor ### 2. The Core Core Places are located in downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland. These urban core areas are the County’s major centers for office employment, government, cultural venues, higher education, finance, health care, research, and startup ventures. Residential development is generally very dense. Ongoing revitalization and development in Core Places is vital to the economy of Allegheny County and the region. Improved transit, linking Core Places and the Airport, is a key element. Much new development in Core Places will be infill development, rehabilitation of existing buildings, and adaptive reuse of former industrial or warehouse sites and structures. ### 3. Corridors Corridor Places are located along the following major highways: * Interstate 79 * Route 28 * Interstate 279 * Route 48 * Future I-376 (Parkway West) * Route 50 * Route 8 * Route 51 * Route 19 * Route 65 * Route 22 * Mon/Fayette Expressway Corridor Places have good access to major transportation corridors and highway interchanges. They are relatively intense, mixed-use hubs of office, industrial, commercial and residential uses. Corridor Places can accommodate high-intensity land uses that require large amounts of land such as regional shopping centers, industrial parks, and business parks. The intent of Corridor Places is to break away from the old pattern of strip development. They will be planned instead as nodes or hubs, with a gridded street network that interconnects uses and has limited access points on existing major roadways. ### 4. Urban Neighborhoods Urban Neighborhoods are located within the cities of Pittsburgh and McKeesport. They build on existing business districts and mixed-used areas in older, densely developed neighborhoods, and include more regionally-oriented services with a mix of housing types in a walkable setting. Revitalization of Urban Neighborhood Places will include infill development, rehabilitation of existing buildings and improved transit connections, and will take advantage of nearby cultural and recreational amenities. ### 5. Community Downtowns Community Downtowns are similar in character to Urban Neighborhoods, but are less densely developed and include other municipalities. Most, but not all, Community Downtowns build on the existing business districts and downtowns in older communities. They will be Places where additional business development can occur in a mixed-use setting that includes residential, office, retail, and other compatible uses. A number of the Community Downtowns include business districts targeted by Allegheny Together, including Oakmont, Swissvale, Castle Shannon, McKees Rocks, Wexford and Coraopolis. Allegheny Together is a new Allegheny County Economic Development program that assists in the revitalization of the County's "Main Streets". <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor ### 6. Villages Village Places are located in suburban communities throughout the County, in places such as Oakdale, Rennerdale and Indianola. Village Places are characterized by a mix of residences and small-scale, low-intensity businesses and services that primarily serve neighborhood needs. Non-residential development in Village Places should neither generate, nor depend on, large volumes of vehicular traffic. Streets should be laid out on grids or modified grids to promote walkability. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor ### 7. Rural Places Rural Places are located along the "edges" of the County in municipalities that are less developed such as South Fayette, West Deer and Elizabeth Townships. Rural Places are the least densely developed of all the types of Places. They will be primarily residential in nature, with a focus on single-family detached housing. Non-residential development will be limited mainly to recreation and essential supporting services. ### 8. Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs) Transit-oriented development, or TOD, is a mix of relatively dense residential, office and retail uses at transit stations or transit stops, to maximize pedestrian access to transit. TOD is an overlay on selected Places that are located along the existing 'T' line and busways, and on proposed new transit lines. TOD Places will incorporate both infill development, and substantial new development on large parcels when available. TOD Places will create opportunities for people to live, learn, work, invest and play in the same Place. TOD Places will also enable people to connect to other Places in the County via transit. Examples of TOD Places include Mt. Lebanon, Wilkinsburg, Oakland, the North Shore and Carnegie. <
> TOD Places are a key element of the County's Equity and Diversity plan. Many people do not have cars; and many others, such as the disabled, elderly, and young, depend on walking and transit. TOD Places will support transit use and make it more accessible to more people. OTHER FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENTS In addition to the eight types of Places, there are several other elements on the Future Land Use map. ### Infill Areas Infill areas will provide opportunities for new development and redevelopment on properties that are vacant, abandoned, or under-used. Infill development can occur on a single lot or on groups of lots. Infill development areas are located throughout the County, although they tend to be the most concentrated in older communities. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Many communities – especially inner-ring suburbs and former industrial towns – have thousands of vacant and abandoned properties. They can be a great opportunity for community revitalization. When blighted and vacant buildings are demolished in older communities, the lots can be reclaimed and infill development used to bring new housing, businesses and recreation into the community. ### Conservation Areas Conservation Areas include sensitive environmental features, scenic landscapes, and cultural resources. The Future Land Use Plan targets development to Places and Infill Areas, with the intent of limiting development in designated Conservation Areas. Future development in Conservation Areas must be consistent with the goal of conserving environmentally-sensitive features. Except for agricultural, recreational and resource-based enterprises, there should be no new commercial or industrial uses in these areas. New infrastructure will be discouraged in conservation areas. ### The Greenway Network The Greenway Network is a linked system of greenways and nodes that includes parks, State Game Lands, trails, and land preserved through land trusts and agricultural easements. The Greenway Network also includes areas of environmentally-sensitive lands and resources, such as rivers, wetlands, floodplains, streams, steep slopes, landslide-prone areas, and open space buffers. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor An essential role for the Greenway Network is to create more livable communities, protect natural resources, showcase cultural resources, and connect people to the outdoors. The emphasis is on connections both within the County and outside the County to regional and state greenway networks, also known as mega-greenways. Additionally, the County’s Greenway Network should connect to Places identified in the Future Land Use Plan. Development within the Greenway Network is discouraged. CHAPTER 4 ### The River Network The River Network includes the County’s four rivers: the Monongahela, the Allegheny, the Ohio, and the Youghiogheny. Rivers are Allegheny County’s most defining feature. They are important to the County and the region environmentally, economically, historically, and culturally. They are an important component of both the Greenways and Transportation Networks. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Places adjacent to rivers will incorporate scenic river views and provide public access to riverfronts. Additionally, they will support and provide for water and trail corridors that are complementary to the Allegheny County Riverfronts Project established by the County in collaboration with two primary partners, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council and Friends of the Riverfront. ### The Transportation Network The County’s extensive multi-modal Transportation Network includes the two major systems for linking Places to one another: roadways and transit corridors. Most of the major roadway corridors identified on the Future Land Use map have Places along them that are targeted for development and redevelopment. Transit corridors primarily link TOD Places to each other, as well as to centers of employment, population and recreation. Currently, existing transit corridors within the County include the ‘T’ and the East, West and South busways. Potential future transit corridors along the <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, and along the future I-376 corridor connecting the Pittsburgh International Airport to Downtown, Oakland and Monroeville, are identified on the Future Land Use map as well. ### ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines what can be done to direct and accommodate the types and forms of development and redevelopment depicted in the Future Land Use Plan. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Future Land Use Plan, all of the Resource Panels helped to identify these key challenges: ■ Sprawl in the northern and western portions of the County ■ Declining population, especially in core areas ■ Disinvestment in older communities ■ Brownfields that have high clean-up costs and hinder river access ■ A large number of local governments ■ Poor condition of housing stock in older communities and the need for demolition The following provides an understanding of these issues. # SPRAWL IN THE NORTHERN AND WESTERN PORTIONS OF THE COUNTY The County’s slow rate of growth has not slowed the rate of land consumption. Between 1982 and 1997, the amount of land developed increased by nearly 43% even though the population declined by 8%, according to Sustainable Pittsburgh’s 2002 *Sustainability Indicators Report*. Over the past two decades, much new development in Allegheny County has been in the form of suburban sprawl. Sprawl is a term used to describe a classic pattern of land development where different types of uses are separated – often widely – by zoning, and development is at a much lower density compared to urbanized areas. Suburban sprawl typically consumes greenfields and requires the extension of infrastructure such as water and sanitary sewer lines, and roads. Sprawl tends to foster dependence on automobiles because where people live is located far from where they work, shop, and attend school. In Allegheny County more than 14,000 acres were developed between 1993 and 2005. About 9,000 acres, or 67% of the total land area developed, was residential development. Single-family was the predominant dwelling type, and the average lot size was ½ acre. Most of the development was in the northwestern and southern parts of the County (primarily Marshall, Pine, Moon, Collier, North Fayette, South Fayette, and Robinson Townships), but the north-central and eastern portions of the County also experienced increases. *Inefficient land use patterns can lead to higher costs for utilities and services, an erosion of the urban core tax base, a decline in downtown commercial centers and a concentration of poverty in older urban centers.* According to a 1998 study by the Natural Resources Defense Council, sprawl is more inefficient, costly, and inequitable, and uses more resources than traditional city and town development. Unlike modern sprawl, historical patterns of development in Allegheny County were highly supportive of transit use. In 1947, more than one million persons – about 70% of the County’s population – resided in 19 of the County’s 130 municipalities. All were in, or close to, urban population centers accessible by trolley lines. Public transit ridership hit a peak of 280 million per year in 1947. The typical suburban land use pattern does not have the density to support transit use. After 1950, when individual ownership of automobiles became more common, many of the core communities experienced substantial population losses, while the municipalities in outlying areas gained. Public transit ridership dropped dramatically. In 2006, it was slightly more than 70 million per year. # DECLINING POPULATION, ESPECIALLY IN CORE AREAS In each decade from 1960 to 2000, the County’s population has decreased. From 2000 to 2006, Allegheny County is estimated to have lost 4.3% of its population, falling from approximately 1.28 million to 1.22 million. Of Allegheny County’s 130 municipalities, 97 lost population in the 1990s. Population losses were concentrated in the urban core and in former industrial communities along the rivers. The City of Pittsburgh lost the largest number of people in the 1990s – over 35,000 residents – while Braddock Borough suffered the largest percentage of population loss – nearly 38% of its population. *More than one-third of the County’s municipalities, or 46, have less than one square mile of land, and 14 have fewer than 1,000 people.* # DISINVESTMENT IN OLDER COMMUNITIES Over the past twenty years, the County has been ‘hollowing out’, as people moved from the urban core and older river communities to the outlying suburban municipalities. With no population growth to offset outmigration and natural population loss, many older communities became increasingly tax burdened. As the lack of revenue impacted the provision of services, it led to further decline. When property values decline, local taxing bodies are often forced to increase millage rates in an attempt to meet the demand for services. When higher tax rates are coupled with lowered property values and an eroding quality of life, it is difficult to retain existing residents and businesses or to attract new ones. It is a cycle of decline that is hard to break. # CHAPTER 4 *In declining communities the neediest people are often left behind to bear the burden of increased costs for providing services.* Over the years, various economic development incentives have been used to attract new development to greenfields in outlying municipalities. A balanced, geographic targeting of incentives consistent with the preferred development scenarios outlined in *Allegheny Places* is critical to the revitalization of the urban core and older communities. ## BROWNFIELDS THAT HAVE HIGH CLEAN-UP COSTS AND HINDER RIVER ACCESS Allegheny County was once an industrial powerhouse, with many factories and mills lining the rivers. Riverfront locations were common because the rivers were essential for the transportation of raw materials and finished products. Today, most of the old industrial operations have closed down, leaving behind large tracts of vacant or abandoned land, commonly referred to as brownfields (see Map 4A.2). Many brownfield sites have environmental problems that require expensive remediation. In addition, the extent of environmental contamination is often unknown, which can further complicate and delay remediation. Despite the challenges, brownfields have tremendous potential for redevelopment and for reclaiming the riverfront. As providing public access is not always a developer priority, however, it needs to be encouraged. Brownfields in the County that have been reclaimed include the Southside Works, the Pittsburgh Technology Center, and the Waterfront. They are notable examples of what can be accomplished. ## A LARGE NUMBER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS When Allegheny County was established in 1788, it had only seven townships. Today the County has 130 municipalities, which include boroughs, first and second class townships, cities, and home rule municipalities. Municipalities have been largely responsible for providing their citizens with public services and community facilities, and managing their own land use planning. Most municipalities in Allegheny County have their own land use ordinances. How the land use approval process is managed can vary greatly from municipality to municipality, however. And when a proposed development spans multiple jurisdictions, the decision-making process can be fragmented, slow, and inconsistent. Declining municipalities face increasing difficulties in meeting the demand for services and facilities. As costs continue to rise, even the stable and growing municipalities may be faced with the decision of whether to increase millage rates in order maintain the same level of services, or provide additional services. Greater sharing and consolidation of services, and more multi-municipal cooperation and planning are essential to the future growth and prosperity of the County. ## POOR CONDITION OF HOUSING STOCK IN OLDER COMMUNITIES AND THE NEED FOR DEMOLITION The County’s housing stock was built to accommodate a much larger population. As the population declined, the number of housing vacancies increased, particularly in and around the urban core and in former industrial communities along the rivers. In 2000, twenty-three municipalities in Allegheny County had vacancy rates of over 10%. Some municipalities in Allegheny County have vacancy rates that are among the highest in the state. Vacant, blighted buildings can have a destabilizing effect on a neighborhood. They project an image of despair, contributing to negative perceptions of the neighborhood, and provide places for criminal activity. Demolition is often the simplest solution. When the land has been cleared and reclaimed, it can open the door for reinvestment and revitalization. <
> Funding for demolition is not always available, however, nor is there is always an immediate use for the reclaimed properties. Demolition needs must be prioritized, therefore, and cleared properties may need to be land-banked for future use. # ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN Land use, development and conservation are compatible with and enhanced by Allegheny County's unique physical characteristics, rich cultural and social heritage, and distinctive communities. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Future Land Use Plan are to: **A.** Create Places that emphasize community. **B.** Direct development, redevelopment and conservation to Places identified on the Future Land Use map. **C.** Ensure that new development occurring outside of designated Places and Infill Areas is beneficial and necessary. **D.** Encourage transit-oriented development. **E.** Promote municipal consistency with *Allegheny Places*, the County Comprehensive Plan. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Create Places that Emphasize Community** The Places envisioned by the Future Land Use Plan are compact, walkable communities that are transit-supportive. They offer a variety of housing options to meet a diversity of needs and respect market trends. Housing, shopping, employment, community facilities and public spaces are all integrated into a lively and human-scale environment. Places are envisioned as mixed-use so that people can commute from their home to their job, to shopping, to recreation and to other destinations without the use of a car. Reducing automobile use has many environmental benefits, and walkability also encourages social interaction and better health. To promote walkability, Places should include sidewalks, pathways, and crosswalks. Street systems should be based on grids or modified grids that promote safe and efficient pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular movement. Street systems should also be designed to maximize connectivity between uses and create a hierarchy of spaces. Public spaces of different types and scales should be provided to encourage people to socialize, accommodate community events, integrate open space into the fabric of the community, and create community identity. For some Places, uses such as restaurants and cafes with outdoor seating areas are also encouraged. Establishing Places as compact, relatively dense and truly mixed-use settings will be a challenge. Appropriate development regulations to guide and permit development patterns in the desired configuration and mix will be needed. **B. Direct Development, Redevelopment and Conservation to Places Identified on the Future Land Use Map** The Future Land Use Plan (Figure 4A.1) is the vision for future growth and development in Allegheny County that emerged from an extensive public outreach effort. The Future Land Use Plan shows the desired character of future land uses and their recommended distribution, consistent with the Composite Scenario (see Map 2.4). The County will strategically target the use of public funds and support the use of economic development incentives to implement projects that are consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. Additionally, State agencies are required to prioritize grants awards and permit approvals to projects that are consistent with *Allegheny Places*. Therefore, municipalities and developers will greatly benefit by consulting the Future Land Use Plan when preparing development plans and proposals. Projects in one community can greatly affect neighboring communities. Municipalities are encouraged to work together, especially when major projects cross municipal boundaries or are located adjacent to other municipalities. # CHAPTER 4 Recognizing that some development will occur outside the designated Places, the County will support smaller redevelopment projects, through technical assistance and funding, in the Infill Areas identified on the Future Land Use map. C. Ensure that New Development Occurring Outside of Designated Places and Infill Areas is Beneficial and Necessary Some development is expected to occur outside of the designated Places and Infill Areas identified on the Future Land Use map. It is important that appropriate land development controls be in place to ensure that such development is appropriate and consistent with the conservation goals of Allegheny Places. Various strategies can be used to support and encourage appropriate development in Conservation Areas, including the following techniques: ■ **Agricultural easements** – The permanent protection of agricultural lands is best achieved through easements. Such easements, which are written into property deeds, prohibit land development. The most common way to acquire conservation easements is through the sale of non-agricultural development rights by the property owner. In return for keeping a property in agricultural use in perpetuity, owners are compensated for a portion of the development potential. The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy is a local organization that acquires agricultural easements. ■ **Agricultural zoning** – Local governments can implement agricultural zoning to retain lands for agricultural use. Recent amendments to the Municipalities Planning Code require municipalities to zone to preserve “prime agriculture and farmland”. To be effective, agricultural zoning must restrict the land to agricultural and agricultural-related uses. It must also strongly limit how much residential density is allowed (for example, one dwelling unit per 20-50 acres). ■ **Cluster residential development** – When residential development is appropriate in a Conservation Area, it should be clustered. Cluster development permits units to be constructed on a smaller portion of a property, leaving the rest undeveloped in perpetuity for open space or other resource conservation purposes. ■ **Conservation easements** – A conservation easement is a tool that can be used to permanently protect important natural resources while the original landowner retains ownership and some use of the land. These easements are legally binding agreements between a landowner and a qualified conservation organization, such as a land trust. The easement permanently limits a property’s use and binds all present and future owners of the land. ■ **Special Purpose Zoning Districts** – Special purpose zoning districts, such as ‘overlay districts’, allow a municipality to provide greater protection for environmentally-sensitive areas, like landslide-prone areas, steep slopes and floodplains. Municipalities are encouraged to identify environmentally-sensitive areas in their community and adopt appropriate zoning. The Future Land Use map shows the location of sensitive areas within the Greenway Network and Conservation Areas. ■ **Transferable Development Rights** – The transfer of development rights (TDR) allows property owners to send their land development rights to another developer in a receiving area that is targeted for development (for example, a designated Place). Development rights received by a developer can allow the developer to increase the density of land use. The sender receives money for their development rights, and retains the use of their property for agricultural or open space uses. Development must be strictly prohibited within the Greenway Network, other than compatible, appropriate recreation, open space, limited agriculture and forest management uses. Proposals to serve new Conservation Areas with public water and sewer service should be denied. Exceptions can be made where necessary to protect public health and safety. D. Encourage Transit-Oriented Development Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an important national land development trend that promotes: * Compact, relatively dense development within walking distance of a transit station * A ‘24/7’ mix of uses – transit origins (housing) and destinations (jobs, retail, schools, medical, civic) * A safe, interconnected and inviting pedestrian environment – sidewalks, plazas, lighting, signage, and building transparency at the street level * A new approach to parking – less of it, shared wherever possible, and (except for curbside spaces) out of view TODs can reduce traffic congestion by providing expanded transportation options, and significantly increase ridership for the Port Authority. The existing ‘T’ line and busways, and the future rapid transit lines envisioned for Allegheny County represent an ideal opportunity for TOD in communities such as Castle Shannon, Dormont, Eastside (in East Liberty), Mt. Lebanon and Wexford. Future opportunities also exist if light rail or rapid transit is developed from Oakland and Downtown Pittsburgh to the Airport. A new state program, Transit Revitalization Investment District (TRID), has been established to help implement TODs. TRID is designed to: * Integrate transit planning with other infrastructure, public facilities and private development * Encourage intergovernmental collaboration * Add legal powers and flexibility to create the best development on public land near the stations * Provide opportunities for Tax Increment Financing and state funding and financial assistance Allegheny County is one of the first areas in Pennsylvania to take advantage of the program, and is currently completing TRID studies for areas adjacent to light rail stations in the South Hills. The County has developed recommendations for three TRID strategic areas: leave-alone territory, infill and investment zones, and strategic opportunity sites. The TRID program will be pursued for future TOD opportunities as well. The County will continue to work closely with the Port Authority to develop TOD Places, and target funding where it will have the greatest benefit. The Port Authority should conduct TOD market, planning and urban design studies for key transit stations, publicize the findings and solicit developers to build on TOD sites. E. Promote Municipal Consistency with *Allegheny Places* Implementing the goals and objectives of *Allegheny Places*, Allegheny County’s first comprehensive land use plan, will require consistency between the County comprehensive plan and municipal comprehensive plans. Municipalities should use *Allegheny Places* when updating their comprehensive plans and land use ordinances. The County, in turn, will revisit and update *Allegheny Places* on a regular basis to ensure that it stays current and remains consistent with municipal and other plans. The County’s role in planning is largely advisory, as most municipalities in Allegheny County have the authority for local land use planning. However, *Allegheny Places* will provide many benefits. The plan: * Opens the door to state and other grants * Facilitates permit processing * Provides land use planning tools and mapping * Provides context for making major land use decisions * Highlights best land use practices Elected officials, planners, and others should consult *Allegheny Places* when making decisions about development and redevelopment in the community. The County also encourages developers and property owners to consider the development and redevelopment of their property in a manner consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. --- ## Circulation — Allegheny Places Transportation Plan (2014 Update) - Source: https://www.alleghenyplaces.com/pdf/TransportationElement2014Update.pdf - Pages: 64 - Covers: circulation # ALLEGHENY PLACES THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Transportation Element Update <
> <
> <
> April 2014 Allegheny County, Pennsylvania # CHAPTER 4 # TRANSPORTATION PLAN ## ■ OVERVIEW OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN According to *Bridges and Tunnels of Allegheny County* (www.pghbridges.com), geology has exerted a strong influence on the development of transportation in Allegheny County. The County is located on the Allegheny Plateau. Our three rivers, together with their many tributaries, formed bluffs and steep slopes as they cut their way through layers of rock for millions of years. Long ago, Native Americans traveled on trails through the area, often following the tops of the ridges to avoid river and stream crossings. Today, Pittsburgh and its suburbs are known for steep hillsides and streets requiring steps for sidewalks. Other metropolitan locations may have similar topography, but generally they are not as heavily urbanized as Allegheny County. Not surprisingly, our topographic features require that we have thousands of bridges and numerous tunnels. It is virtually impossible to travel any notable distance without crossing a bridge or passing through a tunnel here. Pittsburgh is known as the “City of Bridges” for the number and variety of structures spanning our watercourses. Transportation has been instrumental to Allegheny County’s development and remains vital to its economic health. The County’s transportation system is comprised of six basic modes that combine to create the network of infrastructure which moves people, goods and services. Particular emphasis is given through the planning process to modal choice and fuel alternatives. The transportation network is depicted on Map 4I.1. The *Allegheny Places* Transportation Element is organized into sections featuring these transportation modes: ■ ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES ■ PUBLIC TRANSIT ■ BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ■ AIRPORTS ■ RAIL FREIGHT ■ WATERWAYS For each mode covered in the Plan, you will find Today’s Conditions, Issues and Analysis, and Recommendations. ### RELATIONSHIP TO THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN The purpose of the Transportation Plan is to maximize utilization of the existing transportation network, target new investment in the system for maximum return and provide all people equal access to growth opportunities, especially those associated with ‘Places’ designated on the Future Land Use Plan (see Map 4A.1). The Future Land Use Plan focuses development in designated ‘Places’. Most ‘Places’ are along existing transportation corridors and all are highly accessible to each other, as well as to the region. One of the key benefits of concentrating development, investment and activities in ‘Places’ is that transportation alternatives can be developed that provide choices and options for movement between ‘Places’. This mobility will ensure a high level of access to jobs, shopping, schools, and other destinations. We have made choices resulting in the ability to concentrate investments for maximum effectiveness. Visible, usable, quantifiable and dramatic results can occur in a much quicker time frame by targeting funds to ‘Places’. The County’s economic development policies for attracting new business as well as retaining existing businesses are dependent on efficiently moving people, goods and services. Therefore, it is critical that actions and recommendations promote a safe and dependable transportation infrastructure with maximized inter-connectivity for all modes. We want the best functioning system we can achieve, which requires careful, thoughtful planning and investment. *Provide all people equal access to growth opportunities, especially in defined Plan ‘Places’.* ### TRANSPORTATION PLANNING FOR THE REGION #### The Region Allegheny County’s transportation system is part of the regional transportation network. Efficiently managing this network requires regional cooperation and coordination # Future Land Use Map Description **(More information can be found in the Land Use Element of *Allegheny Places*)** **Infill Areas:** Provide opportunities for new development and redevelopment on vacant, abandoned or under-utilized properties. **Conservation Areas:** Sensitive environmental features, scenic landscapes and cultural resources that are only meant for very limited or no development. **Places:** Areas targeted for development. **1. Airport-Industry:** Located in close proximity to Pittsburgh International Airport, and mainly include sites that have been targeted by the County and developers for office and light industrial development. **2. The Core:** Located in downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland. Much new development in Core Places will be infill development, rehabilitation and reuse of existing buildings, and adaptive reuse of former industrial or warehouse sites and structures. **3. Corridors:** Have good access to major transportation corridors and highway interchanges. They are relatively intense, mixed-use hubs of office, industrial, commercial and residential uses. Corridor Places can accommodate high-intensity land uses that require large amounts of land such as regional shopping centers, industrial parks, and business parks. **4. Urban Neighborhoods:** Located within urban areas like the cities of Pittsburgh and McKeesport. They build on existing business districts and mixed-used areas in older, densely developed neighborhoods, and include more regionally-oriented services with a mix of housing types in a walkable setting. **5. Community Downtowns:** Similar in character to Urban Neighborhoods, but are less densely developed. Most, but not all, Community Downtowns build on the existing business districts and downtowns in older communities. **6. Villages:** Located in suburban communities throughout the County. Village Places are characterized by a mix of residences and small-scale, low-intensity businesses and services that primarily serve neighborhood needs. Non-residential development should neither generate, nor depend on, large volumes of vehicular traffic. **7. Rural Places:** Located along the “edges” of the County in municipalities that are less developed. Rural Places are the least densely developed of all the types of Places. They will be primarily residential in nature, with a focus on single-family detached housing. Non-residential development will be limited mainly to recreation and essential supporting services. **8. Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs):** A mix of relatively dense residential, office and retail uses at transit stations or transit stops, to maximize pedestrian access to transit. TOD is an overlay on selected Places that are located along the existing ‘T’ line and busways, and on proposed new transit lines. TOD Places will incorporate both infill development, and substantial new development on large parcels when available. # Future Land Use Plan <
> # Future Land Use Plan ## LEGEND ### Places * Airport * Core * Corridor * Urban Neighborhood * Community Downtown * Village * Rural * Transit Oriented Development ### Transportation * Proposed New Highways * Existing Transit System * Proposed-Transit ### Networks * Road Corridors * Allegheny Land Trust GREENPRINT * Proposed Greenways * Conservation Areas * Infill Development ### Base Map * Major Roadways * Allegheny County Boundary * Bordering Counties * Hydrology * Municipal Boundaries * These alignments are conceptual, alternatives will be studied. ## DATA SOURCES Allegheny County Allegheny County Municipalities City of Pittsburgh Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Western Pennsylvania Conservancy Individual Land Trusts AirPhoto USA Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission National Hydrography Dataset **August 2013 Update** This map is property of Allegheny County and should be used for reference purposes only. This map was prepared for: Rich Fitzgerald, Allegheny County Executive Allegheny County Economic Development - Planning Division Map 4A.1 # Transportation System <
> # Transportation System ### LEGEND | Road | Base Map | | :--- | :--- | | Turnpike | Allegheny County | | Interstate | Municipal Boundaries | | US Route | Bordering Counties | | State or Turnpike Route | Hydrology | | HOV Lane | | | Proposed New Highway | | **Transit System** * East Busway * West Busway * South Busway * T Line **Railroad** * Active Rail * Inactive Rail **Water** * Industrial River Port * Locks & Dams Navigable Waterway * Dams Only **Air** * Public Airport * Private Airport ### DATA SOURCES Allegheny County City of Pittsburgh Port of Pittsburgh Commission Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Bureau of Transportation Statistics Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission National Hydrography Dataset August 2013 Update This map is property of Allegheny County and should be used for reference purposes only. This map was prepared for: Rich Fitzgerald, Allegheny County Executive Allegheny County Economic Development - Planning Division Map 4I.1 with all counties who are members of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The MPO is the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC). SPC is comprised of ten counties and the City of Pittsburgh. Regional coordination is critical to ensure that transportation systems are maintained, congestion is managed, and the safe and efficient movement of people and freight is attained. SPC's website contains extensive related information and can be accessed at: www. spcregion.org. ### The Planning Partners Transportation planning in Allegheny County is a cooperative effort between the County, PennDOT, the City of Pittsburgh and the Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC); all together they comprise the transportation Planning Partners. SPC is the regional organization where the 10-county MPO's Planning Partners come together to produce the official, funded Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and the Long Range Transportation and Development Plan (LRP). The most recent LRP is the 2040 LRP. The LRP is a strictly fiscally-constrained plan. The most recent LRP was developed through participation in SPC's "Project Region" (see www. spcregion.org for more information). The resulting document is named "2040 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania". Chapter 6 of the 2040 Plan contains the most recent listings of programmed transportation projects the Planning Partners expect to construct through 2040 (see Supporting Documents). "Project Region" and the resulting plan integrated transportation planning and economic development into a coordinated vision, with associated actions. Included is the identification of needs and resources, development of a range of potential alternatives, and recommendations for implementing specific solutions on a regional level. The regional plan is consistent with County Plans. Major proposed transportation projects are shown on Map 4I.2. ### Public Involvement Public involvement is critical to transportation planning. SPC utilizes public participation panels (PPPs) appointed by each County. Together, they elicit the input and active involvement of individual stakeholders, groups and entire communities from the earliest planning stages of transportation projects and processes through completion. ### Councils of Government There are eight Councils of Government (COGs) in Allegheny County. The COGs are voluntary coalitions of municipalities organized by geographic area. Most of our 130 municipalities belong to a COG. The COGs act to: * Discuss and bring into focus regional challenges and opportunities * Collect and maintain data of a regional interest * Facilitate improved communication, coordination and intergovernmental cooperation between all levels of government * Facilitate cooperative agreements * Seek technical assistance * Coordinate Federal, State and Local programs of regional importance The COGs hold regular meetings to discuss issues, including transportation needs. ### The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission The existing, and planned, Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission roadway system also plays a vital role in both our transportation system and future land use in Allegheny County. A priority PA Turnpike issue in the future will be obtaining funds for the completion of the Mon/Fayette Expressway and Southern Beltway Projects in Allegheny and Washington Counties. Programming for the Turnpike Commission's projects requires coordination through the SPC's Transportation Improvement Program and Long Range Plan. Funds to program new construction for the Turnpike are expected to come from non-traditional sources including partnerships and other creative finance methods. # Transportation Projects Map Key | Project Type | Project Number | Project Name | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Highway | 1 | SR 286 widening, S.R. 22 to S.R. 380 | | | 2 | Campbells Run Road Widening – I376W area | | | 3 | SR 28 – Creighton to Butler County Line | | | 4 | SR 50 – Washington County Line to Miller Run | | | 5 | SR 65 – Ft. Duquesne Bridge to California Avenue | | | 6 | SR 3069 – Liberty Tunnel Rehabilitation | | | 7 | SR 2031 – Lincoln Way Improvement | | | 8 | SR 28 Troy Hill to Millvale | | | 9 | SR 28 I579 to East Ohio Street | | Traffic Operations & Safety | 10 | US 19 – Pine Creek to Wallace | | Transit | 11 | Downtown to Airport | | | 12 | West Busway Extension | | | 13 | Downtown to Oakland | | | 14 | Oakland Circulator | | | 15 | Allegheny Valley Passenger Rail Transit | | Bridge Capital Maintenance | 16 | Roberto Clemente Bridge (6th Street) | | | 17 | Andy Warhol Bridge (7th Street) | | | 18 | Rachael Carson Bridge (9th Street) | | | 19 | 10th Street Bridge | | | 20 | Glenwood Interchange Bridges | | | 21 | Greenfield Bridge | | | 22 | Hulton Bridge Replacement | | | 23 | Mansfield Bridge | | | 24 | SR 8 – Butler Street Bridge over Heth's Run | | | 25 | US 30 – Ardmore Blvd Bridge over Electric Ave | | | 26 | SR 51 – West Carson Street Viaduct Replacement | | | 27 | SR 65 – Marshall Interchange Rehabilitation | | | 28 | SR 2085 – Birmingham Bridge Rehabilitation | | | 29 | SR 3069 – Liberty Bridge Preservation | | | 30 | SR 3104 – McKees Rocks Bridge Phase 2 | | | 31 | Triboro Interchange Bridges | | | 32 | Charles Anderson Bridge | | | 33 | Coraopolis Bridge Rehabilitation | | | 34 | Dookers Hollow Bridge | | | 35 | Greensburg Pike Bridge Reconstruction / Turtle Creek | | | 36 | 16th Street Bridge Rehabilitation | | | 37 | Fleming Park Bridge Rehabilitation | # Transportation Projects ## Map Key (Continued) | Project Type | Project Number | Project Name | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Intersections & Interchanges** | 38 | S.R. 51 / 88 Intersection Improvements | | | 39 | Warrendale Interchange | | **Intermodal Facilities** | 40 | Carnegie Intermodal Facility with Intercept Garage | | | 41 | Bates St Intermodal Facility w/ Intercept Garage | | | 42 | Central Oakland Intermodal Connection Hub | | | 43 | Pitcairn Freight Intermodal Facility | # Proposed Transportation Projects <
> ## Proposed Transportation Projects ### LEGEND **Transportation Projects** * Proposed Hwy Improvements * Proposed New Highways * West-Busway-Extension * OaklandToDowntown_DowntownToAirport * Oakland Circulator * Allegheny-Valley-Transit * ◆ Bridges * ◆ Intermodal Facilities * ◆ Key Interchanges / Intersections * ◆ Intermodal Freight **Base Map** * [ ] Allegheny County Boundary * [ ] Municipal Boundaries * [ ] Bordering Counties * ● Locks and Dams * 🟡 Dams * ~ Hydrology * ✈ Airports * — Existing Transit System * ★ Monongahela and Duquesne Inclines * — Major Roadways * * These alignments are conceptual, alternatives will be studied. ## DATA SOURCES Allegheny County URS Corporation Bureau of Transportation Statistics Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission National Hydrography Dataset August 2013 Update This map is property of Allegheny County and should be used for reference purposes only. This map was prepared for: Rich Fitzgerald, Allegheny County Executive Allegheny County Economic Development – Planning Division Map 4l.2 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES ## ■ TODAY’S CONDITIONS ### FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Highways are classified according to their function and the type of service they provide. The functional classification system serves as both a guideline for planning as well as means for determining funding for maintenance and upgrades. Table 41.1 details the functional class breakdown and the definition of each class. Table 41.2 provides the total linear lane miles for each functional class within Allegheny County and Map 41.3 shows the Allegheny County highway network by functional classification. ### VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED Figure 41.1 shows that in recent years, average vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the County decreased. As development patterns spread out, people drive more frequently and drive longer distances to reach destinations. While the general trend for VMT is increasing, fluctuations do occur and are a response to shifts in the economy, such as the Great Recession. The number of trips also increases due to changes in household patterns and locations of activities. | TABLE 41.1 - Highway Functional Classes | | | :--- | :--- | | **FUNCTIONAL SYSTEM** | **SERVICES PROVIDED** | | **Arterial** | Provides the highest level of service at the greatest speed for the longest uninterrupted distance, with some degree of access control. Includes interstates, expressways and freeways. | | **Collector** | Provides a less highly developed level of service at a lower speed for shorter distances by collecting traffic from local roads and connecting them with arterials. | | **Local** | Consists of all roads not defined as arterials or collectors; primarily provides access to land with little or no through movement. | Source: AASHTO Green Book <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor | TABLE 41.2 - Functional Classification of Highways in Allegheny County by Linear Mile | | | | | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | **FEDERAL AID** | | | | **SUB TOTAL** | **NON FEDERAL AID** | **SUB TOTAL** | **TOTAL** | | **Interstate** | **Other Freeway/ Expressway** | **Other Principal Arterial** | **Minor Arterial** | **Major Collector** | | **Minor Collector** | **Local Roads** | | | | 108.1 | 61.0 | 355.9 | 597.7 | 469.1 | 1,591.8 | 20.7 | 4,204.4 | 4,255.1 | 5,816.9 | Source: PennDOT Bureau of Planning and Research, 2009 Highway Statistics # Roads by Functional Classification <
> ## Roads by Functional Classification ### LEGEND **Roads by Functional Classification** * Interstates * Principal Arterial Roads (Freeways, Expressways) * Principal Arterial Roads (Freeways, Expressways) * Other Principal Arterial * Minor Arterial * Collector Roads * Local Roads **Base Map** * Allegheny County Boundary * Municipal Boundaries * Bordering Counties * Hydrology * Major Roads * Proposed Roads ### DATA SOURCES Allegheny County Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission National Hydrography Dataset August 2013 Update This map is property of Allegheny County and should be used for reference purposes only. This map was prepared for: Rich Fitzgerald, Allegheny County Executive Allegheny County Economic Development - Planning Division Map 4I.3 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES ### Figure 41.1 – Total Daily Miles Traveled in Allegheny County <
> The chart illustrates fluctuations, but overall, from 2005 to 2009 there was a cumulative decrease of almost 500,000 total daily miles traveled in the County. Source: PennDOT Bureau of Planning and Research, 2009 Highway Statistics Annual vehicle miles traveled in Allegheny County are still expected to increase in the next few decades, unless changes in development patterns occur that result in people needing to travel fewer miles. Figure 41.1 shows that from 2005 through 2009 there was a cumulative decrease of total daily miles traveled. At the highest fluctuation there was a decrease of just under 2% of daily miles traveled, and there has been an overall decrease of 500,000 daily miles traveled during the entire period. ### CONGESTION The Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC) manages the federally mandated Congestion Management Process (CMP) for the 10-county region that includes Allegheny County. Within the County, there are approximately 64 corridors that are included in the program. Table 41.3 lists the 19 congested corridors that were chosen to be analyzed for *Allegheny Places* with their corresponding average weekday traffic. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for 2010 was used to determine the effects of the *Allegheny Places* land use scenarios, by comparing the base year traffic (2010) with projected traffic in 2025. *Allegheny Places* future plan year is 2025. In February 2010, SPC’s Congestion Management Process ranked the Parkway West Corridor (I-376 between Downtown Pittsburgh and Pittsburgh International Airport) as experiencing the highest traffic delay in the region. ### TRAFFIC SIGNALS Allegheny County has over 1,600 signalized intersections. The City of Pittsburgh has 583 signalized intersections. A total of 106 municipalities in the County maintain signals. In Pennsylvania, traffic signals are generally maintained and operated by the municipality, whether the intersection is owned by the state, county or local municipality, and regardless of which entity maintains the roadways. ### CRASH STATISTICS IN ALLEGHENY COUNTY Of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties, Allegheny County had the highest number of reported crashes as well as the second highest number of traffic-related deaths in 2010. The number of crashes declined slightly every year from 2005-2010 (with the exception of 2007), as well as the number of traffic deaths (with the exception of 2010), as shown in Table 41.4. Approximately 16% of these deaths were pedestrians. This information is tracked over time to determine which locations require additional safety measures. ### ROADWAY OWNERSHIP Of all the counties in Pennsylvania, Allegheny County has the highest number of roads owned by local municipalities. Local roads are maintained by approximately 130 public works departments, except in cases where municipalities have voluntarily joined together with their Council of Government (COG) to share the responsibility of road maintenance, among other services. # CHAPTER 4 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES | TABLE 4I.3 – Congested Corridors | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **CORRIDOR** | **LOCATION** | **2010 Daily Volume** | | I-376 | Fort Pitt Tunnels | 137,500 | | Parkway East (I-376) | Squirrel Hill Tunnels | 102,000 | | I-79 | Wexford | 79,200 | | Parkway North (I-279) | McKnight Rd | 77,600 | | I-376 | Pittsburgh International Airport | 62,800 | | I-79 | Neville Island Bridge | 60,400 | | Liberty Bridge | PJ McArdle Roadway, Pittsburgh | 56,300 | | PA 28 | 31st St Bridge | 46,100 | | PA 51 (Saw Mill Run Blvd) | Liberty Tunnels | 37,300 | | PA 8 | Etna | 36,700 | | US 19 Truck (West Liberty Ave) | Liberty Tunnels | 47,000 | | PA 65 | McKees Rocks Bridge | 43,900 | | US 19 (Banksville Rd) | Parkway West | 47,200 | | PA 885 (Lebanon Church Rd) | PA 51 | 33,800 | | PA 121 (Greentree Rd/Cochran Rd) | Parkway West | 28,100 | | Business US 22 | Monroeville Mall/Thompson Run Bridge | 23,900 | | US 30 | Westinghouse Bridge | 27,100 | | PA 88 (Library Rd) | PA 51 | 23,500 | | PA 837 (Duquesne Blvd/8th Ave/Carson St) | Kennywood | 30,200 | Source: SPC Cycle 9 Model | TABLE 4I.4 – Number of Crashes and Traffic-Related Deaths in Allegheny County | | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **YEAR** | **2005** | **2006** | **2007** | **2008** | **2009** | **2010** | | **Total Crashes** | 12,105 | 11,609 | 12,086 | 11,754 | 11,616 | 11,234 | | **Number of Deaths** | 104 | 79 | 76 | 75 | 58 | 64 | | **Number of Pedestrian Deaths** | 14 | 14 | 10 | 14 | 6 | 13 | Source: PennDOT 2010 Crash Facts and Statistics # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES **Allegheny County owns more lane miles of road than all other counties in the Commonwealth combined.** Allegheny County is responsible for maintaining 800 lane miles of road. The ownership pattern of those lane miles is fragmented and lacks continuity. Figure 41.2 illustrates road ownership in the County. ### BRIDGE OWNERSHIP **Figure 41.2 – Road Ownership in Allegheny County by Lane Mile** <
> Source: PennDOT Bureau of Planning and Research, 2009 Highway Statistics Within Allegheny County boundaries, there are 1,448 bridges which are 20 feet or greater in length, of which PennDOT owns 838, the County owns 176, the City of Pittsburgh owns 83, the City of Clairton owns 2, the City of McKeesport owns 4, municipalities own 99, and 246 are owned by other entities such as PA Turnpike, railroads, etc). Allegheny County also owns and maintains another 325 bridges which are less than 20 feet in length for a total of 501 bridges owned by the County. Also, the County owns trail bridges but they are maintained by the official trail groups, which includes inspection to determine maintenance issues. The County always performs major and minor bridge rehabilitations, bridge replacements, inspections, repair contracts and emergency repairs. The following major bridges are owned by Allegheny County: * Mansfield Bridge * Homestead Grays Bridge * Rankin Bridge * Glenwood Bridge* * Rachel Carson Bridge * Andy Warhol Bridge * Roberto Clemente Bridge * Sixteenth Street Bridge * South Tenth Street Bridge * Coraopolis Bridge * Chartiers Creek Bridge * Turtle Creek Bridge * Levi Bird Duff Bridge * Fleming Park Bridge * Homeville Road Viaduct * Jacks Run Bridge * Dooker's Hollow Bridge * Youghiogheny Bridge * The Glenwood Bridge is jointly-owned. The structure, deck and sidewalks are each owned by different entities. The County owns the superstructure, the city owns the sidewalks and PennDOT owns the pavement. ### BRIDGE CONDITION The condition of bridges is determined by inspections and summarized in a Sufficiency Rating. A Sufficiency Rating is a rating from 0 to 100, where 0 is entirely insufficient or deficient and 100 is entirely sufficient. The calculated rating indicates the bridge's sufficiency or capability based on the following factors: * The structure's adequacy and safety (accounts for 55% and based on inspection data) * The structure's serviceability and functional obsolescence (accounts for 30% and based on ability of bridge to meet current traffic conditions) * How essential the bridge is for public use (accounts for 15%) The Sufficiency Rating is considered by the federal government when a state or county requests federal bridge # CHAPTER 4 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES dollars to improve the condition of the bridge. Bridges with low sufficiency ratings are eligible for more funds: | Sufficiency Rating | Funding Eligibility | | :--- | :--- | | 80 – 100 | Not eligible | | 50 – 79 | Eligible for costs to rehabilitate bridge | | 0 – 49 | Eligible for costs to replace bridge | <
> Photo credit: Kevin Smay <
> Figure 41.3 – Sufficiency Rating of All Bridges in Allegheny County over 20 feet in Length Source: PennDOT Bridge Data, June 2011 As of June 2011, of the 1,179 State-owned bridges in Allegheny County on state routes, 172 or 15% have a sufficiency rating that qualifies them for funding for replacement. Thirteen of these bridges have sufficiency ratings less than 10, which places them in serious need of repair. As all bridges in the County get older, more will fall into the category of being in disrepair or as having substandard conditions. This will increasingly require substantial funding be targeted toward their upgrade, maintenance and replacement. Regular maintenance activities may extend the life of a bridge. But, with heavy dependency upon bridges to maintain connectivity countywide, bridges will get precedence over roads for funding as they deteriorate. The bridge projects do compete with other types projects on the TIP. Therefore, the poor condition of bridges in Allegheny County will negatively impact the amount of funds available for highway, road and other transportation projects for the foreseeable future. Figure 41.3 indicates that in 2011, 1% or 13 of the bridges in Allegheny County over 20 feet in length have a sufficiency rating of 10 or below. Those 13 bridges are listed in Table 41.5 along with other Allegheny County bridges with sufficiency ratings under 10. In addition, there are another 177 bridges that are eligible for replacement and 458 that are eligible to rehabilitate or refurbish. In total there are 648, or almost 55% of this category of bridges located in the county, eligible for some type of repair. This is an incredible number of bridges that will need work over the next decade. These numbers do not account for the numerous bridges providing critical connectivity which are under 20 feet in length. Over the past several years, funding for bridge rehabilitation and repair became insufficient because funding levels under Act 44, the most recent state transportation law, were not achieved. In late 2013, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed Act 89 which is expected to improve the transportation funding outlook for several years. Acknowledging the dire condition of bridges in the state, Act # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES 89 created a “bridge bundling” program. The aim of the program is to bundle state and/or locally owned bridges for the purpose of cost-efficient design and construction. Where local bridges are selected to participate, the local governments’ match will be reduced by up to 100 percent. **In Allegheny County, 648 – or almost 55% of all bridges over 20 feet in length – are eligible for some type of repair.** ## CURRENT FUNDING AND PROJECT PROGRAMMING Almost all major transportation projects, whether maintenance or new capacity projects, involve the use of Federal funds. Federal regulations require the SPC, as the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Pittsburgh Transportation Management Area, to develop | TABLE 4I.5 – Bridges in Allegheny County with a Sufficiency Rating < 10 as of June 2011 | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | NAME | OWNER | TYPE | SUFFICIENCY RATING | STATUS | | 301118 AT WEST PARK | Railroad | Steel, Truss - thru | 2 | Posted | | 301067 N. AVE - BRIGHTON RD | Local | Steel, Girder riv/thru | 2 | Posted | | BOSTON BRIDGE | State | Steel, Truss - thru | 2 | Open | | @ INTERSECTION W/SR 1013 | State | Steel, Truss - deck | 3 | Temp | | OAKMONT BORO HULTON BR | Local | Steel, Truss - thru | 3 | Open | | 301014 IN HAYS #1 | Local | Steel, I-beams | 3 | Posted | | P09202 KENMAWR BRIDGE | Local | Steel, Girder riv/thru | 3.5 | Posted | | 1/2 MI NW OF SR 4002 | State | Steel, Girder riv/thru | 4 | Open | | 125’ S OF PROVOST ROAD | State | Concrete (in place), T-beams | 4 | Temp | | P09203 WALL BOROUGH | Local | Steel, Girder riv/thru | 4.2 | Posted | | @ INTERSECTION WITH SR 2075 | State | Masonry, Arch deck - closed | 5 | Open | | 2656’ NE OF SR 2053 | State | Steel, I-beams | 5.3 | Posted | | 250’ SE OF SR 0088 | State | Concrete (in place), T-beams | 6 | Temp | | 200’ W OF INT. W/ SR 3004 | State | Conc encased steel, I-beams | 6 | Open | | PS01 PINE CR, S BR #1 | State | P/S, Box beam - adj | 6 | Posted | | MT05 MONTOUR RUN #5 | State | P/S, Box beam - adj | 6 | Posted | | SQ02 SQUAW RUN #2 | Local | P/S, Box beam - adj | 6 | Open | | HV04 HOMEVILLE CR #4 | Local | P/S, Box beam - adj | 6 | Posted | | 449001 OVERLAND ST (XIO1) | Local | Steel, Girder riv/thru | 7.4 | Posted | | 301110 SWINBURNE BRIDGE | Local | Steel, Girder riv/thru | 8.3 | Posted | # CHAPTER 4 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES TABLE 4I.5 cont'd – Bridges in Allegheny County with a Sufficiency Rating < 10 as of June 2011 | NAME | OWNER | TYPE | SUFFICIENCY RATING | STATUS | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | NEAR GLENWOOD INTERCHNG | State | Concrete (in place), Box culvert | 9 | Open | | 1106 TURTLE CREEK #6 | Local | Steel, Truss - thru | 9.1 | Posted | | P50004 EMSWORTH - PT05 | Local | Steel, Arch deck - open | 9.3 | Posted | | 441001 3/4 S/BEAV CO LINE | Local | Steel, Truss - thru | 9.3 | Posted | | 100' SE OF SR 3018 | State | Concrete (in place), T-beams | 9.6 | Temp | | 1/2 MI SE OF SR 0050 | State | Steel, girder riv/thru | 9.8 | Open | | 1/2 MI NW CORLISS TUNNEL | State | Concrete (in place), Slab (solid) | 9.8 | Open | | 200' NW OF SR 1034 | State | Concrete (in place), T-beams | 9.9 | Posted | and maintain a TIP and a Transportation Long Range Plan (LRP). The TIP identifies the region's highest priority transportation projects, develops a multi-year program of implementation, and identifies available federal and non-federal funding for the identified projects. The TIP covers a four-year period of investment and is updated every two years through a cooperative effort of local, county, state and federal agencies, including participation by the general public. The LRP is similar in nature and covers a 20-year time frame. Transportation projects with any amount of federal funding must be included in both the fiscally-constrained SPC TIP and LRP. Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Lawrence, Indiana, Greene, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties, and the City of Pittsburgh, are the ten counties and the city that comprise our region. Together they comprise the membership and geographic coverage of SPC, our MPO. Major transportation projects being pursued in Allegheny County must be part of official SPC transportation plans and programs to receive federal funding. SPC's current TIP (Years 2013-2016) contains the following funding plan for highway and bridge projects in Allegheny County and the City of Pittsburgh. Highways and bridges receive funding from the "Title 1" Federal category, and bridges also receive state bridge bill funds. SPC TIP Year 2013-2016 highway funding levels, including TIP funds for City, County and PennDOT projects in Allegheny County, total $141,838,295 average annual funding per year, and $567,353,180 total for this four-year TIP period. The significance of SPC funding levels is twofold. First, the SPC program is under limitations of fiscal constraint. Regional funding levels are a budgeted portion of the Commonwealth's overall transportation program. Therefore, the amount of federal and matching state funding is capped. Second, the amount of funding for Allegheny County including the City of Pittsburgh is also a function of the transportation needs of all the counties comprising the SPC Region. Within SPC's region, there are three PennDOT districts. Allegheny County is located in District 11-0 with Beaver and Lawrence Counties. PennDOT has established a set of criteria to ensure equitable distribution of anticipated Title I (or highway and bridge) funding. Criteria considered are data such as roadway lane miles, vehicle travel data, bridge condition, air quality attainment status, percent of urban population and accidents at rail-highway crossings. However, once the block of funds are received by a PennDOT district, the funds may not be targeted to specific counties based on those formulas. There are many reasons for this discussed in other sections of the Transportation Element and supplemental materials. # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES For updated information, you can view the TIP on SPC's website at www.spcregion.org. The TIP is adjusted frequently; checking SPC's website will update information included in this plan on the date the plan went to print. Once on SPC's website, click on Transportation, then on the TIP, then select the appropriate Allegheny County and City of Pittsburgh TIP data. ## FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES For this plan, future highway use was projected to year 2040 by a traffic modeling methodology established to work in conjunction with SPC's transportation model. SPC provided its current highway network files and associated Cycle 9 data to be used as a base from which traffic produced by the proposed land use scenarios could be projected. Base year traffic volumes on key routes in Allegheny County were compared. These volumes are shown in Table 4I.6. The largest increase in traffic volumes are near the 31st Street bridge on PA 28. These volumes are expected to grow by 80%. Other corridors that grow significantly are US 19 Truck (at the Liberty Tunnel), the Liberty Bridge, and Parkway North (I-279). Additional evaluation measures were also developed such as total vehicle miles traveled and total delay times among others. Further documentation on the methodology, as well as the complete set of results, can be found in the Supporting Documents. In 2010 the full length of the Parkway West Corridor/I-376 is currently congested and backing-up during the AM and PM peak hours. By 2040 the Parkway West Corridor/I-376 is expected to be backed-up continuously for the entire day. It is obvious that we must plan to mitigate this projection. The Parkway West (I-376), from Pittsburgh International Airport to Downtown Pittsburgh and on to Oakland, is the main spine highway of the County and the region. It is the lifeline for economic development opportunities, and it is the most heavily traveled highway in Southwestern Pennsylvania. # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES **TABLE 4I.6 – 2040 Traffic Projections for PenndOT Congested Corridors** | CORRIDOR | LOCATION | 2010 | 2040 | % CHANGE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | I-376 | Pittsburgh International Airport | 62,800 | 76,900 | 22% | | I-376 | West of I-79 | 92,200 | 110,000 | 19% | | I-79 | Neville Island Bridge | 60,400 | 77,300 | 28% | | PA 28 | 31st St Bridge | 46,100 | 83,000 | 80% | | PA 65 | McKees Rocks Bridge | 43,900 | 45,300 | 3% | | I-79 | Wexford | 79,200 | 104,200 | 32% | | Parkway North (I-279) | McKnight Rd | 77,600 | 96,200 | 24% | | US 19 Truck (West Liberty Ave) | Liberty Tunnels | 47,000 | 67,400 | 43% | | PA 88 (Library Rd) | PA 51 | 23,500 | 27,700 | 18% | | I-376 | Fort Pitt Tunnels | 137,500 | 138,300 | 1% | | Liberty Bridge | PJ McArdle Roadway, Pittsburgh | 56,300 | 78,100 | 39% | | PA 8 | Etna | 36,700 | 43,100 | 17% | | PA 51 (Saw Mill Run Blvd) | Liberty Tunnels | 37,300 | 46,800 | 25% | | US 19 (Banksville Rd) | Parkway West | 47,200 | 38,800 | -18% | | PA 885 (Lebanon Church Rd) | PA 51 | 33,800 | 35,200 | 4% | | Parkway East (I-376) | Squirrel Hill Tunnels | 102,000 | 112,600 | 10% | | PA 837 (Duquesne Blvd/8th Ave/Carson St) | Kennywood | 30,200 | 32,900 | 9% | | PA 121 (Greentree Rd/Cochran Rd) | Parkway West | 28,100 | 30,700 | 9% | | US 30 | Westinghouse Bridge | 27,100 | 33,300 | 23% | | Business US 22 | Monroeville Mall/Thompson Run Bridge | 23,900 | 25,700 | 8% | Source: SPC Cycle 9 Model, URS # CHAPTER 4 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines ways to improve mobility on the County’s roadways and bridges and to provide for effective maintenance. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Transportation Plan, the Transportation Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * While the passage of new federal and state transportation funding bills in the past two years is certainly good news, there will be on-going funding concerns for transportation for years to come. The primary concerns will relate to changing funding priorities and the adequacy of funding sources to generate the projected levels of revenue to meet the most critical needs of the transportation system. * Increasing congestion levels on corridors of concern such as I-376 (Parkways West and East), I-79 and Route 28 will limit opportunities and plans for economic development, and will result in more time spent in vehicles for freight operators and all citizens. * Core areas such as Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland have internal mobility problems that restrict movement and connectivity with other areas. Lack of a ‘Transit First’ (bus priority) traffic management policy negatively affects Downtown bus operations. * Cost-effective congestion reduction strategies, such as traffic signal retiming projects, are underutilized. Other alternatives such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and restructuring of downtown transit service to optimize transit circulation while reducing congestion may present viable options to congestion in Pittsburgh and Oakland. * There is a lack of options such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities for intermodal and multimodal connectivity. These types of connectivity, through methods like Complete Streets, would create more options and modes for efficient travel. * There is a lack of access management strategies on poorly functioning corridors. This situation can create unsafe conditions and high congestion levels. * Disjointed or fragmented local municipal, County and State roadway ownership creates obstacles to effective road program strategies. * There is a lack of attention to funding for ‘Complete Streets’, which have multi-modal functionality. The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SHORTFALL Despite new federal and state transportation laws, short- and long-term program stability is not assured. The County and SPC are beginning to understand the ramifications of changes brought about by the two-year federal transportation bill passed in July 2012 and due to expire in September 2014. With the passage of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the majority of federal transportation funding will go to roads and bridges in the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) network, which consists of approximately 15 percent of nation’s total roadway network miles. Meanwhile funding for the lower level federal aid roads in the Surface Transportation Program (STP) network, approximately 85 percent of the total transportation network miles, will be reduced to 30 percent of the total federal funding. Also problematic is the elimination of the federal highway bridge program, meaning many bridges will now compete with roadway projects for funding. This problem will be especially severe for those lower level roads on the STP network, where funding has been so drastically cut. The federal transportation law also contains new rulemaking (e.g., creation of new performance measures) that will not be complete before the law expires on September 30, 2014. It is expected that transportation programs will continue to be funded through continuing resolutions while Congress formulates a new transportation law. Reductions in authorized funding levels could be a part of future federal transportation laws. Complicating the funding picture at the federal level is the projected insolvency of the highway trust fund (HTF) by the end of 2014. The HTF is funded primarily by the federal gasoline tax (18.4 cents per gallon since the fund’s creation in 1993). The HTF’s buying power has been eroded by inflation, improved automobile fuel economy, and fewer miles being traveled by the American public in recent years. In order to meet MAP-21 authorized funding levels, a $15 billion transfer from the General Fund or a significant # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES increase in the federal gas tax would be required for 2015. Even greater amounts would be needed in future years. Until recently, the situation at the state level was also extremely challenging. In 2007, a state transportation funding law known as Act 44 was passed. Much of the state's transportation budget was predicated on transfers from the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the tolling of I-80. When the bid to toll I-80 was denied, state funding dropped sharply. In 2011, the Transportation Funding Advisory Commission (TFAC) was formed to develop and evaluate new and innovative ways to deliver transportation services in the state. In November 2013, many of the TFAC recommendations were adopted in the passage of Act 89, the state's new transportation funding law. For roads and bridges, the largest source of revenue will be generated through the gradual elimination of the cap on the average wholesale price of gas and diesel subject to the Oil Company Franchise Tax. By year five of the law, this source of revenue is expected to generate approximately $1.3 billion in revenue. The law also includes a variety of new and/or increased fines and fees. The enactment of Act 89 should put the state in a better position to weather changes in federal funding policy. However, there may be continuing difficulties if the new law does not generate funding at projected levels and if the new revenue does not address the needs of the non-NHPP system. Additional challenges in the years to come include the fairness and sufficiency of the state liquid fuels allocation to counties and municipalities and the statewide allocation of transportation funding to the Commonwealth's MPOs. ### INCREASING CONGESTION LEVELS ON CORRIDORS OF CONCERN Congestion results when traffic demand approaches or exceeds the available capacity of the roadway network. Demand for vehicular travel in Allegheny County continues to rise as development expands to outlying areas. Road capacity changes throughout the day based on weather, work zones, traffic incidents or other non-recurring events. Building new capacity has not kept pace with travel demand due to lack of funds. The need for new capacity must be carefully weighed with many other factors because as more capacity is created, more vehicles miles are traveled, until the roadway system is congested again. Additionally, we are at the point where we cannot afford to maintain the system we already have. This cycle will continue until policies are put in place to help reduce congestion. There is a delicate balance between gridlock and acceptable levels of congestion. This plan points to pathways that can result in mitigation for this situation. But, the path will be long, and the needed changes will require open minds with a new way of looking at and solving issues. The new path will not be a business-as-usual approach. ### CORE AREAS HAVE INTERNAL MOBILITY PROBLEMS Congestion is present throughout Allegheny County, and that can be especially true in the core areas of Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland. These locations are the major economic generators of the region, and are key locations for corporations and businesses as well as institutions of higher education, cultural facilities and medical facilities. Naturally these areas also experience a great deal of freight traffic. They are accessible via major highways, but also have an internal grid system that is served well by transit. The sheer volume of automobiles, buses, trucks, bicycles, and pedestrians and other service vehicles can cause severe mobility issues within the core areas. The congestion restricts movements and connectivity with other areas. Conflicts arise between modes and that can also limit movements, cause delays and create unsafe situations for transportation system users. In addition, accessing available parking locations can be an issue. ### COST-EFFECTIVE CONGESTION REDUCTION STRATEGIES ARE UNDERUTILIZED Roadway congestion can be temporarily reduced by increasing capacity. Increased capacity on a permanent basis is usually a time-consuming and costly endeavor. There are a number of cost-effective congestion reduction strategies that are underutilized. Examples of these are signal retiming projects, access management strategies, traffic incident # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES management and road/weather management. These strategies can all be cost-effective means to improve service on existing roadways. ### LACK OF OPTIONS FOR INTERMODAL AND MULTI-MODAL CONNECTIVITY Multi-modal and intermodal facilities are connection points where someone can access or link with another mode of travel. They can be facilities such as park-and-ride lots with transit service or parking lots with sidewalks and/or clearly marked bike routes or bike lanes. While Allegheny County’s buses are equipped with bicycle racks and vehicle miles traveled and hours of delay are increasing, multi-modal and intermodal connections can make a difference and provide a choice of mode to the user. Overall, our transportation system lacks sufficient amounts of important connections between modes. Getting people out of their cars and traveling via another mode can reduce or slow the growth of congestion and the amount of delay. ### LACK OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES Access Management is the proactive management of vehicular access points to land adjacent to all types of roadways. Good access management promotes safe and efficient use of the transportation network. US 19, 22 and 30 and SR 8, 28, 48, 50, 51, 60, 65 and 88 are highway corridors lacking good access management strategies. These tend to be strip development, are not designed for the high speeds of vehicles that travel these roads. Driveways and curb cuts are spaced very close together in some instances. This can cause safety issues due to poor sight distances and lack of turning lanes or controlled access points. In addition to these major roads coupled with strip development patterns, access management strategies could also benefit many local roads. Lack of good access management negates the investment made in highways and reduces their function. Access Management encompasses a set of techniques that state and local governments can use to control access to highways, major arterials and other roadways. These techniques include Access Spacing, Driveway Spacing, Service Roads, Safe Turning Lanes, Median Treatments and Right-of-Way Management. ### DISJOINTED ROADWAY OWNERSHIP The pattern of roadway ownership throughout the County is very fragmented. PennDOT, the County and a local municipality can each own portions of the same roads as they wind throughout our County. Ownership is not necessarily based on functional class or volume of traffic. Allegheny County owns major roadways that have a higher classification and would typically be owned by the State. This situation results in the County maintaining roads that would be usually be paid for with State maintenance dollars. The County can wait in a long line and compete with State roads for those dollars, or spend County tax dollars to maintain roads. That type of spending makes our County taxes relatively higher than those of other counties and reduces the competitiveness of our County when attracting new population or business here. The current ownership pattern makes maintenance difficult and can result in uncoordinated and therefore more costly maintenance. The situation frequently increases the cost to perform basic functions such as snow removal and salting roadways during the winter months. County or State trucks must pass over roads they do not own to get to their area of responsibility. There are some cooperative agreements in place that result in entities trading snow removal duties with each other to rationalize the process, but sensible, rational road ownership patterns would be a big step toward making positive "good government" change (see Allegheny County Road and Bridge Evaluation Report in Supporting Documents). *Because Allegheny County owns more roads than all the other counties in the state combined, proportionately the County spends more County tax dollars on roads than other counties.* Of all the counties in Pennsylvania, Allegheny County has the highest number of roads owned by the County. But the largest percentage of all roads here are owned by local municipalities. These roads are maintained by approximately 130 public works departments, except in cases where municipalities have voluntarily joined together with their Councils of Government to share the responsibility of road maintenance, among other services. This large number of public works departments further complicates the coordination of maintenance activities within the County and naturally keeps costs high. In some cases, some local municipalities cannot handle their responsibilities for the roads they own, due to limited budgets. There are also duplicative capital costs for municipalities in maintaining their roadways because # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES equipment, and staff the departments. Discontinuous sections of roadway requiring county, municipal and PennDOT personnel attention leads to inefficiencies, compared to a situation where continuous ownership would be more efficient. ### NEED FOR 'COMPLETE STREETS' The term 'Complete Streets' refers to the concept of making streets comfortable, safe and convenient for travel by auto, foot, bicycle and transit. This policy ensures that the entire right-of-way is routinely designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Many of the streets within Allegheny County do not provide for users other than motor vehicles and buses. With the lack of funds available for routine maintenance activities, adding additional amenities for bicyclists and pedestrians can be difficult to require local municipalities, cities, the county, and the Commonwealth to include in their operating and roadway design budgets. The Downtown-Oakland-East End Corridor BRT study is considering application of Complete Streets principles along Fifth and Forbes Avenues. More information can be found at www.GetTherePgh.org. ## ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN An excellent multi-modal transportation network – integrated with the Future Land Use Plan – that: * Efficiently connects all people to jobs, schools and activities * Supports mobility of existing communities * Provides efficient access to proposed development * Facilitates the movement of people, services and freight * Is well maintained in a cost effective and rational manner, and * Utilizes smart techniques and strategies to achieve goals while stretching available road and bridge funds. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Roadways and Bridges portion of the Transportation Plan are to: **A.** Support the Future Land Use Plan through strategic prioritization of transportation system maintenance and operations. Funds for new road capacity will be scarce, and those types of projects must be considered very judiciously within the framework of the guiding principles of the Plan. **B.** Target transportation investments to support job and housing growth as shown on the Future Land Use map. **C.** Use demand management strategies to reduce highway congestion. Encourage options of telecommuting, ridesharing, staggered work weeks, flex-time, intelligent transportation systems and many other related techniques. **D.** Coordinate transportation systems, modes and facilities to increase connectivity and mobility for all, including car, truck, barge, pedestrian, transit, rail, air, roads and bridges, bicycle, etc. **E.** Protect and enhance the environment by promoting energy conservation, emissions reduction and use of alternative fuels. **F.** Review County road and bridge ownership in addition to operation and maintenance practices to identify ways to improve efficiencies. **G.** Use efficient and creative funding strategies such as public/private partnerships, privatization, and leveraging current and future assets. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Support the Future Land Use Plan through Strategic Prioritization of Transportation System Maintenance and Operations** The 'Places' designated in the Future Land Use Plan will be accessible via the traditional County system of circumferential belt roadways. Roadways will provide # CHAPTER 4 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES vital linkages between Places to facilitate commuting to jobs and schools, and for shopping, entertainment, and cultural and recreational trips. This will be accomplished by utilizing as many mode options as are practical. To provide good mobility and connectivity from Place to Place and to further connect these Places to the region, we need to maintain our existing roadway system and provide intermodal and multi-modal connections where feasible. New capacity projects would be generally limited to transit and private development of access roadways to new development. Similarly, upgrades to the system of limited-access highways should be undertaken. In general, these roadway projects should: * Identify and promote improvements on congested corridors that are consistent with *Allegheny Places*. * Identify projects to improve the capacity of existing roadways consistent with *Allegheny Places*. Make sure complete streets are incorporated with accommodations for ADA, walkers, bicyclists, transit users, etc. * Perform access management studies for corridors (see full list in next paragraph) designated in the Future Land Use Plan, and adopt access management ordinances. * Develop modified grid street systems for best circulation in designated Places where they are feasible within topographic constraints; and once again, provide for complete streets. * Ensure that Places can be accessed by existing roadway systems and other transportation modes. In addition, a key recommendation of the Plan is the completion of access management plans and their implementation for U.S. Routes 19, 22 and 30, and PA Routes 8, 28, 48, 50, 51 60, 65 and 88. Access management measures will allow these arterial roadways to function effectively as thoroughfares and provide a high level of accessibility for Places, as well as for current and future development along each of the identified roadway corridors. Places themselves need to have effective systems of roadways and complete streets to allow circulation within each Place (by various modes) and to connect to external systems of roads, transit and trails. The Future Land Use Plan shows a number of locations for new Places where a modified street grid would work, but most are existing centers, to be reinforced and revitalized. For existing centers, the challenge will be to optimize the existing roadway system so that a balance is achieved between the movement of motorized vehicles and the establishment of transit, pedestrian and bicycle-friendly streetscapes, which are key to retaining current residents and attracting new residents, employment and activity. Most Places are to be closely-knit, mixed-use centers of residences, shopping, employment, community facilities and open space. For new Places, a hierarchy of roads should be planned to provide for the intended walkable and transit-supportive character for these locations. Arterial, collector, boulevard, commercial, residential and alley types of roadways should be in the mix, with appropriate functions, design speeds, rights-of-way and cross-sections. A grid or modified grid of streets with small blocks is widely recognized as the most supportive for pedestrian and bicycle mobility and creates the most flexible kind of network for cars, trucks and buses as well. Master plans, design guidelines and development codes should be completed for new Places in particular, to ensure that roadways are constructed as ‘complete streets’, with sidewalks, crosswalks, landscaping, pedestrian-oriented lighting, provisions for transit stops and bicycle movement and, in most cases, on-street parking. ## B. Target Transportation Investments to Support Job and Housing Growth Transportation investments should be targeted to support the job and housing growth identified on the Future Land Use map. SPC has set up the following investment categories that can help guide where # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES transportation funding is spent, based on desired development patterns and need for improvements within the County. ### Capital Maintenance * Roadway Preservation or Reconstruction * Bridge Preservation and Reconstruction/Replacement ### Traffic Operations and Safety * **Efficiency/Operations** – Projects that improve traffic flow, reduce congestion, and improve the operational characteristics of the existing transportation system. * **Travel Demand Management** – Projects such as carpooling, vanpooling, emergency ride-home programs, telecommuting, commuter benefit strategies, parking incentives, park-n-ride lots, job access reverse commute programs, and other nontraditional types of projects that work to affect the demand side of transportation systems. * **Safety** – While virtually every transportation project improves safety by bringing the transportation network up to current design standards, these are stand-alone projects to address specific safety issues. Several major roadway improvement projects are recommended for Allegheny County, although the effects of these projects will be felt on a regional level. Table 41.7 shows the projects from the TIP and SPC’s 2040 Transportation and Development Plan which will assist in the advancement of the Future Land Use Plan in Allegheny County. The following projects from the 2030 Transportation and Development Plan have been completed. For more information on the 2030 Plan, please visit www.spcregion.org * Parkway West Interstate 376 Designation Campbells Run Road Widening and Tunnel Upgrades I-79 / I-376 Interchange Ramps * I-79 Complete Warrendale Interchange * Parkway East SR 286 * Route 28 I-279 Connector Etna Interchange Fox Chapel Interchange Third Lane Widening north of Harmarville * Route 51 West End Bridge Direct Connection * Route 837 McKeesport / Duquesne Bridge Ramps * Major Bridge Maintenance / Upgrades Hulton Bridge Rankin Bridge Mansfield Bridge 30 / Greensburg Pike Bridge Roberto Clemente / Andy Warhol / Rachel Carson Bridges 10th Street Bridge There are also a number of projects from the 2030 Plan undertaken by the City of Pittsburgh that have been completed or programmed for completion that can be referenced at www.spcregion.org The PA Turnpike Commission’s Mon Fayette Expressway, completed in July 2012, stretches 70 miles southward from Allegheny County through the Monongahela River Valley to Interstate 68 near Morgantown, West Virginia. The highway will improve access to economically depressed Mon River towns, and support brownfield reclamation and redevelopment efforts in these communities. Additional funding to complete the project sections in Allegheny County is being sought through innovative means by the PA Turnpike Commission. Privatization or public/private partnership arrangements are being explored. The funding source for PA Turnpike projects is separate from the sources for municipalities, the County and PennDOT, although Turnpike projects must appear on the TIP. The Carrie Furnace site is comprised of over 90 buildable acres of eco-industrial/flex-office park that will complement the riverfront adjacent Homestead # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES **TABLE 41.7 – 2040 Long Range Transportation and Development Plan, Allegheny County Projects** | Project Corridor | Description | Investment ($M) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Roadway Capital Maintenance** | | | | SR 28 | Creighton to Butler County Line | $24.8 | | SR 50 | Washington County Line to Miller Run | $15.0 | | SR 65 | Ft. Duquesne Bridge to California Ave | $45.0 | | SR 3069 | Liberty Tunnel Rehabilitation | $39.9 | | Allegheny Riverfront Infrastructure Projects | Allegheny Riverfront Infrastructure Projects | $38.4 | | Pittsburgh CBD Street Reconstruction | Pittsburgh CBD Street Reconstruction | $113.4 | | Roadway Capital Maintenance Reserve Line | Roadway Capital Maintenance Reserve Line | | | Item for Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence | Item for Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence | | | Counties | Counties | $1,922.8 | | **Traffic Operations and Safety** | | | | U.S. 19 | Pine Creek to Wallace | $19.6 | | S.R. 51 / S.R. 88 | Intersection Improvements | $18.1 | | I-279 | Parkway North Operational Improvements | $11.6 | | I-376 | Parkway East Operational Improvements | $5.8 | | I-376 | Parkway West Operational Improvements | $16.9 | | City of Pittsburgh Traffic Signal System | City of Pittsburgh Traffic Signal System | | | Upgrades | Upgrades | $73.6 | | Painters Run Road | Bower Hill Rd to Robb Hollow | $22.7 | | Traffic Operations and Safety Line Item for | Traffic Operations and Safety Line Item for | | | Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence Counties | Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence Counties | $1,607.7 | # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES **TABLE 4I.7 cont'd - 2040 Long Range Transportation and Development Plan, Allegheny County Projects** | Project Corridor | Description | Investment ($M) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Bridge Capital Maintenance** | | | | S.R. 8 | Butler Street Bridge over Heths Run | $11.3 | | U.S. 30 | Ardmore Blvd Bridge over Electric Ave | $12.0 | | S.R. 51 | West Carson Street Viaduct Replacement | $16.1 | | S.R. 65 | Marshall Interchange Rehabilitation | $59.3 | | S.R. 2085 | Birmingham Bridge Rehabilitation | $34.9 | | S.R. 3069 | Liberty Bridge Preservation | $41.0 | | S.R. 3104 | McKees Rocks Bridge Phase 2 | $18.0 | | Glenwood Interchange Bridges | Glenwood Interchange Bridges | $25.7 | | Triboro Interchange Bridges | Triboro Interchange Bridges | $23.5 | | Roberto Clemente Bridge Rehabilitation | Roberto Clemente Bridge Rehabilitation | $23.0 | | Andy Warhol Bridge Rehabilitation | Andy Warhol Bridge Rehabilitation | $23.0 | | Rachel Carson Bridge Rehabilitation | Rachel Carson Bridge Rehabilitation | $23.0 | | Charles Anderson Bridge | Charles Anderson Bridge | $19.8 | | Coraopolis Bridge Rehabilitation | Coraopolis Bridge Rehabilitation | $16.0 | | Dookers Hollow Bridge | Dookers Hollow Bridge | $15.0 | | Fleming Park Bridge Rehabilitation | Fleming Park Bridge Rehabilitation | $15.0 | | Glenwood Bridge Rehabilitation | Glenwood Bridge Rehabilitation | $19.0 | | Greenfield Avenue #39 Bridge Replacement | Greenfield Avenue #39 Bridge Replacement | $18.8 | | Greensburg Pike Bridge Reconstruction / | Greensburg Pike Bridge Reconstruction / | | | Turtle Creek | Turtle Creek | $23.2 | | Mansfield Bridge Rehabilitation | Mansfield Bridge Rehabilitation | $35.7 | | S. 10th Street Bridge Rehabilitation | S. 10th Street Bridge Rehabilitation | $24.4 | | Sixteenth Street Bridge Rehabilitation | Sixteenth Street Bridge Rehabilitation | $18.0 | | Bridge Capital Maintenance Reserve Line | Bridge Capital Maintenance Reserve Line Item for | | | Item for Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence | Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence Counties | | | $3,859.9 | | | | Counties | | | | **New Capacity, Highways, and** | | | | **Bridges** | | | | S.R. 28 | Widening / I-579 to East Ohio Street | $13.6 | | S.R. 28 | Troy Hill to 31st Street Bridge | $38.0 | | S.R. 286 | Widening, S.R. 22 to S.R. 380 | $93.2 | | S.R. 2031 | Lincoln Way Improvement | $10.1 | | S.R. 2082 | Hulton Road Bridge Replacement | $101.2 | | Campbells Run Road Improvements | Campbells Run Road Improvements | $20.8 | | Other New Capacity Projects for TIP Period | Other New Capacity Projects for TIP Period for | | | for Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence | Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence Counties | | | $18.7 | | | | Counties | | | **Note:** The 2040 plan is now available on the SPC website, **www.spcregion.org**. There are updates to the region's long range plan (LRP) every two years. Allegheny Places will be a continually updated plan, and will incorporate changes at regular intervals, but those changes may appear on the SPC website earlier. # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES Waterfront development. The Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny County (RAAC) is encouraging the incorporation of the principles set forth by U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) including promoting the sustainability in how buildings are designed, built, and operated (including LEED certification for all future development on the site). Access to the proposed site is to be provided via a full access signalized intersection which will connect the Carrie Furnace site to Kenmawr Avenue directly across from the southbound ramps to Rankin Bridge, creating a new four-legged intersection. A second site access may be pursued at a later date in conjunction with the additional development that is anticipated. This access, if pursued, will require refurbishment of the existing Hot Metal Bridge to provide vehicular access to SR 0837 via an access drive that will connect to Waterfront Drive, just north of the existing structure. In addition to the existing sidewalk network and numerous transit routes that serve the project site, there are other multimodal components of the proposed site. The site access roadway will contain a 10’ bicycle lane / side path that will connect directly to the proposed site. Once on site, a trail will be constructed that will run along the river and connect to the Braddock and Rankin areas. There will also be a connection along the railroad track to Old Brown’s Hill Road. In addition to constructing a new trail, the RAAC also anticipates incorporating “sharrows” on roadways towards the Rankin and Braddock areas. In future phases of development, this trail will possibly traverse the Hot Metal Bridge and connect to the Waterfront area and the Great Allegheny Passage Trail. The proposed site also has the potential for freight / river port access. A main line for CSX travels along the northern boundary of the site. Allegheny County has been in preliminary negotiations with CSX for potential design incorporations of rail access onto the site. The site currently has 6 river cells available for future usage. The current Waterfront Permit allows for each cell to support between 3 to 6 barges a piece. The RAAC has currently engaged an existing barging company to occupy these structures and maintain them. Preliminary discussions have also been held with the Port Authority of Allegheny County to offer shuttle service from the Swissvale Station to the site. C. **Use Demand Management Strategies to Reduce Highway Congestion** Demand Management Strategies can result in a more efficient use of the County’s transportation system and resources. Table 41.8 lists several possible strategies to employ throughout the County to assist in reducing congestion as well as unsafe travel conditions. D. **Coordinate Transportation Systems, Modes and Facilities to Increase Connectivity and Mobility** A common roadway attribute for all the Future Land Use Plan places are signalized intersections. Upgrading signalized intersections, along with an ongoing retiming and coordination program, will yield the most cost-effective results of any other type of transportation improvement. Numerous Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) studies have shown how a dedicated traffic signal coordination program can yield consistent benefits in terms of reduced travel time and increased fuel savings. On average, the retiming of one signalized intersection can result in an annual fuel savings of 4,000 gallons of fuel. At current fuel prices, this translates into a savings of $14,760 per year assuming $3.69 per gallon. This savings is likely to increase with rising fuel prices. SPC has a full time staff person to assist municipalities with signal retiming projects. Effective use of this available resource is important and can be requested by contacting SPC (www.spcregion.org) E. **Protect and Enhance the Environment by Promoting Energy Conservation, Emissions Reduction and Use of Alternative Fuels** Clean air is an important part of a healthy environment. Unfortunately, many industrial and transportation activities that sustain our economy can also produce air pollutant emissions which degrade our air quality and threaten our environment. Safeguarding our air from such contamination is an important priority of PennDOT and Allegheny County. # CHAPTER 4 # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program is a funding mechanism that provides funds for congestion mitigation transportation projects that provide air quality benefits by reducing emissions. This program currently is valued at approximately $90 million for each TIP period. Criteria have been developed to determine eligible TIP projects (see Table 41.9 for CMAQ Eligible Project Categories). SPC performs Air Quality conformity analysis for projects on the TIP and in the LRP to assist in determining project eligibility. These projects include the following: ■ Diesel Engine Retrofit ■ Signal Upgrades ■ Traffic Flow Improvements ■ Travel Demand Management Strategies ■ Ride Sharing Programs ■ Pedestrian and Bicycle Programs TABLE 41.8 – Demand Management Strategies | | | | :--- | :--- | | **Alternative Work Schedules** | Flextime, Compressed Work Week (CWW), and staggered shifts | | **Bike/Transit Integration** | Ways to integrate bicycling and public transit | | **Bus Rapid Transit** | Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems provide high quality bus service on busy urban corridors | | **Carsharing** | Vehicle rental services that substitute for private vehicle ownership | | **Cycling Improvements** | Strategies for improving bicycle transport including safe, separate facilities | | **Flextime** | Flexible daily work schedules | | **Guaranteed Ride Home** | An occasional subsidized ride home for commuters who use alternative modes | | **Individual Actions for Efficient Transport** | Actions that individuals can take to increase transport system efficiency | | **Nonmotorized Facility Management** | Best practices for managing nonmotorized facilities such as walkways, sidewalks and paths | | **Nonmotorized Planning** | Planning for walking, cycling, and their variants | | **Park & Ride** | Providing convenient parking at transit and rideshare stations | | **Pedestrian Improvements** | Strategies for improving walking conditions | | **Ridesharing** | Encouraging carpooling and vanpooling | | **Shuttle Services** | Shuttle buses, jitneys and free transit zones | | **Taxi Service Improvements** | Strategies for improving taxi services | | **Telework (Telecommuting, Distance-Learning, etc.)** | Use of telecommunications as a substitute for physical travel | | **Traffic Calming** | Roadway designs that reduce vehicle traffic speeds and volumes | Source: Victoria Transport Institute # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES * Education and Outreach * Transit and Public Transportation Programs * Inspection and Maintenance Programs * Extreme Cold Start Programs * Alternative "Clean" Fuels * Flex-Time and Telecommuting The County can inform and educate the public on ways to protect the environment. Allegheny County can lead by example and, for instance, use alternative fuels in its vehicle fleet and continue to advance CMAQ projects in the process described above. **F. Review County Road and Bridge Ownership to Identify Ways to Improve Operation and Maintenance Efficiencies** The County owns and maintains over 810 linear lane miles of roadways. In addition, there are 130 municipalities that own and maintain roadways. This large number of public works departments complicates the coordination of maintenance activities in the county. The ownership patterns are disjointed and should be reviewed to determine the best way to rationalize the system. One option for defining road ownership within the County is to use the Federal Functional Classification System as a guide. If this classification system is used, the State would maintain, at a minimum, all Interstate Highways, other Freeways and Expressways, other Principal Arterial Highways and Minor Arterials outside the boundaries of the City of Pittsburgh. In addition, it assumes the State will maintain all of the major highway/bridge river crossings within these functional classifications, whether inside or outside of the City of Pittsburgh limits. Under the current road ownership situation in Allegheny County, the State owns highways in all functional classifications including local roads. Under this proposal, Allegheny County Public Works road ownership would consist of a combination of Urban Collectors or Rural Major Collectors, Rural Minor Collectors and Local Roads. These same roadway classifications could also be owned by the City of Pittsburgh or local municipalities. In addition to the roadways mentioned above, the following bridges should also be owned by PennDOT, based on their functional classification and traffic volumes: * Mansfield Bridge * Homestead Grays Bridge * Rankin Bridge * Glenwood Bridge * Rachel Carson Bridge * Andy Warhol Bridge * Roberto Clemente Bridge * Sixteenth Street Bridge * South Tenth Street Bridge * Windgap Bridge *(See the full report, Allegheny County Road and Bridge Ownership Valuation Report in the Supporting Documents.)* **G. Use Efficient and Creative Funding Strategies** Construction of new roadways for Places is likely to be completed by a number of different means. Roadways for new Places may be built by private developers in accordance with locally-adopted master plans, design guidelines and development codes, and then dedicated to a municipality. Some projects may be constructed or upgraded as part of public-private partnerships. For example, there are investment opportunities associated with the Downtown to Oakland Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has legislation in place to govern the use of Public/Private Partnerships (P3s) to fund public improvements. # ROADWAYS AND BRIDGES | TABLE 4I.9 - CMAQ Eligible Project Categories | | | :--- | :--- | | **Transit and Public Transportation Programs** | CMAQ funds may be used to support the use of public transportation: service or system expansion; provision of new transit service; and financial incentives to use existing transit services. | | **Traffic Flow Improvements** | This strategy reduces emissions by promoting efficient traffic movement, thereby reducing unproductive travel delays and emissions resulting from engine idling. There are many ways to reduce and improve air quality by improving traffic flow. | | **Travel Demand Management Strategies** | The demand for transportation can be moderated by adopting policy incentives that minimize the aggregate number of single occupancy vehicle trips and miles traveled. | | **Ride Sharing Programs** | Ride sharing programs are designed to increase vehicle occupancy in an attempt to reduce emissions. This can be achieved by minimizing the total number of vehicles on the road and these programs are most effective for commuting purposes. | | **Pedestrian and Bicycle Programs** | No mobile source emissions are produced by travelers using bicycles or walking; therefore, programs that promote these options are eligible for CMAQ funds. | | **Education and Outreach** | CMAQ funding may be used to increase public knowledge of transportation-related emissions and opportunities to reduce them through mitigation strategies and improved transportation choices. | | **Inspection and Maintenance Programs** | Poor engine maintenance and malfunctioning of pollution control equipment can significantly increase the amount of emissions released per vehicle. Consequently, CMAQ funds may be used to introduce, conduct and provide start-up costs for automobile inspection and maintenance programs. | | **Extreme Cold Start Programs** | CMAQ funds may be directed towards the development and implementation of programs that are designed to reduce or mitigate excessive cold start emissions. | | **Alternative ‘Clean’ Fuels** | For CMAQ purposes, an ‘alternative’ fuel must reduce emissions to be eligible. These fuels can include natural gas, ethanol, methanol, electricity and liquefied propane gas. | | **Public/Private Partnerships** | Partnerships between public and private enterprises can leverage scarce funding resources by allowing private firms to own or operate a service developed with public funds. | | **Experimental Pilot Projects** | Experimental pilot projects are innovative initiatives that are designed to provide a funding mechanism for well thought out strategies that extend beyond current experience and are not explicitly eligible under the law. | Source: Federal Highway Administration # CHAPTER 4 # PUBLIC TRANSIT ## TODAY'S CONDITIONS Despite slow population growth and increasing suburbanization, mass transit remains a vital public service to residents and businesses in Allegheny County. We have a higher percentage of people (young people in particular) who commute to work in downtown by transit than most other places. According to the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, 54% of the workers commuting to Downtown Pittsburgh use public transit, a higher percentage than most other urban areas. In non-CBD travel, roughly 25-30% of travelers to Oakland use transit. ## PORT AUTHORITY The Port Authority of Allegheny County provides public transportation services throughout the County, plus minor portions of Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties – a 775 square-mile service area. In Fiscal Year 2012, the Port Authority provided 65,329,230 passenger trips (see Table 4I.10). The following is a summary of Port Authority operations as of February 2012: * Utilizing a fleet of about 700 buses, all equipped with bicycle racks, and 83 light rail vehicles, the Port Authority operates 98 local and express fixed bus routes and four light rail routes. Port Authority also owns and operates the Monongahela Incline and leases the Duquesne Incline to the nonprofit Society for Preservation of the Duquesne Heights Incline; Port Authority service is provided seven days a week with many routes operating between 6am and 1am. * An extensive network of local buses serving nearly all City of Pittsburgh neighborhoods and most municipalities of Allegheny County. While service connects these communities to downtown Pittsburgh, a few routes also provide direct access to Oakland. Some routes provide feeder service with links to mainline routes to Pittsburgh. Other routes provide crosstown service, the most notable of which is 54 route linking the South Side, Oakland, Strip District and North Side without passing through downtown Pittsburgh. * The Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway is a 9.1-mile bus rapid transit guideway linking downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland and the City of Pittsburgh’s East End <
> Photo credit: Richard Layman | TABLE 4I.10 – Public Transit Ridership, FY 2012 | | | :--- | :--- | | **TRANSIT MODE** | **PASSENGERS** | | BUS | 55,704,706 | | LRT | 7,130,433 | | MONONGAHELA INCLINE | 723,478 | | ACCESS | 1,770,613 | | **TOTAL** | **65,329,230** | # PUBLIC TRANSIT neighborhoods as well as many of Allegheny County’s eastern suburbs. Most of its nine stations interface with local bus routes and many of the East Busway routes provide convenient transfers to Port Authority’s light rail transit (LRT) system in downtown Pittsburgh. At Penn Station, riders can transfer to other regional operators serving Pittsburgh as well as to Amtrak and Greyhound. * The West Busway is a five-mile fixed-guideway facility for buses that connects communities in western Allegheny County with downtown Pittsburgh. The West Busway also links these areas to Pittsburgh International Airport via Route 28X. It has great potential for a large park and ride, intercept garage at Carnegie utilizing existing busway ramps to ease congestion on Parkway West. * The South Busway is a 4.3-mile bus facility that connects downtown Pittsburgh and the South Hills, in cluding the South Side Trail; it interfaces with the South Hills and Library ‘T’ lines. * The 26.2-mile South Hills LRT system, also known as the ‘T’, links downtown Pittsburgh with Station Square and southern communities in the City of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. The downtown portion of the system is a subway. In addition to several park-and-ride lots in the South Hills, it provides intermodal connectivity to the South Busway, South Side Trail south of downtown Pittsburgh and to East Busway and West Busway routes in downtown Pittsburgh. Intermodal connections to a parking garage and the Eliza Furnace Trail are possible at the First Avenue Station. The North Shore Connector opened for revenue service on March 25, 2012 and preliminary ridership data suggests a 30% increase in average weekly ridership. * A 1.1-mile High Occupancy Vehicle facility through the Wabash Tunnel connects Route 51 (at Woodruff Street) and West Carson Street (at Station Square). It is intended as a reliever for Route 51 and Parkway West traffic to South Side and Downtown. * The Monongahela Incline linking Station Square with Mount Washington provides connections to the LRT system and the South Busway. The Duquesne Incline, operated by the Society for the Preservation of the Duquesne Heights Incline and located about one mile to the west of the Monongahela Incline, also serves Mt. Washington and connects to bus routes, some of which operate on the West Busway. * ACCESS is a shared ride transportation service for senior citizens and persons with disabilities. * There are nearly 13,000 park-and-ride lot spaces at 52 locations available to Port Authority users. The locations of the park-and-ride facilities are shown on Map 41.4. The locations of the park-and-ride facilities are shown on Map 41.4. ## RIDERSHIP TRENDS Each weekday, transit provides approximately 230,000 passenger trips. While the share of workers that use public transportation to commute, as a percentage of all workers in the County, has decreased from 24% in 1960 to 9.9% in 2010 overall (based upon US Census journey to work estimates), the percentage of workers that commute to the County’s urban core is between 25% (Oakland) and 54% (Downtown) of all commuting trips. This high rate of transit commuting has been facilitated by major capital improvements such as the East Busway, the South Busway, the West Busway, and the rehabilitation of the South Hills light rail system as well as an extensive network of local buses linking most parts of Allegheny County with downtown Pittsburgh. <
> Figure 41.4 shows that use of transit is highly dependent on what area is being traveled to. The Central Business District (CBD) captures 36.8% of the trips via transit, whereas in the County as a whole, only 8.9% of the trips are made via transit (based upon SPC’s 24-hour 2013 trip estimates). Changes to service levels occurred in 2007 due to funding constraints. In June 2007, Port Authority implemented a 15% reduction in service. This was followed by another 15% reduction in service in March 2011. In July 2007, the state passed Act 44, which established additional future operational funding mechanisms for the state’s transit agencies, including the authority to establish a local dedicated tax assessed on rental cars and poured drinks. However, because the law did not generate the expected level of funding, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed legislation at the end of 2013 that provides new revenues for mass transit. # Park and Ride Lots <
> # Park and Ride Lots ## LEGEND **Park and Ride Lots** * Park and Ride Lots **Base Map** * Allegheny County Boundary * Municipal Boundaries * Bordering Counties * Hydrology * Major Roadways * Proposed Roads ## DATA SOURCES Allegheny County Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Port Authority of Allegheny County National Hydrography Dataset August 2013 Update This map is property of Allegheny County and should be used for reference purposes only. This map was prepared for: Rich Fitzgerald, Allegheny County Executive Allegheny County Economic Development - Planning Division Map 4I.4 # CHAPTER 4 # PUBLIC TRANSIT <
> Source: SPC Also contributing to the high rate of transit usage is the high number of transit dependent individuals in Allegheny County. According to the 2010 Census, there were 75,342 households (14.4%) in Allegheny County who did not have vehicles. In 2010, Allegheny County accounted for 10.6% of the households in the Commonwealth. This and the following data indicate that Allegheny County’s residents are more dependent on transit than the region as a whole, the state, the nation and most metro areas. **Here are some other percentages of 0-vehicle households:** *In Allegheny County, there is a greater diversity of income groups using transit than in other similarly-sized metropolitan areas due to the reasons listed below.* * Port Authority’s LRT and busway systems provide service which is time competitive with automobile travel * The relatively high cost of parking in Downtown and Oakland makes transit, even with its current fares, an economic alternative to automobiles * The relatively limited highway network results in severe congestion on key arterials leading to Downtown and Oakland, thus reducing the convenience of commuting by automobiles * The continued prominence of Oakland and Downtown as a share of regional employment makes them also the locations where transit is most effective * Many universities and colleges generate significant ridership from students and staff associated with these institutions through use of free transit passes. | | | | :--- | :--- | | City of Pittsburgh | 25.6% | | 10-County SPC Region | 12.6% | | Philadelphia County | 33.6% | | 5-County SEPTA Service Area | 16.7% | | Pennsylvania | 11.4% | | United States | 8.9% | **Other Benchmark Metro Area Counties:** | | | | :--- | :--- | | Atlanta (Fulton County) | 12.2% | | Cleveland (Cuyahoga County) | 13.1% | | Denver County | 12.6% | | Detroit (Wayne County) | 12.7% | | Houston (Harris County) | 7.1% | # PUBLIC TRANSIT Milwaukee County | 13.4% --- | --- Minneapolis (Hennepin County) | 10.4% St. Louis | 6.3% Seattle (King County) | 9.0% ## OTHER PUBLIC TRANSIT PROVIDERS Public transportation providers in six surrounding counties offer routes that serve destinations in Allegheny County, primarily downtown Pittsburgh. These operators have routes converging at Penn Station on the Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway, facilitating transfers with the Port Authority’s routes and with other regional services. Mountain Line Transit, taking over a route discontinued by Greyhound in 2005, operates a route between Morgantown, WV and Pittsburgh. Additionally, there are numerous other agencies, organizations and schools that directly or indirectly provide transportation for their clients and customers. SPC, through the Regional Strategic Vision for Public Transportation Serving Southwestern Pennsylvania, has provided several recommendations for improving the regional transit operation. These include a seamless fare box collection system, which would allow passengers to travel between modes and operators, Transit-Oriented Developments, and Intelligent Transportation Systems, which improve management and operations of transportation systems through the use of computers and communication technology. Currently five regional transit providers are participating in the program. Downtown Pittsburgh is an intermodal hub where County residents can access both rail and bus intercity transportation services as well as Port Authority transit vehicles at Penn Station on the East Busway. ### Greyhound A new intermodal facility includes access to Greyhound buses, parking, transit and the Amtrak train station and is adjacent to the PAAC East Busway. The Greyhound Terminal is in the new Grant Street Transportation Center located between Liberty and Penn Avenues at 11th Street in downtown Pittsburgh. Greyhound’s routes serving Pittsburgh include direct service to New York City, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Harrisburg, State College, Wheeling, Erie, Columbus, St. Louis, Kansas City, Denver, Cleveland and Chicago. ### MegaBus Megabus, a new low-cost intercity bus company, began serving Pittsburgh in 2010. A year later, Megabus designated Pittsburgh as one of its operating hubs and is planning an additional stop. For every trip Megabus offers a small number of very low fares at $1.00 and $5.00. However, even Megabus’ highest fares are typically less than those of Greyhound and Amtrak. To keep fares low, Megabus routes typically avoid smaller communities between large endpoint cities and, in most locations, do not use terminals. Megabus’s current Pittsburgh stop is the David Lawrence Convention Center. Megabus’ routes serving Pittsburgh include direct service to New York City, Philadelphia, Washington, DC, Harrisburg, State College, Morgantown, Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit and Ann Arbor. <
> ### Amtrak From its station at Liberty and Grant Avenues in Downtown Pittsburgh, Amtrak serves Allegheny County with two intercity train routes. The Pennsylvanian Route provides daily service between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, and onward to Philadelphia and New York City. The Capitol Limited provides daily service linking Chicago, Toledo, # PUBLIC TRANSIT Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Washington, D.C. The Amtrak station is adjacent to the Penn Station of the East Busway where intermodal connections can be made to transit service provided by the Port Authority and the region's other transit operators. Across Liberty Avenue from the Amtrak station is the Grant Street Transportation Center. A provision of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 requires states to assume responsibility for routes of 750 miles or less. Unless the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania finds the funds to continue operation of the Pennsylvanian, the future of this service will be in jeopardy. ## Other Private Bus Companies Several other private carriers operate scheduled bus service to and within Allegheny County. Fullington Trailways provides service between Pittsburgh and central Pennsylvania. Myers Coach Lines operates commuter service Super Shuttle provides shared ride door-to-door service from the Pittsburgh International Airport to hotels, residences, and businesses in the City of Pittsburgh and other locations in the Allegheny County and the region. Numerous shuttles are operated by the University of Pittsburgh, UPMC, Carnegie Mellon and others. ## CURRENT TRANSIT FUNDING For the Port Authority, the past several years have been marked by on-going budget difficulties. The operating budget of the Port Authority transit system is funded by passenger fares, marketing revenues, Allegheny County, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Federal government (use of Federal funds for operating expenses is limited to a few very specific types of expenses). Over the past several years, these funding sources became inadequate to cover the agency's operating expenses due to a wide variety of factors. One reason that funding did not cover operating expenses is that the Port Authority has been facing increasing costs. Costs for fuel, health care, and retirement benefits have grown rapidly in recent years. To make operations more cost effective, Port Authority undertook the Transit Development Plan, a comprehensive assessment of the bus route network. Most of the Plan was implemented in 2010 and 2011. Additionally, while costs have been escalating, revenues have not kept pace with inflation. In recent years, the Port Authority responded to these challenges by curtailing underutilized services, eliminating administrative staff (sharply reducing retirement obligations) and requiring employee health care contributions. In 2007, the Pennsylvania legislature passed Act 44, which was intended to address some shortfalls in the state transportation budget. It authorized a fifty-year partnership between the PA Turnpike Commission and PennDOT which would have provided $83.3 billion for investment in transportation. A majority of this funding was to be used statewide to repair roads and bridges; in addition, all of the state's urban and rural transit agencies would have received increased, stable and performance-driven funding annually. However, in July 2010, Act 44 revenue dropped from $922 million to $450 million annually, due to the Commonwealth's application to toll I-80 not being approved by FHWA. Because of this, there was a significant gap in projected versus actual transit funding from Act 44 beginning in 2010. Table 4I.11 shows the additional funding Act 44 generated from FY 2009 to FY 2012. ### TABLE 4I.11 - Additional Transit Funding from Act 44 | Year | Total | Transit | Highway/Bridges | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | FY 2009 | $850M | $350M | $500M | | FY 2010 | $900M | $400M | $500M | | FY 2011 | $450M | $250M | $200M | | FY 2012 | $450M | $250M | $200M | Source: PennDOT # PUBLIC TRANSIT Six years later, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed a new piece of legislation to provide a comprehensive transportation funding package for roads and bridges, mass transit, and multimodal transportation. Act 89, passed at the end of 2013, is expected to stave off crippling service cuts in the near term. Funding for mass transit will increase gradually over five years. By year five, statewide transit funding will total approximately $480 million. Transit is a large portion of the County's budget and provision of additional matching funds is not easy to achieve. The City, as is the case with all local municipalities in Allegheny County, does not contribute to transit or the transit match. Act 44 also authorized second class counties (Allegheny) to implement two separate taxes to generate the County's local match for the State funding. The taxes, in effect now, include a tax on poured drinks and a tax on rental vehicles. ## FUNDING SOURCES SPC, as the designated MPO for the Pittsburgh Transportation Management Area, works with member counties to develop and maintain a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). In addition to highway funding, transit funding involving federal grant programs (such as Title III Programs) and state, county and local match are also included on SPC's TIP. On the current 2013-2016 TIP, the Port Authority is budgeted for $1.2 billion total Title III Program funds (average annual funding = $302.1 M). Funding for transit improvements in Pennsylvania is a combination of federal, state and local monies. Federal funding is provided through MAP-21 Title III. State funding is provided through formulas established in Act 26 of 1991 and amended in Act 3 of 1997. In addition, state capital budget funding is released annually for capital improvements. Major capital transportation projects are a part of the programs developed by the member counties of SPC. The TIP identifies the region's highest priority transportation projects, develops a multi-year program of implementation, and identifies available federal and non-federal funding for the identified projects. The TIP covers a four-year period of investment and is updated every two years by designated planning partners in a collaborative effort of county, local, state and federal agencies, including participation by the general public. Federal transit funding for the planning, construction and operation of transit projects is primarily accessed through three major Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Programs. Brief descriptions of these three programs follow. ### Section 5309 - Fixed Guideway Capital Investment Grants (New Starts) Section 5309 is a discretionary, competitive program that funds new and extended fixed guideway systems, bus rapid transit projects, and core capacity projects to expand capacity in fixed guideway corridors (those that are at or above capacity). Maximum federal share is 80 percent; however, FTA's current policy is to limit the federal share to the range of 50 to 60 percent due to the large number of project applicants. Small Starts projects are limited to a net capital cost of less than $250 million with a maximum federal contribution of $75 million. ### Section 5307 - Urbanized Area Formula Program This program provides funds for planning, capital projects, and job access and reverse commute (JARC) projects that provide transportation to employment activities for low-income individuals. Distribution of Section 5307 funds is by statutory formula to individual urbanized areas. In most circumstances, Section 5307 funds apportioned to urbanized areas with populations of 200,000 and over cannot be used for operating assistance (an exception being the provision of JARC services). The federal share for capital projects is 80 percent and it is 50 percent for operating assistance. ### Section 5339 - Bus and Bus Facilities Section 5339 is a new formula program under Map-21 that provides funding to replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment as well as construct bus-related facilities. Each year, $65.5 million will be allocated, with each state receiving $1.25 million. The remainder will be allocated by formula based on population, vehicle revenue miles, and passenger miles. The program requires a 20 percent local match. # CHAPTER 4 # PUBLIC TRANSIT ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines ways to provide more efficient and effective public transit service in Allegheny County. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Transportation Plan, the Transportation Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * Difficult circulation in and around Oakland * Lack of direct fixed guideway connection between Downtown and Oakland * Lack of direct fixed guideway transit connection between Downtown Pittsburgh and the Airport * Critical need for transit expansion and maintenance in the urban core * Public and political attitudes toward transit * Missing intermodal connections * Lack of efficient system to meet current county needs and population levels * Transit farebox doesn't pay for operating expenses The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### DIFFICULT CIRCULATION IN AND AROUND OAKLAND Oakland is the economic wellspring for future growth of the region due to its concentration of research facilities, universities, hospitals and the potential and current realization of related spin-off companies. Circulation in and around Oakland does not meet the needs of current travelers. This is in spite of the fact that PAAC's transit routes serving Oakland are among the most heavily used in the system with a 25% mode share. There is a very high level of bus service on Fifth and Forbes Avenues which are the two key travel arteries through Oakland. Bus service is available in other areas of Oakland, too. There are also effective connections between Oakland and Downtown, Shadyside, East Liberty and other East End and South Side communities. Improvements to these services are needed for existing and future Oakland transit users. Transit plays a key role in connecting development to the institutions that are driving the growth in Oakland, but an expansion of the transit system is needed to help solve the circulation issues. There are internal mobility problems within the Oakland area that can be addressed by construction of an area circulator system which connects Oakland to Southside, Second Avenue, Bloomfield, Lawrenceville, Shadyside and CMU, bringing together greater Oakland's many assets and allowing the parts to function as a whole. Attracting new technology development, and retaining graduating students to enter the workforce here, is highly dependent on public transportation that is readily-available, and easy to navigate. Transit development efforts should be coordinated with the plans of the major institutions in and near Oakland. For more information see the Transit Action Team Report and Oakland Investment Committee Transit Report in the Supporting Documents. ### LACK OF DIRECT FIXED GUIDEWAY CONNECTION BETWEEN DOWNTOWN AND OAKLAND Transit from Downtown to Oakland will connect the two largest economic generation centers in the region – Pittsburgh and Oakland. A frequent, rapid and efficient fixed-guideway rapid transit connection between the two centers is critical as the County grows the education, medical and technology sectors at the core of regional prosperity. The corridor between town and Oakland is congested, and heavily served by bus transit. Facilitating growth downtown, in Oakland and in between, with excellent infrastructure, is a key component needed to assure future prosperity. To address the need for better connections linking Downtown, Oakland and other eastern neighborhoods in the City, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridor Study has been initiated. Background on BRT is contained in the following section. ### BRT Stations BRT has distinct, safe and comfortable stations with amenities. The stations attract TOD activity. They spur investment and job creation on nearby mixed-use development sites where people can live, work, learn, invest and play. A prime advantage and opportunity along the Downtown Pittsburgh-to-Oakland BRT corridor is that station areas can accommodate pent-up real estate demand associated with the research and development activities of universities, hospitals and related "spin-off" businesses. Funding has been programmed to build a prototype BRT station in Oakland. ### TOD Potential is High Density, Mixed-Use Neighborhoods with Station Area Amenities The goal is to have a BRT corridor system on "complete # PUBLIC TRANSIT streets” with multi-modal accommodation for vehicles, transit, pedestrians and commuter bicycles. This can all be achieved on one street or by utilizing a parallel two-street pair. Ideally, the BRT corridor will include an improved, efficient, easy to understand and ride BRT service, resulting in long-term economic and community development, and a better quality of life, along a mixed-use corridor. BRT and station amenities are key elements for success and require excellent design, marketing and product development to project a strong brand and information, a simple fare system, and transit authority security patrols. Above all, the facilities must be very clean and well maintained. Economic development energizers result from the creation of a multimodal “complete street” corridor, or street pair, which accommodates transit, auto, and safe, separate commuter bike and pedestrian facilities. This includes a branded and coordinated streetscape with great aesthetics. The entire corridor should promote a common theme with unique neighborhood identifiers. Careful attention to aesthetics and details encourage quality transit-related development. Naming rights sales can generate revenue to support the BRT system. A BRT program for landscape standards and maintenance, with annual plantings at station areas, also creates attraction. Along with public art at key locations, selections for integrated art installations such as pavement treatments, lighting, benches and street furniture can assist in making the BRT experience seamless. Streetscapes are effective when coordinated with historic architecture and urban context. Traffic calming, coupled with larger sidewalk width for outdoor café zones, are examples of the type features that create exciting outdoor spaces and help achieve place-making. ### Allegheny County Executive’s Transportation Action Partnership (TAP) The Allegheny County Executive’s Transportation Action Partnership (TAP) was formed in 2008. TAP Co-chairs are: Dennis Davin of Allegheny County, Yarone Zober of the City of Pittsburgh and Dennis Yablonsky of the Allegheny Conference. Other TAP stakeholders include foundations, the Port Authority, PennDOT, universities, medical, research, development, innovation and investment entities, community organizations, labor, business, cultural and other representatives. In 2010, TAP released a prospectus to the international transportation finance industry to gauge interest and help TAP prioritize transit initiatives. The prospectus result, based on analysis of industry input, recommended that TAP’s highest priority project should be BRT Downtown Pittsburgh-to-Oakland. The highlight of the industry response includes five recommendations: (1) a single-purpose owner structure entity should be defined and established; (2) interagency agreements should be defined, and in place, to encourage development; (3) stakeholders should reach consensus on a general public statement of intent; (4) Pennsylvania private public partnership (P-3) enabling legislation is needed to provide a clear framework for developers and (5) it is very effective to secure major stakeholder/user commitments to develop a defined quantity of real estate over a specific time period. BRT has the potential to transform the urban landscape along the Downtown Pittsburgh-to-Oakland corridor. TAP is currently working with the Port Authority, and many other stakeholders, to advance the BRT. Appropriately implemented, BRT does more than attract new riders. It assists in place-making; improves connections; creates more attractive, safer streets; is more convenient and provides connectivity for all modes of transport, including pedestrians and bicyclists. All of these factors work together to create safe, vibrant, multiuse places with people out-on-the-street. Importantly, in the Oakland area, the BRT corridor boasts medical and high tech initiatives which average over a billion dollars in research and development funding annually. Oakland is generally considered to be “built-out”, but the research dollars create a huge unmet demand for nearby Class “A” office and R+D facilities. Further development is also constrained by traffic congestion and severely limited parking. A BRT upgrade along this corridor will reduce automobile dependency and create new opportunities to accommodate pent-up real estate demand. In 2010, TAP stakeholders traveled to Cleveland to experience the Euclid Corridor HealthLine BRT. HealthLine was built cost effectively and operates successfully. HealthLine has stimulated $5 billion worth of development (TOD) at stations along a 6-mile corridor. Like our Downtown Pittsburgh-to-Oakland corridor, it connects the city, a # PUBLIC TRANSIT redevelopment area and the region's universities /medical /research /cultural complex. Participants in the site visit included: Caren Glotfelty, formerly of The Heinz Endowments; Dan Cessna of PennDOT; Dennis Davin of Allegheny County; Rich Fitzgerald, President, Allegheny County Council in 2010 and currently Allegheny County Executive; Dennis Yablonsky of the Allegheny Conference and Steve Bland, formerly of Port Authority of Allegheny County. The BRT will advance the recommendations of several recent long-range planning studies including: *Going Places* the TAP action plan; *Transit Development Plan* the Port Authority strategic plan; *AlleghenyPlaces* the County comprehensive plan and *ActiveAllegheny* the County commuter bike, pedestrian and complete streets plan. **Downtown - Oakland - East End BRT** The purpose of this effort, titled *Get There Pgh* is to develop a Downtown-Oakland-East End BRT project which would enhance prospects for economic development and community revitalization through transit improvements in the Downtown-Oakland-East End Corridor. This project is being advanced as a collaborative effort among more than 40 stakeholder organizations including the City of Pittsburgh, Allegheny County Economic Development, Allegheny Conference, educational and medical institutions and neighborhood groups such as Uptown Partners and groups representing the Hill District, along with Port Authority. The collaborative effort is being led by Sustainable Pittsburgh. Current ridership in the corridor accounts for almost one-third of Port Authority's total system ridership. Opportunities for incorporating Complete Streets concepts are being investigated. The narrow width of streets and sidewalks throughout much of the corridor poses a challenge for accommodating transit, general traffic, pedestrians, bicyclists, and parking. Conducting an Alternatives Analysis (AA) and the Environmental Assessment (EA) for a BRT project linking Downtown, Oakland and other East End neighborhoods in the City of Pittsburgh will enable the project to qualify for funding under the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Small Starts Program. These studies are slated to be completed in Spring 2014. Although Port Authority currently operates a high level of transit service in this Corridor, this study will investigate the potential for faster, more reliable, more easily understood, and more evenly scheduled trips through the Corridor. This could be accomplished through a program of operational and physical improvements such as stop consolidation, establishment of additional exclusive bus lanes and traffic signal priority at key intersections. Other potential improvements include use of articulated coaches for all service, provision of real-time passenger information, enhanced shelters and special marketing and branding. The AA/EA scope of work includes development and definition of alternative alignments, preparation of capital and operating & maintenance cost estimates, analysis of impacts to the social and economic environment, assessments of transportation impacts including ridership forecasts and analyses of impacts to the physical environment. An extensive program of public outreach and agency coordination has been initiated. The study will also consider financing options including funding contributions from private and institutional sources in the Corridor. Based on the results of the AA/EA analyses, public input and agency involvement, a Locally Preferred Alternative will be selected. This effort will conclude with the submission of the Small Starts or New Starts Criteria to FTA along with a request to FTA for advancing the project into Engineering. More information about this effort can be found on the project website at www.gettherepgh.org **LACK OF DIRECT FIXED GUIDEWAY TRANSIT CONNECTION BETWEEN DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH AND THE AIRPORT** Congestion along Parkway West makes travel to the airport difficult. Planned and recently completed infrastructure improvements offer the promise of a brighter future for the airport corridor. The proposed Southern Beltway will improve access and east-west mobility between the mid-Mon Valley and the Airport, and will assist in transforming the area around the Airport into a major warehouse and distribution center that will create thousands of jobs. The recently completed Findlay Connector, a new highway linking the Airport to Route 22, is spurring the development of more than # PUBLIC TRANSIT 1,500 acres of nearby land. This additional development, and the jobs that will result, will better support conditions conducive to the provision of direct transit service to the airport. The West Busway/28X serves this route, on one-half hour headways. There should be consideration of the extent to which improvements in existing bus service would address the needs of the Airport Corridor in the short term. A new fixed guideway investment is likely years away in this case. Several studies have investigated various alternatives for providing improved transit service from Downtown to Pittsburgh International Airport. Light Rail Transit from Downtown to the Airport utilizing a "Parkway" alignment, or a more direct new route, and establishing a major intermodal hub at a midway point for the West area will provide the best alternative for these reasons: * Provides opportunities for travelers to our area to rapidly connect to Oakland and other essential corridors * Directly serves Pittsburgh International Airport hub, and a midpoint "western" intermodal hub that will distribute commuters to employment centers, educational facilities and other points of interest in western Allegheny County * Supports economic development, land use priorities and redevelopment opportunities along the corridor * Connections from the intermodal hub to Robert Morris University, CCAC West, and many other higher education facilities should be accommodated * Provides most direct and fastest route to Pittsburgh International Airport * Provides a link connecting the downtown subway, North Shore and South Hills LRT and the East Busway Bus Rapid Transit could be an alternative and serve some of the purposes in the interim before an LRT system is funded. A fixed guideway transit connection would provide improved access to the region for travelers, support economic development and land use priorities along the corridor, and provide access to other transit facilities. Furthermore, without convenient and frequent transit, lower-wage workers will continue to face difficulty accessing jobs along the airport corridor. To serve concentrations of jobs in the sprawling environment in the airport corridor, a feeder system of buses or on-demand shuttles connecting to a multi-modal transit hub is needed. ### CRITICAL NEED FOR TRANSIT EXPANSION AND MAINTENANCE IN THE URBAN CORE A large number of commuters to the urban core use public transit on a regular basis. Therefore, it is vital to extend and maintain transit service to Downtown Pittsburgh and to Oakland. The routes that serve the urban core are the heart of the transit system and the revenues from these routes support services in other parts of the County. ### PUBLIC ATTITUDE TOWARD TRANSIT It is a common misconception among non-transit users, and the public in general, that transit is viewed as an expense rather than an investment in the local economy and a key to Allegheny County’s livability. Transit provides vital service to employment centers, shopping, education and medical destinations among others. Port Authority investments in light rail and busways have helped generate new residential and commercial development, such as the Mellon Client Service Center at the Steel Plaza ‘T’ Station in Downtown Pittsburgh, PNC service center at the First Avenue ‘T’ station condominiums above Giant Eagle and Central Medical Commons in Shadyside, and the Eastside development in East Liberty. Additionally, Allegheny County conducted the South Hills TRID planning study for Transit Revitalization Investment Districts in Dormont and Mount Lebanon, to create the conditions for development and redevelopment at and near Port Authority’s ‘T’ stations in those communities (see Supporting Documents for the full TRID study). In addition, the City of Pittsburgh has completed TRID studies for the South Hills Junction - Beechview Corridor and for East Liberty around the East Busway station, where $52 million of retail, residential, transit center and parking development is underway. Another dimension of the attitude issue is the pressure to re-route buses in downtown and other locations in response to a negative perception of buses and bus riders. This increases transit operating costs and reduces convenience for transit patrons. The Bus Rapid Transit AA/EA includes a Downtown Circulation element which will evaluate the existing network of downtown bus routes and # PUBLIC TRANSIT determine if there are changes which can result in operational efficiencies, improve service to riders and enhance the downtown environment. It is anticipated that this evaluation, just underway, will assess whether existing stops are optimally located. ## MISSING INTERMODAL CONNECTIONS The Port Authority's network of park-and-ride facilities supports connections with automobiles. Many of these lots are located on or near major thoroughfares, or adjacent to limited-access highways. Although all buses are equipped with bike racks, transit's coordination with bicycles is incomplete due to missed connection opportunities and parking, and in suburban areas direct pedestrian connections are often difficult. In order for the multi-modal connections to work, they need to be seamless to the user. Since 2000 the Port Authority has undertaken several initiatives to improve the interface for bicycles and transit. The First Avenue Station provides convenient access to the Eliza Furnace Trail and a bike and blade rental facility. Port Authority's Rack 'n Roll program of racks mounted on buses, the LRT system, and bicycles on the 'T' and Mon Incline, lets bicyclists use transit for part of their journeys. Bike racks have been installed at some transit stations. A map has been developed showing the relationship of bus routes to trails. The Port Authority will continue to pursue other opportunities for enhancing bike/transit linkages within available financial resources. The multi-modal connections mentioned above with transit, bicycles, automobiles, pedestrians, etc. are very important to implementing the Places identified in the Future Land Use Plan (see Map 4A.1). These Places were envisioned to be mixed use and utilize a variety of transportation modes. ## LACK OF EFFICIENT SYSTEM TO MEET CURRENT COUNTY NEEDS AND POPULATION LEVELS Over the past few decades, the County has experienced population decreases in many of transit's traditional markets. Consequently, the Port Authority has had to modify its route structure or level of service to match the changing markets. However, some of the areas with the greatest population decline are also the communities with the greatest reliance on public transportation (i.e. the Mon Valley). The Port Authority <
> Photo credit: Port Authority of Allegheny County has reduced service to the Mon Valley communities over the past 15 years even though it is considered a depressed area. There are three challenges to providing transit routes to changing markets: 1) Many of the new growth areas are characterized by low-density development and are more costly to serve than older densely developed communities in the City of Pittsburgh and older suburbs. 2) Port Authority's financial crisis limits its ability to add service to new areas while maintaining service to older (although declining) communities. 3) While there are some developments which prefer not to accommodate Port Authority buses, service and patrons, other developments are very interested in new or increased transit service. ## TRANSIT FAREBOX REVENUES DO NOT COVER OPERATING EXPENSES As with all transit systems, passenger fare revenue does not cover the entire cost of operating the transit system. Operating expenses are primarily subsidized with state and # PUBLIC TRANSIT local funds. Lottery revenues enable senior citizens to ride public transit for free. This is true of every transit system, and by the way, it is not unique to transit. The road and highway network, airlines, railroads etc., are all heavily subsidized. All modes require subsidy, especially the private automobile! One reason that fares do not cover operating expenses is that Port Authority has been facing increasing costs. Expenditures for fuel, health care, and retirement benefits have grown rapidly in recent years. At the same time costs have been escalating, revenues have not kept pace with inflation. Port Authority has worked hard to address its increasing costs in recent years. Coupled with a new statewide transportation funding law, Port Authority's operating budget should experience stability in the coming years. ## ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN An excellent multi-modal transportation network – integrated with the Future Land Use Plan – that: ■ Connects people to jobs ■ Supports mobility of existing communities ■ Provides efficient access to proposed development, and ■ Facilitates the movement of goods and freight. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Public Transit portion of the Transportation Plan are to: **A.** Target transportation investments to support job and housing growth as shown on the Future Land Use map. **B.** Prioritize the maintenance of existing transportation infrastructure within and across all modes. **C.** Provide integrated transportation alternatives and coordinated transportation systems to increase mobility. **D.** Promote transit-oriented development (TOD) sites at key transit stations and along major transit corridors. **E.** Connect Pittsburgh International Airport to Downtown, Oakland and major population centers via a rapid transit system. **F.** Improve transit into and around Oakland. **G.** Use efficient and creative funding strategies such as public/private partnerships, privatization, and leveraging current and future assets. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Target Transportation Investments to Support Job and Housing Growth** Transit is critical to the economic health of the region and the well-being of the public. It is a sustainable mode of transportation that will help to reduce traffic congestion. Transit is clearly a focus of future investment, and while funds are now tight, plans should be made to prioritize and accommodate future transit improvements. Transit service to appropriate Places designated in the Future Land Use Plan would be by way of either a rapid transit mode (light rail or busway) or bus service. Transit circulation within Places can be by transit, but must be <
> Photo credit: Port Authority of Allegheny County # CHAPTER 4 # PUBLIC TRANSIT carefully planned. Smaller shuttle vehicles operated by a consortium of business owners or a public-private transportation management entity may be viable as these Places establish themselves as true mixed-use centers of housing, shopping and employment, and as a market for very localized and/or demand-responsive transit emerges. ***Transit will play a significant role in Allegheny County’s future.*** **B. Prioritize the Maintenance of Existing Transportation Infrastructure Within and Across All Modes** Upgrading our existing, aging transit infrastructure, along with the importance of regular maintenance of newer transit facilities, is key to ensuring a dependable, attractive and efficient system. Fixing our valuable investments first is a top priority for transit. This is especially important during a time when increasing numbers of commuters are likely to be attracted to the transit option to save money, help the environment and to be more physically active in their daily lives. We cannot afford to waste the valuable assets we currently have, but need to preserve them and maximize their use. **C. Provide Integrated Transportation Alternatives to Increase Mobility** Multi-modal transportation alternatives consider the full range of approaches to solving the transportation problems plaguing Allegheny County’s roadways. Solutions can range from new rail lines, automated fixed-guideway transit and more bus routes to those that reduce demand by integrating modes and making it easier to use the system. Integrating park-and-ride facilities with transit stops, developing HOV lanes and ridesharing opportunities, providing sidewalks and bikeways to transit stops are all ways that can increase mobility. Designing and building ‘Complete Streets’ can also assist greatly in increased mobility and transit accessibility. Allegheny County is working closely with the City of Pittsburgh through MOVEPGH, the City’s Transportation Plan, to realize the opportunities for combined transportation planning efforts. See ActiveAllegheny for more details. There are several studies such as the Eastern Corridor Transit Study and the Allegheny Valley Railroad and Norfolk Southern Commuter Rail Interim Study and the Allegheny Riverfront Green Boulevard Study that have suggested using existing rail corridors for future rapid transit, since the infrastructure and right-of-way costs can be lower when compared to a new alignment. Additional alignments will be developed and assessed. Upgrades to track systems as well as agreements with railroad companies will be needed to allow commuter use of these lines, since freight and commuter operations are not necessarily compatible with each other. Freight trains and commuter rail equipment co-existed in Pittsburgh up to 1989 when the PATrain was discontinued and continue to co-exist in Baltimore, Washington, Chicago, Seattle and Los Angeles, among other cities. Nearly all commuter rail operations in the United States use Federal Railroad Administration compliant vehicles. Agreements are needed with railroad companies in order to gain access to rail lines, make track and signal improvements and ensure that commuter rail and freight operations do not interfere with each other. Future conflicts in rail use will increase along with the trend of vastly increased volumes of freight moving by rail. Although rail traffic declined with the recent economic downturn, it has been growing since 2011, particularly with the rapid expansion of natural gas drilling activities in Pennsylvania. Rail traffic is expected to continue to rise exponentially as highways become more congested and moving freight via the highway system becomes less feasible and far more costly than by rail. The Westmoreland County Transit Authority has completed its Allegheny Valley Railroad and Norfolk Southern Commuter Rail Interim Study which evaluated the potential for commuter rail on the Allegheny Valley Railroad between Arnold/New Kensington and Pittsburgh and on the Norfolk Southern rail line between Greensburg and Pittsburgh. This effort will build upon previous studies of these corridors. This analysis includes an assessment of integrating passenger trains # PUBLIC TRANSIT into lines with increasing freight train operations. The AVR could accommodate commuter rail service by scheduling freight operations at night. Operation of commuter rail service on the NS Pittsburgh Line would require improvements to existing tracks, signal and communication systems. The Port Authority identified proposed alignments for new rapid transit lines through a public process, in the Airport Multi-modal Corridor, Eastern Corridor and Regional Transit Visioning studies. These studies have been conducted in partnership with SPC, Allegheny County and all the region’s transit providers. In addition, there may be possibilities for improved transit to the North Hills, possibly through the use and/or conversion of the I-279 HOV facility for rapid transit. An important next step is selection of priority corridor(s) in consultation with the public, elected officials, local governments, Allegheny County, SPC and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Private funding can help, but major transit capital investments will still require significant local and/or state public funding. Las Vegas is one of the only places in the United States where a new transit project was implemented with major private funding. More typical are Charlotte, Denver, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Francisco and Seattle which fund transit projects with significant local and state funding to match federal funding, and then, complete appropriate engineering studies for selected alignments, secure rights-of-way and construct new rapid transit lines. While the funds for these types of projects are limited, additional and creative funding mechanisms need to be explored. Public-private partnerships (PPP) are one option that can help fund public improvement projects now that the enabling legislation is in place. One example of PPP is the Cleveland BRT system in which the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals paid $6.25M over 25 years for the naming rights to the line. The naming rights will generate between $18-$25 million for the Greater Cleveland Regional Transportation Authority. ## D. Promote Transit-Oriented Development Sites at Key Transit Stations Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an important national land development trend. TOD can be accomplished by targeting mixed-use development around existing and proposed transit stations. The existing ‘T’ line and busways and the new rapid transit lines envisioned for Allegheny County represent an ideal opportunity for TOD such as Eastside in the City of Pittsburgh’s East Liberty and Shadyside neighborhoods and Dormont, Castle Shannon and Mt. Lebanon. TOD is consistent with the principles of the Future Land Use Plan and can provide significant additional ridership for the Port Authority’s transit lines. In 2004, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed legislation permitting the creation of a Transit Revitalization Investment District (TRID) to establish a mechanism for promoting TOD and capturing the value of development at and near transit stations. Allegheny County conducted a TRID planning study for areas adjacent to the light rail stations in the South Hills (see Supporting Documents for the full TRID study). The City of Pittsburgh recently completed a TRID planning study for the South Hills Junction - Beechview Corridor and the East Liberty busway station. In addition, the County co-sponsored the West Busway TOD Assessment and Plan to evaluate the corridor’s potential for TOD. TOD plans were created for the Sheraden and Carnegie stations. The Port Authority and its planning partners should conduct TOD market, planning and urban design studies for key transit stations, publicize the findings and solicit developers to build on TOD sites. Many of the PAAC stations along the ‘T’ line have functioned as TODs for the past century and could be enhanced by future development on PAAC-owned property or on adjacent or nearby privately-owned sites. Private developers are increasingly interested in development opportunities near transit stations. Public-Private Partnerships are an option to assist with site development. ## E. Connect Pittsburgh International Airport to Downtown, Oakland and Major Population Centers via a Rapid Transit System The main recommended transportation feature for *Allegheny Places* is transit from downtown Pittsburgh # PUBLIC TRANSIT “to and around the Oakland Area”, including a major intermodal hub in central Oakland and transit from Downtown Pittsburgh, via the new transit connection on the North Shore, to Pittsburgh International Airport. There have been several studies completed to date (mentioned in the integrated multi-modal section above) that suggest alternatives to complete the rapid transit connection between the Airport, Downtown and Oakland. Along the entire route there will be opportunities for revitalized or new transit-oriented developments, intermodal hubs and other connection points, including intercept parking garages and park-and-ride facilities, trail interconnectivity, pedestrian-friendly improvements, feeder bus lines, bus-rapid-transit (BRT) connections (with potential to connect to hubs via shared high-speed right-of-ways) and many other-related and focused development and redevelopment opportunities. There is vast potential for additional transit connections to this suggested route. The key connection is envisioned to take advantage of major transit-oriented development potential along the West Busway, between Pittsburgh and Oakland, on the North Shore and at other identified Places along the route. New rail transit facilities are very costly and take time. Creative financing must be a component of all future rail transit construction, but there will be opportunities for interim measures as Allegheny County proceeds to implement this plan; for instance, the potential of proceeding with Bus Rapid Transit initially for service between Pittsburgh via the West Busway and Parkway West to the proposed Robinson Town Centre “mixed-use development/intermodal hub”, and on to the Airport. This BRT route would eventually be replaced with LRT. ### F. Improve Transit Into and Around Oakland The County has had several objectives with respect to transit. A priority has been to connect Downtown Pittsburgh with Oakland via rapid transit. Additional transit within the Oakland area is also a priority, since the hospitals and universities in Oakland comprise one of the largest employment and educational centers in the region and, while a number of students and employees live in the vicinity, many more commute. G. Use Efficient and Creative Funding Strategies such as Public/Private Partnerships, Privatization, and Leveraging Current and Future Assets *Allegheny Places* recognizes that transit is a critical service on which many residents rely. In order to construct and operate many of the proposed transit projects, new funding mechanisms, such as public-private partnerships, need to be pursued. The Port Authority, in partnership with SPC, Allegheny County and local governments, should explore options to address funding shortfalls and generate new revenues, including transportation to serve areas of new economic development (e.g. the North Shore, Eastside, South Side Works, Dormont and Mt. Lebanon TOD, etc). This may include, for example, TOD, TRID or public-private partnerships. Upcoming TOD opportunities include the West Busway TOD and the Downtown to Oakland BRT TOD. # CHAPTER 4 # BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ## ■ TODAY'S CONDITIONS The County has been planning for and building trails along its rivers since the 1980's. In 1990, development of a major county-wide trail network was launched with the Montour Trail, and the County's trail network continues to grow. Although the first trails were built with recreation funding and used, perhaps, primarily for recreation, they have evolved into active transportation corridors that link bicyclists and pedestrians to the places where they live, work, learn, shop and play. The County and City continue to plan for and promote bicycling and walking as active modes of transportation, both on-and off-road, in recognition of the value that a truly multimodal transportation system adds to the quality of life in Allegheny County. *ActiveAllegheny*, completed in 2010, is a resource for integrating active transportation modes into the County's existing transportation system. "Active transportation" is defined broadly as human-powered modes of transportation that include bicycling, walking, kayaking and inline skating. The goal of *ActiveAllegheny* is to integrate active modes of transportation, with a focus on walking and bicycling, into our existing transportation network. <
> *ActiveAllegheny* identifies roadways that are important commuter routes and examines their potential as active transportation corridors. Connectivity with the County's transit system and to the trail network is discussed in Chapter 4E and later in this chapter. *ActiveAllegheny* also looks at connections to other active transportation modes such as the Three Rivers Water Trail. *ActiveAllegheny* recommends specific improvements, from lighting and crosswalks to separated bike/pedestrian lanes, needed to ensure that active travel will be safe travel. *ActiveAllegheny* also includes general recommendations for increasing public awareness of the value of active transportation, and other strategies for implementation. *ActiveAllegheny* focus is primarily on providing safe means of travel on-road, for bicycles and walkers. The expanding riverfront trail system is also an important component of the County's active transportation network, as well as providing access to the rivers' many recreational opportunities. Municipalities are looking for ways to connect to the riverfront trail system so that the people in their communities can get to where they want to go. A brief overview of current projects is provided below. ### Allegheny River: The 2011 Community Trails Initiative Feasibility Study is a proposed alignment for a 26-mile long segment of the Three Rivers Heritage Trail along the northern side of the Allegheny River. The proposed trail corridor includes both on and off road segments. Connections to the municipalities along the river and to other important destinations are key components of the proposed alignment. Portions of the trail have been completed and are already serving as active transportation corridors. In Millvale Borough, 65 people a day on average have been parking in Millvale Park and using the riverfront trail to commute to the City of Pittsburgh. The number of commuters continues to grow, and Millvale is exploring the development of a park-and-ride lot closer to their business district to bring people into the community. The Boroughs of Millvale and Etna are also developing an internal bicycle and pedestrian plan to connect the people and places within their communities to the Three Rivers Heritage Trail. # BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN **Monongahela River:** The Eliza Furnace Trail in the City of Pittsburgh was built to be an active transportation corridor connecting the neighborhoods of Oakland, Hazelwood and Greenfield to downtown Pittsburgh. It is heavily used by commuters and served by a commuter parking lot on the Hazelwood side of the trail. It has also become a popular trail for recreation and is enjoyed by lunchtime walkers, joggers and inline skaters from downtown businesses. In the City of Duquesne, the Port Authority allows people commuting to downtown Pittsburgh via the Great Allegheny Passage to use their park-and-ride facility. Access to the park-and-ride also gives bicyclists easy access to Port Authority buses, which are equipped with bike racks. The last segment of the Great Allegheny Passage that connects Pittsburgh to Washington DC was completed in West Homestead Borough in Summer 2013. It is expected to become another popular active transportation corridor, providing more options for commuters into the City and Oakland. **Ohio River:** The Ohio River Trail Pittsburgh to Coraopolis Feasibility Study will determine an alignment for an active transportation corridor that will connect the City of Pittsburgh to the Ohio River South Shore Trail being developed by the Ohio River Trail Council. The Ohio River South Shore Trail will extend from Coraopolis Borough in Allegheny County to Monaca Borough in Beaver County. The Pittsburgh to Coraopolis segment, like most of the Ohio River South Shore Trail, is primarily on-road with connections into the adjacent communities. The trail is expected to be an important commuter corridor for these municipalities and will also provide for bicycle and pedestrian commuting within the municipalities. The Ohio River Trail Council is also planning a trail for the north shore of the Ohio River in Allegheny County. **BicyclePA ROUTES** BicyclePA routes were designed by experienced bicyclists to provide those who want to traverse the state with a guide to some of the Commonwealth's highways and rail-trails. Few of these routes contain bike lanes or other facilities designed specifically for bicyclists. One such route is Pennsylvania Bike Route 'S', which passes through the southern portion of Allegheny County along Route 136. Another example is Pennsylvania Bike Route 'A', which passes through the western portion of Allegheny County as it extends from Erie to West Virginia. Bike Route A in western Allegheny County is also part of the proposed Ohio River South Shore Trail. **BICYCLE PARKING AND TRANSIT ACCESS** The Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership and Bike Pittsburgh have installed approximately 500 bike racks to date throughout the City. Many communities throughout the County are providing bike racks in their business districts through programs like Allegheny Together and Allegheny River Towns. Port Authority provides bicycle parking at many of its light rail and Busway stations. In addition, all of Port Authority's buses are equipped with bike racks. Transit riders can also take their bicycles on the light rail system and the Monongahela Incline. **OTHER PROJECTS** * BRT Downtown-to-Oakland/complete streets * URA Allegheny Riverfront Green Boulevard * North Park Lake Loop Road bike/ped upgrades * Proposed bike-share rental program * County Bridges safety upgrades like "bike-friendly" grate & scupper replacements * Pittsburgh Open Streets plans **FUNDING** For a list of possible funding sources for active transportation activities and projects, please see the comprehensive plan supporting documentation under Transportation on the AlleghenyPlaces website. # BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines ways to facilitate increased bicycle and pedestrian travel in Allegheny County. ### KEY CHALLENGES * Unsafe and unattractive places to wait for transit * Lack of available, safe bicycle parking facilities * Lack of a bicycle route signage program * Lack of continuous sidewalk network in new developments * Consistently incorporating bicycle and pedestrian facilities into road, bridge, and transit projects * Lack of public access to riverfronts The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### UNSAFE AND UNATTRACTIVE PLACES TO WAIT FOR TRANSIT The majority of passengers access transit by walking to a stop. The conditions at transit stops vary throughout the County. Providing amenities such as good lighting and seating at transit stops and stations increases passenger comfort and safety and can increase transit ridership. Other amenities such as landscaping improve the visibility of the transit stop and enhance transit’s appeal to the community. Bus shelters are key to comfort and encourage ridership in inclement weather. Pre-college students use PAAC to get to schools. Safety and dependability are especially critical for youth. Many communities, including the City of Pittsburgh, contract with private firms to provide transit shelters at transit stops. Communities can use new or renewed shelter contracts to improve the conditions of bus stops. ### LACK OF AVAILABLE, SAFE BICYCLE PARKING FACILITIES In order to encourage higher levels of bicycle usage in the County, bicyclists need a safe place to secure their bicycles when they reach their destination. With the exception of bike parking available at public parking garages and other strategic locations in Downtown Pittsburgh, PAAC stations as well as at numerous locations in Pittsburgh neighborhoods, bike racks are not available in most areas of the County. Bike racks/facilities can encourage multi-modal activity. ### LACK OF A BICYCLE ROUTE SIGNAGE PROGRAM Many residents of the County do not bicycle using the local roadway system due to real or perceived threats to bicycling such as traffic volumes, roadway width and traffic speed. While many roadways in the County are suitable for bicycling, residents do not have information that would help them decide which roads to use. ### LACK OF CONTINUOUS SIDEWALK NETWORK IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS In Allegheny County, different patterns of land use development affect pedestrian access to transit, employment, education, and shopping, among other destinations. The County’s older communities often have a well-established sidewalk network that allows residents to easily walk to many destinations. Newer residential and employment centers often present difficulties for pedestrians due to the scale of development or because the construction of sidewalks was not required by local municipal ordinances. Even when there are requirements, they are frequently waived. Developers often ask for exemptions because their sidewalks will not connect to a system of existing sidewalks. Sidewalk connectivity in the suburbs will only improve when all developments are required to install sidewalks. ### CONSISTENTLY INCORPORATING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES INTO ROADWAY PROJECTS An efficient and cost-effective means of improving bicycle and pedestrian conditions is to integrate these facilities into the planning, design and construction of roadway projects. Bicycle and pedestrian needs should be considered at the earliest stages of transportation project development to ensure the appropriate accommodation of those needs. Effective modal integration requires coordination among several entities including PennDOT, Allegheny County, SPC and local communities. ### LACK OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO RIVERFRONTS As discussed in Chapter 4E, Parks, Open Space and # BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN Greenways, existing land uses, land ownership, topography, and a wide range of municipal land use regulations are just some of the challenges to completing the Three Rivers Heritage Trail. A comprehensive, multi-municipal approach will be critical to its success. The Allegheny County Riverfronts Project, an ongoing partnership between Allegheny County, Friends of the Riverfront and the Pennsylvania Environmental Council is an example of a regional collaboration designed to address these kinds of challenges. ## ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN An excellent multi-modal transportation network – integrated with the Future Land Use Plan – that: * Connects people to jobs and schools * Supports mobility of existing communities * Provides efficient access to proposed development, and * Encourages multi-modal connectivity. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Bicycle and Pedestrian portion of the Transportation Plan are to: **A. Provide Integrated, 'Active' Transportation Alternatives Including Bikeways, Sidewalks and Transit.** **B. Coordinate transportation systems and modes to increase mobility.** The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Provide Integrated, 'Active' Transportation Alternatives Including Bikeways, Sidewalks and Transit** Bicycling and walking should be encouraged through incorporating bicycle lanes and sidewalks into both roadway and transit projects. Utilizing and expanding bike trails can also serve to connect people to jobs, schools and shopping. The Future Land Use Plan promotes compact mixed-use development and so it is imperative that sidewalks, pathways and crosswalks are included to accommodate the safe passage of pedestrians within Places. The Future Land Use Plan further encourages linking Places to amenities such as parks, riverfronts, and greenways. Multi-modal transportation systems designed for Places therefore need to be coordinated with the trails and greenways network in the Parks, Open Space and Greenway Plan. Integrating bikeways and sidewalks into new roadway projects, designating bike routes on existing streets, transit, trails and greenways should ultimately create an interconnected alternative 'Active Transportation' network throughout Allegheny County. **B. Coordinate Transportation Systems and Modes to Increase Mobility** Increasingly, the need to integrate walking and bicycling with transit usage is being recognized. As transit routes are being planned or improved, there is a need to ensure that there are: * Safe ways to access transit stops * Secure and convenient places to park bicycles * Desirable places to wait for transit vehicles *Transportation provides access to many key opportunities such as jobs, quality schools, entertainment and recreation. An equitable and efficient transportation system includes multiple modes and ensures mobility for all residents.* <
> # AIRPORTS ## ■ TODAY’S CONDITIONS ### PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT) is an economic generator for Southwestern Pennsylvania. Located 16 miles west of Pittsburgh, the airport is served by 8 air carriers and in 2011 accommodated 8 million travelers in nearly 150,000 aircraft operations. The airport encompasses almost 9,000 acres with four runways, four terminals with 75 gates, and has 13,000 parking spaces. More than 2,000 acres of PIT land are available for non-aviation and aviation-related development. This includes about 130 acres of pad-ready sites available and fully ready-to-go for users, as of 2012. In addition to the traveling public, Pittsburgh International Airport also serves the freight community, processing about 176 million pounds of freight in 2011. Pittsburgh International Airport went through a period of transition in the wake of the dominant carrier, US Airways, eliminating its connecting hub operations at the facility. Table 4I.12 shows airport operations in recent years. Although US Airways still maintains a significant presence at PIT, several low-cost carriers such as Southwest have entered the market, and help to make PIT more competitive in terms of lower fares. In addition to reduced fares, new carriers have increased passenger volumes and trips originating from the airport by airlines other than US Airways. At the time of this update, the following carriers serve Pittsburgh International Airport: * Air Canada * American Airlines * JetBlue * Delta Airlines * Air Tran Airways * Southwest Airlines * United Airlines * US Airways The following air cargo carriers serve Pittsburgh International Airport: * FedEx * UPS There are intermodal facilities at PIT that connect passengers with private vehicles, limousines, taxis, transit and the Montour Bicycle Trail, as well as freight facilities to support the air cargo. ### ALLEGHENY COUNTY AIRPORT The Allegheny County Airport, located in West Mifflin, is the fifth busiest airport in the state and the largest general aviation airport in western Pennsylvania. It is classified as a business service airport with 118 based aircraft and approximately 67,000 annual operations. It is served by two | TABLE 4I.12 - Pittsburgh International Airport Operations, 2007-2011 | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Year** | **Passengers** | **% Change** | **Cargo Volume (lbs)** | **% Change** | | **2007** | 9,822.588 | -1.6% | 185,806,055 | -0.5% | | **2008** | 8,710,291 | -11.3% | 182,177,797 | -2.0% | | **2009** | 8,031,175 | -7.8% | 158,696,927 | -12.9% | | **2010** | 8,195,359 | 2.0% | 170,522,692 | 7.5% | | **2011** | 8,300,310 | 1.3% | 175,943,832 | 3.2% | Source: FAA # AIRPORTS <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor lighted runways. The airport has a continuously staffed air traffic control tower. It serves as the primary FAA designated reliever airport for Pittsburgh International Airport. In this role, the airport supports a high volume of business, corporate and pleasure-related flying activity. ### PRIVATE AIRPORTS The County has two private airports, Pittsburgh-Monroeville Airport and Rock Airport. The locations of the County’s airports are shown on Figure 41.5. ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines ways to support air travel in Allegheny County. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Transportation Plan, the Transportation Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * Underutilized passenger and cargo facilities at Pittsburgh International Airport * No direct fixed guideway transit connection between Pittsburgh International Airport and Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland * Need to increase transcontinental international direct flight destinations * Need to increase air cargo activities <
> Source: McCormick Taylor # AIRPORTS Additional challenges of concern for the Allegheny County Airport Authority include: * Increasing congestion levels and travel times between Pittsburgh International Airport, Downtown Pittsburgh, and Oakland that limit opportunities for growth at PIT and throughout the County * The same issues apply for Allegheny County Airport in West Mifflin; it also suffers from increased congestion levels and travel times between it and Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland. * More than 2,000 acres of PIT land available for development that can assist in providing jobs for the community and lease revenues for the airport. (This is addressed in the Economic Development Plan – Chapter 4, Section C.) The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### UNDERUTILIZED PASSENGER AND CARGO FACILITIES AT PIT There are underutilized gates and terminals due to the removal by US Airways of their hub at PIT and the resulting reduction in flights. Efforts are underway to attract more carriers and additional flights to and from PIT. PIT has underutilized cargo buildings and 235,000 sq. ft. of cargo buildings with a vacancy rate of 35% in late 2011. A new development area at Northfield with a national developer will help to attract users and provide more facilities. ### NO DIRECT FIXED GUIDEWAY TRANSIT CONNECTION BETWEEN PIT AND DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH AND OAKLAND Congestion along Parkway West makes travel to PIT difficult. Planned and recently completed infrastructure improvements offer the promise of a brighter future for the airport corridor. The proposed Southern Beltway will improve access and east-west mobility between the mid-Mon Valley and the Airport, from Route 22 to I-79, helping to transform the area around the Airport into a major warehouse and distribution center that will create thousands of jobs. The recently completed Findlay Connector, a new highway linking the Airport to Route 22, will facilitate the development of more than 1,500 acres of nearby land. Currently, public transit is significantly underutilized in the Airport Corridor, falling far below national averages. In its 2004 study of the corridor, Carnegie Mellon University’s Center for Economic Development concluded that one reason for this may be the disproportionately high commuting times via transit. Therefore, most commuters are using privately owned vehicles instead. Furthermore, public transit may not be an option available to workers working more than one job or working during ‘off-hours’. A fixed guideway transit connection with coordinated feeder services, would provide improved access to the region for travelers, support economic development and land use priorities along the corridor, and provide access to other transit facilities. Furthermore, without convenient transit, low-wage workers will continue to face difficulty accessing jobs in the airport corridor. In the short term, Port Authority should increase service on Route 28X to build demand for service in the corridor. # AIRPORTS ## ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN An excellent multi-modal transportation network – integrated with the Future Land Use Plan – that: ■ Connects people to jobs ■ Supports mobility of existing communities ■ Provides efficient access to proposed airport development, and ■ Facilitates the movement of passengers and freight. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Airports portion of the Transportation Plan are to: **A.** Support Pittsburgh International Airport efforts to retain and increase passenger and air cargo connectivity to national and international destinations. **B.** Support freight movements through safe and efficient air shipping practices. **C.** Increase connectivity to and from Pittsburgh International Airport to Downtown Pittsburgh, Oakland and major population centers via a rapid transit system, and other modes and system improvements. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Support PIT Efforts to Retain and Increase Passenger and Air Cargo Connectivity to National and International Destinations** The Airport area is very important to the County in terms of the economic development opportunities it has to offer. If Allegheny County wants to compete with other cities in attracting national and international companies to locate in our region, it is very important to have non-stop flights to Europe and West Coast destinations. This is a key selling point in getting people to come to the region for business or tourism. Elimination of US Airways connecting hub at PIT has resulted in fewer flights and fewer direct connections for passengers at PIT. The reduction in US Airways activity at PIT has made the airport more attractive to other airlines, and lowered travel cost to passengers. **B. Support Freight Movements Through Safe and Efficient Air Shipping Practices** Pittsburgh International Airport is one of the County's major transportation assets. This facility has the capacity to handle millions more passengers per year. While air traffic is currently down, the Airport Authority has been marketing the airport to multiple airlines, as well as the air cargo market. The airport's goal is to attract additional freight carriers, or combination passenger and freight carriers. The County and its planning partners should continue to support the full utilization of the airport and its facilities, including cargo, and the goal of increasing connectivity to national and international destinations. ■ In an effort to expand air cargo business and to increase the region's international air service, PIT has committed to working with community leaders to support the area's cargo agencies. **C. Connectivity to and from PIT to Downtown Pittsburgh, Oakland, and Major Population Centers via a Rapid Transit System** The Airport area is very important to the County in terms of the economic development opportunities it offers. Projected development in the airport corridor requires support in terms of transportation investments for intermodal connections between the network of roadway, transit and freight facilities and other congestion reduction measures. A future that includes rapid transit between the airport and Downtown is vital to the County. A direct connection from PIT to Downtown Pittsburgh, and on to Oakland, supports economic development plans, land use priorities and redevelopment opportunities along the corridor. Light rail transit can provide opportunities to rapidly connect to Oakland, North Shore and South Hills destinations. Please refer to the major Transit Recommendations found earlier in this section and the # CHAPTER 4 # AIRPORTS Future Land Use Plan (Chapter 4, Section A) for more information. Several studies have recommended using existing rail corridors for future rapid transit, because construction and right-of-way costs can be lower when compared to a new alignment, but many other factors add into the final mix of factors for decision-making. Alternatives will be developed and assessed. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is an initial step toward development of LRT. A potential route is under consideration from Downtown to Oakland. Robinson Town Center serves as a "western" intermodal and multi-modal hub to distribute commuters to employment centers, educational facilities and other destinations in western Allegheny County. # RAIL FREIGHT ## ■ TODAY’S CONDITIONS More than 330 miles of rail lines cross Allegheny County. Historically, rail lines were built along the rivers and transported resources and finished products to and from the manufacturing facilities located there. Today, several railroads, such as the Union Railroad that serves the U.S. Steel Edgar Thompson Works in Braddock, still provide this type of service. The major freight railroad routes in the County are owned by Norfolk Southern and CSX, which utilize the lines for their regional, national and international operations. The Norfolk Southern main line through the County is a link in its east-west line between Chicago and Baltimore, while CSX’s line connects Chicago, Philadelphia and New York. The following lists the class and name of railroads located in Allegheny County. <
> Photo credit: Kevin Smay ### Class I Railroads * CSX Transportation, Inc. * Norfolk Southern ### Class II Railroads * Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad Company (Canadian National) * Buffalo & Pittsburgh Railroad, Inc. (Genesee and Wyoming Railway) * The Wheeling & Lake Erie Railway Company ### Switching Lines * Pittsburgh & Ohio Central Railroad Company (Genesee and Wyoming Railway) * Allegheny Valley Railroad * McKeesport Connecting Railroad Company * Turtle Creek Industrial Railroad (Dura-Bond) * Pittsburgh Allegheny & McKees Rocks Railroad Company * Union Railroad Company Over the past 20 years, rail activity has increased significantly in the U.S. and regionally due to the increased use of containers (COFC) and trailers (TOFC) on flat freight cars. Rail companies are feeling pressure to increase capacity on rail lines and ensure maintenance in order to meet the continuously increasing demand. In many cases, the “last mile” of roadways connecting to rail freight terminals are in disrepair or deficient in ways that make them insufficient to handle the freight traffic traveling on them to be loaded onto rail cars. ## FUNDING The Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission’s Freight Forum is working with railroads in the region to plan and fund infrastructure improvements. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s PA Rail Freight Assistance Program provides matching grants to railroads for projects which preserve essential rail freight service and stimulate economic development through new or expanded freight service. For 2011, the Governor’s budget included increased assistance to improve rail freight infrastructure. In addition, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania committed over $30 million in federal Tiger 1 program funds in 2010 for the vertical clearance of obstructions on the CSX rail line in southwestern Pennsylvania to complete a multi-state double stack clearance program for that major rail corridor. # CHAPTER 4 # RAIL FREIGHT ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines ways to facilitate improved rail freight operations in Allegheny County. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Transportation Plan, the Transportation Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: ■ Need for double-stack capacity ■ Port Perry Rail Bridge capacity issues ■ How the increased volume of rail freight traffic impacts long-term passenger rail plans The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### LACK OF DOUBLE-STACK CAPACITY Double stack clearance refers to a railway’s ability to carry two containers, one on top of the other, on a rail car. The ability to “double-stack” containers exponentially increases the carrying capacity of a given train. In order for a train to be able to carry double stack cars, the vertical clearance of all bridges, underpasses, and other obstacles must exceed 22 feet. The presence of one vertical obstruction means that the entire corridor is restricted to single stack capacity. Due to steadily increasing volume of rail shipping, many raillines in Allegheny County have already been converted to double-stack capacity. Converting the remaining rail corridors is a priority in the region. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) supports the call for double stack clearance on all railways by imposing a 22 ft. vertical clearance requirement on all bridges and structures over active rail lines. ### PORT PERRY RAIL BRIDGE CAPACITY ISSUES The Port Perry Rail Bridge is a key connection crossing the Monongahela River. It carries Norfolk Southern rail traffic into and out of the Pitcairn Intermodal Facility. The bridge connection is single track rail, which significantly impacts the volume of goods that can travel through the area and increases travel time for the railroads. Trains must wait substantial amounts of time for opposing rail traffic to clear the bridge. The bridge at Port Perry is a “pinch point” which slows traffic and negatively affects productivity. ### INCREASED VOLUME OF RAIL FREIGHT TRAFFIC IMPACTS LONG-TERM TRANSIT EXPANSION PLANS Many proposed passenger rail investments and plans for expansion of existing fixed guideway facilities involve the idea of using existing railroad rights-of-way. It will be critical to coordinate with the railroads to determine where joint use may be possible and what rail expansion or reduction plans are being discussed, as transit plans progress. Railroads will want to maintain access to rail line facilities and capacity as moving freight via rail becomes an increasingly viable and cost-effective option for freight movement. In an era of exploding oil and gas prices, and with ever-decreasing highway capacity due to increased traffic, rail becomes more and more desirable. ## ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN An excellent multi-modal transportation network – integrated with the Future Land Use Plan – that: ■ Connects people to jobs ■ Supports mobility of existing communities ■ Provides efficient access to proposed development, and ■ Facilitates the movement of goods and freight. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Rail portion of the Transportation Plan are to: # RAIL FREIGHT **A.** Support freight movements through safe and efficient truck and rail intermodal connectivity and systems as well as with multi-modal facilities. **B.** Increase rail safety at interfaces with people and with other transportation modes. **C.** Support increased movement of goods by rail to free road capacity, and increase road capacity by supporting rail freight initiatives. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. ### A. Support Freight Movements Through Safe and Efficient Intermodal Connectivity The preservation of existing and future rail corridors in Allegheny County is a critical need for the region. As congestion on the region’s highways continues to increase, freight movement by rail can be a viable alternative to trucking. Improving existing intermodal centers and developing others in key locations are fundamental to efficient future freight movement. Road access to the Pitcairn Intermodal Center (a Norfolk Southern facility) should be improved to allow efficient transfer of freight to and from the trains. In addition, the elimination of the pinch point at Port Perry should be investigated and supported. ### B. Increase Rail Safety The interface between rail and other modes of travel is a source of accidents. Elimination of at-grade crossings should be pursued by railroad companies throughout the County. Eliminating at-grade crossings will result not only in improved safety but assist with making rail movements more efficient. Increasing pedestrian safety at rail crossings is also very important. ### C. Support Increased Movement of Goods by Rail Shipping via our rail infrastructure can provide shippers with cost-effective and efficient transportation, especially for heavy and bulky commodities. In terms of cost- effective energy use, rail engines are more fuel efficient than trucks. In terms of time savings, rail can also provide a more efficient travel time for freight companies as well as the added benefit of increasing capacity on the roadways by reducing the number of trucks using the roadway network. This is of particular importance in light of the projected increase in freight traffic over the next 10-15 years. The energy industry (including coal, oil, and natural gas) has dramatically increased the volume of rail traffic especially for frack sand and liquid gas. Along the Parkway West (I-279) the Rook Yard (a Wheeling & Lake Erie facility) has experienced increased activity and expansion due to shale-related needs. # CHAPTER 4 # WATERWAYS ## ■ TODAY’S CONDITIONS Allegheny County has significant water transportation resources for personal, commercial and recreational travel, and for freight shipment. ### PORT OF PITTSBURGH The Port of Pittsburgh continues to be one of the busiest ports in the nation. It’s a vital element in an expansive and expanding transportation network that provides Allegheny County businesses with access to regional and global markets. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Each year the Port of Pittsburgh moves approximately $8 billion worth of goods and contributes more than 45,000 jobs in southwestern Pennsylvania. Nearly 250,000 jobs in the region rely on the maintenance of a reliable river transportation system. The primary commodities moving through the Port include coal, sand and gravel, limestone, scrap, chemicals and primary manufactured goods (such as alloys, fabricated metal products, lime, cement and glass). The Port encompasses a number of terminals, as shown in Table 4I.13. **The Port of Pittsburgh is the second busiest inland port in the United States.** According to the Port of Pittsburgh Commission, Pittsburgh is the third largest inland port in the nation. Based on 2011 data from the US Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh is the third busiest inland port in the nation and the 21st busiest port, of any kind, in the nation. Pittsburgh handles more tonnage than Philadelphia, Seattle, and Chicago. The more than 34 million tons of cargo the Port of Pittsburgh ships and receives each year equates to an annual benefit to the region of more than $873 million. ### LOCKS AND DAMS Within Allegheny County, there are seven locks and dams that facilitate the movement of raw materials and goods to end users and there are intermodal facilities for transfer to other modes of transportation. Table 4I.14 shows the existing system of locks and dams. ***If one of the locks or dams in Allegheny County became inoperable, it would take 700 trucks per day seven days a week to move the freight that would have otherwise been carried on the rivers over the same period of time.*** ### PASSENGER SERVICE The Gateway Clipper is a private company offering excursion cruises on the Three Rivers, and has what is believed to be the largest inland riverboat fleet in the country. The Gateway Clipper also offers a passenger river shuttle that operates in a loop from Station Square to the North Shore’s Heinz Field, PNC Park and Carnegie Science Center and back, stopping at the Point along the way. ### MARINAS Throughout the County there are numerous marinas and boat docks for private boat owners. In recent years, there has been an increase in locations for kayak rentals and launches along the rivers and on local park lakes. # WATERWAYS ### TABLE 4I.13 - Location of Public, For Hire River Terminals in Allegheny County | COMPANY NAME | RIVER | MILEPOST | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Three Rivers Marine and Rail Terminals | Monongahela | 19.1 RDB | | Allegheny River Terminals, Inc. | Allegheny | 18.6 LDB | | Azcon Corporation | Allegheny | 7.0 RDB | | Port of Leetsdale | Ohio | 14.5 RDB | | RiverLift Industries | Monongahela | 23.5 LDB | | Gulf Materials Dock (GTC) | Monongahela | 10.2 RDB | | Josh Steel | Monongahela | 10.1 RDB | | Kinder Morgan | Monongahela | 16.1 LDB | | Kinder Morgan (KM Ferro Group) | Ohio | 33.5 RDB | | Transtar/Union Railroad | Monongahela | 12.1 LDB | RDB - Right Descending Bank, LDB - Left Descending Bank ### TABLE 4I.14 - Locks and Dams in Allegheny County | RIVER | FACILITY | YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION/ RECONSTRUCTION | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **OHIO RIVER** | | | | | Emsworth Locks and Dam | Locks: 1922 Dam: 1938 | | | Dashields Locks and Dam | Locks and Dam: 1929 | | **MONONGAHELA RIVER** | | | | | Braddock (Locks and Dam 2) | Locks: 1906/1953 Dam: 1906/2004 | | | Elizabeth (Locks and Dam 3) | Locks and Dam: 1907/1967 | | **ALLEGHENY RIVER** | | | | | Pittsburgh (Lock and Dam 2) | Locks and Dam: 1934 | | | CW Bill Young – Barking (Lock and Dam 3) | Locks and Dam: 1934 | | | Natrona (Lock and Dam 4) | Locks and Dam: 1927 | Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers # CHAPTER 4 # WATERWAYS ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines ways to ensure the continued viability of waterway transportation in Allegheny County. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Transportation Plan, the Transportation Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * Condition of existing Lock and Dam system * ‘Last Mile’ of local roadways in freight corridors * Underutilized river system for water taxis and transit * Need more marinas boat launches to facilitate access to rivers The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### CONDITION OF EXISTING LOCK AND DAM SYSTEM The condition of the lock and dam system is deteriorating quickly due to its age. A failure of any one of the locks and dams could cause severe impacts to the local and regional economy and to the regional transportation system. If a shut down of the lock and dam system occurs, it will be difficult to accommodate freight on the roadway system. To put it in perspective, if one of the locks or dams became inoperable, it would take 700 trucks a day seven days a week to move the freight that would have otherwise been carried on the rivers over the same period of time. The condition and cost to operate locks and dams in Allegheny County is shown in the following section. **Allegheny River Lock and Dam 2:** Average cost to operate and maintain Lock 2 at an acceptable level of risk is $4.0 million per year. Lock 2 was built in 1934. It is a single chamber lock and any failure will effectively close the river beyond it to navigation until repairs are made. **Allegheny River CW Bill Young Lock and Dam:** Average cost to operate and maintain this lock at an acceptable level of risk is $3.1 million per year. This lock was built in 1934. It is a single chamber lock and any failure will effectively close the river beyond it to navigation until repairs are made. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor **Allegheny River Lock and Dam 4:** Average cost to operate and maintain Lock 4 at an acceptable level of risk is $1.7 million per year. Lock 2 was built between 1920 and 1927, making it almost 90 years old. It is a single chamber lock and any failure will effectively close the river beyond it to navigation until repairs are made. **Monongahela River Braddock Locks and Dam:** While the dam is new, the locks were built in 1906 and rehabbed in 1953. The average cost to operate and maintain Braddock Locks at an acceptable level risk is $3.6 million per year. **Monongahela River Locks and Dam 3 at Elizabeth:** Dam 3 is scheduled for removal upon completion of the reconstruction of the Charleroi Locks. Locks and Dam 3 were built in 1907 and rehabbed in 1967. In addition to the costs of emergency repairs, it is costing $3.2 million per year to operate and maintain a set of locks and a dam that should have been removed in 2003. According to the Corps of Engineers, “Locks and Dam 3 are highly unreliable and threaten to halt navigation on the Monongahela River at any time. The dam was in a progressive stage of failure in 2006 and 2007. Emergency repairs, expected to last for 5 to 10 years, were completed in 2007 and 2008. The locks at Lock and Dam 3 are also highly unreliable. Many of the components of the # WATERWAYS locks filling and emptying system are out of service and the landwall filling/emptying flume is severely deteriorated.” Ohio River, Emsworth Locks and Dams: The Corps of Engineers describes the Emsworth Dams as presently being in an exigent situation. Temporary, emergency repairs to the erosion protection downstream of the dams were completed in January 2005 to fix 10-foot-deep scour holes- -65 percent of the erosion protection was in a failed state. Due to the extreme corroded state of the dam gates, failure of any one of the seven lift gates yet to be replaced would most likely cause a portion of the stilling basin to fail and possibly undermine the dam. The systems are proven to be unreliable due to multiple failures within the past four years. The dams have been categorized as Dam Safety Action Class 1, urgent and compelling. The Emsworth Locks and Dams are the oldest project on the Ohio River, having been completed in 1922. The average cost for operation and maintenance is $4.0 million per year and the cost for the Major Rehabilitation was last updated at $168.3 million. Ohio River, Dashields Locks and Dam: Dashields was built in 1929 and costs $4.4 million per year to operate and maintain. The locks are in a debilitated condition and work was authorized in 2011 to stabilize a lock wall that is at risk of falling into the river. The work has not begun due to a closed township road barring access to the work site. ### ‘LAST MILE’ OF LOCAL ROADWAYS IN FREIGHT CORRIDORS Local roadways in the freight corridors often do not have the capacity to handle the type and amount of vehicles accessing river ports, such as large trucks that have wide turning radii. ‘Last mile’ of roadways refers to the local roadways that connect the river ports with the interstate and arterial roadways system. These routes should be signed to assist drivers to efficiently move freight. ### UNDERUTILIZED RIVER SYSTEM FOR WATER TAXIS AND TRANSIT Due to recent riverfront developments, an opportunity exists to develop a river taxi system as an alternative to commute to Downtown Pittsburgh and to link key attractions in Station Square, North Shore, the Strip District and Downtown. An assessment should be completed to see if river transit is a viable option now that there is more of a concentration of development. ### NEED MORE MARINAS AND BOAT LAUNCHES The rivers are a wonderful resource for the residents of Allegheny County. Additional marinas and boat launches should be developed in appropriate places to provide more people the opportunity to enjoy the rivers as well as to handle more cargo loading and multi-modal connectivity. ## ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN An excellent multi-modal transportation network – integrated with the Future Land Use Plan – that: * Connects people to jobs * Supports mobility of existing communities * Provides efficient access to proposed development, and * Facilitates the movement of goods and freight. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Waterways portion of the Transportation Plan are to: **A. Support freight movements through safe and efficient water systems.** **B. Provide access to the rivers for commercial and recreation uses.** # CHAPTER 4 # WATERWAYS The following provides an understanding of the objectives. ## A. Support Freight Movements Through Safe and Efficient Water Systems The Three Rivers provide a major means of freight movement. The preservation of the rivers’ system of locks and dams that are managed by the Army Corps of Engineers is critical to keep freight moving. The age and condition of the system is a major maintenance concern. Funding is available at the federal level, but not at levels sufficient to rehabilitate the system in the near future. To alleviate concerns and to ensure freight continues to move along the rivers, local representatives need to urge Congress to appropriate sufficient funding for the maintenance and rehabilitation of southwestern Pennsylvania’s system of locks and dams. ## B. Access to the Rivers for Commercial and Recreational Uses The Three Rivers and adjacent brownfields also provide a source of developable land and recreation. These areas are being opened up for uses that include mixed-use centers, office parks, retail centers, recreational centers and trails. Allegheny County and organizations such as Riverlife Task Force and Friends of the Riverfront are using the rivers to revitalize areas of the County that have been neglected and have historically been industrial uses in the past. Homestead’s Waterfront development and the City of Pittsburgh’s South Side Works are two examples of developments that utilize brownfields and their proximity to the river to their advantage. Trails have been incorporated into the developments to encourage alternative modes of travel as well as recreation. Additional development of marinas and public boat launches will provide the residents of Allegheny County with access to the rivers. --- ## Housing — Allegheny Places, Chapter 4D: Housing Plan - Source: https://www.alleghenyplaces.com/docs/DraftPlan/Chapter4D.pdf - Pages: 14 - Covers: housing # CHAPTER 4 # HOUSING PLAN ## TODAY’S CONDITIONS Allegheny County’s housing stock is greatly diverse in style, type, age and condition. Single-family housing is the most common form of new residential construction in Allegheny County, and remains the most widely available housing type overall. Housing is relatively affordable in Allegheny County. In 2000 the median value of homes in the County was $84,200. This is considerably less than the median home values in Pennsylvania ($97,000) and the nation ($119,600). ### HOMEOWNERSHIP RATES Homeownership rates in many of Allegheny County’s municipalities are relatively high compared to the nation: ■ Allegheny County (excluding the City of Pittsburgh) – 72% ■ Allegheny County (including the City of Pittsburgh) – 67% ■ United States – 66% Many municipalities in the County have homeownership rates greater than 80% (see Figure 4D.1). From 1990 to 2000, the rates of homeownership rose in nearly every municipality in the County. However, here as in the nation, the relatively high homeownership rates in Allegheny County have been impacted by a high number of mortgage foreclosures. In April of 2007, Realtytrac.com reported that over 10,000 homes in Allegheny County were in the process of foreclosure. A June 2007 report of the University of Pittsburgh’s Center on Race and Social Problems found that Whites and Hispanics have higher homeownership rates in the Pittsburgh region than those groups do in the nation, while African Americans and Asians in the region have lower rates than in the nation (see Figure 4D.2). <
> Figure 4D.1 – Percentage of Owner Occupied Housing Units, 2000 ### HOUSEHOLD SIZE Despite a declining population, the number of households in Allegheny County remained relatively stable between 1970 and 2000. The primary reason is the decrease in the number of persons per household over this period, which follows the national trend. From 1990 to 2000, the average household size decreased from 2.5 to 2.3 persons per household. The number of one person households in the County increased by almost 10% during that period. <
> **Figure 4D.2 – Homeownership Rates by Race and Ethnicity, 2000** <
> **Figure 4D.3 – Percentage of Housing Unit Changes by Municipality, 1980-1990** **HOUSING UNIT CHANGE** In the 1990s, the number of housing units in the County remained almost unchanged, increasing by less than 1% over the decade. In 2000, there were nearly 584,000 housing units in Allegheny County. Between 1990 and 2000, only single-family detached units increased in number, growing by slightly over 3%. All other housing types declined during the 1990s. Many municipalities lost housing units between 1980 and 2000 (see Figures 4D.3 and 4D.4). Nearly half the County's municipalities (66) lost housing units; however, slightly less than half (64) gained housing units. Decreases in housing stock mirrored population changes, with the greatest losses in the urban core, Mon Valley, and river communities. The greatest increases in housing units and population were concentrated in the northern and western suburbs. In general, the number of housing units increased in the 1990s in the outer ring suburbs and decreased elsewhere. **HOUSING VACANCIES** The vacancy rate is an indicator of local economic conditions. A low housing unit vacancy rate typically signifies a strong housing market. The overall rate of housing unit vacancy for Allegheny County in 2000 was 8%. This compares favorably with vacancy rates for Pennsylvania and the nation, which were both 9% in 2000. Despite the County's relatively high homeownership rate, Mon Valley municipalities – and especially Braddock, Homestead, Clairton and Wilmerding – continue to have some of the highest vacancy rates not only in the County, but also in the region and state (see Figure 4D.5). Braddock has the state's second highest housing unit vacancy # CHAPTER 4 <
> **Figure 4D.4 – Percentage of Housing Unit Changes by Municipality, 1990-2000** <
> **Figure 4D.5 – Percentage of Housing Unit Vacancy Rates by Municipality, 2000** rate (28.5%), after accounting for seasonal housing units. Only Centralia Borough in Columbia County has a higher vacancy rate than Braddock. (Centralia’s vacancy rate is due to an evacuation that occurred over two decades ago because of uncontrolled mine fires.) Municipalities with the highest vacancy rates are typically also those with the greatest decreases in population and lowest household incomes. Baldwin (1.3%), Upper St. Clair (1.8%) and Kennedy (2.1%) Townships have the lowest housing unit vacancy rates in the County. ### AGE OF HOUSING STOCK Identifying housing in the County by age of construction is another way to examine patterns of growth and decline. Figure 4D.6 shows those municipalities where a majority or significant part of the housing stock was built before 1940. Concentrations of houses built before 1940 are generally considered to signify some of the oldest settlement areas in the County. They are typically found in the urban core and in municipalities along the rivers. Figure 4D.7 shows housing stock built between 1950 and 1979. Many of the municipalities with significant concentrations of housing built during this time period are the County’s “inner ring” suburbs, and are largely built out today. Figure 4D.8 shows housing stock built between 1990 and 2000. The municipalities that have the highest concentrations of newer housing are the County’s “second tier” suburbs, and are located primarily northwest and southwest of the urban core. <
> **Figure 4D.6 – Percentage of Housing Units Built Before 1940, by Municipality** <
> **Figure 4D.7 – Percentage of Housing Units Built Between 1950-1979, by Municipality** As the series of maps illustrates, older housing stock is concentrated in older communities along the rivers, and in and around the urban core. Newer housing stock is more common in the outer ring municipalities, and especially to the north and southwest. The communities with the older housing stock tend to have the highest vacancy rates. An analysis done for the Plan showed that these are the same communities that are losing a large amount of their housing stock through demolition and neglect. ### BUILDING PERMITS Over the past two decades, a relatively stable number of building permits were issued each year in the County (see Figure 4D.9). The outer ring municipalities have shown the greatest permit activity in the most recent years. Single-family units remain the most common form of new residential construction. ### AFFORDABLE HOUSING The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) subsidizes rental housing programs for low-income families, the elderly and special populations primarily through three federally subsidized rental housing programs. Three public housing authorities in Allegheny County are responsible for the programs: ■ Allegheny County Housing Authority ■ Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh ■ McKeesport Housing Authority # CHAPTER 4 <
> **Figure 4D.8 – Percentage of Housing Units Built Between 1990-2000, by Municipality** <
> **Figure 4D.9 – Allegheny County Building Permits, 1980-2004** ### Public Housing Public housing units are owned and operated by the three local public housing authorities. The units are leased to low-income and very low-income persons and families. Utilities are included in the rent. The Allegheny County Housing Authority (ACHA) owns and manages approximately 3,200 low-income public housing units throughout the County. The Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh (HACP) provides publicly assisted housing for more than 20,000 Pittsburghers and manages more than 7,000 public housing units. HACP facilities are located throughout the City, with public and senior housing communities located in each region. HACP also provides funding for a number of privately managed housing communities. The McKeesport Housing Authority (MHA) owns and manages eight properties with over 1,000 federally assisted units consisting of senior living communities, handicapped accessible housing and neighborhood sites consisting of town homes and single family homes. Admission into these housing units is not limited to income. Applicants may choose between rental rates based on income or flat rental rates. ### Housing Choice Vouchers Housing Choice or Section 8 vouchers are a form of rental assistance that is tenant-based. The rental subsidy is given to a household or an individual, who may carry it with them from one unit to another, even to a different county or state. The goal of the program is to increase the mobility of individuals and households, and thereby avoid concentrations of low-income populations in the same building or area. Section 8 vouchers are administered by the three public housing authorities in the County: * ACHA administers approximately 5,000 privately-owned housing units through the Housing Choice Voucher Program. * HACP has more than 10,000 people living in Section 8 housing located throughout the City. * MHA assists over 400 families/individuals through its Section 8 voucher program. ### Project-Based Section 8 Program Project-Based Section 8 Program is subsidized housing that consists of privately owned apartment complexes or other multi-family housing on scattered sites. Rents are subsidized through the Project-Based Section 8 Program. HUD administers the program through its local office in Pittsburgh. Private companies manage the properties. There are over 200 such complexes in Allegheny County. The Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency also administers HUD assisted multifamily housing. The subsidy for Project-Based Section 8 is assigned to the unit. An individual or family cannot take the rental subsidy with them if they move. Once a household moves from the unit, the Project-Based Section 8 assistance is discontinued for that family. When a property owner forecloses on a mortgage or HUD terminates the Project-Based Section 8 assistance for a property, the tenant will be provided a Tenant-Based Section 8 Voucher that can be used in the rental market. ### Eligibility Income eligibility for federally assisted housing programs is based on the median income of an area, which is established by HUD every year. The 2007 median income for the Pittsburgh MSA (Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington and Westmoreland Counties) is $44,600 for a family of four. There are different income limits for each subsidy program, ranging from 80% of median and below, to 30% of median and below for a family of four. ### HOUSING AFFORDABILITY The County’s relatively high homeownership rates can be attributed to the affordability of housing. HUD’s definition of "affordability", which is widely accepted, is that a household spends no more than 30% of its annual income on housing. Families who spend more are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording other necessities such as food, clothing, transportation, and medical care. A 2003 University of Pittsburgh study on housing affordability, titled, *A Study of Affordable Housing: Supply and Demand in Allegheny County*, revealed that for a family of four: * The housing market can generally meet the affordability demand for low-income households – those with incomes at or below 80% of the area median income, or at or below an annual income of $35,700. * A shortage of affordable housing units exists for one of the most vulnerable segments of the County’s population – those with incomes at or below 30% of the area median income, or at or below an annual income of $13,400. * This shortage of affordable housing primarily results from housing units that are moderately and severely inadequate, particularly in the lowest rental categories. Moderately or severely inadequate housing units are those with major plumbing, heating or upkeep deficiencies including peeling paint, leaks or rats. **Households whose median income is at or below 30% of the area median income face hardships finding adequate affordable housing.** ### HOUSING ASSISTANCE TO HOMEOWNERS The Housing & Human Services Division of Allegheny County Economic Development (ACED) works to expand the County’s affordable housing stock and assists residents with the acquisition and rehabilitation of homes. ACED’s programs to assist individual homeowners include: * Allegheny First-time Homebuyers Program – This program offers low-interest mortgages to eligible first-time homebuyers. Applicants may also apply for closing cost and down payment assistance. ■ **Allegheny Targeted Area Homebuyer Program** – This program provides low-interest mortgages to qualified homebuyers in targeted census tracts to help increase homeownership. ■ **Allegheny Home Improvement Loan Program (AHILP)** – This program provides funding assistance that enables low-income homeowners to improve their homes. # HOUSING ASSISTANCE TO DEVELOPERS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Housing & Human Services Division provides support for development which incorporates a variety of housing choices to promote diversity within a community – diversity of race, ethnicity, income level and disability status. The Division provides financial support to developers for the construction or rehabilitation of for-sale and rental housing developments that provide affordable options for residents. Funding assistance is available from the Allegheny County Housing Development Fund (AHDF), which provides gap-financing support for affordable housing developments. It is the most flexible housing program available to nonprofit and for-profit housing developers through the County. There are two forms of assistance available: ‘front-end’ construction subsidies (for rental projects), where developers agree to rent project units to qualified low/moderate-income tenants for a period of up to 30 years; and ‘back-end’ deferred second mortgages (targeted to for-sale housing projects), where developers agree to sell the units to qualified low/moderate-income households. Developers can also leverage private mortgage and equity funds, Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development programs, and Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency programs, such as Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. Projects submitted for AHDF financing include the following: ■ New construction of low/moderate-income, multifamily or elderly rental housing ■ Conversion of existing properties, such as old schools, warehouses and municipal buildings, into low/moderate-income, multifamily or elderly rental housing ■ Rehabilitation of vacant, existing multifamily rental housing developments (of four units or more) for rent to low/moderate-income tenants ■ New construction of single-family residences or townhomes for purchase by low/moderate-income buyers ■ Rehabilitation for resale of existing single-family residences or townhomes for purchase by low/moderate-income buyers AHDF financing is available in most areas of the County except opt-out municipalities, of which there are currently six. However, developments in two of the communities, McKeesport and Penn Hills, are eligible for HOME-funded projects. The Housing & Human Services Division administers the Allegheny County Vacant Property Recovery Program (VPRP). VPRP provides a mechanism for taking properties that are blighted and tax delinquent, and clearing the titles so that the properties can be made available for re-use and re-development. Applications to VPRP must come through the municipality in which the property is located, and the municipality must be a participating member of the program. Because the costs of recovering blighted properties are not inconsiderable and funding for VPRC is limited, the program currently operates primarily in distressed communities. However, VPRC can assist with property acquisitions in other communities, depending on the circumstances. # ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines the challenges to improving the quality of existing housing stock, and to ensuring that new and existing housing meets the needs of all County residents. ### KEY CHALLENGES The Housing Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * Impact of high vacancy rates in core communities * Lack of affordable, good quality housing for very low-income residents * Lack of geographically-distributed mixed-income housing * Impact of foreclosures and predatory lending practices * Impact of deteriorating housing stock in core communities * Increasing energy efficiency for new and existing housing * Improving and promoting visitability The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### IMPACT OF HIGH VACANCY RATES IN CORE COMMUNITIES Suburban sprawl and population decline have resulted in a housing surplus, especially in and around the urban core, and in municipalities along the rivers. Housing vacancy rates have increased significantly over the past several decades. In 2000, 23 municipalities in Allegheny County had vacancy rates over 10%, compared to nine in 1990. Some communities in Allegheny County have vacancy rates that are among the highest in the state. Vacant structures can have a destabilizing effect on an entire neighborhood and accelerate its decline. Neglected, vacant buildings often are health and safety hazards, provide places for criminal activity, and generally foster a negative perception of the area. When the owners are absent or untraceable, abandonment of the property often results. A cycle of disinvestment is created. Property values decline and tax revenues decrease, while the need for municipal intervention increases. The lack of resources and difficulty of attracting reinvestment often forces municipalities to cope with problem structures by demolishing them. Removal of hazardous structures and reclamation of abandoned lots presents opportunities for reinvestment and revitalization. However, opportunities to reclaim structures that are unique, locally or historically significant, and still recoverable may also be lost. ### LACK OF AFFORDABLE, GOOD QUALITY HOUSING FOR VERY LOW-INCOME RESIDENTS The lack of affordable housing is a significant hardship for very low-income households. Very low-income households are defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as households making less than or equal to 50% of area median income (note that the actual figure is a determination made every year by HUD). Although housing in Allegheny County is generally more affordable than in other regions, very low-income households still have difficulty finding safe, adequate, and affordable housing. These households are likely to become cost-burdened and have difficulty meeting other basic needs such as nutrition, health care, and transportation. One factor which affects the lack of affordable housing is the limited distribution of units with three or more bedrooms, and higher rental prices for larger units. ‘Renting down’ is another factor reported to contribute to the shortage. It is a term used to describe households that occupy units with rents below the HUD-defined affordability threshold for their particular income level. *Economically depressed urban neighborhoods are usually lacking in opportunity for their residents.* ### LACK OF GEOGRAPHICALLY-DISTRIBUTED MIXED-INCOME HOUSING Where you live is more important than what you live in, according to the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity. Where someone lives determines their ease of access to essential services, good schools, and a safer and healthier environment. Affordable housing is available throughout the County. However, there are geographic disparities. First, in the City of Pittsburgh, eligible households are mixed between public housing units and complexes and Section 8 subsidies, which # CHAPTER 4 help tenants in the private market. The Section 8 programs include private market developments, called Project-Based Section 8, or tenant-based subsidies, with Housing Choice Vouchers. The goal of the Housing Choice Vouchers is to disperse subsidized residents throughout a geographic area. In the City of Pittsburgh, tenant-based Section 8 housing tends to be concentrated in a few neighborhoods, according to a preliminary study conducted by the Fair Housing Partnership of Greater Pittsburgh. The uneven distribution defeats the goal of the federal Housing Choice Voucher Program, which is to break up the concentration of poverty commonplace in conventional housing projects. The study, released in June 2007, determined that three city neighborhoods – Homewood, Larimer and Perry North – have nearly a fifth of their rental units filled by Section 8 tenants. Citywide, only two percent of occupied rental units in the city are taken up by Housing Choice voucher holders. In the County outside of the City of Pittsburgh, eligible tenants are more likely to be in a Section 8 program for their housing needs rather than living in public housing units or complexes. Of households in subsidized housing, 52% are in a Section 8 program. Nonetheless, whether Section 8 or public housing, tenants in subsidized rental units are geographically concentrated in the County (see Table 4D.1). Forty percent of all subsidized households or units are in the eastern part of the County. Nearly 70% are in the East and Southeast combined. ## IMPACT OF FORECLOSURES AND PREDATORY LENDING PRACTICES Here as in the nation, foreclosures have affected homeownership in Allegheny County. While foreclosure rates increased statewide, Allegheny County had one of the highest rates of any county, according to a report by The Reinvestment Fund (TRF), *Mortgage Foreclosure Filings in Pennsylvania*. Between 2000 and 2003, foreclosure filings in Allegheny County increased by over 60%. In 2003, there were over 11 foreclosures in Allegheny County for every 1,000 owner-occupied housing units. The report concluded that, “Areas with more highly clustered foreclosures tend to be areas with lower than average housing values, lower than average family incomes, higher than average percentage Black or African American, and higher than average percentage Hispanic” populations. While the largest percentages of foreclosures are in these demographic categories, there has also been an increase in the number of foreclosures in moderate income and predominantly white communities as well. Nor have numbers improved. The Pittsburgh Community Reinvestment Group (PCRG) reported that in 2006, nearly 4,800 Allegheny County properties went into foreclosure. In April 2007, Realtytrac.com reported to the Pennsylvania House of Commerce Committee an estimated 10,080 foreclosed properties in Allegheny County. | Table 4D.1 - Distribution of Publicly Subsidized Rental Housing within Allegheny County, Outside the City of Pittsburgh, 2000 | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **PUBLICLY SUBSIDIZED RENTAL HOUSING** | | | | | **Subregion \*** | **Public Housing (3902)** | **Private Housing (4310)** | **Total (8212)** | | NORTH | 8% | 5% | 7% | | EAST | 27% | 51% | 40% | | SOUTHEAST | 30% | 27% | 29% | | SOUTH | 9% | 9% | 9% | | WEST | 25% | 7% | 16% | | TOTAL \*\* | 100% | 100% | 100% | Source: U.S. Census Bureau * Subregions are the 1990 U.S. Census Bureau PUMA regions ** Due to rounding, percentages may not add up to 100 Foreclosures on sub-prime loans are a particular problem in Allegheny County. According to PCRG, between 1996 and 2002 over 32% of all mortgage applications in the County were for sub-prime loans. In 2003, sub-prime loans represented the majority (71%) of loans in foreclosure in Allegheny County. Sub-prime loans are often associated with predatory lending practices. Predatory lending practices include aggressively marketing to vulnerable populations loans with irresponsible terms, such as excessively high fees and higher interest rates based on inaccurate appraisal values. Several organizations within Allegheny County such as PCRG, Urban League, Action Housing, ACORN, Mon Valley Initiative, and Neighborhood Housing Services are working to educate the public about predatory lending and help those who have been victimized. ### IMPACT OF DETERIORATING HOUSING STOCK IN CORE COMMUNITIES Many of the County’s core communities have older housing stock. An analysis done for *Allegheny Places* showed some of these communities are losing their housing stock at significant rates, mostly through neglect and demolition. As with higher vacancy rates in core communities, contributing factors are an overall decline in population growth, a shift in population away from core communities, and an increase in new housing construction in suburban communities. When structures are severely deteriorated, demolition may be necessary to protect public health and safety. Demolition and clearing of lots can also open the door for reinvestment and redevelopment. However, public funds available for demolition do not nearly meet demand. Identifying and prioritizing demolition needs would help public agencies to target assistance where the need is greatest, and to better coordinate demolition and redevelopment activities. Housing stock that is potentially recoverable also should be identified and prioritized based on its condition and potential for reuse. Rehabilitation and reuse of housing stock that represents the unique character and history of a community should be made a high priority. ### INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY FOR NEW AND EXISTING HOUSING Rising energy costs are affecting the cost of living for all County residents. Energy efficient housing can lower the cost of living by using energy more efficiently and reducing utility bills. Increasing energy efficiency in new and existing housing has environmental benefits as well. ‘Green building’ design practices, which include use of new, environmentally-friendly building materials, recycled building materials, energy efficient appliances, and integrated site and building planning, make better use of natural resources and create less waste and pollution. For new, private-sector housing construction, educated consumers are the key to increasing energy efficiency through increased use of green building practices. For new housing funded wholly or in part with public monies, use of appropriate green building technologies should be required by the funding agencies to protect public investment and make the cost of owning and operating a home more affordable. Increasing energy efficiency in existing housing is a more complex issue, given the great diversity of the County’s housing stock in type, age, and condition. Many homeowners may lack the means to make improvements to increase energy efficiency. Both homeowners and landlords may lack knowledge of existing programs that could help them with weatherization and other improvement projects. ### IMPROVING AND PROMOTING VISITABILITY ‘Visitability’ is a term used to describe housing that does not have the kinds of physical barriers that prevent or make visits by people with mobility impairments difficult. The three main barriers to visitability are building entrances that cannot be reached without steps or that are otherwise not accessible, narrow interior doors, and lack of a first-floor bathroom. Without visitability, people who are mobility-impaired can become isolated from family, friends, and neighbors. They may even have problems with mobility in their own homes. Of Allegheny County’s disabled population, persons 65 and older constitute a substantial proportion. Physical and go-outside-the-home type disabilities are the most common disability in this age group. Clearly, lack of visibility is an issue for senior citizens. # CHAPTER 4 In Allegheny County there is a need for more dwellings, both to rent and to buy, designed to visitability standards. However, Allegheny County's hilly terrain makes the provision of fully visitable housing especially challenging. Steep streets, steep sidewalks, sidewalks with multiple flights of stairs, existing houses that sit well above or below the abutting street, and sloped building sites are the norm in Allegheny County. ## RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN Good quality existing, renovated and new housing meets the needs of diverse people. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Housing Plan are to: **A.** Support existing fair housing policies that protect the right to housing regardless of race, disability and other federally and locally protected classes. **B.** Provide a variety of mixed-income and affordable housing in mixed-use Places as identified on the Future Land Use Plan. **C.** Target infill housing where needed. **D.** Promote accessible and visitable housing in communities with desirable amenities. **E.** Promote the use of green building techniques and energy efficient housing design. **F.** Support measures to reduce foreclosures, especially those that are the result of predatory lending. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Support Existing Fair Housing Practices** In order to meet the needs of the County's diverse population, *Allegheny Places* supports and promotes actions and policies that ensure equitable access to safe, decent, and affordable housing. *Allegheny Places* recognizes that every resident of the County has a right to fair housing and supports existing federal fair housing laws that prohibit housing discrimination on the basis of age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability and familial status. The Plan further supports additional protections in State (ethnicity) and local (sexual orientation in the City of Pittsburgh) fair housing laws. **B. Provide a Variety of Mixed-Income and Affordable Housing** Designated mixed-use Places in the Future Land Use Plan have been strategically located throughout the County. They are targeted for mixed-income housing, including affordable housing, to ensure that any County resident who desires to live in a mixed-use Place will have an opportunity to do so. The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity points out that *"There is a critical connection between affordable housing and opportunity-rich neighborhoods in improving the lives of low-income residents."* <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Recommended housing types for mixed-use Places include mixed-use structures containing both non-residential and residential uses; live/work housing; adaptive reuse of existing structures for housing; rehabilitation of existing, good quality housing stock; and new, primarily high-density housing on reclaimed vacant/abandoned properties. Affordable housing in some Places may take the form of ‘workforce housing’ for low- and moderate-income working households. The inclusion of affordable units in multi-unit housing developments and structures will be promoted. **_Inclusionary zoning increases opportunities for low-income residents by requiring or providing incentives to developers to provide more affordable housing choices._** ### Recommendations for Type of Place The provision of housing in Places designated on the Future Land Use map will provide a variety of housing options for a diversity of people. In all Places, innovative design to create energy efficient, accessible, visitable and affordable housing is strongly encouraged. The Housing Plan further encourages, in both new and rehabilitated housing, the provision of live/work units and units for aging in place. Live/work units enable the occupants to live and work in the same place. An apartment above a store on Main Street and an artist’s loft are examples of live/work units. Units that enable ‘aging in place’ are designed so that as the occupants age, they can continue to live in the same place. Designing units to meet visitability standards is one way to facilitate aging in place. Specific housing descriptions for each type of Place can be found in Table 4D.2. ### C. Target Infill Housing Where Needed Over the last two decades, the County has been ‘hollowing out’ as its population shifts from the urban core and older river communities to municipalities nearer the edges of the County. When their population declines, older communities often face increased tax burdens that threaten the provision of services. If the quality of life for residents suffers as a result, it can send the community into further decline. To help revitalize declining communities, *Allegheny Places* supports future growth and redevelopment of existing infill areas. Infill development is the redevelopment and/or reuse of vacant, abandoned, and under-utilized properties and structures in areas where surrounding lands are largely developed. Infill housing (and other infill development) should be planned to meet community needs, and to be compatible with existing neighborhood context. Cooperative partnerships between government agencies, developers, financial institutions, nonprofit organizations, neighborhood organizations and others help create infill development projects. To better identify infill opportunities, inventories are needed of vacant and abandoned properties, available infrastructure and its condition, and the condition of any structures that are present. This will help to coordinate demolition, clearing of properties, and the provision of any infrastructure improvements that will be needed to support redevelopment efforts. In communities with many vacant and abandoned properties, land banking can provide a way to assemble and hold the land for future development. The County will explore land banking for areas where revitalization through infill development is not likely to be achieved in the foreseeable future. ### D. Promote Accessible and Visitable Housing in Communities with Desirable Amenities More accessible and visitable housing choices are needed in Allegheny County. Although universal accessibility is covered in the building code, visitability standards are not as clearly addressed. The rapid increase of ‘visitability’ legislation in the United States in recent years demonstrates a growing awareness of the need for housing with specific features that allow easy, safe and convenient access by any individual with a mobility impairment. Access to visitable homes is limited to the main floor or habitable grade level of new single-family homes, duplexes or triplexes. ‘Visitability’ focuses on accommodations that a guest would utilize, such as the entrance to a home and first-floor hallways, rather than on features used by residents of the dwelling. # CHAPTER 4 *According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, "Housing that is 'visitable' has a very basic level of accessibility that enables persons with disabilities to visit friends, relatives, and neighbors in their homes..."* The County will develop policies to address visitability issues in future County-assisted affordable housing projects. Municipalities can similarly require, through an ordinance, that developers provide a percentage of visitable units in residential projects. **E. Promote the Use of Green Building Techniques and Energy Efficient Housing Design** The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is developing a program, LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) for Homes, which will have a rating system for environmentally friendly homes. The benefits of a LEED-certified home include lower energy and water bills, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and less exposure to mold, mildew and other indoor toxins. While the upfront cost of construction may be slightly higher than for a conventional home, the net cost of owning a LEED home is comparable or even lower. For housing in which Allegheny County has involvement, developers and contractors are currently encouraged to apply for Energy Star certification. The County will encourage use of the LEED for Homes guidelines as well. The County supports energy and resource efficiency, waste reduction and pollution prevention practices, indoor air quality standards, and other environmental initiatives for both new construction and existing <
> | | | DESCRIPTION OF HOUSING | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **PLACES** | **Airport-Industry** | Not planned in these Places. Infill housing in nearby residential areas can help meet workforce needs. Zoning to ensure that infill housing is within reach of all potential future workers is encouraged. | | | **Core** | Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland are targeted for housing to foster a ‘24-hour’ downtown environment, and support retail and commercial development. High-density housing is expected. Adaptive reuse of existing structures is encouraged. | | | **Corridor** | Targeted for mixed-income housing to provide more housing choices close to employment centers. Zoning to ensure that housing is within reach of all potential future workers is encouraged. | | | **Neighborhood** | Primarily infill housing. The unique character and history of the community will guide community revitalization efforts. Demolition of unsound structures will provide opportunities for new and redevelopment in some areas. The overall density of development will be high. | | | **Community Downtown** | Similar to Urban Neighborhoods, but not as dense and with more housing located in mixed-use buildings. | | | **Village** | Similar to Community Downtown, but at a much lower density. | | | **Rural** | Housing in these Places will be predominately lower density, new single family housing. | buildings. The County will continue to work with local groups, such as Sustainable Pittsburgh and the Green Building Alliance, to market the importance of green building to area residents, business owners and developers. F. **Support Measures to Reduce Foreclosures** Predatory lending practices are an obstacle to home ownership, especially in low-income areas. The County supports outreach efforts to educate consumers about predatory loans and mortgages. The County will also continue to educate consumers about its and other public agencies' home ownership programs for low- and moderate-income persons. --- ## Conservation — Allegheny Places, Chapter 4K: Environmental Resources Plan - Source: https://www.alleghenyplaces.com/docs/DraftPlan/Chapter4K.pdf - Pages: 20 - Covers: conservation # CHAPTER 4 # ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PLAN ## ■ TODAY’S CONDITIONS Land use patterns have a direct effect on the quality of the environment. This is as true today as it was a century ago. From 1850 through 1950, western Pennsylvania extracted its living from the natural resources of its hills: lumber, coal, oil and natural gas. There were no environmental protections in place, so the result was over-timbering, acid mine drainage, mine subsidence, deplorable air pollution, acid rain and untreated wastewater flowing directly into the County’s rivers and streams. The region was being poisoned by the very industries that had helped it to grow. <
> Photo credit: Kevin Smay Pittsburgh emerged from World War II exhausted and dirty. It had made huge contributions to the war effort and, as a result, suffered from environmental pollution and general degradation. Conditions were so dangerous and disgusting that business leaders, led by Richard King Mellon, and government officials led by Pittsburgh Mayor David Lawrence, forged a new partnership. The result was the Allegheny Conference on Community Development. In 1945, the Allegheny Conference proposed a grand design for Pittsburgh. Over the next decade and a half, their program, the Pittsburgh Renaissance, was a pioneering effort to reduce air and water pollution. The Renaissance rebuilt downtown Pittsburgh. Environmental remediation continues even today, but the County’s natural resources have made a significant recovery. Today, the City’s beautiful natural setting is our prime amenity. ## AIR QUALITY In the early part of the 20th century, coal smoke from industrial furnaces, locomotives and domestic fires filled the air in quantities that can scarcely be imagined today. Furthermore, sulfuric acid, formed by sulfur dioxide in coal smoke reacting with water in the atmosphere, caused acid rain which killed vegetation on the hillsides surrounding the City and on the riverbanks. Smoke-control legislation was enacted in 1941, but suspended during World War II. In 1946 smoke control measures were finally enforced countywide. The 1950s and 1960s brought even stricter air pollution controls. The effects were dramatic: eight years later the hours of "heavy smoke", as reported by the U.S. Weather Bureau, were reduced by 94%. This was in 1954, when the steel mills were still running at full capacity, more than 20 years before the first mill closings. One result of cleaner air was the eventual return of vegetation to the hills and riverbanks. The decline of the steel industry in the 1970s brought severe economic hardship to the entire region, but did lead to a cleaner environment. Today, Allegheny County is in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Air Quality Control Region (AQCR). Air quality is monitored by State and local authorities as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Six criteria pollutants are the focus of this monitoring: carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). The attainment status for each of these pollutants is listed in Table 4K.1. A 2004 emission inventory report showed the Cheswick power plant in Springdale Borough is responsible for 80% of all sulfur dioxide emissions in Allegheny County. ## GEOLOGY Allegheny County is located within the Allegheny Plateaus Physiographic Province, predominantly in the Pittsburgh Low Plateau Section. The Pittsburgh Low Plateau is characterized **TABLE 4K.1 –Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley AQCR Attainment Status 2006** | CRITERIA POLLUTANT | ATTAINMENT STATUS | | :--- | :--- | | CO | Maintenance | | Pb | Attainment | | NO2 | Attainment | | O3 | Non-Attainment | | PM10 / PM2.5 | Attainment / Non-Attainment | | SO2 | Attainment | by a rising and falling upland surface cut by many narrow and shallow valleys. The bedrock underlying the Pittsburgh Low Plateau consists of layers of shale, siltstone, sandstone, limestone and coal. Coal is found in numerous beds underlying much of the County. The Pittsburgh Coal bed has been extensively mined. Other important coal beds are the Redstone Coal, Upper Freeport Coal, Middle Kittanning Coal and the Lower Kittanning Coal. A portion of the southwestern part of the County lies in the Waynesburg Hills Section. The Hills are characterized by narrow hilltops with steeply-sloped, narrow valleys. Rock layers in the Hills are sandstone, shale, red beds and limestone. The Pittsburgh Coal bed underlies 50 square miles of southern Allegheny County in the Waynesburg Hills Section. Mining of minerals and use of coal and gas reserves are discussed in the Resource Extraction Plan. Elevations in the County range from 682 feet above sea level along the Ohio River at the County’s border, to 1801 feet at River Hill in Forward Township. ### HYDROLOGY Watercourses are a prominent feature of Allegheny County – there are over 2,000 miles of stream and 90 miles of river. Four large rivers flow through the County: the Allegheny, Monongahela, Ohio, and Youghiogheny. <
> Photo credit: Kevin Smay The Allegheny and Monongahela rivers meet at the Point in the City of Pittsburgh to form the Ohio River, which is a principal tributary of the Mississippi River. The principal drainage destination on the northern and northeastern sides of the County is the Allegheny River. The river flows through Allegheny County for approximately 29 miles and provides the northeastern-most drainage into the Mississippi River watershed. The Monongahela River drains the southeastern portion of the County and extends for 35 miles through Allegheny County. The river is navigable for its entire length in the County with a series of locks and dams maintaining a consistent depth of nine feet. *The Monongahela River is one of the few major, navigable northward flowing rivers in the world.* # CHAPTER 4 The Ohio River extends for 15 miles through the County, receiving drainage from the western and southwestern sections of Allegheny County. The Youghiogheny River is a major tributary of the Monongahela River, flowing for about 17 miles along the southeastern Allegheny County/Westmoreland County border to its confluence with the Monongahela near McKeesport. There are notably large floodplain areas located along the County’s four biggest drainage ways. In addition to rivers, major streams include Chartiers Creek, Pine Creek and Montour Run. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Wetlands are among our most valuable natural resources in that they reduce flooding, improve water quality, and support a wide variety of plant and animal species. Wetlands are generally characterized by a high water table, poor drainage and some degree of surface ponding. There are approximately 1,700 acres of wetlands in the County as identified by the National Wetlands Inventory. **Many people who live at the bottom of watersheds in flood-prone areas experience a loss of property value and a discouraging cycle of personal property damage.** Hydric soils are poorly drained soils unsuitable for development. They are often indicators of wetlands. This is especially true of the County’s two primary hydric soils – Atkins and Brinkerton silt loams. There are several other soils types in the County with inclusions of hydric soils. There are approximately 198,000 acres of hydric soils in the County – less than 1% of the County’s total land area – mostly along waterways. ### WATER QUALITY At the turn of the last century, much effort went toward managing the flow of the rivers for navigation. Little effort went toward improving their water quality. Nearly 200 years of using the rivers as open sewers had taken a toll. Pittsburgh had the highest rate of typhoid fever in the nation at the time because it was dumping raw, untreated sewage into the rivers and pumping raw, untreated drinking water out of the rivers. In 1907, the city built its first water treatment plant. **Degraded in the past, the County’s waterways are recovering and are now a focus of development plans.** Incredibly, though, until the 1950s most municipalities in Allegheny County still allowed their sanitary sewers to empty untreated into the area’s streams and rivers. Factories dumped waste chemicals and hot wastewater into the rivers. Fish and other wildlife were unable to tolerate the conditions. The County’s waters were lifeless. In 1955, the Allegheny County Sanitary Authority (ALCOSAN) was contracted to build wastewater collection and treatment facilities throughout the city. Industries were also required to treat their wastewater. Slowly, the rivers recovered and by the 1970s, when local and national governments instituted water pollution laws, the fish population began to increase. There is still much work to do, but today the rivers are populated by a diversity and abundance of fish species, and a variety of waterfowl. ### Surface Water Quality Still, there are water quality problems that need to be addressed. According to the National Water-Quality Assessment program of the U.S. Geological Survey, the major findings that emerged from an assessment conducted in the Allegheny and Monongahela River basins between 1996 and 1998 were: * Streams and rivers in the two river basins range from those of high quality that support diverse aquatic life to those that are seriously degraded and support few aquatic species and few human uses of the water. ■ Acid- and mineral-laden mine drainage from abandoned coal mines is one of the most serious and persistent water quality problems in the basins, limiting water use and aquatic resources. Sulfate concentrations were five times greater in streams draining mined areas than in streams draining unmined areas. <
> Photo credit: Bernadette E. Kazmarski ■ Zinc in bed sediment exceeded aquatic life guidelines at 15 of 50 sites. ■ A group of now-banned industrial chemicals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), was detected in over 40% of sediment and fish tissue samples. Consumption advisories are in place for several fish species because of PCB and chlordane contamination in some large river reaches. ■ In sampled streams in basins dominated by urban or agricultural land, pesticides and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were commonly detected, although generally at concentrations meeting drinking water and aquatic life standards and guidelines. ■ Since 1980, treatment of drainage from active and abandoned mines has generally resulted in improved water quality, with increased pH and lower metal and sulfate concentrations, but diversity and abundance of aquatic organisms remain reduced in comparison to unmined areas. ■ Some of the most degraded stream reaches have, since the early 1900s, supported few aquatic organisms. Yet, the quality of many reaches is now improving, and abundant fish and invertebrate populations include sensitive species not seen here in decades. ■ Streams in forested settings are among the most diverse nationally with respect to aquatic insects among sites sampled. The Ohio River, since it receives water from both the Ohio and the Monongahela Rivers, experiences similar contamination. Additionally, dioxin levels exceed water quality standards in Pittsburgh and decrease in concentration in a downstream direction. The State Water Plan, currently being prepared by the Commonwealth, identified the following water quality issues for Allegheny County: ■ Lower Allegheny River ■ Inadequately treated municipal and industrial waste causing acid mine drainage and nutrient enrichment ■ Monongahela River ■ Mine drainage ■ Untreated and/or inadequately treated municipal and industrial discharge ■ Variety of non-point pollution sources ■ Thermal pollution ■ Landfill leachate ■ Excessive mineral constituent concentrations ■ Ohio River ■ Mine drainage ■ Raw and inadequately treated sewage and industrial discharges ### Abandoned Mine Drainage Past mining operations have polluted local streams and waterways with Abandoned Mine Drainage (AMD) through exposing acid producing rocks to rainfall and runoff. Mine drainage can also be alkaline, and pollute streams with # CHAPTER 4 metals such as iron, manganese and aluminum. The following streams experience AMD problems: * Chartiers Creek * Dolphin Run * Half Crown Run * Little Plum Creek * Long Run * Montour Run * Raccoon Creek * Thompson Run This topic is addressed more thoroughly in the Resource Extraction Plan. ## Sewer Overflows According to the National Research Council, in 2005, overflow of outdated combined stormwater and sanitary sewers directly into streams and rivers was the most serious water pollution problem affecting the County. During dry weather, the sewage collection system, which transports wastewater from thousands of homes to the wastewater treatment plant, operates effectively. However, when it rains or snow melts, extra stormwater gets into the sewage collection system through direct connections or through leaky, cracked pipes. This extra volume of water overloads the sewage collection system pipes and raw sewage overflows at hundreds of locations before it reaches the treatment plant. Untreated sewage runs into waterways, overflows from manholes or backs up into homeowners' basements. The service area of ALCOSAN has at least 450 combined and separate sewer overflow structures from which untreated sewage is discharged into local streams during wet weather, more than any similar authority in the country. ## River Conservation Plans The Pennsylvania Rivers Conservation Program has been developed to conserve and enhance river resources through preparation and accomplishment of locally initiated plans. The program provides technical and financial assistance to municipalities and river support groups to carry out planning, implementation, acquisition and development activities. River conservation plans have been completed for rivers and creeks on the Pennsylvania River Registry: * Monongahela River (1998) * Youghiogheny River (1998) * Montour Run (2000) * Nine Mile Run (2000) * Allegheny River (2001) * Lower Chartiers Creek (2001) * Turtle Creek (2003) * Allegheny Monongahela and Ohio Rivers (2004) * Sewickley Creek (2005) * Pine Creek (2007) In order for a river to be placed on the registry, it must have an approved plan and local municipal support. All of these plans have implementation strategies. ## Groundwater Quality Although not regulated, the quality of water from domestic wells meets Federal standards for drinking water for most substances analyzed in the National Water-Quality Assessment program study conducted in the Allegheny and Monongahela River basins between 1996 and 1998. However, the study found that: * Compared to groundwater in unmined areas, water in shallow private domestic wells near reclaimed surface coal mines had higher concentrations of sulfate, iron and manganese, even after all mining and reclamation had been completed. * Overall, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected at very low levels in the groundwater samples analyzed. Gasoline related compounds were detected slightly more frequently and at slightly higher concentrations in groundwater near reclaimed surface coal mines than near unmined areas. * Nitrate was detected in over 60% of sampled wells, although only one domestic well sample exceeded the drinking water standard for nitrate. * Radon was detected at levels exceeding the proposed Federal drinking-water standard of 300 pCi/L (picocuries per liter) in over half of the groundwater samples. ## FLOODING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Rivers and streams often have to carry more water than their channels can contain. The excess water spills onto adjacent lowlands – the floodplain – until the water volume decreases enough to be contained within the channel again. When a storm hits the region, 16 multi-purpose flood control reservoirs built and maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the headwaters of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers retain excess water upstream of the dam. Controlled releases of this excess water help to prevent or reduce downstream flooding. <
> Photo credit: Bernadette E. Kazmarski However, flooding problems are still experienced throughout much of the County. Although there is no comprehensive, county-wide inventory of chronic flooding problems, the Allegheny County Emergency Service Department has designated 12 waterways as priority streams relative to flooding (see Map 4K.1), based on data collected on flooding and the resultant damages: ■ Bull Creek ■ Chartiers Creek ■ Deer Creek ■ Lowries Run ■ McLaughlin Run ■ Montour Run ■ Pine Creek ■ Plum Creek ■ Rawlins Run ■ Robinson Run ■ Sawmill Run ■ Streets Run These streams are high-priority for protection from further development and other activities that would increase flooding. The Emergency Management Division is considering adding two more streams to the list: Girty's Run and Dirty Camp Run. The PA Storm Water Management Act (Act 167), enacted in 1978, enables counties to prepare stormwater management plans for designated watersheds, which provide the basis for local municipal stormwater management ordinances. When a plan for a watershed has been prepared and approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), local municipalities within the watershed must enact stormwater management ordinances to control runoff water volumes, water quality and peak rates of stormwater runoff from development sites. To date, Act 167 plans have been completed for 8 of the 25 designated watersheds in Allegheny County: ■ Deer Creek ■ Flaugherty Run ■ Girty's Run ■ Monongahela River ■ Montour Run ■ Pine Creek ■ Squaw Run ■ Turtle Creek In December 2007, Allegheny County Council approved an update to the County's 1985 Stormwater Management Plan for Girty's Run, Pine Creek, Squaw Run and Deer Creek watersheds. ### STEEP SLOPES Half of the land area in Allegheny County is either moderately sloped or steeply sloped (see Map 4K.2). Generally, the steepest slopes are found in the valleys of the tributaries to the major rivers. ### SOILS Much of Allegheny County has a thin soil cover with areas of low-permeability, clay-rich soils underlain by bedrock. Soils are classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service according to their suitability for development, agriculture or other uses. The Soil Survey of Allegheny County provides maps of the soil series, or soil types found within the County, along with descriptions of their characteristics and suitability for different land uses. ### WOODLANDS Woodlands cover approximately 280 square miles, or more than a third of the County. Tree cover is a valuable resource in that it provides: ■ Slope stability ■ Aesthetic value ■ Habitat for a great diversity of plant and animal species ■ Opportunities for recreation ■ Management of stormwater runoff ■ Improved water quality # CHAPTER 4 The majority of forested areas are located on the steeply sloped hills and ridges of the County's stream and river valleys. <
> Photo credit: Kevin Smay State Game Lands #203, located in Marshall Township and Franklin Park Borough, encompasses about two square miles of woodlands. Another 29 square miles is owned by Allegheny County, mostly as parks. The overwhelming majority of the County's woodlands are privately owned. ### NATURAL HERITAGE AREAS The Allegheny County Natural Heritage Inventory identifies and maps important biotic and ecological resources that make up the natural heritage of Allegheny County (see Map 4K.3). These areas, which include Biological Diversity Areas, Landscape Conservation Areas and Other Heritage Areas, provide habitat for a great diversity of plants and animals, including rare, threatened and endangered species. Natural heritage areas also provide scenic and recreational opportunities for residents and visitors. In addition to this classification system, each area has been assigned one of three County significance ranks of either 'Exceptional', 'High' or 'Notable'. The significance rankings have been used to set priorities for protection. ### Biological Diversity Areas Allegheny County has 30 listed Biological Diversity Areas (BDAs): * ■ Allegheny River * ■ Barking Slopes * ■ Beckets Run * ■ Campbell Run Valley * ■ Campmeeting Woods * ■ Clinton Wetlands * ■ Crouse Run Valley * ■ Deer Creek Valley * ■ Guyasuta Run Valley * ■ Harrison Hills * ■ Hemlock Grove * ■ Jacks Run Valley * ■ Liberty Valley(Dead Man's Hollow) * ■ Lower Allegheny River Islands * ■ Lowries Run * ■ Mayview Valley * ■ Millers Run * ■ Millerstown Woods * ■ Moon Run Slopes * ■ North Park Lake * ■ Oakmont Flood Plain * ■ Ohio River * ■ Painters Run Slopes * ■ Peregrine Falcon * ■ Peters Creek Wetland * ■ Plum Creek Valley * ■ Simpson Run * ■ Toms Run Valley * ■ Trillium Trail * ■ Willow Run Slopes BDAs are: * ■ Natural or human influenced habitat that harbor one or more occurrences of plants or animals recognized as state or national species of special concern, * ■ Areas that possess a high diversity of native species of plants and animals, or * ■ Areas that support a rare or exemplary natural community, including the highest quality and least disturbed examples of relatively common community types. ### Landscape Conservation Areas Allegheny County has three Landscape Conservation Areas (LCAs): * ■ Big and Little Sewickley Creek * ■ Montour Run Valley * ■ Raccoon Creek Valley An LCA is a large contiguous area that is important because of its size, open space and habitats. Although an LCA may include a variety of land uses, it has not been heavily disturbed and thus retains much of its natural character. ### Other Heritage Areas There are six Other Heritage Areas in the County: * Beechwood Farms Nature Reserve * Blue Run Valley * Bullock-Pens Park * Frick Park * Gilfillan Woods * Salamander Park OHAs are areas that are consistently utilized for scientific monitoring of the environment or other natural science studies. This classification includes land regularly used by educational institutions, local environmental organizations or the general public for nature study or instruction. The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy released the Natural Heritage Inventory in 1994. The Conservancy realizes the inventory is outdated and has plans to update it. ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines what can be done to protect quality of our environmental resources; maintain clean and abundant air, water and energy resources; and promote safety from natural hazards. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Environmental Resource Plan, the Environmental Quality Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * Reducing sewer overflows * Impacts of development on steep slopes * Impacts of development landslide-prone areas * Loss of forest land * Improving air quality, especially for ozone and particulate matter * Flood prevention and mitigation * Protecting and improving ground and surface water quality * Wetland protection * Loss of Natural Heritage Areas * Protection of wildlife and biodiversity corridors The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### REDUCING SEWER OVERFLOWS Nearly a third of the County’s municipalities are served by combined sewer systems. Combined sewer pipes carry both wastewater (used water and sewage that goes down the drain in homes and businesses) and stormwater (rain or snow that washes off streets and parking lots) to a wastewater or sewage treatment plant. In a combined sewer system, the mixed wastewater and stormwater flow together in a single pipe. During wet weather and high groundwater table conditions, many of these systems are hydraulically overloaded, causing an overflow. Because these overflows violate the Clean Water Act, regulatory agencies, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and PADEP, have denied new sewer system tie-ins. This restriction is limiting economic growth in many municipalities. Eleven wastewater treatment agencies operating in the County have permits that include requirements for addressing combined sewer overflow. Forty-one of the 126 sewered municipalities within the County have been operating under the requirements of corrective action plans. The municipalities of Edgewood, Penn Hills, Pittsburgh and Swissdale are all under consent orders as well. Combined sewer overflows (CSOs) must be significantly reduced over the next decade. Communities are required to reduce CSOs in the system from 50-60 annually down to 4-5 per year or the EPA will force the community to correct the problem in a very short time frame and may impose very large penalties and fines for noncompliance. Actions required for achieving compliance with Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act regulations and to address stormwater drainage issues within the County will require major capital investments. The costs of maintaining, repairing and replacing aging infrastructure and expanding the capabilities of the existing systems are significant. Preliminary estimates place the cost of achieving compliance with the current combined sewer overflow regulations for ALCOSAN and the tributary systems at over $3 billion. The wet weather issue has become a priority for the region's state and federal legislators. Federal funding totals $17 million to date and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania recently awarded a $2 million grant to the 3 Rivers Wet # CHAPTER 4 Weather Program (3RWW) to help municipalities address the issue. 3RWW has awarded more than $6.8 million to communities over the last four years to help fund 33 innovative sewer projects that can become models for other municipalities and regions. Many of these projects involve multiple communities collaborating to solve the wet weather issue. ### IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT ON STEEP SLOPES Much of the County’s steeply sloped land is highly susceptible to landslides and rockfalls. The red bed (claystones) of the Waynesburg Hills is especially prone to slope failure. Very steep slopes in particular can be difficult and dangerous to develop. There are a number of potentially significant environmental impacts associated with disturbance of steep slopes, including: * Difficulty of re-establishing vegetation * Decreased stormwater run-off absorption rates * Increased volume and velocity of stormwater runoff * Increased potential for accelerated erosion * Potential for landslides and rockfalls * Ugly scarification and other visual impacts <
> Photo credit: PennDOT Steep slopes may provide spectacular opportunities for development, but they also present special challenges for construction. Poorly done and excessive hillside development can diminish the very views and natural features that people valued in the first place. And in the absence of strict controls, public safety may be at risk. In 2005, the Heinz Endowments commissioned a study, *The Physical and Ecological Investigation of Pittsburgh’s Hillsides*. The study, managed by the Allegheny Land Trust, identified options for protecting the City’s wooded hillsides. The main recommendations of the study were: * Adopt standards, rather than guidelines, for development in the Hillside District * Amend the City of Pittsburgh’s zoning code to establish a steep slope overlay district (based on slopes of 25% or greater) that encourages conservation through strict, legally defensible controls * Prohibit development on slopes 40% and greater * Address buffer areas While the study was specific to the City of Pittsburgh, its findings and recommendations are applicable throughout Allegheny County. ### IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT ON LANDSLIDE-PRONE AREAS Landslides are common in Western Pennsylvania, and have shaped the landscape of the region throughout its history. "Monongahela", a Native American word, is variously interpreted as "river of the falling banks", "many landslides", "high banks or bluffs, breaking off and falling down in places", or "places of caving or falling banks". 'Landslide' is a general term for the mass movement of soil and rock on an unstable slope. Landslides can be rapid or very slow, and involve large or small areas and volumes of material. The principal types of movement are falling, sliding, flowing and slumping, but combinations of these are common. Slopes in the Waynesburg Hills have a high susceptibility to landslides, while those in the Pittsburgh Low Plateau have a high to moderate susceptibility. However, major landslides occur regularly in both physiographic regions (see Map 4K.4). The most recent major landslide occurred in Kilbuck Township in the Spring of 2006. Over ½ million cubic yards of rock and soil material fell onto Route 65 and spilled across the adjacent railroad lines. The landslide caused major disruptions to critical transportation infrastructure - two days for rail, and two weeks for highway. The rail impacts were felt throughout the country. As of 2008, Route 65 still has a single-lane closure in the area of the slide. The landslide was caused when a steep, landslide-prone hillside was excavated to prepare a building site for a large-scale commercial development. It was the biggest - and most costly - landslide in the County in decades, and highlights the need for greater control of development in landslide-prone areas. ## LOSS OF FOREST LAND Forested lands throughout the County are under pressure from development. According to the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Social and Urban Research, the greatest population increases since the early 1990s have been in forested areas. That growth areas should face the greatest losses in tree cover is ironic, given the correspondingly greater need for the benefits that these natural systems provide. Forest lands are important as wildlife habitat. They contribute to the stability of soils and slopes, improve air quality, and play an important role in water management. Tree cover can significantly reduce both the quantity and velocity of surface runoff to streams and rivers, thereby reducing sediment loads and flooding. Trees can take carbon dioxide out of the air and store it as carbon in wood, thereby reducing greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Tree cover along streams and wetlands lowers water temperature as well, which is important to stream ecology. The northerly and southerly parts of the County have experienced the most significant growth and development, causing a loss of forest cover and altering the hydrological characteristics of watersheds. The flooding that has resulted has caused severe problems for a number of downstream communities. Municipalities with higher percentages of tree cover have a greater percentage of streams in attainment of water quality standards. The positive effect begins when the percentage of tree cover is above 40%. At greater than 40%, attainment of water quality standards increases sharply as the percentage of tree cover increases. Water management will become increasingly expensive for growing municipalities, and for the County, unless more attention is paid to managing human activities in the landscape and maintaining adequate vegetative cover in critical locations within watersheds. The County's extensive wooded hillsides have also helped to define a scenic identity for Allegheny County. The landscape attracts visitors for sightseeing, and for a wide variety of outdoor sports and recreation including outdoor festivals, fishing, boating, hiking, birding, and bicycling - all of which generate significant economic benefits. Simply put, extensive loss of forest lands will be a blow to the quality of ecosystems necessary for future sustainability and to the quality of life in the region. ## IMPROVING AIR QUALITY Particulate matter in the air remains a significant concern. In 2007, the American Lung Association named Pittsburgh the second worst metropolitan area in the nation polluted by year-round particle pollution (Annual PM2.5) and Allegheny County the second most polluted county by short-term particle pollution (24-Hour PM2.5). The ranking is driven by the fine particle monitor located in Liberty Borough, downwind of U.S. Steel's Clairton Coke Works (the largest cokemaking facility in the United States), as well as other industry. The Liberty/Clairton area is a special non-attainment area for fine particles, also known as PM2.5 (particulate matter with diameters smaller than 2.5 micrometers). This area includes five municipalities: Glassport, Liberty, Lincoln and Port Vue Boroughs, and the City of Clairton. This smaller non-attainment area is surrounded by the larger Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley non-attainment area. The air quality in the rest of the region is hardly pristine. According to the American Lung Association, if the Liberty/Clairton area were omitted from the ranking, Allegheny County would still place as 22nd worst in the nation, and Pittsburgh would be the 19th worst metro area in the U.S. The second highest fine-particulate readings in Allegheny County were found in North Braddock. Three-year averages from monitors located in Stowe, Clairton, Harrison and Lawrenceville exceeded the annual standard. The American Lung Association, in its 2008 *State of the Air* report, named Pittsburgh the sootiest city in America. The ranking is based on based on air quality measurements of short-term particle pollution between 2004 and 2006. It is anticipated that reductions of pollution from the coal-fired power plants upwind of Allegheny County will help reduce PM2.5 in the County. Large power plants are major sources of air pollution. The vast majority of these large power plants (over 70%) are coal-fired. A disproportionate share of emissions comes from a handful of plants that have not yet installed modern pollution controls, or which operate inefficiently. A 2005 # CHAPTER 4 report by the Environmental Integrity Project ranks the top fifty power plant polluters for sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon dioxide (CO2) and mercury. According to the report, the Cheswick power plant in Springdale is the 15th dirtiest plant for SO2 and 45th worst for mercury, based on emission rates, which measure the amount of pollution per megawatt-hour of electricity generated. The plant is planning to install an air pollution control system to reduce emission levels. ### FLOOD PREVENTION AND MITIGATION In September 2004, the remnants of Hurricane Ivan caused massive flooding throughout Western Pennsylvania. Flooding and mudslides damaged and destroyed bridges, closed roadways, and damaged and destroyed thousands of homes and businesses. In January 2005, the remnants of Hurricane Katrina once again produced flooding and mudslides that caused severe damage in Allegheny County. Not all severe flooding in the County has been hurricane related, however. In June 2004, high winds and heavy rains caused flooding. In January 1996, a combination of ice, heavy snow and rain caused severe flooding statewide. The Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers crested within five hours of each other, causing major flooding downtown and elsewhere in the County. Much flash flooding in the County has been caused by development in the uplands and along streams. When rain falls or snow melts on impermeable surfaces, it is usually collected in a system of gutters and storm sewers and either released directly into a receiving waterway (more typical of older development), or conveyed to stormwater detention facilities where it is gradually released into a receiving waterway. When there is too much precipitation in too short a time, both natural and manmade stormwater management systems can be overwhelmed. Large volumes of water are passed rapidly downstream, overtopping channel banks and adjacent floodplain areas; and are even forced up out of inlets, storm sewers and drain pipes. A good example of a streamshed that has experienced severe flash flooding is Pine Creek. Pine Creek and its tributary streams drain about 67 square miles of northwestern Allegheny County and include some 14 municipalities. The watershed begins near the Butler County line and reaches the Allegheny River at the Borough of Etna. Historic patterns of land development in the municipalities at the bottom of the Pine Creek watershed greatly reduced the capacity of the floodplain in its southerly reaches. More recent land development in the northerly municipalities further diminished the capacity of the floodplain in its northerly reaches. In 1986, a flash flood on Pine Creek resulted in the deaths of eight people and extensive damage in Etna Borough and Shaler Township, municipalities located at the bottom of the watershed. *Communities at the bottom of watersheds in flood-prone areas experience declines in property values and a discouraging cycle of personal property damage.* ### ■ Stormwater Management Allegheny County’s many municipalities, diverse patterns of land use and development, and complex topography and geology underscore the need for coordinated stormwater management planning. Stormwater management involves the control of water that runs off the surface of the land from rain or melting ice or snow. The volume and speed of runoff substantially increase with increased land development. Management of stormwater is necessary to mitigate the impacts of development such as frequent flooding, erosion and sedimentation problems, damages to roads, bridges and other infrastructure, as well as non-point source pollution from impervious surfaces. Better development controls and practices – including best management practices adapted for the County’s particular soils and topography – are essential for mitigating existing problems and preventing future flooding. Stormwater management programs typically consist of three elements: the enforcement of effective runoff source controls, structural flood control measures and improved channel maintenance. Pennsylvania’s Act 167 requires local storm management regulations to control runoff volumes and peak rates of stormwater runoff from development sites. Poorly maintained stormwater management facilities can contribute to flooding. A lack of maintenance can cause reduced capacity in pipes, inlets and swales due to the accumulation of sediment and debris. PROTECTING AND IMPROVING GROUND AND SURFACE WATER QUALITY Allegheny County’s ground and surface waters provide sources of drinking water, recreational opportunities, wildlife habitat and the means for transporting people, goods and services. Polluted stormwater runoff is often transported to municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) and ultimately discharged into local rivers and streams without treatment. When deposited into nearby waterways through MS4 discharges, pollutants can impair the waterways, thereby discouraging recreational use of the resource, contaminating drinking water supplies and interfering with fish and wildlife habitat. *National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System* (NPDES) permits require owners of MS4s to develop, implement and enforce a stormwater management program designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the "maximum extent practicable". Ninety-seven municipalities are currently developing the stormwater management programs required by the NPDES permits. As previously discussed, combined sewer overflows are a serious problem in Allegheny County and in the region. Deteriorated sewage infrastructure, combined sewers and sewers that bypass treatment plants have created unsafe and unhealthy conditions in the County’s streams and rivers. As little as one-tenth of an inch of rain – an average area rainfall is one-quarter inch – can cause raw sewage to overflow into the County’s rivers and streams. Melting snow can cause the same effect. Sewage overflows present a public health risk. The bacteria in sewage deplete oxygen from the waters, suffocating delicate aquatic life. While exposure to disease-causing organisms, such as giardia or cryptosporidium, is not considered fatal for a healthy adult, it can be deadly for those with weaker immune systems – small children and the elderly. Phosphorous and nitrogen in sewage provide nutrients that can trigger algal blooms, blocking oxygen and sunlight from reaching water organisms. The discharge of heated water used for cooling power plants further causes harmful reductions in dissolved oxygen concentrations. State and federal regulations require sewer agencies to reduce overflows and meet Clean Water Act requirements. During the recreational boating season, May 15 – September 30, the Allegheny County Health Department issues river advisories to warn individuals using the rivers to limit contact with the water when sewage overflows have likely contaminated it with bacteria (fecal coliforms and e.coli) and viruses. A river advisory can last for several days after a rainfall. Since the program began in 1995, river advisories issued by the Health Department have been in effect for nearly 50% (70 days) of each recreational season. ### WETLAND PROTECTION Wetlands provide many important ecological functions, including: * Pollutant removal * Floodwater storage and absorption * Groundwater recharge and discharge * Wildlife habitat * Shoreline protection When wetlands are lost or degraded by land development, these benefits must often be replaced by costly water treatment and flood control infrastructure. Given the many environmental benefits wetlands provide, wetland conservation and restoration should be an integral part of a comprehensive local watershed management strategy. ### LOSS OF NATURAL HERITAGE AREAS The *Allegheny County Natural Heritage Inventory* was completed in 1994 by the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy. This scientific study made a thorough search for plant and animal species and communities that are unique or uncommon in the County. It also identified areas important for general wildlife habitat, education and scientific study. Further investigation could reveal greater significance at a Natural Heritage Area or uncover a previously unidentified site. An update is needed to reassess this and to assess current development threats to these areas. Historically, wildlife habitats in the County have endured dramatic changes. A century ago, mining and industrialization altered the landscape. Today, there are new and different, but just as serious, threats to wildlife. The largest threat to wildlife habitats, both terrestrial and aquatic, is sprawling development. Although the population of the County has decreased in several decades, the amount of rural and suburban land being consumed continues to increase. Habitat paved over can rarely be reclaimed or restored. CHAPTER 4 Serious threats to the viability of natural areas come from road runoff, habitat fragmentation, logging, invasive species and fragmentation of wildlife areas by roads or development. ### PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE AND BIODIVERSITY CORRIDORS Wildlife or biodiversity corridors are linear strips of land that connect larger areas of wildlife habitat together. The corridors allow flora and fauna to travel across a wider territory to: * Move from where food and water is scarce to where food and water is plentiful * Prevent overgrazing * Move from overpopulated to less populated areas * Access a wider range of breeding partners, thus preventing inbreeding and loss of genetic diversity in a local population The County’s ridge tops and stream valleys – when not developed – are natural corridors for animal travel. *When planning for future growth and development, it is important to provide for the protection of the County's natural places.* Land trusts in the County have been working to preserve biodiversity corridors. In 2003, the Allegheny Land Trust purchased 98 acres in Sewickley Heights, adjacent to Sewickley Hills Park. The property consists of open meadows, wooded slopes, spring seeps and headwaters of Little Sewickley Creek. It is located within the Little and Big Sewickley Creek Area Landscape Conservation Area (LCA), which is the buffer surrounding the Camp Meeting Woods Biological Diversity Area. The land was zoned for single and multi-family housing sites, which if constructed, would have had a significant negative environmental and aesthetic impact. ■ RECOMMENDATIONS ### GOAL OF THE PLAN Natural resources are managed to conserve unique assets; provide recreational and visual enjoyment; maintain clean and abundant air, water, and energy; and provide safety from natural hazards. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Environmental Resource Plan are to: **A.** Meet federal, state and local air quality standards. **B.** Improve quality of surface water and groundwater resources. **C.** Identify and protect ecologically sensitive areas such as wooded steep slopes, stream headwaters, woodlands and wildlife corridors. **D.** Encourage development in Places identified in the Future Land Use Plan to minimize impacts to greenfields. **E.** Protect and restore critical stream valleys, floodplains and wetlands to preserve their functions for floodwater storage, water supply, and groundwater recharge. **F.** Eliminate urban, agricultural and industrial pollution runoff to protect steams and watersheds. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Meet Air Quality Standards** Since a portion of the County is in non-attainment for PM2.5, a criteria pollutant, Allegheny County is required to develop and implement a plan to reduce levels of PM2.5 in that portion of the County. Allegheny County must also participate in the development and implementation of its portion of a state-developed plan for the multi-county Western Pennsylvania area to bring it into attainment for ozone and PM2.5. The Allegheny County Health Department’s Air Quality Program is developing a plan to control fine particulates in the Liberty/Clairton area. This attainment plan is known as a State Implementation Plan, or SIP, and must be submitted to the EPA by early 2008. The County will work with PADEP and EPA to develop and implement measures to encourage and assist local businesses and industries in reducing particulate emission sources. Local governments will be encouraged to implement and enforce measures to reduce emissions within their municipalities, such as prohibiting open burning or requiring measures to reduce dust during construction. ### Alternative Energy Sources The Pennsylvania legislature passed the *Alternative Energy Bill* in November 2004. The Bill has increased interest in implementing alternative energy production systems statewide and in the County. This issue is discussed in more depth in the Energy Conservation Plan. Working with PADEP and EPA, the County will continue to develop programs to promote and attract sources of 'green' renewable energy, and encourage residents and businesses to purchase power from these sources. Alternative fuel options for motor vehicles are increasing, but supplies and availability are still limited at this time. The County will support and encourage their use, however, as the availability of alternative fuels and fuel-efficient vehicles increases. ### Reducing Traffic Emissions The County will continue working to reduce congestion on roadways in the County, to reduce emissions from motorized vehicles. The federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program funds transportation projects or programs that will contribute to attainment or maintenance of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM). The CMAQ program supports two important goals of the County: improving air quality and relieving congestion. CMAQ funds are intended to improve air quality and must be spent in non-attainment or maintenance areas, which Allegheny County is. The Transportation Plan describes several possible CMAQ eligible project categories and Demand Management Strategies that the County will employ to reduce congestion and fuel consumption. ### Transit-Friendly Development Patterns Transportation and land use strategies to reduce automobile dependency are a cornerstone of the County's energy conservation and emissions reduction plans. Reducing vehicle miles traveled is also part of the County's strategy to address climate change. Energy consumption from personal travel can be reduced by investing in more fuel-efficient forms of transportation, including transit. The Future Land Use Plan promotes land use patterns that support transit. Many Places are located on existing transportation corridors, and/or are in areas with transit service. The biggest impediment to efficient and affordable transit use is low density, spread-out development. Therefore, one of the key benefits of concentrating development in Places is that it supports the development of transportation alternatives, which will more provide choices and options for movement between Places. Increasing mobility will also help to ensure better access to jobs, shopping, schools and other destinations for more people. Most Places designated on the Future Land Use map are supportive of transit use. The transit services may range from circulator vehicles within a Place, such as Oakland, to transit that connects one Place to another, such as Oakland to the Airport. In either case, transit will reduce the number of trips by private automobile and reduce energy consumption as a result. Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is a key element in the County's planned economic growth. TODs offers a mix of uses including office, retail and housing. Since they are accessible by many modes of transportation, TODs can reduce the number of vehicles on the road. # CHAPTER 4 B. Improve Quality of Surface and Groundwater Resources ### Abandoned Mine Drainage Since mining has the greatest influence on surface and groundwater quality of any single land use in the County, according to the National Water-Quality Assessment program, efforts to remediate the effects of mining activities will significantly improve water quality. The County will support the efforts of state agencies and nonprofits who are working to reclaim and remediate abandoned mine lands to minimize the impacts of acid mine drainage. This is especially important in the Chartiers Creek drainage basin, since abandoned mine drainage is so prevalent there. ### Wet Weather Issues Addressing the problem of untreated sewage and stormwater overflowing into waterways is also crucial to improving the quality of the region's surface waters. The County supports the work of 3 Rivers Wet Weather to promote the most cost-effective, long-term, sustainable solutions to improving the quality of Allegheny County's water resources. This includes educating the public, advocating inter-municipal partnerships and promoting the use of improved sewer technology. The University of Pittsburgh's Institute of Politics' Environment Policy Committee recently released a framing paper describing southwestern Pennsylvania's most pressing problems concerning stormwater, sewage, water quality and flooding. The Committee established, with the endorsement of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, an independent Regional Water Management Task Force, with the charge of finding and implementing practical, regionally relevant solutions. The County will keep apprised of the work of this committee. More recommendations for wet weather problems can be found in the Utilities Plan. ### Reclaiming the Riverfronts Restoring riverbanks will help to improve water quality. Allegheny County has made a significant commitment to reclaiming, rejuvenating and conserving its riverfronts. The County is applying for federal, state and private foundation grants to raise $100 million for land acquisition and construction of the world's largest urban linear park. This park will run 128 miles along the County's four major rivers and touch more than half of the County's 130 municipalities. The plan is the product of years of study and collaboration among civic leaders, environmental groups and developers. The park will include hillside preservation in places like Mount Washington and across from the Clairton Coke Works. Allegheny County, Friends of the Riverfront and the Pennsylvania Environmental Council are teaming together to implement a strategic plan for the Allegheny County Riverfront Project. This team will have to work with a variety of other partners, including local governments, to accomplish the many specific tasks that will lead to the acquisition, restoration and development of riverfront areas. The City of Pittsburgh is also working to preserve its riverfronts. The City's 1998 *Riverfront Development Plan* seeks "to maintain an open space area with the potential for public access along the banks and to impose additional requirements on structures or uses within the district." The City intends to acquire all of the 35 miles of riverfront property within its borders. Redevelopment of brownfields located along the Three Rivers will contribute to improved water quality. Local governments can contribute to the success of riverfront redevelopment by mandating development setbacks from the river through local zoning ordinances. These actions must be taken before sites are redeveloped and the opportunity is lost. Riverfront blight is a pervasive problem in the County. Litter, flood debris and illegal dumping contribute to the damage. The County supports the efforts of PA Greenways in Allegheny County and numerous watershed organizations to clean up our rivers. C. Identify and Protect Ecologically Sensitive Areas More needs to be done to preserve and protect the County's ecologically sensitive areas from degradation. The *Allegheny County Conservation Corridors Plan* identifies 29 conservation corridors, ranks them in order of priority and proposes that they be protected through the actions and partnerships of municipal governments, nonprofit organizations and community groups. The plan defines conservation corridors as "ribbons of undeveloped open space which include and link sensitive natural features... [such as] floodplains, wetlands, and steep unstable slopes." In developing *Allegheny Places*, experts from the County Parks Department, local land trusts and environmental groups have also identified priority areas for conservation. These priority areas are based on the *Conservation Corridors Plan* and provide for a network of connected green space throughout the County. Priorities for conservation can change as development threats emerge or as new information becomes available concerning habitats of threatened species. The list of preservation priorities from the *Conservation Corridors Plan* and the Greenway Network for *Allegheny Places* provides a starting point, but it should be revisited and revised through the years. The County will initiate coordination between the range of environmental groups and land trusts active in the County to revisit the Greenway Network to ensure the list of conservation priorities is current and comprehensive. ### Protecting Waterways and Wetlands The wetlands associated with the County's streams and rivers control flooding, improve water quality and support a diversity of plants and animals. Wetland regulations require land developers to delineate and limit disturbances to wetlands. The County will protect wetlands by: * Directing development away from these areas * Encouraging cluster development on higher ground surrounding wetlands * Purchasing wetlands that are important for protecting local floodplains or ecological systems The primary federal authority protecting streams and wetlands is the Clean Water Act. Recent Supreme Court decisions have potentially restricted the scope of the Clean Water Act, making headwater streams and isolated wetlands vulnerable. Furthermore, the federal program does not regulate impacts to streams and wetlands resulting from activities within their drainage areas. Numerous studies have documented how indirect impacts from land development significantly alter the hydrology of streams and wetlands, and have secondary effects on water quality, habitat and biodiversity. Headwater streams and isolated wetlands are extremely vulnerable to direct and indirect impacts because they typically receive stormwater runoff, are relatively easy to fill or relocate, and are often unmapped. Headwater streams and isolated wetlands provide a host of benefits that are just beginning to be understood, including: * Ecological linkages to downstream receiving waters * Capacity to store floodwaters and recharge groundwater supplies * Removal of excess nutrients and sediment * Supporting habitat for many threatened or endangered species Most local governments do not currently have the regulatory tools in place needed to protect headwater streams and isolated wetlands. Municipalities are strongly encouraged to implement regulations to control activities in or around vulnerable headwater streams and wetlands. ### Retaining Forest Cover *Allegheny Places* promotes the redevelopment of existing centers and brownfields to reduce development pressures on greenfields, many of which are forested. The Future Land Use Plan includes recommendations to ensure that land development takes place in a responsible way. This includes the use of appropriate land development controls that lead to development # CHAPTER 4 that is high quality and contributes to the long-term conservation of environmental resources. Conservation subdivisions can simultaneously provide for development while preserving valuable forest cover. The Parks, Open Space and Greenways Plan seeks to establish greenways and preserve open space to protect bio-diverse areas, including forest lands. Conservation easements and land stewardship initiatives are primary tools used to accomplish this. Another way to retain forest lands is to support timbering as an economic activity similar to farming. Timbering is not land development since few landowners harvest timber in preparation for development. Landowners who can harvest their woodlots for economic gain have an incentive to leave the forest in an undeveloped condition. As with farmers, forest landowners should be encouraged by their communities to keep their lands in a perpetually forested condition. The Municipal Planning Code (MPC) amendments prohibit local governments from using a zoning ordinance to unreasonably restrict forestry activities. The latest MPC amendments specifically direct all municipalities to permit forestry activities in their zoning ordinances as a “use by right” in all zoning districts. The intent is to make it easier to carry out all forestry activities by limiting the scope of zoning and other regulations. ### Preserving Land Resources The County is known for its beautiful hillsides and valleys. In order to protect these resources as well as to prevent environmental hazards such as landslides, development on steep slopes will be discouraged. Large areas containing steep slopes should be offered for dedication to the municipality, a private land trust or a nonprofit agency in order to preserve and maintain the area in its natural state. The use of conservation easements on steep slopes is also encouraged to preserve the area in perpetuity. The *Opportunities for Hillside Protection* developed for the City of Pittsburgh will be used as a model for local municipalities to use when updating their land development ordinances. The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy prepared the *Allegheny County Natural Heritage Inventory* in 1994. The County will work with the Conservancy to update this inventory and set priorities for areas for protection. To ensure the best use of limited funding, the County will develop a list of planned and ongoing recreation plans and conservation activities by local organizations and municipalities. **D. Encourage Development In Places Identified in the Future Land Use Plan to Minimize Impacts to Greenfields** *Allegheny Places* promotes the redevelopment of existing centers and brownfields to reduce development pressures on greenfields. *Allegheny Places* defines greenfields as lands not previously developed at the edge of the urban area. Greenfields help to delineate one village, city or town from another. Greenfields also provide places for outdoor recreation including playing fields, parks, golf courses, and hiking and bicycle trails; and for conservation of natural resources such as wetlands, wooded hillsides, and greenways. Development in greenfields can require significantly more infrastructure than development in brownfields and in existing centers. Costly water, sewer and road extensions are often needed to support development in greenfields. *Allegheny Places* targets redevelopment and reinvestment in brownfields and existing centers to support improvements to the County’s essential existing infrastructure. When development approvals are piecemeal, parochial, and/or reactionary, valuable greenfields can be fragmented or lost. *Allegheny Places* provides an effective planning framework for identifying and coordinating which areas should be developed and which areas should be protected or preserved. The County will promote protection of greenfields by: * Directing development away from these areas, * Encouraging the protection of natural ecosystems and green spaces, and * Encouraging efficient development density in proximity to existing infrastructure and community resources to minimize the need for the development of new infrastructure. While local municipalities have control over land uses, County funding will be directed to projects that support the Future Land Use Plan. To be consistent with *Allegheny Places*, major developments should be located in the Places identified on the Future Land Use map. The County will not support (through financial or other assistance) locating major projects in areas outside of designated Places. The County will further work with municipalities to achieve consistency with the comprehensive plan to direct development away from greenfields. Land is a limited resource that should be used wisely and, when possible, recycled and reused. E. Protect and Restore Critical Environmental Functions ### Protecting Wetlands Wetlands are extremely valuable to both people and the environment along the County's waterways. Some of the important functions and benefits of wetlands include: ■ **Erosion and Sedimentation Control** – Wetlands act as buffers along shorelines, protecting the property from waves or stream activity. Wetland vegetation filters out sediment by decreasing water velocity and settling suspended particles in the wetland, thereby preventing the sediment from reaching the lake. ■ **Flood Protection and Abatement** – Wetlands act like giant sponges, soaking up excess water and releasing it slowly. ■ **Water Filtration and Purification** – Wetlands are capable of filtering many pollutants from water that is destined for lakes, rivers and sources of drinking water. Water leaving a wetland is frequently cleaner than water entering the wetland. ■ **Fish and Wildlife Habitat** – Wetlands are one of the most productive and valuable wildlife habitats. Many species of fish and wildlife depend on wetlands for breeding, nesting and feeding. Due to the loss of wetland habitat, many endangered fish, wildlife and plant species depend on remaining wetlands. ■ **Recreation** – Wetlands provide a variety of recreational opportunities, including fishing, bird watching, photography, canoeing, hiking, hunting and trapping. Landowners are urged to avoid clearing or replacing natural native vegetation along the wetland edge for a minimum width of 50 feet. ### Restoring and Preserving Floodplain Functions The County's objective is to protect and preserve the ability of floodplains to carry and store flood waters safely, in order to protect human life and property from damage. Floodplains are low-lying areas adjacent to streams, lakes, wetlands and rivers that are covered by water during a flood. Floodplains that are relatively undisturbed work as nature's own disaster damage control; they are naturally designed to accommodate floodwaters. Proper management of floodplains is essential. When the volume of water carried by a waterway, such as a stream, is too great and the water cannot move downstream fast enough to stay within the stream channel, it spills over into the adjacent floodplain. Act 166, the Pennsylvania Flood Plain Management Act, requires compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The main intention of the Act is to regulate new construction, development and major improvements in floodplain areas. Act 166 requires that municipalities identified as having areas subject to flooding participate in the NFIP by enacting floodplain management regulations that comply with the minimum standards of NFIP and also with the regulations set forth by the Act. Act 166 only applies to development within the 100-year floodplain. This area is shown on municipal floodplain maps created by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and can also be referred to as a Special Flood Hazard Area. Most regulation is achieved through ordinances and the issuance of building permits. Municipalities must review proposed projects and impose conditions on any permits issued to reduce the potential for damage from floodwater. Permits # CHAPTER 4 are required for any development as well as for filling or grading activities in the floodplain. Where feasible, efforts should be made to reclaim developed floodplains, especially those subject to repeated flooding and flood damage. Floodplains should be reconsidered for land uses such as recreation and conservation uses that require minimal structures and impervious surface. Recommendations for stormwater management can be found in the Utilities Plan. ### Avoiding Future Stormwater Problems Land development will continue to affect stormwater management in the County. New development that creates large areas of impervious surfaces can cause increases in stormwater runoff, contributing to drainage, flooding and erosion problems. The potentially adverse impacts of land development activities can be mitigated through the use of best management practices (BMPs), including good site design, and structural and non-structural stormwater controls. Approximately 31,000 acres of land within designated Places in the Future Land Use Plan lie within watersheds of a priority stream. Priority streams were identified by the Allegheny County Emergency Service Department based on a history of flash flooding and resultant damages. Furthermore, approximately 26,000 acres of land within designated Places lie within watersheds for which no Act 167 planning has been completed. Stormwater runoff from these Places must be adequately controlled through the use of appropriate BMPs and other technologies. BMPs are generally two-fold: reduce the amount of stormwater runoff created through careful site planning; and manage as much of the runoff that is created on the site as possible. Typically, on-site management of stormwater runoff relies heavily on in-ground filtration techniques. Allegheny County’s soils, weather, and topography can make in-ground filtration particularly problematic, however. The development of BMPs appropriate to the County is needed. Greater use of preventative BMPs, such as retention of existing site vegetation, should be promoted. Municipalities should adopt and enforce site development regulations that require sensitive site design targeting reduction of stormwater runoff, especially for major development. Municipalities should also require the use of BMPs. Landowners are encouraged to use natural retention measures to control runoff. ### Restoring Riverbank Landscapes The Riverlife Task Force commissioned the *Three Rivers Landscape Management Guidelines* in 2006 to focus and provide direction to the many independent initiatives that are taking place along the riverfronts from the 31st Street Bridge on the Allegheny River to the Hot Metal Bridge on the Monongahela River to the West End Bridge on the Ohio River. The guidelines are based on sustainable design strategies and are focused on restoring native plants, conserving water and managing stormwater. The overall recommendations of the guidelines include: * Strengthening the landscape requirements of the City of Pittsburgh Riverfront Zoning Overlay * Building on the identity and visibility of Three Rivers Park * Using Three Rivers Second Nature GIS studies to prioritize and track management activities * Training landscape managers * Ensuring that river edge management is adequately budgeted Although the study has focused on targeted areas along the Three Rivers, the County will encourage similar studies to include all of the riverfronts in Allegheny County. Riverlife’s guidelines will also be a resource for implementing the Three Rivers Park System, the 128-mile long riverfront park along the four major rivers that was adopted by the Allegheny County Council. F. **Eliminate Pollution Runoff to Protect Streams and Watersheds** According to the University of Pittsburgh’s Center for Social and Urban Research, tree cover is positively associated with higher water quality in Allegheny County streams. Streams that are in attainment of water quality standards have a higher percentage of tree cover (75%) within a 660-foot buffer along the water's edge than for streams not in attainment (57%). Lands adjacent to streams, lakes or other surface water bodies that are adequately vegetated provide an important environmental protection and water resource management benefit. The benefits of riparian buffers are that they: ■ Prevent excessive nutrients, sediment and other pollutants from reaching surface waters ■ Provide for shading of the aquatic environment so as to moderate temperatures, retain more dissolved oxygen and support a healthy assemblage of aquatic flora and fauna ■ Provide for the availability of natural organic matter (fallen leaves and twigs) and large woody debris (fallen trees and limbs) that provide food and habitat for small bottom dwelling organisms (insects, amphibians, crustaceans and small fish), which are essential to maintain the food chain ■ Increase stream bank stability and maintain natural flow of the stream system, thereby reducing stream bank erosion and sedimentation and protecting habitat for aquatic organisms ■ Maintain base flows in streams and moisture in wetlands ■ Control downstream flooding ■ Conserve the natural features important to land and water resources, such as headwater areas, groundwater recharge zones and floodways The characteristics of the riparian lands – such as slope, soil characteristics and plant community structure and density – help to determine the width of the buffer strip. The County urges local municipalities and landowners to protect riparian zones of streams and rivers and adjacent wetlands. Many municipalities have already adopted riparian buffer provisions into their zoning ordinances. The County subdivision and land development ordinance includes provisions for riparian buffers. Those municipalities that have not done so should enact such an ordinance. The *Three Rivers Park Landscape Management Guidelines* describes and illustrates restoration measures for the river edge landscape. --- ## Open Space — Allegheny Places, Chapter 4E: Parks, Open Space and Greenways Plan - Source: https://www.alleghenyplaces.com/docs/DraftPlan/Chapter4E.pdf - Pages: 26 - Covers: open_space # CHAPTER 4 # PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND GREENWAYS PLAN ## ■ TODAY’S CONDITIONS Across the nation, easy access to parks and open space has become a new measure of community wealth – an important way to attract businesses and residents by guaranteeing both healthy communities and economic health. Recent research indicates that the health outcomes of individuals are determined to a large degree by the environments in which they live. According to the Center for Healthy Communities, environmental factors unrelated to the health care delivery system – like air and water quality and access to parks and recreation – are vital to a healthy life. Businesses are free to shop for an appealing location and today, according to the Trust for Public Land, prefer communities with a high quality of life, including an abundance of open space, nearby recreation and pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. *Parks, open space and greenways provide a variety of benefits that contribute to livable communities including economic, environmental, recreational, educational and heath benefits.* ### THE BENEFITS OF OPEN SPACE According to the 1995 *Allegheny County Greenways Plan*, parks, open space and greenways provide a variety of benefits that contribute to livable communities. Some of these benefits include: * ■ **Economic benefits** – attracting and retaining businesses, increasing property values by making communities more desirable, enhancing place identity, and reducing public costs through better management of natural events such as flooding. * ■ **Environmental benefits** – protecting natural areas, protecting and improving water quality, improving air quality, reducing flooding and related stormwater damage, and protecting wildlife corridors that link habitats. * ■ **Recreational and transportation benefits** – providing opportunities for rails-to-trails, commuter bikeways, and riverfront development, and enhancing road and highway corridors. * ■ **Educational benefits** – providing outdoor classrooms for children and adults. * ■ **Health benefits** – increasing opportunities for exercise and reducing stress. ## DEFINITIONS The following definitions are provided for the purposes of this Plan. Some types of facilities, such as trails, may fit more than one definition. **Conservation Areas:** open spaces, primarily undeveloped land, that have the specific purpose of protecting natural resources. **DCNR:** the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. **Greenways:** corridors of open space that serve to link natural resource-based or manmade features. Greenways may incorporate both public and private property and be either land- or water-based. Greenway corridors often follow abandoned railways, canals, ridge tops, rivers and stream valleys. Greenways can have many functions: * ■ **Conservation Greenways:** unimproved corridors primarily intended for natural resource protection. * ■ **Major Greenway Corridors:** long-distance corridors (at least 50 miles long) that pass through two or more counties and are recognized in official planning documents by counties. They represent the major “arteries” of the developing statewide greenway system. * ■ **Mega Greenways:** greenways of one hundred miles or more, with a completed plan. * ■ **Recreational Greenways:** corridors that accommodate hiking trails or bikeways, water trails and multi-use trails. **Greenways Network:** a linked system of greenways and hubs of specifically identified natural resources or open space and manmade features or destinations that influence the development of the linear greenway corridor. **Heritage Park Regions:** specifically-designated portions of the state that implement a regional strategy for promoting Pennsylvania’s rich industrial and cultural heritage to stimulate community revitalization and economic development. **"Livable" Communities:** communities that offer a wide range of recreation and transportation alternatives, including bicycling and walking, and have a unique character defined by natural and/or cultural features. Places are intended to be livable communities. **Open Spaces:** areas of natural quality, either publicly- or privately-owned, designated for the protection of natural resources, nature-oriented outdoor recreation or trail-related activities. **Parks:** areas, usually publicly-owned, set aside for recreation and relaxation. * **Regional:** a “destination” recreation facility, usually large in size, that people will drive long distances to get to because of the amenities or the events located there. These parks are usually 200 acres or more in size, but can be less if it has state or national significance. * **Community:** a destination facility on a smaller scale than a regional park that contains at least 1 ‘Community Significant Feature’ (see page 4E-6 for complete list). * **Special Use:** a destination facility that has a unique feature or attraction. * **Linear:** usually a greenway or trail that follows a waterway, abandoned railroad corridor, or ridge line, and is longer than it is wide. * **Municipal:** parks owned by municipalities that do not include a Community-Significant Feature. * **Park Node:** a small pocket park that primarily serves one residential, commercial, or office development. **Trails:** * **Bikeways:** off-road bicycle trails and dedicated bike lanes along roads. *** **Millennium Trails:** a national initiative of the White House Millennium Council, in partnership with the *Department of Transportation*, *Rail-to-Trails Conservancy*, the *American Hiking Society*, and the *National Endowment for the Arts*, that recognize, promote and stimulate the creation of trails to "Honor the Past and Imagine the Future" as part of America's legacy for the year 2000. There are three levels of Millennium Trails: (1) 16 National Millennium Trails; (2) 52 Millennium Legacy Trails (State Level); and (3) 2,000 Community Millennium Trails. * **Multi-use Trails:** greenways designed for recreational purposes that accommodate more than one type of use (e.g. horseback riding, hiking, bicycling, etc.) * **Rail-Trails:** former railroad corridors converted to trails. * **Water Trails:** a recreational waterway on a lake, river, or ocean between specific points, containing access points, and day use and/or camping sites for the boating public (North American Water Trail Association). Allegheny County is fortunate to have an extensive network of parks, open spaces, conservation areas, trails and greenways, as shown on Maps 4E.1a through 4E.1d. Table 4E.1 establishes classification standards for each type of park. The standards were developed for Allegheny County because the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) standards do not fit this topographically complex and primarily urban county with 130 municipalities very well. Allegheny County has 718 municipal parks, 125 community parks, and 16 regional parks, for a total of 859 parks encompassing approximately 26,900 acres. According to NRPA standards, Allegheny County as a whole has more than 3 times the recommended park acreage per capita. Yet when the NRPA standard is applied to an individual municipality, it may show a much higher or lower ratio of park acres per capita. The distance between population centers and parks, usually measured as a radius centered on the park, is also often used as a way to assess the need for new or additional park and recreation facilities. However, in Allegheny County, the effect of geography on road systems means there is often a major difference between “crow-fly” miles and miles traveled. The # CHAPTER 4 Table 4E.1 - Park Definitions and Classification Standards for Allegheny County | | | PARK STANDARDS | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Classification** | **Definition** | **Minimum Size Criteria** | **Service Radius/Area** | **Examples** | | REGIONAL PARK | A destination facility, usually large in size, that people will drive long distances to get to because of the amenities or events located there. | Usually 200 acres, but can be less if it has state or national significance | 20 Miles/Allegheny County and surrounding areas | Point State Park, Hartwood Acres Park | | COMMUNITY PARK | A destination facility on a smaller scale than a regional park that contains at least 1 significant feature. * | NA | 3 miles/Multi-municipal | Boyce/Mayview Park | | SPECIAL USE PARK | A destination facility that has a unique feature or attraction. | NA | 15 miles/County-wide | Renziehausen Park, Round Hill Park, Allegheny Islands State Park | | LINEAR PARK | Usually a greenway or trail that follows a waterway, abandoned railroad corridor, or ridge line, and is longer than it is wide. | NA | Dependent on length and presence of trails | Three Rivers Park | | MUNICIPAL PARK | Parks owned by municipalities that do not include a Community-Significant Feature. | NA | 1 mile/Primarily local residents | Twin Hills Park | | PARK NODE | A small pocket park that primarily serves one residential, office or commercial development. | NA | 0.5 mile/Occupants of the development | Tot Lots, Plazas, Open Space | * A list of Community Significant Features can be found on page 4E-6. Please note some exceptions may apply to the standards above. park standards developed for Allegheny County therefore consider service areas as more significant than distances. The more facilities a park contains or the more unique it is, the larger its service area is likely to be. Service areas also provide a rationale for multi-municipal park and recreation planning. Multi-municipal park and recreation planning is especially important, as there are many municipalities, including the County itself, that struggle to afford basic maintenance and upkeep of existing parks. ### REGIONAL PARKS Allegheny County’s regional parks are described below. All are considered to be destination parks. Most of the County’s regional parks are at least 200 acres in size. One exception to the above size criteria for Regional Parks is Point State Park. It is considered a Regional Park due to the events held at the park, its location in downtown Pittsburgh, and the fact that it is owned by the State. ### State Owned There are two regional, State-owned parks in the County: ■ Point State Park is located at the tip of Pittsburgh’s “Golden Triangle”. This 36-acre park is a National Historic Landmark that commemorates and preserves the strategic and historic heritage of the area during the French and Indian War. The Fort Pitt Museum, the Fort Pitt Blockhouse and many plaques interpret the history and significance of the area. The park is managed and maintained by the City of Pittsburgh and is the annual site of several regional special events. Point State Park is undergoing significant renovations in honor of Pittsburgh’s 250th birthday. The phased construction began in 2006 and is expected to continue through 2009. For more information see http://www.pointstatepark.com/about/. ■ State Game Land, # 203 is located in Marshall Township and Franklin Park Borough. It preserves some 1,246 acres of open space in the northwest corner of the County. State Game Lands were established to manage and preserve wildlife habitats in Pennsylvania. Game lands permit lawful hunting and trapping during open seasons. Compatible recreation, such as hiking, is also permitted. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor ### County Parks The Allegheny County Park system consists of nine parks comprising over 12,000 acres. The parks are enjoyed by more than 11 million visitors annually. Each County Park has evolved around a signature feature, as described in Table 4E.2. The County’s Park System is managed by the Allegheny County Parks Department, with a full-time staff of 24 and a seasonal workforce of nearly 340. Park maintenance and capital projects are performed by the Public Works Department, with an additional full-time staff of nearly 120 dedicated to these purposes. ### City of Pittsburgh Parks In addition to numerous neighborhood and community parks, the City of Pittsburgh has five regional parks: * **Frick Park** – The largest of the City's four parks, Frick Park’s 600 acres encompasses steep valleys and wooded slopes. In addition to an extensive trail system, park amenities include the Frick Art & Historical Center, educational programming by the Frick Environmental Center, Blue Slide Playground, the Frick Gatehouse, red clay tennis courts and a bowling green. * **Highland Park** – The walkway encircling a historic reservoir is one of many popular features of this East End park, which also includes the City's only long-course swimming pool and the Washington Boulevard Cycling Track. Other highlights of the 380-acre park are the Pittsburgh Zoo and PPG Aquarium, Lake Carnegie, sand volleyball courts, a ‘super playground’, trails, picnic shelters and tennis courts. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor * **Riverview Park** – This 287-acre park is nestled between several neighborhoods just north of Downtown Pittsburgh. The park's extensive network of trails serves as a popular destination for hikers, joggers and horseback riders. Other highlights include the landmark Allegheny Observatory, swimming pool, ball fields and picnic shelters, and a ‘space age’ playground located near the observatory. * **Schenley Park** – Situated in the heart of Oakland, the 420-acre park has a visitor center, swimming pool, ice skating rink, and plenty of open space for playing sports. Schenley Plaza is a recently renovated addition between the Carnegie Library and the University of Pittsburgh’s Hillman Library. The plaza includes a carousel and a large music tent. Phipps Conservatory, a newly-expanded, world class, LEED-certified conservatory, is also located here. The Vintage Grand Prix is an annual event that draws car enthusiasts from all over the world. * **The Grand View Scenic Byway Park (GVSBP)** – Created in December 2005 by a unanimous vote of the Pittsburgh City Council, and declared Pittsburgh's Fifth Regional Park in April 2007. The u-shaped Park includes a Pennsylvania State Scenic Byway, as well as nearly 240 acres of open space, playing fields, trails, and other recreational amenities that wrap across three Pittsburgh neighborhoods – Allentown, Mount # CHAPTER 4 Table 4E.2 - County Park Facilities | PARK | ACRES | LOCATION | THEMES AND MAIN FEATURES | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Boyce | 1,096 | Municipality of Monroeville, Plum Borough | The County’s first regional park, named for founder of the Boy Scouts, William D. Boyce. Only location for downhill skiing in County. Ski lodge; wave pool; action park (bikes, blades & boards). | | Deer Lakes | 1,180 | Frazier & West Deer townships | Fishing in 3 spring-fed, man-made lakes stocked by state fisheries; observatory, disc golf. | | Harrison Hills | 500 | Harrison Township | Watts Memorial Overlook of the Allegheny River Valley, birding area (mid-Atlantic flyway). | | Hartwood | 629 | Hampton & Indiana townships | Stately Tudor mansion (circa 1929), cottage, stable complex and gate lodge, outdoor amphitheater. | | North Park | 3,075 | Hampton, McCand-less & Pine townships | Largest of County Parks, it includes 114 picnic shelters, 8 rental buildings, 18-hole golf course, 75-acre lake with boathouse, ice skating rink, big swimming pool. | | Round Hill | 1,101 | Elizabeth Township | Exhibit Farm, where visitors can experience a ‘day on the farm’. | | Settler’s Cabin | 1,610 | Collier, North Fayette & Robinson townships | Along with namesake log cabin, park has both wave and diving pools. A 452-acre botanical garden is planned. | | South Park | 2,013 | Municipality of Bethel Park & South Park Township | The most developed of the County Parks. Oliver Miller Homestead; 9- and 18-hole golf courses; horse show ring; buffalo herd; BMX track; indoor theater; outdoor amphitheater; wave pool; ice skating rink. | | White Oak | 810 | White Oak Borough | Gardens abound at this park, including the Angora Gardens, Allegheny County Gardens and the Wedding Garden. | | Total Park Acreage | 12,014 | | | Washington and Duquesne Heights. The GVSBP includes one of the top tourist destinations in the region with over 1 million people coming each year to enjoy the views from the Park's northern face. The GVSBP is a model for urban sustainable development, protecting fragile hillsides and urban wildlife habitats, and providing efficient storm water management and air quality protection. # COMMUNITY AND MUNICIPAL PARKS Allegheny County’s 130 municipalities provide local residents with a variety of recreational opportunities. Municipal parks range from larger parks that have both active and passive recreation and hold community events to small “tot lots” that act as the neighborhood back yard. Amenities offered through the municipal park and recreation system cover a broad spectrum of activities and serve a diversity of needs. The level of need differs from municipality to municipality as does the current condition of municipal parks, which ranges from excellent to substandard. While some municipalities have a healthy tax base and are proactive in addressing recreational needs, others are struggling and have fallen behind, even on the routine maintenance of existing facilities. In 2006, a municipal survey of parks was done for Allegheny Places to inventory and classify parks by size and their facilities, and to map their locations. Parks were classified in three broad categories: community, municipal, and regional. Community parks were identified as those that had at least one special feature, as defined below. ## Community Significant Features: * Amphitheater Present * Baseball/Softball Fields (with 4 or more fields) * Small Stadium – Open to Public * Boating Access * Campground * Recreation Center (Minimum of 30,000 sq. feet; could include one or more: pool, classroom, fitness center.) * Disc Golf Course * Fenced Dog Park * Golf Course * Ice Rink * Picnic Pavilion (4 or more) * Pavilion with Amenities (All-weather, kitchen, etc.) * Pond/Lake * Skate Park * Soccer/Hockey Facility (4 or more) * Designated Swimming Beach * Swimming Pool * Tennis Courts (6 or more) * Nature/Environmental Centers * Trails (Multi-municipal, 10 miles +, or part of existing trail) * Motorized Access * Equestrian Facility * Mountain Bike/Hiking (Greater than 5 miles/not to include Rail Trails) * Hunting/Fishing Access The 125 municipalities that responded to the survey reported 125 community parks, 718 municipal parks and 16 regional parks, for a total of 859 parks encompassing approximately 26,900 acres. Park information is missing from those municipalities that did not respond to the survey. The survey also asked for the following information: * Number of Municipalities with Recreation Department Staff 25 * Total Number of Recreation Department Staff 65 * Number of Municipalities with Commission/Advisory Board 73 * Number of Municipalities with Recreation Comprehensive Plans 39 More survey results are included in the Supporting Documents. ## Special Use Parks Special Use Parks are considered to be destination parks because they have a unique feature or attraction. Special Use Parks can be owned by municipalities, the County, or the State. For example: * Renziehausen Park in the City of McKeesport contains the Arboretum Rose Garden, the second largest rose garden in Pennsylvania (the garden at Hershey being the largest). There are currently more than 1,200 varieties of roses grown in the 3.5 acre park. * Round Hill Park, one of the County’s 9 Regional Parks, is an ‘Exhibit Farm’ where visitors can experience a sense of farm life. Located in Elizabeth Township, the Farm is open year-round and includes 17 picnic shelters. * Allegheny Islands State Park is in the Allegheny River, offshore of Harmar Township in northeastern Pittsburgh. It consists of three islands totaling 43 acres. CHAPTER 4 The park is undeveloped and there are no public facilities. Group camping is permitted. ### Linear Parks Linear Parks are usually a greenway or trail that follows a waterway, abandoned railroad corridor, or ridge line, and is longer than it is wide. Existing and proposed Linear Parks are described in the Greenways Section below – see Mega Greenways, Allegheny County Riverfront Project, and Three Rivers Heritage Trail and Park. ### GREENWAYS Greenways are extremely important to Pennsylvania residents as well as to state agencies, such as the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR). In 2001 Pennsylvania published *Pennsylvania Greenways: An Action Plan for Creating Connections*. This document established a vision for the creation of a greenway network throughout Pennsylvania, which would enhance recreation and tourism opportunities. An interconnected network of open space along streams, rivers and ridge lines will form the backbone of the *Allegheny Places* Greenways Network. The network is working to connect municipalities and Places designated on the Future Land Use map to parks, recreation, cultural and economic centers. The Parks, Open Space and Greenways Resource Panel established the following guidelines for the Greenways Network: ■ Linear systems that connect people, places and parks, and focus on one or more of these characteristics: ■ Environmental – largely undisturbed; typically along riparian ways; and primarily for the benefit of wildlife, plant life and natural systems ■ Cultural – more developed; may be as narrow as a trail or as large as a regional park ■ Viewsheds – largely undisturbed; typically vegetated hillsides or ridge tops ■ Located along both sides of the Ohio, Monongahela, Allegheny and Youghiogheny Rivers, and their major tributaries ■ Lands meeting certain environmental criteria (such as steep slopes, woodlands, landslide-prone soils, wetlands and floodplains) ■ Connect to the many municipalities and communities, providing access to the greenways systems ■ Connect to the greenways of surrounding counties ■ Connect to Places identified on the Future Land Use map ■ Connect to the PA Greenways Network, which includes systems that are regional To further define the guidelines, the County used GIS technology to identify the following: ■ 40% steep slopes ■ 25% steep slopes within woodlands of 10 acres or more ■ 15% steep slopes within both landslide-prone soils and woodlands of 10 acres or more ■ Conservation stream corridors* with a minimum 50-ft. buffer (updated from the 1995 Conservation Corridor Plan) ■ Forested floodplains ■ Wetlands of 1 acre or more with a 50-ft. buffer ■ River frontage (buffered by a minimum of 100 ft.) ■ Protected land – land trust properties and agricultural easement areas ■ Parks – regional, state, community, and municipal parks (12+ acres) ■ Pittsburgh Greenways ■ Public golf courses * Revised Conservation Stream corridors include “high” and “medium” priority corridors identified in the 1995 *Conservation Corridor Plan*, as well as streams that are adjacent to forested floodplains and steep slopes, as defined above. Connections to ‘Places’ are made through conservation stream corridors and trails, if not already connected through the criteria listed above. Additional work was done by the Allegheny Land Trust (ALT) to develop a GREENPRINT of the County. The GREENPRINT used the technology of GIS to specifically identify priority conservation areas, including biological diversity, water management, and landscape character (See page 4E-17 for more detail). The ALT GREENPRINT is incorporated into the Greenways Network. ## MEGA GREENWAYS DCNR has identified 34 major or mega greenway corridors that are at least 50 miles, pass through two or more counties, and are recognized in an official planning document. Five of these mega greenways have been targeted by DCNR for increased funding and staff assistance. Two of the five pass through Allegheny County: the Great Allegheny Passage and the Pittsburgh to Harrisburg Mainline Canal. The Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway also has a good chance of being included in this group due to its strategic location and the number of residents and communities it can join together. ## The Great Allegheny Passage The Great Allegheny Passage (GAP), Figure 4E.1, is a 152-mile bicycle and walking trail connecting Cumberland, Maryland with Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In Cumberland, the trail links with the C & O Canal Towpath, creating a continuous trail from Pittsburgh to Washington, DC. The GAP is designated as a National Recreation Trail and is a segment of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail. For a map of the entire trail see www.atatrail.org. <
> **Figure 4E.1 – The Great Allegheny Passage** Source: Allegheny Trail Alliance # CHAPTER 4 DCNR’s highest priority for greenways funding in western Pennsylvania is the completion of a nine-mile section of the GAP from McKeesport to the City of Pittsburgh, which will complete the GAP from Pittsburgh to Cumberland, MD. Within the nine-mile section, there are 28 different properties involved. As of August 2008, easements and acquisitions of 27 properties are underway, but there is one property that does not have a resolution. In addition to acquiring easements and ownership of property, the Allegheny Trail Alliance is constructing two new bridges to cross over active railroad tracks. The retrofitting of the Riverton Bridge, connecting McKeesport to Duquesne, is also underway. The Riverton Bridge was donated to the County by the US Steel Corporation. The nine-mile section, with the exception of one property gap, is expected to be completed by late 2009. The GAP is being built by the Allegheny Trail Alliance (ATA), a coalition of seven rails-to-trails organizations. The ATA member trail organizations are: * Allegheny Highlands Trail of Maryland (from Cumberland to the Mason-Dixon Line) * Allegheny Highlands Trail of Pennsylvania (from the Mason-Dixon Line to Confluence) * Youghiogheny River Trail South (from Confluence to Connellsville) * Youghiogheny River Trail North (from Connellsville to McKeesport) * Steel Valley Trail (from Clairton to Homestead) * Three Rivers Heritage Trail (from Homestead to Pittsburgh) * Montour Trail Council – this trail is not part of the GAP, but the organization is a member of the Allegheny Trail Alliance ### Pittsburgh-to-Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway™ The Pittsburgh-to-Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway™, Figure 4E.2, is a 320-mile long corridor that follows the path of the historic Pennsylvania Mainline Canal. The section of the greenway in Allegheny County runs from Pittsburgh to Freeport, along the Allegheny River. This greenway has been designated Pennsylvania’s Millennium Legacy Trail – one of 52 state significant trails that link heritage, culture and recreation. The Pittsburgh-to-Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway™ will encompass both land and river trails to complete the corridor connections. For a map of the entire trail see www.alleghenyridge.org. ### Erie to Pittsburgh Mega Greenway DCNR’s second priority for greenways funding in western Pennsylvania is the Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway, a recently designated greenway in the PA Greenways Program. The Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway incorporates trail systems both built and planned along the Allegheny River, and overlaps the Pittsburgh to Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway™ within Allegheny County’s borders. Trail organizations from Pittsburgh to Erie are working to connect a number of land trails to it. The concept for the Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway emerged from local communities and trail organizations. The success of other community and regional trails built in the western part of the Commonwealth over the years provided good models for the Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway. With trails such as the Three Rivers Heritage Trail, Armstrong Trail, Allegheny River Trail, McClintock Trail, Oil Creek Gorge Trail, Ernst Trail, Pymatuning Spillway Trail, and many others, the Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway can unify the Western Pennsylvania Trail Network. This potential mega greenway will enhance the existing trail system, give it a regional identity, make additional connections, raise the visibility of individual trail projects in the region and elevate the value of recreational resources in local communities. Once the Erie to Pittsburgh regional trail system is completed, it can then connect to The Great Allegheny Passage, linking Erie to Washington, DC. ### Adjacent County Greenways Three adjacent counties have current Greenway Plans: Beaver, Washington and Westmoreland. The *Allegheny Places* greenways plan includes and proposes connections to the following trails and greenways: * Beaver County – Bike Route A and the Proposed Raccoon Park Trail * Washington County – Arrowhead Trail, Bike Route A, Monongahela River Trail, Montour Trail and the Panhandle Trail * Westmoreland County – The proposed Allegheny River Trail, Plum Creek Trail, the proposed Westmoreland Heritage Trail and the Youghiogheny River Trail <
> **Figure 4E.2 – Pittsburgh-to-Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway** Source: Allegheny Ridge Corporation ### LOCAL RECREATIONAL AND CONSERVATION GREENWAYS Other notable greenways in Allegheny County, with a renewed emphasis on riverfront projects, are in various stages of development. #### Allegheny County Riverfronts Project The Allegheny County Riverfronts Projects is a collaboration between Allegheny County, Friends of the Riverfront, and the <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor # CHAPTER 4 Pennsylvania Environmental Council. The Riverfronts Project’s mission is to provide overall planning and coordination for the development of on-land greenways and trails along the County’s four major rivers. The Riverfronts Project builds on the work of the region’s many trail organizations, and coordinates the implementation of recreation, conservation, and access components of new trail and greenway segments. Through the Riverfronts Project, multi-municipal collaboration is taking place with local governments, nonprofit organizations, residents and other stakeholders to implement specific trail projects along the riverfronts. ## Three Rivers Heritage Trail The Three Rivers Heritage Trail is a bicycle and pedestrian trail and greenway system along the riverfronts around the City of Pittsburgh. Currently, 22 miles of a planned 37-mile route have been completed. This trail system includes the trails throughout Three Rivers Park within the City, and extends into County communities that follow the Allegheny, Monongahela and Ohio Rivers. It provides a route for cyclists, walkers, runners and, in some places, in-line skaters. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor Three Rivers Park follows the route of the Three Rivers Heritage Trail. It is a system of trails, walkways, bridges and green spaces that together will comprise a single, grand public space known as Three Rivers Park. The designated Park area is between the West End Bridge on the Ohio River, the 31st Street Bridge on the Allegheny River and the Hot Metal Bridge on the Monongahela River. It will link more than ten miles of public and private riverfront property including bridges, shorelines and adjacent development in a continuous, accessible waterfront park system. ## TRAILS AND BIKEWAYS There are a number of active trail organizations within Allegheny County, and trail systems are continually growing (see Map 4E.3). These are the main organizations: * Allegheny Trail Alliance – a coalition of seven rails-to-trails organizations dedicated to completing the Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) * Friends of the Riverfront * Pennsylvania Environmental Council * Allegheny County * Community Trails Initiative – a coalition of 17 riverfront municipalities from Millvale through Natrona, the Friends of the Riverfront, Pennsylvania Environmental Council and Allegheny County. ## Other County Trails Other notable recreation trails in Allegheny County in various stages of development are: * Rachel Carson Trail – a 35.7-mile long hiking trail that extends from Harrison Hills County Park to North Park. Although the physical trail exists, it is not protected by public easements or rights-of-way. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor ■ **Panhandle Trail** – formerly the Panhandle Railroad Line, it spans 29 miles from Walkers Mill in Collier Township to Weirton, West Virginia. Nearly seven miles of the trail are located in Allegheny County. The Panhandle Trail connects to the Montour Trail in Washington County at McDonald. ■ **Montour Trail** – The Montour Trail is a multi-use rail-trail that will extend 52 miles from Coraopolis to Clairton, with a segment to Allegheny County Airport. Multiple sections of the trail totaling over 40 miles have been completed to date. Construction of a 2.5-mile trail section is scheduled to be completed in the fall of 2008. Remaining sections of the trail all require bridges. ### Bikeways Bikeways are routes designated for bicycle use. These may be exclusive bike lanes on roads or shared pathways, with pedestrians and other users, on trails. ■ Bike Route A ■ Coraopolis Bikeway ■ Monroeville Bikeway ■ North Hills Bikeway ■ Ohio River Bikeway ■ Proposed Pittsburgh Bikeway System Some bikeways and trails include an ‘active transportation’ component, where a bicyclist/pedestrian/kayaker/etc. can travel from one destination to another. This differs from recreation trails that do not link two or more destinations. Pittsburgh’s Bikeway Plan identifies proposed “complete streets” that can safely accommodate both bicycles and cars with improvements and/or signage. See the Bicycle and Pedestrian Section of the Transportation Element for more information (page 41-41). ### Water Trails Water trails are another mode of travel and recreation in our region. Water trails are designed to provide safe non-motorized boat launches and easy shore access, maintain and respect the environment’s natural character, and promote responsible use of our rivers. Water trails also: ■ Improve docking facilities for both motorized and non-motorized boaters ■ Provide opportunities for short-term access to communities and neighborhoods ■ Connect communities ■ Allow boaters a brief or long respite – an escape from the urban to natural environment, a renewal of body and mind Water trails encourage low-impact use of the region’s waterways and foster a strong sense of stewardship of the riverine environment. ■ **Three Rivers Water Trail** – Just as the Allegheny County Riverfronts Project involves on-land trails and greenways along the four rivers in Allegheny County, the Three Rivers Water Trail involves all four rivers. The project is being coordinated by Friends of the Riverfront in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, which has the authority to designate Official Pennsylvania Water Trails. The Allegheny and Youghiogheny Rivers have an official water trail designation. Water trails planned along the Ohio and Monongahela Rivers are in the process of being officially designated. A challenge to small watercraft travel on these two rivers is the amount of barge traffic. ### RIVERFRONT ACCESS Allegheny County has an abundance of river frontage – approximately 185 miles, including island frontage. Of Allegheny County’s 130 municipalities, 73 border on one of the four rivers. Because of the region’s steel industry heritage, over 45% of all river frontage is currently zoned for industrial use. In addition, Allegheny County has the second largest inland port in the country and relies heavily on river barge transportation. Planning for the redevelopment and development of the riverfront for greenways, trails, parks and other recreation and conservation uses must take into consideration other active uses of the four rivers. # CHAPTER 4 ## ■ ISSUES AND ANALYSIS This section examines what can be done to ensure that all residents can enjoy the many natural and recreational amenities that the County has to offer. ### KEY CHALLENGES In developing the Parks, Open Space and Greenways Plan, the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Greenways Resource Panel helped to identify these key challenges: * Lack of access to regional parks for people dependent on public transportation * Lack of connectivity between the County's parks, trails, and greenways * Lack of funding to maintain and improve the County Park system * Inequities between municipal parks and the need for multi-municipal planning * Lack of funding to expand the Greenways Network * Lack of public access to riverfronts The following provides an understanding of these issues. ### LACK OF ACCESS TO REGIONAL PARKS FOR PEOPLE DEPENDENT ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Some people face barriers that prevent access to recreation opportunities. For some it’s a lack of awareness of facilities and programs available in the regional parks. For others who depend on public transportation, transit service to County Parks is currently limited. Students, the elderly and low-income residents, therefore, may not be able to take advantage of the recreational and social opportunities that the parks offer. To equitably provide for the recreation needs of all residents, convenient access to regional recreation resources should be provided. Access in this context has two distinct meanings: * The ability to get to and around in regional parks using public transportation * Wheelchair accessibility to the facilities found within regional parks Currently, there is limited public transportation to only three County Parks: North Park, Settlers Cabin, and South Park during the summer season, with a bus stop at each swimming pool. The four regional parks in the City of Pittsburgh are all accessible by public transit. However, neither the Pittsburgh Parks and Recreation website (www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/parks) nor the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy website (www.pittsburghparks.org) provides information on how to access the parks by public transit. As with the County Parks website, the Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy’s website provides only driving directions to the parks. Inconvenient transportation is a hurdle that some residents must overcome to enjoy many regional park facilities. Physical barriers to participation also exist for people with disabilities. The 2002 Parks Comprehensive Master Plan stated that “close to three-quarters of county park facilities lack adequate access to persons with disabilities….In many cases, relatively low-cost measures, such as installation of a stable, firm, and slip resistant surface from the point of access (parking lot) to the facility (e.g. picnic shelter), would make the facility accessible.” <
> Photo credit: Bernadette E. Kazmarski ### LACK OF CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE COUNTY'S PARKS, TRAILS, AND GREENWAYS The goal of the PA Greenways Program is to establish an interconnected network of greenways. The greenways network in Allegheny County incorporates a number of County and regional parks, regional trail systems and conservation corridors. These systems are not well connected, however. A number of notable gaps in the County’s trail system have been identified that, when connected, would enhance the overall greenways network. A specific list of gaps in trails can be found in the Implementation Matrix on Page 5-48. ### LACK OF FUNDING TO MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THE COUNTY PARK SYSTEM During the development of *Allegheny Places*, residents spoke of the importance of the County Parks system. All nine of the Allegheny County parks were cited as ‘Favorite Places’ by County residents. Both North Park and South Park made the top five Favorite Places. This underscores the need to maintain and improve park facilities so they may continue to provide the opportunities and services that County residents value. Allegheny County operates nine public parks that span 12,000 acres and offer a wide array of sporting, leisure, cultural and entertainment opportunities. The parks are a tremendous asset, but also a very large maintenance responsibility for the County. The sub-standard conditions found in some of the parks and recreation facilities in the County Park System are the result of two primary issues: lack of available resources and the aging of physical facilities and other infrastructure. Many park facilities and features in the County Park system have been in place for decades. Deferred maintenance has taken its toll. Many are now beyond repair and must be replaced. Also, much of the playground equipment installed in County Parks does not meet current safety standards. It is estimated in the Parks Master Plan (2002) that over $50 million is needed for repairs in the parks and an additional $50 million is needed for proposed new facilities. Raising maintenance standards and addressing deferred maintenance needs will require the investment of additional resources, as will any of the new initiatives recommended in the *Comprehensive Parks Master Plan* and *Allegheny Places*. The Allegheny County Parks Action Plan was developed in 2007 to make recommendations to address the financial issues of the County Park System as outlined in the January 2002 Park Comprehensive Master Plan and the October 2002 Parks Transition Committee Report. The 2007 Parks Action Plan establishes a strategy for addressing the financial crisis “…by utilizing private sector assistance programs, updating the fee and charge schedule every 3 to 5 years, establishing a foundation, and pursuing private and public grant funding. ### INEQUITIES BETWEEN MUNICIPAL PARKS AND THE NEED FOR MULTI-MUNICIPAL PLANNING A significant number of municipal parks and playgrounds, particularly in older communities, have deferred maintenance issues. Some municipal playgrounds have old equipment that needs to be replaced with equipment that meets current playground safety standards. Other municipalities have in their inventory facilities that have become functionally obsolete, as recreational interests have evolved over the years. Many municipalities have been replacing their play equipment and rehabilitating their underutilized facilities, such as old tennis courts, by converting them to more currently popular facilities such as skate parks, hockey courts or multi-use courts. However, there remains a considerable inventory of facilities and equipment that need to be improved or replaced and the funding available to do so is often inadequate. Before creating a new municipal park or recreation area, it should be determined that the municipality involved has the capacity to sustain the facility financially and has the work force necessary to provide routine maintenance. If not, the municipality should partner with a neighboring community. Multi-municipal planning and cooperation is a viable way that municipalities can expand, refurbish, or build new parks. *Multi-Municipal Cooperation for Recreation and Parks* (2006) is a DCNR publication that cites three primary reasons for multi-municipal cooperation: * Interdependence * Effectiveness * Economies of Scale The publication provides step-by-step guidelines for creating multi-municipal (regional) recreation agencies. In addition to the reasons for multi-municipal cooperation already mentioned, communities can share resources such as funding, and more options can be provided, especially in smaller communities. CHAPTER 4 ### LACK OF FUNDING TO EXPAND THE GREENWAYS NETWORK Just as there is a lack of local funding to maintain existing park facilities, so too is there a lack of available capital to expand the County’s greenway network. Acquiring land for trails and conservation can be especially difficult because of patterns of ownership, costs and the need to negotiate easements. The completion of the Great Allegheny Passage is the top priority for expanding the greenways network. The remaining gaps in the trail are all within Allegheny County. Funding is available to enable the completion of the remaining portions by 2009. Completion of the other two Mega Greenways, the Erie to Pittsburgh Greenway and the Pittsburgh-to-Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway™, will require significant financial resources. ### LACK OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO RIVERFRONTS Allegheny County has approximately 185 linear miles of riverfront, encompassing 73 municipalities. A comprehensive, multi-municipal approach is needed to manage, protect, and provide for recreational opportunities along the County’s riverfronts that are currently subject to 73 different municipalities and zoning ordinances. The Allegheny County Riverfronts Project is one approach to implementing a series of plans for a regional collaborative project. It has established an ongoing partnership between Allegheny County, Friends of the Riverfront and the Pennsylvania Environmental Council. ### ■ RECOMMENDATIONS #### GOAL OF THE PLAN A green network that provides a range of recreational opportunities, conserves sensitive and unique natural features, and is connected through parks, greenways and trails. ### OBJECTIVES OF THE PLAN The objectives of the Parks, Open Space and Greenways Plan are to: **A.** Implement a strategy to establish greenways that provide connections between people, recreational facilities, cultural facilities, and other significant public areas. **B.** Implement a strategy to establish greenways that encourage protection of bio-diverse areas, floodplains, steep slopes, forested areas, landslide-prone areas, riparian corridors and wildlife corridors. **C.** Expand the parks and trails system to serve future populations. **D.** Facilitate public access to riverfronts. **E.** Ensure that regionally significant parks and trails are ADA compliant and transit accessible. **F.** Raise public awareness of the benefits of greenways and open space. The following provides an understanding of the objectives. **A. Implement a Strategy to Establish Greenways that Provide Connections between People, Recreational Facilities, Cultural Facilities and other Significant Public Areas** The Greenways Network will support the preservation of significant natural, cultural and landscape features across the County as well as provide necessary connections between people and recreational facilities. To expand the Greenways Network the County is exploring the following: ■ **Establishing a Countywide Greenways Committee** The County will create a Greenways Committee to work closely with the County Parks and Recreation Department, the Allegheny County Parks Foundation (discussed later in this section under Objective C) and the County Planning Staff. This committee will coordinate County policy – established by the Chief Executive and County Council – and have responsibility for County programs related to the protection of and enhancement to the countywide Greenways Network. The Greenways Committee can also coordinate the development of a comprehensive list of conservation priorities. The Chief Executive, with input from the Parks Director, will appoint the members of this committee as they will report directly to the Parks Director. This committee should also coordinate, whenever possible, with the numerous other groups undertaking parks, recreation, trails and greenway projects in the County. Once the Greenways Committee is established and underway, the County will explore funding options through DCNR to hire a Greenways Coordinator. ■ **Implementing the Greenways Network** A primary responsibility of the Greenways Committee will be to oversee the implementation of the Greenways Network. Implementation of the network will mean follow-up work, including analyzing the existing and proposed trail network in the County, identifying additional areas for preservation, developing an open space network based upon these areas and making specific recommendations for preservation of areas, both by the County and by municipalities. Additionally, the Committee will work with County officials to obtain funding from County, State and federal sources to assist with implementation. ■ **Engaging in Partnerships** The Greenways Committee will continue to work with the Pennsylvania DCNR in their efforts to collect information for their statewide network of greenways. The County will continue to engage local and regional partners involved in land preservation, conservation and acquisition, as well as those involved in the promotion of recreation and tourism. The Greenways Committee will work with adjacent counties and regional planning commissions in order to plan and promote efforts at developing a regional open space network. In order to establish a connected Greenways network, the County and the Greenways Committee will work with nonprofit partners and adjacent municipalities to acquire land and/or easements. The following mega-greenway connections have been identified as priorities: ■ Complete the Great Allegheny Passage, connecting Pittsburgh to Washington DC (highest priority) ■ Complete the Pittsburgh to Erie Greenway ■ Complete the Pittsburgh to Harrisburg Mainline Canal Greenway A complete list of greenway connections is provided in the Implementation Matrix on Page 5-48. The County supports efforts by public and private agencies to expand and enhance the Greenways Network. County support may include such actions as funding open space and greenway planning efforts, working with land trusts and other conservation associations to purchase conservation easements, and providing financial assistance to municipalities for local parks and open space development. Multi-municipal planning and cooperation to establish greenways is strongly recommended. DCNR's 2006 *Multi-Municipal Cooperation for Recreation and Parks* (2006) can be used to implement cooperative greenways planning as well as municipal park planning. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor B. **Implement a Strategy to Establish Greenways that Encourage Protection of Bio-diverse Areas, Floodplains, Steep Slopes, Forested Areas, Landslide-Prone Areas, Riparian Corridors and Wildlife Corridors** # CHAPTER 4 ### Acquisition of Land and Conservation Easements The most effective way to preserve open space is through acquisition. According to *A Guide to Pennsylvania’s New Conservation and Preservation Easements*, fee simple land acquisition is sometimes the best alternative, but conservation and preservation easements pursuant to the state’s Conservation and Preservation Easement Act, Act 20 of 2001, are less costly and easier to acquire. Conservation easements are agreements between a landowner and a governmental body or a land trust. A landowner voluntarily agrees to refrain from exercising certain property rights and to bind all future owners by the negotiated restrictions. The easements can be either donated or sold. The holder of the easement agrees to enforce the restrictions in court if necessary. While county and local governments can use land or easement acquisition, they may not have the funds or expertise. Entities such as land trusts are set up to do this. Land trusts play an important role in protecting natural areas. Land trusts are nonprofit, charitable organizations that have as one of their core activities the acquisition of land or interests in land (like conservation easements) for the purpose of conservation. Land trusts acquire land or conservation easements through donation by the landowner, through land being willed to them, or by purchasing the land or easement. Land trusts hold the lands or conservation easements in trust for future generations. Most land trusts focus on conserving the biological values of land, but they are also established to protect scenic, historical, agricultural and recreational lands. Allegheny County has eight land trusts operating within its boundaries: * Allegheny Land Trust * Bradford Woods Conservancy (This is not an incorporated entity. They operate under the umbrella of the Allegheny Land Trust) * Chartiers Nature Conservancy * Fox Chapel Area Land Trust * Hollow Oak Land Trust * Pine Creek Land Conservation Trust * Rachel Carson Trails Conservancy * The Scott Conservancy * Western PA Conservancy The eight land trusts manage over 125 separate parcels in the County, totaling approximately 2,700 acres. In 2007, Allegheny Land Trust (ALT) developed the GREENPRINT of Allegheny County with the intent to "…promote strategic land conservation by identifying highly functional landscapes that harbor biological diversity, manage water resources, and maintain the region’s scenic landscape character." Figure 4E.3 shows the datasets used to identify lands worthy of <
> **Figure 4E.3 – Allegheny Land Trust GREENPRINT – Concept and Strategy** conservation. The areas of overlap have the highest capacity to perform all three conservation functions. The GREENPRINT map representing the lands that meet all three criteria has been incorporated into the County’s Greenway Network. The GREENPRINT recommends the following: ■ Conserve large tracts of woodlands in the upper reaches of watersheds to intercept rain water before it becomes stormwater. ■ Conserve large tracts of woodlands on steep slopes along the rivers to maintain their ecological services and maintain the County’s unique visual appeal. ■ Landbank developable lands in watersheds that suffer from frequent flooding and sewer overflows until degraded infrastructure is repaired or upgraded to prevent sewage overflow problems from worsening. ■ Dedicate more public resources toward flood prevention. ■ Measure and document the economic benefits of ecological services to supplement the science behind the GREENPRINT. Figure 4E.4 illustrates the potential role various public and private entities can play to conserve the lands that provide the greatest public benefit. ### Private Conservation Techniques There are many ways for individual property owners to conserve identified environmentally-sensitive lands or desired open space. These are some of the most commonly used conservation techniques that property owners are encouraged to consider: ■ **Outright Donation of Land and Endowment** – Full title and ownership are transferred to a nonprofit conservation organization or qualified government agency. ■ **Donation with Life Estate** – Allows the property owner to retain the right to live on the property for the rest of their life. ■ **Bequest** – A donation of land through will or living trust allows the property owner to maintain complete control of the land while alive. ■ **Conservation Easement** – Places permanent restrictions on the development of land while the property owner retains ownership. The easement binds all present and future owners of the eased land. ■ **Bargain Sale** – Protects land by selling it to a conservation group for less than market value. The difference between the bargain sale price and fair market value is considered a charitable donation. ■ **Limited Development and Conservation Subdivision** – An alternative to traditional development where a portion of land is developed while the rest remains open space. This technique balances the need for higher financial gain with the desire to preserve land. Careful planning ensures that the most critical ecological features are preserved. ■ **Donation of an Asset Property** – A property owner contributes land or home to allow the organization to sell it and use the funds to support conservation. ■ **Purchase of the property** – A fair market appraisal is done and a purchase offer is made to the landowner. ### Planning and Regulatory Techniques The County will publish advisory guidelines to promote general consistency with the objective of conserving identified open space. The County will also provide guidelines to promote uniformity with respect to common types of municipal land use regulations. There are a number of regulatory techniques that can be used including zoning, subdivision and land development and an official map to implement the objective of conserving identified open space. The # CHAPTER 4 **Figure 4E.4 – Allegheny Land Trust GREENPRINT Implementation Matrix** | Scale | Benefits | Protection Strategy | Implementation Partners | Funding Sources | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY | Parcel | Protection of the region's unique biodiversity | •Direct conservation of land & easements
•PA Natural Diversity Inventory | Land trusts
DCNR
DEP | DCNR
Private foundation,
corporate and
individual sources | | WATER MANAGEMENT | Watershed | •Stormwater & Flood controls
•Water quality improvements
•Property value enhancement
•Managed growth | •County Comprehensive Plan
•Municipal land planning, ordinances, and code enforcement
•Landbanking | Municipalities
Municipal authorities
Watershed organizations
Land trusts
3 Rivers Wet Weather
County, DCED,
PaDEP, USACOE,
EPA, FEMA | Municipalities
County, state and
federal agencies
Bonds
Private Sources | | LANDSCAPE CHARACTER | Landscape | Protection of region's scenic character and air quality | •County Comprehensive Plan
•Municipal planning, ordinances, code enforcement | Municipalities
County
Land trusts | DCNR
PennDOT via
(Enhancement Funding)
Private Sources | DCED=Pa. Dept. of Community and Economic Development; PaDEP=Pa. Dept. of Environmental Protection; PennDOT=Pa. Dept. of Transportation; USACOE=U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; EPA=US Environmental Protection Agency; FEMA=Federal Emergency Management Agency | KEY ROLES | | | :--- | :--- | | LAND TRUSTS | Direct conservation of land; planning assistance; site assessment; policy development and advocacy; education; research; land banking; and ongoing land stewardship | | MUNICIPALITIES | Planning and land use managment; integrate GREENPRINT into Comprehensive Plans; adopt and enforce conservation-oriented zoning and land development codes; create Transfer Development Rights programs | | COUNTY GOVERNMENT | Integrate GREENPRINT into Comprehensive Plan to advocate conservation of highly functional green infrastructure; create incentives for conserving GREENPRINT areas; promote awareness and share GREENPRINT mapping; funding | | STATE AGENCIES | Restrict new sources of stormwater and sewage inputs into failing systems; regulate geologically hazardous areas; funding | | FEDERAL AGENCIES | Promote and fund flood prevention strategies; evaluate performance of outdated flood control facilities | following are regulatory techniques that should be applied by municipalities where appropriate: ■ **Zoning and Subdivision and Land Development: Conservation Subdivision** – Provisions in a zoning ordinance to encourage or require a variety of density options that protect identified natural features from development and reward increased conservation area with increased net density on the remaining land, and provisions in a subdivision and land development ordinance for designing conservation subdivisions using a four-step process where conservation areas are identified first and development is designed around it. Open space may be either dedicated to the public or owned and maintained privately. Source: *Growing Greener, A Conservation Planning Workbook for Municipal Officials in Pennsylvania* (model ordinances included). ■ **Zoning: Planned Residential Development** – Provisions in a zoning ordinance to provide for “the conservation and more efficient use of open space ancillary to …dwellings and uses so that greater opportunities for better housing and recreation may extend to all …” (MPC §701) ■ **Zoning: Overlay Districts** – A second layer zoning district superimposed over underlying or base zoning districts intended to protect resources or special interests such as floodplains and riparian areas, steep slopes, landslide-prone areas, subsidence areas, scenic corridors or riverfront corridors. ■ **Zoning: Site Capacity Analysis** – Provisions to establish the density of residential development or the intensity of nonresidential development based on an analysis of the site where protected areas are subtracted before calculating the maximum number of dwelling units or square feet of non-residential space permitted. This can reduce the density or intensity of development, rather than holding density or intensity constant and shifting development within a site to protect identified areas. ■ **Subdivision and Land Development: Mandatory Dedication** – Provisions requiring the public dedication of land suitable for park, greenway, trails and recreation purposes as a condition precedent to final plan approval, or – if the developer agrees – the construction of recreational facilities, the payment of fees in lieu thereof, the private reservation of the land or a combination. The governing body must have formally adopted a recreation plan. There should be standards for open space and recreation area that meet the objectives of the plan. In growing communities, the preservation and protection of green space as development takes place is critical. The passing of a Subdivision and Land Development ordinance requiring the public dedication of land for recreation before a development plan is approved is one way a municipality can control the preservation of land and limit overdevelopment. ■ **Reservation of Land on an Official Map** – A map adopted by a governing body pursuant to Article IV of the MPC by which proposed public parks, playgrounds, greenways, trails and open space identified in an adopted comprehensive plan are reserved from development for future acquisition for public use. More information on these regulatory techniques and others with model regulations can be found in *Improving Local Development Regulations: A Handbook for Municipal Officials*. C. **Expand the Parks and Trails System to Serve Future Populations** **County Parks** Allegheny County adopted a *Comprehensive Parks Master Plan* in 2002. The master plan made 297 park-specific recommendations for the nine County Parks and 42 system-wide recommendations. Over the past four years, the County, through its Public Works and the Parks Department, has made significant progress in addressing the numerous recommendations made in this study. Of all the plan’s recommendations, 13% are completed, 11% are underway, 24% are being addressed through ongoing efforts and 19% are in the discussion/planning stages. <
> Photo credit: Allegheny County Allegheny County will continue to complete the recommendations of the *Comprehensive Parks Master Plan*, particularly the following projects that are fundamental to other implementation strategies: # CHAPTER 4 * Develop and formally adopt a fees and charges policy * Develop and implement a marketing plan for County parks and recreation * Expand the County Parks system by purchasing properties adjacent to the existing parks In January 2007, County Council passed an ordinance to finalize the creation of an entity with tax-exempt [501(c)(3)] status "with a mission to secure and administer financial resources to support and enhance objectives of the Department of Parks, as well as to assist the County in meeting the planning goals for parks and to administer any funds voluntarily contributed by the public for assisting in the improvement and/or maintenance of the County's parks". The American Institute for Leisure Resources conducted a study of the Allegheny County Park System in the summer of 2007. The result of their study defines system-wide revenue recommendations as well as individual park recommendations for each of the nine regional parks. The *Allegheny County Parks Action Plan* will transform and enhance recreational opportunities at the County's nine regional parks, the County riverfront trail system and other greenway initiatives. In the fall of 2007, Allegheny County Chief Executive Dan Onorato announced the establishment of the Allegheny County Parks Foundation. The new Board will raise private funds to help maintain the County's nine parks and will explore new revenue sources, such as the creation of public-private partnerships to operate some of the parks' major attractions. With an initial funding of $1 million, the Chief Executive vowed to match dollar for dollar any private funds raised, up to $10 million. This pledge indicates the County's commitment to raising the funds necessary to continue to maintain one of its most valuable assets, the County Park system. ### Park Planning and Implementation Prototypes Park planning and implementation prototypes were developed to assist local municipalities of various types in making decisions about the types of park facilities that will be needed in the future. These prototypes were designed for the different types of communities found in the County today and for the types of Places that have been designated in the Future Land Use Plan. These prototypes should not be confused with the park standards discussed at the beginning of this element. The park standards describe types of parks in Allegheny County today. The prototypes discussed here describe types of recreation facilities that could be needed in the future, and how to implement them. The County's Councils of Government (COGs) will receive training to use the Park Prototypes developed for *Allegheny Places* to help educate their member municipalities about parks and recreation standards. The COGs should also help municipalities to identify and obtain funding to create and maintain these park assets, such as the funding available from DCNR. The prototypes can be applied by the County and local municipalities to guide the development or redevelopment of parks and recreation facilities in the kinds of locales described below: * **Multi-Municipal Community Prototype:** older, not-growing, population small (5,000 residents); one square mile in size. This prototype could share services with other older, small communities or with one of the mature or growing communities as well. This would depend on location and willingness to work together. * Priority 1: Identify and address repair needs of existing community's facilities. * Priority 2: Establish or participate in an existing multi-municipal Recreation and Park Agency. * Priority 3: Complete a multi-municipal Comprehensive Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan. * Priority 4: Initiate programs and services to address community needs. * Priority 5: Develop a funding strategy and development timeline. * **Mature Suburban Community Prototype:** stable community, population medium (30,000 residents); nine square miles in size. ■ Priority 1: Complete a Comprehensive Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan for the municipality and a Master Site Improvement Plan for each municipal park. ■ Priority 2: Complete design development phase for each municipal park. ■ Priority 3: Develop a funding strategy and development timeline. ■ Priority 4: Initiate phased construction of identified park improvements. ■ **Rapidly Growing (Edge) Community Prototype:** many young families, population low to medium (10,000 residents); 21 square miles in size. ■ Priority 1: Complete a Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Comprehensive Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan. ■ Priority 2: Enact a mandatory dedication (recreation impact) amendment to the subdivision and land development ordinance. ■ Priority 3: Enact an official map to reserve land from development. ■ Priority 4: Enact zoning and subdivision and land development provisions for conservation of identified open space. ■ Priority 5: Develop a funding strategy and development timeline. ■ Priority 6: Initiate acquisition and phased construction of parks. ■ **Urban Community Prototype:** often financially distressed, population medium to large (20,000+ residents); four square miles or more in size. ■ Priority 1: Complete a Comprehensive Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan. ■ Priority 2: Develop a funding strategy and development timeline. ■ Priority 3: Seek additional funding sources. ■ Priority 4: Initiate phased park and trail construction. ■ **Riverfront Community Linear Greenway Prototype:** municipality that borders any of the four rivers in Allegheny County. ■ Priority 1: Establish a partnership with Friends of the Riverfront, PEC, and Allegheny County to coordinate with the Allegheny County Riverfronts Project. ■ Priority 2: Adopt the County Comprehensive Plan as to Riverfront recommendations as part of a multi-municipal or municipal comprehensive plan. ■ Priority 3: Adopt the County’s Riverfront Overlay District into the municipal zoning ordinance. (The Riverfront Overlay District is in *Improving Local Development Regulations: A Handbook for Municipal Officials*, which is available in the eLibrary at www.alleghenyplaces.com). ■ Priority 4: Adopt an Official Map to reserve land for Riverfront Park. ■ Priority 5: Develop a funding strategy and development timeline. ■ Priority 6: Seek additional funding. ■ Priority 7: Initiate linear park and trail construction. This approach for prototype communities can be applied across the County. However, there will be some locations – particularly the Airport Corridor that will primarily have industrial or office uses – where the prototypes will be less applicable. For these areas, a separate model is suggested: **Park Nodes** or **Micro Parks**. These small park-like settings will provide visual relief from the surrounding hardscape and contribute to the ‘greening’ and overall attractiveness of the area. Park Nodes should have landscaping, public art, and/or pedestrian seating and can vary greatly in size. Some may be intensively developed. Basketball courts, softball fields, or open lawn areas, while requiring significantly more space, could provide employees at these locations the opportunity for physical exercise, healthy competition and a chance to further develop friendships or teamwork. ### Recommendations by Type of Place Each of the Places, along with the Park Prototype that would be most appropriate, are listed in Table 4E.3. # CHAPTER 4 ### CDBG Priority Projects Allegheny County uses Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding to assist municipalities with areas of low/moderate-income persons. A portion of that funding is used exclusively for parks, recreation, open space and greenways: * Rehabilitation of existing facilities * Replacement of substandard play equipment * Adaptive reuse of functionally obsolete facilities * Expansion of green space in developed municipalities * Protection of green space in growing municipalities ### Multi-municipal Cooperation In Allegheny County, it is not possible to provide every type of recreational opportunity within each municipality due to the small size of many municipalities, the physical limitations posed by the type of terrain that exists, and fiscal constraints. In some cases, the sharing of facilities across municipal boundaries can be a viable solution. This has already been accomplished in some locations that already have a common bond such as belonging to the same school district. Some communities have been sharing facilities that require a significant amount of level land, such as community ball fields. In another example, several adjacent municipalities avoided a costly duplication of services by sharing the expenses of one multi-municipal community pool. *Allegheny Places* encourages intergovernmental cooperation and multi-municipal planning efforts (as discussed in the prototypes above). In addition to the cost benefits, the use of proper planning tools affords the opportunity to improve quality of life issues as communities evolve. For example, former commercial and industrial sites often extend across several municipal boundaries. As these sites are redeveloped, the reclamation of green space as part of the redevelopment effort benefits all the municipalities involved. In addition to making a more attractive visual environment, providing adequate green space helps mitigate water, air and noise pollution and – in some cases – helps control flooding. ### D. Facilitate Public Access to Riverfronts #### The Allegheny County Riverfronts Project Allegheny County has made a significant commitment to reclaiming, rejuvenating and conserving its riverfronts. The County is teaming together with the Friends of the Riverfront and the Pennsylvania Environmental Council to implement a strategic plan for the Allegheny County Riverfronts Project. Working with a variety of other partners, including local | TABLE 4E.3 - Appropriate Park Prototypes for Places | | | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **PLACES** | **MULTI-MUNICIPAL** | **MATURE SUBURBAN** | **RAPIDLY GROWING** | **URBAN COMMUNITY** | **RIVERFRONT COMMUNITY** | **PARK NODE/ MICRO PARK** | | **Airport** | | | | | | X | | **Core** | | | | X | X | X | | **Corridor** | | X | X | | X | | | **Urban Neighborhood** | | | | X | X | | | **Community Downtown** | X | | | X | X | X | | **Village** | X | | | | | | | **Rural** | X | | | | | | governments and other nonprofits, this partnership will accomplish the specific tasks that will lead to the acquisition, restoration and development of riverfront areas. A number of riverfront plans are being used to implement the Allegheny County Riverfront Project, such as: * Three Rivers Heritage Trail Plan * Three Rivers Second Nature Reports * Three Rivers River Conservation Plan * Monongahela River Conservation Plan * Middle Allegheny River Conservation Plan * Allegheny County Riverfront Plan * Three Rivers Park Plan * Riverlife Task Force Landscaping Guidelines * Report of the Riverlife Task Force Quality and Corridors Committee Development of the linear greenway with trails, picnic areas and non-motorized boat launches will make the County's riverfronts more attractive and accessible. Once completed, the riverfront is expected to become a draw for tourists and business and will enhance the quality of life in Allegheny County. The goals of the Project are to: * Provide continuous access along the four rivers in Allegheny County (the Youghiogheny, the Monongahela, the Allegheny and the Ohio) * Conserve biologically, environmentally and scenically important lands and islands along and in the rivers * Help municipalities maintain and/or improve the quality of riverfront development and consider impacts on water quality * Restore certain lands to a more environmentally sustainable state * Provide for a positive non-motorized recreational experience on and along the rivers Overarching all of these goals is the understanding that each community has its own character and will need to be approached with that character in mind. There will also be instances where achieving the vision is complicated or currently impossible due to current conditions (e.g. railroads, industrial facilities, highways). In these situations, the Project will work to seek alternatives to achieving the vision and be vigilant as to changes in use that may later allow full implementation. For more information on this project, go to http://www.friendsoftheriverfront.org/. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor ### Riverfront Redevelopment Access to riverfronts can be provided through redevelopment of the large number of brownfields located along the Three Rivers. Local governments can contribute to the success of riverfront redevelopment by mandating such items as development setbacks from the river. The County has a model Riverfront Overlay District, which municipalities with riverfront land are encouraged to adopt into their zoning ordinances. With much of the riverfront lying under former steel mills and other industrial uses, these actions are urgent and must be taken before sites are redeveloped and the opportunity is lost. The County recently purchased the Carrie Furnace Site, a 137-acre brownfield that spans portions of Braddock, Munhall, Rankin, Swissvale and Whitaker boroughs. The plan to redevelop this site into a mixed-use development will provide the public with access to the river. ### The Pittsburgh Riverfront The City of Pittsburgh published its Riverfront Development Plan in 1998. The plan for recreation, access and tourism along the rivers called for CHAPTER 4 municipalities to work together, to establish the riverfronts as one entity (not separate parcels), to spark tourism and to implement proper zoning. It stresses the importance of a Riverfront Overlay District, which is “to maintain an open space area with the potential for public access along the banks and to impose additional requirements on structures or uses within the district.” The City intends to acquire all of the 35 miles of riverfront property within its borders. For more information, go to http://www. riverlifetaskforce.org/. ### E. Ensure that Regionally Significant Parks are ADA Compliant and Transit Accessible The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) guarantee equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities. The County will conform to ADA and ABA Guidelines on all new construction and all rehabilitation projects for recreational facilities. These guidelines cover many outdoor recreation facilities and related access items, such as parking and pathways. Trails, however, cannot always be built to ADA standards and there are allowances for this in the guidelines. Recommendations from the 2002 *Parks and Recreation Master Plan* for bringing existing park facilities up to ADA standards will be used as a guideline to establish priorities. Transit access to County Parks is limited. This hinders the ability of residents who do not own a car or do not drive to enjoy an important County amenity. In response to this, one of the system-wide recommendations in the County’s *Comprehensive Parks Master Plan* was to work with the Port Authority to improve public transit service to the County Parks. Currently, transit funding is limited and the Port Authority has been forced to eliminate routes throughout the County. However, *Allegheny Places* is a plan for the next 20 years and beyond. The County Park staff will continue to work with the Port Authority on ways to increase transit access to the parks. By continuing the coordination, the County will be able to take advantage of funding and resources as they become available in the future. One interim solution is for the county and city websites to list the bus routes to the parks and provide a link to Port Authority’s website. ### F. Raise Public Awareness of the Benefits of Greenways and Open Space Implementation of this plan will require a solid base of community support that understands the benefits of trails and greenways. Local officials and citizens will need to know the details of what is being proposed. Tours of proposed routes, maps published in local papers, displays at local events, local speaking engagements and local school activities are all ways which can be used to communicate the value of a trail system and gain support for acquisition and development. Pilot projects are an effective public awareness tool. Specific projects to enhance the usability of a greenway, such as trailhead parking or a commercial establishment selling refreshments or fishing bait, will help to generate public interest. Obtaining land use agreements for private lands within the system can also be newsworthy to attract attention to the growing greenways network. In June of 2001, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania released *Pennsylvania Greenways: An Action Plan for Creating Connections* to provide a coordinated and strategic approach to creating connections through the establishment of greenways in the State. Chapter 11, Greenways Promotional Campaign, identifies four action steps leading to the development of promotional materials and increasing public awareness of the benefits of greenways. One action calls for the development of appropriate promotional materials on greenways for targeted groups; the materials should be produced in many formats, including hard copy and digital. The greenways message will be incorporated into all of the County’s existing marketing outlets to raise awareness of greenway opportunities among residents and into national media to reach potential out-of-state visitors. The County and its greenway planning partners encourage the long-term involvement and participation of citizens in the planning, design, implementation and management of the greenway system. The County, through the Greenways Committee, will use the resources developed by DCNR and DCED to promote greenways. Pennsylvania’s existing marketing outlets include the website www.experiencePA.com, interactive kiosks, media kits, event guides, visitor guides and special events. The County will work with media outlets and local tourism agencies to make them aware of the benefits of promoting local greenways to tourists. In addition, the Greenways map will be on the *Allegheny Places* website and will be a tool for the public as well as for municipal officials to coordinate with their own parks, recreation and open space plans. <
> Photo credit: McCormick Taylor