.png)
By Juliet Martinez, managing editor
Pittsburgh’s proposed Bus Line Redesign, aimed at modernizing the city’s public transit system, faces resistance from riders, advocates and elected officials. During a Jan. 31 Pittsburgh Regional Transit board meeting, over a dozen speakers raised concerns about the plan.
They said the redesign threatens to fail the region’s most vulnerable transit users. It has the potential to disrupt daily commutes and make inequality worse. Some who testified focused on lack of accessibility and communication. Others criticized the agency’s whole approach to reshaping the system.
Pittsburgh Regional Transit, formerly known as the Port Authority of Allegheny County, is often called PRT. Last September, the agency released a proposal for a redesigned transit system. The agency then began seeking public feedback. The window for public comment closed on Feb. 24. PRT has said it will now analyze the input and combine it into a new draft to be released in the spring.
A system in flux
The bus network has stayed the same for decades. Supporters of the redesign argue that it needs to be updated to be a more efficient, fair and sustainable system. But critics fear that the proposed changes could do more harm than good. They say it has not taken into account the people who rely on public transit most. That often means low-income residents, people of color and people with disabilities.
Laura Chu Wiens, executive director of the public transportation advocacy group Pittsburghers for Public Transit, set the tone for the testimony by emphasizing the gravity of the board’s decision.
“You have a very important responsibility with this bus line redesign,” she said. “You will ultimately decide whether to approve a plan that radically reshapes our transit system, and you are accountable to the consequences of that decision.”
Disruption and harm to riders
A repeating theme in the testimony was the potential for the redesign to disrupt riders’ daily lives. Speakers argued that the proposed changes would cut critical direct rides to schools, hospitals and grocery stores.
District 5 City Councilor Barb Warwick collaborated with community nonprofits and residents to gather feedback on the redesign. Her testimony focused on preserving these direct routes.
“Many of these connections are already possible in the existing network,” she said. “Losing them would be devastating to residents who have come to rely on them.”
Accessibility and communication
Another major critique was the lack of available information about the redesign. Many speakers said the materials provided by PRT were difficult to understand.
Kelda Boorman, an Oakland resident, related concerns about the impact on low-income and disabled people.
“Many of my friends and people in the communities I participate in don’t even know that this is happening or have been unable to give their feedback because of lack of accessibility with the maps and communications,” Ms. Boorman said.
Other testimony echoed concerns about the impact on vulnerable populations.
Teaira Collins, who lives in the Hill District, has a child with Down syndrome in his last year of middle school. Her goal is for him to take public transit to high school independently, but the redesign threatens to make that impossible.
“If you start making it to where [my son] has to catch two buses or three buses, then guess what? He’s not going to be able to catch the bus by himself,” she said. “My goal is to make him independent, and you guys are hindering that.”
Ms. Collins offered to testify at the state and even national level if it would reverse course on the redesign.
“Stop changing stuff ’cause every time you change it, you make it worse, not better,” she said.
Dr. Abhishek Viswanathan is a data science professor at Chatham University and member of the Pittsburghers for Public Transit Research Committee. He stressed the need for equity in the redesign.
“A bus line redesign that truly works for all must prioritize service to low-income communities, older adults, people with disabilities, youth and Black and brown riders,” he said. “These are the people who use transit the most and rely on it heavily. They deserve a system that meets their needs.”
‘Ask the operators’
Some speakers recommended the PRT get information from transit operators instead of high-tech analytical tools.
“Bus operators have a better sense of passenger flow than any apps you can use. Please invest in their expertise,” urged Nicole Gallagher, a community organizer with Pittsburghers for Public Transit. The group recommended that PRT pay drivers to tell them about possible routes and the amenities operators need.
“Operators also know which turns can’t be made with buses, which roads best connect communities, and where community hubs can be found,” Ms. Gallager said.
Calls for better engagement
Julie Daa of Bloomfield called for PRT to “canvas bus stops on every route across the county to talk to riders, especially more vulnerable riders who may have even more trouble than I did navigating the extensive amount of information online.”
Ms. Warwick stressed the importance of collaboration between PRT and other government entities. The City of Pittsburgh is beginning to gather public input for a comprehensive plan. She described the process as a “critical opportunity” for PRT to work together with the City of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County to determine what riders need.
“I really encourage that collaboration,” she said.
Looking ahead
PRT is moving forward with the public input process. Meanwhile, riders and advocates are urging the transit agency to listen to riders and transit workers, calling for a plan that puts the most vulnerable first and keeps transit accessible.
Ms. Chu Weins summed up the stakes.
“The bus line redesign will change the course of people’s day-to-day lives, the working conditions of your employees, and everyone’s ability to live and thrive. We cannot afford to have this fail.”
Comments