Mapping a Wicked Problem: Lack of Access to Public Transit in Pittsburgh
By: Russell Singer
Tags: Systems Thinking, Transition Design, Carnegie Mellon, Design Thinking, Pittsburgh

Our Findings

It was clear from our more comprehensive map that a number of issue spirals were sinking the progress of the City of Pittsburgh’s public transportation system. Specifically, despite a growing awareness and current municipal push for transit improvements, ongoing plans fail to address many of the feedback loops and catch-22 situations due to a complicated network of interrelationships that crossed in and outside of the transit network itself. Among the variables at play is the social environment of the region, the traditional methods of accounting for transit economics, individual incentives for use/disuse of the system, the unique geography and infrastructure of the city, and other confounding influences.

A good starting point to illustrate the complexities of the problem with transit access is the fee structure for usage. Typical economic thought dictates that behaviors that make the network more efficient, be it through reduced costs or improved operational effectiveness, should be incentivized. This is the precise reason why Port Authority offers major cost incentives to riders who use their cashless, touch-free ConnectCard to pay fares. Not dealing with cash, change, or physical receipts means it takes riders less time to enter and sit down, it takes less effort to manage physical currency, and results in an overall operational improvement for the Port Authority. Riders are incentivized to use the ConnectCard as it entitles riders to a 10% discount per fare and a 64% discount on transfers between buses.

This system breaks down when factoring in the larger structural ecosystem of the ConnectCard network. Obtaining and subsequently recharging the ConnectCards are available only in a handful of select locations, often far from or out-of-way of the typical commuter. For the large portion of those who are dependent on Port Authority transit for whom access to these stations is difficult, the ConnectCard system then behaves like a penalty for those who are most reliant on the system.

Screenshot taken from the Port Authority Smart Bus Map, highlighting the lack of card charging stations across the Metropolitan Bus System.

‘Residents of the East End and Mon Valley are still highly dependent on cash. Many of them lack access to traditional banking. Right now, they are penalized for using cash in the Port Authority system,’ noted a letter from Mon Valley Initiative board members to Port Authority officials in November, expressing concerns about the system’s proposed Bus Rapid Transit System and asking that they accelerate the rollout of locations that sell ConnectCards. Duquesne Mayor Nickole Nesby, who has advocated for more locations in her community where ConnectCards can be purchased, says the time it takes for residents to get to the Mon Valley’s resources and other job centers can be a major hurdle. Census data shows about 40 percent of Duquesne’s 5,500 residents are considered in poverty, compared with about 11 percent in Allegheny County as a whole. There is one financial institution in the city, a credit union. (Giammarise, 1)

Further confounding the situation is the need for rethinking health and safety of public transit during the current pandemic situation. Transit agencies across the world are working rapidly to roll out touch-free fare systems in an attempt to improve hygiene (Comfort, 1), yet implementing these systems comes at a great economic cost for the agency and further entrenches reliance on systems like ConnectCard or, even more exclusive, NFC payments from smartphones. While the pursuit of improved hygiene is obviously valuable, the question remains of how to prevent further penalties to those are already disenfranchised.

The efficacy of fare structure itself is questionable. According to the Port Authority’s report, revenue from fares only contributes 23% of the total operations budget and 2% or less of capital expenditures. The vast majority of all expenses are paid from federal, state, and local government sources and subsidies (PAAC, 28). The relatively low amount of support for which fare revenue is responsible speaks to the cash-strapped situation of the transit network and shows why PAAC is so committed to seeking to incentivize behaviors (like ConnectCard use) which allow them to improve their efficiency, even knowing full well that community advocates have been vocal about the inequity for years.

Historically, fares generated by a route was the metric for determining funding allocations, with well-performing routes receiving a greater share. Other considerations like population density and demographics aside, one of the fundamental challenges of creating a well-performing route is reliability, frequency, and quality of its vehicles. Failing in any of these characteristics creates a system that is not reasonably usable for those who depend on it, and results in decreased ridership. Thus we find a positive feedback loop where routes that suffer for any reason, then receive less funding, have fewer vehicles, are less patronized, to receive less funding, and so on. While this method of allocating funds might be useful to improve profitability of a business with multiple competing departments or product lines, public transit is a service that operates with different goals and exists within a much larger economic context:

According to a 2018 economic impact analysis performed by Econsult Solutions Inc., the annual combined economic impact from Port Authority’s capital investments and ongoing operations generate $929 million in Pennsylvania, supporting 6,240 full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs and $484 million in earnings, while Port Authority service adds $3.2 billion in residential property value across Allegheny County. Every $1 invested in public transportation generates $4 in economic returns. $1 billion invested in public transportation supports and creates more than 50,000 jobs. $10 million in capital investment in public transportation yields $30 million in increased business sales. $10 million in operating investment yields $32 million in increased business sales. (SWPA, 10)

Given the very clear advantages of properly funding public transit, and using a broader method of accounting for its “profitability,” it’s a wondrous mystery that PAAC (and indeed other agencies nationwide) find themselves in a state of constant funding crisis. The traditional method of simple accounting, the comparison of money-in versus money-out, has made countless transit agencies fall victim to privatization and almost invariably reduced effectiveness and a dramatic equity hit to those who relied upon them. To its credit, Allegheny County has managed to resist the trend and those specific pitfalls quite effectively, but it still must fight against the bottom-line thinking when it comes to political success at the county and state level.

Pittsburgh is the seventh most congested city in the United States (SWPA, 10). One of the best ways to reduce congestion is to increase transit usage, and yet it’s undeniable that buses themselves are major contributors to congestion. Especially in a city with complex traffic patterns like Pittsburgh, a bus’s frequent stopping and re-entering causes significant amounts of traffic. Traffic which, in turn, reduces the effectiveness of the bus system. The city is already home to a number of dedicated bus-only lanes, a proven way of reducing congestion, encouraging more usage, yet also sparking political ire from those who consider themselves purely automotive travelers. While the city is considering a number of technological solutions to traffic problems, as well as expanding the extent of its BRT (bus rapid transit) lanes, effective social messaging about their benefits remains a challenge.

When it comes to ensuring easy access to public transit, few solutions are as effective as Transit Oriented Development, or TOD. The premise behind TOD is to co-locate dense areas of housing, commerce, and entertainment around high frequency transit corridors, thus providing live-work-play accommodations where transit is not just an option, but the best option. Pittsburgh is already on its way to implementing a few areas of TOD, but widespread implementation is often hampered by zoning laws, NIMBY-ism, funding/incentives, and the complex relationship TOD has with gentrification. Speaking generally, it is easiest to pursue TOD projects in neighborhoods that are already reliant on public transit, are in need of economic support, and lack a strong political voice to resist change, ie. poorer neighborhoods. While in theory TOD could be accompanied by subsidized housing or price caps, the area comprising Shadyside, East Liberty, Bakery Square, and Friendship shows that isn’t always the case.

This map shows income level change in Pittsburgh from 2000 to 2020, with darker areas being significant increases and lighter areas being significantly negative. The area around the East Busway’s TOD is highlighted in green. Source: city-data.com

Centered around Pittsburgh’s East Busway BRT line and with robust connections to other parts of the city, Google was among the first major commercial partners for the development of the area. After attracting an influx of well-educated high-earning employees to the area, new builds of luxury townhomes and high-rent apartments sprung up shortly after. For anyone who witnessed the transformation of this area, especially the parts North of the busway, the contrast over the last ten years is stark. While there are obvious benefits for the city (increased tax revenue, elevated transit usage, job creation), the negative result is a great number of low-income residents who rely on public transit have been forced further away from the BRT line and now live with reduced mobility.

Contributing to changes of the city’s demographics is not the only social equity impact of public transit. Vehicle pollution is one of the leading causes of air and ground pollution in the city and the correlation between residential incomes and levels of pollution is notable. It is not exclusively true that high-pollution areas are also low-income, as evidenced by Downtown, however vehicle traffic and the related pollution are major contributors to reduction in property value. Combined with the desirability of TOD as described above, low-income residents are more likely to live in the most polluted areas surrounding thoroughfares heavily utilized by private automobiles.

Comparison of carbon pollution (left) to 2020 income levels (right). Darker red indicates higher levels of pollution, whereas the map on the right darker blue indicates higher 2020 income. The area immediately above the Squirrel Hill Tunnel (highlighted green), which takes 376 under the city, is associated with notably higher incomes and low pollution compared to sections on either exit of the tunnel. Sources: breatheproject.org and city-data.com

Indeed, as evidenced by the income levels/pollution levels surrounding the Squirrel Hill Tunnel, in some cases the correlation is stark. Despite this not being a direct causal relationship, the end result is that those of lower-income demographics are forced to bear the burden of health issues related to pollution more so than their wealthier counterparts, in addition to experiencing reduced access to transit.

Conclusion and Next Steps

Pittsburgh is part of the modern paradigm for car-centric cities and single-home urban living (right) had the most connecting lines to other issues.

One issue which stood apart from all others on our visual map, in terms of the sheer number of connections to other issues around the landscape, was: “Pittsburgh is part of the modern paradigm for car-centric cities and single home urban living.” Insomuch as this exploration is intended to be Pittsburgh specific, the truth is many of the components identified are local incarnations of wicked problems evident globally. This issue of car-centric urban design had radical impacts on the history of transit access in Pittsburgh and across the United States. Part of our task going forward will be to understand in greater detail this history’s specific impact on Pittsburgh, what current relationships are most pertinent to localized problems, and what local assets are in place to resist globally influenced trends.

The visual complexity of the interconnections on our problem map is a clear indication of the actual complexity of the problems at play with access to public transit in Pittsburgh. The above text outlines some of these issues in their relationships; however, it is far from a complete characterization of every identified problem and every connection line between them. Moving forward towards a more complete understanding of the situation will begin with identifying the various stakeholder groups, their value structures, needs, and constraints, as well as the relationships and conflicts between the various groups. Additionally, we also identified a number of connections to other wicked problems being examined by other groups in the Transition Design Seminar, notably Gentrification, Lack of Access to Affordable Housing, and Deforestation. Undoubtedly, examining the results from each of these groups’ research will enhance our understanding.

Works Cited

Comfort, Paul. “What’s Next for Public Transportation? Three Steps to Get Back on Track.” Mass Transit Magazine, Endeavor Business Media, LLC, 1 Feb. 2021, www.masstransitmag.com/management/blog/21208162/whats-next-for-public-transportation-three-steps-to-get-back-on-track.

Giammarise, Kate. “Pittsburgh-Area Riders Penalized for Paying Cash Fares on Public Transit.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9 Mar. 2018, www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2018/03/19/poverty-pittsburgh-cash-fare-port-authority-connectcards-public-transit/stories/201803180010

PAAC. NEXTransit Existing Conditions Report. Pittsburgh: Port Authority of Allegheny County, 2020. Web. https://nextransit.network/s/Existing-Cond-Report-FINAL-9012020.pdf

SWPA, Mobility Final Report. Pittsburgh: Southwest PA Partnerships for Mobility, 2019. Web. https://www.paturnpike.com/pdfs/about/SW_Mobility_Final_Report.pdf