Download the entire 2040 Plan (PDF, 30.1 MB) - Southwestern ...

2040 

Transportation 

and 

Development Plan 

for 

Southwestern Pennsylvania 

Adopted June 27, 2011 

Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission 

Regional Enterprise Tower 

425 Sixth Avenue, Suite 2500 

Pittsburgh, PA 15219-1852 

Voice 412.391.5590 

Fax 412.391.9160 

comments@spcregion.org 

www.spcregion.org 

This document is available in alternative formats upon request.

Members of the 


Officers 

Chairman: Charles A. Camp 

Vice Chairman: Rodney D. Ruddock 

Secretary-Treasurer: Steve Craig 

2011 

Staff 

SPC Executive Director: James R. Hassinger 

Allegheny County 

Dan Onorato 

Lynn Heckman 

David Miller 

Mark Schneider 

Robert J. Macey 

Armstrong County 

Patricia Kirkpatrick 

James Scahill 

Rich Fink 

Mark Snyder 

Gealy Wallwork 

Beaver County 

Tony Amadio 

Joe Spanik 

Charles A. Camp 

Richard L. Shaw 

Kelly Shroads 

Butler County 

A. Dale Pinkerton 

James L. Kennedy 

James C. Lokhaiser 

David Johnston 

Jack Cohen 

Fayette County 

Vincent Zapatosky 

Vincent Vicites 

Andrew “A.J.” Boni 

Joe Grata 

Daniel Shimshock 

Greene County 

Pam Snyder 

Kevin Gray 

Robbie Matesic 

Shirl Barnhart 

Archie Trader 

Indiana County 

Rodney D. Ruddock 

Patricia A. Evanko 

David S. Frick 

Byron G. Stauffer, Jr. 

Dana P. Henry 

Lawrence County 

Steve Craig 

Daniel J. Vogler 

Rick DeBlasio 

James Gagliano 

Carmen Rozzi 

Washington County 

Larry Maggi 

Bracken Burns 

L. Anthony Spossey 

Norma Wintermyer 

Michael A. Silvestri 

Westmoreland County 

Tom Balya 

Tom Ceraso 

Karl Eisaman 

Terry Daughenbaugh 

Ted Kopas 

City of Pittsburgh 

Luke Ravenstahl 

William Peduto 

Robert Stephany 

Jake Wheatley, Jr. 

Yarone Zober 

Pennsylvania Department 

of Transportation (2 Votes) 

James Ritzman 

Kevin McCullough 

Joseph Dubovi 

Daniel Cessna 

Joe Szczur 

Governor's Office 

Mary Ann Eisenreich 

Pennsylvania Department 

of Community & 

Economic Development 

Port Authority of 

Allegheny County (1 Vote) 

Stephen G. Bland 

Wendy Stern 

Transit Operators Committee 

Mary Jo Morandini 

Federal Highway 

Administration* 

Renee Sigel 

Federal Transit 


Letitia Thompson 

U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency* 

Jessica Greathouse 

Federal Aviation 


U. S. Economic 

Development 


*Nonvoting Members 

The preparation of this publication was financed in part through grants from the United States Department of 

Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration; the U.S. Department of 

Commerce; the Appalachian Regional Commission; the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; the Department of 

Transportation of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and, the counties of Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, 

Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, Washington, Westmoreland, and the City of Pittsburgh. The views and opinions 

of the authors or agency expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of these agencies.

2040 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SECTION 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 - 1 

Advancing the Regional Vision…………………………………………………… ….1 – 1 

The Regional Vision Scenario……………………………………………… ............... 1 – 3 

Plan Policies…….. ......................................................................................................... 1 – 5 

Summary………………………….. .............................................................................. 1 – 7 

SECTION 2: Public Participation .......................................................................................... 2 – 1 

Introduction….. .............................................................................................................. 2 – 1 

Public Input, Review and Comment….. ........................................................................ 2 – 1 

Early Public Input….. .................................................................................................... 2 – 1 

Public Participation Panels….. ...................................................................................... 2 – 2 

SECTION 3: Regional Conditions and Trends..................................................................... 3 – 1 

Physical Features…. ...................................................................................................... 3 – 2 

Shale Gas Formations…. ............................................................................................... 3 – 3 

Population…….. ............................................................................................................ 3 – 5 

Future Population and Employment……….. ................................................................ 3 – 8 

Appalachian Context…. .............................................................................................. 3 – 12 

Northern Neighbors……… ......................................................................................... 3 – 14 

Southern Neighbors……… ......................................................................................... 3 – 17 

Eastern Neighbors……… ............................................................................................ 3 – 19 

Western Neighbors……… .......................................................................................... 3 – 21 

Regional Context Summary……… ............................................................................. 3 – 23 

Existing Transportation System……… ....................................................................... 3 – 24 

SECTION 4: The Transportation Plan ................................................................................. 4 – 1 

Transportation Financial Plan……. ............................................................................... 4 – 1 

Eligibility and Use of Program Funding…….. ............................................ 4 – 2 

Long Range Transportation Plan vs. Transportation Improvement Plan….4 – 3 

Use of Line Items….. ................................................................................... 4 – 4 

Long Range Transportation Plan Funding Sources….. ................................................. 4 – 4 

Title I Formula Funds….. ............................................................................ 4 – 5 

Title I Discretionary Funds….. .................................................................... 4 – 6 

Title III Formula Funds…. .......................................................................... 4 – 7 

Funding for Public Transportation Programs….. ........................................ 4 – 7 

Funding for Other Modes of Transportation ............................................................... 4 – 15 

Airports ...................................................................................................... 4 – 15 

Rail ............................................................................................................. 4 – 16 

Pedestrian and Bicycle ............................................................................... 4 – 17 


i


Inland Navigation ..................................................................................... 4 – 18 

Discretionary Transportation Funding Programs ........................................................ 4 – 18 

Year of Expenditure and Revenue Growth Adjustments ............................................ 4 – 20 

Major Projects Financial Plans .................................................................................... 4 – 20 

Transportation Investment Strategies ......................................................................... 4 – 20 

Needs Identification, Project Prioritization and Technical Project Evaluation ........... 4 – 23 

Transportation Modal Investments .............................................................................. 4 – 25 

Highways and Bridges .............................................................................. 4 – 26 

Interstate Maintenance Program ................................................................ 4 – 33 

Public Transportation ................................................................................ 4 – 34 

Transportation Operations and Safety ...................................................... 4 – 43 

Other Transportation Modes ...................................................................... 4 – 48 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Network ................................................................ 4 – 48 

Transportation Enhancements ................................................................... 4 – 50 

Ride Sharing/CommuteInfo ....................................................................... 4 – 51 

Rail ............................................................................................................. 4 – 52 

Waterways and Ports ................................................................................. 4 – 53 

Unfunded Transportation Needs and Illustrative Projects List .................................... 4 – 55 

Highway and Bridge Unfunded Needs ...................................................... 4 – 55 

Public Transportation Unfunded Needs ..................................................... 4 – 57 

Illustrative Project Lists ............................................................................. 4 – 57 

Securing Additional Revenue .................................................................... 4 – 59 

Potential Future Revenue Options Examples ............................................ 4 – 60 

SECTION 5: Economic Development .................................................................................... 5 – 1 

Economic Development Funding…. ............................................................................. 5 – 1 

Economic Development Investment Strategies………………… ................................. 5 – 2 

Plan Consistency….. ...................................................................................................... 5 – 3 

Linking Transportation & Economic Development Investments…… .......................... 5 – 8 

Economic Development Policies …. ............................................................................. 5 – 8 

Project Consistency….. ............................................................................... 5 – 9 

Emerging Energy Cluster…… .................................................................. 5 – 12 

Water and Sewer….. .................................................................................................... 5 – 14 

SECTION 6: Plan Technical Analysis and Performance .................................................... 6 – 1 

Forecasting and the Plan……. ....................................................................................... 6 – 1 

Air Quality Conformity…. ............................................................................................ 6 – 5 

Travel Times…… .......................................................................................................... 6 – 9 

SECTION 7: Consideration of Environmental Mitigation .................................................. 7 – 1 

Regional Environmental Resource Inventory…….. ...................................................... 7 – 2 

Identification of Environmental Resource Impacts….. ................................................. 7 – 3 

Environmental Consultation….. .................................................................................... 7 – 3 


ii


SECTION 8: Plan Implementation and Administration ..................................................... 8 - 1 

Transportation Improvement Program .......................................................................... 8 – 1 

Unified Planning Work Program ................................................................................... 8 – 1 

Development District Programs .................................................................................... 8 – 2 

Implementation of the Transportation and Development Plan for 

Southwestern Pennsylvania .......................................................................................... 8 – 7 

Plan Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 8 – 7 

Advance Plan Policies/Strategies .................................................................................. 8 – 8 

Responsiveness to Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Guidelines…. 8 – 23 

Improve Project Delivery Process ............................................................................... 8 – 23 

Plan Administration ..................................................................................................... 8 – 23 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A: Project Tables and Maps by PennDOT District 

Appendix B: Economic Development Investments 

Appendix C: Glossary and Acronyms 

Appendix D: ActiveAllegheny Maps 

Appendix E: PennDOT Twelve Year Interstate Capital Plan 


iii


LIST OF FIGURES 

Section 1, Introduction 

Figure 1.1 Regional Vision Scenario……………………………………………… 1 – 5 

Section 2. Public Participation 

Section 3. Regional Conditions and Trends 

Figure 3.1 Physiographic Features .............................................................................. 3 – 2 

Figure 3.2 Marcellus Gas Permit Activity…… ........................................................... 3 – 4 

Figure 3.3 Regional Population ................................................................................... 3 – 5 

Figure 3.4 Unemployment Rates .................................................................................. 3 – 6 

Figure 3.5 Unemployment Rates .................................................................................. 3 – 6 

Figure 3.6 Change in Workplace Employment 2001 to 2009 ...................................... 3 – 7 

Figure 3.7 Regional Population .............................................................................. 3 – 10 

Figure 3.8 Regional Employment ……. .................................................................... 3 – 11 

Figure 3.9 Regional Households ................................................................................ 3 – 12 

Figure 3.10 Population Change by County 2000-2010 ............................................... 3 – 13 

Figure 3.11 Neighboring Regions ................................................................................ 3 – 14 

Figure 3.12 Workplace Employment North ................................................................ 3 – 15 

Figure 3.13 Workplace Employment South ................................................................ 3 – 17 

Figure 3.14 Workplace Employment East ................................................................... 3 – 20 

Figure 3.15 Workplace Employment West ................................................................. 3 – 22 

Figure 3.16 Southwestern Pennsylvania Roadway Infrastructure ............................... 3 – 25 

Figure 3.17 Southwestern Pennsylvania Bridge Infrastructure ................................... 3 – 25 

Figure 3.18 Fixed Route Transit Service Area ............................................................ 3 – 28 

Figure 3.19 Vanpool Origins/Destinations in Southwestern Pennsylvania ................. 3 – 29 

Figure 3.20 Dams and River Terminals ....................................................................... 3 – 35 

Figure 3.21 Airport Systems ........................................................................................ 3 – 37 

Section 4. The Transportation Plan 

Figure 4.1 Title I Funding Sources for Highways, Bridges, & Other ........................ 4 – 5 

Figure 4.2 Title I Estimate of Available Revenues for Highways, Bridges, & Other 4 – 6 

Figure 4.3 Regional Sources of Transit Operating Funds .......................................... 4 – 9 

Figure 4.4 Regional Transit Operating Funds – Long Range Projections ................ 4 – 10 

Figure 4.5 Federal Funding Projections for Transit Capital Projects ....................... 4 – 11 

Figure 4.6 State Funding Projections for Transit Capital Projects ........................... 4 – 12 

Figure 4.7 Transit Capital Projects Funding Gap, 2011-2014 TIP ........................... 4 – 14 

Figure 4.8 Transit Capital Projects Funding Gap, 2011 – 2040 ................................ 4 – 14 

Figure 4.9 Project Evaluation Concept Diagram ...................................................... 4 – 24 

Figure 4.10 LRTP Investments – Roadway Capital Maintenance ............................. 4 – 27 

Figure 4.11 LRTP Investments – Traffic Operations and Safety ............................... 4 – 28 

Figure 4.12 LRTP Investments – Bridge Capital Maintenance .................................. 4 – 30 

Figure 4.13 LRTP Investments – New Capacity, Highways and Bridges .................. 4 – 32 


iv


Figure 4.14 Regional Line Items ................................................................................ 4 – 33 

Figure 4.15 Transit Funding Gap ................................................................................ 4 – 34 

Figure 4.16 Transit Projects in 2011-2014 TIP .......................................................... 4 – 35 

Figure 4.17 Future Transit Projects in SPC Region .................................................. 4 – 37 

Figure 4.18 Causes of Traffic Congestion .................................................................. 4 – 44 

Figure 4.19 Distribution of Traffic Signals in the SPC Region .................................. 4 – 45 

Figure 4.20 Traffic Fatality Trends in Southwestern Pennsylvania .......................... 4 – 48 

Figure 4.21 Illustrative Highway and Bridge Project List, 2011-2014 ...................... 4 – 58 

Figure 4.22 Illustrative Transit Project List, 2011 – 2014 .......................................... 4 – 59 

Section 5. Economic Development Strategy 

Figure 5.1 Area Development Program Projects Ranked and Submitted ................... 5 – 4 

Figure 5.2 Economic Development Administration Projects Ranked & Submitted ... 5 – 5 

Figure 5.3 Enterprise Development Clients….. .......................................................... 5 – 7 

Section 6. Plan Technical Analysis and Performance 

Figure 6.1 Cycle 9 Regional Population ..................................................................... 6 – 2 

Figure 6.2 Cycle 9 Regional Households ................................................................... 6 – 3 

Figure 6.3 Cycle 9 Regional Employment ................................................................. 6 – 4 

Figure 6.4 PM-10 and CO Areas ................................................................................ 6 – 6 

Figure 6.5 8-Hour Ozone Designations ...................................................................... 6 – 7 

Figure 6.6 PM 2.5 Air Quality Designations .............................................................. 6 – 8 

Figure 6.7 Estimated Peak Hour Travel Times, Existing ......................................... 6 – 10 

Figure 6.8 Estimated Peak Hour Travel Times, 2040 LRTP No-Build .................... 6 – 11 

Figure 6.9 Estimated Peak Hour Travel Times, 2040 LRTP Build .......................... 6 – 12 

Figure 6.10 Zones within 30 Minutes Peak Travel Time of PIT Airport ................... 6 – 13 

Figure 6.11 Zones within 30 Minutes Peak Travel Time of Downtown Pittsburgh ... 6 – 14 

Figure 6.12 Zones within 30 Minutes Peak Travel Time of Oakland ........................ 6 – 15 

Figure 6.13 Changes in Regional Congestion ........................................................... 6 – 16 

Figure 6.14 Changes in Regional Transportation Conditions ................................... 6 – 17 

Section 8. Plan Implementation 

Figure 8.1 Traffic Fatalities in Southwestern Pennsylvania, 1999-2010 .................... 8 – 13 


v


Section 1. Introduction 

Advancing the Regional Vision 

The 2040 Transportation and Development Plan, or 2040 Plan, is an update of the 2035 Transportation 

and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania (2035 Plan). The 2035 Plan was developed as a 

mechanism for connecting the region’s vision to an official, coordinated implementation program of 

projects and actions. The 2035 Plan was developed through an unprecedented community engagement 

process called Project Region. Project Region was led by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, 

and was conducted in partnership with a wide range of other public, private and non-profit 

organizations. This unprecedented planning process was used as the backbone and basis for the 2040 

Update. 

The Project Region process was a set of 

organized activities to help the 10 

counties of Southwestern Pennsylvania 

work together to develop regional 

consensus on a growth plan by using 

analytical tools, community 

involvement and scenario development 

to create the most effective strategies. It 

was designed to maximize regional 

assets and infrastructure to achieve 

balanced, cost effective growth; to 

capitalize on investments in existing 

communities; and to strengthen quality 

job creation and regional economic 

competitiveness. 

The 2035 Plan was developed actively engaged the region in envisioning the future of Southwestern 

Pennsylvania and utilized what is known as scenario planning. The premise of scenario planning is 

that rather than focusing on only one picture of the future, a region can consider different versions of 

the future by considering a range of possibilities and identifying policies that can lead in different 

directions. Comparing and contrasting a range of different future scenarios empowers a region to make 

better, more informed choices. 

A scenario is essentially a story about the future that can help people understand the forces of change 

and the collective choices they have. Scenarios show alternative futures by using maps, pictures and 

text that illustrate different projections of future conditions that could occur as a result of different 

choices. 

The most up to date scenario planning research found that the four most common components or 

variables used in scenario planning were: 1) the location of development, 2) the density of 

development, 3) the mix of development, and 4) the transportation system elements. 


1 - 1


Using these basic concepts of scenario development discussed above, SPC employed a series of work 

groups to help develop the scenarios by describing the location of development, density of 

development, mix of development, and transportation system elements through facilitated group 

discussions. 

Based on facilitated group discussions, four scenarios were developed to move forward; the Trend 

Scenario, Corridor/Cluster Scenario, the Compact/Infill/Transit Oriented Scenario and the 

Dispersed/Fringe Sketch Scenario. 

The next step in the planning process was to present the draft scenarios for wider public review and 

discussion in order to reach consensus on which scenario or elements of the scenarios are preferred for 

the region. SPC hosted America’s first-ever live interactive webcast Regional Town Meeting to present 

the draft scenarios. This was the first time that residents and communities throughout a region had 

come together via live video web meetings to talk and work together on what they wanted their region 

to look like in the future and how to make the most effective use of public investments throughout the 

region. 

This meeting was conducted live over the 

internet in downtown Pittsburgh and 10 

satellite meeting locations around the region. 

Participants at each location were able to 

have discussions with their neighbors as well 

as hear feedback from the participants at the 

other locations. 

Regional Town Meeting participants 

reviewed the draft scenarios depicting 

different patterns of growth and development 

in the future. Maps and data for each scenario 

showed different ways in which our region 

could accommodate the new people, jobs and 

residences that would be added over the next 

25 years. 

Participants reviewed these different scenarios and discussed the pros and cons of each development 

pattern on their own local community and on the region as a whole, considering the scenario 

performance indicator scores on criteria including: 

Density of development 

Amount of land developed 

Households close to highway interchanges 

Households close to transit stops 

Regional travel 

Cost for basic infrastructure 


1 - 2


Because no individual scenario tells the entire story, it’s important to consider the elements in each 

scenario and how they differ from one another. Scenarios show possible futures based on differing sets 

of strategies and policies, and are designed to help people understand the potential impacts of various 

policy decisions. It’s also important to remember that these scenarios show patterns of how growth and 

development could occur, not how much growth and development there will be. 

Regional Town Meeting participants were encouraged to think about the positives and negatives of 

each of the scenario elements. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the specific elements of each 

scenario. The focus wasn’t on choosing a single scenario for the region, but rather to elicit discussion 

on various policy options which could guide the development of a preferred scenario. 

After this discussion, participants voted on the scenario they preferred based on the performance 

indicator scores, and results were shared live across the region. 

Based on this input a new scenario 

combining the positive attributes of the 

Compact/Infill/Transit Oriented and 

Corridor/Cluster Scenarios was developed. 

The consensus view that emerged from the 

extensive analysis, region wide public 

engagement, partner meetings, work group 

meetings, electronic town meetings and 

comparison of key policies - the Vision – 

was a regional development scenario of 

transportation and land use that supports 

and enhances the regional economy and the 

communities within it, The Regional 

Vision Scenario. 

The 2035 Plan uses this Regional Vision Scenario, its characteristics and its corresponding policies as 

core consideration of all other plan components. The SPC reaffirmed the use of this Regional Vision 

Scenario and all that it entails as the basis for the 2040 Plan Update. This Regional Vision is described 

below. 

The Regional Vision Scenario 

The Regional Vision: Transportation and land use that supports and enhances the regional economy 

and the communities within it. 

The scenario supporting this vision is characterized by regional policy statements addressing the public 

interest in mutually supportive regional activities, places, and the connections among them. The 

scenario is characterized by high to medium density development in centers and clusters with value 

placed on a mix of uses. Infrastructure improvements would be targeted within the centers and 

clusters of development and the corridors that connect them. This scenario also places an emphasis on 

infill development with reinvestment in existing business districts and brownfield rehabilitation 


1 - 3


throughout the region. Open space preservation and support for agriculture are key emphases in the 

more rural areas of Southwestern Pennsylvania. 

There is a strong multimodal focus including highways, transit, railways and waterways with an 

increasing emphasis on connecting the centers and clusters and promoting excellent access to the urban 

core. This scenario promotes improved transportation operations and safety. This scenario emphasizes 

upgrading existing water and sewer, with limited expansion primarily to historically underserved 

communities. 

Most importantly the Region Vision Scenario also includes 16 policies (the Plan Policies) that are used 

to help guide the region towards achieving the vision. The Plan Policies are focused in three key areas; 

place, connections and activities. 


1 - 4

Plan Policies 

Regional Places 


• Revitalization and redevelopment of the region’s existing communities is a priority. 

• Investment in infrastructure improvements will be coordinated and targeted at the corridor level 

to optimize the impact of the investment. 

• The region will focus on the identification and development of industrial sites with special 

attention given to well situated brownfield locations. 

Regional Connections 

• Maintenance of the existing transportation system will be a regional priority. 

• Transportation and development choices will reflect a priority on safe and secure multimodal 

and intermodal networks for both people and goods. 

• The region’s transportation system will be actively managed and operated to allow the system 

to function at its full potential. 

• The region’s transit system will connect people with resources throughout the entire region. 

• The entire region will have access to broadband communications infrastructure. 

• The region’s infrastructure system will be designed to protect and enhance public health and 

the environment. 

Regional Activities 

• The region will place a priority on business development with a focus on existing business 

retention and expansion. 

• The region will support initiatives designed to improve both the quality and quantity of the 

region’s workforce to meet emerging industry demands. 

• The region will support identified strategic industry clusters. 

• The region will place a priority on programs and services to attract and retain a diverse 

population with a particular focus on young adults and immigrants. 

• The region will proactively support the emerging role of colleges and universities in economic 

development. 

• The region will preserve, promote and develop the tourism and hospitality industries by 

capitalizing on historic, cultural, recreational and ecological assets. 

• The region will preserve and develop its agricultural industry. 


1 - 5


Figure 1.1 The Regional Vision Scenario 


1 - 6


Summary 

The core development values expressed in the Regional Vision Scenario were developed through 

various means, be they recent formally-adopted county, regional or state plans and strategies, or be it 

through an extensive public dialogue with citizens or professional experts. 

The basics of those values, though stated many ways, are simple. Preserve, enhance and build upon our 

existing assets. That may mean redeveloping and revitalizing our existing communities and small 

towns, or it may mean capitalizing on previous infrastructure investment. It may mean preserving our 

open space and nurturing our agricultural industry, or it may mean investing in a well maintained 

multimodal transportation system that provides safe, secure, and efficient transportation options. It 

may mean making the most productive use of our thriving academic community, or it may mean 

capitalizing on historic, cultural, recreational and ecological assets. In fact, it means all these things, 

and more. That is what we heard repeatedly from the region and what is the spirit and intent that this 

scenario. It was basis for the 2035 Plan and it is the basis for the 2040 Plan Update. 


1 - 7


Section 2. Public Participation 

Introduction 

As the cooperative forum for regional collaboration, planning, 

and public decision-making as the designated Metropolitan 

Planning Organization (MPO) and Local Development District, 

SPC is charged with developing both the regional long range 

transportation plan and the regional comprehensive economic 

development strategy for Southwestern Pennsylvania. While 

mandated by different federal regulations and requirements, SPC 

integrates these two plans into a coordinated regional program of 

projects and actions that are guided by the principle that the 

relationship between economic development and the region’s 

transportation system is fundamental. 

Public Input, Review and Comment 

SPC brings 

transportation 

planning directly to 

the region’s 

communities through 

Public Participation 

Panels, which host 

public input meetings 

in each of the ten 

counties 

As the projects contained in the 2040 Plan will have a significant 

impact on the future of Southwestern Pennsylvania, SPC has sought public involvement in various 

ways throughout the Plan’s development. 

Early Public Input 

SPC partnered with Sustainable Pittsburgh once again for the 10th Annual Southwestern PA Smart 

Growth Conference, “Regional Collaboration: Investing in Sustainable Communities”, with an 

audience of over 300, serving as an initial public input session as part of the 2040 Regional Plan 

Update. 

In formulating input for the update of the region’s plan, participants heard from presenters from state, 

federal and local governments, community groups and civic leadership on the status of efforts to 

improve livability and sustainability of communities. Conferees heard about the federal Partnership 

for Sustainable Communities among HUD, DOT and EPA which established six livability principles 

that will act as a foundation for their interagency coordination, and discussion was held on ongoing 

initiatives and development concepts at state and local levels that were consistent with these federal 

livability concepts: 

1. Provide more transportation choices. 

2. Promote equitable, affordable housing. 

3. Enhance economic competitiveness. 

4. Support existing communities. 

5. Coordinate policies and leverage investment. 

6. Value communities and neighborhoods. 


2 - 1


Project Region policies and ongoing development planning is focusing the region on development 

within existing communities and corridors that link them, recycled brown field sites, and sites with 

good transportation access in order to leverage economic opportunity. The plan focus on revitalizing 

existing communities was commended. 

Participants developed further recommendations for ongoing development of initiatives and 

performance measures around the plan policies in an SPC facilitated discussion. Suggestions included: 

promotion of walkable communities design across regional, county, and local planning; breaking 

down barriers to integrating housing, transportation, and land use; advancing innovative methods to 

achieve sustainable urban infrastructure; working to ensure the benefits of shale gas while mitigating 

both short and long term community impacts; enhancing community engagement by effectively 

engaging historically disenfranchised populations; and developing metrics to measure what equates to 

sustainable and livable success for our region. 

Participants expressed interest in development of additional performance measures, such as: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue and expenses for infrastructure 

Stable, predictable funding for transit 

Housing affordability 

Economic prosperity 

Percent of communities with sidewalk ordinances 

Population increase 

Reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 

Implementation of neighborhood/community cooperation programs 

Healthy population 

Decrease in energy consumption 

Equity, regional unity, local self-reliance, safety 

Public Participation Panels 

In accordance with its Public 

Participation Plan (revised 

April 2011), SPC conducts its 

primary public outreach 

through Public Participation 

Panels (Panels). Citizens need 

not travel outside their own 

county to participate in the 

planning process, because 

SPC comes to them. County 

Commissioners appoint Panel 

members and Co-Chairs for 

two-year terms, following 

guidelines to assure that panel 

members represent the 

county’s diverse population 


2 - 2


and varied transportation interests. Members come 

from many geographic areas of the county, and 

include minorities, senior citizens, persons with 

disabilities, and low-income populations. 

Near the beginning of each term of appointment for 

Panel members, SPC conducts orientation sessions to 

help members understand the transportation planning 

process and how they can play an important role in 

generating public involvement. We use new and 

creative ways to help the public learn how to be 

effectively involved. 

Materials designed to educate community members on 

the public involvement process and on the 

transportation planning process in the region have 

been developed and widely distributed to facilitate 

local public involvement. 

Every two years, the Panels hold public meetings to 

collect public input on transportation priorities that 

people would like to see addressed in SPC’s four-year 

Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and in the 

state’s Twelve-Year Program. While the fiscal 

constraints on the TIP limit the number and scope of projects that can be programmed in the next four 

years, the input collected at these meetings is significant in focusing attention on priorities for 

subsequent years in the long range plan. 

The draft 2040 Plan resulting from this review and update process has been posted on SPC’s website 

and distributed to county planning departments and public libraries throughout the region for public 

examination. 

Review and comment on the draft 2040 Plan was solicited in a 30-day public review process, in 

accordance with SAFETEA-LU requirements. During this review process from May 18, 2011 through 

June 17, 2011, public comment was solicited at ten Public Participation Panel meetings. Public 

comment was accepted at the meetings or via mail, email or fax at any time during the public comment 

period. A list of meeting dates and locations is provided below. 

 

 

 

May 24, 5:00 p.m., Room 104, Courthouse Square, 100 West Beau Street, Washington 

May 25, 5:00 p.m., Conference Room, Fayette Chamber of Commerce, 65 West Main Street, 

Uniontown 

May 26, 6:00 p.m., Public Meeting Room, County Government Center, 124 W. Diamond 

Street, Butler 


2 - 3


 

 

 

May 31, 5:00 p.m., Commissioners Conference Room, County Courthouse, 810 Third Street, 

Beaver 

June 1, 6:00 p.m., Large Group Instruction Room, Indiana Area Junior High, 245 N. Fifth 

Street, Indiana 

June 2, 6:00 p.m., Commissioners Meeting Room, Lawrence County Courthouse, 430 Court 

Street, New Castle 

June 7, 6:00 p.m., Commissioners Conference Room, Armstrong Courthouse Annex, 450 

Market Street, Kittanning 

 

 

 

June 7, 6:00 p.m., Commissioners Meeting Room, Courthouse Square, 2 N. Main Street, 

Greensburg 

June 8, 6:00 p.m., 31st floor, Regional Enterprise Tower, 425 Sixth Avenue, Downtown 

Pittsburgh 

June 9, 6:00 p.m., Waynesburg University, Stover Hall, 3 rd Floor, Waynesburg 

During the public comment period, public input was also solicited on three companion documents to 

the 2040 Plan: 

 

 

 

Environmental Justice Benefits and Burdens Assessment for the 2040 Plan 

Air Quality Conformity Determination for the Pittsburgh Transportation Management Area 

Southwestern Pennsylvania Public Transit Human Services Coordinated Transportation Plan 

Update 

Comments received during this comment period were compiled, responded to, and presented to the 

Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission for their consideration prior to adoption of the 2040 

Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania. 


2 - 4


Section 3. Regional Conditions and Trends 

Southwestern Pennsylvania is engaged in a transformation. The region has experienced decades 

of challenges; but it is becoming recognized around the world as a place that can adapt and 

renew itself through concerted action. It also has unique assets that will help bring it through 

significant new challenges being experienced nationally. 

The national recession and increases in energy costs 

reverberated through the region since the adoption of the 

2035 Long Range Plan. Rapid increases in petroleum 

costs led to skyrocketing construction costs, as the 

simultaneous increase in the cost of materials, 

transportation and operations created an energy cost 

multiplier for local business. 

Facility management costs have increased universally as 

the costs of heating oil and natural gas have increased. 

Increased fuel costs have also affected local residents, who 

are paying unprecedented prices for gasoline. With prices 

in the $4.00 per gallon range, the cost of basic 

transportation creates a budgetary challenge for local 

drivers, transit service operators and commercial freight operations. 

The costs of living and of doing business, in Southwestern Pennsylvania (and elsewhere) have 

been influenced in recent years by to these higher energy costs. Efforts to reduce energy costs 

through energy efficiency programs, the increased availability of green technology in our 

buildings and our vehicles and other measures aimed at making energy costs a less significant 

economic burden are a growing trend in the region. 

Historically, it is well known that the region’s economy relied 

heavily on the steel manufacturing industry, which sustained 

nearly 100,000 workers and their families throughout the 

Monongahela and Beaver River valleys until the mid-1970s. The 

sharp contraction of the steel industry in this region directly 

contributed to the significant population losses and decline of its 

urban centers. Hardest hit were the historic industrial centers 

where the proportion of residents living in the region’s boroughs 

and cities began to decrease after 1960, and the percentage of 

urban dwellers in 2000 had declined to the levels in the 1930s. 

The region spans ten counties—Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, 

Butler, Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, Washington, and 

Westmoreland—and 548 municipal governments, many of which 

were formed around the local factories to provide services to the 


3 - 1


plants and workers. Geographically, the region covers 7,112 square miles and is situated in the 

southwestern portion of the state. 

Physical Features 

Physically, the Allegheny Plateaus section of the Appalachian Mountains defined the region’s 

terrain and strongly influenced its development. This geography, rugged and heavily dissected by 

surface waters producing deep valleys and steep hillsides, included abundant assets that greatly 

contributed the region’s historic and existing land use patterns (Figure 3.1). 

Beneath the rolling surface of western Pennsylvania lie vast energy resources, including coal, 

natural gas and shale oils. Extractive industries have long been vital elements of the regional 

economy. With recent discoveries of shale gas in the Marcellus and Utica shale deposits 

throughout much of Pennsylvania, new centers of economic activity have begun to dot the 

region. 

Due in large measure to steep slopes and rolling topography, the majority of the region’s 

population is concentrated throughout the river valley communities. The high concentration of 

population stemming outward from the highly urbanized county of Allegheny has contributed to 

relatively high population density levels found in Beaver County. In contrast, the population 

density levels of the remaining eight counties are lower relative to the region. 

Figure 3.1 The Physiographic Region 


3 - 2


Shale Gas Formations 

During the development of the 2035 Plan, deep shale gas 

exploration and extraction was a fledgling industry in 

Southwestern Pennsylvania. However, since the adoption, 

the exploration and extraction of natural gas from the shale 

gas formations, primarily the Marcellus Formation, has 

continued to play an ever-increasing role in the region. 

However, this is not a region foreign to gas and oil 

exploration. According the Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection there are over 41,000 operating 

oil and gas wells in our region already, and only a small 

percentage of them are associated with the Marcellus Shale 

industry. 

The Marcellus Shale, also referred to as the Marcellus 

Formation, is a Middle Devonian-age black, low density, 

carbonaceous (organic rich) shale that occurs in the 

subsurface beneath much of Ohio, West Virginia, 

Pennsylvania and New York. Small areas of Maryland, 

Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia are also underlain by the 

Marcellus Shale. 

The Marcellus Shale, 

also referred to as 

the Marcellus 

Formation, is a 

Middle Devonian-age 

black, low density, 

carbonaceous 

(organic rich) shale 

that occurs in the 

subsurface beneath 

much of Ohio, West 

Virginia, 

Pennsylvania and 

New York. 

Range Resources - Appalachia, LLC may have started the Marcellus Shale gas play. In 2003, 

they drilled a Marcellus well in Washington County, Pennsylvania and found a promising flow 

of natural gas. [Harper, John A. (2008). The Marcellus Shale - An Old "New" Gas Reservoir in 

Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geology, Volume 38, Number 1. Pennsylvania Bureau of 

Topographic and Geologic Survey]. They experimented with horizontal drilling and hydraulic 

fracturing methods that worked in the Barnett Shale of Texas. Their first Marcellus gas 

production from the well began in 2005. Between then and the end of 2007 more than 375 gas 

wells with suspected Marcellus intent had been permitted in Pennsylvania. [Harper, John A. 

(2008). The Marcellus Shale - An Old "New" Gas Reservoir in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania 

Geology, Volume 38, Number 1. Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey ]. 

In early 2008, Terry Englander, a geoscience professor at Pennsylvania State University, and 

Gary Lash, a geology professor at the State University of New York at Fredonia, surprised 

everyone with estimates that the Marcellus might contain more than 500 trillion cubic feet of 

natural gas. Using some of the same horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods that had 

previously been applied in the Barnett Shale of Texas, perhaps 10% of that gas (50 trillion cubic 

feet) might be recoverable. That volume of natural gas would be enough to supply the entire 

United States for about two years and have a wellhead value of about one trillion dollars. 

[Engelder, Terry and Lash, Gary (2008). Unconventional Natural Gas Reservoir Could Boost 

U.S. Supply. Penn State Live.] 

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection reports that the number of permitted 

wells in the Marcellus Shale has been increasing rapidly. In 2007 only 75 Marcellus Shale wells 


3 - 3


permits were issued in the region, however, in 2010 the number of permits had risen to 832. The 

total number of permits issued for Marcellus Shale wells over that period was 1,856 (Figure 3.2). 

Figure 3.2 Marcellus Gas Permit Activity 

Marcellus Shale Gas Play Activity: Permits Issued by Year 

County 

2007 2008 2009 2010 Total 

Allegheny 

0 2 5 2 9 

Armstrong 

4 11 44 42 101 

Beaver 

0 0 6 3 9 

Butler 

15 12 42 76 145 

Fayette 

0 37 90 77 204 

Greene 

4 55 182 178 419 

Indiana 

2 12 19 27 60 

Lawrence 

0 0 0 0 0 

Washington 

48 106 209 249 612 

Westmoreland 

2 28 89 178 297 

Total 

75 263 686 832 1,856 

Source: PADEP 

The Marcellus Shale may just be the opening act. A rock layer below the Marcellus Shale could 

prove to be another incredible source of natural gas. What we are seeing today from the 

Marcellus is only the first step in a sequence of natural gas plays in the region. The second step is 

starting in the Utica Shale. The Utica Shale is a rock unit located a few thousand feet below the 

Marcellus Shale. It also has the potential to become an enormous natural gas resource. The Utica 

Shale is thicker than the Marcellus, it is more geographically extensive, and it has already proven 

its ability to support commercial production. 

The Utica Shale is much deeper than the Marcellus. In some parts of the region the Utica Shale I 

maybe close to two miles below sea level. Two important challenges for developing the Utica 

Shale are its significant depth and a lack of information. However, in areas where the Marcellus 

Shale has been developed the Utica will have an infrastructure advantage. Drilling pads, 

roadways, pipelines, gathering systems, surveying work, permit preparation data and landowner 

relationships might still be useful for developing the Utica Shale. 

While the full story of the shale gas formations exploration will not be written for years to come, 

it is readily apparent that it will be a significant chapter of this region’s future. 


3 - 4


Population 

As Southwestern Pennsylvania was 

being settled, transportation systems 

were developed in a radial pattern, 

emanating outward from the City of 

Pittsburgh. Due to this radial system, 

20 th Century population and housing 

growth within the region largely 

occurred in the region’s post World 

War II communities. This growth, 

however, is constrained differently 

throughout the region due to significant 

differences in topography and the 

varying degrees of accessibility to 

major transportation systems. 

The Point, c. 1896 

At the time of the last decennial count, the region had a population of 2,574,959, making it the 

largest metropolitan area in the 13-state Appalachian Region. In terms of population, the SPC 

region would be the 36 th largest state in the country. In terms of area, the region is larger than the 

states of Connecticut, Delaware, and Rhode Island. Recent estimates from the Census Bureau 

(Figure 3.3), however, continue to show population decline at the regional level for Southwestern 

Pennsylvania and most close regional neighbors such as Youngstown, Johnstown, Steubenville 

and Wheeling. The lingering effect of the population decline related to steel industry reductions 

in the region remains a factor in current population statistics. The distribution of population 

decline and increase varies around the region with the bulk of population decline in the older 

urbanized industrial centers corresponding to economic shifts in the last several decades. 

Figure 3.3 Regional Population 

County 1990 2000 2010 

% Change 

2000 to 2010 

Allegheny 1,336,449 1,281,666 1,223,348 -4.55% 

Armstrong 73,478 72,392 68,941 -4.77% 

Beaver 186,093 181,412 170,539 -5.99% 

Butler 152,013 174,083 183,862 5.62% 

Fayette 145,351 148,644 136,606 -8.10% 

Greene 39,550 40,672 38,686 -4.88% 

Indiana 89,994 89,605 88,880 -0.81% 

Lawrence 96,246 94,643 91,108 -3.74% 

Washington 204,584 202,897 207,820 2.43% 

Westmoreland 370,321 369,993 365,169 -1.30% 

Total 2,694,079 2,656,007 2,574,959 -3.05% 


3 - 5


Household sizes in the region continue to get smaller, as they have in the rest of the country. 

Reduction in average household size in the region from 3.52 persons per household in 1950 to 

2.30 persons per household in 2010 mirrored a national trend of decreasing household size. 

Decreasing household size can create continued demand for housing units even in the face of 

overall population decline as the composition of households changes. 

While the steel industry attracted waves of immigrants from Europe in the late 18 th and early 19 th 

centuries, the region has not seen the recent significant increases in immigration that characterize 

many growing regions today. 

While population continued to decrease in the region, employment levels continued to improve. 

At the 2007 adoption of the 2035 Plan, the region had seen unemployment rates at their lowest in 

three decades. With the economic downturn that, of course, changed. However, unemployment 

rates from the Department of Labor and Industry show that through the recession Pennsylvania 

continued to fare better than the nation, and the Pittsburgh region continued to fare better than 

Pennsylvania. 

Figure 3.4 Unemployment Rates 


3 - 6


Figure 3.5 Unemployment Rates 

Time Period 

Unemployment Rate 

March 2011 8.8% 

February 2011 8.9% 

February 2006 9.7% 

5-Year Annual Average 

2006-2010 

6.78% 

10-Year Annual Average 

2001-2010 

6.1% 

Manufacturing still employs a large portion of the regional labor force, but large shares of the 

region’s jobs and growth are now within the services sector, including education and healthcare 

services. Financial services, education, government enterprise, retail trade, and transportation / 

warehousing are also important industries as well. The region’s economy benefits from its wealth 

of colleges and universities, which also support employment growth in high–skilled and hightechnology 

occupations. Today, the region has nearly three dozen colleges and universities 

within its borders and, as recently as 2010, an enrollment of about 149,000 students. 

Today, there are approximately 120,000 individual business establishments of all sizes in all 

industries in southwestern Pennsylvania, still including large national companies such as Alcoa, 

Inc.; H.J. Heinz Co.; BNYMellon Financial Corporation; PPG Industries, Inc.; U.S. Steel; 

Consol Energy and WESCO 

International, Inc. Sectors cited by 

workforce and economic development 

agencies as key growth opportunities 

include advanced manufacturing, 

financial and back office services, 

information technology and life 

sciences. Energy and transportation will 

remain important parts of the regional 

economy as well due to continuing 

demand for coal as a regional export 

commodity. 

Along with its urban base, Southwestern Pennsylvania has significant agricultural resources. The 

agricultural industry remains a vital aspect of the region’s economy, way of life and cultural 

heritage. The Region has approximately 11,400 working farms. Growing interest and support of 

in development of alternative fuels could advantage farm operations supplying agricultural 

materials in this sector. 


3 - 7


Figure 3.6 Change in Workplace Employment 2001 to 2009 

The change in workplace employment in our region shows that between 2001 and 2009, the 

major employment sectors were, retail, healthcare and social assistance, government and 

government enterprise, professional and technical services. The largest percentage increase 

during that time was management of companies and enterprises at 106.4% (Figure 3.6). 

Future Population and Employment 

With each Plan update, SPC prepares new projections of 

regional population, employment and households. These 

projections represent the best available portrayal of 

Southwestern Pennsylvania’s growth and development 

trends through 2040 based on information available today 

about current and recent trends. This Plan update cycle 

represents the ninth update to SPC’s forecasts. 

SPC’s new forecast, the Cycle 9 forecast, indicates that the 

region will see slow growth in employment and population 

through 2040. This continues the current trend that shows a 

slowing, and gradual reversal, of the population and 

employment decline that has been experienced regionally 

for over 30 years. 


3 - 8


SPC’s projections are developed with a two-step process. First, new population and employment 

projections are produced for the region as a whole. These forecasts are then disaggregated to 

municipalities and traffic analysis zones (TAZs). The forecast process was completed with the 

assistance of a Technical Advisory Committee whose members represent university, private 

sector and government agencies and organizations with expertise / interest in the forecast. 

The first step in the forecasting process (development of regional projections) is produced by the 

REMI (Regional Economic Models, Inc.) PolicyInsight model, a widely used policy analysis 

model that computes regional population and employment totals for future years. Experts on 

staff at the University of Pittsburgh’s University Center for Social and Urban Research 

(UCSUR) assisted SPC and the Advisory Committee in developing and understanding the REMI 

forecast. 

SPC’s MERLAM model (Mature Economic Region Land Allocation Model) is used to allocate 

the REMI regional population and employment projection to municipalities and traffic zones. 

The allocation is based on local data for relative tax rates, accessibility to transportation 

facilities, proximity to jobs, existing development density, and other factors that measure each 

area’s relative capacity to attract and retain people and jobs. The MERLAM model also 

develops the projection of households based on the population forecast and the region’s reported 

40-year Census trend in household size. By varying the attractiveness measures and by altering 

the values of the model's policy variables, MERLAM is able to estimate the impact of various 

regional land use and development scenarios. This feature of the model was useful in evaluating 

the alternative Scenarios tested during the Plan development process. 

Overall regional 

population growth is 

estimated at 

approximately 

482,000 by 2040, 

which is under 1% 

per year 

The overall regional population growth is estimated at 

approximately 482,000 by 2040, which is well under 1% 

per year. Each county’s population is projected to grow 

somewhat in that period. The rate of growth in households 

is determined by both the change in population and the 

change in household size. With a projected decline in 

household size and growth in population, the number of 

households in the region is projected to grow faster than 

population. Over 258,000 new households are projected by 

2040. Regional employment is projected to grow by over 

450,000 jobs, or by about 1% per year. Job growth in 

services and other sectors will offset anticipated declines in 

retail and manufacturing sectors. 

Graphs that compare the regional Cycle 7, Cycle 8 and Cycle 9 forecasts appear in Figures 3.7, 

3.8 and 3.9 (population, employment, and households). The growth estimated with the Cycle 9 

forecast represents a modest increase over the growth rate shown in Cycle 8. However, the 

overall trend remains the same. 


3 - 9


Figure 3.7 Regional Population 


3 - 10


Figure 3.8 Regional Employment 


3 - 11


Figure 3.9 Regional Households 

The Appalachian Context 

Regions can be defined at 

many levels from multimunicipal 

to multi-national. 

Much of western and 

central Pennsylvania is in 

the multi-state Appalachian 

Region which has 

similarities in geography, 

economic conditions and 

natural environment. In 

addition to its neighboring 

counties in Pennsylvania, 

the SPC region is bordered 

by Maryland, West 

Virginia and Ohio. In 

general, within this fourstate 

area, those counties falling within the Appalachian Region have experienced greater 

population loss than most of the other counties in these states that are not in Appalachia. Of the 


3 - 12


five largest cities in this four-state area, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh and 

Philadelphia, all but Philadelphia have experienced population loss over the last decade. 

Pittsburgh is the only one of these major cities that is also located within the Appalachian 

Region; as such, it has the population loss experienced by the other urban cores vis-à-vis 

suburban growth, combined with the population loss and slow growth associated with the 

Appalachian Region, while also experiencing the nationwide effects of long term decline in 

manufacturing in a region that had a higher than average concentration of manufacturing (Figure 

3.10). 

Figure 3.10 Population Change by County, 2000-2010 


3 - 13


Figure 3.11 Neighboring Regions 

By examining our neighboring regions, we gain further insight into the larger geographic and 

socioeconomic context that influences Southwestern Pennsylvania (Figure 3.11). 

Northern Neighbors 

SPC’s northern neighbors consist of Ashtabula, Mahoning, and Trumbull counties in Ohio; and 

Cameron, Clarion, Clearfield, Crawford, Elk, Erie, Forest, Jefferson, McKean, Mercer, Potter, 

Venango and Warren counties in Pennsylvania. These counties experienced a combined 

population loss of -53,572 or -3.7% from 2000 to 2010. The change in workplace employment 

in our neighbors to the north shows that between 2001 and 2009 their major employment sectors 

were manufacturing, retail, healthcare and social assistance, and government and government 

enterprises. Of those four major sectors, only healthcare and social assistance saw growth during 

that period and over took manufacturing as still the leading employment sector for the first time. 

Also of note, the mining sector showed the largest percentage increase (93.4%) most likely due 

to the shale gas industry. 


3 - 14


Figure 3.12 Workplace Employment North 

According to Census 2000 Journey-to-Work data, 10,949 residents of these northern counties 

worked in the SPC region, while 12,938 residents of the SPC region worked in northern counties. 

Major transportation facilities to the north include shipping on the Great Lakes, interstates and 

railroads. Of key importance are iron ore and limestone from Minnesota’s Mesabi Range, 

Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and eastern Canada shipped to the SPC region; coal from our region 

is often a “backhaul” cargo (via rail) to the Great Lakes for shipping. The community of East 

Brady, in Clarion County, PA represents the northernmost reach of the Ohio River navigation 

system. Each year the system (Allegheny, Ohio and Monongahela Rivers) carry more than 40 

million tons of coal, aggregates, petroleum products and other goods through the SPC region. In 

terms of highways, Interstate 79 connects our region to I-80 in Mercer County and to I-90 in 

Erie, which provide east-west connections to the Northeast and Midwest. Interstate 76 turns from 

the Pennsylvania Turnpike to the Ohio Turnpike, connecting our region to Cleveland and to I-80 

in Youngstown. These interstates, I-76, I-79 and I-80 are major national transportation corridors. 

There are major rail corridor connections through these northern counties, which are served by 

three Class I (national) freight rail lines. Amtrak operates passenger service between Cleveland 

and Pittsburgh, including a stop in Alliance (OH) through this corridor. The Ohio Rail 

Development Corporation has investigated the feasibility of additional passenger rail service on a 

“Pittsburgh-Youngstown-Cleveland-Toledo corridor”, which would likely go through Beaver 

and New Castle in the SPC region. There are also five commercial service airports including, 

Youngstown-Warren Regional Airport in Warren County, OH; Venango Regional Airport in 


3 - 15


Venango County, PA; Bradford Regional Airport in Jefferson County, PA; Erie International 

Airport in Erie County, PA; and DuBois Regional Airport in Jefferson County, PA. 

Three development districts comprise this general area: the Eastgate Regional Council of 

Governments in Ohio, and the Northwest Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development 

Commission and the North Central Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development 

Commission in Pennsylvania. A closer look at information from these regional organizations 

provides insight into the smaller economies of our northern neighbors. 

The Northwest Pennsylvania Planning and Development Commission serves as the Rural 

Planning Organization, Local Development District, and Economic Development District for its 

member counties. This region in the northwest corner of Pennsylvania is highly diversified in 

terms of urban and rural. It includes the City of Erie, the state’s fourth most populous city, as 

well as Forest County, the state’s second least populous county. 

This region is dominated by the service and manufacturing industries. Much of the heavier 

manufacturing is located in the western portion of the region, especially in the New Castle, 

Shenango Valley, and Erie urban areas. Manufacturing clusters include plastics, fabricated 

metals, industrial machining, and wood products. The largest subsectors of the services industry 

are healthcare and social assistance. The top three employers in the region include the 

General Electric Company, the Hamot Medical Center, and the St. Vincent Health System. 

Potential identified clusters include biotechnology and distribution centers. 

North Central Pennsylvania Regional Planning and Development Commission serves as the 

Rural Planning Organization, the Local Development District and Economic Development 

District for its member counties. This region, located in the north central region of Pennsylvania 

along the New York border, is rural, non-farm, small-town in character. Manufacturing 

(especially powdered metals and metal fabrication), forest products, limited oil and gas 

extraction, tourism, and transportation/distribution services are the major employments sectors. 

A study completed in 2005 shows the region as a strong competitor for the following clusters: 

alternative energy, powdered metals, and pre-fabricated housing. In 2002, a Foreign Trade Zone 

was established at the DuBois Regional Airport to serve the powdered metals industry in the 

region. 

The Eastgate Regional Council of Governments is the designated Metropolitan Planning 

Organization and Economic Development District for its member counties. This region 

comprises the easternmost counties of Ohio along the Pennsylvania border up to Lake Erie. 

In this region, the workforce has moved from manufacturing to services sector, though 

manufacturing continues to be above average. From 1970 to 2000, the manufacturing industry 

declined by over 40,000 employees - a 41% reduction - while the services industry sector grew 

by over 50,000 employees for a gain of 250%. While there was large decline of manufacturing 

jobs during this period, there was an increase in the number of manufacturing firms. Some of the 

larger employers in the region include Kennametal, Delphi Inc, General Motors Lordstown 

Complex, and Youngstown State University. Emerging clusters of information technology, 


3 - 16


instruments and control, and biomedical have been identified. Existing foundational clusters 

include metalworking, motor vehicles and equipments, and chemicals/plastics. 

Southern Neighbors 

SPC’s southern neighbors consist of Allegany, Garrett, and Washington counties in Maryland; 

and Calhoun, Doddridge, Harrison, Jackson, Marion, Monongalia, Pleasants, Preston, Ritchie, 

Roane, Taylor, Tyler, Wirt, and Wood counties in West Virginia. This was our only neighboring 

region to see a population increase. These counties have shown a combined population gain of 

35,659 or 5.3% from 2000 to 2010. The majority of this growth occurred in those counties in 

eastern Maryland and in the general area of West Virginia University. The change in workplace 

employment in our neighbors to the south shows that between 2001 and 2009, their major 

employment sectors were manufacturing, retail, healthcare and social assistance, and government 

and government enterprises. Of those four major sectors, only manufacturing saw a significant 

loss during that period (29.5%), while government and government enterprises is the leading 

employment sector. Once again, mining showed the largest percentage gain (57.8%). 

Figure 3.13 Workplace Employment South 

According to Census 2000 Journey-to-Work data, 1,803 residents of the southern counties work 

in the SPC region, while 3,955 residents of the SPC region work in these southern counties. With 

regard to transportation, the Monongahela River carries freight traffic (mainly coal) from the 

south to our region, while locks and dams on both the Monongahela River and the Ohio River 

have significant impacts on the larger region. Interstate 79 connects our region to I-68 in 


3 - 17


Morgantown. West Virginia (which provides connection to Maryland and East Coast), and to I- 

77 in Charleston (which provides connection to South). The Mon-Fayette Expressway will 

provide additional connection between our region and Morgantown. There are major rail corridor 

connections along Monongahela River as far south as Morgantown, with Class I rail service by 

Norfolk Southern and CSXT. Amtrak operates passenger rail service from Pittsburgh through 

Connellsville to Cumberland, Maryland. There are also five commercial airports including, 

North Central West Virginia Airport in Clarksburg, WV; Morgantown Municipal Airport in 

Morgantown; and Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Airport in Wood County near Parkersburg, WV. 

Yeager Airport in Charleston and Tri State Airport in Huntingdon, WV also serve this region. 

Three development districts comprise this general area: the Tri County Council for Western 

Maryland, Region 5 Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council, and the Region 6 Planning and 

Development Council in West Virginia. 

The Tri-County Council for Western Maryland, Inc. is designated as the Local Development 

District and the Economic Development District for Western Maryland. Western Maryland is 

somewhat geographically isolated, lying in Appalachia and ranging from 500 to 2,000 feet in 

elevation. In addition, the counties are situated in a linear arrangement, thus at no one point do 

all three counties touch. At one point, it is less than two miles from West Virginia to 

Pennsylvania through Maryland. 

Population of the region is very steady and even on a slight increase based upon estimates from 

the U.S. Census Bureau. Most of the growth is occurring on the eastern end of the region, but 

recent planning efforts show that growth further west is probable in the near future and planning 

for that growth will be critical. 

Because of the extensive history in manufacturing and the presence of several colleges and 

universities in the region, the workforce – which is largely characterized as being of a dedicated, 

hard-working, traditional manufacturing quality – remains strong. The region’s economy 

continues to grow steadily with new companies entering the area and housing costs on the rise. 

Some of the new companies that now call the region home are Parker Plastics, Federal Express 

hub, FEMA, and Closet Maid. 

The Mid-Ohio Valley Regional Council serves as the Local Development District for Midwest 

portion of West Virginia. Nearly 10,000 area residents work for chemical companies. DuPont 

has a large plant on the Ohio River near Parkersburg that produces a wide variety of plastics. 

Also nearby is GE Plastics, the world’s largest manufacturer of ABS engineering thermoplastics. 

In addition, three nationally known glass plants in the Mid-Ohio Valley employ more than 1,000 

people. Products include glass fiber, laboratory ware, and decorative glassware. 

The Region 6-Planning and Development Council serves as the Local Development District for 

the northwest portion of West Virginia bordering Southwestern Pennsylvania. Economic 

development in Region 6 has been steadily increasing, with Interstate 79’s Technology Corridor 

cutting through the region. 


3 - 18


The region is also home to West Virginia University and many government industries, including 

the FBI Fingerprint Identification Center in Clarksburg, which employs 3,000; the Software 

Valley Corporation in Morgantown, where academia, business and government promote the 

application of advanced technologies; and the NASA Independent Verification and Validation 

Center, established in the wake of the Challenger accident to ensure that software produced for 

the space agency will function accurately on the ground and in flight. 

The Mid-Atlantic Aerospace Complex at North Central West Virginia Airport employs more 

than 1,200 people and is home to some of the world's premier aerospace companies, including 

Northrop-Grumman, Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, Bombardier-West Virginia Air Center, and 

Lockheed Martin. 

In addition, the region is experiencing a growth in the health care industry with seven hospitals 

and a potential for medical production, manufacturing, and research and development, 

particularly in Monongalia County. 

Eastern Neighbors 

SPC’s eastern neighbors consist of Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Fulton, Huntingdon, and Somerset 

counties in Pennsylvania. These counties have experienced a combined population loss of - 

12,566 or -2.7% from 2000 to 2010. The change in workplace employment in our neighbors to 

the east shows that between 2001 and 2009, their major employment sectors were 

manufacturing, retail, healthcare and social assistance, and government and government 

enterprises. Of those four major sectors, again only manufacturing saw a significant loss during 

that period (29.6%), while healthcare and social assistance was the leading employment sector. 

Healthcare and social assistance along with mining showed the largest increases at 21/7%. 


3 - 19


Figure 3.14 Workplace Employment East 

According to Census 2000 Journey-to-Work data, 5,088 residents of the eastern counties work in 

the SPC region, while 4,515 residents of the SPC region work in the eastern counties. Interstate 

70 and the PA Turnpike (I-76) connect the East to our region, while U.S. 22, U.S. 30, and U.S. 

422 also provide significant connections. Norfolk Southern, Canadian National and CXST 

maintain Class I freight rail service through the region. The Norfolk Southern rail corridor also 

carries Amtrak passenger service from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia and New York City with stops 

in Greensburg, Latrobe, Johnstown, Altoona, Tyrone, Huntingdon, Lewistown and Harrisburg. 

Connections to Washington, D.C. are also available. There are also two commercial airports, the 

Altoona-Blair County Airport and the Johnstown-Cambria County Airport. 

The counties to the east of our Region are covered by one regional planning organization, the 

Southern Alleghenies Planning and Development Commission (SAP&DC). SAP&DC serves as 

the Local Development District (LDD) and Economic Development District (EDD) for all of its 

member counties in South Central Pennsylvania and as the rural planning organization (RPO) for 

transportation planning in four of the six counties in this region. The Blair and Cambria 

metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) are responsible for transportation planning in their 

respective counties. 

A common factor linking this area is that it is home to the Allegheny Mountain Range of the 

Appalachian Mountains; this region is “branded” and promoted as “The Alleghenies.” This 

topography creates a diverse landscape of forested mountains, towns, and cities in the valleys. 


3 - 20


For the most part, this region is rural and forested but is also home to cities like Altoona and 

Johnstown. 

Starting in the 1970’s, this region was hit especially hard with the loss of manufacturing jobs as 

it was completely dominated by the steel and coal industries. The area is still experiencing a loss 

of manufacturing jobs during the 1990’s. However, there has been a re-emergence of the coal 

mining industry through remining and reprocessing. 

Jobs are clustered in Cambria and Blair Counties. The jobs in these counties amount to 65% of 

the total jobs in the Alleghenies Region in 2000. One fourth of the jobs in the region were in the 

services sector followed by retail services at 20% and manufacturing at 18% according to the 

2000 census. Recently, the tourism industry has witnessed an increase in employment growth 

across related occupations. Bio-technology, defense, logistics, and alternative energy clusters 

are forming. Major employers in the area include: New Enterprise Stone and Lime, Sheetz Inc., 

Concurrent Technologies, JLG Industries Inc., MeadWestvaco Corporation, Seven Springs Farm 

Inc., and several hospitals. 

Western Neighbors 

SPC’s western neighbors consist of Athens, Belmont, Carroll, Columbiana, Coshocton, 

Guernsey, Harrison, Hocking, Holmes, Jefferson, Meigs, Monroe, Morgan, Muskingum, Noble, 

Perry, Tuscarawas, and Washington Counties in Ohio, and Brooke, Hancock, Marshall, Ohio, 

and Wetzel counties in West Virginia. These counties have experienced a combined population 

loss of -6,907 or -0.7% from 2000 to 2010, with those counties in western Ohio experiencing 

moderate growth. The change in workplace employment in our neighbors to the west shows that 

between 2001 and 2009 their major employment sectors were manufacturing, retail, healthcare 

and social assistance, and government and government enterprises. Of those four major sectors, 

only manufacturing saw a significant loss during that period (34.2%), with the government and 

government enterprises sector passing manufacturing as the leading employment sector in the 

west. The largest percentage increase was again seen in the mining sector (66.2%). 


3 - 21


Figure 3.15 Workplace Employment West 

According to Census 2000 Journey-to-Work data, 10,107 residents of the western counties work 

in the SPC region, while 3,300 residents of the SPC region work in the western counties. As for 

transportation, the Ohio River is critical plays a critical role for industry to the west. Interstate 70 

connects our region to Ohio and the Northern Panhandle of West Virginia and provides a major 

east-west connection between the Midwest and the East. The completion of the Findlay 

Connector provides improved access for Northern Panhandle (WV) and northern Ohio Valley 

communities to Pittsburgh International Airport and to I-79. In addition, Brooke, Hancock and 

Jefferson counties are investing approximately $100 million in a new Ohio River Bridge. Class I 

freight rail service is between Ohio and southwestern Pennsylvania is provided by CXST, 

Norfolk Southern and Canadian National. The Ohio River bisects these eastern neighbors, and 

provides a crucial freight transportation corridor for power generation plants and heavy industry 

located along the Ohio River. 

Four development districts comprise this general area: the Buckeye Hills-Hocking Valley 

Regional Development District and the Ohio Mid-Eastern Governments Association in Ohio; 

and the Region 11-Brooke-Hancock Regional Planning and Development Council and the 

Region 10 Bel-O-Mar Regional Council and Planning Commission in West Virginia. 

The Buckeye Hills-Hocking Valley Regional Development District is designated as both the 

Local Development District and the Economic Development District. The region is bordered to 

the south and east across the Ohio River by the state of West Virginia. There are four major 

highways serving the area: Interstate 77, U.S. Routes 33 and 50, and Ohio Route 7. As it passes 

through the area, Route 50 follows the Appalachian Highway Corridor D. These highways 


3 - 22


network the area internally and connect it to the Ohio metropolitan areas of Columbus, 

Cleveland and Cincinnati. 

The driving force of the economy in the Buckeye Hills region continues to be based in 

manufacturing, production, and raw materials. The southeast region of Ohio is rich in coal and 

natural gas resources, which are used to power the metal, plastic, and wood based manufacturing 

operations which are prevalent in the district. The rural nature of the district also plays a role in 

driving the types of investments and developments which take place in the local area. 

The Ohio Mid-Eastern Governments Association (OMEGA) serves as the Local Development 

District for Mid-Eastern Ohio. Historically, this region has been supported by the mining and 

manufacturing industries. Unfortunately, within the past decade the mining sector has 

experienced a steady reduction in workforce due to the limited use of high-sulfur coal. Since 

1990, however, the economy of the region has been experiencing modest growth influenced by a 

diversification of industries. Job increases have been experienced in the sectors of service, retail 

trade, finance, insurance and real estate, and wholesale trade. 

Future economic trends for this region indicate that service industry jobs will continue to 

increase as manufacturing positions decline further. Mining positions, which have suffered major 

losses during the past 25 years, have leveled off and this sector of employment has the potential 

for modest gain over the next 10 to 25 years. 

The Bel-O-Mar Regional Council and Interstate Planning Commission serves as the Local 

Development District and the Metropolitan Planning Organization for northern West Virginia 

and part of eastern Ohio. The region includes the City of Wheeling, which was once an 

industrial and economic force that has experienced a significant decline in population and 

employment. At the same time, the remaining population has become markedly older, as the 

out-migration occurred primarily among younger people. 

The Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson Metropolitan Planning Commission, which staffs the 

development council in West Virginia, also serves the northern-most tip of West Virginia and 

Jefferson County Ohio as the region’s MPO. The region includes the City of Weirton West 

Virginia and Steubenville Ohio. The changing undertow of the world steel economy has affected 

the already vulnerable economy of this region. It has experienced a continuing cycle of 

manufacturing loss. 

Regional Context Summary 

The greater region, of which SPC is a part, shares many qualities, issues and challenges. The 

region located in Appalachia is experiencing population loss or slow growth overall with a 

continued erosion of manufacturing employment. Exceptions are found in areas dominated by a 

state’s largest university campus, federal government investments and health facilities. The 

larger region as a whole is experiencing an increase in health care and social service 

employment. While the general employment shifts are similar to that of the nation they are more 

pronounced in this four state region. 


3 - 23


The journey to work data suggests that the regions bordering Southwestern Pennsylvania play an 

important role in each other’s economies with the overall workforce crossing jurisdictions to 

their jobs. 

SPC will continue to reach out and communicate with its neighbors in the context of its own 

planning responsibilities for the region’s plan, and in the context of cross-state initiatives with 

our neighbors as we all work to address common issues. 

Existing Transportation System 

Highways and Bridges 

The Pennsylvania Highway 

Department was created in April 1903 

with the task of administering funds to 

counties, townships, and boroughs for 

improvements and maintenance of 

roadways owned by those entities. A 

growing conviction that the 

responsibility for highway 

improvements needed to be more 

centralized to keep pace with the 

number of automobiles led to the 

establishment of an 8,835-mile system 

of roads to be improved and maintained 

by the state Highway Department in 

1911. These road miles were taken 

over from counties and townships or 

purchased from private turnpike companies. Today, the Pennsylvania Department of 

Transportation (PennDOT) owns and maintains over 120,000 linear miles of roadway, carrying 

vehicles more than 300,000,000 miles per day. 

In Southwestern Pennsylvania, state-owned highway and bridge infrastructure is divided into 

three PennDOT engineering districts. District 10-0, headquartered in Indiana, encompasses the 

Counties of Armstrong, Butler, and Indiana in the SPC region as well as Jefferson and Clarion 

Counties outside the SPC planning region. District 11-0, located in Bridgeville, covers 

Allegheny, Beaver, and Lawrence Counties. District 12-0, headquartered in Uniontown, 

includes Fayette, Greene, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties. 

A summary of the roadway and bridge assets in each of these areas is included in Figures 3.16 

and 3.17. These figures also illustrate that while state-owned roadways make up a considerable 

amount of the infrastructure in Southwestern Pennsylvania, and many of the higher order 

systems, counties and local municipalities still own and maintain significant roadway and bridge 

assets. 


3 - 24


Figure 3.16 Southwestern Pennsylvania Roadway Infrastructure 

County 

PennDOT 

Linear Miles 

Local Municipal 

Linear Miles 

Other Agency 

Linear Miles 

Total Linear 

Miles 

Armstrong 657.6 1,149.9 14.1 1,821.6 

Butler 655.2 1,574.5 48.6 2,278.3 

Indiana 801.4 1,256.0 29.6 2,087.0 

District 10-0 2,114.4 3,980.4 92.3 6,186.9 

Allegheny 1,178.7 4,519.5 40.8 5,739.0 

Beaver 605.4 1,023.1 48.0 1,676.5 

Lawrence 387.0 787.8 20.1 1,194.9 

District 11-0 2,171.1 6,330.4 108.9 8,610.4 

Fayette 756.8 1,299.6 20.4 2,076.8 

Greene 573.7 932.1 13.5 1,519.3 

Washington 1,095.5 1,731.1 30.4 2,857.0 

Westmoreland 1,202.9 2,361.0 89.1 3,653.0 

District 12-0 3,628.9 6,323.8 153.4 10,106.1 

SPC Region 7,914.4 16,634.6 354.6 24,903.4 

Figure 3.17 Southwestern Pennsylvania Bridge Infrastructure* 

PennDOT 

District 

State-Owned 

Bridges 

Bridge 

Deck Area 

(million square ft) 

County & 

Local Bridges 

Bridge 

Deck Area 

(million square ft) 

District 10-0 1,154 4.155 297 0.406 

District 11-0 1,784 14.633 723 3.58 

District 12-0 2,360 6.438 513 0.681 

SPC Region 5,298 25.226 1,533 4.667 

*Includes all state bridges greater than 8 feet in length and generally includes local bridges over 

20 feet in length. 

Included in the Other Agency mileage in Figure 3.16 are the highways of the Pennsylvania 

Turnpike Commission, which play a vital role in regional travel within and through the SPC 

region. As illustrated below, these facilities include the Pennsylvania Turnpike (I-76) mainline, 

the Mon-Fayette Expressway (S.R. 43), a portion of the Beaver Valley Expressway (I-376), Toll 

66 in Westmoreland County, and the Findlay Connector (I-576). 


3 - 25


The nearly 25,000 miles of 

roadway in the 10-county SPC 

region come with significant 

maintenance requirements in 

order to keep these roadways 

and bridges in satisfactory 

condition. Decades of 

underinvestment in the 

maintenance of Pennsylvania’s 

roads and bridges have left 

southwestern Pennsylvania 

with a backlog of $7 billion in 

deficient roads and bridges. 

Physical condition of the 

transportation network is 

expected to continue to decline 

as aging facilities deteriorate 

faster than limited funding is available to repair them. Section 4 of this Plan includes 

information on the unfunded maintenance needs of the region; more fully describes the current 

condition of the system, and measures the size of the funding gap. 

In addition to on-going maintenance activities to keep the region’s highways and bridges in good 

condition, Southwestern Pennsylvania has significant resources and assets devoted to 

transportation operations. While state highway departments have traditionally been focused on 

designing, building, and maintaining infrastructure, there has been increased recognition in 

recent years that transportation systems must be integrated across modes and actively operated to 

ensure that they function safely and efficiently and return the most benefit on public investment. 

The increasing cost of new infrastructure, coupled with advances in modern technology, has 

caused operations efficiency and improvements to take on added importance. 

Public Transportation 

There is a long history of mass transportation services for residents of Southwestern 

Pennsylvania. Through the mid-century, privately owned and operated services such as 

streetcars, commuter rail and local bus companies dominated the region. Mass transportation 

became less profitable in the mid-century and in 1954, Port Authority Transit was created to 

continue transit service in Allegheny County by combining 33 private bus companies and the 

Pittsburgh Railways Company into a consolidated system. Port Authority of Allegheny County 

was created by legislation enacted by the Pennsylvania General Assembly in 1956. Originally 

created to enable development of ports, Port Authority’s enabling legislation was amended to 

permit Port Authority to acquire privately owned transit facilities and to own and operate a 

public system of mass transit in 1959. A decade and more later, and with the advent of public 

subsidy programs, public transit systems were formed in other areas of the region to replace 

unprofitable privately-provided service. 


3 - 26


In FY 2010, public transit providers in the Region 

provided over 60 million rides on fixed-route buses and 

rail vehicles, moving people to jobs and other life 

activities. Other types of alternative mobility providers – 

County-sponsored shared ride programs, human service 

transportation programs, the region’s volunteer ridesharing 

vanpools and carpools – provided an estimated 4 

to 6 million additional rides. 

In addition, the Port Authority of Allegheny County operates 37.7 miles of light rail, 19.5 miles 

of busway and operates two inclines. The six transit agencies that provide commuter bus service 

into downtown Pittsburgh also utilize Port Authority’s busways. Connections between Port 

Authority and other transit operators are provided at convenient locations such as Robinson 

Town Centre and the South Hills Village Light Rail Station in addition to downtown Pittsburgh. 

Public Transportation is important throughout the region. A recent study led by the Pittsburgh 

Downtown Partnership states that half of all commuter trips into the downtown core are taken by 

public transportation. 

All together, these services accounted for approximately 1.5% of all trips taken throughout the 

region. 

The transit agencies serving the 

region differ in size, staffing, 

funding and service delivery 

methods. For example, the 

agencies that serve as the 

region’s 10 transit operators 

were created under differing 

enabling legislation. The 

agencies were created to meet 

different needs at different times. 

Seven agencies were created 

under the Municipal Authorities’ 

Act, one was created under the 

Second Class County Port 

Authority Act, one is a 

department of City Government 

and one is a department of County Human Services. 

Today, Southwestern Pennsylvania relies on its 10 public agencies that provide fixed-route bus 

service (Figure 3.18), and other coordinated programs and services such as Transportation 

Management Associations (TMAs), access to work programs, shared ride, medical 

transportation, persons with disabilities and ridesharing to assist in providing services. These 

programs and services will be discussed further in Section 4, The Transportation Plan. 


3 - 27


Figure 3.18 Fixed Route Transit Service Area 

There are currently 99 designated Park-and-Ride facilities in the 10-county region: 85 have some 

form of transit service providing more than 14,000 spaces. SPC’s CommuteInfo program 

provides ridematching services for vanpools and carpools (Figure 3.19). 


3 - 28


Figure 3.19 Vanpool Origins/Destinations in Southwestern Pennsylvania 


3 - 29


Transit Oriented Development/TRID 

Several communities are currently pursuing Transit Oriented Development (TOD) related 

projects, including TRID studies (Transit Revitalization Investment Districts) and neighborhood 

TOD planning and transit infrastructure improvements. Such projects seek to integrate land use 

planning, development activities and transit accessibility to create mixed use, sustainable 

communities in the vicinity of transit nodes. 

Rail 

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has an 

extensive system of freight railroads with more 

than 5,000 miles of rail line in active service. 

Southwestern Pennsylvania is served by all 

three major eastern railroad systems - Norfolk 

Southern Railway (NS), CSX Transportation 

(CSX) and Canadian National Railway (CN). 

The ability to be served by these railroads helps 

keep local businesses competitive in the 

national and global marketplace. 

Shortline and regional railroads connect with 

the Class I railroads, and they are one of the 

most important elements of the transportation 

system. They provide access to many commercial and industrial properties and function as an 

economic development advantage for many communities and businesses. Pennsylvania is also 

served by 70 regional and shortline railroads, more than any other state in the United States. 

These railroads range from shortlines that operate on a few miles of track within a single county, 

to major regional systems that extend into adjoining states. The regional and shortline railroads 

are an integral part of the Pennsylvania transportation network and they provide a competitive 

edge for Pennsylvania business by providing access from commercial and industrial facilities to 

the suppliers and customers they serve. 

The ten county SPC region is served by twenty railroads, with direct service by three Class I 

railroads – Norfolk Southern, CSXT and Canadian National. These Class I railroads connect 

southwestern Pennsylvania with a freight rail network that extends from Florida to Maine, and 

west beyond the Mississippi River. Norfolk Southern Railroad’s main east-west line between 

Chicago and Baltimore runs through downtown Pittsburgh, and provides a vital intermodal 

transfer location at the Pitcairn Intermodal Facility in Allegheny County, as well as links to 

multiple shortline and regional railroads throughout the region. The CSX main line between 

Chicago, Philadelphia and the New York area also passes through downtown Pittsburgh and 

provides multiple intermodal transfer locations throughout the region. CSX recently received 

$98 million in federal Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery II 

Discretionary Grants (FY 2010 Appropriations Act) to increase the vertical clearance of track in 

Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia to provide double stack access from a new intermodal 

facility in northwest Ohio to the East Coast. 


3 - 30


The SPC region offers industrial users unparalleled access to rail service. Although an estimated 

86 percent of all communities in Pennsylvania must rely on trucks for the delivery of freight and 

packages because they lack local rail, water or air delivery options, rail remains a valuable 

transportation asset for the movement of bulk goods and containerized freight. It has been 

estimated that one jumbo rail hopper car carries the equivalent of 3.8 large truck containers, 

providing efficiency and cost savings to local industries and reducing congestion on local 

roadways 1 . Railroad service is available in all ten counties in southwestern Pennsylvania. 

The region’s 20 regional and shortline railroads may provide more localized links to Class I 

railroads, or serve a particular industry or set of users. 

There are other significant 

rail facilities located in the 

region. These include the 

Conway Classification Yard 

in Conway, Beaver County, 

where Norfolk Southern uses 

a gravity hump to assemble 

trains according to their final 

destination. Norfolk 

Southern also maintains an 

Intermodal Facility at 

Pitcairn, in Allegheny 

County, where containers are 

transferred from rail to truck 

(and vice versa) for 

conveyance to their final 

destination. A second intermodal facility, the Westmoreland Intermodal Facility, is located near 

the former Sony Plant in Westmoreland County. In addition, Norfolk Southern operates an 

Operations Center in Green Tree, Allegheny County, and CSX operates major yards in 

Connellsville, McKeesport, and New Castle. CSX also maintains a locomotive servicing 

(fueling) facility in New Castle, and rail car repair shops in Connellsville, Pittsburgh, and New 

Castle. Intermodal transfer from rail to truck (TRANSFLO) facilities are located in Pittsburgh 

and in Butler, PA. 

In addition to freight rail, the region also has intercity rail service via Amtrak. Amtrak operates 

approximately 120 daily trains through Pennsylvania, including the following trains through 

Pittsburgh: 

The Capitol Limited (daily Washington-Pittsburgh-Chicago); and, 

The Pennsylvanian (daily New York-Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh). 

1 Port of Pittsburgh Commission, Cargo Capacity Comparison, 

http://www.port.pittsburgh.pa.us/home/index.asp?page=181 


3 - 31


Between 2006 and 2008, the stations serving southwestern Pennsylvania saw an almost 25 

percent increase in passenger activity. Amtrak served the following locations in the SPC region: 

Boardings + Alightings Boardings + Alightings 

City In 2006 In 2008 

Greensburg 10,942 12,828 

Latrobe 3,427 4,253 

Pittsburgh 118,708 159,909 

Since 2008, Amtrak has completed the P.R.I.I.A Section 224 Pennsylvania Rail Feasibility 

Report, which includes an examination of the potential for expanded passenger rail service 

between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The report concluded that the expansion of 

conventional rail service between the two cities faced considerable hurdles based on right-of-way 

ownership; use of the corridor by an estimated 40 freight trains each day; and regional 

topography. 

Waterways and Ports 

The Port of Pittsburgh encompasses eleven counties in Southwestern Pennsylvania (the ten 

counties of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission and Clarion County to the northeast). 

An estimated 200 miles of commercially navigable water along the Ohio, Monongahela and 

Allegheny Rivers provide a valuable “inland navigation” system for bulk material movement 

into and through the region. 

The three rivers are used to carry 

raw materials, bulk and 

manufactured goods for many 

industries in the region. With 

more than 200 river terminal 

operators in the region, the Port 

of Pittsburgh is the 2 nd busiest 

inland port, and one of the 20 

busiest ports of any kind in the 

nation, according the Port of 

Pittsburgh Commission records. 

Commercial navigation is 

important to the region’s 

economy because river transport 

is an extremely economical 

method of transporting raw 

materials and bulk goods. The 30-40 million tons of cargo the Port of Pittsburgh ships and 

receives each year provides a significant annual benefit to the region. The primary cargo in the 

Port of Pittsburgh is coal but millions of tons of raw products including sand, gravel and iron ore; 


3 - 32


manufactured goods; petroleum and petroleum products as well as chemicals and related 

products traverse our waterways. 

The transport of bulk goods by water is also environmentally beneficial to the region, as a single 

barge can carry the equivalent of 70 large semi trucks or 15 jumbo hopper rail cars. When tied 

together into 15 barge loads, a typical movement of material by water may carry the equivalent 

of 1050 trucks or 225 rail cars. In recognition of the cost and environmental savings presented 

by inland navigation, the US Maritime Administration (MARAD) announced the creation of the 

US Marine Highway System in 2010. The new Marine Highway 70 (M-70), begins at 

Pittsburgh, and extends the entire length of the Ohio River, where it meets Marine Highway 55, 

(the Mississippi River System) near St. Louis, MO. In its designation of the M-70 corridor, 

MARAD noted that this Marine Highway corridor has the potential to help alleviate a portion of 

the congestion from the existing landside routes, while at the same time reducing emissions, 

conserving energy, improving safety, and reducing highway maintenance costs. It can also 

contribute to increased economic and commercial activity in the region by removing barriers to 

efficient freight transportation. 

It is estimated that about 250 million tons of cargo, valued at approximately $133 billion, go in 

or out of the area each year – by any mode. Twenty percent of the tons (50 million) or seven 

percent of the value ($9 billion) goes by barge. 

Commercial navigation of the region’s three major rivers is made possible through the region’s 

17 locks and dams. These facilities maintain river water levels between the individual dams, and 

make commercial navigation possible (Figure 3.20). 

The eight locks and dams on the Allegheny River permit commercial navigation as far north as 

East Brady, Pennsylvania, 72 miles from the Point in downtown Pittsburgh. Key commodities 

carried on the Allegheny River include bulk aggregate materials such as sand and gravel. The 

locks and dams on 

the Allegheny River 

were all built 

between 1927 and 

1938. 

The nine locks and 

dams on the 

Monongahela River 

permit commercial 

navigation as far 

south as Fairmont, 

WV, more than 128 

miles from the Point 

in Pittsburgh. Coal is 

by far the largest 

commodity hauled on 

the Monongahela 


3 - 33


Approximately 250 

million tons of 

cargo—worth over 

$130 billion—travel 

through Southwestern 

Pennsylvania each 

year. 

River, and barge transportation is essential to the costeffective 

movement of coal within the region. The oldest 

lock and dam on the Monongahela River was constructed 

at Elizabeth, PA in 1905, making it more than 100 years 

old. 

The Ohio River begins at the confluence of the Allegheny 

and Monongahela rivers at the Point in Pittsburgh, PA, 

and flows 981 miles to join the Mississippi at Cairo, Ill. 

There are three locks and dams on the Ohio River in 

Pennsylvania. The US Army Corps of Engineers, the 

Port of Pittsburgh Commission and regional barge 

operators all agree that these dams are in an “advanced 

state of decline” and could be subject to failure at any time. 

The locks and dams on the Ohio River are more than 70 years old, and are in need of major 

reconstruction and rehabilitation. It has been estimated that $83 million are required to 

rehabilitate the Emsworth Lock and Dam alone. No estimates are available for the costs of 

rehabilitating the Montgomery and Dashields Locks and Dams, but the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers has spent almost $15 million on the completion of the Upper Ohio River Navigation 

Study to determine the total costs of maintaining the operability of the three locks and dams on 

the Ohio River. This report is scheduled to be released in 2011. 

The locks and dams are owned, maintained and operated by the US Army Corps of Engineers. 

Recent funding cuts at the national level will result in the closure of the two northernmost locks 

(on the Allegheny River) to recreational boating, and will significantly reduce the hours of 

operation for commercial and recreational operations at all locks and dams on the Allegheny 

River. 


3 - 34


Figure 3.20 Dams and River Terminals 


3 - 35


Airports 

Scheduled airline service is available within the SPC region at Pittsburgh International Airport in 

western Allegheny County, and Arnold Palmer Regional Airport in Latrobe, Westmoreland 

County. Corporate flight operations, recreational flights and student training occur at more than 

two dozen general aviation airports in the ten county region (Figure 3.21). 

Most of these airports are publicly owned, and are operated by a local or county government or 

airport authority. There is one public use heliport in the region as well. A few airports are 

privately owned, but are open for use by the general public. There are also several private 

airports in the region at which use is limited to the airport owner and guests. 

Pittsburgh International 

Airport is a world-class 

facility that has been 

frequently recognized by 

national and international 

organizations for its high 

quality of traveler 

services. The Official 

Airline Guide (OAG) 

Worldwide has rated 

Pittsburgh International 

Airport in its short list of 

the world’s best airports 

for four consecutive 

years. In two recent 

customer satisfaction 

surveys conducted by 

market research leader LD Powers and Associates, the flying public rated Pittsburgh 

International Airport among the five best airports. Conde Nast Traveler’s Magazine has 

repeatedly named Pittsburgh International Airport as one of the best airports in the United States, 

and the World 

Twelve airlines currently provide passenger service to and from, Pittsburgh International Airport, 

with more than 150 daily flights to 37 non-stop destinations. 

In addition to Pittsburgh International Airport, commercial passenger service is offered by Spirit 

Airlines at Arnold Palmer Regional Airport in Latrobe, Westmoreland County. This airport also 

offers scheduled charter service to several popular tourist destinations and offers corporate flight 

facilities. 


3 - 36


Figure 3.21 Airport Systems 


3 - 37


Pedestrian and Bicycle Network 

Southwestern Pennsylvania has 

an extensive network of 

pedestrian and bicycle routes, 

including sidewalks, rail trails 

and designated bike routes. 

The region’s premier trail is the 

Great Allegheny Passage, a 

150-mile system of biking and 

walking trails connecting 

Pittsburgh with Cumberland, 

MD. In 2006, the linking of the 

Great Allegheny Passage and 

the C & O Canal Towpath in 

Cumberland, MD was 

completed, thereby creating a 

continuous non-motorized 

corridor, from near Pittsburgh to Washington, DC, a distance of 316 miles. 

The Three Rivers Heritage Trail is a pedestrian trail and greenway system along the riverfronts 

in Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. Extending 37 miles along the shores of the Allegheny, 

Monongahela and Ohio Rivers, this trail system includes the popular Eliza Furnace Trail, which 

provides off road pedestrian and bicycle access between downtown Pittsburgh and the Oakland 

neighborhood three miles to the east. 

The City of Pittsburgh has recently embarked on a program of bike lane development along 

roadway corridors demonstrating high bicycle utilization, which has resulted in a dramatic 

increase in the miles of bike lanes in the City. However, not all roadways are suited for bike 

lanes. In cases of insufficient roadway 

width, the City has implemented a 

program of Shared Lane markings. 

This Shared Lane marking program, or 

Sharrow program, results in the 

placement of bicycle markings on the 

roadway pavement, but does not create 

an exclusive lane for use by bicyclists. 

Recently added to the Manual of 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices 

(MUTCD), the utilization of Sharrow 

markings in Pittsburgh has been 

considered “experimental” to date. 


3 - 38


Section 4. The Transportation Plan 

Like the areas it covers, the needs and 

opportunities identified in the 2040 Plan are 

diverse – economic development projects, 

highways and bridges, transit facilities and 

operations, and related infrastructure - and 

are implemented by an equally diverse 

collection of public and private agencies. 

Funding for identified improvements varies 

according to the investment type and is 

shared among multiple sources. Depending 

upon the type of plan, project or program, 

the financial plan for the 2040 Plan 

identifies the potential funding sources and expectations for funding that are reasonably expected to be 

available. Where the funding does not adequately address identified needs, the financial plan discusses 

how the region might achieve the desired funding commitments and identifies possible funding sources. 

Transportation Financial Plan 

The 2040 Plan includes a transportation financial plan that identifies 

anticipated federal, state and local revenues that will be invested in the 

region’s transportation system through highway, bridge and transit 

projects that will be completed during the planning period. A fiscallyconstrained 

financial plan is required by federal and state agencies 

before public monies can be spent on maintaining and operating the 

transportation system or making system improvements. 

Federal funding is under the authority of SAFETEA-LU, the most 

recent federal transportation authorization legislation, which also 

prescribes a set of rules for managing transportation spending. The 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA) oversee these transportation processes. The 

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and SPC are 

the agencies responsible for managing (non-local) transportation 

spending in the Southwestern Pennsylvania region. State monies are 

under the authority of the state legislature and are based on multiple state laws, and are supervised and 

implemented through the State Transportation Commission, PennDOT and the Pennsylvania Turnpike 

Commission (PTC). 

Every two years, as part of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) update process, PennDOT 

issues official transportation program financial guidance. The processes described in the financial 

guidance determine the levels of funding from various federal and state programs and their distribution 

through different transportation planning organizations across the Commonwealth. 


4 - 1


The transportation financial plan identifies funding that is anticipated to be available between 2011 and 

2040 that will be committed to deliver projects and programs within the Southwestern Pennsylvania 

region during that timeframe. PennDOT is the largest implementing agency and recipient of program 

funding. Additionally, SPC’s member counties, local governments, transit authorities, and non-profit 

agencies each produce projects and deliver services using state and federal transportation revenues. 

Projects are selected based on eligibility for the funding programs, their evaluated ability to meet 

program and regional goals, and their priority relative to other similar projects. The 2040 Plan is the 

means for linking the goals of the Regional Vision Scenario with the purposes and uses of the federal 

and state funding sources. 

SPC has prepared the transportation financial plan to meet federal planning requirements that ensure 

regional plans are fiscally balanced. The transportation financial plan must identify realistic cost 

estimates for capital projects, maintenance, and operations. It must also provide an estimate of revenues 

from sources that are reasonably anticipated to be available during the plan timeframe and intended to be 

used to pay for the projects. Federal guidance helps agencies to determine what is reasonable and 

appropriate in counting future revenues while making inflation-adjusted project cost estimates that will 

apply 20-plus years into the future. Only those projects for which construction and operating funds are 

reasonably expected to be available are to be included in the 2040 Plan or the regional TIP. 

Transportation needs in the region far exceed the amount that can be funded within the fiscallyconstrained 

2040 Plan. For transportation needs and projects outside the boundaries of the fiscallyconstrained 

plan, the 2040 Plan also includes a list of additional priority needs within the Illustrative 

Project List. These projects can be considered for addition to the fiscally-constrained portion of the plan 

through a future update or through an amendment at the time that additional revenues are identified. 

Eligibility and Use of Program Funding 

The transportation financial plan 

estimates future funding that is 

anticipated to be available from 

more than 15 federal, state and 

other revenue sources. The 

greatest portion of funding is 

provided through longestablished 

federal 

transportation programs. Most 

of the highway and bridge 

funding distributed through 

these programs is designated for 

use on the federal-aid highway 

system, which includes stateowned 

transportation 

infrastructure and a smaller 

number of locally-owned 

facilities. Municipal roads and 

bridges, with certain exceptions, 


4 - 2


are not eligible for the federal funding covered by the 2040 Plan. Local government maintenance 

programs are funded through independent local taxing authority with significant assistance from state 

transportation revenues provided through PennDOT directly to the municipalities. For the transit 

program, rules differ according to whether the funds are allocated to large urban, small urban or rural 

areas, and whether they are for capital improvements or operations. 

Long Range Transportation Plan vs. Transportation Improvement Program 

Federal regulations require a Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) process, whereby Metropolitan 

Planning Organizations such as SPC plan for a minimum 20-year horizon. The LRTP includes the SPC 

Transportation Improvement Program, or TIP, which comprises the first four years of the LRTP. The 

current TIP covers 2011-2014 and will be updated in July 2012. Projects on the TIP must be derived 

from or be consistent with the LRTP. 

Revenue projections have been prepared based on the following three periods within the 2040 Plan: 

LRTP Stage 1 (equates to the current TIP) 2011-2014 

LRTP Stage 2 2015-2022 

LRTP Stage 3 2023-2040 

Stage 2 includes costs to complete projects that are started in the current TIP period but are not fully 

funded. If the cost to complete a project does not appear in Stage 2 of the LRTP, U.S.DOT is not 

permitted to approve the environmental clearances for that project. Stage 2 is also used to sequence the 

delivery of major projects so that projects in multiple jurisdictions will not find themselves drawing 

against the same funding. Corridor-sized projects are broken down into deliverable segments based on 

cash flow requirements. Project lists are not intended to be comprehensive; only the major projects 

within an area are visible in the 2040 Plan. 

Projects that are not mentioned individually are 

delivered within funding line items reserved for 

highway or bridge capital maintenance programs. 

Fiscal constraint for these smaller maintenance 

projects can be managed either through the TIP or 

administratively within the LRTP planning 

process. Stage 2 is balanced between TIP 

completion, additional major projects, and 

maintenance line items. Stage 2 also begins to 

reserve funding for line items to meet LRTP 

investment strategy goals identified in the 

Strategic Investment section of the document. 

Stage 3 is similar to Stage 2 in identifying major projects anticipated to be delivered within the Stage 3 

timeframe. An increased portion of the Stage 3 resources are identified in reserve line items, 

recognizing that for smaller maintenance-type projects it is generally better to identify project priorities 

closer to the time period when the spending decisions will be made. 


4 - 3


The transit component of the plan is essentially two line items: operations and capital maintenance. 

Specific projects and actions will be identified in the TIP and will be monitored for consistency with the 

Plan. Funding for transit projects is discussed later in this section. 

Use of Line Items 

In order to provide increased 

flexibility to the planning and 

programming process, one of the 

mechanisms utilized in this plan 

is the concept of “line items”. 

After funding for specific 

transportation projects in the TIP 

and Plan is accounted for, the 

remaining funds are calculated 

and set aside into line items that 

are reserved for future use 

toward certain types of projects. 

These categories and the levels 

of investment are consistent with 

the Plan’s investment strategies 

and ensure that funding is set aside for a given purpose, but does not hinder programming efforts by 

overly confining the process. Taking bridge maintenance investments as an example, it is easy to see 

the difficulty in identifying and prioritizing individual bridge rehabilitation needs 25 years into the 

future. Rather than attempting to list every bridge that will need capital maintenance over the period of 

this Plan, project listings are comprised of a limited number of major bridges with the remaining funds 

in line items that set aside funding for bridge maintenance purposes. Individual bridge needs can then 

be more appropriately addressed and prioritized as part of the short-range Transportation Improvement 

Program. 

Long Range Transportation Plan Funding Sources 

Title I Formula Funds 

The mix of funding sources anticipated to be available for the highway, bridge and FHWA-funded 

programs during the 2040 Plan period (2011-2040) is shown in Figure 4.1. Federal funding makes up 

almost 75 percent of the overall program. 


4 - 4


Figure 4.1 Title I Funding Sources for Highways, Bridges & Other FHWA Programs 

Funding Sources for Highways, Bridges and 

Other Title I Programs (in millions) 

$4,341 

25% 

$236 

2% 

$4,467 

26% 

Federal Highway Program 

Federal Bridge Program 

CMAQ, HSIP, TE, RRX 

$841 

5% 

$1,919 

11% 

$5,374 

31% 

State Highway Program 

State Bridge Program 

Local Match 

The Federal Highway category includes a number of separate SAFETEA-LU programs including the 

National Highway System (NHS), Surface Transportation Program (STP), and STP-Urban programs. 

The Federal Bridge category consists of two parts – a main program for bridges that are on the federalaid 

system, and a second, much smaller program that provides funding to projects that are not on the 

federal-aid system. For each of these programs, except as noted, a project must be on the federal-aid 

highway system to be eligible to receive federal funding. This federal-aid system includes all of the 

National Highway System and many other roadways that are important to mobility within the region. 

The CMAQ, HSIP, TE, RRX category includes four additional federal programs: Congestion Mitigation 

Air Quality (CMAQ), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), Transportation Enhancements 

(TE) and Rail Safety (RRX). The financial plan recognizes that funding for these programs will not be 

budgeted for specific projects until a future TIP cycle when projects will be selected for that TIP based 

on each program’s unique guidelines. Funding for each program, therefore, is reserved as a line item at 

the level identified in Figure 4.1 and is not available for use on other projects. SPC manages project 

selection processes for the CMAQ and TE Programs as part of the TIP update every two years and is 

developing a new project selection process for the STP-Urban program for use during the 2013 TIP 

Update cycle. Each PennDOT District is responsible, in consultation with SPC, for selecting projects 

(also during the TIP update cycle) for the HSIP and Rail Safety programs based on state-determined 

technical standards. 

Overall, the 2040 Plan’s Title I (highway and bridge) investments through the year 2040 are expected to 

total about $17.2 billion, a figure that is $2.7 billion larger (an almost 20% increase) compared to the 

2035 Plan investment of $14.5 billion. Figure 4.2, Title I Estimate of Available Revenues, identifies the 

revenue projections for each federal and state program within the time periods of the 2040 Plan. In 2007 


4 - 5


Pennsylvania enacted Act 44, which added significant state bridge revenues to the 2035 Plan. Although 

Act 44 revenues were revised downward in 2010 when the portion relating to tolling I-80 was not 

implemented, most of the remaining revenue increase in the 2040 Plan can be attributed to the additional 

Act 44 funds. 

Figure 4.2 Title I Estimate of Available Revenues for Highway, Bridge & Other FHWA Programs 

Funding Source 

(in millions) 

LRTP Stage 1 

2011-2014 TIP 

LRTP Stage 2 

2015-2022 TIP 

LRTP Stage 3 

2023-2040 TIP 

Total 

2011-2040 

NHS $152.5 $367.4 $1,225.5 $1,745.4 

STP $148.7 $360.9 $1,203.8 $1,713.4 

STP Urban $88.1 $212.2 $707.6 $1,007.8 

State Highway $78.1 $176.0 $587.0 $841.0 

Federal Bridge $469.5 $1,131.3 $3,773.5 $5,374.3 

State Bridge $418.9 $904.7 $3,017.5 $4,341.1 

Local Match $31.4 $62.9 $141.5 $235.8 

Highway and Bridge Programs $1,387.2 $3,215.3 $10,656.4 $15,258.9 

Safety $38.3 $92.2 $307.5 $438.0 

CMAQ $102.7 $247.4 $825.3 $1,175.5 

TE $19.4 $46.7 $155.9 $222.0 

RRX $7.3 $17.5 $58.4 $83.1 

Other Title I Programs $167.6 $403.9 $1,347.1 $1,918.6 

Region Total $1,554.8 $3,619.2 $12,003.6 $17,177.5 

The 2040 Plan continues the conscious effort by the region’s planning partners in the 2035 Plan to focus 

more of the region’s available resources on maintenance in order to address the serious deficiencies 

facing our transportation infrastructure. Even with this “maintenance first” approach, the level of 

transportation need is still projected to exceed the available funding by a substantial margin. According 

to PennDOT, even with significant revenue increases it will take more than a decade for the region to 

reach statewide goals for levels of performance and physical condition. If resources continue to lose 

ground to costs, system condition could deteriorate further from already low averages. 

Title I Discretionary Funds 

A number of discretionary revenue sources outside the LRTP formula funding distributions may become 

available under certain circumstances to fund transportation needs in Southwestern Pennsylvania. 

Discretionary sources include U.S. Congressional Earmarks, the Pennsylvania Secretary of 

Transportation’s Discretionary Highway Program, and the Governor’s Discretionary Economic 

Development Program. 

Members of the U.S. Congress are sometimes permitted to designate a limited amount of funding for 

priority transportation projects by identifying a specific project need in federal legislation. The most 


4 - 6


common source of these earmarks has been federal transportation reauthorization legislation that is 

scheduled to occur every six years. Some earmarks are targeted to meet specific national objectives, 

while others provide congressional members with discretionary authority to fund priority projects in 

their home districts. Earmarks may also be enacted in the annual appropriations bill that each year 

identifies the transportation budget level and authorizes the spending of federal formula funds. However, 

this practice is currently restricted by congressional rules adopted in 2010. Also, budget-balancing 

reductions in 2011 specifically targeted for elimination “old” earmarks that have not been spent. 

In its Financial Guidance for the TIP, Pennsylvania sets aside 20 percent of the federal and state 

highway program funds to be used at the discretion of the Pennsylvania Secretary of Transportation. 

Funding is distributed during the TIP update process in consultation with the State Transportation 

Commission. The Secretary’s recent practice has been to direct funding towards major bridges that are 

structurally deficient, but would not otherwise be funded due to limited TIP formula funds. 

Funding for the Governor’s Discretionary Economic Development Program comes from a $25 million 

annual reserve from state highway program funds. Funding is distributed at the discretion of the 

Governor and the Pennsylvania Secretary of Transportation for transportation improvements associated 

with statewide economic development opportunities. 

Southwestern Pennsylvania will continue to pursue and compete for discretionary revenue programs. 

These sources are not added to the 2040 Plan as prospective revenues until specific projects are selected 

for funding. 

Federal fiscal constraint guidance requires the use of “Year of Expenditure” (YOE) dollars for project 

cost estimates and revenue growth projections. YOE adjustments take into account the problem of cost 

inflation by recognizing that in the future it will cost more to complete a project than if the same project 

were completed today. YOE principles also recognize that over time, periodic increases in revenue can 

reasonably be projected from historical trends. The financial plan for the highway and bridge programs 

assumes a long-term inflation rate of three percent annually for future project costs. Future revenue 

growth is anticipated to match historic trends since ISTEA passage in 1991, averaging about 3 percent 

annually. Discussions with FHWA and PennDOT assume these as a reasonable basis for YOE cost and 

revenue growth adjustments. 

Title III Formula Funds 

Funding for Public Transportation Programs 

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of 

Transportation (PennDOT) through the Bureau of Public Transportation provide funding for public 

transit projects within the region. 

Federal Formula Funding Programs 

A large portion of annual federal formula funding comes to the Pittsburgh Urbanized Area (UZA) 

through FTA’s Urbanized Area Formula (49 U.S.C. Section 5307) program. The Port Authority of 

Allegheny County is the designated recipient for these funds. The funds are re-distributed annually to 


4 - 7


the other eligible sponsors of public transit projects within the UZA according to an established local 

process. 

Because it owns and operates both a light rail facility and multiple busway facilities, the Port Authority 

of Allegheny County also is an eligible recipient of annual formula funding through the FTA’s Fixed 

Guide-way Modernization Program (49 U.S.C. Section 5309). 

Another source of federal formula funding for the region’s public transit projects comes from FTA’s 

Formula Grants for Other Than Urbanized Areas and Rural Assistance programs (49 U.S.C. Section 

5311). The designated recipient for these funds is the PennDOT Bureau of Public Transportation (BPT). 

The PennDOT BPT applies for and administers project grants for the region’s eligible project sponsors. 

Finally, the region receives annual formula funding for the Urban Area Job Access and Reverse 

Commute (JARC) (49 U.S.C. Section 5316) and New Freedom (U.S.C. Section 5317) programs. 

Eligible projects are selected for this funding through an established local process. The PennDOT BPT 

is the designated recipient for the Non-Urban Area formula funds for these two federal programs. The 

PennDOT BPT annually selects eligible projects for funding under these programs according to an 

established statewide process. 

Commonwealth Funding Programs 

Since the Commonwealth enacted Act 44 in 2007, eligible public transit project sponsors in the region 

have received funding from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through the established Public 

Transportation Trust Fund (PTTF). Among other results, establishment of the PTTF “collapsed” what 

had been an array of different funding sources into a few programs that are listed below. 

The Urban and Rural Operating Assistance Program (Section 1513) provides annual formula funding to 

urban and rural public transportation organizations to help pay for the cost, not covered by fares and 

other operating revenue, of providing fixed route and specialized ADA public transportation service. 

The formula is based on total ridership, senior citizen ridership and revenue vehicle miles and hours. 

The Formula Urban and Rural Capital Assistance - Capital Improvement Program (Section 1517) 

provides annual state funding which is allocated to each local public transportation organization based 

on their proportion of overall statewide ridership. This capital funding is provided to help pay for the 

cost of durable assets such as buses, bus garages and related equipment. This funding typically is used to 

cover the 20% non-federal share of 80% federally funded capital projects, or the entire cost of nonfederal 

capital projects. The annual funding allocated for this program is provided by using 16.67% of 

the total amount of state sales tax revenue transferred each year to help fund public transportation 

programs. Grantees receive their share of this allocated funding on a cost reimbursement basis. 

The Lottery Fund Free Transit and Shared-Ride Programs reimburse eligible fixed-route transit 

providers on a fare-based calculation and shared-ride transportation providers for up to 85%of the 

general public shared-ride fare for each ride provided to a person over 65 years old. 

The Intercity Bus Program subsidizes passenger fares on specified routes for private for-profit bus lines 

operating between communities in the region. 


4 - 8


Local Funding 

Each transit operator in the region also receives local funding that is provided to them through the 

county and/or the municipalities they serve. Operating funds are generally matched at a 50% federal/ 

50% non-federal ratio. The 50% non-federal match typically consists of 37.5% state and 12.5% local 

funding. Capital funds are generally matched at an 80% federal/20% non-Federal ratio and grantees 

must provide local matching funds equal to at least .645% of total project costs for 80% federally funded 

projects or 3.225% of total project costs for non-federal capital projects. 

Formula funding provided through the PTTF requires local matching funds equal to 15% of the amount 

of annual state funding provided. Systems that provided less than this required percentage of local 

matching funds at the time Act 44 was enacted are allowed to provide the amount applicable at that 

time, but are then required to increase their local contribution by at least 5% each year until their amount 

of local funding equals at least 15% of state assistance. Also, grantees must provide local matching 

funds equal to at least .645% of total project costs for 80% federally funded projects, or 3.225% of total 

project costs for non-federal capital projects. 

The following charts show historic trends in transit operating funds as well as projections for the mix of 

capital and operating funding for the region projected over the next four years. 

Figure 4.3 Regional Sources of Transit Operating Funds 

Regional Sources of Operating Funds 

(Fixed Route Bus Only) 

100% 

90% 

80% 

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

4.2% 

21.5% 

3.8% 

8.9% 

38.0% 

23.4% 

0.2% 

Local 

0.6% 0.3% 1.4% 0.3% 

18.1% 19.6% 21.7% 22.0% 

3.4% 

6.8% 

44.2% 

26.9% 

0.2% 

Local 

0.7% 

0.2% 

Local 

67.5% 

0.1% 

9.1% 

Local 

9.0% 

65.4% 67.9% 

8.9% 8.5% 7.4% 

FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 

0.1% 

Local 

Federal State County Local Lottery Farebox Other 


4 - 9


Figure 4.4 Regional Transit Operating Funds – Long Range Projections 

Available Funding 

Operating 

Title III Transit Operating Funding (Amounts in $000) 

Growth 2011 Base LRPT Stage 1 LRTP Stage 2 LRTP Stage 3 

Rate Year (2011‐2014 TIP) (2015‐2026) (2027‐2040) 

Total (2011‐ 

2040) 

Federal Revenue 3 2.67% 1 $ 70,781 $ 294,666 $ 1,095,486 $ 1,802,902 $ 3,193,054 

State Revenue 0% 1 $ 199,104 $ 796,416 $ 2,389,248 $ 2,787,456 $ 5,973,120 

Local Revenue 4,6 2.60% $ 30,804 $ 128,105 $ 473,578 $ 772,455 $ 1,374,138 

Fare Revenue 5,6 3.74% 2 $ 74,380 $ 314,631 $ 1,275,292 $ 2,405,035 $ 3,994,958 

Total Operating Revenue $ 375,069 $ 1,533,818 $ 5,233,605 $ 7,767,848 $ 14,535,271 

Operating Costs 6 4.00% $ 367,132 $ 1,559,013 $ 6,453,471 $ 12,578,092 $ 20,590,575 

Notes & Sources 

1 Federal and state growth rates are taken from PennDOT financial guidance for Fiscal Year 2011. 

2 Farebox revenue assumed to increase 3.74% per year based on historical data from the SPC Transit Report Card FY2010. 

3 Federal operating revenue includes Urban Area Formula funding (FTA Section 5307) available to MMVTA and FACT, as well as 

Section 5307 funding for Preventive Maintenance and Associated Capital Maintenance utilized by PAAC and Section 5307 funds used 

by other operators for Capital Cost of Contracting. 

4 Data for the calculations of regional operating costs and local operating revenues are from PennDOT's "Public Transportation 

Annual Performance Report Fiscal Year 2009‐10, Transit Agency Profiles". 

5 Farebox revenue projections are based on data from the SPC Regional Transit Report Card FY2010. 

6 Note that the figures for local and fare revenue and the operating costs are based on self‐reported sources. 


4 - 10


Figure 4.5 Federal Funding Projections for Transit Capital Projects 

Federal Formula Funding Projections: 2011‐14 

Note: 2011 projects do not include the additional $45 million allocated to the Port Authority of Allegheny County by the 

governor from the PennDOT economic development fund. Some of the federal funding/project gap in 2011/2012 is likely 

due to projects associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the "stimulus" bill) of 2009. 

2011 2012 2013 2014 

Urban (5307) Funding $ 33,282,000 $ 34,613,000 $ 35,998,000 $ 37,437,000 

TIP Projects $ 41,271,533 $ 39,806,543 $ 38,272,200 $ 38,611,336 

Deficit ‐$7,989,533 ‐$5,193,543 ‐$2,274,200 ‐$1,174,336 

Running Total ‐$7,989,533 ‐$13,183,076 ‐$15,457,276 ‐$16,631,612 

$45,000,000 

$40,000,000 

$35,000,000 

$30,000,000 

Federal Funding and TIP Projects 

$25,000,000 

2011 2012 2013 2014 

Urban (5307) Funding 

TIP Projects 


4 - 11


Figure 4.6 State Funding Projections for Transit Capital Projects 

State Funding Projections: 2011‐14 

Notes: State Capital Revenue includes state rural & urban funding combined. State Capital Projects includes 340, 341, 

PTAF, 160 and other funds, but not projects funded by one‐time sources such as Capital Bond, JARC or New Freedoms 

Initiatives grants. 

2011 2012 2013 2014 

State Capital Funding $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 

State Capital Projects $ 10,898,000 $ 10,689,000 $ 9,932,000 $ 10,695,000 

Deficit ‐$1,416,000 ‐$1,207,000 ‐$450,000 ‐$1,213,000 

Running Total ‐$1,416,000 ‐$2,623,000 ‐$3,073,000 ‐$4,286,000 

State Funding and TIP Projects 

$11,000,000 

$10,500,000 

$10,000,000 

$9,500,000 

$9,000,000 

2011 2012 2013 2014 

State Capital Funding 

State Capital Projects 


4 - 12


Discretionary Funding 

As with federal highway and bridge discretionary funding, FTA and PennDOT make additional 

discretionary resources available to the region for transit projects. Determining eligibility for these funds 

and the processes for awarding them are external to the SPC TIP and LRTP processes, and therefore, are 

not normally included in revenue projections. Transit project sponsors within the region apply for this 

funding either as direct recipients of federal funding or through PennDOT. Once funding for projects is 

identified and secured, these projects become part of the region’s LRTP and TIP. 

Federal discretionary funding sources include the FTA New Starts; Small Starts, Very Small Starts, and 

Bus and Bus-Related Capital Programs (49 U.S.C. Section 5309); as well as the Elderly and Persons 

with Disabilities Program (49 U.S.C. Section 5310). The capital programs are targeted to major new 

capital projects; new facility and facility expansion projects; and, transit fleet vehicle expansion and 

replacement projects. The Elderly and Persons with Disabilities Program funds are targeted towards 

shared-ride and community transit programs and are used primarily for vehicle fleet expansion and 

replacement and other small capital projects. PennDOT is the recipient of these funds and conducts an 

annual process for their distribution. 

Commonwealth discretionary programs include the Discretionary Urban and Rural Bond-Funded 

Capital Assistance Asset Improvement and the Discretionary Urban and Rural Trust-Funded Capital 

Assistance Asset Improvement Programs (Section 1514), which provide funding for capital projects that 

are authorized in an approved state capital budget, released for payment by the Governor’s Budget 

Office, and are approved by PennDOT. This funding is provided to help pay for the cost of durable 

assets, such as buses, bus garages and related equipment. The amount of state funding provided is 

typically 19.355% of total project costs for 80% federally funded capital projects, or 96.775% of total 

projects costs for non-federal capital projects. 

The PTTF also provides discretionary funding for Programs of Statewide Significance (Section 1516). 

The PennDOT BPT administers these funds. Funding is awarded on a case-by-case basis to support 

various community transit, shared-ride and ridesharing initiatives throughout the Commonwealth as well 

as for technical assistance for transit providers. 


4 - 13


Figure 4.7 Regional Transit Capital Projects Funding Gap - 2011-2014 TIP 

‐$2,000,000 

Transit Capital Projects Funding Gap 

2011-2014 TIP Projects and State/Federal Funding 

Available 

$0 

‐$4,000,000 

‐$6,000,000 

State Funding Deficit 

Federal Funding Deficit 

‐$8,000,000 

‐$10,000,000 

2011 2012 2013 2014 

Figure 4.8 Regional Transit Capital Projects Funding Gap - 2011-2040 

$0 

‐$2,000,000 

‐$4,000,000 

‐$6,000,000 

‐$8,000,000 

‐$10,000,000 

‐$12,000,000 

‐$14,000,000 

Transit Funding Gap 

TIP Projects and State/Federal Funding Available 

Projected over Long Range Plan Period: 2011-40 

State Funding 

Deficit 

2011 

2016 

2021 

2026 

2031 

2036 


4 - 14


Funding for Other Modes of 


The majority of passenger 

movements in the region are by 

automobile and transit. However, the 

regional highway and public 

transportation systems are only two 

components of a vital regional 

intermodal transportation network. 

Transportation options are also 

provided by the region’s airports, 

railroads, pedestrian and bicycle 

facilities, and river transportation 

system. 

Airports 

Typically, general aviation airports 

require federal and state subsidy for airport improvement projects and capital maintenance. The 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Bureau of Aviation administers three grant programs for airport 

development: the Pennsylvania State Block Grant Program, the Aviation Development Program, and 

the Capital Budget /Transportation Assistance Program. 

The Aviation Development Program is funded through taxes on jet fuel and avgas, the revenues from 

which are collected and deposited into Pennsylvania's Aviation Restricted Account. These funds are 

normally used to pay for up to 90 percent of the total cost of an eligible project at Pennsylvania public 

use airports. The amount available for funding through the Aviation Development Program varies but 

averages about $7 million annually. 

The Capital Budget/Transportation Assistance Program is funded as part of the Pennsylvania Capital 

Budget. For public use airports to receive this type of funding, projects must be in an approved bill. 

These projects can then compete for a portion (50-75% of total cost) of the approved budget 

authorization. 

The Pennsylvania Block Grant Program funding is generated through taxes collected nationally on 

airline tickets, freight waybills, international departure fees, and sale of avgas and jet fuel, which is 

deposited into the FAA's Aviation Trust Fund. Congress appropriates funds for the Airport Improvement 

Program (AIP) each year based on an area/population formula (apportionment). Pennsylvania receives 

approximately 18.5 percent of the total federal authorization each year, or about $8.5 million. 

Pennsylvania became a block grant state in 1998. The Pennsylvania Block Grant Program is available 

only to general aviation airports, airports designated as reliever airports, and non-primary commercial 

airline airports (those with less than 10,000 annual enplaned passengers) that are part of the National 

Plan of Integrated Airport System (NPIAS), as approved by the FAA. Airports may receive up to 95 

percent of eligible project costs for projects included in the State's Transportation Improvement 

Program. 


4 - 15


The two commercial service airports in the region also receive Airport Improvement Program (AIP) 

funds for airport planning and development. However, grants for commercial service airports are 

administered directly by the Federal Aviation Administration. For large and medium primary hub 

airports (Pittsburgh International Airport), the grant covers 75 percent of eligible costs (or 80 percent for 

noise program implementation). For small primary, reliever, and general aviation airports, including 

Arnold Palmer Regional Airport, the grant covers 95 per cent of eligible costs. 

Eligible projects include those improvements related to 

enhancing airport safety, capacity, security, and 

environmental concerns. In general, sponsors can use 

AIP funds on most airfield capital improvements or 

repairs except those for terminals, hangars, and 

nonaviation development. Any professional services 

that are necessary for eligible projects---such as 

planning, surveying, and design---are eligible as is 

runway, taxiway, and apron pavement improvement. 

Aviation demand at the airport must justify the projects, 

which must also meet Federal environmental and 

procurement requirements. 

Projects related to airport operations and revenuegenerating 

improvements are typically not eligible for 

funding. Operational costs---such as salaries, 

maintenance services, equipment, and supplies---are 

also not eligible for AIP grants. 

Commercial service airports with scheduled passenger 

service, including Pittsburgh International Airport and 

Arnold Palmer Regional Airport, also impose a fee on 

the cost of tickets issued for flights from their facility. 

These Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) are used to fund FAA-approved projects that enhance safety, 

security, or capacity; reduce noise; or increase air carrier competition. Fees of up to $4.50 are collected 

from every enplaned passenger at airports collecting the Passenger Facility Charges. 

Rail 

To assist railroads in the state in maintaining the rail network in the state, Pennsylvania established the 

PA Rail Freight Assistance Program. This program uses Commonwealth General Fund monies to 

provide matching grants to railroad companies and others for projects which preserve essential rail 

freight service where economically feasible, and/or preserve or stimulate economic development 

through the generation of new or expanded rail freight service. Applications for grant funds typically far 

exceed funds available, requiring the imposition of a $700,000 cap on the public portion of any project, 

up to 70 percent of the actual total project cost. The construction portion of any project may not exceed 

$250,000. 


4 - 16


Funds may be used for maintenance, construction, or maintenance and construction projects. 

Maintenance projects are designed to restore, improve, or maintain an existing railroad line to the level 

necessary for safe operation or use and has an estimated useful life of at least five years. Construction 

projects may include the acquisition of materials, and the construction a railroad line or a rail associated 

facility to a level necessary to provide a useful life in excess of five years. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle 

SPC works with PennDOT and other regional planning partners to aminister funds for a wide variety of 

pedestrian and bicycle projects through two special programs, Transportation Enhancements and 

Hometown Streets/Safe Routes to School. Funding for these programs is derived from a 10 percent setaside 

from the federal Surface Transportation Program. These programs focus on better integrating the 

transportation system with the communities it serves, funding projects that are often outside the realm of 

standard highway or transit improvements. Additional pedestrian and bicycle projects have been 

advanced using Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) program funds, as well as a variety of state 

and federal discretionary funding programs. 


4 - 17


Inland Navigation System 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Port of Pittsburgh 

Commission, and regional barge operators all agree that the 

region’s dams are in an “advanced state of decline”. The 

federal budget for fiscal year 2010 delivers only about 

$118 million for the assessment and implementation of 

much needed repairs on the regional inland navigation 

system nationwide. To illustrate the inadequacy of this 

funding, it has been estimated that the cost of the current 

repairs needed to keep the Emsworth Lock and Dam in 

good operating condition is $83 million. Funds for the 

upkeep and improvement of the Ohio River navigation 

system are appropriated annually in the federal Energy and 

Water Appropriations Bill. As such, future funding 

commitments will be determined on an annual basis. 

Discretionary Transportation Funding Programs 

Since the adoption of the last Long Range Plan, several 

new discretionary funding programs have emerged at the 

State and federal levels. These highly competitive programs provided much needed funding to advance 

important projects. These programs can best be described as “episodic” in that there is no certainty that 

such funding programs will be repeated, or when. These programs included: 

Pennsylvania Community Transportation Initiative 

In 2009, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation provided more than $76 million in funding for 

projects aimed at enhancing the linkages between transportation and community building under the 

Pennsylvania Community Transportation Initiative. Eighty projects were funded statewide. Almost $15 

million went to projects located in Southwestern Pennsylvania. 

This program was repeated in 2011, when $25 in additional funding was made available. Seven regional 

projects were funded under this program 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

In February of 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was signed into law. This 

new program had three immediate goals: 

 

 

 

Create new jobs and save existing ones 

Spur economic activity and invest in long-term growth 

Foster unprecedented levels of accountability and transparency in government spending 


4 - 18


An estimated $1.1 billion was allocated for transportation infrastructure improvement nationally. The 

SPC region received ARRA funding in the amount of $286,550,987 for the completion of 69 

transportation improvement projects. 

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Discretionary Grants 

The TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Discretionary Grant Program 

was included in the Recovery Act to spur a national competition for innovative, multi-modal and multijurisdictional 

transportation projects that promise significant economic and environmental benefits to an 

entire metropolitan area, a region or the nation. Projects funded with the $1.5 billion allocated in the 

Recovery Act include improvements to roads, bridges, rail, ports, transit and intermodal facilities. 

CSX Railroad was awarded $98 million under this program for the implementation of a track clearance 

program that would result in double stack cleared rail corridor between the East Coast sea ports and 

consumption centers and Midwest distribution centers. The majority of this track clearance effort will 

occur in the States of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland and West Virginia. This public-private partnership 

will create greater capacity for goods moving in and out of the Midwest, reducing transit times between 

coastal ports and major population centers by 24 to 48 hours; reduce highway congestion and 

transportation emissions; and create over 50,000 jobs. 

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery II Discretionary Grants (FY 2010 

Appropriations Act) 

The US Department of Transportation has been authorized to award $600 million in National 

Infrastructure Investment Discretionary Grants. This appropriation is similar, but not identical to the 

appropriation for the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, or “TIGER 

Discretionary Grant”, program authorized and implemented pursuant to the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009. Because of the similarity in program structure and objectives, DOT is 

referring to the grants for National Infrastructure Investments under the FY 2010 Appropriations Act as 

“TIGER II Discretionary Grants”. As with the ARRA program, funds for the TIGER II program were 

awarded on a competitive basis for projects having a significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan 

area or a region. 

Forty-two capital construction projects and 33 planning projects in 40 states shared nearly $600 million 

for major infrastructure projects ranging from highways and bridges to transit, rail and ports. 

Regionally, the Allegheny Riverfront Green Boulevard Project received $1.5 million in joint DOT/HUD 

planning funds under this program. 


4 - 19


Year of Expenditure and Revenue Growth Adjustments 

Federal fiscal constraint guidance requires the use of “Year of Expenditure” (YOE) dollars for project 

cost estimates and revenue growth projections. YOE adjustments take into account the problem of cost 

inflation by recognizing that in the future it will cost more to complete a project than if the same project 

were completed today. YOE also recognizes that over time, periodic increases in revenues can 

reasonably be projected from historical trends. The financial plan for the highway and bridge programs 

assumes a long-term inflation rate of 3 percent annually for future project costs. Future revenue 

increases are assumed to match historic trends since ISTEA passage in 1991, averaging about 3 percent 

annually. Discussions with FHWA and PennDOT assume these to be a reasonable basis for the YOE 

cost and revenue growth adjustments. The practical impact of these required adjustments is that the 

planned MPO highway and bridge programs will neither gain nor lose its estimated purchasing power, 

but the MPO must continue to monitor revenue and cost changes for indications of future trends. 

Major Project Financial Plans 

Major projects with a cost greater than $100 million have additional reporting requirements under the 

new federal regulations, and projects larger than $500 million have to file and update a Major Project 

Financial plan at specified times during the project development process. These SAFETEA-LUrequired 

changes help monitor fiscal constraint by improving oversight and better anticipating and 

avoiding major cost escalations. They also improve the planning process by more closely tracking 

revenues that are committed to major projects to ensure that the revenues continue to be available when 

they are needed. A major project appearing in the later stages of the Plan is required to initiate a Major 

Project Financial plan only when the project is under active development. 

There are no major project financial plans integral to the implementation of the 2040 Long Range 

Transportation Plan. 

Transportation Investment Strategies 

The 2040 Plan continues investment strategies formulated in the 2035 Plan, where policy statements 

associated with the Regional Vision Scenario were used to develop detailed investment goals to help 

guide decision-making. This included employing a series of transportation investment categories (see 

definitions below). Through the use of these categories, policy statements such as “maintenance of the 

existing transportation system will be a regional priority” and “the region’s transportation system will be 

actively managed and operated to allow the system to function at its full potential” were translated into 

more detailed investment strategies. 

An example of this is the recognition of the relationship between transportation operations and new 

capacity investments. Resources to address capacity needs are extremely limited partially resulting from 

the region’s emphasis on maintaining the existing transportation system. While this may be viewed as a 

“necessary” investment choice, a corresponding increase in operations and safety investments will also 

be needed to make the most efficient use of existing capacity. 

The investment categories utilized in identifying these policy interrelationships and outlining more 

specific modal goals are as follows: 


4 - 20


 

Capital Maintenance – Roadways 

Roadway Preservation - Repairs and rehabilitation intended to extend the life of an existing 

roadway. This includes projects that necessitate significant capital expenditures such that the 

project would be included on the TIP. It could include resurfacing, shoulder stabilization, 

and other types of activities, but does not include everyday pothole patching or crack sealing 

types of operations that are typically funded with maintenance funds outside the TIP. 

Roadway Reconstruction - Reconstruction of existing roadways where the road is being 

rebuilt “down to the dirt”. This includes interchange reconstructions that rebuild deficient 

ramps but are not adding new movements. It includes activities and associated projects, such 

as wetland banking, which are directly related to a reconstruction project. Roadway 

Reconstruction would also include activities such as tunnel or retaining wall (re)construction 

that are related to maintaining operations on an existing roadway. It does not include 

projects that involve a combination of reconstruction and capacity expansion (adding through 

lanes). 

 

Capital Maintenance – Bridges 

Bridge Preservation - Repairs and rehabilitation intended to extend the life of an existing 

bridge. This includes activities such as expansion dam replacement, substructure repairs, 

deck restorations and overlays, beam repairs, painting, fatigue and fracture retrofits, and 

scour countermeasures. It does not include total reconstruction or replacement of a bridge, 

nor does it include maintenance operations that are typically funded with maintenance funds 

outside the TIP. 

Bridge Reconstruction / Replacement - Total reconstruction or replacement of an existing 

bridge. This includes bridges on new alignment provided that the old bridge is being taken 

out of service for automobile traffic. It would also include deck replacements on existing 

bridges. 

 

Capital Maintenance – Transit 

Transit: Operations - Operation of the public transit system including fuel, personnel, routine 

vehicle maintenance, routine facility maintenance, and materials and supplies. 

Transit: Capital Maintenance, System Preservation and Modernization - Maintenance and 

modernization of capital assets such as preservation and rehabilitation of fixed facilities (i.e. 

buildings, bridges, busways, LRT lines, etc.); preservation, replacement and rehabilitation of 


4 - 21


existing vehicles (i.e. buses, LRT vehicles, support vehicles); and, modernization/upgrades of 

existing facilities, services and vehicles. 

Traffic Operations and Safety 

Efficiency / Operations - Projects that improve traffic flow, reduce congestion, and improve 

the operational characteristics of the existing transportation system. This includes traffic 

signal systems, Intelligent Transportation Systems (highway and transit), truck climbing 

lanes, and intersection improvements such as the addition of turning lanes. It does not 

include capacity expansion/roadway widening projects. 

Travel Demand Management - Projects such as carpooling, vanpooling, bicycling and 

walking, emergency ride home programs, telecommuting, commuter benefit strategies, 

parking incentives, park-n-ride lots, job access reverse commute programs, secure bicycle 

storage and other non-traditional 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. This includes projects to eliminate sight distance problems at 

intersections, projects that improve at-grade highway-rail crossings, projects to improve 

bicycle and pedestrian safety, and other projects that address areas with high accident rates or 

crash clusters. 

 

Other Modes 

Intermodal / Freight - Projects that address other modes of transportation such as waterways 

(locks and dams) or improvements to the rail freight or aviation networks. This also includes 

projects that improve the integration of modes such as intermodal terminals. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle - Bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and shared use pathways that improve 

accessibility and mobility for bicycles and pedestrians. This includes rail-trails and other 

pathways that provide non-motorized links in the transportation network. 

Other Transportation Enhancements - Scenic beautification, wayfinding signage, welcome 

centers, transportation museums, historic preservation, streetscapes, and other projects that 

would qualify for programs such as Transportation Enhancements or Hometown Streets, but 

are not primarily pedestrian and bicycle projects. 


4 - 22


 

New Capacity – Roadways and Bridges 

Roadway & Bridge Widening / Capacity Upgrade - Roadway expansion projects that involve 

the addition of Single Occupancy Vehicle Capacity (SOVCAP) (a.k.a. “through”) lanes to an 

existing roadway or bridge in order to increase the capacity of the facility. These projects 

often include some level of reconstruction of the existing facility as well. This does not 

include widening projects that only add a two-way center turn lane. 

Interchange Completion - Upgrades to existing interchanges where missing ramps are being 

added. This does not include projects which create new interchanges. 

New Roadways / Interchanges / Bridges - Construction of roadways, interchanges, or bridges 

on new alignment which results in additional mileage being added to the transportation 

network. This would include the extension of existing roadways and construction of HOV 

lanes. It also includes the construction of a new bridge when the old bridge is still being left 

in service. 

 

New Capacity – Transit 

Transit: New Capacity - Expansion of the public transportation system to provide new 

services or to provide transit service to areas that are not currently served. This includes 

projects such as the construction of busways, extension of the light rail system, and other 

major new capital investments for service expansion or modification. It could also include 

transit-oriented development projects. It does not include the purchase of upgraded transit 

vehicles to replace vehicles on existing transit routes. 

Needs Identification, Project Prioritization and Technical Project Evaluation 

Policy statements, investment strategies, and defined investment categories provide a general framework 

for expression of the vision of the 2040 Plan and for direction of future transportation system investment 

decisions. A second, technical aspect of investment decisions must also be considered including asset 

management principles such as needs identification, project prioritization, and technical project 

evaluation. Modal Investment choices reflect effective long-term asset management as well as providing 

direction for future strategic investments. 

As illustrated in Figure 4.9, prioritizing transportation projects is essentially a three-step process. First, 

transportation system needs and project ideas are identified through public involvement processes, 

County Comprehensive Plans, PennDOT District planning efforts, transit provider plans, freight carriers, 

economic development agencies and various other sources. Since financial resources will never be 

sufficient to address every problem, needs and projects must be prioritized. The second step is to 


4 - 23


identify needs and projects that are a high enough priority to be included on the region’s fiscallyconstrained 

long range transportation plan. The third step is to identify needs and projects that are a 

high enough priority to be included in Stage 1 of the plan, which corresponds to the short-range 

Transportation Improvement Program. Once on the TIP, projects proceed into the project development 

process which includes environmental review, design and construction. 

There are four basic considerations incorporated into the decision-making process at the key 

prioritization points: Local Needs and Priorities, Regional Needs and Priorities, Technical Evaluation, 

and the Money Mix. Recent efforts have focused on improving the Technical Evaluation component of 

this process in order to provide decision makers with better information from which to base their 

decisions. 

Figure 4.9 Project Evaluation Concept Diagram 

"The World" of Projects, Problems & Ideas 

Fiscally-Constrained Long-Range 

Transportation Plan 

Decision Making Considerations 

Local Needs & Priorities 

Regional Needs & Priorities 

Technical Evaluation 

Money Mix 

TIP 

Project 

Development 

Process 

CE (~90%) 

EA (~5%) 

EIS (~5%) 

It is also important to note that this approach allows for varying levels of project information and 

assessment at the two key decision making points in the planning process – the LRTP and the TIP. 

Integrating technical project evaluation with transportation investment categories and the use of line 

items allows for technical evaluation at the long-range plan level to focus on larger capacity-adding 


4 - 24


types of projects, with technical evaluation for other types of projects conducted during TIP 

development. This keeps data management practical and workable. 

Potential investment mixes were also developed to recognize projects that have already been committed 

to and have progressed in the TIP through various stages of the project development process. Thus, 

investment options were built to look toward the future vision of the region while recognizing the reality 

of current programming commitments and the necessity to make adjustments in investment priorities 

over time. 

Transportation Modal 

Investments 

The following sections of this plan 

include detailed strategies, projects, and 

programs that have been developed for 

each of the major transportation 

investment areas in order to achieve the 

overall plan policy statements associated 

with the Regional Vision Scenario (see 

Section 5). 

The primary mechanism used by the 

LRTP to bridge the gap between maintenance-driven needs identified in current TIP programming and 

the vision and policy-led orientation of future investment strategies are the reserve line items in LRTP 

Stages 2 and 3 that budget increased resources to transportation operations and safety strategies in lieu 

of more expensive new capacity investments that are unattainable within the fiscal limitations of the 

2040 Plan. 

The 2040 Plan continues the conscious effort by the region’s planning partners in the 2035 Plan to focus 

available resources on maintenance needs in order to address serious deficiencies that threaten the 

region’s transportation infrastructure. Even with this “maintenance first” approach, the level of 

transportation need continues to exceed available funding by a substantial margin. In recent years 

highway and bridge spending has been elevated by high levels of revenues from PA Act 44 as well as 

federal economic stimulus monies, temporarily allowing the region to not only to keep up with the aging 

roads and bridges as they reach the end of their service life, but also to reduce somewhat the region’s 

significant backlog of structurally deficient bridges. Without the stimulus monies, however, and faced 

with reduced Act 44 funding because the option to toll I-80 was not able to gain federal approval, it is 

projected that the region will again be losing ground to increased costs and that system condition will 

further deteriorate from already low averages. 

Unfunded needs and revenue options are discussed further in the final section of this chapter. 


4 - 25


Highways and Bridges 

Specific projects are identified in Figures 4.10 to 4.13. The projects are also listed and mapped within 

each PennDOT District in Appendix A. They are designated within three planning periods: the TIP 

(2011-2014), LRTP Stage 2 (2015-2022) and LRTP Stage 3 (2023-2040). A number of projects span 

two or even all three periods. 

A portion of the available funding that will be used for roadway and bridge maintenance has not been 

designated at this time towards specific projects. It has been set aside in maintenance “reserve line 

items” of three types: roadway capital maintenance, bridge capital maintenance and traffic operations 

and safety. This reserved funding will be used to add projects to the transportation program in future 

TIP funding cycles when the immediate needs for bridge rehabilitations, highway resurfacing, etc. will 

be more clearly known. This flexibility is an important tool that allows PennDOT to more effectively 

manage a maintenance backlog that significantly exceeds available revenues. Projects will be added to 

the TIP at that time using the project selection and project evaluation processes described in the previous 

section. 

New capacity projects during Stage 2 and Stage 3 are listed individually in Figure 4.13. A number of 

small new projects that are scheduled to be completed in the TIP period are not listed by name. These 

are included in a record called “Other New Capacity Projects in the TIP Period. 


4 - 26


Figure 4.10 LRTP Investments - Roadway Capital Maintenance (millions of dollars) 

Project 

Roadway Capital Maintenance 

Location 

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Total 

2011-2014 2015-2022 2023-2040 

S.R. 28, Creighton to Butler County Line Allegheny 24.8 24.8 

S.R. 50, Washington County Line to Miller 

Run 

S.R. 65, Ft. Duquesne Bridge to California 

Ave 

Allegheny 7.5 7.5 15.0 

Allegheny 45.0 45.0 

S.R. 3069 Liberty Tunnel Rehabilitation Allegheny 18.7 21.2 39.9 

Allegheny Riverfront Infrastructure Projects Allegheny 6.1 32.3 38.4 

Pittsburgh CBD Street Reconstruction Allegheny 36.8 76.6 113.4 

S.R. 28 Hays Run 3R Armstrong 8.2 8.2 

S.R. 51, S.R. 168 to Ohio State Line Beaver 7.0 7.0 14.0 

S.R. 51 Reconstruction, Allegheny County 

Line to Uniontown 

S.R. 21 Masontown Bridge Roadway 

Reconstruction 

Fayette 249.5 249.5 

Greene 6.7 6.7 

U.S. 22 / S.R. 217 Interchange Indiana 22.8 22.8 

S.R. 18 Betterment Lawrence 8.3 8.3 16.5 

S.R. 56 Pavement Preservation Westmoreland 10.2 50.2 60.4 

S.R. 119 Reconstruction, Fayette County Line 

to I-70 

S.R. 119 Interchange Reconstruction at S.R. 

819 

Westmoreland 120.9 120.9 

Westmoreland 16.6 7.8 24.4 

S.R. 981 @ Kennametal Westmoreland 12.4 12.4 

S.R. 981 Laurel Valley Transportation 

Improvements 

Roadway Capital Maintenance Reserve Line 

Item for Armstrong, Butler and Indiana 

Counties 


Item for Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence 

Counties 


Item for Fayette, Greene, Washington and 

Westmoreland Counties 


Region 29.4 156.2 479.4 665.0 

Region 138.4 288.6 1,495.8 1,922.8 

Region 9.1 122.6 490.5 622.1 


4 - 27


Figure 4.11 LRTP Investments - Traffic Operations and Safety (millions of dollars) 

Project 

Location 

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 

2011-2014 2015-2022 2023-2040 

Total 

Traffic Operations and Safety 

U.S. 19 Improvements / Pine Creek to 

Wallace 

S.R. 51 / S.R. 88 Intersection 

Improvements 

I-279 Parkway North Operational 

Improvements 

I-376 Parkway East Operational 

Improvements 

I-376 Parkway West Operational 

Improvements 


Traffic Signal System Upgrades 

Painters Run Road, Bower Hill Rd to Robb 

Hollow 






Allegheny 14.6 14.4 44.6 73.6 


S.R. 28 Goheenville Dip Armstrong 10.9 10.9 

SR 356 Freeport Bridge Ramps Armstrong 6.4 6.4 

US-422 Theater Road Realignment Armstrong 11.4 11.4 

US-422 Wray Road Cut Armstrong 14.0 14.0 

US-422 Kittanning Elementary School 

Intersection 

Armstrong 9.5 9.5 

US-422 Dutch Run Road Intersection Armstrong 11.4 11.4 

U.S. 30 Upgrade, West Virginia State Line 

to S.R. 168 

Beaver 7.0 7.0 

Freedom Road Upgrade, Phases B and C Beaver 0.0 19.4 20.5 39.9 

SR-228 Pittsburgh Street Intersection Butler 11.7 11.7 

SR-228 Three Degree Road Intersection Butler 14.8 14.8 

SR-228 Balls Bend Safety Butler 11.2 11.2 

S.R. 21, Masontown to Thompson's 

Crossroads, intersection improvements 

and safety upgrades 

U.S. 19 Safety Improvements Phase 1 

(Morrisville) 

Fayette 10.0 19.7 74.4 104.1 

Greene 4.1 24.6 28.7 

S.R. 21, Morrisville Corridor Phase 2 Greene 19.0 19.0 

S.R. 56 United High School Curve Indiana 8.4 8.4 


4 - 28


Project 

Location 


2011-2014 2015-2022 2023-2040 

Total 

Traffic Operations and Safety (continued) 

U.S. 119 Grove Chapel Climbing Lane Indiana 16.3 16.3 

U.S. 119 Wake Robin Curve Indiana 26.7 26.7 

U.S. 422, Armstrong County Line to 

Indiana Bypass, intersection improvements 

and safety upgrades 

S.R. 19 Corridor Safety and Congestion 

Improvements 

S.R. 30 Corridor Safety and Congestion 

Improvements 

Traffic Operations and Safety Line Item 

for Armstrong, Butler and Indiana Counties 

Traffic Operations and Safety Line Item 

for Allegheny, Beaver and Lawrence 

Counties 

Traffic Operations and Safety Line Item for 

Fayette, Greene, Washington and 

Westmoreland Counties 

Indiana 17.1 44.6 61.7 

Washington 25.3 123.7 149.0 

Westmoreland 9.4 42.1 62.9 114.4 

Region 12.4 101.3 176.7 290.4 

Region 64.0 330.1 1,213.7 1,607.7 

Region 55.5 68.5 422.8 546.9 


4 - 29


Figure 4.12 LRTP Investments - Bridge Capital Maintenance (millions of dollars) 

Project 

Location 


2011-2014 2015-2022 2023-2040 

Total 

Bridge Capital Maintenance 

S.R. 8 Butler Street Bridge over Heths 

Run 

U.S. 30 Ardmore Blvd Bridge over 

Electric Ave 

S.R. 51 West Carson Street Viaduct 

Replacement 

S.R. 65 Marshall Interchange 

Rehabilitation 

S.R. 2085 Birmingham Bridge 







S.R. 3069 Liberty Bridge Preservation Allegheny 1.0 40.0 41.0 

S.R. 3104 McKees Rocks Bridge 

Phase 2 


Glenwood Interchange Bridges Allegheny 13.0 12.7 25.7 

Triboro Interchange Bridges Allegheny 23.5 23.5 

6th Street Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 15.3 7.7 23.0 

7th Street Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 23.0 23.0 

9th Street Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 23.0 23.0 

Charles Anderson Bridge Allegheny 19.8 19.8 

Coraopolis Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 16.0 16.0 

Dookers Hollow Bridge Allegheny 15.0 15.0 

Fleming Park Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 15.0 15.0 

Glenwood Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 19.0 19.0 

Greenfield Avenue #39 Bridge 

Replacement 

Greensburg Pike Bridge 

Reconstruction / Turtle Creek 

Allegheny 1.9 16.9 18.8 


Mansfield Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 28.7 7.0 35.7 

S. 10th Street Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 24.4 24.4 

Sixteenth Street Bridge Rehabilitation Allegheny 18.0 18.0 

S.R. 351 Koppel Bridge Replacement Beaver 19.3 15.1 34.4 


4 - 30


Project 

Bridge Capital Maintenance 

(continued) 

Aliquippa-Ambridge Bridge 


Location 


2011-2014 2015-2022 2023-2040 

Total 

Beaver 21.4 21.4 

Veterans Memorial Bridge Beaver 26.8 26.8 

S.R. 228 Mars Railroad Bridge 

Replacement 

Butler 19.2 19.2 

S.R. 711 Crawford Avenue Bridge Fayette 44.6 44.6 

S.R. 4038 Layton Bridge Fayette 69.6 69.6 

U.S. 119 Home Railroad Bridge Indiana 19.1 19.1 

S.R. 18 Mahoning Ave over 

Shenango River Bridge Replacement 

Lawrence 20.6 20.6 

S.R. 224 State Street Bridge Lawrence 15.3 15.3 

S.R. 1022 Donora-Webster Bridge Washington 33.4 33.4 

S.R. 2067 Brownsville Low Level 

Bridge 

Washington 60.5 60.5 

U.S. 119 Jacobs Creek Bridge Westmoreland 29.1 29.1 

S.R. 130 Trafford Bridge 

Replacement 


S.R. 136 West Newton Bridge Westmoreland 20.5 20.5 

S.R. 217 Derry Borough Bridge 

Replacement 

Westmoreland 17.6 6.1 23.7 

S.R. 356 Freeport Bridge Westmoreland 53.7 53.7 

S.R. 1060 Salina Bridge Westmoreland 14.6 14.6 

Bridge Capital Maintenance Reserve 

Line Item for Armstrong, Butler and 

Indiana Counties 


Line Item for Allegheny, Beaver and 

Lawrence Counties 


Line Item for Fayette, Greene, 

Washington and Westmoreland 

Counties 

Region 166.6 244.5 807.8 1,218.9 

Region 296.6 572.9 2,990.4 3,859.9 

Region 150.7 358.2 1,418.9 1,927.8 


4 - 31


Figure 4.13 LRTP Investments - New Capacity, Highways and Bridges (millions of dollars) 

Project 

New Capacity, Highways and 

Bridges 

S.R. 28 Widening / I-579 to East 

Ohio Street 

S.R. 28, Troy Hill to 31st Street 

Bridge 

S.R. 286 Widening, S.R. 22 to S.R. 

380 

Location 

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Total 

2011-2014 2015-2022 

2023- 


2011- 




Allegheny 0.0 66.2 27.0 93.2 

S.R. 2031 Lincoln Way Improvement Allegheny 10.1 10.1 

S.R. 2082 Hulton Road Bridge 

Replacement 

Allegheny 24.8 76.4 101.2 

Campbells Run Road Improvements Allegheny 1.2 19.6 20.8 

Freedom Road Upgrade, Phase A 

(Crow's Run Improvements) 

Beaver 2.6 31.9 34.5 

I-79 Missing Ramps at S.R. 3025 Butler 5.0 5.0 

S.R. 228 Ramps to I-79 Butler 13.7 13.7 

SR-228 Mars Railroad Bridge West Butler 82.7 82.7 

U.S. 422 Moraine State Park Access Butler 10.0 10.0 

Rose Street Extension 2 Indiana 28.0 28.0 

S.R. 21 Masontown Bridge Fayette 60.8 60.8 

S.R. 21 Improvements, Thompsons 

Crossroads 

I-79 Meadowlands Interchange 

Completion 

Fayette 10.0 4.9 14.9 

Washington 31.4 31.4 

I-79 Meadowlands Auxiliary Lanes Washington 19.2 19.2 

Other New Capacity Projects for TIP 

Period for Armstrong, Butler and 

Indiana Counties 


Period for Allegheny, Beaver and 

Lawrence Counties 


Period for Fayette, Greene, 

Washington and Westmoreland 

Counties 

Region 5.1 5.1 

Region 18.7 18.7 

Region 31.7 31.7 


4 - 32


Revenues have been set aside from several additional Title I funding programs for projects that will be 

selected as part of future TIP Update processes: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program 

(CMAQ), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), Transportation Enhancement Program (TE) 

and Rail Safety Program (RRX). Reserve line items are identified at the regional level for LRTP Stage 

2 and LRTP Stage 3. Funding in Stage 1, the TIP, has already been designated for specific projects that 

appear in the 2011-2014 TIP. Figure 4.14 identifies the Regional Line Item funding levels. 

Figure 4.14 Regional Line Items 

Funding Source 

(in millions) 

LRTP Stage 1 

2011-2014 TIP 

LRTP Stage 2 

2015-2022 TIP 

LRTP Stage 3 

2023-2040 TIP 

Total 

2011-2040 

Safety $38.3 $92.2 $307.5 $438.0 

CMAQ $102.7 $247.4 $825.3 $1,175.5 

TE $19.4 $46.7 $155.9 $222.0 

RRX $7.3 $17.5 $58.4 $83.1 

Interstate Maintenance Program 

SPC’s prior Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and Long Range Transportation Plans have 

included the Interstate Maintenance Program for the region as part of the Federal Highway Program. 

This program has since been split into a separate State-managed activity, and PennDOT now manages 

the Interstate Maintenance Program from Harrisburg. 

The current list of interstate 

projects in the region that are 

funded through PennDOT’s 

Interstate Maintenance Program 

is identified in SPC’s 2011-2014 

TIP. The TIP interstate total is 

$379 million. 

PennDOT is now responsible for 

assembling the statewide 

Interstate Long Range 

Transportation Plan that will 

identify projects and estimated 

revenues in accordance with 

federal planning requirements. 

SPC includes this information in 

the 2040 Transportation and 

Development Plan for planning 


4 - 33


use within the region. The PennDOT Twelve Year Interstate Capital Plan appears in Appendix E. SPC 

will continue to monitor the Statewide Interstate Maintenance Plan for information purposes and for 

programming through the TIP. 

Public Transportation 

At the time of this update to the region’s Long Range Transportation Plan, the state of transit projects 

and services within the region could fairly be characterized as “unsettled.” Funding sources at the 

Federal and Commonwealth levels are in an extreme state of flux. The Commonwealth’s Act 44 

legislation was designed to provide predictable and adequate sources of funding for transit system 

preservation and expansion across Pennsylvania. The projected revenue sources for that funding have 

not materialized and the Commonwealth has not yet addressed the resulting shortfall. At the Federal 

level the continuation of the current transportation authorization (SAFETEA-LU) at FY 2009 funding 

levels has not allowed transit project sponsors to keep pace with increased costs. These funding issues 

have created a regional transit environment characterized by cuts in services, deferral of capital 

maintenance and postponement of capital investment. In order to balance budgets and keep viable levels 

of service, the region’s transit project sponsors have been forced to cut costs and utilize non-traditional, 

emergency funding sources. Even the most optimistic funding and spending projections looking at only 

the formula funds available (see the Transit Funding section of this document) shows insufficient 

funding for the first four years of the planning period and a substantial gap across the period (Figure 

4.15). 

Figure 4.15 Transit Funding Gap 

Transit Funding Gap 

Notes: Assumes project costs will increase 3% per year. Federal funding assumed to increase 3% per year. State funding assumed to be flat over 30 years. 

FEDERAL 2011 2012 2013 2014 2039 2040 30‐Year Total 

Urban (5307) Funding $ 33,282,000 $ 34,613,000 $ 35,998,000 $ 37,437,000 $ 78,384,764 $ 80,736,307 $ 1,627,939,550 

TIP Projects $ 41,271,533 $ 39,806,543 $ 38,272,200 $ 38,611,336 $ 83,896,529 $ 86,413,425 $ 1,749,104,768 

Surplus/Deficit ‐$7,989,533 ‐$5,193,543 ‐$2,274,200 ‐$1,174,336 ‐$5,511,765 ‐$5,677,118 ‐$121,165,217 

Running Total ‐$7,989,533 ‐$13,183,076 ‐$15,457,276 ‐$16,631,612 ‐$115,488,100 ‐$121,165,217 

STATE 2011 2012 2013 2014 2039 2040 30‐Year Total 

State Capital Funding $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $ 9,482,000 $284,460,000 

State Capital Projects $ 10,898,000 $ 10,689,000 $ 9,932,000 $ 10,695,000 $ 22,153,390 $ 22,817,992 $ 462,365,054 

Surplus/Deficit ‐$1,416,000 ‐$1,207,000 ‐$450,000 ‐$1,213,000 ‐$12,671,390 ‐$13,335,992 ‐$177,905,054 

Running Total ‐$1,416,000 ‐$2,623,000 ‐$3,073,000 ‐$4,286,000 ‐$164,569,063 ‐$177,905,054 

Total 30‐Year Gap: ‐$299,070,272 


4 - 34


Given the current state of affairs, it is important to note that despite 

the funding shortfalls, in FY 2010, public transit providers in the 

region provided over 60 million rides on fixed-route buses and rail 

vehicles, moving people to jobs and other life activities. Other types 

of alternative mobility providers – County-sponsored shared ride 

programs, human service transportation programs, the region’s 

volunteer ride-sharing vanpools and carpools – provided an 

estimated 4 to 6 million additional rides. 

All together these services accounted for approximately 

1.5% of all trips taken throughout the region. For public transit to support the broader land use and 

transportation vision for the region, it is imperative to grow this mode share percentage. At this point, 

the sponsors of publicly-funded transit programs as well as other creative and forward-thinking mobility 

stakeholders are poised to advance planning and projects to contribute to that growth if increased and 

more predictable sources of funding are found. 

Figure 4.16 Transit Projects in 2011-2014 TIP 

Fixed-Route Transit Providers in 

Southwestern Pennsylvania: 

Beaver County Transit Authority 

Butler Transit Authority 

Fayette Area Coordinated Transportation 

Indiana County Transit Authority 

Mid-Mon Valley Transit Authority 

New Castle Transit Authority 

Port Authority of Allegheny County 

Town and Country Transit 

Washington City Transit 

Westmoreland County Transit Authority 

Project Title Sponsor Project Type Project Cost 

Downtown Pittsburgh ‐ Oakland ‐ 

East End BRT Study 

PAAC 

Operating/Capital‐Bus Rapid 

Transit $1,500,000 

SMART TRID (South Hills Junction, 

Beechview) 

City of 

Pittsburgh Capital‐Facilities/Nodes/TOD $225,000 

East Liberty TRID 

City of 

Pittsburgh Capital‐Facilities/Nodes/TOD $75,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ McKeesport 

Transportation Center 

(Renovation) PAAC Capital‐Facilities/Nodes/TOD $1,500,000 

Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland 

BRT Shelters PAAC Capital‐Facilities/Nodes/TOD $2,000,000 

Station Access Improvements‐ 

Negley Station Pedestrian Bridge PAAC Capital‐Facilities/Nodes/TOD $2,000,000 

Station Access Improvements‐ 

South Hills Junction Steps PAAC Capital‐Facilities/Nodes/TOD $500,000 

Keystone West Rail Study: 

Pittsburgh to Harrisburg PennDOT Passenger Rail ‐ Intercity $1,500,000 

Washington County Transit 

Visioning 

MMVTA, 

WASH, WCT 

Feasibility Assessment/Special 

Study $25,000 

Allegheny Valley Green Blvd. 

City of 

Pittsburgh, 

URA 

Feasibility Assessment/Special 

Study $2,000,000 

Regional Smart Card REGION Technology $3,000,000 

Regional Transit Trip Planner REGION Technology $500,000 

Transit Priority Signalization 

City of 

Pittsburgh Technology $1,000,000 


4 - 35


Figure 4.16 above shows a some of the currently approved and funded projects appearing in the region’s 

transit portion of the TIP. The list represents an extraordinary effort on the part of the region’s transit 

project sponsors to “move forward” and plan for the future in the midst of a struggle to fund viable 

levels of transit service and system maintenance. Most of these projects are modest capital facilities 

improvements and studies meant to identify more substantial system improvements in the future. 

Example key projects include: 

 

 

 

 

Alternative Analysis Study between Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland (PAAC) 

Regional Smart Card Automatic Fare Collection System Project (six of the regions’ transit 

service providers) 

City of Pittsburgh TRID Studies in East Liberty and the South Hills 

Keystone West Rail Study – (PennDOT) 

Though not appearing on the list in Figure 4.17, it is notable that one of the most significant transit 

projects ever to be implemented in the region is nearing completion during this period. The expansion 

of the Port Authority of Allegheny County’s light rail system – The 

North Shore Connector – is slated for opening in early 2012. The 1.2 

mile extension of the system will offer benefits to commuters and 

also bring light rail into an area that is now rich in entertainment, 

educational and corporate destinations. The project has been 

financed primarily with the help of competitive Federal and 

Commonwealth funding and includes three new stations on the North 

Shore and downtown. 

In addition to creatively programmed and previously funded projects, the region’s transit project 

sponsors have worked to conceptualize future system improvements. Given adequate and as-yetunidentified 

sources of funding, potential expansions of fixed-route bus service, fixed guideway 

expansions, corridor improvements, new customer facilities and transit oriented development 

opportunities have been identified (see Figure 4.17). Potential future study efforts have been identified 

as well. Currently, various strategies for funding this broad vision of future improvements have been 

advanced. The Pennsylvania Transportation Funding and Reform Commission has suggested a number 

of potential solutions to the Commonwealth’s transportation funding gap and Federal legislators are 

exploring many new options that could be part of the next Federal transportation authorization. 


4 - 36


Figure 4.17 Future Transit Projects in SPC Region 

Projects on 2011‐ 

2014 TIP 

Transit Projects 

(Project costs in 

$000's) 

Project Title Sponsor Time Frame Project Type Project Cost 

Allegheny Valley Green Blvd. 

City of 

Pittsburgh/URA Short Term 

Feasibility 

Assessment/Special Study $2,000 

Downtown Pittsburgh ‐ Oakland ‐ East End 

BRT Study PAAC Short Term 

Operating/Capital‐Bus Rapid 

Transit $1,500 

Downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland BRT 

Shelters PAAC Short Term Capital‐Facilities $2,000 

East Liberty TRID City of Pittsburgh Short Term 

Feasibility 

Assessment/Special Study $75 

Keystone West Rail Study: Pittsburgh to 

Harrisburg PennDOT Short Term Passenger Rail ‐ Intercity $1,500 

Regional Smart Card REGION Short Term Technology $3,000 

Regional Transit Trip Planner REGION Short Term Technology $500 

SMART TRID (South Hills Junction, 

Feasibility 

Beechview) City of Pittsburgh Short Term Assessment/Special Study $250 

Station Access Improvements‐Negley 

Station Pedestrian Bridge PAAC Short Term Capital‐Facilities $2,000 

Station Access Improvements‐South Hills 

Junction Steps PAAC Short Term Capital‐Facilities $500 

Transfer Facility ‐ McKeesport 

Transportation Center (Renovation) PAAC Short Term 

Park & Ride/Transfer 

Facilities $1,500 

Transit Priority Signalization City of Pittsburgh Short Term Technology $1,000 

Feasibility 

Washington County Transit Visioning MMVTA/WASH/WCT Short Term Assessment/Special Study $25 

Unmet Needs 

Federal Funding Gap* 


BCTA, FACT, MMVTA, 

PAAC, SPC, WASH, 

WCTA Long Term Other $121,165 

State Funding Gap* REGION Long Term Other $177,905 

* See Figure 4.15 (page 4-34) 


4 - 37


Potential Future 

Investments 

Illustrative Studies (Project Costs in $ 000) 


Ambridge TOD BCTA Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $250 

Manchester/Chateau/North Side LRT 

Development District City of Pittsburgh Short Term Feasibility Assessment/Special Study $200 

New Castle TOD NCATA Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $100 

Pittsburgh Urban Circulator Transit 

Development District City of Pittsburgh Short Term Feasibility Assessment/Special Study $200 

Regional AVL REGION Short Term Technology $50 

Regional Mobility Website REGION Short Term Technology $100 

Regional Shared‐Ride System REGION Mid Term Feasibility Assessment/Special Study $150 

Regional Transit Marketing/Customer 

Information System REGION Short Term Feasibility Assessment/Special Study $100 

Route 51 Corridor TOD Intervention 

PAAC/City of Pittsburgh/Rt. 

51 Committee Short Term Feasibility Assessment/Special Study $500 

Potential Service 

Expansions (Project Costs in $ 000) 


Atwood/Kittanning/Freeport TACT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $206 

Beaver County to New 

Castle/Youngstown/Grove City BCTA/NCATA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $521 

Butler to Cranberry to Pittsburgh BTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $240 

Butler to Rt.528 to Pittsburgh Rt.68 

Corridor BTA Short Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $240 

California to Downtown Pittsburgh MMVTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Charleroi to New Stanton MMVTA/WCT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Community Circulators ‐ Rochester 

/Aliquippa /Ambridge/Beaver 

Falls/New Brighton BCTA Longer Range Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $629 

Cranberry Circulator BTA Longer Range Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $240 

Cranberry to Downtown Pittsburgh BTA Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $357,000 

East Busway Extension to East 

Pittsburgh/Turtle Creek PAAC Long Term Capital‐Fixed Guideway $250,000 

Elwood City to Beaver Falls BCTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $629 

Freeport to Downtown Pittsburgh TACT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $206 

Greensburg/Delmont to 

Blairsville/Indiana ICTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Grove City/Slippery Rock to Butler BTA Longer Range Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $240 

Hookstown to BCTA Travel Center BCTA Short Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $629 

Marianna/Centerville to California MMVTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Monaca/Beaver Falls/New 

Brighton/Midland BCTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $629 

New Castle to Erie NCATA Longer Range Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $413 

New Castle to Slippery Rock NCATA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $413 

New Galilee to Beaver Falls BCTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $629 

North Apollo/Freeport TACT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $206 


4 - 38


Penn Incline PGH Mid Term Capital‐Fixed Guideway $10,000 

Pittsburgh Urban Circulator Phase 1 ‐ 

Lawrenceville to Strip District PGH Mid Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $50,000 


Hazelwood to Lawrenceville PGH Mid Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $50,000 


Strip District through Downtown PGH Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $50,000 


Downtown to Hazelwood PGH Longer Range Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $50,000 


South Oakland to Second Avenue PGH Longer Range Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $50,000 

Rochester to Cranberry BCTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $629 

Rostraver Township/Route 51 to 

Pittsburgh MMVTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Saltsburg to Blairsville ICTA Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Saxonburg to Cranberry BTA Longer Range Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $240 

Slippery Rock University Circulator BTA Longer Range Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $240 

Uniontown to Morgantown, WV FACT Short Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Washington to Bentleyville/Charleroi WCT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Washington to Burgettstown WCT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Washington to Canonsburg WCT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Washington to West Alexander WCT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Waynesburg to Morgantown GREENE Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

Waynesburg to Washington GREENE Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $150 

West Busway Extension to I‐79 PAAC Long Term Capital‐Fixed Guideway $50,000 

Worthington/Kittanning/Freeport TACT Mid Term Operating‐Fixed Route Bus Service $206 

Potential Facility 

Expansions/Stations/Transit Centers (Project Costs in $ 000) 


Administrative/Maintenance Facility ‐ Kittanning TACT Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Bloomfield‐Lawrenceville Iron City Station 

Development ‐ Pittsburgh Urban Circulator PGH Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Century III/West Mifflin Transit Station & TOD 

PAAC/Rt.51 

Committee Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Cranberry Intermodal Facility BTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Downtown TOD/Pedestrian Connections to Park‐n‐ 

Ride/Courthouse NCATA Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

East Pittsburgh Bike/Ped Community Connections 

(East Busway) PGH Short Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $2,000 

Martin Luther King, Jr., East Busway , 21 st Street 

Transit Station PGH Mid Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor TBD 

Expanded Intermodal Transit Center – Charleroi MMVTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Expanded Intermodal Transit Center – Greensburg WCTA Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Expanded Intermodal Transit Center ‐ New Castle NCATA Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Improved Intermodal Transit Center in Butler BTA Short Term Capital‐Facilities $4,875 

Intermodal Transit Center at New Kensington WCTA Long Term Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Intermodal Transit Center in Aliquippa BCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Intermodal Transit Center in Beaver Falls BCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Intermodal Transit Center in Vanport/Brighton BCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

New Transit Center in Washington WCT Short Term Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

North Pittsburgh Bike/Ped Community Connections 

(LRT) PGH Short Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $2,000 


4 - 39


Oakland/ CMU Station Development ‐ Pittsburgh 

Urban Circulator PGH Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Oakland/UPMC Shadyside Station Development ‐ 

Pittsburgh Urban Circulator PGH Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $4,000 

Pittsburgh Grand Central ‐ Greyhound/Amtrak/PAAC 

Connector PGH Mid Term Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

South Pittsburgh Bike/Ped Community Connections 

(LRT and South Busway) PGH Short Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $2,000 

Transit Center ‐ Latrobe WCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Transit Center ‐ Mount Pleasant WCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Transit Center ‐ Murrysville WCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Transit Center ‐ New Stanton/Youngwood WCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Transit Center ‐ North Huntingdon WCTA Longer Range Capital‐Facilities $5,000 

Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Facility – 

Greensburg WCTA Short Term Capital‐Facilities $2,785 

West Pittsburgh Bike/Ped Community Connections 

(LRT and West Busway) PGH Short Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor $2,000 

New East Busway Station: Baum‐Centre Corridor PAAC Long Term Capital‐Facilities $8,600 

Potential Park & Ride/Transfer 

Facilities (Project Costs in $ 000) 


Park‐n‐Ride ‐ 62nd Street Loop (Lawrenceville) PAAC Short Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,500 

Park‐n‐Ride ‐ Allison Park PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,500 

Park‐n‐Ride ‐ Brentwood PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,500 

Park‐n‐Ride ‐ Center Place and/or Green Garden BCTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $1,500 

Park‐n‐Ride ‐ Penn Hills PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,500 

Park‐n‐Ride ‐ Wikinsburg/Swissvale PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,500 

Park‐n‐Ride Expansion ‐ Carnegie PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $1,500 

Transfer Facility ‐ Bellevue PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Bentleyville MMVTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Blairsville ICTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Brownsville FACT Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ California MMVTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Canonsburg WCT Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Connellsville FACT Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Delmont WCTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Donaldson’s Crossroad WCT Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ East Pittsburgh PAAC Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Freeport TACT Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Homestead PAAC Short Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $4,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ McCandless PAAC Short Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $4,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Monongahela MMVTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Monroeville Mall PAAC Short Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $4,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ North Apollo TACT Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $2,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Robinson Town Centre PAAC Short Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $4,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Ross Township PAAC Short Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $4,000 

Transfer Facility ‐ Slippery Rock BTA Longer Range Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $1,700 

Transfer Facility ‐ Wilkinsburg East Busway Station PAAC Mid Term Park & Ride/Transfer Facilities $4,000 


4 - 40


Alternative Service Types 

In the Southwestern Pennsylvania region, transit is more 

than merely fixed-route bus and rail service. There are a 

number of alternative programs and projects that utilize 

public funding to support a broad array of regional 

strategies to provide alternatives to single occupancy 

vehicle trips. 

County-Sponsored Shared Ride and Community Transit 

Programs: 

County-sponsored shared-ride providers: 

County 

Provider 

Allegheny 

Armstrong 

Pennsylvania’s Shared-Ride transportation program 

subsidizes demand-response, door-to-door transportation 

services in every county of the Commonwealth. These 

services are subsidized by various transportation funding 

Westmoreland 

Westmoreland 

Westmoreland 

Manor Valley Taxi, Inc. 

Tri-County Access 

Veteran's Cab Co., Inc. 

programs including the Commonwealth’s Lottery-funded Senior Citizen Transportation Program. The 

County-sponsored shared ride services in the region provided over 2.5 million rides during 2010, over 

half of those provided to members of the region’s older population. Allegheny County’s ACCESS 

program, administered by the Port Authority of Allegheny County, is the one of the oldest specialized 

transportation brokerage firms in the country and the second largest provider of these types of transit 

services in the Commonwealth. 

Beaver 

Butler 

Fayette 

Greene 

Indiana 

Lawrence 

Washington 

Westmoreland 

Westmoreland 

Port Authority of Allegheny County/ACCESS 

Town & Country Transit 


Butler County Community Action 

Fayette Area Coordinated Transportation 

Greene County Transportation Department 

Indiana County Transportation Authority 

Allied Coordinated Transportation Services, 

Inc. 

Washington County Transportation Authority 

Byers Taxi Service, Inc. 

Greensburg Yellow Cab 

The Transportation Management Associations: 

 

 

 

The Airport Corridor Transportation Management Association (ACTA) is located at Robinson 

Town Centre in Pittsburgh's western suburbs and serves the business community located along 

the Parkway West from the western portal of the Fort Pitt Tunnel through Beaver County. 

ACTA members receive benefit from a number of services including help with transportation 

issues that affect businesses, weekly construction updates, and quarterly membership meetings. 

ACTA also helps local workers and job seekers find a way to work through a number of travel 

options including the rideACTA shuttle service that provides “last mile” service connecting 

workers reverse commuting from downtown Pittsburgh via Port Authority buses to employment 

within the corridor. 

The Oakland Transportation Management Association (OTMA) is located in the Oakland area 

of the City of Pittsburgh. Working with the vital business, medical and higher education 

communities into Oakland, OTMA engages in multiple transportation demand management 

activities that help workers, commuters, students and visitors negotiate the many transportation 

challenges within one of the region’s most congested areas. 

The Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership TMA (PDP) located in the heart of the region’s central 

business district offers information and services designed to help people utilize all the 

alternatives to single occupancy vehicle travel including car-sharing, bike and car pooling, as 


4 - 41


well as public transit. The PDP also provides valuable information and services regarding 

parking in downtown. 

The region’s three TMAs are funded through a variety of sources including special funding from 

PennDOT and SPC through the Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program. 

The Accessible Transportation Workforce Interagency Cooperative (ATWIC): 

Since 2005, three organizations within the region – SPC, the Port Authority of Allegheny County and 

the Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board (TRWIB) have formally cooperated to build support for a 

more focused regional approach to implement integrated transportation and workforce development 

strategies in support of economic development and employment growth. Activity is conducted through 

ATWIC Task Force made up of stakeholders from human service and transportation agencies 

throughout the region. The primary purpose of ATWIC is to direct funding decisions to project 

sponsors who are eligible to receive funding from the Federal Job Access and Reverse Commute 

(JARC) and New Freedoms programs. These funding sources provide public funding for transportation 

projects related to employment opportunities for low income and entry-level employees as well as 

people with mobility limitations. In 2010-11, twelve different projects utilized over $2 million of 

Federal funding to provide a variety of different transportation services. Special “last-mile” type shuttle 

services, extended hours of fixed-route transit service, subsidies for transit trips and automobile 

purchases and the implementation of technological solutions to scheduling and dispatching of vehicles 

were all part of this integrated program. In addition ATWIC provides important implementation 

oversight for the region’s Public Transit Human Service Coordinated Transportation Plan, the Federallyrequired 

planning document that lays out the long-range plan and strategies for these programs. 

The CommuteInfo Program: 

SPC supports and manages the region’s volunteer vanpool transit service. The CommuteInfo program 

also provides a wide variety of ridesharing information and personalized services; carpool and bikepool 

matching; public transportation and park-n-ride lot information; and, commuter education. The program 

is coordinated in partnership with the region’s TMA’s fixed-route transit providers, businesses and nonprofit 

service organizations. The program is designed to increase the number of people who travel to 

work or school by riding transit, carpooling, vanpooling or bikepooling. In 2010 CommuteInfo 

supported 43 vanpools and registered 232 carpools accounting for almost 400,000 vehicle trips. 

Land Use Planning: 

Southwestern Pennsylvania continues to be a region showing innovation in the field of Transit Oriented 

Development (TOD). Several communities are currently pursuing TOD-related projects, including TRID 

studies (Transit Revitalization Investment Districts), neighborhood TOD planning and transit 

infrastructure improvements: 

 

East Liberty, Pittsburgh: The City of Pittsburgh’s East Liberty TRID study (elTRID) holds the 

potential to become the first successful TRID in the state to capture revenue. This project is 

centered on the East Busway station and the Penn Mall bus turnout area. 


4 - 42


 

 

 

 

 

 

SMART TRID (South Hills, Pittsburgh): This study involves two neighborhoods along the 

PAAC light rail line as they look at potential development opportunities and related 

infrastructure improvements in the areas around the South Hills Junction and the Beechview 

light rail stations. 

Rochester Borough, Beaver County: Rochester was among the first communities in the state to 

complete a TRID study. The TRID planning process has lead to a series of successful projects 

sponsored by the Beaver County Transit Authority (BCTA) and PennDOT. The current project is 

the construction of a traffic roundabout in the center of the borough. 

Rt. 51 Communities, Allegheny County: In 2010, several of the communities along the SR51 

Corridor, including Baldwin, Whitehall and Jefferson Hills have allied themselves under the 

name “Economic Development South” and have taken the first steps toward starting a TRID 

study centered on the Rt. 51/Rt. 88 intersection and its proximity to the terminus of Port 

Authority of Allegheny County’s South Busway. 

West Busway Communities (Allegheny County)—Sheraden and Carnegie: In 2010 SPC and 

Allegheny County sponsored a TOD study of the communities surrounding stops on Port 

Authority’s West Busway, focusing on two: Sheraden, a City of Pittsburgh neighborhood, and 

Carnegie Borough. 

Castle Shannon (Allegheny County): A TOD project centered on the Port Authority’s light rail 

station in Castle Shannon call for a mixed-use apartment/retail building and a Port Authority 

park-and-ride structure utilizing air rights over the station. 

Mt. Lebanon/Dormont (Allegheny County): The origins of the Mt. Lebanon/Dormont TRID 

project go back to the mid 1980s, when the Mt. Lebanon Parking Authority purchased the air 

rights to develop the area above the T station. Efforts continue to advance TOD strategies to 

connect the shopping district on Washington Road down to the T station and the residential 

areas. In 2008 with the South Hills TRID Study, which looked at three stations: Potomac and 

Dormont Junction in Dormont and Mt. Lebanon Station was released. 

Transportation Operations and Safety 

As vehicle-miles of travel for both freight and passenger cars continue to increase, the cost of 

infrastructure increases, and the buying power of transportation dollars diminishes, public agencies have 

put an increased emphasis on transportation operations, which focuses on maximizing the efficiency of 

existing infrastructure. If construction equates to the creation of an asset, and maintenance relates to the 

condition of the asset, then operations deals with the performance of that asset. 

Traffic congestion results when travel demand approaches or exceeds the available capacity of the 

system. While this is a simple concept, it is not constant. Traffic demands vary significantly depending 

on the season of the year, the day of the week, and even the time of day. Also, the capacity of the 

system, often mistaken as constant, can change because of weather, work zones, traffic incidents, or 

other events. As illustrated below in Figure 4.18, a national study for the Federal Highway 

Administration indicates that only about 40% of congestion is caused by bottlenecks in the system, 

where demand is simply greater than the supply. The other 60% of congestion is caused by factors that 


4 - 43


are at least partially manageable through transportation operations activities. Furthermore, studies 

indicate that approximately 20% of traffic incidents occur as secondary events resulting from a primary 

incident. So in addition to congestion relieving benefits, transportation operations activities also provide 

safety benefits for transportation system users. 

Figure 4.18. Sources of Traffic Congestion 

Causes of Congestion 

5% 5% 

Bottlenecks 

15% 

40% 

Traffic Incidents 

Work Zones 

10% 

25% 

Bad Weather 

Poor Signal Timing 

Special Events/Other 

Source: FHWA 

Many operations initiatives and assets fall under the broad moniker of Intelligent Transportation 

Systems (ITS), which encompasses a wide range of technologies and communications-based 

information systems. In Southwestern Pennsylvania these include highway advisory radio installations, 

dynamic message signs, weather monitoring stations, RouteShout® and 511PA traveler information 

systems, closed-circuit television cameras on major roadways, a regional traffic management center, and 

the Pennsylvania Turnpike’s electronic fare collection system, EZ-Pass. The most ubiquitous 

transportation operations device in the region is the traffic signal. In Pennsylvania, traffic signals are 

permitted by the Department of Transportation, but are owned, maintained and operated by local 

municipalities. There are over 2,500 traffic signals in the SPC region, and they are distributed 

throughout more than 265 municipalities. As shown in Figure 4.19, most municipalities that operate 

traffic signals in the SPC region (>79%) have 10 or fewer signal installations, which makes maintaining 

and coordinating these systems and maximizing their effectiveness very challenging. 


4 - 44


Figure 4.19. Distribution of Traffic Signals in the SPC Region 

Municipalities w/Traffic Signals (# of signals) 

0.4% 4 or Fewer 

13.2% 

4.1% 

3.0% 

5 to 10 

11 to 20 

21 to 35 

36 to 60 

61 or More 

25.2% 

54.1% 

In 2006, SPC merged its long-standing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Steering Committee 

with its Interagency Task Force on Congestion Management to create a regional Transportation 

Operations & Safety Committee. This committee provides a centralized forum for coordinating 

transportation operations and safety planning with a diverse group of stakeholders from across the 

region. It also helps to integrate ITS, safety, and congestion management efforts and improve 

communication between practitioners in these different specialty areas. 

A key initiative of SPC’s regional Transportation Operations & Safety Committee has been the 

development of a Regional Operations Plan (ROP). The purpose of the ROP is to work toward the 

regional goal that “The region’s transportation system will be actively managed and operated to allow 

the system to function at its full potential.” This is being accomplished by building on statewide 

priorities for ITS and operations laid out by PennDOT, and tailoring this statewide direction to the 

specialized needs of the region. The Southwestern Pennsylvania ROP (see Appendices to this Report) 

has established the following regional priority areas and operational objectives: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Traffic Signals – Improve the operational efficiency and safety of traffic signals; 

Incident and Emergency Management – Manage and coordinate incident and emergency 

management activities; 

Traveler Information – Provide timely and reliable traveler information; 

Operational Teamwork – Promote institutional coordination to improve the efficiency of 

management and operations programs and initiatives; 

Intermodal Connectivity – Enhance intermodal integration and safety; 

Freeway & Arterial Operations – Implement freeway and arterial operations initiatives in an 

integrated fashion; and, 


4 - 45


 

Freight Management – Improve the operational efficiency 

and safety of freight movement within the region. 

Detailed projects, initiatives, and performance metrics to address 

each of these priority areas are included in the ROP and will be 

advanced by SPC, PennDOT, and their regional partners as part of 

ROP implementation. 

A key method for identifying corridors and locations for ROP 

implementation initiatives and pilot projects is through the region’s 

Congestion Management Process (CMP). Federal transportation 

legislation (SAFETEA-LU) requires that each metropolitan planning 

area in the United States have a CMP. The CMP is a regional 

planning tool designed to help manage congestion by identifying 

congested corridors and recommending multimodal strategies to 

facilitate the movement of people and goods. Travel time and delay 

data and first-person field observations collected as part of SPC’s 

CMP process help SPC and its planning partners understand 

congestion patterns in individual corridors as well as the overall 

climate of congestion in the region. In turn, this helps transportation 

practitioners customize congestion management strategies for 

specific corridors and subareas based on the unique needs and travel 

patterns in that part of the region. 

SPC has defined twenty-five different strategies to address both 

recurring and non-recurring congestion as part of its “congestion 

management toolbox”. These strategies can be grouped into the 

following four categories: 

Demand Management; 

Modal Options; 

Operational Improvements; and, 

Capacity. 

Demand Management programs attempt to address congestion at the 

root of the problem by reducing the number of vehicles on the road. 

These initiatives work to modify driver behavior by encouraging 

people to make fewer single-occupancy trips, travel in off-peak hours 

when possible, and support land use policies that reduce the demand 

for automobile transportation. Modal Options include techniques to 

give people transportation choices beyond just driving alone in their 

cars. These include initiatives to encourage carpooling, vanpooling, 

transit, bicycle and pedestrian modes of travel. Operational 

Improvements are geared toward improving the “supply side” of the 

transportation system. These efforts are intended to enhance the 

operation of the transportation system and make it as efficient as 

ROAD SAFETY AUDITS 

In 2009, SPC launched a regional 

Road Safety Audit (RSA) program. 

RSAs are a proactive approach to 

improving safety through the use 

of independent teams of 

engineers and planners that 

qualitatively analyze areas with 

safety concerns and identify 

opportunities for improvements. 

To date, SPC has conducted RSAs 

in the following locations: 

Franklin Road at Peters Road in 

Cranberry Twp, Butler County 

Freeport Road in Harrison Twp and 

Brackenridge Borough, Allegheny 

County 

S.R. 519 at Thomas‐Eighty Four Road 

in North Strabane Twp, Washington 

County 

S.R. 56 in Apollo Borough and 

Kiskiminetas Twp, Armstrong County 

S.R. 224 in Union Twp, Lawrence 

County 

Liberty Avenue (Strip District) in the 


S.R. 21 at Ceylon Road in 

Cumberland Twp, Greene County 

S.R. 51 in Darlington and South 

Beaver Twps, Beaver County 

S.R. 22 in Blairsville Borough and 

Burrell Twp, Indiana County 

S.R. 21 in the City of Uniontown and 

South Union Twp, Fayette County 

S.R. 68 in Butler Twp and the City of 

Butler, Butler County 


4 - 46


possible. Operational Improvements include things such as intersection upgrades, access management, 

reversible lanes, traffic signal improvements, and Intelligent Transportation Systems. Finally, Capacity 

projects include new roadways and roadway widening for additional single-occupancy vehicle lanes 

(SOVCAP). Capacity improvements are typically the last measures transportation professionals 

consider, because they are often the most expensive and can have adverse impacts on community and 

the environment. Capacity projects can also have the effect of inducing additional travel, which may 

result in the roadway becoming congested again in the future. 

As indicated previously, transportation operations and congestion reduction activities can have the 

added benefit of improving safety by reducing the number of incidents and by addressing and clearing 

incidents quickly. Active operation of the transportation system can also have security benefits. Having 

operations infrastructure and personnel functioning throughout the transportation system can help 

increase the probability of identifying security threats. And in the event of a major security incident 

such as a terrorist attack or weather-related disaster, ITS devices and operations infrastructure can be 

critical in communicating and directing transportation system users to safety. 

Federal SAFETEA-LU legislation expanded the emphasis on safety and security by untying the two 

concepts and elevating their status. One of the ways it did this was by establishing a new core Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), which is structured and funded to significantly reduce highway 

fatalities and provides states with the flexibility to target their most critical safety needs. In 

Pennsylvania, these safety needs are identified in PennDOT’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). 

The SHSP establishes a statewide goal of reducing highway fatalities by 100 per year and identifies the 

seven vital safety focus areas: 

Reducing Aggressive Driving; 

Reducing Impaired (DUI) Driving; 

Increasing Seatbelt Usage; 

Infrastructure Improvements; 

Improving Traffic Records; 

Reducing Motorcycle Crashes; and, 

Mature Driver Safety. 

Recognition of this statewide goal and progress on these focus areas requires extensive support and 

cooperation from a variety of stakeholders representing the four “E’s” of transportation safety: 

Education, Enforcement, Engineering, and Emergency Response. SPC’s broad-based regional 

Transportation Operations & Safety Committee can play an important role as a regional facilitator of 

these efforts, as well as a link to the project programming process. 

These programs have been effective in reducing highway fatalities in Pennsylvania, as illustrated in 

Figure 4.20, Traffic Fatality Trends in Southwestern Pennsylvania. 


4 - 47


Figure 4.20 Traffic Fatality Trends in Southwestern Pennsylvania 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

Traffic Fatalities 

PA 

SPC 

200 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010* 

*Preliminary Data 

Other Transportation Modes 

SPC has an active intermodal planning program that seeks to identify, support and implement initiatives 

that lead to safer and more efficient transportation options for pedestrians and bicyclists, freight 

operators and other transportation users. The development of an intermodal, multimodal transportation 

network that serves the transportation needs of all users is a key regional objective. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Network 

Southwestern Pennsylvania has an extensive network of pedestrian and bicycle routes, including 

sidewalks, rail trails and designated bike routes. 

The region’s premier trail is the Great Allegheny Passage, a 150-mile system of biking and walking 

trails connecting Pittsburgh with Cumberland, MD. In 2006, the linking of the Great Allegheny Passage 

and the C & O Canal Towpath in Cumberland, MD was completed, thereby creating a continuous nonmotorized 

corridor, from near Pittsburgh to Washington, DC, a distance of 316 miles. 

The Great Allegheny Passage was developed as a series of interconnected regional trails, including the 

Montour Trail, the Yough River Trail- North, the Yough River Trail-South and the Steel Valley Trail, 

among others. In linking these trails, a neighborhood or local resource became a regional resource. 

With the linking of the Great Allegheny Passage and the C&O Trail in Cumberland, MD., these regional 

resources became a trail of multi-state significance. 


4 - 48


The creation of a series of local trails into a regional trail network is a model that is being emulated in 

several areas of Southwestern Pennsylvania. The Ohio River Trail Council is working to establish a 

connection from the Montour Trail at Groveton, in Allegheny County, westward along the Ohio River to 

the Ohio State Line. A short extension would then permit the connection to the Lake to River Trail in 

Ohio, an effort currently underway that seeks to create a continuous trail from Lake Erie in the north to 

the Ohio River in the South. 

A similar north-south trail network is also under development in the SPC region, under the guidance of 

the Erie to Pittsburgh Trail Alliance. This consortium of trail development groups has identified a 

program of trail connections that would link Pittsburgh to Lake Erie via a major trail nexus at Freeport, 

at the juncture of Westmoreland, Allegheny, Butler and Armstrong Counties. 

To connect the City to Freeport, Friends of the Riverfront has developed a plan for the extension of the 

Three Rivers Heritage Trail from Pittsburgh to Freeport, along the north shore of the Allegheny River. 

Recent efforts to advance that trail extension include the formal opening of the Millvale Trail 

Connection in Allegheny County, and preparation of a formal plan for trail connectivity through the 17 

communities that separate the City of Pittsburgh from the Municipality of Freeport. 

These trails function as regional connectors, serving the recreation and transportation needs of local 

residents. As longer trails and trail networks evolve, recreation tourism has become an economic 

generator in communities along the trail network. 

Trails provide non-motorized transportation options for much of the year, but with only a few 

exceptions, are generally not plowed or otherwise maintained during winter. As biking and walking 

become preferred commuting options in trailside communities, provisions for winter and night time use 

of these trail facilities will need to be developed. 

Bikeways, bike lanes and sidewalks also provide transportation connections for pedestrians and 

bicyclists in the region. SPC often assists PennDOT in their completion of a Pedestrian-Bicycle 

Checklist used to identify the pedestrian and bicycle accommodations needed in association with 

specific TIP project implementation. SPC also works with local and regional planning partners in the 

development and implementation of bicycle and pedestrian plans. One such plan is ActiveAllegheny, A 

Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan for Allegheny County. 

The goal of ActiveAllegheny is to “integrate nonvehicular modes of transportation, specifically walking 

and biking, into the transportation system through creation of a comprehensive active transportation 

plan.” The primary objective of the Plan it to encourage and accommodate walking and biking as 

commuter options in Allegheny County. ActiveAllegheny is an implementation activity of the 

AlleghenyPlaces, Allegheny County’s Comprehensive Plan. 

The Action Plan outlined in ActiveAllegheny identifies recommended County Commuter Bicycle 

Routes, both on road and off road, as well as a number of key pedestrian corridors. Three streets in the 

County are also recommended as Complete Streets prototype projects. Maps of the Countywide Bicycle 

Routes, Pedestrian Corridors and Intersections and City Bicycle Routes from the ActiveAllegheny Plan 

are included in Appendix D. 

The City of Pittsburgh, in partnership with Bike Pittsburgh, has recently embarked on a program of bike 

lane development along roadway corridors demonstrating high bicycle utilization, which has resulted in 

a dramatic increase in the miles of bike lanes in the City. In 2010, more than five miles of new bike 


4 - 49


lanes were installed. However, not all roadways are suited for bike lanes. In cases of insufficient 

roadway width, the City has implemented a program of Shared Lane markings. 

This Shared Lane marking program, or Sharrow program, results in the placement of bicycle markings 

on the roadway pavement, but does not create an exclusive lane for use by bicyclists. Recently added to 

the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the utilization of Sharrow markings in 

Pittsburgh has been considered “experimental” to date. 

Based on the success of the Sharrow program in Pittsburgh, the City of Butler also recently implemented 

a Shared Lane marking program for bicyclists in that community. Other communities in the region are 

also considering their use. 

Transportation Enhancements 

The Transportation Enhancements (TE) program strives to better integrate the regional transportation 

system with the communities it serves by focusing on pedestrian and bicycle facilities, scenic and 

historic byways and other “non-traditional” transportation projects. 

Ten percent of the funding distributed to states through the federal Surface Transportation Program is 

set-aside for the Transportation Enhancements Program. Funding from this program focuses on projects 

that are often outside the realm of standard highway or transit improvements. Eligible projects fall 

within one of these twelve Transportation Enhancement categories: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Education Activities 

Acquisition of Scenic or Historic Easements and Sites 

Scenic or Historic Highway Programs, Including Tourist and Welcome Centers 

Landscaping and Scenic Beautification 

Historic Preservation 

Rehabilitation and Operation of Historic Transportation Buildings, Structures, or Facilities 

Preservation of Abandoned Railway Corridors 

Control and Removal of Outdoor Advertising 

Archaeological Planning and Research 

Mitigation of Highway Runoff and Provision of Wildlife Connectivity 

Establishment of Transportation Museums 

Since 2004, SPC and PennDOT have helped to deliver more than 70 Transportation Enhancement 

projects totaling over $35 million in federal funding. SPC has also worked to streamline the project 

application process, make program requirements and procedures clear to program applicants, and forge 

deeper alliances between agencies with complementary programs such as those administered by the 

Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and the Department of Community 

and Economic Development. 

The Hometown Streets/Safe Routes to School Program is an offshoot of the Transportation 

Enhancements program, and was established in Pennsylvania in 2004. This program targets a portion of 

Transportation Enhancement funds for projects that help revitalize existing downtown and neighborhood 


4 - 50


commercial districts in established communities, and projects that improve pedestrian and bicycle access 

to elementary and secondary schools. Since 2004, SPC has awarded Hometown Streets/Safe Routes to 

School Program grants to 40 projects in the region’s ten counties. 

Ride Sharing/CommuteInfo 

The regional metropolitan planning organization (MPO), the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission 

(SPC), provides ridesharing services and operates the volunteer vanpool transit and arranges carpools 

region-wide through the CommuteInfo ® program. The ultimate goal of the program is for commuters 

living, working or attending school within the 10-county Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission 

region (including Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, 

Washington, and Westmoreland counties) to choose ridesharing at least twice a week. 

In 2010, CommuteInfo’s vanpool and carpool program’s 1,011 participants’ kept 736 single occupancy 

vehicles from traveling on area roadways each workday. Using 260 days of work/school related trips 

throughout the year, the carpool and vanpool groups have averted 382,720 vehicle trips in the region. In 

addition, using an average of a 15 mile one way commute (30 miles round trip), this savings also means 

a reduction of 5,740,800 vehicle miles traveled. 

2010 CommuteInfo Outcomes 

Commuters Carpooling or Vanpooling 1,011 

Single Occupancy Vehicles Off Roadways Each Workday 736 

Number of Vehicle Trips Off Roadways Each Year 382,720 

Number of Vehicle Miles Off Roadways Each Year 5,740,800 

The CommuteInfo program is coordinated in partnership with transportation management associations, 

transportation providers, businesses, and non-profit service organizations throughout Southwestern PA. 

The CommuteInfo program is designed to increase the number of people who travel to work or school 

by riding transit, carpooling, vanpooling, or bikepooling. 

Commuters can register with CommuteInfo to request a commuting options report which includes 

contact information for the regional fixed route transit operators, information regarding nearby park-nride 

facilities and a list of other individuals making a similar commute who are interested in vanpooling, 

carpooling, and/or bikepooling. 

Employers can access technical assistance, articles, posters, and surveys for use during employee 

recruitment, with job applicants or existing employees. The CommuteInfo program staff also meets 

with regional employers to assess their unique transportation needs and help design a customized 

transportation plan for their company’s employees. 

By offering a set of commuting alternative options, education materials, and technical assistance, the 

CommuteInfo program allows commuters and employers to learn more about available commuting 

options, and to select the option(s) that are best suited to their needs. 


4 - 51


The CommuteInfo website (www.commuteinfo.org) provides detailed information on the program 

services and commuting alternatives. The CommuteInfo staff also provides individual consultations to 

employees as well as employers on commuting alternatives, park-n-ride facilities and commuter choice 

benefits. 

In 2010, the vanpool service has helped keep an average of 481 vehicles off of the regional roadways 

each workday. 

Rail 

The ten county SPC region is served by twenty railroads with direct service by three Class I railroads – 

Norfolk Southern, CSXT and Canadian National. These Class I railroads connect southwestern 

Pennsylvania with a freight rail network that extends from Florida to Maine, and west beyond the 

Mississippi River. Norfolk Southern Railroad’s main east-west line between Chicago and Baltimore 

runs through downtown Pittsburgh, and provides a vital intermodal transfer location at the Pitcairn 

Intermodal Facility in Allegheny County, as well as links to multiple shortline and regional railroads 

throughout the region. The CSXT main line between Chicago, Philadelphia and the New York area also 

passes through downtown Pittsburgh and provides multiple intermodal transfer locations throughout the 

region. CSXT recently received $98 million in federal Transportation Investment Generating Economic 

Recovery II Discretionary Grants (FY 2010 Appropriations Act) to increase the vertical clearance of 

track in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia to provide double stack access from a new intermodal 

facility in northwest Ohio to the East Coast. Railroad service is available in all ten counties in 

southwestern Pennsylvania. 

The region’s many regional and shortline railroads provide more localized links to Class I railroads, or 

serve a particular industry or set of users. These regional railroads face both capital and operational 

challenges. They are responsible for the maintenance of all rail related infrastructure and face increased 

federal safety and environmental mandates, from positive train control to new emissions standards and 

diesel emission objectives. The cost of attaining these new federal standards is borne almost 

exclusively by the railroad. 

At a community level, some railroads also face competition from adjoining land uses, which may limit 

their ability to efficiently and safely serve existing and new customers. 

Despite the recent national recession, many railroads in the region have seen an increase in activity as a 

result of the growing shale gas industry. Rail is often used to carry the pipes used in the drilling and gas 

conveyance processes, as well as materials used in the production process, including water, waste water 

and fracking sand. 

In 2010, Amtrak completed the P.R.I.I.A Section 224 Pennsylvania Rail Feasibility Report, which 

includes an examination of the potential for expanded passenger rail service between Pittsburgh and 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The report concluded that the expansion of conventional rail service between 

the two cities faced considerable hurdles based on right-of-way ownership; use of the corridor by an 

estimated 40 freight trains each day; and regional topography. The report did conclude that an 

additional Pennsylvanian train between New York and Pittsburgh would net an additional 144,400 riders 


4 - 52


annually, with ticket revenues of $6,661,000. However, the projected costs associated with an increase 

in service between New York City and Pittsburgh are estimated at $13.7 million per year and annual 

operating losses are estimated at $6.7 million annually. Section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment 

and Improvement Act of 2008 requires Amtrak and states to develop and implement a uniform 

methodology to allocate operating and capital costs of existing and future Amtrak routes less than 750 

miles in length, and that, by 2013, all states pay an equivalent share of the costs of such routes that are 

not covered by farebox revenues. Thus, Pennsylvania would need to provide the additional 

Pennsylvanian routing revenue at approximately $6.7 million per year for passenger service 

improvement between Pittsburgh, Harrisburg and New York. 

As a step forward in the planning process, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) 

recently received funds for the Keystone Corridor West Study from the Federal Railroad 

Administration’s (FRA’s) High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Track 3 – Planning Program. 

Under this application, PennDOT is requesting FRA to match a state-provided $750,000 to prepare a 

Service Development Plan (SDP) and a Programmatic NEPA document that could serve as a base for 

future service improvements 

Waterways and Ports 

The Port of Pittsburgh encompasses eleven counties in Southwestern Pennsylvania (the ten counties of 

the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission and Clarion County to the northeast). An estimated 200 

miles of commercially navigable water along the Ohio, Monongahela and Allegheny Rivers provide a 

valuable “inland navigation” system for bulk material movement into and through the region. 

The three rivers are used to carry raw materials, bulk and manufactured goods for many industries in the 

region. With more than 200 river terminal operators in the region, the Port of Pittsburgh is the 2 nd 

busiest inland ports and one of the 20 busiest ports of any kind in the nation, according the Port of 

Pittsburgh Commission records. 

Commercial navigation is important to the region’s economy because river transport is an extremely 

economical method of transporting raw materials and bulk goods. The 30-40 million tons of cargo the 

Port of Pittsburgh ships and receives each year provides a significant annual benefit to the region. The 

primary cargo in the Port of Pittsburgh is coal but millions of tons of raw products including sand, 

gravel and iron ore; manufactured goods; petroleum and petroleum products as well as chemicals and 

related products traverse our waterways. 

The transport of bulk goods by water is also environmentally beneficial to the region, as a single barge 

can carry the equivalent of 70 large semi trucks or 15 jumbo hopper rail cars. When tied together into 15 

barge loads, a typical movement of material by water may carry the equivalent of 1050 trucks or 225 rail 

cars. In recognition of the cost and environmental savings presented by inland navigation, the US 

Maritime Administration (MARAD) announced the creation of the US Marine Highway System in 

2010. The new Marine Highway 70 (M-70), begins at Pittsburgh, and extends the entire length of the 

Ohio River, where it meets Marine Highway 55, (the Mississippi River System) near St. Louis, MO. In 

its designation of the M-70 corridor, MARAD noted that this Marine Highway corridor has the potential 

to help alleviate a portion of the congestion from the existing landside routes, while at the same time 

reducing emissions, conserving energy, improving safety ,and reducing highway maintenance costs. It 


4 - 53


can also contribute to increased economic and commercial activity in the region by removing barriers to 

efficient freight transportation. 

It is estimated that about 250 million tons of cargo, valued at approximately $133 billion, go in or out of 

the area each year – by any mode. Twenty percent of the tons (50 million) or seven percent of the value 

($9 billion) goes by barge. 

Commercial navigation of the region’s three major rivers is made possible through the region’s 17 locks 

and dams. These US Army Corps of Engineers owned, operated and maintained facilities maintain river 

water levels between the individual dams, and make commercial navigation possible. 

The eight locks and dams on the Allegheny River permit commercial navigation as far north as East 

Brady, Pennsylvania, 72 miles from the Point in downtown Pittsburgh. Key commodities carried on the 

Allegheny River include bulk aggregate materials such as sand and gravel. The locks and dams on the 

Allegheny River were all built between 1927 and 1938. 

The nine locks and dams on the Monongahela River permit commercial navigation as far south as 

Fairmont, WV, more than 128 miles from the Point in Pittsburgh. Coal is by far the largest commodity 

hauled on the Monongahela River, and barge transportation is essential to the cost-effective movement 

of coal within the region. The oldest lock and dam on the Monongahela River was constructed at 

Elizabeth, PA in 1905, making it more than 100 years old. 

The Ohio River begins at the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers at the Point in 

Pittsburgh, PA, and flows 981 miles to join the Mississippi River at Cairo, Ill. There are three locks and 

dams on the Ohio River in Pennsylvania. The US Army Corps of Engineers, the Port of Pittsburgh 

Commission and regional barge operators all agree that these dams are in an “advanced state of decline” 

and could be subject to failure at any time. 

The locks and dams on the Ohio River are more than 70 years old, and are in need of major 

reconstruction and rehabilitation. It has been estimated that $83 million is required to rehabilitate the 

Emsworth Lock and Dam alone. No estimates are available for the costs of rehabilitating the 

Montgomery and Dashields Locks and Dams, but the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has spent almost 

$15 million on the completion of the Upper Ohio River Navigation Study to determine the total costs of 

maintaining the operability of the three locks and dams on the Ohio River. This report is scheduled to 

be released in 2011. 

A traffic deferral assessment completed as an adjunct to that Study, has assessed the truck load 

equivalent of goods moved by barge along the Upper Ohio River, and has created a formula that 

allocates those truck load equivalency to local roadways, to determine the impact of Ohio River barge 

movements on local roadways, should the River become inaccessible due to failure of a lock or dam. 

The findings of this Traffic Externalities Study are not yet ready for public release, but a 2011 release 

date is anticipated. 

All Locks and Dams in the SPC region are operated by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Recent 

funding cuts at the national level will result in the closure of the two northernmost locks in the region 


4 - 54


(on the Allegheny River) to recreational boating, and will significantly reduce the hours of operation for 

commercial and recreational operations at all locks and dams on the Allegheny River. 

The Port of Pittsburgh Commission and the US Army Corps of Engineers are active partners in the SPC 

freight planning process. 

Airports 

Scheduled airline service is available within the SPC region at Pittsburgh International Airport in 

western Allegheny County, and Arnold Palmer Regional Airport in Latrobe, Westmoreland County. 

Corporate flight operations, recreational flights and student training occur at more than two dozen 

general aviation airports in the ten-county region. 

Most of these airports are publicly owned, and are operated by a local or county government or airport 

authority. There is one public use heliport in the region as well. A few airports are privately owned, but 

are open use by the general public. There are also several private airports in the region at which use is 

limited to the airport owner and guests. 

Twelve airlines currently provide passenger service to and from, Pittsburgh International Airport, with 

more than 150 daily flights to 37 non-stop destinations. Commercial passenger service is also available 

at Arnold Palmer Regional Airport in Latrobe, Westmoreland County. Scheduled charter services are 

offered from both Pittsburgh International Airport and Arnold Palmer Regional Airport to several 

popular tourist destinations. 

Unfunded Transportation Needs and Illustrative Projects List 

Both nationally and within the Commonwealth there is broad recognition that transportation needs far 

exceed the level of resources that are currently being provided. 

Highway and Bridge Unfunded Needs 

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) estimated in 2009 

that funding levels for highways and bridges need to increase from $78.7 billion annually from all levels 

of government to a new total of $132 billion to $166 billion annually, depending on travel growth. $13 

billion in additional annual costs for environmental mitigation, highway operations and safety, and 

highway security were not included in the baseline estimate [The Bottom Line Report, 2009]. The 

estimated shortfall, between $66 billion and $100 billion each year, can be compared to current federal 

spending level of $43 billion annually. 

The Pennsylvania Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) in its 2010 report “Transportation 

Funding Study” identifies Pennsylvania’s unfunded transportation needs. The report identifies a $2.131 

billion annual shortfall to address only the maintenance deficiencies on state-owned highways and 

bridges. Local roads and bridges, traffic signals, safety and operations improvements, and modest new 

capacity needs would require another $887 million per year in new revenues. This unfunded need for an 


4 - 55


additional $3 billion per year in transportation spending compares to the current level of spending which 

is about $2 billion in 2011 in the State TIP. 

SPC worked with PennDOT Districts Ten, Eleven and Twelve to estimate the unfunded highway and 

bridge needs in southwestern Pennsylvania for public hearings on the transportation funding crisis held 

by the State Transportation Commission in November 2009. 

The estimate of roadway maintenance needs identified a required increase from $112 million in 2011 to 

a new total of $300 million annually, a deficit of $188 million per year. $104 million in additional 

funding would be needed each year for pavement preservation treatments and to replace other older 

pavements as they wear out. The roadway deficit also includes $84 million annually for fifteen years 

that would allow the region to fix a huge maintenance backlog of deficient (out-of-cycle) miles of 

pavement. 

The estimate of bridge maintenance needs identified a required increase from $222 million in 2011 to a 

new total of $610 million annually, a deficit of $388 million per year. $72 million in additional funding 

would be needed each year for bridge preservation work and to restore older bridges as they wear out. 

An additional $316 million per year would only begin to address the backlog of structurally deficient 

(SD) bridges, allowing the SD backlog to be reduced to 17% by 2025. 

PennDOT’s Annual Performance Measures Report for 2010 defines the extent and severity of roadway 

and bridge maintenance deficiencies in southwestern Pennsylvania. The pavement report shows 2,163 

miles of pavements in poor condition from a total of 8,774 miles, about 25%. The statewide average is 

19.4%. The bridge report identifies 1,482 bridges in the region as structurally deficient from a total of 

5,297, a 28% SD rate. This compares to the statewide SD rate of 21%. 

Southwestern Pennsylvania has a higher-than-average share of the statewide deficiencies for both 

roadways and bridges. SPC estimated an overall cost of about $7 billion to fix all of the region’s 

currently deficient state-owned roadways and bridges. This compares to available funding of about $330 

million per year in the TIP. Based on the age of the region’s transportation system and the limited 

available funding compared to the need, the region might expect the backlog of deficiencies to increase 

rather than decrease. 

The projects, line items, and other programs listed in the fiscally-constrained portion of this Plan will 

direct available funding to thousands of transportation projects in Southwestern Pennsylvania during the 

2011-2040 timeframe. However, as depicted above, the region’s unfunded needs are much greater than 

what available revenues can address. Figure 4.21, the Illustrative Project List, includes a series of 

projects that do not currently fit within federally mandated fiscal constraint but which have been 

identified by the region’s planning partners as priority needs. Specific project funding, however, cannot 

be identified at this time. 


4 - 56


Public Transportation Unfunded Needs 

AASHTO’s Bottom Line Report estimated the needed increase in public transportation investment at 

$32.7 billion each year (nationwide) to meet expected annual rates for growth in ridership. Meeting a 

goal to double transit ridership in 20 year to help in reducing greenhouse gas emission would require a 

$45.7 billion annual increase in public transportation investment. The report identifies $13.3 billion 

each year in current public transportation spending nationwide. A total transit investment of $46 - $59 

billion annually would be required in the two growth-driven scenarios. 

The 2010 Pennsylvania Transportation Advisory Commission’s report “Transportation Funding Study” 

estimates the funding gap in Pennsylvania for public transportation capital assistance/system expansion 

in Pennsylvania as $484 million per year. The report states that the gap between needs and available 

resources for operating programs will be evident for some systems in 2010-11 and will continue to 

widen, eventually to $2.2 billion by 2029-30. Pennsylvania’s Act 44 of 2007 restructured state transit 

funding programs and increased state transit funding starting in 2007-08, bringing substantial relief to 

many transit agencies with operating deficits. Federal denial of Pennsylvania’s application to toll I-80 

reduced transit funding in 2010-11 reduced Act 44 revenue and forced actual service cuts in some 

systems. Proposed annual increases of 2.5% per year that were attainable by tolling I-80 had to be 

eliminated. 

PennDOT’s financial guidance for the 2011 TIP shows $37.9 million available for the southwestern 

Pennsylvania region’s transit programs during the first four years of the Plan. But, there are $42.2 

million in projects already approved during this period, leaving a gap of $4.3 million during the first 

four years. A similar gap of $1.2 million exists for federal funding. Over the 30 years of the plan, the 

combined state and federal funding gap is expected to total $299 million. This gap makes it impossible 

for the region’s transit operators to plan for new investments or to capitalize on new opportunities. 

Illustrative Project Lists 

A number of recently completed studies identified key, strategic capital highway and bridge projects that 

could benefit the region (See Figure 4.21). For now, given the current funding situation, these projects 

are illustrative of the proposals for improving transportation in the region. In the event that additional 

funding is identified for “illustrative” projects, these projects or others that are prioritized by the 

Commission as consistent with the plan, and for which sufficient specific funding has been identified, 

may be considered as amendments to the Plan. A list of illustrative Major Transit Proposals that are not 

currently funded is presented in Figure 4.22. 


4 - 57


Figure 4.21 Illustrative Highway and Bridge Project List, 2011-2040 

Illustrative Project List, 2011 - 2040 

Investment Category Project Location 

Interstate 


Facilities 

Cost 

(in 

millions) 

PREVENT MAINT I‐79 Middle Section, PM BUCO $30 

PREVENT MAINT I‐79 South Section, PM BUCO $30 

PREVENT MAINT I‐79 North Section, PM BUCO $20 

Non‐Interstate Transportation Facilities 

CAP MAINT BRG Regional Bridge Maintenance Needs Region $6,800 

CAP MAINT RD Regional Roadway Maintenance Needs Region $3,750 

OPS & SAFETY Regional Operations & Safety Needs Region $2,700 

NEW CAPACITY Hazelwood/LTV Site Access ALCO $24 

NEW CAPACITY Lower Hill Development ALCO $37 

NEW CAPACITY S.R. 28/119/219, Kittanning to County Line, major widening and upgrade ARCO $235 

NEW CAPACITY S.R. 21, Masontown to Thompson's Crossroads, major widening and upgrade FACO $75 

NEW CAPACITY S.R. 21 Morrisville Corridor, Phase 2 GRCO $20 

NEW CAPACITY S.R. 228 Widening, S.R. 19 to S.R. 8 BUCO $365 

NEW CAPACITY U.S. 422, Indiana to Kittanning, major widening and upgrade INCO $235 

NEW CAPACITY Millenium Park interchange LACO $15 

NEW CAPACITY I‐70 Zediker Station Interchange WACO $15 

NEW CAPACITY S.R. 30 Widening, Allegheny County Line to Westmoreland Mall WECO $100 

Turnpike Projects 

NEW CAPACITY Mon‐Fayette, S.R. 51 To I‐376 ALCO $3,600 

NEW CAPACITY Southern Beltway, I‐79 To Mon‐Fayette Expressway WACO $735 

NEW CAPACITY Southern Beltway, I‐79 to S.R. 22 ALCO $659* 

NEW CAPACITY Turnpike Access Project for the Greater New Stanton Area WECO $80 

Other Modes 

PED‐BIKE ActiveAllegheny Implementation ALCO $25 

INLAND NAVIGATION Wireless Waterway Test Bed and Demonstration Network ITS Deployment Region 

INLAND NAVIGATION Smart Locks ‐ Port of Pittsburgh Commission ITS Deployment Region 

* Project was included in Fiscally Constrained Project List in 2035 Long Range Plan, changes in status of PA Act 44 require 

resubmission of Major Project Financial Plan for these projects 


4 - 58


Figure 4.22 Illustrative Major Transit Proposals, 2011-2040 

Illustrative Major Transit Proposals 

Project Title Sponsor Time Frame Project Type 

Hazelwood ‐ Almono‐Interstate 376 access, catchment area, and 

intermodal center ‐ Pittsburgh Urban Circulator PGH Mid Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

Intercity Rail: Pittsburgh‐Youngstown‐Cleveland 

REGION 

Longer 

Range Passenger Rail ‐ Intercity 

LRT Extension from South Hills Village to McMurray PAAC/WCT Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

LRT Extension to Manchester/Chateau and McKees Rocks 

Minimal Operable Segment PAAC Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

LRT or other rapid transit: Downtown Pittsburgh to Convention 

Center PAAC Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

MagLev: Airport‐Downtown‐Greensburg 

MAGLEV 

Longer 

Range Passenger Rail ‐ Commuter 

Rail: Beaver Falls to Downtown Pittsburgh BCTA Long Term Passenger Rail ‐ Commuter 

Rail: Latrobe to Downtown Pittsburgh WCTA Long Term Passenger Rail ‐ Commuter 

Rail: Southern Butler County to Pittsburgh North Shore BTA Long Term Passenger Rail ‐ Commuter 

Rapid Transit ‐ Airport Corridor PAAC Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

Rapid Transit ‐ Downtown‐Oakland‐East End Corridor PAAC Mid Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

Route 65 with connection to North Shore Intermodal Facility BCTA Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

Allegheny Valley Railroad Commuter Rail AVRR Mid Term Passenger Rail ‐ Commuter 

Westmoreland County Rapid Transit WCTA Long Term Capital‐Rapid Transit Corridor 

Securing Additional Revenues 

The prospect for securing additional revenues remains uncertain despite a widespread recognition of the 

reality of a serious transportation infrastructure deficit. Over the past several years a number of national 

bodies have reviewed existing and proposed transportation funding mechanisms and documented their 

views. [National Conference of State Legislatures, “Surface Transportation Funding: Options for 

States”, May 2006. National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, 

“Transportation for Tomorrow”, December 2007. National Surface Transportation Infrastructure 

Enhancing Commission, “Paving Our Way, A New Framework for Transportation Finance,” February 

2009.] These studies, however, seem to have had little practical effect at the national level. 

Transportation reauthorization legislation to replace SAFETEA-LU, originally scheduled expiration in 

September 2009, remains unknown. A number of legislative proposals since 2009 have included 

funding levels that would significantly increase transportation spending but specific sources of revenue 

have yet to be identified. 

A 2011 Commonwealth Transportation Funding Commission is to recommend specific funding 

solutions that could generate an additional $2.5 billion each year. However, in the absence of legislative 

approval of new revenues at this time, the 2040 Plan financial plan necessarily projects future funding 

with revenues reasonably expected to be available without additional state funding. Projects on the 

illustrative lists versus the fiscally constrained plan remain unfunded with significant fiscal challenges. 


4 - 59


Potential Future Revenue Option Examples 

This last section provides a sample of potential revenue options cited by the State TAC Transportation 

Funding Study and other studies as having a relatively direct transportation nexus, that may be future 

building blocks for long-term funding solutions. This is not a complete list of options or a 

comprehensive description of options. Each potential revenue source includes summary information for 

items that can potentially generate significant amounts of revenue. 

The Motor Fuel Tax and Indexing. Charged to the consumer on a per gallon basis rather than as a 

percentage of the price, revenues from this source have been eroding as vehicles become more fuelefficient, 

as the high price of gasoline drives down vehicle use, and as alternate-energy vehicles claim an 

increasing share of the market. Periodic increases in the per gallon tax have been used in past decades to 

keep pace with the cost of maintaining the system but the federal gas tax has been static since 1992 and 

the state gas tax since 1997. Indexing the motor fuel/gas tax to the price of the fuel is an option that 

automatically increases the motor fuel tax as the price increases, thereby preserving the purchasing 

power of this revenue source. Only a few states are currently making use of the indexing option. 

Oil Company Franchise Tax. Charged to the oil company at the wholesale level rather than to the 

customer at the pump. In Pennsylvania, similar to the Motor Fuel Tax, it can be implemented in the 

short-term, has high potential revenue yields, and requires more from higher-volume users. The current 

tax is the equivalent of 19.2 cents charged on the first $1.25 per gallon of gasoline. Revenue can be 

raised either by increasing the (19.2 cent) tax rate or raising the ($1.25) ceiling (using the gasoline 

example). 

Vehicle Registration Fee. Registration fees have been well-established as a flexible, dedicated 

transportation funding source at the state level for a moderate amount of new revenue in the near-term. 

Flat fees for everyone do not reflect differing system usage. Revenues can be raised by either an increase 

in the flat fee or a change in the fee structure to a variable rate based on vehicle type, weight, age, 

horsepower, EPA mpg ratings, or value. 

Tolling. Tolling can generate substantial revenues. For example, a 5 cent per mile toll is the revenue 

equivalent of $1.00 per gallon for a vehicle that gets 20 miles per gallon. Tolls may be increased 

depending on congestion levels to charge higher tolls based at times roads experience measurably heavy 

traffic. 

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Fees (Mileage-Based). VMT fees tax drivers based on how many miles 

they drive rather than by how much fuel their vehicles consume. Currently, there are no VMT-based 

fees levied in the United States, though several pilot programs have been undertaken. Privacy issues, 

and administrative and implementation costs are the main concerns hindering adoption. 

State Sales Tax on Fuel. As part of the state sales tax rather than the Motor Fuels Tax, this funding 

could be spent on public transit. 

The State Funding Study also identifies a number of items that might be useful combined with revenue 

options such as tolling and other direct user fee or tax generators. 


4 - 60


Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) provide access to new sources of private capital for transportation 

projects. 

Regional Transportation Districts (RTDs) are local in nature where tax dollars are spent in the area 

where they are raised. Includes Tax Increment Financing (TIF) options. 

Transit Revitalization Investment Districts (TRIDs) support investment on underutilized areas with 

transit access. 

Transit Oriented Development (TOD) can be effective for more efficient transportation and higher 

density land-use patterns. 

PPPs, RTDs, TRIDs and TODs may be useful for attracting private money for specific initiatives related 

to development or infrastructure improvements within a localized area. 

PPPs can leverage cost efficiencies/savings in project development, shift project-related financial risks 

to the private sector, or generate a one-time revenue event in exchange for private control of a revenuegenerating 

asset. 

Borrowing and Bonding provides up-front funding to help advance projects that would otherwise take 

years to develop, if at all. This requires repayment from a long-term dedicated revenue source to avoid 

displacing resources for ongoing maintenance and other existing programs. 

Infrastructure Banks are a form of borrowing money for transportation projects at a below-market, 

subsidized interest rate. 

GARVEE Bonds use an existing revenue stream, often federal TIP funds, as the source for repayment of 

the bonds. 

For information on additional revenue options being considered in Pennsylvania and elsewhere, or for 

more complete descriptive information on the identified options please refer to the State Transportation 

Funding Study, which includes additional sources and references, available from 

www.dot.s117tate.pa.us. 


4 - 61


Section 5. Economic Development 

Economic Development Funding 

Funding for economic development projects, unlike that for transportation infrastructure, comes 

from somewhat less predictable sources. Traditionally, more often than not, it has been the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with its wide array of programs that provides the public support 

to an identified project. Currently in Pennsylvania, there are approximately 105 state and federal 

programs available that can be matched to an economic development project; 91 of these 

programs are designated for business development and 14 programs are closely related to site 

revitalization and site development (Source: PA Department of Community and Economic 

Development). Specific funding programs are always subject to change. Thus, implementation 

of the Plan focuses on consistency of projects as they are 

developed with the policies established in the Plan. 

Projects that are similar in scope to those that have been 

advanced in accordance with the policies (strategies) 

identified in this Comprehensive Economic Development 

Strategy (CEDS) document have historically been funded 

through the Economic Development Administration (EDA); 

the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC); the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Redevelopment Assistance 

Capital Program (RACP); federal appropriations through the 

region’s six U.S. Representatives and two Senators; and, one 

or more of the state’s site revitalization programs. 

The Southwestern 

Pennsylvania region 

has attracted over 

$325 million in 

grants and loans 

from the 

Commonwealth since 

2007 

Analysis of data from the Pennsylvania Department of Economic Development Investment 

Tracker shows that from June 2007 to April 2011 the region was able to attract over $325 million 

in grants and loans through various Commonwealth programs to assist in economic development 

activities. Additional analysis shows that: 

 

 

 

ARC – Since 1999 ARC has funded over $10,000 projects in the SPC region 

EDA – Dating back to 1980, federal funding through the U.S. Department of Commerce’s 

EDA program is over $30 million 

RACP –Since1998 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has awarded funding for eligible 

projects totaling over $380 million 

These and other sources leverage private sector development dollars to undertake development 

projects throughout the region. For example, EDA reports leveraging private sector investment 

of $30 to $37 dollars for every dollar invested. 


5 - 1


Economic Development Investment Strategies 

During the development of the previous 2035 Plan, the Economic Development Work Group 

considered key strategies in state, local and regional partners’ plans for common themes and 

complementary policies in developing an overall Regional Vision Scenario. Review and 

discussion of the various programs underway resulted in a 

consensus set of policies about regional activities, places 

and connections throughout the region. SPC continues to 

actively support projects that demonstrate consistency with 

the policies identified in this plan. For projects to be 

considered consistent with the Comprehensive Economic 

Development Strategy, whether economic or transportation 

and related infrastructure, they must show primary 

consistency with one of more of the major policies 

emphasized in the Regional Vision Scenario. 

While projects may show primary consistency for any of 

the Plan’s 16 policies, generally the economic development 

strategy of the Plan is set by the 11 policies listed below. 

The 2040 Plan policies 

are focused on three 

key areas: 

Regional Places 

Regional Activities 

Regional Connections 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revitalization and redevelopment of the region’s 

existing communities is a priority. 

Investment in infrastructure improvements will be coordinated and targeted at the 

corridor level to optimize the impact of the investment. 

The region will focus on the identification and development of industrial sites 

with special attention given to well situated brownfield locations. 

The entire region will have access to broadband communications infrastructure. 

The region will place a priority on business development with a focus on existing 

business retention and expansion. 

The region will support initiatives designed to improve both the quality and 

quantity of the region’s workforce to meet emerging industry demands. 

The region will support identified strategic industry clusters. 

The region will place a priority on programs and services to attract and retain a 

diverse population with a particular focus on young adults and immigrants. 

The region will proactively support the emerging role of colleges and universities 

in economic development. 

The region will preserve, promote and develop the tourism and hospitality 

industries by capitalizing on historic, cultural, recreational and ecological assets. 

The region will preserve and develop its agricultural industry. 


5 - 2


Plan Consistency 

SPC actively supports 

projects that 

demonstrate 

consistency with the 

regional policies 

identified in the 2040 

Plan 

The Plan serves as a guide to development activities 

throughout the region, and it particularly guides SPC and 

its various work plans. Since the adoption of the 2035 

Plan, SPC has worked to insure that both its activities and 

the projects it reviews, recommends or endorses are 

consistent with the Regional Vision Scenario and its 

policies. For example, ARC and EDA projects ranked 

and submitted to the appropriate agencies for funding 

consideration show primary consistency to policy 

statements. These examples include: 

POLICY: Revitalization and redevelopment of the region’s existing communities is a priority. 

– West Newton Town Square 

– City of Uniontown Blight Removal Project 

– Elizabeth Borough Streetscape Improvements 

– Northern Ambridge Redevelopment 

POLICY: The region will focus on the identification and development of industrial sites with 

special attention given to well situated brownfield locations. 

– Carrie Furnace, Rankin 

– Sony Re-Use 

POLICY: The region will proactively support the emerging role of colleges and universities in 

economic development. 

– Windy Ridge Business and Technology Park 

– Fayette Campus – Comprehensive Study for an Energy Research and Development 

Center 

POLICY: The region will preserve, promote and develop the tourism and hospitality industries 

by capitalizing on historic, cultural, recreational and ecological assets. 

– Monaca Riverfront Park 

– West Newton Town Square 

– Allegheny Trail Towns Initiative 

The maps on the following pages highlight the consistency of these projects with the Regional 

Vision Scenario. 


5 - 3


Figure 5.1 Area Development Program Projects Ranked and Submitted 


5 - 4


Figure 5.2 Economic Development Administration Projects Ranked and Submitted 


5 - 5


As part of its Local Development District designation, SPC is responsible for carrying out the 

Enterprise Development Program, which is designed to assist small and medium-sized 

businesses in the region. The program itself helps to deliver on many of the Plan policies, 

particularly the following: 

POLICY: The region will place a priority on business development with a focus on existing 


Since adoption of the previous 2035 Plan, SPC has worked with over 420 companies in the 

following areas: 

• The Export Assistance Program has helped to produce $120,000,000 in export sales and has 

helped to create or retain 1,700 jobs 

• The Business Finance Program has a loan portfolio of over $13,000,000 and has helped to 

create or retain 2,989 jobs 

• The Government Procurement Assistance Program has helped client businesses secure 234 

Government contracts valued at over $230,000,000 and has helped to create or retain 5,220 

jobs 

The consistency of the Enterprise Development Program services with the Regional Vision 

Scenario is highlighted on the following map. 


5 - 6


Figure 5.3 Enterprise Development Clients 


5 - 7


Linking Transportation & Economic Development Investments 

As the Economic Development District and the Metropolitan Planning Organization for 

Southwestern Pennsylvania, SPC has integrated the development of its Comprehensive 

Economic Development Strategy with the development of its Long Range Transportation Plan 

into a joint transportation and development plan. In that regard, this plan explicitly recognizes 

and stresses the linkage between a well-maintained, efficient transportation system and economic 

opportunity. 

This linkage takes place at both the policy and the project level. As one joint plan, the 2040 Plan 

has a single vision and a set of policy statements that guide investments for transportation and 

economic development. On the project level, consistently evaluating investments in 

transportation and economic development against the spirit and intent of the plan ensures that 

projects are mutually beneficial. This means that projects either work in tandem or are mutually 

supportive, and that they do not work at cross purposes or 

hinder one another. 

Economic Development Policies 

The 2040 Plan serves as the Comprehensive Economic 

Development Strategy (CEDS) for the region. A 

comprehensive economic development strategy is 

designed to bring together the public and private sectors 

in the creation of an integrated economic roadmap to 

diversify and strengthen regional economies. Integrated 

economic development planning provides the flexibility 

to adapt to global economic conditions and fully utilize 

the region's unique advantages to maximize economic 

opportunity for its residents by 

attracting the private investment that 

creates jobs. 

The 2040 Plan serves as 

the region’s 

Comprehensive 

Economic Development 

Strategy, or CEDS 

SPC has reviewed and collected other 

development plans at the local, regional 

and state level. The majority of these 

plans showed consistent concepts for 

economic development. These concepts 

were incorporated into the 2035 Plan 

Policies and are carried forward into the 

2040 Plan. They include: 

Geographic targeting of investment - 

Corresponding Policy: Investment in 

infrastructure improvements will be 


5 - 8


coordinated and targeted at the corridor level to optimize the impact of the investment. 

Business development - Corresponding Policy: The region will place a priority on business 

development with a focus on existing business retention and expansion. 

Workforce Development - Corresponding Policy: The region will support initiatives designed to 

improve both the quality and quantity of the region’s workforce to meet emerging industry 

demands. 

Community revitalization and 

development - Corresponding Policy: 

Revitalization and redevelopment of 

the region’s existing communities is a 

priority. 

Expand and enhance tourism. - 

Corresponding Policy: The region 

will preserve, promote and develop 

the tourism and hospitality industries 

by capitalizing on historic, cultural, 

recreational and ecological assets. 

Industrial site identification and 

creation - Corresponding Policy: The 

region will focus on the identification 

and development of industrial sites with special attention given to well situated 

brownfield locations. 

Support growth in targeted industry sectors - Corresponding Policy: The region will 

support identified strategic industry clusters. 

Project Consistency 

As previously mentioned, the 2040 Plan serves as the region’s Comprehensive Economic 

Development Strategy (CEDS). At the time of adoption of the prior CEDS (the 2035 Plan), it 

was EDA policy that all projects were required to be on an adopted CEDS prior to funding. Since 

that time, EDA policy no longer requires that a project be expressly named on a plan. The 

previous 2035 Plan included 156 economic development projects for inclusion in the 

Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy portion of the Plan. A copy of the previous 

project list as submitted is included for informational purposes in Appendix B. 

While individual project identification in the Plan is no longer required, it is important to 

recognize that there are great projects advancing in our region. The following are example 

projects currently being advanced by our members and our partners that are consistent with the 

policies and strategies of 2040 Plan. 


5 - 9


Project: Carrie Furnace Redevelopment, Allegheny County 

After environmental remediation and infrastructure development, a total of 90 developable acres 

will be pad ready for businesses or private development. The site and its natural proximity to the 

City of Pittsburgh lends itself to flex space which can accommodate anything from research labs 

to space for up and coming high tech firms. Additional attractions will include the Steel Industry 

National Historic Park. A high caliber, national park development will instill value to the site 

and assure the quality of the Furnace preservation. The project also includes a fly-over ramp 

over existing railroad tracks in order to improve access to a brownfield redevelopment site in 

Rankin and Swissvale. This is an excellent example of how integrating the Long Range 

Transportation Plan and the CEDS can benefit the planning and overall advancement of regional 

strategies. 

Project: Fayette County Business Park (Route 40), Fayette County 

Complete infrastructure and site development of the first half of a 277-acre (total) business park 

serving population center of Uniontown. This mixed-use project will include industrial and 

commercial, with the potential for residential development. A portion of the site includes a state 

Keystone Opportunity Zone and is located along Route 40 near the Mon-Fayette Expressway. 

Project: Sony Industrial Reuse Project, Westmoreland County 

The project consists of converting the 2.8-million sf Sony Technology Center into a large multitenant 

industrial facility. By dividing the building into smaller units of 50,000 to 500,000 sf and 

diversifying the tenant base, this regional employment center will stabilize and promote 

economic growth not only in Westmoreland County but in Southwestern Pennsylvania. 

Project: Southpointe II, Washington County 

This project is known as Southpointe II and is expected to create $300 million dollars in private 

investment and 2,500 jobs. It consists of the redevelopment of 217 acres of state surplus 

property. Infrastructure improvements totaling $10 million dollars are completed, attracting 

$100 million dollars in private investment and 1,000 jobs, all situated on less than 100 acres. 

Project: Windy Ridge Business and Technology Park, Indiana County 

The Windy Ridge Business and Technology Park is located at the intersection of U.S. Route 422 

and State Route 286 in White Township, Indiana County. The Windy Ridge Business and 

Technology Park is envisioned to capitalize on a technology based economic development 

strategy implemented primarily through the Indiana County Keystone Innovation Zone (KIZ) 

program. The Indiana County KIZ currently focuses on five major industry clusters, including 

Advanced Diversified Manufacturing, including wood products, Sustainable Energy, Homeland 

Security and National Defense, Information (Assurance) Technology and Cyber Security, and 

Life Sciences. 


5 - 10


Project: Ohio River Industrial Site Improvements, Beaver County 

This project entails redevelopment of a former integrated LTV Steel plant that occupies 7.5 miles 

of riverfront along the Ohio River in the municipalities of Aliquippa, Hopewell, Center, and 

Monaca. Sites are planned for industrial reuse complemented by access to rail and the Ohio 

River. 

Project: Butler Centre City Project, Butler County 

The revitalization of Main Street in the City of Butler is necessary for the long term viability of 

the city. This project includes demolition of several obsolete vacant structures, construction of a 

new Convention Center, Hotel, and Parking garage, and rehabilitation of the Historic Penn 

Theater. 

Project: New Castle Rail Corridor, Lawrence County 

The New Castle Rail Corridor is located within the City of New Castle and is zoned for and 

consists of light to heavy industrial uses. The site is 224 acres and public water and sewerage is 

available as it is close to the central core of the City. There are no major environmental issues 

and the site is relatively flat with no steep slopes. Transportation is a key asset to this site as it 

can access the New Castle Industrial Railroad. The site is also close to State Route 18, State 

Route 422 and 1-376. An asset of the site is the close proximity to the New Castle Transit 

Authority which offers a Park-n-Ride facility for users. 

Project: Lower Hill District Infrastructure Redevelopment, City of Pittsburgh 

This project will construct a five-street grid to reconnect the Hill District to the central business 

district. The redevelopment of the street grid through the Mellon Arena site will also create 

development parcels and promote economic development in the area by making valuable real 

estate available for development. 

Project: Airport Business Park and Airside Development, Greene County 

The conceptual plan for this Airport Business Park development calls for the construction of both 

large and small corporate rental hangars, as well as conventional T-hangars. Building sites will 

be identified to foster increased productivity and efficiency for business that can benefit from 

general aviation services to support their business and corporate aviation needs. 

Project: Industrial Park Site Development, Armstrong County 

This project would make sites pad ready for industrial tenants planning to develop in West Hills 

and Northpointe. It will also improve approximately 100 acres for pad ready development. All 

other utilities and infrastructure are in place. 


5 - 11


Emerging Energy Cluster 

This region has always 

been home to an 

abundance of natural 

resources such as coal 

and natural gas. For 

example there are over 

41,000 active gases or 

oil wells in the region. 

But the energy cluster is 

much more than just 

natural resources--it is 

made up of components 

such as biofuels, smart 

grid design, 

photovoltaics, fuel cells, 

wind and nuclear 

energy. According to the Energy Alliance of Southwestern Pennsylvania, the energy 

sector in the Pittsburgh region is responsible for a $13.7 billion contribution to our 

regional Gross Domestic Product; 10% of our regional economy; 105,000 direct/indirect 

jobs; 25% of 2009 business expansion projects; and, more than $1 billion in public and 

private R&D annually. 

One of the policies in the 2040 Plan states that “The 

region will support identified strategic industry 

clusters.” Since adoption of the 2035 Plan, the 

energy cluster and its many components have grown 

significantly. SPC acknowledges and understands 

how important the energy cluster has become and 

will continue to be for the region. SPC will continue 

to support planning and development of this strategic 

industry cluster itself consistent with pertinent 

policies in the plan, as well as our partners’ efforts in 

the energy cluster. 

2040 Plan Policy 

The region will support 

identified strategic 

industry clusters. 

The following are examples of the various projects 

and initiatives that SPC’s partners are engaged in throughout region: 

Energy Alliance of Southwestern Pennsylvania, Allegheny Conference and Innovation Works 

The Energy Alliance of Southwestern Pennsylvania is led by a CEO Advisory Group 

representing all seven of our region’s energy-related industries and supported by the staff of the 

Allegheny Conference on Community Development and Innovation Works. They advocate for 

policies that will encourage these industries to flourish here, reaching out worldwide to attract 


5 - 12


investors and encouraging commercialization of innovations emerging from our government and 

university labs. 

Technology Regional Innovation Consortium (T-RIC), Catalyst Connection 

The T-RIC is focused on commercializing new energy technologies in the manufacturing 

sector. The T-RIC vision is to create a model for technology acceleration that improves 

the competitiveness of American small and mid-sized enterprises, and inspires them to 

develop and commercialize new products and services. 

Environmental Management Assistance Program (EMAP), Duquesne University SBDC 

The award winning SBDC Environmental Management Assistance Program (EMAP) is a 

specialized consulting service of the Pennsylvania Small Business Development Centers 

(SBDC). EMAP provides free and confidential environmental and energy assistance to 

small businesses in Pennsylvania. EMAP offers a step-by-step program to help small 

businesses recognize and realize potential energy cost savings. EMAP’s comprehensive 

program provides a utility bill analysis to assess current energy usage as well as on-site 

energy assessments and recommendations for equipment upgrades. 

Expanding Capabilities in the Area of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency for 

Mexican Students, Faculty, Professionals and Businesses to Enhance Competitiveness in 

Mexico, Duquesne University SBDC 

This program is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development to promote 

cooperation between Duquesne University and the Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon 

(UANL), Monterrey, Mexico, to develop international programs that will result in enhancing the 

energy efficiency and use of renewable energy. 

N-Viro International, Butler County 

A new company locating in a new building in the AC Valley Industrial Park located off Route 38 

in the northern portion of the County (Allegheny Township). This facility will take in sewage 

sludge from area sewage treatment plants and will subject the sludge to intense heating and 

drying. The remaining product is then hauled up the road into Venango County to the 

Scrubgrass Generating Plant. Scrubgrass is a 650 acre facility that produces and sells 

approximately 87 megawatts of electricity (enough for about 83,000 homes) to Pennsylvania 

Electric Company (Penelec). 

Washington County Energy Partners, Washington County 

The Washington Country Energy Partners are a collaboration of leading economic development 

organizations, elected officials and private companies. Its primary mission is to attract energy 

companies to locate in Washington County and help generate economic development in the 

region. 

SPC will continue to support the work of its partners in ways that are consistent with its various 

work programs and the 2040 Plan. The 2040 Plan promotes community and economic 

development by integrating economic development planning with transportation planning, 

allowing the region to use its unique advantages to maximize economic opportunity for its 

residents. 


5 - 13


Water and Sewer 

To accommodate and promote 

economic and community 

development, as well as health and 

human safety, the maintenance, 

repair and development of aging 

sewer and water infrastructure is an 

important and expensive 

proposition. It has been estimated 

that the cost to upgrade the 

region’s sewer and water 

infrastructure would require $9 

billion (SOURCE: Investing in 

Clean Water: A Report from the 

Southwestern Pennsylvania Water and Sewer Infrastructure Project Steering Committee (WSIP, 

2002)). 

There is no consistent, predictable allocated funding stream for water and sewer infrastructure to 

supplement user-fee based assessments and related bonding. Investment in the region’s water 

and sewer infrastructure has been achieved primarily through a state funding source, the 

Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority (PENNVEST). PENNVEST funding is 

achieved through low-interest loans. Federal funding has also been a critical source for 

infrastructure investment through appropriations from the Energy and Commerce Committee in 

Congress. 

Analyzing the investment in the region’s infrastructure since 2007 shows that Southwestern 

Pennsylvania has seen PENNVEST contribute a total of approximately $557 million, with the 

following breakdown: 

 

 

 

Wastewater Projects — 67 Projects/Approx. $343 Million 

Drinking Water Projects — 54 Projects/Approx. $207 Million 

Stormwater Projects — 5 Projects/Approx. $7 Million 

Looking at these investments, the typical wastewater project averaged approximately $5.13 

million per project; drinking water projects averaged approximately $3.84 million per project; 

and, stormwater projects averaged approximately $1.38 million per project. Overall, 

PENNVEST has invested an average of $4.44 million per project in the region. Most 

importantly, many of these projects have been completed through low interest loans through 

PENNVEST, which shows the region’s commitment to invest local funds to address the 

infrastructure needs. 

SPC will continue to work with its partners to address these issues by helping to identify funding 

sources for both effective planning and construction costs for projects that are consistent with the 

2040 Plan’s policies. 


5 - 14


Section 6. Plan Technical Analysis and Performance 

The 2040 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania makes 

substantial contributions toward greater mobility and reduced delay for people and goods 

traveling in the region. Improved access to regional activity centers facilitates economic growth 

and development. In this section are measures that dimension the Plan’s performance and its 

impact on the region. 

Forecasting and the Plan 

SPC’s long-range planning activity includes determining regional population, employment, 

and travel forecasts. These projections offer the best available portrayal of what 

Southwestern Pennsylvania will look like over the next few decades. As such, they are 

widely used by local governments, transit authorities, and state agencies in their own 

planning. 

SPC’s population and employment projections, based on the forecasting process and models 

discussed in Section 3, Regional Conditions and Trends, play two valuable complementary 

roles: identification of project needs, and assessment of the Plan’s performance. Where 

projections show substantial population growth, for example, they can lead to prioritizing of 

new transportation improvements to serve that location. In addition, the projections help 

SPC assess the Plan’s likely impact and to validate that the final Plan meets federal 

requirements. The population, household and employment projections are presented on 

Figures 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3. 


6 - 1



6 - 2



6 - 3



6 - 4


Air Quality Conformity 

The federal Clean Air Act specifies the analysis that must be conducted to show progress in 

achieving or maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). MPOs are 

responsible for making conformity determinations for both their long range transportation plan 

and for their short range Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). To demonstrate that the 

Plan conforms with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, the analysis must show that emissions 

from transportation sources do not exceed established emission “caps” (budgets). 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated eight non-attainment 

areas within Southwestern Pennsylvania for four separate National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS). The four air quality standards are: 

 

 

 

 

Carbon Monoxide NAAQS (one designated area illustrated in Figure 6.4 – City of 

Pittsburgh’s Central Business District); 

PM-10 NAAQS (one designated area illustrated in Figure 6.4 – five municipalities within 

Allegheny County); 

8-hour Ozone NAAQS (three separate areas illustrated in Figure 6.5 that, combined, 

cover nine of the ten counties within SPC’s planning area); and, 

PM2.5 NAAQS (three separate areas illustrated in Figure 6.6 that, combined, cover five 

entire counties and parts of four other counties). 

Transportation conformity must be addressed by SPC for each area. The companion document 

“Air Quality Conformity Determination for the Pittsburgh Transportation Management Area” 

(SPC, DRAFT May 2011) describes SPC’s transportation modeling process, the methods used to 

develop emission estimates and the results of the conformity analysis. 


6 - 5


Figure 6.4 PM-10 and CO Areas 


6 - 6


Figure 6.5 8-Hour Ozone Designations 


6 - 7


Figure 6.6 PM 2.5 Air Quality Designations 


6 - 8


Travel Times 

Estimated average peak-hour travel times between several key locations in Southwestern 

Pennsylvania are shown in Figures 6.7, 6.8 and 6.9, followed by four maps. The first three maps 

(Figures 6.10, 6.11 and 6.12) show the change between no-build conditions and the Plan for the 

geographic area within a 30-minute drive (at rush hour) of the region’s three largest employment 

centers: Pittsburgh International Airport, downtown Pittsburgh and Oakland. The fourth map 

(Figure 6.13) shows the projected changes in transportation conditions in Southwestern 

Pennsylvania. 

Compared to the no-build scenario, the Plan does not improve access to Oakland, the Golden 

Triangle, and the Airport, as the Plan does not contain any major projects that would improve 

access to these three major regional destinations. So there is virtually no change in the number 

of jobs within 30 minutes of these destinations. The number of people within 30 minutes of the 

Golden Triangle increases by about 3% with the Plan. There is no significant change to the 

number of people within 30 minutes of the Airport or Oakland. Trip times between most of the 

points listed in Figures 6.7, 6.8 and 6.9 increase between 2010 and 2040. A few exceptions are 

highlighted on Figure 6.9. Travel times between most of the locations listed on Figures 6.7, 6.8 

and 6.9 differ by less than five minutes between the no-build and the Plan. 

Travel and Delay 

In Figure 6-14 the "Existing" condition presents performance of today's transportation system. 

The "No-Build" presents the performance of today's transportation system with 2040 population, 

employment, and resultant travel demand. The "Plan" presents performance of the Plan's 

transportation system with 2040 travel patterns. Compared to today (Existing) the No-Build and 

Plan both show increased delay and time per trip. However, Figure 6-14 does show that there is 

nearly 5% less delay with the Plan compared to the No-Build. 

As shown in Figure 6.14, the total number of highway vehicle trips in Southwestern 

Pennsylvania is expected to grow from 6,295,869 per day in 2010 to 7,814,128 in 2040, an 

increase of about 25%. The average length of each trip remains essentially the same at just under 

10.0 miles per trip. 

The average delay per trip is estimated as 1.04 minutes with the Plan. The total delay with the 

Plan, at 168,607 person hours per day, is higher than existing conditions due to the 25% growth 

in trips between 2010 and 2040. 

The number of people traveling by transit will increase by over 15% between 2010 and 2040. 

This increase results from the overall 25%% increase in tripmaking. 

Figure 6.13 indicates that highway congestion will remain low in much of the region in 2040. 

The Plan will reduce congestion in areas experiencing moderate and high congestion compared 

with the no-build. 


6 - 9


Figure 6.7 Estimated Peak Hour Travel Times, Existing 


6 - 10


Figure 6.8 Estimated Peak Hour Travel Times, 2040 LRTP No-Build 


6 - 11


Figure 6.9 Estimated Peak Hour Travel Times, 2040 LRTP Build 


6 - 12


Figure 6.10 Zones within 30 Minutes Peak Travel Time of PIT Airport 


6 - 13


Figure 6.11 Zones within 30 Minutes Peak Travel Time of Downtown Pittsburgh 


6 - 14


Figure 6.12 Zones within 30 Minutes Peak Travel Time of Oakland 


6 - 15


Figure 6.13 Change in Highway Congestion 


6 - 16


Figure 6.14 Change in Regional Transportation Conditions 


6 - 17


Section 7. Consideration of Environmental Mitigation 

The Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Act: a 

Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA-LU), which 

was passed by Congress 

and signed by the 

President in August of 

2005, established new 

requirements for the 

preparation of long 

range transportation 

plans (LRPs). One of 

these new requirements 

is that plans include a 

discussion of potential environmental mitigation activities associated with proposed 

development, and potential implementation strategies for such activities. 

Other provisions focus on the need for earlier and more extensive consultation with resource 

agencies: 

 

 

 

 

SAFETEA-LU requires the MPO to consult with the regulatory and resource agencies 

“responsible for land use management, natural resources, environmental protection, 

conservation, and historic preservation concerning the development of the transportation 

plan,” (23 C.F.R. § 450.322(g)) 

Consultations shall involve “comparison of transportation plans to inventories of natural 

or historic resources, if available.” (23 C.F.R. § 450.322(g)(1)) 

Consultations shall involve “comparison of transportation plan with State conservation 

plans or maps, if available” (23 C.F.R. § 450.322(g)(2)) 

SAFETEA-LU requires “a discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation 

activities and potential areas to carry out these activities, including activities that may 

have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected 

by the plan. The discussion may focus on policies, programs, or strategies, rather than at 

the project level. ” (23 C.F.R. § 450.322(f)(7)) 

These provisions originate from a desire to extract benefits for overall transportation project 

development by considering environmental resources early in the transportation planning 

process. The early consideration of environmental resources during the transportation planning 


7 - 1


process can assist the subsequent environmental clearance process and compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on individual transportation projects. This concept 

is referred to as “linking planning and NEPA” or, more generally, “planning and environmental 

linkage”. This concept can assist in program predictability, project decisions, project 

deliverability, and mitigation decisions while responding to the desire to improve both 

transportation and the environment. 

Regional Environmental Resource Inventory 

Southwestern Pennsylvania is a geographically and geologically diverse area, with a generally 

rolling to mountainous terrain. The varied terrain and the natural and environmental resources 

found in the region have done much to shape the history of the region, and the future. 

Natural resource extraction 

has been a leading industry 

for more than 200 years, and 

remains a leading 

employment sector in many 

areas of the region. Many of 

the region’s natural 

amenities, including 

waterways, forested areas 

and hillsides have been 

protected from future 

development through 

preservation as State or 

Regional Parks, viewsheds 

or conservation areas. 

The regional landscape also reflects the presence of some operating surface mines, old strip 

mined areas, and many reclaimed stripping areas. In areas, valley sides and hillsides can be 

moderately steep and may be susceptible to landslides, which create a range of development 

opportunities and limitations. 

The 2040 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania promotes and 

protects the many environmental resources in the southwestern Pennsylvania region. The Plan 

also identifies the many environmentally based development limitations in the region, and makes 

deliberate efforts to divert development away from such areas. 


7 - 2


Identification of Environmental Resource Impacts 

In concert with the development of the 2040 Long Range Plan, SPC has produced a companion 

document, the Planning and Environmental Linkages in Southwestern Pennsylvania Report (as 

updated through the 2040 Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern 

Pennsylvania) to address these enhanced transportation planning and environmental linkage 

requirements. The interactive version of the full Environmental Linkages Report is available on 

the SPC website at http://www.spcregion.org/lrpenv/ 

The Environmental Addendum to the LRTP includes the following sections to address the 

planning and environmental linkage requirements of SAFETEA-LU: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory Context – summarizes major environmental resources and regulations related 

to the resources that influence transportation project development. The section also lists 

the available planning level data to identify these “red flag” resources. 

Agency Consultation Process – discusses and summarizes the activities that were 

conducted in consulting the regulatory environmental resource and cultural resource 

agencies. 

Environmental Inventory – presents a detailed inventory of available planning level data 

for environmental and cultural resources in the region; including numerous resource 

mapping figures. 

Existing “State Conservation Plans and Maps” - presents a review of current state 

conservation plans and maps. 

Environmental Screening – discusses and presents the analysis comparing a sample of 

LRTP projects (TIP candidate transportation projects from each of the ten counties in the 

SPC region) to the inventory of environmental and cultural resources. This section 

includes a summary matrix, project environmental checklist, and various preliminary 

constraint maps for the projects included in the screening. 

Potential Environmental Mitigation Activities – discusses the potential options and 

strategies for environmental mitigation activities for resources with the greatest potential 

to restore and maintain environmental functions and a discussion of spatial factors for 

identifying areas to carry out potential mitigation activities. 

Summary and Next Steps – summarizes the Addendum and provides some potential 

future regional planning activities to extend planning and environmental linkages. 

Environmental Consultation 

Dozens of statewide and regional environmental resource agencies and PennDOT environmental 

specialists were active participants in the development of SPC environmental resource mapping 

capabilities. 


7 - 3


In the development of a formal Planning and Environmental Linkage process with SPC, multiple 

meetings have been held with these environmental agencies and specialists to determine the 

frequency of on-going coordination and update efforts. Any impacts of the proposed 2040 

Transportation and Development Plan activities on these environmental resources, and the 

identification of potential strategies for the mitigation of any potential adverse impacts will be 

considered through a Statewide Agency Coordination Meeting. 


7 - 4


Section 8. Plan Implementation 

The Plan itself is a living document. With adoption it is used in ongoing planning efforts 

throughout southwestern Pennsylvania. It serves as vital input and as a planning tool into 

shorter-range planning efforts, ensuring coordination between different areas of planning, 

advancing specific projects that are in the pipeline that are being planned/programmed to achieve 

the Plan’s vision through advancing delivery of the policy statements. In addition, general policy 

actions to deliver the Plan vision are advanced through SPC’s various work programs and 

through outreach to regional public and private leadership, the media and the general public. 

Continuing the exchange of information and ongoing coordination among the various public, 

private and civic partners maximizes the return from individual planning efforts at the local, 

regional and state level. 

A variety of planning tools are utilized by SPC in its role as the MPO to translate the plan’s 

policies, programs and projects into reality. In the area of transportation planning and 

programming, these tools include SPC’s Transportation Improvement Program and Unified 

Planning Work Program. 

Transportation Improvement Program 

Updated every two years, the Transportation Improvement Program for Southwestern 

Pennsylvania sets the schedules for all transportation investments and project phases to be 

advanced over the next four years. The TIP is developed cooperatively by the regional planning 

partners with public input and directs and controls transportation funding. It is the delivery 

mechanism for advancing all transportation investments in the Plan. The next TIP update begins 

immediately with Plan adoption, with the new TIP scheduled to be in place by summer of 2012. 

This 2040 Long Range Plan will drive the next TIP’s investment decisions. 

Unified Planning Work Program 

SPC’s Unified Planning Work Program identifies the transportation planning priorities and 

activities to be carried out within the region each year. The next UPWP (2011-2012) starts July 

1, 2011, and has been developed to immediately begin to advance the Plan through a wide range 

of planning support tasks. The UPWP also includes other federally-funded transportation 

planning activities that are to be performed by other regional partners during the year, and any 

significant state or local planning activities to be conducted without federal funds in the region. 

The UPWP provides the planning tool to coordinate and advance Plan implementation for 

transportation strategies across all partners throughout the region. Development of the next 

UPWP (2012-2013) will begin in the fall of 2011 with a continued priority emphasis on Plan 

implementation. 


8 - 1


Development District Programs 

As the region’s Economic Development District and Local Development District, SPC 

administers and manages several state and federal programs including the Appalachian Regional 

Commission Area Development Program, the Economic Development Administration Economic 

Development Assistance Program, and various programs under the Commonwealth’s 

Department of Community and Economic Development. In addition to the guidelines and 

direction establish for each program by their sponsor, SPC will carry out these programs with the 

intent of implementing this plan. 

Appalachian Regional Commission Area Development Program 

ARC's Area Development Program seeks to augment the Highway Program and bring more of 

Appalachia's people into America's economic mainstream. At least half of ARC's area 

development grant funding is directed to projects that benefit counties and areas in the 

Appalachian Region designated by ARC as economically distressed. 

The focus of the area development program is on: 

promoting a diversified regional economy through strategies that help communities create 

and retain businesses and jobs; 

helping communities develop an educated, skilled workforce and create access to 

affordable, quality health care; and 

supporting the development and improvement of infrastructure, including water and 

sewer services, and the development and use of Internet access. 

Area Development Goals are supported by the following Plan Policy Statements: 

• Revitalization and redevelopment of the region’s existing communities is a priority. 

• Investment in infrastructure improvements will be coordinated and targeted at the 


• The region will focus on the identification and development of industrial sites with 

special attention given to well situated brownfield locations. 


• The region will place a priority on business development with a focus on existing 


• The region will support initiatives designed to improve both the quality and quantity of 

the region’s workforce to meet emerging industry demands. 



• The region will proactively support the emerging role of colleges and universities in 





8 - 2


SPC’s role as the LDD is key to project development and review, providing technical assistance 

to local project sponsors and sending priority recommendations to the state. High priority 

projects must exhibit support and enhancement of the plan policies. 

Economic Development Administration Economic Development Assistance Program 

The Economic Development Administration (EDA) was established under the Public Works and 

Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. § 3121), as amended, to generate jobs, help 

retain existing jobs, and stimulate industrial and commercial growth in economically distressed 

areas of the United States. EDA assistance is available to rural and urban areas of the nation 

experiencing high unemployment, low income, or other severe economic distress. 

In fulfilling its mission, EDA is guided by the basic principle that distressed communities must 

be empowered to develop and implement their own economic development and revitalization 

strategies. Based on these locally and regionally developed priorities, EDA works in partnership 

with state and local governments, regional economic development districts, public and private 

nonprofit organizations, and Indian tribes. EDA helps distressed communities address problems 

associated with long-term economic distress, as well as sudden and severe economic dislocations 

including recovering from the economic impacts of natural disasters, the closure of military 

installations and other Federal facilities, changing trade patterns, and the depletion of natural 

resources. 

This document serves as the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. This EDAapproved 

plan for economic development will be used as a guide in grant awards for water and 

sewer infrastructure systems, technology training centers, telecommunications facilities, research 

parks, and other major public-works projects. 

Economic Development Administration guidance on CEDS development indicates that a 

“CEDS Plan of Action” implements the goals and objectives of the CEDS in a manner that: 

promotes economic development and opportunity; fosters effective transportation access; 

enhances and protects the environment; maximizes effective development and use of the 

workforce consistent with any applicable State or local workforce investment strategy; promotes 

the use of technology in economic development, including access to high-speed 

telecommunications; balances resources through sound management of physical development; 

and obtains and utilizes adequate funds and other resources. 

The CEDS must also contain a section that discusses the methodology for cooperating and 

integrating the CEDS with a State's economic development priorities. Each component of that 

requirement is addressed in the 2040 Plan. 

Promotes Economic Development and Opportunity 

The overall policy statement of the plan “The region’s transportation and land use will support 

and enhance the regional economy and communities within it” shows that it is the intent of this 

plan to help guide sound investment decisions in a manner the enhances the regional economy. 


8 - 3


It can be said that it was a guiding principles along with enhancing the communities of the 

region. 

Fosters Effective Transportation Access 

As stated previously SPC, as the Economic Development District and the Metropolitan Planning 

Organization for Southwestern Pennsylvania, has integrated its CEDS development with the 

development of its Long Range Transportation Plan as joint transportation and development 

plan. In that regard this plan explicitly recognizes and stresses the ties between a well maintained 

efficient transportation system and economic opportunity. This is reflected as well in several of 

the key policy statements of the plan. These statements include: 

• Investment in infrastructure improvements will be coordinated and targeted at the 


• Maintenance of the existing transportation system will be a regional priority. 

• Transportation and development choices will reflect a priority on safe and secure 

multimodal and intermodal networks for both people and goods. 

• The region’s transportation system will be actively managed and operated to allow the 

system to function at its full potential. 

• The region’s transit system will connect people with resources throughout the entire 

region. 

Enhances and Protects the Environment 

It is understood that the concept of enhancing and protecting the environment in the region is 

inherent to the planning process and the plan itself. There are several key policy statements that 

address this issue specifically. The first is “The region’s infrastructure system will be designed 

to protect and enhance public health and the environment.” This is an understanding that all of 

the investments considered through the course of action supported by the plan should be 

designed not just to minimize impact on the environment but to enhance it. This becomes even 

more crucial when considering the policy statement that “The region will preserve, promote and 

develop the tourism and hospitality industries by capitalizing on historic, cultural, recreational 

and ecological assets”. In order for the region to advance this strategy it must enhance and 

protect the environment. 

Maximizes Effective Development and Use of the Workforce Consistent With Any Applicable 

State or Local Workforce Investment Strategy 

Again, this Plan addresses this issue directly in one of its policy statements. The statement that 

“The region will support initiatives designed to improve both the quality and quantity of the 

region’s workforce to meet emerging industry demands” is a direct response to the understanding 

that workforce issues are on the forefront of the economic development challenges of the region. 

Promotes the Use of Technology in Economic Development, Including Access to High-Speed 

Telecommunications 


8 - 4


Another of the key policy statements comprising the Plan is “The entire region will have access 

to broadband communications infrastructure”. This Plan recognizes that access to high-speed 

telecommunications is a vital component of modern business and seeks to support initiatives 

throughout the region to insure our competitiveness. 

Balances Resources Through Sound Management of Physical Development 

The Plan was developed with the understanding that to make the most effective and efficient use 

limited resources the region needed to smart on how where it made development and investment 

choices. This can best be captured in the following three policy statements: 

Revitalization and redevelopment of the region’s existing communities is a priority. 

Investment in infrastructure improvements will be coordinated and targeted at the corridor 

level to optimize the impact of the investment. 

The region will focus on the identification and development of industrial sites with special 

attention given to well situated brownfield locations. 

Cooperating and Integrating the CEDS with a State's Economic Development Priorities 

The regional vision that was established in the current Transportation and Development Plan for 

Southwestern Pennsylvania had, as its basis, the plans and strategies of SPC’s members and 

partners including State and other region plans. This updated Plan remains the nexus of those 

planning activities and documents, which include: the Commonwealth’s Transportation and 

Land Use for Economic Development Initiative, the strategies of the Allegheny Conference on 

Community Development, Keystone Principles for Development, County and City 

comprehensive or strategic plans, Action Plan for Investing in a New Pennsylvania (IBM), 

Regional Vision for Public Transportation, Transit Agencies’ Strategic Plans and Studies, 

Transportation Management Associations’ Plans, PennDOT Mobility Plan & Districts’ Business 

Plans, and the Governor's Transportation Funding and Reform Commission. 

Enterprise Development Program 

As a one of seven Local Development Districts in Pennsylvania SPC receives funding to assist in 

the delivery of business development services to the region’s small business community under its 

Enterprise Development Program. The Enterprise Development Program consists of three core 

programs: Business Finance Assistance; Government Procurement Assistance; and, Export 

Assistance. 

Business Finance Assistance 

SPC’s Business Finance Program helps entrepreneurs create business opportunities by acting as a 

public partner to reduce risk for local private sector lenders. SPC works with industrial 

development corporations and community-based development departments to create 

comprehensive loan packages that encourage economic investment in Southwestern 

Pennsylvania. Small businesses come to SPC to obtain low interest loans for working capital, 

machinery and equipment, or real estate to increase business and employment opportunities. 


8 - 5


Government Procurement Assistance 

SPC’s Government Procurement Assistance program helps hundreds of companies in the region 

market to and contract with federal, state and local government agencies. We provide one-on-one 

counseling and training with an emphasis on small businesses with minority, female or servicedisabled 

veteran owners to facilitate their participation in this market. 

SPC’s Procurement Technical Assistance Center (PTAC) helps companies to enter and succeed 

in the world of government contracting. Along with technical assistance, SPC provides 

companies with immediate alerts on solicitations that are issued for their particular products or 

services. 

On any given day there may be 2,000 or more solicitations that SPC sorts through and passes on 

to client companies at no charge. PTAC helps companies gain knowledge of standards and how 

to comply. In addition, PTAC provides the personalized technical assistance on bidding 

procedures and regulations that must be met when selling to the government. The one-on-one 

support PTAC offers is instrumental for small companies that are new to the government 

procurement process. 

Export Assistance 

The goal of SPC’s Export Development Program is to provide assistance and create 

opportunities for Southwestern Pennsylvania companies to expand their business internationally, 

thereby increasing export sales and employment prospects in the region. SPC’s Export 

Development staff offers consultative services to small- and mid-sized businesses located 

throughout Southwestern Pennsylvania. SPC’s Export Development Program also sponsors and 

co-sponsors educational seminars and training programs designed for exporters and potential 

exporters in the region. 

These Enterprise Development Programs supports the following Policy Statements: 

• The region will place a priority on business development with a focus on existing 


• The region will support initiatives designed to improve both the quality and quantity of 

the region’s workforce to meet emerging industry demands. 



• The region will proactively support the emerging role of colleges and universities in 





8 - 6


Broadband Outreach and Aggregation Fund 

The Broadband Outreach and Aggregation Fund (BOAF) is a vehicle whereby the SPC has 

helped develop outreach programs concerning the benefits, use and procurement of broadband 

services as well as providing seed grants to aggregate customer demand in communities with no 

service. SPC helps communities aggregate the demand. 

This program implements the following policy statement: 


Implementation of the Transportation and Development Plan for Southwestern 

Pennsylvania 

Whether it is in its role as the Economic Development District, the Local Development District, 

the Metropolitan Planning Organization, or the region’s forum, SPC seek out opportunities to 

support, progress and implement, the policies and intent of the Plan. This commitment continues 

with the Commission’s adoption of the 2040 Transportation and Development Plan for 

Southwestern Pennsylvania. 

The Plan’s policy statements provide the basis for decision-making related to all investments in 

southwestern Pennsylvania. Explicit connections exist between the Plan and ongoing SPC 

programming responsibilities and processes, both in transportation and economic development. 

The elements that are in place to guide Plan delivery include Plan Monitoring, Advance Plan 

Policies/Strategies (Plan Implementation), and Plan Administration. All three elements have 

required the active participation and commitment of all sectors of the region. 

Plan Monitoring 

As stated previously, the Long Range Plan is a living document. Plan policies, funding programs 

at the state and federal levels, and regional conditions change over time. The Plan monitoring 

process identifies the relevant change as it occurs between Plan update cycles. Changes in 

regional conditions reflected in the 2040 Transportation and Development Plan that were not part 

of the 2035 Plan include the role of Marcellus Shale Gas in the region, a new emphasis on Smart 

Transportation at the state and federal levels, and significant changes in funding expectations in 

the out years of the Plan. 

The Plan monitoring process is designed to track and flag the need for consideration of Plan 

update or amendment. It also tracks and assembles feedback on issues and regional priorities 

between Plan update cycles. As needed, specialty studies may be considered, and when 

appropriate undertaken through SPC’s work programs to investigate or address issues that 

surface between Plan cycles. Such studies could also be used to input to subsequent Plan 

updates. One such example is the SPC Report FIT: Future Investment in TOD. This SPCproduced 

workbook and website is an interactive tool to help planners, developers and municipal 

officials explore the potential for Transit Oriented Development in a particular area. Users enter 

specific data about a site or area into the website and are presented with a customized report 


8 - 7


comparing their site to a series of benchmarks for TOD success. The report shows which factors 

tilt toward a successful TOD and which need to be addressed during the planning phase. SPC 

plans to continue work on the FIT project by demonstrating its use around the state. 

Technical monitoring and tracking is routinely conducted of the specific actions and projects 

identified in the Plan. Results for transportation performance is conducted and reported through 

TIP monitoring reports and through various UPWP tasks annually. With regards to the 

Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) element of the Plan, performance 

measures used to evaluate implementation include but are not limited to number of jobs created 

after implementation of the CEDS, number and type of investments undertaken in the region, 

number of jobs retained in the region, amount of private sector investment in the region after 

implementation of the CEDS, and changes in the economic environment of the region. SPC’s 

extensive data bases and systems will continue be used for this performance monitoring. Key 

findings from these monitoring activities are presented in SPC’s Annual Reports, are shared with 

SPC’s various committees and are posted on the SPC website. Information and Plan 

implementation status reports are shared with decision-makers, stakeholders and the public. 

Monitoring of the Comprehensive Economic Development element of the Plan also focuses on 

advancing the CEDS plan of action. This includes implementing the goals and objectives of the 

CEDS in a manner that: promotes economic development and opportunity; fosters effective 

transportation access; enhances and protects the environment; maximizes effective development 

and use of the workforce consistent with applicable state and local workforce investment 

strategy; promotes the use of technology in economic development, including access to highspeed 

telecommunications; balances resources through sound management of physical 

development; obtains and utilizes adequate funds and other resources; and effectively and 

cooperatively integrates the CEDS with the Commonwealth’s economic development priorities. 

Advance Plan Policies/Strategies 

Both SPC’s final Plan product and the process used to develop that Plan are subject to various 

federal compliance requirements. Following are some of the primary federal requirements that 

guide SPC’s planning activities and to which this Plan is responsive. 

Responsiveness to SAFETEA-LU Guidelines 

The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA-LU), the current Federal surface transportation legislation, requires that long-range 

transportation plans must take into account eight planning factors. Plans must: 

1. Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global 

competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency; 

2. Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users; 

3. Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users; 

4. Increase accessibility and mobility of people and for freight; 


8 - 8


5. Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality 

of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and 

local planned growth and economic development patterns; 

6. Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and 

between modes, for people and freight; 

7. Promote efficient system management and operation; and 

8. Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system. 

The 2035 Plan’s sixteen policy statements and directly related delivery activities responded 

directly to these SAFETEA-LU planning factors. Progress has been made in each of these areas 

since the adoption of the 2035 Plan. Examples of efforts underway to advance these policy 

priorities are provided below: 

Planning Factor 1: Support Economic Vitality 

The region seeks to have transportation and land use support and enhance the regional economy 

and the communities within it. The Plan focused on strengthening our communities through 

policies, implementing programs and projects that improved the efficiency of the transportation 

system, encouraging infill development and downtown revitalization, promoting effective use of 

growth corridors, and connecting existing communities and corridors in the region with multiple 

modes of transportation. 

To this end, SPC has completed a series of Transit Oriented Design Studies and Guidelines, each 

designed to better integrate the land use, economic development, transportation and community 

development goals of areas served by transit nodes. Specific efforts underway in the region 

include: 

East Liberty, Pittsburgh: The City of Pittsburgh’s East Liberty TRID study (elTRID) 

holds the potential to become the first successful TRID in the state to capture revenue. 

This project is centered on the East Busway station and the Penn Mall bus turnout area. 

SMART TRID (South Hills, Pittsburgh): This study involves two neighborhoods along 

the PAAC light rail line as they look at potential development opportunities and related 

infrastructure improvements in the areas around the South Hills Junction and the 

Beechview light rail stations. 

Rochester Borough, Beaver County: Rochester was among the first communities in the 

state to complete a TRID study. The TRID planning process has lead to a series of 

successful projects sponsored by the Beaver County Transit Authority (BCTA) and 

PennDOT. The current project is the construction of a traffic roundabout in the center of 

the borough. 

Rt. 51 Communities, Allegheny County: In 2010, several of the communities along the 

SR51 Corridor, including Baldwin, Whitehall, Jefferson Hills and the City of Pittsburgh 

have allied themselves under the name “Economic Development South” and have taken 


8 - 9


 

 

 

the first steps toward starting a TRID study centered on the Rt. 51/Rt. 88 intersection and 

its proximity to the terminus of Port Authority of Allegheny County’s South Busway. 

West Busway Communities (Allegheny County)—Sheraden & Carnegie: In 2010 SPC 

and Allegheny County sponsored a TOD study of the communities surrounding stops on 

Port Authority’s West Busway, focusing on two: Sheraden, a City of Pittsburgh 

neighborhood, and Carnegie Borough. 

Castle Shannon (Allegheny County): A TOD project centered on the Port Authority’s 

light rail station in Castle Shannon call for a mixed-use apartment/retail building and a 

Port Authority park-and-ride structure utilizing air rights over the station. 

Mt. Lebanon/Dormont (Allegheny County): The origins of the Mt. Lebanon/Dormont 

TRID project go back to the mid 1980s, when the Mt. Lebanon Parking Authority 

purchased the air rights to develop the area above the T station. Efforts continue to 

advance TOD strategies to connect the shopping district on Washington Road down to 

the T station and the residential areas. In 2008 the South Hills TRID Study, which 

looked at three stations: Potomac and Dormont Junctions in Dormont and Mt. Lebanon 

Station, was released. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations, such as SPC, also play an integral role in advancing the 

principles of livability and livable communities by serving as a forum for the integration of 

transportation, housing, environmental, community and economic development plans, and the 

development of implementation plans for livable communities. Transportation initiatives that 

contribute to community livability include the development of multi-modal corridors and the 

provision of modal choice; congestion reduction; a reduction in Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) 

and other methods of reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions. 

To this end, SPC has been an active participant in a range of initiatives aimed at improving 

community quality of life. At the federal level, the US Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD), the US Department of Transportation (DOT), and the US Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and the joined forces in 2009 to create the HUD-DOT-EPA 

Partnership for Sustainable Communities focusing on the following principles: 

Livability Principles 

Provide more transportation choices. 

 

 

 

 

 

Promote equitable, affordable housing. 

Enhance economic competitiveness. 

Support existing communities. 

Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment. 

Value communities and neighborhoods. 


8 - 10


Partnership Agreement 

 

Enhance integrated planning and investment. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Provide a vision for sustainable growth. 

Redefine housing affordability and make it transparent. 

Redevelop underutilized sites. 

Develop livability measures and tools. 

Align HUD, DOT, and EPA programs. 

Undertake joint research, data collection, and outreach. 

In May of 2010, the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission was one of only two regions in the 

country to host a US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “Sustainable Transportation 

Performance Measures Workshop”. This EPA/SPC workshop engaged regional stakeholders in a 

discussion of innovative transportation performance measures. Workshop participants reviewed 

and provided feedback on EPA’s draft Guide to Sustainable Transportation Performance 

Measures and how this research can inform initiatives already underway in the SPC region. This 

workshop was conducted in support of the Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities, 

a federally led effort to coordinate and integrate activities of the US Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, US Department of Transportation, and EPA. Members of the public 

participated in a facilitated discussion of the challenges to and opportunities for advancing 

sustainable transportation projects and programs at different phases of decision making, as well 

as specific metrics SPC can realistically apply to current and up-coming projects, as reflected in 

the 2040 Plan. 

Planning Factor 2: Transportation Safety 

SPC has dedicated significant resources to transportation operations and safety projects and line 

items. This commitment continues with Commission adoption of the 2040 Plan. In addition, 

SPC’s regional Transportation Operations and Safety Committee plays an important role as a 

regional facilitator of transportation safety efforts. This includes assisting PennDOT in 

advancing the statewide Comprehensive Strategic Highway Safety Improvement Plan (CSHSIP), 

programming safety projects on the TIP, integrating safety into the Regional Operations Plan and 

the Congestion Management Process, and supporting efforts to improve safety-related education, 

enforcement, engineering and emergency response. 

Since the adoption of the 2035 Plan, SPC has completed eleven Road Safety Audits in the 

region. Each Roadway Safety Audit consists of a three day field survey by a multidisciplinary 

team, with field views slated in daylight, night time and peak hour conditions. During these field 

views, local road conditions are thoroughly documented and photographed. The team then 

reviews conditions, and provides the road owner (municipality, County or PennDOT) with a 

report containing their finding and a list of suggested strategies for roadway safety enhancement. 


8 - 11


To date, Roadway Safety Audits have been completed in each County in the region, and 

additional Roadway Safety Audits are proposed in the 2011-2012 Unified Planning Work 

Program. 

Federal SAFETEA-LU legislation expanded the emphasis on safety and security by untying the 

two concepts and elevating their status. One of the ways it did this was by establishing a new 

core Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), which is structured and funded to 

significantly reduce highway fatalities and provides states with the flexibility to target their most 

critical safety needs. In Pennsylvania, these safety needs are identified in PennDOT’s Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The SHSP establishes a statewide goal of reducing highway 

fatalities by 100 per year (see Figure 8-1) and identifies the seven vital safety focus areas: 

Reducing Aggressive Driving; 

Reducing Impaired (DUI) Driving; 

Increasing Seatbelt Usage; 

Infrastructure Improvements; 

Improving Traffic Records; 

Reducing Motorcycle Crashes; and, 

Mature Driver Safety. 

Recognition of this statewide goal and progress on these focus areas requires extensive support 

and cooperation from a variety of stakeholders representing the four “E’s” of transportation 

safety: Education, Enforcement, Engineering, and Emergency Response. SPC’s broad-based 

regional Transportation Operations and Safety Committee plays an important role as a regional 

facilitator of these efforts, as well as a link to the project programming process. 


8 - 12


Figure 8.1 – Traffic Fatalities in Southwestern Pennsylvania, 1999-2010 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

Traffic Fatalities 

PA 

SPC 

200 

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010* 

Planning Factor 3: Transportation Security 

Since 1991 and the passage of ISTEA, Congress has included safety and security of the 

transportation system as factors to address in the MPO long-range planning process. However, 

until the passage of SAFETEA-LU, the emphasis has been on safety, with security receiving 

little attention or guidance beyond some federal transit programs. In the wake of national events 

such as the September 11 th terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, and other catastrophes, Congress 

has added security as a stand-alone planning factor to be considered in MPO long range 

transportation plans. SPC is addressing this planning factor through interagency coordination 

efforts such as the Regional Operations Plan, which identifies projects and programs for potential 

funding and implementation through various stakeholder agencies. These include a variety of 

new, planned, and ongoing projects such as: 

Implementation of Region 511 Traffic Information System 

Establishing incident management teams on selected corridors; 

Establishing a clear incident management system and response procedures for various 

types of incidents and emergencies; 

Exploring real or virtual co-location of operations centers; 

Developing pre-planned detour routings for key roadway segments; 

Exploring expanded use of Freeway Service Patrols; 

Developing and implementing a plan to close existing equipment gaps in the regional ITS 

network; 

Developing evacuation plans and procedures for natural and man-made emergency 

events; and, 


8 - 13 

*Preliminary Data


 

Expanding partnerships with organizations to utilize their communication networks for 

distributing critical traveler information. 

Planning Factor 4: Accessibility and Mobility 

The 2035 Plan sought to improve accessibility and mobility for all modes of transportation. This 

commitment continues with the adoption of the 2040 Plan. Progress has been made in many 

areas to advance this planning priority: 

Transit Visioning: 

 

Washington County Transit Vision: The three transit operators in Washington County 

(Mid-Mon Valley Transit Authority, Washington City Transit and Washington Rides) 

continue to work together to improve cooperation and find new ways to offer better 

service. This includes completion of a Transit Vision Plan for the county and a detailed 

look at the financial challenges and opportunities of all three agencies. SPC will continue 

to provide technical assistance as needed 

Regional Fare Collection Project: 

The “Smart Card” project is set to reach full implementation in April of 2012. This 

project involves farebox upgrades for the Port Authority of Allegheny County as well as 

many of the region’s other transit providers. Re-loadable Smart Cards will replace 

traditional bus passes, providing operational efficiencies and new opportunities for 

regional cooperation. The participating operators include: PAAC, Westmoreland County 

Transit Authority, Butler Transit Authority, Washington Rides, Washington City Transit 

and Mid-Mon Valley Transit Authority. 

 

Regional Trip Finder Service: 

A new project facilitated by SPC is set to reach implementation by the end of 2012. The 

Regional Trip Finder will allow the participating transit providers to offer their customers 

the ability to use the Internet to plan a trip that involves multiple transit services. For 

example, the system will allow a customer to plan how to use BCTA to get from 

Rochester to Pittsburgh and then use PAAC to get to a destination in Oakland, including 

time, transfer and fare information. All of the region’s fixed-route operators are 

participants in this project. 


8 - 14


 

CommuteInfo/Rideshare Program: 

. 

 

In 2010, CommuteInfo’s 1000+ vanpool and carpool program members kept 736 single 

occupancy vehicles from traveling on area roadways each workday. Assuming 260 days 

of work/school related trips throughout the year, the carpool and vanpool groups have 

averted 382,720 vehicle trips in the region. In addition, using an average of a 15 mile one 

way commute (30 miles round trip), this savings also means a reduction of 5,740,800 

vehicle miles traveled. 

2010 CommuteInfo Outcomes 

Commuters Carpooling or Vanpooling 1,011 

Single Occupancy Vehicles Off Roadways Each 

Workday 

736 

Number of Vehicle Trips Off Roadways Each Year 382,720 

Number of Vehicle Miles Off Roadways Each Year 5,740,800 

The CommuteInfo program is coordinated in partnership with transportation management 

associations, transportation providers, businesses, and non-profit service organizations 

throughout Southwestern PA. The CommuteInfo program is designed to increase the 

number of people who travel to work or school by riding transit, carpooling, vanpooling, 

or bikepooling. 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodation: 

Planning for the design of pedestrian and bicycle accommodations within the existing 

transportation network continues actively in the region. Active Allegheny, the Pedestrian 

and Bicycle element of the Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan was completed in 

2010. This Plan recommends the establishment of bicycle commuter routes throughout 

the County, better pedestrian and bicycle access to regional trails and parks, and 

pedestrian enhancements in the vicinity of commercial centers, transit stops and 

employment centers. The three Transportation Management Associations in the region 

(Oakland Transportation Management Association, Airport Corridor Transportation 

Association and Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership) have all secured funding for the 

implementation of pedestrian accommodation enhancements since the adoption of the 

2035 Long Range Plan. Numerous other efforts continue with our County and municipal 

planning partners to identify issues and opportunities relative to pedestrian and bicycle 

accommodation in the region. 

The establishment of connections between local and regional bicycle trails (rail trails) 

into a regional trail network is a model that is being emulated in several areas of 

Southwestern Pennsylvania. The Ohio River Trail Council is working to establish a 

connection from the Montour Trail at Groveton, in Allegheny County, westward along 

the Ohio River to the Ohio State Line. A short extension would then permit the 


8 - 15


connection to the Lake to River Trail in Ohio, an effort currently underway that seeks to 

create a continuous trail from Lake Erie in the north to the Ohio River in the South. 

A similar north-south trail network is also under development in the SPC region, under 

the guidance of the Erie to Pittsburgh Trail Alliance. This consortium of trail 

development groups has identified a program of trail connections that would link 

Pittsburgh to Lake Erie via a major trail nexus at Freeport, at the juncture of 

Westmoreland, Allegheny, Butler and Armstrong Counties. 

To connect the City to Freeport, Friends of the Riverfront has developed a plan for the 

extension of the Three Rivers Heritage Trail from Pittsburgh to Freeport, along the north 

shore of the Allegheny River. Recent efforts to advance that trail extension include the 

formal opening of the Millvale Trail Connection in Allegheny County, and preparation of 

a formal plan for trail connectivity through the 17 communities that separate the City of 

Pittsburgh from the Municipality of Freeport. 

The City of Pittsburgh has recently embarked on a program of bike lane development 

along roadway corridors demonstrating high bicycle utilization, which has resulted in a 

dramatic increase in the miles of bike lanes in the City. However, not all roadways are 

suited for bike lanes. In cases of insufficient roadway width, the City has implemented a 

program of Shared Lane markings. 

This Shared Lane marking program, or Sharrow program, results in the placement of 

bicycle markings on the roadway pavement, but does not create an exclusive lane for use 

by bicyclists. Recently added to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices 

(MUTCD), the utilization of Sharrow markings in Pittsburgh has been considered 

“experimental” to date. 

Based on the success of the Sharrow program in Pittsburgh, the City of Butler also 

recently implemented a Shared Lane marking program for bicyclists in that community. 

Other communities are also considering their use. 

Planning Factor 5: Environment, Energy Conservation & Plan Consistency 

A commitment to the preservation and enhancement of the region’s quality of life is inherent in 

many of the policy statements associated with the Regional Vision set forth in this Plan. All 

activities of SPC and its Planning Partners are done with recognition of the need to balance 

development with the issue of protecting the environment and achieving the desired quality of 

life. Air quality is closely monitored in Southwestern Pennsylvania and SPC actively promotes 

transit use, ridesharing and other fuel-efficient transportation strategies. To further reduce air 

emissions, SPC’s Congestion Management Process and Intelligent Transportation Systems 

initiatives strongly support the implementation of traffic signal improvements and other 

technologies as low-impact, cost-effective ways to conserve energy and improve traffic flow. 


8 - 16


Planning and Environmental Linkages 

A variety of planning initiatives are underway at SPC and partner agencies that will assist in 

translating the plan’s ideals and policy statements into tangible program areas and results. One 

of these emerging planning initiatives is known in transportation planning circles as “Planning 

and Environmental Linkages” (PEL) or “Linking Planning and NEPA” (LPN). NEPA is the 

National Environmental Policy Act and in this context represents the detailed environmental 

studies, clearance, and permitting required for transportation projects in the design stage. The 

LPN initiatives originate from a desire to extract benefits for overall transportation project 

development by considering environmental resources early in the transportation planning 

process. FHWA, PennDOT, and SPC have embraced these LPN initiatives with the goal of 

improving project selection, increasing program predictability, and increasing the efficiency of 

the overall project development process; resulting in a transportation system that has less of an 

impact on the region’s natural resources, cultural resources, and community resources. The 

pursuit of these PEL/LPN initiative goals will help to implement the overall plan policy 

statements that they are consistent with including: 

Investment in infrastructure improvements will be coordinated and targeted at the 


The region’s infrastructure system will be designed to protect and enhance public health 

and the environment. 

Capitalizing on the region’s historic, cultural, recreational, and ecological assets. 

SPC has focused increased attention on the PEL/LPN provisions within SAFETEA-LU 

metropolitan long-range transportation plan regulations for the development of this 2040 long 

range plan. The result of this focus is a new plan addendum on environmental aspects, which 

incorporates many PEL/LPN concepts and practices. A comprehensive version of this 

addendum material is available at http://www.spcregion.org/lrpenv/ . Much of the data, tools, 

processes, and coordination activities developed during the completion of the addendum will be 

useful in future implementation activities associated with these initiatives. 

PennDOT recently revamped its statewide project development process to include LPN 

provisions, particularly for early planning and asset management focus. SPC and the PennDOT 

Districts in the region are working collaboratively to implement these LPN provisions into the 

project and program development process. SPC has established District Project Development 

Work Groups in each of the three PennDOT Districts in the region, including the SPC member 

planning departments and other transportation agencies, to implement and administer the LPN 

provisions. Through this work, the District Project Development Work Groups will help to 

deliver the 2013 Transportation Improvement Plan. The District Project Development Work 

Groups will be considering transportation problems and project proposals at a level of detail not 

considered in prior TIP updates. Details on project need, project purpose, location, scope, costs, 

engineering aspects, and environmental aspects will be provided via new LPN screening forms, 

which are required to be completed on each new problem/project considered for the 2013 TIP 

update. This information will be helpful in project comparisons that ultimately increase cost 

effectiveness of the program and provide benefits to the subsequent stages of project 

development. 


8 - 17


Improving Regional Air Quality 

Pennsylvania’s “Climate Change Act” (Act 70 of 2008, effective July 9, 2008) required the 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP) to convene a Climate Change 

Action Committee to develop a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions inventory for the 

Commonwealth and to prepare a Climate Change Action Plan. The inventory is to be updated 

annually and is to establish GHG emissions trends and the relative contributions of major 

sectors. The Climate Change Action Plan is to be prepared and updated on a three year cycle. 

The first Climate Change Action Plan was published in December, 2009. It identifies GHG 

emission trends, evaluates cost-effective strategies for reducing GHG emissions, identifies the 

costs and benefits of GHG reduction strategies recommended by the Action Plan, and 

recommends to the General Assembly legislative changes necessary to implement the Plan. The 

Plan establishes an overall goal to reduce GHG emissions to a level 30% below year 2000 levels 

by the year 2020. The work plans and recommendations in the Climate Change Action Plan 

recognize recent federal and state actions that will lead to reductions in GHG emissions, and 

identify additional opportunities for mitigating GHG emissions. 

Emissions of greenhouse gases are expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 e). 

Each GHG has a different impact on climate. For making comparisons, all greenhouse gas 

emissions are converted to their impact of an equal volume of CO 2 . On a net emissions basis 

Pennsylvania, in 2000, accounted for approximately 263 million metric tons of greenhouse 

gases (263 MMtCO 2 e), or about 4% of the total U.S. net GHG emissions. 

The principal sources of GHG emissions in Pennsylvania in 2000 included electricity 

consumption (30%), industrial activities (28%), transportation and land use (24%), and 

residential and commercial fuel use (14%). Waste handling, forestry and agriculture sectors 

combined account for the remaining 5% of the total. 

Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation and land use activities are produced largely by 

burning of gasoline or diesel fuel by light-duty (on-road) vehicles, aircraft, rail engines, and 

marine engines. In 2000, the land use and transportation sector contributed about 70 MMtCO 2 e 

(about 25% of the statewide total). On-road gasoline and diesel combustion contributed about 

79% of the total land use and transportation emissions (64% and 15% respectively). The 

remaining land use and transportation emissions were contributed by aviation (11%), marine 

(4%), and rail and other non-road sources (5%). 

The Climate Action Plan provides work plans and recommendations that, if fully implemented, 

can achieve the target reduction of 30% below 2000 levels by 2020 (a reduction of nearly 84 

MMtCO 2 e per year). Recent federal and state actions have the potential to reduce GHG 

emissions by an additional 24 MMtCO 2 e. 

The emissions reduction recommendations for the transportation and land use sector are 

estimated to reduce GHG emissions by up to 7 MMtCO 2 e. When combined with the benefits 

from recent federal and state actions, a potential GHG emission reduction of up to 22 MMtCO 2 e 


8 - 18


from the transportation and land use sector is identified, if all the recommendation and recent 

actions are fully implemented. 

The recent federal and state actions in the transportation and land use sector include: 

Pennsylvania’s Clean Vehicle Program, Federal Vehicle GHG emissions and CAFÉ standards, 

Biofuel Development and In-State Production Incentive Act, and Pennsylvania’s Diesel Antiidling 

Program. 

Many of the Climate Action Plan’s recommendations for the transportation and land use sector 

are consistent with policies and strategies articulated during development of SPC's 2035 Long 

Range plan in 2007. The Climate Action Plan's recommendations for the transportation and land 

use sector and their potential emissions reductions, include: 

Low-Rolling Resistance Tires (0.68 MMtCO 2 e reduction) can improve fuel efficiency in 

all vehicles by up to 3 to 4 percent. 

Eco-Driving (3.51 MMtCO 2 e reduction). This includes five elements (1) Pay as you 

drive insurance, which provides an incentive to drive less; (2) Feebates, which provide 

incentives to purchase more fuel-efficient vehicles and a tax on less efficient vehicles; (3) 

providing direct driver training on methods to save fuel while on the road; (4) 

Encouraging proper tire inflation guidelines which provide fuel savings at minimal cost; 

and (5) most vehicles are more fuel efficient at 55 MPH than 65 MPH, reducing the 

speed limit should provide significant GHG reductions. 

Utilizing Existing Public Transportation Systems (0.05 MMtCO 2 e reduction). The 

Climate Action Work Plan emphasizes the need to make significant capital investments 

in transit in order to provide options to driving alone. 

Increasing participation in Efficient Passenger Transit (0.12 MMtCO 2 e reduction). This 

recommendation complements the one above providing incentives for work place 

promotion of public transit use, carpooling or vanpooling, telecommuting, urban and 

intercity roadway tolls, sales tax exemptions for eCommerce, and other measures that 

could decrease drive alone trips, increase transit trips, and avoid motor vehicle trips 

altogether. 

Cutting Emissions from Freight Transportation (0.99 MMtCO 2 e reduction). 

Recommendations included fuel efficiency improvements and emission reduction 

measures for freight vehicles (trucks, rail locomotives, and marine vessels). 

Increasing Federal Support for Efficient Transit and Freight Transport in Pa (1.17 

MMtCO 2 e reduction). This set of recommendations recognize that many of the 

advancements needed in the transit system will not occur without a large increase in 

federal support for transit operations, car and vanpool programs, telecommuting 

strategies, and other activities that will cut transportation and land use sector GHG 

emissions. 

Enhanced Support for Existing Smart Growth, Transportation and Land Use Policies; and 

Transit-Oriented Design, Smart Growth Communities, and Land Use Solutions (0.76 

MMtCO 2 e reduction). This includes two sets of recommendations. One to use existing 

policies and regulations to promote smart growth principles to create more compact 

communities with a mix of land uses that generate less vehicular traffic and support auto 


8 - 19


trip reduction measures. The other set to implement new policies to promote smart 

growth communities and sustainable land use practices including transit oriented 

development, infill projects, and policies to reduce the consumption of undeveloped land 

outside existing towns and other built-up areas. These recommendations recognize the 

need for both new legislation and changes to Pennsylvania's Metropolitan Planning Code. 

SPC's Transportation and Development Plan policy statements and overall emphasis on 

investment in corridors and centers support many of these recommendations of the Pennsylvania 

Climate Action Plan. New or ongoing SPC Plan implementation strategies include: 

 

 

 

 

 

Continuation of SPC's regional ridesharing program (CommuteInfo), which operates the 

regional carpool and vanpool programs and promotes other ridesharing options. 

Managing SPC's process for selecting projects for funding through the Congestion 

Management and Air Quality Program (CMAQ). Projects selected for CMAQ funding 

must show a potential for reductions in vehicle emissions. 

Implementation of SPC's traffic signal improvement program which provides funding to 

local communities to re-time and upgrade traffic signals to improve traffic operations and 

reduce vehicle delay at intersections. 

Development of guidelines and criteria for design of Transit Oriented Development 

(TOD) projects. 

Funding for a pilot project to implement Smart Transportation projects, which is modeled 

on the statewide PCTI Program. 

SPC is also implementing strategies that support and advance recommendations for GHG 

reductions in other sectors. For example, SPC's Energy Program supports Pennsylvania's 

Climate Action Plan recommendations for the Residential and Commercial fuel use sector. 

Energy costs in the SPC region are predicted to increase by 29% in the next few years. SPC 

created PowerSmart to help local governments and non-profit agencies save money while 

improving the environment and building a green job economy. 

PowerSmart is SPC’s comprehensive approach to reduce energy costs for local governments, 

schools and non-profits through energy efficiency improvements and demand-side energy 

management. Services include: 

Approaches to energy management planning 

Technical Assistance 

Utility Bill Analysis 

Training Workshops 

Energy Assessments & Audits 

LED Traffic Signal Conversion 

Help with accessing financing or funding for improvements 

Participation on the Clean Cities program to promote the use of alternative fuels and 

support infrastructure for selected fuels throughout the region. 

Promotion of combined heat and power systems in wastewater treatment facilities to 

capture a triple bottom line for the environment: reduction of methane gases from 


8 - 20


wastewater treatment facilities; reduction in use of electricity to operate the plant and 

generation of power from waste heat. 

Participating in the PowerSmart program results in: 

reduced energy consumption and increased operating efficiencies 

lower energy bills and operating costs 

reduced greenhouse gas emissions 

lower costs for taxpayers, and 

creation of more environmentally friendly policies. 

Planning Factor 6: Integration of Modes 

As presented in Section 3, Regional Conditions and Trends, Southwestern Pennsylvania features 

a transportation network that is both intermodal and multimodal in scope, with thousands of 

miles of highways, ten transit service providers, two dozen airports, more than 1,400 miles of rail 

lines, pedestrian and bicycle facilities in every County, and the second busiest inland port in the 

United States. The integration of these modes into a unified transportation network is a primary 

focus of the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission’s annual work program. Ongoing efforts 

directed at intermodal integration within the region include cooperative efforts by the SPC 

Pedestrian / Bicycle Committee and PennDOT in the development and implementation of a 

planning and design checklist to ensure that highway improvement projects include pedestrian 

and bicycle accommodations. 

SPC works closely with PennDOT partners in the design, implementation and utilization of the 

PennDOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Programming Checklist. Completed for each project, this 

checklist is used to document the presence of pedestrians and bicycles in a project areas, and to 

determine the need for and nature of any necessary pedestrian and bicycle improvements in 

association with a PennDOT funded transportation improvement program. The Pedestrian and 

Bicycle Programming checklist has been used to review proposals for shared use sidewalks on 

the Freeport Bridge, a major crossing of the Allegheny River, and for the design of sidewalk 

enhancement and shared lane markings to be completed in association with the West Carson 

Street/Route 51 Viaduct project. However, perhaps the most visible example of how the region 

has worked together to accommodate pedestrians and bicycles in highway projects can be seen in 

the PA Route 28 Millvale Trail connection. The Millvale Trail, part of the Three Rivers Heritage 

Trail System, connects downtown Pittsburgh with the community of Millvale, following the 

North Shore of the Allegheny River. Along the same routing, PennDOT has been working to 

advance the PA Route 28 enhancement project to address congestion along this major 

commuting arterial. The narrow corridor is also shared by the Norfolk Southern Railroad’s 

Conemaugh line. 

In order to widen Route 28, it was necessary to maximize the use of the entire corridor width. At 

one pinch point, it appeared that the existing pedestrian and bicycle trail would have to be 

sacrificed to make sufficient corridor width for the expanded highway and the railroad. The trail 

was saved when PennDOT, working with the City and regional trail partners, agreed to design a 

“floating” trail connection that permitted the trail to extend over and area of floodplain and steep 


8 - 21


shoreline. The Millvale Trail connection was completed in 2010, and remains a popular walking 

and biking commuter route into downtown Pittsburgh. It also serves as the regional connection 

to the proposed Erie to Pittsburgh Trail. 

The regional Freight Forum brings together freight interests from the rail, trucking, aviation and 

barge industries to identify intermodal connectivity needs, assets and opportunities in the region. 

Regional initiatives to advance freight planning in the region include SPC participation in the US 

Army Corps of Engineers’ Upper Ohio Navigation Study, an assessment of the maintenance 

needs of the Locks and Dams on the Upper Ohio River. Also significant to the region is the 

2009 award of $98 million in federal funding to the CSX Railroad’s “National Gateway” project 

to provide double stack (vertical) clearance for the entire distance of their line from the Midwest 

to the East Coast. About a dozen projects are completed or currently underway in the region. 

This program of improvements is slated for completion in 2012. 

Planning Factor 7: System Management & Operations 

SPC’s regional Transportation Operations and Safety Committee coordinates efforts to ensure 

efficient system management and operations with a variety of regional stakeholders representing 

multiple transportation modes. One of these efforts is the implementation of a comprehensive 

Congestion Management Process (CMP). SPC’s CMP includes active monitoring of more than 

100 corridors throughout Southwestern Pennsylvania and identifies strategies to address both 

recurring and non-recurring congestion. The data and information generated through the CMP is 

shared through an innovative on-line reporting system that makes the CMP readily accessible to 

planning partners and the public throughout the region. This information is also integrated into 

the programming process and used to help evaluate the potential effectiveness of proposed 

projects. 

Planning Factor 8: Preservation of the Existing System 

SPC remains attentive to the need to preserve the existing transportation system, as evidenced by 

the policy statement, “Maintenance of the existing transportation system will be a regional 

priority.” The vast majority of highway, bridge, and transit funding in this Plan continues to be 

dedicated to maintenance and upgrades of existing infrastructure. 


8 - 22


Responsiveness to Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Guidelines 

This 2040 Plan was developed consistent with section 302 of the Public Works and Economic 

Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. § 3162) and EDA regulations at 13 C.F.R. part 303 

governing CEDS development. The Plan document addresses all key technical requirements set 

forth by the Economic Development Administration. These include a detailed background of the 

region, an analysis of the economic development problems, and goals of the region. The Plan 

document also has an in-depth discussion on community and private sector participation in Plan 

development, a list of strategic projects, programs and activities, as well as, a detailed description 

on a plan of action and performance monitoring. 

Improve Project Delivery Process 

Plan implementation also includes advancing strategies for improving the transportation project 

delivery process. Plan projects and investments cannot languish amidst rising construction costs. 

Tight funds dictate timely and efficient usage of all available resources. Actions will include 

better integration across all modal programs through SPC’s committee structure that brings 

project sponsor partners regularly to the SPC table, improved and expanded mechanisms for 

public and stakeholder involvement to assist planning, programming and project delivery, and 

improved project data bases for tracking project costs, emerging delivery issues, and sponsor 

performance. SPC’s Unified Planning Work Program will continue to advance activities to 

improve the project delivery process. 

Continuing and ongoing stakeholders and public outreach involvement will be essential to Plan 

implementation. Through SPC’s various work programs, efforts will continue to evolve creative 

ways to keep all partners involved between plan update cycles. Innovative outreach to ensure a 

broad cross section of the public will continue, ensuring that participation in Plan 

implementation and monitoring of delivery is not limited to just special interest groups and 

professionals. 

In 2011, SPC revised and updated its Public Participation Plan to incorporate the use of 

technology and increased visualization strategies into the public involvement process through the 

establishment of standards for web based interaction, including web based seminars, or 

“webinars” to supplement our active public participation outreach program. 

Plan Administration 

It is critical that the Plan be responsive to changing conditions within the region. Plan 

administration will be directed at maintaining and confirming the Plan’s validity and consistency 

with current and forecasted transportation, economic and land use trends. The Plan 

administrative process will ensure that the Plan is responsive to changes on the funding and 

project development front. Monitoring will receive feedback from SPC’s committee structure, 

from public involvement/outreach activities, from annual work program activities, and from the 

various data bases maintained at SPC. The administrative process will work to be responsive to 

changes in regional investment needs and strategies, changes that occur with individual projects 

through the project development process, and changes in funding programs at the federal, state 


8 - 23


and local level. Coordination will continue between Plan update cycles with various planning 

partners to identify the possible need for change through such instruments as monitoring updates 

of individual county comprehensive plans to tracking direction from the Mobility Plan for 

Pennsylvania. Plan administration will focus on three areas – amendment procedures, project 

delivery, and preparation for the next Plan update cycle. 

Amendment Procedures 

Major plan amendments will require Commission action. This includes all Plan amendment 

requests that may affect air quality conformity, add a major project that is not covered under line 

items by investment category, or change the overall Financial Plan. The advancement of air 

quality non-neutral projects from the Illustrative Project List (or from any other source) will be 

considered only upon submission of a project budget and identification and confirmation of the 

sources of additional funding. To qualify, the submitted project financial information must 

conform to the current federal guidelines for determining fiscal constraint. 

Federal fiscal constraint guidelines require a federal review and determination that the 

construction costs for a project are included in a fiscally constrained TIP/LRTP before approval 

may be granted to advance a project beyond the environmental study phase of project 

development. The effect of this requirement is an increased demand to manage projects and 

revenues in Stage 2 of the LRTP in a manner similar to the TIP. Therefore, to expedite LRTP 

amendment processes and to keep the current project costs synchronized between the TIP and 

LRTP Stage 2, regular amendments and administrative changes to the LRTP will follow the TIP 

Revision Procedures identified in SPC’s current version of the TIP (Transportation Improvement 

Program for Southwestern Pennsylvania, 2011-2014.). Examples include projects advanced 

under the highway and transit investment line items, minor individual project cost increases, and 

changes in project schedule that remain within the Plan years. 

Technical amendment requests from sponsoring agencies will be advanced for consideration 

through the appropriate SPC technical committee. This will vary by Plan element. All 

transportation amendments will first be through the Transportation Technical Committee for 

highway requests, and through the Transit Operators Committee for transit requests. 

For the Plan’s transportation component, project delivery will be through the Transportation 

Improvement Program that is updated every two years. Plan implementation will begin 

immediately after adoption in June 2011, with the start of the development of the 2013-2016 TIP 

this summer (2011). Action on the 2013-2016 TIP by the Commission is scheduled for June of 

2012. A second TIP update to advance project delivery will also occur two years later, with work 

beginning in the summer of 2013 to develop the 2015-2018 TIP for June 2014 adoption. Thus 

two TIP update cycles will be advanced between Plan updates cycles to deliver projects that 

match the direction and vision of the 2040 Plan and its policy statements. With TIP adoption in 

2012 and 2014, the transportation component of the Plan will also be amended as needed to 

reflect the current status of projects and of funds available for the region. Thus at a minimum 

there are several opportunities between the four year Plan update cycle to revisit the Plan’s 

detailed content and reflect current regional climate and direction for transportation planning and 

funding. This will allow the Transportation Component of the Plan to remain current and 


8 - 24


responsive to change at the federal, state and local level. As necessary Plan amendment requests 

will also be considered between TIP update cycles. 

Economic development investment coordination will occur through SPC’s economic 

development committee structure and SPC’s partnering efforts with the member economic 

development departments, the economic development stakeholders and partners throughout the 

region. 


8 - 25


Appendix A: 

Project Tables 

and Maps by 

PennDOT District 

(Fiscally Constrained Component) 

Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission

£¤422 

£¤30 

£¤22 

£¤40 

£¤30 

£¤19 

£¤19 

£¤19 

§¨¦79 

£¤19 

§¨¦579 

£¤19 

£¤119 

£¤422 

£¤119 

£¤119 

§¨¦76 

£¤30 

£¤119 

£¤22 

£¤19 

§¨¦ 80 

Cherry Valley 

SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA COMMISSION 

¬«8 

Harrisville 

MARION 

Eau Claire 

VENANGO 

ALLEGHENY 

HOVEY 

MERCER 

¬«38 

Parker 

PARKER 

Slippery Rock 

SLIPPERY ROCK 

CHERRY 

WASHINGTON 

Bruin 

¬«8 

BRADY 

PERRY 

Petrolia 

WORTH West Liberty 

Fairview 

West Sunbury 

South 

Bethlehem 

BRADY 

CLAY 

CONCORD 

Karns City 

FAIRVIEW 

REDBANK 

¬«68 BRADYS 

¬«38 

BEND 

£¤ 422 10 ¬« 528 MADISON 

Chicora 

MAHONING 

![ 

FRANKLIN 

¬«28 

¬«68 

CENTER 

OAKLAND 

SUGARCREEK 

MUDDY CREEK 

DONEGAL 

¬«38 

WASHINGTON 

PINE 

¬«8 

Prospect 

¬« 

¬«68 

268 15 

FRANKLIN 

£¤ 422 

BOGGS 

East Butler 

Dayton 

Butler City 

WEST FRANKLIN 

WAYNE 

¬« 528 WEST MAHONING £¤ 119 

¬«68 

LANCASTER CONNOQUENESSING BUTLER £¤ 422 CLEARFIELD 

Smicksburg 

CANOE 

SUMMIT 

EAST FRANKLIN 

NORTH MAHONING 

§¨¦ 79 Kittanning 

¬«68 

RAYBURN 14 

7 

Worthington 

Connoquenessing 

West 

Kittanning 

VALLEY 

![ 

£¤ 422 

Harmony 

¬« 356 

Applewold 

Rural 

SOUTH MAHONING 

JACKSON 

Manorville 

Valley 

FORWARD 

PENN 

JEFFERSON 

Plumville 

EAST MAHONING 

WINFIELD 

NORTH BUFFALO 

2 

Evans City 

COWANSHANNOCK 

GRANT 

Ford City ![ 

13 Marion Center 

Ford Cliff 

Saxonburg 

CADOGAN 

£¤19 

16 

Callery 

SOUTH 

KITTANNING 

MANOR 

Atwood 

BUFFALO 

¬«66 £¤ 

¬« 422 ADAMS 

CRANBERRY 

¬« 

4 

9 5 

![ 

¬«28 

PLUMCREEK 

§¨¦ 228 

228 

19 

76 Mars 

MIDDLESEX 

CLINTON BUFFALO 

BETHEL 

Seven Fields 

![![ ¬« 

¬« 

![ ![ ![ 

356 

WASHINGTON 

228 RAYNE 

3 

Valencia 

Freeport 

Elderton 

¬«28 1 

BURRELL 

![ 

![ 

18 

GILPIN 

£¤ 422 Creekside 

Ernest 

8 6 17 

Shelocta 

£¤ 119 

¬« 286 Clymer 

20 

¬«66 

WHITE 

SOUTH BEND 

Leechburg 

PARKS 

¬« 156 

CHERRYHILL 

ARMSTRONG 

Indiana 

LOCATION MAP 

¬«56 

North Apollo 

21 

Apollo 

KISKIMINETAS 

£¤ 422 

§¨¦ 

Legend 

80 

LAWRENCE 

YOUNG 

¬« 286 

£¤ BRUSH VALLEY 

£¤ 422 

422 

§¨¦ BUTLER 

![ LRP Projects 76 §¨¦ Jacksonville 

CENTER 

79 Homer City 

¬«56 

ARMSTRONG 

LRP Routes 

BEAVER 

INDIANA 

BUFFINGTON 

Major Roads 

§¨¦ 

¬« 286 279 CONEMAUGH 

BLACK LICK 

ALLEGHENY 

Saltsburg 

£¤ 119 ¬«56 

§¨¦ 376 

§¨¦ 70 

§¨¦ 79 

Portersville 

Zelienople ¬«68 

¬« 3020 

Roads 

Railroads 

Rivers 

Municipal Boundaries 

WASHINGTON 

GREENE 

£¤ 40 

WESTMORELAND 

FAYETTE 

2040 Transportation Plan Fiscally-Constrained Component 

DISTRICT 10 

11 

GREEN 

PINE 

¬« 12 

217 

![ 

Blairsville 

BURRELL 

£¤22 

WEST WHEATFIELD 

![ 

Armagh 

EAST WHEATFIELD 

BANKS 

¬« 286 

Glen Campbell 

MONTGOMERY 

Cherry Tree 

µ 

County Boundaries

MAP NO. COUNTY DISTRICT PROJECT NAME 

Location of Mappable Transportation Projects 


By PennDOT District 

1 Armstrong 10 SR 356 Freeport Bridge Ramps 

2 Armstrong 10 US‐422 Kittanning Elementary School Intersection 

3 Armstrong 10 US‐422 Dutch Run Road Intersection 

4 Butler 10 SR‐228 Pittsburgh Street Intersection 

5 Butler 10 SR‐228 Three Degree Road Intersection 

6 Butler 10 S.R. 228 Mars Railroad Bridge Replacement 

7 Butler 10 I‐79 Missing Ramps at S.R. 3025 

8 Butler 10 S.R. 228 Ramps to I‐79 

9 Butler 10 SR‐228 Mars Railroad Bridge West 

10 Butler 10 U.S. 422 Moraine State Park Access 

11 Indiana 10 U.S. 22 / S.R. 217 Interchange 

12 Indiana 10 S.R. 56 United High School Curve 

13 Indiana 10 U.S. 119 Home Railroad Bridge 

14 Armstrong 10 S.R. 28 Hays Run 3R 

15 Armstrong 10 S.R. 28 Goheenville Dip 

16 Armstrong 10 US‐422 Wray Road Cut 

17 Butler 10 SR‐228 Balls Bend Safety 

18 Indiana 10 U.S. 119 Grove Chapel Climbing Lane 

19 Indiana 10 U.S. 119 Wake Robin Curve 

20 Indiana 10 U.S. 422, Armstrong County Line to Indiana Bypass, intersection improvements and safety upgrades 

21 Indiana 10 Rose Street Extension 2

§¨¦76 

£¤422 

£¤30 

£¤22 

£¤40 

£¤30 

£¤19 

£¤42 2 

£¤19 

§¨¦79 

£¤19 

£¤19 

§¨¦70 

§¨¦579 

£¤19 

£¤119 

§¨¦80 

£¤119 

£¤30 

£¤119 

£¤22 

¬«51 

¬« 

PULASKI 

¬«60 158 

WILMINGTON 

WASHINGTON PLAIN GROVE 

NESHANNOCK 

£¤19 

¬«18 

30 

46 

MAHONING 

HICKORY 

£¤ 

![ 

422 

SCOTT 

New 

£¤ 224 UNION 

Castle 

Bessemer 

¬«60 

![ 

£¤19 

South New Castle 

£¤ 422 

¬«65 

29 

£¤ 422 

SLIPPERY ROCK 

NORTH BEAVER 

¬«18 

TAYLOR 

SHENANGO 

S.N.P.J. 

§¨¦ 76 ¬«65 

LITTLE BEAVER 

PERRY 

¬« §¨¦ ¬« 76 

WAYNE 

288 351 Wampum 

New 

Ellwood 

µ 

Enon 

Beaver 

City 

Valley 

Ellport 

¬« 351 Ellwood City 

¬« 

New Galilee 

Koppel ![ 

351 ¬«18 

FRANKLIN 

DARLINGTON 

Big Beaver 26 

Darlington 

Homewood 

42 

Ohioville 

Glasgow ¬«68 

Georgetown 

43 

SOUTH BEAVER 

Hookstown 

GREENE 

Midland 

Shippingport 

HANOVER 

Frankfort Springs 

§¨¦ 

LAWRENCE 

79 BUTLER 

§¨¦ 79 

£¤422 

BEAVER 

Industry 

CHIPPEWA 

§¨¦ 376 

BRIGHTON 

¬«18 

RACCOON 

£¤30 

¬«18 

28 

West Mayfield 

POTTER 

New 

Wilmington 

WHITE Eastvale 

Beaver Falls 

![ 

INDEPENDENCE 

LOCATION MAP 

§¨¦ 279 §¨¦ 376 

ALLEGHENY 

ARMSTRONG 

CENTER 

Volant 

NORTH SEWICKLEY 

DAUGHERTY 

PATTERSON 

Patterson Heights 

New Brighton 

PULASKI 

¬«68 

Fallston 

VANPORT 

INDIANA 

¬«65 

ROCHESTER 

Bridgewater 

Rochester 

East Rochester 

Beaver 

Monaca Freedom 

Conway 

Aliquippa 

§¨¦ 376 ¬«51 ¬«65 

HOPEWELL Ambridge 

![ 

South Heights LEET 

27 

Leetsdale 

CRESCENT 

¬«51 

¬«60 MOON 

FINDLAY 

§¨¦ 376 

£¤22 

§¨¦76 

45 

MARION 

NEW SEWICKLEY 

¬« 2004 

Baden 

HARMONY 

44 

Economy 

Bell Acres 

¬« 288 

MARSHALL 

Sewickley Hills 

£¤19 

Franklin Park 

Bradford Woods 


2040 Transportation Plan Fiscally- 

Constrained Component 

PINE 

Mccandless 

34 

RICHLAND 

HAMPTON 

WEST DEER 

FAWN 

47 

INDIANA 

Sewickley Heights 

¬«8 

Edgeworth 

§¨¦ 279 £¤19 

SPRINGDALE 

Sewickley 

OHIO 

HARMAR 

ROSS 

Osborne 

25 

Cheswick 

Springdale 

ALEPPO 

Haysville 

Glenfield KILBUCK 18 

SHALER 

Fox Chapel 

West View 

O'HARA 

![ 

![ 

Coraopolis 

Emsworth Ben Avon Heights 

Oakmont 

NEVILLE Ben Avon 

4 

¬«28 

Avalon 

O'HARA Verona 

§¨¦79 

Bellevue 

Etna 

10 

O'HARA 

Plum 

16 

Sharpsburg Aspinwall 

![ ¬«65 

RESERVE 

Blawnox 

STOWE 

KENNEDY 

7 37 Millvale 38 

![ 

![ 

Mckees Rocks 

33 

Penn Hills 

13 

¬«8 

¬« 

ROBINSON 

![ ![ 

39 

286 

£¤30 

6 

24 15 

Ingram 

![![![ ![ 

Wilkinsburg 

£¤22 1 

Thornburg Crafton £¤19 

Pittsburgh 

20 

![ 

Churchill §¨¦ 

Pennsbury Village 31 12 

![ ![ ![ 

NORTH FAYETTE 

Green Tree ![ 

376 

¬«51 

Swissvale Edgewood 5 

¬« 

Rosslyn Farms 

§¨¦ 286 

Forest Hills WILKINS 

14 3 

376 Monroeville 

Swissvale 

41 

Braddock Hills 

Carnegie 

Mount Oliver ¬« Homestead Rankin 

¬«48 

Oakdale 

9 

COLLIER 

23 8 

885 Chalfant Turtle Creek 

West Homestead 

Pitcairn 

Braddock North Braddock 

![ 

![ 

21 

Dormont 

Whitaker 

East Pittsburgh 

![ ![ 

Heidelberg 

32 ¬«51 

19 

Wilmerding Wall 

SCOTT 

11 

BALDWIN 

Baldwin 

Munhall 

East Mckeesport 

Mount Lebanon 

![ 2 

Mcdonald 

Trafford 

Brentwood 

17 

Duquesne 

Castle Shannon 

36 North Versailles 

SOUTH FAYETTE ¬«50 Bridgeville 

Whitehall 

West Mifflin ¬« 

40 

Dravosburg 

48 

White Oak 

UPPER ST CLAIR 

![ 

837 

35 

Mckeesport 

Port Vue 

White Oak 

Pleasant Hills 22 

Bethel Park 

Glassport Liberty 

¬« 136 

SOUTH PARK 

Jefferson Hills 

DISTRICT 11 

§¨¦76 

Clairton 

Lincoln 

Versailles 

![ 

FRAZER 

EAST DEER 

SOUTH VERSAILLES 

Legend 

LRP Projects 

LRP Routes 

Major Roads 

Roads 

Railroads 

Rivers 


County Boundaries 

¬«28 

Brackenridge 

Tarentum 

HARRISON 

£¤ 119 

WESTMORELAND 

West Elizabeth Elizabeth 

WASHINGTON 

§¨¦ 76 

¬«51 

ELIZABETH 

GREENE 

£¤ 40 

FAYETTE 

FORWARD 

¬«0





1 Allegheny 11 Pittsburgh CBD Street Reconstruction 

2 Allegheny 11 S.R. 51 / S.R. 88 Intersection Improvements 

3 Allegheny 11 


Traffic Signal System Upgrades 

4 Allegheny 11 S.R. 8 Butler Street Bridge over Heths Run 

5 Allegheny 11 U.S. 30 Ardmore Blvd Bridge over Electric Ave 

6 Allegheny 11 S.R. 51 West Carson Street Viaduct Replacement 

7 Allegheny 11 S.R. 65 Marshall Interchange Rehabilitation 

8 Allegheny 11 S.R. 2085 Birmingham Bridge Rehabilitation 

9 Allegheny 11 S.R. 3069 Liberty Bridge Preservation 

10 Allegheny 11 S.R. 3104 McKees Rocks Bridge Phase 2 

11 Allegheny 11 Glenwood Interchange Bridges 

12 Allegheny 11 6th Street Bridge Rehabilitation 



15 Allegheny 11 Charles Anderson Bridge 

16 Allegheny 11 Coraopolis Bridge Rehabilitation 

17 Allegheny 11 Dookers Hollow Bridge 

18 Allegheny 11 Fleming Park Bridge Rehabilitation 

19 Allegheny 11 Glenwood Bridge Rehabilitation 

20 Allegheny 11 Greenfield Avenue #39 Bridge Replacement 

21 Allegheny 11 Greensburg Pike Bridge Reconstruction / Turtle Creek 

22 Allegheny 11 Mansfield Bridge Rehabilitation 

23 Allegheny 11 S. 10th Street Bridge Rehabilitation 

24 Allegheny 11 Sixteenth Street Bridge Rehabilitation





25 Allegheny 11 S.R. 2082 Hulton Road Bridge Replacement 

26 Beaver 11 S.R. 351 Koppel Bridge Replacement 

27 Beaver 11 Aliquippa‐Ambridge Bridge Rehabilitation 

28 Beaver 11 Veterans Memorial Bridge 

29 Lawrence 11 S.R. 18 Mahoning Ave over Shenango River Bridge Replacement 

30 Lawrence 11 S.R. 224 State Street Bridge 

31 Allegheny 11 S.R. 65, Ft. Duquesne Bridge to California Ave 

32 Allegheny 11 S.R. 3069 Liberty Tunnel Rehabilitation 

33 Allegheny 11 Allegheny Riverfront Infrastructure Projects 

34 Allegheny 11 U.S. 19 Improvements / Pine Creek to Wallace 

35 Allegheny 11 Painters Run Road, Bower Hill Rd to Robb Hollow 

36 Allegheny 11 Triboro Interchange Bridges 

37 Allegheny 11 S.R. 28 Widening / I‐579 to East Ohio Street 

38 Allegheny 11 S.R. 28, Troy Hill to 31st Street Bridge 

39 Allegheny 11 S.R. 286 Widening, S.R. 22 to S.R. 380 

40 Allegheny 11 S.R. 2031 Lincoln Way Improvement 

41 Allegheny 11 Campbells Run Road Improvements 

42 Beaver 11 S.R. 51, S.R. 168 to Ohio State Line 

43 Beaver 11 U.S. 30 Upgrade, West Virginia State Line to S.R. 168 

44 Beaver 11 Freedom Road Upgrade, Phases B and C 

45 Beaver 11 Freedom Road Upgrade, Phase A (Crow's Run Improvements) 

46 Lawrence 11 S.R. 18 Betterment 

47 Allegheny 11 S.R. 28, Creighton to Butler County Line 

48 Allegheny 11 S.R. 50, Washington County Line to Miller Run

£¤422 

£¤30 

£¤22 

£¤40 

£¤30 

£¤19 

£¤422 

£¤19 

£¤19 

£¤19 

§¨¦579 

£¤19 

£¤119 

£¤119 

£¤119 

§¨¦76 

£¤30 

£¤119 

£¤22 


2040 Transportation Plan Fiscally-Constrained Component 

DISTRICT 12 

13 

![ 

¬« 356 

West Leechburg 

Hyde Park 

ALLEGHENY 

¬« 366 ¬« 819 ¬« 286 ¬« 130 ¬« 981 

Arnold Lower Burrell 

New Kensington 

19 

¬« 356 ¬« 819 

¬«56 

¬« 819 ¬« 981 ¬« 217 

UPPER BURRELL 

Vandergrift 

¬« 286 

WASHINGTON 

BELL 

14 

![ 

Avonmore 

LAWRENCE 

§¨¦ 80 

BUTLER 

§¨¦ 79 

§¨¦ 76 

BEAVER 

§¨¦ 279 

ALLEGHENY 

§¨¦ 376 

§¨¦ 70 

§¨¦ 79 

WASHINGTON 

GREENE 

§¨¦ 79 £¤422 

£¤ 40 

ARMSTRONG 

INDIANA 

WESTMORELAND 

FAYETTE 

¬« 366 

£¤40 

HANOVER 

JEFFERSON 

INDEPENDENCE 

DONEGAL 

£¤22 

¬«18 

Burgettstown 

¬«50 

SMITH 

West 

§¨¦ §¨¦ 70 Alexander 

NORTH 

70 

§¨¦ 79 

¬«21 

WEST FINLEY 

RICHHILL 

ALEPPO 

CROSS CREEK 

West 

Middletown 

Claysville 

HOPEWELL 

BLAINE 

EAST FINLEY 

GRAY¬«21 

¬«18 

SPRINGHILL 

FREEPORT 

JACKSON 

BUFFALO 

GILMORE 

ROBINSON 

MOUNT PLEASANT 

CANTON 

Green Hills 

¬«18 

MORRIS 

Midway 

CECIL 

Houston 

CHARTIERS 

Washington 

NORTH 

FRANKLIN 

SOUTH FRANKLIN 

MORRIS 

¬«18 

CENTER 

7 

18 

Mcdonald 

![ 

East Washington 

£¤19 

§¨¦ 79 

£¤40 

AMWELL 

17 

£¤19 

SOUTH 

STRABANE 

£¤22 

SALEM 

¬«56 

New Alexandria 

![ 

£¤ ¬« 982 Bolivar 

Trafford PENN 

¬« ¬« 119 

¬« 130 819 

DERRY 

217 

New Florence 

£¤30 

Manor 

North Irwin 

ST CLAIR 

PennJeannette 

¬«66 

![ 

NORTH Irwin 

Derry 

HEMPFIELD 

FAIRFIELD 

Adamsburg 

HUNTINGDON 

Greensburg£¤ 119 Latrobe 

12 

Southwest Greensburg 

Canonsburg 

HEMPFIELD 

UNITY 

South Greensburg 

Youngstown 

PETERS 

£¤30 

Finleyville 

22Arona 

¬«88 

SEWICKLEY 

UNION 

¬« 23 

837 Madison 

Sutersville 

Youngwood 

11 

Ligonier 

NOTTINGHAM 

5 

New Stanton 

LIGONIER 

West Newton 

New Eagle 

¬« 

![ 

21 

837 

Monongahela ¬« 

Donora 

CARROLL ![ 

201 Hunker 

¬« 982 Laurel Mountain 

SOUTH 

£¤30 

MOUNT PLEASANT 

§¨¦ 70 ROSTRAVER 

HUNTINGDON 

North Charleroi 

20 

COOK 

SOMERSET 

Monessen 

Smithton 

Mount Pleasant 

FALLOWFIELD Charleroi North Belle Vernon 

¬« 

Belle Speers Vernon ¬«51 

981 8EAST 

Bentleyville 

2 

HUNTINGDON 

¬«88 

Twilight 

Ellsworth 

Dunlevy WASHINGTON 

![ 

Fayette 

Long Branch 

![ 

§¨¦ 

µ 

Donegal 

76 

Cokeburg 

California 

City 

DONEGAL 

Allenport 

Scottdale 

WEST PIKE RUN 

Everson 

Perryopolis 

¬«43 Elco Stockdale ![ 

£¤40 

Coal Newell Roscoe 

LOWER 

9 

Bealsville 

Center 

TYRONE UPPER 

PERRY 

TYRONE BULLSKIN 

West JEFFERSON 

Dawson 

SALTLICK 

Brownsville 

Centreville 

Vanderbilt 

Seven 

Deemston 

¬«88 

Springs 

Marianna 

BROWNSVILLE ![ 

1 

Brownsville ¬«51 

Connellsville 

FRANKLIN ![ 

NORTH STRABANE 

BETHLEHEM 

WEST BETHLEHEM 

6 

Murrysville 

£¤ 119 £¤22 

EAST BETHLEHEM 

CONNELLSVILLE 

South 

£¤19 

REDSTONE 

Connellsville 

24 

SPRINGFIELD 

WASHINGTON 

Clarksville 

LUZERNE 

Dunbar 

MORGAN 

£¤40 

£¤ 119 

Rices Landing 

§¨¦ 79 MENALLEN 

DUNBAR 

NORTH UNION 

¬« 188 Jefferson 

¬«51 

16 

15 

¬« 381 

Waynesburg 

JEFFERSON 

¬«88 

GERMAN 

4 

¬«21 £¤ 119 Uniontown 

¬«21 

STEWART 

CUMBERLAND ¬«21 

FRANKLIN 

¬«21 

SOUTH 

UNION 

Ohiopyle 

![ Masontown 

¬«43 

3 

£¤40 

WHITELEY GREENE 

Fairchance 

MONONGAHELA¬«88 

NICHOLSON 

GEORGES 

Smithfield 

Greensboro 

£¤19 

WAYNE 

WHARTON 

HENRY CLAY 

£¤ 

PERRY 

DUNKARD 

119 SPRINGHILL 

Point 

£¤40 

Marion 

Markleysburg 

¬« 381 

10 

Export 

¬«66 

Delmont 

LOYALHANNA 

§¨¦ 70 ¬«56 

![ 

Legend 

LRP Projects 

LRP Routes 

Major Roads 

Roads 

Railroads 

Rivers 


County Boundaries





1 Fayette 12 S.R. 711 Crawford Avenue Bridge 

2 Fayette 12 S.R. 4038 Layton Bridge 

3 Fayette 12 S.R. 21 Masontown Bridge 

4 Greene 12 S.R. 21 Masontown Bridge Roadway Reconstruction 

5 Washington 12 S.R. 1022 Donora‐Webster Bridge 

6 Washington 12 S.R. 2067 Brownsville Low Level Bridge 

7 Washington 12 I‐79 Meadowlands Interchange Completion 

8 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 119 Interchange Reconstruction at S.R. 819 

9 Westmoreland 12 U.S. 119 Jacobs Creek Bridge 

10 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 130 Trafford Bridge Replacement 

11 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 136 West Newton Bridge 

12 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 217 Derry Borough Bridge Replacement 

13 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 356 Freeport Bridge 

14 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 1060 Salina Bridge 

15 Fayette 12 S.R. 21 Improvements, Thompsons Crossroads 

16 Greene 12 S.R. 21, Morrisville Corridor Phase 2 

17 Washington 12 S.R. 19 Corridor Safety and Congestion Improvements 

18 Washington 12 I‐79 Meadowlands Auxiliary Lanes 

19 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 56 Pavement Preservation 

20 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 119 Reconstruction, Fayette County Line to I‐70 

21 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 981 Laurel Valley Transportation Improvements 

22 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 30 Corridor Safety and Congestion Improvements 

23 Westmoreland 12 S.R. 981 @ Kennametal 

24 Fayette 12 S.R. 51 Reconstruction, Allegheny County Line to Uniontown


Appendix B: 

2035 PLAN 

COMPREHENSIVE 

ECONOMIC 

DEVELOPMENT 

STRATEGY 

PROJECT LISTING 

Source: 2035 Plan: Comprehensive Economic Development 

Strategy Project Listing (Adopted June 2007) 

Included For Informational Purposes Only 


2035 PLAN 

COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC 

DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 

PROJECT LISTING 

Source: 2035 Plan: Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Project Listing 

(Adopted June 2007) 

Included For Informational Purposes Only

Source: 2035 Plan: Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Project Listing (Adopted June 2007)—Included For Informational Purposes Only

The Preferred Scenario for the 2035 Plan emphasizes: infrastructure targeted within centers, clusters and the 

corridors that connect them; infill development and reinvestment in existing business districts and brownfield 

rehabilitation throughout the region; open space preservation and agriculture are key in rural areas; strong multimodal 

focus including highways, transit, railways and waterways with an emphasis on connecting the centers and 

clusters. 2035 Plan community and economic development projects are anticipated to support those areas of emphasis. 

The following are community and economic development project for Allegheny County along with the corresponding policy 

statements. 2035 Plan policy statements and Scenario Description are attached. 

County Project Name Project Summary Policy Statements 

1 ALCO 

2 ALCO 

3 ALCO 

4 ALCO 

5 ALCO 

Amphitheatre 

and Mansion 

Preservation 

Upgrades at 

Hartwood Park 

Carrie Furnace 

Development 

Convention 

Center 

Riverfront Park 

Edgewater Steel 

Brownfield 

Redevelopment 

McKees Rocks – 

Acquisiont, 

Remediation, 

and Access 

Improvements 

Upgrades to the lighting and sound systems and 

stage of Amphitheatre, necessary upgrades to 

Mansion 

Redevelopment of 135 acre brownfield site that 

will create a mixed-use development of 

regional importance tying together communities 

and other former brownfield developments 

Development of ¼ mile park that will provide 

connections to Convention Center and existing 

trails in addition to docking facility for 

water transportation 

Redevelopment of former Edgewater Steel site 

that has been identified as viable for reuse 

and development 

Redevelopment of area that contains an 

existing business in need of expansion while 

opening up new developable acreage 

The region will preserve, promote and develop 

the tourism and hospitality industries by 

capitalizing on historic, cultural, 


‣ Revitalization and redevelopment of the 

region’s existing communities is a 

priority. 

‣ The region will focus on the 

identification and development of 

industrial sites with special attention 

given to well situated brownfield 

locations. 

‣ The region will preserve, promote and 

develop the tourism and hospitality 

industries by capitalizing on historic, 

cultural, recreational and ecological 

assets. 



priority. 





locations. 



priority. 





locations. 



6 ALCO 

7 ALCO 

8 ALCO 

9 ALCO 

10 ALCO 

11 ALCO 

12 ALCO 

13 ALCO 

McKeesport 

Hydroponic & 

Agricultural 

Greenhouse 


of Boyce Park 

UPMC Braddock 

Avenue 

Renovations 

Chapman 

Industrial Park 

Pittsburgh 

International 

Airport 

Development 

Sites 

Imperial 

Business Park 

Leetsdale 


Imperial Land 

Co. Sites 

Building of a regional science and technology 

greenhouse and agricultural center to support 

growing industry cluster 

Site Preparation and installation of new lift 

system and snow producing capabilities 

Renovation of health facility – including 

handicap accessible features, consolidating 

various departments 

Development of Findlay Connector-Airport Area 

property for light industrial and truck 

terminal use 

Development of large ready-to-go and future 

large sites on airport property for light 

industrial/office/warehouse/industrial users 

in the Northfield, Chemington, Clinton 

Industrial Park, McClaren, and State Route 30 

Areas 

Light Industrial Park located at the State 

Route 22 and Findlay Connector Area 

Development in Leetsdale Borough for expansion 

of an industrial park with river access and 

barge loading facilities 

Redevelopment of brownfield along the Findlay 

Connector in the Airport Area for a mixed use, 

primarily industrial development sites 



priority. 

‣ The region will support identified 

strategic industry clusters. 





assets. 



priority. 







locations. 





locations. 





locations. 





locations. 





locations. 


The Preferred Scenario for the 2035 Plan emphasizes upgrading existing water and sewer with limited expansion, 

primarily to underserved communities. 2035 Plan sewer and water projects are anticipated to support that emphasis. 

The following are sewer and water projects for Allegheny County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


14 ALCO 

15 ALCO 

16 ALCO 

17 ALCO 

18 ALCO 

3 Rivers Wet 

Weather, Inc. 

Aquatic 

Restoration at 

North Park Lake 

Chartiers Creek 

Water Plan 

Forward 

Township Sewer 

McLaughlin Run 

Flood 

Protection Plan 

Development of innovative, cost-effective 

solutions to address the region’s aging 

sewer system in the three rivers region 

of Allegheny County; will also assist the 

83 communities served by the Allegheny 

County Sanitary Authority to comply with 

the federal Clean Water Act 

Restoration of North Park Lake to 

original contours and improve aquatic 

life habitat 

Remove debris and dredge the stream to 

restore it to its normal levels; also 

repairs to the flood walls and barriers 

along the banks to prevent future 

flooding disasters that affects over 

10,000 homes 

Installation of sewage plant and 

collector sewer for the 

Gallatin/Sunnyside area of Forward 

Township, Pennsylvania 

Remove debris and dredge the stream to 

restore it to its normal levels; also 

repairs to the flood walls and barriers 

along the banks to prevent future 

flooding disasters that affects over 

10,000 homes 

‣ Revitalization and redevelopment of 


priority. 

‣ The region’s infrastructure system 

will be designed to protect and 

enhance public health and the 

environment. 




environment. 



priority. 




environment. 



priority. 








The following are community and economic development project for the City of Pittsburgh along with the corresponding 

policy statements. 2035 Plan policy statements and Scenario Description are attached. 


1 

PITT 

American 

Electric 

Acquisition, remediation and redevelopment 

of an approximate four (4) acre former 

brownfield site into a 26-unit market rate 

for sale housing community. 



priority. 





locations. 

2 

PITT 

Bakery Square 

A planned mixed-use development of the 

former Nabisco Bakery buildings on Penn 

Avenue in the East Liberty/Larimer section 

of the City. The proposed redevelopment 

will include 213,670 sq.ft. of renovated 

office space, 111,814 sq.ft. of new retail 

space, 55,110 sq.ft. of renovated retail 

space, a 120-room hotel and an 850 space 

parking garage. 



priority. 

3 

PITT 

Baum/Liberty 

Mixed-use 

Development 

Public infrastructure and support of major 

mixed-use development. Full redevelopment 

will include a hotel, residential units, 

several hundred thousand square feet of 

retail space, an office building and 

subterranean parking. 



priority. 



4 

PITT 

Beechview 

Business 

District 

Revitalization 

Acquisition, redevelopment and public 

infrastructure improvements to distressed 

business district. Redevelopment will 

include more than one dozen commercial and 

mixed-use properties and will stabilize a 

transitional neighborhood. 



priority. 

5 

6 

PITT 

PITT 

Braddock & Penn 

Avenue (North 

Point Breeze) 

Industrial 

District 

Bryant Street 

The redevelopment and reuse of vacant and 

underutilized buildings in this older 

industrial district at the eastern end of 

the City, near the border with Wilkinsburg. 

Redevelopment of strategic sites/buildings 

in a concentrated area in the Highland Park 

neighborhood commercial district. The 

project consists of the rehabilitation of 

mixed use structures, the new construction 

of market rate for sale units combined with 

first floor neighborhood serving retail 

uses plus public space improvements. 



priority. 



priority. 

7 

PITT 

Centre Avenue 

Corridor 

The mixed-use redevelopment of parcels that 

have been land banked by the City and URA 

in the Hill District, one of the City’s 

most distressed neighborhoods. The sites 

assembled include one for a grocery store 

that would fill a pressing need in this 

underserved neighborhood. 



priority. 

8 

PITT 

Chartiers 


Development on the remaining parcels of an 

industrial park in the distressed Fairywood 

neighborhood. 



priority. 



9 

10 

PITT 

PITT 

Cultural 

District/RiverP 

arc 

East Carson 

Street Widening 

Development of a new downtown neighborhood 

in the Cultural District that will include 

residential, retail, hotel, parking, green 

space and a new “Three Sisters Park” along 

the riverfront. 

This infrastructure project will provide 

improvements needed to buildout an 

additional 1.3 million square feet of space 

at the South Side Works. 





assets. 



priority. 



priority 

11 

PITT 

East Liberty 

Infrastructure/ 

Penn Circle 

Reconstruction of Penn Circle to allow twoway 

traffic throughout. This modification 

will open up key sites for redevelopment by 

national retailers and better integrate all 

parts of the neighborhood. 



priority. 

12 

PITT 

Eastside V 

Site assemblage, demolition and preparation 

of an approximate six (6) acre site for 

redevelopment as an approximate 142,000 

square foot retail anchor at the eastern 

and northern entrance of the East Liberty 

commercial center. 



priority. 

13 

PITT 

Federal North 

Redevelopment 

Area 

The final phase of the Federal North 

Redevelopment Project which will include 

the redevelopment of an entire block of 

buildings (nine in all), including the 

former Garden Theater. The redevelopment 

will include a mix of uses – cultural, 

residential and retail. 



priority. 





assets. 



14 

PITT 

Forbes Village 

Construction of new residential high-rise 

in Central Business District. Development 

will include street level retail and 

internal structured parking. 



priority. 

15 

PITT 

Hazelwood 

Business 

District 


The mixed-use redevelopment of parcels and 

buildings acquired by the Urban 

Redevelopment Authority in this distressed 

neighborhood. 



priority. 

16 

PITT 

Hazelwood 

Business 

District 


The mixed-use redevelopment of parcels and 

buildings acquired by the Urban 

Redevelopment Authority in this distressed 

neighborhood. 



priority. 

17 

PITT 

Herron Avenue 

Corridor 

The mixed use redevelopment of vacant land 

in this corridor which connects the key 

neighborhoods of Oakland, the Hill District 

and Lawrenceville. 



priority. 

18 

PITT 

Junction Hollow 

R&D Center 

Phase II 

Phase II of CMU R&D center in upper 

Junction Hollow. 



priority. 

19 

PITT 

Lawrenceville 

Redevelopment of former industrial 

properties as part of revitalization 

strategy for this neighborhood. The loss 

of many industrial jobs and the abundance 

of obsolete and contaminated industrial 

properties have presented obstacles for 

neighborhood revitalization. 



priority. 

20 

PITT 

Lexington 

Technology Park 

Redevelopment of former Rockwell 

International facility that is currently 

owned by the URA. 



priority. 



21 

22 

PITT 

PITT 

Market Square 

Mellon Arena 

Site 

Redevelopment 

Redevelopment, infrastructure improvements 

and reprogramming of major public open 

space in heart of Pittsburgh’s Central 

Business District. 

Redevelopment of 20+ acre site of existing 

Mellon Arena and parking. 





assets. 



priority. 



priority. 

23 PITT 

PITT 

24 

PITT 

25 

Mt. Ararat 

Community 

Renaissance 

New Uptown 

Arena 

Nine Mile Run 

Mixed use development including incubator 

space, office space, retail development, 

residential development, a community 

center, and open/green linking to City 

Trails 

Acquisition of site and construction of new 

public arena. 

Completion of mixed-use development and 

park restoration that is creating a new 

neighborhood, Summerset at Frick Park. 



priority. 



priority. 





assets. 



priority. 

26 

PITT 

Orbital 

Engineering 

Expansion of major engineering services 

company world headquarters, including 

parking and site improvements. 



priority 



27 

PITT 

Penn Avenue 

Street 

Reconstruction 

Public infrastructure improvements along 

Penn Avenue Business District, spanning the 

neighborhoods of Lawrenceville, Bloomfield, 

Garfield, Friendship and East Liberty. 



priority. 

28 

PITT 

Penn/Washington 

Corridor 

Reuse of commercial and industrial 

properties in an important corridor in the 

East Liberty, Larimer, Point Breeze, 

Homewood and Lincoln/Lemington/Belmar 

neighborhoods. 



priority. 

29 

PITT 

Pittsburgh 

Technology 

Center 

Buildout of the site according to a revised 

masterplan that will allow the development 

of an additional one million square feet of 

space in this strategically located 

university research park. Public 

infrastructure improvements include new 

structured parking, relocated utilities and 

roadways. 



priority 

30 

PITT 

Produce 

Terminal 


Redevelopment of this building that has 

played a key role, historically, in the 

development and redevelopment of the Strip 

District, an important retail and wholesale 

district adjacent to the Central Business 

District. 



priority. 

31 

PITT 

South Hills 

High School 

Acquisition, selective demolition, adaptive 

reuse and substantial renovation of a 

200,000 square foot closed high school into 

a neighborhood anchor mixed use facility to 

contain approximately 84 affordable elderly 

apartment units, 25 market rate apartment 

units and approximately 25,000 square feet 

of commercial space. 



priority. 



32 

33 

PITT 

PITT 

South Shore 

Park 

South Side 

Works 

This $10.5 million riverfront park will 

provide access to the riverfront for the 

South Side Works and the South Side 

neighborhood. It will also make possible 

the development of an additional 925,000 

square feet of space on the riverfront at 

the South Side Works. 

Completion of an additional 1.3 million 

square feet of space on this important 

brownfield site that has already seen $300 

million in mixed use development. 



priority. 





assets. 



priority 

34 PITT 

35 

PITT 

Switchback at 

Mon Wharf 

Uptown 


Phase two: completion of a vertical and ADA 

accessible connection from the Landing to 

the Smithfield Street bridge that will 

complete the connection between the Eliza 

Furnace Trail and the Allegheny Passage to 

Point State Park 

Revitalization of Fifth and Forbes Avenue 

Corridor through Uptown neighborhood of 

City, linking Central Business District and 

Oakland. 





assets. 



priority. 

36 

PITT 

West Carson 

Street 

This project would involve the 

redevelopment of a blighted area, which 

includes a junk yard, across the Ohio River 

from the Central Business District. 



priority. 

37 

PITT 

West End 

Village 

Revitalization of West End business 

district, including new construction, 

historic rehabilitation and public 

amenities. Will result in new residential 

units, retail and other commercial space. 



priority. 








The following are community and economic development project for Armstrong County along with the corresponding policy 



1 ARCO 

2 ARCO 

Additional 

Industrial 

Parks 

Apollo 

Industrial 

Reuse Project 

3 ARCO Armstrong Trail 

4 ARCO 

5 ARCO 

Belmont Complex 

Improvements 

Downtown 


Projects 

Evaluation and subsequent construction 

of industrial parks in several areas of 

the County 

Redevelopment of a 19-acre brownfield 

site formerly housing Metal Services and 

Babcock & Wilcox's Nuclear Fuel 

Facility. The project involves site 

preparation, environmental remediation, 

and infrastructure. Once approved by 

the PADEP, liability protection from 

prior environmental problems combined 

with the KOZ designation should 

encourage firms to locate and or expand 

in the area. 

47 miles of new trails as part of the 

rails-to-trails tourism project 

The rehabilitation of the ice arena 

including handicapped accessibility 

improvements and extensive interior and 

exterior renovation. 

Downtown revitalization projects in 

communities of Freeport Leechburg, 

Apollo Kittanning, Ford City and Parker. 

‣ Revitalization and redevelopment 

of the region’s existing 

communities is a priority. 



industrial sites with special 

attention given to well situated 


‣ The region will preserve, promote 

and develop the tourism and 

hospitality industries by 

capitalizing on historic, 

cultural, recreational and 

ecological assets. 

‣ The region will preserve, promote 

and develop the tourism and 

hospitality industries by 

capitalizing on historic, cultural, 



the region’s existing communities 

is a priority. 



6 ARCO 

7 ARCO 

8 ARCO 

9 ARCO 

Ford City 

Borough 

Industrial 

Reuse Project 

IUP Kittanning 

Campus Reuse 

Project 

Kiski Junction 

Railroad 

Northpointe 

Continued 

Development 

Redevelopment of 74 acres of the former 

PPG land including 60 acres in a KOZ. A 

42-acre industrial park is proposed for 

the vacant acreage. Another 7.2 acre 

parcel currently houses two existing 

structures comprising 60,000 square feet 

of flexible industrial and office space. 

The first 30,000 square feet have been 

completely refurbished. Work on the 

remaining area will house an industrial 

heritage museum, business incubator, and 

flex space multi-tenant facility with a 

shared video conference center. The 

northern 24 acres provides for expansion 

of existing businesses and possible 

reuse for housing. Though the former 

factory site has a developed 

infrastructure, it needs increased sewer 

and water tie-ins together with 

increased road access. 

Involves the reuse of the former IUP 

campus 

Extension of shortline 10 miles. 

Further development of the Planned Mixed 

Use Community 












‣ Transportation and development 

choices will reflect a priority on 

safe and secure multimodal and 

intermodal networks for both people 

and goods. 

‣ Investment in infrastructure 

improvements will be coordinated 

and targeted at the corridor level 

to optimize the impact of the 

investment. 



10 ARCO 

Northpointe 

Technology 

Center II 

Construction of a 30,000 square-foot 

multi-tenant facility at Northpointe 





investment. 

11 ARCO 

12 ARCO 

13 ARCO 

Route 28 

Interchange 

Construction 

Schenley 


West Hills 


Expansion, 

Phases 3 & 4 

Construction of a new interchange to 

serve expansion of the proposed Slate 

Lick Industrial Park. 

Railroad yard improvements in the Park. 

This project involves the continuing 

expansion of an existing industrial park 

to accommodate the demand for modern, 

ready-to-go facilities that have easy 

access to Route 28, the Pennsylvania 

Turnpike, and I-80 (once the Allegheny 

Valley Expressway is completed). Phases 

1 and 2 of the expansion are already 

completed. 





investment. 





and goods. 










investment. 




The following are sewer and water projects for Armstrong County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


14 ARCO 

15 ARCO 

16 ARCO 

17 ARCO 

18 ARCO 

Brady's Bend 

Water System 

Freeport Water 

System 

Kiskiminetas 


Project 

Kiskiminetas 


Project 

Kittanning 

Suburban Joint 

Water Authority 

Water Line 

Extensions 

Construction of water system to serve 

village of Roseville 

Waterline replacement and plant upgrade 

in Borough of Freeport 

Sewer line extensions along SR 56 to 

Apollo Ridge School campus 

Waterline extension in Kiskiminetas 

Township 

Waterline extensions in North Buffalo 

Township 







environment. 







environment. 







environment. 




environment. 




environment. 



19 ARCO 

20 ARCO 

21 ARCO 

Manor Township 

and Rayburn 


Project 

Parks Township 

Water Line ext 

Rural Valley 

Water Line and 

Storage Tank 

Replacement 

Construction of a new treatment facility 

and line extension. 

Extension of waterlines throughout 

Bethel and Parks Townships 

New water storage tank, water treatment 

plant, pump station modifications, new 

raw water source, and interconnect with 

Cowanshannock Township. 




environment. 







environment. 




environment. 

22 ARCO 

23 ARCO 

Seminole and 

Putneyville 

Sewer Project 

South Buffalo 

Water Line ext 

Construction of sewage system extensions 

to serve these communities. 

Extension of waterline to serve village 

of Clinton 







environment. 







environment. 








The following are community and economic development project for Beaver County along with the corresponding policy 



1 

BECO 

Aliquippa 

Industrial Site 

Designed, financed and built to serve as 

a public river port. Estimated cost is 

$6 million. A 1-mile segment of 

infrastructure exists between the CED 

completed infrastructure at the southern 

end of the site and the infrastructure 

constructed at the end of the West 

Aliquippa Bridge and also for the Beaver 

County Jail. This will open up approx. 

100 acres. Estimated cost is $2 million. 

Also, Aliquippa Tin Mill, LP requires 

extending public infrastructure. 

Estimated cost is $ 5 million. Matching 

funds for the appropriation can come from 

the CED, private investment, and the City 

of Aliquippa Port Authority. 













investment. 

2 

3 

BECO 

BECO 

Chippewa Route 51 

Site 

Former Moltrup 

Steel Site 

Construction of public infrastructure in 

support of commercial development of site 

located on PA Route 51 near the 

intersection of PA Route 60. 

Located in the City of Beaver Falls; 

involving the redevelopment of a 

brownfield site into a mixed use site 

consisting of potential residential and 

recreational uses. 





investment. 








4 

BECO 

Hopewell Business 

and Industrial 

Park 

In 1998 the CED acquired 80 acres to 

expand the Hopewell Business and 

Industrial Park. Six improved acres 

remain available to sell at the original 

site. The site is designed to attract 

light manufacturing, 

warehouse/distribution facilities, and 

office operations to locate near the 

Pittsburgh International Airport and a 

four lane limited access highway, PA 

Route 60. Matching funds provided by the 

Beaver County Corporation for Economic 

Development. 





investment. 





and goods. 

5 

6 

BECO 

BECO 

Midland 

Redevelopment 

Project 

Monaca 

Redevelopment 

Site 

Redevelopment of a brownfield site into a 

mixed-use commercial, industrial, and 

professional site 

Redeveloping underutilized and 

deteriorating industrial property in 

Monaca south of the Monaca/East Rochester 

Bridge. One of the drawbacks is the lack 

of internal access. Commitments from 

adjacent property owners are needed to in 

upgrade their properties in return for 

improving the site access. CED has 

acquired the Pittsburgh Tube building. 

Funds are needed for renovation, and to 

improve access to adjacent properties. 

Matching funds provided by the 

Corporation for Economic Development and 

private investment. 













7 

8 

BECO 

BECO 

Northern 

Ambridge 

Redevelopment 

Redevelopment of 

Former B&W Sites 

Redevelopment of 60 acre brownfield site 

in Ambridge, Pennsylvania into a mixed 

use site that includes commercial, 

industrial, residential uses. 

Redevelopment of 200 acres of the former 

Babcock and Wilcox industrial sites. 

This land currently is underutilized and 

unproductive. There are over 500,000 

square feet of buildings. Several small 

operations remain within the facilities 

and have invested in site cleanup 

activities. Significant Investment is 

still required to modernize the 

properties. Matching funds may come 

from the Beaver County Corporation for 

Economic Development and private 

investment that can be attracted to the 

site. 











9 

10 

BECO 

BECO 

Rochester 

Transit Oriented 

Development Proj 

ect 

Rochester 

Waterfront 

Redevelopment 

Project 

An integrated approach to land use and 

transportation planning and to encourage 

“livable communities” initiatives and 

transit oriented development. 

Redevelopment of brownfield and other 

property at/near the confluence of the 

Ohio and Beaver Rivers into a mixed-use 

commercial, professional and recreational 

site 


improvements will be coordinated and 

targeted at the corridor level to 

optimize the impact of the investment. 








11 

BECO 

Route 60 

Business Park 

The intersection of Rte 60 and the PA 

Turnpike is largely undeveloped due to 

lack of infrastructure. This provides 

substantial opportunity for development 

of an upscale business park. Estimated 

development costs are $5 million. A $2.5 

million capital budget appropriation is 

requested for eligible on site 

improvements. including acquisition. 

Matching funds can come from the 

Corporation for Economic Development and 

private investment. 





12 

BECO 

WestGate 

Business Park 

On-site water and sewer facilities to 

serve new business developments in 

WestGate Business Park in Big Beaver 

Borough, Pennsylvania 




environment. 




The following are sewer and water projects for Beaver County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


13 

14 

BECO 

BECO 

Bridgewater 

Crossing 

Midland Water 

Intake and 

Waterline 

On-site water and sewer facilities to 

serve new business developments in 

Bridgewater, Pennsylvania. 

Construction of new water supply lines 

in Midland Borough, Pennsylvania 



priority. 




environment. 



priority. 




environment. 








The following are community and economic development project for Butler County along with the corresponding policy 



1 BUCO 

2 BUCO 

Butler County 

Arts Center 

Butler County 

Historical 

Projects 

Development of a new arts and 

cultural center to serve the 

Butler County area. This facility 

is to be constructed on the Butler 

County Community College campus in 

Butler Township. 

The renovation of the central 

historical museum and upgrades for 

preservation of several other 

historically significant 

properties throughout the county. 





assets. 





assets. 

3 BUCO 

CSX Rail 

Project Evans 

City 

Acquisition and maintenance of 

existing CSX main line railroad 

from the Allegheny and Beaver 

County lines. This rail line has 

been earmarked for abandonment by 

the CSX railroad. If this 

abandonment is allowed to proceed, 

two existing manufacturing 

businesses which are dependent on 

the rail for raw materials and 

finished product shipments will be 

forced to leave the area. 

‣ Investment in infrastructure improvements 

will be coordinated and targeted at the 

corridor level to optimize the impact of the 

investment. 

‣ Transportation and development choices will 

reflect a priority on safe and secure 

multimodal and intermodal networks for both 

people and goods. 



4 BUCO 

Ice Rink Sports 

Center 

Construction of a dual ice surface in 

central Butler County would provide a 

facility usable for both high school and 

collegiate games. 



industries by capitalizing on 

historic, cultural, recreational and 

ecological assets 

5 BUCO 

6 BUCO 

Slippery Rock 

Business Park 

Slippery Rock 

Coffin Property 

Redevelopment of surface mined property 

in Slippery Rock Township, Butler 

Township. Project includes infrastructure 

development, road improvements, 

excavation and site development. Park 

would bring jobs to area where median 

family income is 150% of poverty and 

below. Park would compliment Main Street 

revitalization program in Slippery Rock 

Borough. 

Development of 106 acres adjacent to 

existing business park. Site has sewer 

and water and is currently zoned for 













priority. 





7 BUCO 

Slippery Rock 

Tech Park 

Development of technology based business 

park, including construction of spec 

building adjacent to Slippery Rock 

University Park would compliment Main 

Street revitalization program in Slippery 

Rock Borough. 







priority. 



8 BUCO 

West End 

Revitalization, 

City of Butler 

80+ acres within City of Butler, mixed 

use with significant deterioration of 

residential, commercial, and industrial 

property, some abandoned. Located at 

Southwestern city boundary, Hansen 

Avenue North to State Route 356, Route 

356 East to S. Bluff Street, North to W. 

Penn Street, East to North Cliff Street, 

South to E. Jefferson Avenue, East to S. 

Monroe St., South to Center Avenue, West 

to State Route 8, South to city 

boundary. Significantly underutilized 

land resources subject to continued 

deterioration and declining property 

values, several abandoned industrial 

sites with possible environmental 

contamination; underutilized public 

infrastructure. 








priority. 




The following are sewer and water projects for Butler County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


9 BUCO 

Middlesex Twp 

Sewage System 

Install new sewer lines and expand 

treatment capacity to serve 1,200 

customers in Middlesex Township 

currently suffering from a high rate of 

failing on-lot septic systems. 




environment. 

10 BUCO 

Winfield 

Township Sewage 

System 

Funding will be used to correct on-lot 

sewage systems within Winfield Township. 




environment. 








The following are community and economic development project for Fayette County along with the corresponding policy 

statements. 


1 FACO 

2 FACO 

3 FACO 

4 FACO 

Brownsville 

Wharf and 

Riverside 

Project 

Downtown 

Brownsville 


Downtown 

Connellsville 



Airport 

Expansion 

Project 

Redevelopment of riverside 

recreation and heritage 

attraction, including community 

park, industry heritage displays 

and educational tours. Project is 

being carried out by the Fayette 

County Redevelopment Authority. 

Rehabilitation of streets, 

sidewalks, and building facades. 

Rehabilitation of streets, 

sidewalks, and building facades. 

Extension of the runway to 

accommodate corporate jet traffic; 

hangar repairs. 





assets. 


region’s existing communities is a priority. 









5 FACO 


KOZ industrial 

development 

projects. 

Development of 800 acres of KOZ 

tax-free sites in Springhill 

Township along Route 119/Route 43 

highway corridor. 




investment. 



6 FACO 

Gallatin Avenue 

Elm Street 

Project 

Residential development consisting of 25 

single family dwelling units and over 20 

town home units. 



priority. 

7 FACO 

Southwest PA 

Rail 


Program 

Renovation of shortline rail system to 

connect industrial sites to Class I 

carriers. 

‣ Transportation and development choices 

will reflect a priority on safe and 

secure multimodal and intermodal 

networks for both people and goods. 

8 FACO 

9 FACO 

10 FACO 

11 FACO 

State Theater 

for the Arts 

Uniontown 


Project, Phase 

2 

University 


US 40 Business 

Park - Phase 2 

Complete renovation of the Old Union 

Trust Building (Owned by the Greater 

Uniontown Heritage Consortium), 

including installation of an elevator. 

Renovate buildings in downtown area. 

Preparation of 150 acres of underutilized 

and unproductive land strategically 

located along Route 119 in order to 

enable private investment in modern, 

ready-to-go industrial business parks. 

Specific work includes the construction 

of utilities and roadway infrastructure 

Development of new industrial park. 



priority. 








priority. 




optimize the impact of the 

investment. 

‣ The region will proactively support 

the emerging role of colleges and 

universities in economic development. 





investment. 




The following are sewer and water projects for Fayette County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


12 FACO 

Existing Water 

and Sewage 

Projects, Phase 

1 

New water and sewage services as well as 

expansion of water and sewage services 

in Fayette County. 




environment. 

13 FACO 

Existing Water 

and Sewage 

Projects, Phase 

2 

New water and sewage services as well as 

expansion of water and sewage services 

in Fayette County. 




environment. 








The following are community and economic development project for Greene County along with the corresponding policy 

statements. 


1 

GRCO 

Greene County 

Airport 


Spur 

Construction of a 1-mile extension with side 

track from the (N.S./CSX) to service Airport 

and EverGreene Technology Park. 





2 

GRCO 

Mather 

Redevelopment 

Project 

Clean up and environmental remediation of the 

Mather Gob Pile and development of industrial 

sites. Phase One and Two of this project has 

been funded through Growing Greener. Those 

phases are wrapping up and we have applied 

for a third Growing Greener grant totaling 

$5,000,000 to complete the remediation, 

earthwork, testing and final design. The 

environmental benefits to this community are 

significant and the final product after 

remediation will be a recreational facility 

for the area. 











3 

GRCO 

Meadow Ridge 

Business Park 

Enhancements 

This ongoing project involves construction of 

additional utilities and supplemental roadway 

enhancements in preparation for private 

investment in an industrial business park 

strategically located at Exit 1 on I-79. 

Planning dollars for an interchange 

improvement project will also be needed. 

This land, which currently is underutilized, 

will provide additional modern, ready-to-go 

industrial sites within the Meadow Ridge 

Business Park. 





investment. 



4 

GRCO 

Ruff Creek 

Interchange 

Planning 

Planning activity for interchange 

enhancements at Exit 19 on Interstate 

79, the Ruff Creek Exit, is needed to 

allow for improvements to the 

interchange area needed as a result of 

the location of the United Mine Workers 

Training Center in Washington Township. 

In addition, a Coal Heritage Park is 

being planned at the site, which will 

serve as an educational and 

entertainment attraction to the area. 













The following are sewer and water projects for Greene County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


5 

6 

7 

8 

GRCO 

GRCO 

GRCO 

GRCO 

Cabbage Flats 

Sewer 

Improvement 

Project 

Carmichaels- 

Cumberland 

Joint Sewer 

Authority 

Mt. Morris 

Water and Sewer 

Extension 

Waynesburg 

Borough CSO 

Separation 

Project 

Extend the collection lines of the 

Greensboro-Monongahela Township Joint 

Sewer Authority to serve the area known 

as Cabbage Flats along SR 88 in 

Monongahela Township 

Extension of approximately two miles of 

sewer collection lines in Cumberland 

Township along SR 88 North 

Water and sewer line extension in Mt. 

Morris 

Separation of aging storm sewers in the 

Borough of Waynesburg to alleviate run 

off water from entering the sewage 

collection system during storm events and 

wet weather episodes 




environment. 




environment. 








environment. 




environment. 








The following are community and economic development project for Indiana County along with the corresponding policy 

statements. 


1 

2 

INCO 

INCO 

Blairsville 

Secondary 

Blue Spruce 

Park 

The Cambria and Indiana Trail Council 

plans to extend the Ghost Town Trail, a 

bicycle/pedestrian trail in Indiana and 

Cambria counties. Conrail abandoned 12 

miles of the Blairsville Secondary 

between the villages of Dilltown and the 

Blacklick. This project will provide the 

critical link to the regional trail 

system by tying into the Hoodlebug Trial 

above. 

Recreational development and park 

renovation 











3 

4 

INCO 

INCO 

Commerce Center 

I Build-out 

Project 

Commerce Park 

R&D/Office 

facility 

The Indiana County Development 

Corporation proposes to acquire the 

33,000 sq.f. building and update and 

renovate the building to tenant 

specifications. 

This project involves land acquisition, 

site development, and construction of a 

30,000-square-foot R&D/office facility in 

the Indiana County Commerce Park. 










Count 

y 

Project Name Project Summary Policy Statements 

5 

6 

7 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 

Conemaugh Dam 

Trail/North 

Park Trailhead 

Project 

Corporate 

Campus High- 

Tech Office 

Facility 

Corporate 

Campus 

Manufacturing 

Facility 

The Conemaugh Valley Conservancy will 

construct a 3.3-mile trail along an 

abandoned railway line. It follows a 

portion of the Pennsylvania Railroad line 

that operated along the corridor in the 

early 1900's.The trail also crosses 

portions of the historic Pennsylvania 

Main Line Canal that operated in the mid- 

1800s. 

The North Park Trailhead Project includes 

a railhead and interpretive visitor site. 

Development of a 60,000-square-foot 

office building for high-technology 

office purposes to support e- 

applications, e-devices, e- 

infrastructures, and e-commerce 

enterprises. 

This project involves the development of 

a 100,000-square-foot manufacturing 

facility. 














8 

INCO 

Corporate 

Campus Multitenant 

Building 

Design, site preparation, and 

construction of a multi-tenant building 

to be located at the Corporate Campus. 





9 

10 

INCO 

INCO 

Corporate 

Campus Phase 

III 

Fiber Optic 

Project 

The Corporate Campus Phase III project 

includes land acquisition, site 

preparation, construction of access 

roads, infrastructure and related phases 

of development. 

Upgrade fiber optic and communication 

systems in business parks 





‣ The entire region will have access to 

broadband communications 

infrastructure. 


Count 

y 

Project Name Project Summary Policy Statements 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 

Greater Indiana 

Business Park 

Hi-Tech 

Business Park 

Redevelopment of site, including land 

acquisition, site preparation, 

infrastructure development and 

construction of a mixed-use business park 

located in the Greater Indiana area. 

The Hi-Tech Business Park project 





Hoodlebug Trail As part of the Route 119 widening project 

from Route 56 in Homer City to Route 22 

in Blairsville, the project will include 

8.3 miles of pedestrian/bicycle trail 

that will tie the IUP Trail, which was 

constructed as part of the Rose Street 

extension southward to Homer City, then 

to Black Lick. 

Indiana Borough 

Streetscape 

Project 


- Jimmy Stewart 

Airport Runway 

Extension 

Indiana Borough, Downtown Indiana, Inc., 

and Indiana University of Pennsylvania 

are proposing several phases of 

streetscape improvements (updated roads, 

underground utilities, traffic signals, 

lighting, sidewalks, landscaping, and 

signage) along Philadelphia Street, 7th 

Street to Wayne Avenue, and ultimately 

into White Township. 

New runway expanding to 5,500', lighting 

and full instrument landing system. 














priority. 







16 

17 

18 

19 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 


Commerce Park 


Covered Bridge 

Restoration 

Project 


Keystone 

Innovation Zone 


Rails to Trails 

Program 

The Indiana County Commerce Park is 

located near Routes 119 and 286.This 

county-owned industrial park has 

approximately 10 acres remaining. With 

proximity to IUP, the Park will provide 

convenient access to University-based R&D 

and faculty and staff. 

Restoration of covered bridges in Indiana 

County to serve both transportation needs 

and to preserve the structures for 

tourism opportunities. 

The Indiana County Commissioners, in 

cooperation and partnership with Indiana 

University of Pennsylvania are requesting 

funding to support the establishment of 

the Indiana County Keystone Innovation 

Zone (KIZ) and thus improving 

opportunities for technology oriented 

economic development initiatives. 

Acquisition of railroad right-of-ways and 

related development for Indiana County 

Rails to Trails Program. 

























20 

INCO 


Wayfinding 

System 

Development of coordinated wayfinder 

signage through Indiana County. 








21 

22 

23 

INCO 

INCO 

INCO 

Indiana 

Regional 

Medical Center 

Land and 

Building 

Expansion 

Indiana 

University of 

Pennsylvania 

Campus 

Expansion 

Indiana 

University of 

Pennsylvania 

Kovalchick 

Convention and 

Athletic 

Complex (KCAC) 

The Indiana Regional Medical Center is 

proposing the acquisition of 60 adjacent 

acres of land to support the long-range 

expansion and development plans to 

support healthcare programs for the 

region. 

Expansion includes student housing 

revitalization, land acquisition, minicampus 

development, multiple building 

renovations, renovations to recreation 

and athletic complexes and varsity sports 

complex, vehicle circulation and parking. 

Land acquisition, including adjacent 

properties, design and development, 

construction of a multi-purpose 

convocation center, including a 600-seat 

auditorium, convention center, athletic 

venue, and office space for the John P. 

Murtha Institute for Homeland Security. 



priority. 
















24 

25 

INCO 

INCO 

IUP Small 

Business 

Incubator 

Renovation 

Project 

Jimmy Stewart 


Airport 


Design and engineering, construction, and 

related development activities for the 

IUP Small Business Incubator Renovation 

Project. 

Upon completion of the proposed runway 

extension project, full instrument land 

system, etc, 25-30 acres will become 

available for development at the airport. 

The scope of this project includes 

infrastructure and site development to 

prepare for public and private aviation 

investment (hangars) and private business 

development. 












26 

27 

INCO 

INCO 

Joseph Land 

Development 

KOEZ Multi- 

Tenant Building 

The Joseph Land Development project 


preparation, underground utilities and 

support infrastructure, construction of 

access roads, and related phases of 

development. 



located in a Keystone Opportunity 

Expansion Zone or Improvement Zone. 









28 

29 

INCO 

INCO 

Mixed-use 

Business Park 

Multi-Tenant 

Business 

Facility 

The Mixed-use Business Park project 







to be located in White Township. 









30 

INCO 

Northern 


Multi-tenant 

Building 

Land acquisition, design and engineering, 

site preparation, and construction of a 

multi-tenant building to be located north 

of Route 422. 





31 

INCO 

Redevelopment 

Site Project 

Land acquisition, design and engineering, 

environmental cleanup and site 

redevelopment, infrastructure and related 

phases of development of certain parcels 

located in White Township and Indiana 

Borough for a community development 

project. 



priority. 



32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

INCO 

INCO 

Regional Indoor 

Fitness Complex 

Saltsburg 

Borough Canal 

Park 

INCO The 119 

Business Park 

INCO 

INCO 

Thunder 

Mountain Lenape 

Nation Native 

American 

Heritage 

Complex 

Windy Ridge 

Business and 


Construction, including phases of land 

acquisition, design, and site 

preparation, for the Regional Indoor 

Fitness Complex to be located in Southern 

Indiana County. 

This project involves Phase II 

development of this cultural heritage 

project, including construction of a 

visitors center and exhibition 

facilities. The Saltsburg Visitors Center 

and Canal Park is one component of the 

Path of Progress heritage tour route in 

Pennsylvania. 

The 119 Business Park project includes 

land acquisition, site preparation, 

construction of access roads, 

infrastructure and related phases of 

development. 

The Thunder Mountain Lenape Nation Native 

American Heritage Complex project 

includes land acquisition, design and 

engineering, site preparation, 


construction. 

The Windy Ridge Business and Technology 

Park project is envisioned as a mixed-use 

development to serve as a location for 

technology oriented companies and 


preparation, underground utilities, 

construction of access roads, 


development. 



























The following are sewer and water projects for Indiana County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


37 

INCO 

Blairsville 

Sewer Treatment 

Plant 

Improvements 

Project 

The Blairsville Municipal Authority is 

proposing to expand the existing sewer 

treatment plant that also currently 

serves a portion of Burrell Township, 

specifically the U.S. Route 22 corridor 

to accommodate business sector growth 

and residential developments. 





investment. 




environment. 

38 

39 

INCO 

INCO 

Indiana Borough 

Sewer 

Interceptor 

Project 


Stormwater 

Management Plan 

The Indiana Borough Sewer Interceptor 

project is being proposed to relocate 

and update aged sewer lines that are 

currently undersized due to many years 


The Indiana County Commissioners propose 

to develop a Stormwater management plan. 




environment. 




environment. 



For CEDS planning purposes Lawrence County is part of the Northwest Planning Commission Economic Development 

District, these project are included for reference only. 





clusters. 2035 Plan community and economic development projects are anticipated to support those areas of 

emphasis. The following are community and economic development project for Lawrence County along with the 

corresponding policy statements. 


1 LACO 

2 LACO 

3 LACO 

Millennium Park 

Millennium Park 

Phase II 

New Castle 

Municipal 

Airport Runway 

Extension 

Providing utilities and appropriate 

access to the Millennium Park in 

Neshannock Township to help attract 

critically needed jobs to the county. 

Site preparation and infrastructure 

construction for 500-acre industrial 

park offering large (100+ acre) pad 

sites for major industrial complexes. 

The project will result in the 

demolition of a former barracks at the 

New Castle Municipal Airport to make 

room for new hangars and aviation 

related development on the airport. 

The project is being completed in 

concert with a 1,000 ft. runway 

extension project. This project will 

enable the New Castle Municipal Airport 

to become a true business airport for 

the County and the region. 





investment. 





investment. 





and goods. 



4 LACO 

Riverview 

Commerce Park 

Phase II 

Continued redevelopment of 75-acre 

brownfield site in Keystone Opportunity 

Zone and Lawrence County Enterprise 

Zone. 










investment. 








emphasis. The following are community and economic development project for Washington County along with the 



1 WACO 

2 WACO 

3 WACO 

Alta Vista, A 

Business Park by 

MIDA 

American Zinc and 

Chemical 

Canton Township 

Exit 16 

This project involves the construction of 

complete road and utility infrastructure 

on a site of approximately 256 acres on 

the north side of the I-70 Bentleyville 

Interchange (Exit 32) in Fallowfield 

Township, for a mixed-use business park. 

Redevelopment of a blighted 115+ acres in 

Smith Twp. Includes acquisition, 

environmental remediation, demolition of 

existing buildings and infrastructure 

improvements. 

This project involves property 

acquisition, environmental remediation, 

rehabilitation of existing buildings and 

infrastructure improvements. 









locations. 









locations. 



4 WACO 

Fort Pitt 


This project will remediate and redevelop 

25 acres of underutilized industrial 

property located in the Borough of 

Canonsburg. 

This project complements the Canonsburg 

Downtown Revitalization Project and Main 

Street Program. The current, rusting 

warehouse structure at the Fort Pitt site 

is an eyesore, and is unfortunately the 

first impression those traveling 

Interstate 79 have of Canonsburg. 





locations. 





5 WACO 

6 WACO 

I-79 Meadowlands 


PA Trolley Heritage 

Complex 

This project involves the expansion of 

water and sewer lines to 106 acres in a 

400 acre development park. 

The final phase of a three-phase 

$11,726,000 capital improvement project 

is the construction of a 36,000 square 

foot Visitors Center and Trolley Era 

Street Exhibit. The final design work 

will be completed in 2007. The site work 

is funded and construction will be 

completed in 2007. 









7 WACO 

Phoenix Business 

Park 

Development of 130 acre site for light 

industrial/business park. Project will 

reuse the site has 30 acre gob pile and 

11,000 of illegal waste. 





locations. 

8 WACO Southpointe II 

This project involves environmental 

remediation, demolition, site grading and 

installation of infrastructure in order 

to prepare sites for mixed use private 

development. 







9 WACO 

10 WACO 

Southpointe II – 

Cultural Center 

Renovation 

Starpointe 

Business/Industrial 

Park by WCCED 

Renovation of the former Administration 

Center for the Western Center School and 

Hospital to serve as educational and 

cultural center. 

This project includes the construction of 

utilities and roadway infrastructure for 

the expansion of the Starpointe 

Industrial Park. The 1,000 acre expansion 

will be constructed on Brownfields (strip 

mines which have been partially 

reclaimed). 





locations. 













locations. 




The following are sewer and water projects for Washington County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


11 WACO 

12 WACO 

13 WACO 

14 WACO 

15 WACO 

Center-West 

Sewage 

Collection 

System 

&Treatment 

Facilities 

Project 

Charleroi Water 

Plant and 

Intake Upgrades 

Elrama Sewage 

Project 

Hanover 

Township / 

Starpointe 


Sewer Extension 

Mt. Pleasant 

(villages of 

Southview and 

Westland) 

Sewage Project 

Constructing a sewage collection system 

and wastewater treatment plant to serve 

the southeast region and the villages 

along the Monongahela River in 

Centerville Borough and the developed 

areas of West Brownsville Borough where 

malfunctioning on-lot system and wildcat 

sewers currently exist. 

Upgrading the filtration system and 

water intake facility at the Charleroi 

Water Plant to meet Safe Drinking Water 

Act specifications. 

Extending sewer service to Elrama and 

surrounding areas where wildcat sewers 

currently dump raw sewage into the 

Monongahela River directly upstream of a 

primary water intake for a Pennsylvania 

American Water plant in Washington 

County. 

Downstream resiting of a planned sewage 

treatment plant to provide sewage 

service to the Little Raccoon Creek 

watershed, thereby avoiding the 

construction of a second sewage 

treatment plant in the near future to 

service this growth area. 

Extending sewage treatment service to 

two villages in Mt. Pleasant Township, 

Washington County that suffer from 

malfunctioning on-lot septic systems 

that contaminate the local aquifer. 




environment. 




environment. 




environment. 





investment. 




environment. 








emphasis. The following are community and economic development project for Westmoreland County along with the 



1 WECO 

Arnold - New 

Kensington 

Redevelopment 

Demolition Project 

Due to the lack of available sites in 

this area, this project will involve a 

major redevelopment in these 

communities and prepare the properties 

for reuse to provide the needed sites 

for new industrial and commercial 

businesses. Funding is needed for 

acquisition and demolition to initiate 

this project. 




investment. 

‣ The region will focus on the identification 

and development of industrial sites with 

special attention given to well situated 




2 WECO 

3 WECO 

History & Education 

Center at Historic 

Hanna’s Town 

Jeannette 

Industrial Park - 

Phase III 

Design and construction of a 14,000 

square foot history and education 

center at Historic Hanna’s Town 

Acquisition and demolition of former 

Jeannette Corporation property 





assets. 

‣ The region will focus on the identification 

and development of industrial sites with 

special attention given to well situated 






4 WECO 

5 WECO 

6 WECO 

New Stanton I-76 

Mixed-Use 

Development 

Northmoreland 

Mixed-Use 

Development 


Airpark - Phase II 

The proposed site for this development 

is adjacent to the Pennsylvania 

Turnpike, two (2) miles east of New 

Stanton. The planned park would 

encompass approximately 1,500-acres 

and provide a mixed-use development in 

Westmoreland County with the ability 

to accommodate large industrial, 

commercial and residential 

development. 

Develop 800 acre mixed-use development 

near Westmoreland Business & Research 

Park to include industrial, office, 

and mixed-use residential 

Develop 100-acre industrial park 

adjacent to Arnold Palmer Airport in 

Unity Township. 




investment. 




investment. 




investment. 





7 WECO 


Airpark - Phase III 

Develop 225 acres abutting Arnold 

Palmer Airport to accommodate air 

cargo and aviation-related companies. 




investment. 

‣ The region will support identified strategic 








8 WECO 

9 WECO 

10 WECO 


Community College 

Baseball Stadium 

Westmoreland 

Distribution Center 

- Phase II 

Westmoreland Museum 

of American Art 

Renovate current baseball field, add 

seating and locker rooms, press box to 

attract minor league baseball team and 

state regional college playoffs 

This project involves the construction 

of utilities and roadway 

infrastructure, as well as the 

clearance and grading of land that 

currently is underutilized and 

unproductive despite its strategic 

location at the intersection of 

Interstates 70 and 76 and Route 119. 

The additional asset of direct railway 

access and 14 miles of rail siding 

create an unique opportunity to create 

a modern, ready-to-go highway-railway 

intermodal yard for Conrail, CSX, and 

Norfolk Southern. 

This project involves the construction 

of new amenities for visitors to the 

museum, as well as an upgraded 

reinstallation of the permanent 

collection. This important visitor 

attraction in southwestern 

Pennsylvania attracts over 30,000 

attendees each year. 





assets. 








investment. 





assets. 



11 WECO 

Westmoreland Office 

and Technology Park 

- Hempfield 

An assessment conducted by 

Westmoreland County determined that 

there is a tremendous demand for 

parks, complete with infrastructure, 

to accommodate office space and hightech 

companies. In addition, there is 

a lack of property and sites available 

for this market. To address this 

demand, the WCIDC intends to develop a 

113-acre parcel of property currently 

owned by the county, and located along 

SR 1053 directly opposite the 

Westmoreland County Industrial Park I 

in Hempfield Township. This project 

would be the first-of-its-kind to 

accommodate business needs for highquality 

locations. 




investment. 

‣ The region will support identified strategic 





The following are sewer and water projects for Westmoreland County along with the corresponding policy statements. 


12 WECO 

Route 366 – 

City of New 

Kensington to 

Merwin Road 

Interceptor 

Install 3 miles of sewage interceptor 

to provide service to 2,000 homes in 

and around Pucketta Creek communities 

of Murrysville, New Kensington, Upper 

Burrell, Lower Burrell and Washington 

Twp. 







environment. 



Appendix C: 

Glossary and Acronyms 



Appendix C: Glossary and Acronyms 

Acronyms 

AASHTO American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials 

ADA 

Americans with Disabilities Act 

ARC 

Appalachian Regional Commission 

ACTA 

Airport Corridor Transportation Association 

AIP 

Airport Improvement Program 

ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

ATWIC 

Accessible Transportation and Workforce Interagency Cooperative 

BCTA 

BOA 

BPT 

BRT 

BTA 

CAAA 

CE 

CEDS 

CMAQ 

CMP 

DEP 

DOT 

DVMT 

DUI 

EA 

EDA 

EDD 

EIS 

EJ 

EMAP 

EPA 


Bureau of Aviation, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 

Bureau of Public Transportation, Pennsylvania Dept. of Transportation 

Bus Rapid Transit 

Butler Transit Authority 

Clean Air Act Amendments 

(Environmental) Categorical Exclusion 

Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality 

Congestion Management Process 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Driving Under the Influence (of drugs or alcohol) 

Environmental Assessment 

U.S. Economic Development Administration 

Economic Development District 

Environmental Impact Study 

Environmental Justice 

Environmental Modeling and Assessment Program 

Environmental Protection Agency 

FAA 

FACT 

FEMA 

FHWA 

FRA 

FTA 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Fayette Area Coordinated Transit 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Federal Highway Administration 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Federal Transit Administration 


Page 1


GHG 

GIS 

GPS 

HOV 

HUD 

HSIP 

HSIPR 

Greenhouse Gas 

Geographic Information Systems 

Global Positioning Systems 

High Occupancy Vehicle 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

Highway Safety Improvement Program 

High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail 

ICTA 

Indiana County Transit Authority 

ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 

ITS 

Intelligent Transportation Systems 

JARC 

KIZ 

KOZ 

LDD 

LED 

LEP 

LPN 

LRT 

LTRP 

MARAD 

MERLAM 

MMVTA 

MPC 

MPO 

MUTCD 

NAAQS 

NCATA 

NEPA 

NHS 

NOAA 

NOX 

NPIAS 

OAG 

OIBD 

OMEGA 

OTMA 

Job Access Reverse Commute 

Keystone Innovation Zone 

Keystone Opportunity Zone 

Local Development District 

Light Emitting Diode 

Limited English Proficiency 

Linking Planning and NEPA 

Light Rail Trans 

Long Range Transportation Plan 

U.S. Maritime Administration 

Mature Economic Regional Land Allocation Model 

Mid Mon Valley Transit Authority 

Municipalities Planning Code 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

New Castle Area Transit Authority 

National Environmental Protection Act 

National Highway System 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Nitrous Oxides 

National Program of Integrated Airport Systems 

Official Airlines Guide 

Office of International Business Development 

Ohio Mid-Eastern Governments Association 

Oakland Transportation Management Association 


Page 2


PAAC 

Port Authority of Allegheny County 

PADEP 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 

PDP 

Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership 

PEL 

Planning and Environmental Linkages 

PENNDOT Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 

PENNVEST Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority 

PFC 

Passenger Facility Charge 

PPM 

Parts Per Million 

PPP 

Public-Private Partnership 

PRIIA Passenger Rail Improvement and Investment Act of 2008 

PTAC 

Pennsylvania Transportation Advisory Committee 

PTTF 

Public Transportation Trust Fund 

PTC 

Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission 

RACP 

REMI 

ROP 

ROW 

RRX 

RSA 

RTD 

SAFETEA-LU 

SAP&DC 

SBDC 

SBF 

SD 

SDP 

SHSP 

SOV 

SOVCAP 

S.R. 

STC 

STIP 

STP 

STP–Urban 

SXF 

TAZ 

TAC 

TACT 

TE 

TIGER 

Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program 

Regional Economic Models, Inc. 

Regional Operations Plan 

Right of Way 

Railroad Crossing Program 

Roadway Safety Audit 

Regional transportation Districts 

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, & Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A 

Legacy for Users 

Southern Alleghenies Planning and Development Corporation 

Pennsylvania Small Business Development Centers 

Small Business First 

Structurally Deficient 

Service Delivery Plan 

PennDOT’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

Single Occupancy Vehicle 

Single Occupancy Vehicle Capacity Adding Project 

State Route 

State Transportation Commission 

State Transportation Improvement Program 

Surface Transportation Program funds 

Surface Transportation Program funds – (urban areas) 

Special Federal Funds 

Traffic Analysis Zone 

Transportation Advisory Committee 

Town and Country Transit 

Transportation Enhancement 

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Discretionary 

Grant Program 


Page 3


TIGER II 

TIP 

TMA 

TMA 

TOC 

TOD 

TRID 

TRWIB 

TTC 

UCSUR 

UPWP 

USDOT 

UZA 

VMT 

WASH 

WCTA 

YOE 

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, Discretionary 

Grant Program II 

Transportation Improvement Program 

Transportation Management Area 

Transportation Management Association 

Transit Operators Committee 

Transit-Oriented Development 

Transit Revitalization Investment District 

Three Rivers Workforce Investment Board 

Transportation Technical Committee 

University of Pittsburgh, University Center for Social and Urban Research 

Unified Planning Work Program 

United States Department of Transportation 

Urbanized Zone 

Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Washington City Transit 

Westmoreland County Transit Authority 

Year of Expenditure 


Page 4


Glossary of Terms 

Abutment - Part of a structure which supports the end of a span or accepts the thrust of an arch; 

often supports and retains the approach embankment. 

Air quality conformity determination - A process in which transportation plans and programs 

are reviewed to ensure that they are consistent with federal clean air requirements. Changes to 

the transportation system collectively must not worsen air quality; in areas where air quality does 

not meet federal standards, transportation plans and programs are expected to improve the air 

quality. 

Allegheny Mountain Section - A physiographic section in southwestern Pennsylvania, 

containing broad, rounded ridges separated by broad valleys. 

Allocation - An administrative distribution of funds for programs that do not have statutory 

distribution formulas. 

Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) - The legislation defining the responsibilities of and 

requirements for transportation providers to make transportation accessible to individuals with 

disabilities. 

Anticline - A configuration of folded, stratified rocks in which rocks dip in two directions away 

from a crest, as principal rafters of a common gable roof dip away from ridgepole. Reverse of 

syncline. 

Appalachian Plateau Province – A rugged, well-dissected physiographic province covering 

nearly half of the state of Pennsylvania, including all of southwestern Pennsylvania, consisting of 

numerous hills and stream valleys, and containing minable deposits of coal, oil and natural gas. 

Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) - A federal agency charged with assisting 

economic development and improving communities in America’s Appalachia region. All nine 

counties of southwestern Pennsylvania are considered part of Appalachia for ARC purposes. 

SPC is the designated agency through which federal ARC funds are invested in this region. 

Arterial - A class of roads serving major traffic movements (high-speed, high volume) for travel 

between major points. 

Arterial Highway - A major highway used primarily for through traffic. 

Arterial Street - A class of street serving major traffic movements (high-speed, high volume) 

for travel between major points. 


Page 5


Attainment Area - An area considered to have air quality that meets or exceeds the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) health standards used in the Clean Air Act. 

Nonattainment areas are areas considered not to have met these standards for designated 

pollutants. An area may be an attainment area for one pollutant and a nonattainment area for 

others. 

Beam - A horizontal structure member supporting vertical loads by resisting bending. A girder is 

a larger beam, especially when made of multiple plates. Deeper, longer members are created by 

using trusses. 

Bearing - A device at the ends of beams which is placed on top of a pier or abutment. The ends 

of the beam rest on the bearing. 

Bikeway - 1) Any road, path, or way which in some manner is specifically designated as being 

open to bicycle travel, regardless of whether such facilities are designated for the exclusive use 

of bicycles or are to be shared with other transportation modes. (23CFR217) 2) A facility 

designed to accommodate bicycle travel for recreational or commuting purposes. Bikeways are 

not necessarily separated facilities; they may be designed and operated to be shared with other 

travel modes. 

Bituminous Coal - A soft coal, containing about 80 percent carbon and 10 percent oxygen. The 

most abundant rank of coal, it is dark brown to black in color and burns with a smoky flame. 

Bridge - A raised structure built to carry vehicles or pedestrians over an obstacle. 

Bridge Deck - The top surface of a bridge which carries the traffic. 

Brownfield - Abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial and commercial facilities where 

expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contaminations; a 

tract of land that has been developed for industrial purposes, polluted, and then abandoned. 

Bus - Large motor vehicle used to carry more than 10 passengers, including school buses, 

intercity buses, and transit buses. 

Bus Lane - 1) A street or highway lane intended primarily for buses, either all day or during 

specified periods, but sometimes also used by carpools meeting requirements set out in traffic 

laws. (APTA1) 2) A lane reserved for bus use only. Sometimes also known as a "diamond lane." 

Camber - A positive, upward curve built into a beam which compensates for some of the 

vertical load and anticipated deflection. 

Capacity - A transportation facility's ability to accommodate a moving stream of people or 

vehicles in a given time period. 


Page 6


Carbon Monoxide (CO) - A colorless, odorless, tasteless gas formed in large part by incomplete 

combustion of fuel. Human activities (i.e., transportation or industrial processes) are largely the 

source for CO contamination. 

Carpool - An arrangement where two or more people share the use and cost of privately owned 

automobiles in traveling to and from pre-arranged destinations together. 

CEDS – see Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 

Census Block - The smallest geographic unit used by the United States Census Bureau for 

tabulation of 100-percent data. 

Clean Air Act (CAA) - The original Clean Air Act was passed in 1963, but the national air 

pollution control program is actually based on the 1970 version of the law. The 1990 Clean Air 

Act Amendments (CAAA) are the most far-reaching revisions of the 1970 law. The 1990 Clean 

Air Act Amendment is the most recent version of the 1970 version of the law. The 1990 

amendments made major changes in the Clean Air Act. 

Cluster Development – Development that takes place in tighter on smaller parcels organized in 

close proximity, typically mixed use with a high to medium development density. 

Column - A vertical structural member used to support compressive loads. Also see pier and 

pile. 

Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) - Overflow of a sewer system that handles both sewage and 

storm water. 

Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) - Official planning document of 

regional strategy recognized by the EDA. A CEDS is a plan that emerges from a broad-based 

continuous planning process addressing the economic opportunities and constraints of a region. 

The guidelines for developing a CEDS include effective general planning practices that can be 

used by any community to design and implement a plan to guide its economic growth. A CEDS 

should promote economic development and opportunity, foster effective transportation access, 

enhance and protect the environment, and balance resources through sound management of 

development. 

Congestion Management Process (CMP) - A method for studying congestion, identifying 

techniques for managing it, and measuring the effectiveness of implemented strategies. Under 

federal requirements, SPC maintains a CMP for the region. This program identifies corridors for 

congestion monitoring and evaluates and advances strategies for managing congestion. Project 

sponsors also work with SPC to review congestion management alternatives for corridors where 

additional single-occupancy vehicle capacity is proposed.. 

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) - A category in federal transportation 

legislation under which funds are available for projects that would reduce congestion and 

improve air quality. 


Page 7


Conglomerate – Detrital sedimentary rock made up of more or less rounded fragments of such 

size that an appreciable percentage of volume of rock consists of particles of granule size or 

larger. 

Corridor Development – Development that takes place along a linear transportation 

infrastructure or asset, be it highway, rail, transit, and/or waterway, most often at major hubs 

and/or intersections. 

Corridor/Sub-area Study - Also known as "Major Investment Studies," these studies are used 

to flesh out transportation strategy and project recommendations on a geographic basis. A 

Corridor or Sub-area is a context for evaluating how specific transportation conditions, problems, 

and needs should be addressed within the defined geographic area. A wide range of multimodal 

strategies, including ITS, are considered as candidate solutions for those problems. 

Culvert - A drain, pipe or channel which allows water to pass under a road, railroad or 

embankment. 

Deck - The top surface of a bridge which carries the traffic. See Bridge Deck. 

DCED - Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic 

Development; agency of state government whose goal is to foster opportunities for businesses 

and communities to succeed and thrive in a global economy. 

Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS) - A draft version, prepared for public comment 

and review, of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) required for a transportation project. 

EDA - Economic Development Administration; EDA was created by Congress pursuant to the 

Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to provide financial assistance to both 

rural and urban distressed communities. 

Economic Development District (EDD) - A federally designated region for purposes of 

investment of federal funds from the U.S. Economic Development Administration (part of the 

U.S. Department of Commerce). SPC is the EDD for its nine-county region. 

Embankment - Angled grading of the ground. 

Environmental Impact Study (EIS) - A study of the anticipated environmental impact of a 

transportation project. Before a large transportation project can be carried out, the environmental 

impact of the project must be assessed and, if necessary, mitigated. 

Environmental Justice (EJ) - Environmental justice assures that services and benefits allow for 

meaningful participation and are fairly distributed to avoid discrimination. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - The federal regulatory agency responsible for 

administering and enforcing federal environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean 

Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and others. 


Page 8


Expansion joint - A meeting point between two parts of a structure which is designed to allow 

for movement of the parts due to thermal or moisture factors while protecting the parts from 

damage. Commonly visible on a bridge deck as a hinged or movable connection. 

Facilities - As used in transportation, "facilities" means all the fixed physical assets of a 

transportation system, such as roads, bus terminals, bridges, bike paths, and train stations. 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) - A branch of the U.S. Department of 

Transportation that administers the Federal-aid Highway Program, providing financial assistance 

to states to construct and improve highways, urban and rural roads, and bridges. The FHWA also 

administers the Federal Lands Highway Program, including survey, design, and construction of 

forest highway system roads, parkways and park roads, Indian reservation roads, defense access 

roads, and other Federal lands roads. 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) - A branch of the U.S. Department of Transportation 

that assists communities in developing and improving mass transportation equipment, facilities, 

techniques, and methods with the cooperation of public and private mass transportation 

companies. The FTA also assists States and local governments and their authorities in financing 

areawide urban mass transportation systems that are to be operated by public or private mass 

transportation companies as decided by local needs. 

Fill - Earth, stone or other material used to raise the ground level, form an embankment or fill the 

inside of an abutment, pier or closed spandrel. 

Financial Planning - The process of defining and evaluating funding sources, sharing the 

information, and deciding how to allocate the funds. 

Fine Particulates - Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM-2.5). A micron is one 

millionth of a meter. See "Particulate Matter" below. 

Fiscal Constraint - Making sure that a given program or project can reasonably expect to 

receive funding within the time allotted for its implementation. 

Fixed Base Operator (FBO) - An operator based at an airport that provides various services 

such as selling fuel, repairing aircraft, or giving flying lessons. 

Fixed Guideways - Transportation pathways reserved for transit vehicles. These may include 

rail lines, inclines, busways, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, and reserved bus lanes on 

roads. 

Functionally Obsolete Bridge - A bridge that lacks adequate clearances, deck geometry, and/or 

alignment. 

General Aviation (GA) - A generic term used to reflect the most basic aviation activities (such 

as recreational flying and small corporate aircraft operations) and the airports that support them. 


Page 9


Geographic Information Systems (GIS) - A computerized system designed to capture, update, 

analyze, and display all forms of geographically referenced information. GIS permits the user to 

view map layers on a computer screen while also accessing databases related to the map features. 

GIS has extensive uses in the analysis of demographic, transportation, and environmental data. 

Global Positioning Systems (GPS) - A system that uses advanced technology and satellite 

communications to determine ground location at any place in the world. Initially developed by 

the U.S. military, GPS is now widely used in mapping, surveying, and navigational situations 

(such as traffic monitoring systems or the automatic location of transit vehicles). 

Greenfield - Term used to describe a piece of undeveloped land, either currently used for 

agriculture or just left to nature; land (as a potential industrial site) not previously developed or 

polluted. 

High Density – Referring to a development density and type most commonly associated with 

urban, vertical development with zero to limited structural separation and little open space. 

High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) - Vehicles carrying two or more people. The number that 

constitutes an HOV for the purposes of HOV highway lanes may be designated differently by 

different transportation agencies. 

Higher order roads – includes Interstates, freeways, expressways, and principal arterials. 

Highway - Any road, street, parkway, or freeway/expressway that includes rights-of-way, 

bridges, railroad-highway crossings, tunnels, drainage structures, signs, guardrail, and protective 

structures in connection with highways. The highway further includes that portion of any 

interstate or international bridge or tunnel and the approaches thereto (23 U.S.C. 101a). 

Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) - A nationwide system providing essential 

data on highway conditions, performance, and usage throughout the country. 

Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (Rail) - A location where one or more railroad tracks are 

crossed by a public highway, road, street, or a private roadway at grade, including sidewalks and 

pathways at or associated with the crossing. 

Highway Trust Fund (HTF) - An account established by law to hold Federal highway user 

taxes that are dedicated for highway and transit related purposes. The HTF has two accounts: the 

Highway Account, and the Mass Transit Account. 

Historic Preservation - Protection and treatment of the nation's significant historic buildings, 

landmarks, landscapes, battlefields, tribal communities, and archeological sites; prominent 

federally-owned buildings; and State and privately-owned properties. 

INDEX: - An integrated suite of interactive GIS planning support tools from Criterion Planners, 

Inc. 


Page 10


Industry cluster - A geographical concentration of industries that gain performance advantages 

through co-location. 

Infrastructure - A term connoting the physical underpinnings of society at large, including, but 

not limited to, roads, bridges, transit, waste systems, public housing, sidewalks, utility 

installations, parks, public buildings, and communications networks. 

Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) - Electronics, communications, and information 

processing used singly or integrated to improve the efficiency or safety of surface transportation. 

Interested Parties - Interested parties as defined in 23 C.F.R. §450.316 include citizens, affected 

public agencies, representatives of public transportation employees, freight shippers, providers of 

freight transportation services, private providers of transportation, representatives of users of 

public transportation, representatives of users of pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation 

facilities, representatives of the disabled, and other interested parties. 

Intermodal - The ability to connect, and the connections between, modes of transportation. 

Interstate - Limited access divided facility of at least four lanes designated by the Federal 

Highway Administration as part of the Interstate System. 

Interstate Highway System (IHS) - The system of highways that connects the principal 

metropolitan areas, cities, and industrial centers of the United States. Also connects the U.S. to 

internationally significant routes in Canada and Mexico. 

ITS Architecture - Defines an Architecture of interrelated systems that work together to deliver 

transportation Services. An ITS Architecture defines how systems functionally operate and the 

interconnection of information exchanges that must take place between these systems to 

accomplish transportation Services. 

Intermodal - A term used to refer to transportation systems that involve more than one mode of 

travel (e.g., highway, water, rail, air, bicycling, walking). 

Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) - The landmark federal 

transportation law passed in 1991. It was the first transportation legislation to give regional 

agencies like SPC the primary responsibility for deciding how highway and transit funds will be 

spent in its region. 

Jersey Barrier - A low, reinforced concrete wall wider at the base, tapering vertically to near 

mid-height, then continuing straight up to its top. The shape is designed to direct automotive 

traffic back toward its own lane of travel and prevent crossing of a median or leaving the 

roadway. Commonly used on new and reconstructed bridges in place of decorative balustrades, 

railings or parapets. 


Page 11


Keystone Opportunity Zone (KOZ) - A collection of identified sites where, under state 

legislation, businesses may obtain abatement of state and local taxes through the year 2010. The 

state legislation is designed to offer powerful incentives for economic development in these 

locations. SPC is coordinator of the KOZ program for southwestern Pennsylvania. 

Land Use - Refers to the manner in which portions of land or the structures on them are used, 

i.e. commercial, residential, retail, industrial, etc. 

Local Development District (LDD) - A federal designation given to agencies that are 

responsible for handing Appalachian Regional Commission funds for their region. SPC is the 

LDD for Southwestern Pennsylvania. 

Local Street - A street intended solely for access to adjacent properties. 

Long range transportation plan (LRTP) - A long range (20+ years) strategy and capital 

improvement program developed to guide the effective investment of public funds in multimodal 

transportation facilities in the context of the regional vision. The regional plan provides 

the context from which the region's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), a short-range 

capital improvement program for implementing transportation projects, is drawn. The regional 

plan is updated every four years in consultation with interested parties. 

Low Density - Referring to a development density and type most commonly associated with 

rural, horizontal development with wide structural separation and abundant open space. 

Maintenance Area – A Maintenance area is any geographic region of the United States 

previously designated nonattainment pursuant to the CAA Amendments of 1990 and 

subsequently redesignated to attainment subject to the requirement to develop a maintenance 

plan under section 175A of the CAA, as amended. 

Major Investment Study (MIS) - A study often conducted (though no longer legally required) 

in order to justify the expenditure of federal funds on certain large highway or transit projects. 

Mass Transportation - Another name for public transportation. 

Medium Density - Referring to a development density and type most commonly associated with 

suburban, horizontal development with limited structural separation and some open space. 

MERLAM - Mature Economic Regional Land Use Allocation Model 

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) - Regional policy body, required in urbanized 

areas with populations over 50,000, and designated by local officials and the governor of the 

state. Responsible in cooperation with the state and other transportation providers for carrying 

out the metropolitan transportation planning requirements of federal highway and transit 

legislation. SPC is the MPO for its ten-county transportation region. 


Page 12


Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) - Areas defined by the U.S. Office of Management and 

Budget. A Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is 1) A county or a group of contiguous counties 

that contain at least one city of 50,000 inhabitants or more, or 2) An urbanized area of at least 

50,000 inhabitants and a total MSA population of at least 100,000 (75,000 in New England). The 

contiguous counties are included in an MSA if, according to certain criteria, they are essentially 

metropolitan in character and are socially and economically integrated with the central city. In 

New England, MSAs consist of towns and cities rather than counties. 

Minor Arterials (Highway) - Roads linking cities and larger towns in rural areas. In urban 

areas, roads that link but do not penetrate neighborhoods within a community. 

Mixed-use development - Refers to the practice of allowing more than one type of use in a 

building or set of buildings. In planning zone terms, this can mean some combination of 

residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses. 

Mobile Source - Mobile sources include motor vehicles, aircraft, seagoing vessels, and other 

transportation modes. The mobile source-related pollutants are carbon monoxide (CO), 

hydrocarbons (HC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM-10 and PM 2.5). 

Mode - A specific form of transportation, such as automobile, subway, bus, rail, or air. 

Multimodal - The availability of transportation options using different modes within a system or 

corridor. 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) - Federal standards that set allowable 

concentrations and exposure limits for various pollutants. The EPA developed the standards in 

response to a requirement of the CAA. Air quality standards have been established for the 

following six criteria pollutants: ozone (or smog), carbon monoxide, particulate matter, nitrogen 

dioxide, lead, and sulfur dioxide. 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) - Established a national environmental 

policy requiring that any project using federal funding or requiring federal approval, including 

transportation projects, examine the effects of proposed and alternative choices on the 

environment before a federal decision is made. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) –Community-based Restoration 

Program began in 1996 to inspire and sustain local efforts to conduct meaningful, on-the-ground 

restoration of marine, estuarine, and riparian habitat. 

Nonattainment - A geographic region of the United States that the EPA has designated as not 

meeting the air quality standards. 

Northwestern Glaciated Plateau Section - A physiographic section in southwestern 

Pennsylvania, that consists of many broad, rounded uplands cut by long, linear valleys. 


Page 13


Ozone (03) - Ozone is a colorless gas with a sweet odor. Ozone is not a direct emission from 

transportation sources. It is a secondary pollutant formed when VOCs and NOx combine in the 

presence of sunlight. Ozone is associated with smog or haze conditions. Although the ozone in 

the upper atmosphere protects us from harmful ultraviolet rays, ground-level ozone produces an 

unhealthy environment in which to live. Ozone is created by human and natural sources. 

Parapet - A low wall along the outside edge of a bridge deck used to protect vehicles and 

pedestrians. 

Paratransit - A variety of smaller, often flexibly scheduled and routed transportation services 

using low-capacity vehicles, such as vans, which operate within normal urban transit corridors or 

rural areas. These services usually serve the needs of people that standard mass transit services 

would serve with difficulty, or not at all. Often, the patrons include the elderly and people with 

disabilities. 

Particulate Matter (PM-10 and PM 2.5) - Particulate matter consists of airborne solid particles 

and liquid droplets. Particulate matter may be in the form of fly ash, soot, dust, fog, fumes, etc. 

These particles are classified as "coarse" if they are smaller than 10 microns, or "fine" if they are 

smaller than 2.5 microns. 

Parts Per Million (PPM) - A measure of air pollutant concentrations. 

Passenger Mile - One passenger transported one mile. 

Passenger Service - Both intercity rail passenger service and commuter rail passenger service. 

Pedestrian - Any person not in or on a motor vehicle or other vehicle. Excludes people in 

buildings or sitting at a sidewalk cafe. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also 

uses another pedestrian category to refer to pedestrians using conveyances and people in 

buildings. Examples of pedestrian conveyances include skateboards, nonmotorized wheelchairs, 

rollerskates, sleds, and transport devices used as equipment. 

Pedestrian Walkway (or Walkway) - A continuous way designated for pedestrians and 

separated from the through lanes for motor vehicles by space or barrier. 

Physiographic Province - A geographic region in which climate and geology have given rise to 

landforms similar in geologic structure and which has consequently had a unified geomorphic 

history; a region whose pattern of relief features or landforms differs significantly from that of 

adjacent regions. 

Physiographic Section - A geographic subdivision of a physiographic province within whose 

which the geology and landforms have a degree of uniformity in contrast to contiguous units. 

Pier - A vertical structure which supports the ends of a multi-span superstructure at a location 

between abutments. Also see column and pile. 


Page 14


Pile - A long column driven deep into the ground to form part of a foundation or substructure. 

Also see column and pier. 

Pittsburgh Low Plateau Section - A physiographic section in southwestern Pennsylvania, that 

consists of a smooth undulating upland surface cut by numerous, narrow, relatively shallow 

valleys, the uplands of which contain the bulk of the significant bituminous coal in Pennsylvania. 

Public Participation - The active and meaningful involvement of the public in the development 

of transportation plans and programs. 

Public Participation Panel (PPP) - A citizen panel (there is one in each county of SPC’s 

transportation region) whose members are appointed for two-year terms by the county 

commissioners (in Allegheny County, by the County Executive and the Mayor of Pittsburgh) to 

represent the diverse population and transportation concerns of their county. The PPP’s role is to 

review and provide comment on major SPC transportation decisions, such as Long Range Plans 

and Transportation Improvement Programs. Panels meet on an as-needed basis. They may host 

public meetings to solicit broader input from the general population. 

Public Participation Plan - A framework that identifies strategies and tools to ensure that SPC’s 

transportation planning processes include a proactive participation process and comply with 

federal participation plan requirements. 

Public-Private Partnership – A system in which a government service or private business 

venture is funded and operated through a partnership of government and one or more private 

sector companies. 

Public Transit - Passenger transportation services, usually local in scope, that is available to any 

person who pays a prescribed fare. It operates on established schedules along designated routes 

or lines with specific stops and is designed to move relatively large numbers of people at one 

time. 

RACP - Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program; grant program offered by the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to not-for-profit entities for qualifying economic development 

projects with cultural, historic or civic significance. 

Reclaimed Stripping Areas – Land that was once strip-mined for coal, ore, stone, gravel, or 

other aggregates or resources, and has been restored to original contour, use, or condition 

Reinforcement - Adding strength or bearing capacity to a structural member. Examples include 

the placing of metal rebar into forms before pouring concrete, or attaching gusset plates at the 

intersection of multiple members of a truss. 

REMI - Regional Economic Models, Inc. 

Rural - Sparsely settled places away from the influence of large cities; of or relating to the 

country, country people or life, or agriculture 


Page 15


Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA-LU) - Passed in 2005, this act reauthorizes federal surface transportation programs 

through the end of FY2009. SAFETEA-LU is the successor to TEA-21. 

Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) - Overflow of a system designed to assure proper disposal and 

treatment of sewage. 

Skew - When the superstructure is not perpendicular to the substructure, a skew angle is created. 

The skew angle is the acute angle between the alignment of the superstructure and the alignment 

of the substructure. 

Sources - Refers to the origin of air contaminants. Can be point (coming from a defined site) or 

non-point (coming from many diffuse sources). Stationary sources include relatively large, fixed 

facilities such as power plants, chemical process industries, and petroleum refineries. Area 

sources are small, stationary, non-transportation sources that collectively contribute to air 

pollution, and include such sources as dry cleaners and bakeries, surface coating operations, 

home furnaces, and crop burning. Mobile sources include on-road vehicles such as cars, trucks, 

and buses; and off-road sources such as trains, ships, airplanes, boats, lawnmowers, and 

construction equipment. 

Span - The horizontal space between two supports of a structure. Also refers to the structure 

itself. May be used as a noun or a verb. The clear span is the space between the inside surfaces 

of piers or other vertical supports. The effective span is the distance between the centers of two 

supports. 

Special Federal Funds (SXF) - The term used for earmarks or line-item appropriations by 

which Congress designates federal funds for specified transportation projects. 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) - Produced by the state environmental agency, not the MPO. 

A plan mandated by the CAA that contains procedures to monitor, control, maintain, and enforce 

compliance with the NAAQS. Must be taken into account in the transportation planning process. 

State Transportation Commission (STC) - The committee responsible under state law for 

adopting the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) - A staged, multi-year, statewide, 

intermodal program of transportation projects, consistent with the statewide transportation plan 

and planning processes as well as metropolitan plans, TIPs, and processes. 

Statewide Transportation Plan - The official statewide intermodal transportation plan that is 

developed through the statewide transportation planning process. 

Stationary Source - Relatively large, fixed sources of emissions (i.e., power plants, chemical 

process industries, petroleum refining and petrochemical operations, or wood processing). 


Page 16


Structurally Deficient Bridge – A bridge with deteriorated condition and reduced load-carrying 

capacity. 

Suburban – Commonly defined as residential areas on the outskirts of a city or large town; an 

outlying part of a city or town; a smaller community adjacent to or within commuting distance of 

a city 

Substructure - The portion of a bridge structure including abutments and piers which supports 

the superstructure. 

Superstructure - The portion of a bridge structure which carries the traffic load and passes that 

load to the substructure. 

Surface Transportation Program (STP) - Federal-aid highway funding program that funds a 

broad range of surface transportation capital needs, including many roads, transit, sea and airport 

access, vanpool, bike, and pedestrian facilities. 

Syncline - A configuration of folded, stratified rocks in which rocks dip downward from 

opposite directions to come together in a trough. 

TAZ - Traffic Analysis Zone; unit of geography most commonly used in conventional 

transportation planning models. 

Telecommuting - Communicating electronically (by telephone, computer, fax, etc.) with an 

office, either from home or from another site, instead of traveling to it physically. 

Title VI - Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Prohibits discrimination in any program 

receiving federal assistance. 

Toll Facility – A road, bridge or tunnel for which travelers pay a specified toll for a particular 

class of vehicle to travel on, over, or through, respectively, the transportation facility. 

Town center - Traditionally associated with shopping or retail the town center is the center of 

communications with major public transport hubs and often includes public buildings including 

town halls, museums and libraries. 

Transit Operators Committee (TOC) - The SPC standing committee, comprised primarily of 

the region’s transit operators that is responsible for developing the region’s transit plan and the 

transit component of the Transportation Improvement Program. 

Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) - A term used to describe land-use approaches 

(primarily compact, mixed-use communities) that help to enhance transit usage in those centers. 

Transit Revitalization Investment District (TRID) - TRID is a program authorized by state 

legislation to promote Transit Oriented Development (TOD). A TRID is an area (1/8 mile to ½ 

mile) around a major transit facility (formalized through a memorandum of understanding) in 

which the real estate tax increment from new development occurring within the TRID is shared 


Page 17


among partners – typically the municipality, transit agency, school district and county – to make 

public improvements within the TRID. Public funding for a TRID is utilized for community 

infrastructure improvements including transit facilities, roadways, sidewalks, water, sewage, etc. 

The development within the district is transit oriented in nature—mixed use, walkable or 

bikeable to take advantage of the transit assets— and based on plans formed during a 

market/development study, which is the required first step to forming a TRID. Some people refer 

to TRID as a “TIF for transit.” 

Transportation Conformity - Process to assess the compliance of any transportation plan, 

program, or project with air quality implementation plans. The conformity process is defined by 

the Clean Air Act. 

Transportation Control Measures (TCM) - Transportation strategies that affect traffic patterns 

or reduce vehicle use to reduce air pollutant emissions. These may include HOV lanes, provision 

of bicycle facilities, ridesharing, telecommuting, etc. Such actions may be included in a SIP if 

needed to demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS. 

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) - Programs designed to reduce demand for 

transportation through various means, such as the use of transit and of alternative work hours. 

Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) - Transportation Equity Act for the 

21st Century (TEA-21) Authorized in 1998, TEA-21 authorized federal funding for 

transportation investment for fiscal 1998-2003. Approximately $217 billion in funding was 

authorized, the largest amount in history, which is used for highway, transit, and other surface 

transportation programs. 

Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): A short range program that 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, state and federal agencies, including participation by the general 

public and consultation with interested parties. Transportation projects included on the TIP are to 

be consistent with the regional plan. 

Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 (TIFIA) - A federal 

credit program under which the DOT may provide three forms of credit assistance - secured 

(direct) loans, loan guarantees, and standby lines of credit - for surface transportation projects of 

national or regional significance. The fundamental goal is to leverage federal funds by attracting 

substantial private and non-federal co-investment in critical improvements to the nation's surface 

transportation system. 

Transportation Management Area (TMA) - All urbanized areas over 200,000 in population, 

and any other area that requests such designation. 


Page 18


Transportation Technical Committee (TTC) - The SPC standing committee involved with 

making recommendations for SPC’s transportation plans and with implementing projects 

included in those plans. 

Truss - A structural form which is used in the same way as a beam, but because it is made of an 

web-like assembly of smaller members it can be made longer, deeper, and therefore, stronger 

than a beam or girder while being lighter than a beam of similar dimensions. 

Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) - The management plan for the (metropolitan) 

planning program. Its purpose is to coordinate the planning activities of all participants in the 

planning process. 

Urbanized Area - For Census 2000, an urbanized area consists of contiguous, densely settled 

census block groups (BGs) and census blocks that meet minimum population density 

requirements, along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a 

population of at least 50,000 people. 

United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) - The principal direct Federal funding 

agency for transportation facilities and programs. Includes the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), 

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), and others. 

Urban - An area with an increased density of human-created structures in comparison to the 

areas surrounding it ; of, relating to, characteristic of, or constituting a city. 

Vanpool - A transit mode comprised of vans, small buses and other vehicles with a minimum 

seating capacity of seven persons including the driver, operating as a ride sharing arrangement, 

providing transportation to a group of individuals traveling directly between their homes and a 

regular destination within the same geographical area. 

Viaduct - A long, multi-span structure, especially one constructed of concrete. More commonly 

used in relation to structures carrying motor vehicles. Trestle is the term for a similar structure 

when used in relation to railroads. 

Waynesburg Hills Section – A physiographic section in southwestern Pennsylvania, that is very 

hilly with narrow hilltops and steep-sloped, narrow valleys, some of which is very susceptible to 

landslides. 

Wing Walls - Extensions of a retaining wall as part of an abutment; used to contain the fill of an 

approach embankment 


Page 19


Appendix D: 

ActiveAllegheny 

Maps 



Appendix E: 

PennDOT Twelve Year 

Interstate Capital Plan

Download the entire 2040 Plan (PDF, 30.1 MB) - Southwestern ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?