Talk:North Shore Connector

NPOV issues

The only named section of content is "Criticisms", which is an automatic red flag. The section largely rehashes politically-motivated attacks on government spending, and I'm bewildered by some of the factually inaccurate claims in it, such as that the subway/light-rail system is "among the world's shortest". The Rendell quote is of dubious value because the North Shore Connector project draws very little money from the state transportation budget. The whole section smacks of cherrypicking, innuendo, and political hay-making to me. —Bill Price (nyb) 00:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Changed heading to "Reception." The section needs reworked. All is One (talk) 21:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I tried finding people and groups who support the project and its costs (both inital and reoccurring). The only problem is that the only group that supports the project is the Port Authority. The criticisms listed are legitimate concerns 1. the project was first billed at $390 million and that cost has almost doubled, which is questionable. 2. There are already four bridges that link the northside to downtown, so why the need? 3. Rendell wanted the stimulus money to go to - what he felt were - more pressing transportation projects in the state.

Finally it is a fact that the NSC is one of the shortest subway systems in the world at 1.2 miles long. The is the Carmelit, in Israel, and the Tünel in Turkey are the only two systems that I know of that are shorter.--Pennsylvania Penguin (talk) 15:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I haven't done a search myself yet, but as a user of public transportation in Pittsburgh, I feel like the lack of support derives from the fact that affluent, politically-active people tend not to use public transportation and so have less of a stake in the project. There's a transportation funding crisis in the state and infrastructure is crumbling, so I can see why politically-active car-using individuals would scoff at an extension of the region's light rail system. But this isn't a one-off project; it paves the way for future northward and westward extensions of the T. (Still waiting on that east-bound Spine Line, though.) Also, regarding the length calculation: The North Shore Connector isn't some separate system; it's part of the T and uses the same trains. It's probably accurate that the "subway" portion (i.e., the below-ground section of the light rail network) is one of the world's shortest, but it's still the same transportation network, so it's disingenuous to measure it separately. —Bill Price (nyb) 17:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

A 30-second search yielded this article. Some choice quotes: "Yet with gas at $4 a gallon, the North Shore Connector looks better each day. Any extension of light rail looks better." "Why are we building the North Shore Connector? That's the wrong question. The right questions are: Where should light-rail go next? Is there any way to speed construction?" "America needs to undergo a massive transportation restructuring first. The North Shore Connector is only the beginning." —Bill Price (nyb) 17:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Another by the same author here. —Bill Price (nyb) 17:55, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

This article should include coordinates for each end of the tunnel. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed merge

Rogers.joseph24 (talk · contribs) unilaterally merged this article into Port Authority of Allegheny County, and I undid the merge. I strongly oppose this merge because this article meets notability requirements—it is a major infrastructure project which has attracted intense local media coverage and periodic national media coverage—and the article also serves to cover the political controversies surrounding the project, which obviously is not appropriate in the main Port Authority article. —Bill Price (nyb) 00:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)