Pittsburgh Rys 101 -- *another* Addendum

[EDWARD H. LYBARGER]

See my earlier comment on the Lougee Report.  Don't assume they didn't want
to do what was recommended.  They did what they did because money was tight
and it was cheaper to run streetcars already on hand than to buy new buses
and tear up the rails.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Holland <pghpcc at pacbell.net>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Monday, July 05, 1999 3:05 AM
Subject: Re: Pittsburgh Rys 101 -- *another* Addendum


> Greetings!
>
> Charlie Brown wrote:::::::
>
> > 1)  I read about the 1949 Lougee report in an old, well 1949,
> > publication which basically favored streetcars but called for replacing
> > them with buses on 19 routes.
>
> I would seriously doubt that this recommendation was followed because
> the PRCo system remained essentially intact until 1959 and the wholesale
> bustification of the West End lines in June of that year.  But there were
some
> piecemeal conversions starting in the 50s.
> The 2 ETNA and 3 MILLVALE were bus-ted because of a highway project in
> September of 1952; the interurbans were abandoned in Washington County and
were
> terminated within Allegheny County at Library (June) and Drake (August) of
> 1953; the 23 SEWICKLEY was cut back to the 25 ISLAND AVENUE loop on
1953.05.29;
> the 17 REEDSDALE and 20 REBECCA went on 1951.10.13; the 4 TROY HILL was
busted
> on 1957.07.06 and 1 SPRING GARDEN and 5 SPRING HILL were busted on
1957.10.05;
> and there were a handful of very short lines or shuttles that were
abandoned or
> bus-ted in the early 50s as well.
>
> --
> James B. Holland
>        To e-mail *off-list,* please click here: mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net
>               PITTSBURGH RAILWAYS COMPANY (PRCo), June of 1949 -- June of
1953
>       Pennsylvania Trolley Museum (PTM) member #273;
http://www.pa-trolley.org/
> N.M.R.A.  Life member #2190; http://www.mcs.net:80/~weyand/nmra/
>