(Speed) Beechview-Castle Shannon

[Vigrass, Bill]

John, I think your comments about SkyBus funding are right on target.  It
may well have been that no light rail would have been funded without having
gone through the SkyBus stage of development.  PAT obtained substantial
funding because of the reasons you stated. It was supported by Very
Important Interests.  Then it went through a metamorphisis by which Ed
Tennyson took advantage of the situation to move to light rail.   Anyhow, it
works.  Bill V.

-----Original Message-----
From: John Swindler [mailto:j_swindler at hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 1999 4:13 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: Re: (Speed) Beechview-Castle Shannon


Ken J. wrote:

>  I would suppose the Beechview-Castle Shannon stretch of the alignment 
>would have stayed no matter what. It was an established transit corridor 
>and most of it was very well patronized. I suppose in any form, i.e. 
>"conventional streetcar", "modern" light rail, Skybus or PAT busway, it 
>made sense to retain this corridor.
>
>
>
This poses a very interesting speculative question: would the 
Beechview-Castle Shannon stretch of the alignment have stayed no matter 
what.

Probably all you can really say is that "it is what it is!"  Pittsburgh has 
a light rail line between the CBD and South Hills Village via old 42, 38, 
38A, 36 and a new branch to a maintenance facility, and that routing is a 
legacy of Skybus planning decisions of the late 1960s.

But Beechview-Castle Shannon was not an established transit corridor. That's

why 38A was a rush hour only extension (Mt. Lebanon-Castle Shannon).  You 
could just as easily serve Mt. Lebanon with a branch from Castle Shannon on 
the Overbrook line.

What would have happened without Skybus planning is mere idle speculation, 
with no right or wrong answer.  For my two cents worth, without Skybus, 
there were two likely scenarios:  complete bus operation by the mid-1970s or

a Media/Sharon Hill type upgrading of the Overbrook and 42 Dormont lines - 
and maybe not even the latter.  There would have been no South Hills Village

spur and maintenance facility.  This was land acquired for Skybus because 
Skybus would use the Wabash tunnel, and not the South Hills trolley tunnel, 
and therefore needed its own maintenance site.

Complete bus operation?  Probably.  Everything goes back to money.  And the 
question to ask yourself is, "without Skybus proposal, how aggressively do 
you think PAT would have pursued federal and state funds for light rail 
rehabilitation in 1970?"  Remember, PAT already had federal approval for 
Skybus - probably about $150 million - and it would be a political 
embarrassment to loose "their" money.

Again, it is what it is, and any different scenarios are mere idle  
speculation.

John

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com