Beechview

[Edward H. Lybarger]

Neeld Avenue is not even in Dormont...it's still in the Beechview
neighborhood of the city!  Yes, Dormont was the big "loser" in the
route-naming-rights game, all right.  Mt. Lebanon was a destination and I
suspect that Beechview was used to distinguish the new line simply because
both lines didn't go there.  The name was used from the beginning.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
[mailto:owner-pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org]On Behalf Of Jim Holland
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 3:34 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: Beechview


Greetings!

> Derrick wrote:

> . . . Rebuilding the existing
> Beechview line and extending the service to South Hills Village

	Let's see:::::::.......

	38-MtLebanon
	42-Dormont  --  24 hour service.
	43-Neeld  --  in reality, a short-turn of the 42-Dormont.  In fact,
other cities with split destination signs would list this as
*42-Dormont--Neeld*  as opposed to  *42-Dormont--McFarland*  for full
through service.  And this 43-line was rush hour service ONLY
terminating on northern edge of Beechview.

	So why is this line always called the Beechview line??(:->)  I was even
miffed at PRCo for signing the owl as 42/38--MtLebanon--Beechview!!  And
this later became the norm when the 38-line inbound of Dormont Jct was
abandoned.  One possible explanation for the latter is that the 38-line
did go through the center of Dormont but not the center of Beechview and
the MtLebanon--Beechview made that distinction!

James B. Holland

        Pittsburgh  Railways  Company  (PRCo),   1930  --  1950
    To e-mail privately, please click here: mailto:pghpcc at pacbell.net
N.M.R.A.  Life member #2190; http://www.mcs.net:80/~weyand/nmra/