[PRCo] Re: West End- Part 1

[John F Bromley]

Do you not mean that the 1700s went to Keating?  The GE 1500s went to Craft
as all were there in 1960 when I visited.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Schneider" <fschnei at supernet.com>
To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 7:30 PM
Subject: [PRCo] Re: West End- Part 1


> Correct, Matt.  The good cars went elsewhere and were replaced by 1000s
and
> 1100s that would be scrapped ultimately. Ingram had GE 1500s and GE 1700s.
I
> know the 17s went to Ingram.
>
> Matt Barry wrote:
>
> > Pittsburgh Press, May 27, 1959
> > Railways Denies Ruse on Bus Shift
> > Palmer Quizzed About Permit for West End Routes
> >
> > CD Palmer, president of the Pittsburgh Railways Company, denied to day
> > that his company will use a temporary permit to operate buses in the
> > West End as a ruse to win approval for permanent bus lines.
> >
> >  Mr. Palmer took the stand today at the Public Utilities Commission
> > hearing on whether the firm should be granted a temporary permit to
> > operate buses in place of street cars on its West End routes.
> >
> >  The company, which eventually wants to convert its West End routes to
> > buses, must win support of affected communities to pull up tracks
> > without paying for track removal and repaving involved.
> >
> >  Mr. Palmer was subjected to intense questioning by Gilbert Morecroft,
> > solicitor of Crafton Borough and spokesman for the communities involved
> > - Crafton, Ingram, Stowe, McKees Rocks, Carnegie, Scott Twp., and
> > Heidelberg.
> >
> >  Pittsburgh Railways has reached an agreement with the State Highways
> > Department under which the State will pay Pittsburgh Railways $300,000
> > for removal of tracks on State-owned rights of way.
> >
> >  The agreement, however, is contingent on the company's reaching an
> > agreement with the municipalities involved regarding track removal and
> > repaving.
> >
> >  "If the agreement (with the State) is voided, Mr. Palmer said, "we will
> > go back to trolley service."
> >
> >  He said the firm has a tentative agreement with Scott Twp., and sees
> > eye-to-eye with Pittsburgh and the County on matters involving those
> > governmental bodies.
> >
> >  None of the communities dislikes the idea of getting buses instead of
> > streetcars, but most are concerned with who will pay for removing tracks
> > and restoring the torn up rights-of-way.
> >
> >  Under its franchise, the trolley company is responsible for this work,
> > but they would like someone else to pay the bills.
> >
> >  But Crafton, Carnegie, Ingram, Stowe and McKees Rocks have money
> > worries, and Heidelberg doesn't like the proposed bus route going along
> > its "congested" Washington Street.
> >
> >  Scott with a little more than a mile of track to contend with has
> > agreed to pay its own way.
> >
> >  Led by Mr. Morecroft, attorneys for the money-conscious communities
> > told PUC Examiner Maurice Claster the railways company doesn't want to
> > pay as previously agreed.
> >
> >  But Mr. Claster agreed to continue the hearing at the request of the
> > lawyers for the affected communities after Mr. Palmer stepped from the
> > stand.
> >
> >  Norman A. Groudine, McKees Rocks solicitor, said he wanted John R.
> > Razzolla to "clarify some misstatements" made at the opening of the case
> > yesterday.  Mr. Razolla, of the State Highways Department legal staff,
> > was absent from the second day's proceedings.  Although not sworn in as
> > a witness, he took part in the first day's hearing.
> >
> >  Other attorneys said they would present evidence against the trolley
> > firm's request for a temporary approval on bus operations.  They pointed
> > out that there was insufficient time to prepare the material since
> > Pittsburgh Railways filed its petition only last Thursday.
> >
> >
> > NOTE from Matt:   I noted in the Pgh Press article written the day after
> > the last service car pulled into Ingram carhouse in June, 1959, that Pgh
> > Railways workmen were there to take the cars to other car houses on the
> > system.  So, that would indicate that active cars didn't stay on the
> > property until the final PUC-approved abandonment of the West End
system.
>
>
>