[PRCo] Re: 84 Larimer/96 East Liberty

[hrbran99 at adelphia.net]

I operated buses out of East Liberty division beginning in 1972 and worked also at Collier and South Hills Car House until 1980. The Forbes Avenue buses had the new numbers, however, the Fifth Avenue buses (71/73/75/76) still carried the old trolley numbers. 71A/B/C/D came about sometime after 1979 or 1980.

HrB
> 
> From: Fred Schneider <fschnei at supernet.com>
> Date: 2004/12/04 Sat AM 10:29:31 EST
> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Subject: [PRCo] Re: 84 Larimer/96 East Liberty
> 
> Well, the East End trolley route numbers lingered into the bus era because the
> operators refused to have different route numbers on different days.  So, for as
> long as the trolleys were running on weekdays, there were weekend buses with the
> same route numbers.  Once the cars quit in 1967, then the bus lines went to the
> new numbering scheme.  Source of information was probably Norm Vutz who was at
> CIT (CMU) at the time but it may have come from Trolley Fare.   I think they may
> have put the new numbers on the buses and the union may have threatened a work
> stoppage.  You know, its Pittsburgh.  fws
> John Swindler wrote:
> 
> > The "U" routes were instituted in early 1970s to provide direct service to
> > University district, or more properly, Oakland.  At the time, ridership was
> > around 120 million per year.  This was also time of first gas restrictions.
> >
> > I think there was also some direct service instituted to Community College,
> > but must leave it to Harold for these route numbers.
> >
> > 71 A,B,C, and D were former 71, 73, 75 and 76 streetcar routes, as
> > mentioned.  Didn't some of the trolley numbers linger into the bus era????
> >
> > John
> >
> > >From: Joshua Dunfield <Joshua_Dunfield at mlist-0.sp.cs.cmu.edu>
> > >Reply-To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > >To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> > >Subject: [PRCo] Re: 84 Larimer/96 East Liberty Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004
> > >16:19:33 -0500
> > >
> > >Derrick Brashear wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Joshua Dunfield wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > * Speaking of which, does anyone know of inconsistently numbered
> > > > > PAT routes other than 56U (should go downtown but doesn't) and,
> > > > > formerly, 71B (which didn't go downtown, but was fixed by being
> > > > > renumbered 74B)?
> > > >
> > > > well, 71B used to go downtown... it certainly did when i was in high
> > > > school; all of 71A,B,C,D were functionally 71, 73, 75, 76 streetcar
> > >lines,
> > > > modulo one-way-street changes
> > >
> > >I believe the story is that, as you say, 71B went downtown; when the
> > >500 was created, it subsumed the 71B, and the 71B became a shuttle.
> > >
> > >I'm pretty sure 71B/74B has been a shuttle since I got here in 2000.
> > >
> > > > 56U was "it's the same route as 56C but then splits to Oakland",
> > >probably.
> > >
> > >It is?  Looks to me like 56C and 56U are completely different.  56U doesn't
> > >travel on Irvine or Second at all (except to turn around), and 56U never
> > >crosses the Mon so there's no similarity there.
> > >
> > > > See also 67U (now gone).
> > >
> > >I think I've seen "64U Oakland-Sq Hill" on a bus stop sign somewhere
> > >on Beeler.  (Good to know we can count on those signs being accurate.)
> > >Is that what you're thinking of, or was 67U something else?
> > >
> > >Hmm, googling "64U Oakland Squirrel Hill" is interesting:
> > >
> > >"* Service along PAT's 64U and 74U routes has been discontinued for
> > >the summer. Alternate service for 64U is available on 61A, 61B and 61C
> > >routes and for 74U on 71A and 71C."
> > >     http://www.pitt.edu/utimes/issues/28/71896/05.html
> > >
> > >-j.
> > >
> 
> 
> 
>