[PRCo] Re: Why was the Drake Loop Built?

[Edward H. Lybarger]

I think, Fred, that those ridership numbers are zone fares rather than
actual passenger counts.  You may want to analyze the numbers contrasted
against the service...how many per day and how many per trip...that should
tell us which.  PRCo records do not.

My mother bought a car in September 1949...she had places to drag me that
weren't served by the trolley.  But I went to elementary school, starting in
the fall of 1951, with lots of kids who lived in one-car families.

In addition to avoiding future maintenance on Drake Viaduct, which was
budgeted for re-decking in 1961 at an estimated cost of $19,000 (paint was
not mentioned), there was no good place for a turnaround loop anywhere near
County Line.  You might have squeezed one in at Paris Lake but the creek was
awfully close and the space was small.

-----Original Message-----
From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
[mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org]On Behalf Of Fred
Schneider
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 12:47 PM
To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
Subject: [PRCo] Why was the Drake Loop Built?


In addition to being a picture of a switch, this picture is very
interesting because it shows the Drake loop being built.   Pittsburgh
Railways' intent was apparently to shorten the interurbans and get
them out of Washington County where accident law suits always favored
the plaintiff and never the railways company.   County Line Siding
was roughly 10,000 feet south of Drake Loop.   The Loop was actually
south of Drake Wye which was situated just south of Walther stop.
At the time the rails were torn up in 1953 there were already a lot
of new homes between Drake and Cremona Siding and Paris Lake stops.
It was already substantially developed.

One look at the interurban revenue chart between 1945 and 1952 would
have made you want to shorten it too.   At the end of the war the
Railways Company was hauling more than 30 million passengers on the
two interurban lines plus the Donora shuttle and the three Washington
city routes.   By 1949 that had dropped to about 21 million.  In 1950
it was about 19 million.   In 1952 it was down to 15 million.
Remember guys ... this was small town and suburban America.   By
1948-49 the auto manufacturers caught up to the pent up demand for
cars after World War II and by 1949 they were advertising to women to
buy a second car for the family so that they didn't have to suffer
with the bus or trolley.     People like Mrs. Samuel Lybarger got the
message ... ultimately there was a second car in their garage.   Ed
can tell us if his mom waited until after the trolley line was torn
up in 1953 or if she bought it before.

So it was obvious that the railway had good reason to shorten the
interurbans to some point but where?  The picture is worth a thousand
words.   The Drake viaduct was a 470 foot long maintenance nightmare
that stood 44 to 45 feet above the valley floor at McLaughlings Run
in Upper St. Clair Township.   Had it remained, the Port Authority
would have no doubt been forced to replace it just as they did the
three other viaducts along Saw Mill Run.   So much for not running
the remaining 2 miles down to the Allegheny - Washington county line.

I think any manager who looked at what was happening would have done
the same thing.



http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/03-Track%20Drake%
20Loop%20Construct%201953xxxx%2001.jpg