|

04-22-2009, 08:36 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
2,488 posts, read 860,327 times
Reputation: 830
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterRabbit
It would serve a lot more towns if it was on the Rt. 28 side of the river. I think Oakmont would want no parts of this.
|
Why would Oakmont not want a part of this? Oh I get it. The Pittsburghan idea of public transportation is, it is only for poor people, and god forbid if the Upper middle class people would use it. Unlike other cities like Philly where the R5 going into the city is one of the most used rail lines in the nation, and it is for upper middle class to upper class suburbs. It was such a great way to get home from Center city in 20 minutes instead of an hour in traffic. I timed when to leave work, walked a few blocks, caught the express R5 which came every 20 minutes, and was home in 20.
Towns and suburbs that are linked with a rail line take off, and TOD spurs a great small economy in these towns. However, the Pittsburghan ideology is, "Public transportation bad. Poor people only use it, and it will rise crime in my already crime ridden and run down town. Must use GM product, must spend money to re-build roads. Must not make this metro any bit progressive. Must drive away all forward thinking, educated, young people to other cities."
|
|

04-22-2009, 08:57 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
1,617 posts, read 1,160,917 times
Reputation: 319
|
|
|
Oakmont doesn't need help taking off. It doesn't care for outsiders and crime would surely be a thought. It has more traffic than it can deal with now at rush hours because of the bridge (getting close to being replaced).
After Lawrenceville there is only Verona and Oakmont before New Ken. The other side of the river has Millvale, Sharpsburg, Etna, Aspinwall, Fox Chapel, Blawnox, Harmarville, Cheswick, Springdale... before New Ken. Those are mostly the type of towns that need/could use it best.
|
|

04-22-2009, 11:45 AM
|
|
No 1 Al Sharpton hater.
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Kensington,pa
597 posts, read 231,293 times
Reputation: 144
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterRabbit
Oakmont doesn't need help taking off. It doesn't care for outsiders and crime would surely be a thought. It has more traffic than it can deal with now at rush hours because of the bridge (getting close to being replaced).
After Lawrenceville there is only Verona and Oakmont before New Ken. The other side of the river has Millvale, Sharpsburg, Etna, Aspinwall, Fox Chapel, Blawnox, Harmarville, Cheswick, Springdale... before New Ken. Those are mostly the type of towns that need/could use it best.
|
Wrong, large sections of Penn Hills and Plum Boro would benefit as most of any areas along Butler st (Lawerenceville). I don't believe the rail line in the area you speak of are available to passenger lines.
|
|

04-22-2009, 11:48 AM
|
|
No 1 Al Sharpton hater.
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Kensington,pa
597 posts, read 231,293 times
Reputation: 144
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awesomo.2000
Why would Oakmont not want a part of this? Oh I get it. The Pittsburghan idea of public transportation is, it is only for poor people, and god forbid if the Upper middle class people would use it. Unlike other cities like Philly where the R5 going into the city is one of the most used rail lines in the nation, and it is for upper middle class to upper class suburbs. It was such a great way to get home from Center city in 20 minutes instead of an hour in traffic. I timed when to leave work, walked a few blocks, caught the express R5 which came every 20 minutes, and was home in 20.
Towns and suburbs that are linked with a rail line take off, and TOD spurs a great small economy in these towns. However, the Pittsburghan ideology is, "Public transportation bad. Poor people only use it, and it will rise crime in my already crime ridden and run down town. Must use GM product, must spend money to re-build roads. Must not make this metro any bit progressive. Must drive away all forward thinking, educated, young people to other cities."
|
Oakmont is not all wealthy people and I used to ride the 78a that went through Oakmont and believe me it was always packed.
|
|

04-22-2009, 02:22 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sebeka, MN
899 posts, read 439,143 times
Reputation: 519
|
|
|
The very last commuter train used to run out of the old B&O station through the Mon Valley and was being run by the Port Authority. (PATrain ?) That one went under in the mid or early 70's. Almost all of those Pennsylvania Railroad commuter trains dropped off the face of the earth with them going belly up specifically due to the increased routes to drive into town. The tunnels and freeways really dug into that demographic. Now most of that old track bed is gone and turned into Busways and hiking/biking trails.
Now the trend is returning to Trains being sound and economically viable solutions.
|
|

04-22-2009, 07:28 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
159 posts, read 81,216 times
Reputation: 55
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterRabbit
I think Oakmont would want no parts of this.
|
I strongly disagree. Oakmont used to have a commuter train to Pittsburgh. A new commuter train would relieve a lot of the traffic on the Hulton Bridge and Allegheny River Boulevard, which I think would be clear to the people of Oakmont. It would also add to the quaintness of the town.
|
|

04-29-2009, 03:59 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
64 posts, read 37,535 times
Reputation: 14
|
|
|
I agree with those in favor of building this thing ACROSS the river from New Ken, on the Tarentum-Springdale-Etna side of the Allegheny, where there is more population. This is me totally going out on a limb here, but maybe a park-and-ride and a shuttle bus in, say, Lower Burrell, Hyde Park or even Parnassus, could help folks in those areas on the east side of the river get to the train.
My opinion, for what it's worth.
|
|

04-29-2009, 05:46 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
2,832 posts, read 2,663,176 times
Reputation: 277
|
|
|
I hope this takes off!! I grew up in Lower Burrell just a stone's throw away from New Ken. And while Lower Burrell was and still is a nice little city to live in (btw, the area of New Kensington right along side Lower Burrell is just as nice, you wouldn't even be able to distinguish them), I'd love to see New Ken cleaned up.
I have a lot of fond memories of P & M! Open again, btw.
When my parent's were little, and of course during my Grandparent's era, New Ken was QUITE the place to be.
|
|

04-29-2009, 06:19 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
1,617 posts, read 1,160,917 times
Reputation: 319
|
|
|
Possibly New Ken was quite the place to be because of the mafia. When they left town New Ken went straight down hill. Or malls took business away. I remember when it was so crowded every day you couldn't find a place to park. I'd love to see it like that again.
|
|

04-29-2009, 06:24 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
2,832 posts, read 2,663,176 times
Reputation: 277
|
|
Quote:
|
Possibly New Ken was quite the place to be because of the mafia. When they left town New Ken went straight down hill. Or malls took business away.
|
Both according to my family. The mafia kept the city clean and safe (yes, I said it) and the Mall, particularly The Heights Plaza (now junk) took a lot away.
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|