ShareThis Page

Oakmont extends trial run making Cedar Way a one-way street

Michael DiVittorio
| Tuesday, Nov. 21, 2017, 1:21 p.m.
Oakmont council decided not to lift the temporary one-way restriction on Cedar Way that was to expire at the end of this month.
Michael DiVittorio | Tribune-Review
Oakmont council decided not to lift the temporary one-way restriction on Cedar Way that was to expire at the end of this month.

Oakmont council is keeping Cedar Way a one-way street while it awaits the results of a traffic study it commissioned this year.

The road that runs behind downtown businesses and parallels Allegheny Avenue was made one-way going north from Ann Street to Pennsylvania Avenue, and from College to Delaware avenues on Sept. 1 in an experiment to reduce traffic and make it safer for pedestrians. The trial run last week was extended beyond its original Nov. 30 ending date.

“I know people are upset about it and it taking longer to go home,” Councilman Tim Favo said. “To me, (concern about) safety hasn't changed just because (90) days have passed.” Council is awaiting results of a study of borough parking and traffic being done by David E. Wooster & Associates of Pittsburgh. President Thomas Briney said changing Cedar Way now could mean delays in completion of that work.

“We have created a bit of new traffic pattern,” he said. “We're better served to leave this in place.”

Changing traffic flow on Cedar Way was not well-received by many residents, officials said. “We've had too much comment from the community, and it is a problem,” Councilman George Coulter said. “I don't know if it was 85 percent unfavorable and 15 percent favorable, but there isn't a whole lot of favor.”

Michael DiVittorio is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-871-2367, mdivittorio@tribweb.com or via Twitter @MikeJdiVittorio.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.