Renaming Leetsdale ramp could get truckers back on track
It has taken nearly six years, but a solution might be near to a mapping quagmire that has caused some truck drivers seeking Leetsdale to get their big rigs stuck in Sewickley.
Since the 2007 opening of the Michele Maruca Overpass in Leetsdale, truckers — through the use of GPS devices — have found Sewickley's Broad Street, which is 2.5 miles from their intended destination in Leetsdale, which also is named Broad Street in mapping programs.
A vote last week by Leetsdale Council will rename the portion of road connecting Route 65 to the overpass to Kost Ramp.
The idea is to make it “less confusing to truck drivers and out-of-towners,” council member Jeffrey Weatherby said.
A sign still notes the existence of Kost Street, but when the overpass opened, PennDOT removed the road from mapping systems and renamed the area Broad Street.
“Kost Street never left,” Councilman Wes James said. “It was always there. The sign's still there.”
Because of the confusion, some truck drivers turned onto Broad Street in Sewickley and sometimes get stuck near Heritage Valley Sewickley hospital or in the business district. Sewickley officials installed signs in 2008 along Route 65 to redirect drivers to Leetsdale.
Leetsdale officials were unsure when the changes would be made to various mapping services.
Leetsdale Council President Joe McGurk said he hopes the solution brings an end to the mapping issues.
“It will be less confusing because of all of this Broad Street discussion,” he said.
Bobby Cherry is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-324-1408 or email@example.com.
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.