Plans to recreate Chateau Beach in Oakmont moving forward |

Plans to recreate Chateau Beach in Oakmont moving forward

Michael DiVittorio
Courtesy of Oakmont Historical Society
Chateau Beach along the Allegheny River in Oakmont was one of the most popular places in the borough during the 1920s and 1930s. A kayak park is proposed at its former location.
Courtesy of Oakmont Historical Society
Chateau Beach along the Allegheny River in Oakmont was one of the most popular places in the borough during the 1920s and 1930s. A kayak park is proposed at its former location.
Michael DiVittorio | Tribune-Review
Preliminary designs of a proposed kayak park called Chateau Beach in Oakmont.

Chateau Beach, a popular recreation spot along the Allegheny River in Oakmont during the 1920s and ’30s, might be restored with a more modern look next year.

Borough officials recently acquired a $200,000 grant through the state’s Department of Community and Economic Development Greenways Trails and Recreation program for the proposed kayak park.

It’s a matching grant, with the borough kicking in about $30,000.

The permitting process with the Army Corps of Engineers is expected to take about six months.

There’s no exact timeline for the project. However, borough officials hope to open the park in late summer.

The proposed park is on an estimated 1.6-acre borough-owned lot along the 1000 block of Allegheny Avenue near the Brenntag Northeast facility.

The park would serve as a launching point for kayaks, canoes, paddleboats and other non-motorized watercraft into the Allegheny River and as an access point to the Three Rivers Water Trail.

An ad hoc committee of council members, kayakers and other boating enthusiasts has worked on the project for quite some time.

“In one year’s time we’ve taken the project, gotten some additional land, got a grant and got a design going,” said Councilman Tim Favo. “It’s really a nice part of the river down there.”

Senate Engineering developed preliminary designs of the site. Documents show about 15 parking spaces, a stormwater retention pond, a 10-foot wide berm and 6-foot tall chain-link fence for security and privacy. There also are many trees.

Ingress and egress comes from Allegheny Avenue. There’s no access from side roads, which is meant to minimize impact on neighboring residents.

Resident Karen Schriver is a bit concerned about one of the proposed park amenities, a compost restroom. She said her home along Potomac Street is the closest to the proposed park, and is worried about the smell.

Schriver said she’s in favor of the project, and hopes they can make some design adjustments.

“We want to be active participants and be positive and make this thing happen,” she said. “I’ve had three people with kayaks in front of my property asking if (the park’s) open yet.”

Favo noted there may be more layout changes as plans have not been finalized.

Councilwoman Carrie DelRosso, who coordinated grant efforts for the project, said other neighboring residents have also been contacted for their input.

Original designs included a 700-foot serpentine walkway from a proposed parking lot to the launch site. That plan was scrapped in favor of a new asphalt road to a turnaround near a retaining wall.

Favo said kayakers could unload their vessels closer to the launch site compared to previous plans.

Michael DiVittorio is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Michael at 412-871-2367, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Plum
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.