ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Let’s get to work on traffic issues | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Let’s get to work on traffic issues

Interesting article about the Parkway East/West having major traffic problems, especially for a city the size of Pittsburgh (“Parkway East, West among the most congested U.S. roads, study finds,” Feb. 12, TribLIVE), plus the subsequent “lance” from the Trib’s editorial board a couple days later (“Laurels & Lances: Perfection, Parkway, Pittsburgh Dad and payment,” Feb. 14, TribLIVE).

Great, we know it’s a problem; it has been for years. Could we maybe start talking about actual ways to address the problem now? Maybe a comprehensive series of articles detailing past efforts and interviewing economic development/elected officials?

The issue made (the last section of) the recently approved Westmoreland County comprehensive plan, but is clearly not a priority even though public transit was ranked one of the highest areas of concern from the public meetings/comments. On top of that, the contractor the Westmoreland County Transit Authority uses can’t even keep enough drivers on staff to keep current operations going without interruptions (“Westmoreland Transit cancels more bus routes due to driver shortage,” Feb. 15, TribLIVE).

There are a lot of different ways to address these issues. It seems Norfolk Southern won’t cooperate with a (realistic) passenger rail study, so let’s start thinking outside the box for once. We need an official to step up and start coordinating meetings with transit authorities, the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, PennDOT, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, and all the other groups involved to actually get to work on fixing this issue, or the regional population will remain stagnant forever, and Pittsburgh will remain flyover country for decades to come.

Alec Italiano

Jeannette


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.