What do suburbanites think of Pittsburgh city? (Fernway, Zelienople: for sale, low crime)

[I_Like_Spam]

Originally Posted by gg

I wish at least Market Square had NO CARS allowed. It would be so much nicer.

Quite possibly, but eliminate automobiles there could pose other problems for access by people who need to go there.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam

Quite possibly, but eliminate automobiles there could pose other problems for access by people who need to go there.

As a delivery driver I could see making very limited exceptions for commercial vehicles that need to make deliveries to businesses within Market Square, as well as for perhaps paratransit shuttles picking up physically-disabled residents in/around the affected area. Otherwise, though, the vast majority of vehicular traffic at Market Square at any given time is extraneous and unnecessary.

As a quasi-caterer I can safely say that sometimes I'm lifting a 30-lb.-50-lb. catering bag in each hand, and making me park even further away from a client site and hoofing it just isn't feasible. I also see many UPS/FedEx drivers with dollies loaded to the gills with heavy packages. People like us would still need to be accommodated.

[Katarina Witt]

Saw this on Facebook today:
https://www.facebook.com/FreshCoatCranberryTownship

See top photos. This is for all of you who think Cranberry is some "new" suburb. Historic buildings can be found in the most unlikely of places.

[erieguy]

There's a lot of older beautiful homes and buildings around here. One would have to actually leave the city and visit the area to know it, however.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Katarina Witt

Saw this on Facebook today:
https://www.facebook.com/FreshCoatCranberryTownship

See top photos. This is for all of you who think Cranberry is some "new" suburb. Historic buildings can be found in the most unlikely of places.

This would be like me pointing to the URA buildings at Antrim and McClure. A few buildings that aren't in character with the neighborhood doesn't change the fact that Cranberry is by and large modern stereotypical American suburbia/exurbia. No different than how Brighton Heights is by and large a stereotypical early 20th century American neighborhood.

Unless there's a "historic downtown" section of cranberry that I'm not aware of?

[erieguy]

We don't want a historic downtown muphere...and many prefer modern, stereotypical, clean, safe, etc... suburbia. We're not limited to where we go. If we want or wanted that we/we'd live/drive 25 minutes south...and thinking there aren't many old homes in the area only proves one has spent little to zero time, here.

I forgot about Harmony. http://harmonymuseum.org
Nice to be so close to pretty much anything one wants.

[Katarina Witt]

^^Agreed! Cranberry has been a northern suburb since I was a kid back in the 50s. I wish Tallysmom were here; she knows a great deal about history.

[erieguy]

Yup, people act like it just appeared since many left da 'burgh for greener pastures.

[sskink]

Originally Posted by Katarina Witt

^^Agreed! Cranberry has been a northern suburb since I was a kid back in the 50s. I wish Tallysmom were here; she knows a great deal about history.

The population of Cranberry in 1960 was 3,596.

Not even worth building a road to.

Please stop with this silliness. Peters Twp is the same. Yes people lived there. Yes there are some old buidings. But Cranberry, Peters and pretty much everything else outside the inner ring was freaking RURAL - even Upper St Clair was mostly farms.

Nobody's suggesting someone filled in a swamp and built it all new or designed some white conservative panacea like the hideous Celebration, FL development. But to call pre-1980s Cranberry a "suburb" is stretching things.

I personally don't give a rat's ass. However, and this applies to any burb anywhere - my thinking is that if you're within the natural orbit of an urban center that provides culture, sports, jobs, etc. and is the raison d'etre why your burb is prosperous in the first place, then you owe something to help maintain that urban center. That's perfectly logical. Even tourists pay hotel and car rental taxes.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by sskink

I personally don't give a rat's ass. However, and this applies to any burb anywhere - my thinking is that if you're within the natural orbit of an urban center that provides culture, sports, jobs, etc. and is the raison d'etre why your burb is prosperous in the first place, then you owe something to help maintain that urban center. That's perfectly logical. Even tourists pay hotel and car rental taxes.

Indeed. I mean, you can look at the Detroit suburbs as a grand experiment that was undertaken to see if a suburban area could still thrive after the essential total abandonment of the core city by the suburbs. We can see how well that turned out for the metropolitan area at large. Thriving suburbs need a healthy core city. And any healthy core city will naturally develop thriving suburbs.