PART IV

_Notes on Parks and Recreation Facilities_

[Sidenote:

The Bellefield Improvement]

Plans for a grouping of public buildings in the Bellefield District, and for improving the entrance to Schenley Park, have been studied with some care. Two plans are herewith submitted (Plan A and Plan B), the essential difference between them being that Plan A contemplates scarcely more than the improvement of the existing layout, while Plan B involves a radical change of design, and absolutely requires, for its happy execution, a control of developments on the Frick property north of Forbes Street.

In Plan A the ravine between the Carnegie Institute and Forbes Field is not filled up but is enlarged. The bridge over the ravine remains, but the present driveway entrance from Forbes Street is moved 50 or 60 feet east, to give room for a double row of trees to screen the Forbes Field grandstand. This road is continued south from the end of the stone bride to Bates and Boquet Streets, thus gaining a direct connection to the Oakland District. Another driving entrance is shown east of the ravine to accommodate travel from the East End through Bellefield, Dithridge and Forbes Streets. Bellefield Street is widened and Tennyson Avenue is extended from Fifth Avenue to Forbes Street, in order to give a more fitting approach to the Institute. And finally, an appropriate setting is provided for the front of the Institute by a small plaza surrounded by public or quasi-public buildings. It may be noted that one of these buildings, the stone church on Dithridge Street, already exists, but it is nearly hidden from Forbes Street by cheap wooden buildings and signboards.

It cannot be denied that the approach from Grant Boulevard to Schenley Park remains rather indirect, and even with the Bates Street extension there is a lack of obvious justification for the bridge location. It must be granted, however, that this bridge in itself is very attractive; and the whole scene, the little valley with its informal groups of shrubbery and trees, spanned at one end by a stone bridge, is extremely interesting and pictorial and peculiarly characteristic of the Pittsburgh topography. The novelty of such a scene, in contrast to the stiff formality of the city all about, gives it not a little value, and there is reasonable doubt if it should not be saved even at some sacrifice. An increased use of this valley would give further reason for its preservation; and the proposed taking of Junction Hollow for park purposes (discussed below) furnishes the opportunity. By carrying an informal park treatment from the valley below up the ravine and under the bridge to Forbes Street, and by having plenty of walks and benches and attractive planting therein, this ravine becomes an interesting and inviting branch of the park, and serves also as an informal entrance to the lower park levels such as Junction and Panther Hollows. The use and the value of the ravine are thus materially increased.

In plan B the ravine is filled and the bridge abandoned. The present Grant Boulevard approach is changed to a more direct and dignified approach from Fifth Avenue and the Boulevard by widening Tennyson Avenue and cutting a broad street through from Fifth Avenue and Tennyson to Forbes Street on the axis of the new park entrance. This new entrance is a formal court enclosed by the Carnegie Institute on the east, by proposed public buildings on the north and west, and by a terrace overlooking the valley, on the south. By narrowing the area between the Institute and Forbes Field, a court of good proportions is obtained, and ample space is left on land already owned by the City for the enclosing building on the west. The strong axial approach in reality extends the park entrance to Fifth Avenue; and the court at Forbes Street, while adding to the dignity and character of this entrance, becomes a fitting plaza around which will be grouped the buildings of a public character. At the southern end of this court are the terrace, overlooking the park to the south, and the two driving entrances, one over Junction Hollow bridge as at present and the other skirting down the west bank of Junction Hollow and joining the new Boundary Street (mentioned below), and thence entering the present park through Panther Hollow.

The parking of Junction Hollow is indicated in both plans, A and B. The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad proposed several years ago to relocate and lower its tracks in Junction Hollow and to abandon its present roadbed to the City as compensation for the streets and other city property to be occupied by the new railroad right-of-way. The present roadbed would become a cross-town thoroughfare[23] (Boundary Street) and the railroad would be in a cut just west of the street. This whole scheme has many advantages both to the railroad and to the City, and it is to be hoped that it may soon be realized. A careful investigation has shown that the Baltimore & Ohio owns such portions and only such portions of the valley as it may need to carry out this plan; and it is also reasonably certain that the Railroad does not contemplate using the wide portion of the valley--where the Italian settlement now is--for freight or storage yards. This whole valley is so closely associated topographically with Schenley Park, it plays so important a part in many of the views from the Park,--from the entrance, from the Junction Hollow bridge, from Panther Hollow and the Panther Hollow bridge,--that its control is of very real moment as a means of raising the value of the western portion of Schenley Park. Incidently it can be made a very attractive and valuable park unit in itself. On the whole, the entire valley from Forbes Street to Wilmot Street, and possibly beyond, should be controlled, and the taking should extend to the top of the west bank. In the narrow portion opposite Panther Hollow the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad owns to the top of the west bank, but undoubtedly it will be willing to release to the City such portions of this bank as are not required by its relocation plans; or, if not, some agreement should be reached whereby this wooded bank will be saved from unnecessary defacement.

In conclusion, it should be noted that Plan A, although it shows some new buildings on private land, would be reasonably satisfactory without them. It is a plan which does not change the present design and one which can be carried out without the coöperation of private landowners in the development of adjacent properties. Plan B on the other hand involves a radical change in the park design, and furthermore it absolutely requires the coöperation of Mr. Frick in the development of his property between Forbes Street and Fifth Avenue, or the acquirement of that property by the City.

Although it is not ordinarily a good public policy to make radical changes in a park design already established, the improvements thereby obtained are sometimes so positive and important that the procedure is fully justified. It is believed that the radical changes proposed in Plan B are fully justified by the value of the improvement attained.

[Sidenote:

Grant Boulevard]

This street--a boulevard by courtesy--has undoubtedly more than justified the large cost of its construction by supplying a much-needed route for automobiles and other fast-moving travel--largely passenger vehicles--between the East End and the down town district. But it is to be regretted that a little more foresight was not evidenced in planning this work; that a better appreciation was not shown of the splendid opportunities offered and of incidental purposes to be served. Located as it is at a commanding height on a steep hillside with an impressive outlook over the Allegheny Valley and the hills beyond, and with little chance to develop a commercial frontage, this street seems peculiarly fitted to be a real pleasure way in fact as well as in name. But instead it has been built without even room for shade trees; it is a mere street, in all appearances like any other traffic way of the city, and no more generous in its width than Fifth Avenue or Smithfield Street; and the unkempt, sordid appearance of the slumping hillsides above is an ever-present eyesore.

In view of these facts it is urged that the following improvements be made in Grant Boulevard: First, enough additional width should be obtained, where the value of frontage or the character of the land does not make it impracticable, to provide for a planting-strip with shade trees on either side of the roadway. Second, additional width should be secured at certain points along the street, where the opportunity seems most favorable, in order to provide special tree-shaded promenades or overlook terraces, where people may stroll amidst comfortable and agreeable surroundings, or sit upon benches and watch the passing stream of travel or look out upon the broad, distant views. Third, the steep hillsides above the Boulevard, at least those which do not have and are not likely to have in the future any appreciable commercial value, should be controlled by the City and reclaimed from their present status as free dumping-grounds and barren wastes. These hillsides are in fact so closely related to the Boulevard that their appearance is of almost equal import, in the value of the street as a pleasure thoroughfare, with the treatment of the street itself. Neatly kept banks, partially covered with trees and shrubs, would go far toward making this street a boulevard in fact as well as in name. Finally, where the slopes are too steep to stand securely at all times of year and in all kinds of weather, retaining walls should be built to prevent the slumping of clayey hillsides into the road, and the more dangerous falling of large pieces of stone from the disintegrating cliffs. Except for the western portion, the banks are seldom steep enough to require a wall of more than ten feet or so in height, even if the street is widened fifteen or twenty feet; but west of the line of Kirkpatrick Street the bank becomes steeper and is partially supported by strata of rather firm shale. It is where the bank is almost precipitous for a height of 30 to 60 feet that the problem becomes difficult. A regular retaining wall of that height would be a tremendous undertaking and would look none too well in the bargain. It may be noted, however, that these cliffs are not solid ledges of shale, but are composed of separate layers, or strata, of pretty firm shale, between which are layers of loose disintegrated stone and earthy material. It is believed that advantage can be taken of this formation, and that all the necessary retaining can be done by several low walls, built one upon each stratum of ledge, and extending up to the bottom of the next solid stratum above. Each wall would thus retain only the few feet of loose material between two solid strata, and it need not, therefore, be very thick or heavy; and in addition to the work of retaining, each little wall would act as a support for the shale stratum above. Such a device would require less than a quarter of the volume of masonry needed for one large retaining wall. Furthermore, if each little wall, instead of being built directly over the one below it, were set back a foot or two, or even more, as circumstances might require, and if small ledges and pockets were thus left, where little shrubs and vines and other clinging plants could be grown; and if great pains were taken to avoid the stiff monotony of regular cut masonry, it will be possible to make this utilitarian construction a feature of interest and beauty.

[Sidenote:

Steep Hillsides]

The problem of making use of the excessively steep hillsides in the Pittsburgh District is a troublesome one. There is a great deal of such land in the district, amounting, outside of the flat regions of East Liberty and the down town districts, to as much as 30 to 35 per cent of the total area.[24] Generally speaking, the slopes are of little value for business purposes and are not well adapted to residential use, the cost of development being excessive in proportion to the location value of the improved property. The market prices are naturally low, especially for the steeper and rougher slopes and peaks and gulleys; and there the owners of very many of these unavailable properties have been delinquent in their taxes for so many years that the accumulation of taxes and costs of attempted collection form a lien that is much larger than the owner's equity in the property or even than its total value. As a rule these "unavailable areas" are unoccupied and unproductive, and are mainly held by owners not resident in the locality, whose sole interest in them is in the hope--sometimes a forlorn hope--of an ultimate speculative profit. In far too many cases they are apt to be wholly uncared for and to become shabby, dirty, and altogether unsightly, depreciating adjacent property and contributing largely to the slatternly conditions in the midst of which so many of Pittsburgh's working people, no matter how self-respecting and personally cleanly, are compelled to live.

The condition is a deplorable one from every point of view, and it is of great importance that steps should be taken to alter it. Where they are really worth developing for private occupation, so as to become useful and productive, such lands ought generally to be so improved; in the many other instances where to follow such a course would be for the owners to throw good money after bad, the City ought to step in and assume the burden of maintaining the land in a decent and attractive condition, converting it from a public nuisance into a park asset of positive value to the public.

To advance this end the City ought to pursue a definitely active policy in the matter. First, it should systematically insist upon the maintenance of all such vacant lands in a clean and orderly condition, and, upon the failure of any owner to perform the duty, it should declare the condition of the lot a nuisance, clean it up, and make the cost a lien upon the property. Second, it should entirely reform the procedure with respect to the collection of delinquent taxes and other public liens; instead of allowing them to run on indefinitely with accumulating costs, it should enforce a prompt settlement or demand the sale of the property for taxes. Third, it should deliberately acquire considerable areas of the lands in question, by tax sale, private purchase or condemnation, having due regard, in selecting the lands for acquisition, for their relative adaptability to public and to private use.

Generally speaking, these steeper and more irregular pieces will be of greater use to the public than they could be to private occupants. It must be noted, however, that their value for recreation is distinctly limited. They cannot adequately or economically supply the local needs for playfields, outdoor gymnasiums and the like; and as isolated fragments they cannot, of course, fulfill the functions of large rural parks. It is possible, however, to lay out sidehill walks on easy gradients and to furnish seats and terraces, especially near the upper edge of such declivities, where the people of the neighborhood can stroll and rest and enjoy interesting and extensive views over the city, the river or the adjacent valley; always with the steep natural hillside below as a foreground.

Such areas, for instance, as the rugged slope under Bluff Street, or the precipitous land south of West Carson Street should be under public control. Hillsides less conspicuous, less striking in their characteristics, and offering inferior opportunities of outlook--while in themselves, perhaps, of doubtful value to the city--should be taken over rather than allowed to become positively injurious features in private hands. In other cases, unless their cost is practically nothing, and there is no apparent probability of future taxpaying development, the City could hardly afford to purchase and maintain them.

GENERAL DISCUSSION OF PARKS

In any city closely built over a large area, public parks or recreation grounds become one of the most urgent civic needs, if the health and vigor of the people are to be maintained. And the most important classes to provide for are the children and the women of the wage-earning families; most important, not only because of their numbers and of the direct influence of their health and vigor upon the efficiency of the coming generation, but also because they, least of all, have energy and opportunity to seek out healthful recreation at a distance. Normally it requires two distinct kinds of recreation grounds to supply the needs of these people,--the local or neighborhood park for frequent and regular use, and the rural park for occasional holiday enjoyment.

[Sidenote:

Neighborhood Parks]

The size and form and character most desirable for neighborhood recreation grounds depend upon the functions to be performed by each. Some of the activities in the best developed playgrounds, as for example in Chicago, are these: (1) The playing of little children in sand-piles and upon the lawn, under the watchful guidance of an attendant who not only keeps them out of danger and mischief, but plays with them, tells them stories and stimulates the healthy activity of their little minds and bodies. Here the mothers may come with their children and remain to watch them play or leave them in safety. A plot one hundred feet square may be of value for such uses. (2) For boys of larger growth and men and for girls and women, the more active games with and without apparatus, in the open air and under cover, always with opportunity and inducement to bathe, and, if possible, with a swimming-pool. Sometimes space is found for the big field games and regular athletic sports on a running track; sometimes for nothing that takes more space than basketball. (3) For the older and the less active people, pleasant shaded walks for strolling and benches to sit upon amid agreeable surroundings, with opportunity to see the youngsters play, and once or twice a week, perhaps, to enjoy a band concert. (4) For the use of all, a field house where the sanitary accommodations are kept to a standard of cleanliness and order that sets a good example to the neighborhood, where a reading-room branch of the public library is available, and in which one or more large rooms are at the disposal of the neighborhood for lectures, entertainments and dances. Clean, healthy recreation may thus be given full play amid decent surroundings instead of being driven to saloons, to vicious or questionable dance-halls and other baneful establishments for the commercial exploitation of the spirit of play.

Of perhaps first importance in the planning of local parks is the problem of distribution--accessibility to the people served. Practically there are few women or small children who will take the trouble habitually to walk much more than a quarter of a mile to a playground or local park for exercise or rest, and for most a carfare is out of the question. This means that, ideally, there should be neighborhood recreation centers not more than a quarter or at most a half mile from every home in the city.

As for the total area desired for local parks, it is so seldom possible to get enough that there is little danger of overdoing the purchase; and the extremely limited experience of any of our cities renders any definite figures on the subject decidedly misleading. But there is a rather general consensus of opinion that about 5 per cent of the total city area is a reasonable minimum allowance to be devoted to local parks, playgrounds, and squares, and that more than 10 per cent may be uneconomic.

In Pittsburgh the questions of size and distribution of local parks must be considerably affected by the topographical conditions. The city and the contiguous boroughs are, to a certain extent, subdivided into hilltop and valley communities, close together it may be, but nevertheless isolated one from the other by almost precipitous hillsides from one hundred to four or five hundred feet in height. These communities are sometimes very small and are frequently very irregular in shape, as, for instance, when confined to the bottom of a narrow valley only two or three hundred feet in width and a mile or two in length. And even on those hillsides where a less severe topography does not actually stop development, it may still make intercommunication so difficult and laborious that the upper portion is practically separated from the lower.

Under such conditions it is certain that a comparatively small recreation center is the most suitable local park unit, especially in the rougher portions of the Pittsburgh District. In Chicago and other cities of normally flat topography, such advantages have been found in grouping related activities--economy in maintenance and operation, and increase of efficiency per thousand of population served--that, _other things being equal_, reasonably large park units, probably twenty acres or more in extent, are considered more desirable than the same total area split into a larger number of small scattered squares. But the conditions in Pittsburgh are peculiar. Here each isolated community, no matter how small, needs its local park; every portion of the long, narrow valley settlement should be near a park; and hillside settlements at distinct levels should have separate opportunities for recreation. Considering the size and shape of the area to be served in many of these cases it is evident that the advantages of concentration must give way to the need for frequent centers, and that economy will here indicate the adoption of a normal size considerably less than that most desirable for cities of flatter topography.

In selecting the land for local parks in Pittsburgh there are three chief points to consider: cheapness, suitability of the land for the purpose, and accessibility to the people who will use it. The best method of procedure is as follows: first, decide upon the general locality within which the park is needed and the functions which it is to serve; second, make a general examination of the values of property within the locality, consider roughly the cost of developing different kinds of land into the sort of park required, and select, tentatively, one or more sites which seem promising; third, obtain options on such of the land within the limits of the tentative site or sites as can be put under favorable option; then, fourth, ask publicly for the tender of any lands in the locality for parks, and hold public hearings thereon; finally, in the light of the information thus secured, select definitely the site and boundaries of the park and take the lands by condemnation proceedings. It is far better to proceed in this way than to begin by buying or accepting certain pieces of land, no matter how favorable the terms may be, and subsequently acquiring adjacent pieces to rectify the boundaries or complete the requisite area. The very establishment of a park renders the adjacent land more valuable at once, and therefore, if the City buys park land piecemeal it has to pay in the latter purchases an increased price due solely to its having previously started to establish a park in the neighborhood. The condemnation process, preceded by obtaining options where possible, takes all the land at one and the same instant, and the cost is that of land in a park-less district.

Delay is apt to add but little to the cost of acquiring parks in built-up regions where land and building values are reasonably stable, whereas it adds enormously to the cost in regions at the growing margin of the city. Here, where the greater city of the future is being made, is surely the opportunity to save the large cost of supplying a built-up district with neighborhood parks.

It should be the invariable rule, as it is in some of the states of Germany, that the amount of land which will be required to meet the public needs of the locality when fully developed should be set apart as a necessary incident to the subdivision of land. The method of setting apart such lands in a district which is subdivided and put on the market by a single owner would normally be dedication, as in the case of streets; but where the area to be subdivided is controlled by a number of different owners, the City might have to purchase or condemn the necessary public spaces and assess the cost upon the whole district benefited, as it frequently has to do with streets that run through the lands of several owners. A rigid and universal city regulation as to the reservation of open spaces would remove the competitive pressure which now forces many real estate owners and promoters to adopt, as a pure matter of business, an illiberal and short-sighted policy in the layout of land.

Some of the most successful suburban real estate operators in the northeastern states have satisfied themselves, and are now operating on the principle, that the dedication of land for local park purposes, up to a reasonable amount, if so arranged as not to interfere with the lotting system, actually increases the net returns from the operation. On a plat which was drawn by Wood, Harmon & Company to illustrate the application of this principle, about 30 per cent of the area was devoted to streets (about the normal figure for Pittsburgh) and about 7¾ percent to the park.

[Sidenote:

Rural Parks]

The large rural park ought to provide something quite different from the neighborhood park. Except for those who live near it and for whom it may serve incidentally as a local park also, it is remote from the people, can be visited only occasionally and with some effort, and it will be justified only if it affords something which the small local parks are totally unable to give. To afford the maximum of pleasant contrast with urban conditions is its fundamental purpose and, if it fail in this, there is reasonable doubt if its return in public usefulness is worth its cost to the community. A considerable degree of seclusion from adjacent land with its city developments is practically essential, and the more complete the barrier, both as to sight and sound, the more perfectly will the park fulfil its purpose. A sense of spaciousness is very important,--the expansive opposite of cramping city streets and walls. For this is needed the concentration of a large area in a single park. But of greater importance than mere size, especially in Pittsburgh, is the topographical situation. Hilltop lands though not in the least secluded frequently offer vantage points from which to look upon vast stretches of landscape, thus giving the greatest possible sense of spaciousness and lack of confinement. On the other hand, the valleys, with their wooded banks, are unrivaled in the natural opportunities they afford for almost complete seclusion from urban surroundings. Fortunately the Pittsburgh District is well endowed with available sites of both kinds, a few of which are noted below under "Special Park Opportunities."

SPECIAL PARK OPPORTUNITIES

The following are some notes, made in the course of the main thoroughfare investigations, regarding certain special opportunities for parks and parkways in and about Pittsburgh.

1. _Moultrie Street Playground._--The small playground at Moultrie Street, in the Soho District, should be enlarged; for it is in the midst of a section where the need for public recreation facilities is very great. Moultrie Street, running north from Fifth Avenue, can be abandoned beyond the south side of the playground, because the proposed street on the hillside to the west[25] will furnish the needed connection between Fifth Avenue and Centre Avenue. The playground can then be extended from side to side of the valley bottom and north to the foot of the dump, thus getting an area of some 3½ acres. This dump, by the way, should not be extended any further down the valley.

2. _Millvale Playground._--At Millvale, Butler Street bends into the mouth of the valley leaving a fair space of vacant land (some 5 or 6 acres) between the street and the railroad. Although this would not be an ideal location for a large neighborhood park, because the district benefited is entirely on one side, and the maximum number of people that could be accommodated would not be found within easy walking distance, a small park such as this, adjacent to the dense population of Millvale, would probably be within reach of all the people it could reasonably serve. Where flat vacant land is so scarce, this opportunity for a small park should not be neglected.

3. _Etna Playground._--At Etna there is some vacant land in the hollow between Butler Street and Pine Creek in the vicinity of Isabella Street. Though the area is small, it should be reserved for public recreation, for it is in the midst of a dense population of working people, a place where playground space is most in demand.

4. _Etna Park._--A short distance up the Pine Creek valley, just above the upper mills of the Spang-Chalfant Company, is a large meadow between the railroad and the main valley thoroughfare on the east, and the steep hillside on the west. Bearing in mind that this valley is the most important line of connection from Pittsburgh to the northern districts and is consequently sure to build up thickly, even as less important valleys have done, it seems wise to secure this land for public use while it is still vacant. Some fifteen acres are now available, and a complete, useful, and beautiful recreation ground could easily be made therewith. The flatness of the ground would make the development of such a park easy and comparatively cheap.

5. _Chartiers Valley._--There is a good deal of vacant land along the Chartiers Valley, even in the vicinity of McKees Rocks. Considering the character and density of the population at McKees Rocks, and in the northern corner of Sheraden, it would seem eminently wise to secure a reasonable amount of this for local parks.

6. _Rankin Playground._--In Rankin there is a hollow east of Kenmawr Avenue between the Pennsylvania Railroad and Braddock Avenue, which is available for a playground. Eight or ten acres could probably be obtained, and, by controlling the banks of the hollow, a beautiful and secluded little park could be made. It is in the center of thickly populated sections of Rankin and Braddock.

7. _Sawmill Run Parkway._--The Sawmill Run valley, from the West End to Fairhaven and possibly beyond, offers a park and parkway opportunity which should not be neglected until commercial development becomes a serious stumbling block to its realization. It is an interesting valley of varying width and form, enclosed by high, steep banks, occasionally wooded; in some parts it is wide enough only for a drive, while in others large, flat meadows make ideal places for play. And Sawmill Run itself, when it is no longer used as an open sewer, will be an additional element of park value. Surrounded as it is by land accessible to the city and reasonably adapted to residential use, this valley seems an unusual opportunity for effective park service. In taking it for park use, Shalerville and the Bell Tavern settlement would, of course, be excepted; otherwise, the holdings should be continuous from Temperanceville to Fairhaven; and such scattered buildings as would in any way impair the value of the park should eventually be removed. A boulevard thoroughfare should extend the length of the valley, serving not only as a cross-town connection between important radial thoroughfares, but as a link in a circumferential parkway system.[26]

8. _Nine Mile Run Park._--Perhaps the most striking opportunity noted for a large park is the valley of Nine Mile Run. Its long meadows of varying width would make ideal playfields; the stream, when it is freed from sewage, will be an attractive and interesting element in the landscape; the wooded slopes on either side give ample opportunity for enjoyment of the forest, for shaded walks and cool resting places; and above all it is not far from a large working population in Hazelwood, Homestead, Rankin, Swissvale, Edgewood, Wilkinsburg, Brushton and Homewood; and yet it is so excluded by its high wooded banks that the close proximity of urban development can hardly be imagined. If taken for park purposes, the entire valley from the top of one bank to the top of the other should be included, for upon the preservation of these wooded banks depends much of the real value of the park.

A pleasure drive should extend from one end of this valley to the other. The route of this drive has not been studied. At the northern end, however, there is no apparent obstacle to reaching any of the important thoroughfares, such as Penn Avenue or Forbes Street. At the other end there is a good chance to extend a parkway down the river as a riverside drive,[27] connecting at the Glenwood bridge with a proposed boulevard thoroughfare to the down town district.[28] This would furthermore be a desirable link in a circumferential parkway system which it is not unlikely will some day extend southward from the Glenwood bridge, and ultimately connect with the Sawmill Run parkway above proposed. (Section 7 above.)

9. _Squaw Run Park._--Northeast of Aspinwall, the valley of Squaw Run with its tributary, Stonycamp Run, would be ideal for park use. It has great beauty and variety of landscape. It has fields for playing as well as woods and a brook. It is secluded and by its wooded banks can always be kept so, even when the higher land about it is commercially developed. It is none too accessible at present, but it is in a clean and beautiful region, well adapted, topographically, for residential use, and such development will inevitably follow the improvement of transportation facilities to the business districts of Pittsburgh. The park will then supply the local needs of the surrounding communities, and, furthermore, it will be easily reached from many parts of the city. A parkway thoroughfare should extend up the valley.[29]

10. _Guyasuta Park._--Just west of Aspinwall is the valley of Guyasuta Run, a beautiful wooded ravine well suited to give holiday enjoyment to the people. It is already used extensively for this purpose, and it should be saved for the people for all time.

11. _Allegheny River Parkway._--A riverside thoroughfare is described on page 79 (Part II, Section 61), running from the Sharpsburg bridge up the Allegheny River to Hoboken or Montrose. This should certainly be treated as a parkway, for opportunities to take advantage of the river in this way for public enjoyment are rare in Pittsburgh. Connections should be made into the Guyasuta Run and Squaw Run valleys.

12. _Beechwood Boulevard._--From Highland Park to Frankstown Avenue, Beechwood Boulevard follows the bottom of a valley. The plateau land above is thickly settled, and the valley banks are mere dumps of the most unsightly and objectionable character, which rob the Boulevard of much of its value as a pleasure drive. These banks are commercially of little use. In some portions of the valley there is sufficient depth of private property between the Boulevard and the foot of the bank to give usable frontage on the parkway, but the location, in the bottom of a valley, is so undesirable for house sites that a very cheap and unsightly development is apt to take place. This would be even more damaging to the pleasure drive than the present conditions. It is urged, therefore, that this whole valley from the top of one bank to the top of the other be taken as an essential part of the present parkway.

13. _Negley Run Parkway._--It is further urged that the entire valley of Negley Run be added to the park system. This would be part of the plan for extending a thoroughfare parkway from Beechwood Boulevard up this valley and along Princeton Place to the heart of East Liberty.[30]

14. _Silver Lake Playground._--Partly as an improvement to Beechwood Boulevard, but chiefly for its own sake, Silver Lake, together with the enclosing valley and its banks, should be taken for park purposes. It is an attractive spot in the midst of a closely built up section which has no local parks. Though small, it could well supply much of the need for recreation in the immediate neighborhood.

15. _Haights Run Valley._--Another valley which should be added to Highland Park is that of Haights Run. Topographically it is so related to the park that any defacement of its present beauty by unsightly usage would greatly injure the value of the western portion of Highland Park. The whole valley, from its mouth to Wellesley Avenue and west to the top of the bank, should be controlled. A parkway thoroughfare from East Liberty down to the river should follow this valley.[31]

16. _Bluff Street Hillside._--The precipitous bank, between Bluff Street at the top and Second Avenue and the Baltimore & Ohio tracks at the bottom, is a topographical feature of much interest and beauty in itself and having, further, a peculiar value as a typical and striking example of the natural physical characteristics of the Pittsburgh District. Commercially, it has little value, unless perhaps as a site for signs, and such use should above all others be guarded against. The whole bank should be owned or controlled by the City to prevent its defacement and to preserve a natural element of civic interest and beauty.

17. _Mt. Washington Hillside._--Another feature of the same sort, only much larger, more conspicuous and therefore more important, is the precipitous hillside south of the Monongahela River from the West End to the Castle Shannon incline. Most of this slope is owned by the Railroad, and it may be that an agreement can be made with them whereby the City need not buy the land in order to stop effectually all defacement. But, whatever might be the best plan for control, there is no doubt that the area in question should be preserved intact for all time as a monumental example of the Pittsburgh landscape.

FOOTNOTES:

[23] Part II, Section 29, p. 69.

[24] See map between Preface and Introduction.

[25] Part II, Section 12, page 62.

[26] Part II, Section 71, page 81.

[27] Part II, Section 32, p. 70.

[28] Part II, Section 14, p. 62.

[29] Part II, Section 63, p. 79.

[30] Part II, Section 23, page 66.

[31] Part II, Section 25, page 67.