Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see a substantive difference between going to a city for a job and choosing where to live within that city. I took this job because of the specific things Pitt offered in order to recruit me, not because Pittsburgh is a better area than Chicago. When I got here I found a community that is as similar as possible to the one I left, and even so, leaving Rogers Park was incredibly hard. I'm not surprised that you don't understand, and that you don't want to understand, and that you will continue to respond with shallow, snarky, antagonistic comments.
The irony in the case of the Northside is that some of the worst blight in the neighborhoods was caused not by people who stayed here, but because so many homes were simply abandoned by people who left. Allegheny City used to be one of the richest places in the world. It's beyond absurd that the people who live within a hundred miles of its remnants have learned so little from its history.
i'm actually fascinated by the history of the north side and would love to learn more about it. what do you think led to people abandoning the beautiful homes and architecture in the area, especially in places like manchester, observatory hill, etc.? is there any reading on the subject?
i'm actually fascinated by the history of the north side and would love to learn more about it. what do you think led to people abandoning the beautiful homes and architecture in the area, especially in places like manchester, observatory hill, etc.? is there any reading on the subject?
White flight played a role in the later decline in Manchester, but it had already gone fairly downscale by that era, with a lower-income white population replacing the earlier rich white population.
The basic answer is the areas became unfashionable, and the homes were seen as dated, along with a desire to avoid pollution once better transit options came about. The North Side (mostly Manchester and Allegheny West) were the original upper-middle to upper-class "suburbs" of Pittsburgh in the mid 19th century, with the wealthy commuting from their jobs in Downtown via horse-drawn railcars. In the 1890s the neighborhoods started to go downscale however, with the wealthy decamping full time to the railroad suburb of Sewickley, and the upper-middle class moving to the new streetcar suburbs in the East End (e.g, what's now Shadyside, Friendship, Highland Park, etc).
I'm less sure about what happened in Observatory Hill that led to the grand homes going more downscale. That area was also a streetcar suburb, but never boomed in the same way that the East End did, with housing for the upper-middle class always a minority. I would hazard a guess that since pollution wasn't a huge issue (as mills were quite far away) that the wealthy residents who moved into the area in the period from 1890 to 1920 decamped to suburbs at further remove once automobile use became widespread.
i'm actually fascinated by the history of the north side and would love to learn more about it. what do you think led to people abandoning the beautiful homes and architecture in the area, especially in places like manchester, observatory hill, etc.? is there any reading on the subject?
Eschaton's answer is on point, as usual; the one thing I wanted to add is the role of urban planning and the construction of 279 and other freeways. Others on here know the history more precisely, but in general the plan for 279 effectively doomed East Street, Deutschtown, and Swiss Hole (Schweizer Loch), and then as residents fought the plan for decades people saw the writing on the wall and quietly moved away...so even homes that are quite desirable now declined wildly in value, because there was confusion about what would be affected by eminent domain, and even if a home was left standing it's understandable that people don't want to live on a freeway on ramp.
So yes, moving out to more fashionable suburbs was the start, but then the new roads that made it easier to reach those suburbs led to the literal destruction of the neighborhood over a span of about 30 years starting in the 1950s. That's my understanding, anyway, but of course I am interested to see if the true Northsiders on here might fill in more details and add more info.
White flight played a role in the later decline in Manchester, but it had already gone fairly downscale by that era, with a lower-income white population replacing the earlier rich white population.
The basic answer is the areas became unfashionable, and the homes were seen as dated, along with a desire to avoid pollution once better transit options came about. The North Side (mostly Manchester and Allegheny West) were the original upper-middle to upper-class "suburbs" of Pittsburgh in the mid 19th century, with the wealthy commuting from their jobs in Downtown via horse-drawn railcars. In the 1890s the neighborhoods started to go downscale however, with the wealthy decamping full time to the railroad suburb of Sewickley, and the upper-middle class moving to the new streetcar suburbs in the East End (e.g, what's now Shadyside, Friendship, Highland Park, etc).
I'm less sure about what happened in Observatory Hill that led to the grand homes going more downscale. That area was also a streetcar suburb, but never boomed in the same way that the East End did, with housing for the upper-middle class always a minority. I would hazard a guess that since pollution wasn't a huge issue (as mills were quite far away) that the wealthy residents who moved into the area in the period from 1890 to 1920 decamped to suburbs at further remove once automobile use became widespread.
huh. so it is actually the east enders that contributed to the demis of the north side.
Eschaton's answer is on point, as usual; the one thing I wanted to add is the role of urban planning and the construction of 279 and other freeways. Others on here know the history more precisely, but in general the plan for 279 effectively doomed East Street, Deutschtown, and Swiss Hole (Schweizer Loch), and then as residents fought the plan for decades people saw the writing on the wall and quietly moved away...so even homes that are quite desirable now declined wildly in value, because there was confusion about what would be affected by eminent domain, and even if a home was left standing it's understandable that people don't want to live on a freeway on ramp.
So yes, moving out to more fashionable suburbs was the start, but then the new roads that made it easier to reach those suburbs led to the literal destruction of the neighborhood over a span of about 30 years starting in the 1950s. That's my understanding, anyway, but of course I am interested to see if the true Northsiders on here might fill in more details and add more info.
Of course, none of the destroyed neighborhoods were particularly wealthy. Manchester was, however, and it was hurt greatly by the conversion of 65 into a highway, the wholesale destruction of all residential closer to the river, and particularly the elimination of the old Beaver Street business district. It's what led to the weird present-day state where Manchester is a 19th century neighborhood with only one functional/occupied storefront.
huh. so it is actually the east enders that contributed to the demis of the north side.
Yes, absolutely. The "grand foursquare" style which is all over the place in the East End was built en-masse for professional class Pittsburghers like doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. Prior to this period there wasn't much built out in the east besides Downtown, the Strip, Lawrenceville, the Hill District, and Uptown. Bloomfield existed, and there were a lot of buildings around the core of East Liberty, since it was on a major rail line into the city. But the rest of the East End was mostly farmland and "country estates" for the wealthy. The electric streetcar changed all that, and made the area an easy commute into downtown. With hundreds of acres of flat land, relatively clean air, and the now easy commutes into the city, it triggered a building bonanza.
I’m aware this is an old post. Just to offer my 2 cents. As somebody who has lived and worked in all of the different pittsburgh areas. Comparing Monroeville to Robinson is a bit foolish. One has been in decline and decay for some time. And is geographically surrounded by poverty. The other has never declined and with the exception of the north hills and probably the s hills area around my lebenon is the best place in the pittsburgh metro to live and work.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
