ShareThis Page

Walking, running top uses for Aspinwall Riverfront Park

| Sunday, Aug. 5, 2012, 9:21 a.m.


A survey on the Aspinwall Riverfront Park property completed earlier this year will help guide the design process of the site.

The project's board of directors released survey findings last week.

Walking and running was voted the most important activity for the park, with 33 percent of the 1,675 respondents choosing that option.

Bike-riding received 18 percent of votes, a playground received 12 percent, and nature appreciation received 10 percent.

Susan Crookston, an Aspinwall resident who led efforts to buy the property, said she was impressed by the number of people who responded.

She said the survey attracted responses from a variety of people in the area.

“People in general are really excited to develop something that has a chance to interact with the river,” Crookston said.

The board also announced that Environmental Planning and Design of Pittsburgh will serve as the landscape architect of record for the project.

“So far, it's been a pleasure to work with them,” Crookston said.

The company will be joined by NIPpaysage of Montreal; studio d'ARC architects of Pittsburgh; Lennon, Smith, Souleret Engineering of Coraopolis; blue tomato design of Pittsburgh; and 360 Intelligent Marketing.

Representatives of the firm are talking with people familiar with the site.

Crookston said public tours of the park are possible in the future, along with public meetings to discuss land usage.

With the survey results in hand, Crookston said, planners can have an idea of how the new park will best serve the community.

“What the survey does is help guide our decision-making and create something that doesn't just serve a few people — but is really something the community wants,” Crookston said.

Tom McGee is a staff writer with Trib Total Media. He can be reached at

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.

click me