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.
Status:
"See My Blog Entries for my Top 500 Most Important USA Cities"
(set 9 days ago)
Location: Harrisburg, PA
1,051 posts, read 978,334 times
Reputation: 1406
Advertisements
Buster, that in of itself would get subjective though too. Do you go by age, walkability, density. Does it include vacant buildings, factories. "Urban area" tries to go by labor market, and what is connected (i.e. what is driveable). But yes, it definitely includes "suburbs" and what is truly not "urban" like brand-new far-flung singe family home developments. You couldn't even walk to the corner store or a bar, let alone the city core.
Gladhands, true. But that can have big consequences when comparing metros. For example, if a little bit of the city spills into a huge county, the metro gets that entire county. I'm not saying metros are a bad way either. But they do go by county lines, which are completely arbitrary. Nothing really "changes" when you cross a county line, except maybe some local laws/ordinances.
There really is no perfect way to compare relative city sizes. I would say urban area is the best I have seen.
Btw, much love to Pittsburgh. I just hate how it's all about - "who is the hottest/fastest growing city", instead of looking at the history and character of what makes a city great. Some new, up-and-coming cities like Omaha, OKC, Tampa, Las Vegas and even a major city like Pheonix have something to offer. But these cities are relatively "new" and lacking on the historical element, and have a very different urban form than older, more historical cities.
Pittsburgh is a one-of-a-kind and so is Baltimore. They both were massive cities back in the day (2nd and 8th largest in the entire US), and still are large cities that just reached maturity. There is nothing wrong with that at all. They aren't losing population, they are stable. Both rich in history. So sure, they can be peers if you want. I'll just say Baltimore is a little bigger, little closer to other metros. Also St. Louis is definitely a peer city to both of them. So they are like cousin peer cities at a minimum. Pittsburgh is really unique with its hills and the rivers. It is a one-of-a-kind city, and under-rated to a good extent.
Pittsburgh is a one-of-a-kind and so is Baltimore. They both were massive cities back in the day (2nd and 8th largest in the entire US), and still are large cities that just reached maturity. There is nothing wrong with that at all. They aren't losing population, they are stable. Both rich in history. So sure, they can be peers if you want. I'll just say Baltimore is a little bigger, little closer to other metros. Also St. Louis is definitely a peer city to both of them. So they are like cousin peer cities at a minimum. Pittsburgh is really unique with its hills and the rivers. It is a one-of-a-kind city, and under-rated to a good extent.
I agree! 100%
I mean Pittsburgh isn't "Midwest", but it does have a unique and beautiful location that differs from east coast cities. The topography is amazing! If you look at Pittsburgh on a map with the lines of the states taken away (too many people compare {Philly and Pittsburgh-???!), it really is in a unique location. It is nestled between three rivers on the very western edge of the Appalachians...hilly and dramatic. Philly is one of the old east ancients (NYC/Boston/DC), near the coast with a flat scape. Yes, there are hills in the Philly burbs, but the city is on the coastal plain.
Growing up in Philadelphia I saw Pittsburgh as: a smaller city, steel, Flashdance, rougher and more working class than Philly (though yeah, we are working class too!), younger city, Mr. Rogers. Never had a desire to live there growing up (unlike San Fran), wouldn't mind now, though my family just moved back to the Philadelphia area. I went to college in OH and went to school with lots of Pittsburgh folk. They don't have our accent. I still say pop though and always will!
I don't want to come off as a UPMC booster, because I'm anything but, so I'm going to leave that part of the discussion alone.
People on this board often bemoan low salaries in Pittsburgh, but I think they also lose sight of just how cheap Pittsburgh real estate is. Sure, close food and cars generally cost the same everywhere, but housing makes up the largest percentage of most people's budgets. Pittsburgh's median household income is within a couple thousand of New York City's. People complain about the high cost of east end housing, losing sight of the fact that you can buy a condo in our most expensive neighborhoods for less than the national median home price.
Those who actually read the article saw that it says that it's hard to recruit people to Pittsburgh as compared to the other tech hubs. Take a look at those cities, those are widely considered some of the most desirable cities in the United States. Of course it's hard to recruit young people who'd rather live in Austin, Seattle or the Bay? It talks about the length of time ads sit on monster. I don't know about you, but I don't enter my job title into a search engine and look at jobs at every city. I target cities, and Pittsburgh just isn't on the radar for a lot of people yet.
The techies I've met in Pittsburgh seem quite happy with their compensation, but I understand why some people would rather have the higher salary; it helps you when negotiating salary for your next position. I also understand why some wooden want to come here at all. That said, the personal income data doesn't fit this board's consistent "Pittsburgh jobs don't pay" narrative.
And it seems that's how these companies justify the lower salaries. DH took a look at Pittsburgh salaries once and said "I won't work for that!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Buster
I think you are putting an inordinate amount of importance on raw population and city limits. Tampa for example is nothing like Baltimore, and has a lower GDP than Pittsburgh. Seattle is also nothing like Baltimore, is quite a bit larger, with a much much higher GDP and far different demographics and industries.
Pittsburgh packs a lot within it's small city limits - a vibrant downtown, one of the best skylines in the US, theater district, Carnegie Museums, National Aviary, Andy Warhol Museum, Phipps Conservatory, several large city parks, lots of art galleries and installations, Carnegie Mellon Univ, Univ or Pittsburgh, Duquesne Univ, (and others), multiple large vibrant nightlife areas, a great street market neighborhood(strip district), lots of great residential neighborhoods, many with historic houses, and a lot more.
Re: the bold. Well . . . yes, though I'm not sure about "vibrant downtown". My dad used to carry on like that, too. I grew up thinking Pittsburgh was the only place that had "all that". It wasn't until I married someone from another large city, and then moved to yet another large city, that I found out that more than one city has stuff like the underlined.
Quote:
Originally Posted by g500
City limits are what is truly in the city. And by that measure Baltimore is over twice the size of Pgh. I really don't like using city limits because it tends to favor southern/western cities with massive city limits. City limits are entirely arbitrary to what the real population of an area is. Urban area (to me) is the perfect indicator because it represents areas that are "close enough" to the main city to still be in that area. They are defined by the US Census. Usually represent one labor market. Urban areas do not follow any arbitrary township, city, county lines.
Pgh and Baltimore are both in the "maturity phase" of being a city (neither urban area or city proper is experiencing major growth or deterioration). This is not necessarily a bad thing.
Ah, these avaricious western cities! You mean like Sitka, Juneau, Wrangell, and Anchorage, AK? (The four largest.) I can assure anyone who needs assurance that no one thinks those cities are "above" Pittsburgh. Here's the rest of the top 10: Jacksonville (FL), Anaconda (MT), Butte (MT), OKC, Houston and Phoenix. The only ones that are considered anywhere near Pittsburgh in rep are Jax, Houston and Phoenix. Heck, even St. Mary's, PA is larger than Pittsburgh, geographically.
What I mean is that many areas included as urban area in the definition, I consider to be suburban. and in fact a lot of them are true suburbs. For example, Robinson Twp. in the Pittsburgh area is considered "urban area" by the census. I can assure you it is not urban. Catonsville, Ellicott City, and Columbia Md are also urban area according to census. and lots of other areas like these examples. That is not urban to me.
It gets even worse when you get to younger cities in the midwest like Columbus, Ohio and sunbelt like Charlotte. Some of their "urban areas" are ridiculously non city-like and are just areas of suburban housing with strip malls scattered around.
But suburbs are still part of the urbanized area. It's not like Robinson is out in the boonies with a bunch of farms.
A lot of these cities have newer housing than Pittsburgh, true. I just read that Pittsburgh has the second-oldest housing stock in the country. But many of them, especially in the west and southwest, have remarkably urban features. It is usual for suburbs in the west to have sidewalks in all built-up areas for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands
In my opinion, most true metros to not encompass more than two or three counties.
Buster, that in of itself would get subjective though too. Do you go by age, walkability, density. Does it include vacant buildings, factories. "Urban area" tries to go by labor market, and what is connected (i.e. what is driveable). But yes, it definitely includes "suburbs" and what is truly not "urban" like brand-new far-flung singe family home developments. You couldn't even walk to the corner store or a bar, let alone the city core.
Gladhands, true. But that can have big consequences when comparing metros. For example, if a little bit of the city spills into a huge county, the metro gets that entire county. I'm not saying metros are a bad way either. But they do go by county lines, which are completely arbitrary. Nothing really "changes" when you cross a county line, except maybe some local laws/ordinances.
There really is no perfect way to compare relative city sizes. I would say urban area is the best I have seen.
Btw, much love to Pittsburgh. I just hate how it's all about - "who is the hottest/fastest growing city", instead of looking at the history and character of what makes a city great. Some new, up-and-coming cities like Omaha, OKC, Tampa, Las Vegas and even a major city like Pheonix have something to offer. But these cities are relatively "new" and lacking on the historical element, and have a very different urban form than older, more historical cities.
Pittsburgh is a one-of-a-kind and so is Baltimore. They both were massive cities back in the day (2nd and 8th largest in the entire US), and still are large cities that just reached maturity. There is nothing wrong with that at all. They aren't losing population, they are stable. Both rich in history. So sure, they can be peers if you want. I'll just say Baltimore is a little bigger, little closer to other metros. Also St. Louis is definitely a peer city to both of them. So they are like cousin peer cities at a minimum. Pittsburgh is really unique with its hills and the rivers. It is a one-of-a-kind city, and under-rated to a good extent.
I agree, and most cities are really one-of-a-kind.
Re: the bold. Well . . . yes, though I'm not sure about "vibrant downtown". My dad used to carry on like that, too. I grew up thinking Pittsburgh was the only place that had "all that". It wasn't until I married someone from another large city, and then moved to yet another large city, that I found out that more than one city has stuff like the underlined.
How long has it been since you've been there? It is MUCH more vibrant than it was even a few years ago. I'm sure most on this board will back me up on that. It has actually turned into somewhat of a nightlife district as well, and a lot more people live downtown now. I was comparing it to Baltimore and it's a lot more vibrant than Baltimore's downtown IMO.
Of course during weekdays it's always been busy with the office crowd, but now it is at night as well.
How long has it been since you've been there? It is MUCH more vibrant than it was even a few years ago. I'm sure most on this board will back me up on that. It has actually turned into somewhat of a nightlife district as well, and a lot more people live downtown now. I was comparing it to Baltimore and it's a lot more vibrant than Baltimore's downtown IMO.
Of course during weekdays it's always been busy with the office crowd, but now it is at night as well.
I was there last summer. Yes, it was active. I haven't been to Balto in a long time.
Very friendly town, good white collar jobs in health, moderate cost of living and a cool sport town. I'd rather be in Pittsburgh than filthy San Francisco with a lousy attitude.
Many other cities like Atlanta don't enjoy that many accolades but still they are surging. Pittsburgh looked promising during the recession with its low unemployment, but now it's unemployment rate is above the national average. Sounds like there is a northeast exodus and Pittsburgh is caught up in it. Had it been located in the South or West, things could be different.
Many other cities like Atlanta don't enjoy that many accolades but still they are surging. Pittsburgh looked promising during the recession with its low unemployment, but now it's unemployment rate is above the national average. Sounds like there is a northeast exodus and Pittsburgh is caught up in it. Had it been located in the South or West, things could be different.
I saw this posted on Bloomberg earlier in the week (https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...-aren-t-so-hot) - the Bloomberg article has references cited from the article and has comments (which the P-G reposting did not).
I thought it was a balanced article, but figured it would be hated here.
The thing is, Pittsburgh is not the Hell-hole that some make it out to be. But nor is it the Heaven that others portray it as.
I hit a breaking point this past week. My bus elected not to come again. The Port Authority should rename their "Schedules" to "Suggestions", as that is how they conduct their service - utter unreliability. I work downtown and live in Etna - about 6 miles apart. It took me an hour and 50 minutes to get home. This is not Manhattan. That travel time is ridiculous. Last week, I drove (at rush hour.. on a Friday.. while the Blue Jays were having a home game) from Hamilton to Toronto (downtown, Yonge Street) in less than that time.
When I complain about the bus not coming, or about the bus tracker app not working, or about how impossible it is to travel around Pittsburgh - nobody wants to have any conversation about a negative of Pittsburgh. There is such an insular mindset here.. if you criticize anything about Pittsburgh, it's as if you'd personally insulted someone's dead grandmother and are derisively dismissed with "It's better than it was" or "Everywhere has these problems" or some variation of "Pixburgh is the only city in the world that was built on hills next to a river".
But you can pick any paper, or engage in a casual conversation with anyone on the street, and everyone here has an opinion on changes the Pirates, Pens, or Steelers need to implement to improve.
But there is no political opposition here. There are no policy debates in the media. The people here have been so conditioned to "know their place" that the elites have an utter free hand to do whatever they want. There are no advocates for the middle class here, nobody is trying to make things work more efficiently. The only talk of change is of one extreme's wet dream to bring back the still mills, and of another extreme's wet dream to transform Pittsburgh into Portland East or Brooklyn West.
If I didn't have a kid here, I'd seriously begin to consider relocating. Pittsburgh's cultural mindset and its acceptance of mediocrity is incredibly frustrating to someone who can see Pittsburgh's potential, but who is unbiased enough not to try to pass off Pittsburgh's warts as beauty marks. Nothing is going to change about Pittsburgh, because the people don't want it to - they're too insular, provincial, and ignorant about other places.
Many other cities like Atlanta don't enjoy that many accolades but still they are surging. Pittsburgh looked promising during the recession with its low unemployment, but now it's unemployment rate is above the national average. Sounds like there is a northeast exodus and Pittsburgh is caught up in it. Had it been located in the South or West, things could be different.
The problem with that article is that it stops at top line basic MSA numbers. It doesn't dive deeper into what's actually going on beneath the surface, which is that we are moving a ton of young highly educated people here, but older people are moving away or dying off at the same rate. Therefore, our basic numbers look like a flat line. A city can have a dramatic shift in demographics while still remaining at a flat number. And the hype about Pittsburgh right now is that when we quickly replace old/retired with young, the amenities that go along with a younger city increase like a rocket ship, creating press. This is why all the *omg pittsburgh!!* articles. It looks like and *is* a boom, just a weird internal one masked by the exit of the last steel generations.
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.
Pitt
