Is Pittsburgh in a good or bad geographic position? (Philadelphia: home, living)

[Craziaskowboi]

Pittsburgh is located within 500 miles of half the country's population, which seems convenient but I've heard people say that it's isolated too. In relation to the largest cities, I do wonder if it is. It seems like Pittsburgh is too far east to be heavily influenced by Chicago, whose territory seems to be limited to areas with flat land, but it's also walled off from New York, Philadelphia and Washington DC by the Appalachian Mountains. Do you think that the lack of proximity to any of the largest population centers hurts Pittsburgh? Cities like Baltimore and Milwaukee benefit tremendously from their proximity to Washington DC and Chicago, respectively, but the nearest large city to Pittsburgh is Cleveland, which is not only struggling economically, but also isn't large enough to have the kind of inertia or cultural pull of Chicago or the largest East Coast cities. So basically, my question is, is Pittsburgh helped or hindered by its location?

[Citypoot]

Gnutella,

I think it's absurd to think Pittsburgh is somehow "hurt" just because it has some breathing distance to New York or Chicago.

As you said, half of Americans are within 500 miles of Pittsburgh, so in a very tangible way, Pittsburgh is reasonable close to a stunning number of people.

As for Pittsburgh being "hurt" by being 6 or 7 hours from New York City, that's ridiculous. Is San Francisco some backwards and isolated city just because it's 7 hours to LA? Is Denver? Is Seattle? Is Portland? Is Miami? Nah...the truth in 2010 is, people in one place aren't all that "isolated" to anybody else. So a better measure in our time is "how many friends and family can you visit in a reasonable days drive? If you live in Pittsburgh, and left there in the morning, half of all Americans would have you in their driveway at or before dinner.

I think Pittsburgh's location is, as George W. Bush would say, "strategery".

[Craziaskowboi]

Originally Posted by Citypoot

Gnutella,

I think it's absurd to think Pittsburgh is somehow "hurt" just because it has some breathing distance to New York or Chicago.

As you said, half of Americans are within 500 miles of Pittsburgh, so in a very tangible way, Pittsburgh is reasonable close to a stunning number of people.

As for Pittsburgh being "hurt" by being 6 or 7 hours from New York City, that's ridiculous. Is San Francisco some backwards and isolated city just because it's 7 hours to LA? Is Denver? Is Seattle? Is Portland? Is Miami? Nah...the truth in 2010 is, people in one place aren't all that "isolated" to anybody else. So a better measure in our time is "how many friends and family can you visit in a reasonable days drive? If you live in Pittsburgh, and left there in the morning, half of all Americans would have you in their driveway at or before dinner.

I think Pittsburgh's location is, as George W. Bush would say, "strategery".

The difference is, Seattle, San Francisco and Miami are on a tier above Pittsburgh, and have plenty of their own weight and influence, and I would think that Portland benefits somewhat from its proximity to Seattle.

Denver is a special case; it's not much bigger than Pittsburgh, but the fact that it's by far the largest city within 500 miles gives it extra weight. It's the cultural epicenter of a region that stretches all the way north to the Canadian border, and its influence covers both the Rocky Mountains and the "high" Great Plains.

[BigCityDreamer]

Location-wise, Pittsburgh isn't bad, but it's not great either. There's a feeling of being in the middle of nowhere, away from the action. Yet, it still looks impressive from a distance.

[Chriscross309]

Pittsburgh is in the ideal location

It is between the East Coast and Chicago

[stevo6]

On one level I think of Pittsburgh as isolated. The markets for hard goods (and we make some here) is a long drive away. Cleveland and Columbus are sort of close, but they do some of the same things we do, like metals, coal and gas, and electronics.

On the other hand, Pittsburgh has a very convenient airport, rail and barge access to the Ohio Valley, and a strong internet culture (free wi-fi downtown etc.).

Psychologically, that 4 1/2 hour drive thru the "wilderness" is a strong barrier to the east coast. No, we're not east coast and we're not mid-west. I think we are more like the northern capitol of Appalachia. :-)

The root of our economic problems is not isolation though. Its more about an excess of local government and infrastructure. This is in large part a result of our topography.

[MissShona]

Originally Posted by Gnutella

Pittsburgh is located within 500 miles of half the country's population, which seems convenient but I've heard people say that it's isolated too. In relation to the largest cities, I do wonder if it is. It seems like Pittsburgh is too far east to be heavily influenced by Chicago, whose territory seems to be limited to areas with flat land, but it's also walled off from New York, Philadelphia and Washington DC by the Appalachian Mountains. Do you think that the lack of proximity to any of the largest population centers hurts Pittsburgh? Cities like Baltimore and Milwaukee benefit tremendously from their proximity to Washington DC and Chicago, respectively, but the nearest large city to Pittsburgh is Cleveland, which is not only struggling economically, but also isn't large enough to have the kind of inertia or cultural pull of Chicago or the largest East Coast cities. So basically, my question is, is Pittsburgh helped or hindered by its location?

This is an interesting premise. I see geography hurting Pittsburgh in that many of the younger or professional crowd are not hindered by the distance that stands between Pittsburgh and the many metros that are within a day's drive (i.e. Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Baltimore, New York, etc.). Therefore when looking for opportunities, they don't limit themselves to Pittsburgh; which is a disadvantage to this area.

Someone mentioned Miami. When I lived there, many, many people could not even fathom living elsewhere.....and for a good reason. While Orlando, Tampa and Jacksonville were within a day's drive, they usually shared the same economic ups and downs of Miami sans the cultural life. Other cities, such as Atlanta, New Orleans and Charlotte were just prohibitively far away. In other words, if you left Miami it was a 'big deal'....in that your family/hometown would not be just a short car trip away. I think that a lot of cities in TX and the western states are the same way. Contrast this to Pittsburgh where people can go away to work/relocate in any number of cities....and still be close enough to come home for every holiday.

[BrianTH]

Big picture-wise, I think being the de facto capital city of our own little region is a good thing. Sure, it is a smallish region population wise, but being the de facto capital city allows us to have a nicely diversified economy. Indeed, I think the only reason this isn't so clear right now is that steel allowed us to grow into something bigger than a de facto capital city of a smallish region, but that was an undiversified and ultimately unsustainable dynamic. That led to a rough transition, but going forward I think it is going to become more and more obvious that a smaller, more diversified Pittsburgh is well-positioned.

Incidentally, I agree it is easy for people from here to scatter to places relatively nearby looking for opportunities, places like NYC, Philly, DC, Chicago, and so forth. I think we will eventually recognize that as a good thing, as more of those people come back with new ideas, new skills, more money, and so on--and maybe bringing some friends with them.

[MathmanMathman]

Locals tried to sell Pittsburgh's airport as a relief airport when traffic in the northeast was too crowded. Pittsburgh's airspace is uncrowded but considered to be too far away to be of use for the congested northeast corridor. And while it is "close" to population centers, it might be too close for flight hops. Philly is more of a origin/destination center and Pittsburgh is too close so Pittsburgh lost its US Airways hub. Cincinnati might have a better balance of proximity and distance for air flights. I think that is why DHL selected them for a hub but I think FedEx and UPS have really battered DHL's US market. I think even Delta has scaled back in Cincy because of its merger.

As for roads, I don't think Pittsburgh is at the crossroads of many major expressways as is say Atlanta. Businesses like have good access to transportation routes. If Obama's dream of high speed rail comes to fruition, I'm not sure how many routes will intersect with Pittsburgh. Maybe a DC to Chicago route would stop by Pittsburgh. A NYC to Chicago route might prefer to stop by Cleveland. And Pittsburgh's connection to the northeast is not so great. Extending 28 as an expressway up to I-80 would be good.

But yeah, I think Pittsburgh is sort of isolated and Cleveland is only a bit larger and even they are in a similar boat. Pittsburgh is sort of on the wrong side of the Allegheny mountains. The rivers are not as strategically important as they once were. They go through the declining rust belt and empty into the Gulf of Mexico which doesn't have a huge economic value for Pittsburgh. The rivers have more value for recreation and moving coal.

[terminator2]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that we're not that close to any of the major cities. Regardless, Pittsburgh is undervalued I think.