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 lived in Minneapolis...and there is a downtown...tall buildings, etc.
But most of the houses are just different...houses with big yards...kind of typical midwest. So, you might have your urban core which is tall buildings...but you also get a lot of parking lots all over the place...so if you are downtown, you aren't getting the 'energy'. MInneapolis' downtown also had a skyway system of interconnected malls within the buildings and walking off of the street. Which meant street life was fairly dead, but being downtown kind of meant walking among something like one giant mall above ground.
In short, when I lived in Minneapolis, I lived in two different locations that were within proximity of downtown, but the housing areas itself felt very residential. I'm a person that really wants to walk around the neighborhood...but those neighborhoods really had nothing to walk around and see. It was standard 'get into the car and drive' kind of thing. For Minneapolis, that meant driving to 'uptown' which had a small collection of shopping and restaurants that covered a relatively very small area. There was another area called Dinkytown by the university. These areas though were the exception, not the norm, so you always drove to them, looking for parking, and then walked around - watching the parking meters the entire time.
I can't speak for Milwaukee, Cleveland or St. Louis though - as they all are known to be a bit more denser than generic Midwest, and certainly more denser than the mass majority of U.S. cities in the south and southwest.
But, when I google map Pittsburgh there is something completely different going on there....something so unlike those other Midwest cities. I think one of the big ones is plot land sizes don't really exist in Pittsburgh in the same way. In a typical Midwestern city, you have a grid system of big streets, big yards, sidewalks going through, etc. If you are walking, it'll take a lot of time to walk by 20 houses as they'll each have sizeable plot lands to them. Whereas observing Pittsburgh they seem to cut it down considerably and even lots of the row structures which eliminate it. Plus there are the mountains which seem to densify things...and buildings that have that 'built right on top of each other' look - something I personally really like.
I think it has a lot less to do with skyscraper sizes, but more to do with how the residential communities are setup. Pittsburgh with rows and density is much more like Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, etc. Whereas everywhere east of Pittsburgh has the 'I want a half acre in the city' look - making them very car-dependent.
Lot sizes in Pittsburgh, especially in the burbs, are quite large, as large if not larger than I have seen in suburban Minneapolis. We had friends in Bloomington who had a very small yard (even by the standards of metro Denver), and some friends in Lakeville have a moderately sized lot, about the size you might find in a similar burb in Pgh. In the old row-house neighborhoods in Pgh, lots are small, but that does not describe the entire city. Squirrel Hill lots seem to be on a par with what I've seen in Minneapolis. Plus, Pittsburgh is NOT in the mountains. One of the University of Pittsburgh's slogans is "the first college west of the Alleghenies".
To be precise, Pittsburgh is sitting in the middle of a large, old plateau, and what we call hills around here are actually the high spots left between the valleys and ravines carved by local streams and rivers.
Anyway, according to the USGS, this puts Pittsburgh in a "highlands" region (specifically the Appalachian Plateaus Province within the Appalachian Highlands Region), but that is indeed different from saying we are in mountains (the USGS defines an Allegheny Mountain Section within the Appalachian Plateaus Province, but that is to the east).
Edit: Here is the USGS map of physiographic regions:
But I wonder if Pittsburgh is underrated due to the simple fact that the American (and possibly international) public have yet to completely shed their stereotype of Pittsburgh as being a run-down dirty rustbelt town, and have no idea of how much Pittsburgh has reinvented and revitalized itself.
I'm from the Chicago suburbs, and I think in many ways, (except topography!)Pittsburgh is most like a smaller version of Chicago, because both Pittsburgh and Chicago are industrial cities that have made an amazing transformation.
If you include Pittsburgh as part of the midwest (which many don't consider it to be) it has the second densest and tallest skyline (it does have the architectural diversity of Chicagos loop, with many fortune 500 companies that have made Pittsburgh a more economically diverse area.
Its neighborhoods from what I've seen on Google earth have urban density that is lacking in midwestern cities outside Chicago. From pictures I've seen it is indeed be the second most "truly urban" city between the coasts.
But yet, despite this, the area is still losing people. Do you think thats just a legacy, that keeps people from relocating? Do you expect to see population increases in the future. Hopefully Pittsburgh can be a good example for other industrial era cities to follow.
A little east coast perspective:
I never thought much of pittsburgh at all, good or bad. At some level, I knew it was there, had heard it used to be awful (choking pollution) but not much else. I started meeting more and more people who had positive impressions this past decade (before that, mostly negative). i don't consider Pitt midwestern and do consider it underrated. Buffalo has nice people but it's downtown is dead, even during the day. the place just felt depressing though there were signs of hope. cleveland has potential but wasn't a big fan. Detroit is a sad case, so much potential, so much FAIL. Milwaukee was a pleasant surprise. Definitely an underrated city, nice, quiet, but more going on than Buffalo. It's proximity to Chicago surely helps. Milwaukee is known generally has a rust belt city (run down, boring). Indy-clean, boring. Pittsburgh also has plenty of potential but it's downtown is fairly vibrant during the day (meaning there's more than just a little economic pulse). downtown is extremely walkable, as much as any east coast ity I've been to. close in neighborhoods like the north side or southside feel a lot like philadelphia. Pittsburgh's biggest problem is its location (though a potential strength). it's not a short train ride from NY (aka Philadelphia) or Chicago (aka Milwaukee) so one has to GO there, not just happen upon it. I'd rank it as the most underrated city I've been to and the one most likely to realize its potential soon. my list
underrated:
Philadelphia (less so ever year but still underrated)
Pittsburgh (where Philly was maybe ten years ago, "off the grid so less known)
Milwaukee-(great little city, less potential and less fun that Pitt is today)
overrated:
Portland, OR
DC
Boston
possibly San Fran, byooteeful but people are unbearable
Charlotte (how do people even talk about this place?
)
Properly rated:
Seattle
NYC
Chicago
A little east coast perspective:
I never thought much of pittsburgh at all, good or bad. At some level, I knew it was there, had heard it used to be awful (choking pollution) but not much else. I started meeting more and more people who had positive impressions this past decade (before that, mostly negative). i don't consider Pitt midwestern and do consider it underrated. Buffalo has nice people but it's downtown is dead, even during the day. the place just felt depressing though there were signs of hope. cleveland has potential but wasn't a big fan. Detroit is a sad case, so much potential, so much FAIL. Milwaukee was a pleasant surprise. Definitely an underrated city, nice, quiet, but more going on than Buffalo. It's proximity to Chicago surely helps. Milwaukee is known generally has a rust belt city (run down, boring). Indy-clean, boring. Pittsburgh also has plenty of potential but it's downtown is fairly vibrant during the day (meaning there's more than just a little economic pulse). downtown is extremely walkable, as much as any east coast ity I've been to. close in neighborhoods like the north side or southside feel a lot like philadelphia. Pittsburgh's biggest problem is its location (though a potential strength). it's not a short train ride from NY (aka Philadelphia) or Chicago (aka Milwaukee) so one has to GO there, not just happen upon it. I'd rank it as the most underrated city I've been to and the one most likely to realize its potential soon. my list
underrated:
Philadelphia (less so ever year but still underrated)
Pittsburgh (where Philly was maybe ten years ago, "off the grid so less known)
Milwaukee-(great little city, less potential and less fun that Pitt is today)
overrated:
Portland, OR
DC
Boston
possibly San Fran, byooteeful but people are unbearable
Charlotte (how do people even talk about this place?
)
Properly rated:
Seattle
NYC
Chicago
I've felt the exact same with Cleveland and Buffalo. I've driven around both, and just didn't see anything. Since then, from inquiry, I've heard that it's really Cleveland's suburbs that Clevelanders seem to enjoy. (Which is something I'm not ordinarly attracted to - nice suburbs).
I think you're certainly right about Milwaukee being a gem. I've always written it off as being much too cold than for my liking. But if it were situated elsewhere, than might be interesting. Wisconsin in general seems to have a lot of gems, as does Minnesota.
Like you, I also felt the same about Pittsburgh - and still do to some extent. When I mention that I wouldn't mind moving abroad back to the U.S., and Pittsburgh is high on the list, it's met by quizzical looks. The, but you could go anywhere! Why not _______? And as you can imagine, just about every city you can imagine gets placed before it. But being that I'm getting older, have a family now, but still really love cities and city amenities..and the costs of Pittsburgh, it's really ideal. But yeah, even now, the name 'Pittsburgh' still doesn't resonate any 'I'd like to SEE that city' images like many other cities do. I'm thinking when I spend some time there next month, I'll have to take a lot of photos and post them up on facebook, and at least feel out a 'surprised' reponse by how interesting it looks...
For the OVER-RATED list...I definetely think San Francisco is overrated in relation to its cost of living. It is a beautiful place, but when a place is so expensive all you can do is sit in your overpriced rental apartment and enjoy doing nothing while working all the time to afford overpriced renting in a sketch area...it just isn't worth it
Regarding Philadelphia..yeah, thats another city I never hear anyone talk about, and never hear anyone say 'I'd like to visit that city!'. Actually I think all of Pennsylvania is like that...seems to be strangely non-existant in the overall national scope of things.
I think Pittsburgh's relative isolation is both a blessing and a curse. We definitely don't get the inherent cross-support any of the BosWash cities gets, but on the other hand we really are the de facto capital city of our little region, without any serious competition (even Cleveland doesn't really poach as much business as you might have expected). So now that we have "right-sized" the city, I think we are poised for getting on a solid, stable, slow-growth track. But we do have to pretty much rise or fall on our own.
Pittsburgh has been rated the Number 1 Most Livable City MORE than once in recent years. That does not sound under rated to me.
I think no one really cares or listens to those polls. I mean, it seems like every city in the nation is contantly making #1 on something or another every other week.
--
So, I think it is still VERY under-rated. Actually I just met up with one of my Canadian friends here in Japan. He is from Manitoba - really middle of nowhere!
I told him I was thinking of getting back to the U.S., and maybe Pittsburgh. He had this look...'what? Why not Seattle or Portland or somewhere? Why Pittsburgh'.
I already knew his thinking...but made a few inquiries...and typical of the mass majority of people...they have a strong image of decay, rust belt, lack of jobs, etc.
I'd say Pittsburgh is VERY under-rated...amazingly so.
I then mentioned the affordability...and previous, I mentioned Seattle you're looking at $300,000...and he quickly said, 'that's a great deal! So much better than CA, etc.!' Then I told him the Pittsburgh prices, averaging $120,000 and could get real good quality and location with that as well.
Needless to say, I couldn't convince him. His mind is still 'rust, decay, no jobs', etc. He also mentioned brutal winters with no coastline.
For me, I'm still sold on Pittsburgh comparitive to other cities...particularly since I've lived in NYC, SF and Portland on the coasts before. But if I hadn't have had those experiences, I can see myself thinking 'ah, I want coastline and it's worth the extra costs, I'll make $ like anywhere anyways', and on and on. Having 'been there, done that', I'd much more prefer being in a city like Pittsburgh with all of the amenities and great cost of housing, etc.
I think Pittsburgh's relative isolation is both a blessing and a curse. We definitely don't get the inherent cross-support any of the BosWash cities gets, but on the other hand we really are the de facto capital city of our little region, without any serious competition (even Cleveland doesn't really poach as much business as you might have expected). So now that we have "right-sized" the city, I think we are poised for getting on a solid, stable, slow-growth track. But we do have to pretty much rise or fall on our own.
Plus, thinking of what pman said and yourself here.
I think IF Pittsburgh were right in the BosWash corridor, it would be awashed and drenched with the drug trade and the crime that comes with it. Not only that, but if it were smack dab in the middle of it, it probably wouldn't have nearly as much character and distinction either.
Basically, the city is what it is, because of where it is
Pittsburgh has been rated the Number 1 Most Livable City MORE than once in recent years. That does not sound under rated to me.
That is why the population is skyrocketing. Pittsburgh is overrated. Drive around. It is a very dirty and dying city.
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.
