Share on Facebook     Email This     Tweet This      

52 Comments
Topics: Demographic Analysis, Economic Development, Talent Attraction
Cities: Pittsburgh

52 Responses to “Jim Russell: Catch a Rising Star – Pittsburgh”

1. Eric says:

   August 17, 2010 at 2:23 pm

   Compared to what I had heard about it before visiting, Pittsburgh has impressed me more than any other place I visit. Beautiful building stock nestled amongst hills and rivers. A great urban fabric with unique neighborhoods. I’m pulling for it.

   I think in 25 years, Charlotte and Dallas and Phoenix will still look car-focused and sprawling while Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati will have a rare urban fabric that you can’t buy at any price.
2. Jim Russell says:

   August 17, 2010 at 2:27 pm

   More about the per capita income story, comparing Pittsburgh to Austin:

   http://burghdiaspora.blogspot.com/2010/08/us-metro-prosperity.html
3. DUer says:

   August 17, 2010 at 3:00 pm

   I was SHOCKED when I first went to Pittsburgh this year. My boyfriend moved there for law school and I was not excited for him. Pittsburgh threw me for a loop. It is an amazing and beautiful city with a lot of amenities. I am a perennial Columbus fan, but I have to give Pittsburgh the praise it deserves. The urban neighborhoods are beautiful and somehow the region manages to have two extremely active ‘downtowns’ in Oakland and Pittsburgh as well as great urban streets in squirrel hill and shadyside.

   I don’t know how much it would be possible or even helpful, but I think Pittsburgh could align itself more with the East Coast than the Rust belt in the future. Its steel legacy could be hard to break. That would position it as the little brother of that region. Or I really think Pittsburgh could build itself as a capital of the midwest. One thing it might want to do is try to lure Youngstown/Warren and Wheeling more into its region than Cleveland for instance. I grew up in Warren and always associated myself as a Greater Cleveland kinda guy. Pittsburgh could steal those back in the future. We’ll see. Regardless, Pittsburgh = great city.
4. Stéphane Dumas says:

   August 17, 2010 at 3:26 pm

   I’m a new comer here but I lurked on this blog since a little while ago.

   Besides Las Vegas who wants to learn from Pittsburgh, I saw a CNN article from Anderson Cooper dated from March 2009 titled “Can Pittsburgh save Detroit?”. As to see what Detroit could learn from Pittsburgh. On a little off-topic note, there this article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette about Pittsburgh and Detroit sports teams. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08144/883985-61.stm
5. Monongahela Goner says:

   August 17, 2010 at 4:43 pm

   Detroit actually has a lot in common with Pittsburgh — specifically, the Pittsburgh of the ’80s, when steelmaking in America died.

   A whole generation had to leave to find work, which is why there are Steelers bars in every town in America.

   Pittsburgh could have died completely, but it gradually, painfully developed a new, diversified economy — with its research universities playing no small part.

   There’s hope for the Rustbelt here if you want it. But it’s not easy, and doesn’t happen overnight. Is Detroit on a similar trajectory? Only time will tell…
6. cdc guy says:

   August 17, 2010 at 4:59 pm

   Re “car focus”: interestingly, Pittsburgh is the only major US city without a mainline interstate (or two or three) running through its core.

   That is not to suggest Pittsburgh doesn’t have expressways downtown, only that it is “off the beaten path” of Western PA’s major through interstates (70, 76, and 79).

   Through traffic on those highways never catches a glimpse of the downtown as in all the other cities along the routes; the three highways effectively form a big “outer belt” around the edges of Allegheny County, 20-30 minutes out from downtown.

   —

   DUer, one way for Pittsburgh to intentionally align with the Midwest would be for Pitt to leave the Big East and to join the Big 10 conference.

   The city is only slightly closer to Philadelphia than to Indianapolis (home of the Big 10’s basketball and football playoffs).

   Athletic ties could lead to a higher “midwest-facing” profile (academic collaboration and increased interest in Pitt from Midwestern students) for a second Pennsylvania state university.
7. Stéphane Dumas says:

   August 17, 2010 at 7:45 pm

   @cdc guy: I spotted a interesting trivia from http://pittsburgh.pahighways.com/

   Originally, I-79 was supposed to pass thru downtown Pittsburgh while I-279 would had acted as the bypass but in the early 1970s, they switched places. I-76 beginned where I-279 continue its path north to reach the turnpike at Monroeville. The gap of the turnpike between I-80 and I-76 was known as “I-80S”, here a good link about it http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/pdi.html
8. west town ed says:

   August 17, 2010 at 9:41 pm

   I’m looking at my road atlas and I clearly see that the CBD of Pittsburgh is clearly crossed by north-south I-579 on the east side and north-south I-279 that passes through it to the west and both are connected by east-west I-376. [Actually, I don't really need the map as last summer I was on all three.]

   The “I” stands for “Interstate” and these roads are by strict federal definitions, limited-access, grade- and lane-separated expressways or freeways. What they are called depends on where you live.

   Off subject comment #1: Where do you have to stop at several traffic lights to continue on one of the major Interstates? [And why does it make so mad?]

   Off subject comment #2: I’m not sure the sign is still there but the underpass where Cicero Avenue passes under the Edens (aka I-94) Expressway in Chicago reads (or read) “Edens Superhighway.” Don’t you love it!
9. Alon Levy says:

   August 17, 2010 at 11:15 pm

   Yes, there are Interstates through Pittsburgh (as through every US city larger than Fresno and Bakersfield), but those are only spurs. The mainline routes, with two-digit numbers, bypass it.
10. BrianTH says:

    August 18, 2010 at 10:27 am

    A few random thoughts:

    (1) One of the reasons for the (perceived) Pittsburgh Paradox is simply that people don’t always realize the steel bust diaspora caused a demographic ripple effect. The steel bust disproportionately drove out young people–those without jobs yet or with little seniority–and left behind a cohort of middle-aged and older people. That uneven impact eventually threw off the birth/death ratio, with some extra retirement-related migration thrown into the mix as well. But the resulting effects on the topline demographic numbers didn’t reflect contemporaneous causes. Not that there weren’t other real, ongoing factors–like the relative lack of internationa immigration–but I do think the topline numbers have been a bit deceptive for a while now.

    (2) I’m convinced Pittsburgh’s way forward is to align neither with the Northeast Coast nor the Great Lakes region, but rather to embrace its “Paris of Appalachia” destiny. In other words, for a host of reasons relating to history, geography, economy, culture, and so on, I think there is a distinct highlands region in between the Northeast Coast and the Great Lakes, overlapping several states, of which Pittsburgh is the de facto capital city (in the same general way that Atlanta, Chicago, Boston, Denver, and so forth are de facto regional capitals).

    Now this isn’t a huge region, and overall it is somewhat sparsely populated compared to its neighborhoods, but Pittsburgh is unrivaled in this region (if you accept the regional definition I outlined). Therefore, I see no reason why a metro area of Pittsburgh’s current relative size couldn’t have a healthy future as the capital city of this region. That said, I agree with the poster above about being aggressive with respect to what you might call border disputes, such as bringing Youngstown and Warren into a Pittsburgh rather than Cleveland orbit.

    (3) I think Pittsburgh has gotten to the point where there may be few cities with as wide a disparity between the typical before and after impressions of first-time visitors. However, those before impressions are the legacy of not just recent decades, but well over a century of PIttsburgh’s history. So for quite a while, I think Pittsburgh needs to be thinking about how to use that powerful (albeit negative) brand image to its advantage. That isn’t an easy trick, but the point is that Pittsburgh can’t be aiming to be a poor man’s Portland, or even a poor man’s Minneapolis. It has to sell a vision built on its existing branding–and the good news is that this vision only has to capture the imagination of some small fraction of people in the U.S. and globally in order for Pittsburgh to return to a healthy demographic path.
11. Oliver says:

    August 18, 2010 at 10:33 am

    I was very impressed with Pittsburgh. My friends moved there from Cincinnati for Grad school. It is a wonderful place. The rolling hills and dense, walkable, old neighborhoods remind me very much of Cincinnati. The two cities are very much twins in that sense and I think that’s why I enjoy them both very much.
12. Jim Russell says:

    August 18, 2010 at 10:54 am

    I appreciate all the comments and I’m a bit surprised how positive all of them are. Perhaps the Pittsburgh Surprise is already a cliché.

    I agree with BrainTH that Pittsburgh should embrace its position as a regional leader. Actually, I think it is already the case. The eastern half of the Midwestern Rust Belt is a bit beyond the gravity of Chicago, but also a mountain range too far for the NYC-DC megalopolis.

    There’s ample evidence to support Pittsburgh as the capital of the Not Chicagoland region. More about such proof here:

    http://burghdiaspora.blogspot.com/2010/08/geographic-mobility-neighborhoods.html
13. cdc guy says:

    August 18, 2010 at 11:00 am

    west town ed: the route of I-70 runs as a non-expressway several blocks (on US30/Lincoln Highway) through Breezewood PA near its junction with I-76, the Pennsylvania Turnpike.

    —

    The main east-west “interstate” spur through Pittsburgh (I-376, Penn-Lincoln Parkway) connects to US22, a regional highway that connects Altoona PA with Steubenville, OH/Weirton, WV.

    It’s just not quite the same as being right on the highway that connects KC, St. Louis, Indianapolis, and Columbus with the east coast, or on one that’s the direct route from Toronto/Buffalo to the Carolinas and Florida.
14. Ed says:

    August 18, 2010 at 11:10 am

    “Pittsburgh prosperity isn’t tied to attracting new residents.”

    I think that is what the key to what is going on and why the path Pittsburgh is taking is very interesting.

    The focus seems to be on making the city a better place for the people who already live there, instead of attacting new residents.

    The norm for urban development in the US is to get people to move to your city, who will need new houses, schools, etc., which will create more jobs, which in turn will attact more people to move to your city, and so on. The expanded population also potentially boosts the cities’ political power, enabling its representatives to divert government money to the city, or at least prevent the diversion of the city’s taxpayer dollars to other cities.

    However, this model is essentially a ponzi scheme, and in the meantime even while the “boom” is happening, the people who were actually born in the city have to put up with increased crowding, strain on resources, disruption from all the new people moving in, and increased competition for jobs. Then the “boom” inevitably ends.

    In my city, New York, unfortunately the city government has completely embraced this model since at least 2001 and the quality of life has gradually but inexorably deteriorated. Ironically, one of the effects of the Pittsburgh model is that it is not feasible for me to move there myself -no jobs for me- but I admire their approach.
15. JoeP says:

    August 18, 2010 at 12:39 pm

    No, Appalachia is absolutely not the way to go. The city needs to continue to build on what is working for it now.
    However, being an alternative to the higher cost flat Eastern neighbors is somethng that the city should better exploit. Both urban and outdoorsy like Pacific Northwestern cities Seattle and Portland
16. BrianTH says:

    August 18, 2010 at 1:15 pm

    The dollar bill tracking methodology does indeed support the thesis: basically, it can’t decide whether to draw a line to the west of Pittsburgh or to the east of Pittsburgh, and the alternative is to instead draw both lines.

    But now we get to a branding issue. I happen to like the name Paris of Appalachia, but most people in Pittsburgh hate the idea of associating Pittsburgh with Appalachia–to them that word reeks of poverty, lack of education, lack of cities, and so forth. And they have a point: there is a real divide between Northeast Appalachia and Central-to-Southwest Appalachia, on all these measures and more.

    But whatever you call it, I think the concept is solid. And I continue to think we need to–and ultimately have little choice about–distinguishing ourselves from the cities of the Pacific Northwest. There is definitely some family resemblance there, but while we may well push for a person on a kayak to be one of our iconic images, I think in the background of that image has to be an overgrown steel mill along the banks of the river. Or something like that–the point is to embrace and utilize the existing Pittsburgh branding, and hopefully some people will think it is cooler that way.
17. cdc guy says:

    August 18, 2010 at 1:23 pm

    Brian TH, there is a legal definition for Appalachia that is much larger than the area you propose as Pittsburgh’s natural hinterland.

    From arc.gov: “The Appalachian Region, as defined in ARC’s authorizing legislation, is a 205,000-square-mile region that follows the spine of the Appalachian Mountains from southern New York to northern Mississippi. It includes all of West Virginia and parts of 12 other states: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. Forty-two percent of the Region’s population is rural, compared with 20 percent of the national population….

    The Region includes 420 counties in 13 states. It extends more than 1,000 miles, from southern New York to northeastern Mississippi, and is home to 24.8 million people.”

    I’d propose Western PA, Western MD, the northern two-thirds of WV, the old steel-and-coal cities of eastern Ohio (A-C-Y), and the Appalachian part of Ohio (east of a line from Athens to Zanesville to Canton) are Pittsburgh’s area of dominant influence. The problem is, Pittsburgh’s really the only decent-sized metro there.

    Chicago’s the center of a constellation of medium-to-large Midwest cities, and as Aaron has pointed out, that’s the root of its greatness.

    Pittsburgh has Erie, Johnstown, the Mon Valley, Morgantown, Wheeling, Sharon, and has to fight over A-C-Y with Cleveland. Being the capital of that mostly-rural part of Appalachia is a “so what?” The really serious assets are in Pittsburgh already. The talent draw from that region’s base will be pretty slim, unlike Chicago drawing the best and brightest from the smaller (but still large) Midwest metros.
    —

    I found a lot to like in Pittsburgh even back in the late 70’s and early 80’s while visiting relatives and friends who lived there. Especially Oakland, the area around Pitt and CMU. The good bones were very evident then, even in the dark shadows of the shut-down mills, but the urban-renewal downtown still hadn’t sprouted city life.

    And there is terrain, something not true of Midwestern metros. This is not to be dismissed: there is real outdoor adventure available on weekend trips from Pittsburgh. Mountain rapids, skiing, wilderness camping, hunting. East of the Rockies, this is rare in a large metro. It is a distinguising characteristic and could be a lifestyle/amenity set useful in talent attraction.
18. BrianTH says:

    August 18, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    Oh, and I honestly think the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh was a watershed moment in terms of popular narratives about the city. It seems like every conceivable media outlet presented its own variation on the “Pittsburgh, not nearly as awful as you think!” story (in part because the immediate reaction to the announcement was a more or less universal “Why Pittsburgh?!?”).

    But even though that is the popular media line on Pittsburgh these days, it hasn’t wiped out the old branding entirely. Indeed, that point is demonstrated by the fact that most of these stories even today still have to begin with an obligatory disclaimer about popular perceptions (“You probably think Pittsburgh is awful, dear reader, but actually . . .”).
19. BrianTH says:

    August 18, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    cdc guy,

    I agree Appalachia as a whole is way too large. In fact ARC itself divides up Appalachia into subregions based on various factors, and what we are talking about is really only the Northern region:

    http://www.arc.gov/research/MapsofAppalachia.asp?MAP_ID=31

    But good luck getting people in Pittsburgh to accept even “Northern Appalachia”.

    As for the lack of other major cities–I’m not sure that is a problem. Denver, for example, is in the same situation, and I don’t think anyone would think it is improper for Denver to view itself as a regional capital. I also think it is important to note that while there are not that many people in Pittsburgh’s region, it still has some other notable resources, like a strategic location, plenty of water, shale gas, and so on.

    Of course PIttsburgh isn’t going to become Chicago that way, but that’s OK–I see no plausible path for Pittsburgh reaching that relative status anyway. But as others are suggesting above, Pittsburgh can become a very nice, quite prosperous on a per capita basis, place without attaining such relative status. It probably needs at least a little population growth and a little more international immigration to keep things moving along, but other than that I think it can focus on quality over quantity and do quite well for itself.
20. Jim Russell says:

    August 18, 2010 at 1:44 pm

    cdc guy,

    Pittsburgh’s sphere of influence is much bigger than you delineate. As Richard Longworth has described, Michigan can be split down the middle in terms of the influence of Chicago and Detroit. Columbus is definitely in Pittsburgh’s orbit. So is Cleveland. I could see Cincinnati/Dayton and even Louisville ending up in “Pittsburghland”. I think that’s where Detroit will end up (ceding its regional capital status to rising Pittsburgh).

    How Longworth has grappled with defining the Midwest really opened my eyes to the multiple regions that make up the Rust Belt. He excludes Appalachia from his area of discussion, cutting states such as Indiana and Ohio in half. He ends up with Chicago’s hinterlands along with Detroit’s hinterlands. Pittsburgh and Western PA is excluded. You have to draw the line somewhere.

    I imagine the Eastern half of Longworth’s Midwest plus Northern Appalachia will comprise Pittsburgh’s region of gravity. I suppose Chicago could fill the vacuum left by Detroit, but I don’t think that will happen. I think we’ve seen the furthest advance of Chicago’s influence.
21. cdc guy says:

    August 18, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    Jim, Longworth isn’t up to date on Indiana. Only the southern third or quarter of Indiana is Appalachian anymore…it was never legally defined so anyway, even though its history would clearly suggest otherwise.

    The second ring of counties out from Indianapolis (south of I-70, an area that includes Columbus, Bloomington, Greensburg, Rushville) is more urban than rural in economic activity and spirit, and is now the exurban fringe of Indianapolis; most of that area is part of its CSA.

    With the dramatic shrinkage of the Big 3, Detroit has already lost its status as the capital of the car-part region outside of Michigan (NW Ohio, NE and North Central Indiana). Indiana’s successful and growing auto industry (Subaru, Toyota, Honda) is largely Japanese assembly plants and suppliers not subject to Big 3 or UAW command, control, and dominance. Likewise Ohio’s (Honda).

    —

    There is no earthly way that Columbus is in Pittsburgh’s sphere. That line I suggested from Athens to Zanesville to Canton is a hard line of current and actual differences between Appalachia and Midwest. One might quibble and put its southern point at Portsmouth instead of Athens, but it’s a hard line.

    In reality, all kinds of geographic, economic, and social lines converge there: where does the Columbus-Pittsburgh migration flow divide? Where would one draw a line of balance between Pitt/CMU and OSU in student attraction, alumni concentration and employer preference in hiring? A line of speech patterns? Dominant terrain? Ag-market flows? King Coal influence? Old-media (TV and newspaper) ADI, including the “local” channels on sat and cable systems? Bank market share? Logistics? Drive-to-fly zone? It’s really pretty close to I-77 and it’s not moving west.

    The Pittsburgh CSA is 2.4 million. Columbus is 2.0, Cincinnati 2.2, with another 1 million in Dayton. That’s pretty heavy economic and social gravity centered on the Columbus/Dayton/Cincinnati triangle, and the CSAs are effectively contiguous.

    It’s just not likely that Pittsburgh’s dominant zone could ever extend that far past I-77 into Ohio. The combination of Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati outweighs Pgh by too much; the three share a common (non-Appalachian) Midwest ag-industrial heritage and (not a small thing) a state government legal/regulatory regime.

    I’d suggest that if Pitt ends up in the Big 10, it will be a sign that the opposite of your conjecture would be occurring: Pittsburgh pulled more into the Midwestern constellation, one of a cluster of second-tier metros.
22. JoeP says:

    August 18, 2010 at 3:53 pm

    I would say that I-77 is a good line, but in reality I think the influence takes a hard stop at the border counties (which are heavily in the sphere). By this I mean the Upper Ohio Valley, from Belmont county OH (adjacent to Wheeling WV) up through Steubenville, East Liverpool and then to Youngtown which has ties to both Pittsburgh and its Northeastern Ohio neighbors.

    I think that’s fine. The city’s Eastern ties I think are where the potential is.
23. Jim Russell says:

    August 18, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    “There is no earthly way that Columbus is in Pittsburgh’s sphere. That line I suggested from Athens to Zanesville to Canton is a hard line of current and actual differences between Appalachia and Midwest. One might quibble and put its southern point at Portsmouth instead of Athens, but it’s a hard line.”

    It’s not a hard line, but it is a cultural shatterbelt of some importance. The pull of Detroit on Northern Appalachia is well documented. There is a large region where the cosmopolitan Midwesterners grew up turning up their noses at the Hilljacks. Ever encounter the term Ypsitucky?

    There is strong talent churn in the Pittsburgh-Columbus-Cleveland triangle. Columbus is definitely on the radar of Pittsburgh college graduates. As for Cleveland-Akron/Canton-Youngstown-Pittsburgh, it is functionally one labor market. There is no migration flow divide between Cleveland and Pittsburgh. None. There really isn’t one between Columbus and Pittsburgh, either. However, you might think of the two regions overlapping somewhere in Southeastern Ohio. I’m sure we could find a line in the commuter-sheds.

    You overlook the economic and social gravity of the TechBelt. This entire urban corridor has strong ties to Columbus. I would suggest that it is Columbus that could bring Dayton and Cincinnati into Pittsburgh’s orbit. Columbus and Cleveland could do the same for Detroit. Detroit already looks to Pittsburgh, not Chicago, for a way forward.

    There’s more, so much more. I’ve been studying the various regional possibilities for over 4-years. Where do you draw the line concerning Chicago’s gravity? To me, that’s the main question.
24. BuckeyeShadow says:

    August 18, 2010 at 7:30 pm

    Pittsburgh is a bit too far from the East Coast to have any meaningful gravity/association with it, save the fact that it exists within an East Coast state. If state boundaries were dissolved, this tie would also disappear. Geographically, economically and culturally, there really isn’t any major or meaningful connection between the two regions.

    Also, concerning the Midwest, I see Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis and Indianapolis as being individually, if not collectively distinct in terms of economy and culture (e.g. “Great Lakes West”) from Detroit, Flint, Toledo, Cleveland, Akron-Canton, Youngstown, Warren and Pittsburgh (e.g. “Great Lakes East”). The latter cities, of course, make up the traditional Industrial Belt and have suffered through very similar troubles throughout the Rust Belt Era. Chicago, Minneapolis, et. al., meanwhile, never endured anywhere near the same level of enduring economic hardship or population loss, and actually made full recoveries. No such recovery ever happened for the Rust Belt cities, although Pittsburgh is showing promising signs of having turned the corner at long last.

    Great Lakes East, then, can and should stand apart from GLW and the East Coast. Pittsburgh will certainly lead the Reset charge, although I don’t quite see it emerging and surging ahead as a “Second Chicago/Regional Capital” or even necessarily absorbing Youngstown and Warren into its orbit, away from Cleveland. The Youngstown-Warren area is already an economic and cultural bridge between Cleveland and Pittsburgh, and has been for a very long time, through good and bad times.

    What I can see happening instead is an emerging regional partnership/network of Reset cities. Pittsburgh’s economic successes lead to investment in the Youngstown-Warren area, and eventually Cleveland as well as Akron-Canton, reinvigorating each of these places. If Cleveland in particular can get its act together, it could rival Pittsburgh in many aspects, but an economic partnership would still be in both cities’ best interests (think hospitals and medicine). Meanwhile, if Detroit follows Pittsburgh’s model, it will see a similar reset that will lead to new investment in Flint and Toledo, eventually bringing the two ends of GLE together.

    Now for Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati. I didn’t include Columbus earlier as its emergence on the scene as a significant economic and cultural destination is fairly recent. Columbus also never experienced the economic hardships and mass population/demographic exodus that its GLE neighbors did, and in fact much more closely resembles Indianapolis or even a Sun Belt city like Austin in terms of economics, demographics and growth than it does Pittsburgh or Cleveland. Cincinnati to me also seems more akin to a GLW city like Milwaukee or Minneapolis than it resembles a traditional GLE/RB city. Dayton, on the other hand, has suffered both the loss of industry and population similar to a Rust Belt town, but as part of the extended Cincinnati metropolitan area, it isn’t usually associated with them.

    Columbus’ successes have made it a magnet for many younger people from Cleveland and Pittsburgh, but the cultural and economic lines that separate Columbus from Cleveland or Columbus from Pittsburgh are still pretty strong and significant (as opposed to the line between Cleveland and Pittsburgh, which is there but almost non-existant). Perhaps it would help if there were a “Youngstown” of sorts between Cleveland and Columbus or Pittsburgh and Columbus that could serve as a “bridge city.” The closest thing to this that exists, however, is Mansfield between Cleveland and Columbus, and to an even smaller degree, Zanesville between Columbus and Pittsburgh, but both cities are very small and isolated. At best, this would take several decades of investment and development, which in the end might never truly achieve the desired result.
25. Alon Levy says:

    August 18, 2010 at 10:02 pm

    The problem with marketing Pittsburgh to Easterners is that it doesn’t have anything that the East Coast doesn’t. It has scenic mountains, but so do the Hudson Valley, Harrisburg, and most of New England. If I wanted, I could take Metro-North from Manhattan and go hike parts of the Appalachian Trail, with mountains rising 45 degrees from the water. It has a low cost of living, but so do all cities that aren’t New York, Washington, and Boston. If I care about proximity to the East Coast cities I’ll move to Trenton or Bridgeport, and if I care about low cost to the exclusion of all else I’ll move to Houston.

    From the Midwest, it’s different. Pittsburgh is close to Columbus and Cleveland, much more so than to Philadelphia – and the terrain is less mountainous, in case anyone ever wants to build a modern rail connection. The Midwest already has a large contingent of people who don’t think just in terms of access to Chicago; connections to the smaller Midwestern cities work fine, too. Driving west you don’t have to deal with the Turnpike or with New York’s traffic jams.
26. Aaron M. Renn says:

    August 18, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    If you look at migration patterns, the orientation is clear: Pittsburgh is aligned to the East Coast nexus. From 2000-2008, Pittsburgh’s top migration (circulation) was with:

    #1 – Washington, DC
    #2 – Philadelphia
    #3 – New York
    #4 – Youngstown
    #5 – Cleveland
    #6 – Eire, PA
    #7 – Miami
    #8 – Tampa-St. Petersburg
    #9 – Columbus
    #10 – Chicago

    DC, Philly and NYC all have more than double the level of Chicago, the Midwest’s capital city.

    Of the 12 Midwest metros I track, Pittsburgh has the lowest migration with Chicago of any other than Louisville, KY (which most say isn’t a Midwest city either).
27. Jim Russell says:

    August 18, 2010 at 11:52 pm

    Pittsburgh attracts a lot of refugees from NYC and, particularly, DC. The economic and cultural connections with NYC are too numerous to recount here. More importantly is the use of Pittsburgh by East Coast cities as a gateway to points West.

    Using the type of migration data that Aaron details, West of Columbus is beyond the Pittsburgh pale. Flint, Ann Arbor, Detroit (not to forget Windsor and the industrial valley to that city’s north), Toledo, Dayton, and Cincinnati are up for grabs (roughly the I-75 corridor). Meaning that will it be Pittsburgh or Chicago acting as East Coast liaison for those cities? I can see Pittsburgh staking a strong claim. Maybe the I-75 corridor will develop on its own.

    Just food for thought.
28. BrianTH says:

    August 19, 2010 at 12:01 am

    More random thoughts:

    (1) I’m not sure any major Ohio cities are currently in the same region with Pittsburgh, but I wouldn’t mind pursuing Columbus. It is very different and potentially complementary, and I sense Columbus might see things the same way.

    (2) I think Aaron’s migration patterns are consistent with the own-region hypothesis.

    (3) I actually don’t think there are any Northeast Coast cities with the same combination of amenities and low cost of living (particularly low cost of housing, and even more particularly low cost of historic, centrally-located housing in safe walkable neighborhoods) as Pittsburgh. I certainly looked around, and I couldn’t find any. Alon seemed to imply that cities like Philly and Baltimore are equally low cost, but that is definitely not the case.

    Basically, the steel bust insulated Pittsburgh from the urban gentrification wave that hit the East Coast and most other older U.S. cities in the 1980s/90s. So Pittsburgh’s current dynamic is basically just what these other cities went through 20-25 years ago.

    So I’d put it like this to East Coasties. If you have always regretted not having the chance (or missing your chance) to buy into Brooklyn circa 1990, consider Pittsburgh (not a precise claim, but you get the point).
29. Alon Levy says:

    August 19, 2010 at 12:10 am

    I don’t think Pittsburgh is as expensive as Philly and Baltimore. However, I do think it’s as expensive as Trenton, Bridgeport, Newark, and Yonkers, and much further away from any of the centers of East Coast activity. Beyond a certain distance, it’s all flight distance anyway, in which case Pittsburgh has no advantage over Houston.
30. BrianTH says:

    August 19, 2010 at 5:54 am

    I don’t know about all those cities being comparable in expense (the median home price is under $130K in the Pittsburgh metro, and I believe at least Bridgeport and Newark, despite recent declines, are still considerably higher than that). But in any event, these places aren’t comparable to Pittsburgh in their own right.

    So it is true that if you would rather be a long drive (or perhaps train ride) away from a major East Coast city than in the heart of Pittsburgh, perhaps you won’t see the value proposition. But the pitch would be directed at East Coasties who wish they could afford to be centrally located in a major city.

    It is also true that the generic form of this pitch could be offered in favor of some other major cities, such as some Texas cities. But those Texas cities are much more different from the major East Coast cities in many ways: history, culture, housing stock, politics, climate, typical neighborhood patterns, and so on. So they may be a viable choice for East Coasties looking for a big change, but Pittsburgh would be available for those looking for something a lot more similar to the major cities that they know, just much less expensive.
31. Vin says:

    August 19, 2010 at 9:51 am

    Trenton, Bridgeport, Newark and Yonkers are all quite far from the centers of their respective metro areas, as BrianTH pointed out. Though Pittsburgh is much smaller than New York and Philadelphia, I still think it’s not really fair to compare a peripheral city to a central city.

    Also, with possible exception of Yonkers (which is semi-suburban), all of those places have rather well-deserved reputations for being unsafe places to live. Having never been to Pittsburgh, I can’t really say how they’d compare in this regard, but my guess is that there is a larger selection of safe neighborhoods in Pittsburgh than in Newark, Trenton or Bridgeport.
32. cdc guy says:

    August 19, 2010 at 4:06 pm

    Jim, Zanesville is an Appalachian coal town which happens to be in Ohio halfway between Pittsburgh and Columbus. It is far more like the Mon Valley or Upper Ohio Valley than like the Scioto Valley. Just a few miles west of there, the terrain levels out as I-70 straightens and stretches into Midwest farmland and plains…and stays that way for about 1,300 miles.

    There is no question (in geographic economics) that edges and boundaries and leftover splinters are always interesting. Clearly Pittsburgh is capital of its own rural, river-and-mountain region; Zanesville’s the western edge.

    Pittsburgh is in Pennsylvania, but within the state it’s far outweighed by Philadelphia (four of the last six governors from Eastern PA, two from Pittsburgh). It’s far different in culture, history, speech, and surroundings.

    Regardless of what’s going on in downtown Pittsburgh or its universities, the city is where it is, and it’s surrounded by what’s around it: rural Appalachia. It can’t physically, socially or economically escape it.

    —

    “There is strong talent churn in the Pittsburgh-Columbus-Cleveland triangle. Columbus is definitely on the radar of Pittsburgh college graduates.”

    Aaron has documented the the “talent churn” is more in the Pittsburgh-Erie-Cleveland triangle, including Youngstown. Columbus is pretty far down that list for its proximity; Philadelphia, DC and NYC are much further away and higher on the list.

    Aaron doesn’t say which way the net-migration arrow points. If it’s toward Columbus, Columbus is taking people and talent from Pittsburgh, not exactly proof that Columbus is in or entering Pittsburgh’s orbit. Maybe the opposite.

    Columbus is most probably on the radar of Pittsburgh college graduates because (1) OSU is big and has grad schools, particularly in engineering, which would attract CMU undergrads; (2) there is actual job and population growth in Columbus; and (3) Pittsburgh is a net exporter of college grads, like every other city with lots of colleges and universities.

    Jim, there’s just no real economic evidence of significant Pittsburgh influence over Columbus. If Aaron put up the rank of migration partners for Columbus, I’d expect that Cleveland, Dayton, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and probably also Chicago would rank above Pittsburgh on that list.
33. JoeP says:

    August 19, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    Appalachia is just location. That’s it. There is no relevant quality and certainly no positive one. Additionally there is no branding advantage or reason why it might be part of Pittsburgh’s future. When focusing on the city and region, it’s best to ignore it, because it’s both negative and irrelevant. It’s the ties (churn or any other aspect) that the region has with DC, Baltimore and Philly that matter, not the coal towns or Zanesville.
34. Alon Levy says:

    August 19, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    Pittsburgh’s crime rate is actually one of the highest in the country; the city’s murder rate is the same as Newark and Trenton’s, about 50% higher than Bridgeport’s, and 5 times that of Yonkers.

    While many of those other cities are secondary cities, they’re still large centers in their own right. This is especially true for Newark, which has a large CBD with a commuter shed not much smaller than Pittsburgh’s. Yonkers is more suburban, but even it has a largish downtown, plus a way lower crime rate and a way better school system than any city with its poverty rate should have.

    Finally, you’re right that Houston is a big cultural change for any East Coaster. However, the same could be said about Pittsburgh. The climate may be similar, but the politics and culture aren’t. Pennsylvania has lax gun restrictions. Diversity is just black/white. And in terms of metro area Obama vote share, Pittsburgh (53%) is actually closer to Houston (48%) than to the East Coast metro areas (61-67%), if I remember correctly.

    In a lot of ways, Pittsburgh is somehow sandwiched between moving to another region and staying in the Northeast. It’s not really Northeastern, but reminds one of the East Coast somewhat more than Texas does. It’s a viable strategy if and only if the city can expect to keep having a good spot in the middle.
35. Jim Russell says:

    August 19, 2010 at 4:31 pm

    “Pittsburgh is a net exporter of college grads, like every other city with lots of colleges and universities.”

    Pittsburgh is a net IMPORTER of college grads.

    “Columbus is pretty far down that list for its proximity; Philadelphia, DC and NYC are much further away and higher on the list.”

    Proximity isn’t the only variable you should consider. Population size is also important. The bigger the city, the more people it should attract and export.

    Concerning the migration data, Columbus ranks 7th for sending people to Pittsburgh. It’s 9th in terms of attracting people from Pittsburgh. For Pittsburgh, Columbus is an important migration partner. Those are strong ties.

    Columbus undoubtedly has strong migration ties with Cleveland and Youngstown. The ties of those two cities to Pittsburgh is well understood, beyond dispute. Pittsburgh sends about the same number of people to Cleveland as it does Columbus.

    But if you go further west, then the migration connection disappears. Next stop Chicago before you run into another city that has a strong migration exchange with Pittsburgh. Columbus is the last stop for proximity relocation. It’s the western edge of Pittsburgh’s gravity, not Zanesville.
36. cdc guy says:

    August 19, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    Jim, The question (when one asserts that Columbus is in Pittsburgh’s zone of influence) is not Pittsburgh’s migration dance partners. I was suggesting to look at which cities are COLUMBUS’ most important migration partners.

    Pittsburgh, I suspect, is probably behind other Midwestern cities on Columbus’ list. That would indicate less “gravity” pulling Columbus (and its talent) east toward Pittsburgh and more to the north, west, and south…especially so if Indianapolis is a bigger partner than Pittsburgh, because it is both smaller and further away. If this is so, it would verify a weak attraction at best between Cbus and Pgh.

    Circumscribing your argument with limits of “proximity migration” weakens the case further. Some people will always be willing to move one city over, so they can stay reasonably close to family and friends. When “one city over” is lower on the list than places two or three cities over in different directions, then how can one claim a significant tie between the adjoiners or dominance by one?

    That Pittsburgh-Columbus migration is really just background noise, not trend, tie, or domination of any kind. Columbus is low on Pittsburgh’s list compared to Erie, Cleveland, and especially Philadelphia…Pittsburgh’s other “next cities over”. I’d assert that it is ONLY there because it’s the next metro west.

    That demonstrates to me that Pittsburgh is really tied east by Philadelphia’s gravity, something I’m sure Pittsburghers are loath to acknowledge.

    The Zanesville argument is more about the gravity of each city: at what point do people equally head east and west for “their” airports, major medical treatment, newspapers, “local” TV?

    It’s not a bad thing, but I think it reinforces an argument that Pittsburgh is unlikely to be the “first city” of any defined construct other than Northern Appalachia (western boundary I-77), and that it has relatively weak ties to the Eastern Great Lakes cities. It won’t be the “first city of Pennsylvania” (far more people and a bigger and better higher-education complex in Philly). Neither will significant non-Appalachian chunks of Ohio (other than Youngstown) be tied tightly to it.
37. Jim Russell says:

    August 19, 2010 at 6:23 pm

    cdc guy,

    Without a doubt, Pittsburgh is oriented towards the East Coast. The ties to DC are substantial, arguably the most significant. For a variety of reasons, I don’t expect Pittsburgh to rival Philadelphia for the title of PA’s first city. All of that has little to do with our discussion.

    “When “one city over” is lower on the list than places two or three cities over in different directions, then how can one claim a significant tie between the adjoiners or dominance by one?”

    How? Because of the number of migrants moving between the two cities. That the connection with DC is stronger doesn’t mean that the connection with Columbus isn’t significant. You are confusing relative strength of connectivity with absolute strength of connectivity. The reasons behind the connectivity strength are immaterial. The point is that it exists.

    Regardless, Indianapolis would be a good test case for RELATIVE strength of connectivity. Which city churns more people with Columbus?
38. Aaron M. Renn says:

    August 19, 2010 at 6:42 pm

    Gross migration between Columbus is higher with Pittsburgh than Indy, but only by 19% (99-00 to 07-08). But Pittsburgh MSA is 35% larger than Indy and the two cities are almost equidistant to Columbus.
39. Jim Russell says:

    August 19, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    Aaron,

    Just for giggles, does Pittsburgh or Indianapolis attract more migrants from Columbus? (over same time period)
40. Aaron M. Renn says:

    August 19, 2010 at 6:48 pm

    It’s almost a wash. Indy gets 5% more migrants from Columbus than Pittsburgh does.
41. Jim Russell says:

    August 19, 2010 at 6:52 pm

    Thanks. That’s very interesting. I take it that relative to Pittsburgh, Indy doesn’t send many to Columbus.
42. Aaron M. Renn says:

    August 19, 2010 at 7:09 pm

    Indy sends a reasonably healthy amount to Columbus. More than it does to St. Louis, for example. (Indy sends almost nobody to Pittsburgh). But by simple math it’s obvious Pittsburgh sends more.
43. west town ed says:

    August 19, 2010 at 9:57 pm

    Introductory notes: (1) although I have lived in Chicago for more than 42 years, I was born and spent the first 27 years of my life within an easy drive of Columbus, Ohio; (2) I have a younger brother who has ranged further afield but who spent 7 years in Pittsburgh (at Pitt for his PhD in computer science — it was supposed to take 3-4 but…) and has now lived in Columbus for an equal number of years. (3) My brother (and his wife) are two of my favorite people in the whole world and also two of the smartest people I have ever known, and I will go out of my way to spend time with them wherever they are. And I have.

    So…

    Pitt and CMU produce professionals of the highest caliber in the country but when they graduate, they must move elsewhere because the (smallish) economy in the area can not provide them with jobs which are equal with their superb education. And I don’t have any ideals on how either private or governmental institutions in eastern Pennsylvania can really change this when in these times when there’s no money from either sector to do anything.

    If you want an urban experience — as I do — there is no comparison between what you will find in Pittsburgh and Columbus. Columbus is “nice” but mostly a suburb with a very large embedded state government and university presence but Pittsburgh, to me, feels like a real city and that may be why it’s more east coast than midwest.

    As an aside: I wish someone would explain to me why having a two-digit interstate running through the center of a city is more important than having a three-digit one if they are built to the same standard.
44. BrianTH says:

    August 20, 2010 at 9:37 am

    One has to be careful with crime statistics. Alon Levy didn’t provide any citations, but I suspect he may be looking at City of Pittsburgh statistics. The City of Pittsburgh happens to be on the low side in terms of geographic size, and thus on the low side in terms of how of the urbanized area and metro area population it covers. Thus you are not necessarily doing an apples to apples comparison if you compare only City statistics.

    If you instead look at the entire MSA, Pittsburgh actually ranks reasonably low in terms of violent crime rates, particularly given its relative size. For example, in this aggregation:

    http://www.crimetrends.com/id4.html

    . . . it is #189 out of 311 metro areas, right after Rochester, NY. I’m not sure if anyone has done the same thing for just the core urbanized area, but I strongly suspect Pittsburgh would also fare reasonably well if one did.
45. cdc guy says:

    August 20, 2010 at 10:01 am

    Ed, people are visual, and visual impressions matter. One important way people experience other places is by driving through them; we’re a car-based society. But people almost never end up driving through Pittsburgh on the way to some other city. (You have to go there on purpose.) It may not be major, but it is something.
    —

    “Indy gets 5% more migrants from Columbus than Pittsburgh does”; this is on a smaller base, over a comparable distance.

    Churn is one thing; actual relative migration is another. Though it’s a relatively weak attraction, Indy has for the past 10 years pulled on Columbus migrants harder than Pittsburgh has, despite being a 20% smaller CSA. (I think CSA is a better proxy for economic area of dominant influence for a city than MSA.)

    Jim, this pretty clearly cuts against an argument that Pittsburgh is pulling Columbus into its orbit. If the trend reverses, you’ll have a case. If Pitt joins the Big 10, it will really jolt the status quo and make things interesting.
46. BrianTH says:

    August 20, 2010 at 10:24 am

    Oh, and although I do think East Coasties would find Pittsburgh more familiar than Texas, I would agree they are still moving into a distinct region with notable differences. I think it would be roughly comparable to Californians moving to Denver.

    On the other hand, I think the relatively strong family resemblance, given that these are two distinct regions, is fairly robust. It is embedded in the history, built environment, cultural institutions, to some extent the language and the people–not things which change quickly.
47. Monongahela Goner says:

    August 20, 2010 at 10:52 am

    Yeah, not sure where you’re getting your crime numbers.
    Pittsburgh is ranked #227 on this list (FBI stats), between Santa Rosa and Sioux Falls. Newark is #155.
    http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2009/MetroCrime2009_Rank_Rev.pdf

    The city’s relatively low crime rate is always cited as a reason Pgh. keeps coming out on top of those “Most Liveable Cities” rankings…
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10124/1055313-53.stm
48. Alon Levy says:

    August 20, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    I’m getting the numbers from the UCR, posted here. The list is only for cities with 250,000 people or more, but you can follow links to get lower-population cities. Pittsburgh turns out to have the same murder rate as Newark, which is also small and surrounded by safer suburbs.

    The FBI explicitly rejected the ranked list of overall crime rates, on the grounds that it doesn’t distinguish more serious crimes from less serious crimes. (I’d add that you shouldn’t trust the reported numbers for anything other than murder and auto theft, which are universally reported.)

    Yes, Pittsburgh looks better if you look at the metro area. But the Pittsburgh suburbs lose all the central-city advantage, and are also culturally different from East Coast suburbs: for one, excluding the city, the metro area is about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.
49. west town ed says:

    August 20, 2010 at 9:45 pm

    I wonder sometimes if crime statistics accurately reflect the quality of life in any city, in this case, Pittsburgh.

    Specifically, where do these crimes, especially murder, happen and who are the perpetrators and who are the victims and what, if anything, is the relationship between the perpetrators and their victims?

    I may be wrong but unless you know a lot of murder-prone friends (or relatives) or unless you venture into a part of town that is known to be dangerous at the wrong time you are unlikely to be a victim of random violence.
50. Alon Levy says:

    August 20, 2010 at 10:34 pm

    I don’t know the statistics for Pittsburgh, but nationwide, about two thirds of solved murders are committed by someone known to the victim according to the UCR. However, since many murders are unsolved, the actual numbers may be different; murders committed by strangers may be more difficult to solve than murders committed by nonstrangers.

    However, there’s a point to using murder as the primary statistic, because it’s so strongly correlated with other violent crimes, which, other than sexual assault, are usually committed by strangers.

    It would be interesting to check whether murder is a stronger correlate of the violent crime rate than the reported violent crime rate. This could be checked by going to crime surveys; while the National Crime Victimization Survey’s sample size is too small to reliably estimate the rates in small cities, we could check states or large cities. Unfortunately I don’t know of any public state-level NCVS data or of any local-level data except for New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles.