You can, but other people would rather have a smaller home/apartment in NY or SF in exchange for living in those places, since they are considered to be more desirable.
OT: Pittsburgh's "Best City" status & the resulting conversation we have 2-3 times/year
- Thread starter pittpitt
- Start date
You can, but other people would rather have a smaller home/apartment in NY or SF in exchange for living in those places, since they are considered to be more desirable.
My daughter recently visited a college classmate's family in NYC. The family is pretty wealthy. My daughter was shocked at how "tiny" their house was. She couldn't believe it.
OK, you're confusing me. You specifically said affordability should be left of as a criteria, but then you wan an "entire" picture. ???????
I am confusing myself too.
I think the root of what I am trying to say is that many of these lists weigh affordability too heavily, mainly home prices. To one person, cheap housing might be the biggest factor in determining a place as livable. To another, being able to do lots of stuff outside all year round is considered to be more livable. I think some of these lists showing 'most livable' cities are really just showing the most affordable cities not named Detroit.
Did you stop to think that perhaps for the majority of folks out there, affordability does mean something? And you almost have to make that assumption as it appears to be a mainstay in city rankings, regardless of the source.I am confusing myself too.
I think the root of what I am trying to say is that many of these lists weigh affordability too heavily, mainly home prices. To one person, cheap housing might be the biggest factor in determining a place as livable. To another, being able to do lots of stuff outside all year round is considered to be more livable. I think some of these lists showing 'most livable' cities are really just showing the most affordable cities not named Detroit.
You know how many people in SF have been forced to the East Bay or farther out? You should see what people are living in inside SF. It is not their preference. It is definitely a negative. If you don't have a rent controlled apartment or aren't a making major 6 digits, you are screwed. Seriously.
Other than that HUGE negative, SF is one of the best cities in the world to which few cities, including, Pittsburgh can compare.
But Pittsburgh is well deserving of its rankings and not just because of affordability.
Last edited:
I agree that it means something for most people, myself included. I don't think it should be as big of a factor as it seems to be on many of these lists.
I kind of get HTPs point, these lists seem to always have affordability very high on the list.. It's obvious cities like SF, LA, CHic, NY are the best cities but never appear on these lists as cities like Pittsburgh and your typical "under the radar" cities like KC, mainly because of affordability. It's kind of a list of "best bang for your buck" instead of Best cities to live in..
I guess I'm still missing the point. It's your opinion that all cities outside of NYC, LA, SF, Chicago can't really be the "best". I love Chicago. it's my husbands hometown. But I also see first hand every trip what a grind it is because of the real estate prices and the sacrifices his siblings have had to make. So for us, when we could have lived anywhere, we chose to raise our kids here in Pittsburgh. So again for us, Pittsburgh IS the best. See how that works?
Agreed. The precise reason those cities are so significantly less affordable is that they are more desirable, for whatever reason. The reasons ... culture, weather ... don't really matter either. The desirability raises the cost. They are "better".
Compare to expensive places that are mostly so because they have some limitations such as remote, difficult location. NY or SF are relatively easy to get to and ship things to. Yet still highly expensive. That signals "desirability".
The list really should be called "cities with the highest value" that weighs amenities and costs with some kind of formula. Because otherwise, yes, those costlier cities would always be at the top.
I just had a new house built this year. It is about 3200 Sg Ft, red brick front, in a nice neighborhood but not Fox Chapel, USC nice....and showed a coworker who has the same position as I do some pictures and he was astounded. He looked at me, "how can you afford that"? And I mentioned, "you live in Connecticut in the NYC suburbs, I live in the Pittsburgh suburbs, the house is probably the same price as yours".
So again, there is that.
I rented in MD, in a town called Poolesville. About 30 miles NW of DC. Anyways, I lived in a townhouse and the one right next to me, connected btw, sold for 230k. A townhouse, with zero storage, sold for almost 1/4 million dollars.. This is a townhouse that I cut the grass with a weed-wacker.. Housing in these cities just don't make sense to me.. Brother lived out in Huntington beach area.. 1 million dollar homes with a side yard that didn't exist. Imagine spending 1 million dollars and being able to touch the side of your house and your neighbors AT THE SAME TIME.. It's just weird to me.. For that reason alone, Pittsburgh is a great place to live. Affordability, very good school districts, and of course incredible college football.
NYC is chock full of folks who CAN'T get out. There are millions there living in hellholes because they can't afford anything else. Same with all the big-name cities. They've been conditioned to accept their fate. It's not like the bulk of residents have season tix to the MET.....those are for the rich folks, or suburbanites. If you live in Pgh, you can enjoy lots more of everything because your housing costs are low.
Agree with a lot of these thoughts.
I live in Regent Square, which is a great neighborhood. Easy access to the parkway, 4 bus routes to downtown, an ample yard for my dog to sniff around, and it is a 2 block stroll to get to Frick Park. I pay less than $1,000 in rent. In a bigger city, there is zero chance that a guy like me would be able to afford those kinds of features.
I live in Regent Square, which is a great neighborhood. Easy access to the parkway, 4 bus routes to downtown, an ample yard for my dog to sniff around, and it is a 2 block stroll to get to Frick Park. I pay less than $1,000 in rent. In a bigger city, there is zero chance that a guy like me would be able to afford those kinds of features.
And plenty of people live there because they love that city and wouldn't want to live anywhere else.
Exactly my point. Too many people interpret these lists to mean that Pittsburgh is the greatest city in the world. Spoiler alert.... It isn't.
I would even argue that the average home price is not a good indicator, as many neighborhoods that bring down that average are not desireable. It's why developers are putting up new apartment buildings with relatively expensive rent (for Pittsburgh). Many people would rather spend $2000 a month for a small apartment then $600 a month on a large house in an 'up and coming' neighborhood.
I don't know. I bet it is very affordable. What is the unemployment rate? If it is decent then it's one of the best places to live!
Last edited:
I would counter that plenty of people live there because there are more jobs. Period. It would be interesting to survey a city like NYC, high end to low end and find out if people could keep their job if they'd move.
There are plenty of people living there sharing apartments without great jobs. They want the lifestyle.
Nope. Plenty of transplants doing this. They want to be in that city, despite crappy living conditions. Willing to make the trade off.
I think you hit on an important point with regards to what type of lifestyle people want. The Pittsburgh supporters often say things like "I can afford a bigger house than I could elsewhere, but I can still drive into downtown in 15-20 minutes or to the beach at Lake Erie in 2 hours," and this makes sense as a positive statement of why Pittsburgh is a good place to live. To others, this doesn't sound like an enjoyable situation at all because they are more interested in a shared experience that is immediate to them (think parks, transportation, libraries, interactions with various types of people on a daily basis...not necessarily shared living situation).
If a city's amenities are immediate to you and are part of your daily life, your thoughts about them will be very different than someone who sees a dense part of a city as a destination for special events; these thoughts will be especially different in regards to how many amenities there are and how varied they are. I live in a city with a few nice playhouses that I might catch something at a couple times a year, but if I was someone who valued staged cultural events more, this would be hell due to the lack of choices compared to at least 10 other cities. A lot of posters on here have referenced Pittsburgh's Cultural District, but most larger cities have so many art & cultural areas/spots that people who live in that city don't even associate a part of town that gives itself that name as the place to go for those experiences. Example: My city has a neighborhood that calls itself the Arts District, and there are arts events there everyone is aware of, but very few locals who are into art at all would feel they had to take an inquisitive visitor there. Art is just much more integrated into the city and most people's daily experiences for a single destination to mean much.
And that really might be the difference between Pittsburgh supporters and those who poop on the rankings parade. Burgh supporters value spending a lot of time at home and the ability to keep their home lives how they want them (affording a big house in a quiet neighborhood, good places to raise kids away in specific environments) while being able to drive to something cool or helpful when they need it (colleges, hospitals, sports teams, specific parts of town that are clearly intended to be a destination on the weekend & not a place to live). City dwellers who value a varied cultural experience that is outside of their direct control yet is happening all the time probably don't stay in Pittsburgh.
Hmmmmm...... Just fyi, our house/neighborhood has increased in value over 100% in the last 10 years, so that blanket statement really isn't true. I've found that real estate here is catching up (and in some instances quite quickly) with the rest of the nation. I also wanted to add I was pleasantly surprised at the real estate prices around Raleigh. Very affordable also.
Last edited:
This whole thing is analagous to arguing over what is the best car?
It's All preference ... Some thing a hyandui sonata is best , others a Ford Focus, or a bmw or Lexus .
Pittsburgh is a Camry XLE.
It's All preference ... Some thing a hyandui sonata is best , others a Ford Focus, or a bmw or Lexus .
Pittsburgh is a Camry XLE.
San Francisco??? That city has so many homeless people that they have very large "camps" established all over the city. Aside from aggressive panhandling, discarded needles and all the "normal" problems with large numbers of homeless, San Francisco is being overwhelmed by human feces. Don't believe me? Here is a story from today's San Francisco Gate (look at the photos if you dare):
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/How-to-solve-San-Francisco-s-homeless-pooping-6465355.php
The homeless simply stop in the middle of the sidewalk in the middle of the day and crap. They also crap on the subway steps and escalators - so often that it gums up the gears in the escalators, breaking them. Don't believe me? Read:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down-BART-escalators-3735981.php
The human waste problem creates such a stench that it is difficult to walk through many parts of the city. Locals have even made maps of the human feces to help fellow residents try to avoid it. Here's one:
http://mochimachine.org/wasteland/
You can keep San Fran, my man.
SF is desirable, but it is also super expensive because Silicon Valley churns out 100s of millionaires with each IPO.
Let me guess, you never been there, or if you have, your experience is limited to Fisherman's Wharf and Alcatraz.
I think you are underestimating what Pittsburgh has culturally. For its size, it is hard to match. And it will only improve as people continue to move into the city core like they have in many larger cities.
Pittsburgh has a great urban density and unique topography. It has a great stockpile of cultural amenities and foundations that remain from its industrial heyday. It has a high number of students and well educated people. What it lacks sufficient public transportation to its neighborhoods, sufficient regional and national air service at PIT, and a critical mass of permanent residents in its core.
Like we all haven't defecated on the middle of a sidewalk in the middle of the day once or twice in our lives.. Show me a person that has never done this and i'll show you a person that has never lived..
I agree. The thing is... Pittsburgh will become more expensive as more people move here (already happening) and even if an increase in population brings more in the way of cultural amenities and more thriving neighborhoods, the "livability" will decrease in these rankings because the average home price will increase. It is odd, because I live here and own a home. Most likely, my salary will continue to increase as I get more experience. I will have even more things to do, restaurants to eat at, events to see, etc. However, in some random magazine Pittsburgh will slide down the list even though it has become more desirable because home costs are usually an important factor.
Public transit is definitely an area that needs massive improvements. But the politicians won't do anything that might cost them a future election. Even Peduto attempts to pass the buck whenever he is asked about it. I think he believes that the folks in places like Cranberry are going to help foot the bill for a future regional rail system. LOL.
Advice for the board, stay away from ripping Lawrenceville.. I said that it wasn't all that great either and got crucified.. Some things you just avoid on the Lair and that is one of them..
