Pittsburgh compared to Seattle

[PghUSA]

SunD,

lots of info up there. Having spent many a January in Florida I am pretty intimate with how palms react to lower temperatures (many a dark Jan. night out with thermal blankets etc.). I realize that Seattle's avg. January temp is about 45 degrees (whereas Pittsburgh's is about 30 degrees), I have heard that certain palm varities grow and flourish as far north as Maryland. If you think about it all the mystique and chic that goes into saying "Palm tree" is a bit overblown, to have the Rodeo (or is that Hollywood) Blvd. or Miami Beach type palms (Sabal, Queen, Coconut if my memory serves), you really need to have the lowest avg. temps in the 50's possibly with just a few nights every other year in the 40s or 30s or those palms will die. Fairly or unfairly the palm on the South Carolina flag (Sabal or Palmetto I believe) is mostly referred to in Florida as "scrub palms", although hearty enough to grow as far north as metro Baltimore and up the Pacific coast, they are not exactly the palms LA or Miami include in postcards. You are technically correct though, alot of the mystery and mystique of the palm family is a bit overblown, Coconut or Queen Palms need a definite sub or tropical climate but if you want any old palm it can do quite well for a few years in northern climes. My question for you on the palm tree thing though is I have heard that either last winter or the winter before Seattle had snow accumulation, from what I've heard it was at least a foot in some areas. Although the Virginia and NC and SC palms (again not the ones LA and Miami brag about being photogenic) can weather brief periods of snow, usually a foot or more is certain death for any palmtree . . . "scrub" or not. I have never seen in person a Seattle palm tree so let me know if my application of spring drives through NC and SC and my numerious January's in Orlando and Miami are applicable to the Pacific species and their distribution.

. . . .

As far as the pics go, I love those aerials, beautiful, you might want to be careful about posting ones that are copywritten in the future though a link to copywrittens are good .

To be honest neither shot looks much like Pittsburgh, I understand where your going with it though showing that Portland is a "rivercity" and Seattle is a "harborcity" etc. One thing you might want to reconsider though is that Pittsburgh's three rivers (and really 6 in the metroplex, that's 4 in the county), tend to look much more like Seattle's many lakes and harbors, I have had many many people remark to me on seeing a picture of the "point" in Pittsburgh where two major rivers join to form the Ohio and what the Army Corps of Engineers refer to as the "Ohio Pool" have looked like the city was on a harbor or ocean. Again a simple ferry or boat ride around the point, though much much more massive then the Columbia in Portland or the Ohio in Cincinnati or even the Mississippi in St. Louis, is nothing like the harbor in Seattle, but alas Pittsburgh doesn't quite fit into those "river" cities with 4 in the immediate area and 6 majors in the metroplex (in addition to about a half dozen lakes). I would say Pittsburgh is like Portland in that the area of the water is closer (though Pittsburgh has a ton more in my mind) but much more like Seattle in the many bridges, hollows, coves, harbors, and piers.

What might be an interesting stat is the number of bridges in the city of Seattle or King County, and the miles of coastline (both freshwater and saltwater) in Seattle or King County. I have googled this for Seattle for about an hour couldn't come up with any stats but a stat on the sq. miles of water?!

Pittsburgh has more bridges then any other city in the United States (one reason the comparative to SF and Cincy and Seattle and Boston work so well) it also has the most miles of "coastline" then any other landlocked city in the U.S. Though SF, Boston and Seattle are by no means landlocked, Pittsburgh has a tough time comparing apples to apples in this catagory to a Cincinnati or Portland or Cleveland, if your the most waterbounded landlocked city the best you can compare to is non landlocked traditionally waterbounded cities.

If you know how many bridges and miles of coastline Seattle has I'd be interested to compare those two stats. I have found several Seattle tourist guides describing the "grading" and "leveling" of streets because of the many hills in the city, and how much of the city is still picturesque and hilly . . . sounds kind of like Pittsburgh or San Fran to me.

Before you think SF or Cincy might be closer to Seattle in this regard, Pittsburgh does have double the amount of scenic stairways then Cincy and San Francisco respectively (the best measure anyone has come up with to measure urban density with number of hills).

If there exists a number of "scenic stairways" (usually as a substitute for a block of a street or a connection between two neighborhoods at different elevations) for Seattle or King county that might also be a good comparative.

[Sundodger]

Palms do well all the way up to Vancouver, BC. Windmill palms, I think they are, do the best. As for the foot of snow, it probably was on the ground a day before it washed away in the rain. The higher elevation suburbs get most of the snow.

The shots of Portland totally look like Pittsburgh. Big river, the bridges, & the hill. If Portland had a better skyline, it would look totally like Pittsburgh.

One thing you might want to reconsider though is that Pittsburgh's three rivers (and really 6 in the metroplex, that's 4 in the county), tend to look much more like Seattle's many lakes and harbors, I have had many many people remark to me on seeing a picture of the "point" in Pittsburgh where two major rivers join to form the Ohio and what the Army Corps of Engineers refer to as the "Ohio Pool" have looked like the city was on a harbor or ocean.

The Willamette in Portland is almost as large as the Ohio in Pittsburgh. It is larger than the Allegheny & Monongahela. The rivers are much a like between Portland & Pittsburgh except the Columbia dwarfs anything Pitt has. The Portland area also has the Tualatin River that flows from the coast range through the western burbs into the Willamette above Oregon City & the Clackamas River that flows out of the Cascades through the eastern suburbs to the Willamette at Oregon City.

Again a simple ferry or boat ride around the point, though much much more massive then the Columbia in Portland

The Columbia in Portland dwarfs the Ohio in Pitt. See:

Ohio "pool", Pittsburgh

Columbia River, Portland

I would say Pittsburgh is like Portland in that the area of the water is closer (though Pittsburgh has a ton more in my mind) but much more like Seattle in the many bridges, hollows, coves, harbors, and piers.

Portland has all of the bridges, not Seattle. Seattle's waterfront is weak, Portland's is strong, like Pittsburgh. Compare Northshore & Rose Quarter for one. The hills. The tunnels through the hills. The college town feel. Sorry, Portland is way closer to Pittsburgh than Seattle. Ever been to either? I see tons of similarities between Portland & Pittsburgh.

If you know how many bridges and miles of coastline Seattle has I'd be interested to compare those two stats.

Of bridges over significant water courses, there are 11 bridges in Seattle, none anywhere near downtown. 2 bridges (3 spans) over Lake Washington, 6 over the ship canal, & two over the Duwamish.

Portland has 10 over the Willamette alone, 8 of which are downtown, and 2 over the Columbia.

I have found several Seattle tourist guides describing the "grading" and "leveling" of streets because of the many hills in the city, and how much of the city is still picturesque and hilly . . . sounds kind of like Pittsburgh or San Fran to me.

Pittsburgh's hills look like Portland hills. What is so terrible about Portland that you won't admit it is your westcoast twin?

Before you think SF or Cincy might be closer to Seattle in this regard, Pittsburgh does have double the amount of scenic stairways then Cincy and San Francisco respectively (the best measure anyone has come up with to measure urban density with number of hills).

Portland is your NW home for scenic stairways, not Seattle.

[PghUSA]

That second to last comment made me laugh some, what's wrong? Nothing in particular I have heard some great things about Portland and your right on one account I mistook that river in the pic as the Columbia (that is the Willamette as I recall). Portland is a great city with some truly great and "hip" things taking place in and around it but only the 'blazers and no major universities and accompanying research/medical/technology centers and college sports facilities . Even with those two major rivers Portland doesn't have the same thrills and "watercity" experience as two big rivers coming together to form a major American river right downtown in the center of it all. That type of "center city" experience (though on a much grander scale) is more comparable to Seattle's harbor. 6 rivers in the metroplex with just as many lakes in Pittsburgh is another trait like Seattle's waterwonderland (though nothing matching harbor status).

The links to the "Ohio Pool" were nice, if you ever see it in person though you might forget for a few moments that Pittsburgh is indeed an Inland city. From many vantage points the uninformed observer has a hard time making out that really its just three rivers and not some really big lake or harbor. The mighty Bubby Brister Steelers QB for a number of years about a decade ago remarked about the "wind off the lake" while playing games in Pittsburgh. All slights against the Bubby aside, if taken at a glance 2 major rivers flowing immediately into one of the largest rivers in NA does create a "harbor" affect. True the test would be to take a boat out 5 minutes into the great "lake" in Pittsburgh and harbor in Seattle and the differences would immediately favor Seattle but I'm not sure Portland is much more of a better fit as Seattle is in that respect.

Portland to me and others I've talked to is a great city, but more comparable to a Memphis or Buffalo with the one downtown river, hills and only a single major sports franchise, and (correct me if I'm wrong on this) no real "major" university or college cluster adjacent to downtown and the kids, parties, entertainment, research, libraries, medical centers etc. that and OSU 2 hours to the south and an OU 4 hours to the south could provide. Again if I'm missing a major university in the city let me know but even Memphis and Buffalo each have one arguably "major" university downtown, nothing comparable to a Point Park U., Arts Institute, Duquesne U., Carlow U., U. Of Pittsburgh, Carnegie-Mellon U., Chatham College in one 5 mile strip (not to mention the dozen others surrounding the city).

OSU and OU do have large fanbases from what I've heard but being that they are 2 and 4 hours to the south respectively it would be similar to Pittsburgh claiming Ohio State, West Virginia Univ. and Penn State as adding to the "hipness" and academic prowress of downtown. Two hours away to go see Stanford or USC play is not the same as three Divison I NCAA Basketball programs and a Division I football program with long traditions all within the city. The accompanying fans, tailgating, parties, sportsbars, entertainment etc. not to mention the research and medical complexes go without saying.

In pro sports, college sports, and masses of college kids and brainpower Seattle metro is an easier fit--though to my limited knowledge not yet equal to Pittsburgh in that respect. Hey we even have a retractable domed stadium in Pittsburgh just like Seattle . Your comment about baseball ratings is a good observation but if you really look into what goes into hosting a MLB franchise, Chicagoans or New Yorkers pouring millions into your city to go on a road trip to see their team, conventioneers taking in a ballgame, Corporate planners and relocation leaders choosing your city because of the ability to entertain meetings in luxury suites during games etc. etc. Portland is off that radar with the exception of November to May with the Blazers. Seattle Metro has 3 Pro franchises equaling Pittsburgh as well as Washington (or is it WSU) in the metroplex for college games . . . much closer comparative to Pittsburgh's 3 pro franchises and Pitt Basketball and Football (not to mention Duquense and RMU roundball).

Interested in hearing other opinions on this as well as your views Sun.

[PghUSA]

Oh and to your question on wether I have been to Portland or Seattle . . . I have twice for each and I do have a pretty advanced knowledge of different cities vs. the average Joe, but in no way am I close to a Pacific NW expert . . . it sounds like you have stopped in on the 'burgh once or twice yourself?

[TheGerbil]

Pittsburghers look upon major league sports as a religion. As a result, sports, I'd say, is the dominating culture of Pittsburgh.

I don't think that is as true as everyone seems to think. I have lived here my whole life, and most people I know don't care that much about sports. I think the local media pushes sports on us, and I guess some locals are pretty crazy about it... but most people really don't seem to care that much.

Then again, I think there are two kinds of people in Pittsburgh (if I may over-simplify for a minute...) There are the "yinzers," who fit the typical stereotypes. And then there are the rest of us (transplants, and those natives who are not yinzers). As one of "the rest of us" I am really annoyed by the stereotypes I keep hearing, which includes the whole sports thing.

[Kasper]

Seattle is a leap above Pitt culturally & not that far behind academically

Wow there just are not words to describe how wrong this statement is. I'm laughing. Seattle has surpassed Pgh in population, economics and shopping but it has a long way to go before it can even try to make a claim to cultural and academic superiority. And it not suprising you can import people and build stores in no time. Building cultural institutions and an academic community takes a long time, more time that Seattle has been a major city for.

The money in Pittsburgh at the turn of the century ensured that this town has some of the best cultural amenities in the nation. It will take the "newer" cities out west a hundred years to catch up if they ever can. I'm sorry but there is nothing in Seattle that can compare to the Carnegie Museum complexes in Oakland (and the NorthShore). The pittsburgh zoo is one of the best in the country. Pittsburgh has the National Aviary. Pittsburgh has Phipps conservatory (one of like seven city conservatories in teh entire country). Pittsburgh has the largest single artist museum in the WORLD. Not to mention all the modern art museums around town and the artist colonies in the South side. Pittsburgh has its own Ballet company, symphony (which is considered better than the NY symphony) and opera. Three major sports fanchises. More gothic architecture and churches than any American city. Ethinic negiborhoods that are HUNDREDS of years old. Saying Seattle is superior to Pittsburgh culturally is truly laughable. And yes I have been to Seattle.

I'm sorry but U of Wash cannot hold an candle to CMU (I'm an alum so I may be biased of course). Plus Pgh has one of the largest concentration of colleges in the country as well.

Seattle has alot to brag about and is certainly doing better than Pittsburgh is many ways, but don't get ahead of yourself. Pgh is so far ahead culturally and academically you cannot even compare the two.

[Sundodger]

quote=PghUSA' date='Oct 26 2005, 01:29 AM' post='231955]Portland is a great city with some truly great and "hip" things taking place in and around it but only the 'blazers and no major universities and accompanying research/medical/technology centers and college sports facilities .

Actually Portland is home to Oregon Health & Science University, an elite research/medical institution. Also Portland is the largest metro with one sports team & have the potential to land either NHL or MLB in the future. Portland & Pittsburgh are similar in size currently. The reason Pittsburgh has more pro-sports than Portland currently is that it was significantly larger than Portland in the past. Being an undersaturated sports crazy sports market, Portland will get another franchise eventually.

Even with those two major rivers Portland doesn't have the same thrills and "watercity" experience as two big rivers coming together to form a major American river right downtown in the center of it all.

No, but functionally it is the same. Look at those google aerials and see all of the quays & marinas along the Willamette, Columbia, & the Columbia's sloughs. Looking at the aerials, the rivers in Portland seem more happening than the ones in Pittsburgh.

. 6 rivers in the metroplex with just as many lakes in Pittsburgh is another trait like Seattle's waterwonderland (though nothing matching harbor status).

Again, Portland is your twin. Lake Oswego & Lake Vancouver are big lakes around Portland. Seattle doesn't resmble Pittsbugh at all. For one, the lakes are giant & Seattle's river is pathetic. Portland & Pittsburgh are the opposite of that.

True the test would be to take a boat out 5 minutes into the great "lake" in Pittsburgh and harbor in Seattle and the differences would immediately favor Seattle but I'm not sure Portland is much more of a better fit as Seattle is in that respect.

People in Seattle boat in Puget Sound & Lake Washington, not Elliot Bay. Seattle's harbor waterfront is pathetic. Portland's river front looks a lot like Pittsburgh & the Willamette in Portland is almost as large as Ohio Pool.

Portland to me and others I've talked to is a great city, but more comparable to a Memphis or Buffalo with the one downtown river, hills and only a single major sports franchise, and (correct me if I'm wrong on this) no real "major" university or college cluster adjacent to downtown and the kids, parties, entertainment, research, libraries, medical centers etc. that and OSU 2 hours to the south and an OU 4 hours to the south could provide.

Wrong. Cincinnati & Pittsburgh are the best comparisons of Portland. Portland is becoming Pittsburgh meets Vancouver, BC. Memphis & Buffalo have zero in common with Portland. Portland State University, the largest (or 2nd largest, it goes back & forth) university in the state of Oregon is downtown. OSHU is directly above the hill from downtown. Portland is also the home of the University of Portland, Reed Collge, Lewis & Clark College, & numerous other little ones.

OHSU on the hill (Portland State is downtown, look for the avenue of trees to spot the campus) -

PSU campus map:

Also OSU is 90 minutes south & UO is less than 2 hours south.

Two hours away to go see Stanford or USC play is not the same as three Divison I NCAA Basketball programs and a Division I football program with long traditions all within the city.

Portland has 2 D1 programs in town. The University of Portland has hosted Duke & is in the same conference as Gonzaga, San Francisco, Santa Clara, & Pepperdine. They are a soccer power.

I think you need to educate yourself a little more about Portland, Pittsburgh's west coast twin. Portland is also a good hockey town too. Some years their major junior league attendance numbers come close to some NHL teams. In fact the Penguins were a candidate to relocation to Portland; that still may play out though the likelyhood of that dropped big time when Paul Allen surrendered control of the Rose Garden.

[Sundodger]

quote ='Kasper'

Wow there just are not words to describe how wrong this statement is. I'm laughing. Seattle has surpassed Pgh in population, economics and shopping but it has a long way to go before it can even try to make a claim to cultural and academic superiority.

Culturally, yes Seattle is above Pittsburgh & is not that far behind academically.

Seattle is one of the preeminent music hot spots. It also is a major art glass center, art & gallery center, & culinary center. Being near Vancouver, BC & a short flight from LA, it is also a growing performance art center too.

The money in Pittsburgh at the turn of the century ensured that this town has some of the best cultural amenities in the nation. It will take the "newer" cities out west a hundred years to catch up if they ever can.

Seattle is swimming in new money. Benaroyal Hall & the McCaw Opera House are both new & the Seattle Art Museum is under another expansion. Also that old money doesn't buy a virbant cultural community & scene.

I'm sorry but there is nothing in Seattle that can compare to the Carnegie Museum complexes in Oakland (and the NorthShore). The pittsburgh zoo is one of the best in the country. Pittsburgh has the National Aviary. Pittsburgh has Phipps conservatory (one of like seven city conservatories in teh entire country). Pittsburgh has the largest single artist museum in the WORLD. Not to mention all the modern art museums around town and the artist colonies in the South side. Pittsburgh has its own Ballet company, symphony (which is considered better than the NY symphony) and opera. Three major sports fanchises. More gothic architecture and churches than any American city. Ethinic negiborhoods that are HUNDREDS of years old. Saying Seattle is superior to Pittsburgh culturally is truly laughable. And yes I have been to Seattle.

Saying Pittsburgh is superior to Seattle culturally is laughable. Seattle has much of what you named; three major sports franchises, excellent zoo, major aquariam (Seattle has two zoos & aquariams in the metro; Tacoma has a pair), major ballet company, Opera, Symphony, etc. Sure the museums are smaller but Seattle is one of the nation's music centers & art glass centers. They put the Museum of Glass in Tacoma but Chihuly & company work out of Seattle & Pilchuck. Also Seattle is an art & culinary hotspot.

I'm sorry but U of Wash cannot hold an candle to CMU (I'm an alum so I may be biased of course). Plus Pgh has one of the largest concentration of colleges in the country as well.

University of Washington is one of the top 20 universities in the world. CMU didn't make the top 50.

Seattle has alot to brag about and is certainly doing better than Pittsburgh is many ways, but don't get ahead of yourself. Pgh is so far ahead culturally and academically you cannot even compare the two.

No, Seattle is miles ahead. Jimi Hendrix, Nirvana, Chihuly, Pearl Jam, Bumpershoot, Pike Place Market, Folk Life, etc. Artists, chefs, musicians with zero connections at all are flocking to Seattle. Pittsburgh wins in the museum catergory but Seattle crushes it with just about everything else.

[Kasper]

University of Washington is one of the top 20 universities in the world. CMU didn't make the top 50.

The 2006 rankings:

#22 - Carnegie Mellon

#45 - U. of Washhttp://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/tier1/t1natudoc_brief.php

So you are wrong about U Wash being in the top 20 and you are wrong about CMU not being in the top 50. Actually it is U of Wash that barely made it into the top 50.

Culturally, yes Seattle is above Pittsburgh & is not that far behind academically.

Say this as much as you want it doesn't make it true. Then again I do not consider alternative rock music to be the sole factor in deteriming a city's culture.

I don't really feel the need to respond to your attempt to dismiss Pgh's cultural history and amenities as subpar when compared to Seattles because (as just demonstrated above) you have no idea what you're talking about.

if you want to pretend a couple of new small museums can compete with the Carnegie Complex; or that a having a downtown Barney's is more cuturally significant that the hundreds of hundred+ year old gothic, nationally landmarked churches go right on ahead. No one with half a brain is buying though.

I'm sorry but Starbucks and Pearl Jam may quailfy as pop culture but not much else.

Save the lecture PghUSA - I'll stop being pissy.

[TheGerbil]

Why has this become a "this city versus that city" thread? What is the point of that? Everyone wants to be proud of their town, and ever city has both good points and bad points. Is it neccessary to rank and compare? No matter what claim anyone makes, there will always be some evidence for both sides.

[Sundodger]

quote =Kasper' date='Oct 26 2005, 10:05 AM' post='232260]

University of Washington is one of the top 20 universities in the world. CMU didn't make the top 50.

The 2006 rankings:

#22 - Carnegie Mellon

#45 - U. of Washhttp://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/tier1/t1natudoc_brief.php

US News uses "peer review" to determine their rankings. In the lastest list of the world's top Universities published recently in the Economist using more tangible comparisions, UW was #17 & CMU was #54.

o you are wrong about U Wash being in the top 20 and you are wrong about CMU not being in the top 50. Actually it is U of Wash that barely made it into the top 50.

I was correct, we are looking a different lists. You are looking at the "peer review" list & I am talking about the tangible accomplishments, results list.

Say this as much as you want it doesn't make it true. Then again I do not consider alternative rock music to be the sole factor in deteriming a city's culture.

Just as I don't consider art museums to be a sole factor either. Seattle has a big jazz, classical, pop, you name it musical tradition. Ray Charles, Quincy Jones, Kenny G, Kenny Loggins, & Heart isn't alternative rock. The Seattle public high schools reguarly win national jazz competitions & there are jazz clubs downtown.

I don't really feel the need to respond to your attempt to dismiss Pgh's cultural history and amenities as subpar when compared to Seattles because (as just demonstrated above) you have no idea what you're talking about.

I understand Pittsburgh''s amenities & I am not dismissing them, it just doesn't compete with what Seattle has. Our cultural infrastructure may not be on par with Pittsburgh but our cultural scene greatly overshadows Pittsburgh. Add everything up & Seattle easily wins.

if you want to pretend a couple of new small museums can compete with the Carnegie Complex; or that a having a downtown Barney's is more cuturally significant that the hundreds of hundred+ year old gothic, nationally landmarked churches go right on ahead. No one with half a brain is buying though.

I haven't even mentioned the Museum of Flight or the Experience Museum Project yet. Seattle has some big time museums. Sure Pitt still has an edge in that dept., but not as great as you assume & the gap is closing. The art, music, & general cultural scence is much greater in Seattle & that is why it has the edge between the two.

I'm sorry but Starbucks and Pearl Jam may quailfy as pop culture but not much else.

It is culture. You can brag about symphonies but classical music has been reduced to movie scores these days.

[Kasper]

US News uses "peer review" to determine their rankings. In the lastest list of the world's top Universities published recently in the Economist using more tangible comparisions, UW was #17 & CMU was #54.

Sorry but the Economist rankings are pretty obscure compared to US News and World Report.

US News and World Report uses a variety of variables in its rankings, one such variable is peer review, as it should be. Prestige and reputation can only be assessed by third party review. I tried to find out what these "tangible comparisions" you speak of are used by the economist. In all my internet searching on the Economist Undergraduate College Rankings I could only find one thing - an article from a SEATTLE newspaper (suprise suprise) about U. Wash's #17 rating. This is what those rankings are based on "The rankings focused on academic and research performance, including Nobel prizes and articles published in respected journals." No definition of what qualifies as a "respected journal" or what is meant by "research performance" and how it is measured. Apparently it does not consider the most important tangible variables like admission standards, SAT scores, endowments, gov't grants etc though which are rather important.

I'm hesitant to take the rankings of a British News Magazine that has a global circulation of lass then half the Pittsburgh Metro over US News and World Report which whether it derserves it or not, are the only rankings anyone pays any attention to. If U of Wash is ranked #17 then according to the Economist (which includes foreign schools) U Wash is better than at least a couple of the Ivys as well. If CMU is ranked 54 by the Economist I can't wait to see what schools are ranked ahead as I think it will entertain me endlessly. I'm sure I can find a ranking that puts the University of Middle Earth, Rivendale campus as #1 in the country.

[PghUSA]

I agree with Gerbil that we don't want this turning into a verses thread. Try to remember to stick with "comparables" and not "my city is better". Fine line I know but let's remember the overall goal of this forum is to learn fun things about other places, not to win an argument.

SunD, I was unaware and pleasantly surprised by the number of colleges/Universities in Portland, I have never ever heard of any Portland based University playing basketball in Division I-A (not a huge college bball fan except locally). Although I was always certain there were a few colleges/universities in Portland--and the presence of Division I basketball is a definite plus--that still doesn't translate into what Pitt (Univ. of Pittsburgh) brings to Pittsburgh let alone the combined forces of CMU, RMU, Duquesne, etc. etc. I will admit that OSU and OU do equate to that (may even exceed what Pittsburgh has in some respects, fan base etc.) but again to include universities 2 and 4 hours away is including Penn State, Ohio State and WVU for Pittsburgh.

What would you say is Portland's metro University population, similar to Pittsburgh's 150,000 or in that neighborhood? Again given your rankings of CMU and UW (I don't see any Portland University on that list) wouldn't it tend to compare Seattle and Pittsburgh since even the Economist compares Seattle and Pittsburgh?

I agree with Kasper that CMU and UW's rankings by that publication are a little fishy, but I'll grant you that the Economist has good reason to rank Seattle's higher compared to Pittsburgh's. The fact of the matter though is that both cities are having their Universities COMPARED. Portland is somehow not in that league.

Nothing against Portland but again the lack of Division I football and 150,000 college kids (though I will grant you the Division I basketball though I've never heard of it) and the lack of multiple pro sports franchises when compared to Seattle has Pittsburgh more in line with the Emerald City. Not that Portland doesn't have a shot at gaining MLB and NHL as you've mentioned, it's just that Portland can't compare teams they "might" get to other cities, Memphis and Buffalo also are in the hunt for more franchises this makes Portland a better fit with those two eastern cities. As you might know from your knowlege in Seattle the Mariners and Sonics and 'hawks have some traditions, some heritage, some fond memories of childhood, Portland or Memphis or Buffalo even if they get a pro franchise won't have that kind of "halo" affect with the team for generations. Pittsburgh and Seattle already do and have had for decades.

Did I mention our rectractable pro sports domed stadium?

Seattle in sports, academia, student population and culture is much closer to Pittsburgh then Buffalo and Memphis.

[Sundodger]

Sorry but the Economist rankings are pretty obscure compared to US News and World Report.

Again, the U.S. News uses something untangible, peer review, for their rankings. The U.S. News rankings are bunk, always have been.

I tried to find out what these "tangible comparisions" you speak of are used by the economist. In all my internet searching on the Economist Undergraduate College Rankings I could only find one thing - an article from a SEATTLE newspaper (suprise suprise) about U. Wash's #17 rating. This is what those rankings are based on "The rankings focused on academic and research performance, including Nobel prizes and articles published in respected journals." No definition of what qualifies as a "respected journal" or what is meant by "research performance" and how it is measured.

Methodology

Apparently it does not consider the most important tangible variables like admission standards, SAT scores, endowments, gov't grants etc though which are rather important.

- comparing a school like CMU & UW by SATs & admission standards is comparing an apple with a fruit basket. Being a flagship state school, it has a vast array of programs.

- as for govt. grants, Washington is #2 behind Johns Hopkins

I'm hesitant to take the rankings of a British News Magazine that has a global circulation of lass then half the Pittsburgh Metro over US News and World Report which whether it derserves it or not, are the only rankings anyone pays any attention to.

It wasn't their survey, they just published the results. Reporting the news, not manufacturing it like US News.

[Sundodger]

quote name='PghUSA' but again to include universities 2 and 4 hours away

[PghUSA]

If you go to the website:

http://www.collegeboard.com

And do a 50 mile radial search for all colleges and Universities in Seattle, Pittsburgh and Portland these are the results:

Pittsburgh 50 miles: 67

Seattle 50 miles: 41

. . . . (both more then double digits what Portland has)

Portland 50 miles: 27 (within 12 of Memphis compared to within 14 of Seattle, within 5 of Buffalo)

Buffalo 50 miles: 22

Memphis 50 miles: 15

If the question is . . . does Pittsburgh compare better with Seattle or Portland the answer would have to be Seattle.

If the question is . . . does Portland compare better with Memphis and Buffalo or Pittsburgh and Seattle the answer would have to be Portland is much more like Buffalo and Memphis.

[Sundodger]

You must be counting community colleges, trade colleges, bible colleges, for proift colleges etc. to get those numbers. If you just count four+ year colleges & universities within a 50 miles radius, there are 7 in Seattle (3 in Seattle, 2 in Tacoma, & 2 of those in Olympia, a 60 mile drive through traffic hell), & Portland has 10 (5 in Portland) including the oldest university in the west, Willamette University, in Salem.

If the question is . . . does Pittsburgh compare better with Seattle or Portland the answer would have to be Seattle.

Absolutely not. Seattle isn't that alike to Pittsburgh at all while Portland is practically your twin.

If the question is . . . does Portland compare better with Memphis and Buffalo or Pittsburgh and Seattle the answer would have to be Portland is much more like Buffalo and Memphis.

Absolutely not. Portland doesn't compare to Buffalo or Memphis at all. Again, if you ever been to Portland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Memphis, & Buffalo, you would realize that Cincy, Pitt, & Port are a lot of like & not like Buffalo or Memphis at all. Heck, Portland is bigger than Cincy & almost the size of Pittsburgh while Memphis & Buffalo are both about a 1,000,000 smaller. Why bring them into the conversation in the first place? Portland is more like Seattle than Pittsburgh is & Portland is more like Pittsburgh than Seattle is.

[pointbreeze]

I'm not sure what this thread is about any more, but I will chime in. I spent 10 days over the summer taking a vacation in Portland and Seattle (I live in Pittsburgh).

In my opinion, Portland and Pittsburgh are very similar - on the water, hilly, a lot of green space, neighborhood oriented, etc. People that we spoke with there that had been to Pittsburgh also mentioned the similarities. Portland had fewer cultural attractions, though.

Seattle was a completely different city than Portland. It has a much more vertical downtown that includes a lot of shopping with a nice movie theater. The people were more consumed with cars in Seattle than Portland (bikes everywhere in Portland). There are a lot of condos downtown, which was nice. Seattle was also full of homeless people. They were everywhere - they would even sit right next to you while eating at a restaurant outside. By the way, the aquarium was one of the worst I have been to.

Pittsburgh should strive for Seattle

[PghUSA]

Pointbreeze, those were some interesting observations. Though I don't disagree with the bikes (though from what it sounds like both Seattle and Pittsburgh are trying to be more like Portland in that way) and the hills and the riverscape, if you look at the raw data Seattle tends to be a better fit in ways that may not be readily visible from a stay in either city.

Sun, the colleges did count 2 year institutions for every city, so there is no disparity, Seattle's CCs, Pittsburgh's CCs and Portland's CCs were all counted equally.

If you want to only count 4 year and up here are the stats according to Collegeboard.com:

Pittsburgh 29

Seattle 20

Portland 18 (within 9 of Memphis and within 5 of Buffalo . . . within 11 of Pittsburgh??)

Buffalo 13

Memphis 9

Again the facts of the matter is that Portland is just not a good comparative to Pittsburgh. It is a great city with some things in common with Pittsburgh (hills, riverscape) but has neither the size nor scale to equate in any overall sense. Seattle is a much better fit. Buffalo and Memphis is comparative to anything is most easily assigned to Portland's catagory of city.

[Sundodger]

quote=PghUSA' date='Oct 27 2005, 03:02 PM' post='233524]

If you want to only count 4 year and up here are the stats according to Collegeboard.com:

Pittsburgh 29

Seattle 20

Portland 18 (within 9 of Memphis and within 5 of Buffalo . . . within 11 of Pittsburgh??)

Buffalo 13

Memphis 9

Again, those must include trade schools, bible schools, & for profit schools (like U of Phoenix). The numbers I posted above of are traditional 4+ year colleges & universties with more than 1,000 students.

Again the facts of the matter is that Portland is just not a good comparative to Pittsburgh.

Again, that is wrong. Look at geography, population, culture, & feel; they are practically twins except Portland is trendy & growing. The Portland metro area will pass the population of Pittsburgh's in the near future.

It is a great city with some things in common with Pittsburgh (hills, riverscape) but has neither the size nor scale to equate in any overall sense.

Wrong again. The city of Portland itself is larger than Pittsburgh & the metro populations are similar.

Seattle is a much better fit.

No it isn't. The Seattle area is over 1,000,000 people larger than Pittsburgh & the cities are not much alike except literate & pleasant. Portland is closer in size to Pittsburgh.

Buffalo and Memphis is comparative to anything is most easily assigned to Portland's catagory of city.

Not at all. They are both about 1,000,000 smaller than Portland & Pittsburgh. Also Buffalo & Memphis don't resemble Portland in any way. You said you been to Portland, I doubt that since you are comparing it with two cities nothing like it all. Portland's peer group of cities include Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Milwaukee, & Charlotte. Memphis & Buffalo are a tier or two below these cities.

[Kasper]

How about we all just agree that Pittsburgh and Portland have many things in common and many things not in common. We can also agree the Pittsburgh is similar in some ways to Seattle and different in some ways from Seattle.

Why anyone would even care to try to convince Pittsburghers that their city is more like Portland and Seattle is beyond me. Plus locals may get defensive when someone else presume to tell "truth" about what their town is like. How much time have you spent in Pittsburgh Dodger?

[Sundodger]

Why anyone would even care to try to convince Pittsburghers that their city is more like Portland and Seattle is beyond me.

Living between Seattle & Portland, I have the perspective to make that evaluation. Portland & Pittsburgh are more a like than Seattle and Pittsburgh are.

Plus locals may get defensive when someone else presume to tell "truth" about what their town is like. How much time have you spent in Pittsburgh Dodger?

Never spent the night but if you add up all the times, probably a weeks worth of time. My family is from upstate NY & I have relatives in Allegheny. If you are visiting relatives in Allegany, would you rather go to Buffalo or Pittsburgh to see the big city or catch an MLB game? I am going to my first game at PNC Park next August, I can't wait. From the reports from friends & the pictures, it looks like the best of the new ballparks.

[PghUSA]

If you want to only count 4 year and up here are the stats according to Collegeboard.com:

Pittsburgh 29

Seattle 20

Portland 18 (within 9 of Memphis and within 5 of Buffalo . . . within 11 of Pittsburgh??)

Buffalo 13

Memphis 9

Again, those must include trade schools, bible schools, & for profit schools (like U of Phoenix). The numbers I posted above of are traditional 4+ year colleges & universties with more than 1,000 students.

Again the facts of the matter is that Portland is just not a good comparative to Pittsburgh.

Again, that is wrong. Look at geography, population, culture, & feel; they are practically twins except Portland is trendy & growing. The Portland metro area will pass the population of Pittsburgh's in the near future.

SunD,

Did you click the link for http://www.collegeboard.com ? If you do you will have known I did not "include trade schools" etc. on those numbers.

A) The first numbers I gave were ALL colleges (Univ. of Phoenix, trade schools etc.) being that it counts both major univerisites and commercial enterprises that go where the population is--indicative of a city's "pull". Since the first set of stats were based on the same benchmark for EACH city where is the invalidity?

To review here is all colleges according to the College Board:

Pittsburgh 50 miles: 67

Seattle 50 miles: 41

. . . . (both more then double digits what Portland has)

Portland 50 miles: 27 (within 12 of Memphis compared to within 14 of Seattle, within 5 of Buffalo)

Buffalo 50 miles: 22

Memphis 50 miles: 15

B ) the numbers you quoted me above (the second set) were ONLY schools that offered Bachelor degrees or above, major universities.

So again here are the "real" numbers according to the people who spend their lives crunching these numbers:

Major 4 year + degreed schools:

Pittsburgh 29

Seattle 20

Portland 18 (within 9 of Memphis and within 5 of Buffalo . . . within 11 of Pittsburgh??)

Buffalo 13

Memphis 9

Looks like the only city that gets really damaged by leaving out the Univ. of Phoenix's (compare the first to the second) is Seattle, that is very curious actually.

All this misses the point though . . . I counted Seattle's in the same way I counted Portland's and Pittsburgh's for both sets, so again there really is no response to it, if you want to check my math please check the web site I mentioned above, I DID NOT count things like Univ. of Phoenix for the 2nd batch, but as both batchs show Seattle = Pittsburgh more then Portland = Pittsburgh.

Since the numbers haven't been disputed on the colleges/universities (the methodolgy has but then again my source has been quoted and linked for all to see so its a bit hollow). I'll provide yet another reason why Seattle is a more comparative city to Pittsburgh.

Economics and Business:

Fortune 500 corportations:

Metro Seattle 9

Metro Pittsburgh 7

Metro Memphis 2

Metro Buffalo 1

Metro Portland 1

Fortune 1000 corporations:

Metro Pittsburgh 16

Metro Seattle 14

Metro Memphis 6

Metro Portland 4

Metro Buffalo 3

Again its cool that we have "opinions" on all this but when we take those views out to the light of day and the facts of the matter (# of corporations, # of major colleges, # of all colleges) things that dictate a metro's business, economy, job status, youth population, hipness etc. Seattle=Pittsburgh much much more then Portland does.

[Sundodger]

Again its cool that we have "opinions" on all this but when we take those views out to the light of day and the facts of the matter (# of corporations, # of major colleges, # of all colleges) things that dictate a metro's business, economy, job status, youth population, hipness etc. Seattle=Pittsburgh much much more then Portland does.

Portland resembles Seattle more than Pittsburgh does & Portland resembles Pittsburgh waaaay more than Seattle does. There is more to a city than sports teams & the # of corporate HQs. Omaha is loaded with fortune 500 companies but it is a tier or two below even Memphis & Buffalo. Look at the size, feel, culture, scenary, geography, etc. to see the massive similarities between Pittsburgh & Portland. For one, Portland & Pittsburgh are the same tier city while Seattle is a notch or two above. Out of Portland & Pittsburgh's group of peer cities, they with Cincinnati are the most alike of that group with Portland being the most hip of that group & 2nd fastest growing (behind Charlotte). If you venture to other tier cities, I still wouldn't use Seattle as a comparison with Pittsburgh.

[blueblackcat]

Portland resembles Seattle more than Pittsburgh does & Portland resembles Pittsburgh waaaay more than Seattle does. There is more to a city than sports teams & the # of corporate HQs. Omaha is loaded with fortune 500 companies but it is a tier or two below even Memphis & Buffalo. Look at the size, feel, culture, scenary, geography, etc. to see the massive similarities between Pittsburgh & Portland. For one, Portland & Pittsburgh are the same tier city while Seattle is a notch or two above. Out of Portland & Pittsburgh's group of peer cities, they with Cincinnati are the most alike of that group with Portland being the most hip of that group & 2nd fastest growing (behind Charlotte). If you venture to other tier cities, I still wouldn't use Seattle as a comparison with Pittsburgh.

If you're looking only at topology, contrasting Seattle's bay/ocean to Portland's single river and Pittsburgh's confluence of three, none of them really resemble one another. If you size either port by tonnage, Pittsburgh's is as large as many ocean ports, which makes it irrelevant that it's only on a river. While a far cry from the port of LA or NYC, a comparison to Seattle seems fair game.

If you look at population density then there's only 4 cities in the US which top Pittsburgh and I doubt Seattle's one, so why direct our attention at Portland which is even more sparse? PD is probably the single most telling number about a city, affecting every aspect of lifestyle and culture (including the music scene).

Yes Seattle had Nirvana but not every band in Seattle is cool just cos they're from the same city. Appearantly some people think so. And it's been a while already. Pittsburgh has an incredible music scene. Places like Club Cafe, Crawford Grill, Gooski's are without comparison in America. You can listen to any genre of live music any day of the week all year round in Pittsburgh. The Crawford Grill (if you like jazz and don't know about it then you don't know much about jazz) will be featured in a new movie based on August Wilson's play Fences, btw. Where's that movie about that famous music venue in Portland? Seattle? Club cafe has an average of 4 bands a night, 5 nights a week. For a long time East Carson Street held (still might) the world record for the most bars on a 1 mile stretch. Not even the French Quarter can say that. When someone attempts barhopping to every bar on the South Side it's called the East Carson Crawl because by the time you get half way... and plenty of those bars play live music.

Pittsburgh has slightly less Fortune 500 companies than Seattle but it's an apples to oranges comparison. Seattle is a relatively new city that didn't really get national prominance until the high-tech era. Before then what, Jack London hung out there for the gold rush? Meanwhile, Pittsburgh's economic prowess 30 years ago would still eclipse Seattle today, even with Microsoft. The infastructure and cultural institutions of Pittsburgh remain a testament to that. Imagine Microsoft crushed by overseas competition or antitrust lawsuits tomorrow and think 30 years to the future. What would Seattle be left with tomorrow and how would it look like 30 years from now? Would it be poised for the type of renaissance that Pittsburgh is starting to enjoy?

I think it's pretty charitable of Pittsburgh to compare itself to Seattle when all is said and done. Seattle does get the national prominance and thumb-up reviews, and it does feature some well-entrenched companies at the height of their power, so it does attract the biggest talent pool of the young and willing. But as Pittsburgh knows and as Bill Gates is aware of, all of that can easily go away overnight. Pittsburgh isn't about being the "it" city or the next "boom" town with a housing bubble, it's about building a strong base for steady long term growth. It's sort of insulting to insinuate that Pittsburgh could be more like the latest crop of boom towns and then maybe if all goes well it could become an established city like them.