Itchygomba69 0 Posted May 9, 2008 Families thinking about relocating need look no further than Pittsburgh! Just a year after reclaiming the title of the nation's most livable city, a new survey ranks Pittsburgh as the best US city to move your family. After weighing nearly 50 factors from affordable housing and commute times to recent job growth and the proximity of top-ranked universities, the 2008 report from Worldwide ERC and Primary Relocation gives Pittsburgh top honors among large metropolitan areas in the country. Pittsburgh beat out Indianapolis, Austin, and Fort Worth, Texas to win the top spot among cities with populations of at least 1.3 million people. Best Cities For Relocating Families (Among Metro Areas with Populations Of 1.3 Million & Over) Source: Primacy Relocation 1. Pittsburgh, PA 2. Indianapolis/Carmel, IN 3. Austin/Round Rock, TX 4. Fort Worth/Arlington, TX 5. San Antonio, TX 6. Cambridge/Newton/Framingham, MA 7. Columbus, OH 8. Kansas City, MO/KS 9. Minneapolis/St. Paul/Bloomington, MN/WI 10. Cincinnati/Middletown, OH/KY/IN Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrPsychic 1 Posted May 9, 2008 The best place in Pittsburgh to move isn't actually Pittsburgh itself, more like the suburbs. That's where my mom is from, my father is from an area just outside the slums. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kor37 9 Posted May 9, 2008 They forgot to mention that Pittsburgh has just taken the title from Los Angelos as the most polluted city in the US. So I guess its ok to move there.....as long as you don't mind glowing every once in awhile........ :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Theunicornhunter 2 Posted May 9, 2008 Best city of cities with population of 1.3 Million is sort of like winning best actor in a horror/scifi mini series. I don't know why anyone would live in a major metro area. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethlehem 7 Posted May 9, 2008 Good point TUH I would not Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
He Who Shall Not Be Named 2 Posted May 10, 2008 I don't know why anyone would live in a major metro area. Well I do live in a major metro area - San Jose is the 10th largest US city (even though we are still considered a suburb of San Francisco we dwarf them in population and land mass) and I live right downtown. Not a good place to raise a family but if you are single and enjoy good restaurants and bars without a lot of driving you can't beat downtown. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Itchygomba69 0 Posted May 10, 2008 (edited) Kor what is your source on Pittsburgh being the city with the most pollution right b4 I moved down it was voted one of the greenest cities around, now back when they had the Steele mills running is was the most polluted cities in the country, but last I heard it had some of the best air quality in the Northeast That report is flawed here is an article on it Region passes L.A. on pollution list By Allison M. Heinrichs TRIBUNE-REVIEW Thursday, May 1, 2008 Buzz up! Post to MySpace! StumbleUpon Toolbar The American Lung Association today dealt Pittsburgh a black eye. The city topped the group's annual ranking of metropolitan areas with the worst short-term fine particle pollution -- the first time in its nine years that the "State of the Air" report has given a city outside California the dubious title. Environmental officials say it's undeserved because the association bases its ranking on one air quality monitor. Pittsburgh's ranking is based on a monitor in Liberty, a small Mon Valley town about 16 miles from the Golden Triangle. "The air certainly is a lot cleaner in Pittsburgh," said Donald Welsh, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator for the Mid-Atlantic region. "Is it perfect? No, but the trend is in the right direction." story continues below The lung association defended its methods, saying some other pollution monitors in the region also have high readings. In the Pittsburgh area -- covering Allegheny, Westmoreland, Butler, Beaver, Armstrong, Washington, Fayette and Lawrence counties -- the monitor used is downwind of U.S. Steel's Clairton Coke Works, the nation's largest coke plant. The company plans to invest $1.2 billion to modify the plant to lessen pollution. That monitor accurately measures air quality only in Clairton, Liberty, Glassport, Lincoln and Port Vue, where about 25,000 people live, said Guillermo Cole, Allegheny County Health Department spokesman. "This is what's unfair about the ranking," Cole said. "This is a county of 1.2 million people -- 1,175,000 people throughout this county are not exposed to fine particle pollution at those levels found near Clairton." The lung association ranks metro areas for three categories of pollution: ozone, and year-round and short-term particle pollution. The particles, from burning coal, wood or diesel fuel, are about 1/40th the size of a grain of sand. Short-term particle pollution refers to spikes in soot levels in a 24-hour period. The 2008 report averages data collected by the EPA from 2004, 2005 and 2006. Pittsburgh ranked second for year-round particle pollution and didn't make the top 25 for ozone, which is created when pollution reacts with sunlight and high temperatures. Los Angeles, which last year ranked worst in all three categories, this year fell behind Pittsburgh for short-term particle pollution. It maintained its worst-ranking for long-term particle pollution and ozone. Particulates are believed to contribute to between 5,000 and 50,000 deaths in the United States each year. "They have been associated with increased cancer rates, but what they mainly do is increase deaths due to heart disease. They also cause increases in asthma attacks among children," said George Leikauf, professor of environmental health at the University of Pittsburgh's Graduate School of Public Health. To create its report, the lung association examined metro areas with at least one air quality monitor, a device that measures air pollution. Of the more than 3,000 counties nationwide, about 700 have monitors. The Pittsburgh metropolitan area has monitors in 20 locations, and the lung association uses the one that records the worst pollution levels, as it does for all cities. Because the coke works is located in a river valley, weather changes can trap pollution in the low-lying areas, Cole said. "That's going to get lost, especially to outsiders who do not know the unique problem that we have here," Cole said. "The whole region and city gets a black eye that it really doesn't deserve." The Liberty monitor had an average reading of 20.4 micrograms of soot per cubic meter of air -- the amount a person breathes in about two hours. Other monitors in the county ranged from 12.9 in South Fayette and North Park to 16.2 in North Braddock. The EPA considers 15 or less to be acceptable for human health. "If you were to average the stations together, we'd come in under the national norm," said Frank Gamrat, senior research associate at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy, a Castle Shannon think tank. "We don't average them together because you don't breathe average air," said Janice Nolen, assistant vice president of national policy and advocacy for the lung association. Even if the association used the area's next highest-recording monitor in North Braddock and the worst monitors in every other city, Pittsburgh would rank in the top 25, Nolen said. "It is true that (the Clairton monitor) doesn't represent the air quality for the entire metropolitan ... area," said Rachel Filippini, executive director of the Group Against Smog and Pollution in Squirrel Hill. "But the truth is that nobody living in this area has pristine, healthy air. "And that monitor is located where about 25,000 people live and work and are breathing," she said. "It's not like it's in some desolate area where we don't have to worry about it." Pollution-reducing upgrades at the coke works are expected to begin later this year. When the work is completed in 2014, the Health Department expects pollution in the area to meet EPA standards. Air pollution near the Liberty monitor has improved in the past several years, falling from 21.4 micrograms of soot per cubic meter of air in the 2002 report to 20.4 in this year's report. Next year, the Health Department expects it to fall to 19.8. The ranking probably won't deter businesses from locating in Pittsburgh because they are more concerned with taxation and the labor force, Gamrat said. "How does this come across to others in the country? Well, not good," he said. "But I doubt if it would really cause a business to say 'Huh, maybe we shouldn't go there.' Most people think of us as smoky and polluted anyway, even though those of us who live here know otherwise. ******************************************************************************** ***************** oh and the list was about the city and surrounding suburbs, not the city itself IDK who would want to live in a major city anymore, I did when I went to college. that was enough I take Suburbs anyday Edited May 10, 2008 by Itchygomba69 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kor37 9 Posted May 10, 2008 Well, OF COURSE Pittsburgh officials are going to nitpick the article apart and dispute it. What city wouldn't?......... :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VaBeachGuy 12 Posted May 10, 2008 I've never been there but one of my brothers said he didn't really like it there. Not one of his favorite places. He may have been in the city itself though and not the suberbs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
