Downtown Population increased 25% since 2000 (Philadelphia, Pittsburgh: condos, construction, colleges)

[pman]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I could see Pittsburgh becoming a notable layover stop between Chicago and Philly/NY/DC, if there was decent high-ish speed train service along the relevant routes. That's not quite the same thing as being in the heart of the BosWash corridor like Philly, but I do think it would add to our appeal for international and even West Coast tourists.

But in any event, I absolutely agree with pman that an improving Downtown--improvements which will be driven mostly by residential demand, but could be sped along by tourist dollars--should spill over into Downtown becoming more and more attractive for tourists. I'd also like Pittsburgh to play up its Rust Belt Chic branding--if it can sell Levis it can sell a tourist destination.

certainly a real high speed train (2.5 to Philly, 3-3:15 to NY) would negate some of pittsburgh's geographical "disadvantage". flying into pittsburgh for a coupel days before taking the train east, something europeans and asians are probably quite comfortable doing.

the "new" airport bus is likely an effort to overcome this part to some extent. I'd also guess the study looks at spending per county, allegheny county is some

Michael Chapaloney, spokesman for the state tourism office, said the computation is based on hotel, food and transportation spending. He said the main reason Allegheny County eclipsed Philadelphia was that its transportation spending was higher, a factor he attributed to the larger mass transportation system available to tourists in Philadelphia.

Read more: County is top tourist draw in state
I'd guess KK's post was to say Pitt is already fulfilling it's mission but the numbers are too broad to say such a thing one way or another. For example, it's by county, Allegheny county is enormous making up half the MSA's population and over five times the geographical area of Philadelphia county. on the plus side, the powers that be seem well aware of the hotel problem which leads to unusually high hotel rates (which, in turn, may be a necessary intermediate ste to getting more hotels).

[BrianTH]

True high speed rail (say 3 hours to Chicago, 2 hours to Philly) could even make Pittsburgh a daytrip possibility. But even at double that (so about 6 hours to Chicago, 4 hours to Philly), I think Pittsburgh could be an intermediate stop.

[KoobleKar]

Actually, my point was that one article dealt with INTERNATIONAL VISITORS only while the other two dealt with tourist numbers in general.

I also don't think too many tourists are coming to Allegheny County to take in the sights at McKees Rocks or Monroeville.

[BrianTH]

I wouldn't be surprised, though, if tourists were based in Allegheny County but visiting regional attractions like Falling Water.

[KoobleKar]

Yes, but that would be one of a scarce few places that would happen.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by KoobleKar

Yes, but that would be one of a scarce few places that would happen.

There is also Ohiopyle and Kennywood, plus people also go antiquing, visit historic battlefields, and such. But yeah, I think you are right that most of the local tourist attractions are in the City.

[pman]

FWIW, I was reading Philadelphia magazine last night and they have a section called Top 9 getaways, two were in Western PA (Bedford and the second is Pittsburgh). they still find the need to note that Pitt ISNT overrun by pollution but in the short half page prtion of the article they recomend big burrito restaurants, a fish sandwich at wholey's, and something that I can't remember. primanti's only if you must. they note the warhol museum, the national aviary, the duquesne incline, and nearby falling water. they recomended hotel is the fairmont. (note I have also seen amish country listed as an attraction, noting "relatively unspoiled compared to southeast PA")
Pittsburgh was also ranked as one ot the top 3 places to travel to watch the phillies, based on quality of the park/location, excuse to visit, and price. the other two were Boston and Chicago I believe. Frommer's listed it as an alternative place to visit. thinking of chicago? try pitt. I don't remember ever reading many recomendations to visit before, it may already be starting. hotel prices are really high though which makes a visit expensive.
regarding Philly, it looks like they've been bumped up to #9 with over 30 million visitors according to the latest list I found. If I'm not mistaken, the city used to be much lower, perhaps #18. it illustrates both the challenges and possibilities of moving up the list.

One of the most historic cities in the U.S., Philadelphia has a great museum system that includes the African American Museum and National Constitution Center. With traveling exhibits that attract millions of attendees, it’s understandable that Philly’s day-leisure-visitor count is as high as 12.97 million. Even with all the day trippers, the city's hotels performed admirably in 2009, with a 61.7% occupancy rate.

List: America's Most-Visited Cities - 7. Atlanta, Ga.: 35,400,000 visitors - Forbes.com

Worth noting that two of the top four are disney world and disneyland.

Originally Posted by BrianTH

True high speed rail (say 3 hours to Chicago, 2 hours to Philly) could even make Pittsburgh a daytrip possibility. But even at double that (so about 6 hours to Chicago, 4 hours to Philly), I think Pittsburgh could be an intermediate stop.

Actually, at ten hours to chicago, you won't be seeing the enormous increases in through travel from the east. you will see large incremental increases, perhaps tripling or quadrupling, but much less than the likely airline numbers you'd see with 5 hours. Of course, at four hours, I think you'd continue to see the trend you see today, only much greater...Pittsburgh is a stronger OD than intermediate stop. All of a sudden it's worth taking the train to Pitt from the east. for many people it's a more relazing way to travel than driving, and with gas and tolls, it's cost competitive. I'd guess you see a surge in domestic tourism even at 4 hours.

[BrianTH]

We really need to do something about our central hotel situation--I know most of the rooms are bound to be business/luxury-class, but we've got to be able to offer more tourist-class rooms.

It would be nice to get the train from Chicago to Pittsburgh under 4 hours--and in fact I think eventually that will happen--but even at 6 hours you could put together a viable tourist itinerary with a night or two in Pittsburgh (in between visiting Chicago and the East Coast, or vice versa). Six hours would beat driving, and while it is a little long for the time-pressed solo business traveller, for a group of tourists on an extended trip looking for more comfort, more interaction, and a look at the scenery along the way, it is a reasonable alternative to flying.

[Blackbeauty212]

I've always said Pittsburgh is the perfect transfer hub for rail....Even if it was Acela type highspeed

All you'd need are upgrades to the Keystone west the Capitol Limited and maybe throw in a spur line that take the same path as route 78-81 from NYC down to Harrisburg...and the line out to Chicago...and I'm telling you the amount of people coming thru Pittsburgh would be night and day to what you have now....

Pittsburgh's problem is its not connected..and as the city continues to revitalize and grow this issue will become ever more prevalent....in this era you have to accessible by all modes if you want to be on the level-relevant as an NYC DC Chicago.

PA needs the Keystone west upgraded in the worst way before all else.

[pman]

if the state only had small dollars, the best thing to do would be to invest it in the very ends of the Keystone corridor, within philly's city limits and pittsburgh's. in Philly, speeds are still 15-30 mph despite a recent investment program. speeds are no better in pitt, if not worse. these are among the slowest stretches on the corridor and would probably be the most bang for the buck (and least likely to be bypassed by a new high speed stretch). that said, I see real HSR (2-2.5 hours to Philly) as a huge boon to the city. first, it would expose pittsburgh to a large market (and one that is used to small, dense housing I might add) but also finally address one of the large downsides, remoteness. one of the advantages to being on the east coast is proximity to other places. being 2-3 hours from philly and ny would be a huge boon.

anyway, thought this was interesting:

All five raved about Philadelphia and its convention-friendly offerings: the 1,408-room Philadelphia Marriott Downtown, which connects to the Convention Center; the proximity to the airport; the high-quality staff at the center and the visitors bureau; and the city's restaurants, historic sites, and walkability...

Read more: Labor issues mar a great convention city, planners say | Philadelphia Inquirer | 09/05/2010
Watch sports videos you won't find anywhere else