ShareThis Page

Pittsburgh, Raleigh 'most livable' contenders for Amazon HQ, study says

| Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2018, 2:30 p.m.
The Amazon logo in Santa Monica, Calif.
The Amazon logo in Santa Monica, Calif.

Pittsburgh is the “most livable” of the 20 places contending to be the home of Amazon's second headquarters, as long as you ignore its tie with Raleigh, N.C., in an analysis by personal finance site

The LendingTree subsidiary tallied scores for contenders using seven factors, including commute times, living costs, climate, taxes and housing vacancy rates.

“We trust that Amazon is doing a great job of evaluating (and negotiating) the core criteria and key preferences they deem essential to their business operations,” said study author Kali McFadden, a LendingTree analyst. “We wanted to take a closer look at what each of these cities can offer their rank-and-file employees, both local and transferred.”

Pittsburgh and that other city both scored 78 out of a possible 100, with Dallas coming in third at 69.

Pittsburgh's low cost of living and relatively short commute time helped it reach the top, while its temperature swings allowed Raleigh to catch up despite its higher housing costs. An obvious quality-of-life factor missing from the study is the fun of rooting for the Steelers and Penguins instead of the Panthers and Hurricanes.

New York City had the lowest score at 22 because of high living costs, high tax rates and the longest commute time.

Brian Bowling is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-850-1218, or via Twitter @TribBrian.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me