Best skyline in Upstate New York? [Archive]

Jaybird

March 11th, 2005, 01:10 AM

I love upstate New York, I think it is beautiful up there in the summer by some pictures I have seen and researched. Not to mention, all of its cities have great things to offer, and the unique skylines, and I'd rather focus on Upstate New York than Toronto or the Golden Horseshoe in Ontario. I have yet to visit Syracuse and Albany, though, but I will one of these days. Buffalo is the BIG LEAGUE city up there, but even then, it feels like a small town compared to Toronto, and there are many other reasons why I like upstate New York, and I was impressed with some of the scenery in Western New York when I took a tour of it on my bike last year. Not to mention, much of upstate except for Albany, is in a bit of a sour economy crisis, and I like to support, not to mention the Sabres as well in Buffalo and show appreciation for them. Also, upstate is not SPRAWL crazy as say, the Ontario Golden Horseshoe is, and the people there are much friendlier (although I know they must be frustrated with the economy and poor government) than uptight-minded Ontarians. :)

Jaybird

March 11th, 2005, 01:15 AM

Not to mention in the last poll of this similar kind I did two years ago, Rochester actually had the advantage in votes. I did on SSP, though, so I don't know if that means anything.

jmancuso

March 11th, 2005, 01:22 AM

yes, the biggie about upstate new york is that sprawl is almost non-existent but there are patches of it her and there. if the economy was healthy, i would move back (and stay) in a heart beat. buffalo has so much potential and still is twice the city as those in the south that are two or three times its size.

oh, and go bills. :yes:

MattSal

March 11th, 2005, 01:28 AM

My Ranking . . .
1. Buffalo
2. Rochester
3. Albany
4. Syracuse

BTW, do Utica, Binghampton, or Niagara Falls have substantial skylines?

P.S. This should be my 100th post. :cheers: Now to 500!

jmancuso

March 11th, 2005, 01:33 AM

^ for its size, utica has a modest skyline.

steel

March 11th, 2005, 02:54 AM

i actually think the consistancy of syracuse's skyline despite being short makes it more appealling. next would be rochester, then albany and finally buffalo.

if buffalo's skyline were more condensed, it would easily be my favorite becuase it has a great stock of buildings and great architecture.

I can't see a skyline in teh Syracuse pic. You could insert the entire Syr skyline into Buffalo's and not even notice it.

steel

March 11th, 2005, 03:11 AM

My Ranking . . .
1. Buffalo
2. Rochester
3. Albany
4. Syracuse

BTW, do Utica, Binghampton, or Niagara Falls have substantial skylines?

P.S. This should be my 100th post. :cheers: Now to 500!

Here is Niagara Falls Skyline from Buffalo City Hall Observatory

http://www.globalphotos.org/buffalo/20040802/RIMG7571.jpg

MattSal

March 11th, 2005, 03:25 AM

Here is Niagara Falls Skyline from Buffalo City Hall Observatory

http://www.globalphotos.org/buffalo/20040802/RIMG7571.jpg

Forget the view of Niagara Falls. Look at those beautiful streets of Buffalo. Why anyone wouldn't want to live there is beyond me. Just look at the trees! Are all cities up north like that?

Jaybird

March 11th, 2005, 05:31 AM

^I guess maybe I should have included Niagara Falls and Utica... but I wasn't sure what to expect if I put those two cities in the mix. I have never seen Binghamton's skyline before.

Here are a few more pics of Buffalo's skyline, to add :) :
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/561/2481buffaloskylinemmjui.jpg
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/561/2087buffalo.jpg
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/561/1102image-11.jpg
http://img137.exs.cx/img137/9580/buffaloskyline1.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jaybird287/image/40649008.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jaybird287/image/40649650.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jaybird287/image/40648999.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jaybird287/image/40649002.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jaybird287/image/40649639.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jaybird287/image/40649653.jpg
http://www.buffalocvb.org/images/photogallery/city%20hall%20skyline.jpg
http://www.tailwinds.org/2004/Erie/Erie-Images/46.jpg

BuffCity

March 11th, 2005, 06:15 AM

Ex-Ithacan

March 11th, 2005, 08:18 PM

I like 'em all. Some great old buildings in each one, and nice density for their size too. But how about some of the little cities?

Utica :

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375utny02.jpg

Jamestown:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst15.jpg

Elmira:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375mvc-e05s.jpg

And finally the best, Ithaca

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/500/375ith02.jpg

Collegetown area of Ithaca:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375ith7-3-4-30.jpg

:jk:

BuffCity

March 11th, 2005, 09:06 PM

LOL...Ithaca...hahaha(where is that?)

Lets see some places like Watertown, Binghamton, Lockport, Olean or maybe even Auburn

Utica sure looks alright, but it must be the people there that give it it's great reviews...lol

I have a bunch of NY State city photos I'll post tonight if I remember, we have some awsome places here...too bad the economy sucks

nostyle

March 11th, 2005, 09:24 PM

From an aerial perspective Buffalo blows other upstate cities away, but from a skyline perspective it wins by a small margin over Rochester IMO.

MattSal

March 11th, 2005, 09:29 PM

Isn't Ithaca a Greek Island? I think it's where Odysseus was from.

pjpmk

March 11th, 2005, 10:05 PM

"Forget the view of Niagara Falls. Look at those beautiful streets of Buffalo. Why anyone wouldn't want to live there is beyond me. Just look at the trees! Are all cities up north like that?"

Yup, gotta love the trees. Summertime makes it more than worth dealing with the ugliness of them when they are bare. Look at the trees in the syracuse pic! I always love driving into the city from the hilly south in the summer, nothing but valley after valley of thick green.

asohn

March 11th, 2005, 11:21 PM

Here is Niagara Falls Skyline from Buffalo City Hall Observatory

http://www.globalphotos.org/buffalo/20040802/RIMG7571.jpg

Thats Niagara Falls, ONTARIO. Niagara Falls, NY has no skyline.

That's a great picture though!

samsonyuen

March 12th, 2005, 12:50 AM

Watertown and Syracuse have got pretty good skylines for its sizes. But Buffalo and Rochester are pretty nice too.

BuffCity

March 12th, 2005, 01:15 AM

can they catch Buffalo?

Vlad the Great

March 12th, 2005, 01:36 AM

Albany: Corning Tower is so intimidating, it's 180 meters, on top of a hill and on top of a "pedestal" on top of the hill. It really looks taller than it actually is, especially from a distance.

There's also a nice cluster of 10-20 story office buildings over on State street and Pearl streets. Actually, I like this more than the Empire state plaza, since not only was this not paid for by the state (yeah I find it cheap too) but it's got that big city feeling, more than you would think a city of 90,000 would give you....

Vlad the Great

March 12th, 2005, 01:37 AM

Oh but I still vote Buffalo ;)

jmancuso

March 12th, 2005, 02:09 AM

Why anyone wouldn't want to live there is beyond me.

http://i.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/buffalo/bus.jpg
http://i.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/buffalo/umbrella.jpg
http://i.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/buffalo/work.jpg

Just look at the trees! Are all cities up north like that?

just about, yes.

steel

March 12th, 2005, 05:28 AM

jmancuso

March 12th, 2005, 06:53 AM

I Love winter and especially winter storms. Give me a good three footer any day.

March and April are the only months that suck in the north. Unless you get no snow in December January and February. Without snow those months suck too.

4 seasons all the way baby.

Houston weather. NO THANKS!

march and april my ass...try from the beginning of november 'til about may. i wish the shitty winter weather was confined to just two months.

houton summers suck big-time; worse than a buffalo blizzard but the winters here are heaven.

steel

March 12th, 2005, 07:00 AM

march and april my ass...try from the beginning of november 'til about may. i wish the shitty winter weather was confined to just two months.

houton summers suck big-time; worse than a buffalo blizzard but the winters here are heaven.

You don't get it so I will not try to explain. Isn't may to November pretty shitty in H town though?

jmancuso

March 12th, 2005, 07:23 AM

^ i grew up in upstate new york so i am more than familiar with the climate. as for houston; it is hell from about may to october so you're close.

BuffCity

March 12th, 2005, 07:25 PM

4 seasons are better IMO, too hot in Texas.

ItsConanOBrien

March 13th, 2005, 01:23 AM

I'll go with Buffalo and Syracuse. Ithica is definatly an honorable mention.

Third of a kind

March 13th, 2005, 08:20 AM

man I hate the snow...I've been thinking of relocating to miami for good..but its just some things down there I can't get with..but its still ill..although I digress

all of the upstate cities are interesting..very interesting...I wish I had the means to go upstate and spend some time in these cities, or even the adirondacks..i've always wanted to go there.

that pic of downtown syracuse looks like a shot of dtwn yonkers without the hills and less density

I'd go with buffalo because I think it seems to have more than a skyline, but I know of its rep for art..and i'm a artist myself

Ex-Ithacan

March 13th, 2005, 05:36 PM

OK, here's some more cities not really in the running, but probably not seen before.

Olean, NY
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375olen2.jpg

Middletown:
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375mdlny3.jpg

Troy (sorry, these pics aren't really representative of the city)
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375tny03.jpg
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375tny02.jpg

Schenectady
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375schny6.jpg

Amsterdam
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375amny1.jpg

Mesocyclone

March 14th, 2005, 01:17 AM

BuffCity

March 14th, 2005, 01:58 AM

Binghamton has a great skyline...it's also a little bit more in its own market, as where Utica is kinda between Syracuse and Albany.

Nice pic.

BuffCity

March 14th, 2005, 02:33 AM

http://www.consultwebs.com/ncphotos/binghamton_photos_pg1.htm

binghamton photos link

jmancuso

March 14th, 2005, 02:48 AM

I think Binghamton has a really good skyline for it's size.It's Metro area is around the size of Utica's,maybe a little smaller.However,I think it looks bigger than Utica..

http://www.langernetz.de/jan/usa/binghamton/town/001_town.jpg

What do you think?

wow, that looks a lot like utica...except for the river cutting through town.

more of utica...
http://www.pbase.com/mancusoj/image/24956395.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/mancusoj/image/24956393.jpg

phxmania2001

March 14th, 2005, 02:55 AM

Gotta give this one to Buffalo.

On the other hand... Ithaca wh00t! :rock:

cfx68

March 14th, 2005, 03:06 AM

I think Binghamton has a really good skyline for it's size.It's Metro area is around the size of Utica's,maybe a little smaller.However,I think it looks bigger than Utica..
What do you think?

Thanks for that great pic of the rarely seen Binghampton. I never seen what it looks like until now. I'm impressed.

Ex-Ithacan

March 14th, 2005, 12:36 PM

Nice pic of Binghamton Mesocyclone. Really shows off the skyline in that angle, thanks. Nice additions for Utica too Jman.

Malo

March 14th, 2005, 07:23 PM

I'm going with Rochester. The most modern city Upstate. The one with the clearest vision of what it wants and needs in its central core, and the one city that is looking to the future.

Second place, and a close second I may add, goes to Buffalo. Gorgeous as always.

steel

March 14th, 2005, 09:29 PM

Rochester
http://img224.exs.cx/img224/9941/rochesteroct200216ks.jpg

Buffalo
http://img142.exs.cx/img142/9952/air2.jpg

Buffalo: More buildings, more diversity of buildings, more density, more tall buildings. Buffalo also has three distinct clusters of buildings. The main cluster is two or three times bigger than Downtown Rochester. Then there is another cluster at the Bufflao Niagara Medical Campus and another small cluster stretched out along Deleware Ave.

CiceroClark

March 14th, 2005, 10:19 PM

A couple more showing Syracuse

http://www.pbase.com/ciceroclay/image/29758226/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ciceroclay/image/29752911/original.jpg

Malo

March 15th, 2005, 12:17 AM

Jaybird

March 15th, 2005, 12:39 AM

I could never find really good skyline pics of Utica or Binghamton. I would always look for at least 30 min-1 hour changing my search terms, looking for those! lol! Anyways, Binghamton's skyline is actually not too bad for a city of its size. Those mountains give it a nice touch as well. Reminds me of Kelowna, BC. Syracuse's skyline is like Ottawa's lot of density but BRUTAL heightage. I like the first skyline shot there, CiceraClark. It makes Syracuse look green, and that is a very nice looking urban neighborhood there!

steel

March 15th, 2005, 01:15 AM

Steel: Considering that Buffalo was at one time, a city with a population of 600,000--while Rochester approached 400,000--it would only be fitting that Buffalo have the bigger downtown core. Don't get me wrong, I love downtown Buffalo, I just like the more modern look of Rochester more.

And yes, it does need some more density in DT Rochester, while Buffalo would look great if they filled in some of those holes in the skyline with some newer buildings.

The truth is Buffalo has more new buildings than Rochester. The prominent modern style High rise buildings in Rochester are all from the sixties. There is one some what stumpy Post Modern Building in rochester that is fairly recent.

Also as far as size comparison goes. Rochester claims to have a metro of 1.1M to Buffalo's 1.2. So that should not be an excuse. (though that is the official US census version whihc does not count the Canadian portion of metro Buffalo and also gives Rochester a huge 5 county area) Buffalo's real metro should be more like 1.6M

BuffCity

March 15th, 2005, 04:58 AM

Mesocyclone

March 15th, 2005, 05:15 AM

Hey thanks everybody!! If any of you have any more Questions about Binghamton,just ask me..because..well I live there heh. I must also add that all the pics I've seen on here are great! I really love Upstate NY cities and how urban they look.It's hard for me to choose a favorite,because I think theyre all really good for one reason or another.

However,I have to add that I think the Syracuse Skyline is a bit more impressive in person.Everytime I come up on 81 from the south you can really see how dense the city core looks,and how far the skyline for a city it's size extends.Everytime I drive around downtown the city feels bigger than it is.Also,I've always loved Armory Square,and I feel like the city has a lot of potential if it can start looking towards the future a bit.

Malo

March 15th, 2005, 06:14 PM

I will agree thats Buffalo's unofficial census should recognize numbers from across the border. Rochester Metro...lol talk about sprawl, I hear next census is gonna have Niagara county with Rochester...lol. Being here in Batavia and being listed in the Rochester metro is kinda wrong, its more and more growing towards the Buffalo side...mind you its exactly 30 miles from both city. Rochester metro if looked at in the same way they did the Buffalo metro would be more like 800-900k.

Buffalo has more density, and more development now...it's cleaner downtown and more green (trees and parks) Rochester shot itself in the liver when it built the inner loop.

enough Rochester trashing...I hope the Ferry gets stuck in the mud (damn thing)

Boy, somebody in Rochester must have pee'd in your Wheaties, huh? I hope the Ferry gets stuck in the mud? What did the poor Ferry do to you?..lol

Batavia is growing more towards the Buffalo side? Really? How come both of its high schools play in Section 5 (Rochester metro)then? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if what you say were true, wouldn't they be lobbying to compete in Section 6?

And Buff City--Buffalo cleaner than Rochester? Since when? Yesterday? Ask any unbiased person, (like someone who doesn't have Buff City as a user name), what they think of each city after visiting, and 9 out of 10 will tell you that Rochester is the cleaner of the two--by far. Always has been..

Not to take anything away from Downtown Buffalo, mind you. They've done a very nice job with it. It looks great. Now all they need is to put something approaching a big consumer retail store in it, and people might actually come back downtown to do their shopping...lol

I also love the fact that you're not going to let this exclusion of Canadian numbers go by the board. Many years ago, when Buffalo was a bigger attraction than Toronto, I would have grudgingly agreed with you--but today(?)--not happening, bro. All of the urban areas along the Queen E between Buffalo and Toronto, are their own urban/suburban entities, and have no reason to be included in the Greater Buffalo metro. None.

Also, the Rochester metro is composed of those cities, towns, and counties, that look to Rochester as the nexus of their existence--the area of dominant influence--or ADI. This was decided long ago by the Census Bureau, and the people of those counties--not you and I.

Where the Census Bureau made a huge mistake IMO, was in NOT including the three counties you mentioned before, in the Buffalo Metro. Stupid move on their part, and something that clearly needs to be rectified. Buffalo would show an even larger metro population with the inclusion of these three, which could possibly then garner Buffalo even greater sums of state money that the Buffalo politicians could then siphon off, or bicker about for years to come. Kinda brings a tear to your eye doesn't it? :)

Malo

March 15th, 2005, 06:41 PM

The truth is Buffalo has more new buildings than Rochester. The prominent modern style High rise buildings in Rochester are all from the sixties. There is one some what stumpy Post Modern Building in rochester that is fairly recent.

Well, if by new you mean built in the last year or two, then yes, Buffalo wins that round. But if you're talking about newer looking buildings, then Rochester wins that one. But if you're talking about Rochester's high rise towers downtown? Then you should know that the one's that clearly stand out and make up the majority of the skyline downtown, are from the 70's--not the 60's. Just like Buffalo...

Both cities should revel in the fact that no one anywhere builds more 10-12 story buildings than they do--and absolutely no one makes a bigger deal out of it than do these two cities. To read the papers in both towns, one would get the idea that somebody was proposing a 650,000 sq. ft./45 story tower somewhere in the city. Unfortunately for both--nothing could be further from the truth.

Then local civic leaders are quoted, TV and radio carry the story ad nauseum, Republicans and Dems start fighting over who brought the project to town first, and the first of many exclamations fill the local newspaper headlines with quotes like, "9 Story Tower Means Economic Recovery Just Ahead!" Or--"New 11 Story Tower to Create 30 Jobs!"

The whole thing just makes me want to cry.

steel

March 15th, 2005, 07:51 PM

I also love the fact that you're not going to let this exclusion of Canadian numbers go by the board. Many years ago, when Buffalo was a bigger attraction than Toronto, I would have grudgingly agreed with you--but today(?)--not happening, bro. All of the urban areas along the Queen E between Buffalo and Toronto, are their own urban/suburban entities, and have no reason to be included in the Greater Buffalo metro. None.

Tell that to the people in Fort Erie and Niagara falls that work in Buffalo, or the Canadians that fill the Buffalo area malls and theaters. Tell that to the Merchants of Downtown St. Catherines who advertise in the Buffalo News, Buffalo Spree and Art Voice. Tell that to the many many Canadian Bills and Sabers Season Ticket holders. Tell that to the Canadians who live closer to downtown Buffalo than People of Buffalo's biggest burb (Amherst).

You can keep dreaming that Rochester metro is equal in size to Buffalo but it is nothing but a dream. Driving into each city makes that very clear. Rochester is suburban almost all the way to downtown. Not so with Buff. There is a reason Galisano does not move the Sabers to Rochester. It is called more people. Buffalo has far larger population in a much more densley built area.

BuffCity

March 15th, 2005, 09:23 PM

Malo

March 15th, 2005, 10:08 PM

[QUOTE=steel]Tell that to the people in Fort Erie and Niagara falls that work in Buffalo, or the Canadians that fill the Buffalo area malls and theaters. Tell that to the Merchants of Downtown St. Catherines who advertise in the Buffalo News, Buffalo Spree and Art Voice. Tell that to the many many Canadian Bills and Sabers Season Ticket holders. Tell that to the Canadians who live closer to downtown Buffalo than People of Buffalo's biggest burb (Amherst). [QUOTE]

Well, I lived in Buffalo, and while I saw Canadian license plates in the suburban malls, I never saw those same malls PACKED with Canadians. Hell, I've seen many Buffalo plates on cars in downtown Toronto--applying your logic to that situation--that should mean that because there were cars from Erie County in Toronto, that the downtown merchants in Toronto are dependent on Buffalo shoppers, or that Toronto's ADI extends all the way into Buffalo. Not true. Toronto can no more lay claim to all the communities down to the US border, any more than Buffalo can lay claim to the residents in a 40 mile arc across the border.

For the same reason that St. Catherines, Hamilton, and Kitchener are all destinations at some point for Buffalonians, their economies or industries are not dependent on Buffalo. They are their own entities unto themselves. Because Buffalo and Southern Ontario happen to share a close proximity to each other, does not make them a part of Buffalo's metro, nor Buffalo a part of theirs. Were Southern Ontario devoid of cities, cultural events, sporting and civic events, etc.--I would be the first to agree with you on the Canadian inclusion thing--but not as it stands now.

Also, just because there seems to be an abundance of major league ticket holders from Canada--who have the wherewithal to decide whether or not to attend a CFL game or an NFL game (Buffalo wins that one), or who can choose between the major league hockey team in Toronto or Buffalo (toss up)--does not mean that those people who do decide to spend their Canadian dollars in Buffalo on big league sporting events, are part of the Buffalo metro. Let me ask you this? With unemployment being as high as it is in Erie Co., just how many Canadians do you think are gushing over the chance to work in a city with very few job opportunities available? Wouldn't you think that the employment opportunities are better on that side of the Bridge? Why come to work in Buffalo then?

Also Steel--I've attended the Canadian Ballet more than a few times in my life--does that now make me part of the Ft. Erie metro?

On a different note--would I advertise in the Buffalo papers if I had the same proximity to Buffalo that St. Catherines has? Certainly. But does that mean that St. Catherines merchants are trying to tap into the large consumer base just across the Peace Bridge, or does it mean that they think of themselves as a distant Buffalo suburb. I have to go with the former rather than the latter.

[QUOTE=steel]You can keep dreaming that Rochester metro is equal in size to Buffalo but it is nothing but a dream. Driving into each city makes that very clear. Rochester is suburban almost all the way to downtown. Not so with Buff. There is a reason Galisano does not move the Sabers to Rochester. It is called more people. Buffalo has far larger population in a much more densley built area.[QUOTE]

I have no such dream, Steel. I can look at the same figures you are privy to and see that Buffalo is the larger metro. As far as Rochester being suburban almost all the way to downtown goes, that is such a load of crap. No matter where you enter Rochester from, once you've crossed the city line, you know you're in the city. Maybe you're just distressed because there are much nicer homes in Rochester, and that you can't seem to tell the difference between the suburban homes and the city homes. In Buffalo it becomes very difficult to separate the two, understandably, except the rule of thumb is, that the house in the city is the one that is a little bit smaller, and the cheap pink clap-board siding has faded a bit more...Also you have less lawn for a statue of St. Mary to be situated on.

steel

March 15th, 2005, 10:31 PM

Malo

March 15th, 2005, 10:56 PM

Malo...

I don't like that Ferry because it's gonna sink the city...they can't afford it and to buy something like that is retarded. Watch Rochester threaten to cut school teachers next year because of a budget crunch...watch

Where are you? Houston or Seattle? I don't know who you talked to that said Rochester was some great wonderful paradise downtown, actually building quality wise...it has only a fraction of classics compared to Buffalo, it has some 60's era stuff, but we all know what is more pleasing to the eye.

Rochester unfortunately tore down many of its old classics (RKO Palace, Rochester hotel, etc.). Not that it didn't have them (as you intimate), but that they didn't keep as many as Buffalo did. Rochester in the 60's and 70's had a lot of money coming into it, and because they were cash rich, decided to just tear down a ton of downtown structures, paving the way for Xerox Tower, Lincoln First Bank, Midtown, First Federal, all the building along the one side of State Street, etc. Buffalo, just starting to go through what would become a 40 year fall from grace, didn't have the same dollars available to them, and chose to renovate many of its older buildings. But they too knocked down some sizeable gems.

I've never thought of Downtown Rochester as some kind of urban paradise, btw.

My biggest gripe with downtown Rochester is the lack of green space and the Genesee River with all the trash and Tree Stumps. Buffalo has the harbor on one side, Lasalle Park on the other, Elmwood strip another, Delaware Ave, Main street, Medical campus, HSBC Arena and Cobblestone district to the south.

And downtown Rochester has the Genessee River flowing through it, a couple of beautiful waterfalls within it, two small parks, the High Falls/East End/St. Paul Corridor entertainment district, the Red Wings and the Rhino's stadiums within walking distance, East Avenue, the Park Avenue/cultural art district very close by (Rochester's Allentown), and the cultural landmarks of the Eastman Theatre, GeVa theatre, etc. So, what's your point?

Rochester is incircled by a highway that seems to strangle it from neighborhood pedestrian traffic.

Rochester, as I have said many times before, made a huge mistake in letting the Inner Loop get built. However, with the new interest on the part of the city Fathers to move alot of the newer development downtown, coupled with the increasing number of people living downtown, I honestly think this will change in the very near future, making downtown a much more liveable environment.

and Bro...there is no reason to explain which city is better, but statistics show Buffalo is bigger not only regionally but it gets more recognition nationally as well.

Dude, if you want to call the extremely negative press that Buffalo gets all over this country, and label it as "getting more recognition," than I'd rather see Rochester NOT get the recognition that Buffalo is getting. Rochester's problem is that it gets NO publicity--negative OR positive...lol

And if you're talking about Buffalo being more recognized regionally? Not sure about that one either, bro. Most anyone in Buffalo can tell you what companies are Rochester based/recognizable nationally (Kodak, Xerox, Bausch & Lomb, Paychex, etc.), but I'd bet that the number of people who could name the major industries of Buffalo would be very small indeed. Not only in WNY but nationally as well.

steel

March 15th, 2005, 11:54 PM

Jimi C

March 16th, 2005, 12:28 AM

Buffalo products recognized regionally and nationaly recognized
HSBC Bank

HSBC bank sure as hell isnt a Buffalo product.. they just lease a few floors of a building.

edit: Also im pretty sure Tops is owned by a company based in Japan.

steel

March 16th, 2005, 12:33 AM

Malo

March 16th, 2005, 12:40 AM

Buffalo products recognized regionally and nationaly recognized
HSBC Bank
M&T Bank
Rich Products
SportSystems (Delaware North Companies)
Bison Brand
Tops Markets
Fisher Price Toys
Mentholatum
Bird Air Structures

Not to mention Buffalo is known for the Bills and Sabers and Chicaken wings nationally

Sure Buffalo does not get a lot of good pub (both justly and unjustly) But as you say Roch gets none. I would bet more people know about Roch Min than Roch NY. Hey that would be a good Vs thread!

Rochester
Xerox is not officially located in Rochester and is a drasticaly shrinking company
Most People in Buffalo have only heard of Paychex because of Tom Gallisano
Kodak is a shrinking company which missed the digital revolution

You should have mentioned Wegmans

I am not sure why you bring up these things since this is a skyline thread.

The only reason those 60's 70's buildings stand out so much in Roch is that there are very few ofther buildings of lage size to compete with them. The fact is Buffalo built as much (or should I say as pathetically little) as Rochester in those days and niether city has built as much as it should have since then. Buffalo tore down many many buildings in the last 30 years and the only reason it looks somewhat preserved is because of the vast number of buildings it started out with.

Steel, not to take issue with everything that comes out of your mouth, BUT--your list at the top is comprised of a number of local Buffalo area companies that are at best, recognized regionally. HOWEVER--outside of FisherPrice Toys, and maybe Mentholatum, if you polled people in Atlanta, LA, Boston, Mineapolis, or Phoenix--they would have no clue as to the rest of the list.

And yes, I should have mentioned Wegmans. The supermarket chain that totally revolutionized the grocery store industry, with the super-successful concept that every other grocery chain copied. Including Topps.

Or I could have mentioned Nothnagle Homes, who came up with an extremely innovative way of marketing homes to clients. A marketing innovation that is still utilized today by every real estate agent and agency in the country. And it started and was developed in Rochester.

On your other points--Xerox is no longer headquartered in Rochester, but it sure did start there, and has its largest number of employees there. And no, its not dying a slow death, but has certainly shrunk in size.

Kodak, may have missed the digital age, but is more than making up for it with some of its acquisitions of late. The company is about as lean as it ever will be, and should rebound nicely, thank you.

And if most people in Buffalo have only heard of Paychex via the name of Tom Galisano, then-1). that's a damn good start, and, 2). ask anyone in a corporate business structure if they've heard of Paychex, and I think you'll see just how wrong your assessment is.

I mean Steel, if you're gonna diss hell out a da Roch, you may want to do it via another means other than pissin' on the companies that this city launched and brought to world-wide attention. If this is the only way you can make your point, then fine. But it seems to me to be a pretty petty way to state your point.

And yes, more people have heard about Rochester, Minn., than Rochester, NY. Drives me crazy!

And yes, Buffalo is known for the Bills/Sabers and Chicken wings, nationally. And two years from now, Rochester will be known even more so than it is now, as a spectacular hotbed of soccer, once it gets the MLS designation.

Still doesn't make it a better place than Buffalo--nor does it make it worse. They just are what they are--tired old narrow industry based manufacturing cities that have seen better days, and who are both struggling to make it past the fiscal and manufacturing crises of the last 30 years. That's all..

steel

March 16th, 2005, 12:52 AM

Actually I have not dissed Roch other than to respond to your posts. (as a matter of fact I have seen you around lobing some light insults BVuffalo's way on a few other threads. That is fine it is your opinion.

As far as the companies go I was responding to your post which requested Buffalo companies which were regionally recognized.

I should say that HSBC is in the same boat as Xerox as far as corporate location goes. The official HQ for HSBC USA is in Delaware due to NY's dumb banking laws. This is a recent move. Most of the Bank is in Buffalo. HSBC entered the US when it purchased Buffalo's Marine Midland Bank. HSBC Center is Buffalo's tallest at 42 floors. HSBC occupies several other buildings as well.

jmancuso

March 16th, 2005, 12:55 AM

ok guys, this thread is deteriorating in to a buffalo vs. rochester thread. let's get back on topic.

anyway, both those cities suck. batavia is where it's at. ;)

sargeantcm

March 16th, 2005, 01:21 AM

Yeah, seriously. I like them both, and would accept a new job in either were there any for the taking! Both have their merits. I've long thought Rochester was one of the cleanest cities I had ever been to (albeit I've never really been there, only through. Buffalo's had tough times, but it's still one of my favorite places and it's about time things seem to be coming around.

And funny to hear about Wegmans, the best damn supermarket in the world! Here in New England, the few supermarkets all suck, and most aren't even open after 11pm! Makes me appreciate (and miss) good old Wegmans and Tops!

Malo

March 16th, 2005, 01:32 AM

I will not keep on arguing this point Malo but the fact is Buffalo's economy benefits substantially from the cities of southern Ontario (containing about 600,000 people and those cities benefit form Buffalo. That is 600,000 people living closer to Buffalo than many of the people living in Rochester's gigantic (US Census) metro area. Those people add to the economic power of a region weather they are counted or not. You try to muddle the conversation by bringing in Toronto and Hamilton. But the fact is if the 600,000 Canadians were not on Buffalo's door step it would be a dramatically different place.

I would be willing to bet that more people come to Buffalo from St. Catherines for downtown entertainment than people from Canandaigua or Geneva to Rochester.

Steel, I never said that Buffalo didn't benefit from the proximity of having 600,000 Canadians living nearby. I said that just because they live nearby, in another country, with cities who have metro's of their own, that they shouldn't be thought of as being in the Buffalo metro, that's all. Not that they don't come to Buffalo, ever..

...and I'm not trying to muddle the conversation at all by bringing in Toronto and Hamilton, Steel. They are equally as close or closer than Buffalo, and they play a much more important role in Ontario-ans lives than does Buffalo. How is one to ignore the pull and the lure of a city that has 5 times as many people in it as Buffalo--directly to the north of 'em? With ten times the shopping establishments, and 20 times the employment, educational, social, civic, and entertainment opportunities?

Next you're going to tell me that Buffalo has it all over Toronto when it comes to being at the centre of dominant influence in Canadians lives, right?

And Steel, I would be willing to bet that people from St. Catherines are not flocking to Buffalo for its spectacular night-life. Who would want to leave an area with a great deal of entertainment possibilities of their own, for a downtown with a crime rate 6 times higher than the one they have back home? Why take the risk even if downtown Buffalo is the entertainment mecca you say it is?

And your comment about Rochester is off-base once again. Next time you're at an event in downtown Rochester, ask the people you see where they come from--you'll find their answers to be pretty surprising. A great many of them drove in from Dansville, Warsaw, Geneva, Canandaigua, Hornell, etc.

Malo

March 16th, 2005, 01:36 AM

I'm done. Back to the topic at hand. Good points gentlemen..

BuffCity

March 16th, 2005, 04:11 AM

this just turned into a A - B conversation.

HSBC is now based out of Delaware, not Buffalo...but thats only for tax reasons. HSBC still employs many in the metro (Rochester too)

Malo, I admire your pride in Rochester. It has its good points as well.

Malo

March 16th, 2005, 05:00 AM

Thank you, Buff City--but just for the record, let me just say that I have a very special place in my heart for both cities, and that if you hear me rag on one of them, you will eventually hear me rag on/or stick up for, the other.

I'm a WNY kid, and I love no other place on earth as much as I love WNY. ALL of WNY..

No hard feelings bro. I'm just jealous that I don't get to live there anymore.

BuffCity

March 16th, 2005, 07:17 AM

it's shot here, we all want to think it's turning around, but its not.

all the politicians do...play golf and fondle thier trophy wives.

NYS is in trouble, and we all get to pay the consequences. wtf

jmancuso

March 16th, 2005, 08:43 AM

yeah, new york state seriously needs to institute some term limits. pataki, the house, the assemby, etc...

Third of a kind

March 16th, 2005, 08:41 PM

steel, are you from buffalo originally? you always have so much pride for buffalo in threads all over the forums...i'm just being curious mayyne...????

Evergrey

March 24th, 2005, 06:22 AM

Most people I encounter don't realize that the "Buffalo" in "buffalo wings" stands for the great city of Buffalo, where wings were invented... most people seem to think of "buffalo", the animal, instead.

steel

March 24th, 2005, 06:40 AM

steel, are you from buffalo originally? you always have so much pride for buffalo in threads all over the forums...i'm just being curious mayyne...????

Buffalo just needs someone speaking up for it. Most people are painfully unaware of how many incredible buildings and neighborhoods are there, not to mention its great natural setting. Keep an eye out for my next thread SPECTACULAR BUFFALO HOUSING coming soon

Spooky873

April 1st, 2005, 07:01 PM

jmancuso

April 1st, 2005, 07:05 PM

But I think we all know the best one. :) Not to mention in the country and arguably....the world.

poughkeepsie?

Spooky873

April 1st, 2005, 07:08 PM

nope, but for about 8 bits, you can catch a train to this place...

Malo

April 1st, 2005, 07:16 PM

White Plains?

jmancuso

April 1st, 2005, 07:17 PM

oh, i know...

yonkers!

Neph

April 1st, 2005, 07:27 PM

I dont think people realize the size (area) of Buffalo's downtown, the larger buildings are not in a cluster...or perhaps they are with the exception of the tallest the HSBC? as where Rochester and Syracuse have downtowns that are in central areas, Buffalo's seems to be more a strip going from the Medical campus to the foot of main.

but I see the point you are making.
This is an exact discription of Milwaukee's skyline. Both skylines remind me so much of each other and they both have beautiful old architecture. Milwaukee's skyline is also more of a strip along Wisconsin Avenue, from lakeshore to Marquette U. campus with it's tallest building kind of sticking out all by itself. Milwaukee is going through a building spree though so this effect will be deminished however. Still, the downtowns are not centralized as most cities but has three or four different focal points.

Here's an older pic of Milwaukee that shows how the downtown is strung out, more or less, on a line but not centralized.
http://www.boomspeed.com/paule17/72429457nFJUhh_ph.jpg

Anyway, I love Buffalo but Rochester is pretty impressive too!

Spooky873

April 1st, 2005, 08:24 PM

oh, i know...

yonkers!

the one and only NYC.

steel

April 1st, 2005, 08:27 PM

the one and only NYC.

Thread titles have meaning once one reads them.

jmancuso

April 1st, 2005, 08:38 PM

he meant NYM - new york mills

http://www.townsusa.org/images/New_York_Mills_New_York_regional.gif

Architorture

April 1st, 2005, 08:40 PM

those towers in albany are so brutalist

Evergrey

April 1st, 2005, 08:50 PM

I always liked Rochesters skyline of them all. Its more modern, Im only impressed with HSBC in B-lo, Syracuse is mostly lowrise to me, Utica has a better skyline IMO than Syracuse, and Albany is behind Rochester. But I think we all know the best one. :) Not to mention in the country and arguably....the world.

You're only impressed with HSBC... the ugliest skyscraper in Buffalo? Yet you're not impressed with this?

http://www.sebastianwhite.com/architecture/images/niagara.jpg

Architorture

April 1st, 2005, 08:53 PM

the HSBC tower is nothing but tall... it isn't a nice design...

one of the nicest buildings in buffalo in terms of fine design is the yamasaki m&t buidling... and considering it was completed just prior to WTC you can see alot of similarities and see that it was definitely part of the process in coming up with the WTC design

Spooky873

April 1st, 2005, 10:13 PM

You're only impressed with HSBC... the ugliest skyscraper in Buffalo? Yet you're not impressed with this?

http://www.sebastianwhite.com/architecture/images/niagara.jpg

talk about a piss match..

honestly that building does nothing for me. what do you want. to me it looks like a church. NYC is my favorite skyline, i love vintage but that building to me is as good as used toilet water. dont impose your shit on me.

Evergrey

April 1st, 2005, 10:52 PM

You give Utica a bad name.

Spooky873

April 1st, 2005, 10:54 PM

You give Utica a bad name.

Have you been here? The bad name has been given long before I got here.

BuffCity

April 1st, 2005, 11:35 PM

Nimo looks like a church? wtf that is the most stupid thing I have heard yet in this thread. If the NIMO was in Chicago or Cleveland it would be a favorite, it's 295 feet tall and white marble, it's also illuminated well in several colors at night, IMO and the opinions of many others it is a very beautiful structure that is being converted as we speak to class A office space.

The HSBC looks no uglier than any other 1969-1970 box built, so to hate on it is just plain wrong.

jmancuso

April 2nd, 2005, 12:10 AM

no one mentioned buffalo's biggest gem yet...city hall.

http://pluto.fss.buffalo.edu/classes/eco/sb56/City%20Hall%203.JPG

Spooky873

April 2nd, 2005, 12:11 AM

Opinions.......im entitled arent I.... Just curious, were the Twin Towers just too tall boxes to you, or anyone? I find more modern structures more interesting. When people talk about Woolworth in the City....I dont see it. Im not saying its bad, im saying it does nothing for me. Would NIMO matter if it were in Hong Kong....a city thats pretty much all modern? Different people have different tastes, and personally I dont like HK either. NYC is a vintage skyline, and its my favorite. Its the only true city with a skyLINE, other than Chicago. NYC gives you everything, old and new. I stand by my Rochester post until someone gives me credible information that Rochester isnt catching up.

jmancuso

April 2nd, 2005, 12:13 AM

spooky, remember this thread has to do with upstate skylines. NYC has a little bit of an unfair advantage over NY's other cities.

Spooky873

April 2nd, 2005, 12:14 AM

no one mentioned buffalo's biggest gem yes...city hall.

Ya know something, I was going to include city hall with hsbc but that wouldnt make a difference to them. Theyd still take offense, put your fucking guard down will you? Makes me wonder if he can actually agree Buffalo is on the decline which is pretty well known.

Spooky873

April 2nd, 2005, 12:18 AM

spooky, remember this thread has to do with upstate skylines. NYC has a little bit of an unfair advantage over NY's other cities.

I know, im not comparing, im using NYC's gems simply as an example. Im starting to hate forums, you find the stupidest shit and people think they have something to prove on here. Takes alot to be understood apparently.

steel

April 2nd, 2005, 12:23 AM

Funny thing is the only person on here trying to prove his Sh*t don't stink is Spooky.

Ex-Ithacan

April 2nd, 2005, 04:08 PM

You seem like a "fun" guy there Spooky.

Ease up.

NYC007

April 2nd, 2005, 05:18 PM

Evergrey

April 2nd, 2005, 05:26 PM

Buffalo is also a leader in the healthcare sector!

CiceroClark

April 2nd, 2005, 05:30 PM

NYC007

April 2nd, 2005, 05:52 PM

Well, I'm not going to spend much time debating the statistics because we all know the way numbers can be twisted around to support any argument you care to make. Statistics from last year show that it was the first time that the area has gained population. You can look at the last year, the last decade, or the last century, and you'd come up with different data to support whatever argument you're making. You can't just look at a pie graph or a chart and see the truth. It's just not that simple. Also, US Census data is nororiously unreliable. It seems the other points I made about Buffalo being on an upswing, and not on a decline, culturally for example, seem to have been lost on you. Have you heard anything about ArtSpace building lofts and studio space in Buffalo because it's known nationally as a mecca for cultural institutions? How about Ani Di Franco restoring a 19th Century Church and reusing it as Headquarters for Righteous Babe Records, Performance Space, and Hallwalls Art Galleries? How about the Albright Knox continually luring in world class exhibitions? Have you ever been to Kleinhans Music Hall to hear the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra? Ever visited any of the parks in our Olmstead System? I could go on, but why bother? Think what you want, but I would dispute Spooky's assertions that this is a city "in decline." And the last thing I'll offer on the topic of population is this excerpt from the Buffalo News. It's good food for thought:
_______________________________________
How We Rank Now

3/6/2005

The current population of Buffalo puts us far down the list of American cities - at 60th, in terms of size.
Compare that with Louisville - which now sits at No. 16 on the list of major cities, thanks to a consolidation in 2003. Before that, Louisville ranked 69th - worse than Buffalo.

If Buffalo and Erie County became one regional entity - let's call it Buffalo Metro - then Buffalo would be the 10th biggest city in the country.

1.) New York City 8,085,742

2.) Los Angeles 3,819,951

3.) Chicago 2,869,121

4.) Houston 2,009,690

5.) Philadelphia 1,479,339

6.) Phoenix 1,388,416

7.) San Diego 1,266,753

8.) San Antonio 1,214,725

9.) Dallas 1,208,318

10.) Detroit 911,402

11.) San Jose 898,349

12.) Indianapolis 783,438

13.) Jacksonville 773,781

14.) San Francisco 751,682

15.) Columbus, Ohio 728,432

16.) Louisville 699,107

...

55.) Tampa 317,647

56.) Cincinnati 317,361

57.) Raleigh, N.C. 316,802

58.) Toledo, Ohio 308,973

59.) Aurora, Colo. 290,418

60.) Buffalo 285,018

How We Would Rank After a Consolidation into One Metro Area

1.) New York City 8,085,742

2.) Los Angeles 3,819,951

3.) Chicago 2,869,121

4.) Houston 2,009,690

5.) Philadelphia 1,479,339

6.) Phoenix 1,388,416

7.) San Diego 1,266,753

8.) San Antonio 1,214,725

9.) Dallas 1,208,318

10.) Buffalo Metro 941,293

11.) Detroit 911,402

Source: 2003 population estimate data from U.S. Census

...talk about twisting data!

steel

April 2nd, 2005, 06:05 PM

This is all well and good and we all know that city population ranks are meaningless because the metro population ststistic is what defines the importance of the place. But this is a skyline contest and Spooky is only in here to cause trouble. It is probably best to ignore him unless he adds something constructive and informative to the conversation

Jaybird

April 2nd, 2005, 07:38 PM

WOW! I never thought in my life that this thread would turn so competitive. :)

CiceroClark

April 2nd, 2005, 07:52 PM

Erie County is so huge in size that it has farmland. Erie County would become the biggest city in the country land wise at 1,044 sq miles.

Monroe County is almost half that size at 659 sq miles and about 740,000 in population. Heck even Onondaga County land size is smaller at 780 sq miles and about 460,000 in population. That would put Rochester and Syracuse within the top 50 largest cities in the USA too.

Jaybird

April 2nd, 2005, 08:43 PM

Apparently, Rochester's metro consists of, I think five or six different counties, which may be one reason why Rochester's metro is so huge. Orleans, Genesee, Monroe, Ontario, Livingston, and Wayne. Otherwise, I think if this wasn't the case, the population of Metro Rochester might be 900,000-1,000,000. Not much difference, but if you ask me, that is one HUGE METRO area. But then again, sometimes NYC includes Philly in their metro. Also, Toronto has communities included in their metro 60 miles away, so maybe we shouldn't think bad or senseless about all this.

Plus, Buffalo's metro has only two counties, Erie and Niagara (if you like to include Niagara Falls in the area, I do.) But they're VERY POPULATED counties.

I don't know if those things have been mentioned yet (and I believe they might have and if they have, sorry) but it might be worth mentioning. Sometimes the ways U.S. cities figure their metro populations out can be confusing, at least moreso than Canada's metro population counts.

Spooky873

April 2nd, 2005, 09:44 PM

Spooky, I'm wondering if you have actually been to Buffalo. To say that Buffalo is on the decline, in such a broad and general way, seems very naive to me. That would depend on what you mean by "on the decline." The city itself has lost a lot of population recently, but the actual metropolitan area has grown, and there are well over a million people. Manufactuing jobs are actually returning to the area, and the area is becoming a financial hub and center for Federal employment--providing the city with white collar jobs. There are more residential developments recently opened, or soon to open, than in any recent generation. So I think you're dead wrong about Buffalo being on the decline. And, actually, it's pretty well known that Buffalo is experiencing a renaissance. "Buffalo-yes, Buffalo-is now walking proud as a hip center of arts and performances" (The Washington Post) "Buffalo has cast off its old rust-belt image." (The New York Times) "The architectural treasures of Buffalo are riveting. They must be seen." (The Atlanta Journal Constitution) Those are all quotes from the past year, making reference to Buffalo's many cultural attractions. So, although the city may make headlines for poor local government and bad weather, to say it's on the decline is simplistic and misinformed. Of course, I suppose that it does make some people feel better about their own home city when they take cheap shots at places like Buffalo. But don't hate us because a good living standard is actually affordable and easily attainable in smaller, less hyped, cities between the coasts.

DUBYA OH DUBYA.......WOW. Im from Utica, its about 180 miles east of Buffalo if you consider I-90. I dunno whether youre from the City [that being NY] but if you are chances are you dont know where it is. Is that an offensive statement who knows? Now before anyone makes a move, id like to say yes im from Utica, am I saying Utica is something to brag about? Hell no. Utica-Rome area is probably the worst urban metro area in the state, and since the late 80s, jobs have left and the city has lost almost 50% of its population. For me to say Utica is growing is like saying Buffalo is growing. It is simply not true. Anyone from upstate New York will tell you the thing they desire most about Western NY is mainly the Fingerlakes and Rochester, not many considering Buffalo, and if they do, its well out in the suburbs. Tell me I havent been to Buffalo? My old man schooled there for 4 years, at ECC (south campus), Canisius and Brockport. We almost lived in Buffalo. Ive been to 1 Bills game and 3 Sabres games. Whenever I go to Ontario I always go to the Anchor Bar on Main. Im also going to SUNY Brockport in the fall which is 15 minutes from Rochester and about 45 from Buffalo. Ive been to the Warped Tour at LaSalle Park twice, and going to Brockport I know alot of Buffalonians, mainly from Lancaster, Williamsville, and Clarence, and they will agree Buffalo generally is in decline. Amherst is one of the best towns in the state, my old man used to drive me all through the suburbs and showed me where OJ Simpson lived when he was on the Bills, the UB campus, and many other things whenever I had hockey tournaments mostly in Lockport and N Tonawanda. Cant forget the Chip Strip, and the Galleria. I love Buffalo and Ive always told my old man I wanna move out there because Utica sucks, is it in decline? Yes. Collect a general consensus up upstaters' opinions, and theyll say Rochester is growing, and Buffalo is in decline. Buffalo is one of the best sports cities in the country. Im also pissed because my cable provider took out Empire Sports Network so now I dont get coverage of the Sabres or Bills, or the college sports. Driving I-90, ive always been disappointed at the views of Buffalo, because its very hard to see the skyline, the only noticable buidling I see is HSBC, but driving under Buffalo/Niagara Intl airport is cool. I think that more than answers your qusetion on whether ive been to Buffalo.

BuffCity

April 3rd, 2005, 01:24 AM

lets be real here and look at it the right way, and living in Batavia (30 miles between both Buffalo and Rochester) I can say ONCE AGAIN that its very much becoming its own micropolitan.

Rochester has a expressway system that winds into Genesee and Livingston counties, and Ontario and Wayne as well I beleive. Because an expressway runs into a county does not mean that all the people in that county generally polarize themselves to that city metro, I mean Buffalo is to my left, Rochester is to my right, and in Batavia our biggest commercial area of strip malls and plazas are on 63 North, 5 West...in other words, in the direction of Buffalo.

Batavia is considered Rochester Metro, and this was before we went under the Monroe water authority...I know alot of people that work in both cities, but as far as banks, stores and food...Batavia is very Buffalo oriented.

Olean, falls into the Buffalo metro...its like twice the distance from Buffalo as Batavia...thats BS.

Medina which is Orleans counties largest village polarizes from Lockport, the seat of Niagara county and very much Buffalo Metro...so to give Rochester all of Orleans, thats ehhhhhh wrong.

lets look at it this way, the county idea for MSA sucks, they need to go by township especially in the Northeast where big cities are just 60-70 miles apart.

if that be the case Genesee would split 50/50 like Orleans county, thus taking 100,000 from Rochester and giving Buffalo 100,000 to its MSA. Rochester claims parts to all the counties in its MSA, but to say that all the people in that MSA consider Rochester their metro for work, shopping and commerce is wrong, that being the case, Ontario county (Geneva and Canandaigua) are both cities and in the finger lakes, they are quite independent, but I must admit they are polarized to Rochester because of the malls. but to say Seneca Falls is Rochester...lol no way, thats Syracuse.

oh well, this is a never ending battle

steel

April 3rd, 2005, 03:59 AM

A nice image of Buffalo's "non skyline". I do not think you will get anything like this out of Rochacha.

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/561/2087south.jpg

jmancuso

April 3rd, 2005, 04:33 AM

^ i must admit, that one of the best views of buffalo's skylines i have seen yet. to bad the picture is grainy

i_am_hydrogen

April 3rd, 2005, 04:42 AM

I pick Buffalo's skyline. It has reasonable height and density and a wealth of historic architecture. Those tall, grayish buildings in Albany are downright appauling. Could they be any more impersonal?

Also, Troy looks really charming. Anyone have more photos?

nostyle

April 3rd, 2005, 06:18 AM

^ i must admit, that one of the best views of buffalo's skylines i have seen yet. to bad the picture is grainy

Well if you want to take the same pic for yourself while visiting Buffalo, just be sure to get sick. That pic was likely taken from one of the upper floors of Buffalo General Hospital.

Spooky873

April 3rd, 2005, 06:45 AM

The highway system in Buffalo also reminds me of Los Angeles with the big loops, driving on I-190 i believe, or thats by NF.....I dunno, theres one that goes to the Peace Bridge but you drive by HSBC Arena and right through downtown. Maybe its just me.

jmancuso

April 3rd, 2005, 07:48 AM

^ yeah, i know what your talking about; a big over pass dissecting downtown.

steel

April 3rd, 2005, 07:50 AM

Well if you want to take the same pic for yourself while visiting Buffalo, just be sure to get sick. That pic was likely taken from one of the upper floors of Buffalo General Hospital.

Close but not quite. It was taken by a fellow who lives on the top floor of a nearby apartment building.

Here are some more taken by the same guy

http://img156.exs.cx/img156/4866/ship19nm.gif

http://img156.exs.cx/img156/6557/hill14gq.gif

http://img156.exs.cx/img156/2891/north14nd.gif

Here is his webpage
http://www.buffnet.net/~alyx1/Welcome.html

Spooky873

April 3rd, 2005, 08:14 AM

^ yeah, i know what your talking about; a big over pass dissecting downtown.

Yeah my dad always said that too. Theres a couple I think. He spent alot of time in Buffalo and Los Angeles in the 70s.

nostyle

April 3rd, 2005, 08:40 AM

Buffalo's downtown highways include I-190, which goes from the 90 in South buffalo, around the southern edge of downtown, along the waterfront, up towards Grand Island, and then meets the 290, which gets you all the way back to the 90, creating a whole loop. Downtown also has the 33, which connects it to the airport, and Route 5, which goes over the Skyway downtown.

the peace bridge is connected to the 190.

Evergrey

April 3rd, 2005, 11:37 AM

Olean, falls into the Buffalo metro...its like twice the distance from Buffalo as Batavia...thats BS.

Olean (and Cattaraugus County) is not part of any metropolitan area.

steel

April 3rd, 2005, 04:42 PM

Olean (and Cattaraugus County) is not part of any metropolitan area.

That is part of the big gyp. Buffalo only gets 2 counties even though places like Olean buy the Buffalo News and watch Buffal TV, shop in Buffalo's malls etc. they are not considered part of Buffalo by the census.

BuffCity

April 3rd, 2005, 11:21 PM

Evergrey,

I looked on Emporis at Olean, they have it listed as part of the Buffalo metro. I wonder if they do that because of the College or what, or if it's a mistake. I personally don't agree that it is metro Buffalo, it might share some things with Jamestown, but certainly not a MSA.

Jaybird

April 4th, 2005, 03:33 AM

I don't agree with that either. It seems like every small city or town in NYS has to be part of a LARGE metro area, doesn't it? Olean is a bit too far to be part of Buffalo's metro. It probably should be on its own, like Jamestown. I think some metro areas should consist of cities that are next to one another, or to make sense, add up cities/towns that are within, say, a 30 mile radius to the city centre/downtown or larger, dependent on the city's population and/or land area.

nostyle

April 4th, 2005, 03:59 AM

Olean (and Cattaraugus County) is not part of any metropolitan area.

This is highly unscientific, but I work with a girl who moved to Charlotte from Olean and when she says where she's from she says 'the Buffalo area'.

Hey, for what it's worth...

steel

April 4th, 2005, 04:10 AM

Olean is not officialy part of the Buffalo metro according to the US census but for the people living there Buffalo is the place they turn to for big city things. Theater, major hospitals TV, shopping, etc. It is probably linked to Buffalo as much as many of the far flung towns which ARE officialy part of the Rochester metro.

NYC007

April 4th, 2005, 03:50 PM

I grew up in Allegany County (Rushford, NY) which is quite far South of both Buffalo and Rochester. The most popular newspaper was the Olean Times Herald, and we thought of Olean as "our city." When I was in high school, for example, my Drivers' Education Class drove to Olean for a day of "city driving." (I know that's funny.) When we went shopping at "the mall" it was understood that we meant the Olean Mall. "The movies" were also in olean, as were the supermarkets. I should add, however, that all of our television stations came from Buffalo--except a few people who lived up in the hilltops could get TV from Rochester. Our shool field trips were usually taken to Buffalo, but I always assumed that was because there were more cultural attractions in Buffalo than in Rochester. Don't get mad at me for saying that--I am just telling you what I thought when I was a teenager, and I don't want to start another debate over which city has more to offer. All I know is our Art Department took an annual trip to the Albright Knox to see great art, and I can't even remember the name of the Art Gallery in Rochester (though I think I remember it being near Park and Goodman). Rochester probably has a zoo, and it might be located within an Olmstead Park, like Buffalo's, but we always visited Buffalo's. The difference in driving time to each city is only about 10 to 15 minutes. So I guess you could say that Allegany County residents are very fortunate to be located so close to two great cities, and they don't have to get involoved with all this nonsensical debate over which one is greater. I spent time living in both cities, and I usually tell people that Buffalo has the feel of a larger city, but Rochester is a little less gritty. Neither one is actually very large, and they're both kind of gritty--Despite their shorcomings, they both have great things to offer, so it guess it just comes down to personal taste and preference.

Evergrey

April 4th, 2005, 04:25 PM

This is highly unscientific, but I work with a girl who moved to Charlotte from Olean and when she says where she's from she says 'the Buffalo area'.

Hey, for what it's worth...

There's a difference between being from the "area" of a major city and actually being in its Census-defined Metropolitan Area. Nobody in Charlotte is gonna know what Olean is (unless they're huge St. Bonaventure fans)... so she says Buffalo... which is the nearest major city... Olean is Buffalo's "hinterlands"... and Buffalo's "market" in many ways... but it's too far-flung and independent to be part of its metro.

NYC007: That's an interesting story about Olean. I grew up in St. Marys, PA... about 60 miles south of Olean... and people there love Olean. They go shopping there all the time.

BuffCity

April 4th, 2005, 05:59 PM

Lets see if this makes sense...

Lockport - Buffalo Metro / Lockport Micropolitan
Batavia - Buffalo/Rochester Metro / Batavia Micropolitan
Warsaw - Rochester Metro / Batavia Micropolitan
Geneseo - Rochester Metro
Geneva - Rochester Metro / Geneva Micropolitan
Canadaigua - Rochester Metro / Canandaigua Micropolitan
Newark - Rochester Metro
Hilton - Rochester Metro
Albion - Rochester Metro / Batavia Micropolitan
Medina - Buffalo Metro
Olean - Buffalo/Jamestown Metro / Olean Micropolitan
Jamestown - Buffalo Metro / Jamestown Micropolitan
Dansville - Rochester/Elmira Metro / Hornell Micropolitan
Hornell - Rochester/Elmira Metro / Hornell Micropolitan
Salamanca - Jamestown Metro / Olean Micropolitan
Avon - Rochester Metro
Hamburg - Buffalo Metro
Dunkirk/Fredonia - Buffalo Metro / Jamestown Micropolitan
Attica - Buffalo Metro / Batavia Micropolitan
Brockport - Rochester Metro
Waterloo - Rochester Metro / Auburn Micropolitan
Corning - Elmira Metro
Watkins Glen - Rochester/Elmira Metro / Ithaca Micropolitan
Hornell - Elmira Metro / Hornell Micropolitan
Pen Yan - Rochester Metro / Canandaigua Micropolitan
Bath - Rochester/Elmira Metro / Bath Micropolitan
Arcade - Buffalo Metro
Niagara Falls - Buffalo Metro / Niagara Falls Micropolitan
North Tonawanda - Buffalo Metro
Mount Morris - Rochester Metro
LeRoy - Rochester Metro / Batavia Micropolitan

*Micropolitans are smaller than Metropolitans (duh) and include the city named, and any small villages or hamlets that leach off that small city even if that city falls into a metro. Some cities fall into a micropolitan of a bigger or more influencial city that is not really a metro...see above.

anyone care to disagree on any of these? lol

Ex-Ithacan

April 4th, 2005, 06:06 PM

^ Sorry Buff, Ithaca is now a Metro area with Cortland. Just got the designation last year I believe. Big city stuff now.

BuffCity

April 4th, 2005, 07:48 PM

Ithaca Cortland....Sheeeee-it!

The last population figures I saw showed Ithaca with a few hundred more than Elmira...funny how things change huh?

Evergrey

April 4th, 2005, 08:45 PM

steel

April 4th, 2005, 09:27 PM

BuffCity... you include Olean as part of the Buffalo metro... yet not Salamanca? Salamanca is closer to Buffalo and is located on 219. I doubt there's many people that commute from Olean to Buffalo. Olean is within Buffalo's "sphere of influence", but to claim it is metropolitan Buffalo is insanity!

I think sphere of influence is the most descriptive term used so far. Officially Buffalo is only Erie and Niagara County. But in reality Buffalo's metro extends beyond those two counties. Olean is not true metro Buffalo but is kind of in its orbit. If Buffalo ever had major growth that would probably change.

BuffCity

April 5th, 2005, 12:42 AM

If Olean gets the Buffalo News, and it's south on 16, so I guess my explanation was that Salamanca fell into the Jamestown area, and Olean slid into the Buffalo Area.

Also we need to look at historical ties between these places, like the Holland Land purchuse, the Morris purchuse and how the Genesee River and Erie Canal led to development.

steel

April 5th, 2005, 02:44 AM

getting back to skylines... a few new ones I dug up showing Buffalo. No other upstate city can give you these type views.

From the harbor brakewall © 1996-2002, Michael C. Calanan
http://www.calanan.com/kayaking/WNY/LakeErie/20020901/LakeErie19.JPG

From the water intake © 1996-2002, Michael C. Calanan
http://www.calanan.com/kayaking/WNY/LakeErie/20020901/LakeErie04.JPG

Buffalo from 15 Mi out in Lake Erie
http://www.carolinaoutdoors.net/Buffaloskyline2.jpg

Silver7

April 5th, 2005, 10:00 PM

I hate Albany's skyline, it may have the highest building in NYS besides NYC but that's about it for me..

BuffCity

April 5th, 2005, 10:02 PM

Its one thing to have the tallest building in a city, or a region, or a state...but when that building was paid for by tax dollars and not corporate funds...it makes the status of that city a joke, at least in the capitalist world.

Albany is fake, and its ugly

Silver7

April 5th, 2005, 10:13 PM

BuffCity

April 5th, 2005, 10:43 PM

normally I won't bash a city...BUT....Albany....lol

madmagician

April 6th, 2005, 04:43 AM

Um.... I actually like the look of those buildings in Albany. Maybe due to me liking the retrofuture look. Reminds me of Logan's Run for some reason.

Anyways, since no one likes Albany, second choice for me would be Rochester.

CiceroClark

April 6th, 2005, 04:52 AM

I like Rochester's skyline, but the best thing about Rochester is its suburbs. The second best thing about Rochester is its skyline. Rochester's modern skyline is shaped nicely IMO.

steel

April 6th, 2005, 05:08 AM

the best thing about Rochester is its suburbs.

I hope for Rochester's sake that this is not true.

BuffCity

April 6th, 2005, 02:17 PM

lol...wow

NYC007

April 6th, 2005, 03:21 PM

I have to admit that I too like Albany's skyline. There may not be very many tall buildings, but the ones they have are impressive. I know people think they are cold and impersonal, but that's because they were never meant to give you the warm and fuzzies when you look at them. They are supposed to convey a sense of power and authority, which is indicative of what the buildings are used for (NYS Government). Perhaps if they were built now, in a time when governments throws around ridiculous terms like "gentler and kinder" and "compassionately conservative" they'd look a little cuter. But I, for one, am glad that our State Capitol doesn't look like Disney Land (That scary corporation has already ruined at least one important place in one of our State's cities, Times Square.) I also like the retro future look. It sort of reminds me of Brazilia, which was supposed to be a great South American center. I don't know about all that, but it does look pretty cool. Maybe it's just me, but I like the way the buildings of the two totally different cities, on different continents, relate to one another.

http://homepage3.nifty.com/kailou/3b2_Brasilia.htm

P.S. I hope I didn't just spark a debate over whether or not Times Square was cooler in the pre-1990s when it was gritty and had some substance, or if people prefer the sterile, family-friendly version we have now. It wasn't the point I was trying to make.

BuffCity

April 6th, 2005, 03:34 PM

my only point about the Albany skyline is that the skyline of a city with less than 100,000 that has a builing just shy of 600 foot is stupid, all the talls are state offices, too many employees = too much taxes and too much ego what do we get...Albany and the waste of dollars.

I know it's the state capital, but why that city tries to be much bigger than it really is, well thats beyond me.

gaboy

July 29th, 2005, 06:44 PM

I think all of the New York cities have a character we in the South do not have. But, I think Syracuse is underrated. It has many buildings in the 10 to 20 story range, but you need the right angle to see them all. Going from I690 West to I81 South is one good view. And the view of the city going north on I81 from Binghamton is impressive, too (especially at dusk in the winter).

WestSideJohn

July 29th, 2005, 08:21 PM

Syracuse's downtown core is surrounded by hills so when seen from a distance it doesn't look all that impressive. When you're driving through it on route 81 it's a lot more interesting.

Buffalo has almost the opposite problem... the best views of the skyline are from Canada or out on Lake Erie.

algonquin

July 29th, 2005, 11:50 PM

I'm going with Rochester.

Buffalo has the most going for it, in terms of the quality of architecture, but overall it's less than inspiring from most angles. Rochester is very picturesque from the river... for me that takes the cake.

Albany's government buildings are cool, but it's way to Brasilia, if you know what I mean. I don't know what Syracuse looks like.

bjfan82

July 30th, 2005, 04:26 AM

Here's my take on Albany, Roch, Buff

Albany has the tallest building, and must have the largest skyline in all of America for 100,000 population cities (my guess)...if it wasn't for the state government its skyline would probably look like Erie, Pa

Rochester has the newest buildings...more flashy/nicer looking buildings. Definitely has a great skyline for a city its size, and definitely looks great from the river

Buffalo has the most buildings in downtown and better older architecture. Heightwise and quantitywise it is very sub-par for a city of its size (or former size) but none the less still a little taller than the other two cities on average.

I give the edge to Buffalo's skyline because from a distance it is more imposing and a little more complete than Rochester or Albany's

steel

July 30th, 2005, 05:17 AM

ILuvNY

July 30th, 2005, 10:43 AM

steel

July 30th, 2005, 01:15 PM

1. Buffalo- Nothing in Upstate NY can touch this
http://img220.exs.cx/img220/7550/south13bg.gif

2. Rochester- most modern looking upstate skyline but it needs a few more buildings to become #1.

3. Syracuse- short but dense downtown and Syracuse U. buildings on steep hills look good

4. Albany- Height isn't everything, the skyline is dominated by unfriendly, weird looking buildings.

still not seeig the modern buildings in Roch. Is anyone going to pony-up with pictures of the the modern Rochester buildings

Buffalo
http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/4908/dometowerssm7zb8py.jpg

sargeantcm

July 30th, 2005, 06:22 PM

I would say the current 28-13 ranking of Buffalo to Rochester sums up my opinion. Rochester definitely has a more compact, crisp, and clean cut skyline than Buffalo (which carries it's own appeal), but Buffalo's just has more "content"; and it's jagged style, while from many angles looking grossly underbuilt, offers a style not often seen anymore in the US. It'll be interesting to see how much the new waterfront development adds (if any) since it's finally starting to pick up some serious steam.

As for the other two, I realize alot of people aren't particularly fans of Albany's modernist/brutalist style, but I'm surprised Syracuse is beating it. No knock to Syracuse, which has a decent CBD and a somewhat more picturesque landscape. That being said, however, given the choice to live in either of those 2, I myself would probably pick Syracuse.

BuffCity

July 31st, 2005, 04:02 AM

Malo

August 2nd, 2005, 06:58 PM

the Bing? lol nice place actually, lemme see if I can get some shots up on this piece. As for The syracuse skyline, eh it's okay...pretty dense for a city that size IMO, and Rochester just has a bunch of 70-80's boxes...blahh.

Yeah, what was Rochester thinking, huh? They had the audacity to go and build some modern day, late 20th century office towers. And Buff City, you also forgot the Bausch & Lomb building that was built in 1995. IMO, one of the nicest looking buildings ever to grace backwards-as -shit, WNY.

Next time you're in Downtown Buffalo, you might want to take a look at some of the 70's boxes Buffalo built also during that time period. They weren't exactly award winning architecture either, dude. Not that you'd notice...

steel

August 2nd, 2005, 07:18 PM

Yeah, what was Rochester thinking, huh? They had the audacity to go and build some modern day, late 20th century office towers. And Buff City, you also forgot the Bausch & Lomb building that was built in 1995. IMO, one of the nicest looking buildings ever to grace backwards-as -shit, WNY.

Next time you're in Downtown Buffalo, you might want to take a look at some of the 70's boxes Buffalo built also during that time period. They weren't exactly award winning architecture either, dude. Not that you'd notice...

Still waiting to see all the modern flashy buildings that everyone is talking about in Rochester. I hear lots of talk and no evidence of their existance! Show us the modern buildings in Rochester!

By the way Bausch and Lomb is a dog.

Malo

August 2nd, 2005, 07:40 PM

you know once the Federal Court is completed, Bass Pro has renovated the Aud and once some of these waterfront projects take off...Buffalo may not have any more talls, but the streetscape will be bad ass.

One thing Rochester lacks IMO, is streetscape life, there are alleys with no life, just walls, no stores...no parks. I like Buffalo because the city has a very welcome feel downtown...litterally anyplace downtown.

You know, judging from most of your comments about Rochester, Buff City; I am continually surprised that anyone at all continues to live in Rochester. I'd be most happy to take you around my hometown and show you the alley life or the street life, you speak of. You seem to only skim the surface of what Rochester has to offer, without ever delving below the surface to really see what makes that city click--which is a shame, since you never really see the real Rochester. The one you see is no different than the one the tourists see, and that ain't the real deal, G...

And parks? You're kidding right? Highland Park is regarded as one of the best parks in the country. Durand Eastman, Cobbs Hill..the list goes on and on. One thing about upstate NY cities that can't be denied, is that they all had their poop in a group when it came to their individual park systems. You're the only guy I've ever heard complain about 'em though.

Malo

August 2nd, 2005, 08:06 PM

Still waiting to see all the modern flashy buildings that everyone is talking about in Rochester. I hear lots of talk and no evidence of their existance! Show us the modern buildings in Rochester!

By the way Bausch and Lomb is a dog.

Dude, no one in their right mind would call that building a "dog." If the Bausch & Lomb building is a dog dude, then you must have all of your architectural taste in your toes. I'm certain that it can't possibly compare to that piece of shit you have down at the end of Main Street..lol
you know, the one that looks as though it was designed by a sixth grade art project class?

Give me a f*'in break..

NYC007

August 2nd, 2005, 08:13 PM

I lived in Rochester for a couple of years while I went to Monroe Communtiy College. Rochester has a lot going for it. Downtown reminds me of a mini Chicago the way the Genesee River flows through it, and several bridges cross over. I lived off Monroe Ave near Goodman, for those of you who know where that is, and it was a cool neighborhood. (I still miss that dive take-out place, Country Sweet.) There are some beautiful parks in Rochester (isn't it noted for Lilacs and stuff?) but I don't think they are easily accessible. From my old neighborhood, I don't remember ever walking to a park. Was there one close to me that I never discovered? From my new neighborhood in Buffalo, I could walk to Johnson Park (Buffalo's oldest park lined with houses built before or during the Civil War), Days Park (an Olmstead Park) or beautiful Arlington Park all within 5 to 10 minutes. Or I could walk to Prospect Park, Front Park, or the park at the marina in 10 to 15 minutes. Now, admittedly, I could be wrong about this, so seriously, correct me if I am wrong, but I never felt like I could walk to a park from where I lived in Rochester. That being said, and because I by no means want to bash Rochester (I like it there) the parks I have been to in Rochester are truly beautiful. I think there's a Pride celebration in Highland Park each June, no? I went to that once. And also the Lilac Festival.

Malo

August 2nd, 2005, 09:16 PM

NYC007, I too lived in Rochester (born and raised there), off Monroe Ave on Laburnam Crescent, Suter Terrace, and Belmont, and I loved that neighbourhood. I used to walk up Monroe to Cobbs Hill reservoir all the time, as well as Highland Park--which only took 15 minutes or so to reach from my house. If I ventured downtown, I would always stop at Washington Park right on Clinton, which at the time was a youth hang-out of sorts.

I never had any accessibility problems though. You could get to any park in the city via bus, cab, foot, or bike. Just my two cents worth. Hope it answers some of your original questions.

BuffCity

August 2nd, 2005, 10:00 PM

Malo, I dunno how to take your posts...you jump on everyones shit for stating a fact like Rochester having a bunch of 60s, 70s Boxes...

Xerox, Chase, Midtown, Hyatt, First Federal, ect ect...look at them, no matter what the color they still are boxes...the difference is not that Buffalo does not have Boxes... HSBC, M&T, Rath, Main Place, Federal Bld ect ect, but Rather Buffalo has very large significant older "classic" architectural gems in the skyline as well. this creates a blend, a very nice mix of old and new...and it works quite well when comparing Buffalo to Rochester.

You talked about B&L...wow, that is not very much to brag about to any Buffaloians, hell when we have something like City Hall, Guaranty, Liberty, Telephone, Ellicott Square, Dunn, Statler, YMCA, Brisbane and on...and on.

I recommend Rochesterians talking up Kodak, Powers, Chamber of Commerce, or Sibleys...these are your gems, and yes I love these buildings.

Parks comment was about downtowns...not the city as a whole, and I don't feel as if Rochester is as park friendly as Buffalo IMO

and finally, you seem to have something against the 529ft tall HSBC Center, you should look further into that building and you will find it is one of the nicest class A towers in WNY, it's also the TALLEST. If you wanna get technical it looks nicer that Xerox, plus Buffalo already has a Black tower (Main Place) so we are one up on ya.

Malo, I like your pride in the Roch, but damn...you cut down Buffalo without understanding why Buffalonians will cut down Rochester? come on

NYC007

August 2nd, 2005, 10:17 PM

Bufalo and Rochester are really very much alike. There shouldn't be any arguing between the two, because they really have a lot in common. And I mean a lot. I guess it's like sibling rivalry, maybe, because IMO they are sister cities. If they were closer to one another, I'd call them twins.

btw, I also think the HSBC tower at the foot of Main Street in Buffalo is not all that bad. The architecture itself may be somewhat uninspired, but it is loaded with museum quality modern art. The outside plaza, lobby and some of the interior sections are quite impressive. I was a security guard there once in the 1990s while I went to college. There was a restaurant on the 38th Floor--it was called "The 38th Floor"--and it was pretty swanky, with amazing views of the city and Lake Erie. You could even see Niagara Falls and sometimes Toronto. I'm not going to try and say it's a beautiful building, but it's not as bad as people try to say.

Now that black tower attached to the Main Place Mall is just heinous. The ArtVoice (local weekly newspaper in Buffalo) is predicting the Sececas are going to choose that black tower and the mall itself as the next casino site. The casino would be in the mall, and the tower would become a hotel. There's parking below the mall too. If this happens, then maybe AM&A's would be incorporated into the complex.

steel

August 2nd, 2005, 11:08 PM

BuffCity

August 2nd, 2005, 11:37 PM

So Main Place is gonna be the next Casino site huh? interesting idea...I like the Hotel idea in Main Place.

Main Place has like no tenants, which sucks because its a decent tower IMO, but it's not very welcoming...maybe thats why.

The Casino would be better off looking at Statler IMO, it's in a great location, and it has all the grand ball rooms for that kinda set-up.

Who knows...?

Malo

August 3rd, 2005, 08:55 PM

Malo is right B&L is not a dog it is a pig. I know a little about architecture and believe me that building is nothing to be proud of.

Xerox is nice but the base is goofy.

Are these the flashy rochester moderns that everyone is talking about?? If so even Buffalo with its few 60's 70's and 80s towers wins this competition hands down.

Steel, from what I've gathered, what you know about architecture could fit on the head of a thimble. The B&L building and its percieved beauty, like any other building, is in the eye of the beholder. You think it's a pig, and I think it's a thing of beauty. No, not the most beautiful building ever built, but certainly not a dog...

And to take your argument further by saying that Buffalo wins "hands down" in the alleged competition between the two cities in the 60's, 70's, and 80's building stock both cities have is (again) only in the eyes of the beholder. There is no irrefutable truth in your statement, only your own personal opinion. Please don't shove your distorted viewpoint of Buffalo down my throat. And it isn't because I have anything at all against the Queen City--because I don't. Every time I come home, I make it a point to visit Buffalo and my friends there. Hell, I lived there and I loved it!

As for the Xerox Tower, well; let's just say that I saw that building being built and it has always held a special place in my heart. And whether or not you find the base of it to be "goofy' or not, I still happen to love the dark stone used to build it, the area they built it in, and its impressive size and its imposing signature on the Rochester skyline.

And Steel, ask anyone who's not from Buffalo, who has the more modern skyline, Rochester or Buffalo, and the majority will tell you it's Rochester. Not that Rochester has all the modern flashy buildings like you keep harping on, but modern enough to seperate it from most of the other upstate metro's.

sargeantcm

August 3rd, 2005, 10:48 PM

...ask anyone who's not from Buffalo, who has the more modern skyline, Rochester or Buffalo, and the majority will tell you it's Rochester...

I'm from Buffalo and I agree with that, I've always thought Rochester had a more modern skyline. A depressing form of modern in terms of current day cities, but modern nonetheless.

I think Buffalo may have more modern looking buildings when you actually get into the nitty gritty, but from an overall skyline view it's not apparent.

I based my vote on the Buffalo skyline in part because of how impressive it can be from an aged standpoint, you don't see US skylines that (minus HSBC) look like they could have come out of Europe.

steel

August 4th, 2005, 03:09 AM

Steel, from what I've gathered, what you know about architecture could fit on the head of a thimble. The B&L building and its percieved beauty, like any other building, is in the eye of the beholder. You think it's a pig, and I think it's a thing of beauty. No, not the most beautiful building ever built, but certainly not a dog...

And to take your argument further by saying that Buffalo wins "hands down" in the alleged competition between the two cities in the 60's, 70's, and 80's building stock both cities have is (again) only in the eyes of the beholder. There is no irrefutable truth in your statement, only your own personal opinion. Please don't shove your distorted viewpoint of Buffalo down my throat. And it isn't because I have anything at all against the Queen City--because I don't. Every time I come home, I make it a point to visit Buffalo and my friends there. Hell, I lived there and I loved it!

As for the Xerox Tower, well; let's just say that I saw that building being built and it has always held a special place in my heart. And whether or not you find the base of it to be "goofy' or not, I still happen to love the dark stone used to build it, the area they built it in, and its impressive size and its imposing signature on the Rochester skyline.

And Steel, ask anyone who's not from Buffalo, who has the more modern skyline, Rochester or Buffalo, and the majority will tell you it's Rochester. Not that Rochester has all the modern flashy buildings like you keep harping on, but modern enough to seperate it from most of the other upstate metro's.

First off......I am not shoving my opinion anyplace and if you don't want to read them then don't

Second......this thread happens to be asking for opinions

Third....personal insults are uncalled for, unneeded, un-useful, and boring

Fourth....Malo you are usually quite quick to take a swipe at Buffalo so don't pretend you are all that with the Buff..

Fifth....As for Xerox, if you look at the HSBC V Xerox thread you will see that I have some nice things to say about it. I think it has some elegance. It and its neighborhood definitely have a funky sixties quality though.

Sixth....All I am asking is where are all the modern buildings that everyone is talking about in Rochester. There are 2 or 3 dominant buildings from the 60's and then there is B&L. In MY opinion B&L is a cheap looking stumpy dated looking post modern lump on the skyline and is hardly modern. I could focus a picture on M&T (a great Yamasaki building) and Main Place tower and make Buffalo look every bit as "Modern as Rochester"

Seventh.... Both cities are severely lacking in new towers. Buffalo is starting a spree of new low rise infill buildings which should fill out the city nicely and add a lot of density.

BuffCity

August 4th, 2005, 05:49 AM

OKAY...

Buffalo had a Population of just over 580,000 people before it began the population decline

Rochester Had a Population of a little over 330,000 before the decline at roughly the same time period.

So a bigger city which had many more large classics built pre-1950's that got the same amount of moderns thereafter is less modern?

NO...it's just they mixed the skyline well with old and new, and unlike Rochester...retain and obtained many awsome classics that only a city of stature and power like Buffalo once had could get.

Rochester has some nice stuff, but there is this overwhelming need for Rochesterians to try and compete with a place like Buffalo that cracks me up...Buffalo is Bigger, it has a bigger economy, it is more significant on an International and National level and it damn sure has a better skyline...and if modern means retro 60's...then yea, Rochester wins or whatever.

NYC007

August 4th, 2005, 03:55 PM

Like I've said before, it would be far better for Buffalo and Rochester to work together rahter than competing with one another. They are both mid-sized, second (or third) tier cities that are good looking and severely under-rated nationally, and internationally. (Does Rochester have any Frank Lloyd Wright or Louis Sullivan buildings, or buildings by famous 20th Century architects?) I think they should promote tourism and regionalism together. They are two great destinations, sepatated by only about one hour's worth (by car) of beautiful countryside. Buffalo and Rochester (and Erie County and Monroe County) should really learn to get along better, IMO.

BuffCity

August 4th, 2005, 04:20 PM

as desperate as both are for change...the chances of working together are more unreal. They compete for regional business landings, they compete to see who can drag in more Torontonians and they compete economically, if they had the same Metro it would be easier to say this...but it's not a Dallas/Ft. Worth situation.

I like the competition myself, makes it better so the good things in each are not overlooked.

Malo

August 4th, 2005, 06:57 PM

Third....personal insults are uncalled for, unneeded, un-useful, and boring.

First...I didn't think I was being personally insulting by responding to your cheap shot comment about the B&L building. When you insult MY opinion on a building with architecture I happen to find inspiring, I take umbrage at it. Plain and simple.

Fourth....Malo you are usually quite quick to take a swipe at Buffalo so don't pretend you are all that with the Buff..

Who are you to tell me what my real feelings are about Buffalo? You don't know me, my background, my history, or my set of beliefs? So, how do you go about taking me to task for statements of truth? I said what I meant, and I meant what I said. Period. End of story.

Fifth....As for Xerox, if you look at the HSBC V Xerox thread you will see that I have some nice things to say about it. I think it has some elegance. It and its neighborhood definitely have a funky sixties quality though..

Well, considering the fact that it was designed in the late 60's, your point would stand to reason. I like the building for the same reason you like the HSBC building--both add something of architectural significance to their respective skylines. And I would be re-miss in not thanking you for your comments about the Xerox Tower in the other thread. So...thank you.

Sixth....All I am asking is where are all the modern buildings that everyone is talking about in Rochester. There are 2 or 3 dominant buildings from the 60's and then there is B&L. In MY opinion B&L is a cheap looking stumpy dated looking post modern lump on the skyline and is hardly modern. I could focus a picture on M&T (a great Yamasaki building) and Main Place tower and make Buffalo look every bit as "Modern as Rochester".

I have no idea who rattled your cage with regard to "all the modern buildings" in downtown Rochester, but it certainly wasn't me.

Now having said that, I don't think Rochester has any monopoly on modernistic looking structures in its downtown area. If you want to see an extremely modern looking downtown with beautiful looking buildings and a futuristic air, look no further than Atlanta or Houston. Rochester or Buffalo have nothing at all on those two...

From the modern standpoint--Buffalo has an equal number of 1970's era buildings that happen to be shorter, just as modern, fugly structures that were built within the same time period. My point was, that if you look at the skyline of both cities and compare them (read this carefully so you don't misunderstand me)--you come up with this:

Buffalo has the larger more dense downtown. It was also a city with an infrastructure of a city that at one time had almost 600,000 residents. It also has a very good array of both modern and post-modern buildings, with a variety of what you describe as 60's and 70's "boxes." No prettier than Rochester's econo-boxes, nor any uglier.

Rochester, in its quest to be the more modern of the two, has too many times relyed upon, and put its faith into, sacrificing its older buildings for new ones that aren't as architecturally significant as the ones it replaced. Rochester, when one is looking at the resultant skyline has, IMO, the more modern of the two, but the less architecturally significant one.

That's all I'm sayin'. I don't want to get into a pissing match about who has the better this or that, Steel. If you detected a tone of anger in my comments, it was because you seemed to be passing off your opinions as fact, when in fact they weren't--and I strongly objected to it. No harm no foul...

Seventh.... Both cities are severely lacking in new towers. Buffalo is starting a spree of new low rise infill buildings which should fill out the city nicely and add a lot of density.

Rochester will be doing the same thing once the plans on the drawing board are finalized and ratified by City Council. Rochester built a downtown office building in 1995. 401 feet tall. This should not be overlooked, or under-emphasized--especially when you consider that the last building over 400 feet tall that Buffalo built, was the HSBC. Understand Steel, I'm not trying to take Buffalo to the woodshed because they haven't built anything of real significance in the last 30 years, I'm just trying to say that while you laud and applaud Buffalo for what its done recently, look no further than 60 miles away from you for the tallest structure built in Upstate NY in the last 30 years. Meaning; if you're going to really shower credit on a city Upstate, it should by all rights be going to Rochester. At least for the time being...

NYC007

August 4th, 2005, 07:50 PM

Malo, I agree with many of your points--and I like Rochester too (as I pointed out I used to live there). But to say Buffalo has not built anything significant in the last 30 years is just wrong. M&T Center was built in 1985, Key Center was built in 1990, and Roswell Park (though only 10 stories) was built in 1998. These may not be super-talls, but they do enhance the skyline, and I think are technically highrises. I sort of have to think that develpment in many places (other than NYC, ironically) will be affected by 9/11 and people will prefer lower rise buildings with wider floor plans. The fact that no 30 or 40-floor buildings are going up any time soon may not be because developers in Buffalo "can't" do it, but maybe they're thinking that people might prefer less vulnerable structures (whether that feeling is warranted or not). It may be a sad commentary on the time we live in. I think we're going to see a lot less tall construction in a lot of cities (Buffalo and Rochester included) except for in larger cities who have something to prove. Also those larger cities have more need to build up due to the cost of real estate. I don't think either of the cities uner discussion in this thread are going to deal with those issues in our lifetime. But, in the end, can't we just agree to disagree on whose skyline is more "modern and flashy?" It really is just a matter of opinion and personal preference. And arguing over whose skyline is less outdated is really kind of sad and proves nothing. (That was directed to everyone, not just Malo.)

steel

August 4th, 2005, 08:13 PM

NC agreeing to disagree is the wrong approach.

This is a vs thread.

The point of the thread is to give opinions and then to disagree about them.... I am harping on this modern skyline issue because it comes up over and over...."Rochester has the more modern skyline" .... Blah blah blah...... But if you ask anyone to post some proof nothing ever happens.

The truth is neither city has a modern skyline.

Also the Key center built in 1990 is two buildings which if stacked up would be over 30 floors. That is fairly significant but not when looking at what cities outside NYS are building every year. NYS severely lacking when it comes to promoting its upstate cities.

Here is some modern stuff going up in Buffalo. Not tall but nice dense modern infill.

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/6715/medcampus26at.jpg

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1964/med11kt.jpg

BuffCity

August 4th, 2005, 08:15 PM

First...I didn't think I was being personally insulting by responding to your cheap shot comment about the B&L building. When you insult MY opinion on a building with architecture I happen to find inspiring, I take umbrage at it. Plain and simple.

Who are you to tell me what my real feelings are about Buffalo? You don't know me, my background, my history, or my set of beliefs? So, how do you go about taking me to task for statements of truth? I said what I meant, and I meant what I said. Period. End of story.

Well, considering the fact that it was designed in the late 60's, your point would stand to reason. I like the building for the same reason you like the HSBC building--both add something of architectural significance to their respective skylines. And I would be re-miss in not thanking you for your comments about the Xerox Tower in the other thread. So...thank you.

I have no idea who rattled your cage with regard to "all the modern buildings" in downtown Rochester, but it certainly wasn't me.

Now having said that, I don't think Rochester has any monopoly on modernistic looking structures in its downtown area. If you want to see an extremely modern looking downtown with beautiful looking buildings and a futuristic air, look no further than Atlanta or Houston. Rochester or Buffalo have nothing at all on those two...

From the modern standpoint--Buffalo has an equal number of 1970's era buildings that happen to be shorter, just as modern, fugly structures that were built within the same time period. My point was, that if you look at the skyline of both cities and compare them (read this carefully so you don't misunderstand me)--you come up with this:

Buffalo has the larger more dense downtown. It was also a city with an infrastructure of a city that at one time had almost 600,000 residents. It also has a very good array of both modern and post-modern buildings, with a variety of what you describe as 60's and 70's "boxes." No prettier than Rochester's econo-boxes, nor any uglier.

Rochester, in its quest to be the more modern of the two, has too many times relyed upon, and put its faith into, sacrificing its older buildings for new ones that aren't as architecturally significant as the ones it replaced. Rochester, when one is looking at the resultant skyline has, IMO, the more modern of the two, but the less architecturally significant one.

That's all I'm sayin'. I don't want to get into a pissing match about who has the better this or that, Steel. If you detected a tone of anger in my comments, it was because you seemed to be passing off your opinions as fact, when in fact they weren't--and I strongly objected to it. No harm no foul...

Rochester will be doing the same thing once the plans on the drawing board are finalized and ratified by City Council. Rochester built a downtown office building in 1995. 401 feet tall. This should not be overlooked, or under-emphasized--especially when you consider that the last building over 400 feet tall that Buffalo built, was the HSBC. Understand Steel, I'm not trying to take Buffalo to the woodshed because they haven't built anything of real significance in the last 30 years, I'm just trying to say that while you laud and applaud Buffalo for what its done recently, look no further than 60 miles away from you for the tallest structure built in Upstate NY in the last 30 years. Meaning; if you're going to really shower credit on a city Upstate, it should by all rights be going to Rochester. At least for the time being...

The last paragraph cracks me up...

Lets take a look at Downtown Rochesters buildings, there is the UGLY Hyatt Hotel, Clinton Square and Baush & Lomb...is there anything newer than these?

Buffalo has Key Center and M&T Plaza which was built in the 80's, Bank of America Center built in the 80's and ofcourse the HSBC Atrium and I have no idea when that was built. Tall, ok...Rochester has the newest 400 plus tower in the last 30 years, but she still has NONE over 500 feet.

Perhaps it would be interesting to see how much commercial space in offices that Amherst has taken from Downtown Buffalo.

Either way, it all boils back down to Rochester trying to make a modern image...to bad they screwed up that plan and now have some kinda Disco Funk 60s-70s Jive party of a downtown, atleast Buffalo kept old, added some retro and is now looking at new (Makes a city seem a little more...nice)

CiceroClark

August 5th, 2005, 01:12 AM

Buffalo and Rochester should be thankful they don't have flat, boring and short looking skylines like Syracuse

http://www.pbase.com/ciceroclay/image/29752641/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ciceroclay/image/29752398/original.jpg

:sleepy:

sargeantcm

August 5th, 2005, 02:35 AM

Buffalo and Rochester should be thankful they don't have flat, boring and short looking skylines like Syracuse
:sleepy:

While I agree that Syracuse doesn't have much of a skyline (as I mentioned before in surprise that it was beating Albany), I think it deserves some credit. The hilly terrain no doubt takes the height out of the skyline, as there's always ground "around" it, but from certain angles it's pretty impressive, and it does have some good density - pound for pound it's probably to par with Buffalo and Rochester (beating Albany, courtesy of it's gross height imbalance).

jmancuso

August 5th, 2005, 04:03 AM

syracuse is short but dense. which is more important in my book.

BuffCity

August 5th, 2005, 04:15 AM

Syracuse has nothing to be ashamed of...That city is wonderful and has the density to keep itself well filled with office space and retail, in the future I bet Syracuse will get a few tall towers, but the NYS economy has to turn for that to happen.

oh yea...screw Albany with the ugly plaza and corn tower.

bjfan82

August 5th, 2005, 08:12 AM

Well I used to live in Jamestown and we have 1 skyscraper - city hall which is like 13 or 14 stories, a skyline dominated by our city hall, our high school, and our old factories. One of the factories downtown still has a 1909 Furniture Exposition sign still painted on it....so syracuse is like manhattan compared to Jtown.

BuffCity

August 5th, 2005, 02:36 PM

So Jamestown has a skyline, well I guess at nearly 40,000 they should. Jamestown has always impressed me, problem is it always seemed to be out of the WNY transit corridor.

Does anyone have any photos Jtown?

Malo

August 5th, 2005, 04:49 PM

Ex-Ithacan

August 5th, 2005, 05:25 PM

^^
Not the best shots, but here's some pics of Jamestown from last fall:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst15.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst07.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst08.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst10.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst11.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/3164/375jmst16.jpg

:)

Malo

August 5th, 2005, 05:33 PM

The last paragraph cracks me up...

Lets take a look at Downtown Rochesters buildings, there is the UGLY Hyatt Hotel, Clinton Square and Baush & Lomb...is there anything newer than these?

Buffalo has Key Center and M&T Plaza which was built in the 80's, Bank of America Center built in the 80's and ofcourse the HSBC Atrium and I have no idea when that was built. Tall, ok...Rochester has the newest 400 plus tower in the last 30 years, but she still has NONE over 500 feet.

Perhaps it would be interesting to see how much commercial space in offices that Amherst has taken from Downtown Buffalo.

Either way, it all boils back down to Rochester trying to make a modern image...to bad they screwed up that plan and now have some kinda Disco Funk 60s-70s Jive party of a downtown, atleast Buffalo kept old, added some retro and is now looking at new (Makes a city seem a little more...nice)

Buff City, we all know where your heart lies (clue: it ain't Rochester), so to have you offer up (once again) your highly negative opinion of my hometown, is nothing new to me. However, if Rochester is "kinda Disco Funk 60's-70's Jive Party," then Buffalo (to me) looks like the downtown that time forgot.

Oh well, please forgive us if you can, oh Mighty Buff City. Rochester hasn't built a 500 footer yet. How horrible... Perhaps we can make amends somehow. Why don't you act as the catalyst for such a project? I do know this though--Rochester at least has the distinction of building a 400 footer in the last 30 years--something that even mighty Buffalo cannot claim. No, Rochester doesn't have a 500 footer (yet), or may never have, yet it still doesn't detract from the overall look and feel of the downtown area or the skyline. (Cheap shot Buff City--but one I've come to expect from you).

Rochester not only has the newest 400 footer in Upstate NY--it has the only 400 footer to be built in the last 25 years. Let's call a spade a spade here, brother! You're so hell bent on castigating Ra-cha-cha on everything from its architecture, to the overall look of its downtown, that you failed to take notice of that fact. And dude, before you go thinking that I'm bragging here--I'm not--but it would be nice once every blue moon to have you Buffalo guy's give Da Roch a little credit once in awhile. That's all.

Further, I don't believe that Rochester screwed anything up with the plan they have had in place to make a modern looking downtown out of one that had neither height or a remotely modern influence 40 years ago. It is my personal opinion that they should've kept some more of the traditional looking, older buildings, in the mix--but they didn't. Shoulda, coulda, woulda. Whatever.

Rochester kept the Sibley Building, the Powers bldg, Temple, and a bunch of others in the mix (St. Paul corridor, High Falls, etc.), so to say that all that Rochester built in the last 30 years is new, architecturally insignificant buildings, is lame and not true. Both cities have a good mixture of both old and new. Not just Buffalo.

BuffCity

August 5th, 2005, 05:36 PM

steel

August 6th, 2005, 05:40 AM

Y'all Rochesteronians might want to get yer buts over to the City V City thread because the Roch is taking a beating by Omaha NB.

http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=242410

Malo

August 8th, 2005, 06:14 PM

Malo,
Have you seen the site www.downtownrochester.com ?
This site is great I've been looking over it all morning.
I don't think there is a Buffalo site like this, besides shitty Emporis.

I have. Many times. But I don't think they posted enough in the way of pictorials to let the average person view the idea's they're talking about. A few here and there, but not enough to give one the overall impression of what will be taking place. Other than that, they've done a pretty credible job of giving one a fairly good idea of what is planned or in the works.

Thanks for pointing out that site though. I appreciate it.

BuffCity

August 8th, 2005, 06:42 PM

Rochester - Baush & Lomb Place (401 ft) 1995
Niagara Falls - Seneca Niagara Tower (358 ft) 2005
Buffalo - Key Bank North Tower (300 ft) 1990
Rochester - Hyatt Regency (272 ft) 1990
Buffalo - Key Bank South Tower (250 ft) 1990
Rochester - Eastman School of Music (213 ft) 1998
Rochester - Clinton Square (200 ft) 1990
Buffalo - City Centre Condos (165 ft) 2002
Buffalo - M&T Center @ Fountain plaza (164 ft) 1985
Buffalo - Roswell Park Cancer Inst. (115ft) 1998

source: SkyscraperPage.com
compiled by: BuffCity

Malo

August 8th, 2005, 06:44 PM

Y'all Rochesteronians might want to get yer buts over to the City V City thread because the Roch is taking a beating by Omaha NB.

http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=242410

Rochesteronians?? lol..that is hilarious!

I went to the site and voted. Thank you for the tip, Steel.

sargeantcm

August 9th, 2005, 12:20 AM

Rochesteronians??

Sounds like a slur of "Rochester" and "Testosterone". Given the origins of the name "Buffalo", and the two cities' geographical proximity; I think it's quite likely. :)

Malo

August 9th, 2005, 01:04 AM

I'm still on the floor over that one. That is truly funny!!

sargeantcm, your comment is right on the money too...lol

BuffCity

August 9th, 2005, 06:11 PM

Does anyone know a place to see current vacancy rates and available office space for each of these cities? Square footage numbers.

1st Division Marine

August 11th, 2005, 05:43 PM

Buffalo.

BuffCity

August 11th, 2005, 08:12 PM

yes...Buffalo.

ROCguy

August 15th, 2005, 06:34 AM

I am bias as you can tell by my name, but I think that Buffalo's skyline is just too spread out, I mean look at it, the tallest building is all they way to one side. Rochester had the best one. The Genesee river enhances it 10 times, expecialy at night when the lights, including the very well lit top of the Bausch tower, reflect off of it. Plus, Rochester has the most centralized skyline, yeah, there are fewer outsanding buildings, but they are much more organized. Also, since this thread seems to have turned into a Buffalo metro vs. Rochester metro, there is a VERY good reason why Rochester's MSA is larger in area than Buffalo's. All you have to do is really look at the city proper of both of them. http://www.housesandhomes.com/images_cities/images_rochester/rochester_map1b.jpg http://wuarchive.wustl.edu/aminet/pix/map/Buffalo.jpg Buffalo's city proper hugs the Lake Erie shorline, it is much longer than it is wide. When it's citizens began to spread out into the suburbs, they followed the same patern; The suburbs tend to estend to the South and especialy the north, but they don't go that far to the east, because the city limits themselves don't go that far to the east, because downtown Buffalo is really in the extreme western part of the City. But, look at Rochester's city limits. What not many people know, is that Rochester wasn't really thought of as a great lakes city until a few decades ago when the suburban towns of Greece and Irondequiot that have long shorlines on Lake Ontaro, became heavily populated, and it's city limits didn't even reach Lake Ontario until 1916 when sparcly populated Charlotte was annexed to the city, over 100 years after Rochester was founded in 1811 as Rochesterville, a small milling village on the Genesee river. As the city grew in population and area, it grew in ALL directions, because it had more room. The city's downtown is actually in the geographic center of the city limits. So, as Rochesters citizens moved to the suburbs, they also followed the same growth patern that they did in the city. They went west to Greece and Gates and into eastern Orleans county (which I agree should only half be in the Rochester MSA), it grew south into Livingstonj county (even Dansville, in the very south of Livingston county, looks toward Rochester, they get the D&C, Rnews, and some even travel there for work), it deffinetly spread souteast into Ontario county, much of which is full blown suburbia now rather than just an outlying county, and they spread east all the way into Wayne county, in which Macedon, is located, and now also considerd a suburb. Also not to be mean, but Rochester''s metro area as a whole is still growing, where as Buffalo's, including the suburbs, has been losing population since the 1970's. That is why the Rochester MSA is so much larger, because it spread out in more directions.

sargeantcm

August 15th, 2005, 06:47 AM

steel

August 15th, 2005, 02:57 PM

BuffCity

August 15th, 2005, 03:17 PM

Anyone who knows anything on Buffalo can tell you the importance of Main Street! This is the road that connected the North East USA to the Midwest, how the ships going west docked right at the foot of main, about where the HSBC is now and the entire strip of Main built up because of this. Buffalo's layout is hardly unorganized (lol) Ellicott's plan is one of the most recognized city layouts in the country and downtown follows that plan for the most part.

Rochester has all its buildings at either Four Corners or on the other side of the river, and Rochester too built up along its main street, but since Urban Renewal, it would be hard to prove that due to demolition of some nicer buildings.

As for MSA, this is completely argued here...Rochester sets claim to entire counties of Orleans, Genesee, Livingston, Wayne, Ontario and Monroe as where the Buffalo metro only takes Niagara and Erie? gimme a break, we have been over this before here. Split Ontario, livingston and wayne, only about half are Rochester Metro, Genesee and Orleans are 50/50 Buffalo/Rochester and incorporate some of Wyoming county into the Buffalo metro (yea) and once again this fair way of doing this would show that Rochester still has not 1,000,000 people in it's metro, and Buffalo has more than 1.3 million.

Rochester likes to forget about all the Canadians who commute the peace bridge daily and center themselves around Buffalo instead of St. Catherines or Niagara Falls Canada (many do...don't argue) I think this would really change the numbers as far as populations of MSA's, remember the politics of all this as well.

I'm so glad we can still have this discussion, and perhaps even agree that Buffalo still is the Anchor and center of WNY, Rochester has many great assets but unfortunately they have smaller examples by scale, Major popular sports teams, Zoo, Downtown, Entertainment districts and Airport...thats because Rochester just is NOT as big...simple as that.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v69/Citysky/Buffalo%20Skylines/ttrert.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v69/Citysky/ROCHESTER%20nightshots/IMG_3779.jpg

Malo

August 15th, 2005, 06:44 PM

The Rochester contingent never presents any images to back up their claim. Rochester's skyline is only about half the size of Buffalo's. If I pointed a camera at just one segment of downtown Buffalo it would look as "organized" or dense as Rochester's. As a matter of fact when looking at Rocherster's skyline only 3 major buildings stand out.

Rochester's downtown is only about half as big as Buffalo's, but alot of how Rochester's DT grew and developed, came as a net result of the early German population that settled there. If one takes a look at German villages and city centres, one finds that the Germans (those masters of organization) built the core centers of their towns in a very central location, and always kept things "compact." This is very German in origin and nature, and accurately reflects the "how's and why's" of what Rochester did, that Buffalo didn't. Downtown Rochester is very compact, and also very centrally located.

Two different start-ups, two different philosophies, two different ethnic groups and thought processes..

steel

August 15th, 2005, 06:55 PM

Again I am not seeing compact when I look at Rochester. Lets see some evidence.

ROCguy

August 15th, 2005, 07:28 PM

No offense, but that map of Buffalo is a bit dated, as far as the yellow "urbanized area" is concerned. I would say nowadays, that yellow would extend to Hamburg in the south, just past US 20 in the east, and to Harris Hill/E. Amherst in the northeast. (North looks about right). There is no way any parts of Cheektowaga or West Seneca could be outside that area.

Not to mention the map is missing the US-219, NY-400, and I-990, and the NY-33 Kensington doesn't even reach I-90! How old is that map, 1960 or something? Even the QEW doesn't look right!

And while the Buffalo metro area has been losing population slowly, I think it peaked in the early-mid 80's rather than the 70's. I could be wrong, I'm not exactly positive on that one.

To each his own, but I don't see how Rochester's skyline is more organized than Buffalo's. It depends on the angle, from the N-S direction, you could fit Buffalo into a 20 degree field of view, it's from Canada and SE where it looks spread out. In the same sense, you could then argue NYC's skyline is even more spread out. Would you call that disorganized?

The map was from 1984, and it wasn't meant to show just the urban area of Buffalo (which you are correct is much larger than that map shows) it is just to show the city limits (the darker shade of yellow). The city limits is my point. Buffalo's is longer and more narrow, like I said, and that is why the msa follows the same pattern. Downtown Buffalo is on the very Westernmost edge of the city limits. So, again, when the people spread into the suburbs, they followed the same pattern, they moved more to the north and south, much more than they did to the east. But, again, Rochester's downtown is actually in the middle of the city, so when the people spread, the also followed the same pattern. I would say that the Rochester MSA should include; the entire areas of; Monroe County (duh), Wayne County, Ontario County, Livingston County (like I said, Dansville, in the extreme south of Livingston county, definitetly looks toward Rochester); and the Eastern Half of Orleans, Genesee, and Wyoming counties. Also, some parts of Yates county, Penn Yan at least, also look toward Rochester. Oh, and here is the Rochester skyline from one of the best vantage points other than on or near the Genesee river, Cobbs Hill (Which is within the city limits)
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/839/5440skyline.jpg

And another showcasing the soon to be completed Troup-Howell bridge, which from many other vantage points, adds to the skyline (unfortunetly I couldn't get a picture of it from the right angle, and this one blocks out the skyline, oh and it's computer imposed)
http://www.dot.state.ny.us/reg/r4/490gateway/trouphowell/images/troup_howell_brthm.jpg

sargeantcm

August 15th, 2005, 08:16 PM

That first one is a pretty nice looking skyline shot - it reminds me of those Syracuse ones, only without the hills, and has the same overall look as Buffalo's from the north (ECMC?), just slightly shorter and boxier (no spires). The second one, on the other hand, seems kind of whimpy (the bridge has an interesting look to it though).

Malo

August 15th, 2005, 08:19 PM

As for MSA, this is completely argued here...Rochester sets claim to entire counties of Orleans, Genesee, Livingston, Wayne, Ontario and Monroe as where the Buffalo metro only takes Niagara and Erie? gimme a break, we have been over this before here. Split Ontario, livingston and wayne, only about half are Rochester Metro, Genesee and Orleans are 50/50 Buffalo/Rochester and incorporate some of Wyoming county into the Buffalo metro (yea) and once again this fair way of doing this would show that Rochester still has not 1,000,000 people in it's metro, and Buffalo has more than 1.3 million.

Let me throw in my two cents here (again).

Revised Buffalo Metro:

Erie, Niagara, Cattaraugus, half Orleans, half Ontario, half Wyoming.

Revised Rochester Metro:

Monroe, Genesee, Livingston, Wayne, Steuben, half Ontario, Half Wyoming, half Orleans. Again, Rochester doesn't lay claim to anything other than Monroe Co. The US Census Bureau is the one who determines what, where, and who..

[QUOTE=BuffCity]I'm so glad we can still have this discussion, and perhaps even agree that Buffalo still is the Anchor and center of WNY, Rochester has many great assets but unfortunately they have smaller examples by scale, Major popular sports teams, Zoo, Downtown, Entertainment districts and Airport...thats because Rochester just is NOT as big...simple as that.

In my opinion, we keep getting into what one city has or doesn't have, or who has the most of or the least of--all in an effort to convince the other side that we truly are as big or as great as we say we are. Yes, Buffalo is a bigger city than Rochester. Yes, Buffalo constitutes a bigger metro (population wise), than Rochester. Yes, Buffalo has major league sports teams. Yes, the Buffalo Zoo is larger and better stocked than the dismal, small, quaint Seneca Park Zoo. But Rochester has its own set of examples that it too, can rely on. Now, with all of that said--I'd like to point out some lesser known facts and trivia about both cities.

Neither city is a bastion of well-dressed urbanites. Both lag behind other cities of their size when it comes down to gentrification efforts and downtown residential populations.

Both are heavily Italian and heavily conservative. One is heavily Polish and decidedly conservative. Rochester is, by far, the more liberal of the two.

Rochester has a museum that is the most financially well-endowed museum in the country, and #7 in overall attendance. Both have world-class orchestra's, while Rochester has the Eastman School of Music--generally regarded as the #1 or #2 best music school in the country (depending on which poll you see).

Buffalo has major league football and hockey. The hockey team plays in Buffalo, yet draws people from Rochester and Canada, and is owned by a Rochesterian.

Rochester has a new, full use soccer stadium, and will soon have its first major league team in years (since the Rochester Royals).

Buffalo has a major state university within its city borders (Buff State). While Rochester has two state universities within thirty minutes of the city--SUNY Brockport and SUNY Geneseo.

Both cities are insular, conservative, and reluctant to change.

Both cities are 5 years behind everyone else--except, maybe Fresno or Wilkes-Barre.

Both cities are extremely expensive to get to from anywhere in the US or Canada (Rochester moreso). Neither are hubs for any major airlines.

Both Rochesterians and Buffalonians say, "mingua." No one else in America knows what the hell they're talking about...

Only in Boston and Rochester do people continue to use the term, "wicked." Everyone else in America moved on to other more modern, up-to-date, slang terminology.

Few cities in North America turn their garages into "summer rooms." Most cities have homes with either "three-season' or "four season" porches or decks. Buffalo and Rochester aren't, "most cities."

For all of the hoopla about how good the restaurants are in Buffalo, neither city can lay claim to having either a 4 or a five star restaurant to their name, and good luck trying to find one rated a three star. (Lowly Dayton, Ohio, beats them both like a red-headed step-child...and Dayton is home to more mullets and Skoal chewers, than almost any other semi-major city, anywhere).

Buffalo has one of the highest percentages of American brand automobile ownership than any city outside Detroit. A person in Rochester is more than three times more likely to buy a foreign brand than an American name, when purchasing a new or used car.

The music scene in both cities is ten years behind the rest of the nation. Radio is very conservative in both cities.

Both are considered "small markets" when it comes to aggragate music sales (except in Black music sales).

Both Rochester and Buffalo have a fairly high percentage of "deer hunters." (Though Syracuse has more registered deer hunters than Buffalo and Rochester, combined).

There are other "gems" as well, I just have to get to my research information and I will post them...

Malo

August 15th, 2005, 08:25 PM

As for MSA, this is completely argued here...Rochester sets claim to entire counties of Orleans, Genesee, Livingston, Wayne, Ontario and Monroe as where the Buffalo metro only takes Niagara and Erie? gimme a break, we have been over this before here. Split Ontario, livingston and wayne, only about half are Rochester Metro, Genesee and Orleans are 50/50 Buffalo/Rochester and incorporate some of Wyoming county into the Buffalo metro (yea) and once again this fair way of doing this would show that Rochester still has not 1,000,000 people in it's metro, and Buffalo has more than 1.3 million...

Let me throw in my two cents here (again), and this time try to post it properly.

Revised Buffalo Metro:

Erie, Niagara, Cattaraugus, half Orleans, half Ontario, half Wyoming.

Revised Rochester Metro:

Monroe, Genesee, Livingston, Wayne, Steuben, half Ontario, Half Wyoming, half Orleans. Again, Rochester doesn't lay claim to anything other than Monroe Co. The US Census Bureau is the one who determines what, where, and who..

In my opinion, we keep getting into what one city has or doesn't have, or who has the most of or the least of--all in an effort to convince the other side that we truly are as big or as great as we say we are. Yes, Buffalo is a bigger city than Rochester. Yes, Buffalo constitutes a bigger metro (population wise), than Rochester. Yes, Buffalo has major league sports teams. Yes, the Buffalo Zoo is larger and better stocked than the dismal, small, quaint Seneca Park Zoo. But Rochester has its own set of examples that it too, can rely on. Now, with all of that said--I'd like to point out some lesser known facts and trivia about both cities.

Neither city is a bastion of well-dressed urbanites. Both lag behind other cities of their size when it comes down to gentrification efforts and downtown residential populations.

Both are heavily Italian and heavily conservative. One is heavily Polish and decidedly conservative. Rochester is, by far, the more liberal of the two.

Rochester has a museum that is the most financially well-endowed museum in the country, and #7 in overall attendance. Both have world-class orchestra's, while Rochester has the Eastman School of Music--generally regarded as the #1 or #2 best music school in the country (depending on which poll you see).

Buffalo has major league football and hockey. The hockey team plays in Buffalo, yet draws people from Rochester and Canada, and is owned by a Rochesterian.

Rochester has a new, full use soccer stadium, and will soon have its first major league team in years (since the Rochester Royals).

Buffalo has a major state university within its city borders (Buff State). While Rochester has two state universities within thirty minutes of the city--SUNY Brockport and SUNY Geneseo.

Both cities are insular, conservative, and reluctant to change.

Both cities are 5 years behind everyone else--except, maybe Fresno or Wilkes-Barre.

Both cities are extremely expensive to get to from anywhere in the US or Canada (Rochester moreso). Neither are hubs for any major airlines.

Both Rochesterians and Buffalonians say, "mingua." No one else in America knows what the hell they're talking about...

Only in Boston and Rochester do people continue to use the term, "wicked." Everyone else in America moved on to other more modern, up-to-date, slang terminology.

Few cities in North America turn their garages into "summer rooms." Most cities have homes with either "three-season' or "four season" porches or decks. Buffalo and Rochester aren't, "most cities."

For all of the hoopla about how good the restaurants are in Buffalo, neither city can lay claim to having either a 4 or a five star restaurant to their name, and good luck trying to find one rated a three star. (Lowly Dayton, Ohio, beats them both like a red-headed step-child...and Dayton is home to more mullets and Skoal chewers, than almost any other semi-major city, anywhere).

Buffalo has one of the highest percentages of American brand automobile ownership than any city outside Detroit. A person in Rochester is more than three times more likely to buy a foreign brand than an American name, when purchasing a new or used car.

The music scene in both cities is ten years behind the rest of the nation. Radio is very conservative in both cities.

Both are considered "small markets" when it comes to aggragate music sales (except in Black music sales).

Both Rochester and Buffalo have a fairly high percentage of "deer hunters." (Though Syracuse has more registered deer hunters than Buffalo and Rochester, combined).

There are other "gems" as well, I just have to get to my research information and I will post them..

steel

August 15th, 2005, 09:08 PM

Not sure what any of this has to do with quality of skyline.

As far as restaurant stars go who cares. Buffalo has some of the best food anyplace. And I am not talking piza and wings.

BuffCity

August 15th, 2005, 09:35 PM

I guess when we look at outlying counties like Genesee, Livingston, Orleans, Ontario, Wyoming, Chatauqua, or Wayne we have to look at the villages and towns within these places...Albion is more towards the Rochester side of Orleans vs. Medina which is more Lockport/Buffalo based...yet the US Census bureau gives all of the county to the Rochster metro. In genesee County, Batavia is a 50/50 Buffalo/Rochester split, we are so cut down the middle that most people on the west half the city are Buffalo commuters and the East side are Rochester commuters, as for Elba, it can also go either way, from there you can do the math for places like LeRoy or Corfu / Pembroke. Ontario County is very much connected to the Rochester metro, it has places like Geneva and Canandaigua which give the metro access to the finger lakes and some wine country. One thing I noticed is how Livingston county is basically the I390 land, which shoots right into Rochester, but at the same time...places like Hornell, Elmira, Dansville and Geneseo have thier own employers, but I'm sure some do go north.

Jamestown could be argued part of the Buffalo metro, that being said...Wyoming County has some commuters who travel west to work in the metro daily, maybe not 50% of the population, but the number is justifiable.

UB, Daemon, Buff State, Canisius, Niagara, NCC, ECC, D'Youville...All Buffalo schools, and for Rochester...U of R, RIT, Eastman School, MCC and I'll throw in SUNY Geneseo and SUNY Brockport to be nice (lol)

Airports, Buffalo has a busier facility, but these two shoulda built these places away from each other, as they gotta be like 50 miles apart...duh?

ZOO's? well I don't have any idea where the Seneca Park zoo is, nor what it has, I just know its gotta be small. Buffalo has like one of the oldest Zoo's in the USA, its a nice little place (compared to the Toronto Metro Zoo) and it's always been a clean place.

One thing I really think that would set these two off...a high speed commuter trail between the two, like from Batavia to Buffalo to the Falls, then to Lockport, Medina, Albion, Brockport and into Rochester and back again to Churchville and Leroy. Something very fast that could link these two better.

sargeantcm

August 15th, 2005, 09:37 PM

^ I agree. If Slimey Joe's doesn't have any stars, but has the best darn pizza or hamburgers or what-have-you, you better bet I'll go there. Sometimes, especially when it comes to diners, the dumpier the place looks on the outside, the better the food. Yeah, that's not what tourists see, but if your food is so good, you ought to have area name recognition and decent enough business to get your name out there to the tourists when they're sitting in a hotel room watching TV or looking in a phone book trying to find a place to eat. Not to mention half the tourists must be ex-residents anyways so they should know better or know someone who does - I've seen more FL cars this year than my life combined! (Maybe that's why this summer's been too hot.) Granted you want "real" tourists, but that's one of the problems here. But for the meantime, beggers can't be choosey.

As for airline hubs, now that's ridiculous because I wouldn't expect it even if Buffalo and Rochester were both vibrant, modern cities of 1 million +. A megolopolis called Buffochester (or is it Rocheffalo? Ehh just call it Batavia! :)) I don't see why an airline would want to center there when they're on the edge of the country, and not close enough to the coast. Heck, Toronto and Montreal are all there is between them and the "edge" of civilization as we know it!

BuffCity

August 15th, 2005, 09:57 PM

Malo

August 16th, 2005, 12:17 AM

I think Buffalo Airport is a beauty...better too small now with the need to grow than something too big and rotting away. Rochester is not as modern of a facility, never flown from there.

Well, considering that both cities built their airports within two years of ech other--both are modern and relatively new. Rochester, IMO, cheaped out when it came to the outside of their buildings. Buffalo seemed to have a better cladding on the outside of theirs. Not nearly as ugly as Rochesters', but not nearly as nice as Albany's airport.

BuffCity

August 16th, 2005, 12:22 AM

Malo,

screw Albany!

Buffalo is better, you know it...stop trying to deny it.

Fly Buffalo.

Malo

August 16th, 2005, 12:25 AM

UB, Daemon, Buff State, Canisius, Niagara, NCC, ECC, D'Youville...All Buffalo schools, and for Rochester...U of R, RIT, Eastman School, MCC and I'll throw in SUNY Geneseo and SUNY Brockport to be nice (lol)

Don't forget St. John Fisher, Nazareth, and Roberts Weslyan in Rochester, also. Plus, both SUNY Brockport and SUNY Geneseo are Rochester schools in that they are 30 minutes outside the city proper, and the vast majority of the student body are from the Rochester area. The same thing would apply to NCC and Niagara with regards to Buffalo.

Malo

August 16th, 2005, 12:28 AM

Malo,

screw Albany!

Buffalo is better, you know it...stop trying to deny it.

Fly Buffalo.

LOL...I couldn't agree more. Buffalo is tha shizznit--while Albany is the eastside wannabe!!! Go Buffalo!!!

sargeantcm

August 16th, 2005, 12:32 AM

^ Syracuse has a fairly new terminal as well, don't they? It's not spectacular in any sense, but I remember several times on the Greyhound when it stopped there that it was big, bright, and white. Not bad looking, definitely better than LaGuardia lol.

BuffCity

August 16th, 2005, 04:26 AM

ROCguy

August 16th, 2005, 04:41 AM

I just can't stand Albany, I love Buffalo, really like Rochester and have a new found interest in Syracuse...But Albany is the place where all the ideas that kill Buff/Roch/Syr are made, the policies, the ideas and the silly government skyline do no more than make a idiotic example of how not to run your state.

I really wish sometimes there was two states, Western NY and NY...and we take Syracuse with us...you can take the catskills because we get the State forest north of Albany.

It's bullshit....AHHHHHHHHH
OH MY GOSH BUFFCITY, DON'T WORRY YOU ARE NOT ALONE AT ALL. You took the words RIGHT out of my mouth, I posted almost the exact same thing on Rateitall.com!!!!!!!!! Albany does not count as Upstate New York because it is totally run by people in downstate. Everything from Binghamton, up through Syracuse and all the way up to Watertown should become it's own state. Centrally located Rochester or maybe Ithaca should be made the capitol. The taxes would go way down, the government would be run by the good-hearted honest people of Upstate New York, and businesses would have much more reason to come to the heavenly region (then heavinly state) known as Upstate New York ( not sure what it should be called then, but let's be creative). The rest of the state, from the Long Island/NYC area, up through Albany, and all the way up to the Adirondacks (the Adirondacks are beautiful, but very few people live there year round, and the people who live there seasonaly and vacation there are almost all from the NYC metro anyways) Could remain as New York state.

sargeantcm

August 16th, 2005, 05:09 AM

Long Island already seems to think that they're their own state anyways. Have you seen the license plate holders that say for example "Joe Blow Nissan - West Islip, L.I."? I wonder if the postal service recognizes that...

Point is, make them change the name. They don't represent what it means (meant).

Jaybird

August 16th, 2005, 05:10 AM

At least Albany is a better capital city for a state/province and a nicer city overall than Toronto is. :) At least I think it is. Although as usual, in reality, that more than likely is not the case according to some.

I'd trade TO for Albany anyday, lol.

bjfan82

August 16th, 2005, 06:56 AM

Well, considering that both cities built their airports within two years of ech other--both are modern and relatively new. Rochester, IMO, cheaped out when it came to the outside of their buildings. Buffalo seemed to have a better cladding on the outside of theirs. Not nearly as ugly as Rochesters', but not nearly as nice as Albany's airport.

Buffalo's airport is a thousand times nicer than Albany's. I flew out of Albany back in April and it seemed really old with newer renovations, but Buffalo Intl absolutely blows Albany Intl out of the water.

I think Buffalo Intl is what every airport in America should strive to look like - high tech and cool airport architecture. If there is one thing you can turn and say Buffalo got right it would be our airport.

BuffCity

August 16th, 2005, 02:34 PM

my anger for Albany should not discredit the nice things the city has, like some of its buildings and it's history...but since the 1960's that place has ruined not only New York, but perhaps it's blunders effected the decline of other states as well.

Buffalo's Airport is a gem, the place is very modern and very very clean.

One thing I noticed is how Urban friendly the facility is...some bigger cities are so building Airports so far out that the only way to get there is by taxi or metro bus. In Buffalo you could walk from any neighborhood in the city right to your flight...thats freakin cool.

HaloVet

August 18th, 2005, 10:27 PM

Buffalo's skyline Rules UpState!

Here's some Falls Pics:

Niagara Falls, NY

http://www.richard-seaman.com/USA/States/NewYork/NiagaraFalls/HelicopterTrip/EntireAreaFromNorthOfWhirlpool.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/montecarloss/image/45824696/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/montecarloss/image/45824685/original.jpg

Good Pic found here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?threadid=80809

HaloVet

August 18th, 2005, 10:40 PM

Niagara Falls, NY

http://www.richard-seaman.com/USA/States/NewYork/NiagaraFalls/HelicopterTrip/EntireAreaFromNorthOfWhirlpool.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/montecarloss/image/45824696/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/montecarloss/image/45824685/original.jpg

Good Pic found here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?threadid=80809

Navy_JAG

September 27th, 2005, 05:06 PM

Your list of Syracuse high-rise buildings doesn't include the Chase Bank Building. I have colleagues who work in this building and it seems to be the second largest building in Syracuse at 19 stories tall. Here's an article outlining the sale of the building a few years ago.

http://www.sonngold.com/press_show.asp?id=107

I don't know how to insert pictures or I would provide one of Chase (I clicked the "insert image" icon but was unable to insert the image. :)

Buffalo

One HSBC Center (529ft)
Buffalo City Hall (378ft)
Rand Building (351ft)
Main Place Tower (350ft)
Liberty Building (333ft)

Rochester

Xerox Tower (443ft)
Baush & Lomb Place (401ft)
Chase Tower (392ft)
Eastman Kodak Building (366ft)
First Federal Plaza (309ft)

Syracuse

State Tower (315ft)
(2)MONY Towers (268ft)
Toomey Abbott Tower (229ft)
Lawrinson Hall SU (223ft)
Bernardine Apartments (220ft)

Albany

Erastus Corning Tower (589ft)
Alfred C Smith State Office Building (388ft)
(4)Empire State Plaza (310ft)
Mohawk Tower (286ft)
Eastman Tower (286ft)

*I should point out that Albany's top 3 buildings are all STATE OFFICES...Blah

Navy_JAG

September 27th, 2005, 05:25 PM

[QUOTE=BuffCity]
Buffalo has a major state university within its city borders (Buff State). While Rochester has two state universities within thirty minutes of the city--SUNY Brockport and SUNY Geneseo.

OK--Buffalo does have a major state university within its city borders, but it is not, I repeat-- it is not Buff State! Buffalo State College (aka "Buff State") is a much smaller SUNY school (comparable to a Brockport or Oswego) within Buffalo that is significantly different is size, athletics and admission criteria than the University at Buffalo ("UB"). UB, NOT Buff State, is the major SUNY school in the area. UB is one of SUNY's four major research institutions (along with Binghamton, Albany & Stony Brook) while Buff State is one of SUNY's many teacher's colleges. This distinction was clarified by one of my good friends who is a professor at SUNY Oswego.

I used to mix the schools up as well before I attended law school at UB where I became intimately familiar with the difference. Regardless, I just wanted to clarify this small and seemingly irrelevant issue.

donbuy

September 27th, 2005, 06:42 PM

For the last two years EB Greens has been rated as one of the ten BEST restaurants in the United States.

from their web site

BUFFALO, N.Y.) – E.B. Green’s Steakhouse, located in the heart of Buffalo’s downtown theater and entertainment district, has been selected for the second year in a row as one of “ America’s Top Ten Steakhouses”. In 2004 E.B. Green’s was ranked 10 th in the country and in 2005 earned the 9 th position on this distinguished list.

“Ralph Guadagno, General Manager of E.B. Green’s Steakhouse commented, “We are very proud to be included at number 9 on Tom Horan’s Top Ten List. This is a real honor to be recognized for the second year in a row as one of the Top Ten Steakhouses in the U.S. and illustrates our commitment to great food and fantastic service at an exceptional value.”

The steakhouses included in the 2005 list, released in January, were screened by representatives of the Top Ten Club during the summer and judged on quality, reputation and value. “America’s Top Ten Steakhouses” is one of the most recognized lists of its kind in the food and beverage industry.

“Being named to the list of Top Ten Steakhouses is quite an achievement, and being named two years in a row shows a real dedication to serving great food all the time. E.B. Green’s meets that challenge day in and day out,” said Tom Horan. “We are proud and excited to include E.B. Green’s again this year.”

E.B. Green’s Steakhouse has been owned and operated since 1984 by Paul Snyder and is named after the prominent turn of the century architect who designed the historic building in which the restaurant is housed. The management and staff of E.B. Green’s pride themselves on providing the finest cuts of choice and prime beef in a unique restaurant environment to the Who’s Who of Buffalo restaurant patrons.

A long-standing cornerstone in downtown Buffalo, this is a special honor for E. B. Green’s Steakhouse and the City of Buffalo that is now home to one of America’s Top Ten Steakhouses.

donbuy

September 27th, 2005, 06:44 PM

HSBC building is 529.8 feet tall from the downtown side but 569.5 feet tall from the Arena side as it is built into a hill. This info is from an old World Almanac that I still have

steel

September 27th, 2005, 06:46 PM

Navy_JAG

September 27th, 2005, 07:27 PM

HSBC building is 529.8 feet tall from the downtown side but 569.5 feet tall from the Arena side as it is built into a hill. This info is from an old World Almanac that I still have

Does the Almanac provide any information on the Chase Bank Building in Syracuse? I'm curious what its actual height is.

donbuy

September 27th, 2005, 09:25 PM

I'll look it up and let you know

donbuy

September 27th, 2005, 09:30 PM

EB Green comment was in response to MALO comment dated 8/19/02 2:25pm. I read about EB Greens in an airline magazine. I hope to check it out next time my job takes me to Buffalo, NY

ROCguy

September 28th, 2005, 01:26 AM

Glad to see this thread back up. I found the best view of Rochester's skyline that I have ever seen. It is looking North from the UR main campus. It's far enough away to see the entire skyline, the river, in a distance Lake Ontario. and all of the tree shaded neighborhoods on the South side of the City. I have to wonder how they got this shot, must have been in a low flying helicopter or something.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a221/nixter369/Aerial_000.jpg

jmancuso

September 28th, 2005, 02:30 AM

yeah, that is a great pic. i used to have to go to rochester twice a week (from utica) for a few years for speech theraply and all i remember is that rochester had really cool looking neighborhoods on a hill.

BuffCity

September 28th, 2005, 03:21 PM

just a note...

Niagara Falls USA looks alot nicer with this new Hotel up. Infact, the building to some might look ugly, IMO...it's very very nice. Talk about a fine example of modern Native American architecture, perhaps it is the finest example in the Americas!

BuffCity

September 28th, 2005, 03:36 PM

btw...

University at Buffalo is the largest SUNY campus in NY.

NYC007

September 28th, 2005, 03:40 PM

Buffcity, In addition to your comments about the new casino in Niagara Falls, check out this article from today's Business First of Buffalo. 1,000 new jobs should go a long way to help out that city.

Senecas on hiring spree for new $200M hotel
Elizabeth Carey

The planned opening of the Seneca Niagara Hotel & Casino this winter is leading to an autumn job blitz.

Seneca Niagara officials say they're looking to hire approximately 1,000 new employees to staff the new hotel and additional casino space.

A two-day began Wednesday as job seekers lined up at the Grand Island Holiday Inn to apply for a variety of positions.

"Everything from food and beverage service to environmental services to guest services, hotel sales, transportation, security," said Phil Pantano, spokesman for the Seneca Niagara Casino. "You name it, we've got to fill it."

A second job fair begins Sunday at the Conference Center in Niagara Falls. A total of five job fairs will be held through the end of October.

Pantano says the 26-story hotel is almost complete and phase one will open in December. The entire project is scheduled for completion in March when the pool, spa, and salon will be finished.

The project will cost an estimated $200 million dollars.

"It's going to be a tremendous operation," Pantano said. "We're creating 604 guest rooms in downtown Niagara Falls, three new restaurants, and retail stores." The hotel will also feature 35,000 square feet of additional gaming space connected to the existing Seneca Niagara Casino.

© 2005 American City Business Journals Inc.

Malo

September 28th, 2005, 06:40 PM

donbuy

September 28th, 2005, 08:35 PM

Wait until you see the 19 story tall sign they are going to put on the new 358 foot hotel in NF NY.

ROCguy

September 28th, 2005, 09:48 PM

lol, I think Buffcity meant to post this one......http://rochesterdowntown.com/

It's easy to confuse the two.

BuffCity

September 28th, 2005, 10:07 PM

yes, I meant to post the one you mentioned, I guess my aixelsid went nuts when writing that reply. lol

Malo

September 28th, 2005, 11:00 PM

No biggie, dude. I just thought it was funny...and I didn't catch the difference at first.

Roc36

October 25th, 2005, 07:30 PM

bjfan82

October 25th, 2005, 07:46 PM

^ Rochester has a worse economy than Buffalo does now...and if you think Buffalo looked bad in the 80s and early 90s...Rochester that is what u may be in for in the next 10 years

But you do have some really nice buildings in ur downtown, which is the topic of this thread...i think people feel Buffalo's skyline is better because it has a much more imposing feel when you drive up to it from a distance...rather than a little cluster of three buildings.

steel

October 25th, 2005, 07:59 PM

hold on now Roc36...What got into your britches? I would kool it with that kind of talk. You obvioulsy know little of the Buff with that goofyness you are spewing.

sargeantcm

October 25th, 2005, 08:38 PM

First of all, this is not an "overall condition of the city" thread, it's "best skyline", plain and simple, at the top of the page. If it were the former, I wouldn't be surprised if Rochester were winning. But it's not.

Rochester, unfortunately, has lost about as large a chunk of it's peak population as Buffalo has, check your stats. Sure, it's doing a little better right now, but all-in-all they're equal over the last 50+ years. Rochester also doesn't seem to have the downtown investment that Buffalo is beginning to see.

And why the heck does Syracuse need to be dragged into this? You're beating them 19-4. You act like that's some sort of insult or something.

And if NYC is such a nice place to live, just move there then.

ProudBuffalonian

October 25th, 2005, 09:22 PM

Actually I think in the past few months, Buffalo has been doing a tad better economicly then Rochester. And Buffalo has a larger population then Rochester by about 100,000 people, which is why it's bigger on the map. Buffalo is also clean. I assume that when you last visited the city, (and I am assuming that you even visited it in the first place) you must have entered through a bad area.

This thread is ancient isn't it lol.

BuffCity

October 25th, 2005, 10:05 PM

Ok people...Buffalo the best skyline??...or even being a nicer or whoever said it was cleaner than Rochester really needs to have their head examined!!..Buffalo is a pile of trash,and Syracuse is isn't any better.It's a shame that Buffalo is bigger on a map,And that is only because of the pro sports teams.Other than that more people have fled that area in the last 15 years than most other cities.Rochester has lost very little beacause it has accepted the Kodak cuts and found new ways to improve it's economy!!....Rochester is the ONLY nice place in New york state..besides NYC

because there has been a long and painful understanding just met by the Buffalo and Rochester forumers for an overall alliance for our area...I won't begin the old battle of two cities. Roc36, your only post and you come in here talking like a true "tard", not cool.

I would examine both the developments threads of Buffalo and Rochester, the photo posts and some of the overall discussions on the cities before going out like a chump so quick.

this is an old thread, it's cool that it stays active.

NYC007

October 25th, 2005, 10:26 PM

Anyone who thinks Buffalo is a dirty city is obviously living in the past. Here's a link to the Readers Digest poll from this past July (2005) that named Buffalo as AMERICA'S THIRD CLEANEST CITY.

http://www.rd.com/content/openContent.do?contentId=15115

...and before you go and say that Rochester is on the list too, you should notice that Buffalo is higher on that list.

Jaybird

October 26th, 2005, 12:30 AM

^ Impressive statistics. Ever since I started visiting Buffalo, I always thought the city was quite clean, especially downtown. :)

ROCguy

October 26th, 2005, 01:02 AM

Ok people...Buffalo the best skyline??...or even being a nicer or whoever said it was cleaner than Rochester really needs to have their head examined!!..Buffalo is a pile of trash,and Syracuse is isn't any better.It's a shame that Buffalo is bigger on a map,And that is only because of the pro sports teams.Other than that more people have fled that area in the last 15 years than most other cities.Rochester has lost very little beacause it has accepted the Kodak cuts and found new ways to improve it's economy!!....Rochester is the ONLY nice place in New york state..besides NYC

This guy DOES NOT speak for all Rochestertians. Just had to say that (but I'm sure everyone on here already knew that). Buffalo and Rochester are both improving their economies right now. It is true that Buffalo's metro area has lost population while Rochester has gained. But right now, they are both stagnant, and at major turning points of improvement. They need eachother right now as a support system to get out from under the fat opressive ass of Albany.... According to the D&C.... all of the 11 county area of western NY that includes both Buffalo and Rochester is doing better economiclay now than it has in years. DESPITE the recent announcement of cutts at Delphi and Kodak. WNY is a great region all around, and shouldn't be at odds with itself.

bjfan82

October 26th, 2005, 03:07 AM

Jaybird, thats cuz you contributed to Buffalo being the third cleanest by picking up garbage off the ground and throwing it out like a good little citizen. Sorry I had to mention it, it was the perfect opportunity.

Yeah downtown is pretty clean, just wish there would be less homeless people and panhandlers down there during the day.

ROCguy

October 26th, 2005, 03:23 AM

^ There are panhanlders and homeless people in every downtown in America though.

bjfan82

October 26th, 2005, 03:55 AM

ik but i don't want them in my downtown, especially when they urinate on the sidewalk...it makes going downtown a little less enjoyable and a little more depressing.

i was reading in the USA Today the other day and there was an article about homeless people with some statistics....and Buffalo has the highest EMPLOYMENT Rate among our homeless, at about 40% employed. I don't know how the interpret that stat other than maybe the jobs pay too low here to afford $400/month apartment.

ROCguy

October 26th, 2005, 04:07 AM

That is very strange.

DonQui

October 26th, 2005, 04:07 AM

buffalo I would imagine. :yes:

sargeantcm

October 26th, 2005, 04:45 AM

Yeah downtown is pretty clean, just wish there would be less homeless people and panhandlers down there during the day.

It's funny because my father works at the City Mission, and he's told us to refer anybody who asks for money to them, obviously. But as you would imagine, in most cases, the Mission doesn't "offer what they are looking for". One I ran into after a Bisons game said they were closed (which they don't).

My girlfriend works downtown, and she's run into the same ones every day, including one who has a brand new mountain bike. Now I don't want to get into the stereotypical "drug money" accusations here, but it's really tough to get that out of your mind.

But I suppose it's a problem most, if not all major cities have. Although that stat is kind of odd. You'd think there'd be less homeless employed just because of how relatively cheap the housing is.

But hey, at least we have one shining employment stat! Gotta start somewhere, although I would hope it wasn't that low!