SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I am interested urban textue. The stuff that fills up the city. Not the skyline but the stuff that leads up to the skyline. The messy jumbly stuff that the real city is made of. No post cards here.

Here is some stuff I found on the web showing Buffalo's urban texture.

Show us your city if you like.

( these are images are not by me. they are form the web and might be copyrighted. please treat them as if they are)













































 

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
Wow. I hate to bring this up, but the pics in this thread, and specifically the large pic above, show why it's just not a comparison when Rochester forumers try to compare Rochester to Buffalo in terms of urban character and density. Buffalo, while struggling, is still quite something at the core.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,175 Posts
Buffalo's population peaked at 580,000 and Rochester peaked at 332,000. Rochester hasn't lost as many people as Buffalo, so the size of Rochester now is closer to what it peaked at than what Buffalo peaked at. Which is why Buffalo looks like a muche bigger city that its current population, it still has the infrastructure from its much larger past.
 

·
Professional
Joined
·
764 Posts
bjfan82 said:
Buffalo's population peaked at 580,000 and Rochester peaked at 332,000. Rochester hasn't lost as many people as Buffalo, so the size of Rochester now is closer to what it peaked at than what Buffalo peaked at. Which is why Buffalo looks like a muche bigger city that its current population, it still has the infrastructure from its much larger past.
you have to remember too that when buffalo's population peaked you had people crammed into row housing, much of which has been torn down and replaced over the past few decades...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,424 Posts
Architorture said:
you have to remember too that when buffalo's population peaked you had people crammed into row housing, much of which has been torn down and replaced over the past few decades...
Row housing?!?! Not in the Buffalo I know. Two-flats, yes, townhomes, no. Not sure why it never caught on here compared to the east coast and some midwest cities. I think it was because of the abundance of wood locally, most of the growth happening in the later 1800's and early 1900's, and plenty of land to build on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,596 Posts
NoCtUrNaL said:
(taken today 9am)

That picture could be a competition for the famous Ralph Wilson Stadium shot I have seen many times. Anyways, all these pictures certainly give the most unique and best perspective of Buffalo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,175 Posts
^ Is that taken from the central terminal? It looks just like the shot of the skyline in the Goo Goo Dolls DVD when they go to the top of the building.

It is a fantastic picture of the entire skyline. However, IMO I don't think it rivals "The Ralph" picture because the picture from the stadium makes the skyline look denser and taller. The pic you show above exposes our skyline for how pathetic it really is (in terms of height and density). But it is a great picture because it shows tons of housing with the skyline emerging in the background. It definitely gives the best perspective of Buffalo all one pic.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
Where was that shot taken from again...? j/k lol

Never, in all of the Buffalo pictorials I've seen in this and other threads, have I seen the true magnificence of this city quite in the way it has been presented here. Absolutely amazing photo's!!

You can plainly see the grandeur that was Buffalo 40 or 50 years ago. This was a very impressive city then, and I'd be fairly certain that other cities around the country tried in some way to emulate what Buffalo had and did.

On another note:

nostyle alluded to the inevitable comparisons between Buffalo and Rochester, and not to disagree with him entirely--but each city was layed out differently--not better than the other--just differently. To my way of thinking, Buffalo has the superior design, while Rochester looks alot like many other older cities, in that the design is a lot more "old-school" than Buffalo. buffalo's "wheel-spoke" design is infamous in city planning circles, while Rochester's is well...hodge-podge."

Rochester has done away with a great many of its older buildings, while Buffalo has kept theirs in tact. This contributes to the dense structural feeling you get when you look at photo's of Buffalo today. Rochester too is dense, but not nearly as linear as Buffalo in its street layout and design. Both cities would put Southern cities to shame though when it comes to urban density and design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,973 Posts
lol. ok, one thing I have to know, I always see the Buffalo forumers on here talking about "two flats" being a traditional Buffalo home, what's a two flat, is it like a duplex or something? Any pics?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,973 Posts
geez, I thought this thread got "ressurected" and now I am the only one to leave coments, and it was 7 hours ago?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,973 Posts
^^ and that is supposed to be impressive? I don't get it, what is so special about something like that?
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top