Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree and I have always viewed the role of Pueblo as the counter balance to Denver in the state. To be fair I would include Grand Junction as well. The reason is those 3 cities are strategically located in the state making them hub cities for a large geographic region.
Buffalo is the second largest city in New York and has about 247,000. New York City, the largest city has about 9 million. Can one not see a big problem here.
Does it not seem strange with such an unbalanced State of such a large population. New York is not like Neveda with a large areas, a relatively small population and areas that are difficult to populated. It is old Colonial State, that is large, fertile and hospitable in most areas with a very large population but most live near or in NYC.
New York sits in the category of large population with California, Texas and Florida. In those states you see a distributed population with more than one thriving large city. New York is indeed a strange place.
When I was growing up in the 1950s, Buffalo had about 550,000 and it was decaying at that time. Now with less than half the population it is much worse. Buffalo is ignored by the power elite in NYC but so is the rest of the cities that are not in the shadow of NYC. NYC is prospering; the rest of the State is dying. If you want to see something really tragic, go to Niagara Falls, NY--a city of extreme decay and is an American Shame when you look across the river at the Canadian Side. It is not recent as it has always been that way.
From my prospective, New York is the Empire State and it runs as an old Empire with a central powerful core and vassals that the Empire wants to keep in dependence and need. Why? I think because New York City and its inhabitants are much different and have a much different culture than the rest of the country. It has an arrogance that is beyond any city, as it has always be touted as the biggest, the best, the financial capital, the Capital of Corporate America. It is just bad luck that the other cities have to be in the same State as this greedy, arrogant beast. New York City should be its own State and the rest of the State should become independent or in association with another neighboring State.
The point I am making we should not form the same extreme imbalance in Colorado. Wealth and Opportunity and Population must be distributed as much as possible. There will always be more people on the front range than the mountains or the far eastern plains because of the geographical constraints, but we need not become a New York Empire State with all the control and wealth in Denver. We need to heavily invest in other cities such as Greeley, Grand Junction, Fort Morgan, Burlington, and Pueblo etc.; and if it requires the front range to give more, to develop more of the other regions, then so be it.
Livecontent
I'm not sure I agree with some of your analysis of New York. The problems that NYS cities experience are historical. Rochester, for example, became a vibrant city back in days when it was not the Flower City, but when it was the Flour City. At that time central and western NYS was the wheat producing capital of the country, and Rochester became a milling city. Of course, as time went on, the flour industry moved west. Rochester did have Kodak, but we all know what is happening to Kodak since it didn't keep up with the times, even though it invented the digital camera. Xerox was founded in Rochester, but moved its world headquarters to Connecticut.
Buffalo is another rust belt city. In part, its decline was led off -- historically -- when the Erie Canal was no longer an important shipping route (remember, the "first port" on the Erie Canal -- which shipped goods to NYC -- was Buffalo.
Niagara Falls boomed as an industrial center because of the water power available. Now, electrical power is everywhere. No need to stay at Niagara. The Canadians always developed their tourism more effectively than the NYS side.
I'm not very clear at why you think Colorado is comparable at all. It's pretty clear that, with minor exceptions, it's the Front Range cities that are experiencing the population and business growth in Colorado, and that's geographical. Denver became the hub and will continue to be so because it has the infrastructure that the other cities don't have. The other hub, really, is Grand Junction, because it is the most populous city on the western slope.
It really is a matter of physical geography, even in the 2000s. It should not be a matter for social engineering.
I'm not sure I agree with some of your analysis of New York. The problems that NYS cities experience are historical. Rochester, for example, became a vibrant city back in days when it was not the Flower City, but when it was the Flour City. At that time central and western NYS was the wheat producing capital of the country, and Rochester became a milling city. Of course, as time went on, the flour industry moved west. Rochester did have Kodak, but we all know what is happening to Kodak since it didn't keep up with the times, even though it invented the digital camera. Xerox was founded in Rochester, but moved its world headquarters to Connecticut.
Buffalo is another rust belt city. In part, its decline was led off -- historically -- when the Erie Canal was no longer an important shipping route (remember, the "first port" on the Erie Canal -- which shipped goods to NYC -- was Buffalo.
Niagara Falls boomed as an industrial center because of the water power available. Now, electrical power is everywhere. No need to stay at Niagara. The Canadians always developed their tourism more effectively than the NYS side.
I'm not very clear at why you think Colorado is comparable at all. It's pretty clear that, with minor exceptions, it's the Front Range cities that are experiencing the population and business growth in Colorado, and that's geographical. Denver became the hub and will continue to be so because it has the infrastructure that the other cities don't have. The other hub, really, is Grand Junction, because it is the most populous city on the western slope.
It really is a matter of physical geography, even in the 2000s. It should not be a matter for social engineering.
I'm not sure I agree with some of your analysis of New York. The problems that NYS cities experience are historical. Rochester, for example, became a vibrant city back in days when it was not the Flower City, but when it was the Flour City. At that time central and western NYS was the wheat producing capital of the country, and Rochester became a milling city. Of course, as time went on, the flour industry moved west. Rochester did have Kodak, but we all know what is happening to Kodak since it didn't keep up with the times, even though it invented the digital camera. Xerox was founded in Rochester, but moved its world headquarters to Connecticut.
Buffalo is another rust belt city. In part, its decline was led off -- historically -- when the Erie Canal was no longer an important shipping route (remember, the "first port" on the Erie Canal -- which shipped goods to NYC -- was Buffalo.
Niagara Falls boomed as an industrial center because of the water power available. Now, electrical power is everywhere. No need to stay at Niagara. The Canadians always developed their tourism more effectively than the NYS side.
I'm not very clear at why you think Colorado is comparable at all. It's pretty clear that, with minor exceptions, it's the Front Range cities that are experiencing the population and business growth in Colorado, and that's geographical. Denver became the hub and will continue to be so because it has the infrastructure that the other cities don't have. The other hub, really, is Grand Junction, because it is the most populous city on the western slope.
It really is a matter of physical geography, even in the 2000s. It should not be a matter for social engineering.
I am not saying that Colorado is at all comparable to New York. I was just giving an example of an unbalanced State of population, power, control, and wealth; which I do not want Colorado to become. There are, of course, different situations that apply.
The History of New York is complicated. I would like to point out that the Erie Canal issue, as relating to Buffalo, is given all this discussion among our contemporaries. They fail to realize that The Erie Canal is a very old project of the early 19th century that was first diminished by the advent of the Railroads.
Buffalo really grew much bigger after the initial decline of the Canal and also benefited much from the Railroad. The height of Buffalo, in prestige, was at the decades around the turn of the 19th to the 20th Century, which was many years after the initial decline of the Erie Canal and it continued to grow in population.
The New York State Barge Canal, a project, which is oddly is not mentioned, is more important to the issues, replaced the Erie canal in the early 20th Century; that was the canal that was put out of use that caused the further decline of Buffalo. People obsess on the word Erie Canal because it is now being restored as recreational resource, but when I was growing up in New York, the Erie Canal was many years dead and was a barely noticed but as a weed encrusted ditch. The obsolescence of the Erie Canal has nothing to do with the current decline of Buffalo.
They fail to mention the other much more current important big projects that caused the declined of Buffalo as a main shipping point and further the decline of Buffalo. The Welland Canal bypassed the Falls through Canada and that was part of the largest waterway of The Saint Lawrence Seaway which was opened in the 1959. That waterway was what ended Buffalo as a important port for connection to the Great Lakes and opened the Great Lakes to International Commerce, without needing Buffalo.
I remember the Canal, through its many improvements as I grew up near Buffalo and we traveled to Ontario, often, as we had relatives in Canada. We had to wait for the bridge to be lowered, latter the highway went over the canal. I remember the whole event of the opening of the Saint Lawrence Seaway as I went to the ceremonies where I first saw Queen Elizabeth II and President Eisenhower. I addition, I do remember much the discussions that this will destroy Buffalo but many people said that would never happen. Well, at that time, Buffalo had about 550,000 and now has about 247,000.
Livecontent
Last edited by livecontent; 03-01-2012 at 12:34 PM..
I'm not very clear at why you think Colorado is comparable at all. It's pretty clear that, with minor exceptions, it's the Front Range cities that are experiencing the population and business growth in Colorado, and that's geographical. Denver became the hub and will continue to be so because it has the infrastructure that the other cities don't have. The other hub, really, is Grand Junction, because it is the most populous city on the western slope.
It really is a matter of physical geography, even in the 2000s. It should not be a matter for social engineering.
Denver is not the only city with the right infrastructure they just happen to get lucky early on as they became home to the universities and the state capitol. This is why I am excited about Pueblo getting a major university as we have most of the infrastructure Denver has (east west and north south highways, close to a airport, water, etc) yet lacked a university to help Pueblo take full advantage of what the city has to attract companies. Grand Junction is defiantly the hub city on the western slope but they lack a north south highway.
This state is still young and cities do not grow at the same rate. In my opinion when the state is mature the 3 large regional cities in the state will be Denver, Pueblo and Grand Junction and historians will look back as to how each town got there as they will have different stories. I mean look at California as the 3 large regional cities are San Diego, LA and San Francisco with other large cities around them. They did not all grow the same rate and the same time yet now they are all considered major cities.
I am not saying that Colorado is at all comparable to New York. I was just giving an example of an unbalanced State of population, power, control, and wealth; which I do not want Colorado to become. There are, of course, different situations that apply.
The History of New York is complicated. I would like to point out that the Erie Canal issue, as relating to Buffalo, is given all this discussion among our contemporaries. They fail to realize that The Erie Canal is a very old project of the early 19th century that was first diminished by the advent of the Railroads.
Buffalo really grew much bigger after the initial decline of the Canal and also benefited much from the Railroad. The height of Buffalo, in prestige, was at the decades around the turn of the 19th to the 20th Century, which was many years after the initial decline of the Erie Canal and it continued to grow in population.
The New York State Barge Canal, a project, which is oddly is not mentioned, is more important to the issues, replaced the Erie canal in the early 20th Century; that was the canal that was put out of use that caused the further decline of Buffalo. People obsess on the word Erie Canal because it is now being restored as recreational resource, but when I was growing up in New York, the Erie Canal was many years dead and was a barely noticed but as a weed encrusted ditch. The obsolescence of the Erie Canal has nothing to do with the current decline of Buffalo.
They fail to mention the other much more current important big projects that caused the declined of Buffalo as a main shipping point and further the decline of Buffalo. The Welland Canal bypassed the Falls through Canada and that was part of the largest waterway of The Saint Lawrence Seaway which was opened in the 1959. That waterway was what ended Buffalo as a important port for connection to the Great Lakes and opened the Great Lakes to International Commerce, without needing Buffalo.
I remember the Canal, through its many improvements as I grew up near Buffalo and we traveled to Ontario, often, as we had relatives in Canada. We had to wait for the bridge to be lowered, latter the highway went over the canal. I remember the whole event of the opening of the Saint Lawrence Seaway as I went to the ceremonies where I first saw Queen Elizabeth II and President Eisenhower. I addition, I do remember much the discussions that this will destroy Buffalo but many people said that would never happen. Well, at that time, Buffalo had about 550,000 and now has about 247,000.
Livecontent
To me you were saying there is some relationship between what is happening in New York State and Colorado when you said, "I grew up in New York where New York City thrives and the rest of the state dies. It has been, consistently, the case over many decades where the powers of the State ignored the other cities and regions in the state. Buffalo, Rochester and other cities in regions are dying and in decay while New York City gets richer."
And, it seems to me that you've got it backwards. Buffalo and Rochester, and to some extent Syracuse, thrived because they could ship first their wheat and later their industrial output to one of the east coast's greatest ports -- New York City. In terms of wheat and other agricultural products, much remained in NYC. NYC was the biggest market of western NYS's agriculture. Without NYC, who exactly would have bought all that agricultural product (particularly keeping in mind shipping at the time)?
You see, I think you miss the point. You are talking about why Buffalo is declining. In my view it is naturally declining because it has lost one key factor -- uniqueness. There really was only one reason that Buffalo first became a major city -- the Erie Canal. Just before the Erie Canal was finished, Buffalo had a population of 2,500. Just 5 years after the canal was completed, the city's population had roughly quadrupled. For all practical purposes, Buffalo had been a landlocked city because the only natural water transportation to the population centers of the East Coast were impassable until the advent of the Erie Canal. Therefore, Buffalo became unique in terms of transportation. Buffalo remained an important port after the decline of the Erie Canal (keep in mind that the Barge Canal -- as stated in the state legislation approving it -- was merely, "the improvement of the Erie, the Osweog, the Champlain, and the Cayuga and Seneca Canals"). It was not looked on as a different canal, and in fact at many points in its history it was actually called "the Erie-Barge Canal". You are absolutely correct that the Welland Canal changed everything, but not necessarily the industrial strength of Buffalo...for a while. After all, no city on the Welland Canal took over much of Buffalo's industry. Other transportation systems -- railroads and roads were taking over, and taking away Buffalo's uniqueness and Buffalo's advantage.
I'm not sure that the railroads had much to do with the long-term viability of Buffalo, particularly when you consider that in the late 1800s there wasn't a major eastern city that didn't have direct railroad connections. There was nothing unique about Buffalo having rail transportation. Heck, my hometown of Palmyra had rail transportation. And, trucking became a major factor beginning in the 1910s...again, adding to Buffalo's loss of its uniqueness.
Buffalo's continued importance -- for awhile -- was in large part due to the electrical power resources of Niagara Falls. Remember, that Buffalo long had the nickname of "The City Of Light".
Of course, anyone bothering to read all this may be asking what this has to do with Pueblo. I think it is related, because the question in my mind is -- what is unique about Pueblo that will ever make it anything more than an average "state city". Let's go back to NYS. NY City is not just a "state city". NYC is a "national city" and one of the great "international cities". It has unique attributes that put it up there as an international city and will keep it up there. Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany are simply "state cities" with little international importance.
Denver is clearly a "national city". What makes it unique? First, history. The old iron ore resources of Pueblo never matched the gold and silver resources near Denver, and as a result, the infrastructure of Pueblo is a fraction of that of Denver. Second, transportation. Denver was on a major east-west rail line. Pueblo was not. Denver is now on a major interstate highway that links the upper midwest to southern California. Pueblo is now on a fading US-50.
Denver is a "national city", and the only one in Colorado. Pueblo is like Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany -- a "state city". So is Colorado Springs, so is every other city along the Front Range, so is Grand Junction.
Of course, anyone bothering to read all this may be asking what this has to do with Pueblo. I think it is related, because the question in my mind is -- what is unique about Pueblo that will ever make it anything more than an average "state city". Let's go back to NYS. NY City is not just a "state city". NYC is a "national city" and one of the great "international cities". It has unique attributes that put it up there as an international city and will keep it up there. Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany are simply "state cities" with little international importance.
There are many similarities between Pueblo and the buffalo area. Both of them being manfucturing cities is most likely the biggest however there are some differences too. From reading your post Buffalo grew because it served the needs of NYC while Pueblo did not grow to serve the needs of the Denver area but helped build the west so its "uniqueness" its not tied to Denver like Buffalo was to NYC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Denver is clearly a "national city". What makes it unique? First, history. The old iron ore resources of Pueblo never matched the gold and silver resources near Denver, and as a result, the infrastructure of Pueblo is a fraction of that of Denver. Second, transportation. Denver was on a major east-west rail line. Pueblo was not. Denver is now on a major interstate highway that links the upper midwest to southern California. Pueblo is now on a fading US-50.
Denver is a "national city", and the only one in Colorado. Pueblo is like Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and Albany -- a "state city". So is Colorado Springs, so is every other city along the Front Range, so is Grand Junction.
Pueblo is on a east west rail road line and continues to be a major rail hub. Highway 50 is not fading and it is slowly being upgraded across the nation as it goes from the nations capitol to San Francisco. That being said I am not arguing that Denver is the only national city in the state as it is but I do not think its as bad for Pueblo as you make it out to be. My understanding is the steel mill is the most profitable it has ever been so Pueblo continues to help build the nation. Plus Pueblo has a growing regional comprehensive university, is attracting large companies and developers making Pueblo a nice regional city. Not a national city but not just a state city either. Aslo, Pueblo and Colorado Springs continue to grow together and I think will merge someday and the combined cities could become Colorado's next national city.
This is a great discussion. What's missing for me is assessment of *value*
Is Pueblo a great college town like Fort Collins or Boulder? No. Is Pueblo a great "national city" with extensive infrastructure like Denver? No. Will Pueblo grow so amazingly fast that it will overtake Phoenix, Dallas and Albuquerque in population? No.
But, does Pueblo have better weather than all these other cities mention? Yes. Does Pueblo have lower housing costs than all these cities mentioned? Yes. Do you ever have to sit in traffic while driving around Pueblo? No.
Is Pueblo the best value in Colorado? In my opinion, yes.
Is Pueblo the best value in the US? Maybe.
This is a great discussion. What's missing for me is assessment of *value*
Is Pueblo a great college town like Fort Collins or Boulder? No.
This is a interesting statement. Let me try to give my opinion being as specific as I can.
Do I think that CSU Pueblo will ever be a tier 1 university like CU Boulder and CSU Fort Collins? No.
Do I think that CSU Pueblo will eventually grow to about the same size as CU Boulder and CSU Fort Collins with a enrollment around 20,000 students? Yes.
Because of this I think Pueblo will be known as a college town just like Boulder and Fort Collins is just for students who attend a tier 2 university instead of a tier 1. However the economic impact on Pueblo will be just as large as the economic impact CU has on Boulder and CSU has on Fort Collins. I mean when the students and faculity spend money in the city it does not matter if its a tier 1 or tier 2 university as the money and economic impact is the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuebloInvestor
Is Pueblo a great "national city" with extensive infrastructure like Denver? No. Will Pueblo grow so amazingly fast that it will overtake Phoenix, Dallas and Albuquerque in population? No.
Pueblo is a regional city that has some national roots. In time Pueblo will grow but it will never be a Phoenix or Albuquerque, or Dallas nor does it have to be to be successful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuebloInvestor
But, does Pueblo have better weather than all these other cities mention? Yes. Does Pueblo have lower housing costs than all these cities mentioned? Yes. Do you ever have to sit in traffic while driving around Pueblo? No.
Is Pueblo the best value in Colorado? In my opinion, yes.
Is Pueblo the best value in the US? Maybe.
I agree with all of this. The only comment I will make is unless the Interstate and highway 50 are widened Pueblo will have traffic jams. Our interstate is most likely the worse designed interstate in the state as there are little to no acceleration and deceleration lanes. This week alone there has been 2 major accidents on I-25 causing major back ups. Unless this gets fixed the interstate will most likely be a parking lot during rush hour by the next decade. Same with highway 50 going towards Pueblo West as studies by CDOT have suggested people will be siting in traffic unless it is widened.
I can't help but get involved in this conversation since I lived for 30 years in Pueblo and then 16 years in Fort Collins. Do I like Fort Collins more than Pueblo? Yes! Fort Collins is a clean, vibrant city. But I personally think CSU has gone downhill since I was a student there in the laste 80s. My son has been a CSU student for several years, and my stepdaughter got her degree there. The stories they've told me are pretty sad. But there's still a lot of great research going on there. Just not that much great teaching, especially in the EE department.
One thing I didn't like about Fort Collins is how WASP the city is. I'm Caucasian, but my two boys are half Mexican, and I love the Mexican culture. I missed that a lot in Fort Collins. I'm back in Pueblo on a part-time basis, and I'm enjoying that aspect of the city.
I lived in Rockland County, NY, for a time. And while the area is beautiful, we really hated living there (my husband grew up on Long Island). The people are rude. The pace is rushed and stressful. Working there was really awful. It was a joy to come back to Colorado, where people are friendly, the pace is more relaxed, and there's much less traffic and congestion (even in Denver).
Having said that, I really like NYC. I've spent quite a bit of time there (I was there two weeks just last month). People are friendly, unlike their reputation. And I felt safe walking about the East Village by myself at night.
I'm not sure how long I'll be in Pueblo part time, but it will be interesting to compare life here when I go back home to New Hampshire. The two places are like different worlds. :-)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
