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.
Very nice! The level of responses in here (save a few) match my experience of the intelligence I see in the workforce in Rochester - which is strong.
So, reading over this data I'm left with the impression that Rochester is a "slow and steady" kinda economy. Yes, it took some licks back in 2000, but since then it's been chuggin' along. I've only been here since 2009 (leaving originally in 1988), so I can only comment on the last few years. From my perspective, the statements above are true. The small businesses are filling the void left from the disappearing giants. Is this the most efficient way to grow - probably not. But it get's the job done.
The only downside I've seen from the shift from big employers to small business employers is the impact it has had on midtown / downtown. This is just a hypothesis, so tell me what you guys think: Small businesses are much less likely than large corporations to put an office in downtown due to the costs. As a result, we have the small businesses sprouting up in suburban sprawly, 2-story office parks all around the outer rim of the city. While I welcome these jobs, I sure wish there was a way for them to be downtown so we could start drawing people back there. Our downtown has some FANTASTIC bones (i.e., old, beautiful buildings). We just need to add workers!
P.S. I'm fascinated by how much time some of you senior members put into this forum, which is nationally owned / run. Why not join up and put all this great content on a local forum controlled by Rochesterians?
Thanks.. Sure, it could. But Wiki's aren't really forums...
I'm guessing that this forum has the traffic from SEO - so it's self-reinforcing. I just hate to see all this great Rochester information NOT on a locally-owned / oriented site.
I think the whole downtown issue is that the area is it's own worst enemy and it just can't get out from under it's own ugly shadow. The inner core of downtown has nothing to really be proud of and showcase, at least anything grand enough for a larger business to want to move down there. You want your surroundings to be impressive to your clients, vendors, visitors, etc., and nothing about downtown has that shining star appear that the nicer albeit smaller complexes in the suburbs have. For smaller, local companies yeah it's great to have those coffee shops and what not there for your employees, but those kinds of small ticket items don't necessarily leave a mark on visitors to the area.
When I see downtown, which I'm at 5 days a week myself in the HSBC building, I see very little in the way of glamor. All you have down there is the Xerox building, Chase tower, the Hyatt, the HSBC building, and the ugly skeleton that is Midtown. Everything else is old and decrepit in desperate need of renovation, and really just an eye sore. One of the biggest embarrassments of the entire area is the Cadillac Hotel. That thing just needs to burn to the ground and never exist again.
So yeah, sure the 'burbs may be "boring" and lacking any of that old time feel Rochesterians always seem to want (which to me is moving backwards instead of forward, but I digress), but at least it's clean and aesthetically pleasing, which in no way can be said for downtown. I'd love to see it prosper as much as the next person, trust me, but it's just tough when you don't have multiple private entities committing to spending a boat load of cash to clean it up and make it something.
I hear you... Those are reasonable points you are making....
But my question for you, OverTaxed, is this: How did Pittsburgh manage to make their downtown turnaround so well when it was arguably as "old and decrepit" as Rochester?
What about San Antonio? (same situation 15 years ago)
What about Oklahoma City? (talk about shadows and bad press)
All three of these cities are about the same size (give or take) and all have engineered great turnarounds for their burned-out midtowns. My question remains unanswered... What did they do? Why can't Rochester do the same?
P.S. It's funny that you mention the Cadillac Hotel. It was just in the news recently, and I made a blog post myself about it: Why is the Cadillac Hotel so scary
Did you know that the City has been paying (with our tax dollars) for homeless people to stay at the Cadillac? And not just a few nights either. I think it was over 1,500 stays last year. I was shocked......
When I was in New England working and was talking to some people who used to travel to Rochester for work. They said they stayed there a few times and it was apparently nice at one point in time.
I hear you... Those are reasonable points you are making....
But my question for you, OverTaxed, is this: How did Pittsburgh manage to make their downtown turnaround so well when it was arguably as "old and decrepit" as Rochester?
What about San Antonio? (same situation 15 years ago)
What about Oklahoma City? (talk about shadows and bad press)
All three of these cities are about the same size (give or take) and all have engineered great turnarounds for their burned-out midtowns. My question remains unanswered... What did they do? Why can't Rochester do the same?
I may be wrong here, but I was always under the impression that Pittsburgh employers didn't evade the city. Pittsburgh has always been a larger city than Rochester, and although it has struggled like Rochester, downtown jobs were always pretty densely located there. In fact, Pittsburgh currently has something like the second highest employment density in the country (120,000 ppsm during the day). Here's an excerpt on Pittsburgh from wikipedia:
Quote:
Beginning in the 1980s, the city shifted its economic base to education, tourism, and services, largely based on healthcare, medicine, and high technology such as robotics. Although Pittsburgh successfully shifted the focus of its economy and remained a viable city, the city's population never rebounded to its industrial-era highs. While 680,000 people lived in the city proper in 1950, a combination of suburbanization and economic turbulence caused a sharp decrease in city population to just 330,000 in the year 2000.[note 2]
During the late 2000s recession, however, Pittsburgh remained economically strong, adding jobs when most cities were losing them, and becoming one of the few cities in the United States to see housing property values rise. This story of regeneration was the inspiration for President Barack Obama to personally select Pittsburgh as the host city for the 2009 G-20 Summit.[38]
Its economy made a pretty sharp turn from its industrial days; Rochester was a bit slower in that regard (but better than others). That combined with grand architecture, strong neighborhood connectivity, pretty decent transit and a pretty strong economy, I think it's just a different situation than Rochester. Despite the population loss in Pittsburgh, downtown is still very lively, even after working hours.
I also blame the inner loop for the cut-off of downtown from its neighborhoods...makes for a 9-5 city, which is never attractive IMO.
The inner-loop was a TERRIBLE idea......it's like a smaller-scale version of Boston's "central artery" conundrum that plagued them for decades before the big-dig. There are many neighborhoods that would be in MUCH better condition today if they weren't cut off from downtown by the innerloop...especially those just north of downtown.
But getting back to the original point of this thread....the economy in Rochester is actually doing quite well right now compared to the rest of the country and especially compared to the regional economy itself was 5-10 years ago. And not to beat a dead horse, but Rochester also had a higher rate of job growth in the past year than Pittsburgh.... Pittsburgh, PA Economy at a Glance
Current state of local economy is not good. We are going to face bad conditions. Today Bank of America has decided to slash nearly 30,000 jobs. All industries are going to cut jobs so this is a crucial time for all of us.
The inner-loop was a TERRIBLE idea......it's like a smaller-scale version of Boston's "central artery" conundrum that plagued them for decades before the big-dig. There are many neighborhoods that would be in MUCH better condition today if they weren't cut off from downtown by the innerloop...especially those just north of downtown.
But getting back to the original point of this thread....the economy in Rochester is actually doing quite well right now compared to the rest of the country and especially compared to the regional economy itself was 5-10 years ago. And not to beat a dead horse, but Rochester also had a higher rate of job growth in the past year than Pittsburgh.... Pittsburgh, PA Economy at a Glance
Funny, I was ALSO just blogging about the Inner Loop issue (similar to the Cadillac Hotel issue). I agree with you entirely, but there is currently action under way by City Council. See my thoughts more fully here: Fill in the Rochester Inner Loop
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.
