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.
Sorry to butt in but can I just ask a quick question?
I was thinking of buying a multifamily home in or near Park Ave. Saw one actually on Wellesly St. Would I have trouble renting out apartments? How is the supply/demand for these units?
That is false. New York State has simply not grown at the rate of other states. I just looked at Census data. Rochester's current population is similar to it's pop. in 1910. You've come a long way, baby!
Sorry to butt in but can I just ask a quick question?
I was thinking of buying a multifamily home in or near Park Ave. Saw one actually on Wellesly St. Would I have trouble renting out apartments? How is the supply/demand for these units?
Thanks, Tom
Hey Tom, I was actually going to ask you about your visit to Rochester.
It's going to be hit or miss. You'll either score a home-run (quiet, clean retiree) or strike-out (loud, noisy 20 something that pays late... if ever). I looked at a unit downtown that had 5 tenants that had been there for over 15 years (very tempting).
I know several people who have tried this and nobody has succeeded. No real horror stories... just an empty month here, a water heater there, a fighting couple there.
Rochester's current population is similar to it's pop. in 1910. You've come a long way, baby!
I don't know why you are comparing populations to that of 1910. In 1910, more people lived in cities and suburbs basically did not exist. Now you have many many people living in the suburbs. If you take all of the suburban people and put them in a situation like 1910 where people stayed strictly in cities, you would have a much larger population.
I don't know why you are comparing populations to that of 1910. In 1910, more people lived in cities and suburbs basically did not exist. Now you have many many people living in the suburbs. If you take all of the suburban people and put them in a situation like 1910 where people stayed strictly in cities, you would have a much larger population.
So by your logic NYC should still have 4,766,883 (1910) people living in it.
I don't dislike Rochester. My simple observations are these: It hasn't changed much; I wouldn't move back. Garmin, let's agree too disagree and let this thread focus on Rochester, good or bad.
So by your logic NYC should still have 4,766,883 (1910) people living in it.
I don't dislike Rochester. My simple observations are these: It hasn't changed much; I wouldn't move back. Garmin, let's agree too disagree and let this thread focus on Rochester, good or bad.
no, NYC should have much more than that if you are treating it like its 1910 since the metro area grew so much since thehn.
You said that the Rochester area hasnt changed much. I gave several examples that you chose to ignore.
Garmin, please, I didn't ignore them. My opinion is that Rochester hasn't changed much. The 'Rochester Rattlers' are not transformative. Neither is Ren Square. Ren Square and 'Midtown recovery' are feeble and temporary attempts to capture something that the free market has decided it does not need. For every club that opens, one closed. Daisy Duke's used to be Tonic. 289 used to be a bunch of other failed clubs. This is exactly the history of Rochester. I'll say it again: Rochester is neither dying nor growing. It changing/not-changing, which is what Rochester does. It trades one "Field of Dreams" for another.
Let's both take a breather and let other people post about Rochester. I am sincerely sorry if you do not like what I am saying or how I say it. Let's just agree to disagree.
Anyway, this is requisite viewing for anyone that knows Rochester.
Don't worry mods, it's totally clean, etc.
I would agree to disagree if you brought up valid points, but you are not giving factual statements. I don't know where you get your info from, but you have been wrong on a few occasions already.
For one, Daisy Dukes was not tonic, Soho was tonic. 289 used to be Jungle which was not failed. They had no problem putting people in the club. There was some shady things going on and that is why it closed. "for every club that opens, one closed" is just not true. Look at the clubs now compared to 5-10 years ago in the east end. You have "Pearl" which was not occupied by a club before. You have the pig & whistle and A-pub live which were not occupied by clubs before. You have more clubs/bars in that area than you did 5-10 years ago.
Adding several new sports teams that attract people is pretty transformative. Adding new statiums is transformative. In the past 10 years, frontier field and paetec park were built. Both have been successful.
You stating that ren square and little italy will fail really does not mean much. Just because you say something is feeble does not make it true. There has been a mixture of failures and successes but you decide to only focus on the failures.
I have also mentioned neighborhoods that have grown and become trendy (south wedge, corn hill).
When I bring up an example all you do is chime in with a "well thats going to fail" or you bring up an incorrect "fact".
How about you provide something of substance.
For starters, both of your population links are based upon estimates. I'll wait for the actual REAL data. And while we're waiting for state stats, we can agree that Rochester has - in certain terms - lost population.
Your statements about the East End lead me to believe you are not old enough to remember Liberty Pole area, Water Street area, and High Falls. When all of those locales were jumpin' there was no A-Street. The nightlife in Rochester always oscillates between neighborhoods. A-Street is where "it's at" for now. I am not wrong about this, and someday you'll remember "going down to the toad" because you'll be looking at another vacated building.
I drove by Daisy Dukes on three different nights and it was dark and nobody was there. I presumed that since I was visiting at a time when bars do great business it would have been open. I admit all mistakes: so far this is the only one.
FYI: I lived in Rochester for a combined total of 23+ years. Please discuss the retraction of Kodak and Xerox and the effect on Rochester. That is truly transformative.
Also, the "large govt contract" for Harris you referred to is for $5million; not exaclty a windfall for a company with 14,000 employees.
More; please share with me your "friend temperature." If you grew up in Rochester, please estimate how many of your friends live there, and how many left. Of your friends that remain, how many still live at home
or receive parental subsidy?
And lastly, if the 'Little Italy' idea is so bulletproof, why is the city discussing demolishing Midtown altogther?
I have also mentioned neighborhoods that have grown and become trendy (south wedge, corn hill
Frontier Field didn't replace something? Frontier Field didn't host soccer games? Nothing transformed; it moved and took up other abandoned space.
THIS IS ROCHESTER; moving around the "Field of Dreams."
Homey, for every Corn Hill there is a Lexington Ave. I can't continue this conversation with you.
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.
