U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Syracuse area
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-14-2008, 09:42 AM
 
2,359 posts, read 8,260,960 times
Reputation: 1107

Advertisements

Syracuse used to be an important US city and metro. In 1950, the Syracuse Metropolitan Area was ranked the 37th largest Metropolitan area in the country. Hard to believe, huh? Today, the Syracuse MSA is ranked 80th largest.

I put together some statistics to show that Syracuse used to be up there with the larger Metropolitan Areas of today.

The population growth of selected US Metropolitan Areas from 1950 to 2000......

Date - Metropolitan population

Syracuse
1950 465,000
1960 562,000
1970 636,000
1980 642,000
1990 659,000
2000 650,000

Phoenix, AZ
1950 331,000
1960 652,000
1970 1,039,000
1980 1,600,000
1990 2,238,000
2000 3,251,000

Sacramento, CA
1950 277,000
1960 500,000
1970 847,000
1980 1,099,000
1990 1,506,000
2000 1,796,000

Richmond, VA
1950 328,000
1960 406,000
1970 742,000
1980 839,000
1990 949,000
2000 1,096,000

Nashville, Tenn.
1950 321,000
1960 391,000
1970 749,000
1980 912,000
1990 1,048,000
2000 1,311,000

Rochester, NY
1950 487,000
1960 582,000
1970 961,000
1980 971,000
1990 1,002,000
2000 1,037,000

Tampa, FL
1950 409,000
1960 760,000
1970 1,105,000
1980 1,613,000
1990 2,067,000
2000 2,395,000

Denver, CO
1950 612,000
1960 923,000
1970 1,118,000
1980 1,450,000
1990 1,639,000
2000 2,157,000

Tulsa, OK
1950 327,000
1960 414,000
1970 572,000
1980 711,000
1990 761,000
2000 859,000

San Diego, CA
1950 556,000
1960 1,003,000
1970 1,357,000
1980 1,861,000
1990 2,498,000
2000 2,813,000

Charlotte, NC
1950 197,000
1960 270,000
1970 741,000
1980 855,000
1990 1,024,000
2000 1,330,000

Memphis, Tenn.
1950 482,000
1960 617,000
1970 911,000
1980 997,000
1990 1,067,000
2000 1,194,000

Austin, TX
1950 160,000
1960 211,000
1970 398,000
1980 585,000
1990 846,000
2000 1,249,000


***Some Metropolitan Areas jumped in population from 1960 to 1970. Why? Many metros added additional adjoining counties to their Metropolitan Area in that time period.

source:http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decenni...611098_TOC.pdf

source:Metropolitan Statistical Area (CBSA) Population and Components of Change



After looking at the Syracuse Metropolitan Area stacked up against other more well-known Metropolitan Areas you'll notice one thing. The Syracuse area stopped growing while most other Metropolitan Areas Syracuse's size continued to boom and grow in population.

Last edited by bellafinzi; 02-18-2008 at 06:53 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-14-2008, 10:00 AM
 
56 posts, read 316,105 times
Reputation: 53
Very interesting, thanks for sharing!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2008, 01:24 AM
 
Location: Cicero, NY
625 posts, read 1,650,140 times
Reputation: 221
I think it has to do with several things:

Higher taxes as opposed to the other metro areas experiencing big growth
Industry moving out
Corporate taxes
Terrible winter weather
No true international airport
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2008, 09:53 AM
 
49 posts, read 167,992 times
Reputation: 38
Interesting how Syracuse started to decline right after Rt 81 split the city in half. Bad zoning and unrestricted growth in the suburbs combined with white flight destroyed the inner core of the city. The death of large corporate manufacturing in the area was the final nail in the coffin.

Cuse is about to be reborn but outdated thinking of the past promoting parking lots and suburbs further and further out is not the answer. We need to learn from past mistakes. Look at the revival of Portland , Oregon as an example. Its success was due to rehabbing existing structures and restricting suburban sprawl.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2008, 04:33 PM
 
2,359 posts, read 8,260,960 times
Reputation: 1107
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny99 View Post
Interesting how Syracuse started to decline right after Rt 81 split the city in half. Bad zoning and unrestricted growth in the suburbs combined with white flight destroyed the inner core of the city. The death of large corporate manufacturing in the area was the final nail in the coffin.

Cuse is about to be reborn but outdated thinking of the past promoting parking lots and suburbs further and further out is not the answer. We need to learn from past mistakes. Look at the revival of Portland , Oregon as an example. Its success was due to rehabbing existing structures and restricting suburban sprawl.
Interstate 81 had nothing to do with Syracuse's decline. Buffalo, Rochester, Utica, Cleveland all started declining during same period in history. Please stop with the scare tactics. Not everyone actually believes the propaganda by promoted by Syracuse environmentalists.

Portland's suburbs are booming. Placing a ring around the suburbs did not stop their suburban development. It only contained it and raised the prices of homes in that region.

johnny99, you're way of thinking is exactly why the Syracuse area will never be respected and is ignored today. Without new tall buildings downtown, without an impressive skyline, without nice new suburbs like outside Rochester, the Syracuse area will always be overlooked in favor of the Albany and Rochester areas.

Rochester would be just another Syracuse if you take out 3 elements: the nice skyline, the past 30 years of new suburban growth and the Fortune 500 companies headquartered there. Syracuse, NY and Rochester, NY could be twin brothers...except that for those three major differences. Why do Rochester residents take more pride in their city than Syracusans? Those three elements missing in Syracuse...nice skyline, sprawled out nice attractive suburban towns and large corporations headquartered in there. Why does the Rochester area attract more new residents and new jobs than Syracuse? Those same three elements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 10:13 PM
 
Location: Pompey, NY
405 posts, read 1,288,447 times
Reputation: 326
Bella, because you recommended Cazenovia as a great place to check out, we wound up moving here. You seem to have become embittered since then, endlessly touting the superiority of cookie cutter suburbs over a city that has seen better days. There is no doubt that Syracuse needs improvement, as do all cities in the rust belt. I appreciate your posts asking for suggestions for said improvements and am racking my brain to come up with some. I don't think your attitude is helping, as you seem to be very down on anyone who dares disagree with you. You seem to think that environmental activisim is a bad thing. I think the opposite, and think that trying to become a pioneer "green" city may very well be the thing that saves Syracuse. I am glad to see Joanie Mahoney's decision to scrap the ill-advised sewer treatment plant by Armory Square, and hope that this is a sign of new enlightend thinking on the pols part.We are facing huge changes in all manner of energy usage and gasoline will never be cheap again.Cities are proven energy savers, as apartments use heating resources much more efficently than single housing units and automobile use does not have to be manditory for day to day living. BTW, I suggest getting rid of the repulsive billboards lining the highways, and offering some sort of incentive to business owners to encourage sprucing up the outside of their plants.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 10:42 PM
 
2,359 posts, read 8,260,960 times
Reputation: 1107
Quote:
Originally Posted by boomvang View Post
Bella, because you recommended Cazenovia as a great place to check out, we wound up moving here. You seem to have become embittered since then, endlessly touting the superiority of cookie cutter suburbs over a city that has seen better days. There is no doubt that Syracuse needs improvement, as do all cities in the rust belt. I appreciate your posts asking for suggestions for said improvements and am racking my brain to come up with some. I don't think your attitude is helping, as you seem to be very down on anyone who dares disagree with you. You seem to think that environmental activisim is a bad thing. I think the opposite, and think that trying to become a pioneer "green" city may very well be the thing that saves Syracuse. I am glad to see Joanie Mahoney's decision to scrap the ill-advised sewer treatment plant by Armory Square, and hope that this is a sign of new enlightend thinking on the pols part.We are facing huge changes in all manner of energy usage and gasoline will never be cheap again.Cities are proven energy savers, as apartments use heating resources much more efficently than single housing units and automobile use does not have to be manditory for day to day living. BTW, I suggest getting rid of the repulsive billboards lining the highways, and offering some sort of incentive to business owners to encourage sprucing up the outside of their plants.
My world view is very different than "Syracuse". I'm impressed with places like Raleigh-Durham, NC. Most civic leadership in the Syracuse area think all of North Carolina is a sprawled out wasteland. If it was really that bad, then why are so many people from all over the country flocking there, instead of the City of Syracuse? The reason is simple. Most people do not mind living in the suburbs. In fact, many people enjoy living in the suburbs. People who like suburban living aren't automatically evil people. The problem is that many people in the Syracuse area are scared that Syracuse will turn into Raleigh-Durham. I on the other hand, would love to see the Syracuse area prosper and grow similar to Raleigh-Durham. The old neighborhoods in the City of Raleigh did NOT attract people to live in Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Area. What attracted them is the location(near the ocean and mountains etc.), the abundant jobs, low cost of living and the attractive suburban neighborhoods.

There are many posts in the Raleigh-Durham forum that show pictures of new suburban neighborhoods in that area. I have never seen a reply by anyone criticizing the thread and asking why they are taking photos of and promoting sprawl. I create threads showing Syracuse's various suburban neighborhoods and I get post and after post of negative remarks about the evil of sprawl.... (you will not see this posts since I deleted them.... they were way off topic).

boomvang, one thing you have to understand. For nearly 10 years I've been attacked by locals for my views on how to grow the Syracuse area. I still believe my world view will work better for Syracuse. It has not been tried yet since most civic leaders in the Syracuse area are influenced by SUNY ESF and SU. It is my opinion that SUNY ESF cares more about saving local farmland than they do about saving the local economy. I'm all for using the green movement for Syracuse's advantage. The question still remains, will Syracuse take advantage of its green city designation or will places with more passionate leadership like Ithaca or Rochester steal Syracuse's thunder?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 11:08 PM
 
Location: Polish Hill, Pittsburgh, PA
30,732 posts, read 68,408,571 times
Reputation: 16429
Bella, comparing the photo tours of suburbs of Raleigh/Durham to photo tours of the suburbs of Syracuse is like comparing apples to oranges. The former is growing so rapidly in terms of metropolitan population that there are enough new residents going around to support both new suburban development AND a revitalizing urban core. In the latter, stagnant growth overall has lead to unhealthy competition between the city of Syracuse and its many suburbs for the same few new residents to help boost their tax bases.

I'm sorry, but if you were to survey Upstate New Yorkers and ask them if they'd rather see cities fail in order to promote suburbs or to see suburbs wither up in order to revitalize cities, then I'm CERTAIN more will chose the latter option over the former. You're a dreamer for sure to ever envision Syracuse as having the same incredible growth rate as Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill; you can't easily change dreary weather and high taxes in order to make this happen.

I wouldn't be as bold as boomvang by calling you "bitter," but I'll admit that you do have a somewhat warped ideology that the will of the majority is always correct. In the 1850s the majority thought enslaving African-Americans was appropriate. In the 1950s the majority thought segregation was appropriate. In time as fuel prices continue to soar, congestion continues to worsen on suburban roadways, etc., people will also realize that it's just not worth all of the additional cost and trouble to live in the outer suburbs anymore as opposed to an older, established neighborhood nearer to the city. The majority has been wrong in the past. Hell, just look at all of the states that have legalized bans on same-sex civil unions while tap-dancing around banning smoking in restaurants or even HOSPITALS! Just because the majority of this nation drives a large SUV alone to the office everyday, watches American Idol, eats fast food daily, lives in a home with more bathrooms than residents, etc. doesn't mean that they're all "correct." They may indeed be sheep---following one another to slaughter in the long-term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 11:18 PM
 
2,359 posts, read 8,260,960 times
Reputation: 1107
What about Rochester, NY?

The Rochester area attracts many more newcomers than the Syracuse area. If I wasn't born and raised in the Syracuse area and saw the potential here, I'd pick the Rochester area over Syracuse based on a day of driving around the two metros. The Rochester area looks cleaner, nicer and better for two main reasons...much more new suburban development and a nice attractive skyline.

The bottom-line is this. Syracuse needs more new attractive buildings in both the city and suburbs if it desires to compete with the Albany and Rochester areas.

I really wish this forum was active with more Syracusans giving their advice. My opinions would just be a footnote. It is not my intention to start and reply to every topic. I'd rather just be one opinion of many. The only reason I do reply is that I have a different opinion about the future of this area. Clearly no one in the whole world agrees with me, so please ignore me while I vent.

Syracuse please continue on your path. Clearly this path is working for you! So much progress in 50 years....it is truly hard to believe. LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2008, 11:39 PM
 
2,359 posts, read 8,260,960 times
Reputation: 1107
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScranBarre View Post
Bella, comparing the photo tours of suburbs of Raleigh/Durham to photo tours of the suburbs of Syracuse is like comparing apples to oranges. The former is growing so rapidly in terms of metropolitan population that there are enough new residents going around to support both new suburban development AND a revitalizing urban core. In the latter, stagnant growth overall has lead to unhealthy competition between the city of Syracuse and its many suburbs for the same few new residents to help boost their tax bases.
No it is definitely the same. Both are sprawl. Suburbs do not become good once they are located around a thriving city center. Both eat away at forest and farmland. Both use cars as its main transportation.

If the Syracuse metropolitan population was growing rapidly the City of Syracuse would be growing too. Cities do not matter. Regions matter. If a region is growing, the city will be healthy too. Decaying cities can not comeback to life without a fast growing regional economy. Name one city that has been revitalized with the metropolitan population growing rapidly? There are none. Every city that is healthy is located in a fast growing region. The region's economy is first, then the city center.

You have the order backwards. Jobs and population growth come first, then the central city is revitalized. It is nearly impossible to revitalize a large city filled with run-down ghettos, boarded up buildings, bad schools and crime without first having a fast growing local economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Syracuse area
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top