Outer ring burbs are ugly sprawl...City of Cuse is a GR8 Place (New York: middle-class, loft)

[johnny99]

Does anyone else feel that many of the outer ring suburbs are detrimental to the future of Syracuse? I had a post deleted because I brought this up about Cicero in particular. I believe smart zoning is the key to making Syracuse great again. I love this area and hate to see all this one sided posting for more and more Mcmansions and sprawl. The city of Syracuse has such great potential. What are the best up and coming Syracuse neighborhoods (I'm partial to the east side and Tipp Hill) and what can be done to continue to promote families and business to set up shop here? IMHO promoting outer suburbs is not the answer and just creates more problems.

[bellafinzi]

You can promote the City of Syracuse all you want. But if people move there and do not like it, you are only hurting the region's image that much more. If the City of Syracuse was very beautiful, clean, had a new impressive skyline with glass and steel shiny buildings, and had a large upscale or middle population, the city would sell itself.

Now that we know what we want Syracuse to become (well, what I want it to become) then we can work towards ways to creating this NEW Syracuse. The problem is that there is not a real vision of what Syracuse should become. The older generation want it to be what it once was in the 1950s. Environmentalists want it to be a green city. Others just want it safer, and cleaner. Syracuse needs leadership with a clear vision.

[johnny99]

What about starting w/81?...it gutted this city. A raised Interstate highway through the middle of the city?? Must have been an idea of the "growth" movement of the late 1950's. Unfortunately many people today still have a dated view of urban planning. It devalues the city in favor of suburbia (pre-global warming and OPEC cartels). Syracuse would be much different city today if that highway system did not dissect the city. Its like the DMZ under that ugly monstrosity. It destroyed neighborhoods and businesses. Make 81 into a grand avenue running at the ground level through the city. If you don't want to travel through the city then 481 is an option. I disagree and believe big modern buildings are not the answer to Cuse's problems. The great architecture left in the city should be cherished and revitalized. A light rail system and better mass transit would also help immensely. Todays economy does not favor sterile outer ring burbs. When it costs somebody $150 to fill their SUV to drive from Cicero to the city daily for their job then mass transit,the inner ring burbs, and city neighborhoods start to look really attractive. Syracuse has good bones. An educated workforce, access to H2O, centrally located, affordable homes. The days of big factories (Carrier) are over and not coming back. Tech jobs and Green Industry are the future for this area and it looks very bright.

[bellafinzi]

I don't like the location of I-81 running through the City of Syracuse either. Yet, I'm not sure that taking down Interstate 81 in the city will solve much either.

Blaming suburbs and highways for Syracuse's shortcomings is incorrect. Even if it was correct, it does not help the situation today. Trying to go backwards in time and undo the past is futile.

Syracuse's problems have NOTHING to do with suburbs. Chicago has large sprawling suburbs and their city center is booming too. So what is the difference between Chicago and Syracuse? The Chicago Metropolitan area is fast growing in population and is increasing in white collar jobs. The Syracuse metropolitan area hasn't grown in population in nearly 40 years.

Stagnant metros produce declining decaying cities

Fast growing metros produce revitalized city centers

How does the Syracuse area become fast growing?

1) Improve the bad image. How? An attractive skyline, new impressive buildings, beautiful structures next to highways, landscaped main roads and neighborhoods, beautification etc.

2) Decrease property taxes. How? NYS needs to lift the Medicaid costs off the counties. If that is done, then property taxes could be cut in half. Also, approve most proposed new commercial development in Onondaga County which helps the local tax base.

3) Improve the airport. Lower airfares, increase parking, provide free parking, make it so attractive and cheap that people drive to use Syracuse's airport instead of Rochester's or Albany's airports.

4) Develop shovel ready sites. Companies continue to bypass the Syracuse area and build outside Rome, NY. Why? Rome has Griffiss Business and Technology Park that has easy highway access and all the infrastructure in place. Meanwhile the Clay Industrial Park is just a empty field without roads, without highway access, without water and sewer lines in place, without landscaping, without an entrance, without anything that new companies can see that will attract them there.

5) Lower energy costs. New York State can only help us with this.

I could list many more, but just working on those 5 points will really make a huge difference.

[bellafinzi]

johnny99, as you probably realize, the Syracuse area is dominated by environmentalists. The newspaper, the media, the leadership, the organizations, the SUNY Environmental Science and Forestry community etc. This is not a bad thing if the environmentalists also have a passion to see this region grow and prosper. I'm a moderate environmentalists myself. I want to save virgin forests throughout the world, especially in China, Himalaya, Japan, Korea, South Africa and anywhere else most of the hardy exotic plants originate. Saving species is important. What is also important to me is the economy in Upstate NY. I do not want to live in a dying, decaying place that never changes and is not respected. Unfortunately, the Syracuse area has been stagnant for nearly my whole life.

What is my point? For at least 10 years, your way of thinking has dominated the Syracuse area and where has that gotten us as a community? The newspaper runs stories almost weekly casting Syracuse's suburbs in a negative light. Any proposed development the newspaper does not support gets plastered on the front page to rally up the opposition. The former County Executive has laws on books against expanding the infrastructure in the suburbs. All this does is divide this community. The City opposes the suburbs and the suburbs make fun of the city. For some reason, city residents believe they are better and that their lifestyle is better just for living within the city limits. This mindset is not conductive in fostering a sense of a ONE Syracuse area community. Rather.... "the city is good, suburbs are bad" mindset has limited this community from moving forward on a number of fronts. For example, the Clay Industrial Park has not been developed to be totally shovel ready in terms of a interior roads paved, an entrance, a highway spur. Why is this? I believe that the leadership in this county focuses so much on the city, that they refuse to invest any money in the suburbs in fear that it will promote sprawl. Sadly, this community is missing out on any chance a large company will into the region without places like Clay Industrial Park all set up for development. In the end, this can only backfire on the city.

The local media and local leadership has failed to realize one thing in their effort to revitalize the city. That the city NEEDS the suburbs. Syracuse is not some small town. Syracuse is a medium Metropolitan area. Not all the needs of a Metropolitan area can be stuffed into the small 25 sq mi city limits. And this is exactly what the leadership has been trying to do for at least the last decade. Placing every attraction, every new job, every new development inside the city will not bring back the city. The only thing that will really revitalize the city is to grow the population of Onondaga County. Like I said in my previous post.....Stagnant metros produce declining decaying cities.....Fast growing metros produce revitalized city centers

Why is that?

The city is usually the place with the highest crime rate and the worst schools. So families, understandably, want a safe place to raise their family and good schools. The problem comes with a stagnant population. When you have the same number of people in a given area...one part of that area will lose population if anyone is moving around. Generally, city residents are moving to the suburbs for the better schools districts, the safer environment, the larger homes and yards etc. So of course the city will lose population. Less people in the same number of buildings means decay.

The only thing that can change this trend is for the population of the area (Onondaga County) to start rising....and fast. Not some campaign promoting people to move back to the city.

Why will fast growth in the Syracuse area help revitalize the city?

More people in the area, means more people seeking places to live. Chances are some of those new people will want to live in the city limits due to various reasons. As demand for city housing increases, investors and developers look at it as an opportunity to make money. So investors will start buying up homes in the city and fixing them up. Thus less decay. As the population continue to grow in the city, more and more homes are renovated. Thus new businesses popping up in the city to cater to the new population. Yes, gentrification is good for the city!

[ScranBarre]

I'm not very familiar with Syracuse, so I hope bella or johnny won't ream me out for this, but would paralleling the "Big Dig" in Boston be an option by moving I-81 underground through the downtown area? The last time I visited Beantown they were just finishing up on that massive endeavor, and the scar that once tore through downtown was being "healed" with attractive urban green space. In the case of Syracuse the reclaimed land could be used for a mixture of green space to liven people's spirits and new loft housing to boost the city's tax base and attract more empty-nesters and young professionals back downtown.

Syracuse is like a larger version of Scranton, so I've always had a soft spot for it and have wanted to see it progress and advance socially and economically. Scranton is starting to do just that as I speak because we're just barely close enough to NYC to lure in those who wish to leave the city in pursuit of a smaller city like us. Would it be possible for Syracuse's Chamber of Commerce to advertise Syracuse as a relocation destination in Greater NYC? I know housing developers here in the Poconos have been doing that, and we are now the fastest-growing part of Pennsylvania as a result. People in NJ and Greater NYC in general are tiring of the high housing costs, exorbitant property taxes (don't even whine, Syracusers, when you see THEIR tax bills!), traffic congestion, incessant sprawl, etc., and many wouldn't need much of a "push" to ponder moving to places like Syracuse, Scranton, Binghamton, Albany, etc. For us we saw a brief yet rapid influx just after 9/11 when middle-class families already pondering leaving NYC decided that the potential of future terrorist attacks was enough of a reason to finally take the plunge into PA. Syracuse isn't THAT far from NYC---about four hours, right? Perhaps that's a major untapped market that should be investigated?

[ScranBarre]

By the way, Bella, I must side with johnny here. This is a classic case of the "chicken and the egg." In the long-term the entire Syracuse Metropolitan Area, including the nicer Northern suburbs where you reside, are doomed if Syracuse proper continues to wither and die. Why would someone wish to move to an area where you have a dead city surrounded by urban sprawl? I personally wouldn't mind terribly living in a suburb, but that would of course be contingent upon being able to commute into a city on a regular basis for nightlife, dining, shopping, sporting events, etc. If Syracuse loses all of that, then what's left? Chili's? Applebee's? Barnes & Noble? Every other chain under the sun that already exists in every other part of the nation's suburbs? A city is what makes an area unique and helps to set it apart from its more homogenized suburbs. I saw upstake_uk's photos of the shopping areas in Vestal, NY. I am actually planning a similar photo tour of Scranton's two new sprawl-infested commercial boom-burbs of Dickson City and Moosic, and you'll see that the photos in each will be nearly exactly the same---large asphalt parking lots teeming with newer SUVs parked in front of chain stores. While you might like Cicero, Manlius, Clay, etc., they really aren't anything "special" when compared to nearly every other suburb in this nation. They're all carbon copies of one another.

Then I can show people my photo tours of the city proper of Scranton, PA, and their breath is taken away totally by the large variety in historic architecture. In some photos you can see Victorians, Tudors, and Greek Revivals in the same tree-lined block. You can't see gorgeous architectural variety like that in any of our North Jersey-like sprawling suburbs, and that truly sets our city apart from other cities. I can't think of one metropolitan area in our nation that is thriving DESPITE having a crumbling core. Even the areas I always frown upon on this forum for their sprawl issues---Atlanta, Phoenix, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Raleigh/Durham, and Charlotte---all have rapidly growing city proper and even downtown populations. Sprawl in cities like Syracuse, Scranton, Binghamton, etc. ONLY serves to fleece the city's tax base, abandonment, decay, etc. As more and more people leave the city for the suburbs, taxes have to spike in order to maintain an adequate level of public services with less and less taxpayers available to fund them. Those rising taxes make it even MORE unattractive to live in the city proper, sending more people packing their bags.

The only saving grace to help ebb this are our rapidly rising gas prices. For families that were barely making ends meat once they moved from the city to an outer suburb, having to wince as they fill up their SUVs could be the final kicker to push them back into an inner 'burb or the city proper where they'd have to fill their tanks less frequently to access city amenities. Scranton is finally starting to see more empty-nesters and young professionals reinvesting in its core neighborhoods, and I'm hoping Syracuse will too. After all, what good are the suburbs if they surround a dismal city?

[bellafinzi]

Originally Posted by ScranBarre

By the way, Bella, I must side with johnny here. This is a classic case of the "chicken and the egg." In the long-term the entire Syracuse Metropolitan Area, including the nicer Northern suburbs where you reside, are doomed if Syracuse proper continues to wither and die. Why would someone wish to move to an area where you have a dead city surrounded by urban sprawl? I personally wouldn't mind terribly living in a suburb, but that would of course be contingent upon being able to commute into a city on a regular basis for nightlife, dining, shopping, sporting events, etc. If Syracuse loses all of that, then what's left? Chili's? Applebee's? Barnes & Noble? Every other chain under the sun that already exists in every other part of the nation's suburbs? A city is what makes an area unique and helps to set it apart from its more homogenized suburbs. I saw upstake_uk's photos of the shopping areas in Vestal, NY. I am actually planning a similar photo tour of Scranton's two new sprawl-infested commercial boom-burbs of Dickson City and Moosic, and you'll see that the photos in each will be nearly exactly the same---large asphalt parking lots teeming with newer SUVs parked in front of chain stores. While you might like Cicero, Manlius, Clay, etc., they really aren't anything "special" when compared to nearly every other suburb in this nation. They're all carbon copies of one another.

Then I can show people my photo tours of the city proper of Scranton, PA, and their breath is taken away totally by the large variety in historic architecture. In some photos you can see Victorians, Tudors, and Greek Revivals in the same tree-lined block. You can't see gorgeous architectural variety like that in any of our North Jersey-like sprawling suburbs, and that truly sets our city apart from other cities. I can't think of one metropolitan area in our nation that is thriving DESPITE having a crumbling core. Even the areas I always frown upon on this forum for their sprawl issues---Atlanta, Phoenix, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Raleigh/Durham, and Charlotte---all have rapidly growing city proper and even downtown populations. Sprawl in cities like Syracuse, Scranton, Binghamton, etc. ONLY serves to fleece the city's tax base, abandonment, decay, etc. As more and more people leave the city for the suburbs, taxes have to spike in order to maintain an adequate level of public services with less and less taxpayers available to fund them. Those rising taxes make it even MORE unattractive to live in the city proper, sending more people packing their bags.

The only saving grace to help ebb this are our rapidly rising gas prices. For families that were barely making ends meat once they moved from the city to an outer suburb, having to wince as they fill up their SUVs could be the final kicker to push them back into an inner 'burb or the city proper where they'd have to fill their tanks less frequently to access city amenities. Scranton is finally starting to see more empty-nesters and young professionals reinvesting in its core neighborhoods, and I'm hoping Syracuse will too. After all, what good are the suburbs if they surround a dismal city?

Here is why I do not agree with you.....

Rochester, NY.

Take out Rochester's skyline and replace it with Syracuse's skyline, take out 80% of the new suburban/sprawl construction outside Rochester, and take away Kodak......then what do you have....a larger Syracuse!!!!!!!!!!!

Basically, Rochester would be a larger Syracuse and would have the same bad image as Syracuse, the same lack of respect by outsiders, the same lack of pride.Those three major differences are

1) Rochester has a impressive tall modern skyline. Syracuse does not.

2) Rochester has over three times more new sprawl (mostly housing, retail, and office) than Syracuse in the last 40 years.

3) Rochester is the headquarters of a well-known large company. Syracuse is not.

ScranBarre, lets face the facts. Not promote agendas. Rochester is viewed as a better place to live mostly due to the large expansive nice suburbs. Take those away and Rochester, NY is a "dangerous city" with a bad image.

Take away Pittsford, take away Henrietta, take away Mendon, take away Penfield, Perinton, Victor, take away Webster and take away the Rochester skyline...replace it with Syracuse's skyline.... leave Irondequoit, Gates, Chili, half of Greece, and half of Brighton AND WHAT YOU HAVE IS SYRACUSE, NY!!!

The City of Rochester has a few nice neighborhoods, but so does the City of Syracuse. The main difference is the skyline and the suburban development. If Syracuse can improve upon those two elements, many more people will find the Syracuse area attractive. That is was my main point.

[bellafinzi]

ScranBarre, if I could wave a magic wand, I'd make every professional person move to the City of Syracuse. Why? So that the city will improve and become revitalized. The problem is that most white collar professionals do not find living in the city desirable.

For over ten years, Syracuse civic leaders have been trying to fight suburban growth. They truly believe that if you can curb sprawl, the City of Syracuse will automatically improve. I say the Syracuse's civic leaders are misguided in that belief. These "leaders" fail to understand that stopping suburban growth is not the answer. If somehow all suburban growth stopped, people would not start moving into the city. People are not sheep. You can not treat them like a flock of sheep that will follow the leader. Most people would rather move to the Rochester area, than move into the city limits.

So please quit focusing on ways to stop suburban development. Instead focus on ways to make the City of Syracuse look beautiful so that people will WANT to live there. Another focus should be on increasing the population of the Syracuse area. Only population growth in the area will help improve the city long term.

[johnny99]

Bella your views are outdated and do not work in todays world of super high property taxes and mega commutes w/ high gas prices. The outer burbs future is tied directly to the City of Syracuse. Big new ugly empty modern buildings are not the answer. The future will be formed by the new economic realities, as soaring gas prices turn the cookie cutter suburbs you love so much into an outer poverty ring.