Syracuse Suburban Sprawl, good or bad? (New York, Poughkeepsie: best school, universities, incomes)

[proulxfamily]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Park

Mea culpa; I did not mean for that to seem like a personal attack. I do think, though, that there is very little (aside from what JRice contributes) praise for the suburbs for their inherently good qualities -- most of what I read on here boils down to "The suburbs are great because they are the alternative to that hell-hole that is inner-city Syracuse."

It doesn't say much for the suburbs if their only merits are comparatively better to a contrived straw-man of an inner city that doesn't really exist for anyone who's familiar with it. I'm sure many of us would appreciate it if you refrained from disparaging the city, especially when the negative claims about the city aren't even remotely true.

Remember, there are people who use this forum as a reference in choosing a new home. Not only is it unfair to mislead people in portraying the city as a dump, but it also perpetuates the stereotype that Central New Yorkers are bitter and negative. Further, if Syracuse is a dead place, the suburbs will be quick to follow. There are very few successful regions of the country that have no strong economic center. It is in everyone's -- urbanites and suburbanites -- best interest for the city of Syracuse to be the best it can be, and it's in no one's interest to portray it dishonestly.

Well said!

And to stress the issue, building a few purdy, "oooooo, look! Shiny..." skyscrapers is NOT - I repeat, NOT - going to *in any way* improve Syracuse's outlook. Success is neither made through nor measured by the latest and greatest design SHELL with no substance within. That's how the really "successful" areas in the rest of the country came to their demise... and now you have development after development of empty mcmansions and no economy to speak of. I don't want that for this area, on perhaps a grander scale. It was silly enough to build these monstrous homes and malls and communities on the basis of the *appearance* of success; how ridiculous would it be to build a shiny city with nothing to prompt it than pure vanity?

I don't want my city to become a village of skyscrapers made of playing cards.

[Cleveland Park]

Also, by way of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, here's another insight into what national transportation (and energy, and land-use) policy is going to look like for the rest of the century: Rail will come ‘when Georgia gets its act together’ | Jay Bookman

The days of government-subsidized gasoline and freeway widening have come to an end. This isn't just one crazy guy positing -- it's becoming federal policy, and local jurisdictions will either comply or miss out on funding. Americans are moving back to cities, becoming one- or -no-car households, and embracing transit. Upstate New York will be very sorry if it doesn't get out ahead of this trend. It's a terrific opportunity; the glass is half-full for everyone right now.

[proulxfamily]

We're one of those one-car households. Last month, we bought a commuter car for my husband (promotion but a longer commute) after being a one-car family from the start (since 2003.) It was paid for with cash so it's not an issue of affording another car payment and the car was in great shape BUT- I started finding that, even with all of this newfound "freedom" of having another vehicle, I still wasn't going anywhere when my husband was gone. Almost everything we need is in the village of Manlius- the car just sat there. So, we sold it and will be doing some home improvements over the next few months instead. We are just a one-car family, I guess. I feel so much more free, knowing that I'm not insuring, maintaining, and fueling a car for the "priviledge" of having it sit in the driveway. LOL

I would love a broader mass transit system. I'd use it with my kids without issue... if the rest of the world can manage, so can we. Maybe, as a nation, we'll slim back down with all of that "inconvenience" of walking and fidgeting and non-sensical conversation with strangers while waiting for the bus/train/tube.

[bellafinzi]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Park

Mea culpa; I did not mean for that to seem like a personal attack. I do think, though, that there is very little (aside from what JRice contributes) praise for the suburbs for their inherently good qualities -- most of what I read on here boils down to "The suburbs are great because they are the alternative to that hell-hole that is inner-city Syracuse."

It doesn't say much for the suburbs if their only merits are comparatively better to a contrived straw-man of an inner city that doesn't really exist for anyone who's familiar with it. I'm sure many of us would appreciate it if you refrained from disparaging the city, especially when the negative claims about the city aren't even remotely true.

Remember, there are people who use this forum as a reference in choosing a new home. Not only is it unfair to mislead people in portraying the city as a dump, but it also perpetuates the stereotype that Central New Yorkers are bitter and negative. Further, if Syracuse is a dead place, the suburbs will be quick to follow. There are very few successful regions of the country that have no strong economic center. It is in everyone's -- urbanites and suburbanites -- best interest for the city of Syracuse to be the best it can be, and it's in no one's interest to portray it dishonestly.

Who portrays it dishonestly. Not me.

Why are there few successful regions of the country that have no strong economic center? Simple. Successful regions create vibrant central cities.

You need a thriving economy first. Then after that, the revitalization of the city takes place.

"Shiny new buildings" do matter.

People are attracted by beauty. As the city continues on the path of only building mediocre looking structures, Syracuse will never evolve into a city with a beautiful built environment.

[bellafinzi]

I'll sum up everything again.

-Efforts to drastically suppress growth in the suburbs (of Syracuse) will hurt Syracuse's economy.

-For those who already live here, when it comes to overall community satisfaction, being in an aesthetically beautiful city is quite important.

-For those seeking a new city, so-called "beautiful cities" tend to attract more highly-educated people.

[Cleveland Park]

For those seeking a new city, with very little exception, highly educated people flock to walkable, urban places with culture (and, of course, available employment). There's no disputing that. This is why New York, Boston, Chicago, Washington, San Francisco, and, to a lesser extent, Portland, pull the bulk of recent graduates from the nation's best schools.

Even if there were jobs to be had, very few of this group would want to live in an area that can only be accessed via automobile. Fewer still would want to live in a place that has a.) no museums/theatre/culture, and b.) mainly chain retail.

Moreover, the matter of "stopping sprawl" is, again, not one of "efforts to drastically suppress growth." Extension of (public) infrastructure is the only thing facilitating suburban sprawl. The county has a finite amount of resources. It is nuts to use them in such a way that a.) destroys green space, b.) encourages land use in a manner that will be obsolete decades from now, and c.) diverts capital from the region's greatest asset (the city). We're not talking about suppressing suburban growth -- simply not further subsidizing it at the necessary expense of other areas.

Moreover, as far as portraying the city dishonestly, you're on the record denigrating Syracuse for having, among other things, poor schools, rampant crime, and a downtrodden citizenry; you've also said that, due to these factors, you could never recommend that someone settle there. They're baseless claims that show no familiarity with what the city is like, and it serves to give casual readers of this forum a very wrong impression.

[bellafinzi]

You can not compare Syracuse to world class cities like New York, Boston, Chicago, Washington, and San Francisco.

Those cities are walkable due to the simple fact that they are old, large, and have growing economies in white collar fields of employment.

Stopping sprawl did not make those cities great....job growth did.....

Syracuse is a medium sized rust belt that has a historically blue collar economy. Very different.

Most people who desire to live in places like San Francisco will not settle for a city like Syracuse just because you can walk past decaying and abandoned buildings on your way to work.

Beauty matters, not just walkablity.

Cleveland Park, this thread is about sprawl. Not about whether to build up the city. The city needs change and investment no doubt. So I agree with all your great points about ways to improve the city.

My main disagreement (involving the topic of this thread) is I see efforts to stop suburban development hurting this region in the long term. If you read my posts, you'll see where I'm coming from.

[bellafinzi]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Park

Moreover, as far as portraying the city dishonestly, you're on the record denigrating Syracuse for having, among other things, poor schools, rampant crime, and a downtrodden citizenry; you've also said that, due to these factors, you could never recommend that someone settle there. They're baseless claims that show no familiarity with what the city is like, and it serves to give casual readers of this forum a very wrong impression.

It is a common tactic to attribute to the person with whom they disagree a position that he doesn't hold to avoid addressing his facts which they find so disquieting. This is precisely what you have done multiple times.

You are dishonestly portraying me and you know it.

-Overall the city does indeed have poor schools compared to the suburbs.

-"rampant crime" NEVER said that and you know it.

If you think the city is great place to live, then defend the city..... speak out and join the conversation. I've never attacked anyone for stating their opinion about the city.

I have my opinion, you have yours.

[proulxfamily]

Originally Posted by bellafinzi

"Shiny new buildings" do matter.

People are attracted by beauty. As the city continues on the path of only building mediocre looking structures, Syracuse will never evolve into a city with a beautiful built environment.

I guess, then, that the issue is- What do people consider to be beautiful?

I can say, with absolute certainty, that I know no one who visits NYC or Chicago or Boston to see shiny skyscrapers. I mean, they're *there* and yes, very shiny... but the thoughts in my head are along the lines of "Wow- it's so tall... I wonder if I can stand at the top and look down?" And then something like "I wonder if there's a good sushi place nearby?" I don't go to cities to see skyscrapers- I go for a conference, to visit friends/family, to see a play/opera/symphony, to see national monuments... and saying "Hey- we also went to the top of..." is just to fill time.

People don't see a skyscraper and think "Hey- I bet that's a great place to live... look at how sleek those lines are. And the glass is so... clean... and shiny and... reflective." I don't get it. Seriously.

Beauty, to me, is seeing the community within the PLACE. Syracuse is just a place, like any other. Buildings house it, they *are not* IT. Westcott vibrancy, streets fair and festivals downtown, visits to the museums and zoo and parks within the city, meeting up with old friends downtown, buying a few special things from fancy stores throughout the city blocks... night ice skating in the square with exquisite historical buildings in every direction and delicate tree branches drenched with sparkling white lights... a friend was married at the Cathedral last year and a horse and buggy carried them from Columbus Circle to the Lemon Grass in Armory Square. You know those "hobos" who "clutter up" city corners and "detract" from the city? They serenaded the couple down an entire block... that's personality. Syracuse has it. People need to open their eyes. The next time you're downtown, walk around and explore before you rush from an office building back to the parking lot/building.

And that's just within a mile or two of downtown, mostly within 4-5 city blocks... I don't know where you're going when you visit the city but it cannot be the same place we visit.

Don't get me wrong- some of the suburbs and rural areas are great. We've chosen to raise our family in one of the most stereotyped suburbs... but that doesn't mean that Syracuse doesn't possess its own great worth. I want to see it grow and thrive... but only with MERIT, not some shallow semblance of success.

[proulxfamily]

I just had a crazy thought... how about we test this Shiny Skyscraper Theory and build one in the center of the south side? If success follows shiny buildings, then BAM! Poverty *solved.*

That would definitely work, right? :P