What does Buffalo have that Rochester doesn't and vise versa? (Syracuse: for sale, real estate market)
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.
I have lived in NY for the last 8 years or so and have currently lived in Rochester for about a year and a half. During my time in NY I have visited Buffalo about a dozen times. They are only 60 miles apart and have roughly the same population and weather. So my question is, besides Buffalo having two major sports teams, what do you really think sets these two cites apart from each other? Sometimes when I visit Buffalo it feels very similar to Rochester but other times not at all. Why do you think that is?
I've heard many say that Buffalo feels like a small big city, while Rochester (and Syracuse) feel like big small cities. In a way, Buffalo is like a smaller version of Chicago or Pittsburgh, while Rochester is like a larger version of Fort Wayne or Appleton.
In the end, the reasons behind many of the differences come down to two things:
* Buffalo was a boomtown before WWII, after which the economic and population growth slowed to a crawl. Rochester has much slower, but steadier growth from the canal days to the 1990s.
* Buffalo is (or was, depending on who you talk to) a solidly blue collar city, with closer cultural ties to the industrial Great Lakes and Midwest. Rochester is a more white collar city, with closer cultural ties to the Northeastern US.
Buffalo
* Emerging as the "hip city" of the Rust Belt, kind of like Austin is for Texas, Nashville for the South, and Portland for the Pacific Northwest..
* Urban neighborhoods with much larger, more cohesive and more walkable commercial areas.
* More walkable streetcar suburbs and close-in suburban villages.
* Downtown essentially sits on Lake Erie.
* More abundant and prominent high culture offerings (visual and performing arts).
* Less urban sprawl - typical residential building lots are smaller in suburban Buffalo than suburban Rochester.
* Sidewalks are far more common in suburban Buffalo than in suburban Rochester.
* NFL and NHL teams.
* Hotter residential real estate market.
* MUCH larger Polish-American community.
* More colleges and universities.
* More interesting local food scene.
* Oddball local culture that is much different than what one would find in similarly sized metro areas elsewhere.
* Extremely blue collar suburbs (Cheektowaga, Depew, Sloan, Lackawanna, Niagara Falls), with no Rochester equivalent.
* Very strong support for rough-and-tumble politicians with "swagger" -- Jimmy Griffin, Paladino, Trump, etc.
* In Buffalo, you're never far from post-industrial blight, and it's a lot harder on the eyes than the equivalent in Rochester.
Rochester
* More interesting topography - gently rolling hills vs flat, flat, flat.
* More entrepreneurial white collar culture vs Buffalo's collective blue-collar-and-proud-of-it mindset.
* Rochester's suburbs are "sprawlier", but generally more attractive, bucolic, and affluent than Buffalo's 'burbs.
* Rochester's worst neighborhoods aren't nearly as battered as some parts of Buffalo's East Side.
* Rochester has a growing Jewish community, while Buffalo's Jewish population shrank to half its size over the past 20-or-so years.
* More prominent Italian-American community.
* More prestigious colleges and universities.
* Not toll-locked - you can take an expressway out of town without having to pay a toll.
* Rochester tends to get national chain stores years before they arrive in Buffalo. Many chains set up shop in Rochester, and won't even think about a Buffalo location (Von Maur, Costco, West Elm, LL Bean, Staples, etc).
I'd say that the Rochester metro area has never had a population decline is one difference.
Rochester has a bigger Hispanic/Latino presence.
Rochester has a strong(er) Canal presence/culture.
Rochester has a higher educational attainment.
Buffalo has a later Last Call.
Buffalo has rail public transportation.
Buffalo has 3 NCAA Division 1 college sports programs, while Rochester just has RIT Hockey at that level. Rochester does have lower level pro soccer(men's and women's), pro outdoor Lacrosse and semi pro Basketball.
I think the number of area colleges may be close, Rochester: U of R, RIT, Brockport, Geneseo, Hobart, St. John Fisher, Nazareth, Roberts Wesleyan and Keuka(Yates County is in the metro now); Buffalo: UB, Canisius, Buff State, Niagara, D'Youville, Medaille, Hilbert, Daemen, Villa Maria and perhaps Trocaire. Rochester has Finger Lakes and Monroe for community colleges, while Buffalo has Erie and Niagara for community colleges.
Buffalo as a city probably has more international recognition including its major sports. Historically it was always a much larger city than Rochester until more recently. So it has more recognition including being featured in major movies such as Jim Carrey's Bruce Almighty.
Rochester I think has 2 world class museums that are internationally known with the Strong Museum (Toy and Video Games Hall of Fames) and The George Eastman Museum with its collection of film and moving images which is one of the largest collections in the world.
I'd also say that Rochester has more internationally attended festivals with the Jazz Fest and The Lilac Festival being the most well known.
As a visitor from downstate, I noticed significant differences between the two cities myself, but I'd say most of them are opinion based:
Rochester feels like a downstate area in some ways. The suburbs could be like anywhere in NJ or metro NYC. Buffalo was not really like this in the suburbs.
Rochester people seemed more cosmopolitan. Buffalo people seemed more insular. I was a bit turned off by how many people we met that were drunk or talking about heavy drinking in Buffalo.
Not that many dilapidated areas in Rochester. Buffalo has a lot of these areas. Syracuse does too. My friend that I went up there with said that she could live in Rochester metro, but never in Buffalo or Syracuse. She didn't feel comfortable there.
Buffalo people seemed to have more pride in their city. Rochester people were like "why would you move here". Buffalo people were like "get in while its still cheap".
Rochester just felt more coastal, Buffalo felt more inland. I'm not sure why, but Lake Ontario really dominates Rochester, in a good way. Buffalo has a nicer skyline though.
I could probably live in Rochester, but although Buffalo was a decent city, I don't think I'd want to live there.
Rochester just felt more coastal, Buffalo felt more inland. I'm not sure why, but Lake Ontario really dominates Rochester, in a good way.
The funny thing is, that Lake Ontario doesn't dominate Rochester. First, downtown is about 7 miles away from Lake Ontario, so there no real large scale development there. Next, most of the moneyed people of Rochester live in the southeast part of the metro. They in turn have their summer cottages on the Finger Lakes. One of the nice things about Rochester is that we have so much waterfront access--Lake Ontario, Genessee River, Erie Canal, and all of the Finger Lakes. So no one area dominates.
Buffalo as a city probably has more international recognition including its major sports.
I've always heard that Buffalo was more widely known nationally and that Rochester was more widely know internationally.
As far as sports teams, you must admit, without the support of Rochester, the Bills would have been gone long ago. Possibly the Sabres too. They were for sale a few years back with no takers until Tom Golisano saved them.
So I'd rate the cities equally except Buffalo feels bigger because it once was twice Rochesters size and when people lived in the cities.
The funny thing is, that Lake Ontario doesn't dominate Rochester. First, downtown is about 7 miles away from Lake Ontario, so there no real large scale development there. Next, most of the moneyed people of Rochester live in the southeast part of the metro. They in turn have their summer cottages on the Finger Lakes. One of the nice things about Rochester is that we have so much waterfront access--Lake Ontario, Genessee River, Erie Canal, and all of the Finger Lakes. So no one area dominates.
There's something about the sky, the trees, and the wind quality when you live near a large body of water. Maybe I'm just in-tune with it. I can feel it even a few miles away. Webster felt pretty coastal to me. I noticed a lot of weeping willows there too. I'm a topographic nerd so I even like how the land slopes there.
I've always heard that Buffalo was more widely known nationally and that Rochester was more widely know internationally.
As far as sports teams, you must admit, without the support of Rochester, the Bills would have been gone long ago. Possibly the Sabres too. They were for sale a few years back with no takers until Tom Golisano saved them.
So I'd rate the cities equally except Buffalo feels bigger because it once was twice Rochesters size and when people lived in the cities.
Without a doubt. Without Rochester, there is no Buffalo Bills. That's the main reason they moved their training camp into Rochester. The NFL was basically telling them that they needed to focus on Rochester support for the team to survive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageSunlight
There's something about the sky, the trees, and the wind quality when you live near a large body of water. Maybe I'm just in-tune with it. I can feel it even a few miles away. Webster felt pretty coastal to me. I noticed a lot of weeping willows there too. I'm a topographic nerd so I even like how the land slopes there.
I can't tell you how many times I've been working with out of state vendors at my job and they comment about how surprised they were with the number of trees, greenery and the beauty in the Rochester area. They must have this vision in their head that it's a typical bland, decaying concrete rust belt city. There are areas along the Parkway (near the lake), in Brighton and in Penfield that feel like you are ducking into a massive forest in the hills with beautiful unique homes when you drive through them. If you ever get a chance to drive down Elmwood Ave. in Brighton you really should. The amazing homes and landscape is so beautiful.
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.
