Construction Watch: One Canalside
Comments
Leave a commentIt's a shame the fist building at Canalside was not built to the sidewalk.
I have been to the site recently, and like the Avant on Delaware, the renovated Donovan will detract from what could have been an active street life.
Now, similar to the Avant there will be a "no man's land" between the street and building. The first few floors of the Donovan could have been brought to the sidewalk. Dead space does not attract people.
Canalside should be about making a dense and exciting destination. This building detracts from this goal and compromises the success of Canalside.
How do you know they won't be making good use of that "dead space"? They may have plans to have outdoor cafes or utilize it for public activities. Maybe you should wait and see the final product before condemning the design....
Perhaps you don't live in western NY. But for at least 6 months of the year, it will be too cold for that space to be used. It will be windswept and barren. Another reason to build to the sidewalk.
Its not really dead space when its a pedestrian space. You can only have so much table space on a side walk.
Check out the Pedestrian Mall that took over Main Street and tell me "pedestrian space" is not "dead space".
But this isn't a Pedestrian Mall. You cannot make the comparison to mainstreet.
Also there is no proof that the closing of Main Street to vehicle traffic killed the once vibrant district. It is just as likely that it would have declined with or without vehicle traffic (like much of the city). On street parking has very low capacity; at the end of the day most visitors still have to park around the corner on a different street or in a lot.
The Pedestrian Mall shouldn't be demonized without further study. Correlation does not equal causation.
"Building to the Curb" has become a bit of a punchline here on BR but Hamp makes a good point. Designers over the years in Buffalo have loved the Plaza style building setback, 1 HSBC Tower, 1 M&T Plaza, Federal blgd (now Avant), Golddome (now M&T), New federal Bldg on South Elmwood, and of course the Donovan. These building are Islands and offer little to density and urbanity.
I think the city itself offers little density, or vibrancy after 5pm and on non concert days, which isn't necessarily an individual buildings fault. I think this is a perfect chicken and egg situation.
There is a reason for that. It keeps the undesirable people from standing in front of the first floor window. Don't shoot the messenger but that's the reality. The setback serves a designed purpose...that being to set the building and its occupants back from the street life...which at a good amount of times is undesirable.
While I agree in principal, you should walk by the building on the Main Street side. It is not really that far from the sidewalk. It may not be built to the sidewalk on that side, but it is very close. I would agree the Washington side is not ideal though.
I was just there.
The Main Street side is set back too far to add to an interesting street life. Again, see Avant on Delaware.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The Main Street side is much closer to the street than the Avant in my opinion (since I have not measured). But as someone stated above, it is a chicken and egg situation. Things to do and places to go will bring people and vibrancy.
"chicken and egg" sounds cute but that expression is not relevant here.
Street life doesn't just "happen". It has to be encouraged, through careful planning and building design.
Go to Sixth Avenue in New York. Arguably the least pedestrian friendly and lifeless street in midtown. And what is happening there? Barren plazas (yes empty spaces in the middle of Manhattan) are being filled in with new construction - to enliven the street. All the people in the world could not make these empty plazas work, so they're being eliminated.
You raise valid points, but there is also not carte blanche to do everything on every project. In this case, there was an existing structure to deal with. Perhaps there were cost and scheduling issues with building out the structure. Or perhaps the client dictated the design. Or the city. Etc.
I do know that it is not as setback from Main as you make it out to be and that we do need see the building in context with the development across the street to make a full judgement like brownteeth stated. Even with the shortcomings, I still see this as a good project overall and a positive for Canalside.
And the Avant is a huge failure. No one goes in that building and it's completely ugly.
You are missing the point completely.
The Avant is successful, but Delaware Avenue is not. It is not filled with pedestrians, shopping, etc. That's what residents (and convention tourists) want to see downtown. And that's what downtowns need to be successful.
Avant does not add to the street life. It detracts from it. Ditto for New Era, the new Courthouse, etc.
Why is Buffalo losing major conventions? No place to walk to, no place to shop.
Or it's losing conventions because our convention center sucks and our downtown hotel market is unable to keep up with demand. Not because of any of the reasons you listed.
Hamp--spot on. This is a suburban approach to an urban development. There should be as much density as possible. Terrible precedent to set for Canalside.
Delaware Ave used to be quite pedestrian friendly, back before the 1950s or so. It's when they started tearing down good buildings and closing up shops that foot traffic disappeared.
I agree the building is set back a bit but I'd wait to see how the overall site plan lays out once Canalside proper (Aud site)is built out more and Main street on this block has traffic returned as well as the removal of those giant arches. Right now it looks like a bomb went off so until there's notable progress on all that it's still difficult to know how they will all integrate together.
And I drive by the Avant about a dozen times a day since I live around the corner. It's always pretty busy around the patio & canopy area with guests coming and going. While they may not attract pedestrians walking by, there's always a sense of life there, even if it's just the valets or doormen hanging around.
A peek at a valet or doorman is not what I call an exciting urban experience.
You can't force an "urban" experience without the density and demographics, this is one thing you lack to figure into your equation.
Nor would I. My point is that at least there are human beings outside the building 24/7 unlike most any other building downtown. So for whatever that's worth it's better than nothing. True vibrancy will take time and will require multiple factors to come into play. A hotel is a 24/7 operation so I'm more optimistic there will be life there than if it were merely an office or residential.
Good morning, Buffalo! Let the complaining begin!
Oh, and I'll refrain from making the sarcastic shot at a fellow commenter that comes to mind.
I'd be interested in your opinion of the parking for this site? Seems like overkill to me here, what with the parking at the Webster Block (both future and present) as well as the myriad of other options in the immediate area.
lol. I was just saying to myself, "man, Slu let Hamp off easy with a quick conclusion of mutual disagreement".
Hmm, parking. Yeah, I agree, overkill. I don't like the attached parking garage concept, like BCBS. But I do say a garage is better than a surface lot. I'd love garages in Buffalo to be built like I've seen in other cities where you can't tell it's a garage right away. But, lipstick on a pig perhaps.
The sarcastic shot wouldn't have been directed at you, btw, if that's what you thought.
Agree. I have seen a few garages that were actually pleasant to look at. I would guess they were forced to include parking in order to get the Marriott.
And even if the sarcastic shot would have been directed towards me, it is all in good fun! Plus anyone whose username is taken from my favorite movie of all time must be alright.
go for it, give it your best shot.
Oh, you mean how we have to endure ANOTHER update on this building???!!!! Yawn. Get a life, Buffalo.
Still waiting for a response, toots:
http://www.buffalorising.com/2012/08/preservationists-they-did-build-that-1.html#comment-130479
Anyone know why all those lights are on at night and strung on every floor?
Security / safety purposes I imagine.
The HSBC building looks so ugly in those photos. Would love to see it with a modern glass facade.
Its not fair to liken the concept of all and any pedestrian space in such a broad brush way to the Main Street Pedestrian mall. Based on that logic we should discourage pedestrian space in all and any situation because of its negative effects on a community. Not all pedestrian space is created equal and in this case certainly two different birds. Even when comparing pedestrian malls to other pedestrian malls there are examples that are successful and those that are not. The Buffalo one not so successful, places like Charlottesville VA, pretty successful. Ithaca NY seems to have one that works. Its all about how its designed and location.
I just got back from Ithaca. The pedestrian mall is the deadest part of their downtown.
A pedestrian mall and a pedestrian space are night and day.
Care to tell us how they are different?
I believe Ithaca is in the process of planning to completely rip up the pedestrian mall and redesign it because of how much of a failure it is. Last time I was there, there were vibrant streets all around the pedestrian mall - mostly filled with restaurants and bars serving the colleges - but the commons pedestrian mall was a total dead zone. It was tired, old and felt deserted.
Hamp is completely correct throughout this entire thread. This is a terrible design precedent as the first private development project at Canalside.
It really burns me that almost all of the washington street site will be surface parking - when we will have a giant parking garage on the webster block, and eventually an underground lot on the aud site. There is a total disjointed, lacking vision for development at ECHDC. They have no clue how any individual project fits in and contributes to what Canalside needs to become.
They need to stop being plumbers at ECHDC that just "get something done" and be an organization with the vision to do something great.
I agree. Almost any European city has multiple successful pedestrian malls.
The trick is getting the formula right. You need residents and visitors. You can have businesses and hotels.
Most importantly you need a reason to be walking around there. You cannot just create a pedestrian mall and expects results, they have to develop naturally and then implemented when pedestrian traffic overwhelms vehicular traffic.
You cannot compare the car-dependent United States with Europe.
Am I the only one who thinks that this building fits in perfectly? It's going to have a brick and glass exterior which will work perfectly witht the existing F'in Center, The Atrium and the proposed development on the Webster Block. Also, the brick will compliment development across the street at Canalside. I think it's a perfect transition.
I see this building as a transition too in regards to what is beyond it (Buff news, HSBC tower, Atrium, Arena, etc.). When you look at the whole picture, not just Canalside proper, it does make a decent transition from what are supposed to be 19th century canal era buildings into mid/late 20th century design such as the Buff News and Atrium buildings.
Besides, is the Donovan building even technically part of Canalside? Or is it just really close? Same with Webster block, that's not technically part of Canalside. These all should make decent buffers between new and "old".
Webster block is not Canalside (it was city owned); Donovan building is.
Thanks, wasn't sure about the Donovan.
Pedestrian malls are so lame....they are another bad design from the eighties...just like those awful bubble awnings on storefronts that spang up in 90's (or more recently if you're Just pizza or Mister pizza)......the last three pedestrian malls I've been to ( Ithaca, boulder, Santa Monica).. are all awful....please stop building these generic eyesores
... the last three pedestrian malls I've been to ( Ithaca, boulder, Santa Monica).. are all awful....
What is awful about the Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica? It's packed with pedestrians and activity every day year-round. It's a retail hot spot. That's a problem?
just because it is popular doesn't make it good....America's Got Talent is probably the most watched show on television right now....you couldn't pay me to watch that crap...and have you ever gone by a Chili's or Olive Garden when they're open and not seen a full parking lot?....maybe they should put one of those down there so the people will come flocking to downtown...if enough people like it, it must be a good thing...maybe a Walmart...there is always a lot of activity at Walmart
Ivan, I understand your point about popularity but the Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica is a great pedestrian experience. Too many national retailers for your taste? If so, fair point; but, what is it about that pedestrian mall itself that upsets you?
Im not advocating for pedestrian malls at all but recognizing that the pedestrian space associated with this project is NOT a pedestrian mall. No roadways are being closed to vehicluar traffic here and the scale of this pedestrian space is nothing compared to the Buffalo pedestrian mall either. There are differences between good pedestrian spaces that work and bad ones. The building is all site plan and building lpabns at this point while just nuder construction. Do we truly know the entire picture about how pedestrian spaces will be utilized until constructed? I dont think so. William H Whyte had a good video called the social life of small urban spaces many years ago. Its still a good resource. I would have liked a stronger street wall along Washington St with this project myself with retail/ restaurant space but not going to lose sleep over this project. I agree with up and coming that its a good transitional building between HSBC tower, etc. and canalside.
There is no such thing as a "transitional" building.
Perhaps you can convince me how a building can be "transitional"?
Simple, it combines an old design style (brick) with a newer style (glass skinned). It is a more subtle change between an old style building (Pearl St grill) and a newer style (HSBC Atrium). Therefore it transitions two distinctly different architectural styles. This particular building may not be the best example, but it does work to some extent.
Do you really believe what you just said? And if so, what does that have to do with making a great urban building?
HAMP, give it up, nobodys on your side. This building looks 10 times better than what was there before. And your whole argument about it not helping to transition between two different sytles of architecture is completely off base. How do I know this? One, because you do nothing more than ask open ended questions which your respone to them will only be, more open ended questions. Here's one for you, how is this building "not" tranisitioning between two different styles/time periods of architecture?
You have made this up.
There is no such thing as a building serving as a "transition" between other buildings.
It makes no sense. And does not address my main point: that the building is not built to the sidewalk.
I'm on Hamp's side. That's one.
I'm on Hamp's side. That's one.
Yeah, we'll apparently no one else is on your side.
I agree with Hamp about the ground floor. It should have been bumped out to the sidewalk, instead of having the plaza. But in the big picuture of things it's not a huge deal. It's a lost opportunity (as usual) but if they program activities on it, it will be ok.
The Avant should have been built out to the Delaware sidewalk as well...
Hamp is generally correct...
however i think there were ways to make this work better from a design standpoint even without pushing the first floor or two too the the sidewalk. The design just falls short - the building design for not recognizing the intent of the canalside district to emphasize commercial activity on the ground floor (building design emphasizes the complete opposite - yet includes first floor retail/ rest.) and plaza design for not making a decent connection between the public sidewalk and the commercial space on the first floor through physical design and programming.
No, I lie about my own opinions to strangers on the internet. I don't see how this is necessarily bad urban design? That can be pretty subjective. Could they have done better? sure. Is it awful? Not really
I've had the pleasure of attending a presentation by the ECHDC president about the plans for Canalside and the surrounding space.
When it comes to the Donovon, the reason they are not "building to the sidewalk" is because that space was purposely set aside for public use. They are digging another canal in that space and are planning for it to be the welcoming east "entrance" to Canalside.
We're talking about the dead space that fronts on the Main Street (west) side of the building.
So this is the side you're talking about, right hamp (first photo at the top of the post)? http://www.buffalorising.com/2011/12/work-begins-on-donovan-building-makeover-and-aud-block.html
I think it looks great, I don't know why you're upset...
That would be the section filled with concrete stairs, railings, and few people. Yes.
I agree, Main St. is a 100 percent dead zone in this area right now. So it's not like it's going to get any worse. Also, I bet people will enjoy relaxing in this space once Canalside is built up and workers look for a spot to relax.
Gee, they never seemed to be outside relaxing in front of the Donovan building when it was occupied by hundreds of state employees. This side of the building, the way it has been designed, is not the kind of space people want to hang out in.
Can someone just say "uncle"?
I used to work right across the street at The Atrium and we we're always hanging out outside and I wish we had an actual place to chill, instead of just hanging around a big planter box.
Yep, that's the side I'm talking about. Dead space.
I see people moving around. From the rendering it looks a lot more active than it currently does.
Hamp is a bit obsessive about this but he's right. This will most likely be dead space. See every concrete covered plaza in buffalo...they're all the same. I'm sure one HSBC's plaza looked awesomely active in their renderings too, but it's not.
Personally if they're not going to extend the building to the street (which is fine with me because this is not a new build), I'd love to see a pocket *park*, with grass as opposed to concrete. Cheaper and much more attractive. Enough with the concrete.
Technically the whole boardwalk at Canalside is deadspace, yet there's all these pesky people always hanging around.
The boardwalk is programmed space for walking along the water, watching boats, doing other waterfront things that people enjoy. The plaza, unless it is packed with outdoor seating spilling out from restaurants, will be devoid of activity. The problem I have is that they could have kept the plaza if they made a conscious effort to connect it to the retail space and connect it to the public sidewalk on Main Street. And to do that, they needed to make a bigger design gesture to reinforce the retail space making it more prominent. Instead all the design energy of the building goes to the office lobby and then to the top floors of the building. The design fails to integrate with the street with or without a public plaza. All that stuff they added on (like the trellis) is just that, tacked on nonsense that serves no real purpose. And what the freak is up with that canal???? It looks like it belongs in a shopping mall from the 80's and has no relationship to the canals on the opposite side of main. This project is a design failure on several fronts.
I agree it is about the programming. In fact any use of space is only as good as what you make of it. I can't say for certain this won't end up being dead space but what I do know is that over the last few years people are becoming more comfortable making use out of "dead space" more than ever. I think it will be a combination of programming and continually changing peoples attitudes towards attending events or activities in these spaces.
Larkinville is a great example of people going to a plaza to enjoy the activities and nothing more. There is no retail, no residences, no hotel and only one restaurant, nothing else. How can the Donovan space being located so close to the water/boardwalk, Naval Museum, FN Arena, The new Sabres complex, cobblestone, etc., be any worse than what Larkinville manages to do in the middle of nowhere?
By the same token just because a building is built to the curb does not guarantee it will be more vibrant. If there were retail with no outside space wouldn't most people be indoors? Would that give the impression of less people? It's too early to tell how this will play out.
Main Street is not on the water. The Main Street side of this building will have a dead space in front of it. And in the winter it will be piled with snow. Sorry.
No one is talking about the extra space fronting scott street that is being held for new development. This will add a ton to the urban vibrancy of canalside once it is developed. With harbor center on the webster block to the south and 1 canal side with a simple plaza and water element to the north it would seem logical that space fronting scott will be the next area to be developed. Am I off base here? It seems like a perfect progression to me and if I had deep pockets i would be all over that.
Go to Chicago to see how many buildings are set back off the street. This building already existed off the street. Stop complaining. Canal side is emerging as a public space area NOT Wall Street.
Very few buildings are set back off the street in Chicago.
Hi Buffalo expat here now living in Ithaca for 7 years. Lived on Trinity Place in Buffalo for 10 years before moving out here. I think that Hamp is being a little to fundamentalist with his remarks about street set backs and building to the curb. While this is a common tenant of good urban design it is not the be all and end all of urban design. This building was never really built to fit those guidelines as the state office building that it was for 30 years. But, it is a reuse of an older building and it will bring new people downtown to stay and to work.
Also, just because the Buffalo pedestrian mall sucks pretty badly doesn't mean that they all do. Ithaca's Commons has been very successful and popular place over the 40 years that it has been in existence. There are restaurants, clubs, banks, shopping and people. It is everything that Buffalo's isn't. It also serves as Ithaca's "square" and has regular music in the summer along with all the festival's that happen over the course of the year. It is the center of Ithaca and communal gathering place. The comment that it is the deadest part of downtown implies a deep misunderstanding of Ithaca. The ithaca commons and the immediate surround streets which border it ARE downtown. To say that other parts are busier is really misinformed.
Since it is 40 years old it has shown it's age and Ithaca is discussing having the Commons redone. There is no talk of turning it back into a street. None, in fact that would be sacrilege. The commons has the support of students, residents, business, Chamber of Commerce, etc the whole community supports the commons by frequenting the shops there and attending the concerts and festivals. So Hamp, trying to throw Ithaca's Commons in, to support your picky comment about the plaza isn't really gonna work. Take it from someone who has lived in both cities extensively and understands a thing or two about how urban design works. (ok, getting off of high horse now)
There is no reason to believe the renovated Donovan will revitalize the area on its own by "bringing people to stay and work". Remember until recently the Donovan was occupied by hundreds of workers. And the Aud attracted thousands. Even so, there was ZERO spin-off in the adjacent neighborhood. How do you explain this?
This is why there are design guidelines for Canalside - to create a vital, attractive destination. Dense, and built to the street, with retail and restaurants. This attracts people. But the guidelines were not followed at One Canalside.
I don't live in Ithaca, and obviously someone living there would know the situation better.
My comments are based on two different times I've visited Ithaca. Both times in the summer.
The last time being a few weeks ago.
Both times the downtown pedestrian mall was desolate and uninviting. The streets, that still had traffic seemed much more active and vital.
I haven't been to Ithaca in the winter, but I would expect the pedestrian mall is used even less then.
Anything in Ithica is more inviting than anywhere in our downtown.
the pedestrian only street in Ithaca is a wind swept wasteland
There's the x factor now that didn't exist 20 years ago downtown. People are going down here now more than ever and there's really no specific reason. I can't see how this project couldn't help that, let alone detract from it. You're putting far too much emphasis on the arbitrary and subjective design of one building of many more to come.
Who has claimed that the Donovan alone will attract more people? It's all the small and medium sized pieces that will create a great district. One building alone won't and shouldn't make or break that.
I strongly disagree with Hamp's assertion that M&T plaza, Key Plaza, the former Goldome plaza are 'wastelands'. People use those plazas. There are more people congregating at M&T during lunchtime concerts than anywhere else for blocks (although many use that nice tree lined street next to St. Paul's, which, thankfully, is also set back from the street enough to create public space).
And the Key Tower Plaza is another jam packed gathering place. Do you go downtown in the summer at lunchtime?
Those plazas are way more populated by office workers enjoying the outdoors than all those vacant sidewalks lining vacant storefronts all along Main, and any other buildings which once upon a time supported retail, along Chippewa, along Delaware, along Washington and Pearl and Franklin and Genesee. There are a ton of formerly thriving retail streets downtown, streets where traffic still drives relentlessly by, but which are not thriving for retail. And that will be the case for most of those streets, even after downtown residential builds up more critical mass.
The design failure is less about the plaza and more about the lack of emphasis on retail and the anticipated integration with a vibrant retail district. They could have built this anywhere downtown. Exept of course it's a retrofit...but it's a retrofit that ignores the context.
there will be many things to do around Canalside, but turning it into a 'retail district' would be dooming it to failure. It would never work. Western New Yorkers aren't going to go shopping in retail storefronts on the waterfront (especially in winter) when they live nowhere near downtown.
People shop close to home, not close to work. When they get out of the office they're going home, not shopping. To sustain any nascent retail district downtown, we have to increase the number of downtown residents by orders of magnitude (tenfold, or a hundredfold, not doubling or tripling). Slapping retail spaces up all around the canals won't change that fact. Empty stores would not enhance the appeal of Canalside.
Got it.. No retail downtown until 50,000 people move in. Sounds like a plan. Make sure we pull that component out of harbor center - not sure what new era is thinking.
I don't agree.
People shop where the stores and bargains are. And where they can park easily and cheaply.
Canadians flock to the Galleria. And people from all over WNY do too. Even though they live far from the mall.
Providence, RI, a city similar to Buffalo has a thriving mall downtown that attracts shoppers from a wide area.
b-
You're making my point. Canalside has design guidelines to help make it a 24/7 place. The downtown plazas you mention are busy for only a few hours each day, and are deserted on weekends and during the winter.
One Canalside did not follow the design guidelines, and that will detract from its contribution to making Canalside a success.
I'm unclear about the 'bumpouts'. Are these just small additions here and there? or have these floors been significantly added to? It looks to me, from one of the photos, that perhaps a significant increase in the floorspace on each level has been added. Maybe I'm misinterpreting . . .
Have to go down and see what's new in person.
They are small additions. Not significant at all.
And I just walked by here twice today (like I do 6 times a week) and the Main Street side is very close to the sidewalk. On this side of the building, "build to the curb" is a non-issue.
I walk by it too.
The Main St side is almost 20 feet from the sidewalk.
Look at the rendering. The building has no interface with the pedestrian. No windows to peer into, no retail or other commercial to activate the street. That's the problem, and that's one of the main reasons downtown buildings should be built to the sidewalk.
The space in front of this building will be a dead zone most of the time.
You're putting way too much emphasis on a conceptual design and not factoring in anything that will be built across Main street that might play off this building or vice versa. I can't say your wrong about this space, it will all come down to how this space is utilized. Even if the building were built to the curb there's no guarantee it would attract more people. It might only give the illusion that there's more people. The truth is it will be about a decade until everything is built and we can assess how successful any of this will be.
You're missing the point. If you build to the sidewalk, there is no "space" to have to fill in.
The building with its windows lighted up, action inside etc, is enough.
Action INSIDE makes for a vibrant area? With all the people inside their first floor offices on Main street you consider that vibrant? Look, I won't argue that they may have too much space outside now, but given the momentum and success of grass roots programming and the buzz in this area I don't think it's going to go the same way the rest of Main street has.
Plus many of the plazas further up Main consist of banks with security issues and only office workers. Given this prime location and the hotel/restaurant component I don't think the expanse of space outside will be nearly as dead and useless as you think.
Almost 20 feet? What are they going to do with all that space? I mean that is almost 7 or 8 steps from the sidewalk! The humanity!
IINM it means the extra metal framework shown in image 4 of 7, which supports the design element projecting from the wall.
All this talk of urban planning, downtown revitalization, pedestrian malls that work and those that don't, building to the street, no plaza, yes plaza, sheesh!!!
What noboby on here gets is that any downtown area, mall, street, plaza is not utilized by Buffalonians and their suburban counterparts. On any night, even a nice one, check out what happens when Shea's lets out. Thousands of people leave the theatre at one time....they cross Main, get in their car and head home, whether that home is in the suburbs or in the City. I usually walk up Main a little and can count on one hand the amount of people that are walking. Yes, I know....why would they walk when there's nothing there to walk for. Well, now there's the egg and chicken scenario. But any event in our city lacks the ability to keep people downtown to patronize our city.
In NYC, those that don't live in the city and catch a show usually have dinner, the show and then dessert or another drink after....hence the saturation of people on the street. Our residents don't do that. Until they do, any street will be a dead zone whether the building is built to the street or not.
That's not entirely true. Most restaurants that are close to shea's are busy before and after big shows. And they aren't necessarily even known to many theater goers that don't venture around the block. If more restaurants were open right on Main St people unfamiliar with the city would see them and support them.
I think that has more to do with the demographic of people attending the shows. A lot of people are older and hail from the suburbs so they're not familiar with where places are located in the city. So, after the shows they head home, or to Friendly's for a late night ice cream. Buffalo is still one of those cities that you need to be "in the know" to really know what places are hot on certain night and what places arent. Also, I believe there's still a stereotype that the city is dirty and filled with blacks that will rob you. Exampl: I have free Dipson movie theater passes. I wanted to see Lawless and it was only playing at the Market Arcade. So, I called my grandpa and asked if he wanted to go. His response was, "i try to stay out of black neighborhoods." My response was, well its not black down there. His response, "well whats the makeup of people?". I said, "well it's 1:30 on a Saturday so probably me you and a bunch of old people with nothing better to do.". He wasn't having it needless to say we didnt go. But this story is a perfect example of the stereotype's we still fight with on a local and national scale.
Agreed on the in the know comment; This is something we need to change.
Speaking of in the know, does anyone know what the plan for Main Street and cars is in this area? If cars are separate as they are by FNFG and under HSBC and past the Ellicott building and not sharing the tracks, that 20 ft may not really be 20'ft after the fact.
Leave a comment
Sponsor
Recent Comments
Sponsor
Interested in advertising on BuffaloRising?
E-mail John C. Powell
or call John at 716.602.0200




"There's more than one way to skin a building."
--Vitruvius, Book III