The popular Elmwood-Bidwell Farmers Market has become a highlight of summer, not just for those living in Buffalo's Elmwood Village, but for a growing number of loyal customers spread throughout Western New York. But when the market ends its 2012 season in mid-December, several vendors will take part in a brand new indoor winter market that will serve customers every Saturday until the summer market opens again in May for the 2013 season.
Karl Frizlen, treasurer of the Elmwood-Bidwell Farmers Market and owner of The Frizlen Group Architects, will open a Winter Market on Saturday, January 5, in the 115-year-old Horsefeathers Building, located at 346 Connecticut Street. The once vacant West Side building is currently being renovated by Frizlen's company, which has a long and successful track record of green urban projects and historic restorations in the City of Buffalo.
The Winter Market will feature a minimum of 12 vendors selling a wide variety of local produce and products. The market will be held in the building's renovated basement and first floor. Several food tenants will also do business out of the Horsefeathers Building, including Martin Cooks Restaurant, The Pasta Peddler and "press raw food & juice." Twenty-four loft-style apartments will fill the building's top four floors.
Hours at the Winter Market will be 8 a.m. to noon Saturdays, Jan. 5 through May 4. Vendors interested in participating in the market can contact Diane at The Frizlen Group at 716.881.0046 or info@horsefeathersmarket.com for more information.
Odd how it was announced long ago that this building was about to be renovated, when it only changed hands on June 6, 2012. It didn't appear to be under any kind of construction, last time I passed.
Anyway. The 'market' should be held here ALL year 'round, because the ground of Bidwell Parkway is being destroyed by heavy foot traffic. Parks/Parkways are not appropriate sites for commercial use.
Or they could close down a section of one way Bidwell and have the market on the street
Or they could have it on a large expanse of pavement, like the rear of the Albright, and still hold it in a Park.
Stop by now -- it's well under renovation, and geothermal was drilled this summer next to the building.
And it escaped the Connecticut Street "tornado" unscathed!
Any insight on what is happening with the buildings that were damaged in said "tornado"?
Yep: I cleaned up the part of our roof that ended up in the neighbor's side yard (discovered a couple days later). Insurance covered the minor damage to the house to which Burning Books is attached. Scaffolding remains up in front of the larger buildings damaged: Ashland Pest Control, Mineo & Sapio, and the 2-story brick storefront building across the street from them.
indeed. cosmetic improvements are usually the last task on the project list, mainly because old buildings need to have structural problems addressed first: leaky roofs, weak foundations, rotted floors and walls, substandard plumbing and wiring. just because the exterior hasn't been tackled doesn't mean that nothing is being done.
You must hate that M&T Jazz series. You know, with all those silly people getting trashed on boxed wine.
I love boxed wine-nice and square, can pack easily...
You must be an idiot. No idea what the hell you are trying to insinuate.
Us sophisticated folks prefer to drink our wine from a Pesi can so we can drink anywhere without offending Mr. Green Fancy Pants.
*Pepsi Can
Yes it was a long time ago! Bro was asleep at the wheel during that time when they should have been covering every detail of what was going wrong here. "Realists" like us need news of routine delays, restaurant closings, and projects that never get off the ground as talking points for whining about everything that is wrong with this town. I can drown out dozens of stories about new businesses and development just by screaming about the Cooperage or the Artspace storefront.
And your absolutely right to demand that the Bidwell market be moved to this "market," if that's what they're calling it. People might think they can use public spaces like this to gather but we can tell them what to do because we know better.
I demanded nothing, moron. You do not know better.
..."but we can tell them what to do because we know better. "
We call such knowledge "laws", Einstein.
I think you're a bit of an idiot for coming on Buffalo Rising and trying to start some sort of prohibitionist forum.
You guys have to understand Whathaveyou's satirical intent. Evidently a bit shy, he prefers mocking what he perceives to be an opposing viewpoint as opposed to stating his own. He wants you to get mad at the view he mocks. The fact that he invents the argument he mocks doesn't seem to trouble him. He's winning, in his mind.
I think BR should require commentators to distinguish themselves more from previously registered commentators. In this case, I think Whathaveyou's name is deliberately similar to Whatever's, and in so far as Whathaveyou's posts seem primarily mocking in nature, I think it would benefit discussion to have Whathaveyou choose a different pen name. Needn't edit his comments at all, he is free to build his audience through whatever powers of persuasion he possesses. But he shouldn't be allowed to deliberately mislead people about other commentators views, and I think the similarity in pen names leads one to the conclusion that this is part of his intent.
Stepping out of character for a moment to address the comment police:
I had no idea good humor and satire were traits of shyness. Are there any character flaws that can be associated with your repeated overreactions to my comments? I guess I am "winning" as evident in the raging remarks that now follow my contributions here.
Don't expect me to change my name anytime soon, unless bro takes your silly request to force me to seriously. It isn't as if you've demanded them to censor good natured snark and satire when it is directed at people who are less aligned with your views than our buddy whatevs. I wouldn't expect them to take a side in anyone's spat.
Speaking of whatever, although he wrongfully seems to think my comments are all about him, he has been taking my remarks a lot more in stride than you have. I'd suggest letting him fight his battles the way he knows best and not trying to play the role of his personal comment police. If my comments bother you this much, you don't have to read them.
what bothers me about your comments is the clear intent to obfuscate and confuse readers into thinking you are whatever. If snark and satire are your only intents, choose (once again, like you used to) monikers which don't resemble established commentators. Why specifically play off his pen name, if not to imitate him and confuse readers? Why the resistance to choose a name which would confuse no one?
I wouldn't get too caught up in all of it. He/she/it is a very light skinned hipster grasping for attention with too much time on their hands. When someone disagrees with their world view their approach is to hide in a hole like a coward.
I wouldn't get too caught up in all of it. He/she/it is a very light skinned hipster grasping for attention with too much time on their hands. When someone disagrees with their world view their approach is to hide in a hole like a coward.
kettle/whathave -
Nope, this looks like your wild imagination again
"Speaking of whatever, although he wrongfully seems to think my comments are all about him ...I'd suggest letting him fight his battles "
I've never thought or implied 'all about' me.
The opposite, I agreed with your previous denial to Bini… much of what you write looks nothing like what I've ever said. Since you don't want to say to whom who your satire refers, your target(s) remain known only to you.
But I agree with you when you've said it isn't focused on me.
Some stuff you and your character have written doesn't look like anything I've ever noticed anyone commenting on here - not me, not anybody.
So if you're trolling about a 'group' as you've said, maybe it's a group of voices in your head.
Regarding the trying to mix up people - well, it was you who bragged that you enjoyed mixing up commenter Hitchcock ...
This for example...
"My wha impression is so good some of the readers of the latest Hoyt Lake article actually thought I was you. Now that's funny."
This too…
"Bini, yeah one commenter called me "whatever" twice. Based on that I think I've got wha's signature selective principals, pretend objectivity, and manufactured outrage down pat."
Yup, clearly you aren't hopelessly obsessed with me or anything like that!
:-)
-eyes rolling-
Regardless, that's between you and whoever you mix up. If you engage people in multi-comment discussions (like Hitchcock, or Greenjeans, or Rand) and they don't realize you're playing with them as part of imaginary 'battles', they might get annoyed at you. Or maybe not - who knows.
Either way, such is life with blog trolls like you.
People can react, ignore, criticize, or not.
Also speaking of your playing with Mark H in that lake thread - it's is a good example of your satire inventing a view that probably nobody's ever expressed on here.
Your character opposes public $ for water cleanup in public parks -
'...
If park users don't want bacteria and odors creating a nuisance, they ought to chip in and pay for this public project themselves.…'
I don't know if that's one of the views you'll claim unnamed 'others' have said on BR, but I'd doubt if anyone has.
Public parks are something I favor using public $ for in general, very unlike giving public $ for things like privately owned condos, restaurants, etc - regardless of city or burbs.
So that was a classic straw man, like 'pro-demo crowd', and your endless b.s. about casino exclusivity/monopoly (which also nobody I've seen on here advocates except your imagination), and your new one 'hating art history', … yada yada...