Cool. i remember when this was proposed. good project.
This project has much to praise. But I think we should look at the bigger picture. I don't think a development that requires demolishing two "troublesome" properties should be considered "green". Green builidngs preserve the environment, they don't cart it off to Buffalo Reuse" or a landfill.
This project also smacks of elitism. Sustainable design should be equitable. That means mixed incomes and diversity.
Sure the new buildings will look great, and in many ways will be a neighborhood asset. But let's not forget the other issues involved here, and what our values really are.
The design looks institutional and dated to me, but it's nice to see something happening there.
I like the project and the addition of upscale condominiums to the neighborhood is a good thing. But it seems that we always focus on the structures themselves as being "troublesome" rather than on the owners and occupants who are the root of the problem. These turn-of-the-century homes have potential and you can find similar owner-occupied homes nearby that sell for $200,000 and up. If these properties were maintained and had good owners or tenants, we would be talking about a different project at a different location. An effective housing strategy is lacking in this city that includes targeting vacant and underutilized properties, investing in some of our aging housing stock with potential especially in already stable areas, and enforcement. Having said that, I still think the condo project will be great for the neighborhood and bring in new residents clamoring for upscale city living.
Hamp, this neighborhodd has more than its share of mixed incomes and diveristy. One hundred more projects like this would have minimal effect on the composition of the area. Buffalo has lost more than 50% of its middle class and upper class in the last 50 years so we she be welcoming these types of projects and the disposable incomes that come with them.
The general area may be diverse, but the project itself is not meant for mixed incomes and will most likely not attract a diverse group of residents. This, combined with the demolition of existiing buildings (in a city with so many vacant lots) is what troubles me about this development.
At least the buildings are going to Buffalo Reuse, lets worry about the 10K other units coming down and being dumped in the landfills first.
Id prefer to see something like this on the eastside or in sout Buffalo...rather than neighborhoods where there are still decent homes that could be rehabbed and remain part of the urban fabric.
chris69, if you had $300k+ to spend on a luxury home would you want to live in the east side or south buffalo? common! people who have that kind of money want to be around a neighborhood with nice restaurants, luxury stores and safe places to walk to. somewhere somewhat gentrified (in most cases). it's the same reason why the gates circle condos need to be build on gates circle and not downtown or in south buffalo or in the east side....
why don't you try to get a loan to build a multi-million dollar luxury condo building in the east side and see how fast they sell...
do me a favor chris, give me a call when the east side gets it act together!
1-800-YR-BITTR
Chris69 I think I'd rather see you on the Eastside, without a computer!!
Gimme a break, I'm not even going stupify myself to the level of that post.
Another welcome sign, more strength to one of the cities strongest districts. Even though places like Elmwood have signs of life, they're far from perfect in my opinion and developments like this will only further solidify the areas mark on society, with beacoup bucks!!
Weezer, if these properties were maintained and had good owners I'm sure they could sell for $200k today b/c its an amazing neighborhood, but they aren't and they don't and they're far from significant.
Numerous vacant lots in Buffalo yes.. thousands... vacant homes in buffalo.. yes... upscale condominums near one of the trendiest streets in the area.... Oo short supply.
Give ReUsE some time... I'm sure they'll get there hands on many more homes with time... they're only a couple of months old right?
Dave it does look somewhat out dated... I've seen it in more than one article "Buffalo gets everyhting other cities get 10 years later". I'm positive I saw a building like thiis 10 years ago in Florida or Houston.. its just our time.
Hemp.. get of your environmentalist throne.. I'm sure this green building goiing up is 10x more energy efficient as every house on the block. The environmentalist movement has really just begun.. If I had more choice start with consumption before we more to recycling.. slow and steady. You think a couple of thousand houses in buffalo is bad.. take a look at whats recycled in big cities and then get back to me.
All I can say is love the project.. not in love with the location.. but good all the same. Save the city by filling it with rich people... make it liveable again!!!
Hamp, a single upscale development in the midst of one of the most income and racially diverse areas of the city can only be a positive and has existed in this part of the city for more than a century. Walk from block to block and you'll find apartment buildings, doubles, modest single family homes, mansions etc. Objecting to a single upscale development because it doesn't accomodate mixed incomes is ridiculous. This area already has substantial moderate and low income housing and adding more to this part of the city would be counterproductive.
Hospitable, I don't object to this development but a combination of failures has led to the decline of these properties which needs to be addressed. Notwithstanding the insentive siding and faux stone, these were once nice homes and similar ones in the neighborhood are being brought back to life. The bottom line is that if we combine investment in properties like these with quality infill development on vacant or underutilized land, we create a significant positive for the neighborhood and city.
This project is not perfect; therefore, I find it troubling. More troubling, in fact, than decades of disinvestment, suburbanization, unattractive and environmentally unfriendly design and general decay.
Ah, to be able to see "the bigger picture." You must need 3D glasses or some such.
Hamp.
Maybne you should be complaining about the lack of diversity in most if not all suburban developments
Ugh! Dreary! Looks like the New Newark (New Jersey). Come on, Buffalo! This was a city that set styles, not followed the most mediocre of mediocre.
Anatomy of a Buffalo Rising thread:
Subjective opinionating about design - something about which there can never be 100% consensus. Gratuitous shots at the suburbs, which I guess aren't lucky enough to sport $300,000 townhomes that are only 2100 square feet. Non sequiturs about "diversity", because we all know how "diverse" a $300,000 townhome will be in the Elmwood Village. Declaratory statements about whether something is or isn't mediocre.
I can't fathom why any of this is of any importance.
Pundit: An expert or critic in a particular field who often presents their views to the media. No one cares what you can or can't fathom.
Maybe it's important to hear what other people have to say so one doesn't think they are the only one with a certain opinion. After having completed a tour of 4 international cities in the past few months (London, NYC, Marsaille and Miami) I can emphatically express that this building is completely unimaginative and dowdy for a main throroughfare. Buildings like this in NYC stick out like sore thumbs. It would be nice to think that Buffalo could support something visionary on this corner. It would be reasonable to think that it could support something modern. But this is like the worst NYU housing from the mid-90s. Please, don't we deserve better than this? Point being that this is important to state so that there is a record of dissent - which there should be - on a building like this. Buffalo should demand something visionary, settle for world-class and stop accepting these type of suburban strip-mall buildings downtown like we're being given some kind of a gift. This has been the problem all along - just being happy that *anything* is happening is not good enough.
I enjoyed the Buffalo News article about Amherst's decision to cease large scale development on vacant or undeveloped property. This can only mean good things for the city, as companies looking to build or expand can no longer build huge complexes in the suburbs. This makes existing buildings and vacant (or shovel-ready) parcels in the city more attractive and enticing. Bring in corporations, jobs, retail, residential, etc... I like where this is going, I hope that someday we won't have to celebrate the opening of every new residential project, it will just become common-place.
I am a little dismayed by the comment about former residents of these properties. We are justifying the removal of the building because the owner ran a rooming house? This sounds like the type of complaint that we would have for Amherst and Clarence, that they won't shoulder their 'burden' for the poor and undesirable. It sounds like we will accept anything, no matter how two-faced and hypocritical, as long as it brings more people, no, more people with money, into the city.
300k and up gets you a pretty nice house in this region - although I love to see any kind of development in Buffalo - this is still a pretty bad neighborhod. Lots of pan handlers. kind a dirty...
How come preservationsits do not stop the demolition of this building? This condo project does not blend in with our urban fabric....the photo on the board looks like a retirement home.
I couldnt disagree more that the eastside and south buffalo could not support a development of $200,000+ condos, townhomes etc.
You think that residents of Lancaster, Clarence, West Seneca would not want to trade a home in the suburbs for a development surrounding City Honors, Science Museum, Humboldt Park, Art Space, Masten Park, Masten Armory and the COE for Life Sciences. Its happening now on Main Street and it could happen around major anchors.
You think that the residents of East Aurora, Orchard Park, Hamburg, etc....would not want to trade their home in the suburbs for a development around Cazenovia or South Park or the Cobblestone District or the outer harbor.
While not everyone would make the trade.....the truth is as developers are finding out...that many of the people in the suburbs have roots in the city and given the right development would return. The KEY is the right development and a large enough scale so they are not an island in a ghetto but integrated into existing community anchors.
I wonder if the neighbor is happy with that billboard sized sign facing their front yard?
PS and of course they could be always have been designed worse!
in all truth...the stucko should have been replaced with shingles....and a few more architectural details around the windows and doors.....but there is a positive point...the basic form is actually pretty good...so in a few years a designer can revisit the exterior....and it could be made to blend in with the community
it could have been worse...they could have followed the architectural designs of our low income housing and municipal housing architects: cheap cheap cheap with soviet era minimal blank walls.
Sexy Beast:
Pundit: An expert or critic in a particular field who often presents their views to the media. No one cares what you can or can't fathom.
Aw, did I offend your delicate sensibilities? Interestingly, thousands of people per day care what I can or can't fathom. So, the basic premise of your terse post is faulty.
I also can't imagine how or why a discussion of Amherst could weasel its way onto a BRO "hyperlocal" thread.
Oh, look! A building! And - and, they want to build parking! Let's comment about it in a circular fashion, and neither seek or reach consensus on anything!
Pundit -
Shouldn't you be campaigning for the very governing body you advocated dismantling about a year ago?
Please keep your attention focused on that race, as I'm certain the citizens of Erie County realize that by adding yet another left-leaning mediocre lawyer to our pool of elected representatives, things will really start to turn around.
>. Green builidngs preserve the environment, they don't cart it off to Buffalo Reuse" or a landfill.
Myth. See http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=30376
[begin]
It sounds like the NIMBY's are focusing exclusively on building ecology--that is that they are only looking at the materials part of the equation while disregarding the rest. They also are not considering disposal methods for the old building. [sni]
Now back to the old building issue: the two things that immediately jump into my mind as key Green differences between the existing building and the proposed building are indoor air quality and energy systems. A 1960s era building is likely peppered with lead paint, asbestos, and a myriad of other materials that release VOCs. In addition, 1960s buildings by their nature are not efficient.
In the case of a 1960s era building, I'd say the preservationists arguement that it should be preserved because it is greener is incomplete. They are obviously neglecting several alternatives, such as recycling of deconstructed waste. I cannot imagine the retrofitting required to take a 1960s building up to any kind of Green standard. I think they are grasping at straws.
[end]
In general this is a pretty awful design with low end exterior finishes. What it represents, however, is great. Buildings like this are a sure sign of investment and the desireability in city living. Anyone that travels has seen this type of development everywhere else. It is great that it has FINALLY come to Buffalo.
Pundit -
Shouldn't you be campaigning for the very governing body you advocated dismantling about a year ago?
Please keep your attention focused on that race, as I'm certain the citizens of Erie County realize that by adding yet another left-leaning mediocre lawyer to our pool of elected representatives, things will really start to turn around.
And with the schoolyard ad hominem attack, and the jacking of the thread, the circle of ignorance is complete. But thanks for paying such close attention to my blog and my race, which is, naturally, completely off the topic at hand. It's also utterly veboten as a subject matter, as my district does not lie within city limits.
I know you're very concerned about thread jacking and the like, so I guess you'll answer the question about how you'll move to dismantle the Erie County Legislator if elected to that body on your blog, but one more thing . . .
Is there another kind of opinionating other than 'subjective opinionating'? Is the stuff on your blog 'objective opinionating'? Or would it be 'objective opinionating' to state that Pace University Law School is ranked in the lowest third of all law schools in a country filled with too many law schools, and, therefore, graduates medicore minds?
See, if you're going to continually attempt to make yourself out as the smartest guy in the room by using 1L jargon, I'd encourage you to avoid elementary language mistakes in the very same comment.
Or, here's an alternative - even though you clearly must enjoy bullying others who make language errors in their posts/comments given how much you do it, go ahead and pass on the opportunity.
Actually, I seldom, if ever, critique people's grammatical or spelling errors, because to do so would be a full time job. Especially with the comment immediately above mine.
As for subjective opinionating, you're wrong. I can look at a building and objectively say, that's square. That has parking in the back and I don't like it. That building is very tall and I don't like it. These types of opinions are different from saying, that building is ugly and I don't like it.
Yes, I went to Pace University School of Law and received an excellent education and did very well there. I don't know who you are, nor where you went to school (or didn't) so dark shucks if I put myself out there and you don't. Good on you.
I must say that I'm flattered by your apparently encyclopedic knowledge about me. It's great to have fans.
As for abolishing the county, I don't think that's a particularly popular position to hold, although I think it underscores how poorly the state has been managing the way it mandates services locally without providing counties the means to pay for them. Since you're being sarcastic about it, I'll just go ahead and assume that you're pleased with the status quo. Also, my blog isn't a campaign website, and I won't be using it as such.
Otherwise, thanks George.
For everyone pointing out that the design of the building isn't great or even good, well, you're right -- it's just that that matters a lot less than the post's title.
"It sounds like we will accept anything, no matter how two-faced and hypocritical, as long as it brings more people, no, more people with money, into the city."
I have no idea how it's two-faced to target a run-down property for demolition. It happens to be a fact that the place contained a rooming house, a big part of how it was easy to tell that the property was run-down. Not only is nobody not hiding this fact, they're in fact trumpeting it; the project's leaders, as do all other sane people, see it as a positive thing to build something else on a valuable site in one of the city's thriving business areas. Anyone interested in the self-esteem of roomers is free to purchase one of the hundreds of vacant houses still standing in the city and rent it out. The rest of us can stand firm in our belief that drawing people with money to a city bleeding population is a, you know, good thing.
Yup, getting more moneyed people willl be great, so we'll have more of them to attack when they inevitably act in their own self-interest. The Park Lane residents will breathe a sigh of relief when other wealthy people are in the crosshairs for once. Don't get me wrong; it's great that there's a market for upper-end housing. The city should offer as much housing variety as possible, and that includes the luxurious AND the rooming houses. Unless you prefer paying higher taxes to expand the City Shelter for the newly evicted.
What I am talking about is the disconnect between the hostility towards the wealthy people we already have, who never the left the city and kept understated, elegant places like the Park Lane viable, and the worship of the wealthy people we're supposedly importing for these new-builds. This demon/savior dichotomy is wierd and irrational.
I enjoyed the Buffalo News article about Amherst's decision to cease large scale development on vacant or undeveloped property. This can only mean good things for the city, as companies looking to build or expand can no longer build huge complexes in the suburbs.
Urbanesque - yes they can. There's quite a few suburbs other than Amherst. Buffalo can't depend on Amherst being "full" to ensure it will be the choice of anyone for anything. If Buffalo wants to attract more companies or people, it will need to become more desirable. As things stand, its perception among some as less desirable than other places for various reasons is the root cause of it's continuing decline in population and jobs.
I couldnt disagree more that the eastside and south buffalo could not support a development of $200,000+ condos, townhomes etc... You think that residents of Lancaster, Clarence, West Seneca would not want to trade a home in the suburbs for a development surrounding City Honors, Science Museum, Humboldt Park, Art Space, Masten Park, Masten Armory and the COE for Life Sciences. Its happening now on Main Street and it could happen around major anchors.
I agree with you Chris69; with the caveat that there would have to be massive gentrification, a serious community policing / crackdown effort, and a critical need for people to relocate to the City, before any of this happens. For the time being, this part of the city will remain a decaying, crime-ridden, squalid, slum! The people of Buffalo are focusing on Elmwood, Allen, North Buffalo, and preserving sections of South Buffalo, it will be a long time before considerable effort is put into the deep East Side, beyond what the existing community is doing there.
again, it would be nice if my friends and i could afford it. till then, ill be renting.
What happened to the development at Jefferson and Sycamore that started out so strong? Haven't seen anything recently and I drive by every day.
$200,000+ homes are to be built on the old air conditioning factory that the city leveled, per the Brown administration. I thought it was a terrible idea at first, building houses at that price for the East Side, but now I believe that there may be a market for homes over there. And I believe we need residents and then private businesses will follow hopefully. There are many new builds all along Sycamore from Oak to Jefferson. This develompent could bring in additional residents, businesse and also increase the city tax base.
YEAH EACH NEW HOUSE ON THE EAST SIDE COMES WITH STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES, GRANITE COUNTERTOPS AND AN AK-47 standard...
When there are many more of these types of projects around the city of Buffalo and there is more money floating around, more jobs, more people living in the city, and the city generally in better shape like we all want, then we can pick and choose our buildings, how they look and where they go. Sacrifices HAVE to be made for the city to achieve anyone heres dream of our city.
"YEAH EACH NEW HOUSE ON THE EAST SIDE COMES WITH STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES, GRANITE COUNTERTOPS AND AN AK-47 standard... "
Very witty.....writer for the Daily Show perhaps?
I walk the streets of the near east side (inside the old belt way) almost every weekend. I have yet to even be approached by anyone other than those with a concern for their neighborhoods. And this is with over 1K of camera equipment in my hands and backpack.
The crap is in the Bailey area now and coming soon to the pine hill area of Cheektowaga. We are all part of this disease that is gutting our core and picking up speed as it now passes the city line. Though it is nice that Cheektowaga and Amherst finally acknowledge that the problem is not a city problem, it’s an Erie county problem that is quickly going to become a problem of their’s. Invisible municipality lines are nothing compared to a continually fleeing population with zero interest in putting any effort into turning the area around.
The near east side is prime for development at lower costs for some people willing to take the initial risk around some great anchor structures.. If only I'd hit a $300 million MegaMillions to jump in large scale.
Report this