The other side of the coin is that when a city is not car-friendly, the car finds a car-friendly place, so we get sprawl. But the car didn't drive itself to the suburbs, "we" did. It's partly a reflection of our values--some people like their space and don't want to be bothered by city noises. Since Buffalo doesn't have any geographic limits to sprawling--like the rivers that cut Manhattan off from its suburbs, and we don't have any social or political limits to sprawl, "we" have collectively contributed to the kind of downtown we have now.

The part I like is that we have a choice of where to live. The ones who like to walk to the shops and bicycle to work can live close to or in the city, and those who prefer driving around the burbs can live there. I'm not judging the burbanites, or praising the urbanites, I'm just saying.

Make downtown as hospitable to residents as the suburbs and we might be on to something. Unfortunately for most cities, and especially Buffalo, the city is unable to play in the same league as the suburbs. Quality of life, safety, response from government, education, return on real estate investment, personal voice in decisions, and return on tax dollars spent, are all concerns that drive people to the suburbs. Unfortunately, the cities tend to be less responsive to the residents than the suburbs, at least that is the prevailing perception.

Suburban schools tend to be superior, policing is superior, neighborhoods are walkable and safe. Your biggest investment tends to retain value in the suburbs, more so than in the city, etc, etc, etc. The cars enable people to find the space where they are most comfortable, so they are no longer forced to live in the "Urban Jungle". They can move to a place that does not require a camera on the corners for residents to feel safe. A place where their children will receive a quality education and have a wealth of extracurricular activities available.

Maybe it is time that we rethink the cities instead of blaming the suburbs. People leave the cities for a reason, address these issues and then maybe we can have a real discussion that goes beyond the agenda driven bs in this article.

Have to STRENUOUSLY disagree with this. Last summer, on the way from PA to VA, we spent half a day at the Inner Harbor at Baltimore. We parked in one of many incredibly large (I think they were ten story) garages. The garages were architecturally attractive and fit in with the surrounding area.

Imagine if there was little or no parking, and the web site suggested you take public transportation. Guess what? We wouldn't have gone. And how many people in the Baltimore suburbs would spend late nights in the Inner Harbor knowing they could only get there and back by bus? Very few.

Other than a few exceptions like Manhattan and Toronto (and Buffalo is not Manhattan or Toronto), a vibrant downtown needs numerous attractions, along with plentiful parking that is close to the attractions. Limited or no parking mean limited or no attractions.

Sally, did you see that Benderson is forbidden from using the name Amherst? If the lawsuits don't kill the project it'll have to be called Maple Town Center or something like that. God bless those folks out there.

Surface parking degrades the quality of the city center. Buildings do not. That includes well designed parking garages.

A city doesn't need to be NYC in order to have people come downtown even if parking is scarce. Downtown Austin humms with activity and parking has gotten to be a complete pain. Downtown is cool and people want to be there. There is a lot going on. Sure, Austin is growing and that helps but I'll use Providence as an example of an older city with less growth that still has a hot and happening downtown that isn't 50% parking lot.

Surface lots and one way express arterials are the main enemies. Places people do not want to be or interact with. They do not want to cross them or walk past them to see what lies on the other side.

The parking garages are a step up. If Baltimore was filled with the same area of surface lots, the harbour would look no different than Transit road and be about as hospitibal. Garages with other uses on the first and second floors are even better as the parking aspect starts to become transparent. Parking hidden underground is even better. surface Parking behind buildings even works as it removes it from where the pedestrian interacts. See the new Ulrich City Center in Lockport for an example. Buildings are up against the street on both sides of the block with parking sandwhiched in-between them.

I feel this is the issue with Pano's expansion and its creation of a surface lot where the Atwater house stood. Maybe a missing tooth can be hidden here or there, but as they multiply you get a pretty ugly "smile" that no one wants to acknowledge anymore. Roll that expansion clear across the Elmwood frontage with all parking at the rear and you would have a layout more in line with what is being talked about above.

I also like the Childrens hospital garage "hidden" mid-block. Or the concept for the buildings on Oak at the 33 exit. Parking can people can co-exist. It coast a little more and involves some creativity, but we get a much higher quality environment in which to live. A place where people want to congregate.

kind of nice results when higher social classes of people can afford to move across invisible town lines and sheild themselves from the costs of the society they live in no? ;)

you mean there are still people that think cars are good for cities? ;)

Isn't this exactly what most of have been trying to tell local developers and politicians here for years? We have enough parking, build Buildings instead of parking lots.

I've been all over the world and the economic segregation you speak of is a historically speaking recent and wetern construct that America has taken it to a high art form. In many other countries there is far more residential mixing among socio-economic strata.

As for suburban real estate investments holding their value better that just plain isn't true. In most cities real estate values in established city neighborhoods tend to outpace the suburbs. Even in Buffalo as the anomoly certain sub-areas of the city have out appreciated most of the suburbs.

I spend a lot of time in gainesville and it's interesting to watch that growing city grapple with the car-parking-mass transit-smart growth dilemma. with respect to who would pay for the alleged increased costs of mass transit, didn't our esteemed congressmen (higgins) vote for the iraq war and all the subsequent bills to fund it? i know it's not that simple but doesn't Buffalo deserve the money over Bagdhad?

I got it reflip and I laughed.... The folks here either have no sense of humor or no understanding of sarcasm...or both....

make that western districts ;)

No where did I deny living along social lines exisits or is inherently "evil". Yes Buffalo had mansions on one side of Main and workers houses on the other side. But they were all part of the same municipality and tax base. Maybe back then Delaware residents said look at how well we do things, what's wrong with the other side of Main St etc? Why don't they hire better representatives? etc etc.... but I'd have issues with that too.

What gets me is the attitude that somehow older urban areas are magically disfunctional while towns on the outskits are somehow full of forward thinkers which solved all of societies problems. When in reality we just leave them behind a municipality line. We set precidents of picking up and running from problems and then bitch that those left behind are not investing/fixing up, but are trying to follow the same path we set:picking up and moving out at first chance. Why should those left behind have the burden of fixing everything and sticking around once they get some money when those with money just got up and left in the first place? The root of the issues is at the individual level.

Yes in America we are free to use our older areas and cities as warehouses for the poor and broken families. Feel free to use it to your advantage. Just be sure to acknowledge the system we have created and perpetuated. Be prepared to subsidize the mess that is left behind. Be prepared for those schools to perpetually underperform or exponentially cost more to achieve the same results. And be prepared for the problems to cross gov't lines as is now being seen in Cheektowaga as the wave of disinvestment continues its roll outward. No gov't will stop it because we as individuals will keep packing up and moving out. Soon eastern Cheektowaga school districts (do they have enough?) will start feeling the effects of a greater percentage of poorer and broken family children.

Amherst etc did not sprout out in the middle of nowhere with zero poverty, crime etc within it. If that was the case it would be located out in Albion, Warsaw etc all by itself and not srouting off of Buffalo. Show me a large municipality that is not a commuter or adjacent to a preextisting municipality that has no poverty, crime, underperforming schools etc within its borders. These are all parts of society and will exist. Show me a location where they are minimalized and you will pry show me an area with a regional gov't and planning.

Here we are content to point fingers while the metro area as a whole perpetually drifts into decline. Any town govt offical is welcome to move into the city, get elected, and show us all how it is done.

That was sarcasm...I guess it got lost....

Get with it people the world is changing before our eyes.

Oil will continue to increase in cost and air travel and long trips in private cars will decreae.

There is no longer any sense or reason in building a new bridge, highway, or airport.

The Buffalo and Fort Erie Peace Bridge reason for building a new bridge no longer hold water. The world has changed. We are never going to see low prices for gasoline again and people are going to make drastic driving changes. Goods might end up going by railroad again due to a need for greater efficency. The urban cores will be the best places to live and those who live in the outer suburbs will suffer or leave and move inward. If the subway in Buffalo had been smart it would have expanded out to the burbs. People residing out there would not be in the economic fix they are in today if the rails had been built outward.