Buffalo Rising Online

Some houses are just not worth saving. Many houses in Buffalo were built as temporary structures. They had no real foundations, 2x2 interior walls, and nothing aesthetically pleasing on the inside. Many of the houses in Riverside and the east side fit this description. Even if rehabbed, they are still poorly contructed and not laid out well for today's living standards. Take them down. Open the door for something nice to take their place.

It was an interesting hearing. I watched it on public access television.

The most innovative and inspiring idea was this:

Take a street missing most of it's houses and create a Day's Park clone. Use other structurally sound homes from torn down streets and move them onto new foundations.

If I had been there I would have said, stop D'Youville College from destroying renovated homes and from turning Fargo Avenue into a parking lot.

One more thought.

Many of the old homes are made of construction materials that are superior to those such as particle board and lower grade lumber used in new build homes. At a time when world forests are being exploited and indigenous people are being forced off their lands into urban areas that pay low wages it make more sense to be conservationists of the housing stock we should rennovate and protect.

One of the highlighted points in this meeting was that training programs to remodel old Buffalo homes and tcreate jobs to repair porches, siding, roofs, ect should be created with state and federal money.

Another women at this meeting suggested that people who want to do their own home blocks should receive training on home repairs using government funds. This gets more bang for the buck and saves home oweners big money and helps all home owners to stabalize this community.

The overall tone of the meeting was hope for Buffalo from enlightened people who desire to improve our community in a holistic way and not in a robber baron way.

First I'll say I agree with saving old homes in the city but at the same time I do feel demolition helps. It is true some of the homes were made as temporary housing as in the use of 2x2's and no architectural details but that shouldn't be the sole reason for demoing a house. Out of those 4 homes in the picture I would personally say 2 are worth saving and the other 2 should be knocked down, and heres why. The white house- No front door or windows, it is probably like that all around. Also the roof has fungus growing on it which is almost a sure bet that besides the shingles being deteriorated the underlying boards and roof supports are as well. With the windows and doors off it allows mother nature to destroy the inside spreading mold and eating away at the wood. The other house I felt should be demoed is the green house next to it. Simply because it appears to have fire damage from the first floor to the second in the front. This would require interior and exterior work to re-secure the home. These homes probably cost the same price as these repairs and that is what I am using to judge demoing them. On the other side many homes even the "temporary" houses and the genuine old style homes in this city are far superior to new builds. Simply they used "real" 2x4's not 1 3/4 by 2 3/4 and real old growth wood that hasn't been engineered to mature to its fullest in 15 years. This causes them to be weaker hard woods. You can see the quality of these homes by just looking at the abandoned homes all over the city. With years of neglect and the weather taking its toll they continue to stand. On the preservation side, I believe if the city cannot find a buying they should be sold for $1 to either organizations that rehab and provide them to low income middle income families. Such as Neighborhood housing services. Speaking as I live next to a house that has been abandoned and has count on fire I believe it is necessary for some of these homes to be torn down. Also it allows for neighboring homes to expand their properties that may have only 10 x 20 back yards and 3 feet on each side of their homes.

"The most innovative and inspiring idea was this:

Take a street missing most of it's houses and create a Day's Park clone. Use other structurally sound homes from torn down streets and move them onto new foundations."

This idea is absolutely nuts. Buffalo has lost nearly half of its population since these neighborhoods were created. At some point we have to recognize that a street with most of its houses gone is a dead street, and stop trying to bring it back to life. There are plenty of neighborhoods that, while struggling, actually have a chance to live. To spend time and money of streets that are dead and gone is negligent. Triage, ya'll.

I love how we see this as a victory! We are begging for scraps from the State coffers to fund basic improvements and programs for the city. Our community leaders are going up to the podium like they are approaching the soup line at the city mission. All of this makes us feel better about how much we dedicate to NYS taxes and how little we see in return. It is even sadder for people from NYC who have to pay for the gross failure that is upstate NY. Sad, very sad indeed.

I have made similar statements recently on this forum about the quality of housing stock in Buffalo. Some areas were not built on fine foundations from good quality materials. Riverside was mentioned. Many of the homes in that area were built from the remnants of the Pan American Exposition. Those sites were intentionally constructed of inferior materials in that is was by design to be just tepmorary.

There is a clamor to extend preservation efforts into areas dominated by such homes in efforts to revitalize more and more neighborhoods. I admire the efforts of well-intentioned groups to become more inclusive and expansive. The fact must be acknowledged that a large percentage of these homes are not worth the cost of rehabbing at all.

Seems to me that establishing a list of criteria and a prioriy schedule are absolutely necessary right now. The resources of the people in Buffalo are very limited.