Buffalo Rising Online

I have been in some of the telescoping houses when I was a kid. They were functional, but indeed had few amenities. I noticed the lack of simple things other typical Buffalo homes had like woodwork. And, the floorplans were, to be kind, interesting. The features that surprised me most were the lack of doors to rooms and closets. Just drapes. It's not that I hadn't seen this before around older homes upstate, but there was a preponderance in this area. But, there was once a lot of people there! How can they compete with other areas of the city where you can by well built houses for a song at auction in neighborhoods with potential? Buffalo has its stereotypes. Here's one I have heard many times but not seen reported here. People have asked me, "Isn't that the city where you have bedrooms off the kitchen." Seen lots of that, too

But think again. What monuments to independence and hope these structures were to people to the poor ethnic peoples to whom this was the American Dream. Jobs in the stockyards or at the railroads or the slaughter houses. They lived in commuities of like people who could bask in their native cultures. Families stayed together as they grew by extending their homes. to accomodate the generations. They built fine churches as symbols to their gods. There were good things going on here in tight neighborhoods. It was indeed a very good thing. The decades and changing opportunities brought changing times, the changing times led to others. They left for bigger and better futures elsewhere. That immigant age had passed. We now see the remains. Too bad, but truly America. Indeed it did.

I agree with RD666, it isn't the pure thought of demolition that bothers me about Lord Byron's 5 in 5 plan. But the lack of forethought to the end product. Are these demolitions a part of a larger revitalization plan? Or scattershot around the city. The end product of the latter is nothing more than more of the same blight, weeds and problems we have had for 30 years.

Where the goal, where is the vision, where is the leadership in this plan? Demolishing 5000 homes shouldn't be the goal. The goal should be stabilizing neighborhood A.. Providing greenspace for neighborhood B. Adding Greenspace for a school, church, community gathering space etc etc. There are a lot of reasons to bring down one of these older less viable homes. But without adding value to the city or our quality of life more vacant weeded lots on the tax payers dollars, to be maintained a nonfunctional land by the tax payer isn't leadership.

WCP,

The West Side was also written off. It's easy to look at the resurgence now and suggest that it was always going to happen but I can tell you that it wasn't so. Even 5 years ago it was as written off as the East Side. We had 100 time multiples in housing prices from Richmond Avenue to Essex (only one block away on Essex you could buy a house for $2,000), 12 vacant houses on 3 blocks of Chenango 2 blocks away, and the worst crime west of Richmond on 19th street only three blocks away. Property values were plummeting for decades, vacancies were increasing, crime was increasing, and homeownership was plummeting.

We put a plan together and stuck to it. A plan that we took responsibility for rather than one that "the City" or someone else would be expected to deliver. We stopped waiting, and pointing out what was wrong, and started doing.

The West Side benefits from proximity to the Elmwood Village to the East, but so does the East Side directly west of Main. Much of the East Side can start coming back too, certainly the Near East Side. We need to stop looking at the East Side as one big overwhelming neighborhood - it's made up of dozens of neighborhoods many of which are not only viable but stable. Hamlin Park is amazing, the area around Artspace is impressive, and the Fruit Belt is benefiting from the Medical Campus and collaborations with Allentown.

We need to stop building new neighborhoods on the East Side that are sucking residents out of more stable neighborhoods like Hamlin Park. We need to stop just knocking houses down and come up with a holistic plan that incorporates rehabs in the stronger neighborhoods (there will certainly be some significant right sizing that needs to take place - BluePrint Buffalo is an excellent starting point). And we need to develop neighborhood-based plans that attract private investment into the neighborhoods between Main and Jefferson. Focusing resources block by block works as long as you have an area of strength to pull from. The housing stock on the Near East Side blows away anything we have to offer in the WSCC area.

If the East Side is being written off then we are the ones who are doing it. Some strong new leaders and initiatives are starting to pop up on the East Side. I'm hopeful that they will work together and create a plan they can take responsibility for.

Harvey

Possibly, there is a plan for the 5 in 5 demo plan. Focusing in on certain roads and rebuliding the community could work, but not all the home on the street are vacant - although they may be in the future.

"We need to stop looking at the East Side as one big overwhelming neighborhood - it's made up of dozens of neighborhoods many of which are not only viable but stable."

Best thing I have read on BRO in a while. I grew up in one of those pockets of stability on the East Side. It isn't so hard to fathom good working people who are tired of the same problems as those on the West Side or the Elmwood village. The residents in many of these neighborhoods want the same thing as people in the EV want. Stability, safety and a job. Unfortunately the media doesn't like that story, so often the East Side is lumped together as some sort of war zone were death, rapes and pillaging run more rampant than Dafur. There are obviously problems, and LOTS of them. But the whole of the east side are not the same.

Drive down East Morris, Victoria, Fernhill, Durham or many others are you would probably be surprised. Sure there are probably some vacant homes, poverty and the like but no different than some of the less fortunate streets in EV or west of RIchmond.

What heather_b envisions could happen in the long term, but so far I haven't heard the mayor or any officials here propose land banking. Perhaps even if they don't want to say it, there will be de facto land banking as a result of nobody wanting to do anything on the land in near and medium term time frames. Harvey makes a great point that different parts of the East Side have differing realistic potentials. Although there's just nowhere near enough population to make the same use of it as in the 1950s, some areas of it can still be saved. That of course in no way detracts from the real need for the 5 in 5 demo program.

How 'bout 10 in 5? "Urban priarries" are safer than vacant decrepit buildings. Eventually the land can be reused.

Thank you for this post, this is an important topic. Too often we ignore the problems of poverty and vacancy in Buffalo. There are a lot of great things going on in the city, but until we deal with poverty, hopelessness, and the crime that comes with it, the rest of the city will not be able to fulfill or maintain its renaissance.

We are getting ahead of ourselves by jacking up prices in the Elmwood Village without following a comprehensive plan for the East and West Side. Lots of community groups are doing their part, but if the city is about to spend $100 million ( mostly state funded ) on this demolition plan, they should do it in a coordinated fashion that supports the work that community groups have already begun.

I looked into Brown's "5 in 5" Demolition plan Follow that link it should help reduce speculation and answer a few questions about who is paying for it etc. I found out that the plan is being overseen by a newly appointed Deputy Commissioner for Economic Development, Permit and Inspection Services, named James Comerford.

I find it interesting that the Office of Strategic Planning has nothing to do with this project. This leads me to believe that the condition of the property will be the only factor used to determine weather or not they will be demolished.

I agree that a lot of homes need to be taken down to deal with the oversupply of housing, and quality of live issues associated with vacancy, but you need to look beyond the house and see the cumulative effect on the neighborhood. The East Side is Not a massive war zone of blight, there are communities and neighbors working to improve their little corner of the city.

If you knock down a house on one block it might turn into a field of weeds and garbage, on another block the neighbors will mow the grass, plant gardens and use it as an asset.

With a project of this magnitude you should use the strategic plans that have already been drafted and the community groups that are already at work, to maximize the positive effects on the neighborhood.

pegger > I have been in some of the telescoping houses when I was a kid. They were functional, but indeed had few amenities. I noticed the lack of simple things other typical Buffalo homes had like woodwork. And, the floorplans were, to be kind, interesting. The features that surprised me most were the lack of doors to rooms and closets. Just drapes. ... People have asked me, "Isn't that the city where you have bedrooms off the kitchen." Seen lots of that, too

Glad to see I'm not the only one who has noticed that, and written about it too. Buffalo's telescoping houses are notorious for their awkward floor plans; bedrooms or the main bathroom off the kitchen, bedrooms off of other bedrooms, no closets, basements only accessible from the exterior, and so on. There is no delineation of public and private space in most telescoping houses. HVAC is primitive; often just a single large vent in the living room or dining room for the entire house. Some are heated with a single large space heater in the living room. Electrical systems are equally primitive; low-amperage service with pull-chain lighting and a single ungrounded outlet in each room is often the norm. Sure, the builders (who were often the first occupants) used "real" two-by-fours, but building codes were nonexistent at the time they were built, tolerances were loose, and many corners were cut. The meme that such houses were "lovingly crafted by extremely skilled immigrant carpenters who honed their art on the great cathedrals of Europe" is largely a myth.

Some preservation advocates have said these homes are worth saving as examples of Buffalo's working-class heritage; they're the modal house of the East Side, much like two-flats are for North Buffalo. Still, the money it would take to upgrade a telescoping house to modern standards -- pretty much a full gutting -- would pay for a nice house in a far more stable neighborhood, or renovations to several more serviceable houses in neighborhoods like Riverside and Kensington. Besides, the result is still a telescoping house on the urban prairie of Buffalo's East Side. Renovation might be worth it if the area was a prospering district, but let's face it, the East Side is far from that. With housing extremely affordable throughout the region, even in Buffalo's most desirable neighborhoods and suburbs, gentrification on the East Side isn't coming anytime soon.

The only problem wiz is that city hall isn't focused on demolishing the right kind of buildings. But are looking for everything and anything to get their hands on to say "they did something" to better the city.

sbrof - I don't mean this as an attack of your opinion, but can you back up this charge with substance?

...The only problem wiz is that city hall isn't focused on demolishing the right kind of buildings. ...

There's no such thing as perfection in choosing exactly which houses to demo. Reasonable people would make different different choices, and it will always be possible to second guess. If you were the person choosing the houses, no doubt others would find fault with your choices too. According to the city's web site these are four priorities in that decision process.

From: http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/files/1_2_1/PolicyBriefs/5in5_DemoBrief.pdf

Buffalo Demolition Priorities

4) Economic Development/ Urban Renewal Projects

What would you change in the above priorities? Or do you agree with those but have evidence they aren't being followed to a reasonable degree in practice?

That link above is a 4-page discussion of the city's plan. Another thing I noticed in that is this, which makes the 5-in-5 plan sound even more modest than I'd thought previously:

...According to the 2000 Census, Buffalo has an estimated 15% vacancy rate, with an estimated 10,000 vacant residential structures. ...Buffalo’s Comprehensive Plan sets a goal of annually demolishing 1,000 units, or approximately 500 "vacant, dilapidated, or un-repairable” residential structures. Achieving the 5% vacancy rate goal set in this plan would take well over 10 years to accomplish. ...

I had thought the 5-in-5 goal was 1000 vacant houses/year, but that says 1000 units/year which is 500 houses/year. Hard to argue that's too much. Based on intermediate Census estimates since 2000 and real world evidence we can see, the city's population shrinkage has continued at a fast rate since 2000 - so the 2010 official count will likely show an even higher vacancy rate than the 15% reported in 2000.

Wiz,

I'm not saying that we don't have a lot of houses that will need to come down - I'm just saying that we need more of a plan than 5 in 5. Everyone should be able to agree that we haven't saved the East Side through demo yet - and we wont. Everyone told me that I was too optimistic about the West Side 5 years ago too.

Optimism and pessimism are both self fulfilling prophesies.

Harvey

Harvey - Previously you commented on BR something along the lines of saying for your work in your chunk of the WS you aren't looking for additional govt help for rehabs, that your private group was far better than a central planning approach, and they cooperated with you well about demos when necessary. I hope that paraphrase doesn't overstate what you said.

But it sounds like now you think more govt planning and/or helping is needed? Or by "more of a plan" are you not referring to City Hall? Have you suggested anything that you want the city to do for the ES or WS and they've refused? Just curious.

Atwater,

On the West Side we have our own plan and it's working for us. We asked Tobe to remove several properties from the list he submitted to the state for the 5 in 5 funding and he did it. This is possible because we have plans for the properties - they won't sit vacant for long. So very little of the 5 in 5 demos will be taking place on the West Side of Buffalo.

My suggestion that we need some rehab planning in addition to the 5 in 5 plan has primarily to do with the East Side where I don't really see any plan and I'm concerned that demo alone will harm some neighborhoods where rehab or even mothballing would have been more productive. There are definitely neighborhoods on the East Side where we need to remove whole blocks - they are just too far gone. But there are other neighborhoods on the East Side (some near East Side - some in other areas) where rehabs would help to break the disinvestment cycle as they have on the West Side.

Indiscriminate wholesale demo is not a path to bringing back the East Side - and a healthy East Side benefits the whole City. I'd love to see some leadership pop up in the near East Side neighborhoods (and other strong areas of the East Side) that would stem the tide of vacancies by rehabbing the existing vacant properties and putting homeowners in them. Until that happens I'd like to see City Hall embrace a rehab and mothballing program for the stronger neighborhoods while developing a right-sizing plan for the weaker ones that will never come back. As I mentioned before - we also need to stop all the crazy new builds until we have our vacancy problems under control.

Harvey

Interesting and apt discussion. Speaking of East Side leadership, and stemming the tide of demolitions, check out the good news about the Woodlawn Row Houses, posted on Fix Buffalo this evening: http://fixbuffalo.blogspot.com/2008/03/four-years-lateranother-save.html

Harvey - Thanks for clarification. I agree with you the mayor's projects for subsidized new builds sound crazy. As 5-in-5 proceeds, I'd hope Tobe and Comerford would welcome (even seek out) feedback from insightful people such as you, FixBuffalo, Michelle J, etc. to help them distinguish which blocks should be considered chaff vs potential future wheat. If they'll really be doing around 500 actual houses/year out of 10,000 vacant houses, 5%/year, there should be plenty of opportunity to do things smartly.

Atwater,

"As 5-in-5 proceeds, I'd hope Tobe and Comerford would welcome (even seek out) feedback from insightful people such as you, FixBuffalo, Michelle J, etc. to help them distinguish which blocks should be considered chaff vs potential future wheat."

Michele is keeping an eye on things (demo-wise) in housing court and we're all looking at the historic resource survey for Broadway Fillmore as our guide on what should possibly be saved. You can see the survey at www.broadwayfillmorealive.com on the left sidebar. You will also see the East Buffalo Good Neighbor's Planning Alliance plan on our site as well.

mmiller - Good to hear that there's at least some proactive coordinating going on. Seems to me especially if the city will be doing 500 houses/year (1000 units/year) then there's no reason 500 good decisions (or at least not awful decisions) out of the 10,000 and growing vacant houses shouldn't be very doable. Inevitably a few will be questionable but not many should be. Sometimes when I read vague complaints that 'city hall isn't focused on demolishing the right kind of buildings' as sbrof said it makes me wonder if the city is really doing this very wrong, or if it's a case of the city being guilty-til-proven-innocent with some who deep down inside feel bad about supporting any demo plan. That's why I asked for clarifications. Harvey's reply makes sense and probably sbrof didn't notice my question. He usually answers. Anyhow I was just curious.

Atwater, yes, thanks to Harvey and Michele being in housing court, we are able to at least intercept some demo information, research the list as compared to the historic resource survey and try to inform the Preservation Board. In fact, we just found out about a few homes in BF that were on the list yesterday.

Michele also has a great partnership with the building inspector in the area and he carries the survey with him. Nobody knows the buildings and their conditions better than he does. He often risks injury by going into these vacant buildings.

All of that being said, a lot of these old houses (as historic as they may be) MUST come down, as they pose serious safety issues to the neighborhood. It's our goal to try to save the ones we can.