East Side Neighborhood Parks?
One big disappointment I have with Buffalo is the seeming continued lack of any new thinking with regard to renewal of the devastated East Side. The city, along with the metropolitan area as a whole treats this area as a hopeless place that is not worth the effort. The unspoken thinking is that as long as the problem stays east of Main we can pretend that it does not exist and that it does not affect us. In fact there is not one person in WNY that does not pay a price for the massive disinvestment in Buffalo's core over the past 50 years. The East Side concentration of poverty and social breakdown creates an atmosphere that perpetuates generation after generation unable to function at an acceptable level in society. The crime and destructive trends that result spur costly outward growth as people try to move away from its effects. The city is left to struggle with abandonment and loss of valuable historic infrastructure. The devastation left in the city becomes the image of WNY to outsiders, further harming WNY's delicate economy. Time will show that neither Main Street or the city's boarders will contain the problem for long.
What will it take to repopulate this large and important part of the city? How can WNY attract growth back to its center instead of the continued trend toward wasteful sprawl that everyone pays for? How will a poor city bring back the people of means who have the ability to help pay for the programs needed to alleviate the social burden of poverty now being carried by the few?
The current plan, if it can be called a plan, is to allow buildings to rot to the point where demolition is the only option left. Empty lots are sometimes replaced by cheaply built houses set in sterile and uninspired streetscapes. The remaining empty rotting buildings spread the disease of neighborhood decimation, while absentee owners face no penalty. Beautiful and densely built East Side neighborhoods such as Hamlin Park have largely escaped the destruction, but surrounding neighborhoods need help.
Solutions must be multi-faceted and will certainly take much hard effort and money. No one person, event, or project will make the difference. But, we must start someplace with ideas that are fresh and bold. Being an architect, I tend to think architecturally in terms of how the East side could be renewed. An Idea I have long had is to take advantage of one byproduct of disinvestment ... "empty land". Cities thrive on density. The close proximity of many people and the architectural spaces created by dense walls of buildings make for exciting urban environments. Without density cities die. The East Side is a drastic example of this. The images shown here show a contrast between what is and what could be on a typical devastated East Side block.
My idea is to take this pig’s ear of empty space on the East Side and make it into a silk purse. Some of the city's most attractive streets are composed of small tree packed parks surrounded by dense rows of beautiful houses. Johnson Park, Days Park, and Arlington Park have some of the highest property values in the city even though they are all directly adjacent to impoverished neighborhoods. The reason these streets are successful is because they have leveraged the power of great architecture and a beautiful park setting. These same characteristics can be created all over the East Side by concentrating buildings and freeing up vacant land for strategically placed new mini parks. Move and renovate valuable salvageable buildings. Concentrate them in dense rows around these new parks. And then infill with quality new buildings. Create new neighborhoods with unique identities. ‘Re-densify’ the streets while taking advantage of the vast amount of land freed up by the city's destruction. Don't destroy valuable historic buildings. Bring them together and create critical mass. Sure, this idea would be expensive and would take a lot of work but the results would be light years more valuable than anything being done today.
What Others Have To Say
What Do You Think?
Related Articles
-
The Wait is Almost Over - BR's New Site
As we mentioned in our previous post, we’re in the process of changing the Buffalo Rising site. We’re almost there as we expect to launch the new site on Friday, December 19th.
In the meantime, posting will be light as we log new stories in the new publishing system which will only be viewable when we launch on Friday.
As always, we appreciate our users’ patience as we make this transition but we promise it will be well worth it. With faster load times, a comment view … - Dec 18th 2008, 11:32am
- Continue Reading
- 5 Comments
-
A Kennedy Visits Buffalo
Caroline Kennedy was in town for a visit with our mayor yesterday. A possible choice to succeed US Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Kennedy's name has been mentioned along with that of Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (son of former New York Governor Mario Cuomo) and our own Byron Brown, among others.
Certainly, Kennedy has "been around politics" all of her life, which is to say she was born into a family of politicos and lived in the White House--neither of which would necessarily f … - Dec 18th 2008, 7:55am
- Continue Reading
- 32 Comments
-
Downtown Free Fare Zone May be Axed
Free light rail rides on downtown's above ground section could be derailed thanks to the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority's budget mess. That is the news coming out of a Buffalo Place meeting this morning. Facing a budget shortfall and reduced State operating assistance, the NFTA is scrambling for new revenue sources and is contemplating charging for rides along the lengthy downtown pedestrian mall.- Dec 17th 2008, 4:40pm
- Continue Reading
- 48 Comments
-
The NFTA Santa Ride
Well it is Christmas time in the city and the NFTA helped put people and especially children into the mood in a very festive and fun way. One of my favorite memories of childhood was taking the train downtown with my grandfather. I would gaze out the windows and watch the tunnel speed by. It always felt like we were going a million miles an hour.
Then there was the ability to stand up and walk around during the ride without the need to be strapped down. It was always a fun time … - Dec 17th 2008, 4:34pm
- Continue Reading
- Join the conversation
Comment Options
Einstein
Thank you for reiterating the obvious in your article.
I would love to see more parks; however these will ultimately take properties that, if the city did their job, would generate tax revenue for the city out of the mix. Instead of generating tax revenue, they would become another cost center for the city, who will ultimately be responsible for insurance and maintenance of these parks.
We have more than enough empty parks in Buffalo, a few more for the sake of urban aesthetics and the creation of a less 'urban' look just doesn't make sense. If you haven't noticed the trend in the past 20 years is for parents to bring their children to very structured and secure play groups and areas where they are supervised. Kids typically do not play in parks, unsupervised, as children; so the parks become a hang-out for teenagers and older children.
Good architecturally oriented idea, but not exactly sound from a societal perspective.
Report this
sbrof
I think the idea has merits because these types of places are "defensible.". They are places where people take certain ownership of the park itself and while to some degree the city will need to do large maintenance (cutting grass) residents can be given the responsibility for care. The George Washington park which was created / extended along Niagara street in Riverside if largely maintained by residences with the city cleaning only a couple times a year and using their large machinery to cut it. But the trash / the flower beds are the responsibility of the residents of Niagara street. That assumes the people living around the edge this created park care and the space isn't too big. Arlington Park, Days Park etc all work because they are small spaces.
The value of these places for people and taxes would be worth testing. You might loose some properties (that probably are not paying much if anything is taxes anyhow) and create a place where property values could increase. I don't think Steel is talking about creating new large open spaces but more of a reorganization of current empty space into something that does add value to the neighborhood instead of detracting value.
Report this
chris69
There is really only one way to save the eastside and the answer is in places like Amherst, Clarence, Lancaster, Hamburg, etc.
Buffalo, specifically the eastside and the southside, need to have office and light industrial parks built but instead of parklike settings they need to be within city blocks like Buffalo Forge encompassed an entire city block.
The second step is to look at local eastside and southside landmarks as ANCHORS for development....then expand that development until each of the so called ANCHOR DISTRICTS connect.
However, what I see from our city is more suburban and exurban office park being incorporated into our urban grid which isnt going to work...or create the job density that our city and its neighborhoods need.
The city needs to pool together all its BMHA, Urban renewal, brownfield, etc from state and federal and even county and city....to bring employment back to the city neighborhoods.
Until this happens....there is little hope for any of Buffalo's neighborhoods.
Report this
becker
The only thing that the city needs from the suburbs is their snobby residents. They can keep their uninspiring cookie cutter homes and their sprawling sterile office parks. The city is URBAN, it is full of HISTORY and CHARACTER. We aren't looking for a centre-pointe style development in East Buffalo, and we aren't looking for vinyl sided mcmansions or faux victorians. We should concentrate on selling what we already have and convincing the suburban losers that the city is the place to live. We should also focus on keeping the good jobs that are already in Buffalo here, instead of sending them to India and China, or North Carolina and Arizona. Our mayors have done nothing to stop the flow of good paying jobs from leaving Buffalo. It won't be too long until American Axle loses their next contract to one of the antilabor states like Virginia or North Carolina. It won't be long until every decent paying job that hard working Americans fought for is moved out of this town. Until the mayor or county executive steps in to prevent jobs, there is little hope for reviving our neighborhoods.
Report this
MRodgers
Steel, unfortunately, one of the biggest issues I see is that the city has a 10 year plan for the demolitions already listed on the books. Ten years...this is unbelieveable. In 10 years, sure, we might be able to demo the properties that have decayed too long to save, but what happens to the surrounding property values, the neighborhoods, the crime, the spirit that may be left? We'll only have more properties to demo, and how many more "10 Years" will that take? It's like the old proverb - "As a dog returns to its vomit." Not a pretty saying, but very true.
Our plan for redevelopment needs an overhaul. We have to start with creating solutions from the ground up to assure, while we are waiting for the silver bullets to be expended from the muzzle, we prevent any further decay. Chris69 has some great ideas there, but we also have to redevelop and maintain what we have already and create the partnerships with those in power to assure we have the support to realize success.
Johnson Park is not on the top of the heap when it comes to property values, but it is far better off than 13 years ago when I first bought here. That is due to a group of citizens who have created partnerships within city and county government. These partnerships are solution-based rather than complaint-based.
The park, itself, had been neglected for many years. Now, every year the neighbors perform the clean ups each spring and fall. We plant the flowers and create the gardens, we watch over the green space to assure it is not being brutalized like it has been.
The county is the maintenance for the grass mowing and I had to fight them, utilizing the media last year around Memorial Day, when the grass was knee-high. It wasn't until Mike Igoe of Channel 2 contacted Andy Sedita that we finally got the cut AFTER Memorial Day.
This is unfair to the many lower-income families who utilize this green space that was created for this very reason by our first mayor, Ebenezer Johnson. Small pocket parks are essential to the seeding of quality of life in surrounding neighborhoods, but throughout the city, they are neglected. They can be the place for kids to play, we have seen it here. Youngsters running around and playing hide and seek, teens with skateboards and hackey-sacks, young couples sitting and reading a book, oldsters just walking through, families having picnics. Many of our city kids need green space as their families do not have the means to get them to a larger park as public transportation doesn't go as far as many of them. But, they must be maintained, and a plan must be devised so that maintenance, even if performed by neighbors, doesn't get dumped due to an aging population or frustration from services not being delivered by the city or county to just mow the darn grass.
The planning process of rebuilding a neighborhood has fallen into the hands of the citizens who can truly create that pact with their government leaders. Unless this collaboration is taken seriously and worked out as a plan, we will only go back to where we came from.
Report this
The_other_mike
Based on the photos above, are you proposing that we relocate these houses to create parks?
Report this
david
Relocating existing houses is one option. Buy-outs are another.
I encourage everyone to become familiar with Blue Print Buffalo - an amazing action plan and policy brief that was unveiled last November. Major think piece about land use, abandonment and vacancy issues that the good folks at LISC - Buffalo and the National Vacant Properties Campaign researched and wrote. Here's the post and links to both the action plan and policy brief - Getting Smarter about Decline...
Not every building can or should be saved. Agree with those who advocate for a comprehensive and strategic approach to land use on the ever expanding "urban prairie"...certainly a component of new plan will include urban homesteading - something that I'm openly advocating here on the City's near East side with respect to certain City owned residential property.
An emerging success story - - Queen City Farm - that you'll here more about in the next few weeks and months.
Report this
bornandraised
I think to revitalize the east side there needs to be an overall plan and not the dribs and drabs of rehab that is going on. I believe the plan should include taking 2-3 empty city lots to combine into the size of a typical suburban size lot to attract people from the suburbs to live closer to where they work in the city. These larger lots can then be used to build $300,000-400,000 homes like you have in Clarence and Orchard Park. Many people live in the suburbs, including self, because you cannot by new, larger, more upscale houses in the city. I think the 1st neighborhood near downtown that has the largest number of empty, abandoned houses should be used to build the 1st suburban scape neighborhood and the move out towards the far east city line rebuilding in the same manner as you go. The streets that have 2-3 viable houses on them, can be bought out and level the entire neighborhood to start fresh. The infrastructure of the streets (water, electric) can be salvage during the rebuilding. The main streets such as Broadway, Sycamore, Walden, Genesee would still be used for shops and stores for the new residence to patronize. A 'buffer' of several neighborhoods would need to be established to keep the new neighborhoods from the old until the redevelopment gets to Bailey. East of Bailey, a good portion of the house could still be saved and rehabbed.
Another thought would be to start one of these new neighborhoods as a gated community should clearing out the 'bad' neighborhoods not be able to be done all as part of one master plan.
To stop the sprawl out to the farther and farther suburbs the region has to rebuild its housing starting at the core of the city and moving outwards as it did 100 year ago.
Report this
david
bornandaraised...
Larger and more upscale? Huh?....There are hundreds of existing homes - albeit some in rough condition - that have detail and features that exist in East Amherst and Clarence as dim reflections...
We already have suburban style streetscapes...very close to downtown. Drive along William or Genesee - soon 26 more houses will be photo-shopped into the urban landscape with double garages in the 500 block of Broadway, site of the former Buffalo Forge.
You can't be serious about placing additional residential developments along major commercial strips...and, why do we need more houses if the population is shrinking? That's just another version of musical chairs. There's already a clear connection between new builds - aka, "vinyl victorians" and the hollowing out of existing neighborhoods like Hamlin Park...
Report this
bornandraised
David - I should have made it more clear. New houses will continue to be built regardless. I am suggesting that instead of building them out farther into Elma, Clarence, Alden, etc. where neighbors don't really want more sprawl next to them, that we should try to get new houses built withing the city limits and stop the building going out to the outer rural/suburban rings. The population may be shrinking, but whatever population we have should be centered closer to the city center.
Report this
MRodgers
One thing I don't understand, and I hope someone can provide clarification, is that there is a need for affordable housing for low- to middle income families in our city. How could we possibly perform this need by adding triple sized lots with $300-400K homes on them? We also need to assure that gentrification does not equate to social gentrification.
Report this
MRodgers
Sorry, just needed to get this out and I apologize, in advance, for using this forum.
For everyone coming downtown to attend the St. Patrick's Day Parade tomorrow:
Eventhough Johnson Park has experienced extreme turf damage due to the heavy machinery used for the clean-up of the October Storm and it looks like hell, PLEASE do not park your vehicles on the green space. Fortunately, we have a crew from WNY AmeriCorps that will be working to bring it back this spring, but added damage will add to their labors. One year we had 37 vehicles parked on the Green and the resulting ruts were four to six inches deep. The neighbors had to repair it then and it's a bear of a project. We'd hate to see this great group have to perform extra duty due to other's needs for parking spaces.
Thanks for your patience with this comment and for your consideration.
Report this
chris69
why is there such a brief pause whenever opening a post to comment?
anyway....parks...parks and more friggin parks....what drug are all you people on....Buffalo needs jobs and people, employers and property owners....
you people are living in a fantasy world...without employment all these homes will be demolished....and the eastside wont be a park...it will be an urban prairie
Report this
StreetcarSuburbanite
Marilyn, have you ever opened the real estate page in the newspaper?? One problem that Buffalo certainly does NOT have, is a lack of affordable housing.
Report this
StreetcarSuburbanite
Steel, you're ideas are all theory yet no context.
These devastated neighborhoods will not gain new people as long as there is no jobs and population growth in this region. The majority of people in this region will not give a shit about the city's worst neighborhoods until desirable parts of the city start becoming vastly unaffordable. This is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
The best thing we can do with these spotty, urban prairie ghetto areas right now it to strategically clear them though attrition by demolition. Then landbank the worst blocks for sensible uses like urban farms and forests. The city has enough parks right now. Creating small parks in these areas (which is also more space that tax dollar will have to maintain) will just make new drug/malignant behavior havens for the dysfunctional inhabitants.
Unfortunately all the urban planning theories you blindly subscribe to are all contingent upon growth. Buffalo is not growing, we need a different approach. It's called Smart Decline.
Report this
david
Street Car...
I think you are on to something - Buffalo is not growing. We are shrinking...big time! Geographically the East side is the largest part of our City. It's being "hollowed out" at an increasingly faster rate...more abandonment and vacancy in this month than in February - really. Tours available...just let me know!
Report this
MRodgers
Streetcar: My comment was in response to a sugestion that we build $300-400K homes on the East Side where there is an inordinately high rate of unemployment and low-income families. Chris69 is right - we need more jobs and not just the ones that pay minimum wage. Also, where is BERC here? How diligent are they in creating an outreach rahter than waiting for folks to knw how to navigate their system to obtain additional education and employment? Just as an example, (although not an issue on the East Side as much as the West Side) they just recently obtained a bi-lingual, bi-cultural staff member, but none of their materials are written in Spanish to assure they can reach out to this ever-growing and highest growing population to assure ESL and other courses are "on-the-ready."
By taking a concept of building $300-400K homes in an area that needs education and job-development, we assuredly would kick out those who have called the East Side their home for decades. The plan needs to redevelop with education, job-training, job-development, and a mixture of affordable and higher valued properties to truly create a sustainable community.
However, East Siders and East Side promoters need to connect with the Matt Urban Center to see the plans for their housing development on the East Side. These are solid plans, although I have concerns as to the materials that will be used (vynil vs. brick, etc.)
Report this
Medina_Sandstone
It is striking that the only response that many of us have with when it comes to vacant land is to parkify it. Reread your Jane Jacobs, everyone, parks often cause more problems than they solve. If Elmwood, the most affluent neighborhood in town, could have drinking, drugging, and worse at the former Tot Lot (now Globe Market), what hope is there for parks in more distressed neighborhoods? We are all prisoners of Olmsted in this regard; so in awe of his accomplishments that we think parks will cure all urban ills. They do not and can not.
The better solution, as offered by David, is to put that land back into productive use. City Hall and our associated development agencies should consider urban farming & horticulture a viable and desirable form of economic development. Imagine being able to grow annuals for your neighbors' gardens during the day and hop the subway down to a game at night. Farming means jobs, tax revenue, and land put back into use. The East Side desperately needs all of these.
Report this
platt4
I thought the way towards revitalization was densificiation? Now its farming within walking distance to light rail stations? Somehow I don't see the urban gardeners hopping on the train to a sporting event. Delusional planners.
Report this
Medina_Sandstone
Delusional? Hardly. It's already happening, Platt4.
Check out David's comment above for a link to the urban farm that is being established within walking distance of the Utica station. Since we no longer have enough population to support the density we once enjoyed--or we would't be having this conversation about what to do about abandoned land (DUH!!!)--farming is a far superior land use than parks.
Some parks are works of art but many are just plots of land on welfare.
Report this
bornandraised
Does anyone know, what agency/government arm is currently in charge of the type of development/reuse that is being discussed in this thread. I am sure there must be several - all of which who don't have a plan. I'd like to contact them to see what their plans are or how people people like us can get involved to guide them to take some action.
Report this
Medina_Sandstone
At the risk of being a blog-hog, the reason that so many new parks are problems rather than amenities is that we insist on turning the least desirable land into parks instead of the most desirable. This is understandable; it's a strategy to turn lemons into lemonade, but it usually fails. If the location cannot attract residences, commerce, or industry, it will probably be a lousy park, too.
When a city hired Olmsted, they showed him the most desirable parcels, not the crummy, unwanted leftovers.
So I fully agree with Steel's opening sentence: "One big disappointment I have with Buffalo is the seeming continued lack of any new thinking with regard to renewal of the devastated East Side." Urban farming is new thinking. Parks are OLD thinking.
Report this
becker
Is it April 1st already? The same people who complain about suburbanizing the urban core, landbanking, and creating shovel-ready development sites, are supporting the removal of additional housing to create "urban farms". Seriously? Are you just screwing with people to see how much of your kool-aide they will drink? How about that great post about Buffalo needing more afforable housing for the poor. What would make you happy, giving away new houses to the poor? At least Habit for Humanity holds new homeowners somewhat accountable for their actions. Under your proposal we will just create a welfare district in the city to maintain or advance the cycle of corruption and sloth that permeates the East Side today. Your claim that we need more affordable housing for the poor is beyond liberal hooee, it is so ludacris that even Hillary would chuckle at the thought.
We do not need urban farms or more community run parks with painted tires and cheesy picket fences. We need a comprehensive plan to revitalize the East SIde. The Blue Print Buffalo plan is as hollow as the promises from our elected leaders. It is a bunch of politically correct crap that does little to address the true underlying issues on the East Side. What will ceding property to neighboring homeowners and removal of derelict properties truly do for East Buffalo. It is as single sided and day-dreamy as the few community activists and local gadflys who choose to live in East Buffalo. There is a reason that it is the slums, but no one wants to talk about it here. Instead we blame the schools and police, we point the finger at companies that shut their doors 30 years ago, and we blame the suburbs. The truth is that except for the aforementioned gadflys and activists, the majority of residents would get the hell out of the East Side if they could find a buyer for their properties, or put together enough cash to move to University Heights, Parkside, or to a generally nicer area. Maybe this is where we need the more afforable houses to further the blight and devastation fo the East Side.
This thread just perpetuates my belief that the East Side will be the last area in Buffalo to improve. It will be the dumping ground for poor and undesirable residents as the other areas improve.
Report this
STEEL
It seems very few of you have read the piece that I wrote and instead read only the title of the story.
There is nothing old school about making parks. PArks for the sake of open space is wrong, This idea would transform the current liability of vacant land into an asset. The idea is to create new density in the city by concentrating the land used for houses and using the left over land in a strategic way to create attractive nodes for investment. The way to rebuild the East side is to build off successful points and work outward until they join up with others. Pocket neighborhood Parks have already been proven successful in Buffalo
So far a majority of the comments have confirmed my opening statement. The people of WNY have decided that the east side is for the poor and no one else should live there and that there needs to be no infrastructure improvement. Why should the east side not have $300,000 houses? ? ? Why should all the poorest people live on the east side? ? ? Why does no one complain that there are no low income projects being built in CLarence? ? ? Most of the new jobs that everyone is talking about are going into Amherst and other outer fringe areas and no one is calling for allowing the people of the east side to live out near those jobs. Why is it that a proposal for new expensive housing (not part of my piece by the way) will always meet with howls of protect when proposed for the city but never a notice if it goes into Clarence?
Why is it that the city should absorb the majority of the area's shrinkage. Farms in the city may be an interesting stop gap experiment and will certainly help transform people's attitudes about the east side. But great cities are bursting with activity and people, not farms. We can not continue to promote sprawl at the expense of the city. It is not good for WNY and it is certainly not good for our country in the long run.
Funny how lower and mixed income is always hailed as what the city should do but never what the suburbs should do.
Invest in the city and stop the suburban sprawl waste! ! ! !
finally.Jane Jacobs would certainly have approved of a park such as this you have taken her comments about parks out of context.
Report this
Fudgeworth
STEEL WROTE: [Why should the east side not have $300,000 houses? ? ? Why should all the poorest people live on the east side? ? ?]
Do a query on buffaloniagarahomes.com for houses on the east side. They range from $2,900 to $90,000. The east side won't have $300K houses because it would be foolish for someone to build one there. Sure someone could build one but their resale value would be terrible.
The poorest people live on the east side because that's where the cheapest houses are, simple logic.
I'm sick of people who think everyone DESERVES a nice house, a good paying job, and unlimited healthcare. Face it, some people are poor because they are lazy. The current condition of the east side should be a motivator for the children who live there to study hard, not get pregnant at an early age, and then one day they'll be able to move out of there.
Report this
Meghan
STEEL: Your article and comments are astute; however I do take exception to your over-generalization and mis-characterization of Amherst and Clarence. I have worked in Clarence for 11 years and can tell you first hand that this is an economically diverse area. I encourage you to take a drive through Clarence some day, you will notice a vast array of housing options, ranging from rooming houses, to weekly rent apartments, to trailers, to small single-family homes and duplexes, to some of the largest and most expensive houses in Upstate New York. There is economic diversity in Clarence and Amherst, probably to a greater extent than in the city because the extremes are further apart, so comparing the richest to the poorest highlights just how dramatic the difference can be. Now try putting children from those extremes into the same classroom, it is an interesting mix to say the least.
You characterize the suburbs as "WASTE", to that I tell you that you are more of a closed-minded snob than any of the residents in Clarence could ever dream of being. At least they bother to open their minds, hearts and wallets to the various causes in the city, while you have written off the suburbs.
It sounds to me like you have an inferiority complex with the suburbs, they have what you want and hope for. Maybe if you spent time learning more about what the suburbs have done right, instead of dwelling on dead architects and overplayed ideas, then you might actually see the error in your thinking.
Until you realize this, I am sure that we will continue to read your monthly installment of intellectual drivel that blames the suburbs for all that is wrong with the city.
Report this
Medina_Sandstone
Steel, in 1901 the Pan-American Exposition was built on Rumsey family FARMLAND. We had about the same population in 1900 that we did in 2000. In addition to manufacturing, milling, and other commerce, the city of Buffalo in 1900 had agriculture and dairying within the city limits. The lessons are obvious.
Growing food within close reach of population centers is not second-rate land use until something better comes along, it is a simple security imperative on a planet with ever-diminishing fossil fuels for shipping your meal thousands of miles.
Report this
urbanesque
It is everyone's civic responsibility to take care of the city. The suburbs would not exist if it wasn't for a strong city center to support them, the same is still true for Buffalo.
Report this
scooter
The only solution.....
Moritorium on suburban sprawl. No new developments in 3rd & 4th ring burbs (Clarence, OP, ect) Reinvest in our communities core (Buffalo, Kenmore, WS, Lack, Cheek)
Cheektowaga is already starting to look like the east side, same with lackawana. Even property values in west seneca are suffering.
We continue to grow our community outwards.....as if our population is growing. The poeple moving into these Clarence subdivisions aren't from out side of WNY, they are from WS, Cheektowaga, east side of buffalo......
All this growth, and this new infrastructure (roads, utilities, ect) is growing ever more expensive.....it's the #1 reason why WNY is an expensive place to live (taxes)
Stop surburban sprawl.
Report this
The_other_mike
Although I agree that suburban sprawl is not a good thing, I would never agree with limiting a person's right to choose where they want to live. That is absolutely the wrong approach.
Report this
scooter
If someone wants to build there own home anywhere in WNY, thats fine, they should be allowed. When these developers get approved for these large subdivisions, who do you think pay's for the majority of the cost of the roads and utilities in these subdivisions?
Tax payers. Not just the residents in those subdivisions.
Report this
SerenityNow
Agree with need for a much smart shrinkage approach, or whatever euphemism people prefer. Landbanking, whatever.
And yes, new parks would be prohibitively expensive to maintain well (as the county govt and even the Olmstead non-profit group are discovering all too well). And small parks can result in bad side effects as other commenters have discussed.
The farming idea sounds very far fetched to me from the perspective of economic feasability.
Doesn't seem to me that there's any shortage of small farms in WNY already. All counties surrounding Erie have many small farms and based on the fact that there's fewer than there used to be it seems those have a hard time succeeding these days, even with their expertise, equipment, and very cheap undocumented immigrant labor. It's beyond me how anyone could seriously think a big number of new farms in the city could compete even with those (which in turn have a very hard time competing with larger farms). Sure I suppose a handful of small "farms", basically large gardens, could happen in Buffalo using more-or-less volunteer labor to the extent volunteers can be found (good luck!), so if that's what David and others are talking about then ok fine. But farming won't be a big part of the solution so it's probably not worth much focus. More of a distraction than it's worth.
So what exactly are we talinkg about then by smart shrinkage?
Sounds to me like it'd include clearing land on streets that become unpopulated, paying the few remaining owners to turn their property over to the city (assuming fewer than 1% of houses are worth moving), and then changing the zoning so the land stays empty indefinitely. And then doing this on strategically selected adjacent streets. Once the houses are gone, they can no longer be flipped to naive buyers, they don't need to be boarded, re-boarded, and re-re-boarded until the end of time, they can't be used as drug houses, the streets don't need to be plowed or garbage-collected, etc. Mother Nature over time will build some wilderness.
Maybe this is consistent with what Youngstown Ohio is doing? (Didn't have time to read about their approach yet.)
This kind of thing makes sense but I doubt it will happen here at least in the next few decades with our current politicians. It sounds way too smart.
Report this
Medina_Sandstone
I agree completely, it is wrong to stop anyone from living where they wish.
But as a community we can agree that we should limit the number of roads, sewer lines, water lines, electrical lines, and schools that we will extend into undeveloped land as long as existing sites with these services are underutilized.
If you want to live in a place without infrastructure, then go solar, put up a windmill, use a septic system, dig a well, home-school your kids, and so on. You'll probably have a much more satisfying life. :)
Report this
david
I encourage everyone here to read Blue Print Buffalo, links in my above comment.
In addition the National Vacant Properties Campaign (NVPC) has a regular e-newsletter - subscribe, it's free...
There's also a short resource page for additional information the NVPC has compiled - < a href = "http://www.vacantproperties.org/technical/programs/buffalo.html>right here which contains links to "best practices" today.
Rod and all the imaginative folks who are supporting Queen City Farm - website to follow soon - are stepping up and providing a creative solution to the abandonment and vacancy in this part of the City.
Report this
david
oops...here's the resource link.... right here...
Report this
SerenityNow
Relevant excerpt from National Vacant Properties Campaign (NVPC) "Buffalo blueprint" doc to which David linked is this (from their Strategy Three on pg 28):
I'm still very skeptical about green space stuff in point 2 above, and point 3 sounds too vague to make much real difference. I think the big benefit would come from reducing the size of the footprint as described in point 1, and if too much enegry and politics are focused on things like farm, parks, and "empowering" the whole thing will just get bogged down forever and decrease chances of anything ever happening. KISS Principle would be very important. Carville would say "It's the footprint, stupid."
The general public should be able to grasp that 50 years ago Buffalo had over double the population it has today. So logically to maintain same density as then, we'd need to shrink to about half the houses Buffalo had back then, half the residential blocks, etc.
Obviously that much isn't ever gonna happen no matter what, way too impractical to think about, but obviously there are thousands of houses that should come down, and if as many as possible of those can be selected in a logical way then maybe at least... hmm maybe dozens(?) of blocks in city's most declined areas could be cleared and indefinitely left empty. That would be only a small percent of the city but could have huge positive impacts in those districts vs. status quo of a very small number of occupied houses per block spread out over huge chunks of the city.
The state would obviously need to fund this big a project (billions and billions $), then afterward the city govt would save money over time by not needing to provide services to emptied areas, and people who formerly lived on those blocks could help re-densify other parts of the city. Those are main ideas right? Do any currently elected officials in Buffalo support this? (Guessing not even one.)
Report this
skeptical1
I agree with sandstone except I don't believe that people in Buffalo would allow any of the suburban developers to the type of houses that makes them money and at the rate and scale that brings them profits. We already complain about the look and feel of just about every project that has been proposed in the last few years. It is either too suburban, too big, too far from the street, too vinyl, too much parking, too close to a historic structure, or any number of other things to pass without protest or criticism. If someone builds a new house, someone will bring up the opportunities lost for the vacant properties, if it isn't architecturally magnificent, then it disrupts the look and feel of the neighborhood, etc, etc, etc. So is it really a bad thing for a developer to choose an outer ring suburb to build in if they find the inner ring 'burbs or the city prohibitive?
I read through the Blue Print plan a couple of months ago and thought that it is a great start for revitalization. Why isn't it being implemented?
Report this
skeptical1
oops, that should say "to build the type of houses"..
Report this
david
Skeptical1 and others...
I encourage you to call and connect with your Council member, County Leg. and State Ass. people to get them familiar with the language and policy suggestions contained in Blue Print Buffalo...
PUSH - Buffalo, LISC - Buffalo, myself and a few other folks are right now exploring a City wide Housing Congress for May/June where many of these issues will be discussed in a public forum - stay tuned here on BRO and Artvoice and WNYmedia for additional details.
Meanwhile if you haven't listened to the 30 minute interview Smart City host Carol Coletta had recently with 36 year old Youngstown OH Mayor Jay Williams, it'll blow you away... here's the post with a link to the Mp3...
Report this
nick
If you're looking for a revitalization strategy akin to the LISC proposal see http://www.phila.gov/nti/. Philly's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative is based on land banking, parcel assembly and public/private reinvestment. The city issued a 300 million dollar bond to acquire and demolish vacant properties, a strategy that has been successful but limited in scope. Much of the new housing has been built suburban style and lacks the urban context which makes a neighborhood truly vibrant. Although not perfect, it has created private sector housing growth within the city.
Report this
SLEEPL8
The only way that the east side will change is if the people who live there choose to make it a better place. How many people who have posted comments on this article actually live there? I dont and I never will so I can't sit here and judge those who do for what has become of their neighborhoods. It is their own doing and they choose to remain there. If change is to occur then parents and schools need to teach their children to take pride in their homes and neighborhoods and they will grow up to do so. Unfortunately lazy neglectful parents have lazy neglectful kids and the cycle continues.
Report this
Martin
SLEEPL8... you hit the nail on the head. The East side did not get the way it is on it's own. It's neglect from the residents/homeowners that have been it's downfall. Homes and streets need constant up-keep. If you do not paint, repair,sweep, weed etc, well...no pity here.
Report this
MJWorthington
It’s just not who is there. It is also who was there. We have a system where it is rewarded to build on outer green fields instead of reusing older land and rebuilding.
We keep our little localities and fight amongst each other for growth. Stealing from one tax base to increase another and then walk around all proud because we were able to sucker grandma out of some more of her money.
Yes people should have the right to live where they want. But it should be more expensive to develop new land and infrastructure and cheaper to rebuild and use existing infrastructure. Most of us tell our children not to waste, take care of their things, work together, be responsible, etc. But the way we go about our land use is anything but that. But that's what happens when we are fighting amongst each other for the “growth” instead of sharing it and making ourselves stronger. We pick up and move away from the problem areas and then point fingers at them when they are not reinvesting and looking to do the very same thing.
Most people would not add on to the rear of their houses while the front is rotting away and falling down. But that is exactly what we, as a collective, choose to do. Everyone complains about our jobs picking up and heading to southern states, but we do the same thing picking up and moving outward from the core to different tax bases. We then complain about taxes but fail to accept that the millions of dollars we throw to the city every year in state/federal aid comes out of all of our pockets because we fail to do what is required to control and fix the problem.
The poor etc. are an inherent part of a society. If you want to keep ignoring them and keep them contained in one area, at least confess to it. Clarence, Amherst etc are not located out in the middle of Stueben County sprouting up all by their lonesome as utopias free from the burdens of society. They are an integral part of the Buffalo metropolitan area. Just because they are "protected" by outdated government boundaries doesn't mean they are not part of the whole and dependant on it. And, as we can see by the west side of Cheektowaga lately, even these boundaries do not protect a town from the migration of the rats to the top of the sinking ship. Maybe someday we will all stop acting like rats and make the tough choices to fix the ship and strengthen it.
Report this
david
Martin, Sleepy and Goofy...
While individual responsibility is key - and the beginnings of your analysis conform to the findings of The Bell Curve (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) where it was argued that apples don't fall far from the tree even on a windy day - you seem to oblivious to the broader systemic things happening over here. Yes, I believe I'm one of the few East side residents participating in this forum.
East side residents did not decide to obliterate whole neighborhoods with the "33" that made it easier - for you? - to visit and work downtown. East side residents did not decide to close Diocesan property and East side residents did not decide on the "Through the looking glass" strategy to build "vinyl victorians"...
In my neighborhood (Cold Springs, directly across the street from the 30m renovation of Performing Arts HS) the two single largest owners of abandoned and vacant residential property - 1. City of Buffalo and 2. Rev. Stenhouse's Bethel CDC (he's also a member of our Control Board.
We - at least me - are not asking for your pity. I am asking you to participate in meaningful problem solving that will add to the vibrancy of our emerging City. I'd also ask you to rethink your analysis and include the broader systemic components that have lead to abandonment and vacancy and perhaps Steel's post.
Report this
bradon
MJ- You continue to blame the suburbs for the blight in the city, and you blame the government and system for poverty amongst the lazy and unmotivated. At what point are people responsible for their own actions, even when they lead to something bad? Cheektowaga is going to hell because the poor try their best to leave the city as soon as they have money for a "suburban" rental in Cheektowaga; but they bring the East Side with them. At some point the poor will continue to migrate away from the East Side, until there are so few left that it easy to gentrify and rebuild new houses and neighborhoods for the wealthier people who still want to live away from the poor. This may not coincide with your communist ideal, but this is reality. It has happened in other cities and it is happeninig here.
Report this
skarnath
i agree with steel's suggestion, but would give serious consideration to adding another major east side urban park (not a new idea) connected by parkways to mlk park & perhaps to cazenovia. there's a reason many of buffalo's most expensive (& high property taxpaying) homes surround olmsted's parks and line his parkways. look what has happened along richmond as the street was redone and the circles recreated. watch what happens to the area around front park as it is rebuilt. great urban parks (with forest, meadow and gala water) are economic engines for cities, and olmsted's paper "urban parks & the expansion of towns" is as relevant today as it was when he delivered it in 1860 at the lowell institute. and you can build a comprehensive plan for the east side around it.
Report this
viking
Here's an observation from experience, organic farming is labor intensive, and consequentially my farm had a lot of volunteer help. The interest in the well being of the garden and surrounding area by these volunteers increased in proportion to their collective and individual efforts. Many of these same volunteers created gardens in the city where they lived. These people monitored and protected their creations as valuable assets, and their interest was rewarded with a sense of accomplishment, healthy produce, and decreased food costs.
People taking a direct personal interest in a piece of property, usually promotes the type of situation which seems to be the goal expressed here. Ever watch a kid who begins to understand that he can positively affect a result, caring for a pet, helping build something, planting a garden and eating something produced by his direct effort. The stewardship of this activity with nature, is the easiest path to responsible development.
Report this
MJWorthington
I don't blame these mythical creatures named "suburbs” or the government. Actually I think without the government programs we’d have a lot more motivated people. And I don’t judge people on their social class. There are a—holes in all of them.
Please reread my post. I blame us. I blame the citizens of metropolitan Buffalo. I blame all of us. My post is all about self responsibility, the portion of which many of us choose to ignore. I came from a single mom who worked three jobs in order to stay off of public assistance. I don't need any lectures in hard work or self responsibility. I just grow tired of the dual standards and the "it’s not my fault" mentality.
1) Its very wrong of Company X to leave here for S. Carolina and take their tax money and jobs with them leaving an empty building, but its ok for me to leave for suburb town X and take my money with me.
2) Its not OK for people to stop investing in their property and move outward because it’s a bad investment (bringing the east side), but it’s OK for me to take my money and move farther out every time I feel my investment may be threatened. It sets a great example, doesn’t it? We didn't/don’t fight for the neighborhoods, so why should they be expected to? I guess because we don’t want to put forth the effort or acknowledge the “responsibility our actions”. If I'm around in 20-30 years, maybe I'll have the honor to see them bring the east side to Lancaster while everyone is hiding out in Alden.
Where do I come off as communist? Please point it out to me. Is it because I expect us to act like team so this area can actually progress? I didn't understand this losing self-centric “holier-than-thou” system at 5 yrs old, and I still don't at 30. Let’s just keep fighting over the scraps and running with them. It has gotten us this far.
Maybe we enjoy being the MaGahees, patting ourselves on the back for our "accomplishments" while the Patriots are actually winning?
Report this
Lucia
Sleep8, Martin and David,
I agree with Sleep8 who said, "the only way the east side will change is if the people who live there choose to make it a better place".
I KNOW THIS IS UNREALISTIC but my fantasy plan is instead of demolishing everything (I have been told that it costs the city $13,000 per home to demolish it) we take the salvageable homes and give them to families that are on renatl public assistance (housing assistance) and we give those families the $13,000 - and in return we gradually remove the public financial support (say in 5 years). I know it is a completely ridiculous idea but wouldn't it help everyone all the way around? Families would become home owners, hopefully take better care of their properties, good homes would be saved, etc.
Report this