Buffalo Rising Online

I hate the preservationist and narrow minded people in this city who are opposed to change.

I hate the preservationist and narrow minded people in this city who are opposed to change.

so this project is dead in the water? what happened to let him try it for 6 months (to see that there would be no issues at all)?

::shakes head::

Is there a paragraph missing from this article? What happened to the project? Who killed it? Why was it killed? Are there other opportunities to make this happen? Please take back and do over.

"A good thing for the entire city" but I'd be surprised if a hundred Buffalonians cared about this. It seems like this would've been very good for this Russ Maxwell guy. Its a stretch to say that this would be good for the entire city.

I guess you have to be in-the-know to know why this project was killed since the article doesn't say.

There were a few articles in the Buffalo News about why the owner of the house on Tillinghast withdrew his application to the city for a permit to allow him to use his house as a bed and breakfast. Mostly it was because the neighbors had a fit and complained about property values, strange people, traffic, etc. I liked the idea of a 6 month trial so they could see it in action, but I don't think the neighbors did. I think the owner was so shocked by the negative reaction that he simply gave up, not wanting to create ill will with the neighbors. It really is too bad. I can't imagine the people renting a Frank Lloyd Wright house causing disruptions, etc.

Quoted from buffalonews.com -

"Paying guests will not be spending the night under the roof of a Frank Lloyd Wright house in North Buffalo anytime soon, if ever. Russell Maxwell, owner of the Walter V. Davidson House on Tillinghast Place, said Thursday he has shelved plans to convert the private residence into a guesthouse, citing neighborhood opposition. "

The City of Buffalo should be held responsible for the shelving of these plans also as THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR A VARIANCE.

"I hate the preservationist and narrow minded people in this city who are opposed to change."

This wasn't something stopped by the preservationists.. in fact I would guess that Russ by owning such a property and its maintenance costs is the preservationists in this picture. The people who opposed it were just as the article said.. NIMBY's. They are the bread and butter of an American perspective.

What cracks me up are that the type of people who would rent a FLW house are probably older, intellectual folks...not quite the party animals the neighbors are portraying will rent the house. It's a crying shame...there's only a few FLW houses in the entire US that you can rent, and one of them would've been in Buffalo. With the Martin House around the corner, Olmsted Parks at their doorstep, the Davidson House would've been a tremendous addition to Buffalo's architectural treasures. A real shame. From what I hear, the neighbors were really nasty, saying things to the tune of "I'll make your life hell if you go through with this."

When I heard that the F.L.W. Davidson House would have the possibility of being a B&B; I thought that would be a great idea. So what if there would be 2 or 3 extra cars on the street. What is more important the residents that already live there and want the same old, same old or NEW TOURISM. People being able to stay at the Davidson House would have been a real treat to F.L.W enthusiasts and lovers of architecture alike. Buffalo desperately needs more tourism, this could have been a great part of it. It's too bad that the neighbors pooh poohed the idea.

Dagner is the typical Buffalonian with a myopic view of what constitutes a person's rights. The idea that everyone needs to consult with their neighbors on everything is the reason why nothing gets done. Sorry dude, but as a property owner, you owe nothing to your neighbors other than following the codes and laws. So regardless if he went public before filing any variance applications, he has no justification to call all his neighbors into a room and seek consensus.

This consensus idea is way out of hand. Consensus means everyone gets in the room with thier ideas and then agree on something no one likes and is far from everyone's original ideas.

At the same time, it's also indicative of the system in Buffalo, where people can't trust the government to do their job properly so they have to self-police, which has created this neighborhood mob mentality.

Seems to have worked real well for the Peace Bridge, waterfront, Skyway, etc.

danger - In regard to your comment: I believe in general terms, it would be a change in zoning. The different zoning (hotel status) had to be obtained.

Another quote from buffalonews.com -

In the meantime, Maxwell has a hearing scheduled for May 21 before the Zoning Board of Appeals, which will decide whether to grant him a variance to operate something akin to a bed-and-breakfast out of his home.

Richard Tobe, the city’s development, permits and inspection chief, who was invited to the neighborhood meeting arranged by the Parkside Community Association, said the city’s current zoning codes and licensing laws do not address such an operation.

“We determined it was not a lodging house and that a license was not necessary,” he said.

Ultimately, after a couple of meetings between the Planning Department and other City Hall staffers, Tobe said it was determined that operating a guest house in the Davidson House would constitute a commercial use in a residential neighborhood, which is not allowed under the current zoning.

Maxwell applied for a change of use permit for the property, but it was denied by the city and referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals, which will decide whether to grant him a use variance.

If granted, the variance will be limited to the specific activity that Maxwell is proposing for the Davidson House.

Neighbors expressed concerns about an increase in the number of cars parked along their street, the presence of strangers and fears of out-of-control parties at the house.

Tobe suggested that neighbors can establish a set of conditions for Maxwell, or that the zoning board may include as stipulations for granting a variance. Tobe also suggested that neighbors present a united position to the zoning board.

“The zoning board has a long history of listening to united neighbors,” he said.

thinker - I think that the waterfront is moving forward, as seen at the Commercial Slip. Everyone (besides some hard-headed politicians) believes the skyway should come down. The Peace Bridge (that's a whole other discussion for another time).

This bed and breakfast is not a party house where beer blasts are going to occur. It is a historic site. What fears would there be? People loving architecture and possibly walking down the street to look at the different homes? The influx of cars on the street - maybe 3 more possibly?? That is a sorry excuse why this is not getting done. I really think that in order to move forward those "fears", if you will, should have been addressed immediately.

You know, it wouldn't be too hard to send a message (legally) to the residents who opposed this. Make their biggest nightmare come true - legally park your cars up and down the street at all hours of the day. Put "I want the Davidson House B&B" bumper stickers on the cars. Organize it so that cars move in and out in shifts and keep it legal so no one can be ticketed/towed.

This isn't illegal, and it doesn't harm anyone, but by inconveniencing them it sends the message that their backyards are in a City with other residents who support the project. It will certainly make the 2 or 3 extra cars on the street from the B&B look like a cake-walk.

So, a person who deals in real estate buys a residential property, decides (some time ago) to use it for something not allowed by the zoning laws, seeks out publicity in a number of venues (misleading the reporters and readers about the legal status of the project) in an attempt to steamroll the project through, advertises and books customers before permissions are granted (apparently, assuming that he is above any kind of law or process), and fails to notify any neighborhood group about the project until these meetings are set up by the neighborhood - and somehow, the neighbors are the problem?

Sorry to be quoting so much on this but it's an important topic.

The Davidson House is a single family residence and what Maxwell proposed was use as a single family residence. The only bone of contention here was that the residents would change every few days.

I have no problem with the City of Buffalo restricting single family residence use, as long as it is done by law. Here there is no law that restricts the use of the Davidson House.

If I were Maxwell I'd rent the house anyway, possibly on a longer term basis.

there's a B&B around the corner from me (Linwood/Bryant). Only knew it was there after 5 years of living where I do. It is absolutely benign, and most people don't even know it's there.

NIMBY (from www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/) “opposition to the locating of something considered undesirable (as a prison or incinerator) in one's neighborhood.”

Queeneyes: You chose to write a very brief, one-sided, factually sparse article as a follow-up to an already one-sided, factually sparse article about 57 Tillinghast Place. You say that we are NIMBYs (which is either good or bad, depending on where you live). And you call us a “select few.” Before I continue with the facts of the situation, which either you do not know or choose to ignore, I need to ask what makes me and my other neighbors “select?” Who “selected us”? I don’t remember this selection process going on. Now, if you mean self-selected, as in we chose to live where we did, then yes we are selected. Otherwise, I don’t get it.

Your tone in the paragraph written here is condescending and dismissive. As the proprietor of BR, I guess you have the right and ability to post inflammatory and misleading articles such as this, but I would hope that you first exercise the responsibility that this requires of you to post articles that are accurate and informative.

Sal, the city decided it was a commercial use (after a meeting with the owner - which also suggests that the owner wanted the flexibility to more with the property in the future) - not the neighbors. The neighbors didn't deny the initial use request, the neighbors did not file the motion for a zoning variance, and the neighbors did not withdraw the motion. The neighbors, after receiving a formal notification from the City of Buffalo, signed a petition saying they did not was a variance for a change from residential to commercial use. Perhaps the owner should fight the city on the need for the variance - but that is not the neighbors' problem. It is also not the neighbors' responsibility to have to police the terms of a zoning variance.

As a separate issue, a request to turn 500 Lafayette into a B&B was also recently withdrawn from the zoning board, due to neighborhood opposition - why aren't people upset about that? Because BRO isn't friends with the people that own that house? Or that owner wasn't as savvy at playing the media before the zoning request was made?

thinker: Mr. Maxwell does not need consensus to do what he wants with the property, but he does need to obey the laws. He needs a commercial variance to do what he wanted to do, and that is a BIG problem in a residential zone. He chose to buy the property and then convert the residential property to a commercial use property and needed a variance to do so. The neighbors opposed the variance. Mr. Maxwell withdrew his request for a variance. That is what happened.

hodgepodge: The B&B you are referring to is not in a R2 zoned area. And it is a B&B with the owners living there. The plan for 57 Tillinghast Place was not a B&B; the owners were not planning on living there, and thus the “policing” for the place, however much or little would be needed, is left to the neighbors, who would be working for free.

Livingforge: Nice idea. Except that you need to make sure that you get your bumper sticker correct. The plan for 57 Tillinghast Place was not a B&B but just a rental with no one on-site. So the bumperstickers should read: “We want our commercially zoned property in the middle of our residential street.” Oh, and good luck finding a parking spot; although so many people seem to think that the residents of the street have had it “gated”, it is indeed a public street with cars parked on it whose owners are at the zoo, Delaware Park, Nichols School etc.

What about the people who reserved and were ready to stay there?

Perry: “From what I hear, the neighbors were really nasty, saying things to the tune of "I'll make your life hell if you go through with this."

I’m not sure who you talked to, but no one that I know of on Tillinghast Place said anything of the sort either in public or private. Who did you hear this from? Again, "neighbors were saying things like..." is just inaccurate. No one was saying that or anything like that. I cannot and do not speak for everyone on the street, so I cannot deny that that "or something like that" was said by someone, but it certainly was not "the neighbors" as a whole.

As someone else has stated, Mr. Maxwell is a businessman whose business is in real estate. This property is a business. The made up quotes such as that stated by Perry only serve to make everyone feel sorry for him because of the big bad neighbors.

Dagner, did you read my post?

I suggested parking cars in the neighborhood, not plastering stickers on other people's cars already parked there.

It is too bad that, instead of being nasty, the neighbors could have worked with this project, seeing it as a positive development to the history of Buffalo's architecture. For instance, the parking issue...is there any room on the property for 2 or 3 cars to park, without taking away from the properties beauty?

everyone who was against this.. anyone listening on this site should read this article by someone who came to buffalo, spent money and time and stays at a B&B... please read this and understand this is the three ducks hostel in paris or some party crazy. This is going to be well to do people who would actually do wonders for our word of mouth reputation and economy..

uncommontraveller & Beau Fleuve

What exactly is the evidence of people being nasty? The only communications at the meetings, or with respect to the petition, were polite, and welcomed Mr. Maxwell as a neighbor (to live in the residential house, that he has purchased) - except for one person at the meeting who was pointedly nasty to the neighbors with concerns - perhaps that is the person you were referring to, but the target of the nastiness wasn't Mr. Maxwell.

Given a chance, I could assure Commissioner Tobe that the neighbors do not constitute a united front because I am a neighbor three doors down and I do support the project.

Me and The Wife even went down to City Hall last week just to attend the scheduled public hearing but it was cancelled.

I know that other neighbors are willing to express their support for the project as well. I wish we could get a chance.

Was it not Tillinghast residents that also forced Nichols to change their plans in redeveloping their campus for fear of traffic from students/parking?

A change of use shouldn't scare people so much. A rich collection of uses is what makes other cities alive and great places to live. I had 6 friends that all rented and lived on Tillinghast for a couple years. It is a great street and bringing in couples to rent out a very historic buildings for a weekend would be huge to our ability to draw and give people a sense of architecture you can't get very often. It is one thing to look at a building from the outside it is another to actually live there. This isn't like someone is renting out this house to just anyone for a year lease like a typical property. His bread and butter is to keep the property intact and well maintained and it wouldn't be in his own interests to bring in anyone with even a small destructive tendency.

Parking issues.. come on. really? There are always spots of the street. Sometimes you need to walk a while but so be it. Really a non-issue especially for this street.

BuffaloDrift - no sensationalism here. Without blowing my cover (due to my profession), that exact quote was given to me by someone who is heavily involved in the project. I will not reveal the person's name who made this comment. Like it or not, it was said...do you really know evey word that comes out of your neighbors mouths - if so, you have a special talent.

This is crazy! Do people on this street ever have family and/or friends visit for a few days?

Local.Live.com view of Tillinghast

Sbrof,

I agree about the parking. Check out the link I provided to www.local.live.com (if it worked) and it can be seen that every address on Tillinghast has their own off-street parking. Huge driveways with garages in the back. Even the FLW has some of it's own off-street parking.

Note to users: Please click on Birds-Eye to see clear photos of the street.

You can never make people happy when it comes to parking.. look at downtown 50% of it was demolished for parking. Now people still complain about parking AND the lack of things to do there.. refer to previous sentence. 50% of the places where there could be things to do, were demolished for parking.

'Parking concerns' in Buffalo should henceforth be ignored as argument for argument sake.

I think 79 Oakland needs whatever it is that Commissioner Tobe has decided that 57 Tillinghast needs.

I think 208 North needs the same.

I think the City of Buffalo needs to clarify exactly what constitutes a "guest house."

Perry: As I said in my post, I cannot deny that it was said, but the "scare" tactics that you refer to are neither my view nor the view of anyone I have talked to about this. That is all I can say about it. There is sensationalism because you stated that the "neighbors are saying things like..." implying that many people are making threats, which is completely untrue.

Sbrof: “A rich collection of uses is what makes other cities alive and great places to live…” True. We also have this in Buffalo. However, a “rich collection” means many things. If you choose to live next to a commercial establishment, you can do so. You can choose to live in the city where you can walk places, which is what I did. I did not choose to live one house down from Hertel Ave. Had I done so, I could not complain about living next to a commercial establishment. I don’t think that the concept that “mixed use” means that anyone can do anything with their property that they want and neighbors are irrelevant. You can choose where you live, and the amount of “mixed use” that you want, but if someone else buys a property and wants to change its use, it is not me who has created the problem. The change in use IS a problem.

Quaker: It was not just Tillinghast residents, and nothing significant was changed by Nichols as far as I know. Nichols initiated a “consensus building” process that involved constituents from the neighborhood (Tillinghast, Amherst, Colvin, Crecent, and New Amsterdam). The concern was that plans proposed by Nichols to move their fields was going to result in more traffic congestion on Colvin. Nothing that Nichols has done so far has been different from what they wanted to do.

yes but this change of use isn't a HUGE change. No one is asking you to allow a strip club or mighty taco to move next door. This is a residential property and will continue to house people... Its use is still the same. Are they different groups sure. Do people complain when someone sells a house on that street because strangers are going to move in. Or when out of town family comes to visit someone. My argument is that residents of this street would in no way have their lives affect by this 'change'

Except that the city overall would be a stronger more tourist friendly place to live. I am sure that there are already many many people driving down your street stopping, taking pictures and admiring this house. I know because I have directed many dozens myself... Did you notice? Were your property values somehow hurt by these people? Somehow considering the value of the real estate there I doubt it.

1. The "change in use" is a technicality with no real meat to it. No one is talking about turning the place into a retail store. The actual character of the house and the neighborhood would stay the same.

2. The "who would police it" concerns are unfounded. If some FLW fans were getting rowdy after 11 -- and they're notorious party animals -- neighbors would have three options: ignore it, go ask them to quiet down, or call the cops. These are the exact same options that would be available at an owner-occupied house! So how does what was proposed present some kind of special hardship?

3. 208 North (the co-op house) should be held up as an example to be emulated rather than some sort of problem property.

Sbrof: The use of the property is a change, and it could be huge. It is not a strip mall, but what prevents someone else from deciding they want a variance also? And how do you stop that? Or don’t you? Whatever language is put into the variance wording can either be ignored by the owner or used as justification for a different use. The point is that the property has been a private residence since it was built, and the proposed variance would have changed that. It is not a B&B, it is not 208 North, it is not the B&B on Linden.

It is a funny thing because apparently no one is supposed to care what goes on outside the boundaries of their own property line. But at the same time, we are supposed to care because we live in a community. I should have no say about what goes on on my street, but I am supposed to be involved with my community to make it a better place to live or a safer place to live or more attractive place to live. It seems that the people who would be impacted by this change in use are supposed to shut up and go away, while those who would have almost no impact on their daily lives get to dictate what they think is right. It is not just an abstract theoretical, blog debate about if you had unlimited money what kind of house would you build in Hawaii; it is a real situation that can affect real people every day. And if you are not one of those people, it is very easy to dismiss any concerns and issues the other people have.

And, as I have said previously, property values are irrelevant to me in this situation; I have no data about whether property values would go up or down.

I never said you shouldn't have a say but maybe there was a compromise that could have worked out for both parties. From what I read there was no option for compromise. It looks like you got your say about what should happen and took away his say over his own property.

The point is this really would not have had a negative impact on the neighborhood and since not everyone has a Frank Lloyd Wright design home on the street your worries about this spreading like some virus are a little exaggerated.

... and, another thing, Buffalodrift, my friend: I have no idea whether the B&B near me is owner occupied but cannot imagine that the owners simply leave the property to "scary" guests every night for long periods of time. heck, I understand that the Saturn club does not have a night manager and they rent out their rooms. What's the problem with that?

NIMBYism is certainly the bane of development in Buffalo, especially considering how the lack of a predictable planning and development review process can cause a few misinformed, extremely vocal people to stall or halt an otherwise beneficial and well-planned development.

Still, I wonder if the extreme NIMBYism that is practiced in Buffalo is a backlash against the YIMBYism -- Yes In My back yard -- of the 1980s and 1990s, which led the way to inappropriate suburban-context development in otherwise dense urban neighborhoods, the proliferation of group homes and halfway houses in Allentown, and so on.

What traffic , strange people...................what the hell is wrong with these people. I cant see how there could possibly be any more traffic than if the house was occupied in a normal situation(rented or owner occupied) . And strange people ? Seems to me that the only "strange people" , are the backwards , illiberal , human brick walls that will blindly argue and fight anything they can in this city. The funny thing is that these are the same people who probably supported asinine things like building the thruway through riverside , black rock ,etc. and effectively amputating the neighborhoods from their waterfronts . How do these people even get heard , who is listening to them ?. Why is everyone here(Buffalo) in such a glass is half empty frame of mind . It's alot like being tied up and gagged and forced to watch helplessly as someone goes through your home and one by one destroys everything in your home that means something special to you. We need to band together and form some sort of citizens oversight committee that has the power and leverage to force our elected officials to start doing what is good and intelligent for our city. I seen an article in the Buffalo News yesterday about developers wanting to build new "walkable communities" in the suburbs (because of the current gas situation) but finding there is alot of red tape to deal with . The whole time im screaming in my mind and wanting to scream at the top of my lungs" THERE IS A WHOLE CITY OF GOD DAMN "WALKABLE COMMUNITIES " ALREADY BUILT....IT'S CALLED BUFFALO PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!! I mean , come on , this is ridiculous , I see no reason why Buffalo cant be the top mid sized city in the U.S , Portland ,OR , Seattle ,WA , Atlanta , GA , what do these cities have that we don't . Somebody has to get the ball rolling here folks , we need to have some serious dialogue here on how we can take this city back from the knuckle head government and people that have driven it into the ground for the last 50 years. Anyone who is with me and is sick of just talking and whining about the inefficiency and mismanagement of our city that we love so much , send me an e-mail with some solid ideas and lets see if we can start something positive here and get on the road to taking back our city. anthonysiracuse@yahoo.com

I just wanted to share how a Bed and Breakfast in Buffalo convinced us to relocate here and raise our family downtown.

After I got back from a tour in the Middle East with the Marines (2004, I think), my wife wanted to show me where she grew up in Buffalo (she hails from Grand Island originally, but had left years ago). I'd never been here, and I thought it was a great idea. We came the weekend of the Taste of Buffalo and stayed in the Beau Fleuve B+B on Linwood and Bryant. It was a wonderful experience and we fell in love with the city and the street. It was a magical weekend that was entirely made possible by having a neat, fun place to stay in the city.

We eventually bought a house on Linwood and moved from Oahu to set up our business here. The historic housing, the price of said housing and the wonderful people here made it an easy decision.

I think the city could use a few more B+B's....

I agree that this is a shame that it will not happen, however, Wikipedia for the definition of a NIMBY? I am kind of unimpressed. The definition fails to reflect where the burden of such projects actually fall - those who have no choice. Take a power plant or DPW transfer station, of course the wealthy would not want it in their backyard, however it will still be built, but at the expense of a low-income neighborhood that is probably plagues by other things that lead to the demeanor of the quality of their lives. Nonetheless, NIMBYism has more than just the effect of projects failing to happen, sometimes they can actually cripple another place.

Sbrof: A compromise about what? This is what is unclear to me. Mr. Maxwell bought a private residence in an R2 district and wants to run it as a business. This was not allowed by the city, so he needed a variance and the city decided that he needed a variance to commercial use. Commercial use means commercial use.

You say that we should compromise, but since Mr. Maxwell is the person who wants the changes, he should have sat down with the neighbors and talked about what the plan was and how best to do it. Mr. Maxwell has owned the property for more than a year, and during that time, the plans were very hush-hush. No one was saying anything. Then it all comes out on BR and in the Buffalo News. Not one neighbor knew what was going on until then. So a compromise might have been possible, except that a compromise was not wanted by Mr. Maxwell.

The fact that you can actually say that we, as neighbors, did anything to Mr. Maxwell in terms of taking away his right to use the property as he wants is laughable. We did not prevent him from anything. He withdrew the application for a variance after learning that many neighbors were opposed to the variance. We would welcome him moving into the house, as we would welcome anyone who moves onto the street. His right to do what he wants with his property required a zoning variance, which means it no longer just affects his property as an island.

Also, in terms of exaggeration, look at the BR article “What were they thinking #2?” It talks about how Delaware Ave used to be the place to live. And now?

Hodgepodge: I do not know if the B&B near you has an owner there or not either…But that doesn’t change anything. And the Saturn club renting rooms is not at all the same…It is in an R4 or R5 district, not R2. The recurring theme that the FLW enthusiasts are either quiet and shy or are all party animals is a simplification of a more complex situation. The assumption is that only FLW enthusiasts will stay there, and that is not guaranteed.

BUFFALODRIFT SHUTUP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! quit over complicating a already overcomplicated situation. I think i can speak for most of us when i say that you sound ridiculous . REFER YOU DIRECTLY BACK TO MY EARLIER POST . You sound like a souless robot . THE R4 RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT IS OVERFLABULATED BY THE THRUST MECHANICS OF THE THYROID LLOYD WRIGHT MANIFEST .....DOES NOT COMPUTE ...OVERLOAD ....DOES NOT COMPUTE ....SYSTEM WILL NOW SELF DESTRUCT IN 10....9....8...(INSERT ROBOT SOUND EFFECT HERE) Give it up , FLW enthusiasts are not guaranteed to be the only ones staying here , HA ................OMG that is so funny , The bloods street gang will be in town for a crack cooking convention next week and im sure this project would have provided wonderful accommodation's for about a hundred or so of them . lol lmao.....picture that with a Polaroid ! I'm not Christian but can somebody please give me an AMEN

Anthonycapone: Thanks for your advice. I guess you believe in the “if I shout louder I win” theory of blog posting, regardless of the content. Also, if I put a lot of exclamation points in my post, does that get me bonus points?

I’m not sure how I am overcomplicating anything. What I have posted is in regard to the 57 Tillinghast Place house. Your previous post rants about Buffalo, politicians, walkability, and the Buffalo News, none of which is relevant to this particular thread.

I understand Russ is donating this house to recovering crack head junkies with ADHD, how fortunate for the "community" Which I understand is an improvement from the trash that lives on this block.

There is a delicious irony that a site which is famous for scolding property owners (both commercial and residential) for offenses ranging from the types of windows they select to the color of the paint they use is now scolding people for doing the same thing. BR has helped foster this environment of condescending meddling and NIMBYism for years and now you deign to criticize it? Good times...

can someone quantify the "opposition"? are we talking 20 people. sorry, 20 R-2 people? also, why can't outsiders comment about this proposed inn? I remember having to read dozens of letters to the editor from people from elma, eden, etc., telling me what a great thing it was to have a helipad built houses away from me