Buffalo Rising Online

Man, those townhouses in pic 1 look a tad too progressive for us. Buffalo is always 15 years late when it comes to architectural fads, I doubt the ninnies at Uniland have any clue that people will pay top dollar to live in nice townhouses. Then again, Buffalo is still largely stuck in this mentality that living in anything but a detached house (whole home or flat) is ghetto--would explain some of the big apartment buildings at the southern end of Elmwood refuse to gentrify.

When we try building something nice (that other cities are building) all the dirty hippies scream gentrification and the usual crotchety NIMBYs bitch about said project "not fitting in".

What you propose would be real nice. in addition Gates circle needs some commercial life breathed into it. Something pedestrian, the rite aid and gas station doesn't really cut it. Other than a restaurant or two, there is nothing "to do" in this area. For the high density of apartment buildings in or near the circle, people still have to drive everywhere to accomplish errands. We can't expected the entire neighborhood to walk to Elmwood.

I think you've got a good idea here. Given what JD said about the priority value placed on single family, detached houses, I'm surprised more town houses (of the semi-detached style) aren't being built. Not just here on Lancaster but throughout the city on some of those dreary empty :"parking lots". I hope someone at Uniland is reading this and that they will consider it.

JD,

Those townhouses are hardly progressive.

Westcoast's idea however is very progressive. The parking lot fronting on Lancaster is an abomination. Lets hope Lancaster does not become a back alley to this new condo building. Lancaster is one of Elmwood Village's premire streets. Useing it for parking is a wated opportunity

JD, why would we want to follow "architectural fads"? I never understood this "fifteen years behind" tag--behind what? Cities aren't fashion shows.

It was following architectural fads that brought us the hideous blue apartment houses, the senior citizen apartment building at the foot of Hertal (next to the watergate II) and Admirals Walk. I say let's not follw the fads of others lets create what works for Buffalo.

If doctors in Buffalo were 15 years behind the times, it would be inexcusable. If the newest car you could buy in Buffalo was from the late 1980s or early 1990s, you'd probably be upset. Why should it be different with best practice in planning and architecture?

Instead of "fad," a better term might be "current best practice in architecture and planning." As a planner who has worked throughout the United States, I can say with complete confidence that the Buffalo area is about 15-20 years behind current practice, and in some areas such as architectural, landscaping and signage regulations, about 30 to 40 years behind. Buffalo is now just beginning to see residential lofts, something that was considered old hat for many cities in the mid-1990s.

New urbanism? Dog parks? Lifestyle centers? Four-sided design? Single-point urban interchanges? Expressway-to-parkway conversion? Signature gateways? High-density urban infill? Neotraditional residential and commercial architecture? Access management? Billboard amortization and removal? That, and many other things - routine in much of the country, but nonexistent in Buffalo.

Buffalo certainly jumped on the bandwagon for destructive practices such as urban renewal, suburbanization of city business districts, and expressways. Maybe the shellshock of 1950s-era policies linger, and anything that's seen as a "modern concept' in planning is considered suspect. After all, urban renewal has plenty of prominent cheerleaders and evangelists in the 1950s and 1960s, and expressways were justified by decreased travel times, which would make suburbanites more inclined to travel downtown.

Then again, Buffalonians love their feathered hair, Zubaz, black Slayer t-shirts and 97 Rock. Effin' A, man, Talas is playing tonight at Desiderio's!

Here Here Dan! Is feathered hair out? oops

My bet is this project never gets done...too many nimby's on Lancasterand too many pres. types block any progress.

Dan, you ruin most of your insightful commentary by unnecessarily harping on 97 Rock and Buffalo stereotypes. It's worthless, makes your thoughts less genuine, and leads me to call you out on that, rather than heartily agree with you on dog parks and other urban innovations that not enough people in the 716 know about or are talking about....

Dan

"New urbanism? Dog parks? Lifestyle centers? Four-sided design? Single-point urban interchanges? Expressway-to-parkway conversion? Signature gateways? High-density urban infill? Neotraditional residential and commercial architecture? Access management? Billboard amortization and removal? That, and many other things - routine in much of the country, but nonexistent in Buffalo."

I would hardly describe these things as routine in the rest of the country and some of these things are not even very progressive. Chicago certainly is not removing any highways or billboards. For that matter they are constantly adding reconstructing and widening them. Very very few cities have removed or even talked about removing highways. Buffalo is talking seriously about do such with large segments of roadway. We really should be honest when we toss in an argument. The Rush limbo means of argument is a bit off base.

As for Buffalo it has been behind the curve on many thing but that lag has more to do with a stagnant economy than a lack of imagination. As for the townhouses used in the example, fake historic styles can hardly be described as progressive. Letis hope Buffalo (being behind the trends) can skip over the trend and tendency the tendency in this country to build and cherish cheap imitations of historic buildings. If that is progressive Buffalo should look the other way.

Surely you jest.

Comparing medicine to planninig isnt' exactly fair, yet in both cases we have learned that "best practices" continue to evolve. Both planners and doctors have made their share of mistakes.

It is easy to criticize retrospectively. And I dare say doctors have made more mistakes than planners (think about how we treat mental patients today, versus just thirty years ago).

It is also easy to say that Buffalo is "behind the times", when in fact some incredible things have happened here that put the city far ahead of other supposedly more progressive places:

The West Village infill housing was done over twenty years ago, BEFORE new urbanism was popular.

Traffic circles were reintroduced onto Richmond Avenue BEFORE traffic calming became a buzzword everywhere else.

Buffalo started recycling its trash years BEFORE other cities did.

Neotraditional design guidelines have been in place for Allentown and the Elmwood Village BEFORE anyone ever heard about Seaside or Andres Duany.

Buffalo requirements that mandate underground electric wiring and tree lawns with street trees were put in place years BEFORE new urbanist communities did so.

The Joseph Ellicott historic district is one of the largest, and earliest protected downtown historic districts in the country. And lets not forget the Olmsted parks conservancy.

Also, Buffalo never experienced the massive urban renewal that other cities like Boston, Detroit and St. Louis (to name just a few) did.

And Buffalo never developed the massive amount of high rise public housing that other cities built, and are now demolishing.

I hope no one is holding their breath for Uniland to do anything bold or beautiful - let alone progressive. They do suburban office park bland very well indeed. That spot deserves something great and urban/Olmsted appropriate - and you can be sure that without some major intervention or some sort of style/architectural vision epiphany on the part of Uniland - we might just end up with another one of those big, blue Miami style places - only with a nice east Amherst twist to it.

Dan - I believe you're a bit off on your concert schedule...Only Human is appearing at Desiderio's tonight.....the pride of Englewood Ave., Talas is not until July 4th at the Niawanda Park pavillion for the hydro-boat races...

I agree with Dan, it should not be about how Buffalo can fit with the trends because it was those trends that destroyed the parts of buffalo that some of us are trying to save today. Urban Removal, Highway projects, activization of park space. All things that many would like to change but cost gigantic sums of money.

Perhaps it is better to see what these trends really mean in the long run before we tear down any more of what we will want to save more. If i could throw in another thing that I have noticed about cities, buffalo and others that i have visited. They are not made from great buildings, but many good buildings. Think of the best part of Buffalo, emlwood, none of the buildings are really that great but the rules and urbanity that bind them together are what create the city we enjoy. The problem with downtown and politicians is that they tear down the simply but well designed for city buildings and place some silver bullet that doesn't fit and breaks from what we knew works. Convention Center, Elm Oak corridor, Main Place mall, none of which saved buffalo but all are in the way of our future.

Remeber cities have been around hundred and hundreds of years, maybe not in the US but we flock to Europe to see their cities but we forget to realize that Buffalo was very fimilar to Europe BEFORE we tried to "FIX" it. It only took only 40 years to demolish what has worked for cities for hundreds of years, now we are trying to fill in the holes wishing and trying to replicate what we had.

So to bring that off topic rant back to Gates circle, it doesn't need to be a great or terrific building but a good building that will reinforce what it means to be in a city.

WCP, looks like a good plan.. Let's hope the developers in charge of this site heed your advice!

(Hamp) > The West Village infill housing was done over twenty years ago, > BEFORE new urbanism was popular.

For the 1980s, the West Village infill project is outstanding. It's aged quite well. However, it's NOT New Urbanism, and it's extent is only a couple of city blocks. Infill elsewhere in the city usually follows a suburban model, with both architecture and site planning, but that's slowly changing.

> Traffic circles were reintroduced onto Richmond Avenue BEFORE > traffic calming became a buzzword everywhere else.

That's great, but where are the NEW roundabouts in other parts of the city? (I know there's a couple.) What about the suburbs? The first modern roundabouts in the US were built in the early 1990s; was the Richmond Avenue traffic circle restored before then? I think it was still paved over into the late-1990s.

> Buffalo started recycling its trash years BEFORE other cities did.

True ... but what does that have to do with land use planning? It's a step in the right direction, Still, where are the paper/glass garbage containers elsewhere in the city? Increasingly commonplace, and not just in Toronto.

> Neotraditional design guidelines have been in place for Allentown > and the Elmwood Village BEFORE anyone ever heard about > Seaside or Andres Duany.

Again, good, but why aren't there citywide architectural regulations? There's the architectural review in Tonawanda, Clarence, Amherst, Cheektowaga and West Seneca? Yeah, I know, the suburbs shouldn't matter, but commercial/multi-family architectural regulations are the norm for suburban communities throughout the country. If anything, it says that Buffalo's suburbs are even further behind the curve than the city itself.

> Buffalo requirements that mandate underground electric wiring > and tree lawns with street trees were put in place years BEFORE > new urbanist communities did so.

Many American cities adopted undergrounding requirements around the turn of the last century. Buffalo had similar regulations, but it only covered part of the city. Many city neighborhoods - I'll say the majority -- still have overhead wired utilities, with many of those running above the tree lawn. I'll say this, though: the extent of undergrounding and rear lot utility easements in the Buffalo area is far more extensive than in Cleveland, where just about ewverything outside of downtown is elevated - even in Shaker Heights.

> The Joseph Ellicott historic district is one of the largest, and > earliest protected downtown historic districts in the country. And > lets not forget the Olmsted parks conservancy.

Again, it's a good sign. When it comes to preservation, Buffalo is on a par with national practice. Unfortunately, many historic buildings are still at risk. Point-of-sale and annual inspections will help a lot. Other cities are starting to recognize the historic value of residential areas developed in the 1920s and early post-WWII era; in Buffalo, outside of Hamlin Park, the emphasis is on the pre-WWI era.

> Also, Buffalo never experienced the massive urban renewal that > other cities like Boston, Detroit and St. Louis (to name just a few) > did.

Compare an overhead photo of downtown pre-WWII to something more recent.

I think the term "shovel ready site" has its roots in Buffalo - not something to be proud of. (I'll see if I can find a definite cite; I hope I'm wrong.)

> And Buffalo never developed the massive amount of high rise > public housing that other cities built, and are now demolishing.

No, but there was high-rise public housing built in the 1950s. Buffalo jumped right in there with other cities after WWII.

(FancyWow) > Dan, you ruin most of your insightful commentary by > unnecessarily harping on 97 Rock and Buffalo stereotypes.

This post brought to you by Harvey and Corky Productions. :D

How 'bout me Dan? :- (

I vote for E-Zone!!! ....and Mullets!

Steel, sadly neotraditonal infill townhouses would be progressive for Buffalo, atleast for the land use application. With New Urbanism, the land use component is really the most important aspect. Exterior styling, IMHO, is much less of a vital concern. The exterior veneer is just a skin ontop of a modular shell. It can be changed in the future to something different when Buffalo finally exerts the will to tolerate more "daring" designs.

Gabe,

Very few places in the US are open to quality modern design. Chicago for the most part is no further advanced than Buffalo in this respect.

Dan--where do you live?

Townhouses on Lexington to shield covered/underground parking would be ideal--though not as pictured. Too 'San Jose' looking. Let's shoot for true Manhattan townhouse styling. I'm sure the Lancaster Ave. types will appreciate the effort and appreciation to their property... and then acquiesce to the 13 floors that will rise on the circle. The Gates Circle bldg MUST be a wonderful design and we should demand nothing less.

Please help me to see what I'm missing! Here's a post that has not one word linking these illustrations of townhouses to any concrete plans for the Park Lane property, and immediately a discussion between the usual suspects ensues about whether Buffalo is "progressive" and up-to-date in architecture and planning. Steel might consider that the reason "quality modern design" is such a hard sell in America is that so many of the examples we have are just so damn ugly and sterile and offensive to their surroundings, most people don't want them.

(Eric) > Dan--where do you live?

Not far from the aforementioned Shaker Heights.

Anyhow, I know where you're going to go with that.

Dear sick,

Why read and comment on something you profess to have no interest in? And second I said "quality" modern design which means that the attributes you describe will not be present . Third people are perfectly willing to accept those negative attributes when they are present in cheap fake historic design.

Finaly sorry for being one of the usual suspects but I AM interested in the subject.

Oh relax, Dan. I just wondered because your descriptions of Buffalo, aside from their caricatures and distortions, seemed a bit off the pulse of the storied city that many here are living in. And those vague elsewheres you extol, what will they do in 15-20 years, when their projects fall behind the curve of the latest Master's thesis in Urban Planning out of Portland State? I worry for them.

I would love to see the roadway system corrected steel, but like other city/county/state projects in this area, I am not holding my breath,yes there is talk and talk and talk and talk and talk and talk.................. ......as to the condo's, lets see what is unveiled. I am sure there will be plenty of time to get the right plans together what with the protests and lawsuits that will follow.

Were I ever to move back to Buffalo, it would not be these types of townhouses/condos that attract me. I like city life, but the houses of Tacoma and Hertel side streets like Saranac, North Park, Sterling all the way up to Winston and Voorhees are much more picturesque and comfortable to me.

I love living in Austin but I do miss those 'detached' single family houses of North Buffalo that some people above deride. Oh we have very nice single family houses here, but everything is newer and lacks the charm.

I love all the discussion about new residential developments and architecture and planning and retail and schools and politics....but this site has a gaping hole......job creation....so that people can afford to buy, live and shop in their communities.

Unless you think someone can buy a $300,000 home working as an ice cream scooper at Sweet Tooth (no offense to Sweet Tooth).

When we try building something nice (that other cities are building) all the dirty hippies scream gentrification and the usual crotchety NIMBYs bitch about said project "not fitting in".

Most people here are obese with no vision. Real bad style too. It is time for everyone to leave, live in the sun, and try to hook up with some hotties before you get too old.

This place is out of gas and so is Eric.

The problem is that I have seen how these condo developments turn out...we have a ton of them down here in Austin (The Triangle, the lofts on 6th Street). Here's what happens: on paper they look fantastic but when constructed the developers use materials that make it look artificial. If you want it to look like Boston or Baltimore rowhouses, you have to use real brick throughout and not a cheap facade. If you want it to look like townhomes and houses found in OTR in Cincinnati or other cities you have to build it so that it looks authentic. Otherwise, it looks like cheap crap. Of course, this drives up price.

Why would you want a unit with no yard when you can have a house in North Buffalo, West Side or even Kenmore for much cheaper than 300k?