Pathetic.
I fail to see how new families moving into new houses in a blighted area is pathetic. These developments are better than crack houses dotting neighborhoods with boarded up houses and vacant lots.
Just because you do not like the look of the building doesn't mean that it isn't positive for the neighborhood and city as a whole.
It's time to realize the realities of the areas outside of Elmwood. If this was placed there, I might understand your objections.
I always get nervous when the government green-lights living in an area once seen as unsafe for habitation due to pollution. Maybe it's because I grew up not terribly far from Love Canal and had friends of the family who lived through that nightmare.
Time will tell, I suppose. And after all, they say it's safe to live in Love Canal again, too. Granted, I wouldn't even if they paid me to, but I'm paranoid.
CK, please cut the shit with the "snobby Elmwood yuppie" strawman. One of the most outspoken critics of these crappy subsidized newbuilds lives in the East side.
Error #1 you make-- These are certainly NOT new families moving into these HUD pork-funded houses. Often the case is that these buyers are simply plucked from other city neighborhoods like Hamlin Park with are typically in a transitional sate, hanging on for dear life.
In an ever-shrinking city building more housing in negative-demand areas is akin to shifting chairs around the deck of a sinking ship. One of Buffalo's biggest problems is an overabundance of housing supply. There are way more left over houses than people actually want. The Hope VI subsidies for newbuilds needs to be stopped. For much less money-per-unit, EXISTING homes could be completely rehabbed to far above modern living standards.
And to top it off, the forclousure rate on these Ghetto 2.0 hovels is pretty abysmal. Many of these buyers who might not be quite ready for a mortgage are suckered into signing on the dotted line and taking on what might be more than they can handle.
Honestly, the best solution would be to seriously avoid porkalicious developments like "Sycamore Village" and instead opt for a program of smart urban shrinkage through land banking. Tear down the remaining houses in the worst off neighborhoods. Let the land remain fallow unit there is real market demand to redevelop it. Meanwhile, the eastside families who have the budget to get out should be encouraged to either rehab existing housing in a salvagable neighborhood if they really want to stay in the city or move to another municipality where they can send their children to better schools and purchase affordable, solid homes which will be far more likely to retain their value. Heck, this region could use a good dose of socioeconomic rebalancing. The blatant segregation really holds this place back.
So, let me see here, we are taking people from run down area's, I'm basically, with the rest of you paying for this development of new homes with my hard earned money to bring these people from the run down area's to a brand spankin new area....hmmm who ran down the old area in the first place?
Instead of idiotically misplaced subdivisions, subsidies should be going to making existing but empty structures either habitable or ripping them down and initiating land banking.
One year ago I stopped by the site - Sickamore Village - a few pix. Amazing that we haven't learned from earlier mistakes about new builds. Why are we placing new residential development on major commercial streets? Then we wonder why retail doesn't follow? Like, duh...
18" of remediation? Wonder what's going to happen when the "seal" gets punctured with the digging of new foundations and the planting of trees...
So it goes...
Aww how cute, it's Williamsville in the middle of the Ghetto. I hope these new homes have BARS on all the windows.
So is this another Love Canal or what is that South Buffalo neighborhood called?, where the residence CAN'T even sell thier houses because the land is TOXIC...Ummm yeah, kind of sad, our city leaders actually call this PROGRESS...Putting up a suburban village in the middle of da' Hood on top of toxic land and actually tell us it's a good project.
I have to say that despite the fact that this particular house in the photo isn't half bad, most of the subdivision houses built as in-fill on the East Side are cheesy, cheap, unattractive, no personality buildings. Look at the areas of William St., South Division and the cross streets in between. They look ridiculous in a urban environment with large buildings and factories surrounding them. Plus, there a really long stretches of houses on major streets without any stores or businesses in between. The whole idea of subdivisions in the city is stupid (yes, I know it's a childish term but I don't care). Unfortunately we will never again see the days of construction where houses were well planned, unique pieces of architecture. I can agree that lower income people deserve attractive housing too but isn't the goal to invite other people from other neighborhoods/towns/cities/states to move in and repopulate the neighborhood. I'd never move there unfortunately. Give me a crazy-colored Victorian any day.
It is really important to do the math. Despite my long using 25,000 Bflo housing vacancies as a benchmark, projecting ftom 22,854 vacancies im the 2000 Census, new Census data indicates vacancies could actually be approaching 27,000.
In this context, WHY are taxpayers heavily subsidizing MORE unneeded housing? . . . especially since City Hall data has documented that most buyers of such new ES housing come from now-declining, once promising Hamlin Park, where Bflo's Mayor lives . . . and where his son just committed an infamous covered-up crime?
Dick Kern
As I have stated before, I don't find these inherently evil, although they so not appeal to me. They have the same cheap look as any new house in the burbs, but with out the fresh green setting to hide the fact.
What th eCity needs to do is drop the income requirements. Scranton PA several years back had a 10 year property and school tax abatement if you moved in to one of these from outside the city and remained living there. ( I forget the details) Once these areas then start to suport themselves, you can drop the hand outs. We need middle class people in these areas too, not just the low income struggling to make the mortgage, much less the upkeep. Diversifying the areas is key to growth.
a 10 year property and school tax abatement if you moved in to one of these from outside the city and remained living there
Uh yeah sure that sounds like it'd be easy for the city to enforce that a certain person lives in a certain house for 10 years, when the city historcically can't even enforce a city residency requirement for its senior officials and recently hundreds of people are already double-dipping on STAR rebate programs.
Seriously, enough with the social engineering gimmicks and subsidies.
Martin, Kern, and Denizen are exactly right. Denizen's comment above is absolutely great - the smartest I've ever seen on this topic of East Side subsidized new builds.
And it's stupidity times two, beyond belief that Buffalo this time is even doing this craziness on supposedly cleaned up contaminated land! Lead, mercury, chomium! Even if cleanup was done right, just imagine the hypocondriacs and the coincidental medical problems sure to happen over the years in these houses. Lawyers will be finding another mineral in those properties some day. As Kenny Banya would say "Gold, Jerry, gold!"
KarenWalker, that S Buffalo neighborhood you were thinking of is Hickory Woods (which city taxpayers are still not off the hook for).
Un. Freakin. Believable.
I just hope anyone who knows about the soil on this land DO NOT BUY/Rent any of these homes. It will be another Hickory Woods all over again....You would think with all the "STUDIES" this town is so famous for, we would NOT be making the SAME MISTAKES all over again. Hmmmm, back to the books Buffalo Leaders, THIS WILL NOT WORK... Un. Freakin. Believable for sure, AtwaterLouse! This out of place development just proves how 'backwards" the thinking in this town actually is..AND we are still builling the SAME 1980's brown crappy condos along the downtown waterfront, and people are actually for it, just as long as something is there. HOW SAD. and DESPERATE are some people in this community?
At the risk of sounding like the antagonist; why are Brownfield’s redeveloped without an environmental impact study?
The same scenario is repeated over and over because the City of Buffalo is headed-up by a bunch of morons and bean-counters.
Incidentally, what is the status of Hickory Woods? The first major building blunder.
I am pro-redevelopment in the inner core but we have an industrial heritage that simply cannot be ignored. Hell, if a plant existed on a certain spot for twenty to one-hundred years you can be damn certain that there is some form of ground contamination.
Duh…any first year engineering student knows that but, low and behold, who is typically in charge…some asshole with a master’s degree whose major is anything except engineering and we are right back on the demented merry-go-round!
I once worked for a guy in engineering whose degree was in marine biology; we produced electrodes for the steel industry!!!
The “plant engineer” had a degree in sociology; he replaced a clown whose background was in theology.
Surprise, surprise, the site is closed now!
Drop the arrogance and be a good manager; if you don’t have a background in engineering then surround yourself with people who do and maybe, just maybe, the City of Buffalo will begin to wake-up from it status quo slumber!
Report this