Buffalo Rising Online

It may be your filter at work. I have no issues.

I asked on an earlier post how BRO can be expected to report objectively on this issue when it has taken a position and is actively seeking signatures for a petition in favor of the new high rise. No response.

Soliciting signatures for a petition for or aginst the building means that BRO cannot report objectively on the issue anymore. That's too bad, because now we're stuck with the Buffalo News.

You might also want to poll Heritage Tourism consultants about what kinds of development best enhance a city trying to market its architectural and historic features and neighborhoods.

MRodgers,

Does it really matter what the people on the other side of the condo think about the proposed development? in many pther prosperous cities, public opinion rarely impacts development like it does in Buffalo. Look at the DC metro region. Condos and apartment buildings are being built at an incredible rate and no one takes into account the opinions of neighbors. Development in this region is slow because we somehow feel the need to care about the opinions of the minority rather than the majority.

Eric Oak,

Buffalo is a trying to market itself based on "its architectural and historic features and neighborhoods"? Really? I'm sorry but I don't see this at all. People do not come to Buffalo for the architecture. (at least not in large numbers) I can think of 5 things that are more profitable to the region than the city's architecture. I could be wrong.

Additionally, did you expect Buffalo Rising to report objectively on this issue? I mean the blog itself is skewed in many ways, city vs. suburbs, development vs status quo...etc. That's not a bad thing and I don't think we should expect a blog titled 'Buffalo Rising' to try to publicize opponents and the potential negative impact of proposed development in the region.

I grew up in that neighborhood. I was born there. I climbed the walls of Gate's Circle when I was a kid. I for one, think this is a nice structure. I watched the old building burn when I was 10 years old and saw the new one come up... I think I would have opposed that fake Manor House over this...

I say build it... What is the city fearing? Is it progress?

EricOak - How silly. How does this detract from the architectural and historic features of neighborhoods? Is a landmark going to be knocked down?

A close neighbor of the proposed tower said it so well in a previous post. To the effect that people didn't stop going to Chicago to see Robie house just because trump built a Tower.

RonR: couldn't agree more w/ you. preskop: renters should have as much of a say as homeowners (like me)? Uh & why? 1 thing which I must repeat everytime this topic (Gates Circle) comes up: as one drives toward downtown down Delaware toward the cricle, one is faced on both sides w/ bogus gas stations, empty lots, and a bogus pharmacy (I know; some poeple shop there but it still looks bad to me -- and, isn't this what the "antis" are worried about--looks?) today I drove down Delaware and for the life of me can not figure out why some are opposed to the new condo tower when there is so much "bad" out there near the circle. shouldn't these current eyesores be the focus of everyone's attention as opposed to a decent looking condo tower (or, at worst, a mediocre tower)? By the by: why did the City tear up the concrete street around Gates Circle one day before the Allentown Festival, the busiest City-day of the year? WTF????

yeah that was an awful decision by the city. What do you think Daniel Sack has to say about that one seeing that traffice was so congested on Lancaster. Maybe he'll file lawsuit against the city for doing roadwork in the summer and clogging up his street.

DANIEL SACK TRANSLATION - "i am opposed to a driveway" is code for no matter what else i write, i'm opposed to the project, and will hide behind process, or any thing else I can conjure up, so as not to be perceived as an obstructionist; "approve with modification" means do it my way;

STAY TUNED

hodgepodge: Bingo. Where is the circle around the circle? Meaning, if the building the proposed structure at that location is an affront to Olmsted or his vision (which I don't believe is true), how far away from the circle can you build junk that is an affront? 50 feet? 500 feet? 5 miles? So close to the circle are junky buildings (drug stores, gas stations, and other throw away structures) that are certainly more of an affront to me than the proposed building. Not that we don't need stores and gas stations (I wish we had charging stations, but that's another thread), but they should also fit into the neighborhood. Entrances on the sidewalk, buildings with windows fronting the sidewalk, parking behind, landscaping etc. are all types of things that should be required.

Where were the Park Lane residents when these places were being built? Where were the Rhode Island opinionators then?

SteveP: Holding up the DC metro area as a shining example of growth is not particularly encouraging. The DC metro area is a poster child for sprawl. The DC area is not prosperous because of the fast, voiceless construction projects; it is because of the government there. Also, architectural tourism is beneficial to the area. And I know many people who come here and spend money visiting the FLW-DM House. And, it's not even done yet. Your point is that people don't won't come here because of the architecture? Falling Water gets many visitors each year, so are you saying people won't come here because it is Buffalo?

I'm enthusiastically for this building, and many more of them, in a smarter location where it is not squeezed into a triangle of space on the edge of a mostly 100 year old residential home neighborhood that is, whether one savors the fact or not, the threshold of the Olmsted Parkway's most verdant and picturesque corridors. I happen to think this unique Olmsted area will be very valuable to Buffalo's economy within 50 years. And not because of squeezing in tall, relatively boiler plate high rises.

As for architectural tourism, MR, indeed it is a central plank in the city's future marketing. They just brought a consultant here from Glasgow who specifically said that Buffalo could harvest a lot of success from CAREFULLY honing and presenting its notable architectural and historic neighborhoods. Darwin Martin estate, Richardson Towers, Olmsted Parkways, Cobblestone, Allentown: this is just some of what we can market. And Delaware Ave. and its precincts is one of them.

IF this were a genuine icon of a building, if we were seeing Gehry or Stern or someone of real vision building an inimitable icon here, I could comprehend the excitement for this project. In fact that's what I was hoping for, and I kept my mouth shut while we waited for the design.

Then we got this: a tall glass of boring. Looked at honestly, it's a predictable tower for 68 residents. What on earth peope feel is so groundbreakingly crucial in this project continues to elude me. And the idea of this issue being divided into two "diameterically opposed" sides is what is silly. I hope ten more buildings just like this are built downtown; I am trying to help bring new development to the Delaware district by giving time and money. But this... this is a serviceable building looking for an ample block of sympathetic high rises. But I am confident it will be built and I am happy for the new owners who will enjoy it.

MRodgers, I do think on issues where complex and debatable perspectives can still be raised, it looks amateurish of BRO, much as I applaud and admire it, to solicit for a petition. I would think the same if they were against the project.

Eric, wake up. Delaware Ave. has been growing taller since the 1920s.

EricOak,

and you don't think Gehry would provide a predictable design? I'm pretty sure I could figure out what he would do at this site...the same damn thing he does with every project. maybe the problem is you just don't like the desing...which is fine. I think it's a great design by a well regarded international firm. "And Delaware Ave. and its precincts is one of them." exactly, but adding to it's legacy as a avenue for afluent residences only strengthen it's allure if you ask me.

Buffalonian,

As a co-founder of Buffalo Rising, I can no longer hide our venal and ulterior motives. Every employee of Buffalo Rising will receive $1M US if this project is approved. So, for the sake of the mortgages on our summer homes and our Rolls Phantom balloon payments, please sign the petition.

buffalonian: it isn't so much that BR is over the top on this issue, it's the rest of us: this project is symbolic. can anything be built anymore in this town against the wishes of a select few? similar to the Atwater house situation (I'm anti-Pano's on that one); it's symbolic. you believe BR is in this for a profit while and fear that the park lane will or has lost value; if so, who really cares? for what it's worth; i bet that the park lane resident scan absorb any alleged loss in their propetty values alot better than the rest of us. should a project be blocked for this reason alone? don't you see the absurdity of your argument? you criticize the BR for allegedly having a profit motive but defend the park lane (dinosours?) who you acknowledge only care about their property values. and, god forbid that someone is doing something for a profit; oh no!! we can't have that in this town can we? what gives my friend?

Figmo, is sarcasm the only language spoken here?

Senorita: you have a point; BRO has a right to a point of view. But most media that are not personal blogs express their stances in an editorial and draw a line. Don't we turn to BRO for accurate information about controversial issues in the community? If we do, how do we have any confidence in BRO's reporting and writing when it decides to work aggresively in favor of a particular side or business whose actions affect many people with different or maybe undecided views? I was pro-hotel on Elmwood but I didn't want BRO to be my soapbox for that. Editorials are fine, but the aggresive solicitation for the petition was a mistake. I don't care that much about the high rise at this point, but I wish there were a more thoughtful forum for debating these issues.

Eric, you obviously do care about the highrise (or lack thereof, which is your ultimate wish) enough to incessantly rationalize the NIMBY side of this argument at every opportunity possible.

Good questions, EricOak.

But does BRO as a supposed regional forum of ideas for the progress of the city (national forum, in many ways, due to the number of Buffalonians long departed, but still passionate about the city) have a right to an editorial point of view? If so, then come out strongly one way or another on all development issues and let the games begin.

I feel BR has been a shameless booster of this mediocre project. On-line petitions? Why not march through the circle banging the tops of garbage cans? A lot more energetic and real. Would that this not unattractive tower were to be built on the hospital site.

Buffalonian...

please explain how you came to this conclusion - "That being said, I travel allot and have been to 6-major Northeastern Rustbelt cities this month and Buffalo does need new builds like this." what did you see that could possibly lead you to this conclusion?

also - "The current location will destroy the value of the properties of those currently living in the old Park Lane" what proof do you have for this? Are you involved in real estate? what methods did you use to determine this?

it appears to me that you are buying the rhetoric be spewed by the obstructionists. give me facts, data, and trained experts as opposed to the conjecture and uneducated oppinions that we've heard over and over.

and isn't this a blog? isn't this a forum for opinions? I suggest anyone looking for unbiased journalism visit a more mainstream news source, not BRO message boards.

While your polling renters on their opinions' regarding development of the condo's...you may as well drive a little further down Delaware Ave to Forest Lawn cemetary and get their input too!!

lol nowhere else in America would so many people spend so much time on an issue like this...in cities that are moving ahead things like this are proposed and completed everyday without needing a two-thirds vote from the city's residents...just build it for God's sake and lets move on to the next one