Buffalo Rising Online

Over my dead body.

The primary responsibility for finding a reuse lies in the Buffalo Diocese. Ideas for reuse are legion, but the church doesn't get passing grades by passing the buck to people who don't own the building.

As usual the preservationists are against an innnovative idea. Here is a new idea let the building rot away a be looted for copper and other metals and then we would have another beat up building on the east side of buffalo.

Why don't we send the Central Terminal to a place that has more train travel? Why oppose that innovative idea?

Somehow I believe that this is flipping in the purest sense and should be an Anti Flipping Task Force issue.

The former St. Francis de Sales church (575 Humboldt Pkwy at Northland Ave) is a similar building and should be dismantled and given to the congregation in Georgia. Even though it already is a local landmark, no one has cared about it since the Catholic Diocese dumped it 15 years ago.

Here's a plan from the preservation community: landmark the building so stupid ideas get nothing more than embarassing news articles.

Chrishawley:

That would be proactive and make too much sense, the preservation community stands by its creed: reactive to a fault. Stand on the sidelines until someone tries to do something instead of logically mapping out a detailed plan to identify and protect key landmarks, therefore creating predicability and advancing the region.

I love the idea. Flipping? More like reuse.

If it were moved, what would take it's place? another vacant lot?

Maybe the Diocese can throw Tim Teilman into the package, so although we would lose a great architectural structure, we would be getting rid of an eyesore who plagues our community.

Maybe we can send the politicians, that have not created job growth in 50 years and that we insist on voting in, with the church.

Hence the reason for church closings and this dialogue.

The fact it's economically viable (and apparently necessary) is a kick in the collective gut to our community.

We're in dire need of some leadership, none seems forthcoming.

NBJOHN, church closings are a national phenomenon in central cities across the nation. It is not unique to Buffalo.

Carlmalone, the legislation that created the city Preservation Board does actually require the board to actively seek out new landmark designations, with historic resource surveys such as what you describe. This power has seldom been exercised, though some cities do it routinely.

A more proactive approach to landmarking historic buildings would require a change in the law that's held the preservation community back: a mandatory $500 fee just to *apply* to have a building designated. Applying gives no guarantee of success, either, particularly with an uncooperative owner like the Buffalo diocese. In cities like New York, reviewing landmark applications is considered a public service, and there is no charge.

To the Preservation Board's credit, they are seeking to landmark threatened churches.

Landmark all these churches.... we all know how we treat our landmarks here in western new york..

They think they can disassemble this church, pack in properly and ship it all the way to Georgia and reassemble it as is for a paltry $3 million... this won't happen because its definately gonna cost $5 million +++ to get this job done properly. Crazy rebels.. we're not talking about a strip mall here

ChrisHawley:

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but please let’s just call the “the law needs to be changed” what it is: an excuse and poor one at that. I am fully cognizant that not all applications are approved. The reason being not all structures are actually historic, regardless of one’s personal viewpoint. A lot of people here think every building in this town is worth saving, they are wrong.

The monetary concession forces the preservation community to prioritize high-value, architectural significant properties. Let’s say there are 1,000 high-value structures. That’s $50,000 in total application fees. Let’s throw in another $50k for application submission, copying costs etc. I routinely ask for money from individuals and corporations in this town and easily raise much more than $100k for a cause which quite honestly has far less value than the preservation of architectural jewels.

Excuses are excuses and only serve to block progress. What the preservation community really needs is some leadership and a viable strategic plan which encompasses both the business and greater community’s interests. This is not the case today. Coming up with the money is not the hard part.

My guess is the cost and other practicalities will prevent the Georgians from going though with moving this church. But if they really want to move it, why not? Buffalo obviously has was too many vacant churches to make use of. How is moving it worse than the likely alternative?

It's a numbers issue. Suppose some re-use could be found for this church. It's doubtful, but suppose it could. That re-use could easily occur in some other vacant church instead. The number of vacant churches greatly exceeds the amount of realistic re-use. There's been a few success stories, sure, and some more are possible. But look at the numbers and look at what usually happens across the city.

al-alo, I think you'll agree that communities are people, not geographic locations. The Catholic community that as you said "saved their pennies to build" this church are people/families who in large number moved away, in many cases far away, a generation or two down the road after it was built. If much of the community didn't stay in a city, why should it be that each and every building they built in that city has to stay forever?

It wasn't the ground at any particular spot of earth who saved pennies for this building. It was people who had feet and long ago used them to move away. I'm neither defending or attacking them for moving away. That was their decision and none of my business. But now the reality is there's all these empty buildings around here. When they stay empty too long they do more harm than good to the people here now in the present day.

I agree with you there shouldn't be deed restrictions. However for this particular church building, what realistic re-use is being prevented by deed restrictions?

Those who built it are passed away, their descendants are in many cases decided to spread out - some still in Erie Co, some far away. It's a mobile society obviously. People come and go.

The diocese selling the bishop's Oakland Pl mansion has been raised a lot and might happen some day. That's none of my business either. If the bishop moved from that, I doubt a huge church would be the most cost effective place to live compared to other buildings the diocese owns. The former Courier building downtown is another that they could sell. None of this affects the reality that huge churches don't have a lot of realistically viable re-use in present day Buffalo. Some do, but not nearly enough compared to how many there are.

How do we reuse St. Gerars's, anyhow?

* The Catholics in the Delavan-Bailey neighborhood are mostly gone, except for some elderly hangers-on.

* The physical plant is too large, and therefore too costly, for most smaller African-American congregations to maintain. There's many smaller, more easily-managed non-Catholic churches fleeing whites left behind that are more practical for a growing inner city congregation.

* The neighborhood is distressed, so there's almost no demand for adaptive reuse such as lofts, offices, a large nightclub, and so on.

* Community center? Maybe with the school, but not with a sanctuary that costs tens of thousands to heat every year. It's a waste of money for what is probably an already-underfunded group.

* Museum? See the above.

There's only two option I see here, if the building is to be saved,

* Force pious Catholic whites at gunpoint to move back to Delavan-Baiiley.

* Move the building

Maybe, though, instead of Georgia, if the building actually can be relocated, it can stay closer to home? Somewhere in the 'burbs, or possibly Toronto? Still sucks, but what;s the alternative, aside from keeping it empty and spending thousands to heat and guard the place when it has no practical reuse as it stands?

FWIW, the kids I knew that attended school mat St. Gerard hated the place with every fiber of their being. The place was legendary in Northeast Buffalo during the 1970s and 1980s for its cruel corporate punishment. Whenever I met a St. Gerard student, almost right away they'd reveal tales of classmates or themselves being duct-taped to desks, forced to stand at attention for hours, and so on. St. Al's students experienced a cakewalk in comparison.

Skarnath:

The preservation community’s lack of leadership is clearly demonstrated by Tielman's presentation on the Buffalo Psychiatric Center and the Richardson Complex, released ahead of the Richardson Center Corporation that is charged with overseeing the redevelopment. Why waste his energy focused on even delivering a plan? The RCC is more than capable of developing a plan for redevelopment. Look who is on their board; are they not capable of delivering a thought, realistic plan? I most certainly would think so.

Why are his resources deployed and expanded to develop an alternate plan, or Tim’s plan, when instead energy and resources should be focused on other needed matters. Let’s be cliché: too many cooks in the kitchen.

You need to strategize, prioritize, execute, stay on point, and avoid redundancy. Quite frankly, I don’t see any of this coming from the leadership of WNY’s preservation community. It truly is sad.

I wonder how many people posting to this thread are practicing Catholics who routinely (religiously) attend services in the City of Buffalo churches.

How many of you classify yourselves as 'free thinking agnostics and atheists', and how many of you are quick to jump as soon as a politician mentions religion or if there is a religious symbol displayed anywhere in public.

The same people who celebrate Buffalo Reuse for selling salvaged plywood and toilets are up in arms about the reuse of an entire building. Has anyone quantified the environmental impact that reusing these materials will have? I bet there is some group in Norcross, GA complaining that the most recently built church lacks the charm and character of the older churches in America.

We are getting what we have been asking for, creative reuse of a historically significant building. It is too bad that Buffalo doesn't have the Catholic population to support the reuse of this structure, and the diocese doesn't see fit to let it become a bar or occasional rental hall for weddings and community art shows.

If you have a better idea, then put up the money and reinvest in the church. If not, then let it go. There is a reason that the Preservationists are often perceived as reactionary and obstructionist. You want to fight this move, but you have absolutely no plans for better use of the building.

It realy saddens me that people are so spiritually bankrupt in our nation as is evidenced from the closings, the neglect, the wholesale gutting, the abandonment, the demolition or even moving of our churchs.

The south and west really have no such architectural gems. To be honest worshipping in those locations is not much different than worshipping in a cafeteria or auditorium. Why because the newly built cities were built after vatican2 when the latin mass was banned, simple things like incense and candles were dismissed and chorals and organs were replaced with grass, unwashed bodies, bare feet, beaded dresses and guitars. Ave Maria was replaced with Kumbuh Yah. The churchs of the Latin Mass were built for their physical presence to place you closer to the holy spirit...the 60s said the holy spirit was everyway and mother, father, abortion, birth, marriage, adultery, fornication, chastity, prudence, providence were guidelines. A nation interwoven in community became unraveled into selfishness, self centeredness and alienation (email, tv, videogames, etc)

I dont know...losing one of Buffalos Churchs would certainly aid the spiritual masses of cities that dont have Buffalos gifts but if that is the case then why not a church in danger of demolition like Our Lady of Notre Dame De Lourdes?

The Catholic Church of Buffalo which I am very sad to announce is about as much a shephard of its flock of parishoners as it is caretaker of its churches. How anyone can entrust their spiritual salvation to a Bishop that is unwilling to care for the institutions that built his diocese...is beyond my comprehension. The bishop should be out there putting the question of school choice and school vouchers and the fate of parochial schools right nect to the issue of charter schools. The bishop should be right out there in the community working with the municipality and the business community to rebuild endangered communities, especially since churches know before governments which communities are in danger and in transition.

If our body is the temple for our souls, then should we care less for those buildings which are caretakers of our communal spirit? The answer to this question is that the bishop is a business manager devoid of the holy spirit and his spiritual void is manifest in the flock within his diocese and visibly manifest in their buildings.

An incredible idea. Would love to see such an event occur. Reason? First, why not? -- it'd be cool to see the deconstruction. Secondly, as someone said this, the US, is a mobile society, and as someone, me, who was married in one of the Buffalo Diocese's recently closed church's, St. John the Baptist in Black Rock, I'd love to someday attend mass in the church were I was married again, and if it was moved to GA or wherever, well then, ROADTRIP!!!

Most of the above comments are not about faith, but simply, "oh yeah, its a cool building, let's bitch about it. When one of these church's dies, a part of ourselves dies. ANY attempt to keep them faith communites should be looked at, and not a 'freak out scene' for the area's hipsters. Frankly, unless your an RC, mind your own business.

-John

It is incredibly unreasonable to think that everything is going to stay the same forever. As we speak, something is changing slightly in our city, one direction or another. So groups like the Catholic Church need to adapt to those changes. They need to serve their members, but where those members are is always changing. The fact is that there are not enough members to support this many churches in those urban areas. And they're anticipating not having enough priests to staff them all soon. People who want to keep everything, and keep everything the same, are fighting a losing battle against the tide. Think of the opportunity costs we could incur by not trying or building anything new. So many people only talk about what you lose with old buildings (many of which have a lifespan). What about what you gain with something new? Louis Sullivan designed what we consider to be a masterpiece of early skyscraper construction with his Guaranty Building downtown. This we gained. What did we lose in the process? - what sort of 1800's building was demolished in its place? You save what's useful and what can be useful and can be adapted. And in any case, if you want to save something, who's going to pay for it? Who's going to use it? These questions haven't been answered. Except by these folks in Georgia. Instead of building some McMansion of a church they're trying to adapt something for changing current uses. You want to save all of these buildings - where is the money going to come from? If you make into an art exhibit, that's great for some but again, where's the money coming from because that won't be a revenue-generating operation. Times change and so do needs. If we do not adapt to meet those needs, we'll be left behind...much like we keep complaining that we are.

1. Why should we let another part of the country loot a piece of our heritage? Our architecture is one of the advantages we have over other areas. Letting it be picked apart is short sighted.

2. The Catholic Church is awash in money. Even today, it is one of the most powerful institutions on the planet. If it actually cared about this church, it could save it.

3. While people blame the loss of the Catholic population to the suburbs for the closing of this church, Church policy played a big role in encouraging that flight. The Catholic Church is on record against sprawl and its negative effects, and could have lived by that commitment and refused to build new churches out in areas that had been farmland a decade before. Instead, they chose the path of least resistance and abandoned the city in favor of ample parking. This whole issue is, forst and foremost, a failure in leadership on the part of the Church.

Just think of how great this will be for the thousands of Buffalonians who have moved to the Atlanta area. Norcross is 25 minutes away from Atlanta, and even closer for those living in North Atlanta and Mechanicsville. We lost the population to greener pastures, now it is time for the rest of the city to follow. We no longer have the population to fill the pews and probably won't for decades to come, especially in that neighborhood.

Maybe we could strike a deal with Norcross that they buy the church and we throw in 500 dilapidated houses for free. Start clearing out the East Side and get it ready for the second coming of Buffalo, something that will occur no earlier than 2090.

Colin - 1) Because we can't take care of it.

2) Probably true, but they no longer care about this church, either does the surrounding community.

3) Probably true, but so has popular sentiment, the continual push towards political correctness. As far as building in the suburbs, that is where the population is. You won't fault Wegman's for building near the people, then why fault the church for moving to where the communities moved. BTW, I believe that the Diocese closed many churches in the suburbs and exurbs as well, the difference is that the suburban community can reuse the churches while the City cannot.

Here is an idea.

Move a wealthy suburban congregation to this building and ask the southern congregation to use their 3 Millions $$ for charitable work. This way the local congregation can work to aid this distressed Buffalo neighborhood as Jesus would have liked and the southern congregation can use their money to do good rather than the harm this concept will do to Buffalo.

Buildings define and belong to the community and should only be moved as a last resort. This area is not desolate or beyond redevelopement possibilities. The future is in the city and losing our best will prove shortsighted. The Catholic Diocese has a poor record in disposing of its surplus real estate and could do much more to protect and market these vacant churches. Rarely agree with Atwater but he is right, it will probably cost too much to move.

Bini,

Oh yes you will run out. The supply is not endless. It is extremely sad to see how little regard Buffalo and WNY has for its very precious and finite heritage.

"You won't fault Wegman's for building near the people, then why fault the church for moving to where the communities moved."

This quote really gets to the heart of the matter. Wegmans and the Catholic Church are radically different organizations. Wegmans is a bottom line business, while the church makes all sorts of claims to be a servant of the people, to operate according to a higher moral code, etc.

"These people have a need, and we can serve that need."

Here's an honest question -- why should I care about the needs of people in Georgia? I'm a partisan of Buffalo and WNY. I don't give a hoot about Georgia. Let them pray in their lousy prefab churches.

The Williamsville Mill is turning out to be a problem- (lack of suitable re-use, restoration costs keeps growing beyond budget), maybe they could put it on e-bay. And then there is the Roycroft Campus, not enough money to restore and maintain this complex, maybe Atlanta could buy it and move it.

Steel says: Here is an idea.

Move a wealthy suburban congregation to this building and ask the southern congregation to use their 3 Millions $$ for charitable work. This way the local congregation can work to aid this distressed Buffalo neighborhood as Jesus would have liked and the southern congregation can use their money to do good rather than the harm this concept will do to Buffalo.

Here's an idea, let's get the expatriates like STEEL to move back from places like Chicago and Georgia. It must be great to preach about people moving to the suburbs when you fled to Chicago.

Steel says: Here is an idea.

Move a wealthy suburban congregation to this building and ask the southern congregation to use their 3 Millions $$ for charitable work. This way the local congregation can work to aid this distressed Buffalo neighborhood as Jesus would have liked and the southern congregation can use their money to do good rather than the harm this concept will do to Buffalo.

Here's an idea, let's get the expatriates like STEEL to move back from places like Chicago and Georgia. It must be great to preach about people moving to the suburbs when you fled to Chicago.

"Hey lifer, that reminds the Coit house on Virginia is up for sale on Ebay right now- No Shit- copy and paste the link below. B.R.L You should put your 1830's Federal on Ebay . http://cgi.ebay.com/3-Bed-2-5-Bath-Virginia-Buffalo-NY-14201_W0QQitemZ160289526242QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item160289526242&_trkparms=39%3A1|66%3A2|65%3A3|240%3A1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14"

I t would be a great deal for Buffalo...0nly if the owner (no name used) WENT WITH IT!

BRA - Sanctuary lofts are located in a developing and growing city. This church is located in the slums of Buffalo. Not near the slums, but pretty much ground zero of one of the most crime ridden and depressed area of Buffalo.

Quick poll: How many BRO readers live in the neighborhood immediately surrounding this church? Let's go out 10 blocks in any direction... anyone?

Ask yourself why you do not live in this area, and then take that thought and apply it to 10,000 other people who won't live here. Do you really think that there is a chance for this "gem" to survive in BUffalo?

Colin - Do you attend church services? Do you understand the purpose, mission, and vocation of the church or are you just throwing stones from your holier than though pulpit?

BRA - I disagree... that section of Denver had turned the corner from slum to vacant wasteland a few years before this project was introduced. I would liken it to the New York Avenue / Rte 50 townhouse project in DC that took place a few years ago. This area was similar to Black Rock and areas around Grant Street when it started, while other areas of Denver that are analogous to the East Side still remain poor and depressed.

I haven't lived there for a few years, but I was working there when the Sanctuary Lofts and similar projects were started. The entire city went through a rebuilding and re-branding exercise, they moved the airport, closed the air force base, and dropped in many high-end residential and commercial projects, mostly subsidized by Colorado and the City of Denver.

One thing about Denver is there is only so much real estate that they are able to develop, the rest is either National Park, State Park, Reservation, or uninhabitable. So there is a greater need for gentrification than what we have in our dwindling city.

If the church stays where it is, as probably will happen but who knows, nobody seems to be disputing that it will become a dilapidated eye sore that adds more blight around Bailey/Delavan. The arguments people are making against it moving are centered on dislike for other things the diocese does or on abstract emotional feelings about the importance of architecture even if it sits empty, falls apart, and creates hazards for neighbors.

Yeah a vacant lot isn't ideal, but a vacant lot is better than what will probably happen. There's simply no sensible purpose for a building that large in that spot.

If the Georgians really want it, they should be encouraged to move it and then thanked if they do.

It is a shame that Buffalo can't or won't maintain this church, but it would be a travesty to let this church disintegrate rather than let others have it.

It is a true shame that City of Buffalo has failed the people of Buffalo time and time again. People like PaulBuffalo and STEEL, who are passionate about Buffalo, must tell us what we should and should not do from more successful cities in California and Illinois. It is a shame that we are so broke that we cannot even attempt to save a building like this, because we know that we are on a continuous downhill slide with more people leaving the area than moving to it.

We are losing the most attractive and inspiring facets of this city, because we lost the lifeblood of our population long ago. The city cannot even compete with the surrounding area, how is it going to compete with cities like Atlanta, LA, Chicago, and Boston. It can't, and as a result companies continue to move and build in these cities while Buffalo wastes away a little more each day.

It is sad that this church is a visible sign of how bankrupt we truly our as a city, spiritually and economically. I hate to say it, but I think that Buffalo may be too far gone, and we may be trying to do too little too late to really make a difference for our future.

Whynot,

It is not a matter of Buffalo being too broke. It is a matter of Buffalo (meaning WNY in general) having set bad priorities. The Catholic Church has built new buildings within the last few years while it closes these amazing treasures. WNY expands outward placing a large percentage of its resources into bloated government and wasteful infrastructure as its population declines.

When you do not take pride in the things that make you unique you are ultimately doomed to mediocrity. At times it seems Buffalo takes pride in it ability to reach mediocrity.

BRA> Sanctuary Lofts is not your typical loft project or a common reuse for an historic church building. With smashed windows, a fire damaged interior and a deteriorating red sandstone exterior, the former Methodist Episcopal Church in Denver’s Uptown area was once one of the largest churches in the city.

Uptown is a mostly-gentrified neighborhood adjacent to downtown Denver, in a metropolitan region where every few years, an old neighborhood is "discovered" and gentrified in less than a decade.

In Buffalo, there isn't the same market forced driving gentrification (growing population of young professionals that embrace city life, general economic prosperity, pricey residential real estate that forces young homebuyers to seek out marginal but livable neighborhoods where they can afford to boy, and so on). In Buffalo, you don't have people paying $500K for North Buffalo four-squares, and a growing market of young prospective homeowners getting into bidding wars over $200K "bargains" in Lackawanna and Kaisertown.

Delavan-Bailey isn't a quaint but unappreciated neighborhood filled with charming architectural treasures. It's a formerly working-class to lower-middle-class German and Italian neighborhood filled with small Buffalo bungalows that have been mostly vinyl-sided and Formstone-veneered beyond recognition, which for the past 15 years has faced severe socioeconomic upheaval; racial transition, influx of low-income households, increases in gang activity, an exodus of most of its family-owned businesses, and so on. Whenever Channel 4 starts off a newscast with a murder, odds are very good the story will include the words "Delavan Avenue",

With so many great affordable, livable neighborhoods in the Buffalo area, why would a young professional choose to live in Delavan-Bailey over Allentown, Elmwood Village, North Buffalo, Kenmore, or Parkside?

Steel - Well spoken from a man who contributes to this mediocrity by abandoning the area. Thanks from all of us in Buffalo to all of you in Chicago!

BTW, the new builds for the catholic church were primarily targeted at areas that do not have churches of sufficient size to fit the congregation (refer to Amherst) or where the congregations are no longer large enough to support the dwindling congregations. Perhaps if more people stayed in the area we wouldn't have as much of a problem with dwindling populations in WNY.

whynot, are we related? You could be one of the all time greats....keep up the good work!

I like reading your posts....a true realist.

It's never going to happen, so let's take the temperature of this debate down a few degress right away. To dismantle, transport and reconstruct this building would cost twice the estimate.

The only sensible comments I've seen here are PaulBuffalo's, but a reasonable and thoughtful understanding of Buffalo's wealth and dignity have been typically drowned out by the "realists" who think cities are lived in, enjoyed and given meaning by statistical comparisons to self-conscious young cities lost in the mountains of Colorado or collecting dry heat on the steppes of Arizona.

In some ways this elegant church, whose last mass I attended, is a strong symbol of Buffalo's character: it is beautiful but robust, subtle but majestic, and just grand enough to impress but still human enough in scale to feel protective. That's what PaulBuffalo and Steel understand about Buffalo, and those are the qualties that will gradually prevail and keep Buffalo seductive to natives and newcometrs, no matter what size the city arrives at.

It's too bad that PaulBuffalo and Steel are not here, but they do more for Buffalo than the snide know-it-alls whose understanding of cities and especially Buffalo has the dull punch of papers like the Buffalo News.

joey- Gerhart Yaskow the owner of the Coit house was once a slumlord here in Black Rock about 3-4 years ago as he owned multiple dilapidated and foreclosure property's. YES...and STILL DOES. He continues to list a parcel for sale for a ridiculous amount of money , DOING no repairs, bleeding the property until he can find another fool to unload it to. Property has been listed for almost 2 YEARS!! with no takers and very little maintenance done in the interim...right across from Habitat For Humanity RESALE STORE..OFF Amherst st.

Haha --- "let's take the temperature of this debate down a few degrees", oh and by the way, people who have adifferent viewpoint about this than I do are "snide know-it-alls" who lack understanding of cities and do less for Buffalo than distant blog commenters.

'so let's take the temperature of this debate down a few degress right away. ... It's too bad that PaulBuffalo and Steel are not here, but they do more for Buffalo than the snide know-it-alls whose understanding of cities and especially Buffalo has the dull punch of papers like the Buffalo News.'

Ok, Eric, good job. Temperature lowered down to a nice cozy elite-ly degrees!

EricOak said: This elegant church... is a strong symbol of Buffalo's character: it is beautiful but robust, subtle but majestic, and just grand enough to impress but still human enough in scale to feel protective."

Absolutely great comparison, but please be sure to add in "utterly and completely empty and undesirable where it is today"... that pretty much sums up Buffalo.

Whynot, Come spend a day with me and see how "completely empty" Buffalo is. That's the kind of denial of reality that makes "realists" such a menace to Buffalo.

EricOak - Refer to picture of Mark Croce standing in the middle of Franklin street on a weekday afternoon with only a handful of cars in sight. Please refer to Main Street on any day after 6:00 PM (TITS nights excluded). Please refer to the 5,000+ empty houses that we can't even give away.

Sometimes reality has a negative bite to it, sorry it can't all be happiness and roses.

Mothballing makes sense, if done properly buildings can be secured and maintained without becoming an eyesore. Structures that have survived for a century deserve a decade or so to find a new life. With each demolition( or relocation) Buffalo loses more of its character and becomes less valuable to future residents.

Whynot,

That's your proof of Buffalo's livability, attractiveness and meaning as a city? One photo, a vulgar reference to one of Buffalo's most wounded streets, and one uncontextualized fact? That's your evidence that the city is "utterly and completely empty and undesirable." Do you really believe those words?

My invitation stands: spend a day with me and let me show you the city--the whole city.

gaustad you aren't related to whynot, but you have the same low IQ and self-esteem. Cheers!

Has BRO become a place to attack all things Buffalo? It is because they cannot see the potential or don't have the strength and perserverance to make things better. This city was never accomodating to whiners and complainers and that's something to be proud of.

EricOak - No, those were a couple of 'tongue-in-cheek' examples... weren't you the one calling to have the 'temperature turned down' or to have people lighten-up? Geez..

Seriously though, the city is struggling. We lose more people than we gain every year, we have very little viable retail in downtown buffalo, our schools are struggling which makes the city undesirable to many who would like to live there, we have high crime and poverty that we blame the suburbs for creating, we have lost more jobs than we have created, in most sectors, over the past 30 years. Our waterfront and primary streets into and out of the city are desolate and depressed (Main, Genessee, Broadway, Filmore, Bailey, etc).

I am laughing at Blackrocklifer's comments about the city not accommodating whiners and complainers, given that this is all I ever read from him. "Whah, the suburbs took our money, whah, they left the poor behind, whah, China took our jobs, whah, whah, whah". Seriously dude, check yourself.

Platt4 - I'll put my IQ against yours any day.

> Perhaps if more people stayed in the area we wouldn't have as much of a problem with dwindling populations in WNY.

As for Delavan-Bailey, the forces that drove people to leave the area can't really be summarized in a simple soundbite. It's far, far more complicated than "blacks moved in, and racist white ethnics fled." There were a number of forces pulling and pushing African-Americans and low-income households into the neighborhood, and other forces pulling and pushing lower-middle-class whites from the neighborhood.

As for the region, the primary reason people leave because given the choice of staying and being unemployed or underpaid versus working in another region for a competitive salary and possibly the chance to enjoy social and recreational opportunities they feel are better suited to their interests, many are going to vote with their pocketbooks. For many, the choice is limited: eat in Charlotte or starve in Buffalo.

Should people that move into a neighborhood be obligated to stay in that neighborhood forever? Are people born and raised in Buffalo morally obligated to stay in the region due to loyalty, even when it means their quality of life, career goals and possibly social life may suffer as a result? Should a birth certificate that reads "Buffalo" as a place of birth also be a ball and chain?

blackrocklifer> It is because they cannot see the potential or don't have the strength and perserverance to make things better.

Many people have the strength and perseverance. What they don't have is the power or money to do so. Both of those things are far, far more difficult to come by in Buffalo than so many other regions.

It's so easy to say "Why don't you stay and make things better?" Many good people are doing so as it is, and it's I give them all the credit in the world for their well-intended efforts, but the dance still hasn't changed from one step forward, two steps back. The old guard still calls the dance, sets the beat, and keeps the rhythm.

Damn, I wish BR had an edit function. Typos and a keybounce-prone iBook ... sigh.

Whynot,

I meant the debate about the church being moved or not--that is certainly not going to happen. But point taken about lightening up...

But it's hard to do that in the face of comments like "utterly empty and unattractive." Your observations in your last post are true, but they are true for any older, formerly industrial northern city: in fact; in fact, they are true for just about any city in America that's over 250,000 people and is more than one hundred years old. High poverty and crime accompany nearly all large cities in America, and the per capita rates are not wildy disparate for cities of Buffalo's size. Almost all older northern cities are losing population.

There are also facts that argue for seeing cautious hope in Buffalo's future: the strongest job growth in all of upstate in the past year, a relatively stable real estate market (with average values rising last year), and an infusion of new medical and health science business in the city. On an anecdotal level, someone just bought a single family house in Buffalo for $1.4 million. There is an impressively diverse menu of cultural life in the city--and not insignificant parts of the city with active streetlife and genuine beauty. The neighborhood around St. Girard's has an authentic street life. It is not a "gentrified" area, but it is alive, it is real and it is functioning.

Taking St. Girard's from Buffalo IS symbolically wrong; it is like taking a loved heirloom away from an aging dowager. Does she need it? Not technically. Can she take care of it? Maybe not right now. But who would say it was wise to take it from her?

Dan- good point on Delavan-Bailey, had family there in the 60's and 70' and you are right, the forces that changed the city were far more complicated than most admit.

Dan- It can be tough here but if you are reasonably smart and hardworking it can be done. I think the old guard is fading and the future looks bright, something I didn't think 10 or 15 years ago.

I do live in the neighborhood, about 6 blocks away. I worship at St. Lawrence Church at 1520 East Delavan Avenue. I attended the last Mass at St. Gerard's. I can't judge the accuracy of the estimated moving costs. I do know that the last pastor tried for ten years to find a good reuse for the church, without success. The estimate for repairs I have heard is in excess of $1,000,000 to repair the roof and replace the heating plant. He did succeed in establishing a housing and education facility for single mothers in the former convent. The school building continues to house a food bank to serve the needy in the neighborhood. Reuse of the school building is being pursued.

The people I have talked to that attended that last Mass all seem to hope that the relocation is successful. They hope that their old building will have new life as a Catholic Church. I do wonder if all the people opposed to the relocation would contribute money to preserve the building. I do not understand why anyone would be opposed to relocating this building from the Northeast US to the Southeast. The Catholic Church in the United States is shrinking in the Northeast and growing in the South and West. For a wide variety of reasons it is unlikely that St. Gerard Church will ever reopen at the corner of Bailey and Delavan as a church of any kind. In my opinion it is far better to relocate it for reuse rather than spend about $1,000,000 to refurbish and stabilize the building and tens of thousands of dollars annually for utilities and maintenance in the hope that it will be used someday, by someone unknown today, even if the money could be found.

St. Gerard's is a beautiful old building, on a large campus, built to service the pastoral needs of 8,000 to 10,000 people. A few hundred people struggled for a long time to keep the doors open, and succeeded for a long time. It has been suggested that the Catholic Church has the money needed. It is possible that money could be diverted from operating the schools, hospitals and Catholic Charities to do so. I suspect that if that happened donations would fall precipitously and the community reaction would be very negative, and justifiably so.

I sincerely hope that the people of Mary our Queen parish are successful.

Bini,

You see this as an either or...either we invest in this piece of heritage or that heritage as if both can not be done. That has been Buffalo's mode of operation for the last half century and the results are quite disgusting.

"Either we tear down the Larkin Building or we allow it to crumble. Either we tear down 50% of downtown for more parking or we lose downtown retail Ether we detsroy this parkway for a new super highway or downtown will die etc, etc etc. Every time a piece of Buffalo's richness is threatened with destruction there is a strong and vocal crowd cheering it on as it is is some badge of honor. It is not. Very few of the city's greatest landmarks would still be in existence today if a very small but vigilant group of people did not call them on their BS.

You know, at one time the Guaranty Building was called worthless and beyond saving. Buffalo could not support such a building. It was too far gone. Parking was urgently needed on that block. Today it holds one of the nation's largest law firms. This is one of the world's most important architectural landmarks and the "realists" wanted to convert it to parking! The dreamers made sure that is was something to be proud of.

Bini you even admitted to your own misguided thoughts on the destruction of that Allentown Civil War house.These buildings should not be taken for granted. They don't grow on trees and they don't build them anymore.

I dont know why people are so up in arms for a church they most likely never visited or went to - this is just a result of the downfall of Buffalo. The city will continue to shrink, so why must the Diocese suffer? There are just too many churches for too few people to go. If you would goto Sunday mass in the majority of the Buffalo churches you would find them barely half full. I know it is nice having your church located down the street but if it means having to drive a bit further and consolidation to save the entire group, so be it. People in Buffalo throw out the preservation card way too often, and will end up trying to preserve every last building. Then, when the entire educated group moves out the poor and elderly can remain with all of these preserved buildings.

Some folks are already circling the wagons on this church's fate as though disassembling and moving it is the only option on the table. The building is in pretty good shape.

With the Catholic church in steep decline in this country, the closing of places of worship was predictable. All over portions of America where this religion had a large presence is experiencing a glut of facilities. Even in more rural parts of Erie and neighboring counties, parishes have been forced to combine congregations. The "Church" in the wake of scandal, declining membership, and costly settlements is in both an economic and spititual crisis. Why not sell this building and others for just practical reasons. I don't see a Catholic resurgance in either the near of distant future. Buffalo has some of the most beautiful and varied styles of faith elevators to maintain a good stock of these architectural feats. Let this one go and it will be assured use by a healthy congregation in need for something that will inspire them as it has many before when it was viable.

"Colin - Do you attend church services? Do you understand the purpose, mission, and vocation of the church or are you just throwing stones from your holier than though pulpit?"

1. No, I don't.

2. Yes, I do.

3. The church is a temporal organization, and is subject to the same critiques as any other organization. My point is that to claim that a church needs to close because the Catholics left the neighborhood ignores the role that the church played in encouraging that flight. And catering to or encouraging sprawl violates the church's commitment to environmental stewardship and justice.

4. It didn't -- and still doesn't -- have to be this way. The Catholic diocese in Cleveland, for instance, seems to have dealt with these issues not by abandoning the city, but by trying to strengthen links between city and suburban parishes and their commitment to the city as a whole. You can read the bishop's speech on "The Moral Implications of Regional Sprawl" at http://www.citc.org/speeches.htm. I've never heard anything similar from local Catholic leadership.

OnRichmond - How is it a "dirty deed" to try letting some people reuse this church in Georgia where they evidently have a real need for it instead of having it sit vacant for the next many decades adding blight as many vacant churches are already doing across Buffalo because there's no realistic use for them?

What are all these other realistic possibilities for reuse that a few comments keep hinting about for this church but never say what they are exactly? Community center? Nightclub? Upscale condos? What?

What's your reaction to dyerluke's comment above from 23:07? Doesn't that really say it all?

1. I think there are options other than sending a piece of our architectural heritage out of state or letting it sit and rot. The diocese could properly mothball it, or move it to another local/regional parish, or they could try and sell it (without burdensome conditions) to a responsible local buyer.

2. The list of local and regional assets that are currently being misused or neglected is pretty long. I'd hate to see us start accepting that they should be sent elsewhere to be taken care of by those with fatter wallets.

Those few examples Daniel writes of did find demand. Many church buildings don't for various reasons including size, maintenance issues, and location. Daniel, specifically for this particular church at Bailey-Delevan what are you saying is likely a realistic reuse?

Colin - Cleveland may be trying to avoid closures, but they're having to face reality too. According to this in the Chigao Tribune, 45 closures are planned in the Cleveland area very soon with 25 Catholic church closings likely in the city there.

Cleveland diocese plans to close churches September 19, 2008 CLEVELAND - A downsizing plan that could shutter more than 45 Roman Catholic parishes in the diocese of Cleveland is prompting some Catholics to look for ways to save their churches. More than 20 regional groups of parishes are preparing recommendations for closing or merging parishes in response to population shifts to the outer suburbs and the ongoing clergy shortage. Bishop Richard Lennon is expected to decide the fate of the parishes by March. The most closures are expected in Cleveland, where about 25 parishes are in danger of being shut down. ...'

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-religion-briefs2sep19,0,2290588.story

Colin is right. I second DanSack's idea.

From today's Buffalo News: http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/story/468614.html

Let's build a new $8 million dollar church while we let churches that our ancestor's built that would cost over $250,000,000 and even $500,000,000 to recreate go to waste and rot. People are driving to the outlying churches anyways. There is really no more "neighborhood churches" anymore that people walk too. The joke here is where the bishop refered to Smormville as a sleepy little place where St. Gerards would not fit in. Anyone notice the mile and miles of stip malls and subdivisions that start up one block away at Transit and County Rd heading all the way south to Elma?

The true shame here is the lack of church leardership in promoting the ideals of the church. People may choose to move away but nothing prohibits them from driving to these old parishes and worshiping among thier poorer bretheren, yet equals in faith. those thier religion supposidly holds in the highest regard. These churches were built out of the need from population growth. These closures and new-builds just perpetuate the uneeded sprawl which eats away at our heritage and overall strength. Just one part of what turned me off to the Catholic Church after being raised quite the "fan."

I suppose Jesus would run his ministry today from a church in the burbs...?

"The city cannot even compete with the surrounding area," - kind of hard to when it's set up that way. We are one metropolitan area. Until we start acting like it, we will just continue to fight amongst ourselves while other places continue to pass us by....

DanielSack> When the Guarantee Building was in danger of being demolished too bad nobody thought to send it south. A more modern building looking like the modern City Court building could have replaced it.

Same with the ECC City Campus building when it was threatened with demolition. Imagine something more beautiful like the ECC buildings in Orchard Park and Amherst!

It's not just the building, but also the location.

Those buildings you mentioned are in downtown Buffalo, an urban core where a wide variety of possible uses are viable. St. Gerard is in an emerging ghetto; a once somewhat pleasant lower-middle-class German/Italian neighborhood that transformed into to a somewhat pleasant lower-middle-class black neighborhood that is now transforming into the sequel of Genesee-Moselle. That's not to say that the East Side doesn't deserve architectural treasures or the attention of preservationists, but rather that the location of St. Gerard makes reuse much more difficult.

Most good-sized churches in Delavan-Bailey, Schiller Park and Kensington either carried on with a congregation that looks much different than that of a decade ago, or with new occupants in the form of growing black congregations. There aren't many black Catholics or white ethnic Catholic holdouts to maintain a viable Catholic congregation at St. Gerard, and there's no black congregations with the size and financial resources to take over such an enormous building, Reuse for lofts, offices, and so may be viable for a large vacant church in downtown, North Buffalo or Elmwood Village, but we're talking about a building on the East Side. Not the white ethnic enclaves of Kaisertown and Lovejoy, or the Polonia that remains the symbolic and sentimental heart of Buffalo's Polish-American community, or the middle-class blocks surrounding Humboldt Parkway, but Delavan-Bailey, a place that has been off the radar screen of Buffalo's collective consciousness for decades, except when another murder makes the six o'clock newscast. Even the most idealistic of the "Buffalo is the most authentic, real and genuine city on the planet, and its poorest neighborhoods are the most authentic and real of them all" crowd would probably shy away from living in a Delavan-Bailey loft, if they had the choice and the means to live in EV, North Buffalo, or anyplace else where it's easy to find a latte and the latest copy of Artvoice.

The building deserves to be saved, but how? Other than forcing people at gunpoint to convert to Catholicism and move to a bungalow on Newburgh Avenue, or dreaming of an ideal Buffalo where people stayed in the neighborhoods of their birth for their entire lives, what do you do?

RonR --

1. I take issue with your claim that I "have contempt for the Catholic Church." There's nothing here to suggest that I do. I respect the church's commitment to the public good, including its opposition to sprawl and urban abandonment. I criticize the church when it fails to live up to its principles, like when it builds new churches in outlying areas and then closes churches in the core.

2. Moving the church may be the "the best option for the owners," but that doesn't mean that everyone else should just accept their judgment. The owners have a responsibility to the community. One of the lessons that we learned from the Livery affair -- I hope -- was that the desires of the owner don't necessarily outweight the needs of the community.

PaulBuffalo> Biniskiewicz, years ago, the argument was made that the Cyclorama building was not suited to any other use, either. It took a creative force to make it into offices.

The Cyclorama wasn't located in Delavan-Bailey. Comparing the old Post Office, Guaranty or Cyclorama to a massive church in an increasingly distressed neighborhood with no signs of a future reversal of fortune is like comparing chicken wings at Gabriel's Gate to a beef on weck in a restaurant many people are afraid to step foot in.

If Central Terminal was downtown (such siting would have been impossible because through trains to Chicago wouldn't be possible, but stiill) or Transfiguration Church was on Allen Street, their fate would be much, much different. Same thing if St Gerard was near West Delavan rather than East Delavan.

"The building deserves to be saved, but how? Other than forcing people at gunpoint to convert to Catholicism and move to a bungalow on Newburgh Avenue . . ."

I can think of two ways.

1. The diocese lives up to its responsibilities as a property owner, and properly maintains and secures the building. Is it expensive? Yes. Is it their responsibility? Yes.

2. While the church can't force anyone to convert or move into the neighborhood, they can compel Catholics to come into the city for an hour each weekend. If believers want their sacraments, I don't see why a 15 minute drive into the city is much different than a 15 minute drive to some new suburban church. If the diocese was serious about its commitment to stopping sprawl, they could reverse field and focus on drawing people to the core, rather than building new at the outskirts.

DanielSack - Yes countless old buildings were reused. In your examples (Guaranty, ECC, Darwin Martin), the number of reused big churches is zero. You included a light house, but not a big church. But ok some big churches were reused as we know, and also many vacant big churches have become rotting blight because good intentions weren't matched by a realistic use.

You know you wouldn't accept your own "logic" in reverse. If someone listed buildings everyone agreed should be demolished and tried to use that by itself to say some other building should also be demolished, you'd rightly say it's a lame argument. But some like to throw around Larkin, Guaranty, etc. as trump cards to say building fill-in-the-blank is realistic for reuse simply because it's an old building too - just like Larkin and Guaranty. Obviously more mature discussions acknowledge there's no automatic answer either way.

Why did you duck my question about what you think is a realistic reuse for this church? Do you honestly think all vacant big churches can be reused? If not, what's wrong with letting this one go and having one fewer to have to find a reuse for?

Other than civic ego, what's the reason for demanding that this church sit vacant here for many decades compared to letting it go to the Georgians who want to use it? Is civic ego a smart and ethical reason to not let them use it?

All this will be moot in the likely event the Georgia move doesn't happen due to cost or Teilman. But for now why oppose the one serious possibility if you can't offer an alternative even close to serious? What's your plan? A jumbo sized community center? A creative-class something? What? Should Buffalo Rising leave the cobblestone "district" and move there?

Colin - I'm not Catholic but I bet a lot of Catholics living past Transit Rd would sooner leave the church than travel to Bailey-Delavan every week as you're saying the church can just order them to do. Based on your previous comment I guess you might feel that makes them evil people, but whatever - this is the real world we're living in. Seems you're arguing for things that have no real chance of happening. You're usually more grounded. Don't you often say the city should downsize its physical infrastructure and point out it not long ago had over double it's current population?

The issue is beyond a building and beyond a religion. Moving the chuch is paramount to abandoning the neighborhood. That church is the cornerstone of the area and should always be that way. How quick are people to abandon areas of the city without providing hope. That church always provided hope to the members of the local community, its removal would signal giving up on the area. Building's don't just stand as a piece of art, especially churches, they're a reflection of the community, of its soul and of the greater good of people. It seems that people are ready to just quit and give away the remaining few things that could help to revive an area. This whole thread is full of "realists" and people who seem to have no hope for any change. This post reveals a city that has quit on itself, given up on rebirth and become resigned to being happy in seperate little ghettos, be them impoverished or golden.

Ron, I'm not Catholic, but I think the disproportionately vocal outrage in response to the fallout of Journey in Faith and Grace is because Buffalo has a disproportionately large Catholic population; the second largest percentage of Catholics in the US, behind Providence. Catholicism is inextricably linked with Buffalo's collective culture. The actions of the Catholic church have a huge impact on all Buffalonians, regardless of their faith. Consider how often Buffalo Diocese news makes the front page of the Buffalo News, or the lead story of television newscasts. Such prominent coverage is something you won't see in other cities.

The rumblings of the recent Temple Beth El/Temple Shaarey Zedek merger were barely felt outside of 14221; even among Buffalo's Jewish community, the merger was seen as being critical for the long-term survival of Conservative Judaism in the region. Nobody batted an eye when several Lutheran churches in northeast Buffalo closed their doors in the 1990s. The Catholic Church is the really, really big kid on the block, and when they make a move, no matter how small, it's going to affect tens or hundreds of thousands.

This location would be perfect for an organization with a mission to serve the poor and forgotten. Some Christian group with vast resources and a large following. A place for members to live the life of a Christian instead of just going through the ceremonies and feel good rituals that pass for being religous.

Atwater --

1. I'm not saying that the church can order people to do anything. People have a perfect right to choose where or whether to attend church. But it can offer people different choices than are currently on the table. And while you may be right that some Catholics would balk at spending an hour each week on the east side, I think the effect would be marginal. I know people who would drive 45 minutes each way to Mass. If the church had more options at the core, and fewer at the periphery, people would start to change their habits. Very few would fall into apostasy or decide to become Lutherans or whatever.

2. I don't think that people who hesitate to come into the city are "evil people." It'd be nice if you didn't put words in my mouth.

3. I think you're probably right that there's little chance of what I suggest happening, but it isn't because it violates the laws of physics or something. It's unlikely because the people in charge don't want it to happen. That doesn't seem like a reason to stop arguing for it to.

4. You're right, I do think the city should downsize and focus on density. I think the same thing of the region, too. A big part of that (to me, anyway) is focusing on the core rather than continuing to build up the periphery.

I don't understand the mentality that we feel that we can tell a property owner what they can and cannot do with their property. Colin points out that the Diocese owns the building and must maintain it, mothball it, or reuse it; but then says that they cannot sell it to an out of state interest. We cannot have it both ways. If the community wants to dictate what can be done with the church, then the community should buy the church to preserve it here.

The Church used to be the foundation of the community, that is rarely the case these days. If you turned your back on the church, then don't blame the church for feeling shunned and moving away. I had the opportunity to attend the Eastern Hills Wesleyan Church a few weeks ago, there were probably 4,000 people attending mass on that Sunday. It was inspiring to see that many people congregating to worship, the same is true with The Chapel and a few other churches in the suburbs. I attend my neighborhood church most weekends and have seen the congregation continually drop for a number of reasons. Some say it is a matter of convenience, others a matter of doctrine, and others say that the church is not up to speed with the times. All are true, but faith is complicated, and there is a certain level of acceptance that is involved with faith. I asked Colin if he attended services and the answer was no. For whatever reason, you are part of the problem, and I wish you could see that.

Colin's views are uninformed and show his lack of understanding of faith and religion. Your arguments are similar to someone who insists that homosexuality is a choice, without really understanding homosexuality at all. You sound like the typical bigot "well if they just changed their lifestyle choices then people wouldn't persecute them so much, they are asking for what they get". It is a flawed argument with bias and bigotry at the root, just like your feelings that the Church should just "change the options" so more people will accept it.

I also think the city should downsize. I think we should eliminate the majority of the East Side that lacks density and mass. Areas like Broadway and Fillmore, right around the Central Terminal, or areas of the Old First Ward where there are more vacant houses than occupied houses. Let's make a plan and follow it.

RonR --

1. My "basis on understanding the Catholic Church and their principles" has to do with attending Catholic school, coming from a Catholic background, having a working understanding of the new testament, and being married to a Catholic woman. Is that enough of a basis to comment on a blog?

2. "You have shown open disrespect for the Catholic Church . . ." I'm gonna call bullshit on this claim. Where? I've disagreed with the policy decisions made by local Catholic leaders. That's a completely different thing than disrespecting a religion.

3. By contrast, your comments about "Atheists, WASPS and Blacks" are dripping with disrespect and sectarianism.

4. I wanted to check on the official Catholic position on sprawl. Here's the relevant excerpt from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops: "Revenue for infrastructure maintenance and other services are drained away from the inner cities and close-in suburbs as wealthier earners move further away. State and federal transportation policies often contribute to sprawl. Many other issues combine to make urban sprawl a key environmental concern. While the USCCB has policy on a range of associated sprawl issues--brownfields, employment and housing, agricultural land use, takings, etc., it does not have a comprehensive policy approach at this time."

So while the church is clearly anti-sprawl in spirit and intent, it doesn't yet (as of 2000) have an official policy.

5. From the same source, on whether "the best option for the owners" should trump what's best for the community: "The Church has extensive teaching about property: we uphold the right to ownership and use of private property as a moral good, but with a social mortgage. Thus, private property is subject to the needs of the larger common good."

1. Does order mean something different than compel? Or should 14:50 Colin have a talk with 20:44 Colin?

Colin 14:50: '2. While the church can't force anyone to convert or move into the neighborhood, they can compel Catholics to come into the city for an hour each weekend.'

Colin 20:44: '1. I'm not saying that the church can order people to do anything.'

2. I wrote I guess you might. Doubly qualified. Who's putting words in who's mouth there?

3. It's not just people in charge who don't want it to happen. There's nothing stopping suburbanites from coming into the city for church frequently. Probably some do. Probably very few. Those are realities which people can argue against if they want, but arguing for something constructive sounds more useful to me.

"I don't understand the mentality that we feel that we can tell a property owner what they can and cannot do with their property."

It's not that hard to understand -- we can and do tell property owners these things all the time. We tell people that they have to maintain their property so that they don't become an eyesore or a nuisance. Zoning laws dictate what can and can't be built in certain areas. This is all well established and should be easy to understand.

whynot- "we should eliminate the majority of the east side that lacks density and mass, Broadway Fillmore, the first ward, lets make a plan and follow it". Who are you to decide the fate of anothers neighborhood and home. There are people living in these areas that may see things in a different way. You sound arrogant and uninformed .

Atwater --

1. Yes, the words have different meanings. Think of the difference between "hunger compelled me to eat" and "I was forced to eat," for instance. There is a stronger sense of agency in the former. So no, the church can't force anyone to do anything, particularly "at gunpoint" as you suggest. But it can compel people to make different choices.

2. Cute trick. So "guess you might" are the magic words to make a fake strawman appear out of thin air? Got it.

3. People's choices are influenced by the choices of institutions. I think it's perfectly constructive to argue that institutions should make choices that would tend to limit sprawl.

Ok, one more then I'm done here for a while.

Nick - Doesn't this sound like you're the one who's opposing change?

.'...Moving the church is paramount to abandoning the neighborhood. That church is the cornerstone of the area and should always be that way. ... This whole thread is full of "realists" and people who seem to have no hope for any change. This post reveals a city that has quit on itself, given up on rebirth and become resigned to being happy in seperate little ghettos, be them impoverished or golden. ...'

You're saying that church should stay there and in use for something-anything forever no matter what? How is that not demanding the status quo? I'm open to the change of letting this be recycled and focusing attention on things more relevant to the here and now in this city. Letting Georgia have the building if they want it wouldn't be giving up or quitting on anything, or abandoning a neighborhood. It's being willing to let go of one no-longer-used piece of 100-year-old Buffalo, allowing resources here to be better spent as Bini described earlier. And at the same time it's making a neighborly gesture to people in another part of the country who say they'd like to make use of it. How is that sinister?

Try looking at what you degrade as a "realist" attitude (hardly an insult, btw) as just realizing for the foreseeable future Buffalo will be a much less populated city than 50 or 100 years ago, a much less Catholic city, and has need for a lot fewer big churches than it once did. A huge ornate building without any obvious use isn't as much of a positive to that neighborhood now as you make it sound. Those realities aren't necessarily bad or good. Times change. Look to the present and future.

Within a mile of that church, I'll bet over 2/3 of residents never stepped foot in it and have about a thousand bigger concerns in life than what happens to that building as long as it doesn't become some ugly falling apart hell hole like some other vacant churches have. How many nearby residents consider that church a cornerstone as you say it is? How many neighborhood parishoners did it have when it closed? What year are you talking about? As dyerluke noted in the 23:07 comment, the convent and school continue to be used for charitable purposes and there's no reason that needs to change. Sounds to me like it's some of the preservationists who are projecting this "giving up" drama onto the whole matter. That's not the only way to look at it.

Money needed to repair, maintain, and heat that big space with fossil fuels every winter, and give it some contrived purpose - all mainly to soothe egos of people trying to cling to the past - could instead be much better spent on real needs around Bailey-Delavan. While there's nothing wrong with keeping some of the past, it's not useful to be a zealot and demand every single big church in Buffalo must stand and be used for something-anything until the end of time no matter what. That's extremism.

Finally, props to BRLifer for being the only one I see who tried to answer the question of what an alternative use could be. I'm not sure a non-profit org couldn't choose a more efficient building around that area instead of the church and use its overhead money better than on high utilities and maintenance - but who knows. At least BRL didn't ignore the question as so many others did.

Atwater Louse, even in its worst condition this church will still appear nicer than all the buildings around it. Its existence adds only value. Your conclusion that the building's fate is doomed unless it's packed up and sent to the Georgia suburbs is overly pessimistic.

I started out thinking we should just let this church go south, but I think I have an appreciation for the other side of the argument after reading the comments. Let me see if I have this straiight. If you are going to save Buffalo, shouldn't you save the best of Buffalo? If buildings are going to exist in this city, why not the most beautiful ones? If stores, banks, law firms, libraries, non-profits, museums etc, have to occupy a space, why not this one? If a great building can fight blight and help a neighborhood, than why wouldn't you start here? Sometimes the realists seem to miss the bigger point; Buffalo doesn't have to exist at all. There is no intrinsic value in it since highways and rail opened up the country. It exists because some people, call them romantics, see value in it. The beautiful architecture is one reason people like it. If you sell that off, you will lose even those people. This is why this story hits a nerve. Can the realists and the romantics get together and solve this?

Atwater, you're very good at deconstructing what people say, though when you charge me on wanting status quo and me being against change, you miss my point. When I say "This whole thread is full of "realists" and people who seem to have no hope for any change." that is in regard to the neighborhood and the plight of Buffalo, not the specific building. The building and the attitudes shown here are a microcasm of a defeatest attitude and a possible reason why people don't want to come back to Buffalo. That's fine, if realism is accepting your future as an inevitability, then be real, but I'd rather believe that certain conclusions are inevitable.

As far as saying that the chuch should stay there and in operation no matter what, yes you're correct, I'd much prefer it to be in use.

Implying that I feel people who want to let the church go are sinister is again out of context. I reference people giving up and accepting fate, not actively promoting the abandonment of this neighborhood as "sinister" would suggest.

Again, as a conerstone I'm speaking of the fabric of the neighborhood, and of the building, not of an ideology or religion connected to it. Removing the building and adding one more vacant lot will only further reduce the chances of rebirth. If you accept that there is no opportunity for the neighborhood to have a future then that is fine and my point is moot, but again, if we're just resigned to these facts, why should anyone do anything, let's just shut the lights off and everyone head out.

Everybody fails in that these are not "Buffalo" issues. They are Metropolitan Buffalo (Erie County) issues. It is all one social unit. Convienent invisible municipal lines do not change that. There is a reason first ring suburbs grew first and second rings are now growing. there is a reason Buffalo's east side has hollowed out from its core through the east side and is now creeping into the first ring 'burbs. There is a reason Amherst is not some utopia out in the middle of nowhere with no social ills. I guess having an inivisible box around a good area makes some feel that way though. Maybe my arm can take joy in that the cancer is in my lungs and thatit is stil growing beautiful new nails.

We keep feeding off each other while pointing fingers at those we are feeding off of as being without hope and a lost cause. We lose buildings, etc that can no longer be replicated as be build cheaper disposible structures which give people even less reason to stick around and fight for everything. We act clueless why we are in a downward spiral and point to politicians to relieve ourselves of any responsibility, civicly or morally.

The church, any church, but especially the largest one should be leading by example. Practicing what you preach should be commitment #1.

In the small scheme I rather see this building be preserved anywhere. In the big scheme we are just taking another small bite out of Erie County while perpetuating what ills it the most.

1. I think skarnath's idea of designated check off for church upkeep is fantastic.

2. I still don't get why people assume that a decommisioned church will be abandoned and left to rot. These buildings are owned by the diocese, which is a respected and very public institution. They aren't slumlords.

3. Atwater is probably right that there isn't a viable use for the building right now at its location. But I think there are 2 problems with that assessment. First, we don't know what the interest in the building might be without the burdensome conditions being put on its sale. And second, why does there have to be an immediate answer to the question of reuse? One of the points of preservation is simply to keep a valuable piece of our heritage alive in the hopes that something will come up in the future. Sometimes, that something happens quickly, but other times it doesn't. That doesn't mean that it's a fool's errand, though.

Nick, We won't agree on this, but that drama of "shut the lights off and everyone head out" is just b.s.

So what if I or some others think differently from you about what strategies make sense for Buffalo's future? That doesn't make my views defeatist and yours hopeful. If you think it's important that some or all old vacant large churches be kept here and intact, you're more than entitled - but it's just your opinion. Others may consider those of much lower importance. It doesn't have to equate to shutting off lights or everyone heading out.

I was born in Buffalo and I've spent the majority of my live in Buffalo, but I've also lived in Indiana, Florida, Texas and currently Los Angeles. Believe me, you can't find anything like the churches that Buffalo has in any of these places. That is one thing that Buffalo has over any of these other "more prosperous" locations. In my opinion, the Buffalo/ Niagara region has 4 things that make it special: a very large clean power source in Niagara Falls, good, hardworking people, beautiful scenery and especially, it has a unique and amazing architectural heritage. To "give away" a building as incredible as St. Gerard's is just plain crazy. You could never, ever build something like that again in Buffalo. Once it's gone, it's gone. And along with that, you also lose that bit of history of Buffalo. And once the people of Buffalo finally come to that realization sometime in the future, it may, unfortunately, be too late. Also, if you can realistically move a church like that across the country, then why not move it to downtown Buffalo? I would suggest putting it on the rundown block where Genesee St. intersects E. Huron St. Then, when families and visitors go downtown for sports events, they can stop in and see a bit of the amazing architecture that Buffalo has to offer. If it can't be used as a church, it could be used as a history museum or even as a large, very impressive reading room. Moving and reassembling the church to downtown Buffalo would provide the people of Buffalo with a lot of jobs. (How to pay for this move you might ask? Why not tap into Niagara Falls Power Plant profits? - somebody is making a whole lot of money off of that electricity and it's obviously not the people in the Buffalo/Niagara region. And as for the future price of electricity?....try running your electric car in 2020 with no electricity! The Buffalo/Niagara region can afford to finance it's preservation, it just needs to be smart about it). Also, if it costs 3 million to disassemble and move that beautiful church to Norcross, GA, how much more is it going to cost to re-assemble it accurately? It's got to be at least double the 3 million, and probably closer to 7 million. Going with that estimate, with 700 familes in the Parish that wants to buy the church, that comes out to $10,000 per family. That's a rich congregation. Who is doing the accounting down there? Is there more to this story then we are being told? In Europe, many of the cities lost their historical buildings to the bombings of WWII, and they lost them forever. In most of the southeast, midwest and southwest US, they never had those buildings. Buffalo needs to wake up and realize what they (luckily) have, and not let it fall into ruin or be sold to the highest bidder. In this world, people come and go and what remains after they are gone is their art and their buildings. These great old buildings in Buffalo were built from displaced Europeans with their money, their sweat and their love. In many cases, they built buildings that reminded them of the cities that they left behind, to remind them of where they came from and to make them feel a little closer to the places that were actually thousands of miles away. Don't insult their labors and creativity and work for money or laziness. It's just not right. When I finally get to move back to Buffalo, I hope I find it relatively intact, and not just a bunch of "green spaces with a marker" to remember what Buffalo once had.

royunderwood- well said, sometimes a distant perspective is more clear and better able to recognize the value and importance of our built environment as well as our natural advantages.

BTW, I accidently sent my comment before I had a chance to check it for spelling and grammar. Sorry about that. Kind of embarrassing. - RoyUnderwood

Royunderwood,

I like the way you talk... amen.

I think that the best thing to come of all this is that from now on we will always have the gag line "why don't we just dismantle it and ship it to Georgia!" I imagine how useful that phrase will become. They could also make a movie about this called "700". It would be a story about how 700 families in a parish in Norcross, Georgia, managed this incredible feat of dismantling a solid limestone church from Buffalo and shipped these very large stones and massive columns halfway accross the country without damaging any of the columns or even the intricate artwork inside, all for a mere 3 million dollars. It's quite inspiring, albeit unbelievable.