FLFan Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 The decisions to put the football stadium in the outer suburbs and the new UB campus in Amherst were perhaps the biggest mistakes made with respect to urban planning in Buffalo's history, and there have been many. It would be a very different city today if not for those short sighted decisions. The opportunity should not be lost again. I agree with the author.
Snorom Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) Future of Buffalo will be at the Harbor Center and the waterfront canal area. The restaurants bars casinos and storefronts will follow Edited May 21, 2014 by Snorom
voodoo poonani Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 First off, Artvoice has historically had better articles on urban issues like this, the Buffalo News is too close to business interests and the developer class to make any real assessment of anything in this region. But Fisher is decidedly pro-urban to a fault and that can cloud his judgment as well, although he's still head and shoulders above any other writer in WNY when it comes to policy. That being said, it was hard to read much beyond the first sentence when he states that Buffalo is "arguably" the smallest NFL market. That's lazy work on his part, not because he can't find the data to show otherwise (it's not although is one of the smallest as we all know) but because by makign this vague argument, it'll support his argument that the stadium must go in Buffalo, and without reading the rest, to support his pro-urban agenda. Outside of Green Bay (which is grandfathered in) we are the smallest metropolitan area. That's why the Batavia idea makes some sense. Combining the Rochester and Buffalo greater metropolitan areas would rival Pittsburgh. I don't doubt that placing the stadium downtown would help revitalize the area. That being said, I don't think that is at the top of the NFL's to do list. As Jerrah points out, they want to grow the pie. Do we have a better shot with Canada or Rochester? Toronto is huge, but they won't fill the Sky Dome (excuse me) Rogers Center for us.
yungmack Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 Very good article. I agree with his key points about density and adjacency. As the Bills are seemingly remaking themselves in the image of the Steelers, why not remake Buffalo in the image of Pittsburgh? It's somewhat overlooked, but Pittsburgh has done a tremendous turn-around in the last few decades, from an old and rotting industrial capital falling into irrelevancy, into a quite thriving center of learning and advanced businesses. It has required a commitment of, for want of a better term, the local Establishment, in combination with banks, politicians and, crucially, universities. All of those factors are present in Buffalo, though largely semi-dormant. And as that Establishment did in Pittsburgh, Buffalo too should focus on making the city itself the core of the revival. If Fisher is correct, that the Bills will be staying and a new stadium will be built in any case, then use that inevitability to assist in the revitalization. And use the current enthusiasm about keeping the Bills as a starting point in re-imagining Buffalo itself.
Lurker Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 This is a long article and was in Artvoice, of all places, but it makes some interesting arguments. I'm in favor of putting a new stadium downtown after living in Baltimore for years and seeing how Camden Yards and the Ravens stadium helped to expand the rejuvenated Inner Harbor area. http://artvoice.com/...9/news_analysis As I write this post, I'm sitting in a 12th floor guestroom of the Baltimore Hilton looking down on Camden Yards across the street and M&T Stadium right behind it. If Buffalo could score even 20% of the vibe that Baltimore has with its downtown stadiums, it would be a game changer of epic proportions in terms of the city's economic future. Gotta go with somewhere adjacent to Buffalo's inner harbor--the synergies trump all other possible locations floated to date, IMO...
DC Grid Posted May 21, 2014 Posted May 21, 2014 Outside of Green Bay (which is grandfathered in) we are the smallest metropolitan area. That's why the Batavia idea makes some sense. Combining the Rochester and Buffalo greater metropolitan areas would rival Pittsburgh. I don't doubt that placing the stadium downtown would help revitalize the area. That being said, I don't think that is at the top of the NFL's to do list. As Jerrah points out, they want to grow the pie. Do we have a better shot with Canada or Rochester? Toronto is huge, but they won't fill the Sky Dome (excuse me) Rogers Center for us. I think you're 100% right it's not on the NFL's list...but it should be on Buffalo's. Redevelopment of Buffalo's downtown is a must if the city is going to do anything more than shrink further. The trend in most metropolitan areas is a return of young professionals to downtown living. If Buffalo wants to ride the wave that is revitalizing similarly situated cites like Milwaukee and Cleveland and Baltimore they need an anchor to develop around. A new stadium could be that. While giving hundreds of millions of dollars to a billion dollar private entity should make anyone sick, this is a rare case where it makes sense. If Buffalo finances the building of a new downtown stadium it can lock in the Bills for a long time AND help revitalize a city that needs redevelopment.
Recommended Posts