Paving Paradise to Put Up More Parking Lots

Paving Paradise to Put Up More Parking Lots	by Carl Mrozek

After several months of debate, last week Amherst’s town board voted four to three to approve Benderson Development’s proposed Amherst Town Center project to be built on 33 acres of rural land on Maple Road, a.k.a. the former Buffalo Shooting Club. A coalition of opponents walked out of the meeting in protest after the decisive vote. Their key concern was that the $44 million “lifestyle center” would add to rampant suburban sprawl in Amherst while increasing traffic, carbon monoxide and noise along Maple Road and arterials. There is also the prospect of increased property assessments and taxes to pay for road widening and other infrastructure improvements required. This is all in addition to the change from a fairly quiet green landscape to a busier, browner one with even more strip development flanking the community center, i.e.-more suburban sprawl.

In his recent his Artvoice articles, Bruce Fisher discussed the footprint of suburban sprawl in Western New York since 1970: 75 percent more land area was developed at the same time that our population decreased by 180,000. Coincidentally, this drop matches Buffalo’s population decline over the same period, where net new land development has been scant. In other words, outside of Buffalo, Erie County’s population has remained fairly flat during exactly the same period that “development” there has been rampant. If you believe that somehow property taxes have remained flat during this same period you should consider joining the Flat Earth Society. It costs megabucks to lay all those new sewers and to expand and maintain all those roads to the malls and to all the far flung new ’burbs.

Lost in the debate over whether to approve the Amherst Town Center is the laudable concept of walkable communities. Also forgotten is the fact that many of Erie County’s 45 municipalities actually had walkable communities before malls of all sizes and shapes began monopolizing our landscape, enslaving us to our cars, trucks and minivans and mortally wounding retail and social life in the original town centers.

The problem with the “walkable communities” proposed by Benderson and other area developers is that they are isolated from the existing commercial and social landscape, hence you need to drive some distance to them, and then again from them, to get most of your essential goods and services, sprawled across the ex-urban county. Also, for the retail outlets in these new “walkable communities” to flourish, others will have to perish, given our shrinking population and net worth. This results in still more ghost malls dotting the over-paved suburban landscape.

On the bright side, the debate over whether to permit the Amherst Town Center has been healthy and long overdue. It is also likely continue in the courts. However, it behooves all of us to get involved whenever a developer proposes yet another shopping complex in our town, because ultimately we’ll be paying for it with our taxes. We’ll also inherit the ghost malls left in their wake, which we’ll see a lot of as we drive even further, at greater expense, to our new, far-flung, walkable, multiple-use “centers.” To end this vicious cycle of boom, bust, and dust, we need to put developers on the hook for the infrastructure improvements that their projects require, and to keep them and/or their successors liable for maintenance costs for decades, whether occupied or not. This might make them think twice before launching another short-term project for quick profit.

Ultimately, we need coordinated regional planning with a long-term vision, like that described by Fisher which enabled Hamilton, Ontario, to prosper while Buffalo has floundered. Reviving and empowering the Erie-Niagara Planning Boards and regionalizing development incentives makes much more sense than the decentralized approach that now prevails. Currently, we have too many economic development boards which compete rather than cooperate, and dole out enticing incentive packages full of goodies, mostly at taxpayer expense, in exchange for projects of dubious public benefit and limited longevity.

It’s time to stop paving what’s left of our paradise in order to build more parking lots and megastores, a substantial percentage of which are doomed to fail and to join the ranks of one of this area’s biggest growth industries: ghost mall development.

Carl Mrozek

Buffalo

Artvoice reserves the right to edit letters for content and length. Shorter letters have a better chance at being published in their entirety. Please include your name, hometown, and contact number. E-mail letters to: editorial@artvoice.com or write to: Artvoice Letters, 810 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14202

Reader Comments

Tony Delisi
12 Jun 2008, 03:03

This article is a huge distortion and an example of how the media twists things to suit its adgenda. The author describes the land as "to be built on 33 acres of rural land on Maple Road". I live a mile from there. The area is full of doctors offices, homes, the University etc. Hardly rural. Then, the author mentions the , "prospect of increased property assessments and taxes to pay for road widening" but fails to mention that taxes from the new development will be far more than the taxes on almost vacant land that is completely polluted from the lead left by the shooting club.

I could go on. This article has more holes than the targets left on the site by the gun club that owned it.

StreetWise
12 Jun 2008, 10:01

I agree that AV is distorting the facts. First, the proposed project is the polar opposite of sprawl. What is proposed it to redevelop a brownfield in the middle of a built out urban area. The brownfield is flanked by a major university, 70s era neighborhoods, and professional office parks. This type of infill development is EXACTLY what smart groth development advocates and anti-sprawl groups like the EPA push for. So, the people at AV need to get educated on the topic before making idiotic remarks.

I say all of this despite my personal opposition to the project. If Amherst was a progressive community the brownfield would be remediated and redeveloped as affordable housing. The community toutes its schools and safety, and should open up to poor families from places like Buffalo in search of those resources.

Joe
12 Jun 2008, 10:13

This strikes me as a little funny... both of you with your keen sense of media conspiracy didn't notice this is a "letter to Artvoice"... i.e., it was written by a reader of the paper, and not an Artvoice journalist.

Not to let AV totally off the hook, I'm sure they have editorial discretion over letters to the editor they choose to publish... but still, pay a little attention to whom you're criticizing and why... or you look kinda hypocritical and a bit silly trying to poke holes in things based on entirely the wrong premise.

StreetWise
12 Jun 2008, 14:24

Nice try Joe. But, not in anyone's wildest dreams would the Buffalo Shooting Club site be considered sprawl or anything other than a brownfield. Do a soil sample. The site is contaminated and a prime spot for infill development after remediation. The only question is what to build there. It could be retail as planned, an office park, or housing. Anyone interested in social justice would argue for affordable housing for families. There are thousands of people with school age kids in Buffalo who would jump at an opportunity to live there if it was affordable. So, Mohan then Democrat should be pressured to scrap the strip mall and advocate for affordable housing. That type of project could help integrate the community and schools both economically and racially.

Unfortunately, people like Mrozak use the sprawl argument to block infill and any projects that may give everyone access to their communities, and AV blindly goes along

Joe
12 Jun 2008, 14:43

Nice try? huh? I didn't even comment on the original letter nor its contents. You made a fine point in fact in your first comment.

Just pointing out, its a little hypocritical to "blame" Artvoice for the contents of what's essentially an opinion-based letter to the editor. Considering the fact you're also apparently a reader, who's basically also wrote in by means of the website, and you're also having your voice heard on the "AV airwaves" right here on the web, just like Mr. Mrozek did in the first place. Just sayin'. Its kind of a glass-house thing, dontcha think? It detracts from your argument when you indiscriminately throw stones, is all...

Geoff
12 Jun 2008, 16:52

Joe's right, of course. It's a letter to the editor, and it doesn't represent any Artvoice editorial position on the development in question. (I, for one, don't have a strong opinion on that development, and I'm the editor of Artvoice.) It's a pretty simple and time-honored concept.

I ran the letter because Carl Mrozek sent it to me, it had verbs and noons in all the right places, and it presented a point of view. Not ours, his. We run letters all the time that don't reflect the paper's editorial positions. We run letters that attack our editorial positions. More than once we've run letters suggesting I be fired.

And, of course, these comment pages are a free-for-all, and while I will defend your right to post comments on our articles (to the point of actually being fired from my job, if it came to that), I'll be damned if I'll be held responsible for your opinions. Any more than I'll be held responsible for opinions expressed in letters to the editor.

StreetWise
13 Jun 2008, 10:12

Very convenient for AV to publish the letter and then argue that AV has no opinion on the issue. To be complacent in this manner is a tacit endorsement of the writer's views. AV owes its readers an independent opinion on this issue. AV owes its readers an explanation on AV's definition of sprawl. AV should disclose its position on the distinction between Editor vetted letters and blogs. Are we to believe that AV does not edit letters sent to it? If Charles Manson or some other mandman wrote a letter to AV, would AV just print it as is with no Editoral statement or explaination.

Joe
13 Jun 2008, 10:35

Ahah you guys are still cracking me up.

Quit yer bitchin, take it for what it is, and appreciate the fact somebody is willing to publish people's opinions (including yours, StreetWise, right here on this page.) By your logic they're somehow endorsing *your* criticism of them by allowing you to post it. Circular logic much?

StreetWise, AV doesn't need an opinion on "everything" give me a break. There's only so many people there and so many hours in the day. Besides, isn't it refreshing to see them report opinions that aren't theirs? What is it you want (besides to bawwwwww)?!

As for a distinction for what's a letter to the editor, or if Artvoice may or may not edit them... work on some reading comprehension skills there bud. Check out the big bold section at the bottom of the letter. Its right here. "Artvoice reserves the right to edit letters for content and length." They're not trying to fool you.

That's partly what got me laughing at all you complainers in the first place. Jumpin to your conclusions in your tinfoil hats... everyone's out to get you and Artvoice is obviously in bed with THE MAN! BEWARE! One by one they're going to chip away at your rights and freedoms by printing a free paper about concert dates and movie reviews!!

hahaha chill out guys... stop taking yourselves so seriously

Paving Paradise to Put Up More Parking Lots

by Carl Mrozek

Reader Comments

Artvoice Links

Search Artvoice

Share

Subscribe