Newsletter of the
Preservation Coalition of Erie County (Home
Page)
Back to Table Of Contents
June 1995
Preserving Small Neighborhood Scale and Small Business
'Ban the Box' Move
By Hilary Sternberg
Elmwood Avenue residents have apparently seen enough of what the new wave of retailing
is doing to streetscapes across the city to know they do not want the same thing
for Elmwood Avenue.
It is not the NIMBY syndrome. Elmwood residents have, after all, the Elmwood Strip,
the Albright Knox Art Gallery, and Buffalo State College.
Franzcyk, whose Fillmore district has seen recent demolition of small-scale neighborhood
business blocks for auto-scale national chains like Blockbuster video, has many constituents
without access to cars who need walkable neighborhoods.
In trying to keep big business off Elmwood, residents are blazing a trail for other
city neighborhoods interested in maintaining and fostering small, neighborhood-scale
businesses. More so than the Walgreens on Delaware, a big-box retailer of any type
would require stark changes to the neighborhood. It would buy and tear down a row
of classic Buffalo doubles.
The Elmwood Avenue task force, a roundtable of Elmwood area business people, residents,
and elected officials, knew they had a hot topic at their meeting last April 25.
Usually 10 or 15 people attend the meetings, 20 if there is a controversy or dispute.
This evening, an estimated 150 people jammed the back room and spilled back down
into the old ‘wine cellar’ of Bullfeathers Restaurant. The neighborhood came out
in response to a national chain drugstore company’s interest in buying up nine properties
and demolishing all the houses on them, to put up a 14,000 square foot drugstore
and 70,000 square feet of asphalt at the southeast corner of Elmwood and Forest.
Residents were upset and skeptical. In addition to Elmwood Task Force members, representatives
and members of Forever Elmwood, the Granger Place Block Club, and the Preservation
Coalition were present. One resident presented a petition signed by over 1,000 people
opposing construction of a large store on the site. Council members Dale Zuchlewski
(North District) and Rosemarie LoTempio (At-Large) and City Planning Director Kevin
Greiner fielded questions for over an hour. Not a single questioner or speaker expressed
a desire to have a ‘superdrugstore’ such as Walgreens in the neighborhood.
Greiner confirmed that Walgreens officials were set to meet with the city regarding
the site. Hans Mobius, who owns five contiguous properties directly south of Forest
was, and is, willing to sell. Residents remember Mobius as a force behind the plan
to place a parking lot on greenspace along Forest Avenue, between Elmwood and Richmond,
jeopardizing a commanding row of maple trees. Residents banded together to ‘Save
the Forest on Forest’ several years ago. This led to the air of skepticism evident
at the meeting.
Jennifer Preston, owner of a longtime Elmwood landmark, Home of the Hits, and another
property owner told Walgreens they were not interested in selling. [Preston indicated
in a follow-up conversation that she was ‘sick of all the Walgreens talk. It’s over.
Nothing’s happening.’ When informed that the legislation committee had the Elmwood
Zoning before it, and that ‘adjacent property owners’ would be informed (as they
are now) of hearings regarding Elmwood properties, she said “Students should have
no say. Renters should have no say. People on Ashland—it’s none of their business
what goes on here. If they don’t like it, they can move.” When asked whether Walgreens
had made her an offer she said no. “They called months ago and asked me if I was
interested in selling. I was busy, so I said no.”] Walgreens apparently had confidence
it could acquire sufficient property, because the company did file for a zoning variance,
which alerted the neighborhood to its intent.
Greiner, the Planning Director, who was among those to meet with Walgreens, assured
the crowd that, even if Walgreens could buy up all the properties, it was unlikely
that the city or the Zoning Board of Appeals would grant the necessary zoning variance
because of the potential adverse impact on the neighborhood.. [Already, the Elmwood-Forest
intersection is statistically one of the most accident-prone in the city.] A follow-up
phone call to Greiner after the Walgreens meeting indicated Walgreens had withdrawn
its request for a variance. Greiner said the city was willing to entertain another
meeting with Walgreens if the company desired to submit a design more sensitive to
the neighborhood. In addition, city officials would be willing to work with Walgreens
to identify more appropriate locations.
Back at the April meeting residents voiced concerns that, even if the present Walgreens
proposal failed, the Elmwood and Forest area was vulnerable to large developers who
could afford to consolidate several smaller properties, either from Forest south
or from Bird Avenue northward. Preservation Coalition spokesman Tim Tielman suggested
the neighborhood could re-evaluate the 20-year-old Elmwood Business District Zoning,
and act to insure that contiguous properties could not be combined into larger parcels
for development, thereby insuring the preservation of small businesses and moderate
rental apartments by preserving the buildings they are in.
Council members Zuchlewski and LoTempio have since presented such a resolution to
the Council. In addition, Council member David Franzyck, joined by Zuchlewski and
LoTempio, offered a truly progressive forward-thinking resolution aimed at Asphalt
and a Box Architecture.”