albanyweblog.com
Updated
February 10, 2008
A weblog about the politics and affairs of the old and glorious City of Albany, New York, USA. Articles written and disseminated from Albany's beautiful and historic South End by Daniel Van Riper. If you wish to make a response, have anything to add or would like to make an empty threat, please contact me.
Click on this link to add this site to your RSS feed.
Now With Comments! As promised for way too long!
Check the bottom of the page and try them out.February 10, 2008
Demolition City
Despite his claims to the contrary, Jerry Jennings is working feverishly to tear down the City he claims to care about
Right now I am extremely angry. I am so goddam angry I don’t know who I should snarl at first.
About an hour ago (this is Saturday afternoon) I saw that someone had posted the following on the Democracy In Albany (DIA) website which I present verbatim:
had to make an emergency run to the big box hardware store for a thermocouple last night. along the way, my normal route straight down south pearl was interupted by a blockade.
hi-powered lights, and fire trucks hosing down what appeared to be several buildings falling under the wrath of wrecking machines.
it was around 9:30pm on south pearl, between alexander and fourth ave. anybody have a clue what happened? i certainly didn't hear about any fires or buildings collapsing on their own, presenting a hazard for the community. nothing in the TU online today.
so what's the story?
With that sinking feeling I went down there to see what they had done to the South End this time. Sure enough, not only had they destroyed the historic Albany Knitting Company building, they'd destroyed the entire goddam block. All those beautiful brick buildings, going to the Rapp Road Dump.
This is the Jennings administration up to their old tricks, sending out their preferred demolition contractor to start work at 9 PM on a Friday and work through the night. This is done to avoid confrontations with the press or preservationists or people who love Albany. By the time anybody figures out what is happening, Albany’s architectural treasures are a pile of rubble. Too late and too bad.
The contractor these days is DiTonno and Sons. Back in the 1990s the preferred contractor was an outfit called A. Ritz, which at that time happened to be located in my neighborhood at the end of my street. I can’t tell you how many times we heard their big trucks and equipment rumble out in an ominous parade at 9 PM. Some things never change in this City.
It costs a whole lot extra to have DiTonno’s guys working after dark and on weekends instead of during the day. But no matter, this is taxpayer money, plenty more where that came from. It’s worth the extra cost so as to avoid confrontations with outraged citizens.
While grimly returning from the scene of desolation on South Pearl, my brain started to put together a few things that it should have figured out already. Sometimes I’m painfully slow in the head. After the dimbulb lit up over my head, my mood took another dive into utter rage.
It’s like this. I reported on this blog back in November that the City Industrial Development Agency had floated a loan to the City for $1.7 million. The loan was to be used by the City of Albany to set up a Strategic Acquisition Fund, or SAF. This is supposed to be a revolving fund to be used to acquire abandoned properties. And I’ve heard that the SAF may also be used to stabilize distressed buildings.
This $1.7 million disappeared mysteriously into the general fund in Jerry Jennings lousy 2008 budget, which is crippled with a substantial deficit. Good old Dom Calsolaro (1st Ward) caught this little accounting maneuver and raised objections. In response, His Majesty released a little bit of the IDA money back into the SAF where it belongs.
But not much of it. Most of the IDA money remained in the general fund. Then, in a mighty blink of comprehension, I remembered something Dominick told me the other day: “The money to pay for building demolitions comes out of the general fund.”
Oh my stinking urine dog mother. Jerry Jennings is using the IDA building acquisition money to tear down buildings.
Excuse me a moment. I have to suppress an urge to scream and throw around tables and chairs like a banana-starved chimpanzee. I’m sure the fine employees here at the Ultraviolet Cafe on Delaware Avenue where I’m pounding this into my laptop would not appreciate that.
On December 27th of last year, our Buildings and Codes Committee, which is part of the Council of Albany Neighborhood Associations (CANA) met with The Mayor at City Hall. He made a very reassuring statement to us:
Look, I was born and raised here. I don’t want to knock these buildings down. It’s the last thing I want to do.
Well, this February 6th His Majesty said an interesting thing to the full CANA meeting at the public library, something quick that few people caught: “We have about a hundred buildings that we need to knock down.”
No one asked Jennings how he was going to pay for these demolitions with a budget running a deficit. I didn’t think of it that evening. Now I know what he had in mind when he said that.
As a result of this funding source, the demolitions are coming down fast. What’s next on the gun sights? Well, a likely victim is 402 Madison Avenue, which is between Lark and Dove Streets.
Okay, it looks like a pile of crap. It IS a pile of crap. It sags and you can see through the house. And it is quite vacant. But understand that this house has been sitting here since 1845. It belongs there. It needs to be stabilized and ultimately brought back to life.
The City determined last October that the building had structural problems. But they sat on the report, keeping it secret. They didn’t even inform the owner. Suddenly, we have an emergency, and last week the City posted a ten day abatement order. If nothing is done in ten days, DiTonno knocks it down. ( I understand that a short extension has been negotiated.)
After looking over the house this morning, I agree with what I’ve been told, that the house could be made safe from collapse for between ten to twenty thousand dollars. But I’m told that the cost of demolition would be well in excess of twenty thousand dollars. Is anybody in City Hall good at math?
It would take quite a bit more to renovate 402 and bring it back on line. Unfortunately, if the building were located on the other side of the street, it would be eligible for historic funding and tax credits. Apparently, someone decided that the buildings on one side of the street are not as historic as the other.
That shouldn’t matter. Demand for housing in downtown Albany is on the upswing, and will continue to rise as the national economy contracts and gas prices rise to record levels. There is a serious danger that in the next five to ten years property values all across downtown will become out of reach of the middle class. The Hudson Park neighborhood, where 402 is located, is already pretty pricey.
The point I’m making is that preserving and stabilizing these buildings is economically justified, not way off in the future but a few short steps from now. Funneling IDA money to a preferred contractor may put money into the “right” pockets, but it’s killing our City. And it assures that Albany’s insolvency will grow until the City dies.
Time is running out for 402, so I posted a diary entry last Thursday night on the DIA website. Now, the regular posters on DIA are an argumentative lot, and often say ridiculous things. But I was astonished at their comments to my post:
(AlfredMoisiu) I also doubt that the owner knew nothing. Why would the Fire Department randomly do a secret inspection of a building? [It] just doesn't add up.
(alfrednewman) That would be a complete waste of resources... Sure, the building is old. So what? Being old doesn't mean that it should be saved.
(hailstorm) sometimes you just have to know when to let go. as another poster here has described, this building is an absolute hazard. it may be unique, but it's still a hazard.
I’m getting ready to do my chimpanzee act again. I’m starting to see why The Mayor is getting away with this crap.
What the hell is wrong with these people, why don’t they go live in Colonie if they like parking lots so much? I hear Colonie is in even more financial trouble than Albany. Might this have something to do with this widespread obsessive mania for creating parking lots, no matter the cost?
Wait, it gets worse. You see, I made the mistake of mentioning on the DIA post that I got my information from Historic Albany (HA), the nonprofit that advocates preservation of historic buildings in Albany. They demanded that I take down the post. Why, you may ask? From an email I got from HA:
We do not want to jeopardize the progress we are making with the Fire Department. I think your posting would be better served later, if needed. This will not make the chief happy nor will it endear him to include us in the dialogue of vacant buildings.
Gaaaah! Who cares if City officials are happy or not? They’re supposed to be working for us, not the other way around! They’re tearing down our City today and now, but we should be worried about hurting the Fire Chief’s feelings!
I will never understand this whole thing about withholding vital information “until the right time.” Secrecy serves the powerful. When us regular folks voluntarily agree to play their secrecy game, we are ceding to them a degree of power over ourselves that they don’t deserve.
The only rational reasons for withholding information is if one wants to deceive. Those reasons would be a) giving the wrong idea, b) allowing the wrong idea to proliferate, or c) lying.
The good intentioned folks at Historic Albany are not interested in doing any of these deceptive things. That’s a solid fact. But lo and behold, our City officials do these things all the time. Who wins when you suppress information?
Okay, I think I’ve pissed off enough people with this post. Various City officials (again,) the staff at Historic Albany which will never talk to me again without spitting, and the regular posters at DIA who may very well start a flame war in my direction. I tell you folks, I write this blog to serve mankind.
By the way, DIA honored my sullen request and pulled my 402 Madison post off his site by midday, no problem. He may be anonymous, but he’s a helluva a guy. And I still feel like a chimpanzee.
Prior Post * * * Next Post
Comments:
If you are having difficulties posting a comment, please email Daniel Van Riper. We are experimenting with our spam filters, and we do not want to exclude any legitimate commenters, just spammers!
Posted by: AlfredMoisiu
Posted on: 02/10/2008
Comments:
Hi -
I understand where you're coming from, particularly with regard to buildings like the Knitting Company. Buildings like that are worth stabilizing so that they can be used again someday when the neighborhood comes back.
402 Madison is another story. Its in a neighborhood where housing is in high demand, where people routinely restore homes. Yet it's falling apart. $20,000 keeps it from caving in. How much for it to be used again?
Commenters on DIA mentioned that it lacked a foundation. I'm not sure if that's true, but its pretty obvious that the building is basically held up the the adjacent building. It's a dump.
I don't want there to be more sad gaps in the streetscape. But I also don't want to see the whole block burned down when some vagrant lights the place up.
Posted by: nycowboy
Posted on: 02/10/2008
Comments:
It's simple.
Demolitions are a way to funnel money to the mayor's friends. It's illegal for the city to give out checks to random people on the street, but if you "give them jobs", under an emergency basis, then you can legally pay them.
To boot, the city even gets to recycle some of this money back in landfill tipping fees.
Posted by: Grogger
Posted on: 02/11/2008
Comments:
You people called for the mayor to "do something" about abandoned buildings. Well, they're doing something.
If the historical people care so much about old run-down buildings, they can feel free to buy and restore them -- they are available cheap!
The Albany Yarn Company or whatever it is may have been a pretty building at one time, but unfortunately its not pretty enough to have been used in the last 50 years.
Better off bulldozing the thing now than risking the lives of firemen when the building goes up.
Posted by: Legislator, Luci McKnight, 2nd District
Posted on: 02/11/2008
Comments:
Folks, for the last two years, there has been much movement in the NYS Senate (Padavan), Assembly(Hoyt) and the Albany County Legislature(McKnight)working inconcert with the Preservation League on New York State who joins with numerous municipalities, economic development zone and historic preservation organizations to offer tax credits to those considering the rehabilitation of these historic buildings.
These tax credits will stimulate the rehab of a larger number of commericial and residential structures. After passage of this new and expanded historic tax credit program, residential properties in distressed areas like the South End will see an increase cap on qualified rehab cost up to $50,000. The definition of distressed cenus tracts qualified for programs will expand to "at or below 90% State Median Income." Commericial will remove the $100,000 cap on rehabilition and offer other federal and state incentives.
Saddened to say that these programs are a little too late to save the -- Historic Albany Knitting Co. which was located on South Pearl Street in the Grosbeckville Historic District.
Posted by: Dan Van Riper
Posted on: 02/11/2008
Comments:
Thanks for the info, Luci. But it's not the State taxes that's killing us property owners and rehabbers, it's the City taxes.
Hey Grogger... who exactly is this "You People" that you're talking about? I'd be curious to know precisely which people you are referring to when you write that phrase.
The last person to call me "You People" was Jimmy Scalzo, who did not appear to be sober at that particular Common Council meeting. He was referring to those of us who opposed a spot zoning change to allow a Walgreens in our neighborhood.
I guess what Scalzo meant by "You People" was "Taxpayers who give a damn about Albany and refuse to kiss The Mayor's butt."
Is that what you mean, Grogger?
Posted by: hailstorm
Posted on: 02/12/2008
Comments:
let me clarify things a bit here, because i think you have me misunderstood. i'm all for the preservation of historic buildings. i own one myself, and i chose to live downtown because i cannot stand the "automobile slums", endless sprawl mentality, and cheap flimsy construction of the "burbs". really. clifton park is like my own little personal version of hell.
however, as i expanded on in my 2nd comment on your (now deleted) DIA entry, albany is not a fully walkable shining beacon of public transportation. there's a lot of work left to do on that front. right now, to get around in any sort of reasonable manner, you need a car.
i needed a car the night i saw these buildings being torn down so that i could hike it out to the latest big box plaza out in sprawlsburgh to buy a thermocouple at 9:30 at night. there certainly wasn't any place within walking distance where i could do that at that time of night, and probably not any time of the day for that matter. and good luck finding a bus to take you there w/o having to transfer 67 times and stranding you in the middle of surburban hell when they all stop running for the night.
so our public transportation sucks. and why is that? because there's no demand for it (yet). the "right" people (white middle class commuters) are not clamoring for it yet because they can still sort-of afford to drive their grossly inefficient 4-wheel drive hulking masses of steel over the oh so treacherous terrain that leads from their "developments" (in allegedly "good" neighborhoods w/ allegedly "good" schools) to their offices every day. once the strain becomes too much on their wallets this will change (unless the government bails them out of that burden too, along with their stupid mortages). people, as a whole, will not change until they have to. history has proven that time and time again.
but now i've digressed...
back to the original subject matter. the problem to me isn't a matter of whether we "can" save these buildings or not, but who "will" save these buildings? who's going to put up the money? sure, there's people who want to do it, and then there's people who can afford to do it, the trouble is they're two entirely separate groups of people.
and while it might cost less, short-term, to stabilize a building like 402 madison, what do we do 20 years from now when it's still vacant and has once again de-stabilized itself? sure madison ave might be increasing in popularity right now, maybe by then someone will have swept in and fixed it up. but i wouldn't bet on it.
meanwhile, in areas of the city that are still "less desirable" to yuppies than center square, what happens? prospective buyers see a row of vacant houses and think twice about buying the one that is salvageable. who wants to live next door to a hazard? those poor folks on alexander street who kept up their own home only to have it destroyed by the neglect going on right next door?
i don't have a good answer to all of this. it would be nice to provide incentives to people to fix up these homes, give out some tax breaks that expire in a couple years if they don't follow through. and give them to everyone, not just people below a certain income level who can't afford to fix up homes even WITH the tax breaks. i'd do it, but i'm not wealthy enough to do it on my own, and i'm not poor enough to qualify for tax breaks. and besides i have a day job.
i daydream of winning the lotto some day and taking this sort of thing on, but then again, i guess i can't win the lotto if i don't play...
Posted by: John Wolcott
Posted on: 02/12/2008
Comments:
Hi Dan ! :
I'm so mad I don't care what I say. I share your anger Dan. This all happened when I was away in a city that appreciates it's history and historic Bldgs. Quebec. It's their 400th anniversary and they, unlike Albany, have plenty to show for it.
Of course next year is the 400th anniversary of the Mahikan Indians discovering some dumb Dutch and English sailors looking for the way to China up the Hudson. Then a few years later the Mahikans made the mistake of letting these scraggly pale looking Europeans with fur on their faces, set up here, and the neighborhood started running down after awhile. There will be the most ostentatious and hypocritical celebrations of Hudson's 400th with no mention of all the wanton stupid historic building and just plain useful demolitions in great number, year after year after year.
This has been to the point where I suggested in a letter to the Times Useless about 10 years ago, that Albany make these demolitions an official tourist attraction to be called "The Albany Daily Demolition Derby ". They could make a little money for the city by marketing this for the tourist trade in the same way that I make some conducting lecture tours by appointment of" Historic Parking Lots, Garages and Arterials of Albany ". Not too surpisingly,
The Times Useless refused to print my letter. Be polite. Don't upset or insult the Mayor. Don't upset or insult the Common Council or any member of it. Don't tell the truth like it is.
When will people, even some who jump up and down about deteriorating bldgs. or " historic " Blgs. get it right, and get together ?
On these topics Albany seems run by low grade, middle grade, and high grade morons. In any case it is being run into the ground literally and figuratively. There has never been and still isn't communication between communtiy activists trying to preserve neighborhoods and housing for people and the historic preservationists, especially the blue ribbon types. Myself, I like you Dan, and some of our friends are both .
Virtually all urban structures should be maintained and preserved simply as useful buildings for residences and businesses, preferably in neighborhoods accommodating both with mixed use. Preserving of structures which might be deemed historic by any number of divers criteria should be expected as a routine incident to common sense building code enforcement by a common sense and good willed and public service oriented municipal government.
A couple of years ago, I made a speech at the Common Council about preserving and marking historic sites on South Pearl between 4th. and Alexander. The emphasis was on the location of the First Black schoolhouse and the first Black Church Bldg. (the same Bldg,) and the house of Francis March , a Black community leader. I pleaded to mark the locations and examine the present structures for remaining portions of the earlier ones .
My speech went in one ear and out the other even of the Black members, probably because everyone was still drinking the same contaminated political water then. I added the Knitting Company. That was basically intact
and was part of the business and labor history of Albany. Moreover it was originally "Andes Hall" a music hall run by the South End German community in the 19th. Cent. Where was anyone concerned about music history and German-American history in Albany when I gave this talk. Where was the Times Useless when I brought all this to them several years ago and again a couple of years ago ?
Yes, preservationists and neighborhood activists have to understand their common interests and band together as do urbanists and environmentalists. And we do we have to hope that these bitter hard lessons from the irresponsible derelict municipality of Albany will have taught us to play hardball on befhalf of real community interests.
Hardball is the only way that Save the Pine, whose example needs to be followed, has won victories against derelict local government. Citizen legal actions should begin against the City over lack of code enforcement in general and the recent South Pearl destruction in particular. I will be glad to write affidavits on the historic value of the block. Get together then contact me.
John Wolcott
Posted by: alfrednewman
Posted on: 02/12/2008
Comments:
OK, First post on your site and I will try to make this a long post.
Let me first start by saying that I agree with you on the "Midnight Demolitions" of the Knitting Factory and the super secret double probation code violations for 402 Madison. Unless the Knitting Factory was in a "dynamic state of collapse" (meaning in process of coming down already) then the owner should have been compelled to stabilize it or the city step in an do it and bill the owner. If the buildings razed were starting to come down on their own then they have to be pulled down in a controlled fashion to prevent loss of life and property damage.
Tens to hundreds of tons of bricks and debris coming crashing down at once will certainly cause a shock. The ground will transmit this shock to adjacent structures and underground utilities. The silt and mud down there is especially good at transmitting movement.
There are gas mains that could easily rupture if the Knitting Factory suddenly dropped its roof into its basement of the front or the building's face detached from the surely rotted structure and dropped onto the street. Properties in close proximity would suffer damage. Water mains will either be weakened or break.
So, if it was coming down and an imminent threat then pull it down.
Anyone know when these structures were inspected? Was this a case where they have been a known hazard for months and only after 5PM on a Friday was a demo order is issued?
As for saving an old building simply because it is old: Common sense would dictate that some structures are simply too far gone or too outdated to be of any further use. When a brick structure is left open to the elements for a even a short period of time it will suffer. Water will rot the structure and work its way into the walls. This water freezes and the structure starts to literally pop apart apart.
How much money would it have cost to stabilize the Knitting Factory? More than the structure would have ever been worth even if fixed up.
There is another thing to consider. How much of the past should we actually want to preserve and just why would we want to "freeze" our city's development to reflect a certain period?
You can always tell when a city was, and is, prosperous. All you have to do is drive around and see when the buildings were built. Troy is a splendid example. Walk down most streets and you cant tell if it is 2008 or 1888. Why? Because Troy's economy went into the toilet around the turn of the 20th century and never came out. Even today a large percentage of Troy houses do not even have central heat! Those rotten gas on gas stoves and gas space heaters are STILL common.
New buildings mean economic progress. It means that people are prosperous and money is being invested. The lack of new building means economic stagnation. No real investment. Ideally there should be a mix of historic preservation, when the street scape is intact or architecturally significant, and new.
The Knitting Factory and the empty bar next door were not in an architecturally significant or part of an intact corridor. Yes, a case can be made to keep street scapes intact when a significant part of the street is still standing. But this is simply not the case. There are empty lots and buildings from different decades all around the site.
Nor were the buildings in question a particularly good or unique example of their style of architecture. The Knitting factory was a basic run of the mill 1870s-1890s commercial building with a not very distinguished Mansard roof and dormers stuck on it- almost as an after thought. The group that is credited with its creation didn't last long and the architect is certainly an unknown.
This wasn't a HH Richardson building. It isn't the early work of Frank Lloyd Wright. It was a run of the mill mixed use building that was left to rot.
Now the site is cleared and economic progress can occur.
When 402 Madison was built it was one of many small, poorly constructed, fire traps that filled the neighborhoods of Albany. The place probably looked like a Tijuana slum.
Thankfully the 19th Century version of urban renewal saved us from having to deal with most of the other "402" style houses. Poorly constructed fire traps tended to, well, burn. Arguing about the preservation of 402 is like advocating for the preservation of a 1960's double wide trailer sitting on Morton Avenue. It wouldn't add to the street no matter how old it is. It would detract.
Again, no one famous or infamous lived at 402. It isn't the only surviving example of a poorly built fire trap left in Albany. As a matter of fact there are several still around. In its present condition 402 detracts from the street and even if it was fixed up it would look out of place.
It is another case where the cost of bringing the property up to habitability would cost far more than it is worth.
Posted by: Corruptany II
Posted on: 02/12/2008
Comments:
That is such a shame, my grandmother grew up around the corner from there. I remeber my Uncle Lewis taken me for walks past there and telling me stories about the old Albany. Why is it that Albany never learns from other cities. I am all for economic development, but Albany needs to Capitalize on what it has that 90% of cities don't have.
Here is a perfect example, I used to date a girl from Nevada and brought her home to show her the city I grew up in. She fell in love with the city despite the condition at the time because in most of the country, they only seem old buildings on TV. Doesn't Jennings and the gang realize that Albany is the ideal place for new urban villages.
Gas is not coming down anytime soon, the sprawl in other cities is making life horrendous. Most homes are mass produce garbage these days. I live in Cambridge Mass now and people here buy up old properties and redo them. Why can't we do this in places like Arbor Hill and the South End. People pay millions for turn of the century homes, in Albany you can own one for very little as long as you have the heart and vision.
If we allow Jennings and the gang to turn Albany into a developers free for all, these amazing buildings will be bulldozed and replaced with something worse. Can't people in Albany see what I see. I see young middle class families buying these old homes, putting work into it and living in them. I see a return to the days when people lived in cities, and where people walked to work and shopped 5 mins from homes.
I have a feeling that once Jerry is done, we will be left with parkinglots, and/or useless development projects that make the city ugly and provide no benefit to Albany. With all the talk on smart growth, Transit Oriented Development and other planning ideas, why is this happening.
Posted by: alfrednewman
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
Corrupt:
You hit one important note with your post. You brought your girlfriend here for a visit and she loved the old architecture.
But then again, she never had to spend a night in a nice old house with a "city bedroom" or had to pay the heating bill for a drafty old house that was designed for ease of cooling during the summer and not heating during the winter (remember fuel was cheap).
Albany has to be a LIVEABLE city, not a place where suburban tourists gaulk.
Times and arhcitectural tastes change. If a city is not able to adapt to those changes and accomodate people desire something different that a draft old building with small bedrooms then the city and the local economy will suffer.
In an ideal city there would be a mix of drafty old houses and ancient apartment buildings and brand spanking new ones.
(Old and ancient for those with to clue and brand spanking new for people with no soul.
Trying to save every old and tired building is just folley.
Posted by: hailstorm
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
alfred, you make some good points about what is worth saving and what isn't. especially the "double wide on morton ave" concept. ancient albanians certainly weren't concerned with preservation of shabby 1700's architecture when they built the majority of the downtown housing stock in the mid/late 1800's. why are we obsessed with preserving, exactly, one particular period for all eternity? did the people who lived in these house in the 1880's think they were really special? what would they think of our efforts to preserve each and every house today? probably the same things i'd think about people 150 years from now fighting to preserver "vintage 2005 suburban housing developments".
listen folks, i love the old downtown housing stock. that's why i chose to buy my own home here. i personally think these homes are beautiful and have much more character than flimsy, sterile, uninspired new construction does. but as much as i'd love to preserve each and every building, i know that's not the reality.
there are what? 800 abandoned structures in albany? how many of them get fully rehabbed each year? maybe 10? that's generous. so in 80 year we could possibly rehab every house in albany, assuming:
1. they don't fall down on their own while waiting for their chance; and
2. more don't become abandoned during those 80 years.
which everyone knows isn't going to happen.
once again, it's not about whether we CAN save these buildings, it's about finding people with the money and desire to do so. and for the time being that demand simply isn't there.
but i wish it was.
Posted by: Dan Van Riper
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
Okay, when I reproduced some comments from the regular posters on DIA, I in effect invited you all over to argue back and forth on my site. I got what I asked for.
Fine. But in all this back and forth discussion, I have seen absolutely no evidence of a very important thing that none of you seem to grasp. Everything we see around us is the result of public policy.
Empty decaying buildings in Albany are a result of public policy. Someone decided to make those buildings derelict, and a lot of someones have carried out this policy. And a whole lot more someones have decided that this policy is the way things ought to be and should never change.
Didn't you read my article? The Mayor took a $1.7 million loan from the IDA and used it to tear down buildings. Now do you think, maybe, possibly, something else could have been done with that money?
Did it ever occur to you guys that if "no one wants to rehab these buildings," they may find it impossible to do so because of public policy?
And don't give me any of that crap about "social forces" or "the invisible hand of the marketplace." Society and the marketplace are human inventions, and thus the rules that govern them are whatever we decide they should be.
In short, wake up guys. Stop passively supporting The Mayor's policies.
Posted by: Dan Van Riper
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
Except, of course, John Wolcott who posted above. He understands the link between public policy and urban decay better than almost anyone. But John doesn't post on DIA.
Posted by: hailstorm
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
of course it's the result of public policy! and by public policy, i mean jerry jennings and ye olde democratic machine.
and i don't support anything this mayor does, passive or otherwise!
i have no allegience to him or his cronies. but i suppose you don't know me well enough to know that.
and yes, social forces and the marketplace are human inventions, and humans do, in fact, have control over them. but 50% of these very same "humans" that you're relying on also saw fit to elect george w bush as leader of the united states. they re-elect jerry jennings every time he decides he wants to continue his tenure as supreme overlord of the capital city. these same "humans" elected brian scavo to the county legislator.
your "humans" ARE in fact those people who willingly decide to live in inefficent oversized homes, where they park their fleet of fossil fuel burning personal transport machines every night, waste their money at walmart and shopping malls as a form of recreation, and are more concerned about the state of lindsey lohan than they are about the situation in iraq.
you think these "humans" are going to want to go out of their way to help save some long-abandoned buildings in "the ghetto"? we're talking about people who are afraid to even set foot in any area even remotely "urban" after sundown.
sure, we COULD make better use of that $1.7 million to maybe save some of these buildings and put them to use. but how? tell me how. i'm all for it. and more importantly, how do we get the rest of these "humans" on board with it? how do we make them care? how do we make them think before they vote?
but don't pin this on me. i didn't vote these assholes into office.
Posted by: AlfredMoisiu
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
Dan -
To me, both you and DIA appear suffer from the illusion that anyone who doesn't fully believe and accept your position is either a passive sheep or a supporter of the machine politicians.
This puzzles me, because I've started reading your archives and have become a real fan of your writing -- you're typically not a propagandist like DIA.
You're right that social forces are created by man and can be changed by man. But what I don't agree with is that the tools for affect that change are here in the city or even the county. The state is a major player in this. If we hadn't driven out industry 30 years ago, someone might be knitting in the Albany Knitting Company, and the entire Mohawk Valley wouldn't be a ghost town.
All that the city can do is setup and implement fair and appropriate regulatory environment. It needs to set policy directions and enforce them equally. If we need to bulldoze buildings, the contracts should be properly bid. If you need to make zoning changes, they should be discussed in an open forum like they are in Guilderland.
The city has utterly failed to do this of course. We pay obscene amounts of money to demolish buildings. Public meetings are typically a mockery of the concept of an open meeting. Even the layout of the Common Council chamber makes it clear how a citzen fits into municipal politics -- shoved into a uncomfortable chair in the back of the chamber.
But... even if the city got its shit together, you're not doing to see some overnight change. Enforcing codes too strictly will push out too many landlords and destroy property values. Considering the preservation every old building will make it impossible to build something new. Slashing budgets to put the fiscal house in order means fewer festivals, less flowers, closed parks and outsourced services.
And don't dismiss the endangered, SUV driving middle class that also inhabits this city. Like it or not, you need those folks too, for they bear the brunt of the tax burden.
Posted by: alfred newman
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
Dan, your web site hates me. The following isnt what I intended to post
I have a question for you. Do you think that there is a connection between the economic decline of NYS and the dramatic rise in taxes that occured at the same time?
Posted by: Jason Lietuva (UAlbany class of 2000)
Posted on: 02/13/2008
Comments:
You can gut an old building and make it new on the inside. I used to live in a building in Brooklyn like that. It was a brownstone from 1872 and a developer came in and more or less kept the frame making everything new on the inside. To me, thats having your cake and eating it a the same time. I come to Albany alot for work, and spent 6 years here getting my BA and MPA. I grew up in NYC but always loved Albany's charm. Its always felt it was the ideal place for 25-40 year olds looking for an inexpensive small city with an big city feel towards it.
Public Policy can aide in urban renewal, but I think that we need a carrot and stick approach. One policy idea I think that would work is to intice wealthier people to buy these old buildings. With the coming gas crisis, and peoples desire to live in urban villages, Albany is in a good place. That is if the right steps are taken.
I would propose corporate housing. This isn't something allot of lefties would like, but think about it for a second. If Albany were to attract companies to move shop here due to the lower operation costs, the city could also make an agreement for these companies to invest in the city by buying old property to make homes for their employees. This is actually happening in many parts of the Boston region.
First and foremost, Albany needs jobs other then the state. Private sector jobs will pay more, hence attract people with more money to spend in the city. If company X moves to Albany, buys up old homes, refurbishes them, brings in employees, retail will follow.
Posted by: alfrednewman
Posted on: 02/14/2008
Comments:
Jason is right on the mark.
One other thing: Public Policy planners and advocates have an annoying habit of leaving out of their calculations potenially negative consequences, especially if those consequences counter the political beliefs of their masters.
What would the negative consequences be if the city tried to save all of the abandoned houses? An astronomical tax bill that would drive rents (remember the tenant pays the taxes through the rent) through the roof and drive even more people and businesses out of the city.
Posted by: Barak Marx
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
Yeah, thats what we need "Corporate Housing". The problem is the free market, it fails. Look at Albany, the reason the city is in the state its in because the market is imperfect because people aren't rational. Look at suburbanization, is that rational.
A rational person would realize that moving to the suburbs cost more in gas, destroys communities and eats away land. We assume people think this way, but they don't. Most people are slaves really, they do and say what their lead to believe.
I feel one of the major factors behind the destruction of cities was the car industries move to convince people that the American dream was to move out of the city into burbs where the only means of transporation is guess what, "Cars". Why do you think our trolley systems were destroyed in the early part of the century, it was competition.
I agree we need some sort of sound public policy to adress the issue, but I don't agree with Corporate Housing. I am not saying it won't work, but think of the negative cost associated with doing so. We give companies more clout and say in local government hence hijacking neighborhoos in their name. I am sure you can see what that will lead to. Also, many corporations don't exactly have a good track record of rebuilding cities. They do when it benefits them, at our expense of course. They also leave when it doesn't making cities worse off then before. Look at Schdy for instance.
I don't know what can be done, but I feel the city and state needs to realize that the car and sprawl are hitting the wall and people will have no other choice but to love in cities in the future.
Posted by: alfrednewman
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
Marx:
The problem wasn't caused by the "market." It is generally caused by well meaning people who didn't want to see the down side of well meaning policies.
You bring up Schenectady. It wasnt the market that hurt the city. It was the city government who actively prevented other large employers from moving to Schenectady in order to protect GE from competition for workers.
Posted by: alfrednewman
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
And Marx:
You look at the movement out of Albany as proof that the market fails. On the contrary, it shows that the market works.
Simply put, the Suburbs provide a location where the schools are better, the taxes are cheaper, the crime rate is lower and the quality of life is a lot better.
A guy I knew was assulted by five kids on Lark Street two months ago, one of many assaults that have happened. Is it rational for him to want to live where he is not safe?
Delmar doesnt have assaults.
Posted by: Dan Van Riper
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
Porco. Ax. Yellow Jeep. Ring any bells?
Okay alfrednewman, enough. You've made your points, such as they are. Don't turn into a flaming troll.
Posted by: Alfrednewman
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
Sorry Dan,
As this is your site I will respectfully end my participation in your discussion pertaining to the presevation and demolision of historic properties in Albany.
Thank you for allowing me on your forum.
AEN
Posted by: Tom Monjeau
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
There are too many points to address, so I will try to focus on what seems the most obvious. Since Adam Smith's "invisible hand" of the market has never and will never exist in an unfettered way, those who think that "market economics" rule are living in a dream world. As far as what happens in our city, it is politics and the policy that whatever Lola (er BBL, Columbia Development or pick any other) wants, Lola gets. The only market or economic forces that drive demolitions, spot rezoning etc, would be the economics of the old boys.
Like Corruptany's ex flame, I came to Albany (in 1975) and fell in love with the whole look and feel of the city and I found the architecture fascinating. The concept of a pre-suburban environment where the rich and poor and all those in between lived within houses or blocks of each other rubbed shoulders everyday, was fascinating to me as I grew up in that classic homogenous lily white suburb. I have enjoyed living in our diverse environment as has my family. Of course, many people would rather segregate themselves be it in Bethlehem, Guilderland, Colonie etc, or in the charter schools which seem to show very little diversity in their own right and they are entitled. What I object to is the fact that we here in the city make sure to maintain all the infrastructure necessary for them to leave their enclaves and come here to earn their livings and then return to the enclaves to pay their taxes. (I particularly love hearing the calls to the Mayors call in show from our suburban commuters complaining about potholes etc...)
Well I guess that I got off track, but the point is that if the city administration had a policy of trying to save these old structures rather that just call in DiTonno to take them down, they could and would be saved. It seems that there are plenty of buildings owned by the city that would be a great place to start some programs to get some of our youth working with members of the trade unions in rehabbing buildings and perhaps getting some of them interesting in joining union apprentice programs.
And as a side note, I think that the idea of increasing the registration fees for vacant buildings is a joke. It sounds like something, but in reality it is nothing. The way things statnd now,if the building is going to be rehabbed it will be done regardless of the fee. If there is no economic viability to the property, it does not matter how much the fees are.
Also, considering the fact that Albany County reimburses the City of Albany (and all the other municipalities and school districts) for all unpaid taxes until the property is tax foreclosed and this includes the cost of demo once it is added to the property taxes, the City has not really cared too much about the costs of demo. I fact, you and I ultimately pay these fees when they are added to the tax bill. Ironic isn't it...
I suppose I am just really ventilating here because all of these issues can be solved, but the "Block by Block" plan is not really the way. By the way, does anyone have any " B by B" action to report?
Posted by: Corruptany II
Posted on: 02/15/2008
Comments:
Here is some fun, kind of. Google earth allows you to go block by block in Albany and see pictures. Its disturbing, I showed my coworkers it and they thought I was looking a picture of my grandfathers village in Latvia.
Posted by: C^2
Posted on: 02/16/2008
Comments:
Savannah, GA is the model.
Low taxes.
Active collaboration between Savannah College of Art and Design and city where SCAD would buy up derelict historic property, use for architecture and other classes, renovate, and either use for college or sell.
Vibrant arts scene.
Not ruled by a single party since the 1920s.
I'm sure there are other drivers...these are the ones that come to mind.
And it's at a relative disadvantage...though it has a strong government presence with Army bases nearby, it's also 4 hours from Atlanta...a little hard to get to. Main employers are paper mills and Gulfstream.
I understand Charleston is even better...don't know much about it.
Posted by: Paul Fowler
Posted on: 02/17/2008
Comments:
Dan,
Going back to the discussion on abandoned buildings in Albany... and
better ways to spend money than the Convention Center.
Has anyone seriously proposed to the legislature and the governor for
them to fix up Albany housing and provide it through the Office of
Temporary and Disability Assistance for the Working Families
Initiative? If not, then why not?
At 50,000 per house for 850 houses, the State would only be shelling
out an initial 45 million. That is really chump change to OTDA.
Then, if the State provided the homes to working families under a
pay-back option, the State could recoup more than it spent once taxes
and property values are factored. It would seem to fit in line with
helping fix some of the general housing crisis, etc...
I know there is a reason this has not been proposed, but what is that
reason? Why not provide the housing under the working families
guidelines?
Thoughts?
Fowler
Posted by: Ken von Geldern
Posted on: 02/19/2008
Comments:
It's hard to understand why some people can say it's a good idea to spend $400 million plus for a convention center, and in the next breath say we can't afford to fix up the old buildings in Albany. Do the math--if there's a thousand abandoned buildings in Albany County, 400 mill would be -- What? -- $400,000 per building! The real reasons for not fixing them are not that we can't afford it, or there aren't economically feasible uses for them. The real reasons are something else all together.
Let's look at two buildings that were vacant for a few years, that have been reclaimed. One is old School 10, on the corner of Central and Lake Aves. A few years ago the Jennings administration made a deal with Eckerds' Drugs to tear it down and build one of those concrete box warehouse type drug stores. There was lots of community opposition, not only because people liked the old School 10 architecture, but they also hated the Eckerds' style so much. In the course of many public meetings and statements, the administration repeated the phrase over and over that there was too much wrong with the building, it would cost too much to fix, and nobody was willing to take it on. Plus, even if it were fixed up, thare wans't a good use for it. Fortunately, Eckerds finally got the point (although the administration didn't) and pulled out of the project.
(This was around the same time that Eckerds was being opposed on two other similar projects, with all the same similar rationalizations given for why big swaths of our neighborhoods had to be leveled to make way for these neo-correctional-facility type of buildings that they like to puke out. [For example, look at the main street in Watervleit, at the end of the Rt. 2 bridge.] Eckerds was finally run out of town, along with their concrete-box-surrounded-by-a-half-acre-parking-lot plan for revitalizing Albany.
Interestingly, School 10 has been rehabbed, added on, and is now functioning as... A neighborhood school! Who would have thought.... Of course, the addition doesn't exactly match the original style, but it's close enough to show that the developer had some respect for the original design (and for the other old buildings around it, and for the people who have to look at it).
The other building is one that I own. It had been vacant for a few years and fairly run down when I bought it ten years ago. It has two apartments that needed major work to be livable. Because I like the old style of this building, I did as much as I could to keep the style when I remodeled it. So the apartments still have the old moldings and doors with thirty coats of paint, the huge double hung windows, the ceramic door knobs, and the old double entry doors. Etc., etc. Granted, it wasn't so easy to get the materials than if I'd just gone to Home Depot for them. But the outcome was surprising even to me. The fact is, even though this building is in a poor neighborhood with more crime than most, and it's an urban setting, with stores and people on the street, not a quiet residential street, just about everybody who looks at the apartments wants to rent them. Person after person without fail says how much they like the apartments, even though many would not opt for the location.
My conclusions from these two examples are that the reasons we are usually given for why old buildings cannot be repaired are not the real reasons they aren't repaired. We are usually told 1)It would cost too much to fix them up, and 2)If they were fixed up, there still wouldn't be an economically feasible use for them. I maintain that these two points are almost never true.
These two reasons are just excuses which serve to hide the real reasons for letting these old buildings decline. I think the real reasons are more likely:
1) Scale Preferences--Much of what is proposed for urban revitalization projects are huge scale, dealing with multi million dollar contracts and huge corporate development companies. Rehabbing takes looking at the smaller scale projects. Furthermore, it takes using smaller scale building contractors.
2) Style Preferences--A lot of people don't have the appreciation for older style architecture. They like the newer, sleek styles, even though their designs may contain a lot of drawbacks in terms of cost, functionality, long term planning, and aesthetic realities.
3) Work preferences--It's a whole different kind of work to rip out the old stuff and build new, than to keep what you can of the old and keep it repaired. Many people who prefer to work that way rationalize it by saying that it's impractical or expensive to do the repairing. It often is much more practical and less expensive. It's just a kind of bias that is common. As a result of the crash-and-build attitude, a lot of builders and remodelers nowadays don't have the skills to actually repair things. That doesn't mean it can't be done, or that people with the skill can't be found. it just takes a desire to do it.
4) Political Preferences--Do you want to give huge amounts of money to one or two corporate developers? Or give smaller amounts to smaller contractors or individual homeowners? Someone whose political style is locked into the big-money dealings, is simply not capable of doing things in a smaller scale way. They don't have the understanding or the political connections necessary to carry it out.
Finally, I want to comment on what I think is the basis for the value of preserving our old structures. I don't think we can explain it by economics or practicality alone, even though those are important. I don't think we can explain it completely by talking about architectural style, or history, either. I think it has to do with something way more subjective than that. I think it has to do with Soul. I think neglecting our structures, letting them decline, and the destroying them is like destroying the Soul of our Community. A city that lets that happen has a spiritual sickness. I wish I could come up with some way to explain it better than that. But I think you have to just get it. You have to have a feel for the Soul of a Community. The only thing I can think of to explain it is, it's the opposite of Greed.
Add a comment, if you like :
Prior Post * * * Next Post
This site maintained by Lynne Jackson of Jackson's Computer Services.
