from today's SNOOZE:
I drove by the complex the day after Christmas. It looked far enough away from the rest of the Psych Center complex that it could be separated off and developed by a developer into upscale condos. If it's feasible, perhaps build some new townhouse condos of a similar/complimentary style along Forest on both sides of the complex. It's got a park-like setting; it's within walking distance of Buffalo State, Delaware Park, and the north end of the Elmwood Strip; and it's in an area of the city that can support upscale housing. It would also give that section of Forest a boost and might encourage more rehabs of homes along Forest between Elmwood and Grant.ALBANY - A hundred million dollars for the H.H. Richardson complex made it into two State of the State messages by Gov. George E. Pataki and was embraced by the full State Legislature in the 2004 state budget - no small feat for what some officials view as a local real estate project.
Yet, after being hailed by the governor and others as a historic landmark worth saving, the soaring Richardson complex on the grounds of Buffalo Psychiatric Center endures another harsh winter, tearing away at its brick and sandstone exterior and crumbling interior walls.
It's not for lack of money. The state in 2004 - a year after Pataki called for its salvation - approved $100 million to restore the complex - a National Historic Landmark designed by Richardson, one of the nation's greatest architects, and opened as the Buffalo State Asylum for the Insane in 1880.
"There's a very unusual dynamic taking place here," said Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, D-Buffalo, a Richardson preservation ally. "Typically, you have grand plans for a major project and you don't have the money to pay for it. In this case, we've got the money to pay for a major project, but there isn't a consensus as to how it ought to be spent, other than the general idea that the Richardson buildings need to be restored."
Unlike other big state projects, officials in 2004 failed to lock down an agreement on precisely how the $100 million pot would be spent. That has left nearly two years of quiet, behind-the-scenes battling among state and local officials and preservationists who have been unable not only to prioritize the spending, but even to decide what should go on the site.
Further, there has been an ongoing argument over just how far the money will go to restore the sprawling complex.
Now another danger creeps in.
As often happens when state money is unused, talk in Albany turns to redirecting it. No one is saying they have specific other plans, but the worry is there, officials say.
"We have, frankly, warned people they better get this done before the governor leaves," said State Sen. Dale Volker, R-Depew. "I addressed the concept of "sweeping' funds. If the governor leaves and can't spend this, he's going to use it one way or the other."
Some state officials have tentatively agreed on how to spend some of the money: $16 million to $20 million to relocate Burchfield-Penny Art Center from the adjacent Buffalo State College campus and as much as $20 million to place an architectural museum and visitors center in the main towers building for tourists interested in exploring Buffalo's rich architectural history.
An additional $7 million - not part of the $100 million pot - was set aside by the state in 2003 to make emergency stabilization repairs. Only part of that sum has been spent.
In addition, there is talk of spending up to $7 million to help complete a historic project that is not part of the Richardson complex: the visitors center at Frank Lloyd Wright's Darwin D. Martin site. But some officials have privately grumbled that the funding stream should not be tapped for off-site uses.
Still unclear is what would happen to the remaining $50 million or more that the State Legislature and Pataki appropriated in August 2004.
There is talk of creating a commission that would be empowered to spend the money and maybe engage in public-private partnerships.
There also is talk about using some of the complex site - property along Forest Avenue - to provide much-needed expansion space for Buffalo State College.
The ultimate decision rests with Pataki, who in his 2003 State of the State message first suggested rehabilitating the complex and using part of it as a teacher training facility.
State officials say they are close to announcing a funding plan to direct about $20 million to the Burchfield-Penny and Darwin Martin projects, with the remaining $80 million for Richardson. Money for the architectural museum and visitors center would come out of that $80 million.
"The governor remains committed to the Richardson preservation effort, including an on-site visitors center, as well as the Martin House and Burchfield-Penny projects," said David Catalfamo, a Pataki spokesman. "We will continue to work with local officials and community leaders on a final consensus plan that will advance these priorities, and an announcement is expected in the near future."
But Richardson allies say they have been hearing such claims for nearly two years.
Assembly Majority Leader Paul Tokasz, D-Cheektowaga, said some officials are concerned about the true cost to transform the complex for other use. He said there is agreement to give Burchfield-Penny $20 million, leaving $80 million for Richardson work.
"But one of the major concerns is, if you can't do the Richardson work for $100 million, how can you do it for $80 million?" Tokasz said.
Paul Ciminelli, a local real estate developer, calls the Richardson complex his favorite piece of architecture but says the cost of a complete overhaul of the buildings - which would include not just restoration but rehabilitation for new uses - soars far beyond what the state has committed.
Ciminelli attributed the high expenses to the state's decision to let the buildings fall into disrepair - the lack of heat has hurt the interior, and the exterior shows increasing signs of serious deterioration - along with its sheer size and historical features that must be protected.
Ciminelli said the $70 million to $80 million could easily be spent on the complex just to get it ready for some future use.
"But it won't be a finished project," he said.
Tokasz and other lawmakers said that they can support ideas like an architectural museum and visitors center for the site but that these plans don't resolve the question of what do to with the overall complex, which includes not just the landmark twin towers but also a series of attached wings of brick buildings.
"I might question the cost, but I think it's good," Hoyt said of the architectural museum.
Some preservationists worry that the inaction could lead to a dangerous solution: cutting the complex, leaving just the main building in place. Others think some state officials may be looking at the Richardson funding for other uses.
"Without naming names, the vultures are circling. Having a $100 million pot of money unspent and being reappropriated year after year has got people thinking, "If they're not going to spend it, let's use it elsewhere,' " Hoyt said.
"I think a lot of people are looking at it as a goodie bag," said Timothy Tielman, executive director of the Campaign for a Greater Buffalo, a preservation group.
He believes the state should be required to restore the entire 350,000-square-foot complex - not just the twin towers facility. While he said he doesn't particularly care what kind of new use is discovered for the complex, Tielman questions those who say the job is too expensive.
"Priority one has to be the emergency repair and stabilization of the entire complex," Tielman said.
Volker, who was never a fan of spending so much money on a single project in the area, agreed that repairs should be done quickly.
"I say take $10 million and fix it up right away," said Volker, whose suburban constituents have regularly complained to him about the costs of the project.
Tokasz said the Burchfield-Penny should get the $20 million and that project should begin immediately, as discussions continue about overall reuse of the Richardson site.
The passage of time and competing interests have blurred the original chief component of the deal, advocates worry.
"Let's not forget the origins of this discussion was to restore and reuse this extraordinary complex of buildings in the heart of Buffalo. That's the foundation of the discussions," Hoyt said.
Use the $100 million to stabilize and fix the exterior, and then let a private developer complete it. I believe the complex is on the National Historic Register, so any re-use would have to be consistent with its historical character, but this can be written into the contracts and put in as deed restrictions.
Your right to buy a military weapon without hindrance, delay or training cannot trump Daniel Barden’s right to see his eighth birthday. -- Jim Himes
Anything to get it saved! What is unreal is that the money hasn't even been spent to stabilize the complex. How much more damage is another winter going to cause? Just more money that'll need to be spent in the future. Bureaucratic log-jam at its worst!
Even after reading Linda's article, I fail to understand what the actual holdup is. The money is there for the spending, are they just unable to find a contractor or are they unable to agree on a design plan in order to get it started? Who controls that process? Have they even opened up the project for bids?
The state is reluctant to release the money when the future use of the complex isn't clear. The future use isn't "clear" because nobody knows where the money to complete the project and support for the non-profit uses will come from. Since the money is sitting "unused", it's fair game for a money grab by another "worthy" project.
Your right to buy a military weapon without hindrance, delay or training cannot trump Daniel Barden’s right to see his eighth birthday. -- Jim Himes
The problem is there is no clear responsibility for the project. Nobody "owns" it. The state owns the property but is looking to Buffalo to come up with a plan. Buffalo can't do anything without getting some funds first.
They need to create a separate organization like the Inner Harbor has to get this moving.
Originally posted by Linda_D
The state is reluctant to release the money when the future use of the complex isn't clear. The future use isn't "clear" because nobody knows where the money to complete the project and support for the non-profit uses will come from.
So, the money is allocated but not disbursed because no one has stepped up and created a plan? The onus is on whom to create the plan?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote