Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Mensch - Amherst Cooperation On Westwood.

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    855

    Mensch - Amherst Cooperation On Westwood.

    http://buffalonews.com/2018/03/02/we...ning-for-site/

    "Mensch Capital Partners is putting on hold its years-long effort to transform the shuttered country club into a $250 million mixed-use development and cooperating with town leaders as they figure out how best to use Westwood and neighboring properties. The group also has set aside a lawsuit it filed against the town over its handling of the project."

    Sooooooo, is this a good thing or a bad thing for Amherst? Right off the bat, waiting for TOA "leaders" (what does that even mean?) to make a decision kinda suggests that whatever happens will be years down the road.

  2. #2
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,974
    Wouldn't something like this be based on profitability of the project?

  3. #3
    Member leftWNYbecauseofBS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    10,873
    Quote Originally Posted by Member 2358 View Post
    Sooooooo, is this a good thing or a bad thing for Amherst? Right off the bat, waiting for TOA "leaders" (what does that even mean?) to make a decision kinda suggests that whatever happens will be years down the road.
    The deal they were looking for would have been a horrible deal for the town. That being the land swap.

    That said, I really don't like how the "Keep Westwood Green" group feel as if they are entitled to that green space that they don't own. Someone needs to put those people in their place. Judith Ferraro calls Westwood "our green space" and I think the a very solid move to help the conversation along is for Mensch to come out in public comments asking Judy for her address to send the property tax bill.

    If you really want to get creative, they should create a special improvement district around Westwood. Then go offer fair market value for Westwood and charge down the cost of the purchase to just this SID. Wonder how much ownership Judy would claim then?

    Being more adult about the process, I think if the TOA wants to remain in the golf business they should move rebuild the couse at Westwood and combine the Par-3 into it and make a 'destination' course for the region. Then turn around and create a lifestyle village on the current course that opens up to UB as a way to pay for it.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    855
    Quote Originally Posted by leftWNYbecauseofBS View Post
    The deal they were looking for would have been a horrible deal for the town. That being the land swap.

    That said, I really don't like how the "Keep Westwood Green" group feel as if they are entitled to that green space that they don't own. Someone needs to put those people in their place. Judith Ferraro calls Westwood "our green space" and I think the a very solid move to help the conversation along is for Mensch to come out in public comments asking Judy for her address to send the property tax bill.

    If you really want to get creative, they should create a special improvement district around Westwood. Then go offer fair market value for Westwood and charge down the cost of the purchase to just this SID. Wonder how much ownership Judy would claim then?

    Being more adult about the process, I think if the TOA wants to remain in the golf business they should move rebuild the couse at Westwood and combine the Par-3 into it and make a 'destination' course for the region. Then turn around and create a lifestyle village on the current course that opens up to UB as a way to pay for it.
    Ha! I'm in for all those ideas. Funny thing is, Ferraro's house isn't even abutting Westwood. The Ferraro's were party to the anti-development movement for the Buffalo Shooting Club thing, too. Maybe they're just serial-NIMBY activists. Doubt they will shut their pie-holes about any development on either site.... 'cuz, y'know, it's "theirs".

    I truly wonder how much the Ferraro's and their kindred would be willing to chip in via some form of assessment year-after-year to get what they want. seriously... $100/yr?... $500/yr?... $1,000/yr?... $10,000/yr?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,639
    Leftie, I read your comments above. The battle cry of Ferraro, Marconi and that crowd is a simple one: “My property is my property and your property is my property.” They’re ably aided and abetted by white liberal suburban Democratic office holders like Bucki and Kulpa who use land use terminology like “walkable communities” and the rest of that crappola to prevent emigration of “those types” into town. Plain as the nose on Bucki’s face. I’m told it’s one the landmarks on earth that can be seen with the naked eye from the space shuttle.

  6. #6
    Member leftWNYbecauseofBS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    10,873
    Quote Originally Posted by grump View Post
    Leftie, I read your comments above. The battle cry of Ferraro, Marconi and that crowd is a simple one: “My property is my property and your property is my property.” They’re ably aided and abetted by white liberal suburban Democratic office holders like Bucki and Kulpa who use land use terminology like “walkable communities” and the rest of that crappola to prevent emigration of “those types” into town. Plain as the nose on Bucki’s face. I’m told it’s one the landmarks on earth that can be seen with the naked eye from the space shuttle.
    But that's what doesn't match up. The whole urbanist 'walkable communities' would be in favor of projects like what was proposed at the gun club and westwood. What Ferraro wants is old fashioned suburbia. I am not saying they don't have these people or someone in their pocket...I just don't see the line of thinking connection. NIMBYs are in every city and every town. They are empowered by Republicans and Democrats alike.


    What's sad is how Mensch tried to get greedy in the land swap. Shocking since Paul Ciminelli and Dan Hamister are a part of the group. The reasoning Amherst gave for not doing the swap was it was a bad deal. It was but it could have easily been a good deal.

    They should have offered to upgrade the club house to a town facility and improve the course. They could have then leveraged a better course for residents and a town facility for all to gain support for the deal. Instead they just stuck with the 170 for 170 and everyone but the NIMBYs didn't pay attention.

    Now the course is too far gone to bring it a playable shape for golf. At least without a massive investment.

    I wish just out of spite Mensch scaled back the project to be so small it would be impossible to make the traffic and too much development claim and build a massive and ugly as hell wall around the property so all of these people see are cinder blocks.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •