Skip to main content

If Batavia could get that one big project, funded by the Fed... what would it be?

By Philip Anselmo

An article in the Buffalo News this morning got me thinking. Briefly, the article is about Robert Wilmers, chief executive officer of M&T Bank Corp. Wilmers spoke to an audience of venture capitalists about revitalizing the upstate economy.

He pointed out that New York City’s economy — until recently — had been doing "a lot better than the economy upstate."

Part of that is due to what he called the "innate attributes" of the city itself, but he also cited the "billions and billions of dollars" spent on projects such as the 42nd Street revival, the South Street Seaport, the Jacob Javits Center and Ground Zero.

By contrast, "in upstate, including Western New York, we have not seen any large projects."

Indeed, Wilmers said he was told by former downstate Empire State Development chairman Patrick Foye that up to 70 percent of the agency’s money was spent upstate, but "I was having trouble finding that."

So this got me thinking. Rochester tried for its home-run project some years back. Who here remembers the fast ferry? Connect Rochester to Toronto. Boost tourism. Bring in the money. Yeah... So, that one tanked. Big.

But what about Batavia... what could we do for Batavia that would give it that shot in the arm, get the kids out walking the streets and the old folks dancing in their homes? Money rolling in, fame, glory. We're not on a body of water, so we don't have to worry about a ferry flop. We've already got the "mall" that people love to hate.

Wilmers:

Finally, the region should combine tourism and its renowned architecture to draw in visitors. “We’ve been less successful than most communities in upstate New York,” he said dryly. “We have not destroyed as many architectural sites as other parts of the country.”

Batavia has plenty of architecture to show off: glorious old homes, towering brick churches, regal crumbling mansions.

So... We had the chance to ask Pat Weissend what he would want for Batavia. Weissend is the director of the Holland Land Office Museum. He says, why not think even bigger. Something huge, something humungous! At a recent meeting of the Kiwanis Club, Weissend heard a presentation by economic developer Chad Zambito about erecting an enormous technological-industrial park in Alabama. This industrial center would create 10,000 jobs and entirely transform the character of the region, says Weissend.

Well, either that, or establish the state of Genesee. "We could be the 51st state," he says. Just make sure there's enough money left over to triple the size of the museum.

Charlie Mallow

This is an easy one. The Harvester Ave project. This is the only space big enough in the city to make a difference in our future. There is nothing like shovel ready land in the middle of a city. Cross your fingers, things are in the works.

Dec 3, 2008, 10:31am Permalink
Gabor Deutsch

The mall is and will always be that stain you just can never get rid of. You try scrubbing, pretreating even using calgon. OUT OUT DAMNED SPOT !

Dec 3, 2008, 10:59pm Permalink
Charlie Mallow

Here are some reasons why this is an easy one.

There are many problems when it comes to redeveloping the mall property. The biggest problem is that the properties are individually owned and operated. For anything to be done, those owners would have to come together. There have been attempts by developers in the recent past to do something with the land that have failed for that reason. The owner of the land on Harvester is an active participant.

The question in this post was what we could do to have real impact on Batavia. There is no question that manufacturing and industrial type jobs that would be created with the Harvester project would be better for the city. At best redevelopment downtown would only provide lower paying retail jobs.

There is also a little known fact about sales tax in the city. The county water agreement put into place a provision for the sharing of sales taxes in the county. The city gets the same share of sales tax whether you buy something in the county or in the city. All the city would get from a better retail area is increased property taxes. Those taxes would be higher from a redeveloped industrial corridor on Harvester.

The Harvester project is doable and would benefit all city residents with employment opportunities and enlarging the tax base therefore, lowering everyone else’s share. . The mall is just an eye sore with no real path for redevelopment right now. Harvester/Swan is an eyesore that can be turned into a valuable part of our city.

Dec 4, 2008, 7:44am Permalink
Mark Potwora

Charlie ..I agree that Harvester hold the greatest potential for growth.Could this be an empire zone .Are there steps being made to tear it all down .Where's the county on all this.They seems to want to put all these corp.parks all over the county..So one in Batavia would be great..

As for the mall ,what about eminent domain.Couldnt that be used here..They city takes the property and sells it to a developer..

Dec 4, 2008, 2:09pm Permalink
Charlie Mallow

Mark, Lots of real good questions. It would be hard to give you complete answers in a post but, let me do my best.

The EDC applied for a grant to tear down some of the buildings in the corridor. The EDC is a department of the county. A large part of that land is the business incubator and already has breaks for new businesses.

Eminent domain would involve the city purchasing the land in the mall and that isn’t something the city has enough money to do. With that last developer that wanted to do something with the mall property, the agreement called for a percentage of owners to sell their land before the city would have been able to follow through with an eminent domain of the rest of the property. The developer was not able to reach that percentage. The long and short of this is, in order for something to be done with the mall, the owners have to get together and agree.

Dec 4, 2008, 3:50pm Permalink
Gabor Deutsch

Mistake one :
"The biggest problem is that the properties are individually owned and operated".
Mistake two :
Nobody foreseeing this problem.
Mistake Three :
Everyone complains and no one can do anything about it.

The last thing I want to hear is the word "tearing down" or "redeveloping project". That seems to be a costly FUBAR for the city. I am all for jobs but not to tear down and rebuild and fail.
I am 100% for any "development" that creates and keeps jobs.
I know its easier said then done but it makes sense doesnt it ?

Dec 5, 2008, 8:00pm Permalink

Authentically Local