Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is a good point. The residents of Elma are very protective of their rural atmosphere. That being said, there have been smaller subdivisions pooping up in the town. Eventually, West Seneca and Lancaster will fill up, and Elma will probably be the next town with a lot of new houses. The 400 goes right through the town and there is a lot of open flat land. So, in my opinion it is only a matter of time before Elma becomes more developed. It will surely take years, decades really, for Elma to get to the developmental level of Lancaster or Clarence however.
I wouldn't call them subdivisions. Single family homes yes.
As far as the subdivisions go, i was just thinking of a patio home community that i have driven by off Rice Road. Now that i think about it, that is the only subdivision i can think of in Elma. I mistakenly thought the subdivisions built on bowen road were in Elma. They are farther north, in Lancaster.
Wheatfield and Pendleton are the only ones that I can see becoming "exurbs" because of the subdivison boom that has happened since the early 2000's. I guess you can also consider the outer parts of Lancaster and Clarence that are further out closer to Akron-Alden.
The southeastern part of Wheatfield, and the southwestern part of Pendleton are quite close to the business district along Amherst, North French and they're not too far away from much of anything.
Metro Detroit is a classic example of exurb growth......a lot of sprawl has happened away from the city of Detroit.
I don't think there will be any more major exurbs or growth waves popping up in WNY only because I don't think the region can financially support another Wheatfield like community, nor will areas capable of doing so allow it to happen, as in Elma's case, they are protective of their rural atmosphere and community as many similar communities also are. But the biggest reason is financially. If you build these homes, someone has to buy them.
Metro Detroit has a lot of people, a lot of commerce, and businesses who set up shop in the inner suburbs and exurbs. There's also a lot of wealth in the region...there's still growth occurring out in the outskirts of Detroit.
Both cities are trying hard to retivalize their downtown cores....but I think it will be a bigger priority for Buffalo than Detroit....Buffalo is trying very hard to make the downtown area gentrified..... as is Detroit, and the movement into city cores will be the next point of emphasis in the future....but I foresee Detroit having more long term success with this mainly because they have reasons to live downtown being they are a corporate headquarters city, they also have major operations for many companies there, and it also helps that Michigan has improved it's business climate tremendously. Buffalo is under the New York State umbrella, and until things change in Albany, the rest of upstate will have a hard time living up to it's full potential.
There have been improvements in Buffalo and the region for sure....but it's full potential is limited by being under the NY State umbrella and the politics here.
Wheatfield and Pendleton are the only ones that I can see becoming "exurbs" because of the subdivison boom that has happened since the early 2000's. I guess you can also consider the outer parts of Lancaster and Clarence that are further out closer to Akron-Alden.
The southeastern part of Wheatfield, and the southwestern part of Pendleton are quite close to the business district along Amherst, North French and they're not too far away from much of anything.
Metro Detroit is a classic example of exurb growth......a lot of sprawl has happened away from the city of Detroit.
I don't think there will be any more major exurbs or growth waves popping up in WNY only because I don't think the region can financially support another Wheatfield like community, nor will areas capable of doing so allow it to happen, as in Elma's case, they are protective of their rural atmosphere and community as many similar communities also are. But the biggest reason is financially. If you build these homes, someone has to buy them.
Metro Detroit has a lot of people, a lot of commerce, and businesses who set up shop in the inner suburbs and exurbs. There's also a lot of wealth in the region...there's still growth occurring out in the outskirts of Detroit.
Both cities are trying hard to retivalize their downtown cores....but I think it will be a bigger priority for Buffalo than Detroit....Buffalo is trying very hard to make the downtown area gentrified..... as is Detroit, and the movement into city cores will be the next point of emphasis in the future....but I foresee Detroit having more long term success with this mainly because they have reasons to live downtown being they are a corporate headquarters city, they also have major operations for many companies there, and it also helps that Michigan has improved it's business climate tremendously. Buffalo is under the New York State umbrella, and until things change in Albany, the rest of upstate will have a hard time living up to it's full potential.
There have been improvements in Buffalo and the region for sure....but it's full potential is limited by being under the NY State umbrella and the politics here.
I think some other differences between Detroit and Buffalo is that Detroit is THE major metro in its state and is a top 20 metro in population.
I agree that some changes need to be made in terms of governmental structure and that will also depend on the residents in the state realizing this or to consider other options.
I did a little research, and this is the growth, in percentage, since 1980 according to the latest Census estimates.
Wheatfield 90.7%
Pendleton 38.7%
Newstead 19.8%
Marilla 10.2%
Alden 5.3%
Eden 5.1%
Concord 5%
Colden 4.8%
Boston 4.6%
Aurora -0.2%
Holland -1.4%
Most of these towns are slow growing, and some are even shrinking. Contrast that to the population growth of the outer suburbs between 1980 and 2014:
Clarence 75.1%
Lancaster 41.8%
Grand Island 23.6%
Orchard Park 21.3%
Amherst 14.8%
Elma 10.8%
Hamburg 8.7%
The outer suburbs seemed to grow faster, and their growth will likely continue. Many of these areas have extensive open area that could be developed. Southern Orchard Park, Eastern Elma, and Northern Clarence are still quite rural, in fact. Having said all that, before we see farther out towns grow like Concord and Boston, the outer suburbs will have to fill up more with development. Whether or not that will happen, I'm not sure.
Thank God, they are running out of room to build in Lancaster. Most of the available area ( farms) has been sold off. My end of town has no sewers, so it isn't viable for builders -- every lot would need to be over an acre for septic. We won't have lots of new building in a few years; families having more kids? Maybe. More newer housing? Probably not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
