Fairmount, present day
August 12th, 2007. Filed under: Featured, Suburbia, Fairmount, Syracuse.It’s been a while since my last installment of the Compleat History of Fairmount… I believe I left off poised to look at Fairmount’s connections to the State Fair and with the founding of the city of Syracuse. That’s still being left for another day, but I suppose it’s OK to jump back and forth in time. (This particular post does have to do with Fairmount’s relationship to the city of Syracuse, however, and was prompted by the recent news about Excellus fleeing to Dewitt.)
The big news in Fairmount is, and has been for some time, the redevelopment of Fairmount Fair plaza by Benderson, which was made possible by the fortuitous departure of Wal-Mart up the road to Camillus. This is happening in stages. A couple weeks ago, a shiny new PetSmart opened. The new Target looks for all the world like it’s ready to open, but that won’t happen until October, which is disappointing many locals. The same goes for Michael’s. In any case, when these new establishments finally do open, it’ll probably be the biggest thing to happen to Fairmount since the original FF opened on October 28, 1959. That was the final event in Fairmount’s transformation from a rural farming to a fully suburban community (FF taking up the last spot of agricultural land, the Terry farm). It finally had “all the amenities.”
Fairmount’s latest transformation from Wal-Mart country to Target country is intriguing. When it comes to the remodeling of western plazas by Benderson, I don’t know anyone who doesn’t think Fairmount got the better deal, although the new Camillus Plaza has “bigger” big-box stores. Thinking back to the history of development in the town of Camillus already covered, it sort of reminds me of Camillus getting the Erie Canal, but Fairmount eventually getting the better deal with the railroad coming through. That was a sign of the rapidly changing times in the 19th century when what seemed wonderful initially, was superceded by a new kind of progress. We live in a consumer culture now (not a producing and exporting one) so I guess applying that analogy to shopping centers isn’t off the mark.
I also have to wonder what happens when first- or even second-time homebuyers can no longer buy the new homes being built out in the Camillus hills, and up in Lysander and Van Buren too. With the collapse of subprime lending and associated skittishness in the mortgage industry, you have to wonder how Onondaga County’s “sprawl without growth” can keep sustaining itself. I mean, it already makes no sense that so many of those McMansion developments in Cicero and Camillus even exist. But then again, the state of home financing in this country makes absolutely no sense either — as Wall Street is now finding out.
I can’t help wondering if the perceived suitability and desirability of the smaller and older housing units (such as those found in Fairmount and Westvale) will appreciate in the future. The population of the western burbs is aging, and needs new blood. With the sort of stores that are coming in to Fairmount Fair this fall, Fairmount just got a lot more appealing in terms of “amenities.” The fact that places like Fairmount and Westvale and Taunton are in highly regarded school districts (West Genesee and Westhill) can’t hurt their future desirability either.
I’m not sure if this could ever actually happen, but it is interesting to contemplate. A contraction of suburban sprawl in the Syracuse area? Could such a thing ever happen?
What’s especially interesting is that a suburb like Fairmount is just about maxed out on building space. There is no place to build new houses, barring an incursion into the Split Rock area, and it seems to me that that is either unavailable or undesirable (after all, that was The Rock, and God only knows what industrial messes and scary ghosts are still up there). So if anyone wanted to set up house in Fairmount, they’re going to have to get used to having a smaller lawn and three or four bedrooms instead of six. (And a nice neighborhood park, and a good elementary school, and a library, and a nice shopping mall with a Target, all within walking distance for many…) There is of course more room for sprawl in the Town of Onondaga, but only so much.
As for what this means for the future of the city of Syracuse? Probably nothing, but you never know. Everyone talks about suburban sprawl in the Syracuse metro area, the notion of big new houses out in the swamps and wealthy outer suburbs surrounding a decaying urban core. But the reality is that there are healthy neighborhoods in the city of Syracuse and there are not-so-unaffordable suburbs in the inner ring, spread about over three converging town lines (Onondaga, Camillus, and Geddes). Even more interesting is that nice neighborhoods like Strathmore are… hmmm… roughly in the same quadrant as the inner ring suburbs I have mentioned above. (And yes, some down-and-out areas are, as well.) And then there’s OCC, which has got some big, big plans (and I assume, will add at least a few jobs to the economy, not to mention human activity).
This is the same quadrant, coincidentally, that the powers-that-be failed to slice apart with a proposed bypass, decades ago.
I don’t know where I’m going with this line of thought really, and there are probably factors I haven’t considered (like all those town lines). But I do know the southwestern quadrant of the Syracuse area has long been overlooked as an area with potential. All development has been centered on the far northern exurbs and on the center of Syracuse, it seems to me. Wouldn’t it be interesting if time and tide, and the overall changing economic fortunes of our country, somehow started reversing this disjointed process of growth (or decay) here in the Syracuse metro area? Can suburban America retrace its steps? (Even if it’s because the suburbanites might have to, not because they want to?)
Let’s imagine a Syracuse area where suburb and city start to draw toward each other again. Or, at the very least, suburbanites are somewhat closer to the city — and are encouraged to enjoy it, but also forced to deal with it.
If it is too ambitious to hope for a full-scale recolonization of downtown… where do you think re-engagement between suburb and city could begin?

August 15th, 2007
Interesting concept, re-engagement between city and suburb. Your neck of the woods is best situated for this kind of deal–Burnet Park/Avery Ave./Tipp Hill sort of blend right into your area. (Again, think what could have happened with the baseball stadium in the mix, too.)
Dewitt has some possibilities, as well–if they would stop stealing our businesses and suing us over the airport! There connection would be more University-centered.
Maybe the Connective Corridor should go from Wegmans in Dewitt to Target in Fairmount.
August 15th, 2007
I just think that you have a lot of socioeconomic diversity within that SW city-suburban quadrant that bears a closer look — given a theoretical return of SOME suburban homebuyers in closer toward the core, due to circumstances beyond their control. and that’s a pretty big if. But still…
Everything seems to focus on repurposing the CITY, which is important, but… what about these burbs? All burbs are not alike. (Not even Fairmount is homogenous in terms of architecture, street layout, etc. as it was developed from the 1930s through the 1980s, with the 1950s being the biggest period of growth.)
As for Dewitt… well, as I said, all burbs are not alike. Dewitt is not necessarily “upscale,” but let’s face it, it’s in the east and that is where the rich people in Syracuse traditionally go. Fayetteville, Manlius. Those burbs (F-M, I mean) do not and I dare say never will have any real relationship to the city. No offense, but one will have a hell of a time convincing THOSE suburbanites (as a mass) to face the city. (Of course, there are tons of individual people there who DO care!) But when it comes to having to deal with the city - the good and the bad - in practicality… I dunno. Dewitt is probably different.
As for your comment on a Connective Corridor - there is a front door to the southwestern burbs (West Genesee St), and a back door (Onondaga Boulevard; also, 173). While I think the downtown CC is a great idea, I don’t understand why you can’t also think about how these burbs (working-class in origin) used to relate to the city, and could conceivably do so again. There is room for more than one CC in the Syracuse area. That’s why OCC’s projected growth is so interesting.
But alas, it seems to me that urban planners and architects and theorists see suburbia as totally sterile and uniform, and not as a potential staging area for renewal in the context of specific cities.
The extreme fragmentation of not only municipal governments (four in this area alone - a city and three towns), school districts, and county government legislative districts (the map printed in the PS story the other day about county races was depressing) is probably the big factor into why these burbs are perceived to not be a potential part of the solution. But that doesn’t change the things they do have in common.
August 15th, 2007
OK, let’s focus on the inner ring suburbs instead of the city (a difficult task for me ususally!)
I agree, I think the SW side is a great candidate for reintegration. So I have a couple of questions:
You say Fairmount is built out, is there capacity for more homeowners? Does your area have to repurpose land or just do a better job attracting folks (marketing etc.?)
Burnet Park, the Zoo and Tipp Hill are city attractions readily available to Fairmountians (Fairmountites, Fairmounties?) What do you have to offer us?
What kind of development/planning could the two groups do together and are there interested groups outside governmental entities?
What kind of integration are we talking? Land, economic development, public services, entertainment/shopping, schools?
Idea to get conversation started: an alternative school open to both city/suburban students right on the border.
August 15th, 2007
Fairmount is an aging burb. There is a capacity for more homeowners in that people are dying off or becoming snowbirds. I talked to someone moving into a house on our street last year, and they said Fairmount was thought to be a good value, but the old folks just weren’t selling. I imagine that will change somewhat. I don’t know of any houses around here that have been on the market excessively long.
I think Fairmount has had an image problem with suburbanites just because of the perception that it’s Dead Mallville, which is changing.
We can offer you some perhaps easier access to thriving, shopping areas now that folks of limited income could really use (Super Wal-Mart comes to mind, which the city does not have). And our new Target has to be the nearest Target to the city that you’ll find, I would think. Also, two Wegmans, for what it’s worth. Er… farmer’s market at Camillus Town Hall (I’m grasping). And, we have an express bus line from downtown.
Re planning and integration: You are way ahead of me on this. I’m basically wondering what would happen if suburbanites HAD to live closer to the city. Right now? I got nothing for ya. But I wonder what would happen if the economy tanked and SOME of these young suburbanites had to settle for dear old Fairmount (even apartment living - quite a few complexes in Fairmount and also in the southwest near OCC) instead of some overpriced McMansions out in Van Buren. They’d be forced to care about the city’s problems. Don’t get me wrong, there are people in Solvay obsessed with the problem of “city dirt” coming, but that attitude has to be confronted ANYWAY.
And well, if you are talking about alternative schools on the border you are talking about Westhill… OR perhaps Holy Family.