Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [BuffaloHistory] 1051 Clinton St. area 1888-1889

Expand Messages
  • William Coleman
    Rhonda, Since you mention consulting so many sources, I didn t think my resources were likely to turn up much new. Still, you made me curious. The few
    Message 1 of 4 , May 27, 2011
      Rhonda,

      Since you mention consulting so many sources, I didn't think my resources were likely to turn up much new. Still, you made me curious. The few results I found are peripheral and don't really answer your question. But, for what it's worth, here they are.

      I looked at the 1880 Bird's Eye View on the Library of Congress web site:
      http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/map_item.pl?data=/home/www/data/gmd/gmd380/g3804/g3804b/pm005420.jp2&style=pmmap&itemLink=D?gmd:3:./temp/~ammem_Oe9p::&title=The%20city%20of%20Buffalo,%20N.Y.%201880.%20Maerz%20Lithographing%20Co.

      Some observations on this 1880 map:
      1. It seems to imply that Clinton Street (not very clearly delineated) stops at Lord Street, just before getting to Fillmore and the railroad tracks.
      2. In fact, it shows all the major east-west streets there (N. Division, Eagle, Howard, William) as ceasing at the railroad tracks.
      3. In that area, it shows nothing at all on the other side of the railroad tracks. This might just be a cartographic convenience, implying that the map isn't meant to include that area, but I'd guess not.
      4. It does not show any vegetation in that area, but it's not clear if that's meant to imply that there isn't any or if it just means that the map isn't intended to show vegetation.
      5. It does show a lovely, but lonely, series of trees lining each side of Fillmore Avenue for several blocks.
      6. Anyway, although 1051 Clinton is just off the edge of this map, it might possibly seem that that whole area was empty and undeveloped in 1880.

      Then I looked at a similar 1902 map:
      http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/map_item.pl?data=/home/www/data/gmd/gmd380/g3804/g3804b/pm005430.jp2&style=pmmap&itemLink=D?gmd:2:./temp/~ammem_ZVLl::&title=Buffalo,%20Erie%20Co.,%20N.Y.

      1902 Observations:
      1. The immediate area in question (south side of Clinton between Jones and Lewis) is now very densely built up with what seem to be low, industrial buildings next to or including Standard Lumber Company??).
      2, No vegetation is indicated, but again this seems inconclusive.
      3. It does seem astonishing (at least to me) that so many buildings appeared in 22 years between 1880 and 1902.

      Sorry I can't be more help.

      -- Bill

      NOTE TO CYNTHIA VAN NESS: You already have a link to a version of the 1880 map on your Maps page (http://www.buffaloresearch.com/maps.html), but you might want also to mention the LOC version linked to above.



      On 27 May 11, at 9:54 PM, rahk27 wrote:

      > Hello,
      >
      > I'm researching a property in Buffalo (1051 Clinton St.). I'm trying to determine what the piece of land looked like in 1888-1889, before it was developed. Specifically, if there was vegetation on the lot and what type (trees, brush)or if it was likely that it was cleared before it was purchased and built on. Many sources have already been checked (deed, tax maps, tax records, title search, atlases and maps available at the Central Library, Local History File at the Central Library, an early real estate magazine, Buffalo Common Council proceedings, Buffalo history books).
      >
      > I'm wondering if any of you have any knowledge of the development of Buffalo during this time period, or the real estate process during this time period. If you do, do you think it's likely that this area was cleared by the time the property was purchased (1889)or if it was likely that it wasn't cleared until it was sold. -- Or if you know of any other sources where I could find this information.
      >
      > Thanks for any help you can give!
      >
      > Rhonda


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • William Coleman
      Rhonda and All: I just learned a lesson--not to be so susceptible to the poetry that some cartographers like to express in their maps. Compare the following,
      Message 2 of 4 , May 27, 2011
        Rhonda and All:

        I just learned a lesson--not to be so susceptible to the poetry that some cartographers like to express in their maps.

        Compare the following, more conventional, 1880 map:
        http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/dgkeysearchdetail.cfm?trg=1&strucID=1070797&imageID=1584507&parent_id=1070434&word=&snum=&s=¬word=&d=&c=&f=&sScope=&sLevel=&sLabel=&total=148&num=36&imgs=12&pNum=&pos=37

        It completely refutes any idea that the area SE of the railroad tracks was undeveloped.

        Apologies for any confusion.
        -- Bill
      • Chet
        Easy to explain:  1880 population: 155,000  ... 1900 pop: 352,000  ... 1910 pop: 423,000 . ... 3. It does seem astonishing (at least to me) that so many
        Message 3 of 4 , May 28, 2011
          Easy to explain:  1880 population: 155,000  ... 1900 pop: 352,000  ... 1910 pop: 423,000 .

          --- On Fri, 5/27/11, William Coleman <wpc@...> wrote:


          3. It does seem astonishing (at least to me) that so many buildings appeared in 22 years between 1880 and 1902.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.