Real Estate April 1, 2010 12:08 AM

Mix of Uses Planned for 500 Seneca Street

Mix of Uses Planned for 500 Seneca Street

A unique mix of uses is expected to fill a remade Seneca Street industrial complex.  Preliminary plans call for light-industrial, office and residential uses in the six-story structure located at the corner of Seneca and Hamburg streets.  The property was purchased in March for $200,000 by 500 Seneca Street LLC, a partnership that includes developer and contractor Sam Savarino.  Agreements are in place with firms to take two floors of space.

The sprawling industrial complex was originally home to the F.N. Burt Company, a manufacturer of small paper boxes.  According to Chris Hawley's The Hydraulics Press, the factory produced upwards of four million boxes per day.  What appears to be one building is actually a series of buildings, at least a half dozen, built from 1901 to 1927. 

DSC_0591.JPGNew Era Cap Co., the property's last occupant, departed in 2004 when it consolidated its local manufacturing facilities at a plant in Derby.  It has been vacant since and portions of the complex are not as solid as they appear from the street.

The development group is planning to demolish the the four-story brick portion at Seneca and Hamburg streets (see site plan below).  Upon completion, the revamped complex will total slightly over 200,000 sq.ft. in size and will help bridge the Larkin District to the east and downtown to the west. 

"Our original, preliminary plans showed us saving the corner building," said Savarino, President and CEO of Savarino Companies.  "But once we got in there, we found that the building had deteriorated significantly." 

Savarino says the brick portions of complex have wood floors, beams, columns and roof decking that have not held up well compared to the newer, solid masonry construction of the buildings on the west end of the property. 

"That portion of the complex just isn't usable anymore," he said.  "In the end, it allows us to accommodate a tenant we have secured for the first floor."

500SenecaSitePlan.pngSavarino does not want to name the company eyeing the 32,500 sq.ft. first floor, but says it is a local light manufacturing firm that is bringing new work into the area and needs a larger facility.  A second company, a professional services firm, is taking 42,000 sq.ft. of office space on the second floor.

500Seneca2.jpg

The first floor tenant's primary access will be located on the east end of the building.  A new main entrance serving the balance of the building will be constructed along Spring Street.  It will feature a covered entryway and a small addition to the building's west façade (above).

Floors three through five will each offer 31,000 sq.ft. of office space.  Savarino says the project will not be geared towards poaching tenants out of the central business district.  Rather, he says that like the nearby Larkin at Exchange office building, 500 Seneca's large floor plates, proximity to downtown and the I-190, and free parking will attract firms that may otherwise locate in the suburbs.

"We don't see the building as competition for downtown," said Savarino.  "We are competing with the suburbs."

A roof over an existing atrium extending from the third through sixth floors within the building will be removed.  The exposed courtyard will become an amenity for the building's tenants and help bring additional natural light into the building's office floors.  Similar to Savarino's 95 Perry Street, a rooftop garden is also planned.  

Fourteen loft apartments would be created on the building's 16,400 sq.ft. L-shaped sixth floor.  Several of the units will have downtown skyline views. 

If the City agrees, Myrtle Avenue between Hamburg and Spring streets would be abandoned.  Parking for 183 cars is planned.

Savarino has worked with some of the development group's partners on past projects and they approached him with an interest in renovating the building.  Savarino's company will be shepherding the project through the development review process and will be the construction manager.  The $25 million project will utilize New Market and Historic Tax credits.  IDA financing is also being pursued.  BHNT Architects, PC is project architect.

Said Savarino, "There are a lot of moving pieces, but our intention is start work by the end of the year."

Get Connected: Savarino Companies, 716.332.5959
500Seneca3.jpg

View image

Comments

Leave a comment

Hmm. It's definitely nice to see an old building reused, but I hate to see another sacrificed to another stupid surface parking lot. That aspect of this project will definitely not contribute to revitalizing Seneca Street, as hoped for by the whole "Larkin District" vision.

All I want for Christmas is a form-based zoning code that encourages actual urbanism... please?

And as an aside, my understanding is that Larkin at Exchange did, in fact, poach many of its tenants from downtown.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

They clearly stated that the wood components of this building have deteriorated...what do you (hamp, destiny, JSmith, etc.)expect them to do with it? I don't understand why arbitrarily demand it be saved when you lack little or no knowledge of the structure.

replied to JSmith
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Well, the article doesn't say that the brick itself is in bad condition, so it could be possibly to gut and replace the interior structure while leaving the shell of the building intact.

Or demolish it and build a new addition that fronts the streets to the corner. Hide the parking on the block behind it. Or buy the enormous vacant block on the other side of Seneca and use that for parking since it's already a dead zone.

I don't know the details or what other options might be feasible. I'm just stating that I hate to see more of our city's historic urban fabric destroyed for automobile parking.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

That should read "another *corner* sacrificed..."

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Please dont demolish the brick building!

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

PLEASE FORGIVE ME, BIG BROTHER!!! But Buffalo Rising is still in the 20th century and does not have a message board, so I must resort to unrelated posts.

Darrin Pfeiffer of 102.1 Canadian Edge
http://www.edge.ca/Blogs/WhoCares/BlogEntry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10105323

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Darrin is an absolute idiot who has bashed his HOME TOWN more than once. It's bad enough that Dean Blundell feels compelled to knock Buffalo but a local guy?? I'll never understand people from Toronto criticizing WNY, Niagara Falls I could see, but not Buffalo.

replied to LouisTully
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Commercial real estate is so incredibly cheap in Buffalo! It's just unbelieveable but true!

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Tremendous investment for the Hydraulics Neighborhood! A top notch stock of adaptable warehouses and mercantile buildings will soon make this one of the coolest districts in Buffalo. A world of gratitude to Sam Savarino for taking on this project!

I do not want to critique the preliminary designs too much; however, razing a great corner building is simply bad urbanism and will ultimately lesson the positive effects from this project on its surroundings. Cost burdens to Mr. Savarino aside, mitigation is simple. An alternative, perhaps, would be to replace the deteriorated structure with a small commercial building that completes the important corner of Seneca and Hamburg Streets, for starters. A small café or delicatessen would add attention getting vibrancy to this block, as would a main entrance on Seneca Street – not the back parking lot (which could also have an entrance).

The Hydraulics website and blog, by Buffalo urban leader Chris Hawley, is the single best repository for information on this neighborhood; equal to any in Buffalo in history and significance.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Sweet jeebus it's never ending around here.

"Cost burdens to Mr. Savarino aside, mitigation is simple."

Let me fix that for you:

"Cost burdens aside, ANYTHING is simple."

All you dopes you cry about another building being knocked over might want to consider the costs you impose on development in the Buffalo area.

replied to Nate Neuman
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

How does posting one's opinion on this blog impose costs on a development project?

replied to Jesse
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

So if the brick building is not demolished, does that mean there won't be enough parking for prospective tenants? And if there is not enough parking for prosepctive tenants, does that mean that prospective tenants will look elsewhere and the building will remain largely vacant?

Just asking.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

i see on street parking all around the area- maybe people would have to walk a block (still shorter walk than parking at the mall). the more parking you have, the more parking you need. its an unfortunate paradox that is crushing development in buffalo.

replied to rubagreta
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment


I don't believe the "deteriorated significantly" bit.

Too bad they won't save the corner portion. All that surface parking really detracts from the project.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

ROFL.

Oh, okay. You don't "believe" it. They're lying about it.

You people are crazy.

replied to hamp
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Yes it will detract from the project and the entire neighborhood. However, considering the developer's track record on adaptive reuse, if they say it cant work I believe them. Besides, its better to restore half of this property than let the entire thing continue to rot.

I find this part interesting:

wcp>IDA financing is also being pursued."

Maybe the IDA funding, or additional incentives can be used as a bargaining chip to make rehab of the corner structure doable?

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

What is with the developers and city planning in this city???? For EVERY new development/renovation ONE or more must be knocked down for parking????? WHY???? What about being more agressive with the NFTA to getting a REAL TRANSIT SYSTEM IN PLACE for this region, like an extended Metro Rail, Bus's that RUN OFTEN and encouraged PUBLIC TRANSIT instead of 'parking' at every FREAKIN CORNER.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

"That portion of the complex just isn't usable anymore," he said. "In the end, it allows us to accommodate a tenant we have secured for the first floor." - Translation, Parking. I agree with hamp, this is taking the easy way out, I don't believe it was significantly deteriorated as much as parking was more desirable.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

They could get parking elsewhere... what about the WHOLE Block behind this building. There are only 3 structures left standing. Sounds like a potentially better option than tearing town a 4 story street fronting building.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

What right do the people who bought the building have to demolish part of a building they own and to decide how much tenant parking to have adjacent to it? That part of the building obviously belongs to all 270,000 of us.

Okay, maybe not quite belongs to in a legal technicality sense, and sure, 99% of us couldn't pick it out of a lineup - but it's undeniably part of our history and fabric. Just the possibility that a portion of a brick building on Seneca St that very few of us have ever stepped foot in might not be there any more is another insult to this city. We all demand that ALL of the Burt Box Building stay standing forever! When is the protest? Maybe Karl Malone will organize something.

By the way, JSmith is correct about Larkin Exchange having tenants who used to be in other downtown buildings. This one will compete with other downtown office buildings too. How could it not?

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Funny. I tried to make the same point but fell quite a bit short. My cut/paste crap grammar left words out ruining my comment. Well done on your part.

replied to whatever
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Here's another unrelated topic, but does anyone know what's going on with the Graystone?

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The City owns a very large lot directly across the street from FN Burt. If parking is the issue, this lot is almost the size of the entire Burt building footprint.

I bet this is not the only issue, and the costs to secure a deteriorated woodframed structure are undoubtedly high, but I hope Savarino can move forward with this project even if they are required to keep the brick portion. It's the oldest and most historic and the most interesting section of the plant.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment


We have every right in the world to demand good quality developments. You can't build anything you want.
That's why we have zoning, and a plan review process.

And that's why virtually all projects these days require a "community process". That's the way it is, and more, not fewer people need to speak up. That is our duty.

They are taking the nicest building, at the best part of the site, and they're demolishing it.

Shame on the developer,and shame on the architects.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I hope Zemsky and Swift try to have an influence on Savarino-this is a district/community being built, and it would be good to work under some guidelines...even if there is no zone in place.

Agreed that parking on the front is FAR from ideal....

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

They should find a way to keep the east portion of the building.

Also, when it comes time to replace the windows, I hope to God that they use the sympathetic style of window that was used in the M. Wile building on Goodell Street and not repeat the embarassment that was done to the Larkin at Exchange building.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Jesse-

All of us "dopes", or progressive urbanists, are very pro-development. However, we also realize that there are certain attributes that are requisite for the type of successful, dynamic neighborhoods that Buffalo needs to grow itself as a livable and desirable place. Sure, this renovation would be positive if it is anything more than a deteriorating structure. However, by ignoring the basic ingredients that make up a quality neighborhood, this project will fall short.

Many very difficult renovations have been successfully undertaken in this city. With a little innovation, and a knack at the public incentive process, this could be a tremendous end result for all. Mr. Savarino deserves much praise for his continued investments in our urban core, but that doesn't absolve the citizenry of their responsibility to critique proposals for the best possible outcome.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Convenient freeway access: Check

Large Floorplates: Check

Ample Surface Parking: Check

This suburban-style development belongs at Crosspointe. I won't even ride my bike there.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Knocking down buildings is sad yes, but is anyone here looking at the positive? It is not the end of the world and in a perfect world we could have our cake and eat it too. My guess is that the building is not salvageable. I don't think Mr. Savarino would knock down a building that could be saved otherwise, that doesn't seem to be his style. Sometimes this is necessary to move forward. Same goes for Termini, et al.

I get what everyone’s saying here about demolishing an existing building but the way I see it that may be the only way these developments happen around here. It’s not like these developers are chomping at the bit for these buildings. At the end of the day I think this will be better for Buffalo rather than nothing happening. If nothing happens then eventually this whole block may fall to the wrecking ball. Let's face it, if he doesn't go through with this then nothing WILL happen. I’m sure Savarino could make more money by having more tenant space available rather than parking spots, which leads me to believe he doesn’t have much choice in the matter.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I think in this case, it's not so much about tearing down an old building. The issue is that they're tearing down a building to replace it with just parking. If the building is too far gone to reuse, then fine. But how about replacing it with a small new building to fill in the corner? Empty corners are generally bad for the city streetscape.

replied to brownteeth
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I agree 100%, but without knowing the fine details that would seem like a bad business move to make right off the bat. I mean the lot isn't going anywhere so why not lease out the building in full, build revenue, then pursue a new building once the dust settles. Trying to do it all at once is partly the reason the Statler is in the position it is. There is no reason to try that all at once, it will only increase the chances of failure in my opinion. It seems Savarino will have his hands full as it is. I guess it's a little premature to speculate at the moment. If leasable space becomes that demanding I'm sure Savarino would consider building new there. Just a thought anyway.

replied to 300miles
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I know they named the architect in the story,

But I whould have thought the architect was Dell, or HP, or CAD based on those hot renderings.

Na ja... Ach, nicht sehr gut. Der Computer ist der Architekt. Die Architekten sind Roboter.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Brace the exterior brick walls
demolish the interior rotted wood floors
rebuild the interior

City's all over the US manage to keep the facades of older buildings while rebuilding the interiors knowing that they help enormously to attract and integrate new builds to the surrounding community.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Amen, Destiny.

replied to Destiny
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

the only way to have 'enough' parking is to charge for it, just like the only way to have enough food, shelter, and clothing is to charge for them.

regular meals are essential to our survival, but none of us outside of silicon valley get free food on the job, whether the company has a 24-hour cafeteria or a beat up vending machine.

so savarino can charge for parking just like his vending machines or coffee shop will charge for food. those who chose to live where they can walk, bike, or use public transportation will have more disposable income on payday, just like those who choose to bring a bag lunch will have more disposable income.

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

grad94>"so savarino can charge for parking just like his vending machines..."

Won't Savarino's tenants be "charged" for parking and many other things by their rent payments?

Under your plan using the vending machine analogy, should Savarino's commercial tenants have to slide dollars and quarters every day into the heating and a/c systems, or can that just be paid for as part of the rent? How about building security? Can that be part of the rent, or must there be a per-person separate "charge"? Should each tenant and visitor have to pay separate fee for window washing? Landscaping? Cleaning the carpets?

If heat, a/c, cleaning, security, etc. can be included in the rent, why can't parking?

replied to grad94
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

because free parking incentivizes destruction of viable buildings, as seen here, and therefore disfigures cities. free utilities do not.

when parking is 'free,' everyone pays for it except drivers. meaning, that we pay for parking as customers, taxpayers, citizens, employers, employees, pedestrians, nondrivers, every conceivable role you can think of, -except- as drivers. like any other finite resource, those who use it ought to pay for it.

if socialized medicine and housing are evil, i fail to see why socialized parking is good.

replied to whatever
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

grad94, how is it socialized if Savarino owns it?

grad>"when parking is 'free,' everyone pays for it except drivers."

These drivers will pay for parking if the plan happens, through their rent payments to Savarino (or their employer's rent to him).

replied to grad94
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

point taken, but when surface parking is incentivized to be the highest and best use of downtown land, we still pay by having a degraded streetscape that undermines the development of a healthy pedestrian realm (i.e. a desirable place to live or visit).

replied to whatever
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Yet again the incessant harping about parking. Someone is doing something positive with an abandoned eyesore. Yay! If you want an alternative, buy the building yourself!

Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

That would mean getting out of one's cube, away from the computer screen and being productive. I think it much easier to sit in the lazy boy, stare at google maps and dictate this and that from a keyboard, followed by some marxist dribble and holier than thou nonsense. repeat ad nauseam.

replied to Delawarian
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Very true. Only those who can afford to produce large development projects have a right to comment on issues pertaining to the public good. The rest of us non-elites need to get back into their lazy boys and stfu while noble captains of industry and the invisible hand do everything for us.
(Church of Freemarketologists actually believes this)

replied to KarlMalone
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Leave a comment