Maddening Demo on Main Street

No matter what those "other uses" may be that Ellicott Development has for the property, what's already there is simply irreplaceable. It would be sad to see yet another part of Buffalo's history turned to rubble.

When will Buffalo leadership stop the MADness? Main Street is starting to have an important revival by resuscitating many of the architectural gems along this corridor, and now Carl wants the right to demolish this beautiful (and, clearly intact, structure)? No more Rite Aids or Dollar Stores at the expense of Buffalo's history (and future)!!!! I hope they stop him dead in his tracks.

And, before the anti-preservation peanut gallery steps in, why should we have a say in this (and other buildings) as a community? Because, every building that is demolished effects neighboring properties' values (particularly if Rite Aid is put in its stead), as well as Buffalo's value as a city. If we are gaining international recognition for our historic architecture, for which people will come here and spend important tourist dollars, why continue to tear at the foundation?

Very sad

If Carl needs the space for parking, so that Our Lady of Lourdes can be developed, then let's explore moving this structure to another part of Main St. where it, too, can be reused. Outright demolition should not be a possibility.

Awesome news!!!

This is not a good time for Mr. Paladino to be raising the ire of anyone. This structure cannot be replaced. I am sure it is built with far more integrity and stamina than anything that would replace it.

If they demolish it, they should put a building up in its place for office space or something. I know old buildings like that are hard to retro-fit into modern office/living space. Travelrrr, that's a good idea. Replace some surface lot with the convent.
If they don't replace the space the convent was on with a complementary building (to the Church) then the convent should be left up. We should know what's going there. We have enough shovel ready sites and rite-aids.

Paladino looks out for himself and doesn't seem to have any interest in doing what's best for the community.

A bully like Paladino has not business running for governor.

and this is who wants to be the next governor. If he should ever get elected, he will probably level the city of Buffalo for surface parking for all of NYS.

Anyone have pics of the inside? It was an unofficial homeless shelter for quite awhile. Having the water shut off didn't stop them from using the bathrooms.

BTW. I blame George W. Bush for the nightmare that is Pallidino for govenor.

Paladino might think that should he become governor, he'll no longer have to actually buy landmarks and other historic buildings before demolishing them. He'll use "eminent domain," as he threatened to do in the case of Cordoba.

I'd certainly like this place preserved but I'd also be open to demolishing it if there was something worth while proposed in its place. Medical office building-good, blight aid-bad.

Any comment from Ellicott Development?

Is this announcement a surprise? It's probably the prelude to an eventual last-minute notice that the church will be demolished so Mr. Paladino can redevelop the block. I hope I'm wrong.

Sorry, but I, for one, am not outraged.

This is no huge loss, imo. I can't see many uses for a former rectory and I do see the land as very attractive to new development (the medical campus is one block away). The Squire Mansion, by contrast? Glad it got rescued. Very unusual remnant from a bygone architectural era. This? Not nearly so rare. Pretty run of the mill, as far as rectories go, it seems to me. The school building can be adapted to modern office use, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him reuse that building. But even if he doesn't, it wouldn't offend me. As for the rectory: exactly what should he do with it and why?

Paladino gets bashed, as above, for aspiring to 'turn Buffalo into a parking lot'. No basis in fact for this ridiculous, over the top accusation. It's every bit as hyperbolic as one of Carl's own rants. He has owned a good many historic and beautiful buildings. Did he demolish the Ellicott Square Building, the Guarantee building, the University Club, etc? No, of course not. He doesn't make his money operating parking lots. He makes his money developing buildings. Look at what a nice job he's doing a block away with the former Bryant and Stratton campus. Does he get any credit for this? Apparently not.

Wring your hands if you like, but the rectory is a house designed for communal living which doesn't convert well to office or any other use. And it occupies good, developable land.

fwiw: I'd be okay with domolition of the church, too. Ding me if you like, but I'm pretty unsentimental about church buildings (and congregations and religions, for that matter). This church structure is a mess (which is why the price was $40k) and churches are very challenging redevelopments. No one I've heard has any realistic ideas for how to make a behemoth hulk such as this financially viable. Even in the very best cases, church redevelopments are very iffy. For every Babeville, there are ten Transfigurations.

Carl may be a foul mouthed bully and a class A jerk. He may be an overgrown adolescent horndog with little appreciation for others, too. But as a developer, I'd take him over, say, Benderson, or DDR, or a number of others. He's not Zemsky or Iskalo, but he's not the devil, either.

Wasn't the property offered by public auction 2 years ago for a pretty low price ($25k)?
http://fixbuffalo.blogspot.com/2008/09/church-auction-follow-up.html
"the auction very quickly bottomed out at $25,000, with only one person bidding"

If none of the many local/vocal preservation advocates were willing to group together to buy the property even for that price and ensure the former convent and church stay standing, what's wrong with somebody else who doesn't favor their preservation then eventually buying it and doing something else with the land?

Travelrrr>"why should we have a say in this (and other buildings) as a community?"

We already have had a say in this. Evidently none of us in the community think this property is worth pooling our resources to own. If just 500 people chipped in $100, that's $50k which could've bought it in 2008 and still had money remaining for boarding windows, etc.

Of course anyone always has a right to complain, protest, and demonize Paladino - free speech and all. But hasn't the community also spoken with our actions?

WHAT IS HE GOING TO PUT THERE??? Only in Buffalo would someone demo for no reason. If there is a reason, then let's hear it! Let's see the plans and hear the argument that this building is the ripest for redevelopment (hard sell considering the empty lots, parking lots, and cheap, low density builds all around this area). Then maybe people wouldn't automatically assume they're being shafted, yet again.

Jag, he is going to demo it because, like urbanesque said, it is a crack house with no working plumbing or water. Crack head live there illegally and defecate in the bathrooms...so I think at this point it is a done deal. The problem on this site is people love to complain, but yet don't do anything about what they gripe about. Sounds to me like this building may be beyond repair and seeing how it is not in the registry for historic preservation, Paladino is free to do what he wants with it.

Moreover, this building is just another part of the reason why there is a pending real estate correction in downtown Buffalo.

The city is still grossly underdeveloped with homes now being reassessed for much more than they are worth.

Guideline just tightened again today. FHA now has a minimum 640 Fico requirement top purchase - that used to be A plus credit.

Perhaps you should purchase some of the blighted vacant building downtown and renovate them instead of being the armchair developer on this site.

NYTimes article over the weekend:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/nyregion/27paladino.html
mentions Paladino's promise to restore the old Harbor Inn at Ohio and Chicago streets:
http://wnyheritagepress.org/photos_week_2004/harbor_inn/harbor_inn.htm
--only to abruptly demolish it on a Saturday morning.

If this building was on Delaware or just on the other side of Main Street it probably would have been saved and redeveloped by now. It seems like the east side of Main has no rules and demolition is almost encouraged to clear development space for the medical campus. Just a thought.

It's always the same refrain: Use someone else's money to save an old building.

I'm ALL FOR preserving old architecture. New glass and concrete crap is, well, crap.

I don't like people bitching and then doing nothing about it (electing the same morons who don't realign revenue with perceived priorities, banding together to buy / save buildings themselves, etc).

Great, if the Preservation Board doesn't stop this they better not stop me from putting asphalt shingles on my roof. At least I'm trying to save my house while Paladino lets his buildings rot and tears down the ones that are still easily salvageable. I guess it's easier to pick on me then him. How is that even legal? Is it not discrimination to hold one person to a standard and no one else?

The Rectory is not a unique or rare example of architecture but it is of substanial construction and is an attractive part of the streetscape of Main St. The turn of the century building is typical of the four square style but the sandstone trim and decorated cornice and other details indicate high quality construction.

As for the claims of "crackheads ruining the bathrooms" meant to portray the building as beyond saving, that is just typical uninformed nonsense. Buildings of this age generally require complete replacement of the plumbing, electric, and HVAC systems. Any serious renovation can address these issues as is done all the time in such projects.

Our city continues to lose the fabric that has defined this place at an alarming rate. Each of these buildings, however humble are a part of our idenity, our past, and every effort should be made to see that they are a part of our future.

Sorry, but other than being old, there is nothing particularly interesting about that building. And as a prior poster stated, a preservation group could have easily raised money and purchased it. Of course they would have been left with a white elephant that has zero economic use.

Also, isn't it possible that a new building on this property could be a lot more attractive than what's there now?

Good news: word is that the demo application seems to have been withdrawn....for now at least.

What is historically or architecturally significant about this building?

Travelrrr- true! The Demi application has been withdrawn, for now.

Jag, I see your point and don't think that it is unreasonable, but like many have said....his money, his project.

There are projects that I don't agree with that Paladino has developed...but I over look them because I believe his accomplishments far outweigh the negatives. There is no perfect developer; he is a business man.

Quite honestly, this whole portion on Main St needs to be demolished -- its a joke. People that come here to visit and drive down Buffalos "Main St" never want to come back.

Main has been like this for years...it is suppose to be our busiest street.

In my view, Buffalo is heading in the right direction and I think we will get there "some day" but for right now we still have a looong way to go.

Last, there is an impending real estate correction in Buffalo...financing is still tight, properties surged too high too fast in a terrible economy.

there is simply not enough money or demand downtown..

The real problem here is not really the demolition. The problem is the demolition without any plan for redevelopment. We have plenty of parking lots, or lame 1-story buildings that should never have been approved. If he wants to replace it with something better, fine. But show those plans to the city first before any talk of demolition. That's why I asked if there was any comment from their company. Maybe they do have plans. Has anyone asked them?

I was just flipping through a "History of the Town of Amherst, New York", by Susan Miller. The book has close to 100 images of buildings that no longer exist. They've been replaced by buildings that better utilize the specific site, and create more wealth for the owner.

Has anyone ever heaad someone say, "Amherst is a worse place because the old buildings are gone." I own, and have rehabbed property in Allentown. I think that's a worthy endeavor.

Expecting a building owner in a non preservation district to act in a way contrary to what maximizes value is about as sensical as asking him to drive backward to work... just because you think it's a good idea.

Fair enough. I'm not adamantly in favor of the building being torn down. Just makes you wonder if in a more economically favorable location, a marginal building like this would be down, and we'd be on revision 2, 3, 4 without much thought.

I'm all for significant buildings being saved. However, if a building like this is part of the city's 'identity', I'm afraid the identity is 'I'm a poor city that hasn't advanced'.

This specific part of the city is advancing (to it's credit) with the growth of the medical corridor. Let's embrace it, not hinder it.

Looks like Carl confirmed the "too crazy to be governor" argument yesterday in Lake George. Also looks like his campaign staff and supporters have some serious ethical, criminal, and just plain sleaze issues as well. What a surprise from the candidate of family values and honest government.

Of course Carl wants to demo it. He wants to wipe away all traces of the neglect of his buildings while he's so very much in the public eye.

His apt. buildings are a good example -- Took a look at one on Linwood this time last year when looking for a place in the city -- and between the overflowing trashcans of dog crap, broken windows, barely functioning elevators and filthy hallways....No thanks.

About a week or so after he announced his campaign, was taking a walk around the neighborhood and the place looked the same. After the Huffington Post and the national media first got wind of this guy and the comments about his properties started... looked like a different place next time I wandered by. See those maintenance vans everywhere now.

Carl is a great guy and it's too bad that none of you can support one of our own...sad indeed

Blackrock and Jag...in all due respect, perhaps we see things in a different light. you seem to disagree with anyone to the right,conservative, or republican. You are a radical liberals... And that is fine. But try to stay open minded.

REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL PARTY, I think Carl is winning the vote of the common man. His tactics are unorthodox, but that is what is getting him the votes and how he beat Lazio...Carl has nothing to lose...and he does makes some very good points on how he plans to change Albany..one of which is by cutting state employees by 20%.

Moreover, it is kinda strange that you would not support someone from your own backyard, rather someone who happens to be partly responsible for the subprime debacle. Cuomo could care less about you or upstate NY.

If Cuomo is elected, your taxes are going higher and you will be milked for more money; walked over by again by downstate. They all think we are a bunch of dumb farmers..."hunter and gatherers"

Carl is loyal to this city and will make Buffalo a better place if he is elected...bottomline!

I think the nation in general respects Carl because he has balls...not afraid to stand up for what he believes in...there are a lot of voters out there that want a gritty guy...not a politically motivated candidate/career politician.

Does any of this make sense?

the reality is Cuomo and Barney Frank pushed for mortgages for people who couldnt afford them PERIOD. They pushed that homeownership should be avail to all people, especially low income non qualified minorities. THAT is why we're in this mess. Those are the FACTS

May disagree with you a bit...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKb78kJhaMw

OBAMA MONEY!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRVIeCYAJFk&feature=related

Bini, good points...however, it was in fact Barney frank, Obama, and several other cohorts that pushed for expanding lending criteria at the peak of the housing bubble back in 2005. The denied there was a housing bubble.

As a matter of fact, bush and Greenspan tried to pass a bill to regulate subprime loans being purchased by fannie and freddie. Barney Frank and Obama voted against it....

The is the root of the problem, which needs to be addressed in Washington.

well said Gaustad1...apparently the lefties on BRo dont think that the proof in the linked video is enough...thats insanity

Gaus/Ron: it was not a Democrat OR a Republican fault, singularly. It was a systematic problem in which many, many had a hand: homeowners, mortgage companies, investment banks and, yes, politicians....You cannot pin point it on one party or the other-everyone was complicit.

@BRL...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRVIeCYAJFk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRVIeCYAJFk&feature=related

perhaps u missed this BRL

youre clueless BRL...