Benderson Proposes Donovan Makeover, Phillips Lytle Would Anchor Project

Part of the problem with the existing Donovan Bldg. is that it is set back from the street.

This proposal does not address that problem, nor does it seem to offer mixed use at the first floor.

And finally, I have read the RFP, and have seen the Canal Side Design Guidelines. I don't see how this meets those requirements either.

That's the ticket! Turn the only iconic International Style building in Buffalo into drivel.

Wow. I hope this is what this looks like in 5 years.

It looks like the Pasquale Condos...not a bad thing neccesarily.

Whos the architect? Is this under EEK's scope?

Nice - very nice

I Like the look of the rendering, and would be happy to see this project completed. I do worry about all the shifting of businesses from one office to another. That being said, I guess the hope would be some of the buildings that lose tenants might be converted to mixed use as opposed to strictly offices. Or, maybe we can attract out of town businesses, but in this economic climate, that might be a tall order.

Yet another tasteless building. I'm amazed by how badly designed this entire waterfront project is. Look at those stupid three tiered buildings in the model near the useless canal. The conversation is so dominated by planners and developers peddling cliches that the architecture has become a total joke.

this is pretty awful.

not only does it take a building that potentially could be transformed into an inspired remake the likes of the avant (and maybe better) but it neglects Main Street and removes the retail component of the project. Next thing you know, they will ask for the metro rail station in front of the building eliminated because they need driveway access to the car plaza out front.

This is a pile of bricks.

What is wrong with the design? Seriously people.

Just build it before Phillips Lytle decides to close the Buffalo office and expand its Rochester location.

Enough is enough.

I will ask again. Why does Benderson have carte-blanche on this project? They responded to an RFP and won with this design?

I'm glad the Donovan is being reused, rather than simply being scrapped. Not because it currently has much merit historically, architecturally or contributes significantly to the urban fabric.

But because it is far more economic and environmentally friendly to use an existing building than to demolish what's there, haul it all away to a landfill, blight the area with an empty lot for an indeterminate amount of time, and eventually replace it using expensive materials and non-local skills and labor.

While this may not be the BEST building redesign, it certainly isn't bad. And any project that can promote reuse of existing structures serves to expand the minds of local government, businesses and population to what ELSE is possible with our other underused structures. If local labor is used, it also helps sustain an economy of construction firms skilled in this type of work... that will come in handy in the years to come!

Not a bad building but awfully like a modern suburban high school on steroids. Also shares the fate of most of downtown D.C. architecture: squat without character.

The only issue I see here is BENDERSON. I'm not sure how they function in Buffalo, but in Cheektowaga they own almost every retail space there is and they continue to build even though they have a relatively high rate of vacancy along Union Road. By the way, has anyone seen the eye-sore at Walden & Union? What the hell is that? It looks like a miniature 1980's Buffalo Courthouse.

I admire Phillips Lytle for wanting to be downtown, in this building.

But parking lots and car drop offs don't belong in downtown, especially at Canal Side.

The Erie Canal redevelopment is about creating density, and an urban feel that will attract pedestrians and activity.

This project does not meet these objectives and should not be selected unless the proposal is changed.

This is great look for an old building that has been vacant for years, im still not sure why some people in these comments are not happy. This looks better than most building downtown ??? ..............How about we leave it empty for a few more years so then you could complain that nothing is getting done. SMH.....#never happy

i agree with those who suggest eliminating the setback and drive-in idiocy.

the only thing that doesn't work about the proposed design is the recessed first floor. they were big in the '60s and '70s and in practice, they produce dark overhangs that rarely appeal to anyone except winos & panhandlers.

why can't architects do proper urban ground floors any more?

Folks, the main reason we even have Canal Side is because we don't want to settle for "something" just because it's better than nothing.

It is precisely that attitude that would have given us a bland waterfront with no canals, no bridges, and no history.

After all these years, we are finally on the verge of getting a nice project.

This is not the time to "settle" for less than something great. Benderson's proposal is mediocre, and at a minimum needs to be reworked to meet the design goals for Canal Side.

who cares its all about money!!!!benderson gets big tax brakes and then collects big rent money from these thieves in return for getting a building for free !who cares !it was so cold one day in buffalo that a saw these lawyers with thier hands in thier own pockets ! they should be called howy,cheatem and when.what a joke this buffalo is.krooked politicians,krooked mayor,krooked police,krooked judges,krooked people, and the list could go on and on!!!krooked kroce too!!!

Yes it looks like the Niagara Center on Elmwood (mediocre and already dated) and Pasquale (more average and should age well for Buffalo).

I agree about buildings with first floor retail, built to the sidewalk and of course having a design that fits historical integrity BUT IT DOES NOT NEED TO LOCK THE ARCHITECT INTO A CORNER. PHILADELPHIA AND OTHER CITIES OFTEN KEEP OR REPLICATE THE 1ST THRU 4TH FLOOR WITH PERIOD ARCHITECTURE AND THEN WITH A SETBACK BUILD HIGHER WITH CONTEMPORARY/MODERN.

I see absolutely no reason why we cant have a more traditional canal era first floor, built to the sidewalk, first floor office/retail, etc...and then a beautifully contemporary/modern building for the Donovan upper floors.

Oh and the 1st or 2nd floor expansion would provide great views of the city/canal/waterfront for a terrace bar/restaurant.

Build it out... What's next?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this building. Turning a vacant building into a functioning mixed use building is something that Buffalo. It has been a few year since the Avant... It is really time to rehab the next building downtown.

Additionally another developer can deliver a better plan.

Maybe it could look a bit sexier like the brand spanking new Morgan Stanley building in Baltimore:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbell1975/4964756973/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brianeden/5233418706/in/set-72157594507794545

I think they can extend the 1st floor of the building out to Main street for retail. The second floor would make an awesome rooftop park with a great view!

Having walked by this building going to HSBC Arena events from Pearl St I must say this building is embarassing as it is right now. A total eye sore. And embarassment that our premier sporting venue is directly across from this building. No wonder people visiting think Buffalo is a dump when they have to go past this for arena visits.

Get a design and get it done! ASAP.

Well I have to say thats its definately an improvement of whats there now. It is a sharp building and things like this are all over the country.

Some sort of addition needs to be planned in here..its entirely tooo far from the street. (If this is just a proposal where are the others?) Then again, I can't blame Benderson..as stated above this part of town is years/decades away from supporting retail on a regular basis. (What kinda office tenants want to walk into a building daily that has empty store fronts..for years?) Office space can rent..retail not so much. (I like the comment about a rooftop park/views..you could see it esp. with the canal infront of one of the pictures.

If you've ever been to Colombus, Ohio there is a thruway (couldn't tell you the ##) where there are buildings like this lit up at night on either side...sharp..clean...sophisticated. It looks very very good...I would say a building like with no walkability would be better suited next to the Fairmont building, rt-33 or Larkin district even...I think it looks good but its definately in the wrong place and 100% shouldn't be in whats supposed to be the "new" walkable district of Buffalo.

For goodness sakes. Is this proposal perfect? No. But so what? I think there are people who would rather fight over this for 10 years and keep the hulking eyesore, than have something modern and decent in 18 months.

International Style? Like all styles, there is good and there is bad. There is nothing special about this squat box that screams for its restoration.

I love it. Green-light this asap! Time to get commercial momentum going on the waterfront!

I guess that it all boils down to trying to recreate the past rather than using our past to create a new future. Buffalo is trying to market itself as a city that has iconic and architecturally significant historic buildings. Lets then USE that and move forward building NEW architecturally significant buildings. Something for people with more modern architectural sensibilities to be in awe with. If you want to draw young people to look at this city as more than a has-been and currently a city in demise, bring the city to life with its new architecture. With all of the new building that has gone on in the past 5 years, Buffalo could have really put itself on the map - and made buildings that will be interesting in 100 years. Like it did in Buffalo's heyday...

My criticism of this building would just be that it is very boring. It is a well-executed, conventional, post-modern-ish design, but I think we should expect a bit more from a building that will serve as a major backdrop to the Canal Side project. While it would be nice to re-imagine the building as a truly avant garde Caltrava-like or Ghery-esque sculpture, I doubt that is in the budget. However, I think some simple changes would make the building much better.

First, I would probably simplify the fenestration, I don't dislike the switch to all-glass cladding on the upper floors, but I'm not sure about the way the brick dissolves into the glass - I'd probably keep it simple: all glass floors or all masonry floors (perhaps with the exception of the central bump-out). I also think the minor bump-outs of the glass floors look a bit awkward. They're not bumped out enough to look daring; instead they look like a mistake or compromise.

It's an unfortunately sited building. I think bumping out the first floor might make the overall form awkward (maybe if it had a park above it?). A well landscaped plaza could possibly make up for building's set-back. Of course, plazas run the risk of seeming cold. This is something to seriously play around with and present a few scenarios.

If they do go with brick, I would hope they would choose a color other than red and a pattern that's more interesting than the ubiquitous stretcher bond. Brickwork can be amazingly expressive. For some examples, check out Brick Expressionism.

Otherwise, I would probably go with an inventive cladding that lends the building some texture from afar and tells a story when you get up close - like the Guarantee Building's terra cotta panels do. It doesn't necessarily have to use reliefs, maybe a pattern printed on glass panels, for example. The sky's the limit, really. Maybe crinkled cor-ten steel or punched aluminum? Maybe tile or slate? Maybe something that plays with shiny and matte or shadows; just make it fresh, inventive and engaging to the pedestrian.

Lastly, I'd ditch the cornices and emphasize the building's vertical lines as it approaches the roof. An interestingly patterned rooftop railing could serve dual purposes of providing the building with a final flourish and, well, a railing. A green roof (maybe a publicly accessible roof-top park) would also be very interesting.

Palidino will also be submitting a proposal. Probably the plan will be to mothball this building for 15 years.

the LEAST they can do is make that terrace on the top floor wrap all the way around for some nice outdoor space for tenants.
It would overlook the canal and could be very nice

One strange thing about Buffalo is that we don't open these terraces most of the time. There is a nice terrace on top of the Buffalo News that isn't used. I think the one on the HSBC building is closed too.

I like it. I hope to see it constructed. Much better than the Donovan that sits there as it is now. This is a structure on the outskirts of the canalside area and as such should be a transitional piece. I personally feel its a good transition building (mid height) between the 40 floor HSBC Tower and Canalside. You need to step these transitions down between intense and lower rise, more quaint developments and I think this does that. I personally find the facade to be interesting. The use of brick and glass in the facade meshes the more traditional facade with more modern. The bump outs get rid of the monotony and add some mass to the building. I like the terrace feature as well. The critics out there will probably thumbs down and thats fine. There is no perfect building that everyone will love. Someone will always find fault and smoe just love to hate just to hate because it makes them feel alive. This proposal is a thumbs up for me!

>the LEAST they can do is make that terrace on the top floor wrap all the way around for some nice outdoor space for tenants.

Better yet, make some of those tenants residential. That is essential for the downtown core and for a healthy mixed use building.

There will be multiple companies submitting multiple designs for this project. If you aren't happy with any of them, go to architecture school, start a company, and then in 30 years from now you can call the shots on what's being built in Buffalo.

Otherwise, when someone is going to convert that pce of cr** eyesore in front out our multimillion dollar arena and "water front" to that rendering, even if its not to your liking, you take a step back and say, "yep, that would be about 200x better then now."

With every new development story on this website, it seems like there are a lot of people expecting something like a NYC/Chicago ultra modern work of art that just seems so unrealistic right now. Kind of like Buffalo City Tower. Buffalo is just beginning it's long road to recovery and small steps are needed to modernize the city before big steps are taken. This design is clean, modern and reuses the existing structure and isn't another faux historical building that will be in abundance in Canal Side. Baltimore's harbor has the perfect mix of old and new style architecture that makes it such an interesting place to be. It can work here too.

I prefer and love the mid century design, but the new proposal is actually quite nice as well. The tenant is building and occupying it; so I should think it is up to them considering the new building meshes better with the Canal project eventhough it's a little hokey.

I should be working but it's time to jump into the muck and mire and take another swim in the swill of chronic mal-contents of metro Buffalo. It's like a sickness. A new building gets proposed and everybody gets nasty. I am suspecting that those who don't like this structure have traveled very little to some other cities. Recently returned from Europe, I think many of you would be stunned at what is being built next to what and where. There is no real rhyme or reason when it comes to the collage of a truly urban center. Each building is designed for aesthetics AND a purpose. And often the function of the structure dictates the form. This proposed building is really very nice. The issue is that there are no other buildings close by so it sits there like a model home ripe for criticism. Taken singularly it's a fine building. Taken in the context of the bigger picture, which is hopefully coming as Canal Side evolves, it’s an attractive and functional piece of the urban landscape. I like it and hope that it’s built.

i actually like the use of brick and wish there was more of it in new-builds and less dry-vit or glass boxes.

Wanna know what is even funnier about all of these complainers?

If HSBC were to move build on the Webster block, the new build probably wouldn't be too far off in design from this Donovan rendering.

ECHDC wants the buildings to blend in with the historic canal era, so even if it was new, the building would have been most likely a red/brown brick with a modern twist of glass. Seneca is currently redoing the whole casino to have it fit in with the canal side/cobblestone theme.

So we have the "complainers" that expect something better. Something that fits in with the community's desire for Canal Side.

And then we have the "better than nothing" crowd that wants to accept a buidling that is mediocre and doesn't fit with the design standards set out for Canal Side.

You tell me which side is making more sense?

Everyone knows what to do except those who are doing it.

To be fair, the thing that fits in best with this area is either a parking lot, a rubble pile, or a derelict and vandalized building. We have to start with some success and build from there because we are just growing old waiting for something amazing to come along. Frank Gehry is not on the short list for the new Phillips-Lytle building, so let's keep this real for once and be happy that this eyesore is going to be redone. It won't take much to add retail in the future, either here or in the next building. It also won't take much to make this pedestrian friendly or feel like it is built to the curb. It won't take much to fit into the urbanist catch phrase of the day once it is up, but it will take a lot if it is never even started.

I wonder what it would take to make the average BRO reader happy with what is being built. It doesn't seem to matter if it is a condo on Utica, a storefront on Elmwood, a courthouse, or the redo of the Donovan building, there will be a group here who will thumb their noses at it and poo-poo whatever is being done.

I would welcome the opportunity to follow each of you for a few weeks at work to see if you are living up to the high standards and expectations that you expect everyone else to live up to.

Build it out to the street eh? It's working so well with the existing streetside retail on the 400 block of Main. Also, the Donovan Building in its current form and condition is embarrassing. This is not bad. This is a good thing. For once on these posts I would like to hear positive feedback about positive changes being made. Not everything built here between 1880 and 1950 is a landmark or a masterpiece. The masterpieces that were built benefitted from wealthy industrialists who could afford world class architects using the finest materials. That Buffalo does not exist anymore.

It looks nice and more importantly, what the client wants. You can argue architectural merits all you like but money talks and pipe dreams walk. Want something more cutting edge? BUILD IT YOURSELF.

Too bad they didn't move to the grain elevators cause that would be noteworthy.

Build it ourselves? We are.

The entire Canal Side development is heavily subsidized by us, the taxpayers.

Not only is the public paying for this through taxes, but the public has been actively involved in the evolution of this project - for over a decade!

There was a time when Tony Masiello was imposing a generic waterfront plan that ignored the Erie Canal. The public stopped this plan.

Then the ECHDC got in the picture and had a plan that centered on Bass Pro. Again, the public got involved and the plan changed.

This is not the time for architects and developers to step in and ignore all the work, time and energy (not to mention tax money) that the public has contributed to the project.

This is not a private development. It is a public development, and the public gets to have their say.

only in wny would so many people take issue with p l's building design and wanting to lay down permanent roots near buffalo's waterfront. The relocation and renovation would give them greater identity in the region, double their footprint - enabling them to expand their practice, and put to use a prime location that is currently a dead-zone.
but you're all right, let's focus on the fact that the design is shit and the red bricks and glass facades don't match the grey and dreary skyline of the rest of the city like the vacant donovan building does. nor does it quite match the historical period of the erie canal we're going for. where in the proposed design is the mule tie-up and trough? and if there isn't yet another surface parking lot, oh snap, the whole waterfront area, hsbc arena, and p l can go f themselves! this is buffalo and the 21st century can go to hell!

It seems to me an uninspired design. Given an almost blank slate, they could have dreamed up something more interesting. I hope someone else does, but without PL in tow it will be hard for a competing design to prevail.

someone please explain to me how you can renovate the current structure AND build it to the curb without Doubling it's size?

Do you honestly expect a 1-2 story expansion to jut out to the sidewalk? That would look awful

Only in WNY?? I don't think so.

Go to any city that cares about its built environment, like NYC, Chicago, Boston, and even LA,
and you will see plenty of projects scrutinized down to the finish of the door knobs.

I will remind you again that if it were not for the fussy "obstructionists" we wouldn't even have
a Canal Side to argue about.

It's the "build it now" folks that got us UB North, the Convention Center, the Pedestrian Mall, and other local planning debacles.

In the year or so that I have been reading Buffalo Rising, I have seen a steady trend of comments that second guess and dismiss nearly every building design as being unacceptable. Some use the term "suburban" to criticize some of the proposed developments, others criticize the parking lots or the distance to the curbs, meanwhile others just say that they expect more from whatever architectural firm proposed the design and follow-up with a laundry list of what they could have or should have done.

I lived across the street from a neighbor like that, no matter what the other neighbors did to their house or lawn, he had a criticism about it. It didn't matter if it was the type of shrubbery used, the r-value of the replacement windows, or the color of the paint on the fence, he always knew better. The thing is he rented his house and didn't invest anything in the neighborhood. He didn't paint the house, mow the lawn, weed the garden, or even clean-up the dog poop in his backyard, yet he was usually there to criticize someone else. While he lived there, he would always talk about how his old house was decorated and landscaped, and how much better it was, but in five years we never actually saw a picture of what his old house looked like. Finally, we all just started to ignore him and go about doing things our own way because it was such a chore to hear him pontificate on the merits of the boxwood over the nine bark.

I sometimes feel like I am reliving this experience when I read some of the critiques from Buffalo Rising readers. I sometimes think I know what will pass muster with the BRO architecture crowd, but then the comments surprise me. For example, the renovation of the old KFC on Elmwood is amazing, but so many people complained that it was too busy, or the balconies should be extended, or the windows were wrong, or whatever. The same with the renovations on Delaware Ave, the shrubs are wrong, the windows are too small, the color should be different, the cement is too gray and the sky is too blue.

The funny thing is that some of those who make these comments are the first ones to throw out barbs at others about the suburbs or brand someone as being part of the pro-suburb shovel ready demolish everything just build it now no matter what it looks like crowd. The pissing match is epic on Buffalo Rising. It is fun at times, but when it comes to something serious like the future of our Central Business District, it isn't a joke. We need to renovate the Donovan building, in fact we need to renovate all of Main Street through the 1,000 block. Some of these renovations will be magnificent and some will be mediocre. This is part of the patchwork that makes a city great. So many bitch about the sterile monotony of the suburbs, but then turn around and want to do the same with the buildings in the city. We don't need everything built to the curb with mixed use retail on the first floor and residential upstairs. That is nice to have in many of the buildings, but doesn't have to be a requirement for all buildings.

For many companies, adding mixed use commercial space becomes a concern. Companies that have to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley or PCI regulations need to limit access to all entrances, employees, and visitors. I am not saying that adding retail is a show-stopper but when you look at a building like the glass HSBC building it just might be. The same may be true for Phillips-Lytle, I don't honestly know. They may want to limit the building to only Phillips-Lytle employees and put a fence around the parking lot to limit parking to only their cars. I am not in favor of this, but that may be something that they need to do to appease their employees and clients. The fact is we don't really know all the facts. So much speculation is based on a cardboard mock-up and a few artist's drawings that it would almost be funny if it weren't so tedious and obnoxious.

Anyway, I hope Phillips Lytle does decide to renovate the Donovan building, and I hope it is done before the next Junior Hockey or NCAA tournament because what we have standing there now is a huge embarrassment to Buffalo. I really hope that we renovate all of the buildings along Main Street soon too, because they are a huge embarrassment as well. I hope that if I ever decide to relocate my practice to an old building along Main Street, that this crowd cuts me some slack on how I am redoing the floors or what color curtains I decide to put in the windows.

It is nonsense to think this tone of critique is somehow unique to Buffalo or to the BR site. It happens everywhere, and it's a good thing.

NYC residents are in the midst of a hot debate regarding the new taxicab design Mayor Bloomberg selected.

Yes, they're fighting over a taxi design. The hundreds of negative comments sent to the Times' blog makes us look like amateurs.

my biggest concern with this project is that it is a waste of this building given its proximity to the metro rail and canal side. i would love to see a roof top restaurant or coffee shop open but since its all just one tenant in the building, i doubt that will happeen, same with any ground floor retail really. also, not that its the law firms job to fill their old space but are there any plans in place to try and fill the 6 floors in hsbc? i would rather see a comletely new build for this company somewhere else in downtown rather than using this building. how about the extra space that they were going to use to build a new building for hsbc. i just dont see a single use building that doesn't really have anything to do with the waterfront bringing much to the area. the expense would probably be too great to build it to the curb but at least a mixed use building would make more sense. this building will operate strictly from 8 to 5 and be dark the rest of the evening. from what i can see of the renderings, i could picture a bar or coffee shop on the ground floor with some tables outside, the rooftop resturant with some nice views and a fitness center also on the top floor to have some great views while working out and then people who take it, would still have the subway right there to take back to south campus (and if the rail explands even further). also i think that this would be a good location for apartments and condos. im not against some offices in there but just having one tenant, especially a law firm that doesnt have later hours usually doesn't bring much to the table in terms of making this area vibrant again.