Real Estate July 19, 2011 12:00 PM

Benderson Awarded Donovan Site Rights

Benderson Awarded Donovan Site Rights

Benderson Development today detailed plans to completely reinvent the former Donovan State Office Building as a mixed-use, LEED certified complex, with Buffalo law firm Phillips Lytle LLP, as the anchor tenant of new Class-A office space.

This morning Benderson Development was unanimously awarded the development rights for the critical Donovan Block of the Canal Side project by the Erie Canal Harbor Development Corporation (EDHDC). The developer plans a $30 million investment in the site including the makeover of the 49-year-old structure that will mark the first private investment in the Canal Side project.

"We are extremely proud to be selected as the developer of the Donovan Block for a project that will be an absolute game changer for downtown Buffalo and Canal Side," said Benderson Development Managing Director Randy Benderson.

"Canal Side has already seen great success through the wonderful physical improvements that are drawing record numbers of people to the Erie Canal Harbor for seasonal evening and weekend events, now we're going to take it to the next level by creating year-round density, in addition to making a significant addition to the property tax base," Mr. Benderson said.

donovan5.bmpPhillips Lytle LLP will be the building's anchor tenant, occupying 85,000 square feet of space, on the top four floors of the eight story, 160,000-square-foot structure.

"We studied and weighed multiple location options as we considered our firm's long-term future space needs, and none of them were more appealing to our Partners and staff than being part of Canal Side," said David J. McNamara, Managing Partner, Phillips Lytle.

"The Donovan site will not only provide us with a blank canvas to create a 21st Century law office environment, it gives us the opportunity to invest in Buffalo's dream of a thriving waterfront. Our firm has grown and prospered on lower Main Street for the last 176 years and we look forward to continued success in Canal Side," Mr. McNamara added.

Congressman Brian Higgins also noted the development rights award as a milestone in waterfront redevelopment efforts.

"In recent months we have made significant progress transforming public infrastructure along the inner and outer harbors to make the area attractive for economic development that will support jobs in Western New York.," Rep. Higgins said. "With this agreement we bring new life to the Donovan site which has sat vacant for years and see millions of dollars in private investment at that location as well as an additional $4 million dollars for additional waterfront progress in the surrounding area over the next 15 years."

"The selection of the Benderson team to redevelop the Donovan Building, with Phillips Lytle as anchor tenant, is a huge win for our City and Canal Side.  Not only will it take an older building and give it new life, but this project alone will bring hundreds of people to our redeveloped waterfront every single day of the week," said ECHDC Chairman Jordan Levy.

Work on the vacant Donovan Building will begin in December with 'de-skinning' which will see the structure stripped down to its structural steel.  The project is slated for completion in December 2013, with Phillips Lytle and other tenants taking up residence in 2014.

"As this vacant building prepares to be brought back to life, we have another sign of progress for the city of Buffalo," said Senator Timothy Kennedy," This private-sector investment will lead to serious job creation and economic development along the waterfront - which is critical to our efforts to revitalize our city starting at the water's edge."

donovan6.bmpIn addition to adding approximately 150,000-square-feet of 'market rate', Class-A office space, the building will offer lobby-level retail and restaurant components, a conference center and a two-story, 130-vehicle parking garage.  The garage will be directly attached to the east and north sides of the existing building.

Clark Construction Group, LLC, the nation's largest privately-held construction company, will serve as general contractor. The Bethesda, MD-based firm, whose resume includes significant experience in LEED-certified projects, will follow guidelines to achieve LEED "Silver" certification for the Canal Side building.

Benderson Development has also directed Clark to utilize local subcontractors, trades people and laborers, and adhere to the Canal Side district's guidelines for inclusion of minority- and women-owned businesses.

Orchard Park-based Fontanese Folts Aubrecht Ernst Architects, P.C. will serve as the project architect.

Founded in 1834, Phillips Lytle has grown in size, expertise and reputation to become one of the region's best-known law firms, which has over 170 attorneys with offices located across New York State in Buffalo, Albany, Chautauqua, New York City and Garden City. Phillips Lytle currently employs over 300 lawyers and support staff in its downtown Buffalo office.

View image

Comments

Leave a comment

Great, more musical chairs the results in a vacancy at the end of the chain. And I assume the additional $4M that Higgins mentions if in the form of taxpayer funded improvements. The new tax revenues from this project will likely be undercut but lost assessment in the building vacated to fill this one. Let's talk about the long-term off-site impacts too or once.

Socialized debt for privatized profit. Great model.

Free Lunch.

Score: -35 ( 57 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Can someone delete this guys account?

replied to buffalofalling
Score: 22 ( 42 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

have to say i agree with buffalofalling.

this is moving a tenant from one building to another subsidized by a $7 mil public investment. it's not a net positive for downtown. it's not bringing a new tenant in from outside buffalo. As proposed, the benefit of this project is we don't have to stare at this "piece of garbage". It ignores an adopted plan and design guidlines from ECHDC to create a vibrant neighborhood. This is not a spark for more private investment. As proposed it's a dead end...a sinkhole for taxpayer money.

replied to buffalofalling
Score: 0 ( 18 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

class A office vacancy in downtown buffalo is 3.94% as of january 2011. that's a shortage. http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/news/2011/01/21/buffalo-class-a-vacancy-rate-dips.html

replied to buffalofalling
Score: 4 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Great! Build it out. Let's get over the questionable process and just let it be developed.

We are in dire need of attractions down there for our events! This building alone can help change the perception by visitors of arena events from out of town.

Score: 13 ( 17 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Sure will! Downtown will now have its own slice of suburbia. Right front and center.

replied to Chris
Score: -20 ( 38 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Please, stop whining about new suburban styled structures being built downtown. Open your wallet and build a 21st century modern skyscraper that the likes of Phillips Lytle would be interested in relocating to, end of conversation.
Honestly, all of Buffalo would be ecstatic to get a new skyscraper downtown but this is Buffalo, New York, we can barely support the class A space we have, so in the short term Buffalo would be very lucky to have the hideous HSBC building re-skinned someday.

replied to Travelrrr
Score: 4 ( 16 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

my wallet was opened already for this building in the form of $7MM in stabilization/renovation-so, I have every right to have my voice heard. I am not sure what your ramble is about, but the underlying sentiment "be lucky we are getting anything" is lazy and lacks even a modicum of creativity.

Buffalo and Canalside deserve better than this design. We helped pay for it, make it about the site and function, NOT about a developer and his connections.

replied to derby98
Score: 5 ( 15 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Show us your design then so we can pick it apart. Put up or shut up!

replied to Travelrrr
Score: -3 ( 17 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Thanks for asking, Burch.

I would go sleek and contemporary (like the enclosed buildings in Athens):
www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=267669&page=5

and energy efficient:
http://inhabitat.com/kfw-headquarters-aims-to-be-the-most-energy-efficient-office-tower-in-europe

What I wouldn't do? Safe, bland, suburban, everywheresville...like this plan.

replied to BurchJP
Score: -3 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

@Travelrr: Can you give us a cost comparison between the two structures? The one proposed by Benderson, and the one built in Germany? What is the price difference between the two?

replied to Travelrrr
Score: 0 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Almost identical :)

My point is the we, the taxpayer, have invested north of $7MM on this building to date. Given the prominence of this building, why settle? why not have a signature building?

There is a whole urban design world that is utterly passing Buffalo by. Why not complement our class heritage stock with inspiring new builds (which, again, are already receiving significant subsidies)?

replied to bobbycat
Score: 1 ( 11 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Everything doesnt need to be a "signature building".

replied to Travelrrr
Score: 5 ( 15 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

@Travelrr: Almost identical, do you have the website to reference? I am really interested in why this development costs as much as the larger, and much more intricate, development in Germany,

replied to Travelrrr
Score: -1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Boring, seen it before, doesnt fit in with Canal Side, how would you expand it to the curb, its just a plain glass building, would it be a green building?

replied to Travelrrr
Score: 0 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Man, that is one ugly building you linked to. Plus it does not meet the design guidelines for the cobblestone district.

replied to Travelrrr
Score: 5 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This is an already existing development with framework that is not built to the curb. I think that deserves an exception to the rule. A build-out of this (again, already existing) building might be cost-prohibitive among other reasons. If this is the way this building must be redeveloped to make it feasible for developers, so be it. It seems to me we can have a decent new building not built to the curb for years to come, or a pile of junk not built to the curb for years to come (let's be honest here). Because the demand isn't there yet and may not be for a long time, I'll take the former.

replied to Travelrrr
Score: 2 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Remember that the greenest building is one that is already built! :-)

replied to Tim
Score: 4 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Derby, Buffalo has one of the highest Class A occupancy (not vacancy) rates in the United States. Large cities like the ones you LOVE with the skyscrapers have fully vacant buildings. Buffalo is a smart, conservative market that is doing pretty damn well in the real estate scenario at this point. In Darling Las Vegas (America's BOOM city) 80% of the mortgages are upside down and 25% of properties are in some form of foreclosure. And that's not even mentioning the commercial office space. Not in Buffalo. The value of the homes keeps going up, incrementally, but in the right direction. My friend in Vegas bought a home 10 years ago valued at about 730,000 and he would consider himself lucky if he could list the home for sale at 300,000!

replied to derby98
Score: 4 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Not to mention the two major EMPTY hulks of skyscrapers in this "fair" sin city!!!

The 60 story Fountainbleu project was completed just short of the top floors. They had to do an emergency enclosure of the elevator shafts to stop the water damage (yes, water damage in the desert). Pigeon poop is corroding the open top floors and they are slowly infiltratin the building. Meanwhile, the new owner had gutted (ala Central Terminal) the building and sold off anything of value - plumbing, copper wiring, etc. and has already recuped his multi-million dollar purchase price of this formerly 2 BILLION dollare building!!! They don't anticipate anything further being done to it for a MINIMUM OF TEN YEARS!!!

Down the street, there's the rusting steel framing of the former Encore casino project - it has steel up to the fourth floor I believe - and it's just stopped dead.

Between the two sits the empty tower of the City Center multi-tower project. This wonderful building was improperly designed - the foundation can't support the structure it has been learned - so not only did they only build half it's height since it was in danger of COLLAPSING with the original structure - it is totally EMPTY while the lawyers work it all out. The Owners want to tear it down and start over. The problems stemmed from falsified inspection reports and improperly placed and defective materials.

Glad I wasn't involved in any of those projects!!!

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


There is something unsettling about Benderson getting this job, and the fact that they are working with an architecture firm with little urban design experience, for one of the most important development projects in the City's history.

I don't care how many people you add to the renderings, I fear the large plaza shown will be a dead space most of the time.

Score: 7 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The firm did a great job with Ciminelli's project in Ithaca...ironic, Ciminelli may be suing over the process selecting Benderson. Small town.

replied to hamp
Score: 2 ( 8 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This building has always seemed particularly ugly and unfriendly to me due to the asphalt parking lot that surrounds it on all four sides. No matter what the new facade looks like, it will only be lipstick on a pig if it still stis in the midle of a parking lot.

Score: 3 ( 11 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Not surprised (though disappointed) considering the process and pre-existing relationships.

But - are you f'king kidding me on the buildout?!?!?! Every canalside plan, including the current plan shows a buildout of the first floor, at least to Main and Scott Streets. Urban density, creating vibrant streetscapes, is going to be a linchpin of the success of canalside and it appears that ECHDC is already making concessions to their god damn preferred developer. Benderson has been involved for years now and (should) understand how this site needs to be developed - yet they're making a proposal that does not enhance the surrounding urban environment. They should not even have a potential mock-up that does not include the lower floors build-out.

I am absolutely disgusted. How much longer should we have to tolerate the ineptitude and insider politics of the ECHDC Board. Jordy Levy should have been gone long ago.

Score: 2 ( 14 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I think it's gorgeous.

Score: 3 ( 15 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

What makes this so "suburban" looking? When I think of suburban office park, I typically see a spread out one - three story building with blacked out windows. I don't see that here. Are you bitching because Benderson has developed suburban locations in the past? Is it because it has a plaza or a parking lot?

Really, it has 2 restaurants that are desperately needed to attract and keep people near the waterfront. It is a hell of a lot better than what stands there today and what stood there for years in the past.

Score: 12 ( 20 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Just because it is better than what is currently there doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for something more appropriate for the site.

replied to bobbycat
Score: 1 ( 19 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

What would make it more "appropriate" for the site? Given the existing footprint and building that sits on the site, what should they have done? In your humble opinion.

replied to TranspoGuy
Score: 3 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Go look at the plans for Canalside. It has already been established what should be done with the footprint. Its why you create a plan!!!!

Should we just throw out the design qualities of canalside so one law firm can move across the street?

replied to bobbycat
Score: 4 ( 12 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Your snide tone is so tiresome and unwarranted. For starters, the way the area surrounding the building is built up higher than street level, plaza style, isn't all that inviting.

I personally don't hate the building Bobbycat, I just think it could be a lot better. If you are taking it down to the steel, you have a tremendous opportunity to do something great, not mediocre.

replied to bobbycat
Score: 0 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

"If you are taking it down to the steel, you have a tremendous opportunity to do something great, not mediocre."

....and how much more would that add to the price tag for redevelopement? Oh yeah, thats right, you live in BRO land where money and being realistic walk on different sides of the street.

replied to TranspoGuy
Score: 1 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Who says a better design is going to cost more at all? You're making an assumption there.

replied to BurchJP
Score: 4 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

@Transpo: My comment wasn't meant to be "snide", it is you who are putting that connotation or association to my comment.

I am seriously wondering what is wrong with the building. There is nothing snide about that. I go to concerts at One M&T Plaza a few times a week and love that venue. I see this building as offering a similar opportunity for live music and events that augment and support what is being done a few blocks up Main Street. The rendering looks like it would be very conducive to this type of event.

Other than the fact that it doesn't fit with one of the many renderings that have been offered for the area is somewhat inconsequential to this. We still don't have a formal plan for the old Aud site, and that could change things considerably.

I am looking at the opportunities that the redevelopment of this site brings to Buffalo. It is an opportunity to really anchor the foot of Main Street and enable development between already existing attractions. I don't think it looks bad, when you compare the old to the new design.

replied to TranspoGuy
Score: 4 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I don't think it looks "terrible" either. I would just like to see the area around the building designed a little better. I also enjoy the concerts at M&T plaza, but do we need another space like that? The design in this location seems to be a little less inviting (separated from the street more, less overall space which isn't even conducive to a grade separation). I would say the same thing about the concrete wall surrounding parts of the new federal courthouse.

replied to bobbycat
Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

We definitely have plenty of plazas...

replied to bobbycat
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This is an important location, and deserves equally inspiring (and inspired) design. The "anything is better than nothing" argument is so tired-we have, and are starting to take advantage of, an opportunity to develop a first-class waterfront. But, instead, we hire a Delta Sonic and strip mall developer.

"Buffalo was developed by giants, but inherited by pygmees" seems to ring true here.

Here is some thought provocation: www.nlpdir.com/contemporary+commercial+building+design+images.html

replied to bobbycat
Score: 0 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

@Travelrr: Again, what makes this so "suburban" and "inappropriate" for the site. What else do you expect from the developer? More floors, more space, more retail, what?

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

I'm glad we're finally doing something with this eyesore of a building. But if this was the best design they had for it, I;d suggest going back and rethinking it. This is downtown, Canalside, if you will, and this is the best idea of a building Benderson can come up with? Some one should have sent old Bendy the memo. This isn't one of your plazas in Depew that's going to be vacant in six months so you can write off the losses. Look at the architectural history within a 2 block radius of this building alone and ask yourself, should I really be putting a building that looks like this here? If this were Williamsivlle, I'd say great job, but it's not. WE have a chance to make it right, let's do so.

Score: 10 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

" Look at the architectural history within a 2 block radius of this building alone and ask yourself,"


....LOLOLOL hummm lets look at it....

Marine Drive Apartments (fail)
HSBC Arena built in 97 (?) (fail)
The Buffalo News WWII style bunker (fail)
The Empty lot that we call Canal Side (fail)
The Empty parking space on the Webster Block (fail)
HSBC parking lots (fail)
Pearl Street (thats 1)
HSBC Tower (hardly architectural history)
Another parking ramp on Washington and Exchange (fail)
Coca Cola Field (fail)
Webb Lofts next to Pearl St (thats 2)

.....congratulation you have two parking ramps, 5 parking lots and a bunch of ugly building, great post, keep'em coming.

replied to tonydiamond
Score: -7 ( 23 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Good point. This design will just be more of the same as whats there - so lets keep at it!

replied to BurchJP
Score: -1 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

You must have very high standards for successes then. Please, shower us with your wisdom on how this building should look. Like every other of one of Benderson's buildings? Can't we add any imagination to the design of this building?

replied to BurchJP
Score: 0 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I think it looks great the way it is.

replied to tonydiamond
Score: 1 ( 11 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I'm not discussing the process. I am discussing the fact that a hulking eyesore that is a scar on downtown is going to be replaced with what looks like a very nice building (not perfect, but very nice).

And people still whine, complain and moan...

Score: 10 ( 14 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

quit your bitching and moaning, my god

Score: -1 ( 21 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

That's what the developers of the current convention center probably said.

replied to ccbuffalo
Score: 2 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Wow that was a reach!

replied to townline
Score: -4 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

how so?

replied to BurchJP
Score: 0 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

You're comparing the convention center (jail) to this? Thats what I meant by it being a reach, and if you dont see that, its not worth debating.

replied to townline
Score: -3 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I'm making the point that its absurd, considering our history, to just shut up and accept whatever we're told without comment! Do you really think that the parking garage that is going to line Washington street on this project will look any less awful than the pearl street side of the convention center?! I'm guessing you're brain hasn't been able to wrap itself around to that side of the building yet though. So we should just shut our mouths, right?

replied to BurchJP
Score: 1 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I don't think it looks that bad. I like all the glass and contour and dimension added. Who cares who is developing or designing this? It's a decent start for the area and it is mixed use. Funny some of the complaints about the layout, the Avant has a near identical ground floor / exterior layout and it works well.

Furthermore, I think the employees will be more likely to head out of the office at lunch time if they dont have to waste 20 mins to ride an elevator up and down, that can't hurt either.

If they land a restaurant and retail tenant I don't see what the problem is?

Score: 2 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The site of this building is NOT the same as the Avant!!! Not even close! Go take a look at the current renderings for Canalside - where it focuses on density of the built environment - and tell me where a set back building with a 1950s style plaza (i.e. useless dead space) fits in? There is a plan established, and they're already allowing Benderson to just say, "fk that!"

replied to brownteeth
Score: 1 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Well for starters it's set back like the Avant. Second, it's adaptive reuse of an existing building so you're more limited with the footprint, like the Avant. Next, they're re-cladding the exterior changing it's boring vibe. This building is the same shape as the Avant too. I'm sure a lot of people thought the Avant was going to be blah looking before they finished but you should probably wait to see the final results before tearing this apart.

With that, you're basing this building's site plan off of a preliminary rendering that shows no details what so ever. So how do you propose to change an office building built in the 1950's to resemble a building built in the 1850's? That's absurd.

Most important of all, it will revitalize a building NO ONE else wants. i think we can live with the results.

replied to townline
Score: 3 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment


THIS IS ABSURD.

ECHDC has been preaching to us for years about making Canal Side a vibrant neighborhood. They have shown renderings of the Donovan site with street fronting retail and an active canal envrionment. They gave development rights exclusivly to benderson to help make buffalo's waterfront what it should be, a center for retail and commerce complimenting natural and historic resources making this place a major destination.

What are we getting - I guess what we should expect - a law office. Benderson was gifted this building and despite everything they know about what canal side should be, the best they can do is *label* restaurant on the ground floor. A low ceiling space, set back too far from the street, and without a proposed tenent.


WHAT A JOKE. Randy and Jordy, childhood friends. This will be their legacy to canal side. Way to go boys.



Score: 2 ( 20 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Here to the here!

replied to nyc
Score: -4 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

We are alll waiting for your investment in the area. There are plenty of blocks left.

replied to nyc
Score: -2 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I think Travelrrr comment of......

"my wallet was opened already for this building in the form of $7MM in stabilization/renovation-so,"

....was quite misleading because after he says that the "taxpayers" have footed the 7 million dollar bill. So nice try in trying to make us think that you had 7 mill in capital and were waiting to invest. I think its safe to say that he/she is just another commenter on BRO blowing hot air.

replied to johnnywalker
Score: -2 ( 8 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Any chance we could go get a count of how many complaints about "a suburban office park downtown" when Uniland developed the Avant? ..... my gosh, look at how bad that turned out!

Score: 7 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

tell me, how lively are the 4 streets on each side of the Avant? Is that how lively you think canalside should be?

replied to Gardner
Score: 3 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I would say that Chippewa and Delaware are very vibrant.

replied to townline
Score: -4 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The Avant doesn't touch Chippewa at all, nice try though

replied to BurchJP
Score: 2 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Close a f*in nuff for me!

replied to TranspoGuy
Score: 0 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The hotel ON Chippewa has ground floor retail and is built to the curd

replied to BurchJP
Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

You mean the hotel that faces away from Chippewa and has parking in front.

replied to TranspoGuy
Score: 0 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The Hampton Inn is aligned just like the Avant is, facing towards downtown. The Hampton Inn has ground floor commercial like Chocolate Bar, Subway, etc...that is accessible from Chippewa.

The Avant is successful without needing ground floor retail, but the commercial space in the Hampton Inn certainly does help with pedestrian traffic on Chippewa. They both work.

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

It is nice to see an older building brought back to life...but this whole deal stinks to high heaven. Benderson has always had the inside track and has been the "favored" developer. In the bidding process they have always had the upper hand. Phillips Lytle is the anchor tenant? They are the law firm that handles the ECHDC business. And the completion date coincides with the end of their lease on Main St??? They've made what a million from ECHDC since 2007 at $355 an hour? ECHDC has done $7 million of work on the building already for who ever developes it.

Favoritism, bed partners and filtering public money to a select few!

Score: 6 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

what turns my stomach about this is how proud Jordan Levy is of the work that Benderson has done with Canalside in the past 5 years. I don't get it. He was so happy with them he didn't even think this building needed to go through an RFP process. Which essentially it really didn't. So the only option now is this trash which is not the seed to a great waterfront, it's an office building with absolutly no effort at placing this in the context of canal side...so..
Jordy - is Canalside Dead? In it's entirety? I mean, we were told that it could happen with or without Bass Pro, but clearly with this project, the only project moving forward- rejecting the canalside plan, clearly you must consider it dead.

Score: -2 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

It's so nice that you could take some of your time to critique buildings in downtrodden BUF. After all I'm sure there are dozens of development projects in NYC that are in a holding pattern waiting for your input.

replied to nyc
Score: 6 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The deal is done, it isn't THAT bad so just let it be built and move on to the next thing.

Canal Side was a big win for preservation and authenticity which is great but all we have are parks and roads but not private investment.

This development will be a net positive for Canalside and the entire district.

Score: 5 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Seriously...These people could spend their entire lives waiting for the perfect solution. This is a minor project in the grand scheme of things, but is incremental progress and the alternative is having the eyesore that is the Donovan building sit there idle for another 5-10 years. If the Donovan building had been demolished, as it should have been, along with the Aud then obviously this solution would not be acceptable, nor would it even have been proposed. But apparently we're stuck with the Donovan building, so let's make it better. This project does that.

replied to Chris
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Love it! Personally looking forward to seeing this. Haters are going to hate but I feel different.

Score: 6 ( 14 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

OKAY HOW ABOUT THIS...

look at the ground floor of the perspective rendering- where is the emphasis - THE OFFICE LOBBY ENTRANCE.

What did ECHDC sell us Canalside on? Retail and Restaurants.
This project completely contradicts everything they have presented to the public in the past about what this place could become.

Score: -2 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

So what are your thoughts about the drawing above that features two restaurants and a conference center?

There should also be one more building, or set of buildings, between the old Donovan building and the waterfront. These will fill in the old Aud / Bass Pro site. There are plenty of opportunities for restaurants and retail in that "from the ground up" site.

replied to nyc
Score: 5 ( 7 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

The canalside plan for the donovan site included an extension of the 1st and/or 2nd floor of the existing building to the sidewalk along Main Street. The intent was to make Main Street part of the Canalside experience with retail and activity. Also the building had an extension south to reach the proposed "canal" on the donovan site. The emphasis of the canalside plan was to make the waterfront a vibrant neighborhood as indicated in the elimination of the setback on the project plans for the donovan site. Setbacks are usually dead space. They detract from an active public street. Given that this will be the first major development of the canalside area, ECHDC should have stipulated in the RFP that the developer comply with the canalside plan, putting retail and restuarants on the street frontage. If they had made this stipulation and allowed for competing bids we would be looking at a project with a much better urban design and the seed to a great waterfront neighborhood. Instead Jordy gave Randy a free pass at our cost.


replied to bobbycat
Score: 0 ( 8 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Why ever makes you think that this is going to be a waterfront neighborhood?

replied to nyc
Score: 1 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

interesting comment..

replied to BurchJP
Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Wasn't the RFP for this submitted before BassPro quit Buffalo, and hasn't the plan for the waterfront changed a couple times in the past year or two?

Designs and conditions change. Maybe the developer doesn't want to build a huge restaurant space that might not survive. Remember all the hype about Networks sports bar at Main Place? They tried to find many restaurants and suitors to take the place before they turned it into a data center. I can understand why Phillips-Lytle may be a little apprehensive about putting money and materials into something that has not proven to work anywhere else in the vicinity.

replied to nyc
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Nope. The RFP came out about a month ago. Well after the revised master plan and even longer since the design guidelines were established and put through a public process.

replied to bobbycat
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Ok, I usually don't participate in these types of discussions, but since the attacks on my character and integrity are so specific here, I think that I need to defend myself.
For the record, Benderson was selected before I joined this Board. Second, we did go through a state mandated RFP process to get to this point and while people may have preferred that we select someone else, the Benderson Company was the only bidder and many others looked hard and visited the building.
Next, the building is currently a piece of garbage and this is a great adaptive re-use of a 1950's office building. For five years. anyone could have come forward and offered to develope this property, nobody ever did!
We now have a private sector investor spending $30MM of their own money in downtown Buffalo, putting a non taxpaying property back on the tax rolls.
Lastly, the plans for the Historic District and Aud Block will come together shortly and will celebrate the history of the district, but remember, there is almost nothing remaining from the great history of this district, so whatever we build will be a re-creation of what we think makes sense and meets contempory standards in todays world.
I am happy about what we did today and where we are headed and hope that all of the folks that have nothing positive to say will come forward and invest their time and money in doing something that will move the needle in downtown Buffalo vs just criticize people willing to invest their time, energy and money. my close friend or not, this was an open, transparent and extremely positive day for Buffalo.

Score: 24 ( 44 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Continue the good work Jordan, I do agree with most people on here that progress has been slow, but with all the lawsuits I cant blame you. Just keep in mind that we need high end retail on not a Teds hot dog, and a JCPenny. Make it a destination and not just something every other city laughs at.

replied to Jordan Levy
Score: -5 ( 23 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I can shop anywhere, when I go to the waterfront I want to be able to utilize or have a great view of it. That's hard to do when I'm in the Gap trying on a sweater. Most (downtown)retail would be better served on Main Street, we should leave canalside to ammenities that compliment it and take advantage of it.

Truthfully I'd rather sit a picnic table eating a Ted's hotdog overlooking the water than wait in line at an Apple Store to buy a new iPhone or skinny jeans at H&M.

Otherwise why not put up a wall along the water?

replied to BurchJP
Score: 9 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I'd love to see the push for a downtown anchor store go into the former AM&A's. It's already designed for retail, it's right on MAIN STREET, it's across the Main Place Mall that NEEDS an anchor store to lure smaller retailers back and most of all, the people are ALREADY on Main Street. (Office workers, residence, and visitor's) all year long. Why push for retail in an area that only works during the warm months when retail needs to be open to all, all year long?

replied to brownteeth
Score: 3 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

That's my point, Main street was built to house retail. It's ironic that we're trying to build replica canal era buildings just to house modern retail when we have an original retail district relatively in tact two blocks away! Now I'm not saying we shouldn't have any retail at canalside but let's not lose focus of the reason this is arguably the most valuable real estate in the western half of our state, the water.

The real issue here is not the design, it accessibilty. It's difficult to get to this area by any means. I'd rather see the Bass Pro money go to re-configuring the infrastructure so even a blind person can get down there.

replied to Lego1981
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Jordy - I do have concerns about the process, but my main concern is regarding the exterior design and the urban design building.

In regards to design, all I have heard from your comment is basically "its better than what's there now."

Should this be what we should expect from Canalside? That whatever we will get will be better than a vacant building and a series of former gravel parking lots? In ECHDC's renderings and planning documents, we see a very dense and vibrant urban environment - one that, frankly, our downtown desperately needs. The buildings are constructed to their property lines and create the type of atmosphere that can only found in densely developed cities. Its what makes places like Boston, Philadelphia or San Fransisco great. The changes that ECHDC have made to the project's master plan, starting late last year, have been exciting and commendable, including a Donovan building that saw its ground floor uses built out beyond the buildings present footprint, to engage the streetscape and enhance the public realm.

Yet, on the very first private development project at Canalside, ECHDC is allowing the developer to stray from design qualities and urban development values established in the Master Plan. This is alarming for this particular property as well as in precedence for the development of the rest of Canalside. And your response to these concerns about the design is that its just better than the piece of garbage that is there now?!

This, along with your assumption that people with critical comments to offer have not invested their own time and energy in making Buffalo AND the waterfront a better place is beyond alarming from a representative of a public agency.

replied to Jordan Levy
Score: 4 ( 12 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Reading back through my comments, I regret the personal attacks, Jordan. It shouldn't be personal and I do not envy your role in the project.

But I do what to stress that am extremely concerned about the design of this project. Members of the public have been fighting for years to get a master plan that ECHDC has most recently developed and I do not feel that the design of this project is in the spirit of that plan. Design guidelines were established by ECHDC for the purpose of maintaining the integrity of the built environment. This project does not follow those design guidelines. I feel strongly that any developer, regardless of who it is or what particular parcel, have to uphold the quality of the built environment that has been planned for canalside.

replied to townline
Score: 1 ( 9 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment


See Exhibit 4, mandatory build to lines of the document “Canal Side Design Guidelines” issued by the Erie Canal harbor Development Corporation issued July 2009 and revised March 2010.

These guidlines were created for a purpose. Why is the Donovan developer (Benderson) allowed to ignore the design guidlines?

replied to Jordan Levy
Score: 1 ( 7 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

well geesh, if townline is apologizing, i suppose i should as well. I take back my "randy-jordy" talk. It's a little immature (although rooted in some real concern). I also appreciate that you read the comments.

However I feel strongly about the role of canal side in shaping what happens in downtown Buffalo. I believe we can have a great waterfront. However, for the first real project to ignore the design guidlines and the spirit of what this place should be, is very disheartening and sets a very bad precedent. As stated by ECHDC, canal side is not a "series of projects" but rather a new urban neighborhood. This project should plant the seed for that new neighborhood and follow the design guidlines.


replied to nyc
Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

"there is almost nothing remaining from the great history of this district"


Go stick up for what's left, for instance the blacksmith on Illinois.

I'm a regular critic of the agency and yourself, however I don't think a public official responding in the comments section is necessarily appropriate. If any unofficial response or defense of character was needed, perhaps an editorial sent to BR and not by jumping into the trenches and engaging the muck.

replied to Jordan Levy
Score: -6 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Well, I'm not a huge fan of Benderson, or the process to come to this point. But whatever. Do something.

I'm also not a fan of the parking plan. But then, what's the alternative to another garage.

How about residential? What's the plan to get more residential in the Canalside and Cobblestone areas? You want to create density and around the clock presence then residential is a priority.

Score: -3 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

i'm "satisfied" with the design. The current donovan is so ugly I wish it was plowed into by a semi. I dont think there was much you could have done with the current Box that we call the Donovan without stripping it to it's skeleton.

Glass = Modern. Red Brick = Canals past.

Don't know why buffalo cant "build it to the curb" like every other normal city, but this is a start.

Although this isn't a home run, I think this project has rounded second base. There should be 3 homeruns that follow this project however

Score: 3 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I am totally for having design standards down in this part of town with building materials, height, built to the street, etc..but I find the fake historical design that everyone keeps pushing for every building to be the worst type of planning for a new neighborhood. It makes it look phony...not unlike the fake historical buildings you would see in Las Vegas or a Disney theme park.
Architectural variety should be the goal...but with the materials and pedestrian-friendly atmosphere being the things that tie the neighborhood together.

As for the Donovan, people would have complained if Benderson leveled the place and started from scratch so it really is a lose-lose situation for anyone down there.


While the complaints over the bidding process are valid, I have a bad feeling that if and when this project goes to court, much like every previous project before it in this town, it will be put on hold indefinitely and we'll have to keep looking at a dilapidated structure that looks out of place in any neighborhood.

Score: 7 ( 7 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Clearly if they had a more historical design for the building and built to the curb there would be at least 50-60 more people drawn in the rendering because it would be enticing to those who work and live in the CBD.

The building looks better than what is there now because its not vacant, its new and I'm sure all the people working there will be more concerned and happy that they still have a job in Buffalo then they will care what the outside of their NEW building looks like. I work and live downtown and anything is better than empty run down buildings. So props to anyone who is willing to take a risk , invest and redevelop or build new in downtown.

Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Time, once again, to wallow in the Muck & Mire of the malcontents of Buffalo. Not possible to build to the street with this structure which is 49 years old, it sits where it sits and it's not going anywhere. Building an atrium to the curb is not feasible either. Have any of you people visited other cities? They ALL build some of their buildings away from the curb. Buffalo is not WALL STREET. Problem is Buffalo does not build enough buildings so when one comes along everyone jumps all over it like they were architects or something. It's a nice building. Leave it alone. ..'nuff said.

Score: 1 ( 7 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

seen the ECHDC master plan? no? Check it out, look at this site. It's entirely feasible and even recommended...by ECHDC.

replied to DOC
Score: 0 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I wish people dressed this nice downtown like in that illustration.

Score: 3 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I'd love to see the push for a downtown anchor store go into the former AM&A's. It's already designed for retail, it's right on MAIN STREET, it's across the Main Place Mall that NEEDS an anchor store to lure smaller retailers back and most of all, the people are ALREADY on Main Street. (Office workers, residence, and visitor's) all year long. Why push for retail in an area that only works during the warm months when retail needs to be open to all, all year long?

Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

@Lego1981: What anchor store would survive on Main Street and would it attract new tenants to the Main Place mall?


Anchor stores in malls and stand along shopping districts are struggling and closing all over the country, why would they work in Buffalo?

replied to Lego1981
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Not only that, you would need MULTIPLE "anchors" like they have in all malls.

But, as others have said many times, retail FOLLOWS demographics.

Maybe someone could find any support for "if you build it, they will come" but I think it would be doubtful.

If - IF - one were to do such a new retail project, in order to be successful, it would have to be part of a larger planned development like the "power centers" here in Vegas and even in Honolulu. Everything from the streets, to planting to the buildings is planned as a "theme" with multiple "anchors".

I was amazed at the development in the former cane fields of Kapolei/Makakilo on the other side of Pearl Harbor. The comomercial areas were truely amazing - and they're still building thousands of homes - that start at around 300 thousand!!! And they look REAL tacky with horrible siding - ugh!!!

But the common "theme" is that they have many retail/dining establishments that were all encouraged to be built at the same time. This development was started over 17 years ago and is only now nearing fruition!

If I were going to shop, I wouldn't want just a Sears and nothing else - especially during the holidays. You want to be able to go to multiple destinations before heading home again.

I am surprised that even in depressed Vegas, they are continuing to fill out strip malls/plazas with Petsmarts, Ross's and Targets EVEN AFTER THE ECONOMY HAS TANKED!!! Go figure...

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

i dig it!

Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Doesn't this still have to get approved by the Planning Board?

Score: -1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I have to believe this forum has inspired the Snews coverage:

www.buffalonews.com/city/communities/downtown/article493896.ece

Almost all of the issues discussed are covered in the article.

Score: -1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Buffalorising - please update your graphics to show the full site plan with a 2-story parking garage fully along the east and north property lines as well as an approximately 50' curb cut for a "drop off" driveway from Main Street.

Whatever people think of this design - I'm not sure anyone was expecting or hoping for canalside developments with more than 2/3s of the project's street frontage to be off-street automobile parking and access, and 60' setbacks everyplace else.

That is certainly not what ECHDC shows in its own design guidelines for the property, here:

http://eriecanalharbor.com/pdf/CanalSide/MGPP101210exhibitsCD_part1.pdf

Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Your link shows "ground floor active uses" for only the Scott Street and less than half of the Main Street frontage for the Donovan block. You haven't proved a thing.

replied to BFLO4theBTTR
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

OK - active ground floor uses along scott street and 1/2 of main street - this plan does not show that. It shows an unprogramed "terrace."

More importantly, if you bothered to scroll further - they define the "street wall." For the donovan block, they outline the entire property line of Main Street and Washington street. Meaning that it is required that a building at this be designed to the street wall. If you need it clearer, let me read the words directly out of the guidelines for you...

"Mandatory building frontages for each block are indicated
in Exhibit 4. A minimum of 75% of the lineal length of the mandatory building frontage shall be set at
the streetline or within 10 feet therefrom. The fi rst two stories of a building are required to be set at this
mandatory front property line."

I don't know how much clearer that can be. Its why they create these crazy things called "design guidelines." What else do you need me to "prove?"

replied to Platt4
Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Sorry - meant to write regarding the street wall:

"For the donovan block, they outline the entire property line of Main Street and SCOTT street."

replied to BFLO4theBTTR
Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

they need to have heated sidewalks in Canalside so its "shoppable" during our heavy snow season

Score: 6 ( 6 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Absolutely agree! All of downtown should as well.

Score: 3 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This building is an eyesore. I met a good friend from Philly back home in Buffalo for game #6 of the Sabres/flyers series this year. While we waited to meet our ticket guy outside HSBC, the Donovan building was all that was talked about. While I took him to the Anchor Bar, the Falls and lots of great Buffalo places it was THIS builing that stuck in his mind and I am sure gave him his visual memory/impression of Buffalo. This thing has sat for YEARS. I don't care who got the bid, who moves into it or what the affect is on Class A office space - get this building done!! Being by the arena and seen from the Skyway this building may be the single worst visual representation of our fine home town - GET IT DONE!!!!

Score: 11 ( 11 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Agree 100% - this is easily one of the worst buildings ever to be built in downtown Buffalo.

replied to AaroninCleveland
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Fantastic design - looks modern but with red brick to fit into the Canalside "era" look. Ignore all the naysayers on this site and just build it...this site seems filled with talkers/complainers

Score: 3 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Can the new construction also incorporate the return of cars to Main street. this would save time and construction delays.

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

For the outside of the structure:

Our city housed 4 Liberty Poles that were built by the Liberty Loving, Working Class men of Buffalo at our city's operational inception! The history of it is magnificent! The last pole was taken down at the Dawn of the Aud. So, I propose that since the Aud is now a distant memory, why not reincarnate the renowned Liberty Pole. You can view the full history of it on my site: http://www.dedicatedtobuffalo.com/buffaartifacts.php .

I feel that it would help to link, unite, infuse DT with the water and it truly symbolizes and defines Buffalo's blue-collar identity. It was where civic events were held and was the nucleus of the city!

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

I like it - it's not MY preferred design, but after thinking about it - I don't think I could come up with something that much better and different considering the likely budget, existing structure, functional requirements, and zoning requirements.

And any design I would come up with would have lots of people unhappy anyway for a whole new set of reasons.

As for "historical" - common - a TEN STORY CANAL STRUCTURE?!!! 3 or 4 yes - but THERE IS NO "HISTORIC" PERIOD STRUCTURE OF THAT AREA!!! That's like trying to design a "Hawaiian Style" skyscraper!!! (believe me, we actually had complaints like that!!!) I don't think they had any 40 story grass huts back in the day...

It's not my money, I don't have the funds to do the project, it's not an eyesore - quite the contrary actually.

And who knows - it another twenty years after it's all done, they can always CHANGE IT!!!

At least it will no longer be an eyesore.

And as far as spending the 7 mill, it will be recouped over the years as a tax paying entity where NO TAXES ARE BEING COLLECTED NOW!!!

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

Leave a comment

Buffalo Rising Poll