Real Estate December 3, 2011 12:20 AM

Ellicott Development's Demo Plans on St. Paul Mall Delayed

Ellicott Development’s Demo Plans on St. Paul Mall Delayed

Ellicott Development is seeking City approvals to demolish ten residential properties the firm has acquired along St. Paul Mall.  The residences are adjacent to the Ellicott-owned Our Lady of Lourdes complex and are located between Main and Ellicott streets at the edge of the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus.  The Preservation Board, which reviews all city demolition permits, tabled the application at its Thursday meeting.

The ten St. Paul Mall properties were acquired by Ellicott over the last year at a premium price of $709,800.  Purchase prices ranged from $47,500 to $110,000.  For six properties that had historical sales data on the City of Buffalo property information page, previous sales ranged from $3,500 to $48,000. 

Elllicott Development owns all but four homes on the street.  There are six vacant lots on the block, all but one owned by the City.  Properties on N. St. Paul Mall are privately-owned as is the Wendy's restaurant at the southeast corner of St. Paul Mall and Main Street.

stpaulmap.PNGAccording to William Paladino, Chief Executive Officer of Ellicott Development, the company does not have immediate plans for the properties. 

"These houses are not the highest and best use of that site," says Paladino. 

According to Paladino, the structures are not in good condition and knocking them down will reduce the company's tax bill.  The Preservation Board was told taxes are approximately $610/year for each of the properties.

Ellicott Development bought the Our Lady of Lourdes convent and school from Prayer & Praise Fellowships Inc. in 2009 for $370,000.  A year later, the circa-1898 church at 1115 Main Street was purchased for $40,000.  It closed in 1993.

Paladino says that his company plans to eventually redevelop the Our Land of Lourdes complex and notes the "church is staying."  He says his company has no specific plans for the property at this point and that it is "on the back burner" as Ellicott now has a "full plate" with a number of other projects underway or starting soon (future post).

Entry image by David Torke at FixBuffalo.

View image

Comments

Leave a comment

"According to Paladino, the structures are not in good condition" . So they offered "premium" prices to buy? BS! Paladino should be forced to PUT them "in good condition", seeing as he KNEW they weren't. Don't play into his evil plot to force the hold-outs to sell, by demolishing the rest of the block.

This is utter nonsense. How much of this city must be turned into parking lots before we scream: ENOUGH! Stop appeasing the rapists who pose as Buffalo's saviors. The list of Vampires is about 12; if you choose the names, they'll probably match my 12.

Score: 1 ( 27 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Agreed. These could be perfectly usable, adorable homes for professionals working at the medical corridor. Spruce them up, add top-of-the-line appliances and amenities and rent/sell them. They are the appropriate density for the area....

There needs to be a new rule in DT Buffalo: if a developer plans to demolish, there needs to be a iron clad redevelopment plan in place (which does not necessarily ensure that the dev. will get the demo rights).

replied to MrGreenJeans
Score: 7 ( 25 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

"These houses are not the highest and best use of that site," says Paladino.

Surprising talk from someone with no alternative plans for the site -- we're told. And not even plans to make plans.

Score: 5 ( 17 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Path of progress, folks. Medical corridor is right there. I'd have no objection to holding up demo until another acceptable plan is in place, but it isn't for nothing that he wants to demolish and not for nothing that he paid premium dollars. He bought the underlying dirt so that he could develop it. I'm interested to see what his eventual development becomes. If it's a ten story apartment or medical building built to the sidewalk, most of us wouldn't object, probably.

But I wouldn't object in the least to retaining the houses until such time as an acceptable alternative plan is in place. I think demo now is a tactic not only to free him up in the future, but to put terrific pressure on those who have not yet sold. If there is no demo now, those other owners have great leverage to demand huge dollars later, potentially squashing any development deal. But if he demos now, those other homeowners no longer live in a neighborhood, they just live in a parking lot. Not very fair to them.

Score: 11 ( 15 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

if that land is that fantastically important to him, then he -should- pay "huge dollars." where is it written that paladino is entitled to make money on real estate but ordinary joe is not?

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

@Grad94: who says ordinary Joe is not intitled to make money on real estate? Not me.

Those remaining owners should make money. They have something he wants. Good for them. They should maximize that. It's just a tricky thing to do, that's all. Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered, so the saying goes. The trick is to get as much as they can without killing the project. Charge too much and they get cut out or they quash the deal. Charge too little and they leave money on the table for no reason.

replied to grad94
Score: 5 ( 7 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Bini>"I think demo now is a tactic not only to free him up in the future, but to put terrific pressure on those who have not yet sold."

If what you and Greenjeans are suggesting is true, I hope the people living there are aware they have some cards to play as well.

I'd strongly suggest that the holdouts have their houses, or the entire block, nominated for local landmark status. That will negate any threats of demolition and give Ellicott good reason to pay these people what they are asking.

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

landmark status could be a double edged sword. It could prevent demo and stop the owners from profiting from a sale to Paladino.

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

Local landmark status!!!!!!!!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

replied to Armchair MBA
Score: 7 ( 17 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

bini>"But if he demos now, those other homeowners no longer live in a neighborhood, they just live in a parking lot. Not very fair to them."

Well, Ellicott Dev has no obligation to continue renting out the 10 houses indefinitely, just to keep them obeying safety codes, right?
If they become unrented, the neighborhood of that street could become 4 (at most) occupied houses, 10 vacant houses, and a few vacant lots. Arguably, is swap of 10 empty houses for 10 more vacant lots after demo really much (or any) worse/unfair toward owners of the other 4?

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

@Whatever:

While EDC may have no obligation to rent these, it's not as though this is a foreign business to Paladino. His company rents out residential as one of its main lines of business. These could stay low rent, but flexible. He could easily place a stipulation in the leases that management reserves the right to terminate the leases upon, say, 90 days notice (and sweeten the deal, perhaps, by offering free rent for the last 60 if such a cancellation of the leases is forthcoming). It wouldn't make him a mint, but he'd make some return on his investment while awaiting the bigger deal. It wouldn't harm him to do so, and it would preserve a viable little neighborhood until such time that redevelopment is imminent.

I suspect he won't pursue this avenue only for fear that he will somehow be opposed in the future in his quest to demolish. Toward that end, were I a common councilman, for example, I would entertain a resolution supporting demo of all the structures he owns at that sight at any time that a new development of 'x' square feet and 'y' percentage of the land is in place for that parcel.

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

True, EDC has a lot of residential units, although if I'm not mistaken usually not in the older house category.

I suppose your approach's assumption that it would be at least slightly profitable to keep them rented out for say 5 years or so would depend on the houses' conditions, how much fixing/maintaining they'd need, and what amount of tenant demand they have on that street.

Granted, if City Hall won't allow them to demo, EDC would still be obligated to maintain houses enough to meet building codes… but the question remains would rent amounts exceed extra costs to make them sufficiently desirable.

Another question is on what legal basis can the City forbid demo of these type of non-landmarks which aren't in a preservation district?

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

You know, at this time of year, you sound like Mr. Potter. You and the libertarian crowd must boo George Bailey during broadcasts of It's a Wonderful Life.

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

Those seem like valid points to me, I'm not sure what your post there contributes to the discussion.

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

Meh. I'm just figuring maybe a spambot takes over his login sometimes and spews a non sequitur like that.

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

Paul that movie is obviously a socialist propaganda flick.

You have big brother, in the form of Joseph and Clarence, trampling individual liberty by bailing out failed savings and loan baron George Bailey. Let the market, and job creators like Potter, decide who jumps off bridges and who doesn't.

Maybe Mel Gibson could create a remake of this movie only without all of the communism.

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

that's pretty funny. good job.

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

wow...have any of you been in these homes before??? they're hideous. good riddance. just like the housing across from this street, on michigan next to city honors (the red ones). these homes were not built to last, they do not hold any historical significance whatsoever.
this entire neighborhood is evolving rapidly and just because there is not an immediate plan for reuse, i think it bodes well for the area long term. remember the church paladino wanted to demolish next door?? maybe there will be value now to restore it for some kind of use. across the street from there on main st there is a pair of apartment buildings either with plans for a rehab or currently undergoing one. there are plans to build a medical facility on the corner of main and high, just a block away.
i dont think for a minute paladino is sitting atop some perch saying "haha...i'll show them"...there has been tremendous amounts of development on ellicott street from beginning to end..ECC, hotel lafayette, m.wile expansion, medical campus walk, the building behind buffalo general and the science charter rehab. i believe EDC sees value (they rehabbed the school btw) in prepping the land for future use. they're not tearing down whitney st or robie st or something like that. if they buils a family dollar on this site, i'll eat crow and keep my mouth shut from now on but i really doubt that will happen.
the irony here is that so many people may bash carl for proposing to knock down housing that rented to low income people and had absentee owners, yet you all have a problem with him renting space to government agencies downtown which probably benefitted these very people.

if this chaps your a** so much go to him and propose a reuse for this street, and bring cash too, you'll need that, the way the science charter did for that eb green building they just restored. it too was sitting vacant and rotting, yet historically significant.

Score: 2 ( 16 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Are there people living in any of these houses? Especially if they are owner occupied, I think it is absurd that someone is proposing to demolish three quarters of the neighborhood without anything taking its place. How would you like it if someone bought up half of your block and proposed to level it and leave it a gravel lot?

This business with wanting to reduce the property tax burden. First of all, it's certainly not in the city's interest to grant a demolition permit for that reason alone. Second, maybe this is a good example of where a land value tax would help.

replied to elias
Score: 11 ( 17 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

let them knock down three quarters of my neighborhood and see how quickly the parkside community association is on it, and thats the problem. this is a transitional street and always has been. it does not have anyone organized to make it a better community. these types of neighborhoods have always come and gone, because the owners do not live there. three quarters of the neighborhood homes are owned by EDC what does that tell you.
now they come forward with a proposal with an open ended long term goal and people are having a cow. what if it was rocco termini who came up with this proposal? would your response be different?
say for example they proposed knocking down three quarters of oberlin street(which the city already has btw), and that neighborhood has absolutely nothing going for it. not oberlin, or gittere or sycamore or ruhland, that wouldn't be a problem because the immediate neighborhood has zero growth. now this neighborhood has a tremendous opportunity ahead of it because not only the medical campus growth but also the preservation aspect which includes properties on main, ellicott, best, northampton, coe, and the fruit belt. these specific homes are out of place in so many ways, they're actually doing you a favor.
the tax thing is relative because something will be built in its place and pay taxes and it will all work out in the end because the neighborhood is hot right now.
maybe a land value tax is right on, talk to your councilman, until then, they have every right to their properties whether we like it or not.

replied to JSmith
Score: 3 ( 7 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Again, 'Let's knock down two blocks of working buildings with no plans for replacement'....WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THIS CITY'S DEVEOPMENT???????????? No vision, just knock it down has been proven a problem in this town for decades, just look at our current downtown today and thank our leaders for the past 60 years as to a why we have many blocks with NOTHING on them.

Score: 2 ( 12 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This is an interesting block. By the look of it, it appears to be a mid-century modernist spin on adaptive reuse. They took some 1950-70s concepts, such as visual uniformity, decorative slabs of concrete, and pedestrian malls, and applied them to the existing fabric.

That would have made this place a cutting edge development for its time as large scale slum clearance and new construction was all the rage (see Pilgrim Village on the other side of Ellicott Street).

Score: 1 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

ARM: you're right that they were cutting edge for their time. It was an unusual (at least for Buffalo) project. I remember this being redeveloped--early seventies, I'm pretty sure. I thought it was the dumbest thing I'd ever seen, having no appreciation of older housing being saved. My parents, though, were very happy about what was being done here, rehabbing older houses and adding amenities like parking and a little pedestrian mall. They thought that it was a very cost effective, less wasteful way to develop, especially compared with all the Urban Renewal. Once in a while they turned out to right.

replied to Armchair MBA
Score: 1 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I'll have to look for some early 70s newspaper articles on this place when I get some time to look at microfilm. I'd like to know more about how this was perceived and the developer's rationale but google is no help. Thanks for your input though.

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

The original houses here date to about 1910. The renovations occurred in 1975 under the direction of Stieglitz, Stieglitz, Tries. Have fun on your research.

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

Thanks Paul. That will help narrow things down.

1910 is around the same time the church was built. I wonder if the congregation built both as part of the same development?

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

i've often thought that same thing. it was an adaptive reuse back when bulldozers overruled all other options.

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

My take on this - Paldino's company treats land as a commodity. Commodities have no value beyond the unimporved material cost. This is fine for lumps of gold and bushels of wheat or train loads of coal. Gold that has been made into a ring and passed down through generations gains value far beyond the basic material cost. Paladino sees no value in the herritage of a building or place. That is why his company will buy and hold a property and often invest nothing into its maintenance. Why would you polish a ring you intend to melt down? Pawn brokers and metal merchants don't care about the herritage value. Places for parking cars or selling cheap household products don't need the personal value of grandma's wedding ring.

Score: 12 ( 16 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

A one block street surrounded by parking lots is not viable and its unlikely that a new neighborhood will get built with single family or duplex's.

This does not upset me. Id rather the medical/research campus grow and residential neighborhoods that are viable and do have something worth preserving actually do get preserved.

The Masten District (City Fields, Masten Armory, City Honors, etc) is but a few blocks away and still viable.

Humboldt District (Humboldt Park, Science Magnet, Science Museum, etc) is but a few blocks away and that is still viable.

Across Main Street in Allentown and Linnwood...that is gentrifying.

Just dont demolish our Lady of Lourdes de Notre Dame

Score: 1 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

re: Our Lady of Lourdes:

I'll wager 10:1 that gets demolished. He's carving out a bigger site here. Any church is difficult to redevelop into anything economically attractive, but this one maybe more so given its already sorry condition. He didn't buy it for the church building. He bought the land. The size of the parcel he's accumulated here shows that he's thinking bigger. That church was had for $40k because of all the deterioration prior to his ownership. He didn't buy it to fix it up. Those wishing to prevent demo will have a steep uphill climb, imho.

As for my opinion about the demo: if he builds something big enough here and interesting enough to add to the density of the neighborhood and interest of Main Street, I have no objection to losing that church or the houses.

replied to paulsobo
Score: 4 ( 8 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Not often I disagree with you, Bini, but in this sense I do: the only silver lining to the stripping of Lourdes (gut wrenching to see the interior photos) is that the present "blank slate" interior may actually make the building easier to repurpose and reuse.

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

Our lady of Lourdes surrounded by parking or empty land is a very shallow preservation vctory. The cynisim of demolition fo tave a few hundred dollars in taxes is pretty sad.

replied to paulsobo
Score: 4 ( 8 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

There is nothing real notable about these homes, its in an area that is likely going to be expanded upon, and we'd all have better luck forcing a nice new development then trying to fix whats there. Also there is allot of housing stock in Buffalo, when we knock some of it down we increase the value of the rest. Getting these homes out of circulation increases our ability to save other, more important homes.

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

if demolition is that beneficial, then the neighborhoods with the most demolition should have the highest value, right? and the neighborhoods with the least should have the lowest, right?

well, surprise surprise, the most intact neighborhoods with the most effort to save even the "nothing notable" houses, have the highest property values.

so demolition isn't exactly the value-added proposition that you suggest. or are you saying that some people just have to tolerate value-diminished neighborhoods, where houses are thrown away like used kleenex, so that other people can benefit from value-enhanced neighborhoods?

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

Grad: Yes I’m suggesting we’d be better off with half the homes worth twice as much, in a walkable neighborhood then every other house being abandoned on a street. I don’t know how you could reason it backwards. Your logic completely baffles me, I truly don’t understand how you come to conclusions.

replied to grad94
Score: -3 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

There is nothing notable about most buildings in most cities. Its when you put them together in a pedestrian oriented people scaled assembly that places become notable. If demolition was the best rout to "forcing" something better then Buffalo would truely be an extraordinary place wouldn't it.

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

Steel: I am once again astounded by your compete lack of understanding of economics. There are more house then people who want to live in buffalo. This means all the houses are worth allot. You can buy say one of those house for 50k, rent it out for $750 a month and having a wonderful ROI, then “toss it away like a used Kleenex” and leave with a heft bit of money.

5k upfront, 30 year mortgage at 4.5%, $182 + 50(tax) making overhead 517 profit per month. After 6 years the building is completely paid off if he put that all toward the mortgage, which you wouldn’t in a slum lord and taking cash out.
Since there are some many homes, you can rinse and repeated in Buffalo. Section 8 means you don’t run out of tenets. If you do the minimum and dig into your line a little bit you can get those checks straight from the government every week.

As long as we have the housing stock for a city of 500k and we have 250k people this will keep happening. So the solution is having less homes or have more people. Of the two, having less homes is the one we have control over. And in this case its taking out a whole street. Now you don’t have to plow it or do anything on that street and there are no buildings so we won’t see criminal actions being based out of abandoned housing. While I agree with a few other people, his taxes should be pegged against what he paid + the cost of demo, since that is the fair market value of that land.

Isn’t this your whole thing steel? You don’t want houses spread out all where we have to maintain everything between them. These things will increase density back into the walkable neighborhoods, or people will leave Buffalo, Gentrification at it full power.

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

Agreed. Abundant, cheap housing stock is a blessing and a curse. If we are about strategic shrinkage, which we must be by necessity, isn't it better to get rid of whole neighborhoods and the infrastructure imbedded in them than perpetuating a sporadic sprinkling of housing, much of which is unoccupied? I realize a few are occupied, but eye, there is the rub.

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

How would the new Buffalo Green Code treat this site?

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

There is no excuse to tear these down with no plans for the site. Buffalo has too much vacant land already. We can have a discussion about the relative merits of the replacement proposal once there is one. Glad the Preservation Board is holding its ground.

Score: 6 ( 8 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

What does Buffalo's "Cheif of Economic Development" have to say about all this?????.....oh yeah, he just got ARRESTED last week!!!! .....need we say more about our so called 'leadership'???????

Score: -5 ( 13 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

um, if you're talking about wanamaker, he is a -former- city official. left the employ of city hall in 2008.

replied to Lego1981
Score: 3 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Hmmmm, interesting. Wonder if Carl knows I'm overseeing the redevelopment of the two apartment buildings across the street...

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

I can't imagine he cares.

or even knows who you are.

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

Who is he?

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

Look at it this way - the longer the houses sit vacant, the more crime and decay for the existing owners. It's a squeeze play to make them sell cheap.

I don't particularly like this since we have made tremendous strides in turning the two buildings on Main around (directly across the street). Now, instead of a busy-body, nosy neighbor, I am viewing this as a threat to a business development.

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

not sure they're all vacant. in fact, i bet they're close to fully occupied, unless carl evicted everyone from the properties he now owns. i know someone ho lives there and raised their family there.

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

This is exactly the problem, we have not been able to balance "property rights" with the rights of the neighbors and community. The trend so far has been to favor the speculators and profiteers while ignoring the cost to the other stakeholders in the community.

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

Suggestion for new BRO poll: how long will it take before these Crisa-like spam postings are prevented?

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

Several years ago I walked down this street, more out of curiosity than anything else, and I recall what appeared to be early 20th century homes that had been renovated in the late 1970’s or early 1980’s.

Almost an early form of a gated community for low income.

I am surprised that so many of the homes have been purchased by Mr. Paladino. However, the statement “Purchase prices ranged from $47,500 to $110,000” leads me to believe the owners were more than eager to sell and Mr. Paladino bought these homes at market rate so these are legitimate sales.

Mr. Paladino, whether we like it or not, is a businessman who is in business to make money.

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

My father lived on that street in the 60's during his childhood before it was redeveloped. Enjoyed it and hear stories about it. If there was a concrete plan, then that would be good but the fact that there's "no specific plans for the property and Paladino is involved, I can't help but to be skeptical.

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

Paladino really is a schmuck. Lets buy out and evict everybody, tear down their homes and then do nothing with the land while I wait for someone to offer me a good price for it. What? The area looks like crap with another open vacant lot? Who cares...

No demo work should be done in this city without a concrete redevlopment plan in place, financed and ready to go. This site should by all rights be fairly appeasing to all sorts of different development should the green light for demo be issued, so I really dont see why or how Ellicott couldnt or shouldnt have a plan in place.

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

Who is 1238 group llc?

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

Well what does "captain parking lot" Carl Paladino have planned for the redevelopment of the St Paul Mall housing site?

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

Be ye leery!

Paladino without a plan . . . very unlikely.

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

I feel the same way, minus the "be ye leery" part. I guarantee that he has long term plans for this area. He's just not going to tell the public and I dont blame him.

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

Leave a comment

Buffalo Rising Poll