It is unfortunate that the building is in such disrepair.

However, as an owner of a property directly endangered by the structure's instability, I find it somewhat disturbing that people are so adamant about preventing its demolition. Perhaps they would not be so eager to hold off the demolition if it were their own back yard and home that was in danger.

I sympathize with the concerns of neighbors, and I mean no offense to preservationists, but I own adjoining property, and I'd like to be able to move home as soon as possible. This is costly and inconvenient, and as a realist, I don't think I'll be reimbursed for my expenses in being displaced. I'm sorry that the building has to come down, but if it has to, it has to. I would ask those who are protesting the demolition to consider the safety and interests of those of us whose homes lie under the shadow of a massive, dangerous collapsing brick building before they assemble on the picket line.

About Rivera, I'm pleased to say that he seems to be becoming quite a preservation-minded councilman. I've run into him at four events just in the last couple of months, all preservation-related. And he's not just putting in appearances - he's very engaged (as Colin describes). At one of these events, he joined a dozen of us for a tour of the Kleinhans neighborhood, and stayed on the tour for a full hour and a half. At several points the preservationist leading the tour stopped the group and talked at length about the value of preservation to the neighborhood, and Rivera said that he wished several of his Common Council colleagues were on the tour, seeing and hearing what he was. And that wasn't just lip service - I believe something very much like that was slated to happen last week.

If I relocate to Buffalo, I'd love to move into Rivera's district, so I can vote for him and help keep him in office - he's one of the good guys. It doesn't surprise me to hear that he's working hard on this issue as Colin describes - I hope and pray that he can help broker a solution.

I haven't made anyone homeless for the night. That's on the building's wealthy owner for allowing it to fall apart, and on the city for letting it happen.

And I think the situation you cite is exactly the problem. Average homeowners are given a rough time, while substantial property owners get off relatively easy. That seems entirely backwards to me. It's time for the city to stop going after people for a bit of missing trim on their home, and start going after wealthy people who let their investment properties rot. Even is we can't save the livery, we've shined a bit of light on how backward this whole business can be.

mbhxam & buffaloboy

Let me ask you a question?

Are you a resident of this city?

If answered "yes", why are you not angry about this? I mean, this owner's and city hall's (in)actions, are now resulting in every taxpayer in this city paying for a $300,000 demolition. Not to mention a devastating blow to one of the few intact 115+ year old neighborhoods.

Now, if this owner had conformed with building inspection laws, and the city had enforced them, we would not be facing this tragedy. This needs to change, we cannot continue to let buildings die that can never be replaced. City building codes need to be enforced, and owners held accountable.

This was 100% preventable and sickens me that we will probably lose this amazing building, and city hall nor the building owner will be held accountable.

Bullshit. Buffalo needs to hold it's government to a higher standard.

well according to Buffaloboy14, if we knock it down a magical glass tower will appear on this site (unlike all our other shovel ready sites) and we will be like all other northeastern cities and have zero decay.......;)

I suppose those who fought for the Webb building to stand after its floors were collapsed also made the wrong choice too? I mean we could have 100 shovel ready sites downtown instead of 99......what were they thinking?

Its obvious knocking stuff down with no other plans to build anything there had done wonders for us.

1. The demolition was postponed until Saturday at 8AM. Folks are working to find an engineer to look at it, and a judge to issue an injunction.

2. Rivera was at the rally, working the phone and trying to get Tobe and others on the horn. Rivera's not the problem.

3. The owner has had offers but has turned them down, including one as recently as three months ago.

you need to think about the whole picture here. Yes some people in close proximity to this buildings might be in danger. No one really knows the structural stability of the whole buildings. But without changing the system how is this going to be prevented next time to the countless other people near large old buildings with absentee landlords.

This building is showing just how basackwards our city's ability to enforce its own health and safety laws are. The city is being negligent by allowing structures to fall into such disrepear. It is first and foremost the owners responsibility but it is also the city's to get on their ass to actually do something. If they don't. Then the city should take the property. Offer it up the next day for a dollar or the highest bidder. Lets put property into the hands of people who care.. you know.. the ones that won't let walls collapse on their neighbors.

I would much rather pay for legal fees to take this property and sell it to someone else than to py for the demolition of a structure that is going to change the urban character of a whole block.

well, if they love it so much, how about they form an LLC, pool money together and buy/rehab the place? as i've said before, talk is oh so cheap.

1. Most of the picketers walked or biked home, actually, since it was mostly folks from the area. Thanks for the gratuitous suburbs smack, though.

2. I feel for the people who've been most directly impacted, but I don't see how this is a complicated issue. The city should enforce its laws, and property owners should obey them. Neighborhoods shouldn't be made to pay for their failure to do so.

3. This isn't about "every landlord." It's about one particular landlord who was allowed to ignore his duties under the law, to the detriment of an entire neighborhood. And people did try to work with him -- by buying the property and rehabbing it -- but he preffered to let it sit and rot.

Bob Freudenheim is a disgrace. Old buildings like this are art wonders. Correct me if I'm not wrong but he owned this structure for 30 years, That's a substantial time that should have allowed the roof to be repaired and the walls to be fortified.

He should be indicted for destruction of a building and given jail time.

The City of Buffalo and the local judicial system is at fault for not enforcing all sorts of laws in the city.

It was lucky that a person didn't get killed when the wall collapsed.

What kind of justice system do we have in Buffalo when a Buffalo Bill can hit and run down a women from Milton Ontario? What sort of justice system do we have in WNY that gives probation to the young arsonist who set the fire that nearly killed Firefighter Reed? What kind of justice system do we have that allows buildings like this to deteriorate for generations?

Username, you shouldn't have to aplogize for wanting to get home. All those picketers will get in their cars and drive home, thinking they've done some great deed, while they leave this complicated issue in their rear view mirror. While you figure out where your spending the night, their toughest decision will be where to stop for Sushi on the way back to Williamsville.

A lot of good has occurred in the city over the last few years. Focusing so much effort on a building that is so far gone is counter productive, and makes the 'preservationist' appear out of touch, limiting your influence where you really could be making a difference (buildings that still have hope). Stop making it sound like every landlord has some 'superplan' to let their property rot so they can get the city to tear it down. Most landlords are investing in their property, and improving a good percentage of the city. Working with these landowners, not against them, is the only way you'll prevent this type of problem in the future.

Poor spelling there BB14. Now go get your homework done.

I'm glad you 'feel' for the guy you've made homeless for the night. Only looking at one side of the issue does keep it less complicated, but it also makes it much less likely you're going to find a real solution.

Have you gone down and spent a day in housing court? 95% of the court's time is tied up with poor homeowners barely keeping their heads above water, trying to keep some minimal living standard. They get in fights with the neighbors, then call code enforcement on each other. Would you throw these people in jail? Is there a difference between this building and one on the east side?

I think it's unlikely he skates from any demolition bill. Unless they put on an act in housing court, it's my belief that they do a pretty thorough financial check to see if the amount paid to the city, per month, is in accordance with the person's assets.

I'd prefer to see buildings like these stay. Personally, I have money in properties older than this one. Increasing inspections raises the cost of ownership, and in the long run causes more problems like this, not less.

BB14 = me speak English good

magnificent building from old Buffalo... Hoping something can be done to save it

Let's just kill Bob, ok, lets burn him at the steak and eat his heart. Because this is a terrible thing, right?. Lets kill his wife too and if he has a dog let's kill that too, let's dig up his parents and kill them again. Let's kill every friend he ever had because this is serious stuff, I mean it involves an empty derlict building and god knows Buffalo will turn out for an empty derlict building any day of the week. Oh did they just kill like the 33rd person on the East Side? Thank god it didn't involve a derlict building because then, gosh we'd do something about it....

I hope it poors out during this tree hugging meet and greet

You mean we could have had a shinny new glass tower were the web is? And instead we have to settle for a beautifully restored historic building full of upscale tenants?

Well anyway, a shinny new tower should appear any day now on the two parking lots next to Web,

GOOD LUCK!!! I'D BE THERE IF I COULD!!! I'M AT WORK UNTIL 8 :(

We should not be taking BuffaloBoy14 seriously.

1. The demolition was postponed until Saturday at 8AM. Folks are working to find an engineer to look at it, and a judge to issue an injunction.

2. Rivera was at the rally, working the phone and trying to get Tobe and others on the horn. Rivera's not the problem.

3. The owner has had offers but has turned them down, including one as recently as three months ago.

GOOD LUCK!!! I'D BE THERE IF I COULD!!! I'M AT WORK UNTIL 8 :(

We spent a few days two weeks ago trying to come up with a concept design for this building. My partner toured the building and the pictures he took were probably the last befor the collapse. There were some vintage (although ruined) cars still being stored in parts of the upper floors (not too smart). There were signs of failure in the structure and my partner cautiously backed out of the building. The structural system is this building depends on the third floor trusses to support the second and first floor.......very unusual.

Our concept was workable and would have resulted in eight or nine apartment units, plus first floor, indoor parking. The disrespect the building owner showed the building is evident. Much like the WEBB Building though, we feel this building can be saved. It is not any worse off and is every bit as valuable to Buffalo's history.

Carmina Wood Morris, PC

is there realistically a chance that this is gonan turn into something if its saved or is this just going to be a hard fought battle to save a building so it can rot for another 30 yrs?...im not being sarcastic i actually want to know