They always find a way to light the city up very nicely when Sunday Night and Monday Night Football are in town. We should try to keep that rolling on a daily basis, point well taken.

I agree with the writer. I'd also like to add that the Rand building should be lit up at night as well! I've seen old postcards from the '30's or maybe '40's that shows off what a brilliant addition that building is to the Buffalo skyline.

Energy conservation should be number one on any building owners list. The way to do that would be to install solar-powered extrerior lighting. Charged during the day to shine brightly at night. I would think that these upgrades would pay for themselves very quickly considering the rising cost of energy. There should be no reason our skyline isn't lit brightly EVERY night.

silent majority is right. with uitility cost being what they are david sweet will never light up the rand at night. it would cost to much. but install some solar power lights......and there you go. i bet it would help with the marketing of his building as well....draw some attention to it.....might help with some of his vacant space.

good point sm.

I am not sure why more building owners (especially those with flat roofs) are not taking advantage of solar energy. Obviously, Buffalo is not the "ideal" location for solar energy, but it can still help a lot with energy costs, even with the large upfront cost of installation and purchase of the panels.

It would be nice to see one of these new builds or rehabs try it out and set a good example. I think the roof of the newly coined Avant is pretty ideal actually.

on the scheme of things, its all about infrastructure isnt it!

street lights, sidewalks, curbs, paved streets, cobblestone streets, water mains, sewars, trees and shrubs, cleaned gutters, painted (or atleast unpeeled) buildings, etc.

Whether its at the level of the state, county, municipality or property owner...it just doesnt seem like the majority of people of this city will spend a dime fo do even the most simple and basic of maintenance.

Furthermore, it seems oblivious that it benefits them even if they dont care that it benefits the community.

And this is beyond the flipping and abominable neglectful property owners that want to demolish at the taxpayer expense.

while the little things matter for the overall appearance of our city's skyline, our lighting issues are like salt on a stale kimelwick roll. At this point we are seeing positive growth but a lot needs to be done in order to diminish our city's stale roll aesthetics.

The edges are soft in development gravy and all of our recent projects confirm that there is an apatite to move away from the suburbs. From dunn tire park to pearl street, nothing is advertising how fresh and relaxed our city life can be. We have some hidden jewels within the city and no i'm not talking about me treasures. Like most of us hopeful comedians i am tired of having every joke start and end with the hsbc tower. Once we get out of its shadow things will once again become interesting.

now of course i am completely delusional but at some point you would think that the heart of downtown would be a respectable address. I'm putting the empty lots between Washington and main on notice.

about solar power, buffalo actually gets more 'days of sun' then a lot of other cities, alot has to do with the lake and weather patterns, but surprisingly buffalo does have a high % of sunny days

While I agree that solar power would be a great way to go, tower owners in cities all across the United States are lighting their downtown buildings up, even with energy costs what they are today.

Truth be told, to a building owner, it pays to make their building stand out from the rest, even if that means paying additional money in electric costs. Lighting a building up at night gives the building a signature appeal, which means that they can charge more money for their leases. Many companies love to be able to say "I'm in the XYZ building", and have people know exactly what building they’re talking about. They pay a premium to be in these signature buildings. Also, a headquarters building is often a portrayed reflection of what that corporation wants to look like. If they are in a shabby building, from a marketing perspective, people may think it’s a shabby company. If they are in a 50 story tower, that is the best looking building on the skyline, well, you can guess what people will think. Why do you think banks (except the banks in Buffalo, for whatever reason) almost always have the nicest buildings, and most contemporary designs? Google image search Bank of America in Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas, San Fran or Seattle, Wachovia in Philly and Charlotte, PNC and Mellon in Pittsburgh, Key Bank in Cleveland, or Citi and Chase in NYC, just to name a few. A Successful company wants to convey a successful message through their buildings, and they take great pride in that.

Simply put, lighting up a building gives that building an identity at night, when no one can see the architecture that gives that same building its identity during the day. Downtown buildings in Buffalo, are, but shouldn't be the exception, and high energy costs are no excuse for that.

The Central Terminal tower and exterior clocks are lit every night and we're a non-profit. It's really not that expensive to do some modest lighting.

sb16, I'm glad you were amused, but we're not talking floodlights and computer controlled illumination here. We're talking in the range of $30 per month to light the top of the tower and the lights. It's an effective way to keep the building in the public eye.

It's not often that I post here, but this observation is a bit disturbing. "The skyline looks so trashy when it COULD be looking SO beautiful, and be of inspiration to all of us city dwellers (and visitors). The disrepair and unkempt nature of the skyline represents a sort of neglect, and dare I say, signs of a medio-city if you will......... and it’s been this way for months!" is a very broad statement. Look around at the growth we are going through and have some vision, please take a look at some images of the skyline here http://www.pbase.com/panomaniac/skylines the first is a night shot, granted from last year, but I don't think we look that bad, some things will always be in flux. Mike Miller has it right, there doesn't have to be a large outlay of capital funds to get most of this done. I'll stop now, please look at the images and enjoy our city.

Pano, I agree with you. The city skyline doesn't look so bad at night. Sure it could be better.

I still remember and seen pictures online to prove it, when Main Place Tower used to have lights goin up all four corners at night. And even the Brisbane Building not too long ago was all lit up on the top floors, think the light fixtures are still there, but not being used. And the Rand building is in desperate need of lights, it looks deserted at night.