50 Court Street Project Revised

50 Court Street Project Revised

Story Options

Ellicott Development's planned office building on Court Street has shrunk by three floors. The City Planning Board approved scaled-back plans for 50 Court Street last week. The now eight-story building will include 184,000 sq.ft. of Class-A office space and 147 parking spaces on a portion of the first floor and one underground level. Ellicott Development CEO Carl Paladino says he expects to break ground on the project next spring.

Construction of the building has been delayed due to a lawsuit by Main Place Liberty Group (MPLG). MPLG filed suit claiming the new development would negatively impact existing downtown office buildings and that the City should have accepted their higher offer for the City-owned land needed for the project. MPLG sought to build a parking ramp on the site. The case was dismissed and Ellicott has since returned the favor filing suit against MPLG seeking compensation for damages incurred due to the delay.

The office building is proposed to be built on what is now a surface parking lot on the south side of Court Street between Pearl Street and Franklin Street. 50 Court Street will consist of a total of 241,372 sq.ft., including approximately 184,000 sq.ft. of commercial and office space and approximately 57,600 sq.ft. of parking and common area. Floors four through eight will each be 26,721 sq.ft., amongst the largest floor plates downtown.

The building, designed by Kideney Architects, will have a glass curtain wall design. A light-colored, three-story stone façade will identify the front of the building at its base. The building will step back 15 feet at the fourth floor as required by City code. The main entrance will be located on Court Street with a secondary access along Franklin Street.

According to Ellicott Development, several tenants are interested in leasing space in the building.

Get Connected: Ellicott Development: (716) 854-0060

DSC_0195c.jpg

Rock Harbor

What Others Have To Say

  1. STEEL

    1 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 00:35

    That hole has to be filled in.

    What's up with that stupid set-back rule?

  2. Andrew

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 01:05

    Yes a gaping hole on the way to city hall. I really hope he plans on allowing first floor tenants. Its a very high profile location. He shouldnt have too much of a problem signing someone. Its not the worst building ever. I too have never heard of that set back rule. why doesnt the court tower have to do it? Lets hope he actually does break ground this spring

  3. chrishawley

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 01:08

    The step-back rule is another example of the hang-over we still have from having a zoning code from 1951.

  4. paragon

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 09:49

    This will go a long way in filling in our gap-toothed downtown, as will the new court house on Niagara Square. Idea: add 10 floors of residential on top of the office space creating a true multi use building with life 24-7. This location downtown deserves a much taller building. Of course this is easy for me to say while this isn't my money!! Kudos to Carl Paladino. (I hope he wins his lawsuit)

  5. sbrof

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 09:49

    yeah those types of zoning codes were popular and functional in allowing sunlight and air to reach the streets in more densly built cities. Both important factors in creating comfortable spaces but in a city like Buffalo, where 50% of the land in our downtown they are unecessary. Plus starting the setback on the 4th floor of a structure is ridiculous. Usually they are talking about 10+ stories before setbacks are required in other cities. 4 just goes to show how our codes are trying to be like the big boys... when they really shouldn't be.

  6. buffaloed

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 09:49

    That building seems to actually look nice next to the courthouse.

    I think the city-court building doesnt need the setback because it does not occupy the entire block right up to the sidewalk, as this seems to do. I don't know for sure though.

  7. kooksapalooza

    1 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 09:54

    sweet....one parking lot down

  8. Andrew

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 10:12

    Pragon, Good point. I know everyone is sick of hearing this but why not throw on a floor or two of residential on top. Its not like the man doesn't have the experience to do it. I cant imagine them not selling right in the heart of down town in a new building like that. If I were a lawyer that worked down town you bet I'd be first in line for a condo in that location. The only thing that is going to turn our downtown around is if more people live down there.

  9. zamedy154

    1 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 10:21

    Build baby build! I have always saw that lot as one of the biggest gaping eyesores downtown. It is such an amazing view to look from Lafayette Square to City Hall... yet that parking lot always took away from it. And even walking past it, perhaps on your way to one of the forementioned sites, is just plain unpleasant. It just takes away from the overall experience of being downtown... in the heart of the city. This coupled with the new courthouse in Niagara Square will fill two big holes in the downtown core. And perhaps just as important, they will help to start changing the perception of the city, among visitors and natives.

  10. bison716

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 11:12

    I LIKE IT! Build, Build, Build. Great location for some offices. Lets hope we get this started this spring. 2011... remember that year, and when it gets here compare our skyline to how it was this time last year.

  11. bison716

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 11:14

    I LIKE IT! Build, Build, Build. Great location for some offices. Lets hope we get this started this spring. 2011... remember that year, and when it gets here compare our skyline to how it was this time last year.

  12. onestarmartin

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 11:51

    what a stupid lawsuit, carl should now sue them for his setback.

  13. MJWorthington

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 12:23

    he tried too sue them back, I think it was dismissed?

    The building does work well with coarthouse farther down.

    Nothing wrong with a set-back. They work rather well on City Hall in the background ;) any one going to research the actual code?

  14. Ike

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 12:23

    WCP, or anyone else with some info care to enlighten us as to why the City Planning Board felt they had to knock down 3 floors?

    What is the criticism? How is that area negatively effected by 3 extra floors? I'm guessing they were responding to pressure applied by the clowns at MPLG. What a joke

  15. bflorox

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 12:45

    There won't be a demand or need to build up as long as it is so easy to build out (here and the 'burbs). If I could snap my fingers and change legislation I would: Stop new commercial construction (unless it serves the immediate locale) in the 'burbs until the city was occupied to some % (say 90%); Either provide an incentive (not fond of that) to re-hab existing buildings and/or impose a penalty or premium to construct new within a certain radius of existing unoccupied buildings so that it is no longer cheaper to build new. I know that's a simplified solution to a complex problem but my point is that something (many things) needs to be done to curb sprawl and encourage the stabilization and growth of the CBD.

  16. Buffalo21stcentury

    1 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 13:04

    I think its rather stupid and short sighted...build the extra 3 floors as intended

    Look at the M&T Building on Delaware which they are kicking themselves for not making it taller....

    Both the M&T Building on Delaware on the Court Street Building are playing it to conservative....downtown is underdeveloped...and it can absorb this space....

  17. phrank

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 13:31

    Won't it now be actually shorter than the parking ramp behind it? That speaks volumes about our priorities.

  18. STEEL

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 15:45

    Whoa,

    phrank sounds just like me

  19. DPH

    2 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 18:15

    It's good to see progress in Downtown Buffalo, and glad to see Carl and Kideney hooking up on a nice project. I have great respect for both, and they will do a great job.

    As far as the step-back zoning ordinance, this is being implemented in other cities as well (new or old code). Here in Sarasota, Florida, the new Downtown Code requires a 12' step back above the fourth level. I'm not for or against this code at this time, but have not heard a great reason for this yet. (I've heard explanations, but no good ones yet, ok....I guess I'm against it unitil I hear a reason other than some world reknown planner pushing their views on municipalities...but that's another story..)

    For adding residential on the upper levels; this is not always feasible on a structure like this. In my experience, you need to incorporate other building features to add residential above an office structure like this (utilities, condo documents, etc...). These components add costs that may not agree with their proforma, and likely that Carl would not want competition within his own projects (residential sales/units). I'm sure Carl has reviewed every potential program / use for this property, and he will do what makes sense at the current time. Kideney is also one of the best to help assist him in making the right decision, and i'm sure they've shared many options.

    Keep up the good work Buffalo. Each time I visit I see progress, good progress!! (too bad it is happening after I left )

  20. zamedy

    1 ratings12345
    Oct 28th 2008, 19:24

    I believe the parking ramp behind the building is 9 stories. But parking ramp levels are typically not has high as each floor in a building.. at least the first floor. I'm pretty sure that even though the Paladino building will technically be 8 stories tall, it will still be as tall as the parking ramp, if not taller. Either way... it's a lot better than having a parking lot smack dab in the middle of our downtown.

  21. impressingagent

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 29th 2008, 01:33

    All right, I am glad this is finally being built! It is definitely a fitting architectural style and perhaps it will succeed without the extra floors? We do have enough complementary history, its too bad the developers can ‘t always see eye to eye. I came up with a sweet architectural design for this location. The liberty building can even make Victoria’s secret look tacky. Such an adventurous page for our city's chapter.

  22. sonyactivision

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 29th 2008, 11:42

    It sure looks good and will be a great addition to Downtown. Having fewer floors is a bummer, but if Paladino pulls this off, in this economy, my hat's off to him!

  23. MJWorthington

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 29th 2008, 12:19

    As for this block, I think I can recall when the whole block was cleared. this 1966 Aerial still shows the block intact so I'm not sure when it was cleared though. Aerial photography from the past to the present!

    I must admit there was some good foresight in putting the ramp mid block with store fronts along the west facade. It left room for Erie County Family court to the south and this to the west. now if we can only fill in across the street where a cool building was demoed for the never used SE Convention Center entrence.

  24. JSmith

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 30th 2008, 09:38

    Ike, this didn't have anything to do with the Planning Board. Paladino scaled back the project on his own. There were previous reports that he might try to shrink it all the way to 5 floors. The reason given is that the delay resulting from the lawsuits caused him to lose interested tenants to other buildings like Avant.

    Hopefully, this will actually get built next year. It's been "in the works" for what, 5 years?

  25. Quinn

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 31st 2008, 08:18

    You know what's even greater than a new building eliminating another parking lot/hole in our streetscape? You didn't have to knock down another historic building to get it. What a concept.

  26. sonyactivision

    0 ratings12345
    Oct 31st 2008, 19:50

    Now if only we can get Swan St.'s 'streetwall' back.

Would you like to subscribe to this conversation?

Enter your email below, and you will receive an alert each time someone leaves a comment on this post.

What Do You Think?

Text Links