Elmwood Village Condo Site Prep to Start

Elmwood Village Condo Site Prep to Start

Story Options

Think Financial Student Loans

The next phase of the Elmwood Village Condominium project will get under way today with the start of "deconstruction" by Buffalo ReUse of one of the buildings on the site. "Deconstruction is a far more environmentally sensitive approach than demolition because the materials are disassembled and most are recycled or re-used in another building," according to project architect Karl Frizlen.

The $5 million development will require the demolition of a five-unit rooming house at 301 W. Utica and a neighboring home at 305 W. Utica.

Frizlen, who is also a member of the project's development group, FJF Development, noted that the project is distinguished by its commitment to state of the art environmental principles, which will result in an energy efficient, low-maintenance, "green" building.

Michael Gainer, of Buffalo ReUse says, “We’re confident that this deconstruction will yield more than 20 tons of recyclable or reusable materials which would otherwise be buried in a landfill.”

Prices for the planned condominiums start at $230,623 for a one-bedroom, one and a half-bath unit with 1093 sq.ft. of living space. Two-bedroom, two-bath units range from 1300 to 1408 sq.ft. and are priced from $274,300. The last two-story unit with 2,588 sq.ft. is priced at $546,600. All units feature balconies, fireplaces, high-end finishes, a balcony and secure underground parking.

The building's fourteen units are being marketed by Maureen Flavin and Ellen Warner of Realty USA.

Get connected: Maureen Flavin, 716.743.6469 or Ellen Warner, 716.725.1410

feed your soul buffalo

What Others Have To Say

  1. buffaloed

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 00:15

    Why are they only deconstructing one of the two houses to be demolished?

  2. gaustad

    7 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 00:43

    The whole Elmwood Strip needs to be "deconstructed."

    I am all for new developement and happy to see this project come alive, but who in god's name has 230k for a one bedroom condo and 275k for a two bedroom condo.

    you can buy a very nice mulit unit down the street for that kind of change.....

    I hope Maureen Flavin can inflate this market too!

  3. Colin

    4 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 00:59

    I don't understand all the angst on BRO about condo prices. The developers are profesionals, and I have to assume that they've done their homework on what prices will work.

  4. gaustad

    3 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 02:41

    colin, then why don't you buy one?

  5. Ike

    5 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 03:21

    Gaustad, you are missing the point entirely...Developers aren't planning to lose money, and neither are the banks who undoubtedly have signed off on significant constructions loans those developers have for the site. If the developers say the market can support 230k condos, and the Banks have looked over all the documents the developers have and say the market can support 230k condos..

    then the market can PROBABLY support 230k condos...I'm going to go with the finance guys on this one, and not the resident internet crank. Perhaps you're not the demographic they're looking to entice

    More to the point, even if the market can't support 230k, why do you care? Prices will drop until they reach the level set by demand.

  6. Colin

    5 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 03:32

    gaustad --

    I won't buy one because I already own a house that I'm happy with, and even if I didn't, I couldn't afford the prices they'll be charging. However, that doesn't mean that no one can afford those prices -- my personal situation isn't the universal rule.

    So I still don't understand why you (and others) are often upset about condo prices. The developers have done their homework, so I feel safe in saying they'll be bought and the project will succeed. If that doesn't happen, the price will be lowered and the developer might lose some money, but thats no skin off my nose. And in either case, the development provides jobs, is an improvement n what's there now, and is apparantly being done with some concern for the environmental impact. Where's the problem?

  7. onestarmartin

    4 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 08:24

    I think some people must still have their head in the sand and are still living in the day of 350 dollar apartments. Buffalo has caught up with the rest of the country in housing prices and yes, condo's sell for 250-800K, homes for 300 to a 1,000,000.00 dollars and nice apartments are 800 and up [and no, they do not include heat]. Time to realize it ain't gonna change!

  8. sbrof

    2 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 09:05

    prices are rising across the board and as with everything prices are rising. Landlords have to buy the same inflated food and gas as everyone else and are going to charge more in rents in order to do this. I agree with onestarmarton time to get used to it. Live closer to work, drive less, buy local food and save money. Things are not going to get any cheaper.

  9. rubygreta

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 09:11

    Hey Gaustad, in a metropolitan area of 1,000,000 people, you don't think the developer will be able to sell these 14 units?

    There are tons of people who want something that is brand new with no stairs and no maintenance, and they are willing to pay a premium for it. And there isn't exactly a lot of competition in the area.

  10. bboozehound

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 09:16

    ha ha...Ike you couldn't have put this "resident internet crank" any better! Well done!!

    I don't have a problem with the prices of these units, just the exterior design. The exterior is horrible and at some point we need to start demanding more from our developers. While it is true that our prices have started to rebound and approach what other mid-sized cities are fetching, it is also true that more "happening" cities are getting much more bang for their buck in the designs.

    I'm looking out the window now at newly built campus housing that is at worst on par with this project and that is pretty disappointing!

  11. MikeJW

    4 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 09:33

    Gaustad- why so angry over what other people can obviously afford? Don't worry I'm sure you'll make the big move out of your Mom's basement soon enough...

  12. Sal

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 10:25

    I believe rubygreta hit the nail on the head by stating "[t]here are tons of people who want something that is brand new with no stairs and no maintenance". When my company owned 322 Bryant St (where the little red house was built on the corner of Ashland Ave), I received a lot of inquiries to build a handicap accessible home. The population is grower older and the independent housing opportunities are few and far between. Since purchasing the vacant lot at 276 Summer St last year, this kind of housing has been on my mind again.

  13. Dan

    2 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 11:01

    gaustad> I am all for new developement and happy to see this project come alive, but who in god's name has 230k for a one bedroom condo and 275k for a two bedroom condo.

    I'm reminded of the Cheektowagans who, in the late 1980s, opposed construction of the Walden Galleria not just because of concerns about traffic and the like, but because they thought it was "too fee-yancy", and that nobody could ever afford to shop there.

    More variety in housing options is a good thing, and the asking price for units at 305 West Utica is a positive indicator of the health and stability of the surrounding area.

  14. EricOak

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 12:26

    The idea is good, the prices are market prices, but it's too bad the deisgn is so poor. These units just don't harmonize at all with Buffalo's vernacular--East Amherst, maybe, but not Buffalo. I don't usually cite other cities for examples, but some of the newer condo developments in Charleston would be much more handsome than this design.

  15. wizardofza

    3 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 12:39

    Eric, I'll agree the condo design sucks but highly disagree with the notion that buildings in cities must always harmonize with one another. One of the most exciting things about an urban environment is how things contrast and juxtapose into surroundings that don't all look alike.

    Earth to Gaustad: new construction is expensive, especially when there are no subsidies involved.

  16. EricOak

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 13:36

    Well wizard, that's an argument that has never been resolved. I suppose it's a matter of taste and opinion and what one likes in a a city, but I think harmony is an important and still viable value in many large and small cities: Paris, Barcelona, Savannah, and the city I love most, Charleston. Washington D.C.'s limit on the height of buildings has been essential to its retaining its character and uniqueness. I don't think Charleston would become a more interesting city if it decided to interrupt its textures with willfully contrasting styles of building. That approach pleases some people, but I find places where it has flourished, such as Toronto, to be among the most dissonant and visually anxious cities I know. I want to say ugly, but agin, I know it's all subjective.

    I agree with you in one area: in downtown areas with an already established eclectic building landscape, diversity and contrast in style and period can be enhancing.

  17. rubygreta

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 15:01

    EricOak - you can say it. Toronto is ugly. And with the completion of each condo building it gets even uglier.

  18. wizardofza

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 15:42

    Eric, I think you're confusing architectural style with scale.

  19. davvid

    2 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 17:06

    EricOak, I think D.C seems pretty dull architecturally. Maybe the National Gallery is nice but not much else. There is no harmony. Harmony require different piches right? D.C is just flat and dull. I think you are confusing harmony with regularity.

  20. wizardofza

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 19:03

    EricOak, I think D.C seems pretty dull architecturally. Maybe the National Gallery is nice but not much else.EricOak, I think D.C seems pretty dull architecturally. Maybe the National Gallery is nice but not much else.

    I take it you've never ventured outside the core touristy areas of the city (Smithsonian, national mall, downtown. ect.) of the city. Much to your surprise there are plenty of drop-dead-gorgeous Victorian-era rowhouse neighborhoods throughout the city containing architecture well on par with Brooklyn's brownstones and SF's painted ladies. DC's inner residential areas look much like the older Southern coastal cities mentioned above like Savannah and Charleston.

    Oh, and for all you Toronto haters, I don't see how it's any uglier than most other NA cities. If you don't like big busy cities, then that's one thing. Toronto isn't much different than the continent's other major cities. Outside of the bustling, modern downtown core, there are some very livable low-scale, charming historic neighborhoods. Kensington Market, The Annex, Cabbagetown, Roncevalles Village, to name a few, are like more vibrant versions of Buffalo's nicer neighborhoods. As far as ugliness goes, the massive suburban sprawl (which actually defines most American cities) surrounding the city is far more hideous than anything in the core. I'll take a boxy condo over the cookie cutter tract houses and stripmalls any day.

  21. davvid

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 21:32

    yes wizardofza I was definitely talking about the central area of DC. You and EricOak were discussing new construction and mentioned DC's height limits and so I assumed that meant the downtown areas.

  22. pgf1948

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 21:37

    About one thing you are most certainly right wizardofza: penetrating the miles of sprawl around even our "best" cities to find a rewarding "historic urban core" is a daunting experience-- and Charleston is no exception, much as I love it.

    Washington and Baltimore and Richmond have some of the best historic districts anywhere, and I am a little bit prideful that in a former life I had something to do with their preservation.

  23. gaustad

    3 ratings12345
    Apr 16th, 21:59

    MikeJW - get your own material, that is my line! {deleted, off-topic flaming}

    Colin, this is the same developer that still cant rent the loft apartments he built on Elmwood Ave. He didn't do his homework.

    Although, I have plenty of money to buy one of these condos, why on earth would I spend 230-300k on a sterile hosiptal looking building like this.

    If developers and banks "did their homework" than the US would not be facing a collapse in the central banking system. Our economy is in the toliet. Get educated!

    As mentioned, I am ecstatic that a project like this is coming to fruition in Buffalo, but the reality is the condos are very expensive for most people downtown, the building is an a terrible design, and the neighborhod is filled with pan handlers and crack heads.

    Better off "deconstructing" those two houses and building two new multi-unit homes from the ground up.

  24. pegger

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 01:31

    I would suggest that they put a No Smoking clause in their CC&Rs. Looks like they'll all go together when they go!

  25. onestarmartin

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 09:31

    @ Gaustad...you do keep up on current affairs, yes? The banking system is not at fault for the collapse of the housing market and economy. It was sub prime mortgages, bought by people [usually with no down payment] that wanted to live in homes that are typically out of their reach, said mortgages are sold off to other banking institutions, after their 2-5 year arm was up, interest rates went up on the mortgages. Then those poor fools who typically could only afford a 150k house, but wanted to live large and got 200k and up homes were living way beyond their means. If they had just gone to a bank, got a regular interest 30 year mortgage, on a home they could afford, they would not find their furniture on the front lawn. Even with the collapse of the market, there are many people who can still afford 250k condo's and even million dollar condo's. Also, realestate/land are always the safest investment bet, prices will go back up when the economy stabalizes.

  26. WholeLottaJibbaJabbah

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 10:01

    Gaustad our economy is in the toilet because the "Central Bank" (No where on the constitution does it state that we should have one of these "Central Banks," and we've actually had them removed twice since the birth of the United States) prints money whenever they need more, with nothing backing it. Thats why the economy is in the toilet. Do your homework.

  27. mjman4

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 10:07

    rooming houses are soooo 20th century...

    Karl Friszlen, Please follow the following link.... THIS is contemproray urban architecture....learn a thing or two. Your designs suck.

    http://www.loftsboston.com/boston/lofts/residential/sales/Penn_Street_Lofts

  28. gaustad

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 10:54

    WholeLotta and onestar - I guess we will have to wait and see. I hope the condos sell.

    It is only one person' opinnion, but I think the condos are very expensive for what you are buying.

    This is not the waterfront, but we have to start somewhere.

  29. MJWorthington

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 12:52

    The Penn St. Lofts look straight out of a Miami Vice studio set. They should show Crockett and Tubbs modeling in those shots. Though they seem to have forgotten the backlit glass block walls ;)

    New builds in stable neighborhoods is a great thing to see. Not every house is going to last 150+ years. Nice to see ReUse perserving the more unique features of the houses that will be demoed. Can they peel off the siding so we can see the original exterior details before the knock them down?

  30. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 14:39

    Friszlen isn't an architect, just another design-build hack. I feel sorry for anyone dumb enough to buy into these hideous condos from hell. Buffalo ReUse should deconstruct Elmwood Village as soon as it's completed.

  31. gaustad

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 22:24

    RisingDamp, always on point....

  32. blackrocklifer

    1 ratings12345
    Apr 17th, 22:49

    the existing houses could be restored or renovated and would be far better than this hotel chain look alike.

  33. mmjazz

    4 ratings12345
    Apr 19th, 17:39

    There is a certain amount of "talking out of our asses" lately here. As we have noted from previous threads re: the east side-you cant just say, these condos are worth this now in a neighborhood. The market creates a number for price per square foot based on all factors. Just like the stock market, the price of something is a close as you can get to the truth of it(meaning fair market value) We can speculate, but recent sale prices are the truth--no if ands or buts. It might more sense to rent them. Having said that, If developers can sell these at a premium regardless of the other properties in the area, guess who holds the bag-the buyer. It could be likened to what happens after you buy a new car off the lot.

    I did a few loans as an apprentice. It is a corrupt business it needs regulation. It is not fair to blame the consumer entirely. Who can blame someone for doing what they can to get into a house. A mortgage broker SHOULD have a fiduciary responsibility to the buyer-any hack can do it--its a travesty. I actually had someone from Buffalo lie through their teeth to me; I didnt tell him I did loans, then bagged him on his lies where he claimed that origination fees were mandatory--bullshit! mortgage paperwork is complex to dupe the consumer and needs corrections--its never regulated because lobbyists fight against it. bottomline: you cant blame the consumer completely.

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