Buffalo Rising Online

it looks like the cvs windows.

I've been waiting years for this news. I couldn't never figure out why all those places looked like bunkers. I understand, in some cases, it's for crime prevention...but, there's better ways to go about it than making your business look like a prison.

It is not a window if you can not see through it. The reason a window is good for a street is because it projects life and activity from inside to outside. It is not the glass that is the benefit to the street. It is what that glass enables that becomes the benefit. If you take away the transparency you take away the quality of the glass that makes it good. It is no different than a brick wall if you make it opaque!

Queenseyes,

No, a fake window is not preferable to a nicely articulated and crafted wall of some solid opaque material such as stone or brick. A fake window will always be just a fake window, promising something it can never provide.

It really is a poor solution for the ugly building. Yeah, down the road, I suppose this makes it more feasible to put in actual windows, but that costs thousands of dollars still. I'm sure Zepto has some administrative and office components to their space - that is what you place in front by the windows, so that its ok to put in real windows.

If they wanted the front of the building to remain visually inaccessible, there are far more creative ways to do that, especially on a City's "Main" street.

Queenseyes,

To conclude that infill can only be bad since there are only bad examples of solid infill is not a scientific conclusion to make. Just as I can not say that because since I get wet when I open my door on a rainy day my door causes rain to fall on me.

Urban Guy - The reason for the critisism is that this post comes just after the CVS post and you would conclude from the two articles that this is viewed as a good example of Main Street windows while CVS is a bad example when in fact there is little difference - Both are visually repelling. Of course this is an improvement over what was there. I doubt they had no choice but to make the windows completely opaque and there are creative ways to deal with this situation if they needed controlled light. But just like everything else, it's an improvement and maybe they can replace the glass one day.

No, I was anointed "expert" by the Supreme Council of Experts on all Matters.

Is it bulletproof or shatterproof?

Is it bulletproof or shatterproof?

Urban Guy - sorry, i didn't mean to imply you were making conclusion about what is good vs bad in the world of main street windows. I was just making a point in general that it's funny that a post about the windows in cvs regarded as "bad" is followed by a post about the improved facade on this building when the windows have the same character that is critiqued at cvs - that they are opaque.

And I don't think the critical nature of the comments is a bad thing. People are passionate about the city and people write comments derived from their own experience. I walk home from work through lower manhattan and there are many offices on the first floor with transparent windows. It is much more inviting to me regardless of whether there is retail or not to see some life associated with the building. These windows shown above deflect your view as it is uncomfortable to look at a window where you see nothing but know someone may be looking back at you. This type of thing is pretty common on Main Street in Buffalo and contributes to the feeling the street is dead. But whatever I am glad to see the investment but hope future projects can avoid the mistake. (and again maybe the post should explain the black windows and then we would understand why they are there and why nothing better could be done...especially in light of the cvs post)

If indeed these are faux windows...It may have to do with the facility being a bio-lab that needs to be secure (government regs?). The real windows are going in on the mansion next door at 878 Main that is being restored for their corporate office space. Regardless- it is a definite improvement.

Any updates on the Victorian house next door? That is a nicer bldg with more potential to beautify Main Street

These windows are sad because they demonstrate such a marked lack of imagination. Let's take as a given that Zepto doesn't want people wandering up and looking in the windows. Why do they have to be black? Why not make them frosted white? Then they could be illuminated at night and add something to the streetscape. Or make them clear and put some sort of screen behind them with images of viruses or spores, or whatever they're working on inside.

I think the thing that the people who post negative comments about this are voicing is a feeling that as a community we're constantly be shortchanged by going for the most obvious, least creative solution. We need to start to think out of the box a little, once in a while.

Elurbano- Zepto is moving forward with renovation plans. They'll be going to the Preservation Board for sign-off on some design details (i.e. roofing). I believe they're on the agenda for this Thursday.

Could we please retire the word "tragic" as a means of describing aesthetic trivialities like window coverups or Wilson Farms facades (as in a previous QE post)?

I think we should give Collins a butter lamb for doing this!

Yeah, there are gauges of tint. Police have those meters that they can put on your car window to see if you have an illegally dark tint. It seems that the same general principles should apply here.

Developers and companies being able to do whatever they want with hardly any opposition happens all the time in the US. Its called Las Vegas. I'm not sure thats the type of environment that I want to live in....

These should really be described as glass facade panels rather than windows. It is my understanding that this is opaque glass placed in front of a solid stucco wall. Same will be done with the second floor

booya hamp. Nice post.

hamp - Isn't it relevant that the black windows are at least an improvement over how the building looked before this company bought it?

Folks, our city's buildings and urban fabric are some of our strongest assets. Shouldn't we be protecting them?

Did you really prefer the "before" to the "after"? How would it have been "protecting" anything if this company had located elsewhere and that building was left still looking like the "before" for the next bunch of years? The curtain idea simply might not meet their needs for the work they intend to do in that laboratory building. Fabric curtains might cause problems for a clean environment they need, who knows?

Yeah if money was no object they probably could have done something nicer looking, but money is an object, they're a small co in a highly competitive industry where most companies end up failing, and again - they IMPROVED how the building looks compared to how it looked before and it did not even do any permanent harm.

A step in the right direction in appearance, plus some well paying bio-tech jobs for our economic appearance.

You do agree your assertion is very subjective, hamp, right? My taste is different from yours and although I don't think the dark windows look great, I think they do have a much more professional look than would a painted mural. The same would apply to something creative with corrugated metal or whatever as you suggest - some people commenting here would like, and others here would be every bit as condemning of however that ended up looking as you are of the black windows. Your glass block idea might've been a good alternative but to make windows that large with glass block sounds very expensive. They probably would've been much smaller and left the front wall looking much like it did before.

You ignored my question about the before vs after. Do you at least agree the black windows are a step up over what that building looked like for many years (or was it deccades?) before ZeptoMetrix bought the bulding?

Regular windows would look best, but obviosuly that wasn't doable. The black isn't best but is better than what's been there before. Painted murals on a biotech co would probably look very unprofessional. By making you happy with a painted mural for example, they'd be doing more harm than good.

A city's "vitality" is determined by whether you can see into the windows of its buildings? Wouldn't a better indicator of vitality be whether the city's residents can get good jobs? And isn't it likely that economic vitality leads to bettter aesthetics, rather than the other way around?

Isn't this cart-before-the-horse thinking unfortuantely common on BRO?

hamp - Thanks for answering. Clear windows allowing view into what's happening in the building apparently is not an option for some reason(s), so that comparison isn't meaningful in this case.

The matter of taste to which I referred was your previous assertion a painted mural would be better than black windows. That may be true for your taste, but I doubt I'm the only one who'd find a mural on the front of a biotech co in the context of what's hoped to be a "medical campus district" to look very out of place and unprofessional. Seems to me dark windows for this building is better than anything except clear windows.

Bottom line is small fledgling co ZeptoMetrix bought a Buffalo building with no obligation to improve its front appearance at all, but chose to. People including QE and you who are often particular about building appearance acknowledge they improved it.

Colin's right. Economic weakness makes it much harder to achieve aesthetic improvements. The biggest threat to Buffalo's ' urban fabric' is its relative weakness in attracting and keeping profit-making, jobs-creating, taxbase-building companies. Consider how many with local presence won't even consider a City of Buffalo site: Gieco, Citicorp, Tops corporate HQ, Ecology & Environment, etc.

I'm not saying never raise aesthetics issues, but the degree of outrage should be proportional to the "offense", small improvements shouldn't be treated as negatives, and everything should be considered at in context.

If ZM changed something good looking into something butt-uglier than before, then I could more understand outrage. Or if they made something horrible in a way that couldn't be pretty easily upgraded when some other usage of the building came along. Doesn't seem the case at all. They improved the look - even you say so. They're putting about 17 career-type private sector jobs here. They spent money modifying the wall that will make it less expensive some day for the building's next user to replace windows with clear ones and make it look even better.

This company has created good jobs, bought 2 city-owned buildings that might otherwise have been lost or neglected forever, strengthened the biotech corridor in Allentown/midtown, and has indiputably improved the aesthetics of the building. How absurd is it to complain that those aesthetic improvements weren't improvement enough?