Pano's
Pano won.
Everyone cool it and move on.
What Pano ought to do is offer the building for $1.00 to anyone who wants to pay to transport it away. Then the preservationists can have a whip-round and come up with the cash and place the Atwater house elsewhere.
The project that will replace the Atwater house isn’t a parking lot, as Mr. Tielman suggests. There are 12 additional spaces, yes. but the project that Pano has announced would expand the restaurant into that plot and upgrade the building in general.
You win some, you lose some.
I have no quarrel with people like Jessie Fisher or Tim Tielman, who believe strongly that the demolition should be blocked.
Tielman:
“If this decision holds up, it’s basically open season on any building that someone wants to buy and demolish for parking on Elmwood Avenue or any other street in the city,”
Fisher:
“If it means that any business owner can buy the business next door and tear it down, and the city has no legal mechanism to review the appropriateness of the demolition or a way to stop it, then it leaves Elmwood Avenue and other commercial districts vulnerable to eroding the character that made them successful in the first place,” Fisher said.
Well, that’s capitalism and private property rights for you. The default should be that someone can buy property and do what they like with it. Every preservation decision, every barrier to demolition, every deed restriction or other legal provision that prohibits that from happening is an exception to the general rule.
As I’ve said before, the city really needs to stop waging ad hoc battles every single time a property owner wants to do something new and different. There should be uniform, general rules which everyone must either follow, or else seek a variance and bear the burden of proving why it’s justified. That’s where smart coding comes into play, and would prevent these sorts of incessant mini-battles.
Also, what is it about the “character” of Elmwood Avenue that makes it in any way significantly different from the “character” of Grant Street, for instance?
Let’s take as a given that everyone wants Buffalo to grow in population and disposable income. When the Gap, Banana Republic, Jamba Juice, and other national chain retailers start locating on Elmwood Avenue, pushing rents up and indies out, what then will people say? Will there be outrage, protests, and pickets? Or will we welcome our new corporate overlords as evidence that Buffalo is moving in the right direction and thus begin the hipsterfication of Grant Street and other shopping districts now punctuated by Rent-a-Centers and Aaronses?
Tobe:
“I don’t think this is a question of the failure of the law. If the building was of a specific value, the Preservation Board could have listed it and did not do so,”
It would be nice if Pano kept the Atwater house and incorporated it into his plans. It is by no means a necessity that he does so.
35 Comments
-
Advertisement
-
Latest
-
The Answer Lady
Latest: Heights Stabbing Arrest - a look under the 'hood -
BfloBlog
Latest: Dave Hannan Open Thread: Sabres at Bruins -
The Goose's Roost
Latest: Enroth Time -
Alan Bedenko
Latest: Massa (NY-29) On the Health Care Bill -
Marc Odien
Latest: Sitting on the Toilet... -
Sports Road Trip
Latest: Profiling Saginaw's Dow Events Center -
Chris Smith
Latest: Video - Journalism Panel Discussion -
Bill O'Loughlin
Latest: Bill O'Loughlin Show: Fri 11/6/09 -
Tom Schuh
Latest: Hometown News: Fri 11/6/09 -
WNY Homeless Alliance
Latest: Thanksgiving Dining Room Schedule
-
Advertisement
“What Pano ought to do is offer the building for $1.00 to anyone who wants to pay to transport it away.” Pano did more than that. At one point he offered to pay something like $10,000 to help someone move it away. No one stepped up. During the first round of this debate, the point I made was that if Elmwood wants to preserve it’s character, then it should be working to establish a preservation district around it. I don’t think anyone is working on that. From one preservationist to another – put up or shut up.
Sad day for Buffalo.
With just a little bit of imagination Pano could have had his restaurant abd the city could have retained the unique character of this house and the street scape. Well anyway 12 more people will be able to park a little closer. Who needs to walk anyway
Let’s face it folks, Most all of the City was built up in the days before cars.
Most folks walked, or used horse drawn transport or the Streetcars to get around. Riverside and Black Rock are pretty good examples of areas where there weren’t even any carriage houses in backyards, many homes have no driveways at all.
SO, sometimes, if you want to go to a certain eatery, bar, gallery or whatever, you have to park some distance away and walk. Round the block, next street over, whatever. Since I grew up in the city, I always accepted this as part of City Life, especially after I started driving myself around.
Derek and I agree on this one. Perhaps a Preservation District should be made in the Elmwood areas, say from Allentown to Forest. Then these uproars would be controlled. If not, to paraphrase Hal Sleet, the Hippie-Dippie Weatherman, IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE CITY—MOVE!!!
Steel — Not sure how sad a day it is. An entrepreneur is going to invest more than a million dollars in an existing business, and a long vacant and (apparently) neglected property is being sacrificed to make it happen.
Pano’s eatery is as much a part of the “character” of Elmwood as the homes of his patrons.
We are too quick to tell other people how they should spend their money.
Steve & others celebrating this – Assuming the BN article quoted Mr. G’s son correctly expansion plans will proceed “cautiously”. Get it “cautiously” as in we’re in no rush. I think the plans presented in December were just a PR stunt. And first I heard about the 10K offer. I just know he refused to sell it to an interested party. I wonder how much it would cost to move such a house?
Steve.
From what I understand the building was not neglected until the current ownership. I remember it as always an active business location. Yes it is a very sad day because Buffalo will be sacrificing a unique part of its character and history for the sake of 12 parking spaces. The great cities of our country are not built with parking lots. They are built with the very things that Buffalo is so intent on removing.
I believe that with a little bit of imagination that house could easily have been incorporated into a restaurant that I am sure would be a vastly more interesting and enjoyable place to eat than what is being planned.
Where should we put the next parking lot. I vote to get rid of Coles so that Goodbar can have some parking. Funny thing is I bet the deed restrictions on the formerly proposed hotel site do not forbid parking as a use.
Come to Buffalo….we have pleanty of parking but not much to see and do!
Steel: Slippery slope arguments are fun, but seldom particularly probative of anything.
It’s not just 12 more parking spots, and it’s disingenuous for you or Tielman to say the demolition is for that reason only.
Pano owns the property, and intends to do this to it:
Love it or hate it, it’s not 12 parking spots.
Steel – I remember looking at an upper apartment in that house in the mid 1980’s … and it was in not-so-great shape even back then. There is a big difference between your Coles/Goodbar scenario and what is happening with the Atwater house – FIRST – Coles and Goodbar are seperate entities, and both successful businesses. Pano OWNS the restaurant AND the dilapidated house. Was the sale of the house to Pano a secret, or was anyone able to buy it ?
Come to Buffalo … there’s no parking, and property rights mean nothing – but you can stare at a dilapidated house from the street !
correction:
I agree with the poster above: PR stunt. He’ll knock it right the f**k down, put up a ‘temporary’ parking lot, and prevaricate until we all just accept the lot and bear him no grudge any longer.
But, I hope you’re right and I’m wrong.
Pundit,
Spin it like you want but that proposal is for a building with parking on 3 sides, one additional side to what is there now. I see nothing to be happy about in this shallow plan. Parking on 3 sides is not conducive to an attractive urban street. Big loss for Elmwood. By the way 12 new parking spaces was noted in the News story. I think they said the total would be 35.
Welcome to Buffalo we have lots of parking. We make sure that none of those pesky old buildings get in your way. One more benefit…the more parking we make the less there is to do.
Pano isn’t in the business of “attractive urban street”. He’s in the business of diner food. And he’s successful enough at it that he has a big following, lots of regular customers, and enough scratch to buy the adjacent property and do what he wants with it.
The building in which Pano’s is now located isn’t “attractive” by any measure, and what he’s said he has planned is a huge step forward.
Ultimately, however, this is all subjective so neither one of us is going to convince the other.
A successful business is a huge plus for Elmwood. A successful restaurant even more so. A successful restaurant business that attracts people even from suburbia trebles that. A successful restaurant that’s been on the strip since 1977 is an enormous plus for Elmwood. Forest, trees.
12 spaces and a complete redesign.
What, exactly, were people “doing” in or with the Atwater house, precisely? Apart from the demolition of a pretty house that wasn’t historical enough to make the PresCo’s list, what is the loss of things “to do”?
good for Pano
if the preservationists are really that upset they should have bought the house
Actually Pundit,
I did forget to say that I do agree with you that the city is negligent in not protecting this property and and this neighborhood in general. There is no reason this whole area should not be designated a historic district and there should be a plan in place that would have prevented this from ever becoming an issue.
As for your question “what people were doing in the Atwater House”? “people” have been doing nothing in it or with it since the current owner has kept it vacant. How does that have anything to do with what could be there? That is like saying sure officer I shot him but I couldn’t help it that he died after I shot him.
Just because a business is successful does not mean it is good for the street. That is a huge leap that is not universally true. I could have a very successful truck depot on this site making gobs of money but it certainly would not be good for Elmwood. As for attracting business to Elmwood. I would wager that anyone parking in this Panos lot is not spending money at any other Elmwood establishment. If they did you can bet their car will be towed out of that lot as soon as their toes hit the sidewalk.
And any business that does not make it part of their business to help create an attractive urban street in Buffalo should maybe think of not BEING in Buffalo. It is very sad indeed If they make a good living from the city but refuse to contribute the the quality of the built environment that we all are affected by. Of course as we have seen most people these days are perfectly willing to accept a second rate built environment. And that IS very sad.
Buffalo should start putting some money into promoting its ample parking. I can see the tourists arriving in droves. “tired of visiting those same old beautiful historic places, can’t stand old buildings blocking your view? Come to Buffalo we Know what you want. Our parking lots are big and they are arranged for your every convenience. Everything within 5 steps of your car! Buffalo…come for the vast vistas of emptiness..come for the parking.
Do you REALLY think that there is “ample parking” on Elmwood, from Forest to Allen ?
How do you operationalize “ample”, “realist”?
I rarely have trouble parking 2-3 blocks away from where I need to go, Allen-Forest. Ample.
Well “eac” I don’t think that parking 3 blocks away is “ample”, and I would bet that a lot of people ( who don’t want to scale snowbanks , walk in the rain, or carry packages etc )) would agree with me. People are always trying to come up with ways to draw more people into the city, and walking 3 blocks one way isn’t the way to do it. If you want to keep things the way they are – fine – but don’t pretend that there is “ample” parking in that area.
Steel,
How much did you offer for the Atwater house the last time it was for sale?
Further, this whole issue came up about 3 years ago. Mr. G. wanted to knock the house down for parking. There was an uproar and over 3500 people signed a petition to prevent demolition. The petition was presented to then mayor Masiello who revoked the demolition permit. Then, three years later, Mr. G wants to demolish it again but this time he doesn’t mention the extra parking only but presents colorful cool looking plans for a new business!
And the crowd goes wild!!! It’s all a ruse. Mr. G’s primary “intention” is to expand is parking lot. And do you really think he’s going to shut his resaurant down for at least a year (no money coming in don’t forget) to build this? Duh.
Ryan,
So your test for the worth of a building or a neighborhood is based on weather I can afford to buy and renovate it? Just tear them all down then.
Buffalo has got to start leveraging the gift of its architecture. The continued contempt for its historic urban fabric will just speed yup the decline
Steel … the fact is that Pano bought the building. Do I want it torn down ? Not necessarilly, but I respect his right to do as he wishes with HIS property.
Do you honestly believe that the Atwater house was any kind of “draw” to that neighborhood ?
The “yes he is — no he isn’t” debate about Pano’s intention is fruitless and less entertaining with each iteration.
What I believe — that his proposal is more attractive than what is there now, that he has been part of the Elmwood “character” for 30 years and has earned some slack, that the Atwater house isn’t all that interesting or attractive — is only relevant to me. I frequent his restaurant, and will continue to do so. (By the way, I don’t live nearby so I will be showing up in a car. I have been known to frequent other restaurants, bars and shops in the area when I do so. Sorry about that.)
If you believe that he is destroying the fabric of the area, demolishing an important piece of history and wasting an opportunity to show “a bit of imagination,” then don’t frequent his establishment. Do something about preservation code and enforcement. But put up. Or, leave this man alone.
Will this affect Pano’s pesto omelette?
OK, then, I’m good.
Steve- I disagree. I think his intentions are at the crux of the matter.
I am not against businesses expanding. I am also not against demolishing run down run of the mill structures (Record Theatre on Main for example). What I am against is bogus expansion plans to gain community support for knocking down an architecturally significant structure for more asphalt.
Surely there are other options and another more civic minded owner would appreciate them. And Realist, really, are three blocks that much for you to walk??? If so, you might want to have a physical exam soon.
Haterade,
Yes that building in combination with others IS what draws people to the Elmwood village. What a sorry day it will be when Elmwood is nothing but isolated plastic buildings surrounded by parking lots. The combination of many old and attractive buildings IS what makes this neighborhood Buffalo’s MOST successful neighborhood. These old buildings ARE what makes this the fastest appreciating real estate market in the metro area.
The most successful and most loved cities in this country have walkable dense commercial streets with lots of activity. What does Buffalo do? It does the opposite. Lets get rid of density. Lets get rid of uniqueness, lets get rid of history! Hmmm kind of explains why Buffalo is in the state that it is in.
By the way any time I have EVER visited a business on Elmwood by car I have never parked more than a few doors away from my destination. There is no parking problem in that area.
How does that explain the completely depressed areas of the East Side that have old and attractive buildings that far surpass the Atwater House in terms of beauty and historical/architectural significance?
Places change. Buildings change. Sometimes we demolish stuff that’s pretty, but doesn’t necessarily deserve special protection just because it’s pretty.
Other buildings get placed on a list that ensures that they are preserved because they are significant in some landmarkian way. The Atwater was on no such list. Its absence therefrom is what preservationists should be most concerned about – they shouldn’t be particularly suprised by the consequences of that absence.
Buffalo is in the state it’s in because of politics. Plain and simple. It has nothing whatsoever to do with parking on Elmwood or off Elmwood or the preservation or demolition of certain pretty buildings.
Main Street downtown is as walkable a commercial street as one could possibly find. Yet it remains empty. Despite having a certain density of available commercial space, it has a dearth of actual things within said space, and a similar dearth of people who go down there. They built it, but no one came.
Elmwood over by Spot and Brodo has two off-street parking lots, and a mini-plaza Wilson Farms up on the corner. Yet somehow miraculously that particular are of Elmwood is among the most successful and vibrant bits of that strip. I’m not saying the two have anything to do with each other, but it could certainly stand to have more “density”, yet remains pedestrianriffic.
People need to be proactive, not reactive with this stuff – that’s the way to avoid this kind of thing from happening again.
To begin with, I know nothing of this issue other than what I have read. I dont know if that preserving a unique home trumps a businessman’s right to tear it down.
All I know about Panos is what I see on TV. You know the ad. In the first frame, I see a plate of food that is supposed to look tantalizing but every time I see it I squir with disgust. I see a big dog’s claw on the plate. I swear it looks like a plate of dog’s paw. (Actually, I think its a piece of shrimp that for all the world looks like a dog’s claw)
I could not believe that Pano (or any responsible ad agency) would allow the ad to run for so long. I phoned the restaurant months ago and told the manager about it. She said she would relay the info to Pano, who was away at the time.
But the TV ad kept running. Hey, if they don’t care, I sure don’t care. Besides, some of that dog is damned fine eating, if you can catch ‘em young.
Jefferson –
“Surely there are other options and another more civic minded owner would appreciate them. ”
Perhaps, but the Atwater house has been something other than what the original designer and owner intended it to be for a long time. How long do we hold up development while we wait?
I don’t have the qualifications to judge either the historical or architectural significance of this particular house (although, I fail to see the attraction — looks like it was designed by someone experimenting with acid). But it appears that no one else stepped up.
Let me qualify that — no one else WITH MONEY stepped up. There’s been plenty stepping up to tell Panos how to spend HIS money.
BP’s original post on this says it best — “cool it and move on.”
Pundit,
I love how you like to play dumb. Or maybe it is not an act. The east side has many wonderful buildings. It is also the place that WNY has decided to concentrate the most socially incapable people in the area. It is the place that many of the city’s public housing projects have been concentrated. It is a place cut up by highways. It is hardly comparable to Elmwood Village. The fact that it does have some great buildings may be what saves the east side. But as long as the local economy maintains its decline there is no chance of that ever happening. Really how does the plight of the east side have anything to do with a very interesting and unique building on Elmwood. Are you saying that since most people do not have the strength to tackle the huge problems of the east side that this one is not worth caring about?
Sure Buffalo dropped the ball by not being proactive on this issue but does that mean that it should just accept ugliness as the only alternative. Elmwood as a strip mall is a bad idea
What is so interesting and unique about that dilapidated house ? A Turret room ? Big deal. Give a house a “name” and watch all the hipster doofi whine about it’s impending demolition. If you think people go to the Elmwood strip to see the beat-up old homes you are delusional. It sure doesn’t look like a strip mall to me. I love how you like to play hipster doofus from Chicago – or maybe it’s not an act.
Elmwood will not become a strip mall. And I don’t think that there were buses from all over WNY dropping off socially incapable people on the East Side like it was some kind of specific destination for them (Nice way to make friends on the East Side Steel). Can we please stop dealing in hyperbole? I liked the Atwater house, but I don’t have the cash for it, so I accept that the person who owns it will do as he so wishes.
This is not worth a myocardial infarction.
Is there a point there? I don’t come to your house and call you dumb, so please try not to call me dumb again. It’s petulant, pathetic, and puerile.
Really? WNY concentrated “socially incapable people” there? I’d love for you to elaborate on what constitutes a “socially incapable” person. On whose orders did “WNY” concentrate that type of person there? Do you realize how patently offensive that statement is – in two separate ways?
You’re right. It’s populated by poor and working-class people. Hardly comparable. People who are poor and working-class hardly have time to worry about turreted brick houses being torn down by wealthy Greek diner owners.
No, Steel. You said earlier:
You credit the age and attractiveness of buildings with a thriving, successful neighborhood and fast-appreciating real estate prices. That’s a facile position to take, and the fact that the east side has buildings as old and attractive as anything on the west side, yet is neither as successful or fast-appreciating underscores how incorrect your statement was. It’s not buildings that make a neighborhood. It’s the people. And what those people do. And how they interact. And how they conduct their commerce.
No. I’m using your own statement about the age and attractiveness of buildings being the key to success and market appreciation. If that were even remotely true, then the Central Terminal would be the among the most successful, most highly assessed buildings in the city. But it’s not.
If you want to argue that the Atwater house is worth saving, that’s great. You’re an architect, you can use all kinds of architectural jargon to explain exactly why it’s worth saving. Why it’s unique. But you don’t. Instead, you complain about what’s going to replace it. That’s not the issue. If the issue is preserving the building, the fact that it would be replaced by a parking lot shouldn’t matter any more than if FLW was brought back from the dead to build a new building there.
Again – that’s a bullshit statement, because no one is suggesting that Elmwood be a strip mall. I challenge you to point out where anyone suggested that it be replaced by “plastic” buildings or strip malls. In fact, many urbanists argue that it’s quite reasonable for businesses to place parking behind structures, so long as the building itself abuts the sidewalk. That’s what Pano is proposing, basically. So, let me ask you – if Pano suggested building out the whole property and placing parking underground, would that pass the Steel test of “attractiveness”? The Lex Coop has a parking lot, is that building “ugly”? Did it detract from the uniqueness, density, or success of Elmwood?
Pundit
I cease to discuss with you when you twist my words and change the meaning. I did not call you dumb. I said you play dumb. Big difference. (actually my true statement had the exact opposite meaning that you attribute to it) I have never called you names nor anyone else.
I will not even get into the twisting you did on the rest of my comments. Limboughesque debate tactics are unbecoming.
Right. You can’t defend the undefensible, so you walk away. Those are your words, Steel – not mine.
You said I like to play dumb, or maybe it’s not an act. I took that to mean, “or maybe you’re really just dumb and not playing”.
After you proudly proclaim that you never called me or anyone else names, you characterize my “debate tactics” as “Limbaughesque”. I’m so pleased that the name-calling stopped riiiiiiiiight….NOW.
Punidit and steel you had a good debate going until the discussion degraded. Pundit, I respect that you run this blog and in the future be sensative to “your house”. I usually agree with you anyways, but never asimilated your blog to your house.
I don’t understand why Pano was allowed to let a perfectly fine building decay in the first place. Letting him tear it down only justifies his negligence.
Let me ask everyone this: If the house next door (close enough to pass a salt shaker between windows) to you, was left to degrade by negligent landlord, how would you feel?