There is a solution to the parking problem for this building that does not involve any demolition. Look at the satellite imagery of this block and you will see that there is a large amount of open property behind this building with access on the next street over. Some one with vision could provide mid block parking for this building, save the mansion at 419 and possibly even fill the hole left on the other street by previous demos.

Let,Aeos hope that someone with vision and means steps up to the plate and makes this an asset to Buffalo. Not all progress requires removal of irreplaceable assets.

The Pan Am was delayed due to the war at the time - another kitch in Buffalo's armor - and the planning had started in mid 1890's. The three I mentioned were built during this time and were designated for the Pan Am. Somewhere in my archives I even have an ad that publicized the Whitney as a Pan Am hotel. In addition, if one would look closely, there are other ads and plans for the two noted on JP.

Jas-

I hope you are wrong about the arson and I truly HOPE that the abused and neglected old dame (419) does NOT become a parking lot. Any updates on 419 and Greenleaf/Swiezy's intentions???

"open property behind this building with access on the next street over. Some one with vision could provide mid block parking for this building, save the mansion at 419 and possibly even fill the hole left on the other street by previous demos."

The empty lot on West is 363 - and owned by the City .. the rest of the open property is mostly the backyards of 419 and 413 Porter, with only 413 touching the West Ave lot. So, it might be possible to use the West Ave lot & 419's yard for parking, but access across 413's yard ....?

It's either very difficult or impossible to make a new driveway on your own property on the West Side, so why are ANY new parking lots allowed? Make it an ironclad rule: NO parking on demo-cleared lots, and the assessment is NOT reduced.

And fires do not start themselves in the middle of a vacant house, unless God has made new rules for lightning !

Awaiting download of my previous comment....

oh I like that...dont reduce the assessment for any demolished lots. That should stop all this jewish lightning in Buffalo.

What I have noticed (since I do live in the area) is that people are very interested in their neighborhoods. When homes are purchased by new, young owners, they turn the huge old dames that had been broken into multiple units into singles or doubles (I did!). And these are large flats going for high rents. I can name several just on my block. Investing in a building like this is key. It keeps single renters in the area, plus the location is very advantagous. A cleaned up building, parking or not, would draw many people that need smaller, cozier units.

This touches on a fundamental problem. I've noticed in Buffalo, almost every LARGE apartment building without onsite parking isn't attactive to anyone beyond public assistance types.

Another thing....

28 apartments in that building? They must be the size of broom closets. Sounds like they were divided up nicely to be condusive to a section-8 rent collection frenzy. I've seen this before and I've been in these sort of buildings....barely habitable living spaces is what they are.

The owners must be crazy to think that installing a parking lot will somehow automatically attract better tenants. I don't think this neighborhood is quite ready yet with especially tiny apartments...

Oh and whoever the hell you are (I have a faint suspicion) throwing around that "Jewish Lightning" term, if you're gonna use it, please use it correctly. It's supposed to mean when landlords burn down their own buildings to collect insurance money...Think the Bronx in the 70s, when these neighborhoods became warzones it really wasn't worth it maintaining crumbling buildings anymore.

Many of the landlords just happened to be Jewish (because many of the neighborhoods were Jewish before masive white flight), but not all. Owners of all ethnic backgrounds burnt their own buildings to the ground because the neighborhoods became such f-n hopeless quagmires.

Dak, though I agree that some parking issues are extremely evident in the West Village (I have to park on the street and can't find parking during the day or even sometimes on weekends) I can't see demolition of housing on West, 10th, or Whitney between Carolina and Virginia as a solution. I would much rather see a strong acquisition/rehab program as the WVRG is venturing into the research for this as we speak. We are also working to see what can be done with the Whitney - although there is some major water damage to it.

However, there are already some lots here and there that can be set up like biniszkiewicz said. A double lot on Carolina between Whitney and Johnson Park - two owners who don't necessarily or with any regularity take care of the mowing and maintenance - could be obtained for this type of parking.

Also, Dak, thanks for bringing up these great former hotels. The Whitney, along with the Algonquin (76 JP), the Lyndehaven (49 JP) and quite a few others were, indeed, built as hotels for the Pan Am. We try to let visitors know during events like the GardenWalk and others.

Bob, I know you're reading this, give me a call and let's see what we can do with these lots, although one might already have plans for it.

Small apartments doesn't automatically mean they are dumpy. Have you ever lived in Manhattan? Some of the nicest apartment are tiny and cost alot too....Anywho, I can see how the fire is suspicious and now someone wants to demolish it for parking...Yup, looks pretty planned out to me. What's wrong with parking in the street? This is a city, isn't it? You want onsite parking so your fat a## doesn't have to walk to far, then move to the burbs.

Except that the 3 mentioned, and the rest of the neighborhood, were all on the 1894 city atlas. Not that it matters now - just being picky :)

This property was on the market for nearly 2 years!

419 had arson written all over it. Greenleaf set the fire with plans to demolish this manson to provide parking for the tenants in the 425 building and raise the value for potential buyers. What a bum!

I don't agree with the majority.

I do think it is important to accomodate offstreet parking. I had a building in Allentown without it, and I was able to fill that building, but it was an issue. And the issue only grows.

Let's make parking lots highly greenspaced and hidden from the street. I'm all for requiring trees to planted (big shade trees) between all rows. Make them as nice as we can, and as hidden from the neighbors. But parking is an issue. As time goes by, it gets tighter and tighter. This building crowds out a lot of on street parking needed by other residents. No offstreet parking for residents of the nearby homes, in turn, inhibits the attractiveness of those in the marketplace.

I can appreciate the residents' concerns about what a parking lot will do to their property if it's just a typical ugly Buffalo parking lot.

But if it is completely fenced in with an attractive, solid fence (at least 8' tall, with remote entry gate required), and a little green space in front of that, this could be made to be invisible. It would look a lot like a fenced in yard with attractive plantings in front. Require it to look good and function well. But don't squander opportunity to help that building get itself through the next hundred years.

It is in the neighborhood's best interest for that building to be an attractive distination in which to live. Fifteen years from now, thirty years from now, all those new kitchens baths and roof (and probably window) will be old, worn out and sad. What happens to the building then? Parking will help this building.

Someone above objected to the assertion that parking helps attract good tenants. Sorry, but it is so.

Not all car driving tenants are good. Some of my best tenants had no cars. But the meat of the tenant market drives and the ones who can afford decent cars often are very concerned about where they can park them. It makes a difference. Even students drive nice cars today.

Offstreet parking is a big deal. A way can be found to make it work for the rest of us. Our surface lots are terrible. They're ugly, ugly, ugly. Screen, green them, secure them. But don't disallow them.

STEEL, great solution indeed.

For a better look: http://tinyurl.com/ygaxlo

Jai, people accept tiny apartments in Manhattan because land values are so astronomical making it so damn expensive to live there.

Buffalo has cheap land and plenty of space...no reason a discriminating renter would be forced to settle for a broom closet. Buffalo has so many spacious apartments at affordable prices.

Variety is the key to vibrancy. Not everyone needs or wants huge spaces.

why dont we just continue bulldozing every other building so we can create little castles all over the city for the people who are too afraid of urban life and too lazy to deal with its minor inconveniences.

I absolutely agree with biniszkiewicz on the off-street parking issue. The West Village is a perfect case in point. There are several beautiful buildings on Whitney Place, Prospect Ave, Carolina Street, Georgia/Chippewa, and on Johnson Park. Many of them were built as hotels for the PanAm Exp. They're gorgeous and they have a ton of history. One of my favorites is a vacant builiging called "The Whitney" and it has its name over the front door. The uses for all of these cool buildings range from being vacant to being used as rooming houses, to being used as Section 8/welfare housing. Why? Well, I believe a lot of it has to do with the lack of off-street parking. They're simply not marketable to people who would pay premium rent if there is no place to put a car. One block away, there are rows of houses on 10th Street and West Ave that should be demolished, and room created to make a landscaped, gated parking lot for these buildings. I know that opinion is probably in the minority here, but that's my opinion.

What else besides the lack of parking could be preventing these buildings from being snatched up by a developer? I suppose it could also be that most of the people living in these buildings any combination of black, Puerto Rican, homeless, mentally ill, etc. I just know that we, in this city, are progressive enough to not see those things as deterents to urban living. Most of us who post regularly on this website probably live in buildings that are ethnically and soci-economically diverse. And I'm sure we all ride the metro to work too.

The fire happened before the property belonged to Greenleaf properties. The previous owner of 419, is currently in jail for unrelated reasons. You want to know why nothing is happening to Buffalo? It's because you guys just sit around and do nothing fruitful with your time besides of sitting around and judging others! That is also why the money that will be made in Buffalo in the near future, will be from outsiders.

Actually, those places were not built for the 1901 Exposition; all of the big apartment and "flat" buildings in the WV were built prior to 1894, well before the Pan Am planning even started. They may have been USED by Expo visitors, but were not built "for" it.

Nice story for tours, but not correct history. :)

Right on Alex. Finally someone with balls to speak the truth. Are you an outsider too? I am, and totally agree that the locals here are very negative towards anything and everything that happens here. Instead of getting out there making changes (for the better), they most likely tend to just sit back and complain.

A ha ha, PaulPops, looks like you got served!

Have any of you ever been inside this building? I knew a guy who lived on the third floor facing Porter Ave. a few years ago. His place was not "tiny" at all. For only 1 person, it was very spacious. A normal sized living room and seperate bedroom, bathroom and reasonable sized kitchen with room for a table to eat at. Also, he did not own a car and was able to walk for grocerys (several choices nearby), to Allentown/Downtown (work, nightlife, ect) and buses right out front if needed. This is an ideal location and not shabby at all.

Whatever - (said in exhasperation) - sorry I performed research on my own neighborhood and block that contradicts your "theory."

(Actually, the lots were most significantly noted on atlases and deeds as well as structures during this time. The Lyndehaven - completed in 1897, The Algonquin - completed in 1898, the Whitney - 1899)

T & ALex - Are you ready to jump in? If so, we're glad to have ya! Some of us are trying to work towards a better city, and we welcome all to join in.

Yes, but the research is wrong. For instance: the Algonquin, at 76 Johnson Park, was finished and occupied by 1894. The Pan-Am wasn't set on Buffalo until after the Spanish-American War, which was in 1898.

Your dates for the other 2 are also wrong.