Buffalo Rising Online

i hope this issue becomes pretty significant so that the outrage can be loud and persistent enough to make city hall stop any further progress with this project. an absolute f**king embarassment.

and please explain why ciminelli would bother designing a 10 story building when there were alleged restrictions for no more than 4 stories.

and why would there even be height restriction? ciminelli's proposal looks great.

this is absolutely insane.

James Pitts was once a true advocate for Buffalo and also a friend to preservation. It is sad to see he would use his connections to push such a mediocre and lame project.

Now things are making sense...this is much too urban for Waterfront Village and would only call out how poorly planned the village is and what could have been.

Paul - I meant I don't think architecture is the main issue about this controversy and there's no sense in arguing that. Neither of us will change the other's mind. I agree it's one factor but not the only one. Anyway, there were several other issues about this which I listed in the previous thread that make BURA's actions today seem awful to me, and worthy of the common council overriding it if they have that power. I doubt they will, but we'll see what happens.

QE, do you have the RFP wording about the 4-story limit, or do you have a way to find that out?

It sounds strange that Ciminelli would have wasted their time and money designing something that would get rejected automatically. Maybe the RFP wording, or maybe the way RFPs usually work, reasonably implied to Ciminelli that a height variance was a real possibility? Otherwise, this just doesn't add up.

Why does it take a year to modify the zoning? Not enough donations from favored developers? Erkel for Senator........................ of Rome. The ancient Rome of ruins!

if these are the plans, whats wrong with them? looks pretty smokin hot to me.

and in the third rendering on the right is the urban boulevard leading to a bascule bridge to the outer harbor.

Oh that would be the day. First we need to learn how to tie our shoes.

The city's OWN PLAN calls for just about the exact style and mass of the Ciminelli project. The fact that the zoning still hasn't been changed and we are still arguing about suburban vs urban architecture on this site is a HUGE light being shined on the Brown admin's refusal to actually follow up on city plans.

go to Queen City Waterfront

page through this... This was a plan started in 2003... 2003 it was finished in 2007 or so just about when Shanghai reds was being proposed. It was too late to change the plans and fix what was THEN considered a huge mistake.

Now here we go a year or so later... and a council APPROVED plan, fit as an addendum to the City Comprehensive plan, by a well respected award winning planning team... and the council and mayor STILL don't 'get it'

They still don't do what has been shown to be the better proposal for the city. Hey guys... YOU ARE NOT PLANNERS, ARCHITECTS or DESIGNERS in any way... maybe you should start to listen to them (like other cities do) and actually follow through on some of your OWN plans.

This is maddening. Here are three items from the Erie St Plan, page 51: 1. Expand development opportunities by expanding the urban street grid 2. Promote urban densities by allowing multiple story buildings, zero-lot line, multi-use, ground floor commercial, residential or office above.....

HELLO! There are even graphics to show people what this means. I don't know. I hope Patterson chooses Brown so maybe just.. maybe we can get someone is office that knows what the hell is going on. Why even bother making plans, getting public input, WINNING AWARDS for those plans.... if the politicos are just going to ignore them.

Pundit - he wants the one shown here. The previous post linked in the article shows the proposal that BURA approved.

Paul - No problem. In this case, the Pitts proposal seems worse several ways - one of which is appearance. If appearance was in favor of one, and other factors in favor of the other, that situation would illustrate what I meant by appearance is only one factor among many in the decision. No matter what, both should have been allowed to make their case fully and publicly.

On a relatively isolated parcel like this, I don't think urban-ness of the design is the biggest deal in the world, but the overall appearance of Ciminelli's is higher quality, and it's bigger (which once the tax breaks expire would be a positive), and is more multi-purpose so even if the hotel ever has difficulties the other uses can help keep it more viable.

If the Pitts proposal having a physical connection to Shanghi Reds is what's really driving this decison as one comment speculated, that should be publicly stated by BURA (and then rejected by the council because that's a bad thing to require). Something still doesn't add up about the height limit. It sounds like an excuse to choose the Pitts proposal - either a planned excuse or a convenient one. What would it hurt to have a taller building in that spot? There's nothing nearby that would be hurt by that, right? Sounds arbitrary.

I'll get the torches, you get the pitch forks, let's storm the Bastille!

its amazing that the citizens of western ny have not started a riot over some of the bullshit that our politicians pull here!

we rejected this project for a 4 story plain peice of shit?

pundit....you're a tool.

You don't get a good urban neighborhood in one bang. You have to start with one building.. The first of a series. Sure it isn't urban now but that doesn't mean it can't be one day. The best neighborhoods and cities are all built, one building at a time. We just need to follow through with the better of the two options.

I love Mickey Kearns.. he is 0 bullshit- does not mess around-and gets stuff done.

Ciminelli's building would be one of the nices buildings built in Buffalo over the last twenty five years. I am in shock that Mayor Brown would allow this. Brown is so big on talking up large projects and development under his administration. This is truly a sad day in Buffalo, and im sure this beautiful project will never come to fruition. It would stand as a beacon on the waterfront. Ciminelli is class and does projects right. That motel is an embarassment and is a jole. Planning ideas or not there is no way any one can justify that the pitts motel is the highest and best use of that land. This is absolutly deplorable. I hope Higgans, or some one steps up to stop this criminal act from continuing. I am also e mailing the mayor!

BUILD THIS MODEL!!!!! seriously, another 4 storey building.... we have enough of them! lets make a statment!!!

cookjr... what is his email adress? i think emailing the mayor would be a great way to show that many citizens are outraged at this decision.

MayorBrownWebMail@ch.ci.buffalo.ny.us

E mail the mayor to let him know how you feel. I think this is down right sad

Hoe could they possibly have accepted this scheme? Its got no gazebo. The Gazebo is clearly the issue!

I am with Dan on this one. This is very small town thinking.

the ciminelli proposal is by far the better one, design-wise. It's far more contemporary and and less suburban than the pitts proposal, what is the common council thinking?

This makes me feel like ted stevens. I cannot believe they passed this up for any reason! Ciminelli wants to invest money in buffalo so why are we stopping them? This project has excellent descriptive qualities to complement and illuminate our waterfront. I don’t believe a 4-story motel tells the right story for our waterfront. What did the city run out of abandoned homes to demolish? This project has a fluid urban class for an area that is desperate for distinction. There is no way we can let this project be turned aside! Lets go buffalo!

Height restriction's are for roller coasters, this city has made some nice additions ad i bet you every single citizen in this region prefers Ciminelli's project. so what is the point of our goverment?

mjs - the Common Council hasn't acted on this yet one way or another. The agency who made the decision is the Buffalo Urban Renewal Agency, which has a few council members on its board but they all voted against this.

The height restriction just doesn't make any sense to me as the reason, even though it sounds like they pretty much pointed to that that as their whole justification. I'm picturing that area - next to Shanghi Red's, near the marina.... and trying to imagine any real reason why anyone might object to a 10 story building being there. Can't think of one.

"but they all voted against this", meaning the three Council members on the BURA board voted against the 4-story Pitts proposal which the board's majority (including Mayor Brown and his appointees) voted for. I didn't mean the Council members voted against what's pictured at the top here - they supported that, or at least supported letting it be presented as a choice.

WE NEED THE CIMINELLI DESIGN OR THE BAR GETS SET AT MEDIOCRITY FOR THIS ENTIRE AREA!!!! NO NO NO!! Progress is slowly happening around downtown and projects like this are what we need to get the city back on track. Is this a 100% done deal? Is there anything we can do?

Ciminelli team....this is exactly what buffalo needs! Is it to late to choose Ciminelli team?

Looks like the community has decided on the 10 Story. So build it......WE DON'T WANT THE 4 STORY PITTS BUILDING. WE WANT THE 10 STORY MODEL!!!!!!

can we just copy and paste this and the other article about this project into CitiStat?

Ok, I just got off the phone with a very involved mover and shaker on this whole project, and there has been major issues with the taller building because of..........birds, there is a lot of concern that migrating birds will not see the building and fly right into it...

Ahhhh... politics in Buffalo. It's the reason the city died, it's the reason it's not coming back and its the reason progress can't be made. The issues in BFLO and WNY remain pretty simple to identify, but impossible to change. Our "leaders" from the smallest town politician to state and national senators are self-interested a-holes (see story on Stachowski and the the state senate control and try to make sense on how that whole joke helps takes payers when it invovled $6 million in pork barrel funding as an enticement). And Byron Brown is now king of the castle and master of the idiots.

Sadly, people don't know how to vote when election time comes. They remember ribbon cutting that the mayor attended and got his picture in the paper for (even though he probably had nothing to do with the project) and not the plethora of bad decisions he's made in his tenure.

What is really disgusting is when people who know better like Brian Reilly try to make transparent statements in favor of this joke. LoCurto as far as I know has a masters in urban planning and he voted against this. So Reilly is nothing more than another in a long line of political yes men appointed to important positions and told to keep their common sense out of the discussion.

We're all just preaching to the choir...I suggest that everyone with a post here today redirect their frustration to the email below...

MayorBrownWebMail@ch.ci.buffalo.ny.us

It's time to demand better from the city.

Ahhhh... politics in Buffalo. It's the reason the city died, it's the reason it's not coming back and its the reason progress can't be made. The issues in BFLO and WNY remain pretty simple to identify, but impossible to change. Our "leaders" from the smallest town politician to state and national senators are self-interested a-holes (see story on Stachowski and the the state senate control and try to make sense on how that whole joke helps takes payers when it invovled $6 million in pork barrel funding as an enticement). And Byron Brown is now king of the castle and master of the idiots.

Sadly, people don't know how to vote when election time comes. They remember ribbon cutting that the mayor attended and got his picture in the paper for (even though he probably had nothing to do with the project) and not the plethora of bad decisions he's made in his tenure.

What is really disgusting is when people who know better like Brian Reilly try to make transparent statements in favor of this joke. LoCurto as far as I know has a masters in urban planning and he voted against this. So Reilly is nothing more than another in a long line of political yes men appointed to important positions and told to keep their common sense out of the discussion.

I have had "dealings" with my Council Member Brian Davis for years now. I can see why he would not stand up for this project, He has done absolutly nothing for his district and is actually a pretty ignorant person. Like the Mayor, if it does not involve the east side, he really has no interest in Buffalo. So you can call him, but his answer will be evasive and uneducated. I applaud the three Council Members who wanted to shelve this for now as THEY seem to want the best for Buffalo. If the 4 story motel gets built, maybe Higgins can get the elevated route 5 to exit at the entrance. After 30 years of decline, what is waiting one more year to get the proper zoning and do it right?

We're all just preaching to the choir...I suggest that everyone with a post here today redirect their frustration to the email below...

MayorBrownWebMail@ch.ci.buffalo.ny.us

It's time to demand better from the city.

Ducks and other other water fowel as well. The taller building was too close to the waters edge as well, impeding on the ducks runway space for take-off and landing.

From the Buffalo News today:

Ciminelli Chief Operating Officer G. Gail Edwards disputed city claims the developers were informed of strict height and massing limitations.

“Not only did they not talk about restrictions, we were encouraged to be as creative as possible with our design,” Edwards said.

What a JOKE! I can't believe that our city is still stuck in reverse and thinks that it's residents can't tell the difference between horrid and beautiful when it comes to architecture.

I just sent off an email to byron...I hope everyone else does that same. MayorBrownWebMail@ch.ci.buffalo.ny.us

bbrown@city-buffalo.com [this one goes right to his office]

We need to file a suit to block the 4 story saying it's TOO SMALL and that the 10 Story is the new minimum hieght.

Thank you Common Council. At least someone has planning brains around here.

our politicians are not qualified to do there jobs.

they know nothing of development or finances.

i've dealt with brian davis...not the sharpest tool in the shed. odd's are...pitts says do it...and davis does it.

tim kennedy i know personally....unqualified. he was a long time intern, went to school for occupational therapy. was given his political positon by his party when shroeder moved up to a state seat. not qualified to review development proposals or review a budget.

and we keep voting them in. we deserve this four story hotel.

Thank you Common Council. At least someone has planning brains around here.

Looks like our very own leaders who say "The City is Booming" think that ANY development is progress....so sad. especially that they pick the worst idea instead of the best.

We can not let this awful suburbs looking hotel be built....Ciminelli's project will allow people to actually see the lake, main reason to put a hotel on the water....What do we need to do, petition, sue? It is one embarrassing mistake after another and Mayor Brown needs his head examined...

The Ciminelli hotel will be a destination hotel, a hotel people will make a point to reserve, the other will be a comfort INN looking disaster that will take away from a nice resurging waterfront

Mayor Brown and his croonies only care about saving themselfs instead of what's best for Buffalo. Remember, it's former Councel President PITTS whose design won. If it were someone else's 4 story design, we would'nt be having this discussion, because the 10 story concept would have been chosen.

It drives me nuts that we are taking down a classic E.B.Green auditorium on the waterfront and putting up glass panels that exhibit no craftsmanship and take literally five minutes each to attach.

i thought this was the plot of land where the adelphia tower was proposed. if this is the case, shine on you crazy diamond.

I can see the architectural tours coming through Buffalo 200 years from now. "This is another magnificent example of Buffalo at the turn of the Obama Century." "This style is typical of the Late First Capitalism Period." "It is a shame that we no longer have the craftsmanship that these old accountants exhibited when they built this glass palace." "Our accountants have no business even calling themselves accountants when you compare their work to those of the Late Capitalism Period." "In all fairness, glass used to actually be cheap, now it is found only in expensive jewelry."

"Now get back on your bicycles and we shall tour a section of town that demonstrates architecture from the Second Capitalism Period in Buffalo, where they met and exceeded the accomplishments of the 19th century. "

I really like the Ciminelli design, that would be so amazing to see on the waterfront, but unfortuantely we have idiots running city and county government with no vision of the future. "All you people up there in City Hall, You're fuckin' it up for the people that's in the streets. This is a song for the people in the streets, Not the people City Hall. All you motherfuckers in the streets it's time to rise up, Come along children and fuckin' rise! " - Tenacious D

NewBeginnings. the really annoying part about this, is that the Chosen concept is actually the one that goes against the plan and the principles that the city accepted for this site... ohh wait. it is Pitts.. and Browns appointees.. all bigger ideas and vision are off the table...

We'll just have to keep emailing and call his office to voice our opinion , or, when is the next meeting? Is there even another one? It so sad that he have to make the right choices for those elected, majority of us should be runnning and giving approvals since our own officials can't.

I sent an email to Mayor Brown requesting his opinion on how this development fits into the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan and the City's master plan for development. The proposals do not seem to fit into the master planning guidelines proposed and "adopted" by the City.

I am still wondering what everyone would like to see on the waterfront. If the only options we have are the Ciminelli or Pitts renderings, then we might never realize the true potential of what could be for one of our most visible and viable areas.

How can there even be a height restriction? It's such small time thinking. If can only attract the merchants of the cheap.

Perhaps the Cimminelli team didn't know about the height restriction? I'd prefer to think they did and used this as a forum to get people to wake up to the possibilities.

Mike LoCurto responded saying that "the developer designation status that BURA approved will still have to be approved by the Common Council and that will entail a public hearing."

EVERYONE NEEDS TO ATTEND THIS HEARING TO PREVENT THE GARBAGE WINGATE FROM BEING BUILT

Public Hearing it is, i'm sure they will schedule it at some odd time to make it hard for people to show. As long as BR keeps us informed of any forthcoming public meets i'll be there, hopefully along with bunch of other folks ready to wage war on this stupid decision.

Just let me know when and I will NOT miss that public hearing!!! Is Ciminelli still interested in building that building with the current economic climate. It is important to build that building with the understanding that this is a growing section of Buffalo. Build Big or Go Home! FYI... Bow Ties are out.

Onstarmartin... Davis deos nothing because he's too busy trying to pickup girls at Soho and Snooty Fox to actually do anything, he is just another in a LOOOOOOOONG line of politicians who choose this path as their career instead of actually doing anything to help a community... He got elected or appointed because he is a minority. Look at our politicians now, mostly Minorities...and they get elected by the minotities ands Unions...

Yes the other proposal on the table is awful, however how easily we forget who voted in the schmucks that are running this city. Try keeping this in mind come 2009!

Wingate Hotel On Our Prime Space = WHOOPS

QUIT VOTING IN THESE UNION TEET SUCKING SUPPORTER DEMOCRATS.... CANT EVERYONE SEE THAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN BUFFALO HAS RUINED THIS PLACE? HIGHEST TAXES IN US, 55% POPULATION LOSS...WHAT MORE NEED BE EXAMINED?????

Assaroni- New York state has been controlled by Republicans for the past 40 years and The federal government by Republicans for the past 8 years. Look how that has worked out.

The whole height restriction argument is BS, just as the Gates Circle condos. If you didn't want your view blocked they should have purchased the air rights. Based on the article the village residents seemed very pleased with this concept.

This whole story just seems suspicious from the top down. Ciminelli would not have spent time and money if they knew about the height restrictions which would lead to the proposal being shot down. Magically, Pitts knew of the restrictions and the Mayor came right out and said there would be no further delays. I know Buffalo is sue happy when it comes to these projects, but I'll have to say this is the FIRST time I'd advocate a lawsuit from stopping this from happening!

{Deleted}

Here is the response from Janet Penska:

Thank you for writing.

Please allow me to address your concerns..We were presented with two proposals regarding this site. One fully complied with the requirements of the RFP, the other did not.

Other than the Ciminelli project, we were presented with no other options other than to continue to leave the cite vacant.

New York State statute mandates that the requirements of an RFP be fulfilled. The Ciminelli project did not comply with the requirements expressed in the RFP (in particular, the requirement to comply with zoning codes).

There was some board discussion that the Wingate Hotel did not comply with the requirements because of the mixed use provision; however, mixed use was a preference, not a requirement. Consequently, this proposal did in fact comply with all RFP requirements.

As a board, we must ensure projects are within city law and regulations. The Ciminelli project was not, and consequently, as a board member, I could not justify a vote for this project. New York State law governing procurement requires adherence to the requirements contained with RFP’s. A vote for the Ciminelli project would have violated this law, and as a good citizen and a board member I would not do so.

In addition, Public Authorities Law mandates that board members not take actions that violate the law. If so, the sanctions are quite severe.

Once again, I appreciate your views, however I was obliged to adhere to the law.

GOOD CITIZEN MY A** HER RESPONSE IS COMPLETE BS AND EVERYONE HERE KNOWS IT, THE CITY HAS NO PROBLEM CHANGING THE LAW FOR OTHER PROJECTS.

IF SHE WAS A GOOD CITIZEN SHE WOULD HAVE NOT VOTED FOR EITHER PROJECT AND REQUESTED A CHANGE IN THE ZONING SO THAT A GREAT PROJECT COULD BE BUILT.

I would rather have the site (not cite) left vacant than have the motel style hotel built. Anyone else?

Some council members cite the design guidelines for that site as the reason they voted like they did. What were the design guidelines? Make it nondescript? Aim low? Underutilization? Mediocrity?

The design guidelines are the problem then. Change them. My question is: if the design guidelines were different, would the vote have been the same? Was this railroaded through?

Seriously- if the design guidelines are the reason for this, then go back and get them changed. I realize that the slow pace of how things get done in Buffalo means that this will take a year. I'd rather have it take another year to get it right in order to avoid 30 years of looking at a mistake situated right in the middle of one of the more visible spots in the city. This is the best that Buffalo can do to build a "world class" waterfront? If you want a world class waterfront you don't hand people 2nd class options. This is the same kind of junk that any little town and countless highway exits all across the USA have. Why would a tourist want to go out of their way to come to Buffalo to see nothing out of the ordinary?

The Janet Penska response... and rocks explode when exposed to air. This town has a million excuses.

Am I the only one that went into work today and had a conversation with co-workers who all agreed on one issue, this design. What type of statement does that little 4 storey hotel make to out-of-towners. Prime property deserves a prim building! In the words of some wise people; GO BIG OR GO HOME!!

impressingagent, The Adelphia building was to go up on the Webster Block (Washington/Perry/Main/Scott in front of the HSBC Atrium building. Does anyone know why that is called the "Webster Block?" The EPA website (designating it a brownfields site) says: "...previous uses including tenement housing, copper and sheet iron manufacturing, clothing manufacturing, an oil warehouse, a flavoring extract manufacturing facility, and a foundry" but does not say anything more about the name.

Blackrocklifer...Really? Ummm better check the record buddy, Buffalo has been ruled by Dems for over 50 years...

bhorvath - The small city vs big city labels aren't relevant to the choice between these proposals. Actually those labels aren't relevant to much. Buffalo's has a long term weak economy compared to most cities and it's shrinking people, no doubt. With or without this it won't have a "big city waterfront" whatever that means.

Cimineli knows all about Buffalo's shrinking and economy, and they think their plan is viable anyway. Hilton wanted to partner with Ciminelli so they thought it viable too. Ciminelli said in the Buffalo News today they're really mad about the rejection (but won't fight it in court). All 10 stories aren't for a hotel in the Ciminelli proposal. There is demand for more hotel rooms in Buffalo. That might be surprising, but whatever. I can't stand that any tax breaks or subsidies ever happen here for hotels, but that's being offered for both proposals. The issue here isn't someone asking for a pie-in-the-sky publicly funded new project. This would be privately funded as far as I know, except for the tax breaks.

Penskas response shows how noone knows how to write proper RFP's. The RFP should have had the proper guidelines for a decent design

BuffaloBob57 in the previous BR thread about this made a couple of great points:

'1) The waterfront RFP states that the respondents must follow a document called NY R 35. Google it. “The project area is a Community Business District”. As listed in NY R-35, section C.2.b on page 10 and 11 lists the height limitations to be three stories or 40 feet.

It sounds like BURA could change the restrictions (if they wanted to) without much effort at all! It doesn’t sound like a re-zoning or an act of Congress! ...'

Puts Ms. Penska's spin into some perspective.

^Considering what BuffaloBob57 wrote about the RFP in his points 1 and 2 above, I can understand why the Ciminelli C.O.O. expressed frustration in Friday's Buffalo News:

www.buffalonews.com/145/story/514124.html

People who think this is only a typical BuffaloRising drama about architecture styles should read the following:

'...Ciminelli Chief Operating Officer G. Gail Edwards disputed city claims the developers were informed of strict height and massing limitations.

The 210,000-square-foot, 10-story building would have housed a 135-room Hilton Garden Inn, 80,000 square feet of Class A office space, and first-floor retail. The mixed-use blueprint incorporated 76 interior parking slots.'

bhrvath - you sound like and probably are a bumbling idiot. Your one of those that think they are something because you attach yourself to a BIG city. You probably can just cover your rent every month. Well heres a news flash, there is a lot of people here that can afford a home and build equity while you try impress old friends and family with your new big city ways. Get a life you turncoat loser!

Why the hell would Buffalo compare itself to some city like NY or Chicago. We are a medium size city on the rise that is in the strong position of diversifying our economy. We can definitly support a Hilton Garden hotel with 200 room on some of the nices waterfront property on lake erie. Hilton, Ciminelli, and we the people think this project would work and the politians at City Hall have the ethical right to do what is best for the greater good. Go Big or Go Home!!!

Jack thanks.

bhorvath. You are only considering a small fragment of our idealistic despair. You make a great point about it being around nothing though lets not forget about our waterfront. This project is not perfect but it does come close to addressing many of our major weaknesses. Have you ever had a problem trying to find something that slide near your feet in the car? Well our waterfront is a parking lot for these kind of lost things. Speaking of parking lots, I wonder how many of these law-abiding politicians are willing to wait for a shared border plaza?

The pitts project is the same old clip on tie and coffee stained briefcase. It accomplishes nothing for the descriptive qualities of our city. There is a ride at darien lake called the sleigh ride and for our city this represents the 190 from elm street to church. Driving in the other direction, this building would give our city so much more volume (similar to blue cross blue shield). It’s unfortunate that the design does not outreach the marine drive apartments.

I agree with assaroni on this.... the RFP was poorly planned to begin with, which leads to poor design being the ONLY legal option.. They basically set the site up to fail! They tell Ciminelli to be creative, then say woops... but the law says this.. so me and my hand picked croonies 'HAVE' to vote for the legal project... which just so happens to be a former prominent politician's pet project..

Sound about right? sigh... The RFP should be considered illegal because it doesn't follow the city's own master planning principles for this site... Sorry guys but Ciminelli seems to know your own plans and vision more than you. That is the saddest part about this whole fiasco.

http://buffaloruse.com/2008/12/common-council-fast-tracks-pitts-waterfront-proposal/