Reply With QuoteIt's about time Pano got a break. That house was nothing but a dilapidated mess - the only thing historical about it was the mold that's probably inside.
After several rounds, the winner by court decision is Pano's.
Pangiotis Georgiadis, owner of the Elmwood Avenue restaurant, got the legal go-ahead to expand his business by demolishing an 1893 Medina sandstone building next door. In the decision, the Appellate Division in Rochester unanimously upheld a State Supreme Court ruling in 2005 allowing the demolition.
Richard Tobe, the planning director, said the city would not challenge the decision. The corporation counsel's recommendation was that the court's 5-0 ruling would not be overturned, and Tobe said he was already advising staff to allow the issuing of a demolition permit.
Niko Georgiadis, Pangiotis' son who lived in the house for several years, said the company plans to proceed cautiously with expansion plans that were announced in December 2006. He also said he hopes demolition opponents would move on without harboring ill will.
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial...07/1046482.asp
People who wonder if the glass is half empty or full miss the point. The glass is refillable.
It's about time Pano got a break. That house was nothing but a dilapidated mess - the only thing historical about it was the mold that's probably inside.
Playing devils advocate here.
He owned the house, if it was a dilapidated mess wasnt that his fault?
People who wonder if the glass is half empty or full miss the point. The glass is refillable.
I don't know if it was dilapidated or not, but the key phrase is "it was his house".
Truth springs from argument among friends.
The house was not delapitated when Panos' took ownership. There was at least one business there. He, Georgiadis, let it go from an old house to a wreck, because he wanted to make it into a parking lot for his restaurant.
No crime there.
BTW-He did follow the prescribed procedures for getting the house demolished. Contrary to The News article, there is an established procedure in the City to review demolitions. And they said go.
And then the brain-dead libs blocked him from doing with his property what he wanted and was approved to do.
The smartest property guy so far though, is Paladino. Get a demo permit Friday afternoon and crash the joint Saturday.
As with that case, the (hated) "activists" never put their money where their big mouths are. Panos even offered ten grand to whoever wanted the building so they could move it.
Truth springs from argument among friends.
Bravo Pano's
Bravo Pano's ! ! Enough said!
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
Actually - the obstruction of his demolition got us all a better deal in the end. 2 years ago when he first wanted to tear it down, all he was going to do was expand the patio and pave the rest for parking.
Now he has a more ambitious plan to build a second floor and completely overhaul the facade.
pretty cool how that worked out, huh.
Obviously you're one of those who believe your definition of what's "best" is best funded by someone else.Originally Posted by 300miles
Have you ever heard of the "takings" clause in the Constitution?
Truth springs from argument among friends.
This does a great job of paving the way for a CVSWalgreensRiteAidEckerd on Elmwood.
I haven't taken sides on the Pano's thing. I think Pano is at fault for letting a building rot. If you let your house rot, you can bet the town/city would be all over you eventually. On the other hand he had the right to take it down if he wanted.
I was merely stating facts. Had the original plan gone thru smoothly, we'd get the same restaurant with a big parking lot. Now for some reason, he's planning major improvements.
A good deal I'd say
The city should take this as wake up call to plan for this and regulate what can be torn down or what kind of parking is allowed.
The main problem with this whole situation wasn't really the owner... it was that the city won't plan ahead.
Pedestrian strips like Elmwood should have building codes preventing excessive parking lots, and should decide now whether demolitions should be limited. Instead, the city reacts at the last minute, as usual!
With so many great locations that Panos could have expanded, I think that Panos is a prime example of the shortsighted and selfish mindset of Buffalonians
He's an example of a patient businessman who worked within the system to expand his restaurant when he could have easily torched the place to circumvent the red tape. Now that the preservo-nazis lost they want to enact more laws to make sure they won't look like fools again.I think that Panos is a prime example of the shortsighted and selfish mindset of Buffalonians
We should have a demolition party. I'll bring the sledge hammers and beer.
When you say "working within the system" do you mean smashing out all the windows and allowing rain and snow to come in and rot the building for years in order to say "The building is beyond repair"?
That is how the system works in Buffalo.
BTW - the expanded restaurant plan only came out 2 months ago. For the past couple years he wanted most of the space for a parking lot. If you spend any time on Elmwood, you'd realize why that is not a good thing for the streetscape.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
