Hmmm, looks interesting but was the original intended to be made with precast concrete? My suspicions say not.

Well said skarnath. This really seems to me like a time the critics should tone down their rhetoric and think about finding another subject. This is a relatively small building with relatively small public sector involvement. If a bunch of people want to build this to further what they see is important goals (rowing and architourism) then let them do it and get out of the way. They're actually doing it, which should be a relief to all the BRO readers who constantly lament the fact that nothing happens fast enough for them on the development front.

why do so many people complain? it looks nice

Im a huge FLW enthusiast and even if I wasnt im glad to see all of the development in our great city. amen.

If the Frank Lloyd Wright people (foundation? heirs?) disapproved of posthumous constructions of unbuilt designs, they wouldn't license those unbuilt designs. I'm looking at the FLW boathouse website now and I don't see any discussion of posthumous construction. Am I missing somethng?

This will be a great addition to our neglected waterfront. It is a significant improvement over the current WSRC facilities!

I am so happy to see progress and positive development! It is about time that we see something progress beyond the discuss and bitch stage.

It looks like a WWII Nazi Bunker…I can almost make out the resistance forces rising up from the polluted waters, one well placed grenade would fix that mess.

This looks great. Thank god they gave up on trying to build a new bridge and did this instead. I’m looking forward to the new FLW elephant house at the Buffalo Zoo

Why was this building so expensive....it looks like its going up very easily and quickly....especially with its poured concrete walls. I thought there were going to be FLW designs in the concrete or FLW tiles.....but while its attractive...it doesnt strike me as having the expensive FLW details that made it wait all these years and cost so much money.

NOW CAN WE MOVE ONTO REBUILDING THE LARKIN ADMINISTRATION BUILDING?

Davvid wrote: "... I'm not exactly a "FLW enthusiast"

Then why did you feel the need to write a comment? A lot of people put a lot of work into this and it is looking good.

I agree with Chief Psychic, emilie and the like: As usual the Buffalo Naysayers are quick to put down any idea that isn't ideal (in their views at least). I'll take a FLW boathouse-- be it of concrete, mud, whatever-- over traditional bflo/erie projects like the 33, main st closure, etc, any day! Progress is progress. We're moving beyond strategizing about what people may want/ what may bring people downtown to building for what is already asked for.

One thing I like very much about this building is how it engages the water edge. It is not just a building sitting nect to the water. It actually becomes the water edge. There are too few examples in Buffalo where the architecture melds with the landscape and the surroundings in general.

What is missing as Buffalo aligns itself with the work of FLW is a very serious and pecise discussion of:

- the relevance of Wright's work.

- authenticity, authorship and posthumous construction

- the ethics of architourism

(perhaps some other topics as well)

This is not the best forum in which to have that detailed discussion but it should happen somewhere. Without that type of rigorous assement of our own inentions we might end up doing very stupid things with alot of money. Maybe I am wrong but I think an informed discussion wouldn't hurt.

STEEL, am I way off base with all of this?

just so you know...FLW purists like jack quinan think projects like this are stupid. it is kinda cool to expand our FLW portfolio but at the sametime, these arent the same materials FLW would use and whose to say he would design the boathouse like this if he was asked to design it for that location....and whose to say blue sky masoleum would look that way if he was told it be for random people of the public to be buried in and not the martin family.

sorry im just saying.

i do think its pretty interesting though. buffalo has definitely pushed the FLW connection for marketing us lately and its working with the martin house, blue sky, and now this.

skarnath, I'm not finding any critical discussion on www.wrightsboathouse.org. Is there another website?

I'm finding rhetoric. "In addition to being a working boathouse the building will be accessible to architectural tourists who desire to tour this building and experience its authentic spaces."

A serious discussion would include experts that do not stand to gain or lose a lot from the project.

"national & international interest in all things Wright continues to grow, not wane." This reads like it was learned from a focus group study and fed to a board of directors. Do we want "focus group" urbanism?

These issues are serious because they affect the integrity of Buffalo's architectural heritage.

They could have hired an up and coming architect of our era to design a better boathouse designed specifically for our city, our time period and the needs of this rowing club . I see this as a missed opportunity but I'm not exactly a "FLW enthusiast".

It's a cool idea to take these dormant plans and build them out. Having completed the adult learn to row class at the West Side Rowing Club a few years ago, I remember their building as being un-inspired. Hopefully the FLW-designed gas station will be built also.