Al Coppola’s Little Pan Am House-- Still Kindling Query

Al Coppola’s Little Pan Am House-- Still Kindling Query

Story Options

Sam Hoyt made a great move this week to delegate into the Historic Preservation Registry to include the Pan American Exposition's Little White House (owned by Al Coppola) into its holds of regulation. This was likely both a valiant and a good intended move by Sam. As a friend and follower of both gentlemen, this suddenly feels like a Buffalo family heated discussion. Know this though--Al Coppola is not seeking help from Sam to make his own point.

I support Sam's move. How not to? But there's more. Sam’s a truly great guy but he just wasn’t there when Al bought and preserved the building for the past 25 years while valiantly supporting the Buffalo Preservation Board’s efforts.

And Sam wasn’t there when the Buffalo Historical Society turned Al down on his offer to pay to move and preserve the building at their wherever intended site five years ago. But Sam is there now, thankfully, and so are many more, now that the media has made Al Coppola a predator of what he’s only ever sought to preserve—his building, and our Buffalo. Somehow, a lot of people missed Al’s intended point.

This once prize fighter, Al Coppola, a total Buffalo advocate and ongoing best-for Buffalo fighter merely wanted to make some significant points about our preservation board choice format.

Al Coppola is a former state senator, a 17-year Buffalo Councilman, and a resident of Buffalo, New York, --indeed a long time political figure in the city, who served in the Senate at the turn of the century, who owns this building in question, which lies in front of his house on Delaware. He’s cared for it alone for twenty-plus years. He even offered it to the Historical Society five years ago as a gift for the Pan Am Centennial—even offered to pay to move it there, and even offered to remain in tact as its preserver. He loves the house. They weren’t whatsoever interested, however. Odd as that may be, he continues to maintain it and to love its heritage and meaning.

Now suddenly everyone is interested in Al’s decision about his little white building no one ever took proper notice of before. Al exclaims he only ever wanted to cite the ridiculousness of a Buffalo Preservation Board he’s supported for over 20 years not looking into the 120-plus properties of Buffalo’s historical waterfront significance being wiped away into oblivion by the Peace Bridge Plan.

“How can we or I or anyone properly care about a little white hut that is supposed to have historical significance when a city like Buffalo goes so un-attuned and uncaring into a hands down battle for the PBA to literally rip out heritage and current lives’ families from an area so rich in history?”

Okay, Al-- I said. You're upset about the PBA's rather imminent onslaught of the West Side's original waterfront Italianate heritage homes. That means a lot to you. Was that then your overall point, Al, I asked him? Did you really mean it when you said you’d tear down your precious Pan Am house?

“Listen," Al said, "It was the straw that broke my camel's back, really---I went to the cited Stillwater restaurant Presevation hearing for their simply most evidentally deserved, really simple canopy request—and I was totally unsolicited by the restuarant—I went just to foster a citizen care for their, what, canopy request --and also in my angst to surmise other ill-thought decisions the board was and has been making on behalf of quieting business opportunities.”

Their staunch response surprised you, Al. So what did you find out? I asked him.

“Here, there’s a board—it blows your mind--it's supposed to preserve heritage—but not freeze-frame it into non-commercial veritable breath for life!—the board was totally unfocused on their mission—totally selfish for ideals that don’t concern a business owner’s rights to co-exist in their presvervationist dreams-- it left me dumbfounded numb to see their lack of clarity of understanding.”

Al Coppola continues: “It really strongly got me thinking about our west side and my day to day after day efforts to save those great homes they’re about to tear down. They're supposed to care about them but the PBA has them blind-sided-- go figure that!

…And it got me ultimately upset over my little white house project I’ve cared for all those years. Do I want to tear it down? Hell no! And I won’t. But I tried to send a message…and here’s the message:

I’m tearing Nothing down—but neither are we letting the PBA tear down Buffalo’s gorgeous and historical first waterfront village that locks in the vestiges of Italian heritage from the city’s onset of the past century. THAT is real preservation—Is anyone listening? And why isn’t the Preservation Board listening???”

Al Coppola has a larger point to make...and asks everyone to help him make it, together:

“We’re going to have meetings in my little white Pan Am house—yes, and we’ll meet once a month there—and if the crowd of citizens is too large we’ll meet elsewhere. But we will meet, and we’ll meet to relocate a conscience in the Preservation Board of Buffalo.”

A new conscience for the Buffalo Presevration Board?...one led by all citizens?-- including those wanting to do business in Buffalo?...that seems an utterly new concept worth detailing-- together.

Suddenly Al Coppola seems more like a Sparticus seeking to enfree those held ignorant under an authority-like entity that holds esoteric ideals that preserve blindly without observe of the necessary community lifts to create necessary progress as well.

Al Coppola isn’t a rich politician and never was—he’s simply an earnest Buffalo neighbor, a man who early on lost his restaurant on Main Street to a ridiculous subway idea that killed the Main street of dreams, and who then went into politics and remained there valiantly always to make things better for his and his neighbors’ future, and who relished his only ever honest work among community endeavors, and who never ever veered from his earnest approach to make things work for his constituents.

The biggest blemish in Coppola’s career is also his greatest victory of conscience. There are those that say Al Coppola held back the progress of the Bison’s stadium. He certainly did. Bob Rich Junior wasn’t going to put any money at all from Rich Products into building the stadium. Coppola fought against that utter grab zeal and indeed held things up. He then forced Rich to at least sign a lease, which they weren’t eager to do—and in the end they did, but only because of Coppola.

Coppola went against every other councilman that time to make his point. There is no councilman in the City of Buffalo history who has repeatedly gone against the veil of the times to stay quick to his honor more than Al Coppola. It hurt him immensely, but he’s remained steel to the wind every time.

And when the Buffalo Common Council voted themselves a $10,000 pay raise one year, Al Coppola denied himself the pay raise. He could have used it too—sending kids to college at the time—but his wife Carol kept teaching, and Al kept working, for us—and there’s no man in Buffalo I’d rather give my thanks to. He is the pride of Buffalo history—and he is deserving of our respect.

Now we can see where Al is going… and we can hope our good-intentioned friend Sam Hoyt and many others are going to be on the Al Coppola team to regenerate an honest Preservation Board purpose and mandate as well.

Buffalo's Preservation Board is still the Best in the country-- preserving more of an historic city than any other Rust Belt locale ever enjoyed the protection by or thereof-- its legacy is streamlined with glorious wins of protection-- all along supported by Al Coppola and countless others. The good members of this board need our proud support, but they also need our intervention, and possible revisions to review their integral visions to co-create for the best for our city.

Al Coppola seeks to bring that vision forward-- this time as a citizen and with all the guts that takes. He's not running for any office this time-- but he's ably running for our community, and just wants a little help from each of us to pay attention to a an able board with mission and purpose that needs our involvement to share the good vision with.

Maybe this is a good Buffalo discussion. Maybe Al Coppola brought it on where it raised some startled eyebrows, but let that good discussion now take its even better steps.

And if there's anything we should preserve first and foremost, let it be Al Coppola's zest-- and add to that Sam Hoyt's as well-- for we've got a multifluous team here we need to keep the topics addressing to their fullest for our fullest.

That's the real Buffalo we're proud to be a part of.

Rock Harbor

What Others Have To Say

  1. JohnB

    0 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 00:38

    When will said meetings begin?

  2. viking

    1 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 09:03

    I attended a meeting that Sam sent his representative to with a packaged speech, the content of that speech didn't match the facts as they actually were. The subject was about level three sex offenders in Sam's district. In Sam's speech he chided the zoning board for not being represented which it actually was, this made me wonder what about other inconsistencies in Sam's tenure . I know Al and have found him always straight forward although sometimes on a different agenda than me. At this point I'm sorry I didn't pay more attention to Al and his political career, I certainly will pay more attention to Sam's.

    In conversation about my observation with other individuals who are politically adept, the consensus was that Sam only attended to issues that put him on the wining side in perception. I'm not sure that's correct but telling if it is.

  3. al-alo

    1 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 09:25

    lets get right down to brass tacks: do we want a preservation board and preservation districts or not?

    'cause, if we do, we wont always agree with them. they arent there to just rubber stamp peoples plans. all this over an awning's material? c'mon. plans get bounced back and forth frequently between local, state and federal agencies. id go as far as saying, this sort of feedback makes a project better.

    and al's sledgehammer to kill a fly approach is not terribly appealing. it makes him look hotheaded. lets try for a little cooperation here! im sure there is a wide middle ground here that is being completely ignored.

  4. ElmwoodBoy

    0 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 09:48

    Hoyt addressed the level III sex offender issue because he believes they should not be on the bike path, and that Buffalo State should look outside its bounds to positively affect the community. He opposed this issue and moved with alternatives that the GNPA proposed, reflecting the community's interests. The importance of not having this in Black Rock/West Side culminated in the resolution urging the Zoning Board to kill the proposal on Dec. 19th. that was unanimously passed by the Common Council. Thompson and Golombek came around, but other politicians who had "cut the deal" w/Rev. King in Nov 2006 have been backpeddling since. All except the Mayor, he signed off in Nov. 2006 and has been nowhere on the issue.

  5. Auburner

    1 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 11:37

    Viking Is it not the job of a Legislation Rep to reflect the populous he/she represents?

    I for one believe Sam Hoyt is one heck of an advocate for the community and believe he is a very effective Legislator for the discricts he represents... Albany is one of the most petty towns in the world and he has certainly proved, time and time again, to be out for the Buffalo area...

  6. WeLovePanos

    2 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 12:21

    I disagree... He hasn't done much but look out for himself and his career politician life

  7. JohnB

    1 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 14:38

    ElmwoodBoy, can you please clarify what you mean by "other politicians who had "cut the deal" w/Rev. King in Nov 2006 have been backpeddling since." Thanks.

    -John

  8. Buffalopundit

    3 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 15:03

    Since when is Coppola's fit of pique over the Peace Bridge? The only thing cited up until this post was the awning at Stillwaters.

  9. al-alo

    1 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 15:24

    Bill

    im not sure how you measure that the subway killed his business. no traffic on main st? well, that occured at the same time as the metro construction, but was not a requirement of the metro.

    and downtown businesses all over america were suffering from neglect at white flight at the same time, i know our metro is waaaaaaay to short to have had such a trans american effect.

  10. michaelscreen

    2 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 15:58

    THANKFULLY,WE HAVE THE BRO FORUM FOR THESE DISCUSSIONS..I SPEAK AS A PRESERVATIONIST OF YEARS STANDING BOTH HERE AND BEFORE THAT IN BROOKLYN TO POINT OUT ONE SEMINAL ISSUE.WE ARE FACIING THE POSSIBLE DESTRUCTION OF A CENTURY OLD WATERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD.THE HEART OF THIS ENCLAVE WILL BE RIPPED OUT BY THE PBA WITH THE BACKING OF THOSE WHO REFUSE TO STAND UP AND SAY NO..NO MORE NEIGHBORHOODS LOST TO THE WRECKERS BALL .

    I ONCE WITNESSED THE THE DESTRUCTION OF MOST OF LOWER MANHATTAN ENGINEERED BY A PUBLIC AUTHORITY AND CORPORATE INTERESTS.THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION ABOUT AWNINGS,AL COPPOLA SEES THE LARGER PICTURE.WE SHOULD STAND WITH HIM.I WOULD REFER ANY ONE INTESTESTED TO GO TO TALKING LEAVES AND ORDER "THE DESTRUCTION OF LOWER MANHATTAN" AN D READ IT WHILE ON A STOOP OF A LOVELY BUILDING ON COLUMBUS PARKWAY.

  11. AtwaterLouse

    0 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 16:07

    al-alo - Although downtown businesses in general declined, isn't it pretty clear that bars and many other downtown business attempts on Main St where car traffic was banned have collectively done much worse than those on other downtown streets where cars weren't banned (Delaware, Pearl, Franklin, Chippewa)? Coincidence? I've no idea if Coppola's bar would've survived anyhow so this might be a scape goat in his case, but doesn't the pedestrian mall's harmful impact seem hard to dispute if you compare Main to nearby streets? I agree the metro rail wouldn't have needed car traffic banned but having it above ground down there was what led to that awful decision.

  12. tudorguy

    1 ratings12345
    Nov 30th 2007, 21:53

    Michaelscreen - lay off the CAPS!

  13. viking

    1 ratings12345
    Dec 1st 2007, 01:18

    I met Sam's father a few times and was impressed, I've been to a few events where Sam was present, listened to his comments and was ambivalent. His dialogue didn't offend me or make me happy, I always thought him to be a reasonable politician. Maybe todays conditions require some conflict to bring out the true people's champion.

  14. AtwaterLouse

    1 ratings12345
    Dec 1st 2007, 13:54

    How come Frankster's comments here were deleted? Open debate offends people?

Would you like to subscribe to this conversation?

Enter your email below, and you will receive an alert each time someone leaves a comment on this post.

What Do You Think?

Text Links