A good bit of attention is focused on downtown right now, which is great. Developers are pumping a lot of money into new housing. The city is planning improvements for Main Street. And there are dreamers: Rochester Broadway Theatre League’s Arnie Rothschild is dreaming of a performing arts center. Mayor Lovely Warren wants something that will increase both people and jobs. Some folks are dreaming of another big park. Others are dreaming of bringing in major retail stores (an increasingly quixotic dream, since nationally, some of those companies are in trouble).
So let me toss out my own dream – but first, let me make a suggestion: that we step back a minute and think about what downtown should be. Should it be simply the center of the city? Just another residential neighborhood, designed primarily for hip young professionals and affluent retirees? An entertainment center predominantly for city residents? An entertainment center for the region?
Several decades ago, we went through a pretty thorough, impressive process to think this through. Committees were formed. Public forums were held. Questionnaires were run in area newspapers, including this one.
The conclusion, after all that, was that downtown is important to the region, that the region needs a vibrant, multi-purpose core, serving and supported by people throughout the region, providing services and entertainment that our multiple individual small communities can’t provide on their own.
There was a lot of talk about the importance of the river, the importance of increasing public access along it (which the Warren administration is working on now). The importance of protecting and using the river access we already have. (Some of the folks pushing for a new downtown park might want to dream up ideas for better use of our existing downtown riverside parks.)
Rochester’s downtown was declining when that big study was done, and it continued to decline afterwards, for reasons we all know. Many US cities have experienced the same thing. We’re exceptionally fortunate, in fact, that downtown is as healthy as it is. A lot of credit for that goes to neighborhood associations and other downtown activists, to cultural and educational institutions who have stayed downtown when they could have followed many of their patrons to the suburbs, and to a persistent group of downtown business people who have hung on or started up downtown, despite formidable odds.
And credit goes to a succession of city elected officials and staff, including current ones, who have believed fiercely in downtown and have been willing to direct money and subsidies to downtown interests, despite the city’s tight finances.
And now, of course, a lot of credit goes to the downtown developers who are renovating a variety of old buildings and turning them into housing and commercial space, despite minimal regional population growth.
That’s the kind of thing we need if downtown is to be a true regional core. That, and a commitment by leaders in the region’s public and private sector to treat downtown’s health as vital to the health of every part of this diverse community.
Which brings me to my dream: convincing the area’s large companies to move their headquarters downtown. We may not be the home of the major multinational players that we once were, but we do still have homegrown companies to be proud of: Wegmans and Paychex, for instance.
In Detroit, Quicken Loans’ chief Dan Gilbert has helped spur that city’s downtown revitalization by moving his company’s headquarters in from the suburbs, buying and renovating other buildings, and encouraging other companies to move downtown.
Where a company has its corporate headquarters makes a statement about that company and how it views its community. With Wegmans, a highly visible building in downtown Rochester, with that big “W” on the side, would say a lot about Wegmans’ commitment to the city. And it might counter the criticism Wegmans got when it closed nearly all of its urban supermarkets.
(Yes, a move would be expensive. I’d bet that City Hall and COMIDA could find some incentives.)
Locating corporate headquarters in the suburbs does little except provide a bit of tax revenue for those individual communities. Locating them downtown does that and a lot more: It puts life into the area surrounding its headquarters. It brings in employees who eat and shop downtown. It puts people on the street. And not insignificantly, it says that this company believes in the importance of a vibrant downtown.
If I were the mayor, I’d put together a team to play the role Dan Gilbert has played in Detroit and encourage Wegmans, Paychex, and others to move their offices downtown. (My nominees to serve with the mayor: UR President Joel Seligman and the developers now investing downtown.)
Moving the headquarters of Wegmans, Paychex, and other companies downtown wouldn’t “save” the city. Urban revitalization is complicated, it’s hard, and there are no quick fixes. Schools, as we all know, are Rochester’s biggest challenge, and they’re the most important at the moment. And even with schools, there are no quick fixes.
But until this entire community agrees that downtown isn’t simply one neighborhood among many, until the entire Greater Rochester community agrees that the health of downtown Rochester is vital to the health of the region, downtown and the neighborhoods surrounding it will continue to face an uncertain future, in competition with their adjacent suburbs.
On their websites, both Wegmans and Paychex list “Rochester” as the home of their corporate headquarters. No, it’s not. Wegmans’ headquarters is in Gates. Paychex’s is in Penfield. The headquarters of Xerox, Bausch and Lomb, and Gannett used to be in downtown Rochester. That they no longer are says something.
Moving corporate headquarters downtown wouldn’t solve all of downtown’s problems, but it would be a start. I keep going back to a statement that Joel Seligman made when he was arguing for putting the photonics headquarters in the Sibley Building: “If we’re going to revitalize Rochester, it starts on Main Street.”
Yes indeed.
This article appears in Aug 17-23, 2016.
Couldn’t agree with this more. Wegmans, Paychex, Harris, etc; if one of the larger companies in the area put their headquarters in the middle of the city I think it would really send a message that the future of Rochester is downtown.
A modest little proposal for revitalizing downtown?? Moving corporations back downtown isn’t a little thing.
Haven’t these big corporations like Wegmans, Paychex, Xerox, etc done their homework and decided that it was best for their companies AND workers to move their headquarters to the suburbs?
Could it be that it’s too expensive and inconvenient for these corporations to stay downtown?
What incentives could be offered to make them give up what they have in the suburbs and bring them back to the city? I don’t think it’s enough for them to just be proud to say that their headquarters are located down town.
Detroit is not Rochester and what you see happening in Detroit may work there but you can’t assume it would work here. We might learn from what Dan Gilbert did and how he did it but do you think Rochester and its corporations want to be told what to do based on what other cities are or are not doing?
Here’s a modest little proposal:
Rochester has been nicknamed “Smugtown” for a reason
To me, that’s an offensive image yet some people have it., I would prefer to see that image be dissolved. What about doing things that are more welcoming; like offering free and convenient parking? This might encourage a less smug image and then build from there. Maybe, in time, Rochester might attract corporations to move their headquarters back downtown and be associated with a less smug image.
And don’t forget Constellation Brands. I think their products are served all over the city. More so than the suburbs. Downtown needs a critical mass. The more people that work downtown, will want to live downtown.
I’m sure COMIDA will have to be involved. I always thought City “news” was against moving companies to another town within our region, leaving a hole where they came from.
How about this- lower taxes so NEW companies move to the area and making the pie for all of us larger? How about LOWERING the minimum wage within the city’s boarders to spur entry level jobs that give people the experience to start moving up the ladder, gain experience and maybe someday start their own business?
Not sure if these corporations are willing to just pack up and move downtown to see if it helps. BUT how about a small Wegmans market in the downtown area, or at least near downtown?
THANKS Harry http://www.SavingSchools.org
With Wegmans, a highly visible building in downtown Rochester, with that big “W” on the side, would say a lot about Wegmans’ commitment to the city.
We already know what Wegmans commitment to the city is. It is zero.
“Rochester’s downtown was declining when that big study was done, and it continued to decline afterwards, for reasons we all know. “
“Schools, as we all know, are Rochester’s biggest challenge, and they’re the most important at the moment.”
What you consider “common sense” needs a lot of rationale building.
It used to be that people were drawn downtown for the experience. Department stores like Sibley’s had a way of getting people to the store and then as long as they were there, they’d buy.
The rise of suburban malls ended it for the department stores. Then came the big box stores.
Now, there’s this growing trend of shopping and buying online and having the items shipped to the store for free. The stores now compete with one another with regard to price, online experience, and in-store pick-up experience.
We need to accept the changing nature of shopping. Years ago, Sibley’s was at the core of our city’s hustle and bustle. The Sibley Building still stands, but Sibley’s is long gone. How does turning a former shopping district into superfluous office space revitalize a city? How do poorer city neighborhoods benefit?
Many Wegmans employees live in the city and work in Gates, Chili, or Pittsford. They probably do most of their grocery shopping at a store other than Wegmans. Who are we to question Wegmans business model? They’re helping the City of Rochester by providing jobs for it’s residents. What more should we be asking for?
Wow…another article bashing someone else for problems in the city. Moving corporate headquarters to the city isn’t going to solve anything. It didn’t in Detroit. Quicken Loans received 47 million in tax credits for the move which jeopardizes all of their employees who must travel into the city. According to the latest FBI crime study, Detroit is listed as #1 for crimes. in fact, for 5 years in a row! Maybe Wegmans cares about their employees and doesn’t want to see them harmed! If you need a grocery store in the city, let an entrepreneur open one! The first step to attracting people to downtown is to clean up the crime. My answer is build more prisons and make them into self sufficient businesses so it doesn’t cost the taxpayers more money. If prisoners don’t want to do the labor, they don’t eat. Simple. And don’t start with your poor people who can’t find jobs crap. I grew up near Clifford Avenue which used to be a nice area with hard working, sometimes unemployed, proud, poor families. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. Instead of writing worthless dribble, why don’t you step up, move from the safe Park Avenue area into the city, and open a grocery store yourself?
I remember when Rochester was home to FIVE Fortune 500 company headquarters. Why were they run out of town? Just recently Tom Golisano was run out of the state. Now he’s making $20 million charitable contributions in Naples Fl.
Maybe, if Mary Anna really wanted a more vibrant downtown, she could encourage Lovely to resign and turn the keys to City Hall over to a republican (a real one). How long has Rochester been declining? It’s simple, once the democrats got control it’s been all downhill. And that’s a fact.
Which republican wants the keys to city hall? Where are they hiding? Why don’t they run for office? When was the last time the GOP fielded candidates for city council, school board, mayor?
One of your best editorials ever! Thanks for such clear and unbiased thinking.
Mitch, I have had issues with City on occasion. But City moved to North Goodman Street BEFORE Village Gate. Don’t question the paper’s commitment to the City Core.
I share Mary Anna’s hope that our downtown would be a place that the region’s largest companies would want to locate. But I do not think this is the highest priority or a good use of taxpayer-funded incentives.
For tens of millions of dollars, the city might attract a Wegmans or a Paychex for a new downtown building. But what will we get in return? A bland new building, connected by skybridge to a new private parking garage? The problem is that when the goal is to attract companies who are frankly indifferent to being downtown, downtown doesn’t become anything more than a suburban office park. This is really the same thing that we’ve tried for the last 40 years, and it’s made downtown a less interesting place, not a better one.
The money right now seems to be flowing to residential developers. You can argue whether taxpayers are getting a good deal for all that money (I personally think the developers are doing great things!), but the end result is that downtown is attracting new people who actually like living and working in the city. It’s a long process. Let it continue, and those residents and workers will themselves help make downtown the kind of place that others — including large employers — want to be again.
If you want to have companies move to downtown Rochester than we as a city must invest in holistic districts that actually generate activity. In your criticism of green-space for Parcel 5 you’ve missed the point that both real estate value and knowledgeable young workers are drawn to central public spaces of these types. https://www.planning.org/cityparks/briefingpapers/economicdevelopment.htm
I find it equally curious that you cite Detroit as a positive example of the effects of corporations moving their downtown headquarters, but did not come across the fact that Campus Martius a 1.2 acre greenspace was directly responsible for drawing the corporate headquarters of Compuware and the 4000 jobs that came to the center of Detroit as part of it. http://www.pps.org/reference/putting-our-jobs-back-in-place/
How were they able to achieve that? Through the programming of retractable stages, outdoor cafes, and an ice skating rink in a greenspace that created a lively district.
Parcel 5 is nearly identical in size (1.17 acre) and a public realm designed for the 21st Century can easily accomplish the same aims. In addition, our plan calls for direct job creation through the creation of a small business district on site of Parcel 5.
Placemaking is about creating centers of long-term prosperity that can be relied upon. We continue to believe a center of social, cultural, and economic activity is the best solution to creating a truly vibrant downtown.
– Benjamin Woelk
thisisnotapark.com
I am native of Rochester, but now live in Los Angeles.
If I were to send my friends/co-workers from LA to visit Rochester, what would you say would be interesting for them to see in downtown?
Another building?
Make Downtown Rochester a worthwhile visit, meaning a place of activity and culture. I think the “This Is not a Park” movement is onto something.
Food truck/vendor spots are big here in LA. People are drawn to what other people are doing/enjoying.
I think Rochester city planners should study cities like Pasadena and San Diego
I support the downtown commons proposal (Visionary Square) from Ken Sato, Ben Woelk and others (see Ben’s comment above).
http://www.thisisnotapark.com
I’d like to point out that, while there are a few older parks downtown, most suffer from Rochester’s past infatuation with Brutalism. They feature lots of concrete and not so much greenspace that really attracts people. Genesee Crossroads is a good example. It’s usually deserted because it’s not such a pleasant place to be.
Pressuring large companies with suburban world-views to move downtown isn’t going to save Rochester. They don’t like it here; that’s why they left. As someone already pointed out, if they move back downtown, they will likely bring their suburban ideas and paranoia with them, which will be no gift to downtown.
People come downtown when they find enjoyable spaces filled with other people. That means public greenspace. The fact is we already have Frontier, ESL, the former B&L, Excellus and more, all within a few blocks of midtown. That area is as dead as Main Street. Those buildings are silos, with no cafes, shops or other amenities that attract people and are deserted as soon as their workers can escape. Save Parcel 5 as a true public space, as Midtown nearly was, to spur growth downtown. If people want to be there, the area will thrive. That’s the challenge. Other development will follow.
So where is the plan? We need a plan, man. Just taking your “suggestion” I would think it would go something like this–(the #’s are ballpark estimates)
-Focus on attracting up to 5,000 new corporate jobs downtown in the next 5 years
-These jobs will create an immediate need for 500-1,000 more housing units within walkable distance to work. Many will abandon their cars.
-The businesses will create many out of town visitors and the need for 1 more hotel.
-There will be a demand for about 5 more restaurants.
– All the new jobs and spin off jobs will get us close to the 10,000 population downtown and maybe get the retail ball rolling.
– Using the numbers we will know home much extra tax revenue is generated and if incentives are workable.
I think if we could pull this off and get retail started, we will have all the pieces to grow downtown for working, living and playing. Of course the city would create a 10,000 page plan that takes 5 years to complete, and then put it on a shelf.