Stand
beside the Genesee River in the middle of downtown — the several hundred yard
stretch from East Main north to Andrews Street — and you feel the impure
thoughts welling up. Is this a river or a canal? What’s in that soup of muddy
water and driftwood? Is this a living stream or a “dead zone” caused by
post-industrial neglect?
And what about the “parkland” here,
with its stolid ramps, excessive pavement, and ceremonial tufts of lawn? Is it
meant to be inviting? How did the Senecas’ zon-esche-o (beautiful valley) descend to this?
Rochesterians of a certain age
marvel that the river is visible today — so different from long ago, when unbroken ranks of buildings lined
the Main Street bridge. But now the question is, will the river be attractive enough that people will want
to get close to it and take more than a peek?
Water quality aside, the river
downtown has its seductions: views of the 90-foot High Falls, for example, and
the rocky chutes below the Court Street dam. But other beauties are pure
potential.
And potential has gotten a lot of
people talking.
On October 2, the city of
Rochester’s Economic Development department, neighbors from Sector 5 (Corn Hill
and Central Business District), and consultant Bergmann Associates held a
“Downtown Design Workshop” at the Crowne Plaza Hotel. The workshop let people
convey their ideas for rehabbing Genesee Crossroads Park (between the Federal
Building and the river), the Crossroads parking garage, and several public
walkways along the river nearby.
Practically anything goes at this
conceptual stage — grand schemes or modest suggestions. And all ideas are
only penciled in. According to city officials, Bergmann Associates is digesting
the public comments and will issue recommendations by the end of December.
Public funding is iffy these days,
but in this case the pump has been primed. “The city does have some money, a
total of about $4 million,” says Tony Hubbard of the city’s Economic
Development department. This sum, he says, is targeted for improvements to the
parking garage, a largely underground affair which opens onto Andrews Street.
In particular, the money will help solve a riddle: what to do with the open
ground that sits on the garage’s flat roof.
Fashun Ku, the city’s Economic
Development commissioner, says the workshop focused on several design issues
and locations.
First, he says, planners must “see
to it that the river becomes much more accessible to the people, more visible.”
This, he says, will require attention to the “blank wall” people see when they
look toward the river from State Street and other vantage points. One problem,
according to Ku: The high railings along the river’s edge are too massive; they
could be replaced by railings that wouldn’t block views of the water.
Ku echoes some general concerns
about the Sister Cities Bridge, a pedestrian crossing just north of Main Street
that honors Rochester’s urban partners worldwide. The structure’s profile, Ku
and others say, obscures part of the river. But the bridge is an established
presence, and it would be a big project to remove or replace it.
Some areas next to the river are now
“wasted,” says Ku. He’d like to see improvements to “the space along the river
so that programmed activities can be much more effective,” à la San Antonio’s
“Riverwalk.” We could even see things like a concert with a moored barge for a
stage.
We need more housing close to the
river, says Ku, plus “something that would create a better business
environment” for downtown hotels and commerce.
So what do the
people have
to say?
Park Avenue area resident Gay Lynne
Levy has plenty of ideas. The 26-year-old, who’s got a degree in urban planning
and will soon take a master’s at the University at Buffalo, works with the
federal AmeriCorps-VISTA program and serves as the Common Good Planning
Center’s Social Equity Educator. Levy thus wore several official hats when she
attended the workshop. But she also came as one who loves downtown for its “tons
of great eating places” and attractions like the Little Theatre. (She doesn’t
own a car, and downtown is a natural destination by bus.)
At the workshop, says Levy, “our
group discussed the Sheraton [Four Points] Hotel, how they need to incorporate
their parking where it’s more aesthetically pleasing.” (The hotel has a covered
driveway parallel to the riverbank.) She says there’s a need for “high-end and
low-end housing” in the immediate area, too. “More vegetation is needed,” she
says. “It’s all cement, and it needs something else.”
Levy also says she has a friend who
lives in the apartment building at 125 St. Paul Street (corner of Andrews), a
high-rise whose back door is practically on the river. The often-maligned
structure, she says, “is actually very nice when you get into the apartments;
they’re nicely furnished and have great views.”
Ed Vesneske, a Park-East resident
who used to own property downtown, also was at the workshop. He was involved
with the Coalition for Downtown, and today he’s a board member of the Rochester
Contemporary gallery on East Avenue near Broadway. Vesneske is, you might say,
a minimalist. He favors some minor adjustments to the downtown river corridor,
not a major rebuilding of the riverwalks or nearby buildings.
“The high-cost things may be very
grand,” Vesneske says. But the real key, he says, “is trying to involve people
more… I do like the idea of putting various current attractions together: the
High Falls, the St. Paul area.” He says more pedestrian links are necessary
between sites like these, which are so near yet so far from each other. “They
do have connections,” he says, “but [the connections] are not obvious.” What to
do? “Street lights are important in themselves,” he says, as are “signage and
subtler things.”
“One of the assets that Rochester
has is its beautiful physical layout,” says Vesneske. “You can walk west to
east with ease,” he says. But there are disincentives, some large like the
Inner Loop, some small like the “skyway” system that channels pedestrians
between downtown office buildings. “Simply getting people out of the skyways
and getting them down to the river shouldn’t be a monumental task,” says
Vesneske. He says he hopes that downtown, and especially the riverside, will
someday attract the flâneur, the
walker-wanderer (or Whitmanesque loafer-loiterer) who thrives in human
profusion and intimacy.
Vesneske points to little matters
that need attention — like some benches on the east-bank walkway, just south
of Andrews, that time and neglect have almost dismantled. But he also mentions
the human factor.
“As much as the physical changes
that need to be made, the marketing is important,” he says. “I think continuous events, artists, [and] public art
could help the utilization of the area.” He maintains the riverside is
inherently more attractive than some trendier places. “People will gladly sit
and suck up fumes on Park Avenue,” he says. “Why would it be insurmountable to
have them do it in a more attractive area with beautiful architecture and views?”
John Lovenheim, a Sector 5
co-chair and Grove Place resident, says the recent workshop carried on work
long in progress. The workshop, he says, “spins off the Sector 5 charrette we
had a couple of years ago; most of the points were echoed with more refinement
and detail.”
Lovenheim sees flaws to be fixed.
“Part of the problem with Crossroads Park is that it’s multi-level,” he says.
There should be two levels at most, he says, “so you’re not going up and down
constantly.”
“The garage has to be worked on,”
says Lovenheim. “What goes on underneath doesn’t bother me,” he says, “but it
really creates a barrier between the city and the river.”
What about the question of
large-scale redevelopment versus small?
“It’s a matter of compromise” and
cost-benefit analysis, says Lovenheim. Attitude is paramount. “The whole thing
can be done in a more urban-friendly manner,” he says.
“People [once] thought that cities
were bad,” Lovenheim says, noting that some urban-center parks were designed to
make people imagine they were out in the country. But today, he says, that’s
one attitude that’s definitely shifted. “I think we’ve learned,” he says, “not
to separate ourselves from the city but to integrate ourselves in the city.”
This article appears in Oct 30 – Nov 5, 2002.
