[UPDATED 04/17/2017] Highland Park Neighborhood residents aren’t happy about a developer’s plan to put a building and parking lot near the corner of Highland Avenue and South Goodman Street, on the Colgate Rochester Crozer Divinity School campus.
The developer, Top Capital of New York, an investment firm that’s buying the divinity school campus, plans to turn the campus buildings into a boutique hotel and conference center, making minimal changes to the buildings’ exteriors in the process. That part of the plan has been uncontroversial, at least so far.
But Top Capital also wants to build a three-story, 40,000-square-foot building that would serve as the seminary’s new campus and would provide 10 apartments for students, along with some first-floor space for what Top Capital’s chief development officer Lou Giardino calls “compatible uses.” The developer hasn’t submitted an application to the city yet.
Some residents of the area say the building will mar the view of a Rochester landmark. And a new institutional building set right against Highland Avenue would be inconsistent with the residential character of the area and would also clash with the neighboring Highland Park landscape, they say.
“I think the neighborhood wants to see the developer and the divinity school go back to the drawing board,” says Monica McCullough, who lives on Highland Avenue near the campus.
McCullough is also one of many residents who have raised questions about whether the property will have to be rezoned for the new building. The campus is currently zoned as an Institutional Planned Development district, which allows for some new construction on the property as long as it fits criteria previously agreed to by the city and school, says Zina Lagonegro, the city’s director of planning and zoning.
But when the city passed its 2003 zoning ordinance revamp, IPD’s were eliminated and were replaced with something called Planned Development Districts. Any major changes to an IPD site’s use would require that the property be converted to a Planned Development District, a detailed and deliberative process that includes public involvement.
Lagonegro says she can’t comment on the process the project might follow, since no application has been submitted yet. But from what she’s seen, she expects the property would have to become a Planned Development District. Those districts can incorporate detailed standards for landscaping, screening, building on steep slopes, building size and appearance, and signs.
Residents questioned Giardino – and shared their objections to the building’s location – during a Highland Park Neighborhood Association meeting last week.
Giardino told the neighbors that the firm presented the divinity school trustees with an option to stay on the campus, which in turn would allow the institution to remain a part of the Highland Park neighborhood. The trustees liked the idea, but they want their new building to have a prominent spot on the property, he said.
The new building would be built behind the existing fence, he said, and wouldn’t need new entrances off of Highland Avenue, where there is already a driveway leading to a small service building.
“Visibility is a concern for us,” said Tom McDade Clay, the school’s vice president for institutional advancement. The trustees didn’t want the building in the rear of the property, he said.
Residents, however, suggested that’s exactly where it should go. Some have realized that their best bet for relocating the building away from the Highland-Goodman edge of the property may be to press the school’s trustees.
Some speakers also suggested that the 100-car parking lot next to the new building would make the intrusion worse. Giardino countered that screening the lot with trees is a possibility, depending on the outcome of the city’s review of the project.
“The divinity school needs to be stewards to the neighborhood,” one resident told Giardino and McDade Clay.
The original version of this post has been replaced with an expanded one.
This article appears in Apr 19-25, 2017.
“The building will mar the view of a Rochester landmark, they said.” The view is already blocked by large trees that line Highland & Goodman.
“And a new institutional building set right against Highland would be inconsistent with the residential character of the area.”
So, locating a school directly next to where there is currently a school will change the character of the area. OK.
I lived a few blocks from this location until last year. It’s going to be difficult to judge one way or the other before seeing renderings.
I really hope their plans change. I live around the corner and will be directly impacted by this daily. It’s a huge mistake to build any structures on the front lawn of that beautiful property. Visibly, it’s an extension of the park. This will be a mistake that can’t be undone, regretted for years to come. Rochester can do better than this!
I find the “visibility” rationale puzzling at best. The viability or marketing/recruitment strategy of the Divinity School does NOT hinge on drive-by visibility. Their students do not enroll because they happened to see the seminary from the road and think, “hey, that would be a good place to study.” There are existing buildings at the top of the hill that could be repurposed or even rebuilt, much closer to the chapel and other facilities that CDS would like to maintain access to. I am a little troubled by the lack of specificity of what Giordano calls “compatible use” on the first floor. And finally CDS will be a tenant. How long will their lease agreement be? What “compatible use” would be found for a newly built three-story building in the middle of a wholly residential neighborhood adjacent to Highland Park? Is that the real reason we need a 130 space parking lot? Bottom line, after sitting through the Top Capital presentation and hearing what the neighbors asked and commented on, my strong hunch is that if CDS agreed to remain at the top of the hill instead of building a new three-story building — totally inconsistent with the rest of the neighborhood — the opposition would vanish.
I used to ride my bike to work by there every day and that was one of the most calming and relaxing areas to go by. Building something at that intersection would wreck the beauty of the area. I always considered the area park of Highland Park.
Rochester has tons of open areas to use for new buildings, yet the city seems hellbent on destroying every little beautiful park (The Subway, next to Eastman House, the building on Prince.) I don’t understand the logic. Well actually I do, bribes work wonderfully.