Oh,
for heaven’s sake. I expect big-business leaders to stand together, but this buzz
about Wegmans is getting a bit much.
           Wegmans has wanted to build a couple
of big new stores, on the county fairgrounds property on Calkins Road in Henrietta
and on Elmwood Avenue on the former
RochesterPsychiatricCenter campus. And
it plans to expand its East Avenue store in the
city. All three have run into community opposition, the Henrietta and Elmwood
proposals because of their location, the East Avenue plan because
of its design.
           The Henrietta Town Board rejected
Wegmans’ Calkins Road plan. Rochester
Mayor Bill Johnson has said he would fight a Wegmans on the Elmwood
Avenue property, and East Avenue area
residents have been meeting with Wegmans officials hoping to get them to modify
the design for that store.
           In a July interview, Wegmans CEO Robert
Wegman complained to the Democrat and
Chronicle that while other areas of the country are welcoming his
superstores, Rochester is becoming a
pain in the rear. Maybe, he suggested, Wegmans will just put its efforts
elsewhere in the future.
           That apparently set off a lot of
alarms. Earlier this month, the Democrat
and Chronicle said area “civic, government, and business leaders” are
afraid that Wegmans might pick up its business and leave the area.
           “The last thing we want to do,”
Rochester Business Alliance CEO Tom Mooney told the D&C, “is chase Bob Wegman out of town.”
           Tension between businesses and
residents is nothing new, of course. And in urban areas, the tension can be
particularly acute. Businesses have been leaving many cities, not flocking to
them, and it’s hard to resist a business that wants to expand. But there’s
often little buffer between commercial and residential areas in cities, and
residents are afraid that eroding that buffer will increase noise and traffic
in their neighborhood — and affect property values.
           I’ve got to admit, I find the
Henrietta objections a little hard to understand. Although there are houses on
the north side of Calkins, there are also abundant commercial buildings in the
immediate area, including a smaller, older Wegmans. On Elmwood, though, a new
Wegmans superstore would inject a large commercial presence where there is none
now.
           On East Avenue; Wegmans
already operates a crowded, popular, moderate-sized store, and that strip of East Avenue is heavily
commercial. But Wegmans wants to greatly expand that store, in the process
tearing down several interesting, small storefront buildings. Taking their
place would be a large store whose most public face would be a long, nearly
windowless wall. It would turn what is now a very pedestrian-friendly sidewalk
— at the entry to one of the region’s most beautiful residential avenues —
into a boring block resembling a suburban strip mall.
           Zoning codes and community planning
are designed to bring balance in this kind of tension. That requires
compromise, to be sure. But compromise has to consist of more than minor
tweaking. East Avenue area
residents have valid concerns about a long, formidable wall. And inserting a
few showcase “windows” doesn’t answer their concern at all.
           (Many of us who shop at the East
Avenue Wegmans don’t even want a bigger store; we like the one we’ve got,
crowded aisles, zooey parking lot, and all. We’re reconciled to the likelihood
of losing that urban atmosphere, but we shouldn’t have to accept a dramatic,
negative change in streetscape.)
           Erecting a Wegmans superstore on a
huge, underutilized lot on a major arterial like Elmwood
Avenue sounds like a good deal. But if that
lot is in a quiet residential area, with no other commercial uses nearby,
that’s another matter entirely.
           Nobody’s trying to chase Wegmans out
of town. I’m as proud of the hometown grocer as anybody. But Wegmans has drawn
a firm line, on which it will not compromise: its new stores have to be huge.
That in itself requires lots of a specific size. To then say that the lot must
be at a specific location, and with a specific design, give or take a tweak or
two, isn’t compromising very much.
           At that point, responsible
government officials must listen to the people who’ll be affected by new
commercial development — and who’ll be affected by future development, once a
precedent is set.
           Wegmans is doing well opening new
stores in growing markets. Locally, though, its potential may have peaked. And
that’s not because residents won’t roll over and play dead when they don’t like
a development plan. It’s because Greater Rochester is not growing.
           The “civic, government, and business
leaders” who are concerned about Wegmans’ future here would serve us all better
by finding ways to grow the economy and the population of this area. (And I don’t mean by bringing in a casino.)
Bill
Stolze
Last
week Rochester lost a unique
visionary — and a uniquely caring man — with the death of Bill Stolze, one
of the founders of RF Communications.
           Many Rochesterians are familiar with
Bill’s business success. But many, many others, including the publishers of
this newspaper, have known him as an enthusiastic, intensely committed mentor
to small-business owners. He wasn’t content to help launch a highly successful
business on his own; he learned from that experience, was confident in his
knowledge and his superb talent, and was almost boyishly eager to share it all.
           He was passionate about the
importance of small businesses, of entrepreneurs, and he seemed to take
particular interest in helping women business owners. Evaluating and training
employees, overcoming obstacles, planning growth, getting through sleepless
nights: Bill had done it all, and he relished showing others the way. He taught
university classes, led seminars, and reached out to new entrepreneurs,
spreading knowledge and encouragement and hope.
           This newspaper was profoundly
affected and inspired by Bill Stolze, a man who never let his disagreement with
our editorial positions stand in the way of his belief in and support of
independent journalism and a multiplicity of journalistic voices.
           We join the family he adored, and
the many recipients of his expertise, in mourning his death.
This article appears in Aug 18-24, 2004.
