A
five-story observation deck, crowned with a rotating restaurant? A chain of islands in LakeOntario?A museum and research center?
These
were among the ideas floated last week as attractions for the waterfront area
around the ferry terminal.
Despite
a layer of icy freezing rain, about 30 participants turned out for a second
public hearing on the redevelopment plan being formulated for the port of Rochester.
Earlier
this year, the city hired a Boston firm, Sasaki
and Associates, to come up with a land-use plan for a 30-acre parcel that
includes some of Rochester’s prime
waterfront (see “Room with a View,” September 28). Last week the firm — along
with its marketing consultant, ZHA — was in town seeking input from the
public. They also gave residents a quick presentation of the work they’ve done
thus far, including surveys of existing infrastructure
(of which there’s plenty) and regional population. The latter found that about
2.5 million people live within a 100-mile radius of the site on the US side of the
border alone.
Those
numbers are important, since they represent enough people to make a large,
international attraction one potentially viable option for the area. The other
option is a mixed-use development incorporating housing, retail, and other
elements. It would be less of an attraction, and more of a community. Both
options have their appeal, but both also present some problems.
During the
public comment part of the meeting, most of the suggestions offered by the
crowd were geared toward the first alternative. Sasaki’s representatives
fielded ideas that ranged from the impossible (building a chain of islands in
international waters, the crowd learned, would require the unlikely blessing of
the federal government) to the mundane (expanding the lighthouse museum). One
participant suggested a light-rail line, with a terminal in the area. Others
proposed uses for the Hojack swing bridge. Among the
more imaginative: a tunneled walkway leading under the GeneseeRiver and up into
the bridge, transformed into several restaurants. (The Army Corps’ decision to
demolish the bridge has given the span its own dedicated group of
preservationists.)
The
Hojack bridge isn’t technically a part of the area
Sasaki is studying, but VaroujanHagopian,
Sasaki’s lead planner on the project, has repeatedly stressed that he’s
interested in areas surrounding the 30-acre parcel, if only to harmonize his
plan with its surroundings.
Among
the more solid options is a Great LakesResearchCenter, museum, or
combination of the two. SUNY Brockport has already received federal money to
plan such a center on the east side of the river and will ask for $3 million
more to begin building it.
All
of those ideas would be consistent with the first scenario — the large
international attraction — that the designers described. The challenge, noted
ZHA Vice President Sarah Woodworth, is that “it has to work 12 months a year.”
Winter could make that difficult, especially in Charlotte. And an area
designed exclusively for tourists may have a tough time attracting a diversity
of businesses — retail, for instance.
“Retail is going to be very difficult to
support without people living here,” said Woodworth.
Although most
members of the public who spoke at last week’s meeting were expounding on large-scale
dreams, at least a few shared visions of the second, more community-oriented
plan. That’s also the vision the Charlotte Community Association embraces.
“We’d like to see something a little more
community oriented,” says association president Michelle Labigan.
“Make it very little-town oriented.” (Labigan wasn’t
at the last meeting, but attended the first one, and has nothing but praise for
how Sasaki’s been conducting the planning.)
Casting
about for a way to describe her vision of what she calls a “harbor village,” Labigan rejected the term “upscale” but said her
association would welcome “a little bit nicer retail merchants for the
community.”
Housing
would be an integral part of any such community. One participant argued for an
emphasis on the types of housing that would attract empty-nesters and young
professionals. That idea seemed to pique Woodworth’s interest more than most of
the others, and Hagopian also seemed to think that
would fill a niche in the market.
“Although you have a lot of housing stock,
it’s not diverse,” he said.
That
may be true of Charlotte, but it’s
quickly becoming less so for the rest of Rochester, with the
addition of market-rate housing downtown, such as Corn Hill Landing and the Sagamore, and several buildings being renovated as loft
apartments.
The
community-oriented plan faces other challenges. For one thing, the planners
pointed out, Lake Avenue is the site’s only real land artery. A large number of
new residents might mean a surge in vehicle traffic and a demand for more
parking.
Plus,
Charlotte’s not all
that close to much of anything else.
“It’s a haul — from a marketing perspective
— getting here from downtown,” said Woodworth. (The driving distance from the
Four
Corners in downtown to OntarioBeachPark along Lake Avenue is nearly 8
miles.) It’s also a haul to the places where young professionals tend to work,
either downtown or in suburban office parks clustered around the southern and
eastern edge of the metro area.
And
although it’s not prohibitively distant, the port area is also much further
from the downtown cultural and entertainment options than other areas that are
also getting distinctive housing options. Proximity to those cultural
attractions is one amenity that both retirees and yuppies will want. Convincing
them to live in Charlotte — even a rejuvenated Charlotte — may take
more than just nice condos.
Sasaki plans
to have preliminary designs finished by early February. In the meantime, you
can check out progress in the planning process and add your own ideas to the
mix by steering your browser to http://projects.sasaki.com/portofrochester/.
This article appears in Dec 28, 2005 – Jan 3, 2006.
