I wrote an update on the Culver Road Armory on September 12, 2011, if you are interested.
I run by the Culver Road Armory on a regular basis. When we moved here, it was a vacant old historic building in a great location across from Cobbs Hill Park, right off the highway and nestled walking distance to the Cobbs Hill, Upper Monroe and Park Avenue neighborhoods and businesses. It saddened me that it sat unused. I also understood, of course, what a monumental undertaking rehabilitating and repurposing an old building like that would be. Let alone, the fact that it was an armory and traces of who knows what must still be around. With petroleum and mercury deposits found at the facility, the city decided not to purchase the armory from the state a couple years ago. So much for my community garden idea.

In the Fall, I noticed bulldozers, construction equipment and a fence. I ran home, hailed Adam on IM and started looking for info online. Someone was finally doing something with the armory! But what?
I have a profound appreciation for preserving historic architecture and building and remodeling things so that they keep in the character of the surrounding neighborhoods. I also like to see things that will withstand the test of time — both in their design features and the strength of the structures themselves. I, personally, think the cool stuff they built in the late 60s was horrid. You drive by and it makes your eyes hurt now. But the structures were strong. The strip mall crap they built in the 80s has shown its longevity, as neighborhoods across the nation are trading in those bland and cheap structures for new mixed use structures that incorporate urban living with shopping, utilitarian needs like dry cleaners and post offices, hidden parking garages and pedestrian friendly designs. And places for trees. I don’t automatically assume that anything new coming in is a good idea, in spite of my strong desire to see more business come to Rochester. So, I was interested to see what was planned for the Culver Road Armory.

Fred Rainaldi purchased the armory from the state at auction in 2009, but no one had an idea of what he planned to do with it, yet. Developer Whitney Baird Associates broke ground on the armory renovation project in November 2010. The new vision for the 100,000 square feet historic armory includes some museum quality features (including new windows in the front) that they hope will attract a diverse base of tenants. They hope that it will be a unique facility that will enhance the surrounding neighborhoods. Sounds lofty, but good. So, then I looked for news coverage.

The articles I found had only negative comments in response to their coverage. Either people are skeptical of development or there are some legitimate concerns about this project. I know I am new to the city and do not have first-hand experience with the developer and his previous track record with projects. But doesn’t anyone look at this as an incredible opportunity to enhance these neighborhoods and reuse an historic building? The developer could have taken the easy route and built a new structure way out somewhere else. It is not easy to refurbish an old historic building, let alone deal with the environmental issues with the grounds (which is the reason many would-be purchasers backed down). Here are the most common concerns I read that were posted in response to the various press the new project has received and my reactions to those concerns.

Skeptic Concern #1. The city puts being business friendly above everything else and is too quick to give developers permission to start projects.

My Response: A city must encourage business development if it has any hope of revitalization. Without business, there are no jobs. Without jobs, there is no focus on neighborhood improvement. People leave their neighborhoods. Crime increases. New businesses spur supporting services and businesses and encourage people to then live nearby.

There are businesses here. They can either move into the city, because the city makes it attractive for them to set up shop there. Or they can build a brand spankin’ new facility way out in a tract somewhere, contributing to urban sprawl and gas consumption and leading to the degradation of our already established neighborhoods.

Skeptic Concern #2. Design concerns. The front windows will be significantly larger, thus ruining the historic facade of the armory.

My Response: The big windows that will be put in bring a very modern and almost industrial feel to the new building. I’m sort-of lukewarm on them myself, but then I thought it through. It’s an armory, people. Armories are not known for their use of light and windows. They are used to house armor and soldiers (this particular armory, I believe, was an equestrian facility). Anyone who would want to reuse the space would want to bring light in and make it livable. Unless they planned to use it as a telephone switching station or, of course, another armory. I personally, would prefer that the space be redesigned so that people want to hang out and bring their businesses there. Not that I have anything against telephones and armories. I’m willing to compromise a bit on the design to make that happen.

Skeptic Concern #3. People are worried the developer (Fred Rainaldi) won’t finish his other projects before tackling the armory.

My Response: This is the one concern I’ve really been trying to get to the bottom of, because it’s an important one and I haven’t lived in Rochester long enough to know the history.
The Rite Aid development on Monroe Avenue (also a Rainaldi project) had a lot of neighborhood opposition, but many people changed their tune once they saw the urban design that turned an unused corner into something utilitarian everyone in the neighborhood could use.

The Monroe Theater project finally seems to be moving forward. From what I’ve read, Rainaldi has been working with the community to come up with a design they could all agree upon. Residents of the neighborhood have been very involved to assure that the historic theater and related development are done right and within the city zoning rules. One of the things Rainaldi proposed was a revolving community art program to fill the theater’s front windows. I have no idea what the status of this proposal is, but the design concept for the theater was just unveiled the end of November. Renovations of the marquee are supposed to be completed by March. And hopefully the plan with the windows is still on track.

Most developers work on multiple projects at once in cities, because each project is at a different stage of development.

It seems like a lot of different interested parties from the city and the community have been very involved with the initiatives around the Culver Road Armory. (The Upper Monroe Neighborhood Association has a helpful timeline leading up the current project in 2008, if you are interested in learning more.) And it appears that Rainaldi acknowledges the importance of including the neighborhoods and communities that will be impacted by (and hopefully benefit from) his developments, which is extremely important to me.

I would love some real constructive opinions from people in the Monroe neighborhoods to provide a little insight into the overall satisfaction with the Rite Aid and theater projects and the processes to get there.

Skeptic Concern #4. Parking.

My Response: People around here talk about parking whenever new development starts to brew. Having moved here from a big city where you had to plan an hour ahead if you planned to drive your car and park, I don’t understand this one. I’m used to parking and walking and I believe it’s a fair trade for having a cool walkable urban setting. But I realize many people don’t share my views. Neighbors don’t want their streets turning into thoroughfares and parking nightmares. Any new development should incorporate hidden parking garages to accommodate the new traffic and ease the stress on the surrounding streets. From the picture depicted on the Culver Road Armory web site, there appears to be more than adequate parking. I prefer creative ways to hide parking, rather than having a big parking lot for all to see, but it looks like it will accommodate a lot of parking that won’t diminish the design concept.