« Rochester Blog

Rochester, NY Rejects Conifer’s Erie Harbor Design by Petition

September 30, 2010 by in South Wedge
Comments (10)

The results are in, and the verdict is clear.  Residents in Rochester’s South Wedge Neighborhood are up in arms over the proposed design of the Erie Harbor housing development on the Genesee River waterfront along Mt. Hope Avenue.  Conifer, the South Wedge Planning Committee and the City of Rochester have worked together on this development for the past four years, but you wouldn’t know it by listening to local residents.  Roughly two years ago Conifer made a series of design changes that address resident concerns about the access to the waterfront, and several other design concerns.  Spirits were high, and a letter writing campaign that brought about the changes appeared to be a rousing success.

But somewhere in the community design process something went wrong.  Earlier this September, Conifer hosted a meeting at City Hall to show off the final plans for the Erie Harbor. What resulted seemed to stun city officials and Conifer executives: outright opposition, and demands from residents that the design be radically altered. If nothing else, this will serve as a lesson to residents for not being more aggressive in their support or opposition of major development projects in the future.

Perhaps most poignant is the harsh irony of the project’s name, Erie Harbor.  This one of a kind waterfront development parcel may be the only ‘harbor’ in the country that you can’t even launch a canoe from.  There is literally no water access for boating of any kind. Another opportunity for something great passes us by…sigh.

Following the aforementioned mid-September meeting, residents created an online petition directed at city officials, asking that public funding not be made available to Conifer’s Erie Harbor project until more residents were on board with its design.  The petition exceeded its stated goal of 500 signatures, gaining 573 signatures in only 18 days, finalizing on September 30.  Here is the complete petition of local residents in opposition to the proposed design of the Erie Harbor development:

# 573

05:10, Sep 30, Ellen Solomon, NY
I agree that the current plan does not fit with the neighborhood

# 572

21:11, Sep 29, Sharlene Goodliffe, UT
I grew up in this part of Rochester, and I feel great pride in the city. I still have many friends, family members, and interests in Rochester, and I am a frequent visiter. I hope that Conifer Realty will reconsider the design for the Erie Harbor Project. If they will work with the neighbors in considering better designs, I think it could be a win-win situation. With the backing of the community, the project will be a success.

# 571

17:27, Sep 29, Rob Levy, NY
For years we had to look at flat-roofed slum dwellings. This design is remarkable in its resemblance to that which was just knocked down!

# 570

14:24, Sep 29, Irwin Solomon, NY
I agree with Ms. Morgan. The design is institutional and is unappealing.

# 569

13:53, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
the design is fine the color is hidious

# 568

13:01, Sep 29, Ray Mc Sloy, NY

# 567

12:08, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
An eye sore was torn down. Don’t put up another !

# 566

11:42, Sep 29, Maria Stein, NY
I am sure a more attractive design can be made!!

# 565

11:25, Sep 29, Mark Kleehammer, NY

# 564

10:38, Sep 29, Aaron Winters, NY
It would be good to include the neighbors in the design process. not enough attention was paid to that,which is why we now have a huge tower that interferes with the view of downtown. Let’s not make that mistake again

# 563

09:41, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Good lord, is it a penitentiary? Low income housing? A really crappy school for poor kids who can’t refuse it’s tasteless exterior and out of place architecture?

# 562

09:33, Sep 29, William Kelly, NY

# 561

08:57, Sep 29, Laura Bannister, NY

# 560

08:13, Sep 29, Jim Vesper, NY
Good design and architecture can inspire a city – look at some of the example out there like the Sydney Opera House and public buildings in Seattle and Minneapolis. Good design is an investment and doesn’t cost much more than mediocre ideas.

# 559

07:50, Sep 29, Tom Wild, NY
When I first saw the multicolor remains of the old buildings, I honestly thought they were covered with insulation or wrap prior to having a final siding applied. I can’t believe an architect would choose this design.

# 558

07:45, Sep 29, Christina Sadowski, NY

# 557

07:00, Sep 29, Rosemary Lubey, NY
please do not build this dated building on the beautiful river.

# 556

06:59, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
You have got to be kidding! They couldn’t come up with anything better than that???

# 555

06:46, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Wow. What a complete (and unfortunate) departure from the original renderings. Terrible.

# 554

06:44, Sep 29, Kim Morse, NY
I understand the artistic aspect of this building, but we’re looking to add beauty to an area that is in need of it. Serene beauty, not angular, uncomfortable concrete.

# 553

06:33, Sep 29, Cynthia Lindeman, UT
I grew up in this area, have many friends and acquaintences that live in the area. A more upscale looking and “hip” type of project would provide for the needs of Rochesterians and maintain Southwedge pride and value. Those are ugly boxes!

# 552

06:26, Sep 29, Tim Reynolds, NY

# 551

06:24, Sep 29, Miles Van Dusen, NY

# 550

06:18, Sep 29, William Wagner, NY
Living across the river from the site, I was so pleased to see the old bunkers demolished and the promise of something better on the horizon. But this design is even more awful! How could ANYONE think it is acceptable? Well, if Conifer does build this design it soon will be torn down anyway, because no one in their right mind would want to live there…

# 549

06:16, Sep 29, Kellie Reynolds, NY
this design is worse than the mess they’re taking down. What are they thinking?

# 548

05:51, Sep 29, Jennifer Dowdall, NY
This doesn’t look like much of an improvement from the original structure at that location. Why not build something that mirrors the character of the neighborhood? The area is becoming more picturesque. The architecture of the new housing project should add to the vista not detract from it! Thank you.

# 547

05:50, Sep 29, Helen Rayner, NY
Look on South Ave. on right side going south across from low income high rise, there is a very nice new building created in a pleasing style.

# 546

05:00, Sep 29, Helen DeNero, NY
I can’t believe anyone would even dream of putting something so hideous on our beautiful waterfront. What could the city/anyone be thinking??? How about something with a bit more character and class?!

# 545

04:39, Sep 29, Franklin Ashcraft, NY

# 544

04:19, Sep 29, Robert Cushing, DC

# 543

04:14, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Why would we replace one ugly concrete dump with another?

# 542

03:59, Sep 29, harold bruno, NY

# 541

03:52, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY

# 540

03:14, Sep 29, Walter Balmer, NY
This “new” design looks just as bad as the structure that was torn down and would be an eye sore

# 539

02:57, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Absolutely hideous. Even worse than the existing eyesore. Better to get rid of the existing one and find someone with some taste to design the project.

# 538

21:17, Sep 28, Pam Boland, GA

# 537

18:54, Sep 28, Dominick Boyle, NC
I have family in Rochester and it is a very beautiful town. I strongly believe that adding this particular building that the effect Rochester has on people will be dampened. Please do not building the awful structure!

# 536

18:47, Sep 28, Amy Hrichak, NY
I thought what they did to the high-rise was bad. It looks like they’re testing paint colors. These units look even worse. Can the developers not see across the river to see how nice Corn Hill Landing looks? Rochester deserves something classier, not these 1950 tenement housing rejects.

# 535

18:47, Sep 28, Evalyn Gleason, NY
I think that this building is a hideous addition to the neighborhood. As a student at the U of R I think it would be an eyesore along the Genesee.

# 534

18:42, Sep 28, Hayley Van Dusen, NY
This building is sinfully ugly.

# 533

18:08, Sep 28, matthew brooks, NY
i am disgusted and feel lied to and very misled. the proposed initial project is far from the new eye sore they are planning to build in the city’s skyline. the decor of the front of the building looks as though a kindergarten class colored it in and if the facade of the building is any representation of the structural quality of craftsmanship i would hope that it is put out for bid and a quality local contractor can complete the job to the specifications that were first presented to our neighborhood.

# 532

17:54, Sep 28, Scott Hewitt, NY
This design will only replace what was previously built. Rochester is a progessive city and we don’t need another eye sore in ten years!

# 531

16:18, Sep 28, Jeffrey Larson, NY

# 530

16:02, Sep 28, Robert Hawkes, NY
Please, no more ugly buildings.

# 529

15:59, Sep 28, Memory Hark, PA
Rochester is where my roots are. I’m impressed with Rochester and it’s desire to keep its roots in history while staying up to date. The Erie Harbor Project has the potential to follow this pattern however the design does not match the amazing neighborhood where it will stand. It therefore destroys the harmony of the neighborhood. I suggest you change the plan to compliment the neighborhood so the the community can embrace it rather than detest it.

# 528

15:44, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
THE prime tract of land in the city of Rochester (the views are amazing!!), and you’re building THIS?! This is not DC or Boston or NYC. People there would toss this out like the garbage design it is.

# 527

14:31, Sep 28, penny gascoyne, NY

# 526

14:28, Sep 28, eric vandermallie, NY

# 525

14:27, Sep 28, Gregory DeTamble, NY
No better than what was torn down

# 524

13:20, Sep 28, Lisa Worden, NY
This building is hideous. The existing building with this same exterior look is an absolute eye sore as well.

# 523

12:42, Sep 28, Bryant Logan, NY

# 522

12:32, Sep 28, Mary Ross, NY
Why didn’t you just leave the other ugly bldg up if you are just going to replace it with this piece of garbage….. Do you guys have any taste?

# 521

12:29, Sep 28, Kelly Ernst, NY
This housing project undermines the historical integrity of one of Rochester’s most beautiful neighborhoods.

# 520

12:17, Sep 28, Brent Howard, NY

# 519

12:11, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
it is hideous

# 518

12:11, Sep 28, Ann Ehmann, NY
I’ve seen the picture of the proposed design. Oh dear.

# 517

11:58, Sep 28, Holly Turner, NY
Please reconsider this design. It’s just awful and un-natural looking.

# 516

11:13, Sep 28, Ann & Mel Braverman, NY

# 515

11:12, Sep 28, Anita MacDonald, VA
I lived in Rochester for my many, many years and am appalled at the design proposal for the Erie Harbor Project. This project has great potential but I, for one, believe you need to reconsider the building and make it more in harmony with the area.

# 514

11:10, Sep 28, Jean Sikora, NY
The existing ugly blue spattered building should be torn down. There is no reason to further insult the river!

# 513

11:01, Sep 28, Barbara Hustler, NY

# 512

10:55, Sep 28, Nicole deGroat, NY
The south wedge is a beautiful neighborhood full of homes that residents have worked incredibly hard to restore to their former beauty, and this would be a jarring eyesore in total contrast to the character of the neighborhood.

# 511

10:48, Sep 28, Nancy Bixler, GA

# 510

10:38, Sep 28, Adam Platzer, NY
This area is getting much better and this would hurt the growth. Also, who puts low income housing on a high income area such as river front?

# 509

10:33, Sep 28, William Deegan, NY

# 508

10:27, Sep 28, Corinne Baker, NY

# 507

10:25, Sep 28, Denise Clay, NY
Are YOU kidding me that design looks like crap. Is this the best that you people can come up with.

# 506

10:24, Sep 28, Annalisa Iannone, NY

# 505

10:18, Sep 28, Susan DeLuca, NY
Please redesign for 2010. You can do so much better for this wonderful site and for Rochester !

# 504

10:17, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 503

10:08, Sep 28, Priscilla Auchincloss, NY
It’s a wonderful site; deserves design that brings out the natural beauty, water and sky.

# 502

10:05, Sep 28, Kevin Finke, NY

# 501

09:45, Sep 28, Heather McKay, NY
I like the use of color, but think this is not an appropriate design for the level of architecture found in Rochester and the South Wedge.

# 500

09:37, Sep 28, Franlee Frank, NY

# 499

09:37, Sep 28, Carl Pultz, NY
Hey, I know. Let’s take one of the nicest spots in town and put something unspeakably ugly on it! It only took 40 years to get rid of the last cement warehouse-for-people, so now let’s reward the community by putting up another one. It’s 1973 again. Yeah. With this level of heroic cynicism and perversity, I can be a developer too!

# 498

09:35, Sep 28, Jamie Mastowski, NY
This building is hideous.

# 497

09:26, Sep 28, Julia Kracke, NY

# 496

09:13, Sep 28, june avignone, NY

# 495

09:08, Sep 28, Jeff Baker, NY

# 494

08:57, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
retro 70’s style…come on rochester, we can do much better!

# 493

08:42, Sep 28, Kathryn Englerth, NY
Completely appalled at this design

# 492

08:33, Sep 28, John Johnston, NY
I am a captain on the Erie Canal and Genesee River. I am appalled at the color scheme of the rehabbed building. we have an opportunity to beautify our riverfront after a half century. Is this the best we can do? I have travelled all over the world and have never seen such an ugly building. Visitors will laugh at Rochester. Is that what you want? I don’t. I’m considering moving down town and if I do, I will avoid this area or any sight of it.

# 491

08:32, Sep 28, Ron Resnick, NY
Ugly looks like what we spent all the money on knocking down

# 490

08:17, Sep 28, Volena Howe, NY

# 489

07:24, Sep 28, Lois Jones, NY
To me, this design looks very much like the structures which were previously there.Certainly, a design more in keeping with the neighborhood homes, Mt Hope Cemetary and the UofR would be appropriate.

# 488

07:18, Sep 28, David Harrison, NY
This is a terrible design and will be an embarrassment for Rochester.

# 487

07:15, Sep 28, Rene Barnes, NY
This awful design is disappointment to the South Wedge. I’m very afraid the area will look just as it did two years ago.

# 486

06:53, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
Looks sort of like what it’s replacing except with color. Can’t they come up with something a bit more elegant???

# 485

06:43, Sep 28, Joanne Paladino, NY

# 484

06:40, Sep 28, Norman Tibbils, NY

# 483

06:23, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 482

06:16, Sep 28, carol zimmerman, NY
Please, this is awful and there is such rewarding architecture across the river

# 481

06:15, Sep 28, Mindy Daniels, NY

# 480

06:11, Sep 28, Heather Simons, NY

# 479

06:10, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
I think this design is a total eyesore that will be looked at and regretted for the next many years- until it too becomes a low income housing project that is wanted to be torn down.

# 478

06:07, Sep 28, Patti Gibbons, NY

# 477

05:48, Sep 28, Michael DeNero, NY
We are properties owners on Hickory St. in this day and age of Green and infill projects that blend with the community, this design is the complete opposite. As a custom home builder for over 20 years, it is my opinion that a modern multi-colored building is not what will enhance the city landscape and the south wedge community. Please consider a period design that will keep the character of the South east area of the city of which there are countless examples of. i would offer my a suggestion of an Arts and Crafts design which is timeless and functional. Michael D 202-0479

# 476

05:42, Sep 28, Holly Cierzo, NY
The design of the proposed building is hideous. This area is improving steadily becoming a trendy and fun neighborhood to visit and live. Please don’t ruin it.

# 475

05:42, Sep 28, Scott Fiske, NY
This is no better than what was torn down . . .

# 474

05:24, Sep 28, Florence Stanley, Australia

# 473

05:07, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 472

05:06, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
Really? This design does not fit with the wonderful architecture we have in this city. It’s waterfront property and is deserving of gorgeous architecture. What is being proposed is simply awful. Find an architect and builder who knows this area, will research this area and will make us proud!

# 471

05:03, Sep 28, Sarah Cassetta, NY

# 470

05:01, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 469

04:45, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 468

04:42, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 467

04:35, Sep 28, David Braitsch, NY
I think this design is a continuation of the failed housing policies of Rochester’s past.

# 466

03:58, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 465

03:41, Sep 28, Burt Vane, NY
This bizarre, hideous building would be an embarrassment to the city in a location that would be seen by anyone visiting or passing through. This is not the impression of our city that we as a region are working toward.

# 464

03:15, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 463

02:50, Sep 28, Cecelia Horwitz, NY
The design of this project is degrading to the community. It looks like a prison for children. I have traveled around the world and designs with this presence can be found in the poor neighborhoods of communist countries. It screams “welfare” “prison” We need to give dignity and respect to all neighborhoods. The design for this area must be approved by the neighbor and aligned with neighboring architecture, built with quality materials, detail and workmanship. Stop this now and do the right thing.

# 462

02:07, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
This is an “eyesore” and an unacceptable use of our public funds.

# 461

21:02, Sep 27, Jessica DeWitt, NY

# 460

20:52, Sep 27, lee pumputis, NY
why do we allow business and industry who are only interested in income to be the planners of our communities?

# 459

20:40, Sep 27, Cathy Feinen, NY
I can’t believe that a building even more hideous than the one that it is replacing would be considered as a blot on such an important river site. It lacks any aesthetic or quality appeal…and looks like temporary low cost warehousing for the poor. How could anyone take pride in their homes in such a surroundings!! Please do NOT cary through with this abomination.

# 458

20:34, Sep 27, Rick Stiles, NY

# 457

20:23, Sep 27, Marjorie Relin, NY
This is a shockingly unattractive design. VERY inelegant. No beautiful lines. What an eyesore it would be if it were built.

# 456

20:22, Sep 27, Karen Struczewski, NY

# 455

20:14, Sep 27, Paul Taylor, NY

# 454

19:56, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 453

19:53, Sep 27, Douglas Wilson, NY
The design is terrible. It looks worse than the buildings that were razed.

# 452

19:45, Sep 27, Raymond S Detor Jr, NY

# 451

19:45, Sep 27, ML McKeever, NY
Is this the best we can do? Good grief. It is UGLY.

# 250

05:39, Sep 20, Karl Stilson, NY
This reminds me of the “Iron Dick” monument on the triangle of Ridge Rd, Lake Ave and Ridgeway that was also thrown down the throats of the taxpayers. I’m sure ripping the deck off the Broad Street Bridge and filling the lower deck with MUD FROM THE GENESEE RIVER will be a GREAT TRIBUTE TO THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER AS WELL. It will surely compliment the proposed 225-405 Mt Hope Ave design being considered by Conifer Reality, LLC

# 249

05:38, Sep 20, Martha Memmott, NY
The proposed design does not blend in with the neighborhood and needs to be changed.

# 248

05:18, Sep 20, Robin Lorenzo, NY
Please solicit at least three other design options and allow the community to participate, review, and comment upon the alternate designs for this project.

# 247

05:15, Sep 20, Anne Sifuentes, NY

# 246

05:05, Sep 20, Jeffrey Mullen, NY
Looks way to similar to what was torn down. If this was the vision city council was looking for, it would have been best to just paint the old complex and call it a day. That would have saved some money.

# 245

04:57, Sep 20, Gillian Coykendall, NY
Why are you not listening to the feedback?? There have been more objections than support!

# 244

03:56, Sep 20, Audra Naujokas-Knapp, NY
I am a city resident near the southwedge. I was energized to hear of the Erie Harbor Project, but dismayed at the choice of architecture. Please reconsider, and give our area hope for redevelopment.

# 243

01:37, Sep 20, Patrick McMahon, NY
All great city’s use their roots to make it not only beautiful but also authentic. The current design fails to meet both criteria.

# 242

20:55, Sep 19, Val Nelson-Metlay, NY
The proposed design does not look friendly, not even look habitable. I used to live in South Wedge – please reconsider the design.

# 241

20:38, Sep 19, MaryAnn Kraft, NY
The institutional design clashes with the ongoing restoration of the South wedge and creates an off balance look to the development of the River front. Quality of the design is at the same level of what was torn down. It has no character and is cold and uninviting. Doesn’t make a good impression…. hope City council hears the voice of the public

# 240

20:37, Sep 19, Thomas Rees, NY
Look around. Walk, drive, bicycle down South Avenue, South Clinton Avenue,and the adjoining streets. Then look at the proposed permanent waterfront carnival.

# 239

20:26, Sep 19, jeanne yamonaco, NY
This complex is HIDEOUS. I thought it was “in process” in the same manner a primer is done first. I was incredulous when I found that this ugly eyesore is a finished project. Who thought this up?

# 238

20:13, Sep 19, jason smith, NY
As someone who lives nearby and frequents the Genesee River Trail every weekend, I am appalled of the proposed design of the Erie Harbor Project.. The style clearly does not reflect the neighborhood. This decision just represents how city council and our government is so clearly out of touch with the people. I recently visited France and Switzerland, where their stunning old world architectural buildings along the Rhine and Limmat was a huge draw for people and the economy.

# 237

20:06, Sep 19, William DeGroote, NY
If the architects intend to attract residents to the Erie Harbor Project they should take care to make the structure pleasing to the lessees and the community.

# 236

20:05, Sep 19, Mitchell Stewart, NY

# 235

16:24, Sep 19, Adele Fico, NY
This is a truly hideous design and an insult to the neighborrhood. Surely we can do better! I can not believe someone would think that this would enhance Mt. Hope Avenue.

# 234

16:02, Sep 19, Kevin Dineen, NY
It’s not worth repeating another cold, ugly complex!

# 233

15:15, Sep 19, grace conte, NY
I lived on hickory st from 1942 until 1978 the aptments that were there forced me out of a neighbor i truly loved.those ones they want to built there now would never bring me back. Its one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city and to put anything like they want build is a sin

# 232

13:42, Sep 19, Harry Davis, NY
Stop it! Erie Harbor. “Stop Mortimer Street Bus Barn/Create Amtrak Inter-Modal” http://bit.ly/bgUGuy

# 231

13:40, Sep 19, Anthony Gerardi, NY

# 230

13:03, Sep 19, Sasha Herbert, NY

# 229

12:36, Sep 19, Toby Zeigler, NY
this looks just like what was removed from the riverfront .

# 228

11:42, Sep 19, Jack Hansen, NY

# 227

10:56, Sep 19, Seth Corona, NY
This building looks dreadful!

# 226

10:09, Sep 19, Jennifer MAjchrzak, NY
Redesign it and all will reconsider! These designs are worse than the projects that were recently demolished.

# 225

09:57, Sep 19, Name not displayed, FL
I used to live in Rochester 2 years ago. I grew up in Rochester. Also, DO NOT sell my email adress or give it away for free.

# 224

09:37, Sep 19, Lawrence Tyndall, NY
After seeing the improvements on South Ave in the block between Gregory and Hickory streets on the west side on South I find it hard think that the present design for Erie Harbor is the best idea that has come forth.

# 223

07:36, Sep 19, Carolyne Garman, NY
This has been a high poverty area, ridden with crime. I used to have students here. We deserve better.

# 222

06:57, Sep 19, Michael Polnicky, Canada

# 221

06:49, Sep 19, Name not displayed, NY

# 220

16:41, Sep 18, Clare Dygert, NY
Please re-consider your design. I don’t know anyone who likes it and I know a lot of people who HATE it!

# 219

15:45, Sep 18, Robert Giese, WI

# 218

13:24, Sep 18, Name not displayed, NY
Please Please reconsider this design; we have to see it everyday

# 217

13:24, Sep 18, Harry Merryman, NY
To build something so cold and institutional-looking on such a prime site would be a travesty. I hope City Council will take seriously its obligation to be good stewards of the City’s resources, like this wonderful waterfront property, and reject a design that is unworthy of it.

# 216

13:06, Sep 18, sarah youngstrom, NY

# 215

12:29, Sep 18, Name not displayed, NY
Does not look attractive at all. Does not look anything like earlier proposals (which looked better). Something like Corn Hill Landing would be much nicer. I live right across the street from this; I don’t want to see a building based on this design every time I look outside :(.

# 214

12:26, Sep 18, janice zaccardo, NY

# 213

11:40, Sep 18, Rob Alexander, NY
I am curious as to the absence of commercial spaces for a corn hill-like development. Also, how does the development tie into the river itself? Will there be anything for canal cruisers to do in the new development?

# 212

10:17, Sep 18, jane ballard, NY

# 211

09:44, Sep 18, Mary Stid, NY

# 210

09:19, Sep 18, Terri Craig, NY
it looks absolutely awful and am very surprised that the city of Rochester would agree with the color and design!

# 209

09:19, Sep 18, kevin linzy, NY

# 208

08:11, Sep 18, Josef Johns, NY
The approved design seems a disappointment on so many levels. If it was the intention of the architect to go beyond the generic look of townhouses built over the past twenty years, the end result is distressingly mediocre, and all too reminiscent of urban renewal housing of the 1960s. The application of bold color blocks suggests the cheapest kind of suburban motel~in this instance nearly half a mile of a “design statement” that insults the adjacent neighborhood.

# 207

07:20, Sep 18, Name not displayed, NY

# 206

06:55, Sep 18, Joanne Felzer, NY
The current building is the worst eyesore in Rochester and the design for the new buildings looks like a prison.

# 205

05:26, Sep 18, Luanne Mansfield, NY
I highly support quality development of the area, just that this proposal is an eyesore totally misaligned with the beauty of the surrounding area.

# 204

05:16, Sep 18, Name not displayed, Canada

# 203

03:06, Sep 18, Roberta Halter, NY
Although I consider my neighborhood a culture diverse and art based neighborhood, I do not feel that the new design of this project fits with the feeling of the southwedge. It takes away from the historical feel of the neighborhood and is in my opion an eyesore.

# 202

00:19, Sep 18, Alamzeb Akhund, Pakistan

# 201

19:22, Sep 17, Carol Baumeister, NY
Rochester deserves a great project in this very prominent, beautiful spot next to our river. We can make everyone happy, a win-win. Let’s slow down the project and do it right. I live in Rochester and I love it. Please ask Conifer to rethink this project. Thank you.

# 450

19:28, Sep 27, Kathleen Weisbeck, NY

# 449

19:19, Sep 27, Karin Topfer, NY
The river front close to downtown is a showcase of the city. It needs a design that complements the 490 bridge and Cornhill Landing, not an eyesore.

# 448

19:05, Sep 27, John Smith, NY
Need more community input if tax dollars are being spent here. There are hundreds of thousands of pedestrian friendly and river developing options.

# 447

19:01, Sep 27, Name not displayed, IL

# 446

18:53, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
This design does not take into account the neighbourhood at all. It does not fit. It is horrible.

# 445

18:52, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I don’t disagree with the concept of housing but this design dates the project and creates an eyesore to an already “behind” neighborhood. Let the community have a voice of how the project will look.

# 444

18:51, Sep 27, Richard E. Bolt, NY

# 443

18:48, Sep 27, Andrea Sheldon, NY

# 442

18:41, Sep 27, Elinor Klein, NY
Our waterfront deserves a better architectural appearance than this design gives it. I say thumbs down — we and future generations deserve better.

# 441

18:37, Sep 27, marc romano, NY
Why in the world would you take such a wonderful location and not compliment the experience. Visual design should be embracing. This will become more low income housing. You’re reaching beyond your creative capability at our expense. Why?

# 440

18:37, Sep 27, …. Wedge, NY
What a joke! Is there going to be a Farris wheel and popcorn machine out front?

# 439

18:35, Sep 27, Sue Sheldon, NY
A location with so much potential for beauty…and THIS MONSTROSITY is the best design available?

# 438

18:34, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
The rendering for the Erie Harbor Project looks more like a 50s building. The architects were probably trying to have it fit with the multi floor structure nearby, but it is about as ugly as anything I have ever seen. There is no point in adding to the eyesore that is already in place.

# 437

18:33, Sep 27, steve scheuerman, NY
looks terrible,not at all able to compliment our neighborhood…

# 436

18:29, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
What happened to class and elegance? Why has it been replaced by The Brady Bunch? Don’t we want to attract people to Rochester? Please reconsider.

# 435

18:29, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 434

18:27, Sep 27, Edwin DeTamble, NY
The design should complement the neighborhood and the look across the river at Corn Hill Landing.

# 433

18:20, Sep 27, Joyce Wagner, NY

# 432

18:09, Sep 27, James P Catalano, NY
You are kidding with this design …right…????

# 431

18:08, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 430

17:49, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 429

16:31, Sep 27, Derrick Brown, NY

# 428

16:27, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 427

16:19, Sep 27, Diane Miller, NY
This is very disappointing. You want to attract people to the area.This design sure misses the mark.

# 426

16:03, Sep 27, John Hustler, NY

# 425

15:40, Sep 27, Gregory Rosinski, NY
I agree. The design is a disaster. Modern is one thing. . .but ugly is ugly. If the goal was to keep the “prison look”. . . .then why were the former “projects” bull-dozed in the first place. G.

# 424

15:23, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I believe a better building design application is possible. A redesign of the high rise also needs consideration if all buildings are to function as one.

# 423

15:10, Sep 27, Bruce Trombley, NY
HORRIBLE Design. They should be ashamed of themselves to put such a piece of junk on our waterfront. Most cities capitalize on waterfront property, and we are asked to settle for this. No Way. Back to the drawing board not only for design but also for use. Come on, REALLY?

# 422

15:04, Sep 27, Marilyn Nickerson, NY
Most water dwellings are monied spots and when rebuilt, have beautiful designs with balconies for sitting and relaxing. Think the architect missed the whole point of this great property site with this design.

# 421

14:22, Sep 27, Darcy Paddock, NY
I appriciate all the work that has gone into this design. It is obvious the designer tried to make it work with the surrounding building….there in lies the problem. We need a fresh start….contemporary can be very beautiful…but this misses the mark.

# 420

14:19, Sep 27, Kevin Campbell, NY
Is this the best we can do?

# 419

14:00, Sep 27, marilyn anderson, NY
Terrible design! No better than what was torn down. Where are the nice balconies, etc. that would allow possible residents to enjoy the river view! The colored panels look “tacked on”.

# 418

13:46, Sep 27, Walter Ketcham, NY
Go back to the earlier (Victorian style) design scheme.

# 417

13:32, Sep 27, Thomas Moughan, NY
this does not complement the Canal future vision we have, nor is it complementary to any other structure of consequence in the line of sight.

# 416

13:22, Sep 27, Jason Dobbs, NY
It makes you wonder if the people that designed this had ever even visited the site? I wonder if this what Norristown PA looks like. Hopefully the next design will use local talent.

# 415

13:20, Sep 27, robert carafice, NY

# 414

13:19, Sep 27, Sigrid Adler, NY

# 413

13:16, Sep 27, Joanne Vane, NY
That is really the ugliest design I have ever seen. I generally never sign any petitions and I have a “live and let live” and “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” belief about everything. But this would really be an eye sore.

# 412

13:12, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 411

13:11, Sep 27, Mark Wandtke, NY
The architecture that was torn down at that site was a nightmare (and kept property values down). We have an opportunity to develop a very high profile site with architecture that is of a design that enhances the well established and healthy neighborhoods of the South Wedge and Corn Hill. The plans that have been put forward are not acceptable for this location.

# 410

12:59, Sep 27, Alfred Pardi, NY

# 409

12:56, Sep 27, Allan O’Grady Cuseo, NY
It is one of the ugliest designs I have seen and I don’t want to look at it. Stop this plan now.

# 408

12:45, Sep 27, jonathan garlock, NY
i don’t recall any solicitation for public input on this project — i would not have spoken in favor of the proposed design

# 407

12:41, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I do not take the daily newspaper and had not seen the design until now. How awful!! It looks like a prison structure. I am an interior designer, often recommending exterior colors, details, and materials and would be willing to work a few hours (at not cost) with the designers / architects for this project to come up with a design, colors, and materials that are more fitting for waterfront / Erie Canal housing.

# 406

12:31, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
A concrete jungle was just torn down, why build another.

# 405

12:31, Sep 27, Lawrence Micciche, NY

# 404

12:29, Sep 27, Joe Brown, NY

# 403

10:55, Sep 27, Dean Ekberg, NY
This would be nearly as unsightly as the buildings that were removed. Surely a more appropriate design is possible.

# 402

10:46, Sep 27, Daniel Galindo, CA

# 401

10:41, Sep 27, Elizabeth Holley, NY
The City of Rochester and the neighbors directly effected by this eye sore should not have to settle for whatever a developer wants to do. We should have a voice in the matter and not be duped.

# 400

10:40, Sep 27, Sharon Hoffman, NY

# 399

10:38, Sep 27, Barbara Day, NY
Redesign — please!

# 398

10:29, Sep 27, Jonathan Muth, Germany
I was an exchange student to Rochester to Rochester 2008/2009 and saw the old the old building being demolished and did not think it could be replaced by anything worse. How about a public park or something like that just not another faceless apartment complex.

# 397

10:25, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
That is the ugliest design any kindergarten kid could come up with. This property is not worthy of being developed if that’s all the designer could come up with. That area is a historical area. Not to be ruined by some rogue designer.

# 396

10:21, Sep 27, Jerry Wolf, NY
If this design is built it will be a travesty. It is an ugly example of 50’s architecture that will lower the values of the homes in the South Wedge and Corn Hill. Ground has not been broken and that means there is hope to stop it. All funding should be removed from this project until it is agreed that it be redesigned. We have a huge opportunity here for something truly stunning to grace our neighborhood, our river, and our city as a whole. We have a great heritage of architecture and design here and this is an opportunity to keep that heritage alive and not deface it with an ill-conceived project. PLEASE do not let this happen. It is imperative to start again.

# 395

10:09, Sep 27, Jean Bayer, NY
This is a hidious design and I do not wish to have the project continue until we are heard.

# 394

10:08, Sep 27, Rosemary Varga, NY
I can’t believe that after all of the effort that has been put into regenerating the South Wedge the city could possibly allow this replication of the previous obscene structure. The new edifices on South Ave and Hickory are a place to start looking for a more appropriate frontage. The Erie HArbor structure is an insult to those of us who have worked and are still working at preserving the beautiful integrity of our forefathers. We are a beautiful family oriented neighborhood not a cheap beach resort. This note only addresses appearances. I can only imagine the inferior materials expected to be used after viewing such an inferior design.

# 393

09:37, Sep 27, Carolyn Curry, NY
This is the same ugly design that was already there. The people of Rochester deserve better, especially on the river.

# 392

09:12, Sep 27, ginelle nerau, NY

# 391

09:11, Sep 27, Rodney Vane, NY
This proposed appears to me to be anything but compatible with the area and the river view. Surely one can develop a more appealing and compatible design to accomplish the same purpose!

# 390

09:11, Sep 27, George Varga, NY
Look at South Avenue between Gregory and Hickory for a great example of fitting in with neighborhood character!

# 389

09:10, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 388

09:09, Sep 27, Colleen McCarthy, NY
This location in Rochester’s South Wedge deserves a much better building design. Please listen to the residents. The building design would undermine all the hard work done for years to uplift and revitalize the South Wedge.

# 387

09:07, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
Who on god’s green earth came up with this design? This is a prime piece of real estate and it looks like they are replacing a poor design with another poor design. How is it any different than the old public housing building?

# 386

08:56, Sep 27, Susan Zgrodnik, NY
Please do not go forward with this the building as is.

# 385

08:53, Sep 27, Joyce Gilbert, NY
Ugly, outdated – Conifer can do better, and Rochester’s waterfront deserves better!

# 384

08:41, Sep 27, dan meyers, NY

# 383

08:38, Sep 27, Fred Cardella, NY

# 382

08:34, Sep 27, Nicole Vitale, NY

# 381

08:30, Sep 27, William B. Hauser, NY
Why build an eyesore when better and more environmentally appropriate designs are easily available?

# 380

08:28, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 379

08:05, Sep 27, Leslie Moon, NC
It is ugly and not up with the times.

# 378

07:50, Sep 27, Terrell Wolf, NY
Please don’t build this Geroge Jetson style outdated housing and make Rochester a laughing stock for those visiting us.

# 377

07:48, Sep 27, Jean McClure, NY
I lived in the south wedge for 30 years. The project was always an eyesore and this is even worse. The design certainly doesn’t fit out city image.

# 376

07:46, Sep 27, Jeanette Carter, NY
Design is very unattractive however I support the Erie Harbor project.

# 375

07:36, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I think this design is hideous..

# 374

07:34, Sep 27, Joseph Finetti, NY
Doesn’t look much better than the eyesore that used to be there. This site deserves so much better!

# 373

07:18, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 372

05:24, Sep 27, Mary Yatteau, NY

# 371

04:58, Sep 27, Gale Lynch, NY

# 370

20:12, Sep 26, Lisa Harasimowitz, NY

# 369

14:36, Sep 26, Jill Mullen, NY

# 368

14:35, Sep 26, Leslie Gillies, NY

# 367

05:16, Sep 26, Terry Burridge, Canada

# 366

05:11, Sep 26, shirley hansen, NY

# 365

01:35, Sep 26, Name not displayed, TX

# 364

19:28, Sep 25, Name not displayed, NY

# 363

18:12, Sep 25, Carol DiMarzo, NY
The current site plan will become an outdated eyesore in few years, it lacks any sense of traditonality that will give the project lasting beauty!!!!!

# 362

17:10, Sep 25, Name not displayed, PA

# 361

17:08, Sep 25, Linda Bislow, NY
This design concept is no better than the concrete tenements that were just torn down. As a matter of fact, they resemble them well. Please reconsider your design for the sake of this beautiful piece of land and take into consideration the highest and best use of this strip of prime waterfront that is going to be seen by thousands of tourists as well as something the residents of this city can be proud of. Reconsider your design, please.

# 360

16:16, Sep 25, Michael Orman, NY

# 359

14:40, Sep 25, James Brown, NY

# 358

14:19, Sep 25, Kenneth Graci, NY

# 357

13:09, Sep 25, Chris Whittaker, SC

# 356

04:12, Sep 25, Claudia Bly, NY

# 355

19:39, Sep 24, george gotcsik, NY
This design switch is an affront to citizen participation that was used effectively in a previous design.

# 354

19:29, Sep 24, . Southwedger, NY
It looks like a retirement home for clowns.

# 353

14:02, Sep 24, Marjorie Benson, NY
When you finally have the opportunity to make the area beautiful, don’t miss your chance!

# 352

11:36, Sep 24, Katie Schalberg, NY
Is the city trying to undermind the residents of the Southwedge who are diligently, and successfully, cleaning up this wonderful neighborhood?? By keeping “low income” housing in this area, you are affecting the home value of these hard working, tax paying individuals. I believe that low income housing is a necessity, but the Southwedge has been home long enough for these people. I’m sure the City of Rochester can find room elsewhere for this project… maybe the Park Ave area??? Thank you for your time :-)

# 351

08:46, Sep 24, Dana Weider, NY

# 350

07:43, Sep 24, Sharron Isaacson, NY

# 349

07:24, Sep 24, thomas fox, NY
Frankly,I can’t see where this is any improvement over what was taken down.And looking like a dorm/prison will not attract the “upscale” renter I thought they were trying to bring in.

# 348

06:05, Sep 24, Shannon Congdon, NY

# 347

05:17, Sep 24, Sue Sanford, NY

# 346

05:12, Sep 24, David Chapus, NY

# 345

02:03, Sep 24, Name not displayed, NY
I’m grateful that Conifer wants to invest to make more money for their company, BUT the building doesn’t fit in the neighborhood. The colors are all wrong.Harlequin pastels don’t work. Please,Mr.Cross,do your magic and transform this property. T

# 344

11:20, Sep 23, Cheri Crist, NY
The building next to it is ugly enough. Please don’t add it.

# 343

10:18, Sep 23, Name not displayed, NY
I’ve seen the new design, and it (1) doesn’t fit at all with the architecture around the area and (2) is downright ugly. It looks like a painted version of the structures that were there before!

# 342

09:06, Sep 23, Sebastien Estaque, NY
The design is simply horrible for Rochester, simply does not fit in at all.

# 341

08:28, Sep 23, Arthur Holtzman, NY
Really. Conifer can be more sensitive to existing local architecture and access to the river both visually and physically.

# 340

07:07, Sep 23, Jennifer Muhl, NY

# 339

06:55, Sep 23, Tara Winner, NY

# 338

06:52, Sep 23, Mark Trzcinski, NY
Preserve the integrity of the South Wedge with a more thought out design. Nobody wants an eyesore to anchore this magical neighborhood. Look accross the river and see how to do it right. Corn Hill is not the South Wedge, but don’t make the South Wedge into a charmless strip mall.

# 337

19:26, Sep 22, Jeanne Herrick, NY

# 336

17:55, Sep 22, Jeremy Turner, NY
Oh my god, the first building is an eyesore that makes me feel like i live in a high rise put back together with scrap metal from 1990’s cars after being burned out. Who is paying these people off to let their 8yr old kid play color by number on the Rochester city?skyscrape.

# 335

16:27, Sep 22, Peter Frosig, NY
I have owneda single-family residence in Rochester since 1975; the last development was a unfortunate and this one only promises to ba another mistake.

# 334

15:58, Sep 22, Courtney Huether, NY

# 333

15:32, Sep 22, ian delaporte, NY
art-yucko!

# 332

15:10, Sep 22, lisa rosica, NY

# 331

14:31, Sep 22, Barb Case, NY
Wow! Talk about making a statement! What a way to greet visitors to a revitalized downtown. Ugh!

# 330

13:46, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
Conifer contradicts themselves with their current proposal. Their Final EIS states “The eclectic nature of the architecture of the South Wedge does not lend itself to modern interpretation.” – that is their response on page 7 of their final Environmental Impact Statement, as found on the City of Rochester website.

# 329

13:39, Sep 22, Laura Catracchia, NY

# 328

13:33, Sep 22, rachel ehmann, NY

# 327

12:03, Sep 22, Tracey Mykins, NY

# 326

11:55, Sep 22, Larissa Huge, NY

# 325

11:25, Sep 22, The Wedge, NY
The project should be renamed the Brimstone Estates because it looks like Hell.

# 324

11:24, Sep 22, Courtney Ter-Velde, NY
This is more than just an aesthetic issue; it is about displacing members of the community without consideration of how they contribute to the neighborhood. It is about another large corporate builder who wants to make the most money for the least amount of quality and effort; trying to pass off poor design, craftsmanship, and materials to those who aren’t savvy enough to ask the questions and see the problems. Continue to speak up fellow Wedgies, this is the only way to make an IMPACTIVE DIFFERENCE! :)

# 323

10:19, Sep 22, Leslie Barnes, NY

# 322

09:00, Sep 22, Mark Westcott, NY
An appropriate design should embrace and be consistent with adjacent South Wedge architecture.

# 321

08:47, Sep 22, Beth Mullen, NY
I thought the blue panels were Tyvek insulations that would be covered up after construction is finished. they are random and look ridiculous.

# 320

08:32, Sep 22, Don Baker, NY
This design is not much better than what was originally there. I feel this will bring my property value down.

# 319

08:18, Sep 22, joanne smoyer, NY
why would anyone want to be proud of such an ugly home. If we want people to maintain this property they must be proud of where they live. The project that was demolished was better looking thgan the new one & look at what happened to it.

# 318

08:13, Sep 22, Spencer Ash, NY
This design is an abomination to a city fighting hard to remake itself and attract new residents and businesses. This design is disgusting and looks little more than a poorly conceived tenement building.

# 317

08:02, Sep 22, natasha johnson, NY

# 316

07:55, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
It is time to put proper thought and money into a very important project.

# 315

07:20, Sep 22, Andy Wilson, NY

# 314

06:44, Sep 22, Chris Pusateri, NY
Please DO NOT fund this project. Waterfront property is normally prime real estate for most cities. If we want to continue the economic development of downtown, the design should be more functional and add to our property values similar to Cornhill landing.

# 313

06:41, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
This building design is not at all in keeping with the the feel of the southwedge comunity and will be an eyesore to the area

# 312

06:15, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
Please do not fund the Erie Harbor Project with public funds until a design is presented that is acceptable to the residents of the area and that will not become just another eyesore.

# 311

06:05, Sep 22, . The Wedge, NY
It looks like it came out of the southern end of a northbound architect.

# 310

21:31, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 309

19:59, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 308

19:18, Sep 21, Wilfred LeBlanc, NY
No way does this design reflect flavor of the South Wedge community .

# 307

18:35, Sep 21, Phyllis Glass, NY

# 306

17:12, Sep 21, . Everyone in the Southwedg, NY
What is this Mondrian in brimstone?

# 305

16:39, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 304

15:18, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 303

13:51, Sep 21, anne dupin, NY

# 302

13:50, Sep 21, mike dupin, NY

# 301

13:32, Sep 21, Michaek Munn, NY
This is an area with the most potential in the city currently has the biggest eyesore. Grow Rochester properly with historic influence and without corporatized and ugly structures please!

# 300

13:28, Sep 21, Jeremy Smith, NY

# 299

12:36, Sep 21, Suzanne Chichester, NY

# 298

12:30, Sep 21, Mary Boyce, NY

# 297

11:40, Sep 21, Melodie Adkins, NY

# 296

10:36, Sep 21, Christopher Sardell, NY

# 295

10:33, Sep 21, Paul Beinetti, NY
Don’t make the same mistake twice, Rochester

# 294

10:03, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY
We should focus on making this a community fixture for the south wedge including park space available to potentially host future South Wedge Farmers Market, not an enormous high rise building with no character or charm of the neighborhood we have all come to love.

# 293

09:51, Sep 21, patricia hans, NY

# 292

09:10, Sep 21, Penny Shepherd, NY
It’s hard to believe that ANYONE would think this design is appropriate for the Southwedge and especially for Rochester’s waterfront property.

# 291

08:29, Sep 21, Robert Shepherd, NY
This design actually appears to be a step backwards. It has no appeal, nor does it fit with the overall character of the South Wedge.

# 290

08:19, Sep 21, Karl Marsiglio, NY
I was shocked to see the tower designed as it was. Not very appealing. This desing already looks dated – wait 10 years – it’ll look even more unappealing. Now you want to do it for the rest of the site? Please don’t. Yes, the Southwedge is a unique neighborhood with a quirky, artsy identity, but don’t take that for granted and assume that funky, Eastern Block retro is cool or even appealing. This is a neighborhood of old homes, old buildings and tree-lined streets, all with history. Try something that fits the longstanding and historic architectual character of the neighborhood, not the presumed sence of what’s “hip” today – because it won’t be hip tomorrow.

# 289

07:10, Sep 21, Christian soderstrom, NY
The design will have a negative impact on the river and canal.

# 288

06:13, Sep 21, Stefania Buonomo, NY
Keep the city looking and feeling alive and vibrant.. Poor archetecture and low income housing is not the answer…

# 287

06:11, Sep 21, Cachelle Guadagnino, NY
This is like “urban renewal”! We have a chance to create something beautiful. The design looks like HOUSING PROJECTS!!!!

# 286

05:22, Sep 21, James DelFavero, NY
PLEASE change the design. It’s unsightly and just plain ugly!!!

# 285

05:16, Sep 21, Richard Hunt, NY
The proposed Conifer building facade is repulsive! This is EXACTLY the look of Urban Renewal of the 70s which did not work on ANY level. Please don’t do it unless you want to tear it down again in the future. We are dealing with a historic urban context, not a children’s museum!!! This site should be a central showpiece, and an anchor to further development of the Southwedge, not a brash contradiction in design style. If lack of funds is the problem, do something small but tasteful, master planned, in phases. I’m sorry but the Conifer proposed design is so unfitting it is almost a joke.

# 284

04:25, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY
Please consider a design more in lline with what is across the river at Corn Hill Landing and incorporates the streets that intersect Mt Hope Ave. This design is destined to be known as “The Erie Harbor PROJECTS”

# 283

04:22, Sep 21, Christine Lechner, NY
Please build according to the neighboring architecture. What is there is an eyesore. Please improve the property not degrade it!

# 282

21:37, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
Please it really needs to be changed!

# 281

21:18, Sep 20, James Caffrey, NY
You have got to be kidding! You call this eyesore of a design, elegant and tasteful! This new design is worse than what was on that site before. What a slap in the face of us, the residents, that make this neighborhood our home! It looks so much worse that what was built on the west side of the river! Please reconsider this ugly design and replace it with something appropriate to the elegant historic nature of this neighborhood and community. James J. Caffrey

# 280

20:01, Sep 20, Janet Kellner, NY
I lived in the “wedge” for many years and I was horrified to see the plans for new apartments. For years we hoped to see a change in that area but this proposal is awful, it will not attract the upscale renters that you would hope for, unless they enjoyed time in prison…..that is what the structures look like. Do not allow this monstrosity to be built!

# 279

19:30, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
The existing building is an eyesore and does not blend in with the neighboring community nor does it co exist aesthetically with the river. This building in not something Rochester should be proud of.

# 278

19:29, Sep 20, Edward Bartl, NY
This is proposed to be an improvement to what was there ? I think not ! Can’t we get this right the 2nd time around on this crucial waterfront property ? We need a design that fits the city neighborhood, such as Mark IV’s design across the river. Corn Hill Landing fits the neighborhood perfectly. Let’s get this right, PLEASE !

# 277

18:11, Sep 20, Susan Mandl, NY
The building that is now there is a terrible disappointment to me. So dated and ugly. The ones that are planned will make it even worse. We can do better. The planners (public and private) need to re-think the design for this crucial site.

# 276

15:46, Sep 20, John Pearsall, NY
When I first came to Rochester I was told a housing development by the Israeli architect, who designed Habitat for the Montreal Expo, would be designing this property. As usual anything exceptional is shot down in this city and instead a piece of junk that looked like some third world prison was put up. When that was torn down, not soon enough, I thought maybe this time they might get it right. I should have known this city would settle for a piece of junk. Other cities are building outstanding buildings which are giving them prominence in the architectural world. It is a shame that Rochester is yet again putting up more trash. It is a shame there is no one with a brain to oversee this monstrosity.

# 275

14:20, Sep 20, Andrea Warner, NY
This is the ugliest building design I’ve ever seen! Please do not let it mar Rochester’s skyline

# 274

14:15, Sep 20, paul kingsley, NY
there is an obvious problem with the local neighborhood’s acceptance of this design. Google “Erie Harbor Design”, and revisit this issue.

# 273

13:54, Sep 20, Jason Gordon, NY
Why replace a poor design with another poor design?

# 272

13:53, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY

# 271

13:49, Sep 20, hellen davis, NY
Very disappointed in the design. Was hoping to live in the new development with view of river..now not so inclined!

# 270

13:47, Sep 20, Robert Stilson, GA

# 269

13:33, Sep 20, Peter Valone, NY

# 268

13:23, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY

# 267

12:40, Sep 20, Mary Shelsby, NY
As a local resident and realtor that works in this community, having a design that compliments and blends in the neighborhood is important for future growth of this area.

# 266

12:14, Sep 20, Jim Ryan, NY

# 265

11:29, Sep 20, Lorie Brown, NY
The design looks like what was there before….crappy and the colors are awful. I was looking forward to the new design and am VERY disappointed.

# 264

09:49, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
The worst design I have ever seen for the city of Rochester. Seriously rethink the design as this will become the image of Rochester for many years to come. I don’t think the development should include low income or assisted living. This is prime real estate and should be used accordingly. Clean up the city, make it look appealing, and let’s reinvent and boost the city of Rochester’s image so people will WANT to VISIT and LIVE and WORK in Rochester.

# 263

09:13, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
The current proposal looks far too similar to the eye sore that once stood there. We need a more inviting, visually appealing building there to compliment the beautiful view of downtown as well as the neighborhoodiing SouthWedge.

# 262

09:06, Sep 20, Luis Maldonado, NY

# 260

07:07, Sep 20, Brennan egling, NY
I’m extremely concerned with the proposed / “excepted” veneer of said properties. I know from first hand experience how a look of a residence can attract certain clients. These new condo’s are strikingly close to the look of the old structure. Having been held up at gun point just outside of the old buildings, for doing something as simple as taking pictures of the Ford Street Bridge, I would of hoped that this property could have been built to show off and mere one of the best views this city can afford. I’m sorry but this design proposal is an insult to everyone who has invested in the Wedge.

# 259

07:00, Sep 20, Penny Dentinger, NY
These buildings were an eyesore before and now the high tower looks almost even worse than before because it appears incomplete and completely outdated — plain silly to have along the river and in clear view of our beautiful new bridge and cityscape. I think the high tower needs to be redone and in no way, shape or form should the low rise buildings be allowed to be built in the same way!!!! Thanks.

# 258

06:10, Sep 20, Sascha Norris, GA

# 257

06:10, Sep 20, vicki gouveia, NY
It was my honor to serve the children and families of the south wedge for many years at School 12. First as a teacher then as the Principal. I am happy to see that something is being done in that area and it will be a big improvement over the Riverpark Commons that was there. However this design is not the right choice for that project. After seeing it on the high rise let’s not make that mistake again.

# 256

06:08, Sep 20, Aimee Bohn, NY
The South Wedge has such charm and character – this new addition to it should follow in it’s form.

# 255

06:04, Sep 20, Michael Bohn, NY
How is this different from what was torn down? We could have saved a ton of money by buying blue and yellow spray paint for the old building…

# 254

06:02, Sep 20, Francis Gerham Jr, NY
No public funds for that awful design !

# 253

05:58, Sep 20, Melissa Stull, NY
The proposed Erie Harbor Project design is an eyesore. I live a few blocks away and I can’t believe what Conifer is trying to do to my up-and-coming neighborhood. It’s almost worse than what was there before.

# 252

05:57, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
They should have just renovated what was there if they wanted the pre fab box look

# 251

05:55, Sep 20, Daniel DeVault, NY
Though I dont live downtown, I am there quite often. What are they thinking of!!

# 200

18:07, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY
need some ideas for a new design? look across the river at Corn Hill Landing.

# 199

17:40, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY
What a horrible sight to welcome you to the city of Rochester. The building looks like a cheap hotel from the 50s. Do something to improve that mess! Please.

# 198

16:36, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY
Biggest eyesore! There are so many examples of beautiful architecture and design in Rochester, why cant the developers open their eyes and try to incorporate some of the existing features of rochester into this design!

# 197

16:23, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 196

15:29, Sep 17, Dana Brooks, NY
That has to be one of the most unattractive designs I have ever seen – please tell me that this is a joke. This will do nothing to increase the value or appearance of this neighborhood which needs so much help.

# 195

15:28, Sep 17, patricia leadley, NY
not even the LEFRAK bldgs in the NYC area looked this bad way back when, i hate to think what the colorful “ticky tacky little boxes” will look like when Rochester winters start making them look sooty. it’ll be like old lego blocks, modern is one thing but these are just ugly!looks like blue and white and yellow trucks stacked on top of each other like at the commercial docks of an unloading shipping area!is that where they got the idea for the design, recycling shipping crates??what message are we sending here?? yuck

# 194

15:13, Sep 17, Name not displayed, WA
So, why won’t the project designers be responsive to the PEOPLE? Perhaps, they have forgotten to listen!

# 193

13:28, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 192

12:59, Sep 17, Richard Reisem, NY
The design stints on glass in a setting that demands more glass. The color scheme is dated, reminding us of ugly urban renewal in the 60s. The design is too much like the ugly development it replaces. It looks more like a cheap motel in the rural slums.

# 191

10:34, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 190

08:38, Sep 17, richard rowe, NY
I am not aware that this design for Erie Harbor was truely and widely brought to the Community as a whole. This design effects more than just the South Wedge residents! The whole community will have to look at and live with the current design for many years. This is one of Rochester’s prime locations and the current design does not reflect the investment or the importants of this property!

# 189

08:15, Sep 17, Robert Farnan, NY
This is a very poor use of land that could host a very beautiful building. The current design looks quite cheap and entirely generic. Go back to the drawing board and turn out a plan that is less stark and more organic – a design that “wows” in a good way….

# 188

07:51, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 187

07:33, Sep 17, Charlotte Howard, NY

# 186

07:17, Sep 17, Laurie Saffran, NY

# 185

06:36, Sep 17, Oscar Pedroso, NY
Just a plain ugly design. I do not want to live around this. It’s already bad enough that there is something already like this near me.

# 184

06:28, Sep 17, Steve Baldwin, NY
It has become clear that a lot more thought and a lot more answers are needed before this project moves onward.

# 183

06:03, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 182

05:50, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 181

05:10, Sep 17, william pieper, NY
the architecture is not in keeping with a low profile to complment the neighborhood and the viewshed off the river.

# 180

05:03, Sep 17, Matthew Sundman, NY

# 179

20:18, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 178

19:38, Sep 16, Josh Cowley, NY
I live in the area and frequently enjoy the Erie Harbor area. The current proposed design will be an eye sore and devalue the area as a whole. Additionally being an art enthusiast it this type of design would be well suited elseware.

# 177

18:42, Sep 16, Elissa Sundman, NY
As someone who has just purchased a home in the area, I must say I am highly upset about this design. It mars the beautiful landscape that the waterfront could be. It seems to me that the original buildings were torn down, just to put new ones that are just as displeasing to the eye. Disgraceful.

# 176

18:18, Sep 16, Cheryl Stevens, NY
After 30 years of living with River Park Commons in the South Wedge what a sad and disappointing day when the Erie Harbor designs were unveiled. The City and City Council owe much more not only to the residents of the South Wedge, but to the entire southeast community by providing a more architecturally significant design that is in keeping with the surrounding historic structures. Please keep the taxpayers vested in their neighborhoods and listen to what is being said.

# 175

17:56, Sep 16, Peter Kline, NY
I just moved from the South Wedge and plan to return shortly as a homeowner. This project is critical to ensuring the future of the wedge’s west side and is a gateway for many into the city. The potential economic impact of those who choose to live at Erie Harbor cannot be understated. Please, get this right and create something worth the hype and excitement!

# 174

17:18, Sep 16, Cheryl BazilVasko, NY
I believe that Conifer’s architects need to go back to the drawing board to design structures more in line with the neighborhood and have it be a pleasure to look at from the water.

# 173

16:54, Sep 16, Nichole Taylor, MA
Even as a former resident of the South Wedge, I protest the current proposed design. Look across the river to the Luxury Corn Hill landscape for a clue to what the community is looking for.

# 172

16:18, Sep 16, Janeane Klingler, NY
I am very disappointed in the current design and feel that it is not a step in the right direction nor appropriate for our area. It is actually quite offensive and a huge eyesore!

# 171

16:02, Sep 16, Jonathan Carroll-Nellenback, NY

# 170

15:34, Sep 16, Sean Daly, NY
How is this ugly structure an improvement on what was there before? The colors are horrifying and it looks identical to the projects that were there before.

# 169

14:43, Sep 16, Jeanne C Parker, NY
We can do better and we need to do it! We deserve better and we need to be sure our community receives it!

# 168

13:48, Sep 16, Jean VanBuren, NY
This design is not much better than what was torn down! Why wasn’t the historic nature of the neighborhood considered in the design.

# 167

13:14, Sep 16, Mary Ellen Dennis, NY

# 166

12:51, Sep 16, Kelly Matthews, NY

# 165

12:39, Sep 16, Kyle Polite, NY

# 164

12:23, Sep 16, Peter Turkow, NY

# 163

12:14, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
This design is no better than the buildings that were torn down. I’m really disappointed. You would think with the success of corn hill landing it wouldn’t be a difficult task to see what works in this area.

# 162

11:59, Sep 16, David Lindahl, NY
I think it is a shame that they are not creating mixed use, living and retail space on this huge river front DESTINATION space. A lot of people think its ugly and it could certainly be better. This should include retail and be a destination boardwalk for people to come to, to eat, and shop – like the Charlotte area. It is also a very basic design – how will we attract a better tax base with this. It’s riverfront property!

# 161

11:46, Sep 16, Linda Marcucci, NY

# 160

11:41, Sep 16, Nick Shippers, NY
As a resident and local business owner, this design could be better for our community. The designers made a great effort tocreate something bold, but it is not something thatmy friends, family, andbusiness partners feel is somethong that fits our culture and community. We want you to invest in our community,but think you should revist the impact of the look. Thanks!

# 159

11:10, Sep 16, Jeffrey Henley, NY
This design does not match the neighborhood architecture. It is a waste of some of the best property the City has left.

# 158

10:46, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Color scheme is too bold!

# 157

10:39, Sep 16, Kristin Chajka, NY

# 156

10:37, Sep 16, T O’Connor, NY

# 155

09:50, Sep 16, Sheila Bazil, NY
The design does not maintain the neighbor character.

# 154

09:29, Sep 16, Richard Vinchesi,P.E., NY
This “design” is a travesty of incredible proportion totally out of character with its neighborhood,site and materials reminicent of urban renewal in the 1960’s most of which have been demolished all across America as they crumbled into the ground after 30-50 years.What is required is a new review board and an architect with an appreciation of the surroundings .Rocheseter can do better than this !!

# 153

09:18, Sep 16, Susan Nerwin, NY
This design will make this look like a subsidized housing project. It deserves a timeless elegant design.

# 152

09:00, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
It isn’t a cohesive design. The building design itself is harsh. It looks like pool lining on a slab of concrete.

# 151

08:58, Sep 16, Margaret Hayes, NY
The proposed design is totally out of character with the neighborhood. The eyesore that was finally demolished is being replaced by another.

# 150

08:53, Sep 16, Gloria Forgione, NY

# 149

08:36, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Water front property needs water front design

# 148

08:12, Sep 16, Mark Mackey, NY
While I appreciate the design in mid-century architecture, this is a horrible location to incorporate it. We need to compliment the historic South Wedge area, not hurt it! The former buildings did that for far too long! Step-up elected officials and stop funding now!

# 147

08:12, Sep 16, Jeff Wagner, NY
Ugly.

# 146

08:11, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 145

08:00, Sep 16, Ryan Smith, NY

# 144

07:57, Sep 16, Chris Anders, NY
This is an eyesore! Even for a person that is colorblind!!!

# 143

07:42, Sep 16, Steven Ward, NY
This design is not only painful to look at, but will unfortunately tarnish a very important, highly visible waterfront site. We have waited SO LONG for the ugly buildings from the old project to be removed. How could Rochester City planners let this happen again?

# 142

07:24, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
The design does not fit within the historic character of the neighborhood. The color scheme looks ridiculous.

# 141

06:41, Sep 16, Maureen Metzler, NY
I have witnessed the progress of the Southwedge for the past 22 years. One can observe that the historic preservation of the neighborhood has been of the utmost importance to its citizens. The community deserves a building design that mirrors their dedication in restoring this area of the city. Modern and the proposed color scheme just doesn’t work. Please listen to the people who have made the Southwedge their home.

# 140

06:13, Sep 16, John Smith, NY
If it were justr ugly it might eventually ingratiate itself into our consciousness and become “charming” in an ugly way. It’s not just ugly, it’s an anachronistic harking back to the 1950’s style of architecture. It in no way is any kind of improvement over what it proposes to replace. Scrap the whole thing and start over!

# 139

06:04, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 138

06:02, Sep 16, mark cold, NY
Too long the river is wasted on schwag

# 137

05:44, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Horrible design – it looks like a recent newspaper photo of an Iraqi prison. Despite developers & city claiming it was an open design process, it was not.

# 136

05:37, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 135

05:23, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Totally unacceptable…this looks just like the former complex with some blue and yellow paint thrown on it. I feel for the residents of the South Wedge Community. Conifer needs to go back to the drawing board and think about the history of the neighborhood and the work it’s residents have put into their homes/community.

# 134

05:17, Sep 16, Gloria Monacelli, NY
I am not opposed to the Hamilton’s colors. But I am opposed to the building design (flat roofed, prison like buildings) and color scheme of the Erie Harbor project. It should be more in keeping with the neighborhood, and CornHill Landing.

# 133

03:23, Sep 16, Heather Penrose, NY
I think it’s a good idea but the colors will deteriorate over time and will be costly to maintain. Please reconsider the outside look of this building. I am a social worker and refer many people to the Hamilton due to the subsidy offered. Most clients refer to The Hamilton as the one that “is ugly on the outside but nice on the inside”.

# 132

22:52, Sep 15, Andrew Branch, NY
I have nothing against modern design, but Erie Harbor is cold, uninviting and too reminiscent of the site that was just razed. We’ll have to live with this for another 40 years, lets get it right this time.

# 131

22:35, Sep 15, Bo Clark, NY
Visually this is as bad or worse than the project that was demolished at that site. The design should be warm and inviting

# 130

22:04, Sep 15, Kristina Phillips, NY

# 129

21:42, Sep 15, Vincent Badali, NY

# 128

21:10, Sep 15, John Comatos, NY
The current plan is extremely offensive and similar to the prison photo last week in the D&C. It was a prison in Iraq!

# 127

20:02, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 126

19:35, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY
these proposed buildings show a total lack of design. and dont look any different from the buildings that were torn down. lets do better!

# 125

19:35, Sep 15, Mary Ellen Latour, OH

# 124

19:11, Sep 15, Douglas Root, NY
There are very few cities in this country that are located next to a river. Rochester in one of the few if not the only city not to take advantage of this unique asset. Erie Harbor looks like college dorms from the 70’s. We can and we should do better!!

# 123

19:03, Sep 15, Martha Heller, NY
What is proposed is outrageous and unacceptable for our community

# 122

18:53, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 121

18:48, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 120

18:36, Sep 15, Paul Whitehouse, NY
Please design with history in mind, this is a lovely old neighborhood.

# 119

18:32, Sep 15, janice damick, NY
for all the years the land was unusable and covered by an eyesore we now have to look at that horrible building that is Hamilton manor and are asked to support some very out of character townhouses/condos tht do not fit the landscape. Hamilton Manor is aneyesore and the thought is buyers for this project will want what’s offered including that horrible behometh in middle

# 118

18:25, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 117

18:05, Sep 15, Donna Lemcke, NY
This design is the same cheap looking, low income, diaster waiting to happen. I thought that was one of the reasons the old bldg. were taken down. I am for low income housing, but don’t design it to look like it. This is such a contradiction to the area. Shame on all who agreed to this.

# 116

17:53, Sep 15, Barbara Outterson, NY
I concur with this request. I attend church weekly in this neighborhood and come to the South Wedge often.

# 115

16:56, Sep 15, Matthew Weasner, NY
I’m sorry, this is just as much of an eyesore as the housing it is replacing. Can’t we do better than this?

# 114

16:50, Sep 15, nancy lauterbach, NY
The integrity of the South Wedge is at stake!! Please consider a new design, preferably old world brick-like structure like the wonderful architecture on South Avenue. The current proposed color and that of Hamilton high rise is unacceptable!!

# 113

16:40, Sep 15, Toni Weasner, NY

# 112

16:32, Sep 15, barbara kennedy, NY
What is happening here? This project is only a tad better in appearance than its predecessor. One is amazed that these plans were ever approved. Please return to the drawing board, consider the input of the residents/taxpayers, and hide the paint.

# 111

16:23, Sep 15, Maureen Dunn, NY
We just got rid of ugly housing that stood on this site for decades. Please do not replace it with something equally unappealing.

# 110

15:06, Sep 15, Karen West, NY

# 109

15:02, Sep 15, Jake Oukes, NY

# 108

14:20, Sep 15, Lauren Wessell, NY

# 107

14:18, Sep 15, Kevin Fridd, NY

# 106

14:13, Sep 15, Rob Goodling, NY

# 105

13:39, Sep 15, Alice Raymond, NY

# 104

13:37, Sep 15, Joseph Arena, NY
I’ve lived in the Corn Hill for 17 years. We worked hard to get a development (Corn Hill Landing) that we are proud of. I would not be at all proud of the Erie Harbor design. It resembles a cross between low cost housing (which they thankfully tore down) and a prison. Please do not allow this project to go thru.

# 103

13:32, Sep 15, Page Simpson, NY

# 102

13:26, Sep 15, Matthew Hjelmhaug, NY
THIS IS NOT MIAMI

# 101

13:18, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 100

13:03, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY
I was on a community development committee last year when I lived in Rochester, and the plans that were shown included lovely townhouses parallel to the river in small groups with lots of green space and public access. What could have possibly happened to allow for this horrific design to be considered??? This will again divide the neighborhood and restrict public access to the river. Please don’t let this happen!!

# 99

12:59, Sep 15, Jacqueline Johnson, NY
I find this design to be an enormous architectural faux-pas that will not be looked back on fondly in years to come. For such a beautiful area, that is widely visible from major tourist sites of the city, I feel Rochester would benefit more from sophisticated and charming architecture that leaves a more prepossessing first impression than something such as this design, that is reminiscent of some childhood Lego structure.

# 98

12:34, Sep 15, Annie Gonzalez, NY
Stop the project and start over again, and design and build something that will be a beautiful addition to Rochester and the South Wedge.

# 97

12:22, Sep 15, Richard Maguire, NY

# 96

12:13, Sep 15, Kari Cameron, NY
The neighborhood in which this is to be built is historically significant and should be a main attraction to Rochester. Unfortunately, it seems that the current plan does not support these ideas. Rather than put up housing units quickly, which are bound to deteriorate just as quickly and convert back to what we just removed, why not consider building something that will draw interest into the area. People who live here are proud to be here. Please enable us to continue to be so. Thank you!

# 95

12:10, Sep 15, Victoria Posner, NY
This is already a great, big eyesore. Who in heaven’s name came up with and approved all those colored panels on the high rise? The blues were bad enough. Then they added yellow. And when there were complaints that that was garrish they added pink/salmon panels making it even worse. Will someone with a modicum of good taste please get involved with this project!!!!

# 94

11:53, Sep 15, richard sarkis, NY
please stop this project from moving forward until a better design concept is created

# 93

11:24, Sep 15, Lisa Fleming, NY

# 92

11:08, Sep 15, Sandra Cona, NY
I have been Realtor in the Rochester area for more than 15 years. I do a great deal of business in the South Wedge area. What a shame to have a project like this going up on such a wonderful piece of real estate. These buildings do not look or represent the historical nature of this area. It would be a huge mistake to allow this to happen.

# 91

11:04, Sep 15, John Van Kerkhove, NY
I am concerned about the quality of the materials and the unwillingness of the developer to engage the community in the design process.

# 90

10:56, Sep 15, Bonita Mayer, NY
This project is without an overall vision for the city. It does not present an attractive reason for people to come into the city, and it will within a very short period of time create just a different view of low income cramped housing that will not support quality living but encourage urban crime. Stop the project. . Don’t allow a builder to cover Brownfield’s with slab construction. Send it back for a full community review. If the city can’t develop a comprehensive plan, contract out, but strive for quality – honor the river and the people who live by the river. Rochester does deserve better.

# 89

10:25, Sep 15, Susan Mars, NY
Previous newspaper(s) of ‘The Wedge’ depicted what was coming down and going up (e.g. June-July 2008 Vol. 30 No. 3). The public had an opportunity to provide input at that time and those changes were made in an updated design to provide easy access to the river from Mt. Hope Avenue, etc. The latest development/design does not appear to contribute to the character and personality of the South Wedge neighborhood.

# 88

10:09, Sep 15, Matthew Carnevale, NY
Rochester is on the verge of a comeback… Rochester is one of the best areas to raise a family… Rochester is the 15th best place to find work in the country (!)… Rochester has one of the highest rates of a college educated workforce in the country… Rochester is all this and much more! Let’s have our city shine! Let’s be proud of Where We Choose To Live… Why have we torn down something on prime real estate in our City only to replace it with more of the same? Remember the definition of insanity and let’s pull our heads out of our collective “we can’t do it” and Do It! If the City is in need of a Real Architect, please feel free to contact me and the name of one will be quickly forwarded.

# 87

09:52, Sep 15, David Chappius, NY
I think that Conifer has gone through the proper steps and channels to get this project approved, and maybe community leaders missed an opportunity to comment and influence the project more. But regardless of communications issues, and lack of community involvement – the current design doesn’t fit the neighborhood and should be reconsidered. It’s not just about color!

# 86

09:48, Sep 15, lorrie perotti, NY
I live in the area and have the the last 48 years and the color has alot to be desired….!

# 85

09:42, Sep 15, Carol Gerbasi, NY
I was shocked when I saw the design, it’s similarity to the previous building, how unattrative and not keeping with the flavor of the Wedge.

# 84

09:30, Sep 15, Donna Heiler, NY
Current design being considered looks terrible! Come on — this is an opportunity to make this side of the river shine!

# 83

09:29, Sep 15, Roxanne Kuliner, NY
A reconsideration of the aesthetics of this building would be thoughtful.

# 82

09:16, Sep 15, Drew Marsherall, NY
Don’t waste this opportunity for prime development on an ugly building that does not match the community!

# 81

08:16, Sep 15, Peter MacDowell, NY

# 80

08:15, Sep 15, Tim Sukhenko, NY
This bleak design is not an improvement over the dismal complex that once stood along the river. Ive seen prisons with more character and appealing design. This design does not work for that space and is not in keeping with architecture style of the neighorhood. I envision multiple buildings with greater access to the river view. This design is esentilly a wall.

# 79

07:48, Sep 15, Peter Mohr, NY
You have prime real estate use it for that, not some god ugly building. This would be a crime for South Wedge and the Cornhill neighbors across the river that have to look at.

# 78

07:27, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 77

07:11, Sep 15, Micheal Faucher, NY
I live a few blocks away and would be saddened to see such a structure built in a historic neighborhood on such nice real estate.

# 76

06:42, Sep 15, Jason Roberts, NY
Although I applaud Conifer for partnering on such an ambitious plan, unfortunately they have missed the mark on this rendering. Aesthetically, the project does not tell the story of the neighborhood it surrounds, and once the thin coat of gloss wears away, will be just another eyesore; much like its predecessor. As an architectural enthusiast and Landmark Society chair, I feel this design does not capture the energy, history & future of one of Rochester’s most valued & sought-after urban villages. Please take a step back, explore the city streets that end where this project begins and find inspiration anew!

# 75

06:27, Sep 15, Paul Frankel, NY
South Wedge residents have waited patiently for renewal of this prime river-scape area. The proposed construction looks oddly similar to the buildings that occupied the property earlier, with a splash of color. This neighborhood needs the highest quality design and construction to preserve it.

# 74

05:42, Sep 15, Daniel Schiavone, NY
Why not build something that fits into and adds to the existing charm of the South Wedge? This design is way outside what I would consider appropriate for the neighborhood. I don’t care if it already made it through the proper City Hall channels. Stop it before its built!

# 73

05:32, Sep 15, Roy Tompkins, NY
As a long time city resident and real estate professional I have watched this project closely. The proposed design is a huge mistake and will in a very short time prove to be another blight on the urban landscape. The residents of our city deserve better than this. Please, please, please do not allow this project to move forward in its present incarnation. The current design has nothing to do with the existing landscape, architecture and feel of the neighborhood.

# 72

05:14, Sep 15, Michael Linsner, NY
This design is inappropriate for the South Wedge and already looks dated.

# 71

21:45, Sep 14, Carlene Woodward, NY
Will the City listen? At the City’s presentation of Erie Harbor on 9/8/10, we had all the community leaders from the Southeast Neighborhoods, Cornhill & residents, 70 in all, who spoke out against the design and unbelievable garish colors used to coved up poor design and materials. We who have spent decades rebuilding the City neighborhoods deserve more than this!

# 70

21:02, Sep 14, Mark Updegraff, NY
This will Kill the view of the Roc skyline coming up mt hope. Leave it as a PARK! please! parks only increase desire for the neighborhood and your design will just block our view of the new bridge. You are no help, you will degrade a neighborhood that is trying very hard to get better!

# 69

20:19, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY

# 68

20:09, Sep 14, Donna Ehmann, NY
When I first saw this new, current design, I honestly thought it was a joke. It is an absolute eyesore! Like some cheap, tacky projects. The original brick design had architectural integrity and historical flavor. Why on earth would you scrap it for this travesty.

# 67

19:51, Sep 14, Michael Tomb, NY
Dear Friends, Conifer’s design for Erie Harbor is anti-social, reminiscent of a prison or at best an office park. It will serve to divide the residents from their neighborhood. This is the type of soul-less architecture that urban planners were supposed to have turned the corner on. Adding garish, incongruous colors as a substitute for a livable design is also troublesome. Please redo this project in a manner that the community will support. That only makes sense with so much public money is required. The current design does not belong in this urban village. Sincerely, Michael Tomb

# 66

19:38, Sep 14, Karrie Laughton, NY
I strongly feel that this design is not only extremely unappealing, but it also does NOT meld with ANY of the areas existing structures. It also is very similar in look and feel to the previous eyesore that so many people in this neighborhood were glad to see go. I feel it is very important that the voices of the community are heard AND their opinions actually hold weight in the decision of this design. These are the people that have to live with it and these are people whose opinions and voices should matter. The people have spoken against this and it would be a huge letdown to our amazing little neighborhood if this failure of a design actually comes to fruition.

# 65

19:10, Sep 14, ROBERT LAUTERBACH, NY

# 64

18:16, Sep 14, Tony Douglas, NY
This is a horrible design, is it supposed to complement the High Rise next to it? How about we scrap the project and get a new architect, and company to start all over again. Maybe we could build something nice and classic that will look just as good in 100 years? Just classic architecture bricks, stone, pillars, and beautiful steel roofs. Classic American Architecture that will make Rochester a better place to look at and to live in.

# 63

18:10, Sep 14, Donna Smith, NY
Let’s not make the same mistake twice…the city of Rochester is smarter than that! Lets prove it!!!

# 62

17:57, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
Shame on SWPC for being asleep at the wheel and thinking their opinion means more than the actual residents who live here.

# 61

17:38, Sep 14, Richard Muto, NY
It is clear that this design doesn’t have the support of the surrounding community. Not only is the design lacking, but the materials offer the same lack of quality and longevity as the last project. We have put too much effort into rebuilding our community to allow this to happen.

# 60

17:14, Sep 14, Ann Rhody, NY
As a person who supports city development, I think it’s important to retain the beauty and harmony with other architecture as we design large projects. Please reconsider!

# 59

16:57, Sep 14, Ruth Delgado-Guzman, NY
Stop the presses, cancel the job, and start over again. Is this for a Public Housing Project? It looks like it will fit with the High Rise next door. How about designing and building a place that will look historic and look good in another 100 years, something that we can be proud of!

# 58

16:53, Sep 14, Judy Hay, NY
The South Wedge is a historic neighborhood dating back to 1800’s. A modern building is out of place. The color scheme does not fit the community. Broader community in-put was lacking in the process.

# 57

15:57, Sep 14, Virginia Duffy, NY
I agree tacky, does nothing to beautify waterfront.

# 56

15:42, Sep 14, gisella gordon, NY

# 55

14:34, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
In my opinion, the design looks tacky. Really, really tacky. Please create a building that is universally pleasing to the eye.

# 54

12:53, Sep 14, Jeannine Collins, NY
Please let our water front property be something we can be proud of!!!!

# 53

12:13, Sep 14, mark bennion, NY
this is an opertunity to make the river front beautiful. this new building will be no better than the one which was recently town down.

# 52

11:59, Sep 14, Kate Rebban, NY
Having grown up on Linden Street, I looked forward to the day that those awful buildings would be torn down. The newest building design is atrocious. As many noted, the design is similar to the “projects” that were already there. The developers of the newest building on South Avenue (between Gregory and Hickory) made sure the building complemented the neighborhood. Why can’t Conifer do the same? Just walk around this beautiful neighborhood for design ideas. Please don’t allow Conifer to build ruin this prime waterfront area.

# 51

11:26, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
The idea and project are great The design is not in keeping with our historic neighborhood by any means. June

# 50

11:04, Sep 14, Linda Hopkins, NY
Unfortunately this design reminds me of ghetto projects from the 70’s. It was considered modern and upscale then but quickly went out of style becoming a horrible eyesore bringing undue attention to a population that does not need negative attention. This design could and should have an appearance that reflects the character of the neighborhood which welcomes the residents moving in and does not make them look like an outcast society plunked in the middle of a stable neighborhood.

# 49

11:03, Sep 14, Moira Platzer, NY

# 48

10:56, Sep 14, James Wolff, NY
In consideration of the large amount of state funding this project is receiving, not to mention the tax benifits which Conifer will be getting in the future, the residents of the South Wedge and surrounding communities are deserving of total satisfaction from this project. Architectural merit, or a lack thereof, is an ongoing debate; however the fact that so many in this community do not support this project needs to be taken into consideration. Recently members of the South Wedge Planning Committee have spoken out against both the design and the manner in which design changes were presented to the public for comment. This project has perhaps the most long-term impact on this neighborhood and needs to be given further review before preceeding.

# 47

10:40, Sep 14, Dennis Rosenbaum, NY
This design is a travesty, and needs to be scrapped in favor of the original from prior to 2008.

# 46

09:51, Sep 14, Laura Jean Diekmann, NY
If this is built it will be a disgrace to our city.

# 45

09:02, Sep 14, Allyn Van Dusen, NY
If this design is built it will be a travesty. Ground has not been broken and that means there is hope to stop it. All funding should be removed from this project until it is agreed that it be redesigned. We have a huge opportunity here for something truly stunning to grace our neighborhood, our river, and our city as a whole. We have a great heritage of architecture and design here (I’m thinking of Claude Bragdon, but there are many others) and this is an opportunity to keep that heritage alive and not deface it with an ill-conceived project. PLEASE do not let this happen. It is imperative to start again.

# 44

07:17, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
The suggested design is in clear contrast with our historic district’s look and feel. It doesn’t add interest or beauty to our neighborhood. If you are at all familiar with our neighborhood you know that this design is in direct contrast.

# 43

05:30, Sep 14, Gerald Jones, NY
Cannot think of anything more displeasing or garish!

# 42

05:20, Sep 14, kimberly bettner, NY
What an emarrassment this is! It honestly looks like they will just be rebuilding the Riverpark and slapping some awful pathwork colors on it in hopes that no one will notice. I was led to believe that the architectural integrity of the ‘Wedge was always being taken into consideration for designing this site. The folks who designed this have no idea what the rest of the Southwedge residents share as the vision for our community’s future. This area is filled with older homes and buildings dripping with character. Why would a structure that looks like nothing more than a childs Lego creation be a good fit here? Building this eyesore is like taking 10 steps backwards!!!

# 41

03:20, Sep 14, Dan Caverly, NY

# 40

02:36, Sep 14, Kevin Morrissey, NY
Looks a lot like the building that was torn down. They just put lipstick on a pig. No one with a choice will live there, so they’ll begin to accept SSI. After that you will have a lovely, river-front drug den.

# 39

21:07, Sep 13, Chris Jones, NY
This design has no place amidst the historic architecture of this neighborhood. Please go back to your original brick design and revise that to mitigate the comments so many neighbors made about it. This is out of left field and will be an eyesore for many years if you let it be built.

# 38

20:30, Sep 13, Jeff Schuetz, NY
As a landlord for over 20 years in the South Wedge, I have been waiting for the development along the river, but I can wait a bit longer, if it means getting the right design. I am happy to consider something more modern in flavor, but this is much too industrial/militaristic, and the color scheme is like something out of mod art and will be dated before it is finished. As a realtor, I think we can do better to help the values in the area by having something that compliments the area’s architecture. It seems like this design was imported from another time and place, without any consideration of the neighborhood context.

# 37

19:43, Sep 13, Thomas Locke, NY
This design too much resembles what it replaced (Riverview Commons). What happened to the idea of having condominiums at that site instead of rental only?

# 36

18:55, Sep 13, Joseph Pasquarelli, NY
Shame on our city council members for approving a design that is reminiscent of buildings that once stood on this parcel of land.

# 35

17:31, Sep 13, C. Wayne Farren, NY
I am not a resident of the South Wedge neighborhood, however I am a resident of the City of Rochester. It’s difficult to find the words to express my disdain for this proprosed design. The current high rise building near the site is a mistake that should never have been allowed to see the light of day. Please, do not allow another travesty to spring up that will be an additional eye-sore we will have to endure for years to come.

# 34

15:12, Sep 13, Mara Marini, NY

# 33

14:30, Sep 13, Jean Lord, NJ

# 32

13:08, Sep 13, Paula Frumusa, NY

# 31

12:44, Sep 13, Antonio Calabria, TX

# 30

11:39, Sep 13, Martha Ruderman, NY

# 29

11:21, Sep 13, Lynn Lickers, NY
The view of the Genesee River is Awesome,Lets make the Building there SHOULD b AwEsOme 22222!!!!

# 28

10:01, Sep 13, Name not displayed, NY

# 27

08:36, Sep 13, David N Moore, CT

# 26

07:50, Sep 13, David Halter, NY
The neighborhood has been mislead by Conifer, its agents and the City throughout the entire permitting process.

# 25

07:25, Sep 13, Virginia Cassetta, NY
The Romans wrote that a building must be conisdered “with due reference to function, structure and beauty” Its difficult to see any of these qualities in this design pattern.

# 24

06:59, Sep 13, mindy munson, VA
I used to live in Rochester and like to visit from time to time. Especially the wedge. The propsed design is horrific. Please do something- contest, whatever- to get better ideas as to how to properly use this space

# 23

06:25, Sep 13, Robin Jaeckel, NY
This design is horrible…I have been excited about the redesign of the erie harbor project…upon seeing this proposed design, it feels as if they are putting up the same type of structure as was just taken down. it is a waste of water front space that COULD be an asset to this community and act as a conduit in connecting the city. what a shame!…i’m appalled

# 22

05:34, Sep 13, SHAWN WALLACE, NY
This proposal has been called modern, yes maybe so, but then again so was the set of buildings that comprised some of Midtown Plaza – which to me looked more like shipping dock containers stacked on top of each other. This design proposal looks as if it was part of that same era. I can’t imagine this will be an asset in 10-30 years from when it is built. I whole-heartedly concur with what Mr. Gary Bogue has said in his comments.

# 21

04:38, Sep 13, Verity Pink, United Kingdom

# 20

04:32, Sep 13, Name not displayed, NY
This looks so outdated it is unbelievable!! Terrible.

# 19

04:18, Sep 13, Leeh Hardy, NY
Please – go back to the drawing board. We have a great opportunity here to make a bold statement about Rochester and the culture here – this design does NOT represent it. If we are going to give Conifer our hard earned money then make them spend the money and time to come up with a plan that is worthy.

# 18

03:56, Sep 13, Anne Weisbeck, NY

# 17

03:55, Sep 13, R. Bruce Colburn, NY
“Mussolini Modern” matches more the ugly Civic Center and does not match up either to the Southwedge neighborhood or the Corn Hill neighborhood across the river.

# 16

01:29, Sep 13, Name not displayed, NY
This plan resembles the previous architecture in an institutional look. The Erie Harbor could be just what the city of Rochester needs to continue the growth and interest in the South Wedge area. Let’s get it right this time around!

# 15

21:41, Sep 12, LeeAnne Valentine, NY
I have lived at the River Park Commons as a youngster. I can remember the gangs that used to roam the sidewalks. I can remember how people would call it the “sister of NYC’s projects”. I can remember living in fear that someone would walk by my window, and climb inside. It was an unsafe, and unsanitary place to live in. These factors were the very reasons why we decided to move out. Using this design will only make the degrading comment ring true, because it does look like the projects from NYC!!!!!

# 14

21:13, Sep 12, Johanna Cummings, NY

# 13

21:10, Sep 12, Chris Edes, NY
If the government is providing subsidies, the concerns of the people must be taken into account.

# 12

20:25, Sep 12, Mark Cross, NY

# 11

20:17, Sep 12, Andrea Romansky, NY
Wish money would instead be spent on STOPPING CRIME in Southwedge. I’m sick of having my car broken into!!!

# 10

20:03, Sep 12, Gary Bogue, NY
I have no problem with the general plan, massing and layout of the low-rise buildings in this project. But I am shocked at the inappropriateness and low quality of their proposed visual appearance. The exterior surfaces and overall visual design of this project are horrible. This is a prime waterfront location that has potential for either improving or detracting from the appeal of the river and downtown Rochester. It’s important that it be an asset to the city, but it will not be so under the current design. For years, one of the most embarrassing and ugly (and crime-ridden) structures in the city occupied this site. It’s gone now and there is an opportunity to do better. Much better. After waiting for so long, why would we want to replace it with something only marginally less ugly? For over a century, Rochester built fine structures that were a great source of civic pride. Some of the buildings built in or near downtown during the past half century, however, have been far less worthy of our city, even embarrassing. Sadly, this project will not be an asset to the city if built using the current visual design. That design seems to mimic some of the worst elements of 1950s architecture and will only serve to counteract progress made in the South Wedge during the past three decades. Once complete, it could blight the area for many more decades. Please don’t do that to my neighborhood!

# 9

19:23, Sep 12, Name not displayed, NY
This is an affront to the honest 19th and 20th century vernacular architecture of south east Rochester. We deserve much better.

# 8

19:16, Sep 12, Tammie Malarich, NY
I have lived in the South Wedge for over ten years as a homeowner and have seen the area blossom with community pride – please do not let Conifer use public funds to construct an architectural blow to that pride. thank you.

# 7

19:14, Sep 12, frank logan, NY
I am a 30 year resident of the South Wedge Erie Harbor does not have my support as currently designed. It is an institutional design for that will not attract market rates on a prime waterfront location.Please help us to stop Conifer and the City of Rochester forcing this design on the Southwedge that is hardly better that the low income project that was there which it resembles. We deserve better. Frank Logan

# 6

19:14, Sep 12, Christopher White, NY
What is that? a home for clowns? Come on, people. Walk around our neighborhood.

# 5

18:52, Sep 12, Chad Ludwig, NY

# 4

18:28, Sep 12, Odile Moreau, Canada

# 3

18:16, Sep 12, Kristin, NY
I feel deceived by Conifer Realty, whose own words describe this building as referencing “the Craftsman, Victorian, and Queen Anne styles prominent in the South Wedge community… and their soft warm color palette.” It is an insult to imply that this building references any architecture style other than Soviet brutalism painted a splotchy mix of blue (which isn’t even a warm color!). I do not want this affront to human senses to lower my property value. City Council has a responsibility to listen to citizens before spending our public monies on something that we don’t want, and are so vehemently protesting.

# 2

17:55, Sep 12, Jayne Morgan, NY
The current design for the Erie Harbor project being considered by Conifer Realty, LLC is unacceptable for this community. Funding must cease until the “powers that be” listen and respond to the VERY outspoken voices of the community.

# 1

17:09, Sep 12, Richard Keefer, NY
To whom it may concern: So many stakeholders have done so much to reinvigorate the Wedge. With its development, Conifer can either honor the shared sacrifice of the Wedge’s various stakeholders or exploit it for a quick profit. I hope Conifer does the right thing. Certainly, public funding should be withdrawn if the do not.

# 573

05:10, Sep 30, Ellen Solomon, NY
I agree that the current plan does not fit with the neighborhood

# 572

21:11, Sep 29, Sharlene Goodliffe, UT
I grew up in this part of Rochester, and I feel great pride in the city. I still have many friends, family members, and interests in Rochester, and I am a frequent visiter. I hope that Conifer Realty will reconsider the design for the Erie Harbor Project. If they will work with the neighbors in considering better designs, I think it could be a win-win situation. With the backing of the community, the project will be a success.

# 571

17:27, Sep 29, Rob Levy, NY
For years we had to look at flat-roofed slum dwellings. This design is remarkable in its resemblance to that which was just knocked down!

# 570

14:24, Sep 29, Irwin Solomon, NY
I agree with Ms. Morgan. The design is institutional and is unappealing.

# 569

13:53, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
the design is fine the color is hidious

# 568

13:01, Sep 29, Ray Mc Sloy, NY

# 567

12:08, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
An eye sore was torn down. Don’t put up another !

# 566

11:42, Sep 29, Maria Stein, NY
I am sure a more attractive design can be made!!

# 565

11:25, Sep 29, Mark Kleehammer, NY

# 564

10:38, Sep 29, Aaron Winters, NY
It would be good to include the neighbors in the design process. not enough attention was paid to that,which is why we now have a huge tower that interferes with the view of downtown. Let’s not make that mistake again

# 563

09:41, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Good lord, is it a penitentiary? Low income housing? A really crappy school for poor kids who can’t refuse it’s tasteless exterior and out of place architecture?

# 562

09:33, Sep 29, William Kelly, NY

# 561

08:57, Sep 29, Laura Bannister, NY

# 560

08:13, Sep 29, Jim Vesper, NY
Good design and architecture can inspire a city – look at some of the example out there like the Sydney Opera House and public buildings in Seattle and Minneapolis. Good design is an investment and doesn’t cost much more than mediocre ideas.

# 559

07:50, Sep 29, Tom Wild, NY
When I first saw the multicolor remains of the old buildings, I honestly thought they were covered with insulation or wrap prior to having a final siding applied. I can’t believe an architect would choose this design.

# 558

07:45, Sep 29, Christina Sadowski, NY

# 557

07:00, Sep 29, Rosemary Lubey, NY
please do not build this dated building on the beautiful river.

# 556

06:59, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
You have got to be kidding! They couldn’t come up with anything better than that???

# 555

06:46, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Wow. What a complete (and unfortunate) departure from the original renderings. Terrible.

# 554

06:44, Sep 29, Kim Morse, NY
I understand the artistic aspect of this building, but we’re looking to add beauty to an area that is in need of it. Serene beauty, not angular, uncomfortable concrete.

# 553

06:33, Sep 29, Cynthia Lindeman, UT
I grew up in this area, have many friends and acquaintences that live in the area. A more upscale looking and “hip” type of project would provide for the needs of Rochesterians and maintain Southwedge pride and value. Those are ugly boxes!

# 552

06:26, Sep 29, Tim Reynolds, NY

# 551

06:24, Sep 29, Miles Van Dusen, NY

# 550

06:18, Sep 29, William Wagner, NY
Living across the river from the site, I was so pleased to see the old bunkers demolished and the promise of something better on the horizon. But this design is even more awful! How could ANYONE think it is acceptable? Well, if Conifer does build this design it soon will be torn down anyway, because no one in their right mind would want to live there…

# 549

06:16, Sep 29, Kellie Reynolds, NY
this design is worse than the mess they’re taking down. What are they thinking?

# 548

05:51, Sep 29, Jennifer Dowdall, NY
This doesn’t look like much of an improvement from the original structure at that location. Why not build something that mirrors the character of the neighborhood? The area is becoming more picturesque. The architecture of the new housing project should add to the vista not detract from it! Thank you.

# 547

05:50, Sep 29, Helen Rayner, NY
Look on South Ave. on right side going south across from low income high rise, there is a very nice new building created in a pleasing style.

# 546

05:00, Sep 29, Helen DeNero, NY
I can’t believe anyone would even dream of putting something so hideous on our beautiful waterfront. What could the city/anyone be thinking??? How about something with a bit more character and class?!

# 545

04:39, Sep 29, Franklin Ashcraft, NY

# 544

04:19, Sep 29, Robert Cushing, DC

# 543

04:14, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Why would we replace one ugly concrete dump with another?

# 542

03:59, Sep 29, harold bruno, NY

# 541

03:52, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY

# 540

03:14, Sep 29, Walter Balmer, NY
This “new” design looks just as bad as the structure that was torn down and would be an eye sore

# 539

02:57, Sep 29, Name not displayed, NY
Absolutely hideous. Even worse than the existing eyesore. Better to get rid of the existing one and find someone with some taste to design the project.

# 538

21:17, Sep 28, Pam Boland, GA

# 537

18:54, Sep 28, Dominick Boyle, NC
I have family in Rochester and it is a very beautiful town. I strongly believe that adding this particular building that the effect Rochester has on people will be dampened. Please do not building the awful structure!

# 536

18:47, Sep 28, Amy Hrichak, NY
I thought what they did to the high-rise was bad. It looks like they’re testing paint colors. These units look even worse. Can the developers not see across the river to see how nice Corn Hill Landing looks? Rochester deserves something classier, not these 1950 tenement housing rejects.

# 535

18:47, Sep 28, Evalyn Gleason, NY
I think that this building is a hideous addition to the neighborhood. As a student at the U of R I think it would be an eyesore along the Genesee.

# 534

18:42, Sep 28, Hayley Van Dusen, NY
This building is sinfully ugly.

# 533

18:08, Sep 28, matthew brooks, NY
i am disgusted and feel lied to and very misled. the proposed initial project is far from the new eye sore they are planning to build in the city’s skyline. the decor of the front of the building looks as though a kindergarten class colored it in and if the facade of the building is any representation of the structural quality of craftsmanship i would hope that it is put out for bid and a quality local contractor can complete the job to the specifications that were first presented to our neighborhood.

# 532

17:54, Sep 28, Scott Hewitt, NY
This design will only replace what was previously built. Rochester is a progessive city and we don’t need another eye sore in ten years!

# 531

16:18, Sep 28, Jeffrey Larson, NY

# 530

16:02, Sep 28, Robert Hawkes, NY
Please, no more ugly buildings.

# 529

15:59, Sep 28, Memory Hark, PA
Rochester is where my roots are. I’m impressed with Rochester and it’s desire to keep its roots in history while staying up to date. The Erie Harbor Project has the potential to follow this pattern however the design does not match the amazing neighborhood where it will stand. It therefore destroys the harmony of the neighborhood. I suggest you change the plan to compliment the neighborhood so the the community can embrace it rather than detest it.

# 528

15:44, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
THE prime tract of land in the city of Rochester (the views are amazing!!), and you’re building THIS?! This is not DC or Boston or NYC. People there would toss this out like the garbage design it is.

# 527

14:31, Sep 28, penny gascoyne, NY

# 526

14:28, Sep 28, eric vandermallie, NY

# 525

14:27, Sep 28, Gregory DeTamble, NY
No better than what was torn down

# 524

13:20, Sep 28, Lisa Worden, NY
This building is hideous. The existing building with this same exterior look is an absolute eye sore as well.

# 523

12:42, Sep 28, Bryant Logan, NY

# 522

12:32, Sep 28, Mary Ross, NY
Why didn’t you just leave the other ugly bldg up if you are just going to replace it with this piece of garbage….. Do you guys have any taste?

# 521

12:29, Sep 28, Kelly Ernst, NY
This housing project undermines the historical integrity of one of Rochester’s most beautiful neighborhoods.

# 520

12:17, Sep 28, Brent Howard, NY

# 519

12:11, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
it is hideous

# 518

12:11, Sep 28, Ann Ehmann, NY
I’ve seen the picture of the proposed design. Oh dear.

# 517

11:58, Sep 28, Holly Turner, NY
Please reconsider this design. It’s just awful and un-natural looking.

# 516

11:13, Sep 28, Ann & Mel Braverman, NY

# 515

11:12, Sep 28, Anita MacDonald, VA
I lived in Rochester for my many, many years and am appalled at the design proposal for the Erie Harbor Project. This project has great potential but I, for one, believe you need to reconsider the building and make it more in harmony with the area.

# 514

11:10, Sep 28, Jean Sikora, NY
The existing ugly blue spattered building should be torn down. There is no reason to further insult the river!

# 513

11:01, Sep 28, Barbara Hustler, NY

# 512

10:55, Sep 28, Nicole deGroat, NY
The south wedge is a beautiful neighborhood full of homes that residents have worked incredibly hard to restore to their former beauty, and this would be a jarring eyesore in total contrast to the character of the neighborhood.

# 511

10:48, Sep 28, Nancy Bixler, GA

# 510

10:38, Sep 28, Adam Platzer, NY
This area is getting much better and this would hurt the growth. Also, who puts low income housing on a high income area such as river front?

# 509

10:33, Sep 28, William Deegan, NY

# 508

10:27, Sep 28, Corinne Baker, NY

# 507

10:25, Sep 28, Denise Clay, NY
Are YOU kidding me that design looks like crap. Is this the best that you people can come up with.

# 506

10:24, Sep 28, Annalisa Iannone, NY

# 505

10:18, Sep 28, Susan DeLuca, NY
Please redesign for 2010. You can do so much better for this wonderful site and for Rochester !

# 504

10:17, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 503

10:08, Sep 28, Priscilla Auchincloss, NY
It’s a wonderful site; deserves design that brings out the natural beauty, water and sky.

# 502

10:05, Sep 28, Kevin Finke, NY

# 501

09:45, Sep 28, Heather McKay, NY
I like the use of color, but think this is not an appropriate design for the level of architecture found in Rochester and the South Wedge.

# 500

09:37, Sep 28, Franlee Frank, NY

# 499

09:37, Sep 28, Carl Pultz, NY
Hey, I know. Let’s take one of the nicest spots in town and put something unspeakably ugly on it! It only took 40 years to get rid of the last cement warehouse-for-people, so now let’s reward the community by putting up another one. It’s 1973 again. Yeah. With this level of heroic cynicism and perversity, I can be a developer too!

# 498

09:35, Sep 28, Jamie Mastowski, NY
This building is hideous.

# 497

09:26, Sep 28, Julia Kracke, NY

# 496

09:13, Sep 28, june avignone, NY

# 495

09:08, Sep 28, Jeff Baker, NY

# 494

08:57, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
retro 70’s style…come on rochester, we can do much better!

# 493

08:42, Sep 28, Kathryn Englerth, NY
Completely appalled at this design

# 492

08:33, Sep 28, John Johnston, NY
I am a captain on the Erie Canal and Genesee River. I am appalled at the color scheme of the rehabbed building. we have an opportunity to beautify our riverfront after a half century. Is this the best we can do? I have travelled all over the world and have never seen such an ugly building. Visitors will laugh at Rochester. Is that what you want? I don’t. I’m considering moving down town and if I do, I will avoid this area or any sight of it.

# 491

08:32, Sep 28, Ron Resnick, NY
Ugly looks like what we spent all the money on knocking down

# 490

08:17, Sep 28, Volena Howe, NY

# 489

07:24, Sep 28, Lois Jones, NY
To me, this design looks very much like the structures which were previously there.Certainly, a design more in keeping with the neighborhood homes, Mt Hope Cemetary and the UofR would be appropriate.

# 488

07:18, Sep 28, David Harrison, NY
This is a terrible design and will be an embarrassment for Rochester.

# 487

07:15, Sep 28, Rene Barnes, NY
This awful design is disappointment to the South Wedge. I’m very afraid the area will look just as it did two years ago.

# 486

06:53, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
Looks sort of like what it’s replacing except with color. Can’t they come up with something a bit more elegant???

# 485

06:43, Sep 28, Joanne Paladino, NY

# 484

06:40, Sep 28, Norman Tibbils, NY

# 483

06:23, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 482

06:16, Sep 28, carol zimmerman, NY
Please, this is awful and there is such rewarding architecture across the river

# 481

06:15, Sep 28, Mindy Daniels, NY

# 480

06:11, Sep 28, Heather Simons, NY

# 479

06:10, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
I think this design is a total eyesore that will be looked at and regretted for the next many years- until it too becomes a low income housing project that is wanted to be torn down.

# 478

06:07, Sep 28, Patti Gibbons, NY

# 477

05:48, Sep 28, Michael DeNero, NY
We are properties owners on Hickory St. in this day and age of Green and infill projects that blend with the community, this design is the complete opposite. As a custom home builder for over 20 years, it is my opinion that a modern multi-colored building is not what will enhance the city landscape and the south wedge community. Please consider a period design that will keep the character of the South east area of the city of which there are countless examples of. i would offer my a suggestion of an Arts and Crafts design which is timeless and functional. Michael D 202-0479

# 476

05:42, Sep 28, Holly Cierzo, NY
The design of the proposed building is hideous. This area is improving steadily becoming a trendy and fun neighborhood to visit and live. Please don’t ruin it.

# 475

05:42, Sep 28, Scott Fiske, NY
This is no better than what was torn down . . .

# 474

05:24, Sep 28, Florence Stanley, Australia

# 473

05:07, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 472

05:06, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
Really? This design does not fit with the wonderful architecture we have in this city. It’s waterfront property and is deserving of gorgeous architecture. What is being proposed is simply awful. Find an architect and builder who knows this area, will research this area and will make us proud!

# 471

05:03, Sep 28, Sarah Cassetta, NY

# 470

05:01, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 469

04:45, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 468

04:42, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 467

04:35, Sep 28, David Braitsch, NY
I think this design is a continuation of the failed housing policies of Rochester’s past.

# 466

03:58, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 465

03:41, Sep 28, Burt Vane, NY
This bizarre, hideous building would be an embarrassment to the city in a location that would be seen by anyone visiting or passing through. This is not the impression of our city that we as a region are working toward.

# 464

03:15, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY

# 463

02:50, Sep 28, Cecelia Horwitz, NY
The design of this project is degrading to the community. It looks like a prison for children. I have traveled around the world and designs with this presence can be found in the poor neighborhoods of communist countries. It screams “welfare” “prison” We need to give dignity and respect to all neighborhoods. The design for this area must be approved by the neighbor and aligned with neighboring architecture, built with quality materials, detail and workmanship. Stop this now and do the right thing.

# 462

02:07, Sep 28, Name not displayed, NY
This is an “eyesore” and an unacceptable use of our public funds.

# 461

21:02, Sep 27, Jessica DeWitt, NY

# 460

20:52, Sep 27, lee pumputis, NY
why do we allow business and industry who are only interested in income to be the planners of our communities?

# 459

20:40, Sep 27, Cathy Feinen, NY
I can’t believe that a building even more hideous than the one that it is replacing would be considered as a blot on such an important river site. It lacks any aesthetic or quality appeal…and looks like temporary low cost warehousing for the poor. How could anyone take pride in their homes in such a surroundings!! Please do NOT cary through with this abomination.

# 458

20:34, Sep 27, Rick Stiles, NY

# 457

20:23, Sep 27, Marjorie Relin, NY
This is a shockingly unattractive design. VERY inelegant. No beautiful lines. What an eyesore it would be if it were built.

# 456

20:22, Sep 27, Karen Struczewski, NY

# 455

20:14, Sep 27, Paul Taylor, NY

# 454

19:56, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 453

19:53, Sep 27, Douglas Wilson, NY
The design is terrible. It looks worse than the buildings that were razed.

# 452

19:45, Sep 27, Raymond S Detor Jr, NY

# 451

19:45, Sep 27, ML McKeever, NY
Is this the best we can do? Good grief. It is UGLY.

# 250

05:39, Sep 20, Karl Stilson, NY
This reminds me of the “Iron Dick” monument on the triangle of Ridge Rd, Lake Ave and Ridgeway that was also thrown down the throats of the taxpayers. I’m sure ripping the deck off the Broad Street Bridge and filling the lower deck with MUD FROM THE GENESEE RIVER will be a GREAT TRIBUTE TO THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER AS WELL. It will surely compliment the proposed 225-405 Mt Hope Ave design being considered by Conifer Reality, LLC

# 249

05:38, Sep 20, Martha Memmott, NY
The proposed design does not blend in with the neighborhood and needs to be changed.

# 248

05:18, Sep 20, Robin Lorenzo, NY
Please solicit at least three other design options and allow the community to participate, review, and comment upon the alternate designs for this project.

# 247

05:15, Sep 20, Anne Sifuentes, NY

# 246

05:05, Sep 20, Jeffrey Mullen, NY
Looks way to similar to what was torn down. If this was the vision city council was looking for, it would have been best to just paint the old complex and call it a day. That would have saved some money.

# 245

04:57, Sep 20, Gillian Coykendall, NY
Why are you not listening to the feedback?? There have been more objections than support!

# 244

03:56, Sep 20, Audra Naujokas-Knapp, NY
I am a city resident near the southwedge. I was energized to hear of the Erie Harbor Project, but dismayed at the choice of architecture. Please reconsider, and give our area hope for redevelopment.

# 243

01:37, Sep 20, Patrick McMahon, NY
All great city’s use their roots to make it not only beautiful but also authentic. The current design fails to meet both criteria.

# 242

20:55, Sep 19, Val Nelson-Metlay, NY
The proposed design does not look friendly, not even look habitable. I used to live in South Wedge – please reconsider the design.

# 241

20:38, Sep 19, MaryAnn Kraft, NY
The institutional design clashes with the ongoing restoration of the South wedge and creates an off balance look to the development of the River front. Quality of the design is at the same level of what was torn down. It has no character and is cold and uninviting. Doesn’t make a good impression…. hope City council hears the voice of the public

# 240

20:37, Sep 19, Thomas Rees, NY
Look around. Walk, drive, bicycle down South Avenue, South Clinton Avenue,and the adjoining streets. Then look at the proposed permanent waterfront carnival.

# 239

20:26, Sep 19, jeanne yamonaco, NY
This complex is HIDEOUS. I thought it was “in process” in the same manner a primer is done first. I was incredulous when I found that this ugly eyesore is a finished project. Who thought this up?

# 238

20:13, Sep 19, jason smith, NY
As someone who lives nearby and frequents the Genesee River Trail every weekend, I am appalled of the proposed design of the Erie Harbor Project.. The style clearly does not reflect the neighborhood. This decision just represents how city council and our government is so clearly out of touch with the people. I recently visited France and Switzerland, where their stunning old world architectural buildings along the Rhine and Limmat was a huge draw for people and the economy.

# 237

20:06, Sep 19, William DeGroote, NY
If the architects intend to attract residents to the Erie Harbor Project they should take care to make the structure pleasing to the lessees and the community.

# 236

20:05, Sep 19, Mitchell Stewart, NY

# 235

16:24, Sep 19, Adele Fico, NY
This is a truly hideous design and an insult to the neighborrhood. Surely we can do better! I can not believe someone would think that this would enhance Mt. Hope Avenue.

# 234

16:02, Sep 19, Kevin Dineen, NY
It’s not worth repeating another cold, ugly complex!

# 233

15:15, Sep 19, grace conte, NY
I lived on hickory st from 1942 until 1978 the aptments that were there forced me out of a neighbor i truly loved.those ones they want to built there now would never bring me back. Its one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city and to put anything like they want build is a sin

# 232

13:42, Sep 19, Harry Davis, NY
Stop it! Erie Harbor. “Stop Mortimer Street Bus Barn/Create Amtrak Inter-Modal” http://bit.ly/bgUGuy

# 231

13:40, Sep 19, Anthony Gerardi, NY

# 230

13:03, Sep 19, Sasha Herbert, NY

# 229

12:36, Sep 19, Toby Zeigler, NY
this looks just like what was removed from the riverfront .

# 228

11:42, Sep 19, Jack Hansen, NY

# 227

10:56, Sep 19, Seth Corona, NY
This building looks dreadful!

# 226

10:09, Sep 19, Jennifer MAjchrzak, NY
Redesign it and all will reconsider! These designs are worse than the projects that were recently demolished.

# 225

09:57, Sep 19, Name not displayed, FL
I used to live in Rochester 2 years ago. I grew up in Rochester. Also, DO NOT sell my email adress or give it away for free.

# 224

09:37, Sep 19, Lawrence Tyndall, NY
After seeing the improvements on South Ave in the block between Gregory and Hickory streets on the west side on South I find it hard think that the present design for Erie Harbor is the best idea that has come forth.

# 223

07:36, Sep 19, Carolyne Garman, NY
This has been a high poverty area, ridden with crime. I used to have students here. We deserve better.

# 222

06:57, Sep 19, Michael Polnicky, Canada

# 221

06:49, Sep 19, Name not displayed, NY

# 220

16:41, Sep 18, Clare Dygert, NY
Please re-consider your design. I don’t know anyone who likes it and I know a lot of people who HATE it!

# 219

15:45, Sep 18, Robert Giese, WI

# 218

13:24, Sep 18, Name not displayed, NY
Please Please reconsider this design; we have to see it everyday

# 217

13:24, Sep 18, Harry Merryman, NY
To build something so cold and institutional-looking on such a prime site would be a travesty. I hope City Council will take seriously its obligation to be good stewards of the City’s resources, like this wonderful waterfront property, and reject a design that is unworthy of it.

# 216

13:06, Sep 18, sarah youngstrom, NY

# 215

12:29, Sep 18, Name not displayed, NY
Does not look attractive at all. Does not look anything like earlier proposals (which looked better). Something like Corn Hill Landing would be much nicer. I live right across the street from this; I don’t want to see a building based on this design every time I look outside :(.

# 214

12:26, Sep 18, janice zaccardo, NY

# 213

11:40, Sep 18, Rob Alexander, NY
I am curious as to the absence of commercial spaces for a corn hill-like development. Also, how does the development tie into the river itself? Will there be anything for canal cruisers to do in the new development?

# 212

10:17, Sep 18, jane ballard, NY

# 211

09:44, Sep 18, Mary Stid, NY

# 210

09:19, Sep 18, Terri Craig, NY
it looks absolutely awful and am very surprised that the city of Rochester would agree with the color and design!

# 209

09:19, Sep 18, kevin linzy, NY

# 208

08:11, Sep 18, Josef Johns, NY
The approved design seems a disappointment on so many levels. If it was the intention of the architect to go beyond the generic look of townhouses built over the past twenty years, the end result is distressingly mediocre, and all too reminiscent of urban renewal housing of the 1960s. The application of bold color blocks suggests the cheapest kind of suburban motel~in this instance nearly half a mile of a “design statement” that insults the adjacent neighborhood.

# 207

07:20, Sep 18, Name not displayed, NY

# 206

06:55, Sep 18, Joanne Felzer, NY
The current building is the worst eyesore in Rochester and the design for the new buildings looks like a prison.

# 205

05:26, Sep 18, Luanne Mansfield, NY
I highly support quality development of the area, just that this proposal is an eyesore totally misaligned with the beauty of the surrounding area.

# 204

05:16, Sep 18, Name not displayed, Canada

# 203

03:06, Sep 18, Roberta Halter, NY
Although I consider my neighborhood a culture diverse and art based neighborhood, I do not feel that the new design of this project fits with the feeling of the southwedge. It takes away from the historical feel of the neighborhood and is in my opion an eyesore.

# 202

00:19, Sep 18, Alamzeb Akhund, Pakistan

# 201

19:22, Sep 17, Carol Baumeister, NY
Rochester deserves a great project in this very prominent, beautiful spot next to our river. We can make everyone happy, a win-win. Let’s slow down the project and do it right. I live in Rochester and I love it. Please ask Conifer to rethink this project. Thank you.

# 450

19:28, Sep 27, Kathleen Weisbeck, NY

# 449

19:19, Sep 27, Karin Topfer, NY
The river front close to downtown is a showcase of the city. It needs a design that complements the 490 bridge and Cornhill Landing, not an eyesore.

# 448

19:05, Sep 27, John Smith, NY
Need more community input if tax dollars are being spent here. There are hundreds of thousands of pedestrian friendly and river developing options.

# 447

19:01, Sep 27, Name not displayed, IL

# 446

18:53, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
This design does not take into account the neighbourhood at all. It does not fit. It is horrible.

# 445

18:52, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I don’t disagree with the concept of housing but this design dates the project and creates an eyesore to an already “behind” neighborhood. Let the community have a voice of how the project will look.

# 444

18:51, Sep 27, Richard E. Bolt, NY

# 443

18:48, Sep 27, Andrea Sheldon, NY

# 442

18:41, Sep 27, Elinor Klein, NY
Our waterfront deserves a better architectural appearance than this design gives it. I say thumbs down — we and future generations deserve better.

# 441

18:37, Sep 27, marc romano, NY
Why in the world would you take such a wonderful location and not compliment the experience. Visual design should be embracing. This will become more low income housing. You’re reaching beyond your creative capability at our expense. Why?

# 440

18:37, Sep 27, …. Wedge, NY
What a joke! Is there going to be a Farris wheel and popcorn machine out front?

# 439

18:35, Sep 27, Sue Sheldon, NY
A location with so much potential for beauty…and THIS MONSTROSITY is the best design available?

# 438

18:34, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
The rendering for the Erie Harbor Project looks more like a 50s building. The architects were probably trying to have it fit with the multi floor structure nearby, but it is about as ugly as anything I have ever seen. There is no point in adding to the eyesore that is already in place.

# 437

18:33, Sep 27, steve scheuerman, NY
looks terrible,not at all able to compliment our neighborhood…

# 436

18:29, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
What happened to class and elegance? Why has it been replaced by The Brady Bunch? Don’t we want to attract people to Rochester? Please reconsider.

# 435

18:29, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 434

18:27, Sep 27, Edwin DeTamble, NY
The design should complement the neighborhood and the look across the river at Corn Hill Landing.

# 433

18:20, Sep 27, Joyce Wagner, NY

# 432

18:09, Sep 27, James P Catalano, NY
You are kidding with this design …right…????

# 431

18:08, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 430

17:49, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 429

16:31, Sep 27, Derrick Brown, NY

# 428

16:27, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 427

16:19, Sep 27, Diane Miller, NY
This is very disappointing. You want to attract people to the area.This design sure misses the mark.

# 426

16:03, Sep 27, John Hustler, NY

# 425

15:40, Sep 27, Gregory Rosinski, NY
I agree. The design is a disaster. Modern is one thing. . .but ugly is ugly. If the goal was to keep the “prison look”. . . .then why were the former “projects” bull-dozed in the first place. G.

# 424

15:23, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I believe a better building design application is possible. A redesign of the high rise also needs consideration if all buildings are to function as one.

# 423

15:10, Sep 27, Bruce Trombley, NY
HORRIBLE Design. They should be ashamed of themselves to put such a piece of junk on our waterfront. Most cities capitalize on waterfront property, and we are asked to settle for this. No Way. Back to the drawing board not only for design but also for use. Come on, REALLY?

# 422

15:04, Sep 27, Marilyn Nickerson, NY
Most water dwellings are monied spots and when rebuilt, have beautiful designs with balconies for sitting and relaxing. Think the architect missed the whole point of this great property site with this design.

# 421

14:22, Sep 27, Darcy Paddock, NY
I appriciate all the work that has gone into this design. It is obvious the designer tried to make it work with the surrounding building….there in lies the problem. We need a fresh start….contemporary can be very beautiful…but this misses the mark.

# 420

14:19, Sep 27, Kevin Campbell, NY
Is this the best we can do?

# 419

14:00, Sep 27, marilyn anderson, NY
Terrible design! No better than what was torn down. Where are the nice balconies, etc. that would allow possible residents to enjoy the river view! The colored panels look “tacked on”.

# 418

13:46, Sep 27, Walter Ketcham, NY
Go back to the earlier (Victorian style) design scheme.

# 417

13:32, Sep 27, Thomas Moughan, NY
this does not complement the Canal future vision we have, nor is it complementary to any other structure of consequence in the line of sight.

# 416

13:22, Sep 27, Jason Dobbs, NY
It makes you wonder if the people that designed this had ever even visited the site? I wonder if this what Norristown PA looks like. Hopefully the next design will use local talent.

# 415

13:20, Sep 27, robert carafice, NY

# 414

13:19, Sep 27, Sigrid Adler, NY

# 413

13:16, Sep 27, Joanne Vane, NY
That is really the ugliest design I have ever seen. I generally never sign any petitions and I have a “live and let live” and “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” belief about everything. But this would really be an eye sore.

# 412

13:12, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 411

13:11, Sep 27, Mark Wandtke, NY
The architecture that was torn down at that site was a nightmare (and kept property values down). We have an opportunity to develop a very high profile site with architecture that is of a design that enhances the well established and healthy neighborhoods of the South Wedge and Corn Hill. The plans that have been put forward are not acceptable for this location.

# 410

12:59, Sep 27, Alfred Pardi, NY

# 409

12:56, Sep 27, Allan O’Grady Cuseo, NY
It is one of the ugliest designs I have seen and I don’t want to look at it. Stop this plan now.

# 408

12:45, Sep 27, jonathan garlock, NY
i don’t recall any solicitation for public input on this project — i would not have spoken in favor of the proposed design

# 407

12:41, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I do not take the daily newspaper and had not seen the design until now. How awful!! It looks like a prison structure. I am an interior designer, often recommending exterior colors, details, and materials and would be willing to work a few hours (at not cost) with the designers / architects for this project to come up with a design, colors, and materials that are more fitting for waterfront / Erie Canal housing.

# 406

12:31, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
A concrete jungle was just torn down, why build another.

# 405

12:31, Sep 27, Lawrence Micciche, NY

# 404

12:29, Sep 27, Joe Brown, NY

# 403

10:55, Sep 27, Dean Ekberg, NY
This would be nearly as unsightly as the buildings that were removed. Surely a more appropriate design is possible.

# 402

10:46, Sep 27, Daniel Galindo, CA

# 401

10:41, Sep 27, Elizabeth Holley, NY
The City of Rochester and the neighbors directly effected by this eye sore should not have to settle for whatever a developer wants to do. We should have a voice in the matter and not be duped.

# 400

10:40, Sep 27, Sharon Hoffman, NY

# 399

10:38, Sep 27, Barbara Day, NY
Redesign — please!

# 398

10:29, Sep 27, Jonathan Muth, Germany
I was an exchange student to Rochester to Rochester 2008/2009 and saw the old the old building being demolished and did not think it could be replaced by anything worse. How about a public park or something like that just not another faceless apartment complex.

# 397

10:25, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
That is the ugliest design any kindergarten kid could come up with. This property is not worthy of being developed if that’s all the designer could come up with. That area is a historical area. Not to be ruined by some rogue designer.

# 396

10:21, Sep 27, Jerry Wolf, NY
If this design is built it will be a travesty. It is an ugly example of 50’s architecture that will lower the values of the homes in the South Wedge and Corn Hill. Ground has not been broken and that means there is hope to stop it. All funding should be removed from this project until it is agreed that it be redesigned. We have a huge opportunity here for something truly stunning to grace our neighborhood, our river, and our city as a whole. We have a great heritage of architecture and design here and this is an opportunity to keep that heritage alive and not deface it with an ill-conceived project. PLEASE do not let this happen. It is imperative to start again.

# 395

10:09, Sep 27, Jean Bayer, NY
This is a hidious design and I do not wish to have the project continue until we are heard.

# 394

10:08, Sep 27, Rosemary Varga, NY
I can’t believe that after all of the effort that has been put into regenerating the South Wedge the city could possibly allow this replication of the previous obscene structure. The new edifices on South Ave and Hickory are a place to start looking for a more appropriate frontage. The Erie HArbor structure is an insult to those of us who have worked and are still working at preserving the beautiful integrity of our forefathers. We are a beautiful family oriented neighborhood not a cheap beach resort. This note only addresses appearances. I can only imagine the inferior materials expected to be used after viewing such an inferior design.

# 393

09:37, Sep 27, Carolyn Curry, NY
This is the same ugly design that was already there. The people of Rochester deserve better, especially on the river.

# 392

09:12, Sep 27, ginelle nerau, NY

# 391

09:11, Sep 27, Rodney Vane, NY
This proposed appears to me to be anything but compatible with the area and the river view. Surely one can develop a more appealing and compatible design to accomplish the same purpose!

# 390

09:11, Sep 27, George Varga, NY
Look at South Avenue between Gregory and Hickory for a great example of fitting in with neighborhood character!

# 389

09:10, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 388

09:09, Sep 27, Colleen McCarthy, NY
This location in Rochester’s South Wedge deserves a much better building design. Please listen to the residents. The building design would undermine all the hard work done for years to uplift and revitalize the South Wedge.

# 387

09:07, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
Who on god’s green earth came up with this design? This is a prime piece of real estate and it looks like they are replacing a poor design with another poor design. How is it any different than the old public housing building?

# 386

08:56, Sep 27, Susan Zgrodnik, NY
Please do not go forward with this the building as is.

# 385

08:53, Sep 27, Joyce Gilbert, NY
Ugly, outdated – Conifer can do better, and Rochester’s waterfront deserves better!

# 384

08:41, Sep 27, dan meyers, NY

# 383

08:38, Sep 27, Fred Cardella, NY

# 382

08:34, Sep 27, Nicole Vitale, NY

# 381

08:30, Sep 27, William B. Hauser, NY
Why build an eyesore when better and more environmentally appropriate designs are easily available?

# 380

08:28, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 379

08:05, Sep 27, Leslie Moon, NC
It is ugly and not up with the times.

# 378

07:50, Sep 27, Terrell Wolf, NY
Please don’t build this Geroge Jetson style outdated housing and make Rochester a laughing stock for those visiting us.

# 377

07:48, Sep 27, Jean McClure, NY
I lived in the south wedge for 30 years. The project was always an eyesore and this is even worse. The design certainly doesn’t fit out city image.

# 376

07:46, Sep 27, Jeanette Carter, NY
Design is very unattractive however I support the Erie Harbor project.

# 375

07:36, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY
I think this design is hideous..

# 374

07:34, Sep 27, Joseph Finetti, NY
Doesn’t look much better than the eyesore that used to be there. This site deserves so much better!

# 373

07:18, Sep 27, Name not displayed, NY

# 372

05:24, Sep 27, Mary Yatteau, NY

# 371

04:58, Sep 27, Gale Lynch, NY

# 370

20:12, Sep 26, Lisa Harasimowitz, NY

# 369

14:36, Sep 26, Jill Mullen, NY

# 368

14:35, Sep 26, Leslie Gillies, NY

# 367

05:16, Sep 26, Terry Burridge, Canada

# 366

05:11, Sep 26, shirley hansen, NY

# 365

01:35, Sep 26, Name not displayed, TX

# 364

19:28, Sep 25, Name not displayed, NY

# 363

18:12, Sep 25, Carol DiMarzo, NY
The current site plan will become an outdated eyesore in few years, it lacks any sense of traditonality that will give the project lasting beauty!!!!!

# 362

17:10, Sep 25, Name not displayed, PA

# 361

17:08, Sep 25, Linda Bislow, NY
This design concept is no better than the concrete tenements that were just torn down. As a matter of fact, they resemble them well. Please reconsider your design for the sake of this beautiful piece of land and take into consideration the highest and best use of this strip of prime waterfront that is going to be seen by thousands of tourists as well as something the residents of this city can be proud of. Reconsider your design, please.

# 360

16:16, Sep 25, Michael Orman, NY

# 359

14:40, Sep 25, James Brown, NY

# 358

14:19, Sep 25, Kenneth Graci, NY

# 357

13:09, Sep 25, Chris Whittaker, SC

# 356

04:12, Sep 25, Claudia Bly, NY

# 355

19:39, Sep 24, george gotcsik, NY
This design switch is an affront to citizen participation that was used effectively in a previous design.

# 354

19:29, Sep 24, . Southwedger, NY
It looks like a retirement home for clowns.

# 353

14:02, Sep 24, Marjorie Benson, NY
When you finally have the opportunity to make the area beautiful, don’t miss your chance!

# 352

11:36, Sep 24, Katie Schalberg, NY
Is the city trying to undermind the residents of the Southwedge who are diligently, and successfully, cleaning up this wonderful neighborhood?? By keeping “low income” housing in this area, you are affecting the home value of these hard working, tax paying individuals. I believe that low income housing is a necessity, but the Southwedge has been home long enough for these people. I’m sure the City of Rochester can find room elsewhere for this project… maybe the Park Ave area??? Thank you for your time :-)

# 351

08:46, Sep 24, Dana Weider, NY

# 350

07:43, Sep 24, Sharron Isaacson, NY

# 349

07:24, Sep 24, thomas fox, NY
Frankly,I can’t see where this is any improvement over what was taken down.And looking like a dorm/prison will not attract the “upscale” renter I thought they were trying to bring in.

# 348

06:05, Sep 24, Shannon Congdon, NY

# 347

05:17, Sep 24, Sue Sanford, NY

# 346

05:12, Sep 24, David Chapus, NY

# 345

02:03, Sep 24, Name not displayed, NY
I’m grateful that Conifer wants to invest to make more money for their company, BUT the building doesn’t fit in the neighborhood. The colors are all wrong.Harlequin pastels don’t work. Please,Mr.Cross,do your magic and transform this property. T

# 344

11:20, Sep 23, Cheri Crist, NY
The building next to it is ugly enough. Please don’t add it.

# 343

10:18, Sep 23, Name not displayed, NY
I’ve seen the new design, and it (1) doesn’t fit at all with the architecture around the area and (2) is downright ugly. It looks like a painted version of the structures that were there before!

# 342

09:06, Sep 23, Sebastien Estaque, NY
The design is simply horrible for Rochester, simply does not fit in at all.

# 341

08:28, Sep 23, Arthur Holtzman, NY
Really. Conifer can be more sensitive to existing local architecture and access to the river both visually and physically.

# 340

07:07, Sep 23, Jennifer Muhl, NY

# 339

06:55, Sep 23, Tara Winner, NY

# 338

06:52, Sep 23, Mark Trzcinski, NY
Preserve the integrity of the South Wedge with a more thought out design. Nobody wants an eyesore to anchore this magical neighborhood. Look accross the river and see how to do it right. Corn Hill is not the South Wedge, but don’t make the South Wedge into a charmless strip mall.

# 337

19:26, Sep 22, Jeanne Herrick, NY

# 336

17:55, Sep 22, Jeremy Turner, NY
Oh my god, the first building is an eyesore that makes me feel like i live in a high rise put back together with scrap metal from 1990’s cars after being burned out. Who is paying these people off to let their 8yr old kid play color by number on the Rochester city?skyscrape.

# 335

16:27, Sep 22, Peter Frosig, NY
I have owneda single-family residence in Rochester since 1975; the last development was a unfortunate and this one only promises to ba another mistake.

# 334

15:58, Sep 22, Courtney Huether, NY

# 333

15:32, Sep 22, ian delaporte, NY
art-yucko!

# 332

15:10, Sep 22, lisa rosica, NY

# 331

14:31, Sep 22, Barb Case, NY
Wow! Talk about making a statement! What a way to greet visitors to a revitalized downtown. Ugh!

# 330

13:46, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
Conifer contradicts themselves with their current proposal. Their Final EIS states “The eclectic nature of the architecture of the South Wedge does not lend itself to modern interpretation.” – that is their response on page 7 of their final Environmental Impact Statement, as found on the City of Rochester website.

# 329

13:39, Sep 22, Laura Catracchia, NY

# 328

13:33, Sep 22, rachel ehmann, NY

# 327

12:03, Sep 22, Tracey Mykins, NY

# 326

11:55, Sep 22, Larissa Huge, NY

# 325

11:25, Sep 22, The Wedge, NY
The project should be renamed the Brimstone Estates because it looks like Hell.

# 324

11:24, Sep 22, Courtney Ter-Velde, NY
This is more than just an aesthetic issue; it is about displacing members of the community without consideration of how they contribute to the neighborhood. It is about another large corporate builder who wants to make the most money for the least amount of quality and effort; trying to pass off poor design, craftsmanship, and materials to those who aren’t savvy enough to ask the questions and see the problems. Continue to speak up fellow Wedgies, this is the only way to make an IMPACTIVE DIFFERENCE! :)

# 323

10:19, Sep 22, Leslie Barnes, NY

# 322

09:00, Sep 22, Mark Westcott, NY
An appropriate design should embrace and be consistent with adjacent South Wedge architecture.

# 321

08:47, Sep 22, Beth Mullen, NY
I thought the blue panels were Tyvek insulations that would be covered up after construction is finished. they are random and look ridiculous.

# 320

08:32, Sep 22, Don Baker, NY
This design is not much better than what was originally there. I feel this will bring my property value down.

# 319

08:18, Sep 22, joanne smoyer, NY
why would anyone want to be proud of such an ugly home. If we want people to maintain this property they must be proud of where they live. The project that was demolished was better looking thgan the new one & look at what happened to it.

# 318

08:13, Sep 22, Spencer Ash, NY
This design is an abomination to a city fighting hard to remake itself and attract new residents and businesses. This design is disgusting and looks little more than a poorly conceived tenement building.

# 317

08:02, Sep 22, natasha johnson, NY

# 316

07:55, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
It is time to put proper thought and money into a very important project.

# 315

07:20, Sep 22, Andy Wilson, NY

# 314

06:44, Sep 22, Chris Pusateri, NY
Please DO NOT fund this project. Waterfront property is normally prime real estate for most cities. If we want to continue the economic development of downtown, the design should be more functional and add to our property values similar to Cornhill landing.

# 313

06:41, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
This building design is not at all in keeping with the the feel of the southwedge comunity and will be an eyesore to the area

# 312

06:15, Sep 22, Name not displayed, NY
Please do not fund the Erie Harbor Project with public funds until a design is presented that is acceptable to the residents of the area and that will not become just another eyesore.

# 311

06:05, Sep 22, . The Wedge, NY
It looks like it came out of the southern end of a northbound architect.

# 310

21:31, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 309

19:59, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 308

19:18, Sep 21, Wilfred LeBlanc, NY
No way does this design reflect flavor of the South Wedge community .

# 307

18:35, Sep 21, Phyllis Glass, NY

# 306

17:12, Sep 21, . Everyone in the Southwedg, NY
What is this Mondrian in brimstone?

# 305

16:39, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 304

15:18, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY

# 303

13:51, Sep 21, anne dupin, NY

# 302

13:50, Sep 21, mike dupin, NY

# 301

13:32, Sep 21, Michaek Munn, NY
This is an area with the most potential in the city currently has the biggest eyesore. Grow Rochester properly with historic influence and without corporatized and ugly structures please!

# 300

13:28, Sep 21, Jeremy Smith, NY

# 299

12:36, Sep 21, Suzanne Chichester, NY

# 298

12:30, Sep 21, Mary Boyce, NY

# 297

11:40, Sep 21, Melodie Adkins, NY

# 296

10:36, Sep 21, Christopher Sardell, NY

# 295

10:33, Sep 21, Paul Beinetti, NY
Don’t make the same mistake twice, Rochester

# 294

10:03, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY
We should focus on making this a community fixture for the south wedge including park space available to potentially host future South Wedge Farmers Market, not an enormous high rise building with no character or charm of the neighborhood we have all come to love.

# 293

09:51, Sep 21, patricia hans, NY

# 292

09:10, Sep 21, Penny Shepherd, NY
It’s hard to believe that ANYONE would think this design is appropriate for the Southwedge and especially for Rochester’s waterfront property.

# 291

08:29, Sep 21, Robert Shepherd, NY
This design actually appears to be a step backwards. It has no appeal, nor does it fit with the overall character of the South Wedge.

# 290

08:19, Sep 21, Karl Marsiglio, NY
I was shocked to see the tower designed as it was. Not very appealing. This desing already looks dated – wait 10 years – it’ll look even more unappealing. Now you want to do it for the rest of the site? Please don’t. Yes, the Southwedge is a unique neighborhood with a quirky, artsy identity, but don’t take that for granted and assume that funky, Eastern Block retro is cool or even appealing. This is a neighborhood of old homes, old buildings and tree-lined streets, all with history. Try something that fits the longstanding and historic architectual character of the neighborhood, not the presumed sence of what’s “hip” today – because it won’t be hip tomorrow.

# 289

07:10, Sep 21, Christian soderstrom, NY
The design will have a negative impact on the river and canal.

# 288

06:13, Sep 21, Stefania Buonomo, NY
Keep the city looking and feeling alive and vibrant.. Poor archetecture and low income housing is not the answer…

# 287

06:11, Sep 21, Cachelle Guadagnino, NY
This is like “urban renewal”! We have a chance to create something beautiful. The design looks like HOUSING PROJECTS!!!!

# 286

05:22, Sep 21, James DelFavero, NY
PLEASE change the design. It’s unsightly and just plain ugly!!!

# 285

05:16, Sep 21, Richard Hunt, NY
The proposed Conifer building facade is repulsive! This is EXACTLY the look of Urban Renewal of the 70s which did not work on ANY level. Please don’t do it unless you want to tear it down again in the future. We are dealing with a historic urban context, not a children’s museum!!! This site should be a central showpiece, and an anchor to further development of the Southwedge, not a brash contradiction in design style. If lack of funds is the problem, do something small but tasteful, master planned, in phases. I’m sorry but the Conifer proposed design is so unfitting it is almost a joke.

# 284

04:25, Sep 21, Name not displayed, NY
Please consider a design more in lline with what is across the river at Corn Hill Landing and incorporates the streets that intersect Mt Hope Ave. This design is destined to be known as “The Erie Harbor PROJECTS”

# 283

04:22, Sep 21, Christine Lechner, NY
Please build according to the neighboring architecture. What is there is an eyesore. Please improve the property not degrade it!

# 282

21:37, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
Please it really needs to be changed!

# 281

21:18, Sep 20, James Caffrey, NY
You have got to be kidding! You call this eyesore of a design, elegant and tasteful! This new design is worse than what was on that site before. What a slap in the face of us, the residents, that make this neighborhood our home! It looks so much worse that what was built on the west side of the river! Please reconsider this ugly design and replace it with something appropriate to the elegant historic nature of this neighborhood and community. James J. Caffrey

# 280

20:01, Sep 20, Janet Kellner, NY
I lived in the “wedge” for many years and I was horrified to see the plans for new apartments. For years we hoped to see a change in that area but this proposal is awful, it will not attract the upscale renters that you would hope for, unless they enjoyed time in prison…..that is what the structures look like. Do not allow this monstrosity to be built!

# 279

19:30, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
The existing building is an eyesore and does not blend in with the neighboring community nor does it co exist aesthetically with the river. This building in not something Rochester should be proud of.

# 278

19:29, Sep 20, Edward Bartl, NY
This is proposed to be an improvement to what was there ? I think not ! Can’t we get this right the 2nd time around on this crucial waterfront property ? We need a design that fits the city neighborhood, such as Mark IV’s design across the river. Corn Hill Landing fits the neighborhood perfectly. Let’s get this right, PLEASE !

# 277

18:11, Sep 20, Susan Mandl, NY
The building that is now there is a terrible disappointment to me. So dated and ugly. The ones that are planned will make it even worse. We can do better. The planners (public and private) need to re-think the design for this crucial site.

# 276

15:46, Sep 20, John Pearsall, NY
When I first came to Rochester I was told a housing development by the Israeli architect, who designed Habitat for the Montreal Expo, would be designing this property. As usual anything exceptional is shot down in this city and instead a piece of junk that looked like some third world prison was put up. When that was torn down, not soon enough, I thought maybe this time they might get it right. I should have known this city would settle for a piece of junk. Other cities are building outstanding buildings which are giving them prominence in the architectural world. It is a shame that Rochester is yet again putting up more trash. It is a shame there is no one with a brain to oversee this monstrosity.

# 275

14:20, Sep 20, Andrea Warner, NY
This is the ugliest building design I’ve ever seen! Please do not let it mar Rochester’s skyline

# 274

14:15, Sep 20, paul kingsley, NY
there is an obvious problem with the local neighborhood’s acceptance of this design. Google “Erie Harbor Design”, and revisit this issue.

# 273

13:54, Sep 20, Jason Gordon, NY
Why replace a poor design with another poor design?

# 272

13:53, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY

# 271

13:49, Sep 20, hellen davis, NY
Very disappointed in the design. Was hoping to live in the new development with view of river..now not so inclined!

# 270

13:47, Sep 20, Robert Stilson, GA

# 269

13:33, Sep 20, Peter Valone, NY

# 268

13:23, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY

# 267

12:40, Sep 20, Mary Shelsby, NY
As a local resident and realtor that works in this community, having a design that compliments and blends in the neighborhood is important for future growth of this area.

# 266

12:14, Sep 20, Jim Ryan, NY

# 265

11:29, Sep 20, Lorie Brown, NY
The design looks like what was there before….crappy and the colors are awful. I was looking forward to the new design and am VERY disappointed.

# 264

09:49, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
The worst design I have ever seen for the city of Rochester. Seriously rethink the design as this will become the image of Rochester for many years to come. I don’t think the development should include low income or assisted living. This is prime real estate and should be used accordingly. Clean up the city, make it look appealing, and let’s reinvent and boost the city of Rochester’s image so people will WANT to VISIT and LIVE and WORK in Rochester.

# 263

09:13, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
The current proposal looks far too similar to the eye sore that once stood there. We need a more inviting, visually appealing building there to compliment the beautiful view of downtown as well as the neighborhoodiing SouthWedge.

# 262

09:06, Sep 20, Luis Maldonado, NY

# 260

07:07, Sep 20, Brennan egling, NY
I’m extremely concerned with the proposed / “excepted” veneer of said properties. I know from first hand experience how a look of a residence can attract certain clients. These new condo’s are strikingly close to the look of the old structure. Having been held up at gun point just outside of the old buildings, for doing something as simple as taking pictures of the Ford Street Bridge, I would of hoped that this property could have been built to show off and mere one of the best views this city can afford. I’m sorry but this design proposal is an insult to everyone who has invested in the Wedge.

# 259

07:00, Sep 20, Penny Dentinger, NY
These buildings were an eyesore before and now the high tower looks almost even worse than before because it appears incomplete and completely outdated — plain silly to have along the river and in clear view of our beautiful new bridge and cityscape. I think the high tower needs to be redone and in no way, shape or form should the low rise buildings be allowed to be built in the same way!!!! Thanks.

# 258

06:10, Sep 20, Sascha Norris, GA

# 257

06:10, Sep 20, vicki gouveia, NY
It was my honor to serve the children and families of the south wedge for many years at School 12. First as a teacher then as the Principal. I am happy to see that something is being done in that area and it will be a big improvement over the Riverpark Commons that was there. However this design is not the right choice for that project. After seeing it on the high rise let’s not make that mistake again.

# 256

06:08, Sep 20, Aimee Bohn, NY
The South Wedge has such charm and character – this new addition to it should follow in it’s form.

# 255

06:04, Sep 20, Michael Bohn, NY
How is this different from what was torn down? We could have saved a ton of money by buying blue and yellow spray paint for the old building…

# 254

06:02, Sep 20, Francis Gerham Jr, NY
No public funds for that awful design !

# 253

05:58, Sep 20, Melissa Stull, NY
The proposed Erie Harbor Project design is an eyesore. I live a few blocks away and I can’t believe what Conifer is trying to do to my up-and-coming neighborhood. It’s almost worse than what was there before.

# 252

05:57, Sep 20, Name not displayed, NY
They should have just renovated what was there if they wanted the pre fab box look

# 251

05:55, Sep 20, Daniel DeVault, NY
Though I dont live downtown, I am there quite often. What are they thinking of!!

# 200

18:07, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY
need some ideas for a new design? look across the river at Corn Hill Landing.

# 199

17:40, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY
What a horrible sight to welcome you to the city of Rochester. The building looks like a cheap hotel from the 50s. Do something to improve that mess! Please.

# 198

16:36, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY
Biggest eyesore! There are so many examples of beautiful architecture and design in Rochester, why cant the developers open their eyes and try to incorporate some of the existing features of rochester into this design!

# 197

16:23, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 196

15:29, Sep 17, Dana Brooks, NY
That has to be one of the most unattractive designs I have ever seen – please tell me that this is a joke. This will do nothing to increase the value or appearance of this neighborhood which needs so much help.

# 195

15:28, Sep 17, patricia leadley, NY
not even the LEFRAK bldgs in the NYC area looked this bad way back when, i hate to think what the colorful “ticky tacky little boxes” will look like when Rochester winters start making them look sooty. it’ll be like old lego blocks, modern is one thing but these are just ugly!looks like blue and white and yellow trucks stacked on top of each other like at the commercial docks of an unloading shipping area!is that where they got the idea for the design, recycling shipping crates??what message are we sending here?? yuck

# 194

15:13, Sep 17, Name not displayed, WA
So, why won’t the project designers be responsive to the PEOPLE? Perhaps, they have forgotten to listen!

# 193

13:28, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 192

12:59, Sep 17, Richard Reisem, NY
The design stints on glass in a setting that demands more glass. The color scheme is dated, reminding us of ugly urban renewal in the 60s. The design is too much like the ugly development it replaces. It looks more like a cheap motel in the rural slums.

# 191

10:34, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 190

08:38, Sep 17, richard rowe, NY
I am not aware that this design for Erie Harbor was truely and widely brought to the Community as a whole. This design effects more than just the South Wedge residents! The whole community will have to look at and live with the current design for many years. This is one of Rochester’s prime locations and the current design does not reflect the investment or the importants of this property!

# 189

08:15, Sep 17, Robert Farnan, NY
This is a very poor use of land that could host a very beautiful building. The current design looks quite cheap and entirely generic. Go back to the drawing board and turn out a plan that is less stark and more organic – a design that “wows” in a good way….

# 188

07:51, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 187

07:33, Sep 17, Charlotte Howard, NY

# 186

07:17, Sep 17, Laurie Saffran, NY

# 185

06:36, Sep 17, Oscar Pedroso, NY
Just a plain ugly design. I do not want to live around this. It’s already bad enough that there is something already like this near me.

# 184

06:28, Sep 17, Steve Baldwin, NY
It has become clear that a lot more thought and a lot more answers are needed before this project moves onward.

# 183

06:03, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 182

05:50, Sep 17, Name not displayed, NY

# 181

05:10, Sep 17, william pieper, NY
the architecture is not in keeping with a low profile to complment the neighborhood and the viewshed off the river.

# 180

05:03, Sep 17, Matthew Sundman, NY

# 179

20:18, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 178

19:38, Sep 16, Josh Cowley, NY
I live in the area and frequently enjoy the Erie Harbor area. The current proposed design will be an eye sore and devalue the area as a whole. Additionally being an art enthusiast it this type of design would be well suited elseware.

# 177

18:42, Sep 16, Elissa Sundman, NY
As someone who has just purchased a home in the area, I must say I am highly upset about this design. It mars the beautiful landscape that the waterfront could be. It seems to me that the original buildings were torn down, just to put new ones that are just as displeasing to the eye. Disgraceful.

# 176

18:18, Sep 16, Cheryl Stevens, NY
After 30 years of living with River Park Commons in the South Wedge what a sad and disappointing day when the Erie Harbor designs were unveiled. The City and City Council owe much more not only to the residents of the South Wedge, but to the entire southeast community by providing a more architecturally significant design that is in keeping with the surrounding historic structures. Please keep the taxpayers vested in their neighborhoods and listen to what is being said.

# 175

17:56, Sep 16, Peter Kline, NY
I just moved from the South Wedge and plan to return shortly as a homeowner. This project is critical to ensuring the future of the wedge’s west side and is a gateway for many into the city. The potential economic impact of those who choose to live at Erie Harbor cannot be understated. Please, get this right and create something worth the hype and excitement!

# 174

17:18, Sep 16, Cheryl BazilVasko, NY
I believe that Conifer’s architects need to go back to the drawing board to design structures more in line with the neighborhood and have it be a pleasure to look at from the water.

# 173

16:54, Sep 16, Nichole Taylor, MA
Even as a former resident of the South Wedge, I protest the current proposed design. Look across the river to the Luxury Corn Hill landscape for a clue to what the community is looking for.

# 172

16:18, Sep 16, Janeane Klingler, NY
I am very disappointed in the current design and feel that it is not a step in the right direction nor appropriate for our area. It is actually quite offensive and a huge eyesore!

# 171

16:02, Sep 16, Jonathan Carroll-Nellenback, NY

# 170

15:34, Sep 16, Sean Daly, NY
How is this ugly structure an improvement on what was there before? The colors are horrifying and it looks identical to the projects that were there before.

# 169

14:43, Sep 16, Jeanne C Parker, NY
We can do better and we need to do it! We deserve better and we need to be sure our community receives it!

# 168

13:48, Sep 16, Jean VanBuren, NY
This design is not much better than what was torn down! Why wasn’t the historic nature of the neighborhood considered in the design.

# 167

13:14, Sep 16, Mary Ellen Dennis, NY

# 166

12:51, Sep 16, Kelly Matthews, NY

# 165

12:39, Sep 16, Kyle Polite, NY

# 164

12:23, Sep 16, Peter Turkow, NY

# 163

12:14, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
This design is no better than the buildings that were torn down. I’m really disappointed. You would think with the success of corn hill landing it wouldn’t be a difficult task to see what works in this area.

# 162

11:59, Sep 16, David Lindahl, NY
I think it is a shame that they are not creating mixed use, living and retail space on this huge river front DESTINATION space. A lot of people think its ugly and it could certainly be better. This should include retail and be a destination boardwalk for people to come to, to eat, and shop – like the Charlotte area. It is also a very basic design – how will we attract a better tax base with this. It’s riverfront property!

# 161

11:46, Sep 16, Linda Marcucci, NY

# 160

11:41, Sep 16, Nick Shippers, NY
As a resident and local business owner, this design could be better for our community. The designers made a great effort tocreate something bold, but it is not something thatmy friends, family, andbusiness partners feel is somethong that fits our culture and community. We want you to invest in our community,but think you should revist the impact of the look. Thanks!

# 159

11:10, Sep 16, Jeffrey Henley, NY
This design does not match the neighborhood architecture. It is a waste of some of the best property the City has left.

# 158

10:46, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Color scheme is too bold!

# 157

10:39, Sep 16, Kristin Chajka, NY

# 156

10:37, Sep 16, T O’Connor, NY

# 155

09:50, Sep 16, Sheila Bazil, NY
The design does not maintain the neighbor character.

# 154

09:29, Sep 16, Richard Vinchesi,P.E., NY
This “design” is a travesty of incredible proportion totally out of character with its neighborhood,site and materials reminicent of urban renewal in the 1960’s most of which have been demolished all across America as they crumbled into the ground after 30-50 years.What is required is a new review board and an architect with an appreciation of the surroundings .Rocheseter can do better than this !!

# 153

09:18, Sep 16, Susan Nerwin, NY
This design will make this look like a subsidized housing project. It deserves a timeless elegant design.

# 152

09:00, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
It isn’t a cohesive design. The building design itself is harsh. It looks like pool lining on a slab of concrete.

# 151

08:58, Sep 16, Margaret Hayes, NY
The proposed design is totally out of character with the neighborhood. The eyesore that was finally demolished is being replaced by another.

# 150

08:53, Sep 16, Gloria Forgione, NY

# 149

08:36, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Water front property needs water front design

# 148

08:12, Sep 16, Mark Mackey, NY
While I appreciate the design in mid-century architecture, this is a horrible location to incorporate it. We need to compliment the historic South Wedge area, not hurt it! The former buildings did that for far too long! Step-up elected officials and stop funding now!

# 147

08:12, Sep 16, Jeff Wagner, NY
Ugly.

# 146

08:11, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 145

08:00, Sep 16, Ryan Smith, NY

# 144

07:57, Sep 16, Chris Anders, NY
This is an eyesore! Even for a person that is colorblind!!!

# 143

07:42, Sep 16, Steven Ward, NY
This design is not only painful to look at, but will unfortunately tarnish a very important, highly visible waterfront site. We have waited SO LONG for the ugly buildings from the old project to be removed. How could Rochester City planners let this happen again?

# 142

07:24, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
The design does not fit within the historic character of the neighborhood. The color scheme looks ridiculous.

# 141

06:41, Sep 16, Maureen Metzler, NY
I have witnessed the progress of the Southwedge for the past 22 years. One can observe that the historic preservation of the neighborhood has been of the utmost importance to its citizens. The community deserves a building design that mirrors their dedication in restoring this area of the city. Modern and the proposed color scheme just doesn’t work. Please listen to the people who have made the Southwedge their home.

# 140

06:13, Sep 16, John Smith, NY
If it were justr ugly it might eventually ingratiate itself into our consciousness and become “charming” in an ugly way. It’s not just ugly, it’s an anachronistic harking back to the 1950’s style of architecture. It in no way is any kind of improvement over what it proposes to replace. Scrap the whole thing and start over!

# 139

06:04, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 138

06:02, Sep 16, mark cold, NY
Too long the river is wasted on schwag

# 137

05:44, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Horrible design – it looks like a recent newspaper photo of an Iraqi prison. Despite developers & city claiming it was an open design process, it was not.

# 136

05:37, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY

# 135

05:23, Sep 16, Name not displayed, NY
Totally unacceptable…this looks just like the former complex with some blue and yellow paint thrown on it. I feel for the residents of the South Wedge Community. Conifer needs to go back to the drawing board and think about the history of the neighborhood and the work it’s residents have put into their homes/community.

# 134

05:17, Sep 16, Gloria Monacelli, NY
I am not opposed to the Hamilton’s colors. But I am opposed to the building design (flat roofed, prison like buildings) and color scheme of the Erie Harbor project. It should be more in keeping with the neighborhood, and CornHill Landing.

# 133

03:23, Sep 16, Heather Penrose, NY
I think it’s a good idea but the colors will deteriorate over time and will be costly to maintain. Please reconsider the outside look of this building. I am a social worker and refer many people to the Hamilton due to the subsidy offered. Most clients refer to The Hamilton as the one that “is ugly on the outside but nice on the inside”.

# 132

22:52, Sep 15, Andrew Branch, NY
I have nothing against modern design, but Erie Harbor is cold, uninviting and too reminiscent of the site that was just razed. We’ll have to live with this for another 40 years, lets get it right this time.

# 131

22:35, Sep 15, Bo Clark, NY
Visually this is as bad or worse than the project that was demolished at that site. The design should be warm and inviting

# 130

22:04, Sep 15, Kristina Phillips, NY

# 129

21:42, Sep 15, Vincent Badali, NY

# 128

21:10, Sep 15, John Comatos, NY
The current plan is extremely offensive and similar to the prison photo last week in the D&C. It was a prison in Iraq!

# 127

20:02, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 126

19:35, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY
these proposed buildings show a total lack of design. and dont look any different from the buildings that were torn down. lets do better!

# 125

19:35, Sep 15, Mary Ellen Latour, OH

# 124

19:11, Sep 15, Douglas Root, NY
There are very few cities in this country that are located next to a river. Rochester in one of the few if not the only city not to take advantage of this unique asset. Erie Harbor looks like college dorms from the 70’s. We can and we should do better!!

# 123

19:03, Sep 15, Martha Heller, NY
What is proposed is outrageous and unacceptable for our community

# 122

18:53, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 121

18:48, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 120

18:36, Sep 15, Paul Whitehouse, NY
Please design with history in mind, this is a lovely old neighborhood.

# 119

18:32, Sep 15, janice damick, NY
for all the years the land was unusable and covered by an eyesore we now have to look at that horrible building that is Hamilton manor and are asked to support some very out of character townhouses/condos tht do not fit the landscape. Hamilton Manor is aneyesore and the thought is buyers for this project will want what’s offered including that horrible behometh in middle

# 118

18:25, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 117

18:05, Sep 15, Donna Lemcke, NY
This design is the same cheap looking, low income, diaster waiting to happen. I thought that was one of the reasons the old bldg. were taken down. I am for low income housing, but don’t design it to look like it. This is such a contradiction to the area. Shame on all who agreed to this.

# 116

17:53, Sep 15, Barbara Outterson, NY
I concur with this request. I attend church weekly in this neighborhood and come to the South Wedge often.

# 115

16:56, Sep 15, Matthew Weasner, NY
I’m sorry, this is just as much of an eyesore as the housing it is replacing. Can’t we do better than this?

# 114

16:50, Sep 15, nancy lauterbach, NY
The integrity of the South Wedge is at stake!! Please consider a new design, preferably old world brick-like structure like the wonderful architecture on South Avenue. The current proposed color and that of Hamilton high rise is unacceptable!!

# 113

16:40, Sep 15, Toni Weasner, NY

# 112

16:32, Sep 15, barbara kennedy, NY
What is happening here? This project is only a tad better in appearance than its predecessor. One is amazed that these plans were ever approved. Please return to the drawing board, consider the input of the residents/taxpayers, and hide the paint.

# 111

16:23, Sep 15, Maureen Dunn, NY
We just got rid of ugly housing that stood on this site for decades. Please do not replace it with something equally unappealing.

# 110

15:06, Sep 15, Karen West, NY

# 109

15:02, Sep 15, Jake Oukes, NY

# 108

14:20, Sep 15, Lauren Wessell, NY

# 107

14:18, Sep 15, Kevin Fridd, NY

# 106

14:13, Sep 15, Rob Goodling, NY

# 105

13:39, Sep 15, Alice Raymond, NY

# 104

13:37, Sep 15, Joseph Arena, NY
I’ve lived in the Corn Hill for 17 years. We worked hard to get a development (Corn Hill Landing) that we are proud of. I would not be at all proud of the Erie Harbor design. It resembles a cross between low cost housing (which they thankfully tore down) and a prison. Please do not allow this project to go thru.

# 103

13:32, Sep 15, Page Simpson, NY

# 102

13:26, Sep 15, Matthew Hjelmhaug, NY
THIS IS NOT MIAMI

# 101

13:18, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 100

13:03, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY
I was on a community development committee last year when I lived in Rochester, and the plans that were shown included lovely townhouses parallel to the river in small groups with lots of green space and public access. What could have possibly happened to allow for this horrific design to be considered??? This will again divide the neighborhood and restrict public access to the river. Please don’t let this happen!!

# 99

12:59, Sep 15, Jacqueline Johnson, NY
I find this design to be an enormous architectural faux-pas that will not be looked back on fondly in years to come. For such a beautiful area, that is widely visible from major tourist sites of the city, I feel Rochester would benefit more from sophisticated and charming architecture that leaves a more prepossessing first impression than something such as this design, that is reminiscent of some childhood Lego structure.

# 98

12:34, Sep 15, Annie Gonzalez, NY
Stop the project and start over again, and design and build something that will be a beautiful addition to Rochester and the South Wedge.

# 97

12:22, Sep 15, Richard Maguire, NY

# 96

12:13, Sep 15, Kari Cameron, NY
The neighborhood in which this is to be built is historically significant and should be a main attraction to Rochester. Unfortunately, it seems that the current plan does not support these ideas. Rather than put up housing units quickly, which are bound to deteriorate just as quickly and convert back to what we just removed, why not consider building something that will draw interest into the area. People who live here are proud to be here. Please enable us to continue to be so. Thank you!

# 95

12:10, Sep 15, Victoria Posner, NY
This is already a great, big eyesore. Who in heaven’s name came up with and approved all those colored panels on the high rise? The blues were bad enough. Then they added yellow. And when there were complaints that that was garrish they added pink/salmon panels making it even worse. Will someone with a modicum of good taste please get involved with this project!!!!

# 94

11:53, Sep 15, richard sarkis, NY
please stop this project from moving forward until a better design concept is created

# 93

11:24, Sep 15, Lisa Fleming, NY

# 92

11:08, Sep 15, Sandra Cona, NY
I have been Realtor in the Rochester area for more than 15 years. I do a great deal of business in the South Wedge area. What a shame to have a project like this going up on such a wonderful piece of real estate. These buildings do not look or represent the historical nature of this area. It would be a huge mistake to allow this to happen.

# 91

11:04, Sep 15, John Van Kerkhove, NY
I am concerned about the quality of the materials and the unwillingness of the developer to engage the community in the design process.

# 90

10:56, Sep 15, Bonita Mayer, NY
This project is without an overall vision for the city. It does not present an attractive reason for people to come into the city, and it will within a very short period of time create just a different view of low income cramped housing that will not support quality living but encourage urban crime. Stop the project. . Don’t allow a builder to cover Brownfield’s with slab construction. Send it back for a full community review. If the city can’t develop a comprehensive plan, contract out, but strive for quality – honor the river and the people who live by the river. Rochester does deserve better.

# 89

10:25, Sep 15, Susan Mars, NY
Previous newspaper(s) of ‘The Wedge’ depicted what was coming down and going up (e.g. June-July 2008 Vol. 30 No. 3). The public had an opportunity to provide input at that time and those changes were made in an updated design to provide easy access to the river from Mt. Hope Avenue, etc. The latest development/design does not appear to contribute to the character and personality of the South Wedge neighborhood.

# 88

10:09, Sep 15, Matthew Carnevale, NY
Rochester is on the verge of a comeback… Rochester is one of the best areas to raise a family… Rochester is the 15th best place to find work in the country (!)… Rochester has one of the highest rates of a college educated workforce in the country… Rochester is all this and much more! Let’s have our city shine! Let’s be proud of Where We Choose To Live… Why have we torn down something on prime real estate in our City only to replace it with more of the same? Remember the definition of insanity and let’s pull our heads out of our collective “we can’t do it” and Do It! If the City is in need of a Real Architect, please feel free to contact me and the name of one will be quickly forwarded.

# 87

09:52, Sep 15, David Chappius, NY
I think that Conifer has gone through the proper steps and channels to get this project approved, and maybe community leaders missed an opportunity to comment and influence the project more. But regardless of communications issues, and lack of community involvement – the current design doesn’t fit the neighborhood and should be reconsidered. It’s not just about color!

# 86

09:48, Sep 15, lorrie perotti, NY
I live in the area and have the the last 48 years and the color has alot to be desired….!

# 85

09:42, Sep 15, Carol Gerbasi, NY
I was shocked when I saw the design, it’s similarity to the previous building, how unattrative and not keeping with the flavor of the Wedge.

# 84

09:30, Sep 15, Donna Heiler, NY
Current design being considered looks terrible! Come on — this is an opportunity to make this side of the river shine!

# 83

09:29, Sep 15, Roxanne Kuliner, NY
A reconsideration of the aesthetics of this building would be thoughtful.

# 82

09:16, Sep 15, Drew Marsherall, NY
Don’t waste this opportunity for prime development on an ugly building that does not match the community!

# 81

08:16, Sep 15, Peter MacDowell, NY

# 80

08:15, Sep 15, Tim Sukhenko, NY
This bleak design is not an improvement over the dismal complex that once stood along the river. Ive seen prisons with more character and appealing design. This design does not work for that space and is not in keeping with architecture style of the neighorhood. I envision multiple buildings with greater access to the river view. This design is esentilly a wall.

# 79

07:48, Sep 15, Peter Mohr, NY
You have prime real estate use it for that, not some god ugly building. This would be a crime for South Wedge and the Cornhill neighbors across the river that have to look at.

# 78

07:27, Sep 15, Name not displayed, NY

# 77

07:11, Sep 15, Micheal Faucher, NY
I live a few blocks away and would be saddened to see such a structure built in a historic neighborhood on such nice real estate.

# 76

06:42, Sep 15, Jason Roberts, NY
Although I applaud Conifer for partnering on such an ambitious plan, unfortunately they have missed the mark on this rendering. Aesthetically, the project does not tell the story of the neighborhood it surrounds, and once the thin coat of gloss wears away, will be just another eyesore; much like its predecessor. As an architectural enthusiast and Landmark Society chair, I feel this design does not capture the energy, history & future of one of Rochester’s most valued & sought-after urban villages. Please take a step back, explore the city streets that end where this project begins and find inspiration anew!

# 75

06:27, Sep 15, Paul Frankel, NY
South Wedge residents have waited patiently for renewal of this prime river-scape area. The proposed construction looks oddly similar to the buildings that occupied the property earlier, with a splash of color. This neighborhood needs the highest quality design and construction to preserve it.

# 74

05:42, Sep 15, Daniel Schiavone, NY
Why not build something that fits into and adds to the existing charm of the South Wedge? This design is way outside what I would consider appropriate for the neighborhood. I don’t care if it already made it through the proper City Hall channels. Stop it before its built!

# 73

05:32, Sep 15, Roy Tompkins, NY
As a long time city resident and real estate professional I have watched this project closely. The proposed design is a huge mistake and will in a very short time prove to be another blight on the urban landscape. The residents of our city deserve better than this. Please, please, please do not allow this project to move forward in its present incarnation. The current design has nothing to do with the existing landscape, architecture and feel of the neighborhood.

# 72

05:14, Sep 15, Michael Linsner, NY
This design is inappropriate for the South Wedge and already looks dated.

# 71

21:45, Sep 14, Carlene Woodward, NY
Will the City listen? At the City’s presentation of Erie Harbor on 9/8/10, we had all the community leaders from the Southeast Neighborhoods, Cornhill & residents, 70 in all, who spoke out against the design and unbelievable garish colors used to coved up poor design and materials. We who have spent decades rebuilding the City neighborhoods deserve more than this!

# 70

21:02, Sep 14, Mark Updegraff, NY
This will Kill the view of the Roc skyline coming up mt hope. Leave it as a PARK! please! parks only increase desire for the neighborhood and your design will just block our view of the new bridge. You are no help, you will degrade a neighborhood that is trying very hard to get better!

# 69

20:19, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY

# 68

20:09, Sep 14, Donna Ehmann, NY
When I first saw this new, current design, I honestly thought it was a joke. It is an absolute eyesore! Like some cheap, tacky projects. The original brick design had architectural integrity and historical flavor. Why on earth would you scrap it for this travesty.

# 67

19:51, Sep 14, Michael Tomb, NY
Dear Friends, Conifer’s design for Erie Harbor is anti-social, reminiscent of a prison or at best an office park. It will serve to divide the residents from their neighborhood. This is the type of soul-less architecture that urban planners were supposed to have turned the corner on. Adding garish, incongruous colors as a substitute for a livable design is also troublesome. Please redo this project in a manner that the community will support. That only makes sense with so much public money is required. The current design does not belong in this urban village. Sincerely, Michael Tomb

# 66

19:38, Sep 14, Karrie Laughton, NY
I strongly feel that this design is not only extremely unappealing, but it also does NOT meld with ANY of the areas existing structures. It also is very similar in look and feel to the previous eyesore that so many people in this neighborhood were glad to see go. I feel it is very important that the voices of the community are heard AND their opinions actually hold weight in the decision of this design. These are the people that have to live with it and these are people whose opinions and voices should matter. The people have spoken against this and it would be a huge letdown to our amazing little neighborhood if this failure of a design actually comes to fruition.

# 65

19:10, Sep 14, ROBERT LAUTERBACH, NY

# 64

18:16, Sep 14, Tony Douglas, NY
This is a horrible design, is it supposed to complement the High Rise next to it? How about we scrap the project and get a new architect, and company to start all over again. Maybe we could build something nice and classic that will look just as good in 100 years? Just classic architecture bricks, stone, pillars, and beautiful steel roofs. Classic American Architecture that will make Rochester a better place to look at and to live in.

# 63

18:10, Sep 14, Donna Smith, NY
Let’s not make the same mistake twice…the city of Rochester is smarter than that! Lets prove it!!!

# 62

17:57, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
Shame on SWPC for being asleep at the wheel and thinking their opinion means more than the actual residents who live here.

# 61

17:38, Sep 14, Richard Muto, NY
It is clear that this design doesn’t have the support of the surrounding community. Not only is the design lacking, but the materials offer the same lack of quality and longevity as the last project. We have put too much effort into rebuilding our community to allow this to happen.

# 60

17:14, Sep 14, Ann Rhody, NY
As a person who supports city development, I think it’s important to retain the beauty and harmony with other architecture as we design large projects. Please reconsider!

# 59

16:57, Sep 14, Ruth Delgado-Guzman, NY
Stop the presses, cancel the job, and start over again. Is this for a Public Housing Project? It looks like it will fit with the High Rise next door. How about designing and building a place that will look historic and look good in another 100 years, something that we can be proud of!

# 58

16:53, Sep 14, Judy Hay, NY
The South Wedge is a historic neighborhood dating back to 1800’s. A modern building is out of place. The color scheme does not fit the community. Broader community in-put was lacking in the process.

# 57

15:57, Sep 14, Virginia Duffy, NY
I agree tacky, does nothing to beautify waterfront.

# 56

15:42, Sep 14, gisella gordon, NY

# 55

14:34, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
In my opinion, the design looks tacky. Really, really tacky. Please create a building that is universally pleasing to the eye.

# 54

12:53, Sep 14, Jeannine Collins, NY
Please let our water front property be something we can be proud of!!!!

# 53

12:13, Sep 14, mark bennion, NY
this is an opertunity to make the river front beautiful. this new building will be no better than the one which was recently town down.

# 52

11:59, Sep 14, Kate Rebban, NY
Having grown up on Linden Street, I looked forward to the day that those awful buildings would be torn down. The newest building design is atrocious. As many noted, the design is similar to the “projects” that were already there. The developers of the newest building on South Avenue (between Gregory and Hickory) made sure the building complemented the neighborhood. Why can’t Conifer do the same? Just walk around this beautiful neighborhood for design ideas. Please don’t allow Conifer to build ruin this prime waterfront area.

# 51

11:26, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
The idea and project are great The design is not in keeping with our historic neighborhood by any means. June

# 50

11:04, Sep 14, Linda Hopkins, NY
Unfortunately this design reminds me of ghetto projects from the 70’s. It was considered modern and upscale then but quickly went out of style becoming a horrible eyesore bringing undue attention to a population that does not need negative attention. This design could and should have an appearance that reflects the character of the neighborhood which welcomes the residents moving in and does not make them look like an outcast society plunked in the middle of a stable neighborhood.

# 49

11:03, Sep 14, Moira Platzer, NY

# 48

10:56, Sep 14, James Wolff, NY
In consideration of the large amount of state funding this project is receiving, not to mention the tax benifits which Conifer will be getting in the future, the residents of the South Wedge and surrounding communities are deserving of total satisfaction from this project. Architectural merit, or a lack thereof, is an ongoing debate; however the fact that so many in this community do not support this project needs to be taken into consideration. Recently members of the South Wedge Planning Committee have spoken out against both the design and the manner in which design changes were presented to the public for comment. This project has perhaps the most long-term impact on this neighborhood and needs to be given further review before preceeding.

# 47

10:40, Sep 14, Dennis Rosenbaum, NY
This design is a travesty, and needs to be scrapped in favor of the original from prior to 2008.

# 46

09:51, Sep 14, Laura Jean Diekmann, NY
If this is built it will be a disgrace to our city.

# 45

09:02, Sep 14, Allyn Van Dusen, NY
If this design is built it will be a travesty. Ground has not been broken and that means there is hope to stop it. All funding should be removed from this project until it is agreed that it be redesigned. We have a huge opportunity here for something truly stunning to grace our neighborhood, our river, and our city as a whole. We have a great heritage of architecture and design here (I’m thinking of Claude Bragdon, but there are many others) and this is an opportunity to keep that heritage alive and not deface it with an ill-conceived project. PLEASE do not let this happen. It is imperative to start again.

# 44

07:17, Sep 14, Name not displayed, NY
The suggested design is in clear contrast with our historic district’s look and feel. It doesn’t add interest or beauty to our neighborhood. If you are at all familiar with our neighborhood you know that this design is in direct contrast.

# 43

05:30, Sep 14, Gerald Jones, NY
Cannot think of anything more displeasing or garish!

# 42

05:20, Sep 14, kimberly bettner, NY
What an emarrassment this is! It honestly looks like they will just be rebuilding the Riverpark and slapping some awful pathwork colors on it in hopes that no one will notice. I was led to believe that the architectural integrity of the ‘Wedge was always being taken into consideration for designing this site. The folks who designed this have no idea what the rest of the Southwedge residents share as the vision for our community’s future. This area is filled with older homes and buildings dripping with character. Why would a structure that looks like nothing more than a childs Lego creation be a good fit here? Building this eyesore is like taking 10 steps backwards!!!

# 41

03:20, Sep 14, Dan Caverly, NY

# 40

02:36, Sep 14, Kevin Morrissey, NY
Looks a lot like the building that was torn down. They just put lipstick on a pig. No one with a choice will live there, so they’ll begin to accept SSI. After that you will have a lovely, river-front drug den.

# 39

21:07, Sep 13, Chris Jones, NY
This design has no place amidst the historic architecture of this neighborhood. Please go back to your original brick design and revise that to mitigate the comments so many neighbors made about it. This is out of left field and will be an eyesore for many years if you let it be built.

# 38

20:30, Sep 13, Jeff Schuetz, NY
As a landlord for over 20 years in the South Wedge, I have been waiting for the development along the river, but I can wait a bit longer, if it means getting the right design. I am happy to consider something more modern in flavor, but this is much too industrial/militaristic, and the color scheme is like something out of mod art and will be dated before it is finished. As a realtor, I think we can do better to help the values in the area by having something that compliments the area’s architecture. It seems like this design was imported from another time and place, without any consideration of the neighborhood context.

# 37

19:43, Sep 13, Thomas Locke, NY
This design too much resembles what it replaced (Riverview Commons). What happened to the idea of having condominiums at that site instead of rental only?

# 36

18:55, Sep 13, Joseph Pasquarelli, NY
Shame on our city council members for approving a design that is reminiscent of buildings that once stood on this parcel of land.

# 35

17:31, Sep 13, C. Wayne Farren, NY
I am not a resident of the South Wedge neighborhood, however I am a resident of the City of Rochester. It’s difficult to find the words to express my disdain for this proprosed design. The current high rise building near the site is a mistake that should never have been allowed to see the light of day. Please, do not allow another travesty to spring up that will be an additional eye-sore we will have to endure for years to come.

# 34

15:12, Sep 13, Mara Marini, NY

# 33

14:30, Sep 13, Jean Lord, NJ

# 32

13:08, Sep 13, Paula Frumusa, NY

# 31

12:44, Sep 13, Antonio Calabria, TX

# 30

11:39, Sep 13, Martha Ruderman, NY

# 29

11:21, Sep 13, Lynn Lickers, NY
The view of the Genesee River is Awesome,Lets make the Building there SHOULD b AwEsOme 22222!!!!

# 28

10:01, Sep 13, Name not displayed, NY

# 27

08:36, Sep 13, David N Moore, CT

# 26

07:50, Sep 13, David Halter, NY
The neighborhood has been mislead by Conifer, its agents and the City throughout the entire permitting process.

# 25

07:25, Sep 13, Virginia Cassetta, NY
The Romans wrote that a building must be conisdered “with due reference to function, structure and beauty” Its difficult to see any of these qualities in this design pattern.

# 24

06:59, Sep 13, mindy munson, VA
I used to live in Rochester and like to visit from time to time. Especially the wedge. The propsed design is horrific. Please do something- contest, whatever- to get better ideas as to how to properly use this space

# 23

06:25, Sep 13, Robin Jaeckel, NY
This design is horrible…I have been excited about the redesign of the erie harbor project…upon seeing this proposed design, it feels as if they are putting up the same type of structure as was just taken down. it is a waste of water front space that COULD be an asset to this community and act as a conduit in connecting the city. what a shame!…i’m appalled

# 22

05:34, Sep 13, SHAWN WALLACE, NY
This proposal has been called modern, yes maybe so, but then again so was the set of buildings that comprised some of Midtown Plaza – which to me looked more like shipping dock containers stacked on top of each other. This design proposal looks as if it was part of that same era. I can’t imagine this will be an asset in 10-30 years from when it is built. I whole-heartedly concur with what Mr. Gary Bogue has said in his comments.

# 21

04:38, Sep 13, Verity Pink, United Kingdom

# 20

04:32, Sep 13, Name not displayed, NY
This looks so outdated it is unbelievable!! Terrible.

# 19

04:18, Sep 13, Leeh Hardy, NY
Please – go back to the drawing board. We have a great opportunity here to make a bold statement about Rochester and the culture here – this design does NOT represent it. If we are going to give Conifer our hard earned money then make them spend the money and time to come up with a plan that is worthy.

# 18

03:56, Sep 13, Anne Weisbeck, NY

# 17

03:55, Sep 13, R. Bruce Colburn, NY
“Mussolini Modern” matches more the ugly Civic Center and does not match up either to the Southwedge neighborhood or the Corn Hill neighborhood across the river.

# 16

01:29, Sep 13, Name not displayed, NY
This plan resembles the previous architecture in an institutional look. The Erie Harbor could be just what the city of Rochester needs to continue the growth and interest in the South Wedge area. Let’s get it right this time around!

# 15

21:41, Sep 12, LeeAnne Valentine, NY
I have lived at the River Park Commons as a youngster. I can remember the gangs that used to roam the sidewalks. I can remember how people would call it the “sister of NYC’s projects”. I can remember living in fear that someone would walk by my window, and climb inside. It was an unsafe, and unsanitary place to live in. These factors were the very reasons why we decided to move out. Using this design will only make the degrading comment ring true, because it does look like the projects from NYC!!!!!

# 14

21:13, Sep 12, Johanna Cummings, NY

# 13

21:10, Sep 12, Chris Edes, NY
If the government is providing subsidies, the concerns of the people must be taken into account.

# 12

20:25, Sep 12, Mark Cross, NY

# 11

20:17, Sep 12, Andrea Romansky, NY
Wish money would instead be spent on STOPPING CRIME in Southwedge. I’m sick of having my car broken into!!!

# 10

20:03, Sep 12, Gary Bogue, NY
I have no problem with the general plan, massing and layout of the low-rise buildings in this project. But I am shocked at the inappropriateness and low quality of their proposed visual appearance. The exterior surfaces and overall visual design of this project are horrible. This is a prime waterfront location that has potential for either improving or detracting from the appeal of the river and downtown Rochester. It’s important that it be an asset to the city, but it will not be so under the current design. For years, one of the most embarrassing and ugly (and crime-ridden) structures in the city occupied this site. It’s gone now and there is an opportunity to do better. Much better. After waiting for so long, why would we want to replace it with something only marginally less ugly? For over a century, Rochester built fine structures that were a great source of civic pride. Some of the buildings built in or near downtown during the past half century, however, have been far less worthy of our city, even embarrassing. Sadly, this project will not be an asset to the city if built using the current visual design. That design seems to mimic some of the worst elements of 1950s architecture and will only serve to counteract progress made in the South Wedge during the past three decades. Once complete, it could blight the area for many more decades. Please don’t do that to my neighborhood!

# 9

19:23, Sep 12, Name not displayed, NY
This is an affront to the honest 19th and 20th century vernacular architecture of south east Rochester. We deserve much better.

# 8

19:16, Sep 12, Tammie Malarich, NY
I have lived in the South Wedge for over ten years as a homeowner and have seen the area blossom with community pride – please do not let Conifer use public funds to construct an architectural blow to that pride. thank you.

# 7

19:14, Sep 12, frank logan, NY
I am a 30 year resident of the South Wedge Erie Harbor does not have my support as currently designed. It is an institutional design for that will not attract market rates on a prime waterfront location.Please help us to stop Conifer and the City of Rochester forcing this design on the Southwedge that is hardly better that the low income project that was there which it resembles. We deserve better. Frank Logan

# 6

19:14, Sep 12, Christopher White, NY
What is that? a home for clowns? Come on, people. Walk around our neighborhood.

# 5

18:52, Sep 12, Chad Ludwig, NY

# 4

18:28, Sep 12, Odile Moreau, Canada

# 3

18:16, Sep 12, Kristin Cox, NY
I feel deceived by Conifer Realty, whose own words describe this building as referencing “the Craftsman, Victorian, and Queen Anne styles prominent in the South Wedge community… and their soft warm color palette.” It is an insult to imply that this building references any architecture style other than Soviet brutalism painted a splotchy mix of blue (which isn’t even a warm color!). I do not want this affront to human senses to lower my property value. City Council has a responsibility to listen to citizens before spending our public monies on something that we don’t want, and are so vehemently protesting.

# 2

17:55, Sep 12, Jayne Morgan, NY
The current design for the Erie Harbor project being considered by Conifer Realty, LLC is unacceptable for this community. Funding must cease until the “powers that be” listen and respond to the VERY outspoken voices of the community.

# 1

17:09, Sep 12, Richard Keefer, NY
To whom it may concern: So many stakeholders have done so much to reinvigorate the Wedge. With its development, Conifer can either honor the shared sacrifice of the Wedge’s various stakeholders or exploit it for a quick profit. I hope Conifer does the right thing. Certainly, public funding should be withdrawn if the do not.

10 Comments »

  • Tweets that mention Rochester, NY Rejects Conifer’s Erie Harbor Design by Petition « Newdigs Blog -- Topsy.com says:

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mindy Munson. newdigs Rochester NY said: The Erie Harbor petition is now closed, well exceeding its goal of 500 signatures: http://bit.ly/9vd9XB #ROC #Rochester [...]

    September 30, 2010 @ 4:38 pm

  • aparadekto says:

    Hey, I can’t view your site properly within Opera, I actually hope you look into fixing this.

    October 25, 2010 @ 11:42 pm

  • kristin says:

    Hey! Thanks for heads up! Opera is just about the only platform we haven’t been able to test the site in yet. We’ll put it on the fix-it list – thanks again!

    October 26, 2010 @ 10:53 am

  • Erie Harbor Apartment Plans Unveiled at Community Meeting « Newdigs Blog says:

    [...] the final designs were so similar to the ones which several weeks ago prompted neighbors to start a petition which raised nearly 600 signatures in protest. One of the biggest hurdles to incorporating public feedback on the design is that most local [...]

    November 9, 2010 @ 6:30 pm

  • FX Robot says:

    That is f*ckin’ awesome Newdigs Blog . Very good and interesting article. Thanks for helpful and useful information.

    January 19, 2011 @ 11:56 am

  • Han Karbowski says:

    I’m not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your sites really nice, keep it up! I’ll go ahead and bookmark your website to come back later. Many thanks

    May 3, 2011 @ 12:50 pm

  • Joseph Smith says:

    I loved your blog and eapecially your post about Rochester, NY Rejects Conifer’s Erie Harbor Design by Petition Thank you very very much.

    July 28, 2011 @ 3:55 am

  • betathome says:

    newdigs.com is bookmarked for future reference!

    August 10, 2011 @ 12:14 pm

  • dogobediencetraining says:

    newdigs.com is awsome, bookmarked

    August 13, 2011 @ 11:16 am

  • play-poker says:

    So much useful content here, newdigs.com bookmarked !

    August 22, 2011 @ 1:55 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment