I'm conflicted about Wegmans. They have great foods, have an upmarket feel, and somehow are cheaper than most other grocers. But, their stores are way too big for a quick grocery run, and they exist primarily in far-flung suburban areas, where I hate spending my money.Apparently there's only one Wegmans grocery store left in the city that gave it birth, Rochester, NY. The store is at the far edge of one of the few thriving residential+retail sections left in the city, where the company wants to expand it by tearing down the whole block it shares with some much older buildings, making room for a gigantic new store. Wegmans needs variances from the city to bypass the zoning laws that would prohibit their plan.
The Wegmans expansion has some pluses for the neighborhood, mostly in residents never needing to drive out to the larger store in Pittsford again, and in creating some jobs easily accessible to city workers. Plus, some complain that the current market is too crowded and there isn't enough parking.
I'll admit I'm biased--I like the scale of the current store. I greatly appreciate a good grocery that I can run into and out of in 5 minutes. I've only been in this store a handful of times, but have never seen it so crowded that it's been difficult to navigate. And, if parking becomes a problem, maybe that'll get more people from nearby to walk or bike--or for other more convenient stores to open up right near where they live. So, I'm not convinced about the negatives of the current store.
More importantly, the expansion plans would be a bad thing for the city long-term. In 20 years, if the city has turned around, having that big block-sized, monolithic building will be more of a barrier than a boon--even if Wegmans is thriving. It's not going to help spur retail around it, as these mega-groceries are self-contained and inward-focused. They're kinda like casinos, in how they try to trap you into their maze in a timeless haze, and to deplete you of your cash. Apparently, in true casino fashion, the design doesn't even include windows on the East Ave side.
The new store would have a massive parking lot to the West, creating a big barrier between it and said thriving neighborhood. Also, the sides facing North (University Ave) and East (Winton Ave) are really ugly--giant blank walls. For Winton especially that seems much worse than the bank building that was just knocked down, creating an added barrier from the neighborhood to the north, across the railroad tracks. The best side of the building by far faces the parking lot, leaving nothing but windowless faux facades, blank walls, and massive asphalt expanses to stick out their tongues at the surrounding city.
City councils in struggling cities sure seem short-sighted in favoring "big projects" rather than laying the economic and urban planning groundwork for growth. In the interest of appearing pro-job creation and getting a photo opp at a ground-breaking, they'll bend over for large companies that promise jobs. Otherwise without the subsidies/variances/etc, or so the threats go, the jobs would go to the suburbs. Cities should give up trying to compete on the suburbs' terms. Forget about luring big box stores, mega groceries, office parks etc. Instead, stick to what cities do well: mixed use, smaller storefronts, pedestrian- and bike-friendly street design, organic growth, preserving history, etc.
Whether historic or not, some of those existing buildings are interesting, and they feel like authentic city buildings. Leveling them for something sparkling and new may seem like a good idea, but the faux-facades won't fool anyone, and the block-size scale will become a major issue. Today's massive, gleaming project is tomorrow's massive, dated eyesore--way worse than a block with buildings of different ages and states of repair.
On this note, the other thing to consider is: what if Wegmans pulls out of the city altogether in 10 or 15 years, taking a tax write-down and abandoning the space. If so, Rochester will be left with a massive, aging retail space that will be nearly impossible to fill, much harder than a handful of smaller buildings / storefronts. And some great old buildings will have been lost to boot.
If Wegmans could incorporate these old buildings more organically--the way markets in some cities expand into multiple storefronts--that would probably be the best thing. But it'd be more difficult than razing them, and runs counter to the way such suburb-focused corporations think.
0 comments:
Post a Comment