Related Ren Square stories:

An interview with Neil Bauman

An interview with Mayor Bob Duffy

When it comes to Renaissance Square, Monroe County Executive Maggie Brooks is the eternal optimist.

She never wavers from her assertion that the theater can be funded. She also believes a consensus is possible, even though community members and leaders express constant doubts and concerns. Mayor Bob Duffy created a clamor recently when he suggested revisiting the bus station design - he's keen on finding ways to increase parking - and dropping the performing arts center.

Brooks and other project partners quickly questioned the mayor's actions. But while some other proponents continue to take swipes at the mayor, Brooks is engaging him.

"People want to create drama in our relationship," she says.

But she also warns that there will be repercussions if Renaissance Square encounters more delays, or fails to come to fruition. City Council is expected to vote sometime in July on whether to give the Rochester Genesee Regional Transit Authority the authority to take needed city properties via eminent domain. If they vote no, the project can't move forward.

"This will be another example to our state and federal delegations that we as a community can't agree on anything," Brooks says. "And what's the incentive for a Senator Schumer to ever come back to Rochester and support us with federal monies when we can't agree to spend the money we have now?"

But the public and the mayor still have significant concerns. One of the mayor's is the Warner Building, owned by Mark IV. The company is renovating the building for high-end lofts and will lose parking to the bus station. Too, Duffy and company officials worry about the impact of bus noise and fumes. Brooks says that bus station plans are basically the same as they have been since Safdie's design, but that plan called for an enclosed station with a park above it - meant to mitigate noise and fumes while improving aesthetics.

Ren Square planners are still working on solutions to deal with noise and fumes.

During an interview, Brooks discussed Renaissance Square, her discussions with Duffy, and some of the details that the public is, five years into the project, still asking for. The following is an edited version of that conversation.

CITY: You and the mayor have, separately, talked about negotiation and compromise. What areas can you discuss that would bring mutual satisfaction?

Brooks: The mayor's concerns and the issues he's raised are legitimate issues, and certainly we are talking to him about those changes.

What I've said all along, and what I said to the mayor when we met privately, is that any change can be discussed, we all just need to understand the impact of any change at this late point in the process on our budget and on our schedules.

We are in the 11th hour of our federal deadline. By the end of July, we have to present to the Federal Transportation Administration a 70-percent design on the first two components. It has to include a budget and a documentation of where those dollars will come from. So if we miss that deadline, the federal dollars that expire in September, I think it's $24 million, we will lose that and that really impacts our ability to move forward with all three components, potentially even two of the components [the transit center and the MCC campus].

People seem to forget why we tied all these together: so that we could leverage the opportunity to use federal funds to pay for common infrastructure.

Have there been any decisions made about who will own the different components, the public spaces, and the retail spaces?

RGRTA will, essentially. Because of their role as the pass-through for all this federal funding, and the acquiring and condemnation authority, they will actually own the property at Main and Clinton.

Part of the joint development agreement that we're working on now will be: How do they lease the property that MCC needs and what does that lease look like? In phase one, we're just talking about MCC and transit, but eventually there will be an amendment to the joint development: How does RBTL fit in as a tenant of the performing arts center and how will they pay RGRTA for the lease of that space?

And then there are the common areas, which will be like any mall or any joint development complex. In other words, if there's a centralized walkway where there's some nontraditional retail, all three tenants would share for the maintenance, the security, the electricity, anything that would support that common area. If there are retail outlets, they would actually be part of that joint development as well.

Does the project accommodate the changes that have happened downtown, even in recent months?

I think so. If you look at other cities of this size around the country and how they have approached revitalization and really redefined their center cities, they're using the same three elements that we're using: education, arts, and transportation.

It's almost like the magic formula for the rebirth of downtown Rochester, because you have a critical mass of people with MCC, you have easy access to downtown with centralized transportation, you have a state-of-the-art performing arts center that will bring people and revenue and have a true economic impact in a positive sense in an area where we need it, and that will trickle out and help the restaurants and any other stores and things that are there.

And then you have the housing. And when you have housing you need amenities, so suddenly there will be the corner drug store, there will be the supermarket, there will be the light retail. I don't think that any of us believe that Rochester will ever be the retail destination that it was when I grew up here. I don't think you see that in many center cities.

This is where I get frustrated. I have said all along, Renaissance Square is not the only thing we need to do; it's one piece of a larger picture. We're making a contribution.

At the same time, you have Anthony DiMarzo, who's worried about the impact the bus station might have on his company's ability to rent out apartments at the WarnerBuilding. Is he wrong to be concerned?

I don't think he's wrong to be concerned. I always question the timing of the conversation, because if you go back in time, you will see that Anthony DiMarzo wrote a letter of support for Renaissance Square when we started talking about the three components and the location. The design of the transit center has not changed significantly since day one. We've made modifications, obviously, in the design to accommodate budget more than anything else. But the scope of the transit center has not changed that dramatically from day one. Anyone who looks at it now who is surprised that it will back up to the Warner Building or back up to some of the properties, that's been the plan since 2004-2005. And so I question the timing of the concern.

The same thing with the property owners that are on the corner. We've been talking about this for years, and to suddenly come out of the woodwork and to want to understand why we're doing this, or they had no idea we were doing this, is a little suspect to me.

The mayor's actually very concerned about this, and one of the things he's mentioned is trying to shrink the bus station. Is that possible?

It's not and I'll tell you why. When you talk about small adjustments, you can do anything. When you talk about changing the scope of any one of the components, that is a monumental change in design and you have to go back and re-plan. That sets us back in terms of schedule and we run the risk of losing federal dollars.

Unless you move the terminal completely, there is no ability to change the movement of those buses.

When you talk about the small changes that can be made and still keep it within the scope of the project, what kinds of things are you talking about?

If we do a study and we move forward on high-speed rail in Rochester and we change the character of the Amtrak station, could there be a connection between the intra-city buses and what's happening with high-speed rail and Greyhound and Trailways? I think that's a very reasonable compromise or something we could add.

I know parking is a concern for the mayor. Is there an ability to add to parking or enhance parking around that area? That is certainly something that we can all look at and something we can all commit to.

Do you back the state's push for high-speed rail?

I certainly support a study of high-speed rail. We're not going to know the answers to the questions until we figure if it's viable. I think we need to look at it from an upstate region.

We do have some challenges with air travel between here and Albany; maybe high-speed rail would be a viable alternative. I don't know what the answers are, so do I support spending a lot of money to create a high-speed rail system? I don't know.

Are you open to leaving the buildings at the theater site standing while the fund-raising team pursues money for that component?

I would be very concerned about doing that. There's some value to leveling that corner and making it shovel ready for whatever entity will be there. I want it to be a performing arts center. If it's not, I think there's a value to encouraging private development there if it's shovel ready. Any company, any private entity that has to come in and remove those buildings and take out all that asbestos and clean out that property on its own to make it environmentally ready to build, I think that would be a huge impediment for private development.

The reality is it's not going to sit there for three or four years. We're going to know in a short amount of time, I'd say over the next year or so, if we can raise money for the theater. If not, you move on to private development.

You've said that City Council has a "critical vote" coming up regarding the project's eminent domain proceedings. Is Council an obstacle?

If they don't give us the approvals, we're stuck. We can't move forward. That means we can't have 70-percent design to the FTA by the end of July. That means we can't go to the County Legislature for the portion that they need to approve, and that is the joint development agreement.

In essence, our federal funding is at risk and the question becomes, can we lose that $24 million and still build MCC and a performing arts center? I suspect we would have trouble raising those additional funds.

It becomes a different conversation, and that's why we need to educate City Council as to why we're doing this.

If City Council doesn't approve the request what do you do?

I think we regroup as a project team and, again, we have to answer the question: is it affordable to build phase one of Renaissance Square [the MCC campus and the bus station], affordable to move to final design of the first two components, without that $24 million, because there's another round of federal funding that expires after that. These federal funds are going to start to expire and expire.

Obviously, I don't control City Council. I will do everything in my power to make sure that on our end we've done everything we can do. But I think it is an educational process.

There have been two conversations about this project. There have been the merits of the project and there have been the politics of the project. I'd love to go back in time and examine some of the things we've done in this community as recent as Frontier Field, but as far back as Midtown Plaza and the Convention Center. Did we have this trouble building those projects - building consensus and getting support? I would love to know the answer to that.

We need to fight as a community for the resources. There were people when we started that said, you're never going to raise a nickel for this project. Well, we've raised $185 million and we've got a little bit more to go, but we're still optimistic we can do that. We are now in final design for two important components of it. I'm sure there are a lot of people that never thought that would happen.

Are you talking with members of City Council?

I am not. There's a project team, on a daily basis we have 75 people working on this project. There is a strategy that the team will put together to reach out to City Council. We're working with the staff at City Council, and there have been some recommendations on how we present that information.

I'm encouraged and looking forward to having people hear the story firsthand from those who are developing it, versus the sound bites and some of the misinformation that's out there.

How important is this project for city-county relationships?

I don't think there's one single thing that should ever be the sole barometer of city-county relationships.

The reality is that the mayor and I are going to disagree from time to time on projects, on policy, on philosophy, on financial issues. I think what people should be paying attention to is how we deal with those differences. Can we do it respectfully? Can we apply leadership versus partisanship to the problems? Do we have the ability to sit in a room and talk? I think we do. I think we have that kind of a relationship.

At the same time, aren't some Ren Square supporters being disingenuous about the mayor's concerns?

Absolutely. There are people around us and on both sides of the project - people that like the project, people that don't like the project - and they're all going to process and filter the discussions in a different way. Those that choose to see the mayor's words as political will continue to do that. Those who continue to say, "Why is that Republican Maggie Brooks trying to force a project on the residents of the City of Rochester?" are going to continue to do that.

You mention several facilities that require local government subsidies: Frontier Field, the Convention Center, and then on the city's end there's the soccer stadium. Ren Square could need local government support, too. Where do you get the money for these subsidies?

RGRTA, as a transit entity, is subsidized 100 percent with government funding anyway; it's the amount of the subsidy. But if you look at their business model, that additional cost is covered. There are a number of reasons for that, one of them is increased ridership. When you have more things in downtown Rochester that are amenities - a performing arts center, more restaurants, you have more housing - you need public transportation. RGRTA will tell you there's not going to be a subsidy.

If you talk to the MCC people, they have since 2004 built into their operational model an expanded downtown campus. They are prepared and have identified the revenue that will pay for it - the growing population that they have is one reason they need an expanded campus. They have more students than ever before. Better facilities will equal increased opportunities for those entities and will help them to make sure there's not an operational gap.

The performing arts center, we have done a lot of analysis based on a single tenant, Rochester Broadway Theater League. We have not included in this model the 50 conventions a year that could benefit from use of this facility. We've shown on paper that the subsidy at the performing arts center, it's a gap that can be overcome simply by increased participation and making that more of a destination. And we have the history of RBTL to back that up. We have other theater venues in other communities of this size that we can benchmark against. So there's actually some evidence and some factual foundation for what we've put together. We're not guessing. It wasn't like the fast ferry where we had no experience; we were just pulling numbers out of the air.

Some people have criticized Safdie for designing a project that the community couldn't afford to build. Was he given parameters about the cost?

He was. In 2004, he told us $230 million would be a tight budget for what we were asking him to design. Remember, in 2004 we were also talking about a PAC that had three theaters. So it was a little bit larger scope that we asked him to consider.

When we started, there was all the controversy about the buses being underground and we quickly realized nobody wanted buses underground. He brought them above-grade, and I don't think we could have done that without him. That was his real major contribution, and also the connectivity of the transit center to MCC and the PAC. I don't think we could have accomplished that integration without the expertise that Safdie had.

It went over budget. Where we couldn't come to consensus with him was once it got to, I think it was $310 million, he didn't feel that he could honor the integrity of his design and scale it back that much. He actually agreed with us that the local team could probably do that better than he could.

I think he was unfairly criticized. He brought great value to the project at a time when we needed to raise awareness and community support.

What indications do you have that you'll be able to raise the money for the theater?

We've done a lot of outreach, but we've also had a lot of people call us and ask for information. What we tend to focus on is, what we can raise privately in this community. But you have to remember that RBTL has a broad reach outside of this community. They work with Albert Noccolino, who is known for Broadway theater around this country, so we can't limit our opportunities for private fund raising just to this community. I think we need to put our collective minds together and see if there's something we're not looking at that might be in New York City or someplace else. There might be a corporation that likes to invest in these types of venues.

The other critical milestone in this project is when we start demolishing and moving ahead on phase one, because then those who are hanging back waiting to see if phase two will happen, will be much more confident.

The mayor and I have had discussions about this. He doesn't believe in a tough economy we can raise money for a performing arts center. I would have said that in a tough economy we couldn't raise $65 million to clear the Midtown site. We were able to do that. I know the mayor has a can-do attitude and I share his can-do spirit, and I think if we can come together, there's no stopping us, quite honestly.

Suppose something happens to throw off RGRTA's business plan, like a ridership decrease. Who's on the hook for the money to plug the gap?

That happens now. They get an annual subsidy from the state of New York. Our transportation authority benefits from mortgage tax in Monroe County every year; they're part of that formula and every year that amount goes up and down. They have to adjust their business model accordingly. Sometimes they can lobby for additional state funds.

In the past, you've said that these facilities wouldn't be funded, from an operational standpoint, by additional local taxpayer dollars. Are you still committed to that?

I am, and I think that's what's taken us so long to get to a joint development agreement. We want to make sure that not only can we build these three components, but we can sustain them and we can operate them. You're not going to find a president of MCC who wants to build a downtown campus that they can't afford to operate and sustain. RGRTA is not going to venture into an area where they're going to bankrupt the transit company.

RBTL has a long history here. We have some trends that we can monitor. They track industry trends and industry changes; they know where their future will be. And that's one of the things they have said. If they don't have a new theater, RBTL will literally be out of business within five to 10 years because the Auditorium cannot be renovated to accommodate the future of Broadway theater technology and the physical infrastructure demands that are needed now to be a level one performing arts community, as we are now categorized. We get the best shows that leave Broadway because we can accommodate them. But five to 10 years from now, we won't be able to.