Suzanne Phillips 
Member since Dec 31, 2014

Recent Comments

Re: “More design concepts for the Port of Rochester

Time to Move Forward!!!

Now, Johnny, that is something on which we can both agree!!!! :-)

I moved to Charlotte, with my husband and 15-mo-old daughter, 36 years ago. I love the area but KNOW!!! it can be much more than it is currently. Empty store fronts are eye sores, and the huge number of vacant houses..especially off Lake Ave, south of the high school, are a disgrace!!!

This quaint waterfront community should be a City of Rochester Gem, but, sadly, recent city administrations have not approached enhancing the Port area with common sense and a long-term goal in mind.

There should have been strong support..including financial grants, tax breaks encourage the growth of misc. small businesses that would provide an incentive to people to visit this area.

And, definitely, our waterfront is something that should be available and enjoyed by ALL...and it should remain "public" and not sold to a developer for his personal gain.

I am delighted about the Public Market that now runs on Monday's at the corner of Stutson and Lake. :-) How wonderful it would be to have a boardwalk of little shops, and to also take advantage of some of the empty buildings...such as the Pres. Church on Stutson. Why not convert that into something like the Street of Shops...many indiv. antique dealers..on W. Ridge, near N. Greece Rd.?

The City wants a hotel??? The old Tape Con building on the corner of Latta and River St. would have been an ideal site for a small test the waters on the need for a hotel.

Moving forward..with the RIGHT type of development that is appropriate for Charlotte, and that does not try to build structures on soil that cannot support 12-story buildings...Count me In!!! :-)

6 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Suzanne Phillips on 06/11/2015 at 11:32 PM

Re: “More design concepts for the Port of Rochester

Something I find very interesting..and "telling" that most of the people who have spoken against this inappropriate development put their money where their mouth to speak..and their full names are displayed under their comments.

Then we have people like carlos5030, johnny and jasonw1 who cast aspersions on comments we have made..which are backed up by scientific information and other data which we have learned to be true from hours of research, numerous hours spent in meetings, talking with hundreds of people/general public, along with gaining over 2,500 signatures from others who share our concerns.

Bill does not have to be an engineer, architect or developer...nor does anyone else who is investigating the reasons why the current proposed development is wrong for the site on which it is scheduled to be built.

One just has to read through many links available on the City of Rochester's own website to see information that raises questions about the wisdom behind the City's insistence on pursuing this project.

And especially disturbing is the composition of soil and the amount of water within on the side of the gorge that was created by ice burgs thousands of years ago.

carlos, johnny and jason..were any of you at the presentation given by Dr. Richard Young, a distinguished geology professor at SUNY Geneseo on May 21, 2015? If so and you have IQ's over 75,..and, especially if you are a City tax should be very worried about the great waste of tax payer money that will be needed to counter the disastrous effects of liquefaction that are almost 101% certain to happen when numerous pieces of heavy equipment start moving and removing soil, and try to come up with supports for 12+ story buildings that are now planned. People on some of the side streets across from the port area are already experiencing cracks in their walls..since the use of heavy equipment to remove soil began.

"carlos", "johnny" and "jason", I am not sure if you are all one person, or if you are a "plant" assigned to argue with only words and no valid information that refutes the fact-based comments made by Bill, Lorilyn, myself..and several others.

Anyone can are wrong, etc. etc. etc., but to carry any weight, you need to come up with reasons for your belief and not hide from using your own name.

In closing, I encourage you to visits Dr. Brown's website and continue to scroll down, and down and down and down..where you can read of his many, many awards, conferences where he was a speaker, articles he has written..oh, and he has also been featured in two different geology-related series on the History channel.

All of the time Dr. Brown has spent working with Bill Brown and helping us to gain accurate, irrefutable knowledge about the very poor, faulty soil at the Port, he has done as a courtesy, and in an attempt to keep a disaster from occurring.

It will be interesting if any of you..or all one of you..decide to question Dr. Young's findings and, if any further negative posts related to the Port project are also made by one person/people who choose not to use their own/full name.

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Suzanne Phillips on 06/10/2015 at 6:21 PM

Re: “More design concepts for the Port of Rochester

carlos5030, I question the veracity and sincerity of your comments, especially after doing a search for info under the name of “carlos5030”.

You mention the demographics of the opposition are not representative of the millennial market. The time frame for this classification of people varies, but from approx. the late ‘70’s through the late ‘90’s covers the largest portion, which gives millennials an approximate age of 16 – 36.

According to an article in this newspaper on 9.12.14,… Mr. Weykamp said “The condos would probably start at around $200,000, Weykamp says, for a smaller, one-bedroom unit. The prices would increase with height and size all the way to the penthouse, which could go for more than $1 million, he says.”

Please note: The prices would increase with height and size...all the way to the penthouse...which could go for more than $1 million.

Since this is Rochester, NY and not NYC, there may be some people in the mid – late 20’s age group who could afford one of the lower condo levels (where there will be no views of the river or lake...only the parking lot and Lake Ave)…but how many of them would be able to afford a condo on the 7th floor, and how many in the mid-30 age group can afford “more than $1 million” for the penthouse.

Rather than pay for a condo with limited views…would it not make more sense to purchase a condo on the water such as this condo...2 floors for $199,900… or this nearly 3,000 sq. ft, 4 bedroom home,…
on Lake Ontario which has 100 feet of waterfront.

One would think an experienced and competent developer would do a market study to determine the need for the building he is considering constructing.

Rochester Young Professionals has membership of over 5,000. Yet this group was never contacted by the City or Edgewater to see if this group of “local millennials” would consider purchasing one of their proposed condos.

Several of us have asked many times for market study results that “they” say they have...but the standard reply for this reasonable request is “this information is proprietary” and will not be shared.

Incidentally, I welcome comments, like yours, that give me a chance to respond with actual facts that continue to show what a TERRIBLE DISSERVICE THE CITY ADMINISTRATORS ARE DOING TO THE PEOPLE THEY WERE ELECTED TO SERVE AND PROTECT FROM AN UNNECESSARY AND OUTRAGEOUS WASTE OF THEIR TAX PAYER DOLLARS.

31 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Suzanne Phillips on 06/06/2015 at 2:48 AM

Re: “More design concepts for the Port of Rochester

It is BEYOND A DISGRACE and A VERY POOR REFLECTION ON OUR MAYOR and CITY COUNCIL that as elected officials they continue to throw their support and continue their insistence on proceeding with their current Port development plan.

Whether it be in large public meetings (such as the one the Mayor attended last May 8, 2014, response to the almost unanimous dislike of "her selected developer" and the plan he had submitted, Mayor Warren asked us to wait until the developer had time to come up with another plan, and PROMISED!!! that if that plan was also disliked..THE CITY WOULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD!!!!

Since MAYOR WARREN'S PROMISE!!!! I have attended every public meeting where this plan has been discussed and 11 City Council meetings. At every meeting and during the Public Speaking portion of each City Council meeting there has been an overwhelming, ongoing outcry about the inappropriateness of the 10-story height (which as of a City Project Review Board meeting on Wed., 6.3.15 IS NOW INCREASED BUILDING HEIGHT OF 12-STORIES).

And, at a public meeting (to which the Mayor, City Council and other City Administrators were invited..but elected not to attend) where Bill Brown and Dr. Richard Young, a Distinguished Professor of Geology at SUNY Geneseo told about the extreme instability and porous condition of the soil where development is scheduled. Most people with one ounce of common sense are even more opposed to this development where Liquefaction (do an Image search of the term) is almost 100% guaranteed to occur.

28 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Suzanne Phillips on 06/06/2015 at 12:17 AM

Re: “Marina may miss a season

The problems and additional cost of tax payer dollars that are apparent with this ill-thought out marina project are nothing compared to the problems and additional cost to tax payers that will occur unless someone or something can stop the City from proceeding with their current plan for development at the Port. There is no way the unstable, water-logged (and did I mention contaminated???) soil will be able to support 10 story buildings over an extended period of time.

16 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by Suzanne Phillips on 12/31/2014 at 3:43 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2019 City Newspaper.

Website powered by Foundation.