It's incredible what a difference some lights can make. For a pedestrian, an unlit street can feel very unsafe; especially in an urban area. Install some pedestrian-oriented lighting and that unsafe perception is all but erased. Throw in some ornamentation and you've got yourself a "historic district". The same can be said for roadways. As a City resident, I'm used to having streetlights everywhere. It can be frightening to drive in the suburbs or rural areas, as cars fly by at high speeds and the only lights around are those emanating from the headlights of the vehicles themselves. Another somewhat less obvious area where lighting can make a world of difference is in the perception of a city.
Most of the world's famously photogenic cities light themselves up at night. You can tell which buildings are which due to their unique lighting arrangements that not only improve a building's nighttime appearance, but the appearance of the city in general. Here in Rochester, we seem to have a phobia of such shameless self-promotion. Just look at our night skyline. Most office lights are turned off and most buildings lack exterior illumination. The Bausch & Lomb Building does a good job, as does the Kodak Building, HSBC Tower, and Powers Building. But other prominent skyscrapers seem to be ashamed of themselves. That shame is then extended to the remainder of our city's skyline, making it appear that our city is empty and unwelcoming. This does not need to be the case.
Every year around this time, when the sun sets before most folks have left work, one of our most prominent and recognizable skyscrapers forgets to turn its exterior spotlights off and the effect is wonderful. The Chase Tower should be easily seen at night, its' ivory vertical lines shining from the city's center. However, for the vast majority of the year, the Chase is nearly invisible, a glaring hole in our nighttime persona. Currently though, the Chase is basked in brilliant illumination at night. Filling that void and creating a relative sense of life and energy at our very core. If only they would do this year-round. Soon, they will adjust the timing of the lights and it will once again be dark at night. Why they do this I do not know for sure. I assume it is to save money on electricity and that is truly unfortunate. I suppose that is the reason why other buildings do not enliven themselves with light. Not surprisingly I suppose, the RG&E Building is one of the more brighter buildings in our downtown nightscape.
Wouldn't it be great if there were some way to provide free or discounted electricity for nighttime building illumination programs? Either through a special economic development-related RG&E program for buildings within Rochester's City Center or through a partnership with the City or RDDC, downtown building owners could feel secure knowing that their towers will be visible from afar and it will not cost them a dime. It would be good for the landlords, it would be good for the City, and it would be good for all area residents who maybe, just maybe, might begin to appreciate our city a little more as they see it in a new light.
Every now and again, you read something that is so well expressed, you just have to tell someone about it. Reading today's Letters to the Editor, I had such a moment. If you haven't already read the following letter, please do so. Mr. Snover couldn't have put it any better. Duffy was a failure as Chief of Police and he has done absolutely nothing to garner our confidence in his first year as Mayor. While suburbanites certainly love having a white guy running the City, they're backing the wrong one.
Two salaries were missing from list I was confused by the fact that neither Mayor (then Chief) Duffy's, nor his sidekick, Commander Girvin's salaries were provided on your Web site's 10-year Rochester police salary chart. I, personally, was the recipient of over $25,000 in overtime over the past two years. This money bolstered my pension and allowed me to retire after serving only 20 years on the force. The abundance of my overtime was generated by Chief Duffy's ill-fated and reprehensible decision to reduce the department from seven to two sections. This decision has resulted in continued violence, increased overtime and poorer police service to the members of the Rochester community. I'm sure that Duffy will have the opportunity to continue his antics at his new position as mayor of Rochester. Now he calls for increased accountability of members of the department, after he demoralized, gutted it and left it in shambles. That sounds a bit hypocritical to me. Unfortunately, his burning desire to leave a lasting legacy has come at the expense of the safety and financial well-being of the community he has sworn to serve. —BOB SNOVER, PENFIELD The writer is a retired RPD lieutenant.
As you well know, layoffs at your corporations in recent years have decimated Rochester's once-thriving manufacturing base and in so doing caused a ripple effect that has all but crippled our economic stability. While there are many local residents that blame you for the current state of our region, I do not. I understand that that is the cost of doing business in a global economy. The cost-cutting at your corporations has allowed you to become leaner and more flexible; more able to compete with your rivals across the world. All three of you are facing issues in various locations around the country and I would like to take this opportunity to offer potential solutions that would benefit both yourself and the Rochester area.
Bausch & Lomb, you have already emerged from your cost-cutting and have become a strong contributor to the new optics and biotech fields in which the Rochester area is a major presence. Your decision to expand the research and development facilities on North Goodman Street sends a strong message that your corporation is dedicated to the Rochester area and its long term health. I applaud you for this and I ask, is it possible for you to do just one more thing? Could you please move your lens solution manufacturing facility from South Carolina to Rochester? I know that the plant down there in Greenville has caused you significant pain and hardship. It is possible that the errors made at that plant could impact your bottom line for years to come. It is also possible that the ineptitude of the South Carolina workforce had something to do with this. If you move your plant up here, we will do everything in our power to accommodate you and to provide you with the most highly skilled workforce you can find.
Kodak, our old friend, it's been a long road for you. It appears that you are finally nearing the end of your cost-cutting program. Thousands of local employees have lost their jobs and the square footage at Kodak Park has declined considerably. It is my hope, and the collective hopes of Rochester, that when you reach the end point of this downsizing effort, you will be able to once again grow here in your hometown. There are numerous opportunities for you to jumpstart this rebuilding by restructuring your nationwide presence and moving some of your business back to Rochester. Specifically, your marketing division in Atlanta would fit nicely with Rochester's core competencies and would greatly affect the prospects for the State Street headquarters and its environs.
Xerox, you have gotten through with your cost-cutting very recently. While thousands lost their jobs locally, you did not bear the same criticisms as were lobbed at your crosstown compadre Kodak. You are still a major force in the Rochester economy, although unlike the other two, you are not technically based in Rochester. That is where I would like to ask you to please move your headquarters back home from Stamford. It has been reported that you will be vacating the large complex that has been your home for many years and moving to a smaller building. Why not save yourself some time and energy and move back to Rochester, where your headquarters would have a significant positive impact on our city's morale without being at all detrimental to your operations. Unlike most mid-sized cities, Rochester is a good place for corporate headquarters operations. Kodak, B&L, Paychex, Constellation Brands, etc. You would fit in perfectly here.
Thank you for your time. If you have any questions, you know how to reach me.
It was an exciting night last Tuesday, election night. The sweet smell of change was in the air from Florida, to Ohio, to Missouri, and to Montana. Even here in the Empire State, the election of Eliot Spitzer seemed to indicate that this great state may finally be on the home stretch of the long road to recovery. But amidst all that energy and excitement, the stale stench of complacency began to set in across Western and Central New York. While Democrats were being elected to Congress in once-unthinkable districts across the nation, the cursed Appalachia Now! mentality soiled that sweet smell of change here at home.
Despite seemingly insurmountable odds, the embarrassment to our region known as John Randy Kuhl narrowly edged the clearly superior Eric Massa. Other Republican Congressmen Tom Reynolds (i.e., the guy who deemed it more important to keep a Republican in office than protect young House pages from a sexual predator) and Jim Walsh both won re-election as well. Sure, liberals Louise Slaughter and Brian Higgins won easily, but they represent heavily Democratic districts. The news wasn't all bad for Massa, Maffei, and Davis; they easily won the more sophisticated urban counties they would have represented (i.e., Erie, Monroe, Niagara, and Onondaga). But the uneducated morons of the Southern Tier and Finger Lakes regions apparently didn't get the memo on removing the failed Republican establishment from office. Folks in the backwards Confederate counties of Allegany, Steuben, Cayuga, Wayne, Livingston, and Wyoming went for the Republican candidates by nearly 2-1 margins.
Not all of Upstate New York is afflicted with Appalachitis. In the Albany area, Democrat Kirsten Gillebrand brought down GOP incumbent John Sweeney; and in the race for an open seat in the Utica area, Democrat Michael Arcuri defeated Republican Ray Meier. Congrats to the progressive voters of those districts who recognized the need to halt the spread of neo-fascism that had spread across this nation in the wake of 9/11. But this blog is not about the Mohawk Valley or the Capital District, this is all about Rochester and we Rochesterians are pissed. These criminally-gerrymandered districts need to be fairly retraced to reflect the views of the constituents contained within them.
Just as the Southern Tier and Finger Lakes regions deserve to be represented by an ignorant, drunk, shotgun-wielding wifebeater like Kuhl; the good folks of Monroe County deserve to be represented by a progressive, informed, honest person such as Eric Massa. Much the same, it is unfair that Louise Slaughter should have to represent the cities of Rochester, Buffalo, and Niagara Falls while also technically representing the lakeside communities of Orleans County. Furthermore, why should anyone from Syracuse be representing the interests of suburban Rochester residents?
These districts are ridiculous and they are a decent excuse for how our region voted last Tuesday. But it is none the less insulting that two of the four Rochester-area Congresspersons did not carry Monroe County and only one of the four is from Metropolitan Rochester. It is my fear that our representation by these out-of-touch gentlemen will further isolate our region from the rest of mainstream America. Governor Spitzer has a lot of work to do if he is to cure this region of the bad case of Appalachitis that is killing it. Of course, five of the eight counties that Spitzer either lost or only narrowly won are in Western New York.
Twice within the past week or so, the Rochester Police Department has announced plans to deploy CCTV surveillance cameras at high crime locations in the City of Rochester. These locations are along Lyell Avenue and the "La Marketa" area of Avenida Clinton Norte (North Clinton Avenue). A Letter to the Editor in yesterday's D&C got me thinking, are these cameras really worth their cost? Will these cameras have any impact at all on the overall crime rate in the City? The letter reads:
Pricey cameras to watch city streets It sounds like another million dollars of our money is about to be wasted on crime-fighting cameras, costing $24,000 each, paid for with $500,000 of our money set aside by Rochester and $250,000 of our money coming from the state Community Capital Assistance Program, not to mention whatever the cost will be to hire people to monitor the cameras, move them around and maintain them. This seems like just another attempt by officials at election time to convince voters they are tough on crime. They emphasize that the cameras will be highly visible. Well guess what, now that the bad guys know this, they'll just move down the street or around the corner. If Mayor Duffy or Police Chief Moore were serious about crime prevention, they wouldn't telegraph their every move — unless, of course, it was an election year. The cost of the cameras is enough to make one "shutter." VINCENT P. YODICE, GREECE Setting aside the obvious indications that Mr. Yodice doesn't want any of "our" (i.e., suburbanites') money going towards fighting crime in the City of Rochester, he raises a valid argument. A million dollars spent towards relatively unproven technology is a very risky venture (and we know all about risky ventures). One could make the argument that these monies would be better spent providing low-interest loans to small businesses that could then employ city residents and in so doing cut down on the hopelessness that exists in many city neighborhoods. One could make that argument, I do not.
If you happen to examine a map of violent crime in the City of Rochester, you would see that in many instances, these crimes occur directly on our City's main commercial thoroughfares. Corridors such as North Clinton, Dewey, Lyell, Jefferson, Hudson, Clifford, Arnett, North Goodman, Thurston, Genesee, etc. That leads me to believe that much of this crime is based on opportunity; opportunity that could be thwarted by the presence of these surveillance cameras. Take Dewey Avenue (north of Lexington) for instance, there is little to no crime on the residential streets that intersect with it, and yet Dewey is lined by shootings, stabbings, and assaults that have occurred over the past few years. Deployment of these cameras along this once-vibrant stretch of Dewey could cut down on such opportunity-driven crime dramatically, improving safety for pedestrians, and leading to reinvestment.
Maybe I'm over-generalizing a bit as far as the direct link between these cameras, crime reduction, and economic growth. And maybe these cameras won't have as pronounced an effect on North Clinton or Hudson Avenues (i.e., commercial corridors plagued by crime surrounded by neighborhoods overrun with crime) than they might on Dewey Avenue or Thurston Road (i.e., commercial corridors plagued by crime but surrounded by peaceful neighborhoods). But certainly these experiments which have the potential to save lives and generate investment are worth the million dollar chance that the City is giving them. Let's hope it works because, in many neighborhoods, we're running out of options.
