RochesterSubway.com : Filling In: 79 North Clinton

Filling In: 79 North Clinton

March 28th, 2014

The following is a guest post submitted by Matthew Denker.
Submit your story today.

Fellow Rochesterians, lend me your ears. I recently visited the reasonably pleasant city of Portland, OR. While I was there, I couldn’t help but notice a rather cleverly decorated, midcentury modern building. It was this one, actually…

Someone once said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery (note to self: look up who said that). With that in mind, I knew I had to imitate this building. Conveniently, Rochester already has the exact building I’ve coveted to do just this sort of thing with. Drumroll please! 79 North Clinton

Call me crazy, but I’ve loved this building for some time. I wanted to buy it when it was on the market a few years back, but the price was a little high, and I was a little poor. Life. Word on the street is that the building has actually been donated to Catholic Family Center. I don’t know if this is true, but this building is one of those black holes in the city’s GIS application. It crashes every time I try to click on it for information.

Moving on, I’ve long considered the conversion of this building to apartments. I think it would easily support three apartments per floor. Likely a studio, a 1BR, and a 2BR. The top floor would have two larger, 2BR apartments. The roof would be converted into outdoor space for all of the building tenants. Every apartment would be appointed in a matching midcentury modern style (think anything on this page ) but with fully modern amenities, including stainless steel kitchens, in-unit laundry, and radiant flooring.

I think the base would do well to have retail too, and either a mod coffee shop or sandwich place would be spectacular. In fact, I think this would be a great spot for a revived Automat style “restaurant.” This would be something unique, and would make for a great spot to stop on the way to waiting for a bus at the new transportation center.

Oh right, what would it all look like!? Well, please excuse me shoddy photoshopping, but, voila!

• • •

About Matthew Denker:

Matthew Denker is a Project Director by day and a fantasy real estate tycoon by night. He has a deep interest in Rochester, NY, as well as the subjects of new urbanism, walkability, mass transit, and land use. Going forward he hopes to combine all of those things to make Rochester a city competitive not only with other small, successful cities, such as Portland and Minneapolis, but even better by leveraging its easy access to the world-class cities of Toronto and New York.

Tags: 79 North Clinton Avenue, downtown, downtown Rochester, Filling In, Matthew Denker, North Clinton Avenue, Portland, Rochester, Rochester NY

This entry was posted on Friday, March 28th, 2014 at 8:04 am and is filed under Opinion, Reader Submitted Stories, Urban Development. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

25 Responses to “Filling In: 79 North Clinton”

Steve Orr says:

March 28, 2014 at 9:59 am

You’re right – county records show the building is owned by Catholic Charities, which got it through donation or purchase in 2001 from the Farash foundation. It’s exempt from property taxes. Can’t tell what they use it for. Give ’em a call!
John says:

March 28, 2014 at 10:13 am

It is very important for these types of projects to come to fruition as part of our Downtown Revitalization effort, but I can’t say I like the color choices at all. Perhaps something more ornate?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m so glad to see that someone else is deeply involved in bringing these things up and trying to make positive changes! 🙂
Dan Palmer says:

March 28, 2014 at 12:18 pm

Pretty sure it is an office building/hotel from the early 20th Century that was “modernized” with a new facade in the 1960’s. I was told a few years back that it’s main issue for reuse is asbestos abatement.
RochesterSubway.com says:

March 28, 2014 at 12:27 pm

Yes. It is actually the same building in this photo (next to the RKO movie palace)…

The top 4 floors were added on and it was given a “modern” new facade. *gag*
jimmy says:

March 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm

O my gosh, Mr. Denker, this would be great if you could do this! I really like the colored panels idea. One thing I would suggest would be to put some sort of border around the windows, like the same color as the dark gray brick. Basically, I think it’s appearance would benefit from new window frames/fixtures. Also it looks to me like this building could support 4 apartments per floor (I’m just guessing). Floors 2 – 5 could have 4 per floor; 6th floor 3, and the top floor 2 or 3 units. thats up to 22 units. Lastly, the south wall could use some balconies starting on the third floor to the 7th.
RochesterSubway.com says:

March 28, 2014 at 12:58 pm

Hey, why not bring back the original/ornate facade, but do the modern color panel look above the 3rd floor? It would look like a building placed on top of another building. It’d be amazing!
Matthew Denker says:

March 28, 2014 at 1:13 pm

Well that’s a serious loss. I imagine that original facade met the landfill.
Matthew Denker says:

March 28, 2014 at 2:39 pm

I must admit I LOVE the 2 building look (facadomy and all). Where it’s brand new: http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/new_york/one_york_apartments_sgla220309_1.jpg

or old and new: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/realestate/adding-penthouses-for-profit.html
Mittens says:

March 28, 2014 at 3:07 pm

Hideous. Looks like the Hamilton apartment building on Mt. Hope which is equally ugly. No thank you.
jimmy says:

March 28, 2014 at 3:18 pm

Ok, this idea seems feasible: so in Mr. Denker’s rendering you see the first floor is a concrete white color. Simply extend that look to the third floor, add a small basic ledge/overhang above the third floor windows. Then make the windows on the first three floors emulate the original windows, or at least distinguish them from the upper floor windows.
Adrian says:

March 28, 2014 at 3:43 pm

I like the Hamilton apartment building on Mt Hope and I like that photoshopped rendition too. Nothing wrong with a little color.
Kmannkoopa says:

March 28, 2014 at 6:03 pm

I must say the Hamilton is a far better example of this idea in action.

However, the Hamilton is still divisive in the South Wedge neighborhood. Some of the neighbors in the area feel that the Hamilton and Erie Harbor were a giant bait and switch when it came to color scheme and design.

Can’t please everyone.
Matthew Denker says:

March 28, 2014 at 7:30 pm

The Hamilton is much more to the digitized-cubist look (ala the east and west faces of One57 http://newyorkyimby.com/wp-content/uploads/blogger/-NbYz_Bneld4/URn1HapY5AI/AAAAAAAAAIE/EXeAQYaA4CA/s1600/P1010523.JPG). Not that there’s anything wrong with that. I think we don’t use color nearly enough in buildings here in the US. There’s hotel in, eh, Chelsea, that I like very much. It looks like the front is a Sol Lewitt piece: http://www.wyndham.com/property/NYCCW/Images/18144_x1.jpg

Anyway, the idea here was to take the building in an interesting direction instead of stripping the facade (again apparently), or going the strange route (100 Church Street), or being intensely bland. The mid-century color palette accented the mid-century look in a Mad Men sort of way.

Loving the feedback, though, and it’s true, architecture is a really challenging thing. People, in general, love that timeless Disney look, no matter how much it works or doesn’t work in a given context.
Charles says:

March 28, 2014 at 8:07 pm

Matt –

you may remember I wan’t a fan of this series back when, but I must admit your passion and due diligence really make it enjoyable. The rendering also reminds me of erie harbor but who cares. I personally think different architectural styles can work anywhere but normally it comes down to whether a space feels “warm or cold”.
Matthew Denker says:

March 28, 2014 at 8:33 pm

Charles – Thank you. I’m honored. Hopefully I can keep the series fresh going forward. Feel free to be in touch if you ever have any ideas for it.
Martin Edic says:

March 29, 2014 at 1:59 pm

The price I heard about 4 years ago was $160,000 but you had to prove you had the funding to rehab it.
Martin Edic says:

March 29, 2014 at 2:01 pm

And, like several other Farash buildings downtown, all the plumbing was taken out. So it needs a gut. Kind of a sweet location now that Sibley’s, Midtown and the Transit center are underway.
Howard Decker says:

March 30, 2014 at 10:08 am

Charles Caleb Colton, 1780-1832, English cleric and eccentric.
ELF says:

March 31, 2014 at 11:59 am

Can we do something like this and the Hamilton project with that hideous housing project next to Manhattan Square Park?
daggar says:

March 31, 2014 at 3:35 pm

I like the color here and on the Hamilton building– not because it’s the best idea, but it mitigates the aesthetic sinkhole that the original buildings are.

I’m not a fan of mid-century modern– too much of the architect-as-dictator thing going on, not enough allowance for adaptive reuse and people who actually use the building to undo the architect’s mistakes. I think even some Frank Lloyd Wright buildings fail as buildings– they should be considered very large sculptures, and are beautiful in that regard, but they fail the test of architecture because it’s impossible to [i]live[/i] with a kitchen that small.
John says:

April 3, 2014 at 10:10 am

Matt,

I really dig the Wyndham!

http://www.wyndham.com/property/NYCCW/Images/18144_x1.jpg

I would love to see something more like that.
Lynn says:

April 4, 2014 at 4:50 am

RKO Palace and the (then) 3-story building were built together in 1928. I think I read the theatre business had some office space in the 3-story bldg, but the two bldgs weren’t connected on the inside.

I love the photoshopped idea for a mid-century facade! It reminds me of the Downtowner Motor Inn. Anyone remember that? Corner of Broad St and South Avenue, directly across from the Rundel Library. Here’s a postcard, with the library in the foreground, Midtown Plaza in background. http://photo.libraryweb.org/rochimag/rochpublib/rpc/rpc01/rpc1353a.jpg
John says:

April 4, 2014 at 11:20 am

Charles & Lynn,

I think the concept of whether or not it makes the area feel “warm or cold” is very important…I also think that the Downtowner Motor Inn pulls off that look with some warmth. I bet the original concept Mr. Denker posted would really REALLY work if it was done in a similar fashion, using multiple shades of two complimentary colors, such as blue and orange…there are other combinations, of course, maybe just blue and red…not with the yellow though!

I’m just crabbing now, but seriously, I think less color, more shading, that’ll do it.

Thoughts, friends? 🙂
Matthew Denker says:

April 18, 2014 at 12:25 pm

John – Sorry it’s taken me so long to circle back to this. I can definitely see how a 3 color palette, instead of four might work. I went with 4 so that in each 3 panel segment, you’d never have all 4 colors together. With 3 colors, you’d be committed to having all 3 in each segment (or duplicates, which may or may not be desirable).

Lynn – I must say I was aware of the downtown motor inn and liked it as inspiration as well.
John says:

April 22, 2014 at 9:02 am

Matt – No worries, I think it’s great that people are actually talking about these things. It raises a lot of hope for our city!

Point take, by the way. 🙂

Topics

Filling In: 79 North Clinton

About Matthew Denker:

25 Responses to “Filling In: 79 North Clinton”

Post a Comment...