Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rochester council rejects developer's bid to remove five South Broadway properties from historic district
Summary
After nearly 30 public speakers urged preservation, the Rochester City Council voted 5-2 to deny a property owner's request to remove five addresses on South Broadway from the city's landmark historic inventory and later upheld the Heritage Preservation Commission's denial of a certificate of appropriateness for the proposed redevelopment.
Council action and outcome The Rochester City Council voted on May 5 to deny a property owner's request to remove 309, 311, 313, 315 and 317 South Broadway from the city's landmark historic inventory, and later upheld the Heritage Preservation Commission's denial of a certificate of appropriateness for a proposed tower and two-story gym behind preserved facades. The motion to deny removal passed 5-2 after several hours of testimony; the subsequent appeal of the HPC decision was denied on the same 5-2 split.
What the owner proposed and why he said it was needed Developer Hal Henderson presented a plan that would retain storefront facades while demolishing and rebuilding the interiors and constructing a set-back, multistory student-housing tower with an interior gym. Henderson told council he has owned some of the buildings since 2017 and said rising taxes, low market rents and costly maintenance make the current building configuration economically unsustainable. He estimated restoring a single facade could cost roughly $700,000 and said one tenant currently pays rents insufficient to cover taxes and upkeep.
Why the Heritage Preservation Commission and staff opposed the project City staff and the Heritage Preservation Commission concluded the proposal failed to meet the Secretary of the Interior's standards and the city's design guidelines. Their written findings, presented to council, said the scale and massing of the proposed addition would destroy historic materials, features and spatial relationships that characterize the contributing properties and the district, and that the extent of demolition would trigger a demolition permit rather than a modest alteration. Staff recommended denial in the absence of documented economic-hardship evidence submitted as part of the application.
Public testimony and community concerns Nearly 30 residents, business owners, students and arts organizations spoke during the G4 public hearing. Speakers representing or citing businesses such as Art Heads Emporium, Cafe Steam, Threshold Arts and TreeDome said the 300 block of South Broadway is the city's cultural heart. Testimony included personal accounts of how the buildings anchor downtown events, provide spaces for artists and students, and contribute to local commerce and identity. Several speakers also described attempts to maintain their storefronts, cited lost licenses or building-safety notices, and urged the council not to set what they called a dangerous precedent for future demolitions.
Council deliberation Council members discussed the quasi-judicial nature of the review, the three criteria for landmark removal (historic significance, historic integrity, economic hardship) and whether the applicant had provided sufficient documentation. Those who voted to deny the removal cited the commission's findings that the buildings maintained historic significance and highlighted city efforts (loans and grants) to support downtown preservation. Members who supported removal emphasized property-owner rights and the financial burden of maintaining older buildings.
Next steps and implications By denying the removal and upholding the HPC's denial of a certificate of appropriateness, the council preserved the current historic-district designation for the five addresses. The decisions mean any future design approach that would substantially alter the contributing properties must meet the city's design guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's standards, or the owner may pursue further appeals or submit revised plans that address staff and HPC concerns. The council's actions leave intact the city's recently adopted heritage-preservation framework and the HPC's role in evaluating compatibility of proposed work.
Attribution Quotes in this story come from public testimony and council proceedings as recorded in the May 5, 2025 meeting transcript of the Rochester City Council. Speakers are identified in the transcript by first name or role; the council's recorded roll-call votes were read aloud during the meeting and recorded in the official minutes.
