DEVELOPMENT: Ren Square's footprint shrinks
By Jeremy Moule on Apr. 24th, 2008
The latest schematic designs for the Renaissance Square project are out, and the biggest change is in the amount of land used.
Compared to the originals from former architect Moshe Safdie, the new plans are scaled back quite a bit. Plans for a small theater have been dropped, and the transit
concourse, retail space, and 2,800-seat theater are packed in tighter. The theater has been scaled back - no longer is it a multitheater performing arts center, but a 2,800-seat Broadway roadhouse style theater. And the $90 million cost estimate is gone. For the entire Renaissance Square project to stay within its $230 million budget, the theater will have to cost less, said County Executive Maggie Brooks.
"We can raise $25 to $30 million in private funds for this," Brooks said during an interview Thursday night.
A new MCC campus will no longer use part of the Granite Building or the Cox Building, and there's a possibility it won't use the Edwards building, either. And to save costs, a rooftop garden and much glass have been eliminated.
"Any one of these can be done for $230 million," says project spokesman Mike Power. County Executive Maggie Brooks, the project's prime proponent, has said that's the absolute maximum that will be spent on the project.
The new plans are based on Safdie's design, in that the three components are contained on one site and that they are linked.
Under Safdie's plan, the Ren Square complex would have occupied the entire block bounded by Main Street, North Clinton Avenue, Mortimer Street, and St. Paul Street. Now, the project's land has been reduced by about a third. The Granite building (at Main and St. Paul), some land adjacent to it, the Cox Building on St. Paul, and possibly the Edwards Building on St. Paul have been eliminated from the plan.*
At first glance, the street-level plans appear to shrink the size of the MCC campus. It's likely that's not the case. In each concept, the community college section is multistory, in some cases expanding over retail, theater, or transit center sections. The three concepts where the Edwards building isn't used include more levels for MCC in other locations. For the same reason, a skywalk over Mortimer Street to the transit center isn't apparent in the street-level plans.
The plans are the result of 10 weeks of work by The Associates - a group of four local architectural and engineering firms originally contracted to work with Safdie. The firms are LaBella Associates, Bergmann Associates, SWBR Architects, and DeWolff Partnership. In February, the Main and Clinton Local Development Corp. partners approved more than $760,000 in payments to extend the contracts with those firms, so they could finish preliminary design work.
Safdie was paid more than $3 million for his design work.
Mayor Bob Duffy said he gives credit to Brooks and the rest of the Ren Square team for responding to concerns expressed by the city and by US Senator Chuck Schumer, who demanded a more aggressive timeline for preliminary designs. Planners have also agreed to keep the city's Mortimer Street garage. They agree with city officials that it will be necessary to meet downtown parking requirements.
Duffy urged residents to keep an open mind until all the information about Ren Square is in. That's what he plans to do, he said. At the same time, he reiterated that he will withdraw his backing if the theater component is ever removed from the project.
The county's driving Renaissance Square, Duffy said. In the end, he's just one vote on a board of four.
"While I certainly have influence, it remains to be seen whether my influence can have major influence on the project because it's not being driven by the city," he said. "But I will certainly never be shy about expressing myself."
* An earlier version of this article stated that the county now owns the Granite Building and the Cox Building. That is incorrect. Those buildings are privately owned.










User Comments
Here is what others say about this article. City Newspaper isn't responsible for the content of comments.
Kevin on April 27th, 2008
The planners could have their cake and eat it too if they would just develop a phased plan that defers some construction until after the facility is operational and can pay for it's own upgrades.