415 replies to this topic

[Frankie811]

gregw, on Feb 28 2006, 06:19 AM, said:

Nice renderings:

http://www.pawtucket...n/siteplan.html

Nice post!    But I wonder what the chances are of actually seeing this project happen.

[Mij]

gregw, on Feb 28 2006, 06:19 AM, said:

Nice renderings:

http://www.pawtucket...n/siteplan.html

I got this from a friend of mine and thought it was intresting

"According to Jim Chelile, District Rep, this project could not happen in the pawt./cf. area until there was an assessment done on 1) the structural integrity 2) the historic value of the old station and 3) the cost of stripping the area and starting from ground zero. ALL of the items I have just mentioned fall mostly on the backs of RI tax payers. Oh yeah and MBTA is highly suspect of the Idea in general according to the rep from Pawt the MBTA feels that they do not need to extend their rail from S. Attleboro to the short distance of CF."

I went on to tell my friend about the work being put in from Mayor Doyle and Mike Cassidy. Does  any one (Herb) no anything further about this issue inside of the Pawtucket city council. Is this an issue that is getting the attention that it deserves? Does Pawtucket see this as an economic engine or another tax burden for the tax payers. (The reason I ask is B/C the tone of Jim Chelile seems to be passive when this project is talked about)

[eltron]

Mij, on Feb 28 2006, 09:15 AM, said:

I got this from a friend of mine and thought it was intresting

ALL of the items I have just mentioned fall mostly on the backs of RI tax payers.

This is a misleading statement. There has been a major study undertaken by VHB, commissioned by the City of Pawtucket and RIDOT, that is funded by a congressional earmark (ie: federal dollars) from Senator Reed, as well as federal transportation dollars. NONE of it is being funded by RI taxpayers.

From my discussions with city officials, they are VERY much behind rail returning to Pawtucket. Its more when where and how, than if.

Great renderings, btw, though I question the parking garage a bit. I wonder if it would be better to make the Barton Street stop more local and pedestrian serviced, and build a huge new parking garage at South Attleboro, which is more suited to regional car/train commuters.

[Cotuit]

Mij, on Feb 28 2006, 09:15 AM, said:

"According to Jim Chelile, District Rep, this project could not happen in the pawt./cf. area until there was an assessment done on 1) the structural integrity 2) the historic value of the old station and 3) the cost of stripping the area and starting from ground zero. ALL of the items I have just mentioned fall mostly on the backs of RI tax payers. Oh yeah and MBTA is highly suspect of the Idea in general according to the rep from Pawt the MBTA feels that they do not need to extend their rail from S. Attleboro to the short distance of CF."

Not that I can confirm that anything he says is patently untrue, though as eltron pointed out, the siting studies are being done with federal funds, this guy sounds typically anti-transit. I've heard that the T has said exactly the opposite regarding rail in RI. They've said as long as we can fund it, we can build whatever we want and they'll serve it. Also, I don't understand this "extending the short distance to Pawt/CF" statement. The T already goes to Providence and is committed to going to Green, so what the hell does that mean, they aren't extending anything by building/re-opening a station in Pawtucket, they already have trains going through town.

eltron, on Feb 28 2006, 11:52 AM, said:

Great renderings, btw, though I question the parking garage a bit. I wonder if it would be better to make the Barton Street stop more local and pedestrian serviced, and build a huge new parking garage at South Attleboro, which is more suited to regional car/train commuters.

I'm pretty sure that's just a study, but it's nice. Current thinking as far as I've heard is that there would be somesort of residential 'tower' on site.

[Recchia]

The MBTA has basically said, if we want it, build it, and pay for it, they will come.  Look at stations like Canton Junction and Canton Center, they're only a few miles if even that apart.  As Eltron said, the S. Attleboro station, with its mediocre pedestrian connections, can be more of a park and ride station, whereas a Pawtucket station can be more of a TOD/neighborhood station.

I personally like the basic design, although I'd like to see no surface parking and a station built to the street, that isn't possible if we are going to keep the existing structure.  So, I'll settle and give it my thumbs up, though it would be nice if they densified the housing around the station.

Edited by Recchia, 28 February 2006 - 11:52 AM.

[eltron]

Cotuit, on Feb 28 2006, 12:42 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure that's just a study, but it's nice. Current thinking as far as I've heard is that there would be somesort of residential 'tower' on site.

Yep, the Seelbinder proposal is for strip retail, a residential tower, but also a huge parking garage. I know that one concern of the immediate neighborhood is the parking garage, and I think that is probably a valid concern.

A parking garage is undoubtedly needed, but I wonder how big and how best to work the plans for that site.
its a tough one. Fantastic, but tough, considering the surrounding residential 'hood.

[mental757]

Recchia, on Feb 28 2006, 12:49 PM, said:

As Eltron said, the S. Attleboro station, with its mediocre pedestrian connections, can be more of a park and ride station, whereas a Pawtucket station can be more of a TOD/neighborhood station.

And while not a huge number, don't forget those who may be driving (or taking RIPTA) to Providence or Warwick for work - a percentage of those folks might find the train easier...

[Recchia]

mental757, on Feb 28 2006, 02:00 PM, said:

And while not a huge number, don't forget those who may be driving (or taking RIPTA) to Providence or Warwick for work - a percentage of those folks might find the train easier...

Definitely.  

Especially south of TF Green, most of the ridership is expected to be Providence bound.

[Dan]

this station project is hot in this forum, but it looks like the renderings came out a year ago and I last recall reading an article about the proposed demolition of this structure a couple months back.  

anything new out there on this?

[mod134]

I like those renderings and I am a history buff. So to have Pawtucket back and the old station work fine in my book.  In addition, I think this will only bolster the state's hopes of viable alternatives to driving - (specifically train ie: Providence, Pawtucket, Warwick, etc.)

[gregw]

Also to counter one of the skeptics points, there's no question of the historical value of the station. According to RIHPHC's Pawtucket survey, it's listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Cotuit, on Feb 28 2006, 12:42 PM, said:

Not that I can confirm that anything he says is patently untrue, though as eltron pointed out, the siting studies are being done with federal funds, this guy sounds typically anti-transit. I've heard that the T has said exactly the opposite regarding rail in RI. They've said as long as we can fund it, we can build whatever we want and they'll serve it. Also, I don't understand this "extending the short distance to Pawt/CF" statement. The T already goes to Providence and is committed to going to Green, so what the hell does that mean, they aren't extending anything by building/re-opening a station in Pawtucket, they already have trains going through town.
I'm pretty sure that's just a study, but it's nice. Current thinking as far as I've heard is that there would be somesort of residential 'tower' on site.

[Cotuit]

Dan, on Mar 1 2006, 03:34 AM, said:

this station project is hot in this forum, but it looks like the renderings came out a year ago and I last recall reading an article about the proposed demolition of this structure a couple months back.  

anything new out there on this?

This project/proposal/plan has been going through a lot of ups and downs. The current status (it could have changed in the last 10 minutes) is that the city is looking into two options, renovating and reopening the existing station, or building a new station at a different location. The city seems to prefer renovating the existing station, but looking for federal money means they need to consider all options. Demolition of the existing station is certainly still a possibility, but seems to be less so now than it was just a few months ago.

[Mij]

Cotuit, on Mar 1 2006, 12:56 PM, said:

This project/proposal/plan has been going through a lot of ups and downs. The current status (it could have changed in the last 10 minutes) is that the city is looking into two options, renovating and reopening the existing station, or building a new station at a different location. The city seems to prefer renovating the existing station, but looking for federal money means they need to consider all options. Demolition of the existing station is certainly still a possibility, but seems to be less so now than it was just a few months ago.

I made contact with the people from the web site and asked about some of the issues. This is the Responce I got this mourning

"I anticipate there will be more action this spring.  For one thing, a team of consultants from VHB Engineering are reviewing the site(s) for their feasibility; then we may need to go back to Council to help assure future Federal support for this project.  So thanks for your interest and stand by for updates."

Rich Davis

[KBagley]

Quote

Also to counter one of the skeptics points, there's no question of the historical value of the station. According to RIHPHC's Pawtucket survey, it's listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Actually, the Pawtucket/Central Falls Station has never been formally listed in the National register.  It is listed in the Historic Resources Survey book for Pawtucket as a "significant property" and has been "formally determined eligible for listing in the National Register" but nobody has actually taken the steps to complete the NR nomination.  I will contradict myself a little bit by saying that it being "formally determined eligible" does actually give it the same protections that an actual listing would... so its all kind of redundant.  Welcome to the nitty gritty of preservation.

Mij, on Mar 1 2006, 01:14 PM, said:

I made contact with the people from the web site and asked about some of the issues. This is the Responce I got this mourning

"I anticipate there will be more action this spring.  For one thing, a team of consultants from VHB Engineering are reviewing the site(s) for their feasibility; then we may need to go back to Council to help assure future Federal support for this project.  So thanks for your interest and stand by for updates."

Rich Davis

I have a contact in the Cultural Resources division of VHB who told me she would be happy to feed any information from the Engineering division on this project.  All we have to do is ask...

[Cotuit]

KBagley, on Mar 1 2006, 03:01 PM, said:

All we have to do is ask...

Well, get asking!

[KBagley]

Cotuit, on Mar 1 2006, 03:07 PM, said:

Well, get asking!

What are you dying to know?  You only get 3 wishes, make them count... j/k

[Recchia]

The "building a station at another location" option that Cotuit mentioned, I beleive that would be at the rail yard in Pawtucket closer to the Providence border.

[gregw]

Recchia, on Mar 1 2006, 04:46 PM, said:

The "building a station at another location" option that Cotuit mentioned, I beleive that would be at the rail yard in Pawtucket closer to the Providence border.

Is that the area just north of Smithfield Ave?

[Recchia]

gregw, on Mar 1 2006, 08:26 PM, said:

Is that the area just north of Smithfield Ave?

I believe so....it's been a while since I saw the RFP though...

[KBagley]

No, the area near Smithfield Ave is actually a layover facility... in order for MBTA to run trains into RI, they have to have a place to park them off the main line when they are not in use, i.e. at night.  They cant just keep them on the main line, as Amtrak trains run pretty much 24/7, and it would be redundant to drive them back up to wherever the nearest layover facility is in Mass.  So DOT was required to build the layover facility before MBTA would be able to run more trains in RI.  Gotta give DOT credit for getting this taken care of as fast as they did.

The alternative station that I think Cotuit is mentioning is the area that is currently being used or proposed to be used by a trash hauling company as a transfer station and recylcing yard or some such thing... the City of Pawtucket doesnt want it located where it is, so I believe there is some lawsuit going on... I could be wrong.