156 replies to this topic

[Cotuit]

Lova, on May 2 2005, 12:23 PM, said:

Are Sasaki Associates and Duany going to have a royal rumble in the parking lot, or are they on the same team?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Rumble I think, Duany will probably insist on rumbling in an on-street parking spot, rather than the parking lot though.

I'm sure Sasaki will respect Duany's proposals, they are mostly quite sound. Sasaki was hired to spread the plan slightly outside of the Downcity footprint that Duany worked in. Sasaki is looking at the Jewelry District, Promenade, "Narragansett Landing" and Fox Point as well.

[Mij]

This will be my first public hearing type thing, what should i expect, Is it going to be a a presentation open type thing, or will it be like some city council meeting

[Cotuit]

Mij, on May 2 2005, 01:02 PM, said:

This will be my first public hearing type thing, what should i expect, Is it going to be a a presentation open type thing, or will it be like some city council meeting

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It'll likely be a bunch of intellectuals talking at you. Sit at the back of the room, if you get bored you can bail.

Starting at 6pm you can wonder about, look at the plans, talk to the people from Sasaki... Starting at 6:30pm they will present their findings.

[Mij]

Cotuit, on May 2 2005, 01:06 PM, said:

It'll likely be a bunch of intellectuals talking at you. Sit at the back of the room, if you get bored you can bail.

Starting at 6pm you can wonder about, look at the plans, talk to the people from Sasaki... Starting at 6:30pm they will present their findings.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks

[Frankie811]

Mij, on May 2 2005, 01:02 PM, said:

This will be my first public hearing type thing, what should i expect, Is it going to be a a presentation open type thing, or will it be like some city council meeting

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The journal just reported on ch.12 that they'll have a report on this in tomorrow's paper. This must be a preview of the forums that will be held over the next two days.

[Frankie811]

http://www.newurbann...vCharrette.html

[Cotuit]

Today's Journal.

[Garris]

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 06:53 AM, said:

Today's Journal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sounds interesting! Anyone else going to be there? I'm going to try to make it tonight, but I'm on call for the hospital. If not tonight, I'll make it tomorrow...

- Garris

[Cotuit]

I'm going to go tonight.

[Garris]

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 07:57 AM, said:

I'm going to go tonight.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, it was interesting, especially the financial presentation (Providence is doing well compared to other New England cities with surprisingly high levels of retail/restaurant activity and a tiny office vacancy rate (!!??!!) but with stagnant office rents and a dismal job outlook with poor growth, low retention of 24-35 yr olds, and poor prospects)... Nothing surprising in the least, I thought. Everything was painted in the broadest of brush strokes and was very, very familiar:

- Mixed use development everywhere
- Transportation spine down Allen's Ave into Eddy into Memorial Drive (no real consideration LRT, unfortunately, which an audience member brought up)
- Tallest buildings closest to downtown (they apparently imagine only another 1-2 tall buildings aside from what's already been proposed, with buildings getting smaller farther from the downtown core)
- Maximization of sightlines to the water and better integration into the waterfront (probably the best idea and clearest vision)
- Build out the city's underutilized properties
- Optimize the West-Downcity connections

Interestingly, of all the plans I've heard (including the recent Duany plan), this was by far and away the lightest on details. As I said, this was very broad, and seemingly a surprising amount of work for such vague recommendations. While they said they weren't going to focus much on the highway move since it was at least 7 years away, oddly, that's where most of their time (and much of their imagination) was spent during the presentation.

My biggest critique is that it's a very boring plan. Sure, its very realistic, very practical, and maybe even very doable, but it doesn't have an ounce of creativity, imagination, or spark. It has no centerpoint, no "feature" piece that everyone can rally around and go, "Wow! We want that!"

The audience feedback was arguably the most interesting part for the themes that came up:

- The Save India/Fox Point folks were out in force, with a zillion people chiming in about how terrible development would be there... They were right about the lack of imagination for that space, though. I really have to say, however, how awesome an idea it is to bring N/S Main, Wickenden, and the Marina/harbor/Fox Point area together finally after the highway move...
- Several people (almost all over 60 years of age, as an aside) argued against tall buildings of any type anywhere in the city...
- Lots of people argued for more open space (its a city folks! If we have much more open space, where's the city part?)
- One women brought up the lack of stated opportunities for those without college degrees in the economic plan. She's certainly right, but show me one community in the US (or all the Western world, for that matter) that's figured out a bright, growing, highly employed future for those without higher education...
- One guy very rightly brought up the lack of a truly impressive "gateway" entrance to the city for folks traveling here by car or bus...
- Lots of people brought up Cotuit's point about how poorly designed the Promenade area is for pedestrians right now, a point which, quixotically, the presenters just didn't seem to get and never addressed well...
- Two or three people brought up possible racial and artist discrimination in all of the work being done, despite clear accomodations and references to the artist community several times in the presentation...
- Fascinatingly, there was almost no discussion amongst the audience (or in the presentation) about two of the most dynamic neighborhoods in the study, the Capitol Center and Atwell Ave... It was all Fox Point, 195 land, Allen's Ave, West End discussion.

And that's about it. Lots of recognizable movers and shakers there from the political and development community (I even got to talk with a few). It was a fun night. I left about 9:00, and it started at 6 (3 hours!).

- Garris

[Recchia]

Garris, on May 4 2005, 10:28 PM, said:

- Mixed use development everywhere
- Transportation spine down Allen's Ave into Eddy into Memorial Drive (no real consideration LRT, unfortunately, which an audience member brought up)
- Tallest buildings closest to downtown (they apparently imagine only another 1-2 tall buildings aside from what's already been proposed, with buildings getting smaller farther from the downtown core)
- Maximization of sightlines to the water and better integration into the waterfront (probably the best idea and clearest vision)
- Build out the city's underutilized properties
- Optimize the West-Downcity connections

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So they didn't mention anything specific related to any of the mentioned topics?

[Cotuit]

I left at 8pm, I was tiring of the Fox Pointers whining about Fox's Point, and I was late to meet people for dinner. The first old bag that spoke about wanting to have trees along 95 instead of buildings was the best, I think if you were sitting near me you could actually hear my eyes rolling. Yes let's put trees along 95 and all sit along the edge and watch the cars go by.

By far the most interesting, and important part of the presentation was the economic issues. I really wished that they had come right out and said the schools suck. The 25-34 year olds aren't leaving because there are no jobs, they are leaving because the schools suck, and there are no jobs because there are no talented 25-34 year olds here (present company in the 25-34 range excluded, of course).

Really I wish they had just left the Fox's Point bit out of it. They could have just sent a memo to the mayor with their recommendations on it, then focused their energy on everything else, would have kept the Fox Point NIMBYs away and we could have actually talked about some important things, like the connections of the Promenade to Federal Hill and Downcity. I don't see how they think the Promenade will thrive without those connections.

Before the presentation I asked Katherine about what their thoughts were regarding connecting the Jewelry District to Narragansett Landing along Allens and Eddy (the crossings under the relocated 195 interchange). She didn't have an answer. I thought that was why they were here. Any idiot can redraw the streetgrid between the JD and Downcity, the difficult connections need the vision. She also said the Hospital had been asking about it.

One thing she did mention, which I was interested in is a proposal from RIPTA to shuttle the buses around the city with stops spaced out around the core. Sounds like something I recently proposed in the Kennedy Plaza thread, :pats self on back:

The 195 land proposals weren't really any different than anything already proposed by the city and DOT. I understand this was a broad stroke kind of presentation and a first blush on an ongoing creative process. But again, any idiot can reconnect the streetgrid, any idiot can propose ground level retail with mised use upper floors, any idiot could propose tall buildings near the core getting smaller as you move out. The things I want to hear from planners is how to target development uses to create a vibrant streetlife and a good flow of uses throughout the city.

I was happy to hear the mayor say the city is setting up a website on this. Everyone who did not attend should be sure to view it when it's up and send in your feedback.

[Cotuit]

I'm guess I'm going to have to put my idea for the Dean Street overpass down on paper, since the professionals didn't do it.

[gregw]

Overall I love the plan.

Cianci in his New Cities proposal wanted to raze almost everything in the Promenade area (including much of the Foundry) to create a glitzy suburban style office park.

The Providence 2020 plan sensibly retains the historic industrial buildings while calling for new contruction to add density. That will help make it an attractive area for tech space as well as for cool mixed use proposals.

One disappointment in the proposal for Promenade was the lack of consideration for making the area accessible for pedestrians although they did suggest making the Dean Kinsley intersection tighter to slow down traffic..

Someone in the audience said there is no good pedestrian connection between Promenade and Federal Hill. Totally true. It would be nice if they could add a lane on the Dean St. overpass for pedestrians and bikes.

As far as the rest of the plan is concerned, what's not to like. I love the waterfront plans such as the Dorrance St. park. I think the Fox Point nibmyites who don't want any buildings in India Point should see the value of the planners' idea is that buildings would provide a better border for the park than a highway.

[Cotuit]

gregw, on May 5 2005, 07:08 AM, said:

I think the Fox Point nibmyites who don't want any buildings in India Point should see the value of the  planners' idea is that buildings would provide a better border for the park than a highway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Indeed, it will also give people from other parts of the city a reason to go there. With economic activity in the form of shops and restaurants on the waterfront, people will want to go there. I can picture bring my parents to a waterside restaurant down there when they're in town for a visit. Would I bring them to India Point now, without such uses? No, they've seen grass and trees before, there's no reason to. Having residents south of the highway will give the area a 24-hour presense. Residents will demand police patrols, and will call the police if anything shady goes down. Without those resident guardians, the area becomes a no man's zone after dark.

As for the size of the park, India Point Park is plenty large enough as it is, and the proposal still calls for making it bigger with a 150' (100'?) zone between the water and the buildings. I find it interesting that when 100' is standing on end in the form of a building, it is perceived as a massive monstrosity, but when you lay 100' feet on it's side in the form of a park it suddenly becomes a vanishly small piece of real estate.

I don't understand why people couldn't wrap their brain around the idea of massing models. The three proposed towers are only what could happen, there doesn't need to be three, they don't need to be that tall, anything could happen. The fact is that land is private and the property owner can do whatever the hell they want within current zoning laws, instead of beating a build-nothing drum, people concerned with the park should be making sure that the developer is encouraged to build sensibly while maximizing his/her economic return.

[Cotuit]

Today's Journal

[Recchia]

"Raising the height of the buildings makes it even more canyon-like and creates more separation from the neighborhoods," said one speaker who would not give her name.

What's with people being afraid of heights? It's not like 300 feet would be a drastic new addition to Providence. I think it'd be cool to have tall buildings around 95, it'd make it alot more like driving down the Mass Pike into Boston.

Edited by Recchia, 05 May 2005 - 07:57 AM.

[billypc99]

Cotuit, last night would of been perfect to wear an urbanplanet.org T-shirt

[Garris]

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 10:20 PM, said:

I left at 8pm, I was tiring of the Fox Pointers whining about Fox's Point...  Really I wish they had just left the Fox's Point bit out of it. They could have just sent a memo to the mayor with their recommendations on it, then focused their energy on everything else, would have kept the Fox Point NIMBYs away and we could have actually talked about some important things, like the connections of the Promenade to Federal Hill and Downcity.

I'm actually going to e-mail their association and ask them to please take this issue to individual people and not clog future public forums like that. It was difficult for anyone to discuss anything else...

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 10:20 PM, said:

The first old bag that spoke about wanting to have trees along 95 instead of buildings was the best, I think if you were sitting near me you could actually hear my eyes rolling.  Yes let's put trees along 95 and all sit along the edge and watch the cars go by.

Yes, I knew we were in trouble with this comment, "Highways don't have to be ugly. They can be beautiful, if they have trees..." Oh, boy...

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 10:20 PM, said:

By far the most interesting, and important part of the presentation was the economic issues. I really wished that they had come right out and said the schools suck. The 25-34 year olds aren't leaving because there are no jobs, they are leaving because the schools suck, and there are no jobs because there are no talented 25-34 year olds here (present company in the 25-34 range excluded, of course).

After I'm guessing you left, someone specifically asked about the school situation, and they said that, of course, this is a problem for urban areas everywhere, not just Providence.

However, the difference in 25-35 retention was still quite dramatic still between Providence and the other New England cities...

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 10:20 PM, said:

I don't see how they think the Promenade will thrive without those connections... Before the presentation I asked Katherine about what their thoughts were regarding connecting the Jewelry District to Narragansett Landing along Allens and Eddy (the crossings under the relocated 195 interchange). She didn't have an answer. I thought that was why they were here. 

Agreed on all fronts, and I don't see why they don't get those things...

Cotuit, on May 4 2005, 10:20 PM, said:

Any idiot can redraw the streetgrid between the JD and Downcity, the difficult connections need the vision. She also said the Hospital had been asking about it.
The 195 land proposals weren't really any different than anything already proposed by the city and DOT. I understand this was a broad stroke kind of presentation and a first blush on an ongoing creative process. But again, any idiot can reconnect the streetgrid, any idiot can propose ground level retail with mised use upper floors, any idiot could propose tall buildings near the core getting smaller as you move out. The things I want to hear from planners is how to target development uses to create a vibrant streetlife and a good flow of uses throughout the city.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Also agreed. There was a real lack of creativity, vision, and imagination. I couldn't help but feel talking to them that they had a good "map" sense of the city, but not a great "on the ground" feeling.

- Garris

[ArtInRuins]

After reading all yur comments, I hope to go tonight (I missed yesterday) and get them to answer some of these specific questions. Height, density, open space, zoning, etc... Thanks guys. I think the City should just hire UP people to redesign the city.