COMPLETE: The Old Public Safety Surface Lot

[Baines]

the EDC recently updated their description of this project:

was:

"development of a 500,000 s.f., 22 story office tower, 522 space parking garage, 25,000 s.f. reatil"

now:

"development of a 500,000 s.f., 20 story office tower, 325,000-350,000 s.f. office space & parking garage for 440 cars."

nothing earth shattering, just though to pass on the update...

[mental757]

Hopefully, TPG website will have details soon.

[Cotuit]

The RIEDC information is only as good as the person collecting and compiling it. I wouldn't depend on it for being the most up-to-date on a project like this that is changing month-to-month.

[f1rehead]

From the Zoning Board of Review Public Notice for the 2/27/07 session:

PRI XIV, L.P.: 197 Fountain Street a/k/a 16 Empire Street (bounded by

Greene Street & Broadway) Lots 116 & 436 on the Tax Assessor’s Plat

25 located in a Downtown D-1 Zone and the Downcity Overlay District,

to be relieved from Sections 502.5, 502.5(A), 502.5(D), 502.5(E) and

502.5(F). The applicant is requesting a dimensional variance and

proposes to demolish the existing building located on the

aforementioned property prior to the Providence Downcity Design

Review Committee approval of plans for new construction citing

safety and security concerns related to maintaining the existing

vacant building. The applicant further seeks relief in order to utilize

said property for the transitional use of surface parking. The lots in

question together total approximately 40,441 square feet of land area.

[jencoleslaw]

no.no.no.no.no.no.no.no.no.no. NO!

[Frankie811]

The Procaccianti Group is trying to obtain from the Zoning Board of Review approvals to raze the former police and fire headquarters at LaSalle Square, a move that would bypass the regular approval process and circumvent an appeal lodged by several local groups against the project.

http://www.projo.com/ri/providence/content...SQ.14d97ac.html

[jencoleslaw]

gee, there's a surprise. Why don't they just take it down on a saturday? You guys all make fun of me and my consipiracy theories, but this is how business is done in Providence, and it is WRONG. I guess what is surprising to me is that the Journal actually reported it. Folks wonder why the neighborhood groups are often so rabid? THIS is why.

[inProv]

gee, there's a surprise. Why don't they just take it down on a saturday? You guys all make fun of me and my consipiracy theories, but this is how business is done in Providence, and it is WRONG. I guess what is surprising to me is that the Journal actually reported it. Folks wonder why the neighborhood groups are often so rabid? THIS is why.

[Frankie811]

There must be an awfull lot of money to be made on surface parking. Low taxes, eh. And I'm trying to picture how the fa

[jencoleslaw]

never say never.

[Frankie811]

Glad to see that this developer's tactics are being publicized, which makes a "Saturday morning masacre" a little less likely.

[jencoleslaw]

There must be an awfull lot of money to be made on surface parking. Low taxes, eh. And I'm trying to picture how the fa

[Frankie811]

who cares if it is expensive?

[webbage]

who cares if it is expensive? I mean, honestly, if we keep allowing the least expensive options in order to placate developers who know how to work the system, we will continue to get the cheapest developments which cut corners, and continue to tear apart the city emotionally and physically. It seems to me that me that it is most certainly possible to try to make amends with neighborhood and advocacy groups by coming to compromise about these sorts of things, but if you're a develper, why would you bother when you can just make end runs around the law?

[runawayjim]

frankly, i don't think we should be blaming TPG unless they start illegally demolishing the building. if ZBR allows them to go around the normal means of obtaining the permit, then we should be upset with ZBR and scrutinize their activities. i don't blame TPG for wanting to save themselves money.

[Cotuit]

Maybe I'm missing something here but it seems that TPG scheduled a MEETING, it didn't start destroying the building illegally...

[mental757]

why can't they build the 'seperate' (from the article) parking garage and glass roofed retail sections and then build the tower later???

[Frankie811]

why can't they build the 'seperate' (from the article) parking garage and glass roofed retail sections and then build the tower later???

[Cotuit]

why can't they build the 'seperate' (from the article) parking garage and glass roofed retail sections and then build the tower later???

[jencoleslaw]

TPG didn't 'schedule a meeting." they got on the docket at ZBR to avoid not just the DRC but the HDC and the CPC and the planning department, and the pending action by the neighborhood and preservation groups. You can spin it any way you like and cast aspersions on unpaid boards and commissions from here til next tuesday but they are trying to tear down this building and make it into a parking lot until they can come up with a design that the city will approve. I thought we all were on the same page here regarding "tear down first, turn into parking lot, design later" business?

[runawayjim]

TPG didn't 'schedule a meeting." they got on the docket at ZBR to avoid not just the DRC but the HDC and the CPC and the planning department, and the pending action by the neighborhood and preservation groups. You can spin it any way you like and cast aspersions on unpaid boards and commissions from here til next tuesday but they are trying to tear down this building and make it into a parking lot until they can come up with a design that the city will approve. I thought we all were on the same page here regarding "tear down first, turn into parking lot, design later" business?

[gregw]

TPG didn't 'schedule a meeting." they got on the docket at ZBR to avoid not just the DRC but the HDC and the CPC and the planning department, and the pending action by the neighborhood and preservation groups. You can spin it any way you like and cast aspersions on unpaid boards and commissions from here til next tuesday but they are trying to tear down this building and make it into a parking lot until they can come up with a design that the city will approve. I thought we all were on the same page here regarding "tear down first, turn into parking lot, design later" business?

[brick]

Or, even worse, they will do like Paolino and put up a parking lot which will remain a parking lot for years to come. Look at the lot on Matthewson behind the skinny building on Washington where Downtown Liquors is. Paolino got approval to knock down a bldg with the idea that he would soon build on the lot. That was something like 10 years ago and it's still a parking lot.

[Cotuit]

I will fault the developer for not being nice. I won't fault them for trying to work our failed system. If we had rules in place that said, a building could not be torn down for surface parking, that there is no such 'temporary use' as surface parking, then we wouldn't be dealing with this nonsense. But I can't fault capitalists for trying to maximize the profit on their property if they see that their is a way for them to do so, and in this city, with our current regulations, there most certainly is a way to do so.

The city has to streamline it's approval processes, it has to ensure that it's unpaid board members understand the rules, regulations, and laws that are in place, that they understand their own role in the process, and that they understand how the process as a whole works. In my limited visits to various regulatory authority meetings, it has become clear that the process is murky even for those charged with carrying out the process. The city also needs to nail down the laws to ensure that there are no cracks that developers think they can worm through to push through their agendas that run counter to the wishes of the residents of the city.

All that said, TPGs story about the building being unsound and unsafe is bull. If they can get some regulatory board to buy that story, or if our regulations have enough holes in them to allow this lame story to slide through, then shame on us.

[Cotuit]

A) A plan in place for the new building, including a schedule

B) That schedule should have major milestone phase gates. Groundbreaking, Subgrade work completion, structure completion, building opening.

C) Each of these phase gates should carry strict penalties if the dates are missed. Obviously major issues (like if the site becomes a SuperFund site because they find a shattered oil tank underneath the building or something) would allow some wiggle room here.