Jump to content

PROPOSED: Conley Wharf

ArtInRuins

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply
CtownMikey Burg

CtownMikey

Posted
Posted

just curious how up to date that website is. IT LOOKS AMAZING.

ie:

"Patrick's Pier 1 Function Center

Occupying nearly 4,000 square feet on the top floor of Conley's Wharf and featuring a sixteen-foot high waterfall and massive fireplace, Patrick's Pier 1 Function Center will soon offer an unmatched setting for receptions, private parties, and special functions. Free, ample, secured parking, top level on-site catering, professional event planning assistance and the unique ambiance of entertaining up to 150 guests within the walls of this gem of industrial architecture are a guaranteed formula for a memorable occasion.

Current opening date: November 2005. "

I'm never around the area, just curious if this project is up to date and on time.

Cant wait to get home tonight so I can check the entire site out

Link to comment
Share on other sites
damus Burg

damus

Posted
Posted

It's probably been said already somewhere in this thread, but what about the areas around this project? Is there any real effort to get rid of the strip clubs and the industrial areas surrounding the project site? How many people would buy an expensive waterfront condo if they also have views of Cheaters and oil tanks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Garris Town

Garris

Posted
Posted

It's probably been said already somewhere in this thread, but what about the areas around this project? Is there any real effort to get rid of the strip clubs and the industrial areas surrounding the project site? How many people would buy an expensive waterfront condo if they also have views of Cheaters and oil tanks?

That's always been my feeling as well... It's a fantastic vision, but there needs to be a coordinated effort by the city to do something else around it.

I'd love to see something like this in the surface lot bordering Davol Square. Even better would be a comprehensive update of Allen's Ave, Providence Piers, and a development at Davol's lot. With those and the anticipated conversion of the power plant, the Eddy to Allen's Ave strip would impressive indeed.

- Garris

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oak Unincorporated Area

oak

Posted
Posted

currently that area is not zoned for a lot of that stuff, especially a hotel.

Also, this is the ONLY place in Providence that is zoned for this type of heavy industry. There are a lot of businesses and jobs along Allens that can only occur down here. There is no place to move these businesses within the city. In the past 2-3 years, companies have invested $millions down here since the shipping channels were finally dredged. Home heating oil and asphalt manufacturing aren't sexy uses, but no one can deny their utility to Providence and the region. These companies have made capital investments with the expectation that this area will stay marine-based industrial.

A coalition of companies along Allens is currently appealing the decision to allow artists to manufacture art in a multi-story warehouse building without a housing component on Allens and this is an allowable manufacturing use, but without a marine component.

It would take quite an effort to get this area rezoned for the uses proposed in these pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikeR Hamlet

MikeR

Posted
Posted

The project looks amazing, but I wonder if it is in the wrong place. When the present I-195 comes down, I wonder if this project would fit in better there rather than where it is being proposed? When the old power plant next to I-195 was demolished, it left a swath of undeveloped space abutting the Providence river. This proposal may actually be a better fit there. The part of Allens Ave. south of the barrier gate is really industrial and should probably stay that way. I'd hate to give up good-paying industrial jobs for lower-paying service jobs in the same location.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...
mental757 Burg

mental757

Posted
Posted

well, from a project standpoint - I say it should pass. If this was simply someone else's project there would little debate, which is why I think it should pass. Just my 2 cents...

BTW it says the $6.5M reno is almost done - anyone go by here that can snap a shot or two??

This is specifically important to me since it has implication on the ferry service and America Cruise Lines - both of which I'm hoping thrive and expand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gregw Hamlet

gregw

Posted
Posted

As far as this one project goes, I think it's fine to approve it even though Conley's got a pretty dubious track record. (Those artists better watch their backs.)

But I'm kind of skeptical about the whole idea of turning Allens Avenue into a glitzy tourism oriented theme park. I mean where are all these industrial uses going to go?

A lot of blue collar jobs and city tax revenue depend on industries like shipping, gas, marine services, asphalt, home heating oil, etc.

It might not be pretty but Allens Ave is Providence's engine room. Every city needs to have one and it has to go somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

Well, zoning would have to change considerably in order for Allens Ave to be all glitzy tourism. Currently there are no residential uses along the waterfront, save that one historic building for artists live/work. But, stranger things have happened. *wink*

something tells me conley has an in with the right people. badda bing badda boom, new zoning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jencoleslaw Town

jencoleslaw

Posted
Posted

something tells me conley has an in with the right people. badda bing badda boom, new zoning.

well,

oddly,

that was tried!

But the change in zoning was not approved. The way it was originally posed, one could have put a casino right down there without a variance, if i remember correctly. So it didn't pass as written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

well,

oddly,

that was tried!

But the change in zoning was not approved. The way it was originally posed, one could have put a casino right down there without a variance, if i remember correctly. So it didn't pass as written.

i've heard that one of his buildings actually is zoned for a casino.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jencoleslaw Town

jencoleslaw

Posted
Posted

i've heard that one of his buildings actually is zoned for a casino.

not along the waterfront. not unless it went thru zoning without anyone knowing. It was the folks at India Point Park who noticed the small print that would have allowed gaming on the water, and stopped it in its tracks. the zoning change was attached, originally to the zoning change for this project for the live/work space. Because the building that is being rehabbed was part of the Historic/Industrial and commercial ordinance, the zoning was able to be changed to residential by right of ordinance. the other--not so much. but i doubt that's the last we'll see of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

not along the waterfront. not unless it went thru zoning without anyone knowing. It was the folks at India Point Park who noticed the small print that would have allowed gaming on the water, and stopped it in its tracks. the zoning change was attached, originally to the zoning change for this project for the live/work space. Because the building that is being rehabbed was part of the Historic/Industrial and commercial ordinance, the zoning was able to be changed to residential by right of ordinance. the other--not so much. but i doubt that's the last we'll see of it.

i think that's the best place for a casino in the state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaveRPI Whistle-Stop

DaveRPI

Posted
Posted

allens ave isnt the harbor area as much as the field's point area is..

its mainly a couple docks and fuel depots

i think north kingstown would have been where most of this would have gone, but that project got derailed... save the bay has an emotional string they can play in this state when something like this comes up. instead of a black and white, bottom-line issue to decide it can become an emotional one. most people probably vote on emotions not on the facts because it is more palatable.

i can see both sides of the argument with moving this industry to a new place or keeping it there. its a tough decision and most decision-makers would probably not want to make it b/c it can really divide their votes. [environment vs economic vitality]... both are crucial to the future of the state... both also point to issues of interested parties' "visions of providence & RI" and it how compares with everyone else's visions...

i would liken the issue to when a business would need to undertake some risk for the greater growth of the company. some levels of risk are unacceptable, while some are acceptable.

the councilperson in question looks to place blame instead of providing for a solution. there's an old saying... "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.