PROPOSED: Hotel Sierra (aka Sierra Suites)

[eltron]

You should all know that the City Council did something very important on Wednesday that will help the cause. The Downcity District Design Review Board was to "sunset" effective December 31. The Council called a special session and removed the sunset clause, leaving the Downcity Design Review in place.

Why is this important? Look at what is on the agenda of the (still functioning) Providence Downcity District Design Review Board hearing on January 09, 2006 at 04:30 PM....

132-134 Fountain Street - Commercial Buildings (Public Hearing)

Proposal to demolish two existing commercial buildings and to

construct a new 11- story hotel building with a parking facility. The

applicant is requesting approval of the proposed demolition and

Waivers of DRC Regulations for building setback and frontage

related to the new construction.

This will be held in the 4th floor conference room of the Planing Deparment, 400 Westminster Street.

The Review Board provides what will be the only opportunity for public coment. If you hate the proposed design, then make it a point to show up and speak up.

Thanks for the heads-up...

very interesting. It is clear that the Cuban Revolution bldg. on WASHINGTON will be demolished too...

maybe the plans have changed?

[ArtInRuins]

Thanks for the heads-up...

very interesting. It is clear that the Cuban Revolution bldg. on WASHINGTON will be demolished too...

maybe the plans have changed?

To be clear... 111 Fountain Street is the Fogarty Building. 132 Fountain is the old MacDonalds that Thom Deller referred to. Cuban is located at 125-143 Washington, but this is essentially the same block, which means to me that The Sierra Suites will go from Washington to Fountain Street (see image below). This is a bigger project than I thought.

What did Thom mention as the height of this project?

[polkadottts]

I have talked to Cogens some about thier move to south providence/cranston. They don't know the plans for thier old building- besides it being a hotel- but did mention that the facade on the building they were in would be restored- taking down the grey stucco stuff. They didn't know any plans for where Cuban and New Japan are.

[gregw]

I'm happy to hear that Mercantile Block (Cogens) is staying. It has handsome detail and is a fine presence on the street. It would fix up nicely with good windows and renovated storefronts.

I can live with the other structures coming down if they were to be replaced by something that was architecturally distinguished. But the rendering is pathetic in the extreme. It's hard to imagine a blander or more banal structure that would be better suited to Jefferson Blvd or Post Road.

I wonder who the developer is and why he/she would choose such a bonehead design from some hack architect in Wichita, KS whose specialty seems to be sterile exurban office parks. Like we don't have decent architects in RI/MA? What about Durkee, Newport Collaborative, etc?

This project should be DOA.

[eltron]

I think Cotuit hit the nail on the head in the first post:

there is plenty of vacant land available to put this crap - why tear down some rather nice older buildings?

The Sportsmans Inn is actually pretty nice.

There are at least FOUR surface parking lots bigger in area than this site within one block of this location that undoubtedly would be cheaper to acquire and build on...

which leads me to think the that the developer is already the owner of the Sportsman Inn. Either way, this proposal is not really good in any way. ick.

[gregw]

My understanding based on Thom's input is that the Sportsman's Inn is NOT coming down. It looks like the Cuban/New Japan bldg. and the McDonald's are the two that would be removed as well as the parking lot on the corner of Washington and Beverly.

If the design for the hotel is radically improved and the adjacent Mercantile Block gets rehabbed, this could be a good project.

[AriPVD]

Wrong wrong wrong.

The developer of the hotel (DiBattista and others) owns the adjacent parking facility as well as the cuban building, the Old McDonalds Building, the small parking lot and the Cogens Building. They don't own the Sportsman. All in all, I think it's not a bad proposal...it's just a horrifying design. The height doesn't bother me at all and Washington Street could desperately use the activity that this place will generate. Cuban and New Japan will hopefully find another home Downcity. With that said, if the design doesn't change this project could be a nightmare. Program and scale wise, it's a win IMHO.

[eltron]

Wrong wrong wrong.

The developer of the hotel (DiBattista and others) owns the adjacent parking facility as well as the cuban building, the Old McDonalds Building, the small parking lot and the Cogens Building. They don't own the Sportsman. All in all, I think it's not a bad proposal...it's just a horrifying design. The height doesn't bother me at all and Washington Street could desperately use the activity that this place will generate. Cuban and New Japan will hopefully find another home Downcity. With that said, if the design doesn't change this project could be a nightmare. Program and scale wise, it's a win IMHO.

Interesting...I guess my rampant speculation was way off. Oh well.

Still, I agree with you to an extent...I just question both the design and the need for another BIG hotel project at the expense of some smaller, interesting and contributing buildings (really on the Cuban Rev. one). I would much rather see the huge lot next to the Strand built up. That said, it wouldn't be awful with a MASSIVELY improved design.

[AriPVD]

One more thing...

I think this debate is emblematic of a huge issue in Providence which we just now see rising to the surface...what to do (or not do) with historically "contributing" buildings which are not necessarily of any historic value on their own. I'm of the school of thought that we sometimes need to sacrifice these buildings to allow a new, dynamic layer of the city rise above the old. Wholesale clearance is obviously a horrible idea, but I think we can easily overstate the value of a relatively insignificant little brick building like the cuban revolution building. The most interesting streetscapes have a well thought out mix, in my opinion.

Also, getting rid of one more surface parking lot is a victory, no matter how small. I agree, I'd love to see the ProJo lot (next the The Strand) developed but you can't just magically pick and choose which one is developed. It's all about who owns the property, who has the money, etc. Sometimes I think there's a general naivete/idealism as to how things are developed where. Am I off on this?

[eltron]

I'm of the school of thought that we sometimes need to sacrifice these buildings to allow a new, dynamic layer of the city rise above the old.

Sometimes I think there's a general naivete/idealism as to how things are developed where. Am I off on this?

I would certainly agree that sometimes a building has to be sacrificed to create something more "dynamic" and better, but often times, the new development is far, far below that level, thereby wasting something that contributed much more to its context. From a purely physical and aesthetic standpoint, the OneTen West. tower does this. Sierra Suites does not.

As far as your last comment, I think that is what this message board is more or less all about. I don't think there is much naivete involved, maybe a little idealism, but hardly naivete. Someone saying they would rather see something happen one way over another without regard to "how things are developed [where]," as you put it, does not necessarily qualify as naivete.

Would you like to explain to everyone how things are developed where? I think everyone here would be interested to get a primer on this...

[BBascule]

One more thing...

I think this debate is emblematic of a huge issue in Providence which we just now see rising to the surface...what to do (or not do) with historically "contributing" buildings which are not necessarily of any historic value on their own.

The building that houses "Cuban" might not be historically "contributing," but it is the best part of the fabric of Washington's streetscape. It's the initimacy of these smaller lots that have made Providence what it is. To continue to break up these smaller units and replace them with larger multi-lot structures dramatically changes the complexion of the city.

Extreme care should be taken as the downtown core faces increasing pressure to deal with this kind of development.

[Garris]

Interesting, interesting, interesting stuff everywhere here. There's LOTS of meat in this issue, and it's emblematic for lots of upcoming Prov development issues... First, my two cents:

1 - The general proposal:

I agree with Ari 100% on most of what he said. I think the rough parameters of the proposal, what it is, where it is, are fine. Let's develop those empty spaces one parking lot at a time...

2 - The building where New Japan and Cuban are located:

No huge loss. I was just thinking the other day that it's a "sacrificable" building. I was scared this was the Mercantile at first. Glad it's not...

3 - The loss of New Japan and Cuban:

Huge. They essentially are Washington Street's retail anchors and its street life. I'd like to see some street retail in the new proposal, if possible... The only area in which I disagree with Ari is that I have yet to see a single hotel in any city I've ever been in contribute to a neighborhood's street life...

4 - The current design:

Bad, bad, bad... An elongated airport parking lot hotel. It might as well be the Dulles Airport Springhill Suites... And you've got to love the parking entrance next to an existing parking entrance. A good, what, about 40-60 feet of straight parking garage entrances on the streetscape? And only 11 floors? It won't even be taller than the Biltmore. I'd love to see some kind of design that even mildly attempts to replicate a row-like facade like the rest of the streetscape.

The design review is January 9th? I'll be there. Time to speak out and stop this "architecture" before it gets any further.

- Garris

[gregw]

The building that houses "Cuban" might not be historically "contributing," but it is the best part of the fabric of Washington's streetscape. It's the initimacy of these smaller lots that have made Providence what it is. To continue to break up these smaller units and replace them with larger multi-lot structures dramatically changes the complexion of the city.

Extreme care should be taken as the downtown core faces increasing pressure to deal with this kind of development.

I think this is a valid point. You start to erode the sense of place that characterizes Downcity. I can see the occasional old bldg being sacrificed for what stands to be a new landmark like 110. But most of what is likely to be built is unlikely to be viewed as superior to what it replaced. The proposed Sierra Suites is a case in point: as it is now it represents a big step down from what already exists.

There's also bound to be some debate about the relative importance of different buildings. Obviously the Arcade, Tilden Thurber, and the Superman Bldg are landmarks.

But what about the Cogen Bldg or the somewhat shabby commercial blocks on the other side of Washington?

They may not be landmarks but they add character and variety to the street. A friend of mine who is from CA saw Washington St and was reminded of a film noir. Do we really want to lose that look and replace it with a look suggestive of anywhere USA? I think that even the plainest old buildings downtown should only be removed with very careful consideration.

Same holds true for industrial buildings. Providence still has a lot of mills and factories. Some are architectually important (the Foundry, Phenix Iron Machine Shop, the Power Plant). Others are more humdrum. But even these second ones help to establish the city's urban fabric and sense of the past. It's Providence's quality of authenticity and the way that the past seems to persist into the present that has made it such a hot commodity.

[eltron]

I think this is a valid point. You start to erode the sense of place that characterizes Downcity. I can see the occasional old bldg being sacrificed for what stands to be a new landmark like 110. But most of what is likely to be built is unlikely to be viewed as superior to what it replaced. The proposed Sierra Suites is a case in point: as it is now it represents a big step down from what already exists.

There's also bound to be some debate about the relative importance of different buildings. Obviously the Arcade, Tilden Thurber, and the Superman Bldg are landmarks.

But what about the Cogen Bldg or the somewhat shabby commercial blocks on the other side of Washington?

They may not be landmarks but they add character and variety to the street. A friend of mine who is from CA saw Washington St and was reminded of a film noir. Do we really want to lose that look and replace it with a look suggestive of anywhere USA? I think that even the plainest old buildings downtown should only be removed with very careful consideration.

Same holds true for industrial buildings. Providence still has a lot of mills and factories. Some are architectually important (the Foundry, Phenix Iron Machine Shop, the Power Plant). Others are more humdrum. But even these second ones help to establish the city's urban fabric and sense of the past. It's Providence's quality of authenticity and the way that the past seems to persist into the present that has made it such a hot commodity.

Very well stated, gregw, and I completely agree.

[Jerry2]

I think this is a valid point. You start to erode the sense of place that characterizes Downcity. I can see the occasional old bldg being sacrificed for what stands to be a new landmark like 110. But most of what is likely to be built is unlikely to be viewed as superior to what it replaced. The proposed Sierra Suites is a case in point: as it is now it represents a big step down from what already exists.

There's also bound to be some debate about the relative importance of different buildings. Obviously the Arcade, Tilden Thurber, and the Superman Bldg are landmarks.

But what about the Cogen Bldg or the somewhat shabby commercial blocks on the other side of Washington?

They may not be landmarks but they add character and variety to the street. A friend of mine who is from CA saw Washington St and was reminded of a film noir. Do we really want to lose that look and replace it with a look suggestive of anywhere USA? I think that even the plainest old buildings downtown should only be removed with very careful consideration.

Same holds true for industrial buildings. Providence still has a lot of mills and factories. Some are architectually important (the Foundry, Phenix Iron Machine Shop, the Power Plant). Others are more humdrum. But even these second ones help to establish the city's urban fabric and sense of the past. It's Providence's quality of authenticity and the way that the past seems to persist into the present that has made it such a hot commodity.

You hit the nail with the hammer there. No one wants to object to sensible development here, but this project will ruin the character of Washington Street. Where wil Cuban Revolution , New Japan, and the bar relocate? All 3 have been staples Downcity for some time. They have to be doing O.K. Is there some agency that will help them relocate? Or will they be forced to move outside the city to accomodate some sprawling suburban style development that does absolutely NOTHING for the streetscape!

[anthonypolitelli]

http://www.providence.edu/About+PC/New+Ini...uites+Hall.html

is it me or does this new proposal share many physical simularities with the newly built Suites at PC?

[Cotuit]

When Thom Deller mentioned this in the height thread he said it would be 180-200. This was a couple months ago so that was probably very early specualtion.

I think the Kansas based architect probably comes from the fact that this is a chain, and they have one firm that does all their work. This is indeed something that could be seen along any highway anywhere because it comes from and architect whose job it is to design buildings that go along any highway anywhere.

There's no doubt that if this project doesn't fall into line it can be blocked. Simply don't allow them to condemn Beverly Street, that seems to be an important component of the proposal. Of course, not allowing them to condemn Beverly may force them to build higher, no complaints from me on that respect.

I'm less appauled by this knowing that the Cogens and Sportsman's buildings won't be going, but this is still a travesty of design, and will remove what little streetlife Washington currently has going for it (New Japan and Cuban Revolution and Talk of The Town).

Now is the time when the city needs to begin flexing it's muscle. It's clear that developers want to be hear, it needs to be made clear to the developers that they need to play by our rules. Unfortunately, right now we don't have any rules. I think there's a pretty wide consensus (and not just among the people who post here) that we want to save remarkable buildings, encourage and save interesting street life, and not see bad design replace our historic fabric. A hotel lobby and parking garage replacing 3 of the only viable businesses on one of our most important arteries is not the direction we should be going in.

I fully understand the parameters that drive what gets developed where. These people own this block and want to develop it, and it needs developing. I think the building that New Japan is in is worth saving. The remaining surface parking, the lot cleared by the removal of the McDonald's building, and the condemnation of Beverly Street leave plenty of room for this development, and allow it to be built taller and on a smaller footprint more in keeping with the scale of Providence.

My question is, who owns the civic center garage? Can this hotel's garage not be accessed via the civic center garage? Do we need to have a new garage entrance? If they must have a seperate entrance, I say put it on Fountain Street.

[gregw]

You can check out what the other Sierra Suites hotels look like here:

http://www.sierrasuites.com/hotel_tour/tou...tour=alpharetta

I'm cautiously optimistic that this plan won't be able to materialize as it is now. The Planning and the Downcity Review Commissions are full of people who, I think, would also frown on this proposal.

Does anyone have any contact with the new head of the Preservation Society? They're now as into promoting good urbanism as saving old buildings.

[Garris]

You can check out what the other Sierra Suites hotels look like here:

http://www.sierrasuites.com/hotel_tour/tou...tour=alpharetta

Most of their hotels look like they are in suburban strip mall hells... That's certainly what Fishkill, NY is all about. I think this is their first "urban" branch.

Interestingly, their designs, except for the hotel basics, don't share many similarities. There seems to be no Sierra Suites "look."

I would like to see a much taller version of their Napa, CA site:

Thoughts?

- Garris

[Cotuit]

You can check out what the other Sierra Suites hotels look like here:

http://www.sierrasuites.com/hotel_tour/tou...tour=alpharetta

I was unable to get on their site last night, it was like they knew I was talking smack about them or something.

I would like to see a much taller version of their Napa, CA site:

Thoughts?

The stuff on their site didn't leave me feeling much better, though the Texas one (I forget which *suburb* it was) at least had a look about it that made me believe it was designed to be in style with the area.

I didn't see the Napa one. It doesn't look half bad, gives me some hope. I would much prefer that the Cuban Revoluion building stay, after that (ignoring the travesty of a rendering for a moment) the side-by-side garage entrances are the worst part. That can't be allowed to happen.

[CtownMikey]

I would like to see that at one of providence's corner with retail and restaurants.

I hate our rendering

[AriPVD]

I certainly didn't mean to suggest that I/developers know where things should go better than anyone else. IN FACT, its pretty obvious that all of us on this board show more sensitivity and understanding of Providence than most developers who invest in the city.

I only meant that sometimes (since I was little) hear people say "well they shouldn't put that here, they should put that there." I always wondered who "they" was. Suffice to say I'm 22 and I still haven't figured it out. But...I do know that cities are unique places and each site in a city has its own unique constraints and individual owners. Sometimes development happens in one site not because it is the perfect or best site but because the stars aligned at the right time. That's simply what I meant.

[AriPVD]

Oooh one more thing...

I don't know about you guys, but I walk down Washington Street at least 5 times a day. I can tell you it is not a pleasurable experience. Even if the streetscape has decent segments (and large gaps), the pedestrian experience will not improve unless surface lots are built on and existing buildings are reanimated. AS220's project will go along way towards that.

As Garris noted, Cuban & New Japan give Washington any semblance of life. With that said, it is rarely a pleasurable experience to walk down Washington.

[Frankie811]

This project seemed to come out of nowhere and hit many of us like a ton of bricks. I'm curious as to how this all came about. Suddenly, without any media announcement, we have knowledge of a hotel proposal for downcity, with renderings no doubt.

[gregw]

Oooh one more thing...

I don't know about you guys, but I walk down Washington Street at least 5 times a day. I can tell you it is not a pleasurable experience. Even if the streetscape has decent segments (and large gaps), the pedestrian experience will not improve unless surface lots are built on and existing buildings are reanimated. AS220's project will go along way towards that.

As Garris noted, Cuban & New Japan give Washington any semblance of life. With that said, it is rarely a pleasurable experience to walk down Washington.

Washington St could use some help. No doubt about it. So they're taking out one of the few good things on the street instead of dealing with the bad. Pretty damn frustrating.