PROPOSED: Ship Street Canal

[spanishboy]

i think the greatest achievements for human kind started as a "pipedream"... when all odds are agaisnt you, great things are done with great leaders. ( something PVD is lacking)

[Mij]

i think the greatest achievements for human kind started as a "pipedream"... when all odds are agaisnt you, great things are done with great leaders. ( something PVD is lacking)

I dont exactly have 10 million dollars to through at the reloctaeing of pipes, but I think as tax payers this makes all the sence in the world, "If you build they will come" I love the ship street canal and really hope that it becomes a reality

[Cotuit]

I don't understand why there is this thought that the Jewelry District won't be a good neighbourhood and won't be attractive to investors without this canal. Sure Venice is wonderful, but there are thousands and thousands of great neighbourhoods that aren't on the water (Federal Hill and Thayer Street being local examples). The backers of this proposal may be of the opinion that a lack of vision is standing in the way of it, I say a lack of vision on the supporters part is making this project seem necessary.

The Jewelry District is going to be the city's jewel with or without a canal.

[Garris]

The Jewelry District is going to be the city's jewel with or without a canal.

This seems to be a conventional wisdom and, I know I may sound like a party-pooper here, but I just don't see it. I think the 195 land has the potential to be the city's jewel, but the Jewelry District as currently constituted does zero for me. Its architecture isn't that interesting, its street layout (and condition) is a disaster, what little residential is already there is way overpriced, it has no retail core, and it's full of surface parking. It doesn't strike me like Westminster or Weybosset, a little historical urban jewel waiting to be reimagined, or like Thayer, Wayland, or Federal Hill, which are already established areas with the potentials to flourish even more than they already are.

What does everyone, as we head into 2006, see as the future of the Jewelry District area?

I think it's going to need serious planning...

- Garris

[gregw]

I have to disagree very strongly about its architecture.

Imperial Place is a beautiful location. The Brown Development office at the Phenix Iron Foundry as well as the Coro bldg offer a great contrast of early and late industrial architecture. The power plant as well as Heritage Harbor are awesome structures. I could go on but refer you to the AIA Guide to Providence Architecture by Mack Woodward or William Jordy's Architecture of Rhode Island, which both provide a lot of coverage of the district.

I see no problem with the street layout. It's largely an extension of Downcity

The problems with the area in my mind are:

1. Too much surface parking

2. Some bad renovation of existing bldgs using Dryvit.

Otherwise I think it's a wonderful area.

This seems to be a conventional wisdom and, I know I may sound like a party-pooper here, but I just don't see it. I think the 195 land has the potential to be the city's jewel, but the Jewelry District as currently constituted does zero for me. Its architecture isn't that interesting, its street layout (and condition) is a disaster, what little residential is already there is way overpriced, it has no retail core, and it's full of surface parking. It doesn't strike me like Westminster or Weybosset, a little historical urban jewel waiting to be reimagined, or like Thayer, Wayland, or Federal Hill, which are already established areas with the potentials to flourish even more than they already are.

What does everyone, as we head into 2006, see as the future of the Jewelry District area?

I think it's going to need serious planning...

- Garris

[Garris]

I have to disagree very strongly about its architecture.

Yeah, I can see what you're saying to a certain degree. The power plant is a Providence signature, the Heritage Harbor building is amazing, and Coro is very nice. But the whole thing doesn't come together as a neigborhood for me. It's almost suburban in that sense. You've got some great structures, but they're sitting in the middle of seas of surface parking, so collectively, there's no sense of place. Almost like a suburb in that sense.

Coro is a great example. The defunct Harvard Pilgrim did a fantastic job restoring that structure, but it's sitting surrounded on two sides by surface parking and a huge parking garage on a third side. As glorious as the structure is, it does nothing to contribute to any streetscape at all.

And for every Coro, there are 3-4 unremarkable brick boxes.

I think the Jewelry District, with great planning and sensitive development, can be wonderful, but not as it stands now. That's why I always liked the Ship St Canal idea. It would give the entire area a development focus and icon to build around.

- Garris

[gregw]

I don't understand why there is this thought that the Jewelry District won't be a good neighbourhood and won't be attractive to investors without this canal. Sure Venice is wonderful, but there are thousands and thousands of great neighbourhoods that aren't on the water (Federal Hill and Thayer Street being local examples). The backers of this proposal may be of the opinion that a lack of vision is standing in the way of it, I say a lack of vision on the supporters part is making this project seem necessary.

The Jewelry District is going to be the city's jewel with or without a canal.

The Jewelry District is a very successful area. In some ways, it's got more activity than Downcity. It's also got some real charm: Olga's, Imperial Place, and the Children's Museum. So it's not just one big brownfield that some people assume it is.

Back to Ship St. Canal: Providence has a number of attractively designed waterfront areas, all of which are to some degree underutilized. Point St Landing is a very nice waterfront setting designed by Bill Warner. Hardly anyone uses it.

Even Waterplace Park does not attract large numbers of people except for when there's Waterfire.

So we pay $10 million for Ship St. Canal and it will likely also be underused and, if anything, dilute the supply of already existing waterfront parks.

I think the city needs to encourage development near these parks and that will spur higher levels of usage. Right near the Ship St. Canal you've got SBER and Brian Fallon doing huge projects. These will hopefully inject the Old Harbor area with more activity.

Near Waterplace you've got GTech, Waterplace Condos, Capital Cove. These will also add activity and change Waterplace Park's often semi-deserted state now.

In terms of where the city should spend money on waterfront, I think it should be to clean up more rundown areas like the stretch of the Woonasquatucket through the Promenade and to maintain what already exists.

[mr2448]

I have to disagree very strongly about its architecture.

Imperial Place is a beautiful location. The Brown Development office at the Phenix Iron Foundry as well as the Coro bldg offer a great contrast of early and late industrial architecture. The power plant as well as Heritage Harbor are awesome structures. I could go on but refer you to the AIA Guide to Providence Architecture by Mack Woodward or William Jordy's Architecture of Rhode Island, which both provide a lot of coverage of the district.

I see no problem with the street layout. It's largely an extension of Downcity

The problems with the area in my mind are:

1. Too much surface parking

2. Some bad renovation of existing bldgs using Dryvit.

Otherwise I think it's a wonderful area.

We would not recognize the "Jewelry District" as it was a hundred years ago before the Manchester Power Plant. It was more related to Wickenden Street as far as structures are concerned. It was a heavily populated area of colonial structures(Benefit Street) and was tied into the nearby harbor. Bars, brothels, etc were there to make the life of a sailor more appealing. This area was one of the first redevelopment areas of Providence. It reinvented itself as the Jewelry District with Coro, Spiedel, etc. in the 10's, 20's and 30's.

I am in favor of the canal (property values are always higher on water) and any type of reconnecting to the Providence Harbor and River. Providence needs to face the sea again and Waterplace Park should be the beginning, not the end. This area should be tied into Narragansett Landing as far as planning is concerned.

I fully expect the downtown area to expand toward Allen's Ave and Narraganett Landing. I don't expect it in my lifetime. I would love to see a ferry dock (Seattle) and large ferry's crossing the bay as commuter vehicles. Large apartment structures should be overlooking the harbor (Vancouver). A parkway along the harbor (Boston). But to get all of this the job creation situation needs to improve, taxes decreased, etc.

Happy New Year all

Mark

[Cotuit]

If waterfront land in Providence was in such demand we would not see the surface parking behind Citizens sitting there with no proposal for development as we do now. With all that is happening in Providence right now, how can it be explained that these parcels sit as surface parking?

[gregw]

We would not recognize the "Jewelry District" as it was a hundred years ago before the Manchester Power Plant. It was more related to Wickenden Street as far as structures are concerned. It was a heavily populated area of colonial structures(Benefit Street) and was tied into the nearby harbor. Bars, brothels, etc were there to make the life of a sailor more appealing. This area was one of the first redevelopment areas of Providence. It reinvented itself as the Jewelry District with Coro, Spiedel, etc. in the 10's, 20's and 30's.

In what's now the Jewelry District industry was mixed in with residential going back to the mid 19th century. For instance, you have the Phenix Iron Foundry complex which stretched to the Providence River from Elm St. (the Machine Shop now houses Brown's Development offices) as well as Barstow Stove on Point St (now Tops Electric). Both of these date to 1840s.

There was a time not too long ago that you could still see a number of older houses (mostly pretty run down) scattered throughout the factories. Most have since come down for parking lots.

[Johnzo]

I think a greenway would be a better idea than a canal.

It's a more feasible option, from a cost and engineering standpoint, and therefore has a better chance of happening. The greenway could connect to the Ship Street Landing, and also serve a focal point/gathering area for this new neighborhood.

[damus]

I think a greenway would be a better idea than a canal.

It's a more feasible option, from a cost and engineering standpoint, and therefore has a better chance of happening. The greenway could connect to the Ship Street Landing, and also serve a focal point/gathering area for this new neighborhood.

That sounds like a reasonable idea... I'm really excited about the possibilities in the Jewelry District and hope they do something other than just turn it all into developable real estate. I love the idea of the canal, but I'd be happy with a greenway. Is there a master plan or timetable available to the public?

[Garris]

I'm really excited about the possibilities in the Jewelry District...

I'm not sure if I'm remembering this correctly, but I thought Thom Deller had said during the last UP gathering that some developers had approached the city brainstorming some really dramatic stuff, but that the Jewelry District Neighborhood group was very resistant to change and was advocating very conservative development and that the current landowners might be an obstacle to moving that entire area forward.

If I'm also correct from the Prov 2020 designs, isn't that canal area part of the park that's slated to go there?

- Garris

[damus]

I'm not sure if I'm remembering this correctly, but I thought Thom Deller had said during the last UP gathering that some developers had approached the city brainstorming some really dramatic stuff, but that the Jewelry District Neighborhood group was very resistant to change and was advocating very conservative development and that the current landowners might be an obstacle to moving that entire area forward.

If I'm also correct from the Prov 2020 designs, isn't that canal area part of the park that's slated to go there?

- Garris

Thanks for the info. I just checked out the design on Sasaki's site, the park seems a little small in my view, but what do I know. It'd be great if that area built up the density they threw into the rendering... also, I see they seem to be extending Memorial Blvd. down through the new area, I'm hoping they do something to make the newer portion more pedestrian-friendly. Maybe leave more space in the middle and line it with trees for aesthetics? That way people could cross half the road then safely wait for the walk signal or traffic to clear up on the other side.

I included some links below for any lurkers or other UP newbies who haven't seen them yet.

Sasaki's site -- contains decent rendering of Jewelry District site

Prov 2020 presentation

[PVDJack]

Thanks for the info. I just checked out the design on Sasaki's site, the park seems a little small in my view, but what do I know. It'd be great if that area built up the density they threw into the rendering... also, I see they seem to be extending Memorial Blvd. down through the new area, I'm hoping they do something to make the newer portion more pedestrian-friendly. Maybe leave more space in the middle and line it with trees for aesthetics? That way people could cross half the road then safely wait for the walk signal or traffic to clear up on the other side.

I included some links below for any lurkers or other UP newbies who haven't seen them yet.

Sasaki's site -- contains decent rendering of Jewelry District site

Prov 2020 presentation

I'd like to find some higher-resolution versions of the images (plans and renderings) included in Sasaki's presentation. The presentation images seem to be very low-res and immediately fall apart when I zoom in for any level of detail.

Has anyone come across higher resolution versions?

Thanks!

PVDJack

[damus]

I was looking the 2 sites over again and noticed that on page 3 of there were differences from a similar map of the overall project on Sasaki's site. In the pdf they proposed decking over 95 like in New Cities, and over in the Promenade district there is a very large extension to the existing park that even includes either a canal or unearthing of a sunken river. They also outlined the Armory district but I don't know what they had in mind for that area. On Sasaki's site, there is no decking over 95 and the park in the Promenade is considerably smaller. Given that Providence has supposedly less park land per capita than other cities, and that parks are a huge boost to property values, I surely hope the city can afford to do the former although my better judgement assumes the latter is the current proposal. Does anyone know which is closer to what Providence is aiming for?

[Cotuit]

I was looking the 2 sites over again and noticed that on page 3 of there were differences from a similar map of the overall project on Sasaki's site. In the pdf they proposed decking over 95 like in New Cities, and over in the Promenade district there is a very large extension to the existing park that even includes either a canal or unearthing of a sunken river.

Sasaki included a slide that was a combination of all previous planning efforts. That's what that was.