PROPOSED: WATERFRONT PARK

[Magellan98]

Call me wishful, but I would love to see something akin to Rittenhouse Square in Philadelphia come out of this park. Rittenhouse square is about as simple of a design that I could imagine for a park, yet it is the life-blood of the neighborhood. For a Providence park to acheive this, we will need to have development bordering the park on the three non-waterfront sides. Imagine a number of medium to high rise buildings (a mix of residential, hotel, and some office with street level cafes and restaurants, perhaps a book store) encasing a simple park with trees, benches, and a small public gathering area - maybe a small New York City-esque dog run. It is sooo much more important that the park be active throughout the day than having slick designs. And we don't need a major street cutting it off from the surrounding buidlings!

[Cotuit]

Just wanted to point something out from another thread:

Future Ship Street Landing:

That's May 8th, 2005. We were talking about this park that JDA was so 'surprised' about almost a year before it was officially announced. Quelle surprise!

[damus]

Is anything going to happen with that INS office?

[Frankie811]

Is anything going to happen with that INS office?

The City of Providence has offices in that building also.

[Cotuit]

Is anything going to happen with that INS office?

Dynamite!

[eltron]

Dynamite!

Oh yeah!

[Thom]

Is anything going to happen with that INS office?

Think 200 (190) Dyer Street. 200+ foot office building.

[damus]

Think 200 (190) Dyer Street. 200+ foot office building.

Really? So where's the INS going to go?

[Frankie811]

Really? So where's the INS going to go?

The INS already has another office on Westminster St downcity. For several years now, so I don't know if they'll consolidate.

[DavidSegal]

I think a lot of the JDA's concern about the proposed park follows from their support of the Ship St Canal project on this site.

I know some of the history, but not all of it. I do find it a really attractive project. (And one that increases density, encourages commerce, use of the waterfront, and so on. And I think it does something to provide a counterexample to the idea that the JDA is just a bunch of NIMBYs.)

Thom, or anybody -- what are the major obstacles to this project? We'd obviously need to secure funding, but the price tag isn't super-high, and my understanding is that the congressional delegation has expressed some interest. A TIF seems like a possibility, or funding some of the work through the expected subsequent increased sale prices of DOT's adjacent land. But I've heard that there'd need to be a new enviro impact study, and that that could have broader ramifications.

[Mij]

I think a lot of the JDA's concern about the proposed park follows from their support of the Ship St Canal project on this site.

I know some of the history, but not all of it. I do find it a really attractive project. (And one that increases density, encourages commerce, use of the waterfront, and so on. And I think it does something to provide a counterexample to the idea that the JDA is just a bunch of NIMBYs.)

Thom, or anybody -- what are the major obstacles to this project? We'd obviously need to secure funding, but the price tag isn't super-high, and my understanding is that the congressional delegation has expressed some interest. A TIF seems like a possibility, or funding some of the work through the expected subsequent increased sale prices of DOT's adjacent land. But I've heard that there'd need to be a new enviro impact study, and that that could have broader ramifications.

just so i can follow this, are you asking what is the obstacles for the park itself or for ship street canal. If its the canal i know that an enviornmental impact study would have to be done and that would prevent the DOT from finishing the IWAY project.

[DavidSegal]

just so i can follow this, are you asking what is the obstacles for the park itself or for ship street canal. If its the canal i know that an enviornmental impact study would have to be done and that would prevent the DOT from finishing the IWAY project.

I'm wondering about the canal obstacles. I've heard that an EIS would hold everything up, but am wondering why, and who makes that decision. What would it take for this not to be the case? Like if the relocation were completed, the land opened up sat idle for 5 years, and then we decided to do the canal, I assume we wouldn't need to do a new EIS.

[Cotuit]

I think it has mostly to do with the current EIS being based on no changes to the river. Make a change to the river banks, and you have to start all over. A canal would be a large change to the environment. Especially a dead end canal. How would it not be stagnant?

[Cotuit]

Design teams envision a park built along Rte. 195 waterfront. Twenty-three teams are entering a city competition for developing a design for the 6-acre park. [ProJo.com]

[Griswald]

Design teams envision a park built along Rte. 195 waterfront. Twenty-three teams are entering a city competition for developing a design for the 6-acre park. [ProJo.com]

Hmm, it's strange that they mentioned William Kite architects, seeing as the teams are supposed to be anonymous, not linked with any professional firms or anything. And they withdrew because of a lack of professionalism?? That's garbage. I entered the competition because I thought it would be a great experience for me, and because it offered a chance to play an active role in Providence's urban renewal.

Regardless of the way the competition is run, I think it's great that it was opened to the public in the first place. How many other places offer a similar opportunity?

[Cotuit]

I entered the competition because I thought it would be a great experience for me, and because it offered a chance to play an active role in Providence's urban renewal.

That's cool you entered, hopefully we can hear some of your ideas at some point...

[mental757]

griswald - best of luck with the competition - either way, I'm sure many of us would like to see what you came up with!

[f1rehead]

Hmm, it's strange that they mentioned William Kite architects, seeing as the teams are supposed to be anonymous, not linked with any professional firms or anything. And they withdrew because of a lack of professionalism?? That's garbage. I entered the competition because I thought it would be a great experience for me, and because it offered a chance to play an active role in Providence's urban renewal.

Regardless of the way the competition is run, I think it's great that it was opened to the public in the first place. How many other places offer a similar opportunity?

I heard that many of the firms withdrew for the same reason. Apparently (I haven't seen it), the terms of the competition do not guarantee that the winning entrant will be involved in the construction or that the winning design will be built as presented. I think there are other reasons as well, but I'm as I said not that familiar with it. Those stipulations may be fine for some people, but not if you're trying to run a firm and maintain a reputation.

It's odd that Kite was singled out since I know there were several firms that also sent letters and withdrew.

[Cotuit]

I heard that many of the firms withdrew for the same reason. Apparently (I haven't seen it), the terms of the competition do not guarantee that the winning entrant will be involved in the construction or that the winning design will be built as presented. I think there are other reasons as well, but I'm as I said not that familiar with it. Those stipulations may be fine for some people, but not if you're trying to run a firm and maintain a reputation.

Of course there's no guarantee that the winning design will be built exactly as submitted. Aside from the fact that the design is mearly a suggestion from the city to RIDoT who will be funding and building the park (though my understanding is RIDoT is ready to do what the city suggests), the winning design will also be subject to public review, and there will invariably be cost issues that come up between the submission of the design and the actual construction.

As far as I can tell, the guidelines for the competition were upfront about these issues, it would be extremely naiive for anyone to think their design is going to go from paper to construction unchanged.

As far as reputation, aren't all designers in all fields working for clients? The clients have input on the design and some of the client's decisions go against the advice of the designer.

[f1rehead]

Of course there's no guarantee that the winning design will be built exactly as submitted. Aside from the fact that the design is mearly a suggestion from the city to RIDoT who will be funding and building the park (though my understanding is RIDoT is ready to do what the city suggests), the winning design will also be subject to public review, and there will invariably be cost issues that come up between the submission of the design and the actual construction.

As far as I can tell, the guidelines for the competition were upfront about these issues, it would be extremely naiive for anyone to think their design is going to go from paper to construction unchanged.

As far as reputation, aren't all designers in all fields working for clients? The clients have input on the design and some of the client's decisions go against the advice of the designer.

That's all true, but I can imagine some people would have a problem with their design being built without them. My understanding (and again, this is all secondhand - I have no direct knowledge of the situation) is that the winner of the competition could be excluded completely from the design changes and construction. To me, that sounds pretty unprofessional so I tend to agree with the sentiment expressed by the firms.

[runawayjim]

That's all true, but I can imagine some people would have a problem with their design being built without them. My understanding (and again, this is all secondhand - I have no direct knowledge of the situation) is that the winner of the competition could be excluded completely from the design changes and construction. To me, that sounds pretty unprofessional so I tend to agree with the sentiment expressed by the firms.

my guess is when you enter, you sign something that says you give up rights to the design after you submit it. obviously griswald woudl know better since he entered...

[xine]

Of course there's no guarantee that the winning design will be built exactly as submitted. Aside from the fact that the design is mearly a suggestion from the city to RIDoT who will be funding and building the park (though my understanding is RIDoT is ready to do what the city suggests), the winning design will also be subject to public review, and there will invariably be cost issues that come up between the submission of the design and the actual construction.

As far as I can tell, the guidelines for the competition were upfront about these issues, it would be extremely naiive for anyone to think their design is going to go from paper to construction unchanged.

As far as reputation, aren't all designers in all fields working for clients? The clients have input on the design and some of the client's decisions go against the advice of the designer.

Well, that's exactly the point - there's a give and take that needs to happen, and to explicity exclude the winning firm from participating in the process is what's unprofessional, not that the original idea is followed precisely. Architecture is as much about the rigor of follow-through as the original idea.

For the record some of the firms that I have heard are boycotting for the same reasons include Lerner Ladds Bartels and Fredriech St. Florian, plus the RI American Institute of Architects' board has formally protested.

It's one thing to ask for a competition to be done on a pro-bono basis - that's clear up front - and quite another to take the ideas, say thank you very much, and shut them out of the more substantial process which occurs as a give and take between the client, the users, the technical constraints, and additional design.

It's pretty easy to take a great idea and completely sabotage it - just look at Leibeskind's original design idea for the Freedom Tower vs. SOM's current scheme.

Also, the competition guidelines explicitly say that the winning design will be built, and this is not just an "ideas" competition. If this is really an ideas competition - great! Let's have everyone participate, not just architecture and engineering firms. The technical constraints are not that daunting. But they've restricted it to professionals and are promising to build the design that is submitted, so what's the problem with keeping them on the job?

I see this as RIDOT's fault and not the city's, since RIDOT has complete authority to hire the winner as an adviser during the construction document process or not.

[Nolli]

The Waterfront Park Competition website says that semifinalists will be announced tomorrow (Aug. 1).

http://www.providenceri.com/government/waterfront/

However, the original submission deadline was extended a week, so the jury decisions might also be delayed. I am curious about how many entries were ultimately received. Hopefully there will be some good ones, although most architects/designers that I know did not enter for the reasons already discussed.

I also understand--on good authority--that some of the jury members also had issues with the guidelines and requirements of the competition, so I hope that their comments will be published along with their decisions.

[Cotuit]

Finalists to be Announced in the Waterfront Design Competition

Mayor David N. Cicilline will announce the finalists in the Waterfront Design Competition on Wednesday, September 20 at 10 am at the Roger Williams Park Casino. A public comment period will begin immediately, and residents will have an opportunity to view the designs at the Roger Williams Park Casino on the following dates: Wed, Sept 20, 11 am until 8 pm; Thurs, Sept 21, 8:30 am until 8 pm; Fri, Sept 22, 8:30 am until 4:30 pm; and Mon, Sept 25, 8:30 am until 8 pm.

[provid]

someone is going to have to take pictures...