PROPOSED: Vista Della Torre

[jencoleslaw]

This might seem off topic but bear with me. Was the petition to abandon Barclay Street ever approved?

[Cotuit]

Are we sure Seth Yurdin voted against this?

[JimmyGreaves]

So a CPC review and recommendation is required for street abandonment but not an approval? I assumed that CPC approval was needed for abandonment.

Are we sure Seth Yurdin voted against this?

[Cotuit]

So a CPC review and recommendation is required for street abandonment but not an approval? I assumed that CPC approval was needed for abandonment.

[runawayjim]

I am opposed to your plan completely...I support the plan as proposed. Taller is the way to go to start the movement towards the Downcity of more tall towers.

[JimmyGreaves]

My point about Barclay Street (putting aside the Public Works Committee's approval) which gives me hope about Bradford Street is this. Same type of development was proposed at the parcel encompassed by Barclay and Stewart. The developer wanted Barclay abandoned in order to accomodate the development. Barclay is a street which is much less utilized than Bradford. And yet, WBNA and one abutting business owner was able to convince CPC to not approve the petition to abandon. If the tire business that Cotuit mentioned was not in favor of Bradford being abandoned will oppose on the record and enough people show up and give comment, in my opinion, there is a good chance that our public officials will swayed by the argument to not grant the petition to abandon so that this development can be altered in a positive way for Federal Hill and the city.

[Cotuit]

My point about Barclay Street (putting aside the Public Works Committee's approval) which gives me hope about Bradford Street is this. Same type of development was proposed at the parcel encompassed by Barclay and Stewart. The developer wanted Barclay abandoned in order to accomodate the development. Barclay is a street which is much less utilized than Bradford. And yet, WBNA and one abutting business owner was able to convince CPC to not approve the petition to abandon. If the tire business that Cotuit mentioned was not in favor of Bradford being abandoned will oppose on the record and enough people show up and give comment, in my opinion, there is a good chance that our public officials will swayed by the argument to not grant the petition to abandon so that this development can be altered in a positive way for Federal Hill and the city.

[basachs]

My point about Barclay Street (putting aside the Public Works Committee's approval) which gives me hope about Bradford Street is this. Same type of development was proposed at the parcel encompassed by Barclay and Stewart. The developer wanted Barclay abandoned in order to accomodate the development. Barclay is a street which is much less utilized than Bradford. And yet, WBNA and one abutting business owner was able to convince CPC to not approve the petition to abandon. If the tire business that Cotuit mentioned was not in favor of Bradford being abandoned will oppose on the record and enough people show up and give comment, in my opinion, there is a good chance that our public officials will swayed by the argument to not grant the petition to abandon so that this development can be altered in a positive way for Federal Hill and the city.

[quente]

this project throws away all the rules of a good urban development. it has absolutely zero interaction with the street, makes a laughable attempt at a park and ground floor retail, cuts off an important north-south artery (one of only a few 2 way streets connecting broadway and atwells), puts a mental blockade for pedestrians on federal street (which are plentiful, even though it's nothing but empty parking lots there now), and it's height, while i don't have an issue with height, would be like putting the new westin tower on federal hill, dwarfing all the downtown buildings.

[Liamlunchtray]

Death to Benicio Del Chicken! This project sucks on all possible levels. That is my intelligent and well crafted viewpoint.

[runawayjim]

Well said Jim!

That paragraph summarizes the problems with this project in a succinct and articulate way. If you don't mind, I think I'll use it as my script when I talk to John Lombardi about this project!

[quente]

• • CPC provides an advisory opinion on street abandonments. Whether the process has been subverted or not is open to debate. The problem is no one in the city is actively looking into this.
    • Since the abandonment of Bradford Street is a petition and not an ordinance, the City Council only needs to vote on this once, not twice as I had previously stated. The next City Council meeting is July 5th - I suspect this will be on the agenda. Here's a corrected diagram:

      CPC and Public Works > Public Works Committee of City Council > City Council

    [*]In answer to Cotuit's question, when the Public Works Committee approved the abandonment, they did not record individual votes - the motion was simply seconded and passed. The members of the committee are: Leon Tejada, Chair; Balbina Young, Vice Chair; Michael Solomon; John Igliozzi and Seth Yurdin.

    [*]The motion for air rights over Federal Street was not taken up by the Committee and has been continued. Since the Committee doesn't have regularly scheduled meetings (the chair calls a meeting when he feels it's warranted), it's unclear when or if the air rights issue will be reviewed. I'm not sure what the significance of this is - perhaps they don't need that approval?

    Please contact your council members and urge them not to approve this abandonment. There has been limited public comment on this and even less consideration given on the consequences of this partial abandonment.

    Thanks.

[runawayjim]

does the mayor have to sign off on the abandonment or does he get a veto?

[JimmyGreaves]

Well said Jim!

That paragraph summarizes the problems with this project in a succinct and articulate way. If you don't mind, I think I'll use it as my script when I talk to John Lombardi about this project!

[Mothra]

Councilman Lombardi came out strongly against the abandonment of Barclay Street. He had a letter read into the record at the CPC meeting. I would hope he would be equally supportive of you and others who would advise against abandoning Bradford Street

[Cotuit]

Was that letter submitted to the City Council Committee which then voted to approve abandonment?

[quente]

I'm hearing Councilman Lombardi withdrew the letter from the City Council Committee. But I wasn't there so I can't confirm that.

[JimmyGreaves]

I heard the same thing.

It would appear that all the CPC meetings, DPD assessments and public opinions amount to little when compared to the considered opinion of a single council member who happens to have a project in their ward. That, coupled with unrecorded votes that allow council members to hide behind the actions of the committee and not assume responsibility, helps perpetuate a parochial system of government.

[yossarian]

I heard the same thing.

It would appear that all the CPC meetings, DPD assessments and public opinions amount to little when compared to the considered opinion of a single council member who happens to have a project in their ward. That, coupled with unrecorded votes that allow council members to hide behind the actions of the committee and not assume responsibility, helps perpetuate a parochial system of government.

[Lone Ranger]

I am opposed to your plan completely...I support the plan as proposed. Taller is the way to go to start the movement towards the Downcity of more tall towers.

[Baines]

And do you know what, Baines? If you think about it, for those of us who support height, as both you & I do, it makes no sense to endorse a project of this nature. Because as you already know, people in our metro area are very suspicious of tall buildings. They seem think of tall buildings as intrusive, standoffish, imposing, arrogant, threatening, etc. And in such a case as this proposal, they would be exactly right. A fortress. In the middle of our city. No benefit at all, but rather a hassle to those who live around it.

If this developer is allowed to build his proposal, he'll make himself a buck or two, but beyond that he'll accomplish nothing. He'll only be reinforcing the negative image that folks around here have of tall buildings. And in that case, we won't see more tall buildings being built in Providence, as you & I would both like, because adamant neighborhood opposition will continue to quash one proposal after another.

[quente]

If the Council failed to record the votes of individual members, that is a clear violation of the Open Meetings Law:

[runawayjim]

Well said.

I wasn't going to articulate my full position on the matter so I appeared as giving my unconditional support for the project. I do substantially agree with you (and others) and concede that it is a monster.

But am 1) concerned that blanket opposition will kill the project and 2) believe very surgical/detailed oppostion relative to the currently proposed street/placement/streetscape/connection....without resisting the height....is the best strategy.

I know that this would be better placed at 55 Broadway, LaSalle Square, or on the Weybosset/Westminster corridor (filling one of the many vacant lots) but it will serve to 1) keep momentum for developers to build more and 2) help create the western edge of a plan (??) to fill in down to the Financial District.

Do we want to kill a relatively ugly goose and lose a major project that will - once complemented with other developments further east - add to PVD's great urban asset?

That is my take (vision).

[Cotuit]

But am 1) concerned that blanket opposition will kill the project and 2) believe very surgical/detailed oppostion relative to the currently proposed street/placement/streetscape/connection....without resisting the height....is the best strategy.

[spanishboy]

You're assuming the developer has the intention of following through with this plan as proposed.