PROPOSED: OneEleven Fountain (Fogarty Bldg.)

[jencoleslaw]

I wonder if an NEA grant was secured for it.

Or maybe KC has an x% for arts program.

[quente]

i wonder how much that cost!

[Cotuit]

PDX has that. Do we have anything like it?

[mental757]

here is a briefing on what the plan is from the Proc Group website:

http://www.procgroup.com/development/dev-fountain.html

[Griswald]

here is a briefing on what the plan is from the Proc Group website:

http://www.procgroup.com/development/dev-fountain.html

[runawayjim]

here is a briefing on what the plan is from the Proc Group website:

http://www.procgroup.com/development/dev-fountain.html

[Cotuit]

That description is their old plan to renovate the existing structure, which they have scrapped (unless they changed their mind again). The rendering on that page is a rendering of a new parking garage with ground floor retail which was proposed for the site and universal panned by the DRC. It's fugly!

Seems TPGs site is bogged down due to the Newport news, all the formatting was shot when I looked at it.

[Frankie811]

The Procaccianti Group has revised its plans for the vacant John E. Fogarty Memorial Building on Fountain Street. http://www.projo.com/ri/providence/content...JQ.367e4a2.html

[Frankie811]

Ya gotta luv this line from the story above. Maria Ruggeri, president of the Downtown Neighborhood Association, said that her group would support the projects as they moved through the approvals process

[runawayjim]

this quote is interesting...

The building would have a pre-cast brick skin similar to the Westin Hotel, and three separate facings, to give the appearance that it is three separate buildings, and not one big parking garage. It would feature roughly six ground-level retail stores on Fountain and Sabin Streets, and six stories of parking above.

[Keelia]

I found it curious that they decided to break the building up visually so that it reads as 3 smaller buildings. This is a fine technique when the pattern of density is that of smaller, tightly packed buildings. But for the proposed location, this building will be surrounded by larger, bulkier structures. It's not a contextual design decision.

Also, I believe they are proposing an indoor public space - akin to the privately owned public spaces in NYC. But Providence doesn't have the same need for that type of space that NYC does. If anything, we need to be attracting activity outside, not trying to usher it indoors. I have a feeling that the indoor space, given time, will first be desolate, and then privatized. Not that there is a thing wrong with privatized indoor space - and this one looks as if it will be very pleasant But let's just call it what it will ultimately end up being: another indoor arcade/mall.

[brick]

I found it curious that they decided to break the building up visually so that it reads as 3 smaller buildings. This is a fine technique when the pattern of density is that of smaller, tightly packed buildings. But for the proposed location, this building will be surrounded by larger, bulkier structures. It's not a contextual design decision.

[Keelia]

I think one of the advantages they might get from this technique is that the building will look less like a parking garage, kind of like the library garage with all of the books.

How well they pull it off is another story.

[mental757]

well, on the density/height side of things, it sounds pretty good; going from 3 to 7 stories. The city does need parking too, so for now, it sounds OK, but yes, I'd like to see the design too...

[JJK5]

So are they going for a design like this one that someone posted earlier in this thread?

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...st&p=613374

[matt]

I found it curious that they decided to break the building up visually so that it reads as 3 smaller buildings. This is a fine technique when the pattern of density is that of smaller, tightly packed buildings. But for the proposed location, this building will be surrounded by larger, bulkier structures. It's not a contextual design decision.

Also, I believe they are proposing an indoor public space - akin to the privately owned public spaces in NYC. But Providence doesn't have the same need for that type of space that NYC does. If anything, we need to be attracting activity outside, not trying to usher it indoors. I have a feeling that the indoor space, given time, will first be desolate, and then privatized. Not that there is a thing wrong with privatized indoor space - and this one looks as if it will be very pleasant But let's just call it what it will ultimately end up being: another indoor arcade/mall.

[matt]

I'm not really thrilled about that pre-cast brick stuff. Don't we have enough of that downtown? If it's going to be garage space, there must be something more clever they can do with that exterior.... please?

EDIT:

I know they want it to "fit in" with the existing area (although, brutalist is what it is by not fitting in), but pre-cast seems more like mimicing downtown/exchange area more than fitting in with some of the finer styles of downcity.

[Cotuit]

I found it curious that they decided to break the building up visually so that it reads as 3 smaller buildings. This is a fine technique when the pattern of density is that of smaller, tightly packed buildings. But for the proposed location, this building will be surrounded by larger, bulkier structures. It's not a contextual design decision.

[Keelia]

Excellent point Keelia, and welcome to the group!

[Cotuit]

I'm not really thrilled about that pre-cast brick stuff. Don't we have enough of that downtown? If it's going to be garage space, there must be something more clever they can do with that exterior.... please?

[mental757]

I think the designers have more to be concerned with from all the 'opposition' type groups that what they (or any of us) really would like to do. I mean between the city regs, the historical minded folks, and then the neighborhood groups, we wonder why it has to have 3 facades???

I'M frustrated for them for crying out loud.

Again, lets make it as difficult as possible for someone to develop an old, currently non-contributing building as possible - geesh.

I just get so annoyed at the snails pace to get anything done in RI!!

OK, rant ended, continue normal discussion...

[jencoleslaw]

i suspect that much of the "opposition" has been about having a solid, good design BEFORE tearing down the building and potentially leaving a big f*cking hole in the middle of the city. I don't think too many people are in love with that building, but what they want is for developers to actually do the work of designing something useful and beautiful (or beautiful and useful) before applying for demolition permits. The idea that you can walk in without any plans, and tear down a building downtown is repugnant and unacceptable to many, myself included. It may not be a high profile parcel compared to Empire at Broadway or Waterplace park, but it is downtown and that, by its very address, makes it pretty high profile in my book and personally i will fight to save that fugly building if it means that at NO TIME will it ever be a surface parking lot.

[Keelia]

i suspect that much of the "opposition" has been about having a solid, good design BEFORE tearing down the building and potentially leaving a big f*cking hole in the middle of the city. I don't think too many people are in love with that building, but what they want is for developers to actually do the work of designing something useful and beautiful (or beautiful and useful) before applying for demolition permits. The idea that you can walk in without any plans, and tear down a building downtown is repugnant and unacceptable to many, myself included. It may not be a high profile parcel compared to Empire at Broadway or Waterplace park, but it is downtown and that, by its very address, makes it pretty high profile in my book and personally i will fight to save that fugly building if it means that at NO TIME will it ever be a surface parking lot.

[runawayjim]

So is the problem the lack of a cohesive process, the ambiguity of the process or failure to enforce the process - or some combination thereof? I'm a little new to the scene here...

[whTnxT]

i suspect that much of the "opposition" has been about having a solid, good design BEFORE tearing down the building and potentially leaving a big f*cking hole in the middle of the city.....

I didn't read in the ProJo that they proposed to demolish Fogarty before getting permits.....

For more information on "leaving a big f*cking hole in the middle of the city", go to the Grant's Block thread.