Jump to content

PROPOSED: OneEleven Fountain (Fogarty Bldg.)

Cotuit

Recommended Posts

bhooley Whistle-Stop

bhooley

Posted
Posted
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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 435
  • Created
  • Last Reply
mental757 Burg

mental757

Posted
Posted

I agree that there should be a solid design in hand and approved before any demo can take place. I just scoff at all the directions designers (who are working for people who want to develop/improve/build Providence I might add) are pulled in to come up with a design that everyone can agree to. The historical groups want the building saved regardless of the style, new urbanists want density and smart use of space with interaction with surroundings, etc., others want specific designs that match the rest of the city!

I'm just pro-development in general and I think it is sometimes silly what we as RIers do to these folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cotuit Megalopolis

Cotuit

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don't think that TPG has ever proposed to use the Fogarty site as temporary parking at any time, they seem to be eager to demolish then build immediately. Now the Old Public Safety Complex is a different story. They've come right out and said they plan to use that as temporary parking until such time as they are ready to build E@B. With them proposing to spend a billion bucks in Newport, I think we should not be waiting around for them to build E@B (I'm not saying E@B is dead, just that they may no longer be as eager to get it built).

In order to get a demo permit (properly) a building permit must be issued first. This means an approved design must be done. Neither the Fogarty nor the Public Safety site yet have approved designs and therefore cannot get building permits. The Public Safety site has a provisional approval for demolition, meaning the DRC approves of the plan to demolish the building and the general proposal to replace it. However they have not given final approval on a design, nor final approval for demolition.

What we should have is no such 'temporary use' as surface parking. That should not be an option. You want to tear down a building, don't expect to be making money off the vacant parcel as parking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mental757 Burg

mental757

Posted
Posted

your missing my point - I never said I was for rt 2 Warwick, I want standards, just less red tape and an understanding that every special interest group isn't going to get thier way...

I don't think that TPG has ever proposed to use the Fogarty site as temporary parking at any time, they seem to be eager to demolish then build immediately. Now the Old Public Safety Complex is a different story. They've come right out and said they plan to use that as temporary parking until such time as they are ready to build E@B. With them proposing to spend a billion bucks in Newport, I think we should not be waiting around for them to build E@B (I'm not saying E@B is dead, just that they may no longer be as eager to get it built).

In order to get a demo permit (properly) a building permit must be issued first. This means an approved design must be done. Neither the Fogarty nor the Public Safety site yet have approved designs and therefore cannot get building permits. The Public Safety site has a provisional approval for demolition, meaning the DRC approves of the plan to demolish the building and the general proposal to replace it. However they have not given final approval on a design, nor final approval for demolition.

What we should have is no such 'temporary use' as surface parking. That should not be an option. You want to tear down a building, don't expect to be making money off the vacant parcel as parking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
runawayjim Metropolis

runawayjim

Posted
Posted

i'm confused by 2 things... the first is why there are so many review boards for so many different things. can't we do away with half of them and let 1 or 2 handle everything with more frequent turnover over of members? i'm saying this as someone who doesn't know a thing about what each of the various boards does.

the second thing i'm confused about is TPG... they got the westin right (and managed to get the garage to not at all look like a garage), they got the hilton right (even if it took time)... why can't they get these other 2 buildings right?

as for the garage at fogarty... i think it can serve a purpose. being between downcity and the dunk and convention center, it will take a lot of those cars. i just hope the pricing is set so that we don't see "event parking, $20" on a sandwich board by the entrance. i think if they undercut the pricing of all the other garages and lots, they could do quite well and force the others to lower their prices. while a garage would be better on grant's block, this one is only 2-3 blocks away. i am glad that they're going 2 floors taller, even if it is just more parking. and i still think the 3 facade styles could make it look cool, especially if at least one of them mimics the current fogarty building.

i also agree on the retail thoughts posted here... no new mall-type space. they should be retail spaces that fill the building and have entrances to the street.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jerry2 Hamlet

Jerry2

Posted
Posted

I happen to agree w/ Jencoleslaw even if she has me on ignore and can't wait till I "disappear" off this forum. While I don't plan on marching in any protest, downtown Pvd is looking and sounding more like downtown Hartford in the boom of the 80's when all sorts of structures were razed for speculative development. Decades later, they are left with acres of parking lots. From accidental holes like the Downcity Diner fire to the speculative holes left in the wake of 110 and Grants Block, any other buildings being razed would be a crime. I still think that the city can't get a grip on the "fairly recent" positive press over the last few years and has no comprehensive plans for the future that would entail long term growth and sustenance. The city still has the mentality that any "hint" of investment is positive and I think that mentality is what is setting itself up for long term failure much like Htfd did in the 80's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mental757 Burg

mental757

Posted
Posted

Thanks Cotuit, I think you summed my frustration in better words than I did!!

I also think that TPG has earned a bit longer of a leash with RI development than say Buff Chase or Paolino. Thats why I'm not too worried about this site and E@B. Thinking back, isn't it ironic that:

E@B got scaled down at what was probably about the same time BCBS shifted thier interest to INT II

The new BCBS HQ looks fairly similar to the early E@B design

E@B will move forward when TPG has a client tenant in hand.

I think 111 Fountain will be a good fix shorter term to ride the wave of the Dunk renovations and the Hilton conversion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.