Another Misstep From the 195 Commission – Architecture Critic Morgan

Monday, December 20, 2021

Will Morgan, Architecture Critic

Why does almost everything that the I-195 Commission touches turn out to be architecturally second rate? How long will Providence continue to suffer from an agency that has failed to provide design leadership for a hugely significant piece of downtown development?

 

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

 

It is painfully apparent that the plans to create a spectacular innovation district were hampered by unenlightened vision. Having had the boldness to remove a scarring interstate highway from the riverfront, the city then lost courage and allowed business-as-usual piecemeal development of mostly mediocre hotels, offices, apartments, and parking garages. Furthermore, the idiocy of the proposed Fane Folly should have erased all doubt that the 195 Commission had any clue about how to inspiringly shape a city.

One exception to the clown school planning process is the pedestrian bridge over the river (although that was not without embarrassing glitches that could have been avoided by fewer political considerations). Now the commission has requested qualifications from architecture and engineering firms to build a 4,000 square feet, $2.8 million building grandly labeled the Innovation District Park Food & Beverage Pavilion. The inappropriate location of the proposed service structure is at the western approach to the pedestrian bridge.

Given the tremendous popularity of the bridge–the jewel of the jewelry district, one has to ask, what sort of fuzzy thinking would locate restrooms-cum-hot dog stand right at the entrance to the bridge?

The much-needed public restrooms were set for Parcel 14, right behind Brown’s Office of Information Technology at 220 Dyer Street. The foodservice operation was to occupy the oddly shaped of that parcel, a potentially scenic spot for dining. Mysteriously, the qualifications solicitation issued by the commission has relocated the food and beverage facility right down in the heart of the park’s open space, as well as in the middle of the sightline toward the bridge and College Hill. Do we, the citizens and taxpayers, get to know the reasons behind the change of venue? Or, perhaps it is just another instance of ineptitude?

 

 

Even if the food and drink structure were a beautifully designed architectural object, this scheme has it in the wrong place. The pedestrian bridge is a real asset, but this pavilion’s placement will diminish the value of the beloved signature piece of the riverside renewal. The building needs to be something special, a jewel box, something to write home about. It demands a sensitive architect to design it.

 

 

Instead of an open competition, for example, that might attract national attention, the RFQ hardly seems more than a perfunctory trolling of the usual developers. And it is unclear whether qualifications are accepted only from architects in Rhode Island, or if the commission could cast its net over a wider area. Design quality does not seem to be the goal, despite the boilerplate claim that they are seeking “striking architecture that will create a new landmark.” The commission has its own engineering firm and restaurant consultants (are we aiming for a food truck or a Michelin-rated dining establishment?). In declaring that respondents should “exclude landscape architecture” from their response, the commission is further limiting designers.

 

 

An impediment to the commission’s realizing its goal of “creating an active and vibrant open space,” is that it is composed of presumably well-meaning public servants who are not trained to design cities. The commission is comprised of lawyers, businesspeople, a casino operator, and a medical school professor. How can there not be members from the design professions, such as architects, landscape architects, urban planners, engineers, and preservationists? (What kind of advice does the commissioners’ architectural consultant from Boston give Providence? Is he window dressing, or does he offer sound advice that goes unheeded?)

It seems unlikely that we can get elevated design for a “highly visible public amenity” from the I-195 Commission, given their faltering, lowest common denominator track record. A magnificent opportunity to reshape an important part of Providence into a truly creative capital was traded for numbing mediocrity.

Most of the larger parcels bear the mark of the commission’s everywhere-and-anywhere aesthetic, so we cannot afford to let the remaining open parts be developed under its aegis. Providence must demand a better, more-design-oriented planning for the 195 land. It is time for the 195 Commission to be expanded with design professionals or disbanded.

 

 

William Morgan has a degree in the restoration and preservation of historic architecture from Columbia. He taught in the School of Urban Studies at the University of Louisville.

Related Articles

• Deja Vu All Over Again: Friendship Apartments–Architecture Critic Morgan
• Can Wickenden Street Remain Funky? – Architecture Critic Morgan
• St. Michael’s, South Providence Landmark, Dominates the Landscape–Architecture Critic Morgan
• Goodbye Green, Hello Asphalt: The Death of Metacomet Golf Club–Architecture Critic Morgan
• Is the Port of Providence the Best it Can Be?– Architecture Critic Morgan
• Assault on Wayland Square – Architecture Critic Will Morgan
• A Century of Jewish History: Lincoln Park Cemetery–Architecture Critic Morgan
• Is Hope Street the Perfect Urban Main Street? – Architecture Critic Will Morgan
• The Antidote to the Seaside McMansion – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Arrivederci Atwells: The Decline of Federal Hill–Architecture Critic Morgan
• Inspired Contemporary Design in Little Compton – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Rethinking Newport’s Open Space–Architecture Critic Morgan
• A New Domestic Style for Our Cheap Age–Architecture Critic Morgan
• A Resting Place for All: North Burial Ground – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Parcel 2: More Junk From the I-195 Commission – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Narragansett Brewery: Fox Point Winner – Architecture Critic Morgan
• The Beatrice Hotel Embraces Downtown – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Cathedral Square: Hideous Present, Glorious Future – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Townie Pride: East Providence High School – Architecture Critic Morgan
• Richmond Residences, Another Downtown Insult: Architecture Critic Morgan
• Can Architecture Save Providence?–Architecture Critic Morgan
• Hudson, NY: Successful, Small-Scale Revival–Can Providence Learn From It? Architecture Critic Morgan
• Affordable Housing Can Be Good Design–Architecture Critic Morgan
• The Mauling of Thayer Street: Architecture Critic Morgan
• A New License Plate for Rhode Island – Architecture Critic Morgan

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.