195 Commission Reaches Out, and Listens (Maybe)–Architecture Critic Morgan

195 Commission Reaches Out, and Listens (Maybe)–Architecture Critic Morgan

Something out of character has happened to the 195 Commission, the organization in charge of developing the recovered land along the Providence River. This body, with an imperious attitude and a paucity of professional training, is listening more to its neighbors and even seeking advice. As a result, the Commission has a chance to offset its dog’s breakfast of mediocre urban design with improved projects for the remaining undeveloped parcels under its stewardship.

 

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

 

To date, the Commission’s clunky, transactional planning process has produced uninspiring structures in the Innovation District that under different leadership could have been transformative. Now, neighborhood pushback has been so severe that the Commission is no longer able to ignore its critics. As Sharon Steele, President of the Jewelry District Association, says, “The Commission’s reputation is in the tank,” and their ability to shape the area without input from the citizenry and design professionals “is over!”

Too easily dismissed as East Side preservationists with a NIMBY chip on their shoulders, people from all over the city have demanded that the 195 Commission be more accountable. In seeking to hold this powerful but untrained cabal to the highest standards, the Commission now has an adjunct advisory panel that includes Brown university architect Craig Barton, architect Jack Ryan, and Emily Vogler, professor of landscape architecture at RISD. Furthermore, at the urging of Fox Point resident Lily Bogosian, the commission agreed to allow the neighborhood associations of the Jewelry District, Fox Point, and College Hill to each be represented by a professional architect or planner.

 

 

Two current projects, the apartments for Parcel 2 on Water Street and the Food Pavilion in the park across the pedestrian bridge, show how the protests over the high-handed methods and unenlightened aesthetics of the 195 Commission have already borne fruit. The Commission agreed to several concessions on the apartment development and has demonstrated some willingness to be more flexible on the siting on the restaurant.

The Parcel 2 land should not be developed at all, in my opinion, or certainly not under the current commissioners. Nevertheless, the forces for better design have declared that Urbanica, the chosen developer, will be held to high standards. And already the formerly tone-deaf Commission has agreed to some reasonable demands.

 

 

The Urbanica design is the best proposal of three–one senses that the Boston design firm has an architectural language beyond the typical developer schtick that the Commission has favored.  Nevertheless, their apartment block needs considerable refining and some outright changes, so the final appearance is far from set. Concerns about the building’s bulkiness have already resulted in lowering the overall height; reducing the commercial space floor height from 13 to 8 feet will also mitigate the building mass. Ground-level passageways will flow through the building, and there is discussion about tweaking the brick and terra cotta wall coverings. Neighbors have asked the Commission for traffic and shadow studies.

The advisory panels will also be consulted and may have an impact on the design of the Food Pavilion. The Commission thoughtlessly waited until the last moment to solicit comments from the public on the four firms selected for consideration, but they did post-hour-long interviews with each candidate online (195district.com/Pavilion/). Given the Commission’s track record of selecting a humdrum design, it is encouraging to note that two of the firms under consideration, Architecture Research Office of New York and our own 3SIX0 Architecture, are first rate. 

A recent GoLocal article on the Food Pavilion questioned both the location of the restaurant and restrooms and the Commission’s process for securing a developer. The Request for Qualifications seemed nothing more than “a perfunctory trolling of the usual developers.” Design quality was not a goal, and the RFQ absurdly separated siting and landscape from design. But in the interview, ARO questioned the location of a 4,000-square-feet, single-vendor building, when something like a series of small, movable kiosks might be more appropriate.

 

 

The outcomes of both Parcel 2 and the Food Pavilion will be much improved by continued discussion and in consultation with professional advisors. Such transparency and collaboration have long been overdue, and the results will far more rewarding for neighbors, the 195 Commission, and the city.

 

William Morgan has been GoLocal’s architecture critic for more than five years.