
Rendering of lower portion of proposed “tower” in parking lot. Note, next door, the Samuel Lewis House, also known as the Thomas A. Doyle House for the city mayor who lived there.
The Downtown Design Review Committee met a couple of days ago to consider applications to demolish a couple of buildings on Chestnut Street and Richmond Street in the Jewelry District. I looked them up to see whether I should be concerned. They all seemed to be expendable: not so old, not so appealing.
On the principle that any demolished building is certain to be replaced by something worse, these buildings should probably all be preserved. But that would require a shift in ideals by a city that has lost its way and is unlikely to go with anything other than what would be worse. No campaign to save them or change city policy is likely to succeed.
Above is a Google street view of 151 Chestnut – a parking lot, or so it seems. On either side of the lot are buildings that probably displaced earlier buildings more attractive than what are there now. The heart aches at the thought of what was demolished to make way for this parking lot. The little house built in 1825, unseen off to the side next to the building to the right of the lot, but visible, although distorted, in the rendering (just below) of the proposed tower, seems to be where former Providence Mayor Thomas Doyle lived. His memory may account for its survival, and its immunity from the developers of the residential tower proposed for next door, which went before the DDRC for the latest design examination this week.
According to the Providence Business News, the proposed 12- (cut to 10) story residential tower destined for that parkiing lot was further downsized and presented again last month. The new proposal is down to five stories and down to 21 units from 138 in the initial proposal. It is now without the ground floor commercial space previously announced in 2019, which was granted several six-month extensions for covid and other reasons, possibly including opposition from locals, who rightly opposed even its latest shrunken five stories. At Monday’s meeting it was apparently delayed yet again.
PBN quoted an employee of ZDS, the cheesy local design firm that seems to have taken Providence by storm (and is responsible for the tedious hotel on Parcel 12 next to Kennedy Plaza). Scot R. Woodin described the architects’ so-called “analysis” as follows:
When designing the structure, which features mostly two- and three-bedroom apartments, Woodin noted they had done a “contextual analysis” of the surrounding area that features several historic buildings to understand what would be most appropriate for the site. However, the goal was not to replicate a historic building, but to introduce something more contemporary.
“Something more contemporary”? In historic Providence? Huh? Well, of course! Historical character be damned! Why do something admirable instead of something regrettable! Downright ugly if possible! Obviously, the “contextual analysis” had no meaning whatsoever. It was just a way to make members of the design panel feel good before they usher another piece of Providence into oblivion.
Maybe the proposal will go away, as it apparently has a couple of times already. That’s what all of these pesky proposals should do. It seems, unfortunately, as if another such proposal, the Brown medical building proposed for 261 Richmond St., is destined to move forward. Sad. Since it is dedicated to “science,” it is, typically, a building ugly as sin.




This is an absurd stance to take, a residential building, no matter how ugly, is always preferable to a parking lot. Providence needs growth and housing.
Also, the idea that any building demolished will be replaced with something worse is just inherently false. Whatever your peculiar thoughts on architecture aside, it has certainly not been getting ever worse. Many buildings from the 70s and 80s are much below the style of newer buildings.
LikeLike
Of course the glass corners of the “science building” are actually rather anti science, in that glass is ill suited for a building’s corners where the structural stresses are the greatest.
LikeLike
Both proposals look dystopic as you would expect from the current so-called architectural profession.
LikeLike
Nimby-ism and Yimby-ism in one Sentence.
LikeLike
Dopey designs of little effort seem to be the norm. Sad for Providence and Rhode Island existing with this sad state of architecture. I support good and great design of all genres, but the supposed contemporary design of today is as bad or worse than the awful postmodernism style of the soon-to-be-empty Hasbro building in downtown Providence. Our rich heritage deserves much, much better.
LikeLike
Did not realize the post was anonymous. I wrote it, Kenneth J. Filarski FAIA, LEED FELLOW
LikeLike
Yes, Ken, that Hasbro building is an interesting precursor to today’s mess. At least the postmodernists knew there was something way wrong with architecture. Dopey indeed!
LikeLike
As strange as it may seem, sometimes I think it’s good that Ron is not here to see the destruction of the Renaissance City. He’d be so disappointed.
LikeLike
I think there may be a lot of people who would join you and Ron in your dystopic fears for Providence. Hope you are well, Rosalie.
LikeLike