Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't get it. Parcel A is not supposed to have more than 4 stories- presumably so the view will not blocked, but now it's Ok for the view to be blocked? What the heck do we have this commission for if they won't enforce the guidelines they're supposed to be enforcing? Wonder where the parking is- that doesn't look like much parking.
The building itself is not bad- at least from the water side- wonder what the 'back" looks like which appears to face South Main st???? It reminds me of the Thomas Graves Landing Condos overlooking the Charles near the Cambridgeside Galleria Mall.
I checked this parcel 1A out yesterday. It is where Williams St meets S Water. It may be the only parcel in the 195 district to directly border the river. The area is now open park space with a boardwalk at the river's edge. No view will be blocked as there is a 6 story building already across the street (situated between S Water and S Main). Very narrow lot. It will just barely fit a typical two rooms across from each other with hallway in between hotel design. Artist's rendering shows the public boardwalk would remain giving people linear river access.
Actual building construction has started on the Homewood Suites hotel which is at the corner of Burnside Park. Concrete is being poured. Construction is also ongoing for the two residential complexes on Canal Street. Some lanes were blocked on Canal and it appears that this space is currently being used for on site construction worker parking. If that is primary reason why they are blocked off, I am not a fan of that practice.
I checked this parcel 1A out yesterday. It is where Williams St meets S Water. It may be the only parcel in the 195 district to directly border the river. The area is now open park space with a boardwalk at the river's edge. No view will be blocked as there is a 6 story building already across the street (situated between S Water and S Main). Very narrow lot. It will just barely fit a typical two rooms across from each other with hallway in between hotel design. Artist's rendering shows the public boardwalk would remain giving people linear river access.
That's good- important not to block views- esp. water views. Look what happened in Fall River.
I assume this is tongue in cheek, but plenty of couples do just that.
We'd like to hope this doesn't get put into the same category as Providence granting endless tax exemptions for businesses- especially since they're fond of doing it behind closed doors. Ha! But seriously folks, the public sphere is different from the private sphere. I don't care what couples do at home, I do care what the city I live in looks like.
Last edited by Hollytree; 10-18-2017 at 01:07 PM..
It will only have rooms on one side of the hallway.
Thanks. Missed that part from the article (see italics below) and checked the artist rendition again. Makes more sense now given its narrow dimensions. With the upper floor balconies, there is no way they would be able to fit rooms on two sides of a hallway.
To Commerce Secretary Stefan Pryor’s question about whether he could envision making the hotel attractive, Love paused and talked about how the building’s not “big, big” and will be smaller than traditional hotels, with rooms only on one side of corridors. “I think it’s possible,” he said, but will require work.
It will only have rooms on one side of the hallway.
I wish we knew the commission's specific objections to the developer's draft design. I'd like to see it either more sympathetic to the historic context surrounding the site, OR conversely, absolutely cutting edge second decade 21st century. Nothing as cheaply bland suburban/generic as are the other hotels being built in PVD now.
Just to get us all on board. Almost All States give tax breaks. Economically it is the reality. Still huge disagreement if it is beneficial. But Rhode Island ain't doing anything out of the ordinary
Just to get us all on board. Almost All States give tax breaks. Economically it is the reality. Still huge disagreement if it is beneficial. But Rhode Island ain't doing anything out of the ordinary
The real issues are more along the lines of cronyism and whether we can afford huge tax breaks that go on for 20 or 30 years. How many tax breaks do you give for a handful of menial jobs in a hotel, for example? It's an equation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
