All of Downtown is in a protected National Historic District. Should buildings like the Fogarty be protected?
I am very much aware of the fact that all of Downtown is protected. One of the assets of Providence is that we have old buildings that have not been taken down, and we also have entire blocks of the city that are still intact, which is very, very important.
Having said that, we are at the point where the city is growing again, and building again, and there is this issue about which are the buildings that deserve protection and which do not necessarily deserve protection.
I think it has to be seen in the light of usefulness. The Fogarty building would be very difficult to rehabilitate. This has to do with the fact that the main level is not at the street level.
Architecturally speaking, the Fogarty Building is the only example in Providence of an architectural movement loosely called the Brutalist movement. And one of the principal architects of that movement was Paul Rudolf—dean of architecture at Yale—he was himself the architect of the School of Art and Architecture at Yale which is probably the best example of [Brutalist] architecture from that period. The Fogarty Building, by comparison, is a decent example of the architectural style but it is certainly not an outstanding example. In my book, it would not be in the top tier of the buildings that we must absolutely save. So then the future use of the site becomes a critical question.
I understand the [Procaccianti Group] would like to put a parking garage there. As we all know, parking is something the city badly needs. Having said that, we would all hope that new parking garages are a part of a comprehensive plan, that will look at the parking situation in Downtown Providence comprehensively rather than let an individual developer say “I’ll have a parking lot here” and another developer say “I’ll have a parking garage there.”
We need parking, but what is crucial, in my judgment, is we should look for a transportation interchange somewhere near the highway 95. This is where [the city] has the interface between the RIPTA buses, Peter Pan and Bonanza, or Greyhound buses. In this location should be a massive 5000 car garage. This would promote people to use more public transportation.
With my students at RISD, in design studios, over the last two years we made plans for such new intermodal transportation centers. We actually showed it to the Mayor and Mr. Deller, they are all aware of that and aware that this is something we need to do.
A garage in this location would be welcome because it is near new development, the convention center, and hotels. I would be supportive of it.
What do you think about the demolition of the Fogarty and Police and Fire Dept. Building?
No building should be demolished in the Old City, which is bordered by Dorrance to the East, Empire Street to the West, and Pine Street to the South Side, and Fountain Street to the North. None of these buildings should be demolished unless there is an absolutely firm commitment by the developer that a building we know about in advance will go up. We have seen the plans for the office building Procaccanti proposed for La Salle Square, where the Police and Fire building stands. If there is a firm commitment that these new buildings will be built, then I am all for it.
What about their proposed replacement buildings?
Being an architect, I hate to judge buildings by a one perspective drawing in a newspaper. I would need to see the model and how it fits into the context of the city.
Can you give some examples of urban development practices, in Providence and/or outside Providence, that you believe have signified success?
Well I think we can remain in Providence for this question. In due time, the development that we witness right now in the Capital Center District will be seen as successful. It already is. It took an awful long time to get it started.
We have right now three high-rise buildings under construction and what I like so much about it is the mix between retail and entertainment. We have offices, the GTech building, and as we go up, we get residential. In the ’40s ’50s and ’60s we segregated everything. So it is this mix between programs that is so significant to success.
The way you can measure success of a development is really two-fold. One is to look at the development itself. For example, the relocation of the river created a new infrastructure. The second dimension to measure success: does the new development have a ripple effect in regard to the Historic City? The answer is absolutely an affirmative yes. I have my office on Union Street so I am right in the heart of the City. And I have seen the conversion of quite a number of the old structures, such as by Cornish into apartment buildings, which have been very, very successful; piecemeal and slow moving, but very successful. When I first moved to this building ten years ago, everything was boarded up around us and I was the first tenant in the building. And now everything is rehabilitated. If I look out of the window, the old department store is now restored and houses the URI Extension program. And another thing we have now is quality retail on Westminster Street. Design Within Reach is a pioneer, and now there is another furniture store just across from them [Bowl & Board]. We are getting restaurants, a wonderful book store [Symposium Books], and coffee houses [tazza]. We are really going to see quality retail come back into the Old City. That is really a wonderful thing; it is a process underway that I watch every day with great joy.
Return to:
Four Perspectives on Downtown Development
Old Buildings Meet New Conversation