Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

degggendorf t1_iv23ic1 wrote

Reply to comment by ToadScoper in Hundreds of housing units coming to East Providence, officials say by GhostOpera406

> mixed-use zoning

What mixed uses would you want to see, like coffee shops and restaurants on the same property? It seems to me like the area needs more housing units most urgently, so maximizing the number of those makes sense. But maybe there's something I'm not understanding.

> no proposed transit connections

Doesn't bus 35 go right by already? Surely they'll add a stop once this is finished....right? They better.

5

AbigailFlippinfloppn t1_iv253of wrote

Well wouldn't increased housing cause increased demand for goods and services? Wouldn't it be better for residents of these new properties to be able to access these goods and services hyperlocally so they don't contribute to traffic congestion?

7

degggendorf t1_iv26dg2 wrote

I mean, sure, but in the area it seems like housing is the more urgent need. But maybe I'm wrong.

FWIW, Hope Market is immediately next door to this development (are they like a regular market?), the Aldi is 1 mile away, and there are several walkable deli, bakery, coffee, restaurant, etc. options too. I don't imagine that any of those businesses are so flat out that the distributed business from an extra 400 families in the neighborhood will break them.

But, again, please correct me if I'm wrong...is that what you're hoping for, a micro-community on the property with all the necessities for life on those 27 acres? I realize that might have sounded sarcastic, but I would genuinely like to learn more and hear what you have to say.

6

AbigailFlippinfloppn t1_iv28ltr wrote

What I want, what I think will make this country actually work well, will likely never happen bc you cannot solve individual problems as if they exist in a vacuum. We cannot reform our way out of this piecemeal. What point am i trying to make? I'm not even sure anymore. It's disorienting and depressing to always feel like you're trying to navigate to simply a less bad situation but never to a good one

4

brick1972 t1_iv2giep wrote

It's a really tough location because the NBC and all the remnants of the industrial waterfront make it hard to link this site to anything else other than up toward Newport Ave.

The best solution to provide housing and density would be something like 800 affordable housing units in the plaza where stop and shop was on Newport Ave then try to bring Newport Ave a little more development that is not "building with setback from street surrounded by asphalt" but I'm not sure you'll get any developers to bite.

Also the Hope Market is a food pantry IIRC.

4

ToadScoper t1_iv2ryhh wrote

Lol Newport Ave is a total beast onto itself and the town is letting it sink further and further, it’s a dangerous stroad that’s overstayed it’s welcome. All the atrociously dilapidated/abandoned strip malls and structures along there should have been razed years ago and rezoned for better (and denser) mixed land usage with affordable housing

8

AbigailFlippinfloppn t1_iv2ntzm wrote

I think the biggest problem you laid out there is the need to get developers interested. The state should be building housing to rent out or sell just above break-even with profit cycled back into the treasury, instead of these neofeudal landleeches sucking our blood and resources.

4

FunLife64 t1_iv2pqpv wrote

I’m not surprised this is full of comments complaining, I’m with you.

Of course, everything should be “affordable” but needs coffee shops, dog grooming and grocery stores within the same development so those affordable people don’t need to drive to get their $5 coffee.

1

degggendorf t1_iv2ts5t wrote

I'm not sure we're totally on the same page.

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be mixed use, or that people in cheap apartments don't deserve amenities...I'm just saying that as far as I see it, we are in more dire need of housing than we are in light commercial spaces. There are tons of vacant storefronts and housing is insanely tight, so we should build what we need. I think we're much better off putting 400 residential units on this plot than putting 200 residential and a handful of commercial spaces.

Beyond that, a nice piece of property like this - right on the water and out of the way - is much better suited for residential, and those hypothetical businesses will be much better off along already-commercial main roads where no one would want to live. The businesses want the traffic, the apartments don't. No need to shoehorn things in places that don't suit them.

But lastly, I want to make it clear that I am still open to learning more. Those are my impressions, but I don't have a particularly educated or firm opinion here.

1

FunLife64 t1_iv355g5 wrote

Everyone wants some perfect community. Not everything can be that. Build housing, it’s what is needed. Luxury, affordable, mid luxury, Coach class. All types of housing is needed.

3

rstuf32 t1_iv668mi wrote

I agree 100%! It would be incredible if we had more areas where people could live and walk to almost everything they need!? Groceries, doctors, parks, restaurants etc. Obviously people can still elect to live in the suburbs and drive everywhere all the time but I think a lot of people would choose the alternative if there was a viable alternative available.

1

March_Latter t1_iv2m9sn wrote

Its near a run down commercial area just waiting for for some investment.

2

degggendorf t1_iv2o2v4 wrote

I want to make sure I understand what you mean. Are you responding to my question about mixed use and saying that the surrounding commercial areas need to expand, so some of this property should be given to commercial expansion? Or adding a point that those commercial spaces should be refurbished in-place?

1

March_Latter t1_iv2uebt wrote

I think you are looking for someone to install what is waiting to be rehabbed or rezoned. There is already a business area across the street from it with waterfront features. There is industrial right next door. Up the road is various commercial districts. The layout says more housing. Not mixed use.

1

degggendorf t1_iv2v1l1 wrote

> The layout says more housing. Not mixed use.

Gotcha, that's how I see it too.

1