Does empty mill have dark future?

BASE LEVEL: The General Electric Providence Base Plant building has been vacant since 2000 and is pegged for demolition despite the protests of preservationists. / PBN PHOTO/JAIME LOWE
BASE LEVEL: The General Electric Providence Base Plant building has been vacant since 2000 and is pegged for demolition despite the protests of preservationists. / PBN PHOTO/JAIME LOWE

A new preservation battle is brewing in Providence’s Eagle Square, ground zero for debate about the future of Rhode Island’s historic industrial buildings.
The General Electric Providence Base Plant building, which at one time produced more incandescent light bulb bases than any factory in the world, is pegged for demolition by its owner to the dismay of preservationists and neighbors.
Built between 1916 and 1918, the Base Plant doesn’t stand out visually, its façade rising two boxy stories set back from the street at 586 Atwells Ave.
It’s been vacant since 2000.
But like many old Providence mills, uncertainty about what, if anything, might replace the factory are driving concerns about demolition, with parking lots and suburban-style shopping centers the prevailing fear.
A cluster of old brick mills on the banks of the Woonasquatucket River, Eagle Square became a cause célèbre 15 years ago when New York developer Feldco proposed replacing more than a dozen historic buildings with a strip mall.
Opposition to the plan drove a compromise that saved a few of the mills and created a more urban, mixed-use complex with homes and offices in addition to stores.
The Industrial Commercial Business District that the Base Plant is in dates to the Eagle Square redevelopment era, and many of those opposing demolition were active in that debate.
“It would not be the most dilapidated building saved before, so technically, yes, you could preserve it, but far more interesting is what people call partial demolition that would consider the overall integrity of site and surrounding buildings,” said Peter Gill Case, owner of the Box Office, which site across the street from the Base Plant and is part of the appealing group.
General Electric Co. first requested permission to tear down the Base Plant in a demolition permit application filed in February. It argued the factory is polluted, unleasable and astronomically expensive to either maintain or repair.
“Attempting to stabilize the structures and address the structural issues would require expenditure of funds far in excess of the post-construction value of the buildings and the site, and would cause undue and unreasonable financial hardship to the owner,” GE wrote. Providence planning staff agreed and the application moved on to the city’s Historic District Commission for a hearing in March.
When the commission met again on the issue in April, a recusal by one commissioner resulted in the absence of a quorum and, since the Commission has 45 days after an application is filed to take action, a “certificate of appropriateness” to raze the factory was issued by default.
In May, however the Providence Preservation Society and five others appealed the certificate, saying GE “waived” the 45-day limit.
In addition, the organization argues that GE didn’t prove “financial hardship” would result from maintaining the factory, one of the criteria for demolition, nor that it had proven the building unusable.
“The application does not address the financial resources available to the applicant, but the tremendous wealth of the applicant is public knowledge,” Timothy T. More, attorney for the Preservation Society, wrote in the appeal.
The Providence Zoning Board of Appeals was initially supposed to hear the appeal June 25, but had to postpone it until July 27 due to, coincidentally, an absence of a quorum due to recusals.
Jason Martin, principal planner and staff member for the Historic District Commission, declined to say whether the commission felt GE had agreed to waive the 45-day limit, deferring to a decision by City Solicitor Jeff Padwa to issue the certificate.
Even if the 45-day limit is waived, it’s unclear whether the commission could make a demolition denial stick in court.
In the Industrial and Commercial Business District, the owner has to meet any of four criteria to tear something down, including the public safety hazard and financial hardship GE is claiming.
Setting aside the procedural and legal issues of the appeal, the most significant question surrounding the Base Plant is whether anyone would invest the money needed to re-use it.
In its application, GE said its consultants estimate it would cost $4.5 million to secure the site so it could be mothballed and another $11.5 million to rehabilitate it. That doesn’t include digging up the petroleum in the ground underneath the buildings. Demolishing the building won’t be cheap either, ranging anywhere from $1.4 million to $4.9 million, GE estimated.
Unlike many old Rhode Island mills with tall, narrow layouts, the Base Plant has a more contemporary low, wide layout with a large floor-plate that makes it better suited for modern manufacturing, but less attractive for office or apartment conversion due to lack of interior light.
Including the 150,000-square-foot main building and two smaller buildings, the 7-acre Base Plant property is assessed at $2.7 million. Since 2009, General Electric said it has paid $670,809 in property taxes.
The company hired Hayes and Sherry Real Estate Services to market the property in 2003, but even before the real estate bubble burst, did not find a suitable buyer or lessee.
In a letter attached to GE’s application, Hayes and Sherry Partner Jeff Finan wrote that he had initially looked at projects such as the Rising Sun Mill and the Eagle Square redevelopment as models, along with potential industrial users such as the Providence Water Authority.
“However, multi-story mill buildings that were successfully redeveloped were structurally sound with lots of windows and natural light. 586 Atwells Avenue is more like a 200,000-square-foot box with poor window lines, structurally unsound flooring and a configuration that does not present a workable layout for work or living space.” Finan wrote. “The highest and best use for the property, given the Eagle Square redevelopment and its success, is to have the building razed and sell the land to a retail user or developer.”
As bleak as that assessment sounds, all might not be lost for the Base Plant.
Reached by phone about the property at the end of June, Hayes and Sherry Partner Karl Sherry said a potential buyer recently had expressed interest in it as is. He declined to go into further detail.
Joining the Preservation Society in the appeal are Base Plant neighbors Case, architect and principal of Green Lot LLC; the Monohassett Mill Condominium Association; Clay Rockefeller, co-founder of the Steel Yard; the Eagle Square Condominium Association; and Erik Bright, co-founder of the Partnership for Creative Industrial Space. •

No posts to display