A proposed six-story, 52-room Riverview Hotel in Providence was abandoned after the R.I. Coastal Resources Management Council denied a requested variance on a 0.28-acre property that tightly hugs the waterfront on the east side of the Providence River.
Developer Gerald Fandetti wanted to build close to the water, with just a 20-foot public greenway between the building and the river, in addition to a small timber boardwalk that’s already present. The variance was needed to completely exempt the project from a 25-foot setback requirement established by the Metro Bay Special Area Management Plan, which the CRMC is tasked with enforcing under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.
CRMC staff wrote in 2020 that Fandetti’s application failed to justify a variance for the property known as Parcel 1A from the 25-foot setback requirement since it didn’t sufficiently address key concerns, including sea wall integrity that could be impacted by construction, the potential for the site to become flooded due to a predicted 5 feet of sea level rise within 50 years, and the need for adequate bioretention measures to manage stormwater runoff.
The I-195 Redevelopment District Commission, which oversees the site, is doing its “due diligence” by having third-party engineering consultants complete additional predevelopment analysis on the property before issuing another request for proposals, said spokesperson Cara Cromwell.
CRMC spokesperson Laura Dwyer said she couldn’t speculate whether a hotel project was possible on the site since the project was abandoned rather than going fully through the commission’s approval process.
“There were a lot of issues with the construction of a hotel on such a narrow site,” Dwyer said. “Normally, during the process, staff evaluates a proposal from the applicant. They make a professional recommendation, and it goes through council for approval or denial, and maybe changes are suggested. But that did not happen here. It wouldn’t be right to speculate as to what would have happened.
“In terms of development in general in this metro bay urban environment, there are certainly success stories,” Dwyer added. “This is just one where the developer was confronted with a very restricted parcel to begin with. Creating a vision in one’s mind of what you want to do with a parcel sometimes runs against environmental regulatory issues that a parcel has. This is just one of those cases.”
The situation demonstrates the difficult balancing act of addressing environmental regulations and making economic sense when pursuing a successful commercial waterfront development.
But that balancing act is something others, such as the team behind the Hammetts Hotel in Newport, say they were able to navigate through diligent planning and engineering work.
Colin Kane, founding partner at Peregrine Group LLC in East Providence, said before the Hammetts was completed in 2020, the company’s project team had to deal with a seaside foundation that he described as a “guacamole” of underground dirt, construction debris and dredge material, along with a grading change from the more elevated front side of the building.
“It was a challenge from an engineering perspective,” Kane said. “That’s true for most of Rhode Island’s waterfront. All of those projects on the waterfront contend with some level of structural challenge.”
The $30 million Hammetts Hotel took 3½ years to get permitting through the city of Newport and the CRMC, and there were 80 to 90 public meetings before the building was finished, Kane said of the property that formerly contained a parking lot.
“It’s a long process and it’s expensive,” Kane said. “But it’s worth it. … I think we created a special place. It’s 8,000 times better from an economic, environmental perspective than a parking lot that’s full two months out of the year.”
Several special design considerations were needed for the waterfront hotel property, including an elevated first floor, lifting the whole building 14 feet above the 100-year flood line, Kane said. A small publicly accessible easement connected to the Newport harbor walk separates the building from where the water meets the wharf at high tide.
In anticipation of a catastrophic storm known as a 100-year flood – which has a 1% chance of occurring in any given year – the hotel is outfitted with collapsible walls, said Douglas Kallfelz, managing partner at Union Studio Architecture & Community Design Inc. in Providence, which designed the building. The collapsible walls wrapping around the foundation would give way, allowing water to flow through the piers that the hotel is built on, protecting the structural integrity of the building, Kallfelz said.
“You can imagine if there was a rigid wall in place and all of a sudden you have water coming against that, the amount of pressure on the surface can be significant,” Kallfelz said. “All the walls around the elevator and between the piers can fall away. There are also openings, grills in the side walls of the building, that allow the water to flow in and out of the foundation.”
While Fandetti expressed frustration with the CRMC’s variance denial, Kane said the project had little chance of approval due to the inherent difficulties of the Parcel 1A site.
“Using the word ‘site’ is an overstatement. It’s a postage stamp,” Kane said. “It’s too small. ... Blaming [CRMC] for killing it is an excuse for a project that was never viable.”
Fandetti did not respond to a request for comment on this story.
Pam Rubinoff, a coastal management specialist at the University of Rhode Island Graduate School of Oceanography, said the setback requirements along the Providence River are important because they preserve public space for pedestrian access and protect properties from the impact of rising sea levels. Over the past 100 years, this area has seen an 11-inch rise in the sea level, which is expected to rise 1.5 feet more by 2050, she said.
“The regulations are designed to have minimum standards,” Rubinoff said. “And there are different ways to work with those, while thinking about the future, to come up with a project that is reasonable. Or, one of the options is a no-action alternative: not to do anything and to restore the waterfront property to its natural state. It’s got to be a balance between environmental issues, economic issues and what the community envisions for its future. … [Preserving] public space in an area at risk allows the area to flood without putting people or economic development under water.”
Marc Larocque is a PBN staff writer. Contact him at Larocque@PBN.com.
