Greater City Providence


  • Those ghost people are terrifying…..

    but seriously, thats a pretty sexy bridge.

  • Love the look of the bridge. But sad that even in architectural renderings of the future the Superman building is vacant and dark.

  • Who’s gonna shovel that in the winter? Nobody shovels the Point Street Bridge that’s only a few hundred feet away.

    I would seriously consider a temporary structure that’s a simple six foot wide walking path for the time being, then figure out how to improve it once the traffic is there.

  • Thanks, mangeek. It wouldn’t be a true gcpvd comment thread without some negativity.

  • Maybe the Point St. Bridge’ll get some protected bike lanes too, soon, to make the picture complete.

    I hope Friendship & Clifford Sts get good connections to S. Side soon, too. Unfortunately no corresponding bridge from JD to S. Side. Point St., unfortunately, not an option die to 95/195 ramps.

    This is a great start. Here’s to more like it!

  • this would be a beautiful addition to the City of Providence! I live in johnston but frequent down city and have seen providence come alive thses last 15 years or so????

  • Wonderful rendering, looks like rhino and Photoshop or something similar. Ghost people are fine. It’s how deisigners are taught to tender. Now Id like to see the green spaces on either side of the river. Well done

  • City of Providence planning deserves some praise for helping move this along, and RIDOT too for fitting it in within the Transportation Improvement Program. There was a lot of public info available as the project was developed too.
    The concern about snow removal is legit as that is a major problem for pedestrians that still has not been taken seriously enough, and not just in Providence.
    That said, this project has some potential to aid the further development of a walk/bike cultre in Providence which would be a good thing for many reasons.

  • As reported in the ProJo, the 195 commission discussed concerns with the pedestrian bridge at their meeting yesterday:

    Commissioner John M. Kelly, who along with two other commissioners has worked on a 195 subcommittee reviewing park plans throughout the summer, raised the issue of river depth and bridge height at the land panel’s regular meeting Monday night. He wanted to know what size boats might fit underneath the bridge in years to come.

    “I’m not thinking about 2015,” Kelly said. “I’m thinking: How do we want to use this in 2025?”

    The commissioners then discussed what they know of the river’s depth and how much clearance boats would have between the water and the lowest point of the bridge. They agreed to convene park and bridge designers and state officials for a subcommittee meeting to discuss the matter further.

    I’m not understanding all the sturm und drang about the bridge clearance. If they simply review the presentation from Planning (which I’m positive they’ve seen), it shows the clearance of the new bridge above mean water level is between 11’2″ and 8’4″. The Point Street bridge is 9’4″ to 8’0″ and the clearance at Crawford is 8’0″. I don’t think we have any plans to tear out the Point Street or Crawford bridges and replace them with higher spans, so this bridge is plenty high.

    As for the dredging, that indeed is not their problem and is as much a problem for the new bridge as the existing ones. What boats exactly are they worried about getting up the river? The design of the bridge has no effect on river depth.

Providence, RI
5:10 am8:22 pm EDT
Feels like: 73°F
Wind: 6mph NNW
Humidity: 40%
Pressure: 30.03"Hg
UV index: 0
75°F / 54°F
79°F / 64°F
90°F / 68°F