[Summit] Fw: Fw: In exchange for overnight parking

Fri Sep 28 13:55:12 UTC 2007

	It seems that if people are asking for it, putting up signs and what  
not, the issue has reached a tipping point where enough people want  
it addressed/taken care of. As much as many of us would love to  
always keep our neighborhoods exactly the same as when we moved in,  
or when we grew up here, time has a way of  forcing changes, and we  
have to embrace change (or at least work with it) or you will  
constantly be struggling against it.

The 3 family houses aren't new, they've always been here (ours since  
1918), and they are supposed to hold 3 families or the equivalent.  
I'm sure there are a few that are pushing that limit, but my guess is  
that most in our area are within that limit. The problem is actually  
do to the numbers of cars that people have now. My family didn't have  
a 2nd car until the late 70's... my dad worked in the area, on the  
days mom needed the car, she drove him into work... with both parents  
working and many commuting out of the area, more cars came in. If  
each unit has 2 cars, that's 6 cars per house, not outlandish in any  
way, but still a lot of space. We've been lucky, our top floor tenant  
is a single female with one car, but if it was a couple, we'd have no  
room for a 6th car. Does on street parking mean that we're going to  
go out and look for another tenant to fit into the space because  
there's now parking for them... no. It means that if the 3rd floor  
becomes available we will be able to rent it sooner, and not have to  
screen all the applicants and tell the majority of them that there's  
no parking for both of their cars. We were lucky to find the single  
tenant, there's not a lot of them out there.

So, while many of us would like to keep things the same, I don't  
think it's possible. We need to find a solution, and I'm pretty sure  
it's not going back to the 70's where everyone had only 1 car. Other  
cities seem to manage, I'm pretty sure Providence will as well.

(FYI... Pawtucket has on street parking and I was over there a couple  
of weekends ago (Pidge Street, about a half mile up the road) and it  
was fine, it didn't look bad, there was plenty of room to drive and  
room for me to park. )

Jennifer Luxmoore
jennifer at luxmoore.com

On Sep 28, 2007, at 6:04 AM, Paul Aceto wrote:

>    Having separate neighborhood rules would be an enforcement  
> nightmare.
> I'm sure if we put paying taxes on the ballot eveyone would vote no.
> Sometimes you have to do the unpopular thing for the greater good.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Gerritt" <gerritt at mindspring.com>
> To: "Summit Neighborhood" <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 5:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [Summit] Fw: In exchange for overnight parking
>
>
>> The proposal is for a street by street designation.  The block I  
>> live on
>> is
>> predominantly single family houses with tiny or no driveways and  
>> driveways
>> with very steep inclines.  Every household, and I mean every  
>> household, on
>> our block has signed a petition asking for overnight permitted  
>> resident
>> parking.  Should we be allowed to do this or should your aversion  
>> prevent
>> our democratic rights from being exercised in a place where on street
>> parking has unanimous support?  How about each block gets to vote?
>>
>> Greg gerritt  6th st
>>
>>
>> on 9/28/07 5:40 AM, Paul Aceto at pjaceto at cox.net wrote:
>>
>>>     Exactly, John. The result is that more parking spaces will  
>>> encourage
>>> more cars. More people will be able to fill the fixed number of
>>> apartments
>>> and we'll be overflowing. Limited parking limits occupancy.  
>>> Quality of
>>> life
>>> will degrade with more people and more cars in a fixed space.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "John Bazik" <jsb at cs.brown.edu>
>>> To: "Summit Neighborhood" <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
>>> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 1:04 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Summit] In exchange for overnight parking
>>>
>>>
>>>> What I don't understand is this.  The purpose of eliminating the
>>>> overnight
>>>> ban is to establish free, on-street automobile storage for  
>>>> residents.
>>>> So when there is a parking ban, for whatever reason, where do those
>>>> cars go?  Presumably they are on the street because there is no  
>>>> other
>>>> place for them.  Anywhere.  So where do they go?
>>>>
>>>> I understand how alternate side of the street parking works, if  
>>>> that's
>>>> what we're talking about.  It's not real convenient.  Everyone  
>>>> moves
>>>> their
>>>> cars at the same time each day.  Is that what parking ban opponents
>>>> want?
>>>> Is that what we're talking about?
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Summit mailing list
>>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>>> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>>> summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Summit mailing list
>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>> summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Summit mailing list
>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/ 
>> summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Summit mailing list
> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/ 
> summit_sna.providence.ri.us
> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20070928/3b903e38/attachment.htm>