[Summit] Summit Digest, Vol 58, Issue 25
Thomas Nosal
thomas.nosal at mail.mcgill.ca
Sat Jan 30 00:06:34 UTC 2010
Emlyn, we are also talking about summit residents, current and future, who share driveways with inadequate space or who eventually pave over their lawns in order to park. I think the idea of getting rid of the Merriam parking lots was merely wishful thinking and is an entirely different debate.
Your anecdote does not discredit overnight parking. Parking more than one foot from the curb is illegal. The emergency vehicles manage during the day. So long as long everyone is parked legally by the curb, they can manage at night too.
________________________________________
From: summit-bounces at sna.providence.ri.us [summit-bounces at sna.providence.ri.us] On Behalf Of summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us [summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 6:25 PM
To: summit at sna.providence.ri.us
Subject: Summit Digest, Vol 58, Issue 25
Send Summit mailing list submissions to
summit at sna.providence.ri.us
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us
You can reach the person managing the list at
summit-owner at sna.providence.ri.us
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Summit digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Parking again! (Mona Delgado)
2. Re: Parking again! (Emlyn Addison)
3. Re: Parking again! (Andrew Nosal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:48:36 -0500
From: Mona Delgado <Mona_Delgado at brown.edu>
Subject: Re: [Summit] Parking again!
To: Greg Gerritt <gerritt at mindspring.com>, Summit Neighborhood
<summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
Message-ID: <C788B3D4.B4D2%Mona_Delgado at brown.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I would love to be part of that!
Mona
4th street
On 1/29/10 3:38 PM, "Greg Gerritt" <gerritt at mindspring.com> wrote:
> I am trying to stay out of the parking discussion, I strongly support
> overnite parking, but this is not the best forum for that discussion. It
> needs to be in person with sufficient time to explore the issues fully rather
> than flinging them back and forth.
>
> That said, I reallty want to applaud the discussion of the future of the
> economy/ecology that Andy has brought to this discussion. Ecological collapse
> on planet Earth is driving much of the eeconomic collapse we see even if it is
> called something else. Resource problems (peak oil anyone) drive
> civilizations to ever more frantic thrashings, one of which is that bubbles
> seem to be the only way to make big money easy in a time of resource
> pressures.
>
> As Andy points out , transit friendly places are holding on to value better
> than sprawl. But even in the places with the real estate deflation, housing
> is still too expensive for most workers to afford.
>
> My recent contrtibution is to work on getting a major increase in the
> production of compost from food waste so Providence and the surrounding
> communities can grow much more of their own food, seeing as the agricultural
> heartland of the world and this country are dependent upon water sources that
> are severely threatened by global warming (think more cars).
>
> No one knows how we shall transform in the coming changes but things are going
> to be different. If you want support starting a compost heap and a garden,
> let me know. Greg geritt
>
>
> on 1/29/10 2:42 PM, Andrew Nosal at andy at mapcenter.com wrote:
>
>>> neighborhoods or cities have every right to preserve their specialness and
>>> livability.
>>
>> To use parking rules as an exclusionary tool is a right that is not equally
>> available to all cities and neighborhoods.
>>
>> More importantly, execise of "rights" like this exact real costs that are not
>> borne by the lucky beneficiaries. It is a primary cause of the mess this
>> whole country is in. "Keep stuff I don't lke away from my house but make
>> sure I can drive everywhere I want" is not, in general, working out well at
>> all.
>>
>> It may seem odd that I, who am as impatient as anyone for the end of the
>> automotive age, am arguing to bring on the cars. Here goes.
>>
>> The policies I criticize contribute to the ongoing pressure to build and
>> develop in the sprawling suburban manner. This Me First has consequences not
>> just in Summit, but everywhere. Few neighborhoods are in a better position
>> than Summit to evolve into a most desireable state of urban walkability while
>> still being full of greenery. Man, are we lucky. I am not envisioning
>> Manhattan here. However, walkable, transit oriented neighborhoods and big
>> parking lots can not exist together. Today is not too soon to prepare for
>> the more sustainable days we all seem to want, by encouraging the replacment
>> of parking lots with useful things. Meanwhile there will be more cars parked
>> on the streets. Transition to a time when cars will be unneeded by more and
>> more people has to begin somehow, somewhere.
>>
>> Miriam Hospital is not an elephant. It is a necessity. There is no better
>> place for it than right in the neighborhood it largely serves. Plus, it is
>> accessible by road and transit to workers and patients from elsewhere. I am
>> glad it is not miles away, accessible by car only, in the middle of a big
>> parking lot.
>>
>> I would remind anyone fighting to preserve the suburbaness of Summit,
>> fighting every slight change towards urbanity, that there are thousands of
>> nice houses for sale along suburban streets where you will never have to
>> worry about strangers parking or walking around. The prices of those houses
>> are dropping much faster than the prices hereabouts. People have some
>> inklings about what the future will be like. Right now we desperately need
>> more Urban options. Everyone will remain able to choose to live Suburban or
>> Urban. Summit has been kinda lucky, kinda in between, but it is not fair
>> is to expect to have it both ways forever.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2010, at 12:03 PM, Art Norwalk wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, we are saying that neighborhoods or cities have every right to
>>> preserve their specialness and livability. And Summit is a special case
>>> because of the elephant (Miriam) in its midst.
>>>
>>> At 11:25 AM 1/29/2010, you wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thank you folks, for so frankly stating the convictions of specialness
>>>> and entitlement that I was attempting to mock.
>>>>
>>>> The parking regulations enforce exclusivity and an aesthetic
>>>> preference for empty streets. People who fight hardest to preseve
>>>> them cite exactly those advantages. If that is a proper rationale for
>>>> parking policy in Summit, then have you thought about what would
>>>> happen if everyplace else could revise their parking regulations along
>>>> those lines? If that does not sound like a good idea, then the claim
>>>> is indeed being made that Summit is differently entitled. Yes, let
>>>> the hapless fools in Pawtucket, College Hill and elsewhere submit to
>>>> the the reality that "Everybody Drives" by not denying parking in
>>>> otherwise empty space on streets that happen to belong to everybody.
>>>> Summit shall deal differently with this reality.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone who can not show me that they seldom or never drive a car to
>>>> another city or neighborhood and park it on a street while they work,
>>>> shop, dine, visit a friend, or whatever, who nevertheless upholds
>>>> Summit's parking regime, is claiming a privilege that they are willing
>>>> to deny others. Just saying.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone seriously think ambulance drivers on their way to Memorial
>>>> Hospital have trouble steering past cars parked in legally designated
>>>> spaces on the streets of Pawtucket?
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Summit mailing list
>>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>>>
>>>> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.
>>>> us
>>>> <http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri
>>>> .us>
>>>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/ <http://sna.providence.ri.us/>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Art Norwalk
>>> Norwalk Communications, Inc.
>>> Advertising - Marketing - Public Relations
>>> Tel 401.421.4310
>>>
>>> "How You Say It DOES Make A Difference"
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Summit mailing list
>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>>
http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.u>>>
s
>>> 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://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20100129/16865e71/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:32:58 -0500
From: Emlyn Addison <noisyblocks at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Summit] Parking again!
To: summit at sna.providence.ri.us
Message-ID:
<e30ad7251001291332n7f8c1cafifade3aab700ea41c at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Firstly, we're not talking about casual visitors, we're talking about the
notion of establishing a permanent parking allocation for hospital staff.
There are three work shifts per 24-hour cycle at the Miriam (I should know,
my wife works there), so how many people shall we estimate work each shift?
300? 500? 800? Where, do tell, are these cars going to fit?
Secondly, Memorial Hospital in Pawtucket is flanked by Prospect street, a
2-lane high-capacity road on which parking is prohibited on BOTH sides. Just
north is Division street, a main throughfare on which parking is also
prohibited on BOTH sides, to the east is Columbus Avenue where no parking
is permitted either, and westward is School street, strewn up and down with
No Parking signs on BOTH sides.
There is hardly an apt comparison to be drawn between this and the rat's
maze of clogged residential streets surrounding the Miriam hospital.
And unless one lives on Eighth street, or any other similarly choked access
street in this area, one has likely never listened to a fire truck
screeching to halt and blowing its horn for three minutes before trying
(unsuccessfully, I might add) to scrape its way between two adjoining parked
cars. (You can bet that the gentleman who finally came out to move his car
will never again park more than a foot from the curb.)
I certainly never considered that, in trying maintain some reasonable
measure of safety, noise, access and litter--standards to which any
self-respecting neighborhood might aspire--in a neighborhood that my
daughter can call home, I would be inviting labels like "special" and
"entitled". I'm a working stiff so this has me in stitches.
It's not our fault that College Hill is congested with cars (tell me what
university district isn't) or that Pawtucket has chosen a different model.
When I visit Boston or New York or Montreal and I enter a zone with parking
restrictions then I know to seek out a parking garage, not a sacrificial
lamb.
I think they did a study some years ago about toddlers who were denied
parking spaces for their Big Wheels. This would prove to have a devastating
effect on their ability to form constructive relationships with others.
Happily, nearly all of them grew up to become excellent city planners.
--Special *and* entitled, apparently.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20100129/e7c9a70b/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:25:15 -0500
From: Andrew Nosal <andy at mapcenter.com>
Subject: Re: [Summit] Parking again!
To: Summit Neighborhood <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
Message-ID: <58D3991E-0108-4B01-8775-68C752A6150C at mapcenter.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed";
DelSp="yes"
On Jan 29, 2010, at 4:32 PM, Emlyn Addison wrote:
> Firstly, we're not talking about casual visitors, we're talking
> about the notion of establishing a permanent parking allocation for
> hospital staff. There are three work shifts per 24-hour cycle at the
> Miriam (I should know, my wife works there), so how many people
> shall we estimate work each shift? 300? 500? 800? Where, do tell,
> are these cars going to fit?
Not proposing to "allocate" anything. Just saying empty parking
spaces might as well be used by someone who needs one. I am not
proposing that any cars that do not "fit" get to park willy nilly or
in any dangerous ways.
>
> Secondly, Memorial Hospital in Pawtucket is flanked by Prospect
> street, a 2-lane high-capacity road on which parking is prohibited
> on BOTH sides. Just north is Division street, a main throughfare on
> which parking is also prohibited on BOTH sides, to the east is
> Columbus Avenue where no parking is permitted either, and westward
> is School street, strewn up and down with No Parking signs on BOTH
> sides.
Maybe they are overreacting in Pawtucket too. Single side parking, at
least, should indeed be especially well enforced on 5th street, the
route to the ER.
>
> There is hardly an apt comparison to be drawn between this and the
> rat's maze of clogged residential streets surrounding the Miriam
> hospital.
Rats maze? clogged? come on now. Take me to the casbah.
>
> And unless one lives on Eighth street, or any other similarly choked
> access street in this area, one has likely never listened to a fire
> truck screeching to halt and blowing its horn for three minutes
> before trying (unsuccessfully, I might add) to scrape its way
> between two adjoining parked cars. (You can bet that the gentleman
> who finally came out to move his car will never again park more than
> a foot from the curb.)
The fact the an illegally parked car once blocked a fire engine once
on your street is not sufficient reason to forbid drivers to park in
spaces where they will not block anyone.
>
> I certainly never considered that, in trying maintain some
> reasonable measure of safety, noise, access and litter--standards to
> which any self-respecting neighborhood might aspire--in a
> neighborhood that my daughter can call home, I would be inviting
> labels like "special" and "entitled". I'm a working stiff so this
> has me in stitches.
Well this can only come down to opinion about what is "reasonable"
>
> It's not our fault that College Hill is congested with cars (tell me
> what university district isn't) or that Pawtucket has chosen a
> different model. When I visit Boston or New York or Montreal and I
> enter a zone with parking restrictions then I know to seek out a
> parking garage, not a sacrificial lamb.
Actually, if any of us drive to College Hill, it IS "our" fault.
Boston and New York have parking restrictions because there can never
be enough spaces for all the cars that people might like to drive
there. The shortage of space is easily solved by setting an
appropriate price for parking. This is why, if you are willing to pay
the going rate, you can almost always park in a garage there.
Here, we are creating an artificial parking shortage, forcing Miriam
and others into the expense and blight of off street parking because,
well, we can. We are special.
>
> I think they did a study some years ago about toddlers who were
> denied parking spaces for their Big Wheels. This would prove to have
> a devastating effect on their ability to form constructive
> relationships with others. Happily, nearly all of them grew up to
> become excellent city planners.
>
When I make make planning proposals and arguments, I am taking into
consideration the needs of people other than myself. I would like to
make the city and the world a better place for everyone, even if that
comes at a small cost to my own interest in having my little street be
as tranquil as possible.
You may not be a city planner (neither am I) but you no less than I
are trying to tell everyone how some city planning should be done,
based on very little reasoning besides "I got mine Jack."
>
> --Special and entitled, apparently.
Indeed.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20100129/44c864ea/attachment.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Summit mailing list
Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
End of Summit Digest, Vol 58, Issue 25
**************************************
More information about the Summit
mailing list