Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

drillpublisher t1_j8w65tp wrote

Reply to comment by Fit-Accountant-157 in Developer has abandoned plans to demolish a former Hampden bookbindery by physicallyatherapist

There is a massive parking garage at the Rotunda. Baring disability people are just unaware/lazy.

If every business razed otherwise useful buildings/lots into surface parking ala the Wine Source the Avenue would fucking suck.

0

Fit-Accountant-157 t1_j8wc9ok wrote

I would love it if people visiting Hampden would park at the Rotunda and just walk to The Ave but they don't. If we had zoned parking restrictions people would probably do that.

Even more reason why we need zoned parking for residents. The Hampden Merchants Association is the problem.

1

drillpublisher t1_j8xia96 wrote

I definitely glazed over the resident parking portion and honed in on "demolishing housing to build a surface parking lot" as "the right thing to do" part of your post.

Maybe residential parking permits help, but in the broader context of more apartments, I don't see how that sways residents to allow more residences...

1

Fit-Accountant-157 t1_j8xsjo0 wrote

Someone else commenting here with a transportation background stated it best but I agree with their point that if there's no plan to fix parking or improve public transit it's ridiculous to expect Hampden residents to not oppose more development projects. Why would we want a less pedestrian-safe, less driver-safe, more congested community by choice? It's just not common sense to expect that of people.

I'm focusing on the zone parking issue because it feels achievable to me as a resident and it would improve the day-to-day lives of me and my neighbors. And I mentioned the parking lots because it's the only thing I see happening and I applaud that business for trying to improve the situation not because I think it's the optimal choice. Of course, I don't want to turn the neighborhood into a bunch of parking lots. The best option is a state-of-the-art public transit system but that's not going to happen anytime soon.

I could also get into other structural issues such as exclusionary zoning in other desirable neighborhoods which should be abolished but I'll stop there.

1

drillpublisher t1_j8y2ete wrote

>Someone else commenting here with a transportation background stated it best but I agree with their point that if there's no plan to fix parking or improve public transit it's ridiculous to expect Hampden residents to not oppose more development projects. Why would we want a less pedestrian-safe, less driver-safe, more congested community by choice? It's just not common sense to expect that of people. >

Because Hampden is largely self-contained. It meets almost all, if not all of, the requirements for the 15-minute city. It almost feels as a small city or town in and of itself with I83 and JHU as the boundaries. Obviously those are blurred, but it is one of the easier places to live in the City car-free or car-lite (1 per house instead of 1 per resident).

>I'm focusing on the zone parking issue because it feels achievable to me as a resident and it would improve the day-to-day lives of me and my neighbors. And I mentioned the parking lots because it's the only thing I see happening and I applaud that business for trying to improve the situation not because I think it's the optimal choice. Of course, I don't want to turn the neighborhood into a bunch of parking lots. The best option is a state-of-the-art public transit system but that's not going to happen anytime soon. >

Like it or not but by celebrating the Wine Sources decision you're absolutely advocating for turning the neighborhood into a bunch of parking.

I'm skeptical a parking permit solves much around the Avenue, but can respect that people would want it. I've not lived within a block or two of the Ave, but have lived in Hampden with/without RPP and haven't seen a huge difference so I understand I'm bias.

1