Submitted by bigbadape t3_yfxifm in providence
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iu69gry wrote
Reply to comment by whatsaphoto in Best ramen place? by bigbadape
Owner is outspoken against the hope st. trail (signs on front door and on tables) and when he gets called out on it in reviews, he denies it or tries to play it off.
People can support him if they want but I've lost too many people in Providence and I definitely don't appreciate his lying and ignorance of the situation.
When a business gets in politics, they should expect this.
ScatmanJohnMcEnroe t1_iu6oiml wrote
Ah, good to know. I was walking down Hope St. this evening and saw a guy in a Jeep try to run a cyclist off the road while honking with one hand and holding a cellphone with the other.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iu8sy0l wrote
How is that “getting political”? God forbid a business prefers to have more parking in front of their establishment
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iu90g06 wrote
Because it involves public policy hence it's political.
>God forbid a business prefers to have more parking in front of their establishment
To me, sacrificing 1-2 parking spots in front of your establishment for a safer, better community that can improve your business because it's now more accessible is a pretty obvious choice to me.
More on the safety thing: Ask anyone who walks, bikes, using scooters, is disabled, etc., if they know anyone who has died doing so in Providence and how many close calls they had that day. Perhaps that alone will change your mind.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iu9206f wrote
I’m just saying, they presumably are taking their stance on the matter solely based on the business they own and less so based on their views on public policy more broadly.
They must believe they get more customers who drive to their establishment than bike there, and so they want to preserve the parking that exists. It’s not like these businesses have their own private parking lots.
I like the idea of making providence more bike friendly in general, but if I were a business owner I’d probably be against it too purely for business reasons
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iu92iga wrote
>I’m just saying, they presumably are taking their stance on the matter solely based on the business they own and less so based on their views on public policy more broadly.
It sounds like you're suggesting they care more about their business than the community. Can you clarify?
>They must believe they get more customers who drive to their establishment than bike there, and so they want to preserve the parking that exists. It’s not like these businesses have their own private parking lots.
It is unfortunate they don't look at the evidence. From the reviews, it's costing them. They put out a public stance against the community, the community reacted. They're also losing business only catering to cars in a huge non-car user area, oh well... shrug
>if I were a business owner I’d probably be against it too purely for business reasons
Just like many other businesses on Hope who support it, I'd support it as well. It's been implemented in cities throughout the world and every single time, there's a few businesses who complain and are proven wrong -- every, single, time. More people walk, bike, use scooters, etc, than these businesses care to consider.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iu9b6be wrote
>It sounds like you're suggesting they care more about their business than the community. Can you clarify?
What is there to clarify? If you own a business and your livelihood is tied to that business, then you’ll tend to oppose proposals if you think they’ll harm your business. Not much of a hot take.
>It is unfortunate they don't look at the evidence. From the reviews, it's costing them. They put out a public stance against the community, the community reacted. They're also losing business only catering to cars in a huge non-car user area, oh well... shrug
I’m not sure that a small sample of recent reviews can be used as broader evidence. It’s usually just the loudest people like yourself who will complain in public forums.
>Just like many other businesses on Hope who support it, I'd support it as well. It's been implemented in cities throughout the world and every single time, there's a few businesses who complain and are proven wrong -- every, single, time. More people walk, bike, use scooters, etc, than these businesses care to consider.
It’s an interesting question to see if the policy would help or hurt business. Keep in mind that Hope St is not some crowded downtown area where walking/biking/public transit may be significantly more convenient. Although I would personally think the loss of parking would be a negative for business, I’m not so smug to imply I know what’s best for them and their business with 100% certainty. Perhaps you should be the next Mayor.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iu9brr6 wrote
> If you own a business and your livelihood is tied to that business, then you’ll tend to oppose proposals if you think they’ll harm your business. Not much of a hot take.
Well, if they ignorantly think it'll harm their business and go against the community, well, they reap what they sow.
>I’m not sure that a small sample of recent reviews can be used as broader evidence.
Uh... you realize that the US Department of Transit, the entire Urban Transit and planning fields, and even the United Nations supports this infrastructure due to the overwhelming evidence, right? This isn't just reviews, there are thousands of peer reviewed studies and case studies on this. It's been implemented around the world, this ain't new. What's next, wind turbines cause cancer? Come on.
>It’s usually just the loudest people like yourself who will complain in public forums.
The loudest people are the minority against it. Demonstrated in full force at the community meetings.
> Although I would personally think the loss of parking would be a negative for business
Please cite your evidence.
>I’m not so smug to imply I know what’s best for them and their business with 100% certainty. Perhaps you should be the next Mayor.
Perhaps you should read the evidence instead of basing your opinion on feelings.
Lastly, you keep harping on the business point and ignoring people actually fucking dying and being too scared to even go on Hope St. Why? What about everyone else in the area who doesn't drive cars? What about climate change? Is this worth 1-2 parking spots per business?
StonksGuy3000 t1_iub0djh wrote
>Well, if they ignorantly think it'll harm their business and go against the community, well, they reap what they sow.
Assuming you're correct and they're not. Which may or may not be true.
>Uh... you realize that the US Department of Transit, the entire Urban Transit and planning fields, and even the United Nations supports this infrastructure due to the overwhelming evidence, right? This isn't just reviews, there are thousands of peer reviewed studies and case studies on this. It's been implemented around the world, this ain't new. What's next, wind turbines cause cancer? Come on.
Let's see these peer reviewed studies you speak of. I can almost guarantee you're extrapolating the results of some studies that analyze densely populated urban areas to the East side of providence which is more of a suburban part of a small- to mid-sized city.
​
>The loudest people are the minority against it. Demonstrated in full force at the community meetings.
It's the minority tho. Doesn't mean that they represent the average resident.
>Please cite your evidence.
Which part?
>Perhaps you should read the evidence instead of basing your opinion on feelings.
>
>Lastly, you keep harping on the business point and ignoring people actually fucking dying and being too scared to even go on Hope St. Why? What about everyone else in the area who doesn't drive cars? What about climate change? Is this worth 1-2 parking spots per business?
Not based on feelings. I feel like you're the one who will back any position that fits your personally preferred outcome without evidence. I live right off of Hope St and have not seen or heard of any deaths or severe injuries during my time here. That kind of alarmism makes for a good "holier than thou" argument tho, so kudos on that.
And climate change? Give me a break. People aren't going to be biking 5-10 miles to go out to eat, and using or not using 0.1 gallons of gas isn't going to have any real impact. Hope St. parking gets crowded as-is without closing off one side of the street.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iub2odj wrote
>Let's see these peer reviewed studies you speak of.
No. This is a consensus. You can use Google scholar, look at the US dept. of transportion website, or simply google and find many, many resources.
> I live right off of Hope St and have not seen or heard of any deaths or severe injuries during my time here.
So do I and I have been fucking chased, threatened, and run off the road - on Hope. I've had friends die in Providence. People who went to be community meetings also told similar stories.
Everything else you said reeks of pure ignorance and lack of empathy for noncar users and thus is not worth my time. Also not going to humor anti-science propaganda around climate change.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iubxf0e wrote
Pretty much all prior studies examine whether it impacts businesses in crowded city areas, not in more suburban areas like the east side. Also, parking on Hope st can already be a pain sometimes. I can only imagine how bad it would be if you take away half the spots.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iubzzc5 wrote
Hope st is a very crowded area, especially with the huge student population, in one of the most dense cities in the US.
We did the trail for a week and it was fine, more people were able to access Hope, families, kids, the disabled, etc, finally felt safe and could commute and ride around. As per studies and my observation, there's an over abundance of parking. And again, this infrastructure reduces parking needs as it encourages noncar transport.
We cannot keep catering to only cars especially in the wake of safety hazards, a growing dense city, climate change, and everything else.
If a business cannot survive losing 1-2 parking spots (even though all evidence shows it increases business), that's on them.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iufqv1v wrote
Hope St is not that crowded if you’re comparing it to any city area. If you’ve never ventured outside RI, take a trip to NYC or any major city and tell me how similar it is to Hope St.
If you’re Wara Wara, KG Kitchen, or any other sit down restaurant on Hope St, your typical customer is not coming via bicycle.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iufr5wa wrote
> If you’re Wara Wara, KG Kitchen, or any other sit down restaurant on Hope St, your typical customer is not coming via bicycle.
A typical customer absolutely is... well, they won't be because Hope St. is literally a death trap. Very few I know in the cycling community go down Hope for that reason and people in the community meetings have said the same. You've surely been to them and heard this, right?
You've also yet to convince me that 1-2 parking spaces is worth the lives of non-car users, climate change, accessibility, losing business, that this infrastructure won't reduce car use and thus parking needs, etc. I've also provided you with details around local and urban planning studies but you simply dismiss it all. This feels like I'm arguing with those anti-vaxxers or evolution deniers again.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iufsso1 wrote
This feels like I’m arguing with someone who makes AOC look like a tea party conservative.
It’s great that you bike everywhere and hang out with other like-minded cyclists, but that doesn’t mean you represent the standard resident or potential customer. The average person is not completing the Tour de France prior to sitting down for tapas and cocktails.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iuftewc wrote
You literally ignored all my points, again.
>This feels like I’m arguing with someone who makes AOC look like a tea party conservative.
What are you... you're literally playing the typical republican, car obsessed American here.
>It’s great that you bike everywhere and hang out with other like-minded cyclists, but that doesn’t mean you represent the standard resident or potential customer.
Most people own bikes and have families, and they want the Hope St. bike trail according to surveys, again, primarily for safety reasons as stated in the community meetings.
>The average person is not completing the Tour de France prior to sitting down for tapas and cocktails.
Huh...? Bro. I have a cheap bike I sometimes use to commute short distances like many others. I drive, I bus, I walk. The typical resident in the area likely doesn't even own a car as students may be the majority on the East Side, but that's not the point.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iufwcvf wrote
>What are you... you're literally playing the typical republican, car obsessed American here.
Our cities aren’t designed to get around solely by walking, biking, and relying on public transit. You can call me car obsessed all you want, but I don’t see any other way that I could practically survive while living on the East side.
>Most people own bikes and have families, and they want the Hope St. bike trail according to surveys, again, primarily for safety reasons as stated in the community meetings.'
Most people going out to dinner at Wara Wara are not biking there, with or without the bike trail. I’m not doubting that a number of very vocal people want the bike trail, but soon we will have a bunch of vocal people complaining about the lack of parking.
>Huh...? Bro. I have a cheap bike I sometimes use to commute short distances like many others. I drive, I bus, I walk. The typical resident in the area likely doesn't even own a car as students may be the majority on the East Side, but that's not the point.
Congrats! I’m sure your decision to bike 1 mile to Hope St instead of driving has really put a dent in global warming.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iufx6mh wrote
> Our cities aren’t designed to get around solely by walking, biking, and relying on public transit.
Wait, are you telling me Providence was built when cars were around or did we accommodate them over time while ignoring other modes of transit?
We just started putting in this accessible infrastructure a few years ago. We're currently catching up to other cities. Your suggestion to continue to cater to only cars is kinda fucking stupid and goes against modern urban planning and basic reasoning.
>You can call me car obsessed all you want, but I don’t see any other way that I could practically survive while living on the East side.
Proved my point about the need for accessible infrastructure 👍
>Most people going out to dinner at Wara Wara are not biking there, with or without the bike trail.
Most are but again, not the point.
>but soon we will have a bunch of vocal people complaining about the lack of parking.
oh no, they might need to walk 30 extra seconds!
>Congrats! I’m sure your decision to bike 1 mile to Hope St instead of driving has really put a dent in global warming.
"Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Rhode Island. Vehicles accounted for 35.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions in 2017." - RI DEM
StonksGuy3000 t1_iug1eyp wrote
>Wait, are you telling me Providence was built when cars were around or did we accommodate them over time while ignoring other modes of transit?
We’re not moving back to less efficient modes of transportation as out primary means of getting around. It’d be nice to have more options, but I will still need to drive when I go to work in the morning.
>We just started putting in this accessible infrastructure a few years ago. We're currently catching up to other cities. Your suggestion to continue to cater to only cars is kinda fucking stupid and goes against all science and basic reasoning.
You continue to ignore the fact that Hope St is in the middle of a residential area, not a city downtown. There are many locals like myself that can walk to anywhere on Hope St, but people coming in from more than a mile or so away are going to drive.
>Most are but again, not the point.
This is an assertion of yours without evidence. Perhaps this is why many of the business owners see it differently than you. Presumably if they thought this change would help business, they would all be fully supportive.
>oh no, they might need to walk 30 extra seconds!
And possibly waste twenty minutes driving in circles looking for a spot while polluting the environment.
>"Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Rhode Island. Vehicles accounted for 35.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions in 2017." - RI DEM
My point was that if you live sufficiently close that you have the option of biking or walking, your drive would be so short that the impact on emissions would be negligible. And if you live 5+ miles away, you’re probably not considering biking to dinner to begin with.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iug3zqt wrote
> I will still need to drive when I go to work in the morning.
No, when we build the accessible lane, you HAVE to use it. And since you drive, everyone else drives. eyeroll
>You continue to ignore the fact that Hope St is in the middle of a residential area, not a city downtown.
Residential areas have the most activity when it comes to non-car usage.
>but people coming in from more than a mile or so away are going to drive.
Tell how building an accessible lane is stopping you from commuting a mile.
>And possibly waste twenty minutes driving in circles looking for a spot while polluting the environment.
City and local studies have shown there's an overabundance of parking already that is never filled to capacity. You'll park on the corner and walk 30 seconds, boohoo!
I literally was there last night and found parking directly in front. I was there a few days ago again and found similar parking. In my almost 20 years here, I have never had an issue parking, lmao
>And if you live 5+ miles away, you’re probably not considering biking to dinner to begin with.
Interesting how other cities and countries people do that just fine... something, something... infrastructure? Naw, can't be! Surely, people don't bike/scooter/walk/bus commute in the smallest state in the nation because they're just lazy, not because they don't feel safe and would likely die because we only cater to cars.
StonksGuy3000 t1_iug75es wrote
>No, when we build the accessible lane, you HAVE to use it. And since you drive, everyone else drives. eyeroll
No idea what you’re even responding to here. I think you misinterpreted what I was saying.
Anyway, kind of tired of dealing with your pompous know-it-all attitude and self righteous manner of conversing. We clearly don’t see eye to eye and likely never will.
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iug7dt9 wrote
ill never see eye to eye with someone who only cares about cars and nothing else
I'll see you at the community meetings.
whatsaphoto t1_iu76vfk wrote
Ahh, fair enough.
[deleted] t1_iu6jvm2 wrote
Its not a political issue… imagine not eating ramen you love because the guy who owns the place has an opinion about a bike lane lmao
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iu9097d wrote
> Its not a political issue… imagine not eating ramen you love because the guy who owns the place has an opinion about a bike lane lmao
I suggest you read on what 'Political' means. It absolutely is political as it involves policy and public affairs.
[deleted] t1_iu90n1b wrote
Oh my bad, just learning what political means rn… def don’t eat there because of his politics, I get it now thank you locksmith pitiful
Locksmith-Pitiful t1_iud5dtl wrote
You can choose wherever you want to eat or shop. There's places I support because of their stances and politics and shops I don't support because of their stances and politics. It goes both ways for me.
[deleted] t1_iudshyy wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iud5e7j wrote
[deleted]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments