Davis Square Task Force agenda for Wed 6/28

[ron_newman]

The Davis Square Task Force will meet Wedneday, June 28 from 7-9pm in the Tufts Administration Building, 167 Holland St. Everyone is invited. Here is the agenda. (I didn't write it up, I'm just passing it on from Chris Daveta, CDAVETA@ci.somerville.ma.us)

7:00-7:10 - Intros

7:10-7:25 - Adam Dash presentation on project next to the Bike Path

7:25-7:30 - Brief update on bike path plans with MBTA

7:30-7:45- DARBI [Davis Area Resident-Business Initiative] Update

7:45-8:00 - Michele Bisoce: Som|Dog presentation about off-leash areas
on bike path

8:00-8:30 - Traffic in Davis Square - Mark Chase, Davis resident and
traffic consultant to present (continued from previous meeting)

8:30-8:40 - Sara Rosenfeld about Community Servings

8:40-8:50 - Dunkin' Donuts' possible proposal for 24 hours
Mr. Crepe coming to Someday Café site

8:50-8:55 - Sign at Middlesex Bank in Davis Sq.

8:55-9:00 - Wrap up and next meeting

Comments

[ron_newman]

I'm pretty sure state law prohibits 24-hour bars.

[push-stars.livejournal.com]

People who own houses and people who rent have different perspective on a lot of issues. I have been a renter for most of my life. When I lived and rented in Brookline, I wanted a place that served food late at night and close by. I had a late shift and it was frustrating if you needed to get something like medicine or a burito and everything was closed. There was one 23 hour store nearby though. The streets were empty and quiet at night. And there was only one person in the store staring at ice cream. I look back on how quite and peaceful it was living there. Now that I own a house I am concerned about quality of life issues and crime. I don't know how bad the crime is in Davis Square but on my street there has been a recent rash of break-ins and several cars have had their windows busted. I can understand why having a lot of places open later at night would concern people.

[chumbolly.livejournal.com]

Hmmm ... interesting how owning can change one's perspective.

I spend a bit of time in the East Village of New York City, where I am often out at ridiculously late hours. I almost never feel unsafe there precisely because there are people on the street and businesses are open at all hours. The presense of people often precludes crimes from happening. Business owners don't want crime, so they'll often take an active role in discouraging it and they become "eyes on the street" whenever they're open. Not always (as the Somerville Home/Heroin Depot shows), but generally. Jane Jacobs, in her masterpeice "Death and Life of Great American Cities," described how a vibrant neighborhood requires different uses at different times of the day to keep it from being seedy--office workers on the streets in the morning, lunchtime and evenings; shopkeepers, parents and children during the day; and diners and bar patrons at night. The longer you extend the hours that people have a legitimate reason to be on the street, the better. There used to be a restaurant in Davis called Dolly's that was only open in the middle of the night. It was generally packed and it didn't cause any significant problems despite being a magnet for people with the drunk munchies. Just some food for thought.

[push-stars.livejournal.com]

That is good stuff thanks! It leads me to an interesting article. Would you consider Davis square to be seedy or are the nearby quiet neighborhoods seedy? Would "seedy" apply more for say the assembly square area?

Check out this article: Can You Be an Urbanist and Still Like Cities? (http://www.alexmarshall.org/index.php?pageId=5469)


"Life begets life," Jacobs wrote. Busy streets are safe streets. Empty streets are dangerous. That’s no more than simple common sense now. But it was heretical 40 years ago.

Death and Life was prescient in so many ways that one short column couldn’t possibly acknowledge them all. Jacobs argued for the reclaiming of seedy industrial waterfronts for recreational purposes. "The waterfront itself," she argued, "is the first wasted asset capable of drawing people at leisure."

She warned against single-purpose zoning and described mixed-use development as the foremost weapon in rebuilding a city neighborhood. Today that is accepted wisdom not only among New Urbanists but in the planning department of virtually every big American city.

Perhaps even more important — and certainly less heeded — was Jacobs’ corollary warning that financial capital and physical rebuilding will not restore a community whose social life has been depleted. "It is fashionable," Jacobs wrote, "to suppose that certain touchstones of the good life will create good neighborhoods — schools, parks, clean housing and the like. How easy life would be if this were so!... There is no direct, simple relationship between good housing and good behavior..." and "important as good schools are, they prove totally undependable at rescuing bad neighborhoods." Billions of wasted dollars and limitless human disappointment could have been averted by a public willingness to face up to those Jacobean truths.

[chumbolly.livejournal.com]

Davis is definitely not seedy, but there's room to improve. Assembly Square REALLY needs improvement, but the current plans to plop down a multi-use housing/shopping/office mecca would do nothing to satisfy Jane Jacobs if she were still alive. Actually, come to think of it, I personally saw Jane Jacobs tear into an urban planner who was touting the plans for Assembly Square as being "oh-so-great" and "Jacobian." She had to explain to the hapless planner that he completely misunderstood a lot of her theories. Even in their best iteration, the redevelopment plans call for large-scale, complete redevelopment based on large parcels and excessive green space. Jacobs always emphasized keeping old buildings (because old buildings tend to be run-down and cheap, and therefore affordable to new businesses) and keeping a walkable street pattern. Diversity of uses is a step in the right direction, but there must also be a diversity of age and economics. Green space becomes a place for trash and crime if its not tightly surrounded by a vibrant urban area. The key idea is people, people, people. Don't fear their presence, encourage it.

[ron_newman]

Having more things open at night increases the quality of life in the neighborhood, by making the neighborhood more useful. I don't see how it affects crime in any way. My opinion would not change if I owned instead of renting.

[push-stars.livejournal.com]

I don't know about one particular opinion, but my perspective has definitely changed. What you are saying about crime is true in as far as you can maintain the kind of local community you have now in the process. Influxes of chain stores and new businesses along with opening them later at night can change your demographic, and help contribute to more anonymity and more crime. If local people can form the casual relationships upon which trust can grow and help prevent crime then you are right. So even though I can understand your point I can still see how it may also still be a concern for people who live in nearby quiet neighborhoods. Families in the nearby houses may be accustomed to quite nights without traffic, cabs and sirens and crowds of people walking outside of their windows. Or perhaps they all feel the same way as you?

[cleanup-davissq.livejournal.com]

Is it coming down to renters versus owners?

The 'convenience' of getting 4am bread and milk verses people talking loudly getting the "drunk munchies"

The 'convenience' of drinking in a bar until 3am verses half empty beer glasses deposited on top of mail boxes

The 'convenience' of renting and not really caring about being quiet verses owners investing in an area and old time residents who do not want Davis to become seedy like Allston.

[ron_newman]

Nobody's talking about extending bar hours to 3 am -- as I said, I'm pretty sure state law doesn't allow that.

[push-stars.livejournal.com]

No it should be a partnership of different perspectives working together to make things better for the whole community. And be careful a lot of renters like Ron here care more about Somerville than a lot of home owners. Espcially abasantee owners that don't take care of their properties.

[cleanup-davissq.livejournal.com]

Agreed!
Absentee landlords that neglect their property are the worst!!!