phantom tollbooths in Davis Sq. ...

[an-art-worker.livejournal.com]

apropos of nothing and not a serious proposal but I was thinking about sales taxes last night, the discussion of tolls on 93 south and something to do with all the border violence going on in the world these days. Suddenly I had this image of tollbooths/checkpoints on the roads entering Davis Sq. Weird but interesting to speculate on.

The growth in popularity of the sq. has brought higher rents and housing prices, higher prices in stores and bars and general gentrification. The city of Somerville and the property owners benefit but the residents don't. Would be interesting to have a toll that went to offset the costs of gentrification to people who actually live here.

Comments

[artic-monkeys.livejournal.com]

People can ride their bikes, Take the T, a bus, walk or call PlanetTran to take them to Davis. After that, what is wrong with limiting the commercial growth, and traffic of an area in order to preserve the quality of life that residents want? There are streets turned into one ways just for that reason. Keeping traffic out of neighborhoods.

Here is a good read too: http://www.knowledgeplex.org/showdoc.html?id=104830

[overstim.livejournal.com]

Youre talking about limiting the growth of an area to preserve the quality of life that a FEW residents want. Im sure that if you presented the possibilities AND CONSEQUENCES of such an idea to the whole area, youd be very disappointed in the resulting vote.

[artic-monkeys.livejournal.com]

I would be very interested to know what everyone thinks and see how they would vote on that. I would like to apply what you are saying to the cape wind project. Those folks in gated communities can do this but we can't. That sucks!

The folks that started Davis fought hard to stop 50 houses from being torn down and fought to stop park-ride communter parking lots. Now the biggest champions for change – the original residents – cannot afford to stay.

Votes are more indicatave of assumptions than of reality.

[turil.livejournal.com]

We often vote for things that are really not in our best interests or at least in ways that reflect an unrealistic belief about an issue. So a vote is ultimately no way to judge the validity and potential effectiveness of a policy.

I agree with you about the possibility that many people would be afraid of limiting and/or slowing motor vehicle traffic in Davis. It's a symptom of the trend for folks who grew up in the suburbs and are very attached to car ownership to move into the traditionally car-free urban area of Davis Square. So I imagine that there might indeed be a lot of resistance to the idea of returning Davis to it's original status as a carfree or car light area. But it's definitely been done in many different parts of the world, and when done right it leads to a really thriving and healthy commercial and residential community. In other words, quality of life goes up for everyone, not just a few.

I think there has been an amazingly effective campaign by the automobile industry for almost a century now, that funcions to almost completely brainwash the public into believing that cars increase one's quality of life. For sure, cars can be extremely useful, especially for those who live in remote areas or haul lots of stuff. But studies have shown, and a little navel gazing on your own might show you that in most instances, car ownership and use usually creates more problems than is solves, especially in dense urban areas.

But since our government policies are effectively kept in check by the very powerful automobile industry, better transportation options are often not made available or are even prohibited by law! So we're sort of screwed, unless a large enough segment of the population wakes up to the brainwashing and starts to impliment real, sustainable, healthy, and enjoyable forms of transportation. Luckily, the Boston area was one of the pioneers in sustainable and efficient public transportation and human powered transportation, and so we have many great travel options available to us. Which is why Davis Square is so great in the first place. History has proved that when quality mass transit is available in an area - as it was in the beginning part of the 1900s and then more recently in the past 20 years - it can become a very vibrant community.

I should say "tradtionally car LIGHT area of Davis Square"

[turil.livejournal.com]

As far as I know, Davis has never officially been car free (at least not for more than half a beautiful Saturday in July...)

Re: I should say "tradtionally car LIGHT area of Davis Square"

[hrafn.livejournal.com]

I'm not even sure it was ever "car light." I did a school project on the Square a few years ago, and back in the 50s and 60s, it was an even more paved-for-cars place than it is now; I've seen old photos, and it looked pretty grim, cause that nice plaza in the middle didn't used to be there. (Plus there were surface rail lines.)

Re: Votes are more indicatave of assumptions than of reality.

[overstim.livejournal.com]

I'm only familiar, mostly, with the northeast, and London. I'd honestly be interested in examples where limiting car traffic resulted in a more thriving urban area. The whole urban planning concept has always facinated me.

Re: Votes are more indicatave of assumptions than of reality.

[hrafn.livejournal.com]

It's a tricky thing, because if businesses are making a lot of money off of people seeing them when they drive by, if you turn that auto route into a pedestrian-only zone, those places get less traffic - the drivers will mostly seek other routes, and they're not likely to end up walking past. Some business districts have been badly hurt by changing traffic patterns. I can't remember any specific examples off hand; sorry. It's kind of a pity, because I'd rather see more pedestrian-only zones, but they don't work well unless you've got enough density.

Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[turil.livejournal.com]

While "drive by" marketing is one option for bringing in business, it is certainly not the only way to get customers. Traffic (of all transportation forms) is always good for business, and as I mentioned, the slower the traffic (studies show 3 mph is ideal) the more business there will be. Though if a store isn't offering what people are looking for, or at least doesn't appear to be*, then the business will suffer.

It obviously takes more than just slowing the traffic down to create a thriving community. But doing so will allow a community more time (literally) to do so.

Oh, and I agree that density is important. But Somerville being one of the world's most densely populated cities (we used to be #1, supposedly, but I think we're down somewhere in the top 5 now), I don't think density is going to be a problem for Davis Square!


* An example of a business that is losing potential customers by appearing to not offer what people need is the weird grocery store McKinnons (I think). The signs scream "dead animals for sale!" to me. As a vegetarian, I think, OK, not a store I'm going to bother shopping at, since I don't need any dead animals. However, I do need groceries - stuff that I consider actual food for me. I imagine that McKinnons has some groceries other than animal bits, but those signs prevent me from even considering going inside and seeing what they have to offer. It's not like a don't shop in stores that also sell animal bits. I mean I don't really have a choice, I don't know of any vegan grocery stores anywhere on the East Coast. So if McKinnons wanted my business, they could choose to market their store in a less offensive (to me) way.

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

McKinnon's indeed has stuff other than dead animal bits. The front half is pretty much all meat (and astonishing cheap, decent meat at that), but the back half has a deli counter (which I think has non-meat objects) and a reasonable supply of fruits and vegetables for a place of its size.

Meat is definitely the strength of McKinnon's, and I wouldn't treat it as a destination if the sole thing you're after is produce, but if you happen to need some peppers or something on your way home, it's a great deal.

We are avid meat-eaters but we also had the experience of not going in there for a long time because we didn't think it offered what we needed...it just looks kind of dirty and downscale from the outside. But it's actually pretty excellent inside for our needs. And it always has a lot of customers -- it seems like once people know about it they go there a lot, so somehow they get good business despite the offputting exterior.

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[komos.livejournal.com]

McKinnon's isn't a grocer so much as an augmented butcher, so I'm guessing that they've anticipated that there won't be a lot of vegetarians that frequent their store, and that they're ok with that. What you're suggesting is akin to saying that the Burren should stop serving Guinness because there are people who don't drink, or that Redbones should stop serving ribs because there are vegans who live nearby.

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[turil.livejournal.com]

I think you may have misinterpreted what I said. I was merely pointing out that McKinnon's signs say a lot about what customers think about the place, and whether or not they bother to visit, unrelated to what their actual selection might be. See what I mean? My point was that their marketing is not as effective as it could be for bringing a variety of customers in, and that no amount of great urban planning can help a business thrive if it doesn't appear to offer the customers what they are looking for.

It sounds like you thought I was suggesting that McKinnons stop selling meat. I'm not sure why you got that impression, because I never even implied that. (A store like that isn't likely to stop selling animals for food until the vegetarian tipping point is reached in this area, which probably won't be for another generation, I expect).

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[komos.livejournal.com]

* An example of a business that is losing potential customers by appearing to not offer what people need is the weird grocery store McKinnons (I think). The signs scream "dead animals for sale!" to me.

&

...if McKinnons wanted my business, they could choose to market their store in a less offensive (to me) way.

You may not have suggested that they stop selling meat, but your assumption that they are a "weird grocery store" shows a fundamental misunderstanding of their function. McKinnon's is a butcher, so I'm asking how you propose a butcher, whose primary business model revolves around the sale of meat, should market its goods (in other words, meat) in a way that is inoffensive to vegetarians? Yes, their signs say a lot about what customers think about the place, but a butcher is going to have a target audience that is unlikely include vegans and vegetarians. Just as a bar isn't going to cater to teetotalers and a baker likely won't try to sell bread to people suffering from celiac disease, a butcher is not going to factor people who won't buy their goods anyway into their marketing plan.

McKinnon's marketing works quite well to bring a variety of customers from all walks of life, ranging from young professionals to working moms to the occasional chef. The things that these customers seem to have in common is that they're omnivorous and they enjoy getting a good deal on an excellent product. I've rarely gone in where there weren't lines at the checkout that were four deep, so I'm guessing that they're doing ok despite they're failure to market in a vegetarian-friendly way.


A store like that isn't likely to stop selling animals for food until the vegetarian tipping point is reached in this area

I cannot stress this enough: McKinnon's is a butcher. A butcher sells animals for food. If a butcher stops selling animals for food, it means that they've gone out of business.

As for your inability to find a vegan grocer in the area, I'm going to leave you with the same advice that you've given to me and to others in this post... "Be the change you want to be." If you need to a vegan grocery so as to avoid the offense of meat altogether, draw up a business plan, find a space in the Square, secure financing and have a go. If you're able to sell excellent produce at reasonable prices, I'll likely shop there. Of course, if you do go with this idea, having McKinnon's nearby will probably contribute to your success since the omnivores who might shop at your store won't have to be forced to choose between shopping in the Square for excellent produce and no meat and heading over to the local Megalo-mart for acceptable produce with meat.

There's nothing wrong with having a business that doesn't make everyone happy.

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[komos.livejournal.com]

I'm not confused. I am simply attempting to explain what McKinnon's does. They sell meat, and their signage is meant to attract people who wish to purchase meat. That they have pickles and asparagus is incidental to the fact that they sell meat. If they were really interested in pushing the pickles or asparagus, they would put signs up for pickles and asparagus. Instead, they put up signs for meat. You have said that putting up signs for meat just says to you that they're selling animals as food, and because you find that offensive, you are unlikely to go in to see what else is there. What you've not understood is that because their primary goal is to sell meat and not pickles and asparagus, having signs that push something other than meat is counterproductive to what they are trying to accomplish, which oddly enough is to sell meat.

The other examples I brought up were an attempt to illustrate just how absurd the idea that a butcher marketing something other than meat is. Does their signage affect their ability to sell to vegetarians? Probably, but since they are a butcher, it's probably safe to assume that they didn't really have vegetarians in mind when they opened.

By extension, that a butcher uses signs that advertise meat is a very good marketing technique, considering that they're in business to sell meat. Your assumption that they are losing business because they don not cater to your specialized needs is partly correct, but that business lost is so infinitessimal that it is effectively irrelevant. On the other hand, if they didn't attract their core demographic - namely, omnivores and other meat-eaters - with the promise of meat, they would lose significant amounts of business because these are the people to whom they are trying to sell. Your example began as flawed because you assumed that they were a "weird little grocery store" instead of a specialty market. It continues to be flawed because of your insistence that a handful of vegetarians never going in because they assume that they only sell meat should even cause a butcher to raise an eyebrow.

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[turil.livejournal.com]

I guess I give up. I'm really not interested in McKinnons at all. I was only using it as an example. I really couldn't care less what they sell or who they are. It really doesn't matter to me, and I'm sorry you've felt the need to spend so much time explaining it to me.

Re: Marketing sometimes takes more than a sign

[turil.livejournal.com]

Ok, I'm really sorry, I'm appearantly not making myself at all clear here. All I'm trying to say that regardless of what's inside a store, the signs on the outside play a big part of what potential customers think a store offers. As it turns out, McKinnons does indeed have products that I need, but I didn't know that because the signs they chose to put up in their windows. So, in this case, the "drive by marketing" (which was the subject of the original discussion) was insufficient to get a potential customer into the store.

And again, to be clear, I'm not at all saying that McKinnons should do anything different if they are happy with their level of business. Ok? I honestly don't give one diddly about McKinnons one way or another, I'm merely using the store's choice in signage as an example of how signs can affect business. I'm sorry if my choice of stores to use as an example confused you :-)

Urban Planning for Humans

[turil.livejournal.com]

Oh, you should check out the organization Project for Public Spaces (http://www.pps.org/). They are at the leading edge of the movement for urban planning with the human heart in mind.

Re: Urban Planning for Humans

[push-stars.livejournal.com]

Great link, How can we get more folks in our community to learn about and get involved in this type of planning?