The Davis Square Community

The cars go out to the suburbs! And then they stay there. In the city there just ins't enough room for everyone to drive or own a car. So instead we've got a whole host of great transportation options like biking, walking, buses, trains, taxis, and um... pedicabs!

From:

csbermack.livejournal.com

Ok, now assume we live in 2006 and those options are insufficient. Which they are.

If you close davis to traffic, where does the traffic go? If you kick all the cars out of Somerville altogether, where are you going to put the 1000 parking spaces at Alewife? Do you only want people to live in somerville who can find jobs in somerville?

I should add two hours to my commute so you don't have to wait three minutes to cross a street?

From:

No, Most of the traffic we are talking about are cars destined for davis square. You can still drive around it or through it.

From:

"Ok, now assume we live in 2006 and those options are insufficient. Which they are."

I understand that you don't think that carfree living is possible, but a large percentage of Somerville residents do in fact live carfree quite happily and easily. Most of us don't work in Somerville either. Niether my husband nor myself work in the city (me in Cambridge, and my husband in Littleton), and we get to work without needing to drive a car.

Perhaps if your commute is so long, you might want to look for a better housing location? Or maybe a different job. Or try telecommuting? My Somervillian friend used to complain that he had to drive his car to work in Burlington. But then he decided that he really enjoyed commuting by bike in the warmer months and then arranged to telecommute most of his week year round. Another friend car pools a lot.

As for your question, yes, I think you should have some responsibility in sharing the "burden" of living in the city with a hundred thousand other humans and consider everyone's needs, as well as your own. It sounds like you aren't really as suited to city living, and might be much happier in a less densly populated area? No one needs to be unhappy here, because there are so many diverse places in the world to live :-)

From:

Just one minor thing... Davis Square is not really "the city." Yes, it's arguably part of greater Boston, but it shares more more characteristics with, say, Arlington Center than it does the Back Bay.

From:

When I said "the city" I was referring to the City of Somerville, not the more abstract idea of an urban area. Sorry for the confusion.

From:

If I recall, the poster lives in Medford, but frequents Davis Square and has to commute through Somerville. The reality is that Somerville and its immediate environs are not car free and are not likely to be any time soon. Closing off Davis to cars simply worsens the problem in the surrounding communities.

From:

csbermack.livejournal.com

There are plenty of people who don't drive. But giving up the car not acceptable for a large number of people, and this is the reality that I think you're missing. You cannot make all the cars go away by wishing, or by explaining to people that they're not civic minded or suited to city living and need to go away or find new jobs. Besides being arrogant and offensive, it doesn't work as a way to institute social policy.

So basically your answer to "what about this specific objection to a proposed change" is "in an ideal world, that is not a problem" or even "Sucks to be you!"?

If you block traffic to davis, the traffic will go through powderhouse, teele, porter. It will back up, because the capacity isn't there. Residents who drive will hate you; people who currently drive to davis to give davis money won't; residents who live on streets that happen to be through streets will have their neighborhoods destroyed; emergency vehicles will be unable to get through.

Wise urban change is not sudden or ill-planned.

From:

The destination for 80% of the cars in Davis traffic is Davis square. They are not trying to go through it or around it but to it. They are either going to some place in Davis or they are going to park and ride the T from Davis. If they can't and don't drive to Davis Square most of the traffic goes away. The traffic you are talking about will actually benefit.

From:

Source for that statistic?

From:

I am really just guessing on that one. My thoughts being that People looking for parking drive around a few times before they find a spot and the whole square is easy to avoid if you don't need to go to it. Most people who need to drive through it live nearby right? It is not a direct route in and out of boston cambridge like Mass ave. is. The only time I drive through it is when I am going to the parking permit place or to some place in the square. What are others finding?

From:

I've certainly driven and especially biked through it (I bike a lot more than I drive) on my way to somewhere else, just because I happen to know those streets a lot better than any of the alternate routes, which is why I'd like to see a source before I buy that statistic.

From:

where do you live?

From:

I want you to be happy where you are, and it sounds like you aren't happy in the city, and that your desire to commute by car is interfering with the community's best interests for thriving, accessable, and safe streets. I don't want it to suck to be you, but it sounds like it does. Maybe I'm not understaning you correctly when I get that impression?

I'm just saying that if your car is a priority to your life, then maybe you might be happier living in an area where the car is more appropriate and practical?

From:

I know we have had this discussion before so I'm sure my words are useless, but things you consider to be reasonable options are not necessarily things that other people consider to be reasonable options. Getting a better housing location may be prohibitively expensive (or may mean that other house residents are no longer near their jobs). Getting a different job is not exactly something to be tossed around flippantly -- some people are in jobs they love and, inconceivable as you apparently find this, happen to value that more than they value their mode of transportation. Some people (such as myself) are in industries that do not have a great many jobs and likely never will; should the entire industry die out in deference to your desire that people switch jobs? Some jobs (again, such as mine) are impossible to do by telecommuting.

I am fortunate enough to be able to live extremely close to my husband's job, and close enough to mine that I can usually bike it as long as the weather is not absurdly severe. But there is no public transportation access to my job, and it's much too far to walk, and I cannot telecommute or flextime or just not come in one day simply because there are conditions I don't feel safe biking in, so I need sometimes to have a car. (And I should note here that I am willing to bike in torrential downpours, significant cold, and snow. But I'm not willing to bike when it's cold enough that exposed skin frostbites in something too close to the length of my commute, or in snow that falls faster than plows can clear it, or in extremely high winds.) It is not feasible for me to live closer to my job (too expensive), or to switch jobs to one closer to my house (too few and not nearly as good).

In addition, I'm pregnant, and while I intend to keep bike commuting as long as I can, there may well become a point when it is neither possible nor safe. My speed and endurance and hill-climbing capacity are already significantly restricted, and many women experience balance problems which make bikes not safe, even if they are experienced riders.

Naturally, this means I will soon have an infant, and I will need to take the infant places. Infants cannot ride in bike seats or trailers until after a certain age. I cannot expose an infant to all the weather conditions I would be willing to bike in. Children cannot safely and independently get themselves places via public transportation, biking, or feet for some years. So the car will continue to be of use. I suppose you could step in at this point and argue that I shouldn't be having a child if it makes a car-free lifestyle harder, but I will laugh at you if you try that, because "motherhood" and "not owning a car" exist at such completely different points along my value spectrum that comparison is just ridiculous.

I'm in the process of buying a house in Somerville, and the car will come with us. I hope to be able to use it as little as possible, but that isn't "none".

I'm very glad for you that your life works out in such a way you are able to make sacrifices that other people would consider prohibitive (or such that for you they are not even sacrifices) in order to avoid owning a car, but your generalization of those experiences to everyone's is...not very credible. As someone who was car-free for about six years in Boston I ought to be the most sympathetic possible audience for you, and I wish I could be, but I can't, because you seem so profoundly unsympathetic to others' situations.

From:

I understand that everyone has different priorities, as I mentioned before. I'm just pointing out that sometimes we aren't aware of our own priorities and we assume that we don't have options that we really do. As I mentioned, the automobile industry is one of the most powerful entities out there in the political and media world, and alongside the energy industry spends most of their time and power creating more business by convincing the world that car ownershipliness is godliness :-)

I am absolutely sympathetic to other's situations and I'm sorry that that's not coming across for you. I had hoped that my statement "No one needs to be unhappy here, because there are so many diverse places in the world to live :-)" would clarify that my goal is to literally help everyone be happy.

From:

Oh, and on a side note, it is quite legal and safe for an infant, even a newborn, to ride in a bike trailer. The law only specifies that a child may not be carried on the bicycle itself (in a child seat, for example), but carring a baby in a secure trailer being towed by a bike is absolutely allowed.

You may not like the idea though, and that's cool. I just didn't want you to think that it wasn't a legitimate option.

From:

That's not what I've heard when I ask people with baby trailers about their experiences; they say they're all designed for kids who have good head control, thus 6 months at least, and often they're sized for kids who are more 10+ months. Are you aware of trailers designed for younger kids, that can deal with the head control issue?

(I'm delighted with the thought of tossing a baby into a trailer and biking up Belmont Hill to get back in shape. ;) I just have not heard anyone yet say you can do that, and I tend to ask parents about their bike seats/trailers whenever practical these days.)

From:

I'll ask my friends Joel and Lynn who are die hard cyclists and just had twins. I know they haven't been biking as much with the babies, but they probably know enough about the various options available.

From:

And therein lies the trouble. I'd be far less likely to trek into the Square from Medford if I couldn't take my car. It's a question of a 5-10 minute drive and the means to transport things or a 5-10 minute walk to a bus that will take 15-20 minutes to get to the Square (assuming I time it right) and figuring out -purely hypothetically - a way to carry my empties to Downtown W&S and then get steaks home from McKinnon's without having them go tainty.

Because transport options aren't nearly as robust as they could be, it's precisely the sort of choice that drives people from supporting quirky small businesses to shopping at the megalo-mart.

From:

Well, the answer is to have a similarly useful small city center in Medford for you! You shouldn't have to go to another city to get the basics.

From:

In a perfect world, I'd live above a bakery and be able to purchase local, organic produce with a short walk. My local publican would know my name and have drinks ready for me, and would probably trade meals for cheese of my making.

The idea certainly has appeal, but I don't think that it's entirely possible given our corporate chain, profit-driven economy. There is certainly a balance that can be struck, but I think the reason why places like Davis work is because there are just as many people who treat it as a destination as call it home.

From:

The only way your "perfect world" will happen is if you make it happen. You'd be surprised what you can accomplish if you only try...

From: