Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

March 28th, 2018, 7:54 pm #921

tyu12 wrote:
flounda wrote: Where will they find parking to accommodate all these units??
40 units at least 40 cars I bet it will be closer to 80 cars
40 units where, tyu?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 9th, 2008, 8:26 pm

March 28th, 2018, 8:18 pm #922

Karly wrote:
tyu12 wrote:
flounda wrote: Where will they find parking to accommodate all these units??
40 units at least 40 cars I bet it will be closer to 80 cars
40 units where, tyu?
I thought they were talking that amount for the old Y and 30 for the old camerons.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

March 28th, 2018, 8:25 pm #923

You are conflating two (at least) projects, tyu. Each project comes with its own parking plan. The old Y project does not have a definite amount of units determined last I knew...depending on how many BR's, etc.  They were planning a level of parking in the building.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 1st, 2012, 8:06 am

March 29th, 2018, 7:50 am #924

We are also moving (too slowly) as a society away from individual ownership of cars...not least for people living in or moving to downtown neighbourhoods, where there is decent public transportation and access to walkable places to shop, eat, work, etc.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: April 15th, 2006, 1:02 am

March 29th, 2018, 10:00 am #925

I like the city offices idea at the old Y so we can stop paying rent to others.  (But I don't think we can force them to give it to the city) but then again, those workers would need parking too.  maybe give them a free pass at I4C2. It isn't far away and will probably still be undeveloped in another 50 years.
You think you know it, but you haven't got a clue!!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 5th, 2008, 12:22 am

March 29th, 2018, 11:45 am #926

I would assume they would need vehicles  to get to work and leave town. I don't think they will be spending their lives in a one mile radius
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 1st, 2012, 8:06 am

March 29th, 2018, 8:56 pm #927

I'm looking forward, flounda...not sideways. You're not wrong, exactly - but things are changing. Quite a lot of people who live downtown don't own cars, already - plus younger people living in urban centers are eschewing them in greater numbers.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

March 29th, 2018, 9:45 pm #928

I'd love to be less dependent on a car and harbor some envy towards folks who live in the downtown area.  But the reality for Gloucester is our vastness - we rank 16th in the state for land area.

http://www.usa.com/rank/massachusetts-s ... y-rank.htm

I don't know what percentage of our population lives in what is considered downtown, but I'm guessing that it is a rather small percentage - I'm thinking North Glo., East Glo., Magnolia, West Glo. all the way to Essex and out to Wingaersheek.  (An aside:  when my kids were of wanting-to-go-to-the-mall age, I was happy to do the drop-off and pick-up until I realized that one friend lived in Annisquam and another in East Glo., another in Magnolia and we are in West Glo. - 20 minutes to the mall after close to an hour of pickups.)  (Another aside:  I once suggested to my child that there is a bus from the senior center that goes to the mall.  Her response: "You want me to take public transportation?!?"  To this day, I have no idea where that came from, lol.)

Anyhow - any looks to the future, no matter how attractive or wishful, for a population less dependent on vehicles in our City, with the relatively small exception for the lucky folks who live downtown, is not realistic.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

March 29th, 2018, 9:50 pm #929

If it depends on public transportation, I agree with Cathy...not happening soon here. If our private transportation advances fast toward shared ownership and driverless cars, anything could happen.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 25th, 2007, 6:00 pm

March 30th, 2018, 1:29 am #930

Our wards are pretty close in population so about two out of five, 40%, live in wards 2 or 3.  Although I use the bus from Lanesville to downtown while on a predictable schedule, there would have to be a lot more buses to make it practical not to have a car. For infrequent trips out of town a rental car is cheaper than owning your own but those trips need to be very infrequent. I agree that shared cars or driver less cars is the most practical approach I see. Our geometry has become car dependent. It was very noticeable after 128 was built and a lot of employment sprung up along it. The people who previously worked in places like Boston or Cambridge and commuted radially from the suburbs by train or bus if they did not live downtown now had to get to work or to the mall without public transportation. It was easy to live here and take the train to work in Boston, but not to live here and get to Peabody on 128 by train or bus.  All of a sudden everyone needed a car.
Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought?...   ..........
 George Orwell , 1984
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 1st, 2012, 8:06 am

March 30th, 2018, 6:44 am #931

Cathy (Admin) wrote: I'd love to be less dependent on a car and harbor some envy towards folks who live in the downtown area.  But the reality for Gloucester is our vastness - we rank 16th in the state for land area.

http://www.usa.com/rank/massachusetts-s ... y-rank.htm

I don't know what percentage of our population lives in what is considered downtown, but I'm guessing that it is a rather small percentage - I'm thinking North Glo., East Glo., Magnolia, West Glo. all the way to Essex and out to Wingaersheek.  (An aside:  when my kids were of wanting-to-go-to-the-mall age, I was happy to do the drop-off and pick-up until I realized that one friend lived in Annisquam and another in East Glo., another in Magnolia and we are in West Glo. - 20 minutes to the mall after close to an hour of pickups.)  (Another aside:  I once suggested to my child that there is a bus from the senior center that goes to the mall.  Her response: "You want me to take public transportation?!?"  To this day, I have no idea where that came from, lol.)

Anyhow - any looks to the future, no matter how attractive or wishful, for a population less dependent on vehicles in our City, with the relatively small exception for the lucky folks who live downtown, is not realistic.
I agree with all this about Greater Gloucester...but we were specifically talking about downtown housing developments, hence my thoughts about fewer personal autos going forward..
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

March 30th, 2018, 12:52 pm #932

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

March 30th, 2018, 8:15 pm #933

Looking forward to it, though I have a double-header that evening.  Had a nice celebration and plans for the future around this and Affordable Housing in general tonight.  The important thing with the Fuller project it to keep moving it forward and keep moving the Middle Street project forward. Tremendous community support for all of it out there.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 9th, 2008, 8:26 pm

March 30th, 2018, 9:41 pm #934

NightStalker wrote: I like the city offices idea at the old Y so we can stop paying rent to others.  (But I don't think we can force them to give it to the city) but then again, those workers would need parking too.  maybe give them a free pass at I4C2. It isn't far away and will probably still be undeveloped in another 50 years.
they could use the parking spaces at the current city hall. I think they could tear it down for additional parking but there are a lot of people who want to keep the old building
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 9th, 2008, 8:26 pm

March 31st, 2018, 7:21 am #935

Karly wrote:
tyu12 wrote: too many units. they should make the y give the building to the city and the city could use it as a city hall and put all offices in one building. we don't need more housing units to put more of a strain on the water and sewer plants and other city services. or at the very least make the housing over 55 people less likely to have school-aged children
You need to read the Housing Production Plan.  We do need more housing, lots of it. Affordable, market rate and senior.  Over 55 will be one target for these units.  That said, it is a large development. 
I have not seen the housing production plan but I strongly disagree we need more housing I am under the impression that the population is going down which is something I like to see and consider
a good thing. 
  I would rather see very expensive houses that people just use in the summer and pay a lot of taxes and don't put a lot of strain on city services.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

March 31st, 2018, 7:27 am #936

Well sit down and pour yourself a cup of coffee, tyu!  It is very interesting and packed with information about demographic trends, available land, our projected future housing needs and much more.  If you read it you will see that we need a lot more housing (both affordable and market rate) even as our population declines due to the aging of our households...fewer people per unit. 

http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/documentcenter/view/4238
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 9th, 2008, 8:26 pm

March 31st, 2018, 8:10 am #937

Karly wrote: Well sit down and pour yourself a cup of coffee, tyu!  It is very interesting and packed with information about demographic trends, available land, our projected future housing needs and much more.  If you read it you will see that we need a lot more housing (both affordable and market rate) even as our population declines due to the aging of our households...fewer people per unit. 

http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/documentcenter/view/4238
I will give it a look over but just remember that they could not get rid of the units over at lepages and have many out of town people living over there. 
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 13th, 2005, 5:30 am

April 4th, 2018, 8:07 pm #938

P&D recommended approval of amendments to FMUV's P&S with the City.  15% affordable per ordinance included, purchase price $4.1m.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: February 19th, 2010, 9:12 pm

April 4th, 2018, 8:16 pm #939

I was happy to see the P & D subcommittee move the Fuller development P & S revision forward to the full City Council.  They also are recommending that the council not only approve of the City's letter of pledged support for the Middle Street project but that as a council they endorse it to show their support.  The hardship application will likely be withdrawn by the developer at the full council meeting since it will no longer be applicable.   Everyone wants to get this done now.  Very happy meeting.  Even got to see our fearless CAO leader :-)
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 16th, 2007, 5:15 am

April 4th, 2018, 8:28 pm #940

tyu12 wrote:
Karly wrote: Well sit down and pour yourself a cup of coffee, tyu!  It is very interesting and packed with information about demographic trends, available land, our projected future housing needs and much more.  If you read it you will see that we need a lot more housing (both affordable and market rate) even as our population declines due to the aging of our households...fewer people per unit. 

http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/documentcenter/view/4238
I will give it a look over but just remember that they could not get rid of the units over at lepages and have many out of town people living over there. 
Anyone living in Gloucester is by definition a Gloucester resident, so, no, there aren't any "out of town people" living at Le Pages. 
Quote
Like
Share