Comments on: In Praise of Za http://ealscoalition.org/2009/04/19/in-praise-of-za/ East Arlington Livable Streets Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:55:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Drew Hite http://ealscoalition.org/2009/04/19/in-praise-of-za/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Drew Hite Sun, 03 May 2009 18:30:25 +0000 http://eals.livablestreets.info/?p=101#comment-10 @Mike We're interested in doing whatever we can to win you over while still increasing access and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists along Mass Ave. We're happy to work with the town to try to get some traffic calming contingencies in place for side streets, but as we've been told by the town those measures would have to be separate from this project since the state and federal money available to this project can only be used on Mass Ave. Perhaps we can convince the town to set aside some of the money that it's going to save for traffic calming contingencies on side streets. @Mike We’re interested in doing whatever we can to win you over while still increasing access and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists along Mass Ave. We’re happy to work with the town to try to get some traffic calming contingencies in place for side streets, but as we’ve been told by the town those measures would have to be separate from this project since the state and federal money available to this project can only be used on Mass Ave. Perhaps we can convince the town to set aside some of the money that it’s going to save for traffic calming contingencies on side streets.

]]> By: Mike Haverty http://ealscoalition.org/2009/04/19/in-praise-of-za/comment-page-1/#comment-5 Mike Haverty Fri, 01 May 2009 01:55:54 +0000 http://eals.livablestreets.info/?p=101#comment-5 Steve Kurland, the General Manager at Za, has been supportive and [b]encouraged everyone to think about the collective good of the neighborhood rather than narrowly focusing on how the project impacts individual businesses and households [/b] Why doesn't the "collective good" seem to involve our concerns as actual residents of the neighborhood? I have seen some lip service paid to "traffic calming" but said with none of the punch and zeal in which you fight for the project as is. Why not actually try and talk and work with the people who have concerns. Why not actually make this part of your dialouge going forward. Actually make an effort to win us over? What really scares me is your absoloute faith in the data. Data that has a similar myopic focus on Mass Ave and not on its real effects beyond 200 yards off of the throughway. Actually what I think is you don't care. You just want this done and you might take a look at this later. All I ask is you look at it now as most of us are all for making Mass Ave. safer. Until I see some real tangible effort paid to our what our concerns are then all this community talk from you isn't "community" at all is it? So far I have read one instance where you acknowledge "traffic calming" but at the meeting Tueday I heard nothing along these lines. Mr. Kirkland needs to be careful here because right now he is being painted in a corner as somebody who might "understand" our concerns but he doesn't appear to have any respect for them. Basically your view comes accross as "we are 100% correct and your concerns are trite and meaningless." How can you expect us to meet in the middle here and find common ground when this is the approach you take? Sure some of the opposition points are wrong or baseless. However there are plenty of concerns that are real and more importantly it is pretty obvious that your side hasn't made an honest effort to go beyond what you feel proves your case nor is it obvious that you care to do so. Simply put this is not helpful. Steve Kurland, the General Manager at Za, has been supportive and [b]encouraged everyone to think about the collective good of the neighborhood rather than narrowly focusing on how the project impacts individual businesses and households [/b]

Why doesn’t the “collective good” seem to involve our concerns as actual residents of the neighborhood? I have seen some lip service paid to “traffic calming” but said with none of the punch and zeal in which you fight for the project as is. Why not actually try and talk and work with the people who have concerns. Why not actually make this part of your dialouge going forward. Actually make an effort to win us over? What really scares me is your absoloute faith in the data. Data that has a similar myopic focus on Mass Ave and not on its real effects beyond 200 yards off of the throughway. Actually what I think is you don’t care. You just want this done and you might take a look at this later. All I ask is you look at it now as most of us are all for making Mass Ave. safer.

Until I see some real tangible effort paid to our what our concerns are then all this community talk from you isn’t “community” at all is it? So far I have read one instance where you acknowledge “traffic calming” but at the meeting Tueday I heard nothing along these lines. Mr. Kirkland needs to be careful here because right now he is being painted in a corner as somebody who might “understand” our concerns but he doesn’t appear to have any respect for them.

Basically your view comes accross as “we are 100% correct and your concerns are trite and meaningless.” How can you expect us to meet in the middle here and find common ground when this is the approach you take? Sure some of the opposition points are wrong or baseless. However there are plenty of concerns that are real and more importantly it is pretty obvious that your side hasn’t made an honest effort to go beyond what you feel proves your case nor is it obvious that you care to do so. Simply put this is not helpful.

]]>