Well, I did, sort of.
I commend the Masked Preservationist on his recent post about the senior center. Give it a read here.
He's suggesting the city stop moving the Senior Center away from downtown as is suggested in today's Daily News. Instead, he'd like to see it combined with a new parking garage on Titcomb Street.
Amen to that.
In fact, I suggested something similar three year back when then Mayor Moak was eying Prince Place as the site of a parking garage.
MP gives all the right reasons in his post and I'll add one more .Seniors (or community members using the center) will have access to an abundance of convenient parking.
3 comments:
we don't need a parking garage though...
If we pursue one....
Central Parking was jamming tonight.
A senior center was incorporated into the garage plan that was brought forward during the Clancy administration. It had its supporters but also some very vocal detractors.
It is important to keep in mind that structured parking can be very expensive if done with any level of visual quality. If the city were to incorporate a senior center in the parking garage, the center would either use space that could be used for parking, or would require the structure to be larger. (Keep in mind that the center would also need to have some dedicated parking spaces for its patrons, or the users would have to pay every time they used the facility. ) The effect of having a senior center as part of the garage would be to increase the cost per space to construct the garage. This would require either a larger percentage of public funding (city, state or federal) or a higher per hour parking fee.
The need for a garage is debatable to be sure. Until yesterday, all non-private parking in town was free, so there has been no way to truly measure demand.
Post a Comment