Hey, there! Log in / Register

Jamaica Plain to consider joining the South End in trying to ban winter space saving

Jamaica Plain, which has rapidly risen to rival South Boston for the boldness, obnoxiousness and inventiveness of its space-saving fervor, could join the meeker South End in trying to ban space saving altogether.

The Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council's had scheduled a hearing for tonight - but moved it to Jan. 8 - to consider whether JP should try to emulate the South End's four-year-old ban on winter space saving. That ban does not have universal acceptance.

Currently, outside of the South End, Boston lets parkers reserve a space for up to 48 hours after the end of any formal snow emergenies.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 
Ad:

Comments

Yes, please.

up
Voting closed 40

Agreed. I am tired of cleaning up after the space saving slobs in my area of JP. They use all sorts of garbage like cardboard boxes, broken vacuum cleaners etc and then just leave them in the street or the sidewalk. They are filthy, lazy, selfish pigs.

up
Voting closed 39

That's what people thought of JP in the 70's, 80's and into the 90's... so I must ask why did you move there? Because you thought it would make you hip and cool because it was a little grungy years ago?

We didn't have these issues growing up in JP. People used space savers and moved them when they were no longer needed. We weren't so selfish to take a space that someone else had shoveled out for hours. Maybe it's not the people that are actually from JP / Boston that are the problem.

up
Voting closed 12

You don't shovel out a space, you shovel out your car. You do it because you chose to leave your car on the street and knew the repercussions of that. So sick of seeing all these empty spots on the streets for hours when people can't find a place to park for an hour or two to go to the store, visit family, etc. There isn't a parking problem without snow and there only is one because people try to privatize the spot that they just so happened to end up in the night before.

up
Voting closed 29

we had them in the 80s, 90s and they were common before that. I can never recall there being any problems. It was a sign of civility to respect parking spaces someone else cleaned out. There were no driveways in the neighborhood.

This has become an issue since so called gentification.

up
Voting closed 25

It was a problem back then. People slashing tires is not "gentrification" but townie stupidity.

You cannot blame this on new people. Stop it. It was always illegal to take over public property and enforce it with thuggery.

Use your driveway, rent a spot for storing your personal property, or get rid of your car.

up
Voting closed 27

Population:

1980 562,944
2018 685,094

and with approximately zero investment in transit between those years, all 122,150 of those extra people brought cars with them.

up
Voting closed 14

The population of the City of Boston has grown 20% since 1980. Most of that growth is in the last 15 years. I'm no civil engineer, but I'm willing to bet that that has a lot more to do with the problem than your "gentrification" boogeyman.

up
Voting closed 50

If everyone "respected parking spaces someone else cleaned out" why would you need the implied threat of a space saver? You could just shovel out your space and go inside, watch Cheers, and listen to Mission of Burma with a nice hot cup of dunks.

up
Voting closed 44

You responded to my post. Yes, I know and remember Mission of Burma very well. Regarding the rest of your post: space-savers were part of the culture and were absolutely respected. It meant someone else (your neighbor, who you knew; I knew all my neighbors. It wasn't like it is today). The issue of space-savers is connected to people who have moved here from places where this custom didn't exist, generally because the congestion, housing stock, street layout didn't require it.

And I don't like Dunkin (Donuts); never have.

up
Voting closed 5

No, it's a sign of incivility to hog a public resource while you're not using it.

up
Voting closed 21

So you must be for getting rid of parking spaces on major roads so that it bus and bike lanes only? You know...that hogging of public resources for your car and all.

up
Voting closed 1

Open roadway and bike lane = open for ALL to use

Space saved when it isn't rented or paid for or privately owned = hogging for exclusive personal use.

You don't get that? Did you fail kindergarten?

up
Voting closed 5

The whole thing is ridiculous and what backwater towns do. Enough already.

up
Voting closed 12

The Venn diagram of people who want to ban space savers and people who don’t own cars/have a driveway is just a circle.

up
Voting closed 20

I lived in the South End and parked on the street. Hated the stupid practice then. I dug out a space, sometimes more than one no big deal. Probably because I grew up in NYC where its non existent. And guess what, people in NYC figure it out.

up
Voting closed 15

You are wrong and you should feel bad.

up
Voting closed 30

Great response..nice to have a laugh

up
Voting closed 2

We could do away with this childish practice and just ban parking on certain sides of the roads after a storm so Public Works can roll in and clean curb to curb.

Otherwise we have this entitled mess of some spots being cleared of snows, others barely being cleared but theres still a space saver and in general, more available parking for those that need it because there aren't all the random piles of snow.

Oh and I guess on the selfish side of things yes, it means parking into spilling over into bike lanes, buses can pull over, traffic isn't as drastically impacted. Its a win win for everyone.

up
Voting closed 30

That would imply Public Works could do the job in a timely and organized fashion. Not gonna happen.

up
Voting closed 2

The idea of banning parking on one side of the street so they could plough it after big snowfall, so they could plow the other side, and then plough the other side the next night is the best way to do it.

up
Voting closed 8

Actually plowing the whole road is the only solution. And making people move their cars can help disabuse them of the notion that some spaces are “theirs.” The transition time should be inconvenient for commuters - so residents can put their cars back.

up
Voting closed 8

so no parking at all during a snow emergency, which is admittedly pretty inconvenient in the middle of the storm -- but I LOVE it, because they plow the whole road, and once the emergency is called off, we have the same number of parking spots we did to start with, and nobody pulls a bunch of bullshit with garbage in the road, etc.

they need to institute switching-sides bans for side roads to CLEAR THE SNOW.

up
Voting closed 7

Space savers waste space, because when the driver of that space isn't using the space, even if they would be gone the whole time another person wanted to use it, its unusable. It makes it so every car that will be in Boston for any period of time that space savers are left out (week or more) needs its own space.

up
Voting closed 13

reject the violent vigilante thuggery implicit in the enforcement of space saving. Fuck off to the suburbs, barbarians, if you want a parking space reserved for you.

up
Voting closed 31

Don't expect your car to be accommodated like a Saudi Prince.

Want a special space for your car?
Buy a house that has one.
Rent a space.

Want to park your car for almost free?
Deal with not owning your spot - ever, at any time. Resident parking is like a LIBRARY of parking - you borrow it.

Remember folks: if you don't pay for it IT AIN'T YOURS.

up
Voting closed 4

...Have resident parking on all non-main streets?

up
Voting closed 12

To get resident parking you need a certain percentage of signatures from neighbors of the streets that wish to obtain resident parking.....I think is how it works

up
Voting closed 4

Does this mean you never drive anywhere outside your neighborhood? Because if that's the universal scheme, you'd only be allowed to park at home.

up
Voting closed 9

Doesn't JP already have that? It should go by median income. If the median income is above 200000, then that neighbor can afford to find a place to park their car. Residential parking should be reserved for poor neighborhoods.

https://cdn10.bostonmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/02/bost...

up
Voting closed 4

Even more of a selfish entitlement program than space savers. Public streets are for use by the PUBLIC. And that includes parking.

up
Voting closed 7

A big part of the problem is that space-savers are way too extra-legal. No laws govern the practice (except the 2014 ordinance that explicitly bans them with a $250 fine). The mayor's reaction is like "Yeah, ok".

With all the resources it has, the city could easily write some rules, enshrine them in law, and encode them in an App, to make the space saver situation more civil and orderly than the status quo.

up
Voting closed 3

JPNDC or the South End equivalent tells the mayor what they want and that's it?

Why do we have neighborhood city councilors if quasi-elected committees have actual policy making power?

up
Voting closed 6

http://gothamist.com/2016/01/29/snow_parking_ethics.php

We had them in the Bronx, just like in Boston where my family moved to.

up
Voting closed 3

But New York City is a backwater with a failing transit system that had to give a bunch of cash to Amazon to get them to move some jobs to their city.

Boston wants to be a world class city instead. They don’t marked spaces when the shovel out snow in places like Phoenix. That’s what we’re aspiring to.

up
Voting closed 4

that we have moved on from bike-lane season into space-saver season, the most wonderful time of the year.

up
Voting closed 28

I can only conclude anecdotally? that bike-line season is a year round phenomenon. Remember, even if there isn't snow, there will be people
who park in the bike lanes EVEY season ("Just a few minutes, OK?) and with snow, they will STILL park there, because sometimes the snow removal process did not include clearing the bike line.

up
Voting closed 6

would undoubtedly lesson the feeling among people that space-saving is a necessity.

up
Voting closed 4

Ok, sure! You really want your elder and disabled neighbors being inconvenienced in this manner? That's a pretty harsh perspective if so...

It's a few days per year and is one of those quaint provincial things (maybe not so quaint...) like opening day that makes for an amusing experience of city life..

up
Voting closed 6

but it's not a few DAYS per year. it's a few days each time that it snows a quarter inch. It's a few MONTHS per year. and with any luck, it will end soon.

up
Voting closed 7

What percentage of space savers are used by the elderly and disabled? Anecdotally on my street, it's zero. So we shouldn't have space savers on our street or what's your point?

up
Voting closed 12

And the neighbors on my street actually help with shoveling... and your point was?

up
Voting closed 3

Your point - hey, what about the old and disabled, shouldn't they be able to mark their spots?

My point - isn't that a very, very small fraction of the population of car owners? Therefore shouldn't there basically be no space savers other than for the elderly or disabled?

Your rebuttal - like, we all shovel man! Kumbaya! Which is a nice sentiment, but then why do you need space savers if you're all shoveling out all the spots on the street?

Fin.

up
Voting closed 8

If that is the case, your neighbors don't need a space saver AT ALL - they can get the city to install a permanent one right outside their home!

All they have to do is get their doctor to sign an RMV form and go through the city and state processes.

up
Voting closed 17

Don't have placards for special parking areas. Nor are there elderly parking spaces.

up
Voting closed 4

The Blue tag hanging from the rear view mirror with a picture of a wheel chair is a placard. And if your physical limitations make it difficult for you to walk, then you can have a special parking area on the street in front of your house. Read Swirly's post more carefully. No one assumes that that an elderly person in excellent physical health wants special treatment.

up
Voting closed 13

She (and another commenter) did say elderly and disabled. I read it as or.

Still, say someone is disabled but under the age of 60? Hence my misreading of the comment.

up
Voting closed 1

It is free speech to question/correct certain people’s grammar, but it is not an opinion and/or a useful addition to the discussion.

up
Voting closed 4

I believe I conceded I misread the comment.

up
Voting closed 1

did I correct your grammar? Do you understand what projection is? I respect your right to mildly insult certain people for off topic grammar mistakes, doesn't mean I have to ignore it.

up
Voting closed 2

I did not correct anything. I read it wrong. I admitted as much.

You might want to take a lesson on what to do when you are called out on writing something that is wrong. Humility goes a long way. I've apologized to Swirly plenty of times over the years, and she's been grateful for it (as I have been for her graciousness.)

up
Voting closed 0

I write a lot things incorrectly and factually wrong. But those 2 things are not equal. I don't understand what your grammar criticism adds to the conversation. It seems that all of your comments are like that. I respect your free speech but I wonder why you constantly moderate threads without adding anything to the discussion. I don't know what you need me to be humble or gracious about, I am not intimidating. You have every right to be petty, and I have every right to notice it.

up
Voting closed 1

What I originally wrote, and you seem not to understand that you made me see that I read Swirly's comment wrong and that I noted my error. You seem gung go on criticizing me, all of this notwithstanding.

You really, really seem to like to criticize other commenters as a way to stifle their free speech. You might like to intimidate, but some are not so easily intimidated.

up
Voting closed 0

What don't i understand about your original comment? Let's see

Friartuck submitted strawman "elderly and disabled" as the reason that space savers must exist. Parkwayne stated that there aren't enough "elderly and disabled" to warrant a policy. Swirly pointed out that there is a system for helping "elderly and disabled" people park close to their house all year even when it isn't snowing.

you chime point out that elderly people don't have special parking.

Since we are talking about spacesavers in this thread, I don't think the correct identification of vulnerable straw people makes no difference to anyone. Certainly my own parents have handicapped a placard and the specific reason may not be "elderly" but that is basically why it is hard for them to walk long distances from the car.

I rephrase Swirlys point

You double down on nitpicking the grammar and identification of what group of straw people are being identified.

I go "say what you want but its off topic"

You accuse me of projection.

I again say your comments are off topic

You tell me to be humble and gracious because you admitted(not) that you were wrong. you tell me to learn to admit my mistakes in a more ladylike fashion

I again say your comments are off topic. I bring up the unnecessary moderating as I have in the past.

So now you say I don't understand you, and that's true. Really I am just waiting for you bring an fact or opinion to a thread. Please do not be intimidated. I personally don't like be moderated, but I respect your right to do so. It seems you can dish out, but you can't take it.

up
Voting closed 2

I didn't

double down on nitpicking the grammar and identification of what group of straw people are being identified.

I corrected myself. I saw my point was wrong.

You decided that you wanted to pick a fight with me, even after I corrected myself. Because that's the kind of person you are. That's what you like to do.

Unlike other bizarre arguments you pick with me, I'm not going to promise no more comments, but it would be nice if you noticed a trend in the comments I've made after I, um, corrected myself after I saw I was wrong. I mean, you were the one who convinced me, but somehow you still want to berate me.

up
Voting closed 0

When you bold the word and and or, you are noticing the grammar not the argument. When you corrected my description of your comment from correcting to misreading, you again are noticing form not substance.

My summary does communicate my opinion that you are nitpicking repeatedly about things that are off topic.

This:

I corrected myself. I saw my point was wrong.

is off topic. The fact that you disagree with my characterization of your off topic comments is your opinion. By saying the same thing over and over, you continue to ignore my true criticism which is that all your comments (in this thread) are unrelated to to the topic. Why is that?

up
Voting closed 0

Or you could read into what I wrote. That you continue not to understand what I wrote, after me trying to explain what I wrote, speaks volumes of your character.

Also, that you think my repeated notes that I was wrong is off topic tells a lot about you. But sure, I’m the hypercritical one.

up
Voting closed 0

More insults, more mysterious pretentious meanings to your comments. Still not one opinion or bit of information about space savers in Jamaica Plain. In my opinion i understand that you have nothing to say.

up
Voting closed 1

This is an issue for JP people to hash out. I don't live in JP.

If you're familiar with the comment section of this website, you'll know my opinion on the issue, but 4 years ago I had a reasoned debate with someone here in which I noted that the solution for Beacon Hill is not the solution for Dorchester, and the best option for JP might be something different.

I just misread something Swirly wrote and commented based on my misreading. I thought she was insinuating that there is elderly parking, which was wrong. I thought that was abundantly clear.

You really have a thing for me, don't you.

up
Voting closed 0

Rhetorically, sealioning fuses persistent questioning—often about basic information, information easily found elsewhere, or unrelated or tangential points—with a loudly-insisted-upon commitment to reasonable debate. It disguises itself as a sincere attempt to learn and communicate. Sealioning
thus works both to exhaust a target’s patience, attention, and communicative effort, and to portray the target as unreasonable. While the questions of the “sea lion” may seem innocent, they’re intended maliciously and have harmful consequences.

up
Voting closed 1

I never knew it had a name.

Thanks.

Your turn.

up
Voting closed 0

oh look, the i'm rubber you're glue tact. someone needs a nap.

up
Voting closed 0

Swirly wrote something, that I commented on. You decided to comment on my comment, which made me reread what Swirly wrote and reply that I had misread it, to which you replied

It is free speech to question/correct certain people’s grammar, but it is not an opinion and/or a useful addition to the discussion.

I have repeatedly noted that my first comment was wrong (she was not implying that elderly people can get spots dedicated to them, and I don't know why I thought that.) For the past three days you have been obsessing with this, despite my repeated protestations that my first comment was wrong. Seven comments dismissing my reply to your first posting. You have not been able to get beyond this. I mean, what would you have done if I doubled down on my ill informed first comment instead of owning up to my error?

Someone is "seal lioning" here. Someone is trolling. It ain't me. That you troll is one thing. Trolling while claiming that someone else is trolling is another.

up
Voting closed 0

You do this in every thread. You identify some small irrelevant perceived error in post, then ask repeated questions about it. If you get any push back you play the victim. If your posts were genuine that would be one thing but it’s fake. When you rarely bring a link to the argument it’s ridiculously superficial. I have chosen not to ignore your disrespectful behavior. All of your responses are part of sea lion play book. You can keep doubling down and passively insulting me or you consider whether your post relates to to the thread.

up
Voting closed 0

And you know what you just wrote is false.

You know I'm happily married, right?

up
Voting closed 0

And someone else brought up the sea lion thing. It makes more sense now.

up
Voting closed 0

They aren't disabled and they do not require special treatment.

If they are, see above.

up
Voting closed 5

I think if someone shovels out a space to park their car, then they should be able to save that space for when they need it. Sometimes it takes hours to clear a space. And if the space is used by a mother with small children, for example, then it's more than fair for her to know that she'll have a place for her car when she gets home after work with kids and groceries.

up
Voting closed 8

That only works when there are enough spaces for all residents who have a car. With the current space saver "system," only those who are lucky enough to find a space before it snows are then "allowed" to use that space after the storm. And never mind if other people need to use that spot during the day while that person is at work (for example delivery people or others visiting the neighborhood.)

up
Voting closed 8

Tend to just stop in the middle, double park or will ignore the space saver and make the delivery. I don't know why you want to destroy something tried and true.

up
Voting closed 4

for parents of young children, or old people, or disabled people?

up
Voting closed 2

who are not lucky enough to claim a space before it snows?

up
Voting closed 19

People with disabilities can get a disability placard. Elders who don't necessarily identify as disabled but meet the qualifications can get one as well.

When I had small children, they walked pretty much everywhere, just like everyone else who lives in a city. There aren't placards for nondisabled children with nondisabled parents, because nondisabled parents can wear/carry a child who doesn't walk yet, and a nondisabled child who walks can walk. If I were the type of person who believed that children need to be taken everywhere in cars and have a driveway and a yard and carpools and playdates, I wouldn't live in a city.

up
Voting closed 9

Some poor mother with small children? Don't want the hassle, don't have kids. SMDH.

/s

up
Voting closed 4

My kids walked up to a mile at a time from the age of 2.

Just bring a stroller - or a sled - as a backup.

up
Voting closed 6

Self driving cars will solve this problem. Once I get where I'm going I can program the car to drive around for a while in traffic until I'm ready and tell it to come back for me. We just need a battery life that will make it 12 hours and the car capable of driving 24 hours straight for days at a time.

Nothing could be wrong with this.

up
Voting closed 8

when the city clears snow to the curb on both sides is the street.

They can do it just like street cleaning. One day on the even side and one day on the odd side.

up
Voting closed 7

Your point is well taken, and it makes great, good sense. I live in Somerville, where, while the snow removal there is better than in Cambridge, it's often no bargain.

This:

when the city clears snow to the curb on both sides is the street.
They can do it just like street cleaning. One day on the even side and one day on the odd side.

is exactly how snow removal after a big snowfall should be done, not only in Boston and Cambridge, but in Somerville as well.

up
Voting closed 4

I'll save you the trouble and move it myself.

up
Voting closed 7

This:

I'll save you the trouble and move it myself.

carries the risk of your car being trashed, as well as the risk of physical assault, on either your property or your person, if the person whose space saver that you moved catches you at it..

up
Voting closed 1

Don't punish people without solving the root of the problem. Ban parking on one side of the street when it's snowing, plow it, have everyone move to that side and plow the side they moved from

up
Voting closed 2

This:

Don't punish people without solving the root of the problem. Ban parking on one side of the street when it's snowing, plow it, have everyone move to that side and plow the side they moved from

is exactly how it should be done!

up
Voting closed 1

thuggish behavior just simply because somebody who didn't know the score parked in the space that the person who saved that space shoveled out that space and thereby claims it as his/her own. This space-saving practice is disgusting enough, but the fact that people act like spoiled children who were told that they can't have that new toy, or too many candies is totally unacceptable.

up
Voting closed 1

Where is your car while you're saving that space, and why do you think you deserve two parking spaces for one car all day, in a city where parking is already hard to come by in a lot of areas?

up
Voting closed 9

Guy threw a fit in Fort Point because people were parking in his "work spot" on a public street.

He probably had another spot space-saved at home.

up
Voting closed 1