Recent comments in /f/providence

Silentjosh37 t1_iup7syn wrote

Reply to comment by an-eternal-hum in The entrance and exit of Trader Joe's. Looks like trouble. by tads73

Completely agree. I have lived here for 15 years. The traffic in that area has gotten significantly worse over the past few years, the first year or so of the pandemic reduced the traffic but it is back with a vengence. The endless construction has only made it worse. There are going to be so many accidents coming in and out of that lot and that is just gonna cause back ups all over the place, not to mention the increased vehicle traffic for the first year this location is open.

I keep reading that is gonna be for pedestrians and residents of the area but that will not be the case for the honeymoon phase of this store being here.

I am all for a trader Joes or an Aldis, or any option in the area, that specific spot is just not ideal, and I think a lot of the traffic studies were done during the pandemic, and before other changes were made to the traffic patterns in that area and are not inclusive of real usage.

Edited to add. - just looked at a traffic study done on 2/2021 and again on 5/2022 showed an increase of from 6000 vehicles a day to 8500. That wasn't the study that was done before zoning. Just a study.

5

Mountain_Bill5743 t1_iup65gi wrote

Reply to How is the dating scene in Providence? by lisachung93

Happily committed here, but Providence used to be one of the worst cities to date in nationally for straight women looking for college educated men. The dating ratio is just really bad-- like 5 women for every 2 men (also the case in NYC). Seriously, they wrote books about it if you google it we came in like top 5 worst.

Things are changing here, but people don't move here for the dating scene they tend to move here inspite of it or move their partner here.

6

an-eternal-hum t1_iup5v74 wrote

Reply to comment by Silentjosh37 in The entrance and exit of Trader Joe's. Looks like trouble. by tads73

I have a business in the jewelry district and have to use this exit daily. It’s been an absolute nightmare for the past year, and this is going to ramp up congestion and conflict and make it far, far worse.

It’s not a huge, dramatic thing, but it’s going to seriously affect me and people like me on a daily basis. That’s worth mentioning.

8

Silentjosh37 t1_iup5img wrote

Reply to comment by an-eternal-hum in The entrance and exit of Trader Joe's. Looks like trouble. by tads73

Love how all the people that are saying traffic isn't that bad over here, or that its only bad at x time obviously haven't spent that much time in the area, especially since the construction projects have ramped up lately. It is horrible, especially with the amount of people that have no clue how to drive in the city, and do not know how to share the road with pedestrians and cyclists. I avoid going that direction as much as possible.

7

420foreverandalways t1_iuoygrk wrote

Reply to Why was Route 95 sited where it is in Providence? by HistoricalDocument11

You can see a map from 1939 here: https://ridemgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=a2960d1a022e4dccaab14aa4a58f5d45

​

If a railroad isn't where a highway currently is, then you can be sure a disenfranchised neighborhood (usually Black) was demolished to make room for the highway. This pdf has some descriptions of a neighborhood destroyed during urban renewal. http://www.upparts.org/uploads/4/5/8/2/45820603/01-a_brief_history_of_urban_renewal_and_displacement_in_the_former_west_elmwood_neighborhood.pdf

​

So, you can clearly see 195 more or less follows an arterial that was already there, (plus some collatoral damage to what I think was Cape Verdean at the time). I-95 follows the rail at some points. Then you can be sure those neighborhoods it cuts through are Black or Chinese or Narragansett, etc.)

29

brick1972 t1_iuoxznx wrote

Reply to Why was Route 95 sited where it is in Providence? by HistoricalDocument11

I don't think it is a huge mystery that 95 was intended to connect city centers (generally speaking all of the 2 digit highways are meant this way) and at the time remember Providence was still a large city in the US (in 1950 it was the same population as Miami for instance) so it wouldn't have been bypassed. Why the route was chosen to follow coastal CT probably has to do with port access.

The specific route in Providence was likely the subject of a lot of fighting. The S curves in Pawtucket were the result of keeping a few buildings instead of blowing through them. But you can imagine that it was always going to skirt downcity. The cricling bit around South Providence I imagine also has to do with Port access. Remember part of the reason for the interstate highway system was efficient movement of military supplies. So if you assume that they wanted the highway as close as possible to the working Port of PRovidence off of Allens Ave, and then wanted to go as directly North to Boston, the choice would be where it is, or to go through downcity. If you look at aerials of the city from the time this would have been a bit of a complex issue and honestly as much as 95 might suck now, running 95 like where Memorial Drive is now would suck more.

I think the story of the route through Pawtucket (Which honestly makes no sense in modern context) is more interesting. Why the sudden right turn instead of following, essentially, the train tracks? I assume this is because the mills were still busy and needing access to the railroad but you'd have to ask someone more learned than me.

*As a side note you might say "but 95 doesn't go through Boston!" which is true but there is an interesting history on this which you can google, etc.

37