NIMBYISM: Providence Style
By 
A bit of context about Providence first. The city is pretty divided by race and class. The East Side, near Brown, is the rich part of town. It is filled with people in pricey single family homes who vote for Democrats and love them some “In This House We Believe” signs while also keeping Maddie and Connor as far away from public schools as possible. In short, it is filled with Emily Oster and the like. Then you have the poorer neighborhoods. The old Italian neighborhood of Federal Hill still has a bit of that older culture, but today is mostly young hipsters. That has expanded into other parts of town, but still, pretty big parts of town are Dominican, Guatemalan, and Black, with white working class enclaves as well. Now, the politics of the city, which are various shades of Democratic, reflect this, so you see different types get elected. Neither of the last two mayors were great, but the the first was Dominican and the second Guatemalan and they represented a combination of those communities and the establishment. But in the last election, Brett Smiley was elected. He is very much the candidate of the East Side. An aide to Gina Raimondo, he very much shares her neoliberalism. His husband is the city’s most famous real estate agent, who handles a lot of the big houses in that neighborhood. And of course, he’s also a gay man. So he is a Democrat of a very specific type that appeals to the East Side and won enough in other parts of the city to get elected. Mostly he won the primary because the rest of the city was divided between a Latino and a Black candidate, so he won the primary with a plurality.
I say this to help you understand this astounding example of NIMBYism I am about to present you. This is by the publishers of Providence Monthly, which is the glossy free magazine that highlights new restaurants, has tons of real estate ads, promotes the homeowners’ associations, and is the type of thing you expect to see in stores in wealthier neighborhoods in cities like this. In short, they are exactly the type who vote for Brett Smiley, or at least represent his core voters on the East Side. And this is some Peak NIMBYism right here.
A great next step is to remove the South Water bike lane which is unused and unnecessary and is only increasing traffic and pollution as cars sit idling. Councilman John “Weathervane” Goncalves still supports the bike lane but acknowledges that it could be removed “if that’s what the Mayor wants to do.” Close the street every other Sunday, and you’ll accomplish more!
Same with the Empire Street, Fountain Street, and Jewelry District bike lanes, which are also rarely used. We don’t have a problem with bike lanes where they make sense and don’t radically and unnecessarily affect a neighborhood’s quality of life. The Hope Street and Eaton Street bike lane trials highlighted the absurdity of a coalition trying to force a concept where it didn’t belong – same with the speed bumps that impact residents of adjacent streets.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan, due in 2024, is designed to direct policy decisions for growth and development over the next decade. Input comes from many stakeholders, which it should. Leadership should recognize that certain proposals are pushed by small groups that believe that loud voices accurately speak for all residents – they don’t, as the Providence Great Streets Plan has demonstrated with its costly starts and stops. What seems missing to us is factoring in the lack of parking now required for residential development and the effect that street parking has on a neighborhood. Brent Runyon of Providence Preservation Society notes, “Over the years, countless studies have been done on the critical importance of adequate parking, and then are ignored.”
Runyon adds, “Development battles are over cost versus benefits. In many cases the ‘benefits’ provide exceptions and options for the developers, with most of the ‘costs’ borne by the neighborhoods.” Building height is a concern, but he believes that parking and good design are paramount thoughts that are echoed by the neighborhood associations.
Capital Center and the 195 District allow greater height because they are not in “neighborhoods,” except for the 195 parcels below Benefit Street. Parcels 2 and 5 with their scale and lack of parking will have a catastrophic effect on the adjoining neighborhood. Anything that blocks the views of important tourist attractions like Benefit Street would be short-sighted.
The Comprehensive Plan will need to have management of neighborhood commercialization and growth. Three entire blocks of single- and multi-family homes on Brook Street, a buffer between Thayer Street and the institutional zone, are now gone and this pattern will only increase if the institutions are not restrained.
To make matters worse, city councilors, state senators, and representatives at developers’ behest are using “state legislative workarounds” to marginalize the liquor and zoning boards creating a new precedent for eroding neighborhoods with liquor licenses and increased commercialization. This is wrong on so many levels. Just look at the 195 District.
In short, the only way to “save” Providence is to get rid of bike lanes, not have any kind of height or density because of parking and VIEWS!!, and to stop the horrors of shops and liquor stores. In other words, Providence should be run to promote the interests of rich people in single-family homes worth over $500,000 and who hate anyone parking on their street. The article is framed as a lovefest to Smiley and I don’t think that’s cynical either. They love him and they are going to use their powerful voices to promote the interests of a minority of people in Providence.
The city is becoming increasingly unaffordable and desperately needs more housing. But color me skeptical that enough building will happen to help much. After all, someone might have a shadow on their house for a couple hours a day.