Fair Haven Health Prescribes Parking Rx

So, housing for humans will be destroyed to make room for parking for cars. I had thought New Haven wanted the opposite. Hartford eliminated parking requirements completely. New Haven city counsel should investigate how Hartford overcame the constitutional right to convenient parking ( a right Kevin McCarthy says his wife is an expert in). :)

This here is a modern-day paradox: a health center that wants more of the least-healthy form of transportation (automobiles/driving/parking). (lets not forget the other health-centers across town too.) And not to mention this would also remove 3+ residences thereby contributing at least a little to high higher costs across the board. As 1644 mentions, why again are minimum parking mandates still in the regulations...? How about some mandated transportation-demand-management instead, like better commuting options for staff at the very least.

Really? 3 houses demolished to only get 10 more spaces? 10 more parking spaces for cars at the expense of hollowing out the neighborhood is going to solve the access problem for the health center? This is pathetic. But oh look, it’s a good project because we get new trees and light poles. There’s a bus every 10-15 minutes on grand ave. How about encouraging more patients and employees to not arrive by the most inefficient form of city transportation.

First off, I do realize that the FH Health Center does good work. However, I am surprised by the lack of information in the article . There is no mention of whether these 3 “buildings” , which appear to be multi family dwellings are occupied and the number of people or families which would be displaced. If they are not occupied, why has the FH Clinic, which owns them, allowed them to fall into disrepair? I can only imagine the slant of the Independent’s article and the howls of protest which would arise if a private business or God forbid, Yale University or hospital, was looking to demolish 3 residences for a measly 10 parking spaces.
I am also struck by the requirement that to have a vote regarding this issue, a Fair Haven resident must have attended FIVE previous meetings of the FH management team. So being merely a concerned Fair Haven resident is not enough to matter. Too bad for any FH resident who works evenings or is taking care of children in the evening. Why not add a picture ID requirement and proof of citizenship too?

I know that commenters HATE cars (but I wonder how many of them gave up their cars) but people who are elderly/sick/ disabled etc., may not be able to comfortably and safely travel by bus. I see the point about the lot and the covering of ground with more hot asphalt but I do like the green aspect because the city is unbearable hot in summer. Is there a compromise solution??

The above commenters have good points to make. Surely there must be a way for the employees to park in another lot further away, and keep parking for patients in the current lot, and not remove housing units which is desperately needed in the city.
But I do like the idea of addressing storm water run off and more greenery to provide shade and oxygen and carbon capture. Painting the parking lot light grey to reflect back sunlight and reduce heat, or covered parking with solar panels and white rooftops would help reduce the heat island and reduce reliance on fossil fuel energy needs.

1644, just to clarify, my wife thinks this right only exists with regard to the space in front of one's home.

Seriously, the city does need to reduce its parking requirements and encourage the shared use of existing parking facilities. The health center may in fact need more parking, but the the city's decision should also consider the impact on housing.

I know 2 families that are soon to be homeless because of this issue.

We appreciate your feedback. Fair Haven Community Health Care has proudly served the people in Fair Haven for over 50 years, providing care for all regardless of ability to pay. In the past few years, demand for our patient-centered, integrated services has continued to grow. Access to health care, housing needs, and neighborhood and environmental impacts have been important factors in our approach to this project. As we consider use today and in the future, many of our patients and staff rely on public transportation, carpool or walk to our location at 374 Grand Avenue, and we need to be able to address these needs.

Here are some of the factors we considered and how we addressed them:
• Of the three houses impacted by the project, only one is occupied by tenants in 2 units. We are working with them to find alternative housing.
• We distributed letters to surrounding residents and only received support for our effort to reduce the demand for street parking.
• Additional street parking spaces will be available on Woolsey Street as we alter current entrances/exits from the street of the current lots.
• FHCHC is committed to addressing housing needs and recently sold two properties on Grand Avenue to the City of New Haven for the sole purpose of developing more affordable housing.
• The existing parking lot requires significant safety improvements to increase the size of each space to meet standards and improve the traffic flow for patients and deliveries. LED lighting is a part of the new safety protocol, while other products have been selected to be neighborhood-friendly.
• The plan includes environmental improvements to manage stormwater runoff, surfacing to reduce radiant heat, and trees for shade.

While patients will gain some spaces, staff parking will remain tight and we continue to look into other options. FHCHC appreciates your support for this project and of our mission.