Ellis’ huge parking garage unneeded as well as unwanted
Ellis Hospital has been approved for a two-story parking garage made necessary by the new emergency room. The proposed additional two stories to this approved structure would turn it into a six-level parking garage (four stories plus ground and roof parking).
To get an idea of how high this building would be, take a ride by the new emergency room. Add one story to see the approximate height of the approved garage; add three to see the approximate height of the proposed garage. Top them both off with 15-foot-tall lights. All floors and the roof will have lights on dusk to dawn.
While the approved garage will have a limited level of negative impacts on the neighborhood, the extra two stories would impact the entire area in an extremely negative manner. The authorized garage is close to the size of the surrounding structures, which — hopefully — will damp out much of the noise and reflected light.
The proposed new structure would be higher than the surrounding buildings, and sound and light carries quite a distance in the open air. I am fairly certain that if you can hear the construction during the day, you will definitely hear the honking of car horns every time someone locks or unlocks their car; probably more so when you are sitting out in your yard on what used to be a quiet evening.
Let’s not forget the added traffic from the proposed 168 or so new parking spots added to the approved 212 spots. (Average emergency stay, say six hours, so these 212 spots could turn over four times, making about 848 spaces available in a 24-hour period.)
Then there are the property values that will go down, and so the amount of taxes these properties pay will also go down. Also, say goodbye to that night sky; you will now get to see the glow from the roof lights instead.
I do not understand why the city would even consider doing this to a beautiful neighborhood when even hospital officials say the extra parking is unnecessary.
If Ellis has extra money as they claim, shouldn’t it be used to improve service or tucked away for a rainy day rather than building unneeded parking that will need to be maintained?
Letter writer wrong about minimum wage
Re Aug. 10 letter, “Need no reason to pay low-wage workers more”: Mr. Clark has clearly missed the mark.
He states that workers are paid in accordance with the value they add to a business, and they should raise their value if they want higher wages. He implies that people making minimum wage are of little value to a company, and the fact that they cannot afford their rent should not be used as a weapon to gain his support for their cause.
Perhaps Mr. Clark should try living on minimum wage and try supporting himself and a family on that. Minimum-wage workers are usually the backbone of a business. Those workers are the core, the foundation that make the business run efficiently and effectively. Has it occurred to him that not everyone has the means or opportunity to “raise their value” within a company.
College costs are skyrocketing and circumstances are different for everyone. A 40-hour work week is a 40-hour work week regardless if you are fast-food worker or not.
Minimum wage should be increased in accordance with the rate of inflation. I would rather see a full-time, minimum-wage worker earn a rate of pay that would allow him/her to support themselves, than see him/her get on government assistance and join the welfare system.
How is it that non-working people on government assistance are able to provide food and shelter for their families, while those working full time on minimum wage are struggling just to keep food on the table?
Families finally getting a break on free lunch
Re Aug. 16 article, “All city students to get free lunch this year”: A huge thank you, and we believe you got this one right, Mr. [Superintendent Laurence] Spring.
Our home has admired your body of work, thus far, in your tenure as superintendent of the Schenectady school district, and we believe you have this one right.
My children’s mom and I would seem to be good on paper. We make a good salary — she is a registered nurse at the county nursing home, and I am a union employee with Bimbo bakeries. Together we would normally be well over the requirements for a free and reduced lunch.
We also have three school-age children, a mortgage, two car payments, insurance, school loans, credit cards, the responsibility of repaying for my past mistakes as well as penalties for not having perfect credit.
It seems a lot of times like the average person and child is taken advantage of. Not under your guidance. Our school district has a lot of kids getting lost due to different issues: Parenting, and that type of problem is huge. But we believe this may be a nice way of your truly helping families and students. Maybe some kids will come for a meal. I’m not sure I am as worried about why they come, as much as I am if they come.
Your hard work, the fact that you live in the district and send your child to public schools in the district is more than commendable. Mr. Spring, your work is very much appreciated, and I hope as you lead, your staff and cohorts see this and follow your lead. Our children are what’s important. This may make a huge difference.
Proctors doing everything right regarding marquee
In the nearly two months since an article in The Daily Gazette announced that Proctors would be updating its marquee to incorporate a digital display, several people have written letters which criticize Proctors for destroying the historic nature of its marquee.
To quote the cited article, “But here’s the good news for lovers of all things old-fashioned: The classic look — the golden canopy, the maroon background, the chasing lights, the ornamental detail — will all remain. In fact, even the familiar block-letter text will make an appearance every now and then through the art of digital display.”
It appears to me that Proctors is doing everything to retain the historic aspect of the building while at the same time eliminating the almost-daily necessity for an employee to climb a ladder to change the information on the marquee.
I cannot understand the need to incorrectly disparage Proctors when there are many more important issues available for comment.
We don’t need nannies to protect us from ticks
The Aug. 17 lead editorial [“Gov’t must act to make us safer from ticks”] calls for the central government to protect us from ticks and pats [Sen.] Charles Schumer on the back for his efforts in this endeavor.
One wonders how the pioneers made it across the Great Plains without the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] and politicians like Schumer holding their hands.
The Gazette wants your opinions on public issues.
There is no strict word limit, though letters under 200 words are preferred.
All letters are subject to editing for length, style and fairness, and we will run no more than one letter per month from the same writer.
Please include your signature, address and day phone for verification.
For information on how to send, see bottom of this page.