Is It Time To Pull the Plug on Main Street’s Complete Streets Project?

At the May 13, city council meeting the administration and the consultants for Main Street’s Complete Streets Project were expected to be prepared to present a final report to the council. And while Mayor Bouley stated before the meeting that he would like to solicit additional public comments before voting on this project, it was expected that this report would represent the project in its final form.

Unfortunately this was not the case. There were many missing elements to the report; signage and lighting are two issues that were not documented in a final form. And there were many other elements of the project where the city staff and consultants did not present a preferred option for the council to vote on. 

So the elements of the Complete Streets project which generated the most controversy and discussion, sidewalks (19 - 21 feet wide), road design and parking (with a loss of 17 spaces between Centre and Pleasant Streets) appear now to be cast in stone.

While components that it appeared everyone agreed on (a snow melt system for the sidewalks and street) are now in limbo.

Also up for discussion; will the owners of the clock tower allow it to be moved and if it is moved will it be placed square to the sidewalk or at a 45 degree angle. For those of you who follow my blogs you know I have commented on how the trees on the sidewalk block the view of the clock tower at its Eagle Square location. Guess what, the most recent plans show the clock tower at the Phenix Avenue pocket park site and yes, there are a double row of trees on the south side of the clock tower that will continue to block its view in its new location. On the north side only a single row of trees.

While the design team was adamant about including fountains at the State House Plaza there was enough dissension from the council on this design element that it appears it will be removed before the start of construction. There was also discussion of whether the city even owns the sidewalk in front of the State House and how much control over its use the city actually has. Let’s hope that this is only the start of the city council’s questioning of the streetscape elements of this project.

And here’s a big one, who is gong to pay for the maintenance of all this stuff. This brings me to yet another concern. Throughout the hearing, staff and consultants’ responses were incomplete, evasive and deceptive. When asked what the cost of the maintenance would be the answer was $275,000 more then it currently costs. How hard would it have been to just say, we estimate the costs of maintenance to be $350,000. 

So when asked about who would be paying for the upkeep of this project it was stated, either the council will authorize payments or some other method. Can that some other method be a Business Improvement District (BID).  Will businesses on Main Street be asked to cover the expenses of the maintenance and operation of many of the streetscape elements.

We have yet to see a design plan that shows signage and kiosks. The Complete Streets Committee chaired by Steve Duprey, felt that signage was so important for the success of this project, they included in their final report that new signage should be in place before the start of construction. Here’s the quote from their report: “That the City create a comprehensive way-finding signage program to enhance connectivity to off-street parking, landmarks, and transit areas, and that signage directing visitors to the garages be improved PRIOR to the commencement of the project;”.

Yet there is no plan for signage as of the May 13, city council meeting.  During a somewhat tense discussion between city staff  and their consultants and Councilor St. Hilaire, it came to light that city staff and the council couldn’t even agree on whether or not certain types of signage met zoning requirements. After further discussion it was apparent that staff and consultants were not prepared to provide the council with a preferred option, even though this was expected to be a final report.

Staff and consultants finally responded that signage is still a work in progress. This means that after the council votes on final approval for this project, that our city engineer and the consultants have said to the city, trust us, we’ll figure this out. 

Of all the comments that were stated during the pubic hearings by the Complete Streets committee, the one that stands out for me is one of Steve Duprey’s comments. Steve stated that engineers and planners should not be left on their own to make decisions for you and me. In fact this was the impetus for keeping the committee intact until final approval by the city council. Again here’s the quote from the committee’s final report: “That this Committee may be continued as representative of the many stakeholders in this project for the purpose of reviewing and consulting on various design elements of the streetscape as the actual designs are created, with an anticipated requirement of meeting as needed until design is complete.”

Two areas that should have been determined before the start of this project were testing of the new lane configurations and a parking study. The lane configuration trial was halted (even though there was funding available) because the Complete Streets committee was told by the city’s engineer, Ed Roberge, there wasn’t enough time. And while there wasn’t funding set aside for the parking study, again city staff stated that there wasn’t enough time to complete the study before construction would start.

And again, here’s what the Complete Streets committee had to say about a parking study in their final report: “That the City undertake an immediate study of the availability and usage of the current parking in the downtown and that it move promptly to consider changes to fees, time limits and other options to ensure maximum usage is made of the garages;”

Now we hear that the city is planning to do a complete inventory of parking. The catch is that the study won’t start until after construction has started.

So what do I think. I continue to believe that this is not the time for this project to move forward. I continue to believe that the timeline as outlined in the grant does not allow enough time for city staff and their consultants to address the issues that would provide even the remotest of chances that this project can be successful.

I continue to believe that the only way to improve the business climate downtown is to bring more people into market rate apartments and condos. I believe that once we have a flourishing downtown neighborhood, then we can consider making our downtown prettier. 

I believe that if the issues that were identified by the Complete Streets committee can’t be addressed by the administration and their consultants in a timely manner, then the council should have the courage to walk away from a project that - as our Mayor has stated - will define our downtown for the next 50 years.

As was stated at the city council meeting, let’s not forget the Downing Street fiasco. And I’ll add let’s not forget what happened to Laconia when they ‘improved’ their downtown.

Oh, did I forget to mention the 12 solar compacting trash cans at $4,200.00 each.

And even though the Complete streets committee recommended against burying power lines on South Main Street, (“The Committee heard testimony from a number of parties that the undergrounding of overhead utilities along South Main Street should be part of the project. Although the Committee supported this concept in theory, it also recognized that this was not financially feasible and thus does not recommend that this be undertaken”).  City staff is now advocating this option at a cost of $2.5 - $5 million depending on how far south they go. And since the grant for the Complete Streets project won’t pay for this, staff is recommending that we continue to drain future tax dollars from the 21 acre Main Street tif district to pay for this.