Who’s Driving Who Down Main Street?

At last night's Downtown Complete Streets Improvement Project Advisory Committee meeting, I once again gave my opinion during the public comment period. While one can never be too sure what position members are leaning towards, until last night, I felt that all those who have testified before this committee were treated respectfully, regardless of the opinions they have presented.

That is until last night.

I stated that in my opinion the city planner, the city engineer, and TPAC (the Transportation Policy Advisory Committee) seemed to be pushing the committee towards an option that would eliminate angled parking and replace it with parallel parking on Main Street. My concern is - and has been - that the loss of parking will hurt businesses on Main Street. The parallel parking option, based on the latest numbers from our city’s engineer would eliminate 81 spaces on Main Street.

Last night, it was stated to me by Dick Lemieux, a member of the committee, that I had testified the committee was being driven to a parallel parking solution. Lemieux continued that no one was driving this committee to a conclusion, that the committee would come to their own determination. Lemieux finished his remarks to me by stating that just because I didn’t want wider sidewalks didn’t mean that others didn’t think it was a good idea.

Wow! I’ve seen this before.

When the Re-Thinking Main Street report was made public, merchants who were concerned with the plan were attacked. When I presented testimony before the Concord City Council, I was told I was misinformed, even though I was taking my information word for word from the supplemental Re-Thinking Main Street report. And last night, I had words put in my mouth and had that same committee member imply he could read my mind.

Let me be crystal clear on what I’ve said to the Complete Streets committee regarding parking: I have stated on a number of occasions that it appeared to me that the testimony before the committee by the planning department, engineering and now TPAC was pushing the committee towards a parallel parking option. That’s pushing not driving. In fact, the only driving I do is when I get in my car to attend these meetings. 

I made my comments regarding the parallel parking option based on what I have heard from those groups I mentioned above. It is my opinion that based on I what I have heard from the city planner, the city engineer, and the TPAC presentation, that they all feel the best option is one with parallel parking.

In fact, at last night's presentation to the committee by TPAC, their option No. 1 - their preferred option - was a design plan with parallel parking. That isn’t my opinion. That isn’t me stating that the committee is being taken for a ride. This is the testimony of the Transportation Policy Advisory Committee.

And what about my not wanting wider sidewalks. I didn’t know we had a mind reader on the committee. Or at least a member whose prognostication skills rivals those of the best carnival fortune tellers.

In fact, I have no issue with wider sidewalks. I have no problem with the discussion of lane changes on Main Street. I even have no problem with the discussion of alternate parking options on Main Street. 

What I do have a problem with is the time line. No time to fully scrutinize these options. No time to test them out before they become permanent. No time to actually get input on whether or not people would use the options presented or shop elsewhere. 

What I do have a problem with is the attack dog mentality. The liberal reinterpretation of testimony. The twisting of the comments of those who dissent and labeling them disgruntled. The outright fabrications.

The facts are that Main Street can use a face lift. The facts are we have a federal grant that has a strict timeline that has to be adhered to. The facts are we don’t know what the outcomes of any of the options that have been presented to the Complete Streets committee will be. And the facts are we don’t have the time to find out.

The timeline is the driver here. If time is taken to think this project through in a responsible manner the grant money won’t be available. So it’s a Hobson’s choice, accept the money now or take the time to think this out so we don’t lose downtown merchants. Do it their way, or don’t do it at all. Not much of a choice.

There is still much to discuss and much to be decided. There are five scheduled Complete Streets Committee meeting left and one meeting that will be hosted by New Hampshire Listens to solicit community opinion in a charette like setting. It’s not that time is running out, It’s that there was never enough time to start with.

Previous posts by Herschlag on this subject can be read here: Allan Herschlag blog posts.