Public Input Session #1 -- Draft Plan of Conservation & Development

The first public session to solicit input from city residents on the Plan of Conservation and Development was held this evening from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. in the Hubbard Room of the Russell Library. I didn't actually do a head count, but I'd say between 30 and 40 people were in attendance. The meeting began with a presentation by Catherine Johnson, P&Z Commissioner (seamlessly assisted by Dave on the powerpoint), on the contrast between "historic" or traditional neighborhood design as opposed to post-1950s suburban "sprawl". Johnson noted that the state wants to see municipal planning policies that offer a sustainable model, and the phrase that is being used at the state level is "responsible growth". (This thinking reflects the work of a Governor-appointed task force, whose February 2008 report may be read here. Appendix B, "Responsible Growth", on pp. 10-12, gives the basic statement of goals, which seem similar in many respects to what is often referred to as "smart growth".)

The main aim of the meeting was to hear ideas from city residents about how Middletown should plan for future development. For the most part, discussion focused on particular areas of concern for distinct neighborhoods. Westfield and Westlake were well represented. Of particular concern to Westlake folks is the fate of the open space or "park" there -- one is unsure what to call the land, and no one seemed to know who currently owns it. All were agreed, however, that it is a nice area and that it should be better maintained. According to one speaker, named Bill (sorry, I didn't catch the last name), the Westlake area contains about 15% of the population of Middletown, yet it is neglected by the city. (The population of Westlake relative to the rest of the city can be seen on the density map in this earlier story; Westlake is represented by the large circles to the north.) Many Westlake residents wish to see the city take charge of the open space and maintain it, especially the paths that run through it.

What was particularly impressive, at least to this writer, was the high rates of owner-occupancy in the Westlake area. Upwards of 85 to 90% in some of the condominium associations, according to those present. (Please forgive me if I'm getting the terminology or numbers wrong.) The associations represented included, if memory serves, Beacon Hill and Trolley Crossing. In any case, the residents in attendance wished to correct the impression that Westlake is full of "transients" who don't care about or have a stake in Middletown. The people in the room were evidence that some "Westlakers" (my term, not theirs [at least, I didn't hear it used]) have lived in Middletown for over 40 years. And many feel a loyalty to and love for Middletown, so much so that they regret the convenience of shopping in Cromwell and wish that there were better shopping opportunities nearby. (My comment here was that perhaps one of the auto dealerships could be converted to a grocery store.) Another speaker, John Wilson, noted that Westlake boasts a diverse population, whether in terms of ethnicity, age, or income. And the bike and walking path is heavily used by all. In pleasant weather you would not be surprised to see anywhere from 200 to 400 people out for a stroll. Often one will see three generations of a family walking together -- yes, there are children in Westlake too.

Two or three people (including me) spoke of the need for better transit connections, both in town and between towns. There was some concern that there are too few arterial roads in Middletown and that we need to connect some of the suburban side roads that terminate in cul de sacs. Others were more concerned with the need for better bus and rail service, and the old trolley routes were mentioned with great longing. Johnson brought out the old trolley map for Connecticut. Another point raised was the need for better pedestrian connections, both in the downtown but also within and between other mini-centers such as South Farms, Washington Square, etc. One person spoke of having to drive to the Super Foodmart on Washington Street even though it was only about 800 yards away from her home, simply because the sidewalks are so unappealing. (I know I wouldn't care to walk on the edge of Route 66 myself.) The need for bike lanes and more bike paths was also expressed. Though it wasn't mentioned, perhaps one way of encouraging more bicycling would be to lower speed limits in town, especially in the downtown neighborhoods.

Another challenge that faces Middletown, noted by me, is how to regain access to the river. Given that the CT DOT has de-prioritized the redesign of Route 9 at both the southern (Acheson Drive) and northern (Arrigoni Bridge) interchanges (reported recently in the Design Review and Preservation Blog, where you can also view the plans), this may be an opportune moment to begin thinking anew about reclaiming the valuable waterfront. It is, after all, the reason Middletown exists. (It is a great pity that we weren't able to convince the CT DOT of the merits of the "tunneling" option. That would have been the shovel-ready project to end all shovel-ready projects.)

One speaker, whose name I did not catch, wondered about the possibility of making the Main Street less expansive -- if not narrowing it, simply making it more user-friendly. This prompted John Wilson to remark that Heidelberg, Germany, has many similarities to Middletown (including being a historic river city), and that the town fathers there decided to pedestrianize the entire Main Street from church to church.

The poor state of our trees was also noted, by none other than the son of Kerste deBoer (sorry, I didn't catch his first name). Kerste deBoer worked hard years ago to protect the lovely row of specimen trees on Long Lane (at one point, the city or state wanted to widen the street, which would have severely damaged the roots). This is why the area is now known as the Wadsworth/deBoer Arboretum (Wadsworth, because it was originally planted by the Colonel). One person observed that "Middletown used to be called the 'Forest City'", prompting Bruce Spaman (Middletown's former Urban Forester) to pipe up and acknowledge that it is still known as the 'Forest City', though the plight of our trees is admittedly pitiful. Ellen Lukens suggested the wonderfully commonsensical expedient of simply having a policy that states that whenever a tree is taken down by the city, another must be purchased to replace it.

Also worth noting is the fact that P&Z Commissioner Deborah Klekowski was in attendance. She spoke about some of her concerns as well, including how we are not doing enough municipal planning for an aging population. This means better sidewalks, access to medical care, etc. We need to do more to ensure that we can "age in place".

It was a productive meeting, particularly because there were so many new faces -- not "the usual suspects" that show up at Common Council and P&Z meetings. The NEXT meeting will be on 16 April, same time (6:30), same place (Hubbard Room, Russell Library). The special focus will be conservation and open space.