The Economic Development Committee (EDC) will hold a special meeting on Tuesday (Nov. 29, 6:30, Room 208), to address the proposed path which will allow residents in the large Wesleyan Hill subdivision to travel to Main Street and to Wesleyan by bicycle.
The "Wesleyan Hills/Wesleyan University/Downtown Connector Project" would be largely funded by the Federal Department of Transportation. City Planner Bill Warner will present a bicycle path plan developed by City Engineer Tom Nigosanti prior to the EDC meeting. His presentation starts at 5:30 on Tuesday, also in Room 208.
Commentary:
If the EDC and Common Council believe that parking is an important factor for economic development in our city, they should approve the Connector Project without delay.
Every Main Street shopper who arrives by bicycle instead of by car creates one free parking space for others, reduces traffic, and marginally reduces the frequency of road repair. The EDC has recently approved the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on parking and traffic studies and on parking lot construction (Melilli Plaza just finished, North End lot just beginning). The rationale for this spending has been that parking lots are necessary for the vibrancy of downtown.
A bicycle path taking people to a store or employment location creates open parking spaces in a cost-effective manner. This is especially true when considering that no businesses or homes are displaced for a parking lot--there is no reduction in the grand list as there is when downtown land is covered in a municipal parking lot.
Moreover, in communities throughout the country, property values have risen after the introduction of a bicycle paths (see HERE for a study in Massachusetts). The construction of bicycle trails connecting our city's residences, workplaces, shopping locations, and schools may be one of the most cost-effective ways to increase our grand list.
Showing posts with label Parking lots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parking lots. Show all posts
Monday, November 28, 2011
Sunday, March 1, 2009
What's the prescription for an asphalt addiction?
Comment
By Jennifer Saines
The enthusiasm for “change” that permeated the airwaves of our country for the past year has not, unfortunately, been incorporated into politics at the town level. At Wednesday night’s P&Z meeting, the commissioners (save one), the Walgreen’s developer, and the members of the Shiloh Christian Church clung to the worn-out mentality of convenience at any cost and the sanctity of asphalt. Pedestrian and cyclist safety and amenities and long term health issues seem trivial obstacles to a streamlined automobile-dependent universe. Never mind that an iconic 140 year-old church at a prominent Middletown gateway will be demolished to make way for the architectural under-achievement that is a Walgreens, surrounded by 65 parking spaces.
The soon-to-be demol-ished church
I hope that the number “65” has raised at least a few eyebrows. Even a generous allowance of fifteen spaces for employees leaves a whopping 50 spaces for customers. When was the last time you encountered 49 other people in a pharmacy? Ironically, this is a drive-thru pharmacy, which should theoretically decrease the need for fixed parking spaces. Commissioner Phipps is to be commended for questioning the need for so many parking spaces and so much asphalt. The developer’s response that the number was simply required by Walgreens was unconvincing, since the company had already reduced that “requirement” to approach the city’s recommendation of 50. The developer then quickly volunteered to construct ten of the spaces of pervious material if that would please the commission, although because it would be expensive he could not do more than that. (Has anyone has ever seen the parking lot of the Walgreens on 66 even near capacity? I have since been informed that Walgreens and other big-box type chains want to create a public perception of ample parking.)
The fact that the Walgreens was applying for a “special exception” for a drive-thru seemed secondary to the proceedings. The plans were presented, incorporating the design of the drive-thru, as if the special exception had already been approved. I found this confusing, and wondered why so much work had been done by the developer in advance of P&Z approval. When this question was raised, the developer quickly and definitively stated that drug stores without a drive-thru are simply not built in Connecticut any more, and the developer would withdraw the application if the special exception were denied.
One commissioner seemed especially delighted that a drive-thru in a nearby bank was saving him so much time, and a member of the church assumed that everyone uses the drive-thru at McDonalds, so why not a drive-thru pharmacy? Despite my opposition to a drive-thru, Commissioner Borrelli’s argument that the satellite bank saved him a trip into town certainly did seem to make sense. We are a big city, area wise, and could use small neighborhood centers for basic necessities such as banking and wine, groceries, drugs, and a movie. This is consistent with Commissioner Johnson’s comments before the final vote (which were nearly stifled by a fellow commissioner) that Middletown develop small neighborhood centers to serve small communities within the city.
This area has the potential to be a community center with a distinct identity and a variety of shopping destinations. Unfortunately, the development thus far has been wanting. The existing stores are fronted by a sea of parking and separated from the proposed Walgreens by an ocean of asphalt sometimes five lanes wide. Commercial buildings should abut the sidewalk, face the street, and connect to others by sidewalks. This very traditional yet proven configuration welcomes the shopper, encourages movement, and puts life on the street. The re-siting of the Walgreens in such a way would be a first step in linking the various establishments of that center.
Five lanes for your auto-motive pleasure
As a community we should urge the Planning and Zoning commission to put a cap on parking lot size. We should also push for a reform of street design. The long-standing practice of widening streets and building additional lanes for the sake of “traffic flow” has compromised the general health of the community, discriminated against the pedestrian and the cyclist, and diminished the environmental, cultural and aesthetic appeal of our city. If it is too late to save the church, the achievement of these goals would at least help to offset this loss.
By Jennifer Saines
The enthusiasm for “change” that permeated the airwaves of our country for the past year has not, unfortunately, been incorporated into politics at the town level. At Wednesday night’s P&Z meeting, the commissioners (save one), the Walgreen’s developer, and the members of the Shiloh Christian Church clung to the worn-out mentality of convenience at any cost and the sanctity of asphalt. Pedestrian and cyclist safety and amenities and long term health issues seem trivial obstacles to a streamlined automobile-dependent universe. Never mind that an iconic 140 year-old church at a prominent Middletown gateway will be demolished to make way for the architectural under-achievement that is a Walgreens, surrounded by 65 parking spaces.
The soon-to-be demol-ished church
I hope that the number “65” has raised at least a few eyebrows. Even a generous allowance of fifteen spaces for employees leaves a whopping 50 spaces for customers. When was the last time you encountered 49 other people in a pharmacy? Ironically, this is a drive-thru pharmacy, which should theoretically decrease the need for fixed parking spaces. Commissioner Phipps is to be commended for questioning the need for so many parking spaces and so much asphalt. The developer’s response that the number was simply required by Walgreens was unconvincing, since the company had already reduced that “requirement” to approach the city’s recommendation of 50. The developer then quickly volunteered to construct ten of the spaces of pervious material if that would please the commission, although because it would be expensive he could not do more than that. (Has anyone has ever seen the parking lot of the Walgreens on 66 even near capacity? I have since been informed that Walgreens and other big-box type chains want to create a public perception of ample parking.)
The fact that the Walgreens was applying for a “special exception” for a drive-thru seemed secondary to the proceedings. The plans were presented, incorporating the design of the drive-thru, as if the special exception had already been approved. I found this confusing, and wondered why so much work had been done by the developer in advance of P&Z approval. When this question was raised, the developer quickly and definitively stated that drug stores without a drive-thru are simply not built in Connecticut any more, and the developer would withdraw the application if the special exception were denied.
One commissioner seemed especially delighted that a drive-thru in a nearby bank was saving him so much time, and a member of the church assumed that everyone uses the drive-thru at McDonalds, so why not a drive-thru pharmacy? Despite my opposition to a drive-thru, Commissioner Borrelli’s argument that the satellite bank saved him a trip into town certainly did seem to make sense. We are a big city, area wise, and could use small neighborhood centers for basic necessities such as banking and wine, groceries, drugs, and a movie. This is consistent with Commissioner Johnson’s comments before the final vote (which were nearly stifled by a fellow commissioner) that Middletown develop small neighborhood centers to serve small communities within the city.
This area has the potential to be a community center with a distinct identity and a variety of shopping destinations. Unfortunately, the development thus far has been wanting. The existing stores are fronted by a sea of parking and separated from the proposed Walgreens by an ocean of asphalt sometimes five lanes wide. Commercial buildings should abut the sidewalk, face the street, and connect to others by sidewalks. This very traditional yet proven configuration welcomes the shopper, encourages movement, and puts life on the street. The re-siting of the Walgreens in such a way would be a first step in linking the various establishments of that center.
Five lanes for your auto-motive pleasure
As a community we should urge the Planning and Zoning commission to put a cap on parking lot size. We should also push for a reform of street design. The long-standing practice of widening streets and building additional lanes for the sake of “traffic flow” has compromised the general health of the community, discriminated against the pedestrian and the cyclist, and diminished the environmental, cultural and aesthetic appeal of our city. If it is too late to save the church, the achievement of these goals would at least help to offset this loss.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Free Parking!
I spent a good portion of my childhood defending the FREE PARKING rule in Monopoly. You know, where you put $500 per round in the center of the board, and whoever lands on the free parking space gets the pot? I couldn't stand playing with people who said that rule was just made-up.
Well, it's not quite as good, but Middletown has its own FREE PARKING rule. By special order of the Mayor, there's a Holiday Parking Amnesty: on Saturdays in the month of December, you can park anywhere downtown without feeding the meter.
Woo Hoo!
Enjoy it while you can. It will be January all too soon.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Design Review & Preservation Board meeting - 10 December 2008
From Jennifer Saines:
A belated report on the Design Review & Preservation Board (usually referred to simply as DRB) meeting which immediately preceded the P&Z meeting Wednesday evening. I was only present for the presentation period of the meeting, and did not stay on to hear the board deliberate and discuss minutes or old business.
A similar thread ran through the Board’s response to the three projects that were presented – the role of the stationary automobile in design considerations. A major goal of the board is to recommend the reduction of parking spaces to the minimum required by city code, to ameliorate the heat radiated by parking lots by planting trees in islands, and to prevent the construction of parking lots in front of residential buildings.
For example, the proposed parking lot for business condos off of I-91, which is known as "Centerpoint" and boasts a gold LEED plan (see the story by Fishmuscle about the P&Z meeting last night in today’s Eye for more details), exceeded the minimum number of recommended spaces. The chairman, Mr. Jeff Bianco, advised that the number of parking spaces be reduced to the city minimum requirement. He also requested that the signage that will be visible from I-91 be reduced in size, as it exceeded code. Another board member recommended that the architect incorporate other types of surfacing such as pressed concrete to break up the monotony of the asphalt in the expansive parking lots. Pedestrian pathways could be delineated by such surfaces, he recommended. When asked if he had considered using porous surfacing material, the architect responded that the type of subsurface on the site was not conducive to proper drainage.
The Price Chopper proposal also came under scrutiny with respect to the sea of asphalt that fronts it. The board strongly recommended that the islands in that lot be planted according to DRB guidelines, and to consider constructing more islands. The representative from Price Chopper responded with the contention that any fewer spaces in the lot would be unacceptable to his corporation. Mr. Bianco noted that there exists plenty of overflow parking in the adjacent lot (Home Depot). Mr. Bianco also questioned the design of the front of the building (with respect to perceived access); according to a Price Chopper representative, the design was not accurately depicted on the drawings provided to the board.
The proposal by Habitat for Humanity to build a duplex on Ferry St. with two separate driveways and parking in front of the house garnered criticism from Mr. Bianco as well as members of the public (myself included). The design of the duplex could be changed and aligned close to the street in keeping with traditional streetscape design. And a single driveway could be used to gain access to the back of the house for parking. Habitat for Humanity representatives argued that an adjacent home had parking fronting the street, but Mr. Bianco pointed out in response that a bad precedent should not be imitated. Jennifer Alexander, as a member of the public, recommended that Habitat incorporate the design of the existing structure on the site, which will be razed as part of the ongoing redevelopment of the Ferry and Green Street areas.
The house on Ferry St., to be demolished by Nehemiah Housing/Habitat for Humanity. Photo added by Jen Alexander.
A belated report on the Design Review & Preservation Board (usually referred to simply as DRB) meeting which immediately preceded the P&Z meeting Wednesday evening. I was only present for the presentation period of the meeting, and did not stay on to hear the board deliberate and discuss minutes or old business.
A similar thread ran through the Board’s response to the three projects that were presented – the role of the stationary automobile in design considerations. A major goal of the board is to recommend the reduction of parking spaces to the minimum required by city code, to ameliorate the heat radiated by parking lots by planting trees in islands, and to prevent the construction of parking lots in front of residential buildings.
For example, the proposed parking lot for business condos off of I-91, which is known as "Centerpoint" and boasts a gold LEED plan (see the story by Fishmuscle about the P&Z meeting last night in today’s Eye for more details), exceeded the minimum number of recommended spaces. The chairman, Mr. Jeff Bianco, advised that the number of parking spaces be reduced to the city minimum requirement. He also requested that the signage that will be visible from I-91 be reduced in size, as it exceeded code. Another board member recommended that the architect incorporate other types of surfacing such as pressed concrete to break up the monotony of the asphalt in the expansive parking lots. Pedestrian pathways could be delineated by such surfaces, he recommended. When asked if he had considered using porous surfacing material, the architect responded that the type of subsurface on the site was not conducive to proper drainage.
The Price Chopper proposal also came under scrutiny with respect to the sea of asphalt that fronts it. The board strongly recommended that the islands in that lot be planted according to DRB guidelines, and to consider constructing more islands. The representative from Price Chopper responded with the contention that any fewer spaces in the lot would be unacceptable to his corporation. Mr. Bianco noted that there exists plenty of overflow parking in the adjacent lot (Home Depot). Mr. Bianco also questioned the design of the front of the building (with respect to perceived access); according to a Price Chopper representative, the design was not accurately depicted on the drawings provided to the board.
The proposal by Habitat for Humanity to build a duplex on Ferry St. with two separate driveways and parking in front of the house garnered criticism from Mr. Bianco as well as members of the public (myself included). The design of the duplex could be changed and aligned close to the street in keeping with traditional streetscape design. And a single driveway could be used to gain access to the back of the house for parking. Habitat for Humanity representatives argued that an adjacent home had parking fronting the street, but Mr. Bianco pointed out in response that a bad precedent should not be imitated. Jennifer Alexander, as a member of the public, recommended that Habitat incorporate the design of the existing structure on the site, which will be razed as part of the ongoing redevelopment of the Ferry and Green Street areas.
The house on Ferry St., to be demolished by Nehemiah Housing/Habitat for Humanity. Photo added by Jen Alexander.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)