Change is coming to Northampton’s Main Street, and I can’t wait. A downtown designed for people and not just for cars will result in a thriving, congenial place and an engine of our local economy.
People come to downtown to meet each other, to dine and shop, and to participate in civic life. Wide sidewalks, safe biking facilities, safer road crossings, and a cool and beautiful tree canopy will draw more people to engage in what makes our city special.
This has been a long, transparent, iterative process with a tremendous amount of public engagement. There has been plenty of opportunity for those who objected to change or who wanted to prioritize cars over people to have their voices heard. In every case, in public hearings and meetings, they have been unable to contradict the data-driven understanding of traffic movement and pedestrian safety that informed the current design.
They claimed that narrowing the road would lead to traffic congestion, but it was clear from the traffic studies that signal timing was the primary cause of any delays and congestion. Further, we know from years of data on every continent that traffic congestion and delays either remain the same or are reduced when lanes are removed.
They claimed that the reduction of on-street parking would hurt business, while studies all over North America show that where parking is reduced and pedestrian and bike access is increased, businesses do better.
The city has already begun to demonstrate the ability of smart parking management policy to increase the availability of on-street parking even as spaces are removed to create expanded outdoor dining areas for restaurants. Besides, if more of us felt that we could bike without getting killed, fewer of us would drive, and there would be even less demand for parking, while you can park 12 bikes in one car-parking space.
They objected to the removal of angled parking, claiming that it is easier to park. They neglected to note that it is more dangerous (especially with large SUVs blocking visibility) to un-park from an angled parking space. As it is, the designers compromised and provided many angled spaces on the south side of the street, despite the known dangers and added road width these spaces entail.
They claimed that removal of some on-street parking would negatively impact access for the disability community, but the design increases the number of on-street disabled-access parking spots and widens the sidewalk so that two wheelchairs can pass without conflict.
Curb cuts and ramp angles have been designed to comply with the most up-to-date ADA standards. Moreover, it is well known that people with disabilities are more likely than those without to use public transit rather than cars, so modernized bus stops improve access for all members of the disability community.
They object to adding bicycle lanes, but we cyclists pay taxes just like they do, and have just as much of a right as they do to travel to and through downtown without getting killed. They disputed the crash statistics presented at the 25% design meeting held by MassDOT in April — but how many dead and injured pedestrians and cyclists are the appropriate price for their convenience?
A survey of 1,200 residents conducted by the city showed that the vast majority favored the priorities embodied in the current design. Only 15% of survey respondents thought preservation of on-street parking was the highest priority. More than half ranked this as the lowest or second-lowest priority.
While a public process is tremendously important, it must not be dragged out by a minority who are determined to thwart progress. I look forward to the enhanced quality of life the final design promises for all residents and visitors to our beautiful city.
Ben Weil lives in Leeds.