Last week, the Representative Town Meeting’s Transit Committee voted 7-2 against recommending that the full RTM spend $630,000 in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to redesign Jesup Green, and the nearby Imperial Avenue parking lot.
Tonight, the final item on the full RTM’s agenda is to vote on a request by the director of Public Works, and a recommendation by the Board of Finance, to approve an appropriation of $630,000 from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Fund for design
and permitting of the redevelopment of Jesup Green and the Imperial Lot.
Here is the report of the RTM Transit Committee, which the full RTM will consider tonight (Tuesday, 7:30 p.m., Town Hall auditorium; click here for the livestream):
Presentation
Director of Public Works Pete Ratkiewich began the meeting with a PowerPoint presentation on downtown parking. The presentation included an overview of the history, the proposed scope of work, costs and timing as well as the reasons for the $630K appropriation request. The discussion primarily focused on the Parking Harding and Jesup lots. (Note: the current Jesup lot is also known as the “ Taylor lot.”)
● History
○ Many downtown parking issues today are similar to those 20 years ago.
○ Desire to connect to the river front wherever possible.
○ Most recent plan: 2015 Downtown Master Plan.
Parker Harding Plaza, through the years.
● Parker Harding
○ Current layout does not meet ADA and Fire Code standards (currently short 3
ADA spaces).
○ Proposed redesign would result in a net loss of 42 spaces.
○ Jesup Green (upper portion) identified the location for the relocated 42 spaces.
● Overall goals
○ Reconstructed Parker Harding and the Taylor lot (lower Jesup) with no net loss in parking.
○ Proposed 850 square foot net increase in green space (once phases are complete).
● Funding/Cost:
○ Current Appropriation Request: $630,000 full design/permitting for Taylor Lot (lower Jesup Green) and Imperial lots.
○ Prior Appropriation (2022): $400,000 completed schematic designs for Parker Harding, Jesup and Imperial, and full design of Parker Harding.
○ Capital Cost Forecast: $11 million
● Projected Phasing – Town is working to move forward with a phased approach:
○ Phase I: construct parking on Jesup Green to alleviate parking issues caused by
Parker Harding reconstruction. Then reconstruct Parker Harding.
○ Phase II: Re-align Jesup Road. Convert part of Taylor Lot (lower Jesup) to green space.
○ Phase III: TBD – “will occur when the police station is relocated”.
Summary and vote
● The committee thanked the DPW and Downtown Plan Implementation Committee for their hard work.
○ Appreciate the decades-old history and efforts.
○ Committee agreed we all want to find a balance between thriving downtown, river access, and enhanced green space.
○ “We’re getting there.” But the only way to accomplish that is to “look at it
holistically first.”
● Desire to move forward but recognized that some things have changed and some things have not yet been adequately addressed:
○ Explore gaining spaces elsewhere before taking Jesup Green (e.g. Baldwin). “Put concrete where concrete is now.”
○ Why not use a portion of the $630,000 to fund an analysis of the cost of structured parking and/or fee-based parking?
○ Evaluate impacts of soon-to-be implemented 3-hour timed parking.
○ The Jesup side should be coordinated with the police station site. For these reasons, the majority of the committee felt that the $630,000 appropriation is not justified.
The Baldwin parking lot, after its recent renovation.
Motion made to approve the $630,000 appropriation:
● 2 in favor – (Bloom, Burkhardt)
● 7 against – (Lowenstein, Liccione, Cohen, Johnson, Benmosche, Gold, Levy)
Below is information with additional detail on some of the issues/points raised by the committee at Monday’s meeting.
RTM Transit Committee discussion:
Various questions were raised by the committee:
Jesup Green
● Multiple questions were raised about the apparent conflict between the proposed parking plan for Jesup Green and stated goals in the 2015 Downtown Plan:
○ Prior plans recommended both expanding riverfront access wherever
possible while retaining existing open space, including Jesup Green.
● Concerns raised around paving green space for more blacktop:
○ Current plan takes upwards of ⅓ of Jesup Green, and removes several
mature trees in the middle and upper portion of the Green.
○ The proposed first stage is to build the 40 spots on Jesup Green before
the redevelopment of Parker Harding.
● Concerns about losing green space on Jesup with no guarantees about the future.
● Currently the entire width of the library opens up to the Green on both floors. Under the proposed plan for Jesup Green the library would overlook a parking lot.
● Is Jesup Green deed restricted?
● Why hasn’t the cost of structured parking been considered before moving forward to pave the upper portion of Jesup Green?
○ Pete Ratkiewich indicated “no shovels in ground until 2025,” indicating that a delay of a
couple of months to evaluate a deck on Baldwin will not seriously delay the
project.
● Is a new waterfront playground a driver of the current DPIC plan?
Jesup Green is surrounded by a road, police station, the Westport Library, parking, and the Saugatuck River. (Photo/Samuel Wang)
Taylor Lot / Jesup Road
● It was noted that the current configuration of the Taylor Lot balances the needs of downtown (including across the river) and the library while providing good access to the waterfront (especially ADA) and Jesup Green .
● Existing waterfront
○ Does it make sense to take upwards of ⅓ of Jesup Green (estimated cost – $4 million) to build a different green space near the library’s lower entrance when there is green space there now?
○ Existing green space along the river and in front of the lower library entrance is lightly used and enjoyed, but not well maintained.
● Jesup Road was recently repaved. Does it make sense to spend money on ripping up a new road?
○ Could proposed angled-parking lead to further congestion caused by people
circulating for parking and/or backing up into the line of traffic?
Economic Changes:
● Does the new plan actually reflect changes the town has seen in the last few years with increased economic activity downtown and new stores, restaurants, shops and cultural attractions?
Timing/Need:
● Concerns that “we’ve lost the forest before the trees”; the 8-24 for Parker Harding has not been approved by the P&Z. Nevertheless, the committee is voting on an appropriation that would result in paving Jesup Green for the purpose of recovering parking spots lost at Parker Harding, on a plan that so far is not approved (?). (NOTE: The P&Z approved the 8-24 for Parker Harding last night.)
● Comment: “Is there any reason why we can’t live with parking as it is now until the police station moves, then do all 3 phases together so we know we are going to get the green space back?:
Discussions have begun about a new police station. The current one is adjacent to Jesup Green.
● It is not clear if the 40 spots on Jesup Green will be needed once the timed parking is implemented – then people who need longer term parking may choose not to park on Parker Harding or Main Street:
○ Consider monitoring the impact of the 3-hour limit first.
○ How often is Baldwin lot full (just holidays or more frequently?).
○ Perhaps wayfinding signs could help with parking losses on Parker Harding.
● Concerns around whether ARPA funding can be used when Westport’s downtown is thriving following the pandemic-related influx of new residents.
● Concerns around opportunities for public feedback:
○ Next formal phase of public comment will follow after Jesup Green is paved.
○ Public never asked the question whether they prefer more parking downtown or green space.
● Those who expressed support for the current appropriation felt that further delay is akin to “paralysis by analysis”; the phased approach outlines how the town will ultimately end up with more green space. But others expressed concerns that the promise for more green space in the future could be jeopardized by lack of funding appropriations for various phases and the uncertainty around the timing and plan for the police station site.
● Concerns that we are spending a lot of money on one narrow view forward:
○ Both $630,000 request and $400,000 prior ARPA funding represents over $1 million in plans for one view without any funds directed to evaluating alternatives for parking other than paving ⅓ of Jesup Green.
Don’t know what we’d do without you keeping us updated. Thanks a great deal, Dan.
Most of this discussion surrounded issues that were adressed and resolved last night at P&Z. This request will fund the design and engineering costs to complete the Downtown parking reinvention and pedestrian access strategic pillars as outlined on the DPIC website. This work will be necessary to complete much what was promised last evening as conditions and requests in the 8.24 and coastal site plan approvals. What it does not include, but also in the P&Z request is parking structure evaluation + police lot usage which will be brought forth as separate initiatives.
The many issues were hardly resolved at the Planning and Zoning Commission in the course of two meetings, including the 6 hour meeting on April 8. The PZC was bitterly divided, and even commissioners who voted in favor called out many unfavorable and unresolved aspects to the plan. No, the issues were NOT “resolved.”
Show some love for trees and green space by joining me and Max on The Green Sunday at noon to photograph the trees!
7-2 is very strong and the full RTM seldom overrides a committee vote as well written as this report.
This Town has a bad habit of enriching consultants for very poor problem solving and devoid of foresight.
Why would any smart wide view of parking replace ment and making quick easy access to downtown merchants , resturantsand businesses proceed with poor designs and loss of green riverside and open space of what should be a park like setting and then spend $11 million dollars not efficiently solving the downtown access and parking issues!! Let’s work smarter not harder and create a more efficient, usable space versus footprint and come up with a much better solution for all of Westport. Forget the $400K we blew on Parker Harding consulting and not follow with more minor league consulting and secure a bdtter overall plan that will make Downtown Westport “major league”!
It took over 20 years of “forgdt about it” attention to the developing problem so another 6 months of even a year for the best overall solution is a better VALUE than charging ahead to satisfy a smaller group of persona involved in this rediculous foley!
Put together a “design build” RFP and get some proven expert parking deck ( structure) construction firms to put a hard number on an Elm street ( Baldwin ) lot parking structure in place and then make both a better financial decision and community acceptance and good solid justification for either scenario!
“LET’S MEASURE TWICE AND CUT ONCE”!!
Mr. Herbertson’s statement is not correct. The $630K is designed to fund the next step in this flawed plan which includes destroying a third of Jesup Green followed by a non-binding promise to recreate the confiscated green space by replacing it on the waterfront at some indefinite point down the road (assuming the $11 million in estimated capital costs are found). Let’s be clear: potentially moving the Police Department off site is also many years and many millions of dollars down the road as well. The destruction of mature trees and open space on Jesup will be an irreparable loss; before taking such a drastic and counter-intuitive step, the parking spots lost as a result of the Parker Harding plan should be replaced on Baldwin, with a single tier deck that would provide more than enough parking to solve all of our needs. Contrary to the misinformation that was initially put forth by the DPIC and others claiming such a deck would cost $80 million, we now know the cost is more like $5 or $6 million. Why pave over Jesup Green when we can build a deck where paving already exists? I urge RTM members to vote against the wasteful and inappropriate use of $630,000 in ARPA funds for a misguided and harmful plan.
Mr Herbertson consistently spews mistruths.
This horrific anti Westport, anti business plan which mysteriously was passed last night will destroy our town green, the vitality of Westport, and the merchants businesses.
Not that Herbertson or his tooker appointed henchmen care about that.
Pretty clear last night when not a single merchant approved of or agreed with this plan, that Matthew mandells statement that this will be great for business was at a minimum irresponsible, and misleading. He had just heard all the merchants plead otherwise. Might want to seriously reconsider being a member of the downtown association and chamber of commerce.
SMH.
Jennifer Johnson, I applaud you for always always doing right by the town.
Let’s see where the RTM many who illegally denied us our right to petition sit on this vote, because at last nights meeting on PH and jesup, it was very clear that almost nobody supported it, exceptions being a few crony’s and naturally DPIC, the inventors of this lunacy.
I’d say last night there were 20 for the plan and 80 against.
By those numbers the rtm vote tonight which should represent those who elected them should be around 20% for the appropriation, and 80% against it !
Hmmm🤔, it’s going to be very very interesting.
Baldwin parking lot is the location most suitable and perfect for tiered parking, as has been suggested. It’s a totally useful, ugly space that is defined by its own purpose. It was David Royce who pointed out very successfully that the riverside view of the Saugatuck in Parker Harding should not be lined by cars blocking the river by thoughtless administrators and commissioners who couldn’t focus on the beauty of the town. Now we’re about to waste millions of dollars when the space is already carved out on Elm street between Church and Main. Well, we can always raise the fees for town beach permits and town recreation along with parking fees.
The loss of 44 spaces, and the making of existing spaces smaller is emblematic of the town breaking faith with the building owners and merchants on Main Street.
There is a golden ratio of retail square footage to parking spaces. Imagine buying a house but your driveway is on town property. The town promises you will always have a spot to park when you buy the house—then the town changes their mind after you buy.
My friends, the shopper schlepper was a failed experiment. Anything across the post road helps not with loss of spots at Parker Harding
When they allowed retail on the second floor they screwed over the merchants because that sacred ratio was disturbed.
If you want to add square footage they will say not enough parking.
But if the want a legacy project they will toss your parking into the river without batting an eyelash.
Opens up town to civil litigation. Big mistake about to happen. For what? So some gerk can cut down the mature old growth trees on our town green?
When town bodies dont understand the dynamics of how downtown works they make mistakes like this.
Think about the ratio of retail footage to parking spots. 44 more cars circling around town looking for a spot.
Last chance to think!!!
A plan that forces downtown merchants, their employees and customers to cross the Post Road endangers them unnecessarily and puts the town at risk of a tragic lawsuit. Oh, and the town cannot fix the situation as it does not have jurisdiction over Post Road crossings! What?
We’ve had enough pedestrian injuries and deaths here. Let’s not increase the odds for more.
Crossing the Post Road near Main Street is a dangerous proposition.
And further, let’s stop plundering green space and mature trees. We don’t have enough as it is. Bring the tree warden before the public to answer questions about these trees, which take decades to reach their majestic state. The DPW says one of the trees is unsavory because it has multiple leaders; whoopie. You can find very old, very beautiful trees everywhere with multiple leaders, including on my property.
Please come to The Green Sunday at noon to photograph the trees. If it’s not raining, bring a picnic blanket. If it’s raining, bring an umbrella. Bring your dog (I’ll have poop bags). Let’s capture in photos what Westport “used to be like” for a Future Friday Flashback on 06880.
And be very careful crossing the streets.
After the first two hours of the Meeting, it was obvious that the powers that be, had already made their decisions. This was an exercise in futility to placate the public and businesses who continue to raise their issues that will directly effect their bottom lines, and long-term concerns. Replacing 40+ parking spaces across the Post Road is a ridiculous rationalization! How many more decades are we going to postpone decking the Baldwin lot when it is needed NOW! You are asking taxpayers to foot the bill for a plan that clearly doesn’t solve long-term issues! Wasting this money, and asking taxpayers to be accomplices to the slow death of businesses with the loss of parking spaces, timed-parking, & merchant & employee inconveniences will only contribute/exasperate workplace issues that make business difficult already. Why are exceptions to P & Z regulations OK for developers under the guise of “affordable housing”, but the benefit for the whole Town makes taxpayers requests impossible? Wake-up Westport Officials!