Honestly, I Don’t Hate Concord Businesses and Our Downtown

For 30 years, I have been a strong advocate for improving our downtown.

I have proposed a pedestrian walkway on Kennedy and Lows Avenues. I have proposed a partnership between the city and downtown landlords to share in the cost of rehabbing their buildings to attract tenants to their unoccupied upper floors. I have urged our city to work with the state to locate more of their employees in our downtown. And I have made suggestions to make our downtown more inviting for residents and visitors.

I believe being labeled a naysayer and anti-business is just inaccurate.

My concern is and always has been that anytime there is a public private partnership it has to make sense for all the stakeholders. All too often our city has made deals that leave out the most important stakeholders, you and I, residential property owners. What I have been urging our city council and administration to do, when establishing these partnerships, is to be cognizant of the impact the financing options they choose have on all of us. 

So, after last night's meeting, I decided it was important to let you know what I think about the downtown improvement project.

While I have been critical of the Re-Thinking Main Street plan, it isn’t because I don’t support our downtown or feel streetscape and infrastructure improvements are’t important or necessary. It is because of my feeling that the premises and promises that the Re-Thinking Main Street report promulgates just don’t pass the smell test. 

The  best way I can do that is to share with you a letter I wrote to the downtown merchants almost two years ago in November 2010. I’ve added updated information to the paragraph that talks about the costs and the city’s portion of the financing and placed that in italics. Everything else is as it was written at the time.

Letter for Downtown Merchants - 11/17/10

Just some of my thoughts on the proposed Downtown improvement project - Al Herschlag

Steve Duprey makes a number of good points regarding the proposed Main Street improvement project. The need to insure and objectively quantify that three lanes will result in higher foot traffic for the merchants and that parking concerns will be addressed before moving forward. Two issues that also require scrutiny are project costs and the interruption to businesses during construction.

Currently estimated at $6 to $9 million (and costs will only only increase by the projected start date) the project as presented has the city picking up 20 percent of the costs. That’s $1.2 to $1.8 million, not chump change. Particularly when you realize that approximately every $300,000 raises the tax rate by 1 percent.

We now know the project is estimated to cost $7.8 million. The Grant will pay for 60% and the city will pay the other 40%. The 40% is broken up into two parts. 20% is currently slated to be paid by a general obligation bond and the final 20% will be discussed at the October 11, meeting of the Downtown Advisory Committee.

 There are a number of options available to the city to pay for our share of the project. Manchester has opted to assess a surcharge of 0.38 perent on their downtown business improvement district. The city can assume that the project will increase the value of the buildings in the improvement district and that the added real estate values will pay for the projects bond without the city having to dip into the general fund. My line in the sand is  that any funding mechanism that is approved will have the bond payments coming from an increased tax base from the improvement district and not out of the city’s funds. Regardless of how the city decides to pay for this project, funding mechanisms need to be at the forefront of any discussions relating to this project.

That brings us to the interruptions to businesses during construction. All too often projects are undertaken without enough consideration for how the project will effect adjacent streets, businesses, traffic patterns... While the project has the potential to enhance our Main Street and improve business in the downtown, without proper planning it can just as easily have the opposite effect.

To look at this as only a Main Street project would be terribly short sighted. Before moving forward with improvement to Main Street it is important to look at impacts and improvements to  Storrs Street, Kennedy and Low Avenues, State Street and the east / west connector streets. Not to look at improvements to these streets first would not only be short sighted but would add to the uncertainty of the success of this project.

I believe that in order to minimize disruptions and loss of business to Main Street merchants during the projected two years of construction that attractive and easily accessible alternatives to parking on Main Street must be incorporated into this project and completed before downtown construction starts. First, Storrs Street needs to be configured so that it is an attractive option to Main Street. Not just aesthetically but also so that it is able to provide parking options that place visitors the same distance to Main Street businesses before construction.

Similarly Low and Kennedy need facelifts and merchants should look towards providing access points from these two streets to their businesses. Traffic patterns that make sense on Storrs, easily accessed parking and a user friendly pedestrian way, will have the potential to mitigate potential negative effects of construction. And the same for State Street. Enhanced parking options, a look at improving traffic patterns and well maintained sidewalks and pedestrian ways that ensure easy and safe access to downtown businesses.

There would need to be a time frame that lets visitors to our downtown become acclimated to the new traffic patterns and pedestrian access points before construction starts on the downtown streetscape. Making improvements to Main Street without considering alternate access routes (vehicular and pedestrian) is a certain formula for failure as many merchants will be unable to weather the downturn in business to their establishments.

I agree that doing nothing should not be an option. As is moving so slowly that our downtown implodes before improvements our made. But moving ahead at a pace that causes more harm then good can’t be an option either. Let’s look at this project carefully and with full consultation from all parties that will be impacted; businesses (and their employees), shoppers, visitors, residents.

Let’s carefully evaluate the most important part of this project, the economic impact it will have on our entire community, with objective data. Will the improvements to our downtown generate enough revenue that landlords will be able to rehab the upper floors of Main Street buildings for occupancy. Will enhanced real estate values cover the costs of the improvements. Will the city’s tax base be expanded so that the recent trend of increases in the percentage of property taxes being paid by homeowners in relation to businesses will see a reversal.

Let’s look at traffic and pedestrian patterns and parking options. Again not only on Main Street but on parallel and connecting streets. Should we get rid of the gate at the Capitol Commons garage and replace it with an attendant? Does it make sense to have a moratorium on parking meter fees during construction? Are there creative ways to add additional parking during construction by the way the work is planned?

Let’s evaluate the requirements of the state and city (and our local businesses) and see if these proposed improvements meet their needs. A large number of those who use our downtown work in our downtown. Doesn’t  it make sense to talk to those who support the businesses on Main Street?

Let’s understand that developing Main Street in a vacuum will result in a vacuum. That loud sucking noise you hear will be visitors and merchants abandoning our Downtown.

Carefully think through what you want this project to accomplish and how well it will accomplish it.

And let’s remember what makes Manchester’s downtown successful. Infrastructure improvements to Canal and Commercial Streets, rehabbing and occupancy of the mill buildings. Renovated row houses and high end residential rentals and condos. The Verizon and Merchants Stadium (and a second downtown hotel). In short it wasn’t the renovation of the downtown that made it successful, it was the development of the projects, I just mentioned, that give people a reason to visit Manchester’s downtown. While a facelift may keep some people from leaving our Downtown is there any evidence that just making it look pretty will attract new faces.

With careful planning and communications that keeps all parties involved and informed this project can provide tremendous opportunities for our downtown. Just remember that we only get one shot at doing it right the first time.