By Gretchen Webster
WESTPORT — If the Board of Selectwomen approves, the town will hire a New York firm for an extensive study of parking problems in downtown Westport — including whether or not to build a parking structure.
A bid on the study, submitted by the consultant firm BFJ Planning, was approved Thursday by the Downtown Plan Implementation Committee.
The committee met in executive session to consider the three bids submitted in answer to a “Request for Proposals” for the project last month, and then approved unanimously BFJ’s selection in public session. The amount of the approved bid, however, was not revealed.
The cost of the study will be made public once the selectwomen approve the bid and grant the contract to BFJ, said Randy Herbertson, the DPIC chairman. The amount the town will pay for the contract will also be listed in the public minutes of the meeting, which will be filed after the selectwomen’s vote, he said.
The cost of the project, however, will not be more than the money already appropriated for the study, committee member and Representative Town Meeting member Matthew Mandell said when the committee came back into public session. “It’s built into the ARPA [American Rescue Plan Act] money that we approved.”
“In 2025, we will be armed with new studies and new information.”
Randy HerBertson, Downtown Plan Implementation Committee Chairman
BFJ is “a consulting firm providing professional expertise in planning, urban design, environmental analysis, real estate and transportation,” according to its website. It has offices in Stamford, Manhattan and New Jersey.
Herbertson outlined three steps the firm is expected to incorporate into the parking study:
- Update a 2015 parking study of downtown Westport.
- Study the feasibility of building a parking structure in three possible locations: the Baldwin lot off Elm Street, the Gillespie Center lot on Jesup Road and Police Department headquarters lot, also on Jesup Road.
- Prepare a comprehensive strategy for parking, including whether to have paid parking, whether to build a parking structure and to consider other possible solutions to the help ease parking problems.
In August, the Board of Selectwomen approved a $26,000 contract with Colliers Engineering and Design to collect public opinion about Westport’s parking issues.
The two initiatives are the latest in a series of surveys and proposals over more than a half-century designed to address the chronic lack of parking and traffic congestion problems downtown.
Fot the parking structure survey, BFJ Planning representatives will meet with stakeholders in downtown parking issues, including the Westport Library, Levitt Pavilion, Westport Women’s Club and Westport Farmers Market, organizations all located in the Jesup Road/Imperial Avenue area, which Herbertson described as “the culture district.”
Additionally, focus groups for the project will include families, seniors, property owners and others, he added.
When Jennifer Johnson, a District 9 RTM member, aked why merchants were not included in the stakeholder groups, Herbertson said that a study and public engagement process had already been completed for “the commerce district,” including the Parker Harding Plaza lot and Main Street.
“Eventually, you have got to pull the trigger and do something.”
State Rep. Jonathan Steinberg
However, DPIC will welcome opinions and input from all sectors as it continues the study process, he said. The consultants’ work will end with a broad public survey, he added, and then the design process will begin.
The parking study should be completed within four to six weeks, according to Herbertson.
“We hope to get this all wrapped up in November,” Herbertson added. “In 2025, we will be armed with new studies and new information.” The committee’s priority then will be to start work on remodeling the Parker Harding lot.
While the public waited outside DPIC’s meeting room as the committee met behind closed doors, state Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, said he agrees something must be done as soon as possible to improve downtown parking problems after years of planning and discussion with little improvement.
“It frustrates me … the level of traffic has increased,” Steinberg said. “Eventually, you have got to pull the trigger and do something.”He said he is “encouraged by the strong effort the [DPIC] committee is taking,” but acting on the plans as soon as possible “is important for the town’s future.”
During the public meeting, Sal Liccione, a District 9 RTM member, asked twice that the town provide a short-term solution for parking problems experienced by downtown employees, who he said are regularly issued $25 tickets for violating parking limits. Liccione said that designating long-term employee spaces or issuing employee parking permits should be done right away.
The committee currently is focused on long-term solutions, not short-term measures, Herbertson said.
Freelance writer Gretchen Webster, a Fairfield County journalist for many years, was editor of the Fairfield Minuteman and has taught journalism at New York and Southern Connecticut State universities.
Today a group of concerned citizens announced the formation of a committee to study whether a study should be made of whether Westport needs another study of downtown parking and to determine what has become of previous studies. The group, called “You Can’t Have Too Many. Studies” (YCHTMS) is studying whether to interview the Boston based Proliferation and Procrastination Consulting Group (PPG) and, depending on the outcome of that study may or may not award a contract in the near or distant future.
Hilarious! BTW, I have question for DPIC about the “stakeholders”: apparently there’s a “culture district” and a “commerce district”. Is it true the place where people live downtown is known internally as the “invisible district”?
Why do we have so many studies with no resolutions? Some examples: downtown parking, longshore, dredging the river, dangerous intersections. The only action I have seen are the ridiculous signs on Cross Highway and Bayberry.
With as much money has been spent on studies, we could have paid for a parking structure already! We all know it belongs on the Elm Street lot, so get moving already! The hiding behind studies and kicking the can to the next administration is hurting the town and downtown merchants!
Without an organization that represents the merchants on Main Street, all will be fir nit.
From California it feels like non issue. I just watched the movie Chinatown, the dpic is the water department. Im jack Nicholson. The question would be, for our downtown parking situation, who is Faye Dunaway? Drew Friedman is the old rich guy. Of course in our case he is a good guy. I will always go back to my systems course at Cornell. Downtown is a complex system. Where is the flo chart, the priorities and the use cases. List the use cases for downtown…see how they branch logically…
“Commerce district”, “Culture district”. I call it downtown because that is what it is. Forget about the fancy words and hold a referendum so the people who live here can decide where to build the parking structure. Another study by an out of town company is unnecessary. As far as I am concerned DPIC should be eliminated.
This is just the usual bullshit !
Nobody who actually comes to Main Street believes there’s room for losing parking spaces. And nobody with an ounce of sense thinks that trading parking for green space makes viable sense. It’s just not a luxury we have.
This has become spoilt child syndrome.
Tooker cannot bear to be beaten. It’s unfathomable for her, yet, she continues to just plough on with expensive studies trying to prove her irrelevant point ! Never owned a business in her life.. utterly clueless. It’s so tiring.
Pity she didn’t think to talk to the businesses in downtown before this crusade.
All I can say is thank God, we have the check and balance of the PZC to be economic stewards of the downtown !
Tooker would destroy this town for an heirloom tomato and a free lunch at one of taibes restaurants.
Well we have had enough !
This is a hellbent effort on the part of at least 2 /3 selectwomen to destroy the downtown. They could care less..
2 clueless politically inclined women on a power play to ruin our downtown.. just to have their own way. You know how to vote !
Dpic does their bidding and is made up of ZERO merchants !
The LARGEST STAKEHOLDERS IN THIS DOWNTOWN .
Who do you think pay the taxes ??
As one of the largest stakeholders in this downtown, surely there should be a pecking order of merchants who contribute to the conversation.
Apparantly not ! Apparantly they do not want to hear the reality !
I am so tired of hearing “culture district” vs “commerce district”
Reality is let’s do the math. Commerce district pays all the taxes !
So we have all the say ! Yep !!!
Culture district are a nice to have – paid for BY THE COMMERCE DISTRICT !
make no mistake ! The merchants pay for the library, the levitt and the farmers market.
AKA, the only voice here is the merchants ! The tax payers are the remaining voice.
You can love the farmers market ! They ARE NOT stakeholders ! I see no sniff of stakeholder there. They are NOT stakeholders !
They are our( residents of Westport) guests. They have no rights. No rights to anything. And as long as we the merchants pay for their existence. We are the last word.
And with a swipe of our pen we can eliminate then !!!!!
Have some respect for your bread and butter !
This is ludicrous behavior.
And do not ask me to have my staff park somewhere a camel ride way from their work place.
This response reminds me of a spoiled child without a filter – a broken record. The same old, tired comments post after post. The name calling and the mud slinging is fatiguing.
Kevin, as an investor of personal funds in my business in the town of Westport, I value your opinion. I presume you’d also value mine.
I like you am a resident. 23 years …
We, merchants of Westport have been engaging in and trying to have collaborative conversations with the town for 3 years.
We have been cast aside like garbage.
So the broken record comes from the aftermath of that.
We do not appreciate being gas lit
In fact not at all.
We do not want to have our businesses explained to us by a bunch of clueless and political gaslighters.
I’ll just sum it up for you Kevin !
Church lane closure does not work.. it’s been vocally opposed by most merchants in town.
Check FOIA.. very valuable of late for the truth !
Next, 3 hour parking does not work !
It simply doesn’t.
So you sound interested in giving an opinion..
please. Please do.
Some of this response is a bit off subject but actually quite relatable.
Does anyone else find it ironic that our Administration
appears to be advocating for the Farmers Market (over) the downtown merchants) yet basically giving a too long kept secret boot to the Community Gardens comprised of Westport citizens and tax payers? The Farmers Market is getting the benefit of yet another paid consultant( no matter how unnecessary or dubious they may be) while our Gardeners are literally left to die on the vine with no clarity of future direction or serious study? Selling produce and flowers are ok but opportunity to grow that produce is that much less important to our administration?
The Farmers Market is a wonderful amenity and rightfully popular addition to our town. They are there once a week, not accessible to the full time working population and only operate seasonally. The merchants however are there day after day, everyday- employing people and are significant tax payers and yet they are NOT considered to be “stakeholders” in the redesign as a whole?
There would be no Downtown without them!
Why not continuously include merchant input as the ideas and plans unfold. We no longer want to be inclusive but rather selectively inclusive? I can’t see any future consensus,no matter how many studies without their knowledgeable and experienced input yet our Administration continues to play favorites for reasons yet to be determined or uncovered?
Has there been no lesson learned from the previous recent debunked ( for good reason)downtown redesign and parking plans? As far as I know,and personally experienced countless times over many seasons and years, our Library and Leavitt don’t experience any notable parking shortages for their patrons yet they are considered stakeholders? These are the same Library folks that were silent on the proposed desecration of Jessup Green that was ultimately overwhelmingly rejected by astute citizens thank goodness as well as our merchants.
Denying the merchants a voice in the comprehensive planning stages will only delay additional needed parking that makes good sense whether for “cultural” or “commerce” activities. They are intertwined in our Downtown. Why seperate the two-and just when will the
“Commerce”input that apparently has already been completed be made public? Seems unwise to go forward with out the public knowing and contemplating merchant concerns that are most important to take into account. I don’t think we should be assuming the Commerce side has no stake in what happens on the now labeled Cultural side if their importance is to be equal. Or is it?
The only new study should be the cost of a well landscaped asthetically pleasing parking deck on Baldwin preferably. This will save our historic Jessup Green area,possibly free up Imperial for the weekly Farmers Market, allow PH to be restriped maintaining the safer angled parking and spruced up some, provide for compliant handicapped parking, give shoppers and employees more accessible and longer term parking options and better allow for the frequent merchandise and food deliveries in almost one fell swoop. Very simple.
In the meantime Herbertson’s response to Liccicone’s plea for a short term solution to
employee parking is beyond callous and disappointing as agreement and execution of a final plan can take years but now at least we know employees are the least of Herbertson’s concerns and collateral damage in, at the least, the short term that I suspect will not be so short- a decision perhaps.
He should not be making considering the hardship.
Speaking of Studies, while I am holding my breath for the next inevitable October Charette on this matter I will try to unearth
the supposed “study” regarding ball field usage with true facts and figures that may or may not indicate our seemingly dire need for an all purpose xtra large and intrusive turf field at Long Lots now causing all kinds of division, complications and expense. I will also await the study(or uninformed guess) as to whether grass or turf or long standing gardens absorb more water and better mitigate flooding in prone areas.
And really want to know just how many Westport athletes were denied participation due to the extreme lack that is being touted both in Westport run programs and pay to play?
Lets get this study and the said already completed “Commerce” study results out in the open so actual local citizens can make timely and well informed opinions on how best to move forward both on a cost basis and a human well being basis.
Claiming transparency and actually providing transparency are 2 completely different things that our town seems to confuse on a regular basis lately.
Lets finally lay out in the the open the competing forces for all to know and measure for the several big impact decisions facing all of us. This can only help regain trust in our processes.