Public Comments on Update to Strategic Sidewalk and Bike Path Plan Due Monday

Thanks to all of you who engaged yourselves in reviewing the update to the Strategic Plan. Big shout-out in particular to Alan Dooley in the Warner Parks Community where they take their lives into their hands everyday just to walk to the park after which their neighborhood is named.


Before I share with you my comments to the update, let me provide a little background information. The Strategic Plan was first created in 2003 as way to identify the most appropriate locations for sidewalks and bike paths and repair and replacement needs. Prior to completion of the Strategic Plan one or both of the following things happened with respect to sidewalks and bike paths: 1) We didn't build them; or 2) We built them when the Council man or the public screamed loud enough. Neither of those things demonstrated sound public policy or open and accountable use of public money.

The Strategic Plan has been criticized by suburban Council members because their communities were so far down the priority scale, they didn't see sufficient benefit of the plan or the resources to which it was attached. Urban Council members were also frustrated by the speed at which sidewalks were repaired and the way priorities were balanced between repairs and new installations. Most of the problem was inadequate funding not the plan. But, on the balance the Strategic Plan represented a step toward understanding the need and beginning to address it.

Newly minted Mayor Dean rightly called for an update of the 5 year old plan. There were 4 community meetings around the county and the results are published at http://www.civicinc.com/MetroStratPlan/ProposedUpdatesSPSB_5-30-2008.pdf

So, here are the comments I sent to Jim Snyder at Public Works:

Dear Jim:

Below please find my comments to the 2008 Sidewalk and Bike path Plan Update:

1. I do not think that the Pedestrian Generator Index gives sufficient credit for commercial nodes in suburban transect. I fully appreciate that sidewalks in the urban, center and core transects with their population densities probably provide more public benefit on a per capita basis than those in the suburban transect. However, I think there should be an effort to create more parity between commercial nodes in the city center with those in the suburban areas. As the PGI is currently configured, sidewalks in the urban areas will continue to take funding priority over those in the suburban areas.

2. It needs to be a major goal of the sidewalk plan to provide sidewalk connectivity to all transit stops up to 1/4 mile. There is no other pedestrian generator that makes walking pretty much mandatory. I would exclude park and ride type nodes from this analysis.

3. I think the decision matrix should include consideration of those sidewalks that can be built more cheaply than others. I realize we affix a linear foot cost but we all know the full blown curb and gutter, storm drain arrangement is more costly than the more environmentally sensitive design you and I have discussed for Davidson Road.

4.. I think including public schools in the trip generator but not private does not make a whole lot of policy sense. We certainly don't distinguish between public hospitals and private hospitals or between public community centers and private community centers. We should not distinguish between private schools and public schools.

5. I think when applying a trip generator factor to a particular area, you need to have a tool to determine if that destination is actually accessible. A commercial node within a 1/4 mile of neighborhood separated by an interstate should be thrown out of the data set immediately. (see Belton, Shiloh)

More generally:

The plan is nice but needs to be incorporated into the complete sidewalk plan. The public and Council do not need to consult multiple documents to figure out what the plan is.

Chapter 3 of 2003 Plan should be updated for new facilities.
Chapter 6 should be updated for changes in costs, etc.. There also needs to be a capital plan for sidewalks as part of the overall Strategic Plan. Capital plans can be monitored semi-annually and changed as funding changes. The capital plan should distinguish between funds for maintenance of existing network and money to expand the network.
Public opinion surveys from the update should be included in the Appendix.
A major goal of the plan should be to manage expectations of the public and hold Metro accountable.
There should be a section on design that addresses use of the green infrastructure that is eventually going to be mandated by the EPA if they have their way and which, by the way, will make Nashville more beautiful.

Thanks for all the hard work. I know we shall have a great update when all is said and done.

Regards,

Emily Evans

Don't be gone too long, Bill

Harvard University, one of the oldest universities (for men) in the United States, has asked our Bill Purcell, our former Mayor, to be the new Director for the Institute of Politics at the Kennedy School for Government. (I say oldest university for men because I attended the college that has educated women far longer than Harvard. Mount Holyoke opened its doors in 1837 and Harvard got around to admitting undergraduate women in the 1970's. What's a 130 years amoung friends?)

First, let me say that I find it ironic that a college in Cambridge, MA recognizes what some in Nashville cannot; that Bill Purcell is a dedicated and devoted public servant. OK, I know, if you are a lobbyist or a lawyer or a public finance banker you probably found him frustrating to deal with. While I never witnessed it, he apparently had a pretty prickly personality at times. (Truth be told, I spent a grand total of 30 minutes in Mayor's Purcell's presence while he was in office so I don't have the personal experience of some)

But ask yourself this: if you had only to concern yourself with whether your tax dollars were being spent in the most transparent way possible with the greatest level of accountability would you not agree that Purcell left the Metro government better off than he found it? Did we have community based, consensus driven land use plans before Purcell brought Rick Bernhardt to Metro Planning? Did we have a plan for sidewalks and bike paths? Did we have a master plan for our parks system that rocked the Kassbah?

The answer is that most of the time we didn't have a plan. In those cases where we had plans we didn't develop them through broad based, grass roots input. In those old days of Metro, we formed a committee just like good Presbyterians. The sub-area plan for my district was created by a committee. It looks like a nice group of prominent people there on the front piece. But, I'll take my regular old constituents who take time out of their day, to show up at a community meeting, to talk about how they think our area should grow and develop over any committee of prominent people any day.

I realize that plans can be a bit of a downer for some. If we write a plan and we can't stick to it, well that might make us look bad as politicians and bureaucrats. That is somewhat true. When we develop a plan, whether it be for Parks or Public Works or Library or Police we need to be realistic. We all know that funding is the great wild card. But even when we aren't sure exactly how much money will be available, should we not have some sense of priorities, some direction, some way to express to our constituents where we are aiming?

I think when you look at the Purcell legacy that way, you will find more courage, more dedication to the people (not the committee) of Nashville than perhaps we have given credit.

So, don't be gone too long, Bill. And, if I failed to mention it before, thanks for all you did.

Metro Budget...I have lost count...Planning, Library, Parks

Thursday afternoon we had an interesting budget hearing. First up was Metro Planning led by Rick Bernhardt. I have already written about Rick's community based planning methods. Having held a number of land use related community meetings that hundreds of people attend, I stand by my belief that the staff of Metro Planning does their very best to encourage development that adheres to broad based community expectations. My constituents are known to give standing ovations to staff members. I realize that they don't make everyone happy but I also realize that those who pay taxes have an equal claim on the time and resources of this department as those who seek to expand the tax base.

Rick's presentation focused on many of the challenges that lay ahead, including higher fuel costs. Planning's budget will be cut 3.94% - $4,034,000 to $3,874,900. In 2007 Planning actually spent about $3.9 million. Planning staff are mostly contract employees so the Director is not bound by the "last in first out" typical for civil service employees. To "minimize" the impact Planning will be laying off two senior employees. Otherwise the budget impact would be a staff reduction of 4. In any event, staff in FY2009 will be lower than in any year since 1968. Seeing as planning and development is one of the most significant concerns of residents of the 23rd district, I would say that this budget cut will be meaningful.

The precious Library was up next. The budget will be cut from $21,377,200 to $19, 981,900 or 6.53%. The major program changes are the elimination of the bookmobile services and a reduction in hours for the Donelson, Looby and Pruitt branches. In all 13 positions will be eliminated. Our library is a jewel but we are running a $25 million dollar a year system on $20 million. Director Donna Nicely tells us that FY09 will be used to develop a strategic vision for our system. I cannot wait.

The Parks department was up next. Parks is another jewel but it is taking a pretty big budget hit. Total appropriation is being reduced from $35,431,000 to $31,375,600 or 11.45%. At total of 76.49 FTE (Full time equivalent) employees will be eliminated from the budget. The layoffs sound much worse than they are. If I understand correctly, the Parks Dept stopped filling vacant positions some months ago. So, those who have jobs will keep them but there won't be a whole lot of hiring going on. Yes, the Warner Parks walk on course will still be closed December, January and February. Hours of operation will go to 4 days a week, 10 hours a day.