Dear Editor,
I would like to respond to the June 6 Westfield Evening News article,“ Complete streets concept heats up the public health and safety committee. Dan Desrochers requested an interview prior to publishing this story. Due to my work schedule he accepted the following written statement. Not a single word of which was used.
There are a number of concerns with the state creating a separate program to encourage cities to adopt a Complete Streets policy regarding all new construction.
It is probably better to have an ordinance versus adopting a policy listing exceptions and language for opting out. However, there are real concerns with making this an ordinance because then you are mandating something, giving up local control and saying that you shall do something.
The state has a history of changing the rules down the road, changing the funding after the fact, or funding decreases as more communities participate, for example, the Community Preservation Act, the Business Improvement Districts, Local Aid and the Quinn Bill.
Complete Streets is a Smart Growth program. Smart Growth is the United Nations Agenda 21 program that gave us the failed model of the Business Improvement District. Agenda 21 programs banned in some states. The proposal was not written locally, and contains some problematic language.
There are serious concerns with some of the proposed language.
Appointees to each Board/Commission should include at least one member who demonstrates or pledges specific support for bicycle, pedestrian or Complete Streets principles and facilities.
Cost alone shall not be considered a valid reason for rejecting further pursuit of such principles or options.
Complete Streets design recommendations shall be incorporated into all phases of all publicly and privately funded projects, as appropriate.
If Westfield wants to change our sidewalk ordinance, for example to allow bicycles on sidewalks outside the downtown area, then lets change the ordinance.
Dan Allie – Westfield City Councilor
