North Adams Reviewing Diagonal Parking Downtown
In a communication to the council, Mayor Richard Alcombright included a design and analysis by Tighe & Bond engineers that looks at transforming the current parallel parking on the north side of Main Street.
"The idea is intended to do two things: First, it will approximately add 10 spaces on the north side of Main Street from the Mohawk Theater to a point just east of the former Petrino's," writes the mayor. "Second, diagonal parking will utilize the most inward line of the three lanes which will help to slow traffic."
A switch to diagonal parking has been raised off and on over the years both here and in Pittsfield. Both Greenfield and Northampton have diagonal parking.
Tighe & Bond looked at both 45 degree and 60 degree parking, finding that spaces at 45-degree angles intruded less into the roadway. The total number of spaces would be 32, including three handicapped-parking spots.
Alcombright said there were pros and cons to changing the parking and requested the issue be referred to the Public Safety Committee. Nothing would be done before May, which would allow the Department of Public Works to also review and issues.
North Adams Diagonal Parking Plan
Tags: downtown, parking, streets,
iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary.Comments are closed for this article. If you would like to contribute information on this article, e-mail us at info@iBerkshires.com
|YES!!!! Slow down main St. traffic. We have 5 lanes for gods sake. I4 in Orlando has 4-6 lanes. That puts our little Main Street speedway on par with one of the most trafficked major highways in the U.S. Diagonal parking is attractive, brilliant, classy, and WILL slow down traffic! I am all for it!|
|from: Dan||on: 09-26-2011 07:27AM|
I Agree (12) - I Disagree (20)
|Is lack of parking really an issue in downtown? Are businesses being hurt because people can't find a spot? I just don't see this as being enough of an issue to justify the PITA that comes with 45° parking, both for those who are parking and those who are trying not to get hit by people backing out into the street.|
|from: theBird||on: 09-26-2011 09:12AM|
I Agree (24) - I Disagree (7)
|The art of parallel parking is dying.|
|from: What a hoot||on: 09-26-2011 09:57AM|
I Agree (25) - I Disagree (7)
|Parallel parking will be beneficial for the body shops and traffic tickets after people start getting rear ended when backing out of a parking space. It definitely won't slow many cars down considering that most drivers don't obey the rules as it is.|
|from: MyYak||on: 09-26-2011 10:00AM|
I Agree (24) - I Disagree (2)
|First off I really like diagonal parking but I don't like the loss of lanes. The problems on Main St. stem more from people not using the lanes properly than it does from speed or amount of traffic. How many times have you seen someone coming down Main St. in the Right lane and not turn onto Holden St.? Also now with the first section of the right lane coming up Main St. not being a right turn only lane after the construction was completed has caused, at the very least, frustration.|
Also something no one seems to have touched on is the fact that the left lane going down Main St. will have to be used more which would make it a plowing nightmare in the winter for the DPW crew. The new machines they now have are excellent but it still takes some time until the roads are plowed to start cleanup efforts.
|from: missing the NA of my childhood||on: 09-26-2011 11:30AM|
I Agree (8) - I Disagree (0)
|If you are so inept that you cannot diagonal park without crashing into other cars you have no business getting behind the wheel in the first place.|
|from: RMV||on: 09-26-2011 12:06PM|
I Agree (16) - I Disagree (9)
|Oh good, let's spend some more of the taxpayers' money on something that doesn't need to be done.|
|from: Nice||on: 09-26-2011 12:29PM|
I Agree (23) - I Disagree (18)
|Did this study cost the city money?|
|from: Question||on: 09-26-2011 12:52PM|
I Agree (16) - I Disagree (5)
|Spend money we do not have to make more parking spaces for law breakers that do not put money in . Also more expired meters the parking officer can DRIVE BY.|
|from: RealWayne||on: 09-26-2011 03:05PM|
I Agree (8) - I Disagree (15)
|I doubt that this is being considered as "more parking for North Adams residents". The thought process behind it probably has more to do with slowing down ROUTE 2, as it goes through MAIN STREET, NORTH ADAMS.|
Nothing says "shops, food and entertainment" like diagonal parking! I think it's a super idea.
|from: guy||on: 09-26-2011 04:23PM|
I Agree (16) - I Disagree (18)
|It's a great idea, but it raises concern about people just backing up blindly into traffic. Most people around don't yield to traffic when backing out of a space.|
|from: Worried||on: 09-26-2011 11:10PM|
I Agree (11) - I Disagree (4)
|What's wrong with people in North Adams? Anything attractive, good, successful elsewhere, and just plain better, gets so much negative feedback. No one gets hit in Northampton, Greenfield, or anywhere else that has diagonal parking. I 100% think that some residents would complain about anything, no matter how nice it is. Plain and simply put, It's a better idea for slowing down the speedway, making downtown attractive once again, and eliminating our 5 lane highway downtown. If you can't back out of diagonal parking, you really should not be behind the wheel of a car. If you are seriously complaining about diagonal parking, you must be a very bad driver, or one of the speeders. Get real, it's just diagonal parking people, and it's a great idea. Good god, get a hobby...please.|
|from: Dan||on: 09-27-2011 07:05AM|
I Agree (18) - I Disagree (16)
|They have got to be kidding! Back when diagonal parking was workable, vehicles did not include SUV's that totally blocked the view of anyone in a smaller car. People will be backing into Main Street totally blind. It's asking for an accident - no, multiple, deadly accidents to happen. It's a stupid idea whose time has long since passed.|
|from: Not another "change"||on: 09-27-2011 08:01AM|
I Agree (22) - I Disagree (13)
|The cost of painting lines in minimal. The extra parking brings in more revenue to downstreet businesses. Four lanes is not necessary for Main Street. Diangonal parking causing more accidents is a myth. People expect cars to be backing out and automatically slow down. How many doors have been hit with the current parking? How many cars shoot out in the lane becuase they are facing that direction and get hit. Plenty. There is a reason malls, plazas, amusement parks use this method. Plus, do you know how many people cant paralle park between two cars. North Adams use to have it. I'm glad they are bringing it back.|
|from: Doesy||on: 09-27-2011 08:57AM|
I Agree (8) - I Disagree (13)
|I keep hearing those in favor say that this will slow down Main St. traffic. Exactly how many accidents have been reported on Main Street in recent years... how many pedestrians have been hit by cars "speeding" down Main Street? I drive on Main Street every day, and it is not the raceway being portrayed, especially in daylight hours. Want to improve traffic in North Adams? Put the stupid light at Brayton Court on "flash" after 9 pm, just like the Phelps Ave. light is already. One car making a right turn onto State Road stops traffic, which is just plain ridiculous. Do something about the Dunkin' Donuts mess, where cars regularly block the intersection every morning between 7 and 9 because of a drive-thru that should never have been granted. This is a waste of money, pure and simple. We the taxpayers have given a good chunk of change to a consultant, as usual, and it's meaningless.|
|from: SpeedRacer||on: 09-27-2011 09:23AM|
I Agree (29) - I Disagree (2)
|I think "slowing Route 2" is a better way to put it, and diagonal parking suggests.... "Hey! Let's get lunch!" Or... Oh, stop! Look at that cool shop!" |
Think bigger. Route 2 goes right through town, and if you are coming through town from points east and west on the foliage trail, for instance, the empty progression through a series of traffic lights and several empty lanes (very ghost-town) makes tourists go through town like it's a place to get past - not a place to stop. Not a destination.
Diagonal parking suggests A DESTINATION. Go to any area where this has been implemented on a main route, and see for yourself. It works!
|from: guy||on: 09-27-2011 10:29AM|
I Agree (4) - I Disagree (12)
|Another brilliant idea by our current Mayor. What will this cost our taxpayers? He just added a water and sewer tax, and property taxes have increased by 11 %. We have no money for the school system, and our residential neighborhood streets are in disrepair, but we have money to spend on parking spaces for Main St.? I don't care if it cost us 1 dime, it is more wasteful government spending. Please Mr. Mayor get your priorities straight while you still have the job as Mayor.|
|from: Concerned Citizen N.A||on: 09-27-2011 12:35PM|
I Agree (21) - I Disagree (5)
|I may be a little slow here, but someone please explain to me what this has to do with Route 2? Route 2 is Route 2, tourists who are driving past the town aren't even going to see the fancy new parking 'cause they aren't driving on Main Street.|
As to NoHo and Greenfield; if you've spent much time in those towns, the diagonal parking is a necessary evil. Both have downtowns that are already much more vibrant than we unfortunately have up here. The diagonal parking is a necessary evil because both towns need the parking! And someone please explain to me how it's not inherently more dangerous for drivers (even good drivers) to be backing into traffic.
Didn't Pittsfield experiment with diagonal parking at Park Square a few years back, and quickly abandon the concept?
|from: theBird||on: 09-27-2011 01:44PM|
I Agree (16) - I Disagree (0)
Editor: Pittsfield did experiment and the merchants seemed quite positive about the experience but it was never instituted.
|I Agree (0) - I Disagree (3)|
|Dear Bird - You're not slow. I should have expanded by saying that good directing signage to the .... let's call it the Main Street District, would have to part of the plan. When you go on vacation, you look for these kinds of things, while you're on your way somewhere else. Slowed traffic and good directions to the Main Street District would divert the tourist and still allow quick access through the town for residents and through travelers alike. Diagonal parking on Main Street would be very inviting, I think. |
|from: guy||on: 09-27-2011 02:31PM|
I Agree (2) - I Disagree (10)
|Guy, there are already directional signs to downtown on Route 2 (that's the real Route 2, not the one you somehow thought was a Main St. speedway) and you don't see it just pushing millions of passing tourists into the downtown. Tourists come here for MoCA, they come here to hit Williamstown in the summer, they come to see trees in the fall, and none of them will say, "Hey, they have diagonal parking, and man, that's just the thing to get me to hit Main St."|
|from: SpeedRacer||on: 09-27-2011 07:24PM|
I Agree (11) - I Disagree (0)
|I have no idea how much a study like this would cost, but it's not free - and as was alluded to earlier, the city has *much* more pressing traffic-reform needs (Dunkin' Donuts is ridiculously inconvenient and dangerous). If you insist on spending this money, spend it where there's actually a problem!|
Where's that guy who volunteered to check out parking meter enforcement in town? Let's set him up on Main Street with a lawn chair and a radar gun, let's see how bad of a "speeding problem" we really have.
|from: theBird||on: 09-27-2011 08:14PM|
I Agree (11) - I Disagree (1)
|Whenever I have encountered diagonal parking I have found it difficult and downright scary. Backing into traffic is not fun. I have never had a problem finding a parking spot in downtown North Adams so don't understand the need for more spaces.|
|from: J. Vankin||on: 09-28-2011 06:47PM|
I Agree (8) - I Disagree (0)
|To the bird:|
I would be more then glad to sit on main street with a city radar gun, please call the mayors office and get the OK, I don't think they will take my calls.
|from: Mark||on: 09-29-2011 09:19AM|
I Agree (2) - I Disagree (0)
|I am not a fan of diagonal parking. I am a good driver without any driving violations on my record and yet I AVOID downtown Greenfield like the plague. I don't drive an SUV and would prefer not to be hit or almost hit by someone backing out into traffic. I don't think it's a good idea. Also, why do we need more parking? It's not like the Steeples Plaza parking lot is ever even remotely full and that's right downtown as well.|
|from: NAresident||on: 09-29-2011 04:41PM|
I Agree (5) - I Disagree (0)
|I cannot believe this idea has reared its head again. It was a bad idea before. It's a bad idea now. No, it won't slow down traffic - ticketing speeders will do that. No, it won't bring people to Main Street - things for people to do, to buy, to see will do that. Yes, there already is plenty of parking on the south side of the street, a huge, mostly empty lot where parallel parking isn't required - have the proponents of this idea noticed it? But most important, it's dangerous. Have you ever seen someone trying to pull out of a parking space parked next to a larger vehicle (think compact car next to an SUV) - the driver of the smaller car can't see and hopes no one is coming or they'll stop and let him back out. It's bad enough in a parking lot - on Main Street it's just stupid.|
|from: What are they thinking?||on: 10-01-2011 09:41PM|
I Agree (5) - I Disagree (0)
|To me, it's about spending. Is this really an investment or is it an expenditure? I don't see parking being an issue to the success of business in the downtown.|
|from: alan||on: 10-02-2011 11:49AM|
I Agree (4) - I Disagree (0)