MAIN STREET PLAN IS ABSURD
I wholeheartedly agree with Diane Swing (letter, March 3): Whose brainstorm was this?
I can understand why the store owners need more parking, but I also agree with Cathy Linhart when she says more parking lots are needed.
The lot vacated by the building that burned down near Hardin Street would afford a great deal of parking and it would certainly improve the view. The city has already missed its chance in not using the spot on the corner of Sandusky and Main for parking if it’s so badly needed, though the little park is very nice.
My biggest concern is emergency vehicles traveling on Main Street. How is one supposed to get over and let them pass if there are only two lanes for traffic? Also, how many people will actually park by backing into a parking space? Backing into a parking space is not an easy task for some people.
I guess I will find another way to get around Main Street since it sounds like it’s going to be a real bottleneck. Have you ever been on Main Street when everyone is getting off of work in the late afternoon?
I will admit the picture in the paper was attractive, but will it be functional, or are we creating a big problem? Someone said, “Get over it!”
I think we need to go back to the drawing board and rethink this plan.
PEOPLE’S NEEDS SHOULD BE FIRST
The parking plan looked pretty on paper, but backing up is not always easy to do, especially if there are vehicles already parked on each side of you.
Whether you are holding up traffic trying to back in, or taking a chance of hitting someone, or being hit by trying to back out if we were permitted to just pull into them, does not sound like the best solution.
And if it happens that someone parks too close to your vehicle to get your door open, you have to go through the whole rigmarole again.
Considering all the different-shaped vehicles, it would be a real nuisance trying to park.
Also, handicap parking should be available near the businesses.
Another idea could be a parking lot just for handicapped folks with shuttle buses (something simple maybe, like enclosed golf carts) available to take them to the store, etc., where they would like to go. Pagers could be made available when the shopper was ready to return to their vehicle.
Findlay could also make Main Street one-way, with the angled parking all in the same direction. That way, you would only have to watch for traffic in one direction. But I suppose that idea has been thought of already.
I think Ms. Swing’s letter (March 3) had some valid points.
People like their old, comfortable way of doing things, and forget changing. But change is necessary as situations change.
I would say the main issue is remembering to put the needs of the people first.
Barbara J. Rice
HE’S GOT QUESTIONS ABOUT DOWNTOWN
Since I will not be able to attend the meeting on the proposed angled parking in downtown Findlay, I have a few questions that I hope will be answered.
With a state route running through downtown, won’t semi trucks or other vehicles driving through have to stop and block traffic while someone is backing into a parking space?
Won’t waiting to turn left from any of the two-lane sections stop traffic?
Won’t the median be damaged from semi traffic turning and running over the curbs?
Where will they put snow when it’s plowed?
With slower speeds and possible bottlenecks, how will an ambulance get through downtown? Currently, four lanes allow them to do so.
Delivery trucks (semis, UPS, FedEx) now double-park while they make their deliveries. Won’t this stop traffic in the two-lane areas?
Marathon’s proposed two parking garages will help the side-street parking. The city could purchase the empty lot next to the Wine Merchant for a parking lot.
HOW ABOUT A TRIAL RUN OF PLAN?
One way to test the downtown parking plan and reverse-angle parking would be to block off the lanes that are proposed to be closed for a week or so and see how the traffic situation would be. There are parking spaces behind some of the stores downtown and, as Cathy Linhart (Page A1, March 3) stated, there are empty lots that could be used for parking.
What is going to happen if one of the downtown buildings catches fire and there is so much congestion that the fire trucks, ambulance, etc. can’t get through?
The drawing of the change (Page A1, Feb. 28) looks good, but a lot of what looks good on paper is not practical.
CITY SHOULD CONSIDER GARAGE
I don’t see how changing Main Street to one lane each way is going to work. How are people supposed to just stop in front of another vehicle and start backing up without causing an accident?
I know people are bumper to bumper now anyway, and people speed down Main Street.
What’s going to happen when someone is going a little too fast and the vehicle in front of them stops to back up and causes an accident? And after this happens, how does Findlay expect emergency vehicles to get around traffic to get to them?
I know there are empty lots everywhere and empty buildings.
Findlay should consider a parking garage instead. It would at least be safer than slowing everyone down to one lane.
This is something that should be voted on.
COACHES SHOULD HAVE CHECKED STATS
Why does it seem that the girls’ coaches always get the Blanchard Valley Conference selections correct, but the boys’ coaches don’t?
If you look at the stats that are posted, either (Michael) Blunk or (Adam) Cytlak should be player of the year. (Sawyer) Junge should have been on the first team over (Zach) Kuhlman, as Kuhlman only showed up in one of the categories.
The coach of the year should have been Van Buren’s coach. Liberty-Benton and Arlington were expected to do well!
I ask the BVC coaches, don’t you have the stats in front of you when you vote?