Sending the parking garage plan in Biddeford to a public vote is both unnecessary and unwise. Several citizens have been pushing for this issue to go to referendum, but we don’t believe it’s in the city’s best interests to do so.
A recent parking study commissioned by the city showed that the mill district cannot grow significantly without more parking spaces, and developers with an eye to bring restaurants, housing and businesses to the old mills have made it abundantly clear that they cannot invest here unless the city is willing to do its part by providing parking infrastructure. It’s an investment the city will need to make, akin to sidewalks and roads, and it’s been done before in many other places with success.
It’s also been shown by a professional engineering firm that Biddeford’s mill district cannot absorb any more growth because of the parking restrictions. The mills in the area ”“ North Dam, Riverdam and Lincoln ”“ have 1.2 million square feet of space, meaning that 2,000 parking spaces would be needed if all that space were to be filled, according to Economic Development Director Daniel Stevenson. Without those spaces, historic buildings will instead have to be demolished to make way for parking.
The proposal at hand is for a $12.65 million, city-owned, 500-spot parking garage, to be built with its front on Main Street, next to the former WestPoint Home retail outlet building.
The proposed garage is only the first phase of the downtown parking plan, which was created by Winton Scott Architects over the past year. Additional phases would include construction of two more similarly sized parking structures directly behind the phase I structure. The second of those would be underground, with a green space at ground level that could include amenities such as an amphitheater and ice skating rink, according to Stevenson. In full build-out of the plan, a third parking garage would be built abutting it.
The project will be funded initially with the more than $1 million set aside in tax increment financing funds that are restricted for downtown improvements. Once it opens, parking garage fees will be combined with fees from metered, on-street parking to pay for the garage. Stevenson and other city officials have said the first parking garage will not require any property tax money, and will be mostly leased before it’s even built.
He has this confidence about it because he’s the one Biddeford people hired to convince developers to invest in the city, and he knows that while they have their sights set on downtown properties, they won’t invest unless parking is made available. Real proposals are on the table, totaling $15 million in new development, he’s said ”“ but not if the city doesn’t step up on the parking issue.
Problem is, many Biddeford residents simply don’t believe him. Big projects translate into big costs in the mind of the wary taxpayer, and it will take the city a huge amount of campaigning to convince enough people that this garage is not going to raise their taxes.
The problem with putting this sort of thing to a vote is that very few voters are going to take the time to educate themselves on how this proposal will work, and even if they do, many won’t take the long view.
The fact is, if a garage can help draw developers to the downtown, the increased investment and improvements to the mill properties will increase the city’s tax base, thereby helping to keep the average homeowner’s taxes down. And that’s not to mention any new jobs that will come with that development.
It’s important to note that the mill district TIF money cannot be used to repair City Hall or pave streets citywide. This fund, which also draws property taxes from the Biddeford Crossing project, can only be used for very specific economic development purposes, which must be approved by the state. The parking garage was authorized back in 2008 and other improvements, such as recent sidewalk repairs downtown, have also been OK’d.
As taxpayers, we hire professionals for a reason ”“ the city manager, economic development director, city planner, parking study engineers, etc. ”“ all of whom have been saying for many years that this parking structure will be an important catalyst for bringing the downtown back to life. These folks aren’t politicians, they’re experienced professionals in their fields who have direct contact with those who are considering investments in the city, and it simply makes sense to trust their judgment on this issue.
The money earmarked for the parking garage project is part of a TIF that the council approved, and it’s part of a downtown development plan the council approved. Citizens should not handcuff the city now in using those funds for their intended purpose.
It would be a shame to see the “vote no on everything” crowd ”“ the same folks who have repeatedly rejected improvements to City Hall and shot down the school budget ”“ sabotage the future of Biddeford by rejecting this parking garage at the polls even though it won’t raise their taxes. The details of the TIF district, mill district plan and the parking garage proposal are readily available for public viewing, and we encourage all interested residents to check them out.
When the other phases’ time comes due, voters should certainly have a say on whether they want to directly invest new tax money in expanding with another garage, if necessary, but this first step must not be hamstrung by misplaced public opinion before the city gets a chance to show developers it means business.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen by calling 282-1535, ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
