Buckfield faces parking problem

BUCKFIELD — At a recent selectmen’s meeting, Fred Cooper Jr. took town fathers to task over what he views as a serious problem with parking on Turner Street.  It’s an issue that municipal officers had already promised Cooper, as long ago as last May, that they would address.

Now, having had the matter once again called to their attention, it appears no resolution will be pursued until at least next spring.

“I believe that it was back in May that the board voted to put up some ‘No Parking’ signs beside the sidewalk so that it could no longer be parked on,” said Cooper. 

Cooper was referring to the westbound side of Turner Street.  The sidewalk there is flush to the ground, with grass on either side.  This asphalt walk has deteriorated over the years, causing it to take on the roll and contour of the front yards along that side of the street.

As Cooper has noted at past meetings, vehicles parking on that side of the road tend to roll right up onto the sidewalk in order to get further off of the narrow main road through the village.  This road, known locally as Turner Street, is also part of Route 117.

With cars on the sidewalk, pedestrians have just two alternatives: walk through local yards, or walk in the street.  As Cooper has pointed out, most people, since they are likely to be crossing the road anyway at some point, tend to walk in the street.

According to Cooper, this especially becomes a problem during performances at the Oddfellow Theater.

When Cooper pressed selectmen on why they had not yet met their signage commitment, Town Clerk Cynthia Dunn took full responsibility.

“That was my oversight,” said Dunn, who had been town manager at the time of the May vote.

“Fall is coming, the theater has started up again, and the practice continues,” replied Cooper, “not only on that sidewalk, but on both sides of the road.”

Cooper was making note of the eastbound lane, next to the theater, where ‘No Parking’ signs already exist.  Town Manager Glen Holmes pointed out that those signs are not a permanent ban, but only disallow on-street parking on that side of the street during the winter months.

“The signs are there, they’re just so faded you can’t read them anyway,” noted Selectman Chris Hayward.  “One football game, I think it was on a Sunday, I came through and you had all you could do to get two vehicles down through town.  It was ridiculous!”

“And the funny thing about that was,” Cooper recalled, “you know how many [vehicles] parked down in the [municipal center] lot?”

“I don’t know,” answered Hayward.  “There was too many cars between here and there and I was watching too many people.”

 

Richard Piper, a member of the planning board, advised selectmen that, if the town put up ‘No Parking’ signs, the Department of Transportation (DOT) — which has begun a project to rebuild Route 117 — would not make space for on-street parking when it comes through town.  That construction is expected to take place within the next year.

However, Holmes, said that after subsequent conversations with DOT officials, this is not the case.  For him, the main issue is rather it would be fiscally responsible for the town to purchase and put in signs that it might well end up taking down in the next year or two.

By Holmes’ calculations, it would cost taxpayers $375, to install six new ‘No Parking’ signs on the westbound side of Turner Street.  Replacing the seven signs by the eastbound lane was estimated to run $227.

“There is no parking at all there [anyway],” asserted Cooper, “It’s a sidewalk.  And there’s no footage between the sidewalk [and the traveling lane.]”

“There’s been footage enough for people to park there for years,” said Selectman Oscar Gammon.

“No, because they are on the sidewalk,” replied Cooper.  “You go down there with a tape measure.”

“Baaahhhh!” answered Gammon with a disgusted wave of the hand.

“No, that’s how you get your facts, Oscar,” Cooper shouted back.  “There’s always been a sidewalk there.”

“Yes, and people have always parked there,” said Gammon.

“Even though people park there, that does not make it a parking space,” said Cooper, “it makes it a violation of the law that ‘you do not park on the sidewalk’.

“Why I brought it up is for the safety and welfare of patrons going to that theater, for the safety and welfare of  people in this community, and also people commuting through the main drag.”

“And I agree,” said Chairman Joanne Bly,  “But you keep heaping everything on the theater.  It’s not just the theater.”

Cooper asserted that it was not his intention to “pick on” the theater.  He acknowledged that there were also issues with the patrons of Tilton’s Market and other downtown businesses.  However, his main contention was that those were generally matters of single vehicles, and a limited number of pedestrians, zipping in and out as they went about their daily business.  For Cooper, the larger issue was the length of time — when there are shows at the theater — when he felt cars were “illegally parked.”  He maintained that the sheer number of cars and pedestrians involved during these timeframes was certain to, eventually, cause an accident.

“And who is going to be liable when that happens, I wonder?” Cooper asked in rhetorical fashion.

In addition to parking troubles on Turner Street, problems on High Street also were brought up.

‘No Parking’ signs are already in place on High Street.  However, all agreed that this has done nothing to alleviate congestion there, especially when there are events at the Masonic lodge, or services at the Andrews funeral home.

As Dunn noted, one major obstacle for small towns like Buckfield, which have no police force of their own, is enforcement.  Buckfield does pay the Oxford County Sheriff’s Department for extra coverage in the village, but getting a deputy in the area when there are events in town, such as a funeral, cannot always be scheduled in advance.

“Ever since I’ve been to high school here, there’s always been people parking there,” said Hayward. “From here [the municipal center, to] down past Tilton’s.  The biggest problem I see is, when they park on both sides of the street, you cannot get through.  Two trucks, there’s just not room enough. 

“Most of the people on this [westbound] side pull off.  Yeah, they end up parking on the sidewalk, but what are you going to do? They are going to park there whether we put up signs or not.

“I think, and this is just my opinion, we ought to redo the signs on that [eastbound] side of the road, and really try and enforce that. “

“It’s a state law,” said Cooper.  “Those signs need to be there, [on both sides] and it needs to be enforced.”

Selectmen dismissed the idea of purchasing the burnt-out Lowe property next to the theater, in order to accommodate additional off-street parking.  It was announced that this lot is scheduled to go up for auction “sometime in the next 45-days.”  Instead, their current priority, Bly said, was the project to rehabilitate the parking area around the municipal building.

At the following selectmen’s meeting, at which Holmes presented costs for the new signage, selectmen again raised the issue of paying for signs that would come down once the road was rebuilt.

“It will definitely be 2006 before we see any real work through here [in the village],” said Holmes

“They [DOT] started the [Streaked] Mountain [Route 117] project in 2000, and it’s now 2004,” said Bly.  “So, I don’t know, we might get three of four more years out them [the signs.]”

Hayward suggested at least replacing the worn signs currently situated on the eastbound side of the road.  However, Gammon noted that in this coming winter season, with its resulting snow banks, it would prevent anyone from parking on that side of the street regardless.

  

Cooper was not present at this subsequent meeting.  It was Gammon then, who had the final world on the subject. 

“I think that we should wait until spring before we do anything now.  I move that we hold the whole project off until after May first.”

The vote to do nothing was quick, silent, and unanimous.