Opinion: Carson City Mayor's Visit to the CC Men's Club — a discussion of the Master Plan for downtown

The Mayor of Carson City was the guest at this week's meeting of the Carson City Men's Club. Per prior agreement he did not give a prepared speech, and after a glowing introduction that gave a brief highlight of his impressive history of accomplishments, he fielded questions from his audience.

I am not sure how in the Q&A we managed to spend so much time on the issue of narrowing traffic to one lane each way on Carson Street, but the discussion illustrates a greater general problem, which is that in government we tend to seek balance between divers desires and opinions, and what gets lost in the process is basic common sense.

I am a regular daily user of the entire length of Carson Street, from the edge of downtown on the north side down to Topsy Lane, two round trips a day. The Mountain-Division-Curry bypass saves a little time only in the afternoon peak commute hours, otherwise there is no difference and I prefer to use Carson Street at night as it is lit up better.

I don't understand who the pedestrians are, to whom Carson Street should be made friendlier. Except when the Legislature is in session, there aren't any. At night my problem is the occasional IDIOT who goes out on foot dressed in all black, steps off the curb at random, without looking, and expects me not only to see him but to stop for him on a dime. This is a result of a stupid man-made law that gives priority to pedestrians regardless of the natural laws of motion that some of us learned in basic physics, and in honor of which my mother taught me as a small kid to look both ways and let traffic pass before stepping off the curb. My task is easier when Carson Street is lit up for Christmas; at least then it is possible to see the sidewalk and anyone preparing to use the crosswalk. But at other times of the year, the darkness between the intersections is spooky.

Perhaps the next time the Mayor decides to address us old geezers, he will explain to what extent the Master Plan is legally binding document. I liked it when I read it in 2009 and it was a major part of my family's decision to settle here. But, after having lived here for three years now and getting interested in local affairs more and more, I am baffled by some of the details I am hearing. For example,

* Apparently we must keep two lanes of traffic in front of the government buildings -- is this true? If so, it greatly reduces whatever advantage we'd get from changing the traffic configuration.

* Nothing wreaks havoc with traffic more than taking away traffic lanes. We see some of the consequent problems at the Stewart turnoff from northbound Carson Street. There are always cars stuck in the wrong lane and making sudden ill-advised lane changes, some to take Stewart and others to stay on Carson. Imagine the mess as the northbound lanes (and southbound too?) yo-yo between one and two lanes, depending if they are in the commercial or government zones.

There are many cities throughout the world that have made their downtowns pedestrian friendly by cordoning off a no-car zone. But in every case it works only if there is sufficient parking immediately on the periphery. Is there a proposal to make downtown a car free zone? If so, what would be the bypass streets to channel traffic away from downtown Carson Street? What would be offered up as the northbound and southbound bypass on both the east and the west side off Carson Street? And how would the residents on those streets (the west side is mixed residential) react if they found their formerly quiet streets humming with heavy traffic? Where would the turn-offs for the bypasses be placed?

Actually, these questions are relevant even if through traffic is cut down to one lane, because the idea is to divert or discourage through traffic as much as possible.

And this brings me back to my original point. Where is COMMON SENSE in this discussion? At some point, opinion must take a back seat to facts. I was educated as a scientist and spent my life working in a related field, so I am comfortable with subordinating my whimsical or selfish desires to immutable natural constraints -- and I don't see why that would not be possible even in an area such as traffic engineering.

But there is another point that no one addressed in anything I heard so far — actually four points —
(1) where will the pedestrians come from to enjoy a pedestrian-friendly downtown Carson City, the ones that are not coming now;
(2) how do we know WHY they are not coming now, but they would come if only traffic was slower still; (it's at 25 mph now; how much slower do we want it?)
(3) not to diss the existing merchants, but what is there downtown that would attract people to spend time there on foot, if only there were less traffic; and
(4) where would they park to do so? Is there sufficient OFF STREET parking on Nevada and Curry streets, west of the downtown strip, or on similar streets one or two blocks east of Carson? This is a particularly sensitive issue for me, because my wife's medical condition prevents her from walking for blocks at a time to a destination, I have to push her in a wheelchair. Where downtown are the sidewalks wide enough and smooth enough to do that? We find ourselves driving "out into the suburbs" south and east of the immediate downtown area precisely because access is more convenient out there. In any case, if on-street parking on Carson Street is desirable, it would make sense if it were maximized with angle parking, not parallel parking, on both sides.

This brings me to my final point or question.

Was there any study done along these lines by those 2000 people who in 2006 thought that choking traffic on Carson Street was a GREAT idea? I think we are facing a situation here in which the problem to be solved is not defined or stated very well, and therefore the solution that is offered cannot be verified that it would work. I am concerned that in an eagerness to "do something," all we will accomplish is waste money on finding out for ourselves something that cities and towns have found out before us -- that deliberately choking traffic does not accomplish anything except cause needless aggravation and loss of business. (This reminds me of something else my mother taught me -- a stupid man insists on making his own mistakes; a wise man learns from the mistakes of others.) At least in places such as San Francisco the government officials are intellectually honest -- even if terribly misguided -- and, in their case, proudly proclaim their war on cars. Surely we are not becoming so californicated that we are engaging in our own version of such a "war," are we?

-----------

As could be expected, this report of the meeting with the Mayor elicited some interesting reactions.

COMMENT: Yes, "we" are in a war against cars. Something that just came to my mind is that on Nevada Day nobody has a problem finding parking at a time they really want to go downtown as a pedestrian. I don't remember any pedestrian complaints on that day.

Something I wanted to say earlier about the definition of pedestrian friendly. That definition is a moving target. Having read the DKS associates web site it seems to me that anything that favors pedestrians and or discourages / inconveniences auto use is "pedestrian friendly." So, one community might want "more" favorable pedestrian circumstances than another, thereby the malleable definition.

REPLY: As to parking on Nevada Day, yea, I know about that, I walked there and back from home, so I covered the entire town on both sides off Carson Street. Normal parking rules were suspended that day. Cars were parked all over the place -- common Sense in action. But that can't be a working model. I would have had a different experience if I had tried to drive to do a little shopping.

COMMENT: I fully agree (with the account above). I just don't understand the reasoning. Saving a few 19th century businesses at the expense of 21st century reality is bone-headed as was the decision to opt out of the Interstate Highway System 50 years ago. Where did people think I-70 was destined? What a travesty. It is time the regime woke up, smelled the coffee and started listening to those that have a clue.

REPLY: In fairness to the Mayor, what he said was that narrowing Carson Street to one traffic lane it's in the master plan. As a newcomer I wish there were more of those 19th century businesses to save. They are what give downtown is charm.

COMMENT: So the Nugget adds charm? Jimmy G's? Or Adele's and Comma Coffee?

REPLY: Well, for me the context is wide ranging, from the victorian capitals of Europe to the glass and steel monoliths of NY and SF, and the tightly pressed-together two-story walls of shops in their suburbs. So yea, the not-quite fully western hodge-podge in downtown Carson City is charming. I wouldn't replace Heidi's, Adele's or the (Firkin) Fox for anything. If I had the money and the power, I'd put back the boardwalk on both sides of the entire street and build a porch over it like the one along the Firkin & Fox, so rain or shine the street would be truly pedestrian friendly. I wouldn't compete with Virginia City in terms of looks, but even in the more cosmopolitan cities of Europe and America the stores along a street put out awnings for the same purpose.

Another problem that I see it is that the government buildings sit right smack dab in the middle of town, rather than next to downtown, and all that park-like greenery is NOT used as a ...park. If you are familiar at all with the town of San Mateo, CA, with their beautiful park downtown, fully used for all kinds of activities, then you know how even a small town can have its own very pretty and functional version of Central Park NY or Golden Gate Park SF. We have that, but we just don't know how to get the government to relinquish their grip on the grounds.