This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.

‘No’ Must Mean ‘No’

The proposal for a six-foot-wide concrete path along the west side of Nut Plains Road is a useless exercise with no comprehensive plan and no stakeholder input that unnecessarily creates anxiety and acrimony for Nut Plains residents. Absent a professional analysis of need and without proper planning that includes stakeholders, an anecdotal “my child wants to bike to school” survey is a murky reason to propose a path.

Preservation of Guilford’s character and cultural landscape is a key component of the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development; the plan calls for protection of Guilford’s historic assets. The river of concrete path will run along a country road, first settled in the late 1600s, with old trees, stone walls, and 19 documented historic buildings/sites. The Connecticut State Historic Preservation Office is aware of this proposal and, because federal funds are being used, will review the plan for adverse impacts on designated historic resources.

The six-foot-wide concrete path is not wide enough to be a shared-use path. Bikers will continue to use the road. A shared use path needs to be at minimum eight feet wide, but ideally 10 feet wide, with clear spaces between the road and the path. Calling this a path separates it from being called a sidewalk; residents are not required to shovel snow. This seems like a silly reason until you learn that the money for the path comes from a federal grant meant solely for transportation alternatives.

A determination of “No” to a Nut Plains path must mean “No”—no revisiting the issue again and again. As one speaker at the Sept. 26 information session said, these proposals become exhausting. “No” never means “no.” Whack a mole, Guilford style.

Helen Higgins

Guilford