Resident Laura Bozzi says transit must "outcompete" driving. #610Connector pic.twitter.com/sCjYXpMUkT
— Transport Providence (@TransportPVD) August 30, 2016
The assembled crowd of 200 people at Tuesday night’s 6/10 Connector community meeting were unequivocal: no highway should be rebuilt along the corridor. It found a receptive if demur audience in Providence Planning Department and Mayor Jorge Elorza. RIDOT and Governor Gina Raimondo’s Office appear to be the only agencies backing the highway rebuild after the loss of a federal grant for the billion dollar project.
BPAC Chair Eric Weis echoing group w/ his table's priority: no displacement of O'ville residents. #610Connector pic.twitter.com/bC5zfiPc4V
— Transport Providence (@TransportPVD) August 30, 2016
RI Future has been among several area publications that have called on Mayor Elorza to take a more direct stance on the project. While the mayor’s office has clearly favored a boulevard approach to 6/10, it hasn’t yet sought direct conflict with RIDOT or Governor Raimondo’s office. Following the rejection of a federal grant RIDOT intended to use towards part of the 6/10 corridor, statements from the agency have focused on the dire need to complete the highway rebuild with a minimum of public input. Read past coverage Tear It Down: Pictures of Our Potential 6/10 Future The Drivers’ Argument for the Boulevard On Tuesday night, Mayor Elorza did not seek direct conflict with the agency, but did refer to the 6/10 Connector as “really a Disconnector”, a sign of his preferences. In a Projo report leading up to the Providence meeting, RIDOT spokesperson Charles St. Martin bristled in his emailed response to questions on the project:
As we stated before, we cannot continue to postpone this work,” wrote DOT spokesman Charles St. Martin in an email. “Thanks to the passage of Rhodeworks, Rhode Island has $400 million in committed state and federal funding to draw from to address the Route 6-10 interchange. RIDOT is evaluating its options to tackle this problem and will soon present a recommendation for next steps. No decisions have been made at this time.”
This brings us to an important question: When is Gov. Raimondo’s office going to see the writing on the wall and redirect the agencies under her charge to better priorities? The assembled crowd was almost unanimous in its priorities. The process sat small groups at tables to outline ideas and present them. Each group, to the one, came up with some form or other of the following priorities:
- New housing
- Non-displacement of current residents while bringing in new residents
- Better outreach & a more welcoming process for Latino residents
- A full and complete bike and pedestrian network
- More green space
- Rapid transit to connect Providence within and without its city borders
- No highway
The groups varied in how they phrased these goals, but each group essentially outlined the same things. Notable about the meeting was the presence of individuals from communities like Cranston, Pawtucket, and Central Falls, whose citizens might have been more inclined to favor a highway than those having one built next to them. But those from outside Providence also favored the boulevard option. Among the attendees was Cranston at-large city council candidate Kate Aubin, who has made removing the 6/10 Connector a central tenet of her candidacy.
.@kate4cranston's campaign is here in support of the 6/10 Blvd. #Cranston #vote pic.twitter.com/96ctXfJa03
— Transport Providence (@TransportPVD) August 30, 2016
While Aubin is running on a progressive ticket, conservative Rhode Islanders also attended, questioning the priority of rebuilding 6/10 as-is. Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity’s Lawrence Gilheeney tweeted:
@TransportPVD also, here's some pictures of last nights forum pic.twitter.com/mx3FGwvePa
— Lawrence Gillheeney (@LGillheeney) August 31, 2016
More pointedly, Brian Bishop, of the taxpayers’ rights group OSTPA spoke to the unnecessary waste of rebuilding the highway, drawing the night’s first laughter and applause:
Hugo Bruggeman & Brian Bishop speak. pic.twitter.com/lPOf3dDCkJ
— Transport Providence (@TransportPVD) August 31, 2016
Bishop, who owns properties on the East Side as well as a farm in Coventry, said that he was a “car person” and that others “can handle the bikes,” a friendly jab at non-OSTPA member Hugo Bruggeman, who held the table’s priority list and spoke to bike infrastructure like his home in the Netherlands. Bishop described the highway “hybrid” that RIDOT has been pushing over the Providence Planning-preferred boulevard as “brought to you by the same people who want to rebuild it again.” The audience roared with laughter at RIDOT’s expense.
With federal grants figured into the mix, RIDOT’s hybrid-highway proposal would have cost upwards of 80% of toll funds. Without that funding, it’s quite possible that rebuilding the highway as-is could put all other state projects on the back burner. Conservatives like Bishop and liberals like Aubin equally question the validity of this priority, despite living outside the city.
Which brings us back to a pointed question: Who exactly does favor the 6/10 Connector as a highway, other than RIDOT and Gov. Raimondo’s office? As a more politically diverse coalition coalesces around opposition to the plan, Gov. Raimondo is going to have to make some decisions soon.
~~~~
Correction: A previous version of this article erroneously named Lawrence Gilheeney’s group the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Progress. It is the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity. No doubt a liberal Freudian slip on my part. . . :-) Corrected.
New Comments