Manchester Infill & Small Developments

I heard this information regarding Elm St. from one of the owners of "Level Up" gaming on Elm St. near Steve's House restaurant. He was telling me for the past couple years there was focus groups and meetings regarding all sorts of issues concerning busineses on the Elm St. Corridor between Salmon St. to Bridge St. He said the meetings pretty much ended but Manchester report never happend and/or still waiting for the report/advice. From what I gathered the city was going to/has hire a consultant group to see what should be done to that area of Elm St. He didnt mention a bike lane, but I think that would be a great addition to make Elm St. feel more urban. His big concern was having the traffic slow down so drivers would even notice his video game business.
 
The market basket was built, and it looks like this.

Not the best, but could look a lot worse. Honestly, it is a good thing for local business. And they did improve the sidewalk and it looks wicked nice. Already you can see mroe business in that area of southern Elm st.

While it's not what I would choose, I wouldn't mind so much if the Market Basket building was built up against the sidewalk with parking behind/underneath. I know that they were able to rehab an existing building, which is why there's a huge parking lot out front right outside downtown, and I know it will get people down to that part of town. But I still don't like it.

I just don't know how many people visiting Market Basket--the vast majority of whom are driving there--will walk across the street to the other businesses in the area. I'm sure some will, but not nearly as many as would if the long-planned transit center plus mixed-use redevelopment was built on the site.

I just don't think I'll ever get over what a huge waste of land the Market Basket is on the (previously) largest undeveloped land downtown, and the long-designated site for a train station and transit hub.
 
While it's not what I would choose, I wouldn't mind so much if the Market Basket building was built up against the sidewalk with parking behind/underneath. I know that they were able to rehab an existing building, which is why there's a huge parking lot out front right outside downtown, and I know it will get people down to that part of town. But I still don't like it.

I just don't know how many people visiting Market Basket--the vast majority of whom are driving there--will walk across the street to the other businesses in the area. I'm sure some will, but not nearly as many as would if the long-planned transit center plus mixed-use redevelopment was built on the site.

I just don't think I'll ever get over what a huge waste of land the Market Basket is on the (previously) largest undeveloped land downtown, and the long-designated site for a train station and transit hub.

Agreed, BUT, it will bring a lot more people there than I think you are giving it credit for. They will also drive by and notice neighboring business.

But until Manchester and Southern NH has a strong public transportation, the majority will drive. People visiting downtown will drive there and then walk around. Heck, there are not even many bike racks for people who choose to ride a bike since the buses hardly ever run.

The Market Basket also provides a good place for people living downtown to shop. One could potentially walk there versus having to wait an hour o grab a bus to one of the other markets (which means they would likely drive then get stuck in traffic.) Personally, I like Market Basket vs. the other large markets due to what they offer and their prices. And honestly, it is hard for one to shop and buy all their food at a small local market, especially when tight on money.

And from a business perspective, without Market Basket going this big, it would have been harder for them to compete. It is this type of businesses nature to have huge parking lots.

That all being said, they torn down a heck of a lot of the old building to consider it really just using the old structure. And yes, that pieces of land IMO could have fit a Market Basket AND a few other buildings.

But there are so many places in Manchester downtown and around downtown that has potential / could use some work, and I think the Market Basket is a better move than nothing. The possibilities for where a transit station could go are endless. So it is not the end of the world. I think what is worse is the fact that NH in general is so against rail.

But between the Market Basket, Gaslight District, and River's Edge, that area will be seeing new business and hopefully continued development to help bring it up to speed with the rest of Elm.
 
Agreed, BUT, it will bring a lot more people there than I think you are giving it credit for. They will also drive by and notice neighboring business.

But until Manchester and Southern NH has a strong public transportation, the majority will drive. People visiting downtown will drive there and then walk around. Heck, there are not even many bike racks for people who choose to ride a bike since the buses hardly ever run.

The Market Basket also provides a good place for people living downtown to shop. One could potentially walk there versus having to wait an hour o grab a bus to one of the other markets (which means they would likely drive then get stuck in traffic.) Personally, I like Market Basket vs. the other large markets due to what they offer and their prices. And honestly, it is hard for one to shop and buy all their food at a small local market, especially when tight on money.

And from a business perspective, without Market Basket going this big, it would have been harder for them to compete. It is this type of businesses nature to have huge parking lots.

That all being said, they torn down a heck of a lot of the old building to consider it really just using the old structure. And yes, that pieces of land IMO could have fit a Market Basket AND a few other buildings.

But there are so many places in Manchester downtown and around downtown that has potential / could use some work, and I think the Market Basket is a better move than nothing. The possibilities for where a transit station could go are endless. So it is not the end of the world. I think what is worse is the fact that NH in general is so against rail.

But between the Market Basket, Gaslight District, and River's Edge, that area will be seeing new business and hopefully continued development to help bring it up to speed with the rest of Elm.

All good points. I just wish the city would have made them comply with the arena zoning overlay, which I believe applies to the Market Basket site, and build a new building--even the exact same building--up against the sidewalk. That would have really changed the feel of that area of Elm Street, especially since as you said, they demolished a lot of the old building. My guess is that in addition to the mayor really pulling for this project, they were able to call it a renovation rather than a new structure, and get around any zoning overlay for the area, if it applied.

And just to clarify about rail and New Hampshire. Generally speaking, people in New Hampshire are actually very much in favor of rail, specifically the Capitol Corridor commuter rail project and the acceptance of federal funds to study it. A survey conducted last year found that 75% of residents favor rail, while only 5% oppose it. That's huge, and it includes majorities from every corner of the state, political party, and political philosophy.

Unfortunately, 3 out of the 5 current Executive Councilors, who must approve all state contracts including the one in which the federal government was going to give the state $4 million to study and plan commuter rail (and high speed rail to Montreal), are apparently among the 5% who oppose it. That's very discouraging, and I'm not sure how much (if any) of that money will be available next year, but I doubt we'll ever see such an anti-rail legislature and Executive Council as we have now. The people want it and the state needs it; it's only a matter of time.
 
Will Stewart, of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce and goodgood Manchester, has written a guest post on LivableMHT about William Fulton's keynote, "Pursuing Prosperity: Smart Growth in Manchester" at yesterday's Intown Manchester luncheon. It sounds like the keynote will be available on MCAM's website sometime in the future.

UNH-Tower%20Mill.JPG

Fulton touched on, and Stewart expanded on the need to integrate the downtown and Millyard
 
I wasn’t aware until recently that Manchester has NO off-street parking requirements in its downtown. Also no minimum lot sizes, no setbacks of any sort, and no max lot coverage. All positive things from a smart growth perspective. Now the only thing that could help, I believe, is to institute the inverse of traditional zoning (max parking, max lot size, minimum lot coverage, minimum heights, max setbacks, etc.). The ordinance allows urbanism, which is good, but doesn’t require it.
 
An update on possibly making Hanover St pedestrian-only on certain nights during the summer from today's UL:

THIS WEEKEND, PORTSMOUTH closed its downtown streets for its annual Market Square Day celebration.

Later this summer, the city will close a portion of Pleasant Street near Market Square on Saturdays from 5 to 9:30 p.m. for events and concerts in the street.

These events were started as a way to bring families downtown to spend money in the city’s restaurants and stores.

While Manchester has street closures for parades and the fall chili festival, the city’s Economic Development Office began looking at closing a small portion of Hanover Street near the intersection with Elm Street to create an inviting, pedestrian-friendly area where residents could grab a bite to eat outside, see performers and shop.

What city leaders didn’t expect was the big thumbs down local merchants gave the idea.

In a meeting with the city, businesses were concerned that closing the street would actually hurt their bottom line, not help it. Some people questioned how cars would get to the Citizens Bank garage, and others worried about other costs, such as police details, fire prevention and loss of parking revenue.

Alderman Garth Corriveau

said he was disappointed the idea was so poorly received and asked the city to continue working with businesses to come up with a plan that works for everyone.

“Amazingly, this is one of the issues when I speak with young people in the city they mention all the time,” said Corriveau.

Corriveau wasn’t alone.

Other aldermen said they, too, would like a pedestrian-only street, even if it was small and for a few weekends out of the year. The proposal is headed to the new Committee on Job Creation, which will discuss a pilot program with businesses.
 
I kind of agree, maybe Hanover street, although the nicest, is not the best. Citizens Bank parking garage is a big thing, and to block access would be bad.

Maybe converting a street that is not as needed or has no major parking lots to a pedestrian only may be the way to go, or creating something new. It may not be the nicest street, but improvements can come or could be done when pedestrian friendly improvements are made.

Depot St., Old Granite St., Maybe Lowell St. if access to all the parking lots are form Concord St. only. Maybe Manchester is just not the best city for pedestrian only streets. Improve what they do have with better pedestrian amenities, more walking paths, nicer sidewalks beyond Elm street, and begin to open up the millyard to more restaurants, shops, and improved sidewalks.
 
Not that it couldn't work, but this idea is ill-conceived. There should have been a bottom-up approach, not a top-down one, and it should have included a market analysis. Young people probably did mention this, but did they say they wanted it where proposed, or were they envisioning a Newbury Street minus the cars somewhere else in the City? And do young people make up the market for the stores there? The public process would have addressed this issue, but it appears to be lacking here. A potentially great idea pursued in the wrong manner is a bad idea--it can derail the effort altogether by failing where it could have worked. Don't impose this, as the public what it wants, and then float the idea, and if it meshes with what the City thought they said, good, do it. Otherwise it will be a blunder.
 
Not that it couldn't work, but this idea is ill-conceived. There should have been a bottom-up approach, not a top-down one, and it should have included a market analysis. Young people probably did mention this, but did they say they wanted it where proposed, or were they envisioning a Newbury Street minus the cars somewhere else in the City? And do young people make up the market for the stores there? The public process would have addressed this issue, but it appears to be lacking here. A potentially great idea pursued in the wrong manner is a bad idea--it can derail the effort altogether by failing where it could have worked. Don't impose this, as the public what it wants, and then float the idea, and if it meshes with what the City thought they said, good, do it. Otherwise it will be a blunder.

Although I can see why they want to do this, I mentioned this when first reading about the proposed thought, I do not think closing the street for one night a week for a few hours is even worth it.

I think if no cars is to be done, more planning is needed than simply closing the street for a few hours.

If Manchester wants more performers and things like that, improve the parks and plaza and promote people to perform there, sell food from food carts, and things of that sort.
 
I kind of agree, maybe Hanover street, although the nicest, is not the best. Citizens Bank parking garage is a big thing, and to block access would be bad.

Maybe converting a street that is not as needed or has no major parking lots to a pedestrian only may be the way to go, or creating something new. It may not be the nicest street, but improvements can come or could be done when pedestrian friendly improvements are made.

Depot St., Old Granite St., Maybe Lowell St. if access to all the parking lots are form Concord St. only. Maybe Manchester is just not the best city for pedestrian only streets. Improve what they do have with better pedestrian amenities, more walking paths, nicer sidewalks beyond Elm street, and begin to open up the millyard to more restaurants, shops, and improved sidewalks.

I really think this is still an idea worth pursuing, though it needs more planning and, as Patrick pointed out, it needs more input from neighboring businesses and others affected.

I don't think downtown Manchester has the presence yet to have any sort of festival atmosphere, the kind of thing that exists in Market Square in Portsmouth, on Exchange Street in Portland, or on the Church Street pedestrian Mall in Burlington. The bars and restaurants tend to be packed and the growth of outdoor seating has created more of a nightlife and dining scene downtown in recent years, but there's very little street activity, aside from crowds moving from place-to-place and a couple of food carts.

Creating a full-time pedestrian mall, even just for the summer, would probably create an underwhelming experience and negatively impact neighboring businesses. But I think there's a lot of merit to a one-night-a-week pedestrian mall, and hopefully growing a more festive downtown scene from there. It will probably happen slowly, but if planned thoughtfully and promoted well, I think a Friday night-only pedestrian mall could become a major downtown attraction/destination. The fact that it will be so ephemeral, lasting only one night a week for a couple months, will make it even more special and could make the activity even more concentrated.

It shouldn't be hard to find bands, street performers and food carts to fill a block for one night a week during the summer. And that will be the key--simply closing the street will not create enough of a draw--it needs to feel more like a festival. During the Baines administration, Hanover Street was shut down for a weekend every summer for the Jazz & Blues Festival, which was very well attended and a huge attraction for downtown Manchester.

02.jpg

Jazz & Blues Festival on Hanover St, sometime in the mid-2000s, photo by James E.D. Cook

The City needs to work with neighboring businesses to ensure that they're on board and that their concerns are met, but creating an atmosphere like the one in that photo--even for one night a week during the summer--would be huge for Manchester, and for the businesses along Hanover St.

I don't think getting to the garage would be a big deal really--it would still be accessible via Manchester St. Granted, that's one-way in the opposite direction, but people can loop around via Concord St, which runs the same way as Hanover. I don't think that's really a big deal, and frankly, there's a glut of downtown parking at night.

The bigger issue will be promoting activities and events on the pedestrian-only Hanover St, so that businesses there aren't passed over because people aren't driving down Hanover. Some of the restaurants there are destinations in their own right, but shutting down the street will make the whole block a destination if it's done right and promoted well. Giving the weekly event a name would also help to promote it.

I don't think the downtown parks or plazas would work well as places for performers and the like. Unlike all the hardscape in Market Square, the parks and plazas of downtown Manchester are either at the fringe of activity or not lined with restaurants and bars. They also lack the intimacy of Market Square or Hanover St.

Ideally, Hanover St would have a few more bars and restaurants on it, but there are good ones as it is, and creating a once-a-week festival atmosphere there could make it an even more attractive place for restaurants and bars to open. Hopefully, some of the specialty shops along the block would stay open late Fridays as well.

There are a few other spots where a temporary pedestrian mall could work--including even a couple blocks of Elm. Obviously, that would have a bigger traffic impact, but cars could still go around and the concentration of bars and restaurants would be even greater. Depot and Old Granite St could be combined to create a high-profile nightlife and arts area in Gaslight District that would work especially well during events at the Verizon and ballpark. But that area is well behind Hanover St in terms of development, and it's at the fringe of downtown.

Hanover St is intimate, already home to several restaurants, and at the heart of downtown. With street performers and activities, it's easy to imagine a pedestrian-only Hanover St being a boon for businesses on the block, as well as those nearby throughout downtown. It would be harder for that to happen starting from the Gaslight District. But if the pedestrian-only Friday nights on Hanover St is planned, promoted and executed well, I think it could easily take off, and spur additional pedestrian-only areas, such as one in the Gaslight District, in the coming years.
 
I wasn’t aware until recently that Manchester has NO off-street parking requirements in its downtown. Also no minimum lot sizes, no setbacks of any sort, and no max lot coverage. All positive things from a smart growth perspective. Now the only thing that could help, I believe, is to institute the inverse of traditional zoning (max parking, max lot size, minimum lot coverage, minimum heights, max setbacks, etc.). The ordinance allows urbanism, which is good, but doesn’t require it.

Where did you find out about the no minimum requirements for downtown Manchester? I knew the city had some good zoning in the downtown area, but I was quite sure what. Did you just glean that from the Zoning Ordinances? I agree--I'd love to see some max parking, max lot size and so on in the downtown, and even elsewhere in the city center. I'm not sure how this could be done exactly, but if you could combine that with a fee dedicated to public transit, that would be great--something like a fee per parking space (without exceeding the max parking limit).
 
Where did you find out about the no minimum requirements for downtown Manchester? I knew the city had some good zoning in the downtown area, but I was quite sure what. Did you just glean that from the Zoning Ordinances? I agree--I'd love to see some max parking, max lot size and so on in the downtown, and even elsewhere in the city center. I'm not sure how this could be done exactly, but if you could combine that with a fee dedicated to public transit, that would be great--something like a fee per parking space (without exceeding the max parking limit).

I reviewed the city's zoning ordinance and table of dimensional requirements and performance standards. Can't get good results without good urban DNA for the city. And it has it.

Max lot standards? Maybe, but taller structures in a CBD would require that metric to be calibrated accordingly.

Other places (mall) it might work better.

How is it done? Write it, adopt it. Pretty simple.

Max parking could work. What about a fee? Portland uses a fee-in-lieu of parking, where if one structured spot cost $10k on average, and a surface spot costs $7k, the fee in lieu might be $5k. It makes sense then to pay not to have to provide the more expensive spots. Then the money is used to go into a sustainable transportation fund. But where you have no minimum requirements, a fee in lieu won't work--they just won't build the spaces they don't need. This makes more sense actually, because how can you require spots as if you are willing to sell them when the only way you can require them in the first place is if they are necessary to mitigate an impact the development will have? Probably that's where the sustainable transportation fund nexus comes in (has to be spent in the immediate area). In Manchester, with no minimum, you could employ a maximum, only to be exceeded if paid for, and then use that fee on sustainable transportation. Hint, set the maximum extremely low for best results.
 
The UL has an update today on the progress at the new Municipal Complex on Valley Street. Sounds like it's all on track for completion around December. Here are some updated photos. Without seeing them in context at the site, I think the buildings look pretty good--I'm glad to see the City doing something a little modern, but still with the dignity and pride that should go into public buildings:

Image_2.jpg


Admin%20&%20%20Fleet%20Maint%20May%2015%202012.jpg


Admin%20Exterior%20May%2029%202012.jpg
 
Ha, it looks sick. Not a bad looking building, and definitely doesn't fit into the rest of the area since everywhere else around it is more run down. So that is a good thing.

Hopefully this does more for the city than just a new building and actually allows the city works and police to operate with more efficiency providing the city with better service.
 
Ha, it looks sick. Not a bad looking building, and definitely doesn't fit into the rest of the area since everywhere else around it is more run down. So that is a good thing.

Hopefully this does more for the city than just a new building and actually allows the city works and police to operate with more efficiency providing the city with better service.

Agreed. One thing I forgot to mention from the UL article is that the new police station is going to include meeting space for neighborhood groups and the like. I think that's great. A number of neighborhood watch groups--Oak Park near the North End, and Eagle Eyes in the area right around the new police station, for example--have begun to evolve into larger community/neighborhood groups. The Rimmon Heights neighborhood group also mixes neighborhood watch-type functions with neighborhood beautification, hosting events and supporting local businesses. It would be great if more of these groups formed and worked to improve all aspects of their neighborhoods. And it's great that the police will now be able to offer their assistance in forming and supporting these groups, as well as offering them space to meet.
 
I kind of agree, maybe Hanover street, although the nicest, is not the best. Citizens Bank parking garage is a big thing, and to block access would be bad.

Maybe converting a street that is not as needed or has no major parking lots to a pedestrian only may be the way to go, or creating something new. It may not be the nicest street, but improvements can come or could be done when pedestrian friendly improvements are made.

Depot St., Old Granite St., Maybe Lowell St. if access to all the parking lots are form Concord St. only. Maybe Manchester is just not the best city for pedestrian only streets. Improve what they do have with better pedestrian amenities, more walking paths, nicer sidewalks beyond Elm street, and begin to open up the millyard to more restaurants, shops, and improved sidewalks.

Despite having a historic building stock and relatively consistent street wall, Manchester Street has always seemed to struggle, particularly relative to Hanover. If the city could ever talk Citizens into moving its parking lot underground and making that lot a quality urban park (think central fountain and gardens), I think it might help open the area a bit and would particularly help Manchester St. The lot currently is pretty surrounded by buildings and I think it would be well utilized. Additionally, the brick plaza directly behind Citizens could be developed into a cafe or something that might spur more streetlife within the park.
 
Here's an interesting piece on the Manchester millyard before it was redeveloped in the late 1960s/early 1970s. It will make you a bit sad that they didn't preserve the canals and other buildings that lent the area so much of its character.

An Epic in Urban Design

The giant Amoskeag plant in Manchester, N.H., is a classic of American industry. It is also a unique and powerful experiment in city planning. But urban renewal threatens to end its days*

http://www.conservationtech.com/RL'.../Milltowns/1968-HARVbulletin/HarvBulletin.htm
 

Back
Top