Committee proposes “soft” cap on vehicles
BY MARY LANCASTER
Tonight the selectmen will receive recommendations from the Auto Limitations Study Committee, charged with coming up with solutions to the island’s traffic problems and submitting a proposal by Dec. 31.

Rather than clamp down on the number of vehicles allowed per household, the committee has agreed on a “soft cap” it will outline that would provide data on the number of vehicles here, generate revenue to be used for bike paths and related non-vehicle projects and hopefully, encourage greater police enforcement of in-town parking spots so spaces open on a more consistent basis for consumers.

The committee, approved by voters, has members Alan Brown, Mike Burns, Paula Leary, Nat Lowell, Matt Fee, Christine Silverstein, John Wagley and Whitey Willauer. After many discussions revolving around various vehicle permit systems, including a restriction of one vehicle per household and parking permit or paid parking considerations, the group settled on a system requiring that all island vehicles except mopeds and all those coming to Nantucket buy an annual $25 sticker.

The outcome of that would be generation of data on the actual count of vehicles on the island and revenue, estimated at $525,000 annually, that would be placed in a revolving fund and used for the program’s operating costs, bike paths and sidewalks, as well as expanded shuttle bus services and the bus company’s equipment needs. Committee chair Paula Leary, Administrator of the Nantucket Regional Transit Authority, views this option as one that will discourage off-island vehicles from being brought to the island and further exacerbating the existing traffic and parking issues.

“We tried to keep it very concise,” she said of the proposal. “We had a lot of discussions. We started off trying to identify the problems, which is where the consensus came from to come up with what we are presenting.”

The committee’s consensus is that the parking problem downtown is acute from April to September; that the core district is used for long-term parking year-round; that parking code enforcement is inconsistent and that congestion on some roads and certain intersections is an issue.

The solutions they agreed on are that new parking opportunities should be created; a zero tolerance of parking infractions should be enforced and that parking fines could rise; and that infrastructure improvements should be considered. The committee was unable to reach agreement on the idea of a paid parking lot, paid on-street parking or allowing parking on sidewalks.

Committee member Nat Lowell said he is comfortable with the recommendation.

“This compromise is about a census — you’ve got to know how many vehicles are here,” said Lowell. “This doesn’t fix anything, but how are you going to take somebody’s car away? The way we’ve got this set up is establishing data, and the money it will generate will go to stuff people want, like bikepaths. It was a way to have an agreement because there’s no way I’m going to agree to limit somebody’s car.

“We are trying to establish some trends and numbers,” he continued. “We don’t know how many cars are here. Personally, I don’t have a problem with this plan not being enacted, but I certainly favor this approach over any limiting ideas in the past or future because it’s too contentious. The reason there is no teeth [in the recommendation] is because it’s impossible. We would be the first community in the state to do something like this, and look at how we are growing. This is not ‘just do something,’ because there is a lot of merit to knowing what is here. We were never going to agree except on something like this.”

I