I’m suspending my blog series on Immigration
yet again, to discuss an exciting proposal that has been presented to one of my
eight subject towns, Bridgeport, Pennsylvania.The proposal offers a great deal
of potential, but it comes with a catch, a big one. The task is to find a way around this catch,
because the opportunity should not be wasted.
I support the routing of the Chester
Valley Trail through Bridgeport to connect with the Schuylkill Valley Trail,
and encourage residents to view this not as a problem, but as an
opportunity. I am not saying accept the
proposal as is, but find a way to get it done with as little damage as
possible. It will be worth it.
No, I don’t drive the bridge or DeKalb
Street anymore (although I used to, on a regular basis); this is an outsider’s
perspective, one that I believe can contribute to the discussion. My point is not about the present, but the
future, based on a study of the past.
What’s needed is a refocusing, from the
personal and the present to the community and the future. The former sees largely loss, while the
latter offers opportunity. And the key
to shifting focus from the present to the future can be found in the past. History
can help you gain this perspective, if you understand history as CHANGE, and
look for patterns rather than just memories.
Here the historical pattern to understand is
importance of access to and location along the dominant transportation networks of
the day. Bridgeport, and the
other towns along the Lower Schuylkill River, once possessed both. Each river town was founded around the
intersection of the early roads and the Schuylkill River. The 19th Century railroad network
nurtured the river towns, Bridgeport most definitely included, for a century
and a half, and underlay their development into true communities.
But that changed. The coming of the new post-WW II road network
bypassed these same towns, Bridgeport again included. Today, only the Conshohockens have a direct
connection to this network, and the consequences of that have literally
transformed both towns. Pottstown has
access (more or less), but its location along the road network tends to isolate
it. Norristown is getting a connection,
and hopes are high.
And
Bridgeport? Well, Bridgeport has always
sort of benefitted from the prosperity of Norristown, and I am already on
record that Norristown’s chances for future prosperity largely derive on that
new connection to the road network, so maybe.
But if you're looking for a vehicle to haul Bridgeport out of the sloth of stagnation onto a faster track, don't bet on the automobile. The automobile played a crucial role in the destruction of old Bridgeport, and shows no sign of altering that role in the future.
But if you're looking for a vehicle to haul Bridgeport out of the sloth of stagnation onto a faster track, don't bet on the automobile. The automobile played a crucial role in the destruction of old Bridgeport, and shows no sign of altering that role in the future.
The proposal before Bridgeport has nothing
to do with the automobile, or road networks at all. In that peculiar way of history, it
represents both the past and the future, based on CHANGE. One of the routes of that old, long-abandoned
railroad network that nourished both Norristown and Bridgeport is now hosting a
new network, one still in development, whose potential cannot yet be guessed. They aren’t going to recreate the old
Bridgeport, but they will play a part in shaping the new.
The future, especially for old river
towns, doesn’t lie in the automobile, but in what is broadly called
“alternative transportation.” That’s
what this old/new network is all about (that and the current obsession with
fitness, of course). And that is just a
component of the larger question, i.e., how to get outsiders to learn about
Bridgeport/Norristown—and others—and see the opportunities they offer?
A network of trails offers at least a
partial answer. People have been
traveling through both Bridgeport and Norristown by automobile for some time
now, and not many have seen either as the town of opportunity. Why don’t we add a different mix of people,
particularly when that mix is weighted toward exactly the type of people a
reviving town hopes to attract?
One of those commenting on a Facebook post
about the proposal questioned how many people in Bridgeport will actually use
it. He may well be right, particularly
in the immediate future, and he brings up the central point, the reason why you
want this trail to pass through Bridgeport.
It isn’t about local residents using it, but about “outsiders.” They’re the ones you want to attract to your
town, and a heavily-utilized bike connection can only help.
The outsiders who will use these trails have been given many names, from intensely supportive to rather derogatory, but as people, the vast majority have one thing in common: they possess "disposable income," as evidenced by their bikes and gear, which are pretty costly. These are exactly the people you want to come to Bridgeport, or at least be aware it exists. Awareness of the Borough if you are driving through on Monday through Friday is minimal, but passing through on a bicycle (not to mention walking) over the weekend will impart a whole new understanding of the trail's surroundings, the Borough of Bridgeport.
The outsiders who will use these trails have been given many names, from intensely supportive to rather derogatory, but as people, the vast majority have one thing in common: they possess "disposable income," as evidenced by their bikes and gear, which are pretty costly. These are exactly the people you want to come to Bridgeport, or at least be aware it exists. Awareness of the Borough if you are driving through on Monday through Friday is minimal, but passing through on a bicycle (not to mention walking) over the weekend will impart a whole new understanding of the trail's surroundings, the Borough of Bridgeport.
But you don’t just want people passing
through on their way to someplace else, you want them to see something locally
and be attracted to it. What is there
for them to see, be attracted to, and begin to think more about the area? There are some small, specific answers to
that question, but the broad answer is obvious, if often overlooked: the
riverfronts of both towns. Both
Norristown and Bridgeport possess unexploited riverfronts; proper development
can make them area attractions. I thus
repeat my earlier thesis that Norristown’s—and Bridgeport’s—return to
prosperity will derive from their relationship to the Schuylkill River.
That means you must get outsiders to the
river, to experience its new beauty. Cars
are only one method; important, to be sure, which is why I promote the
Lafayette Street Project’s potential.
Cars must be accommodated but accommodating them must not dominate the process. Alternative Transportation—the
whole gamut—is a wave of the future, and one that both Norristown and
Bridgeport should ride.
Bridgeport Borough Council favors the Chester Valley Trail project,
subject to some changes. I commend Tim Briggs, State Representative, 149th District, for recognizing the Trail's potential and supporting it. The necessary changes
can be made. Don't let a loss-focused myopia block the kind of creative thinking this proposal represents. A better future depends on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment