To the Editor:
On June 7, I attended the village of Voorheesville’s public hearing for the two Business for Good projects. The majority of the concerns surrounding the two projects dealt with vehicular traffic and parking. I would like to address how these two issues could be mitigated.

Demanding businesses meet the quantity of parking spots specified by the code seems counterintuitive to the fears about increased traffic. Facilitating motor vehicles is not going to combat traffic and the lack of parking should not be used as a way to stop community development.

One way to reduce vehicular traffic is to establish safe pathways for non-motorized travel. The village of Voorheesville has a record of creating, supporting, and maintaining pedestrian and bicycle pathways.

I suggest the work of the planning commission could enhance these efforts by ensuring new development projects include features that facilitate access by non-motorized means, and provide amenities such as bicycle racks, stroller parking, and coat rooms.

Perhaps building codes should acknowledge when a business locates in an area accessible by non-vehicular means and reduce the number of required parking spaces.

The village could install appropriate signs guiding visitors to where parking is and isn’t allowed. Businesses could communicate with their customers in print and online where to park, and how they could get to their business using non-vehicular pathways.

If patrons know parking is limited, they will seek other ways to travel.

I support the two Business for Good projects as they would positively impact the social and economic fibers of our community. Development should not be curtailed by society’s overuse of cars. 

Lea Foster

Voorheesville