The April 8th community meeting hosted by the Smiley administration brought staunch opposition from locals and business owners to his proposed traffic plan, which included the removal of the South Water Street bike lane. Shortly after the meeting, the mayor quickly took to a news interview, stating he’d continue with his agenda regardless. This comes in the face of fierce continued opposition by the Providence community, including its entire City Council, as well as in light of a recent visit by Pete Buttigieg, who championed more bike and pedestrian access, in which Smiley was in attendance. Notably, the mayor also seems to have forgone his pledge to base his determination on what future meetings bring about and what the Providence Green and Complete Streets Advisory suggests.
At this meeting, Smiley detailed his plan. This included, as he put it (summarized), “We are trying to keep the green lights on to move traffic more quickly through Wayland Square and the surrounding communities. We need to keep the flow of traffic moving.” This included additional changes to further traffic flow. To alleviate safety concerns, a sign will be put on one of the streets indicating it’s a pedestrian crossing, and with the bike lane removal, a raised crosswalk will be constructed somewhere on the lengthy South Water Street.
One of the audience members eloquently responded, “These areas have become a fast river of metal”, with others echoing similar sentiments by exclaiming Smiley’s further sole focus on moving cars is putting communities and businesses in danger. “A single sign isn’t going to do anything” as one noted, and surely, a raised crosswalk on a long stretch of a now two-lane, fast-paced South Water Street isn’t going to be sufficient—see how that has worked on North Main Street with its attempts of speed-bump-crosswalk combos. Indeed, Smiley’s proposal is just that: turn residential areas, and popular business and community hubs, into miniature highways.
In addition to parroting false promises, and despite being overwhelmed by dissent, Smiley states in the post-news interview that he has supporters and that businesses are concerned with both traffic and the bike lane. None of this proclaimed support has surfaced, and even some local businesses who originally opposed the implementation of the bike lane have remained silent, while others have voiced their support after seeing its benefits. It’s unclear who or what Smiley is referencing, and from recent meetings, business owners have not only just displayed concerns about traffic but also the safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and families visiting their establishments as well. Instead, Smiley’s plan only addresses moving cars as fast as possible at the expense of everything else.
What’s especially demeaning and demoralizing is that our elected official not only bypassed the City Council, but the first thing they did after hearing opposition was to sprint to a news outlet to state their nonsensical plan would move forward regardless. What was the point of the meeting, then? He doesn’t have support or a plan backed by evidence. The public can then only assume there may be an ulterior motive, and according to some, fingers have been pointed toward campaign donation incentives and trying to appease wealthy groups due to his dodgy past as well as his relationship (see 1, 2, 3). However, perhaps he genuinely believes he’s right, though that’d require following what we know about modern urban planning and accessible, sustainable city transportation.
This leaves many burning questions: How far will this setback businesses, WaterFire, and the surrounding communities? Why does Smiley continue to make false promises and turn his back on the people he represents? Who or what is he actually representing? What is he after, and what are his true motives?