In response to the letters to the editor and recent guest commentary that argue for locating the National Coast Guard Museum at Fort Trumbull, I would like to offer my perspective, based on personal and professional experiences, as to why the selected downtown site is the better choice.

On the personal side, I once recall, as I boarded an Amtrak train for Boston, witnessing a conductor refuse to allow a ticketed passenger to board.

“I saw what you did, and I will not allow you on this train,” she told the would-be rider.

The man protested, then complied. I asked the conductor what happened, and she told me that he had crawled under the train. He had arrived after the train had pulled into the station, so his choice was either to miss the train or do what he did. The conductor said this happens more often than people think.

The Federal Railroad Administration has requested that this situation be remedied, and there may be penalties, including less frequent stops in New London, if a solution is not forthcoming. And regardless of the regulations, not having a way to safely reach the northbound platform when a train is in the station is a public hazard. The funds the state plans to contribute to the National Coast Guard Museum, to construct a pedestrian bridge providing access over the tracks, would have the added benefit of fixing that situation as well as creating a gateway to the museum.

As for the state saving money if the museum was built at Fort Trumbull, I don’t believe that is the case. The state will only save money if it continues ignoring the lack of safety at Union Station.

Professionally, I write from my dozen years managing New London Main Street, a National Trust downtown revitalization program. The program provided considerable educational resources and opportunities to see what worked and what didn’t in other places. One of the time-tested theories of the Main Street approach is particularly relevant here, which is that if a town wants to revitalize its central business district, it must focus on this area and invest attention and dollars in order to get it done.

A healthy downtown not only has a ripple effect on the rest of the town and the area, but most importantly it stands to give the greatest return on investment. This has been established in case after case, and a city like New London, with a limited tax base, cannot afford to ignore this advice.

There is no doubt that Fort Trumbull is a beautiful site, but costly infrastructure work would also be needed for parking and services. More importantly, the site lacks what city planners call “walk-ability.” In downtown, the museum will join the Garde Arts Center, the library, the post office, the train and bus stations and ferry terminals, heritage sites, shops and restaurants and give people one more reason to go downtown.

It’s all about critical mass and synergy.

Should the museum be built in the flood plain? This is a question for those who are trained to evaluate the site and the engineers who will devise a plan. I am confident those at the Museum Association will take that advice as plans develop. I, too, am eager to find out what the experts have to say, but I urge everyone not to second guess them or try to force a change in plans based upon a lack of information or personal preferences.

For the sake of success, let’s use what we know, have patience and give the downtown site a chance to prove that it deserves to be called the best choice.

Penny Parsekian formerly managed the New London Main Street program, currently serves as an advisor to the Avery Copp House of Groton, and was instrumental in the launching of the Thames River Heritage Park water taxi that recently began operating.