|
. . . to discuss pedestrian issues relating to sidewalks, specifically material used for sidewalks, tree roots and sidewalk maintenance and repair and the report on provisions for parking for motorcycles, scooters and mopeds. |
June 6, 2006Committee Report #4 TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC AND In City Council June 26, 2006
The Transportation, Traffic and Parking. Committee held a public meeting on Tuesday, June 6, 2006, beginning at five o’clock and thirty-two minutes P.M. in the Sullivan Chamber. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss pedestrian issues relating to sidewalks, specifically material used for sidewalks, tree roots and sidewalk maintenance and repair and the report on provisions for parking for motorcycles, scooters and mopeds. Present at the meeting were Councillor Craig Kelley, Chair of the Committee, Councillor Henrietta Davis, Councillor Murphy, Lisa Peterson, Public Works Commissioner, Owen O’Riordan, City Engineer, Bill Dwyer, Superintendent of Streets, John Nardone, Assistant Commissioner for Operations, Kathy Watkins, Transportation Planner, Community Development Department (CDD), Rosalie Anders, Project Administrator, Environmental and Transportation Planning Division, CDD, Michael Muehe, Director, Commission for Persons with Disabilities and Donna Lopez, Deputy City Clerk. Councillor Kelley opened the meeting and stated the purpose. The format of the meeting would be public comment followed by a presentation by Public Works. At five o’clock and thirty-five minutes Councillor Kelley opened the meeting to public comment. Estelle Disch, 528 Franklin Street, stated her concerns with the condition of the sidewalks. She felt humiliated living in the city after a situation where she helped a handicapped person to her car. She cited problems with curb cuts, sunken bricks and pedestrian cross lights where there is no pedestrian count light. Carolyn Simon , Mt. Vernon Street, informed the committee that she is blind and that there is confusion for pedestrians at cross lights and there should be a better indication of how long the signals are. Bus stop signs should be placed before hydrants not after because people walk into the hydrants. The new ramp in Porter Square is not in compliance with American Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations. There are supposed to be no obstacles at the end of the ramp. She spoke about the handicapped ramp being on private property at White Hen Pantry, illegally parked cars in handicapped ramps and delivery trucks blocking the ramp. Handicapped ramps and handicapped parking spaces should be protected for those who use these facilities. When she brings the issue to the Police they say it is not their affair. John Kelley, Boston Neighborhood Access Group, informed the committee that he fights for street level access and has filed a complaint against the City of Boston for sidewalk accessibility. The City of Boston is hostile to handicapped persons. He opposed the use of brick. He stated that he does not feel welcome in Cambridge because the sidewalks are not accessible. When sidewalks are curved he can run into people with his wheel chair. People might like the ambiance like the gentrification, but bricks are not the future. He spoke about missing bricks and the inability of brick sidewalks to bear the load. Bricks, he said, do not provide access; the future is accessibility for all. It is not respectable to handicapped persons when bricks are used for sidewalk material. Wheelchairs do not function well on brick sidewalks, as cars don’t function well on cobblestones. Kathy Podgers, 148 Pearl Street, founder of Citizens for Feasible Compliance, stated that she filed a complaint against the Massachusetts Architectural Board. The Hancock ramp doesn’t work because it does not have the width of 48” to wing rollers and dogs. She wants sidewalks accessible for handicapped persons. She cited problems with curb ramps and the height of crosswalks. She spoke about her service dog’s inability to help her because of the ingredients used on sidewalks bothering his paws. The curb cut landings are too short. Curb cuts and sidewalks are not meeting ADA requirements. She feels dizzy when she walks on a crooked sidewalk. She stated that she wants to work with the city to find a solution. Police Commissioner says disabled people are in the street because they want to be there, but they’re really there because they don’t have ready access to sidewalks. ADA sys systemic violations are a civil rights issue. At five o’clock and fifty-three minutes P.M. public comment was closed. At this time Councillor Kelley requested that the Public Works Department proceed with their presentation. Commissioner Peterson spoke about sidewalk maintenance and reconstruction. The goal of the sidewalk maintenance program is to provide pedestrian safety and improve accessibility. She also spoke about preserving significant trees. Sidewalk reconstruction is funded through different programs and financial streams. Larger projects are funded through bonds. Some of these projects are Cambridge Street, Harvard Square, Porter Square and South Massachusetts Avenue. Surface enhancements are addressed when a project is completed. Street reconstruction is done with Chapter 90 funds. There are funds allocated annually that provide for miscellaneous repairs for sidewalks. This fiscal year the allocation is $400,000. At this time Commissioner Peterson turned the presentation over to Owen O’Riordan, the City Engineer, to discuss the sidewalk and pedestrian ramp survey. City policy is to replace sidewalks that are there for free, downgrade from brick to concrete for free or upgrade for difference in cost. $50 square yard for concrete, $150- $165 square yard for brick, so that the city can do 3 times as much concrete as brick. Mr. O’Riordan stated that in 2004-2005, Public Works with help from co-op students looked at the condition of sidewalks and pedestrian ramps throughout the city to help assess budgetary requirements and to prioritize. There were 147 miles of sidewalks surveyed (ATTACHMENT A). The entire city has 200 miles of sidewalks of which 48 miles are brick; 139 miles are concrete and the remaining 12 miles are asphalt, plus some bluestone. The north, west and east Cambridge areas contain little amounts of brick sidewalks. The conditions of the sidewalks were broadly assessed in the survey. Overall the condition of sidewalks were used as follows: 25% excellent 50% good 30% poor Of the 139 miles of concrete sidewalks the survey revealed 102 miles were in excellent to good condition. Of the 48 miles of brick sidewalk, 33 miles were rated as excellent to good condition and 11 miles of asphalt sidewalks rated 0.7 miles in excellent to good condition. A higher proportion of brick sidewalks were in poor condition. Pedestrian ramps were next discussed. Mr. O’Riordan stated that there are eight ramps that have four defects. There are 91 ramps that have either noncompliance slopes or poor structural condition. Councillor Kelley asked if ramp landings were included in the survey. Mr. O’Riordan responded in the negative. This survey helps to estimate the cost for repairs. It would cost $14.5 million to bring sidewalks into compliance that are in poor or fair condition. Without that money they’re using their GPS mapping of sidewalks to prioritize around public buildings, senior centers, housing, etc. The most critical sidewalks were reviewed with a 150 radius around these areas. These areas were then prioritized as Harvard, Porter, Kendall, Central and Lafayette Squares. This is a draft document. This is where the city is on this issue, he said. Councillor Kelley asked if the city has a lot of gravel sidewalks like the sidewalk at Dana Park. Mr. O’Riordan responded that only walkways are gravel. Mr. Muehe stated that the material is stabilized aggregate compound. Another example of this walkway is Corporal Burns. These walkways need to be swept to remove the loose gravel for a period of one to three years after installation, then this walkway becomes a smooth surface like asphalt. Next Mr. Dwyer, Superintendent of Streets, discussed maintenance of sidewalks. Public Works has a sidewalk inspection and minor repair program (ATTACHMENT B). Sidewalks are identified and observed by Public Works staff. Inspections are done by: Street Cleaning Division Public works supervisors and inspectors; Forestry and Parks Division; and the general public The pothole hotline is (617) 349-4854. Reports are entered into the inspection program. A Public Works supervisor reports on the condition of the defect and the defect is prioritized. There are three categories for areas needing repairs or improvements to vertical displacement. They are: minimal displacement – displacement less than ¾ of an inch small displacement – displacement between ¾ to 1 ½ inches; and moderate to significant displacement – displacement greater than 1½ inches. Bus stops and senior centers get top priority. He commented on the temporary repair program. If the repair is in a sensitive area, it is given top priority. The response goal for small displacement is to repair the defect within 10-30 days. Councillor Kelley asked Mr. Dwyer how long the repairs were expected to last. Mr. Dwyer responded, as long as possible. The repair areas are monitored. If an additional repair is needed, it is repaired. Asphalt is used for temporary repairs. On raised tree wells the Public Works staff works with the City Arborist to get an opinion as to what can be done about tree roots. The life and the health of the tree are considered. Tree roots that are a problem are usually major roots of trees. Councillor Kelley asked when bridge repairs are done are they graded. The area is made accessible as soon as possible, stated Mr. Dwyer. Commissioner Peterson stated that the city has a goal to preserve significant trees but this creates a conflict with accessibility on sidewalks, sometimes a 100% conflict. Tree roots are always an issue, commented Mr. Nardone. Areas that have tree root issues will not be bricked because of the tree roots. The permanent fix is asphalt. Small canopy trees are used so that the roots will not cause this problem. In new construction root barren process is used. Roots grow down and out to the side. Mr. O’Riordan stated that bricks are installed on a concrete base. Tree roots and water can’t move through concrete sub-base. Asphalt is used as a mastic base to which bricks adhere. Wire-cut bricks are now used, however in historical areas molded bricks are used. Commissioner Peterson informed the committee that the policy is that whatever material exists on sidewalks this is what is used as a small-scale replacement or repair. The goal is to use wire-cut brick. In response to a question from Councillor Kelley about replacement sidewalk on Hollis Street, Mr. O’Riordan stated that a four-inch base of concrete is used, then ¼ inch of stone dust and then the brick are laid. The concrete stabilizes the bricks. Councillor Kelley asked if there is less displacement with this practice. Mr. O’Riordan responded in the affirmative. Councillor Kelley inquired as to what is done to ensure that sidewalks are cleared of snow, especially for accessibility and the mobility of strollers. The sidewalk clearance program is aggressive, stated Commissioner Peterson. The city clears 18 miles of sidewalk of snow, including bus stops, parks, public buildings and schools. The Parking Control Officers issue tickets to property owners who do not clear their sidewalk. In the fall of last year letters were sent to violators and large property owners to remind them of their responsibility. Literature was mailed with the resident parking sticker renewal notice. Commissioner Peterson would provide data about snow tickets issued. Work would continue to get private property owners to comply. Councillor Kelley was informed that citations were mailed to property owners from information received from the Assessors database. Commissioner Peterson explained the appeal process. Councillor Kelley asked about the snow clearance exemption list. Commissioner Peterson stated that it is a list including income-eligible seniors and persons with disabilities. There is a list of 65-68 households. This list exempts these households from the city ordinance for snow clearance on sidewalks. The city clears the sidewalks in front of these homes. The Danehy Park staff helps with this task. There is also a list of high school students who will shovel the sidewalk for a fee, but it is an inconsistent program. The City clears about 18 miles of sidewalks, high-volume bus stops, etc. On private property Parking Control Officers (PCO) and some DPW staff give tickets. Last year a follow up letter was sent to violators, problems areas and larger property owners. The city sent out literature with residential parking sticker. Ms. Peterson did not have enforcement statistics, can’t get 100% compliance but could do better. Parking Control Officers record the violation. A letter is sent to the Assessor’s office’s owner of record. The city has even gone to the Court Magistrate on some cases. Mr. O’Riordan, in response to a concern expressed by Councillor Kelley, stated that ramps and landing areas would be assessed to see the significance and to prioritize. Councillor Kelley asked what is the cost to do a ramp. Commissioner Peterson stated that ramps are done in concrete and could cost $1,000 - $4,000. A discussion ensued about sidewalks on Hollis Street. They would not have been repaired if the roadwork were not being done. The $400,000 of brickwork will go about a mile at $200 a square yard, so the money is used for smaller level repairs. Councillor Kelley spoke of the North Massachusetts Avenue median strip. There are no curb cuts for pedestrians crossing Massachusetts Avenue. He asked how complicated it is to put a break in the median strip. Mr. O’Riordan could quantify this for him. Councillor Kelley asked what is the city’s sidewalk accessibility requirement under ADA. Mr. Muehe responded that the ADA does not require that every sidewalk be accessible; ADA requires that there be program accessibility when viewed in the entirety. The question is can a disabled person move from point A to point B in the city roughly as easily as a non-disabled person. The GIS system can answer this question. Councillor Kelley asked whether ADA gives Cambridge any flexibility for being an old city. Mr. Muehe responded that the flexibility is the accessibility in the entirety standard. Sidewalk review isn’t systematic but relies on what people report more in an ad hoc fashion. Councilor Kelley wondered if the Mayor’s Summer Youth could be used to report defects. Defect reporting is independent work, stated Commissioner Peterson; participants in the Mayor’s Summer Job Program are in a supervisory environment. Ms. Anders informed Councillor Kelley that the Pedestrian Committee is graphically representative of the city and they do report the defect. Churches and volunteer groups provide service to the city. Maybe a system could be developed like this, she said. Councillor Kelley stated that the meeting schedule for July 18, 2006 would be with the Pedestrian and Bike Committees. He will ask these committees then how they can help. Commissioner Peterson again stated that the city needed to make reasonable effort to address the issue of accessibility. Councillor Kelley asked if the sidewalks and ramps needed to be in compliance in 30 days. Commissioner Peterson responded that public safety and accessibility is a high priority of Public Works. There is no standard that compliance be made in 30 days but when the city is on notice of a defect the DPW must make a reasonable attempt to fix it and that there is a need to prioritize the survey for doing and funding work. The programmatic approach is the key. Councillor Kelley questioned with regard to installing the sidewalk ramp on Hollis Street. Mr. O’Riordan stated that if sidewalks are reconstructed, it is the responsibility of the city to install the ramps. Again at seven o’clock and seventeen minutes P.M. Councillor Kelley opened the meeting to public comment. Ms. Simon spoke of the inability to walk on the left side of Rindge Avenue because of trees. She asked when trees and boxed will be removed. More emphasis on pedestrian safety at night is needed at Alewife Station. She asked if there is a charge to the homeowner if Public Works installs sidewalks in front of her home. Mr. Dwyer responded that there is no change to replace what exists. Commissioner Peterson stated that she will review the location. Councillor Kelley commented that sidewalks will be replaced in kind as needed. John Kelley stated that all sidewalks should be accessible and meet architectural code standards because they are a part of the city. Non-compliant new construction requires a variance from the Massachusetts Architectural Board. He asked where the money for construction of sidewalks comes from. He stated that there was a First Circuit Court decision that states surface-to-surface sidewalks be brought into compliance. Ms. Podgers requested that a committee be developed to respond to the issues raised. If sidewalks are not fixed for accessibility for a person with disability, it is discrimination and that widespread violations are a civil rights violation. Councillor Kelley asked if the city loses operational and planning control for the Mass. Highway Project. Mr. O’Riordan stated that the city has an agreement with the Mass. Highway Department (MHD). The city has a project manager on the property. The project work is done by MHD. Ms. Podgers commented that the Mass. Architectural Board and the ADA states that she has a right to file a grievance. She asked what internal mechanism does Public Works have about complaints. She asked why couldn’t she file a complaint with Public Works and get a response. She suggested that there should be a process. Ms. Peterson said that DPW does not have a formal in-house review procedure. Councillor Kelley thanked all attendees. The meeting was adjourned at seven o’clock and thirty-five minutes. For the Committee, Councillor Craig Kelley |