|
. . . to discuss the petition received from residents requesting that Howard Street be changed to a one-way between River Street and Howard Street. |
June 27, 2006Committee Report #3 TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC AND In City Council August 7, 2006
The Transportation, Traffic and Parking Committee held a public meeting on June 27, 2006 at five o’clock and thirty-two minutes p.m. in the Sullivan Chamber. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the petition received from residents requesting that Howard Street be changed to a one-way between River Street and Howard Street. Present at the meeting were Councillor Craig Kelley, Chair of the Transportation, Traffic and Parking Committee, Councillor Henrietta Davis, Sue Clippinger, Director, Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department, Wayne Amaral, Traffic Operations Manager, Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department, Lieutenant Jack Albert, Police Department, Gloria Leipzig, Director of Operations, Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) and Donna P. Lopez, Deputy City Clerk. Also present were Lawrence Adkins, President, Riverside Neighborhood Association, Lois Jones, 9 Putnam Gardens, Sarah Smith, 267 Putnam Avenue, Ben Holzman, 9 Howard Street #1, Shirley and Cedric Harvey, 16 Howard Street and Steve Kaiser, 19 Hamilton Street. Councillor Kelley opened the meeting, stated the purpose and read the call of the meeting. He opened the meeting to public comment at five o’clock and thirty-four minutes p.m. Mr. Adkins, President, Riverside Neighborhood Association, stated that he was a life-long resident, that in the past Howard Street was briefly one-way, that he has measured distance been Howard and Jay Streets and that those streets could allow circular mode on them. He stated that fire trucks would have the same access with a one-way street as a two-way because they have sirens and are big. He wanted a full debate on changing Howard Street to a one-way. He spoke of the potential traffic bottleneck that would result from the closing of Memorial Drive. Ms. Jones agreed with the comments made by Mr. Adkins. Mr. Holzman stated that he was involved in circulating the petition to make Howard Street a one-way. Traffic on Howard Street is becoming a clogged artery. The traffic comes from two directions with no place to go. The traffic congestion creates problems and altercations, and is not in the best interest of public safety. Two-way traffic causes problems with the Fire and Police Departments. The width of the street prohibits cars from passing on both sides. The residents do not want parking spaces removed. Most residents, he said, are in favor of Howard Street becoming a one-way. He does not care which direction is the one-way. Ms. Harvey stated that she lived there when Howard Street was converted to a one-way street some time ago. She thought it was a good idea to make Howard Street a one-way because of the width of the street. With the no-parking signs removed vehicles are parked in the no-parking spaces and in front of driveways because the street is too narrow. She stated that it is difficult to maneuver the turn out of her driveway. More frustration will result with removing the no-parking signs. She wants Howard Street to remain a two-way street. Councillor Davis stated her interest on the subject, as she is a resident of the Cambridgeport area. Mr. Harvey stated that Howard Street had been a one-way from River Street to Western Avenue, but it was a nightmare. Howard Street was changed back to a two-way. The negative impact to Howard Street as a one-way was traffic congestion and difficulty in parking. He said that old habits die hard and that he would make wrong assumptions about when to turn if the street was one-way. He urged the committee to not repeat the negative impact of making Howard Street a one-way. Ms. Leipzig, Director of Operations, Cambridge Housing Authority, expressed her concern for the residents of Putnam Avenue as it relates to access. It is more inconvenient to go from River Street to Western Avenue and becomes more inconvenient for getting home. Mr. Kaiser stated that his block on Hamilton Street is a one-way and he has thought about making it a two-way because people both speed and cut-through his street. When a street is changed to a one-way it increases speeding. There is speeding on Hamilton Street. Howard Street has built in traffic calming as a two-way. He suggested “Yield” signs. Chestnut and Florence Streets are narrow two-way streets that work. The proposal, he said, is historically badly conceived. In 1949 River and Western became one-way and have become speedways. Operating a narrow two-way road isn’t perfect but it is better than one-way. Councillor Kelley questioned Ms. Clippinger about the issue of Howard Street being a one-way. Ms. Clippinger stated that the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department has the authority to turn a street into a one-way. A petition was received from residents of Howard Street to make it a one-way. The Fire Department indicated their approval of a one-way for Howard Street from River Street to Western Avenue. A letter was sent to the residents of Howard, Hayes and Pleasant Streets and Kelly Road from the Traffic Director (Attachment A). The residents were upset. Leaflets were done by the Traffic Department to get feedback from area residents. The result from twenty-four responses were: 13 responses agreed change should be implemented. 11 responses disagreed and wanted the street to remain the same. The proponent and opponent responses were plotted on a map (Attachment B). She stated that the opinion was split and that she did not expect to get much more feedback. Based on the response the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department would not make Howard Street a one-way. Councillor Kelley questioned the public notice process regarding the change to a one-way. Ms. Clippinger stated that any requested change would be published in the newspaper for three weeks before going into effect. If the situation were bad, the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department would take immediate action to rectify it. Mr. Adkins stated that Howard Street had previously been a one-way toward Western Avenue with parking on one side of the street. The current petition requests that Howard Street be made a one-way between River Street and Western Avenue with parking on both sides. People are under the impression that the petition would result in making the full length of Howard Street a one-way. He stated that the analysis is one sided. In the past no public process existed; the current petition is different. He wanted clarity on any rule that would grant authority to the Fire Department to say why traffic should travel in a specific way. The prior history took away access and parking. A discussion ensued about illegally parked cars and difficulty in backing out of driveways due to the cars. Mr. Harvey commented that four spaces are marked as “No Parking.” Councillor Kelley asked if cars park in these spaces. Mrs. Harvey responded in the affirmative. She commented that if enforcement were increased, the situation would be alleviated. The house lots on the street are 33 feet. This does not give much room for driveways. With Howard Street a one-way and parking on both sides it will be difficult to get out of driveways. The difficulty occurs at each end of the street, commented Ms. Clippinger. Mr. Adkins stated that if the street were flagged to indicate where cars cannot park, the problem would be alleviated. The Harveys want a clear passage in and out of their driveway, with the ability to clearly see oncoming traffic in any direction. The curb needs to be flagged as “no parking.” Councillor Kelley inquired whether the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department marked the curbs. Ms. Clippinger responded in the negative due to the inability to maintain the markings. Councillor Kelley asked whether it is illegal if the public marks the curb. Ms. Clippinger responded in the affirmative. However, the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department takes no action on this issue. If the street was made a one-way and no parking signs were removed, access will be blocked because cars will be legally parked, stated Mr. Harvey. Ms. Clippinger stated that no changes will be made to the “no parking” signs. Councillor Kelley inquired what it would take to go back and say that there was popular support for this change to Howard Street. Ms. Clippinger again stated that residents were encouraged to respond to her department about the change. Councillor Kelley commented that there is opposition from residents many times on various issues, but the city proceeds anyhow. He asked why this decision is based on public opinion. Ms. Clippinger stated that the purpose was to get support for the change to make Howard Street a one-way, especially when it was unpopular in the past. There is insufficient support to make the change, she said. Lieutenant Albert stated that Howard Street can be a difficult street to travel as a two-way. Western Avenue has been gridlocked from traffic congestion, he said. One-way would be easier for emergency vehicles, though he can use his police lights to back into Western Ave if he needs to. The incident that occurred at 7 Howard Street was discussed and the connection to traffic as a factor. There was a belief that two-way traffic lead to cruising. Ms. Leipzig commented that two adjacent parking spaces on CHA property were used for gatherings. Mr. Adkins commented that a do-it-yourself auto shop was being conducted at 7 Howard Street. He suggested that the street be examined and measured and that the concerns of Mr. and Mrs. Harvey be addressed. Cars can be ticketed that block the Harvey’s driveway. This is an opportunity to stop a problem. No parking spaces should be removed and no driveways should be blocked. Mrs. Harvey wanted the Yield signs tested on the two-way street. One way will contribute to speeding. Councillor Kelley stated that he is struggling that this is unquantifiable. More support and/or opposition could be sought. Ms. Clippinger stated that with a regulation like this, the issue becomes current situation versus residents welcoming a change to make Howard Street a one-way. Either alternative is viable; there is no safety problem in the area. The procedure is to get the people who are most affected to weigh in on the issue. Her department is looking for a strong majority of support for the change. Councillor Kelley asked if the decision was final. Ms. Clippinger responded in the affirmative. Mr. Amaral commented that on most streets a traffic survey is done, but this situation is based on the request of the residents. After input from the Fire Department the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department wanted a consensus from the residents. This situation is not the norm. Ms. Leipzig stated she wants to do the best for the Howard Street residents. The public in attendance is representative of the neighborhood. Speed and convenience are her concerns. Mr. Kaiser suggested that there are three ways to make a decision:
Ms. Clippinger and Mr. Amaral explained the history, noting that there was not much information in the file. In April 1987 the Howard Street change occurred for what was to be a six-month trial period. The trial ended in thirty days. The Kelly Road residents seemed to be the nucleus of opposition the change. The Fire Department is always contacted about a traffic change and has veto power, more or less, over street work, especially near stations. The Fire Department has been very supportive of traffic calming. It would be easier for the Fire Department to have Howard Street be one-way, but they can live with it as it is. She also noted that she did not know of any one-way streets being asked to be turned into two-way streets and that two-way streets that have been tried to turn into one-way streets have not lasted long and that there is not a lot of room on our streets to meet various standards and uses. Mr. Amaral noted that street uses measurements are guidelines, not standards and that professional judgment is key. Also, he said that sometimes confusion in traffic patterns can be good. Councillor Kelley asked what percentage of Cambridge streets are one way. Mr. Amaral responded that fifty percent of Cambridge streets are one way. Councillor Kelley entered the following received e-mails into the record: Lydia Knutson, 30 Howard Street, supported Howard Street being a one way, (Attachment C) Jennifer Martin, 8 Howard Street #1, supported Howard Street being a one way, (Attachment D) Gayatri Patnaik, 9 Howard Street #3, supported Howard Street being a one way, (Attachment E) Benjamin Brophy, 51 Hayes Street, supported Howard Street being a one way, (Attachment F) Beth Ginsberg supported Howard Street being a one way (Attachment G) Walter Willett suggested that one-way street parking be moved to the left side to create a car-door-free lane for bikes (Attachment H) Ken Field opposed Howard Street being a one way (Attachment I) Martha Werman suggested that on Sundays the street be two-ways and on other days of the week one-way because there is too much traffic on Western Avenue, especially when Memorial Drive is closed (Attachment J). Councillor Kelley asked if there was a standard width for streets with two-way traffic. Mr. Amaral stated that there is no standard definition of one-way or two-way streets. Confusion like the situation on Pemberton Street is good because it reduces speeding. Mr. Kaiser stated that the AASHTO Standards are out of scale for Cambridge. Bicyclists adjust to traffic, he said. Lieutenant. Albert said that the minimum fine was $50.00 with a $50.00 head injury surcharge. Mr. Adkins spoke about speeding on Western Avenue. There are three driveways on Howard Street that are a problem. This situation can be fixed with work and cooperation, he said. Yield signs will not make people polite and there is a lack of parking enforcement. It is a scary street and we will have to revisit it as upcoming bottlenecks will result in Harvard construction trucks using it as a backup route. Councillor Kelley asked whether jitneys have the authority to use Howard Street. Ms. Clippinger stated that jitney licenses have a specific route. Howard Street is not a restricted roadway, stated Lieutenant Albert. Putnam Avenue, however, is a restricted roadway, unless there is a licensed jitney. Mr. Kaiser suggested that the timing signals on both ends of Howard Street could be set differently. Mr. Amaral stated that this could be reviewed but coordinating four movements would be tough. He did not think it would be the solution as one person dropping off groceries would throw it all out of whack. Mr. Holzman stated that the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department should develop a public policy about how these decisions are made. Mr. Harvey wanted the history of the change and the reversal researched. The feedback of residents was the reason the change was undone, stated Ms. Clippinger. Mr. Amaral expressed his concerns as an engineer about changing a street back and forth. Signs are cheap but changing ingrained behavior can be tough and things could be dangerous if people think the street is something that it is not. Signs may be ignored by neighborhood residents. The last resort is to reverse the decision. Mr. Adkins suggested that the discussions continue and that the concerns of the residents of Howard Street be addressed and that he hoped Mr. Amaral and Ms. Clippinger would visit the area and maybe come up with suggestions. Also, he noted that if people do not pay attention to ‘no parking’ signs, they will not pay attention to yield signs and that elsewhere, like in California, people get killed in these situations. The best practice is needed for the area. Councillor Kelley stated that a stronger case for the change is needed so that the Traffic, Parking and Transportation Department can take another look. Enforcement is needed for illegally parked cars. The 1987 history is needed. Mr. Kaiser noted that perhaps Sandra Graham knows the history. Lieutenant Albert cautioned that when traffic is changed on one street it changes the traffic in the neighborhood. Additional communications were received after the meeting concluded. They are: Robin Cherry, 247 River Street, supported Howard Street being a one way (Attachment K) Carolyn Shipley, 15 Laurel Street, supported Howard Street being a one way (Attachment L) Councillor Kelley thanked all attendees. The meeting was adjourned at seven o’clock and twenty minutes p.m. For the Committee, |