2012-03-20 TPC Minutes 3
. � Transportation and Parking Commission
- y I' City of Northampton
■ r4 210 Main Street, Room 18,
tF E" A Northampton, MA 01060
(413) 587-1210
www.northamptonma._gov/tpc
MEETING MINUTES
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
City Council Chambers, Puchalski Municipal Building
4:04 p.m. —5:57 p.m.
Members Present: Chair Eugene Tacy, Deborah Bruce, Leslie Stein, James Lowenthal,
Wayne Feiden, Gary Hartwell, Owen Freeman-Daniels; Ned Huntley, Russell Sienkiewicz,
Paul Sustick.
Members Absent: none
Others Present: Laura Hanson, DPW
Meeting called to order at 4:04 p.m. by Vice Chair Freeman-Daniels. Quorum met.
1. Public Comment
a. Bill Letendre—Paul Sustick
• Spoke in defense of Mr. Letendre, that he saved the community hundreds of
thousands of dollars over the 5 to 6 years he was here; that he's getting a bad
rap with one of the newspapers;
• said he didn't know who on the TPC supported Mr. Letendre;
• acknowledged conflicts with the Mayor; made reference to "what happened
eight years ago in that garage—travesty";
• in referencing overtime, he said he kept asking the Mayor for more money but
the Mayor didn't have the vision, that he didn't know why Bill & the Mayor
didn't see eye-to-eye on things;
• said that we need someone like Bill to make it work; and that whatever personal
problems he had, the community was precipitous in its harsher judgment on him
and that he should not be hung out to dry;
• concluded that Mr. Letendre saved the community millions at the high school
and thousands with the fire department;
• exhorted the Commission to get behind Mr. Letendre and show him their
appreciation.
1
Discussion
• Ms. Stein referenced Ms. Bruce's statement on Letendre;
• Ms. Bruce clarified the statement as recognizing the contributions to the City
made by Mr. Letendre;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said the statement was in the narrative attached to the
February Minutes;
• Mr. Sustick acknowledged the statement said Mr. Letendre "was a great guy,"
but that his hands were tied; added that Mr. Letendre worked 80 hours a week
and got paid for 40;
• Ms. Stein expressed appreciation for Mr. Letendre, but pointed out to Mr.
Sustick that the board was not in a position to(apparently) choose sides;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said it was his understanding that the Mayor has general
control over the organization of the City departments; said he was unsure what
the TPC was to do now that Mr. Letendre is retired; emphasized that, going
forward, there is a need for a dedicated body focusing on parking;
• Ms. Stein said it would be good if the Mayor communicated his needs for the
position;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said the TPC is as well at liberty to make
recommendations to the Mayor on the running of the department.
b. Street Parking —John Meehan, 17 Vernon Street
• Expressed concern that two signs installed by the city on Vernon St—one on his
frontage, the other at the Church exits —are unnecessarily large, and he would
like for the City to reconsider them and move them so as to improve resident
drivers' sight clearance;
• said he shares concerns with his neighbors as well that parking spaces have been
reduced;
• noted that these concerns, brought up in January's meeting, were not on today's
Agenda.
Discussion
• Ms. Stein sought clarification on Mr. Meehan's address.
MOTION, Mr. Freeman-Daniels, to Close Public Comment; Seconded, Ms. Stein; Motion
Carried.
2. Approval of Minutes of February 21, 2011
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said he may have missed an email or two in reference to
the Minutes;
• Ms. Stein corrected the name spelling of"the gentleman from the PVTA" as
"Jamie";
2
• Ms. Hanson requested adding the location of the meeting to the Minutes.
Motion, Chief Sienkiewicz, to Approve Minutes; Seconded, Mr. Sustick; Abstained, Mr.
Huntley; Motion Carried.
3. Henshaw Avenue Parking Concerns —Maureen Kiely
• Presented slides of vehicles parked to close to her driveway, making it difficult
to enter or back out; indicated the situation was particularly acute during the
academic year; cited signage on other streets addressing similar issues; said
she's been bringing her concerns forward for approximately 9 years and would,
in the end, like to see something done.
Discussion
• Chair Tacy inquired as to whether this was an issue of enforcement; asked Ms.
Kiely what she would like to see done about the matter;
• Ms. Kiely suggested "some visual cue" for people to know they cannot park too
close to her driveway;
• Mr. Lowenthal expressed appreciation to Ms. Kiely for her situation; described
an "alternative view" of the situation could be that it's an inconvenience more
so than a safety issue; pointed out that the street in question is "low volume"
and "narrow"; suggested that if site-lines were opened up, drivers would tend to
go faster, a trade-off with the greater convenience; suggested a compromise
could be effected, say putting in no-parking signs "a few feet (from the
driveway), but not much more than that";
• Chair Tacy said the City has hundreds of similar situations, maybe thousands;
• Ms. Kiely said some communities have "no large vehicles" signage; "I've been
dealing with that for nine years";
• Ms. Stein expressed sympathy but said she'd also hate to move parking off that
street;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said the TPC was discussion different options, one being
the circular mirror to enhance visibility for Ms. Kiely (initially rejected);
another rearranging sides for parking; added that if the answer is to be "we can't
do anything for you," then to tell them that;
• Ms. Hanson said she discussed installing a mirror with Ms. Kiely (now departed
from the meeting) but that she rejected it, although now, with few other options,
she may be more open to it;
• Mr. Huntley pointed out that curb city ordinances required 3 feet from either
side of driveways, and maybe change it to read "5 feet" and provide more
wiggle-room; although the downside for accommodating this resident would be
an increase in demand from a multitude of residents with similar circumstances;
• Chief Sienkiewicz said that without notification, the police cannot ticket
offenders without likely losing a challenge; added that opening spaces from 3 to
5 feet means losing parking spaces, e.g., Union St, Cherry St, therefore he
3
would not be in favor of expanding spaces;
• Mr. Lowenthal said moving parking to the opposite side of the street would be
problematic in that there is no sidewalk that side and it has a steep bank;
• Chair Tacy added that there is a parking lot across the street that is heavily used;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels suggested warehousing cars in the lot would mean
reduced chances of people getting out of a car on the street; moreover, that there
are fewer driveways on the other side of the street, more parking could be
available;
• Chief Sienkiewicz suggested the police are fairly active in that neighborhood,
ticketing and towing cars that are being "warehoused"; suggested getting the
neighborhood on board for parking changes is a paramount concern;
• Mr. Hartwell wondered if determining whether offending vehicles were Smith
students' or others would be useful, and whether Smith vehicles could be made
to park in designated spaces;
• Mr. Lowenthal said Smith vehicles are usually IDed by stickers, but if the
student doesn't put a sticker on the car, the City wouldn't know;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels asked if there was a problem with putting a mirror up in
this case;
• Chief Sienkiewicz speculated that if the mirror is put up on private property,
permission would need be obtained; and if it's a city street, that it would render
the City liable in the event of an accident;
• Mr. Huntley cited two such mirrors, Kennedy Rd and Chesterfield Rd, and that
they're mounted either on trees or telephone poles but not on separate posts;
• Mr. Hartwell said there was a mirror on West St;
• Chair Tacy said a permit from the National Grid would be required;
• Ms. Hanson recommended that Ms. Kiely "pursue the mirror," and that
permission from DPW for her to purchase and maintain it was obtained; said
that despite Ms. Kiely's objection to the mirror, she might be more amenable
now that alternative remedies have been essentially rejected; said she felt that a
follow-up would be in order;
• Chair Tacy said he would call Ms. Kiely, with no objection, and resubmit the
mirror idea;
• Mr. Lowenthal sought a determination of whether this was "a safety issue";
• Ms. Bruce argued that the matter boiled down to personal interest vs. common
good, and concurred that if parking was reduced, speed would increase;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels disputed the matter as a zero-sum gain and wanted it
known that it shouldn't be inferred as such; suggested he will work on way of
offering some solutions other than telling residents they'll have to come up with
the money to pay for a mirror.
4. Ordinance: Amend Sec. 312-103 Schedule II,No Parking Certain Times, Ridgewood
Terrace—Laura Hanson, DPW
• Prefaced with a couple of points:
4
-- Ordinance brought forward in January about the intersection of
Ridgewood Ter and Jackson St; said Bill Letendre provided the
measurements (118 ft side; 114 ft other side);
-- said DPW invited last month the neighborhood to come and discuss
(inaudible) Ordinance re: a homeowner complained about this distance as
affecting the parking in front of his house; said she had promised to work
with the fire department, have them test... talk to them...
• presented Powerpoint slides and a video of a ladder truck; addressed vehicles
parked too close to the intersection on Ridgewood Ter;
• she concluded: "I think 80 feet is a good compromise."
• said she spoke to the fire chief, that "he was fine with it";
• said she got the information to Mary Midura to modify the Ordinance to
indicate "80 feet" as it was going to the Ordinance Committee, having "solved
that one";
• added to her conclusion with "it definitely works for the longest vehicles in the
fire department,"i.e., the ladder truck;
• recapped the first Ordinance as "No Parking anytime, year `round";
• expressed confidence in that she thought the situation is "going to work."
2nd Ordinance
• Addressed subsequently "this Ordinance, the 312-103,"; said it was "our
conclusion from our last meeting" discussing No Parking certain times with
pick-up's and drop-offs as issues, restricting activity to the South Side of the
street, 8-9 a.m. & 2:30-4 p.m. and in conjunction with the"80 feet" Ordinance,
leading to Prospect Ave on "that side";
• wanted to show this to the TPC for the purpose of discussing and taking a vote
on it.
Discussion
• Chair Tacy clarified that the subject was "the first house on the right going up
the hill"; consensus, yes;
• Mr. Lowenthal clarified that parking is permitted on the north side of the street
except within the first 80 feet;
• Ms. Hanson added that the hope is parents will park on that side, referencing a
sidewalk near the school making it clear to children to use that side;
• Ms. Stein asked if it had to go all the way to Prospect, which she described as "a
long street."
• Ms. Hanson replied that if it didn't, the Police would be "pushing the problem
up"farther; acknowledged the neighbors objecting that parking situation was
already "tight";
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels concurred with the conclusion; suggested that any break
from all-day parking will essentially eliminate parking on the south side save
for "convenience runs";
5
• Ms. Hanson said on the other hand, some residents (citing one elderly lady)
want friends to park in front of their houses;
• Mr. Huntley sought clarification on whether the Ordinance should include
Sundays in its restrictions;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said that it's always No Parking for 80 feet; suggested that
at present TPC does not have the authority to modify "102,"in effect, "it's out
of our hands" and that it was going to Ordinance; follow up by clarifying "103"
is specific to the morning/afternoon times facilitating student transportation;
• Chief Sienkiewicz likened 102 to 118, and modified it to 80 before it's current
103;
• Ms. Hanson clarified 312-102 as No Parking Anytime up to 80 feet from the
intersection;
• Mr. Huntley clarified that 103 was No Parking on the south side during school
hours;
• Mr. Feiden said "this one goes from Zero to 80 feet, and this one goes from 80
feet to infinity";
• Mr. Lowenthal clarified that under no circumstances would there be any parking
on Ridgewood Ter within 80 feet of Jackson St;
• Ms. Hanson conveyed the Fire Department as being "very pleased to have that
area open."
MOTION, Mr. Freeman-Daniels, to Recommend; Seconded, Chief Sienkiewicz; Motion
Carried Unanimously.
5. "Except Bicycles" Sign on Church St near King St—Ruthy Woodring 8 High St,
Florence
• Said going north on King St and want to turn left onto Church and
discovering Do Not Enter signs for westbound traffic; inquired whether Except
Bicycles could be provided to allow bikers to proceed; wondered aloud if the
Do Not Enter signs meant the City doesn't know the street is no longer one-
way;
• acknowledged a personal desire to have bicycles be excepted as she often
wants to go that way; as the other way is more of a logistical hassle.
Discussion
• Chief Sienkiewicz assured Ms. Woodring that he was 99.999% certain Ms.
Woodring would not get ticketed if she did take the way she preferred; allowed
for the possibility that bikers might prove to be a traffic distraction merely by
complying with the apparent law;
• Ms. Woodring said she'd have a problem with taking that direction while
using her bike for work purposes;
• Chief Sienkiewicz provided a brief primer on a 5-year "quirky" history of
6
trying to satisfy the interests of competing constituencies, involving the city
complying by installing a pedestrian crossing light in exchange for not allowing
full access to that street;but reiterated that bikes were free to go that way
anytime they want;
• Mr. Lowenthal addressed a couple of points re: Ms. Woodring's suggestion:
1) the TPC plan is to call for "contraflow bike lanes," i.e., bike lanes with use in
the opposing direction to automobile traffic and restricted to bicycles only;
emphasized the overall goal as never to restrict bicycles when creating a one-
way street; suggested putting up an Except Bicycles sign is still a good idea as it
would send a message to both driver and biker that the City is bicycle-friendly;
• Mr. Huntley offered that Church St is a private way, not a public way;
• Mr. Feiden said Church St was not one-way, but that the sign reads simply
Do Not Enter;
• Ms. Bruce said it was one-way except the last 30 feet;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels asked Mr. Lowenthal if there was a list of streets he'd
like to see as contraflow;
• Mr. Lowenthal said it was a very short list;
• Mr. Feiden asked conversely if there were streets that shouldn't allow
bicycles;
• Ms. Woodring suggested that "it would look bad"if cyclists were seen as
flouting the Do Not Enter sign without the exception;
• Mr. Lowenthal said he has photo examples of other cities with Except
Bicycle signs posted;
• Mr. Hartwell pointed out that there were signs located behind the power
plant at Smith College warning bicyclists that cars were allowed on the path;
• Ms. Bruce—put it on future agenda?
Item Moving to Committee
6. Speed Humps: Union St—Michael Starr
• Mr. Starr was not in attendance;
• Ms. Hanson reading the following from the November 15, 2011 Minutes:
-- Mr.Huntley suggested a traffic study to assess the degree of speeding that occurs there
and types of vehicles;
-- Ms. Bruce expressed concern on making too quick a decision for fear that adjoining
streets would have to absorb the traffic and concern that the TPC isn't"just moving a
problem around";concurred with the need for a traffic study to be conducted;
-- Ms. Hanson pointed out that traffic calming devices have been put away for the season
because of the recent snow storm and other matters; said the soonest they could be brought
out again would be in April,though that she would put Union Street"at the top of the list";
• she confirmed her intent to pull the traffic counters out in April; said she'd try to
have something for the April meeting, perhaps having to do with installing a
temporary speed hump, have a traffic count, hold a neighborhood meeting;
• she added the neighbors were in favor, even offering to pay for it, although she
7
didn't know the protocol there;
• suggested TPC get in touch with the neighbors for the April meeting and that
she would have something to share;
8
Discussion
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said he would get in touch with the neighbors but added
he does believe a correction here means pushing the traffic onto other streets;
• Chair Tacy suggested to Ms. Hanson that she might prefer a May presentation;
• Ms. Hanson responded that the weather has made April a viable time, unless a
snow storm occurs, meaning then all bets would be off, said the neighborhood
representative was "committed to two speedhumps"; raised a concern of
pushing traffic onto other streets, causing traffic management to consider
putting speedhumps on parallel streets;
• Ms. Stein clarified traffic studies as focusing on both volume and speed;
• Mr. Lowenthal concurred with the consensus that redirecting traffic in the area
would not be altogether a bad thing, and if speed humps are so popular and the
public will pay for them, that's good too;
• Ms. Hanson suggested going into a greater detail on the kinds of speed humps
would be helpful at the next meeting; suggested to the Chair that the neighbors
be contacted and she would have something for them;
• Mr. Hartwell clarified that two sets of speedhumps would mean one on Union
St and the other on a parallel street,possibly Cherry St, to establish a base line;
said that moving speed humps to increase volume on other streets was "nice to
know."
To be continued...
7. Florence Parking
a. Background—Chair Eugene Tacy
• Said there were parking "issues," though not parking "problems"; one of which
are people who work in Florence parking in 1-hour parking spots "all day long"
(e.g., employees of the Cup & Top who park on Maple St all day); explained
that some business owners who don't have a lot of parking are trying to
persuade those who do to share their parking;
• said the"biggest holder of parking is one guy" (Mr. Shea) is his, quickly adding
"and he's right"; added some businesses have difficulty w/pkg;
• suggested Mr. Shea's son is more receptive and is talking to his father who is in
Florida;
• said the issue was first brought up by Steve Bracken, who owns an auto-repair
facility in the old Fiodor Building —(inaudible) Motors; described as "desperate
for parking" who rents a couple of spaces behind the paint store, owned by the
owner of the Florence Diner;
• clarified he was decidedly not suggesting putting meters in Florence;
b. Follow-up —Laura Hanson, DPW
9
• said the matter was brought to her attention when Jim Laurila asked if it could
be raised to the Tic's attention, and who could then formally ask DPW for study
of Florence parking;
• said she is certainly willing to work with the Florence Civic Association to
brainstorm, check out the parking situation;
Discussion
• Mr. Huntley said Dow's position depends on public attitude; wondered if the
idea is to build a public parking lot in Florence (Chair Tacy: "I don't know.");
• Ms. Stein said she'd be more interested if the Florence Civic Assn would come
to TPC w/data vs., say, the City providing the info;
• Mr. Feiden suggested a municipal parking lot in Florence would be pointless
unless there's a charge; added that other options include ticketing people for
parking more than an hour;
• Ms. Stein asked if the Lawyers/Bank had discussions about sharing parking;
• Mr. Huntley said the priority concern is to define the need after determining that
the need is those who need parking;
• Chair Tacy acknowledged Florence Savings as having "enormous parking";
added that he could dig around the subject with David Murphy some more;
noted the matter came to a head during the Mayor's luncheon at the Look
Restaurant;
• Chief Sienkiewicz wondered if the issue is using private property for public
parking, then why does TPC have jurisdiction; reminded TPC that there are
divided factions over the issue of bus stops;
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels summarized the matter to be either persuading the private
side to share parking or establishing pay public parking;
• Chair Tacy said he'll set up a meeting with the Florence Civic Assn;
8. Northampton High School Pedestrian Safety
a. PTO —Wendy Bernstein & Martha Green
• Ms. Bernstein said this is a follow-up on the traffic/pedestrian flow around the
high school, and with the goal of determining "how we move forward";
• clarified that Officer Henderson did attend a PTO meeting and issued a report,
well received by PTO;
• Ms. Green suggested the immediate challenge is to implement more safety
strategies for when students are coming & going in the morning & afternoon, "a
lot of people, a lot of cars"; suggested a uniformed officer in place at those
times would make a difference, raise awareness; alternatively, she added, there
just isn't enough room for all those vehicles in that period of time;
• Ms. Bernstein noted the challenge of getting 1,000 people into the school in 20
minutes in the morning, and for an expanded period coming out in the
10
afternoon;
b. Follow-up —Laura Hanson, DPW
• Ms. Hanson clarified that the report has been circulated; said she met with
Officer Henderson, the safety officer at NHS, and who was in uniform, and
noted drivers violating standing &parking restrictions right in front of them
(indicating an obstinacy to be overcome), now dubbed "an educational period";
said laminated "During Pick-up & Drop-off' to go with the"No Parking" signs;
said Officer Henderson wanted more signs before he started ticketing; said the
City has to maintain a presence;
• said she met with MassDOT along with Mr. Feiden; added their consensus as
being for DPW to file a Project Need Form (PNF) for that intersection; said she
proposed a pedestrian-activated traffic control light that would not run all day
but just during the peak times; concluded that it's something we need to look at
for the long term;
• floated the idea of another round-about,noting the prohibitive cost, let alone the
cost of a traffic light (ergo Mass Dot's involvement);
• said she would follow up with Officer Henderson;
Discussion
• Chair Tacy acknowledged the crunch/impact is at all the schools in the city;
• Mr. Lowenthal thanked Ms. Hanson and the PTO for their work on the matter;
said he would, however,prefer raised crosswalks ("putting the squeeze on") to a
traffic light (like at Smith College) to slow the traffic down more significantly
and reduce the chance of any fatalities due, say, to jay-walking;
• Ms. Hanson said she would provide data on traffic calming at a future meeting;
• Mr. Feiden weighed the touchy subjects of subsidizing people's rides to school
and ways to get people to pay for parking;
• Chair Tacy exclaimed surprise that bus fees generated less income then he'd
had thought; wondered whether closing up the roadway in front of high school
exacerbated the problem;
• Chief Sienkiewicz said closing the roadway reduced accidents markedly;
remarked the green space is being considered for a temporary parking space;
• Ms. Bernstein revisited the cause of this pursuit (accident a year ago);
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels wondered if a uniformed officer ticketed everyone who
pulled up in the area, then stopped, would they then just come right back(Chief:
"Guaranteed!");
• Chief Sienkiewicz said Officer Henderson is also school resource officer
(w/duties beyond traffic control);
• Chair Tacy asked if there was "a broad plan" to address the traffic/parking
problems at the high school; and recommended such a plan;
• Chief Sienkiewicz cited plans compiled during the renovation of the high
school, e.g., distinguishing between the park& drop-off from the Route 9 traffic
11
flow;
• Ms. Hanson agreed with the Chief re: a need to have enforcement; said the signs
would read "No Parking, Drop-off or Pick-up";
• Mr. Lowenthal said he wanted to make it so nobody could ever plausibly claim
"I thought it was okay to park here.";
• Mr. Freeman-Daniels said he thought it should read"No Standing, Drop-off or
Pick-Up
• Chair Tacy suggested to provide another spot for drop-off, maybe on Elm St;
• Ms. Hanson said she'd get to sign posting as a follow-up;
• Ms. Bernstein referenced crosswalk painting.
To be continued...
9. DPW Updates —Laura Hanson, Gary Hartwell, Owen Freeman-Daniels, Wayne Feiden
a. North St—Laura Hanson
• Said North St"is being designed," meeting, going out to bid; said the
neighborhood meeting on March 6'had a good turnout, about 30 people, good
feedback re: parking at the Sullivan Building; suggested the issue of sidewalks
on both sides elicited differing views; parking issues; supportive of raised
sidewalks; concerned about children on Lincoln St,how to slow the traffic
down;
Discussion
• Mr. Freeman Daniels said he saw no support for bike lane, although more
sidewalks were preferred;
• Ms. Hanson emphasized that it's worse during construction, digging up the
street; going to bid in April; predicted it would take about a year for the utilities,
and then get to the service; do the sidewalks at the same time; the utility poles;
parking at Sullivan building will be tricky.
b. Mr. Hartwell
• Business item: Bike path, Rail trail, obvious connection to the campus; meeting
on April 4'at 9 a.m.; visit the site; reconvene on Friday, 4/5;
Discussion
• Chair Tacy asked Mr. Hartwell to email the Commission with the Dates?
c. Mr. Feiden
12
• Meeting, voted to endorse three CP applications;
• 3 Projects:
1)Main St, Street Scapes,Crafts Ave,Main St intersections; looking at clusters;
Northampton is the 7 b highest"crash cluster"in the commonwealth;
2)Looking at doing a greenway on Damon Rd up to the boathouse;
3)Beaver Brook Bridge unused since 1964;
MOTION, Mr. Freeman-Daniels, to Endorse Three Projects Proposed for CPC Funding;
Seconded, Mr. Lowenthal; Motion Carried.
MOTION, Mr. Freeman-Daniels, to Adjourn; Seconded, Chief Sienkiewicz; Motion
Carried —5:57 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gregory P. Ammons
Johnson & Hill Staffing
13