Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-04-WALKS-minLexington Sidewalk Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 4, 2013, 9 AM Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office Building Present: Judy Crocker ,Mary HosmerFanucci, Bettina McGimsey, Francine Stieglitz, Jerry Van Hook; Members absent:, Jeanne Canale, Francine Stieglitz;Liaisons: Hank Manz(BOS), Marc Valenti (DPW), Elaine Cell (Transportation); Guests: Dave Cannon (DPW), John Livsey (DPW),residents of the Winthrop Street neighborhood (a scanned copy of the sign -in sheet appears at the end of these minutes) The meeting of the Sidewalk Committee (SWC) was called to order at 9:08 AM by Judy Crocker. Discussion of Resident Sidewalk Installation Guidelines: Ms. Crocker opened the discussion of meeting by first asking all present to introduce themselves. She then moved to the discussion of the Resident Sidewalk Installation Guidelines, noting that the goal of this part of the meeting was to focus on the substance of the Resident Sidewalk Installation Guidelines. She pointed out that the discussion of the Winthrop Road petition process during the February 2013 SWC meeting had disclosed an issue with how abutters are notified about a sidewalk petition. This further raised the issue of the difference between a public hearing, which requires abutters to be notified by the Town, and a regular meeting of a Town committee that residents can attend and voice their concerns. Hank Manz suggested that the process by which the Town considers a project, such as a sidewalk installation, has to be commensurate with the level of project being considered. To require a hearing process for small projects, which he noted Winthrop Road fit, would forestall any progress on doing anything. His suggestion was that the Board of Selectmen (BOS) would need to review the sidewalk planning process and determine how to address this issue.It was noted that this process is outlined in the Resident Sidewalk Installation Guidelines, which were submitted to the BOS in May of 2011. Jerry Van Hook noted that the role of the SWC is to determine whether a sidewalk ought to be installed.Said decision is merely advisory to the BOS and non - binding. The SWC has a Master List of sidewalks that are prioritized by a number of criteria including condition, connectivity, and materials. From that list the greatest need is determined for ongoing maintenance, repair, and installation of new sidewalks. The list is reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis. Placement of sidewalks is determined by Town Engineering. Ms. Crocker noted that, at that point in the process, abutters are formally notified of the sidewalk. The discussion turned to revising the Guidelines. Ms. Crocker noted that Francine Stieglitz had suggested that the 2nd meeting referenced in the 3r step of the Guidelines should perhaps be a public meeting. Then ensued a discussion of the process for the Roosevelt Road sidewalk. Ms. Crocker said that the first meeting regarding this sidewalk was, per her recollection, advertised through the Hastings Elementary PTA, as well as in the Minuteman. Mr. Manz noted that it is critical that word is gotten out through venues that reach a wide range of people, not just families with children in the schools. Various communication modes were mentioned, including Global Connect and the Code Red system. None were deemed appropriate to reach everyone or for the task. Mr. Manz noted that the BOS will take notification as an action item and will review the Resident Guidelines with that in mind. John Livsey, Town Engineer, stated that not all sidewalks go through the SWC or through the petition process. Many sidewalks are installed as part of road construction, funded either by the Town or through other sources such as the State. The notification process of direct abutters is similar to what has been done with Winthrop Road: prior to construction Engineering meets with abutters to discuss the process and what will be done. At this point, the discussion was opened to audience members to share their thoughts. Catherine Bauer, 44 Winthrop Road, stated that the Conservation Commission (CC) has an established procedure to keep people apprised of what is happening with its work. Ms. Crocker noted that the CC is a regulatory board with the purview and ability to do that. One attendee (who did not state their name) said that a need must be established for a sidewalk by collecting data and documenting the need. Another audience member then asked for the number of sidewalks that the SWC had worked on. Dan Krupka, 40 Winthrop Road, recommended that the SWC look to the process the Transportation Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) uses to work with residents who want to install signage, etc. He also noted that the default solution for issues on a street does not always have to be a sidewalk; there should be a process that results in a mediated settlement. Barry Fanburg, 20 Sherburne Road, seconded this comment. Marion Krupka, 40 Winthrop Road, stated that the SWC petition process is for asking for a sidewalk, not a process for deciding the sidewalk is necessary. Steve Perry, 28 Winthrop Road, asked what the impact would be of asking people to take a different route to school, as opposed to having to install a sidewalk. Catherine Bauer, 44 Winthrop Road, noted that her primary issue with the process was why she was not notified. Alex Bonner, 37 Winthrop Road, recommended that a cost/benefit analysis be done. Is the cost work the number of people who would use the sidewalk? Another resident asked if sidewalks were being installed, why wouldn't they go on both sides of the street? Trish Green, 7 Winthrop, stated that were the sidewalk to be built, people would use it. Norma Currie, 20 Winthrop Road, said that she believed there was never a serious attempt to contact everyone on the street. Jane Fanburg, 20 Sherburne Road, noted that there was an issue with transparency. She further stated that Winthrop Road is not just a sidewalk issue,but also a traffic issue. School buses are speeding on the street. Another audience member noted that this is the first year that there are so many buses traveling down Winthrop. At this point, members of the audience there for Winthrop Road left the meeting. Dave Cannon stated that all sidewalks are brought to the SWC for their review, whether they have originated through the petition process or not. Mr. Manz noted that all sidewalks should go through a single process of abutter notification, regardless of how the need for the sidewalk is determined. Additional comments regarding the Guidelines were made: 1) People who are either for or against a sidewalk should be encouraged to contact the SWC either in writing or via email. 2) The notification process should explained as to how and when it will be done. 3) The SWC should ask Engineering for the warrant analysis and a feasibility study. Judy Crocker noted that action items were to: 1) Get the TSAC flowchart to understand their process. 2) Raise this issue to the Transportation forum as a discussion point. 3) Ask the BOS to think through the notification process. 2. DPW Update: Dave Cannon noted that he will be submitting paperwork to the Conservation Commission regarding Winthrop Road on Wednesday, March 6 They would consider the application at their 3/26 meeting. This will generate notification of Winthrop Road abutters. Should this application be delayed, Winthrop Road would not be able to be part of the bids that Mr. Cannon is submitting for the work on Waltham Road, resulting in an increase in the cost of the project. Mr.Valenti noted that he will be doing the second phase of the Lincoln pathway — from the back corner of Lincoln Field down to Middleby Road and also up Baskin Road. Construction should start after Patriots' Day. He will also work with Engineering to determine the roads that will be done for the next fiscal year. Mr. Manznoted that people have asked that the boardwalk near Forbes be plowed; however, that is under the jurisdiction of the State. He also raised the issue of the signs at Roosevelt and Wilson. Mr. Valenti said that the signs could be moved, but that might cause some issues with abutters. Mr. Manz noted that neighborhood residents may come back to the Town to try to have stop signs put in. 3. Correspondence Log: An email was received from Sergey Naumovwho noted a problem on the Worthen Road sidewalk. Mr. Valenti inspected and there were no issues. A second email came from Ken Walker who noted the need for plowing in the vicinity of the pedestrian light at the intersection of Lowell Street and East Street. This intersection is not part of the Town plowing schedule — yet there is a T stop and a pedestrian crosswalk there. Mr. Valenti noted that his crew will try to get rid of the snowbanks so that folks can reach the pedestrian light button. 4. Safe Routes To School Update: Ms. Crocker noted that Dr. Ash had encouraged families to drive to school on a recent snowy day. Some people construed his comment to mean that buses were not running, but that was not the case. She also noted that she will be submitting an article to the Minuteman regarding bus safety in response to a recent bus accident. Finally, signage on school property at Hastings, Bridge, and Bowman has been codified and can now be enforced by the Police Department. The intent is for this to happen at all Lexington schools. 5. Lexington Bike Walk `n Bus Week (May 5 -11): Ms. Crocker noted that Safe Routes will have participate with a program on Thursday which will include a bus tour. She also noted that the end date for the first phase of bus registration is May 11. 6 Updating Master Sidewalk List: Mr. Valenti said he was still working on this. 7. New Business: The Town Appropriations Committee has asked for input from the SWC regarding the sidewalk on Concord Avenue. It was noted that the committee was not in a position to vote on this until we examine our past records regarding discussions of Concord Ave. Sean Osborne is interested in joining the SWC. Mr. Van Hook noted that one of his neighbors had also expressed interest. Jeanne Canale will be unable to attend meetings until May due to a professional conflict. 8. The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 AM. The next meeting of the Sidewalk Committee will be April 1, 2013, at 9 AM in the SMR. Respectfully submitted by, Bettina McGimsey 6gcakd L-#,- I �) Dvde CC)a Il C U�nlrn JWk I" �4ti�F A r-A/,/4� -7dr- 4L P, I kIr l ' fl.A !' t it , 34 Fe f r .-.7oF Aj" IT r� :; (A), . r2d