The Arlington Massachusetts Board of Selectmen is scheduled to decide on February 27, 2012 whether to ask voters if they want a reduction from the current, de facto, four shared vehicular travel lanes to three or two travel lanes with two bicycle only lanes on Massachusetts Avenue from the Cambridge line to Pond Lane. I submitted the motion to the Arlington Board of Selectmen for the 2012 annual election and here are the reasons why residents need to be asked what they want on a ballot question:
- Four travel lanes can be safe. Arlington Center around where Mass Ave intersects Medford Street (Google map) is very safe and comfortable for pedestrians, including children from Arlington Catholic High School and St. Agnes grade school. Traffic speeds are low and appropriate, so four travel lanes do not automatically produce high speeds. The raised median gives pedestrians a safe place to stop after crossing half the road before finishing without waiting to have a walk signal and the right of way. This location also provides wider sidewalks, parking, and a dedicated turn lane. A safety improvement would be a less generous median width so that cyclists have more space to share on outer travel lanes. The Lake Street intersection could resemble this intersection, for safety and a more consistent look to Arlington’s primary artery. Both are 78 feet curb to curb.
- It’s important. Arlington’s main artery has operated as a four lane road for decades to many thousands of people every day. A change to fewer lanes for decades to come is a big change affecting many people and business, making it worthy of a town vote instead of just five selectmen . It is a larger issue than other ballot questions asked of voters previously, such as allowing the two movie theaters to serve beer and wine. Diminished capacity and longer travel times on Mass Ave can limit development options for the future. All too often, opportunities are rejected for creating too much traffic. Less traffic means less economic activity and prosperity.
- Residents have not been given a fair chance to be heard and counted. Various committees were loaded with more advocates than opponents, Selectmen have not responded to resident objections, and MassDOT has also ignored over 3,000 petition signatures and over 70% of business objection to travel lane reductions. Even a 2002 Vision 2020 town survey of roadway concerns resulted in traffic congestion and bottlenecks being the third greatest, while bike lanes were fourth least of 17! A ballot vote is the most accurate method to record what residents want, despite typical 30% turnouts. Electronic surveys like the current Vision 2020 one are an invitation to fraud, duplicate votes, and non-residents responding.
- A ballot question is overdue. The issue has divided residents and left many unsatisfied with local government, not just state and federal government! Personally, I lived in Arlington for 19 years, reasonably happy with local government. That changed after hearing about stupid plans for downsizing Mass Ave and feeling like I wasn’t being heard. Various groups who think they know what is best for people have schemed ten years for lane reductions. Its time residents are asked and debate to end.
- The Board of Selectmen, by asking voters, demonstrate that they want to best serve residents of Arlington in learning what residents want. They will also learn the answer and magnitude for each part of the town, the 21 voting precincts, further aiding them in policy decisions.
- Selectmen need to back their claims to MassDOT. MassDOT (Department of Transportation) has repeatedly asked the town if there was wide public support for their plan with bike lanes and fewer travel lanes following numerous letters and newspaper articles in the Boston Globe and Arlington Advocate. Each time, the town manager or senior planner wrote back that there was widespread support, and only a small, vocal minority opposed. This is despite never having a town wide survey or non-binding ballot question. MassDOT was also not told over 2,800 ballot signers opposed their plan. MassDOT accepted claims without proof, save 66 petition signatures and a few letters in favor. They are reconsidering.
- The cost of adding a ballot question to the town ballot is negligible. Selectmen cost taxpayers about $30,000 to hold town elections on a different date than primaries, thus incurring all the costs of an extra day of voting places, election workers, police supervision etc.. Due to redistricting, over 200 town meeting seats are up for grabs, so adding one ballot question is minor.
- Denying voters the opportunity to choose has harsh consequences. If Selectmen refuse to let voters express their wishes, Town Meeting can vote for warrant article 70 to put it on the ballot by the 2013 annual town election. Rather than having a vote too late to impact project plans, I have submitted article 69. This rescinds last year’s Town Meeting vote allowing Selectmen to acquire any needed property for the Mass Ave Corridor Project. Its the only power residents have over Selectmen. Projects can not be built before all needed land rights of way are owned by government entities. When the project plan matches what residents want, Town Meeting can again vote giving Selectmen the authority to obtain land needed for the project. Having to force Selectmen to do what residents want will delay the project. It would have been far better for Selectmen to do what residents want in the first place. Shame on Selectmen if they choose this path.
- If Selectmen give voters a ballot question and they choose bike lanes over shared travel lanes, I will accept that, and withdraw my two articles at Town Meeting. I will continue to advocate for improved safety in the plan with raised medians to protect pedestrians, on-demand high visibility crossing signals at crosswalks now without traffic signals, and other opportunities. The lane count issue will be settled.
- If Selectmen want to hurt residents beyond removing travel lanes and defy residents at Town Meeting, they could change the project plans to eliminate all needs to take land. That has the greatest impact on sidewalks, leaving most as is. Are having bike lanes that important? Who are Selectmen actually serving by denying residents fresh sidewalks? An election recall of Selectmen would then seem natural.
- Some background: In 2002, four travel lanes may not have fit if guidelines with wide parking and travel lanes were respected, despite many projects not observing them. This is a supposed justification for not offering residents a choice. In 2006, the state issued a revised set of guidelines where four travel lanes satisfy requirements. The town’s claims were never updated to reflect it and consultants at Fay Spofford & Thorndike continued to claim four travel lanes were not possible. An earlier version of their Functional Design Report used for the rejected, first 25% plan submission acknowledged four travel lanes were used every day, while a revised FDR downplayed the fact and tried to imply there was insufficient width. In 2011, engineers Howard Stein/Hudson presented design options for Arlington Center. Option one used even narrower lanes than would be needed in a four lane Mass Ave Corridor project. When asked about it at public hearing, the defended the widths as meeting guidelines.