CITY OF NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

125 Locust Street Northampton, MA 01060
413-587-1570 Fax 413-587-1576 Edward S. Huntley, P.E.
Director

Memorandum
To: From: Mayor David J. Narkewicz Edward S. Huntley, P.E., Director James R. Laurila, P.E., City Engineer May 24, 2012 North Street Neighbors Letter of May 20, 2012

Date: Re:

At your request, the following is the DPW's response to the North Street Neighbors letter of May 20, 2012 that was delivered to the Mayor's Office on May 21st. 1. Letter: The lack of due process. Due process was followed. It is unclear that there was a requirement to provide for the neighborhood to analyze and comment on the final design plans. There were two public informational meetings held (June 10, 2010 and March 6, 2012) at the Bridge Street School for this project where the design plans were presented and discussed with the public. There was also an online traffic calming survey made available to the public for three weeks (October 1, 2010 and October 22, 2010) that was coordinated between a previous City Councilor and the DPW Traffic Engineer. Input from the public has been encouraged and received by the DPW, and the Engineers have done their best to respond to overall neighborhood concerns and include constructive suggestions wherever possible. 2. Letter: The lack of a well-defined parking ordinance for the full length of North Street. This assertion is not accurate. a. The plans call for removing non-compliant (illegal) parking in front of the DA Sullivan building. We described our plan to Mr. Sullivan over the phone, and he did not object. He declined an offer to meet in the field to discuss the final design. No other business parking is being removed. b. The final design calls for less, not more, on-street parking. Approximately 14 on-street parking spaces are proposed for removal (pending City Ordinance approval), primarily to ensure pedestrian safety at all existing and new crosswalks. David Newton requested removal of two

parking spaces on each side of his busy commercial driveway entrance (#211) to ensure driver visibility. As per his request, the DPW is proposing one parking space be eliminated on each side of this driveway. c. In addition to the many other measures that are part of the design, on-street parking promotes traffic calming. 3. Letter: The absence of any rationale for determining which segments of North Street will receive upgraded materials in pavement and curbing. The question does not clearly state what upgrades are being referred to. a. All segments of North Street are receiving upgrades in utilities, pavement and curbing. In response to public input, full depth reconstruction will occur for the entire length of the project. b. Existing granite curb on the Market Street end of the project is being removed and reset, and new granite is proposed along this segment where it is currently cast concrete. Concrete sidewalk is proposed along this stretch of granite curb and is seen as an affordable extension of the existing concrete sidewalk on Market Street, the area closest to the center of town. c. All intersecting curb radii are proposed to be new or reset granite. This is an upgrade throughout the project. These curbs take the most abuse from plows and traffic. d. All driveways are proposed to have granite curb corners. Only some have them now. This is an upgrade for consistency throughout the neighborhood. e. Bituminous curb is an economic decision. The low bidder costs for curbing are $6/LF for bituminous and $32/LF for granite, more than five times (5X) the expense. 3,300 LF of bit curb is required. If this were changed to granite it would be an additional $85,800. 4. The lack of an explanation for the DPWs decision to create parallel sidewalks on North Street. It is not clear that there was a consensus at the public meeting for upgraded sidewalks rather than more sidewalks. Numerous people spoke in favor of sidewalks on both sides of the street, including several follow-up emails supporting additional sidewalks. a. The Northampton Transportation Plan supports the construction of sidewalks on both sides of the roadway for safety and to encourage pedestrian activity. b. There is approximately 3,600 LF of existing sidewalk, and the plan calls for approximately 1,400 LF additionally for a total of 5,000 LF. This is approximately a 40% increase. c. Bituminous sidewalk bid price is $70,000 for 400 ton. This converts to $16.92/LF. Concrete sidewalk was bid at $34/SY or $18.89/LF. Surprisingly, the bid price for concrete sidewalk is reasonably competitive with bituminous. About 3,600 LF of bituminous sidewalk is proposed. Upgrading to concrete would be premium of about $7,000. d. Further analysis of the bid prices from the Contractor indicates that concrete sidewalk ($18.89/LF) with granite curbing ($32.00/LF) would cost $50.89/LF. In comparison, bituminous sidewalk ($16.92/LF) with bituminous curbing ($6.00/LF) would cost $22.92/LF. Using the 2012 bid prices, Bituminous Sidewalk/Bituminous Curbing is 45% of the cost for Concrete Sidewalk/Granite Curbing. If this sidewalk/curbing upgrade were incorporated to the North Street Construction Project, the cost differential of $27.97/LF for Concrete Sidewalk/Granite Curbing for approximately 3,000 FT would cost an additional $83,910.