City Council

City of Salem, Massachusetts “Know Your Rights Under the Open Meeting Law, M.G.L. c. 30A ss. 18-25 and City Ordinance Sections 2-2028 through 2-2033.” The City Council Committee on Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs Co-Posted COW___________ met in the Council Chamber on _Thursday May 7, 2020_________________________ at ______6:00________P.M. for the purpose of discussing the matters(s) listed below. Notice of this meeting was posted on ___ May 5, 2020______________ at ___ 3:51 P.M.___________________ (This meeting is being recorded) ATTENDANCE ABSENT WERE: None. SUBJECT(S) #241 Amending Traffic Ch. 42 Secs. 75, 51 & 56 relative to Gedney St & Holyoke Sq #424B Amending Traffic Ordinance Ch. 42 secs 57C, 51B, 74 & 56 relative to Holyoke Sq. & Gedney St #739 Amending Traffic Ch. 42, Secs 50, 74 & 17A relative to Crosswalks #294 Amending Traffic Ordinance Ch. 42 Sec. 50A Handicap Zones #246 Amending Ordinance Ch. 2 Traffic & Parking Commission and Traffic Ch. 42 Sec. 50A Handicap Parking Also present: Councillors Riccardi, Dominguez, and Hapworth. David Kucharsky, Director Traffic & Parking; Nick Downing, Assistant Director Traffic & Parking. #739 Amending Traffic Ch. 42, Secs 50, 74 & 17A relative to Crosswalks. Kucharsky: This was proposed by Salem Police Department to improve safety of crossings and add more buffer from parking to improve visibility of pedestrians. C. Madore: this is one of the top issues in Ward 2, many close calls between pedestrians and cars because problematic visibility. C. Prosniewski asks about impact to parking spaces. Downing: Loss of parking would be minimal. Currently parking within 20 feet of street corners already prohibited, applies to all intersections. Without the addition of 10 feet parking prohibition from crosswalks enforcement cannot take place. C. Dibble: Does this apply only to the side for oncoming traffic? Downing: as proposed, yes. C. Prosniewski would like to see a list of crosswalk locations where this would be impacted. Kucharsky: the list will need to be generated for implementation if the ordinance is adopted. C. Prosniewski notes there are more suburban areas in Salem where mid-block crosswalks exists and this prohibition and loss of parking would not be necessary. C. Sargent: the loss of parking would be too great. C. Prosniewski moves to keep the matter in Committee until we can get an inventory list, seconded by C. Sargent. C. Morsillo notes that the matter was brought forward by the Salem Police Department out of safety concerns. C. Madore: Loss of life is more concerning than loss of parking spaces. C. Riccardi: Asks about the logic behind the $25 fine for violation. Kucharsky & Downing: There are efforts to increase parking fines that was submitted to Council and before this Committee. If adopted the changes would apply to this ordinance. C. Dibble: The list of crosswalk locations already exists. C. Madore: There are a significant number of matters before OLLA (31 as of this evening) and would like to move items out for a full vote. Proposes to refer this out positively and provide input on the crosswalk list prior to second and final passage. C. Prosniewski agrees and withdraws his motion. C. Dibble moves to refer the matter out of Committee with recommendation for adoption, seconded by C. Morsillo, 5-0, motion carries. #241 Amending Traffic Ch. 42 Secs. 75, 51 & 56 relative to Gedney St & Holyoke Sq C. Dominguez would like additional business outreach to assess possible negatively impact. C. Morsillo would like to understand why change the diagonal spaces by Post Office from 30 minutes to 2 hours. Downing responds that this was done to minimize Post Office workers from parking all day. 30 min untimed spaces are hard challenging to enforce. The proposal was in response to feedback from businesses and residents in 2018. C. Hapworth asks how this would impact parking longer term? Kucharsky responds this might move people to garage near by but hard to say. C. Sargent asks if Holyoke Square be used as overflow parking during weekends for residents with visitors. Kucharsky responds the meters are not enforced on Sundays. The proposal brings consistency especially for enforcement in the area. C. Dibble: Asks if residents on Gedney Street Court would be eligible for proposed resident sticker parking on Gedney Street. Downing responds this was not written into the proposed ordinance changes. C. Dibble moves to add Gedney Street Court residents are eligible for resident stick parking on Gedney Street, seconded by C. Sargent, 5-0, motion carries. C. Madore asks Kucharsky and Downing to return to Committee with revised proposal in response to feedback on parking spaces at Post Office and business community outreach. C. Dibble moves to keep the matter in Committee, seconded by C. Sargent, 5-0, motion carries. #424B Amending Traffic Ordinance Ch. 42 secs 57C, 51B, 74 & 56 relative to Holyoke Sq. & Gedney St C. Dibble moves to keep the matter in Committee, seconded by C. Sargent, 5-0, motion carries. C. Morsillo leaves the meeting at 7:33 pm. #294 Amending Traffic Ordinance Ch. 42 Sec. 50A Handicap Zones C. Madore explains that the process of granting a handicap parking space is too lengthy and a few of her constituents who needed this due to disability or terminal illness have passed away waiting for installation. Would like to see the authority of granting handicap spaces move to Traffic and Parking Commission instead of City Council. Kucharsky asks for clarification if this is for both Ch. 42 Secs 50A and 50B, C. Madore says yes. The proposal also includes changing “handicapped parking” to “accessible parking”. C. Prosniewski would like to know whether adoption of this would keep the same process in regards to approval, especially for Salem Police Department consultation. Kucharsky and Downing pointed out the proposed language change would keep the same process and was submitted in the materials to the Committee with order #246. C. Dominguez not comfortable with changing authority to traffic and parking commission, would like to understand why the commission was assembled in the first place. The Traffic and Parking Commission is not an elected board and should not be making these decisions. C. Dibble, C. Prosniewski, C. Sargent agree, add that the process can speed up by giving police more authority; they can already put up a sign. C. Madore says the police still has to go before Council to put up short term signs. The process can be sped up but first step is still waiting for Council to act. Police officers are not elected officials either. Downing clarifies the proposal is to let Traffic and Parking Commission have the ability to make changes to the locations where the spaces are but the ordinance will still be in effect. C. Dibble moves to change “handicap parking” to “accessible parking” and allow SPD to install temporary signs for a duration of 30, 60, or 90 days, seconded by C. Sargent. C. Madore notes this evening’s meeting agenda is missing the matter to add proposed changes to sec. 50B and need to be added so we can discuss the full package of changes at a subsequent meeting. C. Dibble withdraws his motion. Public Comment Eric Papetti, 11 Simonds Street, Vice Chair Traffic and Parking Commission: Appreciates the partnership between the commission and City Council. Urges Council to consider allow moving some of the regulation to commission to lessen the volume of work Council has on traffic and parking so the body can focus on other priorities. Notes that there are many boards that are not elected and still makes important decision. C. Dibble moves to keep the matter Committee, seconded by C. Sargent, 4-0, motion carries. #246 Amending Ordinance Ch. 2 Traffic & Parking Commission and Traffic Ch. 42 Sec. 50A Handicap Parking No action taken on this matter. On the motion of C. Sargent the meeting adjourned at 8:03 P.M. Christine Madore, Chair