Northampton commission reviews proposed "mill and overlay" edits to Complete Streets ordinance

The Northampton Disabilities Commission reviewed proposed edits to the city's Complete Streets ordinance that would narrow when sidewalks must be added during mill-and-overlay road resurfacing projects, and asked Department of Public Works staff for clearer wording and a revised order of sentences before voting.

Commission members said the draft clarifies three conditions under which sidewalks should be included for mill-and-overlay projects'when right-of-way is available, topography allows installation without significant cuts or retaining walls, and the work would not require alteration of drainage infrastructure'but they asked staff to make one highlighted sentence less confusing and to move language about short dead-end streets to the end of the exemption section.

The draft reviewed by the commission would require mill-and-overlay projects to "incorporate appropriate traffic calming measures, accessibility improvements, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities" and specifies that sidewalks shall be included when the three conditions above exist. Exemptions would be allowed when those conditions do not exist; additionally the draft contains a separate exemption for dead-end streets under 500 linear feet or serving 10 or fewer lots, where shared-street designs or other pedestrian-safety measures could be appropriate. The draft requires that sidewalk exemptions for mill-and-overlay projects "including due to lack of right of way, topography, drainage, or financial infeasibility" be presented to the Transportation and Parking Commission and the Disabilities Commission for comment.

Commissioners and staff repeatedly flagged one sentence that reads, "Exemptions when these conditions do not exist may be appropriate," saying it interrupts the flow and leaves the text ambiguous. Members recommended moving the sentence that requires presentation of exemptions to Transportation and Parking and the Disabilities Commission to the end of the section and relocating the example for short dead-end streets so the exemption logic reads more clearly.

Director Mish (DPW) had shared the draft and told commission staff the edits were proposed to help Transportation and Parking better categorize the reasons DPW sometimes cannot install sidewalks on resurfacing projects; the categories offered were "geometrically" and "financially" feasible but staff proposed wording that describes the geometric conditions specifically. Commissioners said the change does not alter the requirement that DPW present instances where the ordinance cannot be followed to Transportation and Parking and the Disabilities Commission for comment, but it does narrow when mill-and-overlay work would include sidewalks and clarifies reasons for exemptions.

The commission did not vote on the ordinance language at the meeting. Members agreed to ask Director Mish to clarify why the highlighted sentence was included and to present a re-ordered draft (moving the short-dead-end-street example after the exemption presentation requirement) for consideration and a possible vote at the next meeting.

Commissioners also asked staff to fix small editorial issues in the draft (for example the commission's name styling) and suggested splitting or reformatting some complex sentences for clarity.