Lowell council presses ahead on citywide speed‑hump rollout, orders traffic studies for problem streets

Lowell City Council voted to pursue expanded traffic calming measures, including speed humps and targeted studies of problem intersections, after residents and several councilors described heavy speeding and school‑bus safety concerns in multiple neighborhoods.

Councilors moved or seconded several requests directing the city manager and the transportation/traffic engineer to evaluate specific locations — including the corner of Appleton Street near Lowell Auto Service and Staubert/Starburst Street (near Woodward Street) — and to bring back recommendations on signage, timed restrictions, three‑way stops, and removable speed bumps. Councilors also asked for a report on city receipts from traffic and speeding enforcement.

The council discussed a pilot speed‑hump program the city tested previously and the city manager said the council has $400,000 in free‑cash funding earmarked for traffic mitigation; the manager told council staff proposed a plan to spend roughly $200,000 this year and $200,000 next year to install speed humps in targeted areas. The traffic engineer, the manager said, will appear next week with a list of candidate streets and implementation timing.

Resident Jean Winn Macom, who spoke during public comment about Starburst Street, asked for sidewalks, a three‑way stop, and temporary removable speed bumps during warm months. "We have a huge amount of traffic coming down our street, speeding down our street," she said, describing school buses and children at bus stops exposed to fast‑moving traffic.

Councilors who represent neighborhoods with planned park improvements urged the traffic engineer to prioritize streets near parks and recent ARPA‑funded open‑space projects. Councilors also noted the city’s adoption of 25 mph neighborhood speed zones and said initial compliance has improved.

The council approved the motions by voice or roll call as recorded on the agenda; where a formal vote was recorded, the clerk reflected those ayes. The manager and traffic engineer were directed to return with a compiled list of proposed speed‑hump locations, cost estimates, and recommendations for time‑of‑day restrictions and signage.

If adopted, the plan will phase installations to balance roadway preservation schedules and to limit cut‑through traffic moving from one calmed street to a neighboring corridor.

Clarifying details: the manager said the city has $400,000 approved for traffic mitigation, with a plan to use about $200,000 this year and $200,000 the following year; the traffic engineer indicated a target on the order of roughly 200 speed‑hump installations over time, though “200” was presented as an approximate planning figure rather than a firm commitment.

Next steps: the traffic engineer will meet with council next week to present the candidate list and timing; the council asked that paving/localized roadway preservation projects incorporate permanent humps where feasible.