Springfield subcommittee hears safety case for closing parts of Wilburham Avenue; keeps item in committee

The General Government Subcommittee of the Springfield City Council discussed a proposal on Feb. 19 to discontinue two short segments of Wilburham Avenue adjacent to the Springfield College campus as a public-safety measure, but stopped short of sending the discontinuance to the full council for a vote.

Dr. Marybeth Cooper, president of Springfield College, told the committee the request is driven by safety concerns tied to recent campus development and pedestrian volumes. "We're not trying to control property," Cooper said, adding the college is not seeking to close Alden Street and that college leaders "come here for a dialogue and a conversation." Mike Chari, the collegevice president for administration, cited the college's incident records and an independent traffic study: "Therehave been more than 70 incidents reported" since 2010, he said, and the 2023 study found the "crash rates at those intersections ... far exceed state averages." Chari and college officials argued the discontinuance would reduce dangerous crossings without "materially" worsening traffic on surrounding streets.

The city's Department of Public Works director, Chris Signoli, described the discontinuance process and technical implications, including potential utility easements and property-line adjustments if the roadway is discontinued. Signoli confirmed the application as submitted covers the segment from King Street to Hickory Street, with Alden Street remaining city-owned.

Residents and neighborhood council representatives pressed for alternatives and stronger guarantees. Pernice Morris, who lives on Wilburham Avenue, said neighbors oppose the street change and urged that speed bumps, flashing signs or crossing guards be tried first: "We did not agree with it at all," she said. Esther Hudson, an Old Hill resident, asked for a written assurance that Alden Street would not be closed in the future. Several councilors echoed those requests and asked the college and DPW to return with a clear diagram of the exact segments proposed for discontinuance, sample barrier treatments and updated traffic-impact materials for neighborhood review.

Council members also raised fiscal and legal questions. The chair asked whether the city had discussed payments in lieu of taxes or other community benefits; DPW counsel warned that conditioning a discretionary discontinuance on a payment could raise legal issues and described quid-pro-quo arrangements as inappropriate. College and DPW staff said they had met with neighborhood groups in 2024 and would circulate the 2023 traffic study again.

Rather than advancing the discontinuance to the full council, the subcommittee voted to keep the item in committee to allow further outreach to Old Hill and Upper Hill neighborhood councils, to receive clarified diagrams and to consider additional traffic-calming options. The committee also scheduled further subcommittee work before any council vote. No formal vote was taken on the discontinuance itself.

What happens next: the college and DPW were asked to supply clearer maps showing the exact segments and proposed barriers, circulate the 2023 traffic study to council members and neighborhood councils, and return to subcommittee for additional discussion. A follow-up subcommittee meeting and neighborhood briefings were planned before any decision would reach a full council agenda.