Council votes to make Riverside Drive barrier at Elm permanent after mixed vote

The Lowell City Council voted to make the barricade at Riverside Drive and Elm Street permanent following public comment and council debate.

Residents and staff had offered competing views during a lengthy discussion. Pro‑barrier speakers noted substantial reductions in traffic volume and speed when the barrier was in place. As resident Steve Doyle said, "When the barrier first went in, it really overnight solved the volume of traffic and the speed of traffic," and cited traffic counts, saying earlier measurements found "4,000 cars per week" diverted and that a prior count recorded as many as 6,600 vehicles at Elm. Opponents urged a stepwise approach, suggesting the city try lower‑cost options — stop signs, speed tables and periodic police speed enforcement — before committing to a permanent closure.

Council debate weighed those tradeoffs: some members said the barrier best protected pedestrian and parking‑lot safety and had demonstrable effects on speeds and volume; others favored trying inexpensive traffic calming measures during the paving season and reserving the option to reinstall a barrier if speeds and volumes rose. After discussion a motion "to make the barrier at Riverside and Elm permanent" was made and seconded. The recorded responses in the meeting excerpt show Council member Eric Barkcus voting No, Council member Burl Barkus Yes, Mayor D'Vor Yes, Council member Salo Yes and Council member Ritzma abstaining; the motion carried.

Staff had reported placing a traffic trailer at multiple locations and provided updated counts. In describing the most recent data, staff said moving the trailer to Elm produced counts closer to earlier baseline figures (roughly 4,000 vehicles) and that a prior February count had been near 6,000. Staff recommended options including making the barrier permanent, installing speed tables, adding a stop sign near Mercer, or reopening with monitored, incremental measures.

The council framed the decision as a safety and equity tradeoff: proponents emphasized immediate reductions in speed and volume near residential driveways and school bus stops; opponents emphasized the value of a second downtown exit and suggested a trial period for speed tables timed with paving to measure effects. The council vote ends the immediate deliberation; staff and council members discussed follow‑up work to monitor Hudson Street and other downstream traffic effects.

Next steps: the city will implement the motion as recorded and the council indicated it will continue to monitor traffic counts and consider restoration of a barrier if trial measures fail to meet safety goals.