WORCESTER—While the city council this week punted a decision on the Mill Street redesign for at least another six months, one issue lurking between the lines in the hubbub of the should-we-shouldn’t-we debate was how involved the council should be in the layout of city streets in the first place.
While no speaker at this week’s council meeting took up the question explicitly, it was not hard to discern the tension in the chambers when discussion turned to At-Large Councilor Morris A. Bergman’s proposed order to unwind at least a portion of the contentious redesign of Mill Street, specifically by moving parking spots back to their original location curbside.
In an effort to make Mill Street safer for cyclists, the city last year halved the road’s travel lanes from four to two, and moved parking away from the curb.
In theory, the redesign creating protected bike lanes between the new parking and the curb will increase safety and make the city more welcoming to bicyclists.
The move is part of a larger effort in what Eric D. Batista describes as changing the “culture of transportation” in Worcester.
He noted that “changing a culture doesn’t happen with one project. It doesn’t happen overnight. It’s going to happen with multiple discussions and multiple years of creating this pathway for us to change the culture of transportation in this city.”
Batista’s comments expressed what was a clear sense of frustration at earlier comments by District 3 Councilor George J. Russell and a pointed jab at the perceived stubbornness of the city administration on the issue.
Russell lamented that similar work on other streets was already set to commence without further community or council input.
“There are some that would say that we should just leave it to the professionals…and some folks also say we shouldn’t listen to the professionals at all when they come in with opinions we don’t like,” he said, before defending the council’s right to be heard on things like the redesign of city streets.
“I, for one, am not ready to disband the traffic and parking subcommittee,” he said. “I’m not ready to disband this council. I think this council has a responsibility of being involved in the process.”
As examples, Russell cited council involvement in past road projects on Hamilton Street and near Worcester State University (which, he added, included a bike lane component), and pointed out the council had even had a chance to make recommendations for a state roadway project on Grafton Street.
As for Mill Street? “There was none of that with this item. None of that. I got serious issues with this type of plan going city wide…without having meetings, without notifying this council, because we don’t have an extra $2 million to spend on every street. We don’t have the money to fix the potholes…never mind to go around and redesign every street .”
The $2 million Russell mentioned refers to a grant awarded in March to Worcester’s Department of Transportation and Mobility earmarked for further improvements to Mill Street, to include expanded sidewalks, separated bike lanes, upgraded streetscapes, and better safety and traffic control at intersections.
In comments later that were clearly directed at allegations that the city administration had been ham-fisted with the Mill Street project, Batista pointed out that, for the moment, progress on Mill Street work rests in limbo until he gets a decision from the council (referring to Bergman’s order that was up for a vote that night).
“Everything that gets discussed here requires us to work together back and forth,” said Batista, “and yes, we’re not always going to see eye-to-eye on situations, but to be saying certain things, or calling people certain things or insinuating certain things about administration or individuals, that’s unfair. When we start pointing fingers and start saying things that are…not in support of what’s happening…or calling me stubborn—that’s a problem. Why? Because I haven’t moved on Mill Street because the council has yet to decide on Mill Street. I’m not stubborn, I’m waiting on the decision of the council to tell me to refer it back or not.”
The decision Batista was waiting for revolved around Bergman’s motion that would have moved parking on Mill Street back to the curb on the section of street that has already been redesigned. (Discussions about another 1.8 mile of Mill Street, and city streets in general, continue.)
Voting “yes”: Bergman, King, Colorio, Mero-Carlson and Russell voted “yes,” while Haxhiaj, Ojeda, Petty, Pacillo, Toomey, Nguyen voted “no.”
In his remarks, Batista said that, despite the changes to the street and two highly-publicized accidents (one of which killed 90-year-old Daniel Abraham in a February accident, and another in May that left a motorcyclist critically injured), the street is no more dangerous than it was prior to the redesign.
“The number of accidents on Mill Street has not changed from what’s happened previously,” he said. “Nothing has changed.”
Batista expressed his condolences to Mr. Abraham and his family, but also pointed out that there have been fatal accidents on roads all across the city
While he took “full responsibility” for an admittedly poor rollout of the Mill Street changes, he said “we’re not having conversations about changing [or] redesigning every street where we have a death.”
Batista lauded the council for “seeing the value of protecting lives in the city. Changing a culture doesn’t happen with one project. It doesn’t happen overnight. It’s going to happen with multiple discussions and multiple years of creating this pathway for us to change the culture of transportation in this city.”
Ultimately, it was a compromise order sponsored by At-Large Councilor Kathleen M. Toomey to leave the changes in place for the next six months in order to gather and analyze crash data that passed, 7-4.
Voting “yes”: Toomey, Haxhiaj, Pacillo, Nguyen, Ojeda, Petty and King voted “yes.” Bergman, Russell, Mero-Carlson and Colorio voted “no.”
Batista reported that, through the end of June 2024, there had been 20 crashes reported this year on Mill Street.
That number is commensurate with figures released by the Worcester Police Department that showed a five-year average of 19.6 crashes in the same period (excluding the COVID years of 2020 and 2021).
In addition to the Mill Street work, the city is also implementing Vision Zero, a nationwide strategy that municipalities sign on to with the goal of eliminating fatalities and severe injuries caused by car accidents through better road design and management.
Still, it’s been a tough sell to Worcester residents, and those who drive the street regularly. There is no shortage of people eager to share their displeasure with the change.
In a previous interview with The Worcester Guardian, Rachael Ellis, a Worcester resident who travels Mill Street daily, said, “I have noticed more crashes than usual. For many years people have treated Mill Street like a drag strip or play on their phones, slow merging into the wrong lane. I feel like it is still happening except there are parked cars now that stop them. I hope that they implement more signage about the changes, possibly at the beginning and end of Mill Street for people to become acclimated to the change.”
Holly Montero, a resident of District Five in Worcester, added, “As a driver here in the city and who visits people on Mill Street, it’s really awkward and quite nerve-racking to park in what feels like the middle of the street. I’m not convinced that the current layout and design of Mill Street is the right way to keep people safe.”
Ted Flanagan is a journalist, novelist, and paramedic from central Massachusetts. During his time as a newspaper reporter he covered courts and crime for the Eagle-Tribune in Lawrence and was a general assignment reporter in the Fitchburg Bureau of the Worcester Telegram & Gazette. He can be reached at ted@tedflanagan.com
