Letters

At their last meeting, Southampton Village trustees heard ideas for significantly altering Somerset Avenue in order to decrease through traffic during the afternoon commute. Several things were notable.

First, all three plans closed a quarter-mile stretch at the north end of Somerset permanently for southbound traffic. Second, the plans were remarkably well-developed and detailed, despite this being the first public discussion, and despite the fact that a lengthy public process involving neighbors two years ago did not recommend or even seriously consider such a permanent closure. (Note to trustees: Didn’t the Pond Lane saga teach us to stop developing significant public works projects in secret?)

Third, and most importantly, was the question Trustee Roy Stevenson asked and the response he received. What impacts will there be to adjacent streets from the traffic displaced from Somerset? The village’s traffic consultant claimed they had considered this (without presenting or alluding to any data whatsoever), and then blithely said it really wouldn’t change things for adjacent streets.

If the consultant can make that traffic disappear, then (a) he should be a professional magician, and (b) the village should hire him full time to make traffic disappear everywhere. It is simply nonsensical to assume that this traffic will not migrate to adjacent streets, worsening safety issues for residents and pedestrians on those streets.

The vast majority of residents who spoke opposed the one-way closure and reminded the trustees that their responsibilities are to the entire community, not simply to grant one neighborhood what they want based on emotions or political sway.

The only speaker favoring the closure told the trustees that they needed to “do the right thing,” even if it was unpopular. Actually, the first job of the trustees is to balance the rights and needs of the entire community, even if it is not what a small minority demands.

Some obvious (and much cheaper and reversible) options exist. The first is to maximize fines for violating the existing prohibition on southbound use of Somerset during commuter hours, and to budget for, say, a month of all-out enforcement. Word gets around pretty quickly when wallets are involved.

Or perhaps a reflective gate with appropriate signage could be closed and opened every weekday; such a gate could swing back onto the village-owned right-of-way outside of prohibited hours.

Or what about installing two or three speed bumps on Somerset to reduce average speeds, as they have on Halsey Street and Lee Avenue?

Each of these options is simpler and cheaper than the construction work required by all three of the consultant’s proposals. They would also be easy to adjust going forward when the inevitable unforeseen consequences arise, a likelihood the consultant blithely failed to mention.

Rob Coburn

Southampton Village