Letter from Perry Lubin regarding City Manager's Agenda Item #5 - Garden St_ is good as-is

1 Macomber, Jennifer From: Perry Lubin <[email removed]> Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2025 6:18 PM To: City Council Cc: City Clerk; City Manager Subject: RE: City Manager's Agenda Item #5 - Garden St. is good as-is To: Cambridge City Council My name is Perry Lubin and I live at 12 Gray Gardens East in Cambridge. I am writing to support the "City Manager's Agenda Item #5" in support of Option #1. The city got this right first time around. This is great project: I’m on that stretch of Garden - on a bike - every day with two kids and as-designed it’s an invaluable connection to Harvard square, the river, and Boston. Understanding some folks don’t agree, respectfully, the data developed and published by the city shows that the rationale for returning 2-way operation to that stretch of garden is so thin as to be nonexistent. I am also on Raymond and Linnaean on foot during the AM peak commute, I do not believe there’s been some unmanageable increase in volumes and all the published data that’s been shared supports the same conclusion. City staff prepared a nice clean analysis of the benefits and impacts of the 1-way operation on garden in 2023. The City’s most recent analysis, prepared in response to the Dec 2024 Policy Order was equally clear: • Making Garden Street 2-way for cars will increase queues, congestion, and gridlock at the Garden/Sherman/Huron intersection - There is no safe way to add 2 way vehicle operation to garden without a dedicated bike signal phase at Garden/Sherman/Huron • Making Garden Street 2-way for cars will reduce the safety of people trying to travel through that stretch roadway - The increase in conflicts with turning cars at busy intersections due to 2- way operation will endanger the most vulnerable users - like my 9- and 11-year old kids - that the city’s bike network is designed to protect. The council asked for options to be considered and presented: the report that results makes it clear that there city got this right the first time around. Options 2, 3, and 4 are all strictly worse for safety and traffic operation. I don’t believe that the folks pushing for changes to Garden Street’s configuration have actually thought through the safety implications of their proposal or, for example, considered the need for an extra signal phase and the inevitable congestion that will result. Finally, I fully support additional traffic calming on Raymond Street and elsewhere in the neighborhood - but the need for these measures long pre-dates the safety improvements on Garden Street. It’s misguided if not disingenuous to claim otherwise in the face of the published data. Thank you, Perry Lubin

2 On 03/28/2023 11:24 PM EDT Toner, Paul <ptoner@cambridgema.gov> wrote: I could not disagree with you more. Paul Toner Cambridge City Councillor Cambridge City Hall 795 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139 ptoner@cambridgema.gov [phone removed] From: Perry Lubin <[email removed]> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 9:45 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@CambridgeMA.GOV>; Huang, Yi-An <yhuang@cambridgema.gov> Cc: McKenna, Brooke <bmckenna@cambridgema.gov>; City Clerk <cityclerk@Cambridgema.gov> Subject: Garden st safety improvements I’m writing in opposition to policy order 2023 #23. I live on Gray Gdns and travel through this area several times a day. I think this is a great project. You've opened up a critical corridor for active transportation - my family and I really appreciate having safe, car- free access to Harvard Sq, the river, Boston, and beyond.

3 I have not observed anything like the widespread issues w. traffic congestion, speeding, etc. that've been reported at the various community listening sessions. I was glad to see the data collected and published by the city reveal that the impacts have in fact been modest. While those listening sessions often became sadly personalized, city staff remained patient & professional in the face of some wild hyperbolic attacks. And where my neighbors have pointed out more targeted, specific issues, I've been impressed by the department's rapid, practical responses. I'm writing to thank you once again for this excellent project and also to urge you to reject the calls to unwind part or all of what you’ve accomplished. In particular, returning two-way traffic flow to garden st between Linnaean and Huron and/or shifting both bike lanes to the east side of garden would compromise the safety benefits of the project as built. Finally, I fully support additional traffic calming on Raymond Street - but the need for these measures long pre-dates the recent safety improvements on Garden Street. It’s misguided if not disingenuous to claim otherwise in the face of the published data. Perry Lubin 12 Gray Gardens East