|
City of Lincoln
Discussion on Elm Street delayed for another two weeks
[August 14, 2026]
At the Tuesday night Committee
of the Whole meeting of the Lincoln City Council one agenda item for
discussion was the proposal to amend a recently passed ordinance
pertaining to speed zones and one-way traffic on North Elm Street in
Lincoln from eighth Street to Tenth Street.
When the item came up Alderman Steve Parrot said that he was going
to be unable to attend the Monday, August 17th voting session. He
requested that the item be tabled until the next Committee of the
Whole meeting (August 25th) so he could be present when a vote was
taken on September 8th.
It was agreed that the topic would be carried over to the next
Committee of the Whole, but there was still discussion, starting
with public comments from two Elm Street residents.
Public participation is open at the beginning of each council
meeting. This week, Mayor Tracy Welch said there were two
individuals who wished to address the council, beginning with Laura
Williamson who lives in the 200 block of North Elm.
Williamson came to the speakers table and explained that she lived
in one of the two blocks that will be made one-way. She said that
she didn’t understand what was prompting the council to reverse what
she felt was the right decision. She asked the council to explain
their decision.
Welch opened the floor and asked if any alderman would address the
questions. Parrott was the first to speak.
He said that since the decision, he has heard from several people
who had similar complaints and were saying to come and look at their
streets, that they needed help too. He said it became very
complicated and raised the question about whether North Elm was any
worse than many other streets in Lincoln. Then, he went and looked
at a section of street on South Elm, below Fifth Street, and saw
that it was even narrower than North Elm and permitted parking on
both sides of the street, something not permitted on North Elm.
He said then he looked at traffic study done by the Lincoln Police
and the report from Police Chief Meister. The study showed that
there were very few accidents on that stretch of North Elm, and that
motorists are adhering to speed zones.
And finally, the council had heard
from citizens of Lincoln who expressed their displeasure with the
decision the city had made.
In all, the more it was considered, the less sense it made to adhere
to the previous decision.
Williamson asked if any of the people who complained lived on North
Elm and Parrott said yes. Williams said that not all of the
residents on Elm were against one-way and stop signs on that street,
and she felt like those who see the need are no longer being heard
by the council.
She said that no matter what reports say the street is dangerous.
She said where there is sidewalk, that walk is only 24 inches from
the street where vehicles are passing. She said it is dangerous for
her child and for herself when they go walking every night. She
added that when two cars are meeting on that section of street, it
would take just one wrong move for there to be a bad accident. She
also commented that with no parking, there is no buffer of parked
cars between the street and sidewalk pedestrians like there would be
on South Elm.
Williamson noted that the police traffic study said there were 700
vehicles on the street over a 12-hour period. She said there were
not 700 people living on Elm, so people were using that street as a
thoroughfare, even though it should not be.
She said that the police were busy she knew and could not be on that
street for 24 hours, but she knows there is speeding. She added that
animals get hit all the time, and it was just a matter of time
before a child gets hit. She asked that the council at least
consider lowering the speed limit and keeping stop signs on the
street.
Alderman Tim Becke spoke about his reasoning for the elimination of
stop signs in the overall plan. He said he had based his opinion not
only on personal experience as a claims adjuster investigating
accidents, but on the professional opinions of the department heads
for the city of Lincoln. He said those recommendations included
reducing the speed to 20 mph on the two blocks of North Elm, and
down to 25 mph on the rest of it. He said there was a recommendation
for one-way traffic from Eighth to Tenth, but no recommendation for
stop signs. He said he wanted to eliminate the stop signs because of
his personal experiences and the opinions of the resident experts.
He added that putting stop signs at 10th Street was a bad idea
because it would hinder traffic in the “pinch point” and the
ultimate goal should be to keep traffic moving through that area
without hindrance. He added that if stop signs come back into the
discussion, he will still vote against them.
[to top of second column] |
Williamson then
suggested that if there were not going to be stops at Tenth
Street, perhaps the intersection of Ninth and Elm could be a
four-way stop. She said there needed to be something there to
slow down traffic and that would help.
Alderwoman Robin McClallen said there was a plan to put new
sidewalk along Elm where there is currently none, so that would
eliminate pedestrian traffic in the street.
There was a second speaker who came to
the table. Bill Wilson lives in the 200 block of North Elm. Just a
couple of doors down from Williamson. He began saying that he had
spent the evening before watching the hours of past council
meetings, reviewing all that had been discussed regarding Elm
Street. He said what he noticed was that as the discussions
progressed from one meeting to the next, the topic became “more and
more convoluted until now we have a massive problem it seems like
compared to what we started with.”
Wilson noted comments that had been made by Welch about the topic
being “polarized” and from Alderwoman Rhonda O’Donohue that she
didn’t ever want to speak about Elm Street again. He said he could
see that the aldermen were tired on the topic, and he fears that
there will be a tendency to just throw up hands and go along with
whatever happens so as to escape the issue. He urged them not to do
that.
Wilson said regarding the belief that other streets in town have the
same issues, the two-block stretch of Elm is unique because of the
retaining wall, the narrowness, and the closeness of the houses to
the street. He said comments made about the one-way being
inconvenient for drivers should not be the primary concern, but
rather the safety of the neighborhood should take priority.
Wilson went on, commenting about the remarks that had been made
about drivers ignoring traffic control signs. He said that happens
everywhere in town and will continue to happen, but it will have an
impact on the majority.
He said he understood that there are bigger issues in town for law
enforcement than traffic on Elm, but the problem on Elm is still
real, and he wants the council to keep working on it. He said he
knows it is a frustrating topic, but it is still an important one
that needs the full attention of the council.
Wilson wrapped up talking about a particular vehicle that had blown
past his house offering an obscene hand gesture as he went by,
driving as fast as he could. He told the council he knows that the
topic has become a “monster” that has gotten out of hand, but he
asked the council to regain control of that monster and make a good
decision.
Becke asked Parrott to clarify what his eventual motion would be.
Parrott said he would move to amend the new ordinance to keep the
reduction in speed but do away with the one-way designation and any
suggested stop signs. Becke asked if the ordinance would be
rescinded entirely then a new ordinance proposed. Parrott said he
thought it would just be an amendment to the current ordinance. He
asked city attorney John Hoblit to clarify and Hoblit said yes, it
would only be a motion to amend. Hoblit went on to say there is no
mention of stop signs in the ordinance.
Alderman Kevin Bateman spelled out the change saying that the
reduction in speed would stay and the one-way would go away.
Welch commented that even though there may not be a mention of stop
signs in the ordinance there had been discussion and direction given
to add stops at Tenth. He said therefore “stop signs are still part
of the equation.
Hoblit said the agenda item could reflect elimination of stop signs,
but that would not be included in the official ordinance.
Bateman said he believed that
eliminating the one-way was okay with Laura Williamson, she was very
much in favor of reducing the speed. Williamson came back to the
speaker table and said if that was where they had to start she would
be okay with that. She added that she believes stop signs are
needed, but the council “has to do what they have to do.” She
indicated that reducing the speed might be the starting point with a
return to topic later to add more control to the road.
Discussion stopped there with the expectation that it will continue
at the August 25th Committee of the Whole with a possible vote on
September 8th. It should be noted that the 8th is on a Tuesday, due
to the Monday Labor Day Holiday.
[Nila Smith]
|
