Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Road Safety And Traffic Calming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board asks DOT for conceptual plans after Route 4 safety concerns
Summary
Board members and residents discussed a Maine DOT report on Route 4, passing zones and speed limits; the board voted to ask DOT for conceptual drawings and cost information to consider traffic-calming, sidewalks, lighting and gateway treatments.
Old-business discussion on Route 4 focused on safety at the Highland Overlook Association entrance and adjacent passing zones after an earlier Maine Department of Transportation (DOT) study that recommended signage but not a speed reduction.
Town staff member Joe summarized DOT’s response and said DOT had affirmed its original determination but welcomed partnership on traffic calming. Joe read from the DOT response and told the board DOT “did not make any changes to speed limit” and had proposed sign and pavement-marking changes. Residents described limited sight lines, the proximity of a short passing zone and differences in speed — with “50” cited as the higher posted speed and 40 as the lower segment.
Board members and residents debated options other than changing posted speeds. Suggestions included improving individual driveway approaches, trimming sightlines, adding signage such as a “village zone ahead” sign, and removing a short passing zone DOT identified as about “500 feet.” Several board members noted that DOT’s study did not find a need for additional changes but offered partnership on cost-shared improvements such as sidewalks, lighting and landscape gateway treatments.
The board voted to have staff contact the DOT planner to request conceptual plans and initial cost estimates for possible traffic-calming measures, with the motion to reach out made by Jim and seconded by Keith and approved by the board. Joe said an initial discussion with the DOT planner would be free and could produce renderings to inform budgeting; staff noted past studies had costs approaching five figures and that construction would be additional and typically cost-shared with DOT in some programs.
Board members asked staff to prioritize low-cost visibility and signage measures first and to return with conceptual drawings and budget ranges for further discussion. The board did not request a formal speed-limit change at the meeting; the next step is preliminary DOT coordination and conceptual options for the board to weigh.
