Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Safe Streets topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Safe Streets for All update: council outlines four priority improvements and funding split with RIPTA still pending

2874861 · March 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council and staff updated residents on a Safe Streets for All plan that focuses on two crosswalks, a path or cleared route to the ball field, and a speed enforcement camera; the project currently shows an 80/20 split with 20% possibly covered by RIPTA pending confirmation.

The Foster Town Council received an update on its Safe Streets for All initiative and the town’s four priority interventions: two crosswalks, a short sidewalk or cleared path to the ball field from the school, and a speed‑enforcement camera at the Route 6 and Route 94 intersection.

A council member said the project’s current cost split is 80 percent town and 20 percent potentially from the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA), pending confirmation. "The 20% can possibly come from RIPTA. We have to get clarification from RIPTA that they're actually gonna do the 20%," the council member said.

Staff and the police chief described the council’s four asks as: (1) a diagonal crosswalk across Route 94 (to shorten the walk), (2) a crosswalk across Route 6, (3) a short sidewalk/cleared path from the crosswalk to the ball field, and (4) speed enforcement at the Route 6/94 intersection. Signage and the potential for flashing school‑zone lights were also discussed; Rhode Island DOT said it would install signs but asked whether the town would maintain lighting components such as bulbs.

Council members noted Foster has essentially no sidewalks and that retrofitting sidewalks will be difficult. Staff said some measures under consideration may be lower‑cost alternatives (cleared pathways and signage) rather than full sidewalks. The council agreed to revisit the cost and design details and to pursue clarification from RIPTA and RIDOT on funding and maintenance responsibilities.

No formal vote was taken; council members directed staff to continue negotiations and return with cost estimates and DOT/RIPTA responses.