Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Bikeways And Active Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission recommends separated Tom Nevers Road path option B3 to county commissioners after debate

2757227 · March 25, 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

After extended discussion about safety, property impacts and costs, the commission voted to recommend option B3 — a full separated bike path (option B) coupled with alignment Option 3 — to the county commissioners by an 8–2 margin.

The Nantucket Planning Commission narrowed competing designs for the Tom Nevers Road multiuse path and voted to recommend the committee’s preferred alignment — labeled B3 — to the county commissioners at its March 21 meeting.

Staff presented five alignment options: three alternatives (Options 1, 2 and 3) for the east-side segment between Milestone Road and Old Tom Nevers Road, and two alternatives (Options A and B) for the south-side segment between Old Tom Nevers Road and the road end. Option A would provide five-foot usable shoulders (bike lanes) on the south side; Option B would provide a 10-foot-wide separated multiuse path. Staff recommended A3 (usable shoulder on the south side combined with Option 3 on the east side) to reduce property and utility impacts, while the Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Committee recommended B3 (full separated path and Option 3).

Commissioners and many abutters debated safety, property impacts, maintenance, utility conflicts and likely project costs. Burns and staff said Option 1 avoids property impacts; Option 2 provides a straight 10-foot path but requires easements; Option 3 is a compromise with a 10-foot path and a four-foot buffer that curves behind utility poles to reduce easement needs. Estimated project costs range from roughly $4.7 million to $5.8 million depending on the chosen combination; staff said the higher estimates reflect easement acquisition and property impacts.

Several commissioners sided with BPAC’s safety-focused recommendation while others urged caution about takings, timeline delays and higher costs. Commission member John cited BPAC as subject-matter experts and said the commission should have a strong justification not to accept their B3 recommendation. Other commissioners urged phasing the project or adopting the lower-impact A3 approach to avoid prolonged easement negotiations.

The commission took individual preferences and then a formal count. The chair recorded the final vote as eight in favor of B3 and two in favor of A3. Burns said staff will present the commission’s recommendation to the county commissioners, where the ultimate selection of a preferred alternative and any right-of-way/takings decisions will be made. Burns also noted that staff will proceed with right-of-way documents and the takings process once the county commissioners select a preferred option and that voluntary donations of easements could shorten timelines while damages/takings would add cost and administrative steps.

Commissioners asked staff to post the materials to the project website and to continue outreach with abutters; staff will also supply maps and cost tables for the county meeting and for Town Meeting appropriation discussions.