The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee on Nantucket voted on Dec. 19, 2024, to send a set of recommendations to the select board and town public-safety staff asking the town to remove numerous “nuisance” stop signs on multiuse bike and pedestrian paths while retaining stop controls at several crossings it judged to be major or hazardous.

The move follows the committee’s review of a spreadsheet of crossings compiled by member Michelle Kramer. Ian Goldin, chair of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, summarized the legal framework the group used in its deliberations, citing a 2021 provision the committee referenced as “Article 76”: “At any location in which a multiuse shared path intersects with or is crossed by a public or private way ... bicyclists, pedestrians, and other users in the path shall have the right of way, and any person operating a motor vehicle shall stop and yield such bicycles, pedestrian, or other user,” Goldin said in the meeting.

Why it matters: committee members said many stop signs on the path had become distractions that make cyclists ignore signs that govern truly hazardous crossings. The panel argued that removing unnecessary stop signs and replacing them selectively with clearer warnings or physical measures (raised crossings, altered pavement, or reduced sight obstructions) would focus attention on the places where a full stop is truly needed.

In the discussion, members described specific safety concerns that shaped their votes: sharp or blind-angle driveways, parking-lot exits that cross paths at shallow angles, heavy truck traffic near commercial feeders, and locations where overgrown brush limits sight lines. Laura Walters, a committee member, described one recurring hazard on the path: “I think one of the worst spots is that little dip that there’s a parking lot, like, right after North Pasture that is totally blind and people are going faster because they’re going downhill.” Other members recommended stronger visual warnings for cyclists and targeted roadway changes for motorists (more stop signs on vehicle approaches, brush trimming, or reconfigurations where feasible).

Formal actions recorded in the meeting included a sequence of motions accepting Michelle Kramer’s spreadsheet as the committee’s recommendation for removing nuisance stop signs on multiple paths, with explicit exceptions and provisos. The committee voted unanimously in favor of the spreadsheet recommendations presented at multiple points in the meeting; the votes preserved stop signs at several crossings the committee identified as major or as requiring additional infrastructure before removal.

Specific outcomes the committee recorded:
- The committee approved the spreadsheet recommendations for the Pulpus (Pulpit/Pulpus—name appears in the committee documents) path, with the caveat that certain intersections remain signed or be studied further for raised crossings or other physical changes.
- The committee agreed that Nobadeer Farm Road, New South Road and Tom Nevers Road should continue to have stop signs on the path at this time.
- The committee voted to keep stop signs at Bartlett Farm and Somerset and to retain a stop treatment at the end of the Milk Street Extension path; other crossings on the Cisco/Hummock Pond overview were marked as “remove” (hard no) or for later follow-up depending on line-of-sight, traffic type, and whether the crossing is a private driveway or a town road.

Members instructed staff to carry the committee’s recommendations to the select board and to coordinate with DPW and public-safety officials (police chief Casper was noted earlier in meeting minutes as having provided an opinion in a prior record). Committee members also asked staff to pursue clearer sign options under RMV sign guidance and to investigate physical treatments (raised side paths, speed-table style transitions, or revised vehicle approach controls) where simply removing a path-side stop would leave cyclists vulnerable.

What the committee did not decide: the panel deferred a final, islandwide signage strategy (how many and which types of caution/warning signs to deploy in place of removed stop signs) until public-safety staff can confirm which RMV-approved signs and pavement treatments are available and which changes DPW can implement. Members said they prefer caution signs or marked crossings in many spots rather than a total absence of visual warning, and they asked DPW to consider brush trimming and minor geometry changes where line-of-sight is poor.

Next steps: the committee’s recommendations will be forwarded to the select board and to DPW/public-safety staff for review and possible implementation. Committee members said they expect follow-up conversations on sign specifications, placement, and any required roadway or driveway owner actions.