Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Concord TAC debates revoking speed zoning to lower speeds and improve safety
Summary
Committee members and residents debated revoking outdated speed zoning and pursuing target-speed policy, engineering fixes and clearer signage to reduce crashes and enable pedestrian infrastructure such as crosswalks. TAC agreed to draft a memo to Public Works and engineering to begin the process.
A sustained discussion at the Nov. 14 Transport Advisory Committee meeting focused on Concord’s speed-zoning system and whether the town should revoke speed zoning to set lower, safety-focused target speeds.
A TAC member who has researched the issue described how historical speed studies created a patchwork of adjacent speed-zone signs that confuse drivers and can prevent safety installations such as crosswalks. The member said recent pedestrian fatalities in nearby Bedford underscored the urgency of rethinking how Concord sets limits.
Committee debate split on two points: whether changing posted speed limits alone will meaningfully reduce speeds without improved enforcement, and whether policy changes (revoking speed zoning) should be paired with engineering measures (road design, striping, bump-outs) to achieve reductions. Several members said both policy and engineering are needed; one member said policy changes are low-cost and worth pursuing immediately.
A resident, Kristen Tollfree, described a concrete example: a crosswalk request near Middlesex School has been stymied because the road segment is posted at 40 mph under speed zoning rules. Planning staff said the school is funding necessary engineering studies as part of permitting, and that some crosswalk changes are being handled through those processes.
Committee members agreed on a procedural next step: draft a memo to Public Works engineering (with TAC and public-works commission input) that outlines the committee’s findings and requests a coordinated evaluation, with the Select Board to be copied. Members volunteered to help prepare the memo and to follow up with engineering on legal parameters and whether a town-meeting bylaw amendment would be required.
The discussion also noted a separate, existing bylaw adopting 25 mph speed management in densely developed areas; any broad change will need coordination with the Select Board and possibly town-meeting action.
Next steps: members will prepare a joint memo to Public Works/engineering, coordinate with planning staff to map legal requirements (bylaw vs. Select Board authority), and propose locations for near-term engineering treatments and signage clarifications.
