Note to reader: This is section E of a 6 part report. To see the entire report click here.
THE FINAL REPORT IS AVAILABLE HERE.
Download this section as a PDF here.
E. Top Areas/Issues of Concern for Follow Up
During the series of meetings held as part of the Plan Update, a number of issues were raised that could not be addressed or fully resolved in the context of the project. This is a compilation of those issues that are recommended for PACTS follow-up.
- Regional, systematic approach to deploying ‘Share the Road’ signs. It is felt that these signs could be deployed in a more comprehensive and systematic way. (This item is included in the ‘Top Most Cost and Time Effective Regional Improvements.’)
- Re-visiting Roadway Design Criteria: Travel lane width, paved shoulder width, design speeds, clear zones, etc. The Maine Highway Design Guide and the AASHTO ‘Green Book’ are the most frequently used manuals for defining roadway standards. They also serve as the basis for many municipal road standards. Although flexibility in their application based upon engineering judgment is suggested, in many cases the defined standards do not fully reflect the context of the road (urban, suburban, rural) nor its adjacent land uses, and rely too heavily on functional classification for travel lane and pavement shoulder widths and design speeds. The cumulative effect is often unintended consequences such as inducing higher traffic speeds, higher construction and maintenance costs, physical and visual impacts on community character, etc.
- Bicycle Access on the Amtrak Downeaster. The Downeaster service currently limits the stations where riders can board with bicycles.
- Consideration/Adoption of a Complete Streets Policy. There is not a Complete Streets Policies in effect now to influence roadway design and/or funding decisions/priorities.
- On-road bicycle facility type selection. Recent efforts to implement bicycle facilities locally have sometimes been met with community push-back. A review of options and opportunities for different types of bicycle facilities under various conditions/ situations would be invaluable to avoiding conflict. The issues often revolve around narrowing or removing travel lanes and/or removing one or two sides of on-street parking to create the room for bicycle lanes or shared lanes/wide curb lanes. Impacts on transit operations also need consideration.
- Sharing rail corridors with trails or pathways: information and dialogue. Efforts to share rail corridors are done piecemeal and typically ‘re-fighting the fight’ with every proposal. A more systematic approach is desirable to gain quicker and better outcomes for all.
- The need for bicycle and pedestrian counts. There is no systematic program for counting bicyclists and pedestrians or for gathering, organizing and making available the data. Good data is essential for good decision-making and monitoring success.
- Travel demand management. Portland has recently adopted and implemented its TDM ordinance. Should this be a municipality-by-municipality approach or a more regional approach?
- Bicycle Safety, Education and Promotion. There are consistent calls for more and effective cycling related safety, education and promotion efforts for cyclists and motorists: What types of programs, who takes the lead and where will funding come from?
- More connectivity. Contemporary residential and commercial development in the region has generally done little to create an inter-connected street network. This disproportionately increases traffic on the region’s arterial and collector streets and limits bicycling and walking opportunities – how can we increase connectivity?
Next Section
