Project No.: 52049.00: / 2
Transportation
Land Development
Environmental
S e r v i c e s
/ Six Bedford Farms Drive, Suite 607
Bedford, New Hampshire 03110-6532
Telephone 603 644-0888
Fax 603 644-2385
www.vhb.com
Meeting Notes
Attendees: / Leighton Cooney - Office of the GovernorChris Mann – MaineDOT
Bruce Van Note - MaineDOT
Marty Kennedy – VHB
Dale Abbott – VHB
Dave Wilcock - VHB
Carol Morris - Morris Communications
Public – See attached attendance sheet / Date/Time: / March 30, 2010
7:00 – 9:00 PM
Project No.: / 52049.00
Place: / Brunswick Middle School Gynmasium / Re: / Public Informational Meeting #4
Notes taken by: / Carol Morris
The meeting began at 7:08 pm.
Mr. Chris Mann introduced himself as the Maine Department of Transportation Study Manager, thanked everyone for attending, and introduced Mr. Marty Kennedy, Study Manager for the consultant team (VHB, RKG, Gorrill-Palmer, Morris Communications, Nobis Engineering, and TechEdit).
Mr. Kennedy said that this was the fourth in a series of public meetings on the NASB Transportation Study, and that this study is managed by MaineDOT in association with the towns of Topsham, and Brunswick, MRRA and the Office of the Governor. He showed a slide indicating the names of the Advisory Committee and one of the study website: Mr. Kennedy emphasized that the study includes a feedback section that allows the public to provide comments directly to him and encouraged meeting attendees to take advantage of the site.
Agenda
Study Purpose
Study Schedule
Purpose and Need Statement
Future Conditions
Public Input
Alternatives to be evaluated
Mr. Kennedy said there is much to cover on the Alternatives to be evaluated, so that is where we will spend most of our time.
Study Purpose
Mr. Kennedy indicated the purpose of the study is as shown below
“The purpose of this transportation study is to guide future infrastructure investments aimed at enhancing mobility and access associated with the redevelopment of the Naval Air Station in Brunswick and the Annex in Topsham.”
He also showed a map outlining the locations that are included in the study.
Study Schedule
- Evaluation of Alternatives (April and May)
Develop and Evaluate Conceptual Alternatives. Screen Alternatives for Resource Impacts, Traffic Operations, Costs etc.
Public Meeting to Present Findings
- Study Documentation (May, June, July)
Respond to Comments, Finalize Plans, Prepare Report Documentation and make modifications
Final Public Meeting in late June, early July with final recommendations
Purpose and Need Statement
Mr. Kennedy indicated that the Purpose and Need Statement is an important guiding document for the study, and read out some of the key sections. (Note: The full statement is available at www.nasb-transportation-study.com)
“To be successful, the proposed solutions must dovetail with the goals of the communities of Topsham and Brunswick, including minimizing NASB-related trips through downtown Brunswick and residential districts to minimize the effect of the predicted growth in traffic and to maintain and enhance livable communities.”
Future Conditions
Mr. Kennedy noted that the study goal is to project traffic out to 2035.
To develop this future condition the existing base traffic was first removed from the existing condition. In addition to other background growth, the volume of traffic that is expected to be generated by the redevelopment of the base over the next 20 years was added back onto the network. It is estimated that approximately 2,850 weekday pm trips at Brunswick Landing and an additional 270 weekday pm trips at Topsham Annex would be generated by the redevelopment over the next 20 years.
VHB also added background growth of 0.5%/year for the first 20 years, and for the final five years, a 1 % annual growth.
Mr. Kennedy showed a map depicting the 2035 future design hour volumes for all study area intersections. He noted that although traffic might typically be expected to grow at approximately 2% a year, given the recession as well as the base closure, growth is expected to be somewhat less. Mr. Kennedy showed a map depicting the expected annual growth rate for various roadways within the study area.
Mr. Kennedy then showed a slide on deficient intersections in the region, pointing out the number and location of these within the study area.
Summary of Public Comments
Mr. Kennedy summarized the general themes of the comments already received from the public.
· Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
· Public Transportation
· Functional Characteristics of Roadways
- Where to add capacity?
- Where to provide access management?
- Where to introduce traffic calming?
- Where to preserve existing character?
- How to pull it all together into a well connected system?
Alternatives
Mr. Kennedy described the different strategies:
Strategy 1 – No-build, Upgrade and up to three (3) Build strategies - need and potential locations of improved direct access from Route 1 to NASB
Strategy 2A - No-build, TDM and up to two (2) Upgrades to improve mobility along Route 196 from I-295 (Exit31) to Rt. 1 (Coastal Connector) and congestion relief at the Rt. 196/201 intersection and along Route 201 north to Old Augusta Road
Strategy 2B - No-build, TDM and up to two (2) Upgrades to improve mobility between I-295 (Exit 28) along Pleasant Street and Maine Street to Route 123
Strategy 2C – No-build, TDM and up to two (2) Upgrades to improve mobility along Mill Street from Pleasant Street to Route 196
Strategy 3 – No-build and up to two (2) Build strategies to extend the existing rail spur to the Naval Air Station Brunswick
Strategy 1/Direct Access to Route 1:
Public Comments on Strategy 1
· Grade separate from Bath Rd & railroad
· Don’t impact existing bike path
· Improve Bike/Ped connection
· Interchange is too expensive
· Bus/Trolley connection to downtown
· East-west connection through base
Mr. Kennedy showed a slide of a new interchange linking Route 1 to the base. He emphasized that although there is a need to show something visual at a public meeting, that doesn’t mean the concept is cast in stone. He also noted that all strategies will have bike and pedestrian access built in, for example in this concept there would be a bike/ped connection to the river as an integral part of the concept. He also noted that there would be an east-west connection though the base as part of MRRA’s work.
Strategy 2a Coastal Connector, Route 201
Public Comments on Strategy 2a
· Connector needs to be 4 lanes
· Improved roadway connectivity/access management
· Intersection upgrades (turn lanes)
· Separate vehicular traffic from peds/bikes
· Grade separate 201/196 intersection
· Roundabout at 201/196 intersection
· Reconfigure Exit 31 ramps/Left-turn storage length
Mr. Kennedy noted that what we heard was that it is important to improve mobility along the Coastal Connector without bisecting the town or impeding pedestrians. Two potential solutions that might accomplish this goal were to grade separate the Route 196/Route 201 intersection or to convert the intersection to a roundabout.
Mr. Kennedy then stepped through the corridor starting at the Coastal Connector/Route 1 interchange discussing needs, issues, and potential alternatives to be evaluated. He showed the existing interchange at Rte. 24, saying this may be sufficient as is. Further north, where the four lanes drop to a two-lane road, widening would likely be necessary in the future. At the Coastal Connector and Village Drive, there is only a single through lane per direction. This limits the throughput capacity during the peak hours resulting in delays. Mr. Kennedy noted that the build alternative along this section of the corridor will consider the widening of the Connector to provide two through lanes in each direction. He indicated that any widening of the Connector would likely be phased with perhaps the signalized intersections widened first, followed by the segments between the intersections.
Mr. Kennedy showed a series of aerials and drawings to illustrate all these concepts, showing how traffic could move through this area and how efficiency could be improved, with more connections to businesses. He noted that the team would be looking at this in more detail. He also said that it would be important to talk with property owners in order to hear their needs and desires in terms of connections.
Strategy 2B (Pleasant St through Maine St)
Public Comments on Strategy 2B
· Access management – raised median, center turn lane, parallel roadway, connections between properties
· Roundabout at Stanwood St intersection
· Free flow lane at Stanwood St intersection
· Signing to direct motorists to Coastal Connector
· Traffic calming/gateway treatment
· Exit 28 to Route 1 connection is confusing
· Convert one-way section to two-way
· Maine St/Bath Rd – Ped/Bike safety – historic preservation
Mr. Kennedy described some of the problems on Pleasant St., such as no defined gateway to the area and too many driveways. He proposed road connections that would allow vehicles to get to the major intersections via these connections. This would necessitate coordination with the various property owners along the corridor. He explained that this approach would be safer and also more efficient because there would be fewer vehicles making uncontrolled left-turns. Providing connections is one of the primary concepts that the team will evaluate. Mr. Kennedy noted that the Town of Brunswick has retained a planning consultant to work with the public and property owners to look more closely at defining the specific locations for these connections.
Another idea is to introduce traffic calming techniques on Pleasant St. Slowing vehicular traffic, making the road more attractive, and enhancing pedestrian access would also make it a better place for business. Mr. Kennedy shared a plan (raised medians, roundabouts, and good parcel connectivity) that is currently being considered for a similar corridor in Brattleboro, Vermont. The businesses and town agreed to this – to replace signals with roundabouts and have good road connections. The idea is that motorists would take right hand turns, and reversing direction via the roundabouts. This could also work well in creating a defined gateway as motorists enter the Pleasant Street corridor from I-295. It would change the look and the feel of the corridor and in turn encouraging motorists to travel slower and safer.
Mr. Kennedy showed a slide of the Riverwalk and reminded everyone that every strategy would incorporate pedestrian and bike access.
Mr. Kennedy then talked about the section of Route 1 that abuts Maine St. This results in motorists cutting through the neighborhoods. Motorists currently turn left from Mill Street onto Cushing Street due to the prohibition of left-turn movements at the Maine Street interchange. These neighborhoods should not be absorbing this type of through traffic.
Mr. Kennedy showed a concept, which is being developed by the MaineDOT, for safety changes at the Bath Road / Maine Street intersection.
Strategy 2C (Mill Street)
Public Comments on 2C
· Improve connection to Maine St.
· Close access to side streets (Cushing, Cumberland)
· Mill St tunnel to enhance connection to waterfront
· New interchange at I-295/River Rd
· Modify route designations
Mr. Kennedy then stated that the prohibition of left-turns from Route 1 onto Maine Street contributes to some of the traffic flow problems in the Mill Street area. He said MaineDOT is currently evaluating the idea of constructing a roundabout at this location. He said a roundabout would accommodate the left-turn movement from the east on Route 1. Mr. Kennedy showed a concept plan depicting the roundabout. He pointed out that although roundabouts have the benefit of maintaining smooth traffic flow, some in Topsham have concerns that unlike signal control the roundabouts won’t provide gaps in the traffic stream away from the roundabout for motorists to enter the roadway. Another option is a single-point interchange, and Mr. Kennedy showed a drawing of this and explained how it would work. He noted that this has real benefits but it would potentially impact some peoples’ properties.
He also noted that this area is a transition area between the relatively high-speed Route 1 to the north, and the slower area of Route 1 on Pleasant Street. He said it is important to make sure any improvements transitions traffic well.
Mr. Kennedy then introduced David Wilcock also of VHB, who will be conducting a separate, but related Regional Rail Intermodal & Maintenance Facility Feasibility Study.
Regional Rail Intermodal & Maintenance Facility
Feasibility Study
· Stakeholder Coordination
· Economic Freight Market Analysis
· Evaluation of Facility Needs
· Site Analysis
· Funding Options Evaluation
· Final Report
Mr. David Wilcock of VHB said that there is interest in evaluating an intermodal facility in Brunswick, where cargo comes in by rail and out by truck and vice versa. The study will look at freight movements in the area to evaluate the feasibility of locating this type of facility in Brunswick. This could be great opportunity for the area. The process will begin fairly soon by talking to potential users (shippers), looking at the potential economics, generating a cost-benefit analysis to find out if such an arrangement would be beneficial to both shippers and rail operators, look at what kind of truck and rail access would be needed. He will be talking with stakeholders and looking at locations and possible funding sources, both public and private.
General Public Comments
At this point, the formal presentation ended and Mr. Kennedy then invited attendees to ask questions or to share their thoughts - adding that comments via the web site were also welcome.
Comment: I just wanted to say that I appreciate the new DOT – it is certainly different than the one I grew up with – very user friendly. I want to be sure which things presented tonight are actually subject to change from public comments. If it is not practical, should we not suggest it? Can we suggest new strategies? Would we be better directed to help refine what you had?
Mr. Kennedy said this was a good and important point, as the study is on a tight schedule and it must be completed by July. To meet this aggressive schedule, we will be initiating our detailed evaluation of the alternatives tomorrow. He said that the team had received a lot of input from the public and incorporated it into the ideas you see tonight. He said that if there are additional thoughts on the prescreening of alternatives, we need to hear them ASAP. The Team will be evaluating these ideas and if we find something changes or there is a better idea, we will bring it back to you in another meeting. However, we need to get down to the detailed work.