You don't need to be a traffic engineer to figure out that traffic tables
are a bad idea. (See Sarah Postlethwaite's letter.). Everyone I have talked
to about the issue agrees that Lincoln should not be committing to traffic
tables/ speed tables.
Diana Smith

‪On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 9:26 PM ‫ٍSarah Postlethwait‬‎ <[email protected]>
wrote:‬

> Who is funding the proposed traffic table scheduled for installation this
> spring?
>
> It is extremely difficult for residents to track decisions being made
> across multiple boards, each operating on separate 5–10 year planning
> timelines. I believe many residents will be genuinely surprised when a
> traffic table appears, as this is not something the community has asked for
> or supported.
>
> If residents are consistently requesting sidewalks next to roadways, why
> are limited funds- even grant funds- being allocated to traffic tables and
> bike lanes instead of addressing those clearly stated priorities?
> Sarah Postlethwait
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 5:21 PM Margaret Olson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> The survey was part of a continuous feedback process. We have the bicycle
>> and pedestrian master plan, developed over several years with multiple
>> neighborhood and public outreach meetings, we present at state of the town,
>> and we send out surveys. We obviously can’t update a master plan very often
>> but we can “check in” with the town through these lighter mechanisms to
>> make sure there have been no major changes.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 4:09 PM Sara Mattes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> The question was not so much about crosswalk design on 117.
>>> It is impeccable.
>>>
>>> The question raised was the rational for location-the general policy to
>>> guide such decisions, and the advisability of using under 100 citizen
>>> response to a survey to guide tax investments in public safety and roadway
>>> questions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2025, at 3:04 PM, Margaret Olson <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The town’s five year plan is available on the Transportation
>>> Coalition website:
>>> https://www.lincolntown.org/1552/Transportation-Coalition
>>>
>>> The town’s engineering consultants designed the crosswalk - all
>>> infrastructure improvements are professionally designed. Site lines
>>> determined the exact location of the new crosswalk as they do all
>>> crosswalks.
>>>
>>> Margaret
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 2:51 PM Sara Mattes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Past road projects were informed  by professional guidance, standards
>>>> and research.
>>>> I am surprised to find that a survey response by under 100 residents
>>>> seems to now guide decisions.
>>>>
>>>> The 117/Old Sudbury Rd. crosswalk is beautifully executed.
>>>> However, it leads to a narrow, busy road (Old Sudbury Rd.) with no
>>>> shoulder, no path, no sidewalk..
>>>>
>>>> When the Roadway and Traffic Committee (the RTC) was formed, clear
>>>> guidelines and standards were established for all such decisions.
>>>> Crosswalk locations were determined to be safest and most appropriate
>>>> where site lines were clear and the crosswalk connect paths and/or trials.
>>>>
>>>> It would be instructive to have the Transportation Coalition share the
>>>> rational developed through guidance documents and professional reports that
>>>> direct the expenditure of tax dollars on these projects.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 13, 2025, at 2:18 PM, ٍSarah Postlethwait <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> “The crosswalk by town hall has new, hopefully more visible signs. It
>>>> will be upgraded to a speed table in the spring, once the water main
>>>> patches have settled. The speed table will give drivers, pedestrians, and
>>>> Public Safety experience with this new traffic calming measure. We will
>>>> then consider whether speed tables are well suited to other crosswalks in
>>>> town.”
>>>>
>>>> I am genuinely struggling to understand why a traffic table is being
>>>> presented as the preferred solution for Lincoln Road, particularly given
>>>> its well-documented drawbacks and the availability of safer, more effective
>>>> alternatives.
>>>>
>>>> Traffic tables carry significant and foreseeable downsides. They can
>>>> delay emergency response vehicles, create safety hazards for motorcyclists
>>>> due to abrupt elevation changes, and cause damage to vehicle suspensions,
>>>> undercarriages, and front splitters—especially once the Table has a few
>>>> seasons of New England weather has left it in less than optimal condition.
>>>> Is the Town prepared to accept liability for vehicle damage caused by this
>>>> installation? If not, why is a measure with such predictable consequences
>>>> being advanced?
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, a single traffic table does nothing to meaningfully reduce
>>>> overall vehicle speeds along Lincoln Road. At best, it creates a brief
>>>> bottleneck where drivers slow momentarily, only to accelerate immediately
>>>> afterward. This does not address speeding behavior along the rest of the
>>>> roadway and offers no comprehensive traffic-calming benefit.
>>>>
>>>> It is also worth noting that traffic tables are not safely traversed at
>>>> 20-30mph. In practical use, drivers must slow to approximately 15–20 mph to
>>>> avoid vehicle damage. This creates an inconsistent and potentially
>>>> hazardous driving environment, particularly for unfamiliar drivers,
>>>> cyclists, and emergency vehicles.
>>>>
>>>> Compounding this concern are ongoing discussions about asking residents
>>>> to contribute financially to repaving Lincoln Road- work that will likely
>>>> be necessary sooner rather than later due to the extremely poor patching
>>>> performed after the water main replacement. If repaving is imminent, would
>>>> the newly installed traffic table need to be removed and rebuilt? If so,
>>>> how is this an efficient or fiscally responsible use of public or resident
>>>> funds?
>>>>
>>>> There are proven, safer alternatives that address pedestrian safety
>>>> without introducing these risks. For example, pedestrian-activated crossing
>>>> signals, such as the flashing system used at Walden Pond, have been shown
>>>> to improve driver compliance and pedestrian visibility while preserving
>>>> road continuity. Why was this option dismissed by the Transportation
>>>> Coalition, and on what evidence was that decision based?
>>>>
>>>> Finally, it remains unclear who would be responsible for the
>>>> installation, maintenance, and long-term upkeep of the proposed traffic
>>>> table. What are the projected costs, and how will they be funded?
>>>>
>>>> Given these unresolved concerns, it is difficult to justify a traffic
>>>> table as the best, or even a prudent solution for Lincoln Road.
>>>> Sarah Postlethwait
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2025 at 1:44 PM Margaret Olson <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> We wanted to share with you the results of the Transportation
>>>>> Coalition survey and give you an update on recently completed and upcoming
>>>>> projects.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Survey:
>>>>>
>>>>> The survey opened on August 26th and closed on October 13th. 312 of
>>>>> you responded to our outreach: postal mailing, flyers, and emails. To all
>>>>> who responded: Thank you! The feedback we received will help guide our
>>>>> long-term planning. The Transportation Coalition will continue to partner
>>>>> with the Town's Public Safety Department and DPW on road safety and
>>>>> maintenance, and to fund as much as possible with a combination of state
>>>>> Chapter 90 money and grants.
>>>>>
>>>>> Resident’s top-rated priorities were additional roadside
>>>>> paths/sidewalks (82 votes), road maintenance (77 votes), and speed/traffic
>>>>> control (61 votes). Answers to the question "if you could pick one project
>>>>> to improve pedestrian or cyclist safety in your neighborhood, what would 
>>>>> it
>>>>> be?" reflected these priorities: sidewalks and speed. The intersection of
>>>>> 117 and Tower Road and additional bike lanes were the largest group of
>>>>> specific responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> When it comes to taxes to support improvements, 146 of you are
>>>>> opposed, 129 are in favor, and 27 responded with "maybe".
>>>>>
>>>>> Projects:
>>>>>
>>>>> The crosswalk at Old Sudbury Road and Route 117 is now complete! It
>>>>> consists of new pedestrian refuge islands and a pedestrian activated
>>>>> warning light. This was funded by a Complete Streets grant. Attached is a
>>>>> picture for those of you who do not often drive along 117.
>>>>>
>>>>> The crosswalk by town hall has new, hopefully more visible signs. It
>>>>> will be upgraded to a speed table in the spring, once the water main
>>>>> patches have settled. The speed table will give drivers, pedestrians, and
>>>>> Public Safety experience with this new traffic calming measure. We will
>>>>> then consider whether speed tables are well suited to other crosswalks in
>>>>> town. A "speed table" is a traffic calming device consisting of a long,
>>>>> flat topped speed hump that allows vehicles to maintain speeds of around
>>>>> 20-30 mph while still slowing traffic for safer pedestrian crossings.
>>>>> Attached is an image of a speed hump from the Federal Highway Division.
>>>>>
>>>>> And, as most of you probably know, the second half of the water main
>>>>> project on Lincoln Road will begin in the spring/summer.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 2A repaving by Mass DOT will not be put out to bid until 2029. At
>>>>> least some of the 2A crosswalks and pedestrian protections that the Town
>>>>> advocated for remain as part of the plan.
>>>>>
>>>>> MassDOT has informed us that the Route 126 bridge project will start
>>>>> this coming summer and is projected to finish in the summer of 2031.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Margaret Olson
>>>>>
>>>>> Chair, Transportation Coalition
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list.
>>>>> To post, send mail to [email protected].
>>>>> Browse the archives at
>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
>>>>> Change your subscription settings at
>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list.
>>>> To post, send mail to [email protected].
>>>> Browse the archives at
>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
>>>> Change your subscription settings at
>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
> The LincolnTalk mailing list.
> To post, send mail to [email protected].
> Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/
> .
> Change your subscription settings at
> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
>
>

-- 
Diana Smith
PO Box 6294
Lincoln MA  01773
Cell: 617 803 8022
-- 
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [email protected].
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at 
https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply via email to