Why not just install automated speed cameras at all major points? Cheap, prevents speeding, works all hours of the day, and frees up police to do other duties.
-Nick On Sun, Dec 14, 2025, 09:24 cmontie montie.net <[email protected]> wrote: > Having lived at 29 Lincoln Road (the house in front on the proposed > traffic table near the Old Town Hall), I can say with experience of the > location—with a master bedroom on the front of the house—that I pity the > residents whose homes are nearby. > > All day and all night, they will hear Thunk-Thunk… Thunk-Thunk with each > car that passes by as they hit the traffic table. That would drive me > nuts. Are the neighbors aware of this potential downside? > > As an alternative: How many hours per week do the Lincoln police sit > parked in the Old Town Hall parking lot and enforce the speed limit on > Lincoln Road? I imagine, with some consistent enforcement, that if that > spot developed a reputation as a speed trap, the issue would largely be > resolved. The cost of a moving violation and points against insurance seems > like a good deterrent. Has a concerted effort—with an actual plan—been put > in place to enlist Lincoln’s public safety team to address this issue? And > if yes, I’m curious, what was it and what were the results? > > Best, > Carolyn > > > > > Message: 13 > > Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2025 21:48:21 -0500 > > From: Diana Smith <[email protected]> > > To: ?Sarah Postlethwait <[email protected]> > > Cc: Margaret Olson <[email protected]>, Lincoln Talk > > <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Roadway Decisions-Policy Framework. > > Question > > Message-ID: > > <cajiljvqoktko4ojdwu_tu1qb+nwdv42u4gc1cefaoyfihmi...@mail.gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > 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 > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: < > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/attachments/20251213/4bddf2da/attachment-0001.htm > > > > > > ------------------------- > -- > 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.
