| Since this is slated for installation several years after documented incidents at a heavily used crosswalk, one could make the case that this is long overdue, too.
And with all due respect to Deerhaven, or any other secondary or lightly trafficked road, I don’t imagine anybody feels there’s much of a risk when their kids walk across the street there, at any time of day, and I would like to think a public safety issue that impacts the entire town might take precedence over some potholes.
Thank you, David, for your note. I am all for flashing lights too, especially since crossing at night (which is 4:30 at this time of year, just as after-school activities end) is difficult to impossible for a child, even with an adult waving a flashlight or wearing a headlamp. But I don’t want to push my luck!
Lis
Sent from my iPhone The question is not whether IF traffic calming is warranted, but whether this specific traffic calming measure is appropriate for this location. Speed tables are widely discouraged on primary or arterial roads, and there does not appear to be any speed study or data supporting the need for a traffic table at this location. There is also the broader issue of opportunity cost. What are we sacrificing by allocating funds to a speed table here? Based on comments made by Tim Higgins at a Transportation Coalition meeting in March 2025, it appears that resources are being diverted away from necessary roadway repaving, such as work which was requested by Deerhaven Road residents, in order to fund this installation, allowing roads in need of repair to continue to be neglected. Additionally, there is the unresolved question of future roadway work. If Lincoln Road is repaved in the near future, will the traffic table need to be removed and then reinstalled? Turning this ~$30k+ project into a ~$60k+ project. (The $30K estimate was given in 2023- it has yet to be stated the actual projected cost of this project in 2026 dollars). This entire project represents a significant and unnecessary expenditure of public funds- funds that would be better spent addressing long-standing road maintenance issues. Given these concerns, it would be far more fiscally responsible to postpone installation of a traffic table and first conduct objective, data-driven analysis to determine whether this measure would meaningfully improve pedestrian safety at the crosswalk and whether any potential benefit justifies the guaranteed delay to emergency response vehicles. Sarah Postlethwait
Dear Lincoln Talk
Lis should be heard and given great creedence as someone who is knowledgeable and has multiple levels of experience and concern with the road. To me, it sounds like the speed bump would help and that adding flashing lights that can be controlled by pedestrians who cross at the cross walk would also help. Why not do both?
David Giber
I am an abutter, and I thank you for your concern, but I am all for it. Somebody suggested to me a few months ago that I should be concerned about noise and I'm not. A couple of years ago the front wheel of my son's bike, while he was on it, was hit by a car that he thought had fully stopped, but for whatever reason slowed and then kept going despite seeing him. Our neighbor was actually hit by a car, very, very seriously injured, and required months of rehab. Years ago, when we were expecting a delivery of tiles that required a lift gate, the truck twice refused to stop in front of our house because, they said, "it's a 45 mile an hour road and too dangerous", nevermind that is technically the start of the school zone. These are anecdotes, but as an observer of the road, from my house and from the Old Town Hall, I cannot tell you how many times I have seen cars and landscaping trucks and their trailers blow down the street at unconscionable speeds -- two weeks ago a car actually sped to pass another car that was apparently moving too slowly for their liking. My guess is the car that was passed was going about 30, and the speeding car was going about 50 (in the direction of the curve, by the way). When I mentioned this to two people who live nearby, getting their mail, they both said that happens all the time, it was just the first time I saw it. My next door neighbor can frequently be heard yelling at cars to slow down, and for good reason. Another neighbor, from what I understand, has been collecting license plate numbers for the cars speeding at night. And finally the plastic standing sign that is now positioned on our wall for some reason, has been knocked over countless times -- if that alone isn't an indication that the crosswalk is dangerous I don't know what is. In terms of remedies, a police car has frequently been parked in the OTH parking lot, and many times they pull out almost immediately, because just about everybody is speeding. I can't imagine this is sustainable or an actual solution -- it helps, definitely, but this cannot be the answer. Cars need to be physically forced to slow down, all the time. And the onus shouldn't be on pedestrians and cyclists to hope that cars will slow and come to a stop. In terms of traffic monitoring cameras, I brought this up at the forum in the fall, having seen one mounted in a tree when visiting my mom in rural CT. They are very effective, both in terms of slowing cars but also generating significant revenue, but they are not (now) allowed in MA, and a traffic camera (as evidenced by the number of people caught speeding when in use) will not protect anybody in the crosswalk. Other roads that are not frequently crossed but rather used as speedways for commuters would be great candidates for them. I cannot remember the details but I think there is hope they will be allowed in the state later next year. I would be happy to discuss the crosswalk with anybody interested. I have a lot to say about it, and would love to better understand why this is controversial, all things considered.
Lis
This is a very interesting idea. It would also bring our town more revenue from speeding tickets.
I would love to hear the opinions on all of this from our police & fire departments.
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.
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.
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.
|
