The Dept. of Transportation (DOT) has a new twist to its Gateway One project to reduce traffic congestion along Rt. 1.
The DOT is looking for voluntary local support for firmed up commitments through memorandums of understanding for the formation of “town cores”, small villages within each community, for clustering of both residential and commercial development along the length of the 100-mile project from Brunswick to Stockton Springs.
The concept represents a change in approach in the preparation for the Gateway 1 project. Until recently, discussions have centered around corridor-wide interventions rather than a region or specific towns. Now, however, the DOT has shifted the discussion to specific towns/regions.
DOT spokesperson Carol Morris discussed the concept with Wiscasset planning board member, representatives of the local transportation committee and conservation commission at a workshop Monday.
Morris described the so-called town cores as a string of pearls, with a “pearl” being a designated area for that kind of development. Each of the towns in the series would consciously preserve stretches of open space and vistas and focus new growth in the cores.
“We know that this vision will require a concerted intervention effort,” she said.
The need for such cores comes from the DOT’s development projections along Rt. 1 that indicate traffic congestion along much of the corridor by 2020 even with a bypass in Wiscasset, according to Morris.
Evaluation of each corridor town’s capacity for development and potential growth patterns would precede identification of such an area, Morris said. She then proceeded to show how the capacity assessment process will work.
Lincoln County planner Bob Faunce, whom the DOT has enlisted for the initiative, said, “You should have at least 15 towns. If you only get 10 towns, it may not be worth doing.”
Morris said implementation of the interventions needed to achieve a preferred growth pattern will depend on two key factors: 1) the town’s capacity to move in the desired direction and 2) the extent of the town’s vulnerability to the results of the low-density growth pattern currently in existence.
Morris said factors affecting the plan include how much of any town’s comprehensive plan and zoning codes are already consistent with the preferred growth pattern. Other factors include how much ability a town has to manage access to Rt. 1, whether a town has excess and/or extendable public sewer and water capacity, and whether a town has sufficient staff resources to implement change.
Morris said implementation of the interventions needed to achieve a preferred growth pattern will depend on two key factors: 1) the town’s capacity to move in the desired direction and 2) the extent of the town’s vulnerability to the results of the low-density growth pattern currently in existence.
Towns, she said, that have a higher need to implement protective interventions sooner include those that have a large number of distinctive views and undeveloped or very low intensity road sections; have extensive, developable stretches along Rt. 1 without typical state and local access controls; have large areas of rural, developable land, have strong pressures for growth in the town; have serious congestion problems, and have serious safety problems.
The DOT lists towns like Wiscasset, Newcastle, and Damariscotta in the medium range and towns like Nobleboro more in the lower range.
“The DOT is serious… about making changes that will improve land and transportation in this corridor,” said Don Jones, transportation committee chairman. “What will it actually take to make this happen?”
Jones expressed concern that it might mean loss of local control, but for the benefits of doing so for the whole corridor, Jones said he would be willing to compromise some of it.
Transportation committee member Lois Quantz questioned why the DOT makes such high punitive assessments for any new business’ curb cuts if it is so interested in promoting development along the corridor.
“I’m not real trusting about that,” she said.
Timeline for the DOT’s plan consists of a draft memorandum by Dec. 3 for town board review and a referendum vote on a final draft in each participating town in February or March, following public hearings.
