Littleton Board Postpones Vote on Long Lake Safety Zone Amid Strong Community Advocacy

The Littleton Board of Selectmen meeting on April 7 addressed numerous community concerns, with the most discussion centering on the proposal to establish a 20 mph safety zone around Long Lake. This proposal, driven by strong community advocacy, was supported by a petition signed by 72% of local households and backed by the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee and the Long Lake Neighborhood Association. Despite this support, the board decided to postpone the vote due to the absence of two members, emphasizing the need for full participation in this decision.

11:53The proposal for the safety zone around Long Lake was introduced in response to ongoing concerns about pedestrian safety, particularly during the busy summer months when children frequent the area. Residents expressed concerns about speeding vehicles, particularly on Lakeshore Drive, which lacks sidewalks and is heavily trafficked by pedestrians.

44:11During the meeting, residents voiced their concerns and shared personal experiences to underscore the need for the safety zone. One resident, Bill Porter, who is legally blind, described the intersection of Beach and Lakeshore Drive as particularly hazardous, emphasizing the need for visual cues to slow down traffic. Amanda Fox shared her personal tragedy of losing a family member to a traffic accident, which fueled her commitment to neighborhood safety. The community’s sentiments were echoed by Tess Degan, president of the Long Lake Neighborhood Association, who emphasized the vulnerability of pedestrians, particularly children, in the area.

The fiscal implications of implementing the safety zone were discussed, with an estimated cost of $250 per posting, totaling less than $2,000 if five markers were installed. Some residents suggested fundraising to cover these costs if necessary. The Police Chief expressed a need for a traffic study to justify the safety zone, a requirement that some residents and board members questioned, given the existing community support and safety data.

55:30Ultimately, the board decided to delay the vote on the safety zone until all members could be present, acknowledging the absence of two members due to a work emergency and illness. The topic is expected to be revisited at the next meeting, with hopes of reaching a consensus on the implementation of the safety zone.

04:37In addition to the safety zone discussion, the board covered several other notable items. A proposal for a Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) grant to replace the high school roof and boilers was approved, highlighting the need for facility updates due to their age. This proposal authorizes the Superintendent of Schools to submit necessary documentation to the MSBA, although funding approval is not guaranteed.

01:02:24The board also addressed affordable housing initiatives, with an update from the affordable housing trust. The trust has secured funding for various projects, including a partnership with Habitat for Humanity to develop affordable units on town-owned properties. Efforts to balance expenditures between new housing developments and assisting residents in existing homes were also discussed, particularly focusing on the needs of seniors wishing to age in place.

01:20:53Traffic safety concerns were further highlighted by residents of Goldsmith Street, who raised issues about speeding near a school zone, calling for stronger enforcement measures. These concerns mirror those of the Long Lake neighborhood.

01:40:45Additional updates included the assistant town administrator’s upcoming transition to a new position in Concord, ongoing construction projects, and preparations for upcoming public sessions and community events. The board also reviewed the town warrant, reducing the number of articles to streamline the process, and assigned members to present specific items during upcoming meetings.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

Trending meetings
across the country: