To the citizens of Wiscasset:

In recent months, I have come to realized that my resignation from the Board of Selectmen in April of 2007 was premature. The unexpected passing of my wife, serious family medical issues and my unsettled future played a major role in my decision.

I have been a local business owner as well as a life long resident of Wiscasset and feel that I have a clear prospective and understanding of the needs of our town. I have served on the Ordinance Review Committee, Planning Board, Budget Committee and as your selectmen.

I believe I can have a positive impact in our community and would appreciate your vote and support on January 15.

Respectfully,

Robert C. Fairfield, Jr.

Wiscasset

Dear Editor:

I want to thank Alex Robertson for his service to the Town of Wiscasset as a member of the Board of Selectmen. Serving on the board is not only time consuming, but it also requires constant commitment.

Bob Fairfield possesses that willingness to serve the citizens of Wiscasset as he has demonstrated in the past. January 15 is less than a week away.

Please take the time to either pick up an absentee ballot or go to the polls at the Community Center next Tuesday and cast your vote for Bob Fairfield.

Most importantly, vote. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Katharine Martin-Savage

Wiscasset

To the Editor: The following comments from the Sheepscot Valley Conservation Association were submitted to the Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT) on December 21, 2007 regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the Wiscasset Route 1 Corridor Study.

The Sheepscot Valley Conservation Association (SCVA) has consistently supported the no-build option in the Wiscasset bypass discussions. It has supported this option because it believes there are no-build - which does not mean "do nothing" - means of mitigating the acknowledged summertime traffic pressures, and because building such roads and bridges as have been proposed is, in itself, always an undesirable undertaking, destroying environmental and possibly historical assets, taking private property and homes, physically disrupting and dividing communities, and absorbing many millions of taxpayer dollars. With all the inevitable negatives, the need to build must be compelling to justify proceeding with a project.

The SVCA's position on this regionally important issue has not changed. It continues to advocate for effective solutions to Wiscasset's seasonal traffic congestion -- and it is important to note that this is a seasonal problem only -- that do not require the building of major new roads and bridges.

We argue that the alternatives to building a Wiscasset bypass have never been put to a serious test. Unfortunately, from our perspective, MDOT focuses in its October 2007 DEIS almost exclusively on build options. But because of our commitment to people and communities as well as to the Sheepscot watershed environment, the SVCA desires to remain at the table as the bypass discussion proceeds, and thus finds itself obliged to comment on the DEIS's bypass build proposals. 

It is in this context that the SVCA has examined the various build options presented in the DEIS and finds the N2/N8c route the clearly preferable choice among them. It is the shortest route, diverts by far the greatest amount of traffic away from Wiscasset village, and thus expedites most effectively the movement of through traffic past the village, displaces fewer homes and businesses, requires less dirt excavation and fill, does not break up any large unfragmented habitat blocks, has less impact on wetlands, vernal pools and streams, and has little impact on the high value sensitive habitats of the lower Sheepscot River. Further, N2/N8C is clearly superior in increasing the "livability" of Wiscasset because it is the only option presented in the DEIS that is projected to reduce traffic year-round.

We note the valuable recent contributions of former SVCA board member Nigel Calder in bringing to the public's attention the sharp differences in projected traffic diversion effectiveness among the five build options that a careful study of the DEIS reveals.

We see that those projections indicate that in 2030 with N2/N8c 5,400 cars a day will cross the Sheepscot on the Davey Bridge in the summertime as opposed to 9,600 for the next best option, 15,500 for the next option and 17,000 for the final option. These are huge differences in effectiveness.

When you couple this with the fact that of the five options N2/N8c has the least overall impact on the environment and displaces fewer homes or businesses than do the others, we conclude that among the build options this is the best and most logical choice. We note also that the DEIS does not highlight these significant differences in the proposed options, nor does it point out the general superiority of N2/N8c.

Still, the SVCA does not feel constrained by MDOT's pronouncement that the bypass build options in the DEIS offer the only solutions to the Wiscasset congestion problem.

Although MDOT has at various times implemented some of the many possible Route 1 congestion reduction measures, including a Wiscasset traffic light, reconfigured parking, traffic pattern modifications, and a too-short attempt at smart sign redirection of turnpike traffic to Augusta's third bridge, there has never been a comprehensive effort to reduce and make more tolerable the seasonal traffic congestion in downtown Wiscasset.

The SVCA notes that even if a decision is made to build a bypass, the state, MDOT, Wiscasset and surrounding towns still have what appears to be a 10-year window in which to implement traffic mitigation measures. There is no valid reason not to do this, and in fact it is inconceivable that nothing would be done during that 10-year period before a bypass were built to deal with the traffic situation.

The SVCA also would support the study of a rerouting of the Davey Bridge traffic to a Route 1 spur running south of the downtown. Such a rerouting would remove most through traffic from Wiscasset's downtown without increasing the capacity of the Route 1 corridor system and without splitting Wiscasset in two, as Route 1 now does.

Why not make a final decision on the build options dependent on the results of a test of alternative traffic mitigation measures? Possible results could be a) the congestion is sharply reduced, eliminating the need for a bypass; b) there is a significant reduction in traffic that calls for a reconsideration of the options in the DEIS; or c) there is no reduction in congestion. Which is the answer? We do not know. It is perplexing that MDOT no longer appears to be giving serious consideration to the no-build option, regardless of the NEPA requirements and regardless of not having these answers.

Any long-term solution to congestion, access management, and growth management along the Route 1 corridor necessitates a strong, enduring partnership between the State and the corridor communities.

The SVCA encourages MDOT, as well as Wiscasset and its neighboring towns, to promote and participate in a comprehensive, well planned, determined attempt to reduce and make more tolerable seasonal traffic congestion in Wiscasset during the 10-year no-build window that begins now.

The future of the midcoast hangs in the balance. We need new solutions to the problems introduced by the automobile, or our fate will be that of so many other parts of the country that have built new roads to relieve congestion, only to be rewarded with more congestion. We must all dedicate ourselves, through programs such as the "Gateway 1" project, to managing future growth in a way that minimizes the need for new road construction.