Office of Operations
21st Century Operations Using 21st Century Technologies
Table of Contents

Appendix C. Gateway 1 Corridor Memorandum of Understanding

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
for the
PREPARATION OF A STRATEGIC TRANSPORTATION-LAND USE
CORRIDOR PRESERVATION PLAN
FOR THE U.S. ROUTE 1 CORRIDOR
FROM BRUNSWICK TO STOCKTON SPRINGS

WHEREAS:

1. U.S. Route 1 through the mid-coastal region of Maine, from the Town of Brunswick to the Town of Prospect, a distance of approximately 100 miles, is an economic lifeline upon which the citizens, businesses, and municipalities both within the corridor and beyond depend; and

2. This arterial is called upon to serve many roles, including the movement of goods and people into and through the region, local trade in downtowns and suburban centers, economic development, property tax base for municipalities, a major tourist highway, and the daily movement of local residents between home, work, schools, and other destinations; and

3. Route 90, by connecting to U.S. Route 1 at Warren and Rockport, is an important companion arterial to U.S. Route 1, and increasingly is experiencing many of the same development pressures and transportation conflicts as U.S. Route 1 itself; and

4. The corridor through which U.S. Route 1 runs is marked by small, traditional New England towns and cities, rural countryside, and vistas to coastal waters and inland hills, all of which create a unique and valuable character by which this region of Maine is well known, and to which both visitors and year-round residents are attracted; and

5. The many roles U.S. Route 1 is called upon to serve sometimes conflict with each other, and over the last 15 years, as through- and tourist traffic, local traffic, population growth, land development, and development sprawl have increased, the conflicts have increased in frequency and intensity; and

6. As Maine Department of Transportation (Maine DOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) try to balance these growing conflicts and invest taxpayers' dollars as wisely as possible, the need to improve mechanisms for outreach to and interaction with the public and to maintain the public's trust also has increased; and

7. Many of the municipalities in this corridor have prepared comprehensive land use plans and related ordinances; and

8. The municipalities have experienced the way in which transportation and land use decisions in one area can affect the quality of life in another; have in some instances begun discussions on how to resolve these issues in cooperation with each other; and have entered into inter-local agreements for certain municipal services; and

9. In the spring of 2003 the municipalities adjacent to U.S. Route 1 in the mid-coast region agreed by Resolution to participate in the development of a corridor preservation strategic plan called Gateway1 and endorsed Maine DOT's request for special funding from Washington to support its development; and

10. Maine DOT, with the advice and assistance of an Interim Steering Committee of citizens from the region, in Phase I of the study conducted meetings in and collected data on transportation and land use for each of the 20 municipalities in the region along U.S. Route 1 in order to clearly identify problems and issues as defined by the municipalities and their residents; and further analyzed and identified problems in preparation for undertaking the next steps for preparing a Strategic Plan; and

11. The findings of Phase I, as listed in part at the end of this document, were reviewed by and commented upon by officials and citizens in each of the municipalities and by the Interim Steering Committee, and they constitute a reasonable summary of the U.S. Route 1-related problems and issues facing both the region and individual municipalities; and

12. Maine DOT and the communities in the corridor are prepared, as Phase II of the study, to jointly develop a strategic transportation-land use corridor preservation plan that will: (a) help anticipate and resolve conflicts among the many demands placed upon the Route 1 corridor, (b) guide Maine DOT, other state agencies, the Federal Highway Administration, and the municipalities in their management of this shared economic and community asset, and (c) serve to streamline future decisions under the National Environmental Policy Act, the Sensible Transportation Policy Act, and other related federal or state laws and rules with jurisdiction over transportation decisions;

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties signed below agree to cooperate in the preparation of a Strategic Transportation-Land Use Corridor Preservation Plan (hereinafter "the Strategic Plan," also referred to as Phase II of the Gateway-1 project) as follows:

Paragraph 1. Purpose

The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to set forth the process by which Maine DOT and the municipalities will prepare, review, and consider adoption of a Strategic Plan for the U.S. Route 1 mid-coastal corridor, including Route 90. The corridor is defined as the 20 mid-coastal municipalities through which U.S. Route 1 and Route 90 run, from Brunswick to Stockton Springs, as follows:

Brunswick
Thomaston
West Bath
Rockland
Bath
Rockport
Woolwich
Camden
Wiscasset
Lincolnville
Edgecomb
Northport
Newcastle
Belfast
Damariscotta
Searsport
Nobleboro
Stockton Springs
Waldoboro
Prospect
Warren

Paragraph 2. Effective Date and Timeframe

The effective date of this MOU is April 1, 2005, or the date upon which Maine DOT, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, the Maine State Planning Office, and at least 15 of the 20 municipalities in the corridor formally agree to the MOU, whichever occurs earlier. If Maine DOT, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, the Maine State Planning Office and at least 15 of the 20 municipalities have not formally agreed to the MOU by July 1, 2005, it is null and void.

The strategic planning process will begin upon approval of this MOU by Maine DOT, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, the Maine State Planning Office and the requisite number of municipalities, and will be completed by [DATE] for consideration by Maine DOT and the state-federal Policy Group.

Paragraph 3. Phase II Public Process

A. Structure of the Phase II Public Process

The Phase II public process will involve formal citizen participation at the municipal, sub-area, and corridor-wide levels, as follows:

1. In each municipality, the elected municipal officials, with the advice of the planning board, economic development groups, conservation commission, and comprehensive planning committee, as appropriate, will be invited to appoint "Town Response Panels" of 7 to 15 people. The size of the panels can be flexible, with additional members appointed over time as individuals express interest or as the municipal officials deem appropriate. The panels will represent a broad range of interests and points of view in the community. The panels' role is to provide local feedback as the Strategic Plan is being developed. These panels are an essential sounding board to ensure the plan will meet local needs. Maine DOT will ask regional planning commissions to provide staffing services to the panels.

2. In each town or city, the Town Response Panel will be invited to nominate, with ratification by the elected municipal officials, one member of its Town Response Panel to serve as a member of a corridor-wide Steering Committee, and a second member as an alternate to the Steering Committee. The alternate will serve as a voting member in the absence of the primary appointee.

3. In addition to the municipal representatives, Maine DOT will solicit expressions of interest and invite one representative from each of the following sectors in the corridor to serve on the Steering Committee: environment and growth management, highway-oriented business, transportation and distribution, downtown and historic preservation, and housing. The Steering Committee also will include one non-voting representative each from Maine DOT, the Federal Highway Administration, and the State Planning Office.

The Steering Committee will serve as a corridor-wide advisor to Maine DOT and a state-federal Policy Group in the development and adoption of the Strategic Plan. It will jointly sponsor, with Maine DOT, public meetings held at appropriate points during the planning process on specified topics relevant to Gateway-1. Maine DOT and its consultants will provide staffing services to the Steering Committee and its subcommittees.

4. The Steering Committee's work will be carried out, in part, through five subcommittees, each representing a sub-area of the corridor. The subcommittees will consist of both the primary and the alternate representatives from each of the towns in the sub-area. The subcommittees will advise the Steering Committee of the land use and transportation needs of their respective areas, and will serve as the principal communications links between the Town Response Panels and the Steering Committee.

B. Receipt of the Proposed Strategic Transportation-Land Use Corridor Preservation Plan

The Steering Committee (which includes Maine DOT as a non-voting member) will present and recommend adoption of the proposed Strategic Plan to a state-federal Policy Group that, in addition to Maine DOT, consists of the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, the State Planning Office, and other appropriate state and federal agencies whose decisions affect land use and transportation in the corridor. Each member of the Policy Group will be asked to adopt the plan as agency policy.

C. Initial Task of the Gateway-1 Steering Committee

The initial task of the Gateway-1 Steering Committee (or of an Interim Steering Committee if the full Steering Committee is not yet appointed) will be to review, suggest revisions to, and advise Maine DOT on the scope of services that will direct the work of Phase II of the Gateway-1 project. This scope of services will be consistent with the outline of work attached to this MOU and will include identification of the public meetings that should be conducted during the course of Phase 2.

Paragraph 4. Responsibility of Maine DOT

Maine DOT will:

1. Participate in good faith and in a timely manner to bring the preparation of a Strategic Transportation-Land Use Plan to a successful conclusion;

2. Fund the strategic planning process;

3. Communicate regularly and clearly on its efforts with respect to Gateway 1, including ongoing or programmed investments being undertaken by Maine DOT in the corridor during the process; and build upon this experience to improve communications with communities and the public at both the programmatic and policy levels;

4. Develop the scope of work for Phase II in collaboration with the municipalities, the Steering Committee, and state-federal agencies;

5. In good faith receive and respond to the recommendations of the Gateway-1 Steering Committee, and work with the State Planning Office and other affected agencies to create an incentive program that promotes the integration of land use and transportation planning and decision-making.

6. Appoint a knowledgeable Maine DOT staff person with decision-making authority as a non-voting member of the Steering Committee;

7. Appoint to the Steering Committee representatives of the sectors identified in Paragraph 3, section 3;

8. Convene a Policy Group of key state and federal agencies that will have roles in implementing the Strategic Transportation - Land Use Plan;

9. Ask regional planning commissions to assist with the staffing of Town Response Panels;

10. Consider mechanisms to be included in the Strategic Plan that reward and provide incentives to municipalities that cooperate with Maine DOT and one another in land use and transportation matters in the U.S. Route 1 corridor;

11. Upon completion of a draft strategic plan, clearly articulate any items that stand as obstacles to adoption of the plan as state (or federal, regional or local) policy and work diligently with the steering and sub-committees to resolve any disagreements;

12. Upon completion of the Strategic Plan, place it before the decision-making persons or bodies of the agencies of the Policy Group and ask each, including Maine DOT itself, to consider adopting, as agency policy for the mid-coastal U.S. Route 1 corridor, the plan or the relevant aspects affecting their respective agencies; and

13. Undertake the planning and public participation processes in a manner consistent with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Maine Sensible

Transportation Policy Act, and other related laws and rules with jurisdiction over transportation and land use decision-making.

Paragraph 5. Responsibility of Municipalities

The Town of Lincolnville will:

1. Participate in good faith and in a timely manner to bring the preparation of the Strategic Plan to a successful conclusion;

2. Inform the citizens of the community of this agreement made with Maine DOT and other Gateway 1 strategic planning partners;

3. Appoint a Town Response Panel that is representative of the interests and points of view in the community in a timely manner; and ratify nominations by the Town Response Panel of a primary and an alternate representative to the Steering Committee.

4. Make available officials who can provide municipal information and data needed for the preparation of the Strategic Plan;

5. Communicate to the Gateway-1 Steering Committee and Maine DOT any proposals for major developments or re-zoning of properties on or adjacent to the corridor that may affect the character and functions of U.S. Route 1 or Route 90, so that Gateway-1 planning team may consider and respond to those proposals;

6. Cooperate in forums and discussions with Maine DOT and other municipalities in its sub-region and throughout the corridor on matters of common interest or of multi-town impact;

7. Upon completion of a draft strategic plan, clearly articulate any items that, from the point of view of the municipality or its sub-region, stand as obstacles to adoption of the plan as local policy and work constructively with the Steering Committee, and its subcommittees, Town Response Panels, Maine DOT and the project team to resolve any disagreements;

8. Upon completion of the Strategic Plan, place the plan before the legislative body of the Town so that it may consider adopting the plan or its relevant aspects for incorporation into the municipality's comprehensive plan or similar policy and implementation documents.

Paragraph 6. Responsibility of the U.S. Federal Highway Administration

The Federal Highway Administration will:

1. Participate in good faith and in a timely manner as a non-voting member of the Steering Committee and as a member of a state-federal Policy Group, as described in this MOU, to bring the preparation of the Strategic Plan to a successful conclusion;

2. Appoint a knowledgeable FHWA staff person with decision-making authority as a non-voting member of the Steering Committee and participate in the preparation of the scope of work for Phase II of the Gateway-1 project;

3. Upon review of drafts of the Plan, clearly articulate any items that challenge the adoption of the plan as FHWA policy and work diligently with Maine DOT, the steering committee and its subcommittees to resolve any disagreements;

4. Explore with participants of the planning process the need for and feasibility of flexibility in standards and regulatory processes of the National Highway System as they may affect the multiple goals for U.S. Route 1 and adjacent communities.

5. Acknowledge that the process undertaken and the findings made during Phase 2 of the Gateway-1 project and incorporated into the Strategic Plan will contribute to elements of compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and similar laws and rules to which federal transportation investments and decisions implementing the Strategic Plan may be subject.

Paragraph 7. Responsibility of the Maine State Planning Office

The Maine State Planning Office will:

1. Participate in good faith and in a timely manner as a non-voting member of the Steering Committee and as a member of a state-federal Policy Group, as described in this MOU, to bring the preparation of the Strategic Plan to a successful conclusion;

2. Appoint a knowledgeable State Planning Office staff person with decision-making authority as a non-voting member of the Steering Committee and participate in the preparation of the scope of the work for Phase II of the Gateway 1 project;

3. Make available to the project team data and documents, which it may have in its records, relating to the comprehensive plans and land use regulations of towns in the Route 1 corridor, and population and other demographic and economic information which it may have developed or to which it may have access;

4. Provide advice on best land use-transportation planning practices;

5. Work with participating communities on changes to comprehensive plans to implement recommendations as a result of Gateway 1 and to keep the plans consistent with the Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Act; and

6. Through the Land and Water Resources Council, the Coastal Program, and other state governmental entities and programs in which it has a leadership role, identify opportunities for connecting state initiatives with the Strategic Plan; facilitate resolution of conflicts or inconsistencies that may arise between the Strategic Plan and other state initiatives; and work with agencies that make capital investments on the corridor to develop incentives that promote integrated transportation and land use planning and decision-making.

Paragraph 8. Communities Outside of Immediate U.S. Route 1 Corridor but Directly Connected to It and/or Affected by It

Resources do not allow detailed study of communities outside of the immediate corridor defined in Paragraph 1. However, it is recognized that a number of other communities are directly connected to mid-coastal U.S. Route 1, affect the functions of U.S. Route 1, contribute to issues in individual U.S. Route 1 communities, and are affected by decisions made concerning transportation and land use on the U.S. Route 1 corridor.

Therefore, although other municipalities are not party to this MOU, representatives of other communities will be invited by the Steering Committee and its subcommittees to observe and participate in their meetings, as those committees deem appropriate. In addition, the Steering Committee will, at least twice during the preparation of the Strategic Plan, meet formally with representatives of off-corridor communities and invite their input.

Paragraph 9. Preparation of the Plan

Maine DOT will develop the Strategic Plan in a collaborative manner with the Town Response Panels, the Steering Committee and its subcommittees, and relevant state-federal agencies, based on the Phase II scope of work.

Paragraph 10. Issues to be Addressed in Phase II

A. Issues Common to Multiple Municipalities

A number of issues identified during Phase I of the study are common to multiple municipalities in the corridor. These issues and the methods for examining them will be articulated in the scope of services for Phase II, consistent with the outline of work attached to this MOU. Issues prominently identified by at least one-third of the municipalities include:

  • Speeding, including
    • setting, visibly posting, and enforcing speed limits
    • speed limits that are thought to be too high near built-up sections of some towns
  • Protecting the capacity, image, aesthetics, and open spaces of the Route 1 corridor
    • At the same time, recognizing and planning for the need to increase property tax base through growth along Route 1
  • Safety, including
    • traffic safety at identified intersections and along identified segments of Route 1
    • the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists
    • the impact of multiple curb cuts from strip development along Route 1
  • Lack of communication/cooperation among municipalities in
    • land use decisions that affect more than one municipality
    • resolving transportation issues that affect more than one municipality
  • Noise and safety problems associated with truck traffic and lack of appropriate (vs. de-facto) alternate freight routes
  • The need to protect and strengthen the viability and character of downtowns
  • Potential for bus, rail, and multi-use path alternatives; and for promoting the use of under-used transportation facilities to help relieve over-used facilities
  • Traffic congestion, where it:
    • diverts traffic onto local residential or secondary roads in order to bypass the congestion, and
    • directly or indirectly affects many communities, as with the Wiscasset bottleneck
  • Conflicts that arise as the result of:
    • competing goals, particularly Maine DOT's goal of safe, free-flowing traffic along Route 1 versus local goals relating to quality of life,
    • inadequate mechanisms for communications between Maine DOT and communities, and
    • inadequate communications and interactions between Maine DOT and communities and sometimes private developers when making design decisions for transportation or land use projects.

B. Issues of High Priority to the Municipalities

(This section is unique to each community, based on input from residents. Specific community issues can be found within each town's individual section of this web site).

Next | Previous

Office of Operations