DALTON, Mass. — The town's engineers say there is still time to work through the Dalton Division Road project’s design and permitting process. 

 

In December, the Select Board voted to advocate for Concept A, which would have sidewalks on both sides, a 5-foot bike lane in the road on both sides with a buffer, and a 2-foot painted buffer between the vehicle lane and in the bike lane. They also recommended the two-way stop control option. 

 

Since that decision, there have been sentiments to revisit this decision to reduce the cost and improve safety at the intersection off Williams Street, Washington Mountain Road, and Mountain Road. 

 

The original vote would have been the most expensive and "certainly not" the engineer or the state's "preferred design," Town Manager Thomas Hutcheson said during a meeting in November. 

 

During last week's Select Board meeting, Fuss & O'Neil project manager and senior traffic engineer Steve Savaria represented the options, explained potential obstacles, and demonstrated the next steps. Present board members have yet to vote on their final choice. 

 

The project is still in the pre-25 percent design stage and is currently on the fiscal year 2029 Transportation Improvement Program list, so there is "plenty of time" to work out the details. 

 

Since the original vote, some board members have shifted their opinion toward advocating for the most feasible and timely option with a "path of least resistance to get this project done." 

 

The project has challenges surrounding wetlands, state Department of Transportation requirements, and easements. 

 

Based on board members’ comments at the last two meetings, the new consensus is leaning toward a roundabout at the intersection off Williams Street, Washington Mountain Road and Mountain Road. 

 

"The [Metropolitan Planning Organization] did a study on dangerous intersections in Berkshire County, and this one Dalton Division Road was in the top five because of the potential for a head-on collision with a car coming off of William Street and cutting across … there's never been a disaster there because it's all local traffic," Select Board member John Boyle said. 

 

The roundabout would require a permanent fee for taking private property on the Pittsfield side. The two-way stop control option would have little impact on traffic operations.

 

The taking is about 6,000 square feet, which is less than 5 percent of the total lot area of the property, around 2 to 3 acres in size, Savaria said. 

 

The existing roadway already crosses private property, so it would need to be corrected regardless, he said. 

 

Later that week, the Traffic Commission endorsed the roundabout option, which it had done previously.

 

Commission Chair William Drosehn said more accidents would occur for the two-way stop control option compared to the roundabout.

 

He also noted that the small amount of taking might not affect the parking lot, just some grass. In addition, the roundabout may be beneficial to the businesses as it would be easier for patrons to enter and leave their properties. 

 

Since the entire western side of the road is within Pittsfield, the state Department of Transportation recommended involving the city in the development process. 

 

Boyle has previously advocated for involving the city in discussions, at one point agreeing with former Select Board member Joe Diver that Pittsfield should cover at least half the project's cost since it would benefit the city as much as it does Dalton.

 

There will be public information sessions so residents, affected businesses, and Pittsfield stakeholders can share their input.  

 

Boyle also emphasized contacting the Pittsfield mayor's office and the city's public works director to incorporate them in the public outreach process.

 

It also appeared that board members' opinions aligned with the project team's recommendation of the shared use path on the west side, given the environmental impact. 

 

Constructing sidewalks on the east side would require constructing retaining walls along significant stretches of roadway where adjacent wetlands are present. The alternatives that avoid wetlands would present the smallest impact. 

 

The options for sidewalks that Savaria presented included bicycle lanes with sidewalks on both sides, a shared-use path on the west side and no sidewalk on the east side, and a shared-use path on the west side and a partial sidewalk on the east side. 

 

The most expensive option is to have sidewalks on both sides, given the wetlands on the east side. The second option would have a 10-foot shared-use path on the west side of the road but no sidewalk on the east side.

 

The third option would also have the 10-foot shared-use path on the west side but would also try to maintain some sidewalks on the east side. It was mentioned that this may not be feasible for the entire road length.