Transportation And Circulation

The ability to move people and goods is essential to the economic vitality and quality of life in the region. A circulation assessment begins with a review of the Town’s goal and policies for the master plan relative to transportation and circulation.

The existing conditions of the roadway system are reviewed looking at such data as traffic counts and accident incidents. Proposals and recommendations are then made taking into consideration work on some of the other elements, such as proposals concerning open space for an interconnected bicycle and pathway system within the Town and connections to other adjoining towns and the region.

Littleton historically was sited on the Great Road to Boston. Its location at the intersection of major regional highways provides convenient access to Greater Boston, which in turn provides employment opportunities to residents and market opportunities for local businesses. At the same time, residents feel vulnerable to negative impacts of excessive through traffic clogging local streets. Part of local traffic problems stems from the suburban location and reliance on the car to get around town. Townspeople would like to minimize the impact of through traffic and increase regional and local transportation alternatives to the car. Strong support is voiced for a system of sidewalks, bike paths, and trails that provide residents with safe and enjoyable access to services, town buildings, the Common, recreation areas, and other important places in town.

Goals are the expression of the most basic community values that reflect the general agreement of the community about its future. Policies are general guidelines or principles that are meant to help achieve the goals.

Littleton will seek to minimize the impact of regional traffic.

Maintain the rural character of Littleton as much as possible while minimizing congestion during peak periods

Participate actively in regional planning and development of a regional public transportation system that lessens the number of vehicular trips along Littleton's streets

Accommodate traffic that has to go through Littleton as quickly as possible during peak hours, but discourage through traffic from using streets in Littleton when adequate alternatives are available outside of Littleton

Improve safety at locations where safety is deficient, striving to design solutions that are most consistent with Littleton's New England town character

Minimize the intrusion of through traffic on Littleton's collector and local streets

Design and implement circulation, sidewalk, and other streetscape improvements for the Town Center

Identify as many funding options as possible to implement roadway improvements that are acceptable to the Town

v Alternative Circulation Systems Goal

Littleton will create alternative ways for townspeople to circulate around town.

Develop a system of safe and attractive bicycle paths, footpaths, and sidewalks, with special attention to connecting residents with Town facilities, conservation and recreation areas, and business centers

Role of the Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization

The regional planning agency for Littleton is the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC). The Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) region is the same area as that of MAPC. The MPO is a federally mandated policy-making body that develops long-range and short-range plans to guide transportation investments in the region. The region covers approximately 1,405 square miles and encompasses 101 cities and towns with the western edge extending out to I-495. It is the commonwealth’s largest MPO and, with nearly three million people, it comprises nearly half of the state’s population. With close to two million jobs, the Boston MPO region is important to the economy not only of Massachusetts, but also to all of New England.

Due to federal regulations and deadlines, the Boston MPO is preparing the Transportation Plan in two stages. The U.S. Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) required the region to have an updated plan in place by January 16, 200l. However, the Boston MPO wishes to emphasize that substantial additional work will need to be done after this first stage is completed. For example, there must be additional analyses of the transportation effects of alternative land-use scenarios and transportation networks, the plan’s initial policies and environmental justice measures will need to be refined, and the public must be provided with additional opportunities to review, comment on, and contribute to the plan. Accordingly, the second stage of the planning effort will begin in January 2001. The Boston MPO will continue to work on the plan through the winter and spring, with the objective of adopting a refined plan before the summer of 2001. The Transportation Plan for the Boston region comprises the policies, strategies, and priorities for the region’s transportation system for the next 25 years.

Preparation of a long-range transportation plan is a federal requirement for all metropolitan areas. Its primary use is to set regional priorities for federally funded projects. The Plan also serves as a comprehensive, coordinated transportation plan for all the implementing agencies within the metropolitan area. The new Plan is being prepared in accordance with the requirements of TEA-21, the current federal surface transportation act. TEA-21, which Congress authorized in 1998 identifies seven key policy areas that must be supported by the planning process.

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 placed the responsibilities for prioritizing transportation projects within the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO’s) instead of the State transportation agencies. This presents local municipalities with greater chances for input in setting local priorities. This shift in priority setting is intended to give local municipalities a stronger role in planning transportation improvements that directly affect them. It is important to note that transportation projects and plans must be included in a regional transportation plan in order to receive federal funding for implementation.

It follows, therefore, that it is important for local communities to have an up-to-date master plan and to actively participate in regional planning. Otherwise, local interests will not become inputs to the Regional Transportation Plan for action by the state and funding.

Journey to Work

The 1990 data below shows where residents of Littleton work, how they get to work, and how long it takes them to get to work. This data is shown here so that when the 2000 US Census becomes available the data in the same tables may be compared. The table below shows that 20% of the resident work force works in Littleton. Ten percent travel to Boston, the central city in Littleton’s metropolitan statistical area (MSA). Another 71% worked in the remainder of the Boston MSA. Those that worked in another MSA were 18%. In the next table, of the 93% who drove to work, 93% drove alone. This is endemic to a suburban community where busy schedules and scattered destination points prevail. There is little incentive to car pool. A majority of Littleton’s residents got to work in less than half an hour (61%); another 30% took up to one hour; and, 7% took greater than one hour. Two percent worked at home.

Table 8 ‑ 3 Travel Time to Work (Workers 16 years and over)

Source: 1990 US Census, STF3B, P50.

I-495 is the most important roadway to the Town and the region, running north south through the region. The I-495 Corridor is the fastest growing region in Massachusetts. The 495 Corridor has emerged as a key location for new homes and many industries. The southern part of the region has attracted more distribution and manufacturing firms, while the northern section has more technology companies.

Route 2 runs east west through the entire region. This limited access roadway provides the area with a direct link to Boston and to the western half of the state. Route 2 connects Littleton to all the regions major urban communities to the west including Fitchburg, Leominster, and Gardner. Worcester to the southwest is easily accessed off Route 2 via I-190 or off I-495 via I-290.

Highways and roads are grouped into classes according to the type of service they are intended to provide. Classification is divided into principal arterials, minor arterials, major collector roads, minor collector roads, and local roads and streets. The chart below indicates the classification of roadways within Littleton.

Table 8 ‑ 4 Roadway Classifications

The table below lists the average daily traffic volumes for count stations located around Littleton. A traffic count of average daily traffic (ADT) is taken on a road over a 24-hour period counting in both directions. The magnitude of traffic is used to measure how near maximum capacity the present road is and over time determine the rate at which traffic is growing. A general ideal capacity for a two-lane road is in the neighborhood of 15,000-16,000 ADT. For those counts where traffic is counted separately in each direction, the two need to be added to obtain ADT. From these figures it is observed that Route 2A/110 is at or near capacity throughout its length. Traffic counts on roads and ramps were taken and reviewed by the Planning Board in July 1997 for the development approval process of Littleton Common; they are not reproduced here, but are available in Board records.

Table 8 ‑ 5 Average Daily Traffic

Source: MAPC – Metropolitan Area Planning Council

MHD – Massachusetts Highway Department

SPA – Sam Park Associates

The Route 495 and 119 intersections currently receive a failing grade. Signals are planned for these intersections as part of the Corporate Common Project. A light has been proposed at the intersection of King and 2A as well.

For the two-year period from 1 July 1995 to 30 June 1997, there were 647 traffic accidents reported in Littleton. Of these accidents, 347 of them, or 57.8, were located on either Great Road or King Street. Of these 347 accidents, the citizen transportation task force was able to chart 235 of them. The breakdown of these accidents is as follows:

52 were at or around the Great Road/King Street traffic light;

48 were east of the intersection (towards Donelans);

56 were west of the intersection (towards 495);

28 were south of the intersection (towards Ayer);

51 were identified only as “Great Road”.

No other location in Littleton had a significant percentage of the remaining accidents as the remaining accidents were dispersed throughout town.

The Town of Littleton does not have a Road Condition Survey. The Town does not have a formalized Road Management Plan. The plan is based upon complaints, emergencies, new developments, complexity of the job and the cost. The town paves 2-3 miles of roadway each year at an average expenditure of $200,000 to $300,000 per year.

Newer roads are built to current specifications for drainage and road width. When older roads are repaved, they are brought up to current specifications for drainage and width.

Chapter 90 funds are used for all major road construction consisting of capital improvements, curbing, culverts, engineering fees and major overhauls. No general road maintenance is included in the Chapter 90 funds.

There is no town map showing the locations of all sidewalks in town, nor is there a sidewalk condition survey. In the past, sidewalks have not been of high priority in the town as they are very expensive to install and run into issues with personal property. Sidewalks are only repaired when an adjoining road is repaired. Approximately $15,000 has been allocated by the town for sidewalk maintenance. Sidewalks are located in town along most major routes. Sidewalks are located on 2A from Kimball Street into Littleton Common. Along 2A/119, there is a sidewalk from Littleton Common to just past Donelan’s. Sidewalks run on Goldsmith Street from 2A to Newtown Road. Sidewalk maintenance on state roads is the responsibility of the town.

Approximately $286,000 of state funding for capital improvements is received by the Highway Department every year. No written breakdown of these funds is available.

There are currently a few major transportation projects that have or will be presented to the State. 2A/119 is being repaved from Robinson Road to the Concord Rotary. This project is now underway and should be finished in the Spring 2000.

A new regional Train Station is planned for Littleton. It is unclear when this project will get underway.

As part of the Corporate Common development project, new traffic lights would be installed at the access ramps of 119 and 495. It is unclear when this project will get underway.

The intersection of 2A and King Street is to be redesigned. The angle of the intersection is to be changed to a 90-degree intersection and a traffic light installed. It is unclear when this project will get underway. Part of this work might be contingent on the development of the new high school.

Goldsmith Road is to be widened; sidewalks, a bike lane, and curbing will be added or improved. This project has been presented to the state. Work is expected to begin in the next few years.

A proposal to redesign the Town Common was presented to the State. This proposal included the addition of turn lanes and signals in all directions at the intersection of 2A, 119, and 110. The intersection of 2A and Goldsmith will be narrowed. Stevens Street would be redesigned as parking area rather than a through street. It is unclear what the current status of this project is.

Today, service along the Fitchburg line from North Station in Boston passes through Littleton and terminates at the Fitchburg rail station. The principal existing need for the region’s commuter rail service is maintenance of its operation at current levels. This also entails maintaining adequate funding levels from fares and local/state sources.

The MBTA commuter rail station at Foster Street/I-495 serves Littleton. The morning peak service of the commuter rail to Boston is generally satisfactory. The outbound evening peak service has gaps where trains only go as far as South Acton. Mid-day inbound and outbound service could be improved but demand may not justify more runs. Weekend service is also sparse.

The major complaint of the riders is the limited frequency of the service. Although many of the riders would welcome increased service, because of the limited ridership it would be difficult to argue for an increase in the daily frequency of the rail service. The commuter rail service is an important asset to the region and has widespread support. The service provides a vital link to the major employment centers in Boston, creating an economic dependence on the service. Interest has been expressed in creating a commuter express line from Fitchburg to Boston. Of course, an express train to Boston should stop in Littleton at I-495. A high quality service could improve upon the current service and increase overall demand.

However, parking at the Littleton station is inadequate. There are only about 40 spaces and the commuter lot often fills before 8AM. Commuter cars regularly overflow onto private land. In fact there is no station at Littleton, just a stop at grade. There has been little progress on the proposal for a new train station south of Route 2. Parking for 300-400 cars would be accessed by a new interchange directly off Route 2. The technical possibility of establishing such an interchange has been cleared. The proposal for a station is on a list of Mass Highway projects awaiting environmental study. In November 2000 the Massachusetts Highway Department had the completion of an Environmental Notification Form (ENF) scheduled for April 2001.

The “Open Space Concept” as part of overall land use (see chapter II) indicates a bicycle and pedestrian bridge over Route 2 connecting other parts of the Town to the train station by trails through a newly created open space system. Such facilities are encouraged and mandated as policy for funding in national and state legislation as part of “enhancement facilities” for highway and transit facilities.

The Boston MPO used the national TEA-21 emphasis areas to structure the development of its guiding policies for the recently approved 2000 Regional Transportation Plan. Policy 5 is to “Effectively and efficiently integrate and connect the various components of the transportation system, across and between modes, for both people and freight”. Some of the ways the Boston MPO states it will implement this policy is to:

“Plan projects that provide street, bicycle and pedestrian connections to transit routes within and between activity centers”.

“Encourage a regional network of safe and convenient bikeways connected to other transportation modes and local bikeway systems, consistent with regional street design guidelines”.

“Provide pedestrian and bicycle access, appropriate to existing and planned land uses, street design classification and public transportation, as a part of transportation projects through priority funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects” [1] [1] . . v MART Service

There is no fixed route bus service provided in Littleton. The Montachusett Regional Transit Authority (MART) organizes services that provide paratransit service for the elderly, disabled or disadvantaged population. Paratransit, functionally defined, is a transportation service, which does not have a fixed route. It is characterized by many origins and many destinations. It is also known as demand-responsive because all trips are arranged by appointment. MART contracts with social and human service agencies for paratransit service. Senior Shuttle Van service is provided for a minimal cost through a local service contracted with Littleton Limo. Reservations for the van service must be made at least two days in advance. The schedule for senior shuttle van service is listed in Table 8‑6 .

Table 8 ‑ 6 Senior Shuttle Schedule

“Bicycles and pedestrians shall be given due consideration in the comprehensive transportation plans developed by each metropolitan planning organization and State. Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways shall be considered, where appropriate, in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction of transportation facilities, except where bicycle and pedestrian use are not permitted.”

(U.S. Department of Transportation, TEA 21(Section 1202(a)(3)(1)).

While bicycle and pedestrian modes often are grouped together, and do have some things in common, they are also quite distinct. Pedestrians use sidewalks; bicyclists may be prohibited from them. Pedestrian mobility is determined by whether there are sidewalks available, and their condition, and by the safety and convenience of roadway crossings. Bicycle mobility is affected primarily by conditions on the roads. Both modes use trails.

Bicycle Travel

“The vision of the Statewide Bicycle Transportation Plan is recognition of bicycling as a viable means of transportation and reasonable accommodation of the needs of bicyclists in policies, programs, and projects. Greater recognition and accommodation of the needs of bicyclists will lead to a more balanced transportation system with greater modal choice and improvements in bicycle safety. Such actions will enhance the environment and quality of life in the commonwealth, and improve personal mobility.

Bicycling is a highly efficient means of transportation as well as a healthy, enjoyable activity for people of all ages. (The Surgeon General has found that a regular, preferably daily, regimen of at least 30–45 minutes of brisk walking or bicycling can lead to improved health.) For all these reasons, bicycling should be encouraged and promoted so that more people will choose to bicycle. Improving facilities for bicycling will lead to greater use of bicycles and an increase in the attendant benefits to citizens, communities, and the commonwealth.” [2] [2]

There has been a noticeable increase in the number of bicycles around population centers and on the highways. Bicycles have found a place on the highway network by default, as have pedestrians. Bicycles mixed with motor vehicle traffic can be dangerous and create traffic delays.

There is strong support from the regional communities for designated bikeways for recreational and commuting traffic. Individual bikeway projects are being implemented in some towns within the region. Construction of bikeways will encourage cycle commuting by providing a direct, separate, and safe route between the communities. Also, increasing concern for air quality and energy conservation is leading to renewed interest in development of adequate facilities for bicycles throughout the region.

Bikeways are special routes and/or facilities established to facilitate the movement of bicycles as an energy efficient transportation and/or recreation mode of travel.

There are three types of bikeways: bike paths, bike lanes, and bike routes. These have been categorized as Class I, II, and III bikeways respectively. Class I bike paths are routes totally separated from automobile or pedestrian traffic. Class II bike lanes are lanes at the edge of streets marked for exclusive use of bicyclists. Class III bike routes are roadways that bikes share with cars.

Legally, a bicycle has been recognized as a vehicle in Massachusetts since 1973, subject to basically all the rights and responsibilities of an automobile. Bikeways are public rights-of-way, maintained by a responsible state or local agency, just as a municipality’s streets are owned and maintained. Where the land for a proposed bike path is privately owned, an easement to permit public passage may be obtained, or the right-of-way may be purchased outright. Bikeways which parallel roads may be located within the existing publicly owned right-of-way, extending beyond the roadway itself.

Trails are used by all non-motorized modes: bicyclists, walkers, skaters, joggers, and users of wheelchairs (which can be motorized) and baby carriages. Trails are used not only by experienced commuter bicyclists heading to work, but by novice adults and children, who, by using trails, might gain the confidence and experience necessary to travel on-road. Even with a significantly expanded network of trails in the Boston area, they can serve only a fraction of all trips.

Trails are usually built on railroad rights-of-way or along natural corridors such as rivers. In general, trails have proved to be very popular with a wide range of people. There are eight proposed regional trails in the Boston area but none are in Littleton. The network of trails proposed in the Open Space Concept (see chapter II) provides a basis for the Town’s Open Space Committee to do more detailed planning and to set some high priorities to establish easements, for land acquisition and construction. Littleton can establish its own natural trail corridors.

Many scenic roads in Littleton are shown as recommended routes on a popular bicycle map. Among these are Newtown Road, Harwood Avenue, Whitcomb Avenue, Liberty Square Road, Harvard Road, Bruce Street, and King Street. The busiest roads, Routes 110 and 119 are not pleasant or safe for bicycle travel. Future improvements on these roads should incorporate dedicated bicycle lanes.

Pedestrian Access

A vision for pedestrians is provided in the Massachusetts Pedestrian Plan:

“As we enter the 21 ^st century, walking in Massachusetts will become a viable transportation choice for more trips; to work and school, for shopping, and for visiting friends and family. Increasing numbers of people throughout Massachusetts, residents and visitors alike, will be able to walk safely and conveniently to their destinations. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers will be aware of each other’s needs, and will act appropriately for the situation in which they are walking, riding, or driving. Walking will increase, while accidents involving pedestrians will decrease. Street and sidewalk design will accommodate and give greater priority to pedestrians in ways that are responsive to local situations and needs. More people will be involved in their communities to improve conditions and encourage more walking.” [3] [3]

Pedestrian activity is generally limited to small areas within Littleton Common. Some residential streets abutting the Common or around Long Lake don’t even have sidewalks. A program to retrofit these areas closest to the center with sidewalks is proposed along with needed repairs to existing sidewalks. Such action encourages walking instead of automobile use and can be an important component of the overall revitalization of the Common.

Sidewalks should be included in new roadway construction, roadway improvements, and residential and non-residential subdivision development. Along major arterial roadways, land should be secured for sidewalks or pathways as development occurs. Pedestrian actuated signals should be in place in densely populated areas where warranted to allow safer movement of pedestrians.

Proposals and Recommendations v Facilitate Transit Station Project

Facilitate the new transit station and associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements for the proposed site south of Route 2 while securing open space for conservation and trail use.

Work with the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority (MBTA) and the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) and insist on “Enhancement Facilities” funding for bicycle/pedestrian facilities at the new transit station. The key improvement is the Bicycle/pedestrian Bridge over Route 2. Town plans to complete the trail to Littleton Common is also extremely important.

The hinge pin of the open space system described in the Open Space Concept (see chapter II) is the Prouty property. The reasons it is such a key property are its central location between Littleton Common and the proposed MBTA rail station, extensive frontage on Long Lake, large size, Wilderness Hill, and vegetation. In previous planning efforts and the Open Space and Recreation Plan, the Prouty property has been given high priority for acquisition to provide protection in perpetuity. We see this property of the highest priority for Town acquisition.

Set the highest priority on planning and constructing a major trail that could be the backbone of a Town trail system through quality open spaces. Such a trail might run from Littleton Common to the new transit station. This part of the whole trail system could be argued to be a commuter bike trail connecting to the MBTA rail station and potentially obtain funding in conjunction with the new train station. It would be prudent for the Town to begin discussions with the MBTA and MHD and begin plans for the feasibility and cost of securing the needed right-of-way. Branches can access the Long Lake residential area, Littleton Common neighborhoods.

Later, other the trail can be continued to the schools along Russell Street (see Open Space Concept in chapter II) and using the Russell Street Bridge across I-495, the trail could reach a future Proctor Hill conservation reservation and residential areas beyond. Likewise, another branch could access the Newtown Hill conservation reservation and residential areas to the north and east.

A network of through streets improves circulation within a Town and reduces travel time. Plus, it also reduces trips on major arterials and collectors. The end result is that capacity of major roadways is maintained for a larger population base, and roads can remain narrower with fewer lanes for a larger population, thus helping to promote rural character. The objective in designing local roads is to establish a pattern that does not encourage through traffic. The Town should:

Adopt a policy that cul-de-sacs will be approved only in situations where connecting roads are not possible due to topography or wetlands. Otherwise provision must be made for through streets with dedicated right-of-ways.

Cul-de-sacs generally will not become approved town roads and maintenance is to be legally provided by a homeowners group with liens on property by the Town possible if not maintained. Require a 100 foot dedicated ROW for extension of road.

Require a minimum of 80’-100’ for all rights-of-way in residential areas outside village districts including cul-de-sacs and including a right-of-way for extension of the road unless it is not possible to extend the cul-de-sac in the future due to topography or wetlands. The added right-of-way is to provide for sidewalks or a trail where needed, street trees, and thereby protect rural character.

Phased projects may use a temporary cul-de-sac meeting all zoning requirements for it if a performance bond is maintained till completion of the road.

Begin the construction and repair program in the most densely developed areas of Town to encourage walking. Two areas that would seem high priority areas include the Littleton Common and Long Lake areas. Construct or repair sidewalks along both sides of streets in Littleton Common. This will make increased pedestrian access possible and provide for safer walking by everyone in the village from kids to seniors.

Institute a Pavement Management System for the Town in conjunction with an improved Capital Improvement Program process to better plan and schedule routine road maintenance in order to better protect the Town’s investment in its roads. The Town needs to protect its investment in roads and other public facilities commensurate with its level of assets. Lack of routine maintenance investment results in needless deterioration and replacement resulting in reduced utility of the facility and greater long-term replacement costs.

It is through the Regional Planning Agency that larger transportation issues concerning the Town are made. In recent years it is understood that Littleton has not been as active in regional planning activities as some other communities. Important areas for regional cooperation and for future implementation concerning Littleton and its surrounding communities occur through MAPC not only in transportation, but also in the areas of economic development, solid waste, and open space. MAPC will also be working with towns interested in establishing bikeways in order to provide technical assistance in bikeway implementation. Therefore, Littleton should be more actively engaged in MAPC activities.

The Town should work with the regional planning agency, MAPC, to establish a systematic schedule (every 2-3 years) for doing traffic counts on its major Routes. The purpose is to monitor the buildup of traffic over time in order to anticipate the need for future improvements.

Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC

Bicycles and Pedestrians Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System

Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System

Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC Facilitate Transit Station Project Ensure Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge to Transit Station Establish Littleton Open Space Trail Restrict Use of Cul-de-Sacs Sidewalk Construction and Repair Program Pavement Management System Proactive Town Participation with MAPC and the MPO Schedule Traffic Counts with MAPC