The Cape Elizabeth Town Council unanimously approved a new traffic calming policy, despite the fact that committee members and councilors said it still needs tweaking.

“We consider this still the draft,” said Richard Berman, a member of the Traffic Calming/Road Safety Working Group, at Monday’s council meeting.

The traffic calming policy was created due to a high number of traffic complaints received by police from residents and a recommendation by the town council in 2006 to improve road safety. The policy provides a guideline for residents with traffic complaints to follow in order to have changes made to calm traffic trouble spots.

Town Manager Mike McGovern did not see a problem with approving an unpolished policy. “This is one of the responsibilities of this committee,” McGovern said at the meeting. The committee is also working on identifying areas of town that need pedestrian and bike safety improvements and is looking at ways to make the town center more pedestrian friendly. McGovern said that issues with the traffic calming policy could be brought up when the committee returns to the council with reports on other projects.

Though the council had questions and suggestions about the wording of the policy, the underlying structure of the policy was well received.

“I’m so excited that we’re talking about calming traffic,” said Councilor Mary Ann Lynch.

According to Berman, by looking at different traffic calming policies from municipalities throughout the country, the committee identified four concepts that needed to be considered in drafting its own recommendation. The classification of roads needed to be considered. For example, traffic problems on Route 77 would be treated differently than those on a dead- end street. Also, different levels of improvements were identified to deal with varying levels of severity of traffic problems. The third concept was how to measure the severity, which would consider both the speed and volume of cars in a potentially problematic area. Lastly, neighborhood buy-in would have to be taken into account; changes would only be made if a majority of a neighborhood is in favor of them, in order to avoid conflict.

Within the policy is a procedure for requesting traffic calming, which begins with a request from a resident to police, followed by a speed study by the police department, which will then determine the degree of improvements that are needed.

There are three classifications of measures that could be taken in order to calm traffic. According to the policy, passive measures, the least severe and costly, include speed notification sign boards, neighborhood mailings, police enforcement, evaluation for pedestrian and/or bicycle safety improvements and the Adopt-a-Cone program, for which citizen volunteers place cones at designated points in front of their homes every morning and retrieve them at dusk.

Though passive measures are the most subtle reactions to traffic problems, Councilor Cynthia Dill, who was also a member of the committee, said they “shouldn’t be seen as a non-effective way to calm traffic.”

The second tier of traffic improvements as defined by the policy are standard measures, which include turn restrictions, pavement markings and plantings of trees near the roadway that can create the illusion of a narrow road, which causes drivers to reduce their speed. Standard measures will be implemented when a speed study indicates that average speeds in the neighborhood exceed 5 mph over the speed limit and 51 percent of the households in the neighborhood are in favor of taking traffic calming measures.

The most severe measures that would be taken in order to calm traffic are physical alterations to the roadways. These include speed tables, traffic circles and chokers or pedestrian refuge islands, which narrow the street in order to slow traffic. In order for physical alterations to be considered for a neighborhood, the speed study must indicate that the average speed of traffic is greater than 5 mph over the speed limit; a volume study must indicate over 100 cars pass through the area during the peak hour; there must be a school zone, other pedestrian generator or lack of a sidewalk; and at least 75 percent of the neighborhood must be in favor of physical alteration measures being taken. At that point, the neighborhood’s request would have to be approved by the town council in order to be implemented.

At the meeting, Lynch asked whether the council would still be able to make physical alterations to roadways in town without the approval of the neighborhood or the result of traffic studies. Dill said that the policy will in no way affect the council’s ability to “put a stop sign on every corner” if it wants to.

Though Councilor David Backer supported the policy, he encouraged the council and the committee to be open to reworking it if flaws are found. Dill agreed there still may be some “massaging” of the policy after it is implemented.

“Our work is not done,” she said.