FREEPORT
Dozens of residents crowded into the Freeport Community Library to give Maine Department of Transportation representatives an earful Tuesday during a tense portion of a town council meeting.
At issue: About 37 acres of trees that were reportedly clear-cut on state property running along Interstate 295 as part of a $205,000 project to improve visibility along the highway.
As a result, residents living near the highway said they are forced to endure the sights and sounds of the busy highway.
Where residents could at least gaze upon trees, they’re now stuck with what they say are an unsightly vista of tree stumps and a worse-forwear fence that separates the houses from state land.
John and Kimberly Libby are residents of True Street that runs perpendicular to I- 295.
“For people at the end of the street, it’s fumes, it’s noise, and of course the visual,” Kimberly Libby said in an interview with The Times Record, describing life since the trees were cleared.
The Libbys said they were given no notification before Maine DOT began the project, but said they were woken several nights with the sound of grinding and chipping of the timber, an activity they said would last between 11 p.m. and 4 a.m.
Members of the town council, neighbors, and two DOT representatives toured the area before Tuesday’s meeting.
Town Council Chairwoman Melanie Sachs said the neighbors’ ire is justified, noting that residents had to yell to DOT officials to be heard over the traffic on the tour.
“I think this was an unwarranted, reckless action on their part, frankly, with very little consideration of the impact it would have on residents,” said Sachs in an interview.
During Tuesday’s meeting, some residents said they have taken it upon themselves to install fences to block the site and sound of the highway at a cost of thousands of dollars.
DOT officials said they had good reason for clearing the 100-foot-wide swath of trees along the highway.
About 50,000 vehicles a day travel long that stretch of highway, according to Dale Doughty, DOT’s Bureau of Maintenance and Operations director.
In the past three years, there have been 187 crashes along the eight-mile stretch of highway. Twenty-three crashes were animal-related, and 44 were due to snow and ice, said Doughty.
Clearing the trees gives motorists a greater chance to see animals before they dart onto the highway, and also means more sunlight to help melt snow and ice on the road.
DOT Region Manager John Cannell said that the department could have done a better job notifying the community in advance of the project.
None of that assuaged concerns of residents, who wanted to know what DOT would do to fix the problem.
“My toddler is no longer sleeping at night,” said resident
Vanessa Leigh. “We’re always struggling to hear, and to overcome disruption.”
“I can’t enjoy my backyard any more,” Oak Avenue resident Michelle Peacock told the DOT representatives. “Are you going to do anything about it?”
Cannell said that, by law, DOT can’t compensate residents for lost property values, but added that DOT could work with the town council to provide funds to plant vegetation on the residents’ side of the barrier fence.
However, no plan has been finalized.
“There’s other places that we’ve cleared that are similar and haven’t had this level of concern,” said Doughty, speaking with reporters after Tuesday’s meeting. “This has been a different experience, here.”
jswinconeck@timesrecord.com
The reasoning
IN THE PAST THREE YEARS, there have been 187 crashes along the eight-mile stretch of highway. Twenty-three crashes were animal related, and 44 were due to snow and ice, said Dale Doughty, DOT’s Bureau of Maintenance and Operations director.
Clearing the trees gives motorists a greater chance to see animals before they dart onto the highway, and also means more sunlight to help melt snow and ice on the road.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less