Skip to main content

How the Boothbay Roundabout Was Sold

In a story published in the Boothbay Register, in May of 2014   The return of the TIF the TIF district which was passed did not include the controversial village improvement plan, traffic roundabout or borrowing money to pay for a municipal bond.

In 2016, the town entered into a financial partnership with the Maine Department of Transportation to finance a roundabout. According to the DOT Cooperative Agreement, the Developer. Paul Coulombe ("PGC5 LLC") hired the design firm to design the roundabout which required approval by DOT. 
I have never found confirmation of the identity of the design firm hired by the Developer.

In March of 2016, a proposal including a re-routed Corey Lane, a new entrance to Back River Road and roundabout near the Boothbay Common was published in the Boothbay Register as a plan approved by the Maine Department of Transportation. The Boothbay Register website displays a video approved by DOT.
 The video is presented by Mark Lenters of GHC inc, who identifies himself as a consultant recommended by DOT. Mr. Lenters advocates for a roundabout located at Rt 27,  The video includes images of earlier plans in which the roundabout is located off to the side of Rt 27 in the vicinity of the old four-way stop which was rejected because property needed to be taken. Instead, the video advocates for rerouting Corey Lane and placing the roundabout on Rt 27 where the traffic from the Botanical Gardens, identified as the cause of long queues, will merge with the traffic going in and out of town. Coincidentally the recommended location for the roundabout is positioned so that it also serves as an entrance to the Country Club and Coulombe's future village development surrounding the Boothbay Center Common.

lists like the one below are used as visual aids.

Traffic generated by the Country Club and the proposed Coulombe shopping development at the Commons, and the town dump is missing in the 2016 presentation of a ten to twenty-year plan. Diagrams of earlier versions of a roundabout, dating back to 2002, include Country Club Road.

In 2016, the new solution is to reroute Corey Lane. The video does not explain the reason why taking property is an issue if the roundabout is located at the old four-way stop but is not an issue if Corey Lane is rerouted, creating a new section of road.

Country Club Road is not included in the video diagrams of the 2016 plan, showing the new section of Corey lane merging into Rt 27 opposite the entryway to the Common, Traffic flows merging into the roundabout are depicted with moving vehicles but the road to the Common is depicted with no moving vehicles, despite the traffic issues caused by events on the Common

Page 22 of the DOT Cooperative Agreement lists the Botanical Gardens as employing 140 persons and the Country Club as employing 125 persons. BGC2is identified in the DOT Cooperative Agreement as the largest taxpayer in the municipality and classified as a country club. One might ask, why is the Country Club missing from this traffic pattern scenario? Country Club Road also serves the town dump which generates its own flow of traffic but the 2014 diagram treats the dump road ("Country Club Road") as if it is just a sleepy intersection used by only a small number of vehicles. This is not the case. Today, after the new roadway has been constructed, the turnoff to and from Country Club Road often entails a long wait, by the standards in the video presentation.

It is written in the DOT Cooperative Agreement that PGC5 LLC submitted a design for the Boothbay roundabout for approval by the Maine Department of Transportation. It is witnessed by Dale Doughty, Director of the Maine Department of Transportation on April 17, 2017.

DOT Cooperative Agreement, pg 3
1.  Proiect Design:The Developer has procured a contract with a qualified engineering firm to design the Project in accordance with specifications approved by MaineDOT (the "Design    Contract"). The Design Contract also includes all necessary title research, right of way mapping services and preparation of transactional documents to properly identify existing conditions, property impacts, and all parties having ownership or financial interests in the affected abutting properties, and to effectively transfer the necessary property rights to the Developer and, in turn, to MaineDOT. The Developer shall ensure that the following standards and expectations are met:
 a.      Design Standards:
 i.         Project Design must meet the requirements of State of Maine, Department of Transportation Standard Specifications, November 2014 Edition.
ii.       Final design must result in a minimum of Level of Service (LOS) D for a 10 year design life measured as 10 years from the scheduled year of completion of the Project,
iii. Prior to the implementation of Project construction, the Developer shall ensure that the PDR and the final PS&E package is submitted to MaineDOT and the Municipality for review and comment, together with any updated information, schedules or estimates as changes occur. Any changes requested or concerns expressed by MaineDOT must be addressed to MaineDOT's satisfaction before the Project may proceed. Any changes requested or concerns expressed by the Municipality must be addressed to the Municipality's satisfaction before the Project may proceed. 
The reason why the design firm, hired by the Developer, might want to downplay the impact of the traffic generated by the Developer's development is that it is challenging to sell a traffic plan which merges all the largest traffic flows into one. The traffic coming from the Botanical Gardens had to merge with Rt 27 no matter what but when the traffic coming from the Gardens was filtered through the four-way stop, the traffic going towards the Harbor separated from the traffic going out of town. In the new configuration that flow of traffic does not divide before it merges with traffic on Rt 27, and not shown, traffic generated by Coulombe's present and future developments. By representing the entrance to the Common as having an insignificant flow of traffic, it minimizes the impact of multiplying the volume of traffic flowing around the roundabout. The new configuration is touted as safer because traffic moves only in one direction, ignoring other considerations such the greater volume of traffic than before, moving in one direction in a tiny roundabout with very small windows of opportunity to calculate which exit the oncoming vehicle is going to take. The argument for the roundabout located in the middle of a formerly unobstructed main through way is that a one direction traffic flow will minimize head-on collisions, not necessarily true should vehicles collide and then spin around within the roundabout.

Without substantiation, the speaker asserts that a roundabout composed of five yielding points will slow the traffic down. If the yield causes traffic to slow down, then five yield points should have slowed traffic down to a crawl but that is not the case. Entering from Back River to Route 27 is as difficult as it ever was, if not more so. The traffic from the Botanical Gardens and heading out of town is routed through the roundabout and on to Rt 27 where it becomes part of the flow of traffic to which drivers coming from Back River must yield. The traffic headed into the Botanical Gardens has the same effect. The four-way stop allowed the short line to proceed in a fair rotation as individual cars came to the head of the queue. The new design favors large interests at the expense of the small, mirroring the operating philosophy of Maine's public-private government as expressed in detail, everywhere. The effect is also seen in traffic going in and out of town. All must wait and make way for the traffic serving the larger institutions. The landscaping feels like one is driving through an extended country club, now incorporating the seat of town government. Traffic speed continues to be regulated only by the same two 30 hour mile limits which existed before the road was changed. The speed limit posted on the road from the Harbor is obscured seasonally by the foliage of the surrounding trees. No attempt has been made to improve visibility by trimming the branches.

The pedestrian crosswalk from the Common to the Town office still exists, almost immediately after the roundabout, which seems needlessly dangerous. If traffic confusion should occur on the roundabout, there is no time to recover before encountering the pedestrian crosswalks. The plan touts the new parking lot which will reduce crosswalk traffic, but the parking lot was also in the earlier plans.

Flash forward to the present day, A new road leading to the Country Club from the Common roadway is visible as one travels the new designer roadway.

About a week later, in an article published by The Wiscasset Newspaper, it is written that Paul Coulombe and Danielle Betts of the Knickerbocker Group held a meeting to present the plan in a public forum. The article does not explain why it was Mr. Coulombe and a representative of the Knickerbocker Group who presented the plan to the public. The DOT Cooperative Agreement grants Mr. Coulonbe (the "Developer") the responsibility of hiring the firm which will design the roundabout. The plan approved by DOT in 2016 was designed by the design firm hired by Mr. Coulombe. I have not come across the identity of that firm.

The DOT Cooperative Agreement

In the DOT Cooperative Agreement diagram, a large area where the Country Club is located is not identified as the location of a traffic-generating enterprise. In the diagram, the wooded area looks undeveloped, as if the traffic will be coming primarily from the Commons.

The Project: Quoted from The Cooperative Agreement.
The State of Maine, acting by and through its Department of Transportation (“Maine DOT”) has formed a business partnership initiative (“BPI”) model. Designed to promote cooperation between Maine DOT, and municipalities, private utilities, private businesses, and other entities by leveraging resources on a to match limited State resources. To implement the Project, the Town has proposed implementing a BPI venture in which Project costs and responsibilities are allocated between the Town, Maine DOT, and PGC5, LLC, a Maine limited liability company located in Boothbay (the “Developer”). These three parties have entered into an agreement, The Maine Department of Transportation Cooperative Agreement Regarding Design, Construction and Maintenance of a Traffic Round About and Associated Amenities Route 27, Boothbay, Maine ( “The Cooperative Agreement”) to provide funds to construct and to maintain finance the project

….Upon completion of the Project, Maine DOT shall be responsible for all year round maintenance associated with the resulting Project infrastructure, including all stormwater drainage elements but excluding any installed treatment plan. The Town, or its designee, shall be responsible for all year-round maintenance associated with the resulting sidewalk and pedestrian amenities, as well as lighting and landscaping, as well as signage components that are not directly related to traffic control.

The Project is estimated to cost $3,545,000. Maine DOT will contribute 33.3 % of the total Project costs, up to a maximum amount of $1,000,000. The Town will contribute funds in the amount of 35% of total Project Costs, up to a maximum amount of $1,125,000. plus $25,000 for legal fees (which is the Voter Approved Municipal Obligation and the Town's legal costs associated with the Project and which represents the maximum amount the Town is authorized to expend; the Developer will contribute the balance of the Project funds, initially estimated to be $1,420,000, which may be applied to any and all aspects of the total Project Costs. If the total Project Costs exceed $3,545,000. (the “Project Costs Overages”), the Developer will assume all additional costs. Neither the Town or the Maine DOT shall participate in Project Costs Overages.

The structuringmaintenance of public infrastructure. The Town is responsible for the costs of maintaining sidewalks and landscaping.

To some, the landscaping is overdone and appears as an extension of what will someday become the Developer's shopping center and is already the Developers country club. The Developer's contribution can be applied to any part of the project and so the Developer could potentially pay for the maintenance of the landscaping.

The video identifies traffic at the Botanical Gardens closing hour as the reason the roadway must be redesigned. The Gardens is a non-profit corporation, which does not pay property taxes used to finance public infrastructure costs. It could volunteer to contribute to landscaping maintenance costs. Non-profits sometimes make contributions related to their mission, in order to keep from showing a profit. Perhaps there is a way for the Town to negotiate this with the Gardens but that usually comes at a cost, perhaps extended expansion in the watershed.

The newly constructed roadway is a system based on trust in the etiquette of the unknown driver. When turning on to Country Club Road, one is left to hope that other drivers will honor the driving etiquette once enforced by law at the four-way stop, which is to say that the vehicle that gets to the intersection first goes first. This is much easier when it is a matter of one or two cars but a much more complex situation when dealing with a long line of cars.

With the exit on the Common and/or the exit on Country Club Road used by country club and the future village development, the traffic situation at the Country Club Road intersection is destined to become more complex if the Coulombe development proceeds as projected. The new “safer' roadway provides no rule of law to direct the functioning of the traffic except for directional arrows painted on the roadway, and the recently added one-way arrows installed at the roundabout by the Department of Transportation after some drivers were spotted going around the roundabout in the wrong direction. The design breaks old standards. Form does not follow function!


The DOT Cooperative Agreement was obtained with a Freedom of Access Request to the Department of Transportation. You can find contact names listed online by searching Maine Freedom of Access.. Anyone can make such a request but it is advisable to request the specific name of the document, which I only learned once I had obtained it but my readers now know the name and can simplify the process of trying to obtain information from Maine's public-private government- not known for its user-friendliness.

In 2014 I made a suggestion to the Maine Ombudsman, Brenda Keilty, of a searchable online database. At the time, the Maine Legislature was working on a transparency bill, shortly after having received a negative transparency review from the Center for Public Integrity.  The response, I received follows:
1.Information made available on an agency website but not in a searchable database format may not provide the research and investigative tool needed by the public. The Freedom of Access Act does not require that public information be posted online in any particular format, just that public records be made available. While there is a strong argument for increasing the accessibility and usefulness of information, there is no current requirement that the technology in place achieve that objective.
2.The collection of data and reports generated from that data may be public records but the agency is not required under the law to create a new record or report in response to a FOAA request. If the dataset you request does not exist, the agency may choose to produce it for any number of reasons but not because they are legally required to take such an action. I appreciate your comments on this topic and I will continue to bring attention to the need for accessible, useful public data.
Brenda Kielty
In 2015, after the Transparency bill was passed, Maine received another F for Failing, from the Center for Public Integrity.

NEWSFLASH!!!!  Right to Know Advisory Committee first scheduled meeting - Please become involved by supporting a publicly searchable Online Database!

The Right to Know Advisory Committee will hold its first meeting of 2018 on Thursday, September 13th at 4:00 p.m. in Room 438 of the State House.   

The meeting is open to the public and the audio will be streamed live over the Internet:

The agenda is posted at  

If you agree that there should be an online searchable database and/or that the public should have the right to request information in a searchable digital form, Please contact the Right To Know Committee and say so.

The following addresses are good:
Margaret J. Reinsch, Esq., Legislative Analyst
Joint Standing Committee on Judiciary
Maine State Legislature
Office of Policy and Legal Analysis
Room 215, Cross State Office Building
13 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333
(207) 287-1670 (office number)
(207) 287-1673 (direct and voice mail)
(207) 287-1275 (fax)


Popular posts from this blog

An Incomplete Theory of Inflation Made to Order for Mass Consumption.

M oney is not what it used to be, so must our ways of thinking about it adapt. jaakko-kemppainen-unsplash The message treads across the media terrain, beating louder and louder as if to drown out the beat of the distant drummer. W arning! The only thing the stimulus will stimulate is inflation. The people will pay as the wealthy elite invests their windfalls in financial assets. Doom and gloom set to march across the land to the beat of the distribution of stimulus funds. In recent years as past predictions of fiscal disaster following stimulus spending failed to materialize and so the thinking about national debt and deficits has evolved, most noticeably with the development of  Modern Monetary Theory . In the   fall of 2020,  National Affairs  published a story,  Does the Debt Matter ? by Peter Wehner & Ian Tufts. Peter Wehner is vice president and senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and served in the last three Republican administrations. Ian Tufts is a recent g

Why are social impact investors trying so hard to defeat smaller shelters for the homeless?

  "Social Impact” developers in Portland, Maine seek to squelch a referendum for smaller shelters called for by qualified practitioners with concrete experience in the field. A large sign says Vote C to support the Homeless, small handmade sign next to it says Untrue! That sign is paid for by developers who want / Photo by Jess Falero In   the 1970s under Governor Longley , Maine became a centrally managed economy that expanded Maine’s wealth gap and merged, almost seamlessly, the public and private and the non-profit and for-profit economic sectors into one mutually beneficial wealth-concentration & distribution system. Currently, mutually benefitting factions are coming together once again in hopes of building a mega-shelter for the homeless in a Portland, Maine industrial development district. In addition to beds for the homeless, the project will include, dining, and locker facilities, as well as offices and an attached health clinic. The promotion  describes the facility

JECD Group Holds Master Plan Pow Wow for Boothbay Peninsula

The most honest statement to come out of the ringleaders of the Joint Economic Community Development Group in their first workshop program was "none of us are experts on economic development", which in my most humble opinion is evident in the fact that the JECD begins with the premise that economic development can be master minded by central management. The article in the Boothbay Register begins with this paragraph: The Joint Economic Development Committee master plan workshop on Thursday, Oct. 12 discuss findings from stakeholder interviews conducted early last month. The interviews centered around building an overall economic development strategy for Edgecomb, Boothbay, Boothbay Harbor and Southport. Who are the stakeholders?  A search for articles in the Boothbay Register comes up short. Why is the public not told who the stakeholders are. Since the taxpayers of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor footed the bill for the JECD's consultants, why are they not the stakeh