Skip First Level Navigation | Skip All Navigation

Skowhegan transportation study - website index:

Home > Project Information

Skowhegan Transportation Study: Overview

History of the Project:

Phase I

The Town of Skowhegan created the Second Bridge Committee to work with Maine DOT and the community. Regular meetings were held to obtain input from the public about the study as the potential corridors and alternatives were evaluated. Building on the input received at the July 1998 meeting, five potential corridors for a new river crossing in Skowhegan were identified for preliminary consideration. Within these five corridors were fourteen potential alternatives involving new bridge and/or highway facilities. Ten alternatives within four river crossing corridors were located downstream of the existing Skowhegan crossing and four alternatives in a single river crossing corridor were located upstream of the existing crossing. The alternatives included:

E1—Through downtown:

E1A—East Front Street to Madison Avenue, over Water Street
E1B—East Front Street to North Avenue

E2—East of downtown, at Coburn Park:

E2A—East Front Street to Water Street
E2B—East Front Street to Madison Avenue

E3—East of downtown:

E3A—Route 201 South to Route 2 East
E3B—Route 201 South to Route 201 North
E3C—Route 1 East to Route 201 North
E3D—Route 2 West to Route 2 East
E3E—Route 2 West to Route 201 North

E4—Rural, east-west only, south of downtown:

E4A—Route 2 West to Route 2 East

W1—West of downtown:

W1A—West Front Street to Norridgewock Avenue
W1B—West Front Street to Route 201
W1C—Route 201 South to Route 201 North
W1D—Route 2 West to Route 2 West

As part of the initial alternative screening evaluation, Maine DOT conducted a traffic analysis, preliminary environmental review, and cost-benefit analysis of each alternative. Each alternative was measured against the "no-build" alternative. The analysis also included gauging each alternative's ability to satisfy the purpose and need, and an identification of any potential environmental fatal flaws.

Based on this work, the study team proposed to the Second Bridge Committee that four alternatives in two river crossing corridors be advanced for further engineering and environmental analysis and for comparison with the no-build option. These included alternatives E3A, E3B, E3E, E1B. The location of these proposed alternatives are shown in the maps below.

Click here to view the maps.

Due to potential environmental impacts on the community and the limited ability to satisfy the project purpose and need, Maine DOT dismissed Alternative E1B from further consideration. This decision was discussed with and supported by the federal sponsoring agency, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

Phase II

The next stage of the process in spring 2002 was to conduct conceptual engineering and environmental evaluation of each alternative. DMJM Harris, Inc. was selected to conduct engineering studies and prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA was passed by Congress in 1969 to protect natural, physical, and social resources. The options developed during the EA alternatives analysis process included the routes shown in the map below.

Click here to view the map.

After consideration of these alternatives by MaineDOT and FHWA in consultation with the appropriate regulatory agencies, Alternative E3E4 was selected to be evaluated in the EA.

In 2005, the EA was elevated to a more comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process due to some public controversy. An important part of the EIS process is the continuing involvement of the public in project decision-making. In addition to public meetings designed for the general public, a public advisory committee is being created to assist MaineDOT and FHWA in developing and evaluating the alternatives. The alternatives being considered in the EIS include the EA alternatives, plus additional options suggested by the public as noted in red in the figure below. These would be in addition to any other options identified as part of the public scoping process.

Click here to view the map.

This page last updated on August 8, 2008