The Revitalization Trust Fund spent substantial time Oct. 30 discussing the Envision committee’s review of three roadway scenarios for Great Plain Avenue: a two‑lane configuration, a two‑lane hybrid, and a four‑lane option.

Paul summarized the committee charge, saying the Select Board directed the committee to evaluate all three scenarios so the Select Board can "make an informed decision, based on facts and considerations." He said momentum within the Envision group is leaning toward some version of the four‑lane plan, but the committee must present pros and cons for all three.

Members described traffic patterns at the Dedham Ave/Great Plain Ave intersection. Paul said he observed drivers gravitating to a single marked lane where a parklet in front of Sweet Basil narrows the roadway, and argued that usage behavior supports a lane consolidation there without materially changing traffic flow. He said one option is to expand the sidewalk into the extra lane where the parklet sits, creating more sidewalk space and three additional parking spaces on the curbside.

Proponents said an expanded sidewalk would enhance pedestrian safety by creating a buffer of parked cars between moving traffic and outdoor seating. The proposal would also reduce the repeated setting up and removal of parklets and could permit restaurants to use the wider sidewalks for seating. The committee noted that current sidewalk regulations are old and that regulatory changes would be needed to support extended sidewalk use and merchandising.

Not all members favored narrowing the road. One member said they "would still prefer 4 lanes over any of the other designs," citing concern about traffic flow and the downtown’s practicality for drivers and customers. Other members voiced concern about business impacts if lane reductions stall traffic and deter customers.

The committee agreed to continue analyzing details of each plan, exploring whether elements of one design might be adapted into another, and to produce a clear report with pros and cons for the Select Board. The group also postponed the community survey until mid‑January to avoid holiday timing and to achieve a better response rate.