A $625,000 bathroom wasn’t needed after all to ensure travelers along Route 9 between Brewer and Calais had a place to stop. Instead, the Department of Transportation is working with a Township 22 restaurant to provide bathroom facilities. Failing that, a privy could be installed. Both are better options than the department quashing the bathroom request by putting up examples of unrealistic cost figures.

Because of the dearth of businesses on the 90-mile stretch of road, Sen. Kevin Raye requested, through LD 561, that the DOT build a rest area with bathrooms on the route. The department initially said it couldn’t do this because it would cost $625,000 to build the facility and $100,000 a year to maintain it.

The Department of Transportation had a point that a crude facility that is not monitored and maintained is worse than no facility at all, but it is to be commended for working with lawmakers to find a solution. Calais is the seventh-busiest border crossing with Canada and Route 9 is heavily traveled by tourists and trucks. Substantial funds, mostly federal, have been invested in upgrading the road. Adding public restroom facilities is a logical next step.

For a 2002 study on rest areas for the New England Transportation Consortium, University of Maine engineering professor Per Garder found that clean facilities that also provide information about local attractions can also be a boost to tourism. He also suggested that partnering with tourism groups or businesses to provide facilities offer a way to provide services without expending solely government funds.

The DOT is pursuing this option after the owners of the Airline Snack Bar, which is located in Township 22 near Beddington about halfway between Brewer and Calais, contacted the department. The department and snack bar are looking at two options. One is to have a round-the-clock indoor bathroom available at the snack bar with its own entrance. The other is to build a privy near the snack bar and contract with the snack bar owners to maintain it.

Although many details have yet to be worked out, the department expects either option to cost significantly less than $625,000.

Proceeding this way could result in much-needed bathrooms with little state investment. That is a good outcome.