More than a 100 concerned Wayland citizens turned out for a standing-room only meeting at Town Building on July 26 called by the Board of Road Commissioners to solicit public input on the traffic plan for the proposed redevelopment of the former Raytheon site.

Wayland CARD was heartened by the turnout and thoughtful questions from scores of individuals concerned about the impact of this proposed massive commercial/residential development on our roads, our neighborhoods, and the future of our town. The Board of Road Commissioners provided an excellent forum for airing citizens’ concerns and obtaining feedback.

Two days later, the Planning Board announced that the project was too big and suggested that the developer submit scaled-back alternatives along with traffic and financial impacts.

This week the Board of Selectmen is scheduled to receive input from the town’s various boards, including the Road Commissioners and Planning Board. This feedback is intended to help the BOS negotiate an agreement with the developer and craft zoning bylaws that would then be presented at a Special Town Meeting in November.

The question is, will the Board of Selectmen rush into a development agreement based on the developer’s proposal, or will they call for scaling down this oversized project and addressing responsibly all of its traffic and related public safety impacts, including elimination of the four-lane bypass road between Routes 20 and 27 (Old Sudbury Road)?

The Board of Selectmen needs to hear from you! (selectmen@wayland.ma.us) today!

For the most recent press coverage of this important issue, check out the Metrowest Daily News’s July 31 cover story “Wayland Downtown: Center’s Size Still an Issue: Planning Board Says Design Must Be Substantially Smaller” and a second article, “Town Center May Up Traffic 26 Percent”.

Also look at two recent letters to the editor: one in the July 28 Boston Globe West, “Proposal Too Big for Wayland” and the other in the July 28 Wayland Town Crier, “Not My Vision of Town”.

Visit us again for regular updates. BECOME INFORMED, GET INVOLVED! And tell your neighbors about it, too!)

For a summary of recommendations by Wayland CARD presented at the Board of Road Commissioners on July 26, read on.

SUMMARY OF CARD PRESENTATION TO BOARD OF ROAD COMMISSIONERS ON JULY 26
Citizens Against Reckless Development, a growing number of Wayland people, appreciates the opportunity to provide the Board of Road Commissioners with these comments on traffic-related issues. We are offering this statement and have provided the Board with more detailed written comments. CARD supports the creation of a town center at the former Raytheon site. However, the developer’s proposal is the wrong development for the location. The scale is far too large for the location, out of character with the surrounding areas of our town and would create severe traffic problems. The most effective way to mitigate the traffic problems that the proposed development would create is to scale back the size and intensity of use of the development and eliminate the proposed cut through connecting the development to Old Sudbury Road.

The Preliminary Traffic Assessment prepared for the developer and reviewed by consultants to the Planning Board and the Board of Road Commissioners finds that the proposed development would dramatically increase weekday and weekend traffic in already burdened intersections in Wayland. However, because the Preliminary Traffic Assessment is incomplete and understates the traffic-related impacts of the proposed development, it needs to be reevaluated if the Town wishes to consider a development of such a large scale.

CARD recommends that the Board study the traffic-related impacts of alternative development scenarios involving a smaller scale and intensity of development and the elimination of the cut through to Old Sudbury Road. This alternative traffic-related impact reevaluation should occur before the Planning Board recommends any zoning bylaw amendment that would create a Town Center Overlay District.

Here are examples of major problems with the developer’s Preliminary Traffic Assessment:

Failure to consider traffic and related impacts on residential roads and neighborhoods affected by the proposed development; The Police Chief and TEC Engineering note this failure-this same type of failure was criticized by Wayland in case of the Danforth development [Note: The developers were asked by both the Planning Board and Road Commission to do a traffic study of the following roads: Bow, Glezen, in two parts, east and west of 126, Moore, Training Field, Plain, Claypit Hill, Glen, and Milbrook; this has not been done and should be done before signing a development agreement.]

Traffic impacts are not tied to an adequately described development plan; changes in uses or scope of uses affect traffic impacts; a more specific, disaggregated analysis of traffic impacts is needed; the developer has suggested an even larger project in draft bylaw language and recently suggested 200 housing units, double what its traffic study assumed

The study period ends in 2010 and does not capture the full traffic impact of the proposed development; a longer study period should be required, as was suggested in the case of the Danforth development

Failure to consider traffic at all relevant intersections-same type of failure criticized by Wayland in case of the Danforth development

Failure to consider all relevant developments in the area, including a development that the Town told the adjacent Wayland Meadows project to take into account

Peer reviewers have commented that the developer’s suggested traffic mitigation measures (1) may not be feasible due to parks, wetlands, etc. in one case and (2) shouldn’t be done in another; these comments need further discussion and evaluation

Failure to consider access into and out of police and fire stations at Public Safety Building, Sudbury and Wayland landfills, commercial locations on Route 20

Failure to consider alternative development scenarios to determine whether a smaller scale of development consistent with a town center concept would generate a more manageable level of traffic requiring less mitigation and avoiding a cut through ingress/egress on Old Sudbury Road

Failure to consider truck traffic increases and the effects of commercial vehicle traffic on road conditions, capital and maintenance costs, public safety

Failure to consider interplay between increased vehicle traffic and existing or expected pedestrian and bicycle routes

Our detailed written comments further discuss these issues and cover other traffic-related issues. We hope that you will recommend further study and evaluation of the developer’s Preliminary Traffic Assessment so that the Town obtains a more accurate and complete picture of the traffic-related impacts of the developer’s concept. We also hope that you will recommend to other Town Boards that smaller scale, alternative development scenarios be examined from a traffic impact standpoint.