Residents Continue Push Back On Prence Traffic

ORLEANS – An independent review found little fault in the traffic analysis provided as part of the zoning board of appeals’ ongoing review of the proposed housing development planned for the former Governor Prence Inn property. But concerns linger from residents who worry about how the project might impact traffic in the area.

 In August, the board, which began its review of the proposed 78-unit mixed housing development in May and is due to close it in November, requested an independent review of the traffic study submitted by Preservation of Affordable Housing, Housing Assistance Corporation and Habitat for Humanity Cape Cod, the project’s developers. On Oct. 22, Michael White of Howard Stein Hudson, the Boston-based firm hired to conduct the independent review, told the board that there were no substantial issues with the developers’ initial study.

 “In general, we found that while we are asking for clarification on a lot of their methodologies, their [study] was completed to industry standards,” he said.

 White said a thorough review was given the traffic impact study prepared by project engineer Tighe and Bond, including how data was collected, trip generation estimates and the overall site design. He said the firm had 29 comments for Tighe and Bond, and also asked them to “update certain aspects of their analysis” to be in line with more recent data. That updated analysis was received by Howard Stein Hudson prior to the Oct. 22 meeting, White said.

 “We have not had a chance to dive too deeply into it,” he said. “However, it does appear that they have responded to the vast majority of our comments at this time.” White said a response to those comments would be made at the zoning board’s next hearing.

 “To my untutored eye, they seemed to have responded fully,” said zoning board Chair Gerald Mulligan.

 Tighe and Bond’s analysis projects a 44 percent increase in the amount of traffic in the area of the proposed development during the summer months. White defended that assessment, calling it a “conservative number” compared to just 37 percent reported by the Cape Cod Commission. 

 But some zoning board members remained dubious of the summer traffic analysis. Martin Szeber said he felt the 44 percent figure did not take into account the unique character of traffic in the area.

 “You’ve got a very busy rotary,” he said. “You’ve got 6A and 28 coming together literally a hundred, 200 feet from the proposed site. You’ve got traffic coming from the north through there, from the south. It just seems like there’s a lot going on there.”

 White said the traffic data presented by Tighe and Bond is more localized and specific to the area. Specifically, Brackett said commission traffic data from Route 124 in Harwich at the intersection of Queen Anne Road, which is 10 miles from the proposed Prence development, was used to help generate the traffic analysis. 

 “It was the closest available dataset that was robust enough to be considered worthy of using,” he said.

 “The characteristics of Queen Anne Road in Harwich and where this development is located seem like night and day to me,” Szeber said.

 White said his firm could give feedback to the town’s assistant director of planning and community development, Elizabeth Jenkins, on Tighe and Bond’s response to its questions by early November.

 Residents also continued to take issue with that analysis at the Oct. 22 session. Mark Norgeot called for a “solid, common sense” explanation as to how the firm arrived at the 44 percent figure.

 “It just seems to be that 44 percent doesn’t begin to tickle the real number,” he said.

 Orleans resident Jim O’Brien said even in October, the traffic in the vicinity of the project, particularly near the rotary, the Lost Dog and the Ice Cream Cafe, is very busy. In the summer months, he added, it’s even worse.

 “And we’re going to add numerous, numerous cars,” he said.

 Elaine Baird, who operated a business for many years near the intersection of Route 28 and Route 6A, was among those who petitioned for the independent traffic review. She attested to the volume of traffic that is generated in the area during the summer. On Saturdays, she said, it can be particularly problematic due to the traffic generated by weddings at nearby churches.

 Baird advocated for a traffic signal to be installed that can operate as needed to help manage traffic during those busy periods.

 “I certainly appreciate what the traffic engineers as professionals are doing,” she said. “But as members of the community, I worry about the safety of the people that are going to be there.”

 Ron Conte of Orleans said he was “not impressed” by the traffic presentation, saying that he felt White and Brackett were only “semi-prepared.”

 “I’m concerned about that circle,” he said, referring to the rotary. “I live about seven minutes from there. They were very nonchalant about that.”

 A retired firefighter, Conte was also critical of the fire department’s approval of plans for fire apparatus access on the Prence property.

 “There’s going to be no place to move on either side of the street,” he said. “I think the fire department was a little [negligent] in their comments.” Conte also said the town was "hellbent on [creating] too much housing.”

 Discussion was also given to the need for public transit and bus stops in the area of the development. Brackett said “multi-modal” transportation options were not taken into account in Tighe and Bond’s traffic analysis.

 “So what you’re talking about would actually reduce the trips generated by this development if we were to take credit for some other uses,” he said.

 As to how much buses and bus stops would impact traffic along Route 6A near the development, Brackett said it depends on how frequently there are stops in the area. But he said he does not anticipate any substantial impacts to traffic that would be caused by bus stops.

 But Orleans resident Bill Wibel said assuming school-age children will reside in some of the new units, school bus traffic could slow vehicle traffic in the area.

 The zoning board has 180 days from the start of its review in May to close its hearing, giving it a deadline of Nov. 16. The board continued the hearing to Nov. 18, and asked that the developers provide the board with a request in writing to extend its review those two additional days.

 “I think this is the only date that again both you are available, Mr. Chair, and the town attorney is available, and I do think it’s critical,” Jenkins said.