Are you aware of this?
The Friel Family is using the same traffic consultants as their former developers.
Imagine what this implies while reading what follows:
From the Sagamore Crossing website:
Traffic in this area is complex.
There are a few firms in this area that are qualified, and we are using one of them known as GPI.
The traffic engineers of GPI represent private developers, institutions, and municipalities.
They are highly qualified professional engineers and have worked hard to help us create a design that improves traffic flow. They work closely with several other independent engineers representing the state and the town.
In the end, the traffic solutions will be a team effort of all concerned.
Rebuttal:
The Friel family is using the same traffic consultants as the former developers.
Greenman-Pedersen Inc. (GPI) is a local traffic consulting firm with excellent credentials.
However, their designs are guided by developer expectations.
It is important to remember that GPI has been contracted to design a traffic solution for Green Meadow Inc.
They do not work for the town of Hudson or its residents.
Therefore, the GPI solution must be cost-effective to the developer to minimize
profit-sapping capital expenditures that could be caused by local traffic improvements
or environmental mitigation. One way to achieve this is to reduce the projected impact
of these issues in favor of the developer.
A recently-designed traffic plan for the Blackstone Shoppes
is now costing Millbury , MA residents $5.9 million to correct,
due to actual traffic numbers that exceeded the projected traffic flows.
Supporting Facts:
Let’s examine some of the methods employed by Greenman-Pedersen Inc.
to possibly reduce mitigation costs for W/S development and now apparently Green Meadow Inc.
(shortcomings in their design will eventually be paid for by Hudson residents):
Traffic:
1.) Local impact:
GPI downplayed the projected traffic through local Hudson roadways in their 2006 traffic analysis,
claiming most traffic would simply come over the Sagamore Bridge. This would allow Green Meadow Inc.
to report a lower local traffic impact and thereby reduce the amount of costly traffic improvements to Hudson roadways.
(Source: Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB) Inc. 12-4-07 memo from Marty Kennedy)
2.) Double-counting:
GPI applies their own version of trip identification (contrary to ITE standards) to reduce the projected
impact to local Hudson roadways. In order to fully understand the impact of this action,
we first need a brief introduction to trip classification:
Pass-by trips are trips from an origin to a primary destination, traveling past the site,
but not visiting the site (3A to Sagamore Bridge to Nashua, and vice versa).
Pass-by trips are not considered new trips on the roadway network.
Diverted trips are similar to pass-by trips except that they are attracted to the development from
a nearby street or roadway that is not directly adjacent to the development.
Like pass-by trips, diverted trips are not new to the roadway system overall.
However, unlike pass-by trips, diverted trips use new routes to get to and from the development
compared to their original route and thus have more impacts to the nearby roadway network than pass-by trips.
Primary trips are made for the specific purpose of visiting the development.
Primary trips are new trips on the roadway network.
Multi-use trips are made between internal components of the development.
(Examples would be hotel to retail, on-site residents to retail, on-site retail to on-site retail, office to retail, etc.)
Multi-use trips are also not new trips on the roadway.
In their 2006 traffic analysis, GPI attempts to count trips from the D.W. Highway to their site as internal multi-use trips.
However, the retail stores on D.W. Highway are obviously not part of the proposed Sagamore Crossing development,
so these are clearly diverted trips.
(Source 1: Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB) Inc. 6-22-06 memo from Marty Kennedy)
(Source 2: http://www.dot.state.ga.us/dpm/desmanual/ch13/Ch13.4.1.a.html)
3.) External trip estimates:
GPI uses different estimates than data from the Institute of Transport Engineers (ITE)
suggests for estimating trips originating outside their development.
In all cases, the GPI estimates are in favor of the developer:
Trips that increase local traffic impact:
New trips: The GPI estimate is 20% lower than the ITE estimate.
Diverted trips: The GPI estimate is 14% lower than the ITE estimate.
Trips that decrease local traffic impact:
Pass-by trips: The GPI estimate is 14% higher than the ITE estimate.
Multi-use trips : The GPI estimate is 20% higher than the ITE estimate.
4.) Internal trip estimates:
GPI applies grossly different estimates than data from the Institute of Transport Engineers (ITE)
suggests for estimating trips originating from within their development (from age–restricted residential housing units)
GPI estimates are an astounding 75% lower than the ITE estimates (66 GPI vs. 264 ITE)
(Source 1: Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB) Inc. 6-22-06 memo from Marty Kennedy)
(Source 2: http://www.dot.state.ga.us/dpm/desmanual/ch13/Ch13.4.1.a.html)
Environment:
GPI provides the environmental assessment to Green Meadow Inc. through Gove Environmental Services.
GPI is also designing the roadways that will impact the same environment.
Clearly, this is conflict-of-interest, since the environmental assessment has a direct affect on their roadway design.
We believe environmental impact studies should be contracted to an independent firm.
Viewing their claims and mission statements makes it immediately apparent that neither Greenman-Pedersen Inc.
nor Gove Environmental Services is really concerned with protecting or preventing damage to environmental resources;
only with preventing the discovery and reporting of said damage:
From Strategic Environmental and Ecological Services, Inc. (the environmental subsidiary of GPI):
“Strategic is proactive in the pursuit of environmental clearance and has the experience
and technical expertise that facilitates prompt agency review thereby often avoiding costly project delays.
Source: (http://www.strategicenvironmental.net)
Obviously, GPI's concern for the environment is second only to avoiding costly delays.
From Gove Environmental Services:
"The firm’s expertise in hydrology, soils, wetland landscaping and additional project design considerations
allows the creation of high quality and cost-effective mitigation plans for project permitting"
(Source: http://www.gesinc.biz/services/restoration.html)
"The ability to document the previously unknown limited value of low-functioning wetlands has resulted
in obtaining wetland impact permits that otherwise may not have been possible without such documentation" (Source: http://www.gesinc.biz/services/wetlands.html)
"Development issues are resolved so that permits are released in the timely manner required of constructionschedules. This has included projects with as much as ten (10) acres of wetland impact, or projects denied permits. Project layouts are designed cooperatively with agencies to be considered environmentally sound and even beneficial—and more importantly, permit-able." (Source: http://www.gesinc.biz/services/permitting.html)
In the above quotes from the Gove Environmental Services website,
the terms "cost-effective" and "permitting" are prevalent
(they actually boast about permitting 10 acres of wetland impact)
However, at no time do the words "protection" or "prevention" appear.
In Summation:
Unapproved cost-saving measures are common in real estate development (See local examples)
A recently designed traffic plan for The Blackstone Shoppes is now costing
Millbury , MA residents $5.9 million to correct. (see traffic example)
Once a site plan has been approved,
any future improvements become the responsibility of the host town.
Developers like Green Meadow Inc. are obviously aware of this precedent,
so it’s reasonable to infer they will attempt to skew impact data in their favor to reduce their out-of-pocket costs.
The NHDOT and the town of Hudson have already uncovered the above traffic reporting deficiencies;
but did they catch all of them?