To: Linda Finucane Re: Special Permit Application, Riverside LLC Dt: October 15, 2012 OVERVIEW I have lived in the Quinobequin Road area for 33 years and walk regularly along that road. My neighbors and I are deeply concerned about the potential impact of traffic generated by the proposed Riverside Project and do not feel reassured by assertions that the project won't have an appreciable impact on the volume of traffic on Quinobequin between Routes 16 and 9. My neighbors and I don't believe that there has been an adequate assessment of the traffic to have an accurate baseline before the project begins. Such an assessment should be made by an independent company and paid for by the developer. We believe that annual assessments must continue and the developer remains responsible for future mitigation. We seek clarification that, should the actual volume of traffic exceed projections by more than 5 percent, as monitored over a five-year period, mitigation shall be required of the developers. That mitigation should include, but not be limited to, the developer's funding of photo-enforced speeding technology. THE SITUATION Quinobequin Road (QBQ) was created as a "recreation road," a small parkway to be overseen by the former Metropolitan District Commission (MDC). It has now been transferred to the DCR. Commercial vehicles are supposed to be excluded. Speed limits are supposed to be maintained at 25-30 mph, depending on the specific part of the roadway. The road follows the river [the name Quinobequin itself means "meandering" in Algonquin], and there are numerous blind spots along the two-mile stretch. Under the influence of the Riverside Project, Quinobequin Road has the potential to become a major cut-through by people trying to avoid traffic congestion on Route 9 and Route 16. It has already begun to be used by commercial vehicles, and cars and trucks both operate in excess of the all-too-infrequently posted speed limits. The dangers are obvious. Concern about worsening conditions has heightened in face of the planned construction of the new Riverside Development. A key problem we anticipate is that, during commuter rush hours, cars seeking to access Route 128 from Route 16, confronting backups on 128 at 16, will cut through Quinobequin to access Route 128 from Route 9. Others will seek to avoid traffic at the intersection of Routes 16 and Grove Street will, again, seek to get to Wellesley by taking Quinobequin to Route 9. Again, Quinobequin is a "recreation road," with speed limits posted at 25 mph and barred to commercial vehicles in excess of 5000 pounds. RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS We recognize that the project is going forward, with very little monitoring having been done on Quinobequin Road between Routes 16 and Route 9. The monitoring that I mentioned before (done by an independent company, funded by the developer) should evaluate the traffic that enters both ends of Quinobequin Road as well as the streets that intersect with Quinobequin. This would better enable planners to assess how many cars are coming in and out of the neighborhood and how many are using Quinobequin as a cut-through. We strongly urge a formula be put in place to trigger mitigation measures should the developer's traffic projections be exceeded by 5 percent over the next five years. We strongly suggest the city to require the developer to fund signage, speed camera systems and enforcement. Automatic ticketing through camera systems are used in Europe and Australia or New Zealand, and are also in place in Maryland. Unlike many problems posed by today's traffic and environmental degradation, the Quinobequin Road traffic problem, expected to worsen due to the Riverside project, is one that can be solved. And it can be solved at relatively low cost. We invite your response and look forward to doing whatever you need us to do as full participants in the process. Thank you for your serious consideration. Sincerely, Marjorie Arons-Barron Edgefield Road Waban October 15, 2012