Study: Expansion Would Reduce Traffic at CVS Site

Jason Adams, traffic study engineer of the site, said it was simple math: “a pharmacy with the drive-thru generates trips at a lower rate than a sub shop.”

As a result, the proposed CVS expansion at its current 555 Main St. location in Medfield is considered "unique" in terms of traffic.

“Trip generation for this site is unique in the sense that the proposed site is shown to generate fewer vehicle trips than the existing site,” Adams said.

This was a critical piece of the Adams’ traffic study in his report to the Medfield Planning Board because of the concerns board members voiced regarding current traffic issues at the site and what the installation of a drive-thru will do in terms of traffic flow to that area of town.

Adams walked through the conclusions of his traffic study report to planning board members at the Oct. 17 public hearing – covering three main topics: Crash history of the site, pedestrian data and trip generation.

Here’s an overview of Adams’ report to the planning board:

Crash History:

Adams said according to MassDOT data, the crash rate at Route 109 and North Meadows Road is “higher than average in the state.”

“It has been requested that we look into local crash data and complete a collision diagram to better understand the crash history of that intersection [Routes 109 and 27],” Adams said.

Adams will contact the to collect the local crash data numbers from that intersection and suggested traffic signal adjustments could be made at the expense of CVS if it fits into the scope of the project.

“Certainly, anything we can do with [the traffic signal] that is in the scope of the project, we would be willing to work to do that,” Adams said.

Medfield Planning Board chair Wright Dickinson said the traffic signal at that intersection is “sensitive” and would not be a simple task to alter.

“This is a sensitive intersection as far as the modification of the signals,” Dickinson said. “I mean really bad. You think it is bad now? It was really really bad and it took forever to get modifications to where it is now. So whatever gets proposed here is going to get looked at pretty closely just to make sure it works.”

Pedestrian Data:

Adams reported he did not collect pedestrian data at the Routes 109 and 27 intersection but did “include pedestrian [activity] at the [traffic] signal.”

“From being out there, it seemed like pedestrian calls happened every two to three cycles,” Adams said.

There’s a 150 seconds per cycle, according to Adams and “close to a peak hour for CVS, there’s 24 cycles. During those cycles, there were only 10 pedestrian calls. Peak pharmacy hours, Adams said, are weekday afternoons, 4 to 6 p.m. and Saturdays “tend to be a little higher,” with not much activity in the mornings.

Trip Generation:

As previously mentioned, the proposed site, with the removal of , will most likely decrease vehicle trips to and from the site. Adams said the information he provided in terms of trip generation in his study were a “worst-case scenario.”

“Our study was conservative in the sense that we didn’t remove vehicle trips from the roadway system, even though we would expect fewer vehicles would be at the driveways and intersections,” Adams said. “We wanted to present the conservative analysis as a worst-case scenario. We do expect fewer trips to the site, especially during the weekday evening and Saturday midday peaks. A sandwich shop is going to be generating a lot more people than a pharmacy would.”

Traffic Safety at the Site:

Medfield Planning Board members stressed the current issues with the flow of traffic are a concern and a safety hazard to motorists. Adams addressed their concerns:

“It’s an intersection that obviously doesn’t work great today,” Adams said. “You can argue that we are actually taking traffic away from the intersection. After reviewing the crash data, if there are particular movements that are causing some safety concerns then that would be an opportunity to read into that data and see if there’s a way to [fix it].”

Asked if the costs for those modifications would be covered by CVS, Adams replied:

“We wouldn’t expect that there would be any kind of equipment needed,” Adams said. “I think that given the setup of the intersection and close proximity of everything around the intersection, we would be pretty much limited to timing adjustments. Which fits within the scope of a project like this. We can look into it.”

The Medfield Planning Board’s public hearing with CVS representatives will continue on Nov. 7 on the second floor of Town Hall at 8 p.m. Residents are encouraged to attend and voice any questions, concerns or comments at the hearing, when deemed appropriate by Dickinson.