Residents push back on New Haven Drive plan as Cary board seeks revisions

Village staff on March 3 presented a detailed traffic‑calming plan tied to the extension of New Haven Drive to Route 31, a condition of the Seasons Carry (Damish) development. The three‑segment plan would use lane narrowing and striping to create travel plus parking lanes, lateral shifts (chicanes), speed radar signs in both directions, targeted raised crosswalks and a pedestrian beacon at Hoffman Park, truck‑restriction and wayfinding (“trailblazer”) signage to divert industrial traffic, and conversion of the existing cul‑de‑sac to a small traffic circle.

Ryan, staff lead on the project, said the measures were scaled to the residential character of the neighborhood, designed to remain within existing right‑of‑way where possible, and that resurfacing of New Haven Drive will be coordinated with the developer. Tony D. Rosa of Fiduciary Real Estate Development introduced himself as the developer and said the design team was present to answer technical questions.

Residents testing the plan raised a range of concerns during an extended public comment period. Sergio (resident at 1464 New Haven Drive) told the board the decision to connect New Haven to Route 31 created the traffic issue and urged removal of trailblazer signage, arguing the signs signal the street as a through route and will attract cut‑through traffic; he asked for more raised crosswalks and lane narrowing near the entrance. Several residents said the proposed chicane and lateral shifts could be hazardous in winter, that raised crosswalks and speed bumps are hard on snow plows and may be ineffective between locations, and that beacons should be installed at all raised crosswalks near parks, mailboxes and blind bends.

Residents also pressed two recurring operational issues: on‑street parking and driveway access. Several speakers said the plan would reduce parking availability for clustered town‑home units and complicate staging during construction or repaving. Residents living adjacent to the proposed roundabout said its current location would place the circular island too close to multiple private driveways, removing curbside parking and creating conflicts during large maintenance projects; staff said moving the circle west would likely require property acquisition and added utility reconstruction.

Staff emphasized nothing is final. The village and developer agreed to refine the designs, consider additional beacon locations, review roundabout siting and driveway impacts, provide cost estimates, and return with revised plans. Trustees repeatedly framed public safety as the top priority but said they wanted design alternatives and cost information before adopting a final approach.