HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Plan Highway Inventory - 1984
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY
HIGHW A Y INVENTORY
.1984
PETER F. COHALAN
COUNTY EXECUTIVE
LEE E. KOPPELMAN
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
GERALD V. CRONIN
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS
The preparation of this report has been financed In part through funds from
the U.S. Oepartn~nt of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration under
the Federal Highway Act of 1956, as an~nded, and the Urban Mass
Transportation Administration, under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of
1964, as amended. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of
the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange.
The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responslbl.
for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents
do not necessarily reflect the official views or poliCies of the Urban Mass
Transportation Administration, the Federal Highway Administration Dr the State
of New York. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or
regulation.
-i-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PREFACE
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan for Suffolk County was
completed in 1978 and consisted of two volumes: Volume I, 1975 Inventory
and Analysis, and Volume II, 1978-1995 Improvement Program. The plan was
prepared by the Suffolk County Department of Transportation under an
a9reement with the Tri-State Regional Plannin9 Commission.
Since the release of the plan, Tri-State has been dissolved and the
New York Metropolitan Transportation Council has been formed and is now
the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the New York City
metropolitan area which includes Suffolk County. The Suffolk County
Department of Transportation was also abolished and its duties were divided
between the Suffolk County Department of Planning and the Suffolk County
Department of Public Works. This update of the 1975 Inventory and Analysis
Plan has been prepared by the Transportation Division of the Suffolk County
Department of Planning.
The 1984 update consists of highway, rail, air and marine transportation
elements. An update of the transit element and the completion of Phase II
of the transit system development plan proposed in the 1978-1995 Improvement
Program was accomplished under a contract with ATE Management and Service
Company, Inc.
* * * * * * * * * *
This report was prepared and written by Daniel Pichney, with inventory
update coordination and editing by Charles F. Nauss, graphics by John T. Wolfe
and typin9 by Tsiporah Roter and Diane Hummel.
We wish to thank the Suffolk County Departments of Planning, Planning
Division, and Public Works, Traffic Control and Engineering Division, for
their cooperation and assistance in the preparation of this report.
-ii-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
....................................................
Page
1
HIGHWAY CLASSIFICATION .......................................... 5
HIGHWAY USE ..................................................... 5
Journey-to-Work ............................................ 6
Automobile Ownershi p ....................................... 8
Ridesharing ................................................ 9
ANALYSIS OF VOLUME CHANGES SINCE 1975 BY TOWN ................... 13
Hunti ngton ................................................. 13
Baby10n .................................................... 14
Smithtown .................................................. 15
151 ip ...................................................... 15
Brookhaven ................................................. 15
Southampton ................................................ 16
East Hampton ............................................... 17
Riverhead .................................................. 17
Southo1d ................................................... 17
LEVEL OF SERVICE ................................................ 18
ACCIDENTS ....................................................... 20
STATUS OF 1978 MAJOR HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATIONS .................... 23
HIGHWAY FUNDING ................................................. 31
PRIORITIES FOR THE FUTURE ....................................... 34
-i i i-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1. Major State Highway Improvements since 1975 ........................ 2
2. Major County Highway Improvements since 1975....................... 3
3. Means of Transportation to Work, 1970 and 1980..................... 6
4. Suffolk County Workforce, Place of Work, 1970 and 1980............. 7
5. Population per Private Vehicle ..................................... 8
6. Automobiles Available per Occupied Dwelling Unit, 1970 and 1980 .... 9
7. 1980 Travel Time to Work........................................... 11
8. 1980 Carpooli ng Characteristics..... ................................ 11
9. Total Number of Reportable Accidents in Suffolk County, 1972-1982... 20
10. Twenty Highest Accident Locations on County Roads, 1982 ............ 21
11. Ten Highest Accident Locations on County Roads in Eastern Suffolk
County, 1982 .................................................... 22
LIST OF MAPS
1. Suffolk County Highway System....-.........................Following 5
2. Highway System Traffic Volume, 1975 and 1982 ...............Following 17
3. High Accident Locations in Suffolk County, 1982 ............Following 22
-iv-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION
Introduction
Since the publication of the 1975 Inventory and Analysis Section
of the Suffolk County Comprehensive Transportation Plan, a number of
significant highway improvements have been made, most of which were
recommended in the final 1978-1995 Improvement Program. On the state
level, improvements were made to the Long Island Expressway, includin9
lighting, service road construction and the construction of several
park-and-ride lots. Additional links in the long planned reconstruction
of NYS 27, Sunrise Highway, as a limited access facility were either
completed or begun. Improvements to NYS 25 and NYS 110 helped alleviate
congestion on these roads. On the county level, over 39 miles of highway
were reconstructed. Table 1 shows the major state highway improvements
and Table 2 shows the major county improvements, including their final
construction cost.
In addition, as far as the planning of future transportation projects
is concerned, the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for Nassau and
Suffolk has been found to be very efficient for staging the implementation
of worthwhile federally-aided projects. The project selection process
is also being helped by the recently implemented 3-1 (Infrastructure,
Inventory and Inspection) Program which aims to develop a methodology for
selecting future highway improvement projects by examining the physical
conditions of roads in a more systematic and less subjective way than had
been done in the past.
-1-
-------------------
TABLE 1
Major State Highway Improvements Since 1975
State Road
Number From To Type of Improvement
NYS 25 Nassau/Suffolk Line e/o Sunken Meadow Pkwy Reconstruction
NYS 27 e/o Brentwood Road NYS 27-27A Merge, Oakdale Reconstruction
NYS 110 New York Avenue Bayl is Road Reconstruction
NYS III NYS 347 Townline Road Reconstruction
NYS 495 Nassau/Suffo 1 k Line CR 97, Nicolls Road Li ghti ng
I
'" Half Hollow Road Ramp and Service
I NYS 495 Nassau/Suffolk Li ne
Road Construction
NYS 495 Park-and-Ride Exits 52, 54, 61, 63 Construction
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 2
Major County Highway Improvements Since 1975
Length
in Miles
County Road Name and Number
1976
C.R. 13-13A, Fifth Ave./Clinton Ave.
Montauk Highway to Sunrise Highway
C.R. 93, Lakeland-Ocean/Rosevale Ave.
Johnson Ave. to Smithtown Blvd.
C.R. 101, Sills Road
Sunrise Highway to L.I.E.
1.62
2.08
3.66
1977
C.R. 2, Straight Path
Wellwood Ave. to Parkway Blvd.
C.R. 3, Wellwood Ave.
Sunrise Highway to Finn Court
3.00
4.24
1978
C.R. 101, Sills Road
Montauk Highway to Sunrise Highway
C.R. 10, Elwood Road
Intersection with Laurel Hill Road
1.70
0.30
1980
C.R. 46, William Floyd Parkway
Essex Circle to Montauk Highway
C.R. 6, Kings Highway
Old Willets Path to Wheeler Road
C.R. 100, Suffolk Avenue
Veterans Memorial Highway to
Carleton Avenue
C.R. 106, Campus Road
Crooked Hill Road to Wicks Road
0.57
0.86
1. 70
0.57
1981
C.R. 59, Union Street
Brentwood Road to Islip Avenue
C.R. 83, Patchogue-Mt. Sinai Road
Horseblock Road to Sunrise Highway
C.R. 4 and C.R. 67, Commack Road
and L.I. Motor Parkway
C.R. 50, Union Street
Aberdeen Road to Brentwood Road
1.69
3.75
1.30
2.42
-3-
Construction Cost
$ 1,356,925
1,669,005
5,152,798
2,005,086
2,995,739.
1,498,953
243,537
1,236,524
1,180,597
3,173,963
845,988
3,216,693
5,599,465
1,365,000
3,895,086
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 2 (cont'd)
Le ngt h
County Road Name and Number in Mil es
Construction Cost
1982
C.R. 100, Suffolk Ave.
Wicks Road to Wheeler Road
C.R. 96, Bergen Avenue
C.R. 10, Elwood Road intersection
with Cuba Hill Road
C.R. 97, Nicolls Road
C.R. 80, Montauk Highway
Hewlett Avenue to Station Road
Total 6 Years
3.10 $ 6,643,437
0.89 1,408,376
0.77 848,959
3.20 956,864
2.48 3,897,054
39.27 Mil es $49,190,049
-4-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Highway Classification
The 1973 Federal Aid Highway Act required realignment of federal
aid systems by June 3D, 1976, based on anticipated functional usage
in the year, 1980. This action was to identify which roads would be
eligible for federal funding for repair and reconstruction. Suffolk
County fulfilled this obligation, and the functional classification
map that appeared in 1975 Inventory-Analysis was the result. Since 1975,
there have been several minor revisions in the map. Recently, realign-
ment of the urban boundary separating urban areas from rural areas for
funding purposes was proposed. The alignm:nt would be the same from the
north shore along Wading River Road to Sunrise Highway. But from there,
the new line would proceed east along Sunrise Highway and then south in
order to encompass East Moriches. The change went into effect in October,
1983. Map 1 describes the Suffolk County Highway System including state,
county and major local roads.
Highway Use
The highway system continues to be Suffolk's primary transportation
facility. With increased industrial growth along the midsection of the
county, particularly in the Hauppauge and Melville areas, the roads,
both north-south and east-west, serving these areas bear a greater burden
in supporting the economic viability of the county.
-5-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~~ -r0
~~ ~ ,. ~ G;~~
~ ~~ ~~..~ " ",,~..' ,~'r'~ ~ / ~~~~-'~f:) + I ~
, :, ,. , '~i,'C( lV"i",' "- ,.". ,,,. '" "-Q f')l~: \~, ~> . , :. ;f;:
"~, .<< ,," '~:~ ~ ".'!;;,jil.((l:/~~'rl~:~"''''';J ~:?~/). "[;~2-.;/ :~~;;H:,>c_' ~\ 9'~ ~[f1f~
~~ rt.. ,) \; .J} y --c.~~f'~1f;/'''';~'''~. 'S." .,,0' ,,_'\ .",.#:.,,, ~;._J "j" ~, ... _~~i ~, /.J. r". ~~.
,~ u?-~ I ." '1-.." '1::=;, .,' ... L'I.:~ . -;;-J I',,';' "" ~ [Co ...~\ 1'1 '~'''''"':t.., ,;___ ~ ,.. \'" ,-",'T~ '
~/_ ,..'''o1.i;;''_~ ;~'",:.'~. ,,--,~c ;t::"'" .$#" '::. '"': :. ~ . _""0 :.~' ,:, . < .. ~ ->... 1"\.,r,';;J,~.. -_~-'_'__ . '. . .' - - ,;,,,..':t "Ji'V '.... .1:.
-v T""" . _.,. ..' . _... .., . I," \',,'" ' ,. .., ,,!"" """"'"' ~, C --
I ~ ;... o~ ..' .."'" Il j 14 ' ". '" II....''',..,. i \ .~ ~ / \ ," \'.\ " 0.. \. '/ ,. t1.,~
r ' ",.~...~';",,~." . -". -~.../.( ....'~;i ./,,,~::t'>C[\.t?'''!J;~. f"~ .'''J~ /. 0" "i'"'''''''':'V''' '--:!t'" ". ,.......v-\\...':(l ";'. ,:,' c-- I\-J!:- ',/ "..,'" ,
i '.'P';; - J' -- L. " i '.. i:;;O;",- --,' '~?::-4-' ._'" \. ,J--) ~ . '~-:-. ( \. ~ 1/,/ D I ..[);j' '~7.' " "" \~ ~ y~~ t--]:- k:ll--j,,~j".. ,~;~:~, fl '" "Y;;:j,Y{ 1 {.. <"" I ;
~.~~ l\ /. : /": \" . '_ __ ,M,c..*.....".,.i ./0, I' ,I i'",.(:~/-,.(i ...V" IP,,'" .. __:.:"" .......iJ'.~'Y-..../-L,-e.. " " ',...,,', ,'iI. ' L.--' J
ki~~ ~', ~.,\>.~Li:~:=fi~/~,',,;::,~ lJ,;",I.;;. .,:~:. ,~';;:~l~:r,~.: C!;:1];;)j . "(~'.' r.~.... [0 .r;;;:s. /:;~::~..,"~. ;i:o,/)~ /::".;'" \~.' ::~:~~ v -- J~\- ~. ..... :...f )),rh ' ~ :.; .'.. · ~~ .. "- /~
i} . ~ :., :'''''' ~ . "";..,, II' "'1\. "J ( ~ Id~ .~",....lr"~ ~"'I'\"::; ',":'"J ..j......,.~.., .... '.1/ /,( (,; Iy..",:'.. /..' ) I r~ (,~' ,(fl.!.J '1 'f' , · '" \; .~ \' ' "'. "". . "'~.","'l.,// ,.' / ......,f)k..--
~ . t ~ !~ ~1'-'@ ~1/' ii" I~,.' \ ~~i J'\ .? . r I .. '~1' .....,...! i . :,,', \. iT.'~' ~~i""'" ( "'~'\ 0 ~,,,\J ','>""',' .\JA .)':..... \: ,.."'.... -/.-'
.Li ~'" -::'/\_.,,,>Ji\K~~:.;) ,.....,,~ .' \.n ~ a, u .~ "~rNi , '. i~! 1/,,-"" '!", i ,1,'-, / J"-..." ,," "-. " 10-..~'i. I, '\ ~,rM''iJt. \)........,-..-.....~:::.. ;.';: l~.c..:.:...'~.,.~.u.....\"/ -;::: -
" ~)~~~""\!:.,Q'fc~I' ~ I';' r~,""~,,,~ \ .1,,,.,\ ~..i"~. ;../........ '!11, i...... ; ""'\ '~'~'" ;t.. ~...' / -i .... r '."""....... ~>,.~ @ _.M..~~~~"...~~4Y~.J..:@ ~~J:I'.~dt.'.... ..\~/.~,.~r}:'.~.,lJ.,..'._.~~,:,~<~.. .......~t.,~;y~i..~:::~------
,. /rt1:'-. ._, " . . ~. ., ._" ) ,;/.' ., ., '. , , I' '"', ,,~..." \- , '.' "',' '. ..- - ""'3E-' r'~.;'" >,. " ' ',; .fE,....._..\\~' \ IV ~
J' ,{ ~ ,"" v.";!f,,,. ,I ~ ,.:.--'j(' ,..,' ',' . \J" I "'j ,< ' rr -'Ji T'-;'~ ';,.:' . --'; \ "T \, 7:k{f- I 6J hr~ ( ~ ..,~': .... ";',.. ~'~....,: .,,,/ : 'oj ~ \ '\, \)\ ~-
, ,j ,;:7'''''''''' -' '., < J<o r:iJ~ i tlJI/"' ,":-- tr~ : },!-,' , i!J1j f'- t ,.?C:i" ; {-::...< ' 7,"~'1'". '1--.J.."'...., Y "t'-< ",.}( i \ :1- -' '~.)".QJ/ ;1';";'" ~,"" . . .' ,- ,
hL:"~'- S;;-'1\Cl-4 ~~:.. JJ .1 '--.. ..~!:~~~ II M~~"ii~~i tl,~' W\t.I'. . '} iI' 1"71"':: oj!~. i~, '''f('' ..:.:. ~ :,!<"1f~j;\" , ~j\;~;:; ",j017:1fl;~~~'\" /C~/ ..]V
J.!!J . t \ \- \\ R LJ ~'~~r "* ~I..)J( .~/ \,-:1 ! L r{1 : ~".. ~v '",,- _ b: ',' ~ I: jz(_ ,"--.J/ ",Jr I '" ....~~~~~ SHINNECOC~ itcOBAY -~-~ .,L.'-)JJ' -.
i::/i:: I\'A J\ ~_ -I- " ~ ,/ _... "'!P _"",u ""'-'-. /: C' J;0' ~ ~ ~ I ~Ju:....:J1{' ~ ><', \.l"",:~':J "~~p
gj~ " ____ I \ ' J i '". .. \ ... " MORICHES SA: ".'1':'''\ ~~-~-
."' ..' ~ b ", CY, "~" ,," '
" "~, ' ,," '. , ' "~Po ."'..-y--~ ',- ,,--
'1'; 0, 0 \; ~.v """ . ..en ""," e": ; ". "', ..- ,r'J.-,P:?';=J..c' ,'- - ,.-"..--
IlIJ ~ \J c>-'Jl~ L! ~ .." I " ' > ~~~~- /.- - .
"/"}..,, __ ~ '<F ~~k'f %J(' . . . \ I .;" ". : J....7 ~ -~,'<?-//
(' V .2..L-,,"..~ ,-w~z.. ~ . .... '^" 1-. 1-. ./,.,.. f~.f'~-~'
r I'L '.;: >-i-~J7 "'-''''0~:, I ../.' "~: '. - ,.,j/
. ,V '- ~ ",_;2"-. -- --'-;.'f, , ---"- . ... \, : /'///
~ ~ l ", '---'___>,;;<-'>--~':J--'~: _. '<~ ~-------h--------
---->- --------"1'Nl,~'~~~ ---- ~
~- \
! .
+
j"" ;.;:;:-~/"'. '--r>
/ '-- ~':'\~f .. . ./.
~~-:'
/":/~
~j
:.../~
/,'V.III'''AIiI~---------
.,' -,,-
" ~ - '
LONG
ISLAND
SOUND
-. ~
BLOCK ISLAND SOUND
1-
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
~
_ _ __ TOWN "OuNOA~Y
___ '.CORPORATEOV"L"GE
__~"n~!1 UN,"cORPORATED AREA
m" STAn ROAD
COUNTY ~oAn
-,
,.._L'RRSTAT'O"
STATE ANO_COU~TY ~OAOS
r.-'~"""":>""'""""
._ - of ACCEgS
= 1>I"'DED/P.RTl'LDR~Q
___0' CO'H~Ol DF .CCESS
_U~OIVIO'D/NOCO"TROl
0" ~CCESS
LllCAL_~_O~
MAP NO. I
1--~Ll"D'VIDEO/"OCO.T"OL
~OFACO>SS
~iLL
.:'i-.;"8~~
1< I AIRPORTS
"___d__ FERRIES
I 6-76 ADDED AIRPORTS FEP.PI,-~ f
MINOR CHANGES' . --..> -~
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION
REVISIONS
SlIFFOL /( COUNTY
i(RANSPORTAT/ON
DEPARTMENT
TITLE
SUFFOLK COUNTY NY
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
ORIG. JAN. 1976 eRN J.T.W. 3-001
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A comparison of U.S. Census data between 1970 and 1980 shows that
overall mode choice for the journey-to-work trip has changed very little.
If all mode choices are compared as a whole, use of automobiles increased
by 5% from 1970 and use of public transit decreased by 1%. However, due
to the increase in the size of the work force between 1970 and 1980,
the absolute number of automobile users increased by over 140,000, or
44%. The number of transit users increased by 6,442, or 20%. This
represents an additional strain on the highway system whose capacity has
remained relatively fixed. Table 3 shows these changes in means of
transportation to work.
TABLE 3
Means of Transportation to Work
Suffolk County Residents, 1970 and 1980
Percent Percent Absolute
Means of Work Trips of Work Trips of Change
Transportation 1970 Total 1980 Total 1970-1980
Private Auto/Carpool 318,944 83 460,625 88 141,681
Public Transportation 31,628 8 38,070 7 6,442
Walked 14,825 4 14,624 3 - 201
Other Means 10,126 3 5,710 1 -4,416
Worked at Home 6,969 2 7,378 1 409
382,492 100 526,407 100
As in 1970, approximately two thirds of the work force continue to
live and work in Suffolk County. The percentage working in Nassau is
virtually unchanged, but there has been a dip of 3% in the number of
workers commuting to New York City. These figures are shown in Table 4.
-6-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 4
Suffolk County Workforce
Place of Work 1970 and 1980
1970 % 1980 %
Suffolk 229,369 59 323,995 60
Nassau 59,989 15 76,950 14
New York City 57,500 15 66,000 12
In the 1975 Inventory-Analysis, it was noted that, for the two thirds
of the work force who live and work within the county, nearly 88% travel
by automobile. The reason given for this extensive intra-county auto use
was the lack of a significant public transportation system.
In the intervening years, the transit plan proposed in the 1978-1995
Improvement Program has been almost completely implemented. In a survey
conducted in November, 1982, it was found that 54% of the ridership use the
buses for the work trip. On the route that serves the NYS 110 corridor,
a work trip figure of 70% ridership was recorded. Similarly, a figure of
82% was recorded for the bus that serves the Hauppauge-Bohemia industrial
area. While these figures are very impressive in terms of the total
ridership of the bus system, they lose their significance when it is realized
that they represent the equivalent of approximately 4,300 people, or 1%
of the total intra-county work force.
Oespite the far-reaching extent of transit coverage in Suffolk
County, considering it is a low density suburban area, it would be
impossible in terms of cost to provide transit service that would have
a significant effect on auto usage.
-7-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The transit system was originally proposed to help the transportation-
disadvantaged, and it performs that task very well: 69% of the ridership
either don't have drivers' licenses or don't own cars. However, for
the majority of Suffolk County residents, the private automobile is and
will continue to be the primary mode of travel; and both auto and transit
users will have to rely on the highways.
As was demonstrated in the 1975 Inventory-Analysis, the extent of
reliance on the automobile is further evidenced by the percentage increase
in vehicular registrations versus population. While the population of
Suffolk County increased by less than 1% between 1975 and 1980, private
automobile registrations increased by 14%.
Table 5 shows the ratio of population to private vehicle registrations
between 1970 and 1980. The projected figure for 1985 is also indicated.
In 1970, the ratio stood at 2.22. It decreased to 1.76 by 1980. It is
further expected to decrease to 1.54 by 1985.
1970
1975
1980
1985
TABLE 5
Population Per Private Vehicle
Population
1,127,030
1,279,690
1,284,231
1,315,000
Private Vehicles
503,841
648,157
741,619
850,000
Persons/Vehicle
2.22
1.97
1.76
1.54
-8-
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The number of vehicles available per household has also changed
dramatically (Table 6). From 1970 to 1980, the number of one car per
unit households dropped by 13%, while the number of three or more auto-
mobile households increased from 7% to 18%.
In addition to the traditional reasons for extensive automobile
use in Suffolk County, the increases since 1970 have been facilitated
by the increased average age of the population, the increase in numbers
of households, coupled with a decrease in the number of persons per
household and increases in income.
TABLE 6
Automobiles Available Per Occupied
Dwe 11 i ng Unit 1970 and 1980
# of Units # of Units
Autos Ava i1 ab 1 e 1970 " 1980 %
10
One 132,948 45 124,872 32
Two 122,534 41 168,371 44
Three or More 19,791 7 67,939 18
None 20,314 7 24,537 6
Total 295,587 385,719
Besides transit, another possible way to reduce the number of
automobiles on the road, particularly during peak hours, that was
suggested in the 1978-1995 Improvement Program, was the promotion of
ridesharing in the form of carpooling and vanpooling. In a special
study funded under Section 175 of the Clean Air Act, the Transportation
-9-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Division explored the feasibility of employer-based ridesharing programs
and of utilizing one lane of the Long Island Expressway for high occupancy
vehicles. It was the conclusion of the study that further consideration
of these options was not warranted. The primary reasons included the
relatively short work trip characteristics of travel in the Nassau-Suffolk
region and the relatively low employer demand for ridesharing services.
A large number of worktrips were identified as going to JFK and LaGuardia
Airports, but these were judged to be incompatible for additional ride-
sharing promotion other than what airport workers were already voluntarily
doing, due to the range and irregular schedules of the workers; i.e.,
trips weren't necessarily taking place during the hours of peak congestion.
Recent census figures confirm some of the findings of the Section 175
study. Table 7 shows travel time to work for Suffolk County workers.
The mean travel time is 31 minutes. There is general agreement in the
literature that work trips of 10 miles or greater are amenable to carpooling
and trips of 15 miles or greater are amenable to vanpooling. In Suffolk
County, during peak hours, a ten mile trip would take between 20 and 30
mi nutes . As shown in Table 7, 58% of the travel ti mes are 1 ess than or
equal to 29 mi nutes . It would be safe to assume that a 11 trips of less
than 20 minutes or 42% of the trips would not be amenable to ridesharing
at a 11 . An additional 34%, or those with trip lengths between 20-29
mi nutes , would be in a gray area where there would be an equal probability
of ridesharing or not. Approximately 25%, or all trips greater than
45 minutes, would be amenable to car and vanpooling; however, it can be
assumed that at least a third of those who travel 60 minutes or more would
use rail transit.
-IQ-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 7
1980 Travel Time to Work
Number Percent
Less than 15 Min. 138,293 27
15 to 29 Min. 160,217 31
30 to 44 Min. 89,010 17
45 to 59 Min. 36,521 7
60 or More Min. 92,199 18
Mean Travel Time to Work 31.0 Min.
TABLE 8
1980 Carpooling Characteristics
Number Percent
Drive Alone 354,681 77
2-Person Carpool 75,173 16
3-Person Carpool 18,751 4
4-Person Carpool 7,838 2
5 or more 4,182 1
The 1980 carpooling characteristics shown in Table 8 support this
analysis. Seventy-seven percent of those who use an automobile to get
to work drive alone, with 23 percent involved in some sort of carpool.
This may correspond to the 25% of the work force that travel 45 minutes
or more to get to work plus a portion of those in the gray area that travel
between 22 and 44 minutes. While there may appear to be some unmet latent
-11-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
demand for ridesharing, it is the opinion of the Transportation Division
that if people haven't started ridesharing already, they are unlikely to
do so, except under only the most drastic circumstances. This conclusion
is based upon events of the recent past including the fuel crises, public
service promotion of ridesharing and the construction of additional
park-and-ride facilities.
While holding this opinion, the Division still supports the efforts
of other agencies which are attempting to overcome some of the obstacles
to ridesharing on Long Island.
The New York State Energy Office has, for example, established a
network of five local ridesharing offices around New York State to provide
area promotion and direct assistance on the implementation of employer~
sponsored ridesharing programs. On Long Island, this service has been in
operation since May of 1981, through a contract with Multisystems
Corporation, a private consultant, and in cooperation with the Long Island
Association of Commerce and Industry.
A Long Island Ridesharing Demonstration project was also made possible
through a Transportation Systems Management grant from FHWA. The major
activities of the project are the development of a ridesharing promotional
campaign which included spots on local radio stations, a marketing campaign,
supplying assistance in the development of ridesharing programs to
employment concentrations and identifying underutilized, retailer-provided
parking lot space for use as park-and-ride facilities*. The Transportation
Division participated on the advisory committee of this project.
* Long Island Ridesharing: An Analysis of Public Services, Attitudes,
Constraints, and Employer/Employee Transportation Issues. Technical
Memorandum No.2.
-12-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Analysis of Volume Changes since 1975 by Town
Between 1975 and 1980, the population of the county grew by less
than 1%, with the western towns actually decreasing in population. This
is to be expected because of the economic recession which resulted in a
loss of jobs and the stagnation of the housing industry. Traffic growth,
which had been at a rate of 4% per year countywide, has now been estimated
to be approximately 2%. Individual roads, however, have increased or
decreased in volume at percentages many times greater than the county
average, due to a variety of factors that will be discussed. Continued
economic recovery may cause the overall county traffic growth rate to
increase in the late 1980's.
Huntington
Population decreased by 3% between 1975 and 1980.
- NYS 25A: Volume increased by 15% west of NYS 110 and decreased by 21%
East of Greenlawn Rd. The decrease east of Huntington Village may be
due to a shift to Pulaski Road for east-west travel.
- NYS 25: Volume remained virtually unchanged.
- CR 11 Pulaski Road: Volume increased by 25% in the west end of
Huntington Town and 40% in the east end. Inexplicably, volume decreased
approximately 20% between NYS 110 and CR 35. TOPICS improvements to
the major intersections along Pulaski Road have resulted in improved
traffic flow. As was suggested, some traffic may have shifted from
NYS 25 & 25A to Pulaski Road. Planned improvements to the links between
the intersections should initially improve traffic flow and perhaps
result in further volume increases.
- 13 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- NYS 495: Volume remained virtually constand at the Nassau/Suffolk line
and increased slightly further west.
_ Northern State Parkway: Remained the same at the Nassau/Suffolk line,
but surged by 43% in the western portion of Huntington Town. This
may be due to traffic shifts from the LIE, plus industrial growth
in the Hauppauge and Melville areas.
- CR 35 Park Avenue: Except for the section immediately north of Northern
State Parkway which increased by 146%, increases on CR 35 ranged
between 11 and 37%. Because the Northport-Babylon Expressway was never
constructed, Park Avenue has had to bear the brunt of north-south
traffic in this corridor.
- NYS 110: Volume remained little changed north of NYS 25, but increased
steadily in the growing industrial and commercial Melville area.
- Larkfield Road: While there is not a volume figure to compare to from
1975, this road now carries approximately 20,000 AADT, indicating the
sustained commercial growth in its service area.
Babylon
Population decreased by 5% since 1975.
- NYS 27 Sunrise Highway: Decreased slightly east of Wellwood Avenue and
38% east of NYS 231. Volume on the Southern State Parkway increased
only slightly, while it has decreased by as much as 40% on NYS 27A.
- NYS 110: Increased commensurate with growth in the commercial and industrial
East Farmingdale area.
- CR 2 Straight Path: Increased by 12% north of Parkway Blvd. Reconstruction
on this route between Wellwood Avenue and Parkway Blvd. was completed
in 1977.
- 14 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- CR 12 Hoffman Avenue: Between Great Neck Rd (CR 47) and Great East
Neck Rd. (CR 96) volume decreased by 26%. Volume decreases on CR 12
and the other east-west roads in Babylon may be due to population
decreases and shifting commutation patterns.
Smithtown
Population decreased by 3%.
- NYS 25A & NY 25: Volume on both of these routes increased indicating
perhaps their continued use as an alternative to NYS 347, which,
ironically, was originally planned as a bypass itself.
- NYS 454 Veterans Memorial Highway: Increased by 60% east of Sunken
Meadow Parkway and 20% in the Hauppauge area, both of which have grown
commercially and industrially.
Islip
Population decreased by 7%.
NYS 495: Increased by 24% in the vicinity of Exit 55, by 83% near
Exit 57 and by 34% near Exit 59. This indicates the industrial growth
in the Hauppauge area (Exits 55-57) in addition to the shift of
population growth to the eastern areas of the county.
- NYS 454 Veterans Memorial Highway: Increased by up to 60% in the
Bohemia area. This is another part of the county where considerable
industrial growth has taken place.
- 15 ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Brookhaven
Population increased by 15%.
- NYS 495: Increased by 34% in the vicinity of Exit 63, further indicative
of the population growth that has taken place in the town. However,
there was a decrease of 30% in the vicinity of Exit 71, which may
possibly be due to the diversion of seasonal traffic to Sunrise Highway
via Exit 70 (CR 111) of the Expressway.
NYS 27 Sunrise Highway: Decreased by 30% west of CR 111. This again
may be due to the diversion of seasonal westbound traffic to the LIE
via CR 111. This interpretation is supported by the fact that CR 111
itself experienced over a 100% increase in traffic volume.
- CR 97 Nicolls Road: Increased by 27% through the Centereach area,
possibly due to the growth of SUNY Stony Brook and residual residential
growth in this area.
- CR 19 Patchogue-Holbrook Road: Decreased by 15%.
- CR 101 Sills Road: Increased by 46% south of Horseblock Road (CR 16)
due to reconstruction that was completed in 1977.
- CR 21 Yaphank-Middle Island Road: Increased between 20 and 30% due to
residential growth.
- CR 46 William Floyd Parkway: Decreased by 14% in the Shirley area south
of Sunrise Highway which is very surprising because of the amount of
residential infilling, increased commercial development and increased
seasonal use of Smith Point County Park.
- 16 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Southampton
Population increased by 4%.
- NYS 27: Increased by over 65% east of CR 111 and over 80% east of the
shinnecock Canal due to both seasonal and year-round population growth
on the South fork.
- CR 31 Old Riverhead Road: Increased by 7% south of Sunrise Highway.
East Hampton
Population increased by 7%.
Traffic growth in East Hampton since 1965 was the subject of a recent
study by the Transportation Division. Since 1965, traffic volume grew by
an average of 18% per year, while year-round population grew an averave
of 2j~ per year.
Riverhead
Population decreased by 7%.
- NYS 25: Increased by 40% through the Aquebogue area possibly due
to the increased interest in the North Fork as an alternative to the
crowded and relatively more expensive South Fork.
Southold
Population increased by 7%.
There is not sufficient data to show changes in traffic volume since
1975; however, this town has come under increased development pressures
in recent years as an alternative to the Hamptons.
There is also a nascent wine-making industry in this area that is
predicted to grow.
See Map 2 for the changes in traffic volume since 1975.
- 17 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L.ONG
'C'1 AND
I-JL. ",
c;OUND
"M,THTOWN
BAY
...lll!~;.n
\
GARDIN E RS
BAY
f..
9
6 7
j
V
.~iIlf SHINNLCOC:K
]v
+
'IJAr
Me-RICHES nOt,;>:
.
,."J
i',_.
}.
;:"
CHEAT
SOUl H
BAY
^ \ i\f'~Tl
t\N
n
2 AADi
ADDED OI::CRIPTlON
REVISIONS
FFOL K COUNTY
SU - r.OAf
/fRAAfSPP/t~1",INT
C VOLUME
TiTlE SYSTEM-TRAFFI
HWY
/.
,C> ri~o~"
,',,,, !.,/~
/>T\:> /\,'r__ <'<S/
C{ '-'('-w.:'''~~. _,V
/-{..(-':',"" . () /
l:~I"" '~,,~IU~
/~~j
BL.OCK
ISLAND SOUND
hcLI)J~Q
"V"',,'-''^"
~','~.
3~\~.(~~n;S ~.'.
':~<~~'~:'; "" .'C~'~"'
MAP
.,I'-___,~
Y SYSTEM
STATE 6. COUNT_
I~ TWO lANES
II I FOUR LANES
- Sl,x I, ANES I
' ,
ANNUAL AVG "
1975 [[]12 DAILY TERAFFl"
VQLUM s)
1982 /2 {IN THOU'SAND
A
NO.
,,- e4
DATE
ORIG. 6-76
,<:,
NO.2
DRN J.T.W.
3-008
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
level of Service
The concept of level of service is associated with different
operating conditions that occur on a roadway when it accommodates
various traffic volumes. It is a qualitative measure of the effect
of a number of factors which include: 1) speed and travel time,
2) traffic interruptions, 3) freedom to maneuver, 4) driver comfort
and convenience, 5) safety, and 6) vehicle operating costs. Six levels
of service have been established and are utilized for highway planning
purposes, designated by the letters A through F, providing for best
to worst in terms of driver satisfaction.
Between 1978 and 1980, the Suffolk County Department of Public
Works conducted speed and delay studies on 25 county roads consisting
of a total of 165 miles in order to determine their operating level.
Of the 165 miles surveyed:
68% operated at level of service A
20% operated at level of service B
9% operated at level of service C
2% operated at level of service D
1% operated at level of service E & F
In terms of orientation, the north/south roads averaged slightly
higher operating speeds overall than their east/west counterparts:
level of Service
A
B
C
D
E & F
North/South Roads East/West Roads
72% 64%
18% 22%
8% 11%
1% 201
10
1% 1%
-18-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
These distinctions become more apparent by time of day:
AM Peak PM Peak
Level of Service North/ South East/West North/ South East/West
A 72% 68% 73% 59%
B 22% 22% 14% 23%
C 5% 8% 11% 13%
D .7% 1% 1% 4%
E & F .2% .3% 1% 1%
While the majority of the system surveyed operates efficiently, as
evidenced by 88% of the total miles exhibitin9 levels of service A and B,
there are specific links which experienced operational problems dependent
on time of day or direction of travel. These links, operating at levels
of service D, E, or F, represent 2% of the county road mileage surveyed.
The remaining 10% operated at level of service C.
These lower level of service links are as follows:
Road
CR 3 Well wood
Ave.
CR 4 Commack
Rd.
Level
Direction/ of
From To Time of Day Service
NYS 109 Southern State SB/AM D
Pkwy.
NYS 109 Southern State SB/PM D
Pkwy.
Straight NYS 109 NB/AM C
Path
Straight NYS 109 S8/PM C
Path
Long Island Colonial Springs SB/PM C
Ave. Rd.
Deer Park Bay Shore Road NB/PM E
Ave.
Deer Park Bay Shore Road NB/AM D
Ave.
Deer Park Bay Shore Road SB/PM D
Ave.
- 19 -
I
Level
I Direction/ of
Road From To Time of Day Service
I CR 4 Commack Deer Park Bay Shore Road SB/AM C
Rd. Ave.
Bay Shore Long Island Ave. NB/ AM C
I Rd.
Bay Shore Long Island Ave. NB/PM C
Rd.
I CR 7 Wicks Rd. Crooked Motor Parkway SB/PM C
Hi 11 Road
I CR 10 Elwood Rd. NYS 25 Burr Rd. NB/PM D
NYS 25 Burr Rd. SB/PM D
NYS 25 Burr Rd. NB/AM C
NYS 25 Burr Rd. SB/AM C
I CR 11 Pulaski Rd. Oakwood Rd. NYS 110 EB/PM D
Oakwood Rd. NYS 110 EB/ AM C
I Oakwood Rd. NYS 110 WB/PM C
NYS 110 Park Avenue EB/PM D
NYS 110 Park Avenue WB/AM D
I NYS 110 Park Avenue WB/PM D
NYS 110 Park Avenue EB/AM C
Park Ave. Broadway EB/ PM C
Greenlawn
I Park Ave. Broadway WB/AM C
Greenlawn
Park Ave. Broadway WB/PM C
I Greenlawn
\:lwood Rd. Larkfield Rd. EB/AM C
El wood Rd. Larkfield Rd. EB/PM C
I Elwood Rd. Larkfield Rd. WB/PM C
CR 12 Hoffman Great Neck We 11 wood Ave. EB/PM C
I Ave. Rd.
CR 16 Porti on Rd. NYS 347 Nichols Rd. WB/AM C
I School Patchogue EB/PM C
House Rd. Rd.
CR 34 Deer Park NYS 27 Deer Park Ave. NB/AM C
I Ave.
NYS 27 Deer Park Ave. NB/PM C
I CR 35 Park Ave. NYS 25 Broadway SB/AM C
Greenlawn
NYS 25 Broadway SB/PM F
I Green 1 awn
I - 20 -
I
I
. Level
Direction/ of
Road From To Time of Day Service
. CR 35 Park Ave. Broadway Pulaski Rd. NB/AM C
Green 1 awn
I Broadway Pulaski Rd. SB/PM C
Greenlawn
Old Country NYS 25 NB/AM D
Rd.
. Old Country NYS 25 NB/PM F
Rd.
. CR 50 Union Blvd. Fifth Ave. Brentwood Rd. EB/AM C
Fifth Ave. Brentwood Rd. EB/PM C
Fifth Ave. Brentwood Rd. WB/AM C
Fifth Ave. Brentwood Rd. WB/PM C
.
CR 57 Bay Shore Commack Rd. Deer Park Ave. WB/PM F
Rd. Commack Rd. Deer Park Ave. WB/AM D
. Conmac k Rd. Deer Park Ave. EB/AM C
Commack Rd. Deer Park Ave. EB/PM C
. CR 65 Division St. River Ave. West Ave. EB/PM C
CR 67 Motor Pkwy. Washington LIE Exit 55 EB/PM F
Ave.
I Washington LIE Ex it 55 WB/AM C
Ave.
I CR 67 Motor Pkwy. LIE Exit 57 Veterans Hwy. EB/PM E
LIE Exit 57 Veterans Hwy. WB/AM D
LIE Exit 57 Veterans Hwy. EB/AM C
I LIE Ex it 55 Carleton Ave. EB/PM D
CR 76 Town Line NYS 347 NYS 111 EB/AM F
Rd. NYS 347 NYS 111 EB/PM E
. NYS 347 NYS 111 WB/PM F
NYS 111 Mt.Pleasant Rd. WB/PM D
NYS 111 Mt.Pleasant Rd. WB/AM C
I CR 80 Montauk NYS 112 Sipp Ave. EB/PM C
Hwy.
I CR 85 Montauk NYS 27 Berard Blvd. EB/PM C
Hwy. NYS 27 Berard Blvd. WB/AM C
NYS 27 Berard Blvd. WB/PM C
. Berard Middle Rd. EB/PM C
Blvd.
Nicolls Waverly Ave. EB/PM C
. Rd.
. - 21 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Level
Direction/ of
Road From To Time of Day Service
CR 86 Broadway NYS 25 Park Ave. SB/PM F
Greenlawn Rd. NYS 25 Park Ave. SB/AM F
NYS 25 Park Ave. NB/ PM C
Park Ave. Pulaski Rd. NB/PM C
Park Ave. Pulaski Rd. SB/Af~ C
Park Ave. Pulaski Rd. SB/PM C
Accidents
Table 9 lists the total number of reportable highway accidents that
occurred in Suffolk County between 1972 and 1982. In general, the rate
of increase in accidents over the eleven-year span has generally been the
same as the rate of increase in population. However, while comparing the
growth in accidents with the growth in population is somewhat interesting,
it is more meaningful in terms of accident analysis to examine the number
of accidents on a specific roadway or intersection.
TABLE 9
Total Number of Reportable Accidents in Suffolk County
1972 - 1982
Year
Number of Accidents
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
36,521
36,209
36,019
37,292
40,285
42,895
43,780
42,333
40,846
42,059
40,572
- 22 -
'7'
., '<1~
,,- ,-""'-';:: ..........--~'-,-"..,~
."..'~,,'---' "". ':"",'-',":il'
'-,
n~
~-'
,
""
\".
NI
1
<J "
,
".....;
,"/\
\.' ,I
"
0\
\;
'~
1:,
l..i
,-'
L
,
"
',,:~.
'"~A
'. .,' ,i~
'+~~i;; "":l
\ <",.,:L;~
. "~.-..~. ,
'7'\':(' ,^, '>"
, ,--" I"~
.,I , 1\
J \
1, ' ,\\
'. ~
')"i
,/
"
(~'t,
'\ I
...~'. - I
~ I
- I
"
/,
r'"
v)
"r\
i
_~; L r\
0-:),:,-
() ',-) \~\
...J \, J fl.'
L.--'
I
.
Cl
z
:::>
o
If>
'\
"
1
"
.1
,
'1
I
1
~
~
~
"i
,:1
"
1
'1
~
.~
j
'i:~
,~
q~
,,'-J
a
Z
<;t
...
'00
~
r'.,'"
:!,'
"
U
o
-'
co
,
"-
" ~.. ~
\. '.
\"j?
'~ '.
.'i"
<,;<,
"
~ A
-It ~ ,'~I
:.~ ~,
r~~
~-:)i.\
/, \
". \\
" \
'-... \. ,})\ \,
\,'
'\\',
\ "\
\ -,
\
'~
I
',,< :';'~~)~~'! {
./ ,:>;/, <;
~",.,~ ""
, ''''---i " , :....- '~;.
.., ):....:/ J .1fT: ' ..,',
'--'~,' -" ":.-'
\,.," ...,"........ ;.~~ ",. -,
._.rir.';""~,.,, ;
(
/
I,
r"
. ..<" '-", ..;-,,-
-', _?;
,~
~\ "
.;.
"
'.
.'
:-..", ; ,
^~
.'~-
\"
)(
(
Ii'
;;'.....
,"' "
'J: '-.
11 '-->
It. if
", I \
, ,
d
'.,
,,;
'iIIl<
~;::~
,S;
-."",-
--.'"',
''''.
,
"
>-
<l
OJ
"
~,
( ,
I
--
"<"-,,
-:
'fJ
0::
W
Z
o
a:
<l
(?
..,::
,,'.'-'
.,..;..t;
'.
j.j
tt""
,
~
,
'.
<\~.
.";.
'-,'
I,","',
.,.. -,'
i
I
I
...y.
"':'
I
)
"',.,7
",
\
\
/""
i'
"
r-,--,
I ~Ir~~ ._' __-/1
I J ("'-'
1,,_,)> \
rt.~./ L
/.. , ,\iii'
ft'" ,'o/j'k
L'---:;; /", \"",
..-:,...., -,../~ ./ t.N~_
/' "C--~ li~:
". "\if.' ",,,.._fi. . ' ,
, '
. 1 ." ,!r~.r 1,/'-
!. ~-k-j"i""
:~:~'2 ,,\,.
,. ]" " Ij
,.(0,,' ':;;"-'" ~ ./'
/ W.f'
~ .,j
./'
-
-
-
, "
,r '"~~-?~''' ~~",I.'
~,,-:r I
..,,~ I
'i....
~.
"
~'i' --'l
P
"
,
'J
\,
;,,-/
~,,-":)
'-I
\
\
.<,,J-
-----'-
,/
,'-"'-",'
r~!,'''\s-)
'f",;-
'.
. ,- .,','.".-',
, if ....-1.
>" - ,,<',
'-,~ " /,,\
~ . '"\
\
...'\
"
....~>~ \
\
..,
-',
-'
('</'.~~
\.
"
.
" ..
, .
;:.l~.~.....L f'.
. '';IF:
'-. ';:(, "
'"' ' "
!i ,f ~\ l: --,AI,
""'" ~\ ( ;-.\
J., '~yt- '._:.~_5 -\
>~,
.
,
\,-'0
r/'>' '-l ~
"1 f ~
i...___--",
"-tip
--:]5
it "
:--..,.
.'..
."'t:3:
.f \~ -' "0'
;t--
~,
',:.
,
1
I,
I
I
I
/
^
/ ,
/ '
~ ~.'.
,r"'.--
;~".
-,...,,<,
"\'
, .:i
':>q
,.::1 .',
,.J ',I
.
I
"
'''i
(\.. ,,'~-' (, -'
f."'-ft- -.
'f',
>,li
'\
:' J
~. ::. ~)
"
~..~ .::-: :1~
'.\-,
~:~~/C~,; ~
:/
\
\
" .~.,
,
,
"
,...,..
1'\
':'.-?i\
,~
..~
,~
,
.-.-'
'~"
~Z-fF:
,_t.,
.'
:; c-:/
, ~ :
."'.1,
"
,~<I ,
",jl; ),:,.;1/
t. If- 11- r' / I I'
': '..;' {'r.
' ..,,,! (
,.
,))'
,.~..j/
-- -".~I'
..<(1
i
IJ.I~
.Jz>-
1--. 0 <!
~. 0 rn
~LIJ
a.
.'
/,
..."
...,,\
.~ ') C"
( "
.,j"'
~-,.-
'j
.
:I~
:'
'.
,
I
i
';
\
-if' ,
"j"
~'J .,.,:~;:.~
:' "t-;'.'"
I J.o;
.) .,11 jj
~:, ';1
t, r
i r/ -\)...Y);;~i.~~ '>, ;::~;
i --" ~;' ~ '." ,,"''': . .'~
" ,\".,,,, I' l
" ..,,'r' ,;j"" 1,
-...., : ", ......-'1'\:.
l (.-~"tt'.iP"'., . J
'-'<?" d.J'" ,:~"
If' ,,f ;....
','
.,;~:t"lt,
\,;'i' ~
~",i
,- ~.
r': ,.'/
\J,.
, ! ~
':"I!~ \-,
'.!
~'. .
,"
-IL
\"'tr:..-,::~,r-/
r'^-
/1 ...
"
'1r"'/1
;y " .
, i
I'
'I,}
/
," :'
'..."";J
,\
,'~::,.,
" '
~:...}!
5./ 1
,
.,~i}..,'!
'f".'
.., , .... - ~ r~
'._ ~l\
'I?l\
~'(,,\
I ~ , ~
/ 'Ii:
, '
! \
\ :
I'
\
u
'i,
, ,
1\
',,\
.,....
,
/f...
f-
<12:>-
WO<1
!>:u<ll
<:>W
a.
t,;
,
/
l:
:.-
ct
co
"'Ii'
1~9
;. /,,'\
,)
p''' \,
.-Irl"'",..,..,~--'
;.;.;--- .......
,\
,
I
,
!
-i
il/. :i
,,-t)~ :!;l
/ "J",
~
i/:'~':-.' ;.
~~ ~~ :::'.
,,;'
'.
'" L ~~\
u ',' \
o ,,,-r',,\
() ,'\ ,
W .' ,\,',
Z I,"";:rj'\
Z "(,\
,,\
i \
),1
.:~i'
:1'
,
."
,,'
I
I
\
\
\
I
I
\
^ '
(fl> r
: ..:r'
r(( i
( i,
,/
/
\
" ~.,J'\~-'
.,'
\.... -~
" ~:,..,
,;,
:r:
v;
\ ",~
\'
, ',~
,.'<
"~,
./
,',
"
"
c'.'."
:f-.....
I
! (.~~~
"
i
,
, 1~_"" ;
,
yC':5~(\, \
.~ 1/ \\;(
"'r )J! {,~-'
,-<-oJ~' ~
. -~"=''',~ r
'''Iv '\11
t: :J:...{;'
)
<f~~
p.r~''''':::,
~
-, ';'
"
/.-...
j
!
'1
~
\.
G-',}
;-,.,)
,.
"
" )
/
/
"
",'
'.;f
,
"
<,.1
^
-,
"~,.'
. ~- ' ,
11"
<---~\
.
",-,~" ,<
~ ~~
..........".,-'
.....,
/
/
'" ..-.-...",
'-:.-~-< ',~
'i>..
"'-'--
".'-";;--~.
;,
,
{if'; .
\i',i
",I
"I (
,."-:
I
j
!
r
-'.:
.......,........./,.
.....,~~' 1
~,,:/
"
~'~ I, 01
~'\,-. ~ ,,\ ,
":,.~,;~ j\
, , ~ .~" ::.[",.
::i::: v'f1' ,'!\
., '" ,
III ,,' ~ \
I<~" \
.;r,. ('i
\",',\
.\1"
" ,
, ,
'1,'
\!
'"
"~4~" ..:
"'\....,.
t;
~ '''''.
"..,;
,~
\,
"
\~
"\\.-
... .\.
" ',0.\
" ".'\\
'~
'~,
'~"'" .~
.,' k'
""'71:7 \ ~..........
''\:' ..
~ ?,
,i,Y'i:;, '
?:\~I:
'" '\....,,,,,..: \;/ , ,'~ ..;
^ 0' "," ~ F 'I '
\"\,"'( /",f '\:
~~."''''''". 1,
"'_ ...\ ,"~- ""J;~
v ,; \' , '_',':i':"~"".. .. ,/ t",
<:'
\
,\
,
'-.!
.~/'. :"
, .-;:
"
"
,
"
;'~"""'i
of
, ~.. :',,;
'>
j" ..
,
,
i._~../
V I
(, "
"
j
(
(
:?~<;;
~:,y):,
.,;)~'~~;,.\
A)~: (
, '\
I,...
, '\-:.
, ,\,.,,)'
.'~~? ;..
': ~,<._--
I
\',
fEr
'Y
".;'
J
'\
e;:';
,
.{;;.-'
.,
\
- >-0, ,Ql..,' ,
<r \ "'I-~,
CD ..,> ,
C "t
\
, ,:}.i
.'n
";~
,.-,'f
:};
,
,</
,-',
i
,
I
i
/-t
':;'
d
C,/-/
(
"" /~
"<:,.;1
.rf)' ("-J
- J-' ): (/J
o;;r:'..;' : hJ
v .r
,
\!
~~'".. .'
~.. :-I'
.--.....--.
',~ /
u
\'......,
I :
!
(~.,
j
'>:-,: /
\,,/
0::
o
::;.
,,'~
";'1
--,
L
-',
~.:
-,,)
('~ :
" '
..~f
".'~~"-~
::.
,':'Ilf;o
----
..
'\."
\y
I
,'-,'"
.j)
"
.~ ,'c ,_~~_;,~~,.,~
V'\
.j
"'.
,".
".
"
i \.
; V,.....'
-- 'X~'
~:A\:
. "
~ ...~...J
1:" ,.,t,
, ,,-,-\
J:J^.1
i
c
.>~~~> -' ~~~ .,~~ '~...
: /....../1.. ,'I ':)
,
(
,-
~
",r'
..
.~, .
.<_,c,
,.
~ .--....
~..-/
'.
'i
I '(
( \
:1~~ ..1'.
',1 ' ~'---+-,"",'-"""\.~"
'1 ,'~'-<
'I f,.'~' '1\ .\ ./r,----.
~<;,'. ,. :J
"f" "'~~ " ,;,1\
.'; '1,'l -"
"""'-.
'-"',
,.."f-~ '
'\,
~\,
~-.
T -"'"':.'
-.. .~-:-":;--
..'
I
,
C
'7
<-
,--.~-:::':.~-
-'
~V'.-'
.. ~;:-'~-e..'.
..~-~1l~~,
, ,
\\
'\
\..
\\ ,;/
,\:~
,
<[
.,..1
U)
~,
/
"'"",,,,:':';:;-':"-'~-1:--
,,,.~:
, (
..
'.'''""'-
\
-
--.'
,;::
C)
-,:;0-
L-..
,..
\..j
"
,.
\)
'\
~
\
~
~
..
..,J
.do
\'
\, .
,~' ,[ ('
:"'"....._~ ,-,"
',,,- I''K,
i ~"Jl,'.' :)~ ~ '\
'J'~' -- ~
/:,~, r-~3 f
:"ti '-.
:~
~~- ><>
r,.,:=~~~,~... <,.;
.';' ..~, <-(" "',.'f
, 'A. ."
, ,.' " -A"-'-,,,./
~-,,\",
, .*
"~'&., - ':
,~;- .'
~. ;."-- .
"
':'-.."j',
,
.'
.
,
o
,
,
(,<!"::~
.;
,
.
/1
:':/
\
.j'
/
/.
'1.'
'i ,
'.... .-~
,.(
I,
':;;:-
I, . 'l~..,.
~~ .~,
...~ ,
/~i('.'
r ~<"1
.!",..c
,)
t. _ ~
'~
~~\
"\
..~ ,/
'\\ ~ .
\~", '". ,,(:':='-=-."<'
\ '.'
i~ \,' ,
t .. d
~,=~'~-- '~:~~',
"
\ "
\~\ ,^.: ~
.~\-~ .:;-",'"
- ~..., - ~ ~'.:" -','.
~; .)..\ --.....--
'r-,'f' ~.
/
"
n-,~_
./
'I
//
(
!
,
, -
, ,
\.~.-~ -J"
~>
,!
---"J:.:;-,,'
:il:
, ,
,.--J,-,'"
. ~-il:'
.- 1f'- t
,-?~
. ,j
'C.
--,;
<1'
.,
.')
I
.----'" ~
>-
<l
,~
~
.(
11""
,\,.
~~"~~;t'"
.'
\
\
:.\
I
, 1i
',' 1,\,
l,ffft""'-:\
":~'
'\1
II
,
,#
., ,'I
F. .....-\1
"WI
_ ,1
",/ . ,</;"/
;r",rr"/"
,/,
7.,;I-:,l.,)\
-.-----..
;
"
+
,'-
..
i'!;;;
~~k__~.2.'
,'. >>"'.. - ~
,,';-:
:r.
.,~
I
......'.
".
,<
:"A.
:;.r:;~
~
~-''.;
"
,
/'
~
r.',t"
'\\1;'
<'"~I . ~"-~
"
"
,,':
\.
,;
,
I'. '
1.'1'-,);,','
, . , ,
,-,
:;. ,~
~
.,.""-
'..1
~
'b
!.'
~." .j
, ~ i
~
::e.
\-"
;j"
~;
" 'ii1
~
., .,
"~\Ki
~jl2
'~15I
, .~
~~
."'It;.
i.~""
~,,;i:
:,',it
.,~
,~
~iM
fi
~~
iffi
~j;,~{
Wt
~<,.;;}i
..
/'
,;;
Jf I
..
"':
/
,I
, y
J-l
I
.",~'r-.
I'. '.
(:".'1/"....i
f...,.: ~ .." ,. j ~ "
/~..-~ ~
~~../ ','
W'!_"j
.~\i'"
/~2 ,~~
/,.. . 1..../
(' i r i~~-\
~~~ ,- :..~"
...,\ -' .,'.'--/
r-
....--..._.~'::..":"-~~Clo
,=
/
j\',
/ '-,
i- ~.'
If ....,.~."
'.
i'
!
,
,~'.
'.I' ",;,"."
;'i
f
,
t.~., _',.
',;" ,...."'"
. .~,;,~ .-'!"Itit.!
r
~
~:@':
r,"').{
j'~'
I' 0,>
, ,;,
,i~
:1"'
',,,,'"
, "
',-:--.
.'~'
;,'t, -l':
,:~
I'~
;/ .;
"
'~
,~~i
~
~II'~
,,:L~iloo ~
,:t,J.Ai~~;
..,. ,.'" ,:L~~ I;
".,;' ,.<;td,,:~':<1;'-' I ,~
'..:' '....':...~{\ ,,-
'{-''';i<;iI.;iLll:.i~~~a11hi....i1,',iI__L,~,f:o! "-~-
j-.
/-.
/'F
"", I
.~; ~1 ,,,,,'
.',l, 'c"
.'!f! \'",
..:,lL- '
I .j
tUJI ~. >;",.;
-.~
'::"r:.-
'"
ii1'~""i" '.,
.." , .~
j ;
'. " / , ~
'lo, ~ -- ~'~~i"
......-.-.
-.,,".. ....
,
~,
---~,-,,,.
\.
:t.-. '..
"".~1.,;:;',~r'
,
"
.,..
\
"
~"'- r
~' . <.1
"e:
~-=","..~..,..~,!~~--
.',-:",":.,-.
..
': .'1L~.' ~-,_
..
-,II! -
, , ,,,,. ,', .
,....~,..."",..~., ....., ...' _."~#+"_.,,.
..
-.'.
',." .~'.
, ,
;,~-
.~:d""'. .... :.
-
-
-
-
-
-
','
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In previous years, police reports of all traffic accidents that
occurred in the county were obtained, and this data was used to establish
a list of the highest accident locations as well as other accident-related
information. Recently, however, the county keeps records on county-
maintained roads only and New York State and the various towns keep
accident inventories on their respective roadways. The only crossover
occurs where a high accident location takes place at the intersection
of a county road with a state or town road. For the purposes of this
report, only data from the county accident records are included and this
is shown in Table 10.
TABLE 10
Twenty Highest Accident Locations on County Roads
1982
Location Number of Accidents
Sunrise Highway (NYS 27) @ Nicolls Rd. (CR 97) 55
Is1ip Ave (NYS 111) @ Suffolk Ave (CR 100) 48
Sunrise Hwy (NYS 27) @ Straight Path (CR 2) 44
Farmingda1e Rd (NYS 109) @ Straight Path (CR 2) 43
Middle Country Rd (NYS 25) @ Patchogue-Mt Sinai Rd (CR 83) 42
Carleton Ave (CR 17) @ Suffolk Ave (CR 100) 41
Veterans Memorial Hwy (NYS 454) @ Lake1and Ave (CR 93) 39
Middle Country Rd (NYS 25) @ Nicolls Rd (CR 97) 38
Deer Park Ave (NYS 231) @ Bay Shore Rd (CR 57) 37
Suffolk Ave (CR 100) @ Brentwood Rd 36
Broad Hollow Rd (NYS 110) @ Pinel awn Rd (CR 3) 34
Fifth Ave (CR 13) @ Pine Aire Dr 32
Jericho Tpk (NYS 25) @ Old Willets Path (CR 108) 32
Jericho Tpk (NYS 25) @ Deer Park Ave (CR 35) 32
Sunrise Hwy (NYS 27) @ Waverly Ave (CR 19) 31
Fifth Ave (CR 13) @ Spur Drive S. 31
Jericho Tpk (NYS 25) @ Commack Rd (CR 4) 30
Fifth Ave (CR 13) @ Suffolk Ave (CR 100) 30
Sunrise Hwy (NYS 27) @ Johnson Ave (CR 112) 30
Jericho Tpk (NYS 25) @ Indian Head Rd (CR 14) 29
- 23 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In eastern Suffolk, because of the lower traffic volumes in this
portion of the county, a lower criterion has been used to define high
accident locations. Table II shows the ten highest accident locations
for 1982 in eastern Suffolk County.
Map 3 shows the location of the high accident locations throughout
Suffolk County.
TABLE II
Ten Highest Accident Locations on County Roads in Eastern Suffolk County
1982
Location
Number of Accidents
Flanders Rd (NYS 24) @ Cross River Dr (CR 105) 16
Montauk Pt. State Parkway (NYS 27) @ Edgemere St (CR 49) 15
North Sea Rd (CR 38) @ North Rd (CR 39) 15
Old Country Rd (CR 58) @ Roanoke Ave (CR 73) 14
Montauk Hwy (NYS 27) @ Flying Pt. Rd (CR 39A) 10
Hampton Bays Rd (NYS 24) @ Montauk Hwy (CR 80) 9
Montauk Hwy (CR 80) @ Springville Rd 9
North Sea Rd (CR 39) @ Tuckahoe Rd 9
North Sea Rd (CR 39) @ Magee St 8
NYS 25 @ Cross River Dr (CR 105) 8
Since 1974, a number of intersections where a large number of accidents
had occurred have been improved so as to reduce the accident rate. Most
notably were several locations along the formerly non-limited access portions
of Sunrise Highway (NYS Route 27) through the Town of Islip. Reconstruction
of Sunrise Highway to limited access status has eliminated the at-grade
intersections and, consequently, taken care of the accident problems at
these locations.
- 24 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Reconstruction, channelization, and the addition or improvement of
signalization at other intersections listed in 1974 as having a very
high number of accidents has helped reduce the accident rate at those
locations as well.
Status of 1978 Major Highway Recommendation
Presented on the following pages is a review of the major
recommendations contained in the Highway element of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan of 1978.
Central Long Island Corridor - Conklin St. Extension
It was recommended in the 1978-1995 Improvement Program plan that a
continuous arterial highway be constructed between NYS 110 and the LIE
approximately along the rights-of-way of Conklin Street, Long Island
Avenue, Acorn Street, Pine Aire Drive, Suffolk Avenue and Old Nichols
Road. To date, Suffolk Avenue between Wicks Road and Veterans Memorial
Highway, a length of five miles, has been reconstructed. Reconstruction
of Old Nichols Road between the LIE and Town Line Road began in mid-1983.
The extension of Suffolk Avenue west from Wicks Road to Commack Road and
connecting to Long Island Avenue has been included in the County Capital
Program, but construction is not anticipated until 1988. Most of the 2.6
miles of the project would be along existing right-of-way while approx-
imately .4 mile would be along a new alignment. The project would provide
a link between the western terminus of Suffolk Avenue and the eastern
terminus of Long Island Avenue without having to traverse the railroad
- 25 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
tracks twice as is now required by the Wicks Road-Pineaire Drive route.
This project would require a new grade separation structure at Sagtikos
Parkway.
While the completed and proposed improvements will go a long way
towards serving the industrial and commercial traffic generated in the
Central Long Island Corridor, there are still some major obstacles to
overcome before a through route could be provided to NYS 110:
- Between Commack Road and Carls Path, both sides of Long Island
Avenue are lined with automobile and scrap metal recycling yards
that are built close to the edge of the roadway and which utilize
on-street parking for their business.
- There is an off-set intersection with Acorn Street at Deer Park
Avenue that may require the acquisition of some developed commercial
property in order to be properly aligned.
- At some point to the east or west of Wyandanch Station, the rail-
road has to be crossed in order to link Acorn Street to Long Island
Avenue.
- At the section between Wellwood Avenue and New Highway, cemetery
property has to be crossed. This could either be done by linking
the off-set intersection between Long Island Avenue and Conklin
Street or by continuing Long Island Avenue westward adjacent to the
LIRR tracks. However, there has been some problems in the past
negotiating for any type of right-of-way access with cemetery
officials.
- 26 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A recent added impetus to the implementation of the Central Long
Island Corridor concept has been the announcement by the MTA of a
proposed electrification of the Ronkonkoma branch of the railroad. The
closing or relocation of several stations along the route has been sug-
gested, requiring that the roads paralleling the railroad be improved
in order to facil,tate the movement of commuter automobile and possibly
transit vehicles. Further development of these ideas will require a
separate study.
New Highway
The southern portion of New Highway from Southern State Parkway
is proposed for widening from two to four lanes. Sharp curves just south
of Zahn's Airport will be straightened. Albany Avenue will be realigned
to intersect New Highway at right angles. The existing southern terminus
of New Highway at Straight Path will be changed due to safety consider-
ations. There are right-of-way problems encountered at the northern
portion of New Highway from Ruland Road to Southern State Parkway due to
the existence of Republic Airport on the west and cemetery property on
the east. A severe curve created by Republic Runway cannot be readily
straightened. The northern terminus of New Highway at Ruland Road will
be realigned to Maxess Road which runs north to the L.I.E. Phase I
of the project, between Sunrise Highway and NYS 109 is under final design.
Construction is expected to be completed by 1986~
This project is expected to relieve some traffic congestion in the
NYS 110 corridor and to service the Zahns Airport property which will be
developed for m}xed residential, commercial and industrial uses.
- 27 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NYS 110
Since 1975, NYS 110 has been reconstructed from the LIE south to
Baylis Road as part of an overall proposal to widen the roadway to a
six-lane cross-section from the LIE to the Southern State Parkway.
This corridor is and will continue to be one of the most important
commercial and industrial areas in Suffolk County. Highway reconstruction
projects in the NYS 110 Corridor were given priority in the 19B4-89
TIP, further confirming the importance of this area.
Hauppauge Industrial/Governmental Area
The traffic in the Hauppauge area has increased disproportionately
to the rest of the county since 1975 and will continue to increase
in the future as the industrial parks in the area are further developed.
The number of employees in the Hauppauge Industrial Park alone is projected
to increase from 40,000 to 80,000 by 1990.
There are few alternatives left for handling the traffic, and those
that are would have been the most effective and also the most costly.
The proposed Hauppauge Spur, for example, is no longer feasible due both
to cost and the fact that new development has occurred in what would have
been the right-of-way area. Some progress has occurred, however; CR 6
Kings Highway has been constructed between NYS 111 and Old Willets Path
to handle some of the east-west industrial park traffic. The section of
NYS 111 between Town Line Road and NYS 347 which has long been a problem
has been reconstructed somewhat to facilitate traffic flow. The Hauppauge
Industries Association, a business executives group, has proposed construct-
ing a ramp from the Northern State Parkway in the vicinity of Oser Avenue,
- 28 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
using primarily their own resources in order to serve the needs of the
industrial park area.
Reconstruction of Old Willets Path from Rabro Drive to Veterans
Memorial Highway has been proposed for inclusion in the county capital
program. The existing two lanes would be reconstructed to four lanes,
with left-hand turn lanes at intersections. New access roads to
New Highway, a town road on the west side of the industrial park, will
together with Old Willets Path, further improve north-south traffic flow.
Northern Brookhaven Corridor/NYS 25A
It was recommended in the 1978-1995 Improvement Program that an east-
west bypass route to NYS 25A be constructed between Nesconset Highway and
William Floyd Parkway. One county proposal was for the construction of a
new highway, CR 26, between these two points; but it was never pursued
primarily due to the high estimated cost and questionable effectiveness.
The bulk of traffic volume between NYS 347 and William Floyd Parkway is
local in nature. Therefore, any alternate route that serves through traffic
would only partially address the local congestion problem.
New York State Department of Transportation, utilizing a Tri-State
computer model, forecasted traffic volume and patterns in the Northern
Brookhaven Corridor for the year 2000 and developed alternative solutions
for relieving traffic congestion based on this modeling approach. The
state realizes that reconstruction of NYS 25A from NYS 347 to William Floyd
Parkway is the most important component of any plan for the area.
Alternatives considered included reconstruction of NYS 25A to four lanes
and construction of CR 26 and CR III in various combinations. However, it
- 29 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
is acknowledged that without a widening of NYS 25A itself, there would
be little improvement in service level on that road even if both CR 26
and CR 111 were to be constructed.
NYSDOT estimates that widening of NYS 25A alone to four lanes
would alleviate projected traffic for the next ten years. It is believed
that the optimal long-range solution to the problems of the transportation
network in this area is the widening of NYS 25A and the construction of
CR 111. The state has begun plans for the improvement of 25A and will
have the section from NYS 347 to Echo Avenue constructed by 1988.
The NYSDOT is not prepared to make a final determination as to the
best course to follow. Further analysis, community input and funding
factors must be considered.
Northport-Babylon Expressway
Although there is need within the north-south corridor in Babylon
and Huntington Towns for additional capacity that would be served by
this route, the project as originally conceived is no longer considered
feasible by the NYSDOT. The need for additional capacity is particularly
felt between the LIE and NYS 25A. The need for additional capacity is
particularly felt between the LIE and NYS 25A. While not proposed for
inclusion in the TIP in the near future, NYSDOT considered extending the
arterial portion of NYS 231 north of Northern State Parkway to NYS 25,
a distance of approximately one-half mile. Although conceptually,
continuation north of NYS 25 would be desirable; in actuality, residential
in-filling, community opposition and concern by the Town of Huntington on
the consequences of a link-up to Warner Road north of NYS 25 would make
this proposal difficult to implement.
- 30 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Smithtown Avenue
As a result of recommendations made in the MacArthur Transportation
Hub Study, reconstruction of Smithtown Avenue between Lakeland Avenue
and the LIE and ,replacement of the highway bridge over the LIRR is
contained in the TIP for fiscal year 1983-84.
Sunrise Highway: Bay Shore to Patchogue
Reconstruction to limited access standards has either taken place
or is under way between Saxon Avenue and the NYS 27/NYS 27A merge in
Oakdale. The remaining portion has been divided into sections and is
contained in the TIP. The actual completion of construction will
probably not take place until the mid or late 1990's.
Sunrise Highway Extension
Traffic continues to grow on the South Fork and severely taxes
the ability of the existing roadway to handle it. Since 1975. there
have been a number of studies to examine the situation including the
formation by, the Governor of a South Fork Task Force. The most recent
study is being performed by Vollmer Associates under contract to the
NYSDOT. Their preliminary findings indicate a deteriorating level of
service on NYS 27 on a year-round rather than just a seasonal basis and
an extension of the hours at which the highway operates at low levels
of service during the day. The Transportation Division continues to
recommend a bypass in some form.
- 31 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TOPICS Improvements
TOPICS-type improvements continue to be an important part of the
county's capital program. The now completed Pulaski Road project, for
example, improved vehicular safety by correcting high accident inter-
sections according to federal standards. A new Pulaski Road project,
with a projected completion date in the late 1980's, will reconstruct
and repave the road between the previously improved intersections.
Grade Crossing Eliminations
Grade separation projects were proposed for Park Avenue in
Huntington, William Floyd Parkway and Lakeland-Ocean Avenue.
- Park Avenue: For a number of reasons including expense, this
project was eliminated from consideration for implementation.
However, with the proposed electrification of the railroad from
. Huntington to Northport, it will probably have to be considered
again.
- William Floyd Parkway: There was a great deal of controversy
surrounding this project including local community opposition
to a grade separation structure. While the grade crossing
was not eliminated, part of the problem of traffic congestion
was solved by widening the roadway at grade to permit the movement
of through traffic and facilitate turning movements.
- 32 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- Lakeland-Ocean Avenue: This road was reconstructed from Sunrise
Highway to Smithtown Boulevard with the exception of the portion
that crosses the Ronkonkoma branch of the railroad. The section
was never completed due to community reaction to a grade separation
structure which was the only type of crossing the MTA would
approve at the time. At one point, the MTA did agree to an
at-grade crossing. However, the MTA then proposed the electrifi-
cation of the Ronkonkoma line. The proposed electrification would
increase the number of trains traversing the area. Increased
industrial and commercial development will also cause traffic to
grow on Lakeland-Ocean Avenue. These two factors combined give
justification for the reassessment of a grade separated structure
if only for safety considerations. These issues have yet to be
resolved. Ideally, grade separation is the preferable course
of action from a technical viewpoint, but community opposition
makes it a political question.
Highway Funding
New York State expenditures for transportation have been decreasing
since the release of the state's Master Plan for Transportation in 1972.
The 1972 plan proposed that approximately $273 million in constant 1972
dollars be spent per year on highway transportation for the 20-year
time frame of the plan in order to meet 50% of the perceived needs.
Even this reduced level was not realized. A review of expenditures
during the past ten years reveals that only 23% of the targeted amount
was expended.
- 33 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Total highway expenditures by New York State have not only decreased
since 1972, but as the federal share of project costs increased, the state
correspondingly scaled down its own share of expenditures. Between 1972
and 1976, the ratio of state to federal expenditures for capital construc-
tion activity was approximately one to one. The ratio changed dramatically
after 1976 to the point where the federal share was exceeding the state's
by more than two to one. Thus, the state, instead of using the increased
federal aid as an opportunity to do more work, allowed just the opposite
to occur. The state, in its current guidelines for CHIPS (Consolidated
local street and Highway Improvement Program) expenditures, prohibits
localities from doing a similar thing in their highway improvement
programs. Municipalities, including counties, must keep up with their.
historic level of highway maintenance expenditures in order to receive
their full capital program allocations available under CHIPS. A reduction
in maintenance levels would cause the state to correspondingly reduce
CHIPS funds.
In addition, shortly after the release of the plan, the State Finance
Law capped revenues at the 1973 level for motor fuels and registrations
that were allocated to counties in accordance with the highway law.
Motor vehicle registrations in Suffolk County have grown over 40% in the
past ten years, but the county received no additional funds from this
increase.
At the present time, even though Nassau and Suffolk Counties represent
approximately 15% of the total population of the State of New York and
have over 21% of all motor vehicle registrations in the state, we receive,
- 34 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
at best, 12% of all state and federal highway funds. The recent
enactment of the new Federal Surface Transportation Act, which was
passed in December, 1982, will unfortunately continue this trend in
allocation. As a result of the Act, a new 5~ per gallon gas tax has been
imposed. This tax will cost Nassau and Suffolk Counties $65 million
annually. One cent of every five is to go to mass transit, with the other
four cents earmarked for highway improvement projects. Highway improvements
that will benefit from the new tax revenue include interstate, primary
and bridge programs. Almost two cents of the four cents allocated to
highway improvement are designated for interstate construction projects.
The bicounty area would have automatically lost two cents for every five
cents we pay, but the recent change in the status of the Long Island
Expressway to an interstate in the bicounty area alleviated this potential
i njusti ce.
In November, 1983, the NYS Transportation Infrastructure Renewal
Bond Issue was approved by the voters. This authorizes the issuance of
$1.25 billion in state bonds, the proceeds of which will be used for
various transportation improvements. Bond funds will be combined with
other funds including state appropriations and federal aid to finance
the improvements. Presumably, the level of state funding for highway
from other sources will not be diminished as a result of the availability
of the bond funds. One of the primary objectives of the bond issue was
to "enri ch" the supply of money avail able for transportati on improvements
and to date this has been the case.
. - 35 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Priorities for the Future
Projects are committed in the TIP virtually into the 1990's. This
is indicative of both the large scope of improvements that need to be
made as well as the relative scarcity of funds for these improvements.
Changes in need and priority do occur, however, and these must be
monitored. As was mentioned in the introduction, the TIP process has so
far been very efficient in this regard.
In general, there are areas of the county where change is occurring
and will continue to occur at a pace greater relative to the remainder
of the county due to either industrial or residential development. These
were elaborated upon in the text, but may be summarized as follows:
1) NYS 110 Corridor and the Hauppauge Industrial Area
2) Central L.I. Corridor
3) North and South Forks
From time to time, special studies will have to be made of these areas.
The county is committed to the cause'of clean air and the implementation
of low-cost, high efficiency measures (generally coming under the heading
of TSM or Transportation Systems Management) that further enhance the
quality of the highway network.
- 36 -