HomeMy WebLinkAboutBergen Ave to Cox Neck Rd reconstruction 1984HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C. · CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENvIRoNMENTAL ~(~iFN'i'IST~ ~nd ~I..~'I~E'~-
125 BAYLIS ROAD, SUITE 140, MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 · 516-752-9060
February 16, 1984
Supervisor Francis J.
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Murphy
Dear Supervisor Murphy:
We are pleased to transmit herewith our Project Initiation
Request for the reconstruction of Sound Avenue from Bergen Ave-
nue to Cox Neck Road.
Copies of this report are currently being forwarded to the
Suffolk County Department of Public Works for their review and
comment.
We look forward to the construction of these necessary im-
provements and would be happy to meet with you at your conven-
ience if there is anything we can do to further assist the
Town in this matter.
Very truly yours,
HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL,
Robert Go Holzmacher, P.E.
President
RGH/KPW/be
Enc.
cc:
Town Board
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Raymond C. Dean, Highway Superintendent
Robert Tasker, Esq., Town Attorney
PoCo
~/~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL. P.C.
PROJECT INITIATION REQUEST
RECONSTRUCTION OF SOUND AVENUE - BERGEN AVENUE TO COX NECK ROAD
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
I PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1
II POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS 5
III PROPOSED SOLUTION 6
IV PROJECT PROPOSAL 6
V PROJECT EVALUATION 8
VI ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 9
VII PROJECT SCHEDULE 12
~J~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C
FIGURE 1
PLATE 1
FIGURES
LOCATION MAP FOR SOUND AVENUE
PROJECT AREA
PLAN & PROFILE OF PROPOSED RECONSTRUCTION
TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTION
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDICES
~APITAL PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF BENEFIT/COST RATIO FOR
THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
LOCATION MAP
FIGURE: 1
~_~ HOI.ZMACHER, M=LENrtI~N & MURREI,.I., I=.C. ~£LWLL;,
FARMINGDALE N v
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS and PLANNERS RIVE~HEAD NY
~ HO[.ZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRI=LL. P.C.
I. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
Sound Avenue, running through the east end towns of River-
head and Southold, has developed into a major east-west route
linking the farming industry of the area with local and distant
consumers of farm products. As such, Sound Avenue is subject to
not only heavy automobile traffic volumes, but a heavy volume of
truck and tractor-trailer traffic as well. Because of its impor-
tance to the area's economic welfare, as well as for the safety
of the traveling public, Sound Avenue should be upgraded to and
maintained at a standard that provides for safe and efficient
travel for passenger and commercial vehicles.
As shown in Figure 1 (Location Map), the section of Sound
Avenue considered for rehabilitation under this project is
between Bergen Avenue and Cox Neck Road in the Town of Southold.
This section of Sound Avenue, as will be described in more de-
tail, consists of a winding road with relatively steep grades
that severely limit sight distance and reduce running speeds.
For the purpose of this project, Sound Avenue is classified as
Federal Aid Secondary (S0715) under the federal aid system. The
need for rehabilitation is outlined as follows:
(A) Existing Conditions - The existing roadway is a well
worn asphalt surface marked by cracking and intermittent patch-
ing, but is in generally fair condition. The most severe pave-
ment damage is along the shoulders, which in some cases have
eroded and cracked away, leaving a damaged edge of pavement.
I-~;~./~ HOLZMACHER. McLENDON & MURRELL. P.C.
The existing 30'+ cross-section varies from extreme to
negligible cross slope, which, when combined with poorly
transitioned super-elevation, results in areas that allow
potentially dangerous sheet flow to occur during storms.
Obviously, this situation becomes particularly hazardous during
the winter months, as there is no existing drainage system in the
area. This situation further contributes to hazardous conditions
in the form of severe flooding in some areas.
Although the grades through the area do not exceed the 5%
allowed for an R-5 secondary road, the existing 3-4% grades con-
tribute significantly to the poor sight distance conditions.
These problems are compounded by substandard curves and reverse
curves throughout the area.
In addition to substandard roadway conditions, there are
occasional unprotected steep side slopes directly adjacent to the
roadway, telephone poles and trees within 5' of the edge of pave-
ment, and poor lighting conditions.
(B) Traffic Data - Traffic volumes studied by the Suffolk
County Dept. of Transportation (SCDOT) are summarized as follows:
ONE WAY
AADT SAT ADT SUN ADT AWDT PEAK HOUR
( VEH/DAY ) ( VEH/DAY ) ( VEH/DAY ) ( VEH/DAY ) ( VEH/HR )
4850 4090 4550 4190 305
Analysis of the data reveals that approximately 36% of the
traffic is comprised of trucks, expectedly high since Sound Ave-
nue is a designated truck route.
I--~'~/~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C.
It should be noted that these counts (taken in November) do
not reflect an increase in population of between 91% and 95% for
the area in the summer months, as established in a report pre-
pared by Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell, P.C. in December of
1980.
(C) Future Traffic Volumes - Projections made in the Suf-
folk County Comprehensive Transportation Plan (1978) indicate an
approximate growth rate of 2% per year over the next several
decades. Based on this growth rate, the projected peak hourly
flow rate (one way) over the next 20 years would increase to
approximately 140% of the present volume, or 427 VEH/HR.
Based on the analysis, the SCDOT has recommended that Sound
Avenue be developed to meet the requirements of a New York State
Design Class R-5 Roadway with a 20 year design volume of 500
vehicles per hour. SCDOT has determined that a two lane facility
would be more than adequate to accommodate projected volume at an
acceptable level of service.
(D) Accidents - According to Town Police accident records,
there has been only one traffic accident in this area of Sound
Avenue in the past year. Considering the poor sight distance and
physical features of the roadway, this is a remarkable record.
It is possible that familiarity with the area has lead to extra
cautiousness on the part of local drivers, just as unfamiliarity
and perception of poor conditions has caused non-local drivers to
proceed slowly and with more than the usual amount of caution.
In any event, despite the fact that no serious accidents have
been recorded, the potential does exist.
~"~/~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C.
(E) Relationship) to Surrounding Area - This particular
section of Sound Avenue, while bordering some farmland, runs
mainly through a residential area in a 50' right-of-way. The
fact that it is a major truck route (because of clearance
limitations on NYS Rt. 25) that is plagued with sight distance
problems makes pulling in and out of hidden driveways hazardous
for the residents. In addition, there is a school bus stop
within this section of Sound Avenue, leading one to believe that
there are a significant number of children in the area. The
danger of a school bus stop in an area with poor sight distance
is obvious.
Despite the residential nature of this particular section of
Sound Avenue, farm equipment moves through the area quite fre-
quently. A fast moving automobile or truck suddenly coming upon
a slow moving farm vehicle could have serious consequences.
Consideration should also be given to the fact that County
Road 48 immediately to the east, and the section of Sound Avenue
immediately to the west, are both relatively recently developed
roadways with higher running speeds than the estimated 40 MPH
along the project section. Approach speeds of 55 MPH or more
have been witnessed, and the problems of suddenly introducing
conditions which reduce running speeds (and introduce distrac-
tions to drivers) are well documented. Since these and other
areas of Sound Avenue have been brought up to standard, it is
unwise (and potentially dangerous) to leave intermittent sections
unimproved.
~-~.J~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C.
II. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Three possible courses of action were considered for the
section of Sound Avenue between Bergen Avenue and Cox Neck Road:
(1) Do Nothing - Leave existing conditions as they are. No
cost.
(2) Widening and Resurfacing with Minimal Drainage - Under
this option, Sound Avenue would be widened and resurfaced. Since
the grades technically do not exceed standards, there would be no
vertical realignment, and minimal drainage would be installed in
the form of leaching pools. This option would improve sight dis-
tance somewhat by virtue of the widening, and allievate some of
the flooding conditions under normal circumstances. Approximate
construction cost, $330,000.
(3) Complete Geometric Realignment and Reconstruction -
Under this option, Sound Avenue would be widened and resurfaced
where possible, and reconstructed where necessary. The road
would be realigned wherever necessary to obtain proper horizontal
and vertical curvature. A complete positive drainage system
would be installed, and miscellaneous improvements including
streetlighting and roadway delineation would be made. This
option would bring running speeds and driveability up to the
levels of the surrounding
alleviate drainage problems.
$55O,O00.
roadways and current standards, and
Approximate construction cost,
I-~/~ HOI 7MACHER, McLENOON & MURRELL, P.C.
III. PROPOSED SOLUTION
Due to the fact that this section of Sound Avenue fails to
meet current design standards, and the sight distance problems
and flooding make travel dangerous for the residents of the area
as well as the general public, we recommend Option 3, the com-
plete geometric realignment and reconstruction of Sound Avenue
between Bergen Avenue and Cox Neck Road. A complete reconstruc-
tion would bring the road up to current standards as well as
bring it up to par with the surrounding roadway. It would
improve rideability and safety, as well as eliminating the pre-
vailing sight distance and flooding problems.
Option 2, widening and resurfacing with minimal realignment
and drainage was rejected because it did not address the main
problem. While it would improve the riding surface and be
technically close to meeting standards, Option 2 would not corn-
pletely eliminate the
distance
likely not
Avenue.
problems.
be brought
severe reverse curve on grade and sight
Running speeds and driveability would most
up to the levels of the rest of Sound
Option 1, do nothing, was rejected because substandard and
potentially hazardous conditions would remain, possibly to get
worse with time.
IV. PROJECT PROPOSAL
The proposed geometric
Sound Avenue would include the
vicinity of Bergen Avenue
realignment and reconstruction of
area from Station 1+00 in the
to Station 46+50 in the vicinity of
~ HOLZMACHER, McLENOON & MURRELL, P.C
Cox Neck Road (see .Plan and Profile of Proposed Construction,
Plate I). The roadway would be reconstructed with two 12' lanes
and 10' shoulders, realigned vertically and horizontally so as to
conform to all appropriate sight distance criteria (headlight,
stopping, etc. ) and all pavement and other standards required
under R-5 classification. A positive drainage system would be
installed and connected to a recharge basin to be constructed at
or near the low point at Station 17+00. Streetlighting and
pavement delineation would be upgraded to reflect the improved
driving conditions.
Right-of-way taking would be required where the current 50'
R.O.W. is insufficient, and would total approximately 3.0 acres,
including the land needed for the recharge basin.
A comprehensive maintenance and protection of traffic scheme
is essential for the convenience and safety of the residents and
the traveling public, and should be included in the contract
plans. Bergen Avenue and NYS Rt. 25 could be used as detours,
but special consideration must be given to the high volume of
truck traffic, which cannot be detoured to NYS Rt. 25. In any
case, considerable advance warning of construction and alternate
routes should be given at all major intersections in the area.
Implementation of this project can be expected to remedy all
of the problems identified in Section I of this report, including
sight distance, drainage, safety and rideability. These objec-
tives could not be fully met under the other options considered.
~-~J~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C
V. PROJECT EVALUATION
(A) Capital Costs - Based on current trends in construction
and engineering costs and research into real estate finances and
costs in 1983 dollars are ap-
valuations, the proposed project
proximately as follows:
CONSTRUCTION $550,000.
RIGHT-OF-WAY 50,000.
TOTAL PROJECT .$600,000.
(B) Benefits - The resulting benefits of the project in-
clude
changes so as to provide acceptable sight distances and
the safety and general riding characteristics of the road.
The quantitative results of these benefits and their
on the economic feasibility of the project can best be
the elimination of combination reverse curves and grade
improve
effect
illus-
trated by a benefit/cost analysis. Taking into consideration
the assumed quantitative benefits to the public and the estimated
costs, the ratio is developed in terms of present worth as
follows:
ANNUAL
FIRST EQUIVALENT PRESENT
COST COST WORTH
COSTS
Construction $550,000. -- $550,000.
R.O.W. Acquisition 50,000. -- 50,000.
TOTAL $600,000.
BENEFITS
Accident Reduction
Travel Time Savings
Maintenance Savings
Negligible ....
-- $101,125. $755,343.
-- 12,875. 96,170.
TOTAL $851,513.
BENEFIT/COST RATIO = $851,513. = 1.42
$600,000.
~./~ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, RC
The resulting Benefit/Cost Ratio of 1.42 indicates that the
project is desirable. Details of the costs used for the ratio
can be found in Appendix B under "Development of Benefit/Cost
Ratio for the Preferred Alternative".
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The effects on adjacent property should be minimal, with the
only major action being the taking of right-of-way and property
for the recharge basin. Residents of the area will be provided
with safe access during construction under a comprehensive main-
tenance and protection of traffic scheme. The final product of
this project will leave most of the surrounding properties in an
improved state due to the elimination of flooding and improve-
ments in access.
(A) Environmental Action Plan (EAP) Category Recommendation
In accordance with the Environmental Action Plan, Transporta-
tion Project Development Process Option Categories, this proposal
satisfies the criteria for Category III (Class II) projects as
there is:
1. No acquisition of any occupied dwelling units or princi-
pal structures of business.
2. No
local travel
3. No
significant changes in traffic volume, vehicle mix,
patterns or access.
more than minor social, economic or environmental
effects upon occupied dwelling units, businesses, abutting pro-
perties or other established human activities.
~l, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C
4. NO acquisition or use of any property protected by
Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act.
5. No effect upon any property or resource protected by
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
6. No more than minor alteration of, or adverse effect
upon, any property, protected area, or natural manmade resource
of national, state or local significance.
7. No requirement for an indirect source air quality
permit.
8. No significant inconsistency with current plans or goals
that have been adopted by local government bodies.
Therefore, this project should be processed as a Category
III (Class II) project.
(B) SEQR Classification and Lead Agency - Analysis of State
Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) implementation procedures for
this project reveals that this proposal is an unlisted Action,
and falls under the conditions of 6 NYCRR 617.7.
The Town of Southold will be lead agency for this project
with environmental review to be provided by the appropriate town
agency, in accordance with Local Law 3 of 1978.
The project, as an Unlisted Action, will not create any
significant impact on the environment, as indicated by the com-
pleted short Environmental Assessment Form (see Appendix C). The
proposal does not meet the criteria for significance, as
specified in Parts 617.11, 617.12 and 617.13 as there is:
10.
~;~_/~ HOI..ZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C.
1. NO substantial adverse change in existing air quality,
water quality, noise, solid waste production, or potential for
erosion, flooding or drainage problems.
2. No removal or destruction of large quantities of flora
and fauna.
3. No encouragement or attraction of large numbers of per-
sons as a result of the proposal.
4. No conflict with community plans or goals.
5. No impairment of important historical, archaeological,
architectural or aesthetic resources.
6. No major change in energy consumption.
7. No creation of hazard to human health or safety.
8. No substantial change in the use or intensity of use of
land or natural resources.
9. No creation of material demand for other actions.
10. No significant cumulative impact resulting from two or
more actions or impact on two or more elements of the environ-
ment.
(C) Anticipated Permits Required - Due to the nature of the
proposed action and its environmental setting, no requirements
for environmental permits are anticipated.
(D) List of Sources Reviewed -
State Environmental Quality Review, 6 NYCRR
617 (Statutory Authority: Environmental
Conservation Law Sec. 8-0113).
11.
~-'~, HOLZMACHER. McLENOON & MURRELL, P.C
VII.
The
ment:
Local Law 3 of 1978. A Local Law of the
Town of Southold pursuant to Article 8 of
the New York State Environmental Conserva-
tion Law, providing for environmental
quality review of actions which
significant
Chapter 44
Southold.
National
CFR 60 ).
New York
tion,
may have a
effect on the environment;
of the Code of the Town of
Register of Historic Places (40
State Department of Transporta-
Environmental Action Plan and Trans-
portation Development Process, October
1978.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
following is an anticipated schedule of project develop-
TASK
Project Initiation Request
Design Consultant Selection
Design Report
Preliminary Plans
Design Approval
R.O.W. Maps
Final Plans, Specifications
and Estimate
R.O.W. Acquisition
Letting
Construction
COMPLETION DATE
February 1984
February 1985
April 1985
August 1985
December 1985
February 1986
December 1986
December 1986
March 1987
April 1987/1988
12.
~-~ HOLZMACHER. McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C.
REFERENCES
American Association of State Highway officials. A Polic? on
Geometric Design of Rural Highways. Washington, D.C.: American
Association of State Highway officials, 1972.
New York State Department of Transportation. Highway Design
Manual. Albany, NY: Facilities Design Subdivision, NYSDOT, 1976.
White, John A., Marvin H. Agee and Kenneth E. Case.
of En~ineerin~ Economic Analysis. New York: John
Sons, 1977.
Principles
A. wiley &
Wright, Paul H. , and Radnor J. ?aquette. Highway Engineerin~
Fourth Ed. New York: John A. Wiley & Sons, 1979.
13.
"EO,p. 10
Suff TR. 25
TITLE ABSTRACTS
{
/
_/
{
B/''`~ II/11/' 'Il/l/ :"lllll~'~"illllF-~')lllll~Wlllm ~ ~
Sound Ave. frc~ Bergen Ave.
to Cox Neck Boad
Reconstruction
Realinemant,
Drainage,
Zisc. Improve-
~ents I
LOCATION APPR
/
12/85
12/86
12/86
3/87
4/88
.550
· soP 1 / /84
.050
-,.,,., / / Ao,,,,. / /
APPRAISALS
PROPERTY
REMARKS:
1/84
----O"L / /
~ HOLZMACHER, MCLENDON & MURREL~ P.G. APPEND IX B
DEVELOPMENT OF BENEFIT/COST RATIO FOR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
(Using 12% Interest Rate and 20 Yr. Proj. Life)
1. Accident Reduction - assumed to be negligible based on information
obtained from Southold Town Police.
Travel Time Savings
Assumptions: - AADT at end of 20 yr. life = 6790 veh/day
Constant of 36% trucks (2445 veh)
Pre-improvement running speed 40 mph
Post-improvement running speed 55 mph
- Avg. time value for cars = $5.00/hr.
for trucks = $10.00/hr.
Savings in travel time due to increase in running speed from
40 mph to 55 mph over 4550 ft. project length
.022 hrs. .016 hrs. = .006 hrs.
Annual Equivalent Cost:
Cars = 4345 x .006 hrs. x $5.00/hr. x 365 days = $47,577.75
Trucks = 2445 x .006 hrs. x $10.00/hr. x 365 days/yr. = $53,545.50
Total = $101,125.00/yr.
Present Worth: $101,125.00/yr. (P/A 12,20) =
$101,125.00/yr. (7.4694) = $755,343.00
Maintenance Savings
Assumptions: - Without improvement, road will have to be
resurfaced in 5th and 15th years.
- Without improvement, road will require patching
of 2% pavement area to be patched for 10 yrs.
of project life, and 5% pavement area to be
patched for 10 yrs. of project life.
- With improvement, road will require 2% pavement
area to be patched over 10 yrs. of project life.
A) without Improvement: 2½" resurfacing at $40.00/ton at years 5 and ii
Pavement area = 4550' x 30' = 136,500 ft2.
Annual Equivalent Cost of Resurfacing:
5th yr. - (136,500) (2%/12) (.0725 T/CF) ($40.00) (F/P 12,5) (A/F 12,20) = $ 2,020.15
15th yr. - '(136,500) (2%/12) (,0725 T/CF) ($40.00) (F/P 12,15) (A/F 12,20) = $ 6,274.47
Total = $ 8,300.00 _+/yr.
Annual Equivalent Cost of Patching:
5% over 10 yrs. = 5% (136,500) (2%/12) (.0725) ($40.00)
2% over 10 yrs. = 2% (136,500) (2%/12) (.0725) ($40.00)
Over 20 yrs., avg. = (10)(4,123.44) + (10)(1,649.38)
20
Annual Equivalent Cost of Misc. Maint. (Pumping
and repair after flooding, shoulder repair, sign
repairs, etc.) - assumed =
Total Annual Equiv. Cost
= $ 4,123.44
= $1,649.38
= $ 2,900.00 ±/yr.
$ 2,500.0~ /yr.
$13,700.00 /yr.
B)
With Improvement:
Annual Equivalent Cost of Patching:
2% over 10 yrs. = 2% (136,500)(2%"/12") (.0725) ($40.00)
Over 20 yrs., avg. = (1,649.38)(10) = 20
= $ 1,649.38
$ 825.00/yr.
Total Ma~nt. Savings, Annual Bquivalent Cost = $13,700.00 - $825.00 = $12,875/yr.
Total Maint. Savings, present w~rth = $12,875.00 (P/A 12,20) = $96,170.00
APPENDIX C
NAME 0F P?~JEC~ R~construction of Sound Ave
Bergen Ave. to Cox Neck Rd.
~ 10 ac~a of land? · , · , · , , , -- Tel ~ No
Vill the~ be a ~Jor ch~ so a~ ~lque or
~ual ~And f~ ~.,.~ 0~ %ho site?
I0.
12.
P~ AR.~R' 5
-- Tea X ~o
¥II1 project a!'.er or ,%av~ a la~-ge effect o,',
p~.ec, ~ve a poten:~!y large ~ ~
~smti~ e~fect.
~! p~Jec~ affec~ any ~a:ened ~ en~ge~
a~ ~ll~? . . . . . . .
~1 pr~Jec: ~ve a ~Jor effec: on v~
~ %0 be ~cr=an~ t0 :~.a :~uni:7~ · , · Tel Nc
emv~en~i area ~ I Loca~ agency? . . · -- Yea .,~
W~i projec: ~ve ~~,o." - effec: on e~%~g or
V~I prcJec: rest: ~ ~Jcr '-
..m .... prowl t~ or
:lu~e a ~Jcr ef~e=: :: e~s~=~& ~nspcr~mci:n X
sitive ~act on ~zst~g syst~.
WIll ~oJec~ ~ve ~y ~ct on public h~cb or
~e~? X Tee
d~e~y caua~g a ~h ~ pe~n,nt pop~
X
X
X ~em No
X
-- ~R~ ~ ~ OF :SOUND A;L.t QNM E NT",
A~, ,SHOWN
JAN 1984
' BERQEN AVE. '~
Me!vllle, N.Y.
.' Sheet ,Title
OF
Consulting Engine'e~s .,
Env!ronmsntal scientists
ers
' ' 51~.a~4.34'~0 []
,:.-McLendon. &..Murrell,'..
Rl~erhead, ;N.Y. ·
Farmlngclale,. N.Y.
Sheet