Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSunoco Service Station Traffic Impact StudyTRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF SUNOCO SERVICE STATION MAIN ROAD AT FACTORY AVENUE MATTITUCK, NEW YORK PREPARED FOR: 8UN REFINING AND MARKETING CO. PREPARED BY: DUNN ENGINEERING ASSOCIATE8 MARCH 1989 I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS Topic Page INTRODUCT ION ..... Purpose of Report Location . . Area Map . . . · Location Map . . Site Map . . STUDY APPROACH .................. EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK ...... · · Roadway Descriptions ..... Major Intersections ........ Grades and Sight Distances . . . EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITIONS ..... Traffic Volumes .......... Traffic Growth Rate ........ Accident Records .......... EXISTING EMERGENCY SERVICES . · SITE TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ANALYSIS · . INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS . . ACCESS EXAMINATION ...... ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS · · Summer Traffic Volumes .......... Traffic Interaction with Adjacent Shopping Center . CONCLUSIONS .................... APPENDIX ........ Capacity Analysis Traffic Volume Counts Accident Records 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 i0 11 12 13 13 14 16 18 28 31 42 44 ~5 45 46 49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -1- INTRODUCTION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Purpose of Report This Traffic Impact Study contains the results of a traffic engineering ex- aminatiou of the proposed redevelopment of an existing Sunoco gas station into a self-service gasoline filling station with a convenience, store. This report has been prepared to assess the traffic impact of the proposed development with particular emphasis on its impact on the adjacent street and highway network. ~oeation The proposed service station will be located on 0.55 acres at the northeast corner of Main Road (N.Y. Route 25) and Factory Avenue, Mattituck, within the Town of Southold, in Suffolk County, New York. Figure 1, Area Map, indicates the location of the Town of Southold in the New York Metropolitan area. The project site is shown in Figure 2, Location Map, while Figure 3, Site Map, presents the boundaries of the property and the adjacent roadway network. At present, the site contains an existing Sunoco service station. -2- N.J. RICHMOND / WESTCHESTER BRONX QUEENS KINGS CONN. NASSAU LONG ISLAND SOUND SUFFOLK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCALE: i° FIGURE 1 AREA MAP ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES DATE: IPAGE: = 7,4m, MAR. 1989f 3 I ! 'Lake . 'CK 6 Lake ' Boat ,y., Launching Site pEcoNIC- BAy FIGURE 2 '.. LOCATION MAP d' % ~. © .o DUNN ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES - ~ Laurel ~ ©' Camp SC~'L'~.' DATE: PAGE; < [ n~. ~,~ ~3,] ~.t~ 1'=1000' MARCH I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I FIGURE 3 SITE MAP SCALE: 1"=200' 5 I I STUDY APPROACH -6- As part of the preparation of were undertaken: this Traffic Impact Study, the following tasks Several personal, field observations were made to observe the traffic movements under various conditions at the site. 10. A physical inventory was made of the adjacent street network. An analysis was made of the traffic volume data obtained from the New York State Department of Transportation. Supplementary manual traffic counts were collected as necessary to up- date the available volume counts. An examination was made of the traffic flow on Main Road and on Factory Avenue. Also, the capacity of the adjacent intersection was determined. An evaluation was made of safety factors by reviewing sight distances and available safe gaps in the traffic flow. The availability of police and fire protection services was examined. A trip §eh, ration analysis was performed to determine the additional traffic attributable to the proposed service station and convenience store. That analysis included data obtained at a comparable service station/convenience store on Long Island. A directional distribution analysis was made to distribute the site- generated traffic onto the adjacent street network. A trip assignment analysis was performed to examine the composite traf- fic volumes that would result from the addition of the site-generated traffic to the existing traffic volumes, in order to determine the traf- -7- 11. 12. fic impacts on the adjacent roadways. A review of the access arrangements was made. As a result of the data and facts gathered were made re~arding the traffic impact redevelopment. -8- in this study, conclusions of the proposed Suuoco I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK -9- Roadway Descriptions As shown in Figure 3, Site Map, t'he proposed service station and convenience store is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of, Main Road (N.Y. Route 24) and Factory Avenue. The site has access directly onto Main Road and onto Factory Avenue. Main Road is a east/west State highway facility. In the vicinity of the site, Main Road is a two lane roadway (one lane in each direction). Factory Avenue is a north/south Town road. roadway (one lane in each direction). Factory Avenue is a two lane The above described roadways serve as the principal routes to and from the site. Major Intersection? There are no traffic signals in the vicinity of the site. The key intersection in the vicinity of the site is the intersection of Main Road and Factory Avenue. The lane configurations at this intersection consist of the following: i. Eastbound Approach on Main Road: 2. Westbound Approach on Main Road: 3. Southbound Approach on Factory Avenue: 4. ~orthbound Approach on Sigsbee Road: One lane. One lane. One lane. ! ! Grades and Sisht Distances The grades on Main Road in the vicinity of the site are essentially flat and there are no appreciable horizontal curves. The grade on Factory Avenue slopes away from Main Road at a modest rats and there are no appreciable horizontal curves on Factory Avenue. As a result, no sight distance restrictions exist at the site driveways. -11- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Available traffic flow information was obtained from the New York State De- partment of Transportation and the files of Dtmn Engineering Associates. The estimated average annual daily traffic (AU~DT) volume on Main Road (Route 25) in 1989 is 11,600 vehicles. ~ Additional traffic turning count information was collected to supplement the information provided by the ~tate and to obtain specific turning movement information for existing traffic during peak hours. Manual intersection turning counts were collected on a weekday during morning and afternoon peak periods. Also, traffic turning movement counts were collected on a Saturday. An examination of the traffic volume information reveals that the peak weekday traffic volumes occur between the hours of 8:00-9:00 A.M. and 5:00-6:00 P.M. The peak highway hour on Saturday occurs from 12:00-1:00 P.M. The traffic volume information is contained in the section of the Appendix entitled 'Traffic Volume Counts". Traffic Growth Rate In order to estimate future traffic volumes, the growth rate of traffic was determined using information from the New York State Department of Transportation and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. Discussions with the State revealed that the current eastern Suffolk County is 2.5 percent per year. traffic growth rate in Discussions with Suffolk County revealed that they project a 70 percent increase in traffic along Sound Avenue (County Road 48) over the next 20 years. Sound Avenue (C.R. 48) runs parallel to Main Road (Route 25) north of the site. A 70 percent increase in 20 years translates into an annual growth I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I rate of 2.7 percent. In other words, 2.7 percent per year, compounded annually for 20 years is approximately equal to 70 percent. The growth rate information from the State and County was discussed with the Town of South old planning staff. As a result, a conservative growth rate of 3.0 percent per year was selected. Accident Records Information was obtained from the New York State Department of Transportation of all accidents that have occurred in the immediate vicinity of the site over three years from January I985 to December ~87. A summary of the accident statistics is presented tn Table 1, Accident Summary. Details on the accident data are contained in the Appendix under "Accident Records". Based on the past accident histories, it is expected that the redevelopment of the service station and convenience store will not lead to an increase in accident rates or create a traffic hazard. -14- ACCIDENTS PER YEAR 1985 1986 1987 LOCATION Re~rtable Non-Re~rtable Re~rtable Non-Re~table Re~rtable Non-Reportable N.Y.S. Route 25 at /- 6 4 5 4 6 5 Facto~ Avenue N.Y.S. Route 25 3 1 4 2 3 1 bet~en Factory Avenue and Marlene Lane N.Y.S. Route 25 at 1 0 2 0 2 1 Marlene Lane Facto~ Avenue between 1 2 1 1 2 1 N.Y.S. Route 25 and Oak Place * Non-reportable accidents are those accidents that are not required to be reported to the Department of Motor Vehicles. TABLE 1 ACCIDENT SUMMARY EXISTING EMERGENCY SERVICES -16- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The availability of police protection and fire vicinity of the proposed site is excellent. Department patrols the area of the site. protection services in the The Southold Town Police The closest firehouse of the Mattituck Fire Department which is located at the intersection of Pike Street approximately .25 miles east of the site. is the Headquarters and Wickham Avenue, Due to the excellent patrol coverage of close proximity of the firehouse, it emergency services are available to redevelopment. the police department as well as the should be recognized that excellent service the site of the proposed -17- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -18- SITE TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Information on trip generation rates for a service station is contained in the 1987 edition of "Trip Generation" a manual that is published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The ITE manual uses two different methods to estimte vehicle trips to and from a service station. The first method bases the trip estimate on the number of pumps at a site. The secoud method uses the service station as an whole entity to estimate the number of trips. The results of the two methods are shown in Table 2, "Site-Generated Traffic, Based on ITE Manual", which presents the number of vehicles expected to enter and exit the proposed S~oco facility during the weekday A.M. and P.M. peak 'hours, as well as the Saturday peak hour. However, not all of the site-generated traffic is new traffic added to the adjacent street system. Buildings such as service stations, retail establish- ments, certain restaurants, banks and convenience markets attract traffic from the passing stream of traffic. The ITE notes that where this phenomenon occurs, trips can be broken down into the following three categories: - Primary Trips - Diverted Linked Trips - Pass-by Trips A primary trip destined to a service station is one in which the purpose of the trip is go to and from the service station. The trip pattern is generally home-to-service station-to-home. A diverted linked trip or a pass-by trip is one in which the gas station destination is a secondary part of the primary trip, such as work-to-gas station-th-home. The diverted linked trip involves a route diversion from one roadway to another, for example, to reach a service station. -19- I I TRIPS PER TRIPS PER TRIPS PER METHOD A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR SATURDAY PEAK HOOP. Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit 1. Bused on 8 8 6 15 14 - - fuel dispensing pumps 2. Per Service 11 11 13 13 27 27 Station I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Notes: 1. 2. ITE data not available for estimating Saturday peak hour trips, using Method 1. The ITE Manual may include data from sites that do not have convenience Stores. TABLE 2 SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC BASED ON ITE MANUAL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The pass-by trip comes directly from the traffic stream passing the facility on the adjacent street system and does not require a diversion from another roadway. It is essential that this phenomenon be recognized when examining the traffic impact of a development on the street system. To determine the percentages of primry trips, diverted linked trips and pass-by trips, as well as other data, patrons at an Exxon facility in Westbury were interviewed. That facility is a self-service filling station with a convenience store, and no service bays. The patron interviews were conducted on a weekday and a Saturday. Over 200 persons were interviewed, regarding (a) the purpose of their trip, (b) the route they selected, and (c) the types of purchases they made. The Table 3, "Survey Results, Westbury, New York, 1988". discussed below. results of the interview study are summarized in Self-Service Filling Station and Convenience Store, Significant findings from the interview study are Regarding trip purpose, only one percent of those interviewed on a weekday said that their trip to the Westbury site was their primary trip. For Saturday, no patrons said the trip was a primary one. Almost all of those interviewed sa id their primary trip was to work, shopping or soma other purpose. Regarding the route selected, 87 percent of those interviewed on a weekday said that they usually drove by the Westbury site. Only 13 percent said that they made a route change (detour) to arrive at the site. For Saturday, the corresponding percentages were 81 and 19, respectively. The ITE "Trip Generation" manual states that 54 percent of the A.M. peak hour volume and 58 percent of the P.M. peak hour volume, generated by a service station, involve vehicles passing by on their way to another destination. The "pass-by" percentages at the Westbury site were significantly higher, probably due in part to the fact that the Westbury facility has no service bays, whereas a typical service station does. A trip to a typical service station for auto -21- I I QDESTIONS RESPONSES (IN PF. RCI~T) WEEKDAY SATURDAY 1. What is the purpose of your trip: a) Work 79% 19% b) Shopping 5% 39% c) Recreation/Social 4% 28% d) School 2% 0% e) Service Station Only 1% 0% f) Other 9% 14% Totals 100% 100% 2. How did you get to this service station? a) Usually drive by 87% 81% b) Made a route change (detour) to get 13% 19% here Totals 100% 100% 3. Did you/will you buy: a) Gas 0nly 56% 70% b) Convenience Store item(s) only 15% 15% c) Both 29% 15% Totals 100% 100% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 3 SURVEY RESULTS SELF-SERVING FILLING STATION AND CONVENIENCE STORE WESTBURY, NEW YORK 1988 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I repair or other service that would require the use of a service bay is not a routine trip. Thus, such a trip would most likely be a primary trip, not a pass-by trip. However, such trips were not generated at the Westbury site and will not be created by the proposed S~oco facility in Mattttuck, because the existing service bays will be eliminated. Therefore, for the proposed Sunoco facility in Mattttuck, we have conservatively estimated that 75 percent of the vehicle trips will be pass-by vehicles and only 25 percent of the vehicle trips will be new traffic. R~garding the type of purchase made, 56 percent of the patrons purchased motor vehicle fuel only, 15 percent used the convenience store only and 29 percent made fuel and convenience store purchases. For saturday the percentages are 70, 15 and 15, respectively. This purchase data is relatively consistent with a similar interview study done in 1986 at two Exxon facilities in New Jersey. Thus, future traffic volumes in and out of the S~oco facility in Mattituck are expected to be affected by two factors (a) the addition of the convenience store (which would cause an increase in driveway volumes) and (b) the elimination of the existing service bays (which will reduce driveway volumes). As indicated above, the convenience store accounts for 15 percent of the generated trips, on both weekdays and Saturday. Therefore, we have assumed that the convenience store will increase driveway volumes by 15 percent. Observations during peak hours at an existing Amoco Station in Roosevelt indicate that service bays account for about four percent of the driveway volumes. This percentage was calculated by determining the difference between entering and exiting volume and dividing that net difference by the total of the entering and exiting vehicles. In summary, the convenience store will increase driveway volumes by 15 percent and the elimination of the existing service bays will reduce traffic by four percent; so the net change in driveway volumes is estimated to be approximately 11 percent. Also, since pass-by traffic represents about 75 percent of the driveway volumes, the net increase in traffic on adjacent streets will be 25 percent of 11 percent, or about three percent. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 4, "1990 Site-Generated Traffic, Sunoco, Mattituck", presents the number of vehicles expected to enter and exit the proposed Sunoco facility during the weekday A.M. and P.M. peak hours, and during the Saturday peak hour. Since only 25 percent of the increase in driveway volumes will be new traffic on the adjacent streets, the projected increases in traffic on the adjacent streets are also shown. The Town of South old requested that the Traffic Impact Study include analyses for five years after the build year and 15 years after the build year. Thus, Table 5~ "1995 Site-Generated Traffic, Sunoco, Mattituck% and Table 6~ "2005 Site-Generated Traffic, Sunoco~ Mattituck," were prepared to present volume tnforwation similar to that shown in Table 3. For Tables 5 and 6, it was assumed that site volumes will grow the same annual rate as highway trafflc~ 3.0 percent per year. -24- I I I I SUNOCO FACILITY A.M. PEAK HOUK P.M. PEAK HOUR SATURDAY PEAK HOUK 8-9 AM 5-6 PM 12-1 PM Enter Exit Enter Exi t Enter Exi t Existing Site 26 36 24 22 53 55 Volume s Projected Future 29 40 27 24 59 61 Site Volumes Increase in 3 4 3 2 6 6 Driveway Volume Driveway Volume 2 3 2 1 4 4 Increase That will Be Pass-By Vehicles Net New Traffic on 1 1 1 1 2 - Adjacent Streets I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 4 1990 SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC SIR;OCO MATTITUCK -25- I I I I SUNOCO F&CIL I T¥ A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR SATURDAY PEAK HOUR 8-9 AH 5--6 PM 12-1 PM Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit Existing Site 26 36 24 22 53 55 Volumes Projected Future 36 49 33 30 73 75 Site Volumes Increase in 10 13 11 8 20 20 Driveway Volume Driveway Volume 7 10 8 6 15 15 Increase That Will Be Pass-By Vehicles Net New Traffic on 3 3 3 2 5 5 Adjacent Streets I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 5 1995 SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC S~NOCO MATTITUCK -26- I I I I SUNOCO FACILITY A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR SATURDAY PEAK HOUR 8-9 AM 5-6 PM 12-1 PM Enter Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit Existing Site 26 36 24 22 53 55 Volumes Projected Future 43 59 40 36 87 91 Site Volumes Increase in 17 23 16 14 34 36 Driveway Volume Driveway Volume 13 17 12 i0 26 27 Increase That Will Be Pass-By Vehicles Net New Traffic on 4 6 4 4 8 9 Adjacent Streets I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 6 2005 SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC SUNO(X) MATTITUCK -27- I I I I --~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I -28- -DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The directional distribution was based on the existin§ distribution pattern of turning movements in and out of the Sunoco service station. Figure 4, Directional Distribution of Site-Generated Traffic, indicates the percentage of the vehicles that will arrive at and exit from the proposed S~oco facility via the existing roadways. -29- I I ! ~ SITE ~ NYS] ROUTE 25 MAIN RD. I I FIGURE 4 I DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC I 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ANALYSIS The site-generated traffic and the directional distribution were utilized to assign traffic volumes at the access points and on the surrounding roadway network. Figure 5, "1990 Assignment of Site-Generated Traffic, Weekday Peak Hours", shows the site-generated traffic during the weekday morning and afternoon hours of 8:00 to 9:00 A.M. and 5:00 to 6:00 P.M. Figure 6, "1990 Assignment of Site-Generated Traffic, Saturday Peak Hour", reflects the assignment for the Saturday peak hour. Figures 7 and 8 show similar information for 1995. Also, Figures 9 and 10 show similar traffic assignment information for the year 2005. For all figures, the ~olumes shown represent the total composite site driveway volumes resulting from the proposed redevelopment of the site. NYS ROUTE 25 MAIN RD. KEY: XX ,~ AM (XX)=PM FIGURE 5 ASSIGNMENT OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC 1990 WEEKDAY PEAK HOURS 33 SITE I I I I I I FIGURE 6 ASSIGNMENT OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC 1990 SATURDAY PEAK HOURS 34 I I I k ,o,,, SITE ~ ~ 8(3) ~ 5(5) . ~ -- 4(4) ~- 4(4) o(o)~NYS ROUTE 25 MAIN RD. i KEY: (XX)=PM FIGURE 7 ~SSIGNMENT OF SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC I 1995 WEEKDAY PEAK HOURS 35 ! I SITE / I FIGURE 8 I ASSIGNMENT OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC I 1995 SATURDAY PEAK HOURS 36 I I I ! I SITE 15(141 ~_ 5(4) NYS ROUTE 25 MAIN RD. KEY: (XX) =,PM FIGURE 9 ASSIGNMENT OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC i 2005 WEEKDAY PEAK HOURS 37 I ! ~ ~8 SITE I~3 ~ ~ 121 6 29 I I I I I ~~'"~NYS ROUTE 25 MAIN RD. I FIGURE I 10 ASSIGNMENT OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC 2005 SATURDAY PEAK HOURS 38 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSES -39- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I In order to examine the impact of the new site-generated traffic, critical gap analyses were performed to examine the ability of vehicles to safely enter and exit each of the key locations noted below: - Main Road at Factory Avenue/Sigsbee Road - Main Road at the site driveways The site driveway on Factory Avenue was not considered to be a critical location because of the relatively low volumes at the driveway and on Factory First, the critical gap analyses were performed for the 1990 No-Build condition. Then, gap analyses were performed for the 1990 Build condition with site traffic generated by the redevelopment of the Sunoco station (1990 Composite Traffic with the Site). In addition, at the request of the Planning Department of the Town of Southold we were also asked to design for five years after the build year and 15 years after the build year of 1990. Thus, the analyses were also done for 1995 (1995 Composite Traffic with the Site) and for the year 2005 (2005 Composite Traffic with the Site). The critical gap analyses were performed in accordance with the methodology set forth fn the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. Summaries of the critical gap analyses are contained in Tables A and B, in the Appendix under "Critical Gap Analyses ". At the intersection of Main Road and Factory Avenue, the gap analyses for 1990 No-Build and 1990 Build show that the unstgnallzed levels of service during the weekday A.M., weekday P.M. and Saturday peak hours will be C, E and F respectively for 1990. The gap analyses for the 1995 Composite Traffic condition show that the unsignaltzed levels of service during the weekday A.M., weekday P.M. and -40- Saturday peak hours will be D, F and F respectively for 1995. Finally, the gnp analyses were done for the 2005 Composite Traffic condition. Those analyses show that the unstgnalized levels of service .during the weekday A.M., weekday P.M. and Saturday peak hours will be E, F and F, respectively. All of these analyses indicate that left turns from southbound Factory Avenue will experience delays during the Saturday peak hour in 1990, and during the weekday P.M. peak hour and the Saturday peak hour in 1995 and 2005. It should be noted that these delays will occur whether or not the Sunoco station is redeveloped. It should also be recognized that for the redevelopment of the Sunoco station, site-generated traffic at this intersection will consist mostly of pass-by traffic already on the adjacent roadways. Only one percent of the vehicles exiting the site will seek to make a left turn from southbound Factory Avenue. Thus, our initial review indicates that the need for a traffic signal should be reviewed by the New York State Department of Transportation in the future to determine if traffic volumes on Factory Avenue meet the warrants for signalization. However, a signal is not recommended based on the proposed additional traffic generated by the site. Re~arding the site driveways on Main Road, the easterly driveway was selected first for the critical gnp analyses. This was done because, compared to the westerly driveway, a) it is expected to handle ~ore volume and b) it will carry more left turns out to the Sunoco station. The gap analyses show that there will be adequate gaps in traffic to accommodate all movements in and out of the easterly driveway, even during peak hours, in 1990, 1995 and 2005. By inspection, the same conclusion applies to the westerly driveway. I I I I I I I I I I I I I '1 I I I I I ACCESS EXAMINATION -42- I I I I I I I ! ! ! I I I I I I I I I Siuce the proposed Sunoco facility will have ~wo access driveways on Main Road and two on Factory Avenue, the access plan was examined in order to assure that the driveways will cause minimal interference to the flow of traffic on Main Road and on Factory Avenue. Each of the access driveways on Main Read and Factory Avenue are desigaed to accommodate left turns in and out, and right turns in and out. On the basis of the observed traffic movements and the expected future directional distribution of traffic to and from the site, the driveways will not cause interference to the flow of traffic on either Main Road or Factory -43- I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS I I I I I I I I ! I I I i I I I I I I Summer Traffic Volumes It ts nomal practice in the preparation of a Traffic Impact Study to adjust data collected during different times of the year in order to represent an average day. However, for this project it is recognized that in Southold traffic volumes during the summer months and particularly on summer weekends, are higher than during the rest of the year. Thus, a "worst case" traffic examination is presented in this Traffic Impact Study that reflects the heavier traffic volumes during the summer. Traffic Interaction with Adjacent Shoppin~ Center At the request of the Planning Department of the Town of Southold, we investigated the interaction of traffic between the existing Sunoco station and the shopping center that abuts the Smaoco station on the north and east. The results of that analysis indicates that although some vehicles travel between the S~moco station and the shopping center, the number of vehicles is very small (generally less than i0 per hour). Further, the driveways for the two sites are well separated, allowing motorists sufficient distance to leave one site and enter the other. Although a direct, internal connection between the two sites might be desireable, this is not feasible due to the substantial difference in grades between the Sunoco station and the shopping center. -45- I I I I I I I I I I I i I I ! I I I I -46- CONCLUSIONS I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I ! ! I Our study and analysis have concluded that the redevelopment of the Sunoco site into a proposed self service gasoline station with a convenience store will have no adverse traffic impact on Main Road (N.Y. Route 25) and Factory Although the redevelopment of the S~moco site will add traffic to the adjacent roadway network, the traffic impact will be minimal and the existing highway network will be able to accommodate this additional traffic. The following points should be recognized: Based on a study of a comparable filling station and convenience store on Long Island, it is expected that redevelopmant of the S,moco site will increase driveway volumes by approximately 11 percent and, of that percentage, approximately three percent will be '%ew" traffic added to the adjacent roadways. Almost all traffic entering and leaving the site will be on the road uetwork anyway, destined for work, shopping or some other purpose. ® The vehicular entrances/exits to the site are clearly visible and sight distance in the vicinity of the site driveways is adequate. 5 The location and desigm of the access driveways on Maim Road and on Factory Avenue will easily accommodate the anticipated traffic, with minimal disruption to traffic. The design volumes presented in this Traffic Impact Study reflect the "worst case" coudition due to heavier traffic volumes during the summer. The interaction of Sunoco station traffic with the adjacent shopping center involves very low traffic volumes and has a minimal effect on traffic. At the intersection of Main Road, Factory Avenue and Stgsbee Road, the gap analyses indicate that most movements will not experience significant -47- I I ! I I I I I I I I i I I i I I I I delay. Left turns from southbound Factory Avenue will experience delays during certain hours, but these left turns will not be significantly affected by the small incremental increase in traffic volumes generated by the proposed redevelopment of the site. It is recommended that the New York State Department of Transportation determine whether future traffic volumes on Factory Avenue .met the warrants for signalization. As a result of our examination, based upon traffic engineering considerations, it is recommended that the proposed redevelopment of the Sunoco service station and convenience store be approved. -48- I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I -49- APPENDIX I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Critical Gap Analysis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7.40 ~ ~ 33 ~1 ~ 47 6.~ 7 4 8 ~4 ~ 6.~ 14 ~ ~ ~ 5~ 327 -- 47 ~ ~ ~7 ~ 7.~ ~ 47 ~ ~ 97 49 6.~ 6 4 7 ~ ~ 69 6.10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5.30 ~ ~ ~ ~ 5~ 5.~ ~ ~ ~ ~6 575 * = Vol~ ~ in p~_~_ruer ~mr m I I I I I I i I I ! I I I I I I I I I ~ Ttrn Fr(m Fa:to~y 7.40 31 33 37 140 58 43 A~p_ru~ Fa~q; ~ 6.90 8 6 10 204 94 66 Right Tan Fran Pac~Dry 6.10 17 25 25 661 453 253 CuJo/ne] N0~tYocu~d ~rce~h -- 56 64 7/ 195 94 65 Left T~rn Fr(m FaC~DZy 7.40 43 55 53 170 65 45 Scutltxu-~ ~u on Fastu~' 6.90 7 6 8 212 95 66 Right %lrn Fr(m Faut~ry 6.10 65 61 76 5~ 436 402 A~u~ Omi/ned S~i-Poocrd ~ -- 115 ]~? 137 290 117 93 Left ~ Fr~ Bafce 25 5.30 5~ 48 53 633 489 446 Isft Ttrn Fr~n l~ute 25 5.30 30 24 25 72) 513 312 * = %blares are in .r~3er car e~uivalaats. ~. A 1995 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Asenu~ F-~ct_ _oog ~ 6.90 11 8 13 117 6~ 55 ~ NoL~r_14~u~d Api~,~ -- 75 86 98 100 61 43 ~ Ttrn From Facbozy 7.4~ 58 75 70 88 44 33 SoJti4oor~ ~ on Fa~toq; 6.90 9 8 ll 122 62 55 Ase. num Bight T~n Fr(m Fauto~_; 6.10 88 8]. 101 473 313 275 Cu£ub~d SoX. tb0uld .~ce~h -- 155 164 18~ 169 78 67 I. eft ~Lrn From ikute 25 5.30 70 67 70 515 357 318 ~ TLrn Froll I%:Lte 25 5.30 40 33 36 632 381 188 * = VOAm~ are in ~3er car e~/wl~:s. ! ! (Seconds) (V~'~.'-lesA-lo~)* (V-h~,.les/Hour)* 1990 BUIlD Southbotnd to Eastbomd Left Turn Fr~m Site 7.40 18 10 26 242 110 60 S~uthbcund to Westb~ad Right T~-n From Site 6.10 6 3 8 589 466 433 Combined Southbotnd Approach -- 24 13 34 281 136 74 Eastbo~d to N~rtFoomd Left Turn From Route 25 5.30 3 3 7 664 537 495 1995 BUILD Southbouad to Eastbound Left Turn Frcm Site 7.40 21 13 32 193 77 59 SoutFoomad to Westbcund Right T~n Fr~m Site 6.10 7 4 10 53~ 4(~ 370 Com~ed Southbo~d Approach -- 28 17 42 228 97 74 Eastbomd to 5brtFootnd Left Turn Frcm Route 25 5.30 4 4 9 612 471 423 ! m m Note: * = Volumes are in p~ssanger car eq,~lents. TA~R B I I 2005 BUILD Southbound to ~o~d ~t ~ ~ Site 7.40 S~t~d to Wes~ R~t T~ ~ Site 6.10 8 4 12 4~ ~ 249 ~ S~o~ ~ -- 33 21 52 ~3 71 71 ~omd to ~o~d ~ft ~ F~ ~te 25 5.30 6 4 11 ~9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Note: * = Vehicles ace in pessen~_r c~r equi~al~nts. T~.~ B I I I I I ! I ! I I I I I I I I I I I Traffic Volume Counts I, VEHICLEVOLUME COUNT I~TERS~E .~. 'CTIONTURNING MOVEMENTS ~OCA TION +':',~ro~y J,"~',-.',-'~ e... ~,,,,,..., ~o,,,,:, (',,,J,/~ .~o,,~ .~ DATE 6-Z(~-~'I~' TIME I. ' [~ Cou,:,i'E~ ,:, ',' mm ~ METH'OD OF COUNT ~ .. ~4a~oac. · .. TRAFFIC CONTROL m m m m m m m DUNN ENGINEERING, P.C VEHICLE VOLUME COUNT TERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS DATE m M'ET Hmo D OF COUNT TRAFFIC CONTROL DUNN ENGINEERIi",IG, P C. VEHICLE VOLUME COUNT IiNTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS  M'ETH'OD OF COUNT ~ TRA lC CONTROL I I I I I I I DUNN ENGINEERIHG, P.C I, VEHICLE VOLUME COUNT 'I°^'~'°~' ..+~-ro,~y A,,~,~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~y~ ~o~ ~) DATE_~-~5.~ ~ ' COMPILED BY' { DUNN ENGINEEIRING P.C. VEHICLE VOLUME COUNT .-o _ ~~ ~'ETH'OD OF GOUNT I DUNN ENGINEERING, P.C. I, VEHICLE VOLUME COUNT '~ITERs~'CTION TURNING .MOVEMENTS DA TE I~-Z7'-I~D TIME .. IV~R~"SOP'("'- · ... TRAFFIO OONTROL DUNN ENGINEERING, P.C. _, VEHICLE VOLUME COUNT iI'TERSE'CTION' TURNING. MOVEMENTS · W, % ~oo o~ couNT I I I I I I I OUNN ENGINEERING, P.C