2015-06-16 FPC - Additional Traffic Comments
To: Gary Zuckerman and the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board
Date: June 16, 2015
Subject: Additional Traffic-Related Comments – Sun Homes at
Reckson Executive Park, Rye Brook, New York (538.662)
As requested, we have reviewed comments submitted by a member of the
Planning Board and included in an email dated June 10, 2015. We offer the
following responses for consideration by the Planning Board in its
deliberations regarding the proposed residential development on the subject
property:
1. Study Area Intersections – The Applicant’s Traffic Report included
two intersections in its analysis for potential impacts along King
Street – the signalized intersections of King Street at International
Drive and King Street at Anderson Hill Road.
The member’s comments suggested that additional intersections
should have been included in the Study provided by the Applicant
as follows:
King Street at Hutchinson River Parkway/Merritt Parkway
ramp intersections/North Ridge Street;
King Street at Arbor Drive; and,
King Street at Blind Brook High School/Glenville Street.
Based on information provided by the Applicant, the proposed
development is estimated to generate 52 and 69 vehicle trips to King
Street south of Anderson Hill Road during the weekday morning and
weekday afternoon peak hours, respectively. In any analysis this
level of additional traffic must also be matched to the level of traffic
under a future build condition on King Street south of the Anderson
Hill Road intersection. For reference purposes, King Street, south of
the Anderson Hill Road intersection, will have a two-way traffic
volume of 2,146 and 1,936 vehicles during the weekday morning
and weekday afternoon peak hours, respectively. The addition of the
2
traffic related to the proposed residential development will result in a 2 and 3.6
percent increase in traffic during the weekday morning and weekday afternoon
peak hours, respectively. While this certainly represents an increase in traffic, as it
relates to the current and future level of traffic on King Street, it is our opinion that
the increase is insignificant. It is correct that all traffic and cumulative traffic
increases result in additional delays; however, this level of traffic added to King
Street, between Anderson Hill Road and the Parkway ramps, should not result in a
significant increase in delay along King Street, although it may have an impact on
motorists exiting side streets from Greenwich along this section of King Street.
In reviewing the Traffic Study submitted by the Applicant, our office did not
recommend any further Study at the Hutchinson River Parkway/Merritt Parkway
Interchange intersections because past experience and analyses of these
intersections indicated there are delays during peak hours. In the past, the
analyses completed for other projects resulted in discussions with the Town of
Greenwich, Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) and the New
York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), which clearly indicated
that modifications to these intersections and King Street in the vicinity of the
Parkway ramps were generally not feasible. Modification of these ramps and
intersections is not the sole responsibility or in the control of the Village of Rye
Brook or the NYSDOT. Discussions with the Town of Greenwich and ConnDOT
has yielded limited options to modify these ramps, improve or change traffic
control or modify pavement markings on the King Street Overpass due to
limitations in pavement width and structural concerns regarding vehicles stopped
on the bridge. Therefore, it was our opinion during the current review that
additional analyses at these intersections would not result in any opportunity to
modify traffic controls or improve traffic conditions.
We acknowledge that there is traffic congestion at these ramps during peak hours,
which is typical of many interchange ramps and intersections along the
Hutchinson River Parkway in the immediate area.
Any analyses of intersections to the south of the Parkway Interchange along King
Street, which would be anticipated to result in smaller volumes than those noted
above, may have a minor impact on the intersections. Any modification to these
intersections would be limited to changing traffic signal timing. Therefore, the
Traffic Analysis provided by the Applicant and the focus of our review on behalf
of the Village was limited to the intersections near the subject property, which
would receive the greatest impact from the proposed residential development.
3
In our review, we also acknowledged that any traffic signal timing change at the
intersection of King Street and Anderson Hill Road would be the sole
responsibility of the Town of Greenwich, since this intersection is completely
within the Town of Greenwich and not in the Village of Rye Brook. Therefore,
the Village of Rye Brook and, for that matter, NYSDOT have no control over the
traffic signal timing plan in place at this intersection.
The findings of the Applicant’s Traffic Analysis indicated that the signalized
intersections could operate at an improved Level of Service “C,” as opposed to
Level of Service “D” and “E” with modification of the traffic signal plans. This is
typically the first step in a review of any Traffic Study to address potential
increases in traffic and increases in delay.
As a reference, Level of Service “C” is an average level of delay, which is
acceptable. Level of Service “D,” which indicates a longer delay, is still
acceptable during peak hour conditions. Level of Service “E” is typically
described as capacity of an intersection where the motorist experiences long
delays, which is not acceptable. Level of Service “F,” which is not referenced in
the email, is an even longer delay and beyond measurable capacity of an
intersection.
* * * * * *
In summary, it is our opinion that further analyses of the southerly intersections
would not provide any benefit to the Village in its review of the Application.
The reference to the previously approved office building is, in our opinion, still
valid for comparison purposes only. It is our understanding that this approval is
still in place. We appreciate the reference that the construction of an office
building may no longer be feasible; however, consistent with previous studies for
the subject property, this analysis is appropriate for comparison purposes.
Michael A. Galante
Executive Vice President
g:\538.662 sun homes at reckson executive park\word\sun15-001.mag.docx: td:ev