Re-assessment of Concept 2 – Oak Point/Leggett Split ... · Concept 2 would reduce traffic on...

Appendix X

Re-assessment of Concept 2 – Oak Point/Leggett Split Interchange

Volume 2 4/5/19 Appendix - Page - 6584

PIN X731.55 Hunts Point Interstate Access Improvement Project Page 1 Appendix X Re-assessment of Concept 2

RE-ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPT 2 - OAK POINT/LEGGETT SPLIT INTERCHANGE

1.0 Overview

As described in the January 2018 Hunts Point Interstate Access Improvement Project Scoping Report, the concepts listed in Table 1 were considered during the scoping process of the Project. Concepts 3, 4 and 5 were initially dismissed, while Concepts 1 and 2 were assessed further based on the following screening criteria: Project Purpose and Objectives • Meets the project purpose (see Section 1.3.1 of the Final Design Report/Final Environmental Impact

Statement (FDR/FEIS)) • Meets the project objectives (see Section 1.3.1 of the FDR/FEIS) Hunts Point Peninsula Operations • Provides multiple direct interstate access points to the Hunts Point Food Distribution Center • Supports multi-modal (i.e., rail) access/growth • Supports access to commercial businesses on the peninsula The Project Scoping Report is available at: https://www.dot.ny.gov/southbronx/repository/X73155_Project_Scoping_Report_1-2018.pdf

Table 1 Concepts Considered for the Project

Concept Description

Concept 1: Edgewater/Leggett Split Interchange (Build Alternative)

Includes a split interchange at Edgewater Road and Leggett Avenue (two new ramps to and from the westbound Bruckner Expressway at Leggett Avenue and three new ramps to and from Edgewater Road)

Concept 2: Oak Point/Leggett Split Interchange

During scoping: Includes the construction of a three-leg interchange to and from the Bruckner Expressway over the Oak Point Rail Yard and a ramp from the westbound Bruckner Expressway to Leggett Avenue. Modified to: Includes the construction of two partial interchanges that include ramps to and from the eastbound Bruckner Expressway at Oak Point Avenue and ramps to and from the westbound Bruckner Expressway at Leggett Avenue.

Concept 3: Edgewater Full Interchange

Includes full access to the Hunts Point Food Distribution Center through four ramps directly connected at Edgewater Road.

Concept 4: Oak Point Full Interchange

Includes a four-leg interchange to and from the Bruckner Expressway over the Oak Point Rail Yard and a ramp from westbound Bruckner Boulevard to the westbound Bruckner Expressway at Longwood Avenue.

Concept 5: Leggett Full Interchange

Includes a full interchange to and from the Bruckner Expressway at the intersection of Leggett Avenue and Bruckner Boulevard.

During the scoping process, the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) determined that Concept 2 was not a feasible and practical alternative for the Project and did not advance Concept 2 for further study in the Draft Design Report/Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DDR/DEIS). Based on public comments received during the DDR/DEIS public comment period, the NYSDOT re-assessed Concept 2 and concluded that the decision to dismiss Concept 2 from further consideration remains valid.


https://www.dot.ny.gov/southbronx/repository/X73155_Project_Scoping_Report_1-2018.pdf


The assessment of and reasons for dismissal of Concept 2 are documented below. The NYSDOT has determined that Concept 1 (the Build Alternative) is the only feasible and practical alternative for the Project (described in Section 3.2.2 of the FDR/FEIS).

2.0 Assessment of Concept 2 - Oak Point/Leggett Split Interchange

2.1 Concept 2 Description Concept 2 originated during development of the NYSDOT Bruckner-Sheridan Expressway Interchange and Improved Access to the Hunts Point Peninsula Project, which commenced in 1997. The Environmental Impact Statement for that project was rescinded in 2012. At that time, the concept had four ramps connecting both directions of the Bruckner Expressway to Oak Point Avenue. The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) modified Concept 2 as part of the Sheridan Expressway TIGER II Study released in 2013. The NYCDOT modification placed the exit ramp from the westbound Bruckner Expressway at the intersection of Leggett Avenue and Bruckner Boulevard, but left the other three ramps at Oak Point Avenue. The NYSDOT further modified Concept 2 during the scoping process of this Project in response to public comments received at and following the public scoping meetings. Concept 2, as proposed at the June 27, 2017 Public Scoping Meeting, included new horizontal and vertical alignments for the Bruckner Expressway, which included replacing all Bruckner Expressway bridges from Hunts Point Avenue to Bronx River Avenue. Replacing the bridges over the Bronx River added substantial costs to Concept 2 while providing improvements in the functioning of the expressway that were similar to Concept 1 (Build Alternative). In addition, the proposed Bruckner Expressway realignment and widening would have closed off Edgewater Road at its intersection with Bruckner Boulevard, where right turns are currently allowed. Concept 2 was subsequently revised to include the same Bruckner Expressway reconstruction from Hunts Point Avenue to Bronx River Avenue as included in Concept 1 (Build Alternative). Concept 2 from the Project Scoping Report included the following: • Constructing a three-leg interchange to and from the Bruckner Expressway over the Oak Point Rail

Yard and a ramp from westbound Bruckner Expressway to Leggett Avenue • Providing access to the Sheridan Boulevard from the Bruckner Expressway through a pair of single-

lane northbound and southbound ramps, both accessed from the right side of the travel way • Reconstructing the Bruckner-Sheridan Interchange to improve geometric deficiencies and provide three

continuous lanes for eastbound/westbound Bruckner Expressway. However, even with the design modification described above, the NYSDOT determined during the scoping process that Concept 2 was not a feasible and practical alternative for the Project. Based on public comments received during the DDR/DEIS public comment period, the NYSDOT further modified Concept 2 from what was presented in the Project Scoping Report to determine if a different ramp configuration would make the concept feasible and practical. To reduce the additional traffic load on Oak Point Avenue from the Food Distribution Center to the Oak Point Avenue ramps and to reduce impacts to the Oak Point Rail Yard, the westbound Bruckner Expressway on-ramp from Oak Point Avenue (Ramp OPNW on Figure 6 of the Project Scoping Report) was eliminated and an on-ramp to westbound Bruckner Expressway from Leggett Avenue was added (Ramp LB). See Figure 1 for this modified Concept 2 layout. The concept includes: • Ramp OPNX – Oak Point eastbound exit ramp – would carry traffic traveling on eastbound Bruckner

Expressway onto Oak Point Avenue eastbound. • Ramp OPNE – Oak Point eastbound entrance ramp – would carry traffic traveling from the Food

Distribution Center along westbound Oak Point Avenue onto eastbound Bruckner Expressway.



• Ramp BL – Bruckner-Leggett exit ramp – would allow vehicles traveling on westbound Bruckner Expressway to exit at Leggett Avenue. Vehicles could then make a left turn onto Leggett Avenue to access the Food Distribution Center.

• Ramp LB – Bruckner-Leggett entrance ramp – would accommodate traffic exiting the peninsula and heading south and west to the Major Deegan Expressway and RFK Bridge. Vehicles could exit the Food Distribution Center and other peninsula locations via Leggett Avenue and travel on westbound Bruckner Expressway.

• Access to Sheridan Boulevard from the Bruckner Expressway would be provided through a two-lane southbound entrance ramp and a single-lane northbound exit ramp, both accessed from the right side of the travel way.

• The Bruckner-Sheridan Interchange would be reconstructed to improve geometric deficiencies and provide three continuous lanes for eastbound/westbound Bruckner Expressway.

Vehicles would continue to be able to make right turns heading north from Edgewater Road onto Bruckner Boulevard eastbound. The Bruckner Expressway Truss Bridge over the railroad would be replaced to accommodate the proposed alignments. Bruckner Boulevard would be reconstructed to accommodate new horizontal and vertical alignments from Hunts Point Avenue to Bronx River Avenue and structural deficiencies in existing infrastructure would be addressed. It is anticipated that the proposed geometry at the Bruckner Expressway would result in a lower crash rate when compared to existing/No Build conditions, thereby reducing delays in traffic in both directions, as the geometric deficiencies would be improved. The Sheridan entrance ramp at Hunts Point Avenue (Ramp N) would be closed. The ramp structure would remain in place, but access would be restricted by barriers. Additionally, Ramp RE (also known as the 138th Street Ramp) from Bruckner Expressway westbound to Bruckner Boulevard would be removed. The intersection of Hunts Point Avenue and Bruckner Boulevard would be redesigned to improve pedestrian crossings. Concept 2 would impact areas outside of the existing highway boundaries, specifically the Oak Point Rail Yard and the Oak Point Avenue access road for local businesses west of the Barry Street intersection. Both Amtrak and CSX railroad operations would be impacted by the construction of the ramps. Future inspection and long-term maintenance of the ramps would also impact railroad operations. The effects to local businesses and railroad operations are described in Section 2.2 below. Access modifications for businesses on Oak Point Avenue could be necessary. In addition, CSX rail yard access to the local street network could be impacted by the ramps. Partial or full right of way (ROW) acquisition would be required for nine properties, totaling a minimum of 12 acres. In addition, utility lines accessed from the Bruckner Expressway and from Oak Point Avenue in the vicinity of ROW for the proposed ramps and the Bruckner-Sheridan Interchange could require relocation. Concept 2 would reduce traffic on Bruckner Boulevard, Whitlock Avenue and Tiffany Street. However, during the re-assessment, the NYSDOT determined that Concept 2 would require all southbound traffic from the Sheridan Boulevard destined for the Food Distribution Center, Bruckner Boulevard and westbound Bruckner Expressway to enter the Bruckner Expressway on a new two-lane entrance ramp (Ramp SS) to accommodate the approximately 2,300 vehicles per hour in the peak period. In order to accommodate the structural widening of the Bruckner Expressway and the structure of Ramp SS, it would be necessary to place column supports for the wider entrance ramp within the structural influence zone of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Interborough Rapid Transit (IRT) #6 subway tunnel, constructed in 1919. The column supports would also require relocation of the drainage system that is adjacent to the #6 subway tunnel. In addition, the ramp geometry would require piers within the median of the Bruckner Boulevard to support the wider highway section. See Exhibit 1 for a cross-section that demonstrates the proximity of the structural support for Ramp SS and the structural influence of the #6 IRT subway tunnel.

In addition, there would not be sufficient weaving distance between the entry point of Ramp SS and the exit ramp to Leggett Avenue (Ramp BL) for entering traffic to accelerate and exiting traffic to diverge. The insufficient weaving length at this ramp merge would result in congested conditions substantially worse than the one-lane ramp proposed in the Build Alternative. The estimated cost of Concept 2 is $1.93B, with construction anticipated from 2019 to 2028.


1

RAMP SS


EXHIBIT 1: CONCEPT 2 – CROSS-SECTION OF PROPOSED RAMP SS AND SUBWAY



2.2 Assessment and Effects As previously stated in Section 1.0, the NYSDOT assessed Concept 2 during the scoping process based on a set of established screening criteria and re-assessed Concept 2 following the release of the DDR/DEIS based on public comments received. This section documents the re-assessment of Concept 2 (as modified following the public comments on the DDR/DEIS and described in Section 2.1) and the effects that would result from the implementation of Concept 2. Meets Project Purpose Concept 2 meets the project purpose of providing improved access between the Hunts Point Peninsula and Sheridan Boulevard and the Bruckner Expressway for automobiles and trucks traveling to and from the commercial business located on the peninsula. Meets Project Objectives As documented in the discussion below, Concept 2 meets the project objectives. • Improve commercial access to the Hunts Point Food Distribution Center and other commercial

establishments in the peninsula The direct connections provided by the proposed ramps under Concept 2 would reduce traffic on Bruckner Boulevard, Whitlock Avenue and Tiffany Street (north of Randall Avenue) with the remaining traffic concentrated/limited to truck routes along Oak Point Avenue, Randall Avenue, and Leggett Avenue. For Concept 2, trucks from the westbound Bruckner Expressway and southbound Sheridan Boulevard would travel through 21 intersections to reach the Avenue A entrance (intersection of Halleck Street and Edgewater Road/Avenue A) and 23 intersections to the Food Center Drive entrance (intersection of Halleck Street and Ryawa Avenue/Food Center Drive) to the Food Distribution Center. Trucks from the eastbound Bruckner Expressway would travel through 20 intersections to reach the Avenue A entrance and 19 intersections to reach the Food Center Drive entrance of the Food Distribution Center. Trucks exiting the Food Distribution Center to access the eastbound Bruckner Expressway would travel through 16 intersections via Oak Point Avenue and nine intersections via Edgewater Road. Trucks destined for the westbound Bruckner Expressway would travel through 20 intersections. Under the No Build Alternative, trucks from the eastbound Bruckner Boulevard would travel through 28 intersections to the Avenue A entrance and 30 intersections to the Food Center Drive entrance to the Food Distribution Center. Trucks from the westbound Bruckner Expressway would travel through 24 intersections to the Avenue A entrance and 26 intersections to the Food Center Drive entrance to the Food Distribution Center. Trucks from the southbound Sheridan Boulevard would travel through 29 intersections to the Avenue A entrance and 31 intersections to the Food Center Drive entrance to the Food Distribution Center. Leaving the Food Distribution Center, trucks would travel through 13 intersections to access the eastbound Bruckner Expressway, and 27 intersections to access the westbound Bruckner Expressway. Table 2 compares the change in the number of intersections to/from the Food Distribution Center for Concept 2 as compared to the No Build Alternative. As shown, Concept 2 would reduce the number of intersections through which trucks must travel for all routes except the route from the Food Distribution Center to eastbound Bruckner Expressway via the Oak Point Avenue ramp.



Table 2 Number of Intersections To/From the Food Distribution Center

Compared to No Build Alternative From To Concept 2

Eastbound Bruckner Expressway Avenue A Entrance -8

Eastbound Bruckner Expressway Food Center Dr. Entrance -11

Westbound Bruckner Expressway Avenue A Entrance -3

Westbound Bruckner Expressway Food Center Dr. Entrance -3

Southbound Sheridan Avenue A Entrance -8

Southbound Sheridan Food Center Dr. Entrance -8

Food Distribution Center Eastbound Bruckner Expressway (via Oak Point Ave.) +3

Food Distribution Center Eastbound Bruckner Expressway (via Edgewater Rd.) -4

Food Distribution Center Westbound Bruckner Expressway -7

• Address identified geometric and operational deficiencies of the Bruckner-Sheridan Interchange Under Concept 2, the Bruckner-Sheridan Interchange would be reconstructed to address the geometric deficiencies. The proposed geometry at the Bruckner Expressway, specifically between Hunts Point Avenue and Bronx River Avenue, would be anticipated to provide a lower crash rate and would reduce the delay of vehicles traveling through the interchange as compared to the No Build Alternative, which would reduce delays in traffic in both directions. The proposed Oak Point Avenue and Leggett Avenue ramps would improve the free flow interchange operations. • Replace the existing geometrically deficient truss bridge over Amtrak and provide three continuous

lanes on the Bruckner Expressway. Under Concept 2, the Bruckner Expressway Truss Bridge over the railroad would be replaced to accommodate the proposed alignments and three continuous lanes for eastbound/westbound Bruckner Expressway would be provided. • Replace the concrete decks and repair other deteriorated elements of the Bruckner Expressway viaduct

and ramps between East 141st Street and Evergreen Avenue. Concept 2 would include replacing the concrete decks and repairing other deteriorated elements of the Bruckner Expressway viaduct and ramps between East 141st Street and Evergreen Avenue. • Provide an improved pedestrian crossing at the Hunts Point Avenue intersection with Bruckner

Boulevard Under Concept 2, the northbound Sheridan Boulevard entrance ramp at Hunts Point Avenue would be closed, and the intersection of Hunts Point Avenue and Bruckner Boulevard would be redesigned to improve pedestrian crossing by reducing the width of Bruckner Boulevard. By providing interstate ramps that are more direct than existing local routes, vehicles seeking to access or egress the Hunts Point Peninsula would shift from Bruckner Boulevard to the Bruckner Expressway and Sheridan Boulevard. Therefore, the number of truck and pedestrian conflicts would be reduced along Bruckner Boulevard, which is the only roadway that currently offers access or egress to the peninsula.



Hunts Point Peninsula Operations

• Provides multiple direct interstate access points to the Hunts Point Food Distribution Center. Concept 2 would include one ramp to and one ramp from the eastbound Bruckner Expressway over the Oak Point Rail Yard and one ramp to and one ramp from westbound Bruckner Expressway at Leggett Avenue. The four ramps would connect the Food Distribution Center to the eastbound and westbound Bruckner Expressway. Although Concept 2 would provide access points to the Food Distribution Center, these routes, the westbound access route on Randall Avenue and the eastbound access route on Oak Point Avenue, are only one block apart. The close proximity of these access routes would provide few options for alternative truck routing in the event of an incident or traffic congestion. The Concept 2 ramps would not provide direct access to the Hunts Point Food Distribution Center. This concept would require traffic to traverse local streets on the peninsula to reach eastern destinations. The single geographical access point would overburden the area, resulting in traffic congestion on several local commercial streets. Thus, Concept 2 would not provide multiple direct interstate access points to the Food Distribution Center and does not meet this screening criterion. • Supports multimodal (i.e., rail) access/growth Rail Concept 2 does not support multimodal access and growth. Concept 2 would negatively affect commuter, passenger, and freight rail transportation. Under Concept 2, approximately 1,400 feet of Ramp OPNX would extend outside of the existing state highway boundary, primarily over and through railroad property. Approximately 1,100 feet of Ramp OPNE would extend outside of the existing state highway boundary, primarily over and through railroad property. In addition, Concept 2 would require crossing over approximately 20 active railroad tracks.

Freight Rail (CSX) The Oak Point Rail Yard, operated by CSX, is the largest freight rail yard in New York City and a critical link in the distribution of rail freight throughout the New York metropolitan area. The Oak Point Rail Yard directly serves the Food Distribution Center and helps to facilitate economic growth throughout the region and beyond. Concept 2 would impede rail access and growth within the Oak Point Rail Yard adjacent to the eastbound Bruckner Expressway between 149th Street and past Leggett Avenue. The proposed ramp design would limit horizontal clearances for the freight tracks, restricting the sizes of trains that the rail yard could accommodate. The proposed ramp walls within the Oak Point Rail Yard would require crash walls according to American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) guidance. All portions of the ramp structures within the Oak Point Rail Yard would require negotiated agreements with CSX for property rights and construction in order to build Concept 2. Based on the AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering, and as coordinated with Amtrak and CSX, a minimum of 21 feet of vertical clearance would be required for highway bridges over the Oak Point Rail Yard. The proposed ramps over the Oak Point Rail Yard would be designed to provide more than the minimum 21 feet of vertical clearance within the rail yard wherever feasible and practical. However, the ramps at a 6% vertical incline beginning from the at-grade ramp approach at the intersection with Oak Point Avenue would have approximately 600 feet of ramp structure lower than 21 feet in elevation through the Oak Point Rail Yard, further restricting the size of trains that the yard could accommodate. The proposed at-grade ramp approach at Oak Point Avenue would make an existing rail siding, which serves businesses along Oak Point Avenue, inaccessible. Exhibit 2 shows the areas of the rail siding that would no longer be accessible or usable. In response to a May 2017 NYSDOT presentation and letter, CSX Transportation (CSXT) stated in a June 20, 2017 letter that CSXT is opposed to Concept 2 due to economic impacts to both CSXT and local industries. CSXT stated that Concept 2 would shut down service to two active customers and potentially a third customer. CSXT also stated that Concept 2 would significantly reduce the efficiency of operations within the yard and result in significant damages to CSXT’s operations. CSXT further stated that no



reduction in yard track capacity within the main yard or within the tie-down area of the Oak Point Avenue ramps or long-term track outages will be permitted. Construction occurring within 25 feet of active track line, which would be required for the construction of the majority of the lengths of proposed Ramps OPNX and OPNE, would need to be halted during train operations. This would extend the overall construction duration for Concept 2 by approximately three years or more. See Appendix A of the Project Scoping Report for the CSXT correspondence. Passenger Rail (Amtrak) The two western railroad tracks within the rail yard are part of the Northeast Corridor, a federally-designated High-Speed Rail Corridor that connects New York City to Boston, owned and operated by Amtrak. The Northeast Corridor is the first high-speed rail corridor in the country and one of the most heavily trafficked rail corridors in the world. The Northeast Corridor moves more than 259 million passengers and 14 million car‐miles of freight per year. The piers and foundations for Ramps OPNX and OPNE would be within the Oak Point Rail Yard and near the Northeast Corridor. Furthermore, piers for Ramp OPNX would be located within Amtrak’s access road, which would limit access to the Northeast Corridor. The piers for the ramp would extend approximately 1,000 feet parallel to the Northeast Corridor and impact the associated maintenance access road. The access road is used by Amtrak to conduct Federal Railroad Administration-required daily track inspections and maintenance and maintain the railroad signal system and overhead catenary. To build Concept 2, the piers and foundations for the ramp structural support would require negotiated agreements with Amtrak for property rights and construction. In response to a June 2017 presentation by the NYSDOT, Amtrak stated in an August 29, 2017 letter that it opposes construction options that restrict Amtrak’s access to their operating right of way and potentially restrict Amtrak’s ability to safely maintain their infrastructure. They further stated that Concept 2 proposes numerous support columns that would be located within Amtrak’s access road. See Appendix A of the Project Scoping Report for the Amtrak correspondence. Commuter Rail (MetroNorth) Concept 2 would negatively affect the future growth of commuter rail service. The ongoing MTA Penn Station Access Project would provide a direct one-seat ride into Penn Station for Metro-North Railroad’s New Haven Line riders. Trains heading to Penn Station would leave the New Haven Line just west of New Rochelle and travel through the Eastern Bronx and Queens via this section of the Northeast Corridor. To add these trains, the Penn Station Access Project would include additional tracks and stations in the location of Concept 2, along Amtrak’s maintenance access road. The trains would travel over these new tracks to continue through the existing East River tunnels, joining Long Island Rail Road trains heading into Penn Station. The additional tracks along the current location of Amtrak’s maintenance access road would be in direct conflict with Concept 2 since the piers for Ramp OPNX would extend approximately 1,000 feet parallel to the Northeast Corridor and are also located on the maintenance access road. Railroad Agreements As stated above, to build Concept 2, the piers and foundations for Ramps OPNX and OPNE would require negotiated agreements with both Amtrak and CSX for property rights and construction, since New York State is prohibited by prior court decisions from using eminent domain to acquire property rights from the railroad (court decisions have consistently held that acquisition by eminent domain constitutes a form of economic regulation and is therefore preempted by federal law under 49 U.S. Code §10501(b)). However, both CSXT and Amtrak have expressed opposition to Concept 2, with CSXT stating that Concept 2 would significantly reduce the efficiency of operations within the yard and result in significant damages to CSXT’s operations. See Appendix A of the Project Scoping Report for the CSXT and Amtrak correspondence.


EXHIBIT 2: CONCEPT 2 – IMPACTS TO AT-GRADE RAIL SIDINGS THAT SERVE LOCAL BUSINESSES


EXHIBIT 3: CONCEPT 2 – RENDERING OF OAK POINT RAMPS OVER RAIL YARD



Bus The BX46 bus route on the peninsula travels along Longwood Avenue, Tiffany Street, and Viele Avenue before traveling around the Food Center Drive (see Figure 2).1 The Concept 2 access/departure routes would utilize Tiffany Street, which is one of the main BX46 travel streets. The concept would also bring trucks across the bus route at two major points, Randall Avenue and Oak Point Avenue. Concept 2 would increase truck traffic at these intersections and increase the potential for congestion at intersections along the BX46 bus route. In addition, there are multiple bus stops at these intersections. The BX6 bus route on the peninsula travels along Hunts Point Avenue, Spofford Avenue, and Halleck Street before traveling around the Food Center Drive. Concept 2 would bring truck traffic through the intersection of Oak Point Avenue and Halleck Street, which has stops on the BX6 route. Overall, Concept 2 could affect access to or growth of bus transit by creating additional congestion along the routes and at intersections on the routes. Bicycle There are several bicycle lanes on the Hunts Point Peninsula, including along Leggett Avenue, Randall Avenue, Tiffany Street (see Photograph 5), Hunts Point Avenue, Longfellow Avenue, Bryant Avenue, Garrison Avenue and Lafayette Avenue. According to the 2017 NYC Bike Map, there is a potential future bicycle route along Edgewater Road/Halleck Avenue, Viele Avenue, and Ryawa Avenue.2 Construction of the ramps proposed in Concept 2 would increase truck traffic in the vicinity of bicycle lanes on Leggett and Randall Avenues and at two intersections with bicycle lanes along Tiffany Street. Concept 2 would place more trucks on Oak Point Avenue, Randall Avenue, Tiffany Street, and East Bay Avenue. Bicycle access would be impacted by the increase of trucks on these streets. However, bicycle access would be improved on those local streets where trucks would be removed. Pedestrian Concept 2 would place more trucks on Oak Point Avenue, Randall Avenue, Tiffany Street, and East Bay Avenue. This could result in conflicts with pedestrians walking or waiting for the BX46 bus at the corners of Randall Avenue and Tiffany Street, as well as Oak Point Avenue and Tiffany Street. As discussed above, Concept 2 would impede rail access and growth in the Oak Point Rail Yard, and thus, does not meet this screening criterion. The NYSDOT has determined that the conclusion that Concept 2 does not support multi-modal access/growth remains valid.

1 Accessed July 28, 2017 http://web.mta.info/nyct/maps/busbx.pdf 2 Accessed July 28, 2017 http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bikemap-2017.pdf


http://web.mta.info/nyct/maps/busbx.pdf

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bikemap-2017.pdf

FIGURE 2: BUS ROUTES



• Supports access to commercial businesses on the peninsula. There are several businesses along Oak Point Avenue that require truck access. Blockages for loading, unloading, or other miscellaneous truck traffic to these businesses along Oak Point Avenue creates congestion along the route. If conflicts arise at either the Oak Point Avenue or Leggett Avenue access route, trucks could attempt to find alternate routes along local streets. These diversions of traffic on local streets could extend into the residential areas on the peninsula due to the congestion and/or traffic conflicts. Traffic leaving the Food Distribution Center would travel westbound on East Bay Avenue to Tiffany Street and then westbound on Oak Point Avenue to access the ramps. The route from the Oak Point Avenue ramps to the Food Distribution Center would require vehicles to travel eastbound on Oak Point Avenue to Halleck Street. These streets all have on-street parking that is highly utilized by employees and commercial vehicles. Oak Point Avenue, East Bay Avenue, and Tiffany Street, in particular, have back-in angle parking and businesses with substantial curbside activity. An increase in traffic volume on these streets could negatively affect commercial businesses and the parking activity would create additional delay and congestion on these routes. Oak Point Avenue and East Bay Avenue are also one-way streets, which limits route choices through the peninsula to/from the Food Distribution Center. Photographs 1 through 5 show existing representative street activities that could increase traffic congestion on Oak Point Avenue and other local streets under Concept 2, and could cause trucks to attempt to find alternate routes along other local and residential streets.

Photograph 1. Oak Point Avenue between Coster Street and Faile Street looking west



Photograph 2. Oak Point Avenue between Longfellow Avenue looking east

Photograph 3. East Bay Avenue between Manida Street and Barretto Street looking west



Photograph 4. East Bay Avenue west of Bryant Avenue, looking west

Photograph 5. Tiffany Street between Oak Point Avenue and East Bay Avenue looking north



To minimize the impedance on traffic associated with parking maneuvers and commercial vehicles loading on Oak Point Avenue, a modified parking configuration was developed, considering three different factors: (1) the alignment with the two-way roadway west of Tiffany Street; (2) the need for parking along Joseph Rodman Drake Park; and (3) the number of overhead doors along each side of Oak Point Avenue. As shown on Exhibit 4, parking on the north side of Oak Point Avenue was eliminated and parking on the south side would be back-in angle parking with a buffer from the through travel lanes. While this parking configuration would reduce the traffic delays and blockages associated with parking maneuvers, it would result in an overall loss of 22 parking spaces on Oak Point Avenue between Tiffany Street and Halleck Avenue (i.e., 173 spaces to 151 spaces). The current parking utilization on Oak Point Avenue is 100%; therefore, the need would exist for these lost parking spaces to be offset in another location. In addition, access to 20 overhead doors at various businesses along the north side of Oak Point Avenue would be affected with this configuration. Lane blockages from vehicles double-parking to access the businesses on the north side of the street would also occur. Due to these issues, this travel lane and parking configuration on Oak Point Avenue is not a reasonable option. Peak hour traffic evaluations of the Hunts Point Peninsula were conducted for Concept 2 using Synchro 10 software. A capacity analysis of Concept 2 in Synchro showed that the Oak Point Avenue and Tiffany Street intersection would experience failing operations, with volumes on northbound Tiffany Street substantially exceeding capacity. Therefore, a roadway reconfiguration was tested that reversed the traffic flow on Oak Point Avenue, East Bay Avenue, and Hunts Point Avenue, resulting in Oak Point Avenue flowing westbound from Halleck Street to Tiffany Street; East Bay Avenue flowing eastbound from Tiffany Street to Halleck Street; and Hunts Point Avenue flowing northbound from East Bay Avenue to Oak Point Avenue. This roadway reconfiguration avoided the need for traffic departing the Food Distribution Center to travel northbound on Tiffany Street. Instead, the traffic departing the Food Distribution Center would turn right onto Hunts Point Avenue from Food Center Drive and left onto Oak Point Avenue. It was assumed in this scenario that the intersection of Oak Point Avenue and Hunts Point Avenue would be signalized, to better accommodate vehicles and pedestrians by providing a signalized crossing to the Joseph Rodman Drake Park. Exhibit 5 demonstrates the implementation of this reversed flow roadway reconfiguration. Exhibits 6 and 7 demonstrate the routes between the Oak Point Avenue and Leggett Avenue ramps and the Food Distribution Center for arrival and departure, respectively.


EXHIBIT 4: PARKING RECONFIGURATION OPTION ON OAK POINT AVENUE


EXHIBIT 5: CONCEPT 2 - REVERSED TRAFFIC FLOW ON LOCAL STREETS


EXHIBIT 6: CONCEPT 2 – ARRIVAL ROUTES FROM OAK POINT AND LEGGETT RAMPS TO FOOD DISTRIBUTION CENTER


EXHIBIT 7: CONCEPT 2 – DEPARTURE ROUTES FROM FOOD DISTRIBUTION CENTER TO OAK POINT AND LEGGETT RAMPS



Tables 3 and 4 summarize the intersection operations for the year 2025 No Build Alternative compared to Concept 2 for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The tables summarize key intersections within the Study Area on the peninsula. The results for Concept 2 include the reversed traffic flow on Oak Point, East Bay, and Hunts Point Avenues. The tables also highlight (in red) the level of service (LOS) that do not meet the traffic operations performance measures that have been established for the Project. As stated in Section 3.3.1.7 of the FDR/FEIS, the traffic operations performance measures are not met if: 1) the approach or intersection LOS worsens to E or F if the No Build was D or better; or 2) the Build delay increases by 10 seconds or more if the No Build already reported an LOS E or F. As shown in Tables 3 and 4, Concept 2 does not meet the traffic operations performance measures during the AM and/or PM peak hour at seven intersections:

1. Leggett Avenue and Bruckner Boulevard 2. Leggett Avenue and Garrison Avenue 3. Leggett Avenue and Barry Street 4. Randall Avenue and Tiffany Street 5. Oak Point Avenue/Bruckner Expressway Ramps and Barry Street (PM peak only) 6. Oak Point Avenue and Truxton Street (PM peak only) 7. Oak Point Avenue and Tiffany Street

Most lane groups at the Leggett Avenue intersections do not meet the traffic operations performance measures. The tables also describe intersection lane groups that have 95th percentile queue lengths that extend through upstream intersections. Note that any queue length with a “#” notation indicates that the 95th percentile volume would exceed capacity and the queue could be longer. The intersections on Leggett Avenue, Randall Avenue and Oak Point Avenue would experience excessive queues that could affect the operations of businesses along these corridors. Exhibit 8 depicts the 95th percentile queue lengths during the AM or PM peak hour (whichever was longer) at the key signalized intersections. As shown, these vehicle queue lengths could block and affect operations at up to 44 businesses on the peninsula. In summary, Concept 2 would require vehicles to traverse the peninsula to access the Food Distribution Center, on streets with highly utilized on-street parking and curbside commercial activity. An increase in traffic volume as a result of Concept 2 would create additional delay and congestion on local streets. Capacity analyses of key intersections on the peninsula show that under Concept 2, seven intersections do not meet the traffic operations performance measures and up to 44 businesses could be affected by queued vehicles. For these reasons, Concept 2 does not meet the screening criterion of supporting access to commercial businesses on the peninsula.



Table 3

Intersection Level of Service and Delay Year 2025 – AM Peak Hour

Approach/ Lane

Group

No Build1 Concept 22

Queue Comments Delay (sec/veh) v/c ratio LOS Delay

(sec/veh) v/c

ratio LOS 95th % Queue

(ft) Leggett Ave. & Bruckner Blvd. (Signalized)

WBTR 49.4 0.93 D 124.0 1.19 F m#588 Extends to Garrison Ave. NBTR 36.5 0.73 D 32.8 0.64 C 226 NBL 38.9 0.37 D * * * * NBT 35.3 0.29 D 52.9 0.83 D #473

SBL 73.1 0.59 E 486.8 1.99 F #1000 Extends beyond storage, would block thru lane. SBT 22.5 0.87 C 6.9 0.61 A 99

SBTR 23.1 0.67 C 51.1 1.04 D #866 Extends through E 156th St. Overall 34.3 C 100.1 F

Leggett Ave. & Garrison Ave. (Signalized) EBL 16.9 0.32 B 156.2 1.20 F #265 EBT 26.6 0.58 C 16.3 0.71 B 393 Extends to Bruckner Blvd.

WBTR 41.9 0.69 D 72.5 0.93 E m527 Extends through Barry St. SBLR 35.0 0.34 C 65.6 0.78 E 299

Overall 33.6 C 59.5 E Leggett Ave. & Barry St. (Signalized)

EBLT 23.7 0.59 C 32.1 0.83 C #276 Extends through Garrison Ave. EBR 30.1 0.65 C 43.4 0.91 D m#304 Extends through Garrison Ave.

WBLTR 76.0 0.93 E 94.8 0.93 F m#312 Extends through Dupont St. NBLTR 20.4 0.53 C 107.4 1.12 F #312 SBLTR 11.0 0.11 B 11.0 0.12 B 28

Overall 42.0 D 67.6 E Randall Ave. & Tiffany St. (Signalized)

EBTR 22.7 0.60 C 240.0 1.45 F #439 Extends through two side streets. WBTR 22.0 0.78 C 67.2 1.03 E #347 Extends through Casanova St. NBL 35.7 0.78 D 433.9 1.81 F #137

NBTR 22.1 0.52 C 179.1 1.31 F #331 SBL 15.1 0.32 B 29.7 0.57 C #70

SBTR 43.1 0.91 D 327.4 1.66 F #632 Extends through Longwood Ave. Overall 29.0 C 227.1 F



Table 3 Intersection Level of Service and Delay

Year 2025 – AM Peak Hour

Approach/ Lane

Group



(sec/veh) v/c


(ft) Oak Point Ave./Bruckner Expy Ramps & Barry St. (Unsignalized No Build/Signalized Concept 2)

EBL * * * 39.5 0.85 D #140 EBLT 27.3 0.39 D * * * * EBTR 22.5 0.18 C 11.2 0.28 B 73 WBL * * * - - - - WBT * * * 21.8 0.56 C 139 Extends beyond Dupont St. WBR * * * 20.7 0.38 C 95 WBLT 14.2 0.25 B * * * * WBTR 11.3 0.25 B * * * * NBLT * * * 25.2 0.09 C 24 NBR * * * * * * *

NBLTR 0.4 0.00 A * * * * SBL * * * 31.2 0.65 C #164

SBTR * * * 24.8 0.49 C 133 SBLR 6.2 0.17 A * * * *

Overall 23.6 C Oak Point Ave. & Dupont St. (Unsignalized)

EBLT 0.0 0.00 A 0.1 0.01 A 0 EBTR 0.1 0.10 A 0.1 0.17 A 0 WBLT 0.0 0.07 A - - A 0 WBTR 0.0 0.07 A 0.0 0.20 A 0 SBLR 12.3 0.07 B 18.4 0.30 C 32

Overall Oak Point Ave. & Truxton St. (Unsignalized)

EBLT 0.2 0.02 A 0.4 0.03 A 2 EBT 0.5 0.13 A 0.5 0.22 A 2 WBT 0.0 0.08 A 0.0 0.26 A 0

WBTR 0.0 0.06 A 0.0 0.15 A 0 SBLR 13.0 0.09 B 26.6 0.22 D 20

Overall Oak Point Ave. & Tiffany St. (Signalized)

EBL 14.0 0.09 B 211.0 1.35 F #334 Extends through one side street. EBT 19.3 0.57 B * * * * EBR 17.9 0.41 B 70.9 0.99 E #373 Extends through one side street.

WBLTR * * * 21.2 0.44 C 111

NBLT 105.0 1.13 F 47.6 0.75 D #170 SBTR 38.3 0.95 D 119.2 1.18 F #666 Extends through Randall Ave.

Overall 53.8 D 102.1 F




Year 2025 – AM Peak Hour

Approach/ Lane

Group



(sec/veh) v/c


(ft) Oak Point Ave. & Hunts Point Ave. (Unsignalized No Build/Signalized Concept 2)

EBLT 9.8 0.25 A * * * * EBTR 9.0 0.20 A * * * * WBTR * * * 11.6 0.01 B 5 NBL * * * 13.4 0.23 B 55 NBT * * * 14.2 0.22 B 58 SBLT 10.7 0.36 B * * * * SBR * * * 12.5 0.10 B 34

Overall 13.4 B Halleck St. & East Bay Ave./Food Center Dr. (Signalized)

EBL * * * 29.9 0.39 C 117 EBR * * * 28.6 0.34 C 130 WBL 22.9 0.17 C 28.0 0.18 C 51

WBTR 28.9 0.60 C * * * * WBT * * * 64.5 0.94 E #308 WBR 32.9 0.59 C 40.2 0.64 D 203 NBL 28.0 0.03 C * * * * NBT 30.8 0.30 C 33.9 0.33 C 79 SBT * * * 36.3 0.48 D 118

SBTR 35.1 0.23 D * * * * SEBL 29.5 0.37 C * * * * SEBR 30.3 0.39 C * * * *

Overall 30.4 C 43.0 D 1 The LOS results shown for the No Build condition are from the FDR/FEIS. See Appendix C of the FDR/FEIS for supporting documentation. 2 The LOS results shown for Concept 2 are from Synchro analyses conducted by NYSDOT (November 2018). Supporting documentation is

available upon request. Legend

v/c Volume to Capacity X LOS impacts # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue could be longer m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal * Lane Group does not exist in this condition




Year 2025 – PM Peak Hour

Approach/ Lane

Group


Queue Comments Delay (sec/veh)

v/c ratio LOS Delay

(sec/veh) v/c


(ft)

Leggett Ave & Bruckner Blvd (Signalized) WBTR 48.4 0.87 D 136.8 1.21 F #546 Extends to Garrison Ave. NBTR 45.7 0.94 D 84.0 1.02 F #682 NBL 62.8 0.37 E * * * * NBT 11.1 0.47 B 117.3 1.15 F #1002 SBL 147.7 1.09 F 573.1 2.17 F #864 Extends beyond storage, would block thru lane. SBT 33.5 0.50 C 13.3 0.75 B 305

SBTR 37.3 0.35 D 16.0 0.65 B 334 Overall 41.0 D 107.8 F

Leggett Ave & Garrison Ave (Signalized) EBL 17.7 0.40 B 254.4 1.49 F m#311 EBT 28.3 0.60 C 64.1 0.82 E m424 Extends to Bruckner Blvd.

WBTR 17.3 0.52 B 74.4 0.73 E m543 Extends through Barry St. SBLR 34.7 0.35 C 108.3 0.55 F 223

Overall 23.6 C 96.5 F Leggett St. & Barry St. (Signalized)

EBLT 22.3 0.59 C 79.5 0.97 E #429 Extends through Garrison Ave. EBR 30.2 0.66 C 24.4 0.66 C m117

WBLTR 20 0.58 C 69.8 0.64 E m129 NBLTR 16.7 0.48 B 95.9 0.99 F #287 SBLTR 11.6 0.14 B 11.8 0.15 B 25

Overall 21.7 C 72.5 E Randall Ave & Tiffany St (Signalized)

EBLTR 21.1 0.54 C 1413.2 4.06 F #554 Extends through two side streets. WBTR 13.0 0.56 B 153.5 1.28 F m#540 Extends through two side streets. NBL 19.3 0.19 B 63.7 0.61 E m#83

NBTR 20.7 0.43 C 33.5 0.62 C 308 SBL 14.4 0.29 B 16.2 0.35 B 59

SBTR 28.3 0.73 C 316.2 1.63 F #546 Extends to Longwood Ave. Overall 20.0 C 464.7 F





Approach/ Lane

Group



v/c ratio LOS Delay

(sec/veh) v/c


(ft)

Oak Point Ave/Bruckner Expy Ramps & Barry St. (Unsignalized No Build/Signalized Concept 2) EBL * * * 110.6 1.11 F #273 Extends beyond storage; would block thru lane.

EBLT 28.9 0.51 D * * * * EBTR 23.3 0.51 C 10.0 0.15 B 49 WBL * * * 18.5 0.01 B 6 WBT * * * 44.5 0.94 D 326 Extends beyond Dupont St. WBR * * * 21.3 0.23 C 87 WBLT 17.2 0.05 C * * * * WBTR 10.1 0.16 B * * * * NBLT * * * 29.5 0.18 C 52 NBR * * * * * * *

NBLTR 0.4 0.00 A * * * * SBL * * * 45.8 0.77 D #207

SBTR * * * 22.7 0.17 C 50 SBLR 7.0 0.18 A * * * *

Overall 48.1 D Oak Point Ave. & Dupont St. (Unsignalized)

EBLT 0.0 0.00 A 0.1 0.01 A 0 EBTR 0.1 0.11 A 0.1 0.14 A 0 WBLT 0.0 0.01 A 0.1 0.01 A 0 WBTR 0.0 0.04 A 0.1 0.23 A 0 SBLR 10.9 0.06 B 27.1 0.70 D 134

Overall Oak Point Ave. & Truxton St. (Unsignalized)

EBLT 0.2 0.03 A 0.5 0.05 A 4 EBT 0.6 0.14 A 0.8 0.18 A 4 WBT 0.0 0.05 A 0.0 0.30 A 0

WBTR 0.0 0.05 A 0.0 0.17 A 0 SBLR 13.1 0.14 B 41.8 0.44 E 50

Overall Oak Point Ave. & Tiffany St. (Signalized)

EBL 13.2 0.08 B 40.3 0.54 D 146 EBT 18.3 0.51 B * * * * EBR 19.8 0.46 B 111.3 1.07 F #461 Extends through two side streets.

WBLTR *

* * 31.8 0.39 C 140

NBLT 25.9 0.78 C 17.8 0.38 B 99 SBTR 34.5 0.88 C 75.2 1.02 E m191

Overall 25.9 C 66.2 E





Approach/ Lane

Group



v/c ratio LOS Delay

(sec/veh) v/c


(ft)

Oak Point Ave. & Hunts Point Ave (Unsignalized No Build/Signalized Concept 2) EBLT 10.6 0.39 B * * * * EBTR 8.9 0.27 A * * * * WBTR * * * 11.8 0.04 B 13 NBL * * * 12.6 0.14 B 37 NBT * * * 13.1 0.14 B 42 SBLT 9.9 0.25 A * * * * SBR * * * 12.6 0.10 B 36

Overall 12.6 B Halleck St. & E Bay Ave./Food Center Dr. (Signalized)

EBL * * * 38.4 0.70 D 260 EBR * * * 33.6 0.46 C 123 WBL 21.0 0.05 C 25.6 0.06 C 25

WBTR 25.5 0.45 C * * * * WBT * * * 38.6 0.70 D 210 WBR 29.2 0.52 C 34.2 0.53 C 179 NBL 28.2 0.04 C * * * * NBT 30.0 0.25 C 33.0 0.27 C 70 SBT * * * 36.7 0.47 D 103

SBTR 34.9 0.24 C * * * * SEBL 29.3 0.34 C * * * * SEBR 29.5 0.34 C * * * *

Overall 28.5 C 36.4 D 1 The LOS results shown for the No Build condition are from the FDR/FEIS. See Appendix C of the FDR/FEIS for supporting documentation. 2 The LOS results shown for Concept 2 are from Synchro analyses conducted by NYSDOT (November 2018). Supporting documentation is available upon request. Legend

v/c Volume to Capacity X LOS Impacts based on criteria in DEIS # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal * Lane Group does not exist in this condition.


EXHIBIT 8: CONCEPT 2 – 95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTHS (YEAR 2025)



2.3 Supplemental Evaluation of Bruckner Expressway Operations As shown on Exhibit 8, the cumulative queue spillback from Leggett Avenue eastbound through the Bruckner Expressway westbound off-ramp would have potential detrimental effects to the expressway operations under Concept 2, as the traffic volume from the westbound Bruckner Expressway and southbound Sheridan Boulevard destined for the peninsula would have to exit at Leggett Avenue. To assess this cumulative effect on the weave segment between Sheridan Boulevard and the Leggett Avenue off-ramp, a VISSIM microsimulation “mini-model” of the Bruckner Expressway westbound and Leggett Avenue was developed. The model was developed for the AM peak hour, as that is the worst-case condition for traffic inbound to the Hunts Point Peninsula. A summary of vehicle travel times from Sheridan Boulevard and the Bruckner Expressway to Leggett Avenue is provided in Table 5. Since the Leggett Avenue off-ramp does not exist under the No-Build condition, a comparison to the No-Build operations is not applicable. Therefore, a VISSIM model of the Build Alternative was also developed, using the same extents, to provide a point of reference.

Table 5 Vehicle Travel Time

AM Peak Hour From To Concept 2 Build

Alternative Bruckner Expressway Westbound @ Bronx River Parkway Leggett Avenue 19 min 50 sec 3 min 55 sec

Sheridan Boulevard Southbound @ Westchester Avenue Leggett Avenue 11 min 50 sec 2 min 40 sec

Under Concept 2, the queue spillback from Leggett Avenue onto the Bruckner Expressway would cause slow-moving to standstill traffic. This would add substantial travel time to this route (nine to 16 minutes longer than the Build Alternative). The substantial delay created by Concept 2 would not support access to the peninsula.

3.0 Summary and Conclusion

While Concept 2 meets the project purpose and objectives, it does not meet the additional screening criteria described in the Project Scoping Report. As described in Section 2.2, Concept 2 does not: • Provide multiple direct interstate access points to the Hunts Point Food Distribution Center; • Support multimodal (i.e., rail) access/growth; or • Support access to commercial businesses on the peninsula.

This re-assessment has demonstrated that Concept 2 is not a feasible and practical alternative for the Project. Table 6 summarizes the effects of Concept 2, as well as those under the Build Alternative, as compared to the No Build Alternative. Based on this re-assessment, the NYSDOT has concluded that the decision to dismiss Concept 2 from further consideration remains valid. The NYSDOT has determined that the Build Alternative is the only feasible and practical alternative for the Project.


Table 6: Concept 2 Re-assessment Summary Traffic Parameters Build Alternative Concept 2

2025 intersection delay between Ramp LB/Ramp BL and Food Distribution Center2

5 sec additional AM delay1 5 sec additional PM delay1

5 min 15 sec additional AM delay1 10 min 35 sec additional PM delay1

2025 intersection delay between Ramp OPNX/Ramp OPNE and Food Distribution Center3 No change1 1 min 5 sec additional AM delay1

1 min 20 sec additional PM delay1

2025 intersection delay between Food Distribution Center and Bruckner Boulevard4

55 sec additional AM delay1 3 min additional PM delay1 No change1

No. of intersections en route to/from Food Distribution Center1 Eastbound Bruckner Expressway to Avenue A Entrance Eastbound Bruckner Expressway to Food Center Dr. Entrance Westbound Bruckner Expressway to Avenue A Entrance Westbound Bruckner Expressway to Food Center Dr. Entrance Southbound Sheridan to Avenue A Entrance Southbound Sheridan to Food Center Dr. Entrance Food Distribution Center to eastbound Bruckner Expressway

(via Oak Point Ave.) Food Distribution Center to eastbound Bruckner Expressway

(via Edgewater Rd.) Food Distribution Center to westbound Bruckner Expressway

25 fewer1 24 fewer1 3 fewer1 5 fewer1

26 fewer1 25 fewer1

N/A

5 fewer1

9 fewer1

8 fewer1 11 fewer1 3 fewer1 3 fewer1 8 fewer1 8 fewer1 3 more1

4 fewer1

7 fewer1

Estimated annual vehicle miles traveled (2055) 9.1 million vehicle miles 9.7 million vehicle miles

Number of intersections that do not meet the Project traffic operations performance measures in 2025 (as defined in FDR/FEIS Section 3.3.1.7)

5 intersections total 3 during AM peak 4 during PM peak

7 intersections total 5 during AM peak 7 during PM peak

Commercial Business Parameters Build Alternative Concept 2 No. of commercial businesses affected by increased traffic queues 6 affected businesses 44 affected businesses 1 Compared to the No Build Alternative 2 Intersections include Leggett Ave. & Bruckner Blvd., Leggett Ave. & Garrison Ave., Leggett Ave. & Barry St., Randall Ave. & Tiffany St. 3 Intersections include Oak Point Ave. & Barry St., Oak Point Ave. & Tiffany St., Oak Point Ave. & Hunts Point Ave. 4 Intersections include Halleck Ave. & Edgewater Rd., Edgewater Rd. & Lafayette Ave., Edgewater Ave. & Bruckner Blvd. 5 AREMA = American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association


Table 6: Concept 2 Re-assessment Summary (continued) Effects to Rail in the Project Study Area Build Alternative Concept 2

Effects on commercial rail lines - Minor effects during bridge construction of I-278 over Amtrak line

- Substantial effects during construction to both CSX and Amtrak rail lines

- Restricts future plans for rail expansion (including Metro-North’s planned new line for Penn Station Access)

- Crosses over approximately 20 active railroad tracks - Ramp piers would impact maintenance access road

for Amtrak tracks Effects on commercial rail yards - No effect - Requires piers in Oak Point Rail Yard, which

reduces clearances to rail and maintenance road to below AREMA5 standards

- Eliminates access to commercial rail siding adjacent to Barry Street (Oak Point Rail Yard)

- Opposed by CSXT, operator of Oak Point Rail Yard Effects to MTA Subway Lines Build Alternative Concept 2

- No effect - Requires construction of column supports for wider Sheridan southbound entrance ramp to I-278 within the MTA right-of-way and structural influence zone of the IRT #6 subway tunnel

- Requires relocation of the drainage system for the IRT #6 subway tunnel

Construction Duration Build Alternative Concept 2 6 years 9 years (duration extended by approximately three years

due to construction within 25 feet of active track line) 1 Compared to the No Build Alternative 2 Intersections include Leggett Ave. & Bruckner Blvd., Leggett Ave. & Garrison Ave., Leggett Ave. & Barry St., Randall Ave. & Tiffany St. 3 Intersections include Oak Point Ave. & Barry St., Oak Point Ave. & Tiffany St., Oak Point Ave. & Hunts Point Ave. 4 Intersections include Halleck Ave. & Edgewater Rd., Edgewater Rd. & Lafayette Ave., Edgewater Ave. & Bruckner Blvd. 5 AREMA = American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association


Re-assessment of Concept 2 – Oak Point/Leggett Split ... · Concept 2 would reduce traffic on...

Documents

Transcript of Re-assessment of Concept 2 – Oak Point/Leggett Split ... · Concept 2 would reduce traffic on...