8A-1

Chapter 8A: Traffic

A. INTRODUCTION This chapter assesses the potential effects of the project alternatives on traffic conditions in the study area. While traffic volumes in Lower Manhattan were substantially affected by the attacks of September 11, 2001 and several streets remain closed to vehicular traffic, over the long-term it is expected that traffic levels in the area will continue to rise as the economic recovery of Lower Manhattan continues. By 2025, the project’s design year, traffic demand will reach the long-range levels that were expected prior to September 11, 2001 and predicted in the 1994 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

Included in this chapter are descriptions of the study area and methodology used in the analysis; existing conditions (2003); assessments of construction impacts; and future conditions affecting traffic demand in 2009 and 2025, the project’s estimated time of completion and design year, respectively. Probable impacts of the project alternatives are then discussed. Cumulative impacts of construction activity and long-term operations have also been assessed; these studies are summarized in Chapter 16, “Cumulative Effects.”

B. METHODOLOGY

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

The traffic analysis was applied to the study area, which comprises the Route 9A corridor below Chambers Street, and east to Broadway. The north-south through streets east of Route 9A are referred to as the “inland streets.” For the inland streets the intersections of Liberty Street at Church Street and Liberty Street at Broadway are assessed.

The traffic analysis involved extensive study of a number of factors affecting traffic flow in the primary traffic study area and consisted of four broad tasks: data collection; development of baseline traffic conditions for construction years; model development and traffic forecasting; and evaluation and assessment of all alternatives. The traffic analysis process was closely coordinated with development of project alternatives. Key elements of the process are described below.

DATA COLLECTION

The traffic analysis began with a comprehensive data collection effort. Emphasis was placed on gathering detailed traffic information for use in determining baseline conditions throughout the primary traffic study area and in updating models previously used for the 1994 Route 9A FEIS. Other data were collected to assist in developing a traffic simulation model, which will augment the Route 9A model. Other inventories involved data collection to address localized issues regarding a variety of areas.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-2

DEVELOPMENT OF BASELINE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

Information obtained in the data collection effort was used to develop baseline traffic conditions. Peak traffic periods to be used in the analysis were determined on the basis of the automatic traffic recorder (ATR) and manual data collected. Peak hour traffic activity in the study area was determined to occur between 8:15 and 9:15 AM, and 5 and 6 PM, during the morning and evening rush periods. Upon further review of the data, it was determined that the largest volume of traffic on Route 9A was during the AM and PM peak hours. The midday period, therefore, was not analyzed further in this assessment. This is consistent with the findings in the 1994 FEIS.

TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING

Two methods have been used to forecast future traffic volumes. One method was used for the near term years of 2007 and 2009. The second methodology projects long term traffic (2025) using information from NYMTC’s regional model. Each of these procedures is explained in Section D.

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

ASSESSMENT OF INDUCED TRAFFIC

The assessment of induced project traffic impacts considered the possibility that, by restoring capacity, as with some locations on Route 9A, the project Build alternatives might induce new vehicular trips to the study area. This study determined that induced traffic (i.e., new vehicle trips in the study area) would be minimal because of the short length of the project (less than 1-mile-long), capacity limitations of the highway to the north, the similarity of VMT values among alternatives on 9A and on inland streets, as well as the “at-capacity” peak hour capacity of Manhattan’s river crossings.

ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON TRAFFIC OPERATIONS

The results of the traffic analysis, conducted using SYNCHRO and Paramics, were organized according to certain measures of effectiveness (MOE) of traffic conditions. Several different MOEs can be used to present traffic conditions in a traffic analysis. The following MOEs were determined to be appropriate for describing existing and/or future conditions in the study area and for assessing the performance and impacts of the project alternatives:

• Vehicular Traffic Volumes • Vehicle-Miles of Travel (VMT) • Person-Miles of Travel (PMT) • Vehicle-Hours of Travel (VHT) • Vehicle-Hours of Delay (VHD) • Person-Hours of Delay (PHD) • Speed (mph) • Levels of Service (LOS) • Vehicle Queues

Each MOE and related impact thresholds are described below.

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-3

Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes refer to the number of vehicles passing a certain point in a given time period. This basic MOE of traffic conditions is useful in understanding the magnitude of traffic demand on a roadway or in an intersection over a year, a day, or an hour. For the Route 9A traffic assessment information on hourly volumes are compared for each alternative for two areas: on Route 9A and on the inland streets of Greenwich Street, Church Street and Broadway. In this way the relative attractiveness of each Build alternative can be measured by the amount of traffic that moves from inland streets to Route 9A.

Vehicle-Miles of Travel (VMT) VMT is useful in assessing the effects of the project over a broad area. It is the product of the vehicular volume (over a given time period) and the length of the street segment or network link traversed. The VMT on each link can be summed to understand the magnitude of vehicular travel over a larger area. VMT should be assessed along with VHT to better understand traffic conditions in an area. VMT is also used to assess regional air quality and energy effects. A higher VMT along Route 9A and a lower VMT on inland streets is desired, since Route 9A is better suited to process higher volumes of traffic than other Lower Manhattan north–south arterials. The shift in traffic to Route 9A results in better overall traffic flow within the study area thereby leading to reduced congestion and delay in this same area. Therefore, if a Build alternative produces a higher VMT on Route 9A and a lower VMT on inland streets when compared to the No Action alternative, it would be considered a beneficial effect. Person-Miles of Travel (PMT) is also used in the assessment. This metric, which uses the VMT estimated for each alternative in conjunction with data on vehicle occupancy, better accounts for the effects on commuter and local bus passengers using the corridor.

Vehicle-Hours of Travel (VHT) Peak hour VHT is used to assess impacts of the project in the primary traffic study area. It is a product of the peak hour vehicular volume and the average travel time on a street segment or link. VHT measures the effectiveness of the project in moving traffic and reducing delay. A high VHT value can imply poor performance. Thus, if a Build alternative produces a VHT that is lower than that of the No Action Alternative, it would be considered to have a beneficial effect.

Vehicle-Hours of Delay (VHD) VHD can be viewed as the component of VHT in which traffic is stopped or slowed at a traffic signal. It is the product of the vehicular volume and the average stopped delay at signalized intersections. Peak hour, peak period, and 24-hour VHD are important descriptors used to assess the effectiveness of the project in the primary traffic study area and the Route 9A corridor. All urban street networks have an inherent amount of stopped delay due to the presence of traffic signals, where some traffic movements may proceed while others must wait. VHD is summed over all signalized intersections in the traffic study area so that it can provide a systemwide assessment of overall delay.

Generally, increases in VHD are undesirable and decreases are desirable, but small changes either way are not significant. VHD changes for congested locations (as defined by LOS E or LOS F) are more important, as they represent changes in excessive delay observed within the system. Reductions in these values are desirable. Similar to PMT, Person-Hours of Delay (PHD), which considers the multiple occupancy of many vehicles in the corridor, is also used in the assessment.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-4

Speed Average speed is a measure of performance throughout the traffic study area. Speed, which is a function of running time and delay time, is related to LOS. It is necessary for the calculation of travel time (see VHT, above). In addition, because the pollutant emissions of vehicles are related to speed, this factor is important to air quality analysis. The analyses produce three speed figures, one for Route 9A, another for the Inland Streets and a third value combining both 9A and inland streets. This combined value is useful is determining the most efficient alternative, the higher the speed the better the alternative performs.

Level of Service (LOS) LOS describes the congestion (delay) that can be found at an intersection or along a roadway link and is ranked from A through F (see Table 8A-1). Generally, LOS A through C describes free-flowing conditions. At LOS A through C, the capacity of the roadway or intersection is more than adequate to accommodate the traffic volumes that pass through. LOS D describes an intersection or roadway that is processing a heavy volume of traffic adequately (without excessive delays). LOS D is acceptable on heavily traveled urban streets. LOS E and F conditions are considered poor operating conditions. At LOS E, traffic volumes are close to or equal to capacity and vehicles are subject to delays beyond those expected. For example, instead of being stopped at an intersection for one light cycle, a portion of the vehicles must wait for two lights. LOS F describes unstable traffic conditions with excessive stops and delays. This can be due to traffic demand that exceeds capacity or to very long traffic signal cycles (i.e., 120 or 135 seconds) that extend the normal waiting period for minor movements.

Table 8A-1LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections

LOS 2000 HCM (sec/vehicle)1 A ≤ 10 B > 10 – 20 C > 20 – 35 D > 35 – 55 E > 55 – 80 F > 80

Note: 1 Control Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds/Vehicle).

High pedestrian volumes have an adverse impact on LOS. Since a large volume of pedestrians cross Route 9A, LOS is worsened due to vehicle-pedestrian conflicts. Vehicle-pedestrian conflicts increase delay, worsening LOS. To ensure accurate results, these vehicle-pedestrian conflicts were included in all traffic analyses.

Queue Length Queue length is an important parameter in evaluating an intersection’s approach. When the traffic signal turns red, vehicles accumulate in the stopped direction. In some instances more vehicles can arrive than can be accommodated within the block. The queue then blocks the upstream intersection. Careful study of queue lengths at each intersection is important to ensure that other intersections remain unaffected. Intersections with significant queues are defined for this study as follows:

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-5

• For Route 9A a significant queue is longer than the distance between two traffic signals, this means that the upstream intersection is blocked. As an example, if a significant queue were to exist at northbound 9A at Chambers Street, it would mean that the Warren Street intersection was blocked.

• A queue is considered significant on a side street approach to Route 9A if its length is 250 feet or more. The 250-foot dimension is the length of a standard city block.

When assessing queuing, a blocked intersection significantly worsens a facility’s performance since another intersection’s performance is negatively affected. Persistent significant queuing can lead to a gridlock type of condition.

C. EXISTING CONDITIONS

OVERVIEW OF EXISTING CONDITIONS

TRAFFIC TRENDS

NYMTC conducts an annual study of people and vehicles entering Manhattan below 60th Street (an area known as the “hub”) via all modes during a typical fall day. A review of data for the 1990s showed that the number of people entering the “hub” during the morning peak hour via all modes was essentially constant.

The lower East River crossings (i.e., BBT, Brooklyn Bridge, Manhattan Bridge, and Williamsburg Bridge) have been observed to be operating “at capacity” during the morning peak hour for a number of years. The Brooklyn Bridge, Manhattan Bridge and Williamsburg Bridge are best observed as a group, since major construction resulted in lane closures on each of these facilities during the 1990s. Inbound morning peak hour traffic grew by less than 2 percent between 1990 and 2000. The “hub” and crossings data are summarized in Table 8A-2.

Table 8A-2Morning Peak Hour Inbound Traffic (vehicles/hr)

1990 1994 1998 2000 Total Growth (1990–2000)

East River Crossings Brooklyn Battery Tunnel 4,245 4,245 4,337 4,181 -1.5%

Bridges Brooklyn Bridge 4,150 4,754 4,551 4,740 14.2% Manhattan Bridge 2,508 3,352 3,148 3,288 31.1% Williamsburg Bridge 4,690 2,584 3,658 3,515 -25.1% Bridge Crossing Total 11,348 10,690 11,357 11,543 1.7%

Source: NYCDOT 2000 Manhattan River Crossings.

TRAFFIC STUDY AREA

POST-SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 CONDITIONS (2003)

The traffic study area is composed of Route 9A from Chambers Street to West Thames Street. Other major streets that intersect the study area or surround it are Chambers Street, the BBT Portal/approach, Church Street, and Broadway. Vesey Street and Liberty Street are not

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-6

considered major streets, as they are currently closed to traffic from Route 9A to Church Street. These streets will become major routes once completed.

All streets west of Route 9A are two-way streets and they serve the traffic needs of Battery Park City and the World Financial Center. For the streets that intersect Route 9A on the east side of the road, four out of eight are one-way. These streets are generally minor, narrow streets.

Parking garages and lots in the primary traffic study area have space for approximately 13,000 vehicles. A listing of the major parking areas is presented in Appendix E. On-street parking is controlled by posted regulations indicating the type of curb occupancy restrictions and time limitations. On-street parking in the Route 9A corridor is generally restricted to trucks loading and unloading and authorized vehicles between 7 AM and 7 PM. Within the study area, limited on-street parking is allowed. Parking regulations are less restrictive during off-peak hours and on weekends.

Given the limited amount of on and off-street parking, vehicles are often forced to park some distance from their actual destinations. The limited on-street parking in the traffic study area places a further premium on the number of off-street spaces available. At the time of the field surveys, construction activity and worker parking existed at the WTC and 7 WTC Sites as well as other locations undergoing recovery construction.

TRAFFIC CONTROL

Most of the eight intersections in the traffic study area are signal-controlled. All signalized intersections on Route 9A operate on a 120-second cycle. The Route 9A signals are timed to provide priority flow on the north-south avenues and coordinates when possible with some of the major east-west, cross-town streets. During the AM, signal progression favors northbound traffic and the BBT. During the PM, signal progression favors southbound traffic.

TRAFFIC COMPOSITION

In the traffic study area, the mix of vehicle classifications varies block by block and by time of day. At Liberty Street, a location central in the corridor, AM and PM peak hour passenger car and taxis account for between 81 and 92 percent of total traffic, while trucks and buses make up between 8 to 20 percent highlighting the importance of the Route 9A as a thoroughfare for bus transit and goods movement. Table 8A-3 presents the vehicle composition for the Liberty Street intersection approaches for both the AM and PM peak hours in both directions.

ROUTE 9A CORRIDOR

A key link in the regional highway system, Route 9A provides direct access to the Bronx and upstate New York via the West Side Highway/Henry Hudson Parkway, to New Jersey through the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, to Brooklyn through the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel; and to the east side of Manhattan via the FDR Drive (accessed through the Battery Park Underpass (BPU). It also connects directly to the local Manhattan business district street network, although left turns to and from the roadway are restricted to major streets in most areas. In addition, the highway provides curbside access to many active adjacent properties.

Traffic usage is typical for a commuter-based road. Peak AM traffic is heaviest in the northbound direction (into Manhattan) and peak PM traffic is heaviest in the southbound direction (out of Manhattan). Traffic varies greatly during the off-hours, and is lower than the AM and PM peak hours.

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-7

Table 8A-32003 Peak Period Vehicle Class Counts at Liberty Street

AM Peak Hour Percent 1 Southbound Northbound

Time Period Auto Taxi Trucks Bus Auto Taxi Trucks Bus AM Peak 63 18 16 4 72 10 13 4 PM Peak 83 4 8 5 82 10 5 3

Note: 1 May not add to 100 percent due to rounding.

The great majority of trips on Route 9A begin or end in Manhattan. For example, a recent MTA survey showed that less than 10 percent of vehicles entering Route 9A from the BBT have destinations outside of Manhattan. Much less than half of all drivers use Route 9A for its entire length between the BBT or BPU and points north of Chambers Street.

The segment of the Route 9A roadway between West Thames Street and Chambers Street includes entrances and exits to and from Battery Park City. The entrance from southbound Route 9A to the BBT currently restricts trucks, they are routed farther south to Battery Place, which leads to Route 9A northbound and the BBT security entrance checkpoint opposite West Thames Street. Route 9A in this segment varies from three to four lanes wide in each direction plus turn lanes at some locations. Truck docks and driveways open to Route 9A from approximately 10 buildings and/or properties. Average daily traffic volume (ADT) along the segment in front of the WTC Site prior to September 11, 2001 was about 80,000 vehicles with an equal north-south directional split.

During the AM and PM peak hours, the 2003 traffic is oriented to/from the BBT and the Lower Manhattan employment centers. This results in morning northbound volumes (about 2,500 vph) being higher than southbound traffic volumes (about 1,800 vph). The opposite is true during the evening (see Table 8A-4). These heavy volumes and the narrowed roadway configuration in front of the WTC site results in low speeds and poor operating intersections in this area.

D. FUTURE CONDITIONS COMMON TO ALL ALTERNATIVES

VEHICULAR ELEMENTS

As part of the redevelopment of the WTC Site, according to LMDC’s Master Plan, Greenwich Street will be constructed between Vesey and Liberty Streets and operate southbound. Fulton Street will be extended to Route 9A and will operate westbound through the WTC site. Vehicles would be able to turn from Fulton Street onto either northbound or southbound Route 9A.

Vesey Street will be modified to be one-way eastbound between Route 9A and Church Street.

Liberty Street will be modified to be two-way between Route 9A and Church Street. The WTC’s vehicular ramp located on the south side of Liberty Street will be between Route 9A and Greenwich Street. Vehicles using this ramp can enter from either direction of Liberty Street.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-8

Table 8A-42003 Approach Volumes: AM and PM Peak Hour

Northbound Southbound AM Peak Hour

Murray Street 2,633 1,835 Vesey Street 2,449 1,865 Liberty Street 2,431 1,831 Albany Street 2,392 1,645

PM Peak Hour Murray Street 2,067 2,250 Vesey Street 1,922 2,298 Liberty Street 1,945 2,350 Albany Street 1,960 2,294

PEDESTRIAN ELEMENTS

As part of the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, PANYNJ proposes to construct a pedestrian concourse under Route 9A which would connect the WTC Site with the World Financial Center in the vicinity of the Winter Garden.

METHODOLOGY

SHORT TERM TRAFFIC FORECAST

The short-term forecasts needed for the construction analysis and the opening year analysis are based on 2003 traffic volumes with traffic added to account for specific developments in the area and background growth. The future development projects are largely residential with sizes ranging between 20 dwelling units at 200 Church Street to 1321 dwelling units at 23 Wall Street/15 Broad Street. A small office development was planned at 10 Liberty Street as well as the completion of 7 WTC and its approximately 1.7 million square feet of office space. At BPC Site 26, an office development of 2 million square feet is planned to be opened by 2009. Background growth was also added to the base 2003 volumes.

LONG-TERM TRAFFIC FORECAST

To assess the impact of the Route 9A project on long-term (2025) future traffic conditions, the model specifically developed for the Route 9A Reconstruction Project and used for the 1994 FEIS was updated. As part of this effort the model’s links and nodes were adjusted to reflect various roadway and development changes expected as part of other Lower Manhattan infrastructure projects. The Route 9A model includes all of Manhattan below 72nd Street on the west side and 59th Street on the east side. For this project, the Route 9A study area was defined as south of Chambers Street and west of Broadway.

Before future traffic conditions could be predicted, the Route 9A model had to replicate existing traffic conditions within an acceptable margin of error. This was accomplished by developing a comprehensive baseline traffic network using information from the data collection effort for the 1999/2000 years, an available survey of BBT users and knowledge of local travel patterns.

Once the existing trip table and traffic assignments were calibrated and future roadway characteristics were coded including changes in roadways and new roadways planned as part of

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-9

other lower Manhattan recovery projects. Each alternative was modeled according to its characteristics. Individual traffic projections were developed for each alternative for the AM and PM peak hours. Future 2025 travel projections were based on the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC) Best Practice Model (BPM) regional traffic forecasts, Battery Park City Authority development plans, and WTC redevelopment and Memorial projects.

A traffic simulation model of the Route 9A study area was also prepared using the Paramics software. The model simulates the movement of individual vehicles through the traffic network to replicate future year traffic volumes and operations. Because the Route 9A model includes all streets below Chambers Street from Broadway to the west, this model provides estimates of important traffic parameters of vehicle hours of travel, vehicle hours of delay and travel speed on both Route 9A and the inland streets.

E. PROBABLE IMPACTS OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

CONSTRUCTION PERIOD

The same traffic study area used to assess the operational effects of the Route 9A Alternatives was used to assess construction conditions. The intersections analyzed within the study area were determined based upon the projected path of construction vehicles traveling to the site. As a result, all eight intersections along Route 9A from Chambers to West Thames Streets were analyzed to assess construction conditions.

Similar to the operational traffic analyses, the construction traffic analyses were conducted using SYNCHRO. Quantitative analyses were performed for signalized intersections using the analytical procedures described in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000. The criteria presented in the 1994 FEIS were used to determine significant traffic impacts in the study area for the critical construction period.

A total of five Lower Manhattan recovery projects including the proposed action, permanent WTC PATH Terminal, WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan, Route 9A Reconstruction, Fulton Street Transit Center (FSTC), and South Ferry Station were considered in the traffic analysis scenario of construction conditions. The No Action Alternative assumes that construction vehicles from four of the five Lower Manhattan recovery projects (without the Route 9A Project) were considered in the traffic analysis. The future with the proposed project assumes that construction vehicles from all of the five Lower Manhattan recovery projects are included in the traffic analysis.

The construction activities along Route 9A would provide three through lanes in each direction during the AM and PM peak periods. At other times two lanes would be maintained in each direction. It is assumed that two travel lanes would be provided on Church Street and Broadway. During construction, the bus lane would be closed and on-street parking would be precluded on Church Street and Broadway.

The base traffic volumes within the study area were developed by applying an overall growth rate to the current condition (2003) traffic volumes at each study area intersection identified previously for the AM and PM peak hours. Growth was estimated by adding 1.5 percent for background growth to the increment generated by completed developments as derived from demographic forecasts. The methodology used to calculate the traffic volumes was consistent with methodology used to calculate the base traffic volumes for FSTC, the Permanent WTC

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-10

PATH Terminal, the WTC Site and the South Ferry Environmental Assessment all of which have undergone separate environmental reviews.

The volume on Route 9A in the central portion of the corridor is presented in Table 8A-5. Similar to the 2003 conditions, traffic is heaviest northbound during the AM peak hour and heaviest southbound during the PM peak.

Table 8A-5Construction Period

Approach Volumes: AM and PM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound

AM Peak Hour Murray Street 2,865 1,963 Vesey Street 2,573 1,988 Liberty Street 2,570 1,949 Albany Street 2,535 1,756

PM Peak Hour Murray Street 2,325 2,397 Vesey Street 2,061 2,439 Liberty Street 2,108 2,487 Albany Street 2,120 2,421

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The generation of construction traffic for the permanent WTC PATH Terminal, South Ferry subway station, the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan, and FSTC projects was developed based on construction information provided for each of these projects and discussed in Chapter 16, “Cumulative Effects.” The construction information was developed based on input from each of the sponsors of the Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects. The construction vehicles projected to be used to rebuild Lower Manhattan would include light vehicles such as contractor vans and pick up trucks and heavy vehicles such as concrete mixers, dump trucks, trailers, etc.

For analysis purposes, it was assumed that all concrete mixers and trailers carrying structural steel were heavy vehicles. The service/utility/fuel vehicles were assumed to be half heavy and half light vehicles. All subcontractor vehicles were assumed to be light vehicles. The daily peak construction vehicles projected for all of the Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects is summarized in Chapter 16, “Cumulative Impacts.”

The assignment of construction vehicles to the Lower Manhattan traffic network was based on coordination among the sponsors of the Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects with the objective of minimizing the adverse effects of truck traffic on the local roadway network. This was achieved by optimizing the use of existing NYCDOT truck routes and by limiting the overlap of truck routes for each project so that individual roadways would not be overburdened with construction vehicles. The distribution of these construction vehicles along Route 9A varies between 24 and 31 during both the AM and PM peak hours.

When added to the baseline volumes the total traffic represents future conditions without Route 9A construction. A project-by-project breakdown of daily and AM/PM peak hour truck trips is summarized in the appendix.

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-11

SHORT BYPASS ALTERNATIVE

As previously discussed in Chapter 3, “Construction Practices,” the potential impacts from construction of the Route 9A Project have been assessed based on the Short Bypass Alternative. Both the No Action and At-Grade Alternatives would result in less construction activity, fewer overall truck trips, and a shorter duration. Therefore, the assessment that follows is a conservative estimate of the potential adverse traffic impacts due to the proposed project. On a daily basis, the Short Bypass Alternative would generate approximately 184 trucks (368 truck trips) during the peak year of construction. As shown in Table 8A-6, 55 of the truck trips could occur in each peak hour.

Table 8A-6 Daily and Peak Hour Construction Vehicle Trip Distribution for Route 9A Construction Vehicles

Route (To/From) Daily Truck

Trips Peak Hour Trips

(AM and PM) North Route 9A 160 24 South Street 46 7 BBT 128 19 Battery Place 34 5

Total 368 55

The proposed action “construction vehicle only” traffic flow volumes were developed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Table 8A-7 shows the total number of construction vehicles assigned to individual intersections (see Table 8A-8) along Route 9A by the construction of the Short Bypass Alternative. (The construction of the At-Grade Alternative would result in a shorter construction timeframe but it is estimated that the number of truck trips during peak construction would be similar.)

Table 8A-7Peak Hour Construction Vehicle Trips at Key Intersection Locations

Approach Volume for Route 9A Construction (AM/PM)Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total

Chambers Street at Route 9A 12/12 12/12 — — 24/24 Murray Street at Route 9A 12/12 12/12 — — 24/24 Vesey Street at Route 9A 12/12 15/16 — — 27/28 Liberty Street at Route 9A 12/12 15/16 — — 27/28 Albany Street at Route 9A 16/15 15/16 — — 31/31

Table 8A-8Construction Period Traffic Level of Service Summary Comparison

Future Without the Proposed Project No 9A Construction Short Bypass

Signalized Intersections AM PM AM PM Overall LOS A/B 4 6 4 6 Overall LOS C 4 2 4 2 Overall LOS D — — — Overall LOS E/F — — — Number of Movements at LOS E or F 3 2 3 2

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-12

The total number of construction vehicles assigned to individual intersections along Route 9A by the construction of the all five Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects ranges between 55 and 86 vehicles during both the AM and PM peak hours.

During the AM peak hour (8:15-9:15 AM), no intersections would operate at overall LOS E or F without Rt. 9A construction. This is projected to remain the same with construction of the Short Bypass Alternative. Three specific traffic movements, however, are expected to operate at LOS E or F both with and without construction of Route 9A.

During the PM peak hour (5-6 PM), no intersections would operate at LOS E or F without the proposed action. This is projected to remain the same with construction of the Short Bypass Alternative. Two specific traffic movements are expected to operate at LOS E or F under either condition. Therefore, construction of the Short Bypass Alternative would not result in any significant adverse impact.

FUTURE 2009 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS

Following the traffic forecasting procedures outlined above, the traffic anticipated for 2009 was estimated for the AM and PM peak hours. The year 2009, which is done primarily for air quality purposes, represents the estimated year of completion of the project. The Route 9A intersections were each evaluated for both peak hours but are not presented herein, since these are only initial volumes on Route 9A and 2025 would have greater traffic volumes. The analyses for 2009 are represented in Appendix E, “Traffic,” since they were used for the air quality analyses discussed in Chapter 9, “Air Quality.”

FUTURE 2025 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS

The At-Grade Alternative and the Short Bypass Alternative would restore the capacity of Route 9A between Albany and Murray Streets compared to the six-lane No Action Alternative. They would not attract a significant number of new vehicular trips to the study area (i.e., induced traffic) as the geometry and number of lanes at the BBT, BPU, and the Chambers Street intersection remain unchanged. These locations effectively meter the majority of traffic that uses Route 9A. Any increase in traffic on Route 9A under the project alternatives would be due to traffic diverted from inland streets and other roadways in and surrounding the primary traffic study area. Some of this traffic was diverted from Route 9A to inland streets and other roadways when the capacity of the roadway was reduced due to the attacks of September 11, 2001 and would likely return once the capacity of the roadway is restored.

The following sections address the effect of the No Action and Build alternatives on traffic conditions in the traffic study area and on the Route 9A roadway itself in 2025. Issues assessed in the traffic study area relate to the increases and decreases in traffic congestion on Route 9A and the impact on the interior streets assessed at the Liberty Street intersections with Church Street and Broadway. The At-Grade and the Short Bypass Alternatives are compared with the No Action Alternative in terms of average queue lengths, LOS, VMT, VHT, VHD, and average travel speeds.

The evaluation of Route 9A focuses on the project Build alternatives’ ability to accommodate future traffic demand. Local issues related primarily to the appropriate accommodation of truck operations at the WTC Site are also discussed.

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-13

OVERVIEW

Several lane configuration differences exist between the No Action, At-Grade, and the Short Bypass Alternatives. The alternatives differ in the number of through lanes and the number of left turn lanes. The No Action Alternative at the Liberty Street and Vesey Street approaches provides three through lanes in each direction. The At-Grade Alternative provides four through lanes in each direction, while the Short Bypass Alternative provides two through lanes at grade and two express lanes below grade in each direction. The location and the number of left turns also vary as depicted in Table 8A-9. For example, single left turns are provided at Liberty Street for the No Action Alternative; double left-turn lanes are provided with the At-Grade Alternative, and the Short Bypass Alternative only has single left turn lanes.

Table 8A-9Left-Turn Lanes Per Alternative

Intersection Direction No Action

Lanes At-Grade

Lanes Short Bypass

Alternative NB NA NA NA Chambers Street and Route 9A SB 2 2 2 NB 1 1 1

Warren Street and Route 9A SB NA 2 2 NB 2 2 NA

Murray Street and Route 9A SB 2 2 NA NB 1 NA 1

Vesey Street and Route 9A SB 1 1 1 NB NA NA NA

Fulton Street and Route 9A SB NA NA NA NB 1 2 0

Liberty Street and Route 9A SB 1 2 0

Notes: NA: Left turn not allowed. 1, 2: Number of turning pocket(s) available.

In addition to the above configuration differences, access to southbound Route 9A from the east via a median opening may change. The No Action, At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives are shown to provide access to southbound Route 9A via Fulton Street. As typical, during the detailed design phase of the preferred alternative, studies will refine the precise number and location of turn lanes, median dimensions, parking lanes and other features aimed at addressing a variety of vehicular and pedestrian concerns. Any changes will be reviewed and if substantive a re-evaluation of the project impacts will be undertaken.

TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (2025)

Route 9A Roadway Both project Build alternatives (At-Grade and Short Bypass) would physically improve roadway conditions in 2025 along the Route 9A corridor. These improvements would produce greatly enhanced traffic conditions. The Short Bypass Alternative provides an added benefit in that an alternate route is provided past the Memorial and proposed location of the Freedom Tower.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-14

During special events and times of heightened security, the Bypass would provide vehicular access past this area.

Specific effects of the Build alternatives are assessed in this section. Roadway volumes, delay, speeds, LOS, and queuing are compared with the No Action Alternative to assess effects of the Build alternatives in 2025. Specific localized issues are addressed, where appropriate.

Roadway Volumes As shown in Table 8A-10, in general, the Build alternatives’ projected Route 9A volumes would be higher than that of the No Action Alternative. This, in turn, would result in a decrease in traffic on inland streets. As shown in Table 8A-11, traffic volumes on the inland area streets would be reduced in the AM peak hour by 480 vehicles with the At-Grade Alternative and 550 vehicles with the Short Bypass Alternative. In the PM peak hour 320 and 480 vehicles for the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives would be reduced on inland streets, respectively. The reductions in traffic on inland streets would reduce inland street congestion and delay, resulting in an increase in average speed, thus improving air quality.

Table 8A-102025 Approach Volumes

Northbound Southbound No Action At-Grade Short Bypass No Action At-Grade Short Bypass

AM Peak Hour Murray Street 2,960 3,330 970

(2,070) 2,350 2,360 2,330

(0) Vesey Street 2,940 3,200 1,190

(2,070) 2,080 2,070 1,000

(1,280) Liberty Street 2,970 3,370 1,400

(2,030) 2,210 2,360 1,150

(1,280) Albany Street 2,860 3,260 3,290

(0) 1,730 1,880 630

(1,280) PM Peak Hour

Murray Street 3,100 3,370 1,040 (2,120)

2,530 2,610 2,550 (0)

Vesey Street 2,910 3,070 1,080 (2,120)

2,260 2,440 910 (1,660)

Liberty Street 2,400 2,540 700 (1,890)

2,660 2,870 1,280 (1,660)

Albany Street 2,090 2,230 2,370 (0)

2,330 2,540 940 (1,660)

Note: (#)—Number of vehicles using the underground bypass.

Table 8A-11 2025 Expected Traffic Volume Changes to Inland Streets

Compared to No Action Alternative (AM/PM Peak Hour) Street At-Grade Short Bypass

Broadway -30/-40 -40/-60 Greenwich Street -120/-170 -140/-210 Trinity Place/Church Street -330/-110 -370/-210 Subtotal Through Inland Streets -480/-320 -550/-480 Washington Street no change No change Other Streets -100/-40 -120/-80 Route 9A +580/+360 +670/+560

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-15

No Action Alternative. In 2025 during the AM peak hour, the No Action Alternative at the approach to Liberty Street would carry approximately 2,970 vehicles northbound and 2,210 vehicles southbound. In the PM peak hour, traffic volumes would be 2,400 vehicles northbound and 2,660 vehicles southbound.

At-Grade Alternative. In 2025 during the AM peak hour, the At-Grade Alternative at the Liberty Street approach would carry approximately 3,370 vehicles northbound and 2,360 vehicles southbound. In the PM peak hour, traffic volumes at the same location are forecast to be 2,540 and 2,870 vehicles, respectively. At Liberty Street Route 9A would carry 550 and 350 more vehicles than the No Action Alternative would carry in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Compared to the No Action, the At-Grade Alternative would also reduce the volume of traffic on inland streets. Because of the better operating conditions on Route 9A the inland street volumes would decrease by 580 and 360 vehicles in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.

Short Bypass Alternative. In 2025 during the AM peak hour, the Short Bypass Alternative at the Liberty Street approach would carry approximately 1,400 vehicles on the surface northbound and 1,150 vehicles on the surface southbound. The Bypass would carry about 2,030 and 1,280 vehicles in the NB and SB direction, respectively. In the PM peak hour at the Liberty Street approach, surface streets would carry 700 and 1,280 vehicles in the NB and SB directions, respectively. The Bypass would carry 1,890 and 1,660 vehicles in the NB and SB direction, respectively. At Liberty Street, Route 9A would carry 680 and 470 more vehicles than the No Action Alternative in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Compared to the No Action, the Short Bypass Alternative would also reduce the volume of traffic on inland streets. Because of the better operating conditions on Route 9A with this alternative, the inland street volumes would decrease by 670 and 560 vehicles in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.

Vehicle-Miles of Travel (VMT) All Build alternatives would accommodate greater VMT on Route 9A than the No Action Alternative. Since the total VMT for Route 9A and inland streets is about the same, increases on Route 9A (compared to the No Action) result in reduced VMT on inland streets, thus improving those conditions. As seen in Table 8A-12, the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives would result in the higher VMT for Route 9A than the No Action Alternative. The At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives would also result in the lowest VMT on inland streets. In 2025, VMT on Route 9A for the At-Grade Alternative, during both peak hours would together increase by about 8 percent compared to the No Action Alternative. For the Short Bypass Alternative, Route 9A VMT in 2025 for both peak hours would together increase VMT by about 10 percent.

Person Miles of Travel (PMT)

Person-Miles of Travel (PMT) was also calculated using VMT and vehicle occupancy figures for Route 9A and inland streets. Due to the large number of buses on inland streets, vehicle occupancy on inland streets is almost three times as large as on Route 9A (5.06 to 1.66).

Vehicle-Hours of Travel (VHT) Overall decreases in VHT indicate improvement in traffic service. As shown in Table 8A-13, the Route 9A VHT in 2025 with the At-Grade Alternative would be 11 percent and 37 percent lower than the No Action Alternative in the AM and PM peak period, respectively. For the Short Bypass Alternative, VHT on Route 9A in 2025 would decrease by 24 percent in the AM peak period and 30 percent in the PM peak period. Overall the Short Bypass Alternative would result in the lowest vehicle hours of travel.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-16

Table 8A-12 2025 Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)

Short Bypass

No Action At-

Grade On

Surface Bypass Route 9A 4,428 4,792 3,661 1,217 AM Peak Inland Streets 2,518 2,153 2,028 Route 9A 4,282 4,568 3,345 1,362 PM Peak Inland Streets 1,959 1,729 1,651

AM + PM peak hours Total 13,187 13,242 13,264 Route 9A 22.4 24.0 18.0 6.6 Inland Streets 11.5 10.0 9.4 Annual VMT (in millions) Total 33.9 34.0 34.0 Route 9A 38.1 40.8 30.6 11.2 Inland Streets 58.2 50.6 47.6 Annual PMT (in millions) 1 Total 96.3 91.4 89.4

Note: 1 Based on average vehicle occupancies of 1.66 for Route 9A and 5.06 for Inland Streets

Table 8A-13 2025 Vehicle Hours of Travel (VHT)

Short Bypass No Action At-Grade On Surface Bypass

Route 9A 531 473 339 63 Inland Streets 214 180 154 AM Peak Total 745 653 556 Route 9A 474 300 272 58 Inland Streets 134 129 111 PM Peak Total 608 429 441

Vehicle-Hours of Delay Substantial reductions in VHD are also expected with the Build Alternatives, compared to the No Action Alternative. As shown in Table 8A-14, in 2025, total VHD reductions on Route 9A for the At-Grade Alternative would be 67 vehicle-hours (a 16 percent reduction) in the AM peak hour and 182 vehicle-hours (a 50 percent reduction) in the PM peak hour. Reduction in VHD on Route 9A with the Short Bypass Alternative would also occur, but to a greater extent than the At-Grade Alternative. The vehicle hours of delay would be 136 vehicle-hours in the AM peak hour (a 32 percent reduction) and 151 vehicle-hours in the PM peak hour (a 41 percent reduction). Person-Hours of Delay (PHD) was also calculated using VHD and vehicle occupancy figures for Route 9A and inland streets. Compared to the No Action Alternative, this results in reductions of 27 percent and 38 percent for the At-Grade and Short Bypass alternatives, respectively. Due to the large number of buses on inland streets, vehicle occupancy on inland streets is almost three times as large as on Route 9A (5.06 to 1.66).

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-17

Table 8A-142025 Vehicle Hours of Delay (VHD)

Short Bypass No Action At-Grade On Surface Bypass

Route 9A 420 353 248 36 AM Peak Inland Streets 150 126 102 Route 9A 367 185 188 28 PM Peak Inland Streets 84 85 69

Total AM + PM 1,021 749 671 Route 9A 583,000 399,000 371,000 Inland Streets 173,000 156,000 127,000 Annual VHD Total VHD 756,000 555,000 498,000 Route 9A 968,000 662,000 615,000 Inland 878,000 687,000 528,000 Annual PHD1 Total PHD 1,846,000 1,349,000 1,143,000

Note: 1 Based on average vehicle occupancies of 1.66 for Route 9A and 5.06 for Inland Streets.

Average Travel Speeds As shown in Table 8A-15, in 2025 the average speed on the Route 9A roadway in both directions in the No Action Alternative would be 8.3 mph in the AM and 9 mph in the PM peak hours. For the At-Grade Alternative, the average speed would improve to 10.1 and 15.2 mph in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. For the Short Bypass Alternative, the average speed on the surface roadways would be 10.8 and 12.3 mph during the AM and PM peak hours respectively. The Bypass would operate between 19 and 24 mph.

Table 8A-152025 Average Speeds (mph)

Short Bypass No Action At Grade On Surface Bypass AM Peak Route 9A 8.3 10.1 10.8 19.2 Inland Streets 11.81 11.9 13.2 PM Peak Route 9A 9.0 15.2 12.3 23.5 Inland Streets 14.61 13.4 14.9 Note: 1 The calculation of speeds on inland streets for the No Action Alternative does not account for the

negative effect that unaccommodated demand will have. If this effect were taken into account, speeds would be lower.

On inland streets, average speeds would range between 11.8 and 14.6 mph for the No Action Alternative. Speeds for the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives will be 11.9 to 13.4 mph and 13.2 to 14.9 mph for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.

LOS, QUEUING, AND SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS

On an individual intersection basis, traffic conditions on Route 9A would improve with either Build Alternative compared to the No Action Alternative. Most of the improvements would result from the elimination of bottlenecks along the roadway. A summary of level of service operations, significant queuing, and identification of significant impacts is presented in Table 8A-16 below.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-18

Table 8A-162025 Level of Service and Queue Summary

Movements Operating at No Action At Grade Short Bypass AM Peak Hour

LOS A-C 27 32 33 LOS D 15 19 20 LOS E/F 30 21 20 9A Intersections Impacted by Queuing 5 0 0 Cross Street Significant Queues1 6 5 6

PM Peak Hour LOS A-C 28 35 34 LOS D 18 15 26 LOS E/F 26 22 13 9A Intersections Impacted by Queuing 7 1 0 Cross Street Significant Queues1 8 7 4

Note: 1 Cross Street Significant Queues are queues that exceed 250 feet.;

The No Action Alternative would have several movements that operate poorly. A total of 30 and 26 intersection movements would operate at LOS E or F during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. In addition, five and seven intersections on Route 9A during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively would be impacted by queues that would extend to one or more Route 9A signalized intersections. These blockages would significantly hamper operations and could result in grid-lock like conditions in some areas.

The At-Grade Alternative performs better than the No Action Alternative. A total of 21 and 22 intersection movements would operate at LOS E or F during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, some 15-30 percent fewer than the No Action Alternative. With the At-Grade Alternative, one intersection on Route 9A would be impacted by queues in the PM peak hour.

The Short Bypass Alternative performs the best. A total of 20 and 13 intersection movements would operate at LOS E or F during the AM and PM peak hours, some 30 to 50 percent fewer than the No Action Alternative. In addition no intersections on Route 9A would have significant queues in either peak hour.

F. TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY A safety analysis was also conducted for each project alternative. The analysis below focuses on vehicular traffic accidents involving vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The methodology utilized builds upon the methodology used in the 1994 FEIS and documented in the Route 9A Reconstruction Project Accident Analysis (November 1993). The following sections describe the methodology, data collection, existing conditions and the effects of the project alternatives on future traffic safety.

METHODOLOGY

A detailed study of accidents along Route 9A from Chambers Street to Albany Street was undertaken for the traffic safety analysis. Four years of accident data, prior to September 11, 2001 (May 1997 through April 2001) were compiled from Police Department reports. It should be noted that Route 9A was under construction during this 4-year period and the construction activity could have affected the accident rates. Data analyzed included the number of accidents, type of accident

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-19

(e.g., head-on, sideswipe, single car), roadway conditions at the time of accident, involvement of pedestrians or bicyclists, and severity (injuries or fatalities). The information was used to establish baseline conditions and to aid in the design of the project build alternatives.

The data considered in the analysis were the accident frequency and rate at a given location or segment of roadway. Accident frequency is the number of accidents that occurred per unit of time and is expressed in terms of accidents per year (acc/yr). Accident rate is generally given as the number of accidents divided by vehicles’ exposure. For an intersection, this is the number of accidents divided by the number of vehicles entering the intersection, expressed as accidents per million entering vehicles (acc/mev). For a section of roadway, the accident rate is the number of accidents divided by the VMT. Thus the rate is typically expressed in accidents per million VMT (acc/mvmt, or acc/mvm).

Once the existing pre-September 11, 2001 accident rates were determined, future accident rates with the project alternatives were estimated. There are two types of changes that can affect safety—physical modifications in roadway design and the changes in traffic volumes. A modification in roadway design can either reduce or increase accident rates depending on whether or not the modification is an improvement. Modifications that could reduce accidents at a location include general reconstruction, horizontal alignment improvements and adding lanes. Reduction factors obtained from the NYSDOT Traffic Engineering and Highway Safety Division were used to lower the existing accident rates for each design improvement. Because improvements in horizontal and vertical curves improve safety, it is assumed that modifications that diminish horizontal or vertical curves will increase accident potential. Since no official method exists to assess the geometry changes, the reverse method was used to recognize that if a feature that reduces accidents is removed, a possible outcome is an increase in accidents. Therefore to estimate the impact of such a design on accident rates, the “reverse” of the standard NYSDOT accident reduction factors was used as an indication of accident potential.

At intersections and roadway segments that would essentially remain unchanged, the projected accident rates were assumed to be the same as under the pre-September 11, 2001 conditions. For new intersections, accident rates were estimated by using the existing rates at the neighboring intersection.

The adjusted accident rates were then applied to the 2025 traffic volumes for the project alternatives to determine the future number of annual accidents for each alternative.

MAY 1997 TO APRIL 2001 CONDITIONS (PRE–SEPTEMBER 11, 2001)

As noted earlier, Route 9A was under construction for most of the period evaluated. The accident rate is high when compared with similar types of roadways—i.e., multilane free-access arterials and the ongoing construction most likely contributed to those rates. However, it should be noted that a number of intersections have unique design elements (e.g., double left-turn lanes) that are rare elsewhere in the state and could contribute to the higher-than-average rates. It is also noted that the accident rate found may not be indicative of future rates since Route 9A was under construction for a portion of this period.

TOTAL ACCIDENTS

During the 4-year period surveyed there were 1,050 accidents, including bicycle and pedestrian accidents, on Route 9A from Chambers Street to Albany Street. Of these, 872 occurred at intersections while 178 occurred at mid-block locations resulting in an annual average of 218

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-20

accidents at intersections and 45 accidents at mid-block locations. Almost 60 percent of the average annual accidents occurred at three of the busiest intersections; Chambers Street (47), Vesey Street (58) and Liberty Street (45). The segment of Route 9A between Liberty Street and Vesey Street averaged the highest annual number of accidents (17). A contributor to this high rate was the complicated geometry at this location including entrance and exit ramps to and from the WTC garage, U-turns in the median, the entrance/exit to the Vista Hotel, and the entrance and exit of 1 WTC as well as the layby area for 2 and 3 WFC.

Of the total accidents, 24.3 percent involved injuries; however, no accident-related fatalities occurred during this period. In New York City, 66.3 percent of accidents results in an injury and 0.28 percent in a fatality. Statewide (outside of the five boroughs of New York City), injuries and fatalities occur in 41.8 percent and 0.35 percent of accidents, respectively.

Approximately 83 percent of the accidents on Route 9A occurred either at the intersections or as a result of intersection-related factors. Pre-September 11, 2001 accident rates are presented in Table 8A-17.

Table 8A-17 Intersection Accident Rates – May 1997 to April 2001

Route 9A at Accident Rate (acc/mev) * Chambers Street 1.66

Warren Street 0.17 Murray Street 1.09 Barclay Street 1.27 Vesey Street 2.10 Liberty Street 1.62 Cedar Street 0.31 Albany Street 0.50

*Note: Route 9A under construction

The total accident rate for the Route 9A corridor from Albany Street to Chambers Street was calculated to be 16.92 acc/mvmt. This is more than three times the statewide accident rate of 5.06/mvmt for similar four-lane divided urban roadways.

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLISTS ACCIDENTS

There were no pedestrian accident fatalities in the 4-year time period. Over the 4-year period, 40 of the 1,050 accidents on Route 9A involved pedestrians. The highest annual average pedestrian accidents occurred at Vesey Street (3), followed by Chambers Street (2) and Liberty Street (2). All other intersections had fewer than two pedestrian accidents per year.

Over the 4-year period, 10 accidents involving bicycles occurred. Chambers Street (2) and Vesey Street (1) were the only intersections that averaged one or more bicycle accidents per year. Again there were no fatalities.

A review of pedestrian accidents from January 1, 2004 through March 2, 2005 reveals that 9 pedestrian/vehicle accidents occurred and there were no fatalities. Pedestrian accident occurrence was as follows: one at Chambers Street, one at Warren Street, two at Murray Street, one at Barclay Street, and four at Vesey Street. At the Vesey Street intersection three out of four accidents involved turning vehicles. Of note is that the Vesey Street intersection, located at the corner of the WTC Construction Site, has had construction activity in some form since the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-21

PROBABLE IMPACTS OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Accident rates for the No Action Alternative were determined by the methodology previously discussed and included roadway modifications as shown in Table 8A-18.

Table 8A-18Route 9A No Action Alternative

Route 9A Segment Roadway Changes from Pre-September 11, 2001 Conditions Barclay Street to Murray Street Reduction of 1 SB lane Vesey Street to Barclay Street Reduction of 1 SB lane

Reduction of 1 SB left-turn lane at Vesey Additional EB lane at Vesey Street NB left-turns now allowed at Vesey Street (1 lane) Prohibit WB movements on Vesey Street

Liberty Street to Vesey Street Reduction of 1 lane in both directions New intersection of Fulton Street with Route 9A NB and SB lanes New horizontal curve as roadway is shifted westward due to WTC reconstruction Reduction of 1 SB left-turn lane at Liberty Reduction of 1 NB left-turn lane at Liberty Street

Cedar Street to Liberty Street Reduction of 1 NB lane New horizontal curve as roadway is shifted westward due to WTC reconstruction

Albany Street to Cedar Street New horizontal curve as roadway is shifted westward due to WTC reconstruction

In 2025, with the No Action Alternative, accidents would average 348 annually. This represents an increase of 85 accidents as compared with the existing roadway. The increase in accidents for the No Action Alternative is attributable to the increase in traffic volumes, an accompanying decrease in capacity, and geometric design modifications.

AT-GRADE AND SHORT BYPASS ALTERNATIVES

Accident Analysis Accident rates with the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives were projected for 2025 by estimating the effect of various roadway components on safety, or specifically, on the expected number of accidents. NYSDOT analysis of previous projects has shown that basic reconstruction projects typically provide a 20 percent overall reduction in accidents. Items typically included in such an effort would all have a positive effect on reducing accidents. These include upgrading pavements, installing barriers, the installation or upgrading of new signs and traffic signals, improved drainage, and enhancements to pedestrian design features (median refuge areas, curb bulb-outs, and larger crosswalks). While improvements to signs, signals, and drainage are quantifiable, pedestrian and bicycle enhancements are not; there are no appropriate historical data on the performance of such features on other facilities. Therefore, their benefits could not be quantified. However, they are discussed qualitatively below.

Roadway modifications to Route 9A with the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives are shown in Table 8A-19.

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-22

Table 8A-19Route 9A At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternative

Route 9A Segment At-Grade Roadway Changes from

No Action Alternative Short Bypass Roadway Changes

from No Action Alternative Warren Street Intersection SB left-turns now allowed (2 lanes) SB left-turns now allowed (2 lanes) Warren Street to Murray Street — — Murray Street Intersection Additional SB left-turn lane 2 NB and 1 SB left-turns prohibited

Additional NB lane Murray Street to Barclay Street Additional SB lane 2 NB and 1 SB lane removed at-

grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel Vertical curve introduced at north tunnel portal

Barclay Street Intersection Additional NB and SB lane Reduction of 1 NB lane Barclay Street to Vesey Street Additional NB and SB lane 2 NB and 1 SB lane removed at-

grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel Vertical curve introduced at north tunnel portal Horizontal Alignment improved NB

Vesey Street Intersection NB left-turns prohibited Additional NB and SB lane

NB and SB lane removed at-grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel

Vesey Street to Fulton Street Additional NB and SB lane NB and SB lane removed at-grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel

Fulton Street Intersection Additional NB and SB lane NB and SB lane removed at-grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel

Fulton Street to Liberty Street Additional NB and SB lane New NB on-ramp to tunnel NB and SB lane removed at-grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel Horizontal curve introduced NB

Liberty Street Intersection Additional NB and SB lane Additional SB left-turn lane Additional NB left-turn lane

NB and SB lane removed at-grade 2 NB and SB lanes in bypass tunnel Additional NB right-turn lane

Liberty Street to Cedar Street Additional NB and SB lane Horizontal alignment improvement

Horizontal alignment improvement NB and SB lane removed at-grade 2 NB SB lanes in bypass tunnel Vertical curve introduced at south tunnel portal

Cedar Street Intersection Additional NB and SB lane Bypass tunnel removes 1 NB lane Cedar Street to Albany Street Additional NB lane

Horizontal alignment improvement Horizontal alignment improvement in 2 at-grade lanes Additional NB lane between Vertical curve introduced at south tunnel portal

Albany Street Intersection — Additional NB lane

Table 8A-20 presents the results of the accident analysis by intersection for the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives. Accident rates for the No Action Alternative are also shown for comparison.

Chapter 8A: Traffic

8A-23

Table 8A-20Route 9A Projected Accident Rates (acc/mev)

Average Annual Accidents and Accident Rates forEach Intersection with Safety Improvements in 2025

No Action Alternative At-Grade Alternative

Short Bypass Alternative

Route 9A Intersection Rate Number Rate Number Rate NumberChambers Street 1.66 51 1.66 53 1.66 54 Warren Street 0.17 5 0.29 8 0.29 9 Murray Street 1.09 32 1.09 34 0.27 8 Barclay Street 1.27 31 0.60 16 1.84 17 Vesey Street 2.44 66 0.70 20 2.44 31 Short-Bypass On-Ramp from WTC Garage1 — — — — 0.67 7

Fulton Street2 2.73 70 1.30 36 2.73 31 Liberty Street 2.73 74 1.30 38 2.73 37 Cedar Street 0.31 7 0.15 4 0.45 4 Albany Street 0.50 12 0.50 13 0.34 9

Total 1.47 348 0.87 222 1.13 207 Notes: 1 Estimated using statewide average rate

2 Same as Liberty Street

As shown in Table 8A-20, the build alternatives would result in lower overall annual accident rates at Route 9A intersections than the No Action alternative. The At-Grade Alternative would result in the lowest overall accident rates of the three alternatives.

The No Action Alternative would have higher accident rates at the Liberty Street, Fulton Street and Vesey Street intersections, mainly due to reduced lane capacity on Route 9A. Intersections that have the same accident rate across the three alternatives show slight increases in projected accidents in the At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives, since these alternatives would result in an increase in VMT along Route 9A. However, the Short Bypass Alternative is projected to have fewer total accidents at intersections due to the diversion of traffic to the bypass structure.

In 2025, with the At-Grade Alternative, total intersection accidents for Route 9A would average 222 annually—a decrease of 126 accidents as compared to the No Action Alternative. The accident rate for this segment would decrease to 0.87 acc/mev compared to 1.47 acc/mev for the No Action Alternative and is attributable to the increase in capacity and roadway improvements.

In 2025, with the Short-Bypass Alternative, total intersection accidents for Route 9A would average 207 annually—a decrease of 141 accidents as compared with the No Action Alternative. The intersection accident rate would decrease to 1.13 acc/mev compared to 1.47 acc/mev for the No Action Alternative. Similar to the At-Grade Alternative, this reduction is attributable to the increase in capacity and roadway improvements but also includes a reduction due to reduced intersection conflicts from diversion of traffic to the bypass.

Pedestrians and Bicyclists The At-Grade and Short Bypass Alternatives would include several features that would improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Route 9A. The existing bikeway/walkway would be maintained and signalized intersections with crossing pedestrian and vehicular traffic would be clearly marked with crosswalks, reducing the potential for jaywalking. Signals would be

Route 9A Project FSEIS

8A-24

timed to permit pedestrians to cross in one cycle where possible. Longer signal cycle lengths have been applied to increase crossing times further. Pedestrians that need two cycles to cross the roadway would have ample refuge areas in the large medians to wait. Crosswalks would be placed so pedestrian conflicts with turning vehicles would be minimized. Wider sidewalks would also be provided for the east sidewalk area between Albany and Murray streets in both Build alternatives.

There are also a number of planned improvements that would reduce the number of at-grade pedestrian crossings and consequently, reduce the number of potential accidents involving pedestrians. These include the PANYNJ’s planned pedestrian concourse beneath Route 9A in the vicinity of Fulton Street and a potential new pedestrian bridge at Murray Street. Moreover, the Short Bypass Alternative would remove as much as 75 percent of total traffic from the surface streets, and would have a direct impact on lowering the number of potential accidents between vehicles and pedestrians in the vicinity of the WTC area.