Heartland Town Square

Transcription

1 Appendix TR-1 Heartland Town Square Supplemental Traffic Analysis Hamlet of Brentwood Town of Islip Suffolk County, New York Prepared by: 2150 Joshua s Path Suite 300 Hauppauge, New York June 2013

2 Preface The Traffic Impact Study prepared in connection with the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS), dated August 2009, was prepared by VHB Engineering, Surveying and Landscape Architecture, P.C. (VHB) for the applicants. This Supplemental Traffic Analysis (STA) was prepared jointly by Dunn Engineering Associates, P.C. (DEA) as consultant to the Town of Islip Town Board and VHB as consultant to the applicants. DEA prepared the internal capture analyses for the STA. VHB prepared the initial traffic distribution analysis, which was reviewed and adjusted by DEA. Additional traffic counts were obtained by VHB, and DEA obtained NYSDOT data, where available, to supplement the new counts obtained by VHB. DEA reviewed the existing 2010 traffic data, and, where inconsistencies were found, additional new data was obtained. VHB constructed the SYNCHRO and VISSIM files and analysis. The models were reviewed by DEA and separately run by DEA to verify model settings and results.

3 Table of Contents Section 1: Summary... 1 Summary... 1 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis Phase I Traffic Analysis Methodology Trip Generation and Mode Split Trip Distribution and Assignment Other Planned Developments Traffic Volumes Traffic Operations Analysis Local Roadway Intersections Operational Analysis Limited Access Facilities Operational Analysis Phase I Build Phase I Recommended Improvements Conclusions Section 3: Full-Build Analysis Full-Build Traffic Analysis Overview Methodology Trip Generation and Mode Split Trip Distribution and Assignment Full Build Traffic Volumes Traffic Operations Analysis Local Roadway Intersections Operational Analysis Limited Access Facilities Operational Analysis Full-Build Project Vision Full-Build Recommended Improvements Sagtikos Parkway Crooked Hill Road at New DU4 Access G Road at New DU4 Access LIE Westbound Ramp Spur to Crooked Hill Road Traffic Signal Timing Improvements Other Measures Conclusions Section 4: Recommended Improvement Implementation Phasing and Cost Recommended Improvement Plan Recommended Improvement Phasing and Cost i Section 1: Summary

4 List of Tables Table 1 Unadjusted Trip Generation Phase Table 2 Retail Trip Generation Phase Table 3 Adjusted Trip Generation Phase Table 4 Regional Vehicle Trip Distribution Summary Table 5 Other Planned Developments as of July Table 6 Other Planned Developments Updated to June Table 7 Tanger Vehicle Trip Comparison Table 8 Signalized Intersections Level of Service Summary Table 9A Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Summary AM Peak Hour Table 9B Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Summary PM Peak Hour Table 9C Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Summary Saturday Peak Hour Table Existing Cumulative Travel Time Summary (in minutes) Table and 2017 No-Build Projected Cumulative Travel Time Summary (in minutes) Table and Phase I Build Projected Cumulative Travel Time Summary (in minutes) Table No-Build and Phase I Build Projected Cumulative Travel Time Summary (in minutes) Table 14 Phase I Recommended Improvements Table 15 Unadjusted Trip Generation Full-Build and Gateway Table 16 Unadjusted Trip Generation Phase I Table 17 Unadjusted Trip Generation Phase II and III and Gateway Table 18 Phase II & III Site-Generated Traffic Summary Proposed Heartland Town Square (Does not include Gateway Area Trips) Table 19 Signalized Intersections Level of Service Summary Table 20 Phase I Build and 2027 No-Build Projected Cumulative Travel Time Summary. 109 Table 21 Full-Build Projected Cumulative Travel Time Summary Table 22 Full-Build with Additional Improvements Table 23 Full-Build Vision Internal Capture Rates Comparison with Table 24 Full-Build and Full-Build Vision Table 25 Full-Build Recommended Improvements i Section 1: Summary

5 List of Figures Figure 1 - Phase I Recommended Improvements... 4 Figure 2 - Full-Build Recommended Improvements... 6 Figure 3A Existing Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 3B Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 4A Existing Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 4B Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 5A Existing Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 5B Existing Itnersection Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 6A No-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 6B No-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 7A No-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 7B No-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 8A No-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 8B No-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 9 - Phase I Site Generated Trips Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 10 - Phase I Site Generated Trips Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 11 - Phase I Site Generated Trips Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 12A - Phase I Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 12B - Phase I Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 13A - Phase I Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 13B - Phase I Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 14A - Phase I Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 14B - Phase I Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 15 - Full-Build Site Generated Trips Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 16 - Full-Build Site Generated Trips Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 17 - Full-Build Site Generated Trips Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 18A No-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 18B No-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 19A No-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 19B No-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 20A No-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 20B - No-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 21A - Full-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 21B - Full-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Morning Peak Hour Figure 22A - Full-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 22B - Full-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Weekday Evening Peak Hour Figure 23A - Full-Build Sagtikos/LIE Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour Figure 23B - Full-Build Intersection Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour ii Section 1: Summary

6 Attachments Attachment TRA-1 Recommended Improvements Attachment TRA-2 Internal Capture Rate Analysis Phase I Attachment TRA-3 Residential Land Use Distribution Attachment TRA-4 Workplace Trip Distribution Analysis Attachment TRA-5 Regional Retail Trip Distribution Attachment TRA-6 Assignment of Other Developments Attachment TRA-7 Phase I Trip Distribution and Assignment Attachment TRA-8 Rerouting of Traffic Due to Proposed Improvements Attachment TRA-9 Phase I SYNCHRO Analysis Attachment TRA-10 Phase I VISSIM Analysis Attachment TRA-11 Internal Capture Rate Analysis Full-Build Attachment TRA-12 Full-Build Trip Distribution and Assignment Attachment TRA-13 Full-Build SYNCHRO Analysis Attachment TRA-14 Full-Build VISSIM Analysis iii Section 1: Summary

7 Section 1: Summary Summary The Heartland Town Square DGEIS was accepted as complete on April 14, A public hearing was held on May 28, 2009 and comments on the DGEIS were accepted until July 28, As a result of the comments, the Traffic Study for the Heartland Town Square has been revised to reflect the comments received on the study contained in the DGEIS. As explained in the Preface, this Supplemental Traffic Analysis (STA) was prepared jointly by Dunn Engineering Associates, P.C. (DEA), as consultant to the Town of Islip Town Board, and VHB, as consultant to the applicants. It is important to understand that separate from the traffic analyses that were performed, the applicants have recently prepared detailed build-out/occupancy projections for each of the projected three phases of development (see Appendix PH-1of this FGEIS). As indicated on the projected timeframe, full occupancy of Phase I is projected in 2023, and full occupancy of all three phases is projected in Thus, although the analyses in this STA conform to the dates agreed upon by DEA (Phase I 2017; fullbuild-2027), the actual occupancy would be farther into the future. Thus, the projected timeframes for mitigation, which would be based on occupancy, would also be farther into the future. The following summarizes significant revisions/clarifications included in the revised document: 1. The methodology for the analysis of limited access roadways (including parkways and the Long Island Expressway[LIE]) utilized a program called Vissim, which simulates conditions on the subject roadway and evaluates its ability to process existing, as well as, future traffic volumes. For analysis of intersections, Synchro was used. In the DGEIS, Synchro had been used for all analyses. 2. For the purpose of this Supplemental Traffic Analysis (STA), which was initially prepared in 2010, the analytical build years were assumed to be 2017 for Phase I and 2027 for the Full-Build-Out (completion of Phases II and III and the Gateway Area). However, as explained above and, shown in Appendix PH-1, actually occupancy would occur further into the future. The applicants have agreed that subsequent traffic counts will be conducted when 70 percent of the Phase I space is occupied. The purpose is to verify that the anticipated internal capture rates and traffic generation of the project follow the projections developed for the 1 Section 1: Summary

8 analysis. As the traffic generation will be revisited, separate analysis of the two subsequent phases was not performed. Phases II and III and the Gateway Area were analyzed together. When added to the Phase I results, this analysis is referred to as Full-Build for the project. 3. The analysis included all of the intersections and road segments included in the DGEIS. Thirty intersections (28 signalized and 2 unsignalized) were included, as well as the Sagtikos Parkway from the Northern State Parkway to the Southern State Parkway, and the LIE from west of Commack Road to east of Wicks Road. The limits of the Northern State Parkway in the analysis were from Exit 43 to Exit 45, and limits of the Southern State Parkway analysis were from Exit 41 to Exit The DGEIS study included an analysis of four potential peak periods when traffic from the proposed project, when added to existing traffic on the adjacent highway system, may create impacts. Those time periods were the AM, Midday, and PM weekday peak hours of traffic and the Saturday peak hour of traffic. The DGEIS Traffic Study revealed that the project trip generation was lowest during the midday weekday peak hour. In addition, the background traffic volumes during the midday peak hour were lower than during the AM and PM weekday peak hours. The results of the DGEIS traffic data and analysis indicated that the Midday weekday analyses did not, in the DGEIS, and would not, in the revised FGEIS analysis, reveal any additional traffic impacts that were not identified in the AM and PM weekday peak hour analyses or in the Saturday peak hour analyses. Therefore, the weekday Midday analyses were not included in the FGEIS traffic analyses. 5. Traffic volume maps and trip distribution maps analyses were prepared by trip type, including residential, office, and retail trips for the AM and PM weekday peak hour, as well as, the peak hour for Saturday. 6. Internal capture rates and modal splits for Phase I, and Phases II and III and the Gateway Area (combined) for the proposed development were calculated based on data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), the Long Island Journey to Work Study and population statistics compiled by the United States Census Bureau. Internal capture rates were based on the project components, as well as published research on this topic. A conservative approach was taken and is fully described in this STA. 7. The internal capture rates were, in turn, used to develop trip generation, as well as parking requirements for the FGEIS. 8. The annual growth rate used in the FGEIS is 0.65 percent. This rate is consistent with the most recent projections by New York Metropolitan Transportation 2 Section 1: Summary

9 Council (NYMTC) for growth in daily vehicle miles of travel in Suffolk County. NYMTC is responsible for the development of long-range transportation plans for the Metropolitan Region, including Long Island. It should be noted that data from the Long Island Transportation Plan 2000 (or LITP2000) are over ten years old, and the utilization of a population growth rate for the Town of Islip only is not appropriate for a regional project like Heartland Town Square. It must also be recognized that the project, even if developed as-of-right, and the other planned developments specifically included in the study, would constitute a significant portion of the traffic growth in the area and that an allowance should be considered to avoid unrealistic total growth projections. The NYMTC growth projections were considered the latest and most realistic. 9. The roadway improvements recommended for Phase I of Heartland Town Square were determined accounting for the existing deficiencies at the intersections and surrounding roadways that were identified during the preparation of the DGEIS. 10. Recognizing these existing deficiencies, a Phase I recommended improvement plan was developed and became the basis for evaluating the Phase I Build volumes. The Phase I recommended improvements are presented in Figure 1, Phase I Recommended Improvements. 11. The results of the analyses indicate that the vehicle trips generated by Phase I of Heartland Town Square can be accommodated with the Phase I Recommended Improvements. In general, conditions at most locations actually improve with the implementation of the recommended improvements, even with the addition of the Heartland Town Square Phase I site-generated traffic. In only minor instances was the Phase I Build Condition worse than the 2017 No-Build Condition, as measured by the overall delays experienced at the intersections. 3 Section 1: Summary

10

11 12. A Full-Build recommended improvement plan was also developed based on an evaluation of the Full-Build volumes, including the development of the Gateway area, as described in the DGEIS. The Full-Build recommended improvements are presented in Figure 2, Full-Build Recommended Improvements. 13. A comparison of the 2027 No-Build analyses with the Full-Build analyses indicates that the road network in the vicinity of the Heartland Town Square will generally experience levels of service (LOS) D or better with the increased traffic resulting from the Full-Build-out of Heartland Town Square. At most locations, due to the recommended improvements, congestion will be reduced, while at others conditions will worsen. These locations include: LIE North Service Road at Commack Road The intersection operating LOS deteriorates from LOS C to LOS E during the PM weekday peak period. LIE South Service Road at Commack Road The intersection operating LOS deteriorates from LOS E to LOS F during the PM weekday peak period. LIE North Service Road at Crooked Hill Road The intersection operating LOS deteriorates from LOS B to LOS E during the PM weekday peak period. Pine Aire Drive at Fifth Avenue The intersection operating LOS deteriorates from LOS E to LOS F during the PM peak weekday period. Suffolk Avenue at Wicks Road The intersection operating LOS deteriorated from LOS C to LOS E during the PM weekday peak period. G Road at the Sagtikos Parkway Northbound Ramp The intersection operating LOS deteriorated from LOS B to LOS E during the PM weekday peak period. Delays and queues on the southbound Sagtikos Parkway ramp to the westbound Southern State Parkway will increase during the weekday PM weekday peak hour. 14. The total estimated cost of the recommended roadway improvements necessary to alleviate existing deficiencies and support the development of the Heartland Town Square is between $200,000, and $225,000, The developer has proposed a contribution of $25,000, toward these recommended improvements during Phase III of the development as a means of the mitigating project-related traffic impacts. 5 Section 1: Summary

12

13 15. New York State and Suffolk County have indicated that they will be participating in the required road improvements, many of which are required before any traffic from Heartland Town Square is generated. Attachment TRA-1 of this FGEIS includes copies of letters received from New York State and Suffolk County explaining their commitment to participate in providing the road improvements identified in this study. 16. The developer of Heartland Town Square has acquired $2,500, in funding from Empire State Development toward the design and construction of improvements to Crooked Hill Road from just south of the Long Island Expressway South Service Road southeast through its intersection with Community College Drive. This award provides funding for the design of the improvements on this segment of Crooked Hill Road identified in this study, with the exception of the bridge over the Sagtikos State Parkway. Furthermore, the award provides funding for the construction of the improvements on the portion of Crooked Hill Road from just south of the Long Island Expressway South Service Road to a point south of the proposed Heartland Town Square Northerly Access Drive. This project will improve a key study area roadway, which will provide direct access to and from Heartland Town Square and will be key in the project s operation. 7 Section 1: Summary

14 8 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

15 2.1 Phase I Traffic Analysis This section identifies the traffic impacts associated with the Phase I development of Heartland Town Square, which is referred to as the Phase I Build Condition. The Full-Build analysis(phases I + II + III + Gateway Area traffic) is reported in Section 3 of this STA. The Phase I Build traffic analysis includes the following: 1. Existing Traffic The DGEIS Existing Traffic was updated to the year This was done by obtaining traffic counts in 2010 at key study intersections and by placing automatic traffic counters on the Sagtikos Parkway. The most recent traffic data were obtained from the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) and Suffolk County Department of Public Works (SCDPW) files and adjusted, if necessary, to the year Background Growth As described later in this section, an annual growth rate of 0.65 percent was used to account for future growth in traffic that cannot be attributed to other planned developments (OPD) that are currently in the planning or construction stages. The annual growth rate used is consistent with the most recent projections by the NYMTC for growth in daily vehicle miles of travel in Suffolk County. 3. Other Planned Developments Several other developments in the vicinity of Heartland Town Square were identified through discussions with Town Planning Departments, including Islip, Huntington, Smithtown and Babylon, during the scoping process for the DGEIS. The anticipated traffic from each of these developments was identified by obtaining State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) documents submitted in support of these projects. The traffic from these developments was included in the analyses No-Build The total of the Existing Traffic, Background Growth and Other Planned Development (OPD) trips is equal to the 2017 No-Build traffic volume analyzed in this STA. 5. Heartland Town Square Traffic (Phase I) This is new traffic that will result from the proposed development based on the projections of Phase I trips distributed to the local roadway network of the study area. Trips that are generated by Heartland Town Square with an origin and a destination in Heartland Town Square are referred to as internal trips and were not added to the Build volumes on the surrounding road network. For example, an internal trip would be made by a person who lived in Heartland Town Square and also worked in Heartland Town Square. 9 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

16 6. Phase I Build - The total of Existing Traffic + Background Growth + OPD trips + Phase I (External) trips is equal to the Phase I Build traffic volume analyzed in this STA. To determine if the Phase I Build traffic would impact the transportation network in the study area, comparisons are made between the Existing volumes, the No-Build volumes and the Phase I Build volumes. As stated in the DGEIS, the analysis results clearly indicate that existing conditions already warrant significant improvements to many roadways, bridges and intersections within the Heartland Town Square study area. The DGEIS also indicated that Heartland Town Square itself would require additional improved facilities. The Phase I Build network includes all of the recommended roadway improvements depicted in Figure 1 and further described in the Attachment TRA-1. These recommended roadway improvements are required to address existing roadway deficiencies and accommodate additional trips associated with the development of Heartland Town Square. Therefore, the Phase I Build analyses in this FGEIS are based on the assumption that these recommended improvements will be implemented. 10 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

17 2.2 Methodology Trip Generation and Mode Split The rate at which any development generates traffic is dependent upon a number of factors such as size, location and concentration of surrounding development. In order to determine trip generation for the proposed Heartland Town Square development, it is first necessary to establish the methodology that will estimate future projections most accurately. The estimates of trip generation for Phase I and Full Build-out of the site are based on the Heartland Town Square revised Conceptual Master Plan (see Appendix RP-1), which was prepared to address comments received during the public comment period regarding the DGEIS. The revised Conceptual Master Plan, like the previously proposed Conceptual Master Plan presented in the DGEIS, maintains smart-growth principles but addresses various salient comments regarding design. The similarities and differences of the two plans are explained in Section of the FGEIS. The trip generation methodology involved the following steps: Determine the expected volume of traffic associated with the Heartland Town Square project, trip generation rates published by ITE were used. Adjust trip generation estimates to account for internal trips, which remain on the site, but move between two different land uses (e.g., office employees or residents utilizing the retail elsewhere within the site boundaries). Adjust for pass-by trips. Pass-by trips involve vehicles that are already on the local roadway network and are attracted to the services being offered at the site as they are passing through the area. Step 1 - ITE Trip Generation The first step involves estimating the Phase I trip generation for the proposed development. Future predictions were based on trip generation rates provided by ITE for the land uses which were determined to be the most appropriate for the proposed development: LUC 230 Residential Townhouses LUC 710 General Office Building LUC 820 Shopping Center LUC 495 Civic Use 11 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

18 Table 1 summarizes the future traffic generation for Phase I of the Heartland Town Square development, based on the revised Conceptual Master Plan. Development Type As shown in Table 1, according to ITE, the future land use is expected to generate a total of approximately 2,300 peak weekday morning trips (1,231 entering and 1,069 exiting); 4,062 peak weekday evening trips; (1,923 entering and 2,139 exiting), and 3,962 peak Saturday trips (2,088 entering and 1,874 exiting). It should be noted that these estimates include internal traffic and pass-by traffic; net new traffic to the roadway network is discussed in the sections that follow. Table 1 Unadjusted Trip Generation Phase 1 Residential Townhouses* Office** Retail*** Civic**** ITE Land Use Code Size 3,504 units 626,000 SF 560,000 SF 105,500 SF Weekday Morning IN ,231 OUT ,069 TOTAL ,300 Weekday Evening IN ,923 OUT , ,139 TOTAL 1, , ,062 Saturday Midday IN , ,088 OUT , ,874 TOTAL 1, , ,962 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition - Land Use Code 230 ** Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition - Land Use Code 710 *** Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition - Land Use Code 820 **** Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition - Land Use Code 495 Step 2 Adjusting for Internal Trips Total Vehicle Generated trips It is anticipated that Heartland Town Square will generate trips between different onsite uses that never leave the project limits (i.e., internal trips). In order to determine how many of these trips will remain on-site, an internal capture rate was applied to the residential, office and retail uses on-site. In order to establish internal capture rates, uses at the proposed development were compared to those from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook recommendations for sites with similar land uses and size. According to ITE, an internal capture rate of 33 percent might be reasonable to assume. However, it was also recognized that in order to fully benefit from the synergistic effects of compatible mixed uses in a planned development, the development must have sufficient mass and be relatively 12 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

19 isolated from external uses that would feed the development. In addition, the development would need to have sufficient maturity to have stabilized. The completion of Phase I alone within the timeframe proposed is not likely to fully benefit from the synergy of the mixed use development. To create a more accurate picture of the potential internal capture of the developing project, a more rigorous analysis was undertaken. Retail Uses It should be recognized that a substantial portion of the retail use within the planned use development will primarily serve the residential and commercial uses within the project and to some extent the local residential and commercial uses in close proximity to the project. Such retail uses include those typical of a local neighborhood shopping center. However, the amount of retail space planned in the development is greater than that which would usually serve these typical local uses and would draw from a larger area than the project and its immediate vicinity. For the purpose of identifying internal capture and more accurately distributing traffic from these different retail draws, the retail trip generation was divided into Neighborhood Retail and Regional Retail. The Neighborhood Retail was assumed to be the first 100,000 SF of the 560,000 SF of retail planned for Phase I. Table 2 shows the trip generation of the two retail types and for site as a whole, as per Table 1. The patrons and employees of the neighborhood retail would come from the site itself and the directly adjacent neighborhoods, resulting in fewer trips to and from the site on the major roadways. For the purposes of trip generation it is assumed that 60percent of the neighborhood retail local traffic remains internal to the site while 40percent of it is distributed onto local roadways surrounding the site. Also, see the discussion of Trip Distribution and Assignment In Section below. Residential, Office and Regional Retail The internal capture rate of the residential, office and regional retail uses was determined by examining the likely internal capture attraction that each of the three uses would have for each other based on data provided by the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, March The attraction weight was then applied to the calculated number of trips each of the three project uses will generate. This calculation is based on ITE data and the actual number of trips anticipated by each use produced imbalances. The raw numbers were balanced between the receptor s attraction and the sender s generation. Detailed information on the development of the internal capture adjustments is contained in Attachment TRA-2. Local Civic Use Phase I includes local civic uses. Such civic uses are not intended to be for the exclusive use of the project residents and employees and may attract some new trips 13 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

20 to the site from the surrounding local community. For the purpose of this study it has been conservatively assumed that no more than 50 percent of the civic use visitors will come from the Heartland Town Square. Table 2 Retail Trip Generation Phase 1 Development Type ITE Land Use Code Size Weekday Morning TRIP GENERATION Phase 1 Components Total Phase 1 Neighborhood Regional Retail Retail Total Retail ,000 SF 100,000 SF 560,000 SF IN OUT TOTAL Weekday Evening IN OUT ,029 TOTAL 1, ,018 Saturday Midday IN ,366 OUT ,260 TOTAL 1, ,626 Table 3, Adjusted Trip Generation Phase I, presents the adjusted trip generation for each of the proposed land uses to be developed in Phase I. The table also summarizes the total trip generation of the Phase I project and notes the anticipated internal capture rate for each time period. Step 3 Adjusting for Pass-by Trips While the ITE rates provide estimates for the projected traffic associated with each land use, not all of the traffic generated by the project will be new to the area roadways. For example, a portion of the vehicle trips generated by the retail land uses will likely be drawn from those motorists already on the roadways adjacent to the site who are attracted to the services being offered on-site as they are passing through the area. The primary origin and destination for these trips is elsewhere and the primary trip will be resumed following the visit to Heartland Town Square and associated retail uses on-site. Based on studies at numerous restaurants and retail establishments, ITE data indicates that as much as percent of the traffic generated by a retail center of this type may be classified as pass-by traffic during the weekday evening peak hour. 1 1 Trip Generation Handbook; Institute of Transportation Engineers; Washington, DC; March Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

21 Table 3 Adjusted Trip Generation Phase 1 Development Type Residential Townhouses Office Retail Civic Total ITE Land Use Code Size 3,504 units 626,000 SF 560,000 SF 105,500 SF Weekday Morning IN ,051 OUT TOTAL ,994 Percent Internal Capture 12.51% Weekday Evening IN ,509 OUT ,685 TOTAL , ,194 Percent Internal Capture 20.92% Saturday Midday IN , ,641 OUT ,455 TOTAL , ,096 Percent Internal Capture 21.78% It is recognized that the project is located adjacent to two major limited access facilities (the LIE and Sagtikos Parkway) and that the traffic volumes these two facilities carry are many times the volume carried by other adjacent roadways (i.e., Commack Road, Crooked Hill Road, Pine Aire Drive and Long Island Avenue). The pass-by traffic can, therefore, be expected to be drawn from these roads primarily and would be either diverted-link or new trips on the ramps and road segments that the pass-by traffic used to gain access to the Heartland Town Square. As many of the study intersections and ramps would not be impacted by the pass-by affect and in order to simplify the study methodology, no pass-by credit has been taken. This results in a more conservative analysis, particularly with respect to impacts on the LIE and Sagtikos Parkway. Bus and Rail Adjustments ITE data is based on studies of land uses many of which have some bus or transit service available. As such, an adjustment is not normally made to reduce the number of vehicle trips due to the presence of local public transportation. Bus service in the vicinity of the project is currently provided by Suffolk County Transit, but no reduction in trip generation has been taken for anticipated bus travel. 15 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

22 The Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) Deer Park Station is close to the Heartland Town Square. Vehicle traffic from the Heartland to the LIRR Station would use mostly internal roadways and it is anticipated that a private shuttle bus service will be provided to eliminate or substantially reduce vehicle trips between the Heartland Town Square and the station. As documented in the Long Island Journey to Work Report, approximately 6percent of the workers in the area surrounding Heartland use rail service to commute to work. The location of the development close to the station and the anticipation of convenient shuttle service are expected to make Heartland more attractive to rail commuters. Thus, it is anticipated that at least 6percent of the Heartland Town Square residents will be destined to the LIRR, thus reducing the number of external vehicle trips. While it is anticipated that Heartland will have reduced residential and vehicle trips due to the proximity of the railroad, for conservative analyses purposes no adjustment has been made to the trip generation data to reflect that. Trip Generation Summary As noted previously, Table 3 presents the total net new vehicle trips anticipated from Phase I of Heartland Town Square. As shown in Table 3, Phase I is expected to add approximately 1,994 morning peak hour trips, 3,194 evening peak hour trips and 3,096 Saturday midday peak hour trips to the area roadway network Trip Distribution and Assignment This section summarizes the methodology used to establish both regional and site access trip distribution patterns for Heartland Town Square. An estimate of the peak hour vehicle trips has been distributed on the study area roadway network based on the patterns detailed herein. A detailed analysis of the anticipated vehicle trip distribution associated with the proposed project was conducted for this STA and three distinct regional trip distribution patterns were developed. The methodologies for determining the regional and site access vehicular trip distribution patterns are described below. Regional Trip Distribution The basis for the regional trip distribution is the United States Census Bureau Local Employment Dynamics (LED) information. These data are based on 2002 through 2008 worker origin and destination data and the Quarterly Workforce Indicator (QWI) profile data files. The 2008 data were used to develop two of the three distinct regional trip distribution patterns. 16 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

23 Residential Land Use Trip Distribution To determine the regional trip distribution patterns for the residential portion of the proposed Heartland Town Square development, the existing patterns of workers residing in 11 individual communities surrounding the site were reviewed. These communities include: Elwood Commack Hauppauge Dix Hills Brentwood Central Islip Deer Park North Bay Shore Baywood Bay Shore Islip Residents living in these communities travel to a number of workplace destinations throughout the Greater New York City area. Based on the census data reviewed, the majority of these destinations (63 percent) are within Suffolk County, followed by 25 percent in Nassau County or Manhattan. The remaining 12 percent are located in other New York City boroughs or counties immediately to the north of the City. Trips outside of Suffolk County were assigned to the appropriate regional roadway based on their ultimate destination. For trips within Suffolk County, town-by-town origin-destination information was reviewed in more specific detail for the 11 communities identified above. For example, specific trip patterns from Elwood to each of the other communities were evaluated. Outside of these 11 communities, trips remaining within Suffolk County were divided into four categories: 1. Suffolk County west of study area 2. Suffolk County east of study area, via Northern State Parkway and/or Nesconset Highway 3. Suffolk County east of study area, via Southern State Parkway and/or Sunrise Highway 4. Suffolk County east of study area, via Long Island Expressway There are many routes that Heartland residents could take to work for destinations within Suffolk County east of the study area. However, based on the distribution of existing employment, it was determined that all resident trips to work would begin in the Heartland study area using one of the three eastern routes identified above. The majority of trips destined for Suffolk County west of the study area are destined for Huntington, Melville or Farmingdale, and were assigned accordingly. The 17 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

24 residential trip distribution for Heartland is provided in Table 4. The vehicle trip distribution was based on all trip patterns except those going to Manhattan. It was assumed that virtually all trips destined to Manhattan (approximately eight percent) would be completed via public transportation. This allows for a more conservative analysis of project impacts by assuming that person trips destined to Manhattan would be reflected as vehicle trips destined to adjacent communities. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that residents would drive to transit connections. In actuality, a shuttle service will be provided from Heartland Town Square to the Deer Park LIRR station, thereby, further reducing site-related vehicle trips. Supporting data may be found in Attachment TRA-3. The distribution of residential trips generated by the Heartland Town Square is also presented in Attachment TRA-7. Workplace Trip Distribution The analysis of trips for people who would work within Heartland is similar to the process described above. The same communities were reviewed for people who work in the communities, but live elsewhere. Seventy-three percent of all workers in the 11 communities also live in Suffolk County. These trips were broken down on a town-by-town level and by major highway connection as discussed above. Approximately 10.5 percent came from Nassau County. The remaining 16.5 percent originate in one of the five boroughs of New York City or counties located immediately north of the City. The percentages for workplace regional distribution differ somewhat from the resident land use. This is due to the concentration of jobs in specific communities. Table 4 presents the workplace trip distribution of Heartland Town Square. Supporting data may be found in Attachment TRA-4. The distribution of work place related trips generated by the Heartland Town Square is also presented in Attachment TRA-4. Heartland Regional Retail Patrons To determine the regional trip distribution patterns for retail customers of the proposed Heartland Town Square, 2000 United States Census population data were reviewed for communities in both Suffolk County and Nassau County. It should be noted that retail uses of a similar nature to the proposed Heartland Town Square do not exist in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Therefore, existing travel patterns in the area could not be used to develop anticipated trip distribution patterns for the retail component of the proposed development. It was determined that a review of population densities was the most appropriate method to establish retail trip distribution patterns. The census data indicated that approximately 52 percent of Long Island residents live in Suffolk County and 48 percent live in Nassau County. For Suffolk County, population data were further broken down into 12 subsections -- the 11 communities identified above and the balance of Suffolk County. Each of the 12 subsections was then assigned a factor based on the area s proximity to the project site. Populations 18 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

25 in areas closest to the project site were multiplied by a higher factor than those farther away. This factor accounts for the fact that the majority of the retail trips to Heartland would be drawn from nearby communities. Once the populations were factored, each county or town was assigned to one or more regional roadways to access the project site, based on the assumption that most motorists will seek the fastest and most direct routes to and from the site. The percent of trips assigned to each roadway was summed to develop a final vehicle trip distribution for the retail component of Heartland Town Square. Table 4 summarizes the resulting regional trip distribution patterns for the residential, office and retail land uses. Supporting data may be found in Attachment TRA-5. The distribution of the regional retail patrons for the Heartland Town Square is presented in Attachment TRA-5. Table 4 Regional Vehicle Trip Distribution Summary Percent of Total Route Direction Residential Office Retail Jericho Turnpike west 0.0% 0.0% 7.0% Northern State Parkway west 14.0% 10.7% 7.0% east 3.0% 6.8% 4.0% Long Island Expressway west 25.8% 18.0% 7.0% east 13.7% 21.2% 11.0% Southern State Parkway (via the Sagtikos Parkway south) west 7.1% 5.6% 14.0% east 8.5% 13.2% 7.0% Sunrise Highway (via the Sagtikos Parkway south) west 0.4% 1.1% 11.0% east 4.7% 2.7% 7.0% Sagtikos Parkway north 3.9% 7.0% 11.0% south 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% Suffolk Avenue east 5.8% 9.5% 7.0% Long Island Avenue west 3.2% 0.0% 3.0% Udall Road south 0.5% 0.8% 0.0% Wicks Road north 4.3% 0.0% 0.0% Commack Road south 3.7% 2.3% 0.0% Fifth Avenue south 1.4% 1.1% 2.0% Total % 100% 100% Neighborhood Retail Distribution The distribution of the Neighborhood Retail Traffic is presented in Attachment TRA- 5. The Heartland Neighborhood Retail uses will primarily generate internal trips from the other land uses within the site. Forty percent of the trip generation from the Neighborhood Retail is anticipated to come from the closely surrounding community (one to three miles). As these will be relatively short trips and the distance between successive interchanges on the Long Island Expressway and Sagtikos Parkway that will lead to trip receptors, are relatively few, none of the 19 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

26 Neighborhood Retail trips are expected to use these facilities. The Neighborhood Retail trips have been distributed to local roadways (Commack Road, Crooked Hill Roadway, Long Island Avenue, and Pine Aire Drive) where the trips will dissipate into the surrounding community. Site Access Trip Distribution The site access trip distribution was based on the results of the regional trip distribution and the location of each Development Unit (DU). The revised Conceptual Master Plan identifies four distinct DUs and two Gateway Area outparcels. DU1 and DU2 are located south of the Long Island Expressway, west of the Sagtikos Parkway, and north of G Road. Site access trip distribution patterns for DU1 and DU2 were assumed to be identical, given their proximity to one another. Access to both DUs from the regional roadway network would be provided via the following existing and proposed driveways: Pilgrim Access on Crooked Hill Road (existing) Second Access on Crooked Hill Road (proposed) G Road (existing) Pilgrim Access on Sagtikos Parkway (existing) Pilgrim Access on Commack Road (existing) Long Island Expressway Eastbound and Westbound Exit Ramp to the southbound Sagtikos Parkway (proposed) Long Island Expressway South Service Road (proposed) DU3 is located west of the Sagtikos Parkway and south of G Road. Access to this DU from the regional roadway network would be provided via the existing G Road driveway and the proposed connection to Long Island Avenue through the Heartland Business Center to the south. The two proposed Gateway Area out-parcel sites are located to the northeast of DU1 and DU2, on the west and east sides of Crooked Hill Road. The western out-parcel would have the same site access driveways as DU1 and DU2. The eastern out-parcel would be accessed via a new driveway on Crooked Hill Road Other Planned Developments Other Planned Development (OPD) Project Trips Based upon the scoping process conducted for the DGEIS and in addition to the background growth and development in and around Heartland, there are several other major development projects in the vicinity of the study area that were under 20 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

27 construction or planned (at the time of DGEIS scoping in March 2004) that would add traffic to the roadway network and study intersections. Table 5, below, is from the DGEIS. It shows the status of four planned projects as of July These projects were the basis for the development of OPD trips, which are added to existing and background growth trips to develop a 2017 No-Build traffic scenario. Table 6 presents an adjustment to the DGEIS table based upon current conditions. Following the table is an explanation for the consideration of OPD trips for the FGEIS. Table 5 Other Planned Developments as of July 2008 Project Location Facility Size/Components Status as of July 2008 Tanger Outlet Center PJ Venture II Heartland II Industrial Park Expansion NYSDOT Intermodal Facility North side of Grand Boulevard east of Commack Road in Deer Park East side of Crooked Hill Road, north of the L.I.E. West side of Rodeo Drive, north of LI Avenue South of and adjoining the Heartland property 800,000 SF, 180 store smart style outlet center 377,000 SF expansion of shopping center: Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Kohls 1,272,000 SF of light industrial/warehouse space Freight Transportation Center; Truck-Rail yard w/storage facilities Under Construction, scheduled for Fall 2008 opening Open Under Construction; Portions complete and occupied In planning, design and permitting stage 2 Table 6 Other Planned Developments Updated to June 2010 Project Location Facility Size/Components Status as of June 2010 Tanger Outlet Center PJ Venture III Heartland II Industrial Park Expansion NYSDOT Intermodal Facility North side of Grand Boulevard east of Commack Road in Deer Park East side of Crooked Hill Road, north of the L.I.E. West side of Rodeo Drive, north of LI Avenue South of and adjoining the Heartland property 800,000 SF, 180 store smart style outlet center Lowe s Store to replace Cinema 635,000 SF of light industrial/warehouse space Freight Transportation Center; Truck-Rail yard w/storage facilities 75% of Shops Occupied BJ s Discount Store not built Planned Planned No progress(see footnote 2) The traffic generated by these nearby projects was determined separately from the background growth in traffic. The new 2010 traffic volumes include the portions of these projects that have been built to date and whose traffic volumes have been captured by traffic counts collected in The trip generation data and distribution 2 This project has not progressed since the time of the DGEIS preparation. 21 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis

28 patterns for these other projects were taken from the traffic impact studies performed for each project to determine the balance of trips to be added to the network. 3 Although many of the intersections being analyzed for Heartland were included in these studies, some were not. At locations where future data for the other projects were not available, the project-generated traffic from each study was carried downstream to the intersections under study for Heartland. These volumes from the other projects were combined with the background growth in traffic, resulting in the expected No-Build traffic volumes throughout the study area. Tanger Outlet Center A field trip was conducted on June 11, 2010 to review the current status of this development project in comparison to what the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Tanger Outlet Center at The Arches indicated would be built. There are 118 stores, of which 30 were built, but vacant. This shows a vacancy rate of about 25 percent. Also, the DGEIS indicated that a 120,000 SF Discount Store would be developed on the site. This has not been built. Table 7 shows the total vehicle trips projected for Tanger and how it compares to existing conditions. Table 7 Tanger Vehicle Trip Comparison Time Total trips today Build Out Trips in Table 27 from DGEIS Percent complete Percent remaining AM % 49% PM 943 1,722 55% 45% Saturday 1,846 3,140 59% 41% Total trips today are based on factoring Table 27 from the DGEIS to reflect existing build conditions. Existing build conditions are based on 75 percent of the Factory Outlet Trips (Table 27) plus all multiplex and restaurant Full-Build trips. Therefore, the percentages shown above under percent remaining were added to the OPD trips representing the Tanger portion of these trips. PJ Venture II/PJ Venture III The PJ Venture II project has been completed; however, recently the developer has proposed that the Commack Cinema be torn down and replaced with a Lowe s Supercenter (PJ Venture III). The Planned Development trips used for this new proposal were based on a 132,000 SF Home Improvement Store in the 8 th Edition of ITE Trip Generation. Although the Lowe s is a replacement of trips currently 3 Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Tanger Outlet Center at The Arches, Frederick P. Clark Associates, Inc., January 20, 2005; PJ Venture II/Cosentino Commerce Center, RMS Engineering, September 2003; Heartland Business Center Expansion DEIS, AKRF, Inc.; Preliminary trip generation figures for Long Island Intermodal Freight Transportation Center, Parsons Corporation. 22 Section 2: Phase I Traffic Analysis