As counties prepared their transportation stimulus wish lists earlier this year, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign wrote a letter to Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy that urged him to “use [his] role as County Executive to work with Towns and Villages and Departments of Transportation to promote smart growth development patterns that create more walkable communities.”
At meetings of NYMTC, Suffolk County has often shown that it is out of step with the other counties in the New York metropolitan region when it comes to walkable and transit-oriented development. So it’s not that surprising that the letter, apparently, has gone unheeded.
Last week Levy once again highlighted his preference for moving cars as quickly as possible at the expense of pedestrian, cyclist and motorist safety. After smart-growth group Vision Long Island criticized the County’s plan to widen County Road 58 in Riverhead, noting that the road would include “no shoulders and a suicide lane in the middle,” Levy responded that there were no resources to include cycling, transit and pedestrian infrastructure into the existing plan, and the priority must be for “moving cars.”
Given that Suffolk’s roads are among the most dangerous in the region for pedestrians, he should consider rethinking these priorities. In fact, considering that Suffolk County’s seniors are disproportionately impacted by unsafe roads, Vision’s recommendation that the CR 58 plan include handicap accessible crosswalks and tree-buffered sidewalks should, perhaps, be his top priority.
Census data compiled by the Long Island Index shows that Long Island’s population is aging, and young people are leaving for elsewhere (see page 46). Surely County Executive Levy isn’t interested in accelerating the exodus of young people or fostering a more dangerous environment for the county’s growing population of senior citizens. But that’s what building greater automobile capacity on County roadways will do. What it won’t do is reduce congestion in the long term, protect the environment, promote economic development, or create vibrant communities that people will want to live, work and recreate in.
[…] lengthy appendix includes even more projects. As usual, Suffolk County stands out by calling for 11 road widenings while other counties are reconstructing […]
Mr. Levy is courageous to tell it like it is. Have you even been on CR58, a road built 60 years ago, when there were only potatoes and farmers on the north fork?Its a slow disaster
Yes there are bikers in Suffolk County, but this busy road in a small space is not the place for them. Better if they can move bucolically thru the back roads of the north fork, thru the current farms. Whats wrong with that?
And please stop using this data nonsense of an aging population in Suffolk. I don’t see too many 70 yr olds on bikes these days, especailly on busy roads that are dangerous for bicycles. The seniors use cars like the rest of us
And reduce congestion in the long term?.. yes this CR improvement will work for 20 years…Ill take it.
Suffolk County did a great job on the south fork thru Southampton with Eric Alexaders advice, and they will do a great job here again
The priority is to provide the most economical way to move goods and people. In this case, could there be changes to the road that better speed buses making them a viable alternative? If there is a proposal for adding lanes, would a single track light rail with passing sidings attract the 1900 people per hour per direction in the peak needed to make it a viable option? Would encouragement of walking and biking change the modal split and provide transportation opportunities? Would full fare integration between all MTA supported agencies (LIRR, the various Long Island bus companies, etc.) encourage people to shift from driving for at least some trips? Would provision of bike and pedestrian facilities allow parents to send their children to some activities rather than driving them? Maybe we should tighten vehicle emission standards and enforce them.
I think we should build safe highways for vehicles. Whatever that takes.
Once that is complete, we can look at safe inhancements for bikes, walk ways and even more buses.
But highway and roads are for vehicles
You want to exercise, don’t do it on a highway go to a gym or take a ride on an empty country road.
This way there is a good chance you will make it home that day,
There are over 750 bike deaths a year.
And over 500,000 emergency rooms visits from bike accidents.
why would anyone want to walk or ride with all the emissions that cars file the air with?
There’s nothing outdated about my views. Your the pompous one who is pie in the sky. Theres a lots of cars out there and they need a safe road to be on. No one travels to work on CR 58 by bike. CR 58 needs to be brought up to date to accomodate the new traffic at miniaml cost, and thats what Suffolk Cty is responsible enough to try to do.
I bike quite a lot, on bike paths. I love bike riding, probably more than you. Set up a bike routes on the North fork, parallel to CR 58, with all the striping that is required. But when people want to drive to work or pleasure on the North Fork, go to Riverhead downtown, they need a CR 58 that is not a bottleneck, creating extra polution. No one is talking about making this a new Sound Ave, just making the traffic on CR 58 flow as efficiently as possible. Suffolk County did this in Southampton, and thats all they want to do here.
Eric Alexander is a committee of one, who writes very well. Where does he have the authority to dictate policy to Suffolk County, or anyone else?
Jared, your outdated windshield perspective is unfortunate. The roads are so dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians BECAUSE adequate facilities for non-motorized transportation have not provided. It isn’t excuse to force them to utilize “back roads” that may or may not connect useful points of interest. Given all the growth planned for Suffolk County over the next few decades, how much sense does it make to accommodate this growth in a way that caters solely to the needs of motor vehicles, to the exclusion of all else?
Someone should educate Mr. Levy that the goal of transportation is to move goods and people, not vehicles be they bikes, cars, buses, streetcars or commuter rail cars. The vehicles are are the tools and automobiles are not necessarily the best tools.