PLANNING BOARD WANTS TRAFFIC LIGHTS AT PROPOSED O&G CROSSINGS

Mike McCagg

ccSCOOP News

01-27-10 - 3:10 p.m. - Let’s not create another intersection that will result in the deaths of area motorists. That’s the message from the Greenport Planning Board to representatives of a Connecticut-based O&G and the New York State Department of Transportation about the proposal to use a former railroad bed as a truck route from the Holcim quarry to the deep-water dock on the Hudson River. The proposal, which is meant reroute trucks loaded with aggregate off Hudson city streets, involves crossing both Route 9 and Route 9G.

On Tuesday, Greenport Planning Board expressed significant concern over the safety of bringing tractor-trailers and dump trucks across the two highways as many as 160 times a day.

“We’re sitting here having to consider the safety of the public when we are considering a major truck crossing. My best druthers would be to put a traffic signal up,” said Planning Board member Michael Bucholsky. “Look at how many people have been killed at Middle Road.” The reference was to the number of accidents that have occurred at the intersection of Middle Road and Route 23.

While Bucholsky expressed concern over the safety of those driving along Route 9 as they come upon the crossing trucks, Planning Board Chairman Don Alger said he believed those encountering crossing trucks on Route 9G would be more at risk. Both men said they believed the site distances—projected to be about 300-feet in both directions at the intersections—were not great enough, particularly in light of the fact that, according to them, drivers routinely exceed the posted speed limits in those areas.

Project engineer Patrick Prendergast, however, said that O&G is already proposing more than is required by the state Department of Transportation by proposing warning signs with flashing lights before the intersection. “All they require are the signs,” he said.

Regardless, the Planning Board agreed to write a letter to the Department of Transportation seeking traffic signals at the intersections as part of the condition of the approval of the project. The board also instructed Prendergast to provide "real time" traffic counts for Route 9 and Route 9G. Those used in their study were from 2005 (for Route 9) and 2008 (for Route 9G). “I would think there should be some reflection of the last five years, especially with the growth of the college and the hospital,’ said Bucholsky.

The board also asked Prendergast to report on what if any impact the heavy trucks would have on the town aquifer. Because the proposed route is meant to continue on the south side of Route 9G on the "causeway" through the South Bay in Hudson, the Greenport Planning Board plans to contact the City of Hudson to discuss the project.